Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout11/09/2004 CC ReportsI ��. r,, x � i 5�'e�. , .. z . m page Friar — Coin, REC©MNiLNa►A' ' 22. A BUS 31 Meetings o' 'vrern R C IIII ' 32: Upai �nd ow yy�y.�.�(/ i oine i. 1 � 61&i4� T IC � 33 • 'R�b R"11 34 a Inc�re'e �: RECt�1Vi�`;�, m 11-- MINUTES JOINT CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STUDY SESSION CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA TUESDAY, OCTOBER 12, 2004 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Buckley called the Joint Study Session to order at 4:08 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: HICKMAN, KELLEY, MAGEE, SCHIFFNER, BUCKLEY COUNCILMEMBERS: NONE Also present were: Assistant City Manager Best, City Attorney Leibold, Community Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp, Lake & Aquatic Resources Director Kilroy, Information/ Communications Manager Dennis, Finance Manager Magee, Engineering Manager Semaulo, Public Works Manager Payne, Build' g & Safety Manager Chipman, City Treasurer Weber, and Deputyity Clerk Ray. DISCUSSION ITEMS Mayor Buckley commented on the presentations. PUBLIC COMMENTS No comments. AGENDA ITEM N0._ �. PAGE��pR�^ PAGE TWO — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 12, 2004 CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes. Councilman Hickman indicated that Item lc page 58 of 60, had a grammatical error. Mayor Buckley indicated that he would be abstaining from vote on Item 1 c. Councilman Hickman indicated that on Item If page 15 of 16 Chairman LaPere made comments on the freedom of speech. He requested a response from Community Development Director Brady. Mr. Brady commented that there had been a spirited debate amongst the Commissioners. 2. Warrant List: September 30, 2004. Councilman Hickman requested clarification on various checks issued on the warrant list; and staff clarified. 3. Supplemental Law Enforcement Service Fund (SLESF) Expenditure Plan. No comment. 4. Authorization to Amend the Contract for CEQA Comphce Documents for North Tuscany Hills Project — HDR Engineering. Assistant City Manager Best requested this item be pulled from the agenda on behalf of the applicant. Councilman Magee commented that the Consultant was indicating there were additional issues; and they were requesting more money. He advised it would be nice if they updated the map they had provided with surrounding land uses, as Freedman Properties and Cottonwood Hills were no longer applicable. AGENDA ITEM NC. PAGE OR PAGE THREE — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 12, 2004 5. Award of Contract — Dust Control — South Western Sealcoating, Inc - $72,483.84. Mayor Buckley questioned if the bid in fact came at half of what was actually budgeted. Public Works Manager Payne explained that the $150,000 the Council had approved was for grading and the application of magnesium chloride. He indicated that staff had estimated $90,000 for the magnesium chloride, therefore staff was $20,000 under the bid; and staff would like to award the contract and still spend $90,000 on the magnesium chloride. He explained that staff would do a second application on the heavily traveled streets. Mayor Buckley commented that he had one person wishing to speak on a non - business item and decided he would allow the individual to speak at this time. Councilman Schiffner requested clarification on the speaker forms used by the public. City Attorney Leibold explained that the policy was with respect to public comments on non - agendized items, the speaker had to choose between a one minute at the commencement of the meeting or a three minute comment at the conclusion of the meeting. She noted that either way any member of the public was permitted to speak on an agenda item. Bill Tiitto questioned having the trash clean up of City streets being done by the Landscape Company that the City was currently contiacted with for street maintenance. Parks & Open Space Manager Fazzexplained that the contracted companies did clean up trash on a weekly basis. Bill Tiitto indicated that he had received the information on the consultant fees, but did not get the fees that City Attorney Leibold was paid on the Stadium program. City Attorney Leibold indicated that the fees being inquired about were the fees related to the Stadium financing. She noted that her firm was not a member of the City team when the Stadium was built and the bond issues were made. She advised that no one from her firm, including herself, received any compensation in connection with those financings. She noted that subsequent refinancings were conducted AGENDAMM No. (k < PAGE PAGE FOUR — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 12, 2004 ..r► by the City Bond Counsel and, on occasion her firm had to provide an issuers opinion which was a very small portion of any of the bonds financed. Councilman Schiffner asked Mr. Tiitto if he had been following the County's investigation of the construction of the French Valley Court system, which was supposed to be $50 million and now was $104 million. He advised that it was constructed the same way the Stadium was constructed. He further advised it was a design and build contract, they did not know what they were going to build when they started. Mr. Schiffner commented that he was not proud of that; but the City could not blame the legal representatives. Mr. Tiitto commented that Councilman Schiffner and Mayor Pro Tem Kelley were Council Members at that time. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley advised that Councilman Schiffner nor she were Councilmember's when this all took place in 1989. Mr. Tiitto .� commented that City Treasurer Weber had given him some information and said that in the last few months City Attorney Leibold charged $60,000. City Attorney Leibold explained that the City had entered into a Lease with Purchase Option, and during the final period of due diligence the tenant and the Agency Board mutually agreed to terminate the lease; and City Treasurer Weber believed that legal fees in connection with those r gotiations should be reimbursed. PUBLIC HEARINGS 21. Tentative Tract Map No. 311106 (Canyon Hills Specific Plan) — Pardee Homes. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley requested clarification that this was an extension of the existing Riverbend project. Councilman Magee inquired if there was any more acreage dedicated to the MF -2 Zone. Community Development Director Brady indicated he would have an answer for Mr. Magee before the 7:00 p.m. meeting. AGENDA ITEM, G✓• PACE,,4R ..Jj ,�., PAGE FIVE — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 12, 2004 Mayor Buckley questioned the ability to build a house on a 38 foot wide lawn. Councilman Magee indicated that he had went and viewed the project and the homes were beautiful; and the answer to the Mayor's question was that the structures were built up. He complimented Pardee Homes on the project. He indicated that the narrowness of the streets, the inability to park anywhere but your driveway, concerned him because of the possible problems it might cause in the future. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley indicated that the development worked well because of the mix. She indicated they were all private streets. 22. Zone Change No. 2004 -01, TTM No. 32129 and MND No. 2004 -05. No comments. BUSINESS ITEMS 31. Second Reading —Ordinance No. 1128. Councilman Magee inquired when the Ordinance would become effective. City Attorney Leibold explained it would be 30 days after adoption. Councilman Magee inquired when the money would be e. City Attorney Leibold advised that according to the escrow instructionupon the approval of the tentative tract map; which took place at the last meeting, but was assured upon the effectiveness, the City Clerk was to present the escrow officer with a certification that the tract map had been approved and the funds would be released to the City. Councilman Hickman inquired if some of the bond debt would be paid off with the funds. City Attorney Leibold explained that the finance team had discussed a variety of proposals with respect to the allocation of those funds. The finance team had laid out some alternatives, and now they needed to meet again and make a proposal to the City Council. Councilman Hickman indicated that this went back to the bond issue of CFD 88 -3 and he preferred it went to pay the bonds off instead of the General Fund. City Attorney AGENDA ITEM N4_ —L&. PACE_.q j PAGE SIX — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 12, 2004 Leibold advised that was one of the ideas the finance team had suggested and that issue would be brought back to the Council. City Treasurer Weber requested a meeting with Administrative Services Director Pressey to discuss this issue. He indicated that there were two properties involved; Southshore Properties and Wasson Canyon. He indicated that this was CFD 90 -3 and $4.1 million was issued; and Council and staff needed to review the background on this issue. He advised that he understood it to read that 97 -F refinanced CFD 88 -3, was that a pooling fund that took care of the debt, because CFD 90 -3 defaulted due to not paying the taxes. He noted that they paid the interest and principal on the bonds, for the bond money that was issued through the pool fund and the pool fund came from CFD 97 -F which again came from CFD 88 -3. He advised that the property owners in the Terra Cotta area would get a break and later the Summerhill, because some how that bond issue was now in 2003H. He indicated that Summerhill was the most complex of all the bonds. He advised that the money be put where it needed to be and not just put in the General Fund and spent. Assistant City Manager Best commented that she did meet with City Treasurer Weber earlier. She explained that there was no way those funds could be allocated without coming back to Council for approval. 32. Proposal by Country Club Heights Committee to address area concerns. 1"60 Raymond Tamargo, Chairman of the Committee, commented that he was available to answer any questions from the Council. Councilman Schiffner inquired if Mr. Tamargo wanted to speak on any of the recommendations presented to the Council. Mr. Tamargo advised that the most important recommendation was the recommendation to change the zoning to RH and the overlay district. Councilman Schiffner commented on the road width minimums. Mr. Tamargo explained that they had spoken with the California Fire Department and were told that the minimum was 20 feet; but 24 feet was preferred. He noted in some cases the street was 12 feet wide. Councilman Hickman indicated that the committee was requesting an analyst for the methods of funding public improvements. He questioned if the property owners in Country Club Heights were receptive NMOW AGENDA ITEM NO ;.. F _.'..00.LL.. �., PAGE SEVEN — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 12, 2004 to that idea. Mr. Tamargo commented that at the Study Session, Councilman Magee commented that he was hearing the property owners say "taxman". Councilman Schiffner advised that action would take a 2 /3rds vote from the property owners; and noted that some property owners did not answer to any type of request. Assistant City Manager Best advised that if there were more than 12 registered voters within the area that was going to be assessed through a CFD or other assessment projects; a vote of residents and registered voters in the area rather than the property owners, so if there were property owners that lived there that were registered to vote there would be a chance of having something moved forward. Councilman Magee advised that items 1 and 2 could be handled as policy items and items 3, 4, and 5 could be brought back to Council by staff; and items 6 and 7 would require for the drafting of a Request For Proposals and reviewing the potential of hiring a consultant. Community Development Director Brady agreed with Mr. Magee. 33. Request for Funding — H.O.P.E - $5,000. Ron Hewison, H.O.P.E representative, indicated that he was available to answer any questions. Councilman Hickman commented that all of the money H.O.P.E had been receiving was from the Coun grants and not from the City itself. Mr. Hewison explained that H.CM.E receives $16,000 in CDBG funds through the City; and $10,000 of that was funded by Supervisor Buster's Office and $6,000 by the City through CDBG. He explained that in 2002 the CDBG Grant was reduced; and H.O.P.E. came before the Council and Council awarded an additional $2,500 from the General Fund. Councilman Schiffner inquired if H.O.P.E. had any paid staff. Mr. Hewison advised that they were volunteers. He indicated that the rent and utilities exceeded the grants. AGENDA ITEM N0. A PAGE � —0!� PAGE EIGHT — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 12, 2004 ,..r 34. Purchase Authorization — Diamond Stadium Furniture — $42,330.52. Kathy Mair, Lake Elsinore Storm representative, urged Council to approve the purchase authorization. She commented that the chairs had aged. Councilman Magee inquired if the dollar amount before Council reflected what had been spent on the City Hall remodel. Assistant City Manager indicated it did not. Councilman Magee requested an update. 35. Memorandum of Understanding for the Acquisition of Property within the City of Lake Elsinore for Conservation Purposes. City Attorney Leibold advised that there was no financial impact to the City. She noted the properties within the City's jurisdiction benefit would be counted as credit toward the MSHCP conservation area. Councilman Magee indicated that this specific piece of property was addressed and it was addressed specifically with Supervisor Ashley regarding the possibility of a transportation corridor through the area; and if they were going to purchase this property for habitat, the City wanted to be sure that nothing would preclude a future extension through that area. He advised that he glanced through the agreement and he was shocked and surprised that there was nothing that addressed that particular item. He expressed concerned that if the Council approved this M.O.U. the Council would be locking out their ability to do that. He indicated that C tle & Cooke brought forth their plans for Alberhill Ranch and they Went to great lengths to make sure they were not impacting anything. Mayor Buckley indicated that they eliminated the potential alignment to Nichols Road by creating Alberhill Ranch. Councilman Magee explained they did not. He further explained they held back and met with RCTC staff to accommodate an alignment through that area that would then intersect with Lake Street. City Attorney Leibold suggested allowing her to get some information before the 7:00 p.m. meeting, and if not she would advise Council to continue the item in order to address that issue. AGENDA ITEM ft9--J C� PACEpF� .# -• PAGE NINE — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 12, 2004 36. Cultural Center Renovations. Bill Tiitto inquired about the dollar amount. Councilman Hickman indicated it would be $25,000. Mayor Buckley noted that it included a handicap ramp, electrical and plumbing. Councilman Magee indicated that this would be another $25,000 from the unallocated revenue. He commented that there was $119,000 minus $42,330.52 for stadium furniture minus $25,000 for Cultural Center renovations minus $30,000 over budget for the City Hall remodel and we have not reached mid -year. Councilman Schiffner commented that he agreed with Councilman Magee in regards to continuing Item No. 35. Councilman Magee commented that he understood that the powers to be were going to purchase that area for habitat; but Council wanted to secure the corridor; and he remembered Supervisor Ashley standing at the podium and promising the City that they would accommodate that. 37. Update on Special Audit — Verbal Report. Bill Tiitto requested an update. Councilman Magee indicated that the sub- committee did not have an answer for why the selected irm quit. He commented that the firm would not talk to the sub- coAuttee or the press. He requested continuing the item for two weeks to allow the sub- committee to meet and develop another course of action to be presented to the City Council. Councilman Magee indicated that the firm would be returning the information provided to them to conduct the audit and would not be billing the City for any services. Mr. Tiitto inquired about the number of people that would be looked at. Mayor Buckley explained that it was not people, but transactions. Mr. Tiitto inquired if anyone had reviewed the Hayhurst report again. AGFJWDA ITEM W. Ct PACE � dje PAGE TEN — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 12, 2004 1400 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes. No comments PUBLIC HEARINGS None. BUSINESS ITEMS None. ADJOURNMENT Nr► THE JOINT CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY STUDY SESSION WAS ADJOURNED AT 5:00 P.M. THOMAS BUCKLEY, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DARYL HICKMAN, CHAIRMAN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA ITEM N0. I , a PACE.L 2.00 11.�. �.,, PAGE ELEVEN STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 12, 2004 Respectfully submitted, FREDERICK RAY, DEPUTY CITY CLERK ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK/ HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AGFNQA ITEM N . AAA � t7 MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA THURSDAY, OCTOBER 14, 2004 CALL TO ORDER The City Council Study Session was called to order by Mayor Buckley at 5:17 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: HICKMAN, KELLEY, MAGEE, SCHIFFNER, BUCKLEY NONE Also present were: Assistant City Manager Best, City Attorney Leibold, _ Community Development Director Brady, Community Services Director Sapp, Police Chief Fetherolf, Information /Communications Manager Dennis, Public Works Manager Payne, Recreation /Tourism Manger Fazzio and City Clerk/Human Resources Director Kasad. DISCUSSION ITEMS Ethics and Conflict of Interest City Attorney Leibold indicated that the topics for this meeting were Conflicts of Interest and Ethics; and noted that the two were often used interchangeably. She clarified that Conflicts of Interest were specifically related to financial or economic interests, as set out in the statutes and FPPC regulations. She explained that they were established to prevent government officials from participating in decisions in which they would have a conflict of interest. She commented that a major difference between Conflict of Interest and Ethics, was that Ethics weren't AGENDA ITEM NO. c b PAGE OF�� Page Two — City Council Study Session — October 14, 2004 legally required. She explained that Conflict of Interest laws establish a floor at which a government official must decide if they can participate in a decision. She further explained that issues of honesty and integrity, as ethical issues were hard to legislate. She clarified that Conflict of Interest should be seen as a legal standard, while ethical considerations were a matter of policy. She advised that the primary law in this area was the Political Reform Act. City Attorney Leibold presented a Powerpoint highlighting the annual disclosures and who was required to file. She also explained that the Council adopted a Conflict of Interest Code for designated employees, pursuant to FPPC requirements and as they changed the law, the City regulations changed. She advised that the only discretionary portion of that law was the list of designated employees. City Clerk/Human Resources Director Kasad highlighted the list of positions required to file. She explained that ongoing standing commissions /committees were required to file, while ad hoc committees, of limited duration were not required to file. She noted that the filings were public records and explained the disclosure requirements, but indicated that the focus of this meeting was the disqualification requirements. - Mayor Buckley questioned the warrant lists and noted that in some places, the checks don't leave the City until the warrant list is approved.- City Attorney Leibold indicated that she did not believe that was a requir-Wnent, as the process of warrants was permitted by the Government Code; and checks can be paid and sent out, so long as there are appropriated funds. She clarified that the list to the City Council was an appropriation, and there was no need to change the process in relationship to Conflict of Interest. City Attorney Leibold detailed the eight steps for determining whether a disqualifying conflict of interest exists. She advised that the most recent requirement was for the public official to announce their conflict and remove themselves from the dial. She indicated that she had always recommended such action, for the protection of the elected official. She stressed that disqualification did not just apply to voting, but also meeting, influencing, etc. AQENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF �_„ Lwn .-• Page Three — City Council Study Session — October 14, 2004 Mayor Buckley questioned the ownership of stocks. City Attorney Leibold indicated that this came down to the issues of materiality; and an official would have to disqualify themselves if there was a material financial effect. Mayor Buckley requested clarification with regard to sources of income, i.e. gifts. City Attorney Leibold indicated that it was necessary to keep track of gifts. Councilman Magee questioned the ability to participate in a discussion if it was within 300 feet of a parcel owned by the official. City Attorney Leibold clarified that participating in the discussion would be deemed participation and a violation of the rules. Councilman Hickman questioned property ownership within proximity of the City. City Attorney Leibold indicated that proximity was only important in decisions in which the elected official participated. Mayor Buckley requested clarification that .— the same would apply for a commissioner. City Attorney Leibold clarified that the Statement of Economic Interest was required for each agency served, so the area covered might go beyond City jurisdiction. Councilman Magee questioned a project within 300 feet of a property owned by a Councilmember; and suggested that the disqualification would limit freedom of speech. He questioned the ability of an elected official to go to the podium. City Attorney Leibold indicated that such action was viewed very critically, but it was acceptable to express their views; however they would be required to articulate that tl had a disqualifying interest. She suggested that if such a situation arose, she would encourage the Councilmembers to discuss the situation with herself or the Fair Political Practices Commission. Mayor Buckley inquired if a property was 300 feet away, but large enough to impact all residents, if there was the potential to not disqualify oneself. City Attorney Leibold used CFD 2003 -1 as an example, noting that it was intended to be City -wide for all new properties, so the impact was no different from anyone in the City. Mayor Buckley questioned if the expansion of a road would be a similar situation. City Attorney Leibold indicated that if it was part of a transportation plan, it probably would not preclude voting, but if there was a unique and special project, there might be a distinction. Mayor Buckley questioned a project like AGENDA ITEM N®. PAGE OF Page Four — City Council Study Session — October 14, 2004 '..v Machado Street. City Attorney Leibold indicated that it was part of the overall CIP Program. She stressed that these were just issues that the Council needed to keep in mind; and noted that she had supplied each Councilmember with the FPPC "Can I Vote" publication as a reminder of the issues. City Attorney Leibold addressed the Conflict issues relating to Contract, as the Common Law Doctrine of Self - Dealing. She indicated that unlike the Political Reform Act, it was not enough to disclose and not participate; but rather, the contract could not_be entered into. She provided an example and noted that there were a series of exemptions. She also highlighted the incompatible office regulations, and explained that an official could not serve on the City Council and the Water District simultaneously. Councilman Magee noted that there was an individual serving on two different City committees and running for a seat on the Water Board. He inquired what that person would have to do if they were successful in the election. City Attorney Leibold indicated that since he was an appointed Commissioner, it might be incompatible; but if it were an ad hoc advisory committee, it was unlikely that the issue would arise. She indicated that it would depend on the conflict. Councilman Magee questioned who could push that individual off a Commission; and noted that there was a situation in the 1990's and it took the press to push the issue. City Attorney Leibold indicated that the public had a stick, and the Attorney General had a stick. .-Mayor Buckley suggested that the Council would have that authority. Citttorney Leibold indicated that it might be a matter for discussion at a later date. Councilman Schiffner noted that he was removed from the Flood Control Commission, when he became a Councilmember. City Attorney Leibold indicated that there were two rules relevant to Redevelopment conflicts and real property. She noted that the only exception was the personal /principle place of residence. She explained that if property is owned when someone assumes office, they are required to disclose it. She further explained that once someone assumes office, it is illegal to acquire property in the redevelopment area, except for a personal residence. Mayor Buckley questioned a house with an apartment; and whether it would be possible to rent it, or a room out. City Attorney Leibold indicated that if the residence was owned, most likely it would be okay to rent it out. She noted that the Agency could not acquire property from an Agency Boardmember, nor enter negotiations AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE - OF _ ®� 101-- Page Five — City Council Study Session — October 14, 2004 to acquire property. She indicated that the only way such a transaction could occur was through eminent domain. Councilman Hickman questioned if someone moved into another home and kept the first home. City Attorney Leibold indicated that she did not see a requirement to sell any property that was already owned, however the official would have to disclose the new acquisition. She noted that if such an issue arose, she would like to look at the issue further. City Attorney Leibold explained that the biggest potential for Conflict of Interest, was under the Political Reform Act. She noted that the City was legally required to adopt a Conflict of Interest Code, which was just done in September. She reiterated that the City's code was the FPPC model Conflict of Interest Code, and the City Code changes with the model. She noted that there were other policy and municipal code provisions relevant to this discussion. She explained that there was a Code of Ethics in the Municipal Code, as Chapter 2.09. She suggested that the existing Code on this issue was a mishmash of Political Reform Act, ethics, etc. She clarified that ethics were things like honesty, integrity, etc.; and noted that she was troubled with those provisions being included as legal requirements. She suggested that following the City law could be in violations of State law, however - it provides for a more restrictive qualifying interest. She noted that the City could have discretion and choose to impose a stricter conflict of interest laws than the State. She explained that the difficulty of that was keeping in step with new State mandates, particularly if the City was more restrictive. Slrcommented that while it was a broad policy matter at the Council's discretion, she would question if the Council should be legislating Conflict of Interest rules that are different from the State. She stressed the difficulty of varying regulations, and suggested that the rules could be too oppressive. She further addressed the Municipal Code section and indicated that it picked up broader ethical considerations, and suggested that honesty and loyalty were hard to legislate. She commented that most cities adopt an oath swearing to abide by the Code of Ethics; while other cities adopted rules of conduct. She noted that the City Council Policy Manual included a Code of Ethics, but it was different from the Municipal Code. City Attorney Leibold indicated that the last piece in the packet were four samples AGENDA ITEM NO. ` L PAGE OF l L. Page Six — City Council Study Session — October 14, 2004 from Thousand Oaks, Santa Clara, Huntington Beach and the University of California. She indicated that for discussion, she would hope the Council would ask questions and discuss the issues generally, possibly giving direction to bring something back to a City Council Meeting on Conflict of Interest rules already governed by State law. She questioned if the Council wanted to further legislate the issues or if it would be clearer to provide State law and not confuse the issues. She questioned if the Council wanted to adopt a model Code of Ethics, if it should be legislated or in a policy. She suggested that the existing Chapter 2.09 in the Municipal Code was outdated and confusing. Mayor Buckley indicated that whatever could match State law made the most sense. He indicated that legislating those issues was difficult in that the definitions were not clear. He questioned the meaning of "disloyal to the political objectives expressed by the electorate ". He indicated that there was no question that a Code of Ethics should be in the Policy Manual; and questioned the ability to add something to the Oath of Office. City Attorney Leibold suggested that it would be sequential with the standard followed by a City Oath. Mayor Buckley suggested that it be in the Policy Manual for elected and non - elected officials. Councilman Schiffner indicated that it was his understanding that the FPPC could establish rules, but had no policing power to enforce them. He noted that he asked the question at the League Conference, but got the run - ground on the answer. He questioned having rules when the people could - violate them without sanctions. City Attorney Leibold clarified that the Municipal Code was enforceable, but the difficulty was in looking at the Code provisions and determining if a violation had occurred. She indicated that there was no body of law defining a personal interest for the Municipal Code. She explained that on financial interests there were volumes of history and reams of regulations, but the difficulty was in making a clear determination on which to make a finding. Councilman Schiffner questioned the ability to spell out this type of regulations adequately. City Attorney Leibold indicated that she could attempt to do so, but questioned how to determine that someone had complied with the oath for the purposes of prosecution. She stressed that she could try, but it was a very difficult task. Mayor Buckley noted the current Code on gifts and favors and indicated AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE b OF ' d i-. Page Seven — City Council Study Session — October 14, 2004 that it should apply to everyone, and then it should be conveyed to the people with whom someone was doing business. He indicated that he would recommend eliminating the inconsistencies between the City Code and State Law., as the two should mirror each other. Councilman Magee suggested cutting out flowery language in the Municipal Code and substituting references to the State Code. City Attorney Leibold concurred and noted the Codes which could be referenced, rather than attempting to restate the requirements. Councilman Schiffner questioned if there was any reason it should be different from the. State Code. City Attorney Leibold indicated that there was not, but it would be appropriate to address a Code of Ethics. She commented that it was a good recommendation to reference other codes, but stressed that ethics were important, but hard to legislate.. 10�' Mayor Buckley inquired if Municipal Code Section 2.09 would come back, per the Council consensus, with the State cites and the ethics code. City Attorney Leibold indicated that she would provide language on the Code of Ethics. Mayor Buckley suggested fixing the policy and creating a separate City Oath that - - specifically refers to the Ethics Code, which could include sanctions. City Attorney Leibold indicated that she could do that, but it would be a matter of policy and a hearing body could be established or a process implemented. Mayor Buckley suggested that violations could lead to terminatior loss of office. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley questioned suggesting a Code of Ethics with sanctions attached, as legislating the issues would be so subjective. She noted that she had reviewed the samples for Santa Clara and Thousand Oaks and preferred the Thousand Oaks one. She indicated she would prefer a policy statement rather than an Oath. She commented that she did not think the Council should go down the road of sanctions for perceived activities. City Attorney Leibold clarified the types of things that would generally be addressed in an Ethics Code and concurred that they were difficult to identify and address. Mayor Buckley noted that the Thousand Oaks sample did include sanctions, but questioned if a separate Oath would be better. Mayor Pro Tem Kelley indicated that she had no problems with the Oath, but was concerned with the sanctions, as it would be so subjective. AQF WA lTEW 4 NO. PAGE :z OF Page Eight — City Council Study Session — October 14, 2004 Councilman Schiffher commented that if the intent was to include enforcement, it would have to be included in the Municipal Code and spelled out in great detail, as it would be law. City Attorney Leibold commented on the difficulty of things like honesty and integrity, and how to prosecute violations. She suggested that to the extent a separate Code of Ethics was adopted, she could provide a process whereby sanctions such as censorship or public apologies were imposed. Assistant City Manager Best noted that several years ago there were sanctions which were unwritten but placed on a Councilmember. She noted that legislating rules and sanctions would put the staff in a position of being a policing agency and enforce the regulations. She indicated that this made it difficult to maintain good working relationships. She questioned the distinction between ethics and conduct. City Attorney Leibold indicated that some cities do distinguish between a Code of Conduct on things like meeting decorum, and. conducting one's self as a public official at all times. City Attorney Leibold noted that Police Chief Fetherolf had specific knowledge in the area of ethics and deferred to his comments. Police Chief Fetherolf commented that ethical behavior had to do with "ought to" behavior, which is generally covered by manuals and policy. He explained that "morality" was correct behavior which was prosecutable. He noted that when there are attempts to sanction ethical behavior it is very difficult to prosecute, and tends to be a disincentive. City Attorney Leibold thankedlim for his comments and noted his credentials in this regard. Police Chief Fetherolf explained that his doctoral dissertation was on Ethical Behavior, and he would be happy to assist the City Attorney on this project. City Attorney Leibold noted comments on rules of decorum of meetings, and while Roberts Rules of Order were discussed, they were not completely applicable. She noted that the City Clerk had provided copies of Rosenberg's Rules of Procedure, and indicated that at some point as work was done on the Policy Manual, she would be asking the Council which one they prefer. Mayor Buckley inquired if the policy should be rewritten to include something else, noting that Robert's Rules could be used as a guide although there was not enough clarity or simplicity. City Attorney Leibold suggested that there was a hierarchy AGENDA ITEM PAGE 3, OFJ.� ,0•11 Page Nine — City Council Study Session — October 14. 2004 of rules, but offered to make the suggestion to the Electoral Reform Committee, as they would be making recommendations with regard to commissions, committees, and ad hoc committees. She commented that the reference to Robert's Rules could be deleted or changes. Mayor Buckley requested the provision of copies of Rosenberg's Rules to the Public Safety Advisory Commission and Planning Commission. City Attorney Leibold noted that there were other reference materials available which might be appropriate to obtain for information. She noted the availability of a "Local Officials Guide to Ethics Law ". Mayor Buckley inquired if there was a consensus to match City Code to the State law and let City Attorney Leibold and Police Chief Fetherolf to take a stab at the policy, with the materials being forwarded to the entire Council. Edith Stafford, 29700 Hursh, questioned what nepotism would come under; and how it would come into play. City Attorney Leibold indicated that it was not a statute, but rather a matter of policy, but there was a clear statement in the - Personnel Rules. Mrs. Stafford inquired about ethics and how anyone could define ethics in a way of living. She noted excuses people could make for their actions and how to determine a set of rules and put it into living. Mayor Buckley commented that people are either ethical or not ethical. N4. Stafford questioned what defined that. Police Chief Fetherolf reiterated that ethics were "ought to" behaviors, defined by policy and rules of an organization. He noted that a personnel code would establish and govern behavior, and related sanctions could be loss of a job, depending on how the rules and regulations were written. He noted that there were a variety of rules in the Sheriff's Department, and noted that employees took an oath that they would live per those rules and regulations or risk discipline. Mrs. Stafford commented that lying would be unethical. Police Chief Fetherolf concurred that would be a breech of ethical behavior. ADJOURNMENT "I-- AGENDA ITEM NO. ` L PAGE OF—LQr Page Ten — City Council Study Session — October 14, 2004 The City Council Study Session was adjourned at 6:35 p.m. THOMAS BUCKLEY, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK/ HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ..6r AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF._1SZ.... 1.601 MINUTES CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA THURSDAY, OCTOBER 21, 2004 CALL TO ORDER Mayor Buckley called the Joint Study Session to order at 5:00 p.m. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: HICKMAN, MAGEE, SCHIFFNER, BUCKLEY ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: KELLEY Also present were: Assistant City Manager Best, Assistant City Attorney Mann, Information /Communications Manager Dennis, Community Development Director Brady, Public Works Manager Payne, and Deputy City Clerk Ray. DISCUSSION ITEMS Mayor Buckley introduced the topic of the Study Session. = Assistant City Manager Best gave an overview of the item and introduced Information/Communications Manager Dennis. Information/Communications Manager Dennis noted that this was a follow up on the Mayor's suggestion, discussing the rational scope and timing of a logo and branding strategy for the City; and the outcome from the Study Session would be to refine any specific direction to staff. Mr. Dennis indicated that the present City logo was adopted in 1971; and branding involved more things than just a logo. He indicated the RDA's logo was adopted in the mid 90's. He noted that variation of these logos had AQENDA ITEM NO, r PAGE OF® PAGE TWO — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 21, 2004 evolved. He indicated that the actual physical change to the area was affecting the City's image upon future residents, businesses, and current and existing businesses. He indicated that branding was strategic because it did use multiple elements and the purpose was to define and manage the City's image. He indicated that it was all about impression, to show distinctiveness. He gave an example by using Phillip -Morris tobacco. He indicated the company was getting rid of old connotations and perceptions, and using their image in a new name to suggest a corporate brand trust, something that was valuable. He advised that market positioning was very important. He advised that the conceptual level is defining how the City wants to be perceived. At the context level the brand strength is ever at the mercy of market or consumer changes. The iconic level is the perception of graphic imagery, and planning is a step along the way. He indicated that staff has a marketing plan goal, but not a marketing strategy in place that has been adopted by the Council. He advised that the purpose of a branding element would be to promote the City; and the logo /slogan was a part of that strategy. Local Branding Approaches a. Murrieta. He indicated that Murrieta had a unique place at the convergence of the 15 and 215 freeways; and that the Madison corridor was so thing the City wanted to capitalize on in addition to the freeway corrid� and the graphic created was the product of focus groups and an effort to invest in a brand and promote that brand by putting that image on every sign. Mayor Buckley commented that he thought it was supposed to be the mountains. Mr. Dennis indicated that they had a great graphic and a nice stylized text, but when you reviewed the idea to reinforce the idea, people did not get it and they thought it was the mountains. He explained the solution, which was done recently, was to change the purpose to fit the popular understanding. He noted there was also a solution in the slogan changing. b. Southwest California. .Noe ,..r ;BEM CA ,.� PAGE THREE — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 21, 2004 Mr. Dennis commented that the name they held before was long and he was happy to see the change. He advised the purpose was to draw attention to the cities that were already proactive marketing themselves, but had to get out of the shadow of terms like Inland Empire versus Southwestern Riverside County, the emphasis is Riverside County which people understood it to be the County government, so there were some connotation with that name. He noted that outside of the State there were other Riverside Counties, so the strategy was to brand an area to show everyone where in California we are located. He noted that the logo was very iconic. They included a little island in representing Southwest California and a list the names. Mayor Buckley commented that the map logo had to be map oriented and iconic. He indicated Los Angeles was referred to as Southern California and San Diego was referred to as Southwest California, so without that map it would have failed miserably. Mr. Dennis commented that it was a brand new term and no one had tried to establish any geographic area to that term. City Logo Mr. Dennis indicated that the Official Seal logo came into being in 1971, prior to that the City stipulated logo in the formation of the City in 1888 was just the words and location and date, it was just a stamp. Mr. Dennis gave an overview of the City Logo inventory. He indicated that 2 years ago s ff created a strict guideline for the logo. He indicated that staff got rid of alle noncompliance versions. Slogans Mr. Dennis indicated that slogans were a part of branding. He further indicated the City had three prominent slogans, and some were informally used. He noted the "Come grow with us" was used in the late 80's early 90's; and "Home of the Diamond" was stamped on the letterhead after 1994; and "One City's Got More!" was done in 2000 primarily to deal with some of the constraints and opportunities existing at that time. AGENDA IiEM-[�ifl.' ,C, PAGE��.� PAGE FOUR — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 21, 2004 Mr. Dennis indicated that one of the approaches to image was the S.W.O.T. analysis, Strengths, Weaknesses, Opportunities, and Threats. He indicated that the City was looking at the advantages of Lake Elsinore and the disadvantages must be confronted as well. Mr. Dennis indicated that Lake Elsinore had a lot of visual images. He noted there was the Lake, mountains, valley and the view from the "Lookout "; and unique palm trees; and the historic & unique architecture of some of the buildings. He further indicated that the type of name played a part in a community. Mr. Dennis continued to comment that Lake Elsinore had recreation, action, open space, preservation and natural beauty. He indicated it was about quality of life. Mr. Dennis indicated a needs assessment should be completed. He indicated there needed to be specific goals. He noted that there needed to be a marketing 1"80 strategic plan. PUBLIC COMMENTS Michael O'Neal commended Mr. Dennis on his presentation. Mr. O'Neal recommended that Council considered the history and futurgoof Lake Elsinore when developing the brand. He suggested considering the-Puiseno Indians or maybe Juan Machado. He indicated that his background was in this field and he was interested in the direction of the City regarding this issue. Assistant City Manager Best commented on the packages presented to the Council which included brochures, flyers and general information. She indicated that Mark Fisher was the graphic designer that completed the designs on the Welcome to Lake Elsinore packages. He also did the graphic design for the Outlook Newsletter. She indicated that the packages were an effort by the City and the Chamber of Commerce. She commented that in the past the Chamber of Commerce Relocation packet was a manila envelope with flyers and business cards from different business and reprints of various advertisements from the newspapers that were photocopies, so there was never AGENDA ITEM PAC: 1 e ,.