HomeMy WebLinkAbout725 - Ordinances ORDINANCE NO. 725
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
DRC2002-00156, A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND RICHLAND-
PINEHURST, INC., FOR THE PURPOSE OF DEVELOPING AN
APPROXIMATE 150.8 ACRE SITE WITH UP TO 358
RESIDENTIAL LOTS, FOR PROPERTIES GENERALLY
LOCATED ON THE NORTH SIDE OF WILSON AVENUE
BETWEEN ETIWANDA AVENUE AND EAST AVENUE - APN:
0225-083-01, 12, 13, 15, 16, AND 20.
A. RECITALS.
1. California Government Code Section 65664 provides, in pertinent part, as
follows:
"The Legislature finds and declares that:
(a) The lack of certainty in the approval of development projects can result in
a waste of resources, escalate the cost of housing and other development
to the consumer, and discourage investment in and commitment to
comprehensive planning, which would make maximum efficient utilization
of resources at the least economic cost to the public.
(b) Assurance to the applicant for a development project that upon approval
of the project, the applicant may proceed with the project in accordance
with existing policies, rules and regulations, and subject to conditions of
approval, will strengthen the public planning process, encourage private
participation in comprehensive planning, and reduce the economic costs
of development."
2. California Government Code Section 65865 provides, in pertinent part, as
follows:
"(a)Any city...may enter into a development agreement with any person
having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of the
properly as provided in this adicle..."
3. California Government Code Section 65865.2 provides, in part, as follows:
"A development agreement shall specify the duration of the agreement, the
permitted uses of the property, the density or intensity of use, the maximum
height and size of proposed buildings, and provisions for reservation or
dedication of land for public purposes. The development agreement may
include conditions, terms, restrictions, and requirements for subsequent
discretionary actions, provided that such conditions, terms, restrictions, and
requirements for discretionary actions shall not prevent development of the
land for the uses and to the density or intensity of development set forth in
the agreement..."
Ordinance No. 725
Page 2 of 66
4. Attached to this Ordinance, marked as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by
this reference, is proposed Development Agreement DRC2002-00156,
concerning that property generally located at the northwest corner of Wilson
Avenue and East Avenue and legally described in the attached Development
Agreement. Hereinafter in this Ordinance, the Development Agreement
attached hereto as Exhibit "A" is referred to as the "Development
Agreement."
5. On May 12, 2004, the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga held a duly noticed public hearing concerning the Development
Agreement and concluded said hearing on that date and recommended
approval through adoption of its Resolution No. 04-57.
6. On June 2, 2004 and continued to June 16, 2004, the City Council of the City
of Rancho Cucamonga conducted a duly noticed public hearing regarding the
Development Agreement.
?. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Ordinance have occurred.
B. ORDINANCE.
NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga does
hereby find, determine, and ordain as follows:
SECTION 1: This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set fodh
in the Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct.
SECTION 2: Based upon the facts and information contained in the record of
this project, the City Council makes the following findings and
statements, and takes the following actions, pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources
Code Section 21000 et. seq.):
a. Richland Pinehurst, Inc. (the "Applicant") seeks approval of a series of
actions related to the annexation of land from unincorporated San
Bernardino County into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, the approval
of Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072, and associated Development
Agreement. The actions also include the development of 358 single-
family housing units on approximately 150.8 acres. The total area to
be annexed is approximately 160 acres. The average density of the
development is approximately 2.38 dwelling units per gross acre for
the entire site. These series of actions and approvals are hereinafter
defined in this Ordinance as the "Project."
Ordinance No. 725
Page 3 of 66
b. The Applicant has submitted the following applications relating to the
Project: Annexation DRC2002-00865, Tentative Tract Map
SUBTT16072, and Development Agreement DRC2002-00156
(collectively the "Project Applications"). These Project Applications,
as well as the appeal of the Planning Commission's approval of
Tentative Tract Map SUBTT16072, constitute the matters involving
the Project, which are submitted to the City Council for decision and
action.
c. The City of Rancho Cucamonga, acting as the lead agency, prepared
the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Project, including
certain technical appendices (the "Appendices") to the Draft EIR
(State Clearinghouse No. 2002091053). The Draft EIR was circulated
for a 45-day public review and comment period from December 2,
2003 through January 21, 2004. Comments were received during that
period and written responses were prepared and sent to all persons
and entities submitting comments. Those comments and the
responses thereto have been included in the Final EiR, as have the
Appendices to the Draft EIR. Those documents together comprise
the Final EIR.
d. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was completed pursuant to
CEQA, and the State Guidelines for Implementation of CEQA, 14
California Code of Regulations, Section 15000, et. seq. ("the
Guidelines"). By Resolution No. 04-204, the City Council has certified
the Final EIR as being in compliance with the requirements of CEQA.
e. The City Council finds that the Final EIR was presented to the City
Council and that the City Council reviewed and considered the
information in the Final EIR and has reached its own conclusions with
respect to the Project and as to whether and how to approve the
various components of the Project approvals.
f. The City Council finds that the Final EIR represents the independent
judgment of the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga and
adequately addresses the impacts of the Project and imposes
appropriate mitigation measures for the Project.
g. Public Resources Code Section 21081 provides that no public agency
shall approve or carry out a project for which an environmental impact
report has been completed which identifies one or more significant
environmental effects unless the public agency makes one or more of
the following findings with respect to each significant effect:
i. Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into
the project, which mitigate or avoid the significant environmental
effects thereof as identified in the completed environmental impact
report.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 4 of 66
ii. Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and
jurisdiction of another public agency and such changes have been
adopted by such agency or can and should be adopted by such
other agency.
iii. Specific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible
the mitigation measures or project alternatives identified in the
environmental impact report.
The City Council finds, based upon the Initial Study, the Final EIR,
public comments, public agency comments, and the entire record
before it, that the Project may create significant impacts in the areas
of Geology and Soils, Biological Resources, Transportation/Traffic, Air
Quality, Noise, Aesthetics, Cultural Resources, and Public Services
and Utilities. However, changes or alterations have been required in,
or incorporated into the Project, which will mitigate, and in some
cases, avoid the significant impacts. The specific changes and
alterations required, and a brief explanation of the rationale for the
findings with regard to each impact, are contained in the "CEQA
Findings" for the Project (Exhibit "F" to the June 16, 2004 City Council
Staff Report) and are incorporated herein by reference. In addition to
the rationale and explanation contained in the "CEQA Findings," the
City Council makes the following additional findings regarding the
impacts to the resources and services listed in this paragraph:
i. Geolo,qy and Soils. The Final EIR identifies that development of
the Project will expose people and structures to risks associated
with seismic hazards, slope instability, and foundation instability.
With respect to seismic hazards, this risk arises because of the
existence of regional faults located in the area and the existence
of the Etiwanda Avenue Scarp fault that runs northeasterly across
the Project site. The risks presented by these faults include, fault-
induced ground rupture, seismically induced slope instability,
ground lurching, seismically induced settlement, and seismic
ground shaking. Mitigation measures are imposed which require
the Applicant to set back structures north of the Etiwanda Avenue
Scarp thrust fault by at least 100 feet and to set back all structures
south of that fault zone by 50 feet (Mitigation Measure GS-1). All
structures within Seismic Zone 4 of the site shall be designed in
accordance with the Uniform Building Code and general
engineering standards for seismic safety (Mitigation Measure GS-
2). In addition, graded slopes will be designed to resist
seismically induced failures, loose, cohesionless soils located on
the surface of the site shall be removed and properly
recompacted, and Iow density native surficial and artificial fills
shall be removed and recompacted or exported offsite. (Mitigation
Ordinance No. 725
Page 5 of 66
Measures GS-3 - GS-5). Based on these mitigation measures,
the City Council finds that the potential for fault-induced ground
rupture, seismically induced slope instability, ground lurching, and
seismically induced settlement will be mitigated to a level of less
than significant. The City Council finds that even after these
mitigation measures, the risks of seismic ground shaking will not
be reduced to less than significant levels.
With respect to slope instability, graded slopes are proposed on
the Project site, with gradients for the slopes to be variable to
provide a natural visual appearance, and cut and fill slopes of
approximately 40 feet high are proposed to be constructed.
Mitigation Measure GS-6 is imposed which requires additional
stabilization measures for potentially unstable graded slopes
exceeding 15 feet in height. Based on this mitigation measure,
the City Council finds that the potential for slope instability will be
mitigated to a level of less than significant.
With respect to foundation instability, the upper few feet of native
soil onsite and uncontrolled fills existing on the site are potentially
compressible. Because of variation in grain size within alluvial fan
deposits on the site, potential collapse of soil material may result
in localized areas. The presence of oversized recks on the site
and the removal of such rocks can result in deficiencies of fill
material. Mitigations measures are imposed which require the
Applicant to remove and recompact potentially compressible soils
(Mitigation Measure GS-7), to identify methods for eliminating the
potential for collapsible soils and after construction, to minimize
the infiltration of water into subsurface soils by proper surface
drainage (Mitigation Measure GS-8), and to relocate oversize
rocks on the Project site during grading operations to reduce the
potential deficiency of fill materials (Mitigation Measure GS-9).
Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that
the potential for foundation instability will be mitigated to a level of
less than significant.
ii. Biological Resources. The Final EIR indicates that, prior to the
Grand Prix fire of October 2003, that area was previously covered
with California Buckwheat-White Sage Scrub (44.1 acres), White
Sage Scrub (82.5 acres), Scalebroom Scrub (11.2 acres), non-
native grassland (2.1 acres), disturbed and cleared areas (6.0
acres) and ornamental landscaping (4.1 acres). In categorizing
the vegetation in accordance with the "Holland System," the Final
EIR identifies Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS)
divided into two subgroups: the Etiwanda Alluvial Fan Group
(171.3 acres), the Prickly Group/Alluvial Chaparral Group (39.5
acres). In addition, the final EIR identifies an area of Ornamental
Ordinance No. 725
Page 6 of 66
Woodland and Disturbed plants (13.8 acres). The proposed
Project would result in the loss of approximately 147.7 acres of
Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub (RAFSS). In addition, the
Final EIR identifies 213 trees that satisfy the City's criteria for
"heritage trees," 15 sensitive plant specifies as occurring within
the general vicinity of the Project site, and the existence of
Plummer's mariposa lily plants (a sensitive species) on the site.
To mitigate impacts for the loss of approximately 147.7 acres of
RAFSS, a mitigation measure is imposed to require the Applicant
to acquire 147.7 acres of land within or near the North Etiwanda
Open Space and Habitat Preservation Program (NEOSHPP) area
that supports similar RAFSS habitat (Mitigation Measure B-l). In
addition, measures are imposed to ensure limits are kept on
grading activities, that new landscaping is consistent with native
landscaping, that lighting is controlled into areas of sensitive
wildlife habitat, and that future residents of the Project are
informed about sensitive wildlife areas and encouraged not to
plant invasive plants (Mitigation Measures B-2 - B-5). To mitigate
impacts to common plant species, all 213 heritage trees shall be
removed and replaced with native trees at a replacement ratio of
one to one (Mitigation Measure B-6). With respect to sensitive
plant species, prior to the issuance of a grading permit, focused
surveys for Plummer's mariposa lily shall be conducted by a
qualified biologist for possible collection and relocation (Mitigation
Measure B-7). Based on these mitigation measures, the City
Council finds that the impacts to natural plant communities,
common plant species and sensitive plant species will be
mitigated to a level of less than significant.
The Final EIR indicates that the site is within the critical habitat of
the federally listed endangered San Bernardino kangaroo rat.
However, protocol surveys were conducted in 2001 and 2002 and
revealed no presence of this species on the site. The site is also
within the known range and within designated critical habitat for
the federally listed threatened coastal California gnatcatcher. In
addition, species of concern were found on the site which include
the Northwestern San Diego pocket mouse, the San Diego desert
wood rat, and the Los Angeles little pocket mouse. The site does
support nesting habitat for raptor species and suitable habitat for
the San Diego horned lizard and orange-throated whiptail (state
species of special concern). In addition, 1.13 acres of waters
would be affected and drainage courses would be impacted by the
Project. To address these impacts, a mitigation measure is
imposed to provide follow-up focus surveys for the San
Bernardino kangaroo rat and the coastal California gnatcatcher
prior to issuance of grading permits (Mitigation Measures B-8 and
B-9). A qualified biological monitor will be on-site during grading
Ordinance No. 725
Page 7 of 66
to reduce mortality to sensitive species, including rodent species
and incidental species (Mitigation Measure B-10). If grading
activities occur during active nesting season, a field survey will be
conducted to preserve any active nests and the areas around
them until the nesting cycle is complete (Mitigation Measure B-
11). With respect to impacts on waters and streambeds, the
Applicant shall obtain required permits from the U.S. Army Corps
of Engineers and the California Department of Fish and Game and
comply with those permit requirements (Mitigation Measure B-12).
Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that
the impacts to sensitive wildlife species, and jurisdictional areas
(waters and streambeds) will be mitigated to a level of less than
significance.
iii. Transportation/Traffic. The Final EIR indicates that the
proposed Project will increase vehicle trips and impact the Level
of Service (LOS) along arterial streets and intersections. LOS
levels of "D" or better do not represent a significant traffic impact,
whereas LOS levels of "E" or worse do represent a significant
traffic impact. Specifically, the Final EIR found that Project traffic,
together with other anticipated traffic, will likely cause traffic flow to
be deficient by experiencing a LOS of "F" during the AM peak hour
at the intersections of Etiwanda Avenue at Banyan Street,
Etiwanda Avenue at Highland Avenue, and East Avenue at
Banyan Street. During the PM peak hour, the intersection of
Etiwanda Avenue at Banyan Street, which will operate at an LOS
of "E". At build-out, certain intersections in the immediate area will
have LOS levels of "F". Mitigation Measures are imposed to
require the Applicant to construct various roadway improvements
at certain phases of the Project. For example, during the opening
year of the Project, the Applicant will be required to construct
Wilson Avenue from Etiwanda Avenue to East Avenue and to
make various improvements to East Avenue (Mitigation Measures
TT-3 - ']-1'-5). The Applicant will also be required to construct
Etiwanda Avenue from the north Project boundary to Golden
Prairie Drive at its ultimate half-section width (Mitigation Measure
']-1'-6). In addition, traffic signals, turn lanes and other
improvements are required at various intersections in the vicinity
of the Project (Mitigation Measures TT-7 and TT-8). Finally, the
Applicant will be required to contribute its fair share toward the
cost of off-site roadway improvements (TT-1 and TT-2). Based on
these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that the impacts
of the Project on traffic and circulation will be mitigated to a level
of less than significant.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 8 of 66
iv. Air Quality. The City Council finds, based upon the Initial Study,
the Final EIR, public comments, public agency comments, and the
entire record before it, that the Project may create significant and
unavoidable impacts to air quality. Specifically, the Final EIR
identifies that short-term emissions from construction related
activities are likely to exceed the thresholds of significance
specified by the South Coast Air Quality Management District
(SCAQMD). Short-term emissions are caused by fugitive dust
and other particulate matter, exhaust emissions generated by
earthmoving activities and operation of grading equipment,
emissions generated during building construction as a result of
equipment and vehicle operation, electrical consumption, and
coating and paint applications. During the building phase of the
Project, levels of nitrogen oxide (NO×), reactive organic
compounds (ROC) and atmospheric particulates (PM~0) will likely
exceed the recommended SCAQMD daily thresholds, and NO×
and ROC emissions will likely exceed the recommended
SCAQMD quarterly thresholds, thereby resulting in significant
short-term air quality impacts. Long-term emissions are caused
by motor vehicle emissions and emissions from the consumption
of natural gas and electricity, the use of landscape equipment, and
the storage and use of consumer products. These emissions
exceed the recommended SCAQMD thresholds for NO×, Carbon
Monoxide (CO) and ROC. Mitigation measures for short-term
impacts upon air quality are imposed on the Project (Mitigation
Measure AQ-1 - AQ-10) which will require various dust control
measures, emission control measures and off-site actions.
Included in those measures are requirements to limit the treat the
site with water or other soil-stability agents, sweep haul roads,
suspend grading operations when wind speeds exceed 25 miles
per hour, apply chemical soil stabilizers to inactive construction
areas, select equipment based on Iow emission factors, use only
Iow volatility paints and architectural coatings, and implement
temporary traffic control during soil transport activities. Mitigation
measures for long-term impacts upon air quality are imposed on
the Project (Mitigation Measure AQ~I 1 - AQ-13) which require the
Applicant to participate in the cost of off-site traffic signal
installation and synchronization through payment of a mitigation
fee, equip the residential structures with energy efficient
appliances, and coordinate bus routing with transit agencies to
determine locations and feasibility of providing bus stop shelters at
Applicant's expense. The City Council finds that with
implementation of the recommended measures, short and long-
term emissions will be reduced, and that the Project's contribution
to regional emission of criteria pollutants will be minimized.
However, the City Council finds that despite the imposition of all
these comprehensive mitigation measures, short-term
construction emissions (building phase) will exceed SCAQMD's
thresholds for ROC and NOx, and that long-term stationary and
mobile emissions will exceed applicable thresholds for NOx, CO
and ROC, and therefore, would remain significant after mitigation.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 9 of 66
v. Noise. The Final EIR identifies the likelihood of shod-term
impacts on ambient noise levels during construction of the Project.
The primary source of construction noise is heavy equipment
associated with construction activities, such as trucks, graders,
bulldozers, concrete mixers, cranes and portable generators with
high levels of sound generation. In addition, the Final EIR
identifies the likelihood of long-term significant noise impacts on
residences proposed on the perimeter of the Project site and
adjacent to Etiwanda Avenue, Wilson Avenue, and East Avenue.
For short-term noise impacts, mitigation measures are imposed
that will require the construction contractors to equip all
construction equipment with properly operating and maintained
mufflers, implement specific noise reduction measures when
construction takes place near existing residences, locate
equipment staging areas away from sensitive receptors, and
comply with the City's Development Code for hours of
construction activity - 6:30 a.m. to 8:00 p.m., Monday through
Saturday, with no construction to take place on Sundays or
holidays (Mitigation Measures N-1 - N-4). To address long-term
impacts to certain residential structures within the Project, sound
barriers shall be placed at specified locations near Project road
intersections and perimeter street intersections, and residential
structures fronting on Etiwanda Avenue, Wilson Avenue and East
Avenue will have mechanical ventilation so that windows can
remain closed, and upgraded windows and other improvements
will be installed on said residential structures so that interior noise
levels are reduced to 45 dB CNEL or less (Mitigation Measures N-
5 - N-6). Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council
finds that the short term and long-term noise impacts from the
Project will be mitigated to less than significant levels.
vi. Aesthetics. The Final EIR indicates that implementation of the
proposed residential community may substantially alter the
existing character of the Project site as well as views of the San
Gabriel Mountains. In addition, the proposed Project and the
cumulative effect of development in the Project vicinity may
permanently alter the visual landscape of the San Gabriel
Mountains. To address these impacts, landscaping and perimeter
walls shall be installed, landscaped transitions will be made
between developed and the natural un-built environment, a strong
landscaped edge will be required along roadways adjacent to the
Project, utilities will be undergrounded where feasible, and trees
and structures shall be used to frame and orient views at key
locations (Mitigation Measures AES-1 - AES-5). Based on these
mitigation measures, the City Council finds that although the
implementation of the above mitigation measures wiil mitigate
visual impacts associated with the proposed Project to a level that
is less that significant, the cumulative impact of the Project upon
aesthetics as well as future development in the Project vicinity will
remain significant and unavoidable.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 10 of 66
vii. Cultural Resources. The Final EIR indicates that three
archeological sites are within the Project area. It is also likely that
prehistoric remains may still be buried at these sites. To mitigate
for the potential loss in Native American archeological resources,
the Applicant is required to retain a City-approved archeologist to
develop an archaeological mitigation plan and a
discovery/treatment plan. These plans will require the monitoring
of 50 percent of the excavation activities, the treatment of found
material and its recordation, mapping and disposition (Mitigation
Measures CR-1 - CR-6). The Final EIR also identifies the
possible presence of buried fossilized remains. To mitigate these
impacts, the Applicant shall retain a City-approved paleontologist
to monitor excavation activities and to prepare, identify and curate
all recovered fossils for documentation and transfer to an
appropriate depository. (Mitigation Measures CR-7 - CR-11).
Based on these mitigation measures, the City Council finds that
the impacts of the Project on archeological and paleontological
resources will be mitigated to less than significant levels.
viii. Public Services and Utilities. The Final EIR identifies that the
proposed Project will create a demand for fire services, water
services, wastewater services, and schools, and will contribute to
cumulative impacts to the need for water supplies, wastewater
treatment, and schools. Mitigation Measures have been imposed
to require the Applicant to obtain approval of the specific designs
for fire flow and proposed fire resistant materials (Mitigation
Measure F-l), pay a water service development fee (Mitigation
Measure W-l), utilize a xeriscape landscape and irrigation design
to conserve water on Project common areas (Mitigation Measure
W-2), provide funds to the Cucamonga County Water District for
sewer service prior to occupancy (Mitigation Measure WW-1), and
pay the required school impact fee as required by Government
Code Section 65995, which is deemed to constitute full and
complete mitigation of the Project's impacts to schools (Mitigation
Measure S-1). Based on these mitigation measures and
requirements, the City Council finds that the impacts of the Project
on public services and utilities will be mitigated to less than
significant levels.
i. The Project is also anticipated to have the potential to create
contaminated runoff containing compounds such as landscaped
chemicals and automotive fluids. To reduce this impact, the Applicant
will be required to prepare a Storm Water Pollution Protection Plan
(SWPPP) and file a Notice of Intent with the Regional Water Quality
Control Board (RWQCB). As part of standard construction practices,
best management practices (BMPs) are required to ensure that
potentially harmful chemicals or pollutants are not discharged from the
site. These measures include sandbags, temporary diversion and
temporary containment areas. Based on these requirements, the City
Council finds that the impacts of the Project on hydrology and water
quality will be reduced to less than significant levels.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 11 of 66
j. The City Council finds, based on the Final EIR, that after
implementation of the proposed mitigation measures, the following
impacts associated with the proposed Project would remain
significant: geology and soils (seismic ground shaking), air quality
(short-term and long-term emissions), and aesthetics/visual
(cumulative views).
k. The City Council finds, based on the Final EIR, that the Project will not
create significant growth inducing impacts because the Project will be
an extension of existing residential development to the west and the
Project is consistent with development contemplated in the 2001
General Plan update as well as the Etiwanda North Specific Plan
approved in 1991. The City Council also finds that the Project would
result in an irretrievable commitment of natural resources (energy
demands) and land.
I. The Final EIR describes a range of alternatives to the Project that
might fulfill basic objectives of the Project. These alternatives include
the required "No Project/No Development" alternative, the "Retention
of Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub Alternative," and the "Less
Intense Development" Alternative. As set forth below, the alternatives
identified in the EIR are not feasible because they would not achieve
the basic objectives of the Project or would do so only to a much
smaller degree and, therefore, leave unaddressed the significant
economic, infrastructure, and General Plan goals that the Project is
intended to accomplish, and are thus infeasible due to social and
economic considerations, and/or they are infeasible because they
would not eliminate the adverse environmental impacts of the
proposed Project. Accordingly, each of the alternatives is infeasible.
In making this finding, the City Council determines as follows:
i. The objectives of the Project are:
a. To provide single-family housing units consistent with the
intent of the City's General Plan and the Etiwanda North
Specific Plan.
b. To annex the proposed tentative tract into the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
c. To create a project that is generally consistent and compatible
with other existing and proposed uses in the vicinity of the
project and the community of Etiwanda in general.
d. To provide project infrastructure including streets, water and
sewer mains, and flood control consistent with City and
regional plans related to these services.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 12 of 66
e. To phase the development of the proposed project to ensure
adequate utilities are provided.
f. To design and landscape the proposed project to create an
aesthetically pleasing living environment.
ii. The "No Project/No Development" Alternative assumes that no
new land uses would be constructed on the Project site and that
the site would remain vacant and undeveloped. Although this
alternative is environmentally superior to the proposed Project, it
would not meet any of the Project objectives. As the subject
property is under private ownership, the elimination of future
development within a previously approved Specific Plan is not
legally or financially feasible. Therefore this alternative is rejected.
iii. The "Retention of Riversidean Alluvial Fan Sage Scrub"
Alternative assumes that all vegetation classified as RAFFS are
not affected by development. As the Project site contains
approximately 10.6 to 13.8 acres of disturbed or ornamental
woodland, this alternative would only involve the development of
those 10.6 to 13.8 acres. Based on the same residential density
as the proposed Project (i.e. 2.4 units per acre), 25 to 33 single-
family housing units would be constructed. Although this level of
development could eliminate the potential significant unavoidable
effects associated with the loss of RAFFS, this alternative would
not meet the objectives of the Project, including, but not limited to,
providing single-family housing units consistent with the intent of
the Etiwanda Nodh Specific Plan. In addition, the City Council
finds, based on substantial evidence, that it is not economically
feasible for the Applicant to construct the required infrastructure
as contemplated by the Etiwanda North Specific Plan while
constructing only 25 to 33 housing units on the entire property.
