Loading...
HomeMy Public PortalAboutAgendas - Jun. 21, 2011Agenda Beaumont City Council Beaumont Redevelopment Agency Beaumont Financing Authority Beaumont Utility Authority Beaumont Charitable Foundation Beaumont Conservation Authority 550 E. 6th Street, Beaumont, California Workshop Session (5:00 p.m.) Regular Session (6:00 p.m.) Closed Session (after Regular Session) Tuesday, June 21, 2011 "Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available for public inspection in the City Clerk's office at 550 E. 6th Street during normal business hours" WORKSHOP Workshop Session to begin at 5:00 p.m. Place: Civic Center, Room 5 Roll Call: Mayor De Forge , Mayor Pro Tern Berg , Council Member Castaldo , Council Member Fox , Council Member Gall 1) Western Riverside Council of Government (WRCOG) REGULAR SESSION Regular Session to begin at 6:00 p.m. Place: Civic Center, Room 5 Roll Call: Mayor De Forge , Mayor Pro Tern Berg , Council Member Castaldo , Council Member Fox , Council Member Gall Invocation: Roy Polman — Grace Brethren Church Pledge of Allegiance: Boy Scouts Presentation: Chiefs Commendation — DA and Beaumont Detectives Adjustments to Agenda: 1. COUNCIL REPORTS (This is the portion of the agenda where the City Council will present updates on city actions taken, committee assignments, and training and travel) a) Mayor De Forge b) Mayor Pro Tem Berg C) Council Member Castaldo d) Council Member Fox e) Council Member Gall 2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS (City of Beaumont Core Values: Treat everyone right; Keep a customer service focus; Effective communication; Present opportunity; Operate like a great business; Eliminate bureaucratic solutions; Embrace positive change) a. Beaumont Charitable Foundation (made up of donations from citizens, employees and contractors) 1) Financial Update 2) Disc Golf Tournament Update b. Community Information and Local Project Update 1) Fire Service & Inspection 2) International Council of Shopping Centers C. Calendar of Events 1) July 4, 2011 — Independence Day Celebration — The Basix and Three Dog Night 2) Concerts in the Park a) July 13, 2011 —The Bangles b) July 20, 2011 — The Commodores c) July 27, 2011 — Kansas d) August 3, 2011 — Rick Springfield 3) 1 s' Wednesday of each Month — Beaumont Care Awareness Team 4) Second and Third Wednesday of Each Month — Story Time Cafe 5) Potential Summer Schedule for City Council Meetings — July 19, August 16, September 20 d. Rumor Control, and Report on Oral and Written Communications 3. CONSENT CALENDAR (This portion of the Agenda is for items that do not require a Public Hearing or discussion.) a. Approval of all Ordinances and Resolutions to be read by title only and publish by summary b. Approval of the Minutes of the City Council Meeting June 7, 2011 C. Approval of the Warrant List for June 21, 2011. d. Denial of Claim — Oak Tree Alternative Care e. Denial of Claim — Alfredo Huerta f. Denial of Claim — Tony Anthony Avila g. Approval of One -Year Extension of Time on Tentative Tract Map No. 31843 & 32747 (Southerly of Jack Rabbit Trail and State Route 60) h. Approve the Emergency Management Contracts with Emergency Solutions Consulting and R & P Enterprises i. Approval of Final Maps and Subdivision Agreements for Tract Map Nos. 33096 -6 & 33096 -10 Located at the Southwest Corner of Potrero Blvd. and Highland Springs Avenue. j. Approval of Agreement and Project Progress Report for Tract 31426 — Aspen Creek (Located at the Southwest corner of Manzanita Park Rd. and Potrero Blvd — Energy and Water Conservation Agreement with RSI Land LLC and Authorize the Mayor to Execute subject to the City Attorney to make non - substantive changes. k. Approval of Increase in Waste Management Trash Collection Commercial Rates. Recommendation: Approval of the Consent Calendar as presented. 4. ACTION ITEMS /PUBLIC HEARING /REQUESTS (This portion of the Agenda is for items that require a Public Hearing, discussion, and /or Council direction.) a. Ordinance No. 972 Adopting the Recycled Water Facility Fee (Continued from (Continued from 812010 and again 3115/11) Recommendation: Adopt Ordinance No. 972 at its second reading by title only, with the revised Recycling Water Fee per EDU based on the shared cost scenario. . b. Ordinance No. 998 — Adding Chapter 17.13.040 "Prohibition on Reapplication after Revocation" for Unlicensed Group Homes. Recommendation: Hold a Public Hearing and Approve the 1St reading of Ordinance No. 998 as presented. C. Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 11- MND-03 for the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Projects & San Timoteo Bike Lane Project and Approval of the Project Progress Report Recommendation: Hold a Public Hearing; Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 11- MND-03; and Approve the Project Progress Report. d. Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Budget Recommendation: Hold a Public Hearing and Adopt the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Budget e. Economic Stimulus Fee Adjustment Recommendation: Adopt Resolution No. 2011 -17 in order to continue with the same fee schedule that was established in 2009. f. Employment Agreement Recommendation: Discuss and Approve an Agreement for City Manager 5. ORAL AND WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: Anyone wishing to address the City Council on any matter not on the agenda of this meeting may do so now. The oral communications portion of the agenda is to hear public comments. It is the City Council's policy not to discuss matters brought up as public comment until they are added to the agenda of a future meeting. Anyone wishing to speak on an item on the agenda may do so at the time the Council considers that item. All person(s) wishing to speak must fill out a Request to Speak Form and give it to the City Clerk at the beginning of the meeting. The forms are available on the table at the back of the room. There is a three (3) minute limit on public comments. There will be no sharing or passing of time to another person. 6. CLOSED SESSION Closed Session to begin after regular session Place: City Manager Conference Room a. Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(b) - Anticipated Litigation — Conference with Legal Counsel — Significant Exposure to Litigation 1) One Zoning Case b. Conference with Labor Negotiator — Pursuant to Government Code Section 54957.6 City Negotiator as Personnel Director, Alan Kapanicas Employee Organizations - Management Employees as Individuals C. Pursuant to Government Code 54956.9 (a)— Existing Litigation 1) Western Riverside Council of Governments vs City of Beaumont RIC 536164 2) Outdoor Media Group vs City 3) Oak Tree Alternative Care v. City of Beaumont RIC 1109687 4) Ochs v. City of Beaumont RIC 1100933 Adjournment of the City Council Meeting at p.m. Any Person with a disability who requires accommodations in order to participate in this meeting should telephone Shelby Hanvey at 951 - 769 -8520 ext. 323, at least 48 hours prior to the meeting in order to make a request for a disability - related modification or accommodation BEAUMONT FINANCING AUTHORITY BEAUMONT, CALIFORNIA AUTHORITY BOARD AND CITY COUNCIL Brian DeForge, Chairperson and Mayor Larry Dresse1, Vice Chairperson and Mayor Pro Tem Roger Berg, Board Member and Council Member Jeffery Fox, Board Member and Council Member Placido Valdivia, Board Member and Council Member AUTHORITY AND CITY STAFF Alan C. Kapanicas, City Manager, Finance Director David W. Dillon, Director of Economic Development Martha Lynn Chance, City Clerk PROFESSIONAL SERVICES Bond Counsel McFarlin & Anderson LLP Lake Forest, California Authority Counsel and City Attorney Akluft & Wysocki Riverside, California Disclosure Counsel Fulbright & Jaworski L.L.P. Los Angeles, California Underwriter's Counsel Burke, Williams & Sorensen, LLP Irvine, California Financing Consultant Rod Gunn Associates, Inc. Huntington Beach, California Special Tax Consultant General Government Management Services Rancho Mirage, California Project Engineer Urban Logic Consultants Temecula, California Trustee Union Bank of California, N.A. Los Angeles, California Underwriter O'Connor Southwest Securities Newport Beach, California FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION Alan C. Kapanicas, City of Beaumont, California (909) 769 -8520 Rod Gunn Associates, Inc. (714) 841 -3993 O'Connor Southwest Securities (949) 717 -2000 11 City of Beaumont 550 E. 6th Street Beaielrnornt, CA 92223 (951) 769 -8520 FAX (951) 76.9 -8526 biiail: cityliallC-Dci.bcalimoiit.ca.lis www. ci. hea it l rn on t ca. its Beaumont City Council Meeting of December 7, 2010 Agenda Item # 4.b b. Resolution to Withdraw from the Western Riverside Council of Governments Recommendation: Hold a Public Hearing and Approve the withdrawal from WRCOG as presented. Staff report was given by Alan Kapanicas, City Manager Open Public Hearing 6:58 p.m. No Speakers Closed Public Hearing 6:58 p.m. Motion by Council Member Berg, Seconded by Council Member Gall to adopt Resolution No. 2010 -35 to Withdraw from Western Riverside Council of Governments. Vote: 5/0 I hereby certify that the forgoing is a full, true and correct copy of an order made and entered in the City Council Minutes of Decembk 21, 2010. Shelby Hanvey Administrative Serjes Manager/ Deputy City Clerk Agenda Item No. -1 STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Council Members From: City Manager Date: December 7, 2010 Subject: Resolution to Withdraw from the Western Riverside Council of Governments Background and Analysis: On April 1, 1992, the City of Beaumont approved a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) to form the Western Riverside Council of Governments ( WRCOG), along with other western Riverside County cities and the County. The stated and intended purpose of WRCOG, as set forth in the JPA, was to: "... improve and coordinate the common governmental responsibilities and services on an area wide and regional basis... and explore areas of intergovernmental cooperation and coordination of government programs... " The Mission Statement of WRCOG is: "Respect Local Control, Provide Regional Perspective. " Ironically, in light of the City's experience with WRCOG's administration of the Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee (TUMF) program and recent WRCOG litigation, WRCOG has turned out to be anything but cooperative or respectful. Membership in WRCOG has, in fact, become a legal liability. WRCOG has evolved over the years into a political agency that uses high - handed administrative rule- making and litigation to further its own agenda and control its members and other agencies. WRCOG's lawsuit against Beaumont for TUMF fees allegedly owed WRCOG, and the two recent lawsuits against the California Energy Commission over the allocation of state grant funds for energy conservation projects, paints a picture of an agency less intent on "providing regional perspective" and "coordinating local programs" than on exercising power. Karen Douglas, the California Energy Commission Chair and Rick Rice, California Task Force Director said the following about WRCOG's litigious nature, as recently reported in the Press Enterprise: "Western Riverside's lawsuit threatens to derail a comprehensive statewide jobs program by holding up $33 million in stimulus funds —funds that would benefit the entire state, including citizens of Riverside County. " "Western Riverside deliberately refused to engage the Energy Commission in a public forum and ambushed us with a baseless, last- minute contempt charge " said Douglas. "This court order places us squarely in conflict with federal deadlines, at the expense of local governments across the state. " "The misguided actions by Western Riverside will likely result in these Recovery Act dollars reverting to the federal government, thereby preventing the Energy Commission from launching a statewide, job creating energy efficiency program, "said California Task Force Director Rick Rice. "Instead of working to put these Recovery Act dollars to good use, Western Riverside is choosing to put tens of millions of dollars at risk for local governments throughout the state that would otherwise be able to participate in this program. The words of the California Energy Commission officials ring true in light of Beaumont's years of good faith efforts to coordinate its highly successful Comprehensive Public Facility Financing Program (City Program) which began in 1993, with the TUMF program proposed in 2003. Both programs had the same goals of building roads to stay ahead of the growth curve. As part of the City Program, the City entered into a series of development agreements with property owners which imposed development exactions for critical facilities and services of the City, including law enforcement, fire protection, transportation, wastewater treatment, and parks, recreation and open space. In 2003, Beaumont was lobbied heavily by the County of Riverside and WRCOG to join the proposed TUMF program. The Beaumont City Council balked because it was concerned TUMF would be administered as a tax and not as a legally- defensible fee, that the program would be costly and inefficient, that the TUMF fee itself would be insufficient to accomplish TUMF goals (actually, it was, by 50 1/oi), that the process of funding road projects would be politicized, and that more than half the fees needed to build critically needed regional transportation facilities in the City and San Gorgonio Pass would be used elsewhere in the County to correct existing problems rather than mitigate impacts of growth. Most of all, the City Council did not want to abandon or compromise the City Program, which had been functioning successfully for ten years prior to TUMF. In an effort to gain trust, the Beaumont City Council was expressly assured by WRCOG and the County Supervisors that the administration of the TUMF program would be made flexible to accommodate the City Program as long as Beaumont charged the same "uniform fee" for building roads as other cities. The City Council received additional assurances before adopting its TUMF ordinance in 2003, when WRCOG agreed to include regional and local transportation facilities being funded and constructed by the City Program, in the TUMF program. Then, WRCOG and the City began to explore ways to grant developer credits for TUMF facilities constructed through the City Program. This was a legal requirement in Beaumont because with few exceptions, the levy of TUMF had to have a direct benefit to the property on which the fee was to be levied. Beaumont's legal requirements for cooperation as a means to coordinate the two programs was again made clear, this time to WRCOG's legal counsel, in November 2004. Unlike Beaumont, which agreed to cooperate with WRCOG and coordinate its preexisting road building program with TUMF, many cities chose to participate in TUMF on condition that exemptions from building and funding TUMF roads were granted to their respective constituents and developers. In several cities, major developers were let off the hook and allowed to build thousands of homes without any regional obligation. A report by David Taussig and Associates in 2004, estimated that half of all building permits issued in the western County would never participate in TUMF. Beaumont, on the other hand, had required its developers to build regional transportation improvements as part of the City Program. It saw a potential benefit to working cooperatively with the TUMF program, as long as WRCOG granted credits or exemptions to the works produced by the City Program. Beaumont's approach was different from every other WRCOG member in this regard. As part of the cooperative effort to meld the two programs, in 2004, Beaumont and the County Supervisors entered into a Memorandum of Understanding which provided written assurances to the City that regional transportation facilities in Beaumont would be given top priority for funding through the TUMF and Measure A programs. The MOU was desirable because at the time there was only a preliminary understanding as to how WRCOG intended to implement the TUMF program and a concern that TUMF roads in the San Gorgonio Pass and Beaumont would be neglected. The initial joint efforts to cooperate were laudable. If WRCOG had allowed the process to continue, it would have taken credit for the development of critically- needed regional transportation facilities in Beaumont which benefit the region. Successful cooperation would have also resulted in WRCOG receiving a steady stream of fees from non -City Program projects and tens of millions in fees once the regional facilities in Beaumont were completed in accordance with the City Program. However, these benefits did not come to fruition because of unilateral changes made by WRCOG over time in the TUMF Administrative Plan. The changes culminated in 2008 when Beaumont's program was disallowed by "COG, thereby signaling an end to the cooperative efforts. All semblances of cooperation evaporated in 2009, when WRCOG removed planned regional transportation facilities in Beaumont from a list of facilities eligible for TUMF funding, which action failed to respect the spirit of cooperation which had formed the basis of the 2004 MOU. The 2004 MOU was ignored again in 2009, when Measure A funding was withheld from the City. In 2006, prior to the legal maneuvering to make the City Program non - compliant with new WRCOG rules and to expel Beaumont from the TUMF program, WRCOG acknowledged the benefits of cooperation. WRCOG construction signs were placed along newly - constructed TUMF roads claiming ownership of Beaumont's road building program. In the same year, WRCOG's TUMF newsletter highlighted Beaumont's road building successes. The cooperative effort also made funding available for the only TUMF facility constructed by WRCOG in the Pass area to date, the realignment and widening of Desert Lawn Drive in Calimesa. WRCOG staff openly acknowledged the effort to integrate and gain credit for the City Program at a City Council Workshop Study Session on May 20, 2008 when Ruthann Taylor Burger addressed the City Council and said: I just want to say that Dave (Dillon) and Alan (Kapanicas) and I have worked a long time, four years, to try to make two fundamental programs that have some very different aspects to them work You gave your staff that direction. My board gave me that direction... That is also part of one of the fundamental problems of trying to make it work but we really have tried. It might not seem like it but it been a lot offun. Since 2004, Beaumont has constructed $45 Million in TUMF roads, in contrast to WRCOG's TUMF program which has banked over $134 Million in cash and charged almost $9 Million in legal and administration fees, while only $80 Million of the WRCOG program has been spent on actual TUMF road construction. Sadly, more than half of all TUMF funding has been spent on WRCOG administration, project planning, legal fees, engineering and right -of -way acquisition. Compared to the City Program, the WRCOG TUMF Administrative Plan, which guides the TUMF program, creates serious inefficiencies by limiting the use of funds and credits for construction of roads. For example, WRCOG restricts how credits are issued for building roads, how public financing must work with TUMF and how projects have to be implemented. It must control all agreements for every project funded or fee credit issued. The TUMF Administrative Plan also sets up cumbersome rules for how the cities and the County must redistribute TUMF funds through a complex and costly committee process administered by WRCOG. By comparison, in Beaumont road builders are simply given credit in exchange for actually building roads and the City Council decides which roads are built, not a committee. As administrator of the TUMF program, WRCOG staff, on one hand, advised the City and its developers to enter into WRCOG credit agreements for facilities funded and constructed through the City Program. On the other hand, WRCOG's legal counsel revised its Administrative Plan rules to ultimately prohibit such agreements. After processing 17 credit agreements over a span of some four years, WRCOG abruptly rejected the agreements and claimed Beaumont owed it $59 Million, a completely erroneous claim. It refused to acknowledge more than $4 Million in fees that Beaumont paid to WRCOG and $45 Million in TUMF facilities constructed through the City Program. After WRCOG made its demand for money, WRCOG staff refused to allow Beaumont to address the Executive Committee and blocked every attempt to resolve the dispute in a cooperative manner. It launched three separate audits of Beaumont while claiming Beaumont was uncooperative. In fact, Beaumont delivered its files showing the true cost of TUMF facilities constructed through the City Program, completely in compliance with TUMF road standards. WRCOG also stymied the mediation process set up to settle the dispute and ultimately demanded that Beaumont stop building roads. In 2009, the Beaumont City Council formally withdrew from the TUMF program. It is clear that WRCOG has abandoned its purpose as expressed in the JPA agreement that created WRCOG, and its own Mission Statement. In light of the complete and utter lack of cooperative spirit and respect, the potential for ongoing and expanding legal disputes which range far beyond the founding principles of WRCOG, the distinct possibility of future conflicts with WRCOG rules and political activities; the City is well- advised to withdraw from WRCOG. If it does not withdraw, the City will subject itself to more unwanted litigation and additional legal liabilities, because it is clear that the internal interests of individual WRCOG members are now at risk if they conflict with WRCOG's agenda These significant risks and potential costs of legal and political entanglement far outweigh the very limited benefits of continued membership in WRCOG. Recommendation: Staff recommends ADOPTION of the proposed Resolution. CITY Alan C. Ka�aj City Manager RESOLUTION NO. 2010 -35 AN RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT AUTHORIZING WITHDRAWAL OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT FROM MEMBERSHIP AND PARTICIPATION IN THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS RECITALS 1. On April 1, 1992, the City of Beaumont approved a Joint Powers Agreement (JPA) to form the Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG), along with other western cities and the County of Riverside; and 2. In 1993, the City Council adopted the "Comprehensive Public Facilities Financing Program" ("CPFFP "), for the purpose of funding the cost of constructing public works infrastructure, including sewer, water and transportation infrastructure to meet the demands of growth and development within the City of Beaumont (the "City") in accordance with the Beaumont General Plan; and 3. In 1993 and 1994, as part of the CPFFP, the City entered into development agreements with property owners which restrict the imposition of subsequent development exactions to those exactions for critical facilities and services of the City relating to law enforcement, fire protection, transportation, wastewater treatment and parks, recreation and open space; and 4. In the 17 years following the adoption of the CPFFP, the City constructed a new wastewater treatment plant, rehabilitated and upgraded its water and sewer system to meet all public health and safety standards, and made provision for new transportation arterials through and around the City such as the Potrero Boulevard Bypass which is a key regional facility identified in the Measure A program; and 5. During the 1980s and 1990s, the County of Riverside (the "County") experienced rapid residential and commercial growth, straining the County's and the City's transportation network, which, at the time, consisted primarily of two -lane roads connecting the incorporated communities of the County; and 6. Beginning in 2002, the Board of Supervisors of the County (the "Board of Supervisors "), recognizing the inadequacy of the transportation network, in conjunction with the Western Riverside Council of Governments ( "WRCOG "), called for the imposition of a uniform fee by all WRCOG members, the "Transportation Uniform Mitigation Fee" ( "TUMF "), and called for the adoption of a building moratorium if the TUMF failed (the "TUMF Program "); and 7. WRCOG prepared a model TUMF Ordinance for its members; and 8. In November, 2002, the voters adopted Measure A, which extended the authority of the Riverside County Transportation Commission ("RCTC ") to collect a tax on gasoline for a period of 30 years, commencing in 2009 (the "Gas Tax "), which Measure also required the members of WRCOG (including the City) to adopt the model TUMF Ordinance (the "TUMF Ordinance ") or lose their eligibility to receive an allocated share of the Gas Tax; and 9. The Board of Supervisors adopted the TUMF Ordinance; and 10. The City was urged by representatives of the Board of Supervisors and WRCOG to adopt the TUMF Ordinance; and 11. On or about January 21, 2003, the City Council considered the TUMF Ordinance, but continued the matter for further deliberation to resolve issues with respect to the preservation of the CPFFP and the legal implications of California Government Code Section 66000 et seq. (the "Mitigation Fee Act'); and 12. Representatives of the County and WRCOG continued to lobby the City by urging adoption of the TUMF Ordinance, with assurances that the City could continue to implement its CPFFP, and that the continued implementation of the CPFFP would be coordinated with the TUMF Program as administered by WRCOG; and 13. On March 4, 2003, the City Council enacted the TUMF Ordinance (Ordinance No. 839) based on the following representations by County and WRCOG representatives: 2009; a. Failure to do so would result in the loss of the Gas Tax commencing in b. Failure to do so would undermine the "uniformity" of the TUMF; C. Failure to do so would produce an undesirable precedent having the potential to lead to early failure of the program and legal challenge by the Building Industry Association; and d. The County and WRCOG would work with the City so that the CPFFP would be coordinated with, and complement the adoption of, the TUMF Program; and 14. Ordinance No. 839 provided an exemption for development projects which are the subject of a public facilities development agreement entered into pursuant to Government Code Section 65864 et seq. which prohibits the imposition of new fees, and the City had previously entered into development agreements which restrict the imposition of subsequent development exactions to those exactions for critical facilities and services of the City relating to law enforcement, fire protection, transportation, wastewater treatment and parks, recreation and open space; and 15. Ordinance No. 839 provided that if there was a recognized benefit district established, the City may credit that portion of the facility identified in both programs against the TUMF, and the City's CPFFP was a recognized benefit district and recognized financing district established by the City through Community Facilities District No. 93 -1, Westside Area Benefit District Ordinance No. 797, Eastside Area Benefit District Ordinance No. 826, and Beaumont Road and Bridge Area Benefit District Ordinance No. 837 and Assessment District No. 98 -1, and the City intended to credit the facilities identified in the CPFFP and the TUMF Program which were acquired and/or constructed through the CPFFP against the TUMF which might otherwise be due; and 16. Ordinance No. 839 provided that if a developer constructed arterial improvements identified on the Regional System of Highways and Arterials (RSHA), the developer shall receive credit for the costs associated with the arterial component based on approved unit cost assumptions for the RSHA and anticipated that when a developer constructed or funded transportation facilities such as an interchange, bridge, or railroad grade separation, TUMF credits would be afforded to the developer or the City; and 17. WRCOG approved the TUMF administrative plan (the "Administrative Plan") after the City's adoption of Ordinance No. 839, and the Administrative Plan provided that (i) where there was an existing benefit district, or an existing fee program with bonded indebtedness established prior to June 1, 2003, the City may credit the TUMF for that portion of the facility identified in both programs; (ii) if a developer constructs improvements identified on the RSHA, the developer shall receive credit for all costs associated with the improvements based on approved unit cost assumptions for the RSHA, and (iii) when a development project was required to construct RSHA facilities as project - specific mitigation, it shall be eligible for credit and/or reimbursement, but the Administrative Plan did not specify the method for (x) providing credits when a local agency constructs the improvements or (y) providing credits with respect to City facilities identified in an existing benefit district or an existing fee program; and 18. On or about April 2, 2004, the County and the City entered into a Memorandum of Understanding whereby the County and the City acknowledge that the arterial road improvements in the southerly part of the City, including the Potrero Boulevard Bypass and the reconstruction and enlargement of the Interstate 10 freeway interchange at Highway 79 were critical to the orderly development of the County and the City and that the parties would cooperate, to the maximum extent possible and with the greatest sense of urgency to make such road improvements (especially Potrero Boulevard Interchange on Highway 60) eligible as highest priority projects under Measure "A ", the TUMF Program and other funding programs; and 19. On March 1, 2005, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 875 amending the schedule of fees set forth in Ordinance No. 839; and 20. On May 2, 2006, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 894 authorizing continued participation in the TUMF Program, which Ordinance superseded Ordinance Nos. 839 and 875 (all three Ordinances shall hereafter be referred to as the "Prior Ordinances") after seeking confirmation from WRCOG staff that WRCOG and the City would continue their efforts to coordinate the CPFFP and the TUMF Program; and 21. With respect to developers not participating in the CPFFP, the City collected approximately $2.7 million of the TUMF and remitted all of the moneys so collected to WRCOG; and 22. The CPFFP has constructed or is constructing over $45 million public transportation facilities including regional transportation facilities; and 23. Since the adoption of the Prior Ordinances, efforts were made by the respective staffs of the City and WRCOG to coordinate the administration of the CPFFP and the TUMF Programs, but all such efforts apparently failed; indeed, several changes were made in the TUMF Program unilaterally by WRCOG, culminating in a rule change adopted on February 4, 2008, which rule change barred the City's continued implementation of the CPFFP; and 24. On or about August 14, 2008, "COG demanded that the City enter into a "Tolling Agreement," which Tolling Agreement was extended to September 15, 2009, for the purpose of preserving WRCOG's legal rights for a period of time necessary for WRCOG to demand that the City justify its participation in the TUMF Program; and 25. The Tolling Agreement provided that in order to facilitate the negotiations contemplated by the Tolling Agreement, the parties may form a "Negotiations Committee" consisting of representatives of the City and WRCOG to discuss what TUMF fees are due WRCOG by the City (if any), what TUMF fees are to be reimbursed to the City (if any), and to explore a practical means for coordinating the City's transportation infrastructure development program with the TUMF Program; and 26. WRCOG never allowed the formation of the Negotiations Committee; and 27. From and after August, 2008, WRCOG repeatedly threatened to sue the City for a lack of participation in the TUMF Program as it relates to the CPFFP, demanding that the City pay WRCOG some $59,000,000.00 and, presumably, to forfeit any claim the City might have to the Gas Tax; and 28. By October 2008, it had become clear to this Council that the City's continued participation in the TUMF Program, as outlined above, had become a legal liability for which termination of the City's continued participation in the TUMF Program was necessary in order to reduce its exposure, and that legal fees expected to be incurred in the threatened litigation will exceed $1,000,000.00; and 29. In November 2008, after repeated requests by the City for a mediation of the dispute, the Chairman of the Executive Committee of WRCOG appointed a County of Riverside employee, Mr. Paul McDonnell, as a mediator; and 30. On December 16, 2008, The City Council introduced Ordinance No. 945 for the purpose of authorizing the City transportation fee program, continuing the CPFFP, amending and restating Ordinance No. 894 and repealing Resolution No. 2008 -35; and 31. On January 5, 2009, WRCOG Officials demanded the City Manager and members of the City Council forego any further action on the adoption of Ordinance No. 945, stating that its adoption would only "worsen matters" and impair settlement of the dispute and that WRCOG would file a lawsuit against the City before the Resolution could be considered for its second reading; and 32. After several mediation sessions in the months before July 2009, it became apparent to the City that WRCOG staff members did not support the mediation. Several attempts were made to circumvent the mediation and, in August 2009, the City discovered that the mediator had been apparently ordered to stop the mediation; and 33. On August 3, 2009, WRCOG, notwithstanding the then- pending mediation and Tolling Agreement, approved two punitive actions against the City: a. Deleted from the RSHA substantially all local and regional transportation facilities in the City; and b. Directed the Riverside County Transportation Commission to escrow the City's share of Measure A funds. These actions in August 2009, were taken over the City's protest that the actions were punitive and inconsistent with the then pending mediation and with the Tolling Agreement, in which the parties expressed a mutual desire to negotiate a solution to the dispute and to explore a practical means of coordinating the City's CPFFP with the TUMF Program; and 34. On September 15, 2009, WRCOG sued the City asserting the City had failed to transmit collected fees to WRCOG and demanded that the City pay WRCOG an unspecified amount of TUMF Program moneys allegedly due WRCOG and, presumably, to forfeit any claim the City might have to the Gas Tax which claim fails to acknowledge the CPFFP and the development agreements entered by the City; and therefore, 35. A public hearing was conducted at which oral and written comments were presented to the City Council on the date hereof relating to the proposed Resolution; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Beaumont does resolve as follows: Section 1: Title and Purpose This Resolution shall be known as the "Resolution Authorizing the Withdrawal from Membership and Participation in WRCOG." Any and all prior resolutions in conflict with this resolution are hereby amended and restated to be consistent with the following provisions of this Resolution. Section 2: Findings A. The recitals set forth above are hereby adopted as findings in support of this Resolution. B. The City Council has been informed and advised, and hereby finds, that future participation in WRCOG will likely subject the City to unwarranted and costly political and legal disputes. C. By notice duly given and published, the City Council set the time and place for a public hearing on the Resolution, and at least ten days prior to the hearing, the Resolution was made available to the public. D. At the time and place set forth for the hearing, the City Council duly considered that data and information provided by the public relative to the withdrawal from membership and participation in WRCOG and all other comments, whether written or oral, submitted prior to the conclusion of the hearing. Section 3: Authorization of Withdrawal from WRCOG The City Council hereby adopts this Resolution to authorize the withdrawal of the City from WRCOG. The City Manager is hereby directed to provide written notice of withdrawal to WRCOG. The City Manager and any written designee of the City Manager (each an "Authorized Representative') are, and each of them hereby is, authorized and directed to do any and all things, and to execute and deliver any and all documents which said Authorized Representatives may deem necessary or advisable in order to consummate the withdrawal of the City from WRCOG and otherwise to carry out, give effect to and comply with the terms and intent of this Resolution. The City Council acknowledges that pursuant to Section 6.2 of the JPA, withdrawal may result in forfeiture of the City's rights and claims relating to distribution of property and funds upon termination of WRCOG. Furthermore, the City Council intends that notice to WRCOG of such withdrawal makes WRCOG aware that WRCOG should not incur any debts or other liabilities subsequent to the City's notice of withdrawal with an expectation that the City will pay its proportionate share of any such debts or other liabilities. The notice to WRCOG may specifically indicate the foregoing and that notwithstanding the provisions of Section 6.2(b) of the JPA, the City is not agreeing to pay any share of any debts or other liabilities incurred by WRCOG after provision of the notice of withdrawal. Section 4. Severability If any paragraph, section, sentence, clause or phrase contained in this Resolution shall be found by a final judgment of a court having jurisdiction to be illegal, null and void, or against public policy, for any reason, the remaining paragraphs, sections, sentences, clauses or phrases contained in this Resolution shall not be affected thereby. If any provision of this Resolution, or the application thereof to any person, party, transaction or circumstance is held invalid, the remainder of this Resolution, or the application of such provision to other persons, parties, transactions or circumstances, shall not be affected thereby. It is the intention of the City Council that if any provision of this Resolution is capable of two constructions, one of which render the provision void and the other of which would render the provision valid, then the provision shall have the meaning which renders it valid. PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 7'h day of December, 2010, by the following roll call vote: AYES: Mayor De Forge, Council Member Berg, Fox, Gall, and St.Martin NOES: None ABSTAIN: None ABSENT: None Mayor of the Ci KzXf Beaumont Record Gazette 218 N. Murray St. Proof of Publication (2015.5 C.C.P.) WITHDRAWAL FROM WRCOG - 33187 State of California ) County of Riverside ) �. I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State Of California; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a peaty to or interested in the above matter. I am the principal deck of the printer and publisher of Record Gazette, a newspaper published in the English lartgtrege in the City of Banning, County of Riverside, and adudcated a newspaper of general circulation as defined by the lays of the state of Cdbnia by the Stet w Court of the County of Riverside, under the date October 14, 1966, Case No. 54737. That the notice, of which the annexed is a oopy, has beers published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the Mowing dates, to-A November 26, 2010 Executed on: 11/26/2010 At Banning , CA I ceritfy (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature NOTICE IS FEREBY GIVEN. Owl rile Smoot o t City Cm d VA conduct a public hMQ an Tuesday. December 7. WO at appaodn d* 60 pat in scam 5 at the seauttat Civic Cater, 560 E Sri+ Sheet, Beaumont. Cataniali1223, b moeive Mdarwy and oateaette tram d role ated pentane raperft riw Nowig maiur(# AN RESOLUTION of THE CITY OF BEAUMONT AUTHORIZING WnDROK OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT FROM MEMBERSKP PARTICIPATION IN THE WESTERN RIVERSIDE COUNCIL OF GOVERNMENTS Ilk to pApaae and Watofriw Readttioa is ID 01 0 1 ' 1e 1011illtdtatr Of the cly of e" aat hom mentwtM 4 and porko Ian in M western RFtaaide Coatd of Gavammerft Date: Nwetttter22.2o10 Sheby Harney OW* Cky Clerk Publish The Raced No. 33187 11/!8.1010 Q -.) Beaumont Charitable Foundation Financial Status as of May 31, 2011 Designated: PD Explorer Post Shop with a Hero Beaumont Youth Activities League Pass Area Youth Court Adopt -a -Cop MDA Balances May 2011 Balances April 2011 Activity May 2011 500 500 323 323 1,104 1,104 316 316 1,011 1,011 12,510 12,885 25,395 14,753 13,896 28,649 Amount available for undesignated use: - 1,402 1,402 a. h -� International Council of Shopping Centers (ICSC) Global Real Estate Convention Dates: May 22 -25, 2011 Las Vegas Convention Center EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: • Staff attended to Promote the City of Beaumont, make contacts with new firms, network with Big Names in Global Real Estate Industry • Real Estate Convention — Largest Venue in World — • Connect with New businesses that have recently entered Beaumont • How they are doing? • How the City can help promote their business? • Work to establish a City to Business Relationship • Continue to Market the City of Beaumont to attract new Business and Jobs Benefits: • Get an Idea of the intense, fast paced competitive atmosphere that is Global Real Estate • Made over 30 New Business Contacts • Arby's, In -N -Out, Taco Bell, Steak n' Shake, Little Ceasars Pizza • Marshalls, Dress Barn, TJ Max • Put Beaumont in Competition for Business with other Cities throughout the Inland Empire • Compared Recent Projects in Beaumont with other areas in the USA: on Par, if not Better than most • Continue to Learn about New Products /Services to "Exceed Expectations" • New Storm Drain Systems and New Retention Basin Systems, , • Themed Clock Towers for a Downtown Intersection • Low Cost Disposable Cones • Special Bollards to reduce collision damage • Vacant Land in Beaumont, CA is some of the most desirable in the Inland Empire Challenges: • Some Companies not expanding in California • Median Household Income just below the Threshold for certain High End Retail 0-.11aiCITY RES NTS HENTtqft ir $iAd SIMUICA MAN lNE MY e 1�0 mom T tA A qjl� rURING s 0 This event is FREE of char open to all. Food and Bev4 will be available for purc and there will be games activities for the kidf Bring your lawn chairs, bl< barbeques & picnics, an course your family and ft You can fend the fun at Sh Park in Beaumont, on 90 951- 769 -8524 Beaumont's 5th Annual Summer Concert Series kicks off with a BANG on Monday, July 4th, 2011! Join The City of Beaumont as we celebrate our nation's birth in style, with a FREE live concert! Filling the night with the sounds of summer are The Basix at 5pm & Three Dog Night at 7:30pm Followed by Beaumont's amazing Pyro Spectacular S/MULCasuly,EON 41 AT9.00pm Come and enjoy the City of BeaumAt's 5th Annual FREE Summer Concert Series beginning July 4th, 2011. Taking place at Stewart Park on 9th and Orange Streets in Beaumont. All concerts begin at 7pm. Bring your lawn chairs or blankets, your barbeques or picnics, and of course your family and friends!!! WORKSHOP Minutes Beaumont City Council Beaumont Redevelopment Agency Beaumont Financing Authority Beaumont Utility Authority 550 E. 6th Street, Beaumont, California City Council Workshop (4:00 p.m.) Closed Session (5:00 p.m.) Regular Session (6:00 p.m.) Tuesday, June 7, 2011 1) Fund Balance Policy 2) Proposed Capital Improvement Plan (CIP) Budget REGULAR SESSION Call to Order: 6:02 Place: Civic Center, Room 5 Roll Call: Mayor De Forge, Mayor Pro Tern Berg, Council Member Castaldo, Council Member Fox and Council Member Gall were present. Invocation: Ron Bridges - Victory Tabernacle Church Pledge of Allegiance: Presentation: Ben Cloninger — Donation for MDA Golf Tournament $2,812.00 Proclamation - Amanda Hendey Linda Hanley — Boys and Girls Club Adjustments to Agenda: None 1. COUNCIL REPORTS (This is the portion of the agenda where the City Council will present updates on city actions taken, committee assignments, and training and travel) a) Mayor De Forge - Run to the Wall, Career Day at Beaumont Unified, Burn the Mortgage, Picnic with your Legislator, Miss Beaumont Pageant, Beaumont Youth Advisory Committee, Mayors Breakfast, Loma Linda Memorial, LEAC Awards, Breezin through Beaumont, Memorial Day Ceremony, Cherry Festival. b) Mayor Pro Tern Berg - Cherry Festival Parade, Pancake Breakfast, RCTC Update, WRCOG Update. c) Council Member Castaldo - League of California Cities Conference Update, LEAC Award Dinner, Cherry Festival. d) Council Member Fox - Beaumont Men's Rugby game, RTA will be donating a van to local charity. e) Council Member Gall - Cherry Festival Parade, Stop Signs at 13th and Michigan 2. CITY MANAGER REPORTS (City of Beaumont Core Values: Treat everyone right; Keep a customer service focus; Effective communication; Present opportunity; Operate like a great business, Eliminate bureaucratic solutions; Embrace positive change) a. Beaumont Charitable Foundation (made up of donations from citizens, employees and contractors) 1) Don Messier — Run for the Wall - Update 2) Chad Devlin — Iron Man Competition 3) Pass the Boot — Cherry Festival Parade - Update b. Community Information and Local Project Update 1) "I have a friend who wants to......" Update 2) Manufactured - Mobile Home a) Energy - Efficiency Program b) Inspection Support for Park Residents 3) Marketing the City — International Conference of Shopping Centers 4) Wastewater Treatment Plant Tour 5) Profile of the City of Beaumont 6) Pass Area Transit Ad -Hoc Committee C. Calendar of Events 1) June 2 -5, 2011 — Cherry Festival — Stewart Park 2) June 2, 2011 — Centennial Bridge Soft Opening — 4 p.m. onsite 3) June 11, 2011 — Disc Golf Tournament — MDA Fundraiser Event 4) June 11, 2011 — Beaumont Municipal Pool full opening for summer swim 5) July 4, 2011 — Independence Day Celebration /Concerts in the Park 6) 1't Wednesday of each Month — Beaumont Care Awareness Team 7) Second and Third Wednesday of Each Month — Story Time Cafe 8) Potential Summer Schedule for City Council Meetings — July 19, August 16, September 20 d. Rumor Control, and Report on Oral and Written Communications 3. CONSENT CALENDAR (This portion of the Agenda is for items that do not require a Public Hearing or discussion.) a. Approval of all Ordinances and Resolutions to be read by title only and publish by summary b. Approval of the Minutes of the City Council Meeting May 17, 2011 C. Approval of the Warrant List for June 7, 2011. d. Authorization to Accept an Offer of Dedication 08 -D -013 for a Corner Cut at the Southeast Corner of 3rd Street and Maple Avenue. e. Adopt Resolution No. 2011 -11 — A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Beaumont, California, Determining and Levying the Special Tax in Community Facilities District No. 93 -1 for Fiscal Year 2011 -2012. f. Adopt Resolution No. 2011 -12 — Resolution of the City Council of the City of Beaumont, California Approving the Appropriation Limit for the 2011 -2012 Fiscal Year. g. Adopt Resolution No. 2011 -13 — A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Beaumont, California, Ordering the Collection of Weed Abatement Charges and Directing the County Auditor to Collect Such Fees on the Tax Roll. h. Adopt Resolution No. 2011 -14 — A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Beaumont, California Ordering the Collection of Delinquent Sewage and Sanitation Fees and Directing the County Auditor to Collect such fees on the Tax Rolls. i. Adopt Resolution No. 2011 -15 — A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Beaumont, California, Ordering the Collection of Nuisance and Building Abatement Charges and Directing the County Auditor to Collect such Fees on the Tax Rolls. j. Resolution No. 2011 -16 — A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Beaumont Pertaining to the 2011 -2012 CalRecycle Used Oil Payment Program (OPP2). k. Authorization to Acquire Mobile Pumps for the Wastewater System I. Approval of the Investment Policy m. Award of the Agreement for Street Repair of Western Knolls Avenue. n. Authorization to Accept Open Space Lots for Tract 24039 -1, Lots G, H, and I, 24039 -3, Lot A, 24039 -4, Lots A & B, 24039 -5, Lot G within Brookfield Homes, Three Rings subdivision. Lots G & H, as part of 24039 -1, are located on the north and south side of Ring Ranch Road, west of Elm Avenue; Lot I, as part of 24039 -1, is located off of Hurstland Avenue, east of Tartan Way; Lot A, as part of 24039 -3, is located at the southwest corner of Brookside Lane and Claiborne Avenue, Lots A & B, as part of 24039 -4, are located on the north side of Ring Ranch Road at Jonabell Way, and Lot G, as part of 24039 -5, is located on the Southside of Ring Ranch Road at Claiborne West Avenue. o. Approval of Amendment to Cooperative Agreement with Caltrans for Potrero Blvd. Interchange Recommendation: Approval of the Consent Calendar as presented. Item 3.0 - Moved to 4.d for pubic request to speak Motion by Council Member Berg, Seconded by Council Member Castaldo to approve the remainder of the Consent Calendar as presented. Vote: 5/0 4. ACTION ITEMS /PUBLIC HEARING /REQUESTS (This portion of the Agenda is for items that require a Public Hearing, discussion, and/or Council direction.) a. 2011/2012 General Fund and Special Fund Budget Recommendation: Hold a Public Hearing and Adopt the 2011/2012 General Fund and Special Fund Budget as presented. Staff report was given by Alan Kapanicas, City Manager Open Public Hearing 7:38 p.m. Judy Bingham - Contracts Gail De Forge - Thank the City Mr. Halliwell - Press Enterprise Article Closed Public Hearing 7:44 p.m. Motion by Council Member Berg, Seconded by Council Member Fox to approve the General Fund and Special Fund Budget as presented. Vote 4/1 (Council Member Gall voted no) b. Preliminary Capital Improvement (CIP) Budget Recommendation: Approve the Preliminary CIP Budget and set the Public Hearing for June 21, 2011 at 6:00 p.m. Staff report was given by Alan Kapanicas, City Manager Motion by Council Member Berg, Seconded by Council Member Fox to approve the Preliminary and set the Public Hearing for June 21, 2011. Vote: 5/0 c. Resolution No. 2011 -10 -A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Beaumont Establishing Annual Sewer Standby Charges. Recommendation: Hold a Public Hearing and Adopt Resolution No. 2011 -10 as presented. Open Public 7:50 p.m. No Speakers Closed Public Hearing 7:51 p.m. Motion by Council Member Berg, Seconded by Council Member Gall to Adopt Resolution No. 2011 -10 as presented. Vote: 5/0 d. Approval of Amendment to Cooperative Agreement with Caltrans for Potrero Blvd. Interchange (moved from Consent Calendar item 3.0) Staff report was given by Alan Kapanicas, City Manager Speakers: Judy Bingham Motion by Council Member Berg, Seconded by Council Member Fox to approve as presented. Vote: 5/0 Oral and Written Communication: Judy Bingham - Pod Casts Adjournment of the City Council Meeting at 8:03 p.m. City AGENDA ITEM NO. F , L- WARRANT LIST CITY COUNCIL MEETING June 21, 2011 075953- 076068 Checks $513,142.92 EFT 568 -572 ACH $398, 704.20 EFT 359 -370 Credit Card $19,410.07 Voids 075995,076058 Payroll $420.00 06/02/11 PPE 05/26/11 $442,992.08 Mutual of Omaha PPE 05/26/11 $ 37,756.84 PPE 05/26/11 $ 515.82 Cal PERS PPE 05/26/11 $114,651.76 Ameriflex 05/31/11 $420.00 06/02/11 $48.00 06/06/11 $20.00 06/13/11 $334.89 Affant 06/01/11 $1,585.49 I DO HEREBY CERTIFY THIS WARRANT LIST HAS BEEN COMPILED AND PREPARED TO MEET THE DAILY OPERATIONS FOR THE FISCAL YEAR JULY 1, 2010 TO JUNE 30, 2011. SIGNATURE: TITLE: pl- n City of Beaumont Vendor Check Register Check Number Check Date Vendor Check Name Amount Description: 075953 06/03/2011 A -1 AUTO ELECTRIC 329.84 SUPPLIES 075954 06/03/2011 AIR & HOSE SOURCE 220.37 SUPPLIES 075955 06/03/2011 AMERICAN FORENSIC NURSES 48.00 SERVICES 075956 06/03/2011 AMERICAN RED CROSS 160.00 SERVICES 075957 06/03/2011 AVID INDENTIFICATION SYSTEM: 2,685.59 SUPPLIES 075958 06/03/2011 BEAUMONT LAWNMOWER 45.82 SUPPLIES 075959 06/03/2011 BIO -TOX LABORTORIES 980.00 SERVICES 075960 06/03/2011 BEAUMONT POLICE OFFICERS P 2,100.00 DUES 075961 06/03/2011 CDW GOVERNMENT, INC. 1,344.90 SUPPLIES 075962 06/03/2011 CITY OF BANNING 3,270.00 REVENUE 075963 06/03/2011 CINTAS CORPORATION #150 56.90 SUPPLIES 075964 06/03/2011 COMSERCO COMMUNICATIONS 791.44 SERVICES 075965 06/03/2011 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE 2,108.00 SERVICES 075966 06/03/2011 DEPARTMENT OF INDUSTRIAL R 225.00 SERVICES 075967 06/03/2011 FEDEX 11.70 SHIPPING 075968 06/03/2011 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 6,858.44 SERVICES 075969 06/03/2011 Gosch 34.32 SUPPLIES 075970 06/03/2011 HUNTINGTON COURT REPORTEI 1,519.64 SERVICES 075971 06/03/2011 ISMAEL PEREZ 5,600.00 SERVICES 075972 06/03/2011 JP STRIPING 3,244.75 SUPPLIES 075973 06/03/2011 KAD PAVING COMPANY 5,915.00 SERVICES 075974 06/03/2011 LEXISNEXIS 229.50 SERVICES 075975 06/03/2011 MATICH CORPORATION 528.48 SUPPLIES 075976 06/03/2011 MATTHEW PISTILLI 5,370.00 SERVICES 075977 06/03/2011 MCGRAW -HILL COMPANIES 1,256.00 SERVICES 075978 06/03/2011 NAPA AUTO PARTS 1,134.94 SUPPLIES 075979 06/03/2011 NATIONAL CONSTRUCTION REN' 222.63 SUPPLIES 075980 06/03/2011 PROFORMA 71.60 SUPPLIES 075981 06/03/2011 PRUDENTIAL OVERALL SUPPLY 244.12 UNIFORM 075982 06/03/2011 QUILL CORPORATON 353.16 SUPPLIES 075983 06/03/2011 RIVERSIDE COUNTY INFORMATI, 112.56 SERVICES 075984 06/03/2011 ROMBERG TREE SERVICE 1,400.00 SERVICES 075985 06/03/2011 S.A MOBIL CARWASH AND DETAI 464.00 SERVICES 075986 06/03/2011 SOUTHWEST NETWORKS INCOF 792.85 SUPPLIES 075987 06/03/2011 STAPLES CREDIT PLAN 1,021.61 SUPPLIES 075988 06/03/2011 SUPPLYLINE, INC 316.09 SUPPLIES Printed 06/14/2011 7:18:20AM Page 1 of 4 City of Beaumont Vendor Check Register Check Number Check Date Vendor Check Name Amount Description: 075989 06/03/2011 TASO TECH, INC 6,319.10 SUPPLIES 075990 06/03/2011 THE RECORD GAZETTE 179.56 ADVERTISING 075991 06/03/2011 TURF STAR, INC. 725.60 SUPPLIES 075992 06/03/2011 UNITED WAY OF THE 81.00 DONATION 075993 06/03/2011 UTILITY PARTNERS 59,836.00 SERVICES 075994 06/03/2011 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 528.19 PHONE SERVICE 075996 06/08/2011 TASO TECH, INC 8,515.32 computer supplies 075997 06/09/2011 EARTHQUAKE MANAGEMENT 4,088.70 SUPPLIES 075998 06/09/2011 QUILL CORPORATON 861.99 SUPPLIES 075999 06/09/2011 TASO TECH, INC 1,577.95 SUPPLIES 076000 06/09/2011 BEAUMONT LAWNMOWER 155.62 SUPPLIES 076001 06/09/2011 CSULB FOUNDATION 600.00 TRAINING 076002 06/09/2011 ADAMSON INDUSTRIES 5,970.00 SUPPLIES 076003 06/09/2011 AISG, ISO SERVICES, INC 17.10 SERVICES 076004 06/09/2011 ALTA OFFICE SERVICES 233.45 SUPPLIES 076005 06/09/2011 AMA ENTERPRISES 2,327.25 SHIRTS 076006 06/09/2011 ARROWHEAD 23.91 SUPPLIES 076007 06/09/2011 BEAUMONT LAWNMOWER 266.35 SUPPLIES 076008 06/09/2011 BEST WESTERN EL RANCHO MC 108.89 SERVICES 076009 06/09/2011 BRIAN'S LIVE BEE REMOVAL SEf 200.00 SERVICES 076010 06/09/2011 C & A JANITORIAL SERVICES 7,884.20 SERVICES 076011 06/09/2011 RAQUEL CARRERA 40.00 REFUND 076012 06/09/2011 CGLIC - CHATTANOOGA EASC 104,817.22 HEALTH CARE 076013 06/09/2011 CINTAS CORPORATION #150 727.36 SUPPLIES 076014 06/09/2011 CITY OF BANNING 197.81 SERVICES 076015 06/09/2011 CITY OF CALIMESA 2,057.00 SALES TAX 076016 06/09/2011 HOWARD CLASEN 8,738.50 SERVICES 076017 06/09/2011 COLONIAL LIFE AND 343.66 INSURNACE 076018 06/09/2011 CR &R INC. 4,712.00 SERVICES 076019 06/09/2011 CUSTOM TROPHIES 784.08 SUPPLIE 076020 06/09/2011 DAVID DAVIS 40.00 REFUND 076021 06/09/2011 DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE 140.00 SERVICES 076022 06/09/2011 DURA PLASTICS 226.93 SUPPLIES 076023 06/09/2011 ESRI 2,689.44 TRAINING 076024 06/09/2011 EVENT SERVICES 92.75 SERVICES 076025 06/09/2011 FIRST STREET S TORAGE 642.30 STORAGE 076026 06/09/2011 GENERAL GOVERNMENT 7,810.46 SERVICES Printed 06/14/2011 7:18:20AM Page 2 of 4 City of Beaumont Vendor Check Register Check Number Check Date Vendor Check Name Amount Description: 076027 06/09/2011 HARMSWORTH ASSOCIATES 1,480.00 SERVICES 076028 06/09/2011 MANUEL HARO 500.00 REFUND 076029 06/09/2011 HdL, COREN & CONE 1,575.00 SERVICES 076030 06/09/2011 HI -WAY SAFETY INC 117.00 SUPPLES 076031 06/09/2011 HOME DEPOT /CREDIT SERVICE: 838.77 SUPPLIES 076032 06/09/2011 INTERSTATE FIRE 162.00 SUPPLIES 076033 06/09/2011 JOHNSON POWER SYSTEMS 520.00 SERVICES 076034 06/09/2011 JP STRIPING 7,150.00 SERVICES 076035 06/09/2011 KAD PAVING COMPANY 4,140.00 SERVICES 076036 06/09/2011 KAISER FOUNDATION 32,068.55 MEDICAL INSURANCE 076037 06/09/2011 KB HOME 68,064.32 SERVICES 076038 06/09/2011 KEEP IT GREEN 150.00 SERVICES 076039 06/09/2011 LEWIS BRISBOIS BISGAARD & SI 799.42 SERVICES 076040 06/09/2011 MATICH CORPORATION 269.34 SUPPLIES 076041 06/09/2011 MOSS,LEVY & HARTZHEIM 2,850.00 SERVICES 076042 06/09/2011 NAPA AUTO PARTS 182.84 SUPPLIES 076043 06/09/2011 NATURES IMAGE, INC 8,659.24 SERVICES 076044 06/09/2011 PRO -PIPE & SUPPLY 85.50 SUPPLIES 076045 06/09/2011 PROFORMA 497.98 SUPPLIES 076046 06/09/2011 PURCHASE POWER 78.00 SERVICES 076047 06/09/2011 PYRO SPECTACULARS 19,074.00 SERVICES 076048 06/09/2011 QUALITY PLUMBING, INC. 1,650.00 SERVICES 076049 06/09/2011 QUILL CORPORATON 342.83 SUPPLIES 076050 06/09/2011 CLAYTON RASMUSSEN 8.00 REFUND 076051 06/09/2011 RIVERSIDE COUNTY SHERIFF DI 2,802.12 SERVICES 076052 06/09/2011 RODRIGO PENA PHOTOGRAPHY 1,640.00 SERVICES 076053 06/09/2011 SIRCHIE 369.48 SERVICES 076054 06/09/2011 SOUTHWEST NETWORKS INCOF 168.75 SERVICES 076055 06/0912011 SPRINT 17.92 SERVICE 076056 06/09/2011 TANEISHATAYLOR 40.00 REFUND 076057 06/09/2011 THE PRESS - ENTERPRISE 85.80 ADVERTISING 076059 06/09/2011 UNDERGROUND SERVICE ALERT 243.50 SERVICES 076060 06/09/2011 U.S POSTMASTER 345.00 MAILING 076061 06/09/2011 UTILITY PARTNERS 59,836.00 SERVICES 076062 06/09/2011 VERIZON CALIFORNIA 43.54 SERVICES 076063 06/09/2011 VERIZON WIRELESS 4,414.42 PHONE SERVICE 076064 06/09/2011 WEST COAST LIGHTS & SIRENS 232.03 SERVICES Printed 06/14/2011 7:18:20AM Page 3 of 4 City of Beaumont Vendor Check Register Check Number Check Date Vendor Check Name Amount Description: 076065 06/09/2011 A & A FENCE 2,075.00 SERVICES 076066 06/09/2011 LET'S HAVE A PARTY 392.63 SUPPLIES 076067 06/09/2011 SHRED -IT 187.00 SERVICES 076068 06/09/2011 TASO TECH, INC 3,360.00 SERVICES 513,142.92 Printed 06/14/2011 7:18:20AM Page 4 of 4 City of Beaumont Vendor Check Register Check Number Check Date Vendor Check Name Amount Description: EFT000568 06/01/2011 AKLUFI AND WYSOCKI 29,154.80 SERVICES EFT000569 06/01/2011 ELITE COMPANIES US, INC. 15,086.40 SERVICES EFT000570 06/01/2011 STEVE MOORE COMMUNICATIOI 1,662.50 SERVICES EFT000571 06/09/2011 STEVE MOORE COMMUNICATIOI 3,687.50 SERVICES EFT000572 06/09/2011 URBAN LOGIC CONSULTANTS 349,113.00 SERVICES 398,704.20 Printed 06/14/2011 7:18:29AM Page 1 of 1 City of Beaumont Vendor Check Register Check Number Check Date Vendor Check Name Amount Description: EFT000000O00359 06/03/2011 A -Z BUS SALES,INC. 96.46 SUPPLIES EFT000000O00360 06/03/2011 ACE ALTERNATORS 271.90 SUPPLIES EFT000000O00361 06/03/2011 ALL PURPOSE RENTALS 624.49 RENTAL EFT000000O00362 06/03/2011 ARAMARK 339.92 SUPPLIES EFT000000O00363 06/03/2011 BEAUMONT TIRE 220.82 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE EFT000000O00364 06/03/2011 BEAUMONT ACE HOME CENTER 501.53 SUPPLIES EFT000000O00365 06/03/2011 BEAUMONT SAFE & LOCK 48.83 LOCKSMITH EFT000000O00366 06/03/2011 CHERRY VALLEY AUTOMATIVE 378.94 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE EFT000000O00367 06/03/2011 DIAMOND HILLS AUTO GROUP 5,087.17 VEHICLE MAINTENANCE EFT000000O00368 06/03/2011 GORM, INC. 1,018.57 SUPPLIES EFT000000O00369 06/03/2011 HIGH TECH IRRIGATION,INC. 10,441.82 SUPPLIES EFT000000O00370 06/03/2011 XEROX CORPORATION 379.62 SERVICES 19,410.07 Printed 06/14/2011 7:18:48AM Page 1 of 1 . J Joseph T. Rhea, Esq. 777 Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite 338, Palm Springs, California 92262 CLAIM AGAINST PUBLIC ENTITY [Gov. Code §§ 905, 905.2, 910, 910.21 City of Beaumont City Council Beamount Civic Center 550 E. 6th Street Beaumont, CA 92223 May 25, 2011 TO City of Beaumont.: C /Ty C/��'FgU Pursuant to Gov. Code §§ 905, 905.2, 910, 910.2, OAK TREE ALTERNATIVE CARE hereby makes claim against City of Beaumont for the surn of S180,000 or that amount according to proof and makes the following statements in support of the claim: 1. Claimant's post office address is OAK TREE ALTERNATIVE CARE, 257 East 6`h Street, Suite A, Beaumont, California. 2. Notices concerning the claim should be sent to Joseph T. Rhea, Esq., 777 Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite 338, Palm Springs, California 92262. 3, The date and place of the incident is at OAK TREE ALTERNATIVE CARE, 257 East 6"' Street, Suite A, Beaumont, California, on March 7. 2011. 4. The circumstances giving rise to this claim are as follows: at the above time and place, claimant was operating a medical marijuana association for the purposes of collectively cultivating marijuana for medical uses between its qualified patient members purstiant to Health and Safety Code §§ 11362.7 et seq. On March 7, 2011 the City of Beaumont issued its final decision that claimant may not operate said association, causing a complete loss of tenant improvements and the costs associate with the improvements claimant made at 257 East 6`h Street, Suite A, Beaumont, California. 5. Claimant's injuries are a loss of at least $180,0)0.00. 6. The names of the public employees /agencies causing the claimant's injuries are the Citv of Beaumont, Building and Safety, and the City of Beaumont. 7. My claim as of the date of this claim is for at least $180.000 according to proof, as such as of the date of this claim is in an amount that would place it within the jurisdiction I of 2 OAK TREE ALTERNATIVE CARE GOVERNMENT CLAIM PROOF OF SERVICE [CCP §§ 1013a(1) 6 (3); Local Rules, Divisina II, Rule 6.71 i, BRIANNA LOZANO, declare that: i am over the aqe of 18 years and am not a party to the within, case; T am employed in the County of Riverside, State of California, where -.he mail._r:g occurs; and my business address is 777 Tahquitz Canyon Way, Suite 33B, Palm Springs, CA 92262. I further aeclare that I am readily familiar with -hE, business' practice at my place of business for collection and processing of corresporu;ernc�- for mailing with the United States Postal Service; and that the correspon =ence shall be deposited w.th the United States Postal Service that sam- day in the (_)T­; -nary course of business. caused to be served the following document(s): CLAIM AGAINST PUBLIC ENTITY by placing a true copy of each document in a separate e:nveicpe addressed -o each addressee, respectively, as follows: City of Beaumont City Counsel Beaumont Civic Center 550 E. 6`h Street Beaumont, CA 92223 completed service by: BY MAIL: Thin same day and at my business shown above, I sealed each er.v^lope, and ith postage thereon fully prepaid, and placed each for deposit in the i.n ted States Ponta' Service, following ordinary cusiness practices. ❑ BY EXPRESS MAIL /OVERNIGHT DELIVERY: 1 caused such onveioped to 'ce delivered by han :: to the office of the addressee via overnight delivery pursuant to C.C.P 5 101:3 ',c), with delivery fees fully prepaid or Provided for. BY PERSONAL DELIVERY: I caused the described document(s)to be hand - delivered to each addressee Leaving said cocument with either the addressee directly or anothe person at that address authorized to accept service on the addressee's behalf. BY FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION: In addition to service s set forth above, t-e ccu ^sc or interested party authorized to accept service was also forwarded a copy of said document(s) by facsimile transmission at the telef.ax Number- corresponding, with his /her_ name. The facsimile machine I used complied wi_h CRC rule 2003,3) and no error was reported by the machine. Pursuant to CRC rule 200S(i), i caused the machine to print a transmission record of the transmission, a copy of which is attached t_o this declaration. I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Ca'_ifornia =hat -he foregoing is tr e and correct to the best of my knowledge. Executed at Paim Springs, California or,�.�. _ RR--ANNA LOZANO Request for Reimbursement May 17,2011 From: Alfredo Huerta 1112 Radka Avenue Beaumont Ca_ 92223 (760) 449 -8924 RNE El +� To: City of Beaumont Public Works Department or a City Department Authorized to address this matter. Dear Sir or Madam: On 3/29/2011 my house on 1112 Radka Avenue in Beaumont flooded at about 1:00am. On the same date Western Carpet provided emergency drying services and a plumber inspected and cleaned (took out a handful of paper) the sewer line. On 3/31/11 the house came close to flooding once more. I was home and was able to immediately keep the water from overflowing from the toilet and bathtub. A second plumber inspected the line and took out about a handful of paper as well. However, both plumbers suspected that there was something wrong with the line. I followed their recommendation to hire a specialist to video inspect the line. The line was video inspected and determined that there was a "blockage." B&D Plumbing determined that there was what appeared to be a separated pipe. Since the location of the blockage was in the city's right of way I contacted the city of Beaumont to address this matter. The city of Beaumont addressed and resolved the situation in the past 30 days. However, the city's dysfunctional sewer system as it relates to this case has caused me and my family enormous hardship and financial loss. Through this letter I'm asking to be reimbursed the amount of $5, 061.61 to cover for our financial loss. Breakdown 1. I.E Plumbing and Drain $165.00 2. Barry's Plumbing $145.00 3. B &D Plumbing $300.00 4. Western Carpet $3,601.61 5. Repairs (unlicensed laborer)$850.00 (flooring, drywall, paint, etc.) Totoal: $5,061.61. I would like to resolve this matter in good faith and promptly. Your prompt and positive response to this request will satisfy all my claims (including personal property loss) and will consider it final and complete. Thank you for the attentive and problem solving approach you've shown thus far. Please submit reimbursement and all correspondence in writing to the below address: 1112 Radka Avenue Beaumont Ca. 92223 and /or Mylyli @verizon.net. Respectfully, A fredIuerta .LE PLUMBING 6 DRAIN P.O. BOX 1366 • WILDOMAR - CA 92595 9 "f4 � JOB NAME JOB ADDRESS CITY .. PLUMBING Work Order /Invoice (951) 375 -9599 BILLING NAME BILLING ADDRESS CITY AUTHORIZATION TO PROCEED WITH ABOVE DIAGNOSIS /SOLUTION I, tLe undersigned, am owner;authaized mpresentativeltenant of the premises at which the work mentioned above is done. I hereby authorize you to perform Diagnosis /Solution, and use such labor and materials as you would deers advisable A monthly service charge of 10% will be added after 30 days, up to $1,000.1 agree to pay reasonable attoney's fees and court cost in the event of legal action, if your dierk bounces, you would be liable for 3 timers the amount of [tie check or $100.00, whichever Is more, plus lace value of the check and court casts. I have read and agree to all terns and conditions set forth on the face set hereof, and have received a copy of the contract and Notice to Ow rof (Section 7018,5 CaAractors License I_aw) on the reverse side. X EMERGENCYSERVICEMAN 24HOUR SERVICE DATE INVOICE #002559 DRIVERS LICENSE NO. WORK ORDERED TERMS 106 PHONE WORKPHONE BILLING PHONE ® tl LABOR DEDUCTIBLE PARTS TAX ` TOTAL NOTES/TERMS (PAYMENT IN FULL UPON COMPLETION UNLESS OTHERWISE ED BELO ) ANY MATERIAL OR LABOR TAMPERED WITH AFTER INSTALLATION WILL VOID WARRANTY ACCEPTANCE OF WORK PERFORMED I find the service, and material mndeied and installed in connection with the above work mentioned, to have been complete in a satsfactory manner. I agree that the amount set torth on this contract is the space labeled "TOTAL to be the total and complete charge. . agree to pay reasonable affect ey's tees and coon costs in the event of legal action. A mouthy/ service charge of 10% will be added after 30 days. I acknowledged Vial I have read and received a legible copy of this contract and have read the Notice to Owner on the reverse. X Barry's Plumbing fc 299 7 0 3 Beaumont, California (961) 846-2060 CUSTOMER'S ORDER NO. I DEPARTI`AENT DATE ADDRESS d 12 ca- CITY. STATE, ZIP SOLD BY CASH C.O.D. CHARGE ON. ACCT. D. PAID OUT QUANTITY DESCRIPTION PRIAMOUNT q ' RA N cA bl e- ,4Mo)e �t s 4A; Form A -j Owner I J Commercial J Reside]ntial J New J Repeat Customer P 0.# Contiract. Number -t�2 &I—Y Map Z01w, --- DaLp Call Tickeld -j Cash J Check J Cr Card CHECK I CREDIT CARD TECHNICIAN'S NAME INFORMATION Jot pr,�,.e # 10) 1 andkj,d (DI 'Evai j Cell J Fa, Tr 1, J Trap 5. J Fixture 2. -j Roof Vent 6.J Other cave U y Dionme Bind* Ro 4 C,(o Camera LJYUN Credd Card # Initation of Negotiation I hereby slate that I initated the contact with B&Dplumbing, Inc to negotiate thew services: AGENTW)JUSTER RESIDENTIAL - COOMERCIAL - SLAB REPAJIR - SEWER LATE 24 PO Box 3508 D SERVICE San Bernardino - CA - 92413 (909) 883-7475 P Fax (909) 883-7776 71 1 am the owner of the property or his duly authorized agent and attest dial no chemicals have been used in the drain system during the last 48 hours except (if none, enter "none'). The estimated price does not include sales or other lax, it any, nor does it cover unforseen parts or labor which may be needed after the work begins Written customer authorization will be obtained before any B&D Plumbing. tric does not assume any responsibility for any damage to pipes In the course of cleaning any drain or sewer line and does not assurne any responsibility for breakage of any toidet, P-trap, or fixture white being pulled Gir damages to Droperly from defective replacement parts manufactured by others. I authorize the performance of the work sub)ect to all the terms arid conditions, This contract is due and paybie upon receipt. L Limited Warranty 0 Yes Period Covered J No Warranty Original Work Approval: Dale. Additional Work Approval; $ Actual Final Co , it: SERVICE MATERIALS SUB TOTAL SALES TAX AX PLEASE PAY THIS AMOUNT Western Carpet Care P.O. BOX 9081 Redlands, CA 92375 1- 909 - 794 -0333 Fax- 909 - 794 -0057 westemcarpet@aol.com Client: Alfredo Huerta Home: 1112 Radka Ave Beaumont, CA 92223 Operator Info: Operator: CHRIS Estimator: Chris Hubbell Business: P.O. BOX 9081 Redlands, CA 92375 Reference: Company: YB10 Type of Estimate: Water Damage Date Entered: 4/1/2011 Price List: CABD5B_FEB 11 Restoration /Service /Remodel Estimate: HUERTA Date Assigned: 3/29/2011 Home: (951) 845 -8280 Cellular: (760) 449 -8924 Business: (760) 863 -8661 Business: (909) 794 -0333 Western Carpet Care P.O. BOX 9081 Redlands, CA 92375 1- 909 -794 -0333 Fax - 909 - 794 -0057 westemcarpet@aol.com HUERTA Entry/Foyer DESCRIPTION LxWxH 6'x 2'x 8' QNTY UNIT COST TOTAL 3. Apply sanitizer - after hours 12.00 SF @ 0.32 = 3.84 Bathroom LxWxH 5'x 5'x 8' DESCRIPTION QNTY UNIT COST TOTAL 2. Apply sanitizer - after hours 25.00 SF @ 0.32 = 8.00 Miscellaneous DESCRIPTION QNTY UNIT COST TOTAL 4. General Demolition - per hour after hours 12:15 AM 3 men forl.5 3.00 HR @ 55.74 = 167.22 hours 5. Haul debris - per pickup truck load - including dump fees 0.50 EA @ 11318= 56.59 6. Air scrub. -Large (per 24 hr period) -No monit. l for 3 days 3.00 DA @ 120.00 = 360.00 7. Air mover axial fan (per 24 hour period) - No monitoring 5 for 3 18.00 EA @ 29.00 = 522.00 days 1 for 3 extra days 8. Gas power truck mount extraction unit for final clean up of 1.00 HR @ 87.00 = 87.00 dust /debris 9. Emergency service call - after business hours 1.00 EA @ 241.12 = 241.12 10. Equipment setup, take down, and monitoring (hourly charge) 8.00 HR @ 57.41 = 459.28 portal to portal 3/29 3/30 3/314/1 11. Dehumidifier (per 24 hour period) - Large - No monitoring 2 for 3 9.00 EA @ 83.00 = 747.00 days 1 for 3 extra days 12. Equip. setup, take down & monitoring - after hrs 3/28 4/2 4/3 5.00 HR @ 86.20 = 431.00 portal to portal 13. Add for HEPA filter (for air scrubber) 0.50 EA @ 162.05 = 81.03 14. Wall cavity drying -Inj. type (per 24 hr period) No monit. I for 3 3.00 DA @ 140.00 = 420.00 days Hallway LxWxH 8' x 3' x 8' DESCRIPTION QNTY UNIT COST TOTAL 1. Apply sanitizer - after hours 24.00 SF @ 0.32 = 7.68 HUERTA 4/5/2011 Page:2 Western Carpet Care P.O. BOX 9081 Redlands, CA 92375 1- 909 - 794 -0333 Fax- 909 - 794 -0057 westemcarpet@aol.com CONTINUED - Hallway DESCRIPTION Grand Total Areas: 464.00 SF Walls 61.00 SF Ceiling 61.00 SF Floor 6.78 SY Flooring 152.00 SF Long Wall 80.00 SF Short Wall 0.00 Floor Area 0.00 Total Area 0.00 Exterior Wall Area 0.00 Exterior Perimeter of Walls 0.00 Surface Area 0.00 Number of Squares 0.00 Total Ridge Length 0.00 Total Hip Length QNTY UNIT COST TOTAL 525.00 SF Walls and Ceiling 58.00 LF Floor Perimeter 58.00 LF Ceil. Perimeter 0.00 Interior Wall Area 0.00 Total Perimeter Length HUERTA 4/5/2011 Page:3 Western Carpet Care P.O. BOX 9081 Redlands, CA 92375 1- 909 - 794 -0333 Fax- 909 - 794 -0057 westemcarpet@aol.com Line Item Total Material Sales Tax Replacement Cost Value Net Claim Summary 3,591.76 @ 8.750% x 112.52 9.85 $3601 '61 —/,$3,601— Chris Hubbell HUERTA 4/5/2011 Page:4 4/15/11 I, Jesus Angulo, did the respairs for the house after the flooding on 1112 Radka Ave. Beaumont CA. I also helped the owner write an inventory of all the stuff that got damaged. The owner paid me a little over $850.00. Jesus Angulo April 19, 2011 Alfredo Huerta and Lylin Munoz 1112 Radka Ave Beaumont, CA 92223 Balboa INSURANCE GROUP RE: Insured: Alfredo Huerta and Lylin Munoz Claim No.: H11003380 Policy No.: THN868850 Type of Loss: Water Damage Date of Loss: 03/22/2011 Location: 1112 Radka Ave, Beaumont, CA Dear Mr. Huerta and Mrs. Munoz: VV 92223 Newport Insurance Company is writing about your claim. After investigating your claim, we have found that the policy does not cover your claim. Below is a summary of the facts and of our position. FACTS The subject property is a single family home located at 1112 Radka Ave Beaumont CA 92223. During your conversation with Steve Bluemel from Cunningham Lindsey on March 22, 2011 you had advised that your plumber inspected the drain line with a camera and found a fracture in the drain line beneath the front yard of your home. He also advised that the break appeared to have existed in the line for an extended period of time. Mr. Bluemel inspected the property on April 1, 2011 and inspected the damage in the guest bathroom, hallway, family room, and the living room. Mr. Bluemel also advised that the damage in this area was caused by water backing up through the shower drain in the guest bathroom as a result of the clogged and cracked drain line. There were also contents in the garage that had been damaged as water from a clean out near the garage backed up as a result of the same break in the drain line. He also advised that the damage to the drain line was caused by wear and tear, the drain line is 21 years old. PERTINENT POLICY PROVISIONS Newport issued policy THIN 868850 to Alfredo Huerta and Lylin Munoz effective for the policy period 03/16/2011 to 03/16/2012. Form number HO 00 03 04 91 contains these relevant provisions: SECTION I - PERILS INSURED AGAINST COVERAGE A - DWELLING and COVERAGE B - OTHER STRUCTURES We insure against risk of direct loss to property described in Coverages A and B only if that loss is a physical loss to property. We do not insure, however, for loss: PO Box 19702, Irvine, CA 92623 -9702 - www.balboainsurance.com Balboa Life Insurance Company • Balboa Insurance Company • McMplan Insurance Company - Newport Insurance Company Balboa Life Insurance Company of New York - Balboa Lloyds Insurance Company 1 2 3 ---� 4 f 5 71 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 ..A I 24 J ( 25 � 26 27 � 28 I Alfred Anthony Avila c/o Berta A. Lopez Notary Public — Forwarding Agent P.O. Box 3722 Ontario, California 91761 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE — BANNING PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA PLAINTIFF, i vs. AVILA, TONY ANTHONY DEFENDANT. CASE NO. BAM10001896 J 3� I Alfred Anthony Avila IN ADMIRALTY Third Party Plaintiff, ANSWER IN AFFIDAVIT IN SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT, VS. OPPORTUNITY OF CURE AND SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTERCLAIM COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE — BANNING AKA BANNING SUPERIOR COURT PHILLIP JAMES ARGENTO #65067 HAROLD FRANKLIN BRADFORD #33299 SHERRI R. CARTER 3EAUMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT 3. FORD :ITY OF BEAUMONT, CALIFORNIA :ALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES 1DRIANA DIAZ :OUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DISTRICT ATTORNEY PAUL EDWIN ZELLERBACH #83086 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, CALIFORNIA IOES 1 -20 Third Party Defendants, Individually and Severally, All. Page 1 of 14 APJ -QWGR 1A1 ACC111AUM 1 &1 c+nl- �►.�..... —.. —..._ _ _ _ —_ _ _ I - 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 ANSWER IN AFFIDAVIT IN SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT, OPPORTUNITY TO CURE, AND COUNTERCLAIM Notice to Agent is Notice to Principal Notice of Principal is Notice to Agent COMES NOW Alfred Anthony Avila, Third Party Plaintiff and Secured Party / Creditor and Real Party in Interest by special visitation, and not appearing generally before this court of record seeking a remedy in Admiralty as is provided by the "Saving to Suitors" clause at 28 USC 1333(1). This is Plaintiff's answer as to discovery as requested by the officers of this court. Plaintiff is standing in his unlimited commercial liability as Secured Party / Creditor and requests that the Third Party Defendants do the same, and waive all of their immunities. Plaintiff respectfully requests the indulgence of this court of record as he is not schooled in law. This is provided by the precedent set by Haines vs. Kerner (1972) 404 U.S. 519. Plaintiff has demanded Proof of Claim from Third Party Defendants PHILLIP JAMES ARGENTO #65067, Magistrate of SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE — BANNING, and ADRIANA DIAZ of CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES. Neither could offer Proof of Claim. All Third Party Defendants are served through the RIVERSIDE COUNTY IDISTRICT ATTORNEY. Plaintiff Alfred Anthony Avila is Secured Party / Creditor for Case No. BAM10001896 filed in this court of record 2 September 2010 by way of UCC FINANCING STATEMENT recorded into the commercial registry with the CALIFORNIA SECRETARY OF STATE, Instrument No. 10- 7241330697, and its amendments. MAXIMS All men shall have a remedy by due course of law. If a remedy does not exist, or if the existing remedy has been subverted, then one may create a remedy for oneself and endow it with credibility by expressing it in one's affidavit. An unrebutted affidavit stands as truth in commerce, and is so acted upon as the judgment. For every wrong there is a remedy. Page 2 of 14 ANSWER IN AFFIDAVIT IN SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT, AMA 1 2 J 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 i Every person who, having knowledge that any of the wrongs conspired to be done..., are about to be committed, and having power to prevent or aid in preventing the commission of the same, neglects or refuses so to do, if such wrongful act be committed, shall be liable to the party injured, or his legal representative(s), for all damages caused by such wrongful act, which such person by reasonable diligence could have prevented;... Ex dolo malo non orifur action — Out of fraud no action arises. Fraud vitiates the most solemn contracts, documents, and even judgments. A party always has a right to counterclaim. AS TO COUNT ONE: On 7/20/2010 at a little after midnight I was pulled over in my Toyota pickup truck by Officer B. FORD of the BEAUMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT, a de facto corporation, while entering a freeway onramp for nothing more than nudging an orange work cone that was along the side of the road. Officer B. FORD had no probable cause that a crime had been committed. My daughter of almost two (2) years of age at that time was riding next to me. I was charged for Driving Under the Influence (DUI), a victimless crime, and arrested, and my truck was impounded. Fortunately, two (2) close friends were directly behind me when I was pulled over, so they took charge of my daughter. Approximately twelve (12) hours later I was released after signing a Promise to Appear (a maritime sales contract aka NOTICE TO APPEAR) on or before 9/15/2010 at the SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA — COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE — BANNING so- called "BANNING SUPERIOR COURT ", a de facto - orporation. Had I not signed said maritime sales contract I would not have been eleased. Thereafter, I traveled to the impound lot where I paid one hundred thirty lollars ($130.00) to get my truck returned to my custody. It is clear that the sole purpose of the above "sale" was to process me into the -aOUNTY OF RIVERSIDE's "system" under contract whereby there would be a never- coding series of subsequent maritime sales contracts presented to me to sign, and .hereafter to exact money from me or be incarcerated forthwith. This is not Liberty, nor s it Freedom. Officer B. FORD was armed and his uniform clearly displayed military ;olors in Admiralty. Further investigation regarding Officer B. FORD shows that he foes not have a valid Oath of Office on file with his employer as is required by our Page 3 of 14 iwi 00MI-101n 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 California Constitution at Article XX § 3 (EXHIBIT A), so therefore is not authorized to "sell" contracts for the county, or to arrest and kidnap, nor is he authorized to accept compensation pursuant to Califomia Govemment Code § 1367 (EXHIBIT B) for any services he may render. CITY OF BEAUMONT, a de facto corporation, responsible for its BEAUMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT, also a de facto corporation, is named as Respondeat Superior. As per this Count, the subject contract issued by Officer B. FORD for either signature or arrest was a (1) Dishonor in Commerce as all crimes whether real or pretended are commercial; and since Officer B. FORD has (2) no valid Oath of Office, he is not authorized to be a "sales agent" for his City and the County — (3) Impersonating a Public Officer or Employee; and he is not authorized to accept compensation for any services he may render — (4) Theft of Public Funds; (5) Breach of the Public Trust; nor is he authorized to arrest me against my will and over my objections — (6) False Arrest; and transport me to jail — (7) Kidnapping; (8) Extortion; (9) ICoercion; (10) Racketeering; and I believe there is no proof to the contrary. AS TO COUNT TWO: On 9/15/20101 appeared as promised at the so- called "BANNING SUPERIOR COURT" where I first presented my NOTICE OF SPECIAL APPEARANCE WITH DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT relating to my status, and thereafter introduced myself as Authorized Representative for Tony Avila. I noticed military colors flying in Admiralty to the left and right rear of the presumed judicial officer presiding. All deputies from the Riverside County Sheriffs Department displayed military colors in Admiralty on their uniforms. PHILLIP JAMES ARGENTO #65067 (purportedly on TDY from Los Angeles County to Riverside County) first asked if I was an attorney, and when I answered "No ", he lectured on the subject of not being able to represent anybody without first being licensed to practice law in California. I pointed out that my paperwork fully covered my authorization which at that time the deputy assistant handed PHILLIP JAMES ARGENTO #65067 a copy thereof. After a quick glance at said paperwork, PHILLIP JAMES ARGENTO #65067 then attempted to argue with me. I inquired twice (2x) if he had a claim against me, or if he knew of anybody who did, and twice (2x) he responded "No ". There not being a claim against me, I stated, "That being the case, my business is concluded for the day "; I then turned and walked out of the courtroom. I vas accompanied by two (2) friends from Court Watch that day who have assured me Page 4 of 14 its cocririrr 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 they would testify under oath if called to be witnesses as to the above being true and correct, or in the alternative, to attest to the above facts in an affidavit. Thereafter, on or about 10/25/2010 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, a de facto corporation, sent me an Order of Suspension indicating that I had "Failed to Appear" at a hearing slated for 10/15/2010. Surprised regarding this news, I requested the same two (2) friends from Court Watch investigate this matter for me, and to and behold, PHILLIP JAMES ARGENTO #65067 had in fact rescheduled a subsequent hearing thirty (30) days after the hearing I had appeared Specially at on 9/15/2010, and purportedly ordered the clerk of the court to notify me by mail. I never received any notification from the clerk of the court by mail or otherwise, so did not know about the hearing which had been scheduled. Nevertheless, I never promised to appear at any hearing subsequent to the hearing of 9/15/2010, nor any other hearing. I then investigated and found PHILLIP JAMES ARGENTO #65067 has an invalid Oath of Office (see EXHIBIT A). Further, he is not authorized to accept compensation pursuant to Califomia Govemment Code § 1367 (see EXHIBIT B) for any services he may render. Defendant SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA — COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE — BANNING so- called "BANNING SUPERIOR COURT', a de facto corporation, is named as Respondeat Superior. PHILLIP JAMES ARGENTO #65067, an individual, is guilty of (1) Invalid Oath of Office; (2) Conducting court business without authorization or jurisdiction, (3) Instructing the clerk of the court off the record to withhold notification From me of the 10/15/2010 hearing thus Creating a Crime (Failure to Appear — Stacking Charges), (4) Impersonating a Public Officer or Employee, (5) Theft of Public Funds, (6) Breach of Public Trust, (7) Dishonor in Commerce, (8) Conspiracy, (9) Collusion, (10) Fraud, (11) Fraud Upon the Court, (12) Extortion, (13) Racketeering, and I believe there is no proof to the contrary. AS TO COUNT THREE: While it is impossible to determine at this time which clerk or clerks in the so- called "BANNING SUPERIOR COURT' were involved in such a Conspiracy as described in Count 2, SHERRI R. CARTER, acting as clerk of the court and executive officer, was presumably on watch at that time, thus is responsible for those individual DOE Defendants under her direct supervision and control. /// Page 5 of 14 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 Z An investigation of Defendant SHERRI R. CARTER shows she has an invalid Oath of Office (see EXHIBIT A). Further, she is not authorized to accept compensation pursuant to California Government Code § 1367 (see EXHIBIT B) for any services she may render. Defendant SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE — BANNING is named as Respondeat Superior. SHERRI R. CARTER, an individual, is guilty of (1) Invalid Oath of Office, (2) Impersonating a Public Officer or Employee, (3) Theft of Public Funds, (4) Breach of the Public Trust, (5) Dishonor in Commerce, (6) Conspiracy, (7) Collusion, (8) Fraud, (9) Fraud Upon the Court, (10) Racketeering, and I believe there is no proof to the contrary. AS TO COUNT FOUR: The hearing of 10/15/2010 conveniently went on as orchestrated without me, so Defendant HAROLD FRANKLIN BRADFORD #33299, who presided over said hearing without authority or jurisdiction, issued a Warrant for my immediate arrest for Failure to Appear. The Minutes of the "Arraignment — 10/15/2010" shows premeditation as said Warrant was issued at 0730 hrs. prior to commencement of the morning calendar. Thereafter, on 14 December 2010, 1 sent to the clerk of the court of Defendant SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE — BANNING, a de facto corporation, a Certified letter (EXHIBIT C) demanding a copy of (1) the clerk's written notification of said hearing with Proof of Mailing, (2) a copy of the above - mentioned Warrant and its Affidavit in Support, (3) a copy of the Oath of Office of the Judge / Commissioner who issued said Warrant, and (4) a copy of the clerk's own Oath of Office as well. Since the clerk of the court never provided any of the above - demanded items, it is confirmed that (1) the clerk can offer no proof that I was ever notified of the second hearing, (2) there is no Affidavit in Support of the Warrant that was issued by HAROLD FRANKLIN BRADFORD #33299 on 10/15/2010 (4th Amendment Violation), (3) HAROLD FRANKLIN BRADFORD #33299 has not taken and subscribed an Oath of Office (see EXHIBIT A), and (4) the clerk of the court has not taken and subscribed an Oath of Office (see EXHIBIT A). Further, neither HAROLD FRANKLIN BRADFORD #33299 nor the clerk of the court is authorized to accept compensation pursuant to Califomia Govemment Code § 1367 (see EXHIBIT B) for any services he / she may render. Penn R of 4d III Defendant SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA — COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE — 2 BANNING is named as Respondeat Superior. Pursuant to this Count HAROLD 3 FRANKLIN BRADFORD #33299 is guilty of (1) Invalid Oath of Office, (2) Impersonating 4 a Public Officer or Employee, (3) Theft of Public Funds, (4) Falsely ordering a Warrant 5 be Issued without authorization or jurisdiction to do so, and (5) without an Affidavit in Support (4th Amendment Violation), (6) Dishonor in Commerce, (7) Conspiracy, (8) 6 Collusion, (9) Fraud, (10) Fraud Upon the Court, (11) Breach of the Public Trust, (12) 7 Extortion, (13) Racketeering, and I believe there is no proof to the contrary. 8 AS TO COUNT FIVE: CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, a g de facto corporation, had invited me to appear at a meeting in San Bernardino on 23 10 September 2010, and I graciously promised to appear. Upon arrival for the subject 11 meeting I identified myself as Authorized Representative and Secured Party / Creditor for ALFRED ANTHONY AVILA and that I would be appearing Specially for him as he is 1� my Debtor, and that I would be providing some papers entitled NOTICE OF SPECIAL 13 APPEARANCE WITH DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT. After presentment, I asked the 14 Driver Safety Officer, ADRIANA DIAZ, if she had a claim against me, and she 15 responded "No ". Further, she apparently did not have much to say about my papers, so 16 1 concluded business for that day, and left the building. Thereafter I memorialized the 17 subject meeting in a certified letter addressed to DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR 18 VEHICLES (see EXHIBIT D). Respondent DIAZ did not respond, nor did anyone from her office in San Bernardino, or the CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR 19 VEHICLES in Sacramento, California. Since the above date, Respondent CALIFORNIA 20 DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES has moved forward by punishing my debtor, 21 ALFRED ANTHONY AVILA. By failing / refusing to respond to my letter, Respondent 22 DIAZ tacitly admitted that neither she, nor the CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF 23 MOTOR VEHICLES, has a claim against me, nor does she personally have on file with 24 her employer a valid Oath of Office (see EXHIBIT A). Hence, she is prevented from 25 representing California in any capacity or from receiving any compensation pursuant to Califomia Govemment Code § 1367 (see EXHIBIT B) for any task she may render. 