HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992-05-26 - AGENDA REPORTS - COMMUTER RAIL STATION (2)AGENDA REPORT
City Manager Approv
Item to be presente
Jeff Kolin DeDutv Citv ManaLyer
UNFINISHED BUSINESS
DATE: May 26, 1992
SUBJECT: COMMUTER RAIL STATION - FINANCING
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
BACKGROUND
At their September 24, 1991 meeting the City Council took action subject to the City
Attorney approval which authorized the City Manager and the City Attorney to execute a
memorandum of understanding with the Los Angeles County Transportation Commission for
the loan of $2.5 million dollars for the construction of the Commuter Rail Station (see
Attachment I). This loan and the future allocation of Prop C funds are the key financial
components from which the Station can be constructed. As of this date, this memorandum
remains unexecuted as staff was developing alternative financing options in case litigation
against Prop C . was successful. On May 14, 1992, staff received word from the LACTC.
that Prop C funds will be available to the City by July 1992. If executed, the City, under this
loan agreement, would be required to pledge TDA funds as a back up funding source to Prop
C: However, staff believes this possibility is remote.
Staff has investigated many variables which impact financial outcomes. These outcomes are
primarily dependant upon secured funding sources (which now include Prop C) and future
unsecured funding sources. There are two primary outcomes; the first is the Best Case
Scenario and is dependant upon the City receiving pending funding sources. The second is
the Conservative Case Scenario, dependant solely on funds which are currently available to'
the City.
BEST CASE SCENARIO
With Prop C funds available, the City may now to repay the $2.5 million dollar loan from the
LACTC as well as accumulate sufficient reserve to assist in the purchase of the Bermite rail
site land in fiscal year 1995-96. Additionally, it assumes that the City will receive $1.5
million in federal funds (Sec. 9 Capital) for rail station construction and 50% of the land cost
from Transportation Capital Improvement funds (TCI) in 1994-95 (see Attachment II).
APPROVED Agenda Item:
Commuter Rail Station - Financing
May 26, 1992
Page 2
BEST CASE FINANCIAL IMPACT
Under this assumption, surplus TDA for streets and roads would not be impacted.
Additionally, with the assistance of surplus Proposition A funds, no addition of monies or
funds will be required to purchase the rail station land conservatively estimated at $6,200,000
for both the Whittaker and Rodeo properties.
Approximately $92,000-$95,000 may need to be shifted from Transit operations to the rail
station. Lowering the cost of transit operations may be achieved by increasing both local and
commuter fares and merging the Yellow (60) line with the Blue (30) line. (See attachment
III, 92-93 Transit Expenditure Alternatives, Draft Scenario 1).
CONSERVATIVE CASE SCENARIO
With Proposition C available to the City to repay debt service on a $2.5 million loan, other
services or capital projects will not be significantly impacted. Other funding sources
included in this Scenario and which the City has received confirmation on are $1.2 million in
Transit Capital Improvement funds and $350,000 in SB300 funds (see Attachment IV).
CONSERVATIVE FINANCIAL IMPACT
Surplus TDA Funds would be available immediately for road projects. However, under this
scenario, because of the total land purchase (currently estimated at $6.2 million ) the City
will run a deficit beginning in 1996-97. This situation may be affected by the land value
being appraised at a much lower figure than staff's conservative estimate. Additionally, the
lease agreement contains provisions for deducting the value added to a surrounding 30 -acre
parcel as a result of the Rail Station. Significant development or -value added to this land
could result in reductions to the land purchase price for the City.
In conclusion, Staff has reviewed many financial options with variables which include
construction cost, loan amounts and their length of repayment and various possible funding
sources (see Attachment V). However, with the recent California Supreme Court decision
not to hear the arguments against Prop C, the financial impact to transportation funded
service and projects is greatly reduced. Staff desires to move forward to the completion of
the station's engineering design and construction with the full intent to have passenger service
by October 1992.
Commuter Rail Station - Financing
May 26, 1992
Page 3
RECOMMENDATION
1.) Direct staff to proceed with the conservative financial scenario.
2.) Direct staff to proceed with Council's direction per its October 22 meeting and
execute construction MOU.
