Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutBoyle Engineering Corporation - 1996-12-16F30VLE E/' al 7EERU')G CORP0N)RTX" CONSULTINO ENOINEERB/ARCHITECTS 1501 Quail Street P.O. Box 3030 714 / 476 - 3300 Newport Beach, CA 92658-9020 FAX 714 / 721 - 7142 Les M. Jones, Director of Public Works January 2, 1997 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Revised Proposal for Professional Services Holly/Seacliff Cost Reimbursement Study for Excess Capacity This is a follow-up to our December 19, 1996, meeting regarding the City Council's actions regarding engineering studies for the Holly/Seacliff Development Agreement and its terms for reimbursement of "excess" capacity. The following points summarize our understanding of the present status of the agreement and the Council's desires for studies involving developing a methodology for a reimbursement procedure that meets the intent of the November, 1990 Holly/Seacliff Agreement. BACKGROUND Considerable infrastructure will be required to support the proposed Holly/Seacliff Development. It is our understanding that the following documents are in place at the present time to support the subject development: November, 1990 Development Agreement executed between the City of Huntington Beach and Pacific Coast Homes and Garfield Pacific Partners (Developer). Section 2.2.5 of this Agreement specifies water, sewer, drainage, and utility improvements with a caveat for the water system [paragraph (h)] that reimbursement shall be in accordance with provision 2.2.11. Section 2.2.11 of the Agreement establishes "Reimbursement" with the intent to establish a procedure to pay the Developer for "excess capacity" that will serve later developments. Furthermore, the following report has been completed to allocate the costs of "excess, capacity" that will benefit other developments, January 18, 1994 engineer's Report entitled "Holly/Seacliff Cost Reimbursement District No. 93-1" that establishes criteria for costs to be borne by the Holly/Seacliff Development and the estimated reimbursable costs that will benefit other developments. Les M. Jones Page 2 January 2, 1997 More recently, PLC submitted a document entitled "Infrastructure Financing Program for the Holly/Seacliff Area, Capacity and Cost Analysis," dated December 19, 1996 to the City. This report provides PLC's analysis of capacity for the Holly/Seacliff area and excess capacity allocated to others, including their opinion of City -Wide benefits and cost allocations. , STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM As we understand the situation, the current Developer(s) for Holly/Seacliff is not the same party who originally negotiated the Development Agreement with the City, leading to potential re- interpretation of the terms and conditions negotiated relative to reimbursement for excess capacity water, sewer, drainage, and utility infrastructure. Specifically, the Developer recently suggested to the City that the nine million gallon water storage reservoir required in Section 2.2.5(h) need only be a six MG reservoir to satisfy the Holly/Seacliff development, with capacity beyond this amounting to "excess capacity" that should be reimbursed. The current developer, PLC, has suggested that the City should anticipate differences of interpretation on the allocation method that will determine how much of the Developer's costs are required by the development and how much is attributed to provide excess capacity. In the case of the nine million gallon reservoir, this could lead to the Developer contending that a smaller reservoir is all that is needed, and that the City should reimburse them for any "excess" capacity to achieve nine million gallons of capacity. The City needs to be prepared to demonstrate how it defines excess capacity and the costs are allocated between the Holly/Seacliff Development and other developments. SCOPE OF WORK We recommend that a series of tasks be developed to provide an opportunity for a pro -active stance by the City with information provided to the Engineering Department, City Administrator, and Council before future meetings with the Developer. This would put the City staff in a better position to deal with the Developer in anticipation of their advancing concepts regarding cost— reimbursement for excess capacity. This approach would provide flexibility in responding to the Developer and providing information to you as required, and is based on the following phases: Task 1. As the fast pro -active step, determine the basic findings from a review of the Development Agreement, past reports, correspondence, and other submittals by the Developer. The following sub -tasks will be performed: a.) Review (and digest) the December 19, 1997 report submitted by PLC entitled "Infrastructure Financing Program," including any other information of file with the City. 0C-B99-197-00kb/P-U0197.doc Les M. Jones Page 3 January 2, 1997 b.) Meet with City Staff, City Administrator, Council Subcommittee (if requested) and PLC to determine the process for a cost analysis to achieve intent of the Holly/Seacliff Agreement (budgeted in Task 3). c.) Summarize in technical letter report to City that would be submitted in draft form for comments by City and finalized. Deliverable: Letter report to City would summarize findings with emphasis on consistencies (if any) and the validity of information developed to date. The report would recommend how to proceed with alternative allocation methods and cost for which would be performed in Task 2. C .•- 111 Task 2. Provide an in-depth cost analysis (include using as much of PLC's December 19, 1996 report as possible) to evaluate excess capacity for water, sewer, storm drains, and utility improvements. In our experience, the most rigorous methodology to determine "excess capacity" is to lay out the proposed development at ultimate build - out and model two scenarios for each type of infrastructure: the first scenario is to determine the size of facilities required to only support the development; and the second is to size facilities to serve the development plus the maximum area of benefit that could be served. a.) Analysis of Sewer Capacity requirements for Holly/Seacliff and other beneficiaries. b.) Analysis of Storm Drain Capacity and other beneficiaries. c.) Analysis of Arterial Street Capacity and other beneficiaries. d.) Analysis of Domestic Water Capacity and other beneficiaries. e.) Analysis of Non -Domestic Water Capacity and other beneficiaries. f.) Prepare alternative methods for allocating costs of capacity to Holly/Seacliff and other beneficiaries. Deliverable: Report with supporting technical data for each scenarios analysis. The report would provide alternative allocation methods for the cost of excess capacity with advantages and disadvantages of each methodology. Task 3. Participation in meeting with the Developer as requested during this process in order to clarify their position. This could be followed up with strategy sessions with the OC-B99-197-OOkb1P-U0197.doc Les M. Jones Page 4 January 2, 1997 City to determine how to enforce the Agreement. It's our experience that this process becomes somewhat iterative as a Developer and the City work though this process until a final conclusions reached that is mutually acceptable to both parties. Task 4. The conclusion of this process should result in a mutually agreeable cost allocation for excess capacity. This will be memorialized in a final report after review by the City. De iverable: Brief Final Report that summarizes the findings. STAFF This assignment will be accomplished primarily with myself and Bill Everest, and support staff as required. This will take maximum advantage of Bill's on -going involvement with the Water Master Plan (including a similar analysis for Koll's Bolsa, Chica development). We will draw on other technical resources, including specialty subcontractors, as the need arises. COST We have provided budgets for four tasks, however, this assignment will require some flexibility among the estimated fee for the four tasks due to the unknown amount of effort until meetings are held with the Developer and we can begin to see how solid their position is on the excess capacity issues. We know, at this point that PLC has retained an engineering firm to perform an analysis that rationalizes PLC's position? Some of the budgeted tasks may be under, and some over individual line items, so we request the capability to adjust line item budgets as we progress on the four tasks within the total budget of $70.000. We will notify you when we are at 80% of the total budget to determine if the level of effort to complete assignments needs to be adjusted. We proposed to bill you for this effort on a time and material basis in accordance with the attached fee schedules. - Thank you for the opportunity to propose on this challenging assignment. Boyle Engineering Corporation actor on 4Vice Regionalesident 0C-B99-197-00kb/P-U0I 97.doc EXHIBIT' A HOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Boyle Engineering Corporation December 1, 1996 City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Project Engineers, Planners, Architects, Landscape Architects, Geologists, Scientists: Vice President/Project Manager $177.00 per hour Principal $150.00 per hour Senior II $125.00 per hour Senior I $105.00 per hour Associate $ 95.00 per hour Assistant II $ 80.00 per hour Assistant I $ 70.00 per hour Construction Administration Personnel: Senior Resident Engineer $115.00 per hour Senior Resident Project Representative $ 90.00 per hour Resident Project Representative $ 75.00 per hour Technical Support Staff: Designer Supervisor $ 95.00 per hour Senior Technician/Senior Designer $ 82.00 per hour Engineering Technician/Designer $ 71.00 per hour Senior Drafter $ 65.00 per hour Drafter $ 51.00 per hour Design CADD Supervisor $ 90.00 per hour Design CADD Operator $ 62.00 per hour CADD Operator $ 58.00 per hour Technical Typist/Word Processor $ 52.00 per hour Programmer/Analyst $ 75.00 per hour Paralegal/Editor $ 67.00 per hour Public Information/Forensic Specialist $ 66.00 per hour Administrative Specialist $ 48.00 per hour Staff Accountant $ 44.00 per hour Direct Project Expenses: Photocopies - Color $ 2.50 per page Photocopies - Black & White/Fax $ 0.20/1.60 per page Communications Charges $ 1.50 per hour Plan Sheet Printing - In-house Bond/Mylar $0.402.80 per square foot Travel - Automobile/Truck $0.60 per mile Travel - Other Than Automobile Actual Cost + 15% Subconsultant Services Actual Cost + 15% Subcontracted Services/Reproduction Actual Cost + 15% Computer Services and Computer Aided Design See Separate Schedule If authorized by the client, an overtime premium multiplier of 1.5 will be applied to the billing rate of hourly personnel who work overtime in order to meet a deadline which cannot be met during normal hours. Applicable sales taxes, if any, will be added to these rates. Corporate officers, Managing Principals, and Consulting Engineers will be billed at 1.2 times the stated rate for Principal. Invoices will be rendered monthly. Payment is due upon presentation. A late payment finance charge of 1.5% per month (but not exceeding the maximum rate allowable by law) will be applied to any unpaid balance commencing 30 days after the date of the original invoice. STANDARD RATE SCHEDULE COMPUTER SERVICES Boyle Engineering Corporation City of Huntington Beach Hewlett Packard HP 3000/925 Super Minicomputer System Terminal, Printer or Plotter Resource Charge - SURGE analysis Electrostatic Plotter - HP 7600 (Includes computer time to drive the plotter) Microcomputers (Personal Computers) Microcomputer System with Laser Printer Resource Charges for Microcomputers $33.00 per hour $ 6.00 per min. $37.50 per hour $12.25 per hour Resource charges are in addition to the above rates and cover the use of special purpose software and extra equipment such as pen plotters, high resolution monitors, and digitizers which are used with CADD software. AutoCAD Computer Aided Design $ 15.00 per hour STAAD III - Structural Design $ 15.90 per hour MicroStation (Intergraph) CADD $ 15.00 per hour AES HYDRO - Hydrologic Analysis $ 52.50 per hour SCADA - Structural Analysis $ 12.00 per hour BoyleNet - Water Distrib Analysis $ 5.00 per hour DAPPER - Electrical Design $ 75.00 per hour EXKYPIPE - Water Distrib Analysis $ 10.00 per hour CAPTOR - Overcurrent Analysis $108.00 per hour BoyleCOGO - Coordinate Geometry $ 4.00 per hour Trane TRACE - HVAC Design $58.50 per hour BDTM - Digital Terrain Model $ 5.00 per hour Carrier HVAC System Design $46.50 per hour BOYLEPLAN - Project Management $ 10.00 per hour PRIMAVERA - Project Management $58.50 per hour SWAN - Sanitary Sewer Analysis $ 10.00 per hour BFMS - Facilities Management $18.75 per hour CONTOURS - Contour Plotting $ 10.00 per hour G WFM - Groundwater Modeling V 5.00 per hour LARSA - Structural Analysis $ 7.50 per hour TERRAMODEL V3.50 per hour HASS - Sprinkler Analysis $162.00 per hour GEOPAK - Highway Design $15.00 per hour ICPR - Drainage Design $ 60.00 per hour BREEZE - Air Pollution Modeling $550.00 SAP90 - Structural Analysis $157.50 per hour Other Notes Charges for outside computer services will be billed at invoice cost plus twenty-five percent. This rate schedule is subject to general revision annually. New equipment categories and resource charges may be added at any time. OC-B99-197-o0kb/P-1J0197/doc Council/Agency Meeting Held: Deferred/Continued to: Ik(Ap rov ❑ Conditij(�� Wally Approved nY Den1y'ed City CI rk' Signa e - n.. ®n 0_ /'�Yw.w �. /� ii..�- __•�ff`. _ J11w is -n n- Council Meeting Date: !/ DECEMB R 1 , 1996 I(J Depa ment ID Number: PW 96-092 ;16') CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL SUBMITTED BY: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, CITY ADMINISTRA R �-- PREPARED BY: OES M. JONES II, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: Holly/Seacliff Cost Reimbursement Analysis Statement of Issue, Funding Source, Recommended Action, Alternative Action(s), Analysis, Environmental Status, Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: Pursuant to the Holly/Seacliff Development Agreement, the City shall use its best efforts to obtain for the Developer reimbursement from future developers the cost of oversized facilities within the Specific Plan area. City staff is, therefore, attempting to exercise those best efforts by pursuing the development of a reimbursement analysis. Funding Source: Fund Balance - General Fund Recommended Action: 1. Authorize the Mayor to execute an agreement with Boyle Engineering Corporation in the amount of $70,000 in payment for the preparation of a Cost Reimbursement Analysis relating to the Holly/Seacliff Development Agreement. 2. Approve a total appropriation of $ 77,000.from undesignated General Funds which includes $70,000 to fund said agreement with Boyle and $7,000 for anticipated change orders. Alternative Action(s): 1. Direct staff not to proceed with such a Cost Reimbursement Analysis. 2. Direct that the staff conduct such a Cost Reimbursement Analysis, in-house. It must be noted that, although staff is fully capable of conducting such an analysis, manpower is unavailable for such a significant undertaking. 3. Direct staff to proceed with this project once PLC agrees to fund the cost. 1 F�- - a REQUEST FOR ACTION MEETING DATE: DECEMBER 16, 1996 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PW 96-092 Analysis: In November of 1990, a Development Agreement was executed between the City of Huntington Beach and Pacific Coast Homes/Garfield Partners (collectively, "Developer") regarding the proposed development of the Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan. Development has proceeded in the Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan area from that time under the provisions of said Development Agreement and has continued with PLC Land Company, the successors to the original Developer. Section 2.2.11(f) of the Development Agreement states, "The City shall use its best efforts to the extent allowed by law to obtain for Developer the maximum Reimbursable Costs available under this Sub -Section from future development served by any facility, a portion of the cost of which is reimbursable hereunder". In 1991, the original Developer hired a consultant to prepare a proposed "Reimbursement District" which was presented to the City Council. Many owners of un-developed land within the Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan Area opposed various components of the plan. Ultimately, the City Council rejected the proposed "Reimbursement District" as it was presented. Since that time, the original Developer prepared one additional analysis which was presented to staff. That analysis included recommended reimbursements to come from such sources as City-wide assessment districts as well as from the owners of un-developed land within the Specific Plan area. City staff rejected that approach. Since the Development Agreement clearly states that the "City shall use its best efforts" to obtain reimbursement for the Developer, staff felt that a more proactive approach would be advisable. Staff has, therefore, negotiated an agreement with Boyle Engineering, the professional consultant in charge of the Water Master Plan and the Water Financing Plan, to develop a complete analysis of the Holly/Seacliff Development Agreement with regard to reimbursement. It is felt by staff that, since a major component of the Development Agreement is the nine million gallon reservoir, Boyle would be the most logical consultant to be employed for such a study. Tasks for the consultant include, reviewing the Development Agreement and past approaches presented by the Developer, preparing a separate plan which employs the fairest approach and, ultimately, assisting City staff in their negotiations with the Developer in order to cooperatively develop a final product acceptable to all parties. PLC Land Company has been asked to fund this study. They have indicated that they will consider it, pending further discussion. Ultimately, this cost would be folded into any future reimbursement district or other reimbursement mechanism. At the conclusion of this study, it is anticipated that a final phase would be the development of the actual reimbursement document. 0022601.01 -2- 12/05/96 3:19 PM REQUEST FOR ACTION MEETING DATE: DECEMBER 16, 1996 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PW 96-092 Environmental Status: Not Applicable Attachment(s): List attachment(s) below. -Page Number No. Description Start Numbering 1. Agreement with Boyle Engineering 2. F.I.S. MTU: LMJ: REE:Ib 0022601.01 -3- 12/04/96 4:53 PM CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICA TION To: Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator From: Robert J. Franz, Deputy City Administrator Subject: FIS 97-10 Boyle/Holly Seacliff Reimbursement Analysis Date: December 4, 1996 As required by Resolution 4832, a Fiscal Impact Statement has been prepared for for $77,000 for the Boyle/Holly Seacliff Reimbursement Analysis, rn If the City Council approves this request, the estimated, fund balance of ,the General Fund at September 30, 1997 will be reduced to $6,117,271. Robert J—Franz, / Deputy City Administrator • FIS9710 Adopted Current Fund Balance - General Fund Budget Estimate Beginning Fund Balance $ 3,227,959 $ 6,699,000 Budget Surplus/(Shortfall) 356,590 356,590 Less Approved One -Time Costs (423,319) Less: Pending Budget Amendments (438,000) Less FIS 97-10 (77,000) Plus PERS Refund Estimated 9/30/97 Balance $ 3,584,549 $ 6,117,271 $6,500,000 $6,000,000 $5,500,000 $5,000,000 $4,500,000 $4,000,000 $3,500,000 $3,000,000 $2,500,000 $2,000,000 G:IHCCTGgFIS.XLSJFIS9710 Fund Balance - General Fund Adopted Revised Budaet Estimate. Page 1 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH MEETING DATE: December 8, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PW 97-101 Council/Agency Meeting Held:!/g197 Deferred/Continued to: l`A proved El Conditionally pproved El Denied 7-0 4c City Cle 's Signature Council Meeting Date: December 8, 1997 Department ID Number: PW 97-101 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH m X REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION L - SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS -- co -f<orn �.,rm SUBMITTED BY: RAY SILVER, Acting City Administrator o2AJ cZ PREPARED BY: LES M. JONES II, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: Accept the Boyle Report on Holly/Seacliff Reimbur nt Statement of Issue, Funding Source, Recommended Action, Alternative Action(s), Analysis, Environmental Status, Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: On December 16, 1996, the City Council hired Boyle Engineering Corporation to conduct an exhaustive cost reimbursement analysis for the Holly/Seacliff development. The completed analysis has been reviewed extensively by a City Council sub -committee and is now ready for full City Council acceptance. Funding Source: A budget of $77,000 in General Funds has been set aside for this effort. Recommended Action: Motion to: Accept and File the Boyle Engineering Holly/Seacliff Reimbursement Analysis. a-d/ � � �."" en��"eo ,/ee�- Heniternative Actionls): Reje t yleInineering Ho y/Seacliff Reimbursement Analysis and send it back to the City Council sub -committee for further review. Analysis: On December 16, 1997, the City Council hired Boyle Engineering Corporation to conduct an exhaustive cost reimbursement analysis for the Holly/Seacliff development 7".I.-� pursuant to the City Council adopted Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan and the Holly/Seacliff l�,e Development Agreement. 4 � 0029176.01 -2- 12/03/97 4:38 PM'~ J REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: December 8, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PW 97-101 At the same time, the Mayor appointed a City Council sub -committee to work with the consultant and systematically review, in public meetings, the findings within the Analysis. After Task I of the Analysis was completed by Boyle, the first meeting of the City Council sub -committee was conducted on March 25, 1997. A total of eight meetings of the sub- committee have taken place. The sub -committee has completed its review of the Boyle Reimbursement Analysis and is hereby submitting the Analysis to the City Council for review and acceptance. Agreement has been reached between City Staff and PLC on the fair -share reimbursement as proposed in the Boyle Analysis, for: 1. Police/ Fire 2. Reclaimed Water 3. Arterial Highways 4. Sewers 5. Storm Drains 6. Reimbursement Agreement Mechanism 7. Mechanism for Binding Arbitration The two parties continue to disagree on Water Facilities. The Boyle Analysis proposes that, for the Water Reservoir, the Developer's fair share is 8.2 million gallons of the 9 million gallon reservoir. Other property owners within the Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan Area would reimburse the Developer the equivalent of 0.8 million gallons, once each one develops. PLC contends that the Developer share of the Water Reservoir should be no more than 3 million gallons and that other property owners within the Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan Area would reimburse the Developer the equivalent of 6 million gallons, once each one develops. The Boyle Analysis lays out the process to be followed if PLC should chose to appeal the fair -share reimbursement determination made by the Director of Public Works. Environmental Status: Not applicable 0029176.01 -3- 12/03/97 4:41 PM REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: December 8, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PW 97-101 Attachment(s): List attachment(s) below. RCA Author: Robert E. Eichblatt boyleanalysis/doc#29176 0029176.01 -4- 12/03/97 4:41 PM RCA ROUTING SHEET INITIATING DEPARTMENT: PUBLIC WORKS SUBJECT: Accept the Boyle Analysis on Holly/Seacliff Reimbursement COUNCIL MEETING DATE: I December 8, 1997 RCA ATTACHMENTS:::, - STATUS Ordinance (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Resolution (w/exhibits & legislative draft if applicable) Not Applicable Tract Map, Location Map and/or other Exhibits Not Applicable Contract/Agreement (w/exhibits if applicable) Signed in full by the City Attorney) Not Applicable Subleases, Third Party Agreements, etc. (Approved -as to form by City Attorney) Not Applicable Certificates of Insurance (Approved by the City Attorney) Not Applicable Financial Impact Statement (Unbudget, over $5,000) Not Applicable Bonds (If applicable) Not Applicable Staff Report (If applicable) Not Applicable Commission, Board or Committee Report (if applicable) Not Applicable Findings/Conditions for Approval and/or Denial Not Applicable EXPLANATION FOR MISSING ATTACHMENTS .REVIEWED RETURNED FORWARDED. Administrative Staff Assistant City Administrator (initial) City Administrator Initial City Clerk _.::.. EXPLANATION FOR RETURN OF ITEM:: RCA Author: f • • MINUTES HOLLY SEACLIFF CONSTRUCTION FINANCING COMMITTEE Council Committee: Staff Liaison: Staff Present: September 30, 1997 Tuesday 3:00 p.m. - Council Committee Shirley Dettloff Dave Garofalo Tom Harman Ray Silver Ray Silver Les Jones Bob Eichblatt Daryl Smith Marybeth Broeren Paul D'Alessandro Huntington Beach Civic Center 2000 Main Street Room B-6 Consultant: Vic Opincar, Regional Vice President Boyle Engineering Bill Everest, Boyle Engineering Council Member Dave Garofalo opened the meeting. Les Jones, Director of Public Works, recapped a meeting which took place at 1:0.0 p.m. between Public Works Staff, Boyle Engineering and property owners in the Holly Seacliff General Plan Amendment area on Tuesday, September 30, 1997. The purpose of the two hour meeting was to provide a question and answer session for the property owners regarding the estimated changes per parcel within this area. 1. Public Comments Mike Ramsey, property owner, stated that the Traffic Impact Report was based on•a two-lane highway. He stated that the two-lane highway the report is based on is now a four -lane highway. • 2. Review and approval of minutes from August 12, 1997, and September 9, 1997 A motion was made by Council Member Garofalo, seconded by Council Member Harman, • to approve minutes of the Holly Seacliff Construction Financing Committee minutes dated . August 12, 1997, and September 9, 1997. The motion passed 3-0. 3. Presentation of revised estimated water reservoir excess capacity - Eichblatt/Opincar A summary of the detailed cost breakdown was prepared based on the analysis in Section 5 "Water Reimbursement Analysis." A summary of the detailed cost breakdown is provided in Table 11 attached. The following qualifiers should be noted: Costs are based on the total estimated water facilities costs shown in Table 3-B which suggest that Holly/Seacliff and others should share in the oversizing that is required, and the "Holly/Seacliff Others" allocation by Boyle shown in Table 4-A which presents a comparison of prior cost allocations by Willdan and Walden, both of which differ from Boyle's recommendation to the City, based on the 3,780 unit analysis that would not result in a further storage deficiency problem in the west side of the city. Capacity for each parcel is based on allocation of ultimate land use, except industrial -zoned property is assessed at $300/acres ($100 minimum). 4. Estimated cost spread to parcels for preliminary cost reimbursement to developer on water infrastructure - Eichblatt/Opincar Please see Table 11 (attached) referred to in Item #3 of the minutes. 5. Possible dates for City Council workshop A City Council Workshop is scheduled for Monday December 8, 1997, at 6:30 p.m. 6. Adjournment The meeting was adjourned to the December 8, 1997 City Council Workshop is HOLLY SEACLIFF CONSTRUCTION FINANCING COMMITTEE • SIGN -IN SHEET 9/30/97 NAME ADDRESS TELEPHONE a MMEA o • �� / G2ovr� !/�� (( ► �(�,2 lac /�-e'�'�u,2 �v� ��� c� ka,)yi/2 e t '�� dr)i �c, I ��;u:�✓,�U 0 U • Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Water Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 26,1997 Table 11 ry W � •, `PaTcc[Numbers, Landu"se k�a} Reimbursement;',�, 110-210-01 RL 3.79 $35,900 110-210-02 RL 1.41 $13,400 110-210-03 RL 0.35 $3,300 110-210-04 RL 0.12 $1,100 110-210-06 RL 0.48 $4,500 110-210-10 RL 0.79 57,500 110-211 RL 1.85 517,500 110-212 RL 2.00 519,000 110-213 RL 1.00 59,500 110-220-02 RL 4.59 $43,500 110-220-03 RL 2.79 S26,400 I10-220-04 RL 1.81 517,200 110-220-05 RL 5.00 $47,400 110-221 RL 1.70 $16,100 110-222 RL 3.30 531,300 111-110-01 I 1.00 $300 111-110-02 I 1.00 5300 111-110-03 I 1.00 1 $300 111-110-04 I 1.82 $500 111-110-07 I 0.34 $100 111-110-10 I 0.11 $100 111-110-14 I 0.11 $100 111-110-15 I 0.09 S100 111-110-18 1 2.00 5600 111-110-19 I 1.00 $300 111-110-20 I 1.00 $300 111-110-21 1 0.50 $200 111-I10-22 I 0.50 ' $200 111-110-31 1 0.23 $100 111-110-32 I 1.01 $300 111-110-33 I 0.11 5100 111-110-34 I 0.03 $100 111-110-36 I 0.17 $100 111-110-37 I 0.17 5100 111-110-38 1 1.01 5300 111-120-01 RL 0.88 589300 111-120-06 1 0.93 S300 111-120-07 I 0.93 $300 111-120-08 I 1.00 $300 111-120-09 I 0.81 $200 111-120-11 1 0.05 $100 111-120-12 I 0.12 $100 111-120-13 I 0.12 1100 111-120-14 1 0.12 5100 REVISED 9/26/97 Page 13-2 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Water Cost Reimbursement for • "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 26, 1997 • Table 11 ParceLNombers L ndu Are"a E't, Zl� 111-120-15 1 0.12 $100 111-120-16 1 0.24 1 $100 111-120-17 1 0.12 $100 111-120-18 1 0.12 $100 111-120-19 1 0.12 $100 111-120-20 1 0.23 $100 111-120-22 1 1.00 $300 111-120-23 1 1.00 $300 111-120-24 1 1.00 $300 111-120-25 1 1.00 $300 111-120-26 1 1.00 $300 111-120-27 1 1.86 $600 111-120-28 RL 0.88 $8,300 111-120-29 1 0.94 $300 111-120-30 1 0.14 $100 111-130-01 1 0.17 $100 111-130-02 1 0.25 S100 111-130-05 1 0.15 S100 111-130-06 1 0.17 S100 111-130-07 1 0.17 $100 111-130-08 1 0.17 S100 111-130-09 1 0.33 S100 111-130-11 1 0.08 $100 111-130-12 1 0.08 $100 111-130-14 1 0.61 S200 111-130-15 1 1.00 $300 111-130-24 1 1.00 S300 111-130-25 1 0.61 S200 111-130-26 1 0.25 $100 111-130-27 1 0.07 $100 111-130-28 1 0.07 S100 111-140-02 1 0.08 $100 111-140-04 1 0.17 S100 111-140-05 1 0.17 $100 111-140-06 1 0.33 $100 111-140-07 1 0.33 $100 111-140-08 1 0.17 S100 111-140-09 1 0.17 $100 111-140-10 1 0.14 $loo 111-140-14 1 1.00 S300 111-140-15 1 1.00 $300 111-140-16 1 0.99 S300 111-140-19 1 0.97 S300 111-140-20 1 0.20 S100 REVISED 9/26/97 Page 13-3 • • • Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Water Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 26,1997 Table 11 Y Parcel Numbers,,-, rLanau'se, ;Area'. sic. ' -K,' Estimat &`,°11-,, .: Re�mbgrserrient`;�_,-. Cost Wate ;x ky 111-140-21 I 0.50 $200 111-140-22 1 0.30 $100 111-140-23 I 1.00 $300 111-140-24 1 1.00 S300 111-140-25 I 1.00 $300 111-140-26 1 0.35 $100 111-140-27 I 0.26 1 $100 111-140-36 1 0.08 $100 111-140-37 I 0.17 $100 111-140-38(-01) I 0.33 $100 111-150-13 RA1 0.17 $1,600 111-150-15 Rb1 0.69 $6,500 111-150-16 RM 0.69 $6,500 111-150-17 RINI 1.38 $13,100 111-150-19 R1NI 0.50 $4,700 111-150-20 RD1 0.44 $4,200 111-150-21 RA7 0.37 $39500 159-402-02 RL 0.21 $2,000 159402-12 RL 0.20 $1,900 159-403-01 RL 0.18 $1,700 159-403-02 RL 0.18 $11700 159-403-03 RL 0.18 $1,700 159-403-04 RL 0.24 $2,300 159-403-05 RL 0.20 $1,900 159-403-08 RL 0.40 $3,800 159-403-09 RL 0.36 $3,400 159-403-10 RL 0.43 $4,100 159-403-11 RL 0.26 $2,500 159-403=12 RL 0.24 $2,300 159-403-13 RL 0.21 $2,000 159-403-14 RL 0.20 $1,900 159-403-15 RL 0.28 $2,700 159-403-16 RL 0.21 $2,000 159-403-17 RL 0.19 $1,800 159-412-01 RL 1.07 $10,100 159-431-07 RL 3.80 $36,000 SUBTOTAL :" • 88.08 $451,200 OS -A OS-B OS-D OS OS OS 26 $246,400 40 $379,200 13 $123,200 SUBTOTAIin_?':;ri;:; 79.00 $748,800 167.08 $1,200,000 REVISED 9/26/97 Page 134 • pA��6�ngL � • i Section 5 - Water Reimbursement Analysis g12-5-�97 5.1. Three Alternatives for Reimbursement Alternative 1 - Follow Development Agreement for reimbursement based on 3780 units. Alternative 2 - Defer determination of reimbursement per Developer Agreement language. Alternative 3 - Use PLC's recommendation for 3200 units as basis of reimbursement. 5.2 Alternative 1 - Recommended Alternative The facilities to be constructed by the Developer are specified in Section 2.25(u) of the Development/ Agreement as follows:' 'In lieu of water system capital facilities fees, the Developer shall construct, on land to be acquired by the City, a nine million gallon water storage reservoir, associated booster stations, water well and transmission lines." Development of the Holly/Seacliff project in accordance with the Development Agreement of the 3780 units (plus commercial) exacerbates a shortfall of water storage in the current west side of the City's water system. This was analyzed in the Water Master Plan and has been discussed in several study sessions regarding other development in the west side of the City. The water system's current storage capacity cannot support the Holly/Seacliff development because of deficiencies and existing development. Construction of the nine million gallon reservoir by the Developer, as required in the Agreement, would alleviate the water storage deficient in the west side of the City and provide adequate storage for Holly/Seacliff. A breakdown of the reservoir storage in presented in Table 3-A. OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY.DOC 5-1 REVISED 9/25197 i 7 a � • n • Section 5 - Water Reimbursement Analysis Table 3-A Reservoir Storage Capacity Summary to Support the Developer Agreement for Holly/Seacliff (3780 Units per Developer Agreement) Planning Area Obligation Reservoir Capacity Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan Developer Agreement 5.5 MG Ellis/Goldenwest Specific Plan Developer Agreement 0.5 MG Open Space (a) Holly/Seacliff GPA 0.2 MG Fire Storage -Zone of Benefit (b) Water Master Plan Criteria 2.0 MG (c) Subtotal - Developer Agreement 8.2 MG Holly/Seacliff Others Specific Plan less Developer Agreement 0.5 MG Fire Storage -Zone of Benefit -Others (b), "Water Master Plan Criteria 0.3 MG (c) Subtotal - Holly/Seacliff Others 1 0.8 MG TOTAL.- Holly/Seacliff Reservoir" Developer plus Holly/Seacliff Others 9.0 MG Capacity (a) 160 acres of irrigated open space; no future development assumed; therefore no developer reimbursement. (b) Additional capacity to meet Water Master Plan criteria of second simultaneous fire. (c) Total of 2.3 MG prorated by other storage requirements. The Development Agteement for the Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan would require an allocation of 5.5 MG of the total 9.0 MG capacity. Similarly, the Development Agreement for the Ellis/Goldenwest Specific Plan would equate to an 0.5 MG allocation. Additional area within the combined specific plan boundaries ("Holly Seacliff Others") would require an additional 0.5 MG allocation. The zone of benefit of the proposed Holly/Seacliff reservoir also includes.open space within the Holly/Seacliff General Plan Amendment (GPA) for a total of 768 acres. Within this area, 160 acres of open space are assumed to require irrigation with potable water (since GAP water is presently not available. This additional area would require an additional 0.2 MG of reservoir storage allocation. The Holly/Seacliff Reservoir is also sized to include additional capacity to meet the Water Master Plan criteria of a second simultaneous fire in the Holly/Seacliff GPA area. This additional capacity is 2.3 MG for a total of 9.0 MG. Construction of the required reservoir capacity by the Developer would allow the orderly integration of the Holly/Seacliff development into the City's water system without further exacerbating the shortfall of water storage for the City's west side. The nine million gallon reservoir is one component of the required facilities in the Development Agreement which are summarized in Table 3-B. OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY.DOC 5-2 REVISED 9/25/97 Section 5 -Water Reimbursement Analysis Table 3-B Estimated Cost of Reservoir, Booster Stations, and Transmission Mains Required the Support of the Holly/Seacliff Development Agreement Developer Required Facilities Estimate of Probable Construction Costs Water well and wellhead - Maximum Day (MD) @ 3500 gpm $1,300,000 Well Supply Main (MD) @ 3500 gpm. $1,400,000 9 MG Reservoir + Booster Station @ 9500 gpm $6,000,000 Transmission Mains (MD + fire) $2,100,000 Subtotal $10,800,000 Total with Overhead and Contingency allowance $13,000,000 Allocation of the costs presented in Table 3-B would suggest that Holly/Seacliff and others should share in the oversizing that is required. Table 4-A presents a comparison of prior cost allocations by Willdan and Walden, both of which differ from Boyle's recommendation to the City, based on the 3780 unit analysis that would not result in a further storage deficiency in the zone .of benefit. OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY.DOC 5-3 Bt74lL� REVISED 9/25/97 Section 5 - Water Reimbursement Analysis Table 4-A Holly/Seacliff Development Estimated Costs of Major Water Facilities Percentage Allocation Comparison (Based on Cost Estimates) 1994 WILLDAN 1997 WALDEN BOYLE (Cost (Developer's Proposed (Recommended Reimbursement Allocation) Allocation) District Allocation) $ % $ % $ % PLC 11,000,000 76 4,600,000 82 $11,800,000 91 Holly/Seacliff 3,400,000 24 600,000 11 $1,200,000 9 Others Others(a) 0 0 400,000 7 0 0 14,400,000 1 100 1 5,600,000 100 1 $13,000,000 1 100 (a) In total zone of benefit 5.3 Alternative 2 - Defer action per Developer Agreement language. Section 2.2.5 (h) of the Agreement addresses construction of the water facilities in lieu of water system capital facilities fees. It also states that the determination of the reimbursement can be made after the facilities are accepted by the City per the following language: "Upon acceptance of these facilities by the City, the Public Works Director shall verify Developer's actual costs and determine Developer's Reimbursable Costs, subject to provision in 2.2.1 L" The City can defer taking any action on the reimbursement issue for the water facilities until the Developer meets the conditions set forth in the Agreement. This Alternative is not recommended. OC-SO8-009-07/kjb/R-HO LLY. DOC 5-4 REVISED 9/25/97 Section 5 - Water Reimbursement Analysis 5.4 Alternative 3 - Use' PLC's recommendation for 3200 units PLC's June 1'l, 1997 letter to the City suggested that their share of the 3780 units set forth in the Development Agreement be reduced to 3200 units based on an "ownership table presented to staff." PLC's contention that they should not be obligated for building facilities to support 3780 units as required by the Agreement is based on various transactions that have taken place over the period since the Agreement was signed by the City and the current time with PLC assuming the obligations as the Developer. An analysis was performed to determine the reservoir size to support 3200 units as shown in Table 4-B. Table 4-B Reservoir Storage Capacity Summary to. Support Reduced Developer Obligation for Holly/Seacliff (3200 Units per PLC Proposal) Planning Area Obligation Reservoir Capacity Holly/Seacliff Speck Plan Developer Proposal 4.5 MG Ellis/Goldenwest Specific Plan Developer Agreement 0.5 MG Open Space (a) Holly/Seacliff GPA 0.2 MG Fire Storage -Zone of Benefit (b) Water Master Plan Criteria 1.8 MG (c) . Subtotal - Developer Agreement 7.0 MG Holly/Seacliff Others Specific Plan less Developer Agreement 1.5 MG, Fire Storage -Zone of Benefit -Others (b) Water Master Plan Criteria 0.5 MG (c) Subtotal - Holly/Seacliff Others 2.0 MG TOTAL - Holly/Seacliff Reservoir Developer plus Holly/Seacliff Others 9.0 MG Capacity (a) 160 acres of irrigated open space; no future development assumed; therefore no developer reimbursement. (b) Additional capacity to meet Water Master Plan criteria of second simultaneous fire. (c) Total of 2.3 MG prorated by other storage requirements. Under this scenario, the obligation of PLC would be reduced to provide 7.0 MG of reservoir capacity with the remaining 2.0 MG required to support the remaining area. This would transfer reimbursement costs to areas covered by the Development Agreement that should not fall within the City's jurisdiction. This Alternative is not recommended. OC-S08-009-07/kib/R-HOLLY.DOC 5-5 REVISED 9/25/97 D+C-05-1996 12:42 FROM BOYLE CORPORATE • 91 i P.02 0 CONRUL"NO KNOINEER6/ARCHITECT8 1501 Qua►t Street P.O. Box 3030 714 / 476 - 3"0 Newport (each, CA 9265s-9020 FAX 774 / 721 •7142 Les M, Jones, Director of Public Works December 5, 1996 CITY OF ,HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Proposal for Professional Services Holly/Seacliff Cost Rkimbi;rseme t f-Qr E c n_Cuacn This is a follow-up to our meeting regarding the City's agreement for the Holly/Seacliff Development and reimbursement for "excess" capacity. You briefed us on the background and current status, which is cited below to restate ourunderstanding. BACKGROUND Considerable infrastructure will be required to support the proposed Holly/Seacliff Development. It is our understanding that the following documents are in place at the present time to support the subject development, November, 1990 Development Agreement executed between the City of Huntington. Beach and Pacific Coast Homes and Garfield Pacific Partners (Developer). . Section 2.2.5 of this Agreement specifies water, sewer, drainage, and utility improvements with a caveat for the water system [paragraph (h)] that reimbursement shall be in accordance with provision 2.2.11. Section 2.2.11 of the Agreement establishes "Reimbursement" with the intent to establish a procedure to pay the Developer for "excess capacity" that will serve later developments. Furthermore, the following report has been completed to allocate the costs of "excess capacity" that will benefit other developments, January 18, 1994 engineer's Report entitled "Holly/Scacliff Cost Reimbursement District No 93- 1" that establishes criteria for costs to be borne by the Holly/Seacliff Development and the estimated reimbursable costs that will benefit other developments. STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM As we understand the situation, the current Developer(s) for Holly/Seacliff is not the same party who originally negotiated the Development Agreement with., the City, leading to potential re -interpretation of DEC-05-1996 12:43 FROM BOYLE CORPORATE TO P.03 December 5, 1996 the terms and conditions negotiated relative to reimbursement for excess capacity water, sewer, drainage, and utility infrastructure. Specifically, the Developer recently suggested to the City that the nine million gallon water storage reservoir required in Section 2.2.5(h) need only be a six MG reservoir to satisfy the Holly/Seacliff development, with capacity beyond this amounting to "excess capacity" that should be reimbursed. This recent suggestion by the Developer indicates that the City should anticipate differences of interpretation on the allocation method that will determine how much of the Developer's costs arc required by the development and how much is attributed to provide excess capacity, In the case of the nine million gallon reservoir, this s�Quldlead to the Developer contending that a smaller reservoir is all that is needed, and that the City should reimburse them for any "excess" capacity to achieve nine million gallons of capacity. The City needs to be prepared to demonstrate how it defines excess capacity and the costs are allocated between the Holly/Seaeliff Development and other developments.. SCOPE OF WORK We recommend a phased approach to provide a ro-a jLy_ stances r the City with information provided to your staff before future meetings with the Developer. This would put the City's staff in a better position to deal with the Developer in anticipation of their advancing concepts regarding cost reimbursement for excess capacity, This approach would provide flexibility in responding to the Developer and providing information to you as required, and is based on the following phases: Task 1, As the first pro -active step, determine the basic findings from a review of the Development Agreement, past reports, correspondence, and other submittals by the Developer, Driaverable: Brief letter report summarizing the findings with emphasis on inconsistencies (if any) and the validity of information developed to date. The report would recommend how to proceed with alternative costs for various analysis in the next phase form which the City could choose. Task 2. Cost analysis to determine excess capacity for water, sewer, storm drains, and utility improvements. In our experience, the most rigorous methodology to determine "excess capacity" is to lay out the proposed development at build out and model two scenarios for each type of inftastructure: the first scenario is to determine the size of facilities requited to only support the development; and the second is to size facilities to serve the development plus the maximum area of benefit that could be served. Dgliyerable: Letter report with supporting technical data for each scenario analysis. The effort would depend on whether water, sewer, drainage, and utility infrastructure are analyzed separately or at one time. DEC-05-1996 12:44 FROM BOYLE CORPORATE TO P.04 • December S, 1996 Task 3. Participation in meeting with the Developer will be done as requested during this process in order to clarify their position. This could be followed up with strategy sessions with the City to determine how to enforce the Agreement. It's our experience that this process becomes somewhat iterative as a Developer and the City work though this process until a final conclusions reached that is mutually acceptable to both parities. 5.0 Task 4. The conclusion of this process should result in a mutually agreeable cost allocation for excess capacity, This should be memorialized in a final report. De iyerable: Brief Final Report that summarizes the findings. This assignment will be accomplished primarily with myself and Bill Everest, and support staff as required. This will take maximum advantage of Bill's ongoing involvement with the Water Master Plan (including a similar analysis for Koll's Bolsa Chica development). We will draw on other technical resources, including specially subcontractors, as the need arises. e, 4-1 We have provided budgets for four tasks, however, this assignment will require some flexibility among the estimated fee for the four tasks due to the unknown amount of effort until meetings are held with the Developer and we can begin to see how solid their position is on the excess capacity issues. Will they be "arm Waving" without backup, or will they have retained an engineering firm to do an exhaustive analysis to rationalize their position? Some of the budgeted tasks may be under, and some over individual line items, so we request the capability to adjust line item budgets as we progress on the four tasks within the JQtal budget o $20.000, We will notify you when we are at 80% of the total budget to determine if the level of effort to complete assignments needs to be adjusted. We proposed to bill you for this effort on a time and material basis in accordance with the attached fee schedules. Thank you for the opportunity to propose on this challenging assignment. 0 1 Engineering Corporation Victor Qpincar, PE Regional Vice President OC-1399.197.001<0 D;C-05-1996 12:44 FROM BOYLE CORPORATE TO P.05 0 December 5, 1996 DOURLY RATE SCHEDULE Boyle Engineering Corporation Decemb r 1,1996 City of Huntington Bezcin Ho➢fly/Seaclli$7f' Project Engineers, Planners, Architects, landscape Architects, Geologists, Scientists: Vice President/Project Manager $177.00 per hour Principal $150.00 per hour Senior 11 $125.00 per hour Senior 1 $105.00 per hour Associate $ 95,00 per hour Assistant It $ 80.00 per hour Assistant I $ 70.00 per .hour Construction Administration Personnel: Senior Resident Engineer $115.00 per hour Senior Resident Project Representative $ 90.00 per hour Resident Project Representative $ 75.00 per hour Technical Support Staff* Designer Supervisor $ 95.00 per hour Senior Technician/Senior Designer $ 82.00 per hour Engineering TechniciatiMesigner $ 71.00 per hour Senior Drafter S 65.00 per hour Drafter S 5 1. 00 per hour Design CADD Supervisor $ 90.00 per hour Design CADD Operator $ 62.00 per hour CADD Operator $ 58.00 per hour Technical Typist/Word Processor $ 52.00 per hour Programmer/Analyst $ 75.00 per hour Paralegal/Editor $ 67.00 per hour Public Information/Forensic Specialist $ 66.00 per hour Administrative Specialist $ 48.00 per hour Staff Accountant $ 44.00 per hour [Direct Project Expenses: Photocopies - Color $ 2.50 per page Photocopies - Black & White/Fax $ 0,20/1.60 per page Communications Charges $ 1.50 per hour Plan Sheet Printing - In-house Bond/Mylar $0.40/2.80'per square foot Travel - Automobile/Truck $0.60 per mile Travel - Other Than Automobile Actual Cost + 15% Subconsultant Services Actual Cost + 15% Subcontracted Services/Reproduction Actual Cost + 15% Computer Services and Computer Aided Design See Separate Schedule If authorized by the client, an overtime premium multiplier of 1.5 will be applied to the billing rate of hourly personnel who Work overtime in order to meet a deadline which cannot be met during normal hours. Applicable sales taxes, if any, will be added to these rates. Corporate officers, Managing Principals, and Consulting Engineers will be billed at 1.2 times the stated rate for Principal. Invoices will be rendered monthly. Payment is due upon presentation, A late payment finance charge of 1.5% per month (but not exceeding the maximum rate allowable by law) -will be applied to any unpaid balance corp-rtencing 30 days after the date of the original invoice. DrEC-05-1996 12;45 FROM BOYLE CORPORATE TO P.06 December 5, 1996 STANDARD RATE SCHEDULE COMPUTER SERVICES Boyle Engiueering Co rpormien City of Hujiti»gton Hach Hewlett Packard HP 3000/925 Super Minicomputer Systems Terminal, Printer or Plotter $33.00 per hour Resource Charge - SPURGE analysis $ 6.00 per min. Electrostatic Plotter - HP 7600 $37.50 per hour (Includes computer time to drive the plotter) Microcomputers (Personal Computers) Microcomputer System with Laser Printer $12.25 per hour Resource Charges for Microcomputers Resource charges are in addition to the above rates and cover the use of special purpose software and extra equipment such as pen plotters, high resolution monitors, and digitizers which are used with CADD software. AutoCAD Computer Aided Design $ 15.00 per hour STAAD III - Structural Design $ 1590 per hour MicroStation (Intergraph) CADD $ IS .00 per hour AES HYDRO - Hydrologic Analysis $ 52.50 per hour SCADA - Structural Analysis $ 12.00 per hour BoyleNet - Water Distrib Analysis $ 5.00 per hour DAPPER - Electrical Design $ 75.00 per hour EXKYPIPE - Water Distrib Analysis 5 10.00 per hour CAPTOR - Overcurrent Analysis $108.00 per hour BoyleCOGO - Coordinate Geometry $ 4.00 per hour Tranc TRACE - HVAC Design $58.50 per hour BDTM - Digital Terrain Model $ 5.00 per hour Carrier HVAC System Design $46.50 per hour BOYLEPLAN - Project Management $ 10.00 per hour PRIMAVERA - Project Management $58.50 per hour SWAN - Sanitary Sewer Analysis $ 10.00 per hour BFMS - Facilities Management $18.75 per hour CONTOURS - Contour Plotting $ 10.00 per hour GWFM - Groundwater Modeling $15.00 per hour LARSA - Structural Analysis $ 7.50 per hour TERRAMODEL $13.50 per hour HASS - Sprinkler Analysis $162,00 per hour GEOPAK - Highway Design $15.00 per hour ICPR - )Drainage Design $ 60.00 per hour BREEZE - Air Pollution Modeling $550.00 SAP90 - Structural Analysis $157.50 per hour Other Notes Charges for outside computer services will be billed at invoice cost plus twenty-five percent. This rate schedule is subject to general revision annually. New equipment categories and resource charges may be added at any time. TOTAL P.06 V 16 December 1996RECEIVED CITY -CLERK,- CITY aF' NUNTINGT(1N etinCll, CALIF. - -DEC 16 8504, °9 Honorable Mayor Ralph Bauer and Members of the City Council 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Subject: City Council Meeting of 16 December 1966 - Agenda Item F-2 Dear. Mr. Mayor - Introduction The issue here is recovery by the Developer of some of the costs incurred to build `excess" infrastructure as required by the Holly/Seacliff Development Agreement. Subject agenda item proposes a - sole source contract to Boyle Engineering for certain analyses in this regard. I know of no urgency for this item although it has suddenly appeared again after several prior Developer plans were rejected by the City" It is not at all clear that Boyle Engineering has any special expertise warranting a sole source procurement, although that is so indicated by the RCA. Boyle Engineering was heavily involved in the Water Master Plan, but that is not particularly germane to the subject proposed study. Recommendations 0 Do not approve the recommended action ® Direct Staff to determine when agreements must be in place for each of the various infrastructure improvements and report that back to Council Direct Staff to proceed with this project consistent wish need dates, preferably in house, but only if PLC agrees to fund the cost. Discussion Certainly we should reimburse the Developer for excess capacity costs to the extent that we can legally obtain money for such costs from future developers in the Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan Area. The Development Agreement recognizes the issue, but also recognizes that the City may not be able 'to cause the Developer to be reimbursed for such costs. M, However, the proposal before us has all the earmarks of turning into some agreement where the Developer gets reimbursed for all excess costs, with our citizens picking up the tab if future developers do not pay enough. B t N.M From the RCA "The tasks for the consultant would include reviewing the Development Agreement and past approaches presented by the Developer, preparing a separate plan which employs the `fairest' approach . ............. Bear in mind that the last approach by the Developer involved reimbursements from a city-wide assessment district as well as the owners of undeveloped land in the Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan Area. Furthermore, how can Boyle Engineering, who was not involved with the Development Agreement, or the negotiations that led up to the final agreement in any way that I know of, determine the "fairest' approach? We should also keep in mind that a reimbursement agreement cannot even be executed; and the Developer receive any reimbursement, until all infrastructure improvements of a particular type are completed for the entire project area, and actual costs are determined. While I am not familiar with the overall timetable, it strikes me that this is still. pretty far in the future, in general. Conclusions We raced to judgment when the Holly/Seacliff Development Agreement was originally approved. There was "no time" for a detailed review of the document . As a result, there have already been a number of "interesting" interpretations which, for some reason, have tended to be resolved in favor of the Developer. We have the potential here for another major problem if we try to move more rapidly than is required. My concerns would be eliminated if an authorized representative of PLC would come before Council and simply agree that reimbursements for excess capacity clearly would come only from owners of undeveloped parcels in the Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan area at the time those parcels are developed. After all, that's what the Development Agreement•says, so that should not be too much to ask. Sincerely yours, � 7_/�Vt, Chuck Scheid M. City Administrator 00 YUF ENGINEERING CMPCRATION 1501 Quail Street 7CDy °`�,.J�fEEL (794) 476-3301 New ort Beach, CA 92658-9020 u X 14 721-7482 FAX TRANSMITTAL To: Ms. Jennifer McGrath Attorney Company I Location: City Attomcy's Office Fax Number: 11 From: Victor Opincar Regional Vice President Date: Time: Total Pages: December 31. 1996 12:33 PM 3 Subject: Professional Services Agreement with Boyle for Holly/Seachff Cost Reimbursement Study Job Number: oc-B99-197-00 Please deliver these pages to the persons listed above. If you have difficulty receiving this transmission or if any pages are missing or illegible, please call (714) 476-3301 and ask to speak to Victor Cpincar. The information contained In this facsimile Is Intended only for the indrvldual(s) named above, it may contain Information that Is confidendai or prtvOged. It you are not an Indvdual named above or the employee responsible for dellvertng this information to that Individual, you are hereby notified that any copying or distrtbudon of the Information contained in this facsimile is strictly prohibited. It you have received this facsimile in error, please notify the sender Immadlately by telephone at the number given above. Thank you for your cooperadon. Comments: This is a follow-up to our December 30, 1996, telephone conversation regarding the City Council's Resolution requiring various insurance limits for professional services contraots. You indioated that there will be a Settlement Committee meeting on January 2nd that considers exceptions to the City's Insurance requirements. Attached to this fax is our request for the Committee's consideration. I hope that they will agree with our presentation. Best ards ` �= oC-B99-197-00/F-MCORTK.Doc 9 movL6 e'nwrieemiria Gampimq Tian CONOULT1N0 6NOINEFoRWARCHIYECTO 1501 Ouall Street P.O. Box 3030 714 / 476 - 3300 Newport Beech, CA 92658-9020 FAX 714 / 721 - 7142 Jennifer McGrath, Assistant City Attorney CITY OF HLINTINGTON BEACH 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California 92648 Profesaionai Services Contract Between the City of Huntington Beach and Boyle Engineering Corporation Request for Exceptions for Consideration by the Settlement Committee December 31, 1996 As discussed with you over the phone, Boyle Engineering Corporation will be able to meet the terms of the City's Professional Services Contract for the Bolsa Chien, Holly/Seacli$'Agreement with several modifications to the City's Insurance requirements. Professional Liability Insurance With respect to Professional Liability Insurance (Section 10E), Boyle maintains coverage well in excess of the City's $500,000 requirement. The professional Liability Certificate(s) of Insurance shall confirm that this coverage is not subject to a deductible. However, we request an exception to the requirement that the Professional Liability Certificate(s) stating that this coverage will not be canceled or modified without thirty (30) days prior written notice to the City (Suction 11(3)). Boyle's Professional Liability Insurance carrier, DPIC, will only provide notice of cancellation. The exception we request is as follows: Boyle hereby promises to provide the City with thirty (30) days prior wti en notice of modification to our Professional Liability 1nsura=r, on lice. Please ask the committee to take into consideration that Boyle has been a DPIC insured for more than twenty years and is going to continue its coverage into future years with DPIC. General Liability Insurance Boyle has General Liability Insurance in excess of the City's $1,000,000 requirement (Section 10A). However, this coverage is subject to a $25 000_dedttectible. While we understand the City's resolution; this should not be an issue with a firm of Boyle's size. Jennifer McGrath December 31, 1996 Page 2 WV, ,request 4t ommittee to consider the following: (1) Boyle is currently ranked among the largest 200 international engineering %s in Engineering News Record's 1996 ranking (ENK is a well respected trade magazine in the construction industry that complies annual rankings for all types of construction and engineering fuins in the world); (2) Boyle has eighteen office nationwide with an annual.business volume of over $55 million; and (3), Boyle's management made a business decision to carry the $25,000 deductible for CGL - - just as we, as car drivers and homeowners, carry deductions for personal insurance. We can provide an audited financial statement if there is any doubt about the fwaneial strength of Boyle among the Committee members. We look forward to working with the City on this project. Please can me (714-476-3301) if you have any questions on Thursday. Thank you for your assistance. Boyl Engine ring Corporation w ��. GnIN�Sa��•� Victor Qpincar E u �' Regional Vice esident y No. C 30 9 � r �;,p, g/30/97 11r ems) CIVIL Q '�_0� GALIF�Q 1:-_ :I i-,.,,-,.II i i,-: t P Clerk's Signature Log ]LOG #97-: 4 IN DATE: SUBJECT: February 24, 1997 Boyle Contract ACTION NEEDED: Insurance requirements in the contract need to be amended to reflect the waviers given at the 1/21 Council meeting. GIVEN TO: Jennifer McGrath DEPARTMENT: City Attorney DATE TO DEPT.: DATE RETURNED: BACK TO CLERK: Deatey, Renton * Associates &�, cJUit.kK a& License #0026139 575 Anton Boulevard, Suite 530 Costa mesa CA 92626 r wer ,w a sss c `Pw�8?i'':,k'i'E' ,�, r�A ti w ... A-: ......................................... THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POUCIRS BELOW. COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE ..................................................................................................................................... cowANY A LETT.... COMPANY g ........... .._...... ...... .. _ NSUAF� COMPANY G. Boyle Engineering Corporation LE7TTA 1501 Quoit Street ......................... COMPANY D Newport Beach CA 92660•7350 LETM ........... COMPANY E LETTER Hartord Fire ins. Co. Twin City FitelHartford THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE SEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY -REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS- ......................... 111­1 .................... ........... .................. ............................ ...... I ..... 11.1 ................. : 111111.11- ............... ................. 1.11,1111.111-1:11* ........................................... CO TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY Nt)MBFR POLICY FF>=ECTIVE 'POLICY pfP6tAT10N LIMOS LTR: DATE (MMIDO/YYI DAZE (MMA)Dn GENERAL LIABILITY 72CESSS9265 12/31/96 12/31/97 GENERAL AGGREGATE s 2,000,000 Ai......... X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY FRODUCTS-COMPNP AGG. S 1 QQQ QQQ ,:�... .......:................................... ... CLAIMS MADE X OCCUR. PERSONAL a ADV. INJURY s "1,000,0oo.. OWNMS a CONTRACTOR'S PROT. ; ;EACH OCCURRENCE s 1, 000, 000 :,, ....,.,., ... RE DAMAGE (My one fire) $ 50,000 :............................................................... : MED- EXPENSE (Any one Person):$ 5,000 ..........................................................................................,.....,........................: . AUTOMOBILE UABILRY COMBINED SINGLE $ ANY AUTO LIMIT :... ........................... ............................... .. ALL OWNED AUTOS i ? BODILY 1N.IURY SCHEDULED AUTOS (Per person) $ .........< ............................. HIRED AUTOS BODILY INJURY NON -OWNED AUTOS (Par accent) ! S .... ........... ...................... SA AGE LLABILMY ' iPROPERTY DAMAGE :S ..................................................:......................... ......... .......................... :.., , B :Excess LJAaILm 72HUSL4493 12/31/96 12/31/47 EACH I7000IiAENCE ;s 1,000=000 ............. ..... . X i UMBRE7IA FORM [ AGGREGATE S 1 , 000,000 O AN M5EII-A OTHER THAN R FORM U STATUTORY LIMITS::. WORKER'S COMPENSATION AND EACH ACCIDENT 5 ....................... .......... ............. .. ........................... DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT S EMPLOYERS L49LITY ...................................... DISEASE - EACH EMPLOYEE �: S .........................................................:.......... ........... ....... ..................... , .. : .......... i OTHER ... . . ............................................................................................................. ..... ........................ ..................... .. .................. -.- A��PR'0V. � . S TO �'UM ot:scAIPTION OF OPERATIONSLOCATIONSNEHiCLE-%•s ;CtAL m4s G.!11; ?;'ir1'0_:T , City Attorney RE: BOLSA CHICA, HOLLY/SEACLIFF THE CITY, ITS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES ARE ADDITIONAL L INSUREDS AS RESPECTS By:: Deputy City Attorney GENERAL LIABILITY PER ENDORSEMENT ATTACHED. "OR MODIFICATION CITY OF HUNTINGTOM BEACH ATTN 'JENNIFER MCGRATH 2000 MAIM STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CA. 92648 SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCEU ED BEFOFE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL I► TZ)0QM ?VXWX MAIL 30 * DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, X�AXXXS Kenneth J. N►ittmxn fin/7n'i n T n n 173 4,TI -nil ITT II ,.,.r_„ ., ,., .. .... __ -- --- - - _0._ in?-9�I I LEA—LO—in E6NERAL ENQ.08SEMENT In consideration of an additional premium of N/A , it is hereb understood and agreed that the following applies: [ X ] ADDITIONAL. INSiJRED - GN202613 THE CITY, ITS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES. is/are Additional Insured/s as respects to work done by Named Insured. [ X ] NOTICE QF CANCEL!, T1aN It is understood and agreed that in the event of cancellation of the Policy for any reason other than non-payment of premium, 30 days written notice will be sent to the following by mail CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 In the event the policy is canceled for non-payment of premium, 10 days written notice will be sent to the above. Policy No.: 72CESSS9265 Insurance Company: Hartford Fire Ins, Co. Issued to: Boyle Engineering Corporation Authori d�f4epresentati KennethJ. Wittman f Effective Date: 12/31 /96 Issue Date: 1 /07/97 Anpt;nV^D AS TO FORM :' City Attorney Ey; Deputy City Attorney. bum gi.Rq )p.h b1) nh, uua nnccu hinit,imv i7riu-in Tlu ,r,TT 7 n I In 10 1TT Ir+ i. l L n — _ it — l l • ...,. ..... �;�: C'�c. ;;�..�i.�:aa�'m_ NO��':G.Y�� :.:} u 5i 'DATE(MMIDDIM ,:vjV. is . s r� M:xs� u�a aotsu �> cx14s i an a3> s i ��ia E�r««Kr �kS3a#�amaisz nn k ) , sb �. ..:...,.., >()UCER : THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND 600D CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS Ci=RT11FICATE ��� DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER -THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE Dealey, Renton Q Associates C%�UC POLICIES BELOW. Lioense#0020729.............................. ..................................................................................... .............................. 575 Anton Boulevard, Suite 530 &6& &-1 COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE Costo mesa CA 92636 ' OwANY c...A.........-�Ii°"..�:o�:..�_....� .................................................................... ........................................................................................... .. COMPANY LETTER ..........' IN RED ..•,•...,.•.• ....................................... Boyle EnSlneerinp C0rp0ra00n [ COMPANY LETTER C, 1501 Quail Street ........................................................... = CCMPANY .,,.,.,,,,,,..,.,.,.,,,.,,.,.,.,.,..,.......... .,........... ...,.,..,.,,,,,,,,..,,......... .......,,,,..,,,, D Newport Reach CA 92660.7350 LETTER COMPANY LETTER E THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REOUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDRION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. �. ....................•.,,..,.,...,.,................................,.......,,...,....,.,,,..,.....................................................,...........,.,......,......................................................................................................................... LT : TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER :'POLICY EFFECTIVE ;POLICY EXPIT{AT1pN LTLIMTTS R DATE (MKCD^ DATE (MMrDONY) .............................................................:.................."......"...................,....,,..,,, GENERAL LIABItJTY :.......... ..,.... .............................. ................... ..,, ,. .. GENERAL AGGREGATE :S COMMERCIAL GENERAL L!ABILTTY ! ............ PRODUCTS•COMRrOP AGO........ f$........................ ..::.............: CLAIMS MADE E OCCUR ................,......................... PERSONAL & ADY. tN 1URY "..................................... :... OwNEri5 8 CONTRACTORS PROT. ..I ...................:....... EACH OCWRRENCE y ....................................... .................. ........... .... ........... I............. ...."......... FIRE DAMAGE (Any one fire) S ..................................... ................................................ r..................................... MED. S GIENSE (Any one parw i ):S :.....,.,.,,....,, ........................... .......................................... :.AUTOMOBLE LLA31M ,....,.. •,. . ... C E...S..a ................ pM81N D IN LE ..: ANY AUTO ........... LIMB iS ALL OWNED AUTOS OD,.Y,j.Y,,,,,,,,,, ,,,,,,,, , R SCHEDULED AUTOS i ? (Per person) § ' f HIRED AUTOS ....:........................................................ ...........�,. . I BODILY INIURY .......' NON -OWNED AUTOS ' ! ! (Pef accIdent) '•S ........ GARAGE LIABILITY i PROPERTY DAMAGE S ....................... .................................. ....,......... .................... .................................. EXCESS LABILffY :.......; ..,:........ ,,,., ............... ............... ;EACH occur ice ;S UMf3RE11A FORM ; ............................ .......... ............................. AGGREGATE S OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM .. :.... .. ..................rim, Tr 0;rFT�:.�. ..TOTORIA r. ..... ............ . :. WOfRK5W8 COMPENSATION STATUTORY LIMITS i'_ll t TOid, City Attorney :... ....,.. ... AND 5,...., EACH ACCIDENT . t y. Dep�- ty, City. Attgrncy, ............ ..............I. ..... DISEASE POLICY :S E►+pLOYTaTs Lwa� ry IIMR :....................................... ..... ..........I ... ................>........................,...............................................,.I.., OISEASE EACH EMPLOYS IS OTHER .............E.................... A PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY' 7 PL700663 12/31/96 12/31197 PER CLAIM AND . 1,000,000 `ANNUAL AGGREGATE .............. ...................................................... DE$CRIFTION OF OPMATION&LOCATIDNSEiiICLE&WECUL REMS ..................:..........................,.:............................:...............................,...,,........................................... . RE: BOLSA CHICA, HOLLY/SEACLIFF *FOR PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY COVERAGE THE AGGREGATE LIMIT IS THE TOTAL INSURANCE AVAILABLE FOR'ALL COVERED CLAIMS PRESENTED WITHIN THE POLICY PERIOD. THE LIMIT WILL BE REDUCED BY PAYMENTS OF INDEMNITY AND EXPENSE. CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ATTN: JENNIFER MCGIRATH 2000 MAIM STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648 SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL KX=30PO(X)(XX MAIL 30 ;; DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLD[R NAMED TO TY,E 1 ,q L, �£iL[K)G1aR�E>g �sCX�t 9F�XY.x3 bn/bn 'r Kenneth J. Wittman / ! IE17 R T R9 ) ?f? b i ) nhi Vu .! nnrru r.tn I M11M I TM 111/1 r rr r . T . Tiealey, Renton & Associates, Insui ance Brokers M 575 Anton Boulevard, Suite 530 .7� ro P O Box 2290 CA Costa Mesa, CA 92628-2290 (714) 427-6810 �r- Fax (714) 427-6818 ti Via Fax 4 Pages including cover sheet ©ate TO 117197 City of Huntington Beach ZI Attention Fax # Jennifer McGrath 714-374-1590 f1 /1 1I C7 From Lisa Shimizu Fookes Subject Boyle Engineering Corporation As requested, attached are renewal Certificates of Insurance issued for the above Your originals to follow by mail r G c 4 in a R 1 AQ ) p�, fit 1 nN uH q nnggp inn i wig j �7u7n < <, , - - - FES-10-37 17:14 FROM: MARSH + MCLENNAN Marsh & McLennan, Inc. PO Box 7650 Newport Beach, CA 92660 w. 714-253-5800 I O: 714t333951t3 PAGE 1 MARSH & MCLF.NNAN 41 Fax Transmittal MM11.A-1071-B Date Time No. of Pages 3 02/10/97 5:36 PM (including this transmittal) O: FROM: Name Jennifer McGrath Name Susan Carroll Company City Newport Beach City Department City of Huntington Beach Risk Management Fax Number Phone Number Fax Number Phone Number 374-1590 714-833-9518 714-253-5810 Message. Certificate of Insurance issued on behalf of Boyle Engineering Corp. (revised) The information contained in this facsimile message is confidential, may be privileged, and is intended only for the use of the individual or entity named above. If you, the reader of the message, are not the intended recipient, or the agent or employee responsible for delivering this transmission to the intended recipient, you are expressly prohibited from copying, disseminating, distributing or in any other way using any of the information contained in this facsimile message. Page 1 -- I ti_;, ^ iif . I F. P T 1 pn I • PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND BOYLE ENGINEERING CORPORATION FOR A HOLLY/SEACLIFF COST REIMBURSEMENT STUDY FOR EXCESS CAPACITY THIS AGREEMENT, made and entered into this S day of a , 193Z, by and between the City of Huntington Beach, a municipal corporation of the State of California, hereinafter referred to as "CITY", and BOYLE ENGINEERING CORPORATION, a California corporation, hereinafter referred to as "CONSULTANT." WHEREAS, CITY desires to engage the services of a consultant for a Holly/Seacliff cost reimbursement study for excess capacity in the City of Huntington Beach; and Pursuant.to documentation on file in the office of the City Clerk, the provisions of HBMC Chapter 3.03 relating to procurement of professional service contracts has been SA-7ec FRO M Les Jbn ee5 complied with; and /+TTJ r-H-,f0) CONSULTANT has been selected to perform said services, NOW, THEREFORE, it is agreed by CITY and CONSULTANT as follows: 1. WORK STATEMENT CONSULTANT shall provide all services as described in the Request for Proposal, and CONSULTANT's proposal dated August 19, 1996, (hereinafter referred to as Exhibit "A"), which is attached hereto and incorporated into this Agreement by this reference. Said services shall sometimes hereinafter be referred to as "PROJECT." CONSULTANT hereby designates Victor Opincar and/or Bill Everest, who shall represent it and be its -'sole contact and agent in all consultations with CITY during the performance of this Agreement. 1 3/k/pcdocs/boylel/2/12/97 • 2. CITY STAFF ASSISTANCE CITY shall assign a staff coordinator to work directly with CONSULTANT in the performance of this Agreement. 3. TIME OF PERFORMANCE Time:is of the essence of this Agreement. The services of the CONSULTANT are to commence_ assoon as practicable after the execution of this Agreement and all tasks specified in Exhibit "A" shall be completed no later than six (6) months from the date of this Agreement. These times may be extended with the written permission of the CITY. The time for performance of the tasks identified in Exhibit "A" are generally to be shown in the Scope of Services on,the Work Program/Project Schedule. This schedule may be amended to benefit the PROJECT if mutually agreed by the CITY'and CONSULTANT. 4.. COMPENSATION In consideration of the performance of the services described herein, CITY agrees to pay CONSULTANT a fee not to exceed Seventy Thousand Dollars ($70,000). 5. EXTRA WORK In the event CITY requires additional services not included in Exhibit 'A" or changes in the scope of services described.in Exhibit "A,"' CONSULTANT will undertake such work after receiving written authorization from CITY. Additional compensation for such extra work shall be allowed only if the prior written approval of CITY is obtained. The Director of Public Works may authorize such additional compensation. 6. METHOD OF PAYMENT A. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to progress payments toward the fixed fee set forth herein in accordance with the progress and payment schedules set forth in Exhibit "A". B. Delivery of work product: A copy of every technical memo and report prepared by CONSULTANT shall be submitted to the CITY to demonstrate progress toward completion of tasks: In the event CITY rejects or has comments on any such product, CITY 2 3/k/pcdocs/boylel/2/12/97 „ shall identify specific requirements for satisfactory completion. Any such product which has not been formally accepted or rejected by CITY shall be deemed accepted. C. The CONSULTANT shall submit to the CITY an invoice for each progress payment due. Such invoice shall: 1) Reference this Agreement; 2) Describe the services performed; 3) Show the total amount of the payment due; 4) ' Include a, certification by a principal member of the CONSULTANT's firm that the work has been performed in accordance with the provisions of this Agreement; and completed. 5) For all payments. include an estimate of the percentage of work Upon submission of any such invoice, if CITY is satisfied that CONSULTANT is making satisfactory progress toward completion of tasks in accordance with this Agreement, CITY shall promptly approve the invoice, in which event payment shall be made within thirty (30) days of receipt of the invoice by CITY. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. If the CITY does not approve an invoice, CITY shall notify CONSULTANT in writing of the reasons for non -approval, within, seven (7) calendar days of receipt of the invoice, and the schedule of performance set forth in Exhibit "A" shall be suspended until the parties agree that past performance by CONSULTANT is in, or has been brought into compliance, or until.this Agreement is terminated as provided herein. D. Any billings for extra work or additional services authorized by CITY shall be invoiced separately to the CITY. Such invoice shall contain all of the information required above, and in addition shall list the hours expended and hourly rate charged for such time. Such invoices shall be approved by CITY if the work performed is in accordance with the extra work or additional services requested, and if CITY is satisfied that the statement of hours worked and costs incurred is accurate. Such approval shall not be unreasonably withheld. 3 3/k/pcdocs/boylel/2/12/97 Any dispute between the parties concerning payment of such an invoice shall be treated as separate and apart from the ongoing performance of the remainder of this Agreement. 7. DISPOSITION OF PLANS, ESTIMATES AND OTHER DOCUMENTS CONSULTANT agrees that all materials prepared hereunder, including all original drawings, designs, reports, both field and office notices, calculations, maps and other documents, shall be turned over to CITY upon termination of this Agreement or upon PROJECT completion, whichever shall occur first. In the event this Agreement is terminated, said materials may be used by CITY in the completion of PROJECT or as it otherwise sees fit. Title to said materials shall pass to the CITY upon payment of fees determined to be earned by CONSULTANT to the point of termination or completion of the PROJECT, whichever is applicable. CONSULTANT shall be entitled to retain copies of all data prepared hereunder. B. INDEMNIFICATION AND HOLD HARMLESS CONSULTANT hereby agrees to indemnify, defend, and hold and save harmless CITY, its officers and employees from any and all liability, including any claim of. liability and any and all losses or costs arising out of the negligent performance of this Agreement by CONSULTANT, its officers or employees.. 9. WORKERS COMPENSATION CONSULTANT shall comply with all of the provisions of the Workers Compensation Insurance and' Safety Acts of the State of California, the applicable provisions of the California Labor Code and all amendments thereto; and all similar state or federal acts or laws applicable; and shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless CITY from and against all claims, demands, payments, suits, actions, proceedings and judgments of every nature and description, including attorney fees and costs presented, brought or recovered against CITY, for or on account of any liability under any of said acts which may be incurred by reason of any work to be performed by CONSULTANT under this Agreement. CONSULTANT shall obtain and furnish evidence to CITY of maintenance of statutory workers compensation insurance and employers liability in an amount of not less than 4 3/k/pcdocs/boylel/2/12/97 $100,000 bodily injury by accident, each occurrence, $100,000 bodily injury by disease, each employee, and $250,000 bodily injury by disease, policy limit. 10. INSURANCE In addition to the workers compensation insurance. and .CONSULTANT'S covenant to indemnify CITY, CONSULTANT shall obtain and furnish to CITY the following insurance policies covering the PROJECT: A. General Liability Insurance A policy of general public liability insurance, including motor vehicle coverage. Said policy shall indemnify CONSULTANT, its officers, agents and employees, while acting within the scope of their duties, against any and all claims of arising out of or in connection with the PROJECT, and shall provide coverage in not less than the following amount: combined single limit bodily injury and property damage, includingproducts/completed operations liability and blanket contractual liability, of $1,000,000 per occurrence. If coverage is provided under a form which includes a designated general aggregate limit, the aggregate limit must be no less than $1,000,000. Said policy shall name CITY, its officers, and employees as Additional Insureds, and shall specifically provide that any other insurance coverage which may be applicable to the PROJECT shall be deemed excess coverage and that CONSULTANT's insurance shall'be primary. The policy may be subject to no more than a $25,000 deductible. V� B. Professional Liability Insurance. CONSULTANT shall acquire a professional liability insurance policy covering the work performed by it hereunder. Said policy shall provide coverage for CONSULTANT's professional liability in an amount not less than $500,000 per claim. A claims made policy shall be acceptable. 5 3/k/pcdocs/boylel/2/12/97 7/ 0 0 11. CERTIFICATES OF INSURANCE: ADDITIONAL INSURED ENDORSEMENTS Prior to commencing performance of the work hereunder, CONSULTANT shall furnish to CITY certificates of insurance subject to approval of the City Attorney evidencing the foregoing insurance coverages as required by this Agreement; said certificates shall: 1. provide the name and policy number of each carrier and policy; 2. shall state that the policy is currently in force; and P 3. shall promise to provide that such policies will not be canceled or modified without thirty (30) days prior written notice of CITY, except 10-day notice is acceptable in the event of cancellation for non-payment of premium. CONSULTANT shall maintain the foregoing insurance coverages in force until the work under this Agreement is fully completed and accepted by CITY. The requirement for carrying the foregoing insurance coverages shall not derogate from the provisions for indemnification of CITY by CONSULTANT under the Agreement. CITY or its representative shall at all times have the right to demand the original or a copy of all said policies of insurance. CONSULTANT shall pay, in a prompt and timely manner, the premiums on all insurance hereinabove required. 12. INDEPENDENT CONTRACTOR CONSULTANT is, and shall be, acting at all times in the performance of this Agreement as an independent contractor. CONSULTANT shall secure at its expense, and be responsible for any and all payment of all taxes, social security, state disability insurance compensation, unemployment compensation and other payroll deductions for CONSULTANT and its officers, agents and employees and all business licenses, if any, in connection with the services to be performed hereunder. 13. TERMINATION OF AGREEMENT All work required hereunder shall be performed in a good and workmanlike manner. CITY may terminate CONSULTANT's services hereunder at any time with or without cause, and whether or not PROJECT is fully complete. Any termination of this Agreement by 0 3/k/pcdocs/boylel/2/12/97 CITY shall be made in writing, notice of which shall be delivered to CONSULTANT as provided herein. 14. ASSIGNMENT AND SUBCONTRACTING This Agreement is a personal service contract and the supervisory work hereunder shall not be delegated by CONSULTANT to any other person or entity without the consent of CITY. 15. COPYRIGHTS/PATENTS CITY shall own all rights to any patent or copyright on any work, item or material produced as a result of this Agreement. 16. CITY EMPLOYEES AND OFFICIALS CONSULTANT shall employ no CITY official nor any regular CITY employee in the work performed pursuant to this Agreement. No officer or employee of CITY shall have any financial interest in this Agreement in violation of the applicable provisions of the California Government Code. 17.. NOTICES Any notice or special instructions required to be given in writing under this Agreement shall be given either by personal delivery to CONSULTANT's agent (as designated in Section 1 hereinabove) or to CITY's Director of Public Works as the situation shall warrant, or by enclosing the same in a sealed envelope, postage prepaid, and depositing the same in the United States Postal Service, addressed as follows: TO CITY: TO CONSULTANT: Les Jones, Director of Public Works City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 3/k/pcdocs/boy1e1/2/12/97 Victor Opincar, P.E. Boyle Engineering Corporation P. O. Box 3030, 1501 Quail Street Newport Beach, CA 92658-9020 7 • 18. IMMIGRATION CONSULTANT shall be responsible for full compliance with the immigration and naturalization laws of the United States and shall, in particular, comply with the provisions of the United States Code regarding employment verification. 19. LEGAL SERVICES SUBCONTRACTING PROHIBITED CONSULTANT and CITY agree that CITY is not liable for payment of any subcontractor work involving legal services, and that such legal services are expressly outside the scope of services contemplated hereunder. CONSULTANT understands that pursuant to Huntington Beach City Charter Section 309, the City Attorney is the exclusive legal counsel for CITY; and CITY shall not be liable for payment of any legal services expenses incurred by CONSULTANT. 20. ATTORNEY'S FEES In the event suit is brought by either party to enforce the terms and provisions of this agreement or to secure the performance hereof, each party shall bear its own attorney's fees. REST OF PAGE NOT USED 8 3/k/pcdocs/boylel/2/12/97 21. ENTIRETY The foregoing, and Exhibit "A": attached hereto, set forth the entire Agreement between the parties. IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this Agreement to be executed by and through their authorized offices the day, month and year first above written. BOYLE E GIN ING CORPORATION By: L print name ITS: (circle one) Chairman/Presiden ice President \ 1� By: tk "Lofuivo, Kristi L. Ronnen ra, SecretaAvl imprint nanid ITS: (circle one retary/Chief Financial OfFcer/Asst Secretary Treasurer RM [WOOMMIMM., City Administrator CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, A municipal corporation of the State of California ATTEST: City Clerk 3�aS�5 APPROV D AS TO -FORM: rI fv�,4City Attorney � l , 14 �? INITIAT A OVED: Director of Pu lic WOrJcs 9 3/k/pcdocs/boylel/l1/12/96 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 PROFESSIONAL SERVICES CONTRACT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND BOYLE ENGINEERING CORPORATION FOR A HOLLY/SEACLIFF COST REIMBURSEMENT STUDY FOR EXCESS CAPACITY Table of Contents WorkStatement....................................................................................................1 CityStaff Assistance..............................................................................................2 Timeof Performance.............................................................................................2 Compensation.......................................................................................................4 ExtraWork............................................................................................................2 Methodof Payment...............................................................................................2 Disposition of Plans, Estimates and Other Documents...........................................4 Indemnification and Hold Harmless.......................................................................4 Workers' Compensation.........................................................................................5 Insurance............................................................................................................... 5 Certificates of Insurance.......................................................................................6 Independent Contractor......:.................................................................................7 Termination of Agreement....................................................................................7 Assignment and Subcontracting............................................................................7 Copyrights/Patents...............................................................................................7 City Employees and Officials................................................................................8 Notices................................................................................................................. 7 Immigration.......................................................................................................... 