26 CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, a de facto corporation, is 27 named as Respondeat Superior. Respondent ADRIANA DIAZ is guilty of (1) Invalid 28 Oath of Office; (2) Theft of Public Funds; and (3) Impersonating a Public Officer or Page 7 of 14 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ( Employee. Further, it is clear that Despondent DIAZ communicates with Respondents (CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES and SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA — COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE — BANNING, and regarding this matter has now done so at least twice (2x) with others thus showing (4) Collusion and (5) Conspiracy; (6) Fraud Upon the Court, (7) Fraud, (8) Dishonor in Commerce, (9) Libel, (10) Slander, (11) Slander of Title, (12) Racketeering, and I believe there is no proof to the contrary. AS TO COUNT SIX: On or about 9/2/2010 Respondent RIVERSIDE COUNTY (DISTRICT ATTORNEY filed into the so- called "BANNING SUPERIOR COURT" a document entitled Misdemeanor Complaint loosely describing several crimes they allege I have committed. Said Complaint was apparently generated by a DOE Complainant and is not verified, nor is it based upon a sworn affidavit, nor does it state a claim for which relief can be granted. While it is impossible at this time to determine if said DOE Complainant has a valid Oath of Office on file with his employer, Defendant PAUL EDWIN ZELLERBACH #83086, District Attorney for Riverside County, has not taken and subscribed to a constitutionally acceptable Oath of Office which is a requirement pursuant to our California Constitution at Article XX § 3 (see EXHIBIT A) before any District Attorney or Deputy District Attorney may prosecute crimes in the name of the people of California. Further, neither DOE Complainant or PAUL EDWIN ZELLERBACH #83086 are authorized to receive compensation pursuant to California Government Code § 1367 (see EXHIBIT B) for any task each may render. Defendant COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE is named as Respondeat Superior. PAUL EDWIN ZELLERBACH #83086 and DOE Complainant are guilty of (1) No valid Oath of Office; (2) Impersonating a Public Officer or Employee; (3) Theft of Public Funds; (4) Collusion; (5) Conspiracy; (6) Fraud Upon the Court; (7) Fraud; (8) Dishonor in Commerce; (9) Libel; (10) Slander; (11) Racketeering, and I believe there is no proof to the contrary. AS TO COUNT SEVEN: Further, while it may be difficult to ascertain whether DOE Complainant has complied with the subject matter of this Count, PAUL EDWIN ZELLERBACH #83086 is certainly an "agent of a foreign principal' as defined in the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA) 22 USC § 611 et seq. as he is not registered as such with the Department of Justice (DOJ). Page 8 of 14 1 2 3 4 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 ( Defendant COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE is named Respondeat Superior. By failing / refusing to register as required by FARA, PAUL EDWIN ZELLERBACH #83086 has 1committed acts of (1) Treason against me, and UNITED STATES, and it is clear PAUL EDWIN ZELLERBACH #83086 has joined in a (2) Conspiracy against me and my property, and is guilty of (3) Collusion; (4) Extortion; (5) Fraud; (6) Fraud Upon the Court; (7) Dishonor in Commerce; (8) Racketeering, and I believe there is no proof to the contrary. AS TO COUNT EIGHT: The above -named agents of a foreign principal purports Ito be "licensed" by the State of California to practice law, yet DOE Complainant and PAUL EDWIN ZELLERBACH #83086 cannot produce a "certificate of oath" to practice law pursuant to their California Business and Professions Code § 6067. The STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA which each named Defendant claims membership was incorporated in 1903. According to the incorporation papers, the corporation would exist for fifty (50) years. In 1953 the corporation ceased to exist. The California Secretary of State does not have any record of the Association since 1953. All corporations are required to register with the California Secretary of State, even municipal and non - profit corporations, before transacting business within the boundaries of California. The Association has not done so since 1953. Production of a BAR card is evidence of membership with the STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA that no longer exists. Defendants DOE Complainant and PAUL EDWIN ZELLERBACH #83086 are members of the STATE BAR OF CALIFORNIA, a California corporation inactive since 1953, which is affiliated with the National Lawyer's Guild, a communist front organization.' Said Guild is directly affiliated to the British Accreditation Registry (BAR) located in London, England. Organized crime never existed before the BAR Associations took over our courts and our government. Now crime is organized internationally, just as the BAR Associations are organized. Some of their international affiliations include, but are not limited to, The International Judicial Association, International Trial Lawyers Association, World Peace Through Law Center, World Assembly of Judges, et al. This means that the BAR Associations are not only the International Crime Syndicate, but also the International World Government and ' Report on the National Lawyer's Guild — Legal Bulwark of the Communist Party, Report No. 3123, 81 't Congress, 2nd Session, House of Representatives, September 21, 1950. Page 9 of 14 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 ( ( International Communist Party. All BARs are private associations; not governmental agencies or offices. Based upon the above, the named agents of a foreign principal are (1) Practicing Law without License are all affiliated with international interests and have joined into a (2) Conspiracy to Defraud me, and have (3) Colluded together to do so, and are perpetrating a (4) Fraud Upon the Court, as well as (5) Extortion, (6) Theft of Public Funds, (7) Dishonor in Commerce, (8) Racketeering, and I believe there is no proof to the contrary. OPPORTUNITY TO CURE The Third Party Defendants, and each of them, shall have twenty (20) calendar days to cure his / her / their Dishonor in Commerce by complying with one of the following terms and conditions. Herein fail not. 1. Dismiss the subject Case with prejudice forthwith, and provide written evidence to Plaintiff of said dismissal; OR 2. Prove that Plaintiffs claims are false by providing him with lawfully documented proof that is certified true, correct, complete and certain by officers of this court of record and / or Defendants named herein, while in their unlimited commercial liability and while under oath, waiving all immunities, and for the official record, under penalties of the law including perjury. Said proof must address point- for -point any and all stipulates and statements of fact by Plaintiff in all the above - referenced documents, notices and otherwise sent to Defendants by Affidavit issued under penalty of perjury. This evidence must prove your case by a preponderance of evidence, and must answer each and every averment point -by -point individually. If any and all points are not answered fully and accompanied by lawfully documented evidence, as provided herein, that will be Default on the part of the Third Party Defendant(s). Non - Response according to the conditions herein will be Default. Incomplete answers and / or lack of documented evidence as outlined herein will be Default. If the Third Party Defendants fail to respond with twenty (20) calendar days, this will be Default. Non - Response will be a Self- Executing Confession of Judgment by all Third Party Defendants, and will be complete agreement with all the Page 10 of 14 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 241 2511 26 27 28 t statements, terms, and conditions of this contract. This is a counter offer and is a contract in Admiralty. Any officer of the court that interferes or involves him or herself with this claim will be added to this claim and become a Third Party Defendant. All Third Party Defendants named herein are jointly and severally liable for this claim; OR 3. Pay all damages as indicated by the Counterclaim herein; AND 4. Surrender any and all Public Hazard Bonds, other Bonds, Insurance Policies, 401 k, 801 k, CAFR Funds, Real and / or Personal Property, etc. as needed to satisfy the subject Counterclaim herein. COUNTERCLAIM THE FOLLOWING DAMAGES HAVE BEEN ASSESSED AGAINST YOU SHOULD YOU FAIL TO MEET THE REQUIREMENTS AS PROVIDED IN THE OPPORTUNITY TO CURE CONTAINED HEREIN 1. Failure to state a claim upon which relief can be granted. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 2. Failure to respond as outlined herein. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 3. Default by non - response or incomplete response. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 4. No Oath of Office (California Constitution, Article XX § 3). One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 5. False Arrest. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 6. Kidnapping. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 7. One day in Jail. One million six hundred thousand dollars ($1,600.000.00) per day; and 8. Impersonating a Public Officer or Employee. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 9. Conducting court business without authorization or jurisdiction. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and Page 11 of 14 AAI@VUCO IAI ACCIMAVIT IAI eoef" IC11- AICt`_ATIVC A %1C0IIA=K1T 1 10. Instructing the clerk of the court off the record to withhold notification of hearing thus Creating a Crime. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per 3 violation; and 11. Falsely ordering a Warrant be Issued without authorization or jurisdiction. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 12. Issuing a Warrant without an Affidavit in Support (4th Amendment 6 Violation). One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 7 13. Libel. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 8 14. Slander. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 9 15. Slander of Title. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; 10 and 16. Dishonor in Commerce. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per 11 violation; and 12 17. Conspiracy. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 13 18. Conspiracy to Defraud. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per 14 violation; and 15 19. Fraud. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 16 20. Fraud Upon the Court. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per 17 violation; and 21. Failure to register with the U.S. DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE as a Foreign 18 Agent under the Foreign Agents Registration Act (FARA). One million dollars 19 ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 20 22. Treason. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 21 23. Practicing Law without License. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per 22 count, per violation; and 23 24. Failure of court to prove it has jurisdiction. One million dollars J ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 24 25. Racketeering. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 25 26 Theft of Public Funds. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per 26 violation; and 27 27. Collusion. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 28 28. Coercion. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and Page 12 of 14 oNSwFR IN AFFIDAVIT IN SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT, 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 t C,. 29. Extortion. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 11 30. Breach of the Public Trust. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per count, per violation; and 31. Failure to pay Counterclaim in -full within thirty (30) calendar days of Default as contained herein. One million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per month per Third Party Defendant, and interest of 1.5% per month compounded daily for the first thirty (30) days from the date of Default. After thirty (30) days beginning on the thirty -first (31S) day after Default, the penalties for failure to pay will increase by one hundred thousand dollars per day per Third Party Defendant for each calendar day that this Counterclaim is not paid in -full, plus interest, penalties and fees. After ninety (90) calendar days of the date of Default, the penalties for Failure to Pay Counterclaim will increase by one million dollars ($1,000,000.00) per calendar day per Third Party Defendant that the Counterclaim is not paid -in -full, plus interest, penalties, and fees as indicated herein. 32. All Claims are stated in United States (US) dollars which are defined as: A one (1) ounce silver coin of .999 fine silver, or the equivalent par value as established by law of the exchange rate as set by the United States Mint, whichever is the higher amount, for a certified one (1) ounce silver coint (US Silver Dollar) at the time of the first day of Default as outlined herein. If the claim is to be paid in Federal Reserve Notes, said Federal Reserve Notes shall only be accepted at par value as indicated above unless the monetary policy of UNITED STATES should change, payment herein shall be adjusted accordingly. 33. Total Damages shall be assessed as the total amount of the damages as outlined herein times three (3) added to the original amount of damages to total four (4) times the damages for total damages. Dated: 25 May 2011. Alfred! Anthony Avila V Counterclaimant and Secured Party / Creditor Page 13 of 14 ANSWER IN AFFIDAVIT IN SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT, 1 JURAT 2 3 State of California ) ss.: 4 County of Riverside ) Subscribed and sworn to (or affirmed) before me on this „ day of Mc 6 7 2011 by �� �' i��- 8 proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) who appeared before me. 9 l0 (Seal) d BERTAA. LOPEZ COMM. #1845023 n 11 Notary Public CALIFORNIA RIVERSIDE COUNTY My Cantu. ExOm May 14.2013 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 Page 14 of 14 ANSWER IN AFFIDAVIT IN SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT, c NOTARY'S CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE It is hereby CERTIFIED that on the below date, the undersigned Notary Public mailed to, SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE — BANNING SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE — RIVERSIDE ATTN: SHERRI R. CARTER BEAUMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY OF BEAUMONT DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES LICENSING OPERATIONS DIVISION ATTN: ADRIANA DIAZ DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES LEGAL AFFAIRS DIVISION COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DISTRICT ATTORNEY ATTN: PAUL EDWIN ZELLERBACH #83086 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE hereinafter "Recipients ", a fourteen (14) page document entitled ANSWER IN AFFIDAVIT IN SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT, OPPORTUNITY TO CURE AND COUNTERCLAIM, and mailed under my Notary Seal via either USPS Registered Mail, Return Receipt Requested, or by regular mail for Courtesy Copies (all detailed on page 2 of this document), regarding the matter of Alfred Anthony Avila, by placing same in a postpaid envelope properly addressed to the above -named Recipients at his / her / its / their mailing address and depositing same at an official depository under the exclusive face and custody of the United States Postal Service within the State of California. Dated: 25 May 2011 1�'` (Seal) Notary Public Mailing Address: BERTA A. LOPEZ COMM. #1845023 NOTARY PUBLIC - CALIFORNIA � RIVERSIDE COUNTY My Comm- Ezpiras May 14, 2013 NOTARY'S MAILING LIST COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DISTRICT ATTORNEY ATTN: PAUL EDWIN ZELLERBACH #83083 3960 Orange Street Riverside, CA 92501 SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE — BANNING 135 North Alessandro Road Banning, CA 92220 C SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE — RIVERSIDE ATTN: SHERRI R. CARTER 4050 Main Street Riverside, CA 92501 BEAUMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, CA 92223 CITY OF BEAUMONT 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, CA 92223 DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES LICENSING OPERATIONS DIVISION Driver Safety Branch Attn: Adriana Diaz Driver Safety Officer 1845 Business Center Drive — Ste. 212 San Bernardino, CA 92408 DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES Legal Affairs Division Legal Office — Fifth Floor 2415 First Avenue Sacramento, CA 95818 COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTER 4080 Lemon Street Riverside, CA 92501 A Pane 2 of 2 REGISTERED NUMBER: RE 705 299 016 US RE 705 299 020 US POS -030 FOR COURT USE ONLY ATTORNEY OR PARTY WITHOUT ATTORNEY (Name, State Bar number, and address): Alfred Anthony Avila c/o Berta A. Lopez Notary Public - Forwarding Agent P.O. Box 3722 Ontario, California 91761 FAX N0. (Optional): TELEPHONE NO.: E -MAIL ADDRESS (Optional): ATTORNEY FOR (Name): In His Own Behalf SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE STREET ADDRESS: 135 NORTH ALESSANDRO ROAD MAILING ADDRESS: CITY AND ZIP CODE: BANNING 92220 BRANCH NAME: B ANNlt v G PETITIONER/PLAINTIFF:PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA RESPONDENTIDEFENDANT:AVILA, TONY ANTHONY CASE NUMBER: PROOF OF SERVICE BY FIRST -CLASS MAIL - -CIVIL BAM10001896 (Do not use this Proof of Service to show service of a Summons and Complaint) 1. I am over 18 years of age and not a party to this action. I am a resident of or employed in the county where the mailing took place. 2. My residence or business address is: P.O. Box 3722 Ontario, California 91761 3. On (date): May 25, 2011 1 mailed from (city and state): the following documents (specify): ANSWER IN AFFIDAVIT IN SPECIFIC NEGATIVE AVERMENT, OPPORTUNITY TO CURE AND COUNTERCLAIM The documents are listed in the Attachment to Proof of Service by First -Class Mail —Civil (Documents Served) (form POS- 030(D)). 4. 1 served the documents by enclosing them in an envelope and (check.one): a. © depositing the sealed envelope with the United States Postal Service with the postage fully prepaid. b. = placing the envelope for collection and mailing following our ordinary business practices. I am readily familiar with this business's practice for collecting and processing correspondence for mailing. On the same day that correspondence is placed for collection and mailing, it is deposited in the ordinary course of business with the United States Postal Service in a sealed envelope with postage fully prepaid. 5. The envelope was addressed and mailed as follows: a. Name of person served: b. Address of person served: © The name and address of each person to whom I mailed the documents is listed in the Attachment to Proof of Service by First -Class Mail —Civil (Persons Served) (POS -030(P)). I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: May 25, 2011 Berta A._I_oPe7 (TYPE OR PRINT NAME OF PERSON COMPLETING THIS FORM) Form Approved for Optional Use Judicial Council of Califomis POS -030 [New January 1, 20051 (SIGNATURE OF PERSON OF SERVICE BY FIRST -CLASS MAIL —CIVIL (Proof of Service) lure, §§ 1013, 1013a www.coufVnfo.ca.gov American LegalNet, Inc. www.USCourtFonns.com J ) POS -030(P) CASE NUMBER: SHORT TITLE: PEOPLE OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA v AVILA BAM10001896 ATTACHMENT TO PROOF OF SERVICE BY FIRST -CLASS MAIL —CIVIL (PERSONS SERVED) (This Attachment is for use with form POS -030) NAME AND ADDRESS OF EACH PERSON SERVED BY MAIL: Addre ss -- Enumber street city and zip code) Name d Person Served COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE DISTRICT ff3960 N: PAUL EDWIN ZELLERBACK #83083 ATTORNEY Oran ge Street, Riverside, CA 92501 [Ban:nin:g, rth :Ale:ss:and:ro:R:,oad SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE - BANNING SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA 4050 Main Street COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE - RIVERSIDE Riverside, CA 92501 BEAUMONT POLICE DEPARTMENT CITY OF BEAUMONT DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES - LICENSING OPERATIONS DIVISION DEPT OF MOTOR VEHICLES Legal Affairs Division COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY ADMINISTRATION CENTE 550 East Sixth Street RPaumont, CA 92223 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, CA 92223 Driver Safety Branch -Attn: Adrian Diaz, Driver Safety Officer 1845 Business Center Dr -Ste 212, San Bernardino, CA 92408 Legal Office - Fifth Floor 2415 First Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95818 4080 Lemon Street Riverside. CA 92501 Form AWroved for oFtionalUse ATTACHMENT TO PROOF OF SERVICE BY FIRST -CLASS MAIL —CIVIL Page ? of 2 Judicial Council of Califomia (PERSONS SERVED) POS -03o(P) [Now Januan f, 20051 (Proof of Service) EXHIBIT A California Constitution Article XX § 3 Oath of Office K K OATH OF OFFICE — From Deering's California Code (Annotated) ARTICLE XX, Section 3. Oath of office Members of the Legislature, and all public officers and employees, executive, legislative, and judicial, except such inferior officers and employees as may be by law exempted, shall, before they enter upon the duties of their respective offices, take and subscribe the following oath or affirmation: «I, , do solemnly swear (or affirm) that I will support and defend the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the Constitution of the United States and the Constitution of the State of California; that I take this obligation freely, without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; and that I will well and faithfully discharge the duties upon which I am about to enter. "And I do further swear (or affirm) that I do not advocate, nor am I a member of any party or organization, political or other wise, that now advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means; that within the five years immediately preceding the taking of this oath (or affirmation) I have not been a member of any party or organization, political or other wise, that advocated the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means except as follows: (If no affiliations, write in the words "No txcepuons and that during such time as I hold the office of (name of office) I will not advocate nor become a member of any party or organization, political or other wise, that advocates the overthrow of the Government of the United States or of the State of California by force or violence or other unlawful means." And no other oath, declaration, or test, shall be required as a qualification for any public office or employment. "Public officer and employee" includes every officer and employee of the State, including the University of California, every county, city, city and county, district, and authority, including any department, division, bureau, board, commission, agency, or instrumentality of any of the foregoing. See also the codification of the Oath requirement at Government Code, Section 1360 Additional tests for qualifications prohibited: Government Code, Sections 1364, 1365. Commission of perjury during Oath: Government Code, Section 1368. Loyalty statements in tax exemption claims. Revenue & Taxation Code, Section 32. EXHIBIT B California Government Code § 1360 & 1367 PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES ARTICLE 4 - Oath of Office K PUBLIC OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES — GovCode Sec. 1360 -1368 ARTICLE 4 — Oath of Office Section 1360. Taking and subscribing before entering upon duties "Unless otherwise provided, before any officer enters set forth in Section 3' of Article shall take and subscribe the oath or affirmation XX of the Constitution of California." Section 1367. Prerequisite for payment of compensation or expenses. "No compensation nor reimbursement for expses i curredribedll be paidth to or y officer by any public agency unless he has taken affirmation required by this chapter." l EXHIBIT C Copy of Letter Dated 14 December 2010 Addressed to Superior Court of California, County of Riverside - Banning Attn: Clerk of the Court CERTIFIED MAIL NO: 7008 1830 0000 3508 3376 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED from the desk of Alfred Anthony Avila December 14, 2010 CERTIFIED MAIL NO: 70081830 0000 3508 3376 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED SUPERIOR COURT OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE - BANNING Attn: Clerk of the Court 135 North Alessandro Street Banning, CA 92220 TO THE CLERK OF THE COURT: I received recently from the CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES a letter informing me that I had purportedly "Failed to Appear" at a hearing that had been scheduled for 10/1512010. Thereafter, I further discovered that a Warrant was issued for my immediate arrest on that same date. I demand that you supply me with a copy of (1) your written notification of said hearing with Proof of Mailing, (2) a copy of the above - mentioned Warrant and its Affidavit in Support, (3) a copy of the Oath of Office of the Judge / Commissioner who issued said Warrant, and (4) a copy of your own Oath of Office as well. I look forward to receiving the above documents within ten (10) days of your receipt of this letter, however, failure to respond within the manner and time specified above shall be your tacit approval that the matter is closed. Very truly Alfled Anthony Ajja Authorized Repre entative for TONY ANTHONY AVILA c/o 33800 Chapman Hei*s Road — Apartment 713, Yucaipa, Califomta [923991 USPS - Track &Confirm btto• / /trkcnfrml smi usVs com/ PTS1nternetWeb /InterLabe11MuiI3j uP(SEJR. Horne I HBID I Sian In Track & Confirm Search Results Label/Receipt Number: 70081830 0000 3508 3376 Expected Delivery Date: December 16, 2010 Class: First -Class Mails tr Service(s): Certified Mail Return Receipt Status: Delivered Your item was delivered at 9:46 am on December 16, 2010 in BANNING, CA 92220. Detailed Results: • Delivered, December 16,2010,9:46 am, BANNING, CA 92220 • Arrival at Unit, December 16,2010,8:69 am, BANNING, CA 92220 • Acceptance, December 14, 2010,12:37 pm, PICO RIVERA, CA 90660 Noffitcadw Ootions Track & Confirm -22i 2M Enter Label/Receipt Number. Track & Confirm by email Get current event information or updates for your item sent to you or others by email. l ii%r Site Mao Customer Service For Gov't Service s Careers Privayy Polity Terms of Use Business Customer Gatewav Copyright® 2010 USPS. All Rights Reserved. No FEAR Act EEO Data FOIA c a .. i; t s , •r -; + t.�. x a i .+ ' W created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.r)dffactory.com 1/7/2011 12:16 PM EXHIBIT D Copy of Letter dated 23 September 2010 to DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES LICENSING OPERATIONS DIVISION Attn: Adriana Diaz CERTIFIED MAIL NO: 7010 0290 0002 1529 7100 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED J from fl a desk of Alfred Anthony Avila 23 September 2010 CERTIFIED MAIL NO: 7010 0290 0002 1529 7100 RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES LICENSING OPERATIONS DIVISION Driver Safety Branch Attn: Adriana Diaz Driver Safety Officer 1845 Business Center Drive — Ste. 212 San Bernardino, CA 92408 RE: THE HEARING OF 23 SEPTEMBER 2010 Dear Ms. Diaz: I appeared personally this morning pursuant to a hearing you had errantly scheduled. Presumably said hearing was to provide discovery to assist you regarding the instant matter. - I identified myself as Authorized Representative and Secured Party / Creditor for ALFRED ANTHONY AVILA; that I would be appearing Specially for him as he is my Debtor; and that I would be leaving some papers with you entitled NOTICE OF SPECIAL APPEARANCE WITH DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT. Since you apparently did not have much to say after I presented my papers, I concluded business for that day, and left the building. If you wish to persist further regarding this matter, please note that I_ have provided herein a Public Servant Questionnaire for you to fill out and return to me before we can continue. Also, I have included a few questions and requests for documents below. Please fill out said Public Servant Questionnaire as well as respond to the questions and provide the requested documents within five (5) days of your receipt of this letter. 1. Please supply your complete name (first, middle, last). 2. Please explain the name "Castorena" mentioned on your business card. Is it a previous name, or your current name, or a fictitious name used for business purposes only? 3. Now that you have read the discovery documents I provided at your hearing, please supply written documentation regarding your authority over my ebtor ALFRED ANTHONY AVILA. Page 1 of 3 Go 33800 Chapman Heights Road — Apt 713, Yucaipa, Califomia (923991 4. Do you have a claim against me? 5. Do you have information of any agency or corporation that does have a claim against me? 6. Are you personally bonded, or are you bonded through CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, or through STATE OF CALIFORNIA, whichever is applicable? 7. Please supply the name and address of the bonding company that bonds you and / or your corporation, if applicable. 8. Please supply the bond number, if applicable. 9. What is the bond's value for you, CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, and / or STATE OF CALIFORNIA? 10. If neither you, nor CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, nor STATE OF CALIFORNIA are bonded, can 1 conclude that you, and each of you, are self - insured? 11. Please supply the corporation number for your employer whether CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, or other, whichever is / are applicable. 12. Please supply the state or country wherein CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, or other is incorporated, whichever is / are applicable. 13. Please supply the Employer Identification Number (EIN) for CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, or other, whichever is applicable. 14. Does your corporation, e.g. CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, fall under the umbrella of STATE OF CALIFORNIA, or is it a separate entity? 15. If CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES is a separate entity from STATE OF CALIFORNIA, in what state or country is it incorporated? 16. If CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES is a different entity from STATE OF CALIFORNIA, please supply its corporation number and date of activation. 17. If CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES is a separate entity from STATE OF CALIFORNIA, what is its Employer Identification Number (EIN)? 18. How long have you been a public employee for CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, or other? x Page 2 of 3 Go 33800 Chapman Heights Road- -Apt. 713, Yucaipa, Califomia [92399] 19. While employed with CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, or other, have you always worked for LICENSING OPERATIONS DIVISIONS - DRIVER SAFETY BRANCH? 20. If you have not always worked for CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES, what other positions have you held with STA TE OF CALIFORNIA? 21. Please supply a copy of your Oath of Office. 22. Has there been a Bid Bond (Form SF24), or other similar form generated regarding the matter before you? If so, what value has been placed thereon? 23. If a Bid Bond, or other similar form as referenced above, has been issued regarding this matter, what person or entity is surety for said Bond? 24. Do you and / or your corporation consider any papers issued regarding the matter which is before you by any agency / corporation a bonded coupon? Please respond in writing within the time allotted above to the questions raised herein, and send all documents via United States Mail to the below address so that I may understand more fully the jeopardy I, and / or my debtor, may be in. In the alternative, please dismiss any action you or your corporation may have against me or my debtor for your failure to state a claim for which relief can be granted, and supply me with written evidence of same. Thanks so much for your timely response to this important matter, and I look forward to hearing from you soon. Very truly yours, BY: -� Alf - Anthony: 4AW�d Authorized Representative and Secured Party / Creditor for ALFRED ANTHONY AVILA Enclosures: NOTICE OF SPECIAL APPEARANCE WITH DOCUMENTS IN SUPPORT Public Servant Questionnaire Courtesy Copies of All Enclosures: DEPARTMENT OF MOTOR VEHICLES 7010 0290 00021529 7087 Legal Affairs Division Legal Office - Fifth Floor 2415 First Avenue / Sacramento, CA 95818 Page 3 of 3 Go 33800 Chapman Heights Road — Apt 713, Yucaipa, Califomia [92399] USP$,- Track& Confirm P i UNITED STATES /� PQSTi�t.5�1 Track & Confirm h : / /trkcnfrml.smi.usps com/PTSIntem tWeb /InterLabeiInguirv.do Search Results Label /Receipt Number: 7010 0290 00021529 7100 Status: Delivered Your item was delivered at 1:44 pm on September 27, 2010 in SAN BERNARDINO, CA 92408. A proof of delivery record may be available through your local Post Office for a fee. Additional information for this item is stored in files offline. t ,rater. tiM� w � s i (,I ) + `far. tt uV'eM *"" s Copyright© 2010 LISPS. All Rights Reserved. No FEAR Act EEO Data FOIA Home I HBIp I Sinn In Track & Confirm FA Qs Track & Cortfam' Enter Labei/Receipt Number. Gea? Privacy Poiiov Terms of Use w sine5s nustomer Gateway oo�� 5/24/2011 1:24 PM IL'D� created with pdfFactory Pro trial version www.Offactory.com Agenda No. STAFF REPORT TO: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members FROM: Community and Economic Development Department AGENDA DATE: June 21, 2011 SUBJECT: Tentative Tract Map No. 31843 & 32747 (Southeasterly of Jack Rabbit Trail and State Route 60, Hidden Canyon Specific Plan), Request for One Year Time Extension Applicant: St. Clair Company ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■■ BACKGROUND /ANALYSIS: Tentative Tract Map No. 31843 and 32747 was originally approved by the City Council on April 5, 2005 for a two -year period. The applicant received two one year time extension, with one additional extension possible and is now requesting that additional one -year extension of time. Additionally, AB 333 gives every map an automatic two -year extension. Therefore, the map will expire on April 5, 2012, with no additional extensions possible. The proposed subdivision map provides for the division 196.5 acre parcels into 411 residential lots and one commercial lot, with lot sizes ranging from 7,200 to 12,000square feet. There are no unusual or changed circumstances which affect this map or the consideration of a time extension RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council approve a one -year extension of time for the approval of Tentative Tract Map No. 31843 and 32747. Respectfully Submitted, Rebecca Deming Assistant Director of Planning .N POINT CENTER F I N A N C I A L, I N C. June 8, 2011 Rebecca Deming Assistant Director of Planning City of Beaumont 550 E. 6th Street Beaumont, CA 92223 RE: Extension of Tentative Map Approval for Hidden Canyon Development Tract Map 31843 & 32747 Dear Ms. Deming: The purpose of this letter is to request an approval from the City of Beaumont for "Extension of Tentative Map Approval" of Hidden Canyon Development with Tract Map 31843 & 32747. Also submitted is a check of $400.00 for the application fees. Please call for any questions. Sincerely, �1 9esChen Director of Real Estate Development Point Center Financial, Inc. 7 Argonaut, Aliso Viejo, CA 92656 T0: Mayor and Members of the City Council Awn& TtPm ;E � I� TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Agenda Item # �h FROM: Alan C. Kapanicas, City Manager DATE: June 21, 2011 SUBJECT: Approval of Emergency Management Contracts with Emergency Solutions Consulting and R &P Enterprises. BACKGROUND In past years, the City's Emergency Management Program has been staffed with two contract employees. For the 2011 -12 fiscal year, staff is recommending that the City enter into contracts with the same two contract employees who provide services to the City of Beaumont and other surrounding communities. FISCAL IMPACT The contracts totaling $85,896 has been included in the City's 2011 -12 adopted budget. RECOMMENDATION Approve the tracts with Emergency Solutions Consulting and R &P Enterprises. Respec lly bmi Ian C. Ka icas City Manager (�k Rev. 09/05 AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES BY INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR (Emergency Management) THIS AGREEMENT is made and effective as of the 1st day of July, 2011, by and between the CITY OF BEAUMONT ( "OWNER ") whose address is 550 E. 6h Street, Beaumont, California 92223 and EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS CONSULTING, A DIVISION OF M &T ENTERPRISES, whose address is 1174 Magnolia Ave., Beaumont, CA 92223, telephone 951- 845 -4273, e-mail mitchz358 @aol.com ( "CONTRACTOR "). RECITALS This Agreement is entered into on the basis of the following facts, understandings and intentions of the parties to this Agreement: A. OWNER desires to engage the services of CONTRACTOR to perform such services as may be assigned, from time to time, by OWNER in writing for the purpose of developing and implementing an emergency management services program for OWNER. B. The specific services to be performed by CONTRACTOR shall be described in one or more written Task Orders issued by OWNER to CONTRACTOR pursuant to this Agreement. C. CONTRACTOR agrees to provide such services pursuant to, and in accordance with, the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and has represented and warrants to OWNER that CONTRACTOR possesses the necessary skills, qualifications, personnel and equipment to provide such services. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals and mutual covenants contained herein, OWNER and CONTRACTOR agree as follows: 1. Term of Agreement. This Agreement is effective as of the date first above written and shall continue until June 30, 2012, unless extended or sooner terminated as provided for herein. 2. Services to be Performed by CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR agrees to provide such services as may be assigned, from time to time, in writing by the City Council of OWNER. Each such assignment shall be made in the form of a written Task Order. Each such Task Order shall include, but shall not be limited to, a description of the nature and scope of the services to be performed by CONTRACTOR, the amount of compensation to be paid, and the expected time of completion. Page 1 of 10 3. Associates and Subcontractors. CONTRACTOR may, at CONTRACTOR's sole cost and expense, employ such competent and qualified independent associates, subcontractors and consultants as CONTRACTOR deems necessary to perform each such assignment; provided, however, that CONTRACTOR shall not subcontract any of the work to be performed without the prior written consent of OWNER. 4. Compensation. 4.01 In consideration for the services to be performed by CONTRACTOR, OWNER agrees to pay CONTRACTOR as provided for in each Task Order. 4.02 Each Task Order shall specify a total not -to- exceed sum of money and shall be based upon CONTRACTOR's schedule of regular hourly rates customarily charged by CONTRACTOR to its clients. 4.03 OWNER may reimburse CONTRACTOR for reasonable and necessary expenses incurred by CONTRACTOR in the performance of services for OWNER. Reimbursement shall be according to a schedule of reimbursable expenses included in each Task Order. 4.04 CONTRACTOR shall not be compensated for any services rendered nor reimbursed for any expenses incurred in excess of those authorized in any Task Order unless approved in advance by the City Council of OWNER, in writing. 4.05 Unless otherwise provided for in any Task Order issued pursuant to this Agreement, CONTRACTOR agrees that payment of compensation earned shall be made in monthly installments within 30 business days after receipt of a detailed, corrected, written invoice describing in reasonable detail, to the extent applicable, the services performed, and materials consumed or used. Such invoice shall also include a detailed itemization of authorized expenses incurred. 5. Obligations of Contractor. 5.01 CONTRACTOR agrees to perform all assigned services in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and those specified in each Task Order. 5.02 Except as otherwise provided for in each Task Order, CONTRACTOR will supply all personnel, materials and equipment required to perform the assigned services. 5.03 CONTRACTOR shall keep OWNER informed as to the progress of the work assigned hereunder, by means of regular and frequent consultations. From time -to -time, when requested by the OWNER, CONTRACTOR shall prepare written status reports. 5.04 CONTRACTOR and OWNER agree that OWNER, its employees, agents and officials should, to the extent permitted by law, be fully protected from any loss, injury, damage, claim, lawsuit, cost, expense, attorneys' fees, litigation costs, defense costs, court costs or any other costs arising out of or in any way related to the performance of this Agreement. Page 2 of 10 Accordingly, the provisions of this indemnity are intended by the parties to be interpreted and construed to provide the fullest protection possible under the law to OWNER. CONTRACTOR acknowledges that OWNER would not enter into this Agreement in the absence of the commitment of CONTRACTOR to indemnify and protect OWNER as set forth here. 5.04.1 To the full extent permitted by law, CONTRACTOR shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless OWNER, its employees, agents and officials, from any liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, actual attorneys' fees incurred by owner, court costs, interest, defense costs, including expert witness fees and any other costs or expenses of any kind whatsoever without restriction or limitation incurred in relation to, as a consequence of or arising out of or in any way attributable actually, allegedly or impliedly, in whole or in part to the performance of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR's obligation to defend, indemnify and hold harmless shall include any and all claims, suits and proceedings in which CONTRACTOR (and/or CONTRACTOR's agents and/or employees) is alleged to be an employee of OWNER. All obligations under this provision are to be paid by CONTRACTOR as they are incurred by OWNER. 5.04.2 Without affecting the rights of OWNER under any provision of this Agreement or this Section, CONTRACTOR shall not be required to indemnify and hold harmless OWNER as set forth above for liability attributable to the sole fault of OWNER, provided such sole fault is determined by agreement between the parties or the findings of a court of competent jurisdiction. This exception will apply only in instances where OWNER is shown to have been solely at fault and not in instances where CONTRACTOR is solely or partially at fault or in instances where OWNER's fault accounts for only a percentage of the liability involved. In those instances, the obligation of CONTRACTOR will be all- inclusive and OWNER will be indemnified for all liability incurred, even though a percentage of liability is attributable to conduct of OWNER. CONTRACTOR acknowledges that its obligation pursuant to this Section extends to liability attributable to OWNER, if that liability is less than the sole fault of OWNER. CONTRACTOR has no obligation under this Agreement for liability proven in a court of competent jurisdiction or by written agreement between the parties to be the sole fault of OWNER. 5.05 In the event that OWNER requests that specific employees or agents of CONTRACTOR supervise or otherwise perform the services specified in each Task Order, CONTRACTOR shall ensure that such individual (or individuals) shall be appointed and assigned the responsibility of performing the services. 5.06 In the event CONTRACTOR is required to prepare plans, drawings, specifications and/or estimates, the same shall be furnished in conformance with local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations. 5.07 CONTRACTOR shall be solely responsible for obtaining all permits, licenses and approvals necessary or applicable to the performance of services under this Agreement, unless otherwise expressly provided for in any Task Order issued pursuant to this Agreement. In the event OWNER is required to obtain an approval or permit from another governmental entity, CONTRACTOR shall provide all necessary supporting documents to be filed with such entity. Page 3 of 10 5.08 CONTRACTOR shall be solely responsible for obtaining Employment Eligibility Verification information from CONTRACTOR's employees, in compliance with the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, Pub. L. 99 -603 (8 U.S.C. 1324a), and shall ensure that CONTRACTOR's employees are eligible to work in the United States. 5.09 Drug -free Workplace Certification. By signing this Agreement, the CONTRACTOR hereby certifies under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the CONTRACTOR will comply with the requirements of the Drug -Free Workplace Act of 1990 (Government Code, Section 8350 et seq.) and will provide a drug -free workplace. 6. Oblijzations of Owner. 6.01 OWNER shall do the following in a manner so as not to unreasonably hinder the performance of services by CONTRACTOR: a. Provide information, requirements and criteria regarding OWNER's project; b. Furnish all existing studies, reports and other available data and items pertinent to each Task Order that are in OWNER's possession; C. Designate a person to act as a liaison between CONTRACTOR and the City Council of OWNER. 7. Additional Services, Changes and Deletions. 7.01 During the term of this Agreement, the City Council of OWNER may, from time to time, and without affecting the validity of this Agreement or any Task Order issued thereunder, order changes, deletions and additional services by the issuance of written change orders authorized and approved by the City Council of OWNER. 7.02 In the event CONTRACTOR performs additional or different services than those described in any Task Order or authorized change order without the prior written approval of the City Council of OWNER, CONTRACTOR shall not be compensated for such services. 7.03 CONTRACTOR shall promptly advise OWNER as soon as reasonably practicable upon gaining knowledge of a condition, event or accumulation of events which may affect the scope and/or cost of services to be provided pursuant to this Agreement. All proposed changes, modifications, deletions and/or requests for additional services shall be reduced to writing for review and approval by the City Council of OWNER. 7.04 In the event that OWNER orders services deleted or reduced, compensation shall likewise be deleted or reduced by a fair and reasonable amount and CONTRACTOR shall only be compensated for services actually performed. In the event additional services are properly authorized, payment for the same shall be made as provided in Section 4 above. Page 4 of 10 8. Termination of Agreement. 8.01 In the event the time specified for completion of an assigned task in a Task Order exceeds the term of this Agreement, the term of this Agreement shall be automatically extended for such additional time as is necessary to complete such Task Order, and thereupon this Agreement shall automatically terminate without further notice. 8.02 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, OWNER, at its sole option, may terminate this Agreement at any time by giving 10 days' written notice to CONTRACTOR, whether or not a Task Order has been issued to CONTRACTOR. 8.03 In the event of termination, the payment of monies due CONTRACTOR for work performed prior to the effective date of such termination shall be paid within 45 business days after receipt of an invoice as provided in this Agreement. Upon payment for such services, CONTRACTOR agrees to promptly provide and deliver to OWNER all original documents, reports, studies, plans, specifications and the like which are in the possession or control of CONTRACTOR and pertain to OWNER. 9. Status of Contractor. 9.01 CONTRACTOR shall perform the services assigned by OWNER in CONTRACTOR's own way as an independent contractor, and in pursuit of CONTRACTOR's independent calling, and not as an employee of OWNER. CONTRACTOR shall be under the control of OWNER only as to the result to be accomplished and the personnel assigned to perform services. However, CONTRACTOR shall regularly confer with OWNER's City Council as provided for in this Agreement. 9.02 CONTRACTOR hereby specifically represents and warrants to OWNER that the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be performed in accordance with the standards customarily applicable to an experienced and competent professional rendering the same or similar services. Further, CONTRACTOR represents and warrants that the individual signing this Agreement on behalf of CONTRACTOR has the full authority to bind CONTRACTOR to this Agreement. 10. Ownership of Documents; Audit. 10.01 All draft and final reports, plans, drawings, studies, maps, photographs, specifications, data, notes, manuals, warranties and all other documents of any kind or nature prepared, developed or obtained by CONTRACTOR in connection with the performance of services assigned to it by OWNER shall become the sole property of OWNER, and CONTRACTOR shall promptly deliver all such materials to OWNER. At the OWNER's sole discretion, CONTRACTOR may be permitted to retain original documents, and furnish reproductions. If OWNER uses such documents for any purpose other than for which they were prepared without CONTRACTOR's prior written approval, OWNER hereby waives any claims Page 5 of 10 against CONTRACTOR and will hold CONTRACTOR harmless from any claim or liability for injury or loss arising from OWNER's unauthorized use. 10.02 Subject to applicable federal and state laws, rules and regulations, OWNER shall hold all intellectual property rights to any materials developed pursuant to this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall not use for purposes other than the performance of this Agreement, nor shall CONTRACTOR release, reproduce, distribute, publish, adapt for future use or any other purposes, or otherwise use, any data or other materials first produced in the performance of this Agreement, nor authorize others to do so, without the prior written consent of OWNER. 10.03 CONTRACTOR shall retain and maintain, for a period not less than four years following termination of this Agreement, all time records, accounting records and vouchers and all other records with respect to all matters concerning services performed, compensation paid and expenses reimbursed. At any time during normal business hours and as often as OWNER may deem necessary, CONTRACTOR shall make available to OWNER's agents for examination all of such records and shall permit OWNER's agents to audit, examine and reproduce such records. 11. Miscellaneous Provisions. 11.01 This Agreement supersedes any and all previous agreements, either oral or written, between the parties hereto with respect to the rendering of services by CONTRACTOR for OWNER and contains all of the covenants and agreements between the parties with respect to the rendering of such services in any manner whatsoever. Any modification of this Agreement will be effective only if it is in writing signed by both parties. 11.02 CONTRACTOR shall not assign or otherwise transfer any rights or interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of OWNER. Unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment, no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under this Agreement. 11.03 CONTRACTOR shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules, regulations, entitlements and/or permits applicable to, or governing the services authorized hereunder. 11.04 If required by law, CONTRACTOR shall file Conflict of Interest Statements with OWNER. 11.05 Any dispute which may arise by and between the OWNER and the CONTRACTOR, including the CONTRACTOR's subcontractors, laborers, and suppliers, shall be submitted to binding arbitration. Arbitration shall be conducted by the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc./Endispute, in accordance with its construction industry rules in effect at the time of the commencement of the arbitration proceeding, and as set forth in this Paragraph. Arbitration shall be conducted before a panel of three arbitrators, unless the PARTIES agree in writing to submit the matter before a single arbitrator. The arbitrators must decide each and every dispute in accordance with the laws of the State of California, and all Page 6 of 10 other applicable laws. The arbitrators' decision and award are subject to judicial review for errors of fact or law in accordance with Section 1296 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by a Superior Court of competent venue and jurisdiction. Discovery may be conducted in the arbitration proceeding pursuant to Section 1283.05 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Unless the PARTIES stipulate to the contrary, prior to the appointment of the arbitrators, all disputes shall first be submitted to non - binding mediation, conducted by either the American Arbitration Association or Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc./Endispute, in accordance with their respective rules and procedures for such mediation. In any arbitration or litigation arising out of this Agreement, or the performance of any obligation under this Agreement, the arbitrators or the court in such arbitration or litigation shall award costs and expenses of arbitration or litigation, including mediation and arbitration fees and expenses, expert witness fees and attorneys' fees, to the prevailing PARTY. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereby have made and executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above - written. OWNER: CONTRACTOR: CITY OF BEAUMONT EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS CONSULTING, A DIVISION OF M &T ENTERPRISES By BRIAN DEFORGE, Mayor Print Name V\.A 1 +12 �N ell r, L� Title CcN-N , 4- r, 4, y- Page 7 of 10 Rev. 09/05 CITY OF BEAUMONT INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR'S TASK ORDER (Project Title: Emergency Management) TASK ORDER NO.: ONE CONTRACTOR: Name: EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS CONSULTING, A DIVISION OF M &T ENTERPRISES Address: Telephone: Fax: E -mail: Fed. Tax Id.: THIS TASK ORDER is issued pursuant to that certain Agreement for Services by Independent Contractor between the CITY OF BEAUMONT ( "OWNER ") and EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS CONSULTING, A DIVISION OF M &T ENTERPRISES ( "CONTRACTOR ") dated July 1, 2011 (the "AGREEMENT "). I . Task to be Performed. CONTRACTOR shall provide all labor, materials and equipment to perform the following task (choose and check one): X See Exhibit "A ", attached hereto Description of Task: 2. Time of Performance. Time is of the essence. Therefore, CONTRACTOR shall begin work within 3 days of the date this Task Order is signed by the OWNER and shall complete performance of such services by or before June 30, 2012. 3. Liaison of OWNER. Mr. Alan C. Kapanicas shall serve as liaison between OWNER and CONTRACTOR. 4. Staff Assiinments. CONTRACTOR will assign the following personnel to perform the services required by this Task Order: (Check if this Paragraph 4 Not Applicable: Mr. Mitch White Page 1 of 2 5. Deliverables. CONTRACTOR shall deliver to OWNER not later than the date or dates indicated, the following: (Check if this Paragraph 5 Not Applicable: _X_) 6. Compensation. For all services rendered by CONTRACTOR pursuant to this Task Order, CONTRACTOR shall receive a total not -to- exceed lump sum of $49,114.50, payable as follows: less $6,166.50 charged to CONTRACTOR as provided in Paragraph 8 below, and paid monthly in 12 equal installments of $3,579.00 each. 7. Reimbursable Expenses. In addition to the compensation provided for in Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR (choose and check one:) _ shall/ X shall not /be entitled to reimbursement for expenses. If authorized by this Task Order, reimbursable expenses shall be limited to: 8. Miscellaneous Matters. The following additional matters are made a part of this Task Order (choose and check one): Not applicable See Exhibit "A ", attached hereto; or X Description: CONTRACTOR may rent 136.5 sq. ft. of office space in OWNER'S City Hall at $1.75 per ft. ($2,866.50) and an emergency response vehicle for $3,300.00, for a total of $6,166.50. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Task Order on the date indicated below. CITY OF BEAMONT Dated: By BRIAN DEFORGE, Mayor CONTRACTOR: EMERGENCY SOLUTIONS CONSULTING, A DIVISION OF M &T ENTERPRISES Dated: By MITC14 WHITE Title Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT "A" A. Emergency Management and Preparedness Training: 1. Provide 3 Community Emergency Response Training (CERT) Classes (20 hours each class plus 10 Preparation time) 2. Provide All City Employees with Emergency Response Training: a) Emergency Operations Center (EOC) b) Federal Emergency Management Training Course (Independent 700, 701, 702, 703, 706) C) National Incident Management System (NIMS) (Federal), Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) (State), Incident Command System (ICS) Local B. City Emergency Response and Recovery Management: 1. Attend Federal, State and Local Disaster Cost Recovery Meetings 2. Prepare all documentation required by FEMA/State Guidelines 3. Provide follow -up on a monthly basis C. Emergency Preparedness Grant Applications and Administration: 1. Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG) 2. Community Emergency Response Training Grant (CERT) D. Update and Maintain the City's Emergency Response Plan E. Attend Emergency Management Planning Meetings: 1. 1 City Council Meeting Each Month 2. Quarterly County Operational Area Planning Meeting 3. Annual Disaster Council Meeting 4. Freeway Task Force Meeting 5. Monthly PASSCOM Meeting 6. 1 Staff Meeting Each Month 7. Monthly Terrorism Early Warning Group Meeting F. Provide Emergency Preparedness Presentation to Local Community Groups: 1. Attend Gated Community Emergency Management Meetings 2. Provide Presentations to Local Service Clubs G. Provide City with 24 hour Emergency Response: 1. Incident Site Response 2. Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Activation H. Manage City Emergency Response Supplies: 1. CERT Training Materials 2. City Disaster Supplies 3. City Emergency Response Kits 4. City Emergency Response Training Materials Rev. 09/05 AGREEMENT FOR SERVICES BY INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR (Emergency Management) THIS AGREEMENT is made and effective as of the 1st day of July, 2011, by and between the CITY OF BEAUMONT ( "OWNER ") whose address is 550 E. 6`h Street, Beaumont, California 92223 and R & P ENTERPRISES whose address is 53727 Ridge Road, Yucca Valley, California 92284, telephone 760 - 464 -3481, e-mail rickandpatcook @verizon.net ( "CONTRACTOR "). RECITALS This Agreement is entered into on the basis of the following facts, understandings and intentions of the parties to this Agreement: A. OWNER desires to engage the services of CONTRACTOR to perform such services as may be assigned, from time to time, by OWNER in writing for the purpose of developing and implementing an emergency management services program for OWNER. B. The specific services to be performed by CONTRACTOR shall be described in one or more written Task Orders issued by OWNER to CONTRACTOR pursuant to this Agreement. C. CONTRACTOR agrees to provide such services pursuant to, and in accordance with, the terms and conditions of this Agreement, and has represented and warrants to OWNER that CONTRACTOR possesses the necessary skills, qualifications, personnel and equipment to provide such services. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing Recitals and mutual covenants contained herein, OWNER and CONTRACTOR agree as follows: 1. Term of Agreement. This Agreement is effective as of the date first above written and shall continue until June 30, 2012, unless extended or sooner terminated as provided for herein. 2. Services to be Performed by CONTRACTOR. CONTRACTOR agrees to provide such services as may be assigned, from time to time, in writing by the City Council of OWNER. Each such assignment shall be made in the form of a written Task Order. Each such Task Order shall include, but shall not be limited to, a description of the nature and scope of the services to be performed by CONTRACTOR, the amount of compensation to be paid, and the expected time of completion. Page 1 of 10 3. Associates and Subcontractors. CONTRACTOR may, at CONTRACTOR's sole cost and expense, employ such competent and qualified independent associates, subcontractors and consultants as CONTRACTOR deems necessary to perform each such assignment; provided, however, that CONTRACTOR shall not subcontract any of the work to be performed without the prior written consent of OWNER. 4. Compensation. 4.01 In consideration for the services to be performed by CONTRACTOR, OWNER agrees to pay CONTRACTOR as provided for in each Task Order. 4.02 Each Task Order shall specify a total not -to- exceed sum of money and shall be based upon CONTRACTOR's schedule of regular hourly rates customarily charged by CONTRACTOR to its clients. 4.03 OWNER may reimburse CONTRACTOR for reasonable and necessary expenses incurred by CONTRACTOR in the performance of services for OWNER. Reimbursement shall be according to a schedule of reimbursable expenses included in each Task Order. 4.04 CONTRACTOR shall not be compensated for any services rendered nor reimbursed for any expenses incurred in excess of those authorized in any Task Order unless approved in advance by the City Council of OWNER, in writing. 4.05 Unless otherwise provided for in any Task Order issued pursuant to this Agreement, CONTRACTOR agrees that payment of compensation earned shall be made in monthly installments within 30 business days after receipt of a detailed, corrected, written invoice describing in reasonable detail, to the extent applicable, the services performed, and materials consumed or used. Such invoice shall also include a detailed itemization of authorized expenses incurred. 5. Obligations of Contractor. 5.01 CONTRACTOR agrees to perform all assigned services in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement and those specified in each Task Order. 5.02 Except as otherwise provided for in each Task Order, CONTRACTOR will supply all personnel, materials and equipment required to perform the assigned services. 5.03 CONTRACTOR shall keep OWNER informed as to the progress of the work assigned hereunder, by means of regular and frequent consultations. From time -to -time, when requested by the OWNER, CONTRACTOR shall prepare written status reports. 5.04 CONTRACTOR and OWNER agree that OWNER, its employees, agents and officials should, to the extent permitted by law, be fully protected from any loss, injury, damage, claim, lawsuit, cost, expense, attorneys' fees, litigation costs, defense costs, court costs or any other costs arising out of or in any way related to the performance of this Agreement. Page 2 of 10 Accordingly, the provisions of this indemnity are intended by the parties to be interpreted and construed to provide the fullest protection possible under the law to OWNER. CONTRACTOR acknowledges that OWNER would not enter into this Agreement in the absence of the commitment of CONTRACTOR to indemnify and protect OWNER as set forth here. 5.04.1 To the full extent permitted by law, CONTRACTOR shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless OWNER, its employees, agents and officials, from any liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind, whether actual, alleged or threatened, actual attorneys' fees incurred by owner, court costs, interest, defense costs, including expert witness fees and any other costs or expenses of any kind whatsoever without restriction or limitation incurred in relation to, as a consequence of or arising out of or in any way attributable actually, allegedly or impliedly, in whole or in part to the performance of this Agreement. CONTRACTOR's obligation to defend, indemnify and hold harmless shall include any and all claims, suits and proceedings in which CONTRACTOR (and/or CONTRACTOR's agents and/or employees) is alleged to be an employee of OWNER. All obligations under this provision are to be paid by CONTRACTOR as they are incurred by OWNER. 5.04.2 Without affecting the rights of OWNER under any provision of this Agreement or this Section, CONTRACTOR shall not be required to indemnify and hold harmless OWNER as set forth above for liability attributable to the sole fault of OWNER, provided such sole fault is determined by agreement between the parties or the findings of a court of competent jurisdiction. This exception will apply only in instances where OWNER is shown to have been solely at fault and not in instances where CONTRACTOR is solely or partially at fault or in instances where OWNER's fault accounts for only a percentage of the liability involved. In those instances, the obligation of CONTRACTOR will be all- inclusive and OWNER will be indemnified for all liability incurred, even though a percentage of liability is attributable to conduct of OWNER. CONTRACTOR acknowledges that its obligation pursuant to this Section extends to liability attributable to OWNER, if that liability is less than the sole fault of OWNER. CONTRACTOR has no obligation under this Agreement for liability proven in a court of competent jurisdiction or by written agreement between the parties to be the sole fault of OWNER. 5.05 In the event that OWNER requests that specific employees or agents of CONTRACTOR supervise or otherwise perform the services specified in each Task Order, CONTRACTOR shall ensure that such individual (or individuals) shall be appointed and assigned the responsibility of performing the services. 5.06 In the event CONTRACTOR is required to prepare plans, drawings, specifications and/or estimates, the same shall be furnished in conformance with local, state and federal laws, rules and regulations. 5.07 CONTRACTOR shall be solely responsible for obtaining all permits, licenses and approvals necessary or applicable to the performance of services under this Agreement, unless otherwise expressly provided for in any Task Order issued pursuant to this Agreement. In the event OWNER is required to obtain an approval or permit from another governmental entity, CONTRACTOR shall provide all necessary supporting documents to be filed with such entity. Page 3 of 10 5.08 CONTRACTOR shall be solely responsible for obtaining Employment Eligibility Verification information from CONTRACTOR's employees, in compliance with the Immigration Reform and Control Act of 1986, Pub. L. 99 -603 (8 U.S.C. 1324a), and shall ensure that CONTRACTOR's employees are eligible to work in the United States. 5.09 Drug -free Workplace Certification. By signing this Agreement, the CONTRACTOR hereby certifies under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the CONTRACTOR will comply with the requirements of the Drug -Free Workplace Act of 1990 (Government Code, Section 8350 et seq.) and will provide a drug -free workplace. 6. Obligations of Owner. 6.01 OWNER shall do the following in a manner so as not to unreasonably hinder the performance of services by CONTRACTOR: a. Provide information, requirements and criteria regarding OWNER's project; b. Furnish all existing studies, reports and other available data and items pertinent to each Task Order that are in OWNER's possession; C. Designate a person to act as a liaison between CONTRACTOR and the City Council of OWNER. 7. Additional Services, Changes and Deletions. 7.01 During the term of this Agreement, the City Council of OWNER may, from time to time, and without affecting the validity of this Agreement or any Task Order issued thereunder, order changes, deletions and additional services by the issuance of written change orders authorized and approved by the City Council of OWNER. 7.02 In the event CONTRACTOR performs additional or different services than those described in any Task Order or authorized change order without the prior written approval of the City Council of OWNER, CONTRACTOR shall not be compensated for such services. 7.03 CONTRACTOR shall promptly advise OWNER as soon as reasonably practicable upon gaining knowledge of a condition, event or accumulation of events which may affect the scope and/or cost of services to be provided pursuant to this Agreement. All proposed changes, modifications, deletions and/or requests for additional services shall be reduced to writing for review and approval by the City Council of OWNER. 7.04 In the event that OWNER orders services deleted or reduced, compensation shall likewise be deleted or reduced by a fair and reasonable amount and CONTRACTOR shall only be compensated for services actually performed. In the event additional services are properly authorized, payment for the same shall be made as provided in Section 4 above. Page 4 of 10 8. Termination of Agreement. 8.01 In the event the time specified for completion of an assigned task in a Task Order exceeds the term of this Agreement, the term of this Agreement shall be automatically extended for such additional time as is necessary to complete such Task Order, and thereupon this Agreement shall automatically terminate without further notice. 8.02 Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement, OWNER, at its sole option, may terminate this Agreement at any time by giving 10 days' written notice to CONTRACTOR, whether or not a Task Order has been issued to CONTRACTOR. 8.03 In the event of termination, the payment of monies due CONTRACTOR for work performed prior to the effective date of such termination shall be paid within 45 business days after receipt of an invoice as provided in this Agreement. Upon payment for such services, CONTRACTOR agrees to promptly provide and deliver to OWNER all original documents, reports, studies, plans, specifications and the like which are in the possession or control of CONTRACTOR and pertain to OWNER. 9. Status of Contractor. 9.01 CONTRACTOR shall perform the services assigned by OWNER in CONTRACTOR's own way as an independent contractor, and in pursuit of CONTRACTOR's independent calling, and not as an employee of OWNER. CONTRACTOR shall be under the control of OWNER only as to the result to be accomplished and the personnel assigned to perform services. However, CONTRACTOR shall regularly confer with OWNER's City Council as provided for in this Agreement. 9.02 CONTRACTOR hereby specifically represents and warrants to OWNER that the services to be rendered pursuant to this Agreement shall be performed in accordance with the standards customarily applicable to an experienced and competent professional rendering the same or similar services. Further, CONTRACTOR represents and warrants that the individual signing this Agreement on behalf of CONTRACTOR has the full authority to bind CONTRACTOR to this Agreement. 10. Ownership of Documents, Audit. 10.01 All draft and final reports, plans, drawings, studies, maps, photographs, specifications, data, notes, manuals, warranties and all other documents of any kind or nature prepared, developed or obtained by CONTRACTOR in connection with the performance of services assigned to it by OWNER shall become the sole property of OWNER, and CONTRACTOR shall promptly deliver all such materials to OWNER. At the OWNER's sole discretion, CONTRACTOR may be permitted to retain original documents, and furnish reproductions. If OWNER uses such documents for any purpose other than for which they were prepared without CONTRACTOR's prior written approval, OWNER hereby waives any claims Page 5of10 against CONTRACTOR and will hold CONTRACTOR harmless from any claim or liability for injury or loss arising from OWNER's unauthorized use. 10.02 Subject to applicable federal and state laws, rules and regulations, OWNER shall hold all intellectual property rights to any materials developed pursuant to this Agreement. CONTRACTOR shall not use for purposes other than the performance of this Agreement, nor shall CONTRACTOR release, reproduce, distribute, publish, adapt for future use or any other purposes, or otherwise use, any data or other materials first produced in the performance of this Agreement, nor authorize others to do so, without the prior written consent of OWNER. 10.03 CONTRACTOR shall retain and maintain, for a period not less than four years following termination of this Agreement, all time records, accounting records and vouchers and all other records with respect to all matters concerning services performed, compensation paid and expenses reimbursed. At any time during normal business hours and as often as OWNER may deem necessary, CONTRACTOR shall make available to OWNER's agents for examination all of such records and shall permit OWNER's agents to audit, examine and reproduce such records. 11. Miscellaneous Provisions. 11.01 This Agreement supersedes any and all previous agreements, either oral or written, between the parties hereto with respect to the rendering of services by CONTRACTOR for OWNER and contains all of the covenants and agreements between the parties with respect to the rendering of such services in any manner whatsoever. Any modification of this Agreement will be effective only if it is in writing signed by both parties. 11.02 CONTRACTOR shall not assignor otherwise transfer any rights or interest in this Agreement without the prior written consent of OWNER. Unless specifically stated to the contrary in any written consent to an assignment, no assignment will release or discharge the assignor from any duty or responsibility under this Agreement. 11.03 CONTRACTOR shall comply with all applicable local, state and federal laws, rules, regulations, entitlements and/or permits applicable to, or governing the services authorized hereunder. 11.04 If required by law, CONTRACTOR shall file Conflict of Interest Statements with OWNER. 11.05 Any dispute which may arise by and between the OWNER and the CONTRACTOR, including the CONTRACTOR's subcontractors, laborers, and suppliers, shall be submitted to binding arbitration. Arbitration shall be conducted by the Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc./Endispute, in accordance with its construction industry rules in effect at the time of the commencement of the arbitration proceeding, and as set forth in this Paragraph. Arbitration shall be conducted before a panel of three arbitrators, unless the PARTIES agree in writing to submit the matter before a single arbitrator. The arbitrators must decide each and every dispute in accordance with the laws of the State of California, and all Page 6 of 10 other applicable laws. The arbitrators' decision and award are subject to judicial review for errors of fact or law in accordance with Section 1296 of the Code of Civil Procedure, by a Superior Court of competent venue and jurisdiction. Discovery may be conducted in the arbitration proceeding pursuant to Section 1283.05 of the Code of Civil Procedure. Unless the PARTIES stipulate to the contrary, prior to the appointment of the arbitrators, all disputes shall first be submitted to non - binding mediation, conducted by either the American Arbitration Association or Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc./Endispute, in accordance with their respective rules and procedures for such mediation. In any arbitration or litigation arising out of this Agreement, or the performance of any obligation under this Agreement, the arbitrators or the court in such arbitration or litigation shall award costs and expenses of arbitration or litigation, including mediation and arbitration fees and expenses, expert witness fees and attorneys' fees, to the prevailing PARTY. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereby have made and executed this Agreement as of the day and year first above - written. OWNER: CITY OF BEAUMONT BRIAN DEFORGE, Mayor CONTRACTOR: R & P ENTERPRISES Print Name �� &,e- Title 4�5 &"1Wz49-1 V1e Page 7of10 Rev. 09/05 CITY OF BEAUMONT INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR'S TASK ORDER (Project Title: Emergency Management) TASK ORDER NO.: ONE CONTRACTOR: Name: R & P ENTERPRISES Address: Telephone: Fax: E -mail: Fed. Tax Id.: THIS TASK ORDER is issued pursuant to that certain Agreement for Services by Independent Contractor between the CITY OF BEAUMONT ( "OWNER ") and R & P ENTERPRISES ( "CONTRACTOR ") dated July 1, 2011 (the "AGREEMENT "). 1. Task to be Performed. CONTRACTOR shall provide all labor, materials and equipment to perform the following task (choose and check one): X See Exhibit "A ", attached hereto Description of Task: 2. Time of Performance. Time is of the essence. Therefore, CONTRACTOR shall begin work within 3 days of the date this Task Order is signed by the OWNER and shall complete performance of such services by or before June 30, 2012. 3. Liaison of OWNER. Mr. Alan C. Kapanicas shall serve as liaison between OWNER and CONTRACTOR. 4. Staff Assi nmgents. CONTRACTOR will assign the following personnel to perform the services required by this Task Order: (Check if this Paragraph 4 Not Applicable: Mr. Rick Cook Page 1 of 2 5. Deliverables. CONTRACTOR shall deliver to OWNER not later than the date or dates indicated, the following: (Check if this Paragraph 5 Not Applicable: _2L) 6. Compensation. For all services rendered by CONTRACTOR pursuant to this Task Order, CONTRACTOR shall receive a total not -to- exceed lump sum of $49,114.50, payable as follows: less $6,166.50 charged to CONTRACTOR as provided in Paragraph 8 below, and paid monthly in 12 equal installments of $3,579.00 each. 7. Reimbursable Expenses. In addition to the compensation provided for in Paragraph 6 above, CONTRACTOR (choose and check one:) _ shall/ X shall not /be entitled to reimbursement for expenses. If authorized by this Task Order, reimbursable expenses shall be limited to: 8. Miscellaneous Matters. The following additional matters are made a part of this Task Order (choose and check one): Not applicable See Exhibit "A ", attached hereto; or X Description: CONTRACTOR may rent 136.5 sq. ft. of office space in OWNER'S City Hall at $1.75 per ft. ($2,866.50) and an emergency response vehicle for $3,300.00, for a total of $6,166.50. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Task Order on the date indicated below. Dated: CITY OF BEAMONT BRIAN DEFORGE, Mayor CONTRACTOR: R &P ENTERPRISES Dated: I S —1 / By Rick Cook Title Page 2 of 2 EXHIBIT "A" A. Emergency Management and Preparedness Training: 1. Provide 3 Community Emergency Response Training (CERT) Classes (20 hours each class plus 10 Preparation time) 2. Provide All City Employees with Emergency Response Training: a) Emergency Operations Center (EOC) b) Federal Emergency Management Training Course (Independent 700, 701, 702, 703, 706) C) National Incident Management System (NIMS) (Federal), Standardized Emergency Management System (SEMS) (State), Incident Command System (ICS) Local B. City Emergency Response and Recovery Management: 1. Attend Federal, State and Local Disaster Cost Recovery Meetings 2. Prepare all documentation required by FEMA/State Guidelines 3. Provide follow -up on a monthly basis C. Emergency Preparedness Grant Applications and Administration: 1. Emergency Management Performance Grant (EMPG) 2. Community Emergency Response Training Grant (CERT) D. Update and Maintain the City's Emergency Response Plan E. Attend Emergency Management Planning Meetings: 1. 1 City Council Meeting Each Month 2. Quarterly County Operational Area Planning Meeting 3. Annual Disaster Council Meeting 4. Freeway Task Force Meeting 5. Monthly PASSCOM Meeting 6. 1 Staff Meeting Each Month 7. Monthly Terrorism Early Warning Group Meeting F. Provide Emergency Preparedness Presentation to Local Community Groups: 1. Attend Gated Community Emergency Management Meetings 2. Provide Presentations to Local Service Clubs G. Provide City with 24 hour Emergency Response: 1. Incident Site Response 2. Emergency Operations Center (EOC) Activation H. Manage City Emergency Response Supplies: 1. CERT Training Materials 2. City Disaster Supplies 3. City Emergency Response Kits 4. City Emergency Response Training Materials Agenda Item No. 3 i STAFF REPORT TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS FROM: COMMUNITY AND ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT DEPT. AGENDA DATE: JUNE 21, 2011 SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF FINAL MAPS AND SUBDIVISION AGREEMENTS FOR TRACT MAP NOS. 33096 -6 & 33096 -10 LOCATED AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF POTRERO BOULEVARD AND HIGHLAND SPRINGS AVENUE APPLICANT: K. HOVNANIAN — FOUR SEASONS AT BEAUMONT, LLC. BACKGROUND /ANALYSIS: K. Hovanian has requested approval of final tract map 33096 -6 which consists of a total of 56 single - family residential lots located within Four Seasons. The minimum lot size is 5,316 square feet and the largest lot is 18,184 square feet with an average lot size of 7,699 square feet. Final tract map 33096 -10 which consists of a total of 38 single family residential lots located at Four Seasons. The minimum lot size is 4,597 square feet and the largest lot is 6,642 square feet with an average lot size of 5,181 square feet. Street improvements and other public improvements will be required pursuant to the conditions of approval and the Subdivision Agreement. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council APPROVE the proposed final maps and Subdivision Agreements subject to conformance with all Conditions of Approval as approved by the Public Works Director based on the findings that the map substantially conforms to the approved tentative tract map and is consistent with the Subdivision Map Act and the Beaumont Municipal Code. Respectfully Submitted, Chris Tracy Associate Planner /i,��1 Ftu� Nuko RID LOTS 56 L£7fEACO LOTS 5 (<%RIVATE STREETS) LETTERED LOTS 6 (PRICES USE) 1173 AWES RATE OF &I JANUARY 0011 ALL OF 7TNTAIVE TRACT MAP 73096 -6 OWNERSHIP STATEMENT6 I HEREBY STATE THAT I AM THE OWNER OF THE LAND NCLLDCD WITHIN TIC SUBDM90N SHORN HEREON: TAT I AM THE ONLY Zr SC CONSENT IS NECESSARY TO PASS A CAEM TIRE TO SAID LAND: THAT I CONSENT TO THE MAINE AND RECORDING OF THIS SUBOI f MAP AS MOWN WIIHIN THE DISTINCTIVE BORDER LINE I HEREBY RETAIN LOTS 'A' THROUGH Y. U40LNSNE FOR SDCNALK PARKNC, IANDSCAPINC FOR THE SME MYSti1F. YYNSIltSESSORS. ASSICNEFS F ORN075 W11NN1 THIS TRACT MAPBE71[FR I MFRTJTR RETAIN LOTS Y 7HR000A x. NO tWM ND947 D AS 'PRIVATE STREET' AS SHOWN HEREON FOR PRIVATE USE FOR THE SOLE BENEFIT OF WMW. W SUCCESSORS. AS51°NECi AND LOT OWNERS WITHIN THUS EMCEE MAP. I HEREBY OEM= 70 THE CITY OF BCMROONT. CASEMENTS FOR SEW R PURPOSES WITHIN PRIVATE STREET IONS V THROWN x. PIWJ&VE AS SHOW ON THIS MAP. I HEREBY DEDICATE TO THE CRY OF 3CMA10NT. CAS04NM FOR NCRESS AND ECRC% FOR PUOUC SALTY ANY LRIUTY MAWIENANCE VEHICLE PURPOSES OVER IRVINE PAAIC NORM (LOT i1'). PETITS OANYOH PARK (LOT VIT SANTIAGO OMCS PARK 41 TNKENS CRtTJC PARK (LOT 'k'). AND ETR3 AHYCO PARK NORTH (LOT '67. THE PRIVATE STREET LOTS AS SHOWN ON THIS MAP. I WUtCOY RETAIN THE COSTAACTS NOMASTD FOR ORAWDC PURPOSES AS SHOWN HEREON FDA PRIVATE USE FOR THE 5011 13CM70 OF MYSELF. W SL*C£SSm ASSICNEES AND LOT OWNERS WTWN THIS TWIST MAP. MRAIR A W94KANAN NAME HUWR A HOVNAN4W K HOVNARUWL45 FOUR SEASONS AT BEAUMONT. L.0 A CALIFORNIA UMBCO LAOUM COMPANY By, SHANE MVLONLY. HCL PRLSIOENT Or OPU PMONS K ttOVNANIAN COMPANW OF CALIFORNIA. NC.. AJMOR2E0 ADENF NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENT, SIRE OF COUNTY OF P. IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE STATE OF CALIFORNIA SHEET T OF 5 SHEETS TRACT N0. 33096 -6 AT - JL °I 2F N AT .IL. N 6001E OF YAPS. AT PACCS AT THE RC°UCST OF BEINC A SUBDMSICN OF A PORTION OF FRACTIONAL SECTION 14. TOWNSHIP S SOM. RANCE 1 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO ME am Or THE DOAA1 MOUDA WN N, MORE PARTICULARLY A PORTION OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO, =259 AS SHO BY A IMP ON FILE IN BOWL 371 � OF MAPS. PACE$ 22 THROUGH 27 INCELSIYE, AND A PORTION OF LOTS 73. 'C. AND Y' OF TRACT NO. 33096 -4 AS SHOWN BY MAP ON FILE IN BOOK 422 OF MAPS, PACES 25 THROUGH 32. INCLUSAT., N THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY FEE RECORDER OF SAO RIVERSIDE COUNTY. JM1R1' w- WAD° - ASSESSOR. COUNTY CLERK A RECORDER SOFA. ING MARISSA CRONTHCR. PAS 6152 BY: . out" TAX BOND CERTIFICATE3 "�1°" TRANCE COAST ERIE COMPANY I NEREBY CERTIFY THAT A BOND IN THE SUM OF f, < BEEN COCCUTCD AND FILED WON THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF ArvCXSI°L CNJFORNIA CONDITIONED UPON THE PAYMENT TA�7Q:5 WHICH AT�iHE TTIIMEE of RIuMD DL"FFTMIS MAP�rRMHTHE COUNTY Y RE�RDERAMA LIEN A�CARm SURVEYOR'S STATENENTr SAID PROPERTY BUT NOT YET PAYABE AND SAD BOND HAS BCCN OVLY APPTOJED BY SAD TOARD OF l HILRF1fY STATE TINT I AN A LCFRSED LINO SURVEYOR IN INC STATE OF CALIFORNIA AND SOPCMSORS THAT THIS YAP CONSISTING OF FM (5 SHEETS CORRECTLY pEPRCCHIS A SURVEY MME WED : 7011 CASH TAX SM UNDER MK SUPERVISION DURNG JAN 2011• THAT ALL THE YONUYCTS SHOWN DON K01f HEREON ACRMLLY DOST AND THOR POSOgNS ARE CORRECTLY SHOWN. DR WILL BE N AOCORCAN= WITH THE IORIC OF INE MONUMENT AGREEMENT FOR THE MhP. 78r LIEN IRIMOI -m COIMlY TAX COIECNR MONUAICTS WLL BE SUFFICIENT TO ENABLE THE SURVEY B. RCRACFD. MSN AAriE.Y 6 H2Ox OF INC DONE OF SIPS TRUE ANp COMPLETE AS SHOWN. ON BEFORE M[ PUMK41Y APPcAKm WAD 1R MO 70 MC ON IRE BAILS Or SAWACIORY LVDEMC 10 BE THE P[R59N(S) WHOSE NNE */ARC SUBSCRIBED 10 IRE NffM 16MM T AND ADNOKSO D To ME WA KjY71EMD,Y EOCtTED TIE SINE N HIMOV INOR WJMOR® TAPAOTY(IGSJ AND TINY BY HS/hWMR =WURQTJ ON THE IMIUM01T THE POSONA OR THE DNIBY CPI/ 110 AIF OF of WIOOI THE P060N(5) ARID, Ow= THE B02RIN0T. I COCI Y UNDER PCWTr OF PTAMRY UNDER THE TANS OF W =TIE OF t%nM% TV3 THE POK414 PARAAWYH * TRUE AND CORKER. NO= Hr KVQ NOTARY RUBES IN AND FOR SAID STATE W r PRIILIPAL PUCE OF DU$ NOS is N COINIY. (PAPIT K WO NT COMM=N O"=- u BO Dam DIMITY DOW TAX COLLECTOR'S CERTIFICATES 1 "DOW CERTIFY THAT ACCORD" TO TNC RECORDS OF THIS OFFICE AS OF THIS QQE THERE ARE NO URNS ACMST THE PROPIXIY SHOWN ON THE WIMN NO FOR UNPAD STATE COUNTY. MUNOPAL OR LOCH. TAXES OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS OOLLEGTEO AS TAXES. 0=1 TAXES OR SPECIAL AS9 SSMCK S COL CCIED AS TAMS NOW A LEN BUT NOT YET PAYABLE; NIHON ARE tMMATED TO BET THIS COMFICADOM CICLOCS ANY SUPPLEMENTAL ASSCS WTS NOT YET EXTENDED. DATED 2011. DON KENT. COUNTY TAX COLLECTOR Br DEPUTY SO" REPORTI A PRELDONARY SOLI REPORT WAS PREPARED BY LL OMN ANO ASSOCMT3:, NC. DATED 4/10 /03 AS REQUIRED BY MC HHON.IH AND SA'CTY CODE SIGNATURE OMISSIONSS PURSUANT TO THE PROVISIONS Or SECTON 6D4M OF THE SUBOMMON MAP ACT THE FOLLOWIND S10N1UR CS HAVE GCON OMIFIED: 1. SOUTHERN CAUFO FGA CAS CD~. A CORPORATON, AND SOUTHERN COUNTIES GAS COMPANY OF DOMME1 F=OROED APRIL � 1971 AS INSTRUMENT NO. 40M 40664 OR. wCID01FAL PUEro05CS PE7t 2. SOUMERN CAUFOIWA CAS COMPANY. A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION. HOLDER OF AN MOMENT FOR RPCLWES, CONDUITS. GOMMUIHiOIONS AND OTHER APPURTCNAM= PER DOCUMENT AECOROED JUNE 21 2007. RECORD. AS NO. 200-0406117 O.R. SAID CASEMENT CAN NOT DE L CRAW FROM THE S, WAY FOR UNOCRGRO U D ELECTRICAL SUPPLY SYSTEM AND HOLDER OF AN CASEMENT COMNROUTON SYS7 � DOCUMENT RECORDED OCTOBER 31 2007. AS INSMAIDIT NO. 2007 -000OM OWL 4. K NOMANWYS FOUR SEASON AT BTAUMONT COMNDNRY ASSOCKWK NG. A CM"KA NONPROFIT MUTUAL BENEFIT CORPORATION, HOLOCH OF MOLDER OF NON- OECLUSWC C*CICNTS FOR NCRESS. ECRCSS USE D M WTDWCE PLR DOCUMENT ACCDROCD MIL 2. 2004 AS INSTRUMENT LID. CA NOTARY ACKNQWLmGMENTi STATE OF C ANTY or ON RCGIE M( PIXm11MLY THE GANS OWNIED OF 501 FACIORY EVIDENCE 70 BE DIC PDL9 WM NMOSC NAM =) */ARE SU85CRBED 70 M Mnm�mom"M AID A3NONSTCO) To K TW KE/51HJIHCY EIEOURD INC SNE N HSAEA/MOR ,RIND = CWIOIY(BSI AND MR BY I AVVINOR 9DMIUIMEW ON M NS7AWCT THE OR TIE ORB( IRON - OF or IBOT VIE N7ODF1(S) PM Own) THE N611001DRY I COMFY UNDER Foom or P&AW UNDER M LOS OF THE SIAIC OF bIPDRNN TAT THE FOKONC PAAACANH IS TRUE AND CDR=. WITNESS W WAD; INDIAN RAMC N AND FOR SAD SIRE 1K PEON PLACE OF BITS KISS * N COOT ( NµQ W CO MISSDN Owls, WA6L. cICWTrmR LS 0101 0071V3 3J1 -2012 CITY ENGINEER'S STATEMENT, I HEREBY STATE THAT I NAVE EXAMINED THE WMIN NAP, THAT THE SUBDM9ON AS SHOWN HEREON IS SUBTEANIMLLY THE SAME AS B APPEARED ON THE TEM%TIVC MAP OF TRACT NO. 33006 BY THE BEWMOM CRY COUNCIL ON MARCH 10. 2011 AND ANY APPANED ALTERATIONS THCREOY: THAT ALL PROVISIONS OF THE LT SUBDIVISION MAP A AND OF TITLE 16 OF THE BEAUMONT MINCRPAL CODE APRICABIE AT TIC 71MC OF THE APPROVAL OF THE TEWATWE MAP MAW DON COMPUED WITH. THAT I AI SAIISFIED TINT THE MAP S TE0RM711.Y CORFCCT: THAT THE PLANS FOR THE ORN�. ORAHACC WORN. ANC SON= SUFFICR7IF TO PROTEGE ALL LOTS IN THE SUBDIVISION FROM FLOODS HAVE BEEN wR CNTS HAS nLm wIM�T�COMMMUN" D AND THAT THE SIRE HAVE SEEN OCCM AND APPIOYW. AND TINT ALL BIPROVCMCVYS HAVE 0EC4 COMPLETED N AOWRDAVCC YNTH THC APPROVED BANS OR THAT THC SUBDMOCR HAS ENTERED INTO AG R OICIF WITH TIC CRY OF BEAUMONT COVERING COMPLETION OF ALL IMPROWIDA ETS AND SPECIFYING THC TIME FOR CONWLETK IE T SAME AS MAY K RECURRED Cr THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DATED MARCH 15. 2011. MR CITY 6NCNFfR�CITY� DMMOM DATED: 2011. BY: OENNS Y. JANDA LS 03M BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL CERTIFICATE, I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS MAP WAS APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCx OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT ON THE DAY OF 2011. AND THAT THE OFYTR(S) OF 0012 N OEPC ON IEO HERE WERE NOT ACC PIED. MC CITY COUNIM NAY, HOWCVER. BY AT ANY Lam RATE, AND WITHOUT FURIHCR ACTION TM THE SU60MDM RESCND IS ACTION RAND ACCEPT THE FI%LOMNC OFDIVOf011N(=) AND wPNOVEMENTS FOR PUBLIC U. WHICH ACCEPTANCE SMALL BE RECORDED N MIL NKRSOE COUNTY THE FJSCHCNT(S) FOR =EWER PURPOSES WNW PRIVATE STREET LUIS 'G' THROUGH x. INCLUSIVE. AS MOWN ON THIS MAP. TR: FASWDIT(S) FOR INCRE55 AND EGRESS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND vnUrY MAUITFJANDf VEIHICIE PURPOSES OVER IRVINE PARR NORM (MDT -WI PETERS CANON PARK (MDT 1). SAXRACO OAKS PARK ( LOT 'I j. TNKCRS C RAE PNIX OUT 'A"). AND ENCHANTED PARR NORM (LOT 1C'). ME PWYAI£ STROU LOSS AS SHOWN ON THIS MAP. DATED: 2011. BY: CITY cum. CITY OF BEAUMONT. RMRSIOC COUNTY. CALIFORNIA Assff t 9 RNOS ARE BATED ON 111E EAST -MCST CENTER SECTION U NC or sCCDON 14, TOw4SHw 3 SOUTN, RANCE , 10SST. 3.1AM. AS SHORN BY MAP OF 7RACT NO, 33090 -3. ON FLE N OOOK 410 OF' MAPS PACES 10 TNAM94 93. INCLUSVE, RCCORDS OF RTVERUX COUNTY. STATE OF CAUFORMA. BONO NAM'56'K GR,WM /C SCALE ISM 40 0 40 EO 720 3 DATA TORE 1. ,80, TAD[f TK SI4Fm ts. WC 10 BIFC/0117A RADLUS LOCSN 1 (LOT DIED) 2r 2 176'(7'14' - 3 W33'Se 1206.00' 48.W I 1 $0 124.10• I t R3 4 N16'61't4 "I - 46.87' 9 t R3 5 [0'45'371 1211.00' 6 sever ID.m' 16.53• I R R3 A.i3•Itb 7 M'W'12: W.W. • 8 71'07'20' 39.00 42.ST N t R 40.24' M t TO 9 1421'715/' (RA9) - ,a 6.90' N t RT 21.00• I t AD 17 NOP4dOp'C - 113.72' M t IC 12 41'40.07' 500.00 381.11' 13 HW49'30'S - 21.30' U 01'0T2Y 573.0' Is 144'2.'381 - 10.23' I t IU 211.00' M t R2 18 1671]0'42' - 17 78.41.01• 20.10' 40.92' I t R 27.31• N t R2 18 NW46'15' - Is ?0'360711 - 40.0' M t 112 M.21 • I t RZ 20 !'311 - 05'. 8.00' M t R2 21 101'39'18'[ - 16.03' N t m IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. TRACT N0. 33096 -6 80NO A SUBDIIASTON OF A PORTION OF FRACTIONAL SECTION 14, TOVNSNIP 3 SOUTH. RANCE 1 VEST, SAN BFRNARDINO MERIDIAN, MORE PARTICULARLY A PORTION OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 32259 AS SHOVN BY A MAP ON FILE W BOOK 371 OF MAPS. PACES 22 1NROUGH 27 WCLUSIVE. AND A PORTION OF LOTS 73, Y^ AND 'F' OF TRACT NO, 33OY6 -4 AS 5110/101 BY MAP ON FILE W BOOK 422 OF MAPS. PACES 23 THRC()CH 32. WCIUSVEIN THE OFFICE OF THE ODWTY RECORDER OF SAID RIVERSIDE OOLR4TY. 7R, T' LOO, m0 TAM -LC.L SB&G• INC. MARISSA CROWSHER, P.LS 6152 �. 1. 0M1 nK I[r1 RA3Tie 1i1C M-0 11110' r01 M. 40 t M. 0001 t.s, 40C I01 M. M. 04, IL^ o.s'. AcmTm a r. v4 mL. TR. NO. 31521 2 KOM a W OIL. E va m v4. a ' �O; w =•a., RIr. M8 398 /i -5 U. TA. It III. _ 4f'7D'4671iOa�r (317}.m'M) Si L3'7AA :1 me an BMW JAT B' 10r'C' Mrd r NXZ 40r C- for A- i111213141s1617 1819jlo1JJ; 27 28 T9 JD J1 \ . LAT'N, AflDfS PAW - 1-.1�j� `\ J2 33 34 35 56 37 ;V 29 ) ,�- r--%- �gTAJt B' TIMM ?AIX ROG1T •Se y i 28 r 30 32 1 112 14 a2a,J In I{-- -,04 e I 27 31 3T -b I 1 !3 26 Z 24 21 22 21 u J9 2b ,� 1 32 76 0 I14 - 12 ' ~°. 40 9J U-.Z y �. 33 3S_O M I- - 11 .. 15 16 17 18 IS ?0 41 2_t 4 <J H 321 34 I J6 N1r3.•mti to 42 2 23 0 1 1 35 ' Y -1 1 3tA, 1 for r y�-�- 33 � t V 7� (-IZ �-I ' - 36 `1 lJT �• 3r.TOrAPiN CANITN.ARx 43 c I 1 Y 52 51 IA• r A C 21 1 37 31 20 J v 38 3010 ¢�' \�J! S3 30 '� a q 1 19 %\ Y 79 � \ ZJ 5 Y 49 / \ 40 / \ \\ / 4 34 'l'jDx 107 A II 1� \ / 28 �\�`. 21 / o. 49 \e 17 \\ 4% <T >�, \`(2T /a` .•!'S' 'T ? 'SS ` 16 / 42 % / ^ 24 ,cd'� \21'9\ r,IL G 2 J ® 47 43 16 -� OE1 y 14 �� Reti'i,A , i Q 6 71 ` LOT 'A" 46 \/ 46 �^2 \ N I \\ 9J/ 8 i 7 117 2 5 a 128 ?� Ile !29 I IS V 1 Tar _ 30 ~i ( 119 H ry 7 /iD, LCC. TAGS l M AAFm LS sw' A f . MUt rOt 7,R. NO. I / 33096 -1 MG _412/46 -58 rj 4 ` 9Z 1334110' 1 58 111 57 d/v ``, 'N \ 1 a ' \ 1. ,80, TAD[f TK SI4Fm ts. WC 3 �6+�p•g5 � fi \I 0 2r /\\ I 5130'Ntrt corn - \ \ \ aw � DETAIL "C" Tar 016.E , O .� 1? 1J 12 r• -• =J.' N f b. M 13.13 9 / -.. L - �Y� Q ``'I�nFiisL DETAIL t0r n- t joiroi ., ♦ NR l6xwE INDICATES SHEET NAM 2 OF Mm YAP NOT 70 SCAT[ : I. N - WAS= 2. hY- CRDIATm Ma t. M - W01IO. 315712, K0.:00" S. 10 - D1AAT Nk 330040. Kb -I- 6. C - 711[ M. SLF3. N.O..n/IO.OT. 7. M - TAU 00. 