HomeMy WebLinkAbout1991-10-08 - AGENDA REPORTS - DEVAGMT TEN YRS BUILD OUT (2)AGENDA REPORT
City Manpproval.
be pre/P?
Item to be presented
PUBLIC HEARING Ken Pulskamp�
DATE: . ' October 8, 1991
SUBJECT: Request for Development Agreement 91-004 to allow ten years
for the build -out of American Landmark's approved Vesting
Tentative Tract Map 47863 for 80 homes on 32 acres. VTTM
47863 is located north of Whites Canyon Road between Nadal
Street and Wildwind Road.
DEPARTMENT: Community Development
BACKGROUND
The public hearing for this project was opened at the .regular City
Council meeting on September 24, 1991, -where it was continued to this
date at the request of the applicant and the Mayor.'
The applicant, American Landmark, is requesting a development agreement
for ten years 'to develop VTTM 47863 in 'accordance with standards
currently in effect. The City Council approved VTTM 47863 on May.22,
1990. On August 6, 1991, the Planning Commission unanimously approved
Resolution P91-35 certifying the negative declaration and recommending
approval of this development agreement, with modifications,to the'
Council. The Initial study for this Development Agreement is on file in
the Community Development Department. .
ANALYSIS
Under VTTM 47863 approval, American Landmark was conditioned to pay
double the Bridge and Thoroughfare District fees ($5,300 per unit), and
pay 50Y of the cost of a traffic signal at the intersection of "A" Street
and Whites Canyon Road. American Landmark together with Weston, the
applicant for VTTM 46626, proposed to satisfy the park obligation for
both projects by donating a 28 acre park site and $700,000 to the City.
These developers also agreed to try and obtain an additional 7 acres of
land adjoining the 28 acres for dedication to the City as a possible
library site. On July 16, 1991, the Planning Commission approved
Tentative_ Parcel Map 22398 which includes the donation of the 7
additional acres to the City. The costs of processing the parcel map are
being paid by American Landmark and Weston.
O _ 91 - vl
/L%v2 ,Q-eG C.V
Agenda Item:I
The development agreement includes the following additional consideration
beyond that of the original tract approval:
* The 28 acre park site and the 7 acre library site would be given to the
City by December 31, '1991, regardless of whether' or not the American
Landmark or Weston tracts record. The 35 acre park/library site is valued
at $510,000.
* $199,500 (American Landmark's share of the $700,000) would be given to the
City upon the issuance of the first building permit for VTTM 47863. This
cash donation would now be increased yearly based on the January CPI from
the date of original tract approval, so the actual amount is already
greater than $199,500.
* The $5,300 per unit BTD fees would now be increased yearly based on the
January CPI from the date of original tract approval, so this amount is
already greater also.
* A new fee of $1,067.62 per unit for development of bicycle lanes in the
City is proposed and would be increased yearly by the January CPI from the
effective date of the Development Agreement. The Development Agreements
for American Landmark and Weston would result in $300,000 plus CPI for
bicycle lane development in the City.
The advantages of approving the requested Development Agreement are that the
dedication of the park/library site would occur regardless of whether or not
VTTM 47836 or VTTM 46626 record. The City would receive $700,000 plus CPI for
park/library site grading. The City would receive $300,000 plus CPI to design
and construct new bicycle trails, removing the need for a bicycle lane on
Soledad Canyon Road. Additional traffic lanes could be added to Soledad
Canyon Road within the existing right-of-way, providing circulation benefits
for the community.
The disadvantages are that the improvements related to the project may not be
constructed as quickly .and the project will be exempt from any new ordinances
or moratoriums.
A letter in support of this development agreement has been received from the
Hart High School District. Mr. Murray Golub, an owner of property adjacent to
the Weston project, has stated an objection to the negative declaration
prepared. for this development agreement claiming that this agreement will
deprive his property of future access. Alternative access to his site could
exist through the Sherburne project, south of the Golub property. Weston has
provided a tap street to the Sherburne property which could then be connected
to Golub's. Copies of the Hart High School letter, the Golub letter and the
City's response are attached.
1. Approve the attached Negative Declaration with the finding that the
proposed project will not have a significant effect upon the environment;
2. Approve Development Agreement 91-004;
3. Introduce the attached Ordinance 91-41, waive further reading, and pass ,to
the second reading.
2 -
1. Ordinance 91-41
2. Development Agreement 91-004.
3. Minutes of Planning Commission dated August 6, 1991, and July 16, 1991.
4. Staff Reports dated August 6, 1991, and July 16, 1991.
5. Negative -Declaration.
6. Planning Commission Resolution No. P91-35.
7. Letters regarding project.
8. Project Site Plan.
LMH:LHS:381
- 3 -
PUBLIC HEARING 'PROCEDURE
1.
Mayor Opens Hearing.
a. States Purpose of Hearing
2.
City Clerk Reports on Hearing Notice
3.
Staff Report
(City Manager)
or
(City Attorney)
or
(RP Staff)
4.
Proponent Argument (30 minutes)
S.
Opponent Argument (30 minutes)
6.
Five-minute Rebuttal (Proponent)
a. Proponent
7.
Mayor Closes Public Testimony
S.
Discussion by Council
9.
Council Decision
10.
Mayor Announces Decision
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
AMERICAN LANDMARK DEVELOPMENT, INC. IS
REQUESTING TO ENTER INTO A FORMAL
AGREEMENT TO ALLOW FOR A TEN YEAR BUILD OUT FOR
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 47863
LOCATION:
NORTH OF WHITES CANYON ROAD BETWEEN
NADAL STREET AND WILDVIND ROAD
IN THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
PUBLIC NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN:
A Public Hearing will be held before the City Council of the City
of Santa Clarita to consider a request by American Landmark
Development, Inc. to enter into a formal agreement to allow for a
ten year build out for Vesting .Tentative Tract Map 47863. The
location is north of Whites Canyon Road between Nadal Street and
Wildwind Road in the City of Santa Clarita.
The hearing will be held by the City Council in the. City Hall
Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Blvd., 1st Floor, Santa Clarita,
the 24th day of September, 1991, at or after 6:30 p.m.
Proponents, opponents, and any interested persons may appear and be
heard on -this matter at that time. Further information may be
obtained by contacting the City Clerk's Office, Santa Clarita City
Hall, 23920 Valencia Blvd., 3rd Floor, Santa Clarita.
If you wish to challenge this order in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public
hearing 'described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the City Council, at, or prior to the public hearing.
Date: August 19, 1991
Donna M. Grindey
City Clerk
Publish Date: September 3, 1991
ORDINANCE NO. 91-41
A ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA,
APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING EXECUTION OF
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT.91-004 FOR
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 47863
THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SANTA CUR TA DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS
FOLLOWS:
SECTION 1. The 'City Council.does hereby find,
a. An application for a development agreement was filed with the City
of Santa Clarita on March 4, 1991, by American Landmark ("the
applicant"). The property for -which this entitlement has been filed
is 32 acres located north of,Whites Canyon Road between Nadal Street
and Wildwind Road. The Assessor's Parcel Numbers are 2802-38-136
and 137.
b. The request is for a development agreement to allow ten years for
the build -out of Vesting Tentative Tract .Map 47863 ("the Development
Agreement•). VTTM 47863 consists of 80 single-family residences and
the site is currently vacant. The General Plan designation of the
site is RL.
C. On March 20, 1990, following the public hearings conducted on
December 19, 1989, January 16, 1990, and February 20, 1990, the
Planning Commission of the City adopted Resolution P90-16
conditionally approving VTTM 47863 and the negative declaration
prepared.for the project.
d. On May 22, 1990, the City Council adopted Resolution 90-74,
approving VTTM 47863 and the negative declaration prepared in
connection therewith.
e. The applicant is proposing to' provide public benefits, as part of
the Development Agreement, in addition to those proposed under the
original VTTM 47863 approval including the following:
1. The 28 acre park site and the 7 acre library site would be given
to the City by December 31, 1991, regardless of whether or not
the American Landmark or Weston tracts record. American
Landmark and Weston have also paid for the cost of a parcel map
(TPM 22398) which included donation of an additional 7 acres for
a library site adjacent to the park site. The 35 acre
park/library site is valued at $510,000.
2. The $199,500 (American Landmark's share of the $700,000) would
be given to the City upon issuance of the first building permit
-for VTTM 47863. This cash donation would be increased yearly
based on the January CPI from the date of VTTM 47863 tract
approval.
3. The $5,300 per unit BTD fees would be increased yearly based on
the January CPI from the date of VTTM 47863 approval,
4. A new fee of $1,067.62 per unit for development of bicycle lanes
in the City would be paid and would be increased yearly based on
the. January CPI from the effective date of the Development
Agreement.
f. The Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on the
Development Agreement application on Tuesday, July 16, 1991 at the
City of Santa ClaritaCity Council Chambers, 23920' Valencia
Boulevard,' Santa Clarita, at 7:00 p.m. At that time, the Planning
Commission received testimony, closed the public hearing and
directed staff to return to the meeting on August 8, 1991, with a
resolution certifying the negative declaration and recommending
approval of the Development- Agreement to the'. City Council. On
August 8, 1991, the Commission adopted Resolution P91-35, certifying
the negative declaration and recommending approval of the
Development Agreement to the City Council.
g. The City Council held a duly noticed public hearing to consider this
ordinance on Tuesday, September 24, 1991, at the City of Santa
Clarita City Council Chambers, 23920 Valencia Boulevard, Santa
Clarita, at 6:30 p.m.
SECTION 2. Based upon the above facts, oral and written testimony and
other evidence presented at the public hearing, and upon the study 'and
investigation made by the Planning Commission and City Council, the City
Council finds as follows:
a. The Initial Study prepared for VTTM 47863 is applicable to this
project. The Development Agreement does not alter the environmental
factors previously considered for VTTM 47863 and will have a de
minimus impact on the environment.
b. The Development -Agreement is consistent- with the General Plan RL
designation.
C. The Development Agreement complies with zoning; subdivision and
other applicable ordinances and regulations.
d. The Development Agreement is consistent with the public convenience,
general welfare and good land use practice, making it in the public
interest to enter into the development agreement with the applicant.
e. The Development Agreement will. not adversely affect the health,
peace, comfort. or welfare of persons residing or working ,in the.
surrounding area.
f. The- Development Agreement will not be materially detrimental to the
use, enjoyment or valuation of property of other persons located in
the vicinity of the site.
g. The Development Agreement will not.jeopardize, endanger or otherwise
constitute a menace to the public health, safety or general welfare.
0
SECTION 3. The City of Santa Clarita City Council has reviewed and
considered the environmental information contained in the Initial study, which
was approved by the Planning Commission, and determines that 'it is in
compliance with the 'California Environmental Quality Act and that the
Development Agreement will not have a significant effect on the environment
and will have a de minimus impact upon wildlife. A Negative Declaration has
been prepared for this project. Based upon the findings stated above, the
City Council hereby approved the Negative Declaration.
