HomeMy WebLinkAbout00-73 - Resolutions RESOLUTION NO. 00-73
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA, RECOMMENDING ADOPTION OF
A CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION AFFIRMING THE EIR AND SEIR
CERTIFIED BY THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, AS AUGMENTED
BY AN ADDENDUM PREPARED BY THE CITY, AND ADOPTION OF AN
ORDINANCE AUTHORIZING THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA TO
ENTER INTO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 00-02, FOR A
DEVELOPMENT PROJECT CONSISTING OF A MAXIMUM OF
685 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND UP TO TWO COMMERCIAL CENTERS IN
THE LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL DISTRICT(2-4 DWELLING UNITS PER
ACRE), GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE
BETWEEN DAY CREEK CHANNELAND HANLEY AVENUE,AS PROVIDED
FOR IN SECTION 65864 OF THE CALIFORNIA GOVERNMENT CODE, FOR
REAL PROPERTY DESCRIBED HEREIN, AND MAKING FINDINGS IN
SUPPORT THEREOF—TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14493 THROUGH 14498,
14522, 14523, 15838, AND 15902.
A. Recitals.
1. U.C.P., Inc. has filed an application for Development Agreement 00-02, as described in
the title of this Resolution. Hereinafter in this Resolution, the subject Development Agreement is
referred to as "the application."
2. On October 26, 1999, the County Board of Supervisors reviewed and approved a
residential development project consisting of 685 residential lots and two commercial centers.
3. On October 26, 1999, an Environmental Impact Report was prepared for the project and
was certified by the County Board of Supervisors
4. On November 29, 1999, the City of Rancho Cucamonga filed a lawsuit on the adequacy
of the EIR and SEIR for the Project.
5. In June 2000, the City of Rancho Cucamonga, County of San Bernardino,and U.C.P. Inc.
reached a settlement agreement. As part of the settlement agreement, the developer is required to
enter into a development agreement with the City, and the City is required to file an annexation
application to the Local Agency Formation Commission for the annexation of the project area into the
City of Rancho Cucamonga.
6. On July 12, and continued to July 26 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga conducted and concluded a duly noticed public hearing and recommended to
City Council the adoption of Development Agreement 00-02.
7. The subject property of the Development Agreement is legally described herein.
8. A true and correct copy of the proposed Development Agreement is attached as
Exhibit "A" to the attached draft Ordinance.
9. The Planning Commission has reviewed and considered the associated Environmental
Assessment prepared for said project.
10. All legal prerequisites prior to the adoption of this Resolution have occurred.
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION NO. 00-73
DA 00-02 — U.C.P., INC.
July 26, 2000
Page 2
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, it is hereby found, determined, and resolved bythe Planning Commission
of the City of Rancho Cucamonga as follows:
1. This Commission hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the Recitals,
Part A, of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. This Commission hereby specifically finds that the Development Agreement and each
and every term and provision contained herein conform to the General Plan of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
3. This Commission hereby recommends approval of the Development Agreement attached
as Exhibit "A" of the attached draft Ordinance and draft City Council Resolution affirming the EIR
and SEIR as certified by the County of San Bernardino and as augmented by an addendum
prepared by the City of Rancho Cucamonga attached as Exhibit "B."
4. The Secretary to this Commission shall certify to the adoption of this Resolution.
APPROVED AND ADOPTED THIS 26TH DAY OF JULY 2000.
PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
BY: A )3119
L*o
rry T. W, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Bu creta
I, Brad Buller, Secretary of the Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, do hereby
certify that the foregoing Resolution was duly and regularly introduced, passed, and adopted by the
Planning Commission of the City of Rancho Cucamonga, at a regular meeting of the Planning
Commission held on the 26th day of July 2000, by the following vote-to-wit:
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: MACIAS, MCNIEL, STEWART, TOLSOTY
NOES: COMMISSIONERS: NONE
ABSENT: COMMISSIONERS: MANNERINO
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA, CALIFORNIA AFFIRMING THE EIR AND SEIR AS
CERTIFIED BY THE COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO AND AS
AUGMENTED BY AN ADDENDUM PREPARED BY THE CITY OF
RANCHO CUCAMONGA AS LEGALLY SUFFICIENT FOR THE
UNIVERSITY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT PROJECT.
A. Recitals.
1. The Board of Supervisors of the Count of San Bernardino (Board) previously
certified an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the University Development Project in 1991
(SCH #88082915). The project was never constructed. Subsequent to the 1991 approval, a
portion of the University Development Project was purchased, and in 1998 the new owners
made application to the County for approval of the Revised University Project (Project), severing
the University portion from the Crest portion of the original University Development Project. The
Board was presented with the Project and certified a Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report (SEIR) on October 26, 1999 (SCH #98121091). In its Statement of Facts, Findings and
Statement of Overriding Considerations, dated October 26, 1999, the Board found that the SEIR
had been prepared to evaluate the potential environmental effects that would result from the
development of the proposed modifications to the Project in accordance with the requirements
of both the California Environmental Quality Act, as amended, (CEQA) and the State CEQA
Guidelines (Guidelines). No judicial determination to the contrary has been issued.
2. On November 29, 1999, the City of Rancho Cucamonga commenced a judicial
challenge to the Board's certification of the SEIR by filing an action entitled "The City of Rancho
Cucamonga v. the County of San Bernardino and the Board of Supervisors of the County of San
Bernardino, et al" Consolidated Case No. SCVSS 62412, (the Action). The Action challenged
the adequacy of the SEIR for the Project on a number of grounds, of which the primary
concerns included inadequate traffic impacts analysis, inadequate open space analysis, and
improper application of the City's zoning standards applicable within its sphere of influence.
The City, Board, and the Project proponent have entered into a conditional settlement
agreement as regards to the Action. The primary benefits to the City arising from the settlement
agreement are (a) the Project proponent's agreement to enter into a development agreement as
regards to the Project and (b) the addition of further clarifying language into the SEIR pursuant
to an Addendum, as the same is defined in Section 15164 of the Guidelines. Through the
settlement agreement, the City and the Project proponent have addressed the City's concerns .
about potential traffic impacts, and have agreed to modify certain traffic elements, primarily
design and timing of construction issues, which address the City's concerns. The City has been
advised that the Project proponent is acquiring additional off-site land for perpetual use as open
space that addresses the City's other primary concerns. Finally, of additional benefit is the
proposal that the Project be annexed into the City of Rancho Cucamonga, thus providing further
benefits to the City and through the settlement agreement addresses concerns about the City's
zoning standards as applied to the Project.
3. The City of Rancho Cucamonga is identified as a responsible agency regarding the
development of the Project pursuant to CEQA and the Notice of Preparation of the SEIR was
served on the City as such responsible agency. However, the City is the lead agency as
regards to the processing of the development agreement. This Resolution is intended to satisfy
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
DA 00-02 - U.C.P. INC.
July 26, 2000
Page 2
all requirements of CEQA and the Guidelines in regards to the Project as amended by the
settlement agreement and in regards to the development agreement as set forth in the related
Addendum. Upon annexation, the City will become the lead agency for all CEQA purposes as
regards the Project.
4. All legal prerequisites to the adoption of this Resolution have been completed as
required by law.
B. Resolution.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
as follows:
1. This Council hereby specifically finds that all of the facts set forth in the
Recitals, Part 'A" of this Resolution are true and correct.
2. This City Council makes the following findings in regard to the addendum
prepared for, and which augments the EIR and SEIR, for the Project as regulated by the
settlement agreement and the development agreement;
a. The City, as a responsible agency under CEQA for the Project and as
lead agency for the development agreement, has prepared an addendum to the SEIR, pursuant
to CEQA Guidelines Section 15096 and 15164 to address the refinements to the Project as set
forth in the development agreement.
b. The decision not to prepare a further subsequent environmental impact
report or a Supplement to the SEIR is explained and supported by substantial evidence in the
Initial Study/addendum attached hereto as Attachment 1. The City Council expressly finds that
through the settlement agreement which settles the Action and through the adoption of the
development agreement the Project has been sufficiently modified in terms of certain design,
construction timing, circulation issues, and zoning concerns, affecting the development of the
Project, that the issues alleged in the Action have been resolved and the City can now support
the Project. The modifications have not substantially altered the previously identified significant
environmental impacts and/or related mitigation measures, as reflected in Attachment 1.
c. That on the basis of the facts and evidence set forth in Attachment 1, an
addendum is the adequate further environmental analysis that is required as authorized by
Section 21166 of CEQA and Section 15162 of the Guidelines.
d. That the addendum has been completed in compliance with CEQA.
e. In reaching its decision concerning the development agreement, the City
has considered the environmental effects of the Project as shown in the EIR, the SEIR and the
addendum, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15096(f), prior to approving the development
agreement, which will govern development of the Project.
f. That the EIR, SEIR, and addendum collectively reflect the City Council's
independent judgment and analysis.
CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION
DA 00-02 - U.C.P. INC.
July 26, 2000
Page 3
3. The City Council, pursuant to the requirements of Guidelines Section 15096(h)
hereby makes the findings required by Section 15091 of the Guidelines as shown on
Attachment 2 and the findings required by Section 15093 of the Guidelines, as shown on
Attachment 3 hereto.
4. The City Clerk shall cause the notice of determination required by Section 15094
and Section 15096(i) of the Guidelines to be filed as required by law.
DRAFT ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA
CALIFORNIA, APPROVING DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT NO. 00-02,
A DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT, BETWEEN THE CITY OF RANCHO
CUCAMONGA AND U.C.P. INC. FOR THE PURPOSE OF
DEVELOPING AN APPROXIMATELY 250—ACRE SITE WITH UP TO
685 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND UP TO TWO COMMERCIAL AREAS,
GENERALLY LOCATED NORTH OF HIGHLAND AVENUE, BETWEEN
DAY CREEK CHANNEL AND WEST OF HANLEY AVENUE -
TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 14493 THROUGH 14498, 14522, 14523,
15838, AND 15902.
A. Recitals.
1. California Government Code Section 65864 now 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 developments 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:
"Any city...may enter into a Development Agreement with any person having a
legal or equitable interest in real property for the development of such property as provided in
this article..."
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 of 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 of intensity of development set forth in the Agreement..."
4. "Attached to this Ordinance, marked as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this
reference is proposed Development Agreement 00-02, concerning that property generally
located north of Highland Avenue, east of Day creek Channel and west of Hanley Avenue, and
CITY COUNCIL DRAFT ORDINANCE
DA 00-02 - U.C.P. INC.
July 26, 2000
Page 2
as 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 July 12, and continued to July 26, 2000, the Planning Commission of the City of
Rancho Cucamonga held a duly noticed hearing concerning the Development Agreement and
concluded said hearing on that date and recommended approval through adoption of its
Resolution.
6. On 2000, the City Council of the City of Rancho Cucamonga
conducted a duly noticed public hearing concerning the Development Agreement.
7. 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 forth in the
Recitals, Part A, of this Ordinance are true and correct.
SECTION 2: Prior to the adoption of this Ordinance, this Council has reviewed an
addendum to the EIR and SEIR as certified by the County of San Bernardino and augmented by
an addendum prepared by the City of Rancho Cucamonga as legally sufficient for the University
Planned Development Project.
SECTION 3: Based upon substantial evidence presented during the above-referenced
public hearing on including written and oral staff reports, together with public
testimony, this Council hereby specifically finds as follows:
a) The location, design, and proposed uses set forth in this Development Agreement
are compatible with the character of existing development in the vicinity.
b) The Development Agreement conforms to the General Plan of the City of Rancho
Cucamonga.
SECTION 4: It is expressly found that the public necessity, general welfare, and good
zoning practice require the approval of the Development Agreement.
SECTION 5: This Council hereby approves Development Agreement 00-02, attached
hereto as Exhibit"A".
SECTION 6: The Mayor shall sign this Ordinance and the City Clerk shall cause the same
to be published with 15 days after its passage at least once in the Inland Valley Daily Bulletin, a
newspaper of general circulation published in the City of Ontario, California, and circulated in
the City of Rancho Cucamonga, California.
RECORDING REQUESTED BY AND
WHEN RECORDED RETURN TO:
City Clerk
City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga,California 91730
(Space above for Recorder's Use Only)
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
By and Between
THE CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA,CALIFORNIA
and
U.C.P. INCORPORATED, a California corporation
Dated: ,2000
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF'
RANCHO CUCAMONGA AND
U.C.P.INCORPORATED CONCERNING
THE REVISED UNIVERSITY PROJECT
This Agreement(the"Development Agreement") is made and entered into this_th day of_, 2000,by
and between U.C.P. Incorporated,a California corporation("U.C.P.") and the City of Rancho Cucamonga, a
municipal corporation(the"CITY")pursuant to the authority of Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the California
Government Code. U.C.P. and its successors and assigns, if any, are referred to collectively hereinafter as the
"Property Owner." The CITY and U.C.P.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 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 Owner owns fee title to approximately 250.67 acres of real property located entirely
within the County of San Bernardino(the"County")and more particularly described in Exhibit"A"attached hereto
(the "Project Site"). Previously, the Project Site was subject to land use entitlements resulting from the County's
approval in 1991 of the University/Crest Project Planned Development,PUD No. W12149(the"University/Crest
PD"). The University/Crest PD entitlements combined two separately owned properties with 1,238 residential units,
commercial development, school,park and open space of 1,111.29 acres. The Project Site is the University portion
of the University/Crest PD.
