Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1989/07/26 AGENDA City Planning Commission Chula Vista, California Wednesday, July 26, 1989 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission on any subject matter within the Commission's jurisdiction but not an item on today's agenda. Each speaker's presentation may not exceed five minutes. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft Environmental Impact Report EIR-89-7, Lower Sweetwater Valley General Plan Amendment, Zoning Actions, and Development of the Rio Vista Apartments 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft Environmental Impact Report EIR-89-6, Salt Creek I 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Development Agreement for Woodcrest Terra Nova - Terra Nova Associates (PCS-89-6) 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of Development Agreement for EastLake Greens - EastLake Development Company (PCS-88-3) 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Extension of P-79-013 and PCC-86-34M: Request for a one-year extension to operate an auto recycling yard at 3513 and 3517 Main Street - Carole and John Marquez 6. Consideration of the design of the Bonita Corporate Center at 3965 Otay Lakes Road - Bob Crane and Jeff Phair OTHER BUSINESS DIRECTOR'S REPORT COMMISSION COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT AT p.m. to the Regular Business Meeting of August 9, 1989 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 1 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft Environmental Impact Report EIR-89-?, Lower Sweetwater Valley General Plan Amendment, Zonin~ Actions, and Development of the Rio Vista Apartments A. BACKGROUND This Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) has been prepared for the City of Chula Vista (City) as part of the environmental review process for the "Lower Sweetwater Valley General Plan Amendment, Zoninq Actions, and Development of the Rio Vista Apartments." The proposed project consists of a series of land use actions and the subsequent development of apartments and a mobile home park in the North Central portion of the City. The DEIR describes the potential environmental consequences of and mitigation measures for implementation of the proposed project. The DEIR was issued for public review on June 26, 1969. It is currently being circulated to various state agencies by the State Clearing House, their review period extends to July 27, 1989. Comments from the Chula Vista City School District, Sweetwater Authority, Police Department and Engineering. B. RECOMMENDATION Open the public hearing, take testimony relevant to the DEIP, close the hearing and schedule consideration of the final EIR for August 23 or September 13 depending on the volume of comments on the Draft EIR. C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The "Lower Sweetwater Valley General Plan Amendment, Zoning Actions, and Development of the Rio Vista Apartments" project consists of a series of land use actions and the subsequent development of apartments and a mobile home park on a 40-acre site in the North Central portion of the City of Chula Vista. The project site is situated to the east of North Second Avenue, to the west of Interstate 805, and south of the Sweetwater Flood Control Channel and State Route 54, as shown in Figure 3.2. Surrounding land uses include a Kampgrounds of America, Inc. (KOA) facility and a psychiatric care hospital on the northwest and west, and single family residential and vacant to the south. The proposed project represents the combination of three separate proposals. Mascot Realty proposes to develop the Rio Vista Apartment complex on 18.00 acres. The City of Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency (Agency) is proposing to accommodate a 150-unit mobile home park on 14.25 acres. In addition, adjoining properties are included in the proposal for a general plan amendment and zone changes. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 2 The requested general plan amendment would change the land use designation for the overall site from "Parks and Public Open Space" to "Medium Density Residential" (6-11 dwelling units per acre). The following zone change actions would also be required: 2.73 acres of unzoned land to R-3-P-6 11.28 acres of unzoned land to R-3-P-11 9.19 acres of unzoned land to M-H-P 5.55 acres of R-1 land to R-3-P-6 4.52 acres of R-1 land to R-3-P-11 5.06 acres of R-1 land to M-H-P 1.73 acres of "A" land to R-3-P-11 These rezone actions can be combined to achieve the following result: 8.28 acres of R-3-P-6 18.00 acres of R-3-P-111 14.25 acres of M-H-P The Rio Vista Apartment development consists of a 200 dwelling unit project located between the KOA campground and the proposed mobile home park. A site plan for the proposed apartments is presented in Figure 3.3. The project would include 56 one-bedroom units and 144 two-bedroom units with carports, a central recreation center with a pool, a tot lot, and a separate spa and tennis court area. Buildings and other structures would cover approximately 40 percent of the 18.00 acre site. The height of the two-story buildings would not exceed 30 feet. Net building density for the apartments is ll dwelling units per acre. The mobile home park proposal involves the construction of a trailer park on land owned by the Redevelopment Agency. The land was purchased by the Agency several years ago with the intent of developing a low-income mobile home facility specifically for displaced residents of mobile home parks that were expected to close in the City along Broadway. More recently, the St. Vincent de Paul Association has proposed to lease the property from the agency at a nominal rate and develop, own, and manage the mobile home park. St Vincent de Paul proposes to house people at the site who are transitionally homeless. They would reside at the park until such time as they could afford to pay rent elsewhere. The Agency proposal is to allow a mix of relocated mobile home park residents and transitionally homeless people to reside at the park (Gustafson, personal communication). As part of the St. Vincent de Paul proposal, mobile home coaches would be donated by Security Pacific Bank. Security Pacific has offered to give St. Vincent de Paul 150 repossessed coaches. The coaches are one to three years old and in good condition. 1Figure rounded City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 3 D. IMPACT ANALYSIS The Lower Sweetwater Valley project would not cause any significant unavoidable impacts. There are several significant impacts associated with construction of the proposed project. However, all of these can be mitigated to below significant levels. The purpose of the DEIR is to formulate, analyze, and recommend ways to mitigate or avoid significant environmental impacts which would occur from implementation of the Lower Sweetwater Valley project. Potentially significant adverse impacts and mitigation measures associated with the project are summarized in Table 2.1. these impacts and mitigation measures are discussed in detail in Section 4 of this DEIR. 1. Geology, Soils Extensive liquefaction at the site could occur in the event of a major earthquake on a local fault such as the Rose Canyon fault. A site specific soils investigation should be performed to determine specific recommendations for mitigation of foundation failure due to liquefaction. 2. Drainage Runoff from the canyons south of the project could cause flooding on the site during a major storm event. The City Engineering Department will require that a hydrology/hydraulic study be undertaken. This study would contain a discussion of the existing structures and drainage system and identify drainage improvements that should be installed as part of the project to meet City standards. The project shall meet the City standard that the lowest finished floor elevation will be at least one-foot above the lO0-year flood elevation. This standard shall apply to localized flooding as well as flooding potential as a result of proximity to the Sweetwater River. 3. Biol o~y The project would cause the loss of approximately 1.og acre of facultative wetland. A 200-foot wide wetland mitigation zone is proposed in the northernmost portion of the subject properties. This would require relocating the access road on the City and Mross properties outside of this zone and the redesigning of a portion of the Rio Vista Apartments plan. Off-site mitigation is also possible. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 4 4. Air Quality An increase in carbon monoxide from project traffic would not cause a change in ambient levels which violate one-hour state and federal ambient standards. No mitigation measures required. Several measures for reducing project construction and operation emission levels are recommended in Section 4.5. 5. Noise The project would experience significant noise impacts from 1-805 and possibly from future construction of SR-54. Construct barrier walls on a section of 1-805 and on the berm to the north of the project site. A detailed acoustical analysis will be required prior to the issuance of building permits. 6. Parks and Recreation The project site is in a portion of the City where there are no public parks within a short, safe walking distance. The Rio Vista Apartments and mobile home park include recreational amenities which offset the demand for local park space. Private developers would be required to pay park fees for the acquiring and developing land for parks and open space purposes. 7. Utilities and Services Impacts to water, sewer, solid waste, gas and electric utilities as well as fire services would not be significant. No mitigation measures required. The Chula Vista Fire Department will require project developers to design the project to meet acceptable fire safety standards. The City Police Department will need one additional staff person to accommodate the project and maintain current levels of service. The City should ensure that funding is provided to employ one additional staff person in the police department. Impact to schools from project development would be significant as the elementary school and high schools are currently overcrowded. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page The private developers would be required to pay school impact fees to partially offset these impacts. A Mello-Roos District which includes this project could be established to provide additional funding for school construction. Financial arrangements for school funding should be agreed to before building permits are issued. 8. Transportation and Access Site-generated traffic plus cumulative traffic would not cause a significant impact on the local roadway system. No mitigation measures required. An alternative access/egress scheme at the North Second Avenue entrance to the site is recommended. This would require restriping the street at this entrance. 9. Community Tax Structure The proposed project would positively impact the City's finances in the short term. In the long run, the City would incur continuing cost of providing public service, resulting in a long-term loss. 10. Aesthetics The aesthetic impacts of project development would not be significant. No mitigation measures required. Use of sodium vapor light bulbs, placing hoods on light standards to direct night lighting, and extensive planting of trees to reduce glare impacts are recommended. WPC 6510P GOVERNOR'S OFFICE OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH 1,aO0 TENTH STREET SACRAMENTO 9S81 GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN June 27, 1989 Douglas Reid City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 Subject: Lower Sweetwater Valley GPA Shortened Review Request, $CH# 89010409 Dear Mr. Reid: This is to inform you that concerned state agencies have been contacted with regard to the request for a 30-day review for the Lower Sweetwater Valley GPA project. As none of the agencies object to shortening the review period, the request has been granted. Accordingly, the review period for state agencies will be £rom June 27, 1989 to July 27, 1989. If you have any questions, please contact Garrett Ashley of the State Clearinghouse at 916/445-0613. Sincerely, David C. Nunenkamp Chief Office of Permit Assistance DCN:GA:hr U m mo mL JUN $ 0 1989 CHUT,A VISTA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT 84 EAST "J" STREET · CHULAVISTA, CALIFORNIA 92010 * 619 425-9600 BOARDOFEDUCA~ON June 7, 1989 SHARON GILES PATRICK A. JUDD JUDY~HULENBERG FRANK~TA~NTI~ Mr. Doug Reid Environmental Review Coordinator suP£m~£NOE~rr City of Chula Vista ROBERT J. McCARTHV,~O, 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 RE: Rio Vista/Lower Sweetwater Rezoning Dear Mr. Reid: The District initially responded to the Notice of Preparation for an EIR on the above project by recommending participation in a Mello-Roos Community Facilities District to provide financing for required school facilities. However, given the present overcrowded situation at Rosebank School, the home school for the project site, and the immediate impact this number of units will have, this mitigation will not be adequate. Historically, lower-income and/or higher density projects generate more students than other types of residential development. It is highly likely that the average District-wide generation rate of 0.3 children per unit, which would result in 116 children, is slightly more than half of the actual number of children that will be generated. Utilizing a factor of 0.5 results in 194 students, probably a much more realistic figure. At 29 children per class, the Rio Vista/Lower Sweetwater project could create almost seven new classes at Rosebank School. As stated previously, Rosebank is currently overcrowded, and we are adding a relocatable classroom this Fall to help accommodate the overflow children. There is no additional capacity at this facility, nor does sufficient space exist at other schools in this area. We are currently analyzing possible mitigation measures to determine how we can provide adequate school facilities and services in a timely manner to serve this project. We will provide the results of this analysis in our response to the Draft EIR on this project. If you have any questions, please give me a call. Sincerely, Kate Shurson Director of Planning KS:dp cc: John Linn SW '--TWATER AUTHORIT' 505 GARRETT AVENUE POSt OFFICE BOX 2328 ChUIA VISTA CALIFORNIA 92012-2328 ,~ ~ FAX (619) 42S 7469 CARY F WRIGHT, CHAIRMAN ~ ~ WAYNE W SMITH VICE-CHAIRMAN SUE JARRETT W D "BUD" POCKL]NGTON eDW]N J STEELE GEORGE h WATERS MARGARET A WELSH WANDA AVERY July 13, 1989 TREASURER JOAN S FOWLER CONTROLLER SECRETARY City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Il,, Chula Vista, CA 92010~, Attention: Mr. Douglas Reid Environmental Review Coordinator Subject: DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT JUL LOWER SWEETWATER VALLEY GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT, ZONING ACTIONS AND DEVELOPMENT OF THE RIO VISTA APARTMENTS Gentlemen: Page 4-73, Water, of the above referenced report, indicates that the source of supply for the City's portion of the system is largely from surface water runoff and collection at Sweetwater Reservoir, augmented by the San Diego County Water Authority aqueduct system when necessary. Actually, the San Diego County Water Authority aqueduct system provides the primary source of supply to the Sweetwater Authority system, augmented by local runoff. Page 4-78 of the report indicates that the project proponents would be required to develop the on-site distribution system and pay water hookup fees to offset impacts on the regional system. After completion of the hydraulic network analysis, if offsite facilities are required to provide the development with required demands, the project proponents would also be required to fund and construct those facilities. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Joe Gray at 420-1413. Very truly yours, SWEETWATER AUTHORZTY Richard A. Reynolds Chief Engineer RAR:JEG:ln NLT9:TOCITYCV ?1 Pubh? ?lgen©,, Serving National Ct?y, Chula lz~3ta and Surrounding ?lreas DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE DATE: June 29, 1989 TO: Doug Reid, Planning Department FROM: Keith Hawkins, Police Department~ SUBJECT: Review of E.I.R. for Lower Sweetwater Valley General Plan I've reviewed Section 9.2, pages 9-2, (Police Protection) of the E.I.R. and find the material basically factual except that the Threshold for Police Services has been modified as follows: 1) Respond to 84% of Priority I calls within 7 minutes and maintain an average response time to all Priority I emergency calls of 4.5 minutes or less. 2) Respond to 62.10% of Priority II calls within 7 minutes and maintain an average response time to all Priority II calls of 7 minutes or less. KH/amh City of Chula Vista, California A 111 July 11, 1989 File # YE-032 TO: Doug Reid, Environmental Review Coordinator FROM: Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer ~/ SUBJECT: Draft EIR 89-7 - Rio Vista Apartments The Engineering Division has reviewed the subject EIR and offers the following comment: The volume of traffic generated by the project indicates the need for a separate left turn pocket to be located on North Second Avenue at the project entrance. Construction of this left turn pocket may require, widening at North Second Avenue. CST:llb (A~MEMOS~EIR89-7.DOC) City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 1 2. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft Environmental Impact Report EIR-89-6, Salt Creek Ranch A. BACKGROUND This Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (SEIR), addresses potential environmental consequences of the Salt Creek I project Iformerly known as Unit 4 of the EastLake Business Center) in eastern Chula Vista. The 124.2 acre site is located in the EastLake Business Center neighborhood of the EastLake Planned Community. The discretionary actions required for the proposed project consists of a General Plan Amendment, General Development Plan, Planned Community District Regulations (PC) Amendment, Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan Amendment, Tentative Tract Map approval, and Precise Plan approval for the southern portion attached residential parcels. The draft EIR was issued for public review on June 26, 1989 and is currently being circulated through various state agencies by the State Clearing House. Their review will end on July 20, 1989, however, no comments have been received prior to this staff report; however, any comments should be available for the Planning Commission meeting. Letters from the Chula Vista City School District and the Police Department are attached. B. RECOMMENDATION Open the public hearing, take any testimony relevant to the EIR, close the hearing and schedule consideration of the final EIR for August 8, 1989. C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION Five alternatives to the proposed project were analyzed. Alternative D is considered the preferred alternative; it is determined to avoid or reduce adverse project impacts while generally satisfying objectives of the proposed project. Although this is not the project described in Section II of the EIR, it is being proposed by the project proponent. The Design Alternative was created upon identification of project impacts, in an attempt to minimize the project's adverse effects while attaining the project objectives of residential development onsite. This Alternative provides a net additional 4.0 acres of open space, specifically in the northwest corner and along SR-125. The plan also changes the proposed land use of the southernwest parcel from Condominium to Future Urban Use. The Alternative will reduce project impacts on biological resources, open space, aesthetics and inconsistency with regulating land use documents. The following provides a description of the three residential concepts and associated infrastructure and park/open space uses. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 2 Single-Family Residential The single-family residential area includes 169 single family lots on 33.8 acres of the site, located north of East "H" Street and northeast of the SR-125 alignment. The overall density equates to 4.8 du/ac. Lot sizes range from 6,000 square feet (s.f.) to 28,344 s.f., with an average size of 8,727 s.f. Emphasis is placed in this area on optimizing views, some of which extend to the ocean. The SFR layout utilizes, in concept, the existing topography of gradual slopes and rolling hills. The circulation concept includes access at two points on the northern project boundary from Proctor Valley Road. The SDG&E easement also provides open space running north-south through the site, culminating at the transmission tower hilltop north of East "H" Street, which overlooks the majority of the site. Multi-Family Residential The project proposes multi-family bounded by East "H" Street to the north, SR-125 to the southwest, and San Miguel Road to the east. The Site Plans show the townhome building footprints, circulation/infrastructure and amenities. The two multi-family parcels are separated by the condominium parking structures. The townhome project (northern area, south of East "H" Street) involves development of 237 units on 20.0 acres, at an overall density of 11.8 du/ac. Access is from San Miguel Road (east boundary); the internal circulation system is a loop road with building clusters to the interior and exterior of the loop road. Buildings contain 6 or 9 units each. Exterior parking and enclosed attached garages are provided. Buildings are oriented to optimize views and sun exposure (passive solar heating). The townhome onsite amenities include an open-space/recreation and pool area at the project entrance; a greenbelt/pedestrian walkway extending east-west; and a park/recreation area at the western corner, including three tennis courts (this area is traversed by the SDG&E easement). The condominium project in the southern area encompasses 8.5 acres. The detailed site plan will be submitted at a later date. Access ~ from ~an Miguel Road; the internal circulation system extends around the perimeter of the site, with parking structures and spaces exterior to this street. Amenities include a pool and open space in the central area, extending to the project entrance. A pedestrian walkway system provides internal circulation and access to the central recreation area and two smaller open space areas. A total of 144 units are proposed. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 3 IMPACT ANALYSIS Each significant environmental impact resulting from the project is reviewed below in consideration of the Design Alternative. A determination of level of significance is concluded under each topic below. This Design Alternative is environmental superior to the proposed project and should be considered as a preferred alternative. 1. Land Use The project single family residential area was determined to be inconsistent with the EastLake I SPA Plan open space land use designation of the site's northern area. The Design Alternative slightly increases open space /14.9 to 18.9 acres) and redistributes open space from the central portion of the single family residential tract to the northwest corner and north central edge. This redistribution is pursuant to biological resource preservation (see below Biology discussion). This Alternative further reduces land use impacts but not to a level of insignificance. 2. Aesthetics/Visual Resources A similar impact resulting from proposed residential development in the northern site area has been identified regarding aesthetics and view impacts. (Note that a portion of the aesthetic impact is due to grading for San Miguel and Proctor Valley Roads, included pursuant to the GP Update Circulation Element.) A substantial portion of the northern area (designated open space on EastLake I SPA Plan) would be developed, resulting in an urban visual appearance in comparison to open space. The Design Alternative will reduce this impact by providing more open space located at the site's outer northwest and north, and by additional setback from SR-125. The aesthetic impact will not, however, be reduced to a level of insignificance by this Alternative. 3. Biological Resources This Design Alternative was created to minimize the identified biological resource impacts. Specifically, the Alternative's open space in the northwest corner provides for preservation of coastal sage scrub habitat; the north-central open space will adequately protect the endangered Hermizonia conjugens (Otay Tarplant). Other biological resources will still be impacted under this Alternative by the proposed development and roadways. It should be noted that habitat in the northeast area (coastal sage scrub, native grassland, cholla thicket) will be impacted by the General Plan alignments of San Miguel and Proctor Valley Roads, in combination with the residential development proposed in that area. The Black-tailed Gnatcatchers present in that area will also remain impacted. In summary, the Design Alternative will provide for mitigation of City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 4 project-specific adverse impacts to a level of insignificance; the projects contribution to cumulative adverse biological resource impacts is reduced by the Alternative but not to a level of insignificance. 4. Noise Noise impacts identified in Section III.H are mitigable to a level of insignificance by onsite design and noise attenuation technology. This impact is mentioned here, however, because the Design Alternative further reduces onsite noise impacts by additional development setback along SR-125 (Figure 5-4, Open Space Lot C). Noise impacts are mitigable to a level of insignificance. 5. Air Quality The project will contribute to an unavoidable cumulative impact on the region's degrading air quality because it was not incorporated into regional land use projections in formation of SANDAG's growth forecasts. This cumulative impact remains unchanged by the Design Alternative. 6. Parks, Recreation and Open Space As identified in the Land Use Section, the project's open space is inconsistent with that designated in the EastLake I SPA Plan. The Design Alternative increases onsite open space by 4.0 acres, in locations critical for biological resource preservation. This Alternative will reduce the open space impacts, in combination with mitigation in Section III.K of the draft EIR to a level of insignificance. Parks and recreation potential impacts are also mitigable by measures in Section III.K. 7. Public Services and Utilities Potential project and cumulative impacts are mitigable by project design, financing programs and measures contained in Section III.L, with the exception of cumulative water supply and energy resource impacts. Under this Alternative, as with any development, this cumulative impact is unmitigable and unavoidable. WPC 6506P  GOVERNOR'S OFF)CE : OFFICE OF PLANNING AND RESEARCH sss,. GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN June 19, 1989 JUN 2 2 1989 Douglas D. Reid City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue San Diego, CA 92010 Subject: Salt Creek I Shortened Review Request, SCR# 89062106 Dear Mr. Reid: This is to inform you that concerned state agencies have been contacted with regard to the request for a 30-day review for the Salt Creek I project. As none of the agencies object to shortening the review period, the request has been granted. Accordingly, the review period for state agencies will be from June 20, 1989 to July 20, 1989. If you have any questions, please contact Garrett Ashley of the State Clearinghouse at 916/445-0613. Sincerely, David C. Nunenkamp Chief Office of Permit Assistance DCN:GA:hr CHUI,A VISTA CITY SCHOOL DISTRICT 84 EAST "J" STREET · CHULAVISTA, CALIFORNIA 92010 * 619 425-9600 SHARON GILES PATRICK ^. JUDD JUDY 8GHULENBE~G FRANK A. TARANTINO June 28, 1989 SUPERINTENDENT .OBE,T J. C^RTHV, E D. JUL Mr. Doug Reid Environmental Review Coordinator City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 R£: Subdivision Rame - Salt Creek One C.V. Tract - 89-9 Deposit Acct. No. - DP663 Located - NW ptn. of £astLake I Planned Community Dear Mr. Reid: This correspondence is in response to your notice of submittal of a tentative subdivision map for the Salt Creek One project. This property is located within the EastLake Planned Community and as such is subject to the terms and conditions of the District's agreement with EastLake Development Company for the formation of Community Facilities District No. 1. This agreement provides for participation in Community Facilities District No. I and payment of developer fees. Currently these fees are $630.37, and are adjusted annually (in July) for inflation. If you have any questions, please contact this office. Sincerely, rson Director of Planning KS:dp DEPARTMENTAL CORRESPONDENCE DATE: June 28, 1989 TO: Doug Reid, Planning Department FROM: Keith Hawkins, Police Department ~/ SUBJECT: Review of E.I.R. for Salt Creek I I've reviewed Section 3.L.2, page 3-105, (Police) of the E.I.R. and find the material basically factual except that the Threshold for Police Services has been modified as follows: 1) Respond to 84% of Priority I calls within 7 minutes and maintain an average response time to all Priority I emergency calls of 4.5 minutes or less. 2) Respond to 62.10% of Priority II calls within 7 minutes and maintain an average response time to all Priority II calls of 7 minutes or less. KH/amh City of Chula Vista, California A 111 City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 1 3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-89-6, Consideration of Development Agreement for Woodcrest Terra Nova (Terra Nova Associates) A. BACKGROUND On April 12, 1989, the Planning Commission approved an amendment to the Rice Canyon Section Planning Area (SPA) Plan and a tentative subdivision map known as Woodcrest Terra Nova. The 24.47 acre parcel is located on the north side of Hidden Vista Drive and Ridgeback Road, northerly of Beacon Place and Woodhouse Avenue. The project was redesignated for residential development from a junior high school site and recommended for approval for 86 single family lots and to expand and enhance the Terra Nova Park which adjoins the site. One of the conditions was that the City would enter into a development agreement with the developer to at least address timing, development of facilities and any waiver of park fees. The project is pending City Council consideration. Before the Council can take action on the draft development agreement, it must first be considered by the Planning Commission at a public hearing. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt the agreement and forward Commission comments, if any, on to the City Council. C. DISCUSSION When the City of Chula Vista agreed to allow Woodcrest to develop this property, a major factor was their offer to develop and expand the adjoining neighborhood park. This offer was well beyond any exaction the City might have contemplated under the requirements of the Subdivision Ordinance. The attached agreement binds the applicant to the timely construction and development of the park in exchange for the City vesting his right to develop the property at the approved density and waiving normal park fees. It should be made clear that the applicant is subject to all of his approved tentative map conditions and all of the environmental review and mitigation requirements that were a part of his project review. Further, the applicant is subject to the City's threshold standards ordinance and will be paying his fair share of the City's development impact fees. The benefits to the City are as follows: 1. Once the park is improved, a one year maintenance by the applicant. 2. The park is to be ready for acceptance of maintenance by the property owner within 3 years of the date of this agreement or within 2 years of the date of final map recordation whichever occurs first. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 2 3. The applicant is to install a temporary tot lot within 60 days of the approval of the agreement. 4. The applicant shall grade the park concurrent with the grading of the project. 5. All of the improvements, play equipment and fields are to be installed and ready for acceptance by the City before occupancy. 6. The expenditure cost of the applicant on the park can be up to $850,000 for all of the various park facilities plus the offer to night light two ballfields located in some other City park (see Exhibit E for further description). In sum, City staff has been very pleased with the proposed facility and design of the Woodcrest Subdivision and housing product. The park plan is an excellent one and has been endorsed by the Parks and Recreation Department and the Parks and Recreation Commission and will constitute a fine addition to the community. WPC 6511P Recording Requested by and When Recorded Mail To: (Space above for Recorder's use only) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT California Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5 THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT is entered into as of this __ day of , 1988, by and between the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a charter city organized and existing under the laws of the State of California ("CITY") and TE~RA NOVA ASSOCIATES, a California general partnership. ("PROPERTY OWNER"). RECITALS THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (hereinafter sometimes referred to as this "AGREEMENT") is entered into on the basis of the following facts, understandings and intentions of the parties. A. CITY's Authority. CITY is an incorporated city having charter powers and existing under the laws of the State of California. Government Code, Sections 65864-65869.5, Resolution No. 11933, CITY's Charter, and CITY's self-rule powers authorize CITY to enter into binding development agreements for the development of real property within its jurisdiction with persons having legal or equitable interests in such real property. B. PROPERTY OWNER's Interest. As of the execution of this AGREEMENT, PROPERTY OWNER is the owner of the real property located within the City of Chula Vista, more particularly described in Exhibit "A", attached hereto, which real property is hereinafter referred to as the "PROPERTY." C. The PROJECT. PROPERTY OWNER intends to construct a housing project of 86 units Ithe "PROJECT") on part of the PROPERTY comprising 24.47 acres located on an area commonly referred to by the parties as the Terra Nova School site ("Terra Nova"). D. The PARK. CITY desires to have PROPERTY OWNER construct a park in the manner described and in the area generally reflected on Exhibit "B", attached hereto (the "PARK"). E. Intentions of the Parties. CITY desires to obtain the binding agreement of PROPERTY OWNER to construct the PARK and PROPERTY OWNER desires to obtain the binding agreement of CITY that CITY will permit PROPERTY OWNER to construct and develop the PROJECT in accordance with this AGREEMENT, and CITY's normal rules, regulations and official policies governing permitted land uses, and density, in force on the effective date of this AGREEMENT. It is the intent of CITY and PROPERTY OWNER that, upon execution of this AGREEMENT, PROPERTY OWNER will be bound to construct the PARK as provided herein and that PROPERTY OWNER shall have a vested right to complete the PROJECT. PROPERTY OWNER desires to construct the PARK only if (i) PROPERTY OWNER is granted permission and vested rights by CITY to construct the PROJECT, and (ii) CITY cooperates with PROPERTY OWNER in reimbursing, if already paid, or waiving any park fees due or that will become due resulting from construction, completion or sale of the PROJECT or any part thereof. F. Benefit to CITY. CITY, by virtue of the development of the PPOJECT, will ensure timely construction and development of the PARK, and will receive development impact fees and other benefits. -2= G. CITY Action. PROPERTY OWNER had applied to CITY, pursuant to Government Code, Sections 65864-65869.5, for approval of this AGREEMENT. The City Council has given notice of hearings on this AGREEMENT, has conducted public hearings hereon pursuant to Government Code, Section 65867, and has found the provisions of this AGREEMENT to be consistent with CITY's official policies governing land use in general and the applicable provisions of CITY's general plan in particular. H. Mutual Assurances. CITY and PROPERTY OWNER desire to enter into this AGREEMENT to give assurances to PROPERTY OWNER, upon which PROPERTY OWNER can rely, that PROPERTY OWNER can develop the PROJECT in accordance with and pursuant to the terms and provisions of this AGREEMENT and to assure CITY that the PARK will be constructed pursuant to the terms and provisions of this AGREEMENT. I. Adoption of Ordinance Approving Agreement. On , 19 , the City Council adopted its Ordinance No. ("Ordinance"), authorizing and approving this AGREEMENT. The Ordinance will become or became effective on J. Further Findings. The City Council further found that the environmental documentation certified by the City Council, as described below for the PROJECT, was adequate for this AGREEMENT and satisfies all of the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA"). CITY has imposed a series of mitigation measures in connection with the development of the PROJECT to mitigate the adverse impacts on CITY traffic conditions and on levels of public services and facilities within CITY. On , 19 , the City Council of CITY adopted Resolution No. , documenting compliance with CEQA. -3- AGREEMENT In accordance with the matters recited above, and in consideration of the mutual covenants and agreements contained herein, the parties agree as follows: 1. Definitions: In this AGREEMENT, unless the context otherwise requires: a. CITY is the City of Chula Vista. b. The PARK is the park described in Exhibit "B" attached hereto. c. The PROJECT is the development of 86 units of mixed residential structures to be constructed on the PROPERTY, as more particularly represented in Exhibit "C", attached hereto. d. PROPERTY OWNER is Terra Nova Associates, a California general partnership, which has legal and equitable interest in the PROPERTY, and shall include PROPERTY OWNER's successors-in-interest. 