8 Legal Services Subcontracting Prohibited.............................................................8 AttorneyFees.....................................................................................................:.9 'Entirety................................................................................................................9 3ik/pcdocsiboyle I / 11 / 12/96 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMUNICATION TO: Connie Brockway, City Clerk FROM: �es M. Jones II, Director of Public Works SUBJECT: CONTRACT FOR BOYLE ENGINEERING TO PERFORM PROFESSIONAL ENGINEERING SERVICES REGARDING HOLLY / SEACLIFF REIMBURSEMENT DATE: September 3, 1997 As you are aware, your file on this contract is incomplete. Therefore, you have, thus far, been unable to execute the contract. In the meantime, Boyle is nearing completion of this $70,000 contract and has billed the City for over $60,000 for completed work. We are unable to pay them until their contract is executed. It is our understanding that you are missing two items: 1. An insurance form approved by the City Attorney 'R 2. Documentation of how Boyle was recruited and hired. We have contacted Jennifer McGrath of the City Attorney's office to get a copy of the approved insurance form. Our documentation as to how Boyle was recruited and hired is, as follows: Please refer to the attached Request for Council Action. It states, "It is felt by staff that, since a major component of the Development Agreement is the nine million gallon reservoir, Boyle would be the most logical consultant to be employed for such a study". No other consultants were contacted to perform this work. The City Council then acted, on our recommendation, to hire Boyle as a "sole source". Boyle's other credentials well qualify them to perform this assignment. LMJ:REE Attachment boylej ustifi catio n/d oc#27548 REQUEST FOR ACTION MEETING DATE: DECEMBER 16, 1996 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: PW 96-092 Analysis: In November of 1990, a Development Agreement was executed between the City of Huntington Beach and Pacific Coast Homes/Garfield Partners (collectively, "Developer") regarding the- proposed development of the Holly/Seacliff Specific %Plan. Development has proceeded in the Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan area from that time under the provisions of said Development Agreement and has continued with PLC Land Company, the successors to the original Developer. Section 2.2.11(f) of.the Development, Agreement states, "The City shall use its best efforts to the extent allowed by law to, obtain for Developer the maximum Reimbursable Costs available under this Sub -Section from future development served by any facility, a portion of the cost of which is reimbursable hereunder". In 1991, the original Developer hired a consultant to prepare a proposed "Reimbursement District' which was presented to the City Council. Many owners of un-developed land within the Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan Area opposed various components of the . plan. Ultimately, the City Council rejected the proposed "Reimbursement District' as it was presented. Since that time, the original Developer prepared one additional analysis which was presented to staff. That analysis included recommended reimbursements to come from such sources as City-wide assessment districts as well as from the owners of un-developed land within the Specific Plan area. City staff rejected that approach. Since the Development Agreement clearly states that the "City shall use its best efforts" to obtain reimbursement for the Developer, staff felt that a more proactive approach would be advisable. Staff has, therefore, negotiated an agreement with Boyle Engineering, the professional consultant in charge of the Water Master Plan and the Water Financing Plan, to develop a complete analysis of the Holly/Seacliff Development Agreement with regard to reimbursement. It is felt by staff that, since a major component of the Development Agreement is the nine million gallon reservoir, Boyle would be the most logical consultant to be employed for such a study. Tasks for the consultant include, reviewing the Development Agreement and :__ past approaches presented by the Developer, preparing a separate plan which employs the fairest approach and, ultimately, assisting City staff in their negotiations with the Developer in order to cooperatively develop a final product acceptable to all parties. PLC Land Company has been asked to fund this study. They have indicated that they,. will consider it, pending further discussion. Ultimately, this cost would be folded into any future reimbursement district or other reimbursement mechanism. At the conclusion of this study, it is anticipated that a final phase would be the development of the actual reimbursement document. 0022601.01 -2- 12/05/96 3:19 PM E • i, CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET CALIFORNIA 92648 OFFICE OF THE CITY CLERK CONNIE BROCKWAY CITY CLERK CITY CLERK LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL REGARDING ITEM APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY APPROVED ITEM DATE:' TO: ATTENTION:• DEPARTMENT: REGARDING: stj-�� �ha-et See Attached Action Agenda Item ,� /.3, Z , F2 Date of Approval a / /2 7 i a ico/9& Enclosed For Your Records Is An Executed Copy Of The Above Referenced Item For Your Records. Comae Brockway City Clerk Attachments: Action Agenda Page ✓ Agreement Bonds Insurance RCA Deed Other Remarks: cc.. r� ��� aokv- V,,- Na U Dep enter RCA / Agree me ' Insurance] N Department RCA Agreement Insurance Name Department RCA Agreement Insurance Risk Management Department Insurance Cope Other -,,,,,,,- Other G: Follo%Nup/agrmts'transltr ( Telephone: 714-536.5227 ) Boyle Engineering corporation 1501 Quail Street P.O. Box 7350 Newport Beach, CA 92658-7350 COMPANY C LETTER COMPANY D LETTER COMPANY E LETTER THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HFREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. CO POLICY UTECTNE a YE)UMRATION TR TYPE OF I1IURANCE POLICY NL*ABER DATE (MM/DO/YY) IMLIMITS GENERAL LIADAM COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY a >':% CLAIMS MADE [:�] OCCUR. OWNER'S d CONTRACTOR'S PROT. GENERAL AGGREGATE a PRODUCTS•COMP/OP AGG. S PERSONAL d AOV. INJURY S EACH OCXURRENCE a FIRE DAMAGE (Any on* Ilan) t MED. EXPENSE (Any one p.rzon) S A AUTOMOBILELANUTY. ANY AUTO ALL OWNED AUTOS SCHEDUIBD ALTOS HIRED AUTOS :NON --OWNED AUTOS GARAGE LIABLITY iPiP-Statutory 3Y0025691-00 I:,". r !. , ' - 12/31/96 I.. ...... '- v t its - 'ttcrney 12/31/97 COMBINED SINGLE LIMIT t 1000000 X BODILY INJURY (Per perwn) -- S BODILY INJURY IP*f ACCW*nt) t PROPERTY DAMAGE t X EXCEf1 LM!>l M ',UMBRELLA FORM OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM EACH OCCURRENCE S AGGREGATE t :.. B WOFWXR'S COMPENMTTON AND Efi1PLOYfRr LASLITY N 962521 1/ 0 1/ 9 7J 1/ 0 1/ 9 8 X STATUTORY LIMTT8 EACH AioCIDENT 1 1000606i DISEASE -POLICY LIMIT � a 1000000 DISEASE-EACH EMPLOYEE ---- a 1000000 M Of OPERATIONt/LOCATION MHICL£1/SKC1AL ITEM { (SEE REVERSE AND/OR ATTACHED) 4 City of Huntington''Plekch ATTNt Jennifer McGrath 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA.-:92648.,... SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE WRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILLI=M XXXX ;"L 10DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE LEFT, XIX=OM M)XXMWXOEXX=IMJMXKJG}MXIKXX 'A l/ //1 DESCRIPTION OI'' OPERATIONS/LOCATIONS/VEHICLES/SPECIAL ITEMS CERTIFICATE #6960 (CONTINUED) SMC INSURED Boyle Engineering Corporation HOLDER City of Huntington Beach ATTN: Jennifer McGrath 2000 Main Street /� //� 7 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 10 Days Notice of Cancellation in the event of nonpayment of premium. Re:, Balsa Chica, Holly/Seacliff Certificate holder, its officers and employees are named as additional insureds as their interests may appear but only with respect to auto liability arising from the operations of the named insured performed on behalf of the additional insured. PAGE: 2 OF 2 ��:._li� lid. t:: G. �.• f.i" — A, Oealey, Renton) 0 Associatet.1"1 G license #0020739 575 Anton Boulerardy Suite 530 Costa Mesa CA 92626 ........ ............. INSURED ;1-a:.r�;•4kq�F; s.:s�n1a, �cuww:.�:;:`IRa:?i#%Y �i? i%ice.'>:s,;<);'� C>,�3;'�\"'.SFr:52:i<?;::�f ::.�.. , �`> : �: :?�� ,:•.;,:, :;,.�;> ..�.��.>• :a.;:?>- `�.e ,;s �?`:;� X: i45{".5>S.: oT ro7ra7 :<; cs;2:?:`::>:i,ip'';,;:;': <::.•:y::,:e:::i:v....,�...,:•..::.::,. .'c..'x.: .::::k-:ox .:..a:�,t,:4i�¢•.,. �.:,,�'�'R:v.".o,.>n:. r.o-:::S#f�.,....,..w�.,�.n............................................... IS AS A TTER OF INFORMATIN ONLY AND CONFERS NOOR G TS ISSUED UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES BELOW. ................ ......•.......................... ,.,,,,... COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE ............. .......................... ........................................................................................ .,.,.,................................. . CO—mF-AN'Y' 'IAHartoed Fire ins. Co. ETTER .............................................................I......................... ............................... 4&*)Uj ............. : rB rivin City' Fitt/Hartford style Engineering Corporation 1501 Quail Street Newport Beach CA 92660•7350 LETT� ........................................ .................................................... COMPANY i LLTTFR C ............................. i COMPANY I'll .......................... .................................................... ......... .............................................. . D LETIm .......................................... COMPANY . ....................... I ........ I....................... LETTER THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERIOD INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUWECT TO ALL THE TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES, UMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. ............................ .......................... .................,....,..... ,..,........................................., ................................................................................"..._............................................ CO ; T•PE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER ;POLICY Fk�ECTTVE 'POLICY EXPIRATpN LTR DATE (MMIDONY) DATE (MM/DD", LIMITS ;............................... ..................................:........ .............................,....................... CENERALLIABILr^Y 72CESSS9265 12/31/96 12/31/97 .................................. GeNQtALAGGREGATE„ 5....... .. 2,000,000 A....... X COMMERCIAL GENERAL LMILRY PRODUCTS-COMPNP AGG. S :-.. 1 , 000 000 :. ;........; :,..: CLAIMS MADE X OCCUR. ; PERSONAL & ADV. INJURY 'S 1, OOO, OOO OWNER & CONTRACTOR'S MOT. EACH OCCURRENCE s 1,000,000 ' • FIRE DAMAGE (My one fro) :$ 50,000 ...,....., , .�.............. E . EXPENSE (Any ene person): S ; . ........................................ 5 , 000 ..........................................................:............,.......................,...,..........................................,,...................... i AUTOMOBILE LIABILITY COMBINED SINGLE i LIMIT s ANY AUTO ........ .............. : ALL OWNED AUTOS ! BODILY INJURY (Per person) S sCrEDULEp AUTOS :....... .. ........... . ." HIRED AUTOS p ! BODILY INJURY NON -OWNED AUTOS (Pot Accident) s ................................ ........,.,.. ,., . :.......i GARAGE LA91LrTY : iPROPERTY DAMAGE 'S .. . . ............................... . ..................I tt :Excess LIABILITY 72HUSL4493 12/31 /96 12/31 /97 .................. ....... EACH OCCURRENCE s 1, 000; 000 X UMBRELLA FORM :AGGREGATE S 1,000,000 ;.,.,....: OTH93 THAN UMBRELLA FORS1 ..... ... ........ .. ........... ..... ....... [ STATUTORY IJM.TS WORKER'S COMPENSAT30N ............................ ...... EACH ACCIDENT s AND i DISEASE - POLICY LIMIT :S EMPLOYERS LODILITY " ........................................ •. .. ...................................... 'DISEASE - EACH EMPLOYEE s ....... .. OTHER . ........... ........... .. .. .... . ............. . DESCRIPTION OF OPERA- 0NSILOCATION SNEHICLE=PSCtA.S L REM RE: BOLSA CHICA, HOLLY/SEACLIFF THE CITY, ITS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES ARE ADDITIONAL GENERAL LIABILITY PER ENDORSEMENT ATTACHED. "OR MODIFICATION .. ............. . A��P��Tr�...-S ..T.Q.. C —L'.i - I T0'I C' Uy Attorney INSUREDS AS RESPECTS By: Do;,)u-ty City Attorney SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POUCIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL M0YXAXXKRXXXXyX CITY OF N1lNT1NGTON BEACH MAIL 30 41 DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE ATTN :J)=NNIFER McGRATH ' LEFT. 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BrACH CA 92648 •FXrE('T 1011AY.�FOR I , P_ YY Kenneth J. WittmRn ft— 1 1, ,- -- -- .-- GEMERAL ENDORSEMENT p �� In consideration of an additional premium of N/A , it is hereby u rstood and agreed that the following applies: ( X I ADDITIONAL. IN,9QRED - GN202613 THE CITY, ITS OFFICERS AND EMPLOYEES is/are Additional Insured/s as respects to work done by Named Insured, [ X ) NOTICE QF CANCELL 1 N It is understood and agreed that in the event of cancellation of the Policy for any reason other than non-payment of premium, 30 days written notice will be sent to the following by mail CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 MAIN STREET HUNTINGTON BEACH, CA 92648 In the event the policy is canceled for non-payment of premium, 10 days written notice will be sent to the above. Policy No.: 72CESSS9265 Insurance Company: Hartford Fire Ins. Co, Issued to: Boyle Engineering Corporation Authori �Aepresenta`tt KennethJ. Wittman Effective Date: 12/31 /96 Issue Date: 1 /07/97 I V—' AnpnnVnT) A' TO FORM:' G� :�L iiU'iT City Attorney By: Daputy City Attorney. hn inn t nTnn i-��_ �_• , -..�.. ..._. _ a ISSUE DAIS D i.1. r.. .,,��ylk, ,�.�-,-,,;:c•, .r1�?�?�r err!. .�ea:z3�-<' ��..,r`,?E :`Ry •\;. ����n• na:.�. ...r3.:. ,�.:. ,.�.. , �;rF. ,L?"�r:'T.•,»tr:::�>�..n-w., �e <.:<• ,.ro,hir., .\a: :?�: �3c.,..Si.., ..Y"`t.,. .> :„t�v.:. MR- 't �:,°r,^*-ti 01i0ii97 ^'tlY.: 43. s.. . ?... .,:�. `tN:3ii,.... ,;'.x �,i`;;:�`:f "m... :. .,..> :.: .. ,.ran. }.w .. �S,RrAa:..�, .'�Y.A.. �.............................. .. ............ THIS CERTIFICATE IS ISSUED AS A MATTER OF INFORMATION ONLY AND CONFERS NO RIGHTS UPON THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER. THIS CERTIFICATE DOES NOT AMEND, EXTEND OR ALTER THE COVERAGE AFFORDED BY THE Dealey, Renton 4 Associates POLICIES BELOW. License#0020729 -............................................................................................................:..........,.,,............................. 575 Anton -Boulevard, Suite 5h 30 . . ... COMPANIES AFFORDING COVERAGE ................................ CosMesa CA 9,626 :.......................... ........................................................ EITER A Det(Qn Prof. Ins. Co. ...................................................... . a��9�........................................................................................................................................ COMPANY B INSURED ........................................................................................................................................... COMPANY C Boyle Engineering Corporation L:TTEii '-'.......................'-'----.....................,.,,,,.,,,.,.,..,.;..,.,,.,,...,,,.,,...,......I.......... 1501 Quail Street COMPANY D Newport Beach CA 92660.7350 LETTER r................................................................................ COMPANY E i LE TM THIS IS TO CERTIFY THAT THE POLICIES OF INSURANCE LISTED BELOW HAVE BEEN ISSUED TO THE INSURED NAMED ABOVE FOR THE POLICY PERI00 INDICATED, NOTWITHSTANDING ANY REQUIREMENT, TERM OR CONDITION OF ANY CONTRACT OR OTHER DOCUMENT WITH RESPECT TO WHICH THIS CERTIFICATE MAY BE ISSUED OR MAY PERTAIN, THE INSURANCE AFFORDED BY THE POLICIES DESCRIBED HEREIN IS SUBJECT TO ALL TERMS, EXCLUSIONS AND CONDITIONS OF SUCH POLICIES. LIMITS SHOWN MAY HAVE BEEN REDUCED BY PAID CLAIMS. . ............ ...................................................................................................... ................... ............. .................................. _THE ........................................................................................ ..................... CO : TYPE OF INSURANCE POLICY NUMBER 'POLICY :POL]CY EX?lR{gTKJN LTA ; DATE (MM100ter) DATE (M.K'DDAY) LIMITS ......................................................................................................................................................... GENERAL LIASAJIY ..... GENERAL AGGREGATE :......................... ....................... :S ' COMMERCIAL GENERAL LIABILITY i PRODUCTE-COMPAP AGG. ............................. ;S CLAIMS MADE : OCCUR.: ................. PERSONAL & ADV. INJURY 'S ' OYNERS & CONTRACTORS PROT. ... ............................................. £ACH OCCURRENCE ............. :S .......................... FIRE DAMAGE (Any one IINe) ................. ............ ........................... i ................................................................................................................. .......,,,....,....... ........................... .......... i IVIED. DFIENNSE (Any one perran):S AUTOMOBL-E LIABILITY ......................................... COM8IND IN E SINGLE .. . . ..... ANY AUTO LIMIT S ' ALL OWNED AUTOS i 8 INJURY DOILY 1 Y .................. „ SCHEDULED AUTOS (Per perapn) !S ' HARED AUTOS ............... BODILY INJURY ................... NON -OWNED AUTOS (Per ac6aent) :s GARAGE LIABILITY PriOPERTY DAMAGE S ................................................. .:......,.....,... ,.,.......................... ..................................... EXCESS L1AELf1Y :.. ...........;... : FACH OCCURRENCE . ..... ;s UMBRELLA FORM , AGGREGATE.. ....................... .. ........................... .. S ,........ ;OTHER THAN UMBRELLA FORM � ' ::.:.. ..; :•:::. ::, ...:,... .:::: .... .:,:. `>..!:';i2�.`"` woRI�R's COMPENSATION .. .i-rn City - 11U TON City 11 torney STATUTORY LIMITS ....................................... ... ...:5 •EACH . .....: ..... :..................... AND L ..: � ACCIDENT City Attciz•ILey. ............... POLICY ................. ................ EMPLOYERSLLkBL'TY _ DSEASE - LLNR :................................................ S :........... ......... ... ............... .............................. DISEAM_ - EACH EMPLOYEE ES OTHER... ............ ................... ........................... . A : PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY* PL700663 12/31/96 ........... ...... .., . DESCRIFTION OF OPERATIONSLOCATx3NNSVEHICLE&SP ECAL ITEMS IRE: BOLSA CHICA, HOLLY/SEACLIFF 12/31/97 ;PER CLAIM AND 1,000,000 ANNUAL AGGREGATE *FOR PROFESSIONAL LIABILITY COVERAGE THE AGGREGATE LIMIT IS THE TOTAL INSURANCE AVAILABLE FOR ALL COVERED CLAIMS PRESENTED WITHIN THE POLICY PERIOD. THE LIMIT WILL BE REDUCED BY PAYMENTS OF INDEMNITY AND EXPENSE, SHOULD ANY OF THE ABOVE DESCRIBED POLICIES BE CANCELLED BEFORE THE EXPIRATION DATE 'THEREOF, THE ISSUING COMPANY WILL 11N93DVXXXXX CITY OF H(INTINGTON BEACH MAIL 3O * DAYS WRITTEN NOTICE TO THE CERTIFICATE HOLDER NAMED TO THE ATTN: JENNIFER MCGRATN LEFT, XXRXXX) 2000 MAIN STREET xDupovem HUNTINGTON BEACH CA 92648-"'L'FXCEPT 10 DAYS -OR NON PAYMENT OF PRFMIUM Kenneth J. Wittman . ,.. 11r, , , - - / / F17 HOLLY SEACLIFF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT EXECUTIVE SUMMARY The Holly Seacliff Development Agreement was approved by the City of Huntington Beach on November 5, 1990 (Ordinance No. 3080). The effective date of the Agreement is December 5, 1990. The following is a summary of the Agreement: Section 1 Definitions. Section 2 Development of the Property Section 2.1 General - Developer has vested legal right to develop; City has right to regulate consistent with Agreement. Section 2.2 Developer's Obligations 2.2.1. Linear Park (a) Dedicate 41.3 acres for Linear Park: (1) 4.9 acres by 2/5/91. (2) 7.9 acres by 6/30/91. (3) 6.7 acres by 12/31/91. (4) 7.7 acres by 6/30/92. (5) 7.8 acres by 12/31/92. (6) 3.6 acres after Shell gas plant removed, by 12/31/94. (7) City has option for 5 years for additional 2.7 acres or 4.5 acres. (b) Dedicate land free and clear of oil and gas equipment. (c) Rough grade portion of Park adjacent to Tentative Tract 14355; cooperate on other rough grading. (d) Provide landscaped buffer between park and new tracts. (e) Provide CLTA preliminary title report on dedicated land. (f) Receive credit for 35.6 acres of park dedications. (g) If City requests additional 2.7 acres, then credit is 41.3 acres; if City requests additional 4.5 acres, then credit is 43.1 acres. (h) Park credit can be applied to other residential developments. (i) Additional dedication or fees may be required by law. qk. 1 2.2.2. Neighborhood Parks (a) Dedicate 12 acres for neighborhood parks. (b) Identify sites on tentative maps and dedicate at recordation. (c) Construct improvements for $1,2000,000. Complete each park at one half unit occupancy of each planning unit. (d) Maintain park until City- acceptance. 2.2.3. Public Right of Way and Private Streetscape Improvements (a) Dedicate and improve public ROW. (b) Improve perimeter streetscape. (c) Maintain perimeter streetscape. 2.2.4. Traffic and Circulation Improvements (a) Dedicate, design and improve arterials. Prepare precise plans within 120 days of Effective Date, and submit improvement plans with 1 year of adoption of precise plans. Commence construction within 120 days of City ROW acquisition and plan approval. Complete within 3 years. (b) Prepare local street plans. (c) Design and construct intersection improvements. (d) Construct and landscape medians. (e) Maintain Transportation Cooridor in Area C. (f) Pay $150 per trip traffic impact fee. (g) If Cross -Gap Connection not built, pay additional traffic fees if required. (h) Construct street improvements on Edwards and Ellis; receive credit against traf fic impact fee. (i) Lower 42" water main at Edwards and Garfield. (j) Developer eligible for Reimbursable Costs for offsite infrastructure improvements. (k) Dedicate all Developer's property within rights of way for arterials. (1) Above improvements mitigate all traffic impacts absent a showing by City. 2.2.5. Water, Sewer, Drainage and Utility Improvements (a) Construct all sewer facilities. (b) Construct all drainage improvements. (c) Upsize infrastructure if necessary because of density transfer. (d) Underground overhead utilities. (e) Construct Cross -Gap water main, or its equivalent within project area. (f) Install "green acres" distribution and service lines. (g) Developer eligible for Reimbursable Costs for (a) through W. (h) Construct 9 million gallon water reservior, booster stations, well and transmission lines. Start design within 180 days of Effective Date. Start construction within 120 days of City site acquisition. s ;da Ki i',���,�`,`y:b o�'µt;%W �.•�,`r v-ait�#;��1ti�iti J 2.2.6. Fire and Emergency Medical (a) At first building permit, start annual payments of $223,300 for paramedic services, until 1000 units or assessed value increase of $775 million. (b) Construct, furnish and equip fire station on land provided by City. Cost of $3,150,000. Developer eligible for Reimburasble Costs. 2.2.7. Police (a) Construct, furnish and equip police substation at fire station. Cost of $654,000. Developer eligible for Reimbursable Costs. 2.2.8. School Facilities (a) Designate school site as provided by law, and encourage Developer and District to negotiate in good faith. 2.2.9. Other Development Controls (a) Maintain minimum of 100,000 sq. ft. GLA in "mixed development" area. (b) Prepare a Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. 2.2.10. Fees (a) Pay all fees as required by Existing Land Use Regulations. (b) Pay any increases to existing fees adopted on city-wide basis. (c) Pay proposed "planning permit processing fee" if adopted. (d) Pay any police/fire operating fee adopted, subject to 2.2.6(a). (e) Pay any increase in water service fee, subject to 2.2.5(h). (f) Pay any new city-wide fee imposed on all. (g) Pay any new fee for new development impacts, based on City study. (h) Pay traffic impact fee, subject to 2.2.4. W Pay annual Report Review Fee. (j) Pay only fees that are legally valid; increases in building fees are not retroactive. 2.2.11. Reimbursement Agreements The following shall apply to Reimbursable Costs: (a) City pay Developer from fees generated from other development served by excess capacity. (b) Director of Public Works verify Developer's actual costs. (c) Disputes appealable to City Administrator, then City Council. (d) Reimbursable Costs determined on 3,780 units, even if fewer units built. (e) Apportion any unrecoverable costs in an equitable manner between Developer and subsequent developers. Iq 1 (f) City to use best efforts to obtain Reimbursable Costs for Developer. (g) Balance of Reimbursable Costs adjusted annually, not to exceed 200%. Section 2.3 Development Standards and Schedule 2.3.1. Permitted uses are set forth in Existing Land Use Regulations (SLUR) and Agreement. 2.3.2. Developer has right to develop at rate it deems appropriate. Minimum schedule is Exhibit J. Rights are cumulative. 2.3.3. The only development exactions applicable are those in the ELUR and this Agreement. 2.3.4. No additional subsequent Land Use Regulations shall apply. 2.3.5. Developer may apply to form an assessment district, community facilities district or similar special district. Section 2.4 Amendments to Existing Land Use Regulations 2.4.1. Developer and City may seek mutually desired changes to the Project or Existing Land Use Regulations (ELUR). If mutually agreeable Holly Seacliff Specific Plan is approved, its standards become part of ELUR. 2.4.2. if ELUR conflicts with State or Federal laws, those portions of ELUR will be modified or suspended. 2.4.3. Developer to comply with all Uniform Codes. 2.4.4. City can modify or suspend Developer's right to proceed, if necessary for health or safety. Section 2.5. Processing of Development Approvals 2.5.1 City- agrees to process all applications. No further E1R's are required. Section 2.6 Cooperation in Securing Approvals City to cooperate to secure permits from other agencies. i f`} Section 3 Section 3.1. 3.1.3. do Section 3.2 Section 3.3 Section 3.4 Section 3.5 Section 3.6 Section 3.7 Section 3.8 Section 4 TZ 111590LR Periodic Review Default; Remedies; Termination Periodic Review 3.1.1. Developer to prepare and City to review an Annual Monitoring Report. 3.1.2. City Council may review Report at public hearing. 3.1.4. Provides procedure for notice and hearing on modification or termination; if necessary. 3.1.5. City to issue certificate of compliance, if appropriate. Failure to perform is a default. Provides time period for cure. Cite may terminate in event of default. Disputes are referred to a retired judge. Remedies are cumulative. Inaction not a waiver of default. No cross defaults. Termination in event of judicial invalidation. Restitution to Developer if City terminates without just cause. General Provisions V ORDINANCE NO. 3080 AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ADOPTING THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND PACIFIC COAST HOMES AND GARFIELD PARTNERS WHEREAS, the Holly-Seacliff General Plan Amendment has been adopted by the City Council; and The complexity and planned long-term development of the project dictate the need for. a Development Agreement between the City and all owners of the property covered by the Agreement; and A Development Agreement has been prepared and reviewed at a duly noticed public hearing held by the Planning Commission of the City of Huntington Beach on October 2, 1990; and Said Development Agreement has been reviewed at a duly -noticed public hearing held by the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach on October 1, 1990 and continued open to October 8, 1990 and October 15, 1990; NOW, THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach does ordain as follows: SECTION 1. The subject Development Agreement between. the City of Huntington Beach and all owners of the property covered by the Agreement is: 1. The Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses ' and programs specified in the general plan. The Development I Agreement recognizes that a future specific plan will implement the master plan. 2. The Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement is compatible with the uses authorized in, and the regulations prescribed for, the land use district in which the real property is located. 3. The Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement is in conformity with public convenience, general welfare and good land use practice, because infrastructure improvements and parkland dedication will be expedited. 4. The Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement will not be detrimental to the health, safety and general welfare, because it is consistent with the Holly-Seacliff master plan and incorporates the mitigation measures from Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1. ' - 5. The Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement will not adversely affect the orderly development of property values because development and infrastructure improvement will occur on a schedule outlined in the Agreement. SECTION 2. Based on the above findings, the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach hereby approves the Development Agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and all owners of the property covered by the Agreement and adopts it by ordinance pursuant to Government Code Section 65867.5, and this action is subject to a referendum. SECTION 3. This ordinance shall take effect 30 days after its passage. - 2 - PASSED AND ADOPTED by'the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach at a regular meeting thereof held on the 5th day of November , ATTE T: City Clerk REVIEWED AND APPROVED: City Administrator r� _y - 3 - Mayor APPROVED AS TO FORM: a-_,e City Attorney Ja /Z—�lo INITIATED AND APPROVED: Director of Community Development Ord. No. 3080 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF ORANGE ss: CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH I, CONNIE BROCKWAY, the duly elected, qualified City Clerk of the City of Huntington Beach and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the said City, do hereby certify that the whole number of members of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach is seven; that the foregoing ordinance was read to said City Council at a regular meeting therof held on the 15th day of October 19 go , and was again read to said City Council at a regular meeting therof held on the 5th day of November , 19 90 , and was passed and adopted by the affirmative vote of at least a majority of all the members of said City Council. AYES: Councilmembers: MacAllister, Green, Mays, Silva, Erskine NOES: Councilmembers: Winchell ABSENT: Councilmembers: Bannister I, Connie Brockway CITY CLERK of the City of Hunbngton Beach and ex-otfm Clerk of the City Counal, do hereby certify that a synopsis of this ordnance has been published in the Daily Pilot on _ 1'7y In : ccordance wi he City Chart°r of su u ;ny. Connie Brockvva Y— / _ City Clerk City Clerk and ex-officio Clerk of the City Council of the City of Huntington Beach, California i90=599766 Recording Requested By: City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 When Recorded Return to: City Clerk City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 RECORDED IN OFFICIAL REM IS �OF ORANGE COUR Y. CALIFORNIA -339 PM NOV 14 '90 o4 a y,�,' REcomj i EX ME FT C4 DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT By and Between THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH ("CITY") and PACIFIC COAST HOMES and GARFIELD PARTNERS (collectively, "DEVELOPER") Zhis docrI=ent is solely for the c City official ,� of Huntin::s. Cc Ic: plated 1- e rocorcl9d S.C. 6Y03 and stoulLL,h free of e:iarge- TABLE OF CONTENTS Page Recitals . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 1 Section 1 Definitions . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 5 Section 2 Development of the Property . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.1 General: Developer's Right to Develop; City's Right to Regulate Development . . . . . . . 10 2.2 Developer's Obligations . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10 2.2.1 Linear Park . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11 2.2.2 Neighborhood Parks . . . . . . . . . . . . 14 2.2.3 Public Right of Way and Private Streetscape Improvements . . . . . . . . . 15 2.2.4 Traffic and Circulation Improvements; Phasing Plan . . . . . . 16 2.2.5 Water, Sewer, Drainage and Utility Improvements . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20 2.2.6 Fire and Emergency Medical . . . . . . . . 22 2.2.7 Police . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.2.8 School Facilities . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.2.9 Other Development Controls . . . . . . . . 23 2.2.10 Fees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 23 2.2.11 Reimbursement Agreements . . . . . . . . . 25 2.2.12 Approval as to Form by City Attorney . . . 26 2.3 Development Standards and Schedule . . . . . . . . 27 2.3.1 Permitted Development On and Uses of the Property . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27 2.3.2 Timing and Phasing of Development . . . . 27 2.3.3 Development Exactions . . . . . . . . . . 28 2.3.4 Subsequent Land Use Regulations . . . . . 28 2.3.5 Financing Infrastructure . . . . . . . . . 29 2.4 Amendments to Existing Land Use Regulations . . . 29 2.4.1 Mutually Approved Changes . . . . . . . . 29 2.4.2 Conflict with State or Federal Laws . . . 30 2.4.3 Uniform Codes . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32 2.4.4 Emergency Situations . . . . . . . . . 32 2.5 Processing of Development Approvals . . . . . . . 33 2.5.1 Applications . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 33 2.6 Cooperation in Securing Approvals . . . . . . . . 34 1 � jlF TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Pace Section 3 Periodic Review of"Developer's Compliance with Agreement; Default; Remedies; Termination. . . 34 3.1 Periodic Review . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34 3.1.1 Annual Monitoring Report . . . . . . . . 34 3.1.2 Procedure for Review of Annual Monitoring Report . . . . . . . . . . . . 35 3.1.3 Proceedings Upon Modification of Termination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 36 3.1.4 Hearing on Modification or Termination . 36 3.1.5 Certificate of Agreement Compliance . . . 37 3.1.6 Separate Proceedings in Event of Partial Assignment or Transfer. 37 3.2 Defaults --General . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38 3.3 Termination . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 3.4 Resolution of Disputes . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39 r� 3.5 Cumulative Remedies . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 42 3.5.1 Inaction Not a waiver of Default . . . . 43 3.6 No Cross -Defaults . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43 3.7 Termination in Event of Judicial Invalidation . . 45 3.8 Restitution to Developer . . . . . . . . . . . . 45 Section 4 General Provisions, . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 4.1 Indemnification, Defense, Hold Harmless . . . . . 46 4.2 Assignment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46 4.3 Encumbrances of the Property; Rights of Mortgagees . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 47 4.4 No Third Party Beneficiaries 49 4.5 Term . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49 4.6 Covenants . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 50 4.7 Project as a Private Undertaking . . . . . . . . 51 4.8 Consent 51 ii TABLE OF CONTENTS (Continued) Page 4.9 Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing . . . . 52 4.10 Cooperation; Execution of Documents; Estoppel Certificates . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52 4.11 Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge . . 53 4.12 Amendments and Waivers . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 4.13 Time of Essence . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 4.14 Enforced Delay; Extension of Times of Performance . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54 4.15 Severability . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 55 4.16 Notices . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56 4.17 Interpretation and Governing Law . . . . . . . . 57 4.18 Compliance with City's Procedures 57 Section 5 Authority to Execute . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 5.1 City Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57 5.2 Developer Authority . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 5.3 Recordation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 5.4 Entire Agreement . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58 iii i DEVELOPMENT, AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH AND PACIFIC COAST HOMES AND GARFIELD PARTNERS THIS DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT ("Agreement") is entered into by and between the CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a municipal corporation (hereinafter "City"), and PACIFIC COAST HOMES, a California corporation, and GARFIELD PARTNERS, a California general partnership (collectively, "Developer"), pursuant to the authority of Sections 65864 through 65869.5 of the Government Code of the State of California (the "Development Agreement Statute"). R E C I T A L S: WHEREAS, The Legislature of the State of California has adopted legislation which authorizes City to enter into a development agreement with any person having a legal or equitable interest in real property for the purpose of establishing certain development rights in and obligations with respect to such property; and Pursuant to the authorization set forth in such legislation, California Government Code Section 65865(c); the City Council of City adopted its Resolution No. 5390 on ` June 18, 1984, establishing procedures and requirements for consideration of Development Agreements; and 1 The property that is the subject of this Agreement consists of approximately 545 gross acres of real property, bounded generally by Central Park and Ellis Avenue on the north, Huntington and Main Streets on the east, Yorktown and Clay Avenues on the south, and the City of Huntington Beach boundary line on the west (the "Property") more particularly described in the legal description attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and shown on the Site Map attached hereto as Exhibit "B"; and Developer is the legal owner of a portion of the Property and the equitable owner of the balance of the Property; and City desires to enter into this Agreement to secure the following public benefits from Developer; 1. A commitment to dedicate certain public parklands; 2. A commitment for dedication and acquisition of right-of-way, and installation and construction of traffic, circulation, landscape and aesthetic improvements; 3. A commitment to construct other needed public improvements, including without limitation water and sewer lines, reservoir storage, lift stations, pump facilities, and drainage improvements; 4. Designation of a portion of the Property for a future school site; and City has determined that it is appropriate to provide Developer with assurances that it may proceed with and complete Development of the Property in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, which are consistent with the adopted Land Use Element of the City's General Plan and the Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan, and upon adoption_, consistent with the parameters of the proposed Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan; and City recognizes that Development of the Property in full accordance with this Agreement will require Developer to make substantial capital expenditures and investments with respect to the construction and installation of major infrastructure and facilities, both on -site and off -site, public and private; to pay substantial developer fees; and to make substantial dedications of land for public benefit; ;:: and City further recognizes that Development of the Property is a single, integrated development project, with each component of the Development dependent upon the completion and occupancy of each other component; and City acknowledges that Developer would be both unable and unwilling to make the commitments set forth in this Agreement without the assurances provided by City herein and the rights vested in Developer by this Agreement; and The environmental impacts of Development of the Property were addressed in Environmental Impact Report (EIR) No. 88-2 prepared for the Ellis/Goldenwest Specific Plan approval and in Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1 prepared for the Holly-Seacliff General Plan Amendment (GPA No. 89-1) which was certified and approved by the City Council through its 3 adoption of Resolution No. 6097 on January 8, 1990. The City has considered the environmental impacts and mitigation measures of the development of the Property as discussed and analyzed in EIR Nos. 88-2 and 89-1 prior to approving this Agreement; and On October 2, 1990, the City Planning Commission, pursuant to Governnment Code Section 65867, held a duly -noticed public hearing regarding this Agreement and, at the conclusion of the hearing, and after considering the evidence and staff report submitted by the City staff, Developer, and all interested parties, adopted its Resolution No. 1436 recommending that the City Council ._ approve this Agreement; and On October 15, 1990, the City Council held a duly -noticed public hearing regarding this Agreement and, after considering the recommendation of the Planning Commission, the evidence and staff report submitted by the City staff, the Developer, and all interested parties, on NoYember 5 , 1990, the City Council adopted its Ordinance No. 3080 approving this Agreement; and City hereby finds that Development of the Property and the dedications and improvements to be made by Developer pursuant to this Agreement are consistent with the goals, policies, and objectives of City's adopted General Plan and the Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan, and will provide balanced land uses, promote an economically sound community, and be in the best interests of the health, safety, and general welfare of the City, its residents, and the public; 4 N A NOW THEREFORE, in consideration of the mutual promises herein contained, the City and Developer enter into this Agreement upon the following terms and conditions: Section 1 Definitions. As used in this Agreement, the following term shall have the meanings set forth below: "Agreement" means this Development Agreement. ' "Annual Adjustment" means the most recent twelve month increase in the Consumer Price Index (CPI), Los Angeles -Anaheim -Riverside Statistical Area, All Urban Consumers, or the Engineering News Record (ENR) Construction Cost Index, whichever is greater, available as of the date the increase is to be calculated. The base for the CPI and ENR indexes shall be November 1990. "City" means the City of Huntington Beach, a municipal corporation organized and existing under the laws of the State of California. "Community Improvements" means -improvements to the streets and arterials within the Holly-Seacliff Master Plan area adjacent to Property not owned by Developer. Improvements include but are not limited to street, curb, gutters, sidewalks and landscaping. J- "Developer" means (i) Pacific Coast Homes, a California corporation, and (ii) Garfield Partners, a California general partnership in which UWC-Peninsula I Partners, a California limited partnership, and Pacific Coast Homes are 6i the general partners, and any successor -in -interest to the equitable or legal interests of Pacific Coast Homes and Garfield Partners in and to all or any portion of the Property, as more particularly set forth in Section 4.1 herein. "Development" means the improvement of the Property for the purposes of completing the structures, improvements, and facilities comprising the Project, including but not limited to: grading; the construction of infrastructure and public facilities related to the Project, whether located within or outside the Property; and the construction and installation of buildings, structures, utilities, driveways, parking areas, landscaping, lighting, signs and all related improvements. "Development" does not include the maintenance,` repair, reconstruction, or redevelopment of any building, structure, improvement or facility after the initial construction and completion thereof. "Development Approvals" means all enactments, permits, and other entitlements for use which are required for the Development of the Project on the Property pursuant to City's Existing Land Use Regulations. "Development Exaction" means any requirement of City for the dedication of land, the construction or installation of improvements or facilities, the payment of fees or other conditions or requirements, in whatever manner or form imposed, relating to Developer's right to proceed with Development of the Property or any portion thereof. 0 4� � f �� ��1 � 1� { i• 1 yAd ?� I t "Effective Date" means the date thirty days (30) after adoption of Ordinance No. 3080 approving this Agreement. "Existing Land Use Regulations" means the following: 1. The Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan, approved by the City Council through its adoption of Ordinance No. 2998 on June 26, 1989; 2. Holly-Seacliff General Plan Amendment No. 89-1 approved by the City Council through its adoption of Resolution No. 6098 on January 8, 1990; 3. EIR No. 88-2 prepared for the Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan (adopted on May 1, 1989, by Resolution No. 6022); 4. EIR No. 89-1 prepared for the Holly-Seacliff General Plan Amendment (adopted on January 8, 1990, by Resolution No. 6097); 5. All elements of the City's General Plan including the recently adopted Housing Element and the current Coastal Element; 6. The City's existing zoning code shall serve as the development standards for the Project unless and until superceded by the City's adoption and incorporation into this Agreement of the "Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan" ; 7. All other ordinances, resolutions, codes, rules and regulations of the City which are in force on the Effective Date of this Agreement; and 8. All other provisions of this Agreement relating to the Development and use of the Property. 7 "7 "Mortgage" means a mortgage, a deed of trust, or any other security device securing financing with respect to the Property or any part thereof. "Mortgagee" means the holder of the beneficial interest under any Mortgage and its successors and assigns. "Party or Parties" shall mean City and Developer, individually or collectively and, following a sale, assignment, or transfer of the Property or a part thereof, any purchaser, assignee, or transferee (excluding any purchaser or transferee who acquires his/her interest on or after the expiration date, as set forth in Section 4.2 herein). "Project" means construction by Developer of the following uses and improvements upon the Property in conformity with the Existing Land Use Regulations and development schedule referenced in Section 2.3 herein, as such matters may be further defined, enhanced, or modified in this Agreement: 1. Residential Uses, including detached single family, attached single family, and multi -family dwelling units including residential units in mixed development areas not to exceed a combined total of 3,780 units; 2. Commercial Uses, including retail and office uses and buildings with an understanding that the commercial uses in Planning Area "D" may be increased from 7 acres to 10 acres, subject to a mutually agreed upon Land Use Element Amendment, processed as a typical General Plan Amendment; 9 3. Industrial Uses, including business park, research and development, production, assembly, distribution and storage uses; and 4. Mixed -Use Development, including residential •uses, retail uses and office uses. "Property" means the real property described on Exhibit "A" and depicted on Exhibit "B." The "County Portion of the Property" means the approximately ten (10) acre portion of the Property located west of Edwards Street and north of Ellis Avenue that is within the unincorporated area of the County of Orange, as described as Parcel 18 on Exhibit "A" and depicted on Exhibit "B". _ The terms of this Agreement shall apply to the entire Property; provided, however, pursuant to Government Code Sections 65865(b), this Agreement shall become effective with respect to the County Portion of the Property only at :such time that said portion of the Property is annexed into the City of Huntington Beach. "Reimburseable Costs" shall mean costs to be reimbursed to Developer through a Reimbursement Agreement as specified in 2.2.11 for improvements in excess of those required to service the proposed Project. "Subsequent Land Use Regulations" shall mean all j ordinances, resolutions, codes, rules and regulations, -which are adopted by City Council, voter approved initiative, or otherwise become effective after the Effective Date of this Agreement and which govern the development, use and 0 maintenance of land, including without limitations: moratoriums; regulations regarding the rate, time or sequence of development; regulations placing a moratorium on, restricting or phasing the provisions of public facilities, services, or utilities; and air quality maintenance plans. Section 2 Development of the Property. 2.1 General: Developer's Right to Develop; City's Right to Regulate Development. Developer shall have the vested legal right to proceed with the Development of the Project in accordance with this Agreement. City shall have :_, the right to regulate the Development of the Project on the Property consistent with the foregoing vested rights of Developer and the terms and conditions of this Agreement. 2.2 Developer's Obligations Subject to the City's adopted procedures, design, size, acreage, construction specifications and insurance and indemnity requirements, the Developer will construct and dedicate the improvements identified in this section. 2.2.1 Linear Park. (a) Developer shall dedicate all property listed below and shown in Exhibit "C" (41.3 acres) for Linear Park as follows: 1) 4.9 acres (a portion of APN 110-230-11) within sixty (60) days of Effective Date of Agreement. June 30, 1991. 2) 7.9 acres (a portion of APN 110-015-56) by 10 3) 6.7 acres (a portion of APN 110-015-60, 61) by December 31, 1991. 4) 7.7 acres (a portion of APN 110-015-56) by June 30, 1992. 5) 7.8 acres (a portion of APN 110-015-56, 57 and 58) by December 31, 1992. 6) 3.6 acres (a portion of APN 110-230-11) after Shell gas plant removed and no later than December 31, 1994. 7) City shall have the option for five (5) years from the Effective Date to accept dedication of either 2.7 acres (a portion of APN 110-015-60) or 4.5 acres (APN a 110-151-15 and 16). Notwithstanding the provisions of 2.2.1(b) through 2.2.1(e) City shall accept dedication of the 4.5 acre parcel herein subject to the continuation of all oil production and related operations. (b) The surface of all dedicated land shall be granted free and clear of any oil and gas related producing equipment owned or directly controlled by Developer or its affiliates. Oil and gas wells, underground pipelines and transmission lines no longer in use shall be abandoned in compliance with the State of California Division of Oil and Gas standards. All remaining functional pipelines shall be �= buried no less than 48" below present grade and shall -be identified in easements. Any contaminated soils shall be 11 cleaned, processed or disposed of in accordance with all local, county, state and federal laws, regulations and ordinances. In the event the cost for clean-up of the Property to be dedicated exceeds $20,000,000 in the aggregate, Developer may offer to dedicate, in lieu of further dedication identified in 2.2.1(a)1-7, comparable property within the Master Planned boundaries of Huntington Central Park. The value of the comparable alternative property to be dedicated shall be based on the current value of low density residential acreage within the Property. A combination of comparable Central Park property and park improvement costs of equivalent value may be considered. In the event the City does not accept the alternative above, the Developer will be subject to the provisions of the City's Park Acquisition and Development Ordinance. (c) Developer shall be responsible for rough grading within portions of the Linear Park area adjacent to Tentative Tract Map 14355 in accordance with the grading plan approved for such tract and ultimate grading plan for Linear Park. City shall cooperate in obtaining necessary permits for grading and storage of fill material if necessary prior to Linear Park Grading Plan approval. Developer agrees to cooperate for mutually beneficial rough grading in other portions of the Linear Park boundary. (d) Developer shall provide a landscaped buffer between Linear Park and adjacent development in conjunction with the standard setback requirement . The buffer will be shown on each appropriate Tentative Tract Map. 12 (e) Developer will furnish to the City Attorney on the California Land Title Association (CLTA) form a Preliminary Title Report for all lands to be dedicated with full documentation of all exceptions. Dedications of land shall be in fee simple with Developer reserving oil, gas and mineral rights below 500 feet, with no right of surface entry. (f) Developer shall be entitled to a credit for 35.6 acres of parkland dedication. (g) In the event City exercises its option for dedication of the 2.7 acres under 2.2.1(a)7) above, Developer's credit shall be increased to 41.3 acres. In the t�zt event City exercises its option for dedication of the 4.5 acres in 2.2.1(a)7) above, Developer's credit shall be increased to 43.1 acres. The credit is calculated to include full credit for dedications of six acres adjacent to Linear Park below the five foot contour; in the event the City does not exercise the option the Developer receives only half credit for the six acres. (h) The parkland dedication credit may be applied toward other residential developments within the City of Huntington Beach on property owned by Chevron Corporation or a wholly -owned subsidiary or affiliate of Chevron Corporation on the Effective Date of this Agreement,' -and excluding APN 23-181-25, APN 23-181-23, APN 23-181-04, APN 23-181-27, APN 110-151-16, APN 110-151-15, APN 23-321-01, APN 23-181-24, APN 23-181-28. The parkland credit may be 13 used by Developer or its assignee at any time to the extent - Developer's dedication of parkland has been accepted by the City. In the event Developer has exhausted its credit, Developer will be subject to the City's Park Acquisition and Development Ordinance. Credit may not be applied in satisfaction of Developer's obligation in 2.2.2 below. (i) The above along with the provision of 2.2.2 is intended to satisfy the park and recreation requirements for the proposed Project. However, additional parkland dedications and/or in lieu fees may be required, in compliance with California Government Code Section 66477 and Huntington Beach Ordinance Code Article 996-B. 2.2.2 Neighborhood Parks. (a) Developer shall dedicate twelve (12) acres for the development of neighborhood parks as identified in Exhibit "D". The surface of all dedicated land shall be granted in accordance with the provisions of 2.2.1(b). (b) Each park site shall be identified upon the appropriate tentative tract map, and shall be dedicated upon recordation of the appropriate final map. Neighborhood park site location shall be determined through the adoption of the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. (c) Developer shall construct landscaping and �• recreational improvements within each neighborhood par Developer is obligated to expend for said improvements a total of $1,200,000, subject to Annual Adjustment. Improvements to each neighborhood park shall be completed no 14 t later than occupancy of one-half of the residential units 1 11 1, , within the planning unit, as shown on the Land Use Element of the Holly-Seacliff General Plan Amendment, in which the park is located. Developer shall not receive any parkland or fee credit for the improvements in this subparagraph (c). (d) Developer shall be responsible for maintenance of park landscaping and improvements until such time each park is accepted by the City. City shall accept dedication of each park and assume maintenance responsibilities upon final release of the tract. Maintenance of any park located in a private community shall be the responsibility of the Developer or a homeowner's association for such community. 2.2.3 Public Right of Way and Private Streetscape Improvements. (a) Developer shall be responsible for dedication and improvement of public right of way (including but not limited to streets, sidewalks, curbs, gutters, street lights and landscaped medians) as shown in Exhibit "E" in conjunction with arterial improvements in 2.2.4(a) (b) Developer shall be responsible for improvements on the Property of all perimeter streetscapes and any private pedestrian and public or private equestrian trails, including but not limited to landscaping, fencing, walls, sidewalks and signage, to be installed as showir-an Exhibit "E", in conjunction with arterial improvements. (c) Developer, property owner's association, or maintenance district shall be responsible for maintenance of the improvements listed in (b) above. 15 2.2.4 Traffic and Circulation Improvements: Phasing Plan. The Developer shall be responsible for mitigation of all traffic and circulation impacts related to the proposed Project, including those identified in this Agreement and the EIR 88-2 and EIR 89-1. (a) Developer shall be responsible for dedication (adequate for street and highway purposes) design and improvement of all arterials (including "Community Improvements" and cost of necessary right of way acquisition by City of land not owned by the Developer) as shown in Exhibits "E", "F" and "G". Precise alignment plans for arterials (in Exhibit "E") shall be submitted within one hundred twenty (120) days from the Effective Date. All arterial improvement plans shall be submitted within one year of the adoption of the precise alignment plans. Arterial improvements shall be phased as shown and commenced within one hundred twenty (120) days after receipt of City -approved arterial improvement plans (including necessary permits) and City acquisition of necessary right of way not owned by Developer and completed within three (3) years from commencement. (b) Plans for local streets will be prepared by Developer and shown on tentative maps. (c) Developer shall design and construct at --- Developer's expense, intersection improvements with traffic signals in conjunction with all arterial improvements as 16 shown in Exhibits "E", "F" and "G". Traffic signals will include opticom devices. (d) Developer shall be responsible for construction and landscaping of all medians as shown on Exhibits "E", "F" and "G" in conjunction with all arterial improvements. (e) The Transportation Corridor within Planning Area C shall be maintained to the extent the underlying fee is owned by Developer per the standards applied to the Pacific Ranch Project. (f) Developer shall be responsible for payment of a traffic impact fee of $150.00 per incremental trip generated by Project for city-wide transportation system improvements outside the limits of the Holly-Seacliff General Plan Amendment as well as those identified in 2.2.4 (h). measure: (g) EIR 89-1 includes the following mitigation "Prior to the first Specific Plan or Tract Map approval, a fair share funding program for the construction for the "Cross -Gap Connector" from Edwards to Bolsa Chica as a modified secondary arterial and the Seapoint Avenue extension from Garfield to Pacific Coast Highway should be determined. In the determination of this fair share funding program, a credit should be given for the segment of the "Cross -Gap Connector" and Seapointe Avenue constructed within the Project boundary." 17 Developer's payment of fees and construction of the arterial improvements identified in this Section 2.2.4 and in Exhibits "E", "F", and "G", which benefit the anticipated development within the area commonly referred to as the "Bolsa Chica Planning Area" will satisfy, based on the best information available, the above mitigation measure. If the "Cross -Gap Connector" is not built as an arterial during the term of this Agreement, Developer shall be required to pay additional fees to mitigate resultant city-wide transportation system deficiencies directly related to the Project which would have been mitigated by the building of the "Cross -Gap Connector" as indicated by an approved updated traffic study as adopted by City Ordinance or Resolution. (h) Developer shall construct street improvements for the benefit of the City to the North one-half of Ellis Street between Edwards and Goldenwest and Edwards from Ellis to Inlet Drive. In consideration for making such improvements Developer shall receive a credit against the traffic impact fee herein for all costs associated with such improvements, subject to verification by the Director of Public Works. (i) Developer shall lower the 42" City water main ~ in Garfield, east of Edwards and in Edwards, north of Garfield and re-establish all street improvements in order to remove the steep grades on both streets approaching the UK intersection, to be completed in conjunction with arterial a improvements as shown in Exhibit "E". (j) Upon acceptance by City of the improvements identified in Exhibit "E", Developer is eligible for I Reimburseable Costs, subject to the provisions in 2.2.11. (k) Developer shall dedicate all of Developer's Property within the rights of way of the arterials identified in Exhibits "E", "F" and "G". City agrees to abandon and vacate to Developer, when alternate routes are opened for public use, those portions of existing Gothard Street and Garfield Avenue that are not in conformance with Exhibit "G". (1) The above improvements together with Developer's payment of traffic impact fees as called for in Section 2.2.4 shall totally mitigate all traffic and circulation impacts generated by the Project absent a showing by City of additional mitigation requirements as a direct result of Project impacts. 2.2.5 Water, Sewer, Drainage and Utility Improvements. (a) Developer shall construct all sewer lines, lift stations, and pump facilities, as shown in Exhibit "H", ` necessary to accommodate Holly-Seacliff total buildout in accordance with County Sanitation Districts of Orange -' County. Developer shall construct improvements to existing drainage pump stations and/or sewer lift stations 19 serving Developer's Project, including but not limited to the replacement of the Gothard sewer lift station. (b) Developer shall complete all drainage improvements necessary to accommodate the Holly-Seacliff total buildout in accordance with an approved drainage study. (c) Any resultant up -sizing in infrastructure resulting from density transfer will be the responsibility of the Developer to design and construct. (d) Developer shall underground all overhead utilities within the limits of the Project Area (except for transmission lines) in conjunction with arterial improvements as shown in Exhibit "E". (e) Developer shall construct either that portion of the Cross -Gap Connector 16" Water Transmission Main, or its equivalent should the Cross -Gap Connector not be constructed, within the Project Area in conjunction with arterial improvements. (f) Installation of service and distribution lines for "green acres" reclaimed water project concurrent with domestic water lines to serve Developer's Project. (g) Upon acceptance by City of the improvements constructed per 2.2.5 (a) through (f), Developer is eligible to receive Reimburseable Costs, subject to the provisions in (h) In lieu of water system capital facilities fees, Developer shall construct, on land to be acquired by City, a nine million gallon water storage reservoir, 20 associated booster stations, water well and transmission lines. The above shall commence within one hundred twenty (120) days of such acquisition and City approval of plans. Project engineering and other related pre -construction -11 activities shall begin within one hundred eighty (180) days of the Effective Date. The cost of construction to Developer shall include design and construction costs and land acquisition costs. Upon acceptance of these facilities by the City, the Public Works Director shall verify Developer's actual costs and determine Developer's Reimburseable Costs, subject to the provision in 2.2.11. reveloper will not be denied any building releases or building permits due to lack of water services provided by these facilities. 2.2.6 Fire and Emergency Medical. (a) Upon issuance of the first building permit for the Project, Developer shall commence annual payments to the City to mitigate the impact of the need to provide paramedic services to Project. The amount shall be Two Hundred Twenty Three Thousand Three Hundred Dollars ($223,300.00) per annum, subject to Annual Adjustment based only on CPI. Such payments shall continue until such time as One -Thousand 21 (1,000) units have received final inspection and approval or the Property has an increased assessed valuation of $775,000,000 compared to the 1990/91 assessed value of the property, whichever occurs first. (b) Developer shall construct, furnish and equip with fire and medical apparatus, a "Public Safety Facility" (referred to as the "Talbert Station" in the Fire Protection Study dated July 1974). Developer shall be responsible for costs of Three Million One Hundred Fifty Thousand ($3,150,000) Dollars, subject to Annual Adjustment. The facility will be constructed on land to be provided by City. Upon acceptance by City of the improvements in 2.2.6 (b), Developer is eligible for Reimburseable Costs. 2.2.7 Police (a) Developer shall construct, furnish and equip with police apparatus, a police substation, as a part of the "Public Safety Facility". Developer shall be responsible for costs of Six Hundred Fifty Four Thousand ($654,000) Dollars, subject to Annual Adjustment. Upon acceptance by City of the improvements in 2.2.7 (a). Developer is eligible for Reimburseable Costs. 2.2.8 School Facilities. (a) Developer agrees to designate an area for a 22 3 + public school site as provided in,the California Government Code, City ordinances and other applicable law. The City encourages the Developer and the school district to negotiate in good faith to reach mutual agreement. 2.2.9 Other Development Controls. (a) Developer shall maintain a minimum of 100,000 square feet of Gross Leaseable Area (GLA) of commercial use within the "Mixed Development" area. (b) Developer shall prepare for City consideration a Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan which outlines design guidelines and new development standards for the Project area subject to 2.4.1. 2.2.10 Fees. (a) Developer shall pay all fees applicable to the Project as required by Existing Land Use Regulations. k (b) Developer shall pay any increases to existing fees adopted in the future by the City and applied on a uniform city-wide basis. (c) Developer shall pay the proposed "planning permit processing fee" if adopted by the City. (d) Developer shall also pay any Police/Fire operating fee adopted by the City, subject to adjustment to credit amounts paid pursuant to 2.2.6(a). " 23 (e) Developer shall pay any increase to the water service fee subject to the provisions of 2.2.5 (h) herein. (f) Developer shall pay any new city-wide fee which is imposed on all property owners, businesses and residents. (g) Developer shall pay any new fee which applies to new development to the extent the fee is reasonably related to the impacts generated by the Project, and not otherwise required to be mitigated by Developer. This provision shall apply only to the extent that the mitigation measures are related to the impacts. Prior to requiring Developer to pay any such new fee, City shall provide Developer with an analysis which documents the purpose of the fee, the use to which the fee is to be put, and also documenting a reasonable relationship between the fee to be paid by Developer and the impacts which are directly attributable to the Project. (h) Developer shall pay a traffic impact fee subject to the provisions of 2.2.4. (i) Developer shall pay an Annual Report Review Fee subject to the provisions in 3.1.1. (j) Developer's obligation to pay the fees or ` increases required herein is subject only to those fees that are legally valid, in accordance with Government Code sections 66000 et seQ. and 54990. Upon payment of building fees for individual projects, those projects shall not be subject to any subsequent increase to building fees. 24 2.2.11 Reimbursement Agreements. When in the performance of this Agreement Developer is eligible for Reimburseable Costs the following shall apply to any agreement for reimbursement: (a) Upon receipt of funds generated by fees or exactions from other development served by the excess capacity of public facilities paid for by the Developer, the City shall reimburse Developer for its verified Reimburseable Costs; (b) The Director of Public Works shall at the time of establishment of the reimbursement agreement verify the Developer's actual costs and determine Reimburseable Costs. -- (c) If the Developer disputes either the amount or percentage of the Reimburseable Costs as determined by the Director of Public Works, based on review of all pertinent data, the City Administrator will determine the disputed item. Any decision of the City Administrator may be appealed to the City Council; (d) Reimburseable Costs shall be determined on a complete buildout of 3,780 units and shall not be reduced if the Developer fails to achieve the maximum build out allowed; (e) If in the event that the cost of any �acili•ty necessary to serve the Project and the cost necessary to serve subsequent development (eligible cost) is less tFian the total, verified cost of such facility, then City, to the extent lawful, shall apportion any unrecoverable cost in an equitable manner between the Developer and any subsequent developer(s) which is found to benefit from the improvements; 25 (f) The City shall use its best efforts to the extent allowed by law to obtain for Developer the maximum Reimburseable Costs available under this Sub -Section from future development served by any facility, a portion of the cost of which is reimburseable hereunder. Developer acknowledges that City is limited in the manner in which it may collect or require such reimbursement and that City may be unable to cause Developer to be reimbursed for such costs; (g) On the anniversary of any reimbursement agreement, the balance of any amount originally determined to be reimburseable shall be increased by an Annual Adjustment based on the ENR index. In no event shall the ;y amount reimbursed exceed two hundred percent (200%) of the original amount determined to be reimburseable. 2.2.12 Approval as to Form by City Attorney. Instruments conveying all dedications shall be subject to approval as to form by the City Attorney as required by the City Charter. 2.3 Development Standards and Schedule. 2.3.1 Permitted Development On and Uses of the Property. The permitted uses of the Property, the density and intensity of use, the maximum height, bulk, and size of proposed buildings, parking requirements, other develoment and building standards, provisions for reservation or dedication of land for public purposes, the location and design of public improvements, and all other terms and conditions applicable to Development of the Property shall 26 w � t be those set forth in City's Existing Land Use Regulations k i and all other terms and conditions set forth in this Agreement. 2.3.2 Timing and Phasing of Development. The parties acknowledge that Developer cannot at this time predict precisely when or the rate at which phases of the Project will be developed. Developer shall have the right, but not the obligation, to develop the various portions of the Project on the Property in such order and at such rate and at such times and such number of units as Developer deems appropriate. The attached Exhibit "J" is the minimum development schedule Developer intends to pursue. If Developer does not build as soon as indicated on Exhibit "J", it is understood that the rights -held by Developer are cumulative. Developer may accelerate such schedule to the extent that the impacts of that portion of the Project to be accelerated have been mitigated as required in this Agreement. 2.3.3 Development Exactions. The only Development Exactions applicable to Development of the Property shall be those set forth in the Existing Land Use Regulations and this Agreement. Development Exactions imposed for the purpose of planning, designing, engineering, constructing, supervising, inspection, operating, maintaining, repai-ring and reconstructing any of the types of improvements, facilities and services referenced in Section 2.2 of this Agreement shall not be increased, except as provided herein. 27 The City shall retain the right to impose reasonable conditions or mitigation measures on individual development projects consistent with this Agreement. 2.3.4 Subsequent Land Use Regulations. Except as specifically set forth in 2.4 herein, no additional Subsequent Land Use Regulations shall apply to the Development of the Property. To the extent that any Subsequent Land Use Regulations are applied to the Development of the Property (either pursuant to 2.4 herein or as a result of the judicial invalidation of the preceding sentence on its face or as applied to a particular set of facts), then to the maximum extent legally permissible, City agrees to apply such Subsequent Land Use Regulation in a manner which shall not conflict with Developer's rights as set forth in this Agreement. 2.3.5 Financing Infrastructure. To the extent that financing through special assessments or taxing districts is legally available to finance the construction and/or acquisition of any of the public improvements required to be financed and/or constructed by Developer with respect to Development of the Property, Developer may apply to City to form an Assessment District, Community Facilities District, or similar special district. Such district may include land other than the Property to the extent perm-itted by applicable laws. 28 City shall process the application to form such a district in accordance with applicable laws. The City shall not, however, have the obligation to form an Assessment District, Community Facilities District, or other similar special district under this Agreement. 2.4 Amendments to Existing Land Use Regulations. 2.4.1 Mutually Approved Changes. The Parties acknowledge that during the term of this Agreement either party may request that the other Party agree to a change to the Project or Existing Land Use Regulations. In the event Developer and City determine that a change in the Project or to any Existing Land Use Regulations is desirable, the ` Developer shall file an application with City to effectuate the desired change in the Project or Existing Land Use Regulations and City shall process and act on such application in accordance with the balance of the Existing Land Use Regulations and exercising its discretion in a reasonable manner. If approved, any such change to the Project or the Existing Land Use Regulations shall be incorporated herein as an addendum to this Agreement. Not by way of limitation of the foregoing, the Parties acknowledge that, as of the Effective Date of this Agreement, Developer is processing with City the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan, which covers the same geograph-ic area covered by General Plan Amendment No. 89-1. If a mutually agreeable Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan is adopted and the standards, regulations, requirements or uses set 29 forth therein are different than those otherwise set forth in the Existing Land Use Regulations, the Existing Land Use Regulations shall be those set forth in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan in addition to those other Existing Land Use Regulations not modified by the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan shall be deemed to be mutually agreeable if it is approved by the City and the Developer sends a written notice to the City that the Specific Plan is agreeable to Developer for purposes of becoming Existing Land Use Regulations under this Agreement. 2.4.2 Conflict with State or Federal Laws. In the event that any State or Federal law, rule, or regulation enacted after the Effective Date of this Agreement prevents or precludes compliance with any of the Existing Land Use Regulations, as the same may be revised from time to time in accordance with this Agreement, such portion of the Existing Land Use Regulations shall be modified or suspended as may be necessary to comply with such State or Federal law, rule, or regulation; provided, however, that the balance of the Existing Land Use Regulations shall remain in full force and effect to the extent they are not inconsistent with such law, rule, or regulation and to the extent such law, rule, and regulation does not render such remaining provisions impractical to enforce. Any Party which determines that it cannot perform any act authorized or required by this Agreement due to a conflict described in this Section 2.4.2 shall, within sixty 30 (60) days of making such determination, provide all other Parties with written notice of such State or Federal law, rule, or regulation and a statement of the conflict with the provisions of this Agreement. The Parties shall, within thirty (30) days after receipt of such notice, meet and confer in good faith in a reasonable attempt to modify this Agreement to comply with such law, rule, or regulation. Within a reasonable time thereafter, regardless of whether the Parties reach an agreement on the effect of such law, rule, or regulation upon this Agreement, the matter shall be scheduled for hearing before the City Council. Notice of such hearing shall be given pursuant to Section 65090 of the Government Code. 2.4.3 Uniform Codes. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, Developer shall comply with all adopted development and building standards -� set forth in the Uniform Building Code, Uniform Mechanical Code, National Electrical Code, Uniform Plumbing Code, Uniform Fire Code, and other similar state -mandated Uniform Codes in effect at the time Development occurs and which would otherwise be applicable to such Development in the absence of this Agreement. 2.4.4 Emergency Situations. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, City. shall have the right to modify or suspend Developer's right to proceed with Development in accordance with the Existing Land Use Regulations if necessary to protect against an 31 immediate and serious threat to the public health or safety. In such event, the modification or suspension of this Agreement shall be limited to the least restrictive measures necessary to prevent or alleviate the danger to public health and safety. Prior to any modification and during any suspension, in the event Developer disputes the necessity for such action, upon notice from Developer, The City Council shall first be required to: (i) conduct a noticed public hearing as soon as allowed under existing regulations, at which Developer shall be given an opportunity to submit oral and written evidence, (ii) adopt a resolution of need and necessity, and (iii) set forth in _ such resolution detailed findings of fact supporting the City Council's determination. In the event of a dispute between the parties regarding any such resolution, Developer shall have the right to challenge the resolution through the procedure provided in Section 3.4 herein. The resolution shall be reviewable pursuant to Code of Civil Procedure Section 1094.5, and shall be supported by a preponderance of the evidence and shall be subject to the "independent judgment" standard of review relating to fundamental vested rights. 2.5 Processing of Development Approvals. _ 2.5.1 Applications. City agrees to accept-f o-r processing and review all applications for Development Approvals in accordance with Existing Land Use Regulations and this Agreement. City agrees that no subsequent or 32 1 supplemental environmental impact report shall be required h for any Development Approval unless the anticipated environmental impacts related to any proposed project exceeds the level of impact identified in the environmental impact reports listed in Existing Land Use Regulations as required by law (Public Resources Code Section 21166; California Code of Regulation, Title 14, Sections 15162-15164). Such project may require additional environmental review and mitigation measures. In the event any of City's Existing Land Use Regulations are inconsistent with the General Plan, are non-specific or permit City to exercise discretion in establishing specific standards or requirements, the City shall exercise such discretion in a manner consistent with the intent of this Agreement and Developer's vested rights hereunder. k Further in the event of any conflict or inconsistency between the specific standards and requirements set forth in this Agreement and the Existing Land Use Regulations, the provisions of this Agreement shall prevail and govern. 2.6 Cooperation in Securing Approvals. City agrees to cooperate with Developer in securing all permits, licenses, approvals, or consents which may be required by City -or -- other agencies having jurisdiction over Development of the Project on the Property. Developer will reimburse to the City its out-of-pocket costs, if any, occasioned in 33 compliance with this sub -section to the extent not anticipated or otherwise included in fees paid by Developer. Section 3. Periodic Review of Developer's Compliance with Agreement; Default; Remedies; Termination. 3.1 Periodic Review 3.1.1 Annual Monitoring Report. The Director of Community Development shall review this Agreement annually, on or before the anniversary of the Effective Date, in order to ascertain the good faith compliance by Developer with the terms of the Agreement. Developer shall submit an Annual Monitoring Report thirty _ (30) days prior to the anniversary date to the Director of Community Development. The Annual Monitoring Report shall be in a form reasonably acceptable to the Director of Community Development and shall be accompanied by an annual review and administration fee sufficient to defray the costs of review and administration of this Agreement. The amount of the annual review and administration fee shall be set by City but shall not exceed the reasonable costs incurred by City in review and administration of the Agreement. 3.1.2 Procedure for Review of Annual Monitoring Report Upon completion of a periodic review, the D rtector of Community Development shall submit a report to the City Council setting forth the evidence concerning good faith compliance by Developer with the terms of this Agreement and 34 `k x his or her recommended finding on that issue. This report shall be made available for public review. The City Council may conduct a public hearing, after proper notice, for the purpose of reviewing this Annual Report. If the City Council finds on the basis of substantial evidence that Developer has complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement, the review shall be concluded. If the City Council makes a preliminary finding that Developer has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of this Agreement as to any portion of the Property, the City Council may modify or terminate this Agreement with respect to the portion of the Property as to which a default exists, as provided in Sections 3.1.3-3.1.4 and 3.2. 3.1.3 Proceedings Upon Modification or Termination. If, upon a preliminary finding under Section 3.1.2, City determines to proceed with modification or termination of this Agreement, City shall give written notice to Developer of such intention. The notice shall be given at least thirty (30) calendar days prior to the scheduled hearing and shall contain: (a) The time and place of the hearing; (b) A statement that City is considering pos&ible termination or modification of the Agreement and the nature of any proposed modification; and 35 (c) Such other information as is reasonably necessary to inform Developer of the nature of the proceeding. 3.1.4 Hearing on Modification or Termination. At the time and place set for the hearing on modification or termination, Developer shall be given an opportunity to present oral and written testimony. If the City Council finds, based upon a preponderance of the evidence, that Developer has not complied in good faith with the terms and conditions of the Agreement as to any portion of the Property covered by the hearing notice, and that Developer has not commenced or diligently proceeded to cure such default within the time period set forth in Section 3.2 M herein, the City Council may terminate or modify this Agreement with respect to the portion of the Property as to which the default exists. The decision of the City Council shall be final, subject to Developer's right to challenge such decision through the procedure provided in Section 3.4 herein or, if such procedure is unavailable for jurisdictional reasons, by appropriate judicial proceedings. 3.1.5 Certificate of Agreement Compliance. If at the conclusion of a periodic review the City Council finds Developer to be in compliance with this Agreement, City shall, upon request by Developer, issue -•a Certificate of Agreement Compliance ("Certificate") to Developer stating that after the most recent periodic review and based upon the information known or made known to the Cam: Director of Community Development and City Council that (1) this Agreement remains in effect and (2) Developer is not in default. The Certificate shall be in recordable form and shall contain information necessary to communicate constructive record notice of the finding of compliance. Developer may record the certificate with the County Recorder. 3.1.6 Separate Proceedings in Event of Partial Assignment or Transfer. Subsequent to a sale, assignment, or transfer by Developer of its interest in any portion of the Property, City shall conduct the periodic review called for in this Section 3.1 separately with respect to each separate ownership within the Property and, to the extent that the City Council finds a particular owner to be in compliance with this Agreement with respect to the portion of the Property owned by such owner, City shall issue a ` separate Certificate to such owner in accordance with Section 3.1.5. 3.2 Defaults --General. Subject to extensions of time by mutual consent in writing or as set forth in Section 4.14 herein, failure or delay by a Party to perform any term or provision of this Agreement shall constitute a default under this Agreement. In the event of an alleged default or breach of any terms or conditions of this Agreement, --the Party alleging such default or breach shall give the Party allegedly in default not less than thirty (30) days notice in writing specifying the nature of the alleged default and 37 the manner in which said default may be satisfactorily cured. During any such 30-day period, the Party charged shall not be considered in default. If the nature of the default in question is such that it cannot reasonably be cured within such 30-day period, the commencement of the cure within such time period and the diligent prosecution to completion of the cure shall be deemed a cure within such period. During the cure period, the non -defaulting party shall not be permitted to pursue any legal or equitable remedy against the defaulting party except to the extent necessary to protect against irreparable injury. The City cannot be held liable for monetary damages in the event that the City defaults or breaches the Agreement. 3.3 Termination. In addition to termination proceedings conducted pursuant to City's regularly scheduled periodic review of this Agreement, as described in Section 3.1 herein, City may terminate this Agreement with respect to any portion of the Property as to which a material default exists and is not cured within the time period set forth in Section 3.2 herein. Any such termination proceedings by City shall comply with the notice and hearing requirements set forth in Sections 3.1.3 and 3.1.4 herein and shall be reviewable as provided in Section 3.1.4. 