D. In 1998,Property Owner applied to County for approval of revisions to the University/Crest PD,
to modify the previous entitlements related to the Project Site(the"Revised University Project"or the"Project").
The requested modifications included:
1. Separating the University portion of the University/Crest PD from the Crest portion;
2. Adding 64 acres to the University portion,formerly owned by Southern California Edison which had
bisected the Project Site;
3. Increasing the number of dwelling units from 578 to 685;
4. Modifying the location of commercial uses and adding a net 2.3 acres of commercial development;
5. Increasing the proposed school and park sites by 6.0 acres;
6. Revising the project design with street aligtunents, lot designs and increased lots sizes;
7. Extending Banyan/Summit Avenue westerly over Day Creek Channel, to connect to Rochester;
8. Transferring to the County of San Bernardino, in fee, 86 acres(one-half of a 172 acre parcel)of off-
site land for permanent open space,along with funding in the amount of$110,000.00,to provide for
long-term maintenance of such off-site land;and
Der<wv^em A,rtc .,0-:4-W - I -
9. Eliminating the 675-acre open space area from the Project, as it had already been transferred to the
County by the Metropolitan Water District.
E. On October 26, 1999, the County approved the Revised University Project, namely Revised
Preliminary Development Plan W121-49, and a Minor General Plan Amendment and zone change for the former
SCE property(the"Revised University Project Entitlements"). In accordance with the rules, regulations and
policies of the California Environmental Quality Act("CEQA")and the County's Development Code, the County
certified a Supplemental EIR in connection with the Revised University Project Entitlements(the "SEIR") as being
accurate, adequate and complete in the environmental evaluation of the impacts associated with the Revised
University Project and adopted Findings and a Statement of Overriding Considerations.
F. On November 29, 1999, the CITY filed a Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for
Declaratory Relief challenging County's approval of the Revised University Project and certification of the SEIR
(the"Litigation"), The CITY filed a first amended Petition for Writ of Mandate and Complaint for Declaratory and
Injunctive Relief on February 3, 2000(the"Petition"). In the Petition, the CITY alleged, inter alia, that(1) the
County should have prepared a new, or subsequent EIR for the approval of the Revised Project due to the requested
changes in the Project;(2) the SEIR is inadequate;(3)the Findings did not support the Statement of Overriding
Considerations;(4)the County failed to consider and apply the CITY's land use and zoning standards when it
approved the Revised University Project;(5)the County's finding of conformity with the CITY's land use and
zoning laws was not supported by substantial evidence; and(6)the County's general plan amendment related to
spheres of influence was invalid.
G. On March 20,2000,U.C.P. filed its answer and response to the Petition,denying each and every
allegation.
H. On March 24, 2000, the County filed its answer and response to the Petition,denying each and
every allegation.
I. Subsequent to initiation of the Litigation, the CITY and Property Owner have resolved their
differences, as memorialized in a transaction which is the subject of a Settlement, Pre-Annexation,and Tolling
Agreement between them, dated April_, 2000(the"Settlement and Pre-Annexation Agreement"). As a condition
of entering into the Settlement and Pre-Annexation Agreement,the CITY and Property Owner have agreed to enter
into a development agreement, substantially in the form of this Development Agreement,subject to compliance with
all applicable legal requirements for notice,hearing and findings. In addition to providing a vehicle for settlement
of the Litigation,this Development Agreement will enable the CITY to realize recreational,commercial,residential
and regional benefits and facilities. The development of the Project at the earliest practicable date will enhance the
quality of life of present and future residents of the CITY.
J. As further set forth in Ordinance No._enacted by the CITY on _, 2000(the
"Enacting Ordinance"),the execution of this Development Agreement and the 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;(it)will
promote the public convenience general welfare, and good land use practices in the CITY; (iii)will promote
preservation of land values: (iv)will encourage the development of the Project by providing a level of certainty to
the Property Owner; and(v)will provide for orderly growth and development of the CITY consistent with the
CITY's General Plan.
Aereement
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 is hereby acknowledged,
the Parties agree as follows:
Development Agree ni<.3a-W -2-
Section L GENERAL PROVISIONS
A. Effectiveness of Development Agreement
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, if all of the following have
occurred before March O1, 2001,unless that date is mutually extended in writing by Property Owner and the CITY:
(i) The Project Site has been annexed to the CITY and said annexation is final as to any and
all administrative actions,and is not then subject to judicial challenge; and
(ii) The Parties have performed all of their respective obligations under the Settlement and
Pre-Annexation Agreement.
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 ten(10) years thereafter(the"Term"),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 extension attributable to the"force majeure"
circumstances described in Section 2D5 hereof or by mutual written 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
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. Assignment
Subject to the terms of this Development Agreement,Property Owner 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 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 perforrit such obligations under this Development Agreement at the
time of the Transfer,except to the extent Property Owner is in Default, as defined in Section 3C hereof, of any of the
terms of this Development Agreement when the Transfer occurs.
If all 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 other 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 3C 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 Development Agreement to such public agency 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.
R vcbpn nl Agnn nt 4-24-W -3
I
Property Owner shall notify the CITY not less than sixty(60)days before any such Transfer, and such
notice shall contain all material information regarding the contemplated Transfer, including but not limited to the i
identity of the transferee, and the material terms of such contemplated Transfer.
D. Amendment of Agreement
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 Owner and the CITY acknowledge that the provisions of this Development Agreement require a
close degree of cooperation between Property Owner 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, without amending the Development
Agreement, the Parties may do so through one or more implementing agreements(the "Implementing Agreement"),
which shall be executed by the Community Development Director of CITY(the"Community Development
Director")and by an authorized representative of Property Owner. 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 Community Development Director(on behalf of the
CITY), if the Community Development Director has determined that such implementing agreements are not
materially inconsistent with this Development Agreement,and the 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 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 Revised University Project Entitlements, shall
be considered"material"and require amendment of this Agreement in accordance with the provisions of Califomia
Government Code Sections 65867 and 65868.
Section 2. PLANNED DEVELOPMENT OF THE PROJECT
A. Land Use Entitlements
The land use entitlements approved by the County are depicted on Exhibit`B". The Parties
acknowledge that, without being obligated to do so,Property Owner plans to develop the Project Site in substantial
conformity with the Revised University Project Entitlements as amended by this Development Agreement. During
the Term,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,provisions for reservations
or dedications,design and performance standards and other terms and conditions of development of the Revised
University Project,shall be those set forth in the Revised University Project Entitlements as amended by this
Development Agreement. The specific terms of this Development Agreement shall supercede and be controlling
over any conflict and/or inconsistency with the Revised University Project Entitlements.
The Parties acknowledge and agree that the total number of lots in the approved tracts total 685
lots and that lots may be shifted between tracts without increasing the overall number of lots and be in substantial
conformity with the Revised University Project Entitlements as amended by this Development Agreement. The
CITY Planner shall exercise his reasonable discretion to review transfers of lots between tracts and make the
determination of substantial compliance.
Other certain specific modifications of the Revised University Project Entitlements to which the
Parties agree are set forth below. All Exhibits attached hereto constitute material provisions of the Development
Agreement,and are incorporated herein.
D[velopn nt Ape nt a?6-00
-4-
B. Rules and Reeulations
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65856 and except as otherwise explicitly
provided in this Development Agreement, the ordinances, rules,regulations and official policies governing
permitted uses of the Project Site, the density and intensity of such uses, and design, improvement, and construction
standards and specifications applicable to development of the Project, shall be the Revised University Project
Entitlements and those ordinances of the CITY, as implemented by this Development Agreement, rules,regulations
and official policies and General Plan provisions in force at the time of the effective date of this Development
Agreement,but only to the extent that they are consistent with the Revised University Project Entitlements,as
modified and/or amended by this Development Agreement(the"Existing Laws"), except that the CITY's street
improvement, lighting, storm drain,and Americans With Disabilities Act("ADA")standards shall be followed, and
the landscape standards applicable shall be those specified in this Development Agreement,and/or the CITY's
standards. In the event of any conflict between the CITY's ordinances, rules, regulations and official policies and
General Plan and the Existing Laws, 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:
(i) modify the pertained 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 provision of on-site or off-site improvements or the reservation or dedication of
land for public use, or the payment of fees or the imposition of exactions,other than as are in each case specifically
provided for in this Development Agreement;
(it) prevent the Property Owner from obtaining all necessary approvals,permits,certificates
or other entitlements at such dates and under such circumstances as the Property Owner would otherwise be entitled
under this Development Agreement;
(iii) prevent or inhibit Property Owner from commencing,continuing and finishing on a
timely basis the construction and development of the Revised University Project or timely satisfaction of Property
Owner's obligations under this Development Agreement, in the manner contemplated by this Development
Agreement and/or
(iv) render any conforming use of the Project Site a non-conforming use or any structure on
the Project Site a non-conforming structure.
C. Design and Infrastructure Issues
1. Commercial.Park and School Sites
The County's approved land uses in the Revised University Project are depicted on
Exhibit`B". Despite these approved land uses, the CITY and Property Owner desire that Property Owner modify
certain of the approved commercial sites, and provide for the joint use of the Park and School site in conformity with
this Development Agreement.
a. Commercial Sites
(i)The Intex Properties Commercial Site
The CITY desires that the commercial site located on the northwest comer of Banyan
Avenue and Day Creek Boulevard be enlarged and have a minimum depth of three hundred(300) feet. If a larger
commercial development is not feasible, then this site should be considered for residential development. However,
this commercial site is owned by Intex Properties,and not by Property Owner and,therefore, Property Owner has no
legal ability to make an agreement about the future development of this commercial site. Nevertheless,Property
Owner shall use good faith,diligent efforts in negotiations with Intex Properties to accommodate the CITY's desires
D elWp agreement 4-24-W - 5 -
to provide for a commercial site of 9.1 acres in substantial conformity with Exhibit"C", The CITY recognizes that
the commercial development depicted on Exhibit"C"does not meet the CITY's usual 10-acre minimum site.
Should these negotiations result in an agreement to develop a larger commercial site, Property Owner agrees to
make application to the CITY to modify its Entitlements and to use diligent, good faith efforts to cause an
application to be made to the CITY for the entitlements to develop the larger commercial site. Should the
negotiations not result in an agreement with Intex Properties, then Property Owner may proceed with residential
development of Tract 14494 of its project site,as generally depicted on Exhibit"D". If a larger commercial
development is not possible,then the Intex Properties Site may be considered for development with residential
development or other CITY-approved commercial uses allowed under the low residential district of the Etiwanda
North Specific Plan. In that case,the approved entitlements of Tract 14494 will be modified to extend the street
south to Banyan Avenue, as generally depicted on Exhibit"D"and the CITY agrees to participate in any required
condemnation proceeding to allow the construction of the new street to connect to Banyan Avenue in conformity
wits- -ITY standards.
(ii)Area G
Property Owner may apply to the CITY for development of the commercial site located
within Area G of the Project Site Plan(see Exhibit`B")in accordance with the Revised University Project
Entitlements and the CITY agrees to consider, in good faith,such application. The Parties acknowledge that the
design criteria for this commercial development shall be those contained in the Etiwanda North Specific Plan,except
the commercial site will be approximately 6.77 acres. All other development criteria shall comply with the
applicable development standards of the CITY. Should commercial development under these criteria be infeasible,
then the use of Area G will revert to residential, which may include a minimum of 26 lots for single family, detached
homes, with minimum lot sizes of 7,200 square feet as depicted in Exhibit"E". Upon final decision by the CITY
that commercial development of Area G is not feasible,the Property Owner shall initiate a zone change and General
Plan amendment for residential development of the site within 120 days of such final decision.
b. Park and School Sites
The CITY and Property Owner agree to use diligent,good faith efforts to obtain the
Etiwanda School District's agreement for reciprocal rights to shared parking facilities and use of the park site and
school site.
2. Day Creek Boulevard Streetscaues
The CITY desires that the design of Day Creek Boulevard streetscapes be modified from
that approved as part of the Revised University Project Entitlements,to accommodate a wider landscape setback
along the east side of Day Creek Boulevard, and that the walls,pilasters and landscapes be modified to be
substantially consistent with the development of Day Creek Boulevard south of the Project Site. Property Owner
agrees to modify the design of Day Creek Boulevard as depicted on Exhibit"F", to build said streetscapes in
substantial conformity with Exhibit"F-1". With the exception of grading and hardscape requirements,the
improvements for Day Creek Boulevard shall be substantially consistent with the CITY's approved Day Creek
Boulevard Master Plan however,the Parties acknowledge and agree that the median width shall be a maximum of
10 feet, and the parkway on the east side of Day Creek Boulevard shall be 25 feet in depth from curb face,except as
shown on Exhibit"F-2". The monuments at the intersections on Day Creek Boulevard shall be constructed in
substantial conformity with Exhibits"G"and"G-1"and with the"Entry Monument Constructions Documents"on
file with the CITY on October 1, 1999.