SECTION 4. Based upon the foregoing, the City Council does hereby
ordain that the Development Agreement is approved and shall be executed by the
Mayor on behalf of the City.
SECTION S. This ordinance shall become effective at 12:01 a.m. on the
thirty -first - day after adoption, or. upon., the recordation of a notice of
agreement, whichever occurs last.
SECTION 6. The City Clerk shall certify as to the passage 'of this
Ordinance and cause it to be published in the manner prescribed by law and is
hereby directed to cause a copy of the fully executed Development Agreement to
be recorded with the County Recorder not more than 10 days following the
execution by the City.
ATTEST:
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED.this _ day of 1991.
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES) as
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA)
MAYOR
I, Donna M. Grindev, City Clerk of the City of Santa Clarita,.do
hereby certify that the foregoing Ordinance No. 91 -Al was regularly introduced
and placed,upon its first reading at a regular meeting of the City Council on
the day of 1991. That thereafter, said Ordinance was duly
adopted and passed at a regular meeting of the City Council on the day
Of , 1991, by the following vote, to wit: -
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:.
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
LHS: 347
0
0
CITY CLERK
Recording. Requested By
and When Recorded Return to:
CITY CLERK
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
23920 Valencia Boulevard
Suite 300
Santa Clarita, California 91355
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA,
AMERICAN LANDMARK DEVELOPMENT, INC. AND
WHITE'S CANYON ASSOCIATES
RELATIVE TO THE SUBDIVISION AND
DEVELOPMENT OF PROPERTY WHICH IS THE SUBJECT
OF VESTING TENTATIVE MAP NO. 47863
THIS AGREEMENT SHALL BE RECORDED WITHIN TEN DAYS
OF EXECUTION BY ALL PARTIES HERETO PURSUANT TO
THE REQUIREMENTS OF GOVERNMENT CODE 565868.5
8/26/91
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT
This Development Agreement ("Agreement") is made
this day of , 1991, by and among
the City of Santa Clarita, a municipal corporation,
organized and existing under the general laws of the State
of California (the "City"), White's Canyon Associates, Ltd.
a California Limited Partnership and American Landmark
Development, Inc., a California corporation (collectively,
the "Developer").
RECITALS
A. The city is authorized pursuant to Government
Code Sections 65864 through 65869.5 (the "Government Code")
to enter into binding agreements with persons or entities
having legal or equitable interest in real property for the
development of such property in order to establish certainty
in the development process. The City further enters into
this Agreement pursuant to Part 4 of Chapter 22.16 of the
Santa Clarita Municipal Code (the "Santa Clarita.Code").
B. The Developer is the applicant for
entitlements and the owner of approximately 32 acres of
unimproved real property located in the City of Santa
Clarita; County of Los Angeles, California, as shown in
Exhibit A to this Agreement, which real property is the
subject matter of this Agreement (the "Project Site").
Exhibit A is incorporated herein by this reference. The
legal description for the Project Site is set forth in
Exhibit B to this Agreement. Exhibit B is incorporated
herein by this reference.
C. The Parties desire to enter ipto this
Agreement relating to the Project Site in conformance with
the Government Code and the Santa Clarita Code in order to
Achieve the development of land uses expressly permitted
under the terms of this Agreement and the provision of
public services; public uses, and urban infrastructure, all
in the promotion of the health, safety, and general welfare
of the City of Santa Clarita and the residents of the Santa
Clarita Valley.
,D. The Developer has applied for the following
entitlements (collectively referred to as the "Project
Approvals")`
TM. A
-1-
WPX/TBM/AGR132461f
(1) Vesting Tentative Tract Map No. 47863
(the "Tract Map").
(2) Development Agreement No. 91 --
The development as proposed by the Developer for
the Project Site will consist of 80 single family homes and
related amenities (the "Project"). '
E. On March 20, 1990, following the public
hearings conducted. on December 19, 1989, January 16, 1990
and February 20, 1990, the Planning Commission of the City
adopted Resolution No. P90-16 approving the Tract Map and
the negative declaration prepared in connection.therewith.
On , 1991, the Planning Commission of the
City, held a public hearing on the Developer's application
for this Agreement.
F. On May 22, 1990, following the public hearing
conducted on April 24, 1990', the City Council of the City
adopted Resolution No. 90-74, approving the Tract Map and
the negative declaration prepared in connection therewith.
On , 1991, the City Council of the City
adopted Ordinance No. approving this Agreement with
the Developer. The second reading of Ordinance
No. was approved on 1991, and
became effective on , 1991.
G. The City desires to obtain the binding
agreement of the Developer to dedicate its share of the
proposed twenty eight (28) acre park/library site,
Developer's donative payment of $199,500.00 in cash, which
sum is Developer's share of the total of $700,000.00 cash
donation to be made by Developer and the balance of said
cash donation is to be made by Weston to the City for said
park/library improvements and facilities, and Developer's
donative payment of $1,067.62 per unit for the development
of bicycle trail improvements in the City.
H. The Developer desires to obtain the binding
agreement of the City that the City will permit the
Developer to develop the Project and Project Site in
accordance with the "Applicable Rules" (as hereinafter
defined), including any modifications permitted by this
Agreement. The Developer further desires that it not be
required to construct public improvements or make
dedications or'financial contributions to the City in lieu
of public improvements, except as expressly set forth in
this Agreement and the conditions of the Project Approvals.Y_r d.
WPX/TBM/AGR132461f -
I. Developer has applied to the City in
accordance with the procedures set forth in the Santa
Clarita Code for approval of this Agreement which provides
for the binding agreements desired by the Parties to this
Agreement. The City Council of the City has given notice of
intention to consider this. Agreement, has conducted public
hearings thereon pursuant to the Government Code and the
Santa Clarita Code, and has found that the provisions of
this Agreement are consistent with the City's adopted plans
and policies and the "Zoning Ordinance" (as hereinafter
defined). The City, as a newly incorporated municipal
corporation, has.not yet adopted a general plan. The. City
is in the process of preparing, reviewing, and considering a
general plan as required by California Government Code
Sections 65300, et seq. In approving the Project, the City
Council and the City Planning Commission found, pursuant to
the provisions of the California Government Code, as
follows:
(a) There is a reasonable probability.that the
Project will be consistent with the City's proposed
general plan under study at the present time; and
(b) There.is little or no probability of
substantial detriment to, or interference with, a
future -adopted general plan if the Project is
ultimately inconsistent with the proposed general
plan.
J. The terms and conditions of this Agreement
have been found by the City to be .fair, just, and
reasonable, and prompted by the necessities of the situation
so as to provide extraordinary benefits to the City.
K. This Agreement is consistent with the present
public health, safety, and welfare needs of the residents of
the City -of Santa Clarita and the surrounding region. The
City has specifically considered and approved the impact and
benefits of this Project upon the regional welfare.
L. This Agreement will bind the City to the terms
and obligations specified in this Agreement and limits, to
the degree specified in this Agreement and under State law,
the future exercise of the City's ability to delay,
postpone, preclude or regulate development of the Project on
the Project Site except as provided for herein.
M. A negative declaration has been prepared and
approved in conjunction with the above referenced Project
Approvals and the consideration set forth in this Agreement -1 a
Fa V,
1 7r'.
VPX/TBM/AGR132661f
in accordance with the 'applicable statutes, ordinances, and
regulations of the State of California and of the City of
Santa Clarita.
N. This Agreement eliminates uncertainty in
planning and provides for the orderly development of the
Project Site. Further, this Agreement eliminates
uncertainty about the validity of exactions imposed by the
City, and other Federal, State and local agencies, allows
installation of necessary improvements, provides for public
services appropriate to the development of the Project Site,
and generally serves the public interest within the City of
Santa Clarita and the surrounding region.
NOW, THEREFORE, with reference to the above
Recitals, and in consideration of the mutual covenants and
agreements contained in this Agreement, the City and the
Developer agree as follows:
1. Definitions. In this Agreement, unless the
context otherwise requires:
WPX/TSM/AGR132461f
(a) "Applicable Rules" means the rules,
regulations, and official policies of the City in
force as of the "Effective Date" (as hereinafter
defined) governing development, density, permitted
uses, growth management, environmental
consideration, building codes, grading
requirements, improvement and construction
standards and specifications and design criteria
applicable to the Project.
(b) "Consumer Price Index" or "CPI" is the
Consumer Price Index (all items) prepared by the
Bureau of Labor Statistics for the Los Angeles -
Anaheim -Riverside area relating to all urban
consumers (1967=100).
(c) "Discretionary Actions; Discretionary
Approvals" are actions which require the exercise
of judgment or a decision, and which contemplate
and authorize the imposition of revisions or -
conditions, by the City, including any board,
commission, or department of the City and any
officer or employee of the City, in -the process of
approving or disapproving a particular activity, as,-:'-
distinguished
s,-:=°"`distinguished from an activity which merely_,
requires the City, including any board, commission,
or department of.the'City and any officer or
employee of the City, to determine whether there
has been compliance with applicable statutes,
ordinances, regulations, or conditions of approval.
(d) "Effective Date" is the date this Agreement is
executed by all Parties. In the event this
Agreement is executed by the Parties on different
dates, the latest date of execution shall
constitute the Effective Date. In the event this
Agreement is not fully executed, but substantially
performed, the Effective Date is the date the Tract
Map is approved by the City.
(e) "Final Map" is the final approved map for any
phase of Tract 47863 that is recorded following the
satisfaction of the conditions imposed upon the
approval of the Project, including but without
limitation, Condition 16 of the conditions of
approval for Tract 47863, which allows the
developer to file multiple phase final maps upon
notice to City Departments of Community Development
and Public Works at the time Vesting Tentative
Tract Map 47863 is filed.
(f) "Public Improvements" means those public
improvements that the Developer.agrees to construct
and dedicate or alternatively,.that with regard to
those public improvements, the Developer agrees to
the paymentof money and the dedication of land to
the City or such other.public entity as the City
shall lawfully designate, which improvements
include by way of example, but not, limitation, (i)
those improvements, the provision of which are
conditions to the Project Approvals, and (ii) the
acquisition, dedication and/or construction of
easements and facilities described in Section 6 of
this Agreement.
(g) "Subsequent Applicable Rules" means the rules,
regulations, and official policies of the City, -as
they may be adopted becoming effective after the
Effective Date of this Agreement which, other than
as provided for in this Agreement, would govern the
development, building codes, grading requirements,
improvement and construction standards, density,
-permitted uses, growth management, environmental
considerations, and design criteria applicable to
the Project and Project Site. The parties inten�L_-
the development of the Project AAd, the 1>rojeel; Site s `=
NPX/TBM/AGR132461f k::i✓' "' -
to be subject to Subsequent Applicable Rules only
to the extent specified in paragraph (a) of Section
7 of this Agreement and, provided that any
Subsequent Applicable Rule can be applied to the
Project Site if the City conducts public hearings
and makes reasonable findings based on the record
of the hearing that the failure to apply a
Subsequent Applicable Rule will place residents of
the City in a condition substantially dangerous to
their health or safety, and that such condition, as
determined by the Council in its sole discretion
cannot otherwise be mitigated in a reasonable
manner.