3.) Direct staff to execute the MOU for the Rail Station construction.
ATTACHMENTS
1. September 24, 1992 - Loan MOU
2. Best Case Financial Scenario Spread Sheet
3. Transit Budget Scenario
4. Conservative Case Financial Scenario Spread Sheet
5. LACTC Loan Agreement
6. October 22, 1991 - Commuter Rail Station Agenda Item
7. Council/Commission Chronology
railfm2.agn
DEL:dmr
CONSENT CALENDAR
DAM September 24, 1991
SUBJECTS COMMUTER RAIL STATION
DEPARTMINT) Public Works
ATTACHMENT I
City Manager
Item to be presented 5ye
.X
The Initial Studios for environmental clearance prepared for both the Bermite
site and the Glaser Site (alternate location of the Commuter Rail Station)
have been completed. The Initial Studies have determined that-& mitigated
Negative Declaration is appropriate for both Bites. (See Proposed mitigated
Negative Declarations, Attachment 1.)
The owners of the Cates property have indicated that their site need not be
considered at this time, due to development time restraints.
The proposed Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant to the California
Environmental Quality Act and is currently concluding the public review
phase. Any comments on the proposed mitigated Negative Declaration will be
forwarded to the Council for consideration.
The LosAngelea. County Transportation Commission has sent to staff a
Memorandum of Understanding (M,O.U.) by which they will loan the City the
required amount of money to finance the costs for the Station project. This
loan program was implemented by the LACTC because Proposition C funding, which
could be used for rail station purposes, is currently in litigation. It is
also the City's only funding source which provides immediate capital in.order
to meet the construction and station start-up schedule of October, 1992.
The anticipated sources for funding this project are) the Transit Capital
Improvement Program (TCI)) the Transportation Development Act (TDA)) and the
loon program established by the LACTC The loan would ultimately be paid back
with proposition C local distribution. In the' event that Proposition C fails
in litigation and these funds were not available, then the loan would be paid
back with Preposition A, TDA, and/or Ceneral.Fund money.
On June 110 3991, staff presented to Council a revised outline agreement with
the Whittaker Corporation in order- for the City to lease and eventually
acquire, a portion of the 8ermite property. The Council approved the outline
In concept, ..and directed staff to draft a Segal document from the outline
agreement.
�nOnfia (IPIi1� f
Agenda Report
Commuter Rail Station
Page
The draft outline was
purchase agreement was
remaining between the
resolved.
ATTACHMENT I—A
Sent to the City Attorney'@ office and a draft lease
prepared (Sea Attachment 3). There are some issues
agreed upon outline and the draft agreement yet to be
• Anden/Whittaker prefer to use an escrow company of their choice. Staff
feels that the City should have the option of using a local company.
• anden/Whittaker wishes to establish shared parking with the .station.
Staff foresees. parking conflicts if Ander sites businesses with peak
hours which coincide- with rail $etvice parking and City leased Speedway
parking,. (A potential acquisition option with Rodeo property.
• Aaden/Whittaker seeks to reserve the right to previev and approve the
City's non -rail station uses or other sublease uses. This may restrict
the City's ability to establish multi model transit uses and control
commercial uses around the station.
Staff feels that these issues would hamper our development of the property and
would like the Council's concurrence in that regard,, Staff is seeking
Council's approval, in concept, of the Draft Agreement as presented.
Staff has met with representative$ of Rodeo Property (owners of the Saugus
Speedway) in order to acquire a narrow strip of land.betveen the City's future
2ease/purchass and the railroad right-of-way, which they own. Our
negotiations have not been completed but they have indicated a willingness to
trade the property for joint use of the parking on the Commuter Rail $its.
The draft of the propoSed mitigated Negative Declaration is' 04 file in the
Office of the City Clark,
1. Conceptually approve the proposed mitigated Negative Declarations for the
Bermite and Olaser sites, with direction to staff to return the proposed
Negative Declaration for final certification within thirty days.
Z. Council approve, in concept, the loase/purchase agreement as presented
contingent upon certification of the proposed mitigated Negative
Declaration.
3. Subject to the City Attorney's approval, authorise the City Manager and
City Attorney to execute the Memorandum of Understanding with the Los
Angeles County Transportation Commission.