3. Banyan/Summit Avenue From SCE Easement to Rochester Avenue
The CITY desires that Banyan Avenue,west of Day Creek Boulevard,be fully extended from the
existing Southern California Edison easement, which parallels the western boundary of the Project Site, through to
Rochester Avenue on the west as this is identified as a vital link in the CITY's circulation plan. The CITY
acknowledges and agrees that such extension is not a part of the Revised University Project Entitlements,and is not
required for traffic circulation related solely to the Revised University Project. Property Owner hereby agrees to
provide the funding,and/or,construction necessary to build the improvements to Banyan Avenue through to
I vtIOP=nt ApftMnt 4-24-M
-6-
Rochester Avenue, including all construction drawings and plans. The CITY agrees that within thirty(30) days of
the receipt of final drawings and required completed applications, it will apply to the County of San Bernardino and
anv other local, State or Federal agencies with jurisdiction for all necessary permits to complete such improvements
(the"Permits"). Property Owner shall have no obligation to obtain the Permits,but agrees to cooperate as necessary
with the CITY to obtain such Permits. Once the CITY has obtained the Permits, Property Owner agrees to make
such approved improvements to Banyan Avenue, in substantial conformity with the improvements depicted on
Exhibit"H". The CITY agrees that it has requested that landscaping, including irrigation,be installed along the
south side of the extension of Banyan Avenue, west of the property line of the Project site, and the CITY agrees that
it will be responsible for the cost of maintenance of this landscaping, which may include, at the CITY's option,
inclusion in any landscape maintenance district created pursuant to Section 2K,below. Attached as Exhibit"H-I" is
the"Banyan Offsite Full Width Construction"costs estimate.
4. Dry Utilities
The Revised University Project Entitlements do not require that Burd vaults be installed
and the CITY and Property Owner agree that no Burd vaults will be required throughout the Project Site.
5. Slones
Grading plans depicting slopes in all landscape maintenance districts("LMDs")shall be
reviewed and approved by the CITY. The goal of such review is to minimize the slopes within the LMD project site
areas. 2H:1 V slopes may be permitted for up to 12 feet,six inches(12.5 feet) in height; hardscape conforming to
the CITY's standards above the 12.5 feet height may be used upon review and agreement with CITY Staff and with
retaining walls and/or crib walls as approved by the CITY Engineer. The location of slopes in excess of 12.5 feet
within the Project Site are depicted on Exhibit"I". Proposed specific slope treatments which shall be applied to the
slopes in excess of 12.5 feet are depicted on Exhibits"I-I"through 1-6".
6. Area H—with 68 Future Lots
The Revised University Project Entitlements include a density of 68 lots on lots of a
minimum size of 10,000 square feet for Area H, as depicted on Exhibit"B". Property Owner proposes to develop
Area H as generally depicted on Exhibit"J". The Property Owner shall cooperate with the CITY to address
transportation and circulation issues. The CITY agrees that this density will be applied to Area H, including the
agreement to allow grading to achieve this density,unless public health and safety issues preclude approval of the
necessary grading to allow the density as approved in the Revised University Project Entitlements. The CITY
further agrees that any future approvals for Area H will rely upon the Revised University Project Entitlements,
including the SEIR. In all other respects,Area H shall be reviewed and approved in compliance with the CITY's
then applicable rules and regulations. The CITY acknowledges that the property now owned by the Etiwanda
School District,identified as Area I in paragraph 7 below,may allow for residential development and provide
alternate access to Area H. In the event that such development of Area I is approved, the Property Owner shall alter,
its development to accommodate the additional point of access.
7. Area I—Etiwanda School District Proverty
The Parties acknowledge that the Etiwanda School District("District")owns the area
depicted as Area I on Exhibit"K". Representations have been made to the Parties that the District is prepared to
submit a tentative tract map for residential development in Area I which will propose the development of 30 lots in
accordance with the Etiwanda North Specific Plan. The CITY and Property Owner agree to use diligent,good faith
efforts in considering the development of Area I in conjunction with the Revised University Project.
8. Paseos
In accordance with the previous Settlement Agreement among CITY, COUNTY and
Property Owner's predecessors-in-interest,the Project Site is to include seven(7)additional paseos to provide
access to the trails provided in CITY. The CITY and Property Owner agree that the number of paseos to be required
oc.e.��ncm A,r —.,a-24A -7-
i
within the Project Site and the location of the paseos shall be approved by the CITY's Trails Committee. The
CITY's Staff accepts eight(8) foot maximum widths for construction of the paseos in substantial conformity with
the drawing attached as Exhibits"L"and"L-1".
9. Circulation Issues and Fees
a. Hanson Aggregates
(i) Access. The Revised University Project Entitlements require that Property Owner
provide to the Hanson Aggregates operation located west of the Project Site, interim and permanent access along.
Banyan Avenue to the Day Creek Boulevard interchange at State Highway Route 30. CITY and Property Owner
agree that such access shall be provided in accordance with the Revised University Project Entitlements and as
depicted on Exhibit"M". Furthermore,the Parties agree that the intersection of Banyan Avenue and Day Creek
Boulevard will be constructed in substantial conformity to the depiction on Exhibit"M-1".
(ii) Disclosure. Property Owner agrees to provide a disclosure statement to all
purchasers stating that the Hanson Aggregates operations has rights of access for its truck traffic along Banyan
Avenue from the operation to Day Creek Boulevard,and to the interchange at State Highway Route 30.
b. Transportation Fee/Traffic Impacts Analysis
Circulation improvements necessary to serve the area in and around the Project Site,not
currently within the CITY,are generally depicted on Exhibit"N." The Parties acknowledge that the Property
Owner plans to build improvements that exceed the Project Transportation requirements. The CITY agrees to
establish a circulation fee for the area depicted on Exhibit"N"as a mechanism to reimburse the Property Owner for
construction of infrastructure in excess of Property Owner's fair share. The fee shall be calculated on a per-acre
basis, with the cost of the infrastructure allocated to the benefiting properties. Exhibit"N-I"depicts the benefiting
properties and their respective fair share. Exhibit"N-2"through"N-5"depict the estimated costs of the
infrastructure. Exhibit"N-6"depicts the street cross-sections.
C. Other Circulation Improvements
The CITY has requested and the Property owner has agreed to make the following
changes to the Revised University Project:
(i)Hanley Avenue shall be a minimum of 50 feet in width,curb to curb, from Banyan
Street to the School District's north property line in order to provide left turn pockets and overflow parking for the
school as depicted on Exhibit"O".
(ii)Property Owner shall construct sidewalks on the west side of Hanley Avenue from
Banyan Street to Wilson Avenue,except for the portion of fee property depicted as"N.A.P."on Exhibit"P". As to
this portion, the Parties acknowledge that the School District owns this portion and has already submitted plans to
the State of California which depict the construction of a sidewalk on this portion.
(iii)Traffic signals shall be installed on Day Creek Boulevard at Wilson Avenue, Banyan
Avenue,and Vintage Drive,the traffic signal at the intersection of Banyan Street and Day Creek Boulevard shall be
operational when warranted,or by the issuance of the one-hundred and fiftieth(150'")building permit,whichever
first occurs. The other traffic signals shall be installed by the end of the Project development,or when warranted,
whichever first occurs.
(iv) A raised median shall be provided on Day Creek Boulevard from Wilson Avenue to
the Route 30 Freeway. Median island openings shall be allowed on Day Creek Boulevard at Wilson Avenue,the
intersection located one-half distance between Wilson Avenue and Banyan Street,Banyan Street and Vintage Drive.
[kVelop=nl APrc nt 4-24-W -8
i
(v) Banyan Street from Hanley Avenue to Rochester and Day Creek Boulevard from the
Route 30 Freeway to the north project limit; shall be posted"no parking any time".
(vi) Wilson Avenue shall be fully improved by Property Owner from the western
boundary of Tract 14494 to the existing terminus of Wilson Avenue located west of Hanley Avenue, except for the
north side of Wilson Avenue from Hanley Avenue to the point that is approximately 330' east of Day Creek
Boulevard which is the responsibility of Tract 13527,except one lane north of the median shall be installed to allow
for traffic circulation. Wilson Avenue shall be constructed with 72 feet of paved width, from curb to curb. A raised
medium shall be constructed on Wilson Avenue, with median breaks allowed only at Day Creek Boulevard and
Hanley Avenue. Any other median breaks must be approved by the CITY Engineer. The westerly terminus of
Wilson Avenue shall include a suitable tum-around area for vehicles.
(vii) Wilson Avenue shall be open to public traffic,but not necessarily fully improved,
prior to issuance of any certificate of occupancy.
(viii) Property Owner shall construct Day Creek Boulevard from Route 30 to Vintage
Avenue, as depicted on Exhibit"F", by the issuance of the one-hundreth(100t°)building permit,except that the
Parties acknowledge this construction cannot be completed without the cooperation of third parties who own the
properties on the west side of Day Creek Boulevard above Route 30 or condemnation of a right of way along these
properties. If, for any reason outside the control of the CITY and the Property Owner, Property Owner cannot
timely complete the construction of this portion of Day Creek Boulevard, then Property Owner shall be entitled to
deposit with the CITY a sum of cash or a letter of credit equal to two-hundred percent(200%)of the projected actual
costs, either total or partial, of such construction in full and complete satisfaction of its obligation, and to be relieved
of any further restrictions on the issuance of building permits. If the CITY is required to construct these
improvements because of the Property Owner's failure or inability to do so,then Property Owner shall be entitled to
an accounting for the use of funds by the CITY to complete the construction and to a refund of monies not used for
such construction.
d. Reimbursement to Property Owner from The CITY's Street Improvement
Deposits
The CITY acknowledges that it has received deposits from other surrounding property
owners or projects, including,but not limited to, Centex Homes(Tract 12659, $148,152.40), and Panda
Development(Tract 13812,$225,000.00),and may collect other fees for construction along Hanley and/or Wilson
Avenues(Tract 14120)(as more fully depicted on Exhibit"Q")(the Street Improvement Deposits). The CITY
agrees that it will cooperate with Property Owner to require such surrounding property owners or projects to
complete such Street improvements so that the improvements on Summit Avenue and Hanley Avenue,on Vintage
Drive and on Wilson Avenue are completed at the same time as Property Owner's adjacent development.
Alternatively,the CITY will complete the construction of these Street Improvements using the Street Improvement
Deposits, or the CITY agrees that Property Owner may elect to complete construction of all or a portion of the street
improvements, limited to curb,gutter, street paving and striping,and street lights and CITY further agrees it will
reimburse Property Owner from the Street Deposits upon the CITY Engineer's acceptance of the Street
Improvements and review and of Property Owner's costs of construction,which approval shall not be unreasonably
withheld.
10. Storm Drains
According to the Revised University Project Entitlements,the regional portion of the
Etiwanda/San Sevaine drainage fee is$114,000.00,which Property Owner shall pay to the County, if required. The
Property Owner shall also reimburse Kaufman&Broad and The Lyon Company on a per-acre basis for the
construction of storm drain systems in Day Creek Boulevard south of Highland Avenue in the form of payments at
the time of the first certificate of occupancy of any unit tributary to the storm drain systems. The per-acre basis
calculation and Property Owner's fair share of the total cost of the construction of the storm drain systems set forth
herein is contained in Exhibit"R."
pc Jop, Ape=M 4-14-M -9-
D. Timing of Development and Fees
I. Development of Circulation Improvements
a. Banyan/Summit Avenue-Hanley Avenue to Rochester Avenue
Property Owner agrees to promptly make such improvements for acceptance by the CITY
Engineer before the issuance of any building permit for a housing unit over and above one-hundred(100)such units.
However, if, for any reason not within the control of the CITY or the Property Owner, the CITY cannot obtain the
Permits so that Property Owner can complete the improvements prior to the issuance of the building permit for the
one-hundred and first such unit, Property Owner shall be entitled to either deposit with the CITY a sum of cash or a
letter of credit equal to two-hundred percent(200%)of the projected actual cost, either total or partial,of the
construction of the improvements in full and complete satisfaction of its obligation, and to be relieved of any further
restrictions on the issuance of building permits. If the CITY is required to construct these improvements because of
the Property Owner's failure or inability to do so, then Property Owner shall be entitled to an accounting for the
CITY's use of the funds to complete the improvements,and to a refund of monies not used for such improvements.
b. Day Creek Boulevard
Property Owner agrees to construct Day Creek Boulevard north to Wilson Avenue
concurrently with Phase 1 (as defined in the Revised University Entitlements)and that such improvements will be
substantially complete no later than issuance of the one-hundredth(100'")building permit in the Project. The CITY
agrees to promptly process all applications and permits consistent with its usual and customary procedures.
Streetscape improvements from the curb will be constructed as development of the adjacent tracts occurs.
2. Development of the Park Site
Property Owner agrees to constrict the Park(as defined in the Revised University Project
Entitlements)at the park site in substantial conformity with the depiction on Exhibit"S"and in conformance with
ADA standards, except that the Parties agree that the Park will be constructed with up to four(4) lit basketball courts
and two(2) lit ball fields. The Park improvements will be substantially complete no later than issuance of the one-
hundredth(100")building permit in the Project. The Parties agree that the product specifications for the park
amenities are listed on Exhibits"S-I"through"S-2"and that such amenities shall conform to CITY standards. The
quantities and sizes of the amenities and materials shall be as depicted on Exhibit"S-3"and any remaining issues
shall conform to CITY standards. The CITY agrees to promptly process all applications and permits consistent with
its usual and customary procedures. The CITY agrees that through dedication of 10 acres and construction of the
Park,Property Owner will exceed,through its construction costs,all requirements of the CITY's parks fees and
applicable standards. The CITY waives any requirement for payment of a Park fee against the Revised University
Project. Property Owner shall dedicate the Park to the CITY and the CITY shall accept the dedication promptly
upon completion. The CITY reserves the right to name the Park.