The City Council specifically finds the required improvements to
roadways, pipelines, water supplies, and other infrastructure
would not be economically feasible with a return on investment of
only 25 to 33 housing units.
iv. The "Less Intense Development" Alternative is an alternative that
attempts to avoid all significant, unavoidable, adverse long-term
air emission impacts. To accomplish this result, approximately
104 housing units would need to be eliminated. This would resutt
in approximately 255 residential units on the site with an average
dwelling unit per acre density of approximately 1.7 units per acre
compared with the proposed 2.4 units per acre. This project
density is not consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan
and would not meet many of the objectives of the proposed
Project.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 13 of 66
m. Mitigation measures described in the Mitigation Monitoring Program
will avoid or substantially lessen the potentially significant
environmental effects of the Project. Further, the environmental,
physical, social, economic and other benefits of the Project, as set
fodh in this section and in the "CEQA Findings" for the Project
(Exhibit "F" to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report), which is
incorporated herein by this reference, outweigh any unavoidable,
significant, adverse impacts that may occur as a result of the Project.
Therefore, due to overriding benefits of the Project and because the
alternatives identified in the Final EIR are not feasible, as discussed in
paragraph I above, the City Council hereby finds, based on substantial
evidence presented during the June 2, 2004 and June 16, 2004 public
hearing, including written and oral staff reports and public testimony,
that any unavoidable impacts of the Project, including the mitigated
but unavoidable impacts from seismic ground shaking, the short-term
and long-term impacts to air quality, and the cumulative impacts to
aesthetics from the permanent alteration of the visual landscape of
this region, are acceptable based on the findings contained herein
and in the "CEQA Findings" for the Project. This determination shall
constitute a statement of overriding considerations within the meaning
of CEQA and is based on any one of the following environmental and
other benefits of the Project identified in the Final EIR and the record
of the City Council's proceedings:
i. Provision for the use of land consistent with the established
policies and goals of the City of Rancho Cucamonga General
Plan, Etiwanda North Specific Plan, City Development Code, and
all other City Development guidelines;
ii. Annexation of the 150-acre Project site and adjacent 10.0-acre
area into the City of Rancho Cucamonga;
iii, Implementation and consistency with the policies and goals of the
City of Rancho Cucamonga General Plan, Etiwanda North
Specific Plan, City Development Code and all other City
development guidelines;
iv, Creation of a Project that is generally consistent and compatible
with other existing and proposed uses in the vicinity of the Project
and community of Etiwanda in general;
v. Provision of Project infrastructure including streets, water and
sewer mains, and flood control consistent with City and regional
plans related to these services.
vi. Phasing of the development of the proposed Project to ensure
adequate utilities are provided;
Ordinance No. 725
Page 14 of 66
vii. Integration of the Project with the character of the surrounding
neighborhoods and establishment of a development that results in
logical, coordinated growth;
viii. Provision of a system of public/community facilities, including
trails, open space areas, and landscaping to support the residents
of the Project and surrounding area in an efficient and timely
manner;
ix. Design and landscaping of the proposed Project to create an
aesthetically pleasing living environment.
n. The mitigation measures in the Final EIR that correspond to the
environmental impacts which may result from the Project are hereby
adopted and made a condition of approval of, or incorporated into, the
Project. The City Council also hereby adopts the "Mitigation
Monitoring Plan" attached as Exhibit "H" to the June 16, 2004 City
Council Staff Report for this Project. The Mitigation Monitoring Plan
will be used to monitor compliance with the mitigation measures and
conditions that have been adopted or made a condition of Project
approval as set forth in this Section of this Ordinance and Exhibit "H"
to the June 16, 2004 City Council Staff Report.
o. Pursuant to provisions of California Public Resources Code Section
21089 (b), the findings contained in this Ordinance shall not be
operative, vested or final until all required filing fees assessed
pursuant to California Fish and Game Code Section 711.4, together
with any required handling charges, are paid to the County Clerk of
the County of San Bernardino.
SECTION 3: The City Council finds that the Development Agreement does
comply with the requirements of California Government Code
Sections 65865 through 65869.5 in that the Development
Agreement does specify in detail and contains the following:
a. Provisions are included in Section 3(A) of the Development
Agreement requiring periodic review of the Agreement at least every
twelve months, at which time the applicant shall be required to
demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms of the Agreement
(California Government Code Section 65865.1).
b. The duration of the Development Agreement is specified in Section
I(B) of the Agreement as being for ten (10) years (Government Code
Section 65865.2).
Ordinance No. 725
Page 15 of 66
c. The permitted uses of the property, the density and intensity of use,
the maximum height and size of the proposed structures, and other
required provisions are referred to in Section 2(A) of the Development
Agreement (Government Code Section 65865.2).
d. The Development Agreement includes conditions, terms, restrictions
and requirements for subsequent discretionary actions in Section 2(B)
of the Agreement (Government Code Section 65865.2).
e. The Development Agreement includes terms and conditions in
Section 2(C)7 that require the developer to improve portions of public
streets around the perimeter of the property and provide for and
improve streets inside the development (Government Code Section
65865.2).
f. The Development Agreement specifies that the Project is to be
constructed in coordination with the construction of cedain public
infrastructure improvements as specified in Section 2 of the
Agreement. (Government Code Section 65865.2).
SECTION 4: Based upon substantial evidence presented during the above-
referenced public hearin¢~ on June 2, 2004 and June 16, 2004,
including written and oral staff reports, together with public
testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds that the
Development Agreement will provide for development which is
consistent with the Rancho Cucamonga General Plan. The City
Council bases its findings of consistency with the General Plan on
the compliance of the project entitlements specified in the
Development Agreement with the General Plan's land use
designation for the site, the fact that the project entitlements
specified in the Development Agreement provide for the extension
of the Iow density image of Old Etiwanda into the area as provided
in General Plan Policy 2.4.4.5, the fact that the proposed uses set
forth in the Development Agreement are compatible with the
character of existing development in the vicinity, and that the
Development Agreement is consistent with the General Plan's
intent to keep substantial portions of the Etiwanda North Specific
Plan area as open space.
SECTION 5: Based on substantial evidence presented during the above-
referenced public hearing on June 2, 2004 and June 16, 2004,
including written and oral staff reports, together with public
testimony, the City Council hereby specifically finds that the
Development Agreement will provide for development which is
consistent with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The City
Ordinance No. 725
Page 16 of 66
Council bases its findings of consistency with the Project's
consistency with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan land use
designations for the site and the fact that the Project is designed
to contain a trails system, provide for views of the mountains, and
will comply with the Specific Plan's requirements for landscape
treatments and required walls, fencing, lighting and community
entry that is consistent with the design scheme specified in the
Etiwanda Nodh Specific Plan.
SECTION 6: Based on the findings contained in this Ordinance, this City
Council hereby approves Development Agreement DRC2003-
00751, attached hereto as Exhibit "A."
SECTION 7: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall
cause the same to be published within 15 days after its passage
at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a newspaper of
general cimulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and
circulated in the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California. Upon the
effective date of this Ordinance, the Mayor shall execute the
Development Agreement on behalf of the City and the City Clerk
shall cause the Agreement to be recorded in the offices of the
County Recorder for the County of San Bernardino at the time and
as required by law.
Please see the following page
for formal adoption, certification and signa tums
Ordinance No. 725
Page 17 of 66
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED this 7th day of July 2004.
AYES: Alexander, Gutierrez, Howdyshell, Kurth, Williams
NOES: None
ABSENT: None
ABSTAINED: None ~
William J. A~nder, Maydr
A'I-rEST:
Kath~yn L. $~;ott, CMC, Deputy City Clerk
I, KATHRYN L. SCOTT, DEPUTY CITY CLERK of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance was introduced at a
Regular Meeting of the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga held on the 16th day of June
2004, and was passed at a Regular Meeting of the City Council of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga held on the 7th day July of 2004.
Executed this 8~h day of July 2004, at Rancho Cucamonga, California.
r, athryn L.~Scott, CMC, Deputy City Clerk
Ordinance No. 725
Page 18of66
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2002-00156
(as amended 05/12/2004)
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
AND RICHLAND COMMUNITIES, INC. CONCERNING PROPOSED
TENTATIVE TRACT 16072
This Agreement (the "Development Agreement") is made and entered into this day
of .., 2004, by and between the applicant Hill Country S.A. Ltd., a Texas
limited partnership; and Richland Tracy Ltd., a Florida Limited partnership, and the City
of Rancho Cucamonga, a municipal corporation (the "CITY") pursuant to tl~e authority of
Section 65864 through 65869.5 of the California Government Code. Hill Country S.A.
Ltd., and Richland Tracy Ltd., and their successors and assigns, if any, are referred to
collectively hereinafter as the "Property Owners". The CITY and Property Owners are
collectively referred to herein as the "Parties".
RECITALS:
A. To provide more certainty in the approval of development projects, to
encourage private participation in comprehensive planning, and to reduce the economic
risk of development, the Legislature of the State of California has adopted Sections
65864, et seq. of the California Government Code, thus authorizing the CITY to enter
into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in
real property, in order to establish development rights with respect thereto.
B. Section 65865(b) of the California Government Code authorizes the CITy
to enter into a binding development agreement with respect to real property which is in
unincorporated territory but also within the CITY's sphere of influence, provided that the
effectiveness of the development agreement is conditioned upon the annexation of such
real property to the CITY within the period of time for annexation as specified in the
Development Agreement.
C. property Owners owns fee title to approximately 150.79 acres of real
property located entirely within the County of San Bemardino (the "County") and moro
particularly described in Exhibit "A" and depicted on Exhibit "B" attached hereto (the
"Project Site").
D. On March 5, 2002, the CITY received an application for Tentative Tract
Map (SUBTT16072), Development Agreement (DRC2002-00156), and a request for
Annexation of the Proposed Project. An Environmental Impact Report has been
prepared to address the potential environment impacts of the proposed project and all
discretionary actions anticipated by the CITY and the Local Agency Formation
Commission.
E. As set forth in Ordinance No. adopted by the City Council on .__
(the "Enacting Ordinance"), the execution of this Development Agreement and
performance of and compliance with the terms and conditions set forth herein by the
Parties hereto: (i) is in the best interest of the CITY; (ii) will promote the public
convenience, general welfare, and good land use practices in the CITY; (iii) will promote
Exhibit "A"
Development Agreement 1 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 19 of 66
preservation of land values; (iv) will encourage the development of the Project by
providing a level of certainty to the Properly Owners; and (v) will provide for orderly
growth and development of the CITY consistent with the CITY's General Plan.
_AGREEMENT:
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the above recitals, and the mutual promises
and covenants of the Parties, and for other good and valuable consideration, the receipt
and sufficiency of which us hereby acknowledged, the Parties agree as follows:
Section 1. GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. Effectiveness of Development A.qreement
Notwithstanding the effective date of the Enacting Ordinance, this Development
Agreement shall only become operative and the rights and obligations of the Parties
shall only arise, upon the date that the last of the following have occurred:
1. The project site has been annexed to the CITY and said annexation is
final as to any and all administrative actions, and is not subject to judicial challenge; and
2. The Project and the Final EIR have been approved by the CiTY and all
entitlements have been issued for completion by Property Owners.
B. Term
The term of this Development Agreement shall commence on the Effective Date
of the enacting Ordinance and shall extend for a period of 10 years thereafter, unless
this Development Agreement is terminated, modified or extended by circumstances set
forth in this Development Agreement, including, without limitation, the extensions
provided below and any extensions attributable to "force majeure" circumstances
described in Section 2D5 hereof or by mutual wdtten consent of the Parties.
Following the expiration of the Term, this Development Agreement shall be
deemed terminated and of no further force and effect; provided, however, that such
termination shall not affect any right or duty arising from the project entitlements granted
prior to, concurrently with, or subsequent to the approval of this Development Agreement
and the structures that are developed in accordance with this Development Agreement
and the use of those structures shall continue to be governed by this Development
Agreement for purposes of ensuring, for land use purposes, that those structures
continue to be legal conforming structures and that those uses continue to be legal
conforming uses.