ATS�Ci4i£li'!g '.
Memorandum of Understandiag
Lease Purchase Agreement
/cesSle
BEST CASE
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA COMMUTER RAIL STATION REPORT
H FY 91/92
+ COMMUTER RAIL- REVENUE ESTIMATES:
Reserves (Total Rail Surplus/Deficit) 0
Interest Earned @ 6% 0
Transit Capital Improvement (TCI)
234,000
Proposition A Loan
0
Proposition A - Local Return Fund
200,000
SB300
0
Funds from Transit Surplus
Anticipated Revenue:
3
Proposition C - pending litigation
0
Transit Capital Improvement (TCI)
0
UMTA - Section 9 Capital Projects
0
Land Acquisition Bond
0
Total Revenue
434,000
COMMUTER RAIL- COST ESTIMATES:
RAIL 8: C. TCI, Sec9, SB300,
Surplus Art.B avail. beg. FY 93/94, No Loans, No Bonds needed.
Note: Shaded area of Transit Surplus not Included in totals.
FY 9W FY 97/98 E1L9Bt99 FY 99100 1V 00!01
169,000
354,064
1,610,798
2,616,063
622,532
1,667,310
2,836,228
4,140,482
5,592,170
10,140
21,244
96,648
156,964
37,352
100,039
170,174
248,429
335,530
1,000,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
95,000
95,000
99,275
103,742
110,071
116,785
123,909
131,467
139,487
320,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,628,982
814,491
851,143
889,445
943,701
1,001,266
1,062,344
1,127,147
1,195,903
0
0
0
3,100,000
0
0
0
0
0
500,000
1,036,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
52,172
0
0
0
0
0
3,723,122
2,320,799
2,657,864
6,866,213
1,713,656
2,885,400
4,192,654
5,647524
7,263,089
5 -Year Debt - $2.5 mil Prop A Loan
0
0
0
- 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Construction Costs
265,000
- 3,329,057
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Right -of -Way Cost
0
0
670,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Maintenance Costs
0
40,000
40,000
41,800
43,681
46,346
49,173
52,172
55,355
58,731
Lease Payments
0
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
Land Purchase
0
0
0
0
6,200,000
0
0
0
0
_
0
10 -Year Debt Svc.- $3.9 Land Bond(7.60/)
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
Total Project Cost
265,000
3,369,058
710,001
41,801
6,243,681
46,346
49,173
52,172
55,355
58,731
Total RailSurplus/Deficit
169,000
354,064
1,610,798
2,616,063
622,532
1,667,310
2,836,228
4,140,482
5,592,170
7,204,358
Note: Figures are based on: (1) 3 -yr. lease, (2) 4th -yr. land purchase, (3) City to pay $670,000 RIW Costs, (4) Construction Cost
at $3,594,057.
5/13192
Santa Clarita transit
Rail Station
Expenditure Alternatives
Base Budget (As submitted)
4,132,510
4,132,510
4,132,510
4,132,510
Decision Packages:
1 - Transportation Analyst
41,086
41,086
41,086
41,086
2 - Local Service/San Fernando
125,000
233,000
0
125,000
3 - Elderly/Disabled DAR
51,000
147,000
0
0
4 - General Public DAR
13,000
20,000
0
0
5 - Century City Commuter
89,000
89,000
0
69,000
6 - System Maps
20,000
20,000
20,000
20,000
7 - Side Destination Signs
26,000
26,000
0
0
8 - TranStar
11,000
11,000
0
0
9 - Bus Benches
14,000
14,000
0
0
10 - Kiosks/Maps
5,000
5,000
0
0
11 - Expand LA Commuter
89,000
89,000
89,000
89,000
Tat2lRequested I5&' IsionPackages
484,086
695,086 .•• .