3. Development of Remainder of Project Site
Neither Property Owner nor CITY can presently predict when or the rate at which phases
of the Project Site shall be developed, since such decisions depend upon numerous factors which are not within the
control of Property Owner including,without limitation,market orientation and demand, interest rates, absorption,
competition, and other factors.
The Parties acknowledge and agree that Property Owner 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 Owner's business judgment. The CITY further acknowledges that Property Owner
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 judgement of
subsequent owners of the Project Site.
Ikvelop�nt Agrt n,4.214-W
_ 10_
4. 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 Owner 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 21 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 Owner's 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 criteria used in the evaluation of each development proposal shall be based on the objectives,
policies and specific development standards specified herein.
5. Force Maieure
Notwithstanding anything to the contrary contained in this Development Agreement,
Property Owner 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 other party,economic consideration or any other
cause beyond the reasonable control of CITY or Property Owner,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. Reimbursement Provision
1. Reimbursement Mechanism
As set forth herein,pursuant to the Revised University Project Entitlements, the Property
Owner will construct certain traffic/circulation improvements which will benefit other property owners and
developments adjacent to or surrounding the Project Site. The Property Owner has incurred the costs of designing
these improvements and will incur additional costs, including but not limited to construction, installation,permit and
inspection(the"Costs"),as depicted in Exhibits"0-1"and"0-2." The Parties agree and acknowledge that the
Costs are estimates, and ultimately, Property Owner will submit its actual costs to the CITY, and the CITY's
calculation of Property Owner's reimbursement shall be based upon such actual costs. The CITY further
acknowledges and agrees that as a part of the approvals of each of the projects referenced herein, it will condition
such projects to pay fees for traffic/circulation improvements consistent with Section 9.b.hereof. This will provide
the sole source of funds to reimburse Property Owner for its Costs. The Property Owner, upon application to the
CITY made by the Property Owner not more frequently than once a calendar quarter, will be entitled to recover
from the CITY the fees so collected as reimbursable Costs. The CITY fords it reasonable and appropriate to provide
for a mechanism for reimbursement to the Property Owner for these Costs. However, the CITY's reimbursement
obligations shall be limited to the extent that the CITY can collect such funds.
2. Term of Reimbursement Provision
The CITY agrees to collect the funds identified and to use those funds to reimburse the Property
Owner, without interest thereon,pursuant to this provision. This reimbursement provision shall continue in effect
until the Property Owner has been fully reimbursed as set forth herein, and shall survive the Term of this
Development Agreement,unless the obligation is sooner satisfied by the payment in full of all reimbursable Costs
due and owing to the Property Owner, after which the obligation shall cease.
D elopm M AV=—t a.14-oo - 1 I -
F. Future Entitlements
With respect to any entitlements that Property Owner may require in the future, including, without
limitation,tentative tract and parcel map approvals,conditional use permits,and Development/Design Review
related to the Park Site, Commercial Sites and Area H,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 Revised University Project
Entitlements as amended by this Development Agreement,except as otherwise specifically required by state or
federal law.
G. Environmental Review
Other than the mitigation measures and conditions of approval set forth in the SEIR and the
Revised University Project Entitlements(and any additional future mitigation programs contemplated therein), no
other mitigation measures for environmental impacts created by the Revised University Project,as presently
approved and as evaluated in the SEIR,shall be required. In connection with the CITY's issuance of any further
entitlement(as contemplated in Section 2F 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 and adopt the SEIR 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 CEQA, the adverse environmental impacts
of such future entitlements, which were not considered at the time of approval of the Project;provided,however,
that:
(i) Unless required by state or federal law, no new or additional mitigation measures shall be
imposed as a result of any Future Policies; and
(ii) The CITY agrees and acknowledges that the TLA incorporated in the SEIR has fully
analyzed the traffic projected to be generated from the Revised University Project, and, in accordance with all
applicable legal requirements including, without limitation, the TLA Guidelines set forth in the San Bernardino
County Congestion Management Plan("CMP"), no additional traffic impact analysis shall be required for
development of the Project Site as long as the number of vehicle trips generated do not exceed the vehicle trips
evaluated in the TIA analysis. In the event and at such'[ime as the Project generates more vehicle trips than
analyzed in the TLA, the CITY may require a new traffic impact analysis in accordance with such CMP standards as
may exist at such time. Except in such event(and except for such traffic circulation/site-access analysis as may be
reasonably required to determine the configuration and alignment of Streets adjacent or internal to the Project),no
further traffic impact analyses shall be required by the CITY with respect to implementation of the Project.
H. CITY Fees and Mandates by State or Federal Laws
The Parties acknowledge and agree that the fees and impositions which may potentially be
imposed by the CITY on the Revised University Project and Property Owner(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 all or a portion of the cost of impacts to certain public
facilities, improvements and other amenities from development projects, including any fees described in
Government Code Sections 66000 et seq.(collectively,the"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 Owner's obligation to pay Fees shall be specifically governed by the following provisions:
De elopneni Aprce nl4-24-M
- 12-
I. Processing Fees. The CITY may charge Processing Fees which are in force and effect on
a CITY-wide basis at the time of Property Owner's application for a land use entitlement or a construction permit.
The amount of any Processing Fees shall be determined by the CITY 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 Owner and the CITY, the Processing Fees assessed Property
Owner shall be the same as those imposed upon other development projects throughout jurisdictional limits of the
CITY.
2. Existing.Fee Categories. As set forth above,the CITY agrees that certain fee categories,
(including, without limitation, Transportation Improvement fees, storm drain improvement fees, and community
park fees)have been or will be met by Property Owner through the construction of improvements. In consideration
of the construction costs to be home by Property Owner,CITY waives its right to collect a Beautification Fee from
the development of the Revised University Project, Neither Property Owner nor the Project shall be subject to any
additional CITY imposed fees, impositions or monetary exactions with respect to any Existing Fee Categories, for a
period of ten(10)years following the effective date of this Agreement. The period during which fees within any
Existing Fee Categories are limited as described in this section(and as further applied in paragraph 3 below) is
referred to hereinafter as the"Fee Limitation Period."
3. Other Fees. In consideration of the Property Owner's agreement to modify the Revised
University 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 Property Owner or
the Revised University Project during the applicable Fee Limitation Period, 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 Section 2G above. Even in those
cases where Property Owner or the Project may be required to pay Other Fees,any such Other Fees shall be limited
to Property Owner's fav share contribution to impacts created by the Project, shall not discriminate against Property
Owner(as compared to other property owners in the CITY)and shall not duplicate any Exactions or other
mitigations or fees contributed or paid by Property Owner or the Project,or home by property Owner or the Project
through in-lieu construction.
4. Fiscal Impact Analysis. In consideration of the Property Owners' agreement to modify
the Revised University Project Entitlements as specifically set forth in this Development Agreement and to
implement the timing of development and improvements in accordance with the terms set forth above,and including
the additional improvements the Property Owner has agreed to construct, including but not limited to,the extension
of Banyan Avenue from the SCE Easement to Rochester Avenue,the CITY hereby waives any requirement which it
could impose of the Property Owner or the revised University Project to complete a fiscal analysis for any approvals
or permits that the CITY might issue under this Development Agreement.
I. Non-Discretionary Permits
The Parties acknowledge that in the course of implementing the Revised University Project,
Property Owner 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 Owner 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 2B,above). The CITY shall issue to Property Owner,upon such applications, all required
Non-Discretionary Permits,subject only to compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement,the CITY's
Existing Laws(and any applicable Future Policies under Section 213 above)and payment of CITY's usual and
customary fees and charges for such applications and Non-Discretionary Permits(subject to the provisions of
Section H above). The CITY further agrees that upon its approval of any plans, specifications,design drawings,
maps, or other submittals of Property Owner in connection 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 Plans, shall be expeditiously processed and approved by the
CITY in accordance with this Development Agreement.
De.<bpmem ngr«mcu a:s-W - 13 -
J. Cooperation
1. Cooperation With Other Public Agencies
The CITY acknowledges that Property Owner 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 Revised University Project, in connection 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 Owner in its efforts to obtain such permits and approvals from such agencies(including, without limitation,
the Cucamonga County Water District, and the Inland Empire Utilities Agency,and shall provide any documents or
certificates reasonably required to process and obtain such permits and approvals.
2. Construction of Off-Site Improvements
To the extent that Property Owner is required to construct any off-site improvements as a
condition of developing the Project, the Property Owner shall make good faith, diligent efforts to acquire any off-
site property interests required to construct such public improvements. If Property Owner fails to do so,Property
Owner 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 Section 66462 at such time as the CITY acquires
the property interests required for the public improvements. Such agreement shall provide for payment by Property
Owner of all costs incurred by the CITY 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 stated in an
appraisal report obtained by Property Owner, at Property Owner's 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 Owner 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 costs of such
improvements. Without limiting the generality of the foregoing, the CITY agrees that with respect to the
infrastructure improvements identified in Section 2E above, 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 Owner for construction and
related costs incurred in providing such improvements to the extent legally permissible.
3. Public Financine
The Parties hereby acknowledge that substantial public improvements must be
constructed in order to develop the Park Site and the School 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 Revised
University Project. Subject to the 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 Owner
to the fullest extent possible in developing 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. The Parties
acknowledge that it is Property Owner's intention to request that the Etiwanda School District act as the lead agency
for the plan,possibly with ajoint powers agreement with CITY, for school facilities fees, the Park improvements,
the storm drain improvements,and other CITY facilities. If the Etiwanda School District declines to act as the lead
agency,CITY agrees to act in that capacity. All formation costs shall be borne by Property Owner subject to
reimbursement by the Community Facilities District.
Dcrelopmm Ap m nt 4-14-00
- 14-
i
K. Creation of the Landscape and Street Lighting Maintenance Districts
The CITY agrees to promptly form the necessary Landscape and Lighting Maintenance Districts
("LMD")pursuant to California Streets and Highways Code Sections 22500 et seq. (the"Landscaping and Lighting
Act of 1972") for the Revised University Project development to encompass the Project Site as well as the area
being annexed by the CITY in accordance with the Settlement and Pre-Annexation Agreement. The Property
Owner shall pay for the formation of the LMDs. The Parties agree that the LMD's must be established no later than
recordation of the final tract map and that the CITY may create LMD's which allow annexation of other areas. The
Parties also acknowledge that assessments for LMD's are collected annually in June, and to the extent that
assessments are not collected through the LMD for the period ending June 2001,the CITY may request, and
Property Owner agrees to provide, a reasonable cash deposit to fund the LMD. The CITY shall promptly upon
receipt of assessments the following June reimburse Property Owner for any such cash advances to fund the LMD's.
Section 3. ANNUAL REVIEW
A. Good Faith Compliance
Pursuant to California Government Code Section 65865.1,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 Owner 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 Owner shall provide such
information as may be reasonably requested by the CITY in order to determine whether any provisions of this
Agreement have been breached by Property Owner. If at any time prior to the review period there is an issue
concerning a Property Owner's compliance with the terms of this Development Agreement, the provisions of this
Section 3 will apply.
B. Certificate of Compliance
If Property Owner is found to be in compliance with this Development Agreement after annual
review, the Community Development Director shall,upon written request by Property Owner, issue a certificate of
compliance("Certificate of Compliance")to Property Owner stating that based upon information known to the
CITY,the Development Agreement remains in effect and Property Owner is not in default. The Certificate of
Compliance shall be in recordable form and shall contain such information as shall impart constructive record notice
of compliance. Property Owner may record the Certificate of Compliance in the Official Records of the County of
San Bernardino.
C. Finding of Default
If, upon completion of the annual review,the Community Development Director intends to find
that Property Owner has not complied in good faith with the material terms of this Development Agreement(a
"Default"),he shall first give written notice to such effect to Property Owner. The notice shall be accompanied by
copies of all staff reports,staff recommendations and other information concerning Property Owner's compliance
with the terms of this Development Agreement as the CITY may possess and which is relevant to determining
Property Owner's performance under this Development Agreement. The notice shall specify in detail the grounds
and all facts allegedly demonstrating such noncompliance, so Property Owner may address the issues raised on a
point-by-point basis. Property Owner shall have twenty(20)days after its receipt of such notice to file a written
response with the Community Development Director. Within 10 days after the expiration of such 20-day response
period, the Community Development Director shall notify Property Owner whether he has determined that Property
Owner is in Default under this Development Agreement("Notice of Default"). Such Notice of Default shall specify
the instances in which Property Owner has 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 Owner to meet the terms of compliance, which time shall not be less than thirty(30)days from the date of
the Notice of Default, and which shall be reasonably related to the time necessary to bring Property Owner's
performance into good faith compliance.
C,ebprt t Ape nt 4-26-W - 15 -
D. Right to Appeal
Upon receipt of a Notice of Default, Property Owner may appeal the Community Development
Director's decision directly to the City Council. Such appeal shall be initiated by filing a written notice of appeal
with the City Clerk within ten(10)calendar days following Property Owner's receipt of the Notice of Default. The
hearing on such appeal shall be scheduled in accordance with Section 17.02.080 of the CITY's Development Cade.