-- PAGE FIVE — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 21, 2004 anything that was actually coordinated; so staff put information together with the Chamber. Assistant City Manager Best suggested that the Council consider community input. Mayor Buckley agreed with Information/Communications Manager Dennis that the City has never had a unified marketing/public relationd strategy and he felt it was something the City needed. Mayor Buckley advised that community involvement was very important and that could be handled through focus groups. He indicated that if a branding campaign should be built around a logo and/or theme. He indicated that Lake Elsinore had certain similarities in the area; and something emphasizing the difference or something that would capture the theme such as history, Lake, and scenic beauty. He commented that Perris, Corona, Murrieta, and Temecula did not have specifi things like that. Councilman Magee inquired if the Mayor was looking at forming a budget and a list of items that staff or a subcommittee or focus group could get together to discuss and then bring it back to Council. Councilman Schiffner suggested having a contest to get something started. He suggested a slogan that Lake Elsinore is a great place or something to that effect. Mayor Buckley indicated he was thinking of forming a budget for the whole thing. He commented that getting the community involved was an excellent idea. He suggested bringing in Art teachers from the local schools. He indicated that professional firms would also be able to submit potential logos and the budget range would be $5,000 to $10,000. He indicated there would be a lesser award for an amateur. He questioned if a focus group should be formed first or first create a logo and build around it or first build a series of slogans. He indicated that an RFP would be sent out. Councilman Schiffner suggested a having contest open for all the kids in the �- local schools. He indicated that there were many thoughts that might come AGENDA ITEM NO DACE S. OF PAGE SIX — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 21, 2004 ..,r forward with a heavy input volume from the community; and he did not feel it would cost a lot. Mayor Buckley agreed. Mr. Dennis commented that a branding campaign was about the image the City would be promoting whether the product at the end of the campaign was accepted. He reminded the Council, depending on how they announce to the community they are going to do this might set the bar up or down. Councilman Schiffner indicated that it would be interested to see what people would pick to promote the City. Mayor Buckley questioned if the City should keep all of the current logos. He suggested having a unified image by having everything match. Councilman Magee suggested having the successful firm of the RFP manage the contest. He indicated that he agreed with having both amateurs and professionals. Assistant City Manager Best indicated that Mr. Dennis had a strategic marketing plan that they had been waiting on for a while. She indicated that staff needed direction from the Council. Councilman Magee indicated that the company he was employed with had just gone through this sort of process. He indicated that the Mayor was qualified in this scope of work and he would strongly support the Mayor's active participation on the subcommittee and whatever focus grout were to be formed from this. Michael O'Neal suggested having some City staff control and manage a group; and suggested that Council hired a professional and not do a contest. He advised that it might cause mixed feelings in the community. He noted the Council would be better off doing it in a professional manner. He commented on Mr. George Bloomfield and that he had done wonderful graphic arts ideas. Councilman Hickman agreed with Mr. O'Neal; and commented that Lake Elsinore was about a quality of life. George Bloomfield indicated that if there was a professional group involved, perhaps to incorporate and coordinate a contest to tell a story about Lake `.,► AGENDA MN NO.... G PAGE,OF ,r-• PAGE SEVEN — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 21, 2004 Elsinore, so that you are able to surface their passion, love and experiences in a story and then submit that to a group and pull from those various key points to be incorporated. He indicated that children would have a totally different insight to things and it was often pure; and they would often shed a little light that the greatest professional might never see. Councilman Schiffner commented that a professional was needed to coordinate and put it all together. Mayor Buckley suggested having Mr. Dennis draft an RFP for Council approval. Assistant City Manager Best indicated that staff could put together an RFP to go out for a marketing consultant to work with Mr. Dennis to put together a strategic plan. Councilman Schiffner indicated that he was fine with Mr. Dennis putting together a program and bringing it back to Council. Councilman Hickman inquired if there would be an RFP for the RDA as well. Assistant City Manager Best suggested doing an RFP for everything. ADJOURNMENT THE CITY COUNCIL STUDY SESSION WAS ADJOURNED AT 6:00 P.M. THOMAS BUCKLEY, MAYOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE DARYL HICKMAN, CHAIRMAN REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA ITEM to.. C PAGE EIGHT — STUDY SESSION MINUTES — OCTOBER 21, 2004 Respectfully submitted, FREDERICK RAY, DEPUTY CITY CLERK ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK/ HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE Ar "Noe ,"..► AGENDA ffM NQ. , G, WE p- MINUTES PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 183 NORTH MAIN STREET LAKE ELSINORE, CA 92530 TUESDAY, OCTOBER 19, 2004 CALL TO ORDER: Chairman LaPere called the Regular Planning Commission Meeting to order at 6:03 PM. Commissioner O'Neal led the Pledge of Allegiance. ROLL CALL PRESENT: COMMISSIONERS: ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: LAPERE, O'NEAL, RYAN AND UHLRY LARIMER Also present were: Director of Community Development Brady, Planning and Code Enforcement Manager Villa, Engineering Manager Seumalo, Associate Planner Preisendanz, Associate Planner Coury, Senior Planner Morita, Rental Housing Clerk Alexen and Deputy City Attorney Mann. PUBLIC COMMENTS NONE CONSENT CALENDAR 1. Minutes • October 5, 2004 — Regular Planning Commission Meeting Minutes. Commissioner Uhlry noted a correction on page 9 of 9 the first paragraph, first sentence should read, "He asked about Master Craft Boats located on CollierAvenue. " He had no further corrections. AGENDA ITEM PLO. , PAGE__ j__ OF_ I_L PAGE 2 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — October 19, 2004 CONSENT CALENDAR MOVED BY O'NEAL, SECONDED BY RYAN AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO APPROVE THE CONSENT CALENDAR AND THE OCTOBER 5TH, 2004 MINUTES WITH THE NOTED CORRECTIONS. Chairman LaPere requested Item No. 8 be relocated on the Agenda to Item No. 4a. MOVED BY UHLRY, SECONDED BY O'NEAL AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO RELOCATE ITEM NO. 8 TO NO. 4a. ON THE AGENDA. 4a. Residential Design Review No. 2004 -08 for one hundred and thirty -three (133) new single- family homes located within Tract Map No. 28751. Community Development Director Brady gave a brief overview of the project. He noted that the project had been known as Lusk, Brehm and presently Pulte Homes. He requested Associate Planner Preisendanz review the project with the Commission. Associate Planner Preisendanz noted that the project consisted of the review and approval for the architecture of the homes, site plan, model home complex, landscape plan, fence and wall plan. He noted that the tract proposed a tot lot and indicated the location. He noted the reason for the tot lot was to provide a viewshed to Canyon Lake for the Tuscany Hills residents. He noted that the placement of trees and landscaping was under negotiation with the developer. N"00 Associate Planner Preisendanz noted that there were four different floor plans, three of which are two -story and one, which is a single story. He noted that on lots 7 and 8, there was a single - story and a two -story home. He noted a request for a minor revision to switch the single -story home to lot 8 and the two -story home to lot 7. He gave an overview of the architecture and the color scheme. He noted the primary concern with the tract dealt with maintaining the view from Tuscany Hills. He find 4- noted that the City Council had directed staff to include the City Council minutes for the tract map into the staff report, which contained a condition of approval that lots one through ten establish a difference of elevation between the ridgeline of the homes placed on lots one though ten and the finished pads of the homes in Tuscany Hills. He referenced a site analysis in the agenda packets, which confirms that the developer had met the requirement that the Council had made. He stated that the applicant had complied with staff's recommendations. He further stated that staff recommended the Planning Commission adopt a resolution to approve the Design Review based on the findings, exhibits and conditions of approval in the staff report and pursuant to CEQA guidelines. He noted that the applicant was present to address any questions. Agenda Item No Page of PAGE 3 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — October 19, 2004 Chairman LaPere requested the applicant approach the podium. PUBLIC COMMENTS Tom Houska, Pulte Homes Corp. 30 Bower Lane Ladera Ranch, CA. He stated that he agreed with all of the conditions of approval and he had nothing to add to the report. Dave Ebers, 44 Villa Milano Lake Elsinore. He stated that he was happy with the plans for the tot lot and how it would affect his home. He presented the Commission with pictures of different view fences and noted the picture he liked the best. Donna Franson, 7 Villa Valtelena, Lake Elsinore, stated that the gully below her home had filled with water from the recent rainstorm. She noted her concern with the safety of Della Cava. Ron Hewison, Lake Elsinore, noted that he was happy with the reversal of the homes on lots 7 and 8. John Reid, 21625 Appaloosa Court, Canyon Lake, presented the Commission with copies of a PowerPoint presentation addressing his concerns with grading and slopes along Appaloosa Court line. He further addressed erosion control and street light placement. Beth Rawlings, 43 Villa Valtelena, Lake Elsinore, addressed the issue of the new homes affecting her view. Associate Planner Preisendanz confirmed the height of the rooflines compared to the ridgelines, based on the precise grading plan. She noted that she was happy with the placement of the homes below her home. Jack Wamsley, Councilmember for Canyon Lake, thanked the Commissioner for listening to the concerns expressed by the City of Canyon Lake. He referenced a letter written by Engineering Seumalo and noted the verbal agreement made between the staff of the City of Lake Elsinore and the City of Canyon Lake. He requested a written confirmation of the agreement and noted concerns with the project. Engineering Manager Seumalo confirmed that he ha f een in touch with the staff from Canyon Lake. He confirmed that he was in the process of writing a letter to the City of Canyon Lake acknowledging their intention to meet with staff from the City of Canyon Lake and resolve any issues pertaining to the project. Chairman LaPere requested copies of all correspondence pertaining to this issue be given to the Planning Commission. Engineering Manager Seumalo confirmed. There was further discussion pertaining to drainage concerns. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Commissioner Uhlry stated that he was comfortable with the City Manager working with the developer on the landscape and design of the tot lot to preserve as much of the view as possible. He addressed the drainage issue raised by Donna Franson. There was further discussion pertaining Agenda Item No Page of PAGE 4 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — October 19, 2004 to the reason for the water level in the detention basin. Commissioner Uhlry addressed each of the N"No issues raised by the residents pertaining to the project and confirmed that all issues had been resolved to their satisfaction. He confirmed with Associate Planner Preisendanz that this was the only Design Review for this project. Commissioner Ryan commented on General Condition Number 5 on page 12 of 80 addressing the Home Owners Association (HOA). The applicant confirmed that they would be joining the Tuscany Hills HOA and the board had agreed to annex them in. He further noted his appreciation of the flexibility Pulte Homes had with the surrounding residents. Commissioner O'Neal noted that the issues raised by all parties concerned had apparently been addressed and resolved. He further noted that he concurred with staff's recommendation. Chairman LaPere invited Mr. Ebers back to the podium to speak. Mr. Ebers once again raised the issue of the view fence. Associate Planner Preisendanz addressed his concern and noted the flexibility the applicant had with preserving the views. He addressed the concerns of Mr. Reid pertaining to the slopes and lighting. He addressed Mr. Ebers concerns regarding the view. He further addressed the concern of Mr. Hewison pertaining to lots seven and eight. He confirmed that engineering would check into the draining situation for Mrs. Franson. He further addressed the response letter from Engineering Manager Seumalo. He commended the applicant for their conscious effort to do the right thing and stated that he was pleased with the project in general. Mr. Houska concurred with Chairman LaPere and thanked staff for working hard with him. MOVED BY UHLRY, SECONDED BY O'NEAL AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -142, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING OF THE RESIDENTIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -08 FOR ONE HUNDRED AND THIRTY -THREE (133) NEW SINGLE - FAMILY HOMES LOLKTED WITHIN TRACT MAP NO. 28751. Commissioner O'Neal requested a recess to accommodate any persons wishing to excuse themselves from the meeting. Chairman LaPere granted a three- minute recess. Chairman LaPere noted a Request to Address the Planning Commission, which addressed Item No. 3 on the Consent Calendar. He invited Monica Smith to address the Commission. Monica Smith, 359 Avenue 3, noted her concern with preserving the trees on the lot she had sold. She expressed her concern that the new owner of the lot would cut down the trees. Community Agenda Item No I , Page __q_ of � PAGE 5 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — October 19, 2004 Development Director Brady stated that he and Associate Planner Coury had spoken to the applicant and they had intended to leave the trees there. PUBLIC HEARNINGS 5. Canyon Hills Market Place — Commercial Design Review Nos. 2004 -02 and 2004 -10, and Conditional Use Permit Nos. 2004 -32, 2004 -33, 2004 -35, and 2004 -36 Chairman LaPere opened the Public Hearing at 7:05 pm. Community Development Director Brady provided a brief overview of the project and invited Senior Planner Morita to summarize the project for the Commission. Senior Planner Morita gave an overview of the Commercial Shopping Center. He noted that there were two Commercial Design Review applications and four Conditional Use Permit applications to consider which were in four planning areas. He described the location of the project and the different commercial businesses proposed for the area. He noted the contemporary design of the shopping center and staff's support of the applicant's efforts to make the project appealing and inviting to the public. Colton Sudbury, 5465 Morehouse Dr. San Diego, confirmed that he did not agree with two conditions of approval. He referenced condition numbers 13 and 16. There was discussion addressing his concerns with those conditions. Condition No. 16 was corrected to read, `2Vo outdoor storage of materials /merchandise is permitted, except if related to those temporary uses and/or events that are allowed by issuance of a City temporary use permit. " Brad Lenahan, 4010 Goldfinch St. San Diego, indicated that he was the landscape architect for the project and provided a brief overview of the goals of the landscape design. Keith Pittsford, 1623 Pacific Ranch Dr. Encinitas, indicated that he was proud of the project and enjoyed working with City staff. He stated that he worked closely with Pardee to maintain the design principles. PLANNING COMMISSIONER COMMENTS Commissioner O'Neal noted his appreciation of the discreteness of the design plan and the good visual. He concurred with staff's recommendation. He expressed his support in the applicants request to restate Condition No. 13. Commissioner Ryan clarified the location of the outdoor eating area courtyard. Commissioner Uhlry also clarified the outdoor eating area. There was discussion pertaining to Condition No. 35, signage approval. Stated he was looking forward to the development of the project. Agenda Item No I 'A' Page of �, 1 PAGE 6 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — October 19, 2004 Chairman LaPere stated his support for the project. He further stated that he would go along with staff's recommendation for Condition Number 13, pertaining to trash enclosures. He indicated that he had no problem with Condition Number 35 relating to signage. Commissioner O'Neal indicated that he trusted the applicant to use good signage. Commissioner Ryan indicated that he trusted staff to decide on the signage for the project. Commissioner Uhlry indicated that he had no problem with the signage issue any longer. He further addressed trash enclosures and indicated that he preferred landscaping to stone veneer. The Commission concurred. Condition Number 13 was amended to read, `All trash enclosures shall comply with the City's detail for trash enclosures and shall provide other enhancements deemed appropriate by the applicant and the Community Development Director or designee. " There being no further comments, Chairman LaPere closed the Public Hearing at 7:50 P.M., and requested the reading of the Resolution. MOVED BY RYAN, SECONDED BY UHLRY AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -143, 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 THE COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -02 TO ALLOW FOR THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A 40,150 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL CENTER TO BE LOCATED IN PLANNING AREA THREE OF THE CANYON HILLS SPECIFIC PLAN INCLUDING THE AMENDMENTS TO CONDITION NUMBERS 13 AND 16. MOVED BY O'NEAL, SECONDED BY RYAN AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -144, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CI OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVAL OF THE COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW AO. 2004 -10 TO ALLOW FOR THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A 107,473 SQUARE FOOT COMMERCIAL CENTER TO BE LOCATED IN PLANNING AREA FOUR OF THE CANYON HILLS SPECIFIC PLAN. MOVED BY O'NEAL, SECONDED BY UHLRY AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0, TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -145, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -32 FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF A DRIVE- THROUGH FOR A DRUG STORE LOCATED ON PAD AREA 14 WITHIN PLANNING AREA 4 OF THE CANYON HILLS SPECIFIC PLAN. Agenda Item No _I A, Page_ of I_ PAGE 7 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — October 19, 2004 MOVED BY UHLRY, SECONDED BY RYAN AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -146, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -33 FOR AN OUTDOOR DINING AREA FOR RESTAURANTS NEAR PAD AREA 17 WITHIN PLANNING AREA 4 OF THE CANYON HILLS SPECIFIC PLAN MOVED BY RYAN, SECONDED BY UHLRY AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -147, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -35 FOR A GAS STATION, FOOD MART, AND CAR WASH FACILITY ON PAD AREA 9 WITHIN PLANNING AREA 3 OF THE CANYON HILLS SPECIFIC PLAN MOVED BY UHLRY, SECONDED BY RYAN AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -148, 1 COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 - PAD AREA 10 WITHIN PLANNING ARE PLAN RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING ,6 FOR A LUBE -N -TUNE FACILITY ON k 3 OF THE CANYON HILLS SPECIFIC 6. Zone Change No. 2004 -11, Commercial Design Review No. 2004 -06 and Variance No. 2004 -06 for the Best Western Hotel. Chairman LaPere opened the Public Hearing at 7:56 pm. Community Development Director Brady provided a brief overview of the item. _ Associate Planner Preisendanz reviewed the project location and the request for a zone change. He further reviewed the design and construction of the three -story hotel and clarified the elevation. He indicated that the entire site would be landscaped. He noted site constraints due to issues pertaining to right -of -way requirements. He stated that staff supported the prat and indicated that it was exempt from CEQA, because it was an infill project. Chairman LaPere asked the applicant if he agreed to the Conditions of Approval. Sashi Engineer, 71730 Hwy 111, Rancho Mirage, thanked the Commission. He stated his objection to the TIF and TUMF fees, but he accepted the other Conditions of Approval. He indicated that he would take up his objections with the City Council. Hector Lara, Lara Engineering, 32815 Vincent Moraga Dr. Temecula indicated that he had spoken to Engineering Manager Seumalo and resolved the issues pertaining drainage. � Agenda Item No Page_ of PAGE 8 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — October 19, 2004 Community Development Director Brady explained that the TIF and TUMF fees had been in effect "OW prior to submission of the application for the project. He further explained that the fees were not a Planning Commission issue due to the Ordinance and it could be addressed by the City Council. Commissioner Uhlry confirmed that the MSHCP applied to this project. He indicated that he was supportive of the project. Commissioner O'Neal noted his concern with CalTrans. There was discussion regarding hook ramps and street width. He noted his support for the project. Commissioner Ryan expressed his support of the project. Chairman LaPere noted the positive reputation of Best Western. He further noted his support of the project. There being no further comments, Chairman LaPere closed the Public Hearing at 8:13 P.M., and requested the reading of the Resolution. MOVED BY RYAN, SECONDED BY O'NEAL AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -149, 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. 2004 -11 CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE PARCELS SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS APN (S) 363- 172 -004, 013 AND 020 FROM C -1 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO C -2 GENERAL COMMERICAL DISTRICT UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE. MOVED BY UHLRY SECONDED BY RYAN AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -150, 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 COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO.2004'TO ALLOW FOR THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A 41,340 SQUARE FOOT BEST WESTERN HOTEL LOCATED ON 2.92 ACRES ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER(S) 363-172-004,013, & 020. MOVED BY O'NEAL SECONDED BY RYAN AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -151, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 2004 -06 FOR A REDUCTION IN LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL LOCATED ON 2.92 ACRES ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER(S) 363 - 172 -004, 013, 020. Agenda Item No Page of V, PAGE 9 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — October 19, 2004 7. Amended and Restated Agreement to Develop and Operate Shopping Center and Settlement Agreement between the City of Lake Elsinore and Castle & Cooke Lake Elsinore Outlet Centers, Inc. Chairman LaPere opened the Public Hearing at 8:15 pm. Community Development Director Brady provided an overview of the item. Bill Sampson, Castle & Cooke 10000 Stockdale Hwy, Bakersfield, agreed with the staff report. He thanked staff and the City Attorney for their diligent pursuit in negotiating the agreement. Commissioner O'Neal had no comments. Commissioner Uhlry requested clarification of the sales tax generated to be used to pay off $1,500,000.00. Community Development Director indicated that it would be 50% of sales tax generated. He noted section 3.3 on page 15 of 47, which referenced the obligation to pay the DAG fee. Deputy City Attorney Mann indicated that he would confirm it that line should be removed from the agreement. Commissioner Uhlry questioned the issue of CFD on page 16 of 47. Deputy City Attorney Mann clarified a CFD had not been considered due to the original reimbursement agreement. There was discussion regarding the Orange County Corridor and the effect it could have on the project. �-� Commissioner Ryan requested clarification of the term "total not to exceed $1.5 million." Mr. Swanson indicated that if the time limit had run out prior to full payment, or the ten -year limit, then the obligation would be considered fulfilled. Commissioner O'Neal had no comment. Chairman LaPere requested clarification of the 15 -year limitation payback. He further clarified the maximum developable land as 80 acres. There was further discussion pertaining to the revenue generated for the City from the fees for development. He noted his appreciation that Castle & Cooke desired to develop their property in the City. Commissioner Uhlry requested that Deputy City Attorney Mann provided him with information pertaining to pending litigation. Chairman LaPere requested that the entire Commission receive the confidential information. Deputy City Attorney Mann indicated that he would prepare a written statement for the Commission. There being no further comments, Chairman LaPere closed the Public Hearing at 8:36 P.M., and requested the reading of the Resolution. Agenda It N ' Page o of PAGE 10 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — October 19, 2004 MOVED BY RYAN SECONDED BY UHLRY AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4-0 TO ...✓ ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -152, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA APPROVAL OF THE AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT TO DEVELOP AND OPERATE A SHOPPING CENTER AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AND CASTLE & COOKE, LAKE ELSINORE OUTLET CENTERS, INC. BUSINESS ITEMS 8. Residential Design Review No. 2004 -08 for one hundred and thirty -three (133 ) new single - family homes located within Tract Map No. 28751. At the request of Chairman LaPere, this item was moved to item no. 4a. INFORMATIONAL • None STAFF COMMENTS Director of Community Development Brady commented on the following: • Noted that the Commission trusted staff's review of trash enclosures, but not signs. PLANNING COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS Commissioner LaPere made note of Community Development Dirtor Brady's keen sense of humor. Vice Chairman O'Neal commented on the following: • He thanked staff for fixing the appearance of SOS Storage. Commissioner Uhlry commented on the following: • He thanked staff for the improved appearance of SOS Storage. • He wished Dana a speedy recovery. Agenda Item No Page (Q_ of �, PAGE 11 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES — October 19, 2004 • He thanked staff for their efforts in the projects presented. Commissioner Ryan commented on the following • He thanked Staff for their admirable preparation to allow the Commission to do their job with ease. Chairman LaPere commented on the following. • He clarified that the letter provided by Deputy City Attorney Mann would be confidential. • He commended staff for their effort and hard work. • He recognized Community Development Director Brady as a prime example of a leader and thanked him for his hard work. ADJOURNMENT THERE BEING NO FURTHER BUSINESS, CHAIRMAN LAPERE ADJOURNED THE MEETING AT 8:40 PM ON OCTOBER 19, 2004. Ron LaPere, Chairman Respectfully Submitted, Lisa C. Alexen Rental Housing Clerk ATTEST: Robert A. Brady, Secretary to the Planning Commission Agenda It m No Page I I of l� OCTOBER 28, 2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE WARRANT SUMMARY FUND# FUND DESCRIPTION TOTAL 100 GENERAL FUND 615,700.52 105 MISCELLANEOUS GENERAL PROJECT FUND 41,850.00 110 STATE GAS TAX FUND 26,518.15 112 TRANSPORTATION / MEASURE A FUND 6,276.00 130 LIGHTING / LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT FUND 31,051.46 135 LIGHTING / LANDSCAPE MAINTENANCE DISTRICT NO. 1 FUND 1,500.00 150 C.D.B.G. FUND 55,566.33 205 TRAFFIC IMPACT FEE FUND 6,264.86 257 C.F.D. 2003 -02 CANYON HILLS 5,945.00 351 A.D. 87 -2 DEBT SERVICE FUND 854.53 352 A.D. 86 -1 DEBT SERVICE FUND 1,209.52 353 A.D. 89 -1 DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,682.93 356 A.D. 90 -1A DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,655.13 358 C.F.D. 91 -2 DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,025.00 359 C.F.D. 90 -3 DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,025.00 360 A.D. 93 -1 DEBT SERVICE FUND 3,290.26 362 C.F.D. 95 -1 (1996 -E) DEBT SERVICE FUND 1,350.00 363 C.F.D. 88 -3 III (A) / 97 SERIES A DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,025.00 368 C.F.D. 2004 -2 VISCAYA DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,250.00 370 CAMINO DEL NORTE 2004 -XX DEBT SERVICE FUND 2,875.00 608 TRUST DEPOSITS & PRE -PAID EXP. FUND 4,000.00 610 KANGAROO RAT TRUST FUND 36,830.00 620 COST RECOVERY SYSTEM 38,327.43 GRAND TOTAL 11/2/2004 PAWARRANT LIST MASTERMARRANT 102804 893,072.12 AGENDA ITEM NO. ,- PAGE-- OF-.. OCTOBER 28, 2004 CITY OF LADE ELSINORE WARRANT LIST CHECK# VENDOR NAME AMOUNT 79402 VOID- (ROBBINS PEST MANAGEMENT, INC.) (1,370.00) 79451 UNITED STATES POSTAL SERVICE 2,300.00 79581 DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION 1,736.00 79582 I.C.M.A. RETIREMENT TRUST 4,089.56 79583 ALTURA CREDIT UNION 1,325.00 79584 CALIFORNIA P.E.R.S. 30,481.18 79586 VOID 0.00 79587 -79589 A & A JANITORIAL SERVICE 5,157.50 79590 ACTION PARK ALLIANCE, INC. 4,166.00 79591 ALPINE PREMIUM WATER- NATHAN GARNER 187.55 79592 ANIMAL FRIENDS OF THE VALLEY 1,600.00 79593 APPLE ONE EMPLOYMENT SERVICES 1,101.10 79594 ARTISAN GOLDSMITHS & AWARDS 22.63 79595 ASSOCIATION OF CALIFORNIA WATER AGENCIES 1,050.00 79596 BARRETT, LTD. 2,500.00 79597 BIO -TOX LABORATORIES 911.21 79598 BOATS PLUS 1,852.03 79599 ROBERT BRADY 126.32 79600 RICHARD BULLARD 1,000.00 79601 BUY ONLINE NOW .COM 61.40 79602 CA PARK & RECREATION SOCIETY 140.00 79603 CALIFORNIA SOCIETY OF MUNICIPAL FINANCE OFFICERS 100.00 79604 CITICORP VENDOR FINANCE, INC. 770.41 79605 CITY & COUNTY SOIL ENGINEERING, INC. 2,660.00 79606 COAST RECREATION, INC. 198.02 79607 COMPUTER ALERT SYSTEMS, INC. 600.00 79608 COOK EQUIPMENT COMPANY OF SOUTHERN COUNTIES 292.99 79609 KIRT A. COURY 4,178.11 79610 -79611 CUTTING EDGE STAFFING, INC. 7,901.30 79612 D & S ELECTRIC 5,977 -.00r 79613 DANKA OFFICE IMAGING 256.43 79614 DAPEER, ROSENBILT & LITVAK, L.L.P. 3,993.70 79615 DELL MARKETING, L.P. 1,144.22 79616 DELT BUILDERS 54,981.33 79617 DO IT CENTER - 467.77 79618 CAROLE K. DONAHOE, AICP 4,595.33 79619 DOWNS COMMERCIAL FUELING, INC. 2,285.34 79620 DRESCO REPRODUCTION, INC. 443.72 79621 -79626 E. V. M. W. D. 26,575.60 79627 E.D.C. SOUTHWEST RIVERSIDE COUNTY 6,280.00 79628 ELITE ELEVATOR, INC. 1,902.00 79629 ELSINORE ELECTRICAL SUPPLY, INC. 463.35 79630 ELSINORE PIONEER LUMBER CO. 249.71 79631 ELSINORE VALLEY RENTALS 71.50 79632 EMPIRE PRE -CAST 3,825.00 79633 ENFORCEMENT TECHNOLOGY, INC. 1,125.00 79634 EXCEL LANDSCAPE, INC. 2,935.00 79635 JON FAZZIO 272.96 79636 FEDERAL EXPRESS CORPORATION 163.43 79637 FILARSKY & WATT, L.L.P. 165.00 79638 FRANKLIN COVEY 179.89 79639 G. NEIL DIRECT MAIL, INC. 413.23 1112/2004 PAWARRANT LIST MASTER \WARRANT 102804 1 OF 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE a OF OCTOBER 28, 2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ,-.CHECK# VENDOR NAME WARRANT LIST AMOUNT 79640 GEARHART'S GARAGE, INC. 510.55 79641 GEO SEC, INC. 6,947.89 79642 WILLIAM GORHAM 160.00 79643 -79646 GREENSCAPE 37,719.46 79647 ARLINE GULBRANSEN 126.14 79648 H.O.P.E.,INC. 5,000.00 79649 HARDY & HARPER, INC. 56,005.00 79650 -79652 HARRIS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 114,236.65 79653 HARTZOG & CRABILL, INC. 1,170.00 79654 HAULAWAY STORAGE CONTAINERS, INC. 223.20 79655 HDR ENGINEERING, INC. 33,513.98 79656 HEWLETT - PACKARD COMPANY 7,341.44 79657 DARYL J. HICKMAN 360.40 79658 INLAND EMPIRE LOCK & KEY 49.77 79659 INTERNAL REVENUE SERVICE 456.73 79660 INTERNATIONAL INSTITUTE OF MUNICIPAL CLERKS 100.00 79661 JEFF HAUSER MOBILE WELDING 1,440.00 79662 VICKI KASAD 155.00 79663 PAT KILROY 41.63 79664 KOBATA & ASSOC., INC. 3,260.00 79665 LA SIERRA FIRE EQUIPMENT 5.95 79666 LAKE CHEVROLET 725.50 79667 LAKE ELSINORE FLORIST & GIFTS 191.63 79668 LAKE ELSINORE VALLEY CHAMBER OF COMMERCE 12.00 ,,-,79669 LEHMAN BROTHERS, INC. 4,893.75 79670 LINKLINE COMMUNICATIONS, INC. 47.28 79671 CHARLES MACKEY JR. 4,976.20 79672 KIM MAGEE 50.00 79673 MAGIC VALLEY HELI -ARC & MANUFACTURING, INC. 2,414.08 79674 MAYHALL PRINT SHOP 431-.00 79675 MCMASTER -CARR 53.01 79676 LINDA M. MILLER 3,050.00 79677 MITCHELL DEVELOPMENT 1,500.00 79678 MOBILE SATELLITE VENTURES, L.P. 72,87 79679 DUANE A. MORITA - 4,050.60 79680 MORROW PLUMBING, INC. 204.91 79681 MORTON PEST CONTROL, INC. 45.00 79682 MSA INLAND EMPIRE /DESERT CHAPTER 85.00 79683 NBS GOVERNMENT FINANCE GROUP 10,692.37 79684 NEILL'S CONTRACTING 227.50 79685 NELSON PAVING, INC. 48,126.00 79686 NETCOMP TECHNOLOGIES, INC. 5,058.64 79687 NEW HOLLAND CREDIT, L.L.C. 3,251.42 79688 NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS 1,834.96 79689 NORTH AMERICAN LAKE MANAGEMENT SOCIETY 100.00 79690 NORTH COUNTY TIMES 549.11 79691 CARLOS PACHECO 500.00 79692 PAPER DIRECT, INC. 380.80 79693 DENNIS A. PETERSEN D.O., INC. 1,035.00 79694 PHD PENSKE LEASING 898.94 '^79695 THE PLANNING CENTER 1,321.54 79696 KIMBERLY PRENTICE 56.25 11/2/2004 PAWARRANT LIST MASTERMARRANT 102804 2 OF 3 AGENDA ITEM NO, \ PAGE OF OCTOBER 28, 2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE WARRANT LIST CHECK# VENDOR NAME AMOUNT 79697 THE PRESS ENTERPRISE 3,215.80 `%wl 79698 PRO PET DISTRIBUTORS 334.00 79699 PRODUCTION VIDEO 120.00 79700 PVP COMMUNICATIONS, INC. 321.45 79701 -79702 QUILL CORPORATION 1,818.77 79703 QWEST COMMUNICATIONS 422.25 79704 R.J. NOBLE COMPANY, INC. 5,590.26 79705 REBEL RENTS, INC. 156.81 79706 RIGHTWAY 707.54 79707 RIVERSIDE COUNTY HABITAT CONSERVATION AGENCY 36,830.00 79708 RIVERSIDE COUNTY OFFICE OF AGING 1,000.00 79709 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DEPARTMENT OF INFORMATION TECHNOLOGY 266.73 79710 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE OFFICE OF ASSESSOR, GARY L ORSO 33.00 79711 ROBBINS PEST MANAGEMENT, INC. 250.00 79712 ROTARY CLUB OF LAKE ELSINORE 130.00 79713 SC ENGINEERING 6,050.06 79714 SCOTT FAZEKAS & ASSOCIATES, INC. 3,727.12 79715 SHARE CORP. 1,452.38 79716 SIGNS PLUS 992.00 79717 DAVID S. SOLOMON 3,022.50 79718 -79723 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON CO. 18,991.47 79724 STAPLES CREDIT PLAN 865.74 79725 STAUFFER'S LAWN EQUIPMENT 130.53 79726 BOB STOVER, INC. 4,618.24 79727 SUAREZ'S AUTO UPHOLSTERY 250.00 79728 SUDWEEKS DEVELOPMENT 2,800.00 79729 SUNGARD HTE, INC. 26,457.01 79730 TEAM AUTOAID, INC. 116.80 79731 TEMECULA COPIERS 785.52 79732 TEXTRON FINANCIAL CORPORATION 987.13 79733 TURF STAR, INC. 307.13 79734 UNION BANK OF CALIFORNIA 22,903.82 79735 UNITED PARCEL SERVICE 117.80 79736 UNIVERSITY OF PHOENIX 1,236.00 79737 VALLEY CENTER AUTO PARTS NAPA - 204.25 79738 VERDICON, INC. 11,684.15 79739 -79742 VERIZON CALIFORNIA, INC. 3,675.10 79743 WEST COAST ARBORISTS, INC. 10,421.90 79744 WEST COAST WINDOW CLEANING 450.00 79745 WESTERN HIGHWAY PRODUCTS, INC. 6,794.46 79746 W ILLDAN 1,088.00 79747 ZEE MEDICAL, INC. 59.48 TOTAL 740,949.17 P/E DATE: 10/15/2004 PAYROLL TAXES 44,429.56 10/15/2004 PAYROLL CASH 107,693.39 GRAND TOTAL 893,072.12 11/2/2004 PAWARRANT LIST MASTER\WARRANT 102804 3 OF 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF N REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: NOVEMBER 9, 2004 SUBJECT: REQUEST FOR NO PARKING ON GRAND AVENUE AT WINDWARD WAY AND SHORELINE DRIVE BACKGROUND Staff has received complaints regarding truck parking on Grand Avenue between Shoreline Drive and Windward Way. The trucks substantially reduce the intersection lines -of -sight for drivers trying to exit Windward Way safely onto Grand Avenue DISCUSSION A field investigation indicates that large trucks are parked on Grand Avenue near the intersections of Windward Way and Shoreline Drive. Some are parking close enough to the intersections to substantially reduce intersection lines -of- sight. Adequate intersection lines -of -sight should be maintained for traffic safety purposes. Adequate intersection lines -of -sight have been calculated which indicate where no parking needs to be installed in order to maintain them at all times. The Lake Elsinore Municipal Code permits the City Council to approve No Parking Zones by resolution. A resolution has been prepared for Council consideration of the above No Parking Zones. About 200 feet of parking will remain on Grand Avenue between Windward Way and Shoreline Drive after the no parking zones are installed. Since truck parking is only allowed on arterial streets like Grand Avenue, trucks may park in that area without interfering with intersection lines -of- sight. FISCAL IMPACT The fiscal impact is approximately $ 500.00. RECOMMENDATION Approve the attached Resolution No. 2004 - (7� prohibiting parking on Grand Avenue between Shoreline Drive and Windward Way. PREPARED BY: Chuck Mackey,.City Traffic Engineer APPROVED BY: 1--/ (1-` Community Deve pment Department APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: City Manager's bffice f0j0WWA M NO. PAGE OF !AML •J El RESOLUTION NO 2004 --6� A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ESTABLISHING NO PARKING ZONES ON CERTAIN STREETS WHEREAS, Section 10.40.010, of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code provides for the establishment of No Parking Zones on certain streets by resolution of the City Council; and, WHEREAS, Grand Avenue is an arterial street; and, WHEREAS, Grand Avenue is a designated truck route, and, WHEREAS, Large trucks park on Grand Avenue between Shoreline Drive and Windward Way, and; WHEREAS, Vehicles exiting Shoreline Drive and Windward Way onto Grand Avenue have limited lines -of -sight when large trucks park close to the intersections, and; WHEREAS, The line -of -sight when limited causes an unsafe condition, and; WHEREAS, it is necessary to restore the lines -of -sight for safety purposes, and; WHEREAS, it has been determined that the designation of Narking zones are necessary for traffic safety; NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore, hereby establishes certain No Parking Zones as follows: NAME OF STREET SIDE OF STREET LOCATION OF NO PARKING ZONE Grand Avenue West Side From the BCR at Windward and Grand north 240 feet Grand Avenue West Side From the ECR at Windward and Grand south AGENDA ITEM NO. PA-3 OF—'] OF—'] Resolution No. 2004 - No Parking Zones on Certain Streets Grand Avenue West Side Grand Avenue West Side 2004. 60 feet From the BCR at Shoreline and Grand north 240 feet From the ECR at Shoreline and Grand south 60 feet PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS day of , AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: THOMAS BUCKLEY, MAYOR - - CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE APPROVED AS TO FORM: BARBARA LEIBOLD, CITY ATTORNEY AGENDA ITEM NO. _� PAGE ( OF® Z�-2 ^ INTEROFFICE MEMORANDUM TO: CHUCK MACKEY, TRAFFIC ENGINEER D VIE FROM: BILL PAYNE, PUBLIC WORKS MANAGER OCT SUBJECT: GRAND AVENUE WINDWARD WAY TRUCK PARKING DATE: OCTOBER 22, 2004 CITY OF LENGINEER I received another call yesterday from a resident of Windward Way. She informed me that she suffered another near miss traffic accident due to the truck parking on Grand Avenue at the intersection of Windward Way. I discussed this situation with Brian Scofield who informed me that the problem was being addressed by you. Would you please give me a status on the investigation of the safety concerns at this intersection? Thank You c. Director Community Services City Engineer AQE14UA t e ter► 3 PAOE OF C-D C) C"i 1-0 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Richard J. Watenpaugh, City Manager DATE: November 09, 2004 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF FINAL PARCEL MAP 31963 located at the intersection of Pasadena Street and Crane Street. BACKGROUND The parcel map under consideration consists of approximately 7.3 acres and is being subdivided into 15 lots for industrial and manufacturing purposes. Typically a division of land creating this number of lots would require a Tract Map however the Subdivision Map Act under section 66426 (c) allows the division to be classified as a Parcel Map. The project is located at the intersection of Pasadena Street and Crane Street. FINDINGS Staff has reviewed the final map and it conforms substantially all Conditions of Approval required at the final map stage have been completed. FISCAL IMPACT None. RECOMMENDATION 1. Approve the final map, subject to the City Engineer's accepts e as being true and correct and accept all dedications at time of recordation. 2. Authorize the City Clerk to sign the map and arrange for the recordation. PREPARED BY: Ken SeumaIo, Engineering Manager APPROVED BY: COMP"IT4f DEVEI APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: CITY MANAGER'S,,DFFICE Exhibit A: Final map ARTMENT AGENDA ITEM NO. _.. �' PAGE OF CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO: Mayor and City Council FROM: Richard J. Watenpaugh, City Manager DATE: November 09, 2004 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF FINAL TRACT MAP 25479, Centex Homes located south of State Route 74, two miles east of I -15. BACKGROUND At their regular meeting on August 12, 2003, City Council approved Tentative Tract Map 25479. The tract map under consideration consists of approximately 137 acres and is being subdivided into 254 residential lots, 1- commercial lot, 1- multi - family lot, 15- lettered open space lots, 1- community park site and 18- lettered lots for road purposes. The project is located in the Ramsgate Specifica Plan Area south of State Route 74 and two miles east of I -15. FINDINGS Staff has reviewed the final map and it conforms substantially to the tentative tract map and all Conditions of Approval required at the final map stage have been completed. FISCAL IMPACT None. RECOMMENDATION 1. Approve the final map, subject to the City Engineer's accepts as being true and correct and accept all dedications at time of recordation. 2. Authorize the City Clerk to sign the map and arrange for the recordation. PREPARED BY: APPROVED BY: APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: Ken Seumalo, Engineering Manager CITY MANA Exhibit A: Final map !., PAGE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: NOVEMBER 9, 2004 SUBJECT: REPLACEMENT OF IBM AS 400 ENTERPRISE SYSTEM/PURCHASE OF NEW IBM SYSTEM ISERIES MODEL 520 BACKGROUND The IBM AS 400 system was purchased in 1994 and functions as the server for our enterprise computing software suite by HTE, Inc., including modules for Finance (GMBA), Accounts Payable, Payroll, Personnel, Building Permits, Business License, Code Enforcement, and Planning and Zoning. DISCUSSION The AS 400 system is aging and was recommended for replacement as a result of the IT Strategic Plan adopted last year. The outdated operating system version we run is no longer supported by IBM, but couldn't be upgraded because of system performance concerns. Some system hardware components are no longer covered by IBM under extended warranty. Several power outages this summer affected the system, despite our having a UPS and generator backup system at City Hall. Because the tape backup subsystem is running near maximum capacity it, too, needs to be upgraded for reliable data protection and security. For these reasons, replacement is a priority. City staff has investigated the cost of acquiring a replacement for the * 400 system. The availability of California Multiple Award Schedules (CMAS) pricing, which is equivalent to GSA pricing, ensures state and local governments get the best price on Information Technology products and services from the manufacturer and an IBM preferred vendor for the Public Sector, without the need for an individualized bidding process. The IBM iSeries Model 520 has been selected as the best replacement for our enterprise hardware expansion needs, while holding us in the P5 processor tier to save on the upgrade cost for extended IBM software and hardware warranty support. For our circumstances, the preferred vendor must possess extensive knowledge of HTE, Inc. software and have HTE migration expertise. Our determination of the most qualified vendor is based on phone interviews and comparisons with several vendors we've been in contact with during the past few years. In addition, staff contacted HTE Users Group members to research AS 400 replacement strategies. Staff recommends the purchase the IBM 520 iSeries system as shown AGENDA ITEM NO... PAGE. OF. in the attached proposal from Logical Design, Inc. (CMAS ID# 3- 98- 70- 0172D) because of their -.NO, overall responsiveness and expertise with the IBM iSeries and HTE software. FISCAL IMPACT Replacement of the IBM AS 400 enterprise computing system was budgeted in the FY 04 -05 Capital Improvement Projects budget as recommended in the IT Strategic Plan. The CMAS pricing and migration cost with tax is $59,000.95, which is within the budget estimate shown in the IT Strategic Plan (attached). RECOMMENDATION That the City Council determine it is in the best interest of the City to utilize the CMAS pricing process in lieu of the formal bid process and authorize the City Manager to execute a purchase order with Logical Design, Inc. for a new IBM 520 iSeries system, including data and system migration, service and support, as shown in the attached proposal and specification. PREPARED BY: Mark Dennis, Information /Communications Manager APPROVED FOR AGENDA BY: AQENDA ITEM NO. ` PAM OF_.eL =� 1"00* [loll November 1, 2004 Mr. Mark Dennis City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Dear Mark: LOGICAL DESIGN, INC. Please find the proposal that we (You, Phil & I) customized to meet your IT System requirements. The IBM i5 iSeries Model 520 is the most current line of processors that IBM makes and uses the new POWER 5 processor chip. This system will offer the city a significant increase in performance and capacity and position you to take advantage of new Sungard/HTE applications including their Navaline application. This proposal reflects both IBM's list price and the CMAS /GSA pricing. Logical Design, Inc. is a preferred vendor for the Public Sector and we have supplied new IBM iSeries to many cities and counties throughout California under the CMAS contract. This includes: • Palm Desert — Doug Van Gelder • Thousand Oaks - Charlene Leonard • City of San Dimas — Barbara Herron Additionally, I have proposed our (LDI) services for Setup, Conversion and Migration of your existing applications to the new i5 iSeries processor. As you know, your conversion will take longer than most due to being several releases back on your AS /400 Operating System. However, I can assure you that w_e can accomplish this over a weekend and have the new system up and running on Monday morning. - Should you have any questions about the enclosed proposal, please don't hesitate to call or email me. Regards, S Kevi Schirmer iSeries Specialist Logical Design, Inc. P. O. Box 3128 • Rancho Cordova, CA 95741 •480- 610 -5299 AGENDA ITEM 1140 PAGE OF v -, Model: Type. Processor: Interactive: Processor Group: Main Storage: Disk Storage: LOGICAL DESIGN, INC. 15®Series Upgrade Proposal Prepared for: City of Lake Elsinore Current System 9406 600 2129 (22 .7CPW) N/A P05 384mb 20.94GB List Price - Hardware /Software CMAS /GSA Pricing (GS- 35F- 4984H) - iSeries LDI CMAS ID# - 3- 98- 70 -0172D Conversion & Migration Services Proposed System 9406 520 7450 (500CPW) 0900 (30CPW) P05 2,048mb 140.64GB $ 62,108 $ 51,509* 3,500 Total Price $ 55,009* 4E�- P. O. Box 3128 • Rancho Cordova, CA 95741 •480- 610 -5299 AGENDA ITEM NO.. . PAGE„ OF LOGICAL DESIGN, INC. _ - -- NOV 2 2r 4 IBM Hardware Detail iSeries Subtotal 58,868.00 48,269.00 P. O. Box 3128 • Rancho Cordova, CA 95741 •480- 610 -5299 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 15 OF Extended Extended Product Description Qty List CMAS 9406 -520 iSeries Server 1 N/C N/C 0041 Device Parity Protection 1 N/C N/C 0325 IPCS Extension Cables 1 110.00 89.00 0446 512MB DDR Server Memory 2 880.00 710.00 0530 Software Version V5R3 1 N/C N/C 0834 #4326 Load Source Specify 1 N/C N/C 0900 i5 Series Server (500CPW) 1 N/C N/C 1025 Modem Cable 1 N/C N/C 1454 200V 12A 14ft Line Cord 1 N/C N/C 1482 3.5m HSL -2 Cable 1 550.00 443.00 1483 10m HSL -2 Cable 1 850.00 685.00 1700 IPCS Keyboard/Mouse 1 90.00 73.00 1827 Serial -UPS Conversion Cable 1 95.00 90.00 2640 DVD -ROM 1 378.00 304.00 2749 PCI Ultra Mag Media Ctlr 1 1,300.00 1,048.00 2844 PCI lop 1 2,100.00 1,693.00 2924 English 1 N/C N/C 4326 35.16GB 15k rpm Disk Unit 4 7,084.00 5,708.00 4447 2048MB Main Storage 1 2,200.00 1,774.00 4746 PCI Twinaxial Workstn IOA 1 750.00 605.00 4810 PCI Integ xSeries Server(2.OGhz) 1 1,900.00 1,531/00 5094 PCI -X Expansion Tower 1 17,900.00 14,428.00 5540 Sys Console on Twinax WSC 1 N/C N/C 5703 PCI -X RAID Disk Unit Ctlr 1 3,00200 2,418.00 5709 RAID Enabler Card 1 2,175.00 1,753.00 5754 50GB 1/4" Cartridge Tape 1 6,000.00 4,836.00 6008 SPCN 6m Cable 2 100.00 80.00 6470 6ft - 125V/1 5A Power Cord 1 N/C N/C 6574 4 -Disk Slot Exp — Base Ctlr 1 250.00 202.00 7450 Value Edition for #0900 1 7,019.00 5,657.00 7885 520 Deskside 1 N/C N/C 8950 520 1.5GHz Processor 1 N/C N/C 9517 Base HSL- 2/RIO -G Bus Adapter 1 N/C N/C 9793 Base PCI 2 -Line WAN w/Modem 1 N/C N/C 9844 Base PCI IOP 1 N/C N/C 9910 -P30 2100 Watt UPS 1 4,137.00 4,137.00 iSeries Subtotal 58,868.00 48,269.00 P. O. Box 3128 • Rancho Cordova, CA 95741 •480- 610 -5299 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 15 OF P. O. Box 3128 • Rancho Cordova, CA 95741 •480- 610 -5299 AQrENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF '"aw 4 LOGI CAL DESIGN, INC. } N,OV 2 20 it Software - Detail Extended Extended Product Description Qty List CMAS 5722 -AC3 IBM Cryptographic Access 1 N/C N/C 5722 -CE3 IBM iSeries Client Encryption 1 N/C N/C 5722 -PT1 IBM Performance Tools 1 N/C N/C 5722 -QU1 IBM Query for iSeries 1 N/C N/C 5722 -SSI IBM Operating System/400 1 N/C N/C 5722 -ST1 IBM DB2 Query Mgr & SQL 1 N/C N/C 5722 -WDS IBM Websphere Dev Studio 1 N/C N/C 5722 -WEI IBM Web Enablement 1 N/C N/C 5722 -XW 1 IBM iSeries Access 1 N/C N/C 5733 -UX3 IBM Software Support — 3 Yr 1 3,240.00 3,240.00 5733 -VE1 IBM Virtualization Engine 1 N/C N/C Total Software 3,240.00 3,240.00 P. O. Box 3128 • Rancho Cordova, CA 95741 •480- 610 -5299 AQrENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF '"aw E- government Initiative 2: Infrastructure and Security Goal: Create a secure and stable technology foundation to optimize enterprise ...t.....,..