3.4 Resolution of Disputes. Except as specifically set forth in Section 3.5.1 herein, any and all disputes between the Parties hereto regarding the construction, operation, or m xv S jl i u • a a �. enforcement of this Agreement, and any of the rights or obligations granted or imposed by this Agreement, shall be submitted only to a retired Judge of the Superior Court in and for the State of California (hereinafter "Superior ': Court") in the following manner: (i) The Parties must agree on the Judge's identity within five (5) days after the dispute arises or, at the end of the fifth day, the Parties' respective counsel shall be authorized to agree upon the Judge's identity and bind their clients. Failure to cooperate in this selection process waives the uncooperative Party's right to participate in the selection process, or object to the Judge selected. (ii) Disputed matters shall be promptly %` submitted to the Judge in a manner determined by him/her following his/her selection. once a matter is submitted to the Judge, s/he is empowered with the full authority of a judge sitting on the bench of the Superior Court, and may make any ruling consistent with that power. In order to implement this provision, the -- Parties, by executing this Agreement, agree to execute and file with the Superior 39 M Court, such papers as are appropriate to procure the appointment of said Judge as a Judge Pro-Tempore of the Superior Court. (iii) The Judge may make any order s/he feels is appropriate regarding which Party or Parties should pay for the fees and costs of the Judge. (iv) Except as specifically set forth in Section 3.5.1 herein, the rights of judicial review granted under this Section 3.4 are the only rights of judicial review that are available to the Parties hereto. It is their intention that all of the disputes arising out of, or related to, Lheir execution of this Agreement, o- the rights or responsibilities granted or imposed by this Agreement, be resolved exclusively in the manner provided for in this Section 3.4 and its subparts. Consistent with this intention, the Parties, by executing this Agreement, specifically acknowledge that the decisions and orders of the Judge are nonappealable and nonreviewable, and, therefore, they are waiving their rilgh_ts to seek relief in the State or Fec oral Courts, except for the purpose of securing and confirming the authority of the Judge 40 provided for herein, and to enforce his/her decisions and orders by confirmation pursuant to California Code of Civil Procedure Section 1280 et seq., or through appropriate injunctive relief In the event that a Party files any action inconsistent with the terms of this Section 3.4, then the Party filing the action will be liable for all fees and costs other than attorney's fees actually incurred by the other Party in responding to said action, regardless of its outcome. (v) The limitations on actions set forth in this Section 3.4 apply only to actions between the Parties hereto. They are not intended to and do not limit the Parties' right to bring an action against third parties. Furthermore, no third party shall be entitled to rely on any provision of this Section 3.4 in their response or defense to an action brought against them by a Party(s) to this Agreement. (vi) No money damages shall lie against any party to this Agreement. — 3.5 Cumulative Remedies. Subject to Section 3.4 and to the extent that any remedy specifically described in this Section 3.5 is unavailable through the procedures set forth 41 therein, each of the Parties hereto may pursue any remedy at law or equity available for the breach of any provision of this Agreement. No Party shall be entitled to recover damages for any default, to enforce any covenant or agreement herein, but may obtain appropriate relief enjoining any threatened or attempted violation of this Agreement, declaratory relief, specific performance, and relief in the nature of mandamus. All of the remedies described above shall be cumulative and not exclusive of one another, and the exercise of any one or more of the remedies shall not constitute a waiver or election with respect to any other available remedy. In the event litigation is filed to obtain any such remedy consistent with Section 3.4, such litigation must be instituted and prosecuted in the Superior Court of the County of Orange, State of California, in an appropriate municipal court in that county, or in the United States District Court for the Central District of California. 3.5.1 Inaction Not a Waiver of Default. Any failure or delay by a party in asserting any of its rights and remedies as to any default shall not operate as a waiver of any default or of any such rights or remedies, or deprive such party of its right to institute and maintain any actions or proceedings which it may deem necessary to protect, assert, or enforce any such rights or remedies. 3.6 No Cross -Defaults. Subsequent to a sale, assignment, or transfer by Developer of its interest in any 42 portion of the Property, no default by Developer (including any subsequent assignee of Developer) as to any other portion of the Property shall be deemed a default by the assignee (including any subsequent assignee of such assignee) with respect to the portion of the Property so sold, assigned, or transferred, and no default by the assignee (including any subsequent assignee of such assignee) with respect to the portion of the Property so sold, assigned, or transferred shall be deemed a default hereunder as to any other portion of the Property. Effective upon such sale, assignment, or transfer, the obligations of Developer shall become several and not joint. Non-compliance by Developer or any assignee of Developer shall not be grounds for termination or modification of this Agreement with respect to any other portion of the Property not in default, and shall not constitute cause for City to initiate enforcement action against other persons or entities owning any other portion of the Property. Notwithstanding the foregoing, Developer acknowledges that to the extent a default with respect to one portion of the Property prevents the development of any other portion of the Property from proceeding without posing a material threat to public health or safety (such as -would be the case, for example, if the default prevented completion of 'a water or sewer line needed by the other development), City shall retain the right to prevent 43 development of the non -defaulting portion of the Property from proceeding until the threat to public health or safety has been removed. In this regard, City agrees to cooperate with any non -defaulting owner to minimize the period of the delay and to exercise reasonable diligence to enforce City's rights under this Agreement and any applicable Development Approvals applicable to the defaulting portion of the Property to allow development of the non -defaulting portion of the Property to proceed on a timely basis. 3.7 Termination in Event of Judicial Invalidation. If the final judgment of a court of competent jurisdiction determines that this Agreement is invalid, then neither City nor Developer shall have any further rights or obligations hereunder as of the date the judgment becomes final. A judgment shall not be deemed "final" until all appellate review has been completed or the time for seeking appellate review has passed without any review having been sought. 3.8 Restitution. If City terminates this Y Agreement without just cause and Developer is unable to compel enforcement through any judicial or other remedies it may be entitled to, Developer may be reimbursed by City subject to the provisions in 2.2.11, for any portion of the costs of any improvements constructed by Developer under this Agreement not otherwise necessary to serve the development. In addition, City shall re -convey parklands dedicated in excess of statutory requirements. 44 ,f • 1 Section 4 General Provisions. 4.1 Indemnification, Defense, Hold Harmless. Until such time as the public improvements required by this Agreement to be constructed have been completed and accepted by City, Developer agrees to protect, defend, indemnify and hold and save harmless City, its officers, and employees against any and all liability, claims, judgments, costs and demands, however caused, including those resulting from death or injury to employees of Developer and Developer's subcontractors and damage to Developer's property, arising directly or indirectly out of the operations herein undertaken by Developer, including those arising from the passive concurrent negligence of City, but save and except those which arise out of the active concurrent negligence, sole negligence, or the willful misconduct of City. Developer will conduct all defense at its sole cost and expense. 4.2 Assignment. Upon dedication of all the real property to be dedicated herein and upon completion and acceptance by City of all of the public improvements to be made herein, Developer shall have the right to sell, assign, or transfer the Property in whole or in part, to any person, partnership, joint venture, firm, or corporation upon:• -- completion of all improvements and obligations identified in 45 2.2.1 through 2.2.7, at any time during the term of this Agreement without obtaining City's approval. In the event of such a sale, assignment, or transfer, the seller, assignor, or transferor shall have no further obligations arising out of any acts, omissions, or events occurring subsequent to the effective date of the transfer. Prior to making the dedications and improvements required herein, Developer may sell, assign or transfer the Property in whole or in part with the consent of the City, such consent not to be unreasonably withheld. City's consent will not be required if such assignment is made to an affiliate of Developer. Any purchaser, assignee, or transferee shall u• have all of the rights, duties, and obligations arising under this Agreement insofar as such rights, duties, and obligations are applicable to the Property or portion thereof purchased, assigned, or transferred. 4.3 Encumbrances of the Property; Rights of Mortgagees. The Parties hereto agree that this Agreement shall not prevent or limit Developer, in any manner, at Developer's sole discretion, from encumbering the Property, or any part thereof or any improvement thereon, by any Mortgage. City acknowledges that Mortgagees may require certain Agreement interpretations and modifications and _- agrees upon request from time to time, to meet with Developer and representatives of such Mortgagees to negotiate in good faith any such request for interpretation or modification. City will not unreasonably withhold its 40 1 consent to -any such requested interpretation or modification. Any Mortgagee of the Property shall be entitled to the following rights and privileges: (a) Neither entering into this Agreement nor a breach of this Agreement shall defeat, render invalid, diminish, or impair the lien of any Mortgage made in good faith and for value, unless otherwise required by law. (b) Any Mortgagee which has submitted a request in writing to City in the manner specified herein for giving notices shall be entitled to receive written notification from City of any default by Developer in the performance of Developer's obligations under this Agreement. (c) If City timely receives a request from a Mortgagee requesting a copy of any notice of default given to Developer under the terms of this Agreement, City shall provide a copy of that notice to the Mortgagee within ten (10) days of sending the notice of default to Developer. The Mortgagee shall have the right, but not the obligation, to cure the default during the remaining cure period allowed such party under this Agreement. (d) Any Mortgagee who comes into possession of the Property, or any part thereof, pursuant to foreclosure of the Mortgage, or deed in lieu of such foreclosure, shall take the Property, or part thereof, subject to the te'tms of this Agreement. Notwithstanding any other provision of this Agreement to the contrary, no Mortgagee shall have an obligation or duty under this Agreement to perform any of 47 Developer's obligations or other affirmative covenants of Developer hereunder, or to guarantee such performance; provided, however, that to the extent that any covenant to be performed by Developer is a condition precedent to the performance of a covenant by City, the performance thereof shall continue to be a condition precedent to City's performance hereunder. 4.4 No Third Party Beneficiaries. This agreement is made and entered into for the sole protection and benefit of the Parties and their respective successors and assigns. No person not a Party hereunder shall have any right of action based upon any provision in this Agreement. 4.5 Term. Subject to the last paragraph of Section 2.42 herein, the term of this Agreement shall commence upon the Effective Date and, unless modified or extended pursuant to the provisions set forth herein, shall expire upon the earliest of the following dates: (i) Fifteen (15) years after the Effective Date; or (ii) As to any separate legal lot, parcel, or unit within the Property, upon completion of Development with respect to said lot, parcel, br unit in accordance with this Agreement and the issuance by City of all required occupancy permits or final inspection approvals; or (iii) As to any separate legal residential 16t, parcel, or unit within the Property, upon the sale or lease (for a period not less than one (1) year) to the ultimate purchaser, occupant, or user thereof; provided, however, the 48 t benefits of this Agreement shall continue to run as to any such lot, parcel, or unit until the time set forth in subparagraph (i) or (ii) herein, whichever is earlier; or (iv) As to any portion of the Property as to which ^` a material default exists and is not timely cured, on such earlier date that this Agreement may be terminated with respect thereto in accordance with Sections 3.1-3.3 herein. Any such expiration or termination shall be effective without the execution or recordation of any further document or instrument and, at the time of such expiration or termination, the Property or portion thereof shall be released from and no longer subject to, or burdened by, the provisions of this Agreement. In addition, upon the expiration or termination of this Agreement for any reason as to the Property or any portion thereof, City and Developer agree to cooperate and execute any document reasonably requested by the other party to remove this Agreement of record as to the Property or applicable portion thereof. Termination of this Agreement shall not result in a termination of any Development Approvals applicable to the Property or portion thereof. 4.6 Covenants. The provisions of this Agreement shall constitute covenants which shall run with the land comprising the Property and, subject to Sections 4.3 and 4.5(iii) herein, the benefits and burdens hereof shall bind and inure to all successors in,interest to Developer and City. 49 4.7 Project as a Private Undertaking. It is specifically understood and agreed by and between the Parties hereto that the Project is a private development, that neither Party is acting as the agent of the other in any respect hereunder, and that each Party is an independent contracting entity with respect to the terms, covenants, and conditions contained in this Agreement. No partnership, joint venture, or other association of any kind is formed by this Agreement. The only relationship between City and `• Developer is that of a government entity regulating the development of private property and the owner of such private property. 4.8 Consent. Except as otherwise expressly set forth herein, where the consent or approval of a Party is required or necessary under this Agreement, such consent or approval shall not be unreasonably withheld, conditioned, or delayed. In the event of a dispute between or among any of the Parties regarding the failure or refusal of a Party to provide a consent or approval, or with respect to the conditions to the granting of such consent or approval, the dispute shall be resolved in accordance with the procedures set forth in Section 3.4 herein. 4.9 Covenant of Good Faith and Fair Dealing. Neither }- ' Party shall do anything which shall have the effect of -- harming or injuring the right of the other Party to receive the benefits of this Agreement; each Party shall refrain from doing anything which would render its performance under 50 this Agreement impossible; and each Party shall do everything which this Agreement contemplates that such Party shall do to accomplish the objectives and purposes of this Agreement. 4.10 Cooperation; Execution of Documents; Estoppel Certificates. Each Party shall execute and deliver to the other all such other further instruments and documents as may be necessary to carry out this Agreement in order to provide and secure to the other Party the full and complete enjoyment of its rights and privileges hereunder, to carry out the intent and fulfill the provisions of this Agreement, and to evidence or consummate the transactions contemplated W by this Agreement. Not by way of limitation of the foregoing, each Party shall certify, without charge at any time and from time to time within fifteen(15) days of the receipt of the request of any other Party or Mortgagee, by instrument duly executed and acknowledged; (i) that this Agreement is unmodified and in full force and effect, or if there have been any modifications, that the same are in full force and effect as modified and stating the modifications; (ii) whether or not, to the best of the responding Party's knowledge, any defaults exist under this Agreement or would exist with the giving of notice and/or the passage of —time, and, if any such defaults are alleged to exist, the nature thereof; (iii) whether or not there are any existing setoffs or defenses against the enforcement of any of the 51 agreements, terms, covenants, or conditions set forth herein or any modifications hereof upon the part of any Party to be performed or complied with and, if so, specifying the same; and (iv) such other matters as may reasonably be requested. Any such certificate may be relied upon by and Party or Mortgagee to whom the certificate is directed. However, no Party shall be estopped thereafter from asserting that a default has occurred, if at the time of making of the aforesaid certificate, such Party had no knowledge of such default. 4.11 Cooperation in the Event of Legal Challenge. In the event of any legal action instituted by any third party, including any other governmental entity or official, challenging the validity or enforceability of any provision of this Agreement, or any Development Approval granted pursuant to this Agreement, or any other action by either Party in performing hereunder, the Parties hereby agree to cooperate fully with each other in defending said action; provided, however, that each Party shall bear its own costs and legal expenses in defending such action. 4.12 Amendments and Waivers. This Agreement may be amended from time to time by mutual consent of City and Developer in accordance with the provisions of Government Code Sections 65867, 65867.5, and 65868, including arry applicable requirements for notice and public hearing. 6Va All waivers of the provisions of this Agreement shall be in writing and signed by the appropriate authorities of City and Developer, and all amendments hereto must be in writing and signed by the appropriate authorities of City and Developer. This Agreement may be amended with respect to any separate legal parcel within the Property without the consent or approval of the owner of any other portion of the Property so long as such amendment does not in any way impair the rights or increase the obligations of the other owner(s) hereunder. 4.13 Time of Essence. Time is of the essence in the performance of the provisions of this Agreement as to which time is an element. 4.14 Enforced Delay: Extension of Times of Performance. In addition to specific provisions of this Agreement, performance by either party hereunder shall not be deemed to be in default, and all performance and other dates specified in this Agreement shall be extended, where delays or defaults are due to any causes beyond the reasonable control and without the fault of the party claiming an extension of time to perform. An extension of time for any such cause shall be for the period of the enforced delay only and shall commence to run from the — commencement of the cause, and shall commence upon notice by the party claiming such extension, which shall be delivered within thirty (30) days after commencement of the cause, and 53 shall commence upon notice by the party claiming such extension, which shall be delivered within thirty (30) days after commencement of the cause. If a referendum petition challenging the enabling ordinance for this Agreement is filed, performance by either party hereunder shall be suspended until the matter is resolved. 4.15 Severability. If any term, provision, covenant, or condition of this Agreement is held by a court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, void, or unenforceable, the remainder of this Agreement shall not be affected thereby to the extent such remaining provisions are not rendered impractical to perform taking into consideration the purposes of this Agreement. In the event that all or any portion of this Agreement is found to be unenforceable, this Agreement or that portion which is found to be unenforceable shall be deemed to be a statement of intention by the Parties; and the Parties further agree that in such event, and to the maximum extent permitted by law, they shall take all steps necessary to comply with such public hearings and/or notice requirements as may be necessary in order to remedy the defect which resulted in this Agreement or portion thereof being found to be unenforceable. 4.16 Notices. Any notice or communication hereun-dEr between City and Developer shall be in writing, and may be given either personally or by certified mail, postage prepaid, return receipt requested. A notice shall be 54 effective on the date delivered in person or, if delivered by certified mail, on the date when the postal authorities indicate that the mailing is delivered to the address of the receiving party. Such notices or communications shall be given to the Parties at their addresses set forth below: If to City: City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Attn: Community Development Dept. Director of Community Development Copy to: City Attorney City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 If to Developer: Garfield Partners c/o Urban West Communities 520 Broadway, Suite 100 Santa Monica, CA 90401 Attn: President Pacific Coast Homes 2120 Main Street, Suite 260 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Attn: President Copy to: Pacific Coast Homes 2120 Main Street, Suite 260 Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Attn: General Counsel Any party hereto may at any time, by giving ten (10) days written notice to the other party hereto, designate any other address in substitution of the address to which such notice or communication shall be given. ` 4.17 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 55 according to its fair language and common meaning to achieve the objectives and purposes of the Parties hereto, and the rule of construction to the effect that ambiguities are to be resolved against the drafting party shall not be employed in interpreting this Agreement, all Parties having been represented by counsel in the negotiation and preparation hereof. 4.18 Compliance with City's Procedures. Developer will observe City's building and safety requirements in construction of facilities to be furnished City under this Agreement. Developer will assure competitive bidding of such facilities by a method acceptable to the Director of _. Public Works. 5.0 Authority to Execute. 5.1 City Authority. By the execution hereof, City confirms and acknowledges that City, acting through its City Council and the City Planning Commission, have compiled in full with the requirements of Section 65867 of the Government Code for public hearings and the giving of notice of intention to consider adoption of this Agreement, and that this Agreement has been approved by ordinance as required by Section 65867.5 of the Government Code. City warrants and represents that City has given all notices, held all hearings, and complied with all other procedures required to make this a valid agreement. 3� 5.2 Developer Authority. The 'persons executing this Agreement on behalf of Developer warrant and represent that they have the authority to execute this Agreement and represent that they have the authority to bind Developer to the performance of its obligations hereunder. 5.3 Recordation. Within ten (10) days after the Effective Date of this Agreement, City shall cause a copy of this Agreement to be executed and recorded against the Property, in accordance with Government Code Section 65868.5. 5.4 Entire Agreement. This Agreement sets forth and contains the entire understanding and agreement of the Parties, and there are no oral or written representations, understandings, or ancillary covenants, undertakings, or agreements which are not contained or expressly referred to herein. No testimony or evidence of any such representations, understandings, or covenants shall be admissible in any proceeding of any kind or nature to interpret or determine the terms or conditions of this Agreement. ATTEST: By: Its: City Clerk APPROVED AS TO FORM: By: 1° Its: City Attorney it— ?`97° CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH, a muni pal corporation By: -- Its U Mayor _ 57 INITIATED AND APPROVED: By: Its: Director of Community Development PACIFIC COAST HOMES, a California corporation By: Its: President, Roger Work REVIEWED AND APPROVED: By ` i Ils: City Administrator By: Its: Vice -President, William D. Holman Its: A Segretar��, A • J . Clark =. 1 r�easu er GARFIELD PARTNERS, a California general partnership By: UWC-Peninsula I, a California limited partnership, General Partner By: UWC Development Corporation, a California corporation By: opz_:_� Its: Vresident Stephen D. Gunther PACIFIC COAST HOMES, a California croration, General Past By: % - Its: sident, Roger Work By✓ Its: a-,Est.(/Secretary, sst. Treasurer, A. J. Clark 58 il_rre-cTcfc HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN VOLUME 1 OF 2 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH SPECIFIC PLAN 9 u ADOPTED APRIL20, 1992 ORDINANCE NO. 3128 0 SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS Date Ordinance No. Adopted April 20, 1992 Ordinance No. 3128 Amended May 19, 1992 Ordinance No. 3145 Amended September 21, 1992 Ordinance No. 3170 Amended August 2, 1994 Ordinance No. 3243 Amended August 15, 1994 Ordinance No. 3244 Amended April 7, 1997 Ordinance No. 3350 TABLE OF CONTENTS Section Description I. INTRODUCTION a e A. Purpose and Intent..........................................................................................I-1 BGoals............................................................................................................I-1 C. Project Area Description................................................................................I-2 D. Planning Background.....................................................................................I-2 II. DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT A. General Development Plan ............................................................................II-1 B. Land Use Categories......................................................................................II-1 1. Residential..........................................................................................II-1 2. Mixed Development...........................................................................II-2 3. Commercial........................................................................................II-3 4. Industrial............................................................................................II-3 5. Open Space........................................................................................II-3 C. Circulation Plan.............................................................................................II-3 D. Open Space/Recreation System .....................................................................II-4 E. Grading Guidelines........................................................................................II-4 F. Public Facilities..............................................................................................II-6 G. Community Theme Guidelines....................................................................II-12 III. ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Purpose and Intent.......................................................................................III-1 B. Definitions...................................................................................................III-1 C. General Provisions......................................................................................III-2 D. Development Standards............................................................................III-10 1. Low Density Residential 1........................................................... III-10 2. Low Density Residential 2...........................................................III-13 3. Low Density Residential 3...........................................................III-16 4. Medium Density Residential.........................................................III-20 5. Medium High Density Residential ................................................ III-23 6. Mixed Development......................................................................III-25 7. Commercial...................................................................................III-31 8. Industrial....................................................................................... III-31 9. Open Space................................................................................... III-32 i (hssp97) Section ]Description a e IV. ADMINISTRATION A. Development Phasing Plan .......................................................................IV-1 B. Public Facilities Improvement Responsibilities ....................................... IV-1 C. Methods and Procedures...........................................................................IV-2 D. Density Transfer Procedure......................................................................IV-3 E. Acreage/Boundary Changes......................................................................IV-4 V. LEGAL DESCRIPTION.................................................................................... V-1 VI. MITIGATION MEASURES............................................................................. VI-1 HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN TECHNICAL APPENDIX (Separate Document) ii (hssp97) LIST OF EXHIBITS Exhibit No. Title Following Page 1 Vicinity Map............................................................................................. I-2 2 Existing Zoning......................................................................................... I-2 3 General Development Plan ......................................................................II-1 4 Planning Area I Development Plan ..........................................................II-1 5 Planning Area II Development Plan ........................................................II-1 6 Planning Area III Development Plan .......................................................II-1 7 Planning Area IV Development Plan ....................................................... II-1 8 Circulation Plan.......................................................................................II-3 9 Open Space, Park and Trail Plan .............................................................II-4 10 Infrastructure Schematic Plan - Drainage and Sewer Systems ................II-6 11 Infrastructure Schematic Plan - Water Systems.......................................II-6 12 Community Theme Plan........................................................................II-12 13 Main Street Streetscape Section.............................................................II-14 14 Goldenwest Street Streetscape Section..................................................I1-14 15 Gothard Street Streetscape Section........................................................II-14 16 Overlay Areas........................................................................................ III-3 17 Recreation/Open Space Corridor Section .............................................. III-4 18 Commercial/Industrial Separation.........................................................111-4 19 Transportation/Trail Corridor Section ................................................. III-22 20 Biological Resources............................................................................VI-10 iii (hssp97) LIST OF TABLES Table No Table Following Pages LandUse Table........................................................................................II-1 2 Development Phasing Plan ......................................................................IV-1 iv (hssp97) I. INTRODUCTION I. INTRODUCTION A. Purpose and Intent The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan provides the development standards, design theme and administrative procedures necessary to implement the policies of the City of Huntington Beach General Plan and the Holly-Seacliff Master Plan (General Plan Amendment 89-1). The Specific Plan also provides for application of mitigation measures contained in Final Environmental Impact Report 89-1 and implements the provisions of Development Agreement No. 90-1 for the Holly- Seacliff area. B. Goals The purpose of the Specific Plan is to implement the goals of the Holly-Seacliff master plan, including: • Distribution of planned residential uses, definition of permitted housing types, and provision of a diversity of housing types. • Location, character and intensities of planned commercial, industrial and mixed development uses. • Alignments and design of arterial highways and locations of traffic control devices. • Design of community open spaces, parks, trails and recreation facilities. • Grading guidelines. • Design of required public facilities to serve existing and proposed development. • Design and implementation of the community theme elements. This Specific Plan is regulatory in nature and serves as zoning for the Holly- Seacliff area. Subsequent development plans, vesting tentative tract maps, tentative tract maps, parcel maps and other entitlement requests for the project site must be consistent with both this Specific Plan, the City of Huntington Beach General Plan and the Holly-Seacliff General Plan Amendment No. 89-1. I-1 (hssp97) C. Project Area Description Location The Specific Plan covers 565 acres located in the central portion of the City of Huntington Beach as depicted in Exhibit 1 (Vicinity Map). A legal description of properties included in the Specific Plan project area may be found in Section V. Present land uses surrounding the site include Huntington Central Park, Ocean View Mobile Estates and industrial uses to the north; residential and office uses to the east; the Huntington Beach Civic Center, Huntington Beach High School, Seacliff Country Club and residential uses to the south; and the Bolsa Chica lowlands to the west. The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan excludes properties contained in the previously adopted Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan. Exhibit 2 illustrates the existing zoning within the Specific Plan area. Regional access to the project site is provided from the San Diego Freeway (I- 405) directly from the Goldenwest interchange. Pacific Coast Highway (State Highway 1) provides access from coastal areas to the north and south. Local access is provided via Edwards, Goldenwest, Gothard and Main Streets and Ellis, Garfield and Yorktown Avenues. D. Planning Background There are a number of previous approvals related to land use regulations affecting the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area. These previous approvals include: The Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan, approved by the Huntington Beach City Council through its adoption of Ordinance No. 2998 on June 26, 1989. (Not a part of the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan.) 2. Final Environmental Impact Report No. 88-2 prepared for the Ellis- Goldenwest Specific Plan (adopted on May 1, 1989, by Resolution No. 6022). 3. Holly-Seacliff General Plan Amendment No. 89-1 approved by the City Council through its adoption of Resolution No. 6098 on January 8, 1990. 4. Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1 prepared for the Holly- Seacliff General Plan Amendment (adopted on January 8, 1990, by Resolution No. 6097). 5. Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement No. 90-1 (adopted on November 5, 1990, by Ordinance No. 3080). I-2 (hssp97) EXHIBIT 1 CITY OF H U NTI N GTON BEACH VICINITY MAP F ;�;L , r MI-0-CD r aMlol 'R2 RA-0.»» . i� rN�i „ ,ew a I I RA-0-CD M2-0 NJ A-0 ELLIS-GOLDENWEST SPECIFIC PLAN -Inc kwu ° op F" — o RA-0 -71 Co.N , ; � u, o to 1 �• _ _ l MI -CI OP P s a e or R2 �p\_• _ r 4 <oy RA•0'r oP CC-CZ c I I wRdaAr ✓. c R2' a7� CI-0 RA-01-Cq' �MI 1� R4-0 118 MI i R2. MI -A 2-01 I' o o RA-0 —. R2 k"of jJ- `a RA 0�' R2 �� Rz .,•.,i(w i os NOS-l; i ....` � : M2-01-Cd'r �- — — R: Is R= - --- �.., e`rst� :••. '.�,'_�r :ea4 •�Y' �� R�•q RI ,s,,,ss�nrc�' J.@'g on=•a , MI F a .,oR fl2 .r•n .s J Y J" �'^a,'✓ ". R4 •.c.,,.u''•'. , • RI �. C2-0• i L" •u• -C,ry Ar•rw. ROS-0 RI i 'i K R2-0•PD b�:'e " Rz o� r 1' / RI PI • .a r' In ;a t�: R40' C2-0-CD C2-0 »•�•.ct'���i,` LL ,�I- < ROS-0 '•+ 1, ��ii _-• RI R I RI E `"Sn•EZ—�ruu,.-• R=o �'�.,. ..i�j RI ti< a� RI :ORq - r,t-<:',v17.'—'7 ,�•',Ke' \W.I. P�vw• o r ROS-0 or ` C2-0-CD OP-M R2 Po -co" ° `D• 114.01K. B2,'F.0 C2, ' R4�' CF-C �'�� '•«. "<•, �' .s a',i .,9p �•Y CF-E-CD u.. 12.O-CD .� ^ <� w a k Y•...» IiCF-E-CD' . ( I all EXHIBIT 2 CCIITYnOnFMHUNT/I�NGnTON BEEAnCHH �a� n nn �n EXISTING ZONING 11-' )L L 11-0EACL0FIF/," R ,A\ c� PIECOM"7" l�L�/r M Lan11I111�1I � I ��� The Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement establishes the contractual development responsibilities between the City of Huntington Beach, Pacific Coast Homes and Garfield Partners regarding project phasing, open space dedications, infrastructure improvements, reimbursable costs and other obligations for each party. Although the Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement applies only to the portions of the Holly-Seacliff area to be developed by the parties specified in the Agreement, it does provide for the future public infrastructure improvements for all the Holly-Seacliff area. The Specific Plan is an integral component for the implementation of the Development Agreement. The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan is divided into four Planning Areas (I through IV) and establishes the general provisions and procedures to implement development of the Holly-Seacliff area under General Plan Amendment No. 89-1. I-3 (hssp97) II. DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT H. DEVELOPMENT CONCEPT A. General Development Plan The development concept for the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan is designed in concert with the site's cultural and natural features to provide for a variety of compatible land uses: residential, commercial, mixed development, industrial, open space, parks and recreation areas. The Holly-Seacliff area will be a large master -planned community located within the central area of the City of Huntington Beach. Residential areas are planned at a range of densities to provide a variety of housing types, ranging from large detached single-family homes to various types of multi- family dwellings. The lower -density residential areas are located in the western and central portions of the project and the area abutting Seacliff Country Club. The medium density areas are predominately located in the eastern and central portion of the community, along Garfield Avenue, Main Street and Gothard Street. Medium -high density areas are planned along Garfield Avenue, near planned commercial and industrial uses. A total of 475 residential units are also planned as part of a mixed development project as part of the Seacliff Village area. An industrial park area is centrally located within the community, at the intersection of the major arterial roadways for convenient access and exposure. Neighborhood and convenience commercial centers will be located along Garfield Avenue to serve the residents' shopping and service needs. The Specific Plan also identifies public facilities including three neighborhood parks. The project is divided into four individual Planning Areas (I through IV), as shown on Exhibit 3, General Development Plan and Exhibits 4,5,6, and 7. A summary of land uses within each Planning Area can be found on Table 1, Land Use Table. The purpose of identifying individual Planning Areas is to allow development of individual distinct identities, focusing on the particular character of land uses within each of the specific areas. B. Land Use Categories The following sections describe the development concepts for each land use within the four Planning Areas. 1. Residential Land Uses The Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan provides for a range of residential densities and a variety of housing types, consistent with residential densities permitted throughout the City of Huntington Beach. II-1 (hssp97) LEG -EN D pL,T LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL 1 �rev�e R4f LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL I r rww Rl-0 LOW DENSITY RESIDENTIAL S �rwr�c RM MEDIUM DENSITY RESIDENTIAL r n w�c RMN MEDIUM HIGH DENSITY RESIDENTIAL onmrt YD MIEED DEVELOPMENT COMMERCIAL 11----��� ' 1 ' 1 INDUSTRIAL FED OPENSPACR LI I JJJ PLANNING AREA I 1 PLANNING UNIT NEIONl ORNOOD PARNS EXHIBIT 3 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN �a P, 0(� n w�I�sj� ���,��r�r�' , ii F �°, 0��CHGs0C� PII 1^a�I �IIIIIIIIIII I I TABLE 1 HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN LAND USE TABLE PLANNING AREA PLANNING UNIT LAND USE CATEGORY GLOSS ACRES TOTAL UNITS MAXIMUM GROSS DENSITY AVERAGE GROSS DENSITY DEV� STANDS, (PAGE) I 1-1 RESIDENTIAL -LOW DENSITY 1 6 15 4 2.5 III-10 1-2 RESIDENTIAL -LOW DENSITY 1 26 90 4 3.5 111-10 1-3 RESIDENTIAL -LOW DENSITY 1 16 55 4 3.4 III-10 1-4 OPEN SPACE 16 III-28 SUBTOTAL 64 160 II II-1 RESIDENTIAL -LOW DENSITY 3 62* 310 7 4.1 III-15 11-2 RESIDENTIAL -MEDIUM DENSITY 40 415 15 11.0 111-17 II-3 RESIDENTIAL -MEDIUM DENSITY 34* 390 15 13.0 111-17 11-4 RESIDENTIAL -MEDIUM -HIGH DENSITY 9 170 25 16.6 III-20 II-5 RESIDENTIAL -MEDIUM -HIGH DENSITY 4 75 25 18.8 III-20 II-6 RESIDENTIAL -MEDIUM -HIGH DENSITY 4 75 25 18.8 III-20 11-7 RESIDENTIAL -MEDIUM -HIGH DENSITY 6 100 25 16.6 111-20 11-8 INDUSTRIAL 32 III-28 SUBTOTAL 191 1,535 III III-1 RESIDENTIAL -MEDIUM DENSITY 19 260 15 15.0 III-17 III-2 RESIDENTIAL -LOW DENSITY 2 105 550 7 3.8 III-12 III-3 RESIDENTIAL -MEDIUM DENSITY 11 140 15 15.0 111-17 III-4 RESIDENTIAL -MEDIUM -HIGH DENSITY 10 220 25 25.0 111-20 III-5 RESIDENTIAL -MEDIUM DENSITY 18 240 15 15.0 111-17 III-6 COMMERCIAL 7 111-27 III-7 RESIDENTIAL -LOW DENSITY 2 12* 40 7 6.9 III-12 III-8 OPEN SPACE 16 III-28 SUBTOTAL 198 1,450 IV IV-1 RESIDENTIAL -MEDIUM DENSITY 16 155 15 9.7 III-17 IV-2 RESIDENTIAL -MEDIUM DENSITY 8 120 15 15.0 III-17 IV-3 INDUSTRIAL 9 111-28 IV-4 MIXED DEVELOPMENT 53 475 25 14.4 III-22 IV-5A INDUSTRIAL 22 III-28 IV-6 COMMERCIAL 4 III-27 SUBTOTAL 112 750 TOTAL 565 3,895 * Includes 4-acre Neighborhood Park. NOTE: See Exhibit 10 for Landscape Legend. EXHIBIT 4 PLANNING AREA I CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT PLAN �`xnr,-E ,a OFT CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 11-6 RMH 4AC 75 DU 11-5 RMH 4AC 75 DU II-7 RMH 6 AC 100 DU NOTE: See Exhibit 10 for Landscape Legend. EXHIBIT' 5 PLANNING AREA 11 DEVELOPMENT PLAN i ru L/= _ n arS� y� C _.G,�� A1,411,111 I TaR�1� !' I0S 16 AC OS Qo�c e0 � 5 Gorfieid Avenue 4 M III-3 N1 % 111-4 ARM j RMH AC 10 AC 140 DU 220 DU Rl 2 i• 109 AC 550 DU III-5 RM 18 AC 240 DU 111-6 C 7 AC NOTE: See Exhibit 10 for Landscape Legend. EXHIBIT 6 PLANNING AREA III CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT PLAN NOTE: See Exhibit 10 for Landscape Legend. EXHIBIT 7 PLANNING AREA IV CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH DEVELOPMENT PLAN P_ SPL _' 7-- ` Gl lilillllll l i FOR�4� . _�� a. Low Density The Low Density categories are characterized by densities ranging from 4 to 7 dwelling units per acre. Lots located in Planning Area I (RL-1) will be oriented to maximize their relationship to the linear park and provide unobstructed coastal views from blufftop areas. Permitted uses include lot sale subdivisions and detached single-family home subdivisions. Low -density uses (RL-2) in Planning Area III are planned for areas abutting the private Seacliff Golf Course. Low -density (RL-3) uses in Planning Area II are planned as small lot detached single-family homes oriented in a traditional neighborhood setting. b. Medium Density The Medium Density (RM) category is planned to include densities ranging from 7 to 15 dwelling units per gross acre. Product types include single-family detached, single-family attached, and multi- family residential homes. Medium Density areas are planned within Planning Areas II, III and IV. The single-family attached products will be two-story townhomes or flats. The multi -family units will be two and three- story condominiums/stacked flats and apartments. C. Medium -High Density The Medium -High Density (RMH) category is characterized by densities ranging from 15-25 dwelling units per gross acre. Product types include multi -family uses such as condominium/stacked flats and apartments. Single-family attached units will be permitted, however this category will be primarily multi -family uses. Medium- High density areas are planned within Planning Areas II and III, along Garfield Avenue. 2. Mixed Development The Mixed Development category allows for the creative combination of commercial and residential uses in a compatible manner. Residential products are expected to include townhomes, condominiums, stacked flats and apartments. The location for this use is in Planning Area IV, directly across from the Civic Center. The proposed uses will be clustered around II-2 (hssp97) the existing Seacliff Village retail center providing a focal point for the entire project area. 3. Commercial Land Uses Commercial land uses within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area are planned along Garfield Avenue within Planning Areas III and IV. The uses for these sites are expected to be those characteristic of a neighborhood commercial center, designed mainly to meet the local community shopping needs and reduce trips outside of the project area. 4. Industrial The Industrial area, which currently is the center of oil production and oil - related services and storage uses, is intended to be developed as light industrial.The Industrial land uses within Holly-Seacliff are located at the intersection of Garfield Avenue and Goldenwest Street and Clay Avenue and Stewart Street, within Planning Areas II and IV. 5. Open Space Open Space areas are designated within Planning Areas I and III. These areas are planned to be incorporated into the Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park which will feature trails and passive recreation uses. C. Circulation Plan The Circulation Plan, Exhibit 8, depicts the general alignments and classifications of arterial highways within the Specific Plan area. The Circulation Plan is in accordance with provisions contained in the Holly- Seacliff Development Agreement 90-1. The Development Agreement provides a phasing plan for street improvements to correspond to the phased development in the Specific Plan area and to comply with and satisfy mitigation measures contained in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1. Additionally, as stated in the Development Agreement, development projects within the Specific Plan area will be conditioned to participate in construction or fair -share funding associated with required infrastructure improvements needed to serve the Holly-Seacliff area. The overall circulation concept relies on a hierarchy of circulation features ranging from major arterials to local residential streets. The system is designed to accommodate City -generated through -traffic while discouraging intrusion into individual neighborhood areas. Orange County Transit District bus stops shall be provided at locations as shown on Exhibit 12. Additional bus stops may be required at the time of development. II-3 (hssp97) LEGEND MAJOR ARTERIAL MONWAY • Lan • blz.d OedkW A..— (fast .I Oo1d.Irw..p O.W.nw..1 Street 111-th of OrlMld) MOMIED MAJOR WCHWAY •L.n• OW d O.dkW A.smw (E.s1.1 Sa.polyd, Waal of O.Id.n .I) Gold —I Sireel (Norm of Oorfktd) PRIMARY NgNWAY ALow . Dlalded Ellis A.anuo (W.fl of Oo1Mrd) Main SIrMt Se.pohd Street Yrslewn A.ane MODIFIED SECONDARY WORINAY e Lan • OI.WM 0~ A.emre (Will of Sespo%q SECONDARY NIONWAT e Lon • Dhldod Edward. o"" Ems A—v IEsM of OMhrd) OMhord Spots NOTE: SN Tect kot App.ndl. la rlgh Ot-alf r.golrentenb and striping plans AN focal st,"Is Iho rn shay M V' Wass d..%.Msd with *.ddch Irt" be prla.le EXHIBIT 8 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH CIRCULATION PLAN A transportation corridor has been designated within Planning Area II. See Development Standards for Residential Medium and Medium High Densities for details. All streets shown on the Circulation Plan are public streets unless otherwise indicated. All public streets shall be developed to local street standards (as a minimum) as shown on the Standard Plans of the Public Works Department. All new traffic signals installed as part of development within the Specific Plan area shall be equipped with "Opticom" control devices. Detailed street plans and operational criteria can be found in the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan Technical Appendix. D. Open Space/Recreation System The Specific Plan designates 44 acres of open space and park uses (see Exhibit 9). Thirty-two (32) acres within Planning Areas I and III are to be dedicated per Development Agreement 90-1 to the City for the Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park, which is planned to form a continuous open space corridor along the bluffs between Talbert Avenue and the Pacific Coast Highway for trails and passive recreation use. Three neighborhood park areas with a minimum of four acres each are designated per Development Agreement 90-1 within the residential neighborhoods in Planning Areas II and 1II. These neighborhood facilities will provide local open space and recreational amenities. Neighborhoods within the Specific Plan area will be linked to major open space/recreation facilities such as Huntington Central Park and the Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park by bike lanes on all arterials. Private recreational facilities will typically be provided within the multi -family residential projects for the use of the residents within these developments, adding to the public recreational opportunities available within the HollySeacliff project. E. Grading Guidelines Grading will be required to construct streets, infrastructure and other site improvements and to create properly drained development areas. Another grading objective will be to balance cut and fill within the project area. It is intended that borrow sites, stockpiling and normal grading operations and procedures will occur within each of the individual planning areas. The major grading constraint for the area is the elevation of existing public infrastructure facilities as they relate to the existing grades in the area. All reasonable efforts will be taken in the design of improvements and building pads to minimize the amount of grading required to accomplish workable and safe elevations through good engineering practices. II-4 (hssp97) III1C0)iL, W -- 2 Ef,[,A\,CL IIrT'F AAW I ��1.A\ 6F EC IIIF-3 �C FP L(A NM d!llllllllll I I IMM\ All grading within the Specific Plan area will require a grading permit and will be governed by soils, foundation and other geotechnical reports prepared by registered professional civil and geotechnical engineers, building codes, established engineering practices and City ordinances. The maximum slope ratio, horizontal to vertical, will be 2:1 unless otherwise recommended by a geotechnical engineering report and approved by the City. Grading will occur in Planning Area I to lower grades near the intersection of Edwards Street and Garfield Avenue to meet safe highway design criteria, to increase useable areas within the linear park and to create and enhance coastal view opportunities. In Planning Area II, grading will be necessary for the construction of arterial and local street improvements and the installation of master -planned drainage and sewer improvements within unimproved ravines. The ravine areas will be incorporated into a neighborhood linear park feature with slopes no greater than 2:1, in accordance with the schematic cross section on Exhibit 17. Within Planning Area III, grading will be required to create and stabilize development areas and to direct runoff to master -planned facilities. Within Planning Area IV, grading will occur primarily in the Mixed Development area, concurrent with the widening of Goldenwest Street and removal of the existing abandoned reservoir. The following guidelines are provided to enhance the visual form and character of manufactured slopes within the community: ij Grading shall be consistent with City policies and incorporate safe grading techniques to provide for proper engineering practices and ensure adequate site drainage. 2) Blended and variable slopes shall be employed to restore a natural appearance within the framework of grading that is geologically safe. 3) There shall be a smooth transition where graded slopes meet existing grades. A transition at both the top and toe of slopes should also be provided. 4) Graded slopes shall be revegetated or landscaped per City approval. II-5 (hssp97) F. Public Facilities 1. Infrastructure Plan The Infrastructure Schematic Plan, Exhibits 10 and 11, identifies existing and proposed storm drain, sewer and water facility improvements to serve development within and surrounding the Specific Plan area. A specific analysis of infrastructure requirements and detailed design, construction and phasing plans can be found in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Technical Appendix. The Technical Appendix also includes detailed arterial street sections, right-of-way requirements, traffic control systems and phasing plan. Developers within the Specific Plan area will be responsible for the construction of public facilities improvements on a fair -share basis, as described in Section IV, Administration. a. Storm Drains Existing storm drainage facilities are maintained by the City of Huntington Beach, Public Works Department. The majority of the Holly Seacliff project area will drain via improved swales or proposed underground conduits into four primary runoff outlets. The first of these primary outlets consists of drainage collected from the northwest portion of the project draining north. This runoff is either collected in a proposed storm drain system from Edwards Street northeasterly to the Ellis Avenue crossing, or drains in an improved swale north to the Ellis Avenue crossing. The second primary runoff area consists of flows collected from the northeast and central portion of the project. The existing swales in Planning Area II will be upgraded and improved to accommodate both sewer and underground storm drain facilities. Storm drain systems will be added in Goldenwest Street from Garfield Avenue to midway between Ellis and Garfield Avenues, and in the realigned Gothard Street from Ernest Avenue to midway between Ellis and Ernest Avenues. The third primary runoff area consists of flows collected in the most westerly and southwesterly portion of the area. All runoff from these areas drains to the south and through a detention basin at the downstream end of the Seacliff golf course. This basin has been designed to accommodate the future flows from development. II-6 (hssp97) EGEND E-- aroRr cRAwE EHI GETTER lN[6 , CIA EgM"P TW Ar.nw ! I ---- --•--, l � —� --- -' �� �� � � �� ' I',' x ~r � -" NOTE EwU hnk.1 App.". f. Nl�uWslw. Sawa LW $I~ r ' W I I r/ Y M.N. RL-S pp RM 1 I •GOLOENWESTIFIC PLAN ! !' �•� �_ --- I I AREARM os MH VS�; RL-1 RMH / OS/ ~ �` - L — Vice,—.F_-- _— _--_--="•=� , RM RM r, RL.2 \ RL-2 C"y AVonuo MD COASTAL ZOWN ONE - EXHIBIT 10 Drainage and Sewer Systems CITY OF HUN \INGTON BEACH INFRASTRUCTURE SCHEMATIC PLAN lu, d0L-,L W^5FACP.11lr•UJ [,A\ RFL-,/,� 0Ir'rr,-CH VlI CV Ir Lh� INJ1 4!111111111 1 1 "W\ L EGEND ^FE9 POTAlL[ WATfN F-•-----•� 11ECUtMEO WATER Chfl f"01— WNd" Ind A..Kb111 MOTE $K iKANIN Apgndil IK tnh/ItnKM1 d11.d1. EXHIBIT 11 later Systems CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INFRASTRUCTURE SCHEMATIC PLAN Cri'1CR,11. It 31E- &C L 9 F F Mi EnA S5' [PECHFOC [P AH ,4mimnii 1 1 ICP^ The fourth drainage area consists of flows leaving the project area through the southeast portion of the site. Flows from this area will be transported off the site via an extended storm drain system in Garfield or through the developed areas of the Pacific Ranch project. Developers shall be responsible for the construction or funding of drainage facilities within their project and/or off -site facilities necessary to serve the development. If a developer is required to construct or to oversize these facilities beyond their fair -share to serve other projects, the developer shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City. Storm drain system improvement requirements and design criteria may be found in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Technical Appendix. b. Sewer Facilities Existing sewer facilities for the project area are maintained by the City of Huntington Beach, Public Works Department and the Sanitation District of Orange County, District Nos. 3 and 11. The City's Master Plan of Sewers indicates that four major trunk lines and one City pump station will be required to ultimately collect and convey sewerage from the project area. Generally, sewer lines 8-inches in diameter and smaller, required for interior streets and individual developments, will be the responsibility of developers on a project -by -project basis. Developers shall be responsible for the construction or funding of sewer facilities within their project and/or off -site facilities necessary to serve the development. If a developer is required to construct or to oversize these facilities beyond their fair -share to serve other projects, the developer shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City. Sewer system improvement requirements and design criteria may be found in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Technical Appendix. II-7 (hssp97) C. Water Facilities The majority of the project area lies within the Reservoir Hill Assessment District, which operates as part of the City of Huntington Beach Water System. Although development throughout this district is currently minimal, main lines and transmission lines to service this entire area have been installed as part of this District. Because the existing booster station near Clay Avenue and Goldenwest Street is operating at capacity, plans have been made for the construction of a new booster pump station near Huntington Street and Garfield Avenue. To properly service the project site, some additional 12-inch water lines are required within the arterial highways. Other smaller water lines will also be necessary in local interior streets within the project to provide water service to internal lots. To mitigate project impacts on the City's water system, a 9-million gallon reservoir, water well, booster pump and a major water transmission main will be constructed outside the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area to provide adequate water service and storage capacity for the area. Developers shall be responsible for the construction or funding of water facilities within their project and/or off -site facilities necessary to serve the development. If a developer is required to construct or to oversize these facilities beyond their fair -share to serve other projects, the developer shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City. Water system improvement requirements and design criteria may be found in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Technical Appendix. d. Fire and Emergency Medical/Police As mitigation of project -related impacts, a Public Safety Facility (Talbert Station) will be constructed, furnished and equipped with fire and medical apparatus. The facility will be constructed on land provided by the City outside of the Specific Plan Area. A police substation will also be constructed, furnished and equipped as part of the Public Safety Facility. The Specific Plan requires participation by developers in a fair -share funding program for these facilities. II-8 (hssp97) e. Reclaimed Water The City of Huntington Beach Water Master Plan proposes the use of reclaimed water for irrigation purposes. The City of Huntington Beach Public Works Department, Water Division, is currently coordinating with the Orange County Water District (OCWD) for a supply of reclaimed water to serve portions of the City. It is anticipated that the City will be served via inclusion in OCWD's proposed Green Acres Reclamation Facilities Project (GAP). The possible use of reclaimed water for some irrigated areas should decrease the future use of potable water throughout the developed Holly-Seacliff area. Should the City implement and connect to the Green Acres system of reclaimed water, such a system can be used to irrigate major open space features only, such as landscaped medians, parkways and parks, using County -provided water. Developers shall be responsible for the construction or funding of reclaimed water facilities necessary to serve the development. If a developer is required to construct or to oversize these facilities beyond their fair -share to serve other projects, the developer shall enter into a reimbursement agreement with the City. Reclaimed water system improvement requirements and design criteria may be found in the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Technical Appendix. f. Parks The proposed linear park areas in Planning Areas I and III will be dedicated; and neighborhood parks in Planning Areas II and III will be improved as provided for in the Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement. Properties not included in the Development Agreement will be subject to the City Park Acquisition and Development Fee Ordinance. g. Library Facilities Public library facilities are provided by the City of Huntington Beach approximately one-half mile north of the Specific Plan Area. All new development is assessed for library services through the payment of a cultural enrichment fee at the issuance of building permits. , II-9 (hssp97) h. Schools The Specific Plan Area is located within the Huntington Beach City School District (Grades K-8) and the Huntington Beach Union High School District (Grades 9-12). All development within the Specific Plan Area is subject to the payment of school impact fees at the time of issuance of building permits, in accordance with Government Code Section 53080. School facility impact mitigation measures per Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1 shall be applied to development within the Specific Plan Area (see Section VI). Schools shall be permitted in any Planning Area within the Specific Plan in order to accommodate elementary students generated by the development of the Specific Plan and surrounding areas. A potential school site within the Specific Plan boundaries may be established by means of a general plan amendment. Any new school facility shall be developed in accordance with the construction and planning standards and requirements of the City of Huntington Beach, the Huntington Beach City School District, the State of California Architects Office and the State of California Department of Education. In order to comply with mitigation measures identified in Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1, proposed future development within the Specific Plan may be required to dedicate and convey land to the school district, pay additional school impact fees and/or provide other revenues to facilitate the financing of construction and land for new school facilities. In addition, mitigation may be achieved by providing new or existing permanent or temporary classroom facilities. Compliance with the above shall be addressed concurrent with the filing of the first tentative tract map. The developer shall demonstrate to the City's satisfaction and upon receipt of the School District's review that the mitigation measures identified in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1 have been or will be implemented prior to the approval of any tentative tract maps. A School Facilities Impact Mitigation and Reimbursement Agreement shall be a condition of approval for any subdivision, tentative tract, or parcel map within the Specific Plan. The Agreement shall provide for the adequate mitigation of impacts on the elementary school district by providing adequate funding of school facilities necessary to serve the student population generated by the proposed development. This condition may be waived by the Board of Trustees of the Huntington Beach City School District. II-10 (hssp97) 2. Utilities There are several public utility service providers identified by the Holly- Seacliff Specific Plan. Although adequate facilities exist for the current service needs of the Holly-Seacliff area, additional facilities may be required as development occurs. a. Electrici1y Electrical service to the area is provided by the Southern California Edison Company. Existing transmission and distribution lines are adequate to service current and potential future needs. Developers may be required to relocate or underground existing facilities concurrent with project development. b. Natural Gas Natural gas service in the Specific Plan Area is provided by the Southern California Gas Company. Adequate facilities exist for current and projected future needs. Developers may be required to relocate existing facilities concurrent with project development. C. Telephone Telephone service in the Specific Plan Area is provided by General Telephone (GTE). Developers should coordinate with GTE for the relocation of existing facilities and installation of new service. d. Cable Television Cable television service within Huntington Beach is provided by Paragon Cable. Developers should coordinate with Paragon Cable for the installation of new service. e. Solid Waste Disposal Rainbow Disposal Company currently provides solid waste disposal services for the Holly-Seacliff area. Based on service projections and anticipated demand increase, an adequate level of service will be maintained. No solid waste disposal facilities are planned to be located in Specific Plan Area. II -II (hssp97) G. Community Theme Guidelines The Community Theme Guidelines are intended to provide for the development of neighborhoods, open spaces, buildings and streetscapes having a distinctive visual identity to promote individual neighborhood identities and to promote interrelationships between complementary land uses and community open space features. The major elements of the Community Theme Plan include landscaping, walls, signage and monumentation, street furniture and open space/pedestrian linkage features as described below. Exhibit 12 illustrates the general location of required community landscaping and monumentation. All development proposals within the Specific Plan area shall conform to the community theme guidelines and shall incorporate appropriate community theme elements. Concurrent with the filing of the first tentative tract map in the Specific Plan area, Community Design Guidelines shall be submitted which will address pedestrian linkages between planning areas, design and function of the swales, type of street furniture and greater definition of neighborhoods. 1. Landscaping • Landscaping shall be provided as outlined below, subject to the following general criteria: • Plant materials will consist of low -maintenance trees, shrubs and ground covers approved by the City of Huntington Beach. In graded areas and public open space areas where structures or other improvements are not built, landscaping should consider the use of native or naturalized drought tolerant species which can provide wildlife habitat, with a gradual transition to more ornamental species along the development edge. • The landscaping of development within the plan should be designed to minimize visual impacts of adjacent parcels. Special consideration should be given to orientation of residences (particularly windows and decks) to respect the privacy of adjacent residents to the extent feasible. All landscaped medians located within arterial streets shall be maintained by the City of Huntington Beach, provided medians are designed and constructed per City standards and approval. All other landscaping improvements shall be maintained by a landscape maintenance district, community association, homeowners association or other method acceptable to the City. II-12 (hssp97) L EG EN D MEDIAN PIANTINN COMMUNITY IDENTITY W.fhblglen 11NruN► M.A.- f.n pa" TN. ®COMMUNITYOATEWAYS r , Phefnl. C.n.rl.nel. • C.n.ry I.t.nd 0.1. P.b...t r VW4 MIBM. COt 'tp MoflilfIcati n fbnwv MAJOR INTERSECTIONS Ph..M. C—kn.l. • C.n.ry bb.0 D.t. P.M%.t f." Mlghlo In IMf.offd CWW fe1b- I..AMN fYNgffM YrIMI.lOIY pl.ntblg. OSTRIETSCAPE94TREET IDENTITY TREES blf— I pl.M1ng of sM .P.c4f pN .11N1.1 NIbKY. OI mqa M,"IL NEIGHBORHOOD ENTRIES A—i bN..1. ". f.p..NO fh "b.A MlghborMee flr..UNpr Nolghberhoo0 Mmillic llen Wr".IL BUS STOP EXHIBIT 12 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH COMMUNITY THEME PLAN Nd c�� �t �[ IV��I OFF ,A N r� n c� it 0 C F' 11 � NIJ 11►►►►►►► ► I , a. Arterial Highway Medians • Landscaped medians shall be provided along Goldenwest Street, Gothard Street between Ellis Avenue and Ernest Avenue, Main Street, Seapoint Street and Garfield Avenue where approved by the City. • Washingtonia robusta (Mexican Fan Palm) shall be planted in informal groupings in all medians throughout the specific plan area. • Flowering shrubs and ground cover will accent the palm groupings. • Main Street median planting will consist of the existing mix of Washingtonia robusta and Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm). b. Community Gateways • A minimum 25 foot landscape area (measured from curb face) shall be provided at community gateway locations identified on Exhibit 12 for appropriate landscaping and community monumentation. • Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm), Phoenix dactylifera (Date Palm), Washingtonia robusta (Mexican Fan Palm) in clusters, Erythrina caffra (Coral Tree), Chamaerops humilis (Mediterranean Fan Palm) or other City -approved tree, at varying heights. • Broadleaf evergreen understory planting. • Community identification monumentation accented with flowering ground cover. C. Major Intersections • A minimum 25 foot landscape area (measured from curb face) shall be provided at major intersections identified on Exhibit 12 for enhanced landscape treatment. Phoenix canariensis (Canary Island Date Palm), Phoenix dactylifera (Date Palm), Washingtonia robusta (Mexican Fan Palm) in clusters, Erythrina caffra (Coral Tree), Chamaerops humilis (Mediterranean Fan Palm) or other City -approved tree, at varying heights. II-13 (hssp97) • Broadleaf evergreen understory planting. d. Streetscape/Street Identity Trees • A minimum 15 foot landscape area shall be provided along all arterial highways within the specific plan area for appropriate parkway landscaping. Along Main Street, the 15 foot landscape area shall consist of 6 feet of public right-of-way and a 9 foot private landscape easement. Typical landscaped street sections are found on Exhibits 13, 14 and 15. • The parkways for each street shall consist of informally -spaced groups of two tree varieties from the list below: Botanical Name Common Name Brachychiton acerifolius Flame Tree Casuarina cunninghamiana River She -Oak Cupaniopsis anacardiodes Carrotwood Eucalyptus ficifolia Red Flowering Gum Eucalyptus sideroxylon rosea Red Iron Bark Gum Ficus rubiginosa Rusty Leaf Fig Koelreuteria bipinnata Chinese Flame Tree Magnolia grandiflora Samuel Sommer "Samuel Sommer" Magnolia Melaleuca quinquenervia Cajeput Tree Pinus canariensis Canary Island Pine Pinus eldarica Mondel Pine Pinus sylvestris Erect Scotch Pine Pistacia atlantica Mt. Atlas Pistache Platanus acerifolia London Plane Tree Podocarpus gracilior Fern Pine Schinus molle California Pepper II-14 (hssp97) EX16TING PALM TR>=1=5 6 MEDIAN ROW. q ROM. EXHIBIT 13 MAIN ST REET Looking North, between Huntington and Clay CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 120' R.O.W. STREET SECTION HOO ddV SL CLUFF AIREA SPCEC OFOC PLUG° H o f 1111 111 1 5 10,s Its 25' i i ro42' * 1' it 42' 6' t ROM. 55' q 55' 15' R.O.W. EXHIBIT 14 GOLDENWEST STREET Looking North, between Ellis and Ernest CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 110' R.O.W. STREET SECTION HOLLY 81EACLUFF AMEA 8PECOM PdAH 111111 1 111 1 ,1 F13" 15' �, 42' 42'In In R.O.W. M RO.W. EXHIBIT 15 GOTHA RD STREET Looking North, between Ellis and Ernest CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 84' R.O.W. STREET SECTION HOLLY BE&C CUFF AREA SPEC EFUC PLAN r 1111 < 1 1 1 1 t � 0 5 10 15 e. Neighborhood Entries • A minimum 20 foot landscape area (measured from curb face) shall be provided at each neighborhood entry. • The accent trees at each neighborhood entry are to be repeated throughout the neighborhood streetscape. • Neighborhood identification sign/wall. • Tree, shrub and ground cover species will be consistent with neighborhood character and architectural theme, and will contrast with the adjacent arterial street tree. 2. Walls, Signage and Monumentation a. All single-family residential and industrial areas along an arterial highway shall be screened by a minimum six-foot high solid masonry wall. b. The design and materials of residential walls shall be consistent within each planning unit. C. Community walls will vary by neighborhood and reflect neighborhood theme and architecture, while utilizing the same materials in varied combinations for a consistent community image. These materials may consist of stone, brick, decorative block or tubular steel in different combinations for each of the individual neighborhoods. d. The horizontal form of continuous solid walls shall be softened by the use of pilasters or landscape materials. e. Multiple -family residential areas may be screened by a combination of solid and open fencing materials. f. The location, design and materials for all walls facing an arterial highway within the Specific Plan area shall be subject to approval of the Director of Community Development. g. All proposed signs with the Specific Plan shall conform with the Sign Ordinance of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. h. A monument sign or other architectural feature shall be constructed within the landscaped setback area of all Community Gateway locations identified on Exhibit 12. II-15 (hssp97) i. Neighborhood entry signs shall be located within the landscaped setback area for each neighborhood entry. j. Commercial, industrial and mixed -use project identification signs may be located within the landscaped setback area adjacent to an arterial highway. k. The location, design and materials for all proposed community gateway, neighborhood entry and project identification signs shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Community Development. 3. Street Furniture a. Street lighting may be placed within arterial medians or within adjoining sidewalk and setback areas. b. Street lighting should be standardized throughout the Specific Plan area. Street lighting along arterials shall be of Marbelite Cobra Head type and 30 feet in height. Street lighting along local streets shall be of Marbelite Cobra Head type and 25 feet in height. Street lighting may have custom decorative features within Planning Areas if approved by the City. Bus stops and shelters shall be provided in the locations identified on Exhibit 12. d. The design of any proposed bus shelters shall be reviewed by the Orange County Transit District and approved by the Director of Community Development. 4. Open Space/Pedestrian Linkages The Specific Plan incorporates and is surrounded by numerous significant open space and recreational features, including Huntington Central Park, the Bolsa Chica Linear Regional Park and neighborhood parks. The following guidelines are intended to maximize the interrelationship of land uses within the Specific Plan area to both internal and external community amenities. a. Bicycle lanes shall be provided on all arterial highways within the Specific Plan area. b. Bicycle lanes shall be connected to recreational trails within public and private park and open space areas at locations deemed appropriate by the Director of Public Works. II-16 hL (hssp97) C. Sidewalks shall be provided adjacent to all arterial highways within the Specific Plan area. d. Sidewalks shall be connected to pedestrian trails located within public and private park and open space areas where feasible. e. Pedestrian access shall be provided to all neighborhood commercial areas from adjacent residential neighborhoods to discourage unnecessary automobile trips. f. Residential, commercial, industrial and mixed -use projects shall be designed to encourage pedestrian and bicycle access as well as automobile access. g. Where feasible, pedestrian access should be provided between adjoining residential projects. h. Bus stops and shelters shall be provided as indicated on Exhibit 12 to facilitate public transportation within the Specific Plan area. II-17 (hssp97) III. ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS III. ZONING AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS A. Purpose and Intent The purpose of this section is to provide the specific development and density standards and regulations that will be applied for each type of development permitted within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. Unless otherwise stated, the Specific Plan will be the zoning document for the Planning Areas identified in the Development Plan. This section contains the definitions, general provisions and development standards. The following Zoning and Development Standards apply to all properties within the Specific Plan area. All references to the "Huntington Beach Ordinance Code" mean the current Code, except for properties included in Development Agreement 90-1 which are subject to the Code in effect at the time of adoption of Development Agreement 90-1. B. Definitions The following definitions shall apply to the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. Terms not defined herein shall have the same definitions as used in the City of Huntington Beach Ordinance Code in effect at the time of adoption of the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. 1. Building Height Building height shall be defined as a vertical dimension measured from the top of the highest roof feature, including mechanical equipment screening, to the top of the subfloor/slab directly underneath. In addition, the following standards shall apply: a. Datum (100) shall be set at the highest point of the curb along the front property line. If no curb exists, datum shall be set at the highest centerline of the street along the front property line. b. The differential between top of subfloor and datum shall be a maximum of two (2) feet as determined by Public Works. In the event that any subfloor, stemwall or footing is proposed greater than two (2) feet above datum, the height in excess shall be deducted from the maximum allowable ridgeline height. C. Roofs shall have a 5/12 pitch or greater. III-1 (hssp97) d. In the case of proposed development adjacent to existing structures and infill development involving individual lots with a grade differential of three (3) feet or greater between the high point and the low point, determined before rough grading, Use Permit approval shall be required. Use Permit approval shall be based upon a building and grading plan which terraces the building with the grade and which is compatible with adjacent development. 2. Planning Areas The four areas depicted on the Development Plan, bounded by major streets as shown, and labeled I, II, III and IV. 3. Planning Unit A sub -area of a Planning Area numbered and identified on the Development Plan and Land Use Table. 4.�l tt A lot in which the house is laid out in a diagonal between its front and rear yards and the creation of use easements with other residential properties on its sides results in wider usable side yards. C. General Provisions All development activity within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area will be subject to the following general conditions and requirements, as noted. 1. Permitted Uses a. Permitted Uses within the Specific Plan Area shall be defined in the Development Standards section for each district or subarea. b. All requests for residential density transfers shall comply with the procedures contained in Section IV-D, Density Transfer Procedure. C. In addition to Permitted Uses, Unclassified Uses shall be permitted in accordance with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. d. Nonconforming Uses shall be permitted within the Specific Plan Area in accordance with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. III-2 (hssp97) e. Oil and gas production shall be permitted within the Specific Plan Area in accordance with the regulations contained in the Development Standards section herein and the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. The continued operation, redrilling and servicing of existing oil and gas wells shall be permitted throughout the Specific Plan Area, subject to applicable City regulations and compliance with the mitigation measures contained in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1, see Section VI. The drilling of new oil and gas wells and consolidation of existing operations shall be permitted only within Planning Units II-8 and IV-5, subject to the approval of a Conditional Use Permit and compliance with applicable City regulations and mitigation measures contained in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1. 2. Overlay Areas Additional regulations to those stated in the Development Standards section herein are applicable in the following areas: a. Flood Plain Zone Overlay Development within the Flood Plain Zone Overlay, identified in Exhibit 16, shall comply with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. b. Alquist-Priolo Zone Overlay All development projects within the Alquist-Priolo Zone Overlay identified in Exhibit 16 shall be required to submit a geotechnical investigation identifying any active traces of the Newport/Inglewood Fault and establishing any required building setback lines prior to issuance of a building permit. C. Coastal Zone Overlay All development projects located entirely or partially within the Coastal Zone boundary identified on Exhibit 16 shall require approval of a Coastal Development Permit in accordance with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. III-3 (hssp97) LEGEND © COASTAl20NE BOUNDARY ROOD PLAIN BOUNDARY ALOUIST-PRIOLO ZONE ® ACCESS MAN VYINDRow"Et3 ® SWALE AREA EXHIBIT 16 �tC-nITT�Y OnnFMHUNTIINGnTONN BEACH � ��� � PUN �n OVERLAY AREAS MOO IL,L� U "6rb%CL�,0l�"Fa,, WE& SU'ECHU-"0C Pl�G�1UV 4!1111111111 1 1 fulm1 d. Access Plan Overlay Exhibit 16 identifies parcels in Planning Areas II and IV where coordination of access on Garfield Avenue is necessary for safe and efficient traffic movement. All development applications within this overlay area shall require approval of an access plan by the Public Works Department: C. Windrow Trees and Swales Exhibit 16 shows areas in Planning Area II of existing "windrow" trees and swales. Wherever feasible, existing windrows should be preserved within park sites or replaced to maintain the aesthetic benefits they contribute to the community. Further studies should be completed to assess the health of these trees. Where it is not feasible, as determined by the City of Huntington Beach, to preserve healthy, mature trees, trees may be replaced with 36" box trees at a 1:1 ratio. Landscaping plans specifying the number and type of replacement trees shall be submitted for review and approval by the Huntington Beach Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. The existing swales should be incorporated into a recreation/open space corridor including landscaping and a recreation trail per the typical cross section shown on Exhibit 17. 3. Parking Parking shall be provided for all development projects in accordance with the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 4. Landscaping a. Landscaping shall be required as defined within the Development Standards in Section III for each district. b. All projects fronting on an arterial highway shall be responsible for installing landscaping consistent with the Community Theme Guidelines outlined in Section II-G. C. Residential and industrial/commercial uses shall be adequately separated. Since all such uses in the Specific Plan area are separated by streets, new development and redevelopment shall include a minimum of 15 foot landscape area with a 6 foot high solid masonry wall. Buildings shall be set back as required by the development standards. See Exhibit 18. III-4 (hssp97) 60' MINIMUM HIKING/ MIN 101 E31KING TRAIL EXHIBIT 17 RECREATION/OPEN SPACE CORRIDOR CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH TYPICAL CROSS SECTION HOLLY SEACL OFF AREA SPEC OFUC PLAN 1111111�1 1 z � INDU COMI VARIES PER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS 1S' VARIES 15' L VARIES PER DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS TIAL EXHIBIT 18 COMME RCIALANDUST RIAL AND RESIDENTIAL CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH TYPICAL SEPARATION FOR NEW DEVELOPMENT HOLLY SEACLOFF AREA SPEC URC PLAN 111111 1 11 1 ,s K7R% d. Developers shall consult with the Public Works Department regarding landscaping conservation measures and shall submit landscape and irrigation plans for approval. e. Wherever feasible, trees suitable for use by raptors should be preserved or replaced in accordance with Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1. 5. Walls and Fences A plan showing the proposed location, size and materials of all proposed walls and fences shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. 6. Signs and Outdoor Lighting A plan showing the proposed location, size and materials of all proposed signs and outdoor lighting shall be submitted for review and approval by the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of the building permit. All signs shall conform to the regulations contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Outdoor lighting shall be designed to provide adequate illumination of on -site areas without intruding upon surrounding properties or sensitive uses. 7. Public Facilities and Infrastructure All development projects shall construct or fund required public facilities and infrastructure per a Holly-Seacliff Public Facilities Development Fee Ordinance in conformance with the Public Facilities Plan (Section II-F) and the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Technical Appendix. Developers shall consult with the Orange County Transit District regarding locations for bus stops, turnouts and shelters prior to the approval of a tentative tract map or issuance of a building permit. 8. Utilities All development projects shall be required to install adequate utility services necessary to serve the development. All utilities shall be placed underground and identified in easements, excluding street lights and electrical transmission lines of 66 kV or greater. Utility systems shall be designed to conserve the use of electrical energy and natural resources. Developers shall coordinate with the gas, electricity, telephone and cable TV companies regarding energy conservation and proper planning, phasing and sizing of lines. III-5 (hssp97) 9. Fire Protection and Emergency Vehicle Access All development projects shall comply with the regulations contained in Chapter 17.56 of the Huntington Beach Municipal Code (Fire Code). A plan showing the location of fire hydrants and emergency vehicle access shall be submitted for review and approval by the Fire Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. All projects involving the closure of public streets shall be reviewed by the Fire Department for adequate emergency apparatus access. 