At the hearing,Property Owner shall be entitled to submit evidence and to address all of the issues raised by the
Notice of Default. If, after considering all of the evidence presented at the hearing,the City Council finds and
determines on the basis of substantial evidence that Property Owner is in Default, then the City Council shall specify
in writing to Property Owner the instances in which Property Owner has failed to comply and the terms under which
compliance can be obtained,and shall also specify a reasonable time for Property Owner to meet the terms of
compliance, 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 Owner's performance into good faith
compliance.
E. Property Owner's Cure Rights
If Property Owner is 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 Owner's rights under this Development Agreement. In no event shall such
cure period 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 the force majeure circumstances described in Section 2D5 above.
Section 4. ENFORCEMENT
A. Enforceable 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.
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 this Development Agreement and are not intended to provide additional remedies not otherwise
permitted by law.
C. Attorneys' 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 such 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.
4rclopMnt AWMI t 4-34- - 16-
Section 5. MISCELLANEOUS PROVISIONS
A. Successors and Assigns
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 Owner, as defined herein, if the rights under this Development Agreement are
assigned, the term"Property Owner"shall refer to any such successor or assign.
B. Protect as a Private Undertaking
It is specifically understood and agreed by and between the Parties that the Revised University
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 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
Property Owner 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. Mortgagee Protection
1. Discretion to Encumber. This Development Agreement shall not prevent or limit
Property Owner, in any manner,at Property Owner's sole discretion, from encumbering the Revised University
Project or any portion of the Revised University Project or any improvement on the Revised University Project,by
any mortgage,deed of trust or other security device securing financing with respect to all or any part of the Revised
University Project or any improvement 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 and for
value.
3. Mortgagee Not Obligated. Notwithstanding anything in this Development Agreement to
the contrary,(a)any holder of the beneficial interest under a Mortgage("Mortgagee")may acquire title to or
possession of all or any portion of the Revised University Project or any improvement thereon pursuant to the
remedies provided by its Mortgage,whether by judicial or nonjudicial 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 Owner 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 Owner with respect to the Property 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 Owner with respect to the Project or portion thereof so acquired which arise or accrue
ooCIQP n,AVx nt a.xa.m - 17-
subsequent to the date of purchase,but such purchaser shall not be responsible for any prior defaults of Property
Owner;provided, however, that in either of the instances referred to in clauses(a)and(b)above,to the extent any
obligation or covenant to be performed by Property Owner is a condition to the granting of a specific benefit or to
the performance of a specific covenant by 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 Mortgagee Right of Mortgagee to Cure. If a Mortgagee files with
the CITY Clerk, a written notice requesting a copy of any Notice of Default given Property Owner under this
Development Agreement and specifying the address for delivery thereof, then the CITY shall deliver to such
Mortgagee,concurrently with delivery thereof to Property Owner, any notice given to Property Owner with respect
to any claim of the CITY that Property Owner has 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 period given to Property Owner 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
reasonably 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,commence 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 reason of any action by
any court having jurisdiction of any bankruptcy or insolvency proceeding involving Property Owner, Mortgagee
shall for the purposes of this Development Agreement be deemed to be proceeding with diligence and continuity to
obtain possession of the Property during the period of such prohibition if Mortgagee is proceeding diligently to
terminate such prohibition.
6. Amendment to Development Agreement. The CITY and Property Owner agree not to
modify or amend 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 Owner 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 Owner each agree to execute and
deliver(and to 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
provisions of this Development Agreement,the Revised University 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 Agreement
This Development Agreement and the documents attached to and referred to in this Development
Agreement constitute the entire agreement between the Parties with respect to the subject matter of this
Development Agreement.
[kvelopmenE AQ mens 4.24-0
- 18 -
G. Further Actions and Instruments
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. Governing Law
This Development Agreement including, without limitation, its existence, validity, construction
and operation, and the rights 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 Bernardino no later than ten(10) days following the effective date of this
Development Agreement.
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 Parties 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 original 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.
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 Owner 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 the 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, at the address specified by such transferee in a written
notice to CITY). Notice by mail shall be deemed effective upon receipt or rejection of the addressee. The Parties'
current address are as follows:
To CITY: City of Rancho Cucamonga
10500 Civic Center Drive
Rancho Cucamonga,California 91730
Atm: Community Development Director
Nlcepmem AVtt Ms:a-M - 19-
With copies to: Mr. lames Markman
City Attorney
Richards, Watson&Gershon
One Civic Center Circle
Brea,California 92821
To Property Owner: U.C.P.,Inc.
5109 La Palma, Suite D
Anaheim Hills, California 92807
Atm: Mr. Bruce Elieff
Mr. Ben Anderson
With copies to: Gresham, Savage,Nolan&Tilden
600 N.Arrowhead Avenue, Suite 300
San Bernardino, California 92401
Atm: Mr. Mark Ostoich
Ms.Penny Alexander-Kelley
Either of the 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 of the Parties in the manner provided above.
N. Indemnification
Property Owner hereby agrees 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;provided,however,that Property Owner's obligations under this Section
are subject to and conditioned upon the CITY and Property Owner entering into a mutually satisfactory joint defense
agreement under which the CITY shall cooperate fully with Property Owner in the defense of any such claim,action
or proceeding,Property Owner will be entitled to coordinate and direct the prosecution and defense of such claim, _-
action, or proceeding, and Property Owner shall retain settlement authority with respect thereto. The CITY and
Property Owner agree not to unreasonably withhold or delay their approval of such joint defense agreement.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF,the Parties have duly executed this Development Agreement as of the
day and year fust above written.
CITY OF RANCHO CUCAMONGA U.C.P.,Inc.
a California corporation
By: By:
Mayor Name: Bruce Elieff
Its:
ATTESTED TO:
City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Devclopnrn,ngrzc .a-2aW -20-
City Attorney
Artomeys for U.C.P., Inc.
p vcloymcm Agce m a 244-0 -21 -
LEGAL DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT SITE
U.C.P. owned property is described as follows:
BEING A SUBDIVISION OF A PORTION OF SECTIONS 20 AND 29,TOWNSHIP I NORTH, RANGE 6
WEST, SAN BERNARDION BASE AND MERIDIAN, IN SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY, IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA.
Excepting therefrom the Intex owned properties further described as follows:
THE SOUTH '/,OF THE SOUTHEAST / OF THE SOUTHWEST / OF THE NORTHWEST /.OF SECTION 29
AND THE NORTH '/,OF THE NORTHEAST '/.OF THE NORTHWEST /.OF THE SOUTHWEST '/.OF
SECTION 29 AND THE SOUTH '/2 OF THE SOUTHWEST /.OF THE SOUTHEAST / OF THE NORTHWEST
/.OF SECTION 29 EXCEPTING THE WESTERLY 330 FEET,ALL IN TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 6
WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN,IN SAN BERNARIDNO COUNTY, IN THE STATE OF
CALIFORNIA.
EXHIBIT"A"
I I I \
I � �
IflaSon Avenue
I
9W-;J I I I ITS
I L
J .
s
I
;�— firm eSt venue
I �f $U[i1Nit AVepne
4 LEGEND
ElSINGLI's MAILY
(7,200 SP = MINIMUM LOT SIZE)
pU13LIC (PARK & ELL:M. SCHOOL)
I _
I_
t COMMERCL1i.
j NAP
y I
RANCHO LTIWANDA
L ADOPTED UNIVERSITY
dY PLANNED DEVELOPMENT
CAL ENGINEERING EXHIBIT
mJ Gn9�neannp - Lone Planning
6�a1
enClunynl♦wnu�
fm� a. Coomio 99]]B
i
i
FFFR
Wilson Avenue
v
m
0
0
m y
e
V
>
t
Q
L L C
0 U m
0
U
Iv
U m
`" m Elementar
School Site
Parl Site
10 AC
Inte: Inte I
I I
nn and Ave ue umm, e
U11 E
v
0
RANCHO ETIWANDA
NAP
E TRACT 14494
BANYAN COMMERCIAL SITE
�'
ALLARD GEERING 9.1 ACRE OPTION
��
CMI Enyinaerinng — L
Qay Pgmnily
`
(aoa)1°""�" EXHIBIT C
eor~m„ rm< (°ae7 era—aou
i
PPFFFM9
w mlll�
Nilson Avenue
9
00 1�1
m
Y
in77T77M n=
Y
C
v Y
O y
O Y C
a
0 U =
E ffil
O
U
� T
U a
ryj OElementn
School Site
Par Site
30 AC—
' Into ;
an an Avenue mmitAvenTe
Vintage Drive
e RANCHO ETIWANDA
""P TRACT 14494
BANYAN COMMERCIAL SITE
RESIDENTIAL OPTION
BT: 15 LOTS
AUARD ENGINEERING,
Civil Engin.vinq — Lena Plo ` EXHIBIT D
6101 Qrry www
61.10, c, Caeemb 9fav
(We) 804--5011 F. (ON) ON-55014
I
` IWAGE DRQ— —
65' 2j 9 ti° 88' 63' i o
n 1 rn v 26 coo
io I ° 106' �
9 7' N 24
O w
a 2 v 25' n Pb Lo a
n
98' 2� g1' C"(9 N
I I
3 —
n L'.
99' �� 67' $L
22'
i r- 4 I co 22 W 23
100'
83' 83'
n
5
=O 103' I o 21 0 20 a
m 6
W fid• 65 19 <�(9
106'
I V 7 rno —
Q 106' 0 63' L
1 20, \ �'
n 8 a
107' I 18 w 19
9 a, 82' 81'
108' V
I o p o 16
10 o I W C)
100' 29 63. 18 <'
, 11
ROUTE 3� 12^ 1z2 cg`s'
61 61'
RO 00
Lo cn
93' AR 1314 a 15 N RANCHO ETIWANDi
78' AREA G
A ss LOTTING O"ON
" Eft , N- TNG 63•
�.hl, Enq: Ip — pim-pf
6101 C r y
`°O ON-Ml`°" 923M EXHIBIT E
R/W
R/W EAST
W67 _
9' LANDS
102'
t2' �32 —T-10 EASEMEM1
BASE ONLY TEMPORARY
A.C. PNdT. TEMPORARY
TEMPORARY AC CURB SHOULDER
SHOULDER AC CUR
ROUTE 30 TO VINTAGE DRIVE
N.T.S.
� R/W
R
EAST
WEST
102'. 9' LANDS(
12' 32'�t0�32� 16 EASEMENT
3:1 MA7(
2x
BASECURB AC. PVMT. SIDEWALK
CURB 8 ONLY URB k
LANDSCAPE SIDEWALK GUTTER GUTTER
SETBACK VARIES
VINTAGE DRIVE TO WILSON AVENUE
N.T.S.
L R/W
R/W EAST
WEST
R.O.WI. VARIES 9' LANDSCAPE
12•—..--.t.—VARIES 8' 4'' EASEMENT
2x �
ACO. BASE A.C. PNMT. TEMPORARY
MEANDERING SHOULDER
LANDSCAPE SIDEWALK
SETBACK VARIES
WILSON AVENUE TO NORTH PROPERTY LINE
N.T.S.
RANCHO ETIWANDi
DAY CREEK BOULEVARD
BY.. STREET CROSS SECTION
ALLARD ENGINEERING
Civil En9i/rnn9 - La xl PI mk Q EXHIBIT F
Cg
FpMn. CnlXamb 921Y
(WV) a"-'All Fa (99i) !Y9-�n4��
/� C �O . 73
i
2Kv!
3:l SL.Pg
A4K LOSC.P•
Ac c.
l t 6�JDSobPE 1
2 Kt5 10 tNYS SF!R4C14 .2 d O (QI SG P6VaMcN� PG
ROUTE 30 TO VINTAGE DRIVE WILSON AVENUE TO NORTH PROPERTY LINE
N.7I N.T.S.
10-1
I'1 RevdV _di I s6, rWw
�e�t•Ad.K 1'! Slur_
F—PALM TREE
WASHIGTONIA
ROBUSTA I
SHRUBS &
GROUND COVE
4' WALK if 10' WALK
'SHRUBS &
i GROUND COVER CANOPY TREE
— RIVER ROCK PYRUS CALLERYANA
vAa, 1
VINTAGE DRIVE TO WILSON AVENUE
N.T.S. RANCHO ETIWANDA
STREETSCAPE EXHIBIT
EXHIBIT F-1
i
z.0 I O I
I
LU
�
J I i
m
10' WALK I I--
J �
MEDIAN
DAYCREEK BLVD. BUS STOP SECTION
EAST SIDE
2 36" HIGH -
RETAINING WALL
2 4.
15 GALLONIo
-N VINES La25' O.C.
10' WALK "� 10' WALK
i
7' '� 36" HIGH
RETAINING WALL
15 GALLON
SHRUBS @ 42" O.C.