3WW4, N4. 42%ft 3 . L (RIO) IEM03 MIR& KA06 f. ALL 7100005 31011 a 5c 10L S[7 1D111M 0C YTA11 /1101 NE /77S71MQ O OlIC4000S M OL 0717 16 MT CIRO 1C46o83 AT WA LOr Cava 1R 1• IC1 ILK TA® 1-7, t,DT. AT NCa UR WRM KC'S. M'S AM ONO art its 1T A tIAO. TM( No boil W30 STA0m'L.S. 0137' IN w TV OF aria 0t 71136S3N3 Mwx= 11..3 XT Aw 00HCL 0m SOm, nN TIM 1 yr o=1 DI NAPO %.S 612T U AWWT, R,4L IL • OD- FM Loam a 6010 RO ROVIDOM R o coca Y WN mC Toom t.L sw' A SnN: W WQ FA1rm 'Li sw' at LW. TACK Al[) W 73. 3w TO K YT T0111tKT W. 5704 -A. KL 431JS47, H. Dom Y ININ PVC 9101 nN: TAam L; 61W a SnK NO WCA STAN'm u 31W a I.W TACK AID wC *L . Sw' A IC = FQ ANX M. 3IOm0. LL'MIX1103. v. w ODd= , Ilr OWS W =WW LS. 50•. 10 K 1117 6CL MCI. W. 3M4. M.I. 40 /Aq. 16.0 oo m 1 yr 41215 W srwm i.i 1134', TD K IR RN TINT. w 3001610. M 1., M mum "4160 XT not LO[ UKs blT 170TATE 3TA=, FOR. LOT ID. f MIN mE V17H TR NO.32259 1. ,80, TAD[f TK SI4Fm ts. WC KWIC RAC SHNU MB 371/22 -27 IN 6NN O "" RX 1.1. 440' R3 N. a. ; 1C. RlON. M /SLOE. ICC07 a a mt.E 0 V5.V4. N7f 31'431 ZC w. T3L. L/r. I 5130'Ntrt / � `-.HAS •h'?fe - Arf•20k1' - •.oL•s• „• 0wi Oi•4r61�fiq -• =J.' N f b. M 13.13 9 / -.. 2.01.71 �A,O•tlIN - �Y� Q '�6 t0r n- t � I 3309 e 'A" 'r DETAIL for r 10 a.. E=•w I �7it7R.•'.TFli3a °CB"1�ba±'k it §aRSti{kaa6k b A3Rn ^A 'r iiii69ARR 4R'02° ^='t444 eaga............l.. ei$setli'slet i AeaSRA�I Plum 9� � A�13J 8 a a :< b6k: � ?F ?= ��+l+gepe�rbc��eba3�f�r:yq; A'FaR Vj1PRARAFYB `iIF bq 0 gW A iAaaRasaaaa§i3R§bI°ba�a�sfiee�a a ® 74RgRgq l:V7ilFO!lRRpaltAR6A719:7Bi4 ,gel•�t�gaiqebe'siqy•.7qq's�}ea „x "sige"bbga� Rtl•979MVEORAARY P IR of=44i -i A oAAp Ag?A mpg' sRAl68909 l®98$9gRf0 $19 ak�A*_•aa' kSY�kallAhbelk "hbaesibr3a §� TlWthAbl b's wasaka RSRaa §ae Raga � �•.... ,...•.ft�auaSRCRRR�ppxARRAggApp sQ yliZ TSIS S Z o�� o M o �:Z va f b < g 'ff � f x�� J tS F d 4J � \` €f � 9 a a h q MR , l ft'rrPl K M Qb 4 r ZOO N �0'j 'Q ;t� x•1.11 6 € ��' �'rS A 3rY,t /abrJ b•4av K•a -1� m¢7 skosrsr arnar 3 ' "'10' "" 1 cal., - 'eo,wcrr•1 .q•It+•, • «.fcvrr J MIA ■ MIll J '3r &! •0 'a'r� (an t yT ,.bl 1 •tr. rr, a raa � .04•RI at k'q 1 k'h i rI M+•, MiP, oo� a �l •n { ! tai �- / R Or !_ 7ri .tanf�.lo,n.nw 'a'% S 31YA(� ® .• 0• J07 Q (Li7dl .0 m t,t1.It,YL1 p l o.„ w F^"�q•N A s- AMON land ustNras� � a , .a'R '1 _ 1. - IttOl anw ,N•ft .aa .a�n ' f h M P j-. 7. • • 6 €f � 9 a a h E A 6 € h E A .n at L7' ¢A` ��1� }p4i� �ll'�W! a/ .ri•. .a7n tT `.00a •rt VI ( , .0 K 41 w. . r ,tt•u •:r ® 2, O y + I A s o � ue.s IS g �.A.tC. MR.yp•t 1 lwlycr n tt°i t' ° l i 10 No.- woo -10I / NOS \ \ \ eely* / •4 � �o� ;��� s� �E�q � � • g Q t?� s: o 0 o ® e o ar sEET 4 CP 5 S%MS f,V THE GTY OF BEAUAffklT, COUNTY OF AIVERSIDE, STATE Of CAUff)FLylA. TRACT N0. 33096 -6 0314 A 93M" OF A PMTIW OF FRACDORIl MM 11, TO3H91P 3 SO77R RAVCF T NEST, SAY BW WtDWO R"AV, 40RE PAQWMAY A PCRnW OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 37254 AS S M BY A YAP ON FIE IN BOUC 371 OF YAP; PACES 27 TH M 27 MV511L APO A PORCON OF LOTS 73, 'O' AND 'f' OF MICt Na 33046 -1 AS SHOW BY YAP ON FIE IN BOO[ 172 OF YAPS PAILS 75 THRUH3t 3L NCLMV H DiE MIM OF AE CUM RECMM OF UV MUM COATY. IEtlM3 AR ►s reUM, -- — 56100, INC- 4AAISSA CROWINFA, P.LS 6152 0 11VIC11L!!A [A4JDR IDt PUM MO tDfa tat KWC OvTTY Mo N1UN UUMVa 19.10E RRRAY 16DIC 13 -MM to DE Crn D wwa. t! r • CILIA DYE if 6 ® YOI rAYlD1T �Iu1ED IOQN To nC cm n n - Ifr u. ® CtOAIIIA ApM ICCR( � V1� u° 28 1 rOrA' N•C — 11.01• r: H © 3lA UmOY .S MMA I s.a' 27 3 ) fYU'tY 05.00' W", 97.00' s3.u' 9.40• MAO' wnmC us a7/L qR[H! a frua or 1DVRON OUfaN1A W O1PAW r I 1 W!!'9' S7.W' wA3• MO SmMON MMMS 90 PAPAW rq o6 "m Po. K69. OA. B ® ®a17gr1n1l ! —`f i ° i+�/ / 8 / INS'P'3Pr — I W' 31:42. Q0 DDIUI6 AT LIMIT Wt O3C1[1OC 000oYN:tllla SYStm f I / i+ R i 1 pw'ro 2mi. 0' YH'9'tl•C — .• w.es' W. NA 1NIMM 4 rxmt w u�A PNO1 r I / 10 16'02'02' 105.00• 110MAYSAlarm111M(MUM FMP96S,t7M, 'S r L1N °/ FA CR� It 17 IW'n•t1Y EAU) 1.9' D IH NO IWRIOWa fil"II a rAVM Ir H."#VaWS HAWi A4 WA3r#, Iri qR 9s1AlDR q. 1{N`!7• -7 I . — / yS P^• 1! t5 q 1FNA W'N•73• n.W w 100.00' 9'N'w' 33.4• 40.05' 31.95' D03Ct47 A RIVATC UMM Pa DWMX 1VNffi �MD H ". f.A / 17 18 16'30'9' 300.40' gOV011 /{.N• 4I.w �(�j� �• ° / H 7o !1 300.40' "it It x3.40' w71'n' D7. W' L.n' 30.16' SIX 9027 t rR Tit POn 100. NM.0043 POTR, Wit Q f.YIDfS. IP3o1R1 tOloa AV aEn arA. p ty 31;f / V► n 3s 31 H1dlYNt — 100'61'°7'[ Io0'01'orC aces• 1.11' F0. 1' M PIK 7.11705 III N' "A I.$. 11173.14. DAR /PS'. 0505702 u r. 44 M. LOT C 12 7! DETAIL six& 1 TRAGT No, 71521 -2 MD. &V / i—a 7q•7D'45Y /302.02' Y! H, JU a 00'10'31 19.40' n.tt' 9 16'11'S' 1tl40' w.s1' a 00'0011' M3.95' n 00'3o'00' IOO.W' 30 NY3'tr 61.00• 1#.71' 11 mro?,u r — 31.u' 32 17.3111' 33 a'w IY 11AO' n.• 31 b'Or'w' 373.0• 33.1' A Im'a A.7Y hq A e LOT D 65 n n, a a. I.DIts7T• x q.p�S Amt .102.x' or Tf p�$' fivalrrunl A G 0 Z ! f 62 3!'� I MIINIM Nlt� 10 0 40 00 120 m S t! r • + if 6 iD i n n - Ifr u. u° ARCM pAp i Jr Sff OffAIG ABO�� 12 o B tai 16 ' IT Z p�p 1f Rq tf 8 8 is z is s i f! i0 / / / / 20 12 7! DETAIL six& 1 TRAGT No, 71521 -2 MD. &V / i—a 7q•7D'45Y /302.02' Y! H, JU a 00'10'31 19.40' n.tt' 9 16'11'S' 1tl40' w.s1' a 00'0011' M3.95' n 00'3o'00' IOO.W' 30 NY3'tr 61.00• 1#.71' 11 mro?,u r — 31.u' 32 17.3111' 33 a'w IY 11AO' n.• 31 b'Or'w' 373.0• 33.1' A Im'a A.7Y hq A e LOT D 65 n n, a a. I.DIts7T• x q.p�S Amt .102.x' or Tf p�$' fivalrrunl A G 0 Z ! f 62 3!'� I MIINIM Nlt� 10 0 40 00 120 m S fa A AIrATC rAU1%4 IfA PADC1q R2PoftS my . IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CAUFORNIA, 9EET S cr 6 ws .w 20'45'0Y H.t0' 35.20.12' /f.OD' TRACT N0. 33096 -6 BONG A S)MV9OX CF A PORBCN OF FEACSXHAL SECBON 14. T0Mi5HP 3 SO IK RA4OE 1 SESY. $AY BWI1.Ii11701FJCOA'C YOPE PA4ilUAARLY A PORTIM 0f LOT 3 Cr 24A IIIL 32139 AS "M4 BY A YAP CN RE N BOOK 321 Or YAPS:. PAOFS 22 Oi Or Or LOTS LOTS r ww 22 MO KJSIVL A40 A PMiDM 73, 'C• AND Y a 11yACT X0. AS 9{OMI 8Y YAP ON RE H BOOK i12 0 YAPS, PASTS 23 IIRp30i JA N404KJN s [O2{Mr. OF LAerks O: aol ISIS OISICE a T1E COUfI'/ KcaF FR Or S1JD P114t9OE COIHiY. ID PDICATa N OW" IMDO 1NO MM rut AHIC SO&O, INC. NAPJSSA CRQwniW, P.LS. 6132 ria" R No m1"N m ,=nr roam IIXRftS IlcudD, \ • +_ CF IUM 5!301 H310R t[DIaRP IL®1 w TK tiff afA uu ® M+4JCau Arens intro © OOICAW N EUDC4 f01 PP INM NO PCBODL 1 w•11'b• IC6.co- tiv, RFFM NRVA O1"M CA.MOMA 93 CWAVr t 20'12'37• .t0• 12.00' NO SVIHM COMICT CAS OSPAN FM 160M21X M. 3 Ro'3f'Itt �MD) 21.20' 4x37. O.L Cmvw KW1174) 4 - i•5S'611 31. so- POiM1a M 2Ai)Off FIR 01MICa ND MMJQUlwl 3 n34•f2 20.00' 32.45• / 1110,30 a'C w., srrm Fit= d !not w $"m milvolk a1" Co. ru 1•s1RAW )D, aura om. T 03.45.11• ul.ao• 4011' { 61•ao•W lao.ol' w.a' 1 1 q'a•W 'w 1.37' © u A IOHMlmrE WWII lD6S, TV w 03•OW 2o.aD' R." WE A rl201 W. 1{C feD tutrlpwa RNda d 11145 a A. 1011W6N•s W MR SUS24 At PAW(F. Ila RX 94?KW9 b. 2z"143411. N. n a'45.11• Jm.ro' w.®• 12 00.03.03• , OD: 3.13' w a'a'W M:a.w w.w' T0. LEAD, iAOC k IM. SfA2FTD 14 W'a'31' 452 fa A AIrATC rAU1%4 IfA PADC1q R2PoftS my . 1{ f{ .w 20'45'0Y H.t0' 35.20.12' /f.OD' 2.P4 37.42' 3).{2' L.S, $134 Pc B4OC Or PALX ppl fp. R1m1. y Eor r z) a 1 o. {P3AC. so1AA.MR3RA SLt sm 2 CIA 1YRa11r W, RRA1Dr'6 Ida. YSis 17 to 11 H•JI'JY' 14.03{• w'2s M i 03•!{•11' oww' 42.56' 4.52• A.w• r � \ • +_ / Q MOM, KUVN tbflAi NO Pm WD. � � I � g I TRACT HD. 211b21 -2 MS. 399 / 7-8 A 50' R rD. 1• PYR PPE ltd 1 � �SppY � 33 RAmc Rsc 2wsm ts, tla•IFRSI,AyIYjLLSL � F1) A" 1 psf. -R'% �LOi ACNIm AS 4�....,� 4ZI l , � 2045'S WS.H' 1.03.. A.tr. I 701s, i % I LOT C c 521.03• / ' T LOT C tOT D Z 1 0.331 AC, •► e � R 33 J! JJ J6 k � In 4 / ) y 1BONo�gi L !T (fAlPA2 mrn) L01 K'�, !E, V g� \ t � / •b, / J8 A© �s ^ J9 24 23 11 21 Ilk 1 B A _ �y1.1vY r a Yil•41'a• r 4w.w' p +3 s 40 .u' a.w' n.w• � z M 'WW H•C 7 S tr g !6 t9 m s riW� FAA f7 _•'! � cSi Rl ��� � y1•rr� p��ggQu, QbW PAW (FRIVAIr Z) i1 M_ar i 9i'R is g O I r 62 51 D + 1104 SEE 42 tllk `v A 44 SHEET a •rMt Mltf 0 80 270 t 1 jr y Eor r z) a 1 o. {P3AC. j 4 r� 4 � R r � 2 . Ib w4•a•1rr � �� � � I � g z Ytk 2 A 50' R 1 � �SppY � 33 r .M' H.P p• � F1) A" 1 psf. -R'% �LOi 4ZI l , tllk `v A 44 SHEET a •rMt Mltf 0 80 270 t Rev. 02/10/09 AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE SECURITY FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT MAP OR PARCEL MAP OR PLOT PLAN (Tract Map/Parcel Map/Plot Plan No. THIS SECURITY AGREEMENT is made and effective this day of , 20 , by and between the CITY OF BEAUMONT ( "CITY ") and K. l-1 ov na n tat. „'s Fot., r S.ea.sons aF SCAAUWon+F u.-C- ( "DEVELOPER "). RECITALS A. DEVELOPER has applied to the CITY for permission to develop certain real property, pursuant to Tr &c-+ K,, No. 33cR6-Co ( "Map "). DEVELOPER has also asked the CITY to accept the dedication of the street or streets and other proposed public rights -of -way, parks and recreation facilities, and easements as depicted on the Map and to otherwise approve the Map so that it may be recorded as required by law; and B. The CITY requires, as a condition precedent to the acceptance and approval of the Map and the dedication of the public rights -of -way and easements depicted thereon, that such rights -of -way be improved and certified as completed by the CITY Public Works Director with (for example) grading, paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street lights, stormdrains, sanitary sewers and appurtenances thereto, street name signs, survey monuments, electrical and telecommunications, water pipes, water mains, fire hydrants and appurtenances thereto, and landscaping (collectively, "Improvements "); and C. The Improvements have not yet been certified as completed and it is the purpose of this Security Agreement to set forth the terms and conditions by which the DEVELOPER shall guarantee that such Improvements shall be constructed and completed within the time set forth herein. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the acceptance of the DEVELOPER's offer of dedication and the approval of the Map for filing and recording as provided and required by law, the CITY and the DEVELOPER hereby agree as follows: 1. Provision of Improvements. DEVELOPER shall provide, at the DEVELOPER's sole cost and expense, all necessary labor and materials to complete the construction of the Improvements depicted on the Map and described in the conditions of approval of the Map within one (1) year of the date of this Security Agreement. Construction of the Improvements must be certified as complete by the CITY prior to the issuance of the first final inspection permit for residential projects or occupancy permit for commercial and industrial projects, unless otherwise approved by the CITY. 2. Inspection by the CITY. The CITY shall inspect, at the DEVELOPER's sole cost and expense, all of the work, labor and materials performed and provided by the DEVELOPER in connection with the Improvements. 3. Compliance with Plans and Specifications. The Improvements shall be constructed and installed in strict accordance with the CITY - approved plans and specifications as required by the CITY. 4. Security for Performance. Concurrently with the execution of this Security Agreement by DEVELOPER, DEVELOPER shall deliver to the CITY an irrevocable letter of credit or a performance and warranty bond or bonds issued by a corporate surety (or other security as authorized by Government Code, Section 66499) in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A ", in an amount that is not less than 100% of the total estimated cost of the Improvements and any warranty therefor. The performance and warranty bond shall be issued by an "admitted" corporate surety insurer authorized to do business in the State of California and the surety insurer shall have an A.M. Best rating of at least "A:X ". The surety insurer shall have assets exceeding its liabilities in the amount equal to or in excess of the amount of the bond, and the bond shall not be in excess of 10% of the surety insurer's assets. The security or bond for the warranty shall insure against any and all defects in the Improvements for a period of not less than one full year after the date of the first final inspection certifying completion of the Improvements thereof by the CITY. The bond shall be duly executed and shall meet all the requirements of Section 995.660 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The irrevocable letter of credit or bond shall remain in full force and effect and /or renewed until such time as the Improvements are certified as being completed by the CITY. 5. Security for Laborers and Materialmen. The DEVELOPER shall also provide an irrevocable letter of credit or a bond issued by a corporate surety for the security of laborers and materialmen, which bond or bonds shall be in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and made a part hereof. The amount of the bond(s) shall be no less than 100% of the total estimated amount needed to secure payment to the contractor, to the subcontractors, and to the persons furnishing labor, materials, or equipment to them for the Improvements. The laborers and materialmen bond shall be provided by an "admitted" corporate surety insurer authorized to transact surety insurance in the State of California with an A.M. Best rating of "AX', and with assets exceeding its liabilities in the amount equal to or in excess of the amount of the bond, and the bond shall not be in excess of 10% of the surety insurer's assets. The bond shall be duly executed and shall meet all the requirements of Section 995.660 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The irrevocable letter of credit or bond shall remain in full force and effect and /or renewed until such time as the Improvements are certified as being completed by the CITY. 6. General Liability and Worker's Compensation Insurance. The DEVELOPER shall, before commencing any work, obtain commercial general liability insurance (primary) of not less than $2,000,000.00 per occurrence for all coverages and $2,000,000.00 general aggregate. The CITY and its employees and agents shall be added as additional insureds. Coverage shall apply on a primary non - contributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self - insurance, primary or excess, available to the CITY or any employee or agent of the CITY. Coverage shall not be limited to the vicarious liability or supervisory role of any additional 2 insured. Coverage shall contain no contractors' limitation endorsement. There shall be no endorsement or modification limiting the scope of coverage for liability arising from pollution, explosion, collapse, underground property damage or employment - related practices. Such insurance shall not prohibit the DEVELOPER, and its employees or agents, from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss. The DEVELOPER waives its right of subrogation against the CITY. Unless otherwise approved by the CITY, the DEVELOPER's insurance shall be written by insurers authorized to do business in the State of California and with a minimum A.M. Best rating of "AX" Self- insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance specifications. The DEVELOPER agrees to require all contractors, subcontractors and other parties hired for the Improvements to purchase and maintain insurance of the types specified herein, naming as additional insureds all of the parties to this Security Agreement. The DEVELOPER shall, before commencing any work, obtain Worker's Compensation Insurance in an amount required by law and, failing to do so, the CITY may procure such insurance at the cost of the DEVELOPER. 7. Indemnification. Notwithstanding the provisions of Government Code, Section 66474.9 or any other statutes of similar import, and to the full extent permitted by law, the DEVELOPER shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the CITY, its employees, agents, officials and attorneys, from and against any liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind or nature, whether actual, alleged or threatened, actual attorneys' fees, court costs, interest, expert witness fees and any other costs or expenses of any kind whatsoever, without restriction or limitation, incurred in relation to, as a consequence of, or arising out of or in any way attributable actually, allegedly or impliedly, in whole or in part, to the Map, the Improvements, this Agreement, or any matter related to the same. 8. Procedure for Release of Security. The security furnished by the DEVELOPER shall be released in whole or in part in the following manner: a. Security shall be released upon final completion and acceptance of the Improvements by the CITY Council. If the security furnished by the DEVELOPER is a documentary evidence of security, such as a surety bond or an irrevocable letter of credit, the CITY shall release the documentary evidence and return the original to the Surety upon final completion and acceptance of the Improvements by the CITY Council. In the event the CITY is unable to return the original documentary evidence to the Surety, the security shall be released by written notice sent by certified mail to the DEVELOPER and to the Surety within 30 days of the acceptance of the Improvements. The written notice shall contain a statement that the work for which security was furnished has been completed and accepted, a description of the Improvements, and the notarized signature of an authorized CITY official. b. At such time as the DEVELOPER believes that the work for which the security was required is complete and makes payment of a partial exoneration fee of $350 to the CITY, the DEVELOPER shall notify the CITY in writing of the completed work, including a list of work completed. Upon receipt of the written notice, the CITY shall have 45 days to review and comment on or certify the completion of the Improvements. 3 If the CITY does not agree that all work has been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications for the Improvements, it shall supply the DEVELOPER a list of all remaining work to be completed. C. Within 45 days of receipt of the CITY's list of remaining work, the DEVELOPER may then provide cost estimates for all remaining work for review and approval by the CITY. d. Upon receipt of the cost estimates, the CITY shall then have 45 days to review, comment, and certify, modify or disapprove those cost estimates. The CITY shall not be required to engage in this process of partial release more than once between the start of work and the completion and acceptance of all work. e. If the CITY approves the cost estimate, the CITY shall release all performance security except for security in an amount up to 200% of the cost estimate of the remaining work; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, such partial release shall occur only when the cost estimate of the remaining work does not exceed 20% of the total original performance security. Substitute bonds or other security may be used as a replacement for the performance security, subject to the prior written approval of the CITY. A reduction in performance security is not, and shall not be deemed to be, an acceptance by the CITY of the completed Improvements, and the risk of loss or damage to the Improvements and the obligation to maintain the Improvements shall remain the sole responsibility of the DEVELOPER until all required Improvements have been accepted for maintenance by the CITY Council and all other required Improvements have been certified by the CITY as fully completed in accordance with the plans and specifications for the Improvements. f. The DEVELOPER shall complete the works of Improvement until all remaining items are certified as complete by the CITY. Upon completion of the Improvements, the DEVELOPER shall be notified in writing by the CITY within 45 days and, within 45 days of the date of the CITY's notice, the release of any remaining performance security shall be made within 60 days of the recording of the Notice of Completion and acceptance of the Improvements for maintenance by the CITY Council. 9. Procedure for Release of Payment Security. Security securing the payment to the contractor, his or her subcontractors and persons furnishing labor, materials or equipment shall, after passage of the time within which mechanic's liens and stop notices are required to be recorded and after acceptance of the Improvements, be reduced to an amount equal to the total claimed by all claimants for whom mechanic's liens and stop notices have been recorded and notice thereof given in writing to the CITY, and if no claims have been recorded, the security shall be released in full. 10. Security for One -Year Warranty Period. The release procedures described in paragraphs 8 and 9 above shall not apply to any required guarantee and warranty period nor to the amount of the security deemed necessary by the CITY for the guarantee and warranty period nor to costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 4 11. Binding Effect. This Security Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their legal representatives and their successors and assigns. 12. Authority to Execute. The DEVELOPER hereby warrants and represents to the CITY that the individual signing this Security Agreement on behalf of the DEVELOPER is vested with the unconditional authority to do so pursuant to, and in accordance with, all applicable legal requirements, and has the authority bind the DEVELOPER hereto. 13. No Assiznment. The DEVELOPER may not assign this Security Agreement or any part thereof, to another without the prior written consent of the CITY. 14. Attorneys' Fees. In the event of legal action to enforce or interpret this Agreement or any of its provisions, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to any other form of relief, to recover its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit. 15. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but which together shall constitute a single agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the date first above written. CITY OF BEAUMONT By Mayor DEVELOPER: IC• 1{oyr►ava,av�s Four StRiOKS cL4- 5e&L4_rKaY%41 LAC' ay ; K. Huv►tia►a.ia w CC.—eOA.4AeS OF Cali 60 r vita., I KC, I'm M� +inorize� Ay By Title: Vol of- EXHIBITI "A" PERFORMANCE BOND WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Beaumont, State of California, and (hereinafter designated as "Principal ") have entered into an agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated public improvements, which agreement, dated , 20 , and identified as project , is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required under the terms of the said agreement to furnish a bond for the faithful performance of said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Principal and , as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Beaumont (hereinafter called "City "), in the penal sum of dollars ($ ) lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. The condition of this obligation is such that if the Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and provisions in the said agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City, its officers, agents and employees as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. As part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by the City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment therein rendered. The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work or to the specifications. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 20 PRINCIPAL: SURETY: i C Title Title EXHIBIT "B" BOND FOR SECURITY OF LABORERS AND MATERIALMEN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Beaumont, State of California, and (hereafter designated as "the Principal ") have entered into an agreement whereby the Principal agrees to install and complete certain designed public improvements, which agreement, dated , 20 , and identified as project , is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, under the terms of the said agreement, the Principal is required before entering upon the performance of the work, to file a good and sufficient payment bond with the City of Beaumont to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California. NOW, THEREFORE, the Principal and the undersigned as corporate surety, are held firmly bound unto the City of Beaumont and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen, and other persons employed in the performance of the said agreement and referred to in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code in the sum of dollars ($ ), for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to this work or labor, that the Surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount hereinabove set forth, and also in case suit is brought upon this bond, will pay, in addition to the face amount thereof, costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by the City in successfully enforcing this obligation, to be awarded and fixed by the court, and to be taxed as costs and to be included in the judgment therein rendered. It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies, and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. Should the condition of this bond be fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void, otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the agreement or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any manner affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension, alteration, or addition. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 20 PRINCIPAL: SURETY: Title Title Rev. 02/10/09 AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE SECURITY FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT MAP OR PARCEL MAP OR PLOT PLAN (Tract Map/Parcel Map/Plot Plan No. THIS SECURITY AGREEMENT is made and effective this day of , 20 , by and between the CITY OF BEAUMONT ( "CITY ") and K. 4 4D V K4*Li& 4- 's F6 we Seasor+s a+ aeaU✓wovs4 L4C ( "DEVELOPER "). RECITALS A. DEVELOPER has applied to the CITY for permission to develop certain real property, pursuant to %ac+ tits r No. 33d14,-(. ( "Map "). DEVELOPER has also asked the CITY to accept the dedication of the street or streets and other proposed public rights -of -way, parks and recreation facilities, and easements as depicted on the Map and to otherwise approve the Map so that it may be recorded as required by law; and B. The CITY requires, as a condition precedent to the acceptance and approval of the Map and the dedication of the public rights -of -way and easements depicted thereon, that such rights -of -way be improved and certified as completed by the CITY Public Works Director with (for example) grading, paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street lights, stormdrains, sanitary sewers and appurtenances thereto, street name signs, survey monuments, electrical and telecommunications, water pipes, water mains, fire hydrants and appurtenances thereto, and landscaping (collectively, "Improvements "); and C. The Improvements have not yet been certified as completed and it is the purpose of this Security Agreement to set forth the terms and conditions by which the DEVELOPER shall guarantee that such Improvements shall be constructed and completed within the time set forth herein. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the acceptance of the DEVELOPER's offer of dedication and the approval of the Map for filing and recording as provided and required by law, the CITY and the DEVELOPER hereby agree as follows: 1. Provision of Improvements. DEVELOPER shall provide, at the DEVELOPER's sole cost and expense, all necessary labor and materials to complete the construction of the Improvements depicted on the Map and described in the conditions of approval of the Map within one (1) year of the date of this Security Agreement. Construction of the Improvements must be certified as complete by the CITY prior to the issuance of the first final inspection permit for residential projects or occupancy permit for commercial and industrial projects, unless otherwise approved by the CITY. 2. Inspection by the CITY. The CITY shall inspect, at the DEVELOPER's sole cost and expense, all of the work, labor and materials performed and provided by the DEVELOPER in connection with the Improvements. 3. Compliance with Plans and Specifications. The Improvements shall be constructed and installed in strict accordance with the CITY - approved plans and specifications as required by the CITY. 4. Security for Performance. Concurrently with the execution of this Security Agreement by DEVELOPER, DEVELOPER shall deliver to the CITY an irrevocable letter of credit or a performance and warranty bond or bonds issued by a corporate surety (or other security as authorized by Government Code, Section 66499) in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A ", in an amount that is not less than 100% of the total estimated cost of the Improvements and any warranty therefor. The performance and warranty bond shall be issued by an "admitted" corporate surety insurer authorized to do business in the State of California and the surety insurer shall have an A.M. Best rating of at least "A:X ". The surety insurer shall have assets exceeding its liabilities in the amount equal to or in excess of the amount of the bond, and the bond shall not be in excess of 10% of the surety insurer's assets. The security or bond for the warranty shall insure against any and all defects in the Improvements for a period of not less than one full year after the date of the first final inspection certifying completion of the Improvements thereof by the CITY. The bond shall be duly executed and shall meet all the requirements of Section 995.660 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The irrevocable letter of credit or bond shall remain in full force and effect and /or renewed until such time as the Improvements are certified as being completed by the CITY. 5. Security for Laborers and Materialmen. The DEVELOPER shall also provide an irrevocable letter of credit or a bond issued by a corporate surety for the security of laborers and materialmen, which bond or bonds shall be in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and made a part hereof. The amount of the bond(s) shall be no less than 100% of the total estimated amount needed to secure payment to the contractor, to the subcontractors, and to the persons furnishing labor, materials, or equipment to them for the Improvements. The laborers and materialmen bond shall be provided by an "admitted" corporate surety insurer authorized to transact surety insurance in the State of California with an A.M. Best rating of "AX', and with assets exceeding its liabilities in the amount equal to or in excess of the amount of the bond, and the bond shall not be in excess of 10% of the surety insurer's assets. The bond shall be duly executed and shall meet all the requirements of Section 995.660 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The irrevocable letter of credit or bond shall remain in full force and effect and /or renewed until such time as the Improvements are certified as being completed by the CITY. 6. General Liability and Worker's Compensation Insurance. The DEVELOPER shall, before commencing any work, obtain commercial general liability insurance (primary) of not less than $2,000,000.00 per occurrence for all coverages and $2,000,000.00 general aggregate. The CITY and its employees and agents shall be added as additional insureds. Coverage shall apply on a primary non - contributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self - insurance, primary or excess, available to the CITY or any employee or agent of the CITY. Coverage shall not be limited to the vicarious liability or supervisory role of any additional 2 insured. Coverage shall contain no contractors' limitation endorsement. There shall be no endorsement or modification limiting the scope of coverage for liability arising from pollution, explosion, collapse, underground property damage or employment- related practices. Such insurance shall not prohibit the DEVELOPER, and its employees or agents, from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss. The DEVELOPER waives its right of subrogation against the CITY. Unless otherwise approved by the CITY, the DEVELOPER's insurance shall be written by insurers authorized to do business in the State of California and with a minimum A.M. Best rating of "AX" Self - insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance specifications. The DEVELOPER agrees to require all contractors, subcontractors and other parties hired for the Improvements to purchase and maintain insurance of the types specified herein, naming as additional insureds all of the parties to this Security Agreement. The DEVELOPER shall, before commencing any work, obtain Worker's Compensation Insurance in an amount required by law and, failing to do so, the CITY may procure such insurance at the cost of the DEVELOPER. 7. Indemnification. Notwithstanding the provisions of Government Code, Section 66474.9 or any other statutes of similar import, and to the full extent permitted by law, the DEVELOPER shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the CITY, its employees, agents, officials and attorneys, from and against any liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind or nature, whether actual, alleged or threatened, actual attorneys' fees, court costs, interest, expert witness fees and any other costs or expenses of any kind whatsoever, without restriction or limitation, incurred in relation to, as a consequence of, or arising out of or in any way attributable actually, allegedly or impliedly, in whole or in part, to the Map, the Improvements, this Agreement, or any matter related to the same. 8. Procedure for Release of Security. The security furnished by the DEVELOPER shall be released in whole or in part in the following manner: a. Security shall be released upon final completion and acceptance of the Improvements by the CITY Council. If the security furnished by the DEVELOPER is a documentary evidence of security, such as a surety bond or an irrevocable letter of credit, the CITY shall release the documentary evidence and return the original to the Surety upon final completion and acceptance of the Improvements by the CITY Council. In the event the CITY is unable to return the original documentary evidence to the Surety, the security shall be released by written notice sent by certified mail to the DEVELOPER and to the Surety within 30 days of the acceptance of the Improvements. The written notice shall contain a statement that the work for which security was furnished has been completed and accepted, a description of the Improvements, and the notarized signature of an authorized CITY official. b. At such time as the DEVELOPER believes that the work for which the security was required is complete and makes payment of a partial exoneration fee of $350 to the CITY, the DEVELOPER shall notify the CITY in writing of the completed work, including a list of work completed. Upon receipt of the written notice, the CITY shall have 45 days to review and comment on or certify the completion of the Improvements. 3 If the CITY does not agree that all work has been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications for the Improvements, it shall supply the DEVELOPER a list of all remaining work to be completed. C. Within 45 days of receipt of the CITY's list of remaining work, the DEVELOPER may then provide cost estimates for all remaining work for review and approval by the CITY. d. Upon receipt of the cost estimates, the CITY shall then have 45 days to review, comment, and certify, modify or disapprove those cost estimates. The CITY shall not be required to engage in this process of partial release more than once between the start of work and the completion and acceptance of all work. e. If the CITY approves the cost estimate, the CITY shall release all performance security except for security in an amount up to 200% of the cost estimate of the remaining work; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, such partial release shall occur only when the cost estimate of the remaining work does not exceed 20% of the total original performance security. Substitute bonds or other security may be used as a replacement for the performance security, subject to the prior written approval of the CITY. A reduction in performance security is not, and shall not be deemed to be, an acceptance by the CITY of the completed Improvements, and the risk of loss or damage to the Improvements and the obligation to maintain the Improvements shall remain the sole responsibility of the DEVELOPER until all required Improvements have been accepted for maintenance by the CITY Council and all other required Improvements have been certified by the CITY as fully completed in accordance with the plans and specifications for the Improvements. f. The DEVELOPER shall complete the works of Improvement until all remaining items are certified as complete by the CITY. Upon completion of the Improvements, the DEVELOPER shall be notified in writing by the CITY within 45 days and, within 45 days of the date of the CITY's notice, the release of any remaining performance security shall be made within 60 days of the recording of the Notice of Completion and acceptance of the Improvements for maintenance by the CITY Council. 9. Procedure for Release of Payment Security. Security securing the payment to the contractor, his or her subcontractors and persons furnishing labor, materials or equipment shall, after passage of the time within which mechanic's liens and stop notices are required to be recorded and after acceptance of the Improvements, be reduced to an amount equal to the total claimed by all claimants for whom mechanic's liens and stop notices have been recorded and notice thereof given in writing to the CITY, and if no claims have been recorded, the security shall be released in full. 10. Security for One -Year Warranty Period. The release procedures described in paragraphs 8 and 9 above shall not apply to any required guarantee and warranty period nor to the amount of the security deemed necessary by the CITY for the guarantee and warranty period nor to costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 4 11. Binding Effect. ffect. This Security Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their legal representatives and their successors and assigns. 12. Authority to Execute. The DEVELOPER hereby warrants and represents to the CITY that the individual signing this Security Agreement on behalf of the DEVELOPER is vested with the unconditional authority to do so pursuant to, and in accordance with, all applicable legal requirements, and has the authority bind the DEVELOPER hereto. 13. No Assi ng ment. The DEVELOPER may not assign this Security Agreement or any part thereof, to another without the prior written consent of the CITY. 14. Attorneys' Fees. In the event of legal action to enforce or interpret this Agreement or any of its provisions, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to any other form of relief, to recover its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit. 15. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but which together shall constitute a single agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the date first above written. CITY OF BEAUMONT By Mayor DEVELOPER: �. qoy haK ta►tis t~au,r Qe- sov, -5 cul beam ov4 ,1 � -�y: k• ►Fovwar.;e�h Ccw.fn.n.ses *,J�! Cal.(wrn�a� ►►.t. Y►s A►ai1. r y'e d By -� Title: .!P e-F ePL-""" 5 EXHIBITI "A" PERFORMANCE BOND WHEREAS, the City Council agreement whereby Principal agrees to which agreement, dated of the City of Beaumont, State of California, and (hereinafter designated as "Principal ") have entered into an install and complete certain designated public improvements, 20 , and identified as project _, is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required under the terms of the said agreement to furnish a bond for the faithful performance of said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Principal and as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Beaumont (hereinafter called "City "), in the penal sum of dollars ($ ) lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. The condition of this obligation is such that if the Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and provisions in the said agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City, its officers, agents and employees as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. As part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by the City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment therein rendered. The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work or to the specifications. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 20 PRINCIPAL: SURETY: :A Title Title EXHIBIT "B" BOND FOR SECURITY OF LABORERS AND MATERIALMEN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Beaumont, State of California, and (hereafter designated as "the Principal ") have entered into an agreement whereby the Principal agrees to install and complete certain designed public improvements, which agreement, dated , 20 , and identified as project , is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, under the terms of the said agreement, the Principal is required before entering upon the performance of the work, to file a good and sufficient payment bond with the City of Beaumont to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California. NOW, THEREFORE, the Principal and the undersigned as corporate surety, are held firmly bound unto the City of Beaumont and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen, and other persons employed in the performance of the said agreement and referred to in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code in the sum of dollars ($ ), for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to this work or labor, that the Surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount hereinabove set forth, and also in case suit is brought upon this bond, will pay, in addition to the face amount thereof, costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by the City in successfully enforcing this obligation, to be awarded and fixed by the court, and to be taxed as costs and to be included in the judgment therein rendered. It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies, and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. Should the condition of this bond be fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void, otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the agreement or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any manner affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension, alteration, or addition. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 20 PRINCIPAL: SURETY: Title Title Bond No, 1058983 PERFORMANCE BOND Premium: $8,745.00 CALIFORNIA PUBLIC WORK 2 year premium KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont, LLC 1500 S. Haven Av nus Principal, Suite 100 Ontario. A 91761 , Surety, l, and Lexon Insurance Com an corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of TX and authorized to transact surety business in the State of California, are held and firmly bound unto — City of Beaumont 550 E. 6th Street Beaumont, CA 92223 Obligee, in the sum of Five Hundred Eighty Three Thousand Dollars and 001100 Dollars ($ 583,000.00 for payment of which we bind ourselves, our legal representatives, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. WHEREAS, Principal has entered into a contract with Obligee, dated Street &Sewer Improvement Bond for Tract No. 33096 -6 - K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont, Phase C -3 - p copy of which contract is by reference made a part hereof. NOW, THEREFORE, if Principal .shall faithfully perform such .contract or shall indemnify and save harmless the Obligee from all cost and damage by reason of Principal's failure so to do, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise it shall remain in full force and effect. No right of action shall accrue under this bond to or for the use of any person other than the said Obligee. Signed, sealed and dated K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont, LLC April 18, 201 'tycmti': Vt6vwA- t1"4- 4-10—f ANA MENDOZA i' !a 111;0POA11- Commission 4 1751855 1 r ,,ctary Public alitornla y� ;an 3emardlno County y ✓i (Seal) . - +• r r *r s °rs er , 'tre, ems "&vr Afr- vcs Principal Lexon Insurance Company, By Christine Marotta Attorney -in -Fact i CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONSTRUCTION COST WORKSHEET { DESIGN ENGINEERS ALC CATIONS F IMPR VEMENT BONDING COSTS Construction items and then q uantities as shown on attached sheets are accurate for the improvements required to construct the above project and the mathematical extensions using City's unit costs are accurate for determining bonding, plan check and inspection costs. Above amounts do include additional 20% for recordation prior to having signed plans ��1e 1►�O� Aaeounts do not include additional 20% for recordation prior to having signed plans+ NOG 4ial Rai sisillt Date CIVEngineers Signature �Q1(/ r%OK3 Civil Engineer's Stamp Name typed or printed FORM $ UNIT COSTS REVISED 09/06 * * * * PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BELOW * * * ** * 1, Quantities to be taken from improvement plans, Unit costs to be as provided on "City of Beaumont improvement Requirement Worksheet ". 2. Show Bond Amounts to the nearest $500. 3. For construction items not covered by "City of Beaumont Improvement Worksheet ", Design Engineer is to provide his opinion of construction cost and use of that cost. If City of Beaumont Unit Costs are determined to be too low in the opinion of the Design Engineer, the higher costs as provided by the Design Engineer should be used. 411512011 Tract 3309b -6, Phase C -3 c PARCEL MAP OR TRACT NO.: March 31, 2011 DATE: BY: SB &O, Inc. PP, CUP NO.: ------------------------------ --------------------°"" IMPROVEMENTS - ------------------------------ - - - - -- ----0 ------------------ FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE LABOR & MATERIALS SECURITY 100% ( of Estimated Construction Costs) $ 450,004.20 Streets/Drainage $ 132,968.75 Sewer $ 582,972.95 Total Warranty Retension (22.5 1/o) $ 131,168.91 Street/Drainage Plan Check Fees = $ 9,782.70 $ 3,989.06 Sewer Plan Check Fees = $ 1,652.32 5 5 Street Inspection Fees = $ ,648.44 Sewer Inspection Fees = { DESIGN ENGINEERS ALC CATIONS F IMPR VEMENT BONDING COSTS Construction items and then q uantities as shown on attached sheets are accurate for the improvements required to construct the above project and the mathematical extensions using City's unit costs are accurate for determining bonding, plan check and inspection costs. Above amounts do include additional 20% for recordation prior to having signed plans ��1e 1►�O� Aaeounts do not include additional 20% for recordation prior to having signed plans+ NOG 4ial Rai sisillt Date CIVEngineers Signature �Q1(/ r%OK3 Civil Engineer's Stamp Name typed or printed FORM $ UNIT COSTS REVISED 09/06 * * * * PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BELOW * * * ** * 1, Quantities to be taken from improvement plans, Unit costs to be as provided on "City of Beaumont improvement Requirement Worksheet ". 2. Show Bond Amounts to the nearest $500. 3. For construction items not covered by "City of Beaumont Improvement Worksheet ", Design Engineer is to provide his opinion of construction cost and use of that cost. If City of Beaumont Unit Costs are determined to be too low in the opinion of the Design Engineer, the higher costs as provided by the Design Engineer should be used. 411512011 CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET DATE: 31- Mar -11 Tract 33096 -6, Phase C -3 4/15!1011 CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT r IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT: Tract 33096 -6, Phase C -3 STREET IMPROVEMENTS Cont'd. (.3 Y. I UNIT ITEM $ DATE: 31- Mar -11 ,T AMOUNT 2.50 $ 00.00 $ - 90.00 $ 108,630 L.F. Remove a-:-'T;-1, Fence 62,100 EA. Remove Barricade 1,800 ' Asphalt Concrete - 144 lbs /cu. Ft. 10.00 1207 , TON On -Site SF @ AC thickness Ft. 12.00 C.Y. A e ate Base Class 11 OnSite SF Q, AB thickness Ft.) 1,242 10.00 Asphalt Emulsion (Fog Seat/Paint Binder) 3 TON (1 ton = 240 gals) (OnSite SF) $ ' a I at 0.05 + 0.03 = 0.08 al/SY 8.00 ST A over ay mm. 0. If (a) & (b), a =fill, b= cut -fill $ 10.00 export, provide If import, provide (a) &(C), a--cut, c =fill -cut - $ (Unit costs for (a), (b) & (C) are 20% of $ 23,830 actual costs to assure that work will be 6.00 $ corrected to eliminate hazardous conditions. $ L.F. Curb and Gutter Wed a Curb - L.F. Curb and Gutter T e A -6 $ L.F. Curb and Gutter (Type A -8 8.00 L.F. T e "CO- Curb $ L.F. T e "D" Curb - L.F. A.C. Dike 6" inc1. material & labor $ L.F. A.C. Dike 8" Incl. Material & labor 2,383 S.F. P.C.C. Cross Gutter and S andrels 17,587 S.F. P.C.C. Sidewalk S.F. P.C.C. Drive A roach 8 EA. Handica ed Access Ram S.F. P.C.C. Drive Approach per finished grading plan) (individual lot driveway approach S.F. Cold Plane & Ov rlay Exist. A.C. Paving IR76 L.F. 6" Rolled Curb & Gutter $ DATE: 31- Mar -11 ,T AMOUNT 2.50 $ 00.00 $ - 90.00 $ 108,630 50.00 $ 62,100 600.00 $ 1,800 411512011 1.00 $ - $ 8.00 $ ' $ 10.00 $ - $ 12.00 $ ' $ 10.00 $ ' $ 15.00 $ ' $ 8.00 $ ' $ 10.00 $ - $ 10.00 $ 23,830 $ 6.00 $ 105,522 $ 8.00 $ - $ 1500.00 $ 12,000 $ 8.00 $ - $ 4.00 $ - $ 15.00 $ 58,140 411512011 K CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET nunirrT. Tract 33096 -6, Phase C -3 DATE: 31- Mar -11 411512011 CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET nunipCT• Tract 33096 -6, Phase C -3 DATE: 31 -Mar -1 t 4/15/2011 ff CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET DDn,wr -T. Tract 33096 -6, Phase C -3 DATE: 3I- Mar -I I 4/15/2011 CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT: Tract 33096 -6, Phase C -3 STREET IMPROVEMENTS COnYd. UNIT ITEM EA. Water Quality Structure LS Concrete Inlet Apron LS 84" Storm SF T Wide V LS Signal & l A. Subtotal B. Contingency (15 %) C. Streets/Drainage Total (A + B) DATE: 31- Mar -11 UNIT COST AMOUNT $ 1,500.00 $ ' $ 11,000.00 $ - $ 27,000.00 $ - $ 8,500.00 $ - $ 4.00 $ - $ 100,000.00 $ - Subtotal $ 391,308 $ 58,696 004 4//5/201/ CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT: Tract 33096 -6, Phase C -3 DATE: 31 -Mar - I 1 SEWER IMPROVEMENTS cnnW nitantities on this sheet only if project has a sewer plan. if no water plan, then show applicable A. Subtotal B. Contingency (15% x A) C. Sewer Total (A + B) $ 115,bL� $ 17,344 $ 132 4/1512011 CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT State of IL County of Cook On April 18 2011 before me, Nicole Kubena Name and I me of Notary Date personally appeared r`hrictinn hAnrntta Name and or Names of Signer(s) Who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his /her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature -fu Gtax., AG1. Notary Public Signature Nicole Kubena f 1 OPTIONAL OFFICIAL SEAL NICOLE KUBENA NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF ILLINOIS My Commission Expires 07/15/2012 Place Notary Public Seal Above Though the information below is not required by law, it may prove valuable to the persons relying on the document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another document. Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document Document Date Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): ❑ Partner - ❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Guardian or Conservator Top of thumb ❑x Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Other: Signer is representing Lexon Insurance Company Number of Pages: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): ❑ Partner - ❑ Limited []General ❑ Guardian or Conservator Top of thumb ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Other: Signer is representing POWER OF ATTORNEY LX - Lexon Insurance Company KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, a Texas Corporation, with its principal office in does hereby constitute and appoint: Kentucky, sville I, , * � Christine Marotta, Debra Kohlman, Thomas P. Pluss ******************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** its true and lawful Attorney(s) -In -Fact to make, execute, seal and deliver for, and on its behalf as surety, any and all oonas, unaertarangs U1 other writings obligatory in nature of a bond. This authority is made under and by the authority of a resolution which was passed by the Board of Directors of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY on the 1st day of July, 2003 as follows: Resolved, that the President of the Company is hereby authorized to appoint and empower any representative of the Company or other person or persons as Attorney -In -Fact to execute on behalf of the Company any bonds, undertakings, policies, contracts of indemnity or other writings obligatory in nature of a bond not to exceed $2,500,000.00, Two - million five hundred thousand dollars, which the Company might execute through its duly elected officers, and affix the seal of the Company thereto. Any said execution of such documents by an Attorney -In -Fact shall be as binding upon the Company as if they had been duly executed and acknowledged by the regularly elected officers of the Company. Any Attorney -In -Fact, so appointed, may be removed for good cause and the authority so granted may be revoked as specified in the Power of Attorney. Resolved, that the signature of the President and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile on any power of attorney granted, and the signature of the Vice President, and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile to any certificate of any such power and any such power or certificate bearing such facsimile signature and seal shall be valid and binding on the Company. Any such power so executed and sealed and certificate so executed and sealed shall, with respect to any bond of undertaking to which it is attached, continue to be valid and binding on the Company. IN WITNESS THEREOF, LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY has caused this instrument to be signed by its President, and its Corporate Seal to be affixed this 21st day of September, 2009. C.......... N A c0� TEXAS 4 0: X INSURANCE JZ COMPANY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY BY David E. Campbell President On this 21st day of September, 2009, before me, personally came David E. Campbell to me known, who being duly sworn, did depose and say that he is the President of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, the corporation described in and which executed the above instrument; that he executed said instrument on behalf of the corporation by authority of his office under the By -laws of said corporation. "OFFICIAL SEAL" MALT2EEN K. AYE Notary Public, State of Illinois My Commission Expires 09/21/13 Maureen K. Aye CERTIFICATE Notary Public I, the undersigned, Secretary of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, A Texas Insurance Company, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the original Power of Attorney of which the foregoing is a true and correct copy, is in full force and effect and has not been revoked and the resolutions as set forth are now in force. tif1� AM 18 2011 Signed and Sealed at Woodridge, Illinois this 1Day of 20 A IPA Z? TEXAS -5� X I >C% INSURAMICE " *. COMPANY �_ N Donald D. Buchanan a Secretary "WARNING: Any person who knowingly and with intent to defraud any insurance company or other person, files an application for insurance or statement of claim containing any materially false information, or conceals for the purpose of misleading, information concerning any fact materi- al thereto, commits a fraudulent insurance act, which is a crime and subjects such person to criminal and civil penalties." LX1 Bond No. 1058983 PAYMENT BOND Premium Included In Performance Bond CALIFORNIA PUBLIC WORK KNOW I�IsFIaBY THESE PRESENTS, That we, K Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont, LLC Ave suite 100 Ontario CA 91761 , as Principal, and corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of TX and authorized to transact surety business in the State of California, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto City of Beaumont 550 c 6th Street Raammnnt CA —,as obligee, m me sum or rive rlulluiGu EightV Three Thousand Dollars and 00/100 Dollars ( 583,000.00 ], for the payment whereof, well and truly M -� isa; par a¢ r . I _ t s era igraj -!nadei- said- Pxinciipai= and- SuretTbihd- therms ojue�, -t_. w-he..�, a min.��vors s_ e-so -an ._ss. jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. WHEREAS, the above- bounded Principal has entered into a contract, a copy of which contract is by reference made a part hereof, dated with the obligee for Tract No. 33096 -6 - K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont Phase C -3 - Street and Sewer Improvements Bond NOW, THEREFORE, if the above- bounded Principal or his subcontractors shall fail to pay any of the persons named in Section 3181 of the Civil Code of the State of California, or amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to work or labor performed by any such claimant, or any amounts required to be deducted, withheld and paid over the Franchise Tax Board from the wages of employees of the Principal or his sub - contractors pursuant to Section 18806 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, with respect to such work and labor, Surety will pay for the same, in an agreeable amount not exceeding the amount specified in this bond, and also, in case suit is brought upon this bond, a reasonable attorney's fee, to be fixed by the court. This bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies or corporations entitled to file claims under Section 3181 of the Civil Code of the State of California, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. Signed, sealed and dated this 18th day of Anril 2011 K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont, LLC Principal Lexon Insurance Company Surety By a�9aZZg6 Christine Marotta Attorney -In-Fact CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONSTRUCTION COST WORKSHEET PARCEL MAP OR TRACT NO.: Tract 33096 -6 Phase C -3 DATE: March 31, 2011 BY: SB &O, Inc. PP, CUP NO.: ------------------ FAITHFUL ------ - - - - -- --------------------- PE 100% -------------------------- IMPROVEMENTS FAITHFUL. PERFORMANCE LABOR & MATERIALS SECURITY 1000/0 ( of Estimated Construction Costs) Street/Drainage Plan Check Fees $ 9,782.70_ Sewer Plan Check Fees $ 3989.06 Street Inspection Fees m $ 15L652.32 !i Sewer Inspection Fees = „$ 6,648.44 E ��S* ,tom �*IGINEI?RS CALCi tT ATIONS OF IMPROVEMENT BONDING COSTS Construction items and their quantities as shown on attached sheets are accurate for the improvements required to construct the above project and the mathematical extensions using City's unit costs are accurate for determining bonding, plan check and inspection costs. 0 fgg i� Above amounts do [:]Include additional 20% for recordation prior to having signed plans t �pqp �► Ab a ounts do not include additional 20% for recordation prior to having signed plans NQ 41US • itillg ngineees Siignature Date *IV ��l9,lt JJiPl70�g Civil Engineer's Stamp Name typed or printed FORM $ UNIT COSTS REVISED 09/06 E♦eF READ INSTRUCTIONS BELOW * * * ** 1. Quantities to be taken from improvement plans. Unit costs to be as provided on "City of Beaumont Improvement Requirement Worksheet". 2. Show Bond Amounts to the nearest $500. 3. For construction items not covered by "City of Beaumont Improvement Worksheet", Design Engineer is to provide his opinion of construction cost and use of that cost. If City of Beaumont Unit Costs are determined to be too low in the opinion of the Design Engineer, the higher costs as provided by the Design Engineer should be used. 411512011 i << CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT: Tract3309b•6 Phase G3 DATE: 31- Mar -11 411 saall CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKS14EET PROJECT: Tract 33096 -6, Phase C -3 DATE: 31- Mar -11 4/154011 CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT: Tract 330% -6, Phase C -3 DATE; 31- Mar -1 l 411512011 CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT; Tract 33096 -6, Phase C -3 DATE: 31-Mar-It STREET IMPROVEMENTS Cont'd. QTY. UNIT C.y. ITEM Rip gap IA Ton Method UNIT COST $ 40.00 AMOUNT $ C.I. Ri "Ra `is Ton Mothud B $ 45.00 $ . C.Y. Ra 1 Ton Method B S 50.00 $ - _.R!p C.Y. 1 C.Y. Jti ka 2 Tori Method B Grouted Rig Ra 114 Ton Method B $ SS.00 $ 60.00 $ $ C.Y. Grouted Rip Rap 1/2 Ton Method B $ 67.00 $ C.Y. Grouted Ri Rap 1Ton) Method B $ 75.00 $ - C.Y. Grouted Rip 2 Ton Method B $ 80.00 $ - 40 L.F. 18" R.C.P. $ 60.00 $ 2,400 46 L.F. 24" R-C.P. $ 70.00 $ 3,220 L.F. 30" R.C.P. $ 50.00 $ L.F. 36" R.C.P. $ 90.00 $ L.F. 42" R.G.P. $ 100.00 $ L.F. 48 " RCP $ 110.00 $ L.F. 54" RCP $ 135.00 $ L.F. 60" RCP $ 160.00 $ L.F. 72" RCP $ 200.00 $ EA. H.D.P.E. Clean Out $ 400.00 $ - Drain Basin $ 400.00 $ 4EA. . Curb Outlet $ 3,000.00 $ - EA. Fossil Filters $ 500.00 $ EA. 18" C.M.P. W e $ 500.00 $ EA. Riprap Headwall $ 1,000.00 $ - 1 EA. EA. Concrete Collar Outlet Structure $ 250.00 $ 10000.00 ------ $ 250 $ - at5noll CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET DATE: 31- Mar -11 vunwclrl Tract 33096 -6, Phase C -3 41IS12011 CTTY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT: __ Tract 33096 -6, Phase C -3 DATE: 31- Mar -I I $ .1 A. Subtotal 39,308 $ 58,696 B. Contingency (15 %) C. streets/Drainage Total (A + B) 4 /15/7011 CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT: Tract 33446 -6, Phase C -3 DATE: 31 -Mar -I I on this sheet only if project has a sewer plan. If no water $ 11b,bza A. Subtotal $ 17,344 B. Contingency 0 5% x A) $ 132,969 C , Sewer Total (A + B) itffiki!•!i #fifflN #!HA #AifR #Mil Rfllff #1fi!l fill!!! i# RRR#ikANRf#R #lRikRRRl# #lRifilRf lid` fff!# AR# R### i! #f!i!R##R1kh #RRflk #Rf #RRR1f #R a /15R0f t CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .................................... ............................... State of 1�1-- County of ''OL6, On April 18, 2011 before me, Att /COQ t- �, f and Title of Notary oats personally appeared Christine Marotta Name and or Names of Signer(s) Who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his/her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his /her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature `f•C.t -LJ X'l�C�%Ll-! / 2�'"'� Notary Public Signature OPTIONAL OFFICIAL SEAL NICOLE KUBENA NOTARY PUBLIC. STATE OF ILLINOIS My Commission Expires 07/15/2012 Place Notary Public Seal Above Though the information below Is not required by law, valuable e relying ginenthe document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment of this form to another Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document Document Date Signer's Name: ❑ Individual • Corporate Officer — Title(s): • Partner - ❑ Limited ❑ General • Guardian or Conservator Top Of thumb M Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Other: Signer is representing Lexon Insurance Company Number of Pages: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): ❑ Partner - ❑ Limited ❑ General ❑ Guardian or Conservator Top offnumb ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Other: Signer is representing POWER OF ATTORNEY LX- 89979 Lexon Insurance Company KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, a Texas Corporation, with its principal office in Louisville, Kentucky, does hereby constitute and appoint: Thomas P. P1uSS * Christine Marotta, Debra Kohlman, ******************************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** its true and lawful Attorney(s) -In -Fact to make, execute, seal and deliver for, and on its behalf as surety, any and all bonds, undertakings or other writings obligatory in nature of a bond. This authority is made under and by the authority of a resolution which was passed by the Board of Directors of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY on the 1st day of July, 2003 as follows: Resolved, that the President of the Company is hereby authorized to appoint and empower any representative of the Company or other person or persons as Attorney -In -Fact to execute on behalf of the Company any bonds, undertakings, policies, contracts of indemnity or other writings obligatory in nature of a bond not to exceed $2,500,000.00, Two - million five hundred thousand dollars, which the Company might execute through its !fL!ly elected officers, and affix the coal of the Company thereto. Any raid eXer-.utinn of SLlch documents by an Attorney -In -Fact shall be as binding upon the Company as if they had been duly executed and acknowledged by the regularly elected officers of the Company. Any Attorney -In -Fact, so appointed, may be removed for good cause and the authority so granted may be revoked as specified in the Power of Attorney. Resolved, that the signature of the President and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile on any power of attorney granted, and the signature of the Vice President, and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile to any certificate of any such power and any such power or certificate bearing such facsimile signature and seal shall be valid and binding on the Company. Any such power so executed and sealed and certificate so executed and sealed shall, with respect to any bond of undertaking to which it is attached, continue to be valid and binding on the Company. IN WITNESS THEREOF, LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY has caused this instrument to be signed by its President, and its Corporate Seal to be affixed this 21st day of September, 2009. A TEXAS •-U INSURANCE Z COMPANY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY BY David E. Campbell President On this 21st day of September, 2009, before me, personally came David E. Campbell to me known, who being duly sworn, did depose and say that he is the President of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, the corporation described in and which executed the above instrument; that he executed said instrument on behalf of the corporation by authority of his office under the By -laws of said corporation. "OFFICIAL SEAL" M/ MALTREEN X AYE CQ Notary Public, State of Illinois My Commission Fxpires 09/21/13 Maureen K. Aye CERTIFICATE Notary Public I, the undersigned, Secretary of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, A Texas Insurance Company, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the original Power of Attorney of which the foregoing is a true and correct copy, is in full force and effect and has not been revoked and the resolutions as set forth are now in force. np 2011 Signed and Sealed at Woodridge, Illinois this Day of 20 A 2i1 TEXAS j 4 INSURANCE 'Z COMPANY T Donald D. Buchanan Secretary "WARNING: Any person who _•K o ringiy and with intent to defraud any insurance company or other person, files an application for insurance or statement of claim containing any materially false information, or conceals for the purpose of misleading, information concerning any fact materi- al thereto, commits a fraudulent Insurance act, which Is a crime and subjects such person to criminal and civil penalties:' LXi POWER: OF ATTORNE'V 19 L. X - 9: 57 2 Faxon: insurance Company KNOW ALL MEN By THESE PRESENTS, that LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, a Texas -Corporation, with its principal office in sloes hereby constitute Appoint C.hjiStin, Kentucky, d s Marotta, Debra KohjMan., Thornas P. Pluss Z---------------------- ... ....... ---- --- its true and lawful Aitorney(s)-In-Fact to make, eYecuie, seal and deliver for, and on its behalf as surety, any and all bonds, undeetakings, or other writings obligatoryin nature of a bond. This authority is made under and by the authority of a resolution which was passed by the Board of DiFectors of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY on the 'Ist day of .,July, 2003 as follows: other person o I or . persons as Attonney4ri-Fact to execute on behalf of 7the Cornpany any - bonds, UnderiaKings, policies, contracts of inde innity or other writings. obligatory in nature of a..bond notlto exceed $ 1 2,500,OW.00, Two-million five hundred thousand dollar,,,, which the Cornpany might-execute. through - its -duly e[ei:Aed officers arld, . affix- the seat-of 4he tompa ny 11--oreto. Any said - execution; of such :docurnenis --by all AttorneyNln+act shall be as binding upon She Company as if they had been duty executed and acknowledged by the regularly elected officers of the Company. Any Attorney—In—Fact, so-appointed, may be rernoved for good cause and the.authority so granted may be revoked as specified in the Power of Attorney. Resolv 0, thatthe signature of the President and the seal of the Cornp6hy niay be affixed by facsirnile on any power of atiornely granted, and the signatl.lre.Of the Vice President, and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile to any certificate of any such power and any such power or certificate I I*arilng such facsimile signature and seal shall be valid and binding on the Cornpany. Any such power so executed and sealed and certificate so. executed and sealed shall, with- respect to any bond of undertaking to which it is attached. Continue to be valid and binding oft the Company, n -nent to be signed by its President, and its IN WITNESS THEREOF; LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY has caused this i strut Corporate Seal to be affixed this 21 st day of September, 2009. A TEXAS INSURANCE CowAwy ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY BY David E, Campbell President On this 21,st day of 9boteniberi 2009, before me; personally carne f3avid E. Campbell to me known, who being duly sworn, did depose and say that he is the P . residelit of LgXON INSURANCE COMPANY, the corporation described in alid which executed the above lo of hj6-off ice under the By-laws of said cotporation. instrurnent1hat he, executed said Instrument on b-olialfbif the corporation by authority '—=657EIALSE AL" MAUTRT,'-FN Ic AYIF-- Notary palilic., Stott orlilioois yjy. CtnilmisMan Expires 09111113 Maureen K. Aye GERTIFIGATE Notary Put& 1, the Undersigned, Secretary Cornpany, CO HEREBY CERTIFY that die r y (if LEXON: INSURANCE COMPANY, A Texas. Insurance. , � Y, original Power of Attorney of.v4h11Qhthe foregoing is a. true and correct copy, is in lull force, and effect and has not been revoked. and the resolutions as set forth are now in force' AFR 18 2011 Signed and Sealed at Woodridgef Illinois this __ L)ay of 20__ A TEXAS G0114PANY ------------ .Donald D, Buchanan ---- aiy - 4tr-101— 'WAIANING: Any person who kridwwgly and with Intent to defraud MY instil'01100 company or other person, files an. application for insurance or lri eadl gjilfort"ation concerning any. fact materi- statement of claim Gontolning any materially false information, oe conceals foe the Isue-POSO of 1 ist n � I insurance , . Is a crime and subjeotssuCh person to criminat and civil penaltlesl� actwhich LX1 Bond No. 1058983 PAYMENT BOND Premium Included In Performance Bond CALIFORNIA PUBLIC WORK KNOW MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That we, K Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont, LLC ass slate inn Ontario CA 91761 , as Principal, and LeXon Insurance Company - corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of TX and authorized to transact surety business in the State of California, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto Cily of Beaumont 550E 6th Street RFmttmnnt CA , as Obligee, in the sum of Five Hundred Eiahty Three Thousand Dollars and 00/10 Dollars {$ 583.000.00 1, for the payment whereof, well and truly :.t iris tr s: o rst m e etas ad- l}rmsi}�l- atad- S�a±'ety -b9nd then:` elvers .f° ear- hQ:.-. �,-.. ds�a�r: 9s.. ator.,,- ssaccesso.,.- �nd=as,.sy .s, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. __.__ -_. WHEREAS, the above- bounded Principal has entered into a contract, a copy of which contract is by reference made a part hereof, dated with the obligee for Tract No. 33096 -6 - K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont Phase C -3 - Street and Sewer Improvements Bond NOW, THEREFORE, if the above - bounded Principal or his subcontractors shall fail to pay any of the persons named in Section 3181 of the Civil Code of the State of California, or amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to work or labor performed by any such claimant, or any amounts required to be deducted, withheld and paid over the Franchise Tax Board from the wages of employees of the Principal or his sub - contractors pursuant to Section 18806 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, with respect to such work and labor, Surety will pay for the same, in an agreeable amount not exceeding the amount specified in this bond, and also, in case suit is brought upon this bond, a reasonable attorney's fee, to be fixed by the court. This bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies or corporations entitled to file claims under Section 3181 of the Civil Code of the State of California, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. Signed, sealed and dated this 18th day of April 2011 K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont, LLC Principal Lexon Insurance Company // Surety Christine Marotta Attorney -In -Fact CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONSTRUCTION COST WORKSHEET C -3 PARCEL MAP OR TRACT NO.: Tract 33096 -6, Phase March 31, 2011 DATE: BY: SB &O, Inc. PP, CUP NO.: TS -' ------- - - -- - -- --------------- -FAITHFUL YEKFOKMANI E - -- -------- --- ------------------------ IMPItOVEMEN LABOR & MATERIALS SECURITY 1000/0 ( of Estimated Construction Costs) Sewer Total Warranty Retension (22.51/o) Street/Drainage Plan Check Fees Sewer Plan Check Fees = 3 Street Inspection Fees Sewer Inspection Fees = $ 132,968.75 $ 582 972.95 $ 131,168.91 $ 9,782.70 $ 3,989.06 $ 15,652.32 _ $ 6,b48.44 Construction items and their quantities as shown on attached sheets are accurate for the improvements required to construct the above project and the mathematical extensions using City's unit costs are accurate for determining bonding, plan check and inspection costs. Abigineees ve amounts do [:]include additional 20% for recordation prior to having signed plans a ounts do not include additional 20% for recordation prior to having signed plans Signature Date �'oy ¢QK-- Name typed or printed FORM S UNIT COSTS REVISED 09/06 * *ta* PLEASE READ IINSTRUCTIONS BFLOW * * * ** 1. Quantities to be taken from improvement plans, Unit costs to be as provided on "City of Beaumont Improvement Requirement Worksheet ". 2. Show Bond Amounts to the nearest $500. 3. For construction items not covered by "City of Beaumont Improvement Worksheet", Design Engineer is to provide his opinion of construction cost and use of that cast. If City of Beaumont Unit Costs are determined to be too low in the opinion of the Design Engineer, the higher costs as provided by the Design Engineer should be used. 4/13/1011 CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT: Tract 33096 -6 Phase C -3 DATE: 31 -Mar -11 41154011 z CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROIECT: Tract 33096 -6 Phase C -3 DATE: 31- Mar -I 1 / /10011 CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT: Tract 33096-6, Pbase C -3 DATE: 3I- Mar -I 1 visao1I CTTY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT: ____ Tract 33096 -6 Phase C -3 DATE: _ 31- M_ ar-1 l 4/15/1011 CITY OF BBAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET Dvnrxrr. Traet 33096 -6, Phase C -3 DATE: 31 -Mar -11 411512011 CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT: Tract 33096 -6 Phase C -3 DATE: 31 -Mar -1 I auvwLa1. $ 391,308 A. Subtotal $ 58,896 B. Contingency (16 %) C. Streets/Drainage Total (A + B) J/15/IP11 CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT: Tract 33096 -6, Phase C -3 DATE: 31 -Mar -I 1 on this sheet only if project has a sewer plan. If no water plan, A, Subtotal $ 17,344 g, Contingency 0 5% x A) $ 132,969 {;, Sewer Total (A+ B) , ��i. ii# AtfAkk# 1* RA�w. RRA�# ��fMw�MYiaMHMA��f• �wr�� +r* *�' =�� *Ai���hw #4�Rk�1�MR�M/ 4/1 -v2011 CALIFORNIA ALL - PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGEMENT .................................... ............................... State of ��-- County of On April 18 2011 before me, AllCc>lc,- ben o�-° - Notary Date Name and Title personally appeared Christine Marotta Name and or Names of Signer(s) Who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is /are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he /she /they executed the same in his /her /their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his /her /their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. Witness my hand and official seal. Signature Notary Pudic Signature OFFICIAL SEAL NICOLE KUBENA NOTARY PUBLIC, STATE OF ILLINOIS My Commission Expires 07/19/2012 Place Notary Public Seal Above OPTIONAL Though the information below is not required by law , valuable this form to another lying on nthe document and could prevent fraudulent removal and reattachment Description of Attached Document Title or Type of Document Document Date Signer's Name: ❑ Individual ❑ Corporate Officer — Title(s): • Partner - ❑ Limited ❑ General • Guardian or Conservator Top of thumb 0 Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Other: Signer is representing Lexon Insurance Company Number of Pages: ❑ Individual • Corporate Officer — Title(s): • Partner - ❑ Limited []General = • Guardian or Conservator Tap of thumb ❑ Attorney -in -Fact ❑ Trustee ❑ Other: Signer is representing POWER OF ATTORNEY LX- 89979 Lexon Insurance Company KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, a Texas Corporation, with its principal office in Louisville, Kentucky, does hereby constitute and appoint: * Christine Marotta, Debra Kohlman, Thomas P. Pluss its true and lawful Attorney(s) -In -Fact to make, execute, seal and deliver for, and on its behalf as surety, any and all bonds, undertakings or other writings obligatory in nature of a bond. This authority is made under and by the authority of a resolution which was passed by the Board of Directors of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY on the 1st day of July, 2003 as follows: Resolved, that the President of the Company is hereby authorized to appoint and empower any representative of the Company or other person or persons as Attorney -In -Fact to execute on behalf of the Company any bonds, undertakings, policies, contracts of indemnity or other writings obligatory in nature of a bond not to exceed $2,500,000.00, Two - million five hundred thousand dollars, which the Company might execute through its duly elected officers, and affix the seal of the Company thereto. Any said execution of such documents by an Attorney -In -Fact shall be as binding upon the Company as if they had been duly executed and acknowledged by the regularly elected officers of the Company. Any Attorney -In -Fact, so appointed, may be removed for good cause and the authority so granted may be revoked as specified in the Power of Attorney. Resolved, that the signature of the President and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile on any power of attorney granted, and the signature of the Vice President, and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile to any certificate of any such power and any such power or certificate bearing such facsimile signature and seal shall be valid and binding on the Company. Any such power so executed and sealed and certificate so executed and sealed shall, with respect to any bond of undertaking to which it is attached, continue to be valid and binding on the Company. IN WITNESS THEREOF, LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY has caused this instrument to be signed by its President, and its Corporate Seal to be affixed this 21st day of September, 2009. A•O TEXAS ' ro >'! INSURANCE Z BY u1)�. COMPANY ACKNOWLEDGEMENT LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY David E. Campbell President On this 21st day of September, 2009, before me, personally came David E. Campbell to me known, who being duly sworn, did depose and say that he is the President of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, the corporation described in and which executed the above instrument; that he executed said instrument on behalf of the corporation by authority of his office under the By -laws of said corporation. "OFFICIAL SEAL" MAL'itEEN K. AYE �,� Ce, Notary Public, State of Illinois My Commission Expires 09/21/13 Maureen K. Aye CERTIFICATE Notary Public I, the undersigned, Secretary of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, A Texas Insurance Company, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the original Power of Attorney of which the foregoing is a true and correct copy, is in full force and effect and has not been revoked and the resolutions as set forth are now in force. rt 3 2011 Signed and Sealed at Woodridge, Illinois this Day of __ , 20 A - • TEXAS �: U -0 J( J INSURANCE Z I COMPANY Donald D. Buchanan Secretary "WARNING: Any person who k'ngly and with intent to defraud any insurance company or other person, files an application for insurance or statement of claim containing any materially false information, or conceals for the purpose of misleading, information concerning any fact materi- al thereto, commits a fraudulent Insurance act, which is a crime and subjects such person to criminal and civil penalties:' LX1 .-T 39 humem LASS IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. STATE OF CALIFORNIA. SHEET 7 OF 5 SHEETS TRACT N0 . 33096 -10 : ,2911 AT AL. aM looc a MAPS. OMF of 91M2Y: JULY, 2005 AT PAM _ - AT THE REQUEST OF LOTS 9 a7 THtA MA 72. R TNF L E IN LOTS B. E. G. H 5 T PORTIONS OF LOTS E. 'C' AND 'F' OF TRACT NO 37096 -4, Tw CLm or THE BOARD. POWDONN Of TERNARY!! AS SiOMN ON A MAP THEREOF FILED IN 800!( 422. PAGES 2S TIROAOf 32 INCLUSIVE. Of MAPS, AND PQt710N6 OF LOT 3 Ci TRACT NAP 37096 TRACT N0. 51259, S1OM ON A M P THEREOF FILM IN WW 571. PAGES 22 THWOUOf 27 1NO.USIVE. OF YAPS. ALL IN THE �• OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECMER OF SAID RIVERSIDE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA. FEE IAM W. WARD, ASSESS** -QtWW OlM- RECORDER • ■ • 9Y: . DFPI7IY eowauaVts,s .ALY. 2065 114011WM90M GUARANTEE OYINFRSHIP STATElENT_ gMW OW IURt CGWANY WE mER MY STATE THAT WE ARE THE OWOM OF THE LAND INCLUDED WITHIN THE SUBDIVISION SHOWN tEAEOtt THAT WE ARE THE ONLY PERSONS IWIOSE COI,S C IS NECESSARY TO PASS A CLEAR �,� CITY COL MIL CERTIFTCAT'E: A3YEYOR'S STAjF,�� TITLE TO SAID LM& TWAT WE CURfWC TO THE MAKING AND RECORDING CF THIS SUBDIVISION (HEREBY STARE 71fA7 7 .WH A LIffiSED LAND SURVEYOR tlR AE STATE OF CALIFORNIA WP AS SHOWN WITHIN THE DISTINCTIVE BORDER LINE. I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS NAP SAS APPAMW BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY ANA THAT THIS NAP Ct1I AM ANC C0 SED (5) SURVEY CORRECTLY RF�EIC A A SURVEY OF IICATIO Ri) INC SON ME 2011. Cl THAT THE AAAY. (S) OF MADE UNDER W SUPERVISION OLBRENG JULY OF 2006[ THAT ALL THE MORAICNIS SHOWN WE HERMY rICM P LOTS 'A' iHNAMH ERE* .FOR PRIVATE FOR SIDES". THE PARKING, EFIT LANDSCAPING HOMM.ON(S) SOLUTION HEREON WERE HOT ACCEPTED. THE CITY HER ACT ON B tecoU ACTUALLY EXIST AND THEIR POSITIONS ARE COMEMY SHOW. OR WELL BE IN OUR RECREATION SWOMSC$ A. SNOW HEREON. AND LOT PRIVATE WITHIN FOR IS SOLE MAP. T OF SMIV[ BY RMCINDl IT AS ANY AM OATS, AND WIPCUT FURTHER ACTION BY THE OWS ELVES. OUR 90pC�atis. A55(GIEES AND 1.0T OaN4R5 IIr71ON MIS TRACT WP. SUBDSVIDfR, RtsCIND ITS AC7[RI Ala 14 ^CURT THE FOLLOWING GF,OIGLTION(S) AND ACCORDANCE RUTH THE TFANS Of THE MR4AQIT ALT FOR THE NM. lHE I PROPADAM FOR PUBLIC USE. I MICR ACCEPTANCE SMALL BE RECORDED IN THE MONUMENTS WILL BE SUFFICIENT TO ENABLE THE SURVEY TO DE RETRACED. THE SURVEY WE VAE U RETAIN LOTS 'O" NO I", lIO1GLTW AS 'PRIVATE SORS. A SI SHORN M LOT FQ2 RIVEAStOE COUNTY fE00ROFR. IS TRUE AND COPILM AS SHOW. PRIVATE USE FOR THE SOLE FFjFFt7 � gRSk3.VF$, OUR SIOCESSOIS, ASSEl7EF5 AM LOT OW6S WITHIN THIS TRACT MAP. THE EASf?4M(S) FOR SEWER REPOSES WITHIN PRIVATE STFF3.T LOTS '0' AID 'E' AS DATED;fifka rT 2011. A WE HEEEBV DEDICATE TO THE CITY OF 8EAUl@RT, EAS£Ilk M FOR SEIM PURPOSES WITHIN SHOW ON THIS MAP. PRIVATE STREET LOTS 'D' AND 'E". AS 90tH ON MIS MAP. THE EASEMD(T(S) FOR INGRESS AND £CRESS FOR PUBLIC SAFETY AND UTILITY WE HUSBY ICAI£ TTY OF BEALUONT, EASEAQIIS FOR IN74ESS AND EUJ355 FOR W7NMNI NC£ VENIRE PuRPO= OVER ARCHES PARK (LOTS '0'): AND BLOWING ROCK Y A. N1JE1Y L.S. $13A PUBLIC AHO I _ MAIN TE NA IDe VEHICLE PURPOSES OVER ARCHES PAW (LOT 'D'): (LOB 'E') THE PRIVATE STAEEI LOTS AS SHOWN ON THIS NAP. AND NO ROCK ( ): TIE PRIVATE STREET LOTS AS SHORN ON THIS MAP. a • DATED: 2Dt1, BY: A HONII AN. CITY CLEW. CITY OF BEAUAORT. L RIVERSIDE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA CITY EMINEER'S STATEi£IIT: NOM P111L41ANT TO SECTION 66434(0) OF NNE St1BDlSRS[CN MAP ACT HIE FILING OF THIS I HDREBY STATE THAT I HAVE 0"INED THE WITHIN MAP. THAT THE SUBDIVISION AS H MAP �SIOLL C0A6MUTE THE ABANIONIENI OF ANY R[OftS TO TIE SE NkR EASEMENT AND ytlM 1�b1 [S WHICH AS APP THE SAYE AS IT APPEARED ON INC Y IS. TENTATIVE MAP OF THE FJCS£NTRT(S) FOR ENMW AND EGRESS FOR PUBLIC SWEET AND UTILITY TRACT PR ED AL WHICH WAS APPR011ET! BY THE [TTY COUNCIL ON HOLY 19. 2005 MA ANY APPROVED RX 16r FT E BEAUM THAT ALL AL. CODE AP LI THE SATOTHE TIM MAP MAINTENANCE WERE VEHICLE O INC i5 SITH(N THE Nr. AS DISTINCTIVE 44 BON TRACT OF THIS TRACT TAP. ACT AND OF TIRE 76 OF THE IE WV H VESEEK C MPLI APPLICABLE AT THE TIME OF K HOYNANIAN'S FOUR SEASONS AT 9EAUMONT, LLC. TNIOI WERE OFTiJRLD 70 TTE Cltt OT EEA90NI, AS SHOWN ON TRACT NO. 3]086 -s. THE APPROVAL OF THE TEMArtvi YW HAVE t#3]a COMPLIED *RIVE; THAT t AM A CALIFGVaA LIMITED LIABILITY COW ANY. BOX 422. PAGES 25 THROUGH 32 OF MM. NDT SNOW ON THIS MAP. SATISFIED TWIT THE MAP IS TECHNICALLY CORRECT. THAT THE PLANS FOR THE DRAINS, DRAINAGE WORKS AND SEIM SUFFICIENT TO PROTECT ALL LOTS IN THE SUBDIVISION BY: SIGNATURE OIIISSIOPES FROM FLOODS HAVE BEEN APPROVER THAT A COPL£TE SET OF PLANS FOR THE AWE E'C. V PIrSID CF OPERATICHS PURAWR 70 THE PRIM 066 SIXTION 66!76 RF THE SBDIVISLOM MW ACT CRELaNA &T OF All REWIRED THAT THE HAS BEEN CHEW WITH THE R74M Y N. NONNNlm OWA1410 d IFORNIA. INC.. TIE FOLLOSM SLWTUES AMT£ BEEN d11TID THAT ALL r 06PARA TS AND SHAT THE °ATE IN BEEN CRCE WITH AND E APPROVED AND AA/TNORI2iD AGENT THAT ALL IM°ROVF7MDRT5 HAVE Ei37 COpLE7kD IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE APPNDIfW I. SAN DIEGO LAS CCW%WO, A mV MTION AND Sw N M CRMIES GAS CDAPANY OF CALW0VQ HOLIER PLANS OR THAT THE SBDIVI" HAS ENTERED INTO AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF OF AN EASENIfT FOR PIPELOO AID INCIDDITAL AJAR= PER OOOMM R'.COSED APRIL 20. WI, AS SEMMW COVERING COIPL ETLON OF ALL IMPF04E0ASNIS AM SPECIFYING THE TIME FOR PLACER TITLE COMPANY INSTSAtTR NO. 40062. OR CORdTING THE SAME AS MAY BE RCOuM BY THE CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL DATED .PLY 19. 2005. AS TXXIIM 5611 UNDER COED Of CIAL RECORDED JLIE 27.E CB AS tt MIFO NT 2. K. H MMEAN'S FOR SEAM AT ENAOR OWA1TY A591CIA110t. M. A CALIFWA MO~IF HE BlY CONSENTS OF OFFICIAL TION AN OF RECORDATION OF THIS CALIFORNIA. IyAML MUIT OvI&WIGN RRJ>ER OF M EXINEXT FOR I1ETFN. EGIEIS NO MCIB NTAL RRP09S FOR OEEPAK ENGINEER. R.C.E. SEHAIO I CONSENTS TO TIE PREPARATION AND RECpAOAiIM Of MLS MJP. ADDEAMO APRIL 2. 70M AS INSI NNT NO. 2001- ISMIt. O.R. (DE CM LOGYION W SAID [STY EIGtNEER. CTtt OF EALBRYfT r EA3DW CAIN NOT E O.TWIDm nKM R77FO.) DATED: 2011. BY: PRINT MAND 4MM 01NAVOIL PRINT NAME-- 3. SEUTHEI H CAUFONIA EDISON C?PA7W. A CONRATION, H OM OF AN C49DOO FOR PUBLIC UTILITIES PRINT TM.C- B,H ftl. AWk►IM.T PRINT TITLE NA IRCMINTAL PUPOSES WDEROW OCIWOE 31, 7007 AS EN S311006 NO. 20W-G66790. O.R. (TO BE QJLTCLAOm BY SjPARAIE COOAENT NO NW PAT= HENI N.) BY: DENNIS W. JAADA, LS 6359 CHICAGO TITLE INSURANCE COMPANY SOILS IxslneT AS VA STEE UNCEIt OM OF 7867 RECORDED ON FEBRUARY 9. 2009. AS INSTRlAQ1T _ WORT-- 2000-0050M. OF WrLCIAL I==$ OF RIVERSIDE COUNTY. CALIFOIMIA. A PP$tMINARY SOILS REPORT WAS AEAARED BY LEIGHTON AND ASSOCUTES. INC.. DAM HEIM COMSDM TO THE PREPARATION AND pf50 MTION OF THIS MAP. 4/N1/03 AS REWIRED BY THE WEALTH APO SAFETY CODE. TAX (PCT CERTIF IC-ATE E�� � �j/�, 13Y: TAX HOPE CERTIFICAM I HEREBY Cf3RT[FY THAT ACCORDING TO TIE REGENTS OF MIS OFFICE AS OF THIS PRINT BWH.L7iAHWNWIA. PRINT NAT. !MATE, THERE ARE NO LIM A9ALT6T THE PROPE7ttt SOOT ON THE WITHIN MAP FOR PRINT TITLE:v v"wASOWI. PRINT TITLE: I HERM CERTIFY THAT A BOD IN THE SW OF = Nac BEEN EIECUIED AND UtPAW STATE. COUNTY , IAXNICIPAL OR LOGE TAM OR SPEECIN. ASSESSMENTS FILED WITH THE BONA OF SUPERVISORS OF THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE. CALIFORNIA. COLLECTED AS TAXES. OCC PT TA= OR SPECIAL ASSESSMENTS CMLW(37 AS TAXES ORANGE COAST 1171E COMPANY COCIT10ED IRON THE PATHEW OF ALL TAXES. STATE. COUNTY, MAICIPAL, OR Lom. NO NON A LIEN BUT NOT YET PAYABLE. WICK ARE ESTIMATED TO BE t ALL SPECIAL ASsEssOHTS RXXLJE= AS Tom. WHICH AT THE TIME OF FILiNC OF TH IS MANP THIS CERTIFICATION CC ICC ANY S PPLE ENTAIL ASSESSIORS NOT YET MUM. AS TRUSTEE WFR OEM OF TA6T RECORDED FEBRUARY 9. 2010, AS LNSTRWNT WITH THE OOUNTY RECORDER ARE A LIEN AGAINST SAM PROPERTY BUT NOT YET PAYABLE AND NO. 2010- 000O2e7. OF OFFICIAL RCCOR)S OF RIVH7tSIDE COUNTY. CALIFORNIA. SAID BOND HAS vMv OELY APPROVED 8Y SAID RECORD OF SUPERVISORS. MTFD 2011. HE1m CO BENTS T Q THE PREPARATION AND RECORDATION OF MIS WP. DOH KENT. COJM TAX COLLECTOR OATm - 201E BY: DEPUTY PPRRE • MI PRINT NAPE NESIA LAMER -DflL COa HNM PRINT TITLE VI PRINT TITLE CLEAR HF M BOND OF SUP: W[M CMWTY TAX CALECTtR SEE SFIEET 2 FOR NOTARY ACKNOWLEDGMENTS. ar BY: Dfplttr tTIWJTY JV SO-107707 IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA. TRACT N0. 33096 -10 LOTS 47 THROUGH 72, 74 THROUGH $4. LOTS B, E, 0. H AND PORTIONS OF LOTS 73, 'C' " 'F' OF TRACT NO 33096 -4. AS SHOWN ON A MAP MIMOF FILED IN BOOM 422, PAGES 25 THR0UGH 32 INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, ANN PORTIONS OF LOT 3 OF TRACT NO. 32251, SHOWN ON A MAP THEREOF FILM IN OOOHO 371, PAGES 22 THROUGH 27 INCLUSIVE, OF MAPS, ALL IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID RIVERSIDE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, CON�YATINO JULY, 2005 (HiRA1R A. HO MUM. OWNER) STATE OF ) COUNTY OF J lWM EMNlJ ) SS ON PERSOVN.LY ORQ lvmw PROVED TO ME ON THE B,LSIS OF SATAFkTORY EVI TO BE THE PERSON(S) WHOSE NAMf(S) IS /ARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND ACKNOWLEDE;D TO ME THAT HE/SHffTHEY MCUTED THE SAME IN HIS /HFR/TH£IR AUTHORIZED CAPACITY(IFS). AND THAT BY HIS/HER /THEIR SIGATUC(S) ON THE INSTRMENT THE PERSON(S). OR THE ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF Milo THE PERSON(S) ACTED. E)ECUTED THE INSTRUMENT. I IFY (*cm PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER 'O[ LAWS or THE STATE OF 41 T THE FJORIEGOING, PARROAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT, NOTARY ACKNOWLE (KXER TITLE OOPANY) STATE OF CAH.tf 94 COUNTY OF AClNL MfNJTD ) SS ON "! 3, 2011 BEFaRE ME T. BUSSCY No1(1Ry Pbe1,1G PERSONALLY APPENiED — II(ill� K[L16- *0 PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVID04CE TO BE THE PERSONtV WHOSE NAMEIQ IS/WW SUBSCRIBED To THE WITHIN INSTRUMENT AND AO70NOWLEOI#D TO ME THAT HEl&*J HEY EXECUTED THE SAME IN HIS/W06QUWA AUTHORIZED CAPACITY(4"j, AND THAT BY HIS /I4A160E6HR SI04ATQKCV ON THE INSTRMENT THE PERSONtQ. OR THE ENTITY UPON BEHALF OF m10H THE PERSON(%) ACTED. OMTED THE INSTRUMENT. I CERTIFY wDM PENALTY Cr PERJRY UINDFR THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF CAMIFEWIA THAT THE FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT. W3 S MY MT PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS IS WI MY PRINCIPAL PLACE CF BUSINESS IS -- IN Idw mdc . ) COUNTY. IN .rSAGlJARKA D COUNTY. ND IN SAID STATE Q' MY COMMISSION EXPIRES; f� NOTARY C IN AND F ID STATE P. AvS1[Y MY COMMISSION DPIFES: (PR OMAE� (PRINT mac) RAi OF MEIYJNISf'� I MYGM1YYSMU. (DNl7 AUG � "'... ' (K KNNWIAN -S FOUR SEASONS AT IEAJDNT) NOTARY IMMN.MSiN JQ I (OIICAOO TiTIE IH45UYNAi COPNNY) STATE Hn� STCATE F COUNTY OF 'S ) 55 ) SS ON Ar6� EEFORE , ,s.1c�MUas. — :— �Ih1/M RIL%Afs w�RaYNsM i Y APPENHED � — i0 1E ON THE BASIS (IF SATISFACTORY EVIC04M TO BE THE P MC K PARE SUBSCRIBED TO THE WMIW INSTRUAENT AND A0ONOM1:3GFD TO ME THAT SAME fNqWMr4eIR AUTftMNT CAPACttY4"7., AHD TIT IGHA (y+J ON THE INS11bUFltT THE PEItSOIji), OR THE ENTITY UPON %ALr OF WHIO1 THE PERSON)ES) ACTED. DECLITED THE INSTRUENT. 1 CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF tali. TWU FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT. NY PR�I�NC'IPAL RJUCE OF BUSINESS [5 IN i7lY• �'rnA� COMTY. O NAND FOR SAID STATE .