150?086
:' 344,086', ,• !;
Savings: R30 Service to Ind Ctr
0
0
(125,000)
(125,000)
Total Cost Savtstg§
0
0 ,'
(15,OQ0),
(125,OOOj
DP's minus Cost Savings
484,086
695,086
25,086
219,086
LAC Reimbursement/SFV Local
(62,500)
(116,500)
0
(93,500)
DP's minus Savings/LAC Reimburse
421,586
578,586
25,086
157,586
Fare Increases 20%
0
0
(80,000)
(80,000)
CONSERVATIVE CASE
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA COMMUTER RAIL STATION REPORT
9 EY.9119 FY 97143 FY 93(94 FY 9455 FY.20 FY 9657
i-+
COMMUTER RAIL- REVENUE ESTIMATES:
F
2,111,523
253,577
(406,031)
Reserves (Total Rail Surplus/Deficit)
0
(848,508)
Interest Earned @ 6%
0
108,803
Allocated Revenue,
15,215
r
Transit Capital Improvement (TCI)
234,000
0
Proposition A Loan
2,500,000
0
SB300
Anticipated Revenue:
0
0
Proposition C - pending litigation
0
0
Land Acquisition Bond
0
0
Total Revenue
2,734,000
0
COMMUTER RAIL - COST ESTIMATES:
0
0
5 -Year Debt - $2.5 mil Prop A Loan
0
0
Construction Costs
265,000
0
Right -of -Way Cost
0
0
Maintenance Costs
0
851,143
Lease Payments
0
1,001,266
Land Purchase
0
1,195,903
10 -Year Debt Svc.- $3.9 Land Bond(7.6%)
0
0
Total Project Cost
265,000
0
Total Rail Surplus/Deficit
2,469,000
RAIL 1:. C. A$2.5 ban, 5yr., SB300
FY 9756 FY gam FY 99/0II EY M19
2,469,000
2,197,064
1,813,378
2,111,523
253,577
(406,031)
(1,026,115)
(968,121)
(848,508)
148,140
131,824
108,803
126,691
15,215
0
0
0
0
1,000,000
0
0
0
0
0
- 0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
320,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
1,628,982
814,491
851,143
889,445
943,701
1,001,266
1,062,344
1,127,147
1,195,903
0
0
0
3,989,600
0
0
0
0
0
5,566,122
3,143,379
2,773,324
7,117,258
1,212,493
595,236
36,229
159,025
347,395
0
620,000
620,000
620,000
620,000
620,000
0
0
0
3,329,057
0
0
0
0
0
0_
0
0
0
670,000
0
0
0
0
.0
0
0
40,000
40,000
41,800
43,681
46,346
49,173
52,172
55,355
58,731
1
1
1
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
6,200,000
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
0
952,178
952,178
952,178
952,178
952,178
3,369,058
1,330,001
661,801
6,863,681
1,618,524
1,621,351
1,004,350
1,007,533
1,010,909
2,197,064
1,813,378
2,111,523
253,577
(406,031)
(1,026,115)
(968,121)
(848,508)
(663,514)
Note: Figures are based on: (1) 3 -yr. lease, (2) 4th -yr. land purchase, (3) City to pay $670,000 RM Costs, (4) Construction Cost at $3,594,057 and (5) First Constr. loan pmt. deferred until FY 93/94. 5/1352
0
COMMUTER RAIL STATION BORROWING AGREEMENT
THIS AGREEMENT is made and entered, in duplicate, as of the day of
1992, pursuant to a Minute Order adopted by the City Council of Santa
Clar ta at its meeting held on February 11, 1992, and pursuant to a Minute Order adopted by
the I s Angeles County Transportation Commission at its meeting held on June 26, 1991, by
and between the CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, a municipal corporation (the -"City") and the
LOSJANGELES COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION, a public body, (the
NNW, the City has agreed to pay for the planning and construction of a
cuter rail station to be located on real property described on 'Exhibit A hereto, solely
the funds provided for herein; and
WHEREAS, Commission has approved the City's commuter rail site selection; and
' WHEREAS, City wishes to borrow and the Commission agrees to loan City Two
Milli,�on Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($2,500,000) for costs related to the construction of
the
Milt
commuter rail station; and
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual terms and conditions herein, the
Parti s agree as follows:
41 1. To the extent funds are available, Commission shall transfer all or a portion of
TwolIMillion Five Hundred Thousand Dollars ($2,5W,WW) (the "Loan") to City upon a date
or
Two
and in the amounts selected by the City and appruved by the Commission. City
agr s to use said funds solely for costs associated with constructing a commuter rail station
at th site approved by the Commission.