LOT #35 LOTS 16, 17
DAYCREEK_ BLVD. LOTS 16 17 & 35
EAST SIDE
RANCHO ETIWAND A
STREETSCAPE EXHIBIT
EXHIBIT F-2
I
LLW_L17� MAJOR ENTRY MONUMENT (Z)
iL
I ,
� I
I
I i I
� - I
I
I I
I ' +
I iF
I
- I -
SECONDARY ENTRY MONUMENT (3)
i I �
�I
I i
RANCHO ETIWANDA
-� �- INTERSECTIONS
EXHIBIT G
ITr
/ NOTE:
REFER TO ENTRY MONUMENT
CONSTRUCTION DOCUMENTS ON
FILE WITH CITY FOR EXACT
DESIGN AND DIMENSIONS.
]'ro i'SWAEE N.ASTCl vOl1 LOOLIi vALL GV.,YEIC.AI.
FEEGfTCONdE,=EAE.TYAGi. PLANS DATED 10/1/99
M02 ALLEIV[E COOL WY R[CIILTNID SIOMC
NEIGHBORHOOD ENTRY ELEVATION
BI H.rs
caAonmmrr nmk wA:
INFORMAL EVESUMM ACCENT
O60RAul k1'FELL4ltFti-N
PoDOCMEVS GRACIl30l
COMMUNRYTHEA�SVALL I jam- A'4 smuwAu
V' MMALE j N
ACCENT EMIT TREE
ACCENT ENTRY TREE/
6
CRME MYRTLE C METAL-SEE AS
' r A (SEE MAT.AL ELEVATION,
EAASRwAT ENTET MONUMENT
� / �. y y/ � LAYFEFD SXELI ELANTT`
n.TLE
DAY CREEK BLVD.
NEIGHBORHOOD ENTRY MANOR ENTRY
Hry MTS
los- u'r Tr
ENTRY uv-
OCZ TUBER
ElrtET METAL SEC GRAIL
�" 'lOOAAt Nf11 TEAT,Q
LP
7j SII ' 1 I �� � r�:,/�r£ •'iL " \ 3`
Ir
IECLAST MMCIILIC CAE.,YHCAL J
]'+-TO MONYME.YT'AALL
MCCO FINISH w,TH CONCRETE
-ALL CAE.TWICAL
]'SMAIIIE. A'rTWTE1
NWOR ENTRY ELEVATION
A
RANCHO ETIWANDA
INTERSECTIONS
EXHIBIT G-1
1/4 SEC. LINE
AND
NORRI SOUTH
R/Y G R/W
f- 67' R O.w.-
S CLASS 15' OM LANE - IB'
IT
EQUTRAIL 31 TO
FSIRNN
OAyd" DAYLIGHT
BASE A.C. PNR.
W oINTL CORED CURB •
W VOAIN O ATED GIrtTER LANDSCAPING AREA
IS GAL TREES PER CITY SM.
t ee• UND TS' GROUND COVER-ROOTED CURING
^I PPUIE i:- ON CENTER I
SECTION A-A
N.T.S.
1320'
240' ---._-
S.B. CO. FLOOD CONTROL PROPERTY
o SCE - --
3 EXISTING 16" 00 CORRIDOR
CCWD WATERLINE -
PROPOSED /W a of i
W/C.L. GATE o'i EXISTING 96" �Y -
MWD PIPELINE PROPOSED DIN
------ ------- __ bo _ _ W/CHAIN LINK
- --------------
oo A -___-_ -ww -_____ N
GATE
200' - -- ----
Iy--------- ------- N
__ N
FUTURE C&G BANYAN AVENUE -------- ----- ---------- W
wi N PROPOSED PROPOSED EQUESTRIAN
F- FUTURE ROW STREET TRAIL W J U
W LIGHT PROPOSED CATCH BASIN W U
=i WITH LOCAL DEPRESSION U Z
S.B. CO. FLOOD CONTROL PROPERTY Q U U
0
RANCHO ETIWANDA
BY: BANYAN AVENUE
AUARD ENGINEER[NG FULL WIDTH IMPROVEMENTS -
CM1 Engin Ing — Land Planning
0101a...:;- ,... '
Banyan Offsite Full Width Construction ,
UCP Incorporated
Rancho Etiwanda
685 LOTS 250 ACRES
DATE ESTIMATED: 2/22/00
DATE PRINTED: 418/00
ESTIMATED BY: Allard Engineering
ITEM I JESTIMATED1UNIT UNIT
INUMBERI ITEM I QUANTITY IMEASUREJ PRICE I AMOUNT
CONSTRUCTION
AC PAVING 56,200 S.F. $2.00 $112,40(
CURB AND GUTTER 2,610 LF $10.00 $26,10(
SIDEWALK 5,440 S.F. $3.00 $16,32(
EQUESTRIAN TRAIL 15,520 S.F. $3.00 $46,56(
10'x 8' x 130' BOX CULVERT 1 EA. $200,000.00 $200,00(
6'x 4'x 130' BOX CULVERT 1 EA. $200,000.00 $200,00(
72" RCP 130 LF $282.00 $36,66(
HEADWALL 2 EA. $20,000.00 $40,00(
RIPRAP 14,000 TON $15.00 $210,000
CATCH BASIN 2 EA. $5,000.00 $10,00(
CONCRETE DRIVEWAY 450 SF $5.00 $2,25C
AC DRIVEWAY(TO PL) 3,720 SF $5.00 $18,60C
6' CHAIN LINK FENCE 2,190 LF $15.00 $32,85(
6'x 12'CHAIN LINK GATE 6 EA. $1,000.00 $6,00C
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY ROW 105,600 SF $1.00 $105,60(
STREET LIGHTS 7 EA. $1,500.00 $10,50(
LANDSCAPING 7,150 SF $4.00 $28,60(
Sub Total Full Width Construction $1,102,44(
ENGINEERING 6% $66,14E
SURVEY 5% $55,122
PLAN CHECK/INSPECTION 8% $88.19E
CONTINGENCY 20% $220,48E
TOTAL FULL WIDTH CONSTRUCTION $1,532,392
Notes:
Box Culvert costs are market projections
EXHIBIT H-1
i
i
IAli
LEGEND
SLOPES HIGHER THAN
Wilson Avenue
7
e
EXHIBrr I-1
EXHIBIT 1-6
m
EXHIBIT 1-2 a
m
L
EXHIBIT 1-5
s
9 y
L L
L L
O U
V
V!
l? Elements
EXHIBIT 1-4 Park Site sc oo Sit*
late Intez
MWD
ea en I Avenue SUMmlt Avenue
® EXHIBff 1-3
I
to age
NO 0RANCHO ETIWAND�
u
�° --- E LMD SLOPES EXHIBff
ALLARD ENGINEER
V
Civil Enpineennp — lan0Pk )np
e+o+
wr ATETE
fontoq, Cefle 91370 HIGHWAY
ese-w+em
(foe) + F. (soe) ese u I I �—,a„ROU30 ROW EXHIBIT 1
i
s' a'- a
�1
N
RIVER ROCK 3 �'
N
36" HIGH CRIB WALLS OR ---�
RETAINING WALLS AS APPROVED I 'S
BY CITY ENGINEER.
4' WALK
WILSON AVENUE
RANCHO ETIWANDA
LIED SLOPES EXHIBrr
. EXHIBIT 1-1
12° I
`f 12
3'1 S�ovc MtX
�-D Sc P• G0.a�
j
i G I
I
4' WALK
DAYCREEK BLVD
WEST SIDE
RANCHO ETIWANDA
L!D SLOPES EXHIBIT
-- EXHIBrr 1-2
3:1 5�-oP6 Nuac
211
RIVER ROCK I �}
4' WALK
VINTAGE DRIVE
RANCHO ETIWANDA
LMD SLOPES EXHIBff
EXHIBff 1-3
Q2 q � 3G� 251
L�5oP. 6P-fi�u
I
i
I
i
RIVER ROCK <opE
N
36" HIGH 3 =
RETAINING WALL -
N
10' WALK
DAYCREEK BLVD.
EAST SIDE
RANCHO ETIWAND A
LMD SLOPES EXHIBff
EXHIBrr 1-4
�/Z 34F2� I
9sl Seo PE FWc
��cv. arz�n
I r ,
3
N
36" HIGH I- — -4T I
RETAINING WALL 3:1
4' WALK �y
HANLEY AVENUE
RANCHO ETIWANDA
L.ID SLOPES EXHISF
EXHIBff 1-5
TALL NARROW
UPRIGHT TREE
� I
FLOWERING MEDIUM SHRUB S
CASCADING GROUND COVER = 1a
4' HIGH RETAINING
WALLS (2)
_ 10' WALK
r kco��
PRIVATE SLOPE EXHIBIT
RANCHO ETIWANDA
PRIVATE SLOPE EXHIBIT
EXHIBIT 1-6
i
� I
i
� I r O
Corrldo
SCE, ,, ®
CCW P $ ty
it
i
i
� I
i
Intermediate
School Site
co
a
o
I �
II
i Wilson Avenue
I )
I �
II m v
Q
a
co
--T---) FT77m x RANCHO ETIWANDA
AREA H
ALLARD ENGINEERING
C;w Enginwing - lurq Pbmm�y EXHIBfT J
iwnvq, fq�lemM 925.N
(YO% 19i-5011 f� (90G) !Gi-501 `
L
i
i
CO�doi ' Y -
5C6 P
/ O
r
i Intermediate
c School Site
a`
O
u * INCLUDES 30 LOTS OWNED BY
y � ETIWANDA SCHOOL DISTRICT
lfilaon Alenue
v
m
C
C0
m Q✓
U C
m
u <
o 0
U E �
� LEIC
O 0 U =
V
� r
um
ui ' Element"
School Site
Per Site
10 AC
1 intea Inte 1
1 IIIfD
ea an'A•enue ummit Avenue
1
r
0
a
ti
a
q
a
NAP 60
V
E
u
RANCHO ETIWANDA
BY: 715 LOT*LOTTING EXHIBIT
ALLARD ENGINEERING
EXHIBIT K
to" Pftw�g
419,
fenimq CaNwnb 921M
t (909) e99-5011 F. (9w) M-5014 ` .
SESSION
111111�
II II11■ IIIr►�
can, .. �� .. �
•
wagon ■ on ■■■■�■■��
(I X111 1111/1 . 111111 1111111/
►�iiii iiiil _: �\��� 1�1111111�
" , � X111111111 : � X111111 I11��
► 11111 1111% : logo
• . •- �ig1111 ■■■�� : gone ■■■■■■■��
• - • �11111 1111� � ��
\1111 111111
= iii 11111111
- • ' (I.%1111
♦—�'� �\111 IIIIII� �\II
C 11111/11�� : ■■
e 1111111111 � � 1■
• � /111111111 � � ■�
- • • 1111111111 . � ��
X1111 11111\� : ��
• III/111
X1111
• I�1111' � . •
+r
�� •�.; oil
.90
�• �' tire; !I l
« s 2 -Co t21
t�1 I 6e
RANCHO ETIWANDA
PASEO CROSSECTION
T EXHIBIT L-1
O C L
o
L >
t O U
U U
L O
o Q)
cU o
m
0) U
JE:
X U Lj Q
a
m
L
Ban an Avenue
I
I
TRUCK ACTIVATED
T4FI
RAFFIC SIGNAL (TO
BE INSTALLED BY
HANSEN AGGREGATE)
Vintage Drive
tate Highway
te. 30 ROW
RANCHO ETIWANDA
HANSEN AGGREGATE
e7: HAUL ROAD
AUARD ENGINEERING
°' °"� w - 6 EXHIBIT M
(2m) Pfcnmng
C-5011 (9.
(aa) ew-soli F. (9oa) ew-sou —c
�++r SCALE: 1"=100'
� I 12
co s � I74- �
�f a
IN I � s
. r
—...—._ --'---- - a
DAY CREEK B VD. u
I R
Li
� I
N
I
I
RANCHO ETIWANDA
n SIGNALaATION BANYAN/SUMMff AVE. INTERSECTIC
Ar1aRD ENGINEERING AT DAY CREEK BLVD.
$10, Enginwrrnq - LoM Pbmwng
6101 CMrry Mny
-WlI ( EXHIBIT M-1
( (GW) E9i-'All F. (Ywt eGi-SOl♦ —`
1 L A D. W. P.
1 I•' b
it 1, � Ir� ... �'11+ I.11.•� ��i I �
1 ; a II !
5 C C• i •1
1. iil 'II ' 1 B �9o,'T
LEGEND
Wilson,Avenue " I .r. Wilson A96t1�74:;i'": —,►
BENEFIT AREA
n , OA SECTION KEY
� ,vq ' p�• 1. Il:.';i"-;
ce
k ScAool .fir
County of sen Bernardino Banyan 1 Summit Avenue
.�. a
City of Rancho Cucamonga Avenue
u
1 RANCHO ETIWANDA.
ALLARD ENCiNEE►3YYCi ' �` ' a¢S M .. ' �� 9 ;
Civil Engineering — Land Planning •' Ic. -,:,I 1 ..: .', • '
°'", «." °� 1• :-:: s d z TRANSPORTATION
FMpooe, Calllamb e3]3a W .
coos, ase-�„ Fe. cea�, ase->o,. I lw+• 4 � .