► ,, M ES: , MY COMMISSION EVIR nL&wz- (PRINT NAME) Oi A Y APPEARED HNHD TO ME ON THE 9ASIS (x SATISFACTORY EVIDODE TO (E TIE PE%p(LBr MODS NWELB7 Al1I^ 9LBSCRlEEO TO THE WITH INSTRUENT AND A0001LEDGia TO ►E THAT 'Sp'T}EM -. WED THE SAME IN lR- AUDORIZED CAPACITYUK, AND THAT BY HI SIGNATURCWOIN THE INSTRUMENT THE PDRSONW, OR THE ENTITY UPON WLALF OF MUCH THE PEASO1O ACTED. EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT. 1 CERTIFY DOER PENALTY OF PERJURY UDER THE LAWS OF THE STATE OF F HD FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE A CORRECT. MY PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS IS IN 5m ge.nArdf Ene CONY, � FOR SAID STATE __ MY COMMISSION E FIRE& .l2.p- (PRIM NNE) NOTARY Q lrl FDC.lL�lU7. (OuNo: COAST TITLE OAPANY) STATE OF ) COUNTY OF ) SS 2 OF 5 SHEETS ON Y APPEARED WORE ME. �(C�.T� .a -�IMD PROVED TO ME ON THE BASIS OF SATISFACTORY EVIDENCE TO BE THE PERSON(jry'tU1K75E HV A'jO/WE 9.1SCRIRED TO THE NMIn T AND AC70NOWLfDGED 70 ME THAI DE7 EX�p THE SAME IN Hi� AUTHORIZED CAPACITY(4M. AND THA BY p:Z,EEB7TUfiR SIGNATWE ON THE INSTRUMENT THE PERSON(A). OR THE ENTITY UPON BBE�HA%LF OF WHICH THE PERSON07 ACTED. EXECUTED THE INSTRUMENT. 1 CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OF PERJURY UNDER THE LAWS THAD -T E FOREGOING PARAGRAPH IS TRUE AND CORRECT. NOTARY KKIL -IN AND FOR SAID STATE (PRINT NAME) OF THE STATE OF Ut{f at-L MY PRINCIPAL PLACE OF BUSINESS IS IN Sah Sey-% 10 COUNTY. MY COMMISSION FIRES .N 10-103507 Ixi• 90' 0 1xi' 241• MAE IN RRT) WALL: - . Hxi' FD. H' IRON PIPE VI 2 -, N.As. PI3 1 44790 I'Lum. As 111 Lac. C "2. N 114, Na SCC N, 7..15., A.A. I •- M1'10.4s'V .2 Pt i 1 - 1713.414: r WI R i W20'45'. 2.M' YaM / b POT LDT 2 TRACT NO. 32259 M.B. 371/22 -27 .y„ TRACT NO. Y lx2��M IR'G -4 • P � TRACT 070. ],11311 M 8 9419/70 -93 �t DETAL W WT TO e-• IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT. COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALFORNIA SHEET 3 OF 5 SHEETS TRACT NO. 33096 -10 ry� LOTS 47 7Ni0Ux1 72, 74 14401101 81. LOTS B. E. G. H AND F'OR[IONS OF LOTS 73. 'C" ND "1.. OF fRALT NO 33096 -1, O�ZQ �ti 10 AS SHORN ON A WAP TIFJEOF FILED IN 8000 142. PAGES 25 7X01101 32 [NO IRK. OF YAPS, AND PORTIONS OF LOT 3 W Q •� .'IT : r BCiMl101► TRACT NO. 37159. SHORN ON A MAP TWCOT FILED IN BOOT 371. PAGES 12 ATOM 27 D"I\E, OF YAPS. ALL IN TtE OFFICE OF THE a)IM RECOFM OF SALO RIXOtSIOC OONTY, CALIFORNIA. .4 DATE OF SURVEY: JULY, 2005 // -• - TRACT NO 079. MIN PVC TAOm k.t.c F!".", RIM nrt rIM PvsLC P u sTdrm _ 33096 -1 121:' FM AS. a1/2t -2R. ORM TRACT 070. 31521 -2 M.B. 398 / 1 -8 WL. Mw4 TAL. n i M.S. 412/46 -58 T O.V AWaPIS AS V. 114 Ox., FOR. LOT 'C RC 14. T.M.. A.M. / .• ��• TR. 33096• -4 Ir•2$pp �•. tm.ee• / / ! :. ' DEIAIL xq,W L12S.M YlM, R! I - LOT B- 1 A 3T AAT LEFT "A' ' LOT A' YDrz•15•E - NOT TO 91" l© ©Dung kD' aT L 30 Lk9 11 21 v - 1« 31 37 26 _mkNO F- 32 36 25 pI 33 ,s F - - -.•- 24 0104 1 34 34 �-- -DID -7 LO ! 23 M' F_ DUA& MB' NOT TO SALE 411.15' V LOT "d a PiPC W TIC. 0001.1 AS 1' 4434 PLPE "AMOID 'R.C.C. 12141• M' RS. WAM- N09. mt.. = i4. T.A. IL S. FOR. LOT 73 TR. 33096 -4 v I � FOR. LOT "F' 73 I. TR. 33096 -4 r� -ap POR. LOT 3 �. TRACT N0. 32259 15 M.E. 371 / 22 -27 .,� 16 N905/ss1 MAIM 33 �Q J7 M,41,on =2 Yra 9 19 "Y 3/ S rr41•ts'1 .0.M' aJO O 111, „4rR 11 40.VT' 29 s 114.21•ss1 r ze / 1 7 \\ 117 ' Er /t"llk 116 i 129 1 ! r 130 T I 1 1 / 7 to Y¢P��i \ ; 7 97 / 95 03096/9 8 9 Np. `C loz • LOT c. MTA TALE 22 1 36 `1 Sw'M 7A ODIIC 1301 1 X•9'11' 901.90' 741.17 Y ON ] Nlt'Ol•14Y - 0.17•:1" 3 wror i .11•n•14S' - 1W'II'NaM 41..'D'YaIN ] L 7 OC41'31' 12).90' ].030X' 4.90' 19'05'41' 03.70' 0.530 1 a M 3.13•Y!IN 4iY Y i M V S 3V'0'x0' 1.90' W7'tl•5 - 413/• Y R M 1.00' • a M 1, -1 WI•lt'OT 9.90' Y a 10 11 12 y IRIrnr 41'41'07' '43.90' 191.7[' Y R M 31t. n' r Y a 13 01'07'00' q.A' Y ■ a f4 t5 7lr4l M- ]27.90' x'40 q.7!' Y a a 27.St•r■a 17 W36 -A 39,90' 35.43• 17 W. 2r]1• 01'77'30' x77.90' 4373' male 10 39'3.341 - SLR• Y a a 10 0.47'41' x3.00' 32.31' 11:1 20 12.0.3[• 277.90• 01.31• M 11 21 'SAYWE - 9 -0' 41!1 22 IOTO'Sn - ]4.07' Y L 701 23 3X'0116•% - 45. Y' M a a 2. «1.41'041 - 17,74' 0806 25 WrW00Y - x1.00' M a a b W1'n'4/1 - 17.0, v a As 27 N3rw2rl ^ 9.71' r 1 a } NTrxi•4a1 - 17.10 r R a A 10- ',0'011 - 32.47 Y 6 a 30 11.56'471 -- 0.x0'Noa 31 let, I0•g'V ^ 41.1'::1 32 WIS'23'411 - 40.1: Y Y 1 37 .11.01.01'0 �' 14.X' N a a 3 10.3.11 2L74• 0 a 0 JS _ .16'14'461 27.15'Y0a N IOS'12'041 - M.OY Y■ a D OW22'24't - •. N' Y R a 1 mr3r317 7.34' 34 .14'41x41 - 41.90' :!1 40 Men.- -• DJO• r11 41 10.3.311 - 22.21•X005 42 .10.3'111 41.0' Ma05 411.15' V LOT "d a PiPC W TIC. 0001.1 AS 1' 4434 PLPE "AMOID 'R.C.C. 12141• M' RS. WAM- N09. mt.. = i4. T.A. IL S. FOR. LOT 73 TR. 33096 -4 v I � FOR. LOT "F' 73 I. TR. 33096 -4 r� -ap POR. LOT 3 �. TRACT N0. 32259 15 M.E. 371 / 22 -27 .,� 16 N905/ss1 MAIM 33 �Q J7 M,41,on =2 Yra 9 19 "Y 3/ S rr41•ts'1 .0.M' aJO O 111, „4rR 11 40.VT' 29 s 114.21•ss1 r ze / 1 7 \\ 117 ' Er /t"llk 116 i 129 1 ! r 130 T I 1 1 / 7 to Y¢P��i \ ; 7 97 / 95 03096/9 8 9 Np. `C loz • LOT c. 1.: 22 1 36 . IWO 0001W 4 RIM NO KFOCCO0. g� L. -W`7 .¢ 1 1•�' 1 21 iR 1 37 m "x / rJ ~20 V 38 UPWOM IN M CI77 ODACIL. y LOT . IF M t+3 O 0 /.3 \ / \ 19 39 1/ I 3 to O a WAU WXM 3TWW •L.1.33• ID 4"LT rmmmc WIND A TKKM= W r /A''ly'e OR IOC. INKS$ oDOMY NM. L.. --�- 0 3. CDML20 or PRINSIC TRIALS VIII. K 112umm AT [1llorrID6. POINTS D- S1 { 2 Z 13) Tx4aW DNDtRLTIOI (P.1.), P,D.0 41X7$ ND OL-KSs C PANS POINTS nI m / , �i \ W 4M 1 suss NOP STIR D LS. 313• as AYIYLT rAVmfT N1V11 A Q arm Is A LID. TIO[ ! TM AMNL Z.S, SIN" IN 900[9[. Ix s{ t 1 Q [A .. LDT COVf NIGH IM A $1WET VO.L K VDINW T oN A ( TIC RIOO-011011 m oo u aff-w T a r11m INSIM WIN Q t01/L Not AD 1190E M S. UT A 1E/0. tat 3131• IN m. •rte h I�r LOT 'A• 58 m. Itt1aRl>< 113190. ) U/ LOT • A• U \ _ co cu 90077[, M M C SPUC R OM W20 SrW0 1.S. 5134' I ASPHALT FAVW0 a 0: DODLS nn I' ISM PIPE TAm Ls. SIN% r13RC Q LLD, TAO[ MO TAc 411.15' V LOT "d a PiPC W TIC. 0001.1 AS 1' 4434 PLPE "AMOID 'R.C.C. 12141• M' RS. WAM- N09. mt.. = i4. T.A. IL S. FOR. LOT 73 TR. 33096 -4 v I � FOR. LOT "F' 73 I. TR. 33096 -4 r� -ap POR. LOT 3 �. TRACT N0. 32259 15 M.E. 371 / 22 -27 .,� 16 N905/ss1 MAIM 33 �Q J7 M,41,on =2 Yra 9 19 "Y 3/ S rr41•ts'1 .0.M' aJO O 111, „4rR 11 40.VT' 29 s 114.21•ss1 r ze / 1 7 \\ 117 ' Er /t"llk 116 i 129 1 ! r 130 T I 1 1 / 7 to Y¢P��i \ ; 7 97 / 95 03096/9 8 9 Np. `C loz • LOT c. 1.: --C- . IWO 0001W 4 RIM NO KFOCCO0. 11 1 I \ 5 ,. 0 a YM2DIT AS WIS MT 1404111O®. 1 4 1. JU 141AO1M SIDM AS SET RILL W aY WITHIN aE taw M104 TIC ACM IMt2 Or st II to UPWOM IN M CI77 ODACIL. y LOT . IF M t+3 O 0 p AL KLMW La1o[s "" BE 10AAalm KIN A r Mlol rK r suss IAt a,rm 1L.W. s13P. IR LEM. TOOT a TK $TWO'L.S. 5134' IM COCC2. sl M1 r• ¢[K 1/ I 3 to O a WAU WXM 3TWW •L.1.33• ID 4"LT rmmmc WIND A TKKM= W r 1 i OR IOC. INKS$ oDOMY NM. L.. --�- 0 3. CDML20 or PRINSIC TRIALS VIII. K 112umm AT [1llorrID6. POINTS D- S1 { 2 Z 13) Tx4aW DNDtRLTIOI (P.1.), P,D.0 41X7$ ND OL-KSs C PANS POINTS nI m iY„•�. -• �. W 4M 1 suss NOP STIR D LS. 313• as AYIYLT rAVmfT N1V11 A Q arm Is A LID. TIO[ ! TM AMNL Z.S, SIN" IN 900[9[. Ix s{ t 1 Q [A .. LDT COVf NIGH IM A $1WET VO.L K VDINW T oN A ( TIC RIOO-011011 oo u aff-w T a r11m INSIM WIN Q t01/L Not AD 1190E M S. UT A 1E/0. tat 3131• IN m. •rte al RI L acs COMB W1pM9L LOS. (a InOMS WILL K SIT FQ AQE o IN a oLmu 1M I�r Qj= cc s. P.c.c. $ a rA C 's VAT AYAf A sTREr. U1E3$ 4SA70TYS. t W, L 58 m. Itt1aRl>< 113190. ) U/ LOT • A• 5. LOT Q7XAS M1a 90 PDT MM A aW Ski. RE MIND= VII A 1• RICH PIPC R IRAWS TM SIASS 12. 0t3•, at A ". TAX a TM STra1 L.S. 5w IN 2 `rte 57 90077[, M M C SPUC R OM W20 SrW0 1.S. 5134' I ASPHALT FAVW0 111V00 A MONW K r IN WIC. INNS$ Caffam mum, DODLS nn I' ISM PIPE TAm Ls. SIN% r13RC Q LLD, TAO[ MO TAc ! 3 LS. 3131', nAA1. IN CM= Ill A WINE K04C W*Q STMPOI 1.S 5134•. ! \ to K ' a Fat 1141CT W. 33041-4. N.R..ZV2S4:L 101Am WITH A 4• IWO PIPC 1 7 \ LOT ' r TAM LS. 513'. FLNRIC 41 LION). TACK NO TM 1..S. 5134', PARIH. IN O RM M A SPOT 0AR1us awa Ram 'LA, 513•. Am. 1 Z J (jj WM 7403 r ml POE TAM'L.S. SOP' 147 VXT W 901 -1, M.D. 412 /41.71. `�`�`1 1 wom 2- vo Pin LAW Poe ❑ 1 t3A' TA at ILO. TAX At T� . SIN' W M K YT KA Tau M. 3303.3. 59 j�]3] 110016 rDn 1 Ix QAS w AWED %_s. Sw, rLah. Pat Toter W. 76 1Z 12000'1. Y.0. 41UA'RL 1[Q} ILOCS rc/0 r "PIK TAM LS 5130. nzK M I.W. Tim AD TM •� 1.5. 513. FWS. M C20M M A 4'111 RNSOSS VA9Q S%MM 1.S. $130. r7ASt, FM MAO tq. 330014. N.R. 42L2.1L it. No UK" R5 SUL K SLT FOR LOT LIIFS DIVRDC PRIVATE S1RFC15 1.: 2. 03'. - 7413415 FIL01 CNALA 3. 41S ow 4 INDICATES SLEET KAISER 4. I > - ROM MTA S. 'Fa - TWO 10. 3900. Y.D. DI$K7 0. - WAU M. 371.1•1, :A. 34ry1t0. 7. Ia - T10CT W. 3x01:1. Y.L 412 /41-00. �. L M TRAT N0. �1 -3. NA. 471/70-0. M TARN$ 90M IEN001 Alf DART M M Ia31Oa.T 1. a - IRAQ W. 3011.4, r.2. 4212]-32. Lac or to 3 cr 1MCI W. 3231. AS gat M A IK TIUD M 600 331. FROM a twsm 2 "c" K. O 1I. la1) - 000IC9 POLL W. X1 Mrl. DIM Orly or M 031ST a== If AIIQSIS 0617, rA17aRIU. I'm TOM OD'D'S' 1457. IN THE CITY OF BEAUUONT, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA SHEET A OF 5 SHEETS TRACT NO. 33096-10 Q A. .1O�� Euf)E,OEM � � NO [� � Rb,IC SWCM PC WILIfY WRMWa KXW FUPM OOXCIM 1010M 70 TIE CITY OF 4NIOR. LOTS 47 THRT M 72, 74 THXi0" 54 • LOTS B. E. G. N AND PORTIONS OF LOTS 73, 'C• MO 'F' OF TRACT NO 17096-4, Q OOICATC3 A SO& DOW MOM MMOR TOM CITY AS SNOW ON A WP THEREOF FILED IN BOOK 422• PAGES 25 T13i0 M 32 INCL4SIYE• OF YAPS, 90 PORTIONS OF LOT 3 OF OF Kidd. TRACT NO. 32259• SFM ON A W? THEREOF FILED IN BCOC 371, PAGES 22 TH WUGN 27 IND.USIVE• OF YAPS, ALL IN TIE Q INHICATM M EAMOII FOR KKUM S 730 WOW& OFFICE OF THE CUM RECORDER OF SAID RIVERSIDE CUM, CALIFORNIA. HUM°,= IN MO OF SO OIOJO GS CQWI NOT 1YSTNyDIt r. +ra. °31. TI[e01® anwlm) iD. I 1Aa 1K HERD 0.51. main 0..114w TRAC7 M. 31521 -2 DATE OF SURVEY: JULY. 2005 2 or Kw s aaO� � me ss� , tkus — — ..-. — — 101• %'ISY LOT B` o..m AC. - - `- — — r - -_ — — — - R as.m 4 LOT A' 0.367 AC. +s.m a4 us• xe7•a'x•. 3r.m' m Q0p 'A.40 .p�• FOR. YNSyI 4 t .m m m 007 Ye>;mzy. lo•w•ap'N 1,.✓�" LOT 'C TR. 33095 -4 >Q 8 I w A g $ I 2 w N 8 g 8 I a J - < r 5 - s 8 s fi 6 w 7 FOR. �— LOT 73 j TR. 33096 -4 w I 1 r677'xY - LOT • p 4u. u' a. I ` .n• «- >4 PARR (AP/KN7E57q�7J a Nfts s3.m I � POR. Y No ._a.r•, COT n' .g. TR. kla �• It 33095 -4 7 mr3)Yx x1� .tl' t .n.75'f 71.0" 7.32 41.90 32.3 ' W3r3g'N r.sr LOT 3 0' COT G' o. aV AC. 2 • 2N 4x N Im.12 " �i a �� � � 3 12T.to• •d cj ® 12 s FOR. LOT 3 22• v TRACT NO. 32259 `��'_ °� >a '�' Y■ nY la.m M.B. 371 / 22 - 27 �s09 Yn a u s wl.m C A w y h B A 8 31 37 i a4r. NAIL[ 9 I R las'24'.rs 1a.00• Y7. 0ismTA PIONS LaWH 3 Ir K n • IOI.m "N W 3.40' 2 ■'10'5C 30.00' 3 30'30'3P 30.00' 43.12' 20.73' O '1 t* r'S4'rr 30. 00' ! NM22.241C 24.x' N.ID'Yl10 13i 32 B .j6 8 s f$ s 35•+2'2' 73.00• 7 70'2N•76' 9.00' 33.43• M.r' 05 Iw'x•u+ lam' 33 35 Il 15 T - S££ SN££T 5 - )0-)a3507 rurrtt IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALFORNIA Mu p). TRACT N0. 33096 -10 LOS 11 7}10.91 72. T1 MoAI M. LGS t, f. f, P NO f01110a d IOiS T!. •G' SM Y• R i1 p 1)7el-1. u 90M p ! v0► Of70T t0.m N f00t 122, f1&T n nfo/il !! Oa.IbIK, ? YNS, PO r Ws Or !Ot 3 V Or Wff. lu N tl[ R1ct p. 3735e, 9 X14 ? M OPNR I�CW WI Q S1LD a11601CC WMr:VLIr0�1K� t EGEW OF EA, 11 W_TS, O MIC11f5'w UAY)rt FA OOOf )p ElAE53 ((R wtlC a...r n.. co um wwp f0 m t d���'R2105C5 DATE OF SURVEY. JULY, 2005 ® WIg�Y WD EMMI EMCATm KWD( m M PIT - SEE SHEET ! - p oalwn PY EMW Prof flea DO NO IICIt2}Ol fusrm p f)WI V so Gto NS pOq^ PfP p4}IlSp11 w. 10!57. O.P, (P:JY� GJ70/f911) 32 36 I 14 22 mr 2 ros vic}MIII W. sAl"'s wrt5, 1415 cr YS1116• umm MP YO sat Pm. a � g 34 S6 r6 se' e •a'E xu �{ 18 POR. LOT 3 TRACT N0. 32259 35 r• 33 \,S�� ey){ 17 M,B. 371 / 22--27 'J- M 36 T 32 • tp a 4. 4. 1•(' '� 8 rt3,' ri a Soy n) r 1� � 1f 37 Bs a s m� :3 r9 yy aby 3 8 �' / f' �� ,; �i s� } 20 r Jo f' 39 8 %y 1 ,$ ey �� a� 21 bo. �t�E' .� i? a � 9 ♦t2j 9� 29 40 72 A hv'ai bti 41 r d� �� '� °'�� 'O• 2J 8 s5t �$ ��• �4 • 4. •q, 0. •e t, 24 6� a °m• 42 27 ,y� \ rR4C7 N0. 33096 -4 44 M.B. 422 / 25 -- 32 • d4 ; : x`04/3 C.75' Pfi a Bwtr 43 a3y y„ :� . Y1 r`S6 26 puE ua2 8 vC // ►c. �j / \ ` ) 0131.15• .(,� `Iarb, ' '��'li1y�� 'jam\ p. wtt+aTe vom 12)4111 44 r•S - ,Py�'C:. Irrisf G. `� \ 1 )09•Sf'S5'f _ 11. %' 1".M: 13.7)' 20 23s, �`. 23r CJS f 3 2 1 a1wa+ 8 r Pu sraf f u.f4' - I!m• 45 2 w!'n•a•� it 0)'ib'70� }23.00' f2 0!'37's. )27.00• 70.a 1] Au's!.w.4 1.13' SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON` An 11DISON INTER \,4710NI L " Compare Honorable City Council City of Beaumont 550 E. 6t" Street Beaumont, CA 92223 Attention: Council Members ('+, _e s'c. Jf• Trams. a No 33.1. 1161 10 May 24, 2011 Please be advised that the division of the property shown on Tract Map No. 33096 -10 will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise of any easements and /or facilities held by Southern California Edison Company within the boundaries of said map. This letter should not be construed as a subordination of the Company's rights, title and interest irii and to said easement(s), nor should this letter be Canstrued. as a vtlakt t <CI'v i %f tn- - prov' :-iioins contained in said easements; or a costs i()t ,eloc�.-; }ion rA, � =ry affectled facilities. In the event that thy.,, development requires relocation of facilities, on the subject property, which facilities exist by right of easement or otherwise, the owner /developer will be requested to bear the cost of such relocation and provide Edison with suitable replacement rights. Such costs and replacement rights are required prior to the performance of the relocation. If you have any questions, or need additional information in connection with the y a i1 i.�sy .�• n J A ✓i.l i.i� .. l..L v.: i,4 ..l Ji -. J Uii. >Ii'd+:r. ..l ._7'vt 7� d, ku26) VL-�44;r! 'r i c Steven D. Lowry Title and Real Estate Services Corporate Real Estate Department cc: Katie Cesario 2131 Walnut Grove Ave. 2nd Floor Title and Real Estate Services Rosemead, CA 91770 SOUTHERN CALIFORNIA EDISON' An EMSON 1NTERN;1TlONAL' CompanN Honorable City Council City of Beaumont 550 E. 6t" Street Beaumont, CA 92223 Attention: Council Members :,u:; o- Tract Map No. 330196 -1 May 24, 2011 Please be advised that the division of the property shown on Tract Map No. 33096 -11 will not unreasonably interfere with the free and complete exercise of any easements and /or facilities held by Southern California Edison Company within the boundaries of said map. This letter should not be construed as a subordination of the Company's rights, title and interest in and to said easement(s), nor should this letter be construed as a waiver of any of the provisions contained in said easement(s) or a waiver of costs for relocation of any affected facilities. In the event that the development requires relocation of facilities, on the subject property, which facilities exist by right of easement or otherwise, the owner /developer will be requested to bear the cost of such relocation and provide Edison with suitable replacement rights. Such costs and replacement rights are required prior to the performance of the relocation. If you have any questions, or need additional information in connection with the suujeci suuuivlsiurl, piease curltctc� rr1e dt �o�0� .:,0�- 44r.�. n Z,� Steven D. Lowry - '~ Title and Real Estate Services Corporate Real Estate Department cc: Katie Cesario 2131 Walnut Grove Ave. 2nd Floor Title and Real Estate Services Rosemead, CA 91770 Rev. 02/10/09 AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE SECURITY FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT MAP OR PARCEL MAP OR PLOT PLAN (Tract Map /Parcel Map/Plot Plan No. 33o46- i o ) THIS SECURITY AGREEMENT is made and effective this day of , 20 , by and between the CITY OF BEAUMONT ( "CITY ") and K. HovK &v%&'gLt4's -Four Seasons a:F Best u-mom4 u.t- ( "DEVELOPER "). RECITALS A. DEVELOPER has applied to the CITY for permission to develop certain real property, pursuant to Tot+ AcLe No. 33046 -10 ("Map "). DEVELOPER has also asked the CITY to accept the dedication of the street or streets and other proposed public rights -of -way, parks and recreation facilities, and easements as depicted on the Map and to otherwise approve the Map so that it may be recorded as required by law; and B. The CITY requires, as a condition precedent to the acceptance and approval of the Map and the dedication of the public rights -of -way and easements depicted thereon, that such rights -of -way be improved and certified as completed by the CITY Public Works Director with (for example) grading, paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street lights, stormdrains, sanitary sewers and appurtenances thereto, street name signs, survey monuments, electrical and telecommunications, water pipes, water mains, fire hydrants and appurtenances thereto, and landscaping (collectively, "Improvements "); and C. The Improvements have not yet been certified as completed and it is the purpose of this Security Agreement to set forth the terms and conditions by which the DEVELOPER shall guarantee that such Improvements shall be constructed and completed within the time set forth herein. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the acceptance of the DEVELOPER's offer of dedication and the approval of the Map for filing and recording as provided and required by law, the CITY and the DEVELOPER hereby agree as follows: 1. Provision of Improvements. DEVELOPER shall provide, at the DEVELOPER's sole cost and expense, all necessary labor and materials to complete the construction of the Improvements depicted on the Map and described in the conditions of approval of the Map within one (1) year of the date of this Security Agreement. Construction of the Improvements must be certified as complete by the CITY prior to the issuance of the first final inspection permit for residential projects or occupancy permit for commercial and industrial projects, unless otherwise approved by the CITY. 2. Inspection by the CITY. The CITY shall inspect, at the DEVELOPER's sole cost and expense, all of the work, labor and materials performed and provided by the DEVELOPER in connection with the Improvements. 3. Compliance with Plans and Specifications. The Improvements shall be constructed and installed in strict accordance with the CITY - approved plans and specifications as required by the CITY. 4. Security for Performance. Concurrently with the execution of this Security Agreement by DEVELOPER, DEVELOPER shall deliver to the CITY an irrevocable letter of credit or a performance and warranty bond or bonds issued by a corporate surety (or other security as authorized by Government Code, Section 66499) in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A ", in an amount that is not less than 100% of the total estimated cost of the Improvements and any warranty therefor. The performance and warranty bond shall be issued by an "admitted" corporate surety insurer authorized to do business in the State of California and the surety insurer shall have an A.M. Best rating of at least "A:X ". The surety insurer shall have assets exceeding its liabilities in the amount equal to or in excess of the amount of the bond, and the bond shall not be in excess of 10% of the surety insurer's assets. The security or bond for the warranty shall insure against any and all defects in the Improvements for a period of not less than one full year after the date of the first final inspection certifying completion of the Improvements thereof by the CITY. The bond shall be duly executed and shall meet all the requirements of Section 995.660 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The irrevocable letter of credit or bond shall remain in full force and effect and /or renewed until such time as the Improvements are certified as being completed by the CITY. 5. Security for Laborers and Materialmen. The DEVELOPER shall also provide an irrevocable letter of credit or a bond issued by a corporate surety for the security of laborers and materialmen, which bond or bonds shall be in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and made a part hereof. The amount of the bond(s) shall be no less than 100% of the total estimated amount needed to secure payment to the contractor, to the subcontractors, and to the persons furnishing labor, materials, or equipment to them for the Improvements. The laborers and materialmen bond shall be provided by an "admitted" corporate surety insurer authorized to transact surety insurance in the State of California with an A.M. Best rating of "AX', and with assets exceeding its liabilities in the amount equal to or in excess of the amount of the bond, and the bond shall not be in excess of 10% of the surety insurer's assets. The bond shall be duly executed and shall meet all the requirements of Section 995.660 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The irrevocable letter of credit or bond shall remain in full force and effect and /or renewed until such time as the Improvements are certified as being completed by the CITY. 6. General Liability and Worker's Compensation Insurance. The DEVELOPER shall, before commencing any work, obtain commercial general liability insurance (primary) of not less than $2,000,000.00 per occurrence for all coverages and $2,000,000.00 general aggregate. The CITY and its employees and agents shall be added as additional insureds. Coverage shall apply on a primary non - contributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self - insurance, primary or excess, available to the CITY or any employee or agent of the CITY. Coverage shall not be limited to the vicarious liability or supervisory role of any additional 2 insured. Coverage shall contain no contractors' limitation endorsement. There shall be no endorsement or modification limiting the scope of coverage for liability arising from pollution, explosion, collapse, underground property damage or employment - related practices. Such insurance shall not prohibit the DEVELOPER, and its employees or agents, from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss. The DEVELOPER waives its right of subrogation against the CITY. Unless otherwise approved by the CITY, the DEVELOPER's insurance shall be written by insurers authorized to do business in the State of California and with a minimum A.M. Best rating of "A:X." Self- insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance specifications. The DEVELOPER agrees to require all contractors, subcontractors and other parties hired for the Improvements to purchase and maintain insurance of the types specified herein, naming as additional insureds all of the parties to this Security Agreement. The DEVELOPER shall, before commencing any work, obtain Worker's Compensation Insurance in an amount required by law and, failing to do so, the CITY may procure such insurance at the cost of the DEVELOPER. 7. Indemnification. Notwithstanding the provisions of Government Code, Section 66474.9 or any other statutes of similar import, and to the full extent permitted by law, the DEVELOPER shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the CITY, its employees, agents, officials and attorneys, from and against any liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind or nature, whether actual, alleged or threatened, actual attorneys' fees, court costs, interest, expert witness fees and any other costs or expenses of any kind whatsoever, without restriction or limitation, incurred in relation to, as a consequence of, or arising out of or in any way attributable actually, allegedly or impliedly, in whole or in part, to the Map, the Improvements, this Agreement, or any matter related to the same. 8. Procedure for Release of Security. The security furnished by the DEVELOPER shall be released in whole or in part in the following manner: a. Security shall be released upon final completion and acceptance of the Improvements by the CITY Council. If the security furnished by the DEVELOPER is a documentary evidence of security, such as a surety bond or an irrevocable letter of credit, the CITY shall release the documentary evidence and return the original to the Surety upon final completion and acceptance of the Improvements by the CITY Council. In the event the CITY is unable to return the original documentary evidence to the Surety, the security shall be released by written notice sent by certified mail to the DEVELOPER and to the Surety within 30 days of the acceptance of the Improvements. The written notice shall contain a statement that the work for which security was furnished has been completed and accepted, a description of the Improvements, and the notarized signature of an authorized CITY official. b. At such time as the DEVELOPER believes that the work for which the security was required is complete and makes payment of a partial exoneration fee of $350 to the CITY, the DEVELOPER shall notify the CITY in writing of the completed work, including a list of work completed. Upon receipt of the written notice, the CITY shall have 45 days to review and comment on or certify the completion of the Improvements. 3 If the CITY does not agree that all work has been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications for the Improvements, it shall supply the DEVELOPER a list of all remaining work to be completed. C. Within 45 days of receipt of the CITY's list of remaining work, the DEVELOPER may then provide cost estimates for all remaining work for review and approval by the CITY. d. Upon receipt of the cost estimates, the CITY shall then have 45 days to review, comment, and certify, modify or disapprove those cost estimates. The CITY shall not be required to engage in this process of partial release more than once between the start of work and the completion and acceptance of all work. e. If the CITY approves the cost estimate, the CITY shall release all performance security except for security in an amount up to 200% of the cost estimate of the remaining work; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, such partial release shall occur only when the cost estimate of the remaining work does not exceed 20% of the total original performance security. Substitute bonds or other security may be used as a replacement for the performance security, subject to the prior written approval of the CITY. A reduction in performance security is not, and shall not be deemed to be, an acceptance by the CITY of the completed Improvements, and the risk of loss or damage to the Improvements and the obligation to maintain the Improvements shall remain the sole responsibility of the DEVELOPER until all required Improvements have been accepted for maintenance by the CITY Council and all other required Improvements have been certified by the CITY as fully completed in accordance with the plans and specifications for the Improvements. f. The DEVELOPER shall complete the works of Improvement until all remaining items are certified as complete by the CITY. Upon completion of the Improvements, the DEVELOPER shall be notified in writing by the CITY within 45 days and, within 45 days of the date of the CITY's notice, the release of any remaining performance security shall be made within 60 days of the recording of the Notice of Completion and acceptance of the Improvements for maintenance by the CITY Council. 9. Procedure for Release of Payment Security. Security securing the payment to the contractor, his or her subcontractors and persons furnishing labor, materials or equipment shall, after passage of the time within which mechanic's liens and stop notices are required to be recorded and after acceptance of the Improvements, be reduced to an amount equal to the total claimed by all claimants for whom mechanic's liens and stop notices have been recorded and notice thereof given in writing to the CITY, and if no claims have been recorded, the security shall be released in full. 10. Security for One -Year Warranty Period. The release procedures described in paragraphs 8 and 9 above shall not apply to any required guarantee and warranty period nor to the amount of the security deemed necessary by the CITY for the guarantee and warranty period nor to costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 4 11. Binding Effect. This Security Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their legal representatives and their successors and assigns. 12. Authority to Execute. The DEVELOPER hereby warrants and represents to the CITY that the individual signing this Security Agreement on behalf of the DEVELOPER is vested with the unconditional authority to do so pursuant to, and in accordance with, all applicable legal requirements, and has the authority bind the DEVELOPER hereto. 13. No Assignment. The DEVELOPER may not assign this Security Agreement or any part thereof, to another without the prior written consent of the CITY. 14. Attorneys' Fees. In the event of legal action to enforce or interpret this Agreement or any of its provisions, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to any other form of relief, to recover its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit. 15. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but which together shall constitute a single agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the date first above written. CITY OF BEAUMONT By Mayor DEVELOPER: k.1}ovw4µ3aK�5 -}oKr SeaSerLg t+ 5.[.4t &k-vw -'4 1.1-G-- In: K•Hovo- aw.taw eaw,e --es Ga1IFoeksIq� IKr. -'ts By Title: 5 EXHIBITI "A" PERFORMANCE BOND WHEREAS, the City Council agreement whereby Principal agrees to which agreement, dated of the City of Beaumont, State of California, and (hereinafter designated as "Principal ") have entered into an install and complete certain designated public improvements, 20 , and identified as project , is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required under the terms of the said agreement to furnish a bond for the faithful performance of said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Principal and > as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Beaumont (hereinafter called "City "), in the penal sum of dollars ($ ) lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. The condition of this obligation is such that if the Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and provisions in the said agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City, its officers, agents and employees as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. As part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by the City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment therein rendered. The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work or to the specifications. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on _ _ , 20 PRINCIPAL: SURETY: LIM Title Title EXHIBIT "B" BOND FOR SECURITY OF LABORERS AND MATERIALMEN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Beaumont, State of California, and (hereafter designated as "the Principal ") have entered into an agreement whereby the Principal agrees to install and complete certain designed public improvements, which agreement, dated , 20 , and identified as project , is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, under the terms of the said agreement, the Principal is required before entering upon the performance of the work, to file a good and sufficient payment bond with the City of Beaumont to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California. NOW, THEREFORE, the Principal and the undersigned as corporate surety, are held firmly bound unto the City of Beaumont and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen, and other persons employed in the performance of the said agreement and referred to in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code in the sum of dollars ($ ), for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to this work or labor, that the Surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount hereinabove set forth, and also in case suit is brought upon this bond, will pay, in addition to the face amount thereof, costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by the City in successfully enforcing this obligation, to be awarded and fixed by the court, and to be taxed as costs and to be included in the judgment therein rendered. It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies, and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. Should the condition of this bond be fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void, otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the agreement or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any manner affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension, alteration, or addition. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on 20 PRINCIPAL: SURETY: RIM Title Title Rev. 02/10/09 AGREEMENT TO PROVIDE SECURITY FOR IMPROVEMENTS FOR TRACT MAP OR PARCEL MAP OR PLOT PLAN (Tract Map/Parcel Map/Plot Plan No. 33°46 - to ) THIS SECURITY AGREEMENT is made and effective this day of , 20 , by and between the CITY OF BEAUMONT ( "CITY ") and lc. Novnan;ati's Fokr ScQSOH.s X4 3eauntiort l «c ( "DEVELOPER "). RECITALS A. DEVELOPER has applied to the CITY for permission to develop certain real property, pursuant to Tracc.+ m!!. No. 3 ae4t-1D ( "Map "). DEVELOPER has also asked the CITY to accept the dedication of the street or streets and other proposed public rights -of -way, parks and recreation facilities, and easements as depicted on the Map and to otherwise approve the Map so that it may be recorded as required by law; and B. The CITY requires, as a condition precedent to the acceptance and approval of the Map and the dedication of the public rights -of -way and easements depicted thereon, that such rights -of -way be improved and certified as completed by the CITY Public Works Director with (for example) grading, paving, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, street lights, stormdrains, sanitary sewers and appurtenances thereto, street name signs, survey monuments, electrical and telecommunications, water pipes, water mains, fire hydrants and appurtenances thereto, and landscaping (collectively, "Improvements "); and C. The Improvements have not yet been certified as completed and it is the purpose of this Security Agreement to set forth the terms and conditions by which the DEVELOPER shall guarantee that such Improvements shall be constructed and completed within the time set forth herein. AGREEMENT NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the acceptance of the DEVELOPER's offer of dedication and the approval of the Map for filing and recording as provided and required by law, the CITY and the DEVELOPER hereby agree as follows: 1. Provision of Improvements. DEVELOPER shall provide, at the DEVELOPER's sole cost and expense, all necessary labor and materials to complete the construction of the Improvements depicted on the Map and described in the conditions of approval of the Map within one (1) year of the date of this Security Agreement. Construction of the Improvements must be certified as complete by the CITY prior to the issuance of the first final inspection permit for residential projects or occupancy permit for commercial and industrial projects, unless otherwise approved by the CITY. 2. Inspection by the CITY. The CITY shall inspect, at the DEVELOPER's sole cost and expense, all of the work, labor and materials performed and provided by the DEVELOPER in connection with the Improvements. 3. Compliance with Plans and Specifications. The Improvements shall be constructed and installed in strict accordance with the CITY - approved plans and specifications as required by the CITY. 4. Security for Performance. Concurrently with the execution of this Security Agreement by DEVELOPER, DEVELOPER shall deliver to the CITY an irrevocable letter of credit or a performance and warranty bond or bonds issued by a corporate surety (or other security as authorized by Government Code, Section 66499) in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "A ", in an amount that is not less than 100% of the total estimated cost of the Improvements and any warranty therefor. The performance and warranty bond shall be issued by an "admitted" corporate surety insurer authorized to do business in the State of California and the surety insurer shall have an A.M. Best rating of at least "A:X ". The surety insurer shall have assets exceeding its liabilities in the amount equal to or in excess of the amount of the bond, and the bond shall not be in excess of 10% of the surety insurer's assets. The security or bond for the warranty shall insure against any and all defects in the Improvements for a period of not less than one full year after the date of the first final inspection certifying completion of the Improvements thereof by the CITY. The bond shall be duly executed and shall meet all the requirements of Section 995.660 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The irrevocable letter of credit or bond shall remain in full force and effect and /or renewed until such time as the Improvements are certified as being completed by the CITY. 5. Security for Laborers and Materialmen. The DEVELOPER shall also provide an irrevocable letter of credit or a bond issued by a corporate surety for the security of laborers and materialmen, which bond or bonds shall be in substantially the form attached hereto as Exhibit "B" and made a part hereof. The amount of the bond(s) shall be no less than 100% of the total estimated amount needed to secure payment to the contractor, to the subcontractors, and to the persons furnishing labor, materials, or equipment to them for the Improvements. The laborers and materialmen bond shall be provided by an "admitted" corporate surety insurer authorized to transact surety insurance in the State of California with an A.M. Best rating of "AX', and with assets exceeding its liabilities in the amount equal to or in excess of the amount of the bond, and the bond shall not be in excess of 10% of the surety insurer's assets. The bond shall be duly executed and shall meet all the requirements of Section 995.660 of the Code of Civil Procedure. The irrevocable letter of credit or bond shall remain in full force and effect and /or renewed until such time as the Improvements are certified as being completed by the CITY. 6. General Liability and Worker's Compensation Insurance. The DEVELOPER shall, before commencing any work, obtain commercial general liability insurance (primary) of not less than $2,000,000.00 per occurrence for all coverages and $2,000,000.00 general aggregate. The CITY and its employees and agents shall be added as additional insureds. Coverage shall apply on a primary non - contributing basis in relation to any other insurance or self - insurance, primary or excess, available to the CITY or any employee or agent of the CITY. Coverage shall not be limited to the vicarious liability or supervisory role of any additional iJ insured. Coverage shall contain no contractors' limitation endorsement. There shall be no endorsement or modification limiting the scope of coverage for liability arising from pollution, explosion, collapse, underground property damage or employment - related practices. Such insurance shall not prohibit the DEVELOPER, and its employees or agents, from waiving the right of subrogation prior to a loss. The DEVELOPER waives its right of subrogation against the CITY. Unless otherwise approved by the CITY, the DEVELOPER's insurance shall be written by insurers authorized to do business in the State of California and with a minimum A.M. Best rating of "AX" Self - insurance shall not be considered to comply with these insurance specifications. The DEVELOPER agrees to require all contractors, subcontractors and other parties hired for the Improvements to purchase and maintain insurance of the types specified herein, naming as additional insureds all of the parties to this Security Agreement. The DEVELOPER shall, before commencing any work, obtain Worker's Compensation Insurance in an amount required by law and, failing to do so, the CITY may procure such insurance at the cost of the DEVELOPER. 7. Indemnification. Notwithstanding the provisions of Government Code, Section 66474.9 or any other statutes of similar import, and to the full extent permitted by law, the DEVELOPER shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless the CITY, its employees, agents, officials and attorneys, from and against any liability, claims, suits, actions, arbitration proceedings, administrative proceedings, regulatory proceedings, losses, expenses or costs of any kind or nature, whether actual, alleged or threatened, actual attorneys' fees, court costs, interest, expert witness fees and any other costs or expenses of any kind whatsoever, without restriction or limitation, incurred in relation to, as a consequence of, or arising out of or in any way attributable actually, allegedly or impliedly, in whole or in part, to the Map, the Improvements, this Agreement, or any matter related to the same. 8. Procedure for Release of Security. The security furnished by the DEVELOPER shall be released in whole or in part in the following manner: a. Security shall be released upon final completion and acceptance of the Improvements by the CITY Council. If the security furnished by the DEVELOPER is a documentary evidence of security, such as a surety bond or an irrevocable letter of credit, the CITY shall release the documentary evidence and return the original to the Surety upon final completion and acceptance of the Improvements by the CITY Council. In the event the CITY is unable to return the original documentary evidence to the Surety, the security shall be released by written notice sent by certified mail to the DEVELOPER and to the Surety within 30 days of the acceptance of the Improvements. The written notice shall contain a statement that the work for which security was furnished has been completed and accepted, a description of the Improvements, and the notarized signature of an authorized CITY official. b. At such time as the DEVELOPER believes that the work for which the security was required is complete and makes payment of a partial exoneration fee of $350 to the CITY, the DEVELOPER shall notify the CITY in writing of the completed work, including a list of work completed. Upon receipt of the written notice, the CITY shall have 45 days to review and comment on or certify the completion of the Improvements. 3 If the CITY does not agree that all work has been completed in accordance with the plans and specifications for the Improvements, it shall supply the DEVELOPER a list of all remaining work to be completed. C. Within 45 days of receipt of the CITY's list of remaining work, the DEVELOPER may then provide cost estimates for all remaining work for review and approval by the CITY. d. Upon receipt of the cost estimates, the CITY shall then have 45 days to review, comment, and certify, modify or disapprove those cost estimates. The CITY shall not be required to engage in this process of partial release more than once between the start of work and the completion and acceptance of all work. e. If the CITY approves the cost estimate, the CITY shall release all performance security except for security in an amount up to 200% of the cost estimate of the remaining work; PROVIDED, HOWEVER, such partial release shall occur only when the cost estimate of the remaining work does not exceed 20% of the total original performance security. Substitute bonds or other security may be used as a replacement for the performance security, subject to the prior written approval of the CITY. A reduction in performance security is not, and shall not be deemed to be, an acceptance by the CITY of the completed Improvements, and the risk of loss or damage to the Improvements and the obligation to maintain the Improvements shall remain the sole responsibility of the DEVELOPER until all required Improvements have been accepted for maintenance by the CITY Council and all other required Improvements have been certified by the CITY as fully completed in accordance with the plans and specifications for the Improvements. f. The DEVELOPER shall complete the works of Improvement until all remaining items are certified as complete by the CITY. Upon completion of the Improvements, the DEVELOPER shall be notified in writing by the CITY within 45 days and, within 45 days of the date of the CITY's notice, the release of any remaining performance security shall be made within 60 days of the recording of the Notice of Completion and acceptance of the Improvements for maintenance by the CITY Council. 9. Procedure for Release of Payment Security. Security securing the payment to the contractor, his or her subcontractors and persons furnishing labor, materials or equipment shall, after passage of the time within which mechanic's liens and stop notices are required to be recorded and after acceptance of the Improvements, be reduced to an amount equal to the total claimed by all claimants for whom mechanic's liens and stop notices have been recorded and notice thereof given in writing to the CITY, and if no claims have been recorded, the security shall be released in full. 10. Security for One -Year Warranty Period. The release procedures described in paragraphs 8 and 9 above shall not apply to any required guarantee and warranty period nor to the amount of the security deemed necessary by the CITY for the guarantee and warranty period nor to costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorneys' fees. 4 11. Binding Effect. ffect. This Security Agreement shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the parties hereto, their legal representatives and their successors and assigns. 12. Authority to Execute. The DEVELOPER hereby warrants and represents to the CITY that the individual signing this Security Agreement on behalf of the DEVELOPER is vested with the unconditional authority to do so pursuant to, and in accordance with, all applicable legal requirements, and has the authority bind the DEVELOPER hereto. 13. No Assignment. The DEVELOPER may not assign this Security Agreement or any part thereof, to another without the prior written consent of the CITY. 14. Attorneys' Fees. In the event of legal action to enforce or interpret this Agreement or any of its provisions, the prevailing party shall be entitled, in addition to any other form of relief, to recover its reasonable attorneys' fees and costs of suit. 15. Execution in Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed in counterparts, each of which shall be deemed an original, but which together shall constitute a single agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have caused this Agreement to be executed as of the date first above written. CITY OF BEAUMONT By Mayor DEVELOPER: K. g0VK.QK;A.L4 S : Off! taSOKS A.} 3ke-LLn c •7, LL-r- jj,s ; k,14-ovK&"10-- t--e --es a6 i.e. Ti By Title: v p ,1 EXHIBITI "A" PERFORMANCE BOND WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Beaumont, State of California, and (hereinafter designated as "Principal ") have entered into an agreement whereby Principal agrees to install and complete certain designated public improvements, which agreement, dated , 20 , and identified as project , is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, Principal is required under the terms of the said agreement to furnish a bond for the faithful performance of said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, we, the Principal and , as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto the City of Beaumont (hereinafter called "City "), in the penal sum of dollars ($ ) lawful money of the United States, for the payment of which sum well and truly to be made, we bind ourselves, our heirs, successors, executors and administrators, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. The condition of this obligation is such that if the Principal, his or its heirs, executors, administrators, successors or assigns, shall in all things stand to and abide by, and well and truly keep and perform the covenants, conditions and provisions in the said agreement and any alteration thereof made as therein provided, on his or their part to be kept and performed at the time and in the manner therein specified, and in all respects according to their true intent and meaning, and shall indemnify and save harmless the City, its officers, agents and employees as therein stipulated, then this obligation shall become null and void; otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. As part of the obligation secured hereby and in addition to the face amount specified therefor, there shall be included costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by the City in successfully enforcing such obligation, all to be taxed as costs and included in any judgment therein rendered. The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work to be performed thereunder or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any way affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension of time, alteration or addition to the terms of the agreement or to the work or to the specifications. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 20 PRINCIPAL: SURETY: Title Title EXHIBIT "B" BOND FOR SECURITY OF LABORERS AND MATERIALMEN WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Beaumont, State of California, and (hereafter designated as "the Principal ") have entered into an agreement whereby the Principal agrees to install and complete certain designed public improvements, which agreement, dated , 20 , and identified as project , is hereby referred to and made a part hereof; and WHEREAS, under the terms of the said agreement, the Principal is required before entering upon the performance of the work, to file a good and sufficient payment bond with the City of Beaumont to secure the claims to which reference is made in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code of the State of California. NOW, THEREFORE, the Principal and the undersigned as corporate surety, are held firmly bound unto the City of Beaumont and all contractors, subcontractors, laborers, materialmen, and other persons employed in the performance of the said agreement and referred to in Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code in the sum of dollars ($ ), for materials furnished or labor thereon of any kind, or for amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Act with respect to this work or labor, that the Surety will pay the same in an amount not exceeding the amount hereinabove set forth, and also in case suit is brought upon this bond, will pay, in addition to the face amount thereof, costs and reasonable expenses and fees, including reasonable attorney's fees, incurred by the City in successfully enforcing this obligation, to be awarded and fixed by the court, and to be taxed as costs and to be included in the judgment therein rendered. It is hereby expressly stipulated and agreed that this bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies, and corporations entitled to file claims under Title 15 (commencing with Section 3082) of Part 4 of Division 3 of the Civil Code, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. Should the condition of this bond be fully performed, then this obligation shall become null and void, otherwise it shall be and remain in full force and effect. The Surety hereby stipulates and agrees that no change, extension of time, alteration, or addition to the terms of the agreement or the specifications accompanying the same shall in any manner affect its obligations on this bond, and it does hereby waive notice of any such change, extension, alteration, or addition. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this instrument has been duly executed by the Principal and Surety above named, on , 20 PRINCIPAL: SURETY: i 3 Title Title Bond No. 1060652 PERFORMANCE BOND Premium: $3,825.00 CALIFORNIA PUBLIC WORK 2 Year Premium KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS: That we K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont, LLC 7.575 rnmpim Or IrvinP CA 92612 , Principal, and Lexon Insurance Company , Surety, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Texas and authorized to transact surety business in the State of California, are held and firmly bound unto City of Beaumont 550 E. 6th Street Beaumont CA 92223 , Obligee, in the Sum of Two Hundred Fifty Five Thousand Dollars and 00/100 Dollars ($ 255,000.00 for payment of which we bind ourselves, our legal representatives, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. WHEREAS, Principal has entered into a contract with Obligee, dated April 13, 2011 for K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont - Tract 33096 -10 Street, Sewer & Water Modifications copy of which contract is by reference made a part hereof. NOW, THEREFORE, if Principal shall faithfully perform such contract or shall indemnify and save harmless the Obligee from all cost and damage by reason of Principal's failure so to do, then this obligation shall be null and void; otherwise it shall remain in full force and effect. No right of action shall accrue under this bond to or for the use of any person other than the said Obligee. Signed, sealed and dated K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont, LLC June 6, 2011 ��j: K. F}evNaw�ap �i•aP<a�ts e< �w� Gal riroiKra 1 (Seal) Principal Lexon Insurance Com any Cc Christine Marotta Attorney -in -Fact CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONSTRUCTION COST WORKSHEET PARCEL MAP OR TRACT NO.: TR 33096.10 Street, Sewer, & Water Modifications DATE: 13 -A r -11 PP, CUP NO.: BY: Rick Howe ------------------------ -------------- -------- ---- -- - - - - -- IMPROVEMENTS _ " --" -- °-------------------------- FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE 100% LABOR & MATERIALS SECURITY . 100 %7� (of Estimated Construction Cost§ i / L 3treets/Sewer/Water $ 127,468.30 Q 1,� 'total $ 127,468.30 2� Warranty Retension(22.5 %) $ 28,680.37 � (CiOCJ Street/Sewer/Water Plan Check Fees = $ _ 3,824.05 City °' ! street /Sewer/Water Inspection Fees = $ 750.00 APPRO n / \ L` Construction items and their quantities as shown on attached sheets are accurate for the improvements t o construct the above project and the mathematical extcr sions using City's unit costs are accurate for eetcrmning bowling, plan check and inspection costs. /above amounts do include additional 20% for recordation prior to having signed plans Above amounts do not include additional 20% for recordation prior to having signed plans ngineees Signature Date FORM $ UNIT COSTS REVISED 09/06 *****PLF,ASE READ INSTRUCTIONS B r OIV* * *** 1. Quantities to be taken from improvement plans, Unit costs to be as provided on "City of Beaumont Improvement Requirement Worksheet ". 2. Show Bond Amounts to the nearest $500. 3. For construction items not covered by "City of Beaumont Improvcment Worksheet ", Design Engineer is to provide his opinion of construction cost and use of that cost. If City of Beaumont Unit Costs are determined to be too low in the opinion of the Design Engineer, the higher costs as provided by the Design Engineer should be used. RN pdatat10103507VRVINE1Calcs \Land1PHASE C133096 -10- Bond- 8T- SS- DW.x1s 411M011 CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT. TR 33096 -10 Street Sewer, & Water Modifications DATE: 13- Avr -11 STREET IMPROVEMENTS ConAL EE�p T ITEM UNIT COST AMOUNT Remove Existing Service Lateral (4 -Sewer and 5- Water) Includes sawcut, remove AC, remove curb & gutter section, remove lateral, install sewer cap or water plug, reconstruct street and curb & gutter sections back to approved specifications. (Average in- street trench length from main to back -of -curb = 22.51 (Average back -of -curb 9 trench length= 91 4000.00 $ 9.000 EA. Includes sawcut, remove AC, remove curb & gutter section, install lateral and construct main -line connection if sewer, if water lateral installed by others, reconstruct street and curb & gutter sections back to approved specifications. (Average in- street trench length from main to back -of -curb — 22.55 (Average back -of -curb trench 8 'length = 91 $ 1250.00 S 10 000 32 L.F. Barrlcades $ 28.00 $ 896 37 200 S.F. AC overly min. 0.10, — final lift $ 1.00' $ 37.200 L��d L.F. Curb and Gutter a Curb $ 8:00 $ 256 S.F. P.C.C. Sidewalk I 't � ,,,, I . OUMuLal Subtotal: $ 110,842 B. Contingency (15 %) $ 16,626' C. Streets/Drainage Total (A + B) $ 127,468 i# iAA#* kiA##*** kAf* Rk* k# f4ffAAl4AA A* Afif4#!* l44A#* f# iiiAlikAi# fkAA4f## i* fk; A# fi#* 4k## fk; fk; k#; ik#; k*; kf * #tlAk #H;INIti# ;Aiii*#i #4AIli # ;! H: 1pdata1 10103507URVINE\CalcslLancIPHASE 0133096 -10- Bond- ST- SS- DW.xis 4/13/I071 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SURETY STATE OF ILLINOIS COUNTY OF COOK On JV 1� s 2011 before me a Notary ublic in and for the above county, y, personally appeared Christine Marotta to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did state that he /she is Attorney -in -Fact of Lexon Insurance Company, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Texas that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of the said corporation, that the instrument was signed, sealed, and executed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors, and further acknowledged the said instrument and the execution thereof to be the voluntary act and deed of said corporation by her voluntarily executed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed by name and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. OFFICIAL SEAL NICOLE KUBENA ENOTA,R PUBLIC. STATE OF ILLINOIS mmission Expires 07/15/2012 VW JV'N W'/'fVVV /V'NWVW (SEAL) Notary Public COOK County. ILLINOIS POWER OF ATTORNEY LX - Lexon Insurance Company KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, a Texas Corporation, with its principal office in Louisville, Kentucky, does hereby constitute and appoint: Christine Marotta, Debra Kohlman, Thomas P. Pluss * ********************************************* * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** * its true and lawful Attorney(s) -In -Fact to make, execute, seal and deliver for, and on its behalf as surety, any and all bonds, undertakings or other writings obligatory in nature of a bond. This authority is made under and by the authority of a resolution which was passed by the Board of Directors of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY on the 1st day of July, 2003 as follows: Resolved, that the President of the Company is hereby authorized to appoint and empower any representative of the Company or other person or persons as Attorney -In -Fact to execute on behalf of the Company any bonds, undertakings, policies, contracts of indemnity or other writings obligatory in nature of a bond not to exceed $2,500,000.00, Two - million five hundred thousand dollars, which the Company might execute through its duly elected officers, and affix the seal of the Company thereto. Any said execution of such documents by an Attorney -In -Fact shall be as binding upon the Company as if they had been duly executed and acknowledged by the regularly elected officers of the Company. Any Attorney -In -Fact, so appointed, may be removed for good cause and the authority so granted may be revoked as specified in the Power of Attorney. Resolved, that the signature of the President and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile on any power of attorney granted, and the signature of the Vice President, and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile to any certificate of any such power and any such power or certificate bearing such facsimile signature and seal shall be valid and binding on the Company. Any such power so executed and sealed and certificate so executed and sealed shall, with respect to any bond of undertaking to which it is attached, continue to be valid and binding on the Company. IN WITNESS THEREOF, LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY has caused this instrument to be signed by its President, and its Corporate Seal to be affixed this 21st day of September, 2009. LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY �RANCF A TEXA S S O: •D X: INSURANCE Z BY Wj COMPANY David E. Campbell President ACKNOWLEDGEMENT On this 21st day of September, 2009, before me, personally came David E. Campbell to me known, who being duly sworn, did depose and say that he is the President of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, the corporation described in and which executed the above instrument; that he executed said instrument on behalf of the corporation by authority of his office under the By -laws of said corporation. "OFFICIAL SEAL" MAL-REEN K. AYE M / Notary Public, State of Illinois My Commission Expires 09/21113 Maureen K. Aye CERTIFICATE Notary Public I, the undersigned, Secretary of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, A Texas Insurance Company, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the original Power of Attorney of which the foregoing is a true and correct copy, is in full force and effect and has not been revoked and the resolutions as set forth are now in force. Signed and Sealed at Woodridge, Illinois th U� Q 211 Day of 20 >: n TEXAS % � XO INSURANCE : Z >•t COMPANY Donald D. Buchanan .., •,/ Secretary "WARNING: Any person who knowingly and with intent to defraud any insurance company or other person, files an application for insurance or statement of claim containing any materially false information, or conceals for the purpose of misleading, information concerning any fact materi- al thereto, commits a fraudulent insurance act, which is a crime and subjects such person to criminal and civil penalties." LA 7 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE On June 10, 2011, before me, Cathie Zhou, a Notary Public, personally appeared Shane Maloney, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and offic;al cPai [Civil Code § 1189] mob d6�1 Commission # 1819063 < Notary Public - California ZZ i San Bernardino County My Comm. Expires Oct 21, 2012 Bond No. 1060652 PAYMENT BOND Premium Included In Performance Bond CALIFORNIA PUBLIC WORK KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, That we, K Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont,_ LLC 2525 Campus Dr Irvine CA 92612 , as Principal, and exon _ corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Texas and authorized to transact surety business in the State of California, as Surety, are held and firmly bound unto City of Beaumont 550 G 6th Street Raaumnnt CA 92223_, as Obligee, in the sum of I wo riunarea FiftV Five Thousand Dollars and 00/100 Dollars ($ 255,000.00 ), for the payment whereof, well and truly to be made, said Principal and Surety bind themselves, their heirs, administrators, successors and assigns, jointly and severally, firmly by these presents. WHEREAS, the above - bounded Principal has entered into a contract, a copy of which contract is by reference made a part hereof, dated April 13, 2011 with the obligee for K. Hovnanian's Four Seasons at Beaumont - Tract 33096 -10 Street Sewer & Water Modifications NOW, THEREFORE, if the above - bounded Principal or his subcontractors shall fail to pay any of the persons named in Section 3181 of the Civil Code of the State of California, or amounts due under the Unemployment Insurance Code with respect to work or labor performed by any such claimant, or any amounts required to be deducted, withheld and paid over the Franchise Tax Board from the wages of employees of the Principal or his sub - contractors pursuant to Section 18806 of the Revenue and Taxation Code, with respect to such work and labor, Surety will pay for the same, in an agreeable amount not exceeding the amount specified in this bond, and also, in case suit is brought upon this bond, a reasonable attorney's fee, to be fixed by the court. This bond shall inure to the benefit of any and all persons, companies or corporations entitled to file claims under Section 3181 of the Civil Code of the State of California, so as to give a right of action to them or their assigns in any suit brought upon this bond. Signed, sealed and dated this 6th day of June 2011 K�HoSVnpnian's F Sea on at Beaumont, LLC Principal By _" a" u- exon Insurance Compan / Surety Christine Marotta Attorney -In -Fact CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT CONSTRUCTION COST WORKSHEET PARCEL MAP OR TRACT NO.: TR 33096 -10 Street, Sewer, & Water Modifications DATE: l3 -Apr- -1 I' PP, CUP NO.: BY: Rick Howe itreets/Sewer/Water Total Narranty Retension (22.5%) >treet/Sewer/Water Plan Check Fees = Street/Sewer/Water Inspection Fees = tD con, d,eterm / above Above �ng L 2. 3. FAITHFUL PERFORMANCE 100 % LABOR &MATERIALS SECURITY fl 100% (of Estimated Construction Costs, 5S t $ 127,468.30-/ VO4%9 $ 127,468.30 $ 28,680.37 1 00 $ 3,824.05 Cif ° �pvEDnC $ 750.00 AF r R Ej€ Pub ,Wcrxs 8p 60 on items and their quantities as shown on attached sheets are accurate for the improvements :t the above project and the mathematical extensions using City's unit costs are accurate for g bonding, plan check and inspection costs. )unts do 0include additional.20% for recordation prior to having signed plans )un is do not include additional 20 % for recordation prior to having signed plans u Signature Date FORM $ UNIT COSTS REVISED 09/06 40565 * * ** *PLEASE READ INSTRUCTIONS BELONV * **** Quantities to be taken from improvement plans, Unit costs to be as provided on "City of Beaumont Improvement Requirement Worksheet ". , Show Bond Amounts to the nearest $500. :For construction items not covered by "City of Beaumont Improvement Worksheet ", Design Engineer is to provide his opinion of construction cost and use of that cost. If City of Beaumont Unit Costs are determined to be too low in the opinion of the Design Engineer, the higher costs as provided by the Design Engineer should be used H: 1pdata1 10103507URVINEICalcslLandlPHASE C133096 -10- Bond- ST- S8- DW.Xls 411"011 CITY OF BEAUMONT PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT IMPROVEMENT REQUIREMENT WORKSHEET PROJECT: TR 33096 -10 Street, Sewer, & Water Modifications DATE: 13- Apr -11 STREET IMPROVEMENTS (Contd.) QTY. UNIT ITEM UNIT COST AMOUNT EA. Remove Existing Service Lateral (4 -Sewer and 5- Water) Includes sawcut, remove AC, remove curb & gutter section, remove lateral, install sewer cap or water plug, reconstruct street and curb & gutter sections back to approved specifications. (Average in-street trench length from main to back -of -curb = 22.5 (Average back -of -curb 9 Itrench length= 9 ) 1000.00 $ 9,000 EA. includes sawcut, remove AC, remove curb & gutter section, install lateral and construct main -line connection if sewer, if water lateral installed by others, reconstruct street and curb & gutter sections back to approved specifications. (Average: in- street trench length from main to back -of -curb = 22.5`) (Average back -of -curb trench 8 length = 9 ) 1,250.00 $ 10,000 32 L.F. Barrlcades. $ 28.00 $ 896 37,200 SZ AC overlay mim 0.10' = final lift $ 1.00- $ 37,200 32 L.F. I Garb and Gutter a Curb $ 8.00 $ 256 8 915 S.F. P.C.C. Sidewalk $ 6.00 $ 53,490 A. Subtotal B. ! Contingency (15 %) C. StreetslDralnage Total (A + B) H: 1pdata1 1010350711RVINE \CatcslLand%PHASE C\33096 -10- Bond- ST- SS- DW.x19 Subtotal: $' $ 110,842 $- 16,626 ACKNOWLEDGMENT OF SURETY STATE OF ILLINOIS COUNTY OF COOK On JUN 0 6 2011 , before me, a Notary Public in and for the above county, personally appeared Christine Marotta to me personally known, who, being by me duly sworn, did state that he /she is Attorney -in -Fact of Lexon Insurance Company, a corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of Texas that the seal affixed to the foregoing instrument is the corporate seal of the said corporation, that the instrument was signed, sealed, and executed in behalf of said corporation by authority of its Board of Directors, and further acknowledged the said instrument and the execution thereof to be the voluntary act and deed of said corporation by her voluntarily executed. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto subscribed by name and affixed my official seal the day and year first above written. EOFFICIAL SEAL NOTARY OLE KUBENA BLIC. S TATE CF ILLINOIS , Notary Public ission Expires 07,1:;20'2 (SEAL) COOK County ILLINOIS POWER OF ATTORNEY LX - Lexon Insurance Company KNOW ALL MEN BY THESE PRESENTS, that LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, a Texas Corporation, with its principal office in Louisville, Kentucky, does hereby constitute and appoint: Christine Marotta, Debra Kohlman, Thomas P. Pluss * ********************************** * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * * ** its true and lawful Attorney(s) -In -Fact to make, execute, seal and deliver for, and on its behalf as surety, any and all bonds, undertakings or other writings obligatory in nature of a bond. This authority is made under and by the authority of a resolution which was passed by the Board of Directors of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY on the 1st day of July, 2003 as follows: Resolved, that the President of the Company is hereby authorized to appoint and empower any representative of the Company or other person or persons as Attorney -In -Fact to execute on behalf of the Company any bonds, undertakings, policies, contracts of indemnity or other writings obligatory in nature of a bond not to exceed $2,500,000.00, Two - million five hundred thousand dollars, which the Company might execute through its duly elected officers, and affix the seal of the Company thereto. Any said execution of such documents by an Attorney -In -Fact shall be as binding upon the Company as if they had been duly executed and acknowledged by the regularly elected officers of the Company. Any Attorney -In -Fact, so appointed, may be removed for good cause and the authority so granted may be revoked as specified in the Power of Attorney. Resolved, that the signature of the President and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile on any power of attorney granted, and the signature of the Vice President, and the seal of the Company may be affixed by facsimile to any certificate of any such power and any such power or certificate bearing such facsimile signature and seal shall be valid and binding on the Company. Any such power so executed and sealed and certificate so executed and sealed shall, with respect to any bond of undertaking to which it is attached, continue to be valid and binding on the Company. IN WITNESS THEREOF, LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY has caused this instrument to be signed by its President, and its Corporate Seal to be affixed this 21st day of September, 2009. LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY �FtANCF = Or• TEXAS • : D X� INSURANCE Wj COMPANY BY ••,• David E. Campbell President ACKNOWLEDGEMENT On this 21st day of September, 2009, before me, personally came David E. Campbell to me known, who being duly sworn, did depose and say that he is the President of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, the corporation described in and which executed the above instrument; that he executed said instrument on behalf of the corporation by authority of his office under the By -laws of said corporation. "OFFICIAL SEAL" MAL -BEEN K. AYE Notary Public, State of Illinois My Commission Expires 09/21/13 Maureen K. Aye CERTIFICATE Notary Public I, the undersigned, Secretary of LEXON INSURANCE COMPANY, A Texas Insurance Company, DO HEREBY CERTIFY that the original Power of Attorney of which the foregoing is a true and correct copy, is in full force and effect and has not been revoked and the resolutions as set forth are now in force. j Signed and Sealed at Woodridge, Illinois tht� 0 S 2011 Day of 20 Z• A 2 ' Of TEXAS •t� X• I%_1RANCE :> �j:• COMPANY C Donald D. Buchanan �•••'••••••• Secretary "WARNING: Any person who knowingly and with intent to defraud any insurance company or other person, files an application for insurance or statement of claim containing any materially false information, or conceals for the purpose of misleading, information concerning any fact materi- al thereto, commits a fraudulent insurance act, which is a crime and subjects such person to criminal and civil penalties." LX1 STATE OF CALIFORNIA COUNTY OF ORANGE On June 10, 2011, before me, Cathie Zhou, a Notary Public, personally appeared Shane Maloney, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person whose name is subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he executed the same in his authorized capacity, and that by his signature on the instrument the person, or the entity upon behalf of which the person acted, executed the instrument. I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing paragraph is true and correct. WITNESS my hand and official Pal [Civil Code § 11891 CATHIE ZHOU� Commission # 1819083 Notary Public - California San Bernardino County My Comm. Ex Tres Oct 21, 2012 Agenda Item STAFF REPORT TO: Mayor and Council Members FROM: Community and Economic Development Department DATE: June 21, 2011 SUBJECT: Tract 31426 — Aspen Creek - located at the southwest corner of Manzanita Park Road and Potrero Blvd. - Energy and Water Conservation Agreement with RSI Land LLC. EXECUTIVE SUMMARY: Agreement between the RSI Land, LLC and the City of Beaumont for the construction of energy and water saving features within Tract 31426. Fiscal Impact Value of the fees would be $1,278,506.28 Million to be reimbursed to the City through the sale of future bonds and/or the levy of a special tax upon the development. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends approval of the Agreement and Project Progress Report, and authorization of the Mayor to execute the Agreement and Project Progress Report subject to the authority of the City Attorney to make non - substantive changes. Background and Analysis: RSI Land, LLC recently acquired the remaining undeveloped 77 residential lots within Tract 31426 from Manzanita, L.P. located at the southwest corner of Manzanita Park Road and Potrero Blvd. The proposed Agreement would require RSI Land, LLC. to complete the construction of a water quality basin, which was initially started by the previous owner Manzanita, L.P., which would treat and recharge storm water within Lot B of Tract No. 31426 Additionally, RSI would be required to pay for all of the remaining design, permitting and construction costs to complete this Water Quality Basin in accordance with the approved storm drain plans for Tract 31426 Additionally per the agreement, RSI would be required to redesign and submit amended landscaping plans for open space areas, interior parkways and for park improvements and use UL Staff Report Energy and Water Conservation Agreement with RSI Land LLC Page 2 best efforts to reduce water demand by 50% or more compared to the existing approved plans and City standards for the subject areas. The proposed Amended Agreement would also require RSI to construct water conserving front yards and interior parkways on the remaining 77 lots within the Aspen Creek community. The water conserving landscaping and irrigation systems would significantly exceed existing state and city water conservation standards by saving about 45,000 gallons per year for each home constructed (0.14 acre feet per home or 23% of estimated average demand of 0.6 acre feet per home). In addition, the Agreement would require RSI to offer homebuyers the option of purchasing energy saving tank -less water heaters for each home proposed. In order for RSI to fund the construction of the water and energy conservation facilities and features, the City would agree to waive approximately $902,309.87 in City fees on 77 lots, and $376,196.41 in City fees on 29 lots. The total value of the fees would be $1,278,506.28 Million. This would be reimbursed to the City through the sale of future bonds and/or the levy of a special tax within the Aspen Creek community. Recommendation: Staff recommends APPROVAL of the Agreement and Project Progress Report, and AUTHORIZATION of the Mayor to execute the Agreement and Project Progress Report subject to the authority of the City Attorney to make non - substantive changes. City Manager CITY OF BEAUMONT PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT RSI LAND, LLC. WATER AND ENERGY CONSERVATION AGREEMENT Fund Project Name: RSI Land, LLC. Water and Energy Source: City Impact Mitigation Fees Conservation Project Contract Contractors: TBD Date: Const. Budget: TBD Subcontractors: See approved CIP Contractor List Problems or Delays During Report Period: No problems or delays. Change Orders: No change orders. City Council Action: Provide legal, planning and engineering support for the Project and levy the special tax to fund authorized facilities otherwise funded by mitigation fees waived. Report Approved by: Mayor's Signature Date of City Council Approval r � COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT ENERGY AND WATER CONSERVATION AGREEMENT This Community Facilities District Energy and Water Conservation Agreement (the "Agreement ") is entered into to be effective on June 21, 2011 by and between the City of Beaumont, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (the "City "), and RSI Land LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ( "RSI "). The City and RSI are sometimes individually referred to herein as a "Party" and collectively as the "Parties." RECITALS A. RSI is the owner of real property located in the City, Tract No. 31426 and Improvement Area No. 20 of City of Beaumont Community Facilities District No. 93 -1 (the "CFD ") shown on attached Exhibit "A" (the "Property "). As of June 7, 2011, 29 dwelling units have been built within Tract No. 31426 by Manzanita, L.P., a California limited partnership ( "Manzanita "). RSI expects to build new homes for sale on the remaining 77 lots in Tract No. 31426 on the Property. B. Manzanita has partially completed construction of a water quality basin to treat and recharge storm water within Lot B of Tract No. 31426 (the "Water Quality Basin ") as depicted on page 2 of attached Exhibit "A." Lot B has been offered for dedication to the City in accordance with the final subdivision map. C. The Parties by this Agreement intend to set forth the terms pursuant to which RSI will complete construction of the Water Quality Basin, implement the water and energy conservation measures, and waive certain development impact mitigation fees applicable to the existing 29 dwelling units and not more than 77 future dwelling units to be constructed by RSI on the Property. D. The City and RSI intend to finance and/or fund construction of certain public facilities which are authorized by the CFD for Improvement Area No. 20 through the levy of a special tax on the Property. COVENANTS Based on the foregoing recitals and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows: 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The Parties accept the above recitals as true and correct and incorporate them herein as if they were fully restated. 2. Water Quality Basin RSI agrees to pay for all of the remaining design, permitting and construction costs to complete the Water Quality Basin in accordance with the approved storm drain plans for Tract 31426. RSI shall be responsible for the management and coordination of all aspects of the work required including maintaining the Property in accordance with all City and regulatory permits for the Water Quality Basin as of the date of this Agreement. RSI will, from time to time, provide to City status reports summarizing the construction progress of the Water Quality Basin. RSI shall provide security for the completion of the Water Quality Basin by posting labor and material bonds with the City in accordance with a future subdivision agreement on or before September 30, 2011. The Water Quality Basin shall be completed on or before December 30, 2012. Upon the satisfactory completion of construction and warranty period, the Water Quality Basin shall be accepted for maintenance by the City in accordance with the subdivision agreement. 3. Water and Energy Conservation Measures RSI agrees to redesign and submit amended landscaping plans for open space areas, parkways and medians along Potrero Boulevard and for park improvements and use commercially reasonable efforts to reduce water demand by 50% or more compared to the existing approved plans and City standards for the subject areas. The previously improved landscape areas including those areas located on Potrero Boulevard behind lots 81 through 86 shall be excluded from this provision. RSI further agrees to offer tank - less water heaters for installation in each home it builds on the Property. 4. Subdivision Agreements. RSI shall, at its sole cost and expense, complete the public improvements required in accordance with a future subdivision agreement between RSI and the City which, once approved, will replace the subdivision agreement between Manzanita and the City. 5. Mitigation Fee Waivers. The City shall, from the date of this Agreement through June 30, 2015, waive all development impact mitigation fees listed on Exhibit "B" hereto applicable to the existing 29 dwelling units within Tract No. 31426 and the 77 dwelling units for which building permits will be issued within the Property after the effective date of this Agreement. RSI shall provide an accounting of the fee waivers issued and requested concurrently with each application filed for building permits. 6. CID Proceeds. RSI agrees to cooperate as reasonably necessary for the City to conduct proceedings to authorize the sale and issuance of bonds to fund construction of public facilities authorized by the CFD for Improvement Area No. 20. RSI further agrees that the City shall be entitled its sole discretion to use one hundred percent (100 %) of the special tax revenue and net proceeds of each series of bonds issued for construction of public facilities as authorized by the CFD for Improvement Area No. 20. RSI agrees to reasonably provide information and to enter into a continuing disclosure agreement(s) as needed for the City to market, sell and issue CID bonds for Improvement Area No. 20. 7. Attorneys' Fees. In case of suit arising out of or related to this Agreement, the Parties agree that the prevailing Party shall be entitled to its actual attorneys' fees, and all fees, costs and expenses incurred in connection with such suit. Such attorneys' fees, costs and expenses shall include post judgment attorneys' fees, costs and expenses incurred on appeal or in collection of any judgment. 8. Notices. Any notice, request, demand, consent, approval or other communication required or permitted hereunder or by law shall be validly given or made only if in writing and 2 delivered in person to an officer or duly authorized representative of the other Party or by United States mail, duly certified or registered (return receipt requested), postage prepaid, and addressed to the Party for whom intended, as follows: If to City: City of Beaumont 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, CA 92223 Attention: City Manager Telephone Number: (951) 769 -8520 Facsimile Number: (951) 769 -8526 with a copy to: Aklufi & Wysocki 3403 10th Street, Suite 610 Riverside, CA 92501 -3646 Attention: Joseph S. Aklufi Telephone Number: (951) 682 -5480 Facsimile Number: (951) 682 -2619 If to RSI: RSI Land LLC 620 Newport Center Drive 12th Floor Newport Beach, CA 92660 Attention: Lisa Gordon Telephone Number: (949) 270 -3603 Facsimile Number: (949) 720 -1164 9. Any Party may from time to time, by written notice to the other as provided above, designate a different address which shall be substituted for that specified above. In the event that Party shall convey its property to another person, such person shall notify the other Party of the proper notice address of such successor party and notices shall thereafter be sent thereto. If any notice or other document is sent by mail as aforesaid, the same shall be deemed served or delivered seventy -two (72) hours after mailing thereof as above specified. Notice by any other method shall be deemed served or delivered upon actual receipt at the address or fax number listed above (actual receipt of a facsimile to be evidenced by a transmission confirmation report, provided that the original notice and a copy of such report is sent to the noticed Party by mail within twenty -four (24) hours of transmission). 10. Miscellaneous. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties hereto pertaining to the subject matter hereof and all prior and contemporaneous agreements, representations and understandings of the Parties hereto, oral or written, are hereby superseded and merged herein. No supplement, modification or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless in writing and executed by the Parties hereto. No waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed or shall constitute a waiver of any other provisions, whether or not similar, nor shall any waiver be a continuing waiver. No waiver shall be binding unless executed in writing by the Party making the waiver. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of the State of California. In the event of any dispute hereunder, the sole and exclusive venue shall be in a court of competent jurisdiction in Riverside County, California, and the Parties agree to submit to the jurisdiction of such court. The headings of this Agreement are for purposes of reference only and shall not limit or define the 3 meaning of the provisions hereof. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. This Agreement may be amended or modified only in writing executed by the authorized representative(s) of each Party. The Parties to this Agreement agree to complete and execute any further or additional documents which may be necessary to complete or further the terms of this Agreement. 11. Status of the Parties. This Agreement is not intended to create, and nothing herein contained shall be construed to create, an association, a trust, a joint venture, a partnership or other entity of any kind, or to constitute either Party as the agent, employee or partner of the other. In performing the design and construction of the Project, RSI is an independent contractor and not an agent of the City. 12. Preparation of this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be construed against the Party preparing it, but shall be construed as if both Parties prepared it. 13. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. 14. Signatories. The signatories executing this Agreement represent that they are authorized to enter into this Agreement on behalf of the Party for whom they sign. [Signature Page Follows] 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. ATTEST: IC Karen Thompson, City Clerk R "CITY" CITY OF BEAUMONT, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California t Brian De Feforge, Mayor "RSI" RSI Laid LLC, a� Dire liliability By: Name: isa G rc Title: President EXHIBIT "A" Page 1 of 2 The Property and Water Quality Basin Property Legal Description LOTS 1, 2, 3, 30 THROUGH 82, INCLUSIVE AND 86 THROUGH 106 INCLUSIVE, OF TRACT NO. 31426, IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 404, PAGES 9 THROUGH 13, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. APN: 421 - 750 -01, 02, 03 & 17 -36 & 421- 751 -14 THOUGH 66 & 70 -1 N GENERAL NOTES -rW7 OF STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENT PLANS FOR TRACT 31426 SHEET 3 ra ,o .awx ouua as cw ..� c wwrs .o, tiw ,oca. as ,cL..w •.rsw+. ,�r .w..., -- ' -- ___ -� _ -. Yf OT A r>raar aaon.[as cunr -� axran wa o. rw wn aww w. w •+wm u . me a an nu as aaa ra sww rym _- _ _. �_ _. _ -•" -- S c r - cra.au..w... OLVD vii °'�ao aw of ..wa.., ww .. � rsr.,r. rs a.ww q..x...,w w,� .,,.. 'r f E� _.._ - � ,.,.�4 --.._ y - •�4 �. r,x.a.: I tos L........ um ..o wavc wa .wx "rs .[cFUnvucVr siwl .w°tc w _ -- I ]] - r ENCWEER'S MOTES u.ro 1W l ._ _ 8 i w �F 71 S ��� r c racr w m�'tO m sc"`r wcumw f6P `°a :.i K s_ wwuss .wor rwe —tr 8 L r ]' 1 corn£ r �E Mm Slt.ws�F _ _ B •A i UY A Sl n ]t Ile D r i] r r u 73 ]S tl 10 Ile tt 1 t] viwc nnr rm .ocnone a .vnrn,w ro nuwm w. ro cnr .. WATER GWIJly RISER INLET DECLARATION OFQ ENGINEER OF RECORD NWU.f "t5�.s r l "rnEn. oEawx rt.- a w cxorrssarw � E caoa P,.R _ I I awcT�. rt� nc� oliors. »tr. 1HE f ] - "" M RER015e'` e f r n is is CONSTRUCTION NOTES & QUANTITY ESTIMATE ac�r n,.c msvowauv rcn suc" xsn+. "SOS axaex or LOT eHEET 2 + e s . t. +s ,. wE« ff rscsE .,.ws a. tK en a Ir.,u _ -- oa Oman ff SuM Pw' qE 004 wi mE 6or4M ra or w u� voa,3un_ ,I STORM DRAIN CONSTRUCTION NOTES QUANTITY /UNIT nau rts fl�r ,?nrep E=M'ts ='lrAl='a0170Z, I(Y. ] o- ma w x a wr aeroae. T .art ,rr", .s,oE - e : xw..r.i,. o �JI sw, g . . 'I eva�r mr srzuw ... wun �s aw ewsl _ F 44, ..— wuAfiof -- usouATes CITY OF BI54MOW SHEET F -- °a' STORM CIRMI.P�I�IOVVE B4T PLANS �O 7 % w ..44 �T TITLE Si�T. OF 6 I%95" EXHIBIT `B" Fees to be Waived (not to exceed 29 existing dwelling units) Traffic Signal Fee $176.00 Railroad Crossing Fee $199.00 Fire Station Fee $181.00 Basic Service Fee $500.00 Regional Park Fee $886.86 Emergency Preparedness Fee $700.38 General Plan Fee $50.00 Sewer Connection Fee $2,437.00 Lower Potrero Sewer Fee $480.95 Southern Trunk Main $88.10 Residential Road and Bridge Fee $7,248.00 Sewer Application $25.00 Total Maximum Per Dwelling Unit: $12,972.29 Fees to be Waived (not to exceed 77 future dwelling units) Traffic Signal Fee $123.20 Railroad Crossing Fee $139.30 Fire Station Fee $126.70 Basic Service Fee $350.00 Regional Park Fee $620.80 Emergency Preparedness Fee $490.27 General Plan Fee $35.00 Sewer Connection Fee $2,198.74 Lower Potrero Sewer Fee $480.95 Southern Trunk Main $88.10 Residential Road and Bridge Fee $7,040.25 Sewer Application $25.00 Total Maximum Per Dwelling Unit: $11,718.31 Total for existing 29 units: $376,196.41 Total for future 77 units: $902,309.87 COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT ENERGY AND WATER CONSERVATION AGREEMENT This Community Facilities District Energy and Water Conservation Agreement (the "Agreement ") is entered into to be effective on June 21, 2011 by and between the City of Beaumont, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California (the "City "), and RSI Land LLC, a Delaware limited liability company ( "RSI "). The City and RSI are sometimes individually referred to herein as a "Party" and collectively as the "Parties." RECITALS A. RSI is the owner of real property located in the City, Tract No. 31426 and Improvement Area No. 20 of City of Beaumont Community Facilities District No. 93 -1 (the "CFD ") shown on attached Exhibit "A" (the "Property "). As of June 7, 2011, 29 dwelling units have been built within Tract No. 31426 by Manzanita, L.P., a California limited partnership ( "Manzanita "). RSI expects to build new homes for sale on the remaining 77 lots in Tract No. 31426 on the Property. B. Manzanita has partially completed construction of a water quality basin to treat and recharge storm water within Lot B of Tract No. 31426 (the "Water Quality Basin ") as depicted on page 2 of attached Exhibit "A." Lot B has been offered for dedication to the City in accordance with the final subdivision map. C. The Parties by this Agreement intend to set forth the terms pursuant to which RSI will complete construction of the Water Quality Basin, implement the water and energy conservation measures, and waive certain development impact mitigation fees applicable to the existing 29 dwelling units and not more than 77 future dwelling units to be constructed by RSI on the Property. D. The City and RSI intend to finance and /or fund construction of certain public facilities which are authorized by the CFD for Improvement Area No. 20 through the levy of a special tax on the Property. COVENANTS Based on the foregoing recitals and for good and valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are acknowledged, the Parties hereby agree as follows: 1. Incorporation of Recitals. The Parties accept the above recitals as true and correct and incorporate them herein as if they were fully restated. 2. Water Quality Basin. RSI agrees to pay for all of the remaining design, permitting and construction costs to complete the Water Quality Basin in accordance with the approved storm drain plans for Tract 31426. RSI shall be responsible for the management and coordination of all aspects of the work required including maintaining the Property in accordance with all City and regulatory permits for the Water Quality Basin as of the date of this Agreement. RSI will, from time to time, provide to City status reports summarizing the construction progress of the Water Quality Basin. RSI shall provide security for the completion of the Water Quality Basin by posting labor and material bonds with the City in accordance with a future subdivision agreement on or before September 30, 2011. The Water Quality Basin shall be completed on or before December 30, 2012. Upon the satisfactory completion of construction and warranty period, the Water Quality Basin shall be accepted for maintenance by the City in accordance with the subdivision agreement. 