2. City shall be charged a variable rate for funds borrowed and transferred to the
City hat is based upon the rate funds earn in Los Angeles County's Pooled Investment Fund
plus )nc-half a percentage point. Interest on the Loan shall accrue upon the date of receipt
of fu ids by the City. Interest will accumulate on the unpaid principal and interest with
mont ily amortization in arrears.
3. City shall repay Commission solely from the City's allocation of Proposition "C"
Loc Return Funds the principal and interest accrued thereto on the Loan completely within
five 5) years of receipt of funds. Repayment schedule shall be equal annual installment
payttents due one (1) year from date of receipt of the first funds transferred to the City.
Co
m1nission will provide City with annual invoices at least sixty (60) days prior to the
annual repayment date. City may repay any or all amounts due in excess of the annual
requi{-ed in the annual repayment schedule any time within the five (5) years. City, solely at
.1.
0
0
9
•..Z
0
its option, may use any of its other available funds instead of Proposition "C" Local Return
Funds to make the installment payments, but such funds are not in any way pledged to such
1 4. In the event that the City can not pay an installment of the Loan when due to the
Co fission, the Commission may declare an "Event of Default" under this Agreement and
Uan •lull a written notice of Event of Default to the City. The Event of Uetautt shall identify
the amount of the payment of the installment of the Loan as then due. If the City does not
tender from the funds provided herein the amount of such installment of the Loan to the
Commission within thirty (30) days following receipt of such written notice of Event of
Default, the Commission may, upon coordination with City, instruct the Auditor -Controller
to w thhold from payment to the City an amount during the fiscal year in which the Event of
Default is declared to exist sufficient to pay the Commission the installment of the Loan as
due solely from the City's allocation of Proposition "t:" Local Return Funds not yet received
by ie City or held in trust by the Auditor -Controller for the account of the City.
PropoThis remedy of the Commission may only be asserted against such City's allocation of
sition "C" Local Return Funds not yet received by the City or held in trust for the
account of the City by the Auditor -Controller during the fiscal year of the City in which an
Evert of Default may be declared and remain unpaid by the City.
The Commission shall not seek to assert the special and limited remedy as authorized
in this Section 4 against any other funds of the City as may be received, held in trust or
otherwise payable to the City by the Auditor -Controller or any other official or agency of the
County of Los Angeles.
S. City may, at its option, malum to Commission any portion of the Loan transferred
to thf City and not needed for construction of the commuter rail station. Said funds repaid
will be charged the agreed rate of interest for the time the funds were borrowed.
6. The terms and condition of the Agreement shall be effective upon execution by
the Qity and the Commission.
7. All notices required pursuant to this Agreement shall be in writing and personally
served or deposited in the U.S. Postal Service, first class, postage prepaid to City at 23920
Vale cia Boulevard, Suite 300, Santa Clarita, California 91355, Attention: City Manager
and lo Commission at 818 West 7th Street, Los Angeles, California 90017. Notice shall be
deer ed given oil the date personal service is obtained or on the date of deposit in the mail,
whic iever applies.
S. Tlie ter+ns of this Agreement shall be governed by, construed and interpreted in
utce with the laws of the State of California.
-2-
9.This Agreement shall not be amended, nor any provision or breach hereof
waived, excCpt in writing signed by the parties which expressly refers to this Agreement.
10. This Agreement constitutes the entire understanding between the parties and
supefsedes all other agreement, whether oral or written, with respect to the subject matter
IAS
11. In the event that there is any legal proceeding between the parties to enforce or
I this Agreement or to protect or establish any rights or remedies hereunder, the
ng party shall be entitled to its costs and expenses, including reasonable attorneys'
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused these present to be duly
d with all of the formalities required by the law on the respective dates set forth
e their signatures.
ANGELES COUNTY TRANSPORTATION COMMISSION
Date:
0
PETERSON, Executive Director
APPOVED AS TO FORM:
r)R 1 rrr CLINTON, County Counsel
Date:
PHILLIPS, Deputy County Counsel
CITt OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA
III
bate:
CITY MANAGER
APP OVER AS TO FORM:
CITY ATTORNEY
•4.