2. Ownership of Property. PROPERTY OWNER represents to CITY that it owns the PROPERTY in fee as of the date of execution of the AGREEMENT. 3. Effective Date. This AGREEMENT and obligations for the parties hereunder shall be effective as of the effective date of the Ordinance. 4. Binding Agreement. This AGREEMENT, and all the terms and conditions hereof, shall be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their respective assigns, heirs and/or other successors-~n-interest. 5. Independent Entities. The parties acknowledge that, in entering into and performing this AGREEMENT, PROPERTY OWNER is acting as an independent entity and contractor and not as an agent of CITY in any respect. -4- 6. Terra Nova Amendment. All the conditions approved by CITY for the adoption of the l~oodcrest Terra Nova Amendment for Chula Vista Tract No. 89-6 to the Rancho del Rey Sectional Planning Area ("Terra Nova Amendment") shall be deemed to be a part of this AGREEMENT. CITY has determined that the Terra Nova Amendment is (i) consistent with CITY's Sectional Planning Area Plan; (ii) compatible with the orderly development of property in the area described in the Terra Nova Amendment; and (iii) not detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare of the citizens of CITY. Further, CITY will cooperate in processing of the specific plan and tentative maps for the Property which both parties acknowledge will ensure implementation of this AGREEMENT and development of the PROPERTY. 7. Development and Construction. Development and construction of the PROJECT shall take place as follows: a. Single Family Dwellings. The PROJECT shall consist of and PROPERTY OWNER shall be allowed to construct on the Property a maximum of 86 single-family dwellings, each dwelling containing up to 3,000 square feet and, in addition, a three (3) car garage, all in two story configurations. b. Beginnin9 Construction. PROPERTY OWNER shall commence the PROJECT as soon as possible but at least within six (6) years of the date of this AGREEMENT. c. Reasonable Progress. After commencement of construction, PROPERTY OWNER agrees diligently to prosecute to completion the construction for the PROJECT, subject to delays reasonably beyond PROPERTY OWNER's control and delays as described in Sections 9 or 21 of this AGREEMENT. -5- d. Acceptance of Park Improvements; Completion of Project. Promptly after PROPERTY OWNER notifies the CITY that the Park improvements have been completed, the CITY shall cause the PARK and Park improvements to be inspected for acceptance by the CITY. Upon acceptance of the construction of the Park improvements by the CITY's Parks and Recreation Department, and Engineering Department (Inspection Division), and with written notice of such acceptance provided to the PROPERTY OWNER, and prior to the start of the landscape maintenance period for the PARK, then upon PROPERTY OWNER's request, CITY shall accomplish final inspection of the completed units constructed on the PROPERTY, and shall complete inspection record cards and any other documentation required for utility connections. The completion of such inspection record cards and such documentation shall be conclusive evidence that the PROJECT has been completed, and that all residential units may be occupied and all improvements used. e. Completion of PARK. Promptly after completion of the PARK, the CITY shall by resolution accept the PARK for maintenance. Such acceptance for maintenance shall be conclusive evidence that the obligations for the PROPERTY OWNER to construct the Park improvements have been met, and PROPERTY OWNER shall be entitled to discharge of the bonds securing construction of the improvements. Completion of such improvements shall not, however, discharge PROPERTY OWNER's obligation to keep in effect, for the length of the landscape maintenance period, bonds securing maintenance of the PARK landscaping. Said landscape maintenance shall be for a period of up to one (1) year until acceptance by the City's Park and Recreation Department. f. Model Homes. Anything herein to the contrary notwithstanding, PROPERTY OWNER may complete model homes to be used for sales purposes before completion of the PARK. -6- 8. Permits and Applications. CITY will issue to PROPERTY OWNER, upon PROPERTY OWNER's application therefor, all necessary final development permits, building permits, utility hookups, occupancy certificates and other required permits for the development, construction, use and occupancy of the PROJECT, subject to (i) compliance with this AGREEMENT, CITY's Sectional Planning Area Plan, and the approved Tentative Map, (which substantially conforms to Exhibit "D" attached hereto), and (ii) payment of CITY's usual and customary fees and charges at the rate generally in existence at the time such applications, permits and certificates are requested and other particular fees and charges applicable generally through CITY for the same activity. CITY shall process PROPERTY OWNER's applications for building permits, occupancy certificates or permits, utility hookups, and other required permits, including park improvement drawings, expeditiously and with due diligence. 9. Emergency Circumstances. If, as a result of specific facts, events or circumstances, CITY finds that a severe and immediate emergency threat to the health, safety and general welfare of CITY requires the modification, suspension or termination of this AGREEMENT, CITY will: a. Notification of Unforeseen Circumstances. Notify PROPERTY OWNER of (i) CITY's determination, and (ii) the reason for CITY's determination and all facts upon which reasons are based; b. Notice of Hearing. Notify PROPERTY ~WNER in writing at least fourteen (14) days prior to the hearing, of the date, time and place of the hearing and forward to PROPERTY OWNER, a minimum of ten (10) days prior to the hearing described in paragraph c below, all documents related to such determination and reasons therefor; and -7- c. Hearing. Hold a hearing on the determination at which hearing PROPERTY OWNER will have the right to address the City Council. At the conclusion of such hearing, the City Council may take action to suspend this AGREEMENT. The City Council may suspend this AGREEMENT if, at the conclusion of such hearing, based upon the evidence presented by the parties, CITY finds that the suspension of this AGREEMENT is required to avoid an immediate and severe threat to the health, safety and general welfare of CITY. Anything stated in this AGREEMENT to the contrary notwithstanding, no limited growth or similar ordinances, regulations or policies which may be enacted or adopted to control growth in Chula Vista shall be applied to the PROPERTY or the PROJECT during the term of this AGREEMENT unless, pursuant to the procedures set forth in this Section 9, CITY finds that a severe and immediate emergency threat to the health, safety and general welfare of CITY requires application of such ordinance or regulation to the PROPERTY and the PROJECT. PROPERTY OWNER shall not be obligated during the period of any such suspension to (i) do any act required hereunder, (ii) apply for a final or any development permit or building permit, (iii) commence construction, or (iv) proceed with construction previously commenced. 10. Applicable Rules, Regulations and Policies. The rules, regulations and official policies governing the PROJECT, the permitted uses o{ the PROPERTY, the density of said uses, and the timing and phasing of construction shall be those rules, regulations and official policies of CITY in force as of the effective date of this AGREEMENT. CITY shall not do any act, adopt any official policy or enact any rule, regulation or ordinance -8= which will impede, delay or prevent development and construction of the PROJECT. Notwithstanding the foregoing, this AGREEMENT shall not prevent CITY from applying new rules, regulations and policies relating to uniform codes, such as the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Electrical Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, and Uniform Fire Code, which relate to public safety, are not in conflict with existing rules, are not intended to circumvent this AGREEMENT, become applicable throughout CITY and do not conflict with the Terra Nova Amendment referred to in paragraph 6 hereinabove or adversely effect the development of the PROJECT. 11. Annual Review. CITY shall review this AGREEMENT at least once each year following the effective date hereof in accordance with Government Code Section 65865.1. During each periodic review by CITY, and if requested by CITY, PROPERTY OWNER shall be required to demonstrate, and hereby agrees to furnish, such evidence satisfactory to the City Manager and/or City Council of good faith compliance with the terms hereof as CITY may reasonably require. Good faith compliance shall be deemed demonstrated by evidence that PROPERTY OWNER has timely commenced and prosecuted development and construction of the PROJECT and that PROPERTY OWNER has performed its obligations as described herein. 12. Development of PARK. PROPERTY OWNER agrees that approval of the PROJECT is subject to the terms and conditions of this Section 12. This AGREEMENT constitutes permission and vested rights granted by CITY to PROPERTY OWNER to construct the PROJECT pursuant to the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT in consideration of, among other things, the obligations assumed by PROPERTY OWNER under this Section 12. -9- a. The PARK (as described in Exhibits "B" and "E") will be completed by PROPERTY OWNER such that it is ready for acceptance of maintenance by PROPERTY OWNER on or before the earlier to occur of (i) three (3) years after the date of this AGREEMENT, or (ii) two /2) years following recordation of the map for the property, as defined in Section 7Id). Property owner shall install temporary tot lot within sixty 160) days of approval of this agreement. PROPERTY OWNER acknowledges that the grading for the PARK shall occur concurrently with the grading of the PROJECT and PROPERTY OWNER expects to have the playground equipment and playing fields installed, and the PARK ready for acceptance by CITY, before occupancy of the first unit. 13. No park Fees. Construction as herein provided shall be in lieu of, and shall relieve PROPERTY OWNER from, any park fees or similar assessment by CITY. 14. Amendment or Cancellation. Except as expressly to the contrary provided herein, this AGREEMENT may be amended or cancelled in whole or in part only by mutual consent of the parties and only in the manner provided for in Government Code Section 65868. 15. Rate and Timing of Development. The parties acknowledge that PROPERTY OWNER cannot, at this time, predict either when, or the rate at which, or the order in which the PROJECT's phases will be developed. Such decisions will depend upon many factors which are not within the control of PROPERTY OWNER, such as market orientation and demand, interest rates, competition and other factors. It is the Parties, intent that PROPERTY OWNER shall have the right to develop the PROJECT in such order and at rate and times as PROPERTY OWNER deems appropriate within the exercise of its subjective business judgment. -10- 16. Enforceability. Unless amended, cancelled or terminated as provided herein, and except as provided in Sections 9 and 21 this AGREEMENT shall be enforceable according to its terms. 17. Default. a. PROPERTY OWNER shall be in default under this AGREEMENT only upon a finding and determination by CITY's City Council, at a duly noticed and conducted public hearing, made after periodic review as provided for in Government Code Section 65865.1, and Section ll hereinabove, and on the basis of substantial evidence, that PROPERTY OWNER has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this AGREEMENT. b. In the event of a default by PROPEPTY OWNER and during the continuation of such default, CITY may terminate this AGREEMENT or the parties may modify this AGREEMENT, in whole or in part, all in accordance with Government Code Section 65865.1. CITY's failure to modify or terminate this AGREEMENT after a finding of PROPERTY OWNER's default pursuant to Section I6(a) herein shall not constitute a waiver of such default by CITY during the continuation of such default. In no event, however, shall CITY's right to terminate this AGREEMENT in accordance with this Section 16lb) be construed as a waiver or limitation on CITY's right to pursue remedies by judicial action. Termination of this AGREEMENT shall operate prospectively only and shall not affect any permit, approval or entitlement theretofore granted PROPERTY OWNER or any vested right theretofore acquired by PROPERTY OWNER. 18. Notice of Default and Cure. In the event of alleged default or breach of any terms or conditions of this AGREEMENT, the party alleging such default or breach shall give the other party not less than thirty /30) days, -11- notice in writing specifying the nature of the alleged default and the manner in which such default may be satisfactorily cured. During any such thirty (30) day period, the party charged may commence and thereafter diligently proceed to cure such default. In such event, the party charged shall not be considered in default or breach for purposes of modification or termination, institution of legal proceedings, or denial of issuance of any permit. If such default shall continue after notice and expiration of said thirty (30) day period, the other party to this AGREEMENT, at its option, and during the continuation of such default, may institute legal proceedings pursuant to this AGREEMENT or give notice of intent to terminate this AGREEMENT pursuant to California Government Code Section 65868, and regulations of CITY implementing said Government Code section. Followinq notice of intent to terminate, the matter shall be scheduled for consideration and review by the City Council within thirty (30) days thereafter in the manner set forth in Government Code Sections 65865, 65867 and 65868, and any CITY regulations implementing said sections to the extent not inconsistent with said Government Code Sections. If, after such consideration and review, the City Council, on the basis of substantial evidence, rules that the default or breach specified in the first notice has not been cured, then CITY may act pursuant to Section 17(b) hereof. 19. Remedies Upon Default. If a legal action or proceeding is brought by either party because of a default under this AGREEMENT, or to enforce a provision hereof or for declaratory relief, the parties shall have the remedies of specific performance, mandamus, injunction, and other equitable remedies. In any litigation, both parties shall bear their own costs. -12- 20. Governmental Prohibitions. PROPERTY OWNER and CITY may similarly also be excused from the performance of their obligations hereunder in the event of adoption of any state or federal law or regulation enacted during the term of this AGREEMENT, or the action or inaction of any other affected governmental jurisdiction which precludes compliance with one or more provisions of this AGREEMENT, or requires changes in plans, maps or permits approved by CITY (circumstances collectively referred to herein as "Governmental Prohibitions"). In the event of any circumstance of Governmental Prohibition, the parties will act pursuant to the following paragraphs (a) and (b). a. Notice; Meeting. The party first becoming aware of such Governmental Prohibition will provide the other party with written notice thereof, and with notice of any such state or federal law or regulation, and provide a copy of such law or regulation, and a statement regarding its conflict with the provisions of this AGREEMENT. The parties will promptly meet and confer in a good faith and reasonable attempt to modify or suspend this AGREEMENT to comply in light of such Governmental Prohibition. A copy of any such notice which is sent to PROPERTY OWNER shall also be sent to the holder of any trust deed encumbering the PROJECT or the PROPERTY, if such holder has made written request for notice, and provided CITY with the holder's request for notice purposes. b. Hearing on Supersession of AGREEMENT. Thereafter, regardless of whether the parties reach agreement on the effect of such Governmental Prohibition, the matter will be scheduled for hearing before the City Council no sooner than ten (10) days following written notice to PROPERTY -13- OWNER of such hearing. City Council, at such hearing, will determine the exact modification, suspension or termination which is required by the Governmental Prohibition, if any. Developer, at the hearing, will have the right to offer oral and written testimony regarding any proposed action by CITY. Any modification, suspension or termination shall be subject to judicial review. 21. Covenants Running With the Land. It is intended and determined that the provisions of this AGREEMENT shall constitute covenants which shall run with the PROPERTY. The notice and hearing procedures of Government Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5 shall not apply to obtaining consent of CITY to the assumption of the benefits and burdens of this AGREEMENT by a successor-in-interest of PROPERTY OWNER. PROPERTY O~NER may assign the benefits of this AGREEMENT (partially or wholly) to others who may acquire an interest in the PROPERTY or the PROJECT and at the discretion of PROPERTY OWNER retain the burdens imposed on PROPERTY OWNER by this AGREEMENT. PROPERTY OWNER, its successors and assigns hereby agree to notify CITY of the assignment of this Agreement or the sale of all or any portion of the PROPERTY. 22. Severability. The provision of this AGREEMENT are severable. If any material word, phrase, sentence, paragraph, section or provision of this AGREEMENT is determined by a court having jurisdiction to be inoperable, invalid, unenforceable, illegal or otherwise contrary to law, this AGREEMENT will be automatically terminated unless within fifteen Il5) days after said determination the party holding rights under the invalidating provision affirms the balance of the AGREEMENT in writing. In the event of any inconsistency among the express terms of this AGREEMENT, CITY's zoning -14- ordinances, CITY's approvals referred to in this AGREEMENT relating to the PROJECT or CITY's rules, regulations and official policies, the express terms of this AGREEMENT shall control. 