(h) "Zoning Ordinance" is.the Zoning Ordinance for
the City of Santa Clarita (Title 22 of the Santa
Clarita Municipal Code) as same exists on the
Effective Date.
2. Interest of Developer. The Developer
represents to the City that, as of the Effective Date, it
owns the Project Site in fee, subject to encumbrances,
easements, covenants, conditions, restrictions, and other
matters of record.
3. Binding Effect. This Agreement, and all of
the terms and conditions of this Agreement, shall run with
the land comprising the Project Site and shall be binding
upon and inure to the benefit of the parties and their
respective assigns, heirs, or other successors in interest.
4. Negation of Agency. The Parties acknowledge
that, in entering into and performing under this Agreement,
each is acting as an independent entity and not as an agent
of the other in any respect. Nothing contained herein or in
any document executed in connection herewith shall be
construed as making the City and Developer joint venturers
or partners nor principal and agent.
5. Development of the Property. The following
specific restrictions shall govern the use and development.
of the Project and the Project Site:
(a) "Permitted Uses" The Project Site may only be
used for the development of no more than 80
detached, single family residences and related
amenities.
(b) "Development Standards" All design and -
development standards applicable to the developamerkt.;`"'
-6- T
WPX/TBM/AGR132461f
of the Project Site shall be in accordance with the
Applicable Rules including, by way of example, but
not limitation, the Zoning Ordinance.and the
conditions of the Project Approvals.as same may be
amended or modified in the future by .mutual
consent, and shall also be in accordance with
Subsequent Applicable Rules. 'If there is a
conflict between any of the Applicable Rules and
Subsequent Applicable Rules to be applied, the City
Council, in its reasonable discretion, shall
determine which shall apply.
6. Acknowledgments, Agreements and Assurances on
the Part of the Developer. The parties acknowledge and
agree that Developer's faithful performance in developing
the Project Site and in constructing and installing public
improvements, making payments and providing other benefits
in accordance with the Applicable Rules and Public
Improvements will fulfill substantial public needs not
otherwise obtainable under the Applicable Rules and Public
Improvements defined above in Sections 1(a) and (e),
respectively. The City acknowledges and agrees that there
is good and valuable consideration to the .City resulting
from developer's assurances and faithful performance thereof
and that same is in balance with the benefits conferred by
the City on the Project and the Developer by this Agreement
as more particularly described in Section 7 below. The
parties further acknowledge and agree that the exchanged
consideration hereunder, each as to the other, is fair, just
and reasonable in that known assurances of development is,
among other things, appropriate and reasonable in view of
the extraordinary benefits provided to the.City by this
Agreement. Developer acknowledges that the consideration is
reasonably related to the type and extent of the impacts of
the Project on the community and the Project Site, and
further acknowledges that said consideration is necessary to
mitigate the direct and indirect impacts caused by the
development of the Project.
In consideration of the foregoing and the City's
assurances set out in Section 7 below, Developer hereby
agrees as follows:
(a) Development of the Project Site. Developer
will use reasonable efforts, in accordance with its
sole business judgment in taking into consideration
market conditions and other economic factors
influencing the Developer's business decision to
commence or to continue development, to develop the
Project Site in accordance with the terms and
_7_ a
GP%/T8N/AGR132461f -'�
WP%/T8M/AGR132461f
conditions of this Agreement, the conditions of the
Project Approvalsand the Applicable Rules.
(b) School Fees. Concurrent with the issuance of
each unit building permit for a lot within Tract
No. 47863, American Landmark shall pay to the
applicable School District a per unit sum in
accordance with existing agreements between
American Landmark and the William.S. Hart Union
High School District and the Sulphur Springs Union
School District. Said School Districts and the
City acknowledge that the amount of such school
fees in said Agreements exceed the amount of the
current -required fee for construction of new school
facilities under SB 2926.
(c) Easements. The FinalMap or phased maps shall
describe and depict all easements including, but
not limited to, streets, public utilities, storm
drains, cable television, etc, all as are necessary
to facilitate the construction or installation of
the infrastructure itemized in subparagraph (d)
below and, by the recordation of such map or maps
convey said easements to the City. Developer shall
use good faith efforts to acquire and grant to the
City certain off -tract easements for streets,
drainage, sewers and public utilities in accordance
with the Final Map and the conditions thereto
approved by the City. In the event Developer is
unable to acquire such easements or dedications by
negotiation and upon a reasonable showing thereof,
the City -hereby agrees to acquire same by its power
of eminent domain, provided the Developer shall pay
the amount of such award and attorneys' fees and
costs in the pursuit thereof.
(d) Infrastructure, Fees, Dedication, Donations.
This subparagraph states the time for and
description of Developer performance of certain
Project conditions as follows:
(1) Subsequent to the commencement of
construction of the first phase of Tract 47863 and
prior to issuance of the first certificate of
occupancy for American Landmark Tract No. 47863,
American Landmark shall have constructed its
portion of the access road depicted on Tract 47863.
as "A" Street, in furtherance of the public health
and safety of those existing residences which
presently have only one access road serving their-
r.-
t:i
WP%/T8M/AGR132461f
entire tract thereby providing emergency secondary
access for said existing residential neighborhood
in addition to providing access to the new
dedicated park described in subparagraph (d) (3) of
this Section 6 and conditioned upon'Developer's
decision to undertake construction of the Project,
American Landmark shall perform as follows:
(a) During the first construction phase
of Tract No. 47863, American Landmark
shall construct "A" Street as shown on
the Tract Map through the Project.
(b) Pursuant to Condition No. 68(b) of
said Tract Map, American Landmark shall
construct "A" Street from White's Canyon
Road through its tract to the southwest
boundary of Weston Tract No. 46626
located within an existing easement for
road and utilities purposes reserved by
the City over a portion of the common
area of White's Canyon Homeowners'
Association. Should the final alignment
of.said street eventuate in the right of
way exceeding the City's said easement,
City agrees to cooperate with Weston and
American Landmark in acquiring the
necessary property interest to allow for
construction and maintenance of said
street, which shall provide direct access
to White's Canyon Road.
(c) If Weston starts residential
construction prior to American Landmark,
it will also construct a further part of
said street completing the access -link
across American Landmark property to
White's Canyon Road as shown on Tract No.
47863. Prior to the issuance of building'
permits for its first residential
construction phase, American Landmark
will reimburse Weston for the actual cost
of said street construction done by
Weston within Tract No. 47863 plus
interest at the Prime Rate of interest as
established and changed from time to time
by City National Bank, per year on the
total cost expended by Weston for said
street construction from the date Weston
substantially completed said road to the.
-9- '
f
J
r'•i�i 1 '�
x .. f Y'1.
G �
���.h
6 R .:: "I-
Vi=a'
K.SiJL
:.
..�
date of final payment of reimbursement.
The reimbursement obligation provided for
in this subparagraph shall be enforced
and administered through a separate
reimbursement agreement to be prepared by
the City and subject to the mutual review
and approval of Weston and American
Landmark.
(2) Prior to the first recordation of final
Tract Maps No. 46626 and 47863 or any subphase of
either of said Projects, but in no event later than
December 31, 1991, Weston and American Landmark,
acting together, will dedicate to the City or its
designated public agency approximately 28 acres of
land, described in Exhibit "H" attached hereto,
located west of White's Canyon Road for a public
park and potential library. This land dedication
is acknowledged by the City to exceed, and thereby
satisfy in full, Quimby Act requirements for Tract
Map Nos. 46626 and 47863 and existing City park
standards and policies..
(3) Upon issuance of Building Permits, for
the first for -sale residences (excepting model
homes), for Tract Map No. 47863 or any subphase
thereof,. American Landmark shall donate and pay to
the City the sum of $199,500.00, plus a sum equal
to the increase, if any, in the Consumer Price
Index calculated for the period from the date the
tentative map was approved by the City to the
January prior to the issuance of the Building
Permits, in cash, which sum is Developer's share of
the total of $700,000.00 cash donation to be made
by Developer and Weston to be used for the
improvement and purchase.of equipment and facil-
ities for the park and library site referred to in
subparagraph (2) above. The City acknowledges that
said sum is not a requirement of any.City ordin-
ance, resolution, policy or Tract Map condition of
approval.
(4) Concurrent with the construction of the
intersection of "A" Street and White's Canyon Road,
Weston andAmericanLandmark, shall, pay for the
cost of construction and installation of the
-traffic signal at said intersection.
(5) Concurrent with the issuance of building
permits on a lot by lot basis for each phase of
-10-
WP%/78M/ACR132661f
Tract No. 47863, American Landmark shall pay to the
City.the sum of $5,300.00, plus'a sum equal to the
increase, if any, in the Consumer Price Index
calculated for the period from the date the
tentative map was approved by the City to the
January prior to the issuance of the Building
Permits, for each residential unit permitted. The
City acknowledges that said per unit sum exceeds
the existing District fee and said amount shall not
be subject to increase as long as this Agreement is
in effect.
(6) City acknowledges that Developer has
contributed the cost to process and record a 3 lot
parcel map on property currently owned by Mark and
Renee Ostrove of which the Ostroves have agreed to
donate to the City Lot 3 of said parcel map
containing approximately 7 acres in addition to the
28 acre park/library site, described in Exhibit "H"
attached hereto and by this reference incorporated
herein. City and Developer agree that -if the
approximately 7 acre site is not dedicated to City
by December 31, 1991, this Agreement shall be null
and void.
(7) Developer shall pay to City the sum of
$1,067.62, plus a sum equal to the increase, if
any, in the Consumer Price Index calculated for the
period from the Effective Date to the January prior
to the issuance of the Building Permits, per unit
at the time of building permit issuance, to be used
by City for development construction and mainten-
ance of bicycle trails.
Nothing herein shall preclude phased recordation of
the Tentative Map, phased residential unit construction or
supercede Developer's discretion as to the timing and number
of units to be constructed.
7. Acknowledgments, Agreements and.Assurances on
the Part of the City. In order to effectuate the provisions
of this Agreement, and as an inducement for the Developer to
obligate itself to carry out the covenants and conditions
set forth in the preceding Section 6 of this Agreement, and
in consideration for the Developer.doing so, the City hereby
agrees and assures Developer that Developer will be
permitted to carry out and complete the development of the
Project within the Project Site, subject to the terms and
conditions of this Agreement, the conditions of the Project
Approvals and the Applicable Rules. In furtherance of such ._„^.;
YPX/T8M/AGR132461f' ��
VFX/TBMACR132451 f
agreement and assurances, and pursuant to the authority and
provisions set forth in the Government Code and the Santa
Clarita Code, the City, in entering into this Agreement,
hereby agrees and acknowledges that:
(a) Entitlement to Develop. The Developer is
hereby granted the vested right to develop the
Project and the Project Site to the extent and in
the manner provided in this Agreement, subject to
the conditions of the Project Approvals and in
accordance with the Applicable Rules and the
Subsequent Applicable Rules upon the City making
the findings set forth below in this subparagraph
(a) and City hereby finds the Project consistent
with the City's adopted plans and policies and the
Zoning ordinance. Any change in the Applicable
Rules, including, without limitation, any change in
any applicablegeneral or specific plan, Zoning
Ordinance, growth management regulations, hillside
restrictions, design standards or any subdivision
regulation of.the City, adopted or becoming
effective after the Effective Date, shall not be
applied by the City to the Project or Project
Area. Subsequent Applicable Rules can be applied
to the Project Site only if (1) the City determines
that the failure of the City to apply Subsequent
Applicable Rules will place residents of the City
in a condition substantially dangerous to their
health or safety, which condition cannototherwise
be mitigated in a reasonable manner and (2) it is
applied consistently and evenly to all other
residential developments in the City.