C. Assiqnment
Subject to the terms of this Development Agreement, Property Owners shall
have the right to convey, assign, sell, lease, sublease, encumber, hypothecate or
otherwise transfer (for purposes of this Development Agreement, "Transfer") the Project
Site, in whole or in part, to any person, partnership, joint venture, firm or corporation or
other entity at any time during the term of this Development Agreement, and to the
extent of each such Transfer, the transferor shall be relieved of its legal duty to perform
such obligations under this Development Agreement at the time of the Transfer, except
to the extent Property Owners are in default, as defined in Section 3.C hereof, of any of
the terms of this Development Agreement when the Transfer occurs.
Development Agreement 2 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 20 of 66
If ail or a portion of the Project Site is Transferred and there is noncompliance by
the transferee owner with respect to any term and condition of this Development
Agreement, or by the transferor with respect to any portion of the Project Site not sold or
Transferred, such noncompliance shall be deemed a breach of this Agreement by that
transferee or transferor, as applicable, but shall not be deemed to be a breach
hereunder against other persons then owning or holding any interest in any portion of
the Project Site and not themselves in breach under this Development Agreement. Any
alleged breach shall be governed by the provisions of Section 3.C hereof.
In no event shall the reservation or dedication of a portion of the Project Site to a
public agency cause a transfer of duties and obligations under this agreement unless
specifically stated to be the case in this Development Agreement, any of the exhibits
attached to this Development Agreement, the instrument of conveyance used for such
reservation or dedication, or other form of agreement with such public agency.
Concurrently, with any such sale, transfer or assignment, or within ten business
days thereafter, the Properly Owners shall notify the CITY, in writing, of such sale,
transfer or assignment and shall provide the CITY with an executed agreement, in a
form reasonably acceptable to the CITY, by the purchaser, transferee or assignee and
providing therein that the purchaser, transferee or assignee expressly and
unconditionally assumes all the duties and obligations of the Properly Owners under this
agreement.
D. Amendment of Aqreement
This Development Agreement may be amended from time to time by mutual
consent of the Parties in accordance with the provisions of Government Code Sections
65867 and 65868. Notwithstanding anything stated to the contrary in this Development
Agreement, the parties may enter into one or more implementing agreements, as set
forth below, to clarify the intended application or interpretation of this Development
Agreement, without amending this Development Agreement.
Property Owners and the CITY acknowledge that the provisions of this
Development Agreement require a close degree of cooperation between Property
Owners and the CITY and that, in the course of the development of the Project Site, it
may be necessary to supplement this Development Agreement to address the details of
the Parties' respective performance and obligations, and to otherwise effectuate the
purposes of this Development Agreement and the intent of the Parties. If and when,
from time to time, the Parties find that it is necessary or appropriate to clarify the
application or interpretation of this Development Agreement, the Parties may do so
through one or more implementing agreements (the "Implementing Agreement"), which
shall be executed by the City Planner and by an authorized representative of the
Property Owners. After execution, each Implementing Agreement shall be attached as
an addendum and become a part of this Development Agreement, and may be further
changed or supplemented from time to time as necessary. Such Implementing
Agreement shall not require the approval of the City Council of the CITY and shall only
be executed by the City Planner (on Behalf of the CITY), if the City Planner has made a
reasonable determination that such implementing agreements are not materially
inconsistent with this Development Agreement, and applicable ordinances, rules,
regulations and official policies of the CITY in effect at the time of execution of this
Development Agreement. Any changes to this Development Agreement which would
Development Agreement 3 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 21 of 66
impose additional obligations on the CITY beyond those which would be deemed to
arise under a reasonable interpretation of this Development Agreement, or which would
purport to change land use designations applicable to the Project Site under the
applicable Project Entitlements, shall be considered "material" and shall require
amendment of this Agreement in accordance with the provisions of California
Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868.
Section 2. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT
A. Land Use and Project Entitlements
The Project Entitlements am depicted on the Tentative Tract Map and
Conceptua. I Grading Plan attached hereto as Exhibits 1 - 17. Project Entitlements refers
to the following matedal related to the approval of the Development Agreement
(DRC2002-00156) and the Tentative Tract Map (SUBTT16072): all plans that constitute
the approved project, all Planning Commission and City Council Resolutions of Approval
including the associated conditions of approval, and all mitigation measures included in
the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Plan and the Environmental Impact Report. The
Parties acknowledge that, without being obligated to do so, Property Owners plans to
develop the Project Site in substantial conformity with the Project Entitlements as
approved by this Development Agreement. During the Term of this agreement, the
permitted uses for the Project, or any portion thereof, the density and intensity of use,
zoning, maximum height and size of proposed buildings, building and yard setback
requirements, previsions for the reservation or dedication of land, design and
performance standards and other terms and conditions of development of the Project
constitute the Entitlements as approved by this. Development Agreement. The specific
terms of this Development Agreement shall supersede and be controlling over any
conflict and/or inconsistency with the Project Entitlements.
The Parties acknowledge and agree that the total number of lots in the approved
tract totals 358 lots and that lots may be modified, without increasing the overall number
of lots, as long as the proposed modification is found to be in substantial conformity with
the Project Entitlements as approved by this Development Agreement. The City Planner
shall exercise his reasonable discretion in the review of any proposed modifications to
lots, and make the determination of substantial compliance.
Other certain specific modifications of the Project Entitlements to which the
Parties agree are set forth below. All Exhibits attached hereto constitute material
previsions of the Development Agreement, and are incorporated herein.
B.' Rules and Re,qulations
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65856 and except as otherwise
explicitly provided in this Development Agreement, (1) the ordinance, rules and
regulations and official policies governing permitted uses of the Project Site, the density
and intensity of such uses, and the design, improvement, and construction standards
and specifications applicable to development of the Project and in effect as of the date of
this Development Agreement, and (2) and those ordinances of the CITY, as
implemented by this Development Agreement, rules, regulations and official policies in
effect as of the date of this Development Agreement, but only to the extent that they are
consistent with the Project Entitlements, as modified and/or amended by this
Development Agreement (collectively the "Existing Laws"), except that the CITY's street
improvement, lighting, storm drain, and the Americans with Disabilities Act ("ADA")
Development Agreement 4 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 22 of 66
standards shall be followed, and the landscape standards applicable shall be those
specified in this Development Agreement or if none are so specified, the CITY's
Standards. In the event of any conflict between the Existing Laws and the other CITY
ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies, then the Existing Laws shall control.
The CITY shall not be prevented in subsequent actions applicable to the Project, from
applying new ordinances, rules regulations, and policies in effect ("Future Policies") to
the extent that they do not conflict with the Existing Laws. Such conflict shall be deemed
to occur if, without limitation, such Future Policies:
1. modify the permitted types of land uses, the density or intensity of use,
the maximum height or size of proposed buildings on the property, building and yard
setback requirements, or impose requirements for the construction or provisions of on-
site or offsite improvements or the reservation or dedication of land for public use, or the
payment of fees or the imposition of extractions, other than as are in each case
specifically provided for in this Development Agreement;
2. prevent the Property Owners from obtaining all necessary approvals,
permits, certificates or other entitlements at such dates and under such circumstances
as the Property Owners would otherwise be entitled under this Development Agreement;
3. render any conforming use of the Project Site a non-conforming use or
any structure on the Project Site a non-conforming structure.
C. Desiqn and Infrastructure Issues
1. Street Sections
The CITY desires that the design of Wilson Avenue, Etiwanda Avenue
and East Avenue be designed as depicted in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan Exhibit
13(B)/Section A-l, Exhibit 13(D)/with community trail, and Exhibit 13(E), respectively.
The following deviations from the standard CITY Engineering Division
street standards or policies are acceptable as depicted on the approved plans included
as part of the Project Entitlements: Street 'C' is acceptable as a non-standard cul-de-sac
design; the centerline radius of Street 'A' is acceptable with a radius of 650-feet; and
street sections on straight interior streets may be greater than 800-feet.
2. Dry Utilities
The Project Entitlements do not require that Burd vaults be installed and
the CITY and Property Owners agree that no Burd vaults will be required throughout the
Project Site. The aboveground transformere/switchgear are acceptable subject to
selective placement subject to approval of the City Planner and SCE.
3. Private Landscape Maintenance
This project shall form a Homeowners Association (HCA), which shall
own and be responsible for maintenance of all lettered lots interior and exterior to the
tract. Maintenance responsibility shall include all perimeter walls and interim detention
basins, as well as slopes and landscape areas adjacent to Community Trails within the
Development Agreement 5 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 23 of 66
Fault Zone and along perimeter streets. In addition, the Property Owner agrees to join
Landscape Maintenance District (LMD) No. 7.
a. City will support the creation of a new LMD for the above-
mentioned areas if the Property Owner can provide a design that can be cost-effectively
maintained to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. This would replace the requirement
for a HOA and joining LMD 7.
b. If entrances are gated, they shall conform to City design standards
and all intedor improvements will become private. In that case, the HOA will also
assume responsibility for streets, streetlights, sidewalks, utility easements, and storm
drains/drainage facilities.
4. View Fencinq
Open fencing may be utilized in rear-yard conditions only where view
opportunities are present, subject to mitigation measures that may otherwise be required
for sound attenuation and/or fire protection.
5. Gradinq
The Grading Plan, included in the Project Entitlements, shall conform to
the Design Guidelines of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. However, with an average
slope across the site of less than 8%, the Project is exempt from the CITY Hillside
Development Regulations of the Development Code.
6. Community Trail
The Property Owners shall design and construct improvements to the
CITY Community Trail network along Etiwanda Avenue north of 'U' Street to the north
tract boundary, and along East Avenue north of the Fault Zone Trail to the northerly tract
boundary, in accordance with CITY standard Drawing 1002-A. In addition, a Community
Trail shall be developed through the Fault Zone, between Etiwanda Avenue and East
Avenue, in accordance with CITY Standard Drawing 1004. Improvements to the
Regional Trail within the Edison Corridor are not required as a condition of this
development.
7. Circulation Issues and Fees
a. Revisions to the Etiwanda north Specific Plan/Phasinq Plan
The Property Owners shall construct East Avenue southerly between
Wilson Avenue and Banyan Street, in lieu of extending Wilson Avenue easterly to
connect to Wardman-Bullock Road.
b. Transportation Fee/Traffic Impact Analysis
The Property Owners shall construct circulation improvements necessary
to serve the area in and around the Project Site as generally depicted on Exhibit 18 - 20;
and Property Owners shall construct additional regional transportation improvements
depicted on Exhibit 22. In addition, the Property Owners shall comply with
Development Agreement 6 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 24 of 66
Transportation Development Fees In accordance with CITY ordinance. Upon formation
of a Community Facilities District ("CFD") Property Owners may include the cost of the
improvement specified in this Section 2.C.7.c as part of the CFD financing. The
Property Owners shall receive credit against, or reimbursement of costs, in excess of the
Transportation Development Fee for the "backbone" improvements as described herein,
in conformance with CITY Policy.
c. Circulation Improvements/Reimbursement Requests
The Property Owners shall design, construct, and complete the following
improvements:
(i) Etiwanda Avenue: Improve as a Secondary Arterial along
the property frontage, as depicted in Exhibit 20. These improvements shall be completed
prior to the first release of occupancy, or to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
(ii) East Avenue: North of Wilson Avenue to the northerly
Tract boundary - Construct Collector Street improvements west of centerline and 18-feet
of pavement east of centerline, for a total of 40-feet pavement width along with a 2-foot
graded shoulder, as depicted in Exhibit 19. In addition, construct 44-feet of pavement
for a distance of 200-feet north of Wilson Avenue, transifioning back to 40-feet north of
that point. These improvements shall be completed prior to the first release of
occupancy, or to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The Property Owner may request
a reimbursement agreement whereby the Property shall recover the cost for
improvements east of the centedine from future development as it occurs on adjacent
properties in the CITY limits. If the Property Owners fail to submit for said
reimbursement agreement within 6-months of the public improvements being accepted
by the CITY, all rights of the Property Owners to reimbursement shall terminate.
South of Wilson Avenue to Banyan Street - Construct 36-feet
pavement width, as depicted in Exhibit 19. These improvements shall be completed prior
to the first release of occupancy, or to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The
Property Owners shall receive credit against the Transportation Development Fee for
backbone improvements, in conformance with CITY Policy. The Proper'b/ Owner may
request a reimbursement agreement whereby the Property shall recover the cost for
improvements south of the southerly Tract boundary from future development as it
occurs on adjacent properties in the CITY limits. If the Property Owners fail to submit for
said reimbursement agreement within 6-months of the public improvements being
accepted by the CITY, all rights of the Property Owners to reimbursement shall
terminate.