ROUTE 30 IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS
I I . . • ' .. .� I �
— - --*-- -» EXHIBIT N
Transportation Impact Fee Analysis -City of Rancho Cucamonga
DAY CREEK AREA - Etiwanda North
Rancho Etiwanda
DATE ESTIMATED: 4/15/00
DATE PRINTED: 4/21/00
ESTIMATED BY: Allard Engineering
Total Transportation Costs $3,028,800.00
Total Area Acres 508
Fee Per Acre $5,962.20
PER ACRE BASIS
Parcel APN Acres Lots %of Project Fee Per Acre Fair Share Amount Comments
UCP 232 685 46% $5,962.20 $1,383,231.50 No school or park
Crest 240 660 47% $5,962.20 $1,430,929.13 660 lots exclude Park
School Lots 12 30 2% $5,962.20 $71,546.46 30 lots
Intex Commercial 225-101-34 5 15 1% $5,962.20 $29,811.02
InlexLots 225-161-45 5 15 1% $5,962.20 $29,811.02
Kolo 225-161-66 5 20 1% $5,962.20 $29,811.02
Chun 225-161-65 5 20 1% $5,962.20 $29,811.02
Chang 225-161-13 4 16 1% $5,962.20 $23,848.82
Total 508 100% $3,028,800.00
EXHIBIT N - 1
Transportation Impact Fee Analysis - City of Rancho Cucamonga
DAY CREEK AREA - Etiwanda North
Rancho Etiwanda
DATE ESTIMATED: 4/15/00
DATE PRINTED: 4/21/00
ESTIMATED BY: Allard Engineering
ITEM ESTIMATED I UNIT UNIT
NUMBER ITEM QUANTITY IMEASUREI PRICE I AMOUNT
FACILITY
1 ETIWANDA Avenue -25th street to LADWP 1320 LF $240.00 $316,800.0(
2 DAY CREEK BLVD -Rt.30 to Wilson 4300 LF $240.00 $1,032,000.0(
3 DAY CREEK BLVD -North of Wilson 800 LF $225.00 $180,000.0(
4 WILSON AVE. - East of Day Creek 1400 LF $240.00 $336,000.0(
5 WILSON AVE. -West of Day Creek 1050 LF $220.00 $231,000.0(
6 BANYAN AVENUE -Day Creek to Rochester 1320 LF $155.00 $204,600.0(
7 BANYAN AVENUE - Day Creek to Hanley 1380 LF $180.00 $248,400.00
8 Traffic Signals 3 EA $160,000.00 $480,000.00
TOTAL ROADWAY IMPROVEMENTS $3,028,800.00
EXHIBIT N - 2
Transportation Impact Fee Analysis - City of Rancho Cucamonga
DAY CREEK AREA - Etiwanda North
Rancho Etiwanda
DATE ESTIMATED: 4/15/00
DATE PRINTED: 4/21/00
ESTIMATED BY: Allard Engineering
ITEM ESTIMATEDUNIT UNIT
NUMBER ITEM QUANTITY MEASURE PRICE I AMOUNT
MAJOR ROAD
ETIWANDA Avenue -25th street to LADWP Corridor
Excavation 2.2 CY 51.60 $3.52
Fine Grade 78.0 SF $0.20 $15.60
5"AC over 12"AB 60.0 SF $1.50 590.00
1"AC Cap 60.0 SF $0.40 S24.00
8" Curb & Gutter 2.0 LF $7.50 $15.00
8" Curb Only 2.0 LF $6.00 $12.00
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk SF 51.50 50.00
Parkway Landscaping SF $2.50 $0.00
Median Landscaping - SF $3.00 $0.00
Signing & Striping 4.0 LF $0.50 $2.00
Fog & Seal Coating 60.0 SF $0.15 $9.00
Sub Total $171.12
Utility/Right of Way Allowance(10%) $17.11
Contingencies 30% $51.34
TOTAL $239.57
Estimated Cost Per Linear Foot "USE" $240.00
DAY CREEK BLVD - Rt.30 to Wilson &WILSON AVE. - East of Day Creek
Excavation 2.2 CY $1.60 $3.52
Fine Grade 78.0 SF $0.20 $15.60
5"AC over 12"AB 60.0 SF $1.50 $90.00
1"AC Cap 60.0 SF $0.40 $24.00
8" Curb & Gutter 2.0 LF $7.50 $15.00
8" Curb Only 2.0 LF $6.00 $12.00
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk - SF $1.50 $0.00
Parkway Landscaping SF $2.50 $0.00
Median Landscaping - SF $3.00 $0.00
Signing & Striping 4.0 LF $0.50 $2.00
Fog &Seal Coating 60.0 SF $0.15 $9.00
Sub Total $171.12
Utility/Right of Way Allowance(10%) $17.11
Contingencies 30% $51.34
TOTAL $239.57
Estimated Cost Per Linear Foot "USE" $240.00
EXHIBIT N - 3
Transportation Impact Fee Analysis - City of Rancho Cucamonga
DAY CREEK AREA - Etiwanda North
Rancho Etiwanda
DATE ESTIMATED: 4/15/00
DATE PRINTED: 4/21/00
ESTIMATED BY: Allard Engineering ,
ITEM ESTIMATED UNIT UNIT
NUMBER ITEM I QUANTITY MEASURE PRICE AMOUNT
DAY CREEK BLVD -North of Wilson
Excavation 2.2 CY $1.60 $3.52
Fine Grade 78.0 SF 50.20 $15.60
5"AC over 12"AB 60.0 SF $1.50 590.00
1"AC Cap 60.0 SF $0.40 524.00
8" Curb & Gutter 2.0 LF $7.50 $15.00
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk - SF $1.50 $0.00
Parkway Landscaping SF $2.50 $0.00
Signing &Striping 4.0 LF $0.50 52.00
Fog & Seal Coating 60.0 SF $0.15 $9.00
Sub Total $159.12
Utility/Right of Way Allowance (10%) $15.91
Contingencies 30% $47,74
TOTAL $222.77
Estimated Cost Per Linear Foot "USE" $225.00
WILSON AVENUE -West of Day Creek
Excavation 1.3 CY $1.60 $2.08
Fine Grade 60.0 SF $0.20 $12.00
5"AC over 12"AB 60.0 SF $1.50 $90.00
1"AC Cap 60.0 SF $0.40 $24.00
8"Curb & Gutter 2.0 LF $7.50 $15.00
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk - SF $1.50 $0.00
Parkway Landscaping - SF $2.50 $0.00
Signing & Striping 3.0 LF $0.50 $1.50
Fog & Seal Coating 60.0 SF $0.15 $9.00
Sub Total Collector $153.58
Utility/Right of Way Allowance (10%) $15.36
Contingencies 30% $46.07
TOTAL $215.01
Estimated Cost Per Linear Foot "USE" $220.00
EXHIBIT N - 4
Transportation Impact Fee Analysis - City of Rancho Cucamonga
DAY CREEK AREA - Etiwanda North
Rancho Etiwanda
DATE ESTIMATED: 4/15/00
DATE PRINTED: 4/21/00
ESTIMATED BY: Allard Engineering
ITEM ESTIMATEDUNIT UNIT
NUMBER ITEM QUANTITY MEASURE PRICE AMOUNT
BANYAN AVENUE - Day Creek to Rochester
Excavation 1.3 CY $1.60 $2.08
Fine Grade 44.0 SF 50.20 58.80
5"AC over 12"AB 40.0 SF $1.50 $60.00
1"AC Cap 40.0 SF $0.40 $16.00
8" Curb & Gutter 2.0 LF 57.50 $15.00
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk - SF 51.50 50.00
Parkway Landscaping - SF $2.50 50.00
Signing & Striping 3.0 LF $0.50 $1.50
Fog & Seal Coating 40.0 SF $0.15 56.00
Sub Total Collector $109.38
Utility/Right of Way Allowance (10%) $10.94
Contingencies 30% $32.81
TOTAL $153.13
Estimated Cost Per Linear Foot "USE" $155.00
BANYAN AVENUE - Day Creek to Hanley
Excavation 1.3 CY $1.60 $2.08
Fine Grade 50.0 SF $0.20 $10.00
5"AC over 12"AB 48.0 SF $1.50 $72.00
1"AC Cap 48.0 SF $0.40 $19.20
8" Curb & Gutter 2.0 LF $7.50 $15.00
4" P.C.C. Sidewalk SF $1.50 $0.00
Parkway Landscaping - SF $2.50 $0.00
Signing & Striping 3.0 LF $0.50 $1.50
Fog & Seal Coating 48.0 SF $0.15 $7.20
Sub Total Collector $126.98
Utility/Right of Way Allowance(10%) $12.70
Contingencies 30% $38.09
TOTAL $177.77
Estimated Cost Per Linear Foot "USE" $180.00
EXHIBIT N - 5
R/W R/W
VARIES
F 32' 10'-14' 32'
I �—�VARIES� �
' . BASE I CURB A.C. PVER. =--
LY
CURB k
SECTION A GUTTER
N.T.S.
DAY CREEK BOULEVARD — ROUTE 30 TO WILSON
WILSON AVENUE — EAST OF DAY CREEK BOULEVARD
R/W i R/W
VARIES
64'
— `2X Z
_ AGG. BASE I AC. WAR. -. ...
GURB
TTER
SECTION B
N.T.S.ttt
NORTH SOUTH
R/W RM,
80' R.O.W.
44'
AGG. BASE I A.C. WEFT!
CURB 8
SECTION C GUTTER
I N.T.S.
NORTH
R/W SOUTH
R/W
80' R.O.W.
50'
ACG. BASE AC. WAR.
GURB
TTER
SECTION D
N.T.S.
NORTHSOUTH
R/W If
R/W
102' R.O.
64' ---
�AGG. BASE A.C. WAR.
G
GUTTER
SECTION E
N.T.S.
RANCHO ETIWANDA
BY: TRANSPORTATION
ALURD ENGINEERING. IMPACT FEE ANALYSIS
Civil Engineannq – Land %Coning
11.101 .... EXHIBIT N-6
(m) -mlIb 9137!
(Y09) W➢-'Alt is (Wi) !W-agt4 �'
i
^ Tract 14497
C:
a
Not a Part
Cd
School Site —�
Park Site
Summit Avenue
OouNn oF I cm oP
PA SAN BE AWMNO i4NON0 ajcAmoNG
E
pF3f LIST
M'w iNnK(anSiRY.IgM
ie r a'
zi w
I � we ��
40' �'PROPER�Y b' NWD PROPERTY
NMN Cy A N T
KTS
RANCHO ETIWANDA
BY HANLEY AVENUE
nr">.ean ENGINEERING
Cinl Eng'nsenng - [°nC Planning
°'°' ` C41 .W EXHIBIT O
Fen) f-WII 9 (
(aoo) .p.-SOTT F. (a°.) eaa—wT4 T
i
Tract 14497
0
Not a Part
i
i
Park Site _
School Site
I
I
_- ___:-:Summit--Avenue
RANCHO ETIWANDA
BY. SIDEWALK EXHIBIT
ALLARD ENGILand NEERING
$ 01 1 &'in�dn' — nk` EXHIBIT P
G..ry,v
F W
(aoo) eoa—wii F. (M) M-5014
Tract 13527
Conditioned to build
Ly wilson Avenue Half Width !mprovements
including the median
Tract 12659
Centex Homes
$148,152.40 in
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Account
LE
I �
6
a�
m c
> Tract 14120
Conditioned to build
Full Width (66' ROW)
o o Improvements
o =
C3
Park it_e_ �'V Tract 13812
I 5 Panda Development
$200,000.00 in
Sum .t Av nue City of Rancho
Cucamonga Account
Tract 13812
Panda Development
$25,000.00 in
City of Rancho
Cucamonga Account
RANCHO ETIWANDA
BY STREET IMPROVEMENT DEPOSIT:
arr.ean ENCIIVEERIIVG
Civil rs9;�»��9 - � a . EXHIBIT O
6I0I Ch"NYb4
(aoa) esa-'AII Fax (WY) M-5014
Storm Drain Cost Sharing Proposal - City of Rancho Cucamonga
DAY CREEK STORM DRAIN
Rancho Etiwanda
DATE ESTIMATED: 4/15100
DATE PRINTED: 4/21/00
ESTIMATED BY: Allard Engineering
This proposal allows for the UCP project to participate in the cost of the
Baseline Avenue and Victoria Storm Drain Systems.
Costs and acreage assumptions are preliminary from the developers
and are subject to further review and approval.
Facility
Baseline Ave System $230,349.96
Victoria System $335,260.00
UCP $196.805.00
Total $762,414.96
Total Acres 199.60
Cost Per Acre $3,819.71
Property Acres Cost/Acre Fair Share
K & B- Baseline 21.1 $3,819.71 $80,595.97
RDA Parcel 19.8 $3,819.71 $75,630.34
Horrero 28.3 $3,819.71 $108,097.91
K&B Victoria 19.1 $3,819.71 $72,956.54
Lyon 26.3 $3,819.71 $100,458.48
UCP 60.0 $3,819.71 $229,182.85
Intex,Kolo etc. 25.0 $3,819.71 $95,492.86
TOTAL 199.6 $666,922.10
Note:
Actual Master Planned Limits and Construction Costs to be verified after construction.
EXHIBIT R
I o
a
' =z
t •' a4 it`J''�u .�I
-Ask Am
i a
e
• J
vJ
—r
a w
I.
NIT
c y 4 N
b p I
` ' sit ' r �i (ti 9r
uj
IN
14
.Wa 1 r
ti .