(b) Consistency With Applicable Rules. City
finds, based upon all information made available to
City prior to or concurrently with the execution of
this Agreement, that there are no Applicable Rules
that would prohibit or prevent the full completion
and occupancy of the development of the Project and
the Project Site in accordance with uses and
densities incorporated and agreed to in this
Agreement.
(c) Rate and Timing -of Development. The City
acknowledges and agrees that the Developer cannot
at this time predict when the Final Map for the
Project Site or any recordation phase thereof will
record. Further, the City acknowledges and agrees
that the Developer cannot at this time predict
when, or the rate at which, the Project will be -
developed. Such decisions depend upon numerous
factors including, but not limited to, general
economics, housing market, financial capability,
title, title insurance, interest rates, labor
availability and.costs, loan availability and
terms, lender requirements and other factors which
are not within the control of the Developer. The
California Supreme Court, in Pardee Construction
Company v. City of Camarillo, (1984) 37 Cal.3d. 465
held that the failure of the parties therein to
provide for the timing of development allowed a
later adopted initiative, which restricted the
timing of development, to prevail over the
agreement of the parties. In order to avoid the
effects of that decision, the City acknowledges and
agrees that the Developer shall have the right, but
not the obligation, to develop the Project, and if
developed, to do so in such order and at such rate,
and at such times as the Developer deems
appropriate within the exercise of its subjective
business judgment, subject to the terms and
provisions of this Agreement or, where not in
conflict with this Agreement, any timing or phasing
requirements set forth in the Applicable Rules and
Project Approvals.
(d) Time of Recordation of the Final Map or Phased
Maps; Start of Grading. Notwithstanding, the
provisions of this Agreement to the contrary, the
Developer has the sole right and discretion as to
the.time of recording the Final Map for all or any
phase of the Project and the time to start grading
and/or pulling permits for on and off-site works of
improvement and building permits during the term of
this Agreement.
(e) Subsequent Discretionary Actions, with
respect to any Discretionary Action or
Discretionary Approval that is or may be required
subsequent to the execution of this Agreement, the
City agrees that it will not unreasonably withhold
from Developer or unreasonably condition or delay
any such Discretionary Action or Discretionary
Approval which must be issued by the City in order
for the development of the Project Site to proceed
to construction and occupancy in ordinary course.
In addition, no condition shall preclude or
otherwise limit the Developer's ability to develop
the Project and the Project Site in accordance with
the timing, density and intensity of use set forth
-13-
WPX/TBM/AGR132461f
in this Agreement, unless the City determines that
(1) the failure of the City to impose such
condition would place residents of the City in a
condition substantially dangerous to their health
or safety, which condition cannot otherwise be
mitigated in a reasonable manner and (2) such
condition is applied consistently and evenly to all
other residential developments in the City.
(f) No Moratoriums. In addition to, and not in
limitation of, the foregoing, it is the intent of
the Developer and the City that no interim,
temporary or permanent moratorium (whether relating
to the rate, timing, or sequencing of the
development or construction of all or any part of
the Project, whether imposed by ordinance,
initiative, referendum, resolution, or.otherwise,
and whether enacted by the City Council, electorate
or any agency of the City) affecting parcel or
subdivision maps (whether tentative, vesting
tentative, or final), building permits,
certificates of occupancy, or other entitlements to
use or service (including, without limitation,
water and sewer) approved, issued or granted within
the City, or portions of the City, shall apply to
the Project.
(g) Term of Tentative Map. As authorized by
California Government Code Section 66452.6(a), City
shall extend the term of the Vesting Tentative
Tract Map.up to and including the scheduled
Termination Date of this Agreement as set forth in
Section 10 below. In extending the duration of the
Vesting Tentative Tract Map City shall not impose
any additional conditions or fees, or changes in
design, density or other policies, rules or
regulations which differ from the original approval
of the Project.
(h) Cooperation and Implementation. The City.-
agrees
ity:agrees that it will cooperate with Developer to the
fullest extent reasonable and feasible to implement
this Agreement. Upon satisfactory performance by
Developer of all required preliminary actions and
payments, bonding, or delivery of Letters of Credit
pertaining to appropriate fees, the City will
commence and in a timely manner proceed to complete
all steps necessary for the implementation of this
Agreement and the development of the Project and
the Project Site in accordance with the terms of
-14-
WPX/TBM/AGR132461f '
y%rte
4PX/TBM/AGR132461f
this Agreement, including, but not limited to, the
processing and checking of any and all Project
approvals, agreements, covenants, applications, and
related matters required by this Agreement,
building plans and specifications and any other
plans necessary for the development of the
Property, and the issuance of all necessary
building permits, occupancy certificates, or other
required permits for the construction, use, and
occupancy of the Project Site. Developer will, in
a timely manner, provide the City with all
documents, plans, and other information necessary
for the City to carry out its obligations under
this Agreement.
8. Review of Compliance.
(a) Periodic Review. The City shall review this
Agreement annually, on or before the anniversary of
the Effective Date, in accordance with the
procedure and standards set forth in this Agreement
and the Santa Clarita Code in order to ascertain
compliance by the.Developer with the terms of this
Agreement.
(b) Special Review. The City Council of the City
may order a special review of compliance with this
Agreement at any time. The Community Development
Director or the City Council, as determined from
time to time by the City Council, shall conduct
such special reviews.
(c) Procedure. During either a periodic review or
a special review, the Developer shall be required
to demonstrate good faith compliance with the terms
of this Agreement. The burden of proof on this
issue shall be on the Developer. The parties
acknowledge that failure by the Developer to
demonstrate good faith compliance shall constitute
grounds for termination or modification of this
Agreement in accordance with the provisionsof this
Agreement. However, once Developer has performed
its obligations under Sections 6(E)(2) and 6(E)(3)
it shall not be under any further obligation to
proceed with development or.Final Map
recordation. Upon completion of a periodic review
or a special review, the Community Development
Director shall submit a report to the City Council
setting forth the evidence concerning good faith
compliance by the Developer with the terms of this
-15-r,
r
t
Agreements and the recommended finding on that
issue. All compliance reviews shall be conducted
pursuant to the provisions of Sections 22.16.460,
22.16.470, and 22.16.480 of the Santa Clarita
Code. However nothing in this Agreement shall be
construed to impose an affirmative duty to proceed
with development should Developer decide -to defer
or to temporarily or permanently terminate
construction of the Project.
If, on the basis of review of this Agreement, the
Community Development Director concludes that the
Developer has not complied in good faith with the
terms of this Agreement, then the Community
Development Director may issue a written "Notice of
Non-compliance" specifying the grounds therefor and
all facts demonstrating such non-compliance. The
Developer's failure to cure the alleged non-
compliance within thirty (30) days after receipt
of said notice, shall constitute a default under
this.Agreement, subject to extensions of time by
mutual consent in writing. If the nature of the
alleged noncompliance is such that it cannot
reasonably be cured within such thirty (30) day
period, the commencement of the cure within a
reasonable time period and a diligent prosecution
to completion of cure shall be deemed a cure within
such period. Subject to the foregoing, after
notice and expiration of the thirty (30) day period
without cure, the City may pursue any remedy
available under this Agreement.
(d) Proceedings Upon Modification or
Termination. If the City determines to proceed
with modification or termination of this Agreement
after completing the reviews specified in Sections
22.16.460, 22.16.470, and 22.16.480 of the Santa
Clarita code, the City shall give written notice to
the Developer of its intention to modify or
terminate this Agreement. Notice shall be given at
least sixty (60) calendar days before the scheduled
hearing and shall contain such information as may
be reasonably necessary to inform the Developer of
the nature of the proceeding. At the time and
place set for the hearing on modification or
termination, the Developer shall be given an
opportunity to be heard. The Developer shall be
required to demonstrate good faith compliance wit
the terms and conditions of this Agreement t k
n
City Council finds, based upon s r
Fny., :#
r ' '
to
f k i %�
NPX/TBM/AGR132461f
evidence, that the Developer has not reasonably
complied in good faith with the terms or conditions
of this Agreement, the City Council may initiate
proceedings to terminate this Agreement.
9. Modification, Amendment, or Cancellation.
Subject to meeting the notice and hearing requirements of
Section 65867 of the Government Code and the applicable
provisions of the Santa Clarita Code, this Agreement may be
modified or amended from time to time by mutual consent of
the parties to their successors in interest in accordance
with the provisions of the Santa Clarita Code and Section
65868ofthe Government Code.
10. Term of Agreement. This Agreement shall
become operative and commence upon the Effective Date and
shall remain in effect for a term of ten (10) years, unless
said term is terminated, modified, or extended by
circumstance set forth in this Agreement or by mutual
consent of the parties hereto. Following the expiration of
said term, this Agreement shall be deemed terminated and of
no further force and effect; provided, such termination
shall not automatically affect any right arising from City
approvals on the Project Site prior to, concurrently with,
or subsequent to the Effective Date of this Agreement; and
provided further, that such termination shall not
automatically affect any right the City may have by reason
of the Developer's covenants to dedicate land, contribute
money or provide public improvements in conjunction with any
portion of the Project Site which is under construction at
the time of the termination.
11. Remedies For Default. It is acknowledged by
the Parties that the City would not have entered into this
Agreement if it were to have unlimited liability and damages
under this Agreement, or with respect to this Agreement, or
the application thereof. The Parties agree and recognize
that, as a practical matter, it will not be possible
physically, financially, and as a matter of land use
planning, to restore the Project Site to its prior state
once the construction is commenced. Moreover, Developer has
invested a considerable amount of time and financial
resources in planning the.time, location, intensity of use,
improvements and structures for the development of the
Project Site. For these reasons, the Parties agree that it
will not be possible to determine an amount of monetary
damages which would adequately compensate the Developer for,
this work. Therefore, the Parties agree that monetary
damages will not be an adequate remedy for Developer f ¢ +k'
City fails to carry out its obligations nrrk z�
^gid
_17_ Pte, d
WP%/TBM/AGR132461f 6a.F+U J a1�
Agreement. The Parties further agree that the Developer's
remedies under this Agreement shall be limited to the right
to specifically enforce the terms of this Agreement.