23. Notice. All notices required or provided for under this AGREEMENT shall be in writing, shall be delivered in person or by certified mail, postage prepaid, addressed to the parties as follows: CITY: City of Chula Vista Planning Department 276 4th Avenue Chula Vista, California 92010 Attn: George Krempl With a copy to: City of Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Department 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 Attn: Manuel A. Mollinedo PROPERTY OWNER: Terra Nova Associates, in care of Woodcrest Development of San Diego, Inc. 5473 Kearny Villa Road, Suite 210 San Diego, California 92123 Attn: Mr. Wayne A. Barnett With a copy to: Gray, Cary, Ames & Frye 1200 Prospect Street, Suite 575 La Jolla, California 92010 Attn: Steven M. Romanoff, Esq. The place to which notice may be sent may be modified from time to time upon written notice to that effect. -15- 24. Term of AGREEMENT. This AGREEMENT shall expire on the fifth (Sth) anniversary date of the effective date of this AGREEMENT; provided, however, notwithstanding the foregoing, if PROPERTY OWNER satisfies its obligations pursuant to Section 12, this AGREEMENT shall terminate on completion of the PROJECT the PARK, and park maintenance period. After expiration or full satisfaction, the parties shall execute an appropriate certificate of termination which shall be recorded in the Official Records of San Diego County. 25. Miscellaneous Provisions. a. Interpretation. As used in this AGREEMENT, and as the context may require, the singular includes the plural and vice versa, and the masculine gender includes the feminine and neuter and vice versa and a reference to "person" includes firms and corporations. b. Recordation. Upon execution of this AGREEMENT, CITY shall promptly arrange for its recordation within ten (10) days after this AGREEMENT has been entered into as provided in Government Code, Section 65868.5. c. Cooperation. The parties shall cooperate in performance of this AGREEMENT and shall, upon request, execute and deliver all documents appropriate to carry out the provisions, purposes and intent of this AGREEMENT. d. Duplicate Counterparts. For convenience, the parties may execute and acknowledge this AGREEMENT in duplicate counterparts, or on separate signature pages which, when attached hereto, shall constitute this as one (1) complete AGREEMENT. -16- IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this AGREEMENT has been executed by the parties as of the day and year first above written, "CITY" "PROPERTY OWNER" CITY OF CHULA VISTA, TERRA NOVA ASSOCIATES, a California municipal corporation a California general partnership By: By: Its: Its: APPROVED AS TO FORM: APPROVED AS TO FORM: GRAY, CARY, AMES & FRYE By: By: City Attorney Karl ZoBell WPC 6394P -17- STATE OF ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) On this day of , in the year 19 , before me, the un--ned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appear , personally known to me /or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed the within instrument as of WOODCREST DEVELOPMENT OF SAN DIEGO, INC., the corporation that executed the within instrument, and acknowledged to me that said corporation executed the same as a general partner of TERRA NOVA ASSOCIATES, a California general partnership, the partnership that executed the within instrument, and that said partnership executed the same. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public in and for said County and State STATE OF ) ) SS. COUNTY OF ) On this day of , in the year 19 , before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public in and for said County and State, personally appear , personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed this instrument as Mayor of the City of Chula Vista, a Municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California and acknowledged that the City of Chula Vista executed it. WITNESS my hand and official seal. Notary Public in and for said County and State WPC 6394P -18- LEGAL DESCEZFTZON THOSE PORTZONS OF LOTS 'C' AND 'D" OF C;HUI. A V:ZSTA TRACT NO. 80'3.5, XN THE CZTY OF CHULA VZSTAw COUNTY OF SAH DXEGO, STATE OF CAL.:Zit'ORN:ZAf ACCORDZNG TO THE MAP THEREOF NO. 100Elf FZLED ZN THE OFFZCE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAH DZEGO ¢OUNTYw APR:ZL 3, 1981~ t. YZNG SOUTHERLY AND EASTERLY OF THE FOLLOWZNG DESCRXSED LZHE: BEG?NN?NG AT THE HOST NORTHERI. Y CORNER OF SAXD LOT "C'; THENCE SOUTH 34'02'20" EAST 1S6.38 FEET TO THE TRUE RO:~NT OF SEGXNNZNG; THENCE NORTH 82'32'S6" WEST S6.83 FEET; THENCE NORTH 79'0~.'28' WEST 97.38 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 82'09'25" WEST 72.75; SOUTH 72'57'20" WEST,62.81 FEET; SOUTH 66'49'32" WEST 61.29 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47'18'08' WEST 111.70 FEET: THENCE SOUTH 13'42'32" WEST 68.32 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 0S'S8'21" EAST 38.04 FEET; THENC;E SOUTH 07'5S'3.8" EAST 72.86 FEET THENCE SOUTH 12'47'12" RAST 8S.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 18'43'28" EAST ~.E~l FEET; THENCE SOUTH 25'33'16" EAST 3S.86 FEET; THENCE SOUTH ].8'47'02" EAST 63.1S FEET; THENOE SOUTH 00'03'30" EAST 62.23 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 15'33'26" WEST 63.9S FEET: THENCE SOUTH 3~*'Z~'16" WEST S8.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47'46'42" WEST 66.34 FEET; THENCE SOUTH S8'16'39" VEST 65.33 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 47'00'S8" EAST 29.89 FEET; THENCE SOUTH S9'3S'S9" EAST 124.79 FEET TO A PO:ZHT ON A 61.04 FOOT RAOZUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY A RADZAI. LZNS SEARS NORTH 16'0S'S2' WEST; THENCE NORTNEASTERkY ALONG THE ARC OF SAZD CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAl. ANGLE OF 4~'53'J,~' A DZSTANCE OF 48.89 FEET TO THE BEGZNNZN8 OIr A TAHGENT 30.00 FOOT RAD]:US CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERI. Y; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY AI.ONG THE ARC OF SAZD CURVE THROUGH. A CENTRAl. ANGL. E OF 32.01'57" A DZSTANCE OF 16.77 FEET TO THE BEG:ZNNZNG OF' A TANGENT 300.00 FOOT ~OZUS CURVE CONCAVE WESTERLY; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ArbONG THE ARO OF SAZD CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAl. ANGLE OF 20'03'31" A DZSTAHCE OF 10S.03 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 06'34'27" eAST 97.36 FEET TO THE BEG1;NN:ZNG OF A TANGENT ~70'08 FOOT RAD:~US CURVE CONCAVE WESTERL. Y; THENCE SOUTHERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAZD CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 24'43'56" A DZSTANGE OF 2~9.24 FEET TO THE SSG3;HN:ZNG OF A TANGENT 25,30 FOOT RADZUS CURVE CONCAVE NORTHWESTERLY: THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAZD CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL, ANGLE OF 77'3S'26" A D:ZSTANCE OF 34.26 FEET TO THE SEGZNN~:NG OF A TANGENT S29.00 FOOT RADZUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC QF SAZD CURVE THROUGH A OENTRAI. ANGLE QF 06'26'43" A DZSTANCE OF 59.S1 FEET TO THE HOST SOUTHERL,Y CORNER OF SAZD LOT EXHIBIT "A" EXHIBIT "C" EXHIBIT PARK DESIGN STANDARDS Terra Nova Park will be expanded and reconstructed substantially as shown on the Concept Plan attached to the Development Agreement as Exhibit #B." The Park improvements to be constructed or provided by TNA shall be at a cost not to exceed Eight Hundred Fifty Thousand Dollars ($850,000.00), including design, engineering, installation and maintenance. These improvements shall be made solely on the property described as Terra Nova Park on Exhibit #C,# except that the City may require Woodcrest to install night lighting for two (2) ball fields located in some other City park. In the event that the City does require such offsite lighting, then the cost of providing such offsite lighting shall be credited towards the amount Woodcrest is required to spend for Park improvements. The Park improvements may include two (2) multi-use ball fields, an exercise course incorporating existing fitness stations, a play structure including separate sections for different age groups, a gazebo/ community gathering facility, a viewing overlook with gazebo and picnic tables, three (3) smaller structures for picnicking and gathering, a tot lot, a hitching station and improvement of the existing equestrian trail, two (2) night-lighted tennis courts, a comfort station with storage area, additional picnic tables and cooking grills, an off-street parking area, security lighting, a night-lighted basketball court, additional walkways, D.G. jogging trails and standard park fixtures. The above design elements and components of the Park shall not be modified except upon written agreement between the City of Chula Vista and Woodcrest. EXHIBIT "E" City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 1 4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-89-6, Consideration of a Development Agreement for EastLake Greens A. BACKGROUND On June 21, 1989, the Planning Commission recommended approval of the 830 acre EastLake Greens Project (6-0, 1 abstention). On July ll, 1989, the City Council approved EastLake Greens with varying voting majorities on various sub items of the project. As with other major planned communities in the Eastern Territories such as EastLake I and Rancho Del Rey, the City has entered into Development Agreements on the project. The Development Agreement is normally brought forward with the tentative map. In this instance, due to the applicant's need to initiate grading of the golf course and proceed in a timely fashion with annexation, the Draft Development Agreement has trailed. Before the City Council can act on the agreement, a public hearing and consideration by the Planning Commission is required. B. RECOr~ENDATION Accept the Development Agreement in concept and provide comments, if any, to the City Council. C. DISCUSSION The benefit to the City in entering the agreement is the required participation by the Developer to finance and construct various public facilities. The developer is required to finance and construct those facilities normally associated with and required to support the development. The public facilities taken into consideration with the agreement are those that are in excess of the normal requirements or where the developer is accelerating the completion of the improvement to the benefit of the City and the community. Examples of these City benefits are as follows: 1. Advance funding and construction of the Phase II community park improvements including a community center and a gymnasium. 2. Advance funding and construction of Telegraph Canyon Road widening to a full 6 lanes instead of only 4 lanes. 3. Advance funding for construction of a new branch library. City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of Page 2 4. Advance funding of downstream drainage improvements to Telegraph Canyon Drainage Channel, in part to mitigate existing deficiencies. 5. The dedication of right-of-way for future SR #125 for an 8-lane freeway plus interchanges. These improvements total about $4.3 million in value. In return for the above benefits, the City would vest the right of the developer to develop and maintain his project for the uses and densities set forth in the EastLake Greens SPA Plan. In addition, where the applicant pioneers certain public facilities he will be credited against future development impact fees and/or subject to reimbursement. Also, in terms of improving certain transportation facilities beyond current need, the City would use its best efforts to reserve capacity for the EastLake Greens Project to the extent feasible as stated in the Agreement. It should be noted that EastLake will be subject to all SPA and Tentative Tract Map conditions as well as all of the environmental requirements and mitigation. Further, EastLake Greens is subject to the City's Thresholds Standards Ordinance, East Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan, the City's future Growth Management Program and the Public Facilities and Finance Plan. The City has the right to stop issuing building permits as occurred with EastLake I, if cumulative dwelling unit totals and traffic threshold provisions are exceeded at any particular phase. The format of the development agreement is patterned after the City's most current development agreement which is for Rancho Del Rey. The Draft Agreement represents the most recent language as presented by the applicant. Certain sections are still subject to some negotiations with City staff including the following: Section 4.5 Changes in Thresholds - page 8 4.7 Entitlements to Building Permits - page 8 4.11 Application of New Rules, Regulations and Policies - page 10 4.12.3 Limitation on Modifications - page 12 4.13 Timing and Phasing of Development, page 12 6.2.1 Reimbursements - page 16 6.5 Other Developers, page 16 6.7 Assessment Districts for Public Facilities - page 17 In sum, we believe the benefits to the City are significant and warrant entering into the Agreement. WPC 6507P DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, Developer and CITY OF CHULA VISTA, City Dated: , 19__ TABLE OF CONTENTS Paqe 1. Recitals ................................................... 1 1.1 City's Authority to Enter into Development Agreement ............................................ 1 1.2 The Property: Developer's Interest .................. 1 1.3 Benefits to City ..................................... 1 1.4 Intentions of Parties in Entering into this Agreement ............................................ 3 1.5 Adoption of Ordinance Approving Agreement ............ 3 1.6 Findings of City Council ............................. 3 2. Definitions ................................................ 3 3. Description of Property .................................... 6 4. Vested Rights ............................................. 6 4.1 Right to Develop ................................... 6 4.2 Maximum Height and Size of Structures ............ 6 4.3 Thresholds ........................... [[ ............ 6 4.4 Required Condemnation .............................. 7 4.5 Changes in Thresholds .............................. 7 4.6 Capacity ........................................... 8 4.7 Entitlement to Building Permits .................... 8 4.8 Benefit of Earlier Vesting .......................... 9 4.9 Information Regarding Thresholds .................... 9 4.10 Resolution No. 13346 Thresholds ...................... 9 4.11 Application of New Rules, Regulations and Policies...9 4.12 Modifications of Approvals, Standards and Obligation .......................................... 10 4.12.1 Mutual Agreement to Modify .................. 10 4.12.2 Modification Procedures for the Public Improvements ................................ 11 4.12.3 Limitations on Modifications ................ 12 4.12.4 Determination of Adequacy ................... 12 4.13 Timing and Phasing of the Project ................... 12 4.14 Application of a Pending General Plan Growth Management Element .................................. 13 4.15 Modifications to the Municipal General Plan ......... 13 5. Development Program ....................................... 13 5.1 Processing of Application and Permits ............... 13 5.2 Pre-Final Map Development ........................... 13 5.3 Length of Validity of Tentative Subdivision ......... 14 5.4 Final Map(s) ........................................ 14 5.4.1 "A" Maps and "B" Maps ....................... 14 (i) 5.4.2 Recordation of Final Subdivision Map in Name of Builder or Third Party ........... 14 5.4.3 Recordation of Final Subdivision Map in Developer's Name; Transfer of Obligations Under Subdivision Improvement Agreement(s)..15 6. Urban Infrastructure ...................................... 15 6.1 Dedications, Reservations and Improvements of Land for Public Purposes ............................ 15 6.2 Pioneering of Facilities ............................ 15 6.2.1 Reimbursements .............................. 16 6.3 Parks ............................................... 16 6.4 Insurance ........................................... 16 6.5 Other Developers .................................... 16 6.6 Route 125 ........................................... 17 6.7 Assessment Districts or Public Financing Mechanisms .......................................... 17 7. Development Impact Fees .................................. 17 7 1 Existing Development Impact Fee Program Payments.. .17 7 2 Other Developers ................................... 17 7 3 Use of DIF ......................................... 18 7 4 Withhold of Permits ................................ 18 7 5 New or Additional DIF Programs ..................... 18 7 6 Developer's Transportation DIF Credit .............. 18 8. Binding Effect; Encumbrance of Property; Status ........... 18 8.1 Binding Effect ...................................... 18 8.2 Discretion to Encumber .............................. 18 8.3 Status .............................................. 19 8.4 Releases ............................................ 19 9. Annual Review; Notice ..................................... 19 9.1 Information to be Provided Developer ................ 19 9.2 Finding by City During Annual Review Period That Developer is in Default ........................ 20 9.3 Delay in Annual Review .............................. 20 10. Default ................................................... 20 10.1 Option to Set Matter for Hearing of Institute Legal Proceedings ................................... 20 10.2 Waiver .............................................. 20 10.3 Remedies Upon Default ............................... 21 11. Modification; Suspension; Termination .................... 21 11.1 Emergency Circumstances ............................ 21 11.1.1 Notification of Unforeseen Circumstances.. .21 11.1.2 Notice of Hearing .......................... 21 11.1.3 Hearing .................................... 21 11.1.4 Unilateral Suspension ...................... 21 11.2 Change in State or Federal Law or Regulations ...... 22 (ii) 11.2.1 Notice; Meeting ............................. 22 11.2.2 Hearing on Supersession of Development Agreement ................................... 22 11.3 Modification by Mutual Consent ...................... 22 11.3.1 Minor Modifications ......................... 23 11.3.2 Notice of Termination ....................... 23 12. General Provisions ........................................ 23 12.1 Notices ............................................. 23 12.2 Joint and Several Liability ......................... 23 12.3 Severability ........................................ 23 12.4 Recordation of Agreement; Amendments ................ 24 12.5 Attorney's Fees and Costs ........................... 24 12.6 Applicable Law ...................................... 24 12.7 Assignment .......................................... 24 12.8 Term of Agreement ................................... 24 12.9 Conflict ............................................ 24 12.10 Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealilng ............ 