10. Environmental Requirements Development within the Specific Plan Area shall implement the mitigation measures contained in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1 (see Section VI). General mitigation measures are identified within the Specific Plan. Other mitigation measures are triggered by specific permits or entitlement requests and must be addressed at that time. In addition, each development project shall include an environmental mitigation monitoring program prior to approval. In compliance with the mitigation measures contained in Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1, the following studies or plans may be required as a condition of project approval prior to the issuance of grading and/or building permits, final inspection, or certificate of occupancy as indicated: a. Geotechnical Investigation A geotechnical investigation addressing potential hazards due to seismic activity, erosion, tsunami, liquefaction and subsidence including recommendations for grading and the placement and design of structures, shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. b. Soils Report A soils report containing recommendations regarding the placement of fill, design of slopes, slabs, footings and foundations shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. In areas containing active, idle or abandoned oil and gas wells or storage tanks, a report indicating the location and status of all facilities and any contaminated soils and methane, together with recommended mitigation measures, shall be submitted to the Fire Department prior to the issuance of a building permit. Mitigation from Final III-6 (hssp97) Environmental Impact Report 89-1 has been attached (see Section VI). The methane zone can include areas that do not contain oil wells. A study should be required for all areas within the methane zone. C. Hydrology Report A hydrology report identifying the design of all proposed drainage and flood control facilities required to accommodate projected runoff shall be submitted for review and approval by the Public Works Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. d. Cultural Resources Report For development projects in areas identified as archaeological or paleontological sites in Section 4.11 of Final Environmental Impact Report No. 89-1, the mitigation measures listed in the Final Environmental Impact Report shall apply. These mitigation measures are included in Section VI of this document. A report containing the results of any test excavations and data/materials recovered and conclusions shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to the issuance of a grading permit. e. Noise Report A noise report will be required for development projects abutting an arterial highway or within a helicopter flight corridor to identify recommended design features prior to issuance of a building permit. 11. Maintenance Mechanisms For development projects which include privately -owned streets, parking, recreation, open space, landscaped areas, or community buildings or facilities, the developer shall submit a legal instrument or instruments setting forth a plan or manner of permanent care and maintenance of such areas and facilities. No such instrument shall be acceptable until approved by the City Attorney as to legal form and effect, and by the Director of Community Development as to suitability for the proposed use of said areas and facilities. If the common areas are to be conveyed to a homeowners' association, the developer shall file a Declaration of Covenants to be submitted with the application for approval, that will govern the association. These covenants shall include: a. The homeowners' association shall be established prior to the sale of the last dwelling unit. III-7 (hssp97) b. Membership shall be mandatory for each buyer and any successive buyer. C. The open space restrictions shall be permanent. d. Provisions to prohibit parking upon other than approved and developed parking spaces shall be written into the covenants, conditions and restrictions for each project. e. If the development is constructed in increments or phases which require one or more final maps, reciprocal covenants, conditions, or restrictions, reciprocal management and maintenance agreements shall be established which will cause a merging of increments as they are completed, and embody one homeowners' association with common areas for the total development. 12. Affordable Housing All developers of residential projects shall be required to submit an affordable housing plan in conjunction with any subdivision in accordance with the City's adopted Housing Element. An affordable housing plan shall provide for on -site affordable housing within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan. The contents of the affordable housing plan shall include the following: a. Fifteen (15) percent of the total units proposed shall be for households earning less than 120% of the Orange County Median Income. b. A detailed description of the type, size, location and phasing of the units being built. C. The estimated applicable sales price and rental rate of the units. d. Residential projects for households earning less than 80% of the Orange County Median Income may request a subsidy by one or more of the following: 1. Direct financial assistance. 2. Reduction in fees and/or exactions. 3. Deviations from specific development standards of the Holly- Seacliff Specific Plan. Exception: An In -Lieu Fee may be applied on small projects. Parcels one (1) acre in size or less may pay a fee established by the City Council in lieu of providing on -site affordable housing units. III-8 (hssp97) 13. Parks The final design of neighborhood parks, as well as any requests for private recreation facilities parks credit, shall be reviewed by the Community Services Commission. 14. Lot Consolidation The City should consider adoption of a redevelopment plan or other strategy to assemble encyclopedia lots and other non -buildable parcels in Planning Areas II and IV. 15. Air Quality Conservation Measures Development within the specific Plan area should consider the following during project design: bicycle facilities, bus turnout lanes, bus shelters, park and ride areas, energy conserving lighting an traffic signal synchronization, where feasible. 16. Non -Residential Building Materials Non-residential building materials should be compatible with nearby residential structures and should minimize glare. 17. Department of Fish and Game Notification Upon City approval of any grading or development plans within streambed areas under the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Game, the Developer shall be required to notify and obtain appropriate permits from the Department of Fish and Game. III-9 (hssp97) D. Development Standards 1. Low Density Residential (RL-1) a. Purpose The Low Density Residential District is intended to provide for single- family detached dwellings at the lowest density. b. Permitted Uses 1) Lot sale subdivisions, subject to approval of a tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 2) Single-family home subdivisions, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and a tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 3) Single-family detached dwelling units and associated accessory buildings, subject to issuance of a building permit. c. Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage A licensed land surveyor or civil engineer shall submit calculations showing lot width, depth and area for any new parcel. 1) The minimum lot size shall be seven thousand (7,000) square feet. 2) The minimum lot frontage shall be sixty (60) feet. The minimum required lot frontage for cul-de-sac and knuckle lots shall be forty-five (45) feet; however, if one additional off-street parking space is included, the minimum shall be thirty (30) feet. d. Maximum Densi1y/Intensi1y The maximum density shall not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per lot. Exception: A second unit may be added to an existing single-family residence upon approval of a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with standards contained in,the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. e. Maximum Building Height The maximum building height shall be thirty-five (35) feet and a maximum of two (2) stories. III-10 (hssp97) f. Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five (55) percent for all lots abutting a park, recreation area or public utility right-of-way which is a minimum of 100- feet in clear width. g. Setback Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen (15) feet. Front entry garages and carports: Twenty (20) feet. Side entry garages: Ten (10) feet. Balconies, Bay windows, Eaves and Fireplaces: Twelve (12) feet, except eight (8) feet on side entry garage. h. Setback (Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, patio covers, garages, carports and accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Eaves: Thirty (30) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (30) inches. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard Dwellings, garages, carports, and accessory buildings: Minimum of ten (10) feet. Eaves: Seven (7) feet. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways, architectural features and fireplaces: Seven and one-half (7.5) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. III-11 (hssp97) i. Setback (Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings: Twenty (20) feet. Garages or accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Fifteen (15) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. j. Building Separation The minimum building separation between buildings on the same lot shall be ten (10) feet. k. Open Space Open space shall be provided on the lot by the required minimum setback areas. 1. Parking Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. m. Miscellaneous Requirements Accessory buildings may be permitted on a lot with a permitted main building. The minimum distance between an accessory building and any other building on the same lot shall be ten (10) feet. Setback requirements are as previously specified. n. Parkway Landscaping One (1) 36-inch box tree per lot. If a parkway is not provided, the required street tree shall be planted within the front setback prior to final inspection. III-12 (hssp97) 2. Low Density Residential 2 (RL-2) The Low Density Residential 2 district is intended to provide for single- family detached dwelling units at low densities in Planning Area I11. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family detached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and a tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 2) Golf Course maintenance facility, subject to the approval of a conditional use permit. c. Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage A licensed land surveyor or civil engineer shall submit calculations showing lot width, depth and area for any new parcel. 1) The minimum lot size shall be five thousand (5,000) square feet on one-half of the total number of lots and a minimum six thousand (6,000) square foot lots for the balance. 2) The minimum lot frontage shall be fifty (50) feet. The minimum required lot frontage for cul-de-sac and knuckle lots shall be forty- five (45) feet; however if one additional off-street parking space is included, the minimum shall be thirty (30) feet. d. Maximum Density/Intensity The maximum density shall not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per lot. Second units are not permitted. e. Maximum Building Height The maximum building height shall be Thirty-five (35) feet and a maximum of two (2) stories. f. Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five (55) percent for all lots abutting a park, recreation area, or public utility right-of-way which is a minimum of 100- feet in clear width. III-13 (hssp97) g. Setback ront Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen (15) feet. Front entry garages and carports: Twenty (20) feet. Side entry garages: Ten (10) feet. Balconies, Bay windows, Eaves and Fireplaces: Twelve (12) feet, except eight (8) feet on side entry garage. h. Setback ode Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, patio covers, garages, carports and accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Eaves: Thirty (30) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (30) inches. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard Dwellings, garages, carports and accessory buildings: Minimum of ten (10) feet. Eaves: Seven (7) feet. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways, architectural features and Fireplaces: Seven and one-half (7.5) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. 3) Exception for Zero Lot Line A zero side yard setback or a zero rear yard setback shall be permitted as long as the following requirements are met: The lot adjacent to the zero setback side or rear yard shall be held under the same ownership at the time of application and the setback for the adjacent lot shall be either zero or a minimum of ten (10) feet. • All architectural features shall comply with the Uniform Building Code. • The zero setback shall not be adjacent to a public or private right-of-way. III-14 (hssp97) Exposure protection between structures shall be provided as specified by the Fire Department and the Building Division. i. Setback (Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings: Twenty (20) feet. Garages or accessory buildings: Five (5) feet. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Fifteen (15) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. j. Building Separation The minimum building separation between buildings on the same lot shall be ten (10) feet. k. Open Space Open space shall be provided on the lot by the required minimum setback areas. 1. Parkin Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. in. Miscellaneous Requirements Accessory buildings may be permitted on a lot with a permitted main building. The minimum distance between an accessory building and any other building on the same lot shall be ten (10) feet. Setback requirements are as previously specified. Prior to the approval of a tentative tract map adjacent to the Seacliff Golf Course, preliminary landscape plans and development/open space edge treatments plans should be submitted for City approval. These plans should provide for the review of planting compatibility along the relevant edge of the development. n. Parkway Landscaping One (1) 36-inch box tree per lot. If a parkway is not provided, the required street tree shall be planted within the front setback prior to final inspection. III-15 (hssp97) 3. Low Density Residential 3 (RL-3) a. Purpose The Low Density Residential 3 District is intended to provide for single- family detached or attached dwelling units at low densities in Planning Area II. b. Permitted Uses Single-family detached or attached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. c. Minimum Parcel Size/Frontage A licensed land surveyor or civil engineer shall submit calculations showing lot width, depth and area for any new parcel. 1) The minimum lot size shall be three thousand -three hundred (3,300) square feet. 2) The minimum lot frontage shall be thirty (30) feet; however, the minimum required lot frontage for cul-de-sac and knuckle lots shall be twenty (20) feet. d. Maximum Density/Intensity The maximum density shall not exceed one (1) dwelling unit per lot. Second units are not permitted. e. Maximum Building Height The maximum building height shall be thirty-five (35) feet and a maximum of two (2) stories. f. Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five (55) percent. IIl-16 (hssp97) g. Setback (Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen (15) feet. Front entry garages or carports: Eighteen (18) feet. Side entry garages: Ten (10) feet. Bay windows, eaves, fireplaces and balconies: Twelve (12) feet, except 10 feet on side entry garage. h. Setback (Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, patio covers, garages and accessory buildings: minimum aggregate twenty (20) percent of lot frontage at any point of the structure; with minimum three (3) feet on any interior yard but need not exceed five (5) feet [or aggregate ten (10) feet]. Eaves: - Thirty (30) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (30) inches. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard Dwellings, garages, carports and accessory buildings: minimum aggregate twenty (20) percent of lot frontage at any point of the structure; with minimum six(6) feet on any exterior yard but need not exceed eight (8) feet [or aggregate of thirteen (13) feet]. Bay windows, balconies, open stairways, architectural features, eaves and Fireplaces: Three and one-half (3.5) feet. Patio covers: Three (3) feet. III-17 (hssp97) ILLUSTRATION OF SIDE YARD SETBACKS ------------------------------------ 1 1 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 I 1 1 1 1 50'------- 1 — 1 STREET Lot Frontage = 50 ft 20% of Frontage =10 ft. 3) Exception for Zero Lot Line A zero side yard setback or a zero rear yard setback shall be permitted as long as the following requirements are met: • The lot adjacent to the zero setback side or rear yard shall be held under the same ownership at the time of application and the setback for the adjacent lot shall be either zero or a minimum of six (6) feet. • All architectural features shall comply with the Uniform Building Code. • The zero setback shall not be adjacent to a public or private right-of-way. • Exposure protection between structures shall be provided as specified by the Fire Department and the Community Development Department. III-18 (hssp97) i. Setback Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings: Fifteen (15) feet. Garages or accessory buildings: Five (5) feet. Balconies, Bay windows, open stairways and architectural features: Twelve (12) feet. Unenclosed patio covers: Five (5) feet. j. Building Separation The minimum building separation between buildings on the same lot shall be six (6) feet. k. Open Space Open space shall be provided on the lot by the required minimum setback areas, except where an RL-3 development is constructed on property designated for RM and RMH development projects with 20 or more units shall provide common open space (recreation area) as follows: 150 square feet per lot for lots with less than 40 feet of lot frontage, and 100 square feet per lot for lots with 40 feet or more of lot frontage. In no case shall the common open space area be less than 3,000 square feet. The minimum dimension of the common open space area shall be 50 feet. The total common open space area required may be provided in one or more areas as long as each area is a minimum of 3,000 square feet and has a minimum dimension of 50 feet. For projects with less than 20 units, a minimum 600 square feet of open space (private or common) shall be provided per unit. Private open space excludes side and front yard setback areas. If a portion is provided as common open space that area shall have a minimum dimension of 10 feet. 1. Parking Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. in. Miscellaneous Requirements Accessory buildings may be permitted on a lot with a permitted main building. The minimum distance between an accessory building and any other building on the same lot shall be six (6) feet. Setback requirements are as previously specified. III-19 (hssp97) All streets within Planning Unit II-1 shall be privately maintained but permit public access. The site plan shall be designed as an inward -oriented planned community. n. Parkway Landscaping One (1) 36-inch box tree per forty-five (45) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. If a parkway is not provided, the required street tree shall be planted within the front setback of each lot prior to final inspection. 4. Medium Density Residential (R I) The Medium Density Residential district is intended to provide for single family detached and attached dwelling units, condominiums, townhomes and multi -family residential developments at medium densities. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family attached condominiums, townhouses, stacked flats and multi -family dwelling units (including apartments), and customary accessory uses and structures permanently located on a parcel, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and a tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. 2) Single family detached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings are permitted in accordance with the development standards contained in the RL-3 District (Section D herein), subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. c. Maximum Density/Intensi y The maximum density shall not exceed fifteen (15) units/gross acre. d. Maximum Building Height Maximum building height shall be: Dwellings: Forty (40) feet and a maximum of three (3) stories. Accessory Buildings: Thirty-five (35) feet. Vertical identification elements for non -habitable common area structures may be twenty-five (25) feet higher than the maximum building height. III-20 (hssp97) e. Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five (55) percent for all lots abutting a park, recreation area or public utility right-of-way which is a minimum of 100- feet in clear width. f. Setback (Front Yard) The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures, except stairways, exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: fifteen (15) feet. Front entry garages or carports: Twenty (20) foot minimum, or five (5) foot minimum without driveway parking. Side entry garages: Ten (10) feet. Eaves, fireplaces, open space easements and balconies: Five (5) feet. g. Setback(Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, garages and accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Also, fifteen (15) foot minimum building structure separation for one (1) and two (2) story buildings on the same lot. Twenty (20) foot minimum building structure separation for three (3) story buildings on the same lot. Eaves: Eighteen (18) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (30) inches. Bay windows, unroofed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard Dwellings, garages and accessory buildings: Minimum of ten (10) feet. Side entry garages or carports: Ten (10) feet. Eaves: Eighteen (18) inches. Fireplaces: Seven and one-half (7.5) feet. Bay windows, unroofed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Eight (8) feet. III-21 (hssp97) h. Setback dear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings and open, unroofed stairways and balconies: Five (5) feet. Garages/accessory buildings: Five (5) feet. i. Open Space A minimum of 75 square feet per dwelling unit shall be provided in private open space. In addition, the following minimum common open space per dwelling unit shall be provided: 250 square feet (1 bedroom unit); 300 square feet (2 bedroom unit); 350 square feet (3 bedroom unit). j. Parking Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. k. Miscellaneous Requirements 1) Building Offset: Structures having dwellings attached side -by -side shall be composed of not more than six (6) dwelling units unless such structures provide an offset on the front of the building a minimum of two (2) feet for every two dwelling units in the structure. 2) Landscaping: All setback areas visible from an adjacent public street and all common open space areas shall be landscaped and permanently maintained in an attractive manner with permanent automatic irrigation facilities provided. Trees shall be provided at a rate of one (1) 36-inch box tree per sixty (60) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. 3) A transportation corridor in Planning Area II shall be set aside and maintained in accordance with Development Agreement 90-1 and as illustrated in Exhibit 19. Habitable floor area shall be set back a minimum of ten (10) feet from the southerly five hundred (500) feet on both sides of the corridor. The corridor shall also be landscaped to the extent legal access is available to the developer. III-22 (hssp97) HIKING/BIKING ?RAIL PROPERTY LINE PROPERTY LINE EXHIBIT 19 TYPICAL C ROSS SECTION CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH TRANSPORTATION/TRAIL CORRIDOR NOLL?' SEACLOFF XRE& 3PECOM PUM IIIIII II 1 KFM 0 5 10 5. Medium -High Density Residential (RMH) a. Purpose The Medium -High Density Residential district is intended to provide for single family detached and attached dwelling units, condominiums, townhomes and multi -family residential developments at medium -high densities. b. Permitted Uses 1) Single-family attached condominiums, townhouses, stacked flats and multi -family dwelling units (including apartments), and customary accessory uses and structures. 2) Plan Review: Conditional Use Permit. 3) Single family detached dwelling units (including zero lot line, Z-lot and patio homes) and their associated accessory buildings are permitted in accordance with the development standards contained in the RL-3 District (Section D herein), subject to approval of a conditional use permit and tentative parcel map or tentative tract map. c. Maximum Density/Intensit The maximum density shall not exceed density twenty-five (25) unit/gross acres. d. Maximum Building Height Maximum building height shall be: Dwellings: Forty-five (45) feet and three (3) stories. Accessory buildings: Thirty-five (35) feet. Vertical identification elements for non -habitable common area structures may be twenty-five (25) feet higher than the maximum building height. e. Maximum Site Coverage Maximum site coverage shall be fifty (50) percent. The maximum site coverage shall be fifty-five (55) percent for all lots abutting a park, recreation area or public utility right-of-way which is a minimum of 100- feet in clear width. III-23 (hssp97) f. Setback (Front Yard), The minimum setback from the front property lines for all structures, except stairways, exceeding forty-two (42) inches in height shall be as follows: Dwellings: fifteen (15) feet. Front entry garages or carports: Twenty (20) foot minimum, or five (5) foot minimum without driveway parking. Side entry garages: Ten (10) feet. Eaves, fireplaces, open/unroofed building stairways and balconies: Five (5) feet. Accessory buildings: Ten (10) feet. g. Setback (Side Yard) The minimum setback from the side property lines shall be as follows: 1) Interior Side Yard Dwellings, garages and accessory buildings: Minimum of five (5) feet. Also, fifteen (15) foot minimum building structure separation for one (1) and two (2) story buildings on the same lot. Twenty (20) foot minimum building structure separation for three (3) story buildings on the same lot. Eaves: Eighteen (18) inches. Fireplaces: Thirty (30) inches. Bay windows, unroofed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Three (3) feet. 2) Exterior Side Yard Dwellings and accessory buildings: Ten (10) feet. Side entry garages or carports: Ten (10) feet. Eaves: Eighteen (18) inches. Fireplaces: Seven and one-half (7.5) feet. Bay windows, unroofed balconies, open stairways and architectural features: Eight (8) feet. h. Setback Rear Yard) The minimum setback from the rear property lines shall be as follows: Dwellings, open/unroofed building stairways and balconies: Five (5) feet. Garages/accessory buildings: Three (3) feet. 11I-24 (hssp97) i. Open Space A minimum of 75 square feet per dwelling unit shall be provided in private open space. In addition, the following minimum common open space per dwelling unit shall be provided: 250 square feet (1 bedroom unit); 300 square feet (2 bedroom unit); 300 square feet (2 bedroom unit); 350 square feet (3/ bedroom unit). j. Parking Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. k. Miscellaneous Requirements 1) Building Offset: Structures having dwellings attached side -by -side shall be composed of not more than six (6) dwelling units unless such structures provide an offset on the front of the building a minimum of two (2) feet for every two dwelling units in the structure. 2) Landscaping: All setback areas visible from an adjacent public street and all common open space areas shall be landscaped and permanently maintained in an attractive manner with permanent automatic irrigation facilities provided. Trees shall be provided at a rate of one (1) 36-inch box tree per forty-five (45) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. 3) A transportation corridor in Planning Area II shall be set aside and maintained in accordance with Development Agreement 90-1 and as illustrated in Exhibit 19. Habitable floor area shall be set back a minimum of ten (10) feet from the southerly five hundred (500) feet on both sides of the corridor. The corridor shall also be landscaped to the extent legal access is available to the developer. 6. Mixed Development (MD) a. PuEpose The Mixed Development District is intended to provide for a variety of commercial uses, facilities supporting the surrounding community and the opportunity for residential uses. Commercial uses may include retail sales, services, professional, administrative and medical office uses. Such uses shall be planned so as to create compatibility to each other and the surrounding area. Development within the Mixed Development District may combine residential and commercial uses in either of two ways: III-25 (hssp97) • vertically, where the ground level is reserved for commercial uses and the upper floor (or floors) contains multifamily dwellings; • and/or horizontally, where residential uses are developed in conjunction with commercial uses as an integrated development, either in attached or in separate building complexes. A comprehensive site plan for the entire district shall be submitted and reviewed by the Planning Commission prior to or concurrent with entitlements for new development to ensure compatibility between surrounding uses, proposed uses and activities in this area. Concurrent with the filing of the comprehensive site plan, a comprehensive pedestrian access plan shall be submitted which provides linkages between residential and commercial project areas. A comprehensive, permanent set of covenants, conditions and restrictions covering limitation of the mixed development entitlement, including a list of permitted uses and any conditions of approval for the project, and all development, performance and management standards shall be required as a condition of approval. b. Permitted Uses The following primary uses and structures shall be permitted, subject to approval of a conditional use permit and appropriate subdivision map: Residential Uses -- All residential uses including single-family and multi -family housing, apartments, condominiums and stock cooperatives. 2. Office Uses -- Professional, general and medical offices. 3. Commercial Uses -- Commercial uses such as retail shops, restaurants, automobile service stations and theaters. c. Comprehensive Site Planning Requirements: Any application for a conditional use permit and/or tentative map shall be accompanied by a comprehensive site plan for development of the entire Mixed Development area. This requirement does not apply to a minor expansion (10 percent or less) of the existing commercial center. III-26 (hssp97) 2. The comprehensive site plan shall provide a well -planned vehicular circulation system, pedestrian accessways segregated from arterials and internal streets, and aesthetically pleasing landscape features. Buildings shall be oriented and designed to minimize visual intrusion upon existing residential areas. 3. A Planned Sign Program for the entire Mixed Development area shall be submitted for approval by the Planning Commission for all commercial and residential uses. The Planned Sign Program shall be processed concurrent with the first entitlement. d. Maximum Densitylintensi 1. Retail: In accordance with Development Agreement No. 90-1, a minimum of 100,000 square feet gross leasable area of retail uses shall be maintained. A maximum of 200,000 total square feet of gross leasable area of retail uses may be permitted. 2. Office: A maximum of 100,000 square feet of gross leasable area of office uses may be permitted. 3. Residential: The maximum number of residential dwelling units shall be 475. e. Site Development Standards The following standards shall apply to all development: 1. Building site area: The building site area is the entire net mixed development planning unit. 2. Maximum Building Height: Maximum building height shall be: Eighty (80) feet Vertical identification elements shall not exceed the maximum building height. * Building height shall be measured from the closest arterial street. IIl-27 (hssp97) 3. Maximum Site Coverage. Maximum site coverage for the entire mixed development area shall be fifty (50) percent of net site area. If any structure exceeds sixty- five (65) feet in height, then the maximum site coverage for the entire mixed development area shall be forty (40) percent of the net site area. 4. Building Setbacks and Orientation a) Arterial Setbacks* 1) Along Main Street and Yorktown Avenue, the minimum building setback shall be the greater of: a) Twenty-five (25) feet, or b) , A horizontal distance equal to the building height (one to one setback). 2) Along Goldenwest Street, the minimum building setback shall be the greater of: a) Twenty-five (25) feet, or b) One to one for buildings less than thirty (30) feet in height, or c) Two to one for buildings between thirty (30) and sixty-five (65) feet in height, or d) Four to one for buildings greater than sixty-five (65) feet in height. 3) Structures facing arterial streets shall be designed to avoid visual intrusion upon existing residential areas. A line-of-sight/visual intrusion study shall be provided for future development which will analyze visual impacts to existing residential development. The study shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning Commission. 4) Structures shall be sited to provide a break in massing along arterial streets. III-28 (hssp97) 5) Building elevations along arterials shall incorporate one or more of the following to create visual interest: a) Facade relief, b) Fenestration, c) Horizontal/vertical offsets and/or d) Upper story setbacks b) General Building Setbacks: 1) Front setbacks: a) Ten (10) feet minimum from the interior street line or property line if building is under twenty- five (25) feet in height. b) Fifteen (15) feet minimum from the interior street line or property line if building is between twenty- five (25) and thirty-five (35) feet in height. c) Twenty (20) feet minimum from the interior street line or property line if building is over thirty-five (35) feet in height. d) Twenty (20) percent of the building facade shall step back an average of ten (10) feet from the interior street line or property line along interior streets. 2) Side and Rear Setbacks: a) Ten (10) foot minimum from the side or rear property line for structures thirty-five (35) feet or less in height. b) Fifteen (15) foot minimum from the side or rear property line if building is over thirty-five (35) feet in height. c) Eaves, cornices, chimneys, outside staircases, balconies and similar architectural features may project up to fifty (50) percent into the required setback not to exceed six (6) feet. 5. Free-standing residential projects shall conform to the Medium High Density Residential development standards. III-29 (hssp97) 6. Residential components of integrated development projects shall conform to the mixed -use provisions. Open space and parking requirements shall conform to the Medium High Density Residential development standards. f. Lighting: All lighting, exterior and interior, shall be designed and located to minimize impacts to adjacent properties. g. Commercial Loading and Unloading: All commercial loading and unloading shall be performed on the site. Loading platforms and areas shall be screened from view from adjacent streets, highways, adjacent Residential Planning Areas, and on -site residential uses. Truck loading, dock facilities, and the doors for such facilities shall not face a residential area or be located within twenty (20) feet of property zoned or general -planned for residential use. Adequate on -site truck maneuvering space shall be provided to minimize conflicts on adjacent streets. h. Trash and Storage Areas: All storage, including cartons, containers or trash, shall be located within a building or an area enclosed by a wall of not less than six (6) feet in height. An overhead enclosure shall be required if visible from a residential area. i. Parking: Parking shall comply with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. Exception: Medical office uses within vertically integrated commercial/residential projects shall comply with General Office parking requirements. Screening, and Landscaping: Screening and landscaping shall comply with the screening and landscaping provisions of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. A landscape buffer adjacent to proposed and existing industrial land uses shall be provided as depicted on Exhibit 18. k. Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions: A recorded copy of covenants, conditions and restrictions shall be submitted to the Community Development Department prior to occupancy of any building. Approval for content shall be the responsibility of the Community Development Department and approval as to form by the City Attorney. 1.Agent: A person or agent shall be designated as a permanent liaison to the City under the covenants, conditions and restrictions of any project for the purpose of processing occupancy requests, resolving land use enforcement problems, and any other matters in which the City and property owner are involved. III-30 (hssp97) 7. Commercial (C) The Commercial district is intended to provide retail, commercial and service uses in a neighborhood setting. Permitted uses, development standards, parking, landscaping and procedures will be regulated through the General Commercial District of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. b. Additional Permitted Uses Existing, oil and gas production facilities and consolidation of existing facilities, and drilling of new wells are permitted within commercial areas 'in accordance with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. c. Landscaping All setback areas visible from an adjacent public street and all common open space areas shall be landscaped and permanently maintained in an attractive manner with permanent automatic irrigation facilities provided. Trees shall be provided at a rate of one (1) 36-inch box tree per forty-five (45) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. 8. Industrial (I) a. Purpose The Industrial district is intended to allow general industrial uses. Such uses shall be sensitively designed in relation to each other and the surrounding area. Permitted uses, development standards, parking, landscaping and procedures will be regulated through the General Industrial District of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. b. Additional Permitted Uses Existing oil and gas production facilities, consolidation of existing facilities and drilling of new wells are permitted within Planning Units II-8 and IV-5 in accordance with the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code, subject to approval of a conditional use permit. The drilling of new oil wells is prohibited within Planning Unit IV-3. III-31 (hssp97) c. Landscaping All setback areas visible from an adjacent public street and all common open space areas shall be landscaped and permanently maintained in an attractive manner with permanent automatic irrigation facilities provided. Trees shall be provided at a rate of one (1) 36-inch box tree per forty-five (45) feet of street frontage or fraction thereof. 9. Open Space (OS) a. RuMose The Open Space district is designated as areas to be provided as permanent public recreational open space. b. Permitted Uses Permitted uses and other regulations for this district are in accordance with the Recreational Open Space (ROS) provisions in of the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. III-32 (hssp97) IV. ADMINISTRATION IV. ADMINISTRATION A. Development Phasing Plan The Holly-Seacliff study area is anticipated to be built out over a period of approximately 10 years, with a target completion date of 2001. Actual construction starts and occupancy will be dictated by market forces, the removal of oil operations and interim uses, and the requirements of individual property owners and developers. The Development Phasing Plan shown on Table 2 is a program of the relative timing of development within each of the individual planning areas. The Phasing Plan also provides a guideline for the construction of adequate community infrastructure within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan area. B. Public Facilities Improvement Responsibilities In order to provide for public facilities improvements necessary to serve all future development within the Holly-Seacliff area, developers will have a fair -share responsibility for either (1) constructing the necessary improvements required as described in the Specific Plan concurrent with project development, or (2) funding such necessary improvements if constructed by other developers. The City will determine and administer the fair -share responsibility for the master public facilities improvements, including sewer, water, drainage, roads, traffic controls, fire and police capital facilities as described in the Specific Plan. If a developer provides the necessary facilities beyond his fair -share responsibility, thatdeveloper shall be reimbursed from funds collected from other developers. If a developer is required to pay fees, those fees will be based on the City's fair- . share responsibility determination. This determination will be based on a development's proportional use of the master public facilities improvements necessary to serve the development utilizing assessment on a dwelling unit, acreage, building square footage or front footage basis. All development projects to be served by the master public facilities improvements shall be conditioned to construct facilities or pay fees per a Holly- Seacliff Public Facilities Fee Ordinance. Such construction or payment of fees shall be based on a fair -share responsibility program as administered by the City Public Works Department. Development Agreement No. 90-1 describes certain public facilities improvements to be constructed by Pacific Coast Homes and Garfield Partners. IV-1 (hssp97) Table 2 Development Phasing Plan PLANNING ACRES USE TOTAL EXISTING PHASE I PHASE II PHASE III DWELLING I DWELLING I 1 AREA UNITS UNITS 1990-1993 1994-1997 1998-2001 1 48 RESIDENTIAL 160 20 90 50 16 OPEN SPACE II 159 RESIDENTIAL 1,535 300 985 250 32 INDUSTRIAL III 175 RESIDENTIAL 1,450 150 750 550 7 COMMERCIAL 16 OPEN SPACE IV 24 RESIDENTIAL 750 65 150 300 235 53 MIXED USE 31 INDUSTRIAL 4 COMMERCIAL TOTAL 1 565 1 1 3,895 1 65 1 620 1 2,125 1 1,085 *INDICATES TIMING OF NON-RESIDENTIAL USES. C. Methods and Procedures The methods and procedures for implementation and administration of the Development Standards, as well as the policies, guidelines and other conditions of this Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan, are prescribed as follows: 1. Implementation The Specific Plan shall be implemented through the processing of site plans in conjunction with conditional use permits, tentative tract maps and tentative parcel maps. The site plans may be prepared concurrently in sufficient detail to determine conformance with the Specific Plan. 2. • Tentative Tract Mans For projects requiring a tentative tract or parcel map(s), the provisions and procedures contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code shall apply. .Vesting_ Tentative Mans For residential projects entailing a vesting tentative tract map, the provisions and procedures in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code shall apply. 4. Conditional Use Permits For projects, uses and operations requiring a conditional use permit pursuant to the provisions of this Specific Plan, the procedures specified in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code shall apply. 5. Special PermitsNariances For projects or operations requiring a variance or modification to the Development Standards contained herein, deviations up to ten percent (10%) may be approved via a special permit, except for height and parking. Deviations greater than ten percent (10%) may be approved via a conditional exception. 6. Specific Plan Amendments A Specific Plan amendment shall be required for the following: a) Changes to planning unit boundaries which exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the approved acreage on Table 1. b) Changes to the Development Standards in the Specific Plan. IV-2 (hssp97) c) Substantial variations from infrastructure plans, as determined by the Director of Public Works. Specific Plan Amendments shall be processed in accordance with either the zone change or code amendment procedures, as appropriate, contained in the Huntington Beach Ordinance Code. 7. Coastal Development Permits The south western portion of the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area falls within the coastal zone. All development projects proposed in this area require a Coastal Development Permit. D. Density Transfer Procedure The Land Use Element of the Holly-Seacliff General Plan Amendment allows dwelling units to be transferred from a Planning Unit or Units within the same Planning Area, so long as the maximum number of dwelling units allowed by the General Plan for each Planning Unit is not exceeded, and so long as the total number of dwelling units allocated for that Planning Area is not exceeded. As indicated on Table 1 of the Specific Plan, the "average gross density" of each Planning Unit is less than the General Plan maximum density. Since the General Plan and the Development Standards permit development up to the General Plan maximum density, the following procedures are necessary to allow and monitor density transfers within the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan Area. Transfers Within A Planning Unit Dwelling units may be transferred within a Planning Unit as long as the total number of units for the Planning Unit as shown on Table 1 remains the same. If a property owner submits an entitlement application for development of a portion of a Planning Unit for a density which is greater or less than the average gross density for the Planning Unit, then a transfer of density within a Planning Unit is involved, as long as the assigned total of units (as shown on Table 1) remains the same. The subject application must include: 1) a plan showing both the approved and proposed allocations of dwelling units within the Planning Unit, and 2) the written concurrence of all property owners affected by the proposed transfer. Density may not be transferred from a completed project unless the transfer was approved at the time said project was approved. IV-3 (hssp97) 2. Transfers Between Planning Units Dwelling units may be transferred between Planning Units within the same Planning Area. If a property owner submits an entitlement application for a Planning Unit for a density which is greater or less than the average gross density for the Planning Unit, then a transfer of density between Planning Units will be necessary. The subject application must include: 1) a plan showing both the existing and proposed allocation of dwelling units within all Planning Units affected by the transfer, and 2) the written concurrence of all property owners affected by the proposed transfer. Density may not be transferred from a completed project unless the transfer was approved at the time said project was approved. 3. Entitlement applications involving a density transfer will require the following: a. An Infrastructure Analysis documenting that the transfer does not exceed proposed infrastructure capacity. If capacity will be exceeded based on the required analysis, recommendations for additional infrastructure improvements must also be submitted. Required infrastructure modifications shall be the responsibility of the party requesting the transfer, and shall be placed as conditions of approval on the appropriate development entitlement. b. An Environmental Analysis in the form of the City's Initial Study documentation that the proposed density transfer of planning units will not affect the conclusions of the environmental analysis contained in the Certified EIR 89-1 for GPA 89-1. C. A policy analysis documenting that the density transfers within a planning unit or between planning unit are consistent with the goals, policies, and programs of the City of Huntington Beach General Plan and this Specific Plan. E. Acreage/Boundary Changes Acreage figures shown on the Land Use Table (Table 1) are indicated to the nearest acre based upon planimeter readings. Modifications, not to exceed fifteen percent (15%) of the acreage and boundaries shown, may result from more detailed planning and technical refinements in the tentative tract map or site plan processes, and shall not require an amendment to this Specific Plan. IV-4 (hssp97) V. LEGAL DESCRIPTION LEGAL DESCRIPTION V-1 (hssp97) HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY REVISED PER ZONE CHANGE NO. 93-2 ORDINANCE NO. 3243 BEING PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 34 AND 35, TOWNSHIP 5 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN, PARTLY IN THE RANCHO LAS BOLSAS AND PARTLY IN THE RANCHO LA BOLSA CHICA, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 13 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS AND PORTIONS OF SECTIONS 2, 3 AND 4, TOWNSHIP 6 SOUTH, RANGE 11 WEST, SAN BERNARDINO BASE AND MERIDIAN IN THE RANCHO LAS BOLSAS, AS SHOWN ON A MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 51, PAGE 14 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: BEGINNING AT THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF MAIN STREET AND YORKTOWN AVENUE (SHOWN AS MANSION AVENUE ON A MAP FILED IN BOOK 95, PAGE 20 OF RECORD OF SURVEYS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY); THENCE NORTH 89041'42" WEST 1350.19 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID YORKTOWN AVENUE TO THE CENTERLINE OF GOLDENWEST STREET AS SHOWN ON SAID LAST MENTIONED MAP; THENCE NORTH 41°3725" EAST 11.92 FEET ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID GOLDENWEST STREET TO AN ANGLE POINT THEREIN; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF GOLDENWEST STREET, NORTH 00°16'53" EAST 1403.96 FEET TO ITS POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 7656, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 295, PAGES 28 THROUGH 31 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, SAID POINT BEING THE BEGINNING OF A NON -TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 800.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 09038'08" WEST; THENCE WESTERLY 181.28 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 7656 THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 12059'00", TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE CONCAVE NORTHERLY, HAVING A RADIUS OF 800.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID CURVE BEARS SOUTH 22037'08" EAST; THENCE CONTINUING WESTERLY 880.58 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 7656 AND ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 7421, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 302, PAGES 20 THROUGH 23 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, TO THE BEGINNING OF A REVERSE CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHWESTERLY HAVING A RADIUS OF 800.00 FEET, A RADIAL LINE TO SAID CURVE BEARS NORTH 40026'54" EAST; THENCE NORTHWESTERLY 249.63 FEET ALONG SAID CURVE AND SAID NORTHERLY LINE OF TRACT NO. 7421 THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 17052'42" TO THE EAST LINE OF LOT 6 OF TRACT NO. 14296, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP RECORDED IN BOOK 700 PAGES 39 AND 40 OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY, THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EAST LINE kDEN & HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY SOCIATES REVISED PER ZONE CHANGE NO.93-2 ORDINANCE NO. 3243 CIVIL ENGINEERS — PLANNERS — LAND SURVEYORS W.O. NO. 0867-273-I X 12 Date 10/25 94 18012 COWAN, SUITE 210 • IRVINE, CA 92714 714/66UI10 FAX:660.0418 Eng r D.C. Chk. D.W. Sheet 1 of 5 NORTH 00022'36" EAST 24.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 44°22'22" WEST 78.12 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 48052'36" WEST 27.00 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 88°04'15" WEST 243.99 7 ALONG THE NORTH LINE OF LOTS 5 AND 6 OF SAID TRACT NO. 14296 TO THE jRTHWEST CORNER OF SAID LOT 5; THENCE SOUTH 75°50'26" WEST 342.57 FEET TO THE WESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS "NORTH 80035'37" EAST 262.07 FEET" FOR A PORTION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF PARCEL 2 OF PARCEL MAP NO. 90-198, AS SHOWN ON THE MAP FILED IN BOOK 266, PAGES 37 THROUGH 41 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 65033'53" WEST 135.10 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 38028'53" WEST 157.67 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 42001'01" WEST 126.97 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02°37'39" WEST 321.88 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 14006'58" WEST 101.62 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 19'01'14" WEST 69.70 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 21°33'20" WEST 125.71 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 00054'26" EAST 66.46 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 20053'20" EAST 70.89 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 12°40'17" EAST 96.32 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 50°43'23" EAST 99.49 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 33009'35" EAST 165.63 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 08014'20" EAST 81.14 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 52014' 13" EAST 87.04 FEET TO A POINT ON A PORTION OF THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2 OF SAID P.M. 90-198, SAID POINT BEING ON THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS "NORTH 27031'58" WEST 336.22 FEET" ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE SOUTH 27031'58" EAST 88.35 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID EASTERLY LINE SOUTH 37012'45" EAST 28.77 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID EASTERLY LINE SOUTH 17000' 11" EAST 117.35 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 78054' 15" EAST 35.22 FEET; THENCE NORTH 71000'09" EAST 18.01 FEET TO THE WESTERLY TERMINUS OF THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS "NORTH 57019'50" EAST 67.67 FEET" ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID PARCEL BOUNDARY 2TH 57019'50" EAST 67.67 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID PARCEL BOUNDARY ..,)RTH 57°29'06" EAST 41.72 FEET; THENCE NORTH 63°50'24" EAST 52.18 FEET; THENCE NORTH 87030'20" EAST 38.02 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 52049'54" EAST 127.43 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 39°08'51" EAST 246.87 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 30°04'22" EAST 57.81 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 02°46'37" WEST 61.71 FEET TO A POINT ON A PORTION OF THE SOUTHEASTERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2, SAID POINT BEING ON THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS "NORTH 47037'07" EAST 178.23 FEET" ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE SOUTH 47°37'07" WEST 81.81 FEET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID SOUTHEASTERLY LINE SOUTH 56031'48" WEST 90.34 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 52°26'55" WEST 109.64 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 53°34'35" WEST 199.31 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 53021'07" WEST 144.84 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 53034'54" WEST 79.68 FEET; THENCE NORTH 78°49'50" WEST 129.11 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE NORTH 85015'47" WEST 274.77 FEET; THENCE NORTH 85055'36" WEST 577.09 FEET; THENCE SOUTH 72°57'43" WEST 441.38 FEET TO A POINT ON A PORTION OF THE SOUTHERLY LINE OF SAID PARCEL 2, SAID POINT BEING ON THAT CERTAIN COURSE SHOWN AS "NORTH 78011'24" EAST 320.84 FEET" ON SAID PARCEL MAP; THENCE ALONG SAID SOUTHERLY LINE SOUTH 78011'24" WEST 172.19 FEET; THENCE LEAVING SAID SOUTHERLY LINE NORTH 63026'38" WEST 21.32 FEET; THENCE NORTH 01024'25" EAST 183.23 FEET; THENCE NORTH 14°36'11" kDEN & HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY SOCIATES REVISED PER ZONE CHANGE NO.93-2 ORDINANCE NO. 3243 'YIL ENGINEERS -PLANNERS -LAND SURVEYORS W.O. No. 0867-273-IX12 Date 10 25 94 18012 COWAN. SUITE 210 • IRVINE, CA 92714 714/660-0110 FAX:6604418 Engr. D.C. Chk. D.W. Sheet 2 of 5 i r 3 3 14 SOUTHWEST QUARTER OF SAID SECTION 35; THENCE SOUTH 00°18'39" WEST 455.28 FEET, MORE OR LESS, ALONG SAID PARALLEL LINE TO A POINT ON THE WESTERLY PROJECTION OF THE SOUTH LINE OF PARCEL 1 OF THE MAP FILED IN BOOK 1329 PAGES 35 AND 36 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 89044'06" EAST 639.65 FEET ALONG SAID WESTERLY PROJECTION AND SAID SOUTH LINE OF PARCEL 1 TO THE CENTERLINE OF HUNTINGTON STREET AS SHOWN ON PARCEL MAP NO. 81-575, FILED IN BOOK 172, PAGES 3 AND 4 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 00° 18'34" WEST 1326.13 FEET, MORE OR LESS, ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID HUNTINGTON STREET TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF MAIN STREET AND SAID HUNTINGTON STREET; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID HUNTINGTON STREET SOUTH 00017'42" WEST 744.99 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF GARFIELD AVENUE AND SAID HUNTINGTON STREET, AS SHOWN ON SAID PARCEL MAP NO. 81-575, FILED IN BOOK 172, PAGES 3 AND 4 OF PARCEL MAPS RECORDS OF SAID HUNTINGTON BEACH, THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF GARFIELD AVENUE NORTH 89042'04" WEST 659.89 FEET TO THE SOUTH QUARTER CORNER OF SAID SECTION 35; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF GARFIELD AVENUE, NORTH 89°43'21" WEST 82.85 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF MAIN STREET AND SAID GARFIELD AVENUE AS SHOWN ON THE MAP OF TRACT NO. 10511 RECORDED IN BOOK 455, PAGES 13 THROUGH 17 INCLUSIVE OF MISCELLANEOUS MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE SOUTH 45017'24" WEST 774.32 FEET, MORE OR LESS, ALONG THE CENTERLINE OF SAID MAIN STREET TO A POINT ON THE NORTHERLY PROJECTION OF THE MOST WESTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 10511 DESCRIBED ABOVE, SAID LINE ALSO BEING THE EAST LINE OF HOLLY STREET, 30.00 FEET IN WIDTH AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF TRACT NO. 10511; THENCE SOUTH 00° 18' 18" WEST 242.23 FEET ALONG SAID LINE TO AN ANGLE POINT TO THE WEST LINE OF SAID TRACT NO. 10511; THENCE ALONG THE WESTERLY LINE OF SAID TRACT THE FOLLOWING COURSES: SOUTH 89°40'56" EAST 280.19 FEET, SOUTH 00°17'57" WEST 410.35 FEET, SOUTH 89°42'47" EAST 135.00 FEET AND SOUTH 00017'57" WEST 90.00 FEET TO THE NORTHERLY LINE OF CLAY AVENUE, 30.00 FEET IN WIDTH, AS SHOWN ON SAID MAP OF TRACT NO. 10511; THENCE SOUTH 00017' 13" WEST 30.00 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE OF SAID CLAY AVENUE; THENCE NORTH 89°42'47" WEST 813.43 FEET TO THE CENTERLINE INTERSECTION OF CLAY AVENUE AND MAIN STREET AS SHOWN ON THE MAP FILED IN BOOK 100, PAGES 46 AND 47 OF PARCEL MAPS, RECORDS OF SAID ORANGE COUNTY; THENCE ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF MAIN STREET SOUTH 19°14'02" WEST 829.19 FEET TO AN ANGLE POINT IN SAME; THENCE CONTINUING ALONG SAID CENTERLINE OF MAIN STREET SOUTH 00018'10" WEST 545.95 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. CONTAINING 565.20 ACRES, MORE OR LESS. kSDEN & SOCIATES 'IVIL ENGINEERS - PLANNERS - LAND SURVEYORS 18012 COWAN. SUITE 210 • IRVINE. CA 92714 7141660-0110 FAX• 660.0419 �.STF Jl Vt VI HOLLY-SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN BOUNDARY REVISED PER ZONE CHANGE NO. 93-2 ORDINANCE NO. 3243 W.O. No. 0867-273-1X12 Date 10/25/94 14 Engr. D.C. Chk. D.W. Sheet 5 of 5 i VI. MITIGATION MEASURES VI. MITIGATION MEASURES FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT NO.89-1 These mitigation measures are required of the Holly-Seacliff Specific Plan pursuant to Final Environmental Impact Report 89-1 and should be imposed on future projects in the Specific Plan area. Land Use On -Site Land Uses 1. Prior to issuance of building permits for individual tracts, the applicant should demonstrate that service vehicle access to all remaining operating oil wells on site is monitored through the existing or proposed residential tracts. 2. All potential buyers and renters of on -site residences should be notified of the affects resulting from on -site and off -site oil production activities. The notification should state the frequency and locations of maintenance and service operations. The notification should indicate that noise levels from oil activities may also significantly increase during these times. Air Quality 1. Because it only takes a small amount of material to generate odors, it is important to maintain a very clean operation. Therefore, any oil spilled on the ground should be quickly cleaned up. Well sumps should be pumped out after pulling a well and periodically in the interim. Maintenance of seals and gaskets on pumps and piping should be performed whenever leaks are evident. General clean-up of the site should result in significant improvements in the level of odor found in the area. 2. Appropriately designed, vapor recovery systems which pull the gas off the well casing should be employed, as well as vapor recovery systems for oil transport trucks. A similar system could be employed for any remaining storage facilities on site. VI-1 (hssp97) Noise 1. Noise levels generated by the oil operations should be mitigated to levels consistent with the Huntington Beach Noise Ordinance, by locating consolidation area(s) at least 300 feet from the nearest residential or other sensitive land uses (locating consolidation areas within industrial -use areas would be the most desirable from a noise standpoint). The oil wells could be located closer to sensitive land uses if a perimeter wall with a minimum height of 8 feet was utilized around the consolidation area(s). The following mitigation measures assume a 100 foot distance to the receptor and the mitigation affects of an 8 foot sound wall. Additional analysis of the consolidation area(s) will be necessary when phasing plans become available. Oil Well Drilling Operations 2. The results show that in order for the drilling operations to satisfy the Huntington Beach Noise Ordinance outdoor standards, electric motors with acoustic blankets must be used. Diesel motors even when shielded by acoustic blankets will not meet the nighttime Noise Ordinance standards at the on -site and off -site residences and will not meet the daytime Noise Ordinance standards at the on -site residences. If there are plans to conduct the drilling operations during the nighttime hours, then according to the Oil Code, the operations must be soundproofed. Acoustic blankets as well as an 8 foot high masonry wall along the site perimeter will likely reduce the noise levels to below the Noise Ordinance standards. Oil Well Pumping 3. The well pumps used in the consolidation area should be submerged. If other types of well pumps such as ground level electric or diesel pumps may be necessary. Specific mitigation measures should be presented in an additional noise study. Well Pulling, Redrilling and Service Drilling Operations 4. Well pulling and drilling operations are confined to daytime hours (7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.) by the Oil Code. Any redrilling performed at night must provide soundproofing to comply with the Noise Ordinance. The Oil Code prohibits the pulling of wells during the nighttime hours (10:00 to 7:00 a.m.). Well maintenance activities should also be conducted between the hours or 7:00 a.m. and 10:00 p.m. only. Although high levels of noise may be generated by routine well maintenance operations, these activities would occur inside the noise barrier surrounding the consolidation area. VI-2 (hssp97) 5. Service drilling for this project will be conducted during the daytime hours only. Data on service drilling operations indicate that with a dieselpowered service rig and an 8 foot high noise barrier, the noise level at 100 feet will likely be 55 dBA which corresponds to the City's daytime Noise Ordinance standard. All servicing of the wells must comply with the noise standards contained in the Huntington Beach code. Truck Operations 6. Truck operations should be limited to daytime hours only (7 a.m. to 10 p.m.) Helicopter Operations 7. A notice (and statement of acknowledgement) to prospective homeowners is required stating that the property is subject to overflight, sight and sound of helicopters associated with the police facility. Oil Facilities 1. Future Specific Plan(s) should include an area or areas for the consolidation of oil well facilities. 2. All new development proposals should be accompanied by: • A plan which addresses the requirements for abandoned wells. • The abandonment plans for existing wells. • The operational plans for any remaining wells and facilities. These plans must satisfy the requirements of the City of Huntington Beach and the Division of Oil and Gas. 3. The criteria for the approval of development plans within oil districts should include: (a) That enough open space has been reserved around the oil operation site to allow existing and future equipment which could reasonably be expected to be used on the site, including any setbacks from new development required by the Fire Chief. (b) That adequate access to all operation sites is provided for portable equipment and emergency vehicles. VI-3 (hssp97) (c) That reasonable expansion of the existing facilities, if permitted in the oil district, can be accomplished. (d) That any proposed development includes all provisions for sound -proofing and fire protection required by the Fire Chief. (e) That screening of oil facilities from any new development is included in the plan. 4. As future development occurs, continued subsidence rate monitoring for the region of the subject site is necessary to determine if subsidence rates are declining with current water injection methods being used at operating oil production facilities. 5. The use of post -tensioned slabs should be considered in the foundation design in order to eliminate distress to structures and slabs from minor regional subsidence. Although this measure will provide for a more rigid slab, it will be no means eliminate distress to foundations resulting from the rapid subsidence of the land from continued oil and gas withdrawal. Cultural Resources Archaeology 1. It is suggested that the research design be prepared by the Principal Investigator selected to perform the work and that it be reviewed by a second consulting archaeologist. This step will help insure the completeness and viability of the research design prior to its implementation. The involvement of a second professional is viewed as an inexpensive means of insuring that no major elements are overlooked. 2. The archaeological deposits within the Holly-Seacliff study area should be subjected to a program of excavation designed to recover sufficient data to fully describe the sites. The following program is recommended: a. Analysis of the collections made by the Pacific Coast Archaeological Society, Long Beach State University and any community college which has such material. If the collections are properly provenienced and are accompanied by adequate documentation, they should be brought together during this phase and complete analysis performed. Of particular importance during this phase is the recovery of survey date to be used to determine the exact locations of previous excavation efforts. VI-4 (hssp97) b. Prior to the beginning of any excavation effort, a burial strategy should be developed by the archaeologist retained to accomplish the excavation members of the Native American community and appropriate City Staff. The strategy should address details of the handling and processing of human remains encountered during excavation, as well as the ultimate disposition of such remains. C. Completion of test excavations should be made at each of the archaeological deposits. The information gained from the test excavation will guide the following data recovery excavation. The excavations should have two primary goals: • Definition of site boundaries and depth. • Determination of the significance of the site and its degree of preservation. d. A statistically valid sample of site material should be excavated. The data recovery excavation should be conducted under the provisions of a carefully developed research design. The research questions presented earlier in this report should be incorporated into the research design, other important research questions should be developed from the test excavation data included, and a statement of methodology to be observed must be included. e. A qualified observer appointed by the Principal Investigator/Archaeologist should monitor grading of the archaeological sites to recover important material which might appear. The monitor will be assigned by the Principal Investigator. This activity may require some minor delay or redirecting of grading while material is being recovered. The observer should be prepared to recover material as rapidly as is consistent with good archaeological practice. Monitoring should be on a full time basis when grading is taking place on or near an archaeological deposit. However, the grading should terminate when the cultural deposit has been entirely removed and clearly sterile deposits exposed. f. All excavation and ground disturbing observation projects should include a Native American Observer. Burials are known to exist at some of the sites, a circumstance which is extremely important to the Native American community. VI-5 (hssp97) g. A detailed professional report should be prepared which fully describes the site and its place in pre -history. Reports should receive sufficient distribution which includes the City, the County and the UCLA repository for archeology to insure their availability to future researchers. h. Arrangements should be made for proper curation of the collections. It is expected that large quantities of materials will be collected during the excavation. Curation should be at an institution which has the proper facilities for storage, display and use by interested scholars and the general public. 3. The shell and lithic scatters should be subjected to test excavation to determine if they are or are not in situ archaeological deposits. If any of the scatters prove to be in situ archaeological material, a site record should be prepared and submitted to the Archaeological Survey, University of California, Los Angeles, and the site should be treated as in mitigation number one. If the sites are shown to be not archaeological in nature or not in situ, then no further action should be taken. 4. Ground disturbing activity within the study area should be monitored by a qualified observer assigned by the Principle Investigator/Archaeologist to determine if significant historic deposits, (e.g. foundations, trash deposits, privy pits and similar features) have been exposed. The monitoring should be on a full-time basis, but can be terminated when clearly undisturbed geologic formations are exposed. If such exposures occur, appropriate collections should be made, followed by analysis and report preparation. Historic material may be encountered anywhere within the Holly-Seacliff property, but the area around the old Holly sugar Refinery is probably more sensitive than the balance of the project area. Historical material recovered at the archaeological sites should be treated with those deposits. 5. The plaque commemorating oil well Huntington A-1 should be preserved. As development in the area continues, it may be desirable to upgrade this feature. Paleontology 6. A qualified paleontologist should be retained to periodically monitor the site during grading or extensive trenching activities that cut into the San Pedro Sand or the Quaternary marine terrace units. 7. In areas where fossils are abundant, full-time monitoring and salvage effort will be necessary ( 8 hours per day during grading or trenching activities). In areas where no fossils are being uncovered, the monitoring time can be less than eight hours per day. VI-6 (hssp97) 8. The paleontologist should be allowed to temporarily divert or direct grading operations to facilitate assessment and salvaging of exposed fossils. 9. Collection and processing of matrix samples through fine screens will be necessary to salvage any microvertebrate remains. If a deposit of microvertebrates is discovered, matrix material can be moved off to one side of the grading area to allow for further screening without delaying the developmental work. 10. All fossils and their contextual stratigraphic data should go to an institution with a research interest in the materials, such as the Orange County Natural History Foundation. Human Health and Safety Surface Oil Contamination Prior to grading and development, a site reconnaissance should be performed including a phased Environmental Site Assessment to evaluate areas where contamination of the surficial soils may have taken place. The environmental assessment should evaluate existing available information pertinent to the site and also undertake a limited investigation of possible on -site contamination. Phase I should include: a. Review of available documents pertinent to the subject site to evaluate current and previous uses. b. Site reconnaissance to evaluate areas where contamination of surficial solid may have taken place. C. Excavation and testing of oil samples to determine presence of near surface contamination of soil. d. Subsurface exploration to determine presence of sumps on -site. Testing of possible drilling fluids for heavy metals. e. Completion of soil gas vapor detection excavations located adjacent to the existing on -site wells. f. Testing of air samples for gas vapor, methane gas and sulfur compounds. 2. The actual site characterization and remedial action plan would be developed as part of a later phase. Upon completion of the Environmental Assessment, a Remedial Action Plan can be developed. This plan should address the following items: VI-7 (hssp97) a. Treatment of possible crude oil contaminated soils. A possible solution to this condition would be aeration of the contaminated soils to release the volatile gases and then incorporation of the treated solid into the roadway fills (subgrade). b. Treatment of possible drilling sumps by either on -site disposal of non -contaminated drilling fluids or off -site disposal of contaminated fluids. Treatment of the possibility of the accumulation of methane gas. Methane Gas 3. Prior to development, a thorough site study for the presence of surface and shallow subsurface methane gas should be performed. Any abnormal findings would require a Remedial Action Plan and further studies to assure sufficient mitigation of the hazardous areas prior to building construction. All structures should have a gas and vapor barrier installed underneath the slabs and foundations. Gas collection and ventilation systems should be installed over abandoned wells which are underneath or within ten (10) feet of any structure, and over wells which show evidence of surface emissions of methane gas. Additionally, following construction of structures, an organic vapor analysis should be conducted and the results evaluated to assure that acceptable air quality is maintained within buildings and residences. 4. The presence of methane gas on -site should be the subject of future studies that include the following tasks: a. Drilling of test wells to monitor for subsurface methane deposits and confirm or deny the presence of biogenic methane bearing strata near area. b. Shallow excavation and sampling in areas either known or assumed to be potential drilling mud sumps; C. Vapor monitoring of shallow vapor probes placed at strategic location on the site and collection of soil vapor samples; d. Vapor survey areas adjacent to known abandoned oil wells; e. Laboratory analysis of selected soil samples for metals and soil vapor samples for gases. VI-8 (hssp97) Other Oil Production Related Hazards 5. Oil wells scheduled for abandonment should be completed in accordance with the standards and specifications of the City of Huntington Beach and the California Division of Oil and Gas. Wells which have previously been abandoned must be reabandoned to the most current requirements of the City of Huntington Beach and the Division of Oil and Gas. 6. Existing oil production lines are located throughout the site. Treatment of these lines will depend on proposed land use and development. Utility lines should be relocated and or removed with the trench being filled with compacted fill. Hazardous Materials l . The use, storage and disposal of hazardous materials should be enforced by City of Huntington Beach to provide the greatest possible protection to the public from accidental occurrences. 2. Active wells remaining on -site should be secured and screened as required by the City of Huntington Beach. 3. Prior to development, a review of available public health records should be performed to evaluate possible public health risk sites in the vicinity of the subject site. 4. An inventory of all hazardous materials used and stored by industries locating within the project area should be maintained and recorded for use by the City Fire Department. This inventory should include the location at which each hazardous material is used. Aesthetics 1. Landscaping of future projects should be designed to minimize visual impacts on adjacent parcels. Special consideration should be given to orientation of the project's residences (i.e. windows and deck) so as to respect the privacy of adjacent and nearby homes. 2. Wherever feasible, oil production facilities on -site should be eliminated or consolidated to reduce their total number. Facilities remaining on -site should be painted, camouflaged, or otherwise screened by perimeter walls, plantings or like treatments to reduce their unsightliness to future residents. VI-9 (hssp97) Land -Use Policies Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the Department of Fish and Game should be notified of grading activities on -site that are scheduled to commence in the swales, in order to preclude the possible elimination of wetland areas under the jurisdiction of the Department of Fish and Game, as further specified in the Biological Resources section of this EIR. Biological Following construction of necessary infrastructure in the main drainage swale, i.e., utility lies, sewers, etc., this swale should remain as open space. Mitigation for the loss of cattail marsh habitat (0.5 acres) and willow habitat (0.5 acres) which are depicted on Exhibit 20, will take place such that a minimum of 1.0 acre of riparian vegetation is established in this drainage swale. The plants utilized in the revegetated area will enclosed from the recommended plant palette indicated on page VI-11. 2. Through adoption of future Specific Plans large trees suitable for use by raptors such as the red -shouldered hawk, should preserved or replaced in accordance with the tree species identified in the plant palette contained on page VI-11. 3. Any grading or filling in the brackish wetlands in the western portion of the project site sill be mitigated by restoration of an equal area of coastal wetland at a nearby location in the open space area. 4. Effects upon on -site wetlands within the jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish and Game will require mitigation defined by 1603 permits. VI-10 (hssp97) --------- - �DEV RAG (� 1 PoT I ofv RAc rove ►b ' DEV r.Pt ,MAY DEV�Aa O-PoDf r1Dy�/b D[V-}- NNW � -porT + RAG I D[V I►u RAG DEV- .I 1 o DfV )Per. DI•►D DEV RAG ' I " > / I DEV' "'�'"' �• .1 DEV, r j f,�1 NilMl • REV ((�� RAG JN/TrLj]m 1 DEV ��. RAG DEV .• DEV (/,•,' ' CiPfDS REV NtIW ,RAQ MG ...i. _ NN 1 i' , i D[V NNW �I.. RAG Dry / RAG ` — '� '/-JET. �•'•.��.'• / • (lyofJv[��J `.� ' �}� � ` r-- , � '� � LEGEND DEV DEVELOPED AREA NNW NON-NATIVE WOODLAND RAG RUDERAL ANNUAL GRASSLAND PSD4 PALUSTRINE,SHRUB,DECID000S,SALIX Pb I PALUSTRINE, UNCONSOLIDATED BOTTOM PePD PALUSTRINE, EMERGENT, PERSISTENT, DISTICHUS PDPS PALUSTRINE, EMERGENT, PERSISTENT, SALICORNIA PePT PALUSTRINE, EMERGENT, PERSISTENT, TYPHA pU PALUSTRINE, UNCONSOLIDATED SHORE F—p;V—C—1 PALUSTRINE, UNCONSOLIDATED SHORE, VEGETATED. CONYZA CITY OF EXHIBIT 20 HUNTINGTON BEACH BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES HOLLY—SSC��7 ARcEN �L�OFF dl-ilxl I I Ion G=dUVA_ EUV VUVIGLSNE A ° � L9A ASSOgATEB NC PLANT PALETTE Scientific Name Common Name Trees Alnus rhombifolia White Alder Juglans califomica California Walnut Platanus racemosa Sycamore Quercus agrifolia Coast Live Oak S. laevigata Red Willow S. lasiandra Golden Willow S. hindsiana Sandbar Willow Salix lasiolepis Arroyo Willow Umbellylaria californica California Bay Tall Shrubs Baccharis pilularis var. consanquinea Coyote Brush Heteromeles arbutifolia Toyon R. ovata Sugarbush Rhus laurina Laurel sumac Sambucus mexicana Elderberry Low Shrubs and Vines Diplacus longiflorus R. viburnifolium R. aureum Ribes speciosum Rosa califomica Rubus ursinus Toxicodendron diversilobum Vitis califomica Herbaceous Plants and Grasses Artemisia douglasiana Elymus condensatus Scirpus spp. Typha spp. Bush Monkeyflower Catalina Currant Golden Currant Fuschia-flowered Gooseberry California Rose California Blackberry Poison Oak California Grape Mugwort Giant Wild Rye Tule Cattail VI -I I (hssp97) Public Services and Utilities Schools 1. The General Plan Amendment 89-1 designates a site for a new elementary school to serve students generated by residential development within the project area. 2. The school district and major landowner should enter into an agreement for acquisition or lease of the site as part of implementation of this General Plan Amendment. 3. Developers should pay school impact fees to finance construction of necessary school facilities. 4. The Huntington Beach Union High School District should coordinate its expansion plans with phasing of development within the project area and surrounding areas. VI-12 (hssp97) Holly/seacliff Cost Reimbursement for Excess Capacity Task 2 Cost Analysis City of Huntington Beach Director of Public Works City Engineer Les M Jones Robert E Eichblatt Boyle Engineering Corporation Project Manager Project Engineer OC-S08-009-07 8/9197 Revised 9/4/97 Victor E Opincar, PE Greg Gould SOWLE 1501 Quail Street, Newport Beach. CA 92658 _ Table of -Contents Section Page 1 Introduction..............................................................................................................................1-1 1 1 Background 1-1 1 2 Statement of the Problem ... 1-1 13 Scope of Study. .1-2 14 Cost Analysis .. . . . . 