(iii) Wilson Avenue: Between Etiwanda Avenue to East
Avenue - Install full-width Divided Secondary Arterial improvements as depicted in
Exhibit 20. These improvements shall be completed prior to the first release of
occupancy, or to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The Property Owners (or future
developer) shall acquire right-of-way from Metropolitan Water District (MWD), along with
a permit for the improvements, on the south side of Wilson Avenue.
The Property Owners shall receive credit against, and
reimbursement of costs in excess of, the Transportation Development Fee for the
median curbs and 14-feet of pavement on both sides, in conformance with CITY Policy.
Development Agreement 7 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 25 of 66
The Property Owner may request a reimbursement agreement whereby the Property
Owners shall recover the cost for improvements, other than the 'backbone', including
median landscaping south of the centerline and along the Not-A-Part parcel, from future
development on adjacent properties. If the Property Owners fail to request said
reimbursement agreement within 6-months of the public improvements being accepted
by the CITY, all rights of the Property Owners to reimbursement shall terminate.
8. Storm Drains
a. Deviation from the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Draina,qe Policy
The Project shall comply with the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Drainage Policy with the
construction of the 25t~ Street Interceptor Channel along the Projects' north boundary
line. The Project will deviate from the Etiwanda/San Sevaine Drainage Policy with the
construction of an interim detention basin to attenuate only developed storm flows to
Wilson Avenue storm drain not currently attenuated by existing basins in Tracts 13527
and 14139.
b. Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area 3 Master Plan Storm Drain
The Property Owners shall construct Etiwanda/San Sevaine Area 3
Master Plan Storm Drain facilities along the north property boundary from Etiwanda
Avenue to the Etiwanda Spreading Grounds, including culverts for both Etiwanda
Avenue and East Avenue to cross the facility. These improvements shall be completed
pdor to the first release of occupancy, or to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
Standard drainage fees for the project shall be credited to the cost of permanent master
plan facilities, in accordance with CITY Policy. The Property Owner may request a
reimbursement agreement whereby the Property Owners shall recover the cost for such
improvements from future development on adjacent properties. If the Property Owners
fail to request said reimbursement agreement within 6 months of public improvements
being accepted by the CITY, or all rights of the development to reimbursement shall
terminate. If San Bernardino County Flood Control District requires an interim basin for
this facility, the same easement, maintenance and reimbursement issues will apply as
for the Wilson storm drain basin(s).
c. Interim Detention Basin
The Property Owners shall design, construct and install, an "Interim
Detention Basin" for the Wilson Avenue Storm Drain, located as shown conceptually on
Exhibit 22, justified by a Final Drainage Report, which shall be approved by the City
Engineer. The Property Owners shall:
(i) Design the basin to mitigate developed flows from area
bounded by Wilson, East and Etiwanda Avenues, and Southern California Edison;
(ii) Provide a temporary easement to the CITY over the lots
that contain the basin;
(iii) Provide for maintence of the Interim Detention Basin
through annexation to an existing Assessment District, the formation of a new
Assessment District, or the execution of a maintenance agreement satisfactory to the
Development Agreement 8 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 26 of 66
City Engineer and the City Attorney that guarantees the private maintenance of the
facility. The Properly Owners shall be responsible for the costs relating to the
annexation to an existing Assessment District, the formation of a new District, or the
preparation of a maintenance agreement. The CITY shall be provided with rights of
access to maintain the facility if private maintenance is insufficient. The CITY shall have
the right to assess those maintenance costs incurred by the CITY to the Property
Owners. Said agreement shall include a cash deposit as security for any maintenance
costs the CITY may incur. Said agreement shall be recorded to run with the property.
(iv) Pay an in-lieu fee for the removal of any interim basin
.... improvements within the LMD areas (if applicable) and their replacement with the LMD
Landscaping, pdor to final map recordation.
(v) Request that the CITY execute a reimbursement
agreement to recover the proportionate cost of the land and ultimate basin related
facilities (outlet, etc.) from future development using the basin. If the Property Owners
fail to request said reimbursement agreement within 6omonths of the public
improvements being accepted by the CITY, all dghts of the Property Owners to such
reimbursement shall terminate.
(vi) Install local storm drains to convey development drainage
to the existing Master Plan Storm Drain in Wilson Avenue, and extend the local storm
drain system as far on-site as needed to contain Q25 within the tops of curbs, Q100
'within rights-of-way and provide a 10-foot dry lane in QIO. The cost of local storm drains
shall be borne by the Property Owners with no fee credit.
9. Park Fee/Equestrian Fee/Beautification Fee
Property Owners shall pay the following development fees:
..... a. The Property Owners shall pay CITY a sum totaling $358,000
(based upon $1,000 per unit) for equestrian purposes. The sum may be paid from CFD
formation and funding. However, the prorated share of the fee for each individual tract
map must be paid prior to recording of said tract map. The CITY shall reserve said
funds for the intended purpose, or the Property Owners may directly participate in the
construction of the CITY-approved Nodh Etiwanda Equestrian Arena.
b. The Property Owners shall pay the CITY a sum totaling
$2,362,800 ($6,600 per unit) for park purposes. The sum may be paid from CFD
formation and funding. However, the prorated share of the fee for each individual tract
map must be paid prior to recording of said tract map.
In addition, the applicant shall receive park credit for improvements to the
Community Trail that traverses the site within the Fault Zone, in accordance with
General Plan Policy. The Trail Credit Graph (Exhibit 111-12) of the General Plan
establishes the basis upon which park credit is determined for Community or Regional
Trail improvements. Based on the analysis using the Trail Credit Graph, the Property
Owners will receive credit for 1.5 acres, which is 35 percent of the total trail area. The
1.5-acre credit equates to a dollar value of $600,000, which will be applied to the total
value of the Park Fee as required in the paragraph above.
Development Agreement 9 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 27 of 66
c. The Property Owner shall not pay the CITY Beautification Fee of
$0.20 per square foot for residential construction if improvements to Wilson south
parkway are made.
10. Development Standards
The project shall be developed in accordance the CITY's Low-Density
Residential District of the Etiwanda Nor'ih Specific Plan.
a. Number of Housinq Units: The project entitlements include 358
housing units.
11. Design Review Process
The Project, and all subsequent applications for residential development,
shall be subject to the CITY Development/Design Review process.
12. Architectural Guidelines
The Project, and all subsequent applications for residential development,
shall be subject to the Architectural Guidelines of the Etiwanda North Specific Plan.
13. Etiwanda Avenue Scarp Fault Zone
The Etiwanda Avenue Scarp is located within an Alquist-Priolo Fault Zone
as depicted in the CITY General Plan Exhibit V-l; and is identified as a Fault Zone land
use district as depicted in the CITY Etiwanda North Specific Plan Exhibit 10. The
Property Owners have conducted a Geotechnical Investigation (GeoSoils, Inc.
November 11, 1998) in order to define and identify the actual zone of faulting of the
Efiwanda Avenue Scarp where it traverses the project site. A Fault Setback. Zone, as
recommended by the Investigation, is depicted on the Tentative Tract Map and the
Conceptual Grading Plan included in the Project Entitlements. Habitable structures shall
not be developed within the Fault Setback Zone, however, portions of the lot area may
encroach in the Fault Setback Zone as depicted on the Tentative Tract Map and
Conceptual Grading Plan included in the Project Entitlements. All improvements within
the Fault Zone, as described in this paragraph and depicted in the Project Entitlements,
shall be completed prior to the issuance of building permit of the 150~ dwelling within the
project.
14. Open Space Transfer Plan
The Property Owners shall transfer to the County of San Bernardino
Special Districts OS-1, other qualified conservation entity approved by the City in fee, a
minimum of 150-acres of off-site land for permanent open space and habitat
preservation; along with funding in an amount to be determined by County of San
Bemardino Special Districts (or other conservation entity), to provide for long-term
maintenance of said land. The preferred location of the off-site land is in the
environment surrounding the North Etiwanda Preserve in the CITY Sphere of Influence,
other properties may be considered based the review of appropriate Biological Habitat
Assessments and concurrence of the City Planner. The transfer and funding shall occur
prior to recording of the first final map of the Project.
Development Agreement 10 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 28 of 66
D. Timing of Development and Fees
1. Development of the Perimeter Landscapinq and the Etiwanda North
Specific Plan Neiqhborhood Monumentation
All perimeter landscaping, including the Upper Etiwanda Neighborhood
Monumentation as depicted in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan Exhibit 25A-C, shall be
completed according the following schedule: (1) the East Avenue Perimeter, the Wilson
Avenue perimeter, and the western Project perimeter south of the Fault Zone shall be
completed prior to the release of occupancy of the 150~h dwelling within the project; and
(2) the Etiwanda Avenue perimeter, north of the Fault Zone shall be completed prior to
the release of the 250~ dwelling unit within the project.
2. Development of the Remainder of the Site
Neither the Property Owners nor CITY can presently predict when or the
rate at which phases of the project shall be developed, since such decisions depend on
numerous factors which are not within the control of the Property Owners including,
without limitation, market orientation and demand, interest rates, absorption, competition
and other factors.
The parties acknowledge and agree that Properly Owners, subject to the
restrictions and conditions of this Development Agreement, retains flexibility under this
Development Agreement to develop the Project in such order and at such rate and times
as are appropriate within the exercise of the Property Owners' business judgment. The
CITY further acknowledges that Property Owners may desire to market, sell, or
otherwise arrange for disposition of some or all of the Project Site, prior to development,
and that the rate at which the Project develops will likely depend upon the business
judgment of subsequent owners of the Project Site.
3. CITY's Cooperation
CITY shall use good faith, diligent efforts to promptly process and take
final action on any applications for permits or approvals filed by Property Owners with
respect to the Project. Such cooperation shall include, without limitation, (a) using good
faith, diligent efforts to process subsequent Development/Design Review in accordance
with state regulations; and (b) promptly processing all ministerial permits in accordance
with Section 2.1 below. Without limiting the effect of any other provision of this
Development Agreement, any future regulation, whether adopted by initiative or
otherwise, limiting the rate or timing of development of the Project Site or the extent
thereof, shall be deemed to conflict with Property Owners' vested rights to develop the
Project under this Development Agreement and shall, to that extent, not apply to the
development of the Project.
Processing and review of development proposals shall be subject to
established procedures in effect in the entire CITY, including Development and Design
Review, as specified in the Existing Laws. However, the criteda used in the evaluation
of each development proposal shall be based on the objectives, policies and specific
development standards specified herein.
Development Agreement 11 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 29 of 66
4. Force Maieure
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in the Development
Agreement, Property Owners and CITY shall be excused from performance of their
obligations under this Development Agreement during any period of delay caused by
acts of God or civil commotion, riots, strikes, picketing, or other labor disputes, shortage
of materials or supplies, or damage to or prevention of work by reason of fire, floods,
earthquake, or other casualties, litigation, acts or neglect of the Property Owners, as
applicable. The time of performance of such obligations as well as the term of this
Development agreement shall automatically be extended by the period of such delay
hereunder.
E. Future Entitlements
With respect to any entitlements that Property Owners may require in the future,
including, without limitation, tentative tract and parcel map approvals, conditional use
permits, and Development/Design Review, the CITY shall retain its discretionary review ·
authority and the CITY's applicable ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies.
However, any such discretionary review shall be expressly subject to the provisions of
this Development Agreement and the CiTY may only impose conditions upon such
discretionary entitlements which are consistent with the Project Entitlements as
approved by this Development Agreement, except as otherwise specifically required by
state or federal law.
F. Environmental Review
Other than the mitigation measures and conditions of approval set forth in the
EIR and the Project Entitlements (and any additional future mitigation programs
contemplated therein), no other mitigation measures for environmental impacts created
by the Project, as presently approved and as evaluated in the EIR, shall be required. In
connection with the CITY's issuance of any further entitlement (as contemplated in
Section 2.F above), which is subject to CEQA, the CITY shall promptly commence and
diligently process any and all initial studies and assessments required by CEQA, and to
the extent permitted by CEQA, the CITY shall use the EIR and other existing
environmental reports and studies as adequately addressing the environmental impacts
of such matter or matters, without requiring new or supplemental environmental
documentation. In the event CEQA requires any additional environmental review, the
CITY may impose additional measures (or conditions) to mitigate, as permitted by
CEO, A, the adverse environmental impacts of such future entitlements, which were not
considered at the time of approval of the Project.