24 (iii) DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT California Government Code Sections 65864-65869.5 THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("this Agreement") is entered into on , 19__, between EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, a California general partnership ("Developer"), and the CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation having charter powers ("City"), with reference to the recitals set forth below. 1. Recitals. 1.1 City's Authority to Enter into Development Aqreement. City, as a charter city, is authorized under Resolution No. 11933, its Charter, and its self-rule powers to enter into binding development agreements with persons having legal or equitable interests in real property for the purposes of assuring, among other things, (i) certainty as to permitted land uses in the development of such property, and (ii) construction of adequate public facilities to service such property. 1.2 The Property: Developer's Interest. Developer holds fee title to the property known as EastLake Greens described in Exhibit "A" ("the Property"). The Property is the subject of this Agreement. Developer is master planning the Property as the second phase of the EastLake Planned Community. Developer represents that it has a legal interest in the Property and that Developer intends that all other persons holding legal or equitable interest in the Property be bound by this Agreement. It is the Developer's intent to sell or lease the Property or portions thereof to various Merchant Builders of residential property or developers of non-residential property (collectively "Builders") who may acquire portions of it and obligations and rights under this Agreement pursuant to the provisions with respect to assignments in accordance with Section 12.7 1.3 Benefits to City. This Agreement is entered into for the purpose of carrying out the development of the Property in a manner that will ensure certain anticipated benefits to both the City (including, without limitation, the existing and future residents and populations of the City) as follows: (i) To provide and assure to the city the participation of Developer in the Financing Plan and the accelerated, coordinated and more economic construction, funding and dedication to the public of certain vitally needed public facilities and benefits, and to provide for anticipated levels of service to residents and populations of the Property, the City, and adjacent areas, all as provided for in the General Plan; (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 1 (ii) To provide and assure that the City receive a positive fiscal impact and necessary police, fire and library facilities, significant increases in public parks and expanded sewer and water facilities; (iii) To provide and assure that the City receive sales tax revenues, increase in the property tax base, residential housing, sewer, water and street facilities. (iv) To provide and assure that the City receive public facilities in excess of Project generated impacts and such facilities shall be of supplemental size, number capacity or length, which shall be provided earlier than could be provided either by funds from the City or than would strictly be necessary to mitigate Project related impacts at any development phase; these commitments shall include the following: (a) Advance funding and construction of Phase II community park facilities including a community center and a gymnasium. (b) Advance funding and construction of a 50 mg reservoir on-site in part to mitigate an existing community wide deficit. (c) Advance funding and construction of Telegraph Canyon Road as a 6-lane travelway versus the 4-lanes required. (d) Advance funding for a square foot branch library. (e) Advance funding for downstream drainage improvements to the Telegraph Canyon drainage channel in part to mitigate an existing deficiency. (f) Provision of a 49-acre high school site and 10-acre elementary school site at no charge or significantly reduced land values. (g) Provision of a reclaimed water distribution system to serve the golf course, parks, schools and major open space areas thus reducing the regional impact of the project on water supplies. (h) Dedication of right-of-way acreage in excess of arterial highway standards for a future 8-lane freeway plus interchanges (SR 125). (v) To implement the conditions of the City Council as passed on July 18, 1989, which require that (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 2 Developer's Project be subject to the adoption of a General Plan Growth Management Element currently under consideration and such provisions as the Council may adopt with respect to t~e authorization of residential densities in excess of a target density pursuant to Sections 6.2 and 6.3 of the Municipal General Plan as adopted, in part, by the City Council on July 11, 1989. 1.4 Intentions of Parties in Enterinq into th~ Aqreement. Developer and City intend to enter into this Agreement to: (i) assure Developer's participation in the construction and financing of public facilities pursuant to the Financing Plan, (ii) provide certainty in the land use regulations and policies applicable to the development of the Property, (iii) provide Developer with a vesting of rights to proceed in accordance with the development of the Property as limited below, and (iv) provide that the improvements required by the SPA shall be completed when necessary to service the needs created by Developer's project. 1.5 Adoption of Ordinance Approving Aqreement. On 19__, City Council adopted Ordinance No. approving this Agreement: the Ordinance took effect on · 19__. 1.6 Findings of City Council. City Council has found that this Agreement is consistent with City's General Plan, the EastLake Planned Community District Regulations, and all applicable mandatory and optional elements of the EastLake Greens SPA, as well as all other applicable policies and regulations of City. 2. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the context otherwise requires: 2.1 "Builder" or "Merchant Builder" means a developer to whom Developer has sold or conveyed property within the SPA for purposes of its improvement for residential, commercial or industrial use. 2.2 "City Council" means the City Council of the City of Chula Vista. 2.3 "Commit" shall mean all of the following requirements have been met with respect to any public improvement: 2.3.1 All discretionary permits have been obtained for construction of the improvement; 2.3.2 Plans for the construction of the improvement have all the necessary governmental approvals; and (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 3 2.3.3 Adequate funds (i.e. letters of credit, cash deposits, or performance bonds) are available such that the city can construct the improvement if either construction has not commenced within 30 days of issuance of a notice to proceed by the Director of Public Works, or construction is not progressing towards completion in a manner considered reasonable to the Director of Public Works. 2.4 "Developer" means EastLake Development Company and the legal persons to which or whom it may assign all or any portion of its rights under this Agreement. 2.5 "Existing Approvals" shall mean all discretionary approvals and/or standards which have been approved or established in conjunction with or preceding to the approval of this Development Agreement, as it relates to both the Project and the public improvements, consisting of, but not limited to: (i) The Municipal General Plan and all elements thereto in existence on the date of the first reading of this Agreement as an Ordinance by the City, incorporated herein by this reference; (ii) The EastLake Greens Planned Community Zoning Regulations, General Development Plan and Text, incorporated herein by this reference; (iii) The EastLake Greens SPA, incorporated herein by this reference; (iv) The EastLake Greens Public Facility Financing Plan, including any exhibits and appendices thereto, incorporated herein by this reference; (v) The Transportation Phasing Plan for the Eastern Territories of city, incorporated herein by this reference; (vi) The EastLake Greens Master Tentative Subdivision Map, incorporated herein by this reference; and (vii) The Performance Standards (as hereinafter defined), incorporated herein by this reference. If, during the term of this Agreement, the City approves and Developer accepts in writing any Future Discretionary Reviews or Approvals, the rights and entitlements gained by Developer thereunder shall become vested under this Agreement in the same manner as the Existing Approvals are vested. (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 4 2.6 "Financing Plan" means the EastLake Greens Public Facilities Financing Plan, together with any exhibits and appendices thereto, including without limitation, the draft Eastern Territories Transportation Phasing Plan, and any modifications to such plans agreed upon by the parties to this Agreement in the manner provided herein. 2.7 "Future Discretionary Reviews and Approvals" means the approval by the City of all future discretionary permits and entitlements (excluding Existing Approvals), including but not limited: (i) grading permit(s), (ii) site plan review, (iii) design guidelines and review, (iv) precise plan review, (v) resubdivision of areas previously subdivided pursuant to the Master Tentative Map, and (vi) the issuance of conditional use permits, variances, encroachment permits, all other permits, and approvals of any type which may be required from time to time to authorize the construction of on- or off-site facilities require to construct the Public Improvements and/or the Project. 2.8 "Performance Standards" means those certain "Quality of Life" thresholds and/or standards requiring the construction or development of certain facilities to provide desired levels of service to the public, as adopted by Resolution No. 13346. 2.9 "Planning Commission" means the Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista. 2.10 "Project" means the development of the Property as represented by the SPA (defined below) and the Tentative Maps. 2.11 "Property" means the real property described in Exhibit "A". 2.12 "SPA" means the Sectional Planning Area Plan for EastLake Greens approved by City on , 19 , and any modifications thereto agreed upon by the parties to this Agreement. The SPA covers the Property (defined above). The EastLake Greens SPA is by this reference made a part of this Agreement. 2.13 "Substantial Compliance," for the purposes of this Agreement and periodic review hereunder, shall mean that the party has sufficiently followed the terms of this Agreement so as to carry out the intent of the parties in entering into this Agreement. 2.14 "Master Tentative Map(s)" or "Tentative Subdivision Map(s)" shall refer to the Tentative Subdivision Maps for the EastLake Greens SPA. The term "Final Subdivision Map(s)" shall refer to any Final Map approved pursuant to such Tentative Subdivision Map(s). (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 5 2.15 "Planned Community District Regulations" shall refer to the EastLake I Planned Community District Regulations, Second Amendment, as approved by City on , 19__. 3. DescriDtion of ProDerty. The Property subject to this Agreement consists of approximately 830 acres in area and is located approximately 7.5 miles east of downtown Chula Vista, approximately 2 miles east of the Rancho Del Rey project. The Property is more particularly described on Exhibit "A". 4. Vested Riqhts. In consideration of Developer's participation in the construction and financing of public facilities, all as more particularly described in the Financing Plan and this Agreement, Developer is vested with the right to develop and maintain the Project pursuant to the provisions set forth in this Paragraph 4. 4.1 Riqht to Develop. Subject to complying with applicable requirements of the Financing Plan, including the thresholds and monitoring program described below, the Developer and Merchant Builders shall have the right to develop the Project for the uses and to the densities set forth in the SPA. 4.2 Maximum Heiqht and Size of Structures. The maximum height and size of structures to be constructed on the Project will be governed by City ordinances. 4.3 Thresholds. The City shall have the right to withhold the issuance of building permits for lots in the SPA any time after it is reasonably determined by the City that a threshold of development ("Threshold") (as described in Appendix B of the Financing Plan) has been reached, unless and until the Developer has satisfied its obligation to Commit the construction of public improvements which correspond to the Threshold. Developer agrees that building permits may be withheld where the Public Improvements described in the Financing Plan required for a particular stage have not been Committed in accordance with the authorized methods contained in the Financing Plan. Where such Public Improvements have been Committed as required, however, the City must release building permits as specified to the next threshold. City agrees, however, that where the issuance of building permits to Developer is suspended pursuant to this provision, the City shall immediately notify Developer of the suspension and such suspension shall remain in effect only so long as construction of the facilities needed at any phase, stage or increment of development has not been Committed as required. Thereafter, City shall continue, upon request of Developer, to issue building permits. (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 6 In the event the issuance of building permits is suspended pursuant to the provisions herein, such suspension shall not constitute a breach of the terms of this Agreement by Developer, so long as development does not proceed beyond the identified stages, phases or increments of development at which various Public Improvements are determined to be necessary pursuant to the terms of the Financing Plan. The Threshold Cumulative Regional Development standards set forth on Table __ of the Financing Plan refer to residential dwelling units, commercial/office square footage and industrial square footage within the Area of Benefit described in Exhibit in Chapter __ of the Financing Plan. 4.4 Required Condemnation. Should the construction of any Facility require construction or installation of off-site improvements on land which neither the Developer nor the City has sufficient title or interest at the time the Threshold becomes applicable, the City shall, within 120 days after determining such Threshold is applicable, acquire by negotiation or commence proceedings pursuant to Title 7 (commencing with Section 1230.010) of Part 3 of the code of Civil Procedure to acquire an interest in the land which will permit the improvements to be made, including proceedings for immediate possession of the land. In the event the City fails to meet this 120-day time limitation, construction of the off-site Facility will be conclusively deemed to be removed as a basis for withholding building permits or occupancy permits. Should the interest be in land outside the City and the City reasonably believes that it does not have the power to condemn the interest, then the City will use its best efforts to obtain such interest by negotiation or by convincing the jurisdiction in which the land is located to condemn the interest. The off-site Facility will not be deemed removed, provided that the City so exercises its best efforts to obtain such interest. Where the City is unable to acquire an interest in land necessary for the construction of the Public Improvement which should be commenced according to the Financing Plan, the City shall agree to consider the substitution of another Public Improvement in place of the one scheduled so that Developer shall not be delayed by the City's inability to acquire a necessary interest. For purposes of a the foregoing sentence, the word "substitute" may include a reordering of the scheduled Public Improvements as they appear in the Financing Plan and/or the Transportation Phasing Plan. Nothing in this Agreement shall be deemed to preclude the City f~om requiring the Developer to pay the cost of acquiring such off-site land. 4.5 Chanqes in Thresholds. The Financing Plan anticipates an annual monitoring program and possible adoption of (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 7 and revisions to a Regional Transportation Facility Financing Program. Nothing stated in this Agreement shall be deemed to prevent any such change from being applicable to the Property where such change is necessary to conform the Regional Transportation Facility Financing Program with the requirements of the "Quality of Life" thresholds contained in the Performance Standards which shall exist on the date of the first reading of this Agreement as an Ordinance by City. 4.6 Capacity. The City shall reserve to Developer the capacity of any Public Improvements to the extent any such capacity, as measured by objective indicia such as Average Daily Trips (ADTs), is enhanced by the construction or funding of Developer. The term "reserve" as used in the foregoing sentence shall mean that the City, in calculating the amount and timing of infrastructure improvements to be developed or paid for by any other developer other than Developer, shall for all purposes assume such "reserved" capacity as though it represented capacity actually in use by Developer, or Developer's successors-in- interest or assignees. The reservation of capacity to Developer under this Subsection 4.6 shall be subject to the following conditions: (i) the reservation of capacity for any project of Developer shall be available only for projects for which Developer has an approved General Development Plan and an approved or pending Sectional Planning Area Plan for said project; (ii) the City shall not be responsible for claims on capacity reserved to Developer pursuant to this Subsection 4.6 from development outside of the City's jurisdiction or control; and (iii) the City shall not be responsible for claims on capacity reserved to Developer pursuant to this Subsection 4.6 from redevelopment of areas within the jurisdiction or control of the City where the City does not rezone or otherwise alter the permitted density for the redeveloped area. Notwithstanding the foregoing, nothing in this Agreement shall preclude the Developer from receiving credit for capacity which has been created by Public Improvements constructed or funded, in whole or in part, by Developer prior to the date the Parties sign this Agreement. 