The City's remedies under this Agreement shall also
be limited to the right to specifically enforce the terms of
this Agreement. In addition to specific performance, if the
Developer fails to make any payment or complete any other
act or performance specified in this Agreement in a
reasonable manner, the Developer shall have no further right
or entitlement to any building permits or certificates of
occupancy for any portion of the Project Site until the
default has been cured in accordance with due process and as
provided in this Agreement. The Parties recognize that this
section may result in the limitation or cessation of the
rights otherwise conferred by this Agreement upon the
Developer, including any of the.Developer's successors,
assigns, transferees, or other persons or entities acquiring
title to or otherwise acquiring an interest in the Project
or any portion thereof.
12. Arbitration. In order to expedite the
resolution of disputes and default, the parties have elected
to submit to binding Judicial Arbitration and Mediation. If
the matter in connection with any alleged breach is not
resolved in writing within thirty (30) days of receipt of
notice of breach, either party shall have the right to
submit the.matter to expedited arbitration. Whenever any
dispute over enforcement, interpretation or other arises
between the parties hereto in connection with this Agreement
and either party gives written notice (the "Notice") to the
other that.such dispute shall be determined -by arbitration,
then within thirty (30) days after the giving of the Notice,
both parties shall agree upon and hire one member of the
panel of Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services, Inc.
("Judge"). The Judge shall be a retired judge experienced
with land use, zoning and real estate development matters.
As soon as reasonably possible, but no later than thirty
(30) days after the Judge is selected, the Judge shall meet
with the parties at a location reasonably acceptable to _
Developer, City -and the Judge. The Judge shall determine
the matter within ten (10) days after such meeting. Each
party shall pay one-half the costs and expenses of the
Judge.
If Judicial Arbitration and Mediation Services,
Inc. ceases to exist, and either party gives written notice
to the other that a dispute shall be determined by
arbitration, then, unless agreed otherwise in writing by riitA
parties, all arbitrations.hereunder shall be governscr�y the`.
-18-
UPX/TBM/ACR132461f
then -current ,rules of the American Arbitration Association.
Any determination by arbitration hereunder may be entered in
any court having jurisdiction. Within ten (10) days after
delivery of such notice, each party shall select an
arbitrator with at least five (5) years experience in land
use, zoning and real estate development matters and 'advise
the other party of its selection in writing. The two
arbitrators so named shall meet promptly and seek to reach a
conclusion as to the matter to be determined, and their
decision, rendered in writing and delivered -to the parties
hereto, shall be final and binding on the parties. If said
arbitrators shall fail to reach a decision within ten (10)
days after the appointment of the second arbitrator, said
arbitrator shall name a third arbitrator within the
succeeding period of five (5) days. Said three (3)
arbitrators thereafter shall meet promptly for consideration
of the matter to be determined and the decision of any two
(2) of said arbitrators rendered in writing and delivered to -
the parties hereto shall be final and binding upon the
parties.
If either party fails to appoint an arbitrator
within the prescribed time, and/or if either party fails to
appoint an arbitrator with the qualifications specified.
herein, and/or if any two (2) arbitrators are unable to
agree upon the appointment of a third arbitrator within the
prescribed time, then the.Superior Court of Los Angeles
County may, upon the request of any party, appoint such
arbitrators, as the case may be, and the arbitrators as a
group shall have the same power and authority to render a
final and binding decision as where the appointments are
made pursuant to the provisions of the preceding
paragraph. All costs of any arbitration shall be borne by
the party which does not prevail in that arbitration. All
determinations by arbitration hereunder shall be binding
upon Developer and City.
13. Administration of Agreement and Resolution of
Disputes. All decisions by the City staff concerning the
interpretation and administration of this Agreement and the
Project which is the subject hereof are appealable to the
City Council and all like decisions by the City Council
shall be final but subject to the arbitration provisions set
forth in Section 12.herein and shall also be subject to
judicial review pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section
1094.5.
14. Assignment. The rights of the Developer under
this Agreement may be transferred or assigned in whole or in
part by the Developer upon prior written notice to the
-19-
WP%/TBM/AOR132661t -
City. Express assumption of any of the Developer's
obligations under this Agreement by any such assignee shall
relieve the Developer from such obligation.
15. Notices. All notices under this Agreement
shall be in writing and shall be effective when personally
delivered or upon receipt after deposit in the United States
mail as registered or certified mail, postage prepaid,
return receipt requested, to the following representatives
of the parties at the addresses indicated below:
If to City: City of Santa Clarita
Attention: City Manager
23920 Valencia Boulevard
Suite 300
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
With a Copy to: Carl K. Newton, Esq.
Burke, Williams & Sorensen
611 West Sixth Street
Suite 2500
Los Angeles, CA 90017
If to Developer: L. Thomas Mc Fadden
American Landmark Development_, Inc.
white's Canyon Associates
232 East Canon Perdido Street
Santa Barbara, CA 93101
With a copy to:
Charles W. Cohen,
Cohen, Alexander &
One Boardwalk
Suite 102
Thousand Oaks, CA
Esq.
Clayton
91360
16. Severability and Termination. If any
provision of this Agreement should be determined by a court
to be invalid or unenforceable, or if any provision of this
Agreement is superseded or rendered unenforceable according
to any law which becomes effective after the.Effective Date,
the remainder of this Agreement shall be effective to the
extent the remaining provisions are not rendered impractical
to perform, taking into consideration the purposes of this
Agreement.
17. Time of Essence. Time is of the essence for
each provision of this Agreement of which time is an
element.
-20-
UP%/TBM/ACR132A61f
18. Amendment or Cancellation. Subject to meeting
the notice and hearing requirements of Section 65867 of the
Government Code, this Agreement may be amended from time to
time, or cancelled in whole or in part, by mutual consent of
the parties or their successors in interest in accordance
with the provisions of Section 64868 of.the Government Code;
provided, however, that any amendment which does not relate
to the term, permitted uses, density or intensity of use,
height or size of buildings, provisions for reservation and
dedication of land, conditions, terms, restrictions and
requirements relating to Subsequent Discretionary Actions,
or any conditions or covenants relating to the use of the
Project Site, shall not require notice or public hearing
before the parties may execute an amendment hereto.
19. Force Majeure. In the event of'changed
conditions, changes in local, state or federal laws or
regulations, inclement weather, delays due to strikes,
inability to obtain materials, civil commotion, fire, acts
of god, or other circumstances which substantially interfere
with carrying out the Project, as the Project has been
approved by way of the existing approvals, or with the
ability of either party to perform its obligations under
this Agreement, the parties agree to bargain in good faith
to modify such obligations to achieve the goals and preserve
the original interest of this.Agreement.
20. Waiver. No waiver of any provision of this
Agreement shall be effective unless in writing and signed by
a duly authorized representative of the Party against whom
enforcement of a waiver is sought and refers expressly to an
occurrence or event to be deemed waived or such a waiver
effect a waiver of any right or remedy in respect of any
other occurrence or event.
21. Successors and Assigns. The provisions of
this Agreement shall be binding upon and inure to the
benefit of.the Parties, and subsequent owner of all or any
portion of.the Project Site and their respective successors
and assigns. Any successors in interest to the City shall
be subject to the provisions set forth in Section 64865.4
and 64868.5 of the.Government Code.
22. Interpretation and Governing Law. This
Agreement and any dispute arising hereunder shall be
governed and interpreted in accordance with the laws of the
State of -California. This Agreement shall be construed as a
whole according to its plain language and common meaning to
achieve the objectives and purposes of the parties hereto,
The rule of construction that ambiguities are to be resolved--',,---'-"
-21 F'.
UD%/T8M/AGR132461f
against the drafting party shall not be employed in
interpreting this Agreement, both parties having been
represented by counsel in the negotiation and preparation
hereof.
23. Constructive Notice and Acceptance. Every
person who, now or hereafter, owns :or acquires any right,
title or interest in or to any portion of the Project Site
is, and shall be, conclusively deemed to have consented and
agreed to every provision contained herein, whether or not
any reference to this Agreement is contained in the
instrument by which such person acquired an interest in the
Project Site.
24. No Third Party Beneficiaries. This Agreement
is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit
of the Parties and their successors and assigns. No other
person shall have any right of action based upon any
provision of this Agreement.
'25. Attorney's Fees. If either Party commences
any action for the interpretation, enforcement, termination,
cancellation or rescission of this Agreement, or for
specific performance for the breach hereof, the prevailing
party shall be entitled to its reasonable attorney's fees
and costs.
26. Counterparts. This Agreement may be executed
in two or more identical counterparts, each of which shall
be deemed to be an original and each of which shall be
deemed to be, one and the same instrument when each Party
signs each such counterpart.
27. Incorporation of Attachments. All attachments
to this Agreement, including Exhibits A through H, and all
subparts thereto, are incorporated herein by this reference.
28. Successor Statutes Incorporated. Subject to
the terms of this Agreement in general and Section 29 below
in particular, all references to a statute or ordinance,
shall incorporate any, or all, successor statute or
ordinance enacted to govern the activity now governed by the
statute or ordinance, noted herein.
'7
-22- c w.
UP%/YBM/AGR732661f
29. Entire Agreement; Conflicts. This Agreement
consists of 18 pages and 8 Exhibits which constitute the
entire understanding and agreement of the parties. The
exhibits are as follows:
Exhibit
"A"
- Map of the Project Site.
Exhibit
"B"
- Legal Description of the Project Site.
Exhibit
"C"
- The Project Approvals.
Exhibit
"D" -
Phasing Plan.
Exhibit
"E"
- Applicable.Rules.
Exhibit
"F"
- Development Fee Schedule.
Exhibit
"G"
- Zoning Ordinance.
Exhibit
"H"
- Park/Library Site Legal Description
Should any or all of the provisions of this
Agreement be found to be in conflict with any other
provision or provisions found in the Project Approvals,
Applicable Rules, Subsequent Applicable Rules or Zoning
Ordinance then the provision(s) of this Agreement shall
prevail.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, we affix any signatures hereto
the date first written above.
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
Dated: , 1991
zz
Mayor
AMERICAN LANDMARK DEVELOPMENT, INC.,
A California corporation
Dated: , 1991
By:
Mark Holland, President
-23-
UP%/T8M/AGR132461f
WHITE'S CANYON ASSOCIATES, LTD.,
A California limited partnership
Dated: , 1991
BY: American Landmark Development, Inc.,
General Partner
By:
Mark Holland, President
V,
STATE OF CALIFORNIA, )
j
COUNTY OF ) ss.
On this day of in the year 1991,
before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public, in and for said
State and County, personally appeared
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed this
instrument as of the City of Santa Clarita
and acknowledged that the City of Santa Clarita executed it.
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
Notary Public:
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
ss
COUNTY OF )
On this day of in the year 1991,
before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public, in and for said
State and County, personally appeared Mark Holland,
personally known to me (or proved'to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed this
instrument as the President of American Landmark Development
Corporation and acknowledged to me that suchcorporation
executed the within instrument pursuant to its bylaws or a
resolution of its board of directors.