- ....A :.r..,lomon4 o- nA \ /PrnrnPnt applications and services J JtG11W ca"" a... r.a....vu• .. .. .... ..... _. - -- . Action 2.a: Enterprise System - Reduce Risk of City interruption of Service Cost /Resources Qptimization /AS400 Upgrades and valuable loss of vital City information Estimate S65,000. Internal Staff Time • Optimize performance, usability of HTE Upgrade AS /400 System system components and other system 0 Ensures that City is effectively using enhancements to improve system current system prior to full upgrade of performance and usability; extend system (Phase II) Timing: Immediate the life of the system; and avoid Increase worker productivity potential costly system downtime Improve data integrity and usefulness of from potential system failures information . Data cleanup is essential prior to system upgrade to ensure a smooth upgrade path later on Action 2.b: T -I /Network Provide direct access to City Network for Cost /Resources Connectivity remote locations /facilities Estimate $7,000 • Improve reliability, security and Internal Staff Time Ensure fast and reliable Internet performance of City Internet and Network connections Improve efficiency of remote locations Timing: Fourth Quarter -2003 throughout the City Action 2.c: Security and Cost /Resources Network Upgrades Improve reliability, security and Estimate 55,500 performance of overall City Network Internal Staff Time Improve security of City network Avoid costly downtime from potential via upgrade and improved system interruption of service due to network Timing: Fourth Quancr -2003 maintenance. Ensure ongoing security breaches security and network reliability Action 2.d: Hardware and • Improve productivity /staff effectiveness Cost /Resources Software Upgrades Improve staff morale and employee Estimate 519,000 Upgrades for City Computers — retention Results in better decision making and better Timing: First Quarter -2004, Hardware and Software allocation of IT resources Ongoing Estimated Phase I Cost for Infrastructure and Security: $90,000 - $100,000 City of Lake Elsinore E- Government Implementation Plan Civic Resource Group, November 2003 AGENDA I i EM NO, PAGE ®OF • Most deficiencies in the system are process related rather than actual shortcomings in the software. These cannot be solved without first addressing City process needs and training issues. • Business software replacement projects are lengthy and have a high failure rate — over 70% of such projects fail at government agencies. Successful projects of this nature are best approached in an incremental manner with the City focusing on current data and process issues before it replaces its system. • The market for Municipal ERP systems is undergoing rapid consolidation and a rapid shift in technology platforms. The risk of choosing the "wrong vendor' is substantial including potentially locking into a costly platform that is not supported in the future. • The City's current vendor HTE, was recently acquired by Sungard, a well established and stable technology company. Customer support has noticeably improved since the acquisition. The City is better served by taking a "wait and see" approach on Sungard's plans for the product before replacing with a new system. 3.2.2 Implementation Discussion The City should take a series of steps to improve AS /400 system performance and reliability. Upgrades to the system will need to include hardware as well as other measures that can improve overall system usability and performance. This includes an evaluation of current data storage and looking for potential optimization opportunities such as purging of old data: Usability of the system will also be enhanced by the reporting initiative discussed below in section 4.6. During the course of the planning process it was identified that lack of training and a system for creating new user accounts contributed to overall dissatisfaction with the system. The AS /400 upgrade and system optimization project should include implementing set procedures for system maintenance and user account administration. User account administration shold adhere to the policies and procedures adopted in section 2.6.�- 3.2.3 Recommendation AS /400 System Upgrade & Optimization Recommendation Preferred Alternatives RequirecTResources Upgrade AS /400 Hardware Prof. Services Computer Hardware City IT Optimize and Rationalize System Data City IT Prof. Services Implement Procedures for System Maintenance and User Account Prof. Services Maintenance City IT City of Lake Elsinore E- Government Implementation Plan s3 Civic Resource Group, November 2003 AQENDA ITEM � NO. PAGE OF i 7k f E -Gov Initiative /Action Item 1. Organizational Preparedness 1.a: Adopt IT Strategic Plan 1.b: IT Governance Structure 1.c: IT Roles and Responsibilities 1.d: IT /Customer Service Training 1.e: Policies and Procedures Total Organizational Preparedness 2. Infrastructure and Security 2.b: T- 1/Network Connectivity 2.c: Security and Network Upgrades 2.d: Other Hardware /Software Upgrades Total Infrastructure and Security E- government Implementation Project Estimated Budget and Resources HW SW PS Hardware Software Prof. Svcs. Q4 -03 04 -03 Q4-03 2,500 2,500 Ongoing 3,000 3,000 01 -04 $ $ $ 5,500 $ 5,500 IT Dept. Dept Staff Med Laa Med Law Med n/a Mod Low Med Low 45 nnn >n nnn I R, nnn 4 1- rnmiatP High Low 1,500 500 5,000 7,000 Q4-03 Mod Low 2,500 2,500 5,000 Q4-04 /Ongoing Med Low 9,000 7,500 2,500 19,000 € Q4- 04iOngoing Med Low 58,000 $ 8,000 $ 30,000 $ 96,000 Total Phase I Estimated Implementation Budget: $275,000 City of Lake Elsinore E- Government Implementation Plan 63 n Civic Resource Group, November 2003 ( AGEIVDP► t "t °EIVi asv. 10 PAGE o.Lo. OF 10- 3. Business Improvement & Process Automation 3.a: Business Process Improvement 15,000 15,000 Immediate Med High 3.b: Enterprise GIS 7,500 15,000 12,000 34,500 04-03 High n/a �. 3.c: Document Mgmt. /Imaging 5,000 10,000 12,000 27,000 04-03 Med Med 3.d: E -Forms 2,500 17,000 19,500 1 02-04 Med Med 3.e: Reporting /Decision Support System 10,000 12,500 22,500 01-04 Med Low Total Bus. Improv. & Process Automation $ 12,500 $ 37,500 $ 68,500 $ 118,500 4. E- Services 8 Online Applications 4.a: Website Redesign 20,000 20,000 Ql -04 Med Med 4.b: Municipal Code Online 5,000 5,000 Q2 -04 High Med 4.c: Online Information Service Center 5,000 5,000 Q2-04 High Med 4.d: Online Registration 5,000 5,000 Q2 -04 Med Med - 4.d: Customer Service /Work Order Mgmt. 5,000 5,000 02 -04 Med Med Total Website Redesign and Online Services $ $ $ 40,000 $ 40,00 Unallocated Funds /Reserve $ 15,000 TOTAL Estimated EIP Budqet $ 70.500 $ 45.500 S 144.000 $ 275.000 Total Phase I Estimated Implementation Budget: $275,000 City of Lake Elsinore E- Government Implementation Plan 63 n Civic Resource Group, November 2003 ( AGEIVDP► t "t °EIVi asv. 10 PAGE o.Lo. OF 10- LDI, Inc. Cost Analysis No. List WAS Difference Total $ 62,108.00 $ 51,509.00 $ 10,599.00 Migration 3,500.00 3,500.00 $ - Sales Tax 4,813.37 3,991.95 $ 821.42 TOTAL $ 70,421.37 $ 59,000.95 $ 11,420.42 Discount in Percent 16% LDI_Cost_Analysis AGENDA ITEM �NO. PAGE,,,,L OF I O 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: CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY MEETING OF NOVEMBER 09, 2004 SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004-11 AND COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004-06 FOR THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL. APPLICANT Mukesh Patel MSA Enterprises, Inc. 82 -297 Indio Blvd. Indio, CA 92201. REQUEST Approval of Zone Change No. 2004 -11 and Commercial Design Review No. 2004 -06 for the design and construction a 41,340 square foot seventy two (72) room three (3) story Best Western Hotel and related improvements on 2.92 net acres of vacant land. Review is pursuant to the City of Lake Elsinore General Plan, applicable Chapters of the Lake Elsinore - Municipal Code (LEMC) and the California Environmental Quality Act. PROJECT DESCRIPTION • Zone Change No. 2004 -11. The City of Lake Elsinore is initiating and requesting a Zone Change for the subject property from C -I (Neighborhood Commercial) to C -2 (General Commercial) in order to establish consistency with the General Commercial designation identified on the General Plan Land Use Map. Commercial Design Review No. 2004 -06. The applicant is requesting the approval of a Commercial Design Review to allow for the design and development of a 41,340 square foot seventy two (72) room three (3) story Best Western Hotel on 2.92 net acres of vacant land. The Design Review is pursuant to Chapter 17.82 (Design Review), Chapter 17.48 (C -2, General Commercial District), Chapter 17.38 (Non - Residential Design Review) and Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements) of the LEMC. AQENDA ITEM NO. U PAGE_ OF 2 REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 09, 2004 PAGE 2 SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004-11 AND COMMERICAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2004- 06 FOR "THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL ". BACKGROUND At their regular meeting of October 19, 2004, the Planning Commission adopted Resolution No. 2004- 149, recommending City Council approval of a Zone Change 2004 -11 and Resolution No. 2004 -150 recommending City Council approval of Commercial Design Review No. 2004 -06. DISCUSSION Items of discussion at the Planning Commission meeting were relatively minor, and although, the applicant generally agreed with the Conditions of Approval, the applicant contested Conditions of Approval number 18 and portions of number 35 regarding impact fees. In particular, the applicant contested payment of the Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) Fee, the City's Traffic Impact Fee (TIF) and the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF). In effect, the applicant argued that since he had an "agreement" with the City, these fees were not applicable. Although, the Commission recognized the applicant's dispute, the applicant was directed and agreed to, bring this matter before the City Council. Decisively, it was the general consensus of the Commission to accept the design of the project as proposed. ENVIRONMENTAL Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) this project has been deemed exempt pursuant to Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects). Staff has determined that the proposed - project will not have a significant effect on the environment and shall therefore be exempt from the provisions of CEQA. Additionally, the City Council finds and determines that this project is consistent with the City's General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Under the General Plan EIR, the subject site is designated as General Commercial. Therefore np3ditional environmental clearance is necessary. ` RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council adopt Ordinance No.- 113 k approving Zone Change No. 2004- 11 and approve Commercial Design Review No. 2004 -06 for the design and construction of a 41,340 square foot seventy two (72) room three (3) story Best Western Hotel and related improvements on 2.92 net acres of vacant land based on the recommended Findings, Exhibits A thru N and the attached Conditions of Approval. Also, since the subject site is located within Redevelopment Project Area #1, it is also recommended that the Redevelopment Agency concur with the Council's action. '"Hove AGENDA ITEM NO. — PAGE �L- OF REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 09, 2004 PAGE 3 SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004-11 AND COMMERICAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2004- 06 FOR "THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL ". 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. Considering that the General Plan has designated the property General Commercial, staff concluded that the 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 Zoning Map is consistent with GOAL -1. 0, Objective 1.2 of the General Plan Land Use Element, obligating the City to encourage the development of commercial land uses and revitalization of existing commercial uses that strengthen the city's economic base and offer a range of enterprises that serve the needs of the residents and visitors. 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 Commercial Design Review located within Assesso7-Parcel Number(s) 363 -172- 004, 013, and 020 complies with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, in that the approval of this hotel will assist in achieving the development ofa well- balanced and functional mix ofresidential, commercial, industrial, open space, recreational and institutional land uses as well as encouraging commercial 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 Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363 -172 -004, 013, and 020 is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments in that the hotel 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 hotel site as proposed will complement the quality of existing development and will create a visually AQENDA ITEM NO.—)- PAGE OF 1 ., i REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY NOVEMBER 09, 2004 PAGE 4 vase SUBJECT: ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004-11 AND COMMERICAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. R 2004- 06 FOR "THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL". 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 Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Numbers) 363 -172 -004, 013, and 020, 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 Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363- 172 -004, 013, and 020 has been scheduled for consideration and approval of �, the Planning Commission. PREPARED BY: REVIEWED BY: REVIEWED BY: APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: Attachments Rolfe Preisendanz, Senior Planner ` e _ ando G. Villa, Planni g and Code Enforcement Manager Ro rt A. Brady, Community evelopment Department City Manager's Office I . Ordinance No. approving Change of Zone No. 2004 -11 2. Minutes from the October 19, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting 3. Staff Report, Resolutions and Conditions from the October 19, 2004 Planning Commission Meeting 4. Exhibits AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE..J.._ OF,�I.... ; 140W �., ORDINANCE NO. IL31 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA APPROVING ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004 -11 CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE PARCELS SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS APN(S) 363- 172 -004, 013 AND 020 FROM C -1 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO C -2 GENERAL COMMERCIAL DISTRICT UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE WHEREAS, the City of Lake Elsinore, has initiated proceedings to change the zoning designation of the subject parcels known as APN(s) 363 -172 -004, 013 and 020 from C -1 Neighborhood Commercial District to C -2 General Commercial District; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore at a regular meeting held on October 19, 2004 made its report upon the desirability of the proposed project and made its recommendations in favor of said Zone Change No. 2004 -11 by adopting Planning Commission Resolution No. 2004 -149, recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change No. 2004-11; 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 November 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. 2004 -11, prior to approving such proposal. The City Council finds and determines that this project is consistent with the City's General Plan Environmental Impact Report (EIR). Under the General Plan EIR, the subject site is designated as General Commer4. Therefore, no further environmental clearance is necessary. ` 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. 2004 -11 have been made: 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. Considering that the General Plan AGENDA ITEM NO. '-'2''��''�� pAGE OF �- �- City Council Ordinance No. Page 2 has designated the property General Commercial, staff concluded that the 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 amendment to the Zoning Map is consistent with GOAL 1.0, Objective 1.2 of the General Plan Land Use Element, obligating the City to encourage the development of commercial land uses and revitalization of existing commercial uses that strengthen the city's economic base and offer a range of enterprises that serve the needs of the residents and visitors. 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 - 172 -004, 013 AND 020 TO C -2 GENERAL COMMERICAL DISTRICT 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 commercial 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 N®. �_ 1 PAGE OF A City Council Ordinance No. Page 3 INTRODUCED AND APPROVED UPON FIRST READING this 9th day of November, 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 December, 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. — � PAGE OF PAGE 7 - PLANNING COMMISSION MR\ UI'ES - October 19, 2004 M ED BY UHLRY, SECONDED BY RYAN AND PASSED BY A V OF 4 -0 TO ADO RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -146, A RESOLUTION OF E PLANNING COMM ION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CAL RNIA, APPROVING CONDITI AL USE PERMIT NO. 2004-33 FOR AN OUT R DINING AREA FOR RESTAURA NEAR PAD AREA 17 WITHIN P ING AREA 4 OF THE CANYON HILL ECIFIC PLAN MOVED BY RYAN, S NDED BY UHL AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION 2004 -147 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CI OF E ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT . 2004 -35 FOR A GAS STATION, FOOD MART, AND CAR WASH FACILITY EA 9 WITHIN PLANNING AREA 3 OF THE CANYON HILLS SPECIF LAN MOVED BY UHL , SECONDED BY RY NFOR SSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO ADOPT RESO ION NO. 2004 -148, TION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSI OF THE CITY OF LAKE , CALIFORNIA, APPROVING COND NAL USE PERMIT NO. 2004 -BE -N -TUNE FACILITY ON P EA 10 WITHIN PLANNING AREA 3 OF THE NYON HILLS SPECIFIC 6. Zone e No. 2004 -11. he Best Western I )4 -06 and Varian Chairman LaPere opened the Public Hearing at 7:56 pm. Community Development Director Brady provided a brief overview of the item. - Associate Planner Preisendanz reviewed the project location and the request for a zone change. He further reviewed the design and construction of the three -story hotel and clarified the elevation. He indicated that the entire site would be landscaped. He noted site constraints due to issues pertaining to right -of -way requirements. He stated that staff supported the p17046 and indicated that it was exempt from CEQA, because it was an infill project. Chairman LaPere asked the applicant if he agreed to the Conditions of Approval. Sashi Engineer, 71730 Hwy 111, Rancho Mirage, thanked the Commission. He stated his objection to the TIF and T UMF fees, but he accepted the other Conditions of Approval. He indicated that he would take up his objections with the City Council. Hector Lara, Lara Engineering, 32815 Vincent Moraga Dr. Temecula indicated that he had spoken to Engineering Manager Seumalo and resolved the issues pertaining drainage. Agenda I e No Page of 4 .drr PAGE 8 - PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES - October 19, 2004 Community Development Director Brady explained that the TIF and TUMF fees had been in effect prior to submission of the application for the project. He further explained that the fees were not a Planning Commission issue due to the Ordinance and it could be addressed by the City Council. Commissioner Uhhy confirmed that the MSHCP applied to this project. He indicated that he was supportive of the project. Commissioner O Neal noted his concern with CalTrans. There was discussion regarding hook ramps and street width. He noted his support for the project. Commissioner Ryan expressed his support of the project. Chairman LaPere noted the positive reputation of Best Western. He further noted his support of the project. There being no further comments, Chairman LaPere closed the Public Hearing at 8:13 P.M., and requested the reading of the Resolution. MOVED BY RYAN, SECONDED BY O'NEAL AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -149, 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. 2004 -11 CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE PARCELS SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS APN (S) 363- 172 -004, 013 AND 020 FROM C -1 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO C -2 GENERAL COMMERICAL DISTRICT UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE. MOVED BY UHLRY SECONDED BY RYAN AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -150, 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 COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO.2004 -*TO ALLOW FOR THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A 41,340 SQUARE FOOT BEST WESTERN HOTEL LOCATED ON 2.92 ACRES ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER(S) 363-172-004,013, & 020. MOVED BY O'NEAL SECONDED BY RYAN AND PASSED BY A VOTE OF 4 -0 TO ADOPT RESOLUTION NO. 2004 -151, A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 2004 -06 FOR A REDUCTION IN LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL LOCATED ON 2.92 ACRES ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER(S) 363 - 172 -004, 013, 020. Agenda Ite No pa Page o City of lake lasinme Pla.,i.a DivisioN 130 S. Man Sum Lake Elsi ow_ CA 97530 (909) 674 -3124 (909) 471 -1419 6x DATE: TO: FROM: PREPARED BY: PROJECT TITLE: APPLICANT: PROJECT REQUESTS PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT Tuesday, October 19, 2004 Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission Robert A. Brady, Community Development Director Rolfe Preisendanz, Associate Planner Zone Change No. 2004 -11, Commercial Design Review No. 2004 -06 and Variance No. 2004 -06 for the Best Western Hotel. Mukesh Patel, MSA Enterprises, Inc., 82 -297 Indio Blvd., Indio, CA 92201. • Zone Change. No. 2004 -11. The City of Lake Elsinore is initiating and requesting a Zone - Change for the subject property from C -1 (Neighborhood Commercial) to C -2 (General Commercial) in order to establish consistency with the General Commercial designation identified on the General Plan Land Use Map. • Commercial Design Review No. 2004 -06. The applicant is re(uesting the approval of a Commercial Design Review to allow for the design and development of a 41,340 square foot seventy two (72) room three (3) story Best Western Hotel on 2.92 net acres of vacant land. The Design Review is pursuant to Chapter 17.82 (Design Review), Chapter 17.48 (C -2, General Commercial District), Chapter 17.38 (Non- Residential Design Review) and Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements) of the LEMC. • Variance No. 2004 -06. The applicant is requesting a variance from the strict interpretation of Section 17.48.080 (Landscape Improvements) of the LEMC, which requires a minimum fifteen -foot (15') landscape area between the public right -of -way and the parking lot area. The request for this variance is pursuant to Chapter 17.76 (Variance) and Chapter 17.92 (Hearings) of the LEMC. A(A ITEM NO. _. PAGL OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT ,� OCTOBER 19, 2004 Page 2 of 11 PROJECT TITLE: CHANGE OF ZONE NO 2004 -11; COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -06 AND VARIANCE NO. 2004 -06 FOR THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL. BACKGROUND The applicant submitted a Preliminary Design Review on October 29, 2003 for the topic project. Following, the applicant submitted the subject application on May 26, 2004. Pursuant to the Permit Streamlining Act, the project was deemed complete on June 24, 2004. In the ensuing period, staff continued to work with the applicant to bring forth the current proposal. PROJECT LOCATION The proposed 2.92 -acre vacant project site is located on the west side of Casino Drive, south of the Diamond and Casino Drive intersection and north of Malaga Road and Casino Drive intersection, Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363 -172 -004, 013 and 020. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING Project Vacant C -1 Neighborhood General Commercial Site Commercial North "Lake Car Wash" C -2 General General Commercial Commercial South "Vacant" K -mart C -2 General General Commercial - Building Commercial Southeast Vacant C -2 General General Commercial _ Commercial East "Lakeview Inn" C -2 General General Commercial Commercial - West "Stater Bros. Shopping C -2 General General Commercial Center" Commercial PROJECT DESCRIPTION (S) ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004 -11. Currently the General Plan designation for the subject property is General Commercial with an accompanying zoning designation of C -1 (Neighborhood Commercial). In order to create consistency with the General Plan Land Use Map and to accommodate the use proposed under this application, the City of Lake Elsinore is initiating a Zone Change from C -1 (Neighborhood Commercial) to C -2 (General Commercial), which permits a hotel use. AGENDA ITEM NO � Fly. ol-- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 19, 2004 Page 3 of 11 PROJECT TITLE: CHANGE OF ZONE NO 2004 -11; COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -06 AND VARIANCE NO. 2004 -06 FOR THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL. COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -06. Si a g The applicant is proposing to develop a 41,340 square foot seventy -two (72) room three- (3) story Best Western Hotel on 2.92 net acres of vacant land. The total foot print of the building will cover approximately nine percent (9 0/6) of the total net lot area. The hotel building will generally be oriented parallel to and set back approximately 100' feet back from the ultimate right -of -way of Casino Drive. Due to the topography of the site the applicant is also providing a basement area, which will also provide additional units. The basement area will ultimately reflect a fourth level on the west elevation of the Hotel. Additionally, the parking area will be terraced below the finish grade of Casino Drive. Two (2) access points have been provided into the parking area and to the main entry of the Hotel. The main entry of the Hotel will feature an aesthetically enhanced Porte - cochere and a re- circulating "Mediterranean" style. "fountain water feature" along Casino Drive. The water feature is intended to provide unique identification to the City of Lake Elsinore as well as providing visual interest along the street right -of -way. The porte - cochere will be further defined by decorative stamped concrete providing pedestrian access to the water feature and ultimately Casino Drive. The water feature will be further enhanced with four (4) Date Palm trees and assorted landscape specimens. The topography of the subject property currently descends downward away from Casino Drive _ towards Mission Trail, affording a terracing affect in the development's design. However, in order to maximize the potential of the property the applicant has proposed a crib wall, planted with vines and cascading shrubs, creating a developable building pad for the hotel, the parking area and recreational area. The crib wall will be finished with a wrought iron safe hand railing with cement pilaster columns and a pre -cast concrete cap. A balcony and spiral staitse has been designed into the rear of the building, which will escort guests to the recreational area at the rear of the property over looking the lake and back basin. The recreational area will include a balcony, patio, swimming pool and a Jacuzzi. FloorArea Ratio As emphasized earlier, the applicant is proposing to develop a 41,340 square foot hotel building on a 127,612 square foot vacant lot. As would normally be a primary concern in reviewing a development of this type, staff analyzed the empirical value of the relationship of building area to lot area. This relationship can be described as the "floor area ratio" or F.A.R. As defined, the floor area ratio is the total square footage of the building divided by the total square footage of the lot. Considering this formula, the F.A.R. for this development actualized a .32 floor area ratio, which is less than the .40 F.A.R. required by the General Plan. AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF LI PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 19, 2004 Page 4 of 11 PROJECT TITLE: CHANGE OF ZONE NO 2004 -11; COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -06 AND VARIANCE NO. 2004 -06 FOR THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL. Circulation and Parking The hotel site will be accessible via two (2) driveways located off of Casino Drive. The driveways will ultimately lead to the hotel parking spaces generally located along the frontage of the property and to the main entry of the building. Guests will be provided a drop off point at the Porte - cochere located at the center of the building along Casino Drive. Although, the LEMC requires a total of seventy -eight (78) standard parking spaces, the applicant is proposing a total of ninety -three (93) standard parking spaces. No compact spaces are being proposed as a part of this development. Additionally, the applicant is also proposing a loading zone parking area at the east side of the building for delivery trucks typically used in this type of operation. A twenty -six foot (26') wide emergency vehicular access driveway has been incorporated into the site design to allow for emergency access to the rear of the three- (3) story building. Additionally, as required by the Fire Department, a "hammer- head" turn around has been incorporated into the design of the driveway allowing for emergency vehicle exiting. Further, in order to allow for additional drive isle width for emergency vehicles in front of the building, the applicant has agreed to incorporate "roll curbs" to allow for easier Fire Department accessibility, especially considering the occupancy capabilities of the building. Lan"ing The applicant is proposing to develop the 2.92 net acre site with 68,809 square feet of landscaping - or fifty -four percent (54 %) of the site. The majority of the landscape area will be attributed to the large slope area at the rear of the building. The slope area will be planted with assorted ground cover, shrubs and trees such as "Red Apple ", "California Pepper Trees ", flowering "Silk Trees" and flowering "Jacaranda Trees ". Further, the applicant will provide approxstely nineteen feet (19) of landscaping adjacent to the back of sidewalk along Casino Drive. The Mdscape area will include a "Marathon II Turf Strip" and a five -foot (5') wide landscape hedge, screening the parking area from Casino Drive. The buildings will generally be situated on a landscaped "island ", consisting of assorted ground cover, shrubs and trees, softening the impact of the building. The foundation planting along the perimeter of the building will include one foot (1 � to three foot (3') flowering shrubs and ground cover, creating a landscape island around the base of the building. Twenty-four inch (24 ") box street trees such as "Chinese Flame Trees" will be planted along Casino Drive. Planter islands have been provided throughout the project's parking area, allowing for one (1) 24" box shade tree every ten- (10) spaces. Enhanced Paving will be incorporated into the design of all driveway approaches as well as an enhanced landscape design, creating inviting customer entry points. Four (4) fifteen to twenty foot (15' to 20) specimen Date Palms will be placed around the Mediterranean style fountain at the front entry. The fountain will be bordered with shrubs and flowering ground cover. Finally, the pool and Jacuzzi area will also be augmented with "Date Palms" as well, continuing the Mediterranean feel around the hotel. AWMA ITEM NO. �' I PAGE OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 19, 2004 Page 5 of 11 PROJECT TITLE: CHANGE OF ZONE NO 2004 -11; COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -06 AND VARIANCE NO. 2004 -06 FOR THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL. Architecture The architectural style of the hotel can generally rule be classified a "Contemporary Eclectic Mediterranean" design. The primary treatment of the hotel exterior will be stucco treatment, painted "Spice Beige ", "Eggshell", "Cookie ", and "Honeybird" Vista Colors. The various colors will assist in accenting the various architectural treatments proposed. The focal point of the building's architecture will be concentrated towards the main entry of the hotel, which will feature a Porte- cochere supported by decorative architectural columns. The Porte- cochere will be enhanced with a decorative cornice treatment found throughout the building's architecture and will be further enhanced by the Mediterranean style "water feature" highlighted at the main entry of the Hotel. The combination of landscaping and architecture will ultimately contribute in supporting the aesthetic quality of the hotel. Color and materials The applicant is proposing a hotel building generally finished with exterior stucco. The architectural elements of the building will be painted diverse colors, accentuating the design of the hotel. A decorative cornice treatment will provide a finish look to the eave of the roof. The roof will be finished with concrete "Terracotta Gold Eagle" "S" roof tiles. The following is a compilation of the colors and materials proposed for the Hotel: ROOF I TERRACOTIGOLD EAGLE I EXTERIOR STUCCO ACCENT STUCCO PORTECOCHERE COLUMNS CORNICE TREATMENT DOOR AND WINDOW TRIM "COOKIE" AND "HONEYBIRD" "SPICE BEIGE" "VISTA TAN" "EGGSHELL" "ANODIZED BROWN" ..f � P7� AGMA ITEM "W 'N' Pow1cl— ifuiF�� �n PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 19, 2004 Page 6 of 11 PROJECT TITLE: CHANGE OF ZONE NO 2004 -11; COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -06 AND VARIANCE NO. 2004 -06 FOR THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL. VARIANCE NO.2004 -06 The applicant is requesting a variance from the strict interpretation of Section 17.48.080 (Landscape Improvements) of the LEMC, which requires a minimum fifteen -foot (15') landscape area between the public right -of -way and the parking lot area. Considering the ultimate right -of -way for Casino Drive and the constraints presented by the topography of the site, the applicant is requesting approval for a six foot (6') landscape area between the ultimate right -of -way and the parking lot area. Although, this is substantially less than that allowed by the LEMC, the current improvements for Casino Drive to the northwest of the project is less than that required by the General Plan Circulation Element. Ultimately the. applicant will maintain approximately nineteen feet (19') of landscape area from the back of side walk to the parking lot curb. Additionally, the applicant has agreed to plant larger parking lot shade trees in the islands adjacent Casino Drive providing an additional visual landscape buffer. Further, staff finds that this variance is justified since the applicant has also included a decorative "Mediterranean water feature" and will provide fifty -three percent (54 %) landscape coverage. ANALYSIS � ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004 -11. The City of Lake Elsinore is in support of and is thereby initiated this Zone Change considering that the requested Zone Change from C -1 (Neighborhood Commercial) to C -2 (General Commercial) is consistent with the General Commercial land use designation of the General Plan Land Use Map. - - COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -06. sitznp The proposed site plan meets or exceeds the requirements of Chap 17.38 (Non - Residential Development Standards) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (L�C), Chapter 17.48 (C -2, General Commercial District) of the LEMC and Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements) of the LEMC. Pursuant to and in compliance with Chapter 17.38 (Non- Residential Development Standards) of the LEMC, which encourages that all buildings should be designed to enhance their surroundings and should incorporate a variety of building design and form, the applicant has sufficiently introduced a variety of architectural elements which will enhance the surrounding area and create a visually appealing hotel. Additionally, the applicant has exceeded the requirement contained in Chapter 17.48 (C -2, General Commercial District) of the LEMC, in that the applicant is proposing fifty -three percent (53 %) landscape coverage instead of the allowable ten percent (10 %) coverage. Further, the applicant has also exceeded the parking requirements encountered in Chapter 17.66 (Parking Requirements) of the LEMC, in that the applicant has provided fifteen (15) more parking spaces than required by this Chapter. FloorArea patio The proposed floor area ratio (F.A.R.) exceeds the requirements of the City of Lake Elsinore's AGENDA ITEM MO. ii PAOEL ,�S OF PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 19, 2004 Page 7 of 11 "me PROJECT TITLE: CHANGE OF ZONE NO 2004 -11, COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -06 AND VARIANCE NO. 2004 -06 FOR THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL. General Plan in that although the General Plan allows a maximum floor area ratio of .40 the applicant has chosen to maintain a floor area ratio of .32. Circulation and parking 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: All parking shall be designed to provide complete and through circulation wherever possible. In any case, adequate turning radii and turnarounds shall be provided for emergency vehicles and trash and delivery trucks Subsequently, the applicant has provided sufficient truck circulation for both delivery and emergency vehicles as shown on the Site Plan. Additionally, the applicant has complied with the requirements of the Fire Department by providing a twenty -six foot (26) emergency access to the rear of the building. Further, all parking has been designed to provide complete and thorough circulation for emergency, trash and delivery vehicles and as previously shown, the applicant is providing 15 more parking spaces than the Code requires. No "compact spaces" are being proposed as a part of this application. Landscaping The landscaping generally exceeds the minimum landscaping coverage requirement of ten percent (10 %) per Section 17.48.080 (Landscape Improvements) of the LEMC. The applicant is proposing to provide approximately 68,809 square feet of landscaping or fifty -three percent (53 %) of the net lot area. Additionally, the "Mediterranean Water Fountain" located at the front of the building would also qualify, per the LEMC, as a contribution to the landscape requirement Architecture The architectural design of the proposed building meets the requireme.4 set forth within Chapter 17.38 (Non- Residential Development Standards) of the LEMC in that the architecture of the building has been designed to enhance its immediate surroundings. Additionally the applicant has provided a variety of building design and form such as staggering planes and textures along the exterior walls, which will create light and shadow. Color and Materials The color and materials proposed for this project meets the requirements set forth within Chapter 17.38 (Non - 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. VARIANCE NO. 2004 -06 The request for a Variance is consistent with the purposes of Chapter 17.76 (Variances) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC) in that the code states: AGENDA ITEM NO d" 0 ACW I nF 1 _ PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 19, 2004 Page 8 of 11 PROJECT TITLE: CHANGE OF ZONE NO 2004 -11; COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -06 AND VARIANCE NO. 2004 -06 FOR THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL. The City realises that under certain circumstances an applicant while attempting to comply with provisions of the Zoning Ordinance as stficty interpreted, may, because of certain physical conditions related to the site, such as si „e, shape, dimensions, topography, or unique setting, experience practical difficulties andl or unnecessary physical hardships which are inconsistent with the Ordinance's intended purpose. Considering the topography of the site and the impacts related to the requirement of the Ultimate right -of -way for Casino Drive, staff believes this request for a variance is consistent with the intent of the LEMC. ENVIRONMENTAL Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) this project has been deemed exempt pursuant to Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects), staff has determined that the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment and shall therefore be exempt from the provisions of CEQA. Therefore no additional environmental clearance is necessary. RECOMMENDATIONS It is recommended that the Planning Commission; adopt Resolution No. 2004 -_ recommending to the City Council approval of Zone Change No. 2004 -11; adopt Resolution No. 2004 -_ recommending to the City Council approval of Commercial Design Review R 2004 -06 and adopt Resolution No. 2004- _ approving Variance No. 2004 -06, based the following Findings, Exhibits - - "A” thru "N" and the proposed Conditions of Approval. FINDINGS — CHANGE OF ZONE 1. The proposed zone change will not be; a) detrimental to th4ealth, 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 anal# .Zed 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. Considering that the General Plan has designated the proper y General Commercial, staff concluded that the area will not be degraded as a result of tbis 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 Zoning Map is consistent with GOAL L0, Objective 1.2 of the General Plan Land Use Element, obligating the City to encourage the development of commercial land uses and revitalisation of existing commercial uses that strengthen the city s economic base and offer a range of enterprises that serve the needs of the residents and visitors AGENDA ITEM X1%6. 2 ., w. � 1 1 -- PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 19, 2004 Page 9 of 11 PROJECT TITLE: CHANGE OF ZONE NO 2004 -11; COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -06 AND VARIANCE NO. 2004 -06 FOR THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL. 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 p roposed Commercial Design Review located within Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363 -172 -004, 013, and 020 complies with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, in that the approval of this hotel mill 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 commercial 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 Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number(j) 363 -172 -004, 013, and 020 is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments in that the hotel pmject has been designed in consideration of the side and shape of the property, thereby creating interest and varying vistas as a person moves along the street. Further the hotel site 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_oject is not anticipated to result in any significant adverse environmental impacts. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363 -172 -004, 013, and 020, as reviewed and conditioned by all applicable City Divisions and Departments and Agencies, will not have a significant effect on the envirnnmentpursuant to attached Conditions ofApproval. 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 Elrinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the proposed Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363 -172 -004, 013, and 020 has been scheduled for consideration and approval of the Planning Commission. AGMA ITEM NO. ��� PAGE PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT 100-1 OCTOBER 19, 2004 Page 10 of 11 PROJECT TITLE: CHANGE OF ZONE NO 2004 -11; COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -06 AND VARIANCE NO. 2004 -06 FOR THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL. FINDINGS - VARIANCE That adequate conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.76.050 have been incorporated into the approval of the Variance to insure development of the property in accord with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which the site is located, Pursuant to Section 17 76.050 (Action of the Plx=M C, n7msion) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the proposed uariance granting an da ww in the landscaping area m7uim7xnt along Casriw Dri-ce for the Best Westem Hotel located at Assessor Parcel Nwniur 363- 172 -004, 013, and 020 has ban Kb%i lad for mmideratioz and appmaV of the Hmmmg Cmn issian. 2. That there are special circumstances, pursuant to the purpose of this Chapter, applicable to the subject property which do apply generally to other properties in the neighborhood, and, therefore, granting of the Variance shall not constitute a grant of special privilege inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and district in which the subject property is located. The City has candudad that cauidenrg the topography of the site and the nineteen foot (19) landscape area kmrn the sideudk and the parking area that the dmww in landscape area along Casino Drae will not constitute a grant of specurl pnvdTes mcwsistent with the 1=tawzs upon odxrproMw in the vKru y and district in ubKh the subiect project is located' 3. That in approving the Variance, any reductions authorized from the strict interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance represents the minimum deviation from Code necessary to fulfill the purpose of this Chapter and enable reasonable developmene f the property. In gnmtmg a dee ww in the requmyn" for the landscape area along Casino Dare, doe City has detemwrd that the request for a Zarl'alKe will wprwu a minirnaarc dms ttion )6n the Code necessary to fu fill A purpose of this Chapter and enable reasonable der elopnent of the property. PREPARED BY: ROLFE PREISENDANZ, ASSOCIATE PLANNER REVIEWED BY: ARMANDO G� VILLA. PLANDRNG AND CODE ENFORCEMENT MANAGER APPROVED BY: ROBEBE A. AGENDA ITEM NOS.. PAGE i "I OF `�_� PLANNING COMMISSION STAFF REPORT OCTOBER 19, 2004 Page 11 of 11 PROJECT TITLE: CHANGE OF ZONE NO 2004 -11; COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -06 AND VARIANCE NO. 2004 -06 FOR THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL. ATTACHMENTS 1. Planning Commission Resolution for Zone Change No. 2004 -11 2. Planning Commission Resolution for Commercial Design Review No. 2004 -06. 