4.7 Entitlement to Buildinq Permits. Where Developer has been substantially responsible for the completion of infrastructure improvements required to accommodate any stage, phase or increment of development, within the phasing scheme outlined in the Transportation Phasing Plan for the Eastern Territories of City, which meet the Performance Standards, Developer shall be entitled to the following: (i) an absolute right to Developer's proportionate share of available capacity based on the allowed dwelling units and their corresponding building permits, or a larger share if other land owners or developers shall not have requested such available dwelling units or permits to the next threshold of development, upon completion of such infrastructure improvement phase, stage or increment of (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 8 development, as indicated in the Transportation Phasing Plan; and (ii) a first priority claim to any Development Impact Fees (DIF) collected by the City to cover the costs of improvements constructed by Developer, along with Interest, at seven percent (7%) per annum, on such costs. If Developer shall not utilize its right to all or a portion of the dwelling units and building permits reserved to Developer pursuant to this Subsection 4.7 within three (3) years of Developer's entitlement thereto, then another developer may utilize such allowed dwelling units provided that Developer is reimbursed either directly by such developer or indirectly through the City's collection of DIF fees in an amount which represents the cost of the benefits conferred by Developer upon such other developer's property, along with Interest, at seven percent (7%) per annum, on such costs. Developer shall be deemed to have utilized such dwelling units and permits for purposes of this Subsection 4.7 when Developer has a Sectional Planning Area Plan pending for any project in the Eastern Territories of the City which contemplates the use of such dwelling units and permits. 4.8 Benefit of Earlier Vesting. Nothing in this Agreement will be construed as affecting Developer's earlier vested right, if any, to the development and use of the Property in the manner specified in this Paragraph 4 pursuant to the provisions of California's Constitutional, statutory and decisional law. 4.9 Information Reqardinq Thresholds. City will, from time to time, within a reasonable time after Developer's request, provide Developer with information regarding the current status of each Threshold (i.e. the then-existing cumulative number of residential dwelling units, etc. in the Area of Benefit). As of October 1, 1987 there were 3,074 residential dwelling units, 540,000 square feet of commercial/office space and 66,800 square feet of industrial space in the Area of Benefit. 4.10 Resolution No. 13346 Thresholds. Each proposed Tentative Subdivision Map which comes before the City's Planning Commission and/or City Council for consideration and approval shall be reviewed for compliance with those thresholds and standards set forth in Resolution No. 13346 approved the City Council on November 17, 1987 ("Resolution No. 13346 Thresholds"). Notwithstanding any other provision in this Agrement, the City may disapprove any such Tentative Subdivision Map if it finds that, as of the date of the Tentative Subdivision Map approval hearing, the project covered by the Tentative Subdivision MaD would not comply with any of the Resolution No. 13346 Thresholds. 4.11 Application of New Rules, Requlations and Policies. Except as provided in Section 4.11.1 and 4.12.1, the (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 9 City may, during the term of this Agreement, apply to the Project, Public Improvements and/or Property only such new development rules, regulations and policies, ordinances or standards affecting and governing the dedication or reservation of land for public purposes, provisions with respect to growth management, timing and phasing of development, the provisions of adequate public facilities, the imposition of new fees, taxes or exactions which are: (i) not in conflict with the Existing Approvals, or any portion thereof; (ii) not in conflict with the Standards for Future Discretionary Reviews and Approvals, or any portion thereof; (iii) applicable to all private projects east of 1-805; (iv) to be applied to the Project and/or Public Improvements only as to applications for discretionary or ministerial permits or other approvals not yet applied for as of the date of such enactment or modification; (v) the application of which would not prevent the development of the Property to the uses, densities or intensities of development specified herein, or by the Existing Approvals; and (vi) the application of which would not impair the timing or phasing of the Project as may be specified by the Existing Approvals or otherwise by this Agreement (all herein referred to collectively as "New Rules, Regulations and Policies"). This paragraph shall not preclude the application to the Property of changes in City laws, regulations, ordinances, standards or policies specifically mandated by changes in state or federal law or regulations made applicable to this Agreement where the city asserts such rights in compliance with paragraph 11.2 herein. 4.11.1 The Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use Densities per the SPA shall not be subject to modification except as provided in Article 4.12.1. 4.11.2 The imposition or modification of Development Impact Fee programs affecting the Project shall be regulated by Article 7. 4.12 Modifications of Approvals, Standards and Obliqation. 4.12.1 Mutual Aqreement to Modify. It is contemplated by the parties to this Agreement that the City and Developer may mutually seek and agree to modifications to the Project and/or the Public Improvements. Such modifications are contemplated as within the scope of this Agreement and the SPA and shall (i) upon written acceptance of such a modification constitute for all purposes an Existing Approval, and (ii) not constitute an amendment to this Agreement. The Parties hereby acknowledge that modifications may occur with respect to (i) the Public Improvements, (ii) the Land Uses, and (iii) the Standards for Future Discretionary Reviews and Approvals. Any modification to a Standard for a Future Discretionary Review and Approval, (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 10 upon its acceptance in writing by both parties, shall constitute a modification to the Standards for Future Discretionary Reviews and Approvals in effect at the time of the first reading of the Ordinance by the City approving this Agreement. Modifications under this Subsection 4.12.1 may occur, without limitation, in conjunction with an annual review pursuant to Article 9. 4.12.2 Modification Procedures for the Publi~ ImDrovements. The schedule for Public Improvements as set forth by the Financing Plan, including the Transportation Phasing Plan, may be modified or its adequacy reviewed, pursuant to a periodic review of this Agreement by the City or a request of Developer, according to the following procedures: (i) Developer or City may submit any proposed modification or request for adequacy review of the schedule of Public Improvements to the other party ("Proposal"); (ii) Any Proposal requesting modification shall, without limitation, consist of a description of the existing schedule for Public Improvements to be affected and the proposed schedule of Public Improvements as modified, and shall include supporting material such as studies, maps and plans which shall explain the reason(s) for such modification; (iii) Upon receipt of a Proposal, the Director of Public Works shall, depending upon the nature of the Proposal, either review the adequacy of a Public Improvement(s) with respect to the Performance Standards, or, where modification of the schedule is requested, review the Proposal by comparing the proposed schedule of Public Improvements to the existing schedule of Public Improvements which it is intended to replace with respect to the Performance Standards; (iv) The Director of Public Works shall, on or before the thirtieth (30th) day after receipt thereof, either accept the Proposal, recommend acceptance, recommend denial or deny the Proposal with an explanation as to why the Proposal is deficient with respect to the Performance Standards, or request additional time for review and consideration, which request shall specify any additional information required; prior to the Director's decision, the proposed decision shall be noticed to the City Council; (v) Where modifications to the Agreement pursuant to this Subsection 4.12.2, as contained in any Proposal, would require the consent of the City Council prior eo adoption as a portion of this Agreement, the Director of Public Works shall submit the Proposal to the City Council with a recommendation of either approval or denial as soon as the Director has reached a decision. (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 11 4.12.3 Limitations on Modifications. Notwithstanding anything in this Agreement to the contrary, any changes, modifications or substitutions to the Transportation Phasing Plan's or the Financing Plan's public facilities which are prerequisites to any stages, phases or increments of development must be: (i) for the demonstrated purpose of either rectifying an inadequacy of a Public Improvement as determined with respect to the Performance Standards, or substituting in place of a planned Public Improvements another Public Improvement which meets the relevant Performance Standards; (ii) adopted in the manner set forth in Subsection 4.12.2; and (iii) no changes to the Financing Plan shall be allowed with respect to a particular Public Improvement where the Developer has already Committed such Public Improvements to support a stage, phase or increment of development unless the Developer, in its sole and absolute discretion, shall agree to such a change. 4.12.4 Determination of Adequacy. Following the procedures outlines in Subsection 4.12.3, Developer may request a written determination from the City regarding (i) the adequacy of any Public Improvement to be developed or funded by Developer with reference to the Performance Standards, and (ii) whether such Public Improvement is adequate for any phase, stage or increment of development under the Financing Plan or the Transportation Phasing Plan. The City's determinations of adequacy pursuant to this Subsection 4.12.4 shall not be unreasonably withheld. 4.13 Timinq and Phasinq of the Project. In its development of the Project, Developer will build public improvements in excess of those required to reasonably mitigate the impact of Developer's Project at any one phase. Due to this significant development of public improvements and Developer's need to recoup its capital investment, Developer must have flexibility to respond to market conditions by being authorized to develop, construct and sell what the market will accept. The parties acknowledge that the Developer cannot predict when or at what rate the Project, or phases therein, will be developed. Such decisions depend upon numerous factors beyond the control of Developer such as market orientation and demand, interest rates, absorption and other similar factors. The City, on behalf of itself and/or the citizens of Chula Vista, hereby disclaims any right to further regulate Developer beyond the regulations contained herein, pursuant to such authority as may be found in the case of Pardee Construction Company v. City of Camarilln, 37 Cal.3d 465 (1984), or any similar decision which provides that the failure of the parties to a written agreement to provide for the method for determining the rate of development may subject a development project to a subsequently adopted voter initiative restricting the timing of development. It is the parties' intent to expressly limit any authority held by the voters in either a (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 12 voter-sponsored, or City Council-sponsored initiative, which otherwise may regulate the Property, by acknowledging Developer's right to maintain the flexibility as to the timing of'development except as otherwise noted. 4.14 Application of a Pendinq General Plan Growth Manaqement Element. The parties recognize that City is currently studying the feasibility and need for a General Plan Growth Management Element in the Eastern Territories of City. During the term of this Agreement, the City Council may, by its own motion, adopt such a General Plan Growth Management Element which shall be incorporated into this Agreement, upon adoption and without further action by the parties, as though it were an Existing Approval. If necessary, City and Developer shall solemnify the incorporation of such a General Plan Growth Management Element by executing an amendment to this Agreement. 4.15 Modifications to the Municipal General Plan. City is currently reviewing standards under which the density of a project may be increased, if at all, under Sections 6.2 and 6.3 of the General Plan. This Agreement and Developer's Project shall be subject to the standards adopted by the City for increasing the density of a project under Sections 6.2 and 6.3 of the General Plan and such standards, upon their adoption by the City Council, shall be incorporated into this Agreement, without further action by the parties, as though they were an Existing Approval. 5. Development Proqram. 5.1 Processinq of Application and Permits. City will accept the processing and review of all Tentative Maps, Final Maps, development applications and permits or other entitlements with respect to the development and use of the Property in accordance with this Agreement and the SPA. 5.2 Pre-Final MaD Development. If Developer desires to do certain work on the Property (including, without limitation, grading) prior to the recordation of a Final Map for such portion of the Property, it may do so by obtaining a grading or other permit from the Director of Public Works of City. The Director of Public Works will issue such permit to Developer or its contractor upon Developer's application for the same if issuance of the permit would be in compliance with all applicable ordinances and regulations, and provided Developer posts a bond or other reasonably adequate security required by City in an amount to assure the rehabilitation of the land if the applicable Final Maps do not record. (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 13 5.3 Lenqth of Validity of Tentative Subdivision. It is understood by the Parties to this Agreement that pursuant to existing law, a tentative subdivision map may remain 9alid for the length of term of this Agreement all as provided in Government Code Section 66452.6(a). The City therefore in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement agrees that the Master Tentative Map shall remain valid for a term coterminous with the length of this Agreement; provided, however, that the term of the Master Tentative Map shall not exceed the maximum allowed by law. 5.4 Final Map(s). Prior to conveying any portion of the Property to a Builder, Developer will process with City a Final Subdivision Map(s) prepared substantially in compliance with the Tentative Map for such portion of the Property. Developer may finalize the Tentative Map(s) through as many final maps in such sequence or order as Developer determines is appropriate unless at the time of the City's approval of the Tentative Map(s) the sequencing for any map area was specified by the City. 5.4.1 "A" Maps and "B" Maps. If Developer so elects, the City shall accept and process a Master Final Map ("A" Map) showing "Super Block" lots and backbone street dedications. "Super Block" lots shall be the subdivision units as shown on the Master Tentative Map(s) and shall not depict single family lots. All "Super Blocks" created shall have access to dedicated public streets. The City shall not require improvement plans in order to record a Final Map for any "A" Map "Super Block" lots but the City may require bonding for the completion of backbone streets prior to recording in an amount to be determined by Developer and City. Following the approval by City of any Final Map for an "A" Map "Super Block" lot and its recordation, Developer may sell the "Super Block" lot. The buyer of a "Super Block" lot shall then process final improvement plans and grading plans and a final map ("B" Map) for each "Super Block" lot which the City shall accept and process. The "B" Maps shall substantially conform to the approved Master Tentative Map(s) and "A" Maps. In the instance of the multi-family dwelling unit areas, a separate Tentative Map may be submitted to the City and the "B" Map(s) for these areas may be submitted to the City after the City Planning Commission approves said Tentative Map. 5.4.2 Recordation of Final Subdivision Map in Name of Builder or Third Party. Developer may, if it so elects with respect to any portion of the Property, convey such portion of the Property to a Builder or third party by a grant deed to be recorded in the Official Records of San Diego County as one document number preceding that of the Final Map for the portion of the Property so conveyed. In such case, the Builder or third (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 14 party will (i) sign the Final Subdivision Map for the portion of the Property so conveyed as record owner, (ii) enter into a subdivision improvement agreement with City for the improvements required as a condition of the Final Map and (iii) provide security and insurance satisfactory to City for the completion of the subdivision improvements. 5.4.3 Recordation of Final Subdivision Map in Developer's Name; Transfer of Obliqations Under Subdivision Improvement Aqreement(s). If Developer so elects, it may defer the conveyance of any portion of the Property to a Builder or third party until after the Final Subdivision Map(s) of such portion of the Property is recorded. If Developer elects to proceed in this manner, it will enter into the City's standard Subdivision Improvement Agrement(s) with City for the improvements required as a condition to the recordation of any such improvements. Developer may assign all or any part of its rights and delegate any obligations under any such subdivision improvements agreement(s) to a Builder or third party to which Developer conveys such portion of the Property, upon such Improvement Agreement. 6. Urban Infrastructure. 6.1 Dedications, Reservations and Improvements of Land for Public PurDoses. The portions of the Property to be reserved, dedicated and/or improved for public purposes are designated in the SPA and the Financing Plan and may be further described in the Tentative Subdivision Map(s). Such dedications, reservations and improvements will be imposed in accordance with the provisions of the California Government Code and the Chula Vista Municipal Code in effect as of the date of application for the respective building permits. 