3. Water and Energy Conservation Measures. RSI agrees to redesign and submit amended landscaping plans for open space areas, parkways and medians along Potrero Boulevard and for park improvements and use commercially reasonable efforts to reduce water demand by 50% or more compared to the existing approved plans and City standards for the subject areas. The previously improved landscape areas including those areas located on Potrero Boulevard behind lots 81 through 86 shall be excluded from this provision. RSI further agrees to offer tank - less water heaters for installation in each home it builds on the Property. 4. Subdivision Agreements. RSI shall, at its sole cost and expense, complete the public improvements required in accordance with a future subdivision agreement between RSI and the City which, once approved, will replace the subdivision agreement between Manzanita and the City. 5. Mitigation Fee Waivers. The City shall, from the date of this Agreement through June 30, 2015, waive all development impact mitigation fees listed on Exhibit "B" hereto applicable to the existing 29 dwelling units within Tract No. 31426 and the 77 dwelling units for which building permits will be issued within the Property after the effective date of this Agreement. RSI shall provide an accounting of the fee waivers issued and requested concurrently with each application filed for building permits. 6. CFD Proceeds. RSI agrees to cooperate as reasonably necessary for the City to conduct proceedings to authorize the sale and issuance of bonds to fund construction of public facilities authorized by the CFD for Improvement Area No. 20. RSI further agrees that the City shall be entitled its sole discretion to use one hundred percent (100 %) of the special tax revenue and net proceeds of each series of bonds issued for construction of public facilities as authorized by the CFD for Improvement Area No. 20. RSI agrees to reasonably provide information and to enter into a continuing disclosure agreement(s) as needed for the City to market, sell and issue CFD bonds for Improvement Area No. 20. 7. Attorneys' Fees. In case of suit arising out of or related to this Agreement, the Parties agree that the prevailing Party shall be entitled to its actual attorneys' fees, and all fees, costs and expenses incurred in connection with such suit. Such attorneys' fees, costs and expenses shall include post judgment attorneys' fees, costs and expenses incurred on appeal or in collection of any judgment. 8. Notices. Any notice, request, demand, consent, approval or other communication required or permitted hereunder or by law shall be validly given or made only if in writing and 2 delivered in person to an officer or duly authorized representative of the other Party or by United States mail, duly certified or registered (return receipt requested), postage prepaid, and addressed to the Party for whom intended, as follows: If to City: City of Beaumont 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, CA 92223 Attention: City Manager Telephone Number: (951) 769 -8520 Facsimile Number: (951) 769 -8526 with a copy to: Aklufi & Wysocki 3403 10th Street, Suite 610 Riverside, CA 92501 -3646 Attention: Joseph S. Aklufi Telephone Number: (951) 682 -5480 Facsimile Number: (951) 682 -2619 If to RSI: RSI Land LLC 620 Newport Center Drive 12th Floor Newport Beach, CA 92660 Attention: Lisa Gordon Telephone Number: (949) 270 -3603 Facsimile Number: (949) 720 -1164 9. Any Party may from time to time, by written notice to the other as provided above, designate a different address which shall be substituted for that specified above. In the event that Party shall convey its property to another person, such person shall notify the other Party of the proper notice address of such successor party and notices shall thereafter be sent thereto. If any notice or other document is sent by mail as aforesaid, the same shall be deemed served e delivered seventy -two (72) hours after mailing thereof as above specified. Notice by any other method shall be deemed served or delivered upon actual receipt at the address or fax number listed above (actual receipt of a facsimile to be evidenced by a transmission confirmation report, provided that the original notice and a copy of such report is sent to the noticed Party by mail within twenty -four (24) hours of transmission). 10. Miscellaneous. This Agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the Parties hereto pertaining to the subject matter hereof and all prior and contemporaneous agreements, representations and understandings of the Parties hereto, oral or written, are hereby superseded and merged herein. No supplement, modification or amendment of this Agreement shall be binding unless in writing and executed by the Parties hereto. No waiver of any of the provisions of this Agreement shall be deemed or shall constitute a waiver of any other provisions, whether or not similar, nor shall any waiver be a continuing waiver. No waiver shall be binding unless executed in writing by the Party making the waiver. This Agreement shall be construed and enforced in accordance with, and governed by, the laws of the State of California. In the event of any dispute hereunder, the sole and exclusive venue shall be in a court of competent jurisdiction in Riverside County, California, and the Parties agree to submit to the jurisdiction of such court. The headings of this Agreement are for purposes of reference only and shall not limit or define the 3 meaning of the provisions hereof. This Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, each of which shall be an original and all of which shall constitute one and the same instrument. This Agreement may be amended or modified only in writing executed by the authorized representative(s) of each Party. The Parties to this Agreement agree to complete and execute any further or additional documents which may be necessary to complete or further the terms of this Agreement. 11. Status of the Parties. This Agreement is not intended to create, and nothing herein contained shall be construed to create, an association, a trust, a joint venture, a partnership or other entity of any kind, or to constitute either Party as the agent, employee or partner of the other. In performing the design and construction of the Project, RSI is an independent contractor and not an agent of the City. 12. Preparation of this Agreement. This Agreement shall not be construed against the Party preparing it, but shall be construed as if both Parties prepared it. 13. Successors and Assigns. This Agreement shall inure to the benefit of the Parties hereto and their respective successors and assigns. 14. Signatories. The signatories executing this Agreement represent that they are authorized to enter into this Agreement on behalf of the Party for whom they sign. [Signature Page Follows) 11 IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have executed this Agreement as of the date first above written. ATTEST: an Karen Thompson, City Clerk "CITY" CITY OF BEAUMONT, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California an Brian De Feforge, Mayor "RSI" RSI Land LLC, a Dela are limited liability company By: Name. isa Gordon Title: President EXHIBIT "A" Page 1 of 2 The Property and Water Quality Basin Property Legal Description LOTS 1, 2, 3, 30 THROUGH 82, INCLUSIVE AND 86 THROUGH 106 INCLUSIVE, OF TRACT NO. 31426, IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, IN THE COUNTY OF RIVERSIDE, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, AS PER MAP FILED IN BOOK 404, PAGES 9 THROUGH 13, INCLUSIVE OF MAPS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY. APN: 421- 750 -01, 02, 03 & 17 -36 & 421 - 751 -14 THOUGH 66 & 70 N A, ey TA aG GENERAL NOTES .dm�� _ va o. ENGINEER'S NOTES DECLARATION OF ENGINEER OF RECORD:, omxw — 1, Z 1 1 . 4.Z T T V. =0 h t 1-11 1;= MCA LIPUT R., AV j I C971Y OF 01EIZ STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENT TRACT 31426 UMOMY LANS FOR i - SHEET 3 i Y&WiTy YAP SITE WT -A- a lot, I to I w 87 i lot j " ' !� ItNUoU to 31 .j Ll IS III n as n I all to � 0, 1 17 1 . . . . . . . . . . WATER gUAfJTY —PoSER INSET 1E WAY I I It It 10 1. 14 1. 1. CONSTRUCTION NOTES & QUANTtTY EITIMATE STORM DRAIN CONSTRUCTION NOTES QUANTrry/UNIT F=I,6 crry OF aS4L#A%W STORM DRAIN NPROVEMIENT PLANS SFEET 5. 7:2,JE TRACT SUM ITME SWET OF 6 EXHIBIT "B" Fees to be Waived (not to exceed 29 existing dwelling units) Traffic Signal Fee $176.00 Railroad Crossing Fee $199.00 Fire Station Fee $181.00 Basic Service Fee $500.00 Regional Park Fee $886.86 Emergency Preparedness Fee $700.38 General Plan Fee $50.00 Sewer Connection Fee $2,437.00 Lower Potrero Sewer Fee $480.95 Southern Trunk Main $88.10 Residential Road and Bridge Fee $7,248.00 Sewer Application $25.00 Total Maximum Per Dwelling Unit: $12,972.29 Fees to be Waived (not to exceed 77 future dwelling units) Traffic Signal Fee $123.20 Railroad Crossing Fee $139.30 Fire Station Fee $126.70 Basic Service Fee $350.00 Regional Park Fee $620.80 Emergency Preparedness Fee $490.27 General Plan Fee $35.00 Sewer Connection Fee $2,198.74 Lower Potrero Sewer Fee $480.95 Southern Trunk Main $88.10 Residential Road and Bridge Fee $7,040.25 Sewer Application $25.00 Total Maximum Per Dwelling Unit: $11,718.31 Total for existing 29 units: $376,196.41 Total for future 77 units: $902,309.87 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Agenda Item # ' FROM: Alan C. Kapanicas, City Manager DATE: June 21, 2011 SUBJECT: Approval of Increase in Waste Management Trash Collection Commercial Rates BACKGROUND The City's contract with Waste Management allows for an annual contract adjustment in the service fee rate portion for trash collection along with the adjustments for actual disposal costs. Disposal costs include the County of Riverside landfill tipping fee and the amount of actual trash being disposed by residential and commercial customers. The service fee adjustment is based on the annual change in the consumer price index (CPI). The CPI increase for 2010 -11 was 3 %. Disposal costs decreased slightly due to less waste, on average, by both commercial and residential customers. The overall increase to residential customer rates is 1.34 %, which is being absorbed by the City and will not be passed onto residential customers this year. The overall increase to commercial customer rates is approximately 2.3 %. Staff is not requesting a change in residential rates at this time. On August 21, 2007, the monthly residential rate per single family dwelling was raised to $20 from $18.50. In July 2010, commercial customer rates were increased by approximately 1.5 %. Staff is requesting an increase in commercial rates of approximately 2.3% for 2011 -12. FISCAL IMPACT Commercial franchise fees paid to the City by Waste Management will be increased by less than $5,000 annually and residential franchise fees paid to Waste Management will increase by approximately $30,000. RECOMMENDATION Rate Schedule effective July 1, 2011. — City Manager CITY OF BEAUMONT RATE SCHEDULE EXHIBIT A AS OF JULY 1, 2011 RESIDENTIAL f20 Monthl single Family Rates: COMMERCIAL REFUSE SERVICE -TOTAL RATE $ 26.16 :OMMERCIAL EXTRA EMPTY - FIRST BIN f 52.32 Monthly Disposal Component for One Cubic Yard Monthly Service Component Commercial Can Service 91.65 f 32.74 SIZE QTY ONE TWO SZE QTY ONE TWO TH REE 437.62 2 Yard One f FIVE 358.28 $ SIX 447.85 f 537.42 2 Yard 1 $ 89.57 f f 243.84 $ 268.71 366.61 $ 488. . 733.23 3 Yard f 22.2 19 17 f 5558 f 33.42 533.37 f 711.16 $ 888.95 f 1,066.74 4 Yard 1 241.71 f 48 10.21 Monthly Disposal per cubic yard S 12 08.54 $ 1,450.25 6 Yard 1 f TWO THREE S . FIVE 68.53 f SIX 83.17 $ 99.80 2 Yard 1 f 16.63 f 33.27 24.95 f 49.90 f COMMERCIAL REFUSE SERVICE $ 26.16 :OMMERCIAL EXTRA EMPTY - FIRST BIN f 52.32 Monthly Disposal Component for One Cubic Yard Monthly Service Component 91.65 Pounds per Cubic Yard $ SIZE QTY ONE TWO THREE FOUR FNE f SIX 384.68 f 437.62 2 Yard One f 72.94 f 145.87 f 218.81 f $ 291.75 389.01 f 486.27 $ 583.52 3 Yard One f 97.25 f 193.94 f 289.05 f 291.78 433.57 f 578.09 f 722.61 f 867.14 4 Yard One f 144.52 f 383.61 f 575.42 f 767.23 f 959.04 f 1,150.84 6 Yard One $19181 f 28.16 0.82 S 10.21 Monthly Disposal per cubic yard COMMERCIAL REFUSE SERVICE $ 26.16 :OMMERCIAL EXTRA EMPTY - FIRST BIN f 52.32 Monthly Disposal Component for One Cubic Yard 91.65 Pounds per Cubic Yard $ 13.71 35 - 50 FEET f 20.56 Pounds to tons factor f Divide by 2,000.00 f 34.28 Monthly factor f X 4.33 S 13.33 PER B"MO. Riverside County Landfill Rate $ f 34.37 $ 7.21 RESIDENTIAL EXTRA RECYCLE CART $ f 6.82 $ 3.11 Divide by (1 -.18) Franchise Fee $ 28.16 0.82 S 10.21 Monthly Disposal per cubic yard S $ 8.32 SO!E QTY ONE TWO THREE S FOUR 49.90 $ FIVE 68.53 f SIX 83.17 $ 99.80 2 Yard 1 f 16.63 f 33.27 24.95 f 49.90 f 74.85 f 99.80 $ 124.75 $ 149.70 3 Yard 1 f f 33.27 f 66.53 f 99.80 $ 133.07 f 166.34 $ 199.80 4 Yard 1 99.80 f 149.70 S 199.60 f 249.51 $ 299.41 8 Yard 1 S 49.90 $ COMMERCIAL COMPACTOR SERVICE -Total Rates $ 24.95 Monthly Disposal Component for One Compacted Cubic Yard SIZE QTY ONE TWO THREE f FOUR 368.51 $ FIVE 491.35 $ SIX 614.19 S 737.02 2 Yard 1 f 122.84 f 245.67 344.21 f 516.32 $ 888.42 f 860.53 $ 1,032.63 3 Yard 1 f f 172.11 $ 244.32 f 488.65 f 732.97 $ 977.30 f 1,221.62 f 1,465.95 4 Yard 1 683.02 f 1,024.53 $ 1,366.04 f 1,707.55 $ 2,049.06 6 Yard 1 S 341.51 f COMMERCIAL RECYCLING SERVICE 2SE QTY ONE TWO THREE 145.87 $ FOUR 218.81 f FIVE 291.75 f SIX 364.68 f 437.62 2 Yard 1 f $ 72.94 $ 97.25 $ 193.94 f 291.76 $ 389.01 f 486.27 f 583.52 3 Yard 1 f 144.52 f 289.05 f 433.57 f 578.09 $ 722.61 f 867.14 4 Yard 1 f 383.61 f 575.42 $ 767.23 f 959.04 f 1,150.84 B Yard 1 f 191.81 City of Beaumont Rate Schedule - Exhibit A July 1, 2010 Pane Two 40 YARD CONTAINER f 253.80 10 YARD CONTAINER f 253.80 40 YARD CONTAINER S 380.70 TEMPORARY IN 40 YARD CONTAINER (min 4 tons) $ 429.69 DELNERYRRIP /RELOCATION FEE f x•28 :OMMERCIAL EXTRA EMPTY ADDITIONAL BIN $ 26.16 :OMMERCIAL EXTRA EMPTY - FIRST BIN f 52.32 4ANOLING CHARGE - PULLOUTS PER MONTH PER BIN) 16 -35 FEET $ 13.71 35 - 50 FEET f 20.56 OVER 51 FEET f 27.42 LOCKING CONTAINER f 34.28 RESTART FEE f 41.77 SPECIAL BIWCONTAINER LID S 13.33 PER B"MO. OVERAGE FEE $ 51.70 PER BIN RESIDENTIAL EXTRA TRASH CART $ 7.21 RESIDENTIAL EXTRA RECYCLE CART $ 1.80 RESIDENTIAL EXTRA GREENWASTE CART $ 3.11 ELECTRONIC WASTE PER ITEM $ 28.16 RESIDENTIAL SET UP FEE S 10.21 COMMERCIAL SET UP FEE S 17.01 Agenda Item No. j_ `` STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Council Members From: City Manager Date: June 21, 2011 Subject: Ordinance 972 Adopting the Recycled Water Facility Fee Background and Analysis: On March 1, 2011, the Building Industry Association (BIA) requested a continuance of the proposed ordinance to June 21, 2011 to allow the Association sufficient time to work with the City, Beaumont -Cherry Valley Water District and San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency on plans for a new water fee on new development. Currently, the Agency is proposing a new fee which includes a new water component. Additionally, the District will be updating their Urban Water Management Plan and facility fees in the future, and it is working with the City to draft a recycled water agreement which should address facilities needed to implement maximum benefit objectives which are currently being discussed with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board. All of these activities and discussions could ultimately shift the responsibility for constructing the recycled water facilities to the District. At the March 1, 2011 public hearing, the City Council discussed two alternatives to the proposed fee including financing any required facilities through sewer rates, or lowering the proposed fee to share the burden between new development and sewer rate payers. A new rate calculation was prepared which takes into account the number of existing sewer customers who would be responsible for a portion of the future cost to build recycled water facilities under the shared cost scenario which would lower the proposed recycled water fee from $1,189.55 per EDU to $768.73 per EDU. A copy of the amended rate calculation is attached. Recommendation: Staff recommends ADOPTION of Ordinance 972 at its second reading; with the revised Recycled Water Fee of $768.73 per EDU based on the shared cost scenario. Alan C. Kapanicas City Manager City of Beaumont Recycled Water Facility Fee Fee Summary Fee Comment EDU's % Total Cost Recycled Water Fee Calculation - Future EDU's 23,362 64.62% $17,959,042 Existing EDU's 12,789 35.38% $9,831,273 Total 36,151 100.00% $27,790,315 Fee per EDU $768.73 $768.73 CITY OF BEAUMONT PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Source of Recycled Water Facility Fee Project Name: Recycled Water Facilities Funds: Contract TBD and per existing agreements. Contractors: TBD and per existing agreements. Date: Const. Budget: 24,540,315.00 Subcontractors: As per approved CIP. A&E Budget: $3,250,000.00 Project Start Date: July 2009 Report Period: August 2010 Work Completed During Report Period: Obtained amended waste discharge permit from the Regional Board. Prepared master plan, fee study and ordinance. Problems or Delays During Report Period: No problems of delays. Change Orders: No change orders. Recommendation(s) for City Council Action: Continue the item and direct staff to work with the BIA and water district on joint implementation of maximum benefit obligations. Authorized by: Mayor's Signature Date of City Council Approval ORDINANCE NO. 972 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, CALIFORNIA REQUIRING PAYMENT OF DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FEES FOR RECYCLED WATER FACILITIES, APPOINTING TIME AND PLACE OF A PUBLIC MEETING AND OF A PUBLIC HEARING AND DIRECTING NOTICE THEREOF, DESCRIBING PROPOSED BOUNDARIES OF BENEFIT AREA WHEREAS, California State law, including Sections 66007, 66483 and 66484 of the Government Code authorize the establishment of an area of benefit and the collection of development impact fees for the purpose of defraying the costs of public facilities, improvements and amenities related to new development, including recycled water facilities; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Beaumont has determined to undertake the construction of certain major infrastructure known as the Recycled Water Facility Master Plan (the "Plan") as described in Exhibit A hereto (the "Improvements "), and WHEREAS, the Plan has been adopted as part of the City of Beaumont Recycled Water Facility Fee Study (the "Study ") for the area of benefit which contains an estimate of the total costs of constructing the recycled water facilities required by the Plan and a map of such benefiting area showing its boundaries and the location of facilities; and WHEREAS, in the Study, the City of Beaumont has analyzed the growth of population and land uses and the increase in recycled water generated thereby and the recycled water facilities required in reasonable proportion to the growth; and WHEREAS, the Study concluded that the development impact fees established herein would generate revenues sufficient to design, permit and construct recycled water facilities as shown on the Plan; and WHEREAS, there is a correlation between growth and the need for additional recycled water facilities, and the development impact fees established hereunder will fund the Improvements that are required by the additional new development; and WHEREAS, the City Council has determined to undertake the construction of the Improvements in conjunction with City of Beaumont Community Facilities District No. 93 -1 ( "CFD No. 93 -1 ") and has determined to finance a portion of the costs of the Improvements from fees required to be paid and collected as provided in and authorized by California law; and WHEREAS, pursuant to law, the City Council of the City of Beaumont has enacted this Ordinance (the "Ordinance ") in order to impose certain fees as development occurs on certain land which is benefitted by construction of the Improvements in order to defray a portion of the actual or estimated cost of constructing the Improvements other than property included within CFD No. 93 -1, which finances, funds or constructs facilities equivalent to its share of such costs through CFD No. 93 -1; and WHEREAS, the public interest, convenience and necessity require, and this City Council intends to order the design, permitting, acquisition and construction of the Improvements, related appurtenances and rights -of -way, and the imposition and collection of said fees to defray the costs thereof, and WHEREAS, a public meeting and a public hearing will be held, pursuant to notice as herein provided, for the purpose of establishing the boundaries of the territory more particularly identified on Exhibit B hereto (the "Area of Benefit') of the Improvements, the estimated costs of the Improvements and the method of allocation of said costs to the Area of Benefit and fee apportionment; and WHEREAS, at least 10 days prior to the meeting on the proposed development impact fees, the Director of Public Works shall make available to the public data indicating the amount of costs or estimated costs required to provide the facilities for which each fee is levied and the revenue sources anticipated to provide the facilities; NOW THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. Findin s. The City Council finds and determines that new development in the City of Beaumont increases the demand for recycled water facilities thereby requiring the installation and upgrade of recycled water facilities in order to protect the public health, safety and welfare; and that such development should pay its fair share of such improvements. Section 2. Purpose. The purpose of this Ordinance is to make provision for the establishment of an area of benefit and the assessing and collecting of fees at the time of development or connection the City sewer system, herein referred to as the "Recycled Water Facility Fee," to be collected by the City. Section 3. Definitions. Whenever the following words are used in this Ordinance, they shall have the following meaning: a. "Construction" means, without limitation, design, acquisition of right -of- way, administration of construction contracts and actual construction and such other items as may be authorized by laws of the State of California. b. "Dwelling Unit" means a building or portion thereof or a mobile home space or a mobile home or manufactured house designed primarily for residential occupancy. The term "dwelling" shall not include hotels or motels. C. "Equivalent Dwelling Unit" means one Non - Residential Unit, one Dwelling Unit or one Mobile Home Space. d. "Improvements" means recycled water extraction wells, pump stations, pipelines and reservoirs, rights -of -way, appurtenances, permits and professional services as further described in the Plan and the Study for the area delineated in a map showing the boundaries of the area of benefit and the location of such improvements (the "Area of Benefit ") and which the Study contains reasonable estimates of the total costs of the Improvements. e. "Mobile Home Space" as defined in Section 13.21.040 of the Beaumont Municipal Code. f. "Non- Residential Unit" means each gross acre (or fraction thereof) of retail, commercial and industrial development which is designed primarily for non - dwelling use, but shall include hotels and motels. A Non - Residential Unit is equal to 10.00 Dwelling Units. g. "Recycled Water Facility Fund" means the fund established pursuant to the terms of this Ordinance (the "Fund "). Section 4. Payment of Fees Required. Fees for such purpose shall be imposed upon new construction within the Area of Benefit and shall be imposed at issuance of a building permit, final building inspection or certificate of occupancy, whichever occurs first or as otherwise determined by the City Council; provided, however, that the fees for Improvements may be collected at the time an application for sewer service is received by the City. The City Council may also impose the Recycled Water Facility Fee as a condition of filing a final map or issuing a permit for development with respect to any portion of land which is benefitted by the acquisition and construction of the Improvements for the purpose of defraying the actual or estimated costs of the Improvements, so long as such fees are collected for Improvements to be paid for from the Recycled Water Facility Fund (described below) and for which moneys are being appropriated and for which the City has adopted a proposed construction schedule or plan prior to the issuance of a building permit, final inspection or issuance of the certificate of occupancy, or if the fees are to reimburse the City for expenditures which will have been previously made as authorized by Sections 66007, 66483 and 66484 of the California Government Code. Section 5. Map. Subject to the public meeting and hearing process, the City Council hereby determines that the proposed boundaries of the Area of Benefit is as described in the map attached hereto as Exhibit B. The Map showing the general nature, location and extent of the proposed Improvements and showing the boundaries of the territory containing the lands proposed to be charged with fees to pay the costs and expenses of the proposed Improvements, (the "Map of the Area of Benefit") is hereby approved and adopted in the form attached hereto and made a part hereof as Exhibit B. Section 6. Filing of Map. The original Map of the Area of Benefit and one copy thereof shall be filed in the office of the City Clerk available at City Hall. Section 7. Governing for Details. The Map indicates by boundary line the extent of the territory included in the Area of Benefit and shall govern for all details as to the extent of such area, reference to such Map being hereby made for particulars. Section 8. Certification of Adoption. A Certificate evidencing the date and adoption of this Ordinance shall be endorsed on the original Map of the Area of Benefit and on at least one copy thereof. Section 9. Fees. The proposed fees to be imposed upon construction of all non - residential units, dwelling units and mobile home spaces per equivalent dwelling unit within the Area of Benefit as set forth in Exhibit A. Notwithstanding anything herein to the contrary, the amount of the fees set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto shall escalate each year until paid by an amount equal to the cumulative percentage increases in the Building Cost Index of the Engineering News Record Index published for the month nearest the effective date of this Ordinance. If any fee is not fully paid (or required to be paid), the City may require the property owner, or Lessee if the Lessee's interest appears of record, to execute a contract to pay the fee or charge, or applicable portion thereof, within the time required by Section 4 hereof, as set forth in Section 66007 of the Government Code. Section 10. Estimated Costs. The estimate of the costs of the acquisition and construction of the Improvements, as contained in the Plan and the Study is $27,790,325 and the City Council of the City of Beaumont hereby finds and determines that, of said amount, approximately $27,790,325 shall be paid through the imposition and collection of fees pursuant to the Ordinance. Section 11. Improvements Are In Addition To Existing Facilities. The Improvements are in addition to existing facilities serving the Area of Benefit at the time of adoption of the Ordinance and the Plan. The Improvements are in addition to, or reconstruction of, existing facilities serving the Area of Benefit at the time of adoption of the Ordinance. Section 12. Council Review of Improvements. The City Council of the City of Beaumont hereby declares that it has reviewed the Study presented to the meeting and attached hereto as Exhibit A. Section 13. Subdivision Requires Construction of the Improvements. The City Council of the City of Beaumont hereby finds that subdivision and development of property within the planned local area will require construction of the Improvements and the fees are fairly apportioned within such areas on the need for such facilities created by the proposed subdivision and development of property within such areas. Section 14. Apportionment of Costs. Subject to the public meeting and public hearing process, the City Council of the City of Beaumont hereby determines that the fair method of apportionment of the costs of the Improvements to the Area of Benefit and that the method of apportionment of the fee shall be as set forth in Exhibit A hereto based on equivalent dwelling units. The fee for facilities as to any property proposed for subdivision or development does not exceed the pro rata share of the amount of the total estimated costs of all facilities within such area which would be assessable on such property if such costs were apportioned uniformly on a per -acre basis. The method of apportionment will not provide for higher fees on land which abuts the proposed Improvements, except where the abutting property is provided direct usable access to the facility. The City Council of the City of Beaumont hereby finds and determines that the fees are fairly apportioned within the Area of Benefit on the basis of the need for such Improvements created by the proposed subdivision and development of property within the Area of Benefit. The City Council further finds and determines that there is a reasonable and proportionate relationship between (i) the fees' use and the types of development projects on which the fees will be imposed and (ii) the need for the Improvements and the types of development projects on which the fees will be imposed. Section 15. Deposit of Fees, on Expenditure of Fees. Fees for such purposes shall be paid to the City of Beaumont and shall be deposited into the Recycled Water Facility Fund. Moneys deposited into such fund shall be expended solely for the construction, acquisition or reimbursement for construction of the applicable Improvements serving the Area of Benefit or to reimburse the City of Beaumont for the cost of engineering and administrative services to form the Area of Benefit and to design and construct the Improvements. The payment of fees shall not be required unless the Improvements are in addition to, or a reconstruction of, any existing major infrastructure serving the Area of Benefit at the time of adoption of the Area of Benefit. The fees shall not be expended to reimburse the costs of existing facilities construction. Section 16. City Is Not Obligated to Advance Available Funds. In its sole discretion, the City Council of the City of Beaumont may advance moneys from its general fund, from moneys made available by the Beaumont Redevelopment Agency, CFD No. 93 -1 or any sewer or water fund to pay the costs of constructing the Improvements and may reimburse the general fund, the Agency, CFD No. 93 -1 or the sewer or water fund for such advances from fees deposited in the applicable Facilities Fund for the Area of Benefit. Section 17. City Mgy Incur Interest Bearing Indebtedness. In its sole discretion, the City Council of the City of Beaumont may incur, or cooperate with the Agency with respect to the Agency incurring, interest bearing indebtedness for the construction of the Improvements; provided that the sole security provided by the City for repayment of such indebtedness shall be moneys in the applicable Fund. Section 18. Agreement for Reimbursement. If the proposed Improvements are installed by any owner of property within the Area of Benefit, the City may credit the fee or enter into an agreement with such property owner to reimburse the property owner, pursuant to Section 66486 of the Government Code. Section 19. Calculation of Fee. The calculation of any fee required to be paid under the provisions of this Ordinance shall be based upon the fee schedule in effect at the time of actual payment. Section 20. Exemptions. The following types of development shall not be required to pay the Recycled Water Facility Fee: a. The replacement of existing development, provided that the replacement occurs within 3 years of the date of destruction, contains the same number of equivalent dwelling units and does not add more than 1,000 new square footage; and b. The rehabilitation or remodeling of existing development that does not add more than 1,000 square feet to the existing structure. Section 21. Appeals. In addition to any statutorily - authorized protest procedure, any person aggrieved by the computation of fees pursuant to this Ordinance shall have the right to appeal the computation to the City Council by filing a written notice of appeal no later than 15 days from the date of the computation. Written notice shall be filed with the City Clerk and state the objections of the person filing the notice. The City Clerk shall set the matter for hearing at the next regular City Council meeting at least 21 days after the date the appeal was filed. The City Clerk shall give notice of the time and place of the hearing before the City Council to all interested parties. The decision of the City Council shall be final. Section 22. CEQA. The fees adopted hereunder are exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code, Section 21080 (b) for the reason that the fees are imposed for the purpose of purchasing materials and for obtaining funds necessary to maintain service within existing service areas. Section 23. Public Meeting. August 17, 2010, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 550 East Sixth Street, Beaumont, California, be, and the same are hereby appointed and fixed as the time and place when and where the City Council of the City of Beaumont will hold a public meeting, at which oral or written presentations can be made, as part of a regularly scheduled meeting relating to the matters set forth herein. Section 24. Public Hearing. August 17, 2010, at the hour of 6:00 p.m., in the City Council Chambers, 550 East Sixth Street, Beaumont, California, be, and the same are hereby appointed and fixed as the time and place when and where the City Council of the City of Beaumont will consider and finally determine the boundaries of the Area of Benefit, the Improvements, the estimated costs of the Improvements, and the method of allocation and apportionment of costs of the Improvements to the Area of Benefit and all other matters set forth in this Ordinance. Section 25. Notice of Adoption of Ordinance. The City Clerk of the City of Beaumont is hereby directed to publish this Ordinance once within fifteen (15) days following its adoption in a newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Beaumont; provided, that in lieu of publication of the entire text of the Ordinance, the City Clerk may prepare and publish a summary of the Ordinance with the names of those City Council members voting for and against the Ordinance. The City Clerk shall post a certified copy of the full text of the adopted Ordinance in the office of the City Clerk. Section 26. Severability. If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional by decision of any court of competent jurisdiction, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions. The City Council hereby declares that it would have passed those sections, subsections, clauses and phrases irrespective that one or more may be declared invalid or unconstitutional. Section 27. Effective Date. This Ordinance shall be in full force and effect 60 days from and after its adoption on , 2011. MOVED. PASSED AND APPROVED this day of 2010 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: City Clerk Mayor of the City of Beaumont CERTIFICATION The foregoing is certified to be a true copy of Ordinance No. 2010 -_ duly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council held on , 2010 and duly adopted upon the second reading on , 2010 by the roll call votes indicated therein. City Clerk, City of Beaumont (SEAL) EXHIBIT A FEE STUDY INCLUDING DESCRIPTION OF IMPROVEMENTS AND METHOD OF APPORTIONMENT OF FEE City of Beaumont Recycled Water Facility Mitigation Fee Study Prepared for: Beaumont City Council Brian De Forge, Mayor Roger Berg, Mayor Pro Tern David Castaldo, Council Member Jeff Fox, Council Member Nancy Gall, Council Member Prepared by: Public Works Department Community and Economic Development Department August 17, 2010 I. Introduction and Purpose of the Study The purpose of this study is to reasonably estimate and apportion the total cost to construct certain recycled water facilities which are needed to support the logical and orderly development of the City of Beaumont in accordance with the City of Beaumont General Plan (General Plan). The study will be used to establish a new facility fee known as the Recycled Water Facility Fee to fund the design, permitting, administration, acquisition, construction and upgrade of certain recycled water facilities necessary to serve future development in the City. The report provides an estimate of costs for those facilities along with a calculation of the facility fee to be levied on a "fair share" basis in accordance with Government Code Section 6600, et. seq., based upon measurable units of expected future land uses which are expected to impact recycled water facilities in Beaumont. Currently, there are thousands of acres of vacant land within the City and its Sphere of Influence which are planned for future development. As new development occurs in the City and surrounding region, recycled water will be generated by new residents and businesses, increasing the use of recycled water facilities and requiring them to be upgraded to accommodate the increased use. Additionally, new recycled water facilities will be needed to accommodate expected use by new development, and to comply with regulatory requirements including those set forth by the State of California Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board). Certain facilities or component portions thereof may be constructed by the City using the facility fees, pursuant to the City of Beaumont's Comprehensive Public Facilities Financing Program (City Program) which relies upon public financing districts to construct facilities or directly by developers to mitigate impacts of specific development projects pursuant to development agreements, conditions of approval and the General Plan. It is appropriate therefore to periodically amend the facility fee to reasonably apportion the cost of recycled water facilities included in this study on a fair share basis among future developments and to facilitate the issuance of fee credits and reimbursements when those facilities are otherwise constructed or funded directly by developers or through the City Program. The facilities to funded by the facility fee, the City Program or developers are listed below and are depicted on the Recycled Water Facility Master Plan included this study. The facilities depicted on the Master Plan are identified in the Preliminary Engineer's Cost Estimate, or as may be otherwise approved by the City Council to fund equal facilities having an equivalent benefit. Facilities to be funded by the facility fee are listed below together with their estimated cost. Recvded Water Facility Estimated Cost < Wells $ 1,240,000 < Reservoirs 1,322,500 < Pump Stations 7,542,500 < Pipelines 10,929,500 < Fees and Permits 640,815 < Planning and Engineering 3,250,000 < Contingency 2,865,000 Total $27,790,315 A preliminary estimate of the cost to design, permit and construct the facilities to be funded by the facility fee is provided in the Appendix of this study. The estimated costs are based upon recent unit costs for similar projects which have been publicly bid in the City using prevailing wages. Where no such recent costs were available, estimates were prepared by the City Public Works Director using RS Means unit cost data adjusted for the local area. All costs for facilities should be adjusted for inflation on a regular basis by the City Council in accordance with the Engineering News Record construction cost index for the Los Angeles area. The facilities to be funded by the proposed fee include extraction wells to make sure all of Beaumont's recycled water is utilized in the Beaumont Management Zone in accordance with Regional Board requirements. The Regional Board has issued a waste discharge permit to the City which regulates how recycled water created by new development must be discharged in a manner with maximizes the beneficial use of the recycled water in the region. The facilities to be funded by the proposed fee also include pump stations, reservoirs and pipelines to deliver the recycled water from the extraction wells to approved discharge points where the water will either be used for irrigation or percolated into the Beaumont Groundwater Basin in accordance with the regulatory permit requirements issued to the City by Regional Board. II. Recycled Water Facility Fee Calculation The purpose of this section of the study is to provide a description of the facilities to be funded by the facility fee and an estimate of costs to design and construct those facilities. This section also provides an estimate of how much future development will benefit from each of the facilities based on "equivalent dwelling units" or EDU's. The study provides a reasonable measure of the number of new EDU's that will be developed on the undeveloped vacant land in the City and Sphere of Influence that will benefit from the facilities once they are constructed. Each facility to be funded and constructed for the benefit of undeveloped land is depicted on the Recycled Water Facility Master Plan map included this study. The study and fee is based upon the total estimated cost of the facilities divided by the number of EDU's that will benefit from and will be responsible to pay the cost of designing, permitting and constructing the planned facilities as part of the City Program. In order to establish a reasonable estimate of the number of EDU's different types of land uses will generate, the study establishes the relative demands of residential, commercial and industrial land uses on the future recycled water facilities. The average demand placed on the facilities by a single dwelling unit with an average population of 3.2 persons per unit is used as the baseline of measurement for other land uses. In the case of recycled water facilities, it is assumed, based upon recycled water generation data utilized by the City as part of the City Program, a single dwelling unit generates 280 gallons of recycled water per day (1 EDU) and the average industrial and commercial use generates 10 EDU per acre of development. A listing of the EDU factors used in this study is provided below. Land Use Recycled Water ED U's Residential Dwelling Unit 1.00 Industrial/ Commercial Acre 10.00 In order to estimate the number of new EDU's to be developed in the future, the study uses a listing of the number of EDU's in major planned projects and an estimate of residential, industrial and commercial EDU's which may develop on remaining undeveloped parcels within the City and the City's Sphere of Influence. The list of planned projects future development areas along with the estimated number of EDU's each project and area will generate is shown on the table entitled EDU Summary in the Appendix of this study. Where a specific project could not be identified for undeveloped land, an estimate of acreage and EDU's was made by generic land uses reasonably expected to be developed in each area based on past development patterns in the City and the current General Plan land use designation. A. Recycled Water Facilities Recycled water facilities to be funded by the proposed facility fee include new recycled water extraction wells, pump stations, reservoirs, pipelines and appurtenant facilities. Additionally, the proposed fee will fund the planning, engineering, construction management and environmental mitigation requirements necessary to design, permit and construct the facilities shown on the Recycled Water Facility Master Plan. For the purposes of this study, the total number of EDU's to be developed which will benefit from the facilities is estimated to be 23,362 EDU's. The total cost of recycled water facilities funded by the fee and fair share contribution generated by the City Program is estimated to be approximately $27.8 Million. B. Recycled Water Facility Fee Calculation The proposed recycled water facility fee is calculated by dividing the cost of the planned facilities by the number of EDU's which will benefit from or use the facilities. EDU assumptions for schools which may be developed in place of residential, commercial or industrial land uses are listed in the Fee Schedule below. All non - residential EDU's may be determined by using the generic EDU factor of 10.00 EDU's per acre or by a site and project specific calculation of EDU's made at the time of development as approved by the Planning Director. The total number of estimated EDU's, the fair share cost of facilities and the proposed facility fee for each generic land use are summarized on the Fee Schedule below. The recycled E water facility fee will be levied by the Building Department prior to the issuance of building permits for all new development or expansion of existing development, or at such time as an application for sewer service is submitted, whichever occurs first. All expansions of existing land uses which are less than or equal to 1,000 square feet will be exempt from the recycled water facility fee. Land Use Residential /Com./Ind. *Equivalent Dwelling Unit Factors Residential Dwelling Unit Industrial or Commercial Acre Elementary School Middle School High School Open Space and Agriculture FEE SCHEDULE EDU's Fair Share Cost 23,362 $27,790,315 Recycled Water ED 5 1.00 10.00 47.28 61.19 133.50 0.00 F_ ee Per ED U* $1,189.55 APPENDIX A) Preliminary Engineer's Cost Estimate City of Beaumont Recycled Water Facility Fee Preliminary Engineer's Cost Estimate Facifity/Descrfption Units Unit Cost Estimated Cost Well Site Acquisition 2 $150,000.00 $300,000 Equip Existing Extraction Wells 2 $95,000.00 $190,000 Construct New Extraction Wells 2 $275,000.00 $550,000 Electrical and Telemetry 4 $50,000.00 $200,000 Move -in 1 $10,000.00 $10,000 Rough and Fine Grading 15,000 $7.50 $112,500 Grouted Rip Rap 40 $2,500.00 $100,000 Storage Reservoirs - 1 M Gal. 1 $850,000.00 $850,000 Storage Reservoirs - 260K Gal. 1 $250,000.00 $250,000 Pump Station - 750 hP 1 $3,500,000.00 $3,500,000 Pump Station - 450 hP 1 $2,250,000.00 $2,250,000 Pump Station - 125 hP 1 $1,750,000.00 $1,750,000 64nch HDPE Pipeline 4,800 $72.00 $345,600 8 -inch HDPE Pipeline 2,300 $120.00 $276,000 10 -inch HDPE Pipeline 3,950 $150.00 $592,500 12 -inch HDPE Pipeline 19,600 $180.00 $3,528,000 1 &inch HDPE Pipeline 12,250 $216.00 $2,646,000 Dual 12 -inch HDPE Pipeline 10,300 $288.00 $2,966,400 Jack & Bore 1,000 $575.00 $575,000 6 -ft Block Wall 1,000 $40.00 $40,000 Signs 10 $250.00 $2,500 Planning, Environmental and Project Management 1 $385,000.00 $385,000 Engineering, Surveying and Construction Management 1 $2,865,000.00 $2,865,000 Plan Check and Inspection Fees 1 $290,815.00 $290,815 UPRR Permits 1 $100,000.00 $100,000 Wetlands 404 -1603 1 $250,000.00 $250,000 Contingencies (@ 15% of Construction Cost) 1 $2,865,000.00 $2,865,000 TOTAL $27,790,315 B) EDU Summary and Facility Fee Summary City of ON mmt W 1 lW Aws Centerstone Heartland Second Street Marketplace Four Sessons Sundance Tournament Hills Fairway Canyon Pacific Scene Hidden Canyon Mo Bezhad Manors Construction Mountain Bridge Arbor Ridge Area - Southeast Beaumont Potrero Creek Estates Legacy Highlands Jack Rabbit Trail Sunny Cal Residential Infill Projects Non - Residential Infill Projects Total Equivahw DW&qhV Unk Factors City of Beaumont Recycled Water Facility Fee Benefit Area EDU Estimate Proiect 1 Tentative Tract 5 Tentative Tract 68 General Plan 7 B -E Tentative Tract 8 Tentative Tract 17 " Tentative Tract 19 C-G Tentative Tract 20 Aspen Creek 21 Tentative Tract 22 Tentative Tract 24 Tuscany Villas General Plan General Plan Specific Plan Specific Plan General Plan Specific Plan General Plan General Plan Single- fandty Dweling Urnf 100 Coroner -Mnd AWW Acre EDUAAC 10.00 Open SPace/AgncWture 000 BALMM 350 995 0 1,262 2,782 602 2,471 85 411 95 144 2,000 2,250 700 2,868 1,200 571 300 0 19,086 QuIdnd EDU 0 206 174 0 136 0 260 0 0 0 0 900 300 0 1,600 0 0 0 700 4,276 fit'T'71 350 1,201 174 1,262 2,918 602 2,731 85 411 95 144 2,900 2,550 700 4,468 1,200 571 300 700 23,362 Recycled Water Fee Calculation City of Beaumont Recycled Water Facility Fee Fee Summary 23,362 $27,790,315 $1,189.55 C) Recycled Water Facility Master Plan 9r y�$C O 1 1 LL F. F 117'00'W Produood for city of O"WT otlt 0 Comprehensive Public Facilities Financing Program Recycled Water Facipty Master Plan Produced by: diwlw.. WIL.DERMUTH' FNVINONYr "TAI INC. www wddanxMu VVwn wnw wM Ty T Exisft Extraction Well Proposed Extraction W1b1 Proposed 6" - 1 r Extradion wd PipeMe (30.660 n) Pmposad 8' Conveyance Pipelne (3.600 R) Proposed Dual 12" Comreyanoe Plpsiites (10,300 R) Proposed 18" Recycled Water Pipebw (12.280 ft) Swaps Reemolr and Pump Sialion Q Owd"Ve Print ORWOC8 Marmpemeal Zone Boundary I._.� CRY LYnils - City of 8uumora WWWTP -" A CM OF BEAUMONT Area of Benefit - Recycled Water Facility Master Plan 'rte r7o, P L=-[ M-n4i* Vanq —Pi L4F luu Legaq Hwwam* A ur.2m AREA OF WNGPrr DOMDARY ------- CZrY 90LINDAKY AAW TJDNINPROaffi "N OARRA TODESUMM BY AGRURWI SIT WrTH TIM MY 11r6an Logic Consullan& O PASS s Y • �atabiished X46` • July 28, 2010 San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency A California State Water Project Contractor 1210 Beaumont Avenue • Beaumont, CA 92223 Phone (951) 845 -2577 • Fax (951) 845 -0281 President: Mr. George Jorritsma, President John Jeter Beaumont Basin Watermaster Vice President: 560 Magnolia Avenue Ted Haring Beaumont, CA 92223 Treasurer: Dear Mr. Jorritsma: Dave Dysart Directors: The San Gorgonio Pass Water Agency and the Beaumont Basin Watermaster Bill Dickson have long had a common interest in the Beaumont Basin and its efficient use for Ray Morris current and future generations. The Agency has been recharging the Basin Barbara Voigt continually since 2003, and thus far has recharged over 5,000 acre-feet Carl Workman specifically to address overdraft. General Manager The Agency recognizes that its recharge at Little San Gorgonio Creek is not & Chiej'Engineer: within the boundaries of the adjudicated Basin, though it has been shown to be Jeff Davis, PE within the hydrologic and hydraulic boundaries of the Basin, Legal Counsel: McCormick Ki dman In 2011 , the Agency will begin rechar in supplemental water in Noble Creek. & Behrens This facility will be located within the boundaries of the adjudicated Basin. While the Agency recognizes that it has the right to recharge supplemental water in the Basin on its own, it is clear that a storage account with the Watermaster would be in the best interests of the Agency and the Watermaster. Toward that end, the Board of Directors has authorized me to negotiate a storage agreement with the Watermaster that meets the legal and administrative needs of the Watermaster, while at the same time protects the legal rights of the Agency. On behalf of the Agency, I respectfully request that you place this issue on the agenda for the Watermaster's next board meeting. I will be happy to attend that meeting and answer any questions that your board or staff may have. s' it Importing Water To The Pass Area Cc Joe Zoba, YVWD Duane Burk, City of Banning Dave Dillon, City of Beaumont Tony Lara, Beaumont Cherry Valley Water District Russ Behrens Joe Aklufi Kyle Warsinski From: Dave Dillon Sent: Tuesday, August 17, 2010 2:10 PM To: Kyle Warsinski Subject: Fwd: City of Beaumont Recycled Water Fee ---- Original Message- - From: Mark Knorringa <mknorringa @riversidebia.org> To: ulcdave@aol.com Cc: Bill Blankenship < bblankenship @riversidebia.org >; Tommy Thompson <thompson @riversidebia.org> Sent: Mon, Aug 16, 2010 4:47 pm Subject: RE: City of Beaumont Recycled Water Fee Dave, I ask that you pull this from the August 17'h agenda. Your email this afternoon is the first factual information I've received on this since our conversation last Thursday or Friday. Additionally, you did not mention this would be agendized any time soon. I will be unable to respond to this proposal nor attend the meeting tomorrow. I ask that you delay this proposal for 30 days. Mark Mark Knorringa Chief Executive Officer 131A of Southern Califomia - Riverside County Chapter 3891 1 lrh Street Riveriide, CA 92501 Phone (95 1) 781-7310 ert.'_01 Cell (951) 522 -1581 Fax (95 1) 781.0509 Email: rnk tit) rring2Lt:riversidebia.or;► www. riversidebia.org An affiliate of N.A.H.H. Washington D.C. Sc C.B.l.A. ti:k•r: vrwntu Mayor Brian DeForge, City Council Beaumont Civic Center 550 E. 6th Street Beaumont, CA d% BIR Riverside County Chapter Building Industry Ammiation of Southern California September 10, 2010 329111m Stmt Ri"r", California 92501 (951)781 -7310 Fax(951)781.0509 Mayor De Forge and Council, In accordance with discussions with City staff, I hereby request that the matter of the Beaumont Proposed Recycled Water Facility Fee be put in abeyance until at least your first meeting in December, 2010. The reason for this request is to allow discussions underway between City staff, the BIA, Pardee Homes and the Beaumont Cherry Valley Water District ( "BCVWD ") to continue. These discussions are a cooperative effort to explore and arrive at solutions to several issues relating the City's waste discharge permits, the production, distribution and use of recycled water, and the availability of water for current and future users of water in the City of Beaumont. All of the parties in these discussions have as goals the maximization of water resources, the most efficient use of existing and planned recycled water infrastructure, elimination of duplicate facilities and cost containment and cooperative efforts to implement maximum benefit requirements for the Beaumont Management Zone. I trust that you share these goals and hope you will approve this request to allow us to explore solutions that will benefit us all. Sincerely, Building Industry Association of Southern California Riverside County Chapter Mark Knorringa Chief Executive Officer nnAWdW *cfdwNdeaiAw*cWimoft Bait&manduKG"wvioau ka,w7AssocWw„ 9 E mI 5 rn ll m LL W O _O O fJ A U i g 5 a 117 0'4"W Produced for: City of Beaumont is Produced by: San Timoteo Management Zone •- WaterQuality Mitigation Project ++ WILDERMUTH' rNvIRONMrNTAf INC Figure 1 vrvAwwddermuthenv,ronmerta! cam } Existing Extraction Well Proposed Extraction Well Proposed 6" - 12" Groundwater Pipeline (30,650 ft) Proposed 18" Recycled Water Pipeline (12.250 ft) Proposed 24" Conveyance Pipeline (10.3000) Alternate 8" Conveyance Pipeline (3.600 ft) Storage Reservoir and Pump Station �4I Discharge Point RWOCB Management Zone Boundary City of Beaumont Sery ice Area _j Proposed Recharge Area - City of Beaumont WWTP �4I f, Agenda Item No. STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Council Members From: Community and Economic Development Department Date: June 21, 2011 Subject: Ordinance 998 — Adding Chapter 17.13.040 "Prohibition on Reapplication after Revocation" for Unlicensed Group Home. Background and Analysis: Ordinance 998 adds Chapter 17.13.040 "Prohibition on Reapplication after Revocation" for Unlicensed Group Homes. Section 17.13.040 will read as follows: 17.13.040 Prohibition on Reapplication after Revocation. In the event the special use permit is revoked pursuant to Section 17.13.030, no new application for the same or similar permit shall be accepted within one year of the date of revocation. RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the City Council: 1. Hold a Public Hearing 2. Approve Ordinance 998 at its first reading. Very truly yours; CITY OF BEAUMONT Rebecca Deming Assistant Director of Planning Acv ORDINANCE NO. 998 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, CALIFORNIA ADDING SECTION 17.13.040 TO THE BEAUMONT MUNICIPAL CODE ENTITLED "PROHIBITION ON REAPPLICATION AFTER REVOCATION" BE IT ORDAINED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, RIVERSIDE COUNTY, STATE OF CALIFORNIA AS FOLLOWS: Section 1: Section 17.13.040 of Chapter 17.13 is hereby added to read as follows: "17.13.040 Prohibition on Reapplication after Revocation. In the event the special use permit is revoked pursuant to Section 17.13.030, no new application for the same or similar permit shall be accepted within one year of the date of revocation." Section 2: This Ordinance shall take effect as provided by law. MOVED AND PASSED upon first reading this day of , 2011, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: MOVED, PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of , 2011, upon second reading by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: CITY OF BEAUMONT M. ATTEST: SHELBY HANVEY, Deputy City Clerk BRIAN DEFORGE, Mayor 1 CERTIFICATION The foregoing is certified to be a true copy of Ordinance No. duly introduced at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Beaumont held on , 2007, and was duly adopted upon a second reading on , 2011, by the roll call votes indicated therein. CITY OF BEAUMONT (SEAL) SHELBY HANVEY, Deputy City Clerk 2 Record Gazette 218 N. Murray St. Proof of Publication (2015.5 C.C.P.) ORDINANCE NO. 998 - 48095 State of California ) County of Riverside ) ss. I am a citizen of the United States and a resident of the State of California; I am over the age of eighteen years, and not a parry to or interested in the above matter. I am the principal clerk of the printer and publisher of Record Gazette, a newspaper published in the English language in the City of Banning, County of Riverside, and adjudicated a newspaper of general circulation as defined by the laws of the state of California by the Superior Court of the County of Riverside, under the date October 14, 1966, Case No. 54737. That the notice, of which the annexed is a copy, has been published in each regular and entire issue of said newspaper and not in any supplement thereof on the following dates, to -wit: June 3, 2011 Executed on: 06/03/2011 At Banning , CA I ceritfy (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Signature Legal Advertisement NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that the Beaumont City Council will conduct a public hearing on Tuesday, June 21, 2011 at approximately 6:00 p.m. in the Room 5 at the Beaumont Civic Center, 550 E. 6th Street, Beaumont, California 92223, to receive testimony and comments from all interested persons regarding the adoption of the following mattegs): Ordinance No. 998 An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Beaumont, California adding Sections 17.13.040 of the Beaumont Municipal Code Entitled "Prohibition on Reapplication After Revocation ". The purpose of this amendment is to add Section 17.13.040 to Title 17.13 "Unlicensed Group homes" which prohibits reapplication for one year after a Speciai Use Permit is revoked. Date: June 1, 2011 Rebecca Deming Assistant Director of Planning Publish The Record Gazette No. 48095 06/03,2011 STAFF REPORT Agenda Item q,L-, To: Mayor and Council Members From: City of Beaumont Planning Department Date: June 21, 2011 Subject: Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (No. 11- MND -03) for the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project & San Timoteo Bike Lane Project In 2005 the City was awarded a "Transportation Enhancement" (TE) Grant for building bike lanes and assorted pathway amenities along Oak Valley Parkway and San Timoteo Canyon Road. The TE fund requires both Caltrans and the California Transportation Commissions (CTC) oversight and approval to move forward. Ensuing NEPA clearance pushed the project's findings off to this fiscal year. Over that time period, many of the bike lane facilities were installed per the City's Oak Valley Parkway Street Improvement Project causing revisions to the original bike lane project's scope of work. As a result, the CTC has requested that the City reexamine its Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project / San Timoteo Canyon Bike Lane Project (which was initially approved in conjunction with the Noble Creek Bridge Reconstruction Project) and to file a new Notice of Determination that includes coverage of the subject bike lane facilities and other pathway amenities called out in the San Timoteo Canyon Bike Lane TE Grant. The project's remaining facilities to be covered under this action are as follows (see Exhibit for details): • The final 2.2 mile extension of Class II bike lane facilities from the City of Beaumont's western city boundary to the San Timoteo Canyon Schoolhouse; • Three roadside kiosks located along Oak Valley Parkway west of I -10 Freeway; • San Timoteo Canyon Gateway Sign (west end location) and median strip cobblestone hardscape improvements on Oak Valley Parkway; • A visitor center kiosk facility at Noble Creek Park and sidewalk extension; • A bikeway comfort stationibike lockers at the Noble Creek Park. Since the initial approval of the original MND for Oak Valley Parkway and the Noble Creek Bridge Projects, a supplemental Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (MMRP) was completed in 2007 and an Addendum (No. 2) was prepared in 2009 which included coverage of the bike lane project. Moreover, all Citywide bike lane facilities and pathway amenities were covered via the adoption of the City's Bikeway & Pedestrian Master Plan in 2007 and a Categorical Exemption was filed which included the Noble Creek comfort station facility. Per CEQA, some mitigation measures were required to reduce potential project related impacts to a less - than - significant level relating to air quality, cultural resources, and noise impacts. These mitigation measures include, but are not limited to, conducting grading activities on Monday through Friday between the hours of lam to 7pm; conforming to the City's BMP construction requirements and complying with the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan standards for ambient air quality. In addition, should any cultural or scientific resources be discovered during NEG DEC (No. 11- MND -03) Pg 1 of 3 San Timoteo Canyon Bike Lane Project 6-22-2011 A 4 ' the project's construction activities, the City will contact a qualified archaeologist as specified under the terms of the MMRP. Public notice of the City's pending action was published in the local newspaper 24 days prior to the City Council's hearing date to give sufficient time for affected and interested parties to comment on the project's environmental documents relative to the adoption of the subject MND. All public comments have been reviewed and appropriately addressed by staff as mandated under the CEQA guidelines. Recommendation: Based on our review of the project's potential impacts, staff recommends City Council: 1. Hold a Public Hearing 2. ADOPTION of the subject Mitigated Negative Declaration (No. 11- MND -03) 3. APPROVAL of the Project Progress Report Respectfully Submitted, CITY OF BEAUMONT Rebecca Deming Assistant Director of Planning I I- MND -03 Pg 2 of 3 San Timoteo Canyon Bike Cane Project. 6 -21 -2011 CITY OF BEAUMONT PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Source of City Transportation Mitigation Impact Project Name: San Timoteo Canyon Bike Lane Project Funds: Funds to be 100% reimbursed by State STIP -TE Funds Contract As per CIP Contractor's Agreements Contractors: As per approved CEP contractors list Date: Const. Budget: TBD I Subcontractors: N/A A &E Budget: TBD Project Start Date: June 2006 Report Period: June 2011 Work Completed During Report Period: Prepared Street Improvement Plan and Initial Study & Mitigated Negative Declaration (SCH No. 2006081065) & City Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 11- MND -03. Problems or Delays During Report Period: No problems or delays. Change Orders: No Change Orders. Recommendation(s) for City Council Action: Authorize the City Manager to expend funds to prepare and process all necessary permits and agreements as required to implement the project. Report Submitted by: I City of Beaumont Planning Department Mayor's Signature I Date of City Council Approval 11- MND -03 Pg 3 of 3 San Timoteo Canyon Bike Lane Project. 6 -21 -2011 City of Beaumont/ County of Riverside Historic San Timoteo Canyon Bike and Pedestrian Facilities Project Federal ID# RPSTPLE- 5209 (005) / 08- RN -0 -BAU / EA O8-OG0274 — –' Per Federal Grant: H220 STIP TE Funds San Timoteo Canyon'' School House Facility Map Update: January 2011 Proposed Project Improvements - - - Additional Bikeway Striping/Signage Class II Bike Lane Extension: — — — Proposed 4'-6' Added Pavement to Existing Paved Section and Bikeway Striping/Signage Proposed OVP Landscaping K -1 Proposed Kiosk Locations * Proposed Bike and Pedestrian Comfort Staion • Proposed Gateway Sign — - - — City of Beaumont Boundary r INITIAL STUDY and MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION FOR THE OAK VALLEY PARKWAY ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT IN THE CITY OF BEAUMONT Prepared for: City of Beaumont Planning Department 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, California 92223 Contact: Ernest A. Eggar, AICP, REA (951) 769 -8520 Prepared by: Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc. (EARSI) 223 62nd Street Newport, California 92663 Contact: Raymond H. C. Brantley (909) 886 -0863 July 2006 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration TABLE OF CONTENTS Listof Exhibits ............................... ii ................................................................................................. A. introduction ............................................ ..............................1 ........................ ............................... B. Initial Study Checklist ................................................................................... ..............................2 C. Project Title ..............................3 ................................................................................................... D. Lead Agency Name and Address .................................................................. ..............................3 E. Project Sponsor Name and Address .............................................................. ..............................3 F. Documents incorporated by Reference ......................................................... ..............................3 G. Project Information ..............................4 ....................................................................................... ProjectDescription ..............................4 ..................................................................................... ProjectLocation ..............................4 .......................................................................................... General Plan and Zoning Designations ..................................................... .............................16 H. Explanation of Checklist Categories ............................................................ .............................16 Thresholds of Significance Criteria ........................................................... .............................16 1. Initial Study Checklist and Substantiations ................................................... .............................17 Aesthetics................................................................................................... .............................17 AgricultureResources ............................................................................... .............................18 AirQuality ................................................................................................. .............................19 BiologicalResources ................................................................................. .............................21 CulturalResources ..................................................................................... .............................25 Geology& Soils ........................................................................................ .............................26 Hazards & Hazardous Materials ................................................................ .............................28 Hydrology& Water Quality ...................................................................... .............................29 LandUse & Planning ................................................................................. .............................35 MineralResources ..................................................................................... .............................37 Noise.......................................................................................................... .............................37 Population& Housing ............................................................................... .............................39 PublicServices ........................................................................................... .............................40 Recreation.................................................................................................. .............................41 Transportation& Traffic ............................................................................ .............................41 Utilities& Service Systems ....................................................................... .............................43 J. Mandatory Findings of New Significant Impacts ......................................... .............................45 K. Determination ............................................................................................... .............................47 L. Attachments .................................................................................................. .............................48 General Biological Habitat Assessment Burrowing Owl Survey Report Jurisdictional Delineation City of Beaumont Page i I.b.o..0 July 2006 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Inifial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration LIST OF EXHIBI'T'S City of Beaumont Page ii July 2006 I.b 0 05-M "'5 ... ............................... Exhibit 1 - Regional Location Map ......•••••""""""""' " " " " " " " Vicinity Ma ••••""""""""" " " " "'. " " " " "6 Exhibit 2 - Project Exhibit 3 - USGS Topographic Ma ..................... ..............................7 p.................................................................. Exhibit4 - Aerial Photo ................ ..............................8 Exhibit 5 - Site Photos ... ................................................... .............................10 Exhibit 6 - Typical Roadway Cross - Sections ••°............•"""" """"" " " "' " " " .................11 Projects ............................... Exhibit 7 - Related ............................................................................ Exhibit 8 - Biological Resources Ma .............. .............................12 Exhibit 9 - Class II Bike Lane & Pedestrian Trail ............................................ .............................13 .................. Exhibit 10 - Noble Creek Park Plot Plan ............ .............................14 Exhibit 11 - San Timoteo Canyon School Site ..................... ............................ .............................15 City of Beaumont Page ii July 2006 I.b 0 05-M Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration t A. INTRODUCTION The City of Beaumont (the City) proposes to implement improvements on Oak Valley Parkway, an arterial highway in the western part of the City, in order to achieve three major objectives: 1. Widen the roadway to accommodate existing and projected traffic demands. Current traffic becomes congested during morning and evening peak hours. Widening the roadway will increase the capacity of the roadway; 2. Improve drainage on Oak Valley Parkway. Currently, the roadway experiences flooding at Noble Creek and Marshall Creek during periods of heavy rain. The Project reconstructs these two stream crossings. The Noble Creek Bridge Project would demolish the existing bridge and abutments, excavate a wider channel at the bridge, construct new abutments outside the current jurisdiction, and install a new clear -span bridge with larger capacity. The Marshall Creek Crossing Project would demolish the existing crossing consisting of Oak Valley Parkway paved over compacted earthen materials with two 48 -inch galvanized drainage pipes and replace it with a much larger dual box culvert, and widen Oak Valley Parkway. Separate Initial Studies & Addenda have been prepared for these two facilities; and 3. Implement, where practical, the portions of the proposed Class II Bike Lane & Pedestrian Trail Project, which would create a new trail along Oak Valley Parkway and connect to an existing trail system near San Timoteo Canyon Road. The bike lane and trail project has been designed as a historic preservation, transportation system enhancement, and education project focused on resources in San Timoteo Canyon, which is located in the City of Beaumont and Riverside County, California. The project also includes improvements along the road parkway to mitigate erosion impacts to water quality. All bike lane and other road improvements will be maintained by the City of Beaumont and the County of Riverside. In its review of the Project, the City has determined the Project is located adjacent to and is closely related to several previously approved projects. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 provide a test for review of subsequent projects when a previously certified EIR or previously adopted MND encompasses a current site, as follows: (a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project, which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental City of Beaumont Page 1 July 24116 f.b.(m4r Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Midgated Negative Declaration effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. (b) If changes to a project or its circumstances occur or new information becomes available after adoption of a negative declaration, the lead agency shall prepare a subsequent EIR if required under subsection (a). Otherwise the lead agency shall determine whether to prepare a subsequent negative declaration, an addendum, or no further documentation. (c) Once a project has been approved, the lead agency's role in project approval is completed, unless further discretionary approval on that project is required. Information appearing after an approval does not require reopening of that approval. If after the project is approved, any of the conditions described in subsection (a) occurs, a subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall only be prepared by the public agency which grants the next discretionary approval for the project, if any. In this situation no other responsible agency shall grant an approval for the project until the subsequent EIR has been certified or subsequent negative declaration adopted. (d) A subsequent EIR or subsequent negative declaration shall be given the same notice and public review as required under Section 15087 or Section 15072. A subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall state where the previous document is available and can be reviewed. B. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST CEQA Guidelines suggest format and content for Initial Studies, including an environmental checklist with which to evaluate potential environmental effects of a project. The City of Beaumont Checklist is derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. However, since City of Beaumont rage 2 Jury awv ,�+05� Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitlgated Negative Declaration . _ Appendix G better reflects a new project site with no previous environmental review, the City has developed a modified Checklist for subsequent projects on sites previously reviewed under CEQA. The Checklist in this document is intended to evaluate adequacy of earlier documents pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines and considers the relationship between the previous document and the current project in each impact category in the following areas: • Nearness of the site covered by the previous document to the current site • Extent of relevant discussion • Comparison of impacts Relevance of previous Measures to the current project C. PROJECT TITLE Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project in the City of Beaumont. D. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS City of Beaumont 550 East 6th Street Beaumont, CA 92223 E. PROJECT SPONSOR NAME AND ADDRESS City of Beaumont 550 East 6th Street Beaumont, CA 92223 F. DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE The Project incorporates the following documents by reference. These may be viewed during regular business hours at the Planning Department office of the City of Beaumont. Heartland Specific Plan FEIR (September 21, 1994) - This document was prepared for the Heartland Development Project, located adjacent within the Project vicinity, and will be served by the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project. Oak Valley Specific Plan EIR 229 (April 1990) - This document was prepared for the Oak Valley Specific Plan Area, which will benefit from the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project. Oak Valley Estates Mitigated Negative Declaration - (May 3, 1999) - The 532.72 acre Oak Valley Estates Project is located adjacent to the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project. Site and will benefit from the reconstruction. Addendum to City of Beaumont General Plan Update Subsequent EIR - This document was prepared for the annexation of the Oak Valley Estates site to the City of Beaumont_ The Oak Valley Estates PUD will benefit from the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project. City of Beaumont Page 3 July 2006 leb % OS-0: Oak Valky Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration General Biological Habitat Assessment for City of Beaumont Oak Valley Parkway (July 7, 2006) - Prepared by EARSI, Inc. This Study was conducted to analyze the biological resources along the alignment of the Project. General Biological Habitat Assessment for City of Beaumont Stream Crossings (February 22, 2005) - Prepared by EARSI, Inc. for major stream crossings on Oak Valley Parkway, including Noble Creek and Marshall Creek. Noble Creek Preliminary Floodplain Study (June 1999) - Prepared for Westbrook Oak Valley Properties, LLC, by AEI/CASC Engineering Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) Proposed Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSCHP) - Online Custom Reporting, March 2004. Oak Valley Parkway Class II Bike Lane & Pedestrian Trail Environmental Assessment - This document was prepared for the comprehensive development of a 7 -mile trail paralleling Oak Valley Parkway from Noble Creek Park to San Timoteo Canyon Road, including park improvements, historical preservation and information kiosks. (Please refer to the Land Use & Planning discussion). G. PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project consists of widening and other public works improvements of Oak Valley Parkway within the City of Beaumont. Although the Project includes the stream crossings of both Noble Creek and Marshall Creek, this Project does not fully address the biological and hydrological impacts related the streambeds. Therefore, separate, detailed construction, level documentation has been prepared for both the Noble Creek Bridge and the Marshall Creek Over- crossing. PROJECT LOCATION This Site is located in the City of Beaumont, Riverside County, California, approximately 0.6 mile east of the intersection of Oak Valley Parkway and Interstate 10 and approximately 1.2 miles west of the intersection of Oak Valley Parkway and Beaumont Avenue. Noble Creek crosses under Oak Valley Parkway in a southerly direction via an existing clear -span bridge. Surrounding areas consist of newly developed residential, recreational fields, and disturbed soils. Exhibits Exhibit I shows a regional map. Exhibit 2 shows a vicinity map. Exhibit 3 shows USGS topographic map. Exhibit 4 shows an aerial photo. Exhibit 5 shows site photos. Exhibit 6 shows typical cross sections of Oak Valley Parkway after Project implementation. Exhibit 7 identifies related projects. Exhibit 8 reproduces the Biological Resources Map from the Habitat Assessment. Exhibit 9 shows the proposed Class II Bike Lane & Pedestrian Trail. Exhibit 10 shows the Noble Creek Park Plot Plan. Exhibit 1 I shows the San Timoteo Canyon School Site. City of Beaumont - — Page 4 ✓uty lvvo ,1,. 45'r P s� r, wa►nsnnai mar Z 1 itf too lilt , 9. ,� .x, 0 TWO A fiyf AM- Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Stadj Midgated Negative Declaration (y 0.5 1 2 Miles Exhibit 2 Vicinity Map Ci,tlf Beaumont Page 6 July 20(16 �F Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration �6 AAg .a vf t �. - _BItDO+C$t0£ a F AVE ° , 99 �J + 2 c i Location z i !�+ ---------- - ` rry "" +.�.. .� • �' ' �-, � ,.� '� 'd's.' tea- . � sa e t' # F 4 � _ « .e .* 1 7 ZS. $ ' t • } 3 i �10 1 K; 'h 0 1,000 2,000 4,000 Feet USGS Topographic Map Exhibit 3 2&Reaumont page 7 July 2006 r; Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Midgated Negative Declaration «2 Aerial Photograph Exhibit 4 gff Beaumont Page 8 July 2006 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Photo 1 - View looking west along the southern side of Oak Valley Parkway. Photo 2 - View looking east along the southern side of Oak Valley Parkway. Site Photographs 2 CitBeaumont Page 9 Exhibit 5 July 2006 M 0 0) CL 4C 0 1 0 tai 0 110' r-, 4 'A ,'?);rRRT �! I Typical Section m Not to Scole From Sta. 35+16.70 to Sta. 73+16.67 Cr WLA4P Typical Section Not to Scale From Sta. 23+68.43 to Sta. 31+33.81 1 W 7 ll� lid O Wig I Typical Section m Not to Scole From Sta. 35+16.70 to Sta. 73+16.67 Cr WLA4P Typical Section Not to Scale From Sta. 23+68.43 to Sta. 31+33.81 1 W 7 ll� lid O i Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration «Z Related Projects Map Exhibit 7 919f Beaumont Page 11 July 2006 O_ O O O C C� m N V �O n m x �- v- g a OD a 0 p y 7C' r a 90 -v CD CL rip 1 W W m xT =. �N Cr CITY OF BEAUi4ON"T OAK VALLEY PARKWAY - WEST HISTORIC BIKE LANE & orpn vrr+ rlrnvntivilEr Ir nonccrlrrr GRANT SUNCAL & GRANT, SUNCAL GRANT, & TUMF PARDEE, GRANT, & TUMF RYLAND, GRANT, & TUMF DEVELOPERS. TUMF, & GRANT ...."......... GRANT .A 0. I M �pz :7 At Q O Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial StudylAfidgated Negative Declaration 3` 4 j 7� rr e. Noble Creek Park Plot Plan A ZJ Exhibit 10 �"Beaumont Page 14 July 2006 iC W -7 sk W IN 4 — m� O Noble Creek Park Plot Plan A ZJ Exhibit 10 �"Beaumont Page 14 July 2006 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration I °! Oft AWAW OYOWAW a e O W Q Qw\Q UUW O WOo �UZ Z v San Timoteo Canyon School Site Exhibit 11 C o{ f Beaumont Page 15 July 2006 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project InNal Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration GENERAL PLAN AND ZONING DESIGNATIONS General Plan - Urban Arterial Highway and Arterial Highway Zoning - Specific Plan H. EXPLANATION OF CHECKLIST CATEGORIES Potential environmental effects of the Project are classified and described within the Checklist under the following general headings: No Change From Previous Analysis (No New Document Required) applies where the Project and related impact have been analyzed as part of an earlier CEQA document. The previous environmental document mitigated the impact through a Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program. The City adopted Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to State and City CEQA requirements identifying unavoidable adverse impacts related to the Project. Circumstances have not changed surrounding the Project. Minor Changes from Previous Analysis (Addendum Required) applies where a project has been analyzed by an earlier CEQA document; however, the project and its related impacts require minor clarifications or changes to the previous document. These changes will not result in new significant impacts. Major Changes, Less than Significant Impacts with Mitigation (Mitigated Negative Declaration Required) applies where a project has been analyzed in an earlier CEQA document, but has changed to the point where new studies or analyses are required including new Mitigation Measures. However, the changes or modifications do not result in significant impacts not previously analyzed. New Significant Impact (New EIR Required) applies where a project has been analyzed in an earlier document but new information, including changes to the project and changes in circumstances, result in significant unavoidable adverse impacts not previously analyzed making the earlier document inadequate under State and City requirements. THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA Significance Criteria for Project related impacts are based on the City's Environmental Checklist, as shown in the following tables for each environmental category. An impact is considered potentially significant if the Project would have a substantial adverse effect above and beyond the level identified, analyzed and considered in previous approvals of related projects and their environmental documents upon which the current Project is tiered. City of Beaumont -- Page 16 July 2006 :06 0 05-M Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Stady/Midgated Negative Declaration I. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST AND SUBSTANTIATIONS AESTHETICS I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rocks, outcroppings, and historic buildings ❑ ❑ ❑ within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality ❑ ❑ ❑ of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect the day or nighttime views in the ❑ ❑ ❑ area? a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The Project will not affect a scenic vista. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rocks, outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? The Project will not damage scenic resources. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? The Project will not substantially degrade the visual character of the Site or its surroundings. The Project will enhance the visual quality of the surrounding area by enhancing drainage. d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect the day or nighttime views in the area? The Project will not introduce new sources of light and glare. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. City of Beaumont Page 17 July 2006 Job 0 05.0 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration ( AGRICULTURE RESOURCES II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the Project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and ❑ ❑ ❑ Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a ❑ ❑ ❑ Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of ❑ ❑ ❑ Farmland, to non - agricultural use? a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? The Project will be constructed within the existing Right -of -Way. Therefore, no farmland is affected b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? C) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? None of these potential impacts are applicable to the Project. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. City of Beaumont - Page IS July 2uv6 ;ob 0 05-M Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration c AIR QUALITY a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan ?. The Project will not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the SCAQMD plan. The City has incorporated the various provisions of the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan (SCAQMP) in its building and grading permit procedures. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Construction - The Project will not violate air quality standards or contribute to an existing air quality violation. Operation - Recommended SCAQMD daily operational emissions "significance" thresholds for Pollutants with Regional Effects are as follows: 55 pounds per day of ROC 55 pounds per day of NOx 550 pounds per day of CO 150 pounds per day of PM 10 150 pounds per day of Sox City of Beaumont _- Page 19 Juty lUU6 i.b # osm Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study idgated Negative Declaration In addition, the following California State criteria also affect the Project: One -hour CO standard of 20.0 ppm Eight -hour CO standard of 9.0 ppm Significance of localized Project impacts depends on whether ambient CO levels in the vicinity of the Project are above or below State and federal CO standards. If ambient levels are below the standards, a project is considered to have adverse impacts when project emissions result in an exceedance of one or more of these standards. If ambient levels already exceed a State or federal standard, project emissions are considered significant if they increase one hour CO concentrations by 1.0 ppm or more or eight hour CO concentrations by 0.45 ppm or more. Although the Project is not expected to exceed any of the thresholds noted above, the Project will be required with incorporate procedures to ensure compliance with SCAQMD standards. c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non- attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? The Project is one of the major public improvements in the City capital improvements program. The intent of this program is to provide a high level of services and facilities to City residents, based on the City's General Plan. These Project improvements have been contemplated in the Addendum to the City's General Plan Update, Heartland Specific Plan EIR and Oak Valley Specific Plan EIR in order to accommodate existing and projected traffic volumes in the western half of the City of Beaumont. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? It is not anticipated that sensitive receptors will be exposed to substantial concentrations of pollutants from the Project. The distance of the Site from existing residents, combined with SCAQMD standard air quality requirements, will ensure potential exposure is reduced to less than significant levels. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The Project will not create excessive or objectionable odors. Potential odor impacts related to diesel and gasoline exhausts from construction equipment will be greatly reduced by the physical distance of the Site from residents and the standard requirements of the City which govern operating equipment in compliance with the SCAQMP. Standard Conditions SC 3 -01 - The Project shall comply with SCAQMD standards for ambient air quality. If ambient levels are below the standards, a project is considered to have adverse impacts when project emissions result in an exceedance of one or more of these standards. If ambient levels already exceed a State or federal standard, project City of Beaumont Page 20 July 1006 1nb 0 05-M Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Midgated Negative Declaration r emissions are considered significant if they increase one hour CO concentrations by 1.0 ppm or more or eight hour CO concentrations by 0.45 ppm or more. SC 3 -02 - The Project shall comply with SCAQMD standards regarding equipment emitting NOx during construction operations. The cumulative amount from all construction equipment shall not exceed SCAQMD standards. SC 3 -03 - The Project shall comply with City of Beaumont and SCAQMD standards regarding dust emissions during construction activities. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES eb , Nom ` �t Trevioft' lines `' Amalysia. -M yso _ Mitig^atioif- IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the Project: a) Have a substantial adverse affect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or ❑ regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or ❑ 11 regional plans, polices, regulations or by the California El Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act ❑ ❑ (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, ❑ etc.) though direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with ❑ ❑ ❑ established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting ❑ El ❑ biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, ❑ ❑ or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? a) Have a substantial adverse affect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)? City of Beaumont Page 21 July L°"° as P OS -02 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Section 15065(a) of the CEQA Guidelines states that a project may have a significant effect on the environment if "the project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species." A Biological Assessment of the Site was conducted by EARSI. It is an Appendix to this Mitigated Negative Declaration. According to this report, the Site possesses natural resources (jurisdictional wetlands, waters, or streambeds) that would represent a constraint to development or would involve coordination with resource agencies prior to grading permits being issued The Site is characterized by roadside habitat dominated by non -native grassland/disturbed, buckwheat scrub, unvegetated channel and ornamental communities as indicated in Attachment E -5, Biological Resources Map, and Attachment E -6 (1 -2), Current Study Area Photographs. Exhibit 8 reproduces the Biological Resources Map. The Site is located within the Pass Area Plan Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), outside of designated criteria areas (MSHCP June 2003). The MSHCP has determined that all of the sensitive species potentially occurring within and/or adjacent to the Site have been adequately covered (MSHCP Table 2 -2 Species Considered for Conservation Under the MSHCP Since 1999, 2003). However, additional surveys are required for narrow endemic plants and specific wildlife species that occur within predetermined "Survey Areas" (MSHCP 2003). The Site occurs within a predetermined Survey Area for a single endemic plant (Marvin's onion). However, focused surveys are not warranted based upon a lack of suitable habitat (Conservation Report Summary Generator 2004). The Site also occurs within a predetermined survey area for a single wildlife species (burrowing owl) not considered adequately covered by the MSHCP (Conservation Report Summary Generator 2004). Based on the presence of suitable habitat within the Site for this species, focused survey efforts are warranted. Subsequently, a burrowing owl habitat assessment and focused surveys have been conducted and the report has been attached (Attachment E7, Burrowing Owl Survey Report). This study found that the lack of any direct or indirect evidence of presence of the species indicates that the burrowing owl does not currently occupy the Site. General wildlife surveys were not conducted during the initial site investigation. However, animals identified during the reconnaissance survey by sight, call, tracks, nests, scat, remains, or other signs were recorded. All wildlife was identified in the field with the aid of binoculars and taxonomic keys (if applicable). Vertebrate taxonomy followed in this report is according to Stebbins (1985) for amphibians and reptiles, the American Ornithologists' Union (1983 and supplemental) for birds, and Jones et al. (1997) for mammals. Scientific names are used during the first mention of a species; common names only are used in the remainder of the text. The Project will not result in an adverse effect, directly or through habitat modification, on species identified as candidate, sensitive, or special status in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, by the California Department of Fish and Game, or by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service as none of these resources are present onsite. City of Beaumont Page 22 Jury aVU9 lub 0 65-M Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Sa dy/Mitigated Negative Declaration ' b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, polices, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? A review of the Site by a licensed Biological Consultant has determined the Site has a riparian feature. However, the riparian feature does not constitute high quality riparian habitat. No other sensitive natural communities were found at the Site. Moreover, the Project will not have a substantial adverse affect on the subject riparian resource, as the Project is limited in extent and duration. The Biological Consultant concluded the Project would result in a beneficial effect to the resource, as it involves improving channel capacity at this location, thereby improving stream function. Therefore, the Project will not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through habitat modifications on any riparian habitat or sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans or by the CDFG or USFWS. Marshall Creek crosses under Oak Valley Parkway within the Site boundary. Although the majority of this ephemeral feature passes under Oak Valley Parkway via corrugated metal pipes, a small portion of the unchannelized drainage is present onsite. This feature is unvegetated within the Site boundary. In addition, two unnamed drainages are present onsite that represent areas of local storm drainage associated with Oak Valley Parkway. These features are illustrated in Attachment E5, Biological Resource Map. The Project will not result in an adverse effect on riparian habitat or a sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, by the California Department of Fish and Game, or by the US Fish and Wildlife Service as none of these resources are present onsite. c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? The field investigation and delineation of the Site by a licensed Biological Consultant concluded there are no wetlands present at the Site. The Project will not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means, on any federally protected wetlands, including, but not limited to, marshland, vernal pool, coastal, as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. No wetlands exist on the Site. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory ftsh or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? Noble Creek and Marshall Creek reaches offer potential wildlife movement corridors between open space habitats in the vicinity of the site and San Timoteo Creek located downstream. The roadway improvements to Oak Valley Parkway will not interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or City of Beaumont Page 23 July lvua ,ob.OS -M Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites as none of these resources are present onsite. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? The Project is not expected to significantly impact vegetation, as the channel is characterized as barren with sparsely vegetated terraces of non - native species, and impacts will be temporary only due to construction. A review of the Site by a licensed Biological Consultant has determined the Project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. None of these resources are present on the site. J) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? A review of the Site by a licensed Biological Consultant has determined the Project will not conflict with provisions of the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan. The MSHCP has determined that all of the sensitive species potentially occurring within and/or adjacent to the Study Areas have been adequately covered (MSHCP Table 2 -2 Species Considered for Conservation Under the MSHCP Since 1999, 2003). The Project is located within the Pass Area Plan Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan, outside of designated criteria areas (MSHCP June 2003). The Site does not occur within a MSHCP criteria area. However, the Site possesses jurisdictional drainages, which will require a formal delineation to assess potential impacts of the proposed projects. No riparian/riverine habitat or vernal pools are located on the Site. In addition, the intersection of Marshall Creek and Oak Valley Parkway represents potential wildlife movement corridors The Site also possesses suitable habitat for the burrowing owl (MSHCP 2003). Focused surveys for this species are warranted to determine presence/absence and potential impacts as a result of the proposed project, if documented onsite. A burrowing owl habitat assessment and focused surveys have been conducted and the report has been attached (Attachment E7, Burrowing Owl Survey Report). This study found that the lack of any direct or indirect evidence of presence of the species indicates that the burrowing owl does not currently occupy the Site. The Project occurs within a predetermined Survey Area for a single endemic plant (Marvin's onion). However, focused surveys are not warranted based on a lack of suitable habitat (Conservation Report Summary Generator 2004). The Study Areas also occur within predetermined survey areas for a single wildlife species (burrowing owl) not adequately covered by the MSHCP (Conservation Report Summary Generator 2004). Focused surveys for the burrowing owl were conducted by EARSI to determine habitat suitability and to determine presence /absence (Habitat Assessment for the Burrowing Owl at Three Stream Crossing Bridge /Culvert Improvement Sites in the City of Beaumont, California, City of Beaumont Page 24 Jaty Gums ,d,rmm Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration dated March 29, 2005). Surveys concluded that, due to the level of disturbance and the rocky substrate, none of the areas adjacent to the Site are considered suitable for the burrowing owl. This conclusion was further corroborated by the lack of burrows detected during the survey. In summary, the Site and immediately adjacent areas are not occupied by the burrowing owl and are highly unlikely to become occupied in the near future. Based on reported results, as well as the compliance with the MSHCP, no federal coordination with the USFWS under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act is expected to be required. Midi ation Measures No mitigation is required. CULTURAL RESOURCES a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Standard City Conditions provide for ensuring potential impacts to cultural, historic and scientific resources are mitigated through the grading and excavation process. These conditions provide for periodic monitoring, grading cessation and resource recovery. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Indications of the likelihood of human remains on the Site have not been observed. However, Standard City Conditions provide for ensuring that potential impacts to cultural, historic and City of Beaumont Page 25 Jury avuo !ob 0 05-02 nom V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a 0 0 historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an 0 archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological El resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside 11 1 of formal cemeteries? a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? Standard City Conditions provide for ensuring potential impacts to cultural, historic and scientific resources are mitigated through the grading and excavation process. These conditions provide for periodic monitoring, grading cessation and resource recovery. d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? Indications of the likelihood of human remains on the Site have not been observed. However, Standard City Conditions provide for ensuring that potential impacts to cultural, historic and City of Beaumont Page 25 Jury avuo !ob 0 05-02 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Stndy/Mitigated Negative Declaration scientific resources are mitigated through the grading and excavation process. These conditions provide for periodic monitoring, grading cessation and resource recovery. Standard Condition SC 5-01 - Throughout grading and construction activities, if cultural and/or scientific resources are discovered, earth - moving activities shall be temporarily suspended and a qualified archaeologist and/or paleontologist will be contacted to evaluate the significance of the resources and make further recommendations for their treatment, if necessary. If human remains are encountered during construction, work in the affected area and the immediate vicinity must be halted immediately, and the County Coroner must be notified pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. GEOLOGY & SOILS VI. GEOLOGY & SOILS - Would the Project: E a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area ❑ ❑ ❑ or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑ iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ ❑ iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and ❑ ❑ ❑ potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial ❑ ❑ ® ❑ risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems ❑ ❑ ❑ where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? City of Beaumont Job Y 05-07 Page 26 Jury 'Cvvv Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving. i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? The Project consists of widening and improvement activities within the existing ROW of a major arterial roadway. Therefore, these geologic features will not be affected by the Project. b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? The Project is not affected by these conditions. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? Standard City Conditions require the removal and remediation of expansive soils within the Project site. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Not applicable to the Project. Standard Condition SC 6-01 - The proposed project shall comply with the City's Grading and Excavation regulations in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works, including the following: 1. Soil erosion; 2. Expansive soils; and 3. Seismic safety. City of Beaumont Page 27 July Luuo job Y 05-02 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Intuit Study/Mitigoted Negative Declaration HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? The Project will not involve the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? City of Beaumont Page 28 July 2006 1.b. 05-W Majc� (ho^ . Knor N0 Change New . .eas tharr - 8� fmm significlot, Previous trwPreviotuw � MitigaEioa VII. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment ❑ through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous ❑ ❑ materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident ❑ ❑ ❑ conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely ❑ ❑ hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- ❑ quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 and, ❑ ❑ ❑ as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project ❑ ❑ ❑ result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would ❑ ❑ ❑ the project result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an ❑ ❑ adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation ❑ plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where ❑ ❑ ❑ wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? The Project will not involve the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? City of Beaumont Page 28 July 2006 1.b. 05-W Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration € c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? These impact categories are not applicable to the Project. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? The Site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the project area? J) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? These impact categories are not applicable to the Project. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY City of Beaumont - Page 29 July 2006 toe 0 05 02 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improyanent Project Initial Study/Midgated Negative Declaration b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of ❑ ❑ ❑ the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of the pre - existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a ❑ ❑ ® ❑ stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned storm water drainage ❑ ❑ ❑ systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ f) otherwise substantially degrade water quality? g) Place a housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as ❑ ❑ ❑ mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures, which ❑ ❑ ® ❑ would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ❑ ❑ ❑ injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? J) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ k) Potentially impact storm water runoff from construction ❑ ❑ ❑ activities? 1) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including ❑ ❑ ® ❑ washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas for post - constriction activities? m) otherwise result in any other potential impacts to ❑ ❑ ® ❑ stormwater runoff from post - construction activities? n) Substantially increase the flow velocity or volume of ❑ ❑ ® ❑ stormwater runoff to cause erosion or habitat impacts within the project site or downstream? a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? The Project shall comply with all applicable water quality standards, including obtaining required permits from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. No waste discharge would result from the Project. City ofBeaunront Page 30 July 10 06 t•b 0 05-02 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Midgated Negative Declaration b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of the pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? This impact category is not applicable to the Project. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? The Project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the area. Rather, in conjunction with road widening, the Project will improve existing drainage patterns. The stream crossing replacement will result in an increase in hydrologic capacity at Noble and Marshall Creeks, thereby improving drainage and reducing the potential for erosion or siltation on- or off - Site. Therefore, the Project would improve the existing drainage pattern. d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? The roadway improvements on Oak Valley Parkway will improve the existing drainage course. The stream crossings will be altered in a manner that will increase hydrologic capacity at both Noble and Marshall Creeks, thereby improving drainage and reducing the potential for flooding on- or off -Site. The Project will not alter the rate of surface runoff at the Site. e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources ofpolluted runoff? The Project will not create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable to the Project. J) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? The Project could result in short-term minor impacts to water quality as a result of Project construction only. These impacts would be mitigated through implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) and other required mitigation measures imposed by the California Water Quality Control Board (WQCB), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) through their permit processes. As a result, there would be no substantial impacts to water quality from the Project. g) Place housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? The Project does not involve housing. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable. City of Beaumont Page 31 July 2006 Ab r 05-17 Oak Valky Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial study/Midgated Negative Declaration h) Place within a 100 year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood f lows? The Noble Creek Preliminary Floodplain Study was conducted based on the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Master Drainage Plan for the Beaumont Area. The Study concluded proposed improvements in Noble Creek would not significantly impact adjacent properties. Major impacts are also avoided to upstream and downstream properties. The Project will result in an increase in hydrologic capacity at the bridge crossing, thereby improving drainage and reducing the potential for erosion, siltation, or flooding on- and off -Site. i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, includingflooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? The Project does not place people or structures in flood hazard areas. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable to the Project. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? The Site is not susceptible to seiches, tsunamis or substantial mudflows. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable to the Project. k) Potentially impact storm water runoff from construction activities? The Project may result in short -term minor impacts to water quality as a result of Project construction only. Such impacts were anticipated and considered in conjunction with the approvals of the Heartland and Oak Valley Specific Plans and their related EIRs. Standard Conditions imposed by the required regulatory agencies and BMPs implemented by the City will ensure potential temporary impacts are minimized or avoided. Project BMPs include fencing the limits of the work area, use of erosion and siltation controls such as straw bales and silt fencing if appropriate, and limiting the fueling, washing, and storage of equipment and machinery to areas outside of jurisdictional waters. Finally, the City will restore the channel bed and banks to pre - Project contours following Project completion. With implementation of BMPs, potential impacts related to storm water runoff will be reduced. 1) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas for post - construction activities? The Project may result in short -term minor impacts related to discharge of stormwater pollutants as a result of Project construction only. These impacts were anticipated and considered in conjunction with the approvals of the Heartland and Oak Valley Specific Plans and the related EIRs. Standard Conditions imposed by required regulatory agencies and BMPs implemented by the City will ensure potential temporary impacts are minimized or avoided. BMPs include fencing the limits of the work area, use of erosion and siltation controls such as straw bales and silt fencing if appropriate, and limiting the fueling, washing, and storage of equipment and machinery to areas outside of jurisdictional waters. Finally, the City will restore the channel bed City of Beaumont Page 32 July 2006 ,.,.0542 mp Roadway Oak Valley Parkway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration and banks to pre - Project contours following Project completion. With implementation of BMPs, there would be no substantial impact related to stormwater pollutants from the Project. m) Otherwise result in any other potential impacts to stormwater runoff from post - construction activities? Potential impacts related to post- construction stormwater runoff were addressed in both the Oak Valley and Heartland Specific Plan EIRs. Although the Project may result in short-term minor impacts to water quality as a result of Project construction only, these impacts would be adequately mitigated through implementation of BMPs and other required mitigation measures imposed by the WQCB, ACOE and CDFG through their permit processes. As a result, there would be no substantial impacts to water quality from the Project. n) Substantially increase the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause erosion or habitat impacts within the project site or downstream? Erosion and Sediment Control Measures - The Project may result in temporary erosion or impacts to habitat during construction only. Potential for these temporary impacts would be minimized or avoided through the use of BMPs and other standard mitigation measures required by the City and regulatory agencies. The Project will not increase flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff on- or off -Site, but instead would improve the capacity of the crossing at this location, thereby allowing for reduced flow velocities and the ability to handle higher storm volume, if it occurs naturally. All construction activities are to be conducted during the dry season, when no water is present in the channel, or utilizing proper flow diversion structures, if flow is present. No change in volume or velocity of flow would result from these methods. Materials Handling and Disposal Measures - The Project may result in temporary erosion or impacts to habitat during construction activities only. Potential for these temporary impacts would be minimized or avoided through the use of BMPs and other standard mitigation measures required by the City and regulatory agencies. The Project will not increase flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff on- or off -Site, but instead would improve the capacity of the crossing at this location, thereby allowing for reduced flow velocities and the ability to handle higher storm volume. All construction activities are to be conducted during the dry season, when no water is present in the channel, or utilizing proper flow diversion structures, if flow is present. No change in volume or velocity of flow would result from these methods. Furthermore, all handling and disposal of materials would occur outside the subject channel and would comply with standard regulations for disposal. Hazardous Waste - The Project will not result in Stormwater contamination by hazardous waste. No handling and disposal of hazardous waste will occur on the Site. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable. Non -Storm Water Discharges - The Project will require discharge of native soil material, concrete, and other construction- related materials required to widen Oak Valley Parkway, which may affect Noble Creek and Marshall Creek. However, this discharge of construction materials will occur outside the existing channel in an area that is upland on either side of the two Creek channels. Discharge of these materials would comply with regulations imposed by the ACOE, City of Beaumont Page 33 July 2006 )A, 0 65-02 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Sludy/Mitigated Negative Declaration CDFG and State Water Resources Control Board, thereby minimizing impacts to the waterway and habitat. The discharge will not result in an increase in stormwater velocities or volumes, but would instead improve channel capacity at this location. Equipment Washing - The Project will comply with all BMPs and other required standard construction measures, including restricting washing of equipment to areas outside the subject channel, and in a location that would prevent runoff from entering the channel. Therefore, no change to stormwater flows would result from equipment washing associated with the Project. Inspections and Maintenance Measures - The Project will comply with all BMPs and other required standard construction measures, including restricting inspection and maintenance of construction equipment to areas outside the subject channel, and in a location that would prevent runoff from entering the channel. Therefore, no change to stormwater flows would result from inspection and maintenance of construction equipment associated with the Project. Protect Design Features PDF 8-01 - Structural and non - structural BMPs will be detailed in the final WQMP with goal of minimizing or eliminating dry season flows reaching Marshall or Noble Creek. Irrigation and other source control practices will be the focus of additional measures to be incorporated into the WQMP. Design level measures such as those identified in the Start at the Source Manual (Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association, 1999) will be evaluated and incorporated, as feasible. PDF 8-02 - A master drainage concept will be incorporated into the project design to mitigate hydrology impacts and comply with City of Beaumont requirements and standards. PDF 8-03 - Potential for the proposed project to impact the site's hydrology shall be reduced to a less than significant level through engineering design and construction techniques incorporated into the project in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works. Standard Conditions SC 8-01 - The following shall be executed in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works: • Provide a drainage study determining the effect the proposed development and associated drainage patterns will have on existing drainage facilities. • Design provisions for surface drainage; and • Design necessary storm drain facilities for the proper control and disposal of storm runoff. SC 8-02 - Erosion and Sediment Control Measures - All construction activities shall take place outside of channel flow in the rainy season, when no water is present in the channel, or utilizing proper flow diversion structures, if flow is present. City ojBeaumont Page 34 July 1006 J..b 0 05-02 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Stady/MWgated Negative Declaration SC 8-03 - Materials Handling and Disposal Measures - Potential for temporary erosion impacts to habitat during construction activities shall be minimized or avoided through the use of BMPs and other standard mitigation measures required by the City and regulatory agencies SC 8-04 - Non -Storm Water Discharges - Discharge of non -storm water materials shall comply with regulations imposed by the ACOE, CDFG and State Water Resources Control Board, thereby minimizing impacts to the waterway and habitat. SC 8-05 - Equipment Washing - The Project shall comply with all BMPs and other required standard construction measures, including restricting washing of equipment to areas outside the subject channel, and in a location that would prevent runoff from entering the channel. SC 8-06 - Inspections and Maintenance Measures - The Project shall comply with all BMPs and other required standard construction measures, including restricting inspection and maintenance of construction equipment to areas outside the subject channel, and in a location that would prevent runoff from entering the channel. LAND USE & PLANNING a) Physically divide or disrupt an established community? This impact category is not applicable to the Project. b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? The Project is closely related to the construction of a seven mile long Class II Bike Lane and pedestrian trail extending from Noble Creek Park near Beaumont, California to the San Timoteo Canyon Schoolhouse (National Register of Historic Places No. 00001646 Listed January 19, City of Beaumont Page 35 July 2006 Sub %osm Oak VaUey Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Midgated Negative Declaration 2001) also known as the Little Red Schoolhouse at Casco Lake (Historic San Timoteo Canyon by Peggy Christian, 2002). Please refer to Exhibit 9. Currently there are no designated bike lanes along the project route with the exception of a Class II lane on the north side of Oak Valley Parkway between Noble Creek and Golf Club Drive and along the frontage of Noble Creek Park. The 32' paved section along the majority of the project route currently provides enough room for two undesignated 0 -1' bike lanes along the side two 11- 12' wide travel lanes for motorists. The edge of pavement is ragged further reducing the road width in some areas. The pavement surface is rough and would benefit from the application of a slurry sealant following construction of the bike lanes. Much of the existing center stripe west of Interstate 10 is barely visible. Pedestrian access is restricted due to the inconsistent conditions along the road shoulder. The project will provide a minimum 2' wide dirt trail next to the Class II bike lane for pedestrian use. The seven -mile long Class II Bike Lane and pedestrian trail will be constructed on each side of San Timoteo Canyon Road and Oak Valley Parkway between Noble Creek Park and the San Timoteo Canyon Schoolhouse. A minimum 34 -36' wide road section will be constructed by adding pavement along the dirt shoulders of the existing facility for the length of the project route as needed to create two 5 -6' wide bike lanes and two 12' wide travel lanes. Existing road improvements between Noble Creek Park and Interstate 10 exceed 36' in width at this time. The added pavement needed for the bike lanes and two of the four informational kiosks to be located along the project route will be constructed within existing right -of -way along the existing dirt shoulder of Oak Valley Parkway and San Timoteo Canyon Road. The exiting road will be slurry sealed and re- striped with thermal plastic markers following completion of the bike lane paving. New bike lane signs will also be installed in accordance with Caltrans standards. Two informational kiosks will be located next to the bike lanes, one in the County and one in the City of Beaumont. They will be designed to provide educational information about the history and natural environment of San Timoteo Canyon for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Two other information kiosks will be constructed, one at Noble Creek Park and one at the San Timoteo Canyon Schoolhouse. The kiosks along with parking lot and other site improvements such as fencing and pedestrian paths will be designed and constructed to complement the bike lanes and help preserve and promote the history of the canyon. All unprotected dirt surfaces adjoining the project will be stabilized to convey drainage, reduce erosion, and improve surface water quality. Best management practices will be employed at all times during construction to mitigate water quality impacts from construction. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan? The Project complies with the MSHCP. Please refer to the attached Biological Assessment. Mitisation Measures No mitigation is required. City of Beaumont Page 36 July 2006 Job K 0542 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration r MINERAL RESOURCES X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and to the residents of ❑ ❑ ❑ the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general ❑ ❑ ❑ plan, specific plan or other land use plan? a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and to the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? These impact categories are not applicable to the Project. Mi 'gation Measures No mitigation is required. NOISE City of Beaumont Page 37 July 2006 ,o, # 05-M maim . New MY Changes No Chang front Sigttit"�ant SigoiScmet . pious lmpaet Impacts Previous Analysis with Atoms Mitigad , XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in ❑ ❑ ® ❑ excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to ar generation of excessive ❑ ❑ ❑ groundbome vibration or groundbome noise? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in ❑ C1 1:1 the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient ❑ noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing ❑ ❑ ® without the project? City of Beaumont Page 37 July 2006 ,o, # 05-M Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Midgated Negative Declaration e) For a project bated within an airport land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles ❑ ❑ ❑ of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would ❑ ❑ ❑ the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? The Project will generate noise during construction. However, the distance from occupied structures serves to reduce noise impacts. In addition, City Standard Conditions ensure these impacts are maintained at a less than significant level. These include, but are not limited to strict hours of construction operation and noise abatement through equipment maintenance. b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise? The Project will not generate groundborne vibration or groundborne noise. c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? The Project is a temporary operation. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable. d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? The Project will generate noise during construction. However, the distance from occupied structures serves to reduce noise impacts. In addition, City Standard Conditions ensure these impacts are maintained at a less than significant level. These include, but are not limited to strict hours of construction operation and noise abatement through equipment maintenance. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? J) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? These impact categories are not applicable to the Project. City of Beaumont Page 38 ,.,0, 0,02 July 2006 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/MitiSated Negative Declaration Standard Conditions Sc 11 -01 - The proposed project shall implement City of Beaumont noise regulations applicable to the site in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works. SC I1 -02 - All construction vehicles or equipment, fixed or mobile, operated within 1,000' of a dwelling shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works. SC 11 -03 - All grading and construction activities shall be executed between the hours of lam and 7pm, Monday through Friday. POPULATION & HOUSING xn. POPULATION & HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in the area, either ❑ directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or ❑ ❑ indirectly (e.g., through the extension or roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ❑ ❑ necessitating the construction of replacement housing ❑ elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? a) Induce substantial population growth in the area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through the extension or roads or other infrastructure)? The Project will not induce substantial population growth in the vicinity of the Project. It is a public works capital improvement project with the objective of providing better public road services for existing and projected population growth in accordance with the City General Plan. b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The Project does not displace existing housing. These impact categories are not applicable. City of Beaumont Page 39 July 2006 lab. Q, -02 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Stady/Mitigated Negative Declaradon t Mideation Measures No mitigation is required. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Fire Protection? b) Police Protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? No Change Changes from, Prevca� Mitigation XM. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of the new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire Protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Police Protection? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Schools? ❑ ❑ ❑ d) Parks? ❑ ❑ ❑ e) Other public facilities? ❑ ❑ ❑ a) Fire Protection? b) Police Protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? The Project does not affect fire, police, school, or park and recreation services. Therefore, these impact categories are not applicable. e) Other public facilities? The Project consists of the reconstruction of an existing bridge and serves to implement the City's capital improvements program with the objective of providing better services to existing and future residents in accordance with the City General Plan. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. City of Beaumont Page 40 July 2006 ;M M 03-02 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration RECREATION XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that ❑ ❑ ❑ ED substantial deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which ❑ ❑ ❑ might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? These impact categories are not applicable to the Project. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. TRANSPORTATION & TRAFFIC City of Beaumont Page 41 July 2006 tob Y 0-02 Mom' Chan' Ming No Change New Less, than Changes, fim 3igaicant Signifrc�urt f+ Previous Impact Impacts, Pteviow Analysis with '" Analysis Mitigation XV. TRANSPORTATION & TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of ❑ ❑ El vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratios on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion ❑ ❑ ® ❑ management agency for designated roads or highways? City of Beaumont Page 41 July 2006 tob Y 0-02 f Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results ❑ ❑ ❑ in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses ❑ ❑ ❑ ED (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ® ❑ fj Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, ❑ ❑ ❑ bicycle racks)? a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traIc load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratios on roads, or congestion at intersections)? The Project will result in temporary traffic obstruction due to road improvements. The City Council has approved a Detour Plan to temporarily re-route traffic during the construction of the two stream crossings. The public will be notified of this temporary inconvenience by standard City procedures of posting the vicinity of the Project. b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? The Project will temporarily increase traffic congestion during construction. The completed Project will improve traffic per the County's Congestion Management Plan. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? The Project will not affect air traffic. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable. d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? The Project will not increase hazards to a design feature of the street system within the vicinity. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? The Project may temporarily affect emergency access during construction. However, posting in the vicinity of the Project will serve to reduce such impacts. _9 Result in inadequate parking capacity? The Project will not affect parking. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable. g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? City of Beaamont Page 42 July 2006 r Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The Project will not affect alternative transportation strategies. This impact is not applicable. Standard Conditions SC 15-01 - Signs shall be posted in the vicinity of the construction activities on the Noble Creek Bridge and the Marshall Creek culvert providing the public with notification of the expected construction period. SC 15-02 - Directional signs shall be posted directing traffic to the Detour Route during the construction activities of the two stream crossings. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS XVI. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable ❑ ❑ ® ❑ Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing ❑ ❑ ❑ facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or ❑ ❑ ❑ expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has ❑ ❑ ❑ adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to ❑ ❑ ❑ accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations ❑ ❑ ❑ related to solid waste? h) Would the project include a new or retrofitted storm water treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g. water quality basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the ❑ ❑ ® ❑ operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g. increased vectors and/or odors)? a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? City of Beaumont ,1, { o5-M Page 43 July 2006 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mldgated Negative Declaration The Project will not affect wastewater treatment requirements of the RWQCB. b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? The Project will not involve the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities. Therefore, this impact is not applicable to the Project. c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? The Project consists of expansion of an existing drainage facility, the replacement of the Oak Valley Parkway Bridge over Noble Creek. The Project may result in short -term impacts to water quality and habitat as a result of construction activities only. However, with implementation of applicable BMPs and additional conditions imposed by regulatory agencies, including the RWQCB, these impacts would be reduced or avoided to a level below significance. d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? The Project does not require or affect water supplies. Therefore, this impact is not applicable. e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? This has been previously determined in conjunction with project approvals of the Oak Valley and Heartland Specific Plan developments and the certification of their EIRs. Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? The Project does not affect solid waste disposal facilities. This impact category is not applicable. g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? The Project does not affect solid waste disposal facilities. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable to the Project. h) Would the project include a new or retrofitted storm water treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g water quality basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g. increased vectors and/or odors)? City of Beaumont Page 44 July 20" ,.-h 0 4542 l Oak Talley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Midgated Negative Declaration Project construction will incorporate appropriate BMPs to avoid or reduce potential contamination of stormwater. No impacts beyond those previously anticipated with the Heartland and Oak Valley Specific Plans are anticipated Mitleation Measures No mitigation is required J. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF NEW SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a ❑ ® ❑ ❑ project are considerable when reviewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either ❑ ❑ ❑ directly or indirectly? a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self- sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project entails construction of a public works improvement project to serve existing and projected development within west Beaumont. As an infrastructure project in the City capital improvement program, the Project implements several objectives of providing excellent services to the residents of the City in accordance with the General Plan. The Project has been anticipated and considered in several previous planning projects and environmental documents, including the City General Plan Update and Addendum, the Oak Valley Specific Plan and FEIR, the Heartland Specific Plan and FEIR, and the Oak Valley Estates Planned Development and MND. (city of Beaumont Page 45 July 2 006 J. 0 owe Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration The Project could result in short-term impacts in several environmental categories, including Air Quality, Biological Resources, Hydrology & Water Quality, Noise, and Traffic as a result of construction activities. However, with implementation of applicable Project Design Features (PDFs), Standard Conditions (SCs) and Mitigation Measures (MMs) imposed by the City of Beaumont and Federal, State and Regional regulatory agencies, all of these impacts would be avoided or reduced to a level of less than significant. The Project does not have the potential to substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when reviewed in connection with the effects `ects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) The Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project has impacts that are individually limited, but potentially cumulatively considerable when the various individual impacts are considered together. However, with the implementation of the mitigation measures, including Project Design Features (PDFs), Standard Conditions (SCs) and Mitigation Measures (MMs), these impacts are reduced to below a level of significance. c) Does the project have environmental effects that cause substantial adverse impacts on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The Project will not have environmental effects that cause substantial adverse impacts on people. City of Beaumont Page 46 July 2006 lub i 03-02 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration K. DETERMINATION On the basis of this environmental review: a) I find the Project has been thoroughly analyzed in a previously Certified Final EIR document which either mitigated the Project's impacts or adopted impact findings pursuant to State and City CEQA requirements. No new environmental document is necessary, and a FINDING OF COMPLIANCE will be prepared ...................... ❑ b) I find that although the proposed Project will result in minor changes or clarifications from the previously Certified Final EIR document, the Findings of the earlier EIR remain adequate. Therefore, pursuant to Guidelines Section 15164, an ADDENDUM to the Certified FEIR will be prepared ............. ............................... ❑ c) I find that although the proposed Project will result in major changes or clarifications from the previously Certified FEIRs and Adopted MNDs document, such changes will not result in new Significant Unavoidable Adverse Impacts due to the Mitigation Measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the Project. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162, a MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared ..................... ............................... d) I find the proposed Project may result in one or more new significant unavoidable adverse effects on the environment that were not analyzed in the previously Certified Final EIR. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 through 15163, an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required .............. ❑ J Environmental Consultant for the City of Beaumont Title Raymond H. C. Brantley Print Name July 15, 2005 Date City of Beaumont Page 47 July 2006 t.,t 0 05-02 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration L. ATTACHMENTS General Biological Habitat Assessment Burrowing Owl Survey Report Jurisdictional Delineation City of Beaumont Page 48 July 2006 Jab 0 03-M Note: The attachments to the Initial Study/MND are included in this document in other sections. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS DOCUMENT PREPARED FOR COMMENTS RECEIVED ON OAK VALLEY PARKWAY ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY /MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION Project Scope: Review of Potential Environmental Impacts of Proposed Roadway Improvements on Oak Valley Parkway City of Beaumont Prepared for: City of Beaumont Planning Department 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, California 92223 Contact: Ernest A. Eggar, AICP, REA (909) 769 -8520 Prepared by: Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc. ( EARSI) 223 62nd Street Newport Beach, California 92663 EARSI Contact Person: Raymond H-C_ Brantley (909) 886 -0863 March 2007 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project ISIMND Response to Comments (RTC) Document TABLE OF CONTENTS Introduction ....................... Clarification of Terminology ........................................................................... ............................... 2 Responseto Comments Format ....................................................................... ............................... 2 Responses to Comments Received .................................................................... ..............................) A — California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Santa Ana Region .............. 3 B - Native American Heritage Commission ............................................... ............................... 6 C - Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District 7 EARSI Page H March 2007 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project MUND Response to Comments (RTC) Document RESPONSE TO COMMENTS DOCUMENT OAK VALLEY PARKWAY INITIAL STUDY/MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION INTRODUCTION This Response to Comments (RTC) document has been prepared in compliance with City of Beaumont Procedures and the CEQA Guidelines. Specifically, the Guidelines state the following: Prior to approving a project, the decision- making body of the Lead Agency shall consider the proposed negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration together with any comments received during the public review process. The decision- making body shall adopt the proposed negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration only if it finds on the basis of the whole record before it (including the initial study and any comments received), that there is no substantial evidence that the project will have a significant effect on the environment and that the negative declaration or mitigated negative declaration reflects the Lead Agency's independent judgment and analysis. 1 The City Council is the decision - making body for the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project. In order to ensure that the City Council considers all comments received on this Project, the City has required that formal responses be made on all written comments, thereby significantly reducing the possibility of losing comments germane to pending projects. The 30 -day Public Review period for the Madison Materials IS/MND began on July 31, 2006 and ended on August 31, 2006. During this review period, comments were received from the following: California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB); Riverside County Flood Control & Water Conservation District (RCFC &WCD); and Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). This document has been prepared to respond to the written comments received from the entities listed above and is part of the administrative record of the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project. 1 Section 15074(b) of the CEQA Guidelines. EARS1 Page 1 ,March 2007 Oak Valley Parkway Roadwgp Improvement Project /S/,MND Response to Comments (RTC) Document CLARIFICATION OF TERMINOLOGY Please note that the terms "Oak Valley Road Improvement Project" and "Project" are used interchangeably throughout this Response to Comments document. Both of these terms refer to the project that is the subject of the Initial Study /Mitigated Negative Declaration. RESPONSE TO COMMENTS FORMAT This document has been prepared based upon the following: • Each Comment Letter received on the proposed project has been broken down into individual comments. For instance, comment letter from Regional Water Quality Control Board contained seven (7) Comments. • Comments are questions, corrections, opinions, requests for clarification, and other statements made on a circulated CEQA document. • Each "Comment" is identified and numbered. For the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Mitigated Negative Declaration, a total of 18 Comments were received in three (3) Comment Letters. • Comments are numbered under the source of the Comments. Page and paragraph of the Comment within the comment letter is identified. The Comment is bolded, italicized and underlined. • For each Comment, a Response is provided. Where multiple related comments are received, a single, comprehensive Response is provided on the 1st Comment. For each subsequent, related Comment, the Commentator is referred to the initial Response to Comment. The Appendices to the Response to Comments Document consist of the Comment Letters, clearly identifying and numbering the Comments. EARS! Page 2 :March 2007 Oak Valley Parkwav Roadway Improvement Project IS /,NND Response to Comments (RTC) Document RESPONSES TO COMMENTS RECEIVED A. CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD (RWQCB) 1. Page 1, paragraph 2. The use of the phrase "other public works improvements" on Pape 4 of the ISIMND is ambieuous, is subject to broad interpretation, and should be deleted and replaced with more specific language. Response: The City has reconsidered the Draft MND in light of the comment from the RWQCB. The City agrees that the Project Description should provide better clarification. Therefore, the Project Description of the Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section G PROJECT INFORMATION, which reads as follows: The Project consists of widening and other public works improvements of Oak Valley Parkway within the City of Beaumont. Although the Project includes the stream crossings of both Noble Creek and Marshall Creek, this Project does not fully address the biological and hydrological impacts related the streambeds. Therefore, separate, detailed construction, level documentation has been prepared for both the Noble Creek Bridge and the Marshall Creek Over- crossing. is deleted and replaced with the following: PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project consists of widening Oak Valley Parkway within the existing right -of- way in the City of Beaumont. Ancillary to the street widening are drainage improvements complying with City, county and state requirements to prevent water pollution and prevent street flooding during heavy rains. Although the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project includes the locations of both the Noble Creek Project and the Marshall Creek Project, this Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration addresses those projects at general planning levels. This document does not address the impacts related to reconstructing the proposed streambed crossings due to the unique biological and hydrological issues involved with such crossings. Therefore, separate, detailed, construction -level CEQA documents, in the form of Addenda, have been prepared for these projects. The Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project also includes a portion of the 7.5 -mile San Timoteo Canyon Class 1I Bike Lane Project located within the project limits of the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project. Those portions of the Class II Bike and Pedestrian Trail and Noble Creek Park improvement project located westerly of the Project's boundaries are addressed in other environmental documentation. A complete project description and EARSI Page 3 /March 2007 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project ISININD Response to Comments (RTC) Document discussion of this related project is found in the Land Use Section of the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project IS/MND. 2. Page 1, top 113 of paragraph 3. The proposed mitigation for water quality impacts is inadequate Deferring to the later development of a Water Quality Management Plan (WOMB, references to implementation of best management practices (BMPs) and other standard measures or compliance with `standard conditions'.. does not constitute mitigation that is sufficiently specific to satisfy the requirements of CE0A. Response: The City has reconsidered the IS/MND in light of the RWQCB comment and agrees that the language of Project Design Feature PDF 8 -01 infers the deferral of mitigation until a later date. In light of the comment, the City has amended the Final MND as follows: PDF 8 -01, found in the Hydrology & Water Quality discussion in the document, which reads as follows: PDF 8 -01 - Structural and non - structural BMPs will be detailed in the final WQMP with goal of minimizing or eliminating dry season flows reaching Marshall or Noble Creek Irrigation and other source control practices will be the focus of additional measures to be incorporated into the WQMP. Design level measures such as those identified in the Start at the Source Manual (Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association, 1999) will be evaluated and incorporated, as feasible. is deleted, and replaced by the addition of changes to Standard Condition SC 8 -01 as follows: SC 8 -01 The following shall be executed in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works: Provide a drainage study determining the effect the proposed development and associated drainage patterns will have on existing and proposed drainage facilities in complance with the Beaumont Master Drainage Plan of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District; • Design provisions for surface drainage; and • Design necessary storm drain facilities for the proper control and disposal of storm runoff. 3. Page 1, bottom 2/3 of paragraph 3. Like other elements of the proiect, post- construction storm water treatment facilities must compete for space, and should be carefully considered early in the proiect's design in order to assure that the facility effectively treats pollutants of concern, is integrated well with the project's other elements (particularly surface drainage patterns and subsurface storm drain system and utilities), that the best facilities are not designed out of the project, and that the environmental impacts of the EARS/ Page 4 March 2007 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project IS/MND Response to Comments (RTC) Document treatment facilities themselves are adequately evaluated in the environmental analysis. Identifying these facilities also allows for the cost of their operation and maintenance to be analyzed Response: The Project is located in the City of Beaumont, which is part of the Santa Ana River Drainage Basin. The City is covered in the Beaumont Master Drainage Plan of the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District. Stormwater facilities related to the proposed Project are located within the existing rights -of -way. 4. Regional Board staff requests, at a minimum, structural storm water treatment facilities be selected and shown on an appropriate site plan in the final CEQA document. The selection and location of the facilities should be based upon sufficient engineering analysis to determine that they are feasible and that they treat pollutants to the maximum extent practical and /or address hydraulic conditions of concern. Response: Structural stormwater treatment facilities related to the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project will be developed in conjunction with the Project in compliance with the Beaumont Master Drainage Plan. 5. Page 2, paragraph 1. Regional Board staff recommends that the City consider structural facilities under an interim condition, where adjacent properties are not yet developed, and the ultimate condition, where the adjacent properties are fully developed according to the City's General Plan. The final CEQA document should consider how those ultimate facilities will be constructed, including the acquisition of any additional necessary right -of- way and whether they will be constructed incrementally through conditions on development or through other means. Response: All structural facilities will be constructed based upon the ultimate buildout of the City's General Plan. All improvement, with the exception of the Noble Creek and Marshall Creek Bridges, will be constructed within the existing right -of -way of Oak Valley Parkway. 6. Page 2, paragraph 2. An entity responsible for the long -term maintenance of the facilities should be identified Response: The City will be responsible for the long -term maintenance of the stormwater facilities. 7. Page 2, paragraph 3. Hydraulic conditions of concern, as described in the WQJfP, should also be addressed in the final IS/AND. Any necessary detention facilities should be shown in the final ISIMND in a manner .similar to that described for treatment facilities. EARSI Page 5 March 2007 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project IS /HIND Response to Comments (RTC) Document Response: The proposed Project will not result in any hydraulic conditions of concern. The Project will not require the construction of detention facilities. B. RIVERSIDE CO. FLOOD CONTROL & WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT (RCFC &WCD) 8. Page 1, Comment # 1. The proposed proiect is located within the District's Beaumont Master Drainage Plan (MDP) When fully implemented, these MDP facilities will provide flood protection to relieve those areas within the plan of the most serious flooding problems and will provide adequate drainage outlets. The MND should evaluate potential impacts to proposed MDP facilities within the proiect area. The District's MDP facility maps can viewed online at www floodcontroLco.riverside:ca ms. To obtain further information on the MDP and the proposed District facilities, contact Art Diaz of the District's Planning Section at (951)955 -1345. Response: A number of existing MDP facilities are located within the Project boundaries. Most of the Project falls outside of the 100 -year floodplain. Both Noble Creek and Marshall Creek are located within the flood. Both bridges are currently flooded during heavy rains. The Project will improve this situation by demolishing and replacing these bridges to improve stormflow and reduce flooding. The proposed project will not impact proposed MDP facilities. 9. Existing District facilities (14`h Street Channel and Noble Creek Channel) are located within the proposed proiect area and may be impacted Any work that involves District right -of -way, easements or facilities, will require an encroachment permit from the District. The construction of facilities within road right -of -way that may impact District storm drains should also be coordinated with us. To obtain further information on encroachment permits or existing facilities, contact Ed Lotz of the Distict's Encroachment Permit Section at (951) 955 -1266. Response: The Project will not result in adverse impacts to any of the District's facilities. Rather, facilities within the boundaries of the Project will connect to the District's facilities. 10. Portions of the proposed proiect are located within the 100 -year Zone A4 floodplain as delineated on the Federal Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Community Panel Number 060245 0805A, issued in conjunction with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). A portion of this map is included for your use. The City of Beaumont is responsible for compliance with FEW floodplain management regulations within the city limits. For additional information regarding this matter, please contact Mekbib Degaga of the District's FloodWain iVanazement Section at (951)955 -1265. EARSI Page 6 March 2007 Oak VaQey Parkway Roadway Improvement Project ISAIND Response to Comments (RTC) Document Response: The City is aware of its responsibility to comply with FEMA floodplain management regulations in the Project. Most of the Project falls outside of the 100 -year toodplain. Both Noble Creek and Marshall Creek are located within the flood. Both bridges are currently flooded during heavy rains. The Project will improve this situation by demolishing and replacing these bridges to improve stormflow and reduce flooding. 11. The proposed proiect may encroach within Noble Creek Channel right -of -way, a Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) designated Public/Quasi- Public (P/QP) land The MND should address any potential impacts to P /QP Lands in accordance with applicable provisions of the MSHCP. Response: The MND addresses the Western Riverside County MSHCP. Noble Creek channel impacts are specifically addressed in the Revised Noble Creek Bridge Addendum, which also addresses the MSHCP. NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION (NAHC) The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that any project that causes a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource, that includes archeological resources, is a "significant effect" requiring the preparation of an EIR... To adequately assess the project - related impacts on historical resources, the Commission recommends the following action(s): 12. Page 1, Bullet 1. Contact the appropriate California Historical Resources Information Center (CHRIS)... Response: The proposed Project involves roadway widening and improvements to Oak Valley Parkway within the existing and previously surveyed rights -of -way. The exception to this is the widening of Noble Creek Bridge which also includes demolition of the existing bridge and replacement with a longer, raised, single - spanned bridge. A separate CEQA document has been prepared for this Bridge. A detailed Cultural/Historical Study has been conducted for the Noble Creek Project in conjunction with applications for federal funds through Caltrans. That document considered potential impacts and developed mitigation measures, if applicable. 13. Page 1, Bullet 2. If an archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage is the Preparation of a professional report detailing the rindines and recommendation of the recors search and riled survey. Response: EARSI Page 7 March 2007 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project ISIMYD Response to Comments (RTC) Document The proposed Project involves roadway widening and improvements to Oak Valley Parkway within the existing and previously surveyed rights -of -way. The exception to this is the widening of Noble Creek Bridge which also includes demolition of the existing bridge and replacement with a longer, raised, single- spanned bridge. A separate CEQA document has been prepared for this Bridge. A detailed Cultural /Historical Study has been conducted for the Noble Creek Project in conjunction with applications for federal funds through Caltrans 14. Page 1, Bullet 3. Contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for... a Sacred Lands File (SLF) search of the project area... Response: Please refer to Response 13. 15. Page 1, Bullet 4. Lack of surface evidence of archaeological resources does not preclude their subsurface existence Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the identification and evaluation of accidentally discovered archaeological resources... Response: Please refer to Response 13. 16. Page 1, Bullet 5. Lead agencies should include provisions for discovery of Native American human remains or unmarked cemeteries in their mitigation plans... Response: Please refer to Response 13. 17. Page 2, Bullet 1. Health and Safety Code &7050 5, Public Resources Code 45097.95 and $15064,5(d) of the CEQA Guidelines mandate procedures to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. Response: Please refer to Response 13. 18. Page 2, Bullet 2. Lead agencies should consider avoidance as defined in &15370 of the CEOA Guidelines, when significant cultural resources are discovered during the course of project planning. Response: Please refer to Response 13. EARSI Page 8 March 2007 California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region 3737 Main Street, Suite 500, Riverside, California 92501 -3348 Linda S. Adams Phone (951) 782 -4130 • FAX (951) 781 -6288 • TDD (951) 782 -3221 Secretary for www.waterboards.ca.gov /santaana Environmental Protection August 9, 2006 Ernest Eggar City of Beaumont Planning Department 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, CA 92223 ��,ea,v 61 r�Gl4N6 . aoffie HOUSE 4 Arnold Schwarzenegger Governor COMMENTS ON THE INITIAL STUDY AND MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (IS /MND) FOR THE OAK VALLEY PARKWAY ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT 2.00(00 ,3 (c)(a5 - Dear Mr. Eggar: Thank you for providing Regional Board staff the opportunity to comment on the IS /MND for the proposed Oak Valley Parkway roadway improvement project generally located between Beaumont Avenue and Oak View Drive in the City of Beaumont. The project consists of "widening and other public works improvements of Oak Valley Parkway" (p. 4). Please accept the following comments: The use of the phrase "other public works improvements" on page-4 of the IS /MND is ambiguous, is subject to broad interpretation, and should be deleted and replaced with more specific language. The proposed mitigation for water quality impacts is inadequate. Deferring to the later development of a Water Quality Management Plan (WQMP), references to 'implementation of best management practices (BMPs) and other standard mitigation measures', or compliance with "standard conditions" (p. 32, and elsewhere) does not. constitute mitigation that is sufficiently specific to satisfy the requirements of CEQA. Like other elements of the project, post - construction storm water treatment facilities must compete for space, and should be carefully considered early in the project's design in order to assure that the facility effectively treats pollutants of concern, is integrated well with the project's other elements (particularly surface drainage patterns and subsurface storm drain system and utilities), that the best facilities are not designed out of the project, and that the environmental impacts of the treatment facilities themselves are adequately evaluated in the environmental analysis. Identifying these facilities also allows for the cost of their operation and maintenance to be analyzed. Regional Board staff requests that, at a minimum, structural storm water treatment facilities be selected and shown on an appropriate site plan in the final CEQA California Environmental Protection Agency t�. • Recycled Paper City of Beaumont _ 2-. August 9, 2006 document. The selection and location they a e feasible and that they treat pollutants to engineering analysis to determine that y the maximum extent practical and /or address hydraulic conditions of concern . under an Regional Board staff recommends that the City consider structural f and ultimate interim condition, where adjacent properties are not yet developed, condition, where the adjacent properties are fully developed according to the City's General Plan.. The final GEQA document flan� additional necessary right-of-way facilities will be constructed, including the acquisition Y and whether they will be constructed incrementally through conditions on development or through other means: Ve ry importantly, an entity responsible for the long -term maintenance of the facilities should also be identified. Hydraulic conditions of concern, as described facilities ahould also be shown nt the in the final IS /MND. Any necessary detention IS /MND in a manner similar to that described fortreatrrient- facilities. If y ou have any questions, please contact me at (951 ),320 -6363, or vWelectronic mail at, afischer@waterboards.ca.gov. Sincerely Adam Fischer Environmental Scientist CWA Section 401 Coordinator cc: State Clearinghouse — Scott Morgan , California Environmental Protection Agency %#5 Rwy,ad pap° STATE OF CALIFORNIA _ ____ Arnold.Schwarzeneaaer Governor NATIVE AMERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION 915 CAPITOL MALL, ROOM 364 SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 , }{ (916) 653 -4082 Fax (91 6) 657 -5390 Web Site www.nahe -mgov �` REC EIV E D August 24, 2006 AUG 2 9 2006 City of Beaumont ATTN: Mr. Raymond A. Eggar, AICP, REA STATE CLEARING HOUSE 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, CA 92223 Re: SCH #2006081065- CEQA Notice of Completion: Initial Study & Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Proiect; Beaumont San Bernardino County, California Dear Mr. Egger. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the above - referenced document. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that any project that causes a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource, that includes archeological resources, is a `significant effect requiring the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report (EIR per CEQA guidelines § 15064.5(b)(c). In order to comply with this provision, the lead agency is required to assess whether the project will have an adverse impact on these resources within the area of project effect (APE), and if so, to mitigate that effect. To adequately assess the project- related impacts on historical resources, the Commission recommends the following action: 4 Contact the appropriate California Historic Resources Information Center (CHRIS). The record search will determine: • If a part or the entire APE) has been previously surveyed for cultural resources. • If any known cultural resources have already been recorded in or adjacent to the APE. • If the probability is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located in the APE. • If a survey is required to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present 4 If an archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage is the preparation of a professional report detailing the findings and recommendations of the records search and field survey. • The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation measurers should be submitted immediately to the planning department. All information regarding site locations, Native American human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum, and not be made available for pubic disclosure. • The final written.report should be submitted within 3 months after work has been completed to the appropriate regional archaeological Information Center. J Contact the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) for * A Sacred Lands File (SLF) search of the project area and information on tribal contacts in the project vicinity who may have additional cultural resource information. Please provide this office with the following citation format to assist with the Sacred Lands File search request: USGS 7.5- minute quadrangle citation with name township, range and section: . • The NAHC advises the use of Nature American Monitors to ensure proper identification and care given cultural resources that may be discovered. The NAHC recommends that contact be made with Native American Contacts on the attached list to get their input on potential project impact, particularly the contacts of the on the list. 4 Lack of surface evidence of archeological resources does not preclude their subsurface existence. • Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the identification and evaluation of accidentally discovered archeological resources, per California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) §15064.5 (f). In areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, a certified archaeologist and a culturally affiliated Native American, with knowledge in cultural resources, should monitor all ground - disturbing activities. • Lead agencies should include in their mitigation plan provisions for the disposition of recovered artifacts, in consultation with culturally affiliated Native Americans. 4 Lead agencies should include provisions for discovery of Native American human remains or unmarked cemeteries in their mitigation plans. * CEQA Guidelines, Section 15064.5(d) requires the lead agency to work with the Native Americans identified by this Commission if the initial Study identifies the presence or likely presence of Native American human remains within the APE. CEQA Guidelines provide for agreements with Native American, identified by the NAHC, to assure the appropriate and dignified treatment of Native American human remains and any associated grave liens. .l Health and Safety Code §7050.5, Public Resources Code §5097.98 and Sec. §15064.5 (d) of the CEQA Guidelines mandate procedures to be followed in the event of an accidental discovery of any human remains in a location other than a dedicated cemetery. Lead agencies should consider avoidance as defined in 6 15370 of the CEQA Guidelines when significant cultural resources are discovered during the course of protect planning. Please feel free to contact me at (916) 653 -6251 if you have any Cc: State Clearinghouse Attachment: List of Native American Contacts questions Sincerely, ave Singleton Program AnaN WARREN D. WILLIAMS �t +- 1995 MARKET STREET t RIVERSIDE, CA 92501 General Manager -Chief Engineer ms'ss - 951.955.1200 951.788.9965 FAX www .floodcontrol.co.riverside.ca.us RIVERSIDE COUNTY FLOOD CONTROL AND WATER CONSERVATION DISTRICT August 28, 2006 Mr. Ernest A. Egger City of Beaumont Planning Department 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, CA 92223 Dear Mr. Egger: Re: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project This letter is written in response to the Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) for the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project. The proposed project would consist of roadway widening from two to four lanes and public improvements on the arterial highway in west Beaumont. The proposed project does not include the Noble Creek Bridge Project or the Marshall Creek Box Culvert Project. Separate Initial Studies and Addenda have been prepared for these projects. The proposed project is located from the Noble Creek Park on the eastside of Interstate 10 freeway to the Old School House location west of the City limits on Oak Valley Parkway in the city of Beaumont, Riverside County. The Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District has the following comments /concerns that should be addressed in the Initial Study (IS): The proposed project is located within the District's Beaumont Master Drainage Plan (MDP). When fully implemented, these MDP facilities will provide flood protection to relieve those areas within the plan of the most serious flooding problems and will provide adequate drainage outlets. The MND should evaluate potential impacts to proposed MDP facilities in the project area. The District's MDP facility maps can be viewed online at www .floodcontrol.co.riverside.ca.us. To obtain further information on the MDP and the proposed District facilities, contact Art Diaz of the District's Planning Section at 951.955.1345. 2. Existing District facilities (14th Street Channel and Noble Creek Channel) are located within the proposed project area and may be impacted. Any work that involves District right of way, easements or facilities will require an encroachment permit from the District. The construction of facilities within road right of way that may impact District storm drains should also be coordinated with us. To obtain further information on encroachment permits or existing facilities, contact Ed Lotz of the District's Encroachment Permit Section at 951.955.1266. Mr. Ernest A. Egger -2- August 28; 2006 Re: Notice of Intent to Adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Portions of the proposed project are located within the 100 -year Zone A4 floodplain limits as delineated on the Federal Flood Insurance Rate Map (FIRM), Community Panel Number 060245 0805A, issued in conjunction with the National Flood Insurance Program (NFIP). A portion of this map is included for your use. The City of Beaumont is responsible for compliance with the FEMA floodplain management regulations within the city limits. For additional information regarding this matter please contact Mekbib Degaga of the District's Floodplain Management Section at 951.955.1265. 4. The proposed project may encroach within Noble Creek Channel right of way, a Western Riverside Qbunty Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP) designated Public /Quasi- Public (P /QP) land. The MND should address any potential impacts to P /QP Lands in accordance with applicable provisions of the MSHCP. Thank you for the opportunity to review the Initial Study. Please forward any subsequent environmental documents regarding the project to my attention at this office. Any further questions concerning this letter may be referred to Jason Swenson at 951.955.8082 or me at 951.955.1233. Very truly yours, TERESA TUNG Senior Civil Engineer J Enclosure TLMA Attn: David Mares Art Diaz Ed Lotz Mekbib Degaga JDS:mcv P8 \109182 v ZONE C APPROXIMATE SCALE 1000 0 1000 FEET 2 W Q NATIONAL FLOOD INSURANCE PROGRAM z a W ! FIRM ' m FLOOD INSURANCE RATE MAP LIMIT DETAILED ZONE B STUDY ZONE A;26110 RIVERSIDE COUNTY, °9 CALIFORNIA 612 Ld (' (UNINCORPORATED AREAS) ZONE g 14TH STREET' ZONE B 2586 ZONE Ei PANEL 805 OF 3600 ZONE A4 ( -.�. ; (SEE MAP INDEX FOR PANELS NOT PRINTED) +�`� 2572 2580 LIMIT OF DETAILED STUDY ZONE A .. City O L'?4' L'­ 1; C AREA STUDY - -^ COMMUNITY -PANEL NUMBER 060245 0805 A i� EFFECTIVE DATE: APRIL 15,1980 !i U.S DEPARTMENT OF HOUSING IIII ANO URBAN DEVELOPMENT PEDERAL INSURANCE ADMIN:S7RATICIN This is an oflcid copy of a potion of the above referenced flood map. R was extracted using F-MIT On -Une. This map does not reflect changes or amendments which may have been made subsequent to the date m l' title deck. For the latest product Information about National Flood Insurance Program food maps check the FEMA Flood Map Store at www.rnsc.fema.gov September 12, 2006 Ernest Egger City of Beaumont 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, CA 92223 Subject: Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project SCH #: 2006081065 Dear Ernest Egger: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Negative Declaration to selected state agencies for review. On the enclosed Document Details Report please note that the Clearinghouse has listed the state agencies that reviewed your document. The review period closed on September 11, 2006, and the comments from the responding agency (ies) is (are) enclosed. If this comment package is not in order, please notify the State Clearinghouse immediately. Please refer to the project's ten -digit State Clearinghouse number in future correspondence so that we may respond promptly. Please note that Section 21104(c) of the California Public Resources Code states that: "A responsible or other public agency shall only make substantive comments regarding those activities involved in a project which are within an area of expertise of the agency or which are required to be carried out or approved by the agency. Those comments shall be supported by specific documentation." These comments are forwarded for use in preparing your final environmental document. Should you need more information or clarification of the enclosed comments, we recommend that you contact the commenting agency directly. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Please contact the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445 -0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. Sincerely, Terry Roberts Director, State Clearinghouse Enclosures cc: Resources Agency 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812 -3044 TEL (916) 445 -0613 FAX (916) 323 -3018 www.opr.ca.gov STATE OF CALIFORNIA D Governor's Office of Planning and Research ; i aa.�* State Clearinghouse and Planning Unit OF6AL1Fap Arnold Schwarzenegger Sean Walsh Director Governor September 12, 2006 Ernest Egger City of Beaumont 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, CA 92223 Subject: Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project SCH #: 2006081065 Dear Ernest Egger: The State Clearinghouse submitted the above named Negative Declaration to selected state agencies for review. On the enclosed Document Details Report please note that the Clearinghouse has listed the state agencies that reviewed your document. The review period closed on September 11, 2006, and the comments from the responding agency (ies) is (are) enclosed. If this comment package is not in order, please notify the State Clearinghouse immediately. Please refer to the project's ten -digit State Clearinghouse number in future correspondence so that we may respond promptly. Please note that Section 21104(c) of the California Public Resources Code states that: "A responsible or other public agency shall only make substantive comments regarding those activities involved in a project which are within an area of expertise of the agency or which are required to be carried out or approved by the agency. Those comments shall be supported by specific documentation." These comments are forwarded for use in preparing your final environmental document. Should you need more information or clarification of the enclosed comments, we recommend that you contact the commenting agency directly. This letter acknowledges that you have complied with the State Clearinghouse review requirements for draft environmental documents, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. Please contact the State Clearinghouse at (916) 445 -0613 if you have any questions regarding the environmental review process. Sincerely, Terry Roberts Director, State Clearinghouse Enclosures cc: Resources Agency 1400 TENTH STREET P.O. BOX 3044 SACRAMENTO, CALIFORNIA 95812 -3044 TEL (916) 445 -0613 FAX (916) 323 -3018 www.opr.ca.gov Document Details Report State Clearinghouse Data Base SCH# 2006081065 Project Title Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Lead Agency Beaumont, City of Type Neg Negative Declaration Description Roadway widening and other public enhancements, including trail and park improvement (development, extension and connection to existing trail system) on an arterial highway in west Beaumont. Lead Agency Contact Name Ernest Egger Agency City of Beaumont Phone (951) 769 -8520 Fax email Address 550 East Sixth Street City Beaumont State CA Zip 92223 Project Location County Riverside City Beaumont Region Cross Streets Oak Valley Parkway - Noble Creek Park to Old School House Parcel No. Township Range Section Base Proximity to: Highways 1 -10 Airports Railways Waterways Noble Creek Schools Land Use Arterial Highway Project Issues Air Quality; Archaeologic - Historic; Drainage /Absorption; Geologic/Seismic; Landuse; Noise; Recreation /Parks; Traffic /Circulation; Vegetation; Water Quality; Wetland /Riparian; Wildlife Reviewing Resources Agency; Regional Water Quality Control Board, Region 8; Department of Parks and Agencies Recreation; Native American Heritage Commission; Office of Historic Preservation; Department of Fish and Game, Region 6; Department of Water Resources; California Highway Patrol; Caltrans, District 8; Air Resources Board, Transportation Projects; Department of Toxic Substances Control Date Received 08/11 /2006 Start of Review 08/11/2006 End of Review 09/11/2006 Note: Blanks in data fields result from insufficient information provided by lead agency. City ofBeaumont 550 E. Street Beaumont, CA 92223 (909) 769 -8520 FAX (909) 769 -5526 Email- ci�rballCcz.beaumont.ca.ii. ulww. 6z. beaumont, ca, its TRANSMITTAL W.O. No. DATE: Atlgust 8. 2006 NAME: Mate Clearinghouse ATTENTION: Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project — City of Beaumont (specifically: Class 11 Bike Lane and Pedestrian "frail) KEPT: Office of Planning « PResearch ADDRESS: P.U. Box 3044 acraiimento, Cry 95912 -3)044 SENT VIA: U.S. Mail QUANTITY DESCRIPTION 8 Originals — Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project — City of Beaumont (specifically: Class 11 Bike Lane and Pedestrian "frail) AS REQUESTED a FOR YOUR REVIEW AND C0MINIENT F-1 i FOR YOUR APPROVAL Y FOR YOUR USE NOTES: Per your request and in addition to 7 originals previously sent 8/4112006. Kevin T. i tugnes, 1XICP Citv of Beaumont - OVP Project klanager OAK VALLEY PARKWAY ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY /MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP) SCH No. 2006081065 Project Scope: Review of Potential Environmental Impacts of Proposed Roadway Improvement on Oak Valley Parkway City of Beaumont Prepared for: City of Beaumont Planning Department 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, California 92223 Contact: Ernest A. Eggar, AICP, REA (909) 769 -8520 Prepared by: Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc. (EARSI) 223 62nd Street Newport Beach, California 92663 EARSI Contact Person: Raymond H.C. Brantley (909) 886 -0863 March 2007 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project !Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (MMRP) LIST OF ACRONYMS The following acronyms are used in this Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (MMRP): ACOE U.S. Army Corps of Engineers NOP Notice of Preparation BMPs Best Management Practices NOx Nitrogen Dioxide CDFG California Department of Fish NPDES National Pollutant Discharge and Game Elimination System CEQA California Environmental PDF Project Design Feature Quality Act PDMWD Prado Dam Municipal Water CNEL Community Noise Equivalent District Level PEA Preliminary Endangerment CNPS California Native Plant Society Assessment dBA Decibel "A- weighting" PM10 Particulate Matter (less than 10 microns in size) EIR Environmental Impact Report PRGs Preliminary Remediation Final EIR Final Environmental Impact Goals Report RCFC &WCD Riverside County Flood FESA Federal Endangered Species Control & Water Act Conservation District ICU Intersection Capacity RWQCB California Regional Water Utilization Quality Control Board kV Kilovolt Power SC Standard Condition of LOS Level of Service Approval MDP Master Drainage Plan SCAG Southern California Association of Governments MND Mitigated Negative Declaration SCAQMD Southern California Air Quality Management District MG Million Gallon MM Mitigation Measure USFWS U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service NEW" Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program VOCs Volatile Organic Compounds WQMP Water Quality Management MSHCP Multiple Species Habitat Plan Conservation Program EARS[, Inc. Page 2 of 10 March 2007 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (MMRP) OAK VALLEY PARKWAY ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT INITIAL STUDY / MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION MITIGATION MONITORING & REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP) This Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (MMRP) supplements the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Project Initial Study (IS) /Mitigated Negative Declaration (MDN) by providing a mechanism by which all measures identified in the MND are implemented. This Program is part of the Project's administrative records and will be adopted by the City Council in conjunction with the Project. MITIGATIOIN MONITORING REQUIREMENTS The passage of Assembly Bill AB 3180 to the CEQA Statutes mandates that the following requirements shall apply to reporting or mitigation monitoring programs: • The public agency shall adopt a reporting or monitoring program for the changes to the project, which it has adopted or made a condition of the project approval in order to mitigate or avoid significant effects on the environment. The reporting or monitoring program shall be designed to ensure compliance during project implementation. For those changes which have been required or incorporated into the project at the request of an agency having jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by the project, that agency shall, if so requested by the lead or responsible agency, prepare and submit a proposed reporting or monitoring program. • If there is a project for which mitigation is adopted, a public agency shall comply with subdivision (a) by, among other things, adopting mitigation measures as conditions of the project approval. Those conditions of project approval may be set forth in referenced documents which address required mitigation measures. Prior to the close of the public review period for a draft environmental impact report or mitigated negative declaration, a responsible agency, or a public agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project, shall either submit to the lead agency complete and detailed performance objectives for mitigation measures which would address the significant effects on the environment identified by the responsible agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by the project, or refer the lead agency to appropriate, readily available guidelines or reference documents. Any mitigation measures submitted to a lead agency by a responsible agency or an agency having jurisdiction over natural resources EARSI Inc. Page 3 of 10 Marcn cvv i Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (MMRP) affected by the project shall be limited to measures which mitigate impacts to resources which are subject to the statutory authority of, and definitions applicable to, that agency. Compliance or noncompliance by a responsible agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by a project with that requirement shall not limit that authority of the responsible agency or agency having jurisdiction over natural resources affected by a project, or the authority of the lead agency, to approve, condition, or deny projects as provided by this division or any other provision of law. • The lead agency shall specify the location and custodian of the documents or other material, which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is based.' Assembly Bill AB 3180, incorporated into CEQA Statutes as Section 21081.6 of the Public Resources Code, formalized the process for monitoring of measures incorporated into projects during the CEQA process. The result has benefited all affected parties: • Lead Agencies: For lead agencies, the formalized process provides a vehicle for displaying public disclosure and accountability on implementation of all measures imposed upon project approval at key milestones in the development process. Clear lines of responsibility are identified at the point of project approval. • Project Applicants: For applicants of development projects, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting process has resulted in a clearer understanding of the requirements imposed by the lead agency during the planning process. In addition, confusion is reduced since the process clearly defines responsibilities and public officials responsible for final mitigation approvals. • Responsible and Trustee Agencies: The mitigation monitoring and reporting process has encouraged responsible and trustee agencies to streamline their review process on CEQA documents. • General Public: For members of the general public, including groups or individuals concerned with environmental issues, the formalized mitigation monitoring process has provided a vehicle for following the implementation of measures proposed to mitigate environmental concerns. MITIGATION MONITORING PROCEDURES The City of Beaumont requires the preparation of a comprehensive Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program for all projects prior to project approval by the City Council. For this Project, the Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program has been prepared as an attachment to the adopted MND. As appropriate, the measures applicable to the Site will be identified. Public Resources Code Section 21081.6 EARST, Inc. Page 4 of 10 March 2007 Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (MMRP) The Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program consists of the following measures, as refined during the CEQA process: • Project Design Features (PDFs) - Features and measures designed into the project by the applicant to avoid or reduce potential impacts on environmental resources; • Standard Conditions (SCs) - Measures imposed by the Beaumont on projects to maintain City standards and/or to avoid potential impacts on environmental resources; and • Mitigation Measures (MM) - Measures proposed by the City to avoid, eliminate and/or minimize any potential impacts of the proposed project and include, where appropriate, references to their timing and the City officials responsible for implementation. ELEMENTS OF THE MITIGATION MONITORING & REPORTING PROGRAM The Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program (MMRP) describes the requirements and procedures to be followed by the City of Beaumont to ensure that all measures adopted, as part of the proposed Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project will be carried out as described in the adopted MND. The Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program has been formatted into tabular form and consists of six (6) elements: 1. Measures - Project Design Features, Standard Conditions and Mitigation Measures, as defined above. 2. Monitoring Action - This identifies the action by the City that triggers review of the measure. 3. Responsible/Implementing Agency - This element identifies the agency responsible for implementing the measure. 4. Phase/Monitoring Agency - Identifies the phase of project development during which measure must be fulfilled and the agency responsible for monitoring the milestone. 5. Monitor - Identifies the City official responsible for sign -off of the measure. 6. Compliance - Identifies the date that sign-off of the measure is fulfilled. EARS1, Inc. Page 5 of 10 March 2007 MITIGATION MEASURES Monitoring Responsible Implementing Phase /Monitoring Monitor Compliance /Date Milestone Agency Agency 1. AESTHETICS No Mitigation is required U. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES No Mitigation is required 111. AIR QUALITY SC 3 -01 - The Project shall comply with SCAQMD standards for ambient Grading & Public Works ARMD Director, air quality. If ambient levels are below the standards, a project is Building Department Public considered to have adverse impacts when project emissions result in an Pen-nits Works exceedance of one or more of these standards. If ambient levels already exceed a State or federal standard, project emissions are considered significant if they increase one hour CO concentrations by 1.0 ppm or more or eight hour CO concentrations by 0.45 ppm or more. SC 3 -02 - The Project shall comply with SCAQMD standards regarding Grading Public Works Public Director, equipment emitting NOx during construction operations. The Permit Department Works Public cumulative amount from all construction equipment shall not exceed i Department Works SCAQMD standards. SC 3 -03 -The Project shall comply with City of Beaumont and Grading Public Works Public Director, SCAQMD standards regarding dust emissions during construction Permit Department Works Public activities. Department Works IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES No Mitigation is required OVP ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING & REPORTING PROGRAM MITIGATION MEASURES Monitoring Milestone Responsible Implementation Phase /Monitoring Monitor Compliance /Date Agency Agency V. CULTURAL & SCIENTIFIC RESOURCES SC 5 -01 - "Throughout grading and construction activities, if cultural and /or Grading Public Works Public Director, scientific resources are discovered, earth - moving activities shall be Permit Department Works Public temporarily suspended and a qualified archaeologist and /or paleontologist Department Works \vill be contacted to evaluate the significance of the resources and make further recommendations for their treatment, if necessary. If human remains are encountered during construction, work in the affected area and the immediate vicinity must be halted immediately, and the County Coroner must be notified pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. VI. GEOLOGY & SOILS SC 6 -01 - The proposed project shall comply with the City's Grading Public Works Public Director, Grading and Excavation regulations in a manner meeting the Permit Department Works Public approval of the Director of Public Works, including: 1. Soil Department Works erosion; 2.Expansive soils; and 3. Seismic safety. VII. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS No Mitigation is required VIII. HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY PDF 8 -01 - Structural and non- structural BMPs are incorporated into the Grading & Public Works Public Director, Project in compliance with the Beaumont Master Drainage Plan Building Department Works Public developed by the City and the Riverside County Flood Control & Water Permits Department Works Conservation District. The goal of these measures will be to minimize or i eliminate dry season flows from reaching Marshall and Noble Creek. The Project also incorporates a drainage study determining the effect drainage patterns will have on existing and proposed drainage facilities in compliance with the Beaumont Master Drainage Plan. EARSI, Inc. Page 7 of 10 Niarch 2007 OVP ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING & REPORTING PROGRAM MITIGATION MEASURES Monitoring Milestone Responsible implementation Phase /Monitoring Monitor Compliance /Date Agency , Agency PDF 8 -02 - A master drainage concept will be incorporated into the Grading Public Works Public Director, project design to mitigate hydrology impacts and comply with City Permit Department Works Public of Beaumont requirements and standards. Department Works PDF 8 -03 - Potential for the proposed project to impact the site's hydrology Grading Public Works Public Director, shall be reduced to a less than significant level through engineering design Permit Department Works Public i and construction techniques incorporated into the project in a manner Department Works meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works. SC 8 -01 - The following shall be executed in a manner meeting the Grading Public Works Public Director, approval of the Director of Public Works: Permit Department Works Public • Provide a drainage study determining the effect the proposed Department Works development and associated drainage patterns will have on existing drainage facilities. • Design provisions fur surface drainage; and • Design necessary storm drain facilities for the proper control and disposal of storm runoff: E— SC, 8 -02 - Erosion and Sediment Control Measures - All construction Grading Public Works Public Director, activities shall take place outside of channel flow in the rainy season, Permit Department Works Public when no water is present in the channel, or utilizing proper flow Department Works diversion structures, if flow is present. SC 8 -03 - Materials Handling and Disposal Measures - Potential for Grading Public Works Public Director, temporary erosion impacts to habitat during construction activities shall Permit Department Works Public be minimized or avoided through the use of BMPs and other standard Department Works mitigation measures required by the City and regulatory agencies F.__ _ SC 8 -04 - Non -Storm Water Discharges - Discharge of non -stonn water Grading Public Works Public Director, materials shall comply with regulations imposed by the ACOE, CDFG Permit Department Works Public and State Water Resources Control Board, thereby minimizing impacts Department Works to the waterway and habitat. E;ARS1, Inc. Page 8 of 10 March 2007 OVP ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING & REPORTING PROGRAM MITIGATION MEASURES Monitoring g esponsible Implementation Phase /Monitoring Monitor Compliance /Date Milestone Agency Agency SC 5 -05 - Equipment Washing - The Project shall comply with all Grading Public Works Public Director, BMPs and other required standard construction measures, including Permit Department Works Public restricting washing of equipment to areas outside the subject Department Works channel, and in a location that would prevent runoff from entering the channel. SC 8 -06 - Inspections and Maintenance Measures - The Project Grading Public Works Public Director, shall comply with all BMPs and other required standard construction Permit Department Works Public measures, including restricting inspection and maintenance of Department Works construction equipment to areas outside the subject channel, and in a location that would prevent runoff from entering the channel. It. LAND USE & PLANNING No Mitigation is required X. MINERAL RESOURCES No Mitigation is required XI. NOISE SC 11 -01 - The proposed project shall implement City of Beaumont noise N/A N/A N/A N/A regulations applicable to the site in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works. SC 11 -02 - All construction vehicles or equipment, fixed or mobile, Building Public Works Public Director, operated within 1,000' of a dwelling shall be equipped with properly Permit Department Works Public operating and maintained mufflers in a manner meeting the approval of Department Works the Director of Public Works. SC 11 -03 - All grading and construction activities shall be executed Building Public Works Public Director, between the hours of lam and 7pm, Monday through Friday. Permit Department Works Public Department Works EARSI, Inc. Page 9 of 10 March 2007 OVP ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING & REPORTING PROGRAM MITIGATION MEASURES Monitoring Milestone Responsible Implementation Phase /Monitoring Monitor Compliance /Date Agency Agency XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING No Mitigation is required I XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES I I I No Mitigation is required XIV. RECREATION AND PARKS No Mitigation is required. XV. TRANSPORTATION & TRAFFIC SC 15 -01 - Signs shall be posted in the vicinity of the construction activities on the Noble Creek Bridge and the Marshall Creek culvert providing the public with notification of the expected construction period. SC 15 -02 - Directional signs shall be posted directing traffic to the Detour Route during the construction activities of the two stream crossings. I XVI. UTILITIES & SERVICES SYSTEMS I I No Mitigation is required. EARSI, Inc. Page 10 of 10 March 2007 APPENDIX F 7.5 MILE HISTORIC SAN TIMOTEO CANYON BIKE LANE PROJECT Within the City of Beaumont & Unincorporated Riverside County ADDENDUM No. 2 MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (MND) for the OAK VALLEY PARKWAY ROADWAY IMPROVEMENT PROJECT Prepared for: City of Beaumont Planning Department 550 East Sixth Street Beaumont, California 92223 Contact: Ernest A. Egger, AICP, REA (951) 769 -8520 Prepared by: Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc. (EARSI) 223 62nd Street Newport, California 92663 Contact: Raymond H. C. Brantley (951) 369 -7229 September 14, 2009 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project MND TABLE OF CONTENTS Listof Exhibits ................................................................................................. ............................... ii A. Introduction ................................................................................................... ..............................1 B. Initial Study Checklist ................................................................................... ..............................3 C. Project Title ................................................................................................... ..............................3 D. Lead Agency Name and Address .................................................................. ..............................3 E. Project Sponsor Name and Address .............................................................. ..............................3 F. Documents Incorporated by Reference ......................................................... ..............................3 G. Project Information ....................................................................................... ..............................4 ProjectDescription ..................................................................................... ..............................4 ProjectLocation .......................................................................................... ..............................4 General Plan and Zoning Designations ..................................................... .............................11 H. Explanation of Checklist Categories ............................................................ .............................11 Thresholds of Significance Criteria .......................................................... ..............................1 l I. Initial Study Checklist and Substantiations ................................................... .............................12 Aesthetics................................................................................................... .............................12 AgricultureResources ............................................................................... .............................14 AirQuality ................................................................................................. .............................15 BiologicalResources ................................................................................. .............................17 CulturalResources ..................................................................................... .............................20 Geology& Soils ....................................................................................... .............................23 Hazards& Hazardous Materials ................................................................ .............................24 Hydrology& Water Quality ...................................................................... .............................26 LandUse & Planning ................................................................................. .............................31 MineralResources ..................................................................................... .............................33 Noise.......................................................................................................... .............................34 Population& Housing ............................................................................... .............................35 PublicServices ........................................................................................... .............................36 Recreation................................................................................................. ..............................3 7 Transportation& Traffic ............................................................................ .............................38 Utilities& Service Systems ....................................................................... .............................39 J. Mandatory Findings of New Significant Impacts ......................................... .............................41 K. Determination ............................................................................................... .............................42 City oj'Beaumont Page i ,,,b � 05 0, g August 2009 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND LIST OF EXHIBITS PAGE Exhibit 1 Regional Location Map ........................................ ............................... 10 Exhibit 2 Historic San Timoteo Canyon Bike Lane route . ............ ............................... 11 Exhibit 3 Proposed Improvements at Noble Creek Park ................ ............................... 12 Exhibit 4 Proposed Improvements San Timoteo Old School House Site ........................... 13 Exhibit 4A Simulation of Proposed Fencing at Old School Site ......... .............................14 Exhibit 5 Biological Resources Map ...................................... ............................... 15 Exhibit 6 Willow Resources Index Map ................................. ............................... 16 Exhibit 7 through Exhibit 15 Photographs Willow Resources Along Bike Lane Route....... 17-25 City of Beaumont Page ii August 2009 lub 4 05 -01 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND A. INTRODUCTION This document constitutes an Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared City of Beaumont (the City) to implement improvements on Oak Valley Parkway, an arterial highway in the western part of the City, in order to achieve three major objectives: 1. Widen the roadway to accommodate existing and projected traffic demands. Current traffic becomes congested during morning and evening peak hours. Widening the roadway will increase the capacity of the roadway; 2. Improve drainage on Oak Valley Parkway. Currently, the roadway experiences flooding at Noble Creek and Marshall Creek during periods of heavy rain. The Project reconstructs these two stream crossings. The Noble Creek Bridge Project would demolish the existing bridge and abutments, excavate a wider channel at the bridge, construct new abutments outside the current jurisdiction, and install a new clear -span bridge with larger capacity. The Marshall Creek Crossing Project would demolish the existing crossing consisting of Oak Valley Parkway paved over compacted earthen materials with two 48 -inch galvanized drainage pipes and replace it with a much larger dual box culvert, and widen Oak Valley Parkway. Separate Initial Studies & Addenda have been prepared for these two facilities; and 3. Implement the Historic San Timoteo Canyon Road Class II Bike Lane & Pedestrian Trail Project, which would create a new bicycle trail along Oak Valley Parkway /San Timoteo Canyon Road and connect to an existing trail system near San Timoteo Canyon Road in unincorporated Riverside County. The bike lane and trail project has been designed as an historic preservation, transportation system enhancement, and education project focused on resources in San Timoteo Canyon, which is located in the City of Beaumont and Riverside County, California. The project also involves the design and acquisition through dedication of a scenic easements in the historic canyon for future use as a multipurpose trail. The project also includes minor improvements along the road parkway to mitigate erosion impacts to water quality. All bike lane and other road improvements will be maintained by the City of Beaumont and the County of Riverside. In its review of the Project, the City has determined the Project is located adjacent to and is closely related to several previously approved projects. CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 provide a test for review of subsequent projects when a previously certified EIR or previously adopted MND encompasses a current site, as follows: (a) When an EIR has been certified or a negative declaration adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project, which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; City of Beaumont Page 1 of 58 ,ub405 -02 g September 2009 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project MND (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or Negative Declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the Negative Declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declaration; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible, and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. (b) If changes to a project or its circumstances occur or new information becomes available after adoption of a negative declaration, the lead agency shall prepare a subsequent EIR if required under subsection (a). Otherwise the lead agency shall determine whether to prepare a subsequent negative declaration, an addendum, or no further documentation. (c) Once a project has been approved, the lead agency's role in project approval is completed, unless further discretionary approval on that project is required. Information appearing after an approval does not require reopening of that approval. If after the project is approved, any of the conditions described in subsection (a) occurs, a subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall only be prepared by the public agency which grants the next discretionary approval for the project, if any. In this situation no other responsible agency shall grant an approval for the project until the subsequent EIR has been certified or subsequent negative declaration adopted. (d) A subsequent EIR or subsequent negative declaration shall be given the same notice and public review as required under Section 15087 or Section 15072. A subsequent EIR or negative declaration shall state where the previous document is available and can be reviewed. City of Beaumont Page 2 of 58 Job # 05 -02 g September 2009 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project MND B. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST CEQA Guidelines suggest format and content for Initial Studies, including an environmental checklist with which to evaluate potential environmental effects of a project. The City of Beaumont Checklist is derived from Appendix G of the CEQA Guidelines. However, since Appendix G better reflects a new project site with no previous environmental review, the City has developed a modified Checklist for subsequent projects on sites previously reviewed under CEQA. The Checklist in this document is intended to evaluate adequacy of earlier documents pursuant to Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines and considers the relationship between the previous document and the current project in each impact category in the following areas: • Nearness of the site covered by the previous document to the current site • Extent of relevant discussion • Comparison of impacts • Relevance of previous Measures to the current project C. PROJECT TITLE Historic San Timoteo Canyon Road Class I & II Bike Lane Project in the City of Beaumont and unincorporated Riverside County. D. LEAD AGENCY NAME AND ADDRESS City of Beaumont 550 East 6th Street Beaumont, CA 92223 E. PROJECT SPONSOR NAME AND ADDRESS City of Beaumont 550 East 6th Street Beaumont, CA 92223 F. DOCUMENTS INCORPORATED BY REFERENCE The Project incorporates the following documents by reference. These may be viewed during regular business hours at the Planning Department office of the City of Beaumont. Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration for the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project in the City of Beaumont (July 2006) — This document was prepared for the roadway widening and improvements to OVP, including the construction of the 7.5 mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn Bike Lane Project. Heartland Specific Plan FEIR (September 21, 1994) - This document was prepared for the Heartland Development Project, located within the Project vicinity, and will be served by the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project. City of Beaumont Page 3 of 58 ,,,e A O5 -0, g September 2009 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND Oak Valley Specific Plan EIR 229 (April 1990) - This document was prepared for the Oak Valley Specific Plan Area, which will benefit from the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project. Oak Valley Estates Mitigated Negative Declaration - (May 3, 1999) - The 532.72 acre Oak Valley Estates Project is located adjacent to the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project. Site and will benefit from the reconstruction. Addendum to City of Beaumont General Plan Update Subsequent EIR - This document was prepared for the annexation of the Oak Valley Estates site to the City of Beaumont. The Oak Valley Estates PUD will benefit from the Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvement Project. General Biological Habitat Assessment for City of Beaumont Oak Valley Parkway (July 7, 2006) - Prepared by EARSI, Inc. This Study was conducted to analyze the biological resources along the alignment of the Project. General Biological Habitat Assessment for City of Beaumont Stream Crossings (February 22, 2005) - Prepared by EARSI, Inc. for major stream crossings on Oak Valley Parkway, including Noble Creek and Marshall Creek. Noble Creek Preliminary Floodplain Study (June 1999) - Prepared for Westbrook Oak Valley Properties, LLC, by AEI /CASC Engineering Riverside County Integrated Project (RCIP) Proposed Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSCHP) - Online Custom Reporting, March 2004. Oak Valley Parkway Class II Bike Lane & Pedestrian Trail Environmental Assessment - This document was prepared for the comprehensive development of a 7.5 mile trail paralleling Oak Valley Parkway from Noble Creek Park to San Timoteo Canyon Road, including park improvements, historical preservation and information kiosks. (Please refer to the Land Use & Planning discussion). Visual Impact Assessment (VIA) for the Historic San Timoteo Canyon Bike Lane Project (August 4, 2009) — This Memo Report from Kevin Hughes to Aaron Burton provides a checklist assessment of the Project based upon Caltrans VIA Checklist. G. PROJECT INFORMATION PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Project consists of constructing a new, 7.5 -mile long, Class II, bike lane running from Noble Creek Park, located in the City of Beaumont, to the Old San Timoteo Schoolhouse (National Register of Historic Places No. 00001646), located near El Casco Lake in Riverside County. Bike Lane construction will require minor ground preparation along both sides of an existing paved road. All work will be performed within the existing road ROW (including construction staging area and disposal/borrow site). Additionally a 2' wide gravel pedestrian trail extension is proposed to connect to an adjacent hiking trail leading to the City's new regional park at the intersection of Palmer Ave and Oak Valley Parkway. City of Beaumont Page 4 of 58 Jub k Vial? September 2009 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND To accommodate future bike lane usage, "staging areas" are located at each end of the pathway facility. One staging location is proposed at the Noble Creek Park (eastern terminus) and the other at the Old San Timoteo Schoolhouse (western terminus). To facilitate year round staging activities, each park site will offer a paving parking lot area to park automobiles and unload bikes. The bikeway trails will further be "enhanced" by a series of four (4) informational kiosks designed to document the area's rich historical contribution the canyon's evolution as a transportation corridor. The Project will help redefine the regional trail system running through San Timoteo Canyon area which has historically attracted bicyclists from both the San Bernardino Valley and San Gorgonio Pass areas. The City of Beaumont will maintain the Noble Creek Park staging area, subject bike lanes and pedestrian trail improvements (including kiosks) located within its locality. The County of Riverside will maintain proposed Project improvements slated for the Old Schoolhouse historical site and bikeways in its jurisdiction. Due to the complexity of the proposed Project, the following sections will further define the Bike Lane Project in terms of (I) Existing Conditions and Setting; (II) Components of the Project and (III) Summary of Project Impacts. I) EXISTING CONDITION & SETTING Each year, a stage of the Redlands Bike Classic has been held along the Project route adding to the popularity of San Timoteo Canyon for bike riding. This trend will continue as urbanization pushes the population of the area higher. East of I -10 Freeway - On the east side of the I -10 Freeway, Oak Valley Parkway currently has a Class II Bike Line on the north side of the road between the Freeway and Oak View Drive. After that point, there are no designated bike lanes along the Project route due to construction activity. This segment is undergoing major renovation and street widening work by the City since the beginning of 2009 and is currently closed to traffic, east of Oak View Drive, until the end of summer of 2009 (these street improvements are not a part of the subject Bike Lane Project). West of I -10 Freeway - West of the I -10 Interchange, recent street improvements are completed to facilitate a new grade separation over the Union Pacific Railroad tracks to the south of the Oak Valley Parkway Project. Included in the City's improvement work for Oak Valley Parkway is a new 6 lane road segment between the I -10 Freeway and the future Potrero Blvd intersection. A new 10' wide Class I sidewalk/bike lane facility has also been installed on the north side of Oak Valley Parkway starting at Desert Lawn Drive and terminating at the PGA Golf Course maintenance yard. West of the Potrero Blvd intersection, Oak Valley Parkway has been re- constructed as a 4 lane facility all the way to the future alignment of Cherry Valley Blvd. From Cherry Valley Blvd. (moving west towards the City limits), the road remains as a 2 lane, undivided highway but has been recently resurfaced per approved City plans. New intersection improvements for Palmer Avenue and Cherry Valley Blvd intersections have added turning lanes in both directions with ample stacking capacity to allow the 2 lane segment to operate as the functional equivalent of a four lane facility. City of Beaumont Page 5 of 58 ,,,n a 05 .01 g September 2009 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND County Segment West of City (aka "San Timoteo Canyon Road ") - Once outside the City limits, pedestrian access is restricted due to pavement inconsistency found along the roadway alignment. This area is characterized by a 32' paved section for the remainder of the Project route. It currently provides enough space for two 14' wide travel lanes for motor vehicles and 2' wide bike lanes on either side of the road. The edge of pavement is ragged which further reduces the road width in some areas as well as making bike riding extremely difficult. Much of the existing center stripe on the County portion of San Timoteo Canyon Road is barely visible and bike lane striping does not exist in the area. Proposed bike lane improvement work on the County portion of the Project will entail minor grading work and paving in the rights -of -way (ROW) of San Timoteo Canyon Road. These improvements will require encroachment permits from the County of Riverside and the City of Calimesa for that work within their respective jurisdiction. General Conditions - All proposed Class II bike lanes facilities are within existing street rights - of -way. To start Project construction, NEPA clearance and FHWA funding authorization is required prior to going out to bid and awarding the construction contract. II) COMPONENTS OF THE PROJECT The overall Project can be best understood by a detailed description of it components parts. Therefore, the following section is subdivided into: (A) Bike Lane & Pedestrian Trails; (B) Staging Areas for Bike Lane User; (C) Kiosk Design & Information Signage and (D) Drainage /Erosion Facilities: A) Bike Lane & Pedestrian Trails - As previously mentioned under the "Project Description" section above, the 7.5 -mile long Class II bike trail will be installed along both side of Oak Valley Parkway within City of Beaumont's jurisdiction and along the sides of San Timoteo Canyon Road in the County Portion of the Project. This facility will begin at Noble Creek Park in the City of Beaumont and culminate at San Timoteo Canyon Schoolhouse in unincorporated Riverside County. The following discussion divides the project into two segments; improvements "east" of the I -10 Freeway and improvements "west" of the I -10 Freeway. Oak Valley Parkway East of the I -10 Freeway —In general, there are no designated bike lanes facilities on either side of the road due to construction activity in this segment. Once street improvements are completed in the summer of 2009, the segment will require new bike lane striping and directional signage on both sides of the street from the I -10 Freeway to Noble Creek Park's lower entrance to facilitate the proper extension of the new Class II bike lanes to the Project's eastern staging location. Oak Valley Parkway West of the I -10 Freeway —Unlike on the east side of the freeway, proposed bike lane facilities will need to be constructed on both sides of Oak Valley Parkway. A 10 foot, Class I, facility has recently been constructed (in conjunction with the Oak Valley Parkway Improvement Project) on the north side of Oak Valley Parkway between Desert Lawn Drive and the PGA Golf Course maintenance yard entrance. The subject Class II bike lane will connect to the new Class I multiple purpose trail at both ends of the Class I trail. From the golf course maintenance yard area, where the Class I trail ends, a new 2' wide pedestrian path is proposed to connect City of Beaumont Page 6 of 58 ,,,h405-,, g September 2009 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND up with an existing walking and hiking trail, west of Cherry Valley Blvd, that leads to a new regional park at the corner of Palmer Avenue and Oak Valley Parkway. West of the maintenance yard entrance, bike lanes will again be installed on both sides of the road for the remainder of the Project. Once outside the City's western boundary, the bike lanes continue another 1.7 miles and terminate at the old Schoolhouse located in Riverside County. Typically, the future bike lane trails will be 5' to 6' in width as installed along the dirt shoulder areas of the roadway for the entire length of the Project. After adding pavement to each side of the roadway, the bike lanes will be striped with thermal plastic markers and new bike lane signs will be added in accordance with Caltrans standards. The extension of the pedestrian trail and proposed bike lanes facilities will be constructed within the existing road right -of -way and are consistent to the Project's "Area of Potential Effect Map ". B) Staging Areas for Bike Lane Users - To accommodate future bike lane usage, "staging areas" are proposed at both ends of the trail, starting at the Noble Creek Park (eastern terminus) and terminating as it heads west at the Old San Timoteo Schoolhouse (western terminus). The following discussion divides the staging areas into their respective park locations to facilitate a detailed discussion of each park's proposed improvement relative to the Bike Lane Project: Noble Creek Park Improvements — At the City's Noble Creek Park (eastern terminus), proposed improvements include resurfacing of the existing driveway entrance and new asphalt paving of the lower parking lot area. Further, sidewalks will be extended from the street and several new bicycle stands will be erected to accommodate staging activities. Parking lot striping and directional signage will be added to make the newly paved parking areas more efficient and safe. The Project also includes remodeling the existing Tennis Court Restrooms to create a comfort station for bicyclists by adding showers and bike lockers. The City of Beaumont and the Beaumont Cherry Valley Recreation & Park District will maintain the above referenced Noble Creek Park Improvements. Old San Timoteo Canyon Schoolhouse Improvements — At the County's Old San Timoteo Schoolhouse location (western terminus), the existing gravel parking area will be paved by new asphalt and striped to make parking more efficient and safe similar to the above Noble Creek Park location. In addition, a new 6 -foot high, decorative wrought iron fence will be installed along the site's boundaries replacing the facility's existing chain link fence. These improvements will provide all weather access to the property while enhancing the site's visual characteristics and provide additional protection from vandalism. The City and County have worked jointly on the design of the proposed improvements at the Old Schoolhouse facility in order to ensure compatibility and consistency between both jurisdictions' policies and programs. Proposed project improvements west of the City and at the Old Schoolhouse historical site will be maintained by the County of Riverside. C) Kiosk Design & Information Signage - The primary purpose of the kiosks will be to inform and direct the user to the most significant events and circumstances associated with the canyon's development as a historic transportation corridor connecting the Colorado River to the Pacific catty of Beaumont Page 7 of 58 h, b 4 05 -02 g September 2009 7.5 W Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project MND Ocean. The Project will include three (3) informational "roadside" kiosks and a fourth, larger display at the Noble Creek Park. Each kiosk has been designed with historical pictures regarding major events about the canyon's evolution, combined with other environmental facts about the area's natural and man made resources. The collective design of these kiosks will redefine the regional significance of the corridor running through the San Timoteo Canyon area which has historically attracted bicyclist enthusiasts from the surrounding San Bernardino and San Gorgonio Pass areas. Roadside Kiosks - Three of the four kiosks will be "roadside" facilities with dual sided displays located along the bike lanes where each panel will be approximately 2 ' /2' wide by 8' high and oriented perpendicular to the road. To the maximum extent possible, each kiosk will be designed and installed to withstand vandalism and discourage graffiti, minimize maintenance cost, and avoid being a potential "eye sore" along the highway. Roadside Kiosks will be placed as follows (see Project Facility Exhibit for proposed locations): Adjacent to the cluster of willow trees on the south side of Oak Valley Parkway east of Palmer Avenue; ii On the north side of Oak Valley Parkway at the Desert Lawn Drive intersection at the beginning of the Class I trail, tiiD Before the PGA Golf Course maintenance yard at the end of the Class I trail on the north side of Oak Valley Parkway Noble Creek Park Kiosk - The remaining kiosk will be much larger and consist of a three panel display to be located across from the parking lot staging area at Noble Creek Park (each panel will be 4' by 6' in size – Exhibit — for details). The City of Beaumont and Beaumont Cherry Valley Recreation & Park District will maintain the park's kiosk. Although not included as part of the Bike Lane Project, the County of Riverside will also construct a "low profile" kiosk at that the Old San Timoteo Schoolhouse facility (as developed in the Project's joint committee which designed the City's proposed kiosks to ensure consistency among all the kiosks along the route). D) Drainage /Erosion Facilities - All unprotected dirt surfaces abutting the Project will be stabilized to convey drainage, reduce erosion, and improve surface water quality, including engineering of the bike lanes to drain onto the adjacent roadway. In compliance with City, County and State requirements, the Project will employ measures during construction to avoid potential water quality impacts caused by construction activities. Therefore, no impact will occur to ground water quality. III) SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS During construction activities, the Noble Creek Park will be used to stockpile construction material and serve as the primary staging areas for the Project. For the other bike lane construction work, the existing rights -of -way (ROWS) of Oak Valley Parkway /San Timoteo Canyon Road will serve as minor staging areas for the Project. Impacts related to the Project will be temporary and minor in nature, including negligible impacts to ground disturbance, air City of Beaumont Page 8 of 58 September 2009 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND quality, historic preservation and water quality. Long -term impacts will be positive in nature including creating a major link between the City's local bikeway network and connectivity to the County's regional trail system and improvement to both park site locations. In addition, the Project will enhance the San Timoteo Canyon Old Schoolhouse site (a national recognized historical site) by providing decorative wrought iron fence and all weather, paved parking lot. The Noble Creek Park (eastern terminus) will receive similar parking lot improvement benefits. PROJECT LOCATION This Site is located in the City of Beaumont, Riverside County, California, approximately 0.6 mile east of the intersection of Oak Valley Parkway and Interstate 10 and approximately 1.2 miles west of the intersection of Oak Valley Parkway and Beaumont Avenue. Noble Creek crosses under Oak Valley Parkway in a southerly direction via an existing clear -span bridge. Surrounding areas consist of newly developed residential, recreational fields, and disturbed soils. Exhibits • Exhibit 1 shows the Regional Location Map. • Exhibit 2 shows the Historic San Timoteo Canyon Bike Lane route. • Exhibit 3 shows Proposed Improvements at Noble Creek Park. • Exhibit 4 shows Proposed Improvements San Timoteo Old School House Site • Exhibit 4A shows Simulation of Proposed Fencing at Old School Site • Exhibit 5 shows Biological Resources Map. • Exhibit 6 shows Willow Resources Index Map • Exhibit 7 through Exhibit 15 Photographs Willow Resources Along Bike Lane Route City of Beaumont Page 9 of 58 September 2009 J,,n a 05 01 P 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND INSERT EXHIBITS PAGE Exhibit 1 Regional Location Map ........................................ ............................... 10 Exhibit 2 Historic San Timoteo Canyon Bike Lane route . ............ ............................... 11 Exhibit 3 Proposed Improvements at Noble Creek Park ................ ............................... 12 Exhibit 4 Proposed Improvements San Timoteo Old School House Site ........................... 13 Exhibit 4A Simulation of Proposed Fencing at Old School Site ......... .............................14 Exhibit 5 Biological Resources Map ...................................... ............................... 15 Exhibit 6 Willow Resources Index Map ................................. ............................... 16 Exhibit 7 through Exhibit 15 Photographs Willow Resources Along Bke Lane Route....... 17-25 City of Beaumont Page 10 of 58 n September 2009 ,n A os -oz P 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project MND General Plan and Zoning Designations General Plan - Urban Arterial Highway and Arterial Highway Zoning - Specific Plan H. EXPLANATION OF CHECKLIST CATEGORIES Potential environmental effects of the Project are classified and described within the Checklist under the following general headings: No Change From Previous Analysis (No New Document Required) applies where the Project and related impact have been analyzed as part of an earlier CEQA document. The previous environmental document mitigated the impact through a Mitigation Monitoring & Reporting Program. The City adopted Findings of Fact and a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to State and City CEQA requirements identifying unavoidable adverse impacts related to the Project. Circumstances have not changed surrounding the Project. Minor Changes from Previous Analysis (Addendum Required) applies where a project has been analyzed by an earlier CEQA document; however, the project and its related impacts require minor clarifications or changes to the previous document. These changes will not result in new significant impacts. Major Changes, Less than Significant Impacts with Mitigation (Mitigated Negative Declaration Required) applies where a project has been analyzed in an earlier CEQA document, but has changed to the point where new studies or analyses are required including new Mitigation Measures. However, the changes or modifications do not result in significant impacts not previously analyzed. New Significant Impact (New EIR Required) applies where a project has been analyzed in an earlier document but new information, including changes to the project and changes in circumstances, result in significant unavoidable adverse impacts not previously analyzed making the earlier document inadequate under State and City requirements. THRESHOLDS OF SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA Significance Criteria for Project related impacts are based on the City's Environmental Checklist, as shown in the following tables for each environmental category. An impact is considered potentially significant if the Project would have a substantial adverse effect above and beyond the level identified, analyzed and considered in previous approvals of related projects and their environmental documents upon which the current Project is tiered. City of Beaumont Page 11 of 58 September 2009 J.b q 05-02 7.5 M4 Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project MND I. INITIAL STUDY CHECKLIST AND SUBSTANTIATIONS AESTHETICS The City conducted a visual analysis of the bike route based upon CalTrans Visual Impact Asssessment (VIA) Checklist. This document has been incorporated into the following analysis on the potential aesthetic impacts of the proposed 7.5 -mile bike lane Project. Please refer to Memo from Kevin Hughes (City Consultant) to Aaron Burton (Chief, Caltrans Dist. 8, Environmental Local Assistance) dated August 4, 2009, attached to this document as Appendix A. The project proposal has reached out to the general public and has been prepared with the assistance of County of Riverside Parks and Open Space Department, the Beaumont Cherry Valley Recreation & Parks District, the San Timoteo Canyon School House Committee, the San Gorgonio Pass Historical Society, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, as well as other concerned citizens. These groups helped prepare the proposed kiosk design, content and location along the bikeway route. Consequently, the viewer's perspective has been taken into account since the beginning of the project and incorporated into the project's development. a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The Project will not adversely affect a scenic vista. If anything, the proposed bikeway improvements, parking lot paving and bike amenities will provide a positive aesthetic benefit to the area and will result in a "Low level of change ". In this regard, the Project may result in the creation of a scenic vista for the western Riverside County area. The project's kiosks are oriented and designed to enhance the overall experience of the bike rider and pedestrian users alone the canyon route. Other bike friendly amenities are also planned for the bike route to heighten public awareness of these facilities. In this regard, potential users City of Beaumont Page 12 of 58 September 2009 Jun 4 05-02 p Major New Changes, Less than Minor Changes No Change Significant Significant from from previous impact Impacts Previous Analysis with Analysis Mitigation I. AESTHETICS - Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rocks, outcroppings, and historic buildings ❑ ❑ ❑ within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality ❑ ❑ ❑ of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect the day or nighttime views in the ❑ ❑ ❑ area? The City conducted a visual analysis of the bike route based upon CalTrans Visual Impact Asssessment (VIA) Checklist. This document has been incorporated into the following analysis on the potential aesthetic impacts of the proposed 7.5 -mile bike lane Project. Please refer to Memo from Kevin Hughes (City Consultant) to Aaron Burton (Chief, Caltrans Dist. 8, Environmental Local Assistance) dated August 4, 2009, attached to this document as Appendix A. The project proposal has reached out to the general public and has been prepared with the assistance of County of Riverside Parks and Open Space Department, the Beaumont Cherry Valley Recreation & Parks District, the San Timoteo Canyon School House Committee, the San Gorgonio Pass Historical Society, Morongo Band of Mission Indians, as well as other concerned citizens. These groups helped prepare the proposed kiosk design, content and location along the bikeway route. Consequently, the viewer's perspective has been taken into account since the beginning of the project and incorporated into the project's development. a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? The Project will not adversely affect a scenic vista. If anything, the proposed bikeway improvements, parking lot paving and bike amenities will provide a positive aesthetic benefit to the area and will result in a "Low level of change ". In this regard, the Project may result in the creation of a scenic vista for the western Riverside County area. The project's kiosks are oriented and designed to enhance the overall experience of the bike rider and pedestrian users alone the canyon route. Other bike friendly amenities are also planned for the bike route to heighten public awareness of these facilities. In this regard, potential users City of Beaumont Page 12 of 58 September 2009 Jun 4 05-02 p 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project MND and/or viewers in the area should have a "low sensitivity" to changes in the view corridor resulting from the project. b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not limited to trees, rocks, outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? The Project will not damage scenic resources. Proposed project improvements will provide greater movement system recognition relative to existing bikeway uses in the area and will be compatible with existing visual elements. c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings? The Project will not substantially degrade the visual character of the Project route or its surroundings. The Project will enhance the visual quality of the surrounding area by enhancing drainage. The project will not alter the physical characteristic of the bikeway route or its park sites staging areas and should complement the overall identity of the area as a bike "friendly" community. During project construction, some minor willow tree trimming will be necessary at the west end of the bikeway to allow for pavement extension along the roadway edges. However, this site preparation work will not substantially lessen the appearance or attractiveness of the area and will be very temporary in nature. Thus, the project's construction impacts are considered to be a very "low concern" to the surrounding community. From a visual standpoint, most of the proposed project improvements will be at ground level and will have little or no impacts on the surrounding viewshed. Three "low profile" roadside kiosks are proposed for the area and have been designed to complement the surrounding view areas by providing pedestrian and bike riders with a place to stop and learn above the canyon's historical development. As such, the kiosks are an architectural enhancement for the project and are a "normal mitigation" measure of the project. Over the past 8 years, the north side of Oak Valley Parkway has developed new residential neighborhoods. In addition, new commercial development has been constructed or will be constructed around the I -10 Interchange located in the center of the project. As such, the future bikeway facilities will have some cumulative affect on its surroundings. However, the project will not adversely change the overall visual quality or character of the roadway, but will incrementally add to the local visual "Impacts likely in 0 -5 years." d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, which would adversely affect the day or nighttime views in the area? The Project will not involve new lighting. Therefore, the Project will not introduce new sources of light and glare. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. City of Beaumont Page 13 of 58 September 2009 7 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project AND AGRICULTURE RESOURCES a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? The Project will be constructed within the existing Right -of -Way. Therefore, no farmland is affected. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? None of these potential impacts are applicable to the Project. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. City of Beaumont Page 14 of 58 JA A 05 -02 September 2009 Major New Changes, Less than Minor Changes. No Change Significant Significant'' from from Previous Impact Impacts Previous Analysis with Analysis Mitigation' II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES - In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environmental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the Project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and ❑ ❑ ❑ Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a El El El Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of ❑ ❑ ❑ Farmland, to non - agricultural use? a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources Agency, to non - agricultural use? The Project will be constructed within the existing Right -of -Way. Therefore, no farmland is affected. b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non - agricultural use? None of these potential impacts are applicable to the Project. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. City of Beaumont Page 14 of 58 JA A 05 -02 September 2009 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project MND AIR QUALITY a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The Project will not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the SCAQMD plan. The City has incorporated the various provisions of the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan ( SCAQMP) in its building and grading permit procedures. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Construction - The Project will not violate air quality standards or contribute to an existing air quality violation. Operation - Recommended SCAQMD daily operational emissions "significance" thresholds for Pollutants with Regional Effects are as follows: 55 pounds per day of ROC 55 pounds per day of NOx 550 pounds per day of CO 150 pounds per day of PM 10 150 pounds per day of Sox City of Beaumont Page 15 of 58 September 2009 Se n 05-01 P Major New Changes, Less than Minor Changes No Change Significant Significant from from Impact Impacts Previous Previous Analysis with Analysis Mitigation III. AIR QUALITY - Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable El El air quality plan? El b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to El El El an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air ❑ ❑ ❑ quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant El El F-1 concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of 1:1 1:1 people? El a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan? The Project will not conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the SCAQMD plan. The City has incorporated the various provisions of the South Coast Air Quality Management Plan ( SCAQMP) in its building and grading permit procedures. b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? Construction - The Project will not violate air quality standards or contribute to an existing air quality violation. Operation - Recommended SCAQMD daily operational emissions "significance" thresholds for Pollutants with Regional Effects are as follows: 55 pounds per day of ROC 55 pounds per day of NOx 550 pounds per day of CO 150 pounds per day of PM 10 150 pounds per day of Sox City of Beaumont Page 15 of 58 September 2009 Se n 05-01 P 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND In addition, the following California State criteria also affect the Project: One -hour CO standard of 20.0 ppm Eight -hour CO standard of 9.0 ppm Significance of localized Project impacts depends on whether ambient CO levels in the vicinity of the Project are above or below State and federal CO standards. If ambient levels are below the standards, a project is considered to have adverse impacts when project emissions result in an exceedance of one or more of these standards. If ambient levels already exceed a State or federal standard, project emissions are considered significant if they increase one hour CO concentrations by 1.0 ppm or more or eight hour CO concentrations by 0.45 ppm or more. Although the Project is not expected to exceed any of the thresholds noted above, the Project will be required with incorporate procedures to ensure compliance with SCAQMD standards. c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non - attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? The Project constitutes a public improvements program in the City capital improvements program that will provide an alternative transportation modality to the use of private automobile. These Project improvements related to transportation and air quality have been contemplated in the Addendum to the City's General Plan Update, Heartland Specific Plan EIR and Oak Valley Specific Plan EIR in order to accommodate existing and projected traffic volumes in the western half of the City of Beaumont. d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations? It is not anticipated that sensitive receptors will be exposed to substantial concentrations of pollutants from the Project. The distance of the Site from existing residents, combined with SCAQMD standard air quality requirements, will ensure potential exposure is reduced to less than significant levels. e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people? The Project will not create excessive or objectionable odors. Potential odor impacts related to diesel and gasoline exhausts from construction equipment will be greatly reduced by the physical distance of the Site from residents and the standard requirements of the City which govern operating equipment in compliance with the SCAQMP. Standard Conditions SC 3 -01 - The Project shall comply with SCAQMD standards for ambient air quality. If ambient levels are below the standards, a project is considered to have adverse impacts when project emissions result in an exceedance of one or more of these standards. If ambient levels already exceed a State or federal standard, project City of Beaumont Page 16 of 58 September 2009 me n 05-01 P 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND emissions are considered significant if they increase one hour CO concentrations by 1.0 ppm or more or eight hour CO concentrations by 0.45 ppm or more. SC 3 -02 - The Project shall comply with SCAQMD standards regarding equipment emitting NOx during construction operations. The cumulative amount from all construction equipment shall not exceed SCAQMD standards. SC 3 -03 - The Project shall comply with City of Beaumont and SCAQMD standards regarding dust emissions during construction activities. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES a) Have a substantial adverse affect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)? City of Beaumont Page 17 of 58 September 2009 Jub 4 05-03 Major Changes, Minor No Change New Less than Changes from Significant Significant from Previous Impact Impacts- Previous Analysis with Analysis Mitigation IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES - Would the Project: a) Have a substantial adverse affect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or ❑ ❑ ❑ regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, polices, regulations or by the California ❑ ❑ ❑ Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, ❑ ❑ ❑ etc.) though direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with ❑ ❑ ❑ ED established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ❑ ❑ ❑ ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, El 11 ❑ or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? a) Have a substantial adverse affect, either directly or through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS)? City of Beaumont Page 17 of 58 September 2009 Jub 4 05-03 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project MND Section 15065(a) of the CEQA Guidelines states that a Project may have a significant effect on the environment if "the project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of an endangered, rare, or threatened species." A detailed Biological Assessment of the larger Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvements Project Site was conducted by EARSI. It is an Appendix to the original Mitigated Negative Declaration of which this Addendum is a part. According to this report, the Site possesses natural resources (jurisdictional wetlands, waters, or streambeds) that would represent a constraint to development or would involve coordination with resource agencies prior to grading permits being issued. The Site is characterized by roadside habitat dominated by non - native grassland/disturbed, buckwheat scrub, unvegetated channel and ornamental communities as indicated in Attachment E -5, Biological Resources Map, and Attachment E -6 (1 -2), Current Study Area Photographs. Exhibit 8 reproduces the Biological Resources Map. The Site is located within the Pass Area Plan Western Riverside Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan (MSHCP), outside of designated criteria areas (MSHCP June 2003). The MSHCP has determined that all of the sensitive species potentially occurring within and/or adjacent to the Site have been adequately covered (MSHCP Table 2 -2 Species Considered for Conservation Under the MSHCP Since 1999, 2003). However, additional surveys are required for narrow endemic plants and specific wildlife species that occur within predetermined "Survey Areas" (MSHCP 2003). Based upon a request from Caltrans, a review of willows along the Bike Lanes route was conducted by Urban Logic. In its response, Urban Logic conducted a photographic survey of the willow along the bike route. The Bike Lane Project alignment lies within the existing right -of- way of the Oak Valley /San Timoteo Canyon Road route. From these photographs, found as Exhibits 6 through 15 of this document, it is clear that none of the willows are within the existing right -of -way. Therefore, none of the willows are affected by the Project. The Photographic Willows Survey is also attached to this document as Appendix B. b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, polices, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? The previous review of the Site by a licensed Biological Consultant has determined the larger Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvements Site has a riparian feature. However, the riparian feature does not affect the alignment of the Proposed Bike Lanes Project. The Project will not result in an adverse effect on riparian habitat or a sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations, by the California Department of Fish and Game, or by the US Fish and Wildlife Service as none of these resources are present onsite. City of Beaumont Page 18 of 58 luh N 05 -02 September 2009 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? The field investigation and delineation of the Site by a licensed Biological Consultant concluded there are no wetlands present at the Site. The Project will not have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means, on any federally protected wetlands, including, but not limited to, marshland, vernal pool, coastal, as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. No wetlands exist on the Site. d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of wildlife nursery sites? Noble Creek and Marshall Creek reaches offer potential wildlife movement corridors between open space habitats in the vicinity of the site and San Timoteo Creek located downstream. The roadway improvements to Oak Valley Parkway will not interfere with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites as none of these resources are present onsite. e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? The Project is not expected to significantly impact vegetation, as the channel is characterized as barren with sparsely vegetated terraces of non - native species, and impacts will be temporary only due to construction. A review of the Site by a licensed Biological Consultant has determined the Project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance. None of these resources are present on the site. f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, the Western Riverside County Multiple Species Habitat Conservation Plan ( MSHCP), or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? The Project occurs within a predetermined Survey Area for a single endemic plant (Marvin's onion). However, focused surveys are not warranted based on a lack of suitable habitat (Conservation Report Summary Generator 2004). The Study Areas also occur within predetermined survey areas for a single wildlife species (burrowing owl) not adequately covered by the MSHCP (Conservation Report Summary Generator 2004). Focused surveys for the burrowing owl were conducted by EARSI for the entire Oak Valley Parkway Roadway Improvements Project site to determine habitat suitability and to determine presence /absence (Habitat Assessment for the Burrowing Owl at Three Stream Crossing Bridge /Culvert Improvement Sites in the City of Beaumont, California, dated March 29, 2005). City of Beaumont Page 19 of 58 September 2009 Juh 4 05 -02 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project MND Surveys concluded that, due to the level of disturbance and the rocky substrate, none of the areas adjacent to the Site are considered suitable for the burrowing owl. This conclusion was further corroborated by the lack of burrows detected during the survey. In summary, the Site and immediately adjacent areas are not occupied by the burrowing owl and are highly unlikely to become occupied in the near future. Based on reported results, as well as the compliance with the MSHCP, no federal coordination with the USFWS under Section 7 of the Endangered Species Act is expected to be required. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. CULTURAL RESOURCES The City of Beaumont contracted with LSA Consultants to prepare the Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR), in compliance with the requirements of Caltrans. The seven mile long Class II Bike Lane and pedestrian trail will be constructed on each side of San Timoteo Canyon Road and Oak Valley Parkway. Two informational kiosks will be located adjacent to the bike lanes to provide educational information about the history and natural environment of San Timoteo Canyon. Two other information kiosks will be constructed at Noble Creek Park and the San Timoteo Canyon Schoolhouse respectively. A minimum 34 -36 foot wide road section will be constructed by adding pavement along the dirt shoulders of the existing approximately 32 foot wide roadways for the length of the project route as needed to create two 5 -6 foot wide bike lanes and two 12 foot wide travel lanes. The added pavement and two informational kiosks will be constructed within existing right -of -way. New bike lane signs will be installed in accordance with Department standards. All bike lane and other improvements will be maintained by the City and the County of Riverside respectively. City of Beaumont Page 20 of 58 JA # 05 -02 g September 2009 Major New Changes, Less than Minor Changes No Change Significant Significant from from Impact Impacts Previous Previous Analysis with Analysis Mitigation V. CULTURAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in § 15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? ❑ ID The City of Beaumont contracted with LSA Consultants to prepare the Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR), in compliance with the requirements of Caltrans. The seven mile long Class II Bike Lane and pedestrian trail will be constructed on each side of San Timoteo Canyon Road and Oak Valley Parkway. Two informational kiosks will be located adjacent to the bike lanes to provide educational information about the history and natural environment of San Timoteo Canyon. Two other information kiosks will be constructed at Noble Creek Park and the San Timoteo Canyon Schoolhouse respectively. A minimum 34 -36 foot wide road section will be constructed by adding pavement along the dirt shoulders of the existing approximately 32 foot wide roadways for the length of the project route as needed to create two 5 -6 foot wide bike lanes and two 12 foot wide travel lanes. The added pavement and two informational kiosks will be constructed within existing right -of -way. New bike lane signs will be installed in accordance with Department standards. All bike lane and other improvements will be maintained by the City and the County of Riverside respectively. City of Beaumont Page 20 of 58 JA # 05 -02 g September 2009 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND The Historic Property Survey Report (HPSR) and Archaeologic Survey Report, prepared by LSA Consultants and required by Caltrans, are attached to this document as Appendix C a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to ,15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred outside of formal cemeteries? The following Native American tribes, groups, and individuals were contacted via a letter sent by certified mail on December 7, 2006: • Anthony Madrigal, Cahuilla Band of Indians • Susan Frank, Gabrielino Band of Mission Indians • Bernadtte Brierty, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians • Deron Marquez, San Manuel Band of Mission Indians • Joseph Hamilton, Ramona Band of Mission Indians • Robert J. Salgado, Sr., Soboba Band of Mission Indians • Britt Wilson, Morongo Band of Mission Indians • Maurice Lyons, Morongo Band of Mission Indians • Goldie Walker, Serrano Band of Indians • Harold Arres, Soboba Band of Luiseno Indians In a letter dated August 24, 2006, Dave Singleton of the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) responded to a request for a Sacred Lands File search. Mr. Singleton advised that the results of the search were negative but recommended that ten tribes or individuals that may have knowledge of cultural resources in the project area be contacted. In addition to the above, the identification efforts of historic and cultural resources has included the following: National Register of Historic Places California Register of Historical Resources California Inventory of Historic Resources California Historical Landmarks California Points of Historical Interest State Historic Resources Commission Caltrans Historic Highway Bridge Inventory Month & Year: December 2006 Year: 1992 & supplemental information to date Year: 1992 & supplemental information to date Year: 1995 & supplemental information to date Year: 1992 & supplemental information to date Year: 1980—present, quarterly meeting minutes Year: 2006 City of Beaumont Page 21 of 58 September 2009 i„n r os -02 P 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND A total of 23 cultural resources have been recorded and 19 cultural resource studies have been conducted within a one -half mile radius of the APE. Eleven previous surveys have been conducted within the project area and the entire length of the project area has been previously surveyed. No archaeological resources were recorded within the APE. Two archaeological sites and three isolated artifacts are located adjacent to the APE. Archaeological site CA -RIV -179 is the historic Indian village of Sahat'pa located southeast of the San Timoteo Schoolhouse. Archaeological site, CA- RIV- 3447/H, is sparse scatter of historic debris located adjacent to the historic Southern Pacific Railroad. The three isolated artifacts include historic bottle fragments associated with south side of the railroad. LSA has determined that the Project will have no adverse effect to state -owned archaeological sites, objects, districts, landscapes within the project limits that meet National Register and/or State Historical Landmarks eligibility criteria and is providing notice and summary to SHPO pursuant to PRC §5024(f). (Include below a description of alternatives considered and proposed mitigation measures, or indicate below which HPSR attachment contains the description.) Indications of the likelihood of human remains on the Site have not been observed. However, Standard City Conditions provide for ensuring that potential impacts to cultural, historic and scientific resources are mitigated through the grading and excavation process. These conditions provide for periodic monitoring, grading cessation and resource recovery. Standard Condition SC 5 -01 - Throughout grading and construction activities, if cultural and/or scientific resources are discovered, earth - moving activities shall be temporarily suspended and a qualified archaeologist and/or paleontologist will be contacted to evaluate the significance of the resources and make further recommendations for their treatment, if necessary. If human remains are encountered during construction, work in the affected area and the immediate vicinity must be halted immediately, and the County Coroner must be notified pursuant to California Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5. City of Beaumont Page 22 of 58 September 2009 ,.,e N ni -02 P 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND GEOLOGY & SOILS a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? City of Beaumont Page 23 of 58 JA 4 05 -02 September 2009 Major New Changes, Less than. Minor Changes No Change Significant Significant from from Impact Impacts Previous Previous Analysis with Analysis Mitigation VI. GEOLOGY & SOILS - Would the Project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist - Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area ❑ ❑ ❑ or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? ❑ ❑ ❑ iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? ❑ ❑ ❑ iv) Landslides? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? ❑ ❑ ❑ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and ❑ ❑ ❑ potentially result in on- or off -site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial ❑ ❑ ❑ risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems ❑ ❑ ❑ where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist- Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? iii) Seismic - related ground failure, including liquefaction? iv) Landslides? b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? City of Beaumont Page 23 of 58 JA 4 05 -02 September 2009 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction or collapse? The Project consists of minor grading and improvement activities to place Class II bike lanes within the existing ROW of a major arterial roadway. Therefore, these geologic features will not be affected by the Project. d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18 -1 -B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? The Project will be constructed on previously disturbed soil along an existing arterial highway, making the possibility of new undetected expansive soils remote. However, in the event that expansive soils are identified, Standard City Conditions require the removal and remediation of expansive soils within the Project site. e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Not applicable to the Project. Standard Condition SC 6 -01 - The proposed project shall comply with the City's Grading and Excavation regulations in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works, including the following: Soil erosion; 2. Expansive soils; and 3. Seismic safety. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS City of Beaumont Page 24 of 58 September 2009 ]ub 4 05 -02 P Major New Changes, Less than Minor Changes No Change Significant Significant from from Impact Impacts Previous previous with Analysis Analysis Mitigation VII. HAZARDS & HAZARDOUS MATERIALS - Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous ❑ ❑ ❑ materials? City of Beaumont Page 24 of 58 September 2009 ]ub 4 05 -02 P 7.5 M4 Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project MND b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident ❑ ❑ El involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one- ❑ ❑ ❑ quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 and, El El El as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project ❑ ❑ ❑ result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for the people residing ❑ ❑ ❑ or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation ❑ ❑ ❑ plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where ❑ ❑ ❑ wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? The Project will not involve the routine transport, use or disposal of hazardous materials. b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the likely release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one - quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? These impact categories are not applicable to the Project. d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? The Site is not included on a list of hazardous materials sites. e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the project area? City of Beaumont Page 25 of 58 Job H 05 02 September 2009 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND J) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for the people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? These impact categories are not applicable to the Project. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY City of Beaumont Page 26 of 58 September 2009 ,,�e a os -0z P Major New ! Changes, Less than Minor Changes - No Change Significant Significant from from previous Impact Impacts Previous Analysis with Analysis Mitigation VIII. HYDROLOGY & WATER QUALITY - Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge ❑ El 1:1 b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate ❑ ❑ ❑ of the pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or 1:1 El El river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount ❑ ❑ ❑ of surface runoff in a manner, which would result in flooding on- or off -site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned storm water drainage ❑ ❑ ❑ systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? ❑ ❑ ❑ City of Beaumont Page 26 of 58 September 2009 ,,�e a os -0z P 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND g) Place a housing within a 100 -year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood ❑ ❑ ❑ Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 100 -year flood hazard area structures, which ❑ ❑ ❑ would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a ❑ ❑ ❑ result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? ❑ ❑ ❑ k) Potentially impact storm water runoff from construction ❑ El El activities? 1) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including ❑ ❑ El washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas for post- constriction activities? m) Otherwise result in any other potential impacts to El 1:1 1:1 stormwater runoff from post - construction activities? n) Substantially increase the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause erosion or habitat impacts ❑ ❑ ❑ within the project site or downstream? a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? The Project consists of an alternative means of transportation to the use of private automobiles, thereby ultimately resulting in an improvement in discharges of toxic materials into the wastewater system. The Project shall comply with all applicable water quality standards, including obtaining required permits from the Regional Water Quality Control Board. No waste discharge would result from the Project. b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of the pre- existing nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? This impact category is not applicable to the Project. c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner, which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off -site? The Project will not substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the area. Rather, in conjunction with minor grading to pave the bike lanes, the Project will improve existing drainage patterns. The stream crossing replacement will result in an increase in hydrologic capacity at Noble and Marshall Creeks, thereby improving drainage and reducing the potential for erosion or siltation on- or off -Site. Therefore, the Project would improve the existing drainage pattern. City of Beaumont Page 27 of 58 September 2009 Jun 4 05-02 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off -site? The Project results in improvements to the existing drainage course. The Project will not alter the rate of surface runoff at the Site. e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources ofpolluted runoff? The Project will not create or contribute runoff water, which would exceed the capacity of the existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable to the Project. J) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? The Project will not result in short-term minor impacts to water quality as a result of Project construction only. Any potential impacts would be mitigated through implementation of Best Management Practices (BMPs) and other required mitigation measures imposed by the California Water Quality Control Board (WQCB), the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (ACOE) and the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) through their permit processes. As a result, there would be no substantial impacts to water quality from the Project. g) Place housing within a 100 year flood hazard area as mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? The Project does not involve housing. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable. h) Place within a 100 year flood hazard area structures, which would impede or redirect flood flows? The Noble Creek Preliminary Floodplain Study was conducted based on the Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District Master Drainage Plan for the Beaumont Area. The Study concluded proposed improvements in Noble Creek would not significantly impact adjacent properties. Major impacts are also avoided to upstream and downstream properties. The Project will result in an increase in hydrologic capacity at the bridge crossing, thereby improving drainage and reducing the potential for erosion, siltation, or flooding on- and off -Site. i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? The Project does not place people or structures in flood hazard areas. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable to the Project. j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? City of Beaumont Page 28 of 58 September 2009 7. S ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND The Site is not susceptible to seiches, tsunamis or substantial mudflows. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable to the Project. k) Potentially impact storm water runoff from construction activities? The Project may result in minor, short-term and insignificant impacts to water quality as a result of Project construction only. Such impacts were anticipated and considered in conjunction with the approvals of the Heartland and Oak Valley Specific Plans and their related EIRs. Standard Conditions imposed by the required regulatory agencies and BMPs implemented by the City will ensure potential temporary impacts are minimized or avoided. Project BMPs include fencing the limits of the work area, use of erosion and siltation controls such as straw bales and silt fencing if appropriate, and limiting the fueling, washing, and storage of equipment and machinery to areas outside of jurisdictional waters. With implementation of BMPs, potential impacts related to storm water runoff will be reduced. l) Result in a potential for discharge of stormwater pollutants from areas of material storage, vehicle or equipment fueling, vehicle or equipment maintenance (including washing), waste handling, hazardous materials handling or storage, delivery areas, loading docks or other outdoor work areas for post- construction activities? m) Otherwise result in any other potential impacts to stormwater runoff from post - construction activities? n) Substantially increase the flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff to cause erosion or habitat impacts within the project site or downstream? Erosion and Sediment Control Measures - The Project may result in temporary erosion or impacts to habitat during construction only. Potential for these temporary impacts would be minimized or avoided through the use of BMPs and other standard mitigation measures required by the City and regulatory agencies. The Project will not increase flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff on- or off -Site, but instead would improve the capacity of the crossing at this location, thereby allowing for reduced flow velocities and the ability to handle higher storm volume, if it occurs naturally. All construction activities are to be conducted during the dry season, when no water is present in the channel, or utilizing proper flow diversion structures, if flow is present. No change in volume or velocity of flow would result from these methods. Materials Handling and Disposal Measures - The Project may result in temporary erosion or impacts to habitat during construction activities only. Potential for these temporary impacts would be minimized or avoided through the use of BMPs and other standard mitigation measures required by the City and regulatory agencies. The Project will not increase flow velocity or volume of stormwater runoff on- or off -Site, but instead would improve the capacity of the crossing at this location, thereby allowing for reduced flow velocities and the ability to handle higher storm volume. All construction activities are to be conducted during the dry season, when no water is present in the channel, or utilizing proper flow diversion structures, if flow is present. No change in volume or velocity of flow would result from these methods. Furthermore, all handling and disposal of materials would occur outside the subject channel and would comply with standard regulations for disposal. City of Beaumont Page 29 of 58 September 2009 J,,n 4 05-07 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project MND Hazardous Waste - The Project will not result in Stormwater contamination by hazardous waste. No handling and disposal of hazardous waste will occur on the Site. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable. Non -Storm Water Discharges - The Project will involve the minor discharge of native soil material, concrete, and other construction- related materials required to construct the bike lanes. Discharge of these materials would comply with regulations imposed by the ACOE, CDFG and State Water Resources Control Board, thereby minimizing impacts to the waterway and habitat. The discharge will not result in an increase in stormwater velocities or volumes, but would instead improve channel capacity at this location. Equipment Washing - The Project will comply with all BMPs and other required standard construction measures, including restricting washing of equipment to areas outside the subject channel, and in a location that would prevent runoff from entering the channel. Therefore, no change to stormwater flows would result from equipment washing associated with the Project. Inspections and Maintenance Measures - The Project will comply with all BMPs and other required standard construction measures, including restricting inspection and maintenance of construction equipment to areas outside the subject channel, and in a location that would prevent runoff from entering the channel. Therefore, no change to stormwater flows would result from inspection and maintenance of construction equipment associated with the Project. Project Design Features PDF 8 -01 - Structural and non - structural BMPs will be detailed in the final WQMP with goal of minimizing or eliminating dry season flows reaching Marshall or Noble Creek. Irrigation and other source control practices will be the focus of additional measures to be incorporated into the WQMP. Design level measures such as those identified in the Start at the Source Manual (Bay Area Stormwater Management Agencies Association, 1999) will be evaluated and incorporated, as feasible. PDF 8 -02 - A master drainage concept will be incorporated into the project design to mitigate hydrology impacts and comply with City of Beaumont requirements and standards. PDF 8 -03 - Potential for the proposed project to impact the site's hydrology shall be reduced to a less than significant level through engineering design and construction techniques incorporated into the project in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works. Standard Conditions SC 8 -01 - The following shall be executed in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works: • Provide a drainage study determining the effect the proposed development and associated drainage patterns will have on existing drainage facilities. • Design provisions for surface drainage; and City of Beaumont Page 30 of 58 September 2009 Job 0 05 01 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND Design necessary storm drain facilities for the proper control and disposal of storm runoff. SC 8 -02 - Erosion and Sediment Control Measures - All construction activities shall take place outside of channel flow in the rainy season, when no water is present in the channel, or utilizing proper flow diversion structures, if flow is present. SC 8 -03 - Materials Handling and Disposal Measures - Potential for temporary erosion impacts to habitat during construction activities shall be minimized or avoided through the use of BMPs and other standard mitigation measures required by the City and regulatory agencies SC 8 -04 - Non -Storm Water Discharges - Discharge of non -storm water materials shall comply with regulations imposed by the ACOE, CDFG and State Water Resources Control Board, thereby minimizing impacts to the waterway and habitat. SC 8 -05 - Equipment Washing - The Project shall comply with all BMPs and other required standard construction measures, including restricting washing of equipment to areas outside the subject channel, and in a location that would prevent runoff from entering the channel. SC 8 -06 - Inspections and Maintenance Measures - The Project shall comply with all BMPs and other required standard construction measures, including restricting inspection and maintenance of construction equipment to areas outside the subject channel, and in a location that would prevent runoff from entering the channel. LAND USE & PLANNING a) Physically divide or disrupt an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? City of Beaumont Page 31 of 58 September 2009 Jub 4 05-02 p Major New Changes, Less than Minor Changes No Change Significant Significant from from prevus Previous io Impact Impacts Previous is + with Analysis Mitigation IX. LAND USE & PLANNING - Would the project: a) Physically divide or disrupt an established community? ❑ ❑ ❑ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, ❑ ❑ ❑ local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or ❑ ❑ ❑ natural communities conservation plan? a) Physically divide or disrupt an established community? b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? City of Beaumont Page 31 of 58 September 2009 Jub 4 05-02 p 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND The Project involves the construction of a 7.5- mile long Class II Bike Lane and pedestrian trail extending from Noble Creek Park in the City of Beaumont, California to the San Timoteo Canyon Schoolhouse (National Register of Historic Places No. 00001646 Listed January 19, 2001) also known as the Little Red Schoolhouse at Casco Lake (Historic San Timoteo Canyon by Peggy Christian, 2002). Currently there are no designated bike lanes along the project route with the exception of a Class II lane on the north side of Oak Valley Parkway between Noble Creek and Golf Club Drive and along the frontage of Noble Creek Park. The 32' paved section along the majority of the project route currently provides enough room for two undesignated 0 -1' bike lanes along the side two 11- 12' wide travel lanes for motorists. The edge of pavement is ragged further reducing the road width in some areas. The pavement surface is rough and would benefit from the application of a slurry sealant following construction of the bike lanes. Much of the existing center stripe west of Interstate 10 is barely visible. Pedestrian access is restricted due to the inconsistent conditions along the road shoulder. The project will provide a minimum 2' wide dirt trail next to the Class II bike lane for pedestrian use. The Class II Bike Lane and pedestrian trail will be constructed on each side of San Timoteo Canyon Road and Oak Valley Parkway between Noble Creek Park and the Old San Timoteo Canyon Schoolhouse. A minimum 34 -36' wide road section will be constructed by adding pavement along the dirt shoulders of the existing facility for the length of the project route as needed to create two 5 -6' wide bike lanes and two 12' wide travel lanes. Existing road improvements between Noble Creek Park and Interstate 10 exceed 36' in width at this time. The added pavement needed for the bike lanes and two of the four informational kiosks to be located along the project route will be constructed within existing right -of -way along the existing dirt shoulder of Oak Valley Parkway and San Timoteo Canyon Road. The exiting road will be slurry sealed and re- striped with thermal plastic markers following completion of the bike lane paving. New bike lane signs will also be installed in accordance with Caltrans standards. A one -mile section of Oak Valley Parkway near the future intersection with Potrero Boulevard will be converted into a Class I Bike and Pedestrian Facility at the time Oak Valley Parkway is widened in the future. The Informational Kiosks will be designed to provide educational information about the history and natural environment of San Timoteo Canyon for motorists, bicyclists, and pedestrians. Two other information kiosks will be constructed, one at Noble Creek Park and one at the San Timoteo Canyon Schoolhouse. The kiosks along with parking lot and other site improvements such as fencing and pedestrian paths will be designed and constructed to complement the bike lanes and help preserve and promote the history of the canyon. All unprotected dirt surfaces adjoining the project will be stabilized to convey drainage, reduce erosion, and improve surface water quality. Best management practices will be employed at all times during construction to mitigate water quality impacts from construction. An additional benefit element of the project consists of the design of a 20' wide scenic easement for future construction of a Class I Bike and Pedestrian Facility multipurpose trail. The future trail will be a 10' wide hard surface path between the road and the creek. Equestrians will be prohibited from use of the future trail due to negative environmental impacts of horse riding. The trail will start at Noble Creek Park and extend from the trailhead on the east bank of Noble City of Beaumont Page 32 of 58 September 2009 Jub F (15 -02 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND Creek. The trail easement will cross under a new bridge planned at the Oak Valley Parkway crossing of Noble Creek and will extend approximately one mile downstream running parallel to the 150' wide Riverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District flood control easement. The future trail will cross under Interstate 10 and the Union Pacific Railroad (UPR) at the crossings on Noble Creek. c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or natural communities conservation plan? The Project complies with the MSHCP. Please refer to the attached Biological Assessment. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. MINERAL RESOURCES a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and to the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? These impact categories are not applicable to the Project. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. City of Beaumont Page 33 of 58 September 2009 JA - o> -oz p Major Changes, Minor No Change New Less than Changes from Significant Significant from Impact Impacts Previous previous Analysis with Analysis Mitigation X. MINERAL RESOURCES - Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and to the residents of ❑ ❑ ❑ the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general ❑ ❑ ❑ plan, specific plan or other land use plan? a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and to the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan or other land use plan? These impact categories are not applicable to the Project. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. City of Beaumont Page 33 of 58 September 2009 JA - o> -oz p 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND NOISE a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? The Project will generate a minor increase in noise during construction. However, the distance from occupied structures serves to reduce noise impacts. In addition, City Standard Conditions ensure these impacts are maintained at a less than significant level. These include, but are not limited to strict hours of construction operation and noise abatement through equipment maintenance. City of Beaumont Page 34 of 58 September 2009 Job 9 05 -02 Major Changes, Minor No Change New Less than Changes from , Significant Significant from previous Impact Impacts Previous Analysis with Analysis Mitigation; XI. NOISE - Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or ❑ ❑ ® ❑ noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive E] ❑ ❑ groundborne vibration or groundborne noise? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the ❑ ❑ ❑ project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing ❑ ❑ ® ❑ without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project ❑ ❑ ❑ expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project ❑ ❑ ❑ area to excessive noise levels? a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? The Project will generate a minor increase in noise during construction. However, the distance from occupied structures serves to reduce noise impacts. In addition, City Standard Conditions ensure these impacts are maintained at a less than significant level. These include, but are not limited to strict hours of construction operation and noise abatement through equipment maintenance. City of Beaumont Page 34 of 58 September 2009 Job 9 05 -02 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? fi For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? These impact categories are not applicable to the Project. Standard Conditions SC 11 -01 - The proposed project shall implement City of Beaumont noise regulations applicable to the site in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works. SC 11 -02 - All construction vehicles or equipment, fixed or mobile, operated within 1,000' of a dwelling shall be equipped with properly operating and maintained mufflers in a manner meeting the approval of the Director of Public Works. SC 11 -03 - All grading and construction activities shall be executed between the hours of lam and 7pm, Monday through Friday. POPULATION & HOUSING a) Induce substantial population growth in the area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through the extension or roads or other infrastructure)? The Project will not induce substantial population growth in the vicinity of the Project. It is a public works capital improvement project with the objective of providing better public road services for existing and projected population growth in accordance with the City General Plan. City of Beaumont Page 35 of 58 September 2009 Jub 4 05 -02 Major Changes, Minor No Change New Less than Changes from Significant Significant from previous Impact Impacts Previous Analysis with Analysis Mitigation XII. POPULATION & HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in the area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or ❑ ❑ El (e.g., through the extension or roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing ❑ ❑ ❑ elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the ❑ ❑ ❑ construction of replacement housing elsewhere? a) Induce substantial population growth in the area, either directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through the extension or roads or other infrastructure)? The Project will not induce substantial population growth in the vicinity of the Project. It is a public works capital improvement project with the objective of providing better public road services for existing and projected population growth in accordance with the City General Plan. City of Beaumont Page 35 of 58 September 2009 Jub 4 05 -02 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to OVP Improvement Project MND b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? The Project does not displace existing housing. These impact categories are not applicable. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. PUBLIC SERVICES a) Fire Protection? b) Police Protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? The Project does not affect fire, police, school, or park and recreation services. Therefore, these impact categories are not applicable. e) Other public facilities? The Project consists of the construction of a 7.5 -mile Class II Bike Lane and pedestrian project. The Project serves to implement the City's capital improvements program with the objective of City of Beaumont Page 36 of 58 September 2009 1„n a 05 -oz P Major Changes, Minor No Change New Less than Changes from Significant Significant from Impact Impacts Previous Previous ,analysis Stith Analysis Mitigation XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES - Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of the new or physically altered governmental facilities, need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire Protection? E b) Police Protection? El ❑ ❑ c) Schools? 1:1 El d) Parks? ❑ ❑ e) Other public facilities? El ❑ a) Fire Protection? b) Police Protection? c) Schools? d) Parks? The Project does not affect fire, police, school, or park and recreation services. Therefore, these impact categories are not applicable. e) Other public facilities? The Project consists of the construction of a 7.5 -mile Class II Bike Lane and pedestrian project. The Project serves to implement the City's capital improvements program with the objective of City of Beaumont Page 36 of 58 September 2009 1„n a 05 -oz P 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND providing better services to existing and future residents and offering alternative transportation to the use of automobiles in accordance with the objectives of the City of Beaumont General Plan. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? These impact categories are not applicable to the Project. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. City of Beaumont Page 37 of 58 September 2009 i „n 4 05-01 p Major Changes, Minor No Change, New Less than Changes from Significant Significant from Previous Impact Impacts Previous Analysis with Analysis Mitigation XIV. RECREATION a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that ❑ El 11 substantial deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which ❑ ❑ ❑ might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? a) Would the project increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities, which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? These impact categories are not applicable to the Project. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. City of Beaumont Page 37 of 58 September 2009 i „n 4 05-01 p 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND TRANSPORTATION & TRAFFIC a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratios on roads, or congestion at intersections) ? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? The Project will not result in traffic obstruction or congestion due to Project improvements. However, if obstructions are determined, the public will be notified of this temporary inconvenience by standard City procedures of posting the vicinity of the Project. The completed Project will improve traffic by providing alternative transportation in compliance with the County's Congestion Management Plan. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? The Project will not affect air traffic. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable. City of Beaumont Page 38 of 58 September 2009 Major New ; Changes, Less than Minor Changes No Change Significant Significant from ' from Previous ; Impact Impacts Previous Analysis with Analysis Mitigation XV. TRANSPORTATION & TRAFFIC - Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of ❑ ❑ ❑ vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratios on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion ❑ ❑ ❑ management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results ❑ ❑ ❑ in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses ❑ ❑ ❑ (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ❑ ❑ ❑ f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? ❑ ❑ ❑ g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation _ (e.g., bus turnouts, ❑ ❑ ❑ El bicycle racks)? a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratios on roads, or congestion at intersections) ? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? The Project will not result in traffic obstruction or congestion due to Project improvements. However, if obstructions are determined, the public will be notified of this temporary inconvenience by standard City procedures of posting the vicinity of the Project. The completed Project will improve traffic by providing alternative transportation in compliance with the County's Congestion Management Plan. c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? The Project will not affect air traffic. Therefore, this impact category is not applicable. City of Beaumont Page 38 of 58 September 2009 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND d) Substantially increase hazards to a design feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? The Project will not increase hazards to a design feature of the street system within the vicinity. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? The Project will not affect emergency access during construction. However, posting in the vicinity of the Project will serve to reduce foreseeable impacts. J) Result in inadequate parking capacity? The Project will result in improved parking capacities at both the Noble Creek Park and the Old San Timoteo School House. Therefore, this impact category will be positive. g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? The Project will implement alternative transportation strategies. Therefore, this impact category is positive. Standard Conditions SC 15 -01 - Signs shall be posted in the vicinity of the construction activities on the Noble Creek Bridge and the Marshall Creek culvert providing the public with notification of the expected construction period. SC 15 -02 — In the event that traffic re- routing is required, directional signs shall be posted directing traffic to the Detour Route during the construction activities of the two stream crossings. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS City of Beaumont Page 39 of 58 September 2009 Jim x 05 -m_ Major Changes, Minor No Change. New Less than Changes from Significant Significant from Imppact Impacts Previous previous with Analysis ;Analysis Mitigation XVI. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS - Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing 1:1 facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? City of Beaumont Page 39 of 58 September 2009 Jim x 05 -m_ 7.5 Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the 11 ❑ 1:1 construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or ❑ ❑ ❑ expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has ❑ ❑ ❑ adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to El El El accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations 11 El 1:1 related to solid waste? h) Would the project include a new or retrofitted storm water treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g. water quality basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the ❑ ❑ ❑ operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g. increased vectors and/or odors)? a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations related to solid waste? h) Would the project include a new or retrofitted storm water treatment control Best Management Practice (BMP), (e.g. water quality basin, constructed treatment wetlands), the operation of which could result in significant environmental effects (e.g. increased vectors and /or odors)? City of Beaumont Page 40 of 58 September 2009 lob N 05 -01 7.5 ML Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND The Project will not require or result in the construction of new water, storm water, or wastewater facilities. BMPs and additional conditions imposed by the City and regulatory agencies, including the RWQCB, these impacts would be reduced or avoided to a level below significance. The Project does not require or affect water supplies. Therefore, this impact is not applicable. The Project has been previously considered and determined in conjunction with project approvals of the Oak Valley and Heartland Specific Plan developments and the certification of their EIRs. Project construction will incorporate appropriate BMPs to avoid or reduce potential contamination of stormwater. No impacts beyond those previously anticipated with the Heartland and Oak Valley Specific Plans are anticipated. Mitigation Measures No mitigation is required. J. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANT IMPACTS a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or City of Beaumont Page 41 of 58 September 2009 Jub 4 05 -02 Major Changes, Minor No Change New Less than Changes from Significant Significant from Previous Impact Impacts Previous Analysis with Analysis Mitigation XVII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or ❑ ❑ ❑ animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a El 1:1 1:1 project are considerable when reviewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either ❑ ❑ ❑ directly or indirectly? a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or City of Beaumont Page 41 of 58 September 2009 Jub 4 05 -02 7. S Mi. Historic San Timoteo Cyn. Rd. Bike Lane Project Addendum No. 2 to 0 V Improvement Project MND endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? The Project entails construction of bike lanes and pedestrian path to serve existing and projected development within west Beaumont. As an infrastructure project in the City capital improvement program, the Project implements several objectives of providing excellent services to the residents of the City in accordance with the General Plan. The Project has been anticipated and considered in several previous planning projects and environmental documents, including the City General Plan Update and Addendum, the Oak Valley Specific Plan and FEIR, the Heartland Specific Plan and FEIR, and the Oak Valley Estates Planned Development and MND. The Project could result in minor, short-term and inconsequential impacts in three (3) environmental categories, including Air Quality, Cultural Resources and Noise. However, with implementation of applicable Project Design Features (PDFs), Standard Conditions (SCs) and Mitigation Measures (MMs) imposed by the City of Beaumont and Federal, State and Regional regulatory agencies, all potential impacts would be avoided or reduced to a level of less than significant. The Project does not have the potential to substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self - sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. b) Does the project have impacts that are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? ( "Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when reviewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects) The Project has no impacts that are individually limited, but potentially cumulatively considerable when the various individual impacts are considered together. The Project results in substantial positive impacts as a creation of new recreational opportunities, as an alternative to the use of automobiles for transportation and an aesthetic addition to the City and western Riverside County. c) Does the project have environmental effects that cause substantial adverse impacts on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The Project will not have environmental effects that cause substantial adverse impacts on people. K. DETERMINATION On the basis of this environmental review: a) I find the Project has been thoroughly analyzed in a previously Certified Final EIR document which either mitigated the Project's impacts or adopted impact findings pursuant to State and City CEQA requirements. No new environmental document is necessary, and a FINDING OF COMPLIANCE will be prepared ...................... ❑ City of Beaumont Page 42 of 58 September 2009 hob 105-01 THE PRESS - ENTERPRISE 3450 Fourteenth Street Riverside CA 92501 -3878 951 - 684 -1200 951 - 368 -9018 FAX PROOF OF PUBLICATION (2010, 2015.5 C.C.P.) Press - Enterprise PROOF OF PUBLICATION OF Ad Desc.: San Timoteo Cyn Bike Lane Project I am a citizen of the United States. I am over the age of eighteen years and not a parry to or interested in the above entitled matter. I am an authorized repre- sentative of THE PRESS - ENTERPRISE, a newspa- per of general circulation, printed and published daily in the County of Riverside, and which newspaper has been adjudicated a newspaper of general circulation by the Superior Court of the County of Riverside, State of California, under date of April 25, 1952, Case Number 54446, under date of March 29, 1957, Case Number 65673 and under date of August 25, 1995, Case Number 267864; that the notice, of which the annexed is a printed copy, has been published in said newspaper in accordance with the instructions of the person(s) requesting publication, and not in any sup- plement thereof on the following dates, to wit: 05 -29 -11 1 Certify (or declare) under penalty of perjury that the foregoing is true and correct. Date: May. 29, 2011 At: Riverside, California BEAUMONT, CITY OF / LEGAL 550 E SIXTH ST BEAUMONT CA 92223 Ad #: 10672754 PO #: Agency #: Ad Copy: LEGAL ADVERTISEMENT NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN, that the Beaumont City Council will conduct a public hearing on the matter de- scribed below. The City Council's public hearing on this matter will be held at 6:00 p.m. on Tuesday, June 21, 2011 in the Council Chambers at Beaumont City Hall, 550 East Sixth Street, Beaumont, California. The matter to be considered is further described below: Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 11- MND -03 San Timoteo Canyon Bike Lane Project - The City Council will consider the adoption of a Mitigated Negatwe Dec- laration and subsequent environmental documents, pursuantto the California Environmental Quality Act, for bike lane and associated roadway and park improve- ments proposed for Oak Valley Parkway /San Timoteo Canyon Road between the Noble Creek Park and the Old San Timoteo Canyon Schoolhouse (near El Casco Lake). The Project's CEQA clearances pertain to the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration (July 2006), and subsequent, Miti ation Monitoring & Reportingy Program (March 2007 and MND Addendum No. 2 (September2009) as prepared bythe City Planning De- pa mentwhichdeterminesthatt e Project will not have a significant adverse effect on the environment. CITY OF BEAUMONT Rebecca Deming Assistant Director of Planning On public hearings, the public may present testimony to the City Council either in person or by mail. Written comments will be accepted until the night of the hearing. Dated: May 25, 2011 5,129 Agenda No. qJ STAFF REPORT To: Mayor and Council Members Utility Authority Chairperson and Board Members Redevelopment Agency Chairperson and Agency Members From: City Manager Date: June 21, 2011 Subject: Resolutions Amending and Adopting the City of Beaumont Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Year 2011 -2012 Background: On May 17, 2011, the City Council held a public workshop to prioritize new projects to be designed, permitted and constricted in Fiscal Year 2011 -2012. On June 7, 2011, the City Council held a public hearing and approved the City of Beaumont Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Year 2011 -2012 (CIP). The proposed resolutions will amend and adopt the CIP which includes roughly $33 Million in public improvements which are summarized below. Redevelopment Agency Projects - $4,846,894 ► Old Town Street and Sewer Repair ► Palm Avenue and Sixth Street Storm Drain ► Civic and Community Center Expansion ► Regional Park Facilities ► Downtown Underground Utility Project ► Sidewalk Improvement Project Beaumont Utility Authority Projects - $2,996,950 ► Maximum Benefit and SSMP Implementation ► Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades Transportation and Street Repair Projects — 24,982,632 ► Brookside Avenue Crossing of Noble Creek ► Historic San Timoteo Canyon Bike and Pedestrian Facilities ► State Route 60/Potrero Boulevard Interchange ► Potrero Boulevard Overpass at State Route 60 ► Fourth Street/Potrero Boulevard Extension Golf Cart Transportation Facilites Pavement Management and Street Repair Traffic Signal Upgrades Analysis: The proposed Resolutions authorize the financing, design and construction of the facilities described in the CIP. A map of the proposed facilities is attached to the CIP. The proposed improvements will use funding authorized by the City of Beaumont, the Beaumont Utility Authority and the Beaumont Redevelopment Agency. The Resolutions approving the CIP also authorize the use of grant funds, special funds, mitigation fees, bond proceeds and other funds as needed by the City Manager to expend funds for the design, permitting and construction of projects with multiple funding sources as may be appropriate in accordance with the CIP budgets. A summary of the sources and uses of funds and preliminary budgets for each proposed project is provided on Exhibit No. 2 attached to the proposed CIP. Fiscal Impact: The proposed amendment to the CIP will not impact the General Fund. All capital improvements will be funded by non - General Fund sources. All administrative costs will be recovered by the City and no General Fund Revenues will be utilized to implement the CIP. Recommendation: Staff recommends ADOPTION of the proposed Resolutions, AUTHORIZATION of the City Manager and the RDA/BUA Executive Directors to expend funds to implement the Capital Improvement Plan, APPROVAL the Project Progress Report and AUTHORIZATION of the Mayor to execute the Project Progress Report and Resolutions. Respe2=AIUMM� bmi CITY / man t. napamcas City Manager and Executive Director RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -18 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT AMENDING AND ADOPTING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR THE 2011 -2012 FISCAL YEAR WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Beaumont, California (the "City Council "), along with the Beaumont Redevelopment Agency and Beaumont Utility Authority have previously caused the adoption of a Resolution amending and approving that certain Capital Improvement Plan for the 2010 -2011 Fiscal Year (the "Capital Improvement Plan"); and WHEREAS, the Capital Improvement Plan provides for the acquisition, funding, financing, design, permitting, construction and installation of a various public improvements throughout the community generally; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the Capital Improvement Plan is to, amongst other things, authorize the funding of the public improvements along with various redevelopment activities of the Agency; and WHEREAS, the City Council deems it desirable to amend and approve the Capital Improvement Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A," authorize the use of funding sources for projects and services as shown on Exhibit `B" attached hereto, approve the List of Qualified Professional Services Contractors attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and approve the Project Progress Report attached hereto as Exhibit "D" which exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference to authorize the funding, financing, design and construction of public improvements during the 2011 -2012 fiscal year and thereafter until such time as the Capital Improvement Plan is subsequently amended. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BEAUMONT CITY COUNCIL AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The City hereby amends and adopts the Capital Improvement Plan attached as Exhibit "A, authorizes the use of funds as shown on attached Exhibit `B," authorizes and directs the City Manager, staff, financing team and qualified professional services contractors identified on attached Exhibit "C" to implement the Plan and to take all necessary actions and expend funds as herein directed and authorized as set forth in the Project Progress Report attached as Exhibit "D." 1 Section 2. The City Clerk shall attest to the adoption of this resolution. MOVED, PASSED and ADOPTED this 21'h day of June, 2011 by the following vote: AYES: NOES: ABSTAIN: ABSENT: ATTEST: DEPUTY CITY CLERK MAYOR DE FORGE CITY OF BEAUMONT 0j, EXHIBIT "A" CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN City of Beaumont Amendment to the Capital Improvement Plan Comprehensive Public Facilities Financing Program Fiscal Year 2011 -2012 Prepared by: Public Works Department Prepared for: Brian De Forge, Mayor Roger Berg, Mayor Pro Tem David Castaldo, Council Member Jeff Fox, Council Member Nancy Gall, Council Member June 21, 2011 Table of Contents Section Introduction II. Redevelopment Agency and Public Works Projects III. Beaumont Utility Authority Projects IV. Transportation and Street Repair Projects V. Community Facilities District and Assessment District Projects Exhibits Map of Capital Improvement Plan Projects L INTRODUCTION The City of Beaumont Capital Improvement Plan (Plan) is an integral component of the City budget process and its ongoing implementation of the Comprehensive Public Facilities Financing Program. It identifies capital improvement projects that will be undertaken by the City, the Beaumont Utility Authority (Authority) and the Beaumont Redevelopment Agency (Agency) in Fiscal Year 2011 -2012 and in subsequent years as necessary to implement the Plan. The Capital Improvement Plan also provides data which is used by regulatory agencies such as the State Regional Water Quality Control Board, the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) and the Riverside County Transportation Commission (RCTC). The projects included in the Plan are at various stages of the design and construction process. Most projects address critical infrastructure needs of the City and the region. Redevelopment Agency capital projects are designed to eliminate blighted conditions in the Redevelopment Project Area. All projects are designed to conform to various requirements of the City's General Plan and other public agencies which help administer capital improvement programs. The Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Year 2011 -2012 includes restricted fund projects, community facilities district and assessment district projects and projects funded with grants, development impact mitigation fees and other funding sources as part of the Comprehensive Public Facilities Financing Program. H REDEVELOPMENT AGENCYAND PUBLIC WORKS PROJECTS The Beaumont Redevelopment Agency will, along with other sources of public works construction funds, implement a significant portion of the Capital Improvement Plan with local tax increment revenues for capital projects described below. Old Town Street and Sewer Repair As streets are being rehabilitated in the Project Area, sewers and street lighting are being replaced and upgraded to conform to the City's Sanitary Sewer Master Plan and the Dark Sky Ordinance. The proposed project emphasizes replacement of old sewers currently located in rear yards, easement and alleys which are deteriorating. It includes the elimination of septic tanks for homes along rehabilitated streets. It reduces the use of electrical energy for street lights, reduces sewer back -ups and storm water infiltration into sewer lines. Palm Avenue and Sixth Street Storm Drain The proposed project consists of construction of a new storm drain to eliminate flooding at the intersection of Palm Avenue and Sixth Street. Civic and Community Center Expansion The proposed Civic and Community Center Expansion is an ongoing project designed to improve public safety by integrating the old home of Summit School into the Civic and Community Center and constructing a regional public safety and emergency preparedness center. The Summit School property was recently purchased by the City from Beaumont Unified School District. The proposed project greatly enhances the City's capability to provide regional law enforcement and other public safety services to the community. Regional Park Facilities The proposed project is a joint project with Beaumont -Cherry Valley Recreation and Parks District to construct a new baseball field and install new baseball field lighting. The project will help the City and District meet the growing needs for baseball facilities. Downtown Underground Utility Project The City will work cooperatively with Southern California Edison Company to use Rule 20A funds set aside to remove overhead utility lines and poles on Beaumont Avenue between Fifth Street and Sixth Street. The proposed project will include construction of a new right turn lane from northbound Beaumont Avenue to eastbound Sixth Street. Sidewalk Improvement Project The sidewalk improvement project is a multi -year, ongoing project to improve sidewalks and handicapped access to them in the older areas of town. The proposed project emphasizes high use areas including sidewalks which provide access to schools, parks and other civic facilities. The project also includes the extension of multi - purpose trails along Beaumont Avenue and a pedestrian bridge over Noble Creek on Brookside Avenue to encourage safe pedestrian access to Beaumont High School. III. BEAUMONT UTILITYAUTHORITYPROJECTS The Plan includes two major projects to be constructed by the Beaumont Utility Authority and Sewer Enterprise listed below. Maximum Benefit and SSMP Implementation Every year, the City of Beaumont monitors the quality of regional surface and groundwater, and recycled water produced at the City's wastewater treatment plant. The City works closely with the State Regional Water Quality Control Board to implement the Water Quality Control Plan for the Santa Ana River Basin which sets the water quality limits and operational requirements for the City's wastewater treatment plant. The cooperative and regulatory efforts help implement water conservation projects including implementation of the City's Sanitary Sewer Master Plan. Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades The proposed wastewater treatment plant upgrades include improvements to the "headworks" which is the first stage of the treatment process. The project will include installation of a new "bar screen" which will help remove solids and debris from the sewage effluent near the point where sewage flows into the treatment plant. The upgrade will also include improved water flow and water quality testing equipment along with planning, permitting and design of the treatment plant to treat 8 million gallons of sewage a day. IV.. TRANSPORTATIONPROJECTS The City of Beaumont will use grant funds, development impact mitigation fees, bond proceeds, fair share contributions, local Gas Tax funds and other sources of transportation revenue to implement the following transportation system projects described below. Brookside Avenue Crossing of Noble Creek Brookside Avenue west of Beaumont Avenue will be improved to prevent flooding of the street which provides access to Beaumont High School and Brookside Elementary School. A new arch bridge and other street improvements will be designed and constructed for the creek crossing to ensure safe access to area schools by residents in the Redevelopment Project Area and community at large. Historic San Timoteo Canyon Bike and Pedestrian Facilities The proposed regional transportation project has been approved for a Transportation Enhancement Grant and has been approved for construction by RCTC and Caltrans. The project includes construction of a seven mile long bike trail along Oak Valley Parkway and San Timoteo Canyon Road to connect Noble Creek Regional Park with the Historic San Timoteo Canyon Schoolhouse. State Route 60/Potrero Boulevard Interchange The City is working cooperatively with Caltrans to prepare the plans and specifications for a new freeway interchange on State Route 60. The interchange will connect to the Potrero Boulevard Bypass which is being designed and constructed jointly by the City and Riverside County. The proposed project will be designed to improve public safety and relieve traffic congestion caused by regional development and interstate traffic. The project will also improve access into key areas of the City planned for regional commercial and industrial development. Potrero Boulevard Overpass at State Route 60 The City has entered into a cooperative agreement with Caltrans to start construction on the second phase of the Potrero Boulevard Bypass which will provide a new regional transportation connection between Interstate 10, State Route 60 and State Route 79. The proposed project will provide motorists with alternate routes to state and federal highways, relieve traffic congestion and improve highway safety. The second phase consists of the construction of a new six lane overpass for Potrero Boulevard and State Route 60. Fourth Street/Potrero Boulevard Extension The proposed project will extend Fourth Street approximately one -half mile from the east of the Winco Foods project to connect to Potrero Boulevard which will be extended one -half mile south of Interstate 10. Golf Cart Transportation Facilites The golf cart transportation facilities will include modification of the median north of Oak Valley Parkway in Golf Club Drive to allow golf cart access to the Rite Aid center. Pavement Management and Street Repair Several subdivisions are proposed where local streets will be slurry sealed and repairs made to the pavement as needed. The subdivisions were constructed in the 1980's and are due for scheduled maintenance to extend the life of the pavement. The proposed areas for maintenance are generally located west of Cherry Avenue, west of Elm Avenue and north of Oak Valley Parkway. The project also includes rehabilitation of the following streets: Eighth Street - Pennsylvania Avenue to Xenia Avenue Xenia Avenue - Sixth Street to Eighth Street Pennsylvania Avenue - First Street to Potrero Boulevard Palm Avenue - Fifth Street to Sixth Street Downtown Alleys Traffic Signal Upgrades New traffic signals will be constructed at the following intersections in conjunction with the proposed transportation projects or by developers: Pennsylvania Avenue and Sixth Street Protected Left Turn Addition Beaumont Avenue Signal Synchronization Cougar Way and Beaumont Avenue Protected Left Turn Addition Beaumont Avenue and Sixth Street Right Turn Pocket Addition Traffic signal upgrades will be constructed at the following intersections in conjunction with the proposed transportation projects or by private development projects: Fourth Street and Viele Avenue Fourth Street and California Avenue Sixth Street and California Avenue V. COMMUNITY FACILITIES DISTRICT AND ASSESSMENT DISTRICT PROJECTS The City of Beaumont will use community facility district funds, revenue bond proceeds, fair share contributions, development impact mitigation fees, assessment district and other funds to implement Plan projects as part of the Comprehensive Public Facilities Financing Program. Community facilities and assessment districts will provide funding for common facilities authorized by the districts and included in the City of Beaumont Capital Improvement Plan. Exhibits Map of Capital Improvement Plan Projects 5KZ0 ,4 Palmer Ave. + - +-+-" STORM DRAIN STREET IMPROVEMENTS SIGNAL INTERCONNECT City of Beaumont Capital Improvement Plan For Fiscal Year 2011 -2012 _ Champions Dr. Oak Valley -Pkwy. Cherry Valley Blvd. PAVEMENT REHABILITATION MULTI PURPOSE TRAILS/ SIDEWALKS .�,.',. PARK IMPROVEMENTS ® PAVEMENT MANAGEMENT - CIVIC & COMMUNITY CENTER RENOVATION WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT UPGRADE & EXPANSION © PUBLIC SAFETY & EMERGENCY PREPAREDNESS CENTER ® TRAFFIC SIGNAL BRIDGE CROSSING �1 L AL EXHIBIT `B" PROJECT AND FUND BUDGETS Exhibit B -1 City of Beaumont Capital Improvement Plan 2011 - 2012 Sources and Uses of Funds Rede lopment Agency Projects Sewer Enterprise r-- -- RDA Ckywide RDA Transportation TE/Trensportatton Gas Tax DBG/SB $211BUS BUAIBFA Total Did Town Street and Sewer Repair Project Funds _ $0 Capital Funds $871,500 Mitl atlon Funds $0 Spacial Funds $0 Funds $0 Grants $0 Funds $0 Rule 20 A Grants $0 Funds $0; "act $871,600 Palm Avenue at Sixth Street Storm Drain $0 $215,136 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0' $215,136 Civic and Community Center Expansion $0 $1,002,225, $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,002,225 Regional Park Facilities $o $0 $0 $724,055 $0 $0 $0 $0 $D $724,056 Downtown Underground Utility Project $0 j $192,190 $0 $0; $0 $0; $0 $784,4501 $D $978,840 Sidewalk improvement Project $0 $262,150 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,070,000 $01 $1,332,160 Subtotal $0 $2,543,201 $0 $724,055 $01 $0 $o $1,854,450 $0 $6,121,706 Beaumont Utility Authority Projects Maximum Benefit and SSMP Implementation $650,000' $0 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $860,000 Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades $2,346,950 $0 $0 $0 $o $0 $0 $0 $0 $2,346,960 Subtotal $2,996,950 $0 $0 $0 $0' $0 $0 $0, $0 $2,998,960 Transportation and Street Repair Projects Brookside Avenue Crossing of Noble Creek $0 $0 $0 $800,000 $0 $0 $0 $600,000 $259,647 $1,1169,847 Historic San Timoteo Canyon Bike & Ped. Facilitie $0 $0 $0 $0 $0, $1,414,188 $0 $0 $346,476 $1,760,663 State Route 60/Potrero Boulevard Interchange $0 $0 $0 $0 $1,000,000 $3,500,000 $0 $0 $0, $4,600,000 Potrero Boulevard Overpass at State Route 60 $0 $0 $0, $0 $6,707,976 $3,000,000 $0 $0 $0 $9,707,976 Fourth Street/Potrero Boulevard Extension $0; $0 $0' $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $5,441,667 $6,441,667 Golf Cart Transportation Facilities $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $39,404 $39,404 Pavement Management and Street Repair $0 $779,638 $0 $0 $01 $0 $500,000 $01 $313,511 $1,693,149 Traffic Signal Upgrades $0 $0 $280A $0, $0 $0' $0 $0 $0, $280,125 Subtotal $0, $779,638 $280,1251 $800,000 $7,707,976 $7,914,188 $500,000 $600,000 $6,400,705 $24,982,632 Total $2 998 850 $3 322 838 280 125 $1,624,055 7 707 876 I 7 914188 500 000 2 464 460 $2.464.400600 $8 400,706 $33,101,2871 Redevelopment Agency Projects Old Town Street and Sewer Repair Project Palm Avenue at Sixth Street Storm Drain Civic and Community Center Expansion Regional Park Facilities Downtown Underground Utility Project Sidewalk Improvement Project Subtotal Beaumont Utility Authority Projects Maximum Benefit and SSMP Implementation Wastewater Treatment Plant Upgrades Subtotal Transportation and Street Repair Projects Brookside Avenue Crossing of Noble Creek Historic San Timoteo Canyon Bike & Ped, Facilities State Route 60 /Potrero Boulevard Interchange Potrero Boulevard Overpass at State Route 60 Fourth Street/Potrero Boulevard Extension Golf Cart Transportation Facilities Pavement Management and Street Repair Traffic Signal Upgrades Subtotal Total Exhibit B -2 City of Beaumont Capital Improvement Plan 2011 - 2012 Budget Summary PE & PM Engineering Plan Check/ Survey /GIs Construction Construction Total Services Services inspection Services Management Contractor Project $24,500 $52,500 $31,500 $28,000 $35,000 $700,000 $871,500 $6,048 $12,960 $7,776 $6,912 $8,640 $172,800 $215,136 $28,175 $60,375 $36,225 $32,200 $40,250 $805,000 $1,002,225 $0 $0 $0 $0 $0 $724,055 $724,055 $27,456 $58,834 $35,300 $31,378 $39,223 $784,450 $976,640 $37,450 $80,250 $48,150 $42,800 $53,500 $1,070,000 $1,332,150 $123,629 $264,919 $158,951 $141,290 $176,613 $4,256,305 $5,121,706 $0 $650,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $650,000 $65,979 $141,383 $84,830 $75,404 $94,255 $1,885,100 $2,346,950 $65,979 $791,383 $84,830 $75,404 $94,255 $1,885,100 $2,996,950 $46,657 $99,979 $59,987 $53,322 $66,653 $1,333,050 $1,659,647 $49,497 $106,064 $63,638 $56,568 $70,709 $1,414,188 $1,760,663 $0 $4,500,000 $0 $0 $0 $0 $4,500,000 $290,410 $0 $373,384 $331,897 $414,871 $8,297,415 $9,707,976 $152,979 $327,811 $196,687 $174,833 $218,541 $4,370,817 $5,441,667 $1,108 $2,374 $1,424 $1,266 $1,583 $31,650 $39,404 $44,787 $95,973 $57,584 $51,186 $63,982 $1,279,638 $1,593,149 $7,875 $16,875 $10,125 $9,000 $11,250 $225,000 $280,125 $593,312 $5,149,076 $762,829 $678,070 $847,588 $16,951,757 $24,982,632 $782,919 $6,205,377 $1,006,610 $894,764 $1,118,455 $23,093,162 $33,101,287 EXHIBIT "C" LIST OF QUALIFIED PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACTORS List of Professional Services Contractors • Alhambra Group • Applied Planning • Beaumont Electric • Blodgett Baylosis Associates, Inc. • Buchannan and Associates • CHJ, Inc. • Christopher Drover • Darrell Connerton • Dennis Janda, Inc. • Empire Economics • Environmental & Regulatory Specialists, Inc. • Fullbright & Jaworski • General Government Management Services • Harmsworth Associates • Harris Realty Appraisal • Hunsacker & Associates • Jamkar Engineering • JP Striping • LSA Associates • Mark Thomas Associates • McFarlin & Anderson • McKeever Engineering • Planning Associates • RBF Consultants • Riverside Land Conservancy • Robert Kahn and Associates • Rod Gunn & Associates • Urban Crossroads • Urban Logic Consultants • West Coast Electric • Doug Wood and Associates EXHIBIT "D" PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT CITY OF BEAUMONT PROJECT PROGRESS REPORT CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN Source of Funds: . As per CIP Resolutions. Project Name: 2011 -2012 Capital Improvement Plan Contract Date: As per approved agreements. Contractors: As per approved agreements. Const. Budget: As per approved agreements. Subcontractors: As per approved agreements. A &E Budget: As per approved agreements. Project Start Date: July 2011 Report Period: January 2011 —June 2011 Work Completed During Report Period: Prepared CIP Problems or Delays During Report Period: No problems or delays. Approve Change Orders: As per attached CIP Appendix Recommendation(s) for City Council, RDA and Utility Authority Action: Approve the proposed resolutions. Report Approved by: Mayor's Signature RESOLUTION NO. RDA 2011 -05 RESOLUTION OF THE BEAUMONT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AMENDING AND APPROVING THE CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PLAN FOR FISCAL YEAR 2011 -2012 WHEREAS, the Beaumont Redevelopment Agency (the "Agency ") has been duly created and activated pursuant to the provisions of Section 33100, et se q., of the Health and Safety Code of the State of California by a duly adopted Ordinance of the City of Beaumont, California; and WHEREAS, the Agency along with the City Council of the City of Beaumont, California (the "City Council "), have previously caused the adoption of a redevelopment plan for the Beaumont Redevelopment Project Area (the "Redevelopment Plan"); and WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan provides for the acquisition, construction and installation of a various public improvements throughout the Redevelopment Agency Project Area (the "Project Area ") subject to the Redevelopment Plan and within the community generally; and WHEREAS, the Agency has previously caused the adoption of a Resolution approving the Capital Improvement Plan for Fiscal Year 2001 -2002 and for amendments in subsequent years (the "Capital Improvement Plan") and a qualified contractors list to design and construct public improvements within the Project Area; and WHEREAS, the purpose of the Capital Improvement Plan is to, amongst other things, authorize the funding of public improvements along with various redevelopment activities of the Agency; and WHEREAS, the Agency deems it desirable to amend and approve the Capital Improvement Plan, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A," authorize the use of funding sources and services for projects as shown on Exhibit `B" attached hereto, approve the List of Qualified Professional Services Contractors attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and approve the Project Progress Report attached hereto as Exhibit "D" which exhibits are incorporated herein by this reference to authorize the funding, financing, design and construction of public improvements during the 2011 -2012 fiscal year and thereafter until such time as the Capital Improvement Plan is subsequently amended. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BEAUMONT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. The Agency hereby amends and adopts the Capital Improvement Plan attached as Exhibit "A, authorizes the use of funds as shown on attached Exhibit `B," authorizes and directs Agenda Item No. q ` , STAFF REPORT To: Honorable Mayor and City Council Members From: Community and Economic Development Dept Date: June 21, 2011 Subject: Economic Stimulus Fee Adjustment — Resolution 2011 -17 Background: On February 17, 2009, City Council approved the Beaumont Economic Stimulus Program by means of Resolution No. 2009 -09. The Program includes measures to help mitigate negative impacts of the housing downturn including housing affordability, declining home values and job losses tied to construction, commercial and industrial development. The Temporary Reduction and Deferred Payments of Development Impact Mitigation Fees was approved to help boost the residential construction industry and other economic activity. In 2010, the City Council adopted Resolution 2010 -19 in order to continue the Schedule of Fees adopted in 2009. Success of the Beaumont Economic Stimulus Plan: • Total fees waived or reduced from all 1,713 permits is roughly $3.3 Million dollars. • 1,034 permits received a 50% reduction in permit fees totals, saving our residents $65,784.25. • Beaumont had $122 million in total permit activity to rank 8`s among Riverside County's 26 Cities • This represented 5.2% of all permit value in the county despite the city having just 2.0% of the county's population. • Beaumont's permit valuation per person of $3,675 for the 2009 through November 2010 period ranked 3d in Riverside County after its two wealthiest cities: Indian Wells ($5,781) and Rancho Mirage ($4, 692) • Issued 679 New SFR permits; 2 °d in Riverside County, behind Menifee, the other major city providing fee incentives. (350 in 2009 & 329 in 2010) 0 2009 = gain of 16.7% over 2008 0 2010 =gain of 9.7% over 2008 All 1,713 permits issued have met the City Council's goal of creating jobs. Analysis: In light of what is shaping up to be a tenuous and fragile economic recovery in a region where business and industry is continuing to struggle and un- employment numbers still remain high; Beaumont's Stimulus Plan has encouraged permit activity, creating jobs, and incentivizing shopping local. Beaumont's permit activity Ranks 8h in Riverside County since the start of the Program. It would seem prudent and advisable to maintain the current Economic Stimulus Plan and fees the same as those approved in 2009 and continued in 2010. Recommendation: Staff recommends ADOPTION of the Resolution 2011 -17 in order to continue with the same fee schedule that was established in 2009. RESOLUTION NO. 2011 -17 A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT, ESTABLISHING ECONOMIC STIMULUS PROGRAM FEE. WHEREAS, City Council adopted Resolution 2009 -09 approving the Beaumont Economic Stimulus Program to help mitigate the negative impacts of the housing downturn including housing affordability, declining home values and job losses tied to construction, commercial and industrial development. WHEREAS, City Council Adopted Resolution 2010 -19, to maintain the Fee Schedule adopted under Resolution No. 2009 -09. WHEREAS, it is the purpose of this Resolution to rescind Resolution 2010 -19 and adopt Schedule A, Schedule of Fees. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF BEAUMONT HEREBY RESOLVES AS FOLLOWS: Section 1. City Council adopts Schedule A, Schedule of Fees and Charges as attached. Section 2. Except as Amended in Section 1 above, Resolution 2009 -09 shall remain in full force and effect. Section 3 Resolution No. 2010 -19 is hereby rescinded. MOVED, PASSED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Beaumont this 21st day of June 2011 by the following vote: Ayes: Noes: Absent: Abstain: Mayor De Forge Attest: Deputy City Clerk SCHEDULE A SCHEDULE OF FEES AND CHARGES A. Commencing February 18, 2009, the following fees and charges shall apply on an EDU basis: 1. Traffic Signal Fee $ 123.20 2. Railroad Overpass Fee $ 139.30 3. Fire Station Fee $ 126.70 4. Basic Service and Facility Fee $ 350.00 5. Regional Park Fee $ 620.80 6. Emergency Preparedness Fee $ 490.27 7. General Plan Fee $ 35.00 8. Sewer Connection Fee: $ 2,198.74 9. Road and Bridge Fee: $ 7,040.25 10. Commercial /Industrial Transportation Fee: $ 1,495.75 B. Commencing July 1, 2010, the following fees and charges shall apply: 1. Traffic Signal Fee $ 123.20 2. Railroad Overpass Fee $ 139.30 3. Fire Station Fee $ 126.70 4. Basic Service and Facility Fee $ 350.00 5. Regional Park Fee $ 620.80 6. Emergency Preparedness Fee $ 490.27 7. General Plan Fee $ 35.00 8. Sewer Connection Fee: $ 2,198.74 9. Road and Bridge Fee: $ 7,040.25 10. Commercial /Industrial Transportation Fee: $ 1,495.75 C. Commencing July 1, 2011, the following fees and charges shall apply: 1. Traffic Signal Fee $ 123.20 2. Railroad Overpass Fee $ 139.30 3. Fire Station Fee $ 126.70 4. Basic Service and Facility Fee $ 350.00 5. Regional Park Fee $ 620.80 6. Emergency Preparedness Fee $ 490.27 7. General Plan Fee $ 35.00 8. Sewer Connection Fee: $ 2,198.74 9. Road and Bridge Fee: $ 7,040.25 10. Commercial /Industrial Transportation Fee: $ 1,495.75 D. Commencing July 1, 2012, the following fees and charges shall apply: 1. Traffic Signal Fee $ 176.00 2. Railroad Overpass Fee $ 199.00 3. Fire Station Fee $ 181.00 4. Basic Service and Facility Fee $ 500.00 5. Regional Park Fee $ 886.86 6. Emergency Preparedness Fee $ 700.38 7. General Plan Fee $ 50.00 8. Sewer Connection Fee: $ 3,141.05 9. Road and Bridge Fee: $ 10,507.51 10. CommerciaVIndustrial Transportation Fee: $ 3,152.25 E. Each fiscal year, commencing July 1, 2009, the foregoing amounts shall be subject to review and escalation if needed based on the Consumer Price Index for the preceding calendar year provided, however, that each fiscal year the foregoing amounts shall be adjusted on a pro rata basis for regulatory costs incurred to comply with unfunded federal, state and Regional Water Quality Control Board and other mandated regulations and programs. The City Manager shall provide to the City Council a schedule of such above referenced costs. The foregoing fees and charges do not exceed the reasonable cost of providing public facilities. The schedule of fees and charges does not apply to any permit or project for which fees have been paid prior to February 17, 2009. City of Beaumont 550 E. 6th Street Beaumont, CA 92223 (95/)769 -8520 FAX (951) 769 -8526 www.c1.beaunx>nt.ia.us BEAUMONT ECONOMIC STIMULUS PLAN UPDATE February 2009 — February 2011 On February 17 2009, the City Council approved the Beaumont Economic Stimulus Program which contains measures to assist homeowners, businesses, property owners, and developers. The program included the expansion of the Neighborhood Improvement Program (NIP) which allows the City of Beaumont Redevelopment Agency (RDA) to acquire public improvements from property owners by funding up to 80% of the cost to install curb, gutter and sidewalk and fund up to 50% of the processing fees for permits, plan check and inspection of property improvements. As of February 28, 2011, 1,034 permits have been issued for renovations, remodels, and additions to existing buildings and 630 permits have been issued for new single family dwellings. For these 1664 permits total fees waived or reduced total $3,377,548.10. Total Permits Issued Review of the Impact of Beaumont's Stimulus Measures 2010 John E. Husing, Ph.D. April 22, 2011 Economics & Politics, Inc. 961 Creek View Lane Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 307 -9444 Phone (909) 748 -0620 FAX john @johnhusing.com www.johnhusing.com Review of the Impact of Beaumont's Stimulus Measures Executive Summary A review of new home sales and permit levels appears to indicate that the stimulus measures put into place by Beaumont have had a beneficial impact on residential construction activity in the city. Looking at the new home market: • In 2009, there were 350 permits for new single family residential (SFR) units. This represented 10.2% of all new residential permits in Riverside County and is up from a 7.9% share in 2008. • In 2010, there were 323 permits for new SFR units. That was a slight decline from 2009 but still represented an 8.3% share of the county's activity. • Beaumont's 679 permits represented in 2009 through November 2010 was the second largest number in Riverside County after Menifee, the other major city providing fee incentives to residential builders. • In the 2009 through November 2010 period, Beaumont had $122 million in total permit activity to rank eighth among Riverside County's 26 cities. This represented 5.2% of all permit value in the county despite the city having just 2.0% of the county's population. • Beaumont's permit valuation per person of $3,675 for the 2009 through November 2010 period ranked third in Riverside County after its two wealthiest cities: Indian Wells ($5,781) and Rancho Mirage ($4,692). Other facts about Beaumont's new home market: • The median priced new home (half above, half below) in first quarter 2011 was $241,500, up 9.8% from the second quarter 2010 low of $220,000. However, the level was —43.8% from the peak of $430,000 in first quarter 2007 during the bubble. The city's median prices is back to the fourth quarter 2003 level, before the steep run -up. • The Inland Empire's median new home price behaved in a similar manner. It reached $270,393 in first quarter 2011, up a slight 0.8% from the recent low of $268,155. However, the first quarter 2011 level was off - 38.2% from its $437,200 peak. The region's new home prices fell from a peak of $430,000 in third quarter 2006, off —36.1% in third quarter 2006. The region's new home median price is back to its first quarter 2003 level, nearly a year before prices started their steep rise. Facts about Beaumont's existing home market: • Sales peaked at a seasonally adjusted 157 units in fourth quarter 2005. They then fell to 70 units by fourth quarter 2007 off by — 54.7%. As prices came down, sales reached a record 244 seasonally adjusted units in first quarter 2010 and after some fluctuation returned to near that level at 239 units in the first quarter 2011, -2.0% from the record. • The Inland Empire's seasonally adjusted existing home sales also peaked in fourth quarter 2005 and their low point was in fourth quarter 2007. The region's decline was much larger than that in Beaumont, falling - 64.4 %. The region's sales then increased to a record in first quarter 2009, a year before Beaumont's peak. In first quarter 2011, Inland Empire sales were down - 17.6% from that high level. • Beaumont's median priced existing home was $180,000 in first quarter 2011. That price was down — 51.2% from the peak of $369,000 in second quarter 2006. The city is now roughly at its fourth quarter 2003 level, just before market prices accelerated. • The Inland Empire's median first quarter 2011 existing home price fell to $174,305, down — 55.4% from a peak of $389,924 in first quarter 2007, off — 55.4 %. The region's median price has returned to its second quarter 2002 level, well before prices took off. Impact Beaumont Stimulus Measures Who benefits from Beaumont's reduction in 40% fees to developers and 50% cuts to smaller local projects? From 2009 through second quarter 2011: • Of a total of 1,668 permitted projects, 1,038 or 62.2% were for local smaller projects; 630 were for large development projects or 37.8 %. • Due to the size of larger projects, $3,286,508 or 97.3% of the total of $3,377,548 in reduced permit fees were related to them. $91,040 was saved on local smaller projects of 2.7% of the total savings. Finally, the share of fees saved: • On large projects was $5,217 on fees of $16,341 per home, an average of 31.9 %. • On smaller local projects, the total fee savings averaged 54.2 %. Impact Beaumont Stimulus Measures Economics & Politics, Inc. 961 Creek View Lane Redlands, CA 92373 (909) 307 -9444 Phone (909) 748 -0620 FAX john@johnhusing.com www.johnhusing.com Review of the Impact of Beaumont's Stimulus Measures John E. Husing, Ph.D. In early February 2009, Beaumont took a variety of actions to deal with the economic impact of the slowdown in housing markets on the city and the inland region. Of these measures, several should have resulted in increased housing and construction permit activity in the city: • Developer Impact Mitigation Fees were temporarily lowered by 40% on residential, commercial and industrial projects. • The Development Impact Mitigation Fee Deferral Program temporarily defers collection of those fees until the final building inspection stage of development. Beaumont Neighborhood Improvement Program which helps fund public improvements like curbs, gutters and sidewalks for Redevelopment Area (RDA) homeowners was expanded to include homes and firms throughout the city while the assistance level went from 50% to 80% of cost. Also, a 50% reduction on permit fees for a wide variety of property upgrades was instituted as was the availability of RDA loans to firms undertaking Downtown Specific Plan area projects. • Home & Business Improvement and Purchase Assistance Program assists homes and businesses with necessary improvements including those for utility efficiency. With the program now two years old, the question arises as to whether there has been any measurable increase in construction activity in Beaumont as a result of these changes. Approach. As Beaumont is subject to the same market forces affecting every other jurisdiction in the Inland Empire and Riverside County, it is appropriate to examine those areas or to the cities within them. After looking at the history of Beaumont's existing home market, new home market data are used to illustrate what if any advantages these programs have created for the city. This is followed by a discussion of price behavior in the city and in the inland area. Existing Home Sales Behavior. In the existing home market, Beaumont's home sales peaked at a seasonally adjusted 157 units in fourth quarter 2005 during Southern California's housing boom. As the region's very high prices caused markets to falter, the city's sales fell to just 70 units by fourth quarter 2007 off by — 54.7 %. More recently, as prices have come down, sales have roared back reaching a record 244 seasonally adjusted units by first quarter 2010. After some fluctuation, they returned to near that level at 239 units in first quarter 2011 (Exhibit 1). Note: Without seasonal adjustments, the peak of existing homes sales in Beaumont was 250 in second quarter 2010, followed by sales of 219 units in fourth quarter 2010. Interestingly, the Inland Empire's seasonally adjusted existing home sales also peaked in fourth quarter 2005. They also reached their low point in fourth quarter 2007 (Exhibit 2). The region's existing home sales decline was much larger than that in Beaumont, falling - 64.4 %. Meanwhile, the Inland Empire saw its seasonally adjusted sales increase to a record by first quarter 2009, a year before Beaumont's peak. The level was 2.5% above its prior high in late 2005. By contrast, Beaumont's early 2010 record was 55.4% higher than its previous high in 2005. In first quarter 2011, Inland Empire sales were down - 17.6% from their 2009 peak. At 239 units, Beaumont's first quarter 2011 sales were off just -2.0% from their first quarter 2010 peak. Impact Beaumont Stimulus Measures 2 Exhibit 1 _- Existing Home Sales Beaumont. Seasonally Adjusted, By Quarter. 1988 -2011 Exhibit 2_- Existing Home Seasonally Adjusted, by Sales, Inland quarter. 1988- Empire 2011 .. I ■■� ■■�■ ■ ■■ ■mow ■� :ra■■�-a ■�� ■���� ,,, Il�t ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■1�1r�L: �1 ■ ■ ■ ■Y ■1,■ ■rl ' IIIII■1M■111111111■1111 M VIII■ IIIIIIIII ■11■■IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII �1, A 6; 7 ■■n■■171�'1�L�t'tlL��a�■■�'■■I f ., ,Y• II ■1111111111111111111111111111) 1111111111111111111111111 111111■11111!■11111111111111111 ', A A� A At Y Put together, sales in Beaumont's seasonally adjusted existing home market fell less steeply than those in the inland region (- 54.7% v. — 64.4 %) during the extreme housing slowdown. It sales subsequently recovered for a year longer than the region. Its most recent peak was higher than its 2005 record by a much greater percentage than for the full inland market (55.4% v 2.5 %). First quarter 2011 sales in Beaumont were just below the city's most recent record level, while the Inland Empire's sales were down substantially from its most recent peak ( -2.0% v.- 17.6 %). New Home Sales Behavior. In the new home market, Beaumont's home sales peaked at a seasonally adjusted 326 units in first quarter 2004 when Southern California's housing boom first reached the city. Sales subsequently fell to just 34 units by first quarter 2005 before rebounding to 291 units in first quarter 2006. That was when the severe residential downturn began affecting Southern California. Rather than a continuous plunge, however, the city's sales moved down irregularly reaching 135 units in first quarter 2009. They then fell to 72 sales in first quarter 2010 Impact Beaumont Stimulus Measures Exhibit 2_- Existing Home Seasonally Adjusted, by Sales, Inland quarter. 1988- Empire 2011 .. I ■■� ■■�■ ■ ■■ ■mow ■� :ra■■�-a ■�� ■���� ,,, Il�t ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■1�1r�L: �1 ■ ■ ■ ■Y ■1,■ ■rl ' IIIII■1M■111111111■1111 M VIII■ IIIIIIIII ■11■■IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII f ., ,Y• New Home Sales Behavior. In the new home market, Beaumont's home sales peaked at a seasonally adjusted 326 units in first quarter 2004 when Southern California's housing boom first reached the city. Sales subsequently fell to just 34 units by first quarter 2005 before rebounding to 291 units in first quarter 2006. That was when the severe residential downturn began affecting Southern California. Rather than a continuous plunge, however, the city's sales moved down irregularly reaching 135 units in first quarter 2009. They then fell to 72 sales in first quarter 2010 Impact Beaumont Stimulus Measures before jumping to 169 seasonally adjusted sales in second quarter 2010, but falling to just 48 sales in first quarter 2011 (Exhibit 3). Note: Without seasonal adjustments, the peak of existing homes sales was 311 in third quarter 2006 The raw level was at 136 units in second quarter 2010 and 35 sales in first quarter 2011. Exhibit 3. -New Home Sales Beaumont, Seasonally Adjusted. By Quarter. 1988 -2011 Empire -2011 1988 IMMMMMMMO NMNMMMZ7J1UMM �I IT 1MO1 nM1■I■I►�l IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!l 1111111111111111111111111IIIIIIIl its �'.�ri�+*"'r-r ,"' r���'" ww' �dllI�R1111�111111�1111111111111�Irmil ,r For the Inland Empire, the most recent seasonally adjusted new home peak was in first quarter 2006. After that, sales fell consistently except for a very slight uptick that ended in fourth quarter 2009. The 1,088 new home sales in first quarter 2011 was an historic low for the inland region, down - 90.3% from its peak (Exhibit 4). Beaumont's recent low was -85.2% below its peak. Even at the current low level, Beaumont's 48 sales were above its recent low of 34 in first quarter 2005. In both markets, it is clear that unlike the existing home market, the new home market is in a deep depression. Exhibit 4_ -New Home Sales, Inland Seasonally Adjusted. by quarter, Empire -2011 1988 IMMMMMMMO NMNMMMZ7J1UMM �I IT 1MO1 nM1■I■I►�l IIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII!l 1111111111111111111111111IIIIIIIl 11111111111111111111111111111111111�1 r r' Impact Beaumont Stimulus Measures Permits. While the Inland Empire's construction industry has had great difficulties in 2009 -2010, it is clear that the building industry regards the Beaumont market as an important one in the future. This is evidenced by the volume of new home permits in the city. In 2009 -2010, the volume was respectively 10.2% and 8.3% of all new Single Family Residential (SFR) permits in Riverside County (Exhibit 5). This was for a city with just 1.6% of the county's population: • In 2009, Beaumont issued 350 of Riverside County's 3,431 SFR permits, a 10.2% share. 0 In 2010, Beaumont issued 323 of Riverside County's 3,887 SFR permits, an 8.3% share. Residential developers are thus showing a greater willingness to do business in Beaumont than in the county generally. Looking at cities, Beaumont's 679 permits from 2009 through November 2010 ranked second in Riverside County to Menifee's 710. It has also lowered fees (Exhibit 6). Family Exhibit 6.-Number of Single -- 2009-2010—November bder�ee flu Beatanara 679 Temecula 605 hudia 479 Psis 3$2 Lake Elsmare 321 Hemet 263 Coachella 212 marew Valley 171 LaQuhU 147 Wildama r 135 Riverside 116 Patin Desert 94 Patin Springs 92 Aftneta 75 Caroms 62 Sam Jackto 53 hd= Wells 17 Ra,d%o Ukage 12 Bifthe Desert Hot Sprmg Cathedral City Bffffdn Cutmesa Carryon Lake 1 Source: Camsttuctiom hi&l_trf Researr_h Board Norco Impact Beaumont Stimulus Measures 5 As a small city, an equally impressive fact is that during the period from 2009 to November of 2010, Beaumont had $122 million in total permit valuation. This ranked 8th among the 26 cities of Riverside County (Exhibit 7). When this is converted to the amount of permit valuation per person, Beaumont's $3,675 in valuation for every resident ranked third after Riverside County's two wealthiest cities: Indian Wells ($5,781) and Rancho Mirage ($4,692) (Exhibit 8). Riverside Exhibit T-Total Permit Valuation $5,781 ' d- . 2009-2010 November Riverside Bea mwrlt $212 hden6e $3,076 $210 Temecula $2,650 Pahn Desert $164 ]Sdor m Valley Bernet $1,871 $149 Hemet $1,703 $141 Patin Desert Calimesa $127 Patin Springs Lake Elsinore $1,320 $127 Beavu ovt 1 $1,263 $122 Corona Coachella $109 hudio Penis $949 $91 NbMieta $886 $90 Rancho hdagge Corona $80 La Qunta Carryon Lake $713 $75 Lake Elsinore $701 $67 Penis $52 $615 Coachella Blythe $42 Wilda mar $410 $40 Batmfrig Celiedral City $37 hidun Welk $30 Norco $17 Sanlacinto $15 Calanesa $10 Bye $10 Carryon Lake $8 Source: Corstruction huhstry Research Board Banmarg $5 As a small city, an equally impressive fact is that during the period from 2009 to November of 2010, Beaumont had $122 million in total permit valuation. This ranked 8th among the 26 cities of Riverside County (Exhibit 7). When this is converted to the amount of permit valuation per person, Beaumont's $3,675 in valuation for every resident ranked third after Riverside County's two wealthiest cities: Indian Wells ($5,781) and Rancho Mirage ($4,692) (Exhibit 8). Impact Beaumont Stimulus Measures 6 Riverside . 2009-2010 November kdian wells $5,781 Raruha a $4,692 Bea mwrlt 1$3,675 Mni6ee $3,076 Patin Springs $2,650 Pahn Desert $2,455 Bernet $1,871 LaQuiraa $1,703 Temecula $1,578 Calimesa $1.341 Lake Elsinore $1,320 Wildomar $1,263 h,dio $1,096 Coachella $995 Penis $949 hkmieta $886 Moreno Valley $792 Corona $732 Carryon Lake $713 Riverside $701 Cathedral City $700 Norco $615 Blythe $465 San Jackao $410 Source: Ccrostruction hdusty Research Board & CA Flrmice Departmerit Batmfrig $182 Impact Beaumont Stimulus Measures 6 Exhibit 9.- Existing Home Prices, Quarterly Beaumont, By Quarter, 1988 -2011 Exhibit 10. -Price Trends, Existing Homes Inland Empire, 1988 -2011, Quarterly Exhibit 11. -New Home Prices, Quarterly Beaumont, By Quarter, 1988 -2011 ' I■■■!U■ ■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■■ ■� i■■■■i■■■■■■■■■■■■■r -■■i y , ,., i■■■■i� ■■■■■■■■■■ter. ������r..JL.JI New Home Prices. Beaumont's median priced new home in first quarter 2011 was $241,500, up 9.8% from the second quarter 2010 low of $220,000 but down - 43.8% from the first quarter 2007 high of $430,000 (Exhibit 11). Prices are back to their fourth quarter 2003 level. In this period, the Inland Empire's median new home price behaved similarly. The price was $270,393 in first quarter 2011. That was up a slight 0.8% from the third quarter 2010 low of $268,155 (Exhibit 12). The region's new home prices fell from a peak of $437,200 in third quarter 2006, off — 38.2 %. The region's new home median price is back to its first quarter 2003 level. Note: In both the existing and new home market, the Inland Empire's median price has reached levels farther back in time than what has occurred in Beaumont. Put another way, the city's existing and new home prices have not fallen to levels that occurred as far back in time as for the Inland Empire as a whole. Impact Beaumont Stimulus Measures 8 Who has benefited from Beaumont's reduced fees? Both large developers and local smaller projects have benefitted from Beaumont's reduced construction permit fees. The cuts were 40% for the large developers and 50% for the local smaller projects. In terms of the number of projects that were given lower fees, there were 630 by large developers (37.8 %) and 1,038 local smaller projects (62.2 %). On that criterion, a far greater number of local smaller projects were given fee cuts than the projects by large developers. Given the size of the projects proposed by large developers, it is not a surprise that the $3.2 million in fee savings to them (97.3 %) was much greater than the $91,040 saved on the local smaller projects (2.7 %).\ Finally, the share of fees saved: • On large projects was $5,217 on fees of $16,341 per home or an average of 31.9 %. • On smaller local projects, the total fee savings averaged 54.2%. Exhibit Year 12.-Fee Savings By Large Developers Large Developers and Local Smaller Project, 2009-2011 Local Smaller Projects Permits Share Saved Fees Share Permits Share Saved Fees Share 2009 293 40.5% $1,528,487 97.7% 430 59.5% $36,352 2.3% 2010 323 38.1% $1,684,988 97.3% 525 61.9% $47,618 2.7% 2011 14 14.4% $73,034 91.2% 83 85.6% $7,070 8.8% Total 1 630 37.8% $3,286,509 97.3% 1,038 62.2% 1 $91,040 2.7% Source: City of Beaumont Impact Beaumont Stimulus Measures 9 TO: Mayor and Members of the City Council Agenda Item # `7 FROM: Joe Aklufi, City Attorney DATE: June 21, 2011 SUBJECT: Conversion of the City Manager's Position from Independent Contractor to Employee BACKGROUND Prior to 1992, it was the City's custom and practice to fill key management positions with employees. However, in the years immediately preceding 1992, it became apparent that a number of these positions were filled by individuals who either lacked performance capabilities, or were not acting in the best interests of the City, or both. Consequently, the City Council replaced many of these key management employee positions with independent contractors, a policy that gave the Council the flexibility it needed to make changes in City policy and direction. The use of contractors also allowed the Council to reorganize City Departments and to increase, or decrease, staffing levels in accordance with changing economic conditions, without the attendant problems associated with, for example, layoffs. More recently, the City Council has expressed a growing interest in replacing contractors with full -time City employees. The Council's expressed interest has been reflected in a number of mid- and upper -level management positions. Mr. Kapanicas, our City Manager, has fulfilled his duties as an employee of one of the City's contractors, GGMS, Inc., and has been doing so since 1993. Within the last couple of years, however, both the Council and he have expressed an interest in converting his independent contractor status to that of a City employee, performing the same functions. In anticipation of that conversion, the City Budget reflects the funding needed to make the conversion. Mr. Kapanicas has expressed a willingness to serve as a City employee in accordance with the terms set forth in the attached "Terms of Employment." Basically, Mr. Kapanicas proposes an employment contract of 6 years, with the same benefits other management employees receive. The proposed salary, $218,920.00, represents the average of all cities within Riverside County, as reflected on the attached Salary Survey. This proposed salary is in keeping with the City's philosophy that employees be paid at neither the highest nor the lowest salary range of all other municipal employees, but in the middle. Mr. Kapanicas' salary would be increased at the rate of 2.5% per year, with the possibility that it be increased by as much as 5 %, a merit increase, if the City Council finds that he exceeds expectations. With respect to a pension, Mr. Kapanicas would become a member of PERS. As part of his membership, the City will purchase 5 years of credit to his account, with funds that are currently due and owing GGMS, Inc. for work previously billed but not paid for. FISCAL IMPACT The City Manager's salary is already provided for in the City's Budget. The additional PERS credit will be paid for with funds that are currently due and owing to GGMS, Inc. Therefore, the employment of Mr. Kapanicas will result in no new impact on the City's finances. RECOMMENDATION Approve the City Manager Employment Agreement as proposed. lly submitted a �*� Aklufi ity 2 CITY MANAGER EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT SUMMARY OF TERMS OF EMPLOYMENT Effective Date: June 21, 2011 Assigned Duties: City Manager, Redevelopment Executive Director and Secretary, Utility Authority Executive Director, Finance Authority Executive Director and Special Districts Administrator. Compensation: Annual Base Salary: $218,920.00 Salary Adjustment: 2.5% per year, except that the Council can increase it to 5% if the Employee exceeds expectations. Pension: Membership in PERS as other City employees, except that the City shall purchase 5 years of PERS credit with funds owed to Employee's company, GGMS, Inc. for work performed prior to June 1, 2011, but not paid for. Car Allowance: None. Deferred Compensation: City shall contribute 10% of Employee's salary. Medical Insurance: Health, dental, vision and disability shall be as provided to other employees. Life Insurance: Equal to one year's salary. Vacation: 5 weeks, commencing each July 1. Sick Leave: 3 weeks, commencing each July 1. Term and Termination: Term: 6 years, commencing June 21, 2011 and ending June 30, 2017. Termination: For cause or by mutual agreement. Severance Package: None. Salary Survey as of: 9/27/2009 RIVERSIDE COUNTY MANAGERS Banning Andy Takata 2/17/2010 $220,000 28,272 as of 2/2010 Blythe David Lane 2/11/1992 $175,000 22,625 Calimesa Randy Anstine 8/21/2008 $175,780 7,414 Canyon Lake Lori Moss 2/13/2007 $135,000 10,969 Cathedral City Don Bradley 11/1/1999 $174,000 52,115 Coachella Tim Brown 10/1/2007 $215,000 38,486 Corona Brad Robbins 8/1/2008 $230,254 146,164 Desert Hot Springs Rick Daniels 9/18/2007 $217,000 23,544 Hemet Brian Nakamura 8/24/2009 $204,500 71,705 Indian Wells Greg Johnson 10/16/1995 $262,500 4,942 Indio Glenn Southard 4/1/2005 $309,375 77,146 La Quinta Tom Genovese 5/3/1994 $228,000 41,092 Lake Elsinore Robert Brady 6/8/2005 $185,000 47,634 Menfee George Wentz 10/1/2008 $210,000 62,000 Moreno Valley Robert Guiterriez 1/3/2006 $274,500 180,466 Murrieta Rick Dudley 11/1/2007 $218,505 97,257 Norco Beth Groves* 2/23 /2004 $142,356 27,361 Palm Desert John Wohlmuth 7/1/2000 $219,294 49,752 Palm Springs David Ready 6/11/2000 $275,628 46,858 Perris Richard Belmudez 10/16/2006 $171,821 50,663 Rancho Mirage Pat Pratt 11/15/1990 $242,772 16,944 Riverside Brad Hudson 6/1/2005 $275,000 291,398 San Jacinto Barry McClellan 6/18/2005 $220,500 34,345 Temecula Shawn Nelson 7/1/1999 $285,854 97,935 Wildomar John Danielson 3/20/2008 $180,000 30,000 Riverside County Larry Parrish 3/9/1991 $279,472 1,900,000 With County Without County Average= $220,274 $219,4851 Median= $218,900 $218,900 City of Beaumont Employment Agreement For the Position of City Manager This EMPLOYMENT AGREEMENT ( "Agreement ") is entered into this 21st day of June, 2011, by and between the CITY OF BEAUMONT ( "City "), a California general law city and Municipal Corporation, and ALAN C. KAPANICAS ( "Employee "), an individual. RECITALS WHEREAS, it is the desire of the City Council of the City of Beaumont (hereinafter the "City Council ") to employ an individual to serve in the position of City Manager, which position is prescribed by state law and the City's Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, Employee has the skills and expertise to fulfill such position, having served the City as an Independent Contractor since July, 1993, in the positions of City Manager, Administrative Services Director, and Special Districts Administrator, and desires to accept employment from the City. NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual covenants contained herein, including the Recitals which are made a part hereof, City and Employee hereby agree as follows: AGREEMENT 1.0 EMPLOYMENT & DUTIES City hereby employs Employee as City Manager for the City, and to perform all such functions and duties of the City Manager and also the Redevelopment (RDA) Executive Director and Secretary, the Utility Authority Executive Director, the Finance Authority Executive Director, and the Special Districts Administrator. 2.0 COMPENSATION AND REIMBURSEMENT 2.1 Compensation. For the services rendered pursuant to this Agreement for, Employee shall be compensated for all titles and duties including City Manager and Special Districts Administrator at the annual base salary of $218,920, which shall be paid on a pro -rated basis bi- weekly. 2.2 Deferred Compensation. Employee agrees to participate in the City's deferred compensation plan. The City's contribution shall be 10% of Employee's salary. 2.3 Salpa Adjustments. Employee's base salary shall be increased at the rate of 2.5% on each January 1; provided, however, the City Council may increase Employee's salary by 5% each January 1 if the majority of the Council determines that Employee's performance exceeds expectation. 2.4 Reimbursement. City shall reimburse Employee for reasonable and necessary travel, subsistence, and other business expenses incurred by Employee in the performance of his duties. All reimbursements shall be subject to and in accordance with California law and the City's Employee Reimbursement Policy. 2.5 Pension. City agrees to enroll Employee as a member of the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS). The City shall purchase five (5) years of pension credit to Employee's account, with funds presently due and owing Employee's company GGMS, Inc., for work previously billed but not paid for, in the amount of $214,100.00. 3.0 TERM 3.1 Commencement Date. Employee shall commence his services hereunder on June 21, 2011. 3.2 Term. The term of this Agreement shall be six (6) years following the effective date and, thereafter, this Agreement may be extended for such additional term as the City Council and Employee deem appropriate. 3.3 Termination. This Employment Agreement may be terminated by mutual agreement of the City and Employee. This Agreement may also be terminated by the City for cause, including the conviction of a felony, or abandonment of his duties. Employee shall have no severance pay rights. 4.0 BENEFITS AND OTHER COMPENSATION 4.1 Medical Insurance Health and Disability Insurance. City agrees to provide hospitalization, surgical and comprehensive medical insurance, life, accident, sickness, dental, vision, short and long -term disability income benefits, major medical and dependents' coverage group insurance covering Employee and his dependents to the highest level as other Management Employees receive or the entire premium, whichever is greater. The City agrees to pay such premiums. If Employee chooses to not participate in any medical, dental or vision coverage, the premium therefor shall be paid, at the single rate, to Employee as deferred compensation. 4.2 Leave Time. 4.2.1 Holiday Leave: 14 days per year. 4.2.2 Vacation Leave: 5 weeks, commencing each July 1, accruing at the rate of 7.692 hours per bi- weekly pay period, any such accrued and unused leave to be paid out according to City policy. 4.2.3 Sick Leave: 3 weeks commencing each July 1, accruing at the rate of 3.69 hours per bi- weekly pay period, any such accrued and unused leave to be paid out according to City policy. 4.3 Other Benefits. City agrees to give the Employee all other benefits that are given to other employees generally. -1- 5.0 DUES SUBSCRIPTIONS PROFESSIONAL DEVELOPMENT 5.1 Dues Subscriptions and License Fees. City agrees to pay for the professional dues and subscriptions necessary for Employee's continued and full participation in national, state, regional and local associations and organizations necessary and desirable for his continued professional participation, growth and advancement, and for the good of the City. City also agrees to pay for or reimburse Employee for fees necessary to maintain professional licenses in possession of Employee. 5.2 Professional Development. City agrees to pay travel and subsistence expenses of Employee, subject to the City's travel policy, for professional and official travel, meetings and occasions adequate to continue the professional development of Employee and to adequately pursue necessary official and other functions for City including, but not limited to, the annual conferences of the International City Management Association, the League of California Cities Annual Conference, the League of California Cities City Managers' Department Meeting and other such national, regional, state and local government groups and committees on which Employee serves as a member._City also agrees to pay travel and subsistence expenses of Employee for short courses, institutes and seminars necessary for Employee's professional development and the good of the City. 6.0 GENERAL PROVISIONS 6.1 Notices. Any notice required or permitted by this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be personally served or shall be sufficiently given when served upon the other party as sent by United States Postal Service, postage prepaid and addressed as follows: To City: Mayor, City of Beaumont 550 E. 6t' Street Beaumont, CA 92223 To Employee: Alan C. Kapanicas 550 E. 6`t` Street Beaumont, CA 92223 Notices shall be deemed given as of the date of personal service or upon the date of deposit in the course of transmission with the United States Postal Service. 6.2 Partial Invalidity. If any provision in this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the remaining provisions shall nevertheless continue in full force without being impaired or invalidated in any way. 6.3 Indemnification. City shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless Employee against any tort, professional liability claim or demand or other legal action arising out of an alleged act or omission occurring in the performance of Employee's services under this Agreement. The City may compromise and settle any such claim or suit and pay the amount of any settlement or judgment rendered thereon. This section shall not apply to any intentional tort or crime committed by Employee, to any action resulting from fraud, corruption or malice of Employee, to any action outside the course and scope of the services provided by Employee niinvnnni rlc�oen under this Agreement, or any other intentional or malicious conduct or gross negligence of Employee. 6.4 Bonding. City shall bear the full cost of any fidelity or other bonds required of the Employee under any law or ordinance. 6.5 Drafting of Agreement. The parties acknowledge that this Agreement has been negotiated at arm's length, that each party has been represented by independent counsel and that this Agreement as been drafted by both parties and no one party shall be construed as the draftsperson. 6.6 Authority of Signatures. The parties executing this Agreement personally affirm that they are empowered by the organization to execute binding contracts on their behalf. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the City of Beaumont has caused this Agreement to be signed and executed on its behalf by its Mayor, and duly attested by its City Clerk, and Employee has signed and executed this Agreement, the day and year below written. CITY OF BEAUMONT Mayor Brian De Forge ALAN C. KAPANICAS Alan C. Kapanicas ATTEST: City Clerk ni �nvnnni ncio� n _n_