1-3 2 Capacity of Facilities to Serve PLC..........................................................................................2-1 3 Sewer Reimbursement Analysis...............................................................................................3-1 4 Storm Drain Reimbursement Analysis.....................................................................................4-1 5 Water Reimbursement Analysis...............................................................................................5-1 6 Arterial Roadway Improvements.............................................................................................6-1 7 Police/Fire Facilities..................................................................................................................7-1 8 Alternative Cost Reimbursement Methodologies....................................................................8-1 9 Sewer Reimursment Analysis by Parcel...................................................................................9-1 10 Storm Drain Reimbursement Analysis by Parcel..................................................................10-1 11 Arterial Roadway Reimbursement Analysis by Pa"rcel..........................................................11-1 12 Final Summary of Reimbursement by Parcel........................................................................12-1 OC-SO8-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC I GOWLE List of Tables Table Page No. 1 Estimated Costs of Major Sewer Facilities Percentage Allocation Comparison 3-1 2 Estimated Costs of Major Storm Drain Facilities Percentage Allocation Comparison 4-1 3-A Reservoir Storage Capacity Summary to Support the Developer Agreement for Holly/Seacliff 5-1 3-B Estimated Cost of Reservoir, Booster Stations, and Transmission Mains, Required the Support of the Holly/SeacliffDevelopment Agreement 5-2 4-A Estimated Costs of Major Water Facilities, Percentage Allocation Comparison 5-3 4-B Reservoir Storage Capacity Summary to Support Reduced Developer Obligation for Holly/Seacliff 5-4 5 Estimated Costs of Arterial Roadway Facilities Percentage Allocation Comparison 6-1 6 Estimated Costs of Police & Fire Substation Facilities Percentage Allocation Comparison 7-1 7 Estimated Cost of Major Sewer Facilities Percent Allocation by Parcel 9-2 8 Estimated Costs Storm Drain Percent Allocation by Parcel 10-2 9 Estimated Costs Arterial Roads Percent Allocation by Parcel 11-2 10 Estimated Cost for All Major Facility by Parcel 12-3 OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC 11 MOVLE List of Exhibits Exhibit 2-1* Holly Seacliff Development Agreement Area Exhibit 3-1 * Holly Seacliff Sewer Facilities Exhibit 4-1 * Holly Seacliff Storm Drain Districts Exhibit 6-1 * New Arterial Roadway Exhibit 9-1** Sewer Exhibit 10-1 ** Storm Drain Exhibit 10-2** Storm Dram Exhibit 10-3 * * Exhibit 11-1 * * * Revised * * New Storm Drain Arterial Roadway OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC III BOWLE List of Appendices Appendix A* Holly/Seacliff Sewer Analysis Appendix B* Holly/Seacliff Storm Drain Analysis Appendix C* Holly/Seacliff Arterial Street Analysis Appendix D Holly/Seacliff Briefing #1 for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff,Construction Financing Committee —March 25, 1997 Appendix E Holly/Seacliff Briefing #2 for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee —April 15, 1997 Appendix F Holly/Seacliff Briefing #3 for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee —May 20, 1997 Appendix G Holly/Seacliff Briefing #4 for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee —June 17, 1997 Appendix H Holly/Seacliff Briefing #5 for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee —July 8, 1997 Appendix I Holly/Seacliff Briefing #6 for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee —August 12, 1997 Appendix J Holly/Seacliff Task I Assessment Report —April 15, 1997 Appendix K* * Holly/Seacliff Sewer Analysis by Parcel Appendix L** Holly/Seacliff Storm Drain Analysis by Parcel Appendix M* * Holly/Seacliff Arterial Roadway Analysis by Parcel * Revised * * New OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC iv 13OWLE Section 1 - Introduction 1.1 BACKGROUND Considerable infrastructure will be required to support the proposed Holly/Seacliff Development The following documents are in place at the present time to support the subject development (and have been used for this analysis) November, 1990 Development Agreement executed between the City of Huntington Beach and Pacific Coast Homes and Garfield Pacific Partners (Developer) referred to as the Agreement Wildan Engineering's January 18, 1994 "Engineers Report Holly Seacliff Cost Reimbursement District No 93-1 referred to as the 1994 Wildan Report. Walden & Associates December 19, 1997, report submitted by PLC entitled 'Infrastructure Financing Program' referred to as the 1997 Walden Report 1.2 STATEMENT OF THE PROBLEM The current Developer for Holly/Seacliff is not the same party who originally negotiated the Development Agreement with the City, leading to potential re -interpretation of the terms and conditions negotiated with the City relative to reimbursement for excess capacity water, sewer, drainage, and utility infrastructure As a recent example, the Developer suggested to the City that the nine million gallon water storage reservoir required in Section 2 2 5(h) of the Agreement need only be a six MG reservoir to satisfy the Holly/Seacliff development, with capacity beyond this amounting to "excess capacity" that should be reimbursed This suggestion by the Developer to reinterpret the Agreement indicates that the City should anticipate differences of interpretation on the allocation method that will determine how much of the Developer's costs are required to support the development and how much cost, if any, can be attributed to provide excess capacity for other properties within the Holly/Seacliff Planning area that are owned by other parties In the case of the nine million gallon water reservoir, this could lead to the Developer contending that a smaller reservoir is all that is needed, and that the City should reimburse the Developer for any "excess" capacity to achieve nine million gallons of capacity This cost allocation analysis was authorized by the City to work with the Developer in resolving the cost reimbursement that could be anticipated in accordance with the terms of the Agreement It should be pointed out that under the terms of the Agreement (Section 2 2 11 (b), the City was not obligated to have this cost allocation analysis prepared in advance of construction being completed by the Developer Furthermore, Section 2 2 11 (c) of the Agreement has the following dispute resolution process OC-S08-009-07/k1b/R-HOLLY DOC 1-1 13OWLE Section 1 - Introduction "If the Developer disputes either the amount of the percentage of the Reimbursement costs as determined by the Director of Public Works, based on review of all pertinent data, the City Administrator will review the disputed item Any decision of the City Administrator may be appealed to the City Council " 1.3 SCOPE OF STUDY A phased approach has been taken to provide a�pro-active stance for the City for meetings with the Developer This would put the City's staff in a better position to deal with the Developer in anticipation of their advancing concepts regarding cost reimbursement for excess capacity This approach would provide flexibility in responding to the Developer and providing information to you as required, and is based on the following phases Task 1 The objective of Task 1 was to make basic findings from a review of the Development Agreement, past reports, correspondence, and other submittals by the Developer Task 1 evaluated prior cost analysis prepared by the developer (1997 Infrastructure Financing Program Report by Walden) 1 This initial evaluation by Boyle was to determine if there were inconsistencies in the developer's evaluation report and to check the validity of the data, and it was completed and summarized in an April 15, 1997 letter report to the City Deliverable "Task 1" letter report was presented summarizing the findings with emphasis on inconsistencies (if any) and the validity of information developed to date (Appendix) Task 2 This is a cost analysis to determine excess capacity for water, sewer, storm drains, arterial roadways, and public safety facilities In general, the most rigorous methodology to determine "excess capacity" is to lay out the proposed development at build out and model two scenarios for each type of infrastructure the first scenario is to determine the size of facilities required to only support the development, and the second is to size facilities to serve the development plus the maximum area of benefit that could be served Task 2 provides a more complete evaluation by laying out the Developer's proposed development at ultimate build -out and modeling two scenarios for each type of infrastructure Deliverable "Task 2" letter report with supporting technical data for each scenario analysis (Appendix) 1 Two reports have been prepared proposing cost reimbursements to the Developer (1) Walden & Associates December 19, 1997, report submitted by PLC entitled 'Infrastructure Financing Program' referred to as the 1997 Walden Report and (2) Wildan Engineering's January 18, 1994 "Engineers Report Holly Seacliff Cost Reimbursement District No 93-1 referred to as the 1994 Wildan Report OC-S08-009-07/k1b/R-HOLLY DOC 1-2 f304�LE Section 1 - Introduction Task 3 Participation in meeting with the City's Holy/Seacliff Construction Financing Construction Committee and the Developer Deliverables Briefing outlines for each meeting (Appendix) Task 4 The conclusion of this process should result in a mutually agreeable cost allocation for excess capacity This should be memorialized in a final report Deliverable Brief Final Report that summarizes the findings 1.4 Cost Analysis The cost analysis to determine excess capacity involves evaluating each type of infrastructure provided for in the 1990 Development Agreement on a case -by -case basis For those facilities that appear to have excess capacity and the potential for cost reimbursement, the basic scenario was to determine the capacity at ultimate build -out to serve the Developer (PLC) plus others within the Holly/Seacliff (Holly/Seacliff Others) boundary specifically defined in the 1990 Development Agreement If required for a more rigorous evaluation, two other scenarios are possible to develop cost allocation data (1) determination of the size (capacity) of facilities required to only support PLC's development and, (2) determination of the facilities to serve PLC's development plus additional areas that could benefit from being served This cost analysis has been prepared in accordance with the 1990 Development Agreement, Section 2 2 11 Reimbursement Agreements, Subsection (t), which states in part that "The City shall use its best efforts to the extent allowed by law to obtain for Developer the maximum Reimbursement Costs available under this subsection from future development served by any facility, a portion of the cost of which is reimbursable hereunder Developer acknowledges that City is limited in the manner in which it may collect or require such reimbursement and that the City may be unable to cause Developer to be reimbursed for such costs, OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC 1-3 MOVLE Section 2 - Capacity of Facilities to Serve PLC At the Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee meeting on March 25, 1997, Mr Howard Zelefsky reviewed the 1990 Development Agreement between the City and Developer The 1990 Development Agreement was originally with Garfield Partners (succeeded by PLC) for development of 545 acres of property with benefits to both the City and Developer Benefits to the city include • Forty-one acres of linear park land • Twelve acres of neighborhood parks • Obligation to improve these parks • Expedited infrastructure improvements • Payment to city twice the typical traffic impact fee ($150 per vehicle trip) • Construction of a nine million gallon water reservoir, booster pumping station, water well, and transmission lines • Payment of all normal development fees in effect at time of development • Construction and equipping a fire station and police substation • Commitment to provide infrastructure capacity to serve 3,780 dwelling units In return, the developer receives • Certainty of developments • Contract to allow construction of 3,780 dwelling units • Commitment that the "City shall use its best efforts" for reimbursement of excess capacity to Developer for future development served by any facility • Acknowledgment by the Developer that costs may not be reimbursed OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC 2-1 SOWLE o AX F-7-Z MR-q-� Section 3 - Sewer Reimbursement Analysis Sewer Facilities that have been constructed to serve the Holly/Seacliff area by the Developer are somewhat different from those presented in the 1997 Walden Report. One of the major cost items proposed for reimbursement by PLC is a City sewage pumping station east of Gothard Street. The new sewage pumping station, relocated by the Developer to accommodate Tract No. 14662, accommodated existing City flows to the old pumping station, PLC's property, and to a minor extent, non -PLC property (Holly/Seacliff Others). The relocation resulted in existing City sewage flows being re-routed to the new pumping station site with PLC's flows. There appears to be no benefit to the City of Huntington Beach created by the relocation of the existing sewage pumping station to accommodate existing sewage flows In addition, there appears to minimal future development, if any, that will occur in the existing service area that was contributing flows, leaving no opportunities for reimbursement subsection " rom future development served by any facihtyL " Therefore, no cost reimbursement appears to be due to the Developer for this facility. There is one sewer trunk line that would provide excess capacity to several properties in Holly/Seacliff that are separate ownership's then the Developer, for which provisions should be made to reimburse the Developer for future development A comparison of the cost analysis in the 1995 Wildan Report, the 1997 Walden Report, and Boyle is shown in Table 1. Table 1 Holly/Seacliff Development Estimated Costs of Major Sewer Facilities Percentage Allocation Comparison (Based on Cost Estimates) 1994 WILDAN 1997 WALDEN BOYLE (Cost Reimbursement (Developer's Proposed (City's Allocation) District Allocation) Allocation PLC 1,100,000 94 600,000 57 500,000 88 Holly/Seacliff Others 70,000 6 100,000 9 70,000 12 ide Others 0 0 400,000 34 0 0 ff 1,170,000 1 100 1,100,000 100 570,000 100 OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC 3-1 MOVI-E I N W F- J V a li W 3 W W —.— LL J W J � J O m c mg _ _ 1 , ON F �- 1 Section 4 - Storm Drain Reimbursement Analysis Storm Drain Facilities (size and length) that have been developed over the past several years to serve the Holly/Seacliff area are somewhat different than presented in the 1997 Walden Report, which proposed cost allocations between the Developer, Holly/Seacliff Others, and City Wide Others. The Walden cost analysis did not distinguish between improvements made by the Developer to pick up existing upstream flows as provisions were made for future development downstream of existing development. This is significant due to the downstream location of the northeastern portion of the Holly/Seacliff Development and the need for the developer to accommodate upstream flows In this particular case, drainage areas from outside (and upstream) of the Holly/Seacliff Development Agreement boundary, draining into open channels within Holy/Seacliff, were diverted into conduits within by the Developer to provide better land use opportunities The upstream drainage flow is from developed areas and there are minimal opportunities, if any, for reimbursement to the Developer PLC from future development subsection "from fixture development served by any fqcihy, " Eliminating the cost to accommodate existing flows from cost reimbursement to the Developer shifts costs from the Walden analysis to the Developer as indicated in Table 2 Table 2 Holly/Seacliff Development Estimated Costs of Major Storm Drain Facilities Percentage Allocation Comparison (Based on Cost Estimates) 1994 WILDAN 1997 WALDEN BOYLE (Cost Reimbursement (Developer's Proposed (City's Allocation) District Allocation) Allocation $ % $ % $ % PLC 2,700,000 90 1,600,000 49 1,100,000 73 Holly/Seacliff Others 800,000 10 800,000 24 400,000 27 City Wide Others 0 0 900,000 27 0 0 3,500,000 100 3,300,000 100 1,500,000 100 OC-SOB-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY.DOC 4-1 SOWLE HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN DISTRICTS IA. I f ✓ ' �'f -.�.�' Ili I: i i r.. � i y � I � ARIE I � � 0i 8 I _. I —I "E4� «� I ,77 I l E ' I '. I g-� Y Ai (I al -17 T (( al { �< / \� Ti,✓ ` `� j' ]- �'� T-y! I 17 1 i If /' MTL € r �rl frif�f'irrirjt!%ice/r li_� _)i) III E�13 `I 1� I ._l— II - 'i��r k�';p \ I� � �. f>.c_ ,..� ,rfP•;'<. ` .. �l��'�// ' .�_. `��._..,-�E �I ' — � I`--�I 's�-.Y---I ------ ,�. Parcel & Lot Lines Ellis - Goldenwest Specific Plan Holly Seaclhl Specific Plan Existing Storm Drain Facility Shared Storm Drain Facility PLC Non-Raimhurseahle PLC Development Agroement Areas Non -PLC Development Agreement Area, EXHIBIT 4-1 Poser W0ftK§ DF.PAa%Wf SVRFClFY Gn Section 5 - Water Reimbursement Analysis 5.1. Three Alternatives for Reimbursement Alternative 1 - Follow Development Agreement for reimbursement based on 3780 units. Alternative 2 - Defer determination of reimbursement per Developer Agreement language. Alternative 3 - Use PLC's recommendation for 3200 units as basis of reimbursement. 5.2 Alternative 1 - Recommended Alternative The facilities to be constructed by the Developer are specified in Section 2 25(u) of the Development/ Agreement as follows "In lieu of water system capital facilities fees, the Developer shall construct, on land to be acquired by the City, a nine million gallon water storage reservoir, associated booster stations, water well and transmission lines " Development of the Holly/Seacliff project in accordance with the Development Agreement of the 3780 units (plus commercial) exacerbates a shortfall of water storage in the current west side of the City's water system. This was analyzed in the Water Master Plan and has been discussed in several study sessions regarding other development in the west side of the City. The water system's current storage capacity cannot support the Holly/Seacliff development because of deficiencies and existing development. Construction of the nine million gallon reservoir by the Developer, as required in the Agreement, would alleviate the water storage deficient in the west side of the City and provide adequate storage for Holly/Seacliff. A breakdown of the reservoir storage in presented in Table 3-A. Table 3-A Reservoir Storage Capacity Summary to Support the Developer Agreement for Holly/Seacliff (3780 Units) Planning Area Obligation Reservoir Capacity Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan Developer Agreement 5 5 MG Ellis/Goldenwest Specific Plan Developer Agreement 0.5 MG Holl /Seacliff Others Specific Plan 0.5 MG Subtotal Developer plus Holl /Seacliff Others 6.5 MG City Westside Deficiencies Water Master Plan 4 4 MG Total - Holly/Seacliff Reservoir Capacity Developer plus Holly/Seacliff Others 10.9 MG OC-S08-009-07/kJb/R-HOLLY DOC 5-1 MOVL-E Section 5 - Water Reimbursement Analysis Construction of the required reservoir capacity by the Developer would allow the orderly integration of the Holly/Seacliff development into the City's water system without further exacerbating the shortfall of water storage for the City's west side. The nine million gallon reservoir is one component of the required facilities in the Development Agreement which are summarized in Table 3-B Table 3-B Estimated Cost of Reservoir, Booster Stations, and Transmission Mains Required the Support of the Holly/Seacliff Development Agreement Developer Required Facilities Estimate of Probable Construction Costs Water well and wellhead - Maximum Day (MD) @ 3500 gpm $1,300,000 Well Supply Main (MD) @ 3500 gpm $1,400,000 9 MG Reservoir + Booster Station @ 9500 gpm $6,000,000 Transmission Mains MD + fire $2,100,000 Subtotal $10,800,000 Total with Overhead and Contingency allowance $13,000,000 Allocation of the costs presented in Table 3-B would suggest that Holly/Seacliff and others should share in the oversizing that is required. Table 4-A presents a comparison of prior cost allocations by Willdan and Walden, both of which differ from Boyle's recommendation to the City, based on the 3780 unit analysis that would not result in a further storage deficiency problem in the west side of the City. OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC 5-2 MOWLE Section 5 - Water Reimbursement Analysis Table 4-A Holly/Seacliff Development Estimated Costs of Major Water Facilities Percentage Allocation Comparison (Based on Cost Estimates) 1994 WILLDAN 1997 WALDEN BOYLE (Cost Reimbursement (Developer's Proposed (Recommended District Allocation) Allocation Allocation PLC 11,000,000 76 4,600,000 82 $12,500,000 96 Holly/Seacliff Others 3,400,000 24 600,000 11 $500,000 4 City Wide Others 0 0 400,000 7 0 0 14,400,000 1 100 1 5,600,000 1 100 1 $13,000,000 1 100 This table was revised on 9/4 5.3 Alternative 2 - Defer action per Developer Agreement language. Section 2 2 5 (h) of the Agreement addresses construction of the water facilities in lieu of water system capital facilities fees It also states that the determination of the reimbursement can be made after the facilities are accepted by the City per the following language "Upon acceptance of these facilities by the City, the Public Works Director shall verify Developer's actual costs and determine Developer's Reimbursable Costs, subject to provision in 2 2 11 " The City can defer taking any action on the reimbursement issue for the water facilities until the Developer meets the conditions set forth in the Agreement This Alternative is not recommended OC-S08-009-07/klb/R-HOLLY DOC 5-3 fBOWL.E Section 5 - Water Reimbursement Analysis 5.4 Alternative 3 - Use PLC's recommendation for 3200 units PLC's June 11, 1997 letter to the City suggested that their share of the 3780 units set forth in the Development Agreement be reduced to 3200 units based on an "ownership table presented to staff" PLC's contention that they should not be obligated for building facilities to support 3780 units as required by the Agreement is based on various transactions that have taken place over the period since the Agreement was signed by the City and the current time with PLC assuming the obligations as the Developer An analysis was performed to determine the reservoir size to support 3200 units as shown in Table 4-B Table 4-B Reservoir Storage Capacity Summary to Support Reduced Developer Obligation for Holly/Seacliff (3200 Units) Planning Area Obligation Reservoir Capacity Holly/Seacliff & Not per Developer Agreement 5 0 MG Ellis/Goldenwest Specific Plans Holly/Seacliff Others Specific Plan 15 MG (including areas within the Developer Agreement) Subtotal Developer plus Holl /Seacliff Others 6.5 MG City Westside Deficiencies Water Master Plan 4 4 MG Total - Holly/Seacliff Developer plus Holly/Seacliff Others 10.9 MG Reservoir Capacity Under this scenario, the obligation of PLC would be reduced to provide 5 0 MG of reservoir capacity with the remaining 1 5 MG required to support the remaining area and additional 4 4 MG to correct the west side deficiency This would transfer reimbursement costs to areas covered by the Development Agreement that should not fall within the City's jurisdiction This Alternative is not recommended OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC 5-4 MOWLE Section 6 - Arterial Roadway Improvements The issue in reviewing reimbursement for arterial roadways is the capacity any, that is provided for future development as a result of converting existing two-lane roads into four lane, four lane divided, and six lane divided arterials A series of 1994 reports by LSA, used in both the 1997 Walden and 1994 Wildan Analysis, was also used in this analysis The addition of lane capacity to meet trip generation by both the existing and Developer's requirements often provided excess capacity due to the jump in additional lane capacity When the total new lane capacity could accommodate existing, plus the Developer, plus Holly/Seacliff others, reimbursement does not appear to be warranted as the Developer was not adding capacity for others It just happened that extra capacity is build into the new roadway as a result of the new lanes Table 5 summarizes the analysis Table 5 Holly/Seacliff Development Estimated Costs of Arterial Roadway Facilities Percentage Allocation Comparison (Based on Cost Estimates) 1994 WILDAN 1997 WALDEN BOYLE (Cost Reimbursement (Developer's Proposed (City's Allocation) District Allocation) Allocation $ % $ % $ % PLC 30,300,000 81 9,100,000 25 34,400,000 97 Holly/Seacliff Others 7,300,000 19 2,000,000 9 900,000 3 City Wide Others 1 0 1 0 24,200,000 66 0 0 37,600,000 100 37,600,000 100 35,300,000 100 However, when the Developer had to add lane capacity to meet Holly/Seacliff Others, reimbursement is justified since the Developer is adding more then required to meet his development objectives OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC 6-1 00MLE NEW ARTERIAL ROADWAY M42b07 see ,W. Ave FB Ellis- Golclenwast Specific Plan Holly Sescliff Specific Plan Now Arterial Roadway PLC Development Agreement Areas Noa,PLC Development Agreement Areal EXHIBIT 6-1 4 .1 K'I;IJC WORKS DEPAMT%W& SURF c7ry Grs FB Ellis- Golclenwast Specific Plan Holly Sescliff Specific Plan Now Arterial Roadway PLC Development Agreement Areas Noa,PLC Development Agreement Areal EXHIBIT 6-1 4 .1 K'I;IJC WORKS DEPAMT%W& SURF c7ry Grs Section 7 - Police/Fire Facilities Fire Chief Michael Dolder indicated that new fire facilities are located based on the 1974 Fire Master Plan and the City's Growth Management Element for Fire Medical response for paramedics and fire trucks. The Growth Management Standard is set for an 80% response time within 5 minutes for paramedics and a 100% response time within 10 minutes for fire engines. Based on our understanding of the methodology used by Chief Dolder to site the new Edward's fire station (will be designated Station No. 6) for the Holly/Seacliff Development, total time studies were undertaken by the Fire Department by doing actual time trials over various routes in simulated responses to incidences. Based on these measured response times, the new Edward's station and existing Gothard station will have defined service areas depending on the road patterns and driving speed of the emergency equipment. In general, the Edward's station will benefit that land area in Holly/Seacliff West of Golden West being developed by PLC; and the Gothard Station primarily benefits that portion of Holly Seacliff East of Golden West that has the majority of Holly/Seacliff Others. There is no clear benefit to Holly/Seacliff Others that would justify costs being allocated to non -developer controlled properties. All of the costs required in the Developer's Agreement should be allocated to the Developer as indicated in Table 6. Table 6 Holly/Seacliff Development Estimated Costs of Police & Fire Substation Facilities Percentage Allocation Comparison (Based on Cost Estimates) WILDAN WALDEN BOYLE (Cost Reimbursement (Developer's Proposed (City's Allocation) District Allocation) Allocation $ % $ % 1 $ % PLC 3,300,000 84 3,300,000 84 3,900,000 100 Holly/Seacliff Others 600,000 16 0 0 0 0 City Wide Others 0 0 600,000 16 0 0 3,900,000 1 100 t 3,900,000 100 t 3,900,000 100 OC-SO8-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY.DOC 7-1 SOWLE Section 8 - Alternative Cost Reimbursement Methodologies 8 - 1. Developer Agreements often specify the cost reimbursement methodology to be used for providing excess capacity in different infrastructure facilities. The Holly/Seacliff Agreement did provide several options for financing infrastructure (Section 2.3.5) through special assessments or taxing districts The Agreement states that "Developer may apply to City to form an Assessment District, Community Facilities District, or similar special district Such district may include land other than the Property to the extent permitted by applicable laws " 8 - 2. Assessment Districts are established under specific statues that provide a mechanism to sell tax- free bonds to finance infrastructure improvements Only property owners are permitted to participate in this type of district under the 1911 and 1913 Assessment District Acts The statues provide a procedure for setting up the district with public hearings, and are based on an engineers report to spread costs to. property based on the benefits attributed to various properties. The assessment engineer bases the benefit on judgment and experience, and the formula are limited to specific infrastructure. Police and fire facilities, for example, are not permitted in an assessment district The advantage of an assessment district is that it provides bond money to build improvements at the outset of a project The bonds are issued by the public agency The disadvantage is that all the property owners within the assessment district are assessed their share of the bond payment annually once the bonds are sold based on the benefit attributed to their property. 8 - 3. Cost Reimbursement Districts are a spin-off from an assessment district with several important differences: (1) bonds are not sold to finance the proposed improvements; and (2) there are no restrictions on facilities that can be include in the District However, like an assessment district, an, assessment engineer determines a "method of apportionment" by evaluating the benefits to individual parcels within the district based on the highest and best use of the land The City's General Plans and specific plans are used to determine the highest and best use. The advantage of a cost reimbursement district to a developer is that it provides a mechanism to recover actual costs for building facilities that provide capacity for other property owners. Also, other property owners do not have to pay for their share of the cost reimbursement until they develop the property, which can happen long after the developer has constructed and finance the improvements. The disadvantage to the developer is that a long time period might happen before other property owners decide to develop, delaying the reimbursement payment for a number of years into the future. Other property owners might end up paying more then their fair share of facilities based on the cost reimbursement methodology adopted for the district OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC 8-1 BOWLE Section 8 - Alternative Cost Reimbursement Methodologies 8 - 4. Mello -Roos Community Service Districts (CFD) are a variation of assessment districts in that developer can take raw land and encumber it with bonds to finance infrastructure without'the process used by assessment districts under the 1911 and 1913 Assessment District Acts. However, the registered voters within the district are allowed to participate in the proceedings. A CFD can be formed upon request of two council members and a vote of owners of 2/3 of the property with in the district; the district would then have to be approved by the council. CFD's can be stopped by written protest of 50% of the registered voters within the district. The advantage of a CFD is that bonds can be sold with a longer time period for repayment then assessment districts for repayment. A major disadvantage is that all property owners would have to be assessed for repayment of the bonds annually. 8 - 5. Reimbursement Agreements are a contract between the City and the entity building infrastructure with excess capacity for other properties. This type of agreement is generally straight forward and provides a mechanism for specific facilities at the time they are constructed. The advantage to a developer is that the amount of reimbursement is spelled out when a facility is constructed Other property owners benefit because they will have the capacity needed to develop their property and they have the advantage of "economy of scale" in facility that are built with reduced unit costs for the entire project. The disadvantage to the developer is that the time of reimbursement is not know and can be a anytime in the future, leaving the burden of financing a portion of a facility on the developer The City is at limited disadvantage since they are responsible to keep track of this type of agreement and collect the money for reimbursement, resulting in another administrative task to follow-through on. The agreement should always specify a specific length of time that the City is obligated to collect reimbursement fees from property owners. OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC 8-2 BOWLE Section 9 - Sewer Reimbursement Analysis by Parcel Based on the analysis in Section 3 "Sewer Reimbursement Analysis," a breakdown of costs for each parcel was prepared (Appendix H). A summary of the detailed cost breakdown is provided in Table 7. The following qualifiers should be noted: • All unit cost presented are estimated based on cost provided by the developer in previous reports. • Overhead cost factors in the developers analysis have been decreased. • Capacity for each parcel is based on ultimate land use. • Sewage flow generation are based on County Sanitation District of Orange County criteria. OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY.DOC 9-1 SOWLE Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Sewer Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" in Stewert Avenue September 9, 1997 Table 7 Parcel Numbers Estimated Reimbursement Reimbursement Percentage Costs Based on Estimated (To be revised based Costs on PLC`s actual costs) 111-140-16 $9,300 17 6 111-140-15 $5,200 9 8 111-140-14 $3,600 6 8 111-130-24 $900 1.7 111-130-25 $400 0.1 r- Page 9-2 HOLLY SEACLIFF SEWER FACILITIES - EXHIBIT A Reach 3 l { l C-1 C ,11w•i,■ • ■ II j I 111w10•f , ,ltw■•,■ 1,lwrw 4'' / ` FB City Sewer Line ,�,as+• ,nwr+■ `%> County Sewer Une ----- Private Sewer Line ,a,wrws Shared Sewer Line +�� J Proposed Sewer Line /tlw•sa■ — PLC Non -Reimbursed Line ' mwwro I ,atwra■ maw■ � t _ (!Gliy Lift Station i +„wr•• County Lift Station Private Lift Station 0 ;% i/ `%a ,� </� ` �%�a/wi ' �`/X+S' ;��i ii'�.0.41', ,a,wwat aaww.g ,uww• �' � _ / a. ,/ J // j/ jf//f/` //j� /jj/ • i v,wra• Si Clay Ave f / / ///jI/ • nlwraa - i' /J�� j//Ji�j� /�/f/� j/j��j/�J//f/ � t4tw•i+t r naawn l /////,///.j. j ��;�(ri��fj/�ltJ3afa�!%�/l � a„w�st• n,ww,• �`�,` ' �./ � 'f//_, "\ / � >a-1'.P,. / /J • J J /T !/ ' ri �: P11wr'„, � J;/ i / / ! fet}tFst fi!% Xz t.� �rFN FifJJ/1!d /(e $.tefi,dJxTzTt> p l k/f�eF TJIi/Ysi✓lJsxiri9li'ZAll- x{i1 .J H/or L .J tttwra• /1Yr►r PLC Development Agreement Areas NON -PLC Development Agreement Areas EXHIBIT 9-1 T9� e sd WM& 6U•F(7lYQ■ Section 10 - Storm Drain Reimbursement Analysis by Parcel Based on the analysis in Section 4 "Storm Drain Reimbursement Analysis", a breakdown of costs'for each parcel was prepared (Appendix I). A summary of the detailed cost breakdown is provided in table 8. The following qualifiers should be noted: • All unit cost presented are estimated based on cost provided by the developer in previous reports. • Overhead cost factors in the developers analysis have been decreased. 0 Capacity for each parcel is based on ultimate land use. • Drainage maps from City staff and previous drainage reports are the bases for drainage criteria used. OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC 10-1 13OWLE Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table 8 REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 9 111-140-02 $300 0 9 111-140-04 $700 1 9 111-140-05 $700 1 9 111-140-06 $1,400 1 9 111-140-07 $1,400 1 9 111-140-08 $700 1 9 111-140-09 $700 1 9 111-140-10 $600 1 9 111-140-14 $4,200 4 9 111-140-19 $4,000 4 9 111-140-20 $800 1 9 111-140-21 $2,100 2 9 111-140-22 $1,300 1 9 111-140-23 $4,200 4 9 111-140-24 $4,200 4 9 111-140-25 $4,200 4 9 111-140-26 $1,500 1 9 111-140-27 $1,100 1 9 111-140-36 $300 0 9 111-140-37 $700 1 9 111-140-38(-01) $1,400 1 9 111-150-13 $600 1 9 111-150-15 $2,600 3 9 111-150-16 $2,600 3 9 111-150-17 $5,100 5 9 111-150-19 $1,900 2 9 111-150-20 $1,600 2 9 1 111-150-21 1$1,400 1 1 Page 10-2 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table �h REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 3 111-110-01 $2,500 1 3 111-110-02 $2,500 1 3 111-110-03 $2,500 1 3 111-110-04 $4,600 2 3 111-110-32 $2,500 1 3 111-110-34 $100 0 3 111-120-01 $100 0 3 111-120-06 $1,800 1 3 111-120-07 $1,800 1 3 111-120-08 $1,900 1 3 111-120-09 $1,500 0 3 111-120-11 $100 0 3 111-120-12 $200 0 3 111-120-13 $200 0 3 111-120-14 $200 0 3 111-120-15 $200 0 3 111-120-16 $1,800 1 3 111-120-17 $1,500 0 3 111-120-18 $1,500 0 3 111-120-19 $1,500 0 3 111-120-20 $3,000 1 3 111-120-22 $2,500 1 3 111-120-23 $2,500 1 3 111-120-24 $2,500 1 3 111-120-25 $2,500 1 3 111-120-26 $2,500 1 3 111-120-27 $3,600 1 3 111-120-28 $100 0 3 111-120-29 $2,400 1 3 111-120-30 $400 0 3 111-130-01 $2,200 1 3 111-130-02 $3,300 1 3 111-130-05 $1,900 1 3 111-130-06 $2,200 1 Page 10-3 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table 8 REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 3 111-130-07 $1,100 0 3 111-130-08 $1,100 0 3 111-130-09 $2,100 1 3 111-130-11 $500 0 3 111-130-12 $500 0 3 111-130-14 $3,900 1 3 111-130-15 $6,400 2 3 111-130-24 $13,100 4 3 111-130-25 $7,900 3 3 111-130-26 $3,300 1 3 111-130-27 $900 0 3 1 111-130-28 $400 1 0 Page 10-4 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table `8 REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 2 110-210-01 $3,600 1 2 110-210-02 $1,300 0 2 110-210-03 $300 0 2 110-210-04 $100 0 2 110-210-06 $500 0 2 110-210-10 $700 0 2 110-211 $2,900 1 2 110-212 $3,200 1 2 110-213 $1,600 0 2 110-220-02 $7,300 2 2 110-220-03 $4,400 1 2 110-220-04 $2,900 1 2 110-220-05 $7,900 2 2 110-221 $3,300 1 2 110-222 $5,500 1 2 111-110-01 $100 0 2 111-110-02 $100 0 2 111-110-03 $100 0 2 111-110-04 $100 0 2 111-110-32 $100 0 2 111-110-34 $0 0 2 111-120-01 $0 0 2 111-120-06 $100 0 2 111-120-07 $100 0 2 111-120-08 $100 0 2 111-120-09 $100 0 2 111-120-11 $0 0 2 111-120-12 $0 0 2 111-120-13 $0 0 2 111-120-14 $0 0 2 111-120-15 $0 0 2 111-120-16 $0 0 2 111-120-17 $0 0 2 111-120-18 $0 0 Page 10-5 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table 8 REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 2 111-120-19 $0 0 2 111-120-20 $0 0 2 111-120-22 $100 0 2 111-120-23 $100 0 2 111-120-24 $100 0 2 111-120-25 $100 0 2 111-120-26 $100 0 2 111-120-27 $100 0 2 111-120-28 $0 0 2 111-120-29 $100 0 2 111-120-30 $0 0 2 111-130-01 $0 0 2 111-130-02 $0 0 2 111-130-05 $0 0 2 111-130-06 $0 0 2 111-130-07 $0 0 2 111-130-08 $0 0 2 111-130-09 $0 0 2 111-130-11 $0 0 2 111-130-12 $0 0 2 111-130-14 $0 0 2 111-130-15 $100 0 2 111-130-24 $100 0 2 111-130-25 $0 0 2 111-130-26 $0 0 2 111-130-27 $0 0 2 111-130-28 $0 0 2 159-371-09 $200 0 2 159-371-10 $200 0 2 159-371-11 $200 0 2 159-371-12 $200 0 2 159-371-13 $100 0 2 159-371-14 $100 0 2 159-371-15 $100 0 Page 10-6 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 TableA8 REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 2 159-381-08 $200 0 2 159-381-09 $200 0 2 159-381-10 $200 0 2 159-381-11 $300 0 2 159-381-12 $200 0 2 159-381-13 $100 0 2 159-381-14 $100 0 2 159-381-15 $100 0 2 159-402-02 $600 0 2 159-402-12 $500 0 2 159-403-01 $500 0 2 159-403-02 $500 0 2 159-403-03 $500 0 2 159-403-04 $700 0 2 159-403-05 $600 0 2 159-403-08 $1,100 0 2 159-403-09 $1,000 0 2 159-403-10 $1,200 0 2 159-403-11 $700 0 2 159-403-12 $700 0 2 159-403-13 $600 0 2 159-403-14 $600 0 2 159-403-15 $800 0 2 159-403-16 $600 0 2 159-403-17 $500 0 2 159-411 $4,700 1 2 159-412-01 $1,700 0 2 1 159-431-07 1$9,300 1 2 Page 10-7 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table'8 REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 6 111-110-07 $7,800 5 6 111-110-10 $2,600 2 6 111-110-14 $2,500 2 6 111-110-15 $2,000 1 6 111-110-18 $21,800 14 6 111-110-19 $10,900 7 6 111-110-20 $10,900 7 6 111-110-21 $11,400 7 6 111-110-22 $11,400 7 6 111-110-31 $5,200 3 6 111-110-33 $2,600 2 6 111-110-36 $3,800 2 6 111-110-37 $3,800 2 6 111-110-38 1$23,000 15 Page 10-8 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table S REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 7 111-110-07 $300 0 7 111-110-10 $100 0 7 111-110-14 $100 0 7 111-110-15 $100 0 7 111-110-18 $1,800 1 7 111-110-19 $900 0 7 111-110-20 $900 0 7 111-110-21 $400 0 7 111-110-22 $400 0 7 111-110-31 $200 0 7 111-110-33 $100 0 7 111-110-36 $200 0 7 111-110-37 $100 0 7 111-110-38 $900 0 Page 10-9 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table 8 REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 4A 110-210-01 $200 1 4A 110-210-02 $100 1 4A 110-210-03 $0 0 4A 110-210-04 $0 0 4A 110-210-06 $0 0 4A 110-210-07 $0 0 4A 110-210-10 $0 0 4A 110-211 $100 1 4A 110-212 $100 1 4A 110-213 $100 1 4A 110-220-02 $200 1 4A 110-220-03 $200 1 4A 110-220-04 $100 1 4A 110-220-05 $300 2 4A 110-221 $100 1 4A 110-222 $200 1 4A 111-110-01 $100 1 4A 111-110-02 $100 1 4A 111-110-03 $100 1 4A 111-110-04 $200 1 4A 111-110-32 $100 1 4A 111-110-34 $0 0 4A 111-120-01 $0 0 4A 111-120-06 $100 1 4A 111-120-07 $100 1 4A 111-120-08 $100 1 4A 111-120-09 $100 1 4A 111-120-11 $0 0 4A 111-120-12 $0 0 4A 111-120-13 $0 0 4A 111-120-14 $0 0 4A 111-120-15 $0 0 4A 111-120-16 $0 0 4A 111-120-17 $0 0 Page 10-10 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table 8 REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL. % 4A 111-120-18 $0 0 4A 111-120-19 $0 0 4A 111-120-20 $0 0 4A 111-120-22 $100 1 4A 111-120-23 $100 1 4A 111-120-24 $100 1 4A 111-120-25 $100 1 4A 111-120-26 $100 1 4A 111-120-27 $200 1 4A 111-120-28 $0 0 4A 111-120-29 $100 1 4A 111-120-30 $0 0 4A 111-130-01 $0 0 4A 111-130-02 $0 0 4A 111-130-05 $0 0 4A 111-130-06 $0 0 4A 111-130-07 $0 0 4A 111-130-08 $0 0 4A 111-130-09 $0 0 4A 111-130-11 $0 0 4A 111-130-12 $0 0 4A 111-130-14 $100 1 4A 111-130-15 $100 1 4A 111-130-24 $100 1 4A 111-130-25 $100 1 4A 111-130-26 $0 0 4A 111-130-27 $0 0 4A 111-130-28 $0 0 4A 159-371-09 $0 0 4A 159-371-10 $0 0 4A 159-371-11 $0 0 4A 159-371-12 $0 0 4A 159-371-13 $0 0 4A 159-371-14 $0 0 Page 10-11 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table 8 REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 4A 159-371-15 $0 0 4A 159-381-08 $0 0 4A 159-381-09 $0 0 4A 159-381-10 $0 0 4A 159-381-11 $0 0 4A 159-381-12 $0 0 4A 159-381-13 $0 0 4A 159-381-14 $0 0 4A 159-381-15 $0 0 4A 159-402-02 $0 0 4A 159-402-12 $0 0 4A 159-403-01 $0 0 4A 159-403-02 $0 0 4A 159-403-03 $0 0 4A 159-403-04 $0 0 4A 159-403-05 $0 0 4A 159-403-08 $0 0 4A 159-403-09 $0 0 4A 159-403-10 $0 0 4A 159-403-11 $0 0 4A 159-403-12 $0 0 4A 159-403-13 $0 0 4A 159-403-14 $0 0 4A 159-403-15 $0 0 4A 159-403-16 $0 0 4A 159-403-17 $0 0 4A 159-411 $300 2 4A 159-412-01 $100 1 4A 1 159-431-07 $200 1 Page 10-12 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Talili-8 REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 4B 111-110-07 $0 0 4B 111-110-10 $0 0 4B 111-110-14 $0 0 4B 111-110-15 $0 0 4B 111-110-18 $100 1 4B 111-110-19 $0 0 4B 111-110-20 $0 0 4B 111-110-21 $0 0 4B 111-110-22 $0 0 4B 111-110-31 $0 0 4B 111-110-33 $0 0 4B 111-110-36 $0 0 4B 111-110-37 $0 0 4B 1 111-110-38 Iso 1 0 Page 10-13 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 TdbleS REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 8 110-210-01 $400 0 8 110-210-02 $100 0 8 110-210-03 $0 0 8 110-210-04 $0 0 8 110-210-06 $0 0 8 110-210-07 $100 0 8 110-210-10 $100 0 8 110-211 $200 0 8 110-212 $200 0 8 110-213 $100 0 8 110-220-02 $500 1 8 110-220-03 $300 0 8 110-220-04 $200 0 8 110-220-05 $500 1 8 110-221 $200 0 8 110-222 $300 0 8 111-110-01 $200 0 8 111-110-02 $200 0 8 111-110-03 $200 0 8 111-110-04 $400 0 8 111-110-07 $100 0 8 111-110-10 $0 0 8 111-110-14 $0 0 8 111-110-15 $0 0 8 111-110-18 $400 0 8 111-110-19 $200 0 8 111-110-20 $200 0 8 111-110-21 $100 0 8 111-110-22 $100 0 8 111-110-31 $100 0 8 111-110-32 $200 0 8 111-110-33 $0 0 8 111-110-34 $0 0 8 111-110-36 $0 0 Page 10-14 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table 8 REACH PARCEL No TOTAL COST TOTAL % 8 111-110-37 $0 0 8 111-110-38 $200 0 8 111-120-01 $100 0 8 111-120-06 $200 0 8 111-120-07 $200 0 8 111-120-08 $200 0 8 111-120-09 $200 0 8 111-120-11 $0 0 8 111-120-12 $0 0 8 111-120-13 $0 0 8 111-120-14 $0 0 8 111-120-15 $0 0 8 111-120-16 $100 0 8 111-120-17 $0 0 8 111-120-18 $0 0 8 111-120-19 $0 0 8 111-120-20 $100 0 8 111-120-22 $200 0 8 111-120-23 $200 0 8 111-120-24 $200 0 8 111-120-25 $200 0 8 111-120-26 $200 0 8 111-120-27 $400 0 8 111-120-28 $100 0 8 111-120-29 $200 0 8 111-120-30 $0 0 8 111-130-01 $0 0 8 111-130-02 $100 0 8 111-130-05 $0 0 8 111-130-06 $0 0 8 111-130-07 $0 0 8 111-130-08 $0 0 8 111-130-09 $100 0 8 111-130-11 $0 0 Page 10-15 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table-8 REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 8 111-130-12 $0 0 8 111-130-14 $100 0 8 111-130-15 $200 0 8 111-130-24 $200 0 8 111-130-25 $100 0 8 111-130-26 $100 0 8 111-130-27 $0 0 8 111-130-28 $0 0 8 159-371-09 $0 0 8 159-371-10 $0 0 8 159-371-11 $0 0 8 159-371-12 $0 0 8 159-371-13 $0 0 8 159-371-14 $0 0 8 159-371-15 $0 0 8 159-381-08 $0 0 8 159-381-09 $0 0 8 159-381-10 $0 0 8 159-381-11 $0 0 8 159-381-12 $0 0 8 159-381-13 $0 0 8 159-381-14 $0 0 8 159-381-15 $0 0 8 159-402-02 $0 0 8 159-402-12 $0 0 8 159-403-01 $0 0 8 159-403-02 $0 0 8 159-403-03 $0 0 8 159-403-04 $0 0 8 159-403-05 $0 0 8 159-403-08 $0 0 8 159-403-09 $0 0 8 159-403-10 $0 0 8 159-403-11 $0 0 Page 10-16 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Storm Drain Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table 8 REACH PARCEL No. TOTAL COST TOTAL % 8 159-403-12 $0 0 8 159-403-13 $0 0 8 159-403-14 $0 0 8 159-403-15 $0 0 8 159-403-16 $0 0 8 159-403-17 $0 0 8 159-411 $500 1 8 159-412-01 $100 0 8 1 159-431-07 $400 0 Page 10-17 - T � HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN DISTRICTS - EXHIBIT A Reach 2 and Reach 3 tjr�F, _ — � •>d�ry� S +�% _ J}h��'AN�,� nat0axx 1Yt-Yenta Y 11t-1/6d � j 1H-ixa68 I,Y�lxaxd 111-flbtl a t4trer H,-Y P1LTd :'- I tit-11e66 (- lffgx6- i5f41axx _ 1,f.liDYl ,f1d Y6J8 ,fi-t10.13 1r, I a R 5 ii— � F 1t1-watt �At-t>Isaf r �-'-f r - lli.1 a16 ,11.4-0 �a 111•ilf M 111.1tOdf m i1s1� EN r i .. �Parcel 6 Lot Lines Ellis - Goldenwest Specific Plan Holly Seacliff Specific Plan E stating Storm Drain Foo ty Shared Storm Drain Facility PLC Non-Reimburseable PLC Development Agreement Areas !; Non•PLCDevelopment Agreement Area6 EXHIBIT 10-1 PUBUC WORKS AAA SLWC cn HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN DISTRICTS - EXHIBIT B Reach 6 and Reach 7 1 L I � REACH 8 Ellis Ave 1 111afar m•xoar f11-1161f t11 11ei1. 1 H1-01k -r j 11 MG41 fltAlei! itt•11eit Ht-1SL1e M ck / by it i% r it- — 3H4001F l 1 L 1 1 1 1 1 ? I 1 1 1 1 ! Parcel t Let Lines Ellis - "denweat Specific Plan Holly SeaciiH Specific Plan Existing Storm Drain Facility Shared Storm Drain FacOity PLC Non•Reimburseable PLC Development Agreement Areas s Non -PLC Development Agreement Arose EXHIBIT 10-2 IBC Wa[6 U!'?AB suffCrn-tat HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN DISTRICTS - EXHIBIT C Reach 9 ax 11t4" f,f tf4ar � fifnfau rn-,rue nnfsu 'I t :'s i1 a lHq a _ _ s ,,,-,war' _ gig tf twas' - ��� // �r / / /�/ ' .✓/'i ' ?EW JE — ff-nun ff„wa j 111•iW7i tH-0raw 04-4 _-T ®artield Are ___ ______Ij'_. N Parcel !} Lot Lines Ellis - Goldenwast Specific Plan Holly Seaciifl Specific Plan ^, EAsti g Stearn Drain Facility /V Shared Store+ Drain Facility PLC Non-Reirnburseable PLC Development Agreement Areas Non -PLC Development AgroemeM Areal EXHIBIT 10-3 a a = SURitlIYQ1 Section 11 - Arterial Roadways Reimbursement Analysis by Parcel Based on the analysis in Section 6 "Arterial Roadway Reimbursement Analysis", a breakdown of costs for each parcel was prepared (Appendix J). A summary of the detailed cost breakdown is provided in table 9. The following qualifiers should be noted: • All unit cost presented are estimated based on cost provided by the developer in previous reports. • Overhead cost factors in the developers analysis have been decreased. • Trip generation for each parcel is based on ultimate land use. • Traffic information from City staff and previous traffic reports are the bases for criteria used. OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC 11-1 13OWLE Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Arterial Roadway Cost Reimbursement for "Holly Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Tab`1e,9 LF, COST °fin OF PER OF TOTAL COST PARCEL No ROAD PARCEL FOR GOTHARD 111-110-18 290 $16,000 3 111-110-19 145 $8,000 1 111-110-20 145 $8,000 1 111-110-21 72.5 $4,000 1 111-110-22 72.5 $4,000 1 111-110-38 127 $7,000 1 TOTAL 1 852 1 $47,000 1 11-2 NEW ARTERIAL ROADWAY 111-11t01 Ll HLt J-t-L-L 11 rid Am ' a a , A4411 Ta , Z-f_<.G..�T' III-Imis it"W17 M-1m4t 4 IN FB Ellie- GoidenwestSpedfic Plan A, Holly Seacliff Specific Plan Now Arterial Roadway PLC Development Agreement Areas Non -PLC Development Agreement Areas EXHIBIT 11 -1 74" SMFC[ff GO Section 12 - Final Summary of Reimbursement by Parcel Based on analysis in Section 5 "Water Reimbursement Analysis, Section 9, "Sewer Reimbursement Analysis by Parcel, Section 10 "Storm Drain Reimbursement Analysis by Parcel, and Section 11 "Arterial Roadway Analysis by Parcel. A summary of the detailed cost breakdown is provided in Table 10. OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC 12-1 MOVLP Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Facility Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table 10 Parcel Numbers Landuse Area ac. Estim tC4 Refmbimement COsis for Estimated TOTAL Sewer Storm Drain Arterial Roadwa Water 110-210-01 RL 3.79 $0 $4,200 $0 $4,200 110-210-02 RL 1.41 $0 $1,500 $0 $1,500 110-210-03 RL 0.35 $0 $300 $0 $300 110-210-04 RL 0.12 $0 $100 $0 $100 110-210-06 RL 0.48 $0 $500 $0 $500 110-210-10 RL 0.79 $0 $800 $0 $800 110-211 RL 1.85 $0 $3,200 $0 $3,200 110-212 RL 2.00 $0 $3,500 $0 $3,500 110-213 RL 1.00 $0 $1,800 $0 $1,800 110-220-02 RL 4.59 $0 $8,000 $0 $8,000 110-220-03 RL 2.79 $0 $4,900 $0 $4,900 110-220-04 RL 1.81 $0 $3,200 $0 $3,200 110-220-05 RL 5.00 $0 $8,700 $0 $8,700 110-221 RL 1.70 $0 $3,600 $0 $3,600 110-222 RL 3.30 $0 $6,000 $0 $6,000 111-110-01 I 1.00 $0 $2,900 $0 $2,900 111-110-02 I 1.00 $0 $2,900 $0 $2,900 111-110-03 I 1.00 $0 $2,900 $0 $2,900 111-110-04 I 1.82 $0 $5,300 $0 $5,300 111-110-07 I 0.34 $0 $8,200 $0 $8,200 111-110-10 I 0.11 $0 $2,700 $0 $2,700 111-110-14 I 0.11 $0 $2,600 $0 $2,600 111-110-15 I 0.09 $0 $2,100 $0 $2,100 111-110-18 I 2.00 $0 $24,100 $16,000 $40,100 111-110-19 I 1.00 $0 $12,000 $8,000 $20,000 111-110-20 I 1.00 $0 $12,000 $8,000 $20,000 111-110-21 I 0.50 $0 $11,900 $4,000 $15,900 111-110-22 I 0.50 $0 $11,900 $4,000 $15,900 111-110-31 I 0.23 $0 $5,500 $0 $5,500 111-110-32 I 1.01 $0 $2,900 $0 $2,900 111-110-33 I 0.11 $0 $2,700 $0 $2,700 111-110-34 I 0.03 $0 $100 $0 $100 111-110-36 I 0.17 $0 $4,000 $0 $4,000 111-110-37 I 0.17 $0 $3,900 $0 $3,900 111-110-38 I 1.01 $0 $24,100 $7,000 $31,100 111-120-01 RL 0.88 $0 $200 $0 $200 111-120-06 I 0.93 $0 $2,200 $0 $2,200 111-120-07 I 0.93 $0 $2,200 $0 $2,200 111-120-08 I 1.00 $0 $2,300 $0 $2,300 111-120-09 I 0.81 $0 $1,900 $0 $1,900 111-120-11 I 0.05 $0 $100 $0 $100 111-120-12 I 0.12 $0 $200 $0 $200 111-120-13 1 0.12 $0 $200 $0 $200 111-120-14 I 0.12 $0 $200 $0 $200 111-120-15 I 0.12 $0 $200 $0 $200 111-120-16 1 0.24 $0 $1,900 $0 $1,900 Page 12-2 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Facility Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table 10 Parcel numbers Landuse Area ac. Estimated Reimbuesememt Costs for Estimated TOTAL Sewer Starm Drak Arterial Roadway Water 111-120-17 I 0.12 $0 $1,500 $0 $1,500 111-120-18 I 0.12 $0 $1,500 $0 $1,500 111-120-19 I 0.12 $0 $1,500 $0 $1,500 111-120-20 I 0.23 $0 $3,100 $0 $3,100 111-120-22 I 1.00 $0 $2,900 $0 $2,900 111-120-23 I 1.00 $0 $2,900 $0 $2,900 111-120-24 I 1.00 $0 $2,900 $0 $2,900 111-120-25 I 1.00 $0 $2,900 $0 $2,900 111-120-26 I 1.00 $0 $2,900 $0 $2,900 111-120-27 1 1.86 $0 $4,300 $0 $4,300 111-120-28 RL 0.88 $0 $200 $0 $200 111-120-29 I 0.94 $0 $2,800 $0 $2,800 111-120-30 I 0.14 $0 $400 $0 $400 111-130-01 I 0.17 $0 $2,200 $0 $2,200 111-130-02 1 0.25 $0 $3,400 $0 $3,400 111-130-05 1 0.15 $0 $1,900 $0 $1,900 111-130-06 I 0.17 $0 $2,200 $0 $2,200 111-130-07 I 0.17 $0 $1,100 $0 $1,100 111-130-08 I 0.17 $0 $1,100 $0 $1,100 111-130-09 1 0.33 $0 $2,200 $0 $2,200 111-130-11 1 0.08 $0 $500 $0 $500 111-130-12 I 0.08 $0 $500 $0 $500 111-130-14 1 0.61 $0 $4,100 $0 $4,100 111-130-15 I 1.00 $0 $6,800 $0 $6,800 111-130-24 1 1.00 $900 $13,500 $0 $14,400 111-130-25 I 0.61 $400 $8,100 $0 $8,500 111-130-26 I 0.25 $0 $3,400 $0 $3,400 111-130-27 I 0.07 $0 $900 $0 $900 111-130-28 1 0.07 $0 $400 $0 $400 111-140-02 I 0.08 $0 $300 $0 $300 111-140-04 I 0.17 $0 $700 $0 $700 111-140-05 I 0.17 $0 $700 $0 $700 111-140-06 1 0.33 $0 $1,400 $0 $1,400 111-140-07 1 0.33 $0 $1,400 $0 $1,400 111-140-08 I 0.17 $0 $700 $0 $700 111-140-09 I 0.17 $0 $700 $0 $700 111-140-10 I 0.14 $0 $600 $0 $600 111-140-14 1 1.00 $3,600 $4,200 $0 $7,800 111-140-15 I 1.00 $5,200 $0 $0 $5,200 111-140-16 1 0.99 $9,300 $0 $0 $9,300 111-140-19 1 0.97 $0 $4,000 $0 $4,000 111-140-20 I 0.20 $0 $800 $0 $800 111-140-21 1 0.50 $0 $2,100 $0 $2,100 111-140-22 I 0.30 $0 $1,300 $0 $1,300 111-140-23 I 1.00 $0 $4,200 $0 $4,200 111-140-24 I 1.00 $0 1 $4,200 $0 $4,200 Page 12-3 Holly/Seacliff Development Summary of Estimated Facility Cost Reimbursement for "Holly/Seacliff Others" September 9, 1997 Table 10 Parcel Numbers Landuse Area arc. Estimted Reimbursement CMU for $s4 mated TUTAI, Sewer Storm Drain Arterial Raow.jy Water 111-140-25 I 1.00 $0 $4,200 $0 $4,200 111-140-26 I 0.35 1 $0 $1,500 $0 $1,500 111-140-27 I 0.26 $0 $1,100 $0 $1,100 111-140-36 I 0.08 $0 $300 $0 $300 111-140-37 1 0.17 $0 $700 $0 $700 111-140-38(-01) I 0.33 $0 $1,400 $0 $1,400 111-150-13 RM 0.17 $0 $600 $0 $600 111-150-15 RM 0.69 $0 $2,600 $0 $2,600 111-150-16 RM 0.69 $0 $2,600 $0 $2,600 111-150-17 RM 1.38 $0 $5,100 $0 $5,100 111-150-19 RM 0.50 $0 $1,900 $0 $1,900 111-150-20 RM 0.44 $0 $1,600 $0 $1,600 111-150-21 RM 0.37 $0 $1,400 $0 $1,400 159-402-02 RL 0.21 $0 $600 $0 $600 159-402-12 RL 0.20 $0 $500 $0 $500 159-403-01 RL 0.18 $0 $500 $0 $500 159-403-02 RL 0.18 $0 $500 $0 $500 159-403-03 RL 0.18 $0 $500 $0 $500 159-403-04 RL 0.24 $0 $700 $0 $700 159-403-05 RL 0.20 $0 $600 $0 $600 159-403-08 RL 0.40 $0 $1,100 $0 $1,100 159-403-09 RL 0.36 $0 $1,000 $0 $1,000 159-403-10 RL 0.43 $0 $1,200 $0 $1,200 159-403-11 RL 0.26 $0 $700 $0 $700 159-403-12 RL 0.24 $0 $700 $0 $700 159-403-13 RL 0.21 $0 $600 $0 $600 159-403-14 RL 0.20 $0 $600 $0 $600 159-403-15 RL 0.28 $0 $800 $0 $800 159-403-16 RL 0.21 $0 $600 $0 $600 159-403-17 RL 0.19 $0 $500 $0 $500 159-412-01 RL 1.07 $0 $1,900 $0 $1,900 159431-07 RL 3.80 $0 $9,900 $0 $9,900 TOTAL 88.08 $19,400 $364,500 $47,000 IS430,900 Page 12-4 Appendix A Holly/Seacliff Sewer Analysis OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC BOWLE HOLLY SEACLIFF SEWER ANALYSIS CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH GENERAL COMMENTS: PLC= Current Developer (S/P-Seacliff Partners previous Developer name). HSO = Holly Seacliff Others including Non Holly Seacliff Others. CWO = City Wide Others. 2. Analysis items are those sewer facilities built by PLC, which are serving or will serve future sewage flows by others. Therefore, we did not analyze any existing City facilities. 3. Sewer facilities actually built are substantially different from those in Walden's Cost Analysis Report (1994) submitted by PLC. 4. PLC (Current Holdings) are substantially different from those shown in Walden's Cost Analysis Report (1994) submitted by PLC. Reach 1, 6, and 7 (Area A of Walden's Cost Analysis Report, 1994) are PLC generated flows only, therefore, they were not analyzed or considered for reimbursement. 6. Reach 3 is proposed and considered for reimbursement within this analysis. 7. Parcel 276 is located within the Development Agreement Area, therefore, it will be included with PLC contributions to Reach 5. Based on input from City Staff, Tract 13439 (HSO) was existing prior to the construction of Reach 5, therefore, contributions from this area will be added to PLC. Furthermore, there will be no reimbursement considered for Tract 13439. 9. PLC indicated Undeveloped Area (HSO) - S/O Track No. 14007 & 13439, E/O Track No. 14009 & 13714 (10 acres) would contribute toward the beginning of reach 5A. This cannot be true. Based on input from City staff, MH 5 seems logical, however, there is a County Sanitation District Sewer at Goldenwest Street and Ernest Avenue that would be a better alternative to serve this area. Furthermore, this undeveloped area will not be considered for reimbursement in this analysis. 10. There was a City Pump Station east of Gothard Street that was removed by PLC prior to the installation of reach 2. According to City staff, PLC rerouted and conveyed the existing City sewer lines into their 15" sewer line on Gothard which also accommodated PLC's Tract No. 14662. Since City flows were existing and the alignment of Reach 2 benefited PLC only , there will be no reimbursement considered for Reach 2. 11. The table on page 10 of this report shows data for each reach of the studied sewers and the estimated totals for PLC, HSO, CWO. 12. PLC should provide the City with actual receipts to veriA, cost of constructed sewer facilities. Furthermore, -PLC had many additions to the estimated cost of constructing the sewer pipe (contingency, soils testing, ect.) which inflate the overall cost by about 20 - 40%. 13. Unit construction cost for sewer pipes shown on the table, page 10. consists of their reasonable unit cost in 1994 dollars which in our opinion cover furnishing & installing pipe, contractor mobilization. and profit. This accounts for 20% added to unit cost. These costs do not include engineerin,,. administration, or easements. 2 HOLLY SEACLIFF SEWER ANALYSIS CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Sewage Generation & Peaking Factor Evaluation: Check 230 gpd/D.U. 2.7 - 2.8 persons per D.U. per Orange County Progress Report. 85 gpd per person per CSDOC / CSDLAC master plans. 85 x 2.7 = 229.5 gpd/D.U. .'. 230 gpd/D.U. (reasonable) Peaking Evaluation: Given: Typical Range of Average Q=:> 0 to .4 MGD for Typical (MGD) Peak Flow Linear ratio Flow Rate (MGD) Check PLC Qpeak = 1.704 x (Qave.) 892 MGD .2 .405 2.03 .4 .753 1.88 CSDOC Qpeak = 1.770 x (Qave.) 920 MGD .2 .403 2.01 .4 .762 1.91 City of Long Beach Qpeak = 1.960 x (Qave.) 983 MGD .2 .403 2.02 .4 .796 1.99 Peaking factor used is acceptable and very reasonable for this flow range. 3 HOLLY SEACLIFF SEWER ANALYSIS REACH BREAKDOWN REACH 5A (CONSTRUCTED LINE-FUT. FLOWS) AREA • Tract No. 14007 (PLC), 13 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. + Parcel No. 276 (HSO), 1 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. • Tract No. 13439 (HSO)**, 27 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. • Tract No. 14659 (William Lyon Homes*), 8 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. REACH 5B (CONSTRUCTED LINE-FUT. FLOWS) • FLOWS FROM REACH 5A • Tract No. 14980 (Rielly Homes*), 35 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. • Tract No. 14980 (Rielly Homes*), 11 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. • Tract No. 14980 (William Lyon Homes*), 11 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. REACH 5C (CONSTRUCTED LINE-FUT. FLOWS) • Tract No., 14979 (Sea Country Homes*), 27 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. • Tract No., 14980 (Rielly Homes*), 35 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. • Tract No., 14980 (William Lyon Homes*), 6 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. FROM MH TO MH MH4-MH 11 MH4-MH 11 MH 11 - MH 26 MH26-MH28 B - 4A1 MH 26 - MH 28 AVERAGE FLOW .0032 MGD 0062 MGD 0018 MGD .0081 MGD B - 4A2 MH 26 - MH 28 .0025 MGD B - 3C MH 26 - MH 28 .0025 MGD B - 5A MH 28 - MH 412 .0062 MGD B - 4B MH 28 - MH 412 .0081 MGD B - 3D MH 28 - MH 412 .0014 MGD Total/Qave. .0400 MGD HSO** PLC William Lyon Homes* Rielly Homes* Sea Country Homes* .0062 MGD .0032 MGD .0057 MGD .0187 MGD .0062 MGD 4 NOTES FOR REACH 5: 1. PLC proposed an 8" P.V.C. sewer line (now existing). Currently, there is no floxv contributing the reach 5. 2. No existing sewer facility (City or other) in area prior to the installation of reach 5. 3. Reach 5 connects to reach 2 at MH 412, then connects to the new Ellis P.S. located south of Ellis Avenue. 4. Tracts No. 14007, 14659, 14979, and 14980 are being developed. 5. Tract No. 13439 (HSO) .Area B - 2, is a private development that is switching to public. Their private pumping station is in the process of being shut down. 6. Parcel No. 276 (HSO), Area B - 1, is being developed. 7. *Part of PLC original holdings. Contributions for this area will be added to PLC on table page 10. 8. ** Contributions for this area will be added to PLC on table page 10 (see General Comments). 5 HOLLY SEACLIFF SEWER ANALYSIS REACH BREAKDOWN REACH 2 (CONSTRUCTED LINE -EX. FLOWS) • 10" V.C.P. @ .0449 MGD** (CWO) contributes • 15" V.C.P. @ .1194 MGD** (CWO) contributes. REACH 2 (CONSTRUCTED LINE-FUT. FLOWS) • Tract No. 14662 (Greystone Homes*), 150 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. contributes • P.A. II - 2 (PLC), 264 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. • P.A. II - 3 (PLC), 250 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. • Tract No. 14978 (William Lyon Homes*). 29 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. • Tract No., 14979 (Sea Country Homes*), 36 D.U. @ 230 gpd/D.U. • FLOWS FROM REACH 5D AREA FROM MH TO MH B - 6A1 MH 412 - MH413 B-6A1 MH412-MH413 AVERAGE FLOW .0439 MGD .1194 MGD B - 7 MH 412 - MH413 .0345 MGD B - 6A2 MH 412 - MH413 .0607 MGD B - 6B MH 412 - MH413 .0575 MGD B - 3E MH 412 - MH413 .0067 MGD B - 5B MH 412 - MH413 .0083 MGD MH412-MH413 Total/Qave. .3720 MGD William Greystone Lyon Sea Country CWO*** Homes* PLC Homes* Homes* HSO EX. + FUT. EX. + FUT. EX. + FUT. EX. + FUT. EX. + FUT. EX. + FUT. .0000 MGD .0345 MGD .2857 MGD .0124 MGD .0145 MGD .0062 MGD Rielly Homes* EX. + FUT. .0187 MGD 0 HOLLY SEACLIFF SEWER ANALYSIS REACH BREAKDOWN NOTES FOR REACH'2: 1. "Per Per City metered flow test. 2. ***Contributions for this area will be added to PLC on table page 10 (see General Comments). 3. No other existing facility (City or other) in the vicinity of reach 2 pipeline alignment prior to installation. 4. PLC's proposed a 15" sewer line (now existing). 5. Tract No. 14662 (Greystone Homes*), Area B - 7, 8- P.V.C. existing sewer line connects with the City's 10" V.C.P. on Ellis Ave. This configuration is different from the proposed layout by PLC. 6. 10" & 15" V.C.P. City sewer lines converge at MH 45 into PLC's 15" P.V.C. and continue southbound on Gothard Street. 7. P.A. Il - 2 (PLC), Area B - 6A, is being developed. PLC estimated future flows for this area. The flow estimate seems reasonable. 8. P.A. Il - 3 (PLC), Area B - 613, is being developed. PLC estimated future flows for this area. The flow estimate seems reasonable. 9. Ellis P.S. cost is included in attached table, page 10. 10. *Part of PLC original holdings. Values for these areas will be added to PLC on table page 10. VA HOLLY SEACLIFF SEWER ANALYSIS REACH BREAKDOWN REACH 4 FORCED MAIN AREA FROM MH (CONSTRUCTED LINE-EX./FUT. FLOWS) TO MH • FLOWS FROM REACH 2 • Tract No. 14695 (William Lyon Homes*), 36 D.U. @ B - 3A 230 gpd/D.U. Greystone CWO Homes* PLC EX. +FUT. EX. +FUT. EX. + FUT. .0000 MGD .0345 MGD .2857 MGD NOTES FOR REACH 4: AVERAGE FLO'Vi' .3720 MGD 0083 MGD Total/Qave. .3803 MGD William Lyon Sea Country Rielly Homes* Homes* HSO Homes* EX. + FUT. EX. + FUT. EX. + FUT. EX. + FUT. .0207 MGD .0145 MGD .0062 MGD .0187 MGD 1. Reach 4 is a 10" forced main (F.M.) traveling north from the Ellis P. S., then west along Ellis Ave. 2. Track No. 14659 (William Lyon Homes), Area B - 3A, is being developed. Flow from Area B -3A connects with reach 2 at MH 413 before the Ellis P.S. 3. *Part of PLC original holdings. Values for these areas will be added to PLC on table page 10. 8 HOLLY SEACLIFF SEWER ANALYSIS REACH BREAKDOWN REACH 3(PROPOSED LINE -FUTURE FLOWS) • P.A. IV - 5 (HSO), 3.0 acres @ 9 D.U./acre @ 230 gpd/D.U. • P.A. IV - 4 (MS Vickers II, L.L.C.*), 4.4 acres @ 9 D.U./acre @ 230 gpd/D.U. • P.A. IV - 4 (MS Vickers II, L.L.C.*), 5.9 acres + 3.0 acres @ 3000 gpd/acre • P.A. IV - 5 (MS Vickers II, L.L.C.*), 1.6 acres @ 3000 gpd/acre • P.A. IV - 5 (HSO), 1.6 acres @ 9 D.U./acre @ 3000 gpd/acre AREA FROM MH FLOW TO MH C - lA MH 31 - MH 32 .0062 MGD C - lA MH 31 - MH 32 .0091 MGD C - 1 B MH 32 - MH 34 .0267 MGD C - 1C MH 34 - MH 35 .0048 MGD C - 1C MH 34 - MH 35 .0048 MGD Total/Qave. .0516 MGD HSO MS Vickers II, L.L.C.* .0110 MGD .0406 MGD NOTES FOR REACH 3: 1. P.A. IV - 5 & P.A. IV - 4 (MS Vickers II, L.L.C.), Area C - 1 B & 2A, future flows estimated by PLC seem reasonable. 2. P.A. IV - 5 & P.A. IV - 3 (CWO), Area C - IA & 2B, future flows estimated by PLC seem reasonable. 3. *Part of HSO holdings. Values for these areas will be added to HSO on table page 9. HOLLY SEACLIFF SEWER ANALYSIS CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PLC's proposed percentage breakdown per Walden's Analysis (1994): *PLC HSO CWO 600,000 100,000 400.000 57% 9% 34% *table excluded reached 1, 6, & 7 (PLC only). Current breakdown per this analysis: *PLC HSO CWO 500,000 55,000 0 90% 10% 0% *PLC values include original PLC holdings, even if they are now owned by others. TOTAL 1,100.000 TOTAL 555,000 11 II LIA' SI M,1,1F1, SIIA11E1) SEWERS CONS RIICI E1) BY PLC, tJSEI) BY 0HIERS (Cufnplete Build-(hll) ~Sit �It•LAI� IS19 I_ _--- 26 28 0 00211 0 0 o 0 002-11 006 x x 100 (r o 519 b11x S525 $21SIII U0 b0(111 Su ou I(i A( It 5A ' It IA2 TOIAL S21 mW00 Soon Sono S21 xluuu -. I(IIAL loU u o 5('1 1416 H-SA 2x 412 U o o l U o 0 U o UA U IU x x 100 1 U 116 b t 1x S5 25 $1 1 512 0U So u0 S0 00 It 1H It-11) 10 AI'II Sit iuf41, bl•1,512uu SnUo b111nI b11512uu ". 101 A I 100 u u It-6A1 J12 111 0161S U207S U U U 0 0172 071 15 15 lot)0 0 1Ix S167 S1 to $7, lxx o0 tiI III)buoI It 7 H 6A1 It 6A2 It 613 H-11 It Sit w A( 115r TU I'AL S7,788o0 b0 00 1,11 0II b7 7xx 00 °'.1(IIAL lUo o 0 RIA('112 It 1A UIntS u2lsx u u o o u1xu1 072 IU to Inu 0 u x7o $100 SING $1176000 SI,00 tiIIm [(A Al, b 11 760 0o 7. )(1rAl, 100 b0 00 S0 Inr Sit 760110 o u IZSO _ ('-IA I-Ilt (' 11 12 11 12 11 15 0 0 0 0 o 0 0 (1 0 00151 00267 00096 u a 0 0 I1 0 oU1S1 0012 0(1516 Doi 0l0 012 x x x x x x U u 0 l( IUu 1 0 o 11191 11K Sig S11x S525 b0oo S11x $525 So of) b11x b525 bona bl4i5600 S226txo0 b16SON 110 bONII $ono b0 uu Inl1A1 0 0 0 0U516 o U ToIAI S000 . IOIAI, 0 t%2500o1, S0o0 b5250400 1"', 11 ISIN(. 1. I c W RI A('II I -MAI .N PEA 1,(l)peak) QlvA 1 7o1 r (Q"vc )- h92 "I'll-C.SIZE(DIA HEQ) INDUCT nod King, InIdC 17) Qp-k (1.'10) r (d x71) x (1;' V2) — PIP, lengths ue estlnuted ulnes only 1'1 (' %III need to 5erify the lengths of their sewer lines (UNM (SIM fl S 115 000 00 j 175,ou0 00 b0 IIn y r 00 HOLLY SEACLIFF SHARED SEWERS CONSTRUCTED BY PLC, USED BY OTHERS (Complete Build -Out) Q4vf 44wr Qrv• Qf9a g19f gavr qw. Qaw Qave Qf9a Q4.a Qwa q•9a glvf Oar Qpy __ r•� _ _..._ __ UNT[CONS7 _. PLC PLC ILSO HSO GSVD CWO Wr111r tilsn d4ePy RIe11y Spn Sa Drey 0', V1dmf V1Aers TOTAL • DfL D1k KQa9f veQfl.e 'ffQrw �Q+1'• '*Q4a• :*Qav %Q4�f Y.Qwf AP('AOX REPO&TER COST fFAt71 AREA fWl FROM t.Dl Tfl FTC PITI EX (MOD) (Mal)) D) EU7 F7L PITf CMGD) (MOD) pfOD) EX R*SOD) FVT (MCSD) EX. FM EX FUT EX (MGDI iMOD) fM1fOS7) (MOD) (MOD) PUT EX (1.SOD) (MODS fTJf (b10D) Qa9s (MGD) Qpm� iM ESC. SIM REQ P1,C FLSD �O Wdh4m R4etly Sea 0", 't SIN) EX*EUT EX+FUT EX+11 EX+A%S 6X +FUT 6X+SUT EX4F17T EX fTVT L (LF) CONST ftt>320'� CGS71{N DUILE CY)ST!{N DTA tLF COST PLC CpT T HSD CST CWO [SST WJle�n tt7ST R..II COST S� CRST 44 M31 V.A. 5A 2075 - y B 111112 1 I1 0 0 003 0 0 0060 O 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 w94 00112 0 03 003 8 8 8 8 32 27 68 a p p 0 16 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 729 346 14 38 f438 $S 23 S52S S2317596 3389230 1.�442 Sr 30 007 SOw 5000f233110 300a 5233310 Sow200000000001800000 SowT(7TAL 5000 10w 0 0003 0 00064 0 0 0 00018 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 TOTAL 32706846 f. 0 3 0 0 SODO•.TOTA 0 9 SB 519 BJAI RPSCTI5A 26 28 0 0003 0 1 00069 0 1 0 1 0 10004371 0 0 1 0 1 0 0 0 [0241 006 8 8 12 26 0 I8 44 0 0 0 319 5438 3269239 S'74120 SOw 81918 SOw l/W B-4A2 IS525 ISi IS911183 1'0,0 B 3C TOTAL 5269259 5 74420 snW .. e.v .v .v.�, v. .�..., .., ,.,, ... .._ SC 346 BSA 28 112 0 0003 0 00064 0 0 0 00037 0 00167 0 00062 0 0 0 0 004 0 8 8 8 16 _ 0 11 47 0 346 2438 S525 1108990 S 32512 $000 $207081 3679371 12.21246 fOw SOW 13 4B 1-710 B 3D REACH SB 1 TOTAL 5108990 / F32512 $000 S207081 S679371 12.2`246 ISO SOW 314 `12W Y TOTAL B 16 0 14 1 47 1 16 1 0 0 ' 118 B 6A1 412 413 OIM3 01212 0 00064 0 0 0 00124 0 00187 0 00145 00345 0 0 0 0372 071 15 IS 77 2 0 3 5 4 9 0 118 S367 $440 35 977 08 S3399 3000 S21960 S49149 S 101 16 f'2227 SO 90 B7 B 6A 1 B 6M B 6B B 3E B 5B REACH 5C TOTAL S397708 S3399 1000 S25960 S49149 S10116 S'2227 SO is'e1W %TOTAL 1 77 1 2 1 0 1 3 1 S 1 4 1 9 :1 0 16411 0 1212 1 0 1 00064 1 0 1 0 1 0 1 00207 1 0 1 0 0187 1 0 1 0 0145 1 0 0345 1 0 1 0 1 0 103803 1 0 72 1 10 0 1 3 1 5 1 4 1 9 1 0 1870 1S4 00 3 1250 1 1 31 32 0 0 0 00062 0 0 0 0 0- 0 0 0 0 0 0 00091 00133 004 8 8 0 41 0 0 0 0 0 39 31H f438 3525 S000 S 41211 SOW S000 SOW $000 Sow 1"N10 n., 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00267 0042 010 8 8 0 I00000S52S 3000 3134I 80 3000 3000 i000 fGoo f0001�34 35 0 0 0 00048 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00048 00516 012 8 8 0 21 0 0 0 0 0 79 393 3438 S52S S000 1 .51972 SOOO SOOO SOW Sow S000 f1: TDT4L o 0 0 0011 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 00406 TOTAL So oo f227276 S000 Saw Sow sow 30 M1 i.o:27:4 !*TOTAL 0 1 23 0 0 1 o 0 (, I' hrP3 )S MO% FROM REACTI 4) cONST CYST (LS) PLC H9O C'WO br _ _ 'w2_. t 133300000 $231492241 s 61 SOw f181349 316421.' S12•'241 S1019D 411 ��01 •D[SION PEAK (Qpnlc) "PIPE SUE (DIA. REQ ) (H.1 and A1n8.T61.17) pmk = 1 704 x (Qwe )^ 992 Qpa1 = (K /n) x WW3) x (S^I R) • •lip, ks, ve ntlnulyd values Doll PU w111 need to verify lhr len8 dl, of Netr sewer Ilnn Appendix B Holly/Seacliff Storm Drain Analysis OC-SOS-009-071kjb1R-HOLLY DOC BOWLE HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH GENERAL COMMENTS. 1. PLC= Current Developer (SIP-Seacliff Partners previous Developer name). HSO = Holly Seacliff Others including Non Holly Seacliff Others. CWO = City Wide Others. 2. Analysis items are those sewer facilities built by PLC, which are serving or will serve exis_ tino and future storm flows by others. Therefore, we did not analyze any existing City facilities. 3. Storm drain pipe size and length actually built are substantially different from those in Walden's Cost Analysis Report (1994) submitted by PLC 4. PLC (Current Holdings) are substantially different from those shown in Walden's Cost Analysis Report (1994) submitted by PLC. 5. Reach 1 and 2A (Storm Drain Exhibit -Walden Report, 1994) are PLC generated flows only, therefore, they were not analyzed or considered for reimbursement. 6 PLC did not include adequate supporting information in the Walden Report (1994) on the location of their junction structures and the removal/relocation of power poles. PLC developed storm drain facilities in Gothard Street and south of Ellis Avenue. Since these City flows were existing prior to the development of this area, flowing through the Holly Seacliff area via a natural channel, the City's cost reimbursement for Reach 7 will be shifted to PLC. 8. PLC did not include adequate supporting information in the Walden Report (1994) on the removal of existing storm drain facilities in area prior to Reach 8 & 9 9. The table on page 10 of this report shows data for each reach of the studied storm drain facility and the estimated totals for PLC, HSO, and CWO 10 PLC should provide the City with actual receipts to verify cost of constructed storm drain facilities. Furthermore, PLC had many additions to the estimated cost of constructing the storm pipe (contingency, soils testing, ect.) which inflate the overall cost by about 20 - 40%. 11. Unit construction cost for storm drain pipes shown on the table, page 10, consists of their reasonable unit cost in 1994 dollars which in our opinion cover furnishing & installing pipe, contractor mobilization, and profit. This accounts for 20% added to unit cost These costs do not include engineering, administration, or easements. HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Storm Peaking Factor Evaluation: Rational Formula per Orange County Hydrology Manual (OCHM). Q=CIA where Q = the runoff in cubic feet per second (cfs) form a given area. C = a runoff coefficient representing the ratio of runoff to rainfall. I = the time -average rainfall intensity in inches per hour corresponding to the time of concentration. (OCHM table B-3) A = drainage area (acres) 2 HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS REACH BREAKDOWN REACH 9 (CONSTRUCTED LINE) OWNER/LAND USE/AREA • MS Vickers II, L.L.C.* / Industrial / A • HSO / Industrial / A • HSO / Residential -Medium / A • Weaver* * / Residential -Medium / A TOTAL TRIBUTARY ACRES MS Vickers II, L.L.C.* HSO 9.0 acres 13.6 acres AREA (ac.) FROM TO 9.0 C.B. 1 & 2 J.S. 10.2 C.B. 1 & 2 J.S. 1.4 C.B. 1 R. 2 J.S. .9 C.B 1 & 2 J S. 23.5 Weaver** 9 acres NOTES FOR REACH 9: 1 *Part of HSO holdings. Values for these areas will be added to HSO on table page 10. 2 **Part of PLC original holdings. Values for this area will be added to PLC on table page 10. 3. In Walden Report, a 36' R.C.P. was removed prior to the installation of Reach 9. PLC should supply information on the removal of this existing line. 3 HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS REACH BREAKDOWN REACH 3 (CONSTRUCTED LINE) AREA OWNERILAND USE/AREA (ac.) • HSO / Industrial / Bl 1.3 • HSO / Industrial / B2 3.1 • HSO / Industrial / B3 3.1 • HSO / Industrial / B5 7.7 • HSO / Industrial / 136 14.7 • HSO / Industrial / 137 2.0 • HSO / Pavement / 137 1.1 • MS Vickers II, L.L C.* / Industrial / B2 2.7 • MS Vickers II, L.L.C.* / Industrial / 133 7.8 • PLC / Commercial / 134 6.1 • PLC / Residential -Medium / B4 5.0 TOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA 54.6 MS Vickers II, L.L.C.* 10.5 acres HSO 33 acres FROM C.B. 5 C.B 4 C.B. 1 & 11 C.B 6 C.B. 7 & 8 C.B. 9 C.B. 9 C.B 4 C.B. 1 & 11 C.B. 2 & 3 CB.2&3 PLC I1.1 acres NOTES FOR REACH 3: 1. *Part of HSO holdings. Values for these areas will be added to HSO on table page 10. TO J.S. 4 J S. 4 J.S 2 J.S. 5 J.S. 6 J S. 8 J.S. 8 J.S. 4 J.S 2 J.S. 2 J.S. 2 4 0 HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS REACH BREAKDOWN REACH 2 (CONSTRUCTED LINE) AREA OWNER/LAND USE/AREA (ac.) FROM TO • Taylor Woodrow Homes* / Residential -Low / C1 .3 J S. B is C • Taylor Woodrow Homes* / Pavement / C1 1.95 J.S B J.S. C • PLC / Residential -Medium / CI 40.9 J.S. B J.S. C • PLC / School / C1 8.5 J.S. B J.S C • PLC / Pavement / C1 8.1 J.S. B J.S. C • HSO* / Residential -Low / C1 16.3 J.S. B J.S. C • HSO / Residential -Low / C1 3.8 J.S. B J.S. C • HSO / Pavement / C1 0.9 J.S. B J.S. C • HSO* / Pavement / C1 1.9 J.S. B J.S. C • HSO / Residential -Low / C2 5.9 J.S. C J.S. B • HSO / Residential -Low / C2 5.0 J.S. C J.S. B • HSO / Residential -Low / C3 22 RIP RAP J.S B • PLC / Residential -Low 1 C4 6.0 J.S. B J.S. B • HSO / Residential -Low / C4 17.8 J.S. B J S. B SUB TOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA 142.05 • TRIBUTARY ACRES FROM REACH 3 54.6 J.S B RIP RAP TOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA 196.65 MS Vickers II, L.L.C.* Taylor Woodrow Homes* PLC HSO HSO* 10.5 acres 4.95 acres 74.6 acres 88.4 acres 18.2 acres NOTES FOR REACH 2: 1. *Part of PLC original holdings. Values for these areas will be added to PLC on table page 10. 5 HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS REACH BREAKDOWN REACH 6 (CONSTRUCTED LINE) AREA OWNER/LAND USE/AREA (ac.) FROM TO • PLC / Residential -Medium / D1 4.6 C.B. 1 is. 1 • HSO / Industrial / D2 5.8 C.B 9 J.S. 1 • HSO / Industrial / D3 2.9 C.B. 2 J.S 2 • PLC / Residential -Medium / Pavement / D4 0.58 C.B 3 J.S. 3 • PLC / Residential -Medium / D5 39.82 J.S. 3 J S. 5 • Greystone Homes* / Residential -Medium / D5 5.8 J.S. 3 J.S. 5 TOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA 59.5 HSO PLC 8.7 acres 45 acres Greystone Homes* 5 8 acres NOTES FOR REACH 6: 1 *Part of PLC original holdings Values for these areas will be added to PLC on table page 10. 0 HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS REACH BREAKDOWN REACH 7 (CONSTRUCTED LINE) AREA OWNER/LAND USE/AREA (ac.) FROM TO • CWO / Residential -Medium / E1 174.8 C.B. 7 J.S. 8 • PLC / Residential -Medium / E2 19.2 J.S. 8 J.S. 5 • Greystone Homes* / Residential -Medium / E2 9.2 J.S 8 J.S 5 SUB TOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA 203.2 • TRIBUTARY ACRES FROM REACH 6 59.5 J.S. 5 J.S. A • William Lyon Homes* / Residential -Low / E3 5.7 J.S. A OUTLET • Sea Country Homes* / Residential -Low / E3 .8 J.S. A OUTLET TOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA 269.2 PLC HSO CWO Greystone William Lyon Sea Country Homes* Homes* Homes* 64.2 acres 8 7 acres 174.8 acres 15 acres 5.7 acres .8 acres NOTES FOR REACH 7: 1. *Part of S/P original holdings. Values for these areas will be added to S/P on table page 10. 2 City flows were existing prior to the installation of Reach 7, therefore, the cost reimbursement will be shifted to S/P HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS REACH BREAKDOWN REACH 4A (CONSTRUCTED LINE) AREA OWNER/LAND USE (ac.) FROM TO • TRIBUTARY ACRES FROM REACH 2 & 3 196.65 INLET J S. C • William Lyon Homes* / Residential -Low / F1 12.1 J.S. C J.S E • Rielly Homes* / Residential -Low / F2 22.0 J.S E BOX William Lyon Homes* / Residential -Low / F2 Sea Country Homes* / Residential -Low / F2 TOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA 230.75 MS Vickers II, Taylor S/P HSO HSO* William Lyon Homes* L.L.C.* Woodrow Rielly Homes* Homes* Sea Country Homes* 10.5 acres 4.95 acres 74.6 acres 88.4 acres 18.2 acres 34 1 acres REACH 4B (CONSTRUCTED LINE) AREA OWNER/LAND USE (ac.) FROM TO • TRIBUTARY ACRES FROM REACH 7 2692 RISER BOX TOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA 269.2 PLC HSO CWO Greystone William Lyon Sea Country Homes* Homes* Homes* 64.2 acres 8.7 acres 174.8 acres 15 acres 5.7 acres .8 acres NOTES FOR REACH 4A & 4B: 1. *Part of PLC original holdings. Values for these areas will be added to PLC on table page 10. E3 HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS REACH BREAKDOWN REACH 8 (CONSTRUCTED LINE) AREA OWNER/LAND USE/AREA (ac.) FROM, TO • TRIBUTARY ACRES FROM REACH 4A 230.75 BOX OUTLET • TRIBUTARY ACRES FROM REACH 413 269.2 BOX OUTLET TOTAL TRIBUTARY AREA 499.95 S/P HSO CWO Greystone William Lyon Sea Country Homes* Homes* Homes* 64.2 acres 8.7 acres 174.8 acres 15 acres 5.7 acres .8 acres NOTES: 1. *Part of PLC original holdings. Values for these areas will be added to PLC on table page 10. 2 In Walden Report there was a storm drain removed prior to the installation of Reach 8. PLC will need to supply information for the removal of this line. 9 HOLLY SEACLIFF STORM DRAIN ANALYSIS CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH PLC's proposed percentage breakdown per Walden's Analysis (1994): *S/P HSO CWO 1,600,000 800,000 900,000 49% 25% 27% *table excluded reached 1, & 2A (PLC only). Current breakdown per this analysis: *SIP HSO CWO 1,000,000 500,000 0 67% 3 3 % 0% *PLC values include original PLC holding, even if they are now owned by others. TOTAL $ 3,N0.000 TOTAL 1,500.000 10 I7n1 I.V QV A Pi fVP cuAD Vn Q'MDAA nD A rrTc DV "T RLA(B 1RI31JTARY ARIA ID IRUM TO LAND USE PLC IiSO cwo TOTAL AREA (AD LAC COEF, AT PLC % TOTAL AREA HSO �t TOTAL .AREA cwO 'h TOTAL AREA DL4 EX, (Ii� r r cic "`• APPROIC L (LF) -VUt R'FORTEi7 CONST. COST/1NDLAII.F UNIT CONST, COST PLUS 20'�• COSTIIN DLL /LF COST PLC COST liSO COST C1}'p TRIO AREA (ACRE) LAND USE COEF AC TRIB AREA I(ACRE) LAND USE COEF AC TRIG. AREA (ACRE) LAND USE COEF. AC 9 9 F I 088 3 102 918 34 272 09 072 A A A A CB 1& 2 is INDUSTRIAL INDUS 1 RIAL RESIDENT IAI: MED RLSI)ENfIAl:NI:D 0 0 0 09 0 0 0 08 0 0 0 072 9 102 34 0 09 09 08 0 81 918 272 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 97 0 24 36 42 28 48 791 $2 92 $2 50 $2 38 $350 S3 00 2 $86 S81 73 $180 14 S3 9838 S'_,.70 �7 $ 5,003 86 $91,6�16_ $0 00 $000 $000 235 20 72 TOTAL TOTAL $3,560 2S $99,895 75 $000 S: TOTAL 3 97 0 3 , III CB 5 IS 4 I`'DUSIRIAL - 0 0 0 13 09 117 0 0 0 13 117 090 0 100 0 18 1 27 S333 S400 $000 $1,96200 $000 TOTAL- 1 3 1 17 TOTAL SO 00 $1,962 00 SO 00 0 100 0 132 ( 13 4 IS 4 INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 58 09 5 22 0 0 0 5 8 5 22 0 90 0 100 0 24 88 S2 92 $3 50 $0 00 S7,392 00 $000 TOTAL 5 8 �� 5 .._ TOTAL $000 $7,392 00 $0 00 0 100 0 ► 111 & 2 IS 4 IS 3 INDUSTRIAL. 0 0 0 71 09 639 0 0 0 7 1 6 39 0 90 0 100 0 27 524 S2 78 $3 33 $G 00 $47,169 00 SO 00 TOTAL 7 1 6 39 TOTAL SUM $47,169 00 $000 0 100 0 B3 C B I& I l IS 2 INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 109 09 981 0 0 0 109 981 0 90 0 100 0 24 136 $2 92 $3 50 V 00 $11,424 00 SO 00 TOTAL 109 981 TOTAL $C 00 $11,424 00 SOW 0 100 0 B4 C Il 2& 3 IS 2 COMMERCIAL, RESIDENTIAL: NMI) 61 5 09 08 549 4 0 0 0 0 0 r0 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 5 549 4 095 100 0 0 18 24 30 36 39 101 S3 33 $2 92 $3 14 $4 00 $3 50 S3 77 $2,592 00 $3,249 96 $11,424 00 $000 $000 $000 $000 $000 SO 00 TOTAL 11 1 949 TOTAL S17,26596 SO 00 $000 I 100 0 0 133 & 4 IS 2 IS 3 INDUSTRIAL COMMERCIAL; RESIDLNIIAL-NEED 0 61 5 0 09 08 0 5 49 4 109 0 0 09 0 0 981 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 109 6 1 5 991 5 49 4 088 49 51 0 36 73 $2 50 S3 00 $3 876 11 $4,006 81 SO 00 TOTAL $3 876 11 $4,006 81 $0 00 49 51 0 TOTAL 22 19 3 - 111, 2, 3, & 4 IS 3 IS 5 INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL ( OMMLR(-IAL RESIDEN LIAI: MED 0 0 61 5 0 0 09 08 0 0 549 4 71 109 0 0 09 09 0 0 639 981 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 109 61 5 639 9 b l 549 4 088 37 63 0 36 j 916 $2 50 $3 00 $36,558 80 $62,408 OS $0 00 TOTAL SY,,558 80 S62,408 08 $000 37 63 0 TOTAL 291 2569 BS CB 6 IS 5 INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 77 09 693 0 0 0 77 693 090 0 100 0 18 8 $333 $400 $('00 $57600 $000 TOTAL 77 693 TOTAL S0 00 $576 00 $000 1 0 100 0 w 111,2.3.4. B 5 is 5 IS 6 INDUSTRIAL INDUS7 R IAL COMWERCIAL RESIDENTIAL -NEED INDUSTRIAL 0 0 61 5 0 0 0 09 08 0 0 0 549 4 0 71 109 0 0 77 09 09 0 0 09 639 981 0 0 693 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 109 61 5 77 639 981 549 4 693 089 29 71 0 42 87 $2 38 $2 86 $3 052 63 $7,440 17 $0 00 TOTAL $31052 63 $7,440 17 $000 29 71 0 TOTAL 368 3262 116 C B 7 8 8 IS 6 INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 147 09 13 23 0 0 0 147 13 23 090 0 100 0 18 24 40 124 $3 33 $2 92 $4 00 $3 50 $0 CO $0 (0 $2,880 00 $10,416 00 $000 $000 TOTAL. 147 13 23 TOTAL SO CO S13,296 00 $000 0 100 0 i B 1,2,3,4,5, & 6 IS 6 is 8 INDUSTRIAL INDUS TR IAI, CONBiLRCIAL RESIDENTIAL- INDUSTRIAL MUST RIAL 0 0 61 5 0 0 0 0 09 08 0 0 0 0 549 4 4 0 0 71 109 0 0 77 147 09 09 0 0 09 09 639 981 0 0 693 13 23 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 109 6 1 5 77 147 6 Bo 9 81 5 49 4 693 13 23 0 89 21 79 0 42 691 $2 38 S2 86 $17,160 98 $65,750 62 $000 TOTAL $1 J,160 98 $65, 750 62 $000 21 79 0 TOTALI 51 5 45 85 ,► B7 CB 9 is 8 INDUSTRIAL PAVEMENT 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 09 09 11 099 0 0 0 0 0 0 2 1 1 is 0 9') 0 90 0 100 0 19 6 $3 33 $4 00 $000 $432 00 $000 TOTAL SG OO $432 00 $000 TOTAL 31 279 0 100 0 It 1,2,3 4,5,6, 8 7 is 8 IS B INDUSTRIAL INDIISIRIAL COMMERCIAL RESIDLNTIAL-HIED INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL INDUSTRIAL PAVEMENT 0 0 61 5 0 0 0 0 0 0 09 08 0 0 0 0 0 0 549 4 0 0 0 0 71 109 0 0 77 147 _ 1 1 09 09 0 0 09 09 09 09 639 981 0 0 693 1323 18 099 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 71 109 61 5 77 147 2 1 1 6 39 981 549 4 693 13 23 18 0 99 0 89 20 80 0 42 15 $2 38 S2 86 $362 66 S 1,496 14 SO 00 TOTAL S36266 S1,49614 $000 20 80 0 TOTAL 54 6 4864 S 102,456 00 $1,962 00 $7,392 00 547,169 00 S11,4 4400 $17,265 96 Y7,88 $98,966 88 5576 00 $10,492 80 $13,296 00 S82,911 60 S432 00 $1 Sig 80 I HOLLY SEACLIFF SHARED STORM DRAINS CONSTRUCTED BY PLC, USED BY OTHERS (Complete Build -Out) kFACH TRIDUTARY ARE tU FROM TO LAND USERE) PLC MO CWO TOTAL AREA (AT) �1C COEF AT PLC %. TOTAL AREA H§6 •/. TOTAL AREA CWO %. TOTAL AREA DIA EX. {LN) "' APPROX L (L F) REPORTED CONST CA5T/INDUAF UNIT CONST CO5T PLUS20Y. COSTiN DIAJLF. COST PLC COST HSO COST CWO IB EA T LAND USE C.OEF AC TRID. AREA (ACRE) LAND USE COU AC iRID. AREA (ACRE) LAND USE COEF. AC 2 (I is B J S( RESIDLNTIAL-LOW RESIDENTIAL--MED SCHOOL 193 409 85 04 08 04 772 3272 340 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 193 409 85 7 72 3272 340 067 96 4 0 18 36 60 8 303 354 S3 33 $2 50 $2 67 $4 00 $3 00 $3 20 1 S352 42 $1,138 46 So5,186 00 S23 58 5133 94 52,782 00 S0 00 $0 00 $0 00 PAVEMENT 1195 09 10 755 09 09 081 0 0 0 1285 1157 TOTAL 558,876 88 52,939 52 $0 00 RESIDENTIAL -LOW 0 0 0 38 04 152 0 0 0 3 8 152 % TOTAL 96 4 0 TOTAL 8535 5693 I (I &2 is C J S B RESIDENTIAL. -LOW 193 04 772 0 0 0 0 0 0 193 772 065 92 8 0 18 16 $3 33 $4 00 $1,060 87 S91 13 $0 00 RESIDENTIAL-MED 409 09 3272 0 0 0 0 0 0 409 3272 24 43 $2 92 $3 50 $3,314 65 $284 75 $0 00 SCHOOL 85 04 340 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 3 40 30 8 $2 67 $3 20 $707 24 S60 76 $0 00 PAVEMENT 1195 09 10 755 09 09 081 0 0 0 1285 1157 60 945 S2 67 $3 20 $1 b7,003 29 $14,346 47 S0 00 RESIDENTIAL -LOW 0 0 0 38 04 1 52 0 0 0 38 1 52 TOTAL 5172,086 0 514,783 10 $0 00 RESIDENTIAL -LOW 0 0 0 59 04 236 0 0 0 59 236 % TOTAL 1 92 8 0 RESIDENTIAL -LOW 0 0 0 5 04 2 0 0 0 5 200 TOTALI 91 25 59 29 ('3 RIP -RAP J S B RESIDENTIAL -LOW 0 0 0 22 04 98 0 0 0 22 8 80 1 040 0 100 0 72 67 S2 36 $2 83 S0 00 S13,69656 $0 00 TOTAL 22 880 TOTAL S0 00 $13,696 56 $0 00 Yi TOTAL 1 0 100 0 - C 1,2,3, &4 is B J S B RESIDENTIAL -LOW RESIDENTIAL-MED 193 409 04 08 772 3272 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 193 409 772 3272 056 72 28 0 18 24 84 24 $3 33 $2 92 $4 00 S3 50 $4,334 84 $1,443 40 $1,719 64 S572 60 $0 00 $0 00 SCHOOL 85 04 3 40 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 340 72 609 S2 36 $2 83 S0,002 15 $35,307 29 S0 00 PAVEMENT 1195 09 10 755 09 09 081 0 0 0 12 85 1157 78 183 S2 31 $2 77 $28,268 49 S 11,214 15 ISOOO RESIDENTIAL -LOW 0 0 0 3 8 04 1 52 0 0 0 38 1 52 TOTAL, S 123,048 89 548,813 67 $0 00 RISIDENTIAI -LOW 0 0 0 59 04 236 0 0 0 59 236 %TOTAL 72 28 0 RES IDEN FL41 -LOW 0 0 0 5 04 2 0 0 0 5 200 RESIDLNI IAL-LOW 0 0 0 22 04 88 0 0 0 22 8 90 RESIDLNTIAL-LOW 6 04 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 2,10 RESIDLNTIAI LOW 0 0 0 178 04 712 0 0 0 1 178 712 TOTALI 14205 7961 — (,1,2,3,4, & Reach 3 J S B RIP -RAP RESIDENTIAL LOW 193 04 772 0 0 0 0 0 0 193 772 065 52 48 0 84 43 $2 38 $2 86 $5,407 35 $5,023 05 $0 00 RESIDLNI IAL-MLD 409 08 3272 0 0 0 0 0 0 409 3272 TOTAL $5,407 35 55,023 05 $0 00 S( 1I0OL 85 04 340 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 340 % TOTAL 52 48 0 PAVEMENT 1195 09 10 755 09 09 081 0 0 0 1285 1157 RESIDEN I IAA: LOW 0 0 0 38 04 152 0 0 0 3 8 1 `,2 RES[DEN]IAI.LOW 0 0 0 59 04 236 0 0 0 59 236 LLESIDLNTIAL-LOW 0 0 0 5 04 2 0 0 0 5 200 RESIDLNTAAI: I OW 0 0 0 22 04 88 0 0 0 22 8 80 RESIDLNTIAL -LOW 6 04 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 240 RESIDENTIAL -LOW 0 0 0 178 04 7 12 0 0 0 178 7 12 INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 71 09 639 0 0 0 71 639 INDUSTRIAL. 0 0 0 109 09 981 0 0 0 109 91,11 COMMLR( WL 61 09 549 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 5 49 RESIDENTIAL -MI D 5 08 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 77 09 693 0 0 0 77 693 INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 14 7 09 13 23 0 0 0 147 1323 INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 2 09 18 0 0 0 2 18 PAVEMENT 0 0 0 11 09 099 0 0 0 11 099 TOTAL 196 65 228 25 571,816 40 S 186, 869 16 S 13,696 56 S 171, 862 56 S10,43040 HOLLY SEACLIFF SHARED STORM DRAINS CONSTRUCTED BY PLC, USED BY OTHERS (Complete Build -Out) RI A(f1 TRIBUTARY ARFA ID FROM TO LAND USE PLC fISO CAA'U TOTAL AREA (AT) FAC COEF 4T PLC X ITOTALITOT41. AREA LiSO AREA CAA'O °G TOTAL AREA DI& EX- (B� "` APPROX. L (L.F) REPORTED CONST, COSTtIN.D1AJLF UNIT CONST. COST PLUS COST+TN DIA iLF COST PLC COST HSO COST CAVO TR_M AREA (ACRE) LAND USE COFF AC TRIG AREA (ACRE) LAND USE COEF AC TRLB AREA (ACRE) LAND USE COEF AC 6 DI ( B 1 is I RLNIDLNTIAI: HIED 46 08 368 0 0 0 0 0 0 41 3 68 010 100 0 0 24 43 1292 1110 $3,585 96 $000 $000 TOTAL 46 3 68 TOTAL 53,585 96 $000 SO 00 .o TOTAL 100 0 0 D2 ( H 9 is I INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 58 09 522 0 0 0 58 522 090 0 100 0 24 43 $2 92 $3 50 SO 00 $3,585 96 $000 TOTALI 5 8 522 TOTAL $000 $3,585 96 SO 00 Y TOTAL 0 100 0 e Y DI & 2 Is I 1 S 2 RESWENIIAI: MID INDIIS TRIAL 46 0 08 0 368 0 0 5 8 0 09 0 522 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 5 8 368 522 086 41 59 0 24 520 S2 92 $3 50 S18,06928 $25,630 88 $000 TOTAL $18,069 28 $25,630 88 $000 TOTAL 104 890 % TOTAL 41 59 0 D3 CB 2 JS 2 INDIISTRIAI 0 0 0 29 09 261 0 0 0 29 261 090 0 100 0 30 43 $267 $320 S000 $4,15008 $000 TOTAL 29 261 TOTAL $9 00 $4,150 08 $000 % TOTAL 0 100 0 D 1,2, & 3 J S 2 J S 3 RESIDI-N I IAI -NILD INDOS I RIAI fNDIJNI RIAL 46 0 0 08 0 0 368 0 0 0 58 29 0 09 09 0 522 261 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 5 8 29 3 68 522 2 51 087 32 68 0 30 770 $2 67 $3 20 $23,029 24 $50,276 36 $000 TOTAL S13,629 24 $50,276 36 $000 TOTAL 32 68 0 TOTAL 133 11 51 D4 C B 3 J S 3 PA VEMLNI, 058 09 0 522 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 S2 090 100 0 0 24 38 $2 92 $3 50 S 22644 $000 $000 TOTAL. 0 +2 TOTAL $;,226 44 $000 $000 r46 % TOTAL 100 0 0 w D 12,3,4, 8 5 IN 3 is 5 R17SIDLN I IAI -MED INDI IS I RIAC INDIISIRIAI PAVLMINL RLSIDLN I IAL MED 46 0 0 058 4562 O S 0 0 09 08 368 0 0 0522 36 496 0 5 8 29 0 0 0 09 09 0 0 0 5 22 26) 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 U 05:12 0 0 0 058 4562 368 261 052 36 50 082 84 16 0 30 48 68 135 $267 $250 $320 $300 V,458 60 $16,30577 $1,05020 $3,137 11 $000 $000 TOTAL. S-1,76437 1$4,18731 $000 %TOTAL 84 16 0 TOTAL 595 48 53 7 + L I C B 7& 8 J S 8 RESIDF.N I IAI: NIFD 0 0 0 0 0 0 174 8 08 13984 1748 13984 080 0 0 100 24 691 S2 92 $3 50 $000 SO 00 $58,044 00 TOTAL 174 8 119 84 TOTAL, 5000 SO 00 558,044 00 TOTAL 0 0 100 LI & E2 is 8 is 5 RES IDFNI L4L-MED RES IDLN 1 IAI: MILD 0 28 4 0 08 0 2272 0 0 0 0 0 0 1748 0 08 0 13984 0 174 8 294 13984 22 72 080 14 0 86 84 308 $2 38 S2 86 $ lu 333 02 SO 00 563,598 98 TOTAL $10,333 02 $000 563,598 98 TOTAL 203 2 16256 % TOTAL 14 0 86 r E1,2, & Reach 6 J S 5 1 S A RESIDENI LAL-HIED RESIDEN11AI -MED RESIDENTIAL -MID INDUSTRL I, INDUSTRIAL PAVEMENT RLNIDINfIAL-MED 0 284 46 0 0 058 4562 0 08 08 0 0 09 08 0 2272 368 0 0 0 522 36 496 0 0 0 5 8 29 0 0 0 0 0 09 09 0 0 0 0 0 5 22 261 0 0 174 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 08 0 0 0 0 0 0 13984 0 0 0 0 0 0 174 8 284 46 5 8 29 058 4S 62 13994 2272 3 63 S 22 261 052 36 50 080 30 4 66 96 147 $2 29 $2 75 511,683 83 SI,442 56 525,763 45 TOTAL, S11 683 83 51,442 56 $25,763 45 'J TOTAL 30 4 66 TOTAL 2627 211 09 - I' 1,2 3, & Rejlh 6 1 S A OIJTI ET RESIDENTIAL-MED RESIDENTLAL-MILD REJIDENI IAL-NiED INDIJNIRLAL INDIISIRIAL PAVEMENT RENIDLNTL -L-NiED RLSIDLN I L4L-LOR 0 284 46 0 0 058 4562 65 0 08 08 0 0 09 08 04 0 2272 3 68 0 0 0 522 36 496 26 0 0 0 58 29 0 0 0 0 0 0 09 09 0 0 0 0 0 0 522 261 0 0 0 1748 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 08 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 13984 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 1748 284 46 5 8 29 058 45 62 65 139 S4 22 72 3 6b 522 261 052 3650 260 079 31 4 65 96 656 $2 29 $2 75 Sy53,463 68 $6,341 01 S 1 13,247 31 TOTAL 553,463 68 $6,341 01 $113,247 31 'A TOTAL 31 4 65 TOTAL 1 2692 1 21369 $3,585 96 53,585 96 143,700 16 sa,1 so 08 S73 905 6U $3,226 44 $25,951 68 S58 044 00 $73,932 00 538,889 84 5173 OS2 00 HOLLY SEACLIFF SHARED STORM DRAINS CONSTRUCTED BY PLC, USED BY OTHERS (Complete Build -Out) kF.A('lf TRIIiTARY ARL•A iD FROM 70 LAND USE PLC MO C"WO TOTAL AREA (AT) FAC COEF, AT PLC °.L TOTAL AREA HSO !s TOTAL AREA CWO �o TOTAL AREA DLA EX (" ••' APPROJ: L (LF) REPORTED CONST CO5THNTIFA tI F, UNTO COhST COST PLUS20�/. COST/W DIAILF COS7 PIC COST HSO COST CWO TRIi1 AREA (ACRE] LAND USE COEF AC TRiB, AREA (ACRE) LAND USE COEF AC 7721$, AREA (ACRE) LAND USE COEF AC 4A w Rcich 2 8c 3 INI 1 T 1 S C RLSIDEN FLAL-LOW RESIDLNTIALL MED S( HOOI. 193 409 85 04 08 04 772 3272 340 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 193 409 85 772 3272 340 065 52 48 0 96 28 $2 29 $2 75 S3,766 48 S3,498 80 $0 00 TOTAL S3,766 48 $3,498 80 $0 00 % TOTAL 52 48 0 PAVENfFNF 1195 09 10755 09 09 081 0 0 0 1285 1157 RI SIDLNI IAI LOW 0 0 0 38 04 1 52 0 0 0 38 152 RESII)LN1 IAI -1 OW 0 0 0 59 04 236 0 0 0 59 236 RFSIDLNILAI,IOW 0 0 0 5 04 2 0 0 0 5 200 RLSIDENI IAI -1 OW 0 0 0 22 04 88 0 0 0 22 890 RLSIDLNTLAI LOW 6 04 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 240 RLSIDLN I IAI: 1 OW 0 0 0 178 U 4 7 12 0 0 0 178 712 INDIIS FRIAI 0 0 0 71 09 639 0 0 0 71 639 INDUSIRIAL 0 0 0 109 09 981 0 0 0 109 981 ( ON4MLR( IAL 61 09 549 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 549 RLSIDENI LAI.-Nil D 5 08 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 INDUSFRIAI 0 0 0 77 09 693 0 0 0 77 693 INDIISIRIAI 0 0 0 147 09 1323 0 0 0 147 1323 INDUSi RIAL 0 0 0 2 09 18 0 0 0 2 is PA VLMI Nl 0 0 0 11 09 099 0 0 0 11 099 TOT Al 196 65 128 25 Rc h 2,3 K 1 1 is L J S E RI SIDENl IAI -10"' 193 04 772 0 0 0 0 0 0 193 772 064 54 46 0 96 30 $2 29 $2 75 $ 4,183 77 S3,622 71 $0 00 RES IDLN I IAI- MLD 409 08 3272 0 0 0 0 0 0 409 32 72 TOTAL $4,183 77 $3,622 71 S0 00 S( HOOI . 