6.2 Pioneerinq of Facilities. Developer shall have the right, but not the obligation, to complete those off-site Facilities which constitute regional Thresholds within the Financing Plan. To the extent Developer itself constructs (i.e. "Pioneers") any improvements which are covered by a development impact fee program (including the DIF program described in Paragraph 7 below), Developer shall be given a credit against development impact fees otherwise payable, subject to the City Engineer's reasonable determination that such costs are allowable under the applicable development impact fee program. It is specifically intended that Developer be given DIF credit for the DIF program improvements it makes to Telegraph Canyon Road and Otay Lakes Road Facilities, and the fact that such improvements may be financed by an assessment district shall not prevent DIF credit from being given to the extent such district creates liened indebtedness against the Property. The obligations of Developer under this Article 6 shall be (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 15 conditioned upon~the execution of an equitable reimbursement agreement between City and Developer pursuant to the terms of Subsection 6.2.1. 6.2.1 Reimbursements. Where the City shall request Oversizing of public facilities from Developer, or Developer shall Pioneer pursuant to Subsection 6.2 herein, the City shall agree, contemporaneous with either the imposition by City of the obligation of Oversizing or the Developer's assumption of the obligation of Pioneering, as the case may be, to enter into an agreement providing for equitable reimbursement to Developer, so that Developer's impact on required facilities shall be equitably shared by those benefitting from such facilities, through the methods prescribed by the Subdivision Map Act and Government Code Section 66487, or such legislation as it may be amended from time to time, or any other method of reimbursement authorized or allowed by City of State law. Such a reimbursement agreement shall reimburse the Developer for that portion of the cost of those Public Improvements constructed by Developer, including an amount attributable to Interest at seven percent (7%) per annum benefitting real property outside of the project. 6.3 Parks. In consideration of the vesting provisions of this Agreement, Developer agrees to comply with the parks and recreation requirements set forth in Chapter 2 of the Financing Plan, regardless of whether the requirements of such program exceed the requirements of existing City ordinances. The City agrees to waive all other Parkland Acquisition and Development Fees. 6.4 Insurance. Developer shall name City as additional insured for all insurance policies obtained by Developer for this project as pertains to the Developer's activities and operation on the Project. 6.5 Other Develo_9~ers. Notwithstanding the provisions of Subsection 6.1 to the contrary, Developer hereby agrees to dedicate adequate rights-of-way within the boundaries of the Exhibit A property for other developers to "Pioneer" (as hereinafter defined) Public Improvements on the Property; provided, however, as follows: (i) dedications pursuant to this Subsection 6.5 shall be restricted to those reasonably necessary for the construction of SR 125, EastLake Parkway, Hunte Parkway, Orange Avenue, Palomar Road and/or Otay Lakes Road (ii) this provision shall not be binding on the successors-in-interest or assignees of Developer following recordation of a final "Super Block" or "A Map"; (iii) any dedications pursuant to this Subsection may require a widening of the circulation elements specified in (iv) but shall not require any greater building set- backs from such circulation elements than those specified in the (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 16 SPA; and (v) the City shall use its best efforts to obtain agreements, similar to this Subsection 6.5 from other developers in the Eastern Territories of City and to obtain equitable reimbursement for Developer for any excess dedications. 6.6 Route.k~5. Developer shall irrevocably offer to dedicate rights-of-way within the boundaries of the Exhibit A property for the future SR 125 or any other interim facility within rights-of-way to the extent necessary to accommodate a freeway. 6.7 Assessment Districts or Public~inancin~ Mechanisms. This Agreement and the Financing Plan recognize that assessment districts, Mello Roos Community Facility Districts, or other public financing mechanisms may be necessary to finance the cost of Public Improvements borne by this Project. If Developer, pursuant to the Financing Plan, is required to install Public Improvements where the Financing Plan authorizes the use of assessment districts, Mello Roos Districts, or other public financing mechanism, the city shall select the acceptable method of public financing, initiate and conclude appropriate proceedings for the formation of such financing district or funding mechanism, under the applicable laws or ordinances. Developer shall also have the right to request that City utilize, and City may initiate and conclude appropriate proceedings for any other financing methods which may become available under City or state laws or ordinances. All costs associated with the consideration and formation of such financing districts or funding mechanisms shall be advanced by Developer, subject to reimbursement as may be legally authorized out of the proceeds of any financing district or funding mechanism. 7. DeveloDment~mDact Fees. The following development impact fee program is hereby established for the Property. 7.1 Existing Development Impact Fee ~ro~m Payments. Developer shall pay to the City a Development Impact Fee ("DIF"), or construct improvements in lleu of, for improvements covered by a building permit at the time of application for the building permit. The DIF will be in the amount established by the city at the time of application for the building permit. The per-acre DIF for non-residential uses shall be prorated on the basis of acreage covered by each applicable building permit for such buildings. 7.2 Qther ~e~eloDe~s. The city will use its best efforts to impose and collect, or cause the imposition and collection of, the same DIF program on all the undeveloped real property located in the Area of Benefit described on Table of Chapter__ of the Financing Plan. (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 17 7.3 ~se of DIF. The DIF amounts paid to the City by Developer and others with respect to the Area of Benefit shall be placed by the City in a capital facility fund account established pursuant to California Government Code Section 66000-66009. The City shall expend such funds only for the projects described in the DIF. The City will use its best efforts to cause such projects to be completed as soon as practicable; provided, however, the City shall not be obligated to use its general funds for such projects. Nothing herein stated shall, however, prevent the City from using its general funds for such purposes. 7.4 Withhold of Permits. Developer agrees that City shall have the right to withhold issuance of the building permit for any dwelling unit in the property unless and until the DIF is paid for such dwelling unit. 7.5 New or Additional DIF Proqrams. Nothing stated in this Development Agreement is intended to limit the City in its establishment of any new or additional DIF or related program, nor from replacing the DIF program with another program and applying the same to the Property. Any such new, additional or replacement program shall include such other land as would have a reasonable nexus to the program and shall be established in accordance with applicable law. 7.6 Developer's TransDortation DIF Credit. Upon the completion of any transportation public improvement, the City shall immediately credit Developer with the appropriate number of Equivalent Dwelling Unit credits (EDUs) as determined by Developer and City. Developer shall be entitled to apply any and all credits accrued pursuant to this Subsection 7.6 towards the required payment of future transportation DIF fees for any phase, stage or increment of development for any of Developer's projects within the Eastern Territories of City. The EDUs credited to Developer pursuant to this Subsection 7.6 shall be deemed to be pre-paid and freely applicable against future DIF obligations on an EDU basis. 8. Bindinq Effect; Encumbrance of ProDert¥~ Statu~. 8.1 Bindin~ffect. The provisions of this Agreement will be binding upon and inure to the benefit of the parties' successors in interest. 8.2 Discretion to Encumber. Nothing in this Agreement will prevent or limit Developer, in any manner, at Developer's sola discretion, from encumbering all or any portion of the Property or improvement thereon by any deed of trust or other security device. (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 18 8.3 Status. Each party will, within fifteen (15) days prior written request, given written notice to the other party of whether the party giving the notice knows of any breath of this Agreement and its current understanding of status of performance under this Agrement. A copy of any such notice which is sent to Developer shall also be sent to the holder of any institutional first trust deed encumbering the Project if such holder has made written request for notice and provided the City with the holder's address for notice purposes. 8.4 Releases. Once the required Public Improvements are installed the City may release portions of the Property from this Agreement. All areas of the Property designated for residential custom home lot construction shall be released from this Agreement by the City upon the request of any individual purchaser. 9. Annual Review; Notice. City will, once every twelve (12) months during the term of this Agreement, pursuant to California Government Code Section 65865.1, undertake a periodic review of the parties' compliance with the terms of this Agreement pursuant to the procedures set forth below. Developer shall present information with respect to Developer's good-faith compliance with Paragraph 9.1. In addition to the information provided by Developer in accord with Paragraph 9.1, City may request Developer address additional issues with respect to Developer's good-faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement. City shall deliver no less than thirty (30) days' written notice to Developer prior to any hearing of any requirement City desires to be addressed, and applicable staff reports, in a manner sufficient for Developer to respond. Either party may address any requirement of this Agreement during the review period. If at any time of review, an issue not previously identified in writing pursuant to Paragraph 9 is required to be addressed by City, the review at the request of either party may be continued to afford sufficient time for analysis and preparation. Such review by the City may be conducted by the City Manager. 9.1 Information to be Provided Developer. Pursuant to Government Code Section 65865.1, Developer shall have the duty to demonstrate its good-faith compliance with the terms of this Agreement at each periodic review. Developer's duty to demonstrate may be satisfied (except for additional issues raised by City pursuant to Paragraph 9) by the presentation to the City of: (i) a written report identifying Developer's performance or the reasons for its nonperformance or excused performance of the requirements of this Agreement, or (ii) oral or written evidence submitted at the time of review. (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 19 9.1.1 The parties recognize that this Agreement and the documents incorporated herein could be deemed to contain thousands of requirements (i.e., construction standards, landscaping standards, et al.), and that evidence of each and every requirement would be a wasteful exercise of the parties' resources. Accordingly, Developer shall be deemed to have satisfied its duty of demonstration when it presents evidence of its good faith and substantial compliance with any issues requested to be addressed by City in accordance with Paragraph 9, and substantial compliance with the major provisions of the Financing Plan, SPA, and compliance with the restrictions on the uses, number, type, lots and sizes of structures completed, and any required reservations and dedications to the City. Generalized evidence or statements shall be accepted in the absence of any evidence that such evidence is untrue. 9.2 Findinq by City Durinq Annual Review Period That Developer is in Default. If, during any annual review period, City, on the basis os substantial evidence, finds Developer has not in good faith complied with this Agreement, it will give Developer thirty (30) days' notice of default pursuant to Paragraph 10. 9.3 Delay in Annual Review. The City's failure to review annually the Developer's compliance with the terms and conditions of the Agreement shall not constitute or be asserted by City as a breach by Developer of any terms of the Agreement. 10. Default. If either party defaults under this Agreement, the party alleging such default will give the breaching party not less than thirty (30) days' notice of default in writing. The notice of default will specify the nature of the alleged default and, where appropriate, the manner and period of time in which said default may be satisfactorily cured. During any period of cure, the party charged will not be considered in default for the purposes of termination or institution of legal proceedings. If the default is cured, then no default will exist and the noticing party will take not further action. 10.1 Option to Set Matter for Hearinq of Institute Leqal Proceedinq~. After property notice and the expiration of the cure period, the noticing party to this Agrement, at its option, may (i) institute legal proceedings, or (ii) request hearings before the Planning Commission and the City Council for a determination as to whether this Agreement should be modified, suspended or terminated as a result of each default. 10.2 Waiver. Except as otherwise expressly provided in this Agreement, any failure or delay by a party in asserting any of its rights or remedies as to any default by the other party will not operate as a waiver of any default or of any such rights (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 20 or remedies or deprive such party of its right to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings which it may deem necessary to protect, assert or enforce any such rights or remedies. 10.3 Remedies Upon Default. In the event of a default by either party to this Agreement, the parties shall have the remedies of specific performance, mandamus, injunction and other equitable remedies. Without limiting any other remedy available at law, neither party shall have the remedy of monetary damages against the other, based upon a breach of this Agreement; provided, however, that the award of costs of litigation and attorneys' fees shall not constitute damages based upon a breach of this Agreement. 11. Modification; Suspension; Termination. 11.1 Emerqency Circumstances. If, as a result of specific facts, events or circumstances, City finds, following the procedures outlined in this Section 11 and based upon the preponderance of all evidence presented by the parties, that a severe and immediate emergency threat to the health and safety of the citizens of City requires the modification, suspension or termination of this Agreement, City will: 11.1.1 Notification of Unforeseen Circumstances. Notify Developer of (i) the initiation of City's determination process, and (ii) the reasons for City's determination and all facts upon which such reasons are based; 11.1.2 Notice of Hearing. Notify Developer in writing at least fourteen (14) days prior to the date, of the date, time and place of the hearing and forward to Developer, a minimum of ten (10) days prior to the hearing described in Paragraph II.I.3, all documents related to such determination and reasons therefor; and 11.1.3 Hearinq. Hold a hearing on the determination at which hearing Developer will have the right to address the City Council. At the conclusion of said hearing, City Council may take action to suspend this Agreement. City Council may suspend this Agreement if, at the conclusion of said hearing, based upon the evidence presented by the parties, the City finds that the suspension of this Agreement is required to avoid an immediate and severe threat to the health, safety and general welfare of the City; 11.1.4 Uni%ateral Suspension. Where the citizens of City face a severe and immediate threat to their health and safety, City may unilaterally suspend the effectiveness of the Agreement for a period not to exceed the time reasonably required for notice and a public hearing. (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 21 11.2 Chanqe in State or Federal Law or Requlations. If any state or federal law or regulation enacted during the term of this Agreement or the action or inaction of any other affected governmental jurisdiction precludes compliance with one or more provisions of this Agreement, or requires changes in plans, maps or permits approved by City, the parties will act pursuant to Paragraphs 11.2.1 and 11.2.2. 11.2.1 Notice~ Meetinq. The party first becoming aware of such enactment or action or inaction will provide the other party with written notice of such state or federal law or regulation and provide a copy of such law or regulation and a statement regarding its conflict with the provisions of this Agreement. The parties will promptly meet and confer in a good- faith and reasonable attempt to modify or suspend this Agreement to comply with such federal or state law or regulation. A copy of any such notice which is sent to Developer shall also be sent to the holder of any institutional first trust deed encumbering the Project if such holder has made written request for notice and provided the City with the holder's address for notice purposes. 11.2.2 Hearinq on SuDersession of Development Aqreement. Thereafter, regardless of whether the parties reach agreement on the effect of such federal or state law or regulation, the matter will be scheduled for hearing before the City Council no sooner than ten (10) days following written notice of such hearing to Developer. City Council, at such hearings, will determine the exact modification, suspension or termination which is required by the federal and state law or regulation, if any. Developer, at the hearing, will have the right to offer oral and written testimony regarding any proposed action by City. Any modifications, suspension or termination are subject to judicial review. 11.3 Modification by Mutual Consent. This Agreement may be modified, from time to time, by the mutual consent of this parties only in the same manner as its adoption by an ordinance as set forth in California Government Code Sections 65867, 65867.5 and 65868, and Resolution 11933 of the City of Chula Vista. The term "this Agreement" as used in this Agreement will include any such modification properly approved and executed. 11.3.1 Minor Modifications. The parties to this Agreement contemplate the periodic review and minor modification of the SPA and provisions of the Financing Plan. Such mutually agreed-upon minor modifications by the parties hereto are anticipated and shall not constitute an amendment to this Agreement or a modification pursuant to this Section 11.3.1. (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 22 11.3.2 Notice of Termination. In the event that this Agreement is terminated pursuant to any of the methods authorized herein this Article 12, the City shall prepare and record a Notice of Termination, containing a reference to this Agreement and the effective date of any such termination in a form suitable for recordation with the County of San Diego. 