G. CITY Fees and Mandates by State and Federal Laws
The Parties acknowledge and agree that the fees and impositions which may
potentially be imposed by the CITY on the Project and Property Owners (collectively
"fees") fall within one of three categories: (a) fees for processing land use and
construction permit applications which are not otherwise governed by the provisions of
Section 66000 of the Government Code (but which are subject to the limitations set forth
in Sections 66013, 66014, and 66016-66018.5 of the Government Code) (collectively,
the "Processing Fees"); (b) fees or other monetary exactions which are contemplated
under ordinances or resolutions in effect as of the date of this Development Agreement
and which purport to defray ail or a portion of the cost of impacts to certain public
facilities, improvements and other amenities from the development projects, including
any fees described in Government Code Sections 66000 et seq. (collectively, the
Development Agreement 12 Richland Communities, inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 30 of 66
"Existing Fee Categories") (the Existing Fee Categories include any increases,
decreases, or other modifications to existing fees, so long as such modified fees relate
to the same category of impacts identified in the Existing Fee Categories); and (c) fees
or other monetary exactions which may be imposed in the future by the CITY for
purposes of defraying all or a portion of the cost of public facilities, improvements, or
amenities related to development projects, but excluding the Existing Fee Categories
("other Fees"). The Property Owners' obligation to pay Fees shall be specifically
governed by the following provisions:
1. Processinq Fees. The CITY may charge Planning and Engineering Plan
Check and Permit Fees and Building Permit Fees which are in force and effect on a
CITY-wide basis at the time of Property Owners' application for a land use entitlement,or
a construction permit. The amount of any Processing Fees shall be determined by the
cI-rY in accordance with all applicable laws, including, without limitation, Government
Code Sections 66013, 66014, and 66017-66018.5 (or any successor laws, as
applicable). Unless otherwise agreed by Property Owners and the CITY, the Processing
Fees assessed Property Owners shall be the same as those imposed upon other
development projects throughout the jurisdictional limits of the CITY.
2. Other Fees. In consideration of the Property Owners' Agreement to
modify the Project Entitlements as specifically set forth in this Development Agreement
and implement the timing of development in accordance with the terms set forth above,
no Other Fees shall be imposed upon the Property Owners or the Project during the
Term of this Development Agreement, except as may be specifically required to carry
out any state or federal law or mandate enacted after the effective date of this
Development Agreement, as necessary to mitigate environmental impacts of the project
in accordance with 2.G above.
3. Fiscal Impact Analysis. CITY does not require Property Owners or the
Project to complete a fiscal impact analysis for application or issuance of any approvals
or permits that CITY might issue under this Development Agreement.
H. Non-discretionary Permits
The Parties acknowledge that in the course of implementing the Project, Property
Owners will, from time to time, apply to the CITY for various ministerial permits, licenses,
consents, certificates, and approvals, including, without limitation, non-discretionary
subdivision approvals, grading permits, construction permits, certificates of occupancy
and permits required to connect the Project to utility systems under the CiTY's
jurisdiction (collectively the "Non-Discretionary Permits"). property Owners shall have
the right to apply for any such Non-Discretionary Permits in accordance with the
Existing Laws (and any applicable Future Policies under Section 2.B, above). The CITY
shall issue to Property Owners, upon such applications, all required Non-Discretionary
Permits, subject only to compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement, the
CITY's usual and customary fees and charges for such applications and Non-
Discretionary Permits (subject to the provisions of Section H above) and the terms and
conditions of the applicable permit applications. The CITY further agrees that upon its
approval of any plans, specifications, design drawings, maps, or other submittals of
Property Owners in conjunction with such Non-Discretionary Permits (the "Approved
Plans"), all further entitlements, approvals and consents required from the CITY to
implement the Project which are consistent with and further implement such Approved
Development Agreement 13 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 31 of 66
Plans, shall be expeditiously processed and approved by the CITY in accordance with
this Development Agreement.
I. Cooperation
1. Cooperation with Other Public Aqencies. The CITY acknowledges that
the Property Owners may apply from time to time for permits and approvals as may be
required by other governmental or quasi-governmental agencies having jurisdiction over
the Project, in conjunction with the development of or provision of services to the Project,
including, without limitation, approvals in connection with developing and implementing a
tertiary water system, potential transportation improvements and other on-site and off-
site infrastructure. The CITY shall cooperate with Property Owners in its efforts to obtain
such permits and approvals from such agencies (including without limitation, the
Cucamonga Valley Water District, and the Inland Empire Utilities Agency).
2. Construction of Off-Site Improvements. To the extent that Property
Owners are required to construct off-site street improvements as a condition of
developing the Project, the Properly Owners shall make good faith efforts to acquire the
off-site property interests required to construct such public improvements. If Property
Owners fail to do so, Property Owners shall, at least 120 days prior to submittal of the
first final subdivision map for approval, enter into an agreement to complete the
improvements under Government Code Sections 66462 and 66462.5 at such time as the
CITY decides to acquire the property interests required for the public improvements.
Such agreement shall provide for payment by Property Owners of all costs incurred by
the CITY if the CITY decides to acquire the off-site property interests required in
connection with the subdivision. Security for a portion of those costs shall be in the form
of a cash deposit in the amount given in an appraisal report obtained by the CITY at
Property Owners' cost. The appraiser shall have been approved by the CITY prior to
commencement of the appraisal.
To the extent that such off-site improvements, or the construction of any substantial
infrastructure on-site, substantially benefit other property owners or other portions of the
jurisdiction of limits of the CITY, the CITY agrees to assist Property Owners to the fullest
extent possible in obtaining reimbursement or other fair share contribution by such other
benefited property owners. Such assistance may include, without limitation, conditioning
the approval of development projects proposed by such benefited property owners upon
such owners' contribution, on a fair share, pro-rata basis, to the construction cost of such
improvements. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the CiTY agrees with
respect to the infrastructure improvements which are adjacent to and benefit other
properties (whether such properties are undeveloped or developed), any further
discretionary approvals sought by such property owners shall be conditioned to require
fair share reimbursement to Property Owners for construction and related costs !ncurred
in providing such improvements to the extent legally permissible.
3. Public FinancinR. The Parties hereby acknowledge that substantial public
improvements must be funded in order to contribute to the Park Fee, Equestrian Fee
and School Fees and the remainder of the Project Site and that public financing of a
substantial portion of these improvements will be critical to the economic viability of the
Project. Subject to CITY's ability to make all findings required by applicable law and
complying with all applicable legal procedures and requirements, the CITY agrees to
cooperate with and assist Property Owners to the fullest extent possible in developing
Development Agreement 14 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 32 of 66
and implementing a public financing plan for the construction of the public infrastructure
improvements. The implementation of such plan may include, without limitation, the
formation of one or more assessment districts, or Mello-Roos community facilities
districts, or the issuance of bonds, certificates of participation, or other debt securities
necessary to implement such plan. All formation costs shall be borne by Property
Owners subject to reimbursement by the Community Facilities District.
J. Creation of the Landscape and Street Liqhtinq Maintenance District
The CITY agrees to promptly form the necessary Landscape Maintenance
District (LMD) pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Sections 22500 et seq
.. (~he "Landscape and Lighting Act of 1972") for the Project development to encompass
the Project Site as well as the area being annexed by the CITY. However, the Property
Owners shall annex to the existing Street Lighting District. The Property Owners shall
pay for the formation of the LMD. The Parties agree that the LMD must be established
no later than recordation of the first final tract map and that the CITY may create an
LMD, which allow annexation of other areas. In addition, if outside agencies, upon their
review and approval of various components of the project, impose any non-standard
improvements that require extraordinary maintenance responsibilities of the CITY, the
CITY may impose the creation additional maintenance districts upon the proposed
development. Upon formation of the LMD, the CITY (through the LMD) shall assume full
responsibility for the maintenance, repair and replacement of the improvements to be
maintained by the LMD pursuant to the LMDs governing documents.
The Parties also acknowledge that assessments for the LMDs are collected annually in
June, and to the extent that assessments are collected through the LMD for the period
ending June 2006, the CITY may request, and the Property Owners agree to provide, a
reasonable cash deposit to fund the LMD. The CITY shall promptly upon receipt of
assessments the following June, reimburse Property Owners for any such cash
advances to fund the LMDs.
Section 3, ANNUAL REVIEW
A, Good Faith Compliance
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65866.1, the CITY shall once
every twelve (12) months during the term of this Development Agreement, review the
extent of good faith substantial compliance by Property Owners with the terms of this
Development Agreement; provided, however, that it is intended that this review shall
apply to the Project Site as a whole, as opposed to each individual property owner who
may own a parcel comprising the Project Site. In connection with such annual review,
Property Owners shall provide such information as may reasonably be requested by the
C~TY in'order to determine whether any provisions of this Agreement have' been
breached by Property Owners. If at any time prior to the review period there is an issue
concerning a Property Owners' compliance with the terms of this Development
Agreement, the provisions of this Section 3 shall apply.
B, Certificate of Compliance
If property Owners are found to be in compliance with this Development
Agreement after annual review, the City Planner shall, upon written request by Property
Owners, issue a certificate of compliance ("Certificate of Compliance") to Property
Owners stating that, based upon information known to the CITY, the Development
Agreement remains in effect and Property Owners are not in default. The Certificate of
Development Agreement 15 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 33 of 66
Compliance shall be in recordable form and shall contain such information as shall
impart constructive record of notice of compliance. Property Owners may record the
Certificate of Compliance in the Official Records of the County of San Bemardino.
C. Findinq of Default
If, upon completion of the annual review, the City Planner intends to find that
Property Owners have not complied in good faith with the material terms of this
Agreement (a "Default"), he shall first give written notice of such effect to the Property
Ownem, pursuant to Section 3, Annual Review, subsection M - Notices, of this
Agreement. The notice shall be accompanied by copies of all staff reports, staff
recommendations and other information concerning Properly Owners' compliance with
the terms of this Development Agreement as the CITY may possess and which is
relevant to determining Property Owners' performance under this Development
Agreement. The notice shall specify in detail the grounds and all facts allegedly
demonstrating such noncompliance, so Property Owners may address the issues raised
on a point-by-point basis. Property Owners shall have twenty (20) days after its receipt
of such notice to file a written response with the City Planner. Within 10 days after the
expiration of such 20-day response period, the City Planner shall notify Property Owners
whether he has determined that Property Owners are in Default under this Development
Agreement ("Notice of Default"). Such Notice of Default shall specify the instances in
which the Property Owners have allegedly failed to comply with this Development
Agreement and the terms under which compliance can be obtained. The Notice of
Default shall also specify a reasonable time for Property Owners to meet the terms of
compliance, which time shall not be less than thirty (30) days from the date the Notice of
Default was served on the Property Owners, and which shall be reasonably related to
the time necessary to bdng Propertx, Owners' performance into good faith compliance.
D. Riqht to Appeal
Upon receipt of the Notice of Default, the Property Owners may appeal the City
Planner's decision directly to the City Council. Such appeal shall be initiated by filing a
wdtten notice of appeal with the City Clerk within the (10) calendar days following the
Property Owners' receipt of the Notice of Default. The headng on such appeal shall be
scheduled in accordance with Section 17.02.080 of the CITY Development Code. At the
headng, Property Owners shall be entitled to submit evidence and to address all the
issues raised by the Notice of Default. If, after considering all the evidence presented at
the headng, the City Council finds and determines on the basis of substantial evidence
the Property Owners are in Default, then the City Council shall specify in writing to
Property Owners the instances in which the Property Owners has failed to comply and
the terms under which compliance can be obtained, and shall also specify a reasonable
time for Property Owners to meet the terms of comp lance, which time shall not be less
than thirty (30) days from the date of such writing from the City Council and which shall
be reasonably related to the time necessary to bring Property Owners' performance into
good faith compliance. In the event of a Notice of Default, the timeframe for compliance
in Section 3 - Annual Review, subsection C - Finding of Default, of this Agreement
cannot be enforced during this appeal process.
E. Property Owners' Cure Ri.qhts
If Property Owners are in Default under this Development Agreement, it shall
have a reasonable period of time to cure such Default before action is taken by the CITY
to terminate this Development Agreement or to otherwise amend or limit Property
Owners' rights under this Development Agreement. In no event shall such cure period
Development Agreement 16 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 34 of 66
be less than the time set forth in the finding of Default made under Sections 3C or 3D
above (as applicable) or less than the time reasonably necessary to cure such Default.
Any such cure period shall be extended by force majeure circumstances described in
Section 2D5 above.
Section 4, ENFORCEMENT
A. Enforcement by Either Party
Subject to all requirements mandated by applicable state or federal or other law,
this Development Agreement shall be enforceable by any of the parties to this
Agreement.