Date:
ATTACHMENT VI
AGENDA REPORT /
City Manager Approval
Item to be presented by:
DennisyLuppens w
CONSENT CALENDAR &
DATE: October 22, 1991
SUBJECT: COMMUTER RAIL STATION
DEPARTMENT: Public Works
The Los Angeles County Transportation Commission, in an effort to guarantee their desired October
1992 start up schedule, have instituted a program by which they will administer the construction of the
Commuter Rail Station platforms for those cities which desire such service. The LACTC has
forwarded to staff a Memorandum of Understanding to perform this work. (See Attachment).
At the Santa Clarita station site, the LACTC will be administering the grading and construction of the
Southern Pacific Rail Road track alignment, required to create level, tangent track for passenger
platform use. The LACTC has indicated to staff that expense in time and cost would be saved by
including our platform grading and construction in their realignment project.
Staff has been provided with the LACTC standard platform design. After entering into this agreement,
the City has the option of using their design or we can provide our own design for which they will
construct. Because of the proximity of the station to the future City Center, it may be desirable for the
City to have a station which fits into the City Center Design Theme. Staff has prepared some platform
construction concepts as possible alternatives to the LACTC standard design. (See Attachments).
o Staff recommends to Council to direct the City Manager to sign upon approval by the City
Attorney, the Memorandum of Understanding with the LACTC for grading and construction of
the station platform.
o Staff also requests that the Council provide direction to staff regarding the design of the station
platform and platform structures.
o LACTC Memorandum of Understanding for grading and construction of the.Commuter Rail
Station Platform.
o Standard platform structure design and representations of alternate designs.
rrdAgend
STN
ARMOWED a Item:
ATTACHMENT VII
UPDATED CHRONOLOGY OF EVENTS
October 30, 1990 Station sites are to be identified by December 11, 1990
for Council's review and approval.
November 27, 1990 Council informed that a resolution and site application
needed for receiving Station Transportation Capital
Improvement (TCI) funds.
February 11, 1991 Staff conducts a Commuter Rail Station site forum.
February 12, 1991 Request a recommendation from the Planning
Commission for a Rail Station site.
February 19, 1991 Staff informed the Planning Commission that Bermite
was not feasible as a short-term site because the
additional right-of-way was not purchased. In ranking
short-term rail site, the Planning Commission split; two
preferred Gates; two preferred Glazer; and one preferred
Drayton. Three of the Commissioners preferred Bermite
as the long-term site, and two preferred Schmidt. Since
that time, the LACTC has purchased right-of-way to the
Bermite site.
February 26, 1991 Council adopts Resolution No. 91-91 establishing the
City's intention to construct a Commuter Rail Station by
applying for funding.
April 23, 1991 Council presented an outlined summary of agreement for
the Bermite site. Staff directed to negotiate toward final
agreement.
June 11, 1991 Council receives the latest outline agreement; staff
directed to work out final agreement.
September 24, 1991 Council conceptually approves the proposed Mitigated
Negative Declaration for the Bermite (Glazer) sites,
approves the lease/purchase agreement.
October 22, 1991 Council approves Commuter Rail Station MOU with the
LACTC and directs the City Manager to sign upon the
approval of the City Attorney.
Page 2
Attachment VII -A
February 18, 1991 Planning Commission agrees not to approve the Proposed
Commuter Rail site located on the Bermite property, the
Negative Declaration or the Oak Tree Permit.
February 25, 1992 Council directs staff to return all information submitted in
their February 25, 1992 agenda report and staff
presentation on this subject back to the march 3, 1992
Planning Commission for their review and consideration.
March 3, 1992 Commission approves Bermite site Plot Plan, Negative
Declaration and Resolution P92-08.
March 10, 1992 Council approves Rail Station Plot Plan and Oak Tree
Permit; adopts Resolution 92-47, certifies Negative
Declaration; procures construction plans; signs Letter of
Acceptance of Drainage Cut/Fill Slopes/
April 21, 1992 Council approved Rail Station land lease agreement
between the City and the Whittaker Corporation
April 28, 1992 Council awards design on engineering for the Rail Station
to Willdan Associates.
5-28cr.agn