.e.Lel I I RefSflQ
CJe!rt lYTfER I �R TO CM1:EMXRS RW i
��Te ..••. i IweRro cvy Sp•mis liJl� � i
� CDIf:n.ulp�y Veal tD Cry tlp•l�Rre I
RIr
YCUEtT LlfirT! �vl To 6LC71ECJL[Na•ltRa ILw
FOR L Ta Ac ME
a ayu•Lr r•wclay rrIV.TDE nT I'LOTS WN C ACTED
Lm lIn-[6"•E F SnECM•L aflya RPORT
♦ E>a•raCN JDlrr RSER TO OETA4. a WILT U.1
ICPMRur XJM.r I IROlR To--ET•y
ale
• COIOSIE rCLR•r COaSn.w1UlUL US,W ""ow
r.l�ru
�•IEc [1IWT F1r16"Flr.0,O r•r•rra YGR!JONta
m raw a nnc ie'oc E»wlvr JOMe
m 6"ow a n•Ic la oc
COlJSTE�•v! O•COIGSn DWO.wTuuL U!r W N
81• TG[L F0,1W CONOSn RELD.
uATWI•L u WN•CJD W1W FNIW•IO.'
UED SCOS CM1 m bl'
O OAaammAL.c=leT [OlaldT[.4^C l WN 10,16"AM 2'.!$!Ul
COLOR P!R oET•y•0,p yfC}�Clnpe
Note: Product S
i1 -mR,O WT .�%Iy&W
"OTTTO Exam I Specifications
at are per City of Rancho
����µ� Cucamonga Standards
SCOS JONiS AT IO OL.pa•IRar ATMs
AT MAX.]P OG
I> CCOpLi STOP a1=LI TO"6-1 e•IT•X YN Oe ape OOTAl=RIOYI v' WILT Ul
Ov 5L 5 FLAT.ROOC TO x OST•Ne0 Rfcl, , NKMOIIT AT
StapaTLeD MOITQR o .Wm PROJECT WE
M1 TIItl IT MIT 6"41 O•a U•DLCVC-UST, vLLLT 0XvD m WEEt U.
A. �ATTfti
ITpE K}E[R Wa TO Be••Tal I••11•X WN o •pE (.OT••®FItTr
RAT ROOC TO W OaTAbi PRO+ I CRT AT
SKV !!V n 01`117 O .6"n FRO.ECT lin
.-LASTER car n T COCISn C•0,wnIIAL U!T
EEE CETWL
A SEAT WSLL lbl C YINJ.W N ST11CCO,COLOR NO vliii 00.DNO W'.6"EET U..
FMIW TO"IELCCTED. AATEIE4./
YPLL CJI rlCCyr COIaDtre[Ar wTlq•L C/(T.
SEE OET4L
A R All STEEL RD= COLOR To M SELECTED. I GO.recT U..
IT FRM•RT EMTIR EyOCR HALL WN STUCCO.COLO!WO vALLeT 00.01a T.7.X.t'.T.
rtlWBrt FWW TO OE SELLCTIO. n•nlE•LS v'.WEFT U]
-STOQ lv Em al$TOM&-0,N W n4 W N OK aloe CpTA•W FROT
I RATER RAT.IWC 10 M COT• FIAT M 01 WT AT
lTOOO'y[D 1+vpITOR OFI.Wn ..ORCT Wn
.P1mnR Car FR[CAST COIJIETE CM.wtuR•L UST.
SEE ORAL
-YYLL CCI FRECAST CCICJS}e CA!".wnwaL UST.
SQ OETAIL
-4p0p TRELLIa Iq{YI 441 p01tim FIR IAN,pe Erol
To IN SOEC•Im.
-CCNOSTE Fwk•IT CLNOEn COLVN,wnwAL
CCLY•N UST.SEe OeTWL
-S1'•l•5e K l41.A6i Ol! tl AT to OF•rro tm
RT aueR
E rR•lrr flrOLOiSS SFLrt 1•Q ELOtX W N rST4.CrICOaCS x'.reit uw
L•'QA 0,•M TT.T4.TO IYTOI 1181A11
STEIL Tg Ct
n flO11L TApLe 01 CO.Ofn TO ILT04 WUC rTO11O Tmu;O IIVI R'.VITmr y.6-11117w
ccNaen xan raT a nro ty-OLD.vNTL CL•O.COLOR Ti a Fong!•T4LIOLe
IELCCeD 1IICTT rAOIc DCWreI
co�TE
RANCHO ETIWANDA
PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS
EXHIBIT 8-1
ar �" I onaw•.M MA14PAGTua OETAL
rwRa I 1�4
]e ..Nar..fo lc'.na �C4rF•o.ura WYJc mac TATTLE ro I nRM r Aw r.a1Qr w
aY LOADE}E r..(I( GE"Q741)►MYv�I✓wlal �fv�E
(V)PAcm DWQT
�T! i
11 GRN PCVIrAM(r] YMOCAP Yfrf f TO DE aELLCTm.
r.a.ar w
n D4OPETRALL Pqr,fO4 •.W'OD.BA&grl LI PORT TxrO4!T i1M11 R1WTY1 v.b6T uJ
Aro OAOCEpalp(u DYRiLALL lAOmoATO roO6 I :, TOAAL AVAlAME
5AWJ75ALL QOAL T EL!Y. PSR 04cm 011
Cd@ R
13 OAI15lC1!p!LL f O] lTATIaARr U!LL r'IGOlL]AM• .OLA4 TUI
L. rl� I
a •E
IM Y.6QQTT luyJMWI C4,
:A ar4r04 IM PO WAA4
M.,CP REDYL1Cp CMrRlOtla )r CALL , A9tll AVALAGLE
OAP4CJTr R PAOEK OWON
COAG a
]a VATxryRr OQtl(TCD6)+R-W V vn(rL IRM MOUWAM
CLAD,COLOR TO EE aaEGTW lcr ACAILARLE
Trl1r PAcm DEaCAI
CO1CpT!
n MLAT`Dr Note: Product Specifications
Sy LOT °'"""•""LATER O Com' Tl PLAT 5Y . are per City of Rancho
eneER��Aax a`OlLF�.•'T°O COLOR TO°° Cucamonga Standards
RAr EO! LITTU TxW ro°EL b. LlTlti T)�)yr
Aro LITTLE TR!MOM Ttl. areT&O AVAAAEU
WTALL PER RMT P4 OEaGR
COCQT!
1T rlaLLla a*wc:.ua rr]
Ar Tar Lor O'.LIFET u)
R•P V•scu NN."PACE BLOC CAQE VALLEr SROM
TO W T. IyTv6W
AR�w iGT ft O ONfA.OA PIR PAM OR arAM TO W
lEI.EGTED.
11 REeIgyl py1LOM REAR
to Y Mo'PLYIa P.•w"A'"
11 wwluP ar+.re w AOA APPIV' M T'.seET u.
)O QA ICRP arIFPIIC A,A APPIRT,m
r.seEr u.
)I 'JTALL PTLA67E AT v:Q.ft O .u!r VALLR CrRDM x'.)IQT w
enlEr roAEpT
rurERJAu
-arOTC`OZ[R a1Dr TO W A•TTfr R'"Ai um OT!!OE OGTAE=MftG
LIT R TO K O,,A PR P•. awr Ar
3TO00MLEO E(so Tcw am.&M PIRD,.RGT NTE
-Fl TER CAP PRECAST cocpk E CAP MAMAI lAtT. lTOrdllY
TO a anECTm.
)r TALL P TEA AT C x D•EL=
DaRr Tpy.pTr vAyET ESLDM
M,T=AL*
•5"M vc"jm NII Tome L•TI)l W TVx Wtu OC MD[ OBTAEm Rat)
RAT.loot TO W OBTAND rrMrr )n b1 AT
aTeoe• w rHDTrcwr a-MTC Pol. WTI
-PILAarER CY PI�}r CPQry Cru
.mA (ilr.
MOf W CdRRACTCII r0 CC "C S" r0 ODTAII A COR O aOEa IQORT TO ALIENOR ALf PLATW r!pfo�
R4!! AOTOR T A(O rY7V E Ta?2WR FOR TTS LOOS!YO OWt6M f01 ALL RATYL'rR
canRAcrae ro uy Tr*S V cacaTE OR u DETOR+r�er a°a.R REPOIEI.
t1!lYEL Rzx
PA(JC DWG Goean aTvaraa ac
41�W LOO ME 401M ruw R. COLLET ORDM 1YlgAl!
=Tp.EUpLGL U OW641aWR)pfA 4 EW iT COMMARtN
D9 EKIRI'O
)W)T•LY �
LAPP T.Cl L4L
RANCHO ETIWANDA
PRODUCT SPECIFICATIONS
EXHIBff S-2
Rancho Etiwanda
DATE ESTIMATED: 4/15100
DATE PRINTED: 4121100
ESTIMATED UNIT
ITEM QUANTITY MEASURE
Park Softscape Per 10-19.99 Plans
24' Box Tipu Trees 8 EA.
24" Box Elms 31 EA.
24' Box Evergreen Pear 19 EA.
24" Box Plum 11 EA.
15 Gallon Plane Tree 54 EA.
15 Gallon Pine Mondel 43 EA.
48" Box Pine Canary 25 EA.
36" Box Crepe Myrtle 11 EA.
24" Box Flame Tree 13 EA.
24" Box Camphor 43 EA.
Shrub/Ground Cover
Lonicera 24,572 SF
Myoporum 5,684 SF
Star Jasmine 1,662 SF
Turf-per City of Rancho Cucamonga seed mix 314,298 SF
Cobble 30,657 SF
Park Hardscape Per 10-19-99 Plans
Tot Lot area with 1,500 sf ADA rubber surface 1 EA.
Lighted Basketball Courts 4 EA.
Parking stalls with access to school parking 65 EA.
Restroom Building (per plan) 1 EA.
Entry Monumentation with Signage 1 EA.
Picnic Tables (1 HDCP) 14 EA.
Two-Bin Trash Enclosure 1 EA.
Drinking Fountain 2 EA.
BBQ Grill 12 EA.
Trash Receptacles 2 EA.
Bench 8 EA.
1,200 sf Wood Arbor Structure 2 EA.
EXHIBIT S - 3
i
RANCHO ETIWANDA OPEN SPACE
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
NORTHERLY PORTION:
THAT PORTION OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 22,
TOWNSHIP I NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF
SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT
OF SAID LAND APPROVED BY THE SURVEYOR GENERAL, DATED NOVEMBER 13,
1885, LYING NORTHERLY AND NORTHWESTERLY OF THE NORTHERLY AND
NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF THAT CERTAIN STRIP OF LAND BEING 85 FEET WIDE
AS CONVEYED TO THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA, A PUBLIC CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED DECEMBER 3l, 1969,
IN BOOK 7363, PAGE 582, OFFICIAL RECORDS.
TOGETHER WITH THAT PORTION OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE NORTHEAST 1/4 OF
SECTION 22, TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN,
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE
OFFICIAL PLAT OF SAID LAND APPROVED BY THE SURVEYOR GENERAL, DATED
NOVEMBER 13, 1885, MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:
BEGINNING ON A POINT ON THE EAST LINE OF SAID NORTHEAST 1/4, SAID POINT
BEING N 00005'03" E, 344.33 FEET FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF SAID
NORTHEAST 1/4; THENCE N 89°54'57"W, A DISTANCE OF 1322.81 FEET TO A POINT
ON THE WEST LINE OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE EAST 1/2 OF SAID SECTION 22,
TOWNSHIP I NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST.
SOUTHERLY PORTION:
THAT PORTION OF THE EAST 1/2 OF THE SOUTHEAST 1/4 OF SECTION 22,
TOWNSHIP 1 NORTH, RANGE 6 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO MERIDIAN, COUNTY OF
SAN BERNARDINO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO THE OFFICIAL PLAT
OF SAID LAND APPROVED BY THE SURVEYOR GENERAL, DATED NOVEMBER 13,
1885, LYING SOUTHERLY AND SOUTHEASTERLY OF THE SOUTHERLY AND
SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF THAT CERTAIN STRIP OF LAND BEING 85 FEET WIDE
AS CONVEYED TO THE METROPOLITAN WATER DISTRICT OF SOUTHERN
CALIFORNIA, A PUBLIC CORPORATION, BY DEED RECORDED DECEMBER 1, 1969,
IN BOOK 7363, PAGE 582, OFFICIAL RECORDS.
EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE SOUTHERLY 50 FEET AS CONVEYED TO THE
COUNTY OF SAN BERNARDINO RECORDED SEPTEMBER 26, 1949, IN BOOK 2464,
PAGE 510, OFFICIAL RECORDS.
EXHIBIT C
N\S]17 OOI%DOC ANCHO ETWANDA OPEN SPACE
0 N
O L >
1 L 0 N
L m
� UQ) O
Q) U 2c
L� N
U U W N
X a] 0 U
W10
Ban an Avenue
i
TRUCK ACTIVATED I I F11 I I
TRAFFIC SIGNAL (TO
BE INSTALLED BY
HANSEN AGGREGATE)
Vintage Drive
tate Highway
te. 30 ROW
RANCHO ETIWANDA
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
BY:
ALLARD ENGINEERING
Civil .gineering — Land Planning EXHIBIT D
6101 Cn Av .
Fa6mw. C IW.W 91]]6
(e0e) bee-6011 F. (IM) 6ee-5014