B. Cumulative Remedies
In addition to any other rights or remedies, any of the Parties may institute legal.
action to cure, correct or remedy any Default (to the extent otherwise permitted herein
and in Government Code Section 65864 et seq. or any successor laws and regulations),
to enforce any covenant or agreement herein in this Development Agreement or to
enjoin any threatened or attempted violation, including suits for declaratory relief,
specific performance, and relief in the nature of mandamus. All of the remedies
described above shall be cumulative and not exclusive of one another, and the exercise
of any one or more of the remedies shall not constitute a waiver or election with respect
to any other available remedy. The provisions of this Section 4B are not intended to
modify other provisions of the Development Agreement and are not intended to provide
additional remedies not otherwise permitted by law.
C. Attorney's Fees
In any legal proceedings brought by either party to enforce any covenant or any
of the Parties' rights or remedies under this Development Agreement including, without
limitation, any action for declaratory or equitable relief, the prevailing party shall be
entitled to recover reasonable attorneys' fees and all reasonable costs, expenses and
disbursements in connection with such action. Any such attorneys' fees and other
expenses incurred by either of the Parties in enforcing a judgment in its favor under this
Development Agreement, shall be recoverable separately from and in addition to any
other amount included in this judgment, and such attorneys' fees obligation is intended
to be severable from the other provisions of this Development Agreement and to survive
and not be merged into any such judgment.
Section 5. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
A. Successors and Assiqns
Subject to the provisions of Section 1C above, the terms of this Development
Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the Parties, and their
successors and assigns. Insofar as this Development Agreement refers to Property
Owners, as defined herein, if the rights under this Development Agreement are
assigned, the term "Property Owners" shall refer to any such successor or assign.
B. Proiect as a Private Undertakin.q
It is specifically understood and agreed by and between the Parties that the
Project is a private development, that neither party is acting as the agent of the other in
any respect under this Development Agreement, and that each of the Parties is an
Development Agreement 17 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 35 of 66
independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants and conditions
contained in this Development Agreement. No partnership, joint venture, or other
association of any kind is formed by this Development Agreement. The only relationship
between the CITY and Properly Owners is that of a government entity regulating the
development of private property and the owner of such private property.
C. Captions
The captions of this Development Agreement are for convenience and reference
only and shall in no way define, explain, modify, construe, limit, amplify or aid in the
interpretation, construction or meaning of any of the provisions of this Development
Agreement.
D. Mortgage Protection
1. Discretion to Encumber. This Development Agreement shall not prevent
or limit Property Owners, in any manner, at Property Owners' sole discretion, from
encumbering the Project or any portion of the Project or any improvements on the
Project, by any mortgage, deed of trust or other security device securing financing with
respect to all or any part of the Project or any improvements thereon (a "Mortgage").
2. Effect of Default. This Development Agreement shall be superior and
senior to any mortgage subsequently placed upon the property, or any portion thereof, or
any improvement thereon, including the lien of any mortgage or deed of trust. Despite
the foregoing, breach of any provision of this Development Agreement shall not defeat,
render invalid, diminish or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith for value.
3. Mortqaqee Not Obligated. Notwithstanding anything in this Development
Agreement to the contrary, (a) any holder of the beneficial interest under a Mortgage
("Mortgagee") may acquire to or possession of all or any portion of the Project or any
improvement thereon pursuant to the remedies provided by its Mortgage, whether by
judicial or non-judicial foreclosure, deed in lieu of foreclosure, or otherwise, and such
Mortgagee shall not have any obligation under this Development Agreement to
construct, fund or otherwise perform any affirmative obligation or affirmative covenant of
Property Owners hereunder or to guarantee such performance, and Mortgagee may,
after acquiring title to all or any portion of the Project as aforesaid, assign or otherwise
transfer the Project or any such portion thereof to any person or entity, and upon the
giving of notice of such assignment or transfer to the CITY and the assumption by the
assignee or transferee of the obligations of the Property Owners with respect to the
Property Owners or portion thereof so acquired which arise or accrue from and after the
date of assignment or transfer, Mortgagee shall be relieved and discharged of and from
any and all further obligations or liabilities under this Development Agreement with
respect to the Project or portion thereof so assigned or transferred; and (b) the consent
of CITY shall not be required for the acquisition of all or any portion of the Project by any
purchaser at a foreclosure sale conducted pursuant to the terms of any Mortgage, and
such purchaser shall, by virtue of acquiring title to the Project or such portion thereof, be
deemed to have assumed all obligations of Property Owners with respect to the Project
or portion thereof so acquired which arise or accrue subsequent to the purchase date,
but such purchaser shall not be responsible for any prior defaults of Property Owners;
provided, however, that in either of the instances referred to in clauses (a) or (b) above,
to the extent any obligation or covenant to be performed by Property Owners is a
condition to granting of a specific benefit or to the performance of a specific covenant by
Development Agreement 18 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 36 of 66
CITY, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to the CITY's
granting of such benefit and performance of such covenant hereunder.
4. Notice of Default to Mortqaqee: Riqht of Mort.qagee to Cure. If a
Mortgagee files with the City Clerk, a written notice requesting a copy of any Notice of
Default given Property Owners under this Development Agreement and specifying the
address for delivery thereof, the CITY shall deliver to such Mortgagee, concurrently with
delivery thereof to Property Owners, any notice given to Property Owners with respect to
any claim of the CITY that Property Owners have not complied with the terms of this
Development Agreement or is otherwise in Default under this Development Agreement.
Each such Mortgagee shall have the right (but not the obligation) for a period of thirty
(30) days after the expiration of any cure pedod given to Property Owners with respect
to such Default, to cure such default; provided, however, that if any such Default cannot,
with diligence, be remedied or cured within such thirty (30) day period, then such
Mortgagee shall have such additional time as may be necessary to remedy or cure such
Default, if such Mortgagee commences to remedy or cure within such thirty (30) day
period, and thereafter diligently pursues and completes such remedy or cure.
Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the Default is of a nature which can only be cured by
Mortgagee by obtaining possession, such Mortgagee shall be deemed to have remedied
or cured such Default if such Mortgagee shall, within such thirty (30) day period,
commences efforts to obtain possession and carry the same forward with diligence and
continuity through implementation of foreclosure, appointment of a receiver or otherwise,
and shall thereafter remedy or cure or commence to remedy or cure the Default within
the cure period specified in Section 3E above.
5. Bankruptcy. Notwithstanding the provisions of Section 5D4 above, if a
Mortgagee is prohibited from commencing or prosecuting foreclosure or other
appropriate proceedings in the nature thereof to obtain possession of the Project Site by
any process or injunction issued by any court or by any reason of any action by any
court having jurisdiction of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding involving Property
Owners, Mortgagee shall for the purposes of this Development Agreement be deemed
to be proceeding with diligence and continuity to obtain possession of the Property
dudng the period of such prohibition if Mortgagee is proceeding diligently to terminate
such prohibition.
6. Amendment to Development Aqreement. The CITY and Property Owners
agree not to modify this Development Agreement or to allow this Development
Agreement to be modified or amended in any way, or cancel this Development
Agreement, without the prior written consent of each Mortgagee, which consent shall not
be unreasonably withheld or delayed. Notwithstanding anything stated above to the
contrary, the CITY and Property Owners shall cooperate in including in this Development
Agreement, by suitable implementing agreement from time to time, any provision which
may reasonably be requested by a proposed Mortgagee for the purpose of implementing
the mortgagee-protection provisions contained in this Development Agreement and
allowing such Mortgagee reasonable means to protect or preserve the lien of the
Mortgage on the occurrence of a default under the terms of this Development
Agreement. The CITY and Property Owners each agree to execute and deliver
(acknowledge, if necessary for recording purposes) any implementing agreement
necessary to effect such request; provided, however, that any such implementing
agreement shall not in any material respect adversely effect any rights of the CITY under
this Development Agreement or be materially inconsistent with the substantive
Development Agreement 19 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 37 of 66
provisions of this Development Agreement, the Project Entitlements and the Existing
Laws.
E. Consent
Where the consent or approval of any of the Parties is required in or necessary
under this Development Agreement, unless the context otherwise indicates, such
consent or approval shall not be unreasonably withheld.
F. Entire A.clreement
This Development Agreement and the documents attached to and referred to in
this Development Agreement constitute the entire agreement between Parties with
respect to the subject matter of this Development Agreement.
G. Further Actions and Entitlements
Each of the Parties shall cooperate with and provide reasonable assistance to
the other to the extent contemplated under this Development Agreement in the
performance of all obligations under this Development Agreement and the satisfaction of
the conditions of this Development Agreement.
H. Governinq Law
This Development Agreement including, without limitation, its existence, validity,
construction and operation, and the dghts of each of the Parties shall be determined in
accordance with the laws of the State of California.
I. Recording
The City Clerk shall cause a copy of this Development Agreement to be recorded
in the office of the Recorder of the County of San Bemardino no later than ten (10) days
following the effective date of this Development Agreement. Once any lot or parcel in
the Project has been improved with a structure pursuant to this Development Agreement
for which the CITY has issued a Certificate of Occupancy, this Development Agreement
shall be deemed terminated with respect to such lot or parcel. While Parties intend for
such termination to be effective without further documentation, the CITY agrees to
execute such documentation as a Title Company shall reasonably require to evidence
such termination t the public record.
J. Time
Time is of the essence in this Development Agreement and of each and every
term and condition of this Development Agreement.
K. Waiver
The failure of any of the Padies at any time to seek redress for any violation of
this Development Agreement or any applicable law or regulation or to insist upon the
strict performance of any term or condition shall not prevent any subsequent act or
omission of the same or similar nature which would have originally constituted a breach
of or default under this Development Agreement from having all the force and effect of
an odginal breach or default, and such subsequent act or omission may be proceeded
against to the fullest extent provided by this Development Agreement. No provision of
this Development Agreement shall be deemed to have been waived by a party unless
the waiver is in writing and signed by any of the Parties.
Development Agreement 20 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 38 of 66
L. Partial Invalidity
If any term, covenant, condition or provision of this Development Agreement is
held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void or unenforceable, the
remainder of the provisions of this Development Agreement shall remain in full force and
effect and shall in no way be affected, impaired or invalidated thereby.
M. Notices_
All notices between the CITY and Property Owners and any transferee under this
Development Agreement, shall be in writing and shall be given by personal delivery, mail
or facsimile. Notice by personal delivery or facsimile shall be deemed effective upon
delivery of such notice to the party for which it is intended at the address set forth below
(or, in the case of a transferee in a written notice to the CITY). Notice by mail shall be
deemed effective upon receipt or rejection of the addressee. The Parties' current
address are as follows:
To CITY: Mr. Jack Lam, AICP
City Manager
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Ddve
Rancho Cucamonga CA 91730
With Copies to: Mr. James Markman
City Attorney
Richards, Watson, & Gershon
One Civic Center Circle
Brea CA 92821
To Property Owners: Mr. John Schafer
Hill Country $.A. Ltd./Richland Tracy, Ltd.
4100 Newport Place, Suite 800
Newport Beach CA 92660-1403
With Copies to:
Either Parties may change its mailing address or the person to whom notices are to be
sent at any time by giving written notice of such change to the other Parties in the
manner provided above.
N. Indemnification
Property Owners hereby agree to indemnify, defend, and hold harmless the CITY
and its Council members, representatives, agents, officers, attorneys, and employees
(the "Indemnified Parties") from and against any third party claim, action, or proceeding
against the Indemnified Parties to attack, set aside, void, or annul the approval of this
Development Agreement, the Land Use Entitlements, or both.
Development Agreement 21 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 39 of 66
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the Parties have duly executed this Development
Agreement as of the day and year first above written.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA RICHLAND TRACY, Ltd.
a Flodda limited partnership
By: Richland Ventures Inc., a Flodda
Corporation, its general partner
By: By:
Mayor Name/Title
Date: Date:
A'FI'ESTED TO: HILL COUNTRY, S.A. Ltd.,
a Texas limited partnership
By: Richland Stone Oak, Inc.
a Texas Corporation, its general partner
By:
City Clerk Name (Pdnt):
Date: Title:
Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
City A~omey
Date:
Attorney's for Hill Country S.A., Ltd.
Attorneys for Richland Tracy, Ltd.
Development Agreement 22 Richland Communities, Inc.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 40 of 66
EXHIBIT "A"
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT DRC2002-00156
LEGAL. DESCRIPTION
REAL PROPERTY IN THE UNINCORPORATED AREA OF THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
PARCEL NO. 1 (225-083-01)
THE sOUTHWEST 1/~ OF THE SOUTHWEST 1/4 , AND THE WEST ~ OF THE SOUTHEAST % OF
THE sOUTHWEST %, ALL IN SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN
BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE cOUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF
CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE SOUTH 30 FEET THEREOF.