3. Planning Commission Resolution for Variance No. 2004 -06 4. Conditions of Approval 5. Exhibits A. Vicinity Map B. Site Plan -Upper Level (Sheet SP -1) C. Site Plan -Lower Level (Sheet SP -2) D. Basement Plan (Sheet A -1) E. First Floor Plan (Sheet A -2) F. Second Floor Plan (Sheet A -3) G. Third Floor Plan (Sheet A -4) H. Roof Plan (Sheet A -5) I. Front and Rear Elevations (Sheet A-10) J. Right Side and Left Side Exterior Elevations (Sheet A -11) K. Building Section (Sheet A -12) L. Landscape Concept Plan M. HVAC Detail Sheet N. Full Size Exhibits N"Nor AA ITEM NO. -N PAGE � OF-- a-°_°_� RESOLUTION NO. 2004-149 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. 2004 -11 CHANGING THE ZONING DESIGNATION OF THE PARCELS SPECIFICALLY DESCRIBED AS APN (S) 363 -172- 004, 013 AND 020 FROM C -1 NEIGHBORHOOD COMMERCIAL TO C -2 GENERAL COMMERICAL DISTRICT UNDER THE ZONING ORDINANCE. WHEREAS, Mukesh Patel, MSA Enterprises, has initiated proceedings to change the zoning designation of the subject parcels known as APN(s) 363 -172 -004, 013 and 020 from C -1 (Neighborhood Commerical) to C -2 (General Commerical); 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 October 19, 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- 2004-11, 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 this project is consistent with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and the California Subdivision Map Act and that no further environmental review is necessary pursuant to the - California Environmental , Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects) 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. 2004 -11 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. 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. Considering that the General Plan has designated the property General Commercial, staff concluded that the area will not be degraded as a result of this project. AQENDA ITEM NO. Ll PAGE OF,F PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION FOR ZONE CHANGE NO. 2004- it October 19, 2004 Page 2 of 2 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 Zoning Map is consistent with GOAL 1.0, Objective 1.2 of the General Plan Land Use Element, obligating the City to encourage the development of commercial land uses and revitalization of existing commercial uses that strengthen the city's economic base and offer a range of enterprises that serve the needs of the residents and visitors. 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.2004 -11. 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 October 19, 2004 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Rob,gfit'A. Brady, Secretary' to the ing Commission AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE.. 03F LC N..r In r.rr` ,*-,- RESOLUTION NO. 2004-150 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 COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004 -06 TO ALLOW FOR THE DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT OF A 41,340 SQUARE FOOT BEST WESTERN HOTEL LOCATED ON 2.92 ACRES ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER(S) 363-172-004,013, & 020. WHEREAS, Mukesh Patel, MSA Enterprises, Inc. has initiated proceedings to allow for the design and development of a 41,340 square foot hotel located on 2.92 acres, Assessor Parcel No.(s) 363 -172 -004, 013 & 020; 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 Design Reviews; 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 October 19, 2004; NOW THEREFORE, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY RESOLVE as follows: SECTION 1. The Planning Commission has considered proposed Commercial Design Review No. 2004 -06 prior to making a decision to recommend that the City Council approve the proposed Design Review. The Planning Commission finds and determines that this project is consistent with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and the Californ_i - Subdivision Map Act and that no further environmental review is necessary pursuant to tl California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects), 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 Commercial Design Review No. 2004- 06 have been made as follows: 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 Commercial Design Review located within Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363- 172 -004, 013, and 020 complies with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, in that the approval of this hotel will assist in achieving the development of a well- balanced and functional mix of residential, commercial, industrial, open space, AGENDA ITEIM NO PAGE OED PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004-06 October 19, 2004 Page 2 of 3 recreational and institutional land uses as well as encouraging commercial land uses to diverse 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 Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Numbers) 363- 172 -004, 013, and 020 is appropriate to the site and surrounding developments in that the hotel 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 hotel site 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. ..rr Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the proposed Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Numbers) 363- 172 -004, 013, and 020, as reviewed and conditioned by all applicable City Divisions and Departments and `IA' 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 Comssion) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the proposed Commercial Design Review located at Assessor Parcel Number(s) 363- 172 -004, 013, and 020 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 that the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore approve Commercial Design Review No. 2004 -06. JRonaPere, 4Chairnman Lake Elsinore Planning Commission AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE. OF PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION FOR COMMERCIAL DESIGN REVIEW NO. 2004-06 October 19, 2004 Page 3 of 3 I hereby certify that the preceding resolution was adopted by the Planning Commission at a meeting thereof conducted on October 19, 2004 by the following vote: AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: A. Brady, Secretary tgKe Planning Commission AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE I � OF RESOLUTION NO. 2004-151 A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF ..�r THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING VARIANCE NO. 2004-06 FOR A REDUCTION IN LANDSCAPE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE PROJECT KNOWN AS THE BEST WESTERN HOTEL LOCATED ON 2.92 ACRES ASSESSOR PARCEL NUMBER(S) 363 - 172 -004, 013, 020. WHEREAS, Mukesh Patel, MSA Enterprises, Inc. has initiated proceedings for the approval of Variance No. 2004 -06 for the Best Western Hotel; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore has been delegated with the responsibility of approving Variances; 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 October 19, 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 Variance No. 2004 -06 prior to approval. The Planning Commission finds and determines that this project is consistent with the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and the California Subdivision Map Act and that no further environmental review is necessary pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), Section 15332 (In -Fill Development Projects): SECTION 2. That in accordance with State Planning and Zoning law and the City of Lake Elsinore the following findings for the approval of Variance N�004 -06 has been made as follows: 1. That adequate conditions and safeguards pursuant to Section 17.76.050 have been incorporated into the approval of the Variance to insure development of the property in accord with the objectives of the General Plan and the purpose of the planning district in which the site is located; Pursuant to Section 17.76.050 (Action of the Planning Commission) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code (LEMC), the proposed variance granting an decrease in the landscaping area requirement along Casino Drive for the Best Western Hotel located at Assessor Parcel Number 363 -172 -004, 013, and 020 has been scheduled for consideration and approval of the Planning Commission. 2. That there are special circumstances, pursuant to the purpose of this Chapter, applicable to the subject property which do apply generally to other properties in the neighborhood, and, therefore, granting of the Variance shall not constitute a grant of special privilege *.Ww AGENDA ITEM! NO. PAGE v OF ,�. PLANNING COMMISION RESOLUTION FOR VARIANCE NO. 2004-06 October 19, 2004 Page 2 of 2 inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and district in which the subject property is located. The City has concluded that considering the topography of the site and the nineteen foot (19) landscape area between the sidewalk and the parking area that the decrease in landscape area along Casino Drive will not constitute a grant of special privileges inconsistent with the limitations upon other properties in the vicinity and district in which the subject project is located. 3. That in approving the Variance, any reductions authorized from the strict interpretation of the Zoning Ordinance represents the minimum deviation from the Code necessary to fulfill the purpose of this Chapter and enable reasonable development of the property. In granting a decrease in the requirement for the landscape area along Casino Drive, the City has determined that the request for a variance will represent a minimum deviation from the Code necessary to fulfill the purpose of this Chapter and enable reasonable development of the property. NOW, THEREFORE, based on the above findings, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore DOES HEREBY approve Variance No. 2004 -06. 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 October 19, 2004 by the following voq AYES: Commissioners: NOES: Commissioners: ABSENT: Commissioners: ABSTAIN: Commissioners: ATTEST: Robert A. Brady, Secretary to the Planning Commission AGENDA ITEM NO Pa[,F �1 I CiF GENERAL 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 subject project known as Best Western Hotel located at 363 - 172 -004, 013 & 020, 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. DESIGN REVIEW FOR COMMERCIAL PROJECT NO. 2004 -06 2. The Design Review approval located at Assessor Parcel No. 363 - 172 -004, 013 & 020 shall lapse and become void one (1) year following the date on which the Design Review became effective, unless prior to the expiration of one year a building permit related to the Design Review is issued and construction commenced and diligently pursued toward completion. The Design Review granted herein shall run with the land for this one (1) year period and shall continue to be valid upon a change of ownership of the site. 3. Prior to the certificate of occupancy of the first building, the entire site parking lot, entry driveways, perimeter and internal landscaping shall be completed as indicated on the approved plans attached hereto. 4. Conditions of Approval shall be reproduced on page one of bing plans submitted to the Building Division Plan Check. All Conditions of Approval shall lie met prior to the issuance of a Certificate of Occupancy and release of utilities. 5. 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. 6. Any alteration or expansion of this Design Review approval shall be reviewed according to the provisions of Chapter 17.82 (Design Review) of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code. 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 ,go, equipment shall match the primary wall color. > NUEM NO- PAIGE��`OF CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Page 2 of 8 BEST WESTERN HOTEL 8. 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. 9. Applicant shall meet ADA (Americans with Disabilities Act) requirements. 10. Trash enclosures shall be constructed per City standards as approved by the Community Development Director or Designee. 11. No exterior roof ladders shall be permitted. 12. All downspouts shall be concealed or architecturally screened and painted to match the exterior color of the building. 13. The Planning Division shall approve the location of any construction trailers utilized during construction. All construction trailers shall require a cash bond in the amount of $1,000.00,to be processed through the Planning Division. 14. Materials and colors depicted on the plans and materials board shall be used unless modified by the Community Development Director or designee. 15. On -site surface drainage shall not cross sidewalks. 16. Parking stalls shall be double - striped with four -inch (4 ") lines two feet (2) apart. 17. 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 18. Prior to the issuance of a Grading Permit the applicant shall pay the applicable Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) fee recently adopted by the City of Lake Elsinore. The fee shall be calculated as "Commercial- $5,620.00 per acre ". (2.92 acres x $5,620.00 = $16,410.40) 19. 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. 20. 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. r; AWNDA ITEM W. °� �A^, 1 q n 7F CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Page 3 of 8 BEST WESTERN HOTEL 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 pursuant to the LEMC and Landscape Design Guidelines. 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 -"of 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. 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. 21. 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. 22. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall provide assurance that all required fees to the Lake Elsinore Unified School District have been paid. 23. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall provide assurance that all requirements of the Riverside County Fire Department have been met. 24. Prior to issuance of building permits, applicant shall pay park -in -lieu fee in effect at time of building *./ permit issuance. .40EMA ITEM NO. —LA.— PA4E _1L OF L•-� CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL r , Page 4 of 8 BEST WESTERN HOTEL ENGINEERING 25. Outlet of storm drain adjacent to Casino Drive shall maintain undeveloped peak storm flow volumes, velocity and flow characteristics (example: sheet flow). 26. Dedicate full half -width right -of -way (50 -feet center line to right -of -way line) for project frontage of Casino Drive. Right -of -way dedication shall be consistent with the general plan circulation element. 27. Construct interim roadway cross - section consistent with the projection of the existing curb line. 28. Pay cash -in -lieu of construction for ultimate roadway cross- section along the project frontage. Cash -in -lieu shall be in addition to the cost of the interim improvements. 29. Provide a hydrology study specifically addressing the effects of the grading and drainage to adjacent properties. 30. Street improvements shall include transitions from the proposed improvements to the existing roadway. 31. V- gutter outlet located on the west end of the project shall not exceed the peak storm runoff for the undeveloped condition as shown in the approved hydrology study. Construct an energy disapating structure to reduce the outlet water velocities to a less than erosive condition. 32. 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. 33. Underground water rights shall be dedicated to the City pursuant to the provisions of Section 16.52.030 (LEMC) and be consistent with the City's agreement with Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District. 34. All street improvements, including traffic signals, shall be installed and functioning prior to certificate of occupancy. 35. Pay all Capital Improvement and Plan Check fees (LEMC 16.34, Resolution 85 -26), mitigation fees, area drainage fee, T.U.M.F ($107,484.00), traffic impact fee ($149,237.00), encroachment permit fees and inspection fees associated with the project and its development. The TUMF fee will increase approximately 7.31% on January 01, 2005. 36. 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 final map approval. 37. 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). AWWA ITEM NO. �- _ PAGE OF- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Page 5 of 8 BEST WESTERN HOTEL 38. Street improvement plans and specifications shall be prepared by a California 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). 39. 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. 40. All compaction reports, grade certifications, monument certifications (with tie notes delineated on 8 ' /a" x 11" Mylar) shall be submitted to the Engineering Division before final inspection of public works improvements will be scheduled and approved. 41. The applicant shall install permanent survey monuments in compliance with the City's municipal code. 42. Applicant shall obtain all necessary off -site easements for off -site grading or construction from the adjacent property owners prior to final map approval. 43. 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. 44. Provide fire protection facilities as required in writing by the Riverside County Fire Department. 45. Provide street lighting and show lighting improvements as part of street improvement plans as required by the City Engineer. - - 46. Developer shall install blue reflective pavement markers in the street at all fire hydrant locations. 47. All improvement plans and tract maps shall be digitized. At Ce care of Occupancy applicant shall submit tapes and /or disks which are compatible with City's RC Info /GIS or developer to pay $300 per sheet for City digitizing. 48. All utilities except electrical over 12 kv shall be placed underground, as approved by the serving utility. 49. Apply and obtain a grading permit with appropriate security prior to building permit issuance. A grading plan signed and stamped by a California 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. 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. 50. Provide soils, geology and seismic report including street design recommendations. Provide final soils report showing compliance with recommendations. 1%001 AQENDA ITEM ENO. PAGE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL i-� Page 6 of 8 BEST WESTERN HOTEL 51. An Alquis- Priolo study shall be performed on the site to identify any hidden earthquake faults and /or liquefaction zones present on -site. 52. 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. 53. Prior to commencement of grading operations, applicant to provide to the City with a map of all proposed haul routes to be used for movement of export material. Such routes shall be subject to the review and approval of the City Engineer. 54. Applicant to provide to the City a photographic baseline record of the condition of all proposed public City haul roads. In the event of damage to such roads, applicant shall pay full cost of restoring public roads to the baseline condition. A bond may be required to ensure payment of damages to the public right -of -way, subject to the approval of the City Engineer. 55. 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. 56. 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 easements shall be kept free of buildings and obstructions ". 57. 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. 58. Meet all requirements of LEMC 15.64 regarding flood hazard regulations. 59. Meet all requirements of LEMC 15.68 regarding flood plain management. 60. Submit Hydrology and Hydraulic Reports for review and approv,,��al by City Engineer and the Riverside County Flood Control District. Developer shall mitigate any flooding and /or erosion caused by development of site and diversion of drainage. 61. All drainage facilities in this site shall be constructed to Riverside County Flood Control District Standards. 62. 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 City Engineer. 63. 10 -year storm runoff should be contained within the curb and the 100 -year storm runoff should be contained with the street right -of -way. When either of these criteria is exceeded, drainage facilities should be installed. s^ 64. A drainage acceptance letter will be necessary from the downstream property owners for outletting the proposed storm water run -off on private property. AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE�3 OF- CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Page 7 of 8 BEST WESTERN HOTEL 65. Applicant will be required to install BMP's using the best available technology to mitigate any urban pollutants from entering the watershed. 66. Applicant shall obtain approval from Santa Ana Regional Water Quality Control Board for their stormwater 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. 67. 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. 68. Applicant shall provide first flush BMP's using the best available technology that will reduce stormwater pollutants from parking areas and driveways. 69. Ingress /Egress 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. -"SW 70. All parcels shall have direct access to public right -of -way or be provided with a minimum 30 ft ingress and egress easement to public right -of -way by separate instrument or through map recordation. 71. Existing access easements over property must be addressed to the satisfaction of the easement owners prior to final map approval. 72. In accordance with the City's Franchise Agreement for waste dispal and 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. ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES DEPARTMENT 73. Prior to the issuance of the first building permit, the applicant shall annex into the Lighting, and Landscape Maintenance District No. 1 to offset the annual negative fiscal impacts of the project on public right -of -way landscaped areas to be maintained by the City and for street lights in the public right -of -way for which the City will pay for electricity and a maintenance fee to Southern California Edison. RIVERSIDE COUNTYFIRE DEPARTMENT 74. The applicant shall comply with all Comments and /or Conditions of Approval from Riverside County Fire Department. AW34DA ITEM NO. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Page 8 of 8 BEST WESTERN HOTEL COMMUNITY SERVICES DEPARTMENT 75. The developer to pay park fees of $0.10 per square foot of interior space. 76. The developer shall comply with City Ordinance 8.16.010 for the removal of all construction debris. Developer shall utilize CR &R for all recycling. 77. All drainage and /or flood control facilities to be maintained by developer. 78. The City Landscape Architect shall review all landscape plans. 79. All landscaping shall be maintained by the developer. 80. No park credits shall be given for the swimming pool or jacuzzi. 2i AGENDA ITEM NO- �j SY k��E:S-T—Ea VICINITY MAP BEST WESTERN HOTEL ZC 2004 -11, C 2004 -06, & V 2004 -06 (APN 363- 172 -004, -013, & -020) AGENDA ITEM NO. ' PAGE _V% of ..o► m 9 41 14 If 4 g a 2 z 1 3. �o ooaoa000000a0000a JAI ran e h D < z. z 0 Io < m v a� v m iawinA I 9 ey ! @ ! c P p� e 8c i5 g i �c O r" /" as OR p I 3. �o ooaoa000000a0000a JAI ran e h D < z. z 0 Io < m v a� v m iawinA I i —�I IX rg z I f 4 p I I si Z iS 6k�x S n; BEST VVES jEM HOTEL DESIGNER PAS 11>11T D D ^ SERAM 31781 CASINO DRIVE. 6 LAKE ELSIN WIE. CALIFORNA dl DESMER trmLm FOR: � `� �• 24351 RUE DE GAVGUM I z 82 -297 INDIO BLVD_ INDIO. CALIFORNIA 92201 LAGUNA NIGUEL CALIFORNIA 92677 - Y TEL: (760) 899 -6971 TELL (9a9) 249 -8670 {t ACENDA ITEM Nu p� i m i �c O i —�I IX rg z I f 4 p I I si Z iS 6k�x S n; BEST VVES jEM HOTEL DESIGNER PAS 11>11T D D ^ SERAM 31781 CASINO DRIVE. 6 LAKE ELSIN WIE. CALIFORNA dl DESMER trmLm FOR: � `� �• 24351 RUE DE GAVGUM I z 82 -297 INDIO BLVD_ INDIO. CALIFORNIA 92201 LAGUNA NIGUEL CALIFORNIA 92677 - Y TEL: (760) 899 -6971 TELL (9a9) 249 -8670 {t ACENDA ITEM Nu I 11 rig A 8 six Ra ca 6 Ita � Y Al z I = 1 3� a Z ,Y i 1L� 1 ri x � a \\ a _ , ao 0000a00000000000a a d� I 1111 DESIGNER D D D K.'TOR PA D D FIN DESMER 6 Y 24351 RUE U CAU 9 LACUNA NK:UEL, GA249 -86 92677 ? p ISLE: (94 9) 219 -86]0 } AGENDA + {� *"No N"No BEST WESTERM HOTEL SMPLM 3176' CISNO DRNE. LAKE ELSINORE. CALIFORNA LOMLEVU FOR: MSAENTERPRISES.INC. 62 -297 NDIO BLVD.. "M. CALIFORNW 92201 TEL; (760) 699 -69]' d� I 1111 DESIGNER D D D K.'TOR PA D D FIN DESMER 6 Y 24351 RUE U CAU 9 LACUNA NK:UEL, GA249 -86 92677 ? p ISLE: (94 9) 219 -86]0 } AGENDA + {� *"No N"No HEST WESTERN HOTEL DES DNER D D D D D- o ��(j 31781 CASINO DRIYF. VICTOR PAM3_ ^'w t/JtE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA DESMNER d $ $ PINT Far MSAENTERPRISES.INC. 82 -297 INDIO BLVD.. INDIO, CAI WORNIA 92201 6351 ROE LI GAWIAN - TEL (760) 899 -6971 LAGUNA LADUN NIGUEL. CALIFORNIA 92677 Y TELEX (949) 269 -8670 a 'e DOGE .,_���i__OF - Y D GNER D D D VICTOR PAM � DESK*M IG RUE CALI L FORNIA RNIA 9 9 I LAGUNA 24 3511E26]] 1 TELE: (999) 249 -8670 - cnrF OF N"./ BEST WESTERN Hole. RRSTFUM DRIVE, RAR LAKE E3178RE�� FOR: MSA ENTERPRMS. INC. 82 -297 INDIO BLVD- INDIO. CAI WORNIA 92201 TEL; (760) 899 -69J1 D GNER D D D VICTOR PAM � DESK*M IG RUE CALI L FORNIA RNIA 9 9 I LAGUNA 24 3511E26]] 1 TELE: (999) 249 -8670 - cnrF OF N"./ $ BEST VW-STEM NWEL DESIGNER D D D D - FFSIfLM 31761 CASINO ORME. VICTIM PATEL o tANE ELSINORE. CALIFORNIA ER G3 = $ RM FOR: MSAEPRERPRISEB.INC. 05�\ 62 -297 INDIO BLW.. INDIO, CALIFORNIA 92201 0351 RUE DE RNA 9 - \J LAGUNA UGVN NL (94 CALIFORNIA 9267] e - TEL; (760) 899 -6971 TELL (919) 219 -8670 A ' 7z -•- O 4 fit f °• __ -_ -_ V ---------- __ -m' - _- ___ -__.%1 - DE9 NFR BEST WE$IEM HOTEL THWFU 0R 31781 CASINO DRIVE. PLAN LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA PRES, FOR: MSA ENTERIS W. VK,7pR PA711 82 -297 INDIO BLVD.. INDIO. CALIFORNIA 92201 TEL: (]60) 899 -69]1 fit f °• __ -_ -_ V ---------- __ -m' - _- ___ -__.%1 - DE9 NFR D D >[A> VK,7pR PA711 � DEMNER _ 26351 RUE DE GAUGUIN = LAGUNA NIGUEL. CALIFORNIA 92677 TELE: (949) 249 -8670 ,' ^� AGEND �( OF 9 Ar!!: __ v I I 1561 I I a 8 `g gESTWEgTMH07g DESIGNER DDDDDDD (t" 31781 CASM DRIVE, VICTOR PATH. 10, � LAKE El51NORE. CKIFORNw DESIGNM i a x RAN FORA ENTERPRISES. PIC, 2!3511 RU Uk! R = 82 -297 MDIO BLVD., MDp, CALIFORNw 922°1 LAGUNA NIGUEL, CAUFORNw 92677 IEL; (760) 699 -69]1 TELE: (919) 219 -8670 nc i /l 8 N f P i ag B®®® 8 6 . .0 0 a O DESIGNER VICTOR PATEL DESKINER 8 24351 RUE DE GAUGUIN LAGUNA NIGUEL. CALIFORNIA 92677 p TELE: (949) 249 -8670 b AGENDA ITEM NO {� BUT WESTEM HOM FROrjIEM CAS DRIVE. �I 1 8 LAKE E317B81 IIEORNN� FOR. MSA ENTFRI'lWi S, INC. 82 -297 INDIO BLVD.. INDIO, CALIORNIA 92d TEI: (760) 899 -6971 B®®® 8 6 . .0 0 a O DESIGNER VICTOR PATEL DESKINER 8 24351 RUE DE GAUGUIN LAGUNA NIGUEL. CALIFORNIA 92677 p TELE: (949) 249 -8670 b AGENDA ITEM NO {� AY N �k a s� civil) 9) 8 ° a � 5 _ o c S t L ° a; BEST WESTERN HOTEL DESIGNER D D D D D- g WMSM&LERSOE 31781 cASM DRrvE, VICTOR PATEL S U E ELSINORE. CALIFORNIA DESIGNER caEF MELLVATIM FOR: MSAENTEM"SES.INC. 2 4361 RUE LI GAVA 9 82 -297 INDIO ; (16 1NO10. CALIFORNIA 92201 LAGUNA LE: (4 CALIFORNIA 9267) - e - ML; (]60) 899 -b9]t TELE: (949) 249 -8670 d 'x AGENDA ITEM N0 �� i _ Y F tI L DEW ER D D D D - VICTOR PATF1. � DESIGNER 9 2435 1 RUE DE GAUGUIN LACUNA NIGUEL CAUFORNIA 92677 - p TITLE: (949) 249 -8670 L AGENDA ITEM NO . BEST WESTERN NoM MADW 3178' CASINO WE CALIFORNIA FOR M SA 82 -297 INDIO BLVD.. INDIO. CALFORNIA 92201 TEL: (760) 899 -6971 DEW ER D D D D - VICTOR PATF1. � DESIGNER 9 2435 1 RUE DE GAUGUIN LACUNA NIGUEL CAUFORNIA 92677 - p TITLE: (949) 249 -8670 L AGENDA ITEM NO . /'� Nj KUM Eii s >FV J W >s i a � c� C? 0 \/ 1'! N W N W N O AG, NDA► ITEM(�NO. PACT _ -- Z0 3tJ cj b rn A cn r D A z �mQ zzzE cc O 0 z co o W W W cQj W > U) Z lo Z �d W cn O G rn Z } a � U � Z0 3tJ cj b rn A cn r D A z �mQ zzzE y N ) run Z m Z�' g g z a i � `------ - - - - -- -- J 2' -7 1 2' AGENDA ITEM N& PAGE._aF� - RIH,-I:>4nI')TA P /QPab7GbG 7i':7T bGIR7 /MT /rm ,"Of \fir 0 F >n g a rn z In 40 G rn Z � � z � v y N ) run Z m Z�' g g z a i � `------ - - - - -- -- J 2' -7 1 2' AGENDA ITEM N& PAGE._aF� - RIH,-I:>4nI')TA P /QPab7GbG 7i':7T bGIR7 /MT /rm ,"Of \fir CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCILMEMBERS FROM: BARBARA ZEID LEIBOLD, CITY ATTORNEY DATE: NOVEMBER 9, 2004 SUBJECT: AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT TO DEVELOP AND OPERATE SHOPPING CENTER AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AND CASTLE & COOKE LAKE ELSINORE OUTLET CENTERS, INC. BACKGROUND The applicant, Castle & Cooke Lake Elsinore Outlet Centers, Inc., is requesting an Amended and Restated Agreement to Develop and Operate Shopping Center and Settlement Agreement (the "Development Agreement ") pursuant to California Government Code 65864- 65869.5 in connection with the vesting of City regulations governing the development of approximately 205 acres of land. The property is generally located east of the I -15 and adjacent to Nichols Road, adjacent to the existing Outlet Mall, and is within the City's territorial jurisdiction. On October 15, 1995, City and a prior owner of the Property entered into that certain Agreement to Develop and Operate Shopping Center dated October 15, 1995 (the "Original Development Agreement "), and, recently, Developer and City have disputed the purpose and meaning of the Original Development Agreement. ANALYSIS In an effort to settle the dispute, the applicant has requested to amend the original agreement to confirm vesting of the land use designations and development standards as of October 15, 1995 and to settle claims for threatened litigation with respect�i the Original Development Agreement. The amendment of the Original Development Agreement and settlement of threatened litigation will reduce the economic risk associated with development of the property. The applicant will pay the City an initial Development Agreement Fee (DAG) of $50,000 within 30 days of execution of the Agreement. Thereafter, the Developer will be required to pay a DAG fee of $3.35 per square foot of commercial retail or office space (subject to increases of 3.5% annually commencing in the fifth year) for the benefit of vesting the development requirements. The Development Agreement also obligates the City to reimburse the Developer up to a cumulative total not to exceed One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000) for infrastructure costs incurred by the Developer commencing upon the date upon which the first certificate of occupancy is issued by the City for the Project and continuing until the earlier to occur of (i) such date as is ten (10) years from the date upon which the first certificate of �"' occupancy is issued by the City for the Project, or (ii) the date upon which the aggregate payments by the City to Developer pursuant to the Development Agreement equals One ASMA ITEM NO. „ - I P.� MI Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000). The City's reimbursement obligation is one -half of the Three Million Dollars ($3,000,000) reimbursement under the Original lq ' Development Agreement and, unlike the Original Development Agreement; the reimbursement obligation does not accrue interest. The term of the proposed Development Agreement is 15 years, subject to automatic earlier termination in 2009 and 2014 if specific performance criteria of the Developer are not satisfied. The Development Agreement is beneficial to the City in that it settles threatened litigation with the Developer, reduces the City's potential financial liability, encourages new commercial development, and provides for the Developer to forward fund the construction of infrastructure at the site. Though the City will reimburse the Developer for a portion of its public infrastructure costs, the reimbursement is conditioned upon the Developer completing the improvements and generating sales tax revenue to the benefit of the City. The Development Agreement was approved by the Planning Commission at its regular meeting on October 19, 2004. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION The City has determined that the Development Agreement has complied with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. ...� As a restatement of a project approved in 1995, the Development Agreement does not have the potential to cause an environmental impact and will not result in any physical impact on the environment beyond the project approved in 1995. The Developer and the City shall prepare - all necessary and appropriate environmental documentation in connection with all future development approvals, which shall be subject to CEQA evaluation and any required mitigation measures. FINDINGS The following findings have been made in accordance with Section 19.12.080 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code: 1. The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan. 2. The Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for in the General Plan. 3. The Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use practices. ,"so* AGENDA ITELI 140. 2 x PACE 2.. 01� 5 1 4. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. 5. The Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values. 6. The Development Agreement is consistent with the provisions of Government Code Sections 65864- 65869.5. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the first reading of the proposed Ordinance by title only and waive further reading. The proposed ordinance is attached here to as "An Ordinance of the City of Lake Elsinore, California, Approving an Amended and Restated Development Agreement with Castle & Cooke Lake Elsinore Outlet Centers, Inc. ". PREPARED BY: Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: Richard J. Wat npaugh, City MaKager MENDA ITEM NO. � 2 PAGE_'3 OF ORDINANCE NO. AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, APPROVING AN AMENDED AND RESTATED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT WITH CASTLE & COOKE LAKE ELSINORE OUTLET CENTERS, INC. WHEREAS, Castle & Cooke Lake Elsinore Outlet Centers, Inc., a California limited liability company ( "C &CLEOC, Inc. ") herein owns approximately 205 acres within the limits of the City east of the I -15 Freeway and adjacent to Nichols Road and which more particularly described in Exhibit "A" to the attached Development Agreement (the "Property "). WHEREAS, on October 15, 1995, City and Horizon/Glen Outlet Centers Limited Partnership, a Delaware limited partnership, a prior owner of the Property, entered into that certain Agreement to Develop and Operate Shopping Center dated October 15, 1995 (the "Original Development Agreement "). WHEREAS, subsequent thereto, C &CLEOC, Inc. succeeded to all of Horizon/Glen Outlet Centers Limited Partnership's rights, title and interests in and to the Original Development Agreement; WHEREAS, there was a dispute between the City and C &CLEOC, Inc. concerning the respective rights and obligation of the Original Development Agreement to which representatives of the parties have negotiated a resolution that provides for amending the Original Development Agreement. WHEREAS, California Government Code Sections 65864 through 68569.5 authorizes municipalities to enter into development agreements with persons having a legal or equitable interest in real property in order to strengthen the public planning process, provide greater - certainty in the development process and reduce the economic costs of development; WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Section 65865 the City has adopted rules and regulations establishing procedures and requirements for con eration of development agreements as set forth in Chapter 19.12 of the Lake Elsinore Municifal Code; WHEREAS, the City and C &CLEOC, Inc. have prepared a development agreement which amends and restates the Original Development Agreement entitled Amended and Restated Agreement to Develop and Operate Shopping Center, attached hereto (the "Amended Development Agreement ") with respect to the Property, and proceedings have been taken with respect to the Amended Development Agreement in accordance with the City's rules and regulations; and WHEREAS, following a duly noticed public hearing on October 19, 2004, the Planning Commission of the City of Lake Elsinore approved certain findings and recommended approval of the proposed Amended Development Agreement by the City Council. WHEREAS, in accordance with the terms of the Amended Development Agreement, the City Council desires to terminate the Original Development Agreement with respect to the Property; and N"O,, Ordinance re Outlet Center Development Agmt 110304.doc AGENDA ITEM N©. 2 _ PAGE Ll__DF�L WHEREAS, the City Council desires to amend and restate the Original Development Agreement with respect to the Property by approving the Amended Development Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, CALIFORNIA, ORDAINS AS FOLLOWS: SECTION 1: FINDINGS The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on the Amended Development Agreement on November 9, 2004 and based on the information presented, the City Council makes the following findings in accordance with Section 19.12.080 of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code: The Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified in the General Plan. 2. The Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for in the General Plan. 3. The Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use practices. 4. The Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the community. 5. The Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property or the preservation of property values. _ 6. The Development Agreement is consistent with the provisions of Government Code Sections 65864- 65869.5. SECTION 2: CEQA The City has properly reviewed and assessed the Amended Development Agreement pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (California Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the "CEQA Guidelines" (Title 14, California Code of Regulations Section 15000 et seq.) and the City's local guidelines promulgated thereunder (hereinafter collectively referred to as "CEQA ") and that the Amended Development Agreement has complied with the requirements of the CEQA under the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. As a restatement of the project approved in 1995, the Amended Development Agreement does not have the potential to cause an environmental impact and will not result in any physical impact on the environment beyond the project approved in 1995. C &CLEOC, Inc. and the City shall prepare all necessary and appropriate environmental documentation in connection with all future development approvals, which shall be subject to CEQA evaluation and any required mitigation measures. Ordinance re Outlet Center Development Agmt 110304.doc 2 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE�OF SECTION 3: APPROVAL OF AMENDED DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT The City Council hereby approves the Amended Development Agreement between the City of Lake Elsinore and Castle & Cooke Lake Elsinore Outlet Centers, Inc., attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. The Mayor and City Clerk are hereby authorized and directed to execute and attest, respectively, the Amended Development Agreement on behalf of the City of Lake Elsinore. SECTION 4: RECORDATION The City Clerk is directed to transmit the Amended Development Agreement to the County Recorder for recordation no later than ten (10) days after the adoption of this Ordinance. SECTION 5: TERMINATION The City of Lake Elsinore hereby terminates that certain Original Development Agreement with respect to the Property. SECTION 6: 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. N.r+ SECTION 7: 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 8: 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 , 2004, by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOW Ordinance re Outlet Center Development Agmt 110304.doc 3 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE-4�._Q� PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this _ day of , 2004, by 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 VAN BLARCOM LEIBOLD MCCLENDON & MANN, P.C. Ordinance re Outlet Center Development Agmt 110304.doc 4 Mayor AGENDA ITEM NO.— 2- 2" _ PAGE 7 OF RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: City of Lake Elsinore 130 South Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Attn: City Clerk WITH A COPY TO: Castle & Cooke Lake Elsinore Outlet Centers, Inc. 10900 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1600 Los Angeles, California 90024 Attn: Mary J. Garnett, Esq. (Space Above Line For Recorder's Use Only) RECORDING FEES EXEMPT DUE TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 27383 AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT TO DEVELOP AND OPERATE SHOPPING CENTER AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE ` CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AND CASTLE & COOKE LAKE ELSINORE OUTLET CENTERS, INC. C�i Outlet Center Amended Development Agreement v7.DOC 2 AGENDA ITEM NO- PAGE O F 1. 2. 3. 4. 5. 6. 7. 8. 9. TABLE OF CONTENTS DEFINITIONS........................................................................................... ..............................4 RESTATEMENT OF ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT .............................7 DEVELOPER PROVIDED AMENITIES; DEVELOPMENT FEES .. ..............................7 3.1. Description of Amenities ............................................................... ..............................7 3.2. Initial Development Agreement Fee ............................................. ..............................8 3.3. Development Agreement Fee ........................................................ ..............................8 3.4. Construction of Public Infrastructure; Operation Covenant .... ..............................8 REIMBURSEMENT FOR INFRASTRUCTURE ................................. ..............................8 4.1. Covenants ........................................................................................ ..............................8 4.2. Agreement Containing Covenants Affecting Real Property ...... ..............................9 4.3. City Reimbursement ...................................................................... ..............................9 4.4. Reporting; Payment of the City Reimbursement Amount ........ ..............................9 4.5. Discontinuance of Operations ...................................................... .............................10 SETTLEMENT......................................................................................... .............................10 5.1. Settlement ...................................................................................... .............................10 5.2. Release and Waiver of Claims ..................................................... .............................10 5.3. Compromise of Disputed Claims ................................................. .............................11 5.4. Waiver of Civil Code Section 1542 .............................................. .............................11 5.4.1. Awareness of Civil Code Section 1542 ............................ .............................11 5.4.2. Statement of Intent to Release Unknown and Future Claims ...................11 5.4.3. Acknowledgment of Effect of Waiver of Civil Code Section 1542 ............11 5.4.4. Waiver of Civil Code Section 1542 .................................. .............................12 5.5. Survival of Termination ............................................................... .............................12 DURATIONOF AGREEMENT ............................................................. .............................12 6.1. Term; Scheduling ........................................................................... ............................12 - 6.2. Circumstances Resulting in Earlier Termination of Term ....... .............................13 6.3. Periodic Review ............................................................................. .............................13 VESTEDRIGHT ...................................................................................... .............................13 USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY ................ ........ .............................13 8.1. Potential Development of the Property ......................... ......... .............................13 8.2. Effect of Agreement on Land Use Regulations .......................... .............................14 8.3. Operating Memoranda ................................................................. .............................14 8.4. Tentative Subdivision Map Extensions ....................................... .............................14 8.5. Amendment ................................................................................... .............................14 RULES, REGULATIONS AND OFFICIAL POLICIES ..................... .............................15 9.1. Preexisting Land Use Rules .......................................................... .............................15 9.2. New Rules ...................................................................................... .............................15 9.2.1. Processing Fees .................................................................. .............................15 9.2.2. Procedural Regulations .................................................... .............................15 9.2.3. Regulations Governing Construction Standards ........... .............................15 9.2.4. Nonconflicting Regulations .............................................. .............................15 9.2.5. Certain Conflicting Regulations ...................................... .............................15 9.2.6. Regulations Needed to Protect the Health and Safety ... .............................16 9.2.7. Increases in Preexisting Impact Fees; Special Taxes ..... .............................16 Outlet Center Amended Development i ?i Agreement v7.DOC AQEDpA {TEM NO. �. •o� PAGE OF _� 9.3. Future Development Approvals ................................................... .............................16 9.4. State and Federal Laws ................................................................ .............................16 9.5. Police Power and Taxing Power .................................................. .............................16 9.6. Supersedure by Subsequent Laws ............................................... .............................16 10. COOPERATION AND COVENANT OF FURTHER ASSURANCES ...........................17 10.1. Third Party Actions ...................................................................... .............................17 10.2. Indemnification for Claims Regarding the Property ................ .............................17 10.3. Further Assurances ....................................................................... .............................18 10.4. Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing ................................. .............................18 11. PERMITTED DELAYS ........................................................................... .............................18 12. ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATES ................................................................. .............................18 13. RECORDATION BY CITY CLERK ..................................................... .............................19 14. DEFAULT ................................................................................................. .............................19 14.1. Events of Default ........................................................................... .............................19 14.2. Remedies ........................................................................................ .............................19 14.3. No Waiver ...................................................................................... .............................19 14.4. Effect of Termination ................................................................... .............................20 15. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE ................................................. .............................20 15.1. Recitals ........................................................................................... .............................20 15.2. Exhibits .......................................................................................... .............................20 16. APPLICABLE LAW ................................................................................ .............................20 17. NO JOINT VENTURE, PARTNERSHIP OR THIRD PARTY BENEFICIARY ..........20 18. COVENANTS RUNNING WITH THE LAND ..................................... .............................20 19. CONSISTENCY FINDING ..................................................................... .............................21 20. TERMS AND CONSTRUCTION ........................................................... .............................21 20.1. Severability .................................................................................... .............................21 20.2. Entire Agreement .......................................................................... ............................. 21---1- 20.3. Signature Pages ............................................................................. .............................21 20.4. Time ................................................................................................ .............................21 20.5. Notices ..................................... ............................... ..................................................... 21 _ 21. CONSENT OF OTHER PARTIES ............... ............................... .. 22 22. ASSIGNMENT AND NOTICE ......................................................... .............................22 23. ENCUMBRANCES AND RELEASES ON REAL PROPERTY, ... o .............. o ............. o ... o23 23.1. Discretion to Encumber ................................................................ .............................23 23.2. Entitlement to Written Notice of Default .................................... .............................23 23.3. Property Subject to Pro Rata Claims .......................................... .............................23 24. CONSTRUCTION, NUMBER AND GENDER .................................... .............................23 25. INSTITUTION OF LEGAL ACTION ................................................... .............................24 El!!2 Outlet Center Amended Development II Agreement v7.DOC �n AGENDA ITEM N ®• PAGE I U OFI-L- 11--- EXHIBITS EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY EXHIBIT `B" SCHEDULE OF DAG FEES EXHIBIT "C" AGREEMENT CONTAINING COVENANTS AFFECTING REAL PROPERTY Outlet Center Amended Development 111 Agreement v7.DOC �� AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT TO DEVELOP AND OPERATE SHOPPING CENTER AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT `we BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE AND CASTLE & COOKE LAKE ELSINORE OUTLET CENTERS, INC. The Parties to this AMENDED AND RESTATED AGREEMENT TO DEVELOP AND OPERATE SHOPPING CENTER AND SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT ( "Agreement ") are the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, California, a municipal corporation ( "City ") and CASTLE & COOKE LAKE ELSINORE OUTLET CENTERS, INC., a California corporation ( "Developer "). This Agreement is dated for identification purposes only as of , 2004. The City and Developer are hereinafter sometimes referred to individually as a "Party" and collectively as the "Parties." The Recitals are a RECITALS The following recitals are a substantive part of this Agreement: THE PARTIES ENTER THIS AGREEMENT on the basis of the following facts, understandings and intentions: 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 Cftfhas 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 Agreement has been processed, considered and executed in accordance with the Development Agreement Statutes and the Development Agreement Procedures. D. Developer owns approximately 205 acres within the limits of the City east of the I -15 Freeway and adjacent to Nichols Road and which is described in Section 3, and is more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by this reference (the "Property "). E. Developer has proposed to improve the Property with the development of up to 820,000 square feet of retail and commercial buildings (the 'Project'), including, without limitation, construction of utilities and other Public Infrastructure (as defined herein) necessary in connection with the Development of the Property. ..w Outlet Center Amended Development Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM N6. PAGE al=b 100` F. On October 15, 1995 (the "Original Effective Date'), City and Horizon/Glen Outlet Centers Limited Partnership, a Delaware limited partnership, a prior owner of the Property, entered into that certain Agreement to Develop and Operate Shopping Center dated October 15, 1995 (the "Original Development Agreement "), and, recently, Developer and City have disputed the purpose and meaning of the Original Development Agreement. G. Developer has threatened litigation against the City if the City refuses to permit Developer to Develop the Property under the Preexisting Land Use Rules (as defined herein). H. Developer owns substantially all of the economic interest in the manufacturer's outlet shopping center located west of the I -15 Freeway at Nichols Road in the City (the "Existing Center ") pursuant to Developer's ownership interest in the entity that owns the Existing Outlet Center. I. City believes that the development of the Project is necessary in order to maintain the level of public benefit provided by the Existing Center and that the Project will provide additional public benefit similar to those benefits created by the Existing Center, including, without limitation, the creation of jobs, substantial revenues from sales taxes, an increase in visitors to the area, an increase in customers to other local businesses, improved streets and other infrastructure in the area of the Existing Center and the Project, and greater name recognition and status of the City resulting in the attraction of other new businesses to the area. J. Through this Agreement, Developer and the City intend to vest the Preexisting �-� Land Use Rules for the Property primarily to bring certainty and stability to the government regulations applicable to the future commercial development of the Property. The Parties agree that if the local government regulations change, development costs would increase resulting in a strong likelihood that development would not occur on the Property by Developer and resulting in the loss of, or detrimental delay in, commercial services to the residents of the City and sales and property tax revenue to the City. K. This Agreement complies with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under the general rule that CEQA applies only to projects that have the potential to cause a significant effect on the environment. As a statement of the Original Development Agreement, this Agreement does not have the potentiJ to cause an environmental impact and will not result in any physical impact on the environment beyond the project approved in 1995. The vesting of Preexisting Land Use Rules through this Agreement is not a project. The Developer and the City shall prepare all necessary and appropriate environmental documentation in connection with all future development approvals, which shall be subject to CEQA evaluation and any required mitigation measures. L. 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. M. The Parties desire to enter into this Agreement relating to the Property in conformance with the provisions of the Development Agreement Statues, the Development Agreement Procedures, the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and existing City laws, rules, Outlet Center Amended Development Agreement v7.DOC 2 AGENDA ITEM NO PAC,E� s" 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. Developer shall be entitled to proceed with the Development of the Property in accordance with this Agreement and the Preexisting Land Use Rules in force on the Original Effective Date. N. Developer requires the assurances set forth in this Agreement in order to plan for and pursue the Development of the Property. O. City agreed in the Original Development Agreement to reimburse Developer for certain costs of providing Public Infrastructure on the Property and Developer made certain covenants with respect to the construction, transfer and operation of the Project on the Property. P. Because the Property currently lacks sufficient infrastructure and public improvements to support the Project, and due to the substantial public benefits which would be created if the Project were developed and operated on the Property, City desires to provide Developer with the reimbursement described herein as provided herein. Q. On January 13, 2004, the City adopted certain documents in connection with the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan ( "MSHCP "); on May 11, 2004, the City and the County of Riverside, California ( "County ") entered into a Memorandum of Understanding concerning the MSHCP and implementation thereof and the City executed the MSCHP Implementation Agreement with the County, and on July 27, 2004 the City adopted Ordinance No. 1124 establishing the MSHCP Fee. R. Previously Developer voiced its objections to MSHCP by lobbying local cities (including the City) and engaging in other anti -MSHCP activities, including, without limitation, the commencement of litigation against the County and the threat of commencement of legal action against the City with respect to MSHCP. Developer has now entered into a Settlement- - Agreement and Memorandum of Understanding dated as of February 24, 2004 with the County and the other parties thereto with respect to MSHCP, pursuant to which, among other things, the County and Developer agreed to resolve their disputes with respect to MSHCP in accordance with the provisions of that agreement. S. Because the City does not want to spend substantial sums of money in disputes with Developer over the Original Development Agreement or MSHCP, and because Developer does not want to spend substantial sums of money in disputes with the City over those matters, the Parties desire to enter into a compromise and settlement whereby (i) City agrees to amend and restate the Original Development Agreement on the terms set forth in this Agreement (including limiting the term of the Original Development Agreement as provided in this Agreement), (ii) Developer agrees not to sue the City with respect to the Original Development Agreement or its adoption of MSHCP and/or the MSHCP Documents or to engage in other anti - MSHCP activities which affect the City, and (iii) the Parties waive and release all claims against each other with respect to the Disputed Claims (as defined herein). T. On October 19, 2004, the City Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on Developer's application for this Agreement and recommended to the City Council approval of this Agreement. 'Noe Outlet Center Amended Development 3 Agreement 0.130C 2 AGENDA 17Ew► ►�.,. _... PAGE l� y U. On November 9, 2004, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on Developer's application for this Agreement and on , 2004, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 2004 -_ approving this Agreement (the "Ordinance "). The Ordinance shall become effective on , 2004 (the "Effective Date "). V. 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 Government Code, have found that the provisions of this Agreement are consistent with, and fulfill the objectives of the General Plan and the Zoning Ordinance in existence as of the Original Effective Date 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. W. This Agreement is consistent with the public health, safety, and welfare needs of the residents of the City. X. 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 Preexisting Land Use Rules (as hereinafter defined), hinder, delay, postpone, preclude or regulate development on the Property, except as provided for herein. Y. This Agreement is made in reliance upon the agreements, representations and warranties contained herein. NOW, THEREFORE, for good and valuable consideration, receipt of which is hereby acknowledged, Developer and City desire to settle all claims with respect to the Disputed Claims and to amend and restate the Original Development Agreement in its entirety as set forth herein, and hereby agree as follows: 1. DEFINITIONS 1.1. "Agreement" means this Amended and Restated Agreement to Develop and Operate Shopping Center and Settlement Agreement dated for identification purposes only as of , 2004. 1.2. "Agreement Containing Covenants Affecting Real Property" means that certain agreement set forth in Exhibit "C" hereto and incorporated herein by reference. 1.3. "CEQA" means the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970 (California Public Resources Code § 21000 et sea.) and the state CEQA Guidelines (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, § 15000 et se g.). 1.4. "City" means the City of Lake Elsinore, a municipal corporation. 1.5. "City Council" means the duly elected City Council of the City. 1.6. "County" means the County of Riverside, California. 1.7. "DAG Fee" is defined in Section 5.3 hereof. Outlet Center Amended Development Agreement v7.DOC 4 AGENDA ITEM NO.--2-2— PAGE ` _0F �-�- -- 1.8. "Developer" means Castle & Cooke Lake Elsinore Outlet Centers, Inc., a California corporation and its successors in interest to all or any part of the Property. 1"00 1.9. "Development" means the construction and/or installation of structures, improvements and facilities on the Property as set forth in this Agreement including, without limitation, grading, the construction of Public Infrastructure and public facilities related to the Project (whether located within or outside the Property), the construction of buildings and the installation of landscaping. 1.10. "Disputed Claims" means any and all claims Developer may have against the City and/or City may have against Developer in connection with (i) the Original Development Agreement and (ii) the City's adoption of MSHCP and/or the MSHCP Documents. Any claims Developer may have against the City and/or City may have against Developer in connection with this Agreement are explicitly excluded from the Disputed Claims. 1.11. "Effective Date" means the date the City ordinance approving this Agreement becomes effective. 1.12. "Existing Center" means the manufacturer's outlet shopping center located west of the I -15 Freeway at Nichols Road in the City of Lake Elsinore. 1.13. "Force Majeure Event" means any suspension or discontinuance of all or any part of the operation of the Project due to any event that constitutes a "permitted delay" under Section 11. 1.14. "Future Development Approvals" means any land use development permit .,.r and/or approval obtained after the Effective Date with respect to the Project or the Development of the Property. 1.15. "Governmental Regulations" means all laws, ordinances, statutes, codes, rules, regulations, orders and decrees of the United States, the State of California, the County of Riverside, the City or any other political subdivision in which the Property is located, and any other political subdivision, agency, or instrumentality exercising jurisdiction over the City, the Developer or the Property, including without limitation, the AAflic Contracts Code, any applicable labor standards pursuant to California Labor Code § 1720, et seq., requiring the payment of prevailing wage, maintenance of payroll records in accordance with California Labor Code §§ 1776 and 1812, and employment of apprentices in accordance with Labor Code § 1777.5; City zoning and development standards, building, plumbing, mechanical and electrical codes, and all other provisions of the City Municipal Code, and all applicable disabled and handicapped access requirements, including without limitation the Americans With Disabilities Act, 42 U.S.C. § 12101, et seq., Government Code § 4450, et seq., and Government Code § 11135, et seq. 1.16. "Government Code" means the California Government Code. 1.17. "Initial Term" is defined in Section 6.1 hereof. 1.18. " MSHCP" means the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, as adopted by the County of Riverside, California, and the City. Outlet Center Amended Development 5 Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM NO. a'_ PAGE 1 �) of ."�l 10�1 1. 19. " MSHCP Documents" means collectively, the Memorandum of Understanding between the County of Riverside and the City of Lake Elsinore Concerning Implementation of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, the CEQA Findings Resolution, the Implementing Agreement, the Implementation Resolution, and the Joint Powers Agreement, and the MSHCP Fee Ordinance. 1.20. "Operating Covenant" is defined in Section 3.0 of the Agreement Containing Covenants Affecting Real Property set forth in Exhibit "C" hereto. 1.21. "Original Development Agreement" means that certain Agreement to Develop and Operate Shopping Center dated October 15, 1995 by and between Horizon/Glen Outlet Centers Limited Partnership, a Delaware limited partnership, a predecessor in interest to Developer in the Property, and the City, including the Operating Covenant Affecting Interest in Real Property dated October 15, 1995. 1.22. "Original Effective Date" means October 15, 1995, the date of the Original Development Agreement. 1.23. "Parties" mean Developer and City. 1.24. "Preexisting Impact Fees" means all development impact fee programs, including local and regional development fees and taxes in force and effect upon the Original Effective Date. �--. 1.25. "Preexisting Land Use Rules" means the following rules, regulations and official policies in force and effect upon the Original Effective Date: (a) the City General Plan and General Plan Map, (b) the City's Zoning Code and Map, (c) the City's rules, ordinances, resolutions, regulations and official policies, as applicable, governing: permitted uses; density; intensity of use; design; subdivision; growth management; zoning; moratoria; building and = - construction standards, occupancy; levels of service for traffic improvements; police, fire, and paramedic protection; drainage protection and flood control restrictions, public improvement and dedication requirements, and (d) all Preexisting Impact Fees. 1.26. "Project" means the development of up to 8200 square feet of retail and commercial buildings on the Property, including, without limitation, construction of utilities and other Public Infrastructure necessary in connection therewith all in accordance with the Preexisting Land Use Rules and Future Development Approvals. 1.27. "Property" means the real property which is the subject of this Agreement, which consists of approximately 205 acres within the City limits east of the I -15 Freeway and adjacent to Nichols Road and which is described in the Recitals, and more particularly described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated by this reference. 1.28. "Public Infrastructure" means all public utility systems, public streets, public sidewalks, street lights, traffic lights, public sewers, storm drains and other items of infrastructure which the Developer constructs or installs or causes to be constructed or installed in connection with the Development of the Property and which is either located on public property or dedicated or conveyed to the City or other public agency. Outlet Center Amended Development 6 Agreement v7.DOC 2 2— AGENDA ITEIdt ND. PAGE_ : --P SCI 1.29. "Reimbursement Amount" means the maximum amount City is agreeing to reimburse Developer for Public Infrastructure in accordance with Section 4 hereof, which is w up to $1,500,000. 1.30. "Sales Tax Revenues" means that portion of taxes derived and received by the City from the imposition of the Bradley Burns Uniform Local Sales and Use Tax Law, commencing with § 7200 of the Revenue and Taxation Code of the State of California, as amended, or its equivalent, arising from all businesses and activities conducted on the Property in accordance herewith from time to time, which are subject to such Sales and Use Tax Law. Sales Tax Revenues shall be determined based upon returns for sales tax filed with the State of California by the Developer with respect to all businesses and activities conducted on the Property in accordance herewith that are delivered to the City and certified by the Developer to be true and correct and such other information as may be reasonably requested by the City Manager or his/her designee. "Sales Tax Revenues" shall include subvention monies received by the City to replace shifts of the 1% local sales taxes, including the property tax payments that will or may replace t/2 of the local sales tax under the "sales tax- swap" provisions of the 2003- 2004 California State Budget. Sales Tax Revenues shall be deemed to be received by the City on the date that is the later of three (3) months after Developer (or the retailers) pays such Sales Tax Revenues to the State of California or fifteen (15) days after the Developer (or the retailers) delivers to the City copies of the returns filed with the State of California evidencing such payment. 1.31. "TIF" means the City's local Traffic Impact Fee as adopted by Ordinance No. 1081. *"00 1.32. "TUMF" means the regional Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee as adopted by the County and the City as adopted by Ordinance No. 1096. 2. RESTATEMENT OF ORIGINAL DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT This Agreement is an amendment and restatement of the Original Development _ Agreement. This Agreement is entered into to effectuate the purposes of the Original Development Agreement and to settle any outstanding claims wf respect to the Disputed Claims, and shall, upon the Effective Date of this Agreement, repla d supercede the Original Development Agreement in its entirety. 3. DEVELOPER PROVIDED AMENITIES, DEVELOPMENT FEES 3.1. Description of Amenities The City and the Developer agree that the infrastructure being provided by the Developer will result in substantial general public benefit. Included in this Section 3 is a general description of the infrastructure and other improvements to be made to the Property by Developer. Outlet Center Amended Development 7 Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEMi NO- JPAGE_.__ OF 10"_ 3.2. Initial Development Agreement Fee Pursuant to City Municipal Code § 19.12.170, Developer shall pay City $50,000 (the "Initial DAG' ). Payment of the Initial DAG shall be made within thirty (30) days from the Effective Date by Developer and may not be offset against the Reimbursement Amount. 3.3. Development Agreement Fee If Developer develops the Property, at the time of issuance of any building permit for construction on the Property, the party seeking such permit shall pay to the City at the time any building permit is issued a Development Agreement Fee ( "DAG Fee "). From the Effective Date until the fifth anniversary thereof on , 2009, the DAG Fee will be in the amount of $3.35 per square foot of commercial space or other use permitted by the City pursuant to a Future Development Approval and constructed by the Developer on the Property. Commencing the first day of the sixth year of this Agreement on , 2009, the DAG Fee shall increase 3.5% per square foot annually. A schedule of DAG Fees through the expiration of the Second Mandatory Extension is attached hereto as Exhibit `B" and incorporated herein by reference. Developer shall not be permitted to satisfy any portion of its DAG Fee obligations hereunder by offset against any payments by City to Developer, including, without limitation, the Reimbursement Amount. Developer may elect to prepay the DAG Fee at any time so long as such prepayment is for the entire square footage of proposed commercial space or other permitted use remaining to be constructed and not just a portion thereof. 3.4. Construction of Public Infrastructure, Operation Covenant If the Developer constructs the Project on the Property, Developer covenants and agrees that it shall: (a) Construct and install or cause to be constructed and installed all-_ - necessary on -site and off -site utility lines and facilities and other infrastructure required for the development and operation of the Project (including all Public Infrastructure) in accordance with all applicable building codes and other similar requirements; (b) Convey to City upon completion the blic Infrastructure, which shall be conveyed in good and complete condition and shall be free of mechanic's liens; and (c) Commence operation of the Project upon completion and continuously cause it to be operated (except in the event of Force Majeure Event) in accordance with the Operating Covenant for such period of time as the Developer receives any payments of the Reimbursement Amount. 4. REIMBURSEMENT FOR INFRASTRUCTURE 4.1. Covenants For so long as the City has an obligation to pay Developer any portion of the Reimbursement Amount under Section 4.3, the Developer covenants and agrees to comply in all material respects with Governmental Regulations affecting the Project and the terms of the Agreement Containing Covenants Affecting Real Property (attached hereto as Exhibit "C "), Outlet Center Amended Development Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM NO. �2_2 � PACE�O� subject to all notice and cure periods applicable to an "Event of Default" under and as defined in the Agreement Containing Covenants Affecting Real Property. 4.2. Agreement Containing Covenants Affecting Real Property The City and Developer intend that the covenants set forth in Section 4.1 shall be covenants running with the land for so long as the City has any obligation to pay Developer any portion of the Reimbursement Amount under Section 4.3. In furtherance of this intent and as a condition precedent to the disbursement of City assistance pursuant to this Section 4, Developer shall immediately upon execution of this Agreement execute and deliver to the City the "Agreement Containing Covenants Affecting Real Property" to be recorded by City in the Official Records of Riverside County, California. 4.3. City Reimbursement In consideration of the Developer's substantial initial costs associated with development and use of the Property not then being in default under the Agreement Containing Covenants Affecting Real Property (subject to all applicable notice and cure periods), then commencing upon the date upon which the first certificate of occupancy is issued by the City for the Project and continuing until the earlier to occur of (i) such date as is ten (10) years from the date upon which the first certificate of occupancy is issued by the City for the Project, or (ii) the date upon which the aggregate payments by the City to Developer pursuant to this section equal the Reimbursement Amount, City shall annually remit to Developer payments on the Reimbursement Amount calculated in accordance with Section 4.7 below up to a cumulative total not to exceed One Million Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($1,500,000); provided, however, that the payment calculation set forth in Section 4.7 below is not and shall not be construed to be a pledge of sales tax or any other general fund revenue, and is merely a means of computing the consideration for the obligations of the Developer hereunder. No interest shall._ _ accrue or be payable in connection with the Reimbursement Amount. It is acknowledged by the parties that any payments by the City provided for herein may only be paid if an Event of Default (as defined in the Agreement Containing Covenants Affecting Real Property) does not then exist under the Agreement Containing Covenants Affecting Real Prope The provisions of this Section shall survive any termination of this Agreement. 4.4. Reporting, of the City Reimbursement Amount Within sixty (60) days after the end of each calendar year, Developer shall submit to City a report and supporting documentation of expenditure, in such form and substance as is reasonably acceptable to the City, documenting Developer's actual incurred costs of constructing Public Infrastructure for the previous calendar year and calculating Developer's aggregate actual incurred costs of constructing Public Infrastructure through the end of the previous calendar year. Provided that such report has been timely provided to City by Developer, payments of the Reimbursement Amount shall be remitted by City to Developer in annual installments within ninety (90) days after the end of each calendar year until the earlier to occur of (i) such date as is ten (10) years from the date upon which the first certificate of occupancy is issued by the City for the Project, or (ii) the date upon which the aggregate payments by City to Developer pursuant to this section equal the Reimbursement Amount. Provided Developer is otherwise in compliance with the terms hereof, the annual payment towards the Reimbursement Amount shall be made by City to Developer in an amount equal to Outlet Center Amended Development 9 Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM NO PAGE �-� 0 I/ the lesser of (a) 50% of the Sales Tax Revenues generated during the preceding calendar year; or (b) Developer's aggregate actual incurred costs of constructing Public Infrastructure through the end of the previous calendar year. Developer's aggregate actual incurred costs of constructing Public Infrastructure shall not include expenditures for which payment or reimbursement is received by Developer or on Developer's behalf from a source other than Developer, such as bond proceeds received in connection with the formation of a Community Facilities District. In no event shall the payments made by City under this Section 4.4 exceed an aggregate amount equal to the Reimbursement Amount. The foregoing method of calculating payments on the Reimbursement Amount is not and shall not be construed to be a pledge of sales tax or any other general fund revenue, and is merely a means of computing the consideration for the obligations of the Developer hereunder. The provisions of this Section shall survive any termination of this Agreement. 4.5. Discontinuance of Operations In the event the Developer permanently discontinues operation of the Project, Developer shall forfeit all future rights to payments accruing hereunder after the calendar year in which such discontinuance occurs. In such event, the amount of the payment under Section 4.4 above for the calendar year in which such discontinuance occurs shall be calculated based upon the Sales Tax Revenues up to the date that such operations were permanently discontinued. Operations shall be deemed to be permanently discontinued upon a declaration to that effect by the Developer or by the Developer ceasing operations for a period of twelve (12) consecutive months, for reasons other than a Force Majeure Event. In the event that such operations are permanently discontinued or if the Project is not developed, the City's sole and exclusive remedy shall be the discontinuance of any further payments due under this Section 4 and the termination of this Section 4. 5. SETTLEMENT 5.1. Settlement In consideration of the mutual Release and Waiver of Claims set forth in this Section 5, (i) City is entering into this Agreement, which is - development agreement" within the meaning of Government Code § 65864 et seg., the effect of which is to grant to Developer vested rights in the Preexisting Land Use Rules as of the Original Effective Date in connection with the construction of the Project; (ii) Developer covenants and agrees not to sue the City with respect to the Disputed Claims or to engage in any anti -MSHCP activities with respect to the City; and (iii) City covenants and agrees not to sue the Developer with respect to the Disputed Claims. 5.2. Release and Waiver of Claims Each Party, on behalf of itself, and its officers, directors, parents, subsidiaries, affiliates, executors, administrators, assigns, agents, servants, employees, representatives, predecessors and successors (Arelated parties @), hereby releases and discharges the other Party and its related parties from all rights, controversies, claims, causes, covenants, suits, actions, demands, liabilities and obligations, which it and/or its related parties now have, have had, may have or may have had against the other and/or its related parties, stemming from their differences and rights arising out of or relating to the Disputed Claims. Each Party hereby Outlet Center Amended Development 10 Agreement v7.DOC 2 AGENDA ITEM NO __.__ pAGE OF agrees and recognizes that this Agreement fully and finally settles and forever resolves the Disputed Claims which it has, may have, have had or may have had against the other Party `wo, and/or its related parties. Further, it is expressly understood that this Agreement is intended to, and does cover and release claims relating to any aforesaid matters which may not have arisen or come into being, it being the intent of the Parties hereto that the persons and entities released shall have no liability or obligation to the Party releasing them with respect to the Disputed Claims and said actions, now or ever, except for the releasees' obligations as provided for in this Agreement. 5.3. Compromise of Disputed Claims This Agreement is a compromise of the Disputed Claims, and shall neither be treated nor construed as an admission of liability by any parry to this Agreement, for any purpose, or as a concession by any party hereto that any of the contentions of any adverse party are accurate, true or meritorious. 5.4. Waiver of Civil Code Section 1542 5.4.1. Awareness of Civil Code Section 1542 Each Party to this Agreement expressly acknowledges that it is aware of the provisions of California Civil Code § 1542, which reads: A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to exist in his or her favor at the time of the executed release, which if known by him must have materially effected his settlement with the debtor. 5.4.2. Statement of Intent to Release Unknown and Future Claims Each Party to this Agreement intends, by executing this Agreement, to fully and forever release any and all claims against the parties being released with respect to the Disputed Claims; including not only those claims presently known to or suspected by them, but those claims that are unknown to and unsuspected b4(em, including claims that have not and may not have arisen as of the execution of this Agreement; provided, however, that such released claims shall only include claims based on facts in existence as of the date of this Agreement. Each Party further expressly understands and agrees that any or all of the facts and circumstances relevant to which it has executed this Agreement, and which it now knows or believes to be true, may in fact be, or may subsequently be discovered by such Party to have been other than or different from the facts or beliefs now known or believed by it to be true; and each Party expressly accepts the risk and possibility that such may be the case, and nevertheless agrees that the releases, promises, covenants and agreements made herein with respect to the Disputed Claims shall be binding and effective and shall not be subject to rescission, cancellation, avoidance or modification by reason of any difference in facts or circumstances. 5.4.3. Acknowledgment of Effect of Waiver of Civil Code Section 1542 Each Party expressly acknowledges that it has been represented by counsel, in good standing and licensed to practice law in the State of California, in connection with the Disputed Claims and the settlement of said Disputed Claims, including their Outlet Center Amended Development 11 Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM N®. 2 �L_ PAGE 2-2— OF .5-1 - -- 10011' participation in this Agreement. Each Party further expressly acknowledges that it has been fully advised of the purpose and effect of Civil Code § 1542, and of the effects and consequences of the waiver of the same. 5.4.4. Waiver of Civil Code Section 1542 Having been so advised, and with full knowledge and understanding of the consequences, each Party to this Agreement expressly waives and relinquishes all rights and benefits with respect to the Disputed Claims afforded it by Civil Code § 1542, and any and all similar laws of any State or territory of, and of the United States; and hereby assumes full responsibility for any and all injuries, damages, losses or liabilities that each may hereafter incur as a direct or indirect consequences of the Disputed Claims. Except as otherwise expressly provided herein, this Agreement shall constitute a full settlement of the Disputed Claims, and a full release of each Party's claims and rights with respect to the Disputed Claims; and shall constitute a release of all future as well as all past and present claims related to the Disputed Claims which have arisen or may hereafter arise from said disputes and/or said actions, and whether such claims are currently known or unknown, suspected or unsuspected, anticipated or unanticipated, foreseen or unforeseen, foreseeable or unforeseeable, with respect to the Disputed Claims. 5.5. Survival of Termination The settlement and releases affected by this Section 5 shall survive the termination or expiration of this Agreement. 6. DURATION OF AGREEMENT 6.1. Term; Scheduling Pursuant to Government Code § 65865.2, the Agreement will expire on the fifteenth (15th) anniversary of the Effective Date on , 2019 (the "Term "), . unless terminated as provided in Section 6.2 or extended upon the mutual written agreement of the Parties. City and Developer acknowledge that the Developer e of at this time accurately predict the time schedule within which Development of the Propert'yill occur, if Development occurs at all. At this time Developer cannot accurately predict what type and amount of Development will occur, if it occurs at all. Therefore, Developer will have the right to pursue Development of the Project on the Property, if at all, at the rate and in the sequence deemed appropriate by the Developer within the exercise of its sound business judgment. Since the California Supreme Court held in Pardee Construction Co. v. City of Camarillo, 37 Cal.3d 465 (1984), that the failure of the parties therein to provide for timing of development resulted in a later- adopted initiative restricting the timing of development to prevail over such parties' agreement, it is the Parties' intent to cure that deficiency by acknowledging and providing that Developer shall have the right to develop the Property, if such development occurs, in such order at such rate and at such time as Developer deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment. For purposes of this Agreement, completion of Development of the Property will mean the date on which a certificate of occupancy or comparable instrument issued by the City for the last improvement or structure constructed pursuant to this Agreement and the Preexisting Land Use Rules. Outlet Center Amended Development 12 Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM PsO. PAGE �-3 G _ 6.2. Circumstances Resultinp, in Earlier Termination of Term The Term of this Agreement shall automatically terminate on the fifth (501) anniversary of the Effective Date on , 2009, if on that date Developer (its designees, assignees or successors, as applicable) (a) has not commenced Development on the Property (for purposes of this Section 6.2, "commencing Development" shall mean any physical activity commenced on the Property in connection with such Development, such as mass grading) in accordance with all necessary entitlements with respect thereto, or (b) is then in breach of this Agreement, pursuant to the periodic review provisions of Section 6.3 of this Agreement, after notice and the expiration of any applicable cure periods. In addition, the Term of this Agreement shall automatically terminate on the tenth (10a') anniversary of the Effective Date on , 2014, if on that date Developer (its designees, assigns or successors, as applicable) (a) has not completed the construction of at least 250,000 square feet of the Project such that a certificate of occupancy has been issued for all 250,000 square feet of construction, or (b) is in breach of this Agreement pursuant to the periodic review provisions of Section 6.3 of this Agreement, after notice and the expiration of any applicable cure periods. In any event, this Agreement will be deemed terminated and of no further force and effect upon the expiration of the Term, unless otherwise extended upon the mutual written agreement of the Parties. 6.3. Periodic Review The City will, in accordance with Government Code § 65865.1, review this Agreement at least once every 12 months from and after the Effective Date hereof, in order to review the extent of the good faith substantial compliance by Developer with the terms and provisions of this Agreement and the performance of the City of its obligations under this Agreement. During each such periodic review, the City and the Developer will have the duty to demonstrate their good faith compliance as may be reasonably necessary, or required. The City's failure to review the Developer's compliance with this Agreement, at least annually, will_ - not constitute or be asserted by either Party as a breach by the other Party. 7. VESTED RIGHT This Agreement is made and entered into pursuant to.40overnment Code § 65864 et seq. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereon, the eveloper is obtaining the vested right to proceed and develop the Project on the Property, if Developer so desires, in accordance with this Agreement and the Preexisting Land Use Rules, subject to all discretionary and ministerial approvals of the City required in order to develop the Property and construct the Project. By entering into this Agreement and relying thereon, the City is securing certain public benefits which help to alleviate potential problems in the City and enhance the public health, safety and welfare of existing and future City residents. 8. USE AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROPERTY 8.1. Potential Development of the Property 0 The Parties acknowledge that it is uncertain whether the Property will be developed and that the specific nature and use of such Development is unknown. The Parties acknowledge and agree that any Development of the Project on the Property may be processed in accordance with the Preexisting Land Use Rules. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the "me Outlet Center Amended Development 13 Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM NO-- 2 . PAGE. °'— OV Agreement does not vest the processing of any Future Development Approval, and the City will, before approving any such entitlement application, comply with CEQA. The Parties acknowledge and agree that the Agreement merely sets the date of the Preexisting Land Use Rules, and does not vest any future Development of the Property in any way. 8.2. Effect of Agreement on Land Use Regulations In connection with any Future Development Approval which the City is permitted to give under this Agreement, or otherwise under the Preexisting Land Use Rules, the City will exercise its discretion or take action in a manner which is as expeditious as possible and which complies and is consistent with the Preexisting Land Use Rules. 8.3. Operating Memoranda The provisions of this Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between the City and the Developer. The Development of the Project on the Property may demonstrate that clarifications to this Agreement and the Preexisting Land Use Rules are appropriate with respect to the details of performance of the City and the Developer. To the extent allowable by law, the Developer 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 Developer 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 8.3. 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 Developer, 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 this Agreement which requires compliance with the provisions of Section 8.5 below. 8.4. Tentative Subdivision May Extensions In accordance with Government Code § 66452.6(a)(1), all tentative subdivision maps or tentative parcel maps, whether vesting or not, which may be approved by the City in connection with development of the Property, shall be granted an extension of time for the greater of the term of this Agreement (in which case no such extension application to extend the expiration date of the tentative map need be filed) or such time approved in accordance with State law or the Preexisting Land Use Rules. 8.5. Amendment Subject to the notice and hearing requirements of the Government Code, this Agreement may be modified or amended from time to time only with the written consent of the Developer and the City or their successors and assigns in accordance with the provisions of the Lake Elsinore Municipal Code and §§ 65867 and 65868 of the Government Code. Outlet Center Amended Development 14 Agreement v7.DOC PAGE2, � 9. RULES, REGULATIONS AND OFFICIAL POLICIES •10 9.1. Preexisting Land Use Rules Subject to the provisions of Section 9.2 et seq. of this Agreement, the Preexisting Land Use Rules will govern the use and development of the Property and the City shall exercise its discretion in connection with Future Development Approvals in a manner consistent with the Preexisting Land Use Rules. The Parties agree that the MSHCP is not a Preexisting Land Use Rule and is not applicable to the Property. The Parties acknowledge, however, that Developer may, if it develops the Property, voluntarily elect to participate in the MSHCP and, absent such participation, Developer must comply with applicable provisions of State and Federal law, including traditional regulation under the Endangered Species Act for listed species and related provisions of CEQA. 9.2. New Rules Although the Preexisting Land Use Rules will govern uses of the Property and any potential Development Of the Property, this Agreement will not prevent the City from applying the following rules, regulations and policies adopted by the City subsequent to the Original Effective Date: 9.2.1. Processing Processing fees and charges imposed by the City to cover the estimated actual costs to the City of processing applications for Development approvals, for monitoring compliance with any Development approval or for monitoring compliance with environmental impact mitigation measures. 9.2.2. Procedural Regulations Procedural regulations relating to hearing bodies, petitions, applications, notices, findings, records, hearings, reports, recommendations, appeals and any other matter of procedure. 9.2.3. Regulations Governing Construction Sdards Regulations governing construction standards and specifications including, without limitation, the City's Building Code, Plumbing Code, Mechanical Code, Electrical Code and Fire Code, provided that such construction standards and specifications are applied on a City -wide basis. Use Rules. 