WITNESS my -hand and official seal.
Notary Public:
NPX/TBM/AGR132461f
-25-
�w� sv
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
} ss.
COUNTY OF )
On this day of in the year 1991,
before me, the undersigned, a Notary Public, in and for said
State and County, personally appeared Mark -Holland,
personally known to me (or proved to me on the basis of
satisfactory evidence) to be the person who executed this
instrument as the President of American Landmark Development
Corporation as General Partner of White's Canyon Associates,
the partnership that executed the within instrument and
acknowledged to me that such corporation executed the within
instrument as such General Partner pursuant to its bylaws or
a resolution of its board of directors.
WITNESS my hand.and official seal.
Notary Public:
-26- e3
NPX/TBM/AGR132461f
MINUTES OF THE
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA PLANNING COMMISSION
REGULAR MEETING
Tuesday
August 6, 1991
CALL TO ORDER
The meeting .of the Planning Commission was called -to order by Chairman
Cherrington at 7:07 p.m., in the Council Chambers at 23920 Valencia
Boulevard, First Floor, Santa Clarita, California.
FLAG SALUTE
Commissioner Modugno led the Pledge of Allegiance to the flag.
ROLLCALL
The Secretary. called the roll. Those present were Chairman Cherrington,
Vice -Chairman Woodrow, Commissioners Modugno and Brathwaite.
Also present were Kenneth Pulskamp, Acting Director of Community
Development; Timothy McOsker, Assistant City Attorney; Richard Henderson,
Principal Planner; Donald Williams, Senior Planner; Mike Rubin, Associate
Planner; Fred Follstad, Associate Planner; Glenn Adamick, Assistant
Planner; Laura Stotler, Assistant Planner; Dick Kopecki, Deputy City
Engineer; and Linda Leonard, Commission Secretary.
MINUTES
It was moved by Commissioner Modugno, seconded by Commissioner Brathwaite,
and carried by a vote of 4-0 to approve the minutes of July 16, 1991.
=INISHED BUSINESS - ITEM 1 - RESOLUTION FOR APPROVAL OF DEVELOPMENT
- MASTE- - Located Northof
Whites'
---y—.. .....,.., •waua VZ Cne. ells
Drive and Bakerton Avenue
FOR
51',
of Fozlane Drive, Tambora
s Canyon Road between
Acting Director Kenneth Pulskamp introduced Items l and 2 concurrently.
Items 1 and 2 were heard at the last Planning Commission Meeting of
July 16, 1991 with the Commission having passed the motion to recommend
approval of the Development Agreements with modification.
Discussion and questions ensued among Commission and staff.
Commissioner Modugno motioned and Commissioner Brathvaite seconded, to
approve the Negative Declaration, Development Agreement 91-003•and adopt
Resolution No. P91-34 as amended.
Discussion continued among Commission and staff.
Motion was passed with a vote of 4-0.
Commissioner Modugno motioned and Commissioner Brathwaite seconded. to '
approve the Negative Declaration, Development Agreement 91-004 and adopt
Resolution No. P91-35 as amended. Motion was passed with a vote of 4-0.
CON INUED PUBLIC HEARINGS - ITEM 3 - ZONE CHANGE 90-009, TENTATIVE TRACT
MAP 49647, AND CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT 91-008, MASTER CASE NUMBER 90-145 -
Located on the future extension of Via Princessa, approximately 1,500 feet
west of Rainbow Glen Drive
Richard Henderson, Principal Planner took the chair as the Acting Director
of Community Development. Mr. Henderson introduced and gave a brief
presentation. of Item 3. He then introduced Fred Follstad, Associate
Planner, who gave a staff presentation and slide show.
At 8:00 p.m., Chairman Cherrington opened the public hearing.
Speaking in favor was the applicant, Sam Schaefer, 25035 Salford Street,
Laguna Hills, California, speaking for the project.
Speaking in a neutral vein was Robert Lathrop, 25105 Highspring, Newhall,
California. Mr. Lathrop addressed his concerns as to how the project
relates to the General Plan.
Discussion and questions ensued among Commission and staff.
Mr. Schaefer was given the opportunity for rebuttal and addressed the
concerns of the Commission.
Discussion ensued __ ag Com__ - w_., Schaefer and staff.
At 8:36 p.m., Chairman Cherrington closed the public hearing.
Commissioner Modugno motioned and Commissioner Voodrov seconded, to
approve Tentative Tract Map 49467, Zone Change 90-009, and Conditional Use
Permit 91-008, with an amendment regarding the proposed landfill and haul
route, and for staff to return to Commission with a resolution at the next
regularly scheduled meeting of August 20, 1991. The motion was passed
with a vote of 4-0.
RECESS
At 8:47 p.m., Chairman Cherrington called for a recess.
RECONVENE
At 9:00 p.m., Chairman Cherrington reconvened the meeting.
-2-
Commissioner Modugno moved for approval of the project with the deletion of
condition 33 for street improvements. Commissioner Woodrow seconded. With a
vote of 4-0, the motion was passed, with Resolution P91-36 being adopted.
ITEM 10 - TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 47785 - Located at Mandalay Road, onthe
easterly side of Sand Canyon Road
Assistant Planner Alex Vasquez made the staff presentation.
There was discussion among.the Commission and Staff.
At 10:25 p.m., Chairman Cherrington opened the public hearing.
Those speaking in favor were the applicant, William Cloyd, 15656 Iron Canyon
Road, Santa Clarita. who stated that he agreed with the conditions and was
available for any questions.
Speaking both neutrally and in opposition was Lawrence Oelze, 15830 Cachuma
Lane, Santa Clarita, with questions about an existing dirt road right behind a
lot on Cachuma Lane that accesses the subject property.
Chairman Cherrington closed the public hearing at 10:27 p.m.
Commissioner Brathwaite moved for approval of the project. Commissioner
Modugno seconded. Motion was passed with a vote of 4-0, with Resolution
P91-21 being adopted.
ITEM 11 - TENTATIVE PARCEL MAP 22398 - Located at 19449 Nadal Street, north of
Canyon High School in Canyon Country
Assistant Planner Laura Stotler made the staff presentation.
Discussion ensued among the Commission and Staff.
At 10:40 p.m., Chairman Cherrington opened the public hearing.
Those speaking in favor were the applicant Mark Ostrove, 19449 Nadal Street,
Canyon Country, stating that he was available for any questions.
Chairman Cherrington closed the public hearing at 10:41 p.m.
Commissioner Modugno moved for approval. Commissioner Woodrow seconded. With
a 4-0 vote, the project was approved, with Resolution P91-33 being adopted.
ITEM 12 - MASTER CASE NUMBER 91-028, DEVE.OPMENT AGREEMENT NUMBER 91-003 -
Weston Development Corporation/Weston w. Locatea norta or Unites Canyon.
Road, north of the existing terminus. of Foxlane Drive, Tambora Drive and
Bakerton Avenue
ITEM 13 - MASTER CASE NUMBER 91-029 AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 91-004 -
Amerzcan Landmark eve opment, iocated nor or wriltes Canyon Road betw9%n
Nadal Street and Wildwind Road
Mi!
U
Director Harris introduced Item 12 and Item 13, stating that they can be
considered concurrently. She gave a brief background of the projects and the
Development Agreements.
Principal Planner Richard Henderson and Assistant Planner Laura Stotler made
the staff presentation.
Discussion and questions ensued among'the Commission and Staff.
At 11:03 p.m., Chairman Cherrington opened the public hearing.
Speaking in favor were the applicant, John Ashkar, 10960. Wilshire Blvd., Suite
2150, Los Angeles, who made a presentation on behalf of Weston Development;
Mr. Tom McFadden, 232 E. Canon Perdido, Santa Barbara, who made a presentation
on behalf of American Landmark Development; and Chris Connelly, 26819
Florabunda, Canyon Country, speaking on the need for public facilities in the
Canyon Country area.
Speaking in opposition were Frederick Coleman, 19348 Old Friend Road, Canyon
Country, representing the White's Canyon Homeowners' Association, • stating that
the Homeowners'. Association has not met with the developers. He also
expressed concerns over.clauses 6b and 6c in the agreement.
Assistant City Attorney McOsker clarified the language in the agreement
regarding eminent domain. Some discussion ensued, including a discussion on
the public noticing of this hearing. This will be researched by Staff.
Also speaking in opposition were Robyn Davidson, 28153 N. Haxton Drive, Canyon
Country, addressing concerns on the amount of time it will take to complete
the development, grading, and land slides.
Robert Holder, 28149 Foxlane Drive, Canyon Country, stated his concerns about
the Development Agreements and the park site agreement.
Karen Holder, 28149 Foxlane Drive, Canyon Country,. who is concernedabout the
possibility of empty lots sitting for years, grading, fault lines, hillside
preservation, and land slides.
Glenn Reeves, 28222 Bakerton Avenue, Canyon Country, who stated concerns about
the Development Agreements, fees, the lack of cost indexing, lack of growth
control, and felt that the Agreements are not in the best interest to the City.
George Stigile, 18921 Ermine Street, Canyon Country, stating that his concerns
were the same, as those previously stated, and the bike trails that will be
financed with the money from the Agreement.
Mr. Ashkar was given the opportunity for rebuttal
At 12:00 midnight, Chairman Cherrington closed the public hearing, and
discussion ensued among the Commission and'Staff.
Commissioner Modugno motioned to approve the Development Agreement 91-003 and
Development Agreement 91-004 subject to a final approval by the Commission on
am
the assumption that the commission finds the modifications worded
appropriately, and then forwarding to Council. Commissioner Brathwaite
seconded. Discussion continued.
Motion was passed with a vote of 3-1, with the no vote being Vice -Chairman
Woodrow.
Staff was directed to return with past Staff Reports, and documentation at the
next regularly scheduled meeting of August 6, 1991.
ITEM 15 - IMPLEMENTATION PROGRAM
Item continued to special study session on July 25, 1991.
DIRECTOR`S REPORT
Director Harris discussed the special study session schedule for the
implementation program of the General Plan.
PLANNING COMMISSION REPORT
Commissioner Brathwaite asked about the increase in the Commissioners
compensation. He -requested that documentation be sent to the Commission.
Chairman Cherrington made several corrections to the verbatim transcription of
his General Plan speech.
Commissioner Modugro stated that Mrs. Garasi will be missed on the Commission.
Commissioner Brathwaite stated that he enjoyed being Chairman for the past
year, and commended Chairman Cherrington on his part as General Plan Chairman.
PUBLIC BUSINESS FROM THE FLOOR
Mr. Glenn Reeves, 28222 Bakerton Avenue, Canyon Country, discussed the
Development Agreements for Whites Canyon and that he recently found out:that
the park sites were not part of the tract maps.
At 12:58 a.m., Commissioner Modugno motioned to adjourn to the special study
session on July 25, 1991. Commissioner Brathwa e seco�e Motion was
passed with a 4-0 vote.