PARCEL NO. 2 {225-083-13)
THE NORTHEAST % OF THE SOUTHEAST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP
NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN
~ERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF.
PARCEL NO~.3 (225-083-12)
THE NORTHEAST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST % OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP I NORTH, RANGE 6
WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE
OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL pLAT OF SAID LANDS.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM ALL MINERALS, MINERAL INTEREST, OIL, GAS AND OTHER
HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES, WITHOUT THE RIGHT TO ENTER UPON, PROCESS OR USE ANY
PORTION OF THE SURFACE OF SAID LAND ABOVE A DEPTH OF 500 FEET BELOW THE
SURFACE, AS RESERVED TO RODERICK STEVENSON, ET AL, BY DEED RECORDED
SEPTEMBER 11, 1981, INSTRUMENT NO. 81-202051, OFFICIAL RECORDS.
PARCEL NO. 4 (225-083-18)
THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH Va OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST % OF SECTION
21, TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE CITY
OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA, COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA,
ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND ON FILE IN THE DISTRICT LAND OFFICE,
LYING WEST OF A LINE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID sOUTH Y= OF NORTHWEST t/. OF THE
, t SAID POINT BEING NORTH 89°10,42" EAST, 356.99 FEET, FRO THEAT
BEGINNING
SOUTHWEST ¼. ~ ~· F THE SOUTHWEST ¼AND
NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SOUTH ~ OF THE NORTHWEST % O
SAID CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF ETIWANDA AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 15°37'04"
EAST, 476.71 FEET; THENCE BY A 1000 FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT, A DISTANCE OF
213.30 FEET, TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH Y= OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF
THE sOUTHWEST % AND POINT BEING NORTH 89°10'35" EAST, 563.40 FEET, FROM THE
SOUTHWEST cORNER OF SAID SOUTH ¼ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST %, SAID
CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF ETIWANDA AVENUE.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 41 of 66
PARCEL NO. 5 (225o083-16)
THAT PORTION OF THE SOUTH ~ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF SECTION
21, TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT,
LYING EAST OF A LINE DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE NORTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH Y2 OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE
SOUTHWEST ¼, SAID POINT BEING NORTH 89°10'42" EAST, 356.99 FEET FROM THE
NORTHWEST CORNER OF SAID SOUTH ~ OF THE NORTHWEST t/, OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼, AND
SAID CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF ETIWANDA AVENUE; THENCE SOUTH 15°37'04"
EAST, 47'6.41 FEET; THENCE BY A 1000-FOOT RADIUS CURVE TO THE LEFT, A DISTANCE OF
213.30 FEET TO A POINT ON THE SOUTH LINE OF SAID SOUTH ~ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF
THE SOUTHWEST ¼, SAID POINT BEING NORTH 89°10'35" EAST, 563.40 FEET FROM THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF SAID ½ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST ~, SAID
CORNER BEING ON THE CENTERLINE OF ETIWANDA AVENUE.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM AN UNDIVIDED ~ INTEREST IN AND TO ALL OIL, GAS, MINERALS
AND/OR OTHER HYDROCARBON SUBSTANCES IN AND UNDER SAID LAND BELOW A DEPTH OF
500 FEET BELOW THE SURFACE THEREOF, BUT WITHOUT ANY RIGHTS TO ENTER UPON THE
SURFACE OF SAID LAND OR TO THE TOP 500 FEET OF THE SUBSURFACE THEREOF..
PARCEL NO. 6
THE SOUTHERLY 30 FEET OF THE SOUTH ~ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF SECTION 21,
TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN THE COUNTY
OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT THEREOF.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM '~HE EAST 20 FEET.
ALSO EXCEPTING THEREFROM THAT PORTION CONVEYED TO THE SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
FLOOD CONTROL DISTRICT BY DEED RECORDED MARCH 8, 1951, IN BOOK 2730, PAGE 415,
OFFICIAL RECORDS, IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY.
r PARCEL NO. 7
THE NORTH ¼ OF THE NORTHWEST ¼ OF THE SOUTHWEST ¼ OF SECTION 21, TOWNSHIP 1
NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, ACCORDING TO THE
OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND APPROVED BY THE SURVEYOR GENERAL, NOVEMBER 13, 1881,
AND ON FILE IN THE OFFICE OF THE BUREAU OF LAND MANAGEMENT.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 42 of 66
APN: 0225-083-01°0°000 AND 0225-083-12-0-000 AND 0225o083-13°0-000 AND 0225-083-15-0-000
AND 0225-083-20-0-000 AND 0225°083-16-0-000 AND 0225-083-24-0-000.
PREPARED uNDER MY SUPERVISION:
LICENSE EXPIRES 6-30-2004 u~.xp' 6/30/2004m
G:~05~10~,LEGALS'~ANNEX-DOC ~
Ordinance No. 725
Page 43 of 66
BOUNDARY MaP: ss.c~=.¢n
NWl/4
PARCEL 7 AP~
~ p~3
p,e, RClg. 1 pARCEL 2
AFfl 2~H~-0~ APN 22~08~-13
W. MICHAB. WATI~ 'II~EA~/~YT PLANT
EASEMENT NOTES:
DEVELOPMEN'
AGREEMENT EXHIBr
T~CT NO. 1607:
PROJEC
EXHIBIT "B"
Ordinance No. 725
Page 44 of 66
DEVELOPMEN
AGREEMENT EXHIBI
TRACT NO. t607
TENTATI~
EXHIBIT NO. I TRACT M,
Sheet t of'.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 45 of 66
~~"~EN
DEVELOPM '
AGREEMENT EXHIBI'
TRACT NO~0~7,
TTERANTc.~TMI~A
EXHIBI? NO, '~
Ordinance No. 725
Page 46 of 66
L(~T sUMMARY ~8OUT14 PHASE" (8QUARE~,FI~~
" - DEVELOPMEN
' "*- AGREEMENT EXHIBI
" ' - TRACT NO.
, . -- TENTATI~
· TRACT MJ
EXHIBIT NO, 3 ..... ~--'-'
Ordinance No. 725
Page 47 of 66
i '--'
; = -=- =: ..,.,,__,,__
... _.= ,__.== ~
'."" ~ ~!: = =' ~ ~ -: ~ '"'= ~ ~ ~ OEVELOPMEN'I
B ',!~. ~ = : .~ ~ i ~ .~ ,= AGREEMENT EXHIBI1
i ~ -~ E ~. : ,~ · .=' _.= : TRACT NO. '1607:
' '--' "" ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ TENTATIVI
: ~i~ '"1 TRACTMAI
Sheet 4 of 2
EXHIBIT NO. 4
Ordinance No. 725
Page 48 of 66
DEVELOPMEN
AGREEMENT EXHIBI
TRACT NO. t 60?
CONCEPTUAL GRAOIN
EXHIBIT NO. 5 pLA.
Sh~T'~~
Ordinance No. 725
Page 49 of 66
DEVELOPMEN'
AGREEMENT EXHIBI'
TRACT NO. '1607
CONCEal'UA
EXHIBIT NO. 6 o~o,.o.,.A,
sh~T3 ~~,
Ordinance No. 725
Page 50 of 66
DEVELOPMEN
AGREI=Mm=NT ECXHIBI
TRACT NO. 1607
CONCEPTUA
EXHIBIT NO. 7 ORADINGPLA
Ordinance No. 725
Page 51 of 66
DEVELOPMEN
AGREEMENT EXHIBI
TRACT NO. 160'/
CONCEPTU.(
EXHIBIT NO. 8
s~,~"'~'
Ordinance No. 725
Page 52 of 66
DEVELOPME~
AGREEMENT EXHIB~
T~CT NO. 160~
CONCE~U~
EXHIBIT NO. 9 G~DIN~
Sh~t g ~
Ordinance No. 725
Page 53 of 66
DEVELOPMEN
AGREEMENT EXHIBI
TRACT NO. '160?
EXHIBIT NO. 10 GRADINGCONCEPTU'~pLA
s~'~o~'
Ordinance No. 725
Page 54 of 66
.~._._.,,..., ,-
DEVELOPMEN
AGREEMENT EXHIBI
TRACT NO. '~ 601
CONCEPTU~
EXHIBIT NO.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 55 of 66
__,
**~'~*~'"' DEVELOPMEN
AGREEMENT EXHIBI
TRACT NO. t 60'~
EXHIBIT NO. 12 GRADINGCONCEPTU'pu
Ordinance No. 725
Page 56 of 66
DEVELOPMEN
AGREEMENT EXHIBI
TRACT NO. t 60'~
CONCEPTU~
EXHIBIT NO. 13 GRADING PI..~
Sheet 13 of
Ordinance No. 725
Page 57 of 66
DEVELOPMEN'
AGREEMENT EXHIBF
TRACT NO. ~1607:
EXHIBIT NO. 14 CONCEPTUA
GRADING PI.Al
Sheet t4 of =
l{ I " I I I - I I I-'.l "' r ::' i '"-' i "' ~ -'.-', , ...=".._. ;"; .'-': .'_- .... ~... .... =. ..... .=.,..
- -~.:=. := ....... =,. ............. /.".1 ."."i1
DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT EXHIBIT
TRACT NO. 16072
GRADING
I=¥HIRIT NO 15 ~ ~
SECTION 'D-D'
,~~~111 III III I III1~--I-I1~
SECTION INDEX MAP ~
DEVELOPMENT
AGREEMENT EXHIBIT
TRACT NO. 16072
GRADING
I=¥1-11RIT NO_ t1~ SECTIONS
Ordinance No. 725
Page 60 of 66
AGREEMENT EXHIBr
,. "~- - T~CT NO. 1607:
.... ~ ..... G~DIN~
EXHIBIT NO. 17 SECTION.
Ordinance No. 725
Page 61 of 66
· : FOR EASTAVi~I.
'SEE EXHIBIT
NO. 20
FOR WILSON AVENUE
SEClION
DEVELOPMEN'
AGREEMENT EXHIBI
TRACT NO. t 607
EXHIBIT NO. 18 C,RC.~T,O
IMPROVEMENT
Sheet 18of:
Ordinance No. 725
Page 62 of 66
~Y
EAST AVENUE (NORTH OF WILSON AVENUE)
AGREEMENT EXHIBI
TRACT NO. t60'J
EXHIBIT NO. 19 TYPICAL STREE
SECTIOI'
Sheet 19 of
Ordinance No. 725
Page 63 of 66
WILSON AVENUE (24TH STREET)
DEVELOPMEN'
AGREEMENT EXHIBI'
TRACT NO. 16071
.EXHIBIT NO. 20 TYPICALsEcTioN:STREE'
Sheet 20 of;
Ordinance No. 725
Page 64 of 66
TABLE 6-2
PROJECT FAiR SHARE INTERSECTION TRAFFIC CONTRIBUTION
I 2020 PROJECT
i WITH TOTAL % OF PROJECT
TOTAL EXJSTING. PROJECT PROJECT NEW NEW COST
~NT ERSECTION/S EG ME,"~T cosr TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC TRAFFIC SHARE
.:tiwanca Ave. - West (NS} at:
· WiJson Ave. ,fEW} $120~000 319 : 1,402 142 lr083 13.1% $15,734
!liwanda Ave. - --as;. ,fNS) aC
· Wilson Ave. (EW} $120,000 291 j 1,450 160 1,159 13.8% $16,566
· Summit. Ave. (_=W) $120,000 928 i 1,§B3 112 1.055 10.6% $12,739
· Hi.3h[andAve.,fEW} $309~000 lr214 , 2,209 109 995 11.0% $33,850
:asr Ave. (NS) at:
· Wi!son Ave. (_-~,'¢) $120.000 O 1,305 165 1,305 12.6% $15,172
· SummilAve. (EW1 $738,000 510 1,656 106 1~146 g.2% $68.262
TOTAL I ~;1IS27'000 J I ! $162,324
DEVELOPMEN
AGREEMENT EXHIBI
TRACT NO. '1607
EXHIBIT NO. 21 REGIONAL TRANSPORTAT,O
COST ESTIMATE
Ordinance No. 725
Page 65 of 66
EXHIBIT 7-A
CIRCULATION RECOMMENDATIONS
SITE
,~:. .... ~ engine~dng
DEVELOPMEN'
AGREEMENT EXHIBI'
T~CT NO. 1607
EXHI BIT NO. 22 REGIONAL T~NSPORTATIOtiMPROVEMENT
Sh~t ~of;
Ordinance No. 725
Page 66 of 66
· 'I DE'I1ENT]ON
8A~IN
DEVELOPMEN~
AGREEMENT EXHIBI~
TRACT NO. 1607:
INTERIM DETENTIOI
BASIN