9.2.4. Nonconflicting Regulations Regulations which are not in conflict with the Preexisting Land 9.2.5. Certain Conflicting Regulations Regulations which are in conflict with the Preexisting Land Use Rules if such regulations have been consented to in writing by the Developer. Outlet Center Amended Development 15 Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM N®. PAGE 9 6 OF- AO"1 9.2.6. Regulations Needed to Protect the Health and Safety Regulations which are in conflict with the Preexisting Land Use Rules if such regulations are necessary to protect the health and safety of citizens of the City. 9.2.7. Increases in Preexisting Impact Fees; Special Taxes Ordinances and resolutions which authorize increases in the amount of the Preexisting Impact Fees. The City shall not impose any development impact or mitigation fees on the Property other than the Preexisting Impact Fees and DAG Fees. City and Developer agree and acknowledge that the Preexisting Impact Fees do not include any fees for MSHCP, TIF, or TUMF, and, accordingly, that the Development of the Project on the Property is exempt from the MSHCP, TIF and TUMF fees. 9.3. Future Development Approvals In accordance with Government Code § 65866, this Agreement will not prevent the City, in subsequent actions applicable to the Property, from denying or conditionally approving any application for a Future Development Approval on the basis of the Existing Land Use Rules and/or those new rules set forth in Section 9.2 et seq. hereinabove. 9.4. State and Federal Laws If State or Federal laws or regulations enacted after the Original Effective Date 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; provided, however that this Agreement will remain in full force and effect to the extent it is not inconsistent 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. The City agrees that if it adopts or has adopted since the Original Effective Date any ordinance, resolution, rule, regulation, agreement or policy implementing the MSHCP, TUMF or TIF, such approval does not constitute a state or federal law or regulation for purposes of this Agreement. 9.5. Police Power and Taxing Power ower The City will not impose, or enact any additional conditions, exactions, dedications, fees or regulations through the exercise of either the police power or the taxing power with respect to the Development of the Project on the Property except as provided in the Preexisting Land Use Rules or except as provided in this Agreement. 9.6. Supersedure by Subsequent Laws If any federal or state law made or enacted after the Effective Date prevents or precludes compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement, then the provisions of this Agreement shall, to the extent feasible, be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such new law. Immediately after enactment or promulgation of any such new law, City and Developer shall meet and confer in good faith to determine the feasibility of any such modification or suspension based on the effect such modification or suspension would have on the purposes and intent of this Agreement. Developer and City shall have the Outlet Center Amended Development 16 Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE 1 =_� right to challenge the new law preventing compliance with the terms of this Agreement, and in the event such challenge is successful, this Agreement shall remain unmodified and in full force and effect. Upon a signed, written agreement between City and Developer, the term of this Agreement may be extended for the duration of the period during which such new law precludes compliance with the provisions of this Agreement. 10. COOPERATION AND COVENANT OF FURTHER ASSURANCES 10.1. Third Partv Actions The Developer and the City will cooperate in defending any action instituted by any third party (i) challenging the validity of this Agreement or any provision hereof, (ii) challenging, attacking, seeking to set aside, void, or annul the approval of this Agreement or any permit granted in connection herewith, (iii) arising out of any breach hereunder, or (iv) arising out of any action taken or decision made hereunder (the items listed in (i) through (iv) shall collectively be referred to as ( "Claims "). Developer agrees to assume the lead role in defense of any such Claims at its sole expense and shall indemnify and hold harmless City, its agents, officers, officials, commissions, councils, committees, boards and employees from any such action, proceeding, or liability, judgment, costs or fees with respect to the Claims, including costs and attorneys' fees, in connection with such action or proceeding and shall defend such action or proceeding at its expense. In addition, any action instituted by any third party challenging this Agreement or any other permit or approval required from the City or any other governmental entity for the Development of the Project will constitute a permitted delay under Section 11 (but shall not excuse any payment obligation thereunder). Notwithstanding the foregoing, the filing of any third party action against the City and/or the Developer with respect to this Agreement or any provision hereof will not be a reason to delay or stop the Development of the Property (including, without limitation, the processing of any application of the Developer with respect to the Property, the issuance of any building permit or the issuance of any certificate= - of occupancy) unless the third party obtains a court order preventing such activity. The obligation at Developer to indemnify City under this Section 10.1 shall survive the termination of this Agreement. 10.2. Indemnification for Claims Regarding the Prorty The Developer agrees to and will hold the City, its officers, agents, employees, officials, commissions, councils, committees, boards and representatives harmless from liability for damage or claims for damage, including reasonable attorneys' fees, for personal injury, including death and claims for property damage, which may arise out of the direct or indirect activities of the Developer at the Property, including, without limitation, activities of the Developer with respect to the Project. Developer agrees to and will defend the City and its officers, agents, employees, officials, commissions, councils, committees, boards and representatives, at Developer's cost, from actions for any damages caused by or alleged to have been caused by reasons of the Developer's activities at the Property, including, without limitation, activities of the Developer with respect to the Project. Developer's obligation to indemnify City hereunder shall survive any termination of this Agreement. Outlet Center Amended Development 17 Agreement v7.DOC .AGENDA ITEM NO - PACE�_a This "hold harmless" agreement applies to all damages and claims for damages suffered or alleged to have been suffered by reason of the activities of Developer at the Property. 10.3. Further Assurances Each Party covenants on behalf of itself and its successors and assigns to take all actions and do all things, and to execute with acknowledgments or affidavits if required, any and all documents and writings that may be necessary or proper to achieve the purposes and objectives of this Agreement. Each Party will take all necessary measures to see that the provisions of this Agreement are carried out in full. 10.4. Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealins? Except as may be required by law, neither Party will do anything which will have the effect of harming or injuring the right of the other Party to receive the benefits of this Agreement and each Party will refrain from doing anything which would render performance under this Agreement impossible or impractical. In addition, each Party will do everything which this Agreement describes that such Party will do. 11. PERMITTED DELAYS Any period of delay caused by acts of God; civil commotion; war; insurrection; riots; strikes; walk outs; picketing or other labor disputes; unavoidable shortages of materials or supplies; damages to work in progress by reason of fire, flood, earthquake or other casualty; litigation which prohibits or delays performance of the Agreement; moratoria; judicial decisions; or any other cause which is not within the reasonable control of the Parties may extend the duration of the Agreement. Each Party will promptly notify the other Party of any delay hereunder as soon as possible after the same has been ascertained, and the term of this Agreement will be extended by the period of any such delay. Notwithstanding Section 14.3, any_ - claim for delay must be presented within thirty (30) days of knowledge of the cause of such delay or any entitlement to time extension will be deemed waived. Notwithstanding the foregoing, in no event shall Developer be entitled to a permitted delay due to an inability to obtain financing or proceed with development as a result of general market conditions, interest rates, or other similar circumstances that make development impossible, commercially impracticable, or infeasible. The provisions of this Section 11 shall not operate to excuse either Party from prompt payment of any monetary obligations required under the provisions of this Agreement. 12. ESTOPPEL CERTIFICATES Either Party may at any time, and from time to time, deliver written notice to the other Party, requesting that the other Party certify in writing to the knowledge of the certifying Party that: (a) this Agreement is in full force and effect and is a binding obligation of the certifying Party; (b) this Agreement has not been amended or modified, except as expressly identified; and (c) no default in the performance of the requesting Party's obligations pursuant to Agreement exists, except as expressly identified. A Party receiving a request hereunder will execute and return the requested certificate within thirty (30) days after receipt of the request. Outlet Center Amended Development 18 Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM 10F 22- PACE 13. RECORDATION BY CITY CLERK The City Clerk will record a copy of the Agreement in the Records of the County Recorder promptly after execution of this Agreement by the Parties. 14. DEFAULT 14.1. Events of Default Subject to any written extension of time by mutual consent of the Parties, and subject to the provisions of Section 11 regarding permitted delays, the uncured failure of either Party to perform any material term or provision of this Agreement will constitute a default; provided, however, the City's sole remedy under this Agreement with respect to an "Event of Default" under and as defined in the Agreement Containing Covenants Affecting Real Property shall be as provided in Section 4.3. On written notice to a Party of its failure of performance (other than relating to an "Event of Default" under and as defined in the Agreement Containing Covenants Affecting Real Property), such Party will have thirty (30) days to cure such failure of performance; provided, however that if the nature of the failure of performance is such that it cannot be cured within such period, then the diligent prosecution to completion of the cure will be deemed to be cure within such period. Any notice of default given hereunder (other than relating to an "Event of Default" under and as defined in the Agreement Containing Covenants Affecting Real Property) will be in writing and specify in detail the nature of the alleged default and the manner in which such default may be satisfactorily cured in accordance with this Agreement. During the time period herein specified for the cure of such a failure of performance, the Party charged with such failure of performance will not be considered to be in default for purposes of termination of this Agreement or for purposes of institution of legal proceedings with respect thereto and, if the Developer is the Party that has failed to perform, then the City will not be excused from its performance under this Agreement during that period. 14.2. Remedies Upon the occurrence of a default under this Agreement and the expiration of any applicable cure period, the non - defaulting Party will hav�e4�uch rights and remedies against the defaulting Party as it may have at law or in equity incliAng, without limitation, the right to terminate this Agreement. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, neither Party shall in any event be entitled to, and each hereby waives, any right to seek consequential damages of any kind or nature from the other Party arising out of or in connection with this Agreement, and in connection with such waiver each party is familiar with and hereby waives the provision of § 1542 of the California Civil Code which provides as follows: "A GENERAL RELEASE DOES NOT EXTEND TO CLAIMS WHICH THE CREDITOR DOES NOT KNOW OR SUSPECT TO EXIST IN HIS FAVOR AT THE TIME OF EXECUTING THE RELEASE WHICH IF KNOWN BY HIM MUST HAVE MATERIALLY AFFECTED HIS SETTLEMENT WITH THE DEBTOR." 14.3. No Waiver The failure by a Party to insist on the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other Party will not constitute a waiver of such Party's right Outlet Center Amended Development 19 Agreement v7.DOC ,"No '..i° AGENDA ITEM N®. 2 2— - - _ PAGE 3 C� n- � to demand strict performance by such other Party in the future. All waivers must be in writing to be effective or binding on the waiving Party and no waiver will be implied from any omission by a Party to take action. No express written waiver of any default will affect any other default or cover any other period of time except that specified in such express waiver. 14.4. Effect of Termination Termination of this Agreement by one Party due to the default of the other Party will not affect any right or duty emanating from any then existing City entitlement or approvals with respect to the Property, but the rights and obligations of the Parties will otherwise cease as of the date of such termination. If the City terminates this Agreement because of a default of the Developer, then the City will retain any and all benefits including, without limitation, money or land received by the City hereunder. Notwithstanding the foregoing, the obligations of Developer to pay DAG Fees and to indemnify the City as set forth herein shall survive any termination of this Agreement. 15. INCORPORATION BY REFERENCE 15.1. Recitals The Recitals in this Agreement are material and are incorporated herein by reference as though fully set forth herein. 15.2. Exhibits Any Exhibit to this Agreement is incorporated herein by reference as though fully set forth herein. 16. APPLICABLE LAW This Agreement will be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 17. NO JOINT VENTURE, PARTNERSHIP OR THIRD P. The City and the Developer hereby renounce the existence of any form of joint venture or partnership between them and expressly agree that nothing contained herein or in any document executed in connection herewith will be construed as making the City and the Developer joint venturers or partners. It is understood that the contractual relationship between the City and the Developer is such that the Developer is an independent contractor and not an agent of the City. Furthermore, this Agreement is not intended or construed to create any third party beneficiary rights in any person who is not a party to this Agreement. 18. COVENANTS RUNNING WITH THE LAND All of the terms, provisions, covenants and obligations contained in this Agreement will be binding upon the Parties and their respective successors and assigns, and all other persons or entities acquiring all or any part of the Property, and will inure to the benefit of such Parties and their respective successors and assigns. All the provisions of this Agreement will be enforceable as equitable servitudes and constitute covenants running with the land pursuant to applicable law including, without limitation, California Civil Code § 1468. Each Outlet Center Amended Development 20 Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM NO. .PAGE covenant to or refrain from doing some act on the Property is expressly for the benefit of the Property and is a burden upon the Property, runs with the Property and is binding upon each `one Party and each successive Developer during its Development of the Property or any part thereof, and will benefit each Party and its property hereunder, and each Party succeeding to an interest in the Property. 19. CONSISTENCY FINDING By approving and executing this Agreement, the City finds that its provisions are consistent with the City's General Plan, and the City further finds and determines that execution of this Agreement is in the best interests of the public health, safety and general welfare of the City's present and future residents, property developers and taxpayers. 20. TERMS AND CONSTRUCTION 20.1. Severabilily If any term, provision, covenant or condition of this Agreement is determined to be invalid, void or unenforceable by judgment or court order, than the remainder of this Agreement will remain in full force and effect, unless enforcement of this Agreement, as so invalidated, would be unreasonable or grossly inequitable under all the circumstances or would frustrate the stated purposes of this Agreement. 20.2. Entire Agreement This Agreement contains all the representations and constitutes the entire agreement between the City and the Developer with respect to the subject matter discussed herein. Any prior correspondence, memoranda, agreements, warranties or representations, oral or written, regarding the subject matter described herein, are superseded in total by this. Agreement. 20.3. Signature Pages For convenience, the signatures of the P es may be placed and acknowledged on separate pages and, when attached to this AgAment, will constitute this document as one complete Agreement. 20.4. Time Time is of the essence of this Agreement and of each and every term and condition hereof. 20.5. Notices Any notice shall be in writing and given by delivering the same in person or by sending the same by registered, or certified mail, return receipt requested, with postage prepaid, by overnight delivery, or by facsimile to the respective mailing addresses, as follows: �.I ,.ago Outlet Center Amended Development 21 Agreement v7.DOC AC!"NDA ITEM NO. _ PAGEo F �� I If to City: City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Attn: City Manager Facsimile: (909) 674 -2392 With a copy to: Van Blarcom, Leibold, McClendon & Mann, PC 23422 Mill Creek Drive, Suite 105 Laguna Hills, CA 92653 Attn: Barbara Zeid Leibold, Esq. Facsimile: (949) 457 -6305 If to Developer: Castle & Cooke Lake Elsinore Outlet Centers, Inc. 10000 Stockdale Hwy, Third Floor Bakersfield, CA 93311 Attn: Mr. Bill Sampson, Senior Vice President Facsimile: (661) 664 -6188 With a copy to: Castle & Cooke, Inc. 10900 Wilshire Boulevard, Suite 1600 Los Angeles, CA 90024 Attn: Mary J. Garnett, Esq. Facsimile: (310) 824 -7770 Either City or Developer may change its mailing address at any time by giving written notice of such change to the other in the manner provided herein at least ten (10) days prior to the date_ such change is effected. All notices under this Agreement shall be deemed given, received, made or communicated on the earlier of the date personal delivery is effected or on the delivery date or attempted delivery date shown on the return receipt, air bill or facsimile. 21. CONSENT OF OTHER PARTIES The Developer may, at its discretion, elect to have other holders of legal, equitable or beneficial interests in the Property or parts thereof, acknowledge and consent to the execution and recordation of this Agreement by executing an appropriate instrument therefor. It is understood by the Parties that the execution of such document by other holders of legal, equitable or beneficial interests in the Project is not a condition precedent to this Agreement. 22. ASSIGNMENT AND NOTICE The rights and obligations of Developer hereunder shall not be assigned or transferred, except that on thirty (30) days written notice to City, Developer, may assign all or a portion of Developer's rights and obligations hereunder to any person or persons, partnership or corporation who purchases all or a portion of Developer's right, title and interest in the Property, provided such assignee or grantee assumes in writing each and every obligation of Developer hereunder yet to be performed, and further provided that Developer obtains the written consent of City to the assignment, which consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. Provided the Outlet Center Amended Development 22 Agreement 0.130C ACEN[3A ITEtUI N0.._ PACE 13--u Developer'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 (306) 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. Developer agrees to promptly pay to City its reasonable fees and expenses (including, without Iimitation, allocable internal costs and fees and expenses of counsel to City) in conjunction with the assignment of this Agreement by Developer pursuant to this Section 22. 23. ENCUMBRANCES AND RELEASES ON REAL PROPERTY 23.1. Discretion to Encumber The Parties agree that this Agreement will not prevent or limit the Developer in any manner, at the Developer's sole discretion, from encumbering the Property, or any part of the same including, without limitation, improvement thereon, by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to the Property or the Project. The City further agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold its consent to any modification requested by a lender so long as the modification does not materially alter this Agreement to the detriment of the City. 23.2. Entitlement to Written Notice of Default N%1W Any lender of the Developer which has filed a written request with the City for notice of default by Developer will be entitled to receive written notification from the City of any uncured default by the Developer in the performance of the obligations of the Developer under this Agreement. - - =- 23.3. Property Subject to Pro Rata Claims Any mortgagee or beneficiary which comes into possession of the Property or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the mortgag9r deed of trust, or deed in lieu of such foreclosure, will take the Property or part thereof, subject to (i) any pro rata claims for payments or charges against the Property or part thereof secured by such mortgage or deed of trust, which accrued prior to the time that such mortgagee or beneficiary comes into possession of the Property or part thereof; and (ii) the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 24. CONSTRUCTION, NUMBER AND GENDER This Agreement will be construed as a whole according to its common meaning and not strictly for or against either Party in order to achieve the objectives and purposes of the Parties hereunder. Whenever required by the context of this Agreement, the singular will include the plural and vice versa, and the masculine gender will include the feminine and neuter genders. In addition, "will" is the mandatory and "may" is the permissive. Outlet Center Amended Development 23 Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM NO PAGE —3–H-0T 25. INSTITUTION OF LEGAL ACTION In addition to any other rights or remedies, either Party may institute legal action to cure, correct or remedy any uncured default, to enforce any covenants or agreements herein, to enjoin any threatened or attempted violation thereof or obtain any remedies consistent with the purpose of this Agreement. In the event of any such legal action involving or arising out of this Agreement, the prevailing Party will be entitled to recover from the losing Parry, reasonable litigation expenses, attorneys' fees and costs incurred. The Parties acknowledge that if a breach of this Agreement by the City occurs, irreparable harm is likely to occur to the Developer and damages may be an inadequate remedy. Therefore, to the extent permitted by law, the Parties agree that specific enforcement of this Agreement by the Parties is an appropriate and available remedy, in addition to any and all other remedies which may be available to the Parties under law or at equity. Outlet Center Amended Development Agreement v7.DOC [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] 24 AGENDA ITEM �HG PACE =O° IN WITNESS WHEREOF, City and Developer have executed this Agreement as of the date first hereinabove written. "CITY" CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation By: Thomas Buckley, Mayor ATTEST: Vicki Kasad, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: DO Barbara Leibold, City Attorney "DEVELOPER" CASTLE & COOK,AKE ELSINORE OUTLET CENTER-9, INC., a California corporation By: Name: Title: By: Name: Title: Outlet Center Amended Development Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM NO*- PACE 1"K0 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On , 2004, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the within instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF On , 2004, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, 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 utacknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(iess , 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 within instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public Outlet Center Amended Development Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITE &I No. Z � STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. COUNTY OF ) On , 2004, before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the within instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ss. COUNTY OF On , 2004, before me, the undersid, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appeared personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the within instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public Outlet Center Amended Development Agreement v7.DOC 2835 ..ow ACEMA ITEra I4Io 2 2 PACE,wOF J_ EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT CERTAIN LAND LOCATED IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL A: PARCEL 4 OF PARCEL MAP 25638 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 176 PAGES 82 THROUGH 86 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 5 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF, AS DELINEATED AND DESIGNATED AS "REMAINDER PARCEL" ON PARCEL MAP NO. 25638, AS SHOWN BY PARCEL MAP �-. ON FILE IN BOOK 176 PAGES 82 THROUGH 86, INCLUSIVE, OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL C: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE —HALF OF FRACTIONAL SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 5 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, LYING WITHIN A STRIP OF LAND THREE HUNDRED THIRTY (330) FEET WIDE, THE SIDE LINES THEREOF BEING TWO HUNDRED THIRTY (230) FEET NORTHWESTERLY AND ONE HUNDRED (100) FEET SOUTHSTERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, RESPECTIVELY, FROM THE SURVEYED REFERENCE LINE WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 25, SAID POINT BEING NORTH 880 42' 41" WEST, 440.14 FEET, MEASURED ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE FROM A FOUND 2 INCH IRON PIPE SET AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 25, SAID 2 INCH IRON PIPE AS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 7 PAGE 33 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, SAID LAST MENTIONED POINT ALSO BEING SOUTH 88° 42' 41" EAST, 4832.30 FEET, MORE OR LESS, MEASURED ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE FROM A FOUND 2 INCH IRON PIPE, SET AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 25, SAID LAST MENTIONED 2 INCH IRON PIPE ALSO IS SHOWN ON SAID LAST MENTIONED MAP; Outlet Center Amended Development Exhibit A Agreement v7.DOC Z, AGENDA ii"Liva - ._ THENCE SOUTH 520 59' 35" WEST, 2119.55 FEET, TO A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT "A "; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 52° 59'35" WEST, 4701.71 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE INTERSECTION OF A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND THREE HUNDRED TEN (3 10) FEET SOUTHERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, FROM THE NORTHERLY LINE AND ITS EASTERLY PROLONGATION OF KINGS HIGHWAY, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF HOFFS FIRST ADDITION TO TERRA COTTA CITY, ON FILE IN BOOK 12 PAGE 568 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AND AS SHOWN ON MAP OF TERRA COTTA CITY, ON FILE IN BOOK 4 PAGE 212 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, SAID NORTHERLY LINE EXTENDS EASTERLY THROUGH A FOUND 1 INCH IRON PIPE SET AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE HOTEL BLOCK, AS SAID SOUTHEAST CORNER IS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF HOFFS FIRST ADDITION TO TERRA COTTA CITY FROM A FOUND 2 INCH IRON PIPE, SET AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 1, AS SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER IS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF TERRA COTTA CITY; THENCE NORTH 880 44' 38" WEST, 1040.72 FEET, MORE OR LESS, MEASURED ALONG SAID LAST MENTIONED PARALLEL LINE, TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY LINES OF THE RANCHO LA LAGUNA, SAID INTERSECTION BEING SOUTH 430 58'45" WEST, 2307.99 FEET, MORE OR LESS, MEASURED ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE FROM A FOUND 4 INCH IRON PIPE, SET AT THE INTERSECTION OF SAID NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE AND THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE - QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 25, SAID 4 INCH IRON PIPE IS SHOWN ON MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 7 PAGE 35 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, SAID LAST MENTIONED INTERSECTION WITH SAID NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE ALSO BEING SOUTH 430 58'45" WEST, 3135.06 FEET, MORE OR LESS, MEASURED ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE FROM A FOUND 2 INCH IRON PIPE SET AT CORNER NO.7 OF SAID RANCHO LA LAGUNA, SAID LAST MENTIONED 2 INCH IRON PIPE IS VOWN ON MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 43 PAGES 83 AND 84 OF RECORDS OF SURV - , RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THE SIDELINES OF SAID STRIP OF LAND THREE HUNDRED THIRTY (330) FEET WIDE, SHALL BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED SO AS TO TERMINATE IN THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 25; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING SOUTHERLY OF A LINE HAVING A BEARING OF SOUTH 810 00'25" EAST, AND PASSING THROUGH THE HEREINBEFORE DESCRIBED POINT "A "; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL OIL, GAS, PETROLEUM AND OTHER MINERAL OR HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES IN AND UNDER OR WHICH MAY BE PRODUCED FROM SAID LAND, TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT TO USE ONLY THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND WHICH UNDERLIES A PLANE PARALLEL TO AND FIVE HUNDRED (500) Outlet Center Amended Development ii35 Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM�NO. FAGR....�. 0 FEET BELOW THE PRESENT SURFACE OF SAID LAND, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROSPECTING FOR, DEVELOPMENT AND /OR EXTRACTING SAID OIL, GAS, PETROLEUM AND OTHER MINERAL OR HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES, FROM SAID LAND BY MEANS OF WELLS OR OTHER PENETRATIONS INTO SAID SUBSURFACE OF SAID LAND FROM SITES LOCATED ON OTHER LANDS, AS EXCEPTED AND RESERVED BY CHAS. J. BIDDLE, ET. AL., IN THAT CERTAIN GRANT DEED TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, RECORDED DECEMBER 11, 1972 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 163113 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, IT BEING EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT SAID CHAS. J. BIDDLE, ET. AL., THEIR HEIRS AND ASSIGNS, SHALL HAVE NO RIGHT TO ENTER UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, OR TO USE SAID LAND OR ANY PORTION TEHREOF, TO SAID DEPTH OF FIVE HUNDRED (500) FEET, FOR ANY PURPOSE WHATSOEVER. Outlet Center Amended Development Agreement v7.DOC iii35 AGENDA ITEM NO PAGE. OF.....� r.�.... EXHIBIT `B" FIFTEEN YEAR SCHEDULE OF DAG FEES* Outlet Center Projected DAG Fee Increases* Year Period Period $ per Square Beginning Ending Foot of Commercial Space 1 / /2004 / —i—/2006 /2005 $3.35 2 //2005 —F-12007 $3.35 3 / —i—/2007 /2006 _ —F-/2008 $3.35 4 —i—/2009 $3.35 5 //2008 —i—/2009 $3.35 6 //2010 $3.47 7 T-1201 //2011 $3.59 8 /12011 //2012 $3.72 9 /_/2012 —i—/2013 /_/2013 —i—/2014 $3.85 10 $3.98 11 //2014 —i—/2015 / —F-/2016 /2015 $4.12 12 $4.26 13 i--/2016 //2017 $4.41 14 / /2017 //2018 $4.56 15 /_/2018 //2019 $4.72 * In the event the term of the Agreement extends beyond the initial expiration thereof, the DAG Fee shall continue to increase at a rate of 3.5% per annum. 1.00► Outlet Center Amended Development Exhibit B 0 Agreement v7.DOC AGENDA ITEM N()--- -2- AGE 0 -'' EXHIBIT C AGREEMENT CONTAINING COVENANTS AFFECTING REAL PROPERTY RECORDING REQUESTED BY ) AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO: ) City of Lake Elsinore ) 130 South Main Street ) Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 ) Attention: City Clerk ) (Space above for Recorder's Use Only) This document is exempt from the payment of a recording fee pursuant to Government Code § 6103. THIS AGREEMENT CONTAINING COVENANTS AFFECTING REAL PROPERTY (this "Agreement ") is entered into this _ day of , 2004 by and between the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation (the "City ") and CASTLE & COOKE LAKE ELSINORE OUTLET CENTERS, INC., a California corporation (the "Developer "), with reference to the following recitals which are deemed to be a substantive part hereof: A. The City and the Developer have entered that certain Amended and Restated Agreement to Develop and Operate Shopping Center and Settlement Agreement dated for identification purposes only as of , 2004 pursuant to which City has agreed to reimburse Developer for certain costs (the "Development, Settlement and Reimbursement Agreement ") concerning the development, use and operation of improvements upon that certain real property which is more particularly described in the Legal Description which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by reference (the "Property "). The Development, Settlement and Reimbursement Agreement is available for public inspection at the City's offices located at 130 S. Main Street, Lake Elsinore, California 92530. Capitalized terms utilized herein and not otherwise defined shall have the same meaning as sei forth in the Development, Settlement and Reimbursement Agreement. B. The Developer acquired fee title to the Property in a Grant Deed dated as of December 31, 2000 and recorded as Document No. 2001- 022126 in the Official Records of Riverside County, California and is currently the developer of the Property. C. The Developer has agreed with the City to cause this Agreement to be executed and recorded against the Property in order to bind the Developer and future Developers of the Property to certain obligations regarding the on -going use, operation and maintenance of the Property and certain other covenants, all as more particularly set forth herein. E. The enforcement of the covenants and requirements set forth herein will ensure the use, development and operation of the Property in accordance with the terms and provisions of the Development, Settlement and Reimbursement Agreement and will, therefore, benefit the Developer and the City. EXHIBIT C to Castle Cooke Dev. Sett. Agmt. v1doc AGEMA IT ENI N0. pArjE NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual benefits accruing to the parties hereto, and for other valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which is hereby acknowledged, Developer, on behalf of itself and its successors, assigns and each successor in interest to the Property or any part thereof, and City hereby covenant and agree as follows: 1.0 COVENANT TO CONSTRUCT AND COMMENCE OPERATION OF THE PROJECT. The Developer covenants and agrees to construct and install or cause to be constructed and installed all necessary improvements, including without limitation, the Public Infrastructure and any and all public improvements which are necessary for the development and operation of the Project on the Property (the "Improvements "). Once construction of the Project and Improvements has commenced, the Developer shall diligently prosecute to completion the construction of the Project on the Property in accordance with all Governmental Regulations, including, without limitation, any and all City approvals. In connection with the construction of the Project on the Property, Developer covenants and agrees that it shall: 1.1 Construct and install or cause to be constructed and installed all necessary on -site and off -site utility lines and facilities and other infrastructure required for the development and operation of the Project (including all Public Infrastructure) in accordance with all applicable building codes and other similar requirements; 1.2 Convey to City upon completion the Public Infrastructure, which shall be conveyed in good and complete condition and shall be free of mechanic's liens; and 1.3 Commence operation of the Project upon the issuance by City of the first certificate of occupancy for the Project ( "Commencement Date of Operations ") and continuously cause it to be operated in accordance with the Operating Covenant for such period of time as the Developer receives any payments of the Reimbursement Amount. The requirements of this Section 1 shall be referred to herein as the "Construction- Covenant." In connection with the construction, development and operation of the Project, the Developer agrees to comply with all applicable Governmental Regulations as provided in paragraph 2.0 below. 2.0 OPERATING COVENANT. The Developer hereby cov4ts and agrees to develop, construct, use and occupy the Property in accordance with all Governmental Regulations. From and after the Commencement Date of Operations, the Developer shall continuously and diligently operate the Project on the Property (the "Operating Covenant "). 3.0 MAINTENANCE AND REPAIR COVENANT. From and after the Commencement Date of Operations, the Developer shall keep and maintain or cause to be kept and maintained the Property and all Improvements in good order and repair and safe condition, and the whole of the Property, improvements, and landscaping in a clean, sanitary, and orderly condition free from debris, graffiti and waste materials and in accordance with the requirements and provisions of the City's Municipal Code and this Agreement and all applicable Governmental Regulations. The Developer shall make any and all additions to or alterations or repairs in and about the Property and the improvements which may be required by and shall otherwise observe and comply with all Governmental Regulations from time to time applicable to the Property. ,,so** -2- AGEa`MA ITEM PLO. 2 2 PACE L4L-1 OF The obligations of the Developer under this Paragraph 3.0 shall be referred to herein as the "Maintenance and Repair Covenant." 4.0 RIGHT OF ACCESS COVENANT. The City, for itself and for other public agencies, at their sole risk and expense, reserves the right to enter onto the Property or any part thereof, at all reasonable times upon reasonable advance notice for the purpose of construction, reconstruction, maintenance, repair or service of any public improvements or public facilities located on the Property. The City or such other public agency exercising such right of entry shall take all reasonable measures to minimize interference with the operation of business on the Property and shall promptly repair and restore any damage caused by such entity to the Property or the Improvements thereon. Any such entry shall be made only after reasonable notice to and consent of Developer, and City shall indemnify and hold Developer harmless from any costs, claims, damages or liabilities pertaining to any such entry. The Developer agrees to cooperate with the City in providing its consent and such access, and acknowledges that the City may obtain an administrative inspection warrant or other appropriate legal or equitable remedies to enforce its rights pursuant to this Section 4. This Section 4 shall not be deemed to diminish any rights the City or any other public agencies may have without reference to this Section 4. The requirements of this Section 4 shall be referred to herein as the "Right of Access Covenant." 5.0 APPROVALS AND DESIGNATION OF CITY. The Developer shall obtain and maintain any and all necessary approvals for the development and operation of the Project on the Property. 6.0 TERM. The term of the Maintenance and Repair Covenant, the Right of Access Covenant and the Operating Covenant shall commence on the Commencement Date of Operations. The Maintenance and Repair Covenant, the Right of Access Covenant, and the Operating Covenant shall cease on the first anniversary of the Commencement Date of Operation (the "Initial Term "), unless otherwise extended by the Developer pursuant hereto. Provided than- the Developer is not then in default of this Agreement after notice and the expiration of any applicable cure periods, the Developer shall have nine (9) consecutive annual options to extend the Initial Term for one (1) year each (individually, an "Optional Extension" and, collectively, the "Optional Extensions "). The Initial Term together with ann�y��rrand all of the Optional Extensions exercised by the Developer in accordance herewith is ideinafter referred to as the "Term ". Developer shall exercise each of the Optional Extensions by giving written notice to the City, not more than ninety (90) days and no less than thirty (30) days prior to the expiration of the then - current Term. If the Developer fails to timely exercise any of the Optional Extensions in accordance herewith, then all subsequently exercisable Optional Extensions shall be voidable by City and of no further force or effect following written notice thereof by City to Developer and failure by Developer to exercise such Optional Extension within fifteen (15) business days of such notice. 7.0 COVENANTS RUN WITH THE LAND. During the Term, the covenants, restrictions and obligations established in this Agreement shall, without regard to technical classification or designation, be binding on the Developer, its successors and assigns and any successor in interest to the Property, or any part thereof, for the benefit of and in favor of the City, its successors and assigns. Therefore, whenever the word "Developer" is used herein, it shall include the Developer as of date of execution of this Agreement, and any and all successive Developers or assigns of the Property, and the provisions hereof are expressly binding upon all such successive -3- AGBDA ffEf a 140. 22- PAOE�, i= Developers or assigns during the Term, and the parties agree all such provisions shall run with the land during the Term. The City shall cause a fully executed copy of this Agreement to be recorded in the Office of the Riverside County Recorder. 8.0 NOTICES. All notices shall be given in writing by personal delivery, delivery by a reputable overnight courier service, facsimile transmission or certified mail, postage prepaid and return receipt requested. Notices shall be addressed as follows: City: City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92530 Attention: City Manager Fax No.: (909) 674 -2392 With Copy to: Van Blarcom, Leibold, McClendon & Mann, P.C. 23422 Mill Creek Drive, Suite 105 Laguna Hills, California 92653 Attn: Barbara Zeid Leibold Fax No.: (949) 457 -6305 If to Developer: Castle & Cooke Lake Elsinore Outlet Centers, Inc. 10000 Stockdale Hwy, Third Floor Bakersfield, CA 93311 Attn: Mr. Bill Sampson, Senior Vice President Facsimile: (661) 664 -6188 *"AW With a copy to: Nossaman, Guthner, Knox & Elliott 18101 Von Karman, Suite 1800 - Irvine, CA 92612 Attn: John C. Condas, Esq. Facsimile: (949) 833 -7878 Any notice given by mail shall be deemed given three days after mai ng. All other notices shall be deemed given on the date of delivery, if a business day, and on the first business day thereafter, if the date of delivery is not a business day. 9.0 REMEDIES. An event of default ( "Event of Default ") under this Agreement shall not be deemed to have occurred unless Developer has failed to cure any breach or default under this Agreement within thirty (30) days after written notice from City of such breach or default; provided, however, if such default or breach is of a nature that is not reasonably capable of being cured within such thirty (30) day period an Event of Default shall not be deemed to have occurred provided Developer commences to cure such breach or default within such thirty (30) day period and thereafter diligently prosecutes the same to completion. If an Event of Default, has occurred and is continuing, City shall have the right to exercise all the rights and remedies and to maintain any actions at law or suits in equity or other proper proceedings to enforce the curing of the Event of Default; provided, however, the City acknowledges and agrees that it shall have no rights of foreclosure under this Agreement. -4- ACCEN A iTElul U. PAGE �^ 10.0 SEVERABILITY. 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. 11.0 TITLES AND CAPTIONS. Titles and captions are for convenience of reference only and do not define, describe or limit the scope or the intent of this Agreement. 12.0 MODIFICATION. The City, its successors and assigns, and the Developer and its successors and assigns in and to all or any part of the fee title to the Property shall have the right to consent and agree to changes in, or to eliminate in whole or in part, any of the covenants herein without the consent of any tenant, lessee, easement holder, licensee, mortgagee, trustee, beneficiary under a deed of trust or any other person or entity having any interest less than a fee interest in the Property. However, the City and Developer are obligated to give written notice to and obtain the written consent of any first mortgagee prior to consent or agreement between the parties concerning such changes to this Agreement. 13.0 PRIORITY. This Agreement shall be subordinate only to the lien of the Lender securing construction and permanent financing for the Project. 14.0 WAIVER. Failure or delay by either party to perform any term or provision of this Agreement constitutes a default under this Agreement. The aggrieved party shall give written �-- notice of the default to the party in default. The defaulting party must within a reasonable time commence to cure, correct, or remedy such default, and shall complete such cure, correction or remedy with reasonable and due diligence, and during such period or curing shall not be in default. The waiver by one party of the performance of any covenant, condition, or promise shall not invalidate this Agreement nor shall it be considered a waiver by such party of any other covenant, condition or promise hereunder. The exercise of any remedy shall not preclude the exercise of other remedies City or Developer may have at law or at e�'ity. 15.0 ATTORNEYS' FEES. In the event of litigation arising out of any breach of this Agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover reasonable costs and attorney's fees, and all costs, fees and expenses incurred in any appeal or in collection of any judgment. 16.0 AGREEMENT BINDING UPON SUCCESSORS. During the Term, the terms and conditions, covenants and agreements set forth herein shall apply to and bind the heirs, successors, executors, administrators, assigns and grantees of Developer with respect to the Property and of City. [SIGNATURE PAGE FOLLOWS] -5- AGOYDA 1 EM too. PAGE VOF IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the date and year first written above. "CITY" APPROVED AS TO FORM Van Blarcom, Leibold, McClendon & Mann, P.C. Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation Mayor "DEVELOPER" CASTLE & COOKE OUTLET CENTERS, corporation By: Name: Title: By: Name: Title: LAKE ELSINORE INC., a California -6- AGEIYDA 4TE-M too �2- P'AGE EXHIBIT "A" LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF THE PROPERTY THAT CERTAIN LAND LOCATED IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL A: PARCEL 4 OF PARCEL MAP 25638 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 176 PAGES 82 THROUGH 86 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL B: THAT PORTION OF SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 5 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO UNITED STATES GOVERNMENT SURVEY THEREOF, AS DELINEATED AND DESIGNATED AS "REMAINDER PARCEL" ON PARCEL MAP NO. 25638, AS SHOWN BY PARCEL MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 176 PAGES 82 THROUGH 86, INCLUSIVE, OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA. PARCEL C: THAT PORTION OF THE NORTH ONE -HALF OF FRACTIONAL SECTION 25, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 5 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, LYING WITHIN A STRIP OF LAND THREE HUNDRED THIRTY (330) FEET WIDE, THE SIDE LINES THEREOF BEING TWO HUNDRED THIRTY (230) FEET NORTHWESTERLY AND ONE HUNDRED (100) FEET SOUTHHUSTERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, RESPECTIVELY, FROM THE SURVEYED REFERENCE LINE WHICH IS DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 25, SAID POINT BEING NORTH 880 42'41" WEST, 440.14 FEET, MEASURED ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE FROM A FOUND 2 INCH IRON PIPE SET AT THE NORTHEAST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 25, SAID 2 INCH IRON PIPE AS SHOWN ON MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 7 PAGE 33 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, SAID LAST MENTIONED POINT ALSO BEING SOUTH 880 42' 41" EAST, 4832.30 FEET, MORE OR LESS, MEASURED ALONG SAID NORTHERLY LINE FROM A FOUND 2 INCH IRON PIPE, SET AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SECTION 25, SAID LAST MENTIONED 2 INCH IRON PIPE ALSO IS SHOWN ON SAID LAST MENTIONED MAP; -1- A0EiVDA M-M FAM THENCE SOUTH 520 59'35" WEST, 2119.55 FEET, TO A POINT HEREINAFTER REFERRED TO AS POINT "A "; THENCE CONTINUING SOUTH 520 59'35" WEST, 4701.71 FEET, MORE OR LESS, TO THE INTERSECTION OF A LINE PARALLEL WITH AND THREE HUNDRED TEN (3 10) FEET SOUTHERLY, MEASURED AT RIGHT ANGLES, FROM THE NORTHERLY LINE AND ITS EASTERLY PROLONGATION OF KINGS HIGHWAY, AS SHOWN ON MAP OF HOFFS FIRST ADDITION TO TERRA COTTA CITY, ON FILE IN BOOK 12 PAGE 568 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, AND AS SHOWN ON MAP OF TERRA COTTA CITY, ON FILE IN BOOK 4 PAGE 212 OF MAPS, RECORDS OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, SAID NORTHERLY LINE EXTENDS EASTERLY THROUGH A FOUND 1 INCH IRON PIPE SET AT THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF THE HOTEL BLOCK, AS SAID SOUTHEAST CORNER IS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF HOFFS FIRST ADDITION TO TERRA COTTA CITY FROM A FOUND 2 INCH IRON PIPE, SET AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF BLOCK 1, AS SAID SOUTHWEST CORNER IS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF TERRA COTTA CITY; THENCE NORTH 880 44' 38" WEST, 1040.72 FEET, MORE OR LESS, MEASURED ALONG SAID LAST MENTIONED PARALLEL LINE, TO THE INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY LINES OF THE RANCHO LA LAGUNA, SAID INTERSECTION BEING SOUTH 430 58'45" WEST, 2307.99 FEET, MORE OR LESS, MEASURED ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE FROM A FOUND 4 INCH IRON PIPE, SET AT THE INTERSECTION OF SAID NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE AND THE WESTERLY LINE OF THE NORTHWEST ONE - QUARTER ., OF SAID SECTION 25, SAID 4 INCH IRON PIPE IS SHOWN ON MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 7 PAGE 35 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, SAID LAST MENTIONED INTERSECTION WITH SAID - NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE ALSO BEING SOUTH 430 58'45" WEST, 3135.06 FEET, MORE OR LESS, MEASURED ALONG SAID NORTHWESTERLY BOUNDARY LINE FROM A FOUND 2 INCH IRON PIPE SET AT CORNER NO.7 OF SAID RANCHO LA LAGUNA, SAID LAST MENTIONED 2 INCH IRON PIPE IS VOWN ON MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 43 PAGES 83 AND 84 OF RECORDS OF SURVEY, RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA; THE SIDELINES OF SAID STRIP OF LAND THREE HUNDRED THIRTY (330) FEET WIDE, SHALL BE PROLONGED OR SHORTENED SO AS TO TERMINATE IN THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID SECTION 25; EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION THEREOF LYING SOUTHERLY OF A LINE HAVING A BEARING OF SOUTH 810 00'25" EAST, AND PASSING THROUGH THE HEREINBEFORE DESCRIBED POINT "A "; ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL OIL, GAS, PETROLEUM AND OTHER MINERAL OR HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES IN AND UNDER OR WHICH MAY BE PRODUCED FROM SAID LAND, TOGETHER WITH THE RIGHT TO USE ONLY THAT PORTION OF SAID LAND WHICH UNDERLIES A PLANE PARALLEL TO AND FIVE HUNDRED (500) 1.00 -2- AGEWA ITE %A NO- a �_) FAcE_la._P�-. FEET BELOW THE PRESENT SURFACE OF SAID LAND, FOR THE PURPOSE OF PROSPECTING FOR, DEVELOPMENT AND /OR EXTRACTING SAID OIL, GAS, PETROLEUM AND OTHER MINERAL OR HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES, FROM SAID LAND BY MEANS OF WELLS OR OTHER PENETRATIONS INTO SAID SUBSURFACE OF SAID LAND FROM SITES LOCATED ON OTHER LANDS, AS EXCEPTED AND RESERVED BY CHAS. J. BIDDLE, ET. AL., IN THAT CERTAIN GRANT DEED TO SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON COMPANY, RECORDED DECEMBER 11, 1972 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 163113 OF OFFICIAL RECORDS OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, IT BEING EXPRESSLY UNDERSTOOD AND AGREED THAT SAID CHAS. J. BIDDLE, ET. AL., THEIR HEIRS AND ASSIGNS, SHALL HAVE NO RIGHT TO ENTER UPON THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND, OR TO USE SAID LAND OR ANY PORTION TEHREOF, TO SAID DEPTH OF FIVE HUNDRED (500) FEET, FOR ANY PURPOSE WHATSOEVER. —3— AGENDA ITEr'1 Nis CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO: MAYOR & CITY COUNCIL CHAIRMAN & BOARDMEMBERS FROM: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: NOVEMBER 9, 2004 SUBJECT: MEETINGS OF NOVEMBER 23 AND DECEMBER 28, 2004 BACKGROUND The City Council should consider their options regarding two City Council/ Redevelopment Agency meetings that are approaching. The Meetings of November 23`d falls two days before Thanksgiving, and the December 28th meeting falls three days after Christmas. Staff is not certain of the City Council's holiday /travel plans and would like to determine if these meetings are feasible. DISCUSSION Since many Council items require publication, staff would like Council's direction on whether to hold these meetings, to cancel them or to reschedule them. FISCAL IMPACT None. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the Mayor and City Council provide staff direction regarding the two Ci Council/Redevelopment Agency meetings, November 23, 2004 and December f8,2004. ., VICKI KASAD, CMC, CITY CLERK/ HUMAN RESOURCES DIRECTOR APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER AGENDA ITEM NO. 31 `'a PAGE OF CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: NOVEMBER 9, 2004 SUBJECT: FEE DEPOSIT AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND CENTEX HOMES BACKGROUND As part of a development agreement with Centex Homes, the City has agreed to form a CFD to finance public infrastructure. The City's finance team has met with Centex Homes (the developer) to discuss the formation of a Community Facilities District for the Rosetta Canyon project. DISCUSSION Development costs are only eligible for reimbursement with CFD funding if paid after the bonds are issued. Given the nature of the proposed reimbursable costs and the timing of when bonds will be issued, a Fee Deposit and Reimbursement agreement is necessary for the fees to be reimbursed from thCFD bond proceeds. The City will hold as a deposit, the developer fees. The City will be paid the fees from the future bond proceeds and the deposit is reimbursed to the developer. If the bonds do not go forward, the fee deposit will be released to the City. The development consists of 1,012 single family homes. The CFD formation and City Council decision calendar are scheduled as follows: 11/23/04 Resolution of Intention and Resolution of Intention to Incur Bonded Indebtedness brought to City Council for adoption. Council will review for adoption the rate and method of apportionment and boundary map. The preliminary bond sizing �~ and the financial analysis will also be presented. AA ITEM NO. PAGE OF_L _. 12/17/04 Joint Financing Agreement approved by EMWD 12/30/04 CFD Report Completed 01/04/05 Draft Appraisal completed (Dated December 15, 2004) 01111105 City Council Meeting 1. Public Hearing 2. Adoption of Resolution of Formation 3. Election — 4. Approve Bond Documents 01/14/05 Print POS 01/27/05 Price Bonds 02/03/05 Bond Closing FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact to the City as a result of this agreement. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the fee deposit and reimbursement agreement with Centex Homes. APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: Matt N. Pressey, Director of Administrative Services Dick Watenpaugh, - AGENDA ITEM NO. 2 �` PAGE -)�, OF -LZ;�- 45530458.1 FEE DEPOSIT AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT by and between CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE and CENTEX HOMES relating to CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT NO. 2004-3 (ROSETTA CANYON) AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE 3 OF / "Z FEE DEPOSIT AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT THIS FEE DEPOSIT AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT (the "Agreement ") is entered into effective as of the _ day of , 2004, by and between the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a city duly organized and existing under the laws of the State of California ( "City "), and CENTEX HOMES, a Nevada general partnership ( "Property Owner "), and relates to the proposed formation by City of a community facilities district to be known as "City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 2004 -3 (Rosetta Canyon)" (the "CFD "). RECITALS: A. The property described and depicted in Exhibit "A" hereto (the "Property ") is proposed to constitute the land within the boundaries of the CFD. B. Property Owner intends to develop the Property for residential purposes and has obtained or intends to obtain the necessary development approvals to construct approximately 1,012 residential units on the Property, as such development may be modified from time to time (the "Project "). C. The Project will require the payment, pursuant to the land use entitlements, conditions of approval, existing City ordinances and resolutions and development agreement for and applicable to the Project (the "Project Conditions "), of certain City Fees (defined below). D. In conjunction with the recording of the final subdivision map(s) for the Project, applicable to issuance of grading permits and/or the issuance of building permits for the construction of homes within the Project, Property Owner, or its successors or assigns, may elect to provide a security deposit to cover City Fees to the City (the "Deposit ") before any Bond Proceeds are available to pay the City Fees. In such case, Property Owner shall be entitled to (i) reimbursement of such Deposits and (ii) credit for payments made to the City from Bond Proceeds of the City Fees which would otherwise be due to the City in conjunction with the Project, all as further described herein. _4 AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants set forth herein, the parties hereto agree as follows: 1. Recitals. Each of the above recitals is incorporated herein and is true and correct. 2. Definitions. Unless the context clearly otherwise requires, the terms defined in this Section shall, for all purposes of this Agreement, have the meanings herein specified. (a) "Act" means the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, Chapter 2.5 (commencing with Section 53311) of Part 1 of Division 2 of Title 5 of the California Government Code. V,. 11/2/04 9034.13 H &O: #19374 v245530458.I 1 AGENDA ITEM ISO. J PAGE_L OF�s 11" (b) "Bond Proceeds" or "Proceeds of the Bonds" shall mean those net funds generated by the sale of the Bonds and investment earnings thereon. (c) "Bonds" shall mean those bonds, or other securities, issued by, or on behalf of the CFD in one or more series, as authorized by the qualified electors within the CFD. (d) "Deposits" means an amount deposited with the City by Property Owner as security for City Fees and which are eligible for refund by the City upon the sale of Bonds. (e) "City Fees" means the fees and charges and all components thereof imposed by the City upon the Project pursuant to the Project Conditions as further described in Exhibit "C" hereto. (f) "Party" or "Parties" shall mean any one or all of the parties to this Agreement. (g) "State" means the State of California. 3. Proposed Formation of the CFD. City will undertake 'to analyze the appropriateness of forming the CFD. City will retain, at the expense of the Property Owner, the necessary consultants to analyze the proposed formation of the CFD. 4. Sale of Bonds and Use of Proceeds. In the event that the CFD is formed, the City Council acting as the legislative body of the CFD may, in its sole discretion, finance, among other things, the City Fees by issuing the Bonds. As required by the Project Conditions, it may be necessary for Property Owner, or its successors or assigns, to make Deposits before Bonds are issued. Upon the issuance and sale of the Bonds, Property Owner may execute and submit a payment request, in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B ", to the CFD requesting disbursement to the City of an amount equal to all Deposits from Bond Proceeds. Within ten (10) business days of the City's receipt of funds pursuant to such disbursement request, the City shall return Vie Deposits to Property Owner. In the event Bonds are not issued within six (6) months of th1 date of any Deposit, such Deposit may at the written direction of the City, be applied to pay the City Fees, and shall no longer be reflected as a deposit on the accounts of the City. 5. Indemnification. Property Owner shall assume the defense of, indemnify and save harmless, City and the CFD, their respective officers, employees and agents, and each and every one of them, from and against all actions, damages, claims, losses or expenses of every type and description to which they may be subjected or put, by reason of, or resulting from, any act or omission of Property Owner with respect to this Agreement; provided, however, that Property Owner shall not be required to indemnify any person or entity as to damages resulting from negligence or willful misconduct of such person or entity or their officers, agents or employees. 6. Amendment and Assignment. only in writing signed by each party hereto. part, by the Property Owner to the purchaser 11/2/04 9034.13 H &O: #19374 v245530458.1 This Agreement may be amended at any time but This Agreement may be assigned, in whole or in of any parcel of land within the Property provided, 2 AGENDA ITEM NO PAGE OF,.,,. however, such assignment shall not be effective unless and until the City has been notified, in writing, of such assignment. 7. Entire Age ement. This Agreement contains the entire agreement between the parties with respect to the matters provided for herein and supersedes all prior agreements and negotiations between the parties with respect to the subject matter of this Agreement. 8. Notices. Any notice, payment or instrument required or-permitted by this Agreement to be given or delivered to either party shall be deemed to have been received when personally delivered or seventy -two hours following deposit of the same in any United States Post Office in California, registered or certified, postage prepaid, addressed as follows: City: City of Lake Elsinore 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, California 92530 Attn: City Manager Property Owner: Centex Homes 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, CA 92880 Attn: Chris Holmquist Each party may change its address for delivery of notice by delivering written notice of such change of address to the other party hereto. 9. Attorneys' Fees. In the event of the bringing of any action or suit by any Party against any other Party arising out of this Agreement, the Party in whose favor final judgment shall be entered shall be entitled to recover from the losing Party all costs and expenses of suit, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 10. Severability. If any part of this Agreement is held to be illegal or unenforceable by a court of competent jurisdiction, the remainder of this Agreement all be given effect to the fullest extent reasonably possible. 11. Governing Law. This Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be governed by and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 12. Waiver. Failure by a party to insist upon the strict performance of any of the provisions of this Agreement by the other party hereto, or the failure by a party to exercise its rights upon the default of another party, shall not constitute a waiver of such party's right to insist and demand strict compliance by such other party with the terms of this Agreement thereafter. 13. No Third Party Beneficiaries. No person or entity other than the CFD, when and if formed, shall be deemed to be a third party beneficiary hereof, and nothing in this Agreement (either express or implied) is intended to confer upon any person or entity, other than the City, the CFD, and Property Owner (and their respective successors and assigns, exclusive of N, 11/2/04 9034.13 AGENDA ITEM NO J H &O: #19374 v245530458.1 3 PAGE OF- I ;--! r individual homebuyers), any rights, remedies, obligations or liabilities under or by reason of this Agreement. 14. Singular and Plural: Gender. As used herein, the singular of any word includes the plural, and terms in the masculine gender shall include the feminine. 15. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but all of which shall constitute but one instrument. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement as of the day and year written above. ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK 0 VICKI KASAD CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, McCLENDON & MANN, P.C. City Attorney By: BARBARA ZEID LEIBOLD 11/2/04 9034.13 _ H &O: #19374 v245530458.1 4 AGENDA ITEM, NO. PAGE®/ , OFD CENTEX HOMES, partnership a Nevada general By: Centex Real Estate Corporation, a Nevada corporation, its managing member By: — David L. Hahn, Division President Leo McKinley, Division Controller r.v 11/2/04 9034.13 H &O: #19374 v245530458.1 5 AGEi�a ITEM �. �.. PAGE 9 oF�1 EXHIBIT A DESCRIPTION OF PROPERTY LEGAL DESCRIPTION 11/2/04 9034.13 H &O: #19374 v245530458.1 AQENDA ITEM NO. 3 � PAGE,.= OF L BOUNDARY MAP .�i ..r 11/2/04 9034.13 H &O: #19374 v245530458.1 2 AQENDA ITEM NO. `\ PAGE_ OF�® EXHIBIT B DISBURSEMENT REQUEST FORM 1. City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 2004 -3 (Rosetta Canyon) ( "CFD ") is hereby requested to pay from the CFD bond proceeds to the City of Lake Elsinore (the "City"), as Payee, the sum set forth in 3 below. 2. The undersigned certifies that the amount requested for City Fees is due and payable and has not formed the basis of prior request or payment. 3. Amount requested: $ For Lot Nos: 4. The amount set forth in 3 above is authorized and payable pursuant to the terms of the Fee Deposit and Reimbursement Agreement by and between the CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE and CENTEX HOMES, dated , 2004 (the "Agreement "). Capitalized terms not defined herein shall have the meaning set forth in the Agreement. CENTEX HOMES, a Nevada general partnership By: Centex Real Estate Corporation, a Nevada corporation, its managing member Date: cc: City of Lake Elsinore Finance Dept. Lo David L. Hahn, Division President By:_ Leo McKinley, Division Controller 1I/2/04 9034.13 AQENDA ITEM NO. H &O: #19374 v245530458.1 PAGE OF-12 EXHIBIT C CITY FEES Item Quantity Unit Unit Price Traffic Impact Fee 1,012. DU $1,197.00 Fire Facility Fee 1,102 DU 300.00 Park Fee 1,012 DU 1,600.00 Library Fee 1,102 DU 75.00 Dev. Agrmt. Fee (Fire 1 LS 1,300,000.00 Sta.) Dev. Agrmt. Fee 1 LS 2,850,000.00 (Park) Storm Drain Fee, 169 AC 6,330.00 Third St. Dist. Storm Drain Fee, 76 AC 6,300.00 Arroyo Dist. Storm Drain Fee, 169 AC 6,265.00 Wasson Dist. Total 11/2/04 9034.13 H &O: #19374 v245530458.1 Total $1,211,364 303,600 1,619,200 75,900 1,300,000 2,850,000 1,069,770 478,800 1,058,785 9 967 419 AQENDA ITEM NO. PAGE j CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO THE CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: NOVEMBER 9, 2004 SUBJECT: DEPOSIT AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY AND CENTEX HOMES BACKGROUND As part of a development agreement with Centex Homes, the City has agreed to form a CFD to finance public infrastructure. The City's finance team has met with Centex Homes (the developer) to discuss the formation of a Community Facilities District for the Rosetta Canyon project. DISCUSSION According to the City's policy on forming CFD's and according to the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982, the City Council may approve an agreement to receive a deposit for the cost incurred by the City in creating the CFD and issuing special tax bonds. The development consists of 1,012 single family homes. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact to the City as a result of this agreement. AGENDA ITEM No 3 PAGE O RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the deposit and reimbursement agreement with Centex Homes. Matt N. Pressey, Director of Administrative Services APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: Dick Watenpaugh, Ci 1"MW AQENDA ITEM NO. - 33 PAGE d� OF-1– � DEPOSIT AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT THIS DEPOSIT AND REIMBURSEMENT AGREEMENT (this "Deposit Agreement "), is made and entered into as of , 2004, by and between the City of Lake Elsinore, California (the "City ") and Centex Homes, a Nevada general partnership (the "Owner "). RECITALS WHEREAS, the City has determined to initiate proceedings to create a community facilities district designated "City of Lake Elsinore Community Facilities District No. 2004 -3 (Rosetta Canyon) (the "Community Facilities District ") under the Mello -Roos Community Facilities Act of 1982 (the "Act "); WHEREAS, Owner is the owner of the real property within the proposed Community Facilities District; WHEREAS, in accordance with City's policy regarding use of the Act, the Owner is required to compensate the City for all costs incurred in the formation of the Community Facilities District and issuance of bonds for the Community Facilities District; �.�. WHEREAS, Section 533114.9 of the Act provides that, at any time either before or after the formation of a community facilities district, the legislative body may accept advances of funds from any source, including, but not limited to, private persons or private entities and may provide, by resolution, for the use of those funds for any authorized purpose, including, but not limited to, paying any cost incurred by the local agency in creating a community facilities _ district (including the issuance of bonds thereby); WHEREAS, Section 53314.9 of the Act further provides that the legislative body _ may enter into an agreement, by resolution, with the person or entit advancing the funds, to repay all or a portion of the funds advanced, as determined by tlegislative body, with or without interest under all of the following conditions: (a) the proposal to repay the funds is included in both the resolution of intention to establish a community facilities district adopted pursuant to Section 53521 of the Act and in the resolution of formation to establish the community facilities district pursuant to Section 53325.1 of the Act (including the issuance of bonds thereby), (b) any proposed special tax is approved by the qualified electors of the community facilities district pursuant to the Act, and (c) any agreement shall specify that if the qualified electors of the community facilities district do not approve the proposed special tax, the local agency shall return any funds which have not been committed for any authorized purpose by the time of the election to the person or entity advancing the funds; and WHEREAS, the City and the Owner desire to enter into this Deposit Agreement in accordance with Section 53314.9 of the Act in order to provide for the advancement of funds by the Owner to be used to pay costs incurred in connection with the formation of the Community Facilities District and issuance of special tax bonds for the Community Facilities 11/2/04 9034.13 H &O: #19376 v245445799.1 AGENIDA ITEM R90. PAGE OF._L_ District (the "Bonds'), and to provide for the reimbursement to the Owner of such funds advanced, without interest, from the proceeds of any Bonds; *."so NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of the mutual promises and covenants herein contained, the parties hereto agree as follows: Section 1. The Deposits and Application Thereof. (a) The Owner or a previous owner of the real property within the proposed Community Facilities District has previously deposited with the City the amount of $50,000.00 (the "Initial Deposit "). The City, by its execution hereof, acknowledges receipt of, and accepts, the Initial Deposit. (b) The Initial Deposit, together with any subsequent deposit required to be made by the Owner pursuant to the terms hereof (collectively, the "Deposits "), are to be used to pay for any costs incurred for any authorized purpose in connection with the formation of the Community Facilities District and the issuance of the Bonds (other than costs, fees and expenses to be paid out of the proceeds of the Bonds), including, without limitation, (i) the fees and expenses of any consultants to the City employed in connection with the formation of the Community Facilities District and the issuance of the Bonds, including an engineer, special tax consultant, financial advisor, bond counsel and any other consultant deemed necessary or advisable by the City, (ii) the costs of appraisals, market absorption and feasibility studies and other reports deemed necessary or advisable by the City in connection with the formation of the Community Facilities District and issuance of the Bonds, (iii) the costs of publication of notices, preparation and mailing of ballots and other costs related to any hearing, election or other action or proceeding undertaken in connection with the formation of the Community Facilities District and issuance of the Bonds, (iv) reasonable charges for City staff time incurred in connection with the formation of the Community Facilities District and the issuance of the Bonds by the Community Facilities District, including a reasonable allocation of City overhead expense related thereto, and (v) any and all other actual costs and expenses incurred by the City in connection with the formation of the Community Facilities District and the issuance of the Bonds (collectively, the "Initial Costs "). The City may draw upon the De4sits from time to time to pay the Initial Costs. (c) If, at any time, the unexpended and unencumbered balance of the Deposits is less than $10,000, the City may request, in writing, that the Owner make an additional deposit in an amount estimated to be sufficient, together with any such unexpended and unencumbered balance, to pay for all Initial Costs. The Owner shall make such additional deposit with the City within two weeks of the receipt by the Owner of the City's written request therefor. If the Owner fails to make any such additional deposit within such two week period, the City may cease all work related to the issuance of the Bonds. (d) The Deposits may be commingled with other funds of the City for purposes of investment and safekeeping, but the City shall at all times maintain records as to the expenditure of the Deposits. 1"00 11/2/04 9034.13 AGENDA ITEM NO 3" H &O: #19376 v2 PAGE OF�_,,. (e) The City shall provide the Owner with a written monthly summary of expenditures made from the Deposits, and the unexpended balance thereof, within ten business days of receipt of the City of a written request therefor submitted by the Owner. The cost of providing any such summary shall be charged to the Deposits. Section 2. Return of Deposits; Reimbursement. (a) As provided in Section 53314.9 of the Act, the approval by the qualified electors of the Community Facilities District of the proposed special tax to be levied therein is a condition to the repayment to the Owner of the funds advanced by the Owner pursuant hereto. Therefore, if the qualified electors of the Community Facilities District do not approve the proposed special tax to be levied thereon, the City shall have no obligation to repay the Owner any portion of the Deposits expended or encumbered to pay Initial Costs. In accordance with Section 53314.9 of the Act, if the qualified electors of the Community Facilities District do not approve the proposed special tax to be levied therein, the City shall return to the Owner any portion of the Deposits which have not been expended or encumbered to pay Initial Costs by the time of the election on said proposed special tax. (b) If proceedings for the issuance of the Bonds are terminated, the City shall, within ten business days after official action by the City or the Community Facilities District to terminate said proceedings, return the then unexpended and unencumbered portion of the Deposits to the Owner, without interest. (c) If the Bonds are issued by the Community Facilities District, the City shall reimburse the Owner, without interest, for the portion of the Deposits that has been expended or encumbered, said reimbursement to be made within ten business days after the issuance of such Bonds, solely from the proceeds of such Bonds and only to the extent otherwise permitted under, the Act. The City shall, within ten business days after the issuance of such Bonds, return the then unexpended and unencumbered portion of the Deposits to the Owner, without interest. Section 3. Abandonment of Proceedings. The Owner acknowledges and agrees that the issuance of the Bonds shall be in the sole discretion of the Comm'ty Facilities District. No provision of this Deposit Agreement shall be construed as an agreement, promise or warranty of the City to issue the Bonds. Section 4. Deposit Agreement Not Debt or Liability of City. As provided in Section 53314.9(b) of the Act, this Deposit Agreement does not constitute a debt or liability of the City, but shall constitute a debt and liability of the Community Facilities District upon its formation. The City shall not be obligated to advance any of its own funds to pay Initial Costs or any other costs incurred in connection with the issuance of the Bonds. No member of the City Council of the City and no officer, employee or agent of the City shall to any extent be personally liable hereunder. Section 5. Notices. Notices, Demands and Communications Between the Parties. Any notices, requests, demands, documents, approvals or disapprovals given or sent under this Deposit Agreement from one Party to another (collectively, "Notices') may be personally delivered, transmitted by facsimile (FAX) transmission, or deposit with the United States Postal 11/2/04 9034.13 3 2 H &O: #19376 Q AGENDA ITEM NO. ®/ PAGE, OF-2, Service for mailing, 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 of transmission with the United States Postal Service. Notices shall be sent as follows: If to City: City of Lake Elsinore Attn: City Manager 130 S. Main Street Lake Elisnore, 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 Owner: Centex Homes Attn: Chris Holmquist 2280 Wardlow Circle, Suite 150 Corona, CA 92880 FAX No. (909) 273 -2100 Each such notice, statement, demand, consent, approval, autho ation, offer, designation, request or other communication hereunder shall be deemed delivere>o the party to whom it is addressed (a) if personally served or delivered, upon delivery, (b) if given by electronic communication, whether by telex, telegram or telecopier upon the sender's receipt of an appropriate answerback or other written acknowledgement, (c) if given by registered or certified mail, return receipt requested, deposited with the United States mail postage prepaid, 72 hours after such notice is deposited with the United States mail, (d) if given by overnight courier, with courier charges prepaid, 24 hours after delivery to said overnight courier, or (e) if given by any other means, upon delivery at the address specified in this Section. Section 6. California Law. This Deposit Agreement shall be governed and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. The Parties shall be entitled to seek any remedy available at law and in equity. 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. 11/2/04 9034.13 H &O: #19376 Q A Q,ENDA ITEM NO- --�3 PAGE OF3, u Section 7 Successors and Assigns. This Deposit Agreement shall be binding upon and insure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of the parties hereto. Section 8 Counterparts. This Deposit Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original and all of which shall constitute but one and the same instrument. Section 9. Other Agreements. The obligations of the Owner hereunder shall be that of a party hereto. Nothing herein shall be construed as affecting the City's or Owner's rights, or duties to perform their respective obligations, under other agreements, use regulations or subdivision requirements relating to the development. This Deposit 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. Section 10. Titles and Captions. Titles and captions are for convenience of reference only and do not define, describe or limit the scope or the intent of this Deposit Agreement or of any of its terms. Reference to section numbers are to sections in this Deposit Agreement, unless expressly stated otherwise. Section 11. Interpretation. As used in this Deposit 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 Deposit Agreement shall be interpreted as though prepared jointly by both Parties. Section 12. No Waiver. A waiver by either Party of a breach of any of the covenants, conditions or agreements under this Deposit Agreement to be performed by the other Party shall not be construed as a waiver of any succeeding breach of the same or other covenants, agreements, restrictions or conditions of this Deposit Agreement. Section 13. Modifications. Any alteration, change or modification of or to this Deposit Agreement, in order to become effective, shall be made in writing ans each instance signed on behalf of each Party. Section 14. Severability. If any term, provision, condition or covenant of this Deposit Agreement or its application to any party or circumstances shall be held, to any extent, invalid or unenforceable, the remainder of this Deposit 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. Section 15. Computation of Time. The time in which any act is to be done under this Deposit 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 term "holiday" shall mean all holidays as specified in Section 6700 and 6701 of the California Government Code. If any act is to be done by a particular time during a day, that time shall be Pacific Time Zone time. 11/2/04 9034.13 AQENDA ITEM NO. H &O: #19376 v2 PAGE OF Section 16. Legal Advice. Each Party represents and warrants to the other the following: they have carefully read this Deposit Agreement, and in signing this Deposit ...r 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 Deposit Agreement, or have knowingly chosen not to consult legal counsel as to the matters set forth in this Deposit Agreement; and, they have freely signed this Deposit Agreement without any reliance upon any agreement, promise, statement or representation by or on behalf of the other Party, or their respective agents, employees, or attorneys, except as specifically set forth in this Deposit Agreement, and without duress or coercion, whether economic or otherwise. Section 17 Cooperation. Each Party agrees to cooperate with the other in this transaction and, in that regard, to sign any and all documents which may be reasonably necessary, helpful, or appropriate to carry out the purposes and intent of this Deposit Agreement including, but not limited to, releases or additional agreements. Section 18. Conflicts of Interest. No member, official or employee of City shall have any personal interest, direct or indirect, in this Deposit Agreement, nor shall any such member, official or employee participate in any decision relating to the Deposit Agreement which affects his personal interests or the interests of any corporation, partnership or association in which he is directly or indirectly interested. [Signatures on following page] 11/2/04 9034.13 H &O: #19376 Q AQENDA ITEM NO PAGE � OF ,.No N"WW ,.-- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have executed this Deposit Agreement as of the respective dates set forth below. r- ATTEST: VICKI KASAD, CITY CLERK Uln VICKI KASAD APPROVED AS TO FORM: VAN BLARCOM, LEIBOLD, McCLENDON & MANN, P.C. City Attorney LIN 11/2/04 9034.13 H &O: #19376 v2 "CITY" CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE, a municipal corporation By: _ Title: "OWNER" CENTEX HOMES, a Nevada general partnership By: Centex Real Estate Corporation, a Nevada corporation, its managing member By: David L. Hahn, Division President By: Leo McKinley, Division Controller AQENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: RICHARD WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: NOVEMBER 9, 2004 SUBJECT: INCREASE FEES for LAKE USE PASSES BACKGROUND The City collects a fee from all boaters to partially offset the operation and maintenance costs of the Lake. The City sells both daily and annual lake use passes. Daily lake use passes are sold in volume to private boat launches for subsequent resale to individual boaters. The annual pass is good for the calendar year and is only sold through City Hall. The City has not increased the fees for the lake use passes since December 2000. Attached is a spreadsheet detailing the current and proposed increase in fees, as well as a comparison to other regional lakes. DISCUSSION The City has experienced a substantial increase in the operations and maintenance of the Lake over the past four years, which includes supplemental water purchase ($650,000), aeration system ($45,000) and bio- manipulation efforts ($35,000). It is generally recognized that rehabilitation of the Lake exerts a positive economic influence and improved quality of life throughout the community. The proposed increase in fees is based upon the increased cost of business to operate and maintain the Lake and the desire to shift a higher proportion of the cost to "lake users" in preference of local taxpayers. In addition, citizens of the City shall receive a 33% discount on the purchase of the annual lake use pass. In February 2004, Staff invited all the owners /managers of 4t launch facilities on Lake Elsinore to a general meeting to discuss a wide range of issues. Staff informed the attendees about the proposed increase in fees for the lake use pass. No objections were conveyed to City Staff and no one indicated that their business would be negatively impacted. One letter was received from Crane Lakeside Park & Resort in support of raising the fees. FISCAL IMPACT During the 2004 calendar year, Staff estimates the City will sell 31,000 daily and 270 annual lake use passes for a total revenue of $235,800. Projecting the same usage for the next calendar year and assuming adoption of the new fees, the total revenue for 2005 would equate to $343,750. Therefore, the new fees may increase the annual revenue by $107,950. If the City is able to realize water quality and quantity improvements, then both the attendance and �-� revenue may increase above this figure. AQEWA ITEM NO. ®3 `f PAW—.L— QE Staff suggests fee increases occur in whole dollar amounts, therefore another increase may not be proposed for 2 -3 years. N..r RECOMMENDATION Adopt the attached resolution to increase the fee structure for the lake use passes effective January 1, 2005. PREPARED BY: Pat Kilroy, Director of Lake & Aquatic Resources APPROVED FOR AGENDA LISTING: Richard J. Watenj�augh, City Mafiager AQENDA ITEM No. 34 PAGE. OF 2-3 n O O F+ O � Q+ f'S O� f�D - 0 b C CIA0 H A A� O CA fD rA AGENDA ITEM GE O. 3q �. T OF 2 3— PA® o C z r) ;0- d CD eb rD Cz° o o" �z w o M O O n �. CA o r .'3 p CD -t N Q, CD CD Cr CD "C3 p C 0 0 n C� \' $ A En CD m b 0 CD In En CD C En rn y y 0 CD O �r O w 6' c � t� C r CD b 64 64 69 A W ~ ~ _C H �• \ CD P pr A' 0 A ■s H o 1 1 46S r vii W i i N e fD C7 �i C/1 O i kA 46n 46oD �6n A tot tz CD �� � � ►� y O CD H n O O F+ O � Q+ f'S O� f�D - 0 b C CIA0 H A A� O CA fD rA AGENDA ITEM GE O. 3q �. T OF 2 3— PA® RESOLUTION NO. 2004- A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPEALING RESOLUTION NO. 2000 -51 AND ESTABLISHING FEES FOR USE OF LAKE ELSINORE WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore is desirous of providing a sufficient number of services for residents and tourists using Lake Elsinore; WHEREAS, the City's operational costs related to the Lake exceeds $1,750,000 annually while revenues from Lake use is $400,000; WHEREAS, it is necessary for residents and tourists to pay their fair share of the costs to provide services so that the Lake can remain available as a recreational resource; WHEREAS, the fees collected pursuant to this resolution shall be used for maintaining and operating the Lake for use by the public; and WHEREAS, the City Council does now desire to modify the use fee for the Lake by repealing Resolution No. 2000 -51 and the Schedule of Fees contained therein and adopting the Schedule of Fees as set forth herein. NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby resolved by the City Council of the City of Lake Elsinore as follows: - - - SECTION 1. Repeal of Resolution No. 2000 -51. That Resolution No. 2000 -51 is hereby repealed upon the effective date of this Resolution as set forth in Section 3. SECTION 2. Schedule of Fees. The following fees shall dcharged to City residents and non - residents for the use of Lake Elsinore for purchase of a Daily Lake Use Pass, Annual Pass, and Commercial Pass: Day Use Pass Daily Lake Use Pass $10.00 per day Annual Pass (Standard & Lake Front) Resident Non - Resident $100.00 per year per vessel $150.00 per year per vessel Non - Motorized Resident $25.00 per year per vessel ...1 I -moo 1 AGENDA ITEM NO. 3 PAGE OF Non - Motorized Non - Resident Senior Citizen Discount Commercial Pass Resident Business Non - Resident Business $35.00 per year per vessel 10% on Annual Pass only. $350.00 per year $500.00 per year SECTION 3. Effective Date. The City Clerk of the City shall certify the adoption of this Resolution, and thereafter the same shall be in full force and effect as of January 1, 2005. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2004. Ayes: Noes: Abstain: Absent: ATTEST: Vicki Kasad, City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: Barbara Zeid Leibold, City Attorney Thomas Buckley, Mayor 2 3y AGIENDA ITEM N . (q PAGE - GF '_ N N \ 0 N O n m CO) m w CA 0 0 w 0 m A N N N 0 0 (Q �a N y CD CD G a co C O ` = 000� sto od Boa CD —vd ��CDA) 0) w �0 �°- s�0 Q°° m 0 a C1 d y-1 ? 0 a C 77 CD ' G M y 0 o CD � CD < G) Z, � CD a CD 7 ;o (�D (� w CD 3 °°; w N ? 3 m CD CD CD n nY c n CAD 10 N p D1 C7 m 0 fl. � CD w O m CD m O m U) pCo ON CD 00 (D w c A Ul w VI �0) CD m n w .Z � O C0) 00) Er V CD 0 V w C V pw p X, � O •0 O O W V N V (O 0 V O O Ul 0 O N � � � N O v ao 0 0 < CD (D S O O 7 (D 69 Zu 69 69 AGNCD N flj ul 7 O N S (! O 7 O O 69 N Cn � O O 0 O (O N N N S CA) CD 0 00 c ��c S CD < S C VJ CD C CA Ch N 0 CD O CD vi p 3 v CD d o 0 3 0 CD CO w Cc A CA CD = O V 3 � N -0 V 7 O (O O) W-Q 0 mwm y Vw ��wr a C) co X 0 0 0 u0i 0 O CD O CD O V r0 aD m 0 C j C<D = 0 << CD 3 `< am G M y 0 y y O► C O cr ooDa gam ��ao m 0 (�D (� w CD 3 °°; w l (D 0 c °� p d l�� o N n nY c n CAD 10 N p D1 C7 w (A O v° fl. � CD m N m to m O m N CD (D V CD CA -I OD (D w U1 w w O U1 .< : N V AO ODV WO O V 'O •D N V aD C OD 00 O O O O O TIOODW O A N C O O N 7 6 69 N _ (n .< : N V CD VV CD 7C N W W , v -.46 O O O O O O M O O O O 0 0 0 O N 7c (D C = -s Cf O n w w N v� CD N a l�� aa� n n w � 3 (A O v° fl. � 3 � m CD (D w N CD m n w .Z � O 00 'O O O - V n° OD V N V 00 0 �° OF o° vCDo° N CD � N O N N 6 7 CD pnj a 0 0 - v N H9 cn O 0 CD y O 7 69 Z1 69 -{ 69 U7 G CO CD N CA D Can a 7 U) 7 ( a Q ^ (a A •p = .Si 'p .Si• CD y O 0 O C � .a y w W O O v CD 69 N O 0 (D N O CIN71 7 O 69 y 7 C5 (° •O .�+ (Q 3•. G N C-r.9T1 O O Cc w cn cc CDD - C N 0 O O CD O _ (n .< : N n U) 0 0 CD - •-•. N .* CD 7C N am Qom_ °gym <o c=r� Cron y a, S v y 0 a O CD (D � 0 ( 0 n O 'll O N Q `G 7c (D C = -s Cf O n CL CD a CD N a l�� 0 77 k Z EA 69 O N CT pnj -n N O CD ao - N 7 CD O O O N� UtNN NC\Tt 0`O 7 7 O �• 7• (D C5, w CD CQ =r =r a .Si •Si CL CD N 0 3 CD n O O G (-y G S?� 90 CD CD 7 y N N N � C_ Z p CD o c Ch a x O O c m v 0 C) 0 S O O co 0 O y 7 CD 6r> V7 O o � CD G CD O 7 oW _a &9 _3 y O (t] 0 -I CQ CD � N 00 A a� 3 0_ C N O O 3 In N CD R� y � � c w O < CD w. O 1 n U O CD (D A 0 co �l CCD 3 0) c N W 'p C� N O y D CD r D c Z -n t-4 n x r� _I tom,, M C„ N 7 Q o D I-nD _ m� c O 0 m -C z: v- O m > W � ( ? v m 7 y 7 ? ? Z 7 (o N COTI I J V w v° W O OD �r N 0 .0+. O V 0 0 O 0 0 V � O � � �m �c N m I-nD 0o me z n Z O CD N Uri Z 0 J-n M � N 7 y r- C/) 3 l�� n n w � 3 (A O v° fl. � 3 � m w N m n w .Z � O 'O O A(�NDARTEM NO � PAGE �° OF I NE c Ch 0 3 CD W O C/J 0 a 0 0 c a� 0c 0 D co Cn -a � c O3 �o °U �rn rn N 0 0 .p w QQ* mm �E� ��0O��zz � cm��0� M -izz ;uv < =•O MOO �mm CD cD<mmz+ �-, rn tntn M o -q X �,�my� CD m m Fn w m D_ Xzcn T D- Z C7 0 0 co w .p co0CDC)CD m w(D oo�wM6bD6 -PI:A, �1 f.1 r1 e" Al 11 1 f1 L 0 D c c0 0 .p W, rn C- c v c t. h C/ -0 c AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE_ 7. OF �.3 :� n0 0 0 0 vi a� 0 c v =r 2 c � C =r,< O K = Cr X (D 3 N O 0 v 0 v m N C a 71 (D CT O C- 0) O C 0) .+ (n ? fv cN D (Q Cl) a =r o 03 a3 o v a� (D rn N O O c 0 0 R — ;o (D (D ;D ;o (D (D ;a ( N (D O C (D (D C C (D UC7= 0 O'a'= 6) 0 o z b) ? o 0 -, Z (n o 7 CA Z 0 -: :3 M O O_ p 1 0 O0 0 K=. O P Q N Q N N . Q (D Po co c —N� 6L- :-:tb.:P,io6 o:-4 00w000DOd)alw a i C (Q O .p C- 0) t�i O O 0 C- c .OP (D .a OP 0 _O N W A 0 V1 AQENDA REM O. 34 PAGE OF .-3 e� N,N/ a� c v Cn. �C c � � cc cr c 0� o� (D 0. N 0 0 v m Crane Lakeside Park and Resort 15980 Grand Avenue Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 -5604 info8cranetakeside _ com 909 -678 -2112 Fax: 909 - 678 -7492 RECEIVED ............... ....... -- .............. ---- ......,,.,..• f B 1 01Iit'4 February 5, 2004 City of Lake Elsinore Lake & Aquatic Resources Department 130 S. Main Street Lake Elsinore, Ca. 92530 Attention: Pat Kilroy, Director Dear Pat: This is just a short note to let you know that I certainly did enjoy your meeting on Wednesday, February e. And as usual it was very informative. I also want to thank -you for the stamp. Now I can throw away my labels I use to have to stick on the lake use tickets. My personal feeling on the increase on the lake use ticket to $10.00 is that the city should go for it. Best Regards, 96t Judith A. Ber Manager JAB/ MOO" AQtENDA ITEM NO. 3.® PAGE OF 23 Ct'? t of LakF, Efs I n0TF, GGL' it )S got,: 01EI LAKE & AQUATIC RESOURCES DEPARTMENT / Agenda v February 4, 2004 —10:00 A.M. Attendees: Pat Kilroy, Peggy Storaasli, Jill Delaney, Teri Fazzio, Sgt. Don Sharp and Boat Launch Facilities and Campgrounds Discussion Items: 1) Introductions 2) Distribute and Update Boat Launch Facilities and Campground Information a. Contact Information b. Fee Schedule c. Services 3) Changes in Lake Day Use Pass for 2004 a. Distribute date stamps 4) Procedure to track weekly sales of Day Use Passes sold by Boat Launches 5) Increase Lake Day Use Fee next calendar year (January 1, 2005) 6) City's proposed plans for July events a. Boat Parade b. Fireworks Display 7) Lake improvements 8) Non - agendized items ..v 130 Soutfi ,�)-Rain - ty,,t, -fay z Efse,ZOzz, Gad¢ 92530 9,f,#4one: (gog) 674 -3124 Sax: (gog) 674 -2392 1A7G1TfdT, eaXz- eCsino%E_ 0¢9 AQiENDA FTEM NO. 3 DAn r ' n _� '0 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE ;'00 pw-vi, mom I I ANNUAL LAKE USE PASS FEES & REGULATIONS PER MUNICIPAL CODE SECTION 8.40 1. All passes will be valid from the date of purchase through December 31st of the current year (passes are not prorated). 