Jerry.Cherrington, Chairman
Planning Commission
ATTEST-
Lypy M. Harris; Ditedtor
Coxmunity Development Department
CD:jcg:79
-7-
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
I N T E R O F F I C E M E M O R A N D U M
TO: Chairman Jerry Cherrington and Members of the Planning Commission
r
FROM: Lynn M. Harris, Director of Community Developments
DATE: August 6, 1991
SUBJECT: DA 91-003 and DA 91-004 Material for Final Action
At the meeting of July 16, 1991, the Planning Commission heard the
Development Agreements for Weston (DA 91-003) and American Landmark
(91-004) and passed a motion to recommend approval of.these development
-
agreements, with modifications, to the City Council. Staff was directed
to return to the Planning Commission on August 6, 1991, with the
development agreements as modified, with the original tentative tract
approval documents -and a resolution for final action on these agreements.
At the previous hearing the Commission reserved the right to reopen the
public hearing and reconsider these development agreements.
The Commission directed staff to revise the agreements so all fees would
be adjusted yearly to the Consumer Price Index (CPI) from the effective
date of the agreements. Weston and American Landmark also agreed to give
the City the 28 acre park site and the Ostrove property to the City by May
31, 1993, or earlier. These changes have been added. to the Development=
Agreements'which are attached.
Chairman Cherrington also requested an opportunity, to listen to the public
hearing tapes of the last hearing on the original approval of both
Weston's project. VTTM 46626 and American Landmark's project VTTM 47863.
The last Planning Commission hearings for both Weston and American
Landmark were held February 20; 1990, and the last City Council hearings
were held on April 24, 1990. The tapes for both of these projects were
made available for review by the Chairman prior to this hearing.
The Planning Commission also requested a case history of the Weston and
American Landmark projects. The original project approvals including
staff reports, resolutions and conditions of approval are attached.
According to the original staff reports for these projects, both dated
December 19, 1989, a development agreement was to be considered for these
Agenda Item, °�
projects at a later date. The staff reports also mention the proposed
dedication of the park site and $700,000; however, this was never madea
condition of the tentative tract map approvals because they were to be
included in the projects through the development agreements.
Commission concerns over grading issues (seismic, hydrologic and
landscaping) were also expressed and are covered by the conditions of
approval of the tentative tract maps as follows:
Condition Number
Weston Landmark
VTTM 46626 VTTM 47863 Subiect Matter
41 44 Street drainage improvements
60 59 Grading plan
61 60 Detailed geotechnical report
and approval by City's geologist
62 61 Special geologic provisions due to
local landslide conditions
63
62
Drainage plans
64
63
Additional geotechnical and soils
report,.tests and monitoring
64
Establishment of a drainage
benefit assessment district
66
65
Special notice to purchasers by
CC&Rs
66
Construction to comply with the
approved drainage plan
78
78
Slope and street tree provisions,
landscaping, irrigaion and
maintenance by LMAD or HOA
79
79
Special access for slope
maintenance
80-81
81-82
Landscaping requirements
_
84
Preservation of Oak Tree
a
90-91
93
95
96-98
101
102
90
Special protection of neighboring
homes, landscaping and fencing
requirements
92
Inspection of adjacent 'residences
and complete notice to residents
98
Safety of adjacent residences and
complete notice to residents
93,94
Monitoring system for ground
movement, pre- and post- grading
with notification
96
Limit to small equipment only when
grading within 500 feet of
existing residences
97
Correction of slide on neighboring
property
101
Additional monitoring along
southern tract boundaries
102
Liability insurance
- 3 -
3
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
STAFF REPORT
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 91=004
DATE: July 16,.1991
TO: Chairman Brathwaite and Members of the Planning Commission
FROM: Lynn M. Harris, Director of Community Developments//_;
CASE PLANNER: Laura Stotler, Assistant Planner
APPLICANT: American Landmark
LOCATION: North of Whites Canyon Road between Nadal Street and Wildwind
Road.
REQUEST: The applicant is requesting to enter into a formal development
agreement to allow ten (10) years in which to record Vesting
Tentative Tract Map 47863 and ensure the City will allow
development of the project in accordance with standards
currently in effect. No other project approvals are considered
with VTTM 47863
BACKGROUND:
On March 20, 1990, the Planning Commission conditionally approved Vesting
Tentative Tract Map 47863 and the negative declaration prepared for this
project. The City Council subsequently approved the project on May 22, 1990.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The applicant, American Landmark, is requesting a development agreement for a
term of ten (10) years to complete VTTM 47863 and to protect themselves from
changes in development standards. The project consists of 80 single family
housing units on 32 acres in Canyon Country.
Under VTTM 47863 approval, American Landmark was conditioned to pay $5,300 in
Bridge and Thoroughfare fees per residential unit, and pay 50% of the cost for
a traffic signal at the intersection of "A" Street and Whites Canyon Road.
American Landmark together with Weston, the applicant for Vesting Tentative
Tract Map 46626, proposed to .satisfy the park obligation for both projects by
donating a 28 acre park site and $700,000 to the City, although this was.never
made a condition of .approval for either project.
�r
In consideration for the additional time requested, American Landmark would
make the contribution of its share of the park site and $199,500 of the
proposed $700,000 a condition of the Development Agreement. American Landmark
would also agree to pay an additional $720 per unit to be used by the City for
construction of bicycle trails. This development agreement is similar to
Development Agreement 91-003 for Veston's VTTM 46626.
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS:
State law requires all "projects" receive an environmental review and
determination. An "Initial Study" was prepared and certified for this project
during the public hearings for the tentative tract. Since no changes are
proposed in the project, a negative declaration was prepared based on the
earlier Initial Study.
ANALYSIS:
The approval of VTTM 47863 was given with the understanding by the applicant
and by the City that a development agreement would follow as stated in the
staff report for VTTM 47863 dated December 19, 1989. The Development
Agreement provides an additional time -period for the build -out of VTTM'47863
in exchange for funding toward development of bicycle trails in the City. It
also provides for the donation of a park site and money for park development
to satisfy a park obligation condition of approval for VTTM 47863.
Information given in the report about VTTM 47863 is offered as background only.
The project density of 2.5 units per acre is within the General Plan RL
designation for the area (Low Density Residential, 1.1 - 3.3 dwelling units
per acre, midpoint 2.2). With 81 units on 32 acres, the project exceeds the
midpoint density of the RL designation by.ten units. Because VTTM 47863 does
not include construction of roadways with regional benefits, the applicant was
conditioned to pay $5,300 per unit, or double the standard Bridge and
'Thoroughfare District fee in effect at the time.
The donation of the park site and $700,000 proposed by American Landmark and
Veston was never made a condition of approval for either VTTM 47863 or VTTM
46626 because it was to-be.used as consideration for developmentagreements
for both projects. The combined costs of the park dedication and cash
donation would be 3 to 4 times the amount of the park obligation for these
projects under the City code. American -Landmark and Weston have also
contributed the cost to process and record a parcel map (TPM 22398) on the
Ostrove property adjacent to the park site, upon the understanding that one
lot, Parcel 3 with 6.9 acres, would be donated to the City for a library site.
The proposed park/library site is. approximately 34 acres in area, .or twice the
size of the 17 -acre Canyon Country Park. The park would have a usable area of
12 acres. By. comparison, the usable area of Canyon Country Park is 9 -acres,
or 25Z smaller than the proposed park. The library would have a 2.5 acre pad
fronting Nadal Street and would be large enough to accommodate
Reso. P91-35
- 2 -
development of a 15,000 square foot library and a parking lot. In addition to
adequate parking for the library, an additional 100 spaces: would be provided
for use by Canyon High School, which has a shortage of off-street parking.
The $700;000 cash donation proposed by American Landmark and Weston would be
used for the grading'of the park/library site.
As additional consideration for a development agreement, American Landmark has
agreed to pay an additional $720 per dwelling unit for development of bicycle
trails. Weston has also agreed to pay the same additional fee which, when
combined, would provide the City with over $200,000 for bicycle trail
development within the City. Eventually, these bicycle trails would replace
the existing bicycle lane on Soledad Canyon Road between Whites Canyon Road
and Bouquet Canyon Road and allow a third traffic lane to be added each way on
Soledad Canyon Road.
The advantages of approving the requested Development Agreement are that the
dedication of the 28 acre park site and accompanying funds, would be
finalized. The contribution for bicycle trails would allow the City to design
and construct new bicycle trails, removing the need for a bicycle lane' on
Soledad Canyon Road. Additional traffic. lanes could be added to Soledad
Canyon Road within the existing right-of-way providing circulation benefits
for the community.
The disadvantages are that the project may not be constructed as quickly and
would be exempt from any new ordinances or moratoriums.
It is the opinion of staff that the applicant has or can satisfy. the
findings and requirements associated with the Development Agreement for
this project; and, therefore, staff recommends that the Planning
Commission:
1) Approve the attached Negative Declaration with the finding that the
proposed project will not have a significant effect on the
environment; and,
2) Recommend approval to the City Council of the Development Agreement
91-004 based on the required findings; and,
3). Adopt the attached Resolution P91-35.
LHS:232
Reso. P91-35
3 -
TIMELINE OF CONDITION PERFORMANCE
American Landmark Development Agreement
MCI 91-029, DA# 91-004
Prior to Recordation of Any Phase of either VTTM 46626 or VTTM 47863
* Dedication of 28 acre park site
At Building.Permit Issuance
* School fees shall be paid with the issuance of permits for each unit
* $199,500 shall be given to the .City upon issuance of permits for TT 47863
* $5,300 shall be paid per residential unit for BTD fees
* $720 shall be paid per residential unit for development of bicycle trails
within the City.
At Commencement of First Phase and Prior to Occuoancv
* Traffic signal at "A". Street and White's Canyon (to be built concurrently
with construction of the intersection)
LHS:228
RESOLUTION NO. P91-35
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING CO S? AFT
OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CAL
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNC
THE CITY ENTER INTO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 91-004 FOR
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 47863
WHEREAS, application for a vesting tentative tract map has been
considered and approved by the -City Council of the City of Santa Clarita on
May 22, 1990; and
WHEREAS, determination has been made by the City Council that a_
mitigated Negative Declaration be certified for the application; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Development Agreement does not alter the
environmental factors previously considered for the approved application; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has determined that the existing
certified mitigated Negative Declaration adequately addresses the proposed
Development Agreement for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 47863
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the
City of Santa Clarita does hereby certify the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and recommends to the City Council approval of Development Agreement 91-004,
subject to non -substantive revisions approved by the City Attorney or his
designee.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED this 6th day of August, 1991.
Jerry Cherrington
Chairman of the Planning Commission
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting
thereof, held on the 6th day of August, 1991, by the following vote:
ATTEST:
CITY CLERK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Lynn M. Harris
Deputy City Manager/
Community Development
LHS: 233
g
t
N
VICINITY MAP
DA 91--003
DA 91-004
TT 47863
vAA1-0ow
TT 46626
VA qi-w.3
FOXLANE DR.
gyp• - NADAL ST.
v4
� P
W t
SOLEDAD CYN. RD.