12. General Provisions. 12.1 Notices. All notices required by or provided for under this Agreement shall be in writing and delivered in person or sent by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt required, to the principal offices of the City and Developer. Notice shall be effective on the date delivered in person or the date when the postal authorities indicate that the mailing was delivered to the address of the receiving party indicated below: Notice to Developer: With Copy to: Robert L. Santos Craig Beam President, Chief Operating Officer Luce, Forward, Hamilton EastLake Development Company & Scripps 900 Lane Avenue, Suite 100 110 West A Street, # 1700 Chula Vista, CA 92013 San Diego, CA 92101 Notice to City: City Manager City Attorney The City of Chula Vista The City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 Chula Vista, CA 92010 Such written notices may be sent in the same manner to such other persons and addresses as either party may from time to time designate by mail. 12.2 Joint and Several Liability. If either party consists of more than one legal person, the obligations are joint and several. 12.3 Severabilit . If any material provision of this Agreement is held invalid, this Agreement will be automatically terminated unless within fifteen (15) days after such provision is held invalid the party holding rights under the invalidated provision affirms the balance of this Agreement in writing. This provision will not affect the right of the parties to modify or suspend this Agreement by mutual consent pursuant to Paragraph 11.3.1 (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 23 12.4 Recordation of Aqreement~ Amendments. Ail amendment hereto must be in writing signed by the appropriate agents of City and Developer, in a form suitable for 'recording in the Office of the Recorder, County of San Diego. Within ten (10) days of the date of this Agreement, a copy will be recorded in the Official Records of San Diego County, California. Upon Completion of performance of this Agreement or its earlier termination, a statement evidencing said completion or termination, signed by the appropriate agents or Developer and City will be recorded in the Official Records of San Diego County, California. 12.5 Attorney's Fees and Cost~. If either party commences litigation or other proceeding (including, without limitation, arbitration) for the interpretation, reformation, enforcement or rescission of this Agreement, the prevailing party will be entitled to its reasonable attorney's fees and costs. 12.6 ADDlicable Law. This Agreement will be construed and enforced in accordance with the laws of the State of California. 12.7 Assiqnment. Developer may transfer its rights and obligations under this Agreement if such transfer or assignment is made as part of a transfer, assignment, sale or lease of all or a portion of the Property and the City consents to said transfer. Said consent shall not be unreasonably withheld. 12.8 Term of Aqreement. This Agreement shall expire seven (7) years after the date it is entered into. 12.9 Conflict. The provisions stated in this Agreement shall prevail, should there be any conflict between this Agreement and the Financing Plan. 12.10 Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing. Neither party shall do anything which shall have the effect of harming or injuring the right of the other party to receive the benefits of this Agreement; each party shall refrain from doing anything which would render its performance under this Agreement / / / / / / / / / / / (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 24 impossible; and each party shall do everything which this Agreement contemplates that such party shall do in order to accomplish the objectives and purposes of this Agreement. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties have executed this Agreement on the date first above written. "City" CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation By: Gregory Cox, Mayor EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY, a California general partnership comprised of corporations By: DANIEL V, INC., a California corporation, General Partner By: Daniel D. Lane, President By: DAVID V, INC., a California corporation, General Partner By: David B. Kuhn, Jr., President I hereby approve the form and legality of the foregoing Agreement this day of , 19__. Thomas Harron, City Attorney v/CKB/lcm AG093CKB (Draft Date: 07/20/89) 25 City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 1 5. PUBLIC HEARING: Extension of P-79-013 and PCC-86-34M; request for a one-year extension to operate an auto recyclin~ yard at 3513 and 3517 Main Street - Carole and John Marquez A. BACKGROUND 1. On May 4, 1979, Carole and John Marquez, owners of 3513 and 3517 Main Street, were granted a major use permit (P79-013) for a ten-year period expiring on May 5, 1989, by the County of San Diego, to operate an auto dismantling and recycling operation at the above sited address. 2. On July 7, 1986, subsequent to the annexation of the Montgomery Community to the City of Chula Vista, the Marquez' received approval for a minor deviation from their existing permit in order to replace the caretaker's residence with a temporary butler building to house used auto parts (PCC-86-34M). 3. Carole Marquez contacted staff early in March 1989 regarding the extension of conditional use permit PCC-86-34M and P79-013. Due to scheduling problems, the public hearing on the same could not be scheduled until May 3, 1989, for the Montgomery Planning Committee and May 24, 1989, for the Planning Commission. These ~ates are subsequent to the expiration date of the permit. Carole Marguez' request for an extension of the permit is attached. 4. The project is exempt from environmental review. 5. At the meeting of the Montgomery Planning Committee on May 3, 1989, the Committee recommended that the City Planning Commission grant a one-year extension of P-79-013 and PCC-86-34M. 6. This item was continued from the Planning Commission meeting of May 24, 1989, in order to resolve certain legal and procedural issues. B. RECOMMENDATION Based on the analysis contained in Section D of this report, adopt a motion to approve a one-year extension for P79-013 and PCC-86-34M from May 5, 1989, to May 5, 1990, provided that the following additional conditions are met: 1. By August 28, 1989, thirty (30) days following the granting of the extension, the applicant shall have submitted a complete application for a grading permit to remove the illegal fill from the adjoining parcel of her property which is located south of the area included within the conditional use permit and within the floodway of the Otay River. Within this timeframe the applicant must also apply for a permit from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers and a Streambed Alteration Agreement from the California Department of Fish and Game and any other necessary permits. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 2 2. By September 27, 1989, sixty (60) days after the granting of this extension, work to remove the illegal fill shall have commenced. 3. By January 29, 1990, five (5) months after the granting of this extension, the illegal fill shall have been completely removed in accordance with an approved plan. 4. In the event that any of the above conditions have not been met within the required time periods, the conditional use permit will be revoked. C. DISCUSSION There are two major issues which the Planning Commission should consider: the proposal for an extension of the conditional use permits and the application of conditions which relate to adjoining property also owned by the applicant and located south of the area included in the CUP. 1. Extension of the Conditional Use Permit The Marquez's J and C Auto Wrecking Yard is located at 3513 and 3517 Main Street, on the south side of Main, west of Center Street and north of the Otay River in the Montgomery Community. The portion of their land covered by the above sited permits is 13.72 acres. The site fronts upon and takes access from Main Street. The land is zoned M64 and designated as Research and Limited Industrial on the Plan Diagram of the Montgomery Specific Plan. The current land use, auto recycling, is a non-conforming use and will be phased out once the zoning is implemented in the Montgomery Community. At issue is the timing for the implementation of the zoning. 2. Addition of Conditions to Land South of the Area included in the CUP The Marquez' are also owners of a 5-acre parcel at the rear of the auto wreckers which is leased to a company known as Best Soils, owned by Mr. Joseph Byrne. Best Soils uses the site to store and process soils and other material. Since the establishment of the business sometime after 1981, more than an estimated 26,000 cubic yards have been illegally deposited on the site forming a pad within the floodway approximately ? feet above the natural topography of the river. The fill is in violation of the Grading Ordinance for the City of Chula Vista and the City has been attempting to take steps to enforce compliance with the ordinance. Federal officials from the Department of Fish and Game were also involved in communication with Mr. Byrnes on these violations. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 3 The City notified the Marquez' of the illegal condition on November 17, 1986, however, the illegal condition remains. With regard to relating this situation to the request for extension, Section 19.14.070 of the Municipal Code states: "The Director of Planning or the Planning Commission shall have the discretion to include in notice of the hearing on such application notice that the Planning Commission will consider classification of other than that for which application is made and/or additional properties and/or uses (emphasis added). It is staff's recommendation that Section 19.14.070 be used by the Planning Commission in this case to address the illegal fill luse) of the adjoining property. D. ANALYSIS Extension of Conditional Use Permit 1. With the adoption of the Montgomery Specific Plan on September 13, 1988, the present auto wrecking use became non-conforming. 2. The rezoning of the Montgomery Community is expected to be completed within six months. The plan states "Existing open uses of land, such as automobile salvage yards...shall be regarded as nonconforming and shall not be expanded or continued beyond their existing time limits, or within 24 months after the date of rezoning of the involved sites to "I-L, Limited Industrial" whichever occurs last." 3. Once the zoning for the Montgomery Community has been adopted, the Marquez' will have a maximum of two years' time to relocate or change the present land use. The Planning Department is recommending an extension of the permit for one year. At that time the applicants could apply for an additional extension for the remainder of time their non-conforming use would be allowed. Addition of Conditions to Land South of the Area Included in the CIP 1. As mentioned earlier, the land in question is directly south of that governed by the existing CUP and is located in the floodplain. The Otay River Park proposed under the Montgomery Specific Plan would not be confined to the riparian habitats or wetlands within the jurisdiction of Army Corps of Engineers but would probably occupy a significant part of the Otay River's floodplain. The park is proposed as the southerly component of the Chula Vista Planning Area's greenbelt, and could be of regional importance and scope, since it would serve the residents of Montgomery, the City of Chula Vista at large, the City of San Diego, and much of the South Bay subregion. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 4 This future parkland should be protected. The aforementioned recommendations of conditions related to the adjoining property would help protect the area. 2. The illegal fill has remained in the Otay River for at least 8 years. Regardless of who dumped it, the property owner is responsible for removing it and should do so at this time. 3. When there is an opportunity to improve the Montgomery Community as there is with this conditional use permit application, it should be taken. 4. Finally, the Planning Department views this application for an extension of the conditional use permit in a broader perspective. Auto recycling yards are, as stated earlier, being phased out. The staff are recommending an extension to this permit and to the auto recycling use being tied to the correction of a long standing problem of significant environmental concern. This is in keeping with the goals of the Montgome[v Specific Plan to promote order, amenity and beauty. WPC 6498P I I L : ME-NTARY ZENITH STREET I-L I MAIN STREET 4 A,N~URZ~ WAy WAY CITY (FW) AREA PROP FOR ADD N TO COND L USE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT .APP~ANT,S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE O~ CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICA---~IO~ IWHIC" WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY [COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES. COUNCIL, PLANNIN The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application. List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. 2. If any person identified pursuant to {l) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than )0% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. /~ 3. If any person identified pursuant to {1) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No ~ If yes, please indicate person(s) ~i as' "An., in~-'-~-- ..... ~ ---==- ~ club, frater~'al orJani~~v!oua~' ~rm, copartnership, joint ventur - I~ Club. ~- g at,on, corporation,'t~~ ~~wsion. or any other group or co~~]~ict ~ othe~ ~ignature O~c~_~ ~ ",,,~ or ~Ype ~of appli~an~r~ ~ City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 1 6. Consideration of the design of the Bonita Corporate Center at 3965 Otay Lakes Road - Bob Crane and Jeff Phair A. BACKGROUND On November 30, 1988, the Planning Commission recommended approval of PCZ-89-D to rezone 2.09 acres located on the west side of Otay Lakes Road, between Bonita Road and Allen School Lane, from R-3-P-8 to C-O-P. The Commission also directed that the project plans for the site -- a three-story office building called the Bonita Corporate Center -- be returned for Commission review following action by the Design Review Committee. On June 5, 1989, the Design Review Committee voted unanimously to approve the project. B. RECOMMENDATION No action is required on this item. The Commission may wish to direct comments to the City Council for consideration in conjunction with the rezonin9 proposal. C. DISCUSSION The 2.09-acre site slopes downward from south to north towards Bonita Road. The property to the south is approximately 15 ft. higher in elevation, and the single family properties to the west range from 25-30 ft. higher in elevation. Adjacent land uses include single family dwellings to the west, an electric substation to the south, and a commercial center to the north. The Bonita Corporate Center project consists of 43,300 sq. ft. of office space in a three-story structure located on the west-central portion of the site. Parking for 157 cars is provided to the front and both sides of the building with two points of access off Otay Lakes Road. The landscape concept plan calls for perimeter planting around the building and site -- including enhancement of the off-site slopes to the west or rear of the building -- as well as two-landscaped courtyards adjacent to the building entrance. The Commission had expressed concern with the bulk of an earlier proposal which showed a structure with a uniform height of three stories (please see attached site plan and elevations marked prior plan). The Design Review Committee expressed similar concerns, and the plans were reworked to provide two-story elements to the front and sides of the building in order to reduce the visual mass from the street. The square footage has been maintained by a somewhat larger footprint and the introduction of a two-story, semi-underground parking structure on the southerly portion of the site. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of July 26, 1989 Page 2 The lower two-story elements and resulting additional roof lines have also enhanced the architectural quality of the project, which will feature concrete tile roofs and stucco exteriors with substantial fenestration and detail. The building will maintain a 25-30 ft. vertical and 70-120 ft. horizontal separation from the single family dwellings to the west, with a setback from Otay Lakes Road of 100-130 ft. for the third story and 80 ft. for the two-story elements. The project was approved by the DRC with the support of staff and subject to the following conditions: 1. Revised plans showing each floor's gross floor area and the total parking provided shall be submitted to staff for final review and approval. 2. A landscape and irrigation plan, shall be submitted to the City's Landscape Architect for formal review and approval. 3. Applicant shall resolve parking screening program with the City's Landscape Architect prior to submitting formal landscape and irrigation plans for plan check. 4. A sign program in keeping with the Bonita area shall be submitted for Design Review Committee approval. 5. A color and materials sample board, depicting the colors shown in the color rendering presented at the meeting, shall be submitted to staff for review and approval. 6. Westerly adjacent slopes shall not exceed 2 to 1 slope condition. WPC 6502P MUNICIPAL ~'~]Od~O:) ~'J. INOg ~]iN~J ]iVgOd~OD VIIN08 CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATE~NT IAPPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application. Bob Crane Jeff Phair List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. Carl Berg Lillian Berg Bob Crane Jeff Phair 2. If any person identified pursuant to il) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. 3. If any person identified pursuant to il) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Con~ittees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No x If yes, please indicate person(s) ~ ic~u~fi~adt~;n.'ai "A~y ~di~v~firm, ~c. opartnership, joint venture, ass~ ?y~.,~, o ganlza~on, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate,~n~di~c~a~t~ei I I th!.s..and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, district or other lpolitical subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit." {NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.) ~. / Signature of applicant/date WPC 070IP Bob A-llO Print or type name of appIicant