2. Placement of Pass: Lake Use Passes must be affixed to vessel on the port side= _ (left) within four inches (4 ") from the end of the CF numbers. 3. Annual passes are valid only on Lake Elsinore. 4. Launch fees for private launches are separate. 5. All annual passes are non transferable and nonrefundable. 6. Passes may be purchased at the Cashier window at City Hall, 130 S. Main St. Monday through Thursday 9 am - 5 pm. Upon request passes can be issued through the mail. You may call (909) 674 -3124 ext. 213 to request an application. 7. Please follow all lake use guidelines which are available at City Hall or at the individual private launches. NOTE: Anyone who owns or rents property with launch rights must purchase an Annual Lake Front Use Pass in order to launch from their property. Please provide proof of ownership /residency. REVISED WW4 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OFD FEE SCHEDULE Motorized Vessels: GENERAL PUBLIC: $105.00 SR (55+) $94.50 CITY RESIDENTS: $ 65.00 SR (55 +) $58.50 Non - motorized Vessels: GENERAL PUBLIC: $ 25.00 SR (55 +) $22.50 CITY RESIDENTS: $ 20.00 SR (55 +) $18.00 1. All passes will be valid from the date of purchase through December 31st of the current year (passes are not prorated). 2. Placement of Pass: Lake Use Passes must be affixed to vessel on the port side= _ (left) within four inches (4 ") from the end of the CF numbers. 3. Annual passes are valid only on Lake Elsinore. 4. Launch fees for private launches are separate. 5. All annual passes are non transferable and nonrefundable. 6. Passes may be purchased at the Cashier window at City Hall, 130 S. Main St. Monday through Thursday 9 am - 5 pm. Upon request passes can be issued through the mail. You may call (909) 674 -3124 ext. 213 to request an application. 7. Please follow all lake use guidelines which are available at City Hall or at the individual private launches. NOTE: Anyone who owns or rents property with launch rights must purchase an Annual Lake Front Use Pass in order to launch from their property. Please provide proof of ownership /residency. REVISED WW4 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OFD 9 Registered Owner Name: Address: Phone: ( ) CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE LAKE USE ANNUAL PASS APPLICATION 2004 Birthdate: Drivers Lic. # PLEASE ATTACH A COPY OF YOUR CURRENT REGISTRATION FOR EACH VESSEL. Vessel Description : Vessel Description : Type: Model: Type: Model: Length: Year: Color: Length: Year: Color: CF# CF# Vessel Description : Vessel Description Type: Model: Type: Model: Length: Year: Color: Length: Year: Color: CF# CF# Signature of Registered Owner: Date: - FEE SCHEDULE: GENERAL PUBLIC: Quantity Motorized Vessels $105.00 SENIORS (55 +) $94.50 X Non - motorized $ 25.00 SENIORS (55 +) $22.50 X CITY RESIDENTS: Motorized Vessels $ 65.00 SENIORS (55 +) $58.50 X Non - motorized $ 20.00 SENIORS (55 +) $18.00 X OFFICE USE ONLY: TAG # ISSUED: (LF) 100- 0000 - 320 -40 -20 = S TOTAL PAYMENT: (LF) 100- 0000 - 320 -40 -20 AGENDA ITEM NO. ®.® � P.AGE! �OF3 I.I` Lake Perris SRA Page 1 of 2 California Home Friday, October 2 State Parks Home Find A Park Reservations & Fees Adventures in Learning About Us Jobs Press / Announcements Publications State Parks Store Contact Us Site Index Related Links Accessibility Boating oatin Rules .ramping Hiking, Bicycling, and Horseback Riding Hunting Picnicking Rock Climbing Swimming The Land r—,. Formed by Perris Dam, Lake Perris offers a variety of water recreation, including swimming, fishing (shore, pier and boat), boating, sailing, waterskiing, and a special area for scuba diving. Wildlife includes ducks and Canada Geese. Anglers can find rainbow trout, catfish and Alabama spotted bass. The area also offers opportunities for hikers, bikers and equestrians. Rock climbing is featured in an area south of the dam. The Ya' Heki' Regional Indian Museum is in the area, along with a 2,000 -acre reservoir. Location- Directions The recreation area is located 11 miles south of Riverside via Highway 60 or V 215. Perris, California Latitude /Longitude: 33.8375 /- 117.1400 Link to the California Department of Water Resources _ Reservoir_Data._ _Reports. - Accessible Features (Opens a window to a new site) Park Features Activities ® Beach Wheelchair ® Bike Trails ® Exhibits & Programs ® Family Campsites J Fishing ® Group Campsites 4 Guided Tours " s Hike or Bike Campsites ® Hiking Trails ® Horseback Trails Scuba Diving httn: / /www.nnrks.ca.gov / ?nnge id =651 (7' My CA Ck This Telephone: 951 - 940 -5603 or 951 - 940 -5608 Operating Hours: Call the park Directions/Weather: Location /Maps Weather.com Travel Region: Inland Empire AGENDA ITEM NO. ,,.,_]�L PAGE =✓ OF 23 County: Riverside Cities near the park: Riverside 10/29/2004 Peak Non - Park Unit/Area Name Type of Fee Category season Peak Rate Season Rate ``001 Humboldt Redwoods SP $8.00 Humboldt Redwoods Paid Vehicle Huntington SB $8.00 Huntington Paid Vehicle Indian Grinding Rock/ Chawse SHP Indian Grinding Rock / Chawse Paid Vehicle Jack London SHP Jack London Paid Vehicle Jedediah Smith Redwoods SP Jedediah Smith Redwoods Paid Vehicle La Purisima Mission SHP La Purisima Mission Paid Vehicle Lake Oroville SRA Lake Oroville Boat Launch Lake Oroville Paid Vehicle Lake Perris .SRA _ Lake Perris Boat Launch Lake Perris Paid Vehicle Leo Carrillo SP Leo Carrillo Paid Vehicle Limekiln SP Limekiln Paid Vehicle Los Encinos SHP Los Encinos Adult Entry MacKerricher SP MacKerricher Paid Vehicle Malakoff Diggins .SHP Malakoff Diggins Paid Vehicle Malibu Creek SP Malibu Creek Paid Vehicle Malibu Creek SP (Heart of the Park Shuttle Riders) Paid Vehicle Malibu Lagoon SB Malibu Lagoon Paid Vehicle Manresa SB Manresa Paid Vehicle Developed Parking $6.00 $6.00 Developed Parking $10.00 $8.00 Developed Parking $6.00 $6.00 Developed Parking $6.00 $6.00 Developed Parking $6.00 $6.00 Developed Parking $4.00 $4.00 Power Boat Launch $5.00 $5.00 Undeveloped Parking $4.00 $4.00 Power Boat Launch $8.00 $8.00 A-,'o Developed Parking $8.00 $8.00 s---- Developed Parking $10.00 $8.00 leloped Parking $6.00 $6.00 Museum / Park Entry $2.00 $2.00 Developed Parking $6.00 $6.00 Developed Parking $6.00 $6.00 Developed Parking $8.00 $8.00 Developed Parking $6.00 $6.00 Developed Parking $10.00 $8.00 Developed Parking $6.00 $6.00 AQENDA ITEM NO. PAGF I LA nl 23 Day Use Fees Effective as of July 1, 2004 Page 1 of 1 California Home Friday, October 2 Reservations & Fees Adventures in Learning About Us Jobs Press / Announcements Publications State Parks Store Contact Us Site Index Related Links Reservations and Fees Camping Fees Effective July 1. 2004 amping Information Online Reservations Reservation Sale Dates Telephone Reservations Day Use Fees Effective as of July 1, 2004 Reservations and Fees Download fee sche PDF. At most parks, Day Use Fees are charged for parking only. There is no charge to Download r.k —in he..Day._Use walk or bike into these parks. Most historical parks and museums charge a Day by_ Parkin PDF. Use Fee per person. Vehicle Parking_(Day Use Fees) $5 - $8 Tickets are valid for 1 day at any park unit charging the same or lower rates Private Vehicles Daily Fee Developed $4-$14 Undeveloped $2-$4 Metered $0.50 /30min Buses Adults 10 -24 passengers $50 25 or more passengers $100 Group Day Use Sites $23-$450 Other Dav Use Fees oat Launching $5 - $8 Sno -Parks Daily Fee $5 - - -: Seasonal Pass $25 Swimming Pools Children Free - $2 Adults $3-$5 Museums, Historic Sites, and Tours (Excluding Hearsf astle) Children Free - $2 Adults $2-$8 Hearst Castle, San Simeon SHP Youth 6 -17 Adult Daily Tours $10-12 $20-24 Evening Tours $15 $30 Hearst Experience Tour- (combo) $10-12 $20-24 Back-to Top_of_Page California Department of Parks & Recreation Customer Care and Privacy Policy Email Webmaster This website works best when viewed with current versions of Internet Explorer and Netscape . 10-1 © 2004 State of California. Conditions of Use Privacy Policy AGENDA ITEM NO...� =. htt»- / /www_narks.ca_gov /?nage id =23294 PAGE .J < OF_._...., 10/29/2004 San Diego City Lakes Daily Permit Fees I Water Department ' Busines Cite H II Community I Depart: WATER DEPARTMENT I GENERAL HOME INFORMATION Daily Permits and Fees Concessions Accept Cash and Debit Cards Only F SHING Adults: $ 5.0 Juniors age 8- 5) $ 2.50 Senior /Disabled (Murray only) $ 2.50 Children 7 & under free Page 1 of 2 Aim 1177-77,777 E WATER w BILL/ Mme' CtlNSERVAT]Oti I WATERRECYCLED ( QUALITY ( CAP TTAL llTPRRUOM TS -8 Vfz State Fishing License (effective 1/1/04) - (Annual) $32.80 - (Two -Day) $16.55- (One -Day) $10.50 BOATING Rowboats (rental) All Day - $ 12.00 Half Day - $ 8.00 (Noon to closing) Motorboats (rental) All Day - $35.00 Half Day - $25.00 (Noon to closing) Hourly Motorboat (rental) Miramar and Murray only - $15.00 per hour Canoes (hourly rental only at Miramar and Murray) Per Hour - $ 5.00 Kayak (single person) (rental) - $11.00 per hour, $20.00 for 2 hours, $30.00 for half day, $45.00 for full day Kayak (tandem) (rental) - $19.00 per hour, $32.00 for 2 hours, $45.00 for half day, $60.00 for full day Pedal Boats 4- person (rental) - $15.00 per hour, $25.00 for 2 hours,_` $40.00 for half day, $50.00 for full day ` Private Boats (any craft for all or part of a day). $ 5.00 Must be 16 years of age to rent any boat All Day Motorboat Reservations (Murray or San Vicente) (619 -668- 3274) Mon -Fri 8:00 -2:00 WATER CONTACT (windsurfing, personal watercraft, Wakeboarding, Waterskiing, Tubing, Kneeboarding) Adults $5.00 uniors (age 8 -15) $2.50 Slalom or Wakeboard Course (San Vicente Only): $10.00 per boat/4 hr shift WATERFOWL or TURKEY HUNTING Rowboat and Blind Reservation $20.00 httn• / /www Gannet onv /water /rPrrPatinn /fP.P.0 chtml AGENDA ITEM NO., PAGE) OF 3 10/29/2004 Lei San Diego City Lakes Daily Permit Fees I Water Department Page 2 of 2 Hunting Permit (Adult) $10.00 Hunting Permit (Youth) $ 5.00 A--1- NOTICE: Seasons, fees and operating schedules may be subject to change. Reservoirs are open from sunrise to sunset on operating days only and are closed otherwise. In addition to a daily City recreation permit a State fishing license or State hunting license (with Federal waterfowl stamp) is required as appropriate. In addition to the Rules and Regulations posted at each reservoir all State and Federal regulations must be observed at all times. INFORMATION: For your convenience a recorded message detailing current activities, schedules, fishing and hunting results is available at all times by calling (619) 465 -3474 (465- FISH). Inquiries regarding overnight accommodations and other visitor services and activities should be directed to the San Diego Convention and Visitors Bureau (619) 236 -1212. Campgrounds and related information are provided by County (858) 565 -3600, State (619) 220 -5422 and Federal (619) 673 -6180 agencies. Information on State licenses, limitsand regulations is available from the California Department of Fish and Game (858) 467 -4201. Water Dept _Home_I General _.Information C _Lakes_and Recreation I Water &_Sewer Bill /Rates I Top of Page I Water Conservation I Recycled Water I Water Quality I Infrastructure /Capital Improvements I Home I Business I City. Hall. I Community! I Departments I Information I Leisure. I Services A -Z I Visiting I I Search I Site. Map I Contact.the City I Privacy Notice I Disclaimers I If AGENDA ITEM NO. — -5_�„ PACE �;, OF httn: / /www.sannet.eov /water /recreation/fees.shtml 10/29/2004 San Vicente Reservoir I Water Department WATER DEPARTMENT I GENERAL HOME I INFORMATION San Vicente Reservoir San Vicente is a deep, steep -sided reservoir on San Vicente Creek, approximately 25 miles northeast of San Diego. See the "What's New" page for current schedule. Directions: From Highway 67 go east on Willow Road, turn left on Moreno Avenue, and follow signs to the entrance. From the entrance it's about one mile to the concession /launch area. Page 1 of 2 W BILL/RAT I Ct3 H WATER I W ASR° I WATER r I CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS When full the reservoir has 1,069 surface acres, a maximum water depth of 190 feet, and 14 shoreline miles. Water levels are monitored daily. Reservoir has Florida- strain largemouth bass, black crappie, bluegill, channel catfish, blue catfish, white catfish, green sunfish, and trout (stocked November - January). Minimum size limit for bass is 12 inches. Fish limits are five bass, five catfish, 25 crappie. There is no limit on bluegill or bullheads. Fish catch information is updated weekly. New State and National Records were set at San Vicente on March 12, 2000. In addition to fishing from boats, patrons can float tube or fish from shore. Use of float tubes is restricted to within 150 feet or less from shore. Float tubers must wear chest waders and have a Coast Guard approved personal flotation device readily AGENDA ITEM O.' 3 PAGE . I 2<- ___.. OF httn: / /www.sannet.2ov /water /recreation/vicente.shtml 10/29/2004 San Vicente Reservoir ( Water Department available at all times, and have 144 square inches of international orange visible at least 12 inches above the water line. They must also /0-'-)ossess a horn or whistle to warn approaching craft. Any float tube thgj uses oars or has a motor must purchase a private boat use permit for $5.0 . Concession is open from sunrise to sunset on open days. They now have fishing licenses and live bait (shiners, crawdads, mealworms, redworms, nightcrawlers, and mackerel). They are also now taking reservations for all day motorboats ($35.00) Monday- Friday, 8:00 to 2:00 at (619) 668 -3274. If no answer, please leave a message and someone will call you back as soon as possible. Be sure to call before 2:00 on Fridays for weekend reservations. Concession also has 3 single kayaks (maximum weight limit is 250 Ibs) and 3 double kayaks for rent. Kayaks are not reserved. There is no camping allowed at San Vicente. The nearest camping is at Lake Jennings County Park approximately 7 miles from San Vicente. For reservations call (858) 565 -3600. San Vicente offers waterskiing, wakeboarding, tubing, etc. on Thursday, Friday, Saturday, Sunday, and certain holidays, from sunrise to sunset during the summer (mid -May to early November). During the winter ,-­,(early November to early May) water contact is allowed only on Thursday and Friday. Personal watercraft Qetskis, waverunners, etc.) are not permitted on San Vicente at any time. ON WATER CONTACT ONLY DAYS (FRIDAY, SATURDAY, SUNDAY) DURING SUMMER, ALL USERS PAY THE DAY USE FEE. I Water Dept. Home I General Information I City Lakes and Recreation I Water & Sewer Bill /Rates I Top of Page I I Water Conservation I Recycled._Water I Water..Quah I InfrastructurelCapital Improvements I I Home I Business I City-Hall I Community I Departments. I Information I Leisure_ f rvices A Z I Visiting I Search I Site Map I Contact the Ci& I Privacy. Notice I Disclaimers I Page 2 of 2 AGENDA ITEM o. PAGE J1 OF -"2--3 httn- / /www.sannet_gw/ water /recrea.tion /vicente_shtml 10/29/2004 J A o C '-3 'b 'C ; k� C n o CJ H CD is r C a; �� 'P v; d Cx7' CD CD O A CA CD f A e a C CD ° o Cho a m CD bra ° w CD R� ^�* (.�r CD in is � p, � �' e� �r., � � �. �': � �• t� � o R. to C CD i� �' En 0 CD CD o t7� CA o �3 18D o CD cL CD CD CD 0 CD CL CD � Q P OT w " 0 N CD O Q•O ry p O ry A� � + p' � N a � qQ UQ C0 �eD ►At dO.' O CD r' a r N O rM CD CD 9 P C Op ,, .. O►'vyi . - CD ° d NJ r2 s O 0 �� �s R > �Ccn D O O kA 46^ w fA ; — W CJq @ n CD fit CD o M ? O O Z7O CD C0 n CD o CA �. A In CD # N r O O e-r aE CU N ... H v.. H �3' CC O ml d ao CD i- 3� AGENDA ITEM NO. PACE OF y ET � � ƒ � 0 § � § � / � § 2 cn AB k=o/ f ■ � � § � A � � 2 2 y ƒ / � 7 � � (:) rp /§ p e o k kW§ CD A . m � J § D \ 0 \ / � k U � CL (OD K / / 3 ® ® 2 CD n 7 � 2 .4 CD _v E� AGENDA ITEM NO — � PAS OF :)' ?> 1 � / � � w Reservations Page 1 of 2 Reservations Reservations are recommended not required because of limited parking capacity. Click here to make online reservations. For phone reservations please call 1- 800 -590 -LAKE (5253) Frequently Asked Questions Are reservations required? No. Reservations are recommended not required. Driving Directions Diamond Valley La Lake Skinner Boat Registratioi Click Here for moi information Boat Requiremen Recreation Rules a How do I make a reservation? Regulations 1"1r Reservations can be made two ways. You can call the Diamond Valley Marina for Diamond Valley I at (800) 590 -LAKE (5253), Monday -Friday from 10 a.m. to 6 p.m., or you can and Lake Skinner, (Sp; make reservations online anytime (starting 10 a.m. September 3) at dvmarina.com How much are reservations and how can I pay for them? The reservation service fee is $5 per reservation and does not include the cs for entrance, boat launch or fishing access. All fees, including the non- refundable reservation service fee must be paid in full at the time of booking, by credit card: Visa, MasterCard, or Discover. Can I reserve a boat through the reservation system? Yes. All rental fees are payable in advance. A refundable $100 damage deposit is also required to rent a boat, payable upon arrival. You must be at least 21 years old to rent a boat. How early do I need to make reservations? Reservations must be made at least 72 hours before your scheduled arrival date. How far ahead can I make reservations? Reservations can be made up to 60 days in advance. How many reservations can I make at once? A maximum of four reservations can be made per call to the Diamond Valley Marina; a maximum of 2 reservations can be made online. A 3 4 httrr / /www rivinlre r.nm /rPCervntinn.g01 html Al?INUA ITEAA O. PAGE 2'� OF T 10/294 Reservations r What if I have to cancel my reservation? Cancellations must be made eight days prior to your scheduled arrival date. You will receive a full refund of fees, minus the $5 reservation service fee and a $5 cancellation charge. To cancel a reservation, call Diamond Valley Marina at (800) 590 -LAKE (5253)and have your reservation confirmation number prior to calling. What if I need to change my reservation? You are allowed to change your reservation only once. Call the Diamond Valley Marina at (800) 590 -LAKE (5253) at least 48 hours prior to your scheduled arrival date. Have your reservation confirmation number available prior to calling. A $5 reservation change fee will be assessed. What if it rains? We have no control over the weather. All reservations must be honored, regardless of weather conditions. Can I pay for everything through a reservation? No. The entrance fee ($7 per vehicle) and boat launch fee ($6) fee are paid in advance. You will be required to pay the $3- per - person fishing access fee upon arrival. If you would like to reserve a boat, your rental fees must also be paid in advance. How can I use my coupon, gift certificate or senior discount? If you have a coupon, gift certificate or would like to use a senior discount, we recommend making a reservation through the Diamond Valley Marina at (800) 590 -LAKE (5253). How much will it cost my family of five to fish at Diamond Valley Lake? Assuming you are bringing your own boat, it will cost $5 to reserve a spot, $7 for the entrance fee, $6 to launch the boat, and $15 for fishing access fees ($3 for each person on the boat, assuming they all want to fish). The total cost is $33. Those renting boats (or fishing from the shoreline) do not pay the $6 launch fee, but still must pay the other fees. Page 2 of 2 .�i AGENDA ITEM NO. y PACE OF httn• /hanxnw rlvlA -f- rrnm /rPCPrvatinncnl html 10/29/2004 CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: NOVEMBER 9, 2004 SUBJECT: ELSINORE WATER DISTRICT LIAISON BACKGROUND The City of Lake Elsinore benefits from communication with other public agencies providing services within the City's jurisdictional boundary and neighboring region. The City Council over time has held regular study sessions with the elective Boards of many agencies including Elsinore Valley Municipal Water District and the Lake Elsinore Unified School District. The City Council has also established annual liaison positions of individual or subcommittee Council members to meet regularly with community groups or agencies. The method of communication varies dependant on the desires of the entities and issues involved. DISCUSSION Recent disruptions in the community near the four comers area have been caused by main line breaks in the water system infrastructure of Elsinore Water District. Repairs to the system have been completed at this time. The Mayor delivered a letter to the District immediately prior to their Board Meeting of November 2, 2004 with the stated intent of appointing a liaison from the City Council at today's Council meeting to work with the District on "increasing the level of cooperation between the City of Lake Elsinore and the Elsinore Water District ". The Water District has responded that they are interested in establishing joint study-sessions to discuss topics of mutual interest or concern, but do not at this time desire to aoint a standing liaison. FISCAL IMPACT None. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council consider the action of liaison appointment. PREPARED BY: DICK WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER APPROVED FOR �.., AGENDA BY: CITY MANAGER'S OFFICE AQENDA ITEM NO. � PAGE OF o Y0_kE, ffltnOTE HAND DELIVERED r��nE C'tt9 �oto�E�� November, 2 2004 Board of Directors Thomas Buckley Elsinore Water District Mayor Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Genie Kelley Mayor Pro Tern Thomas Buckley Mayor Daryl Dickman City of Lake Elsinore Councilman Lake Elsinore, CA 92530 Robert E. Magee Councilman Dear Board President, Robert Schiffner Councilman In an effort to increase the level of cooperation between the City of Lake Elsinore and the Elsinore Water District, -I wish to inform you Richard Watenpaugh that I hope to appoint Tuesday, November, 9 a member of our City City Manager Council to act as a liaison between our two entities. Pending Council approval, this new liaison will work diligently to assist your District and the Lake Elsinore residents and business owners who reside in your District to improve critical water - related infrastructure. It has become apparent recently that there exist significant and potentially dangerous problems with the water delivery 'stems in the Country Club Heights and Four Corners neighborhoo0of our City, neighborhoods served by your District. These problems have literally spilled over into City streets, causing traffic snarls, public health inquiries, and economic hardship. Speaking for myself (the Lake Elsinore Council has yet to discuss the matter publicly and/or direct City staff to take any particular action), I believe that the City and District have numerous joint interests in fixing the current problems and that inca eased cooperation will benefit everyone in our City. In the past, the City (and its Redevelopment Agency) and District have entered into certain legal agreements concerning water and development matters. It is possible that those past agreements — 130 cSoutf ,Actin ,=St'cEEt, _fahE CELsino¢E, Ccz7q 92530 �If'pfionE (909 ) 674 -3124 gax (909 ) 67411 www.LakF_ -EL rzo,cE.oz9 AwENDA "hm NU..�.an PAGE OF �3. essentially mothballed years ago – could be re- activated, or entirely new arrangements and plans discussed. Without question, the water service (and lack of sewer service) has retarded development in what could be one of our city's premier neighborhoods – Country Club Heights. Recent work by a Council - appointed Citizen's Committee pointed out the infrastructure problems in that area quite succinctly. Not only would improvements in your District's existing system alleviate the current intolerable situation, but those same improvements could unlock the key to an exciting new hillside neighborhood. This letter is not meant as a threat; merely as an offer of potential assistance. If your District is capable of solving the current problems on its own, then so be it. However, the City of Lake Elsinore stands ready to help our residents, hopefully by helping your District. '^` Sincerely, Mayor, City of Lake Elsinore PS – Please have your Board Clerk read this letter into We minutes of your November, 2 meeting. Thank you. CC: City Council City Manager's Office City Attorney AGENDA ITEM NO.. L' --. PAGE-- 3 OF-2— CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE REPORT TO CITY COUNCIL TO: MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL FROM: RICHARD J. WATENPAUGH, CITY MANAGER DATE: NOVEMBER 9, 2004 SUBJECT: MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING FOR THE ACQUISITION OF PROPERTY WITHIN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE FOR CONSERVATION PURPOSES BACKGROUND On January 13, 2004, the City Council approved the following Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan ( "MSHCP ") documents subject to specific conditions and/or modifications: (1) CEQA Findings Resolution; (2) Implementing Agreement; (3) Implementation Resolution; and (4) Joint Powers Agreement ( "MSHCP Documents "). On May 11, 2004, the City Council approved a Memorandum of Understanding with the County in an effort to address a number of issues raised by the City's approval of the MSHCP Documents. At that time, the City also reconsidered and approved the form of the Joint Powers Agreement entered into by other participating jurisdictions. The U.S. Fish & Wildlife Service issued the Incidental Take Permit ( "ITP ") for the MSHCP on_ - June 22, 2004. With the issuance of the ITP, and approval of the MSHCP Fee Ordinance by the City on July 27, 2004, the MSHCP is fully adopted and effective within the City of Lake Elsinore. As a result, the City is now reviewing discretionary projects for MSHCP consistency and coordinating its review with the Regional Conservation Authori t "RCA "), the joint powers authority formed under the MSHCP. The Memorandum of Understanding, set forth as Exhibit "A" to this report, is an agreement drafted by the County of Riverside that addresses the acquisition of 598 acres of property owned by Tri- Valley I, a California corporation, located east of and adjacent to Interstate 15 in the City of Lake Elsinore (the "Property"). The MOU has already been executed by the County of Riverside and Tri - Valley I. Because the Property is within the City of Lake Elsinore, the MOU requires approval and execution by the City. The MOU was presented to the City Council at its October 12, 2004 meeting and continued by the Council with direction to staff to prepare documentation addressing issues relating to a possible future east -west transportation corridor affecting the Property. Attached is a proposed Addendum to the MOU acknowledging that the parties support the acquisition of the Property so long as the acquisition does not impede the City's desire or preclude the County's ability to locate a future east -west transportation corridor within the City of Lake Elsinore. The Addendum prohibits the County from conveying the Property or recording a conservation Staff Report - TT Group Fahmy MOU. 110904.doc ` i# ITEM NO. -3 b `.= PAGE OF� easement or otherwise encumbering the Property until the earlier of two events occur: (1) an east - west transportation corridor is established by the County under the RCIP; or (2) the expiration of six (6) years from the execution date of the Addendum. DISCUSSION Acquisition Costs The County of Riverside is obligated to pay $5,168,152.00 for the acquisition of the Property which funds have been deposited in escrow (Escrow No. 42035141 -K53). The City has been informed that these funds were obtained by the County through Riverside County Ordinance 810. Accordingly, the acquisition funds are not being provided by the RCA or derived from the MSHCP. However, the acreage will contribute towards the City's fulfillment of the conservation obligations set forth in the MSHCP. A letter from Chicago Title Company verifying the source of funds and the existence of the funds is attached as Exhibit `B" to this report. MSHCP Fee The MOU reflects the ability for a participating jurisdiction to negotiate a reduced MSHCP fee during property acquisition negotiations. The City is in the process of developing and implementing its Lake Elsinore Acquisition Program ( "LEAP "). The RCA recently reviewed the issue of MSHCP fee credits and will likely adopt RCA policy on the subject matter in the near future. Regardless of the policy enacted by the RCA, the MOU is a representation of how the City LEAP can administer MSHCP fee credits under proper circumstances. The City's MSHCP Fee Ordinance establishes a development exaction of $859 per dwelling unit to $5,620 per acre adjusted annually. The terms of the MOU result in a reduction of the MSHCP Fee that would otherwise be imposed upon dwelling units proposed to be developed on - - approximately 392 acres adjacent to the Property. Future Development The MOU references the future proposed development of approximately 392 acres. This reference adequately describes property that is entitled to receive an MSHCP fee credit. However, the MOU does not entitle the property in any manner. Any future development proposal will be subject to City review and approval. East -West Transportation Corridor The Addendum to the MOU prohibits any conveyance of the Property or recordation of a conservation easement for up to six years until an east -west transportation corridor is established. This provision provides the flexibility in locating and designing a future transportation corridor that the City and County previously discussed. Staff Report - TT Group Fahmy MOU. 110904.doc AQENDA ITEM N0.1� 2 _ PAGE OF '^ FISCAL IMPACT Neutral. Pursuant to the terms of the MOU, the $5,168,152.00 acquisition cost is a County obligation. The City has no financial obligations under the MOU. The MOU provides the property owner with a reduced MSHCP fee for future development. The City is obligated to forward all collected MSHCP fees to the RCA for future property acquisition. Therefore, a reduction of the MSHCP fee that would otherwise be imposed by the City does not result in a fiscal impact to the City. - RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City Council approve the attached MOU and Addendum thereto and authorize the Mayor to execute the MOU and Addendum on behalf of the City of Lake Elsinore. PREPARED BY: BARBARA ZEID LEIBOLD, CITY ATTORNEY STEPHEN M. MILES, ASSISTANT CITY ATTORNEY APPROVED FOR AGENDA BY: bjl�j� CITY MANAGER'9 OFFICE �LStaff Report - TT Group Fahmy MOU. 110904.doc AGENDA ITEM, No. - 30F 3 `� PAw .. --- /3 . 4 OCT -07 -04 10:41 FROM:VANBLARCOM LEIBOLD ID :949 457 6305 PAGE 09i22i2004 1u:27 WAY 80a•/Ja6ZUU � J40 uur Aaulzablci, -L-J - - a I L_09 1 EMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING .BETWEEN THE CO NTY OF RIVERSIDE, TRI VALLEY 1,, AND -THE CITY OF LAKE 2 ELSINORE WITH RESPECT TO 598 ACRES OF P_ ROPERTY IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE 3 4 5 6 7' 8 9 10 11 12• 13 14 15' 16 17' 18 19' 20 21 :22 23 24 25 26 27 28 THIS MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ( "MOU ") Is entered into as of the �0 day of , 2004, by and among the County of Riverside, a political . subdivision. 'of the State o California, (herein called "County'), Tri Valley, I, a •CWifomia corporation (herein called "Tri - Valley "), and the City; of Lake Elsinore, a Municipality of the State of California, (herein called ( "City"), with reference to the following facts: RECITALS A.- Tri Valley is the fee title property owner of the subject 598 acres of unimproved real property located both within, and in the vicinity of, the City,' as more fully described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein,- (herein called "Property "). B. In cooperation with local, state, and ,federal entities, the County has 2/8 prepared 'and adopted the Wesiern Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation. Plan (MSHCP) for the acquisition of open space property' and •the-. preservation of the Wildlife and their habitats. During the course of the County's preparation of the MSHCP, it was determined that .the Property' is located within 'the boundaries of the M$HCP .and has been identified as containing habitat - "' 6r,, .the' " i' Califomia .Gnatcatcher.: C_ J�e parties represent and acknowledge' that they are',aware..'thgt'• .; -• .the final boundaries of the Property have not yet been finally determined -andY(j11'.t�ie graphical depiction of such property contained on Exhibit "A ", though_ '.i sutiA "�iX� 11y;T accurate as to location, is imprecise, as to parcel configurabori and legal'1esc . soon as the actual property, boundaries have' been fully establish tto _urtli'er; _ ;. ' .�T,: 'fir :i •�1. �. •'F3X{.'•' !;, - of :tie aetualtpDope mapping, Tri V legal descriptions. alley wilt provide the parties with g .�,.. •R;�.;,ur�,,�;�'�.•'.,..: - • J, i. :+..�4 \1 »~� .1 ( -tip,. h11 �•• -.,'' . soriably and app t be unrea for their review approval, approval shall no •,• ry•,��r�.��'- .'r�l� °• . • :n. ,��'`�' %'c't: - =' � ." Via,' :.. ,. ;. SF c+ Page 1 of 5 0112N04 s.'VZwpmir�lVmpwl 1 `N -i4lei= t �► 'a °'l�r {� 1 �t ro } nCT 07 '04 11:23 ABENDA ITEM NO PAGE OF. .. 9494576305 PAGE.02 ","0* VV1 -Wr_WV 11V=ZL CMWIA % I'. LLIGVLV •✓ =.7Z.7 Z.7/ OJV. -I {"'I"1YG J/O V.Y /LL /LVVM IkiI60 a 01(aVLVU v••v- 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18' 19 20 21 .22 23 24 25 26 27, 28 D. The parties have agreed to, enter Into this MOU in order to memorialize', their mutual intentions and. 1agreemenf :concerning the .terms of the acquisition- NOW -THEREFORE. .together with the mutual promises, ,undertakings and .agreements of the parties as herei hafter I set forth, the undersigned parties to this MOU hereby agree as follows: 1, Location of Tri- Valle)'s Property. Tri - Valley owns. or I, controlling interest, of the Property. It is .composed , of six (6) separate Assessor parcel numbers and eight (8) separate partial parcel numbers, all contiguous to one another, more fully described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated -herein.. This property .is located south and Immediately adjacent to Interstate 15 and east of Lake Street. 2. Purchase Price. The purchase price to be' paid • by the County for the. subject 593 acres is Five Million One Hundred Sixty Four Thousand Six Hundred and Fifty -Two Dollars ($5, 184,652.00). The. Acquisition Agreement is detailed in Exhibit "B" attached hereto and incorporated herein_ The'Acquisition Agreement is subject to the County receiving and' accepting ar, appraisal report that meets State and Federal. ('standards. The agreed upon purchase price is not inclusive of any and, all fees and taxes. • 3. Envirortme'ntal Mitigation Fees. In addition to the subject 598 acres being sold• to the , County, Tri- Valley . also owns an additional 392, as of, vacant property adjacent to said property, which it- plans to develop (the "Developable Property"), which is also described. in Exhibit • "A Tri- Valley understands• that it must mitigate its environmental impacts of the 392 acre .'Developable Property in accordance with Paragraph 3 within. County and Tri Valley agree that Tri- Valley has a period: ot up.to.5 years, .commencing upon the execution 'of tithe Acquisltion- Agreement,. to� gai�Aheir. entitlements and pay; io the City, a M$HCP mitigation fee of $472.Oa per:; Economic Development Unit for each residential unit on the Developable Property,. '.Tri -V;00. is" obligated to pay to the, City a mitigation fee of $821.00 per Economic Developril nt.Ur7it; &Fx� Page 2 of 5 au W4 s•,Ftwnooanrra� rovo,,n{�caos.n- +.tc.aoc • ' AGENDA ITEM NQ. OFD OCT 07 '04 11:23 PAGE 94945 76305 PAGE.03 VVa WI — W-t iV ="2L tRV1'1= Vr11 \GLM/GV V/'/ LL aOVVY 1 •2 . 3 4 • 8. 6 7 8 9 . 10 11 12• 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 26 26 27 28 if it develops the Developable Property within the 6 to 10 year period. And finally, Valley agrees agrees to . pay the prevailing mitigation fee for any development 'on the Developable Property that occurs after the 10 -year term. County and Tri- Valley agree. that Tri- Valley may pre - purchase the mitigation fee for any unit it seeks to develop, at the rates stated herein, even if said unit is not'actually developed within the particular window' period when., the fee is paid.* E.g. Tn= Valley may pay the mitigation fee for .100. units during the first & -year period, "at -$47,200.00 and develop these 100 units during the 6 to 10 .year period without being liable for an increased Ordinance 810 environmental mitigation fee rate (conservation'mitigation fee)_ In addition to the above, the 'parties acknowledge that Tri- Valley, may use the Property with' County's approval, which shall not 'be. unreasonably withheld, whether before or 'after the County's purchase of the Property, to mitigate impacts to sensitive habitats (inctudi%- Without limitation, creating,, enhancing, or preserving sensitive habitat) in .connection with' Tn= Valley's development of the Developable Property, including, without litntatio' '(i) any mitigation necessary to comply.with a Clean Water Act Section 404 permit 'from the U.S_ Army Corps of Engineers,. a .biological opinion and incidental take statement from the U.S_ Fish. and Wildlife Service, a Clean Water.Act Section 401 water quality certification from the Califomial Regional Water Quality Con, trol Board, a'Califo,mia Fish and Game Code Section 16Q3,streambed alteration agreement from the California Department of Fish and -dame, and Califomia Fish and ' Game Code Section&2081 . incidental take permit (collectively, the "Mitigation "). Any physical xodifcation to the Property acquired by the County shall be -in accordance with• •mitigation standards required by .,the applicable resource agencies requiring sudh %Mitigation. (a) . County .and Tri- Valley'•agree -that. all or portions of the 392 acre Developable Property'is located within the designated Criteria Cells of the MSHCP map and that the payment ,of the above noted fees satisfies any and all City and County required conservation' mitigation fees .for development of Tri - Valley's 392 acre Developable Property. .It -is further understood that by paying said conservation SF-p, Page 3 of 5 OMW 6 +AewWou pmvu+ywsHC►ws r-� 4 Mix AQENDA ITEM N0._. 4 PAGE OF�_ OCT 07 '04 11 =24 9494576305 PAGE.04 OCT -07 -04 10 =42 FROM= VANBLARCOM LEIBOLD 1 .2 3 4 5 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 �14 ,-- 15 16 17 ..18 19 �Q 21. 22 23 24 25 26 27 28' ID =949 457 6305 r' PAGE mitigation fees ,and ,by selling the 598 acre Property-to County, Tri- Valley shall not be responsible for any further City and County .required conservation mitigation of any kind, including without limitation, any subsequent discovery of endangered species -or any further biological surveys, for any proposed development on. the Developable. Property. (b). Once the Environmental, Mitigation. Fees identified in Paragraph 3 above, are accepted by Tri- Valley through the acceptance of this document, the.County' and City concur that T6- Valley is in c6mpliance with Section 6.1 .1 of the MSHCP. In addition, Tri- Valley's 392 acre Developable Property, shown on Exhibit W, is considered fully consistent with the goals, policies, and criteria of the MSHCP by Riverside County, and Tri- Valley shall not be responsible for any further City and County required conservation mitigation of any kind„ including without limitation.for any subse'quent'discovery of endangered species or for any further biological surveys, 4. Cooperation. City and County agree to cooperate with Tri Valley and assist in facilitating further lot-line adjustments and other parcel reconfigurations. 5.. Property Boundaries.. The parties represent and acknowledge that they are aware that the tinal boundaries of the subject 598 acre Property and the 392, acre Developable Property identified on Exhibit W, have not yet been finally deter pined and that the graphical depictions, though substantially accurate as to location, are imprecise as to legal parcel configuration and designation, and, thus are intended only for general informational purposes. 6. - Entire Understanding Modification. This M062 contains'. the entire understanding between the parties respecting the matters herein set -forth and supersedes any •end all prior discussions, agreements and understandings among the parties respecting such matters. This MOU may not be modified or amended except by a written addendum signed by all the parties. (a) . , Governing Law. This MOU shall be construed and enforced "in accordance with the laws of the State of California. OCT 07 '04 1124 Page.a of $ AGENDA &TEM`�NO. PAGE 1 OF_L3.__ 9494576305 PAGE.05 5/8 OCT -0 2 3. 4' 6 7 8 9 12 13 14 15 17 18 19• 20, 22' 23 24 25 26 27 28 7-04 20:43 FROM:VANBLARCOM LEIBOLD ID:949 457 6305 rp A At (b) Successors and Assigns. Except 'as set forth below, the rights and/or Qbligation;s under this MOU shall' not be transferable or assignable by any party. . Notwithstanding. -the foregoing, TriValley may. assign this MOU to any successor in interestot Tri-Valley in connection ,with 'a transfer of the Developable Property to such successor., IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Memorandum of Undeistinding. as of the date first above written. COUNTY OF RIVER IDE 1: Eli 10., 2094 Dated: By CK61 I y � ... I Ro P Fo I N Clark and of•Supervisors EP�.W CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE Dated: By: Mayor TRI-VALLEY 1. a California Limited Partnership Dated: By:'_ Name: _ Its: OCT 07 '04 11:24 .Page 5 of 5 AGENDA ITEM NO. PAGE OF 9494576305 PACE 8/8 . A PAGE. 06 en ITA. ' • • a 1f DIt Ilp OCT -07 -04 10 :43 FROM :VANBLARCOM LEIBOLD ID :949 457 6305 PAGE 6/8 CHICAGrO TITLE COMPANY 560 EAST HOSPITALITY LANE, SAN BERNARDINO. CALIFORNIA 92408 (909)3847825 Fax (909)384 -7855 October 6, 2004 '`W` City of Lake Elsinore Ann: Stephen Mies City Attorney 130 S. Main Street - Lake Elsinore, Ca. 92530 Re: Escrow NO. 42035141 -K53, by and between T.T. Group, Inc., as Seller and County of Riverside, as Buyer Dear Mr. Miles, In connection with the above referenced Escrow transaction and In accordance with the request of Chad Wilshire of T.T. Group, please accept this letter as Escrow Holder's confirmation of the following: 1. The County of Riverside, as Buyer, has deposited Into Escrow funds sufficient to close Escrow in the amount of $5,168,152.00, which consists of the Purchase Price of $5,164,652.00, plus Escrow charges of $3,500.00. I have been advised by Brian Smith of the Economic Development Agency for the County of Riverside that the funds deposited into Escrow were obtained through Ordinance 810.1. ShouljtQou needAay thing further please let me know. Sue Klyce Sr. Escrow cc: Chad Wilshire sent via email: ceosurfer@aol.com LM - ON /22/96bK nC:T 017 '04 11:25 AGENDA REM NO. PAGE40 .OF -_ 9494576305 PAGE. 08 "-- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 " 28 Project: Tri- Valley, 598 Acres Parcels: See Exhibit "A" "ADDENDUM" TO MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, TRI- VALLEY I, AND THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE WITH RESPECT TO 598 ACRES OF PROPERTY IN THE CITY OF LAKE ELSINORE This ADDENDUM TO MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING ( "Addendum ") is entered into as of day of , 2004, by and among the County of Riverside, a political subdivision of the State of California (herein referred to as "County "), Tri - Valley I, a California Limited Partnership (herein referred to as "Tri - Valley"), and the City of Lake Elsinore, a municipal corporation. (herein referred to as "City "), with reference to the following facts: RECITALS A. Tri - Valley is the fee title property owner of the subject 598 acres of unimproved real property located both within, and in the vicinity of, the City, as more fully described in Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein (herein referenced as the "Property "). B. City, County and Tri - Valley are in agreement with all terms set forth in the original MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING dated February 10, 2004 (herein referred to as "MOU "), to which t dendum is attached and which shall be modified by this Addendum as set f rth herein. o the extent there is any conflict between the terms and -or conditions of the MOU and this Addendum, the terms and conditions of this Addendum shall govern. Hereinafter, the MOU and this Addendum shall be collectively referred to as the "MOU." NOW, THEREFORE, together with the mutual promises, undertaking and agreements of the parties as hereinafter set forth, the undersigned parties agree to addend the MOU as follows: CW: Page 1 of 3 11/412004 C:\Documents and SettingsMasad\Local Settings\Temporary Internet Fi1es\0LK2F\Tri- Va11ey MOU Addendum clean.doc AGENDA ITEM NO.. PAGE OF t1 c,, 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 7. As part of the RCIP, the County will be considering the establishment and alignment of a new east -west transportation corridor that will alleviate traffic between Western Riverside County and Orange County. The County, the City, and Tri- Valley understand that the acquisition of the Property by the County will contribute to the City's and RCA's conservation obligations under the MSHCP. The parties are therefore in support of the acquisition of the Property so long as the acquisition does not impede the City's desire or preclude the County's ability to locate a future east -west transportation corridor within the City of Lake Elsinore. The County, upon acquisition of the Property will not convey or record a conservation easement or otherwise encumber th(Property until the earlier of two events occur: (1) an east -west transportation corridor is established by the County under the RCIP; or (2) the expiration of six (6) years from the execution date of th's Addendum. . 8. Within 180 ay s of the date an east -west transportation corridor is established and prior to the conveyance or recordation of a conservation easement or any other encumbrance to the parcel that could preclude an east -west transportation corridor, the County shall enter into a Property Disposition Agreement ( "PDA ") with the City of Lake Elsinore that will set forth the terms and conditions of the County's conveyance of a conservation easement over the parcel. The PDA will memorialize the City's land use objectives, compliance with the MSHCP, and cooperation between the County and City. Additionally, the PDA will confirm that: (1) th4portion of the Property that will not be permanently affected by the east -west transportation corridor will be subject to a conservation easement, or (2) the entire Property will be subject to a conservation easement upon the expiration of six (6) years and the failure to establish an east -west corridor. Defining Term: As used in this MOU, an "established" east -west transportation corridor is one that is supported by information detailed by ordinance, resolution, agreement, or similar writing, by the County of cwC+ Page 2 of 3 1vanooa CADocuments and SettingsMasadlLocal SettingsWemporary Intemet Files\0LK2F\Tri- Va11ey MOU Addendum dean.doc AQEMA ITEM NO. PAGE .�.� OF_ ...r 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9' 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Riverside or other responsible or trustee agency evidencing a commitment to a particular east -west transportation corridor alignment. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Addendum as of the date first above written. Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: Assistant County Counsel Dated: APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: City Attorney ATTEST: By: City Clerk Dated: County of Riverside By: Chairman, Roy Wilson Board of Supervisors City of Lake Elsinore By: Mayor, Tom Buckley Tri- Valley I, a California Limited Partnership By: Jennifer Chen, General Partner Cw cW Page 3 of 3 1 varzooa C: \Documents and SettingsMasad\Local Settings \Temporary Internet Filesk=2FlTri- Valley MOU Addendum clean.doc AGENDA ITEM NO �b PAGE©F