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA
N E G A T I V E D E C L A R A T I O N
[X] Proposed [ ] Final
PERMIT/PROJECT: Development Agreement 91-004
APPLICANT: American Landmark Development, Inc. MASTER CASE NO: 91---02q
LOCATION OF THE PROJECT:. North of Whites Canyon Road between Nadal Street
and Wildwind Road.
DESCRIPTION OF THE PROJECT: The applicant is requesting to enter ince ,
formal agreement to allow for a 10 year build .out. for Vesting Tentative
Tract Map 47863 consisting of 80 single family homes on 32 acres. This
negative declaration is based upon the Initial Study prepared for VTTM 47861
on November 29, 1989.
Based on the information contained in the Initial Study prepared for this
project, and pursuant to the requirements of Section 15065 of the Californi.
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); the City of Santa Clarita
[ ] City Council
[X] Planning Commission
[ ] Director of Community Development
finds that the project as proposed or revised will have no signiflcai:(
effect upon the environment, and that a Negative Declaration shall be
adopted pursuant to Section 15070 of CEQA.
Mitigation measures for this project
[ ) are not required. [X] are attached. [ ] are not attached.
LYNN M. HARRIS
DIRECTOR OF CO
Prepared
(Name/Title)
Approved b Donald M. Williams. Associate Planner
(Signa ure) (Name/Title)
Public Review Period From June 25, 1991 To July 16, 1991.
Public Notice Given On June 25: 1991 by:
[X] Legal advertisement. [X] Posting of properties. [X] Written notice.
CERTIFICATION DATE:
RESOLUTION NO. P91-35
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF SANTA CLARITA, CALIFORNIA,
RECOMMENDING TO THE CITY COUNCIL THAT
THE CITY ENTER INTO DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 91-004 FOR
VESTING TENTATIVE TRACT MAP 47863
WHEREAS, application for a vesting tentative tract map has been
considered and approved by the City Council of the City of Santa Clarita on
May 22, 1990; and
WHEREAS, determination has been made by the City Council that a
mitigated Negative Declaration be certified for the application; and
WHEREAS, the proposed Development Agreement does not alter the
environmental factors previously considered for the approved application; and
WHEREAS," the Planning Commission has. -determined that the existing
certified mitigated Negative Declaration adequately addresses the proposed
Development Agreement for Vesting Tentative Tract Map 47863
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the Planning Commission of the
City of Santa Clarita does hereby certify the Mitigated Negative Declaration
and recommends to the .City Council approval of Development. Agreement 91-004,
subject to non -substantive revisions approved by the City Attorney or his
designee.
PASSED, APPROVED AND ADOPTED �is 6th day�of%August, 1991.
7erry.Cherrington
Chairman of the Planning Commission
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing Resolution was duly adopted by
the Planning Commission of the City of Santa Clarita at a regular meeting
thereof, held on the 6th day of August, 1991, by the following vote:
// /
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF LOS ANGELES ) SS
CITY OF SANTA CLARITA )
AYES: COMMISSIONERS: Cherrington, Woodrow, Brathwaite and Modugno
NOES: None
ABSENT: None'
n M. Harris
eputy City Manager/
Community Development
LHS:233
RECEIVER
SEP 17 1991
LYNN M. HARRIS
Olreetof of Community Day.
William S. Hart Union High School District
September 13, 1991
Mr. Carl Boyer, Mayor
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Blvd., 3rd Floor
Valencia, CA 91355
Dear Mr. Boyer:
The Wm. S. Hart Union High School District has entered into a
mitigation agreement with the owners of Tract Nos.' 47385 and 46626.
Based upon the agreement, the district will receive a minimum of
$3,439 per dwelling unit. This is significantly more than the state -
required fee. In addition, the owner will be bound to the agreement
even if a valley -wide mitigation fee is developed and agreed upon.
It is my understanding that, the developer has agreed to make land
available for public use, including park land, a library site, and
approximately 175 ,spaces for off-street parking. The parking space
and the field space that could be developed in the proposed park
would be of significant value to the school district.
Because of the benefits to the school district, we would support the
developer request for a development agreement.
Very truly yours
Hamilton C h, Fd. D.
Superinten t
HCS:af
cc: Mr. John A. Ashkar, Weston Development
Mr. Alex Bowie, Bowie, Arneson, Kadi & Dixon
Mr. George Caravalho, City Manager
Mr. Jeff Kolin, Director, Parks and Recreation
City of Santa Clarita
Wm.,S. Hart UHSD Board of Trustees
RECEIVED
SEP 1 b 1991
CITY CCLtMC1
CITY 0, SANTA CLARITA
21515 Redview Drive. Santa Clarita, Catifomia 91350 805259-0033 FAX 805 254-8653
MURRAY GOLUB, REALTOR®
44407 N. 10th Street West
P O. Box 2437
Lancaster. California 93539
Business (805) 948-6066
Fax(805)948-5597
City Council
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard
Santa Clarita•, CA 91355
September 17, 1991
Re: PUBLIC HEARING -VESTING TENTATIVE
TRACT MAP 47863
I am one of the owners of approximately 80 acres of unimproved property des-
cribed as the East half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 9, Township 4
North, Range 15 West, SBBM.
On June 27th 1991 1 sent a protest letter, copy enclosed, to the Director of
Community Development opposing the acceptance of a negative declaration for
the above mentioned project. Our objection is based upon the fact that our
property will be deprived of reasonable future access by the approval of a
10 year build out period for the subject property.
I am now requesting that the City Council deny approval of the ten year
build out of the above mentioned project until reasonable access can be as-
sured to all adjacent properties.
I submit that General Plans are not frozen in concrete. The changing na-
ture of General Plans has been amply demonstrated by past Council actions.
Actions of local governments throughout the State of California, continual-
ly change allowable land uses on previously adopted General Plans. ,Your
body has elected to include our property in it's Sphere of Influence. Your
approval of a ten year build out period for the above project will deprive
our property and other adjacent properties of reasonable access and will
adversely impact our development potential.
It is further requested that this letter be entered in the record of the
hearing on this matter to preserve our ability to further challenge the
decision of the Council, if necessary.
CENTU Y 21 Murray Golub, Realtor
Murray Go. GRI
Real Estat and Land Use Consultant
MG/dic
Each Office is Independently Owned And Operated
COPIES TO CITY COUNCIL,
CITY MANAGER, CITY CLERK
.3k.
5 R
Date
GEIV EO
Sip 18 1991
CQY.Cou„CI ^QITA
CITY Of SANT A CL
Investment Property Sales
t fuly.,
F .l 3
MURRAY GOLUB, REALTOR®
44407 N. 10th Street West
P. Q Box 2437
Lancaster, California 93539
(805)948-6066
June 27, 1991
Ms Lynn M Harris
Director of Community Development
City of Santa Clarita
23920 Valencia Boulevard, Ste. 300
Santa Clarita, CA 91355
RE: Master Case Number 91-028
Development Agreement 91-003
Weston Development Corporation
Dear Ms. Harris,
Enclosed is a print of a topographic map showing in yellow an 80
acre parcel that I am half owner of. The parcel is described as
the East Half of the Southwest Quarter of Section 9 Township 4
North, Range 15 West, SBM.
Please note that Tentative Tract Map 46018 (Shapell Properties) is
contiguous to our northerly and the north half of our westerly
property lines. Tentative Tract Map 46018 as approved,' does not
provide any access, or future access for our parcel.
We also find that the.City of Santa Clarita in approving Vesting
Tentative Tract Map 46626 again did not provide access for our
property now or in the future.
I find that a NEGATIVE DECLARATION for this project is inadequate.
Our parcel has been landlocked by the City of Santa Clarita and
this proposed project and is consequently adversely impacted.
I therefore protest the approval of the appl-icants request and
request that the City of Santa Clarita take the necessary action to
provide access to our parcel from contiguous projects.
Yours very truly,
/CE�� URRYY 21 Murray Golub, Realtor
=7URRAYL
B, RIReal Eand Land Use Consultant
Each Office Is Independently Owned And Operated REA®' lnvestmentPro arty Sales
P
MURRAY GOLUB
42844 NORTH 19TH STREET WEST , L-ANCASTER, CALIFORNIA 93534
Location Map
/i Kci�on Sudd2r
(`iSmPL
tt
Cam A .\ i. -v y�,> ✓I�Ji
�- /9.,? .i ..• it r� • ' �.- I �^" J .:) i J.� ' •j- r. � .
J
_ /
JEEP
- •ETR ks .;._r . � .� ".' 2�;� / a•: i' •
• e
wat
-
'rJ
p J�••
.10
am
sm
:4•r�-�.� � .,�' �.�i if .��r^i� ?. . ` 'J��.. -v •, �•'-.'1�'i',)IIt .e•".��'• '� i
.p �5
j•.t y �- »z..• I n t f ( c
8M �� j�Y -..:_,.. i �a�t I21 •SO6lint �Ci...y �•":
1357 'ZO� ��A .•:..1: •'14;:� - _ �
'SO EDAD CANYCi'10..r,w tD t
r . ...:.,.,
TOls ?R15WP SBM
City of
Santa Clarita
Carl Boyer, 3rd
Mayor
Jill Klajic
Mayor Pro -Tem
Jo Anne Darcy
Councilmember
23920 Valencia Blvd.
Suite 300
City of Santa Clarita
California 91355
September 24, 1991
Phone
(805) 259.2489
Fax
(805) 259-8125
Mr. Murray Golub, Realtor
Century 21
44407 N. 10th Street West
Lancaster, California 93539
Rae yFN TA C`*9f
a
v 9
Dear .Mr. .Golub:
Thank you for your letter to the City Council regarding your
86 -acre parcel. You abut the.Weston tract of 201 single-family
lots.
When the Weston map was approved, it was with'the understanding
that it was an urban -infill project, and furthermore that the
project would complete the urbanized area and very little
additional traffic would be funneled westerly through the
project to Whites Canyon Road.
Jan Heidt Our traffic engineer stated at the public hearing that possibly
Councilmember the equivalent of 30 additional .homes could use the- proposed
street system from the east. On that basis, a tap street was
Councilmember How"Suck" McKeon provided to the parcel directly to the south of your property.
I believe your best access will be to the north (Plum Canyon
Road) or possibly to coordinate with the landowner directly to
your south if you develop at a low density. The creation of a
second tap street through the steep terrain abutting your land
would not be sensible given the traffic limitations I've
mentioned above.
You have .stated objection to the Negative Declaration but have
not demonstrated environmental reasons. I believe it is
because the City did such exhaustive analysis of the Weston and
Landmark cases in terms of traffic, geology and regional
benefits that the Negative Declaration does meet the test of
CEQA requirements.
Sincerely,
M. Morris
Deputy City Manager/
Community Development
LMM:RM:1f:110