85 04 340 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 340 % TOTAL 54 46 0 PAVINil N1' 1195 09 10755 09 09 081 0 0 0 1285 1157 RLS IDI N I IAI 1 OA' 0 0 0 38 04 1 52 0 0 0 38 1 52 RI SIDLNI IAI -I OW 0 0 0 59 04 236 0 0 0 59 236 RLS IDINIIAL-IOR' 0 0 0 5 04 2 0 0 0 5 200 RLSU)I,NIIAI -IOW 0 0 0 22 04 88 0 0 0 22 88U RI SIDLNI IAI-LOW 6 04 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 240 RI_S IDEN I LAI -1 OW 0 0 0 17 8 04 7 12 0 0 0 178 7 12 INDI IS 1 RIAI 0 0 0 71 09 639 0 0 0 71 639 INDUSIRIAL 0 0 0 109 09 981 0 0 0 109 981 ( ON1NfLR( IAI 6 1 09 549 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 5 49 1 RLSIDEN I IAI -MI 1) 5 0 8 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 WDI)SIRIAI 0 0 0 77 09 693 0 0 0 77 693 INDUSIRIAI 0 0 0 147 09 1123 0 0 0 147 1323 IND[ISIRIU 0 0 0 2 09 18 0 0 0 2 18 PtVINil NF, 0 0 0 11 09 099 0 0 0 11 099 RLS IDLNI W -1 OW 121 04 4 84 0 0 0 0 0 0 121 4 84 TOT.0 208 75 133 U9 r Rcjh2,3,F1,8h2 JS L BOX RESIDENIIAI-1OW 193 04 772 0 0 0 0 0 0 193 772 061 56 44 0 96 11 S229 $275 S1,62652 $1,25372 $000 RESiDLNI LU -NILD 409 08 3272 0 0 0 0 0 0 409 32 72 TOTAL $1,626 52 S1,253 72 $0 00 S( IIOOL PAA'FN1I NT 85 1 1 95 04 09 340 10 755 0 09 0 09 0 081 0 0 0 0 0 0 85 12 85 3 40 1157 % TOTAL 56 44 0 RI.SIDI_N FLAT -1 OR 0 0 0 3 8 04 1 52 0 0 0 3 8 1 52 RLS IDI Nl IAI -LOR 0 0 0 59 04 236 0 0 0 59 236 Rl SII)LNTLll -LOR' 0 0 0 5 04 — 0 0 0 5 200 RLSIDLN 1 WI -1 OR 0 0 0 22 04 88 0 0 0 22 8 80 RESIDLNI IAI -1 OW 6 04 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 240 RLSIDENI LAL-1_013 0 0 0 178 04 7 12 0 0 0 178 7 12 INDUSIRIAL 0 0 0 71 09 639 0 0 0 71 639 INDUSFRLAI 0 0 0 109 09 981 0 0 0 109 981 ( ONIMFRCIAI 61 09 549 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 549 RLS U)ENTI.0 -MED 5 08 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 INDIISTRLU 0 0 0 77 09 693 0 0 0 77 693 INDUSIRLAl 0 0 0 147 09 1323 0 0 0 147 1323 INDIISIRLM 0 0 0 2 09 18 0 0 0 2 18 PAVEMENT 0 0 0 11 09 099 0 0 0 11 099 RESIDI NTI %I-LON1 12 1 04 484 0 0 0 0 0 0 121 484 RLS MEN I L>,L-LOW 22 04 88 0 0 0 0 0 0 22 8 80 TOTAL —2—; ;-7 141 89 S7,265 28 $7,806 48 $2,880 24 HOLLY SEACLIFF SHARED STORM DRAINS CONSTRUCTED BY PLC, USED BY OTHERS (Complete Build -Out) PLC Hso CWO PLc WO ctv0 UN[T CONST, TRIG LAND TRIB LAND TRIB LAND TOTAL °i 5i Si DLA. APPRO.I- REPORTED COST •'�� TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA USE AREA USE AREA COEF. TO;A1 TOTAL TOTAL EX L CONST. PLUS204'e COST COST COST RFACH ART A M FROM TO LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE? COFF AC (ACRE) COEF AC (AT) EAC AT AREA AREA AREA (IN) (LF) COSTIIN.DIA./LF COST/W DIAAF PLC HSO CWO all � RtdLh 7 RISI R BOX RES[DENTIAI -MED 0 0 0 0 0 0 1748 08 13984 174 8 139 84 0 79 31 4 65 72 39 $2 36 S2 83 $2,432 13 $288 46 S5,151 77 RI SIDLN FIAL-MED 284 08 2272 0 0 0 0 0 0 284 2272 TOTAL $2,432 13 $288 46 $5,151 77 RESIDENFIAI -MED 46 08 368 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 368 Ye TOTAL 31 4 65 INDl1SIRIAL 0 0 0 58 09 522 0 0 0 58 522 INDIISIRIAL 0 0 0 29 09 261 0 0 0 29 261 PA VLNfLN F 0 58 09 0 522 0 0 0 0 0 0 058 0 52 RI SIDLN rIA1 -NILD 4562 08 36 496 0 0 0 0 0 0 4562 3650 RLSIDLNIIALIOW 65 04 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 260 TOTAL 2692 21369 8 RwLh 4A B 411 BOX 011171 L F RI SIDE N I IAI NIED 0 0 0 0 0 0 1748 08 139 84 174 8 13984 071 41 20 39 72 430 $2 36 $2 83 $36,053 54 $17,167 88 $34,498 58 RLSIDI N I [AT Nil 1) 28 4 08 22 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 284 2272 TOTAL $36,053 54 S17,167 88 $34,498 58 RESIDLN 1 IAI -MLD 46 08 368 0 0 0 0 0 0 46 368 % TOTAL 41 20 39 INDI IS TRIAL 0 0 0 5 8 09 522 0 0 0 5 8 522 INDIIsTRIM 0 0 0 29 09 261 0 0 0 29 261 PA VI KILN 1 058 09 0 522 0 0 0 0 0 0 058 052 RI-SID1 N I IAI -Nil-1) 45 62 08 36 496 0 0 0 0 0 0 4562 3650 RLSIDLN I [Al -1 O%V 65 04 26 0 0 0 0 0 0 65 260 R1 SWEN I IAI -IOW 193 04 772 0 0 0 0 0 0 193 772 RLSIDI N I IAI -MI-D 409 08 32 72 0 0 0 0 0 0 409 3272 S(11001, 8 5 04 340 0 0 0 0 0 0 8 5 340 PAVIMLN7 1195 09 10755 09 09 081 0 0 0 1285 1157 RI SIDEN7IAl -1 OW 0 0 0 3 8 04 1 52 0 0 0 3 8 1 52 RLSIDINIIM -IOW 0 0 0 59 04 236 0 0 0 59 136 RFSIDENI[A] -IOW 0 0 0 5 04 2 0 0 0 5 200 Rl SIDLNTIAI -1 OW 0 0 0 22 04 8 8 0 0 0 22 8 80 RFS IDLN l 1AL-I OW 6 04 24 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 240 RLSIDLN11A1: 1 OW 0 0 0 178 04 7 12 0 0 0 178 112 WDIISfRIkL 0 0 0 71 09 639 0 0 0 71 1) 39 INDIISIRIAL 0 0 0 109 09 981 0 0 0 109 981 CONI ll RC WL 61 09 549 0 0 0 0 0 0 61 5 49 RES IDLNFIA1 -MLD 5 08 4 0 0 0 0 0 0 5 4 INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 77 09 693 0 0 0 77 b 93 INDUSTRIAL 0 0 0 147 09 13'-3 0 0 0 147 1323 WDt1STRLtL 0 0 0 2 09 18 0 0 0 2 I8 PAVENITNT 0 0 0 1 1 09 099 0 0 0 1 1 099 RES IDLN11Al LOW 121 04 4 84 0 0 0 0 0 0 12 1 4 84 RLSIDLN 17IAL-1.0R 22 04 8 8 0 0 0 0 0 0 1 22 8 80 TOTAL 499 95 355 S7 •' 1'Ipr lengths are estimated i dues only VLC mill need to N enf) the lengths of their see er lines • * ( It) cost shoe" will be shifted to S/P cost (see General Comments) $7,872 36 $87,720 00 HOLLY SEACLIFF ARTERIAL STREET ANALYSIS CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH GENERAL COMMENTS: 1. PLC= Current Developer (S/P-Seacliff Partners previous Developer name). HSO = Holly Seacliff Others including Non Holly Seacliff Others. CWO = City Wide Others. 2. Analysis items are those arterial streets built by PLC, will serve future development capacity by others. 3 PLC (Current Holdings) are substantially different from those shown in Walden's Cost Analysis Report (1994) submitted by PLC. 4. The table on page 9 of this report shows data for each street studied and the estimated totals for PLC, HSO, CWO. 5. PLC should provide the City with actual receipts to verify cost of constructed arterial streets. Furthermore, PLC had many additions to the estimated cost of construction (contingency, soils testing, ect ) which inflate the overall cost by about 20 - 40%. 6. Unit construction cost for sewer pipes shown on the table, page 9, consists of their reasonable unit cost in 1994 dollars which in our opinion cover installing street, contractor mobilization, and profit. This accounts for 20% added to unit cost. These costs do not include engineering, administration, or easements. 1 HOLLY SEACLIFF ARTERIAL STREET ANALYSIS CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH HOLLY SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN AREA TRIP GENERATION (TOTAL PROJECT) PLC 48,658 Daily HSO 11,646 Daily TOTAL 60,304 Daily Values extracted from traffic data report, table B, C, and D - LSA Associates, Inc LANE REQUIREMENTS NEEDING ADDITIONAL ARTERIAL LANES TO SATISFY EXISTING & FUTURE CAPACITY ARTERIAL SEGMENTS EX. LANES/ EX. DAILY PLC CAP. HSO CAP. CAP. CAPACITY Garfield Ave.: Edwards St. - Goldenwest St. 2 / 12,000 15,000 8,600 1,300 Goldenwest St. - Gothard St. 4 / 20,000 21,000 9,100 3,800 Gothard St - Main St. 4 / 20,000 21,000 9,500 2,500 Edwards St. Ellis Ave. - Garfield Ave. 2 / 12,000 10,700 2,400 200 Goldenwest St.: Ellis Ave. - Garfield Ave. 4 / 20,000 24,000 8,500 2,100 Garfield Ave. - Yorktown Ave. 4 / 20,000 22,700 9,900 2,500 Gothard St.: Ellis Ave. - Garfield Ave. 2 / 12,000 14,000 5,300 1,400 Values extracted from traffic data report, table I - LSA Associates, Inc Pa HOLLY SEACLIFF ARTERIAL STREET ANALYSIS CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH HOLLY SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN AREA ESTIMATED COST FOR ARTERIAL STREETS ARTERLAL SEG\fE\T GakF7ELL ac`�CE EDU'ARDS ST - GOLDSNtVEST ST GOLDE\'R'EST ST - GOTHARD ST ST - MAI\ ST EDRARDSSTREET ELLIS A\ E GARFIELD ST LA".ES CONS; COST FOR SI-RET, I P:,C 4 AC PA%E\fE\-r S-24"-v0 F LLLE\GTH,LFi -'I-i AGGREGATE BASE (I s 1 c:I'l 10:, 0. 1 ' \\ IDTH LE\GTH »^ 8"C&v So144000 �,L RIOT AL IC20C2 F.a0n. TOTAL IS cy 524-U 8'C IS5S 4400", 4' THICK S\1 S-- -I s 00 STREETBARACADE Si "2800 MEDLAN ISLAND S25 500 00 REDWOOD HEADER S30600 REMOVE Et A C P A\'EMS\7 54" 0(0 00 SL B TOTAL S914 229 0o LTILIT7 COST ASSOC WITH ROADCON STRLMON S) 15841ON TOTAL S' 09' 6?900 TOTAL SL F N-37 06 6 1 EST LENGTH (L F) l t-s A C PAVEMENT (0 50) S202 600 00 1 2 WIDTH LENGTH 241 AGGREGATE BASE (1 :5) S17602500 8' C&G S30 -20 00 SU B TOTAL S 152 614 01 8" C S13 320 00 TOTAL S76.307 01 4' THICK SW $49 390 00 DRIVE APPROACH S516000 WHEEL CHAIR RAMP S2 800 00 MEDIAN ISLAND S6'0000 REDWOOD HEADER S 140 00 REMOVE EN C&G S16000 REMOVE EN A C PAVEME\7 S50 425 00 SUBTOTAL 55?"84000 UTILITS COSTASSOC WITH St R TO — TOTAL IS1381141- Ft. LL LE\0TH iL F) I II10 12 WIDTH LENGTH 24s SLBTOT Al. S9NI09t TOTAL IS904'831; TOT?1. 5981 I40 00 TOTAL S L F IS622911 6 EST LE\GTH (L F) 981 A C PA\ EMENT (0 50) S145 920 00 1 2 WIDTH LENGTH 981 12 61DTH LE\( AGGREGATE BASEG25) S12288000 SUBTOTAL S"4s6"-4s ';LBTOT AL VAR THICK A C OVERLAI $2 440 00 TOTAL S372 838 73 TOTAL 8" C&G SI3 452 00 4' THICI. SA' S21 11925 DRIVE APPROACH S1 150 00 WHEEL CHAIR RAMP S"00 W CONCRETE CROSS GUTTER $5 197 50 REMOVE EX, CURB S960 00 REMOVE EX A C PAVEME\T S41 25000 REMOVE EX CATCH BASIN S2 000 00 REMOVE EX, CROSS GUTTER S2 137 50 REMOVE E\ SIDEWALK Sl'9s 00 SUBTOTAL S16"2012s LTTILTT) COST ASSOC WITH ROAD CO\STRLMON SI78 1000 TOTAL 5,4s s-I •s 4 1 EST LENGTH (L F) 2 s9s A C PAb EMENT (0 40) S155 20000 1G IVIDTH,LENGTH 2280 AGGREGATE BASE (1 25) S 181 5'10 00 SUB TOTAL IS86249896 A C PAVEMENT (0 25) S'_ 840 00 TOTAL IS86249896 AGGREGATE BASE (0 33) SI 27500 8' CURB S916 00 8' C&G S45 996 00 4'THICK SW S5784900 DRIVE APPROACH S675 00 WHEELCHAIR RAMP $140000 STREET BARRICADE S960 00 REDWOOD HEADER S453 00 REMOVE EX REDWD HEADER S101 00 REMOVE EX A C PAVEMENT $17 975 00 SUB TOTAL $48 7 19000 UTILITY COST ASSOC WITH ROAD CONSTRUCTION $494 470 00 TOTAL S981 66000 AL 5 TOT/L F S178 29 Page 1 4s 6"'4s 1/2 WIDTIt'LENGTH \I s SUBTOTAL 511916104 TOTAL IS119.16104 HOLLY SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN AREA ESTIMATED COST FOR ARTERIAL STREETS ARTERIAL SEGMENT GOIDE % REST STREET ELLIS A\ E - G.ARFIELD ACE ELD AVE - YOP KTOWN AVE L4.\ES I CONSf COST FCR STREET PLC I EST LE\GTH ,L F i 2 N 6 AC PA,E\tE\7(1 IS) $45''-00L-L F L- LENGTHiLF) A C PA\'E\TE\7 (0 33) S2 400 00 12 WIDTH LENGTH HEATER REMI\ & AC OVERLAI 544 400 00 IL B TOT AL TOTAL \AR THICK AC OVERLAl Sl 20000 A C OVERLAI (0 15) S2 000 L-0 EDGE GRIND - S82 S0 8' CURB 558320 00 8' C&G S64 "0 00 CROSS GL7TER S5 692 50 4'THICKSW $1056000 DRIVE APPROACH SI 40000 WHEEL CHAIR RAMP S_ 800 00 AfEDLANISLAND PAVEME\7 S2600000 PC C BUS PAD S20 925 00 REMOVE E`•t A C PAVEMENT $4 642 50 REMOVE EXCLRBGL'ITER S495000 REMOVE EXISTING SW S8 100 00 REMOVE CROSS GETTER SI 550 00 S" 1 S 662 SO SL B TOTAL L7ILITI COST ASSOC VITTH ROAD CO\STRLCilO\ S529 450 00 T OTAL SI24SI12S0 TOTAL S L F S4 71 63 6 FTST LENGTH (L F) 2 641 A C PAVE\fEN7 G 10) S246 800 00 12 I\'IDTH LENGTH HEATER REMIK & AC O VERLAI $64 600 00 EDGE GRIND 5920 00 SL B TOTAL TOTAL 8' CURB S27 240 00 8' C&G S36 900 00 4' THICK SW S67 52625 WHEEL CHAIR RAMP 5700 00 DRIVE APPROACH 5270000 PC BUS PAD S21 78000 CATCH BASIN S1 500 00 MEDIAN ISLAND PAN EME\7 S22 3SO 00 WHEEL CHAIR RAMP S280000 REMOVE EX, A C PAVEME\7 S12 800 00 REMOVE EK CURR'GUTTER S4 89000 SUBTOTAL SSIS S0625 ITTILITI COST ASSOC \VITH TOTAL 5862'+46'S TOTAL S L F S3"'6 S" 1 H.,' 31" FIL LL LE\6TH ,L c 1 1 cQ, 1605 1 2 R IDTH LENGTH I I m" 26108" SL F; TOT AL SI M_,lyl o: 412496 1 TOTAL Inu 913113 1291 FULL LENGTH (L F) 11SO 1 2 WIDTH LENGTH 1291 19818 SLBTOTAL S862469 bI GOTHARD STREET ELLIS A%E GARFIELD A\ E 4 EST LENGTH (L F) 2 -790 A C PAVE'AEN"T (0 45-) S22" 20000 FULL LENGTH (L F) 1710 AGGREGATE BASE (1 95) $333 225 00 1'2 WIDTH/LENGTH 1080 VARIABLE AC THICK OVERLY SAOOW00 SUBTOTAL S1 5814000O 8' CURB $27 000 00 TOTAL 51,276,935 48 8' C&G S68 820 00 4' THICK SW $79,750 00 REMOVE EX CURBIGUTTER $2 550 00 REMOVE EEC A C PAVEMENT SI4 095 00 DRIVE APPROACH $I4 600 00 WHEEL CHAIR RAMP S3 500 00 STREET BARRICADE $z 160 00 REDWOOD HEADER 584000 MEDIAN ISLANDPAVEMEN"T 5550000 REMOVE EX DRIVE APPROACH $750 00 REMOVE EX, SIDEWALK 5141000 SUB TOTAL 5812 600 00 UTILITY COST ASSOC WITH ROAD CONSTRUCTION 5770 800 00 TOTAL $158140000 TOTAL ST F 5567 51 I HOLLI SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN AREA DAILY TRIP GENERATION COST (TOTAL PROJECT) TRIP PER DAI RATU RIP GEN CDST,TRIP GEN PLC HSO 48 658 11,646 S75 00 57500 $3,649 350 00 $873,45000 TOTAL 60 304 $75 00 S4 522 800 00 2 WIDTII'LENGTH 1080 SUB TOTAL S612929 Oz Page 2 Appendix D Holly/Seacliff Briefing #1 for the City of Huntington Beach Holly /Seacliff Construction Financing Committee March 25, 1997 OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC SOWLE Holly/ Seacli*ff Study Brl**efin by Boyle Engineering Corporation for the City of Huntington Beach March 25, 1997 Briefing Boyle"s Scope of Work Review: ■ November 1990 Development Agreement ■ 1994 Engineer's Report Ho eacliff Cost I Reimbursement District 1996 Infrastructure Financing Program Document by PLC Review with City Briefing Boyle's Scope of Work Cost Analysis of Excess Capacity ■ Sewer ■ Storm Drains ■ Arterial Streets Water Non -Domestic Water Prepare Alternative Methods of Allocating Costs Briefing Boyle's Scope qf Work Review Results with Developer for: m Sewer ■ Storm Drains ■ Arterial Streets Water Non -Domestic Water Finalize Cost Allocation Process Briefing Existing Analysis ■ 1994 Cost Reimbursement District Report ■ Allocates $61,000,000 ■ $50M to Seacliff Partners � $11 M to Other Property Owners in H/S Now Out of Date Briefing Boyle's Scope of Work Cost Analysis of Excess Capacity m Sewer ■ Storm Drains Arterial Streets Water Non -Domestic Water Prepare Alternative Methods of Allocating Costs Briefing :Z0 Existing Analysis ■ 1994 Cost Reimbursement District Report ■ Allocates $61 10001000 ■ $50M to Seacliff Partners m $11 M to Other Property Owners in H/S Now Out of Date Briefing Boyle"s Scope of Work Review Results with Developer for: a Sewer � Storm Drains .. a Arterial Streets Water Non -Domestic Water Finalize Cost Allocation Process Appendix E Holly/Seacliff Briefing #2 for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee April 15, 1997 OC-SOB-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC SOWLE v Briefing A M ❖ November 1990 Development Agreement - Excess Capacity ❖ 1994 Engineer's Report (Willdan) Holl ylSeacli Cost Reimbursement District ❖ 1996 Inftastructure Financing Program Report (Walden) ❖ Schedule Developm-ent VM ement "City shall use its best efforts" br reimbursement o Excess Capacity to Developer ❖ Sewer ❖ Storm Drains �:• Arterial Streets ❖ Water ❖ Non -Domestic Water ❖ Fire and Police Willdan - January 1994 ost Allocation District n��acated cost based on en i� veers analusis of benefit to tiarcels within HollylSeadiff area. ❖ Arterial Roadways -:- Right -of -Way Acquisition ❖ Storm Drain Facilities �:• Water Facilitates -:- Sewer Facilities ❖ Fire and Police Facilities ❖ Incidental Expenses Reference: Bovle's April 15. 1997 Letter Walden -1996 cess Capacity Analysis ides PLC's opinion of excess canacity cost allocation to: Seacliff Partners Holly/Seacliff Others City Wide Others ❖ Ran Test Analysis on Sewer ❖ Considerable Changes Over Past 7 years Refinements Show Reduced Need for Excess Capacity Reference: Bovle's Anril 15. 1997 Letter edule ❖ April 15,1997 CFC review of past reports as benchmarks ❖ Mid - Review of preliminary analysis for excess capacity and cost allocations ❖ May 20,1997 CFC - Excess capacity and cost allocations ••• Tune / Tuly,1997 Refinements to excess capacity and cost allocations and draft report ❖ Au&Rst,1997 CDC - Review of Draft R ❖ October,1997 Final Report to Council ••• December,1997 Completion HollylSeacliff Study BYZefii g 2 C O r by Boyle Engineering Corporation Victor Opincar, PE Regional Vice President for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Construction Committee April 15,1997 Appendix F Holly/Seacliff Briefing #3 for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee May 20, 1997 OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC SOWLE HollylSeacliff Study Briefing #3 by Boyle Engineering Corporation Victor Opincar, PE Regional Vice President for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Construction Committee May 20,1997 Briefing Agenda ❖ November 1990 Development Agreement - Reimbursement for Future Development ❖ Sewer Reimbursement ❖ Storm Drain Reimbursement ❖ Water Reimbursement ❖ Arterial Road Reimbursement ❖ Alternative Cost Reimbursement Methodologies Development Agreement "City shall use its best efforts" for reimbursement from ,future development served by any facility... ❖ Sewer �:• Storm Drains •:� Water Arterial Streets ❖ Non -Domestic Water e• Fire and Police Sewer Reimbursement ❖ Sewer facilities constructed are somewhat different then presented in prior studies �:• Major. cost item was relocation of sewerage pumping station at Gothard - Existing Flows - No Future Development - No reimbursement Agreement was executed e• One Truck Sewer provides excess capacity Storm Drain reimbursement :• Storm Drain facilities constructed are somewhat different then presented in prior studies ❖ Walden analysis did not consider capacity for upstream flows - Downstream development must accommodate upstream drainage - Upstream drainage is from "built -out" areas - No reimbursement ❖ One Storm Drain provides excess capacity Water Reimbursemeitt :• Developer was given option to provide the following " in lieu-" of paying connection fees: - Nine million gallon reservoir - Associated booster stations - Water well - Transmission lines ❖ In Lieu Connection Fees = $9,0701000 ❖ No excess capacity based on buy -in cost to the City's water system Arterial Roadways Reimbursement \**.*'Arterial Roadways provide capacity based on number of lanes added ❖ Additional lane capacity must accommodate existing plus Developer ❖ New Roadway Lanes may have surplus capacity ❖ Additional Lanes might be required to accommodate Holly/Seacliff others ❖ Case by case analysis i I CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH HOLLY-SEACLIFF AREA SPECIFIC PLAN -- TRAFFIC SYSTEMS PLAN 1 i I ELLIS AVE cc cAl H W 3 = � W W J �= N G Q S H GARFIELD AVE IT cn W h W C J Cl `mYQR WN AVE ol "`'-' 13DVLE E/7alnEEml7G CORPORRT/O/7 GARFIELD AVENUE EDWARDS STREET TO GOLDENWEST STREET 24,900 existing + developer + HSO 23,600 W existing + developer J 16,300 O existing + HSO U LL 15,000 LL existing I~ 'i 1: xfrci T�tid q.. ' 12,000 - 2 LANE UNDIVIDED existing 20,000 - 4 LANE UNDIVIDED H U 30 000 - 4 LANE DIVIDED a Q U 45,000 - 6 LANE DIVIDED W Z Q J P30VLE EI7G//7EER//76 CORPORRT/On GARFIELD AVENUE GOLDENWEST STREET TO GOTHARD STREET 33,900 existing + developer + HSO 30100 W existing + developer J 24,800 0 existing + HSO U 21000 LL existing F- A' 20,000 - 4 LANE UNDIVIDED >- existing F- U 30 000 - 4 LANE DIVIDED a Q U 45 000 - 6 LANE DIVIDED LLI Z Q J 130YLE E/7G/l7EER//7G CORPORFiT/O/7 .o GARFIELD AVENUE GOTHARD STREET TO MAIN STREET 33,400 existing + developer+ HSO 30,500 W existing + developer J 23,900 0 existing + HSO U 21000 LL existing 1— i- .s 20,000 - 4 LANE UNDIVIDED existing U 30 000 - 4 LANE DIVIDED CL Q U 45,000 - 6 LANE DIVIDED W Z Q J l30YLE El7G1REER/RG CORPORRTIO/7 GOLDENWEST STREET ELLIS AVENUE TO GARFIELD AVENUE W J O U LL LL Q f— existing + developer + existing + developer 26,100 existing + HSO existing - 4 LANE UNDIVIDED existing - 4 LANE DIVIDED - 6 LANE DIVIDED ROYCE E/7Gll7EERIns CORPORNrIan GOLDENWEST STREET GARFIELD AVENUE TO YORKTOWN AVENUE d 35,100 existing + developer+ existing + developer existing + HSO existing - 4 LANE UNDIVIDED existing - 4 LANE DIVIDED - 6 LANE DIVIDED 1 ROVLE 4ffn017EE;?1rM CORPOR/ r10f7 1 1 EDWARDS STREET ELLIS AVENUE TO GARFIELD AVENUE existing + developer + HSO 13,100 existing + developer existing + HSO 10,700 existing 12,000 - 2 LANE UNDIVIDED - 4 LANE UNDIVIDED P3OVLE E/7G//7EERIna CORPORRT/O/7 GOTHARD STREET ELLIS AVENUE TO GARFIELD AVENUE 20,700 ex►shng + developer+ HSO 19,300 LU existing + developer --� 15,400 0 existing + HSO U u, 14,000 LL existing F- 77 :, n V r 12,000 - 2 LANE UNDIVIDED existing ine 20,000 - 4 LANE UNDIVIDED F— Id 30,000 - 4 LANE DIVIDED a Q U W Z Q J MOVLE Ell WMFERIna CORPORRT/O/7 ❖ April 15,1997 CFC review of past reports as benchmarks ❖ Mid - Review of preliminary analysis for excess capacity and cost allocations ❖ May 20,1997 CFC - Excess capacity and cost allocations ❖ June, 1997 Meeting with Developer to resolve cost allocations ❖ August,1997 _Completion Appendix G Holly/Seacliff Briefing #4 for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee June 17, 1997 OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC SOWLE 7 Ahmo 1111 HollylSeacliff Study Briefing #4 by Boyle Engineering Corporation Victor Opincar, PE Regional Vice President for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Construction Committee June 17,1997 Page 1 ALM 111111 Briefing Agenda • November 1990 Development Agreement - Reimbursement for Future Development • Prior Reports 1994 Willdan Report 1997 Walden Report • Sewer Reimbursement • Storm Drain Reimbursement • Water Reimbursement • Arterial Road Reimbursement • Police/Fire Reimbursement Page 2 111111 Development Agreement "City shall use its best effo rts " for reimbursement from ,future development served by any facility... • Sewer • Storm Drains • Water • Arterial Streets • Fire and Police Facilities W= 1111 Prior Reports • (1994 Willdan Report) - Special Study per Development Agreement • (1997 Walden Report) - Special Study for Developer • Cost Estimates for both were very conservative - High Overhead Factors - Made Cost Estimates Very High • 1997 Walden Report Used as Data Source with Cost Modifications • All Costs in the Boyle Study are Cost Estimates -not actual costs • Reimbursement to the Developer would only be made on actual costs Page 4 Ai�= 41111 Sewer Reimbursement e Sewerfacilities constructed are somewhat different than presented in prior studies • Major cost item was relocation of sewerage pumping station at Gothard — Existing Flows — No Future Development — No Reimbursement Agreement was executed • Two Truck Sewers provide excess capacity Page 5 M6= Storm Drain Reimbursement • Storm Drain jac[lities constructed are somewhat different than presented in prior studies • Walden analysis did not consider capacity for upstream flows — Downstream development must accommodate upstream drainage — Upstream drainage is from `built - out " areas — No reimbursement • Several Storm Drains provide excess capacity Page 6 Water Reimbursement • Developer was given option to provide the following "in lieu" of paying connection fees: — Nine million gallon reservoir — Associated booster stations Water well — Transmission lines • In Lieu Connection Fees = $10,000,000 • No excess capacity based on buy -in cost to the City's water system Page 7 011111 Arterial Roadways Reimbursement • Arterial Roadways provide capacity based on number of lanes added • Additional lane capacity must accommodate existing traffic volume plus Developer • New Roadway Lanes for Developer have surplus capacity o Additional Lanes were required for Gothard to accommodate "Holly/Seacliff Others " • Case by case analysis was performed Public Safety Facilities (PolicelFire) Reimbursement • Police Facility Costs are capped in the Agreement as a "buy in" cost. • New Fire Station on Edwards will serve a deficient area for the HollylseacliffDevelopment. - City"s Growth Management Elementfor Fire/Medical - Criteria is set out in 1974 Fire Master Plan • No Benefit to Others" "Holly/Seacliff W= �"11 Alternative Cost Reimbursement Methodo logics • Developer Agreements Contract with a public agency • Assessment Districts — Provides Bond Money — Property Owners are assessed their share of the bond payment O Cost Reimbursement Districts — Developer provides front money — Property owners do not have to pay until their property is developed • Mello -Roos Districts — Provides bond money Registered voters decide e Reimbursement Agreements Contract for specific facilities — Property owners do not pay until development Page 10 01111 Schedule • June 17,1997 Holly/Seacliff Financing Construction Committee Meeting • July 9,1997 Council Sub -Committee Makes Findings • August 12,1997 Council Study Session Sub -Committee Update • September 15,1997 Sub -Committee Submits Findings To City Council • November 3,1997 City Council Adopts H/ Reimbursement Agreemi Page 11 Appendix H Holly/Seacliff Briefing #5 for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee July 8, 1997 OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC F30WLE *11111 HollylSeacliff Study Briefing #5 by Boyle Engineering Corporation Victor Opincar, PE Regional Vice President for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Construction Committee July 8,1997 Page 1 AGENDA OUTLINE HOLLY/SEACLIFF CONSTRUCTION FINANCING COMMITTEE July 8, 1997 Tuesday - 2:00 p.m. 1. Public Comments 2. Council Committee Approval of Staff Recommendations on Excess Capacity Analysis A) Boyle Report June 9, 1997 Report "Holly/Seacliff Cost Reimbursement for Excess Capacity Task 2 Cost Analysis" B) PLC V June 11, 1997 Letter to Ray Silver "Holly Seacliff Reimbursement Analysis" C) Attorney* 'V June 17, 1997 Memo to Ray Silver regarding Holly-Seacliff Agreement D) Cqy Staff X July 2, 1997 Meeting with PLC E) Status X Review completed by Boyle of PLC's June 11, 1997 request for reimbursement relative to the Development Agreement and City Attorney's recommendation F) Recommendation No change from June 9, 1997 Report 3. Council Committee Approval of Reimbursement Agreement Methodology and Plan A) Methodology. Reimbursement Agreements for facilities based on actual costs and excess capacity provided to non -PLC properties B) PLC )k, Request made for Developer's actual costs (Agreement Section 2 2 11) C) Assessor �, Letter dated June 18, 1997 requesting parcel information with follow-up D) Status On hold pending PLC's actual cost data and Assessor's parcels E) Recommendation Schedule Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee meeting on August 12, 1997 to allow analysis to be done and reviewed before August 25, 1997 Workshop 4. Issues for Council Workshop on Monday, August 26, 1997 Issue Recommendations to Council by the Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee Regarding: 1 Determination of excess capacity in accordance with the Development Agreement 2 Determination of reimbursement in accordance with the Development Agreement 3 Draft Reimbursement to PLC based on PLC's actual costs 4 Future reimbursement costs on individual parcels as condition of approval at time of (future) development ��e/)16 /gTT/KNED Holly/Seacliff Cost Reimbursement for Excess Capacity Task 2 Cost Analysis City of Huntington Beach Director of Public Works City Engineer Les M. Jones Robert E. Eichblatt Boyle Engineering Corporation Project Manager Project Engineer OC-S08-009-07 6/9/97 Victor E. Opincar, PE Greg Gould /04,, OPl,y�9� Fyn h r,3 m ° C,c� j30i 91 gTFCF CAL1t�Q� S®WLE 1501 Quail Street, Newport Beach, CA 92658 �� lrr,Q,Cty� 6117f4-1 pig June 11, 1997 Mr Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Subject Holly SeacliffReimbursement Analysis Dear Ray After the May 20, 1997 meeting of the Holly Seacliff Construction Financing Committee, you asked PLC to provide written comments to the analysis prepared by Boyle Engineering Corporation This letter incorporates our comments on the efforts of Boyle and the Committee I would like to reiterate that PLC has requested the City Council to do three things required of the City as part of the development agreement contract with PLC* 1 Determine PLC's fair share of public facilities improvements required to be funded or constructed by the General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Agreement, 2 Approve reimbursement agreement(s) with PLC for the supplemental capacity costs of these public facility improvements, and 3 Amend or adopt development fees to assess other and future developers and to provide reimbursement to PLC where appropriate It is critical that the Council address these issues immediately, as a significant amount of new development that will benefit from PLC's improvements is now in process and opportunities for reimbursement will be lost if no action is taken by the City We have the following comments on Boyle's memos dated April 15 and May 13, 1997 APRIL 15, 1997 TASK I ASSESSMENT REPORT In general, Boyle appears to understand the various public improvement and reimbursement sections of the Development Agreement Missing from their overall analysis, however, are references to and acknowledgment of policies and implementing actions contained in the Holly Seacliff General Plan Amendment (which preceded the Development Agreement) and the Holly Seacliff Specific Plan (which succeeded the Development Agreement) These documents require that the cost of construction of 1 PLC Land Company 23 Corporate Plaza, Suite 250 Newport Beach, California 92660 �6 714 721.9777 Telephone 714 729 1214 Facsimile Mid public facilities improvements be shared by all new development, as opposed to a single developer Review of Willdan Study —We agree that the preliminary cost estimates used in the Willdan Study were conservative This was because little of the infrastructure had been contracted or constructed at the time Actual construction costs have been slightly lower than originally estimated, however, right of way acquisition costs have been considerably higher than originally estimated Review of Walden Cost Allocation Report —We take exception to the comment on page 3 that the relocation of the sewer lift station "was done for the convenience of PLC " The relocation of this lift station has been part of the City's Master Plan of Sewers since the 1970's, and was desired by the City to free up capacity in the Garfield -Delaware trunk system by redirecting flows to the County's Slater pump station, as well as accommodating flows from other residential development (non -PLC) in the Ellis- Goldenwest Specific Plan area MAY 13, 1997 EXCESS CAPACITY TASK 2 COST ANALYSIS Boyle has attempted to determine excess capacity for sewer, storm drain and domestic water improvements Our comments are as follows Sewer Analysis —PLC accepts responsibility for all costs for Reaches 1, 2 and 6 Reaches 4 and 5 provide some excess capacity for undeveloped properties in the Ellis Goldenwest Specific Plan area PLC accepts costs benefitting Tract 14007 (New Urban West, Inc ) and Tracts 14659 & 14978-80 (Lyon, Rielly, SeaCountry) PLC does not own any property benefitted from Reach 3 (Stewart Street) All costs for Reach 3 should be assigned to Holly Seacliff Others and considered excess capacity for PLC Similarly, Reach 7 benefits property not owned by PLC Some of the costs of this Reach should be reassigned from PLC to Holly Seacliff Others We have provided City staff and Boyle with a table identifying PLC properties and allocation of development to assist them in revising their analysis (provided on May 13, 1997) Storm Drain Analysis —PLC accepts responsibility for all costs for Reaches 1, 2A and 7 Reaches 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 8, and 9 provide excess capacity for Holly Seacliff Others Again, Boyle should reanalyze capacities and benefits based on the ownership information provided to staff and Boyle on May 13, 1997 2 pig Water Reimbursement Analysis —In prefacing their analysis on page 4 of the May 13, 1997 memo, Boyle incorrectly states that "the Developer has a choice pay the connection fees or provide the facilities specified " In fact, PLC, and all other developers owning property covered by the Development Agreement, do not have such a choice. PLC assumed the Development Agreement obligation to construct the water facilities specified in the agreement (reservoir, booster station, well and pipelines) PLC's assumption of this construction obligation does not relieve the City from requiring other developers from sharing in the costs of the facilities, as required by the General Plan and Specific Plan We contend that these facilities are sized to benefit not only the Holly Seacliff area, but other new development throughout the City, and PLC is eligible for reimbursement not only from Holly Seacliff Others, but other developers who connect to the City's water system If the basis for determining fair share of water facilities capacity is limited to the 3,780 units identified in the Development Agreement, then PLC's share of this total is 3,200 units based on the ownership table provided to staff, and PLC's maximum obligation would be $7,680,000, using the current $2,400 per unit fee However, the 9 million gallon reservoir has excess capacity to serve not only the Development Agreement properties, but the entire Holly Seacliff area (4,410 residential units, plus significant commercial and industrially -zoned properties) and all new development in the City Aside from the determination of PLC's fair share and excess capacity of the water facilities, the City's approach to collecting water capital facilities fees in the Holly Seacliff area needs to be corrected Currently, because of the language in the Development Agreement, staff does not collect a water capital facilities fee from developers who own property covered by the Development Agreement, even though such developers share a financial responsibility for water facilities based on their properties' zoning Where builders have purchased lots directly from PLC, we have collected "fees" from the builders and retain the responsibility for the improvements However, certain Development Agreement properties were acquired by other owners If the City fails to impose fees on these Holly Seacliff Others at the time of development, and reimburse these fees to PLC, the City has failed to use its best efforts to obtain such reimbursement under the terms of the Development Agreement While we appreciate the efforts of the Council Subcommittee and staff to better understand the complexities of these issues, PLC is anxious to bring a close to these discussions and proceed with the drafting of an equitable reimbursement agreement 3 P 11 C In an effort to quickly and fairly resolve the above issues, we have attached an outline detailing the steps we feel the City needs to take to comply with their obligations under the terms of the General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Agreement for the Holly Seacliff area We will reserve comment on arterial roadway improvements, right of way acquisition, and Fire & Police facilities pending Boyle's review Sincerely, 4j,,� 4 tt 6 Christopher C Gibbs President Attachment cc Mayor Ralph Bauer City Councilmembers Mike Uberuaga, City Administrator Gail Hutton, City Attorney Les Jones, Public Works Director Bob Eichblatt, City Engineer Ziyad Abduljawad Daren Groth Bill Holman Dave Walden John Erskine 4 PIC HOLLY SEACLIFF CONSTRUCTION FINANCING COMMITTEE PLC RECOMMENDATIONS JUNE 10, 1997 SEWER IMPROVEMENTS • Respread Reaches 3 and 7 based on ownership table provided May, 13, 1997. • Approve reimbursement agreement(s) for construction of these reaches (Reach 7 to be constructed in summer 1997) and Reaches 4 & 5 (already constructed) • Reimburse PLC for fees collected from developments served by these reaches STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS • Respread Reaches 2-6 & 8-9 based on ownership table provided May 13, 1997 • Approve reimbursement agreement(s) for construction of these reaches • Reimburse PLC for fees collected from developments (including PLC's) served by these reaches • In lieu of reimbursements, provide PLC a credit against drainage fees due at final map approval WATER FACILITIES • Establish a cap of $7,680,000 for PLC's fair share of water system improvements This amount could be subject to future adjustment if the City's water capital facilities fee is adjusted • Collect the water capital facilities fee from Holly Seacliff Others owners of property covered by the Development Agreement as detailed on the ownership table provided May 13, 1997 Amend Development Agreement language if necessary • Approve reimbursement agreement for the construction of water facilities (construction planned to commence in 1997) • If facilities costs exceed $7,680,000, reimburse PLC from water capital facilities fees collected from new development, including Holly Seacliff Others, Oceancrest, Meadowlark, Atlanta/Lake, Palm & Goldenwest, etc REIMBURSEMENT MECHANISM Approve reimbursement agreement(s) with PLC for specific improvements, prior to construction where possible, including estimated construction costs and determination of excess capacity Actual costs to be determined upon completion City to impose and collect impact fees (sewer fees, drainage fees, water capital facilities fees, etc ) from developers at the time of development No assessment district, reimbursement district, or Mello -Roos district is proposed Upon collection of developer fees, City to reimburse PLC per terms of reimbursement agreement gA,G' Ck bhl tip VIF CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH INTER -DEPARTMENT COMMUNICATION HUNTINGTON BEACH TO: Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator FROM: Gail Hutton, City Attorney DATE: June 17, 1997 SUBJECT: HOLLY-SEACLIFF DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT: Responsibility of MS Vickers to pay water connection fees and/or liability for certain off -site construction costs. BACKGROUND: The city in 1990 entered into the Holly Seacliff Development Agreement (herein as the "Agreement") (pursuant to Article 2 5 of the Government Code) with the Pacific Coast Homes and Garfield Partners entities related to the Huntington Beach Company and Chevron USA (herein as "Chevron") The Agreement allows Chevron, in exchange for numerous concessions to the city's codes and regulations, to develop 545 acres in the city and convey certain off -site and on -site improvements to the city The cost of most off -site facilities would be borne by the developer and are required in any development with or without an agreement if required to serve the subdivision The purpose for having a development agreement is to assure the developer and the city that the property affected would be developed in a unified manner and that the rules would not be changed midstream. (See findings in Govt Code §65864 (a )and (b)) Inter alia, Chevron agreed to build a nine million gallon water reservoir in lieu of paying the City's water fee Chevron agreed to be reimbursed for excess capacity, if any, in accordance with the city's ordinance, which ordinance provides that the city would assess subsequent development fees to defray the excess cost The facility has yet to be built, although more than six years have elapsed In the interim, many building permits have been issued and homes built and sold. The city promised it would use its best efforts to see that reimbursement for such excess costs be sought from subsequent development of properties outside the project area. Chevron conveyed 50 acres to MS Vickers and the balance to PLC. At the same time, MS Vickers and PLC each sent to the City letters wherein PLC agreed to assume the obligations of MS Vickers as to the reservoir. )C Page 2 Holly Seacliff Michael T. Uberuaga PLC has now come to the city requesting that MS Vickers be assessed connection charges or water fees to be used for reimbursement of PLC. PLC contends that the Agreement has been changed by the letters exchanged between PLC and MS Vickers, and MS Vickers is now relieved of its obligations as to the reservoir. Further, PLC contends that MS Vickers is now outside the loop and the city should assess the fees. Whether or not any reimbursement will be owed PLC is now in question PLC indicates it will market all of the balance of the acreage to purchasers who will pay the off -site fee MS Vickers has offered the fees to the city and the fees were not accepted ISSUES: Administration has posed to the City Attorney the following questions (rephrased for clarity). Ouestion 1: Under what circumstances may the city, PLC and MS Vickers delete the 50 acres from the scope of the Agreement so as to transfer MS Vickers's obligations to PLC? Answer 1: The parties to a development agreement may mutually agree to amendment of a development agreement The current parties are the City, PLC, MS Vickers, and the other owners of property covered by the Agreement. However, Govt. Code §65868 which governs amendments to development agreements states that all of the provisions of Govt Code §65867.5 apply to such amendment That is the making of certain findings and adoption of an amendment ordinance. Ouestion 2: Is PLC alone responsible for all of the developer's responsibility under the agreement? Answer 2: No. The Agreement at Section 4.2 Assignments makes clear that all subsequent takers from Chevron shall take all of the rights and duties applicable to the property or any portion thereof until all the dedications and improvements are made This means that since the City cannot allocate or parcel out the costs of the reservoir project, all share equally in its costs Thus PLC, MS Vickers and all subsequent takers assume this burden. The Agreement was recorded as provided by statute. The terms of the Agreement are thus imposed on the world. These covenants run with the land and in effect make MS Vickers an obligor even though it has not executed the Agreement. 2 WSA/4-97Memos Holly doc Page 3 Holly Seacliff Michael T. Uberuaga Ouestion 3: May the City impose water fee requirements on MS Vickers? Answer 3: No, only if the Development Agreement were to be amended as above So long as the property is a part of the project, it is exempt from water fees. Ouestion 4: Since MS Vickers's property is burdened by the duty to perhaps construct excess capacity improvements, should it be included in the reimbursement scheme? Answer 4: No. Only if MS Vickers expends funds by constructing improvements is it entitled to reimbursement. Ouestion 5: What is the effect of the two letters9 Answer 5: As to the City no effect The Agreement provided that until the obligations of the developer are complete, all property owners in the project area are jointly and several liable for the dedications and the costs of the infrastructure These provisions are central to development scheme PLC and MS Vickers may arrange between themselves the liability for the contractual obligations but such agreement does not affect the City's rights in any way. ANALYSIS: We have reviewed the applicable law as well as the Agreement itself All of the questions are answered either in the Agreement or by reference to state law. Our conclusions are that: Chevron, without performing on its obligation to build the water reservoir and attendant facilities, conveyed fifty acres of the Property to the MS Vickers limited partnership. This act burdened MS Vickers with the all of the dedication requirements from the fifty acres and all of the common infrastructure requirements Chevron also conveyed the remainder to PLC Because the Development Agreement expressly provides in Section 4.2 that the right of Chevron to make an assignment (without imposing on all subsequent takers of any portion of the 545 acres the burdens of the Agreement) is not effective until all of the obligations and conditions are satisfied. This provision is made in the Agreement to obviate the obvious. that without such clause Chevron or an assignee of Chevron could sell off all of the property without building and dedicating the infrastructure leaving the City without any security and no reservoir. A development agreement may not be amended like an ordinary contract. A development agreement is subject to ordinance adoption WSA/4-97Memos Holly doc Page 5 Holly Seacliff Michael T. Uberuaga SUMMARY: PLC and MS Vickers are each jointly and severally liable for the dedications and infrastructure improvements until these obligations to the City have been met PLC may agree with MS Vickers to assume MS Vickers's obligations, but until the developer's obligations are satisfied, all owners of the property are obligated. Only by formal amendment of the Development Agreement and creation of an ordinance may the City agree to free MS Vickers from the obligations burdening its portion of the project area. Consequently, the City may not impose an obligation on MS Vickers to pay reimbursement fees which are assessed to subsequent development because MS Vickers is a developer covered by the Agreement, and whose obligation to provide infrastructure is satisfied by the terms of the Agreement. The right to reimbursement for the installation of excess capacity improvements may only be claimed by the entity advancing the costs for such improvements X�44%t:L GAEL HUTTON, City Attorney /sg Michael T Uberuaga, City Administrator WSA/497Memos Holly doc CITY OF HU_ NTINGTON BEACH INTERDEPARTMENTAL. COMMUNI'.CATION ..r TO: Council Sub -Committee on Holly/Seacliff Reimbursement FROM: Robert E. Eichblatt, City Engineer G� SUBJECT: Meeting of July 1, 1997 between PLC and City Staff/ Holly-Seacliff Reimbursement DATE: July 2, 1997 On Tuesday, July 1, 1997, City staff members met with Bill Holman of PLC to discuss differences between the Boyle report and the position of PLC regarding reimbursement issues. The results of the meeting were as follows: 1. Reimbursement Mechanism -- PLC and City staff are in agreement regarding the method whereby PLC shall be reimbursed. This method as recommended in the Boyle report with no new fees. 2. Sewer Reimbursement -- PLC and City staff are in general agreement on this issue. 3. Drainage Reimbursement -- PLC and City staff are in general agreement on this issue. 4. Fire and Police Facility Reimbursement — PLC and City staff are in general agreement on this issue. 5. Arterial Highway Reimbursement --.PLC and City staff are in general agreement on this issue. However, it is PLC's contention that the City-wide Traffic Impact Fee should be raised to the full amount of $150 per trip to coincide with the fee identified within the Holly/Seacliff Development Agreement. 6. Water Reservoir, Pumping Facility and Well Reimbursement -- The City's position and Boyle's findings are and have been that the "Developer" of the Holly/Seacliff Project, per the Development Agreement is required to construct a 9 million gallon reservoir, pump station and well, including the cost of the land. PLC's current position is that the "Developee' shall fund said facilities at a cost not to exceed 3780 equivalent dwelling units at $2400 per dwelling unit (per the Water Master Plan and Financing Plan), or $9,072,000. PLC's definition of "Developer" includes PLC and MSVickers. PLC's share of the not to exceed cost would be 3200 equivalent dwelling units at $2400, or $7,680,000. The remainder of the responsibility would belong to MSVickers. It should be noted however, that the Requests for Council Action, dated February 26, 1996 and May 6, 1996 (copies attached) which both discuss conveyance of the land, both indicate that responsibility for all infrastructure remains with PLC. ,2-D 0026451 01 Meeting of July 1, 1997 between PLC and City Staff ' July 2, 1997 Page Two Our City Attorney has issued a legal opinion which places the total responsibility for the reservoir, pumping facility and well with PLC. Any share of that cost to be allocated to MSVickers would be resolved separately between the two firms. When the property was sold by Seacliff partners to PLC and MSVickers, in the Request for City Council action, the cost of the reservoir, pumping facilities and well were identified at $12,500,000. Boyle Engineering contends that the total cost of such facilities will be considerably lower than that figure. PLC is interested in setting a cap for their responsibility for these facilities and requesting that the City intervene between them and MSVickers to determine fair share. The City staff, however, is standing by the language of the development agreement and the current direction of the City Attorney. At any rate, City staff and Boyle's position is that none of the other landowners within the Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan Area have any responsibility for said facilities. PLC, apparently, doesn't appear to dispute this issue. REE Attachments xc. Michael T. Uberuaga, City Administrator Ray Silver, Assistant City Administrator 0026451.01 / REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION STING DATE: February 20, 1996 DEPARTMENT 1D � JJMBER: CD 96-02 Recommended Action: Motion to: "Pursuant to Section 4.2 of the Holly Seacliff Development Agreement, approve the request by Chevron Land and Development Company for the Cit Council to provide consent for the pending sale of properties to PLC/MS Vickers, L.P.ff ith the requirement that PLC will assume all responsibilities for community improvements as required by the development agreemenfland execute the Certificate of Consent to the Sale of Property and the Assumption of Rights Duties and Obligations." Alternative Action: The City Council may make the following alternative motion: "Continue the request for consent for the pending sale of properties in the Holly Seacliff Development Agreement area and direct staff accordingly." Analysis: A. PROJECT PROPOSAL: Applicant: Pacific Coast Homes Location: Approximately 450 acres located between Ellis Avenue on the north, Huntington Street on the east, Edwards Street on the west and the Seacliff Golf Course on the south. B. BACKGROUND: On November 5, 1990, the City Council adopted the Holly Seacliff Development Agreement for the properties owned by Chevron Land and Development Company in the Holly Seacliff area. The development agreement requires the Developer to provide street and landscaping improvements, dedication of over 41 acres of land for the Linear Park and local parks, fees for fire and police service and other public improvements. Chevron Land and Development Company and its wholly owned companies Huntington Beach Company, Pacific Coast Homes and Seacliff Partners, have complied with the requirements of the development agreement. Since 1990, the developer has prepared annual monitoring reports and staff has prepared annual compliance reports for the City Council. Each year, the Planning Commission and the City Council have accepted the compliance reports which have stated that the Developer and the City have been in compliance with the requirements of the development agreement. C096-02.00C -2- 0211319610:53 AM t t r` REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: May 6, 1996 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: CD 96-27 B. BACKGROUND: On February 20, 1996 the City Council approved the consent for the pending sale -of approximately 448 acres of property governed by the Development Agreement from Chevron Land and Development Company to PLC (Paclaco, Inc. and Paclaco Holdings, Inc.)/MS Vickers, L.P. (Morgan Stanley Real Estate). That sale was not successfully concluded, however, and subsequently, the PLC partnership was restructured. Section 4.2 of the Holly Seacliff Development Agreement requires the City Council to provide consent to the sale of the properties covered by the Development Agreement if the sale is to a party not affiliated with the Developer and if all public improvements have not been completed. While significant public improvements have been finished in the Holly Seacliff Development Agreement area, substantial improvements remain to be completed. Thus, the change in the sale requires City Council review and consent. C. STAFF ANALYSIS AND RECOMMENDATION: According to the letter from PLC dated April 23, 1996, Tiger Real Estate Fund, L.P. and I_ennar Corporation have formed a Delaware limited liability company, T/L Huntington :ach, L.L.C., which will be a general partner to PLC with a two thirds interest. This entity will provide most of the debt financing that was offered by Wells Fargo Bank in the previous purchase agreement. The remaining one third interest in PLC will be held by Paclaco Inc. and PLC Holdings (Attachment No. 2). Tiger Real Estate Fund, L.P. is a real estate investment vehicle sponsored by Tiger Real Estate Partners, L.L.C. and Tiger Management Corporation. Its investors include pension funds, endowments and foundations. Lennar Corporation is a publicly traded, national real estate company with developments in Florida, Texas and Arizona. Attachment No. 3 provides a description of each entity. The pending purchase agreement differs from the previous agreement, consented to by the City Council, in three respects: 1) composition of PLC, as described above; 2) financing terms - with the substitution of T/L Huntington Beach, L.L.C. for Wells Fargo Bank; and 3) assignment of interests from MS Vickers, L.P. to MS Vickers II, L.L.CEResponsibility for soil remediation and completion of public improvements remains unchanged from the previous purchase agreement and rests with PLC. Staff has prepared a table, shown on the following pages, comparing the previous and pending sale. Prior to the action by the City Council on February 20, 1996, the City Attorney determined that all of the obligations of the development agreement run with the land covered by the velopment agreement and with the buyers. The City Attorney has prepared a Certificate _. Consent Agreement (Attachment No. 4) which will be signed by the seller, the buyers and the City if consent is provided for the pending sale. C1396-27.130C -3- 05/02/96 11:59 AM MEMORANDUM TO: Les Jones, Director of Public Works Bob Eichblatt, City Engineer FROM: Victor Opincar Boyle Engineering Corporation SUBJECT: Holly/Seacliff Review of PLC's June 11, 1997 Letter Regarding Their Recommendations for Sewer, Storm Drains, Water Facilities, Traffic Improvements, and Reimbursement Mechanism July 8, 1997 PLC's June 11, 1997 letter to Ray Silver had an attachment dated June 10, 1997, entitled "Holly Seacliff Construction Financing Committee PLC's Recommendations." We have the following comments on the points made in this attachment. PLC RECOMMENDATIONS BOYLE'S COMMENTS SEWER 1WROVEMENTS • Respread Reaches 3 & 7 based on ownership table Reach 3 is included in Boyle's analysis for provided May 13, 1997. reimbursement by Holly/Seacliff Others (HSO). Reach 7 conveys Developer generated flows only and is not eligible for reimbursement. • Approve reimbursement agreement(s) for Reaches 4 and 5 conveyed flows prior to the construction of these reaches (Reach 7 to be construction of either reach, therefore, PLC is not constructed in summer 1997) & Reaches 4 & 5 eligible for reimbursement (already constructed) • Reimburse PLC for fees collected from PLC is eligible for reimbursement of Reach 3 per the developments served by these Reaches. Development Agreement. STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS • Respread Reaches 2-6 & 8-9 based on owner- Reimbursement for storm drains will only be from ship table provided May 13, 1997. HSO, excluding any property in the original Developer Agreement (now PLC an MS Vickers). • Approve reimbursement agreement(s) for Reimbursement for storm drains will only be from construction of these Reaches HSO, excluding any property in the original Developer Agreement (now PLC an MS Vickers). 2[- OC-B99-190-00//PLC-REV2 DOC /30VLE July 8, 1997 Page 2 PLC RECOMMENDATIONS BOYLE'S COMMENTS • Reimburse PLC for fees collected from Reimbursement for storm drains will only be from developments (include. PLC's) served by HSO, excluding any property in the original Developer these Reaches. Agreement (now PLC an MS Vickers). The City is not responsible to collect fees from properties specified in the Development Agreement as S/P - Seacliff Partners • In lieu of reimbursements, provide PLC a credit The Development Agreement does not include against drainage fees due a final map provisions for the Developer to receive credits for fees. approval WATER FACILITIES • Establish a cap of $7,680,000 for PLC's fair share The Agreement does not specify a "cap". The of water system improvements This amount Developer's agreed to "buy -in" to the water system by could be subject to future adjustment If the City's constructing specified facilities water capital facilities fee is adjusted. • Collect the water capital facilities fee from Holly The Developer's "buy -in" to construct facilities was "in Seacliff Others owners of property covered by the Lieu" of paying approximately $10 million in water Development Agreement as detailed on the system capital facilities fees ownership table provided May 13, 1997 Amend Development Agreement language If necessary. As an alternative, City could condition all projects on DA property to demonstrate compliance with obligation (1 a assumption of construction obligation or payment of fees to PLC) prior to issuance of permits • Approve reimbursement agreement forth There is no excess capacity to be dealt with on the buy - construction of water facilities (construction In cost to the City's water system, thus PLC is not planned to commence in 1997). eligible for reimbursement. • If facilities costs exceed $7,680,000, reimburse The City should not consider capping PLC at PLC from water capital facilities fees collected $7,680,000 based on Boyle's analysis. from new development, including Holly Seacliff Others, Oceancrest, Meadowlark, Atlanta/Lake, Palm & Goldenwest, etc TRAFFIC IMPRO MEN • City has already approved a Traffic Impact Fee Credit and Reimbursement Agreement with PLC. • City should increase citywide traffic impact fee This is a City Council policy decision that would be from $75 per trip to $150 per trip based on an analysis per AB 1600 that is not a part of the Development Agreement. OC-1399-190-00//PLC-REV2 DOC 13OWLE July 8, 1997 Page 3 PLC RECOMMENDATIONS BOYLE'S COMMENTS • City should continue to collect traffic impact fees This is a City Council decision that would be from new development and reimburse PLC for _policy based on an analysis per AB 1600 that is not a part of supplemental capacities the Development Agreement. REIMBURSEMENT MECHANISM • Approve reimbursement agreement(s) with PLC Boyle agrees with PLC's recommendation. for specific improvements, prior to construction where possible, including estimated construction costs and determination of excess capacity. Actual costs to be determined upon completion • City to impose and collect impact fees (sewer The Development Agreement is the only contract fees, drainage fees, water capital facilities fees, between the City and the Developer for a specified area etc ) from developers at the time of development. within the Holly/Seacliff Specific Plan. PLC assumed No assessment district, reimbursement district, or the responsibilities of the Developer when it took over Mello -Roos district is proposed the Agreement. • Upon collection of developer fees, City to The Development agreement gives specific guidelines reimburse PLC per terms of reimbursement on reimbursement to PLC agreement OC-B99-190-00//PLC-REV2 DOC 130VLE HOLLY SEACLIFF CONSTRUCTION FINANCING COMMITTEE_ PLC RECOMMENDATIONS JUNE 10, 1997 SEWER IMPROVEMENT Respread Reaches 3 and 7 based on ownership table provided May 13, 1997. Approve reimbursement agreement(s) for construction of these reaches (Reach 7 to be constructed in summer 1997) and Reaches 4 & 5 (already constructed). Reimburse PLC for fees collected from developments served by these reaches. STORM DRAIN IMPROVEMENTS • Respread Reaches 2-6 & 8-9 based on ownership table provided May 13, 1997. • Approve reimbursement agreement(s) for construction of these reaches. • Reimburse PLC for fees collected from developments (including PLC's) served by these reaches. • In lieu of reimbursements, provide PLC a credit against drainage fees due at final map approval. WATER FACILITIES • Establish a cap of $7,680,000 for PLC's fair share of water system improvements. This amount could be subject to future adjustment if the City's water capital facilities fee is adjusted. • Collect the water capital facilities fee from Holly Seacliff Others owners of property covered by the Development Agreement as detailed on the ownership table provided May 13, 1997. Amend Development Agreement language if necessapjW-As an alternative, City could condition all projects on DA property to demonstrate compliance with obligation (i.e. assumption of construction obligation or payment of fees to PLC) prior to issuance of permits.b)¢ • Approve reimbursement agreement for the construction of water facilities (construction planned to commence in 1997). • If facilities costs exceed $7,680,000, reimburse PLC from water capital facilities fees collected from new development, including Holly Seacliff Others, Oceancrest, Meadowlark, Atlanta/Lake, Palm & Goldenwest, etc. TRAFFIC IMPROVEMENTS • City has already approved a Traffic Impact Fee Credit and Reimbursement Agreement with PLC • City should increase citywide traffic impact fee from $75 per trip to $150 per trip - � 1 o V Nr7 • City should continue to collect traffic impact fees from new development and reimburse PLC for supplemental capacities REIMBURSEMENT MECHANISM Approve reimbursement agreement(s) with PLC for specific improvements, prior to construction where possible, including estimated construction costs and determination of excess capacity. Actual costs to be determined upon completion. City to impose and collect impact fees (sewer fees, drainage fees, water capital facilities fees, etc.) from developers at the time of development. No assessment district. reimbursement district. or Mello -Roos district is proposed. Upon collection of developer fees, City to reimburse PLC per terms of reimbursement agreement. 6 BOYLE ENGINEERING CORPORATION 1501 Quail Street TEL (714) 476-3301 Newport Beach, CA 92658-9020 FAX (714) 721-7482 FAX TRANSMITTAL To: Christopher Gibbs President and Bill Holman Company / Location: PLC Newport Beach Fax Number: 4) 729-1214 From: Victor Opincar Regional Vice President Date: Time: Total Pages: July 7, 1997 155 PM Subject: Holly/Seacliff Reimbursement Agreement Job Number: OC-B99-197-00 Please deliver these pages to Christopher Gibbs. If you have difficulty receiving this transmission or if any pages are missing or illegible, please call (714) 476-3301 and ask to speak to Victor Opincar. The information contained in this facsimile is intended only for the individual(s) named above It may contain information that is confidential or pnvileged If you are not an individual named above or the employee responsible for delivenng this information to that individual, you are hereby notified that any copying or distnbution of the information contained in this facsimile is stnctly prohibited If you have received this facsimile in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone at the number given above Thank you for your cooperation Comments: This is a follow-up to a voice mail left for Bill Holman on July 7, 1997 by me The message I left requested all of the actual cost on file with PLC for sewers, storm drains, and arterial roadways that would eligible for reimbursement per Boyle's June 9, 1997 report entitled "Holly/Seacliff Cost Reimbursement for Excess Capacity Task 2 Cost Analysis." The purpose of the request is to advance the reimbursement agreements between the City and PLC for review by the Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee for submittal to the Council workshop on August 25, 1997. Please call me if you wish to discuss in more detail at 714-476-3301 (pager 312-3193). Thank you. r OC-B99-197-00/F-PL0707 DOC ro) F10YLE E17G1r7EE1-?1r74S C01-?1-01-7r-17-1017 CONSULTING ENGINEERS Suite 300 1785 East Sahara Avenue 702 / 731 - 5511 Las Vegas, NV 89104 FAX 702 / 731 - 5095 Mr Bradley L Jacobs, Assessor of Orange County June 18, 1997 630 N Broadway Addition Santa Ana, CA 92702 PARCEL INFORMATION FOR THE HOLLY/SEACLIFF AREA The Holly/Seacliff Area is currently being analyzed for potential cost reimbursement to the developer (PLC) for the infrastructure PLC provided under the Development Agreement between the City of Huntington Beach and PLC Representatives of City of Huntington Beach, PLC, and Boyle Engineering Corporation attended the Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee meeting on June 17, 1997 The Committee requested parcel information necessary to complete the Holly/Seacliff Cost Reimbursement Analysis by July 8, 1997 This date requires that we establish an aggressive schedule to meet their demands To meet this schedule and avoid possible conflicts, we need and will appreciate receiving any parcel information you may have regarding the Holly/SeacliffArea no later then July 1, 1997 A map has been provided for your convenience We apologize for the short time frame If you should need additional information please contact me at GGOULD @ BOYLE ENGINEERING COM, phone 702/731-5511, or fax 702/731-5095 Boyle Engineering Corporation Assistant Engineer Enclosure Holly/Seacliff L% -SOS-009-97i<gg �c BOYLE ENGINEERING CORPORATION 1785 East Sahara Avenue, Suite 300 TEL 7021731-5511 Las Vegas, NV 89104 FAX 7021731-5095 FAX TRANSMITTAL To: Mr. Jack Adelman Company / Location: ORANGE COUNTY ASSESSORS OFFICE Fax Number: 714/834-3934 From: Greg A. Gould Project Engineer Date: Time: July 2, 1997 3:17 PM Total Number Of Pages (including this page): 2 Job Number: OC-S08-009-97 Please deliver these pages to Mr. Jack Adelman. If you have difficulty receiving this transmission or if any pages are missing or illegible, please call 702/731-5511 and ask to speak to Greg Gould The information contained in this facsimile is intended only for the individual(s) named above. It may contain information iat is confidential or privileged. If you are not an individual named above or the employee responsible for delivering this information to that individual, you are hereby notified that any copying or distribution of the information contained in this facsimile is strictly prohibited. If you have received this facsimile in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone at the number given above. Thank you for your cooperation. Other Comments: Jack, Attached is a copy of the Holly/Seacliff Area Specific Plan (outlined area) per your request. Please include parcel numbers for the Ellis-Goldenwest Specific Plan Area as well. If you have any questions please feel free to call me. You effort in this matter is much appreciated. ml MI CD Ml-0-CD ml Of R 2 RA-0 w4w 11 Y RA-0-CD M2-0 PA- 0 OP RA ELLIS-GOLDENWEST SPECIFIC PLAN k* 0 -0 �7 wl a MI-01 cc to —1 RA-01-CZ, A.-O, MI-0 I . OF c, p Op � CC_cz G.;;;Id A.f�2 RA 01 -C ' R 4 - 0 r i. CI-0 I I u ml j R2 2 01 RA-0 R2 R MI -A "'.sF: c v. I�(— _ \ ..�J — —RA 0' 2 at Ros-t., N M2 01 -00 ant am I 1121 R R4 C2-0 All !C C*y A' ROS-0 RI I tea'._ RZ-O PO I 6f, Al;' R2 0 R4 Ott al ni e Al C2-0-CD . C r 2-0 ROS-0 'my 0 PO Into __r6 0 !Op-0 • V.-J 0 co y lo RCIS-0 C -C OP-0-CD R2 0 PD-cDl.f to ar al *a .01 .: :rof' " t nl al i C R4 01 _71 1. A CF- .1 'R,1.101 •'� .t CF-E-CD RZ 0-c0 0 cl ROS-0 10 CD r­i-c E—C, 'D - EXHIBIT 2 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH EXISTING ZON110,"' G-4LL.W-SE&UH F F nA R E /,—A\, SMECAR, V L A M 4, - BOYLE ENGINEERING CORPORATION 1785 East Sahara Avenue, Suite 300 TEL 7021731-5511 Las Vegas, NV 89104 FAX 702931-5095 FAX TRANSMITTAL To: Robert E. Eichblatt, City Engineer Company / Location: Department of Public Works 2000 Main Street P O Box 190 Fax Huntington Beach, CA 92648 714/374-1573 From: Greg Gould, E I.T. Assistant Engineer Date: Time: June 27, 1997 3:35 PM Total Number Of Pages (including this page: 2 Job Number: LV-S08-009-97 Please deliver these pages to Robert E. Eichblatt. If you have difficulty receiving this transmission or if any pages are missing or illegible, please call 7021731-5511 and ask to speak to Greg Gould. The information contained in this facsimile is intended only for the individual(s) named above. It may contain information hat is confidential or privileged If you are not an individual named above or the employee responsible for delivering this information to that individual, you are hereby notified that any copying or distribution of the information contained in this facsimile is strictly prohibited. If you have received this facsimile in error, please notify the sender immediately by telephone at the number given above. Thank you for your cooperation. Other Comments: It is my understanding that the County Assessors Office will not be releasing the revised parcel numbers until July 7, 1997. We will be unable to meet our commitment to have percentages per parcel by July 8, 1997, if we do not have the correct parcel information. Attached is a draft letter for you and Les Jones per your request. By mistake, I had sent this letter under Boyle letter head to the County Assessors Office today. To eliminate confusion, please call the Assessor and ask him to disregard the letter I sent. Please call me if you have any questions. Thanks. MEMORANDUM TO. Vic Opincar July 7, 1997 FROM- Greg Gould SUBJECT ASSESSOR PARCEL MAPS FOR THE HOLLY SEACLIFF AREA On June 18, 1997, I had sent a letter to Mr Bradly Jacobs, Assessor of Orange County, requesting parcel maps with the latest revisions for the Holly/Seacliff Area Furthermore, I had faxed a copy of this letter to Bob Eichblatt, City Engineer for the City of Huntington Beach Listed below are calls received from the Assessors Office of Orange County July 2, 1997 Mr Jack Adelman (714/834-2415) calls to request another map of the Holly/Seacliff Area I explained to him that we have an aggressive schedule to meet and that any information we could receive would be helpful Mr Adelman said he would call me back as soon as possible July 3, 1997 Mr Mike Haumans (714/834-5674) calls to try and help us with our needs I explained that I had talked to Mr Adelman and have herd no response Mr Haumans explained that the only person that could assist us with parcel maps is Mr Webster Guillory from Management Services -Assessors Office of Orange County July 3, 1997 I called Mr Webster Guillory (714/834-2734) and left two messages with his secretary Mr Guillory has failed to return my phone calls It is unclear at this time when the Assessors Office of Orange County will release these maps to us According to John Sanches, City of Huntington Beach-GIS, the Assessors Office should have released the maps as of June 9, 1997 Therefore, we have been unsuccessful to meet our obligations to the City of Huntington Beach OC-S08-009-97/gg SO42E Appendix I Holly/Seacliff Briefing #6 for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee August 12, 1997 OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC BOWLE Hollv/Seacli*ff Stud Briefing #6 by Boyle Engineering Corporation Victor Opincar, PE Regional Vice President for the City of Huntington Beach Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee August 12, 1997 Page 1 Briefing Agenda + Ownership of Individual Parcels + Cost Reimbursement Agreement Elements - Outline of + Cost Spread by Parcel for Sewer in Steward Street • Methodology + Storm Drain Methodology + Arterial Street Methodology - Page 2 Holly/Seacliff Construction Financing Committee Cost Reimbursement Agreement Outline of Elements August 1, 1997 1. Definition of Facilities For Reimbursement Exlubit(s) showing location, size, length of facility and benefiting parcels. 2. Prior to Construction - Estimated Cost of Facility Estimated Construction cost with overhead allowance based on preliminary plans (or actual construction drawings). 3. Prior to Construction - Percentage Allocation to Individual Parcels Percentage allocation based on sizing criteria for type of facility for cost spread. Sewer - estimated flow generated by parcel based on City's land use plan Storm Drain - estimated runoff generated by parcel based on City's land use plan. Arterial - trip generation generated by parcel based on City's land use plan. 4. After Construction - Percentage allocations converted to cost per parcel based on actual cost data from Developer 5. Payment Mechanism - City collects money from parcels benefiting from facilities built and paid for by Developer and identified in the Reimbursement Agreement. Reimbursement can provide for cost increase to parcels at agreed upon interest rate to reimburse Developer for interest/inflation. 6. Reimbursement Time Period - Agreement between City and Developer should have a specified time period that the City agrees to collect money, after which the reimbursement agreement is null and void. Appendix J Holly/Seacliff Task I Assessment Report April 15, 1997 OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC SOWLE 1:30VLE E/'7G//'7EER//'7G CONSULTING ENOINEEREVAACHITECTS 1501 Quail Street P.O. Box 3030 714 / 476 - 3300 Newport Beach, CA 92658-9020 FAX 714 / 721 - 7142 Mr. Bob Eichblatt, City Engineer CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 Holly/Seacliff Cost Reimbursement Study for Excess Capacity Task I Assessment Report TASK I OBJECTIVE April 15, 1997 The objective of Task I was to determine basic findings from a review of the Develop- ment Agreement, past reports, correspondence, and other submittals by the Developer by performing the following analysis. a) Review the following: (1) Walden's December 19, 1997, report submitted by PLC entitled, 'Infrastructure Financing Program' and, (2) Willdan's January 18, 1994, "Engineers Report Holly/Seacliff Cost Reimbursement District No. 93-1. b) Meet with City Staff, City Administrator, Council Subcommittee (if requested) and PLC to determine the process for a cost analysis to achieve intent of the Holly/Seacliff Agreement (budgeted in Task 3). c) Summarize in letter report to City. The letter report will summarize findings with emphasis on inconsistencies (if any) and the validity of information developed to date. Development Agreement This agreement concerns a 545 acre area in Holly/Seacliff that guarantees development of up to 3780 residential units, 10 acres of commercial, and grants a credit for 35.6 acres of park land. The Development Agreement (DA) vests PLC's rights to develop a portion of the Holly/Seacliff area, requiring them to design and construct public facilities to serve the entire Holly/Seacliff area. The infrastructure includes arterial highways, traffic signals, storm drains, water facilities, sewer facilities, and police and fire facilities. The DA includes reimbursement to the Developer for excess capacity of public facilities. Mr. Bob Eichblatt April 15, 1997 Page 2 Water facilities to be constructed under the DA, in lieu of water connection fees, are considered in a special reimbursement clause. This clause states that, "Upon acceptance of these facilities by the City, the Public Works Director shall verify Developer's actual costs and determine Developer's Reimbursable Costs, subject to the provision in 2.2.11." It appears that the intent of the DA was to determine the reimbursement after construction, not before. A Fire/Medical facility is capped at $3,150,000 on an adjusted cost factor, and a Police facility is capped at $654,000 on the same cost adjustment factor. The Agreement gave the Developer the right to request the City to investigate various methods of cost reimbursement, including Assessment Districts, CFD's, Impact Fees, or a Reimbursement District. A Cost Reimbursement District analysis was completed by Willdan. Willdan's Study for a Cost Reimbursement District In reviewing Willdan's study for a Cost Reimbursement District, they followed typical assessment engineering procedures to spread project costs over properties based on the engineer's "formula" for the benefit to be received by individual land parcels. It is a defensible document as the engineer's assumptions and methodology are logically laid out for review. The current value of this study is that it shows how costs would be spread on a benefit basis to all the parcels within the Holly/Seacliff General Plan area, providing a benchmark for other cost allocation methods. We have comments on several areas that could be modified for a new cost allocation methodology. Cost Estimates for all the infrastructure had considerable overhead factors attached to the construction cost, driving up the apparent capital cost of the facilities. The approach taken was very conservative with a 44.2 % overhead factor veers a more typical 25% overhead factor. 2. Arterial Roadway Improvements, which had a $34 million cost estimate, differentiated the benefit from property on frontage roads ($3.1 million) from all other properties ($30.9 million). This methodology spread the arterial costs over many properties. It is possible that cost to individual properties can be reduced by reallocating cost for improvements needed specially for PLC's project. The incremental improvements needed to support full development of the Holly/Seacliff General Plan. 3. Right -of -Way costs for arterial roads were allocated to the property from which the right-of- way was to be acquired. Again, it could be argued that the right-of-way requirements to build out roads' benefits more than just the property from which the right-of-way must be taken, shifting costs over more properties. 4. Storm Drain benefits were based on nine drainage areas with the costs allocated on projected storm water runoff from the properties within the drainage area. \ Mr. Bob Eichblatt Page 3, April 15, 1997 5. Water Facility benefits were based on projected water consumption. The cost allocation did take into account the cost of water storage based on requirements for daily operations, emergency storage, and storage to sustain fire flows. Since water storage is the dominating cost factor in the water facilities, the cost allocation methodology needs to be re -visited 6. Sewer Facility costs were based on a share of the flow from property within sewerage collection areas. 7. Police and Fire facility costs we base on trip generation per day. 8. An Incidental Cost item of $100,000 was allocated over all the property equally. Walden's Cost Allocation Report After reviewing Walden's report and taking into account the previous cost allocation study by Willdan, the best course of action was to "test" Walden's cost allocation methodology for excess capacity in one of the infrastructure facilities. Although this is in Task 2 of the work plan, we proceeded with this approach to determine what kinds of inconsistencies (if any) were embedded in Walden's cost allocations for PLC. The allocation of costs for sewer facilities was chosen as the test case. After completing this analysis we have the following observations: Over five years has past since the Holly/Seacliff DA was signed, and sewer facilities have been constructed in areas covered by the DA. The actual sewer facilities constructed during this period of time are substantially different then those shown at the planning level in Walden's report, and this, in turn, has a substantial impact on cost allocations for excess capacity. 2. One of the major cost items is the relocation of a sewage lift station serving areas outside of the Holly/Seacliff area. The relocation was done for the convenience of PLC, freeing up land by removing existing easements and building new sewers in public streets. The relocation of this facility did not provide excess capacity for area's outside of the Holly/Seacliff area, eliminating reimbursement to provide continuing capacity from the abandoned lift station. Some reimbursement will come from excess capacity provided to an area within Holly/Seacliff that is outside of PLC's land. 3. In at least one case, an area was assumed in Walden's report to be contributing to common facilities serving PLC's land area, and excess capacity was provided in the cost allocations. However, upon closer review, the area could be provided sewer service with a less costly connection to an existing CSDOC sewer, thus eliminating the excess capacity from PLC's cost allocations. Mr. Bob Eichblatt April 15, 1997 Page 4 4. Eliminating provisions for excess capacity in the sewer by providing other viable alternatives increases costs to PLC by approximately 13% under this updated analysis. More refinements are underway. Recommendations Based on our review of excess capacity provided in Waldens' report for the sewer infrastructure, we believe that cost allocations for excess capacity will shift more cost to PLC for the -following reasons: (1) Refinements in the facilities constructed since the 1990 DA was signed and generalized planning was done by Walden, (2) Consideration of alternative methods to provide service to non -PLC properties within Holly/Seacliff and, (3) Re -allocation of costs for excess capacity that are fair for non -PLC properties. We anticipate use of the City's GIS system to provide clear and concise maps of the infra- structure and properties as a reference base that is easy to follow. If you have any questions or wish to discuss this in more detail, please don't hesitate to call. Boyle ngineering Corporation Victor ' c , PE Regional Vice President OC-B99-197-00/veo/rSK1497 DOC Appendix K Holly/Seacliff Sewer Analysis by Parcel OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC 13OWLE HOLLY/SEACLIf DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COSTS OF MAJOR SEWER FACILITIES AREA Qave TOTAL DIA. APPROX. PLC PER LOT FUT. Qave PROP. LENGTH REPORTED CONST.w PARCEL No. (AC) LANDUSE (MGD) (MGD) (IN) % Qave (FT) COSTAN. DIA.ILF. 111-140-16 099 I 00030 8 68 145 525 111-130-19 069 RM 00014 00044 8 32 145 525 j TOTAL 1 $6,090 111-140-16 099 I 00030 8 27 145 525 $1,630 111-130-19 069 RM 00014 8 13 145 525 $784 111-140-15 100 I 00030 8 27 145 525 $1,646 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 19 145 525 $1,136 111-130-18* 079 RM 00016 00111 8 15 145 525 $894 TOTAL $6,090 111-140-16 099 I 00030 8 16 109 525 $746 111-130-19 069 RM 00014 8 8 109 525 $359 111-140-15 100 1 00030 8 16 109 525 $753 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 11 109 525 $520 111-130-18* 079 RM 00016 8 9 109 525 $409 111-140-14 100 I 00030 8 16 109 525 $752 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 11 109 525 $520 111-130-18* 100 RM 00021 00182 8 11 109 525 $520 TOTAL $4,578 111-140-16 099 I 00030 8 15 36 525 $228 111-130-19 069 RM 00014 8 7 36 525 $109 111-140-15 100 I 00030 8 15 36 5.25 $230 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 10 36 525 $159 111-130-18* 079 RM 00016 8 8 36 525 $125 111-140-14 100 I 00030 8 15 36 525 $229 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 10 36 525 $159 111-130-18* 100 RM 00021 8 10 36 525 $159 111-140-29 025 I 00007 8 4 36 525 $57 111-140-30* 025 1 I 1 00007 00197 8 4 36 525 1 $57 TOTAL1 $1,512 HOLLY/SEACLIF DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COSTS OF MAJOR SEWER FACILITIES PARCEL No. AREA PER LOT (AC) LANDUSE Qave FUT. (MGD) TOTAL Qave (MGD) DIA. PROP. (IN) % Qave APPROX. LENGTH (FT) PLC REPORTED CONST. COSTIM DIAJLF. TOTAL COST 111-140-16 099 I 00030 8 12 36 525 $188 111-130-19 069 RM 00014 8 6 36 525 $91 111-140-15 100 I 00030 8 13 36 525 $190 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 9 36 525 $131 111-130-18* 079 RM 00016 8 7 36 525 $103 111-140-14 100 I 00030 8 13 36 525 $190 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 9 36 525 $131 111-130-18* 100 RM 00021 8 9 36 525 $131 111-140-29 025 I 00007 8 3 36 525 $47 111-140-30* 025 I 00007 8 3 36 525 $47 111-130-22 050 RM 00010 8 4 36 525 $65 111-130-21* 050 RM 00010 8 4 36 525 $66 111-130-17* 100 RM 0 0021 0 0239 8 9 36 525 $131 TOTAL $1,512 111-140-16 099 I 00030 8 12 109 525 $536 111-130-19 069 RM 00014 8 6 109 525 $258 111-140-15 100 I 00030 8 12 109 525 $542 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 8 109 525 $374 111-130-18* 079 RM 00016 8 6 109 525 $294 111-140-14 100 I 00030 8 12 109 525 $541 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 8 109 525 $374 111-130-18* 100 RM 00021 8 8 109 525 $374 111-140-29 025 1 00007 8 3 109 525 $135 111-140-30* 025 I 00007 8 3 109 525 $135 111-130-22 050 RM 00010 8 4 109 525 $187 111-130-21* 050 RM 00010 8 4 109 5.25 $187 111-130-17* 100 RM 00021 8 8 109 525 $373 111-140-28 025 I 00007 8 3 109 525 $135 111-140-31* 025 I 00007 00254 8 3 109 525 $135 TOTAL $4,578 HOLLY/SEACLIr DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COSTS OF MAJOR SEWER FACILITIES PARCEL Na. AREA PER LOT (AC) LANDUSE Qave FUT. (MGD) TOTAL Qave (MGD) DM PROP. (IN) % Qave APPROX. LENGTH (FT) PLC REPORTED CONST. COSTAN. DIAJLF. TOTAL COST 111-140-16 099 I 00030 8 9 145 525 $527 111-130-19 069 RM 00014 8 4 145 525 $253 111-140-15 100 I 8 9 145 525 $532 111-130-20 100 RM .00030 00021 8 6 1 145 525 $367 111-130-18* 079 RM 00016 8 5 145 525 $289 111-140-14 100 I 00030 8 9 145 525 $531 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 6 145 525 $367 111-130-18* 100 RM 00021 8 6 145 525 $367 111-140-29 025 I 00007 8 2 145 525 $132 111-140-30* 025 I 00007 8 2 145 525 $132 111-130-22 050 RM 00010 8 3 145 1 525 $183 111-130-21* 050 RM 00010 8 3 145 525 $184 111-130-17* 100 RM 00021 8 6 145 525 $366 111-140-28 025 I 00007 8 2 145 525 $132 111-140-31* 025 I 00007 8 2 145 525 $132 111-140-32 058 I 00017 8 5 145 525 $310 111-140-33* 041 1 00012 8 4 145 525 $221 111-130-23 100 I 00030 8 9 145 525 $532 111-130-16* 100 I 00030 00343 8 9 145 525 $532 TOTAL $6,090 HOLLY/SEACLIV DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COSTS OF MAJOR SEWER FACILITIES PARCEL No. AREA PER LOT (AC) LANDUSE Qave FUT. (MGD) TOTAL Qave (MGD) DIA, PROP. (IN) % Qave APPROX. LENGTH (FT) PLC REPORTED CONST. COSVIN. DIAJLF. TOTAL COST 111-140-16 099 I 00030 8 7 145 525 $417 111-130-19 069 RM 00014 8 3 145 1 525 $201 111-140-15 100 I 00030 8 7 145 5.25 $422 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 5 145 525 $291 111-130-18* 079 RM 00016 8 4 145 525 $229 111-140-14 100 I 00030 8 7 145 525 $421 '111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 5 145 525 $291 111-130-18* 100 RM 00021 8 5 145 525 $291 111-140-29 025 1 00007 8 2 145 525 $105 111-140-30* 025 I 00007 8 2 145 525 $105 111-130-22 050 RM 00010 8 2 145 525 $145 111-130-21* 050 RM 00010 8 2 145 525 $145 111-130-17* 100 RM 00021 8 5 145 525 $290 111-140-28 025 1 00007 8 2 145 525 $105 111-140-31* 025 I 00007 8 2 145 525 $105 111-140-32 058 I 00017 8 4 145 525 $246 111-140-33* 041 I 00012 8 3 145 525 $175 111-130-23 100 I 00030 8 7 145 525 $422 111-130-16* 100 1 00030 8 7 145 525 $422 111-140-32 058 1 00017 8 4 145 525 $246 111-140-33* 041 I 00012 8 3 145 525 $175 111-130-23 1.00 I 00030 8 7 145 525 $422 111-130-16* 1 00 I 00030 00433 8 7 145 525 $422 TOTAL 1 $6,090 HOLLY/SEACLIl DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COSTS OF MAJOR SEWER FACILITIES PARCEL No. AREA PER LOT (AC) LANDUSE Qave FUT. (MGD) TOTAL Qave (MGD) DIA. PROP. (IN) % Qave APPROX. LENGTH (FT) PLC REPORTED CONST. COSTAN. DIA.ILF. TOTAL COST 111-140-16 099 I 00030 8 6 116 525 $293 111-130-19 069 RM 00014 8 3 116 1 525 $141 111-140-15 100 I 00030 8 6 116 525 $296 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 4 116 525 $204 111-130-18* 079 RM 00016 8 3 116 525 $161 111-140-14 100 I 00030 8 6 116 �5 25 $296 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 4 116 525 $204 111-130-18* 100 RM 00021 8 4 116 525 $204 111-140-29 025 I 00007 8 2 116 525 $74 111-140-30* 025 I 00007 8 2 116 525 $74 111-130-22 050 RM 00010 8 2 116 525 $102 111-130-21* 050 RM 0 0010 8 2 116 525 $102 111-130-17* 100 RM 00021 8 4 116 525 $204 111-140-28 025 I 00007 8 2 116 525 $74 111-140-31* 025 I 00007 8 2 116 525 $74 111-140-32 058 1 00017 8 4 116 525 $173 111-140-33* 041 I 00012 8 3 116 525 $123 111-130-23 100 I 00030 8 6 116 525 $296 111-130-16* 100 I 00030 8 6 116 525 $296 111-140-32 058 I 00017 8 4 116 525 $173 111-140-33* 041 I 00012 8 3 116 525 $123 111-130-23 100 I 00030 8 6 116 525 $296 111-130-16* 100 I 00030 8 6 116 525 $296 111-140-32 058 1 00017 8 4 116 525 $173 111-140-33* 041 I 00012 8 3 116 525 $123 111-130-24 100 I 00030 00493 8 6 116 1 525 $296 TOTAL $4,872 HOLLY/SEACLII, DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COSTS OF MAJOR SEWER FACILITIES PARCEL No. AREA PER LOT (AC) LANDUSE Qave FUT. (MGD) TOTAL Qave (MGD) DIA. PROP. (IN) % Qave APPROX. LENGTH (FT) PLC REPORTED CONST. COSTAN. DIA./LF. TOTAL COST 111-140-16 099 I 00030 8 6 264 525 $622 111-130-19 069 RM 00014 8 3 264 525 $299 111-140-15 100 I 00030 8 6 264 525 $628 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 4 264 525 $433 111-130-18* 079 RM 00016 8 3 264 525 $341 111-140-14 100 1 00030 8 6 264 525 $627 111-130-20 100 RM 00021 8 4 264 525 $433 111-130-18* 100 RM 00021 8 4 264 525 $433 111-140-29 025 I 00007 8 1 264 525 $156 111-140-30* 025 I 00007 8 1 264 5.25 $156 111-130-22 050 RM 00010 8 2 264 525 $216 111-130-21* 050 RM 00010 8 2 264 525 $217 111-130-17* 100 RM 00021 8 4 264 525 $432 111-140-28 025 I 00007 8 1 264 525 $156 111-140-31* 025 I 00007 8 1 264 525 $156 111-140-32 058 I 00017 8 3 264 525 $366 111-140-33* 041 I 00012 8 2 264. 525 $260 111-130-23 100 I 00030 8 6 264 525 $628 111-130-16* 100 I 00030 8 6 264 525 $628 111-140-32 058 I 00017 8 3 264 525 $366 111-140-33* 041 1 00012 8 2 264 525 $260 111-130-23 100 I 00030 8 6 264 525 $628 111-130-16* 100 1 00030 8 6 264 525 $628 111-140-32 058 I 00017 8 3 264 525 $366 111-140-33* 041 1 00012 8 2 264 525 $260 111-130-24 100 I 00030 8 6 264 5 25 $627 111-140-32 006 I 00002 8 0 264 525 $38 111-140-33* 055 I 0001 8 3 264 525 $342 111-130-25 061 I 0 0018 0 0530 8 3 264 525 $380 TOTAL $11,087 HOLLY/SEACLIF DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COSTS OF MAJOR SEWER FACILITIES PARCEL No. TOTAL COST PER LOT % TOTAL COST 111-140-16 $9,299 18 111-130-19 $4,473 9 111-140-15 $5,239 10 111-130-20 $6,094 12 111-130-18* $5,324 10 111-140-14 $3,587 7 111-140-29 $706 1 111-140-30* $706 1 111-130-22 $898 2 111-130-21* $901 2 111-130-17* $1,796 3 111-140-28 $602 1 111-140-31* $602 1 111-140-32 $2,457 5 111-140-33* $2,062 4 111-130-23 $3,224 6 111-130-16* $3,224 6 111-130-24 $923 2 111-130-25 $380 1 TOTAL $52,497 100 *LOT IS NOT LOCATED ALONG STEWART STREET Appendix L Holly/Seacliff Storm Drain by Parcel OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC I30VLE HOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, ,TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT `** UNIT CONST TRIB LAND TOTAL 'o DIA APPROX ESTIMATED JEST COST COST COST COST % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST_ PLUS20°/ FOR FOR FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAlD PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) C AT AREA (IN) (LF) COSTIIN D1AA,F COSTIIN DI ILF 24 IN 36 IN 42 IN COST COST 9 A 111-130-22 RM 050 08 039992 25 55 22 1219 087 2 24 28 $2 92 $3 50 $42 52 S93 72 $1,715 96 $1,852 20 2 A 111-130-21 RM 050 08 04 2 36 48 $2 50 S3 00 $42 53 $93 74 $1,716 31 $1,852 57 2 A 111-130-20 (2) RM 200 08 16 7 42 791 S2 38 $2 86 $170 11 5374 94 $6,865 23 $7,410 28 7 A 111-130-19 RM 069 08 0 5536 3 $59 86 $129 73 52,375 37 52,563 96 3 A Stewart St PAV 1 24 09 1 116 5 $118 65 $261 52 $4,788 50 $5,168 67 5 A Garfield Ave PAV 061 09 05454 2 S57 99 $127 81 $2,340 IS 52,525 98 2 A 111-140-09 1 0 17 09 0 1494 1 $15 88 $35 Ol 5641 04 5691 93 1 A 111-140-08 I 0 17 09 0 1503 1 $15 98 $35 22 $644 90 $696 10 1 A 111-140-07 (2) 1 033 09 02988 1 S31 77 S70 02 $1,282 08 $1,383 87 1 A 111-140-06 (2) 1 033 09 02988 1 $31 77 S70 02 $1,282 O8 $1,383 87 1 A 111-140-05 1 0 17 09 0 1494 1 $15 88 $35 Ol $641 04 $691 93 1 A 111-140-04 I 0 17 09 0 1494 1 S15 88 $35 Ol 5641 04 $691 93 1 A 111-140-37 1 0 17 09 0 1494 1 $15 88 $35 Ol 5641 04 $691 93 1 A 111-140-36 1 008 09 00747 0 $7 94 $17 51 $320 52 $345 97 0 A 111-140-02 1 008 09 00747 0 $7 94 $17 51 $320 52 5345 97 0 A 111-140-38(-Ol) (2) I 033 09 02988 1 $31 77 $70 02 $1,282 O8 51,383 87 1 A 111-140-10 1 014 09 0 1233 1 $13 11 $28 89 $529 05 $571 05 1 A 111-140-33 (4) 1 1 79 09 1 6146 7 5171 66 $378 36 $6,927 87 $7,477 90 7 A 111-140-26 1 035 09 03177 1 $33 78 $74 45 $1,363 18 $1,471 40 1 A 111-140-27 1 026 09 02313 1 $24 59 $54 20 $992 45 $1,071 25 1 A 111-140-32 (4) 1 181 09 1 6263 7 5172 91 $381 10 $6,978 07 57,532 09 7 A 111-140-25 1 1 00 09 08973 4 $95 40 $210 27 $3,850 It $4,155 78 4 A 111-140-24 1 100 09 08973 4 $95 40 $210 27 $3,850 11 $4,155 78 4 A 111-140-23 1 100 09 08973 4 $95 40 5210 27 $3,850 11 54,155 78 4 A 111-140-28 1 025 09 02241 1 S23 83 $52 52 $961 56 51,037 90 i A 111-140-31 1 025 09 0 2241 1 $23 83 $52 52 $961 56 51,037 90 1 A 111-140-29 1 025 09 02241 1 $23 83 S52 52 $961 56 51,037 90 1 A 111-140-30 1 025 09 02241 1 S23 83 $52 52 $961 56 $1,037 90 - 1 A 111-140-20 1 020 09 0 1791 1 $19 04 $41 97 $768 48 $829 49 1 A 111-140-21 1 050 09 04473 2 $47 56 $104 82 $1,919 26 52,071 64 2 A 111-140-22 1 030 09 027 1 $28 71 $63 27 51,158 51 $1,250 48 1 A 111-140-14 1 100 09 08982 4 $95 50 $210 48 $3,853 97 54,159 95 4 A 111-140-19 1 097 09 08685 4 S92 34 $203 52 $3,726 53 $4,022 39 4 A Crystal St PAV 1 72 09 1 5471 7 $164 49 $362 54 $6,638 25 $7,165 28 7 A 111-150-13 RM 017 08 01328 1 $1412 $3112 $56981 561505 I A 111-150-15 RM 069 08 0 553 2 $58 69 $129 35 $2,368 50 52,556 55 2 A 111-150-16 RM 069 08 0 552 2 $58 69 $129 35 $2,368 50 $2,556 55 2 A 111-150-17 (2) RM 1 38 08 1 104 5 $117 38 $258 71 $4,737 Ol $5,113 09 5 A 111-150-18 RM 077 08 06176 3 $65 66 $144 73 $2,649 98 $2,860 37 3 A 111-150-19 RM 050 08 04008 2 $42 61 $93 92 $1,719 74 $1,856 27 2 A 111-150-20 RM 044 08 03496 2 $37 17 $81 92 $1,500 05 $1,619 15 2 A 111-150-21 RM 037 08 02928 1 S31 13 S68 61 $1,256 34 $1,356 08 1 7OTAL 100 00 TOTAL 5102,456 00 100 HOLLY/SEACL `EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA., eTROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT »»` EST UNIT CONST TRIB LAND TOTAL I °6 DIA APPROf. ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREA ID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) ?-AC AT AREA (1N) (LF) COSTJN DIA /LF COSTAN DIA /LF 181N COST COST 3 B 1 111-120-20 (2) 1 023 09 0207 138 1 2384 090 17 18 27 $3 33 $4 00 $327 95 $327 95 17 Bl i11-120-19 1 012 09 01035 8 $16398 $16398 8 Bl 111-120-18 1 012 09 01035 8 $16398 S16398 8 B1 111-120-17 1 012 09 01044 8 $16540 S16540 8 Bl 111-120-16 (1/2) 1 012 09 0 1044 8 S165 40 $165 40 8 ' Bl Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 38 $745 73 $745 73 38 Bl Stewart St PAV 016 09 0 1449 12 S229 57 S229 57 12 TOTAL 100 TOTAL S1,962 00 100 LOT LOT EST UNIT CONST TRIB LAND TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS W/o FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) GOEF AG (ACRE) Y-AC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COSTIIN DIAJLF COSTAN DIA tLF 24 IN COST COST 3 B2 111-130-01 1 0 17 09 01503 562 50562 090 3 24 88 $2 92 $3 50 $219 73 $219 73 3 B2 111-130-02 (2) 1 025 09 02241 4 $327 63 $327 63 4 B2 11 I-130-26 (2) I 025 09 02241 4 $327 63 S327 63 4 B2 111-130-05 I 015 09 01305 3 S19079 $19079 3 B2 111-130-06 I 0 17 09 0 1494 3 S218 42 $218 42 3 B2 111-130-27 1 007 09 00612 1 $89 47 S89 47 l B2 111-130-25 1 061 09 05454 11 $797 36 S797 36 l l B2 111-130-24 1 1 00 09 08991 18 $1,314 45 $1,314 45 18 B2 111-130-23 (2) 1 200 09 1 7991 36 $2,630 23 $2,630 23 36 B2 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 9 $688 15 $688 15 9 B2 Stewart St PAV 045 09 04023 8 $588 15 $588 15 8 TOTAL 100 TOTAL 57,392 00 A, LOT LOT ^* EST UNIT CONST TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST TRIG LAND TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF JTOTALJ EX L CONST- PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF All (ACRE) F-AC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COSTIIN DIA /LF I COST/IN DIA /LF 27 IN COST COST 3 (Bl&B2) B1 111-120-20 (2) I 023 09 0207 699 62946 090 3 27 524 $2 78 $3 33 $1,551 17 $1,551 17 3 B1 111-120-19 1 0 12 09 01035 2 $775 58 S775 58 2 Bl 111-120-18 1 0 12 09 01035 2 $775 58 S775 58 2 Bl 111-120-17 1 0 12 09 0 1044 2 S782 33 $782 33 2 Bl 111-120-16 (1/2) 1 0 12 09 0 1044 2 $782 33 $782 33 2 BI Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 7 S3,527 22 S3,527 22 7 Bl Stewart St PAV 0 16 09 01449 2 S1,085 82 $1,085 82 2 B2 111-130-01 I 017 09 01503 2 $1,12628 S1,12628 2 B2 111-130-02 (2) I 025 09 02241 4 S1,679 31 $1,679 31 4 B2 111-130-26 (2) I 025 09 02241 4 $1,679 31 $1,679 31 4 B2 111-130-05 1 0 15 09 01305 2 $977 91 $977 91 2 B2 111-130-06 1 017 09 01494 2 $1,11954 $1,11954 2 B2 111-130-27 1 007 09 00612 1 $458 61 $458 61 1 B2 111-130-25 1 061 09 05454 9 $4,086 99 S4,086 99 9 B2 111-130-24 1 100 09 08991 14 $6,737 47 $6,737 47 14 B2 111-130-23 (2) 1 200 09 1 7991 29 $13,481 67 $13,481 67 29 B2 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 7 $3,527 22 $3,527 22 7 B2 Stewart St PAV 045 09 04023 6 $3,014 66 $3,014 66 6 TOTAL 100 TOTAL 547,169 00 100 HOLLY/SEACI )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA STROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT "* EST UNIT CONST TOTAL o DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST TRIG LAND TRIBLTARY AREA USE AREA CQEF TOTAL EX L CONST_ PLUS ICOSVIN FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) CSC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COST/iN DIAJLF DIA ILF 24 IN COST COST 3 B3 111-130-07 I 0 17 09 0 1494 1095 94188 086 2 24 136 S2 92 $3 50 $18121 $18121 2 B3 111-130-08 1 017 09 01494 2 $18121 $18121 2 B3 111-130-09 (2) 1 033 09 02988 3 $362 41 $362 41 3 B3 111-130-10 I 017 09 01494 2 $18121 $18121 2 B3 111-130-11 1 008 09 00747 1 S9060 $9060 1 B3 111-130-12 1 008 09 00747 1 S90 60 S90 60 1 B3 111-130-28 I 007 09 00612 1 $74 23 S74 23 1 B3 111-130-14 1 061 09 0 5454 6 S661 51 S661 51 6 B3 111-130-15 1 100 09 08982 10 $1,089 42 $1,089 42 10 B3 111-130-16 (2) 1 200 09 1 7973 19 $2,179 93 $2,179 93 19 B3 111-130-17 RM 100 08 07984 8 $968 37 $968 37 8 B3 111-130-18 (2) RM 179 08 1 4296 15 $1,733 95 $1,733 95 15 B3 023-010-25 RM 151 08 1 2072 13 $1,464 20 $1,464 20 13 B3 023-010-26 RM 010 08 00832 1 $100 91 $100 91 1 B3 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 12 $1,417 99 $1,417 99 12 B3 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 6 $646 23 $646 23 6 TOTAL 100 TOTAL $11,424 00 100 TRIB LAND TOTAL % DIA, APPROX ESTIMATED TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX. L CONST- REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) SAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COST/IN DIA/LF 3 B4 110-200-32 (112) C 113 0 9 5 1447 122111 0114 42 18 36 $3 33 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) RM 5 73 08 4 38 24 39 $2 92 B4 110-200-30 RL 047 04 0 2 30 101 $3 14 B4 Golden West St PAV 130 09 1 16911 10 B4 Garfield Ave PAV 1 24 09 1 9 COST COST COST PLUS20% FOR FOR ! FOR TOTAL TOT, I COST/IN DIA iLF� ISIN 24 30 IN COST COS $4 00 $1,094 61 47 1$4,82439 $7,291 47 42 $3 50 $972 99 $1,219 97 $4,288 35 $6,481 31 38 $3 77 $39 63 �$1,372 $49 69 $174 66 S263 98 �$1,652 2 $24802 $31098 S1,09312 12 10 LOT LOT "' EST UNIT 13ONST TRIG LAND TOTAL % DIA APPROt ESTIMATED COST COST TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS FOR TOTAL T TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE} COEF AC (ACRE) SAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COST/IN DLllLF COST/IN DIA lI F 36IN COST COST 3 (B3&.B4) B3 111-130-07 1 0 17 09 0 1494 2543 21 6368 085 1 36 73 $2 50 S3 00 $54 43 $54 43 1 B3 111-130-08 1 0 17 09 0 1494 1 $54 43 $54 43 1 B3 111-130-09 (2) 1 033 09 02988 1 S 108 86 S 108 86 1 B3 111-130-10 1 017 09 01494 1 $54 43 $54 43 1 B3 111-130-11 1 008 09 00747 0 $27 22 $27 22 0 B3 111-130-12 1 008 09 00747 0 $27 22 $27 22 0 B3 111-130-28 I 007 09 00612 0 $22 30 $22 30 0 B3 111-130-14 I 061 09 05454 3 $19871 $19871 3 B3 111-130-15 1 100 09 08982 4 $327 24 $327 24 4 B3 111-130-16 (2) 1 200 09 1 7973 8 $654 81 $654 81 8 B3 111-130-17 RM 100 08 07984 4 $290 88 $290 88 4 B3 111-130-18 (2) RM 1 79 08 1 4296 7 $520 85 $520 85 7 B3 023-010-25 RM 151 08 1 2072 6 S439 82 $439 82 6 B3 023-010-26 RM 010 09 00932 0 $30 31 $30 31 0 B3 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 5 $425 94 $425 94 5 B3 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 2 $194 11 $194 11 2 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) C 5 73 09 5 1597 24 $1,879 83 $1,879 83 24 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) RM 5 73 08 4 5864 21 $1,670 96 $1,670 96 21 B4 110-200-30 RL 047 04 01869 1 $68 06 S68 06 1 B4 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 5 $425 94 $425 94 5 B4 Garfield Ave PAV 1 24 09 1 116 5 $406 59 $406 59 5 TOTAL 100 TOTAL, $7,882 92 100 HOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, STROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT `*• EST UNIT CONST TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST % 'DRIB LAND TI�SBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX- L CONST_ PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) ZAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COST/IN DIAILF COST/IN DIA ILF 36 IN COST COST 3 B1,2,3,4 B 1 11 I-120-20 (2) I 023 09 0207 3242 279314 086 1 36 916 $2 50 $3 00 $733 44 S733 44 1 BI 111-120-19 I 012 09 0 1035 0 $366 72 $366 72 0 Bl 111-120-18 1 012 09 01035 0 $366 72 $366 72 0 B1 111-120-17 1 012 09 01044 0 $36991 $36991 0 B1 111-120-16(1/2) 1 012 09 01044 0 $36991 $36991 0 BI Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 2 $1,667 79 $1,667 79 2 BI Stewart St PAV 0 16 09 0 1449 1 $513 41 $513 41 1 B2 111-130-01 1 0 17 09 0 1503 1 $532 54 $532 54 1 B2 111-130-02 (2) I 025 09 02241 1 $794 03 $794 03 1 B2 111-130-26 (2) I 025 09 02241 1 $794 03 $794 03 1 B2 111-130-05 I 015 09 0 1305 0 $462 39 $462 39 0 B2 111-130-06 1 0 17 09 01494 1 $529 36 $529 36 1 B2 111-130-27 I 007 09 00612 0 $216 84 $216 84 0 B2 111-130-25 I 061 09 05454 2 $1,932 47 $1,932 47 2 B2 111-130-24 1 100 09 08991 3 $3,185 70 $3,185 70 3 B2 111-130-23 (2) I 200 09 1 7991 6 $6,374 59 $6,374 59 6 B2 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 2 $1,667 79 $1,667 79 2 B2 Stewart St PAV 045 09 04023 1 $1,425 43 $1,425 43 1 B3 111-130-07 1 0 17 09 0 1494 1 $529 36 $529 36 1 B3 111-130-08 I 0 17 09 0 1494 1 $529 36 $529 36 1 B3 111-130-09 (2) I 033 09 02988 1 $1,058 71 $1,058 71 1 B3 111-130-10 1 017 09 0 1494 1 $529 36 $529 36 1 B3 111-130-11 I 008 09 00747 0 $264 68 $264 68 0 B3 111-130-12 I 008 09 00747 0 $264 68 $264 68 0 B3 111-130-28 I 007 09 00612 0 $216 84 $216 84 0 B3 111-130-14 1 061 09 05454 2 $1,932 47 $1,932 47 2 B3 111-130-15 1 100 09 08982 3 $3,18251 $3,18251 3 B3 111-130-16 (2) I 200 09 1 7973 6 $6,368 22 $6,368 22 6 B3 111-130-17 RM 100 08 07984 3 $2,828 90 $2,828 90 3 B3 111-130-18 (2) RM 1 79 08 1 4296 5 $5,065 38 $5,065 38 5 B3 023-010-25 RM 151 08 12072 4 $4,277 37 $4,277 37 4 B3 023-010-26 RM 010 08 00832 0 $294 80 $294 80 0 B3 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 4 $4,142 37 $4,142 37 4 B3 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 2 $1,887 82 $1,887 82 2 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) C 5 73 09 5 1597 18 $18,281 91 $18,281 91 18 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) RM 5 73 08 4 5864 16 $16,250 59 $16,250 59 16 B4 110-200-30 RL 047 04 0 1868 1 $661 87 $661 87 1 B4 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 4 $4,142 37 $4,142 37 4 134 Garfield Ave PAV 1 24 09 1 116 4 $3,954 22 $3,954 22 4 TOTAL 100 TOTAL $98,966 88 100 LOT LOT "' EST UNIT CONST ILANDUSEI(ACRE) TRIB LAND TOTAL DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COS' % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No CQEF AC ACRE) �C AT AREA (IN) LF') COSTIIN DIAAF COSTAN DIA /LF 1S IN COST COST 3 B5 111-120-16 (1/2) I 0 12 09 01044 822 739827 090 1 18 8 $3 33 $4 00 $8 13 $8 13 1 B5 111-120-15 I 012 09 0 1053 1 $8 20 $8 20 1 B5 111-120-14 1 0 12 09 0 1053 1 $8 20 $8 20 1 B5 111-120-13 1 0 12 09 0 1053 1 $8 20 $8 20 1 115 111-120-12 1 012 09 01053 1 $8 20 $8 20 1 B5 111-120-11 I 005 09 00432 1 $3 36 $3 36 1 B5 111-120-30 (1/2) 1 0 14 09 0 1233 2 $9 60 $9 60 2 135 111-120-09 1 081 09 07254 10 $56 48 $56 48 10 B5 111-120-08 1 1 00 09 08991 12 $70 00 $70 00 12 B5 111-120-07 I 093 09 08388 11 $65 31 $65 31 11 B5 111-120-06 1 093 09 08388 11 $65 31 $65 31 11 135 111-120-27 (2) 1 186 09 1 6731 23 $130 26 $130 26 23 B5 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 7 S41 48 $41 48 7 B5 Golden West St PAV 1 29 09 1 161 16 $90 39 $90 39 16 B5 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717, 1 $2 89 $2 89 1 TOTAL 100 TOTAL $576 00 100 IIOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT "" EST UNIT CONST TRIG LAND TOTAL % DIA APPRO7f ESTIMATED COST COST TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA OEF [AT TOTAL EX L CONST_ pLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) FAC AREA (IN) (LF) COST/IN DIA./LF COST/1N DIA /LF 42 IN COST COST 9 (131,2,3, BI 111-120-20 (2) 1 023 09 0207 4064 35 3297 087 1 42 87 $2 38 $2 86 $61 48 $61 48 1 4,5) B1 111-120-19 1 0 12 09 0 1035 0 $30 74 S30 74 0 B1 111-120-18 1 012 09 01035 0 S3074 $3074 0 B1 111-120-17 1 012 09 01044 0 $3101 $3101 0 B1 111-120-16(1/2) 1 012 09 01044 0 $3101 $3101 0 B1 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 1 $139 80 $139 80 1 BI Stewart St PAV 0 16 09 0 1449 0 $43 03 $43 03 0 B2 111-130-01 1 0 17 09 0 1503 0 $44 64 $44 64 0 B2 111-130-02 (2) I 025 09 02241 1 $66 56 S66 56 1 82 111-130-26 (2) 1 025 09 02241 1 $66 56 $66 56 1 B2 111-130-05 I 0 15 09 0 1305 0 $38 76 $38 76 0 B2 111-130-06 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $44 37 $44 37 0 B2 111-130-27 1 007 09 00612 0 $1818 $1818 0 B2 111-130-25 1 061 09 05454 2 $16198 $16198 2 B2 111-130-24 I 100 09 08991 3 $267 03 $267 03 3 B2 111-130-23 (2) I 200 09 1 7991 5 $534 33 $534 33 5 B2 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 1 $139 80 $139 80 1 B2 Stewart St PAV 045 09 04023 1 $119 48 $119 48 1 B3 111-130-07 I 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $44 37 $44 37 0 B3 111-130-08 1 017 09 0 1494 0 $44 37 $44 37 0 B3 111-130-09 (2) I 033 09 02988 1 $88 74 $88 74 1 B3 111-130-10 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $44 37 $44 37 0 B3 111-130-11 I 008 09 00747 0 $2219 $2219 0 B3 111-130-12 1 008 09 00747 0 $2219 $2219 0 B3 111-130-28 1 007 09 00612 0 $1818 $1818 0 B3 111-130-14 1 061 09 05454 2 S16198 $16198 2 B3 111-130-15 I 100 09 08982 3 S266 76 $266 76 3 B3 111-130-16 (2) I 200 09 1 7973 5 S533 79 $533 79 5 B3 111-130-17 RM 100 08 07984 2 $237 12 $237 12 2 B3 111-130-18 (2) RM 179 08 1 4296 4 $424 59 $424 59 4 B3 023-010-25 RM 1 51 08 1 2072 3 $358 53 $358 53 3 B3 023-010-26 RM 0 10 08 00832 0 $24 71 $24 71 0 B3 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 3 $347 22 $347 22 3 B3 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 2 $158 24 $158 24 2 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) C 573 09 5 1597 15 $1,532 41 $1,532 41 15 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) RM 5 73 08 45864 13 S1,362 15 $1,362 15 13 B4 110-200-30 RL 047 04 0 1868 1 $55 48 $55 48 1 B4 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 3 $347 22 $347 22 3 B4 Garfield Ave PAV 1 24 09 1 116 3 $331 45 $331 45 3 B5 111-120-16(1/2) I 012 09 01044 0 $3101 $3101 0 B5 111-120-15 1 012 09 01053 0 $31 27 $31 27 0 B5 111-120-14 1 0 12 09 0 1053 0 $31 27 S31 27 0 B5 111-120-13 I 012 09 01053 0 $31 27 $31 27 0 B5 111-120-12 I 0 12 09 0 1053 0 $31 27 $31 27 0 B5 111-120-11 1 005 09 00432 0 $1283 $1283 0 B5 111-120-30(1/2) 1 014 09 01233 0 S3662 $3662 0 B5 111-120-09 1 081 09 07254 2 $215 44 $215 44 2 B5 111-120-08 1 1 00 09 08991 3 $267 03 $267 03 3 B5 111-120-07 I 093 09 08388 2 $249 12 $249 12 2 B5 111-120-06 1 093 09 08388 2 $249 12 $249 12 2 B5 111-120-27 (2) 1 186 09 1 6731 5 $496 91 $496 91 5 B5 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 2 $15824 515824 2 B5 Golden West St PAV 1 29 09 1 161 3 S344 81 S344 81 3 B5 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717 0 Sl 1 04 $11 0 TOTAL 100 TOTAL 510,40492 80 100 HOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT *** EST UNIT CONST TOTAL 90 DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST COST % TRIB LAND TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA CQEF TQTAL EX L CONST PLUS 20°/ FOR EAR TQTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) SAC AT AREA (IN) (LF') COST/1NDIAJLF COSTlIIV D[A/LF 181N ?4IN COST COST 3 B6 111-120-26 1 1 00 09 08964 14 39 129502 090 7 18 40 $3 33 $4 00 $199 35 $720 99 $920 34 7 B6 11 I-120-25 1 100 09 08982 7 24 124 $2 92 $3 50 $199 75 $722 43 $922 18 7 B6 111-120-24 1 100 09 08982 7 S199 75 $722 43 $922 18 7 B6 111-120-23 I 100 09 08973 7 $199 55 $721 71 $921 26 7 ' B6 111-120-22 1 100 09 08973 7 S 199 55 $721 71 $921 26 7 B6 111-120-29 1 094 09 08478 7 $188 54 $681 90 $870 44 7 B6 111-120-30 (1/2) 1 007 09 006165 0 $13 71 $49 59 $63 30 0 B6 Stewart St PAV 133 09 12006 9 $267 00 S965 66 $1,232 66 9 B6 111-110-01 1 1 00 09 08964 7 $199 35 $720 99 $920 34 7 B6 111-110-02 1 1 00 09 08973 7 $199 55 $721 71 $921 26 7 B6 111-110-03 I 100 09 08973 7 S19955 $72171 $921 26 7 B6 111-110-04 (3) I 182 09 1 6407 13 $364 88 $1,319 64 $1,684 51 13 B6 l 11-110-32 1 101 09 09099 7 $202 35 $731 84 $934 20 7 B6 111-110-34 I 003 09 003114 0 $6 93 $25 05 S31 97 0 B6 Ernest Ave PAV 120 09 1 08 8 S240 18 $868 66 $1,108 84 8 TOTAL 100 1 TOTAL 1$13,29600 1 100 HOLLY/SEACL `EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA., iTROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT "" EST UNIT CONST TOTAL % DIA APPRON, ESTIMATED COST COST % TRM LAND TRIBUTARY AREA USEJAC AREA COEF I TOTAL EX I L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL I TOTAL REACH AREA ID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF (ACRE) YAC AT AREA (IN) (V) COST/IN DIA ILF COST/IN DIA /LF 42 IN COST COST, 3 (B1,2,3,4 BI 111-120-20 (2) 1 023 09 0207 5503 482799 088 0 42 691 S2 38 $2 86 $355 48 S355 48 0 5,6) B1 111-120-19 1 0 12 09 0 1035 0 S177 74 S177 74 0 BI 111-120-18 I 0 12 09 0 1035 0 S177 74 S177 74 0 BI 111-120-17 1 012 09 01044 0 $17929 $17929 0 BI 111-120-16(1/2) 1 012 09 01044 0 $17929 S17929 0 B1 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 1 $808 34 $808 34 1 BI Stewart St PAV 016 09 01449 0 S248 84 S248 84 0 B2 111-130-01 I 0 17 09 01503 0 $258 11 $258 11 0 B2 111-130-02 (2) 1 025 09 02241 0 $384 85 S384 85 0 B2 111-130-26 (2) 1 025 09 02241 0 $384 85 $384 85 0 B2 111-130-05 1 015 09 01305 0 S22411 $22411 0 B2 111-130-06 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $256 57 $256 57 0 B2 111-130-27 1 007 09 00612 0 S10510 S10510 0 B2 111-130-25 1 061 09 05454 1 $936 62 $936 62 1 B2 111-130-24 I 100 09 08991 2 $1,544 04 $1,544 04 2 B2 111-130-23 (2) I 200 09 1 7991 4 $3,089 62 $3,089 62 4 B2 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 1 $808 34 $808 34 1 B2 Stewart St PAV 045 09 04023 1 $690 87 $690 87 1 B3 111-130-07 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $256 57 $256 57 0 B3 111-130-08 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $256 57 $256 57 0 B3 111-130-09 (2) 1 033 09 02988 1 $513 13 $513 13 1 B3 111-130-10 1 0 17 09 01494 0 $256 57 $256 57 0 B3 111-130-11 1 008 09 00747 0 $12828 $12828 0 B3 111-130-12 1 008 09 00747 0 $12828 $12828 0 B3 111-130-28 1 007 09 00612 0 $10510 $10510 0 B3 111-130-14 1 061 09 05454 1 $936 62 $936 62 1 B3 111-130-15 1 100 09 08982 2 $1,542 49 $1,542 49 2 B3 111-130-16 (2) 1 200 09 1 7973 4 $3,086 53 $3,086 53 4 B3 111-130-17 RM 100 08 07984 2 $1,37110 S1,37110 2 B3 111-130-18 (2) RM 1 79 08 1 4296 3 $2,455 07 $2,455 07 3 B3 023-010-25 RM 151 08 1 2072 3 $2,073 14 S2,073 14 3 B3 023-010-26 RM 010 08 00832 0 $142 88 $142 88 0 B3 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 2 $2,007 71 $2,007 71 2 B3 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 1 $914 98 S914 98 1 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) C 5 73 09 5 1597 11 � $8,860 82 $8,860 82 11 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) RM 5 73 08 45864 9 $7,876 28 $7,876 28 9 B4 110-200-30 RL 047 04 01868 0 S320 79 $320 79 0 B4 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 2 $2,007 71 $2,007 71 2 B4 Garfield Ave PAV 1 24 09 1 116 2 $1,916 52 $1,916 52 2 B5 II1-120-16(1/2) 1 012 09 01044 0 $17929 S17929 0 B5 111-120-15 I 0 12 09 0 1053 0 $18083 $18083 0 B5 111-120-14 1 012 09 01053 0 S18083 S18083 0 B5 111-120-13 1 012 09 01053 0 $18083 $18083 0 B5 111-120-12 1 012 09 01053 0 S18083 $18083 0 B5 1 I1-120-11 1 005 09 00432 0 $74 19 $74 19 0 B5 111-120-30(1/2) 1 014 09 01233 0 $21174 $21174 0 B5 111-120-09 1 081 09 07254 2 $1,245 74 $1,245 74 2 B5 111-120-08 1 1 00 09 08991 2 $1,544 04 $1,544 04 2 B5 111-120-07 1 093 09 08388 2 $1,440 48 $1,440 48 2 B5 111-120-06 I 093 09 08388 2 $1,440 48 $1,440 48 2 B5 111-120-27 (2) 1 186 09 1 6731 3 $2,873 24 $2,873 24 3 B5 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 1 $914 98 $914 98 1 B5 Golden West St PAV 1 29 09 1 161 2 $1,993 80 $1,993 80 2 B5 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717 0 S63 83 $63 83 0 B6 111-120-26 1 100 09 08964 2 $1,539 40 $1,539 40 2 B6 111-120-25 1 100 09 08982 2 $1,542 49 S1,542 49 2 B6 111-120-24 1 100 09 08982 2 $1,542 49 $1,542 49 2 B6 111-120-23 1 100 09 08973 2 $1,54094 $1,54094 2 B6 111-120-22 1 100 09 08973 2 $1,54094 $1,54094 2 B6 1 I1-120-29 1 094 09 09478 2 $1,455 94 $1,455 94 2 B6 111-120-30(1/2) 1 007 09 006165 0 $10587 $10587 0 HOLLY/SEACL DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA. �TROM DRAIN FACILITIES B6 Stewart St PAV 1 33 09 1 2006 2 $2,061 81 $2,061 81 B6 111-110-01 1 1 00 09 08964 2 $1,539 40 $1,539 40 B6 111-110-02 I 100 09 08973 2 $1,54094 $1,54094 B6 111-I10-03 I 100 09 08973 2 $1,54094 $1,54094 B6 111-110-04 (3) 1 182 09 1 6407 3 $2,817 59 $2,817 59 B6 111-110-32 1 1 01 09 09099 2 $1,562 58 $1,562 58 B6 111-110-34 I 003 09 003114 0 $53 48 $53 48 B6 Ernest Ave PAV 1 20 09 108 2 S1.R14 70 T1 954 70 HOLLY/SEACL IEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, ,TROM DRAIN FACILITIES HOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, -#TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT " EST UNIT CONST TR1B LAND TOTAL °o DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREA ID PARCEL. No LAND USE (ACRE} COEF AC (ACRE} EAC AT AREA (1N) (LF} COST(IN DIA 1LF COSTAN DIA /LF 421N COST COST 3 (B1,2,3,4 B1 111-120-20 (2) I 023 09 0207 57 92 499998 086 0 42 15 $2 38 $2 86 $7 70 $7 70 0 5,6,7) BI 111-120-19 1 0 12 09 0 1035 0 $3 85 $3 85 0 Bl 111-120-18 1 0 12 09 0 1035 0 $3 85 $3 85 0 B1 111-120-17 1 0 12 09 0 1044 0 $3 88 $3 88 0 Bl 111-120-16 (1/2) I 0 12 09 0 1044 0 $3 88 $3 88 0 Bl Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 1 $17 50 $17 50 1 Bl Stewart St PAV 016 09 0 1449 0 $5 39 $5 39 0 B2 111-130-01 1 0 17 09 0 1503 0 $5 59 $5 59 0 B2 111-130-02 (2) 1 025 09 02241 0 $8 33 $8 33 0 B2 111-130-26 (2) I 025 09 02241 0 $8 33 $8 33 0 B2 111-130-05 I 0 15 09 01305 0 $4 85 $4 85 0 B2 111-130-06 1 0 17 09 01494 0 $5 55 $5 55 0 B2 111-130-27 1 007 09 00612 0 $2 28 $2 28 0 B2 111-130-25 I 061 09 05454 1 $20 28 $20 28 1 B2 111-130-24 I 100 09 08991 2 $33 43 $33 43 2 B2 111-130-23 (2) 1 200 09 1 7991 4 S66 88 $66 88 4 B2 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 1 $17 50 $17 50 1 B2 Stewart St PAV 045 09 04023 1 $14 96 $14 96 1 B3 111-130-07 I 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $5 55 $5 55 0 B3 111-130-08 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $5 55 $5 55 0 B3 111-130-09 (2) 1 033 09 02988 1 $11 11 $11 11 1 B3 111-130-10 1 017 09 0 1494 0 $5 55 $5 55 0 B3 111-130-11 I 008 09 00747 0 $2 78 $2 78 0 B3 111-130-12 I 009 09 00747 0 $2 78 $2 78 0 B3 111-130-28 I 007 09 00612 0 $2 28 $2 28 0 B3 111-130-14 1 061 09 05454 1 $20 28 $20 28 1 B3 111-130-15 1 1 00 09 08982 2 $33 39 $33 39 2 B3 111-130-16 (2) 1 200 09 1 7973 4 $66 82 $66 82 4 B3 111-130-17 RM 1 00 08 07984 2 $29 68 $29 68 2 B3 111-130-18 (2) RM 1 79 08 1 4296 3 $53 15 $53 15 3 B3 023-010-25 RM 1 51 08 1 2072 2 $44 88 $44 88 2 B3 023-010-26 RM 010 08 00832 0 $3 09 $3 09 0 B3 Golden West St PAV 130 09 1 1691 2 $43 46 $43 46 2 B3 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 1 S 19 81 S 19 81 1 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) C 5 73 09 5 1597 10 $191 82 $191 82 10 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) RM 573 08 45864 9 $170 50 $170 50 9 B4 110-200-30 RL 047 04 01868 0 $6 94 $6 94 0 B4 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 2 $43 46 $43 46 2 B4 Garfield Ave PAV 1 24 09 1 116 2 $41 49 $41 49 2 B5 111-120-16 (1/2) 1 0 12 09 0 1044 0 $3 88 $3 88 0 B5 111-120-15 1 0 12 09 0 1053 0 $3 91 $3 91 0 B5 111-120-14 1 0 12 09 0 1053 0 $3 91 $3 91 0 B5 111-120-13 1 0 12 09 0 1053 0 $3 91 S3 91 0 B5 111-120-12 1 012 09 0 1053 0 $3 91 $3 91 0 B5 I11-120-11 1 005 09 00432 0 $161 $161 0 B5 111-120-30 (1/2) I 0 14 09 01233 0 $4 58 $4 58 0 B5 111-120-09 1 081 09 07254 1 $26 97 $26 97 1 B5 111-120-08 I 100 09 08991 2 $33 43 S33 43 2 B5 111-120-07 I 093 09 08388 2 $31 18 $31 18 2 B5 111-120-06 1 093 09 08389 2 $31 18 $31 18 2 B5 111-120-27 (2) 1 186 09 1 6731 3 $62 20 $62 20 3 B5 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 1 $19 81 $19 81 1 B5 Golden West St PAV 129 09 1 161 2 $43 16 $43 16 2 B5 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717 0 $1 38 $1 38 0 B6 111-120-26 1 1 00 09 08964 2 $33 32 $33 32 2 B6 111-120-25 1 100 09 08982 2 $33 39 $33 39 2 B6 111-120-24 1 100 09 08982 2 $33 39 $33 39 2 B6 111-120-23 I 100 09 08973 2 $33 36 $33 36 2 B6 111-120-22 1 1 00 09 08973 2 $33 36 $33 36 2 B6 111-120-29 1 094 09 08478 2 $31 52 $31 52 2 B6 111-120-30 (1/2) 1 007 09 006165 0 $2 29 S2 29 0 IIOLLY/SEACI )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA 3TROM DRAIN FACILITIES B6 Stewart St PAV 1 33 09 12006 2 $44 63 $44 63 2 B6 111-110-01 I 1 00 09 08964 2 $33 32 $33 32 2 B6 111-110-02 1 1 00 09 08973 2 $33 36 $33 36 2 B6 1 l 1-110-03 1 1 00 09 08973 2 $33 36 $33 36 2 B6 111-110-04 (3) 1 1 82 09 1 6407 3 $60 99 $60 99 3 B6 111-110-32 1 1 01 09 09099 2 $33 83 $33 83 2 B6 111-110-34 1 003 09 003114 0 $ $ 0 B6 Ernest Ave PAV 1 20 09 108 2 $40 1 5 0 1 $415 2 B7 111-120-01 RL 088 04 035 1 $1301 $1301 1 B7 111-120-28 RL 088 04 03536 1 $13 15 S13 15 1 B7 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717 0 $1 38 $1 38 0 B7 Golden West St PAV 1 09 09 09792 2 $36 40 $36 40 2 HOLLY/SEACL IEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, iTROM DRAIN FACILITIES TRIG LAN ➢ TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS20°lo FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREA ID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) EAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COSTAN DIA/LF CoSTAN DIA /LF 36 IN COST COST 2 C1C 159-431-04 SCL 4 59 64 1 836 1109 4 436 0 40 41 36 311 52 50 S3 00 40 S1,354 40 41 C1C 159-431-05 SCL 1 230 0 4 092 1 21 S678 6S $678 68 21 C 1 C 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 21 �Sl,354 $678 68 $678 68 21 CIC 159-431-07 (1/2) RL 190 04 076 11 17 $560 65 IS56065 17 LOT LOT •»« EST UNIT CONS? TRIG LAND TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE[ACHE) COEF AG (ACRE) YAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COST(IN DIA /LF COST/IN DIA 1LF 60 IN COST COST 2 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 68 575 45 1125 066 3 60 294 $2 67 $3 20 $1,502 75 $1,502 75 3 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 5 $2,870 26 $2,870 26 5 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 32 72 73 $40,975 04 $40,975 04 73 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 0 9 23805 5 $2,981 08 $2,981 08 5 C1B 159-451 RL 1630 0 4 6 52 14 $8,164 95 $8,164 95 14 TOTAL 100 TOTAL $56,494 08 100 TRIG LAND TOTAL DIA APPROX. ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST_ PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) SAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COST/1N DIA /LF COST/IN DIA /LF IS IN COST COST 2 CIC Edwards St PAV 011 09 0 5004 4 49 1011111 0 69 16 I8 8 $3 33 S4 00 $93 33 $93 33 16 C I C Garfield St PAV 1 73 09 1 5579 50 $290 56 $290 56 �S50 50 C1C 159-431-07 RL 190 04 076 25 $14175 $14175 25 C1C Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 9 S50 36 36 9 LOT LOT "'• EST UNIT CONST TOTAL °f, DIA APPROX. ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIB LAND TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) £AC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COST/IN DIA /LF COSTAN DIA /LF 60 IN COST COST 2 C1C 159-431-04 SCL 459 04 1 836 84 15 526368 063 3 60 61 $2 67 $3 20 $406 31 $406 31 3 C1C 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 2 $203 60 $203 60 2 C1C 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 2 $203 60 $203 60 2 C1C 159-431-07(1/2) RL 190 04 076 1 $16819 $16819 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 2 $265 56 $265 56 2 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 4 S507 22 $507 22 4 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 32 72 62 $7,241 01 $7,241 01 62 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 5 $526 81 $526 81 5 C1B 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 12 $1,442 89 $1,442 89 12 C1C Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 1 $11074 $11074 1 C1C Garfield St PAV 1 73 09 1 5579 3 $344 77 $344 77 3 CiC 159-431-07 RL 190 04 076 1 $16819 $16819 1 C1C Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 1 $59 75 5975 1 TOTAL 100 TOTAL, S11,648 64 100 HOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT "" EST UNIT CONST TRIB LAND TOTAL % DIA. APPRO, ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIBUTARY I AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREA]]) PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) EAC AT AREA (1N) (LF) COST/IN D(AILF COST/IN VIA /LF 241N COST COST 2 C2 159-403-01 RL 018 04 00736 498 239336 048 3 24 43 $2 92 $3 50 $110 69 $110 69 3 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 3 $110 69 Sl 10 69 3 C2 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 3 $110 69 $110 69 3 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 4 $144 92 $144 92 4 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 3 S120 31 $120 31 3 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 01592 7 $239 42 S239 42 7 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 0 1448 6 $217 77 $217 77 6 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 01712 7 S257 47 $257 47 7 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 0 1048 4 $157 61 S157 61 4 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 4 S14197 $14197 4 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 3 S124 52 $124 52 3 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 3 S120 9l $120 9l 3 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 01112 5 $167 23 $167 23 5 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 4 $126 33 $126 33 4 C2 159-403-17 RL 019 04 00776 3 S116 70 $116 70 3 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 19 S680 82 $680 82 19 C2 QuarterHorse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 11 S410 12 $410 12 11 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 3 $123 32 $123 32 3 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 3 Sl 17 91 $117 91 3 TOTAL 100 TOTAL SJ,599 40 100 LOT LOT '"" EST UNIT CONST TRIB LAND TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST %TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL I EX L CONST 1COST1INDJAJLF1COST/IN PLUS20?/° FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) EAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) DIA 1LF 60 IN COST COST 2 C1C 159-431-04 SCL 459 04 1 836 89 13 55 0302 062 3 60 69 $2 67 $3 20 S441 62 S441 62 3 C1C 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 2 S221 29 $221 29 2 C1C 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 2 S221 29 $221 29 2 CIC 159-431-07 (1/2) RL 190 04 076 1 $182 80 $182 80 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 2 $288 64 $288 64 2 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 4 $551 30 $551 30 4 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 32 72 59 $7,870 19 $7,870 19 59 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 4 $572 58 $572 58 4 C1B 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 12 $1,568 26 $1,568 26 12 C1C Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 1 $120 36 $120 36 1 CC Garfield St PAV 1 73 09 15579 3 $374 72 $374 72 3 CIC 159-431-07 RL 190 04 076 1 $182 80 $182 80 1 CIC Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $64 94 $64 94 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 018 04 00736 0 $17 70 $17 70 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 0 $17 70 $17 70 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 0 $1770 $1770 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $23 18 $23 18 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 $19 24 $19 24 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 01592 0 $38 29 $38 29 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 01448 0 $34 83 $34 83 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 0 1712 0 $41 18 $41 18 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 01048 0 $25 21 S25 21 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $22 71 S22 71 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $19 92 $19 92 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 $19 34 $19 34 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 01112 0 $26 75 $26 75 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 $20 20 $20 20 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 019 04 00776 0 $18 67 $18 67 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 1 $108 89 S 108 89 1 C2 QuarterHorse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $65 59 $65 59 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $19 72 $19 72 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $18 86 $18 86 0 TOTAL 100 TOTAL $13,236 48 100 HOLLY/SEACL IEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, TROM DRAIN FACILITIES REACH TRIBUTARY AREA ID PARCEL No LAND USE LOT TOTAL AREA (ACRE) EAC COEF AT LOT % TOTAL AREA DIA. EX (IN) .>« APPROX. L (LF) ESTIMATED CONST COST W DIAfLF EST UNIT CONST COST PLUS?0°J> COST/IN AlA # F COST FOR 301N TOTAL COST TOTAL COST TR1B AREA (ACRE) LAND USE CLEF AC 2 C2 Saddleback Ln I PAV 1 003 1 09 10029891 0 03 10 02988 j 090 1 100 30 j 4 $2 67 JS3 20 IS39400 IS39400 I 100 TOTAL 100_j I TOTAL 1138400 1 100 LOT LOT "• EST UN r CONST TRIG LAND TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED ICOST/rNDWLF COST COST 1 I TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) F AC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COST/IN DIA ILL 60 IN COST COST 2 CIC 159-431-04 SCL 459 04 1 836 89 16 5506 062 3 60 10 $2 67 $3 20 $64 02 $64 02 3 C1C 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 2 $32 08 $32 08 2 C1C 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 2 $32 08 $32 08 2 CIC 159-431-07 (1/2) RL 190 04 076 1 S26 50 $26 50 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 2 S4185 $4185 2 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 4 $79 92 $79 92 4 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 3272 59 $1,14098 $1,14098 59 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 4 $83 01 $83 01 4 CIB 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 12 $227 36 $227 36 12 CIC Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 1 $17 45 $17 45 1 C1C Garfield St PAV 1 73 09 1 5579 3 S54 33 $54 33 3 CIC 159-431-07 RL 190 04 076 1 $26 50 $26 50 1 CIC Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $9 42 $9 42 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 0 18 04 00736 0 $2 57 $2 57 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 0 18 04 00736 0 $2 57 S2 57 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 0 $2 57 $2 57 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $3 36 $3 36 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 $2 79 $2 79 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 01592 0 $5 55 $5 55 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 01448 0 $5 05 $5 05 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 01712 0 $5 97 $5 97 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 0 1048 0 $3 65 $3 65 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $3 29 $3 29 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $2 89 $2 89 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 $2 80 $2 80 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 0 1112 0 $3 88 $3 88 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 $2 93 $2 93 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 0 19 04 00776 0 $2 71 $2 71 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 1 $15 79 $15 79 1 C2 QuarterHorse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $9 51 $9 51 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $2 86 $2 86 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 0 0784 0 $2 73 $2 73 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988, 0 $1 04 $1 04 0 TOTAL 100 TOTAL $1,920 00 100 HOLLY/SEACI )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, STROM DRAIN FACILITIES TRB LANA TOTAL % AIA APPROX ESTIMATEA GOST COST TRIBUTARY 1111111EI AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST_ PLUS 20°/< FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) �',4C AT AREA (IN} (LF) COSTtIN 1111F COST/M DIA /LF 301N COST COST 2 C1B Garfield St PAV 1 087 09 0 7812 1 24 1 1124 0 90 70 30 4 $2 67 $3 20 $269 67 $269 67 70 C1B Saddleback Ln PAV 037 1 09 1 033 12 30 5114 33 S114 33 30 TOTAL 1 100 1 1 TOTAL JS384 00 1 100 LOT LOT '" EST UNIT CONST TRIB LAND TOTAL cr DIA APPROX, ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST ICQ!>T/JN--' PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL N0 LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) F,AC AT AREA (IN) (LF) JLF COST/IN DIA 1LF 601N COST COST 2 CiC 159-431-04 SCL 459 04 1 836 9040 56 1724 062 3 60 363 $2 67 $3 20 $2,278 58 $2,278 58 3 C1C 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 2 $1,14177 $1,14177 2 C1C 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 2 $1,14177 $1,14177 2 C1C 159-431-07 (1/2) RL 190 04 076 1 $943 20 $943 20 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 2 $1,48927 $1,48927 2 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 4 $2,844 51 $2,844 51 4 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 32 72 58 $40,607 43 $40,607 43 58 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 4 $2,954 34 $2,954 34 4 C1B 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 12 $8,091 70 $8,091 70 12 CIC Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 1 $621 03 S621 03 1 C1C Garfield St PAV 1 73 09 1 5579 3 $1,933 44 $1,933 44 3 CIC 159-431-07 RL 1 90 04 076 1 $943 20 S943 20 1 C1C Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $335 09 $335 09 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 0 18 04 00736 0 $91 34 $91 34 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 0 $91 34 $91 34 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 0 $91 34 $91 34 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $119 59 $119 59 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 $99 28 $99 28 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 0 1592 0 S197 58 $197 58 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 0 1448 0 $179 71 $179 71 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 0 1712 0 $212 47 $212 47 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 0 1048 0 S 130 06 $130 06 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $117 16 $117 16 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $102 76 $102 76 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 $99 78 $99 78 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 01112 0 $138 01 $138 01 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 $104 25 $104 25 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 019 04 00776 0 $96 31 $96 31 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 1 $561 83 $561 83 1 C2 QuarterHorse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $338 44 $338 44 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $101 77 $101 77 - 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $97 30 S97 30 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 $37 08 $37 08 0 C 1 B Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 1 $969 51 $969 51 1 CIB Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 1 $411 04 $411 04 1 TOTAL 100 TOTAL 569,713 28 100 REACH TRIBUTARY AREA ID PARCEL No LAND USE LOT TOTAL AREA (ACRE) SAC COEF AT LOT % TOTAL AREA VIA EX. (IN) •*' APPROX L {LF) ESTIMATED CONST- COST/IN DiAJLF EST UNIT CONST COST PLUS200/ COSTAN DIA /LF COST FOR 181N TOTAL COST % TOTAL CAST TRB AREA (ACRE) LAND USE COEF AC 2 C2 110-221 RL 100 04 1 04 1 1 00 0 4 0 40 1001 18 1 8 $3 33 IS400 IS576 00 5576 00 1 100 TOTAL I 100_j L TOTAL $576 00 1 100 HOLLY/SEACL IEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA. ,TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT •*• EST UNIT CONST B LAND TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST % TRABUTARY ILANDIRE) EA USE AREA I(ACRE) CORP TOTAL E)C L CONST_ PLUS21]^/ FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREA ID PARCEL No COEF AC ZAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COST/1N DIA ILF COSTIIN DIA ILF 601N COST COST 2 C1C 159-431-04 SCL 459 04 1 836 91 40 565724 062 3 60 44 $2 67 S3 20 S275 98 $275 98 3 C1C 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 2 S13829 $13829 2 C1C 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 2 $13829 $13829 2 C1C 159-431-07 (1/2) RL 1 90 04 076 1 $114 24 $114 24 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 2 $18038 $18038 2 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 4 S344 52 $344 52 4 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 3272 58 S4,918 30 S4,918 30 58 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 4 S357 82 $357 82 4 C 1 B 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 12 S980 05 $980 05 12 C1C Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 1 $75 22 $75 22 1 C1C Garfield St PAV 173 09 15579 3 $234IS $23418 3 C1C 159-431-07 RL 1 90 04 076 1 $114 24 $114 24 1 C 1 C Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $40 59 $40 59 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 018 04 00736 0 $1106 $1106 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 0 $1106 $1106 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 0 S1106 $1106 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $14 48 $14 48 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 $12 03 $12 03 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 0 1592 0 $23 93 $23 93 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 0 1448 0 - $21 77 $21 77 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 0 1712 0 S25 73 $25 73 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 0 1048 0 $15 75 $15 75 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 S14 19 $14 19 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 S12 45 S12 45 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 $12 09 S 12 09 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 01112 0 S16 72 $16 72 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 S12 63 $12 63 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 019 04 00776 0 $1166 $1166 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 1 $68 05 $68 05 1 C2 QuarterHorse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $40 99 $40 99 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $12 33 $12 33 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $11 78 $11 78 0 - C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 $4 49 $4 49 0 C1B Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 1 $11743 $11743 1 C1B Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 1 $49 78 $49 78 1 C2 110-221 RL 100 04 04 1 $60 13 $60 13 1 TOTAL 100 TOTAL 1$8,50368 1 100 Na I LAND USE) (ACRE) LAND COEF AC TOTAL (ACRE) I 7EA AC I .COTE % � AR ATOTAL DIA EX I(IN) L � AP(LF)X 1 RL 0 70 04 028 400 1 16 1 040 18 1 18 8 ESTIMATED I COST I COST CONST PLUS20% FOR COSTIIN DIAJLF COSTlIN DIA lLF 18 IN 63 33 IS400 Islooso r TOTAL I TOTAL 0080 HOLLY/SEACL NEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA,. TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT "*` EST UNIT CONST TRIB LAND TOTAL % DIA. APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST TRIBUTARY EAJ JIAR USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREA 1D PARCEL No LAND USE CRE) COEF AC (ACRE) YAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) CO5T/IN DIA JLF CQ$T/IN AIA /LF 601N COST COST 2 CIC 159-431-04 SCL 459 04 1 836 9540 58 1724 061 3 60 458 $2 67 $3 20 $2,776 65 $2,776 65 3 CIC 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 2 $1,39135 $1,39135 2 CIC 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 2 $1,39135 $1,39135 2 CIC 159-431-07(1/2) RL 190 04 076 1 $1,14938 $1,14938 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 2 $1,814 80 $1,814 80 2 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 4 $3,466 28 $3,466 28 4 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 3272 56 $49,483 66 $49,483 66 56 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 4 $3,600 12 $3,600 12 4 C1 B 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 11 $9,860 44 $9,860 44 11 CIC Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 1 $756 77 $756 77 1 C1C Garfield St PAV 1 73 09 1 5579 3 $2,356 07 $2,356 07 3 CIC 159-431-07 RL 190 04 076 1 $1,14938 $1,14938 1 CIC Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 S408 33 $408 33 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 018 04 00736 0 $11131 $11131 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 0 $11131 $11131 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 0 $11131 $11131 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $145 73 $145 73 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 $120 99 $120 99 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 01592 0 $240 76 $240 76 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 01448 0 $218 99 $218 99 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 01712 0 $258 91 $258 91 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 01048 0 $158 49 S158 49 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 S142 76 $142 76 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $125 22 $125 22 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 $121 59 $121 59 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 01112 0 $16817 $16817 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 S127 04 $127 04 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 0 19 04 00776 0 $117 36 $117 36 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 1 $684 63 $684 63 1 C2 QuarterHocse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 S412 41 $412 41 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $124 01 $124 01 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $118 57 $118 57 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 S45 19 $45 19 0 CIB Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 1 $1,18144 $1,18144 1 CI B Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 1 $500 89 $500 89 1 C2 110-221 RL 1 00 04 04 1 $604 93 $604 93 1 C2 110-221 RL 070 04 028 0 $423 45 $423 45 0 C2 110-222 RL 330 04 1 32 2 $1,996 28 $1,996 28 2 TOTAL 100 TOTAL $87,976 32 300 HOLLY/SEACL IEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA. dTROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT ••• EST UNI1 CONST TR19 LAND TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST voo TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX- L CONST PLUS201 FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) ZAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COSTAN DIAAF COSTf1N DIA ILF 721N CAST CAST 2 C3 110-211 RL 185 04 07392 20 10 80404 040 9 72 67 $2 36 $2 83 $1,259 20 $1,259 20 9 C3 110-212 RL 200 04 07996 10 $1,362 09 $1,362 09 10 C3 110-213 RL 100 04 03996 5 $680 71 $680 71 5 C3 110-220-02 RL 459 04 1936 23 S3,127 57 $3,127 57 23 C3 110-220-03 RL 279 04 1116 14 $1,90107 $1,90107 14 C3 110-220-04 RL 181 04 0 724 9 $1,233 31 $1,233 31 9 C3 110-220-05 RL 500 04 2 25 $3,406 93 $3,406 93 25 C3 159-412-01 RL 107 04 0 426 5 S725 611 $725 68 5 TOTAL 100 TOTAL 513,696 56 100 HOLLY/SEACI )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, 3TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT — EST UNIT CONST TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST TR1B LAND TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL E}L L CONST_ PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREA ID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) EAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COSTAN DIAJLF COSTIIN DIA ILF 721N COST COST 2 Cie 159-431-04 SCL 459 04 1 836 115 50 66 2128 057 3 72 28 $2 36 $2 S3 $159 52 $159 52 3 Cie 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 1 $79 93 $79 93 1 Cie 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 1 S7993 S7993 1 Cie 159-431-07 (1/2) RL 1 90 04 076 1 $66 03 $66 03 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 2 $104 26 $104 26 2 CIA 159-432-03 RL 573 04 2292 3 $19914 $19914 3 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 3272 49 $2,842 83 $2,842 83 49 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 2 3805 4 $206 83 $206 83 4 CIB 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 10 $566 48 $566 48 10 Cie Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 1 $43 48 S43 48 1 Cie Garfield St PAV 1 73 09 1 5579 2 S135 36 $135 36 2 Cie 159-431-07 RL 190 04 076 1 S66 03 $66 03 1 Cie Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 023 0 $23 46 $23 46 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 018 04 00736 0 $6 39 $6 39 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 0 $6 39 $6 39 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 0 $6 39 $6 39 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $8 37 $8 37 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 $6 95 $6 95 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 01592 0 S13 83 $13 83 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 0 1448 0 S 12 58 $12 58 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 0 1712 0 S 14 87 $14 87 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 0 1048 0 $9 11 $9 11 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $8 20 $8 20 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $7 19 $7 19 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00904 0 S6 99 $6 99 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 0 1112 0 $9 66 $9 66 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 $7 30 S7 30 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 019 04 00776 0 $6 74 $6 74 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 1 S39 33 $39 33 1 C2 QuarterHor;e Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $23 69 $23 69 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $7 12 $7 12 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $6 81 $6 81 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 $2 60 $2 60 0 CIB Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 1 S67 87 $67 87 1 CIB Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 1 S28 78 $28 78 1 C2 110-221 RL 100 04 04 1 $34 75 $34 75 1 C2 110-221 RL 070 04 028 0 $24 33 $24 33 0 C2 110-222 RL 330 04 1 32 2 $114 69 S 114 69 2 C3 110-211 RL 1 85 04 07392 1 $64 22 S64 22 1 C3 110-212 RL 200 04 07996 1 $69 47 S69 47 1 C3 110-213 RL 100 04 03996 1 $34 72 $34 72 1 C3 110-220-02 RL 459 04 1 836 3 $159 52 S159 52 3 C3 110-220-03 RL 279 04 1 116 2 S96 96 $96 96 2 C3 110-220-04 RL 1 81 04 0 724 1 $62 90 $62 90 1 C3 110-220-05 RL 500 04 2 3 $173 77 $173 77 3 C3 159-412-01 RL 1 07 04 0 426 1 $37 01 $37 01 1 ITOTALI 100 TOTAL I S5,752 80 100 HOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA. �TROM DRAIN FACILITIES REACH TRIBUTARY AR£AID PARCEL No LAND USE LOT TOTAL AREA (ACRE) 1C i COEF AT LOT % TOTAL AREA DIA EX fIN} *** APPAOX L (LF) ! STIMATED CONST COST11N DIAILF JEST UNIT CONST COST PLUS20^/ COSTAN DIA ILF COST FOR IS IN TOTAL COST TOTAL COST TRIB AREA (ACRE) LAND USE COEF AC 2 C2,3,4, I Saddleback Ln PAV 1 058 09 1 0 5202 1 0 58 1 05202 1 090 1 100 1 18 1 28 $3 33 IS400 $2,018 8S 1$2,01888 1 100 TOTAL 1 235 -TOTAL IS2,01888 1 100 LOT LOT *** EST UNIT CONST TRiB LAND TOTAL I(ACRE) 1/1DIA, APPROX. ESTIMATED COST COST °la TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST_ PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL. REACH AREA ID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC Y—AC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COST/IN DIA./LF COSTIN DIA /LF 72 IN COST CO5T 2 C1C 159-431-04 SCL 459 04 1 836 11608 66 733 057 3 72 9 $2 36 $2 83 $48 94 $48 94 3 Cie 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 1 $24 52 $24 52 1 C1C 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 1 $24 52 $24 52 1 Cie 159-431-07 (1/2) RL 190 04 076 1 $20 26 $20 26 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 2 S31 99 $31 99 2 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 3 $61 10 $61 10 3 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 32 72 49 $872 21 $872 21 49 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 4 $63 46 $63 46 4 C1B 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 10 $17380 $17380 10 Cie Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 1 $13 34 $13 34 1 C1C Garfield St PAV 173 09 15579 2 $4153 $4153 2 Cie 159-431-07 RL 190 04 076 1 $20 26 $20 26 1 C1C Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $7 20 $7 20 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 018 04 00736 0 $196 $196 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 0 $196 $196 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 0 $196 S196 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $2 57 $2 57 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 $2 13 $2 13 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 0 1592 0 $4 24 $4 24 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 0 1448 0 $3 86 $3 86 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 0 1712 0 S4 56 $4 56 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 0 1048 0 $2 79 $2 79 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $2 52 $2 52 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $2 21 $2 21 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 $2 14 $2 14 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 0 1112 0 $2 96 $2 96 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 $2 24 $2 24 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 0 19 04 00776 0 $2 07 $2 07 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 1 $12 07 $12 07 1 C2 QuarterHone Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $7 27 $7 27 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $2 19 $2 19 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $2 09 $2 09 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 $0 80 $0 80 0 C 1 B Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 1 $20 82 $20 82 1 C I B Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 0 $8 83 $8 83 0 C2 110-221 RL 100 04 04 1 $10 66 $10 66 1 C2 110-221 RL 070 04 028 0 $7 46 S7 46 0 C2 110-222 RL 330 04 132 2 $35 19 $35 19 2 C3 110-211 RL 1 85 04 07392 1 $19 70 S19 70 1 C3 110-212 RL 200 04 07996 1 $21 31 $21 31 1 C3 110-213 RL 1 00 04 03996 1 $10 65 $10 65 1 C3 110-220-02 RL 459 04 1 836 3 $48 94 $48 94 3 C3 110-220-03 RL 279 04 1 116 2 S29 75 $29 75 2 C3 110-220-04 RL 181 04 0 724 1 $19 30 $19 30 1 C3 110-220-05 RL 500 04 2 3 $53 31 S53 31 3 C3 159-412-01 RL 107 04 0426 1 $1136 $1136 1 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 1 $13 87 $13 87 1 TOTAL 100_jl I TOTAL 11i,778 88 100 IIOLLY/SEACL `EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA., JROM DRAIN FACILITIES REACH TRIBUTARY AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE LOT TOTAL AREA (ACRE) EAC COCF AT LOT % TOTAL11 AREA DIA EX (IN) *" APPROX L (LF) ESTIMATED CONST COST/IN DLA,/LF EST UNIT CONST COST PLUS20°A COST/IN DIA/LF COST FOR 1S IN TOTAL COST % TOTAL COST TRIG AREA (ACRE) LAND USE COEF I AC 2 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 1 058 09 1 05202 058 1 0 5202 1 0 90 1 100 1 18 1 12 $3 33 IS400 SS50 32 $850 32 ]00 TOTAL 226 TOTAL $850 32 100 LOT LOT °** ES F UNIT CONST TRIB I LAND TOTAL DIA, APPROX. ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST- PLUS20°/ FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL NO LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) Y—AC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COST/IN DIA/LF COSTAN DIA /LF 1 72 IN COST COST 2 CIC 159-431-04 SCL 4 59 04 1 836 116 65 67 2532 058 3 72 26 $2 36 $2 83 $147 14 $147 14 3 C1C 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 l $73 73 $73 73 1 C1C 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 1 $73 73 $73 73 1 CIC 159-431-07(1/2) RL 190 04 076 1 $6091 $6091 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 2 S9617 $9617 2 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 3 $183 6S S183 68 3 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 3272 49 $2,622 18 $2,622 18 49 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 4 $190 77 $190 77 4 CI B 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 10 $522 51 $522 51 10 CIC Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 1 $40 10 S40 10 1 CIC Garfield St PAV 1 73 09 15579 2 $124 85 $124 85 2 CIC 159-431-07 RL 1 90 04 076 1 $6091 $6091 1 C1C Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $21 64 $21 64 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 018 04 00736 0 $5 90 $5 90 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 0 S5 90 $5 90 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 0 $5 90 $5 90 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $7 72 $7 72 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 $6 41 $6 41 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 0 1592 0 $12 76 S12 76 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 01448 0 $1160 $1160 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 01712 0 $13 72 $13 72 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 01048 0 $8 40 $8 40 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $7 57 $7 57 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $6 64 $6 64 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 S6 44 $6 44 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 01112 0 $8 91 $891 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 $6 73 $6 73 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 0 19 04 00776 0 $6 22 $6 22 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 1 $36 28 $36 28 1 C2 QuarterHorse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $21 85 S21 85 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 092 0 $6 57 $6 57 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $6 28 $6 28 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 $2 39 $2 39 0 C 1 B Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 1 $62 61 $62 61 1 CIB Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 0 $26 54 S26 54 0 C2 110-221 RL 100 04 04 1 S32 06 S32 06 I C2 110-221 RL 070 04 028 0 $22 44 $22 44 0 C2 110-222 RL 3 30 04 1 32 2 $105 78 $105 78 2 C3 110-211 RL 185 04 07392 1 $59 24 $59 24 1 C3 110-212 RL 200 04 07996 1 $64 08 $64 08 1 C3 110-213 RL 100 04 03996 1 $32 02 $32 02 1 C3 110-220-02 RL 459 04 1836 3 $14714 $14714 3 C3 110-220-03 RL 2 79 04 1 116 2 $89 44 $89 44 2 C3 110-220-04 RL 181 04 0 724 1 $58 02 $58 02 1 C3 110-220-05 RL 500 04 2 3 $160 28 S 160 28 3 C3 159-412-01 RL 1 07 04 0 426 1 $34 14 $34 14 1 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 1 S41 69 $41 69 1 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 1 $41 69 $41 69 1 ITOTALI 100 1 TOTAL J$5,38968 1 100 HOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, .TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT ••' EST I3NIT CONST TOTAL % pIA APPROX ESTIIvtATEp COST GOST % TR18 LAND TRIBUTARY JLAND AREA 135E I AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST_ PLL3S20of FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE)1C AT AREA (IN) {LF) COSTi1N DL47LF COSTfM D[A /LF 1S IN CAST COST 2 C4 110-210-01 RL 379 04 1 516 1613 696 043 22 18 28 $3 33 $4 00 $442 88 $442 88 22 C4 110-210-02 RL 141 04 0 562 8 S 164 18 S 164 18 8 C4 110-210-03 RL 035 04 0 1408 2 $41 13 $41 13 2 C4 110-210-04 RL 0 12 04 00464 1 $13 56 $13 56 1 C4 110-210-10 RL 079 04 0 314 5 $91 73 $91 73 5 C4 110-210-06 RL 048 04 01908 3 $55 74 $55 74 3 C4 110-210-07 RL 064 04 02544 4 $74 32 S74 32 4 C4 Saddleback Ln PAV 048 09 04302 6 S125 68 $125 68 6 C4 159-371-09 RL 021 04 00836 1 $24 42 $24 42 1 C4 159-371-10 RL 022 04 00872 1 $25 47 $25 47 1 C4 159-371-11 RL 023 04 0 092 1 $26 88 S26 88 1 C4 159-371-12 RL 021 04 00856 1 $25 01 $25 01 1 C4 159-371-21 PAV 028 09 02502 4 $73 09 $73 09 4 C4 159-371-15 RL 0 13 04 00504 1 $14 72 $14 72 1 C4 159-371-14 RL 009 04 0 036 1 $10 52 $10 52 1 C4 159-371-13 RL 009 04 00364 1 $1063 $1063 1 C4 159-381-08 RL 021 04 00848 1 S24 77 $24 77 1 C4 159-381-09 RL 022 04 00876 1 $25 59 $25 59 1 C4 159-381-10 RL 020 04 00788 1 $23 02 S23 02 1 C4 159-381-11 RL 037 04 0 146 2 $42 65 $42 65 2 C4 159-381-12 RL 0 17 04 0 066 1 $19 28 $19 28 1 C4 159-391-13 RL 006 04 0 022 0 $6 43 $6 43 0 C4 159-381-14 RL 008 04 00324 0 $9 47 $9 47 0 C4 159-381-15 RL 008 04 00324 0 $9 47 $9 47 0 C4 159-381-18 PAV 026 09 0 234 3 $68 36 $68 36 3 C4 159-411 RL 500 04 2 29 $584 28 $584 28 _ 29 TOTAL 100 TOTAL 52,03328 100 IIOLLY/SEACI )EVELOPMEN'C ESTIMATED COST OF MA STROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT •' EST UNIT CONST TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST TRIG LAND TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EK L CONST_ PLUS2OV FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREA ID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF All (ACRE) SAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COSTIIN DLkiLF COSTAN DIA /LF 72 IN COST COST 2 CIC 159-431-04 SCL 4 59 04 1 836 132 78 74 2132 056 2 72 361 $2 36 $2 83 $1,823 68 $1,823 68 2 CIC 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 1 $913 83 $913 83 1 CIC 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 1 $913 83 $913 83 1 CIC 159-431-07 (1/2) RL 1 90 04 076 1 5754 90 $754 90 I CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 2 $1,19195 $1,19195 2 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 3 $2,276 62 $2,276 62 3 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 32 72 44 $32,500 51 $32,500 51 44 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 3 $2,364 53 $2,364 53 3 CI B 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 9 56,476 26 $6,476 26 9 C1C Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 1 $497 04 $497 04 1 CIC Garfield St PAV 1 73 09 1 5579 2 $1,547 45 $1,547 45 2 CIC 159-431-07 RL 190 04 076 1 $754 90 $754 90 1 CIC Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $26819 $26819 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 018 04 00736 0 $73 11 $73 11 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 0 18 04 00736 0 $73 11 $73 11 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 0 18 04 00736 0 $73 11 $73 11 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 0 09636 0 $95 71 $95 71 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 $79 46 $79 46 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 01592 0 $15813 $15813 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 0 1448 0 $143 83 5143 83 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 0 1712 0 $170 05 $170 05 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 01048 0 $10410 510410 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $93 77 $93 77 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 S82 24 S82 24 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 $79 86 S79 86 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 0 1112 0 $110 45 $110 45 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 $83 44 $83 44 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 019 04 00776 0 $77 08 S77 O8 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 1 $449 66 5449 66 1 C2 QuarterHorse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $270 87 5270 87 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $81 45 S81 45 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $77 87 $77 87 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 $29 68 $29 68 0 C1B Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 1 $775 96 $775 96 1 CIB Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 0 $328 98 $328 98 0 C2 110-221 RL 100 04 04 1 $397 32 $397 32 1 C2 110-221 RL 070 04 028 0 $278 12 $278 12 0 C2 110-222 RL 330 04 132 2 $1,31115 $1,31115 2 C3 110-211 RL 1 85 04 07392 1 $734 24 $734 24 1 C3 110-212 RL 200 04 07996 1 S794 24 $794 24 1 C3 110-213 RL 100 04 03996 1 $396 92 $396 92 1 C3 110-220-02 RL 4 59 04 1 836 2 $1,823 68 $1,823 68 2 C3 110-220-03 RL 279 04 1116 2 $1,10851 $1,10851 2 C3 110-220-04 RL 181 04 0 724 1 5719 14 $719 14 1 C3 110-220-05 RL 500 04 2 3 $1,986 58 $1,986 58 3 C3 159-412-01 RL 1 07 04 0 426 1 $423 14 $423 14 1 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 1 $516 71 $516 71 1 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 1 $516 71 $516 71 1 C4 110-210-01 RL 3 79 04 1 516 2 $1,505 83 $1,505 83 2 C4 110-210-02 RL 141 04 0 562 1 $558 23 $558 23 1 C4 110-210-03 RL 035 04 0 1408 0 $139 86 $139 86 0 C4 110-210-04 RL 0 12 04 00464 0 $46 09 $46 09 0 C4 110-210-10 RL 079 04 0 314 0 $311 89 $311 89 0 C4 110-210-06 RL 048 04 0 1908 0 $189 52 $189 52 0 C4 110-210-07 RL 064 04 02544 0 $252 69 $252 69 0 C4 Saddleback Ln PAV 048 09 04302 1 $427 31 $427 31 1 C4 159-371-09 RL 021 04 00836 0 $83 04 $83 04 0 C4 159-371-10 RL 022 04 00872 0 $86 62 $86 62 0 C4 159-371-11 RL 023 04 0 092 0 $91 38 $91 38 0 C4 159-371-12 RL 021 04 00856 0 S85 03 $85 03 0 C4 159-371-21 PAV 028 09 02502 0 5248 52 $248 52 0 C4 159-371-15 RL 0 13 04 00504 0 $50 06 $50 06 0 IIOLLI'/SEACL �EVELOPMENI' ESTIMATED COST OE NW ,TROM DRAIN FACILITIES C4 159-371-14 RL 009 04 0 036 0 $35 76 S35 76 0 C4 159-311-13 RL 009 04 00364 0 $36 16 $36 16 0 C4 159-381-08 RL 021 04 00848 0 $84 23 $84 23 0 C4 159-381-09 RL 022 04 00876 0 $87 0l $87 01 0 C4 159-381-10 RL 020 04 00788 0 $78 27 $78 27 0 C4 159-381-11 RL 037 04 0 146 0 $145 02 $145 02 0 C4 159-381-12 RL 0 17 04 0 066 0 $65 56 $65 56 0 C4 159-381-13 RL 006 04 0 022 0 $21 85 $21 85 0 C4 159-381-14 RL 008 04 00324 0 $32 18 $32 18 0 C4 159-381-15 RL 008 04 00324 0 S32 18 $32 18 0 C4 159-381-18 PAV 026 09 0 234 0 $232 43 $232 43 0 C4 159-411 RL 500 04 2 _ 3 $1,986 58 $1,986 58 3 HOLLY/SEACL IEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT "" UNI I CONST TOTAL % DIA APPROX, ESTIMATED COST COST COST % TRIB LAND TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF JTOTAL EX L CONST JEST PLUS20% FOR 1 FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREA ID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) FiIC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COSTlIN DIA ILF COST/IN DIA ILF 72 IN 78 IN COST COST 2 C1C 159-431-04 SCL 4 59 04 1 836 138 22 76 3892 055 2 72 185 $2 36 $2 83 S905 46 $514 64 $1,420 09 2 C1C 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 1 78 99 $2 31 $2 77 $453 71 $257 88 $711 59 1 C I C 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 1 $453 71 $257 88 S711 59 I C1C 159-431-07 (112) RL 190 04 076 1 S374 81 $213 03 S587 84 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 2 $591 80 $336 36 $928 16 2 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 3 $1,130 34 $642 45 $1,772 79 3 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 3272 43 S16,13644 $9,17149 $25,30793 43 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 3 $1,173 98 $667 26 $1,841 24 3 CIB 159-451 RL 1630 04 6 52 9 $3,215 45 S1,827 57 $5,043 02 9 C1C Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 1 S246 78 $140 26 $387 04 1 C1C Garfield St PAV 1 73 09 15579 2 S768 31 $436 68 $1,204 99 2 C1C 159-431-07 RL 1 90 04 076 1 S374 81 $213 03 S587 84 I CIC Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $133 16 $75 68 $208 84 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 0 18 04 00736 0 S36 30 $20 63 $56 93 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 0 18 04 00736 0 $36 30 $20 63 $56 93 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 0 18 04 00736 0 $36 30 $20 63 $56 93 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $47 52 $27 01 $74 53 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 $39 45 $22 42 $61 88 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 0 1592 0 $78 51 $44 62 $123 14 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 01449 0 S71 41 $40 59 $112 00 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 0 1712 0 S84 43 S47 99 $132 42 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 0 1048 0 $51 68 S29 38 SSl 06 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $46 55 S26 46 S73 02 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $40 83 $23 21 $64 04 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 $39 65 $22 54 $62 19 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 01112 0 $54 84 $31 17 $86 01 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 $41 43 $23 55 $64 97 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 019 04 00776 0 $38 27 $21 75 $60 02 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 1 $223 26 S126 89 $350 15 1 C2 QuarterHorse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $134 49 $76 44 $210 93 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $40 44 S22 98 $63 42 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $38 66 $21 98 $60 64 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 $14 74 S8 38 $23 11 0 CIB Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 1 $385 26 $218 97 $604 23 1 CIB Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 0 $163 34 $92 84 $256 17 0 C2 110-221 RL IN 04 04 1 $197 27 $112 12 $309 39 1 C2 110-221 RL 070 04 028 0 $138 09 $78 48 $216 57 0 C2 110-222 RL 330 04 1 32 2 $650 98 $370 00 $1,020 98 2 C3 110-211 RL 185 04 07392 1 $364 55 $207 20 $571 75 1 C3 110-212 RL 2 00 04 07996 1 $394 34 $224 13 $618 47 1 C3 110-213 RL 100 04 03996 1 $197 07 $112 01 $309 08 1 C3 110-220-02 RL 459 04 1 836 2 $905 46 $514 64 $1,420 09 2 C3 110-220-03 RL 279 04 1 116 1 $550 37 $312 82 $863 19 1 C3 110-220-04 RL 181 04 0 724 1 $357 05 S202 94 $559 99 1 C3 110-220-05 RL 500 04 2 3 $986 33 $560 60 $1,546 94 3 C3 159-412-01 RL 1 07 04 0 426 1 $210 09 S119 41 $329 50 1 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 1 $256 55 $145 Sl $402 36 1 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 1 $256 55 S 145 81 $402 36 1 C4 110-210-01 RL 3 79 04 1 516 2 $747 64 S424 94 $1,172 58 2 C4 110-210-02 RL 141 04 0 562 1 $277 16 S 157 53 $434 69 1 C4 110-210-03 RL 035 04 0 1408 0 $69 44 $39 47 $108 90 0 C4 110-210-04 RL 0 12 04 00464 0 $22 88 S13 01 $35 89 0 C4 110-210-10 RL 079 04 0 314 0 $154 85 $88 01 $242 87 0 C4 110-210-06 RL 048 04 01908 0 $94 10 $53 48 $147 58 0 C4 110-210-07 RL 064 04 02544 0 $125 46 $71 31 $196 77 0 C4 Saddleback Ln PAV 048 09 04302 1 $212 16 S120 59 S332 75 1 C4 159-371-09 RL 021 04 00836 0 $41 23 S23 43 S64 66 0 C4 159-371-10 RL 022 04 00872 0 $43 00 $24 44 $67 45 0 C4 159-371-11 RL 023 04 0 092 0 $45 37 $25 79 $71 16 0 C4 159-371-12 RL 021 04 00856 0 $42 22 $23 99 $66 21 0 C4 159-371-21 PAV 028 09 02502 0 $123 39 S70 13 S193 52 0 HOLLY/SEACL 'EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MAj TROM DRAIN FACILITIES C4 159-371-15 RL 013 04 00504 0 $24 86 $14 13 $38 98 0 C4 159-371-14 RL 009 04 0 036 0 S17 75 $10 09 S27 84 0 C4 159-371-13 RL 009 04 00364 0 $17 95 $10 20 $28 15 0 C4 159-381-08 RL 021 04 00848 0 S41 82 $23 77 S65 59 0 C4 159-381-09 RL 022 04 00876 0 $43 20 S24 55 $67 76 0 C4 159-381-10 RL 020 04 00788 0 S38 86 $22 09 $60 95 0 C4 159-381-11 RL 037 04 0 146 0 $72 00 $40 92 Sl 12 93 0 C4 159-381-12 RL 0 17 04 0 066 0 $32 55 $18 50 S51 05 0 C4 159-381-13 RL 006 04 0022 0 51085 $617 $1702 0 C4 159-381-14 RL 008 04 00324 0 S 15 98 $9 08 $25 06 0 C4 159-381-15 RL 008 04 00324 0 S15 98 $9 08 $25 06 0 C4 159-381-18 PAV 026 09 0 234 0 $115 40 $65 59 $180 99 0 C4 159-411 RL 500 04 2 3 $986 33 $560 60 $1,546 94 3 C4 110-210 RL 544 04 2 176 3 51.073 13 5609 94 SL683 07 3 IIOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA. �TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT **• UNIT CONST TRIB LAND TOTAL % DIA APPR01 I ESTIMATED ICOSTITNDFAILF JEST COST COST % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL Eli L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) EAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COSTAN DIA /LF 721N COST COS1, 2 CIC 159-431-04 SCL 4 59 04 1 836 141 67 79 487 056 2 78 84 $2 31 $2 77 $417 40 S417 40 2 CIC 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 1 $209 15 1209 15 1 CIC 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 1 $20915 $20915 1 CIC 159-431-07(1/2) RL 190 04 076 1 $17278 S17278 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 2 $272 81 $272 81 2 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 3 $521 06 $521 06 3 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 32 72 41 $7,438 56 S7,438 56 41 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23905 3 $541 18 $541 18 3 C113 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 8 $1,482 25 $1,482 25 8 CIC Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 1 $113 76 $113 76 1 CIC Garfield St PAV 173 09 15579 2 $35417 $35417 2 CIC 159-431-07 RL 190 04 076 1 $172 78 $172 78 1 CIC Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $61 38 S61 38 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 0 18 04 00736 0 $16 73 $16 73 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 0 $16 73 $16 73 0 C7 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 0 $16 73 S16 73 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $21 91 $21 91 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 S1819 $IS 19 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 0 1592 0 S36 19 $36 19 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 0 1448 0 $32 92 $32 92 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 0 1712 0 $38 92 $38 92 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 0 1048 0 $23 83 S23 83 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $21 46 $21 46 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $18 82 $18 82 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 $18 28 $18 28 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 0 1112 0 $25 28 $25 28 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 $19 10 $19 10 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 0 19 04 00776 0 $17 64 $17 64 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 1 $102 92 $102 92 1 C2 QuarterHorse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $62 00 $62 00 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $18 64 $18 64 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $17 82 $17 82 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 $6 79 $6 79 0 C113 Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 1 $177 60 $177 60 1 CIB Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 0 $75 29 $75 29 0 C2 110-221 RL 100 04 04 1 $90 94 $90 94 1 C2 110-221 RL 070 04 028 0 $63 66 $63 66 0 C2 110-222 RL 330 04 1 32 2 $300 09 S300 09 2 C3 110-211 RL 185 04 07392 1 $168 05 S168 05 1 C3 110-212- RL 200 04 07996 1 $181 78 SI8I 78 1 C3 110-213 RL 1 00 04 03996 1 $90 84 $90 84 1 C3 110-220-02 RL 4 59 04 1 836 2 $417 40 $417 40 2 C3 110-220-03 RL 279 04 1 116 1 $253 71 $253 71 1 C3 110-220-04 RL 181 04 0 724 1 $164 59 S164 59 1 C3 110-220-05 RL 500 04 2 3 $454 68 $454 68 3 C3 159-412-01 RL 1 07 04 0 426 I $96 85 $96 85 1 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 1 $118 26 $118 26 1 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 1 $118 26 $118 26 1 C4 110-210-01 RL 3 79 04 1 516 2 $344 65 $344 65 2 C4 110-210-02 RL 141 04 0 562 1 $127 76 $127 76 1 C4 110-210-03 RL 035 04 0 1408 0 $32 01 $32 01 0 C4 110-210-04 RL 0 12 04 00464 0 $10 55 $10 55 0 C4 110-210-10 RL 079 04 0 314 0 $71 38 $71 38 0 C4 110-210-06 RL 048 04 01908 0 $43 38 S43 38 0 C4 110-210-07 RL 064 04 02544 0 $57 84 $57 84 0 C4 Saddleback Ln PAV 048 09 04302 1 $97 80 $97 80 1 C4 159-371-09 RL 021 04 00836 0 $19 01 $19 01 0 C4 159-371-10 RL 022 04 00872 0 $19 82 $19 82 0 C4 159-371-11 RL 023 04 0 092 0 $20 92 $20 92 0 C4 159-371-12 RL 021 04 00856 0 $1946 $1946 0 C4 159-371-21 PAV 028 09 02502 0 $56 88 $56 88 0 HOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, jTROM DRAIN FACILITIES C4 159-371-15 RL 013 04 00504 0 S1146 S1146 0 C4 159-371-14 RL 009 04 0036 0 5818 $818 0 C4 159-371-13 RL 009 04 00364 0 $8 28 $8 28 0 C4 159-381-08 RL 021 04 00848 0 $19 28 $19 28 0 C4 159-381-09 RL 022 04 00876 0 $19 91 $19 91 0 C4 159-381-10 RL 020 04 00788 0 $1791 $1791 0 C4 159-391-11 RL 037 04 0 146 0 $33 19 $33 19 0 C4 159-381-12 RL 017 04 0066 0 $1500 $1500 0 C4 159-381-13 RL 006 04 0 022 0 $5 00 S5 00 0 C4 159-381-14 RL 008 04 00324 0 $7 37 S7 37 0 C4 159-381-15 RL 008 04 00324 0 $7 37 $7 37 0 C4 159-381-18 PAV 026 09 0 234 0 $53 20 S53 20 0 C4 159-411 RL 500 04 2 3 $454 68 $454 68 3 C4 110-210 RL 544 04 2 176 3 $494 69 5494 69 3 C4 Ellis Ave PAV 062 09 05616 1 $127 67 $127 67 1 C4 Golden West St PAV 282 09 25362 3 $576 58 $576 58 3 IIOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA. TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT •`* EST UNIT CONST TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIB LAND TRIBUTARY ILANDUSEI(ACRE) AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL E}, L CONST- PLUS 2001 FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREA ID PARCEL NO COEF AC (ACRE) SAC AT AREA (IN) fLFi COST/1NDIAJLF COSTIIN DIAiLF 89IN COST COST 2 CIC 159-431-04 SCL 459 04 1 836 19958 129 487 065 1 84 43 S2 38 $2 86 $147 89 $147 89 1 C1C 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 1 $7411 $7411 1 C1C 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 1 $7411 $7411 1 C1C 159-431-07(1/2) RL 190 04 076 1 $6122 $6122 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 1 $96 66 $96 66 1 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 2 $184 62 $184 62 2 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 32 72 25 $2,635 65 $2,635 65 25 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 2 $19175 $19175 2 C1B 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 5 S525 20 $525 20 5 C1C Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 0 $40 31 S40 31 0 C1C Garfield St PAV 1 73 09 1 5579 1 $125 49 $125 49 1 C1C 159-431-07 RL 190 04 076 1 S6122 $6122 1 C1C Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $21 75 $21 75 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 0 18 04 00736 0 $5 93 $5 93 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 0 $5 93 $5 93 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 0 $5 93 $5 93 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 S7 76 $7 76 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 $6 44 $6 44 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 0 1592 0 $12 82 S12 82 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 01448 0 $1166 $1166 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 0 1712 0 $13 79 $13 79 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 0 1048 0 $8 44 $8 44 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $7 60 $7 60 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $6 67 $6 67 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 S6 48 $6 48 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 0 1112 0 $8 96 $8 96 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 S6 77 $6 77 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 019 04 00776 0 $6 25 $6 25 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 0 $36 47 $36 47 0 C2 QuarterHorse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $21 97 $21 97 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $6 61 $6 61 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $6 32 $6 32 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 $2 41 $2 41 0 C1B Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 1 $62 93 $62 93 1 Cl B Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 0 $26 68 $26 68 0 C2 110-221 RL 100 04 04 0 $32 22 $32 22 0 C2 110-221 RL 070 04 028 0 $22 55 S22 55 0 C2 110-222 RL 330 04 1 32 1 $106 33 $106 33 1 C3 110-211 RL 1 85 04 07392 1 $59 54 $59 54 1 C3 110-212 RL 200 04 07996 1 S64 41 $64 41 1 C3 110-213 RL 1 00 04 03996 0 $32 19 $32 19 0 C3 110-220-02 RL 459 04 1 836 1 $147 89 $147 89 1 C3 110-220-03 RL 279 04 1 116 1 $89 90 $89 90 1 C3 110-220-04 RL 181 04 0 724 1 $58 32 $58 32 1 C3 110-220-05 RL 500 04 2 2 $16110 S16110 2 C3 159-412-01 RL 1 07 04 0 426 0 $34 32 $34 32 0 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 0 $41 90 S41 90 0 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 0 $41 90 $41 90 0 C4 110-210-01 RL 379 04 1516 1 $12212 $12212 1 C4 110-210-02 RL 141 04 0 562 0 S45 27 $45 27 0 C4 110-210-03 RL 035 04 01408 0 $1I34 $1134 0 C4 110-210-04 RL 012 04 00464 0 $3 74 $3 74 0 C4 110-210-10 RL 079 04 0 314 0 $25 29 $25 29 0 C4 110-210-06 RL 048 04 0 1908 0 $15 37 $15 37 0 C4 110-210-07 RL 064 04 02544 0 S20 49 $20 49 0 C4 Saddleback Ln PAV 048 09 04302 0 $34 65 $34 65 0 C4 159-371-09 RL 021 04 00836 0 $6 73 $6 73 0 C4 159-371-10 RL 022 04 00872 0 $7 02 $7 02 0 C4 159-371-11 RL 023 04 0 092 0 $7 41 $7 41 0 C4 159-371-12 RL 021 04 00856 0 $6 90 $6 90 0 C4 159-371-21 PAV 028 09 02502 0 $20 15 $20 15 0 C4 159-371-15 RL 0 13 04 00504 0 $4 06 S4 06 0 HOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, �TROM DRAIN FACILITIES C4 159-371-14 RL 009 04 0 036 0 S2 90 $2 90 0 C4 159-371-13 RL 009 04 00364 0 $2 93 S2 93 0 C4 159-381-08 RL 021 04 00848 0 $6 83 S6 83 0 C4 159-381-09 RL 022 04 00876 0 $7 06 $7 06 0 C4 159-381-10 RL 020 04 00788 0 $6 35 $6 35 0 C4 159-381-11 RL 037 04 0146 0 $1176 $1176 0 C4 159-381-12 RL 0 17 04 0 066 0 $5 32 $5 32 0 C4 159-381-13 RL 006 04 0022 0 $177 $177 0 C4 159-381-14 RL 008 04 00324 0 $2 61 $2 61 0 C4 159-381-15 RL 008 04 00324 0 $2 61 $2 61 0 C4 159-381-19 PAV 026 09 0234 0 $1885 $1885 0 C4 159-411 RL 500 04 2 2 S16110 $16110 2 C4 110-210 RL 544 04 2 176 2 $175 28 $175 28 2 C4 Ellis Ave PAV 062 09 05616 0 $45 24 $45 24 0 C4 Golden West St PAV 292 09 25362 2 $204 30 $204 30 2 Bl 111-120-20(2) 1 023 09 0207 0 $1667 $1667 0 Bl 111-120-19 I 012 09 0 1035 0 $8 34 $8 34 0 B1 111-120-18 1 012 09 0 1035 0 $8 34 $8 34 0 Bl 111-120-17 1 0 12 09 0 1044 0 $8 41 $8 41 0 Bl 111-120-16(1/2) 1 012 09 01044 0 $841 S841 0 B] Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 0 $37 92 $37 92 0 Bl Stewart St PAV 016 09 01449 0 Sll67 $1167 0 B2 111-130-01 1 017 09 01503 0 $1211 $1211 0 B2 111-130-02 (2) 1 025 09 02241 0 S18 05 $18 05 0 B2 111-130-26 (2) I 025 09 02241 0 $18 05 $18 05 0 B2 111-130-05 1 015 09 01305 0 $1051 S1051 0 B2 111-130-06 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $1203 S12 03 0 B2 111-130-27 1 007 09 00612 0 $4 93 S4 93 0 B2 111-130-25 1 061 09 05454 0 $43 93 S43 93 0 B2 111-130-24 I 1 00 09 08991 1 $72 42 S72 42 1 B2 111-130-23 (2) t 200 09 1 7991 1 $144 92 $144 92 1 B2 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 0 $37 92 $37 92 0 B2 Stewart St PAV 045 09 04023 0 S32 41 $32 41 0 B3 111-130-07 1 0 17 09 01494 0 $1203 $1203 0 B3 111-130-08 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $1203 $1203 0 B3 111-130-09 (2) I 033 09 02988 0 $24 07 S24 07 0 B3 111-130-10 I 017 09 01494 0 $1203 $1203 0 B3 111-130-11 I 008 09 00747 0 $6 02 $6 02 0 B3 111-130-12 1 008 09 00747 0 $6 02 $6 02 0 B3 1 l 1-130-28 1 007 09 00612 0 $4 93 $4 93 0 B3 111-130-14 1 061 09 05454 0 $43 93 S43 93 0 B3 111-130-15 1 100 09 08982 1 $72 35 $72 35 1 B3 111-130-16 (2) 1 200 09 1 7973 1 $144 78 $144 78 1 B3 111-130-17 RM 1 00 08 07984 1 $64 31 S64 31 1 B3 111-130-18(2) RM 179 08 14296 1 $11516 $11516 1 B3 023-010-25 RM 151 08 1 2072 1 $97 24 $97 24 1 B3 023-010-26 RM 0 10 08 00832 0 $6 70 $6 70 0 B3 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 1 $94 17 $94 17 1 B3 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 0 $42 92 $42 92 0 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) C 5 73 09 5 1597 4 $415 62 $415 62 4 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) RM 5 73 08 45864 4 $369 44 $369 44 4 ' B4 110-200-30 RL 047 04 0 1868 0 S15 05 $15 05 0 B4 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 1 S94 17 $94 17 1 B4 Garfield Ave PAV 124 09 1 116 1 $89 90 $89 90 1 B5 111-120-16 (1/2) 1 0 12 09 01044 0 $8 41 $8 41 0 B5 111-120-15 1 0 12 09 0 1053 0 $8 48 $8 48 0 B5 111-120-14 1 0 12 09 0 1053 0 $8 48 $8 48 0 B5 111-120-13 1 012 09 01053 0 $848 $848 0 B5 111-120-12 1 0 12 09 01053 0 $8 48 $8 48 0 B5 111-120-11 1 005 09 00432 0 $3 48 $3 48 0 B5 111-120-30 (1/2) I 0 14 09 0 1233 0 $9 93 $9 93 0 B5 111-120-09 I 081 09 07254 1 $58 43 $58 43 1 B5 111-120-08 1 1 00 09 08991 1 $72 42 $72 42 1 B5 111-120-07 1 093 09 08388 1 $67 57 $67 57 1 B5 111-120-06 1 093 09 08388 1 $67 57 S67 57 1 B5 111-120-27 (2) 1 186 09 16731 1 $134 77 $134 77 1 B5 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 0 $42 92 $42 92 0 HOLLY/SEACL ►EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA. . TROM DRAIN FACILITIES B5 Golden West St PAV 1 29 09 1 161 1 S93 52 $93 52 B5 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717 0 $2 99 $2 99 B6 111-120-26 1 1 00 09 08964 1 S72 21 $72 21 B6 111-120-25 1 100 09 08982 1 $72 35 $72 35 B6 111-120-24 1 100 09 08982 1 $72 35 $72 35 B6 111-120-23 1 100 09 08973 1 S72 28 $72 28 B6 111-120-22 I 100 09 08973 1 $72 28 $72 28 B6 111-120-29 I 094 09 08478 1 9 9 B6 111-120-30 (1/2) 1 007 09 006165 0 $4 97 $4 97 B6 Stewart St PAV 1 33 09 1 2006 1 $96 71 $96 71 B6 111-110-01 I 1 00 09 08964 1 $72 21 $72 21 B6 111-110-02 1 100 09 08973 1 S72 28 $72 28 B6 111-110-03 1 100 09 08973 1 $72 28 S72 28 B6 111-110-04(3) 1 182 09 16407 1 $13216 $13216 B6 111-110-32 1 101 09 09099 I B6 111-110-34 1 003 09 003114 0 $2 1 $8 51 $2 1 51 B6 Ernest Ave PAV 1 20 09 108 1 $28 00 $8 $28 00 B7 111-120-01 RL 088 04 035 0 $28 19 $28 19 B7 111-120-28 RL 088 04 03536 0 S28 48 $28 48 B7 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717 0 S2 99 $2 99 B7 Golden West St PAV 109 09 09792 1 $78 88 $78 88 HOLLY/SEACL ►EVELOI'MENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, STROM DRAIN FACILPCIES REACH TRIBUTARY AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE LOT TOTAL AREA (ACRE) %AC COEF AT LOT % JTOTAL AREA DIA EX (IN) *** APPROX. L I (LF) ESTIMATED CONST I COSTIIN DIA ILF EST UNIT CONST COST PLUS20% COSMIN DIA fLF COST FOR 24 IN I TOTAL COST TOTAL COST TR1B AREA (ACRE) LAND USE COEF AC 6 DI Gothard St PAV 1 042 09 1 0 378 1 042 0 378 09 1 100 1 24 1 43 IS292 IS350 IS3,58596 1$3,58596 1 100 TOTAL 100 TOTAL IS3,585 96 1 100 LOT LOT »** EST UNIT CONST TRIB LAND TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) YAC AT AREA (IN) (IF) COSTRN DIAlLF COSTlIN D[A /iF 24 IN COST COST 6 D3 111-110-15 1 009 09 008001 3 34 300231 09 3 24 43 $2 92 $3 50 $95 56 $95 56 3 D3 111-110-14 1 Oil 09 00999 3 $11932 $11932 3 D3 111-110-37 I 0 17 09 0 1503 5 $179 52 $179 52 5 D3 111-110-36 1 017 09 01512 5 $180 59 $190 59 5 D3 111-110-10 1 Oil 09 0 1008 3 S120 40 $120 40 3 D3 111-110-31 1 023 09 02034 7 $242 94 $242 94 7 D3 111-110-33 I Oil 09 0 1017 3 $121 47 $12147 3 D3 111-110-07 I 034 09 03078 10 $367 64 $367 64 10 D3 111-110-38 1 101 09 0 909 30 $1,085 71 $1,085 71 30 D3 111-110-22 I 050 09 04491 15 $536 41 $536 41 15 D3 111-110-21 I 050 09 04491 15 $536 41 $536 41 15 TOTAL 100 TOTAL 53,585 96 100 LOT LOT **• EST UNIT CONS TRIG LAND TOTAL % DIA APPROX. ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX, L CONST, PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) Y-AC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COSTIIN DIA ILF COSTfIN DIA iLF 24IN COST COST 6 DI Gothard St PAV 042 09 0 378 376 338031 09 11 24 520 $2 92 $3 50 $4,886 73 $4,886 73 11 D3 111-110-15 1 009 09 008001 2 $1,034 36 $1,034 36 2 D3 I11-110-14 I Oil 09 00999 3 $1,29149 $1,29149 3 D3 111-110-37 I 0 17 09 0 1503 4 $1,943 06 $1,943 06 4 D3 111-110-36 1 0 17 09 0 1512 4 $1,954 69 $1,954 69 4 D3 111-110-10 1 Oil 09 01008 3 $1,30313 $1,30313 3 D3 111-110-31 1 023 09 02034 6 $2,629 53 $2,629 53 6 D3 111-110-33 1 Oil 09 0 1017 3 $1,314 76 $1,314 76 3 D3 111-110-07 I 034 09 03078 9 $3,979 19 $3,979 19 9 D3 111-110-38 1 101 09 0909 27 $11,75142 $11,75142 27 D3 111-110-22 I 050 09 04491 13 $5,805 90 $5,805 90 13 D3 111-110-21 1 050 09 04491 13 $5,805 90 $5,805 90 13 TOTAL 100 TOTAL 543,700 6 100 LAND TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIBUTARY ILANDUSEI(ATRIRBE) AEA DSE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST_ PLUS20% FOR TOTAL I TOTAL I REACH AREAID PARCEL No COEF AC (ACRE) SAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) CoST/IN DIA ILF COSVIN DIA fLF 1 24 IN COST COST 6 D2 111-110-18 I 200 09 1 7982 446 40158 09 45 24 43 $2 92 $3 50 $1,626 04 $1,626 04 45 D2 111-110-19 I 100 09 09 22 $813 83 $813 83 22 D2 111-110-20 1 100 09 08982 22 $812 20 $812 20 22 D2 Gothard St PAV 047 09 04194 10 $379 25 $379 25 10 TOTAL 100 TOTAL 53,63132 100 HOLLY/SEACL IEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA,. ,TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT •"" EST UNIT CONST TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIB LAND TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL DOTAL REACH AREA ID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) ;AC AT AREA (IN) (LF) CO5T/1N DIA ILF COSTIIN DIA (LF 30 IN COST COST 6 DI Gothard St PAV 042 09 0 378 822 739611 09 5 30 770 $2 67 S3 20 $3,777 07 $3,777 07 5 D3 111-110-15 1 009 09 008001 1 $799 48 $799 48 1 D3 111-110-14 1 Oil 09 00999 1 $998 22 $998 22 1 D3 111-110-37 1 017 09 01503 2 $1,50183 $1,50183 2 D3 111-110-36 I 017 09 01512 2 $1,51083 $1,51083 2 D3 111-110-10 1 Oil 09 0 1008 1 $1,007 22 SI,007 22 1 D3 111-110-31 1 023 09 02034 3 $2,032 42 $2,032 42 3 D3 111-110-33 1 Oil 09 01017 1 $1,01621 S1,01621 1 D3 111-110-07 1 034 09 03078 4 $3,075 61 $3,075 61 4 D3 111-110-38 1 101 09 0 909 12 $9,082 94 $9,082 94 12 D3 111-110-22 1 050 09 04491 6 $4,487 51 $4,487 51 6 D3 111-110-21 1 050 09 04491 6 $4,487 51 $4,487 51 6 D2 111-110-18 1 200 09 1 7982 24 $17,968 04 S17,968 04 24 D2 111-110-19 1 100 09 09 12 $8,993 Ol $8,993 Ol 12 D2 111-110-20 1 100 09 08982 12 S8,975 03 $8,975 03 12 D2 Gothard St PAV 047 09 04194 6 $4,190 74 54,190 74 6 TOTAL 100 TOTAL 573,903 68 100 REACH TRIBUTARY AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE LOT TOTAL AREA (ACRE} EAC COEF AT LOT % TOTAL AREA DIA EX (IN) "� APPROX L (LF) ESTIMATED CONST COST/iN pIAlLF taST UNIT CONST COST PLUS20% COST/1N DIA /LF COST FOR 24 IN TOTAL COST % TOTAL COST TRIG AREA (ACRE} LAND USE COEF AC 6 D4 Gothard St PAV 1 071 1 09 1 06354 1 071 1 0 6354 1 09 1 100 1 24 1 38 IS292 IS350 1$3,22644 IS3,22644 100 - TOTAL 100_j I TOTAL JS3,22644 100 LOT LOT *" EST UNIT CONST TRIB LAND TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL Na LAND USE ACRE} CQEF AC ACRE1C AT AREA tN LFj COST/IN DIAlLF COST/IN DIA /LF 30 tN CQST MST 6 Dl Gothard St PAV 042 09 0 378 892 803151 09 5 30 68 S2 67 $3 20 $306 33 $306 33 5 D3 111-110-15 1 009 09 008001 1 S64 84 $64 84 1 D3 111-110-14 1 Oil 09 00999 1 $80 96 $80 96 1 D3 111-110-37 I 017 09 01503 2 $12180 $12180 2 D3 111-110-36 1 0 17 09 0 1512 2 $122 53 $122 53 2 D3 111-110-10 1 Oil 09 0 1008 1 $81 69 $81 69 1 D3 111-110-31 1 023 09 02034 3 $164 84 S 164 84 3 D3 111-110-33 1 Oil 09 0 1017 1 $82 42 $82 42 1 D3 111-110-07 1 034 09 03078 4 $249 44 $249 44 4 D3 111-110-38 1 101 09 0 909 11 $736 66 $736 66 11 D3 111-110-22 1 050 09 04491 6 $363 95 $363 95 6 D3 111-110-21 1 050 09 04491 6 S363 95 $363 95 6 D2 111-110-18 1 200 09 1 7982 22 $1,457 28 $1,457 28 22 D2 111-110-19 1 100 09 09 11 $729 37 $729 37 11 D2 111-110-20 1 100 09 08982 11 $727 91 $727 91 11 D2 Gothard St PAV 047 09 04194 5 $339 89 $339 89 5 D4 Gothard St PAV 071 09 06354 8 $514 93 $514 93 8 TOTAL 100_j TOTAL 1$6,50880 1 100 HOLLY/SEACL IEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA. iTROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT ""` E51' UNI T CONST TOTAL % DIA. APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIG I LAND TRIBUTARY I AREA I USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREA ID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) £AC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COSTAN DIA /LF COSTAN DIA ILF 48 IN COST COST 6 DI Gothard St PAV 042 09 0 378 5982 48 7515 0 81492 1 48 135 $2 50 S3 00' $150 75 5150 75 1 D3 111-110-15 I 009 09 008001 0 $3191 $3191 0 D3 111-110-14 1 Oil 09 00999 0 $39 84 $39 84 0 D3 111-110-37 1 017 09 01503 0 $5994 $5994 0 D3 111-110-36 1 0 17 09 0 1512 0 $60 30 $60 30 0 D3 111-110-10 1 011 09 01008 0 $4020 $4020 0 D3 111-110-31 1 023 09 02034 0 $81 12 $81 12 0 D3 111-110-33 I Oil 09 01017 0 $40 56 $40 56 0 D3 111-110-07 1 034 09 03078 1 $122 76 $122 76 1 D3 111-110-38 1 101 09 0 909 2 $362 52 $362 52 2 D3 111-110-22 1 050 09 04491 1 $17911 $17911 1 D3 111-110-21 1 050 09 04491 1 $17911 $17911 1 D2 111-110-18 1 200 09 17982 4 $71715 $71715 4 D2 111-110-19 1 100 09 09 2 $358 93 5358 93 2 D2 111-110-20 1 100 09 08982 2 $358 22 S358 22 2 D2 Gothard St PAV 047 09 04194 1 $167 26 $167 26 1 D4 Gothard St PAV 071 09 06354 1 $253 41 $253 41 1 D5 111-07 RM 509 08 4072 84 116,239 79 $16,239 79 84 TOTAL 100 TOTAL 519,442 88 100 LOT LOT "' EST UNIT CONST TOTAL % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIG LAND TRIBUTARY AREA USE I AREA COEF TOTAL EX L I(IN) CONST_ PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) 3'AC AT AREA (LF} COST/iN DIA /LF COST/IN DIA /LF 96 IN COST COST 7 Dl Gothard St PAV 042 09 0 378 263 02 211 312 0 80339 0 96 147 $2 29 $2 75 $69 57 $69 57 0 D3 I11-110-15 1 009 09 008001 0 $1473 $1473 0 D3 111-110-14 1 Oil 09 00999 0 $1839 $1839 0 D3 111-110-37 1 0 17 09 0 1503 0 $27 66 $27 66 0 D3 111-110-36 I 0 17 09 01512 0 S27 83 $27 83 0 D3 111-110-10 I Oil 09 01008 0 $1855 $1855 0 D3 111-110-31 1 023 09 02034 0 S37 43 $37 43 0 D3 111-110-33 1 Oil 09 01017 0 51872 $1872 0 6 D3 111-110-07 1 034 09 03078 0 $56 65 $56 65 0 D3 111-110-38 1 101 09 0 909 0 $167 29 $167 29 0 D3 111-110-22 1 050 09 04491 0 $82 65 $82 65 0 D3 111-110-21 1 050 09 04491 0 $82 65 $82 65 0 D2 111-110-18 1 200 09 17982 1 $330 94 $330 94 1 D2 111-110-19 1 100 09 09 0 $16564 $16564 0 D2 111-110-20 1 1 00 09 08982 0 $165 31 $165 31 0 D2 Gothard St PAV 047 09 04194 0 $77 19 $77 19 0 D4 Gothard St PAV 071 09 06354 0 $116 94 $116 94 0 D5 El 111-07 MISC CITY PROP RM RM 509 1748 09 09 4072 13984 19 66 $7,494 12 $25,736 20 $7,494 12 $25,736 20 19 66 E2 111-07, 159-473 &474 RM 284 09 22 72 11 $4,I 40 $4 181 40 11 TOTAL 100 !'OTAL 538,889 84 100 IIOLLY/SEACI )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, STROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOTJ "• EST ITC ONST TOTAL % ➢IA APPRO� ESTIMATED COST COST % TR1B LAND TRIBUTARYJ AREA USE AREA COEF JTOTALJ Ex L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREA ID PARCEL No LAN➢ USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) EAC AT AREA (JN) (LF) COSTQN DIA/LF COST/IN AIA ILF 96 IN COST COST 7 DI Gothud St PAV 042 09 0 378 269 52 213 912 0 79366 0 96 656 $2 29 $2 75 $305 80 $305 80 0 D3 111-110-15 1 009 09 008001 0 $64 73 $64 73 0 D3 111-110-14 1 Oil 09 00999 0 S80 82 $80 82 0 D3 111-110-37 1 017 09 01503 0 $12159 $12159 0 D3 111-110-36 1 017 09 01512 0 $12232 $12232 0 D3 111-110-10 1 Oil 09 0 1008 0 S81 55 $81 55 0 D3 111-110-31 1 023 09 02034 0 $16455 $16455 0 D3 1 l 1-110-33 1 Oil 09 0 1017 0 $82 27 $82 27 0 6 D3 111-110-07 1 034 09 03078 0 $249 01 $249 Ol 0 D3 111-110-38 1 101 09 0 909 0 $735 37 $735 37 0 D3 111-110-22 1 050 09 04491 0 $363 32 $363 32 0 D3 111-110-21 1 050 09 04491 0 5363 32 $363 32 0 D2 111-110-18 1 200 09 1 7982 1 $1,454 72 51,454 72 1 D2 111-110-19 1 100 09 09 0 572809 $72809 0 D2 111-110-20 1 1 00 09 08982 0 $726 63 5726 63 0 D2 Gothard St PAV 047 09 04194 0 5339 29 $339 29 0 D4 Go0tard St PAV 071 09 06354 0 5514 03 $514 03 0 D5 111-07 RM 509 08 4072 19 $32,942 02 $32,942 02 19 El MISC CITY PROP RM 174 8 08 13984 65 ########## $113,128 98 65 E2 111-07, 159-473 &474 RM 284 08 22 72 11 $18,380 22 $18,380 22 11 E3 111-072 RL 65 04 26 1` $2,103 37 $2,103 37 1 TOIALI 100 ji TOTAL $173,052 00 100 HOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA jTROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT EST INITCONST ILANDUSE1 TOTAL I(ACRE) % DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST I COST TRIB LAND TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL Ex L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL I TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL No (ACRE) COEF AC ZAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COSVIN DIA,/LF COSTAN DIA ILF 96IN COST COST 4A C1C 159-431-04 SCL 459 04 1 836 19958 129 487 065 1 96 28 $2 29 $2 75 $103 01 $103 01 1 CIC 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 1 $5162 $5162 1 CIC 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 1 S5162 S5162 1 CIC 159-431-07 (1/2) RL 1 90 04 076 1 $42 64 $42 64 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 1 $67 33 $67 33 1 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 2 $128 60 $128 60 2 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 3272 25 $1,835 86 $1,835 86 25 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 2 $133 57 S133 57 2 C I B 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 5 $365 83 $365 83 5 C1C Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 0 $28 08 $28 08 0 CIC Garfield St PAV 1 73 09 1 5579 1 $87 41 $87 41 1 C1C 159-431-07 RL 190 04 076 1 $42 64 $42 64 1 CIC Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $15 15 $15 15 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 018 04 00736 0 $4 13 $4 13 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 0 $4 13 $4 13 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 0 S4 13 $4 13 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $5 41 $5 41 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 S4 49 $4 49 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 0 1592 0 $8 93 $8 93 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 0 1448 0 $8 12 $8 12 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 0 1712 0 $9 61 $9 61 0 C2 159-403-1 I RL 026 04 0 1048 0 S5 88 S5 88 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $5 30 $5 30 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $4 65 S4 65 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 S4 51 S4 51 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 01112 0 S6 24 $6 24 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 $4 71 $4 71 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 019 04 00776 0 $4 35 $4 35 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 0 $25 40 $25 40 0 C2 QuarterHorse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $15 30 $15 30 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $4 60 $4 60 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $4 40 $4 40 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 $1 68 S 1 68 0 C1B Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 I $43 83 $43 83 1 CIB Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 0 $18 58 $18 58 0 C2 110-221 RL 100 04 04 0 $22 44 $22 44 0 C2 110-221 RL 070 04 028 0 $15 71 $15 71 0 C2 110-222 RL 330 04 1 32 1 $74 06 $74 06 1 C3 110-211 RL 1 85 04 07392 1 $41 48 $41 48 1 C3 110-212 RL 200 04 07996 1 S44 86 $44 86 1 C3 110-213 RL 100 04 03996 0 $22 42 $22 42 0 C3 110-220-02 RL 4 59 04 1 836 1 S103 01 $103 01 1 C3 110-220-03 RL 2 79 04 1 116 1 $62 62 $62 62 1 C3 110-220-04 RL 1 81 04 0 724 1 $40 62 $40 62 1 C3 110-220-05 RL 500 04 2 2 $112 22 $112 22 2 C3 159-412-01 RL 1 07 04 0 426 0 $23 90 $23 90 0 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 0 $29 19 $29 19 0 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 0 $29 19 S29 19 0 C4 110-210-01 RL 3 79 04 1 516 1 $85 06 $95 06 1 C4 110-210-02 RL 1 41 04 0 562 0 $31 53 $31 53 0 C4 110-210-03 RL 035 04 0 1408 0 $7 90 $7 90 0 C4 110-210-04 RL 0 12 04 00464 0 $2 60 $2 60 0 C4 110-210-10 RL 079 04 0314 0 $1762 $1762 0 C4 110-210-06 RL 048 04 01908 0 $10 71 $10 71 0 C4 110-210-07 RL 064 04 02544 0 $14 27 $14 27 0 C4 Saddleback Ln PAV 048 09 04302 0 $24 14 $24 14 0 C4 159-371-09 RL 021 04 00836 0 $4 69 $4 69 0 C4 159-371-10 RL 022 04 00872 0 S4 89 $4 89 0 C4 159-371-11 RL 023 04 0 092 0 $5 16 $5 16 0 C4 159-371-12 RL 021 04 00856 0 S4 80 $4 80 0 C4 159-371-21 PAV 028 09 02502 0 S 14 04 S 14 04 0 C4 159-371-15 RL 0 13 04 00504 0 S2 83 $2 83 0 IIOLLY/SEACL NEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA.. �TROA4 DRAIN FACILITIES C4 159-371-14 RL 009 04 0 036 0 $2 02 $2 02 0 C4 159-371-13 RL 009 04 00364 0 S2 04 S2 04 0 C4 159-381-08 RL 021 04 00848 0 $4 76 $4 76 0 C4 159-381-09 RL 022 04 00976 0 $4 92 $4 92 0 C4 159-381-10 RL 020 04 00788 0 $4 42 $4 42 0 C4 159-381-11 RL 037 04 0 146 0 $8 19 $8 19 0 C4 159-381-12 RL 0 17 04 0 066 0 $3 70 $3 70 0 C4 159-381-13 RL 006 04 0022 0 $123 S123 0 C4 159-381-14 RL 008 04 00324 0 $182 5182 0 C4 159-381-15 RL 008 04 00324 0 $ l 82 $1 82 0 C4 159-381-18 PAV 026 09 0234 0 $1313 S1313 0 C4 159-411 RL 500 04 2 2 $112 22 Sl 12 22 2 C4 110-210 RL 544 04 2 176 2 $122 09 $122 09 2 C4 Ellis Ave PAV 062 09 05616 0 $31 51 $31 51 0 C4 Golden West St PAV 282 09 25362 2 $142 30 $142 30 2 B1 111-120-20(2) 1 023 09 0207 0 $1161 $1161 0 BI 111-120-19 I 0 12 09 0 1035 0 $5 81 S5 81 0 Bl 111-120-18 1 0 12 09 01035 0 $5 81 $5 81 0 B1 111-120-17 1 0 12 09 01044 0 $5 86 $5 86 0 BI 111-120-16 (1/2) I 0 12 09 0 1044 0 S5 86 $5 86 0 BI Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 0 $26 41 S26 41 0 BI Stewart St PAV 0 16 09 0 1449 0 S8 13 $8 13 0 B2 111-130-01 1 0 17 09 01503 0 $8 43 $8 43 0 B2 111-130-02 (2) 1 025 09 02241 0 $12 57 $12 57 0 B2 111-130-26 (2) 1 025 09 02241 0 $12 57 $12 57 0 B2 111-130-05 1 0 15 09 0 1305 0 $7 32 $7 32 0 B2 111-130-06 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $8 38 $8 38 0 B2 111-130-27 1 007 09 00612 0 $3 43 $3 43 0 B2 111-130-25 1 061 09 05454 0 S30 60 $30 60 0 B2 111-130-24 1 100 09 08991 1 $50 45 $50 45 1 B2 111-130-23 (2) 1 200 09 17991 1 $100 94 $100 94 1 B2 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 0 S26 41 $26 41 0 B2 Stewart St PAV 045 09 04023 0 $22 57 $22 57 0 B3 111-130-07 1 017 09 0 1494 0 $8 38 $8 38 0 B3 111-130-08 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $8 38 $8 38 0 B3 111-130-09 (2) 1 033 09 02988 0 $16 77 $16 77 0 B3 111-130-10 1 0 17 09 01494 0 $8 38 $8 38 0 B3 111-130-11 1 008 09 00747 0 S4 19 $4 19 0 B3 111-130-12 1 008 09 00747 0 S4 19 $4 19 0 B3 111-130-28 1 007 09 00612 0 S3 43 $3 43 0 B3 111-130-14 1 061 09 05454 0 $30 60 $30 60 0 B3 111-130-15 1 100 09 08982 1 $50 40 $50 40 1 B3 111-130-16 (2) 1 200 09 1 7973 1 $100 84 $100 84 1 B3 111-130-17 RM 100 08 07984 1 $44 80 $44 80 1 B3 111-130-18 (2) RM 1 79 08 14296 1 $80 21 $80 21 1 B3 023-010-25 RM 1 51 08 12072 1 $67 73 $67 73 1 B3 023-010-26 RM 010 09 00832 0 $4 67 $4 67 0 B3 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 1 $65 60 $65 60 1 B3 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 0 $29 89 $29 89 0 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) C 5 73 09 5 1597 4 $289 50 $289 50 4 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) RM 5 73 08 45864 4 $257 33 $257 33 4 B4 110-200-30 RL 047 04 01868 0 $10 48 $10 48 0 B4 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 1 $65 60 $65 60 1 B4 Garfield Ave PAV 124 09 1 116 1 $62 62 $62 62 1 B5 111-120-16 (1/2) 1 012 09 0 1044 0 $5 86 S5 86 0 B5 111-120-15 I 0 12 09 0 1053 0 S5 91 $5 91 0 B5 111-120-14 1 0 12 09 01053 0 $5 91 $5 91 0 B5 111-120-13 1 012 09 01053 0 $5 91 55 91 0 B5 111-120-12 I 0 12 09 0 1053 0 $5 91 $5 91 0 B5 111-120-11 1 005 09 00432 0 $2 42 $2 42 0 B5 111-120-30 (1/2) 1 0 14 09 01233 0 $6 92 $6 92 0 B5 111-120-09 1 081 09 07254 1 $40 70 $40 70 I B5 111-120-08 I 100 09 08991 1 $50 45 S50 45 1 B5 11 I-120-07 1 093 09 08388 1 S47 06 $47 06 1 B5 111-120-06 1 093 09 08388 1 $47 06 $47 06 1 B5 111-120-27 (2) 1 1 86 09 16731 1 $93 87 $93 87 1 B5 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 0 $29 89 $29 89 0 HOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, STROM DRAIN FACILITIES B5 Golden West St PAV 1 29 09 1 161 1 $65 14 $65 14 1 B5 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 0 03717 0 $2 09 $2 09 0 B6 111-120-26 1 100 09 08964 1 $50 30 $50 30 1 B6 111-120-25 1 100 09 08982 1 $50 40 $50 40 1 B6 111-120-24 1 100 09 08982 1 $50 40 $50 40 1 B6 111-120-23 I 100 09 08973 1 $50 35 $50 35 1 B6 111-120-22 I 100 09 08973 1 $50 35 $50 35 1 B6 111-120-29 1 094 09 08478 1 $47 57 $47 57 1 B6 111-120-30 (1/2) I 007 09 006165 0 $3 46 $3 46 0 B6 Stewart St PAV 1 33 09 1 2006 1 $67 36 $67 36 1 B6 111-110-01 1 1 00 09 08964 1 $50 30 $50 30 1 B6 111-110-02 1 1 00 09 08973 1 $50 35 $50 35 1 B6 111-110-03 I 100 09 08973 1 $50 35 $50 35 1 B6 111-110-04 (3) 1 1 82 09 1 6407 1 $92 06 $92 06 1 B6 111-110-32 1 101 09 09099 1 S51 05 S51 05 1 B6 111-110-34 1 003 09 003114 0 $175 5175 0 B6 Ernest Ave PAV 120 09 1 08 1 $60 60 $60 60 1 B7 111-120-01 RL 088 04 035 0 $1964 S1964 0 B7 111-120-28 RL 088 04 03536 0 $19 84 S19 84 0 B7 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717 0 $2 09 $2 09 0 B7 Golden West St PAV 109 09 09792 1 $54 94 S54 94 1 HOLLY/SEACI )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, STROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT "*1 EST UNIT CONST TRIB LAND TOTAL JTOTAL DIA APPROX ESTIMATED COST COST °h TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF EX L CONST PLUS20% FOR TOTAL PQTAL REACH AREA 1D PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) 7AC AT AREA QN) (LF) COSTiN DIA ILF COSTIIN DIA /LF 96 IN COST COST 4A 2 C1C 159-431-04 SCL 459 04 1 836 210 11 133 699 064 1 96 30 $2 29 $2 75 $107 20 $107 20 1 C1C 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 1 $53 72 $53 72 1 C1C 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 1 $53 72 $53 72 1 CIC 159-431-07 (1/2) RL 1 90 04 076 1 $44 38 $44 38 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 1 $70 07 $70 07 1 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 2 $133 83 $133 83 2 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 32 72 24 S1,910 47 $1,910 47 24 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 2 $138 99 S138 99 2 C I B 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 5 $380 69 S380 69 5 C1C Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 0 $29 22 $29 22 0 CIC Garfield St PAV 173 09 1 5579 1 $90 96 $90 96 1 CIC 159-431-07 RL 1 90 04 076 1 $44 38 $44 38 1 CiC Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $15 76 $15 76 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 018 04 00736 0 $4 30 $4 30 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 0 $4 30 S4 30 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 0 $4 30 $4 30 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $5 63 $5 63 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 S4 67 $4 67 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 01592 0 $9 30 $9 30 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 0 1448 0 $8 45 $8 45 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 0 1712 0 $10 00 $10 00 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 0 1048 0 $6 12 $6 12 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $5 51 $5 51 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $4 83 $4 83 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 $4 69 $4 69 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 01112 0 $6 49 $6 49 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 $4 90 $4 90 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 019 04 00776 0 $4 53 $4 53 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 0 $26 43 $26 43 0 C2 QuarterHorse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $15 92 $15 92 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $4 79 $4 79 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $4 58 S4 58 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 $1 74 $1 74 0 CiB Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 1 S45 61 $45 61 1 CIB Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 0 S19 34 $19 34 0 C2 110-221 RL 100 04 04 0 $23 36 $23 36 0 C2 110-221 RL 070 04 028 0 $16 35 $16 35 0 C2 110-222 RL 330 04 132 1 $77 07 $77 07 1 C3 110-211 RL 185 04 07392 1 $43 16 $43 16 1 C3 110-212 RL 200 04 07996 1 $46 69 $46 69 1 C3 110-213 RL 1 00 04 03996 0 $23 33 $23 33 0 C3 110-220-02 RL 4 59 04 1 836 1 $107 20 $107 20 1 C3 110-220-03 RL 2 79 04 1 116 1 $65 16 $65 16 1 C3 110-220-04 RL 181 04 0 724 1 $42 27 $42 27 1 C3 110-220-05 RL 500 04 2 1 $116 78 $116 78 1 C3 159-412-01 RL 1 07 04 0 426 0 $24 87 $24 87 0 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 0 $30 37 $30 37 0 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 059 09 05202 0 $30 37 $30 37 0 C4 110-210-01 RL 3 79 04 1 516 1 $88 52 S88 52 I C4 110-210-02 RL 141 04 0 562 0 $32 81 $32 81 0 C4 110-210-03 RL 035 04 0 1408 0 $8 22 $8 22 0 C4 110-210-04 RL 0 12 04 00464 0 $2 71 $2 71 0 C4 110-210-10 RL 079 04 0314 0 $1833 $1833 0 C4 110-210-06 RL 048 04 01908 0 $11 14 $11 14 0 C4 110-210-07 RL 064 04 02544 0 $14 85 $14 85 0 C4 Saddleback Ln PAV 048 09 04302 0 $25 12 $25 12 0 C4 159-371-09 RL 021 04 00836 0 $4 88 $4 88 0 C4 159-371-10 RL 022 04 00872 0 $5 09 $5 09 0 C4 159-371-11 RL 023 04 0 092 0 S5 37 $5 37 0 C4 159-371-12 RL 021 04 00856 0 $5 00 $5 00 0 C4 159-371-21 PAV 028 09 02502 0 $14 61 $14 61 0 HOLD'/SEACL EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MAJ TROM DRAIN FACILITIES C4 159-371-15 RL 0 13 04 00504 0 S2 94 $2 94 0 C4 159-371-14 RL 009 04 0 036 0 $2 10 $2 10 0 C4 159-371-13 RL 009 04 00364 0 $2 13 S2 13 0 C4 159-381-08 RL 021 04 00848 0 $4 95 $4 95 0 C4 159-381-09 RL 022 04 00876 0 $5 11 $5 11 0 C4 159-381-10 RL 020 04 00788 0 S4 60 S4 60 0 C4 159-381-11 RL 037 04 0 146 0 $8 52 S8 52 0 C4 159-381-12 RL 0 17 04 0 066 0 $3 85 S3 85 0 C4 159-381-13 RL 006 04 0022 0 $128 S128 0 C4 159-381-14 RL 008 04 00324 0 $1 89 S1 89 0 C4 159-381-15 RL 008 04 00324 0 5189 5189 0 C4 159-381-18 PAV 026 09 0 234 0 S13 66 $13 66 0 C4 159-411 RL 500 04 2 1 $116 78 S 116 78 I C4 110-210 RL 544 04 2 176 2 S127 OS $127 OS 2 C4 Ellis Ave PAV 062 09 05616 0 $32 79 $32 79 0 C4 Golden West St PAV 282 09 25362 2 5148 08 $148 08 2 Bl 111-120-20(2) 1 023 09 0207 0 $1209 $1209 0 Bl 111-120-19 I 012 09 01035 0 5604 5604 0 B1 111-120-18 I 012 09 01035 0 5604 $604 0 B1 111-120-17 1 012 09 01044 0 5610 $6 10 0 B1 111-120-16(1/2) 1 012 09 01044 0 $6 10 S610 0 BI Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 0 $27 48 $27 48 0 Bl Stewart St PAV 016 09 0 1449 0 $8 46 $8 46 0 B2 111-130-01 1 0 17 09 0 1503 0 S8 78 $8 78 0 B2 111-130-02(2) 1 025 09 02241 0 51308 51308 0 B2 111-130-26(2) 1 025 09 02241 0 51308 $1308 0 B2 111-130-05 1 015 09 0 1305 0 S7 62 $7 62 0 B2 111-130-06 I 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $8 72 $8 72 0 B2 111-130-27 1 007 09 00612 0 $3 57 $3 57 0 B2 111-130-25 I 061 09 05454 0 $31 85 $31 85 0 B2 111-130-24 I 1 00 09 08991 1 $52 50 $52 50 1 B2 111-130-23 (2) 1 200 09 1 7991 1 $105 05 $105 05 1 B2 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 0 S27 48 S27 48 0 B2 Stewart St PAV 045 09 04023 0 S23 49 $23 49 0 B3 111-130-07 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 S8 72 $8 72 0 B3 111-130-08 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 S8 72 $8 72 0 B3 111-130-09 (2) 1 033 09 02988 0 $17 45 $17 45 0 B3 111-130-10 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $8 72 $8 72 0 B3 111-130-11 1 008 09 00747 0 S4 36 $4 36 0 B3 111-130-12 1 008 09 00747 0 S4 36 $4 36 0 B3 111-130-28 I 007 09 00612 0 $3 57 S3 57 0 B3 111-130-14 1 061 09 05454 0 $31 85 $31 85 0 B3 111-130-15 1 100 09 08982 1 S52 44 S52 44 1 B3 111-130-16 (2) 1 200 09 1 7973 1 $104 94 5104 94 I B3 111-130-17 RM 100 08 07984 1 S46 62 $46 62 1 B3 111-130-18 (2) RM 1 79 08 1 4296 1 $83 47 $83 47 1 B3 023-010-25 RM 151 08 12072 1 $70 49 S70 49 I B3 023-010-26 RM 010 08 00832 0 $4 86 $4 86 0 B3 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 1 $68 26 $68 26 1 B3 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 0 $31 11 $31 11 0 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) C 5 73 09 5 1597 4 $301 27 $301 27 4 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) RM 5 73 08 45864 3 $267 79 $267 79 3 B4 110-200-30 RL 047 04 01868 0 $10 91 $10 91 0 B4 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 1 $68 26 $68 26 1 B4 Garfield Ave PAV 1 24 09 1 116 1 $65 16 $65 16 1 B5 111-120-16 (1/2) 1 0 12 09 0 1044 0 $6 10 $6 10 0 B5 111-120-15 1 012 09 01053 0 $6 15 $6 15 0 B5 111-120-14 1 012 09 01053 0 $6 15 $6 15 0 B5 111-120-13 I 0 12 09 0 1053 0 $6 15 $6 15 0 B5 111-120-12 I 012 09 01053 0 $6 15 $6 15 0 B5 111-120-11 1 005 09 00432 0 $2 52 $2 52 0 B5 111-120-30 (1/2) 1 0 14 09 0 1233 0 $7 20 $7 20 0 B5 111 - 120-09 1 081 09 07254 1 $42 36 $42 36 1 B5 111-120-08 1 100 09 08991 1 $52 50 $52 50 1 B5 111-120-07 1 093 09 08388 1 $48 98 S48 98 I B5 111-120-06 I 093 09 08388 1 $48 98 $48 98 1 B5 111-120-27 (2) 1 1 86 09 16731 1 $97 69 S97 69 1 HOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF NIA, STROM DRAIN FACILITIES B5 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 0 $31 11 $31 11 0 B5 Golden West St PAV 1 29 09 1 161 1 S67 79 S67 79 1 B5 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717 0 S2 17 S2 17 0 B6 111-120-26 1 100 09 08964 1 $52 34 $52 34 1 B6 111-120-25 1 1 00 09 08982 1 S52 44 $52 44 1 B6 111-120-24 1 1 00 09 08982 1 $52 44 $52 44 1 B6 111-120-23 1 100 09 08973 1 $52 39 $52 39 1 B6 111-120-22 1 100 09 08973 1 $52 39 $52 39 1 B6 111-120-29 1 094 09 08478 1 $49 50 $49 50 1 B6 111-120-30 (1/2) 1 007 09 006165 0 $3 60 $3 60 0 B6 Stewart St PAV 1 33 09 1 2006 1 $70 10 $70 10 1 B6 111-110-01 1 1 00 09 08964 1 $52 34 $52 34 1 B6 111-110-02 1 1 00 09 08973 1 $52 39 $52 39 1 B6 111-110-03 1 1 00 09 08973 1 $52 39 S52 39 1 B6 111-110-04 (3) 1 1 82 09 16407 1 $95 80 $95 80 1 B6 111-110-32 1 101 09 09099 1 $53 13 $53 13 1 B6 111-110-34 1 003 09 003114 0 $182 $182 0 B6 Ernest Ave PAV 1 20 09 108 1 $63 06 $63 06 1 B7 111-120-01 RL 088 04 035 0 $20 44 $20 44 0 B7 111-120-28 RL 088 04 03536 0 $20 65 S20 65 0 B7 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717 0 $2 17 $2 17 0 B7 Golden West St PAV 109 09 09792 1 $57 17 $57 17 1 Fl 111-072-33 RL 1053 04 4 212 3 $245 93 $245 93 3 IIOLLY/SEACL IEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA, -)TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT "'• UNII'CONST TR1B LAND TOTAL °/ DIA. APPROX. ESTIMATED COST COST TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL E\ L CONST IESI PLUS20% FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREA ID PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) FAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COSVIN DIA 1LF C05TIlN DIA fLF 96 IN COST COST AA 2 CIC 159-431-04 SCL 459 04 1 836 232 11 142 499 061 1 96 11 $2 29 $2 75 $37 11 $37 11 1 C1C 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 1 $1860 $1860 1 C1C 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 1 $1860 S1860 1 C1C 159-431-07 (1/2) RL 1 90 04 076 1 $15 36 $15 36 1 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 1 $24 25 $24 25 1 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 2 $46 33 $46 33 2 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 3272 23 $661 35 $661 35 23 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 2 $48 12 $48 12 2 C1B 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 5 $13178 $13178 5 C1C Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 0 $1011 51011 0 C1C Garfield St PAV 173 09 15579 1 $3149 $3149 1 CIC 159-431-07 RL 1 90 04 076 1 $15 36 $15 36 1 C1C Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $5 46 $5 46 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 018 04 00736 0 $149 $149 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 0 $149 $149 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 019 04 00736 0 $149 $149 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $1 95 $1 95 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 $1 62 $1 62 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 0 1592 0 $3 22 $3 22 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 0 1448 0 $2 93 $2 93 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 0 1712 0 $3 46 $3 46 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 01048 0 $2 12 $2 12 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $1 91 $1 91 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $1 67 $1 67 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 $1 63 $1 63 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 0 1112 0 $2 25 $2 25 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 $1 70 $1 70 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 019 04 00776 0 $157 $157 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 0 $9 15 $9 15 0 C2 QuarterHorse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $5 51 $5 51 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $1 66 $1 66 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $1 58 $1 58 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 S0 60 $0 60 0 C1B Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 1 S1579 S1579 1 Cl B Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 0 $6 69 $6 69 0 C2 110-221 RL 100 04 04 0 $8 08 $8 08 0 C2 110-221 RL 070 04 028 0 $5 66 $5 66 0 C2 110-222 RL 330 04 1 32 1 $26 68 $26 68 1 C3 110-211 RL 195 04 07392 1 $14 94 $14 94 1 C3 110-212 RL 200 04 07996 1 S16 16 S16 16 1 C3 110-213 RL 100 04 03996 0 $8 08 S8 08 0 C3 110-220-02 RL 459 04 1 836 1 $37 11 $37 11 1 C3 110-220-03 RL 279 04 1 116 1 $22 56 $22 56 1 C3 110-220-04 RL 181 04 0 724 1 $14 63 $14 63 1 C3 110-220-05 RL 500 04 2 1 $40 42 $40 42 1 C3 159-412-01 RL 1 07 04 0 426 0 $8 61 $8 61 0 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 0 $10 51 S 10 51 0 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 0 $10 51 S 10 51 0 C4 110-210-01 RL 379 04 1 516 1 $30 64 $30 64 1 C4 110-210-02 RL 141 04 0 562 0 $ I 1 36 S 11 36 0 C4 110-210-03 RL 035 04 01408 0 $2 85 $2 85 0 C4 110-210-04 RL 012 04 00464 0 $0 94 $0 94 0 C4 110-210-10 RL 079 04 0 314 0 $6 35 S6 35 0 C4 110-210-06 RL 048 04 0 1908 0 $3 86 $3 86 0 C4 110-210-07 RL 064 04 02544 0 $5 14 $5 14 0 C4 Saddleback Ln PAV 049 09 04302 0 $8 70 $9 70 0 C4 159-371-09 RL 021 04 00836 0 $169 $169 0 C4 159-371-10 RL 022 04 00872 0 $1 76 $1 76 0 C4 159-371-11 RL 023 04 0 092 0 $1 86 $1 86 0 C4 159-371-12 RL 021 04 00856 0 $173 $173 0 C4 159-371-21 PAV 028 09 02502 0 $5 06 $5 06 0 HOLLY/SEACL IEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA. 6TROM DRAIN FACILITIES C4 159-371-15 RL 013 04 00504 0 $102 $1 02 0 C4 159-371-14 RL 009 04 0 036 0 $0 73 $0 73 0 C4 159-371-13 RL 009 04 00364 0 $0 74 $0 74 0 C4 159-381-08 RL 021 04 00848 0 $1 71 $1 71 0 C4 159-381-09 RL 022 04 00876 0 $1 77 $1 77 0 C4 159-381-10 RL 020 04 00788 0 $159 $159 0 C4 159-381-11 RL 037 04 0 146 0 $2 95 $2 95 0 C4 159-381-12 RL 017 04 0066 0 $133 $133 0 C4 159-381-13 RL 006 04 0 022 0 $0 44 $0 44 0 C4 159-381-14 RL 008 04 00324 0 $0 65 $0 65 0 C4 159-381-15 RL 008 04 00324 0 $0 65 $0 65 0 C4 159-381-18 PAV 026 09 0 234 0 $4 73 $4 73 0 C4 159-411 RL 500 04 2 1 $40 42 $40 42 1 C4 110-210 RL 544 04 2 176 2 $43 98 $43 98 2 C4 Ellis Ave PAV 062 09 05616 0 $1135 $1135 0 C4 Golden West St PAV 282 09 25362 2 $51 26 $51 26 2 BI 111-120-20 (2) 1 023 09 0207 0 $4 18 $4 1S 0 BI 111-120-19 1 0 12 09 01035 0 $2 09 $2 09 0 BI 111-120-18 1 0 12 09 0 1035 0 $2 09 $2 09 0 BI 111-120-17 1 012 09 01044 0 $211 $211 0 BI 111-120-16(1/2) 1 012 09 01044 0 $211 $211 0 BI Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 0 $9 51 $9 51 0 BI Stewart St PAV 0 16 09 0 1449 0 $2 93 $2 93 0 B2 111-130-01 1 0 17 09 0 1503 0 $3 04 $3 04 0 B2 111-130-02 (2) 1 025 09 02241 0 S4 53 $4 53 0 B2 111-130-26 (2) 1 025 09 02241 0 $4 53 $4 53 0 B2 111-130-05 I 0 15 09 0 1305 0 $2 64 $2 64 0 B2 111-130-06 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $3 02 S3 02 0 B2 111-130-27 1 007 09 00612 0 S1 24 Sl 24 0 B2 111-130-25 1 061 09 05454 0 $11 02 $11 02 0 B2 111-130-24 1 100 09 08991 1 $1817 51817 1 B2 111-130-23 (2) 1 200 09 1 7991 1 S36 36 $36 36 1 B2 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 0 $9 51 $9 51 0 B2 Stewart St PAV 045 09 04023 0 $8 13 $8 13 0 B3 111-130-07 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $3 02 $3 02 0 B3 111-130-08 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $3 02 $3 02 0 B3 111-130-09 (2) 1 033 09 02988 0 $6 04 $6 04 0 B3 111-130-10 I 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $3 02 $3 02 B3 111-130-I1 1 008 09 00747 0 5151 $151 0 B3 111-130-12 1 008 09 00747 0 $151 $151 0 B3 111-130-28 1 007 09 00612 0 $1 24 $1 24 0 B3 111-130-14 1 061 09 05454 0 $11 02 $11 02 0 B3 111-130-15 1 100 09 08982 1 $1815 $1815 1 B3 111-130-16 (2) 1 200 09 1 7973 1 $36 33 $36 33 1 B3 111-130-17 RM 100 08 07984 1 $1614 $1614 1 B3 111-130-18 (2) RM 1 79 08 1 4296 1 $28 90 $28 90 1 B3 023-010-25 RM 1 51 08 12072 1 $24 40 $24 40 1 B3 023-010-26 RM O10 08 00832 0 $168 $168 0 B3 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 1 $23 63 $23 63 1 B3 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 0 $10 77 $10 77 0 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) C 5 73 09 5 1597 4 $104 29 $104 29 4 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) RM 5 73 08 4 5864 3 $92 70 $92 70 3 B4 110-200-30 RL 047 04 0 1868 0 $3 78 $3 78 0 B4 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 1 $23 63 $23 63 1 B4 Garfield Ave PAV 1 24 09 1 116 1 $22 56 $22 56 1 B5 111-120-16(1/2) I 012 09 01044 0 $211 $211 0 B5 111-120-15 I 012 09 01053 0 $2 13 $2 13 0 B5 111-120-14 1 012 09 01053 0 $2 13 $2 13 0 B5 111-120-13 1 012 09 01053 0 $2 13 $2 13 0 B5 111-120-12 1 0 12 09 0 1053 0 $2 13 $2 13 0 B5 111-120-11 1 005 09 00432 0 $0 87 $0 87 0 B5 111-120-30 (1/2) 1 0 14 09 01233 0 $2 49 $2 49 0 B5 111-120-09 1 081 09 07254 1 $1466 $1466 1 B5 111-120-08 1 100 09 08991 1 $1817 $1817 1 B5 111-120-07 1 093 09 08388 1 $16 95 $16 95 1 B5 111-120-06 1 093 09 08388 1 $16 95 $16 95 1 B5 111-120-27 (2) 1 1 86 09 1 6731 1 S33 82 $33 82 1 HOLLY/SEACL )EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA� ,TROM DRAIN FACILITIES B5 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 0 $10 77 S10 77 0 B5 Golden West St PAV 1 29 09 1 161 1 $23 47 $23 47 1 B5 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717 0 $0 75 $0 75 0 B6 111-120-26 1 100 09 08964 1 $1812 $1812 1 B6 111-120-25 1 100 09 08982 1 $18 15 $18 15 1 B6 111-120-24 1 100 09 08982 1 $18 15 $18 15 1 B6 111-120-23 1 100 09 08973 1 $18 14 $18 14 1 B6 111-120-22 1 100 09 09973 1 $IS 14 SIS 14 l B6 111-120-29 1 094 09 08478 1 $1714 $1714 1 B6 111-120-30(112) 1 007 09 006165 0 $125 $125 0 B6 Stewart St PAV 1 33 09 1 2006 1 $24 27 $24 27 1 B6 Ill-110-01 1 100 09 08964 1 SI812 $1812 1 B6 111-110-02 1 1 00 09 08973 1 $18 14 $18 14 1 B6 111-110-03 1 100 09 08973 1 51814 $18 14 1 B6 111-110-04 (3) I 1 82 09 1 6407 1 $33 16 $33 16 1 B6 111-110-32 1 101 09 09099 1 $1839 $1839 1 B6 111-110-34 1 003 09 003114 0 $0 63 $0 63 0 B6 Ernest Ave PAV 1 20 09 108 1 S21 83 S21 83 1 B7 111-120-01 RL 088 04 035 0 $7 07 $7 07 0 B7 111-120-28 RL 088 04 03536 0 $7 15 $7 15 0 B7 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717 0 $0 75 $0 75 0 B7 Golden West St PAV 109 09 09792 1 $19 79 $19 79 1 Fl 111-072-33 RL 1053 04 4 212 3 $85 13 $85 13 3 F2 111-072-32 RL 22 04 _ 88 6 $177 87 $177 87 6 HOLLY/SEACL EVELOPMENI' ESTIMATED COST OF MAC TROM DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT * EST UNIT CONST TR1B LAND TOTAL % DIA. APR*'O`C ESTIMATED COST COST % TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L I CONST ico!>T/TNDTAILFICOSTIINTD)IAILFI PLUS20% FOR TOTAL I TOTAL REACH AREA 1D PARCEL No LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) F-AC AT AREA (IN) (IF} 72 IN COST COST 48 6 DI Gothard St PAV 042 09 0 378 269 52 213 912 079366 0 72 39 $2 36 S2 83 $13 91 $13 91 0 D3 111-110-15 1 009 09 008001 0 $2 94 $2 94 0 D3 111-110-14 I O11 09 00999 0 $368 $368 0 D3 111-110-37 I 0 17 09 01503 0 S5 53 $5 53 0 D3 111-110-36 I 0 17 09 0 1512 0 $5 56 $5 56 0 D3 111-110-10 1 Oil 09 0 1008 0 $3 71 S3 71 0 D3 111-110-31 1 023 09 02034 0 S7 49 $7 49 0 D3 111-110-33 1 Oil 09 0 1017 0 S3 74 $3 74 0 D3 111-110-07 I 034 09 03078 0 S1133 $1133 0 D3 111-110-38 1 101 09 0 909 0 $33 45 S33 45 0 D3 111-110-22 1 050 09 04491 0 $16 53 S16 53 0 D3 111-110-21 1 050 09 04491 0 $1653 S1653 0 D2 111-110-18 1 200 09 1 7982 1 $66 I8 $66 18 1 D2 111-110-19 1 100 09 09 0 $3312 S3312 0 D2 111-110-20 1 1 00 09 08982 0 $33 06 $33 06 0 D2 Gothard St PAV 047 09 04194 0 $15 43 $15 43 0 D4 Gothard St PAV 071 09 06354 0 $23 38 $23 38 0 D5 El 111-07 MISC CITY PROP RM RM 509 1748 08 08 4072 13984 19 65 $1,49858 $5,146 38 $1,49858 $5,146 38 19 65 7 E2 111-07, 159-473 &474 RM 284 08 22 72 11 $836 14 S836 14 11 E3 111-072 RL 65 04 26 1 S95 69 $95 69 1 TOTAL 100_j TOTAL IS7,872 36 100 HOLLY/SEACLI 'EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MAo fRON,I DRAIN FACILITIES LOT LOT "** EST UNI f CONST fRIB LAND TOTAL % DIA APPROf ESTIMATED COST COST 0 TRIBUTARY AREA USE AREA COEF TOTAL EX L CONST PLUS20�1 FOR TOTAL TOTAL REACH AREAID PARCEL Nn LAND USE (ACRE) COEF AC (ACRE) EAC AT AREA (IN) (LF) COST/1N DIA.-/LF COST/IN DIA /LF 961N COST COST 8 4A CIC 159-431-04 SCL 459 04 1 836 501 64 35641 071 1 72 430 S2 36 $2 83 S451 88 $451 88 1 CIC 159-431-05 SCL 230 04 092 0 $226 43 S226 43 0 CIC 159-431-06 SCL 230 04 092 0 $226 43 $226 43 0 CIC 159-431-07 (1/2) RL 190 04 076 0 S187 05 S187 05 0 CIA 159-42 RL 300 04 12 0 $295 34 $295 34 0 CIA 159-432-03 RL 5 73 04 2 292 1 $564 11 $564 11 1 CIA 159-432-03 RM 4090 08 32 72 9 S8,053 07 $8,053 07 9 CIA Garfield St PAV 265 09 23805 1 S585 89 $585 89 1 C1B 159-451 RL 1630 04 652 2 $1,604 71 $1,604 71 2 CIC Edwards St PAV 056 09 05004 0 $12316 $12316 0 CIC Garfield St PAV 1 73 09 1 5579 0 $383 43 $383 43 0 CIC 159-431-07 RL 190 04 076 0 $18705 $18705 0 CIC Saddleback Ln PAV 03 09 027 0 $66 45 S66 45 0 C2 159-403-01 RL 018 04 00736 0 $1811 S1811 0 C2 159-403-02 RL 018 04 00736 0 $1811 $1811 0 C2 159-403-03 RL 018 04 00736 0 S1811 S1811 0 C2 159-403-04 RL 024 04 009636 0 $23 72 $23 72 0 C2 159-403-05 RL 020 04 008 0 $19 69 S 19 69 0 C2 159-403-08 RL 040 04 01592 0 $39 18 $39 18 0 C2 159-403-09 RL 036 04 01448 0 $35 64 $35 64 0 C2 159-403-10 RL 043 04 01712 0 $42 14 $42 14 0 C2 159-403-11 RL 026 04 0 1048 0 $25 79 $25 79 0 C2 159-403-12 RL 024 04 00944 0 $23 23 $23 23 0 C2 159-403-13 RL 021 04 00828 0 $20 38 $20 38 0 C2 159-403-14 RL 020 04 00804 0 S 19 79 $19 79 0 C2 159-403-15 RL 028 04 0 1112 0 $27 37 $27 37 0 C2 159-403-16 RL 021 04 0 084 0 $20 67 $20 67 0 C2 159-403-17 RL 019 04 00776 0 $1910 $1910 0 C2 159-403-22 PAV 050 09 04527 0 $11142 $11142 0 C2 QuarterHocse Ln PAV 030 09 02727 0 $67 12 $67 12 0 C2 159-402-02 RL 021 04 0 082 0 $20 18 $20 18 0 C2 159-402-12 RL 020 04 00784 0 $19 30 S19 30 0 C2 Saddleback Ln PAV 003 09 002988 0 $7 35 S7 35 0 C1B Garfield St PAV 087 09 07812 0 $192 27 $192 27 0 C1B Saddleback Ln PAV 037 09 03312 0 $81 52 S81 52 0 C2 110-221 RL 100 04 04 0 $98 45 S98 45 0 C2 110-221 RL 070 04 028 0 S68 91 $68 91 0 C2 110-222 RL 3 30 04 1 32 0 $324 88 $324 88 0 C3 110-211 RL 185 04 07392 0 $I8I93 $18193 0 C3 110-212 RL 200 04 07996 0 $196 80 $196 80 0 C3 110-213 RL 100 04 03996 0 $98 35 $98 35 0 C3 110-220-02 RL 459 04 1 836 1 $451 88 $451 88 1 C3 110-220-03 RL 279 04 1 116 0 $274 67 $274 67 0 C3 110-220-04 RL 181 04 0724 0 $17819 $17819 0 C3 110-220-05 RL 500 04 2 1 $492 24 $492 24 1 C3 159-412-01 RL 1 07 04 0 426 0 $104 85 S 104 85 0 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 0 $128 03 $128 03 0 C2,3,4, Saddleback Ln PAV 058 09 05202 0 $128 03 S128 03 0 C4 110-210-01 RL 3 79 04 1 516 0 $373 12 $373 12 0 C4 110-210-02 RL 1 41 04 0 562 0 $138 32 $138 32 0 C4 110-210-03 RL 035 04 01408 0 $34 65 $34 65 0 C4 110-210-04 RL 012 04 00464 0 $1142 Sll42 0 C4 110-210-10 RL 079 04 0 314 0 $77 28 $77 28 0 C4 110-210-06 RL 048 04 0 1908 0 $46 96 S46 96 0 C4 110-210-07 RL 064 04 02544 0 $62 61 $62 61 0 C4 Saddleback Ln PAV 048 09 04302 0 $105 88 $105 88 0 C4 159-371-09 RL 021 04 00836 0 S20 58 $20 58 0 C4 159-371-10 RL 022 04 00872 0 $21 46 $21 46 0 C4 159-371-11 RL 023 04 0 092 0 $22 64 $22 64 0 C4 159-371-12 RL 021 04 00856 0 $21 07 $21 07 0 C4 159-371-21 PAV 028 09 02502 0 $61 58 $61 58 0 C4 159-371-15 RL 0 13 04 00504 0 $12 40 $12 40 0 IIOLLV/SEACL IEVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA.. STROM DRAIN FACILITIES C4 159-371-14 RL 009 04 0 036 0 S8 86 $8 86 0 C4 159-371-13 RL 009 04 00364 0 $8 96 $8 96 0 C4 159-381-08 RL 021 04 00848 0 $20 87 S20 87 0 C4 159-381-09 RL 022 04 00876 0 S21 56 S21 56 0 C4 159-381-10 RL 020 04 00788 0 $19 39 S19 39 0 C4 159-381-11 RL 037 04 0 146 0 $35 93 $35 93 0 C4 159-381-12 RL 017 04 0066 0 $1624 $1624 0 C4 159-381-13 RL 006 04 0 022 0 $5 41 $5 41' 0 C4 159-381-14 RL 008 04 00324 0 $7 97 $7 97 0 C4 159-381-15 RL 008 04 00324 0 $7 97 $7 97 0 C4 159-381-18 PAV 026 09 0 234 0 $57 59 $57 59 0 C4 159-411 RL 500 04 2 1 $492 24 5492 24 1 C4 110-210 RL 544 04 2 176 1 - $535 56 $535 56 1 C4 Ellis Ave PAV 062 09 05616 0 S138 22 5138 22 0 C4 Golden West St PAV 282 09 25362 1 $624 21 $624 21 1 Bi 111-120-20 (2) 1 023 09 0207 0 S50 95 $50 95 0 Bl 111-120-19 1 0 12 09 01035 0 $25 47 $25 47 0 Bl 111-120-18 1 0 12 09 01035 0 $25 47 $25 47 0 Bl 111-120-17 1 0 12 09 0 1044 0 S25 70 $25 70 0 Bl 111-120-16 (1/2) 1 0 12 09 0 1044 0 $25 70 S25 70 0 B 1 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 0 S 115 85 $115 85 0 B] Stewart St PAV 016 09 0 1449 0 $35 66 $35 66 0 B2 111-130-01 1 0 17 09 0 1503 0 $36 99 $36 99 0 B2 111-130-02(2) 1 025 09 02241 0 $55 16 $55 16 0 B2 111-130-26 (2) 1 025 09 02241 0 $55 16 $55 16 0 B2 111-130-05 1 015 09 01305 0 $3212 $3212 0 B2 111-130-06 1 0 17 09 0 1494 0 $36 77 $36 77 0 B2 111-130-27 1 007 09 00612 0 $1506 $1506 0 B2 111-130-25 1 061 09 05454 0 $134 23 $134 23 0 B2 111-130-24 1 1 00 09 08991 0 5221 29 $221 29 0 B2 111-130-23 (2) 1 200 09 1 7991 1 $442 80 $442 80 1 B2 Garfield Ave PAV 052 09 04707 0 $115 85 S115 85 0 B2 Stewart St PAV 045 09 04023 0 S99 01 $99 01 0 B3 111-130-07 1 017 09 0 1494 0 $36 77 $36 77 0 B3 111-130-08 1 017 09 0 1494 0 $36 77 $36 77 0 B3 111-130-09 (2) 1 033 09 02988 0 S73 54 $73 54 0 B3 111-130-10 1 017 09 0 1494 0 $36 77 $36 77 0 B3 111-130-11 1 008 09 00747 0 $1839 $1839 0 B3 111-130-12 I 008 09 00747 0 S1839 $1839 0 B3 111-130-28 1 007 09 00612 0 $1506 $1506 0 B3 111-130-14 1 061 09 05454 0 $134 23 $134 23 0 B3 111-130-15 1 100 09 08982 0 $22107 $22107 0 B3 111-130-16 (2) 1 200 09 1 7973 1 $442 35 $442 35 1 B3 111-130-17 RM 100 08 07984 0 $196 50 $196 50 0 B3 111-130-18 (2) RM 1 79 08 1 4296 0 $351 85 $351 85 0 B3 023-010-25 RM 151 08 1 2072 0 $297 12 $297 12 0 B3 023-010-26 RM 0 10 08 00832 0 $20 48 $20 48 0 B3 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 0 $287 74 $287 74 0 B3 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 0 S131 13 $131 13 0 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) C 573 09 5 1597 1 $1,269 91 $1,269 91 1 B4 110-200-32 (1/2) RM 573 08 45864 1 $1,128 81 $1,128 81 1 B4 110-200-30 RL 047 04 01868 0 $45 98 $45 98 0 B4 Golden West St PAV 1 30 09 1 1691 0 $287 74 S287 74 0 B4 Garfield Ave PAV 1 24 09 1 116 0 $274 67 $274 67 0 B5 111-120-16 1/2 ( ) 1 0 12 0 9 0 1044 0 $25 70 $25 70 0 B5 111-120-15 1 0 12 09 0 1053 0 S25 92 S25 92 0 B5 111-120-14 1 0 12 09 01053 0 $25 92 $25 92 0 B5 111-120-13 1 0 12 09 0 1053 0 $25 92 S25 92 0 B5 111-120-12 1 0 12 09 01053 0 $25 92 S25 92 0 B5 111-120-11 1 005 09 00432 0 $1063 $1063 0 B5 111-120-30 (1/2) 1 0 14 09 0 1233 0 $30 35 $30 35 0 B5 111-120-09 1 081 09 07254 0 $22129 $22129 0 B5 111-120-08 1 100 09 08991 0 $22129 $22129 0 B5 111-120-07 I 093 09 08388 0 $206 45 $206 45 0 B5 111-120-06 1 093 09 08388 0 $206 45 $206 45 0 B5 111-120-27 (2) 1 1 86 09 1 6731 0 $411 78 S411 78 0 B5 Garfield Ave PAV 059 09 05328 0 $131 13 $131 13 0 IIOLLY/SEACL 'EVELOPMENT ESTIMATED COST OF MA., TROM DRAIN FACILITIES B5 Golden West St PAV 1 29 09 1 161 0 $285 75 $285 75 0 B5 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717 0 $9 15 $9 15 0 B6 111-120-26 I 1 00 09 08964 0 S220 62 $220 62 0 B6 111-120-25 1 100 09 08982 0 $221 07 $221 07 0 B6 111-120-24 I 100 09 08982 0 S221 07 $221 07 0 B6 111-120-23 I 100 09 08973 0 $220 84 $220 84 0 B6 111-120-22 1 100 09 08973 0 $220 84 $220 84 0 B6 111-120-29 1 094 09 08478 0 $208 66 $208 66 0 B6 111-120-30(1/2) 1 007 09 006165 0 $1517 $1517 0 B6 Stewart St PAV 1 33 09 12006 0 $295 49 $295 49 0 B6 111-I10-01 I 100 09 08964 0 $220 62 $220 62 0 B6 111-110-02 I 1 00 09 08973 0 $220 84 S220 84 0 B6 111-110-03 1 1 00 09 08973 0 $220 84 $220 84 0 B6 111-110-04 (3) 1 1 82 09 1 6407 0 S403 81 $403 81 0 B6 111-110-32 I 1 01 09 09099 0 $223 95 $223 95 0 B6 111-110-34 I 003 09 003114 0 $7 66 $7 66 0 B6 Ernest Ave PAV 120 09 108 0 $265 81 $265 81 0 B7 111-120-01 RL 088 04 035 0 $86 14 $86 14 0 B7 111-120-28 RL 088 04 03536 0 S87 03 $87 03 0 B7 Ernest Ave PAV 004 09 003717 0 $9 15 $9 15 0 B7 Golden West St PAV 109 09 09792 0 $241 00 $241 00 0 171 111-072-33 RL 1053 04 4 212 1 $1,036 66 $1,036 66 1 F2 111-072-32 RL 22 04 88 2 $2,165 86 $2,165 86 2 D1 Gothard St PAV 042 09 0 378 0 $93 03 $93 03 0 D3 ill-110-15 I 009 09 008001 0 $1969 $1969 0 D3 111-I10-14 I Oil 09 00999 0 S24 59 $24 59 0 D3 111-110-37 I 0 17 09 01503 0 $36 99 S36 99 0 D3 111-110-36 1 0 17 09 01512 0 $37 21 $37 21 0 D3 111-110-10 1 Oil 09 01008 0 $24 81 $24 81 0 D3 111-110-31 1 023 09 02034 0 $50 06 $50 06 0 D3 111-110-33 1 Oil 09 0 1017 0 $25 03 $25 03 0 D3 111-110-07 1 034 09 03078 0 S75 76 $75 76 0 D3 111-110-38 I 101 09 0 909 0 $223 72 $223 72 0 D3 111-110-22 I 050 09 04491 0 $11053 $11053 0 D3 111-110-21 I 050 09 04491 0 S110 53 $11053 0 D2 111-110-18 1 200 09 1 7982 1 $442 57 $442 57 1 D2 111-110-19 1 100 09 09 0 $221 51 $221 51 0 D2 111-110-20 1 100 09 08982 0 $221 07 $221 07 0 D2 Gothard St PAV 047 09 04194 0 $103 22 $103 22 0 D4 Gothard St PAV 071 09 06354 0 S 156 39 $156 39 0 D5 111-07 RM 509 08 4072 11 $10,022 04 $10,022 04 11 E 1 MISC CITY PROP RM 1748 08 13984 39 $34,417 53 $34,417 53 39 E2 111-07, 159-473 &474 RM 284 08 22 72 6 $5,591 86 $5,591 86 6 E3 111-072 RL 65 04 26 1 $639 91 $639 91 1 ***Pipe lengths are estimated values only PLC will need to verify the lengths of their storm drain lines ••*' City cost shown will be shifted to S/P cost (see General Comments) Parcel Totals TOTAL REACH PARCEL No. COST 9 111-130-19 $2,563 96 9 111-130-20 (2) $7,410 28 9 111-130-21 $1,852 57 9 111-130-22 $1.852 20 9 111-140-02 $345 97 9 111-140-04 $691 93 9 111-140-05 $691 93 9 111-140-06 (2) $1,383 87 9 111-140-07 (2) $1,393 87 9 111-140-08 $696 10 9 111-140-09 $691 93 9 111-140-10 $571 05 9 111-140-14 $4,159 95 9 111-140-19 $4,022 39 9 111-140-20 $829 49 9 111-140-21 $2,071 64 9 111-140-22 $1,250 48 9 111-140-23 $4,155 78 9 111-140-24 $4,155 78 9 111-140-25 $4,155 78 9 111-140-26 $1,471 40 9 111-140-27 $1,071 25 9 111-140-28 $1,037 90 9 111-140-29 $1,037 90 9 ` 111-140-30 $1,037 90 9 111-140-31 $1,037 90 9 111-140-32 (4) $7,532 09 9 111-140-33 (4) $7,477 90 9 111-140-36 $345 97 9 111-140-37 $691 93 9 111-140-38(-01) (2) $1,383 87 9 111-150-13 $615 05 9 111-150-15 $2,556 55 9 111-150-16 $2,556 55 9 111-150-17 (2) $5,113 09 9 111-150-18 $2,860 37 9 111-150-19 $1,856 27 9 111-150-20 $1,619 15 9 111-150-21 $1,356 08 9 Crystal St $7,165 28 9 Garfield Ave $2,525 98 9 Stewart St $5,168 67 Parcel Totals TOTAL $102,456.00 TOTAL REACH PARCEL No COST 3 023-010-25 $8,657 94 3 023-010-26 $596 70 3 110-200-3 0 $1, 3 77 12 3 110-200-32 (1/2) $71,850 05 3 111-110-01 $2,493 06 3 111-110-02 $2,495 56 3 111-110-03 $2,495 56 3 111-110-04 (3) $4,563 10 3 111-110-32 $2,530 61 3 111-110-34 $86 61 3 111-120-01 $100 92 3 111-120-06 $1,786 09 3 111-120-07 $1,786 09 3 111-120-08 $1,914 49 3 111-120-09 $1,544 62 3 111-120-11 $91 99 3 111-120-12 $224 22 3 111-120-13 $224 22 3 111-120-14 $224 22 3 111-120-15 $224 22 3 111-120-16 (1/2) $1,754 12 3 111-120-17 $1,531 82 3 111-120-19 $1,518 61 3 111-120-19 $1,518 61 3 111-120-20 (2) $3,037 22 3 111-120-22 $2,495 56 3 111-120-23 $2,495 56 3 111-120-24 $2,498 07 3 111-120-25 $2,498 07 3 111-120-26 $2,493 06 3 111-120-27 (2) $3,562 60 3 111-120-28 $101 96 3 111-120-29 $2,357 89 3 111-120-30 (1/2) $434 01 3 111-130-01 $2,186 90 3 111-130-02 (2) $3,260 71 3 111-130-05 $1,898 81 3 111-130-06 $2,173 80 3 111-130-07 $1,071 48 3 111-130-08 $1,071 48 Parcel Totals 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 3 REACH 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 111-130-09 (2) 111-130-10 111-130-11 111-130-12 111-130-14 111-130-15 111-130-16 (2) 111-130-17 111-130-19 (2) 111-130-23 (2) 111-130-24 111-130-25 111-130-26 (2) 111-130-27 111-130-28 Ernest Ave Garfield Ave Golden West St Stewart St TOTAL PARCEL No 023-010-25 023-010-26 110-200-3 0 110-200-32 (1 /2) 110-210 110-210-01 110-210-02 110-210-03 110-210-04 110-210-06 110-210-07 110-210-10 110-211 110-212 110-213 110-220-02 110-220-03 110-220-04 110-220-05 110-221 110-222 $2,142 97 $1,071 48 $535 74 $535 74 $3,911 57 $6,441 82 $12, 890 09 $5,726 06 $10,252 98 $26,177 32 $13,082 11 $7,935 70 $3,260 71 $890 47 $438 92 $3,093 55 $26,938 24 $19,758 02 $11,318 71 $301,629.96 TOTAL COST $97 24 $6 70 $15 05 $785 07 $2,353 04 $3,588 05 $1,330 14 $333 24 $109 82 $451 58 $602 11 $743 17 $2,935 96 $3,175 85 $1,587 13 $7,292 23 $4,432 53 $2,875 58 $7,943 60 $3,307 78 $5,465 68 Parcel Totals 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2% 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 111-110-01 $72 21 111-110-02 $72 28 111-110-03 $72 28 111-110-04 (3) $132 16 111-110-32 $73 29 111-110-34 $2 51 111-120-01 $28 19 111-120-06 $67 57 111-120-07 $67 57 111-120-08 $72 42 111-120-09 $58 43 111-120-11 $3 48 111-120-12 $8 48 111-120-13 $8 48 111-120-14 $8 48 111-120-15 $8 48 111-120-16 (1/2) $16 82 111-120-17 $8 41 111-120-18 $8 34 111-120-19 $8 34 111-120-20 (2) $16 67 111-120-22 $72 28 111-120-23 $72 28 111-120-24 $72 35 111-120-25 $72 35 111-120-26 $72 21 111-120-27 (2) $134 77 111-120-28 $28 48 111-120-29 $68 29 111-120-30 (1/2) $14 90 111-130-01 $12 11 111-130-02 (2) $18 05 111-130-05 $10 51 111-13 0-06 $12 03 111-130-07 $12 03 111-130-08 $12 03 111-130-09 (2) $24 07 111-130-10 $12 03 111-130-11 $6 02 111-130-12 $6 02 111-130-14 $43 93 111-130-15 $72 35 111-130-16 (2) $144 78 111-130-17 $64 31 Parcel Totals 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 2 111-130-18 (2) $115 16 111-13 0-23 (2) $144 92 111-130-24 $72 42 111-130-25 $43 93 111-130-26 (2) $18 05 111-130-27 $4 93 111-130-28 $4 93 159-371-09 $197 86 159-371-10 $206 38 159-371-11 $217 74 159-371-12 $202 60 159-371-13 $86 15 159-371-14 $85 20 159-371-15 $119 29 159-3 71-21 $592 17 159-381-09 $200 70 159-381-09 $207 33 159-391-10 $186 50 159-381-11 $345 55 159-391-12 $156 21 159-381-13 $52 07 159-381-14 $76 68 159-381-15 $76 68 159-381-18 $553 83 159-402-02 $570 01 159-402-12 $544 99 159-403-01 $511 62 159-403-02 $511 62 159-403-03 $511 62 159-403-04 $669 83 159-403-05 $556 11 159-403-08 $1,106 66 159-403-09 $1,006 56 159-403-10 $1,190 07 159-403-11 $728 50 159-403-12 $656 21 159-403-13 $575 57 159-403-14 $558 89 159-403-15 $772 99 159-403-16 $583 91 159-403-17 $539 43 159-403-22 $3,146 88 159-411 $4,733 58 159-412-01 $1,691 99 Parcel Totals 2 159-42 2 159-431-04 2 159-431-05 2 159-431-06 2 159-431-07 2 159-431-07 (1l2) 2 159-432-03 2 159-451 2 Edwards St 2 Ellis Ave 2 Ernest Ave 2 Garfield Ave 2 Garfield St 2 Golden West St 2 QuarterHorse Ln 2 Saddleback Ln 2 Stewart St TOTAL REACH PARCEL No 6 111-07 6 111-110-07 6 111-110-10 6 111-110-14 6 111-110-15 6 111-110-18 6 111-110-19 6 111-110-20 6 111-110-21 6 111-110-22 6 111-110-31 6 111-110-33 6 111-110-36 6 111-110-37 6 111-110-38 6 Gothard St TOTAL REACH PARCEL No 7 111-07 7 111-07, 159-473 &474 7 111-072 $8,305 25 $11,762 22 $5,893 92 $5,893 92 $4,450 00 $4,868 89 $242,319 49 $45,125 19 $2,929 97 $172 91 $92 98 $251 56 $29,907 52 $1,141 62 $1,895 63 $10,090 92 $140 79 $451,681.80 TOTAL COST $16,239 79 $7,794 64 $2,552 63 $2,529 84 $2,026 15 $21,768 50 $10,895 15 $10,873 36 $11,372 88 $11,372 88 $5,150 84 $2,575 42 $3,828 95 $3,906 15 $23,019 26 $21,778 76 $157,585.20 TOTAL COST $40,436 14 $22, 561 62 $2,103 37 Parcel Totals 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 REACH 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 111-110-07 111-110-10 111-110-14 111-110-15 111-110-18 111-110-19 111-110-20 111-110-21 111-110-22 111-110-31 111-110-33 111-110-36 111-110-37 111-110-38 Gothard St MISC CITY PROP TOTAL PARCEL No 023-010-25 023-010-26 110-200-30 110-200-32 (1/2) 110-210 110-210-01 110-210-02 110-210-03 110-210-04 110-210-06 110-210-07 110-210-10 110-211 110-212 110-213 110-220-02 110-220-03 110-220-04 110-220-05 110-221 110-222 111-072-32 111-072-33 111-110-01 $305 65 $100 10 $99 20 $79 45 $1.785 (66 $893 73 $891 94 $445-9.7 $445 97 $201 98 $100 99 $150 15 $149 25 $902 66 $1,422 81 $138,865 18 $211,941.84 TOTAL COST $162 62 $11 21 $25 16 $1,312 89 $293 13 $204 22 $75 71 $18 97 $6 25 $25 70 $34 27 $42 30 $99 58 $107 71 $53 83 $247 33 $150 34 $97 53 $269 42 $91 60 $177 82 $177 87 $331 07 $120 75 Parcel Totals 4A 111-110-02 $120 87 4A 111-110-03 $120 87 4A 111-110-04 (3) $221 02 4A 111-110-32 $122 57 4A 111-110-34 $4 19 4A 111-120-01 $47 15 4A 111-120-06 $112 99 4A 111-120-07 $112 99 4A 111-120-08 $121 12 4A 111-120-09 $97 72 4A 111-120-11 $5 82 4A 111-120-12 $14 18 4A 111-120-13 $14 18 4A 111-120-14 $14 18 4A 111-120-15 $14 18 4A 111-120-16 (1/2) $28 13 4A 111-120-17 $14 06 4A 111-120-18 $13 94 4A 111-120-19 $13 94 4A 111-120-20 (2) $27 88 4A 111-120-22 $120 87 4A 111-120-23 $120 87 4A 111-120-24 $121 00 4A 111-120-25 $121 00 4A 111-120-26 $120 75 4A 111-120-27 (2) $225 38 4A 111-120-28 $47 63 4A 111-120-29 $114 21 4A 111-120-30 (1/2) $24 91 4A 111-130-01 $20 25 4A 111-130-02 (2) $30 19 4A 111-130-05 $17 58 4A 111-130-06 $20 13 4A 111-130-07 $20 13 4A 111-130-08 $20 13 4A 111-130-09 (2) $40 25 4A 111-130-10' $20 13 4A 111--130-11 $10 06 4A 111-130-12 $10 06 4A 111-130-14 $73 47 4A 111-130-15 $121 00 4A 111-130-16 (2) $242 11 4A 111-130-17 $107 55 4A 111-130-18 $192 58 Parcel Totals 4A 111-130-23 (2) $242 36 4A 111-130-24 $121 12 4A 111-130-25 $73 47 4A 111-130-26 (2) $30 19 4A 111-130-27 $8 24 4A 111-130-28 $8 24 4A 159-371-09 $11 26 4A 159-371-10 $11 75 4A 159-371-11 $12 39 4A 159-371-12 $11 53 4A 159-371-13 $4 90 4A 159-371-14 $4 85 4A 159-371-15 $6 79 4A 159-371-21 $33 70 4A 159-381-08 $11 42 4A 159-3 81-09 $11 80 4A 159-381-10 $10 62 4A 159-381-11 $19 67 4A 159-381-12 $8 89 4A 159-381-13 $2 96 4A 159-381-14 $4 36 4A 159-381-15 $4 36 4A 159-381-18 $31 52 4A 159-402-02 $11 05 4A 159-402-12 $10 56 4A 159-403-01 $9 91 4A 159-403-02 $9 91 4A 159-403-03 $9 91 4A 159-403-04 $12 98 4A 159-403-05 $10 78 4A 159-403-08 $21 45 4A 159-403-09 $19 51 4A 159-403-10 $23 06 4A 159-403-11 $14 12 4A 159-403-12 $12 72 4A 159-403 -13 $11 15 4A 159-403-14 $10 83 4A 159-403-15 $14 98 4A 159-403-16 $11 32 4A 159-403-17 $10 45 4A 159-403-22 $60 98 4A 159-411 $269 42 4A 159-412-01 $57 39 4A 159-42 $161 65 Parcel Totals 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A 4A REACH 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 4B 159-431-04 159-431-05 159-431-06 159-431-07 159-431-07 (1/2) 159-432-03 159-451 Edwards St Ellis Ave Ernest Ave Garfield Ave Garfield St Golden West St QuarterHorse Ln Saddleback Ln Stewart St TOTAL PARCEL No 111-07 111-07, 159-473 &474 111-072 111-110-07 111-110-10 111-110-14 111-110-15 111-110-18 111-110-19 111-110-20 111-110-21 111-110-22 111-110-31 111-110-33 111-110-36 111-110-37 111-110-38 Gothard St MISC CITY PROP TOTAL $247 33 $123 93 $123 93 $102 38 $102 38 $4,716 44 $878 30 $67 41 $75 65 $155 50 $420 70 $635 77 $944 93 $36 74 $283 12 $235 44 $17,952.00 TOTAL COST $1,498 58 $836 14 $95 69 $11 33 $3 71 $3 68 $2 94 $66 18 $33 12 $33 06 $16 53 $16 53 $7 49 $3 74 $5 56 $5 53 $33 45 $52 73 $5,146 38 $7,872.36 TOTAL REACH PARCEL No COST 8 1 023-010-25 1 $297 12 Parcel Totals 8 023-010-26 $20 48 8 110-200-30 $45 98 8 110-200-32 (1/2) $2,398 72 8 110-210 $535 56 8 110-210-01 $3 73 12 8 110-210-02 $13 8 32 8 110-210-03 $34 65 8 110-210-04 $11 42 8 110-210-06 $46 96 8 110-210-07 $62 61 8 110-210-10 $77 28 8 110-211 $181 93 8 110-212 $196 80 8 110-213 $98 35 8 110-220-02 $451 88 8 110-220-03 $274 67 8 110-220-04 $178 19 8 110-220-05 $492 24 8 110-221 $167 36 8 110-222 $324 88 8 111-07 $10, 022 04 8 111-07, 159-473 &474 $5,591 86 8 111-072 $639 91 8 111-072-32 $2,165 86 8 111-072-33 $1,036 66 8 111-110-01 $220 62 8 111-110-02 $220 84 8 111-110-03 $220 84 8 111-110-04 (3) $403 81 8 111-110-07 $75 76 8 111-110-10 $24 81 8 111-110-14 $24 59 8 111-110-15 $19 69 8 111-110-18 $442 57 8 111-110-19 $221 51 8 111-110-20 $221 07 8 111-110-21 $110 53 8 111-110-22 $110 53 8 111-110-31 $50 06 8 111-110-32 $223 95 8 111-110-33 $25 03 8 111-110-34 $7 66 8 111-110-36 $37 21 8 111-110-37 $36 99 Parcel Totals 111-110-38 $223 72 111-120-01 $86 14 111-120-06 $206 45 111-120-07 $206 45 111-120-08 $221 29 111-120-09 $178 54 111-120-11 $10 63 111-120-12 $25 92 111-120-13 $25 92 111-120-14 $25 92 111-120-15 $25 92 111-120-16 (1/2) $51 39 111-120-17 $25 70 111-120-18 $25 47 111-120-19 $25 47 111-120-20 (2) $50 95 111-120-22 $220 84 111-120-23 $220 84 111-120-24 $221 07 111-120-25 $221 07 111-120-26 $220 62 111-120-27 (2) $411 78 111-120-28 $87 03 111-120-29 $208 66 111-120-30 (1/2) $45 52 111-130-01 $36 99 111-130-02 (2) $55 16 111-130-05 $32 12 111-130-06 $36 77 111-130-07 $36 77 111-130-08 $36 77 111-130-09 (2) $73 54 111-130-10 $36 77 111-130-11 $18 39 111-130-12 $19 39 111-130-14 $134 23 111-130-15 $221 07 111-130-16 (2) $442 35 111-130-17 $196 50 111-130-18 (2) $351 85 111-130-23 (2) $442 80 111-130-24 $221 29 111-130-25 $134 23 111-130-26 (2) $55 16 Parcel Totals 111-130-27 $15 06 111-130-28 $15 06 159-371-09 $20 58 159-371-10 $21 46 159-371-11 $22 64 159-371-12 $21 07 159-371-13 $8 96 159-371-14 $8 86 159-371-15 $12 40 159-371-21 $61 58 159-381-08 $20 87 159-381-09 $21 56 159-381-10 $19 39 159-381-11 $35 93 159-381-12 $16 24 159-381-13 $5 41 159-381-14 $7 97 159-381-15 $7 97 159-381-18 $57 59 159-402-02 $20 18 159-402-12 $19 30 159-403-01 $18 11 159-403-02 $18 11 159-403-03 $18 11 159-403-04 $23 72 159-403-05 $19 69 159-403-08 $39 18 159-403-09 $35 64 159-403-10 $42 14 159-403-11 $25 79 159-403-12 $23 23 159-403-13 $2038 159-403-14 $19 79 159-403-15 $2737 159-403-16 $20 67 159-403-17 $19 10 159-403-22 $111 42 159-411 $492 24 159-412-01 $104 85 159-42 $295 34 159-431-04 $451 88 159-431-05 $226 43 159-431-06 $226 43 159-431-07 $187 05 Parcel Totals 8 159-431-07 (1/2) $187 05 8 159-432-03 $8,617 18 8 159-451 $1,604 71 8 Edwards St $123 16 8 Ellis Ave $138 22 8 Ernest Ave $284 11 8 Garfield Ave $768 64 8 Garfield St $1,161 59 8 Golden West St $1,726 44 8 Gothard St $352 64 8 NUSC CITY PROP $34,417 53 8 QuarterHorse Ln $67 12 8 Saddleback Ln $517 27 8 Stewart St $430 17 TOTAL 1 $87,720.00 Appendix M Holly/Seacliff Arterial Roadway Analysis by Parcel OC-S08-009-07/kjb/R-HOLLY DOC FJOWLE HOLLY/SEACLh - DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATE OF COST FOR MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADWAY REQUIRED1 DAILY I EXISTING 1EXISTING1 PLC EXISTING +PLC HSO EXISTING+HSO EXISTING+PLC +HSO ARTERIAL SEGMENT LANES I CAPACITY1 CAPACITY I VIC ICAPACITY1 VIC CAPACITY VIC V{C GOTHARD ST (UNDIVIDED) 1 1 1 ELLIS AVE - GARFIELD AVE 4 20,000 14,000 070 5,300 097 1,400 077 104 LANE REOUIREMENTS TO SATISFY EXISTING + PLC + HSO DAILY VOLUMES REQUIRED DAILY 1EXISTINGIEMSTING1 PLC I EXISTING + PLC HSO EXISTING +M0 EXISTING +PLC + HSO ARTERIAL SEGMENT LANES ICAPACITYICAPACITY1 VIC ICAPACITY1 VIC CAPACITY VIC VIC GOTHARD ST (DIVIDED) 1 1 1 ELLIS AVE - GARFIELD AVE 4 30,000 14,000 047 5,300 064 1,400 051 069 Values extracted from traffic data report, table I, J, K, L, M - LSA Associates, Inc HSO COST I:OR GOTHARD ST. (ELLIS AVE, - GARPIELD AVE) I $IADT $328,927 00 1 S234 95 HOLLY/SEACLIFF DEVELOPMENT ESTIMATE OF COST FOR MAJOR ARTERIAL ROADWAY LF COST eta OF PER OF TOTAL COST PARCEL No ROAD PARCEL FOR GOTHARD 111-110-18 290 $16,008 00 3 111-110-19 145 $8,004 00 1 111-110-20 145 $8,004 00 1 111-110-21 725 $4,002 00 1 111-110-22 725 $4,002 00 1 111-110-38 127 $7,010 40 1 j TOTAL 1 852 1 $47,030 40 a 12/05/97 10:21 V%4 729 1214 PLC: LAND COMPANY viOul FAX TRANSMITTAL Date: r l� �� lqq � I From: William D. Holman To: C; n 6brb I 'Telephone Number: (714) 721-9777 Company:` Fax Numbcr: (714) 729-1214 Fax Number: Number of Pages: vi'r (including, this paPc) Subject: -T LC, �w -6f J—:e6 S awGc � "Mt" .A / I t'11i HC IEW 44MittAll 23 Gatpanu 14W,Sulfa 259' 71+L721 IMUlaphyno Ilsxpot2Cauh dlfhrnlaF2tlBD ri4.M0214hclimilf �12/05/97 16:21 `f3'714 729 1214 PLC "NI) CUMPINY LVJUU4 December 5, 1997 Shirley Dettloff, Mayor Huntington Beach City Council 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 "1`F N''*, , Aft, IT {�j WJ iG1� I J.1� Subject: Holly Seacliff Infrastructure and Reimbursements Honorable Mayor and. City Council: For the past year, PLC has worked closely with City Staff and your Council Subcommittee in an attempt to quantify and establish procedures for reimbursements to PLC for its "Reimbursable Costs" in connection with the construction of public infrastructure improvements in accordance with PLC's and the City's respective obligations under Development Agreement 90-1 for the Holly Seacliff development area. Attached please find a table identifying the major categories of public improvements being funded and constructed by PLC to serve new developments in the Holly Scacliff and surrounding areas and outlining our recommendations for steps that need to be taken by the City to comply with its obligations under the Development Agreement, EIR, General Plan and Specific Plan for the Holly Seacliff area. I would appreciate the opportunity to review this table with the City Council at your study session on December 8, 1997. Very truly yours, William D. Holman Planning & Government Relations Attachment cc: City Councilmembers Chris Gibbs Ray Silver, Acting City Administrator Daren Groth Les M. Jones, II, Public Works Director John Erskine Robert Eichbiatt, City Engineer Gail Hutton, City Attorney Connie Brockway, City Clerk 1 9 0 cn 0 rn (P ro -o 42 HOLLY SEACLIFF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE REIMBURSEMENTS f �i f. R 121D97 ` .r ITEM TOTAL PERCENT PLC REIMBURSABLE PLC RECOMMENDED PLC REQUEST STAFF ESTIMATED COMPLETE FAIR SHARE COSTS SOURCE OF RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDATIOh�- COSTS' REIMBURSEMENT 3. Public Safety Faraldles Fire Station $3,B48,1o0 4% $3,848.100 $0 None - PLC expendAures a_ Advise PLC 01 schedule for design and construction a. Fire Depe rlment has advised PLC of schedule for capped & no fees imposed expenditures. design and construction expenditures, other developers Police Facilities $798,90D 0% $798.9D0 SO None - PLC expenditures b Determine how obligation to be met. b. Police Deparlrnenl wants to purchase eommunicaltons capped & no fees Imposed equlpmenl in lieu of constructing SubstatiDn. on other developers 4 Storm Drain Fadlit4n $3 443.000 70°% Approx. $2.2 million Approx. $1 2 million Drainage Fees a, Allocate costs of Reaches 2-6 & 7-9 to benefitting _ a. PLC allocalion includes non -PLC owned properties in properties and development. Development Agreement area $400,DD0 estimated potential reimbursabte costs, b. Approve credit & reimbursement agreement with PLC. b No credils against fees will be given for facilities Reimbursement request for Readies 4b, 6, 7 & 8 corstwcted by PLC submitted & being reviewed by City c. Collect and segregate drainage fees from other c. Collect and segregate drain age fees from other development for reimbursements to PLC development for reimbursements to PLC d. Condition new development to pay additional d Candrton new development to pay additional improvement fees where appropriate. improvement tees where appropnate. 5 Reciaimed Water $2,138,000 40°% 5223,1500 $846.400 Orange County Water Distinct None —existing reirnbursernent agreement with OC=. Reimbursement from OCWA appropriate. Facilities S. Sewer Facilities $1,361,000 30°% Undelennined Undelermrne,d Sewer Fees a. Allocate costs of Reach 3 to benefit6ng properties and a PLC allocation includes non -PLC owned properties in development Development Agreement area. $74,W0 estimated potential reimbursable costs. b Approve credit & reimbursement agreement with PLC. b. No credits against fees will be given for factitres constructed by PLC c. Colrecf and segregate sewer fees from other c Called and segregate sewer fees from otber development for reimbursements to PLC development for reimbursements to PLC. d. Conditlon new development to pay additional d Conditon new development to pay additional improvement fees where appropriate. improvement fees where appropriate. Intrudes all budgeted facilities, including nonreirnbursable facilities Actual construction costs may vary from estimated costs 2 HOLLY SEACLIFF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE REIMBURSEMENTS 1212197 _ CD cn cn a ^e C. ITEM TOTAL PERCENT ESTIMATED COMPLETE COSTS` PLC FAIRS14ARE REIMBURSABLE COSTS PLC RECOMMENDED SOURCE OF REIMBURSEMENT PLC REQUEST 1 RECOMMENDATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Arterial Highways M.638,000 400A Approx 329 million Approx $6 million Traffic Impact Fees a_ Continue to Implement 1996 Traffic Impact Fee a Conlinue to Implement 1996 Traffic Impact Fee and Signals (Holy Seactrff and citywide) Credit and Reimbursement Agreement with PLC Credit and Reimbursement Agreement with PLC $1 2M In credits asslgned thru 91g7 Tolal mints wil I reach approximately $3.OM at buildout b. Segregate fees collected from all development in Holly b Segregate fees collected from all development in Holly Seaciff area for fulure credit and reimbursements to PLC Seaddf area for future credit and reimbursements to PLC. c Condition new development to pay additional c. Certain properties along new Gothard Street vrill be improvement fees where appropriate conditioned to pay additonal improvement fees at h me of new developmenl. d Per above agreement, reimburse PLC with citywide d. Per above agreement, reimburse PLC with citywide traffic impact fees at discretion of Cdy Englneer_ traffic impact fees at discretion of City Engineer e_ Allow fee credits to be assigned to other builders a City Engineer has discretion to permit assignment of outside Holly Seadiffarea credits or pay reimbursement plus accrued Interest 2. Domestic Water $14,937,000 20% Undetermined Undetermined Water Capital Facilities Fees a. Allocate capacity of 9 million gallon reservoir and a. PLC allocation Includes non -PLC owned properties in Facilities (Holly Seadifi and citywide) associated facilities to benefitting properties & all new Holly Seachff development agreement area $13.DK,000 development. Facilities have no benefit outside of Holly Seadiff area eligible for reimbursement b. PLC's fair share should be capped at S7,680,000, b Estimate PLC fair share at $12.5M, only $500,000 based on demand at maximum buildout of 3,200 units reimbursable on PLC -owned property All costs in excess are Reimbursable per Development Agreement. c_ Collect water capital faclaies fees from all new c, City may not impose water fees on non -PLC properties development (including non -PLC properties covered by in Development Agreement_ City Attorney supports Development Agreemenl}, or condition developers to pay condition on new development to demonstrate compliance fair -share fees directly to PLC. with obligations to construct or pay for facilities. if Segregate water fees collected from development in d Segregate water fees collected from development in Holty Seacliff area for reimbursements to PLC Hoity Seacrrff area for reimburseme nts, to PLC e Enter into reimbursement agreement with PLC prior to e. Defer reimbursement agreement u nbl facilities reservoir construction to defr►e reimbursable costs complete. f If actual construction costs exceed PLC fair share, L Estimate PLG fair share at $12-SM. only $500,000 reimburse PLC with fees from other development. reimbursable. Includes all budgeted facilities, including nonreimbursable facilities Actual construction costs may vary from estimated costs 5/97 16:21 V714 729 1214 PLC LAND C031PAN pie FAX TRANSMITTAL Date: �� } ���� I From: William D. Holman To: C; �� I Telephone Number: (714) 721-9777 Company: RV,57 Fax Numbcr: (714) 729-1214 Fax Number: ; 4 I 55 t Number of Pages: 4� (including this paPc) ,�,,.,,: * Lette✓-G�,� 7�c5 Gvnul weehe� �leQ<zGF[9h'��Jle �eNur,GEd Lalfe✓iE %e4c�G�a '2tau no Law elm= 23 CaMorsts Fla Sufft 250' 1f3 72L471i id�pd�o� 1Ritrp01i�0lG�.Cliti�t0li�2BBB rii „n �w.r.._._.._ ACTION REVISED AGENDA CITY COUNCIL/REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH Monday, December 8, 1997 5:00 P.M. - Room B-8 Adjourned Regular Meeting 5 00 P M - Council Chamber 6-30 P M - Council Chamber Civic Center, 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, California Call City Council/Redevelopment Agency Meeting To Order Roll Call Julien, Harman, Dettloff, Bauer, Sullivan, Green, Garofalo [Present -- Harman arrived 5:02 p.m.; Garofalo arrived 5:02 p.m.] Public Comments Regarding Closed Session Agenda Item [None] Call Closed Session Of City Council/Redevelopment Agency (City Council) Closed Session - City Council pursuant to Government Code Section 54956 8 to give instructions to the city's negotiator, David Biggs, Ray Silver, and Murray Kane, regarding negotiations with Waterfront Development LLC concerning the purchase/sale/exchange/lease of the property commonly know as the Waterfront site, located at the northwest corner of Beach Boulevard and Pacific Coast Highway, APN 024-250-73, 024-250-76, and 024-250-49 Instruction will concern Price and Terms of Payment Subject Real Property Transactions. (120 80) Recommended Action Motion to recess to Closed Session on the aforementioned items [Approved 5-0] Recess To Closed Session 6 3A1[6:55 p.m.] - Approximately - Reconvene In Council Chamber ** The City Attorney Shall Determine If Any Actions Taken By The City Council or Redevelopment Agency In Closed Session Shall Require A Reporting On Those Actions As Required By Law (Government Code §54957.1(a) (3) (B)). (City Council) Adopt Resolution No. 97-84 - Declaring A State Of Emergency On Saturday, December 6, 1997 [City Attorney reported on 12/1/97 Closed Session Action regarding Temporary Restraining Order - Unlawful Work Stoppage - Police Department --Approved: 7-0] Page 2 - Council/Agency Agenda - 12/08/97 (2) [Mayor commended City Employees - Fire/Police/Marine Safety/Public Works Personnel/Red Cross/School District (for use of Sowers School as Shelter During Disaster). Mayor Dettloff extended her appreciation and that of the City Council. Fire Chief reported on extent of emergency.] Public Comments [(1) Comments and protests from property owners regarding Holly-Seacliff Reimbursement Issues] [Clerk read list of Late Communications] 1. (City Council) Presentation and Discussion - Holly Seacliff Reimbursement Issues - Acceptance Of The Boyle Report On Holly-Seacliff Reimbursement Communication from the Public Works Director dated December 8, 1997 transmitting the Boyle Engineering Corporation Report regarding cost reimbursement analysis for the Holly- Seacliff Development Staff Presentation[/Boyle Engineering Presentation] PLC Presentation Council Discussion Recommendations Recommended Action Accept and direct the City Clerk to file the Boyle Engineering Holly-Seacliff Reimbursement Analysis[and by the first meeting in January present a Time- line to the City Council for completion of negotiations for reimbursement for the Holly-Seacliff Development including dates on which we can submit unresolved issues to binding arbitration. This timeline to include target dates for completion of water reservoir site preparation and design of same -- 7-0] Council/Agency Adjournment [at 9:30 p.m.] To Monday, December 15, 1997, At 5 00 P M In Room B-8, Civic Center, 2000 Main Street, Huntington Beach, California 92648. CONNIE BROCKWAY, CITY CLERK City of Huntington Beach 2000 Main Street - Second Floor Huntington Beach, California 92648 Telephone: 714/536-5227 Internet: http://www.ci.huntington_beach.ca.us HOLLY SEACLIFF INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING DECEMBER 6, 1997 HOLLY SEACLIFF AREA • 768 total acres 7 • Multiple Ownerships • Multiple UsesJ�`j��' • < 10% developed prior to 1990 1990 EIR AND GENERAL PLAN • City Approved Master Plan of Development 558 acres Residential 53 acres Mixed Development Residential Retail Office 54 acres Industrial 11 acres Retail 92 acres Open Space 3,935 units 475 units 200,000 sf 100,000 sf 964,000 sf 120,000 sf • Identified Necessary Infrastructure Improvements Arterial Highway Widenings & Construction Drainage Improvements Sewer Improvements Water Lines • Additional Improvements, Phasing and Financing to be defined by Specific Plan • Required Fair Share Funding of Improvements by Developers William D. Holman Government Relat, 714 729 1217 t PLC Land Company 23 Corporate Plaza, Suite 250 Newport Beach, California 92660 714 721 9777 Telephone 714 729 1214 Facsimile DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT 90-1 • 1990 Development Contract between City and Pacific Coast Homes • Covers 545 acres, 71 %, of Holly Seacliff Master Plan Area • Vested Pacific Coast Homes' rights to develop property in accordance with Existing Land Use Regulations and mutually approved changes, subject to satisfying certain identified Developer Obligations • Developer Obligations include: Dedication of Land for Regional and Neighborhood Parks Neighborhood Park Improvements Dedication and Acquisition of Right of Way for Arterial Improvements Design and Construction of Arterial Improvements and Signals, subject to reimbursement for supplemental capacity Design and Construction of Water, Sewer and Drainage Improvements and Reclaimed Water Lines, subject to reimbursement for supplemental capacity Construction of a 9-million gallon water reservoir, booster station, well and associated transmission lines, subject to reimbursement for supplemental capacity Construction of Fire and Police Facilities, subject to reimbursement for supplemental capacity Payment of Certain Development Fees, subject to credits and adjustments • Reimbursement Provisions City shall use best efforts to the extent allowed by law to obtain for Developer the maximum Reimbursable Costs available from future development served by any facility Developer acknowledges City is limited in the manner in which it may collect or require reimbursement and that City may be unable to cause Developer to be reimbursed Reimbursement Agreements required to define Developer's Reimbursable Costs Balance of unpaid Reimbursable Costs subject to annual adjustment not to exceed 200% of reimbursable amount 4 HOLLY SEACLIFF SPECIFIC PLAN • 1992 Ordinance creating Zoning Districts and Development Standards for 569 acres, 74%, of Holly Seacliff Master Plan Area • 479 acres of Development Agreement property incorporated in Specific Plan • Further defines infrastructure improvement responsibilities • Requires City to adopt and administer a Public Facilities Fee Ordinance to allocate pro rata costs of infrastructure improvements and impose fees or conditions on new development • No ordinance or official allocation of costs adopted by City to date 1993 PROPOSED COST REIMBURSEMENT DISTRICT • Proposal by Seacliff Partners and City Staff to create an assessment district to allocate improvement costs to benefitting properties and establish liens payable only at time of new development • $11 million of $61 million in estimated improvement costs determined to be reimbursable • District proposal rejected by City Council based on protests by property owners 1995 PROPOSED PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCING PLAN • Proposal by Seacliff Partners to utilize combination of existing development impact fees, adjustments to certain existing fees and new impact fees as sources for reimbursement of Seacliff Partners' Reimbursable Costs • Facilities with citywide benefit to be reimbursed from citywide fees paid by new developments • $39 million of $59 million proposed to be reimbursable • No action taken on 1995 proposal PLC / MS VICKERS II, LLC 1996 ACQUISITION OF PACIFIC COAST HOMES' ASSETS • PLC acquired 383 acres and MS Vickers II, LLC, acquired 65 acres of land from Pacific Coast Homes subject to Development Agreement 90-1 • PLC assumed majority of Developer Obligations per DA 90-1, including construction of offsite infrastructure improvements Arterial Highways Drainage Improvements Sewer Improvements Water Reservoir, Well, Booster Station and Transmission Lines Fire and Police Facility • PLC also assumed eligibility for reimbursements of Reimbursable Costs from other new development served by facilities • PLC has formally requested the City to Determine PLC's fair share and potential reimbursable costs for areawide public improvements Enter into reimbursement agreements for such improvements Enact some form of Public Facilities Fee Ordinance or otherwise impose conditions on new development as required by the EIR, General Plan, Specific Plan and Development Agreement for the Holly Seacliff Area • City has hired Boyle Engineering to allocate improvement costs • City Council subcommittee appointed D�I�ina�. �C41 Holly/Seacliff Cost Allocation Study briefing by Boyle Engineering Corporation rictorOpincar, PE Regional ViCCPresldent for the J City of Huntington Beach J Cih, Council Workshop December8,1997 ■ ■ Why Are We Here 9 ■ Recovery by Developer for some costs incurred to build "excess "infrastructure capacity as required by the Holly/SeacliffDevelopment Agreement ■ City agreed to use its "best efforts "to determine J reimbursement to Developerfrom future J developments. ■ ■ ■ Resolve reimbursement issues with Developer 2 JJu■■■■■ - , _ Exhibit 2-1 Holly/Seadiff Development Agreement Area 3 Background ■ General Plan - 1990 ■ EIR - 1990 ■ Development Agreement - 1990 ■ Specific Plan - 1992 ■ Reimbursement District J J Ordinance - 1992 • • ■ ■ 4 JJ\\•■\■ MM Holly/Seacl� Constr ztciron Financing Committee ,tleetrngs ■ March 25, 1997 ■ April 15, 1997 ■ May 20, 1997 ■ June 17, 1997 ■ July 8, 1997 ■ August 12, 1997 ■ September 9, 1997 J ■ September 30, 1997 Re%uN • \ (-ost Reimbursement Report Dated 9it0;Y ■ ■ 5 JJ®\\\\■ Fg Scope of Work cub ■ November 1990 Development Agreement - Ezcess Capacity ■ 1994 Engineer's Report (Willdan) Hollv/Seaclifl Cost Reimbursement District J J ■ 1995 Infrastructure Financing Program U Report (Walden) ■ ■ ■ Review with City \ ■ FB,,,sefing 's Scope of Work nalysis of Excess Capacity ■ Sewer ■ Storm Drains ■ Arterial Streets ■ Water J ■ Non -Domestic Water J ■ Fire and Police \ \ Piepaie llternatne.Uetkot/so/A1loumn.;Costs \ \ a rBrieef,ngoyle 's Scope of Work Review Results for: ■ Sewer ■ Storm Drains ■ Arterial Streets ■ Water ■ Non -Domestic Water ■ / ittak,-e Cost Illotation Process ■ ■ 8 JJu■■■•■■ Development Agreement Section 2.2.11(n "City shall use its best efforts to extent allowed by law to obtain for Developer the maximum Reimbursable Costs obtainable under this sub -section rom uture J development served by any facility." J J ■ ■ ■ • LF r- ✓71" 1994 ' District -- Allocated cost based on engineer's analysis of benefit to parcels within Holly/Seaehffarea. ■ Arterial Roadways ■ Right-of-Wav Acqummnn ■ Storni brain Facilities ■ Water Facilitates J ■ Sewer Facilities J J ■ Fire and Police Facilities ■ ■ Incidental Expenses Reference Boyle'sApril l5, 1997 \ 10 JJu■■■\■ Walden - 1995 Excess Capaciry Analysis Provides Developer's opinion ofexcess capacity cost allocation to Seacliff Partners Hollv/Seacl JJOther% C av Wide Others ■ Ran 7est Analysis on Sewer J ■ Camiderahle Changes Over Past' years a Reference Boyle'sAprill5, 1997Letter ■ ■ ■ 11 -1Junea\■■ Walden - 7995- Excess CapacityAnalysm Con't ■ 1994 Cost Reimbursement District Report ■ Allocates $61,000,000 ■ $50M to Seacl ff Partners ■ $11M to Other Property Owners in HIS J J ■ • ■ 12 JJ■\■■■ Prioi- Reports (Sunrinarl') ■ (1994 Willdan Report) ■ Special Study byGryper ' Development Agreement ■ (1995 Walden Report) f Ift ■ Special SludyhyDewloper ■ Cost Estimates for both were very conservative ■ High Overhead Factors ■ Made Cost Estimates Very High 13 rUse of Prlor Reports ul ■ Boyle Report uses 1995 fr, Walden Report as Data Source with Cost Modifications ■ All Costs rn the Boyle Study are Cost Estimates - not actual costs J ■ Reimbursement to lite J Developer would only be All Costs in the ■ made on actual costs Boyle Study are ■ Cast Estimates 14 JJ-`..1■■■■■ .2 - Development Agreement Section 2.2.11(t) "City shall use its best efforts to extent allowed by law to obtain for Developer the maximum Reimbursable Costs obtainable under this sub -section front fulyre J development served by any facility. " J 15 Sewer Reimbursement -ITS 11 Sewer facrl sties constructed are somewhat dierent than presented inprior studies ■ Major cost item was relocation ofsewerage pumping station at Gothard ■ Existing Flows ■ No Future Development J J is Two Trunk Sewersprovide excess capacity 16 ■ Exhibit 3 -1 Holly/Seachff Sewer Facilities 17 Exhibit 9-1 Holly/Seachff Sewer 18 J J ■ ■ ■ ■ JJ■■■■■■ x,- Sewer Reimbursement 1"3Bo e i Walden fPL� ft tm 91% fO Gm 57%, 05m f!% $0 07m 6%, $0 tm 9% 0 07m 12% Others th' 0 Wide 0 O /M f/% 0 0 Others 19 J $117m 100% f11m 100% f0 S7m100% J \ Table 1 \ Estimated Cosb olM for Sewer FBClbtieS \ Percentage Allocation Comparaon \ (Reportpage 7 -1) FS�torni Drain Reimbursement facilities constructed are somewhat different than presented In prior studies ■ Walden analvstsdtdnotconsider capaeuvforupstreant flows ■ Downstream development must accommodate upstream drainage front 'built -out" areas ■ No reimbursement J ■ .Several Storm Drains provide excess capacity that are J %ublect to reimbursement ■ ■ ■ • 20 JJE3••■■■ �a Exhibit 4-1 Holly/Seachff Storm Drain Facilities 21 Exhibit 10-1 Storm Drain ' 3 22 Exhibit 10-2 Storm Drain i1, 23 Exhibit 10-3 Storm Dram 24 fSto7rnn Drain Reimbursement ___T493-- Boyle Walden FPZC— $27m 90%, al am 49% $11m 73% i MY $0 em 10%, foam 24%; $04m 27% Others i 11V 0 0, so 9m 27% 0 0 Wide Others J $3 Sm 100%' $3 3m 100%, $1 Sm 100%, J — J Table 2 Estimated Costs of Ma/or Storm Dram F—hoes Pememage Allocation Comparison ■ (Reportpegel 1J 25 JJ€1■■■■■ .. Water Reimbursement MR CIZ ■ Three alternatives for reimbursement ■ I -Development Agreement for 3780 Units ■ 2 - Defer Determination of Reimbursement per the Development Agreement ■ 3 - Use PLC's recommendation for 3200 units J J asbasisforreimbursement i ■ ■ ■ ■ 26 JJE)■■■■■ Holly/Seacliff Water Storage Reservoir Location 1t Water Reimbursement ■ 9 MG Water Storage Reservoir Capacitv ■ Development Agreement = 8 2 mg ■ Holly/Seaclri fOthers = 0 8 in ■ Total = 9 0 mg ■ Cost allocation J f PLC/MSV = $11, 800, 000 j ■ HIS Others = $ 1,200 000 \ \ ■ Total = $ 13,000,000 i 28 J J7\\\\\ Water Reimbursement .lhrlllclr'1 ■ Defer Action per Development agreement ■ Section 2 2 5 (h) ■ City can defer taking anv action until the Developer meets the conditions set forth in the Agreement J Not Recommended ■ ■ ■ ■ 29 JJ®\\■■■ rWater Reimbursement MG Water Storage Reservoir Ca act ■ Development Agreement = 7 0 MG ■ Holly/SeachffOthers = 2 0 MG ■ Total = 9 0 MG ■ This would transfer reimbursement costs to areas J covered by the Development Agreement that are J J private agreements between PLC, MSV, et al ■ Not Recommended ■ ■ ■ 30 J JCS\■■■■ Water Facilities Reimbursement 7993 Boyle Walden I` PLL $11 0M 76% $46m 82%, $118m 91% $34m 24% $06m 11% $12 m 9% Others jCtty 0 0 0 4m 7% 0 0 Wide (Others J — $144m 100% $56m 100% $130m 100% J Table 4-A \ Estimated Costs of Major Water Faatibes \ Percentage Allocation Corrgtansm \ (Reportpage 5I) 31 JJ\■\\\■ Arterial Roadivap Reimbursement ■ Arterial Roadways provide capacity based on number of lanes added ■ Additional lane capacity must accommodate existing traffic volume pl us Developer ■ New Roadway Lanesfor Developer have surplus capacity J J ■ Additional Lanes were requiredfor Gothard to t accommodate "Holly/SeacliOthers" ■ ■ ■ Case by case analysis was performed ■ ■ 32 -iJ�J\■■■\ 21900 ezistm •devil w JO 1S000 t-�-t a � U LL I 30 0004 LANE DIVIDED I I J J� I5.0006 LANE DNIDED \ wz ■ ■ 33 J J�J\\\■■ s G s G s 34 2kWO 4 LANE UNDMDED (exidn0) J00004 LAN M D n 45 000 6 LANE DMDED ! s G s M s 35 ■■!!\\■■ s ` E A G A 36 i G A Y A 37 d g E A G A i 38 S E A G A i 39 ■ a • Gothard Street • gGarfield Ave to Mam Street • • 40 ■■■•\•■■ g 4M(mt.derak--HSO) 11100(aaat.HSO) - -ttoiivF unnto® ^ MAN4LAW IROMED 30 I LANE OMDED ■ ! ■ ■ • ■ 41 Walden oy e '11% 191m, 25% $34 Im 1 97% 177m .19% uOm. 9% $09.m 2%� Othera - - „�„ I ty D J D p/.2m • f 7% 0 O Wide Others 107 6m 100K i515m 100% 175 Sm 00% � 1 42 ■ Table 5 \ EathnatedCoata otArtadalRoadwayFaclodu \ P«centaga AII—O nConprlam - icilities Reimbursement m" sts are capped in the Agreement rM ]VeivFire-station onEdwards will serve a "deft_ctent area for the'Holly/Seacl ffDeveloom ent ■ Ctry's Growth Management Element for Fire/Medical • ■ ■ Criteria is set out in 1974 Fire Master Plan ■ ■ No Benefit to "Holly/SeacliffOthers " • • 43 ■om••••■ �ss eimbursement oy e Walden SUM i 64% 1 63 9m 1 100% - —SO -bM—_ 16% 0 0%1 0 0- Others ry 0 o to em I 16%; o 0 Wide Others j ■ f $3 9m 100% 1 $3 9m 100% i $3 9m 100% ■ Table 6 • Eatf ated Coats offtice 6 Fire Substation Facilities • P-tege Allocation Cmparism • 44 (Reportpags7.1) ■■me•••e CCOst_ Methodologies greemen ublic agency r Assessment Districts Rr - ■ Provides Bond Money ■ Property Owners are assessed their share of the bond payment - ■ Cost Reimbursement Districts ■ ■ ■ Developer providesfront money m ■ Property owners do not have to pay until their properly is developed • 45 someone: OSt_: - ethodologie"s a _ i Registered voters dectde._ : =� Rei»tbrirsement Amee�menls _ ■ Contract for spect6c factlutes - ■ Property owners do not pay until development ■ ■ 46 \ ■ ■ ■ 47 ■ ■■\\\■■ gotiations (Con't) Between Parties "■TWaterFacilitles- Allocation of9mgCapacity Storage Reservoir to Developer to Citys Positron - 8 2 mg r PLC's Position _ 3 0 in ■ ■ ■ ■ 48 ■■■■■■■■ 'tions vUnM accept & file i`Water, , -■ Arterial Roads ■ Storm Drains ■ PolicelFire ■ Reclaimed Water 49 F - _ aW _ tions (Con't) l>il r . _teed with Preparation of _ DrajtFReLnbursement Agreement with -Developer Consistent with (1) Recommended Analysis (2) Development Agreement 50 comment & ■ Public Works -Director sends letter of preliminary determination ■ PLC responds in writing with agreement/disagreement -files written appeal to City Administrator where ■ disagreement exists51 ■ ■ a 174 52 A inued)7 _ -- t+Agreements will be s_ ubmltted to=Council for approval when iArbitration is completed ■No appeal is filed ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ ■ 53 Mono■■■■ 12/05/W . 16:21 'U714 729 1214 PLC LAND CUUPA4\Y December 5,1997 Shirley Dettloff, Mayor Huntington Beach City Council 2000 Main Street Huntington Beach, CA 92648 MENEM �i�1rw "„icritt. �,7 h OF Subject: Holly Scacliff Infrastructure and Reimbursements Honorable Mayor and City Council: For the past year, PLC has worked closely with City Staff and your Council Subcommittee in an attempt to quantify and establish procedures for reimbursements to PLC for its "Reimbursable Costs" in connection with the construction of public infrastructure improvements in accordance with PLC's and the City's respective obligations under Development Agreement 90-1 for the Holly Seacliff development area. Attached please find a table identifying the major categories of public improvements being funded and constructed by PLC to serve new developments in the Holly Scacliffand surrounding areas and outlining our recommendations for steps that need to be taken by the City to comply with its obligations under the Development Agreement, EIR, General Plan and Specific Plan for the Holly Seacliff area. I would appreciate the oppommity to review this table with the City Council at your study session on December 8,1997. Very truly yours, G4&vu-� William D. Holman Planning & Government Relations Attachment cc: City Councilmembers Chris Gibbs Ray Silver, Acting City Administrator Daren Groth Les M. Jones, II, Public Works Director John Erskine Robert Eichblatt, City Engineer Gail Hutton, City Attorney Connie Brockway, City Clerk d-;�e' &Iil')?GL�'I/ HOLLY SEACLIFF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE REIMBURSEMENTS 1 u2197 ITEM TOTAL ESTIMATED COSTS' PERCENT COMPLETE PLC FAIR SHARE REIMBURSABLE COSTS PLC RECOMMENDED SOURCE OF REIMBURSEMENT PLC REQUEST f RECOMMENDATION STAFF RECOMMENDATION 1. Arienal Highways $33,638,OOO 400A Approx $29 million Approx $6 million Traffic Impact Fees a. Continue to Implement 1996 Traffic Impacl Fee a Continue to Implement 1996 Traffic Impact Fee and Slgnals (Holy Seacliff and citywide) Credit and Reimbursement Agreement with PLC Credil and Reimbursement Agreement with PLC b1 2M In uedrts assigned thru 9197 Total credits will mach approximately $3.OM at buildout. b. Segregate fees collected from all development in Holly b Segregate fees collected from all development in Holly Seac,V f area for future credit and reimbursements to PLC Seadiff area for future credit and reimbursements to PLC. c Condition ne%v development to pay additional c. Certain properties along new Gothard Sl eetw ll be improvement fees where appropriate conditioned to pay additonal improvement fees at Ume of new developmenl. d Per above agreement, reimburse PLC with citywide d. Per above agreement, reimburse PLC with ulywide traffic impact fees at discretion of City Engineer. traffic impact fees at discretion of City Engineer e. Allow fee credits to be assigned to other builders a City Engineer has discretion to permit assignment of outside Holly Seadiff area credits or pay reimbursement plus accrued interest 2. Domestic Water $14,937.000 20% Undetermined Undetermined Water Capital Facilities Fees a. Aflocate capacity of 9 mlltlon gallon reservoir and a. PLC allocation includes non -PLC owned properties in Facilities (Holly Seadiff and crlyviidej assoclated facilities to benelitting properties & all new Holly Seacliff development agreement area. $13.0a''DDO development. Facifilies have no benefit outside of holly Seacliff area eligible for reimbursement b. PLC's fair share sho uld be capped at $7,660.000, b Estnlale PLC fair share at $12.5M^ only $500,000 based on demand at maximum buiidout of 3,200 unils reimbursable - oft PLC -owned property. All costs in excess are Reimbursable per Development Agreement. c_ Collect water capital facilities fees from all new c. Clly may not impose water fees on non -PLC properties development (including non -PLC properties covered by in Development Agreement. City Allomey supports Development Agreemenl}, or condition developers to pay condition on new development to demonstrate compliance fair -share fees directly to PLC. with obligations to constructor pay for facilities. d Segregate water fees collected from development in d Segregate water fees collected from development in Holly Seacliff area for reimbursements to PLC Holly Seacrdf area for reimbursements to PLC e. Enter into reimbursement agreement with PLC prior to e. Defer reimbursement agreement until facilities reservoir construction to define reimbursable costs complete. f If actual construction costs exceed PLC fair share, U EsUmate PLC fair share at 512.5M . only $500,001) reimburse PLC with fees from other development, reimbursable. Includes all budgeted facilities, including nonreimbursable facilities Actual construction costs may vary from estimated costs HOLLY SEACLIFF PUBLIC INFRASTRUCTURE REIMBURSEMENTS 12097 ii E ITEM TOTAL PERCENT PLC REIMBURSABLE PLC RECOMMENDED PLC REQUEST/ STAFF ESTIMATED COMPLETE FAIR SHARE COSTS SOURCE OF RECOMMENDATION RECOMMENDATION COSTS' REIMBURSEMENT 3. Public Safety Facilitles Fire Station $3,648,100 4% $3,848,100 $0 None - PLC expenditures a_ Advise PLC o1 schedule for design and construction a. Fire Department has advised PLC of scheftle for capped & no fees imposed expenditures. design and construction expenditures. other developers Police Facilities $798,900 0% V98.900 SO None - PLC expenditures b Determine how obligation to be met. b. Police Department wants to purchase communications capped & no fees Imposed equipment in lieu of constructing substation. on other developers 4 Storm Drain Facilities $3,443.000 70% Approx. $2 2 million Approx. $1 2 million Drainage Fees a, Allocate costs of Reaches 2-6 & 7-9 to beriefitting a, PLC allocation includes non -PLC owned properties i1 properties and development. Devefopment Agreement area. $400,DD0 estimated potential reimbursable costs, b. Approve credit & reimbursement agreement with PLC. to No credrls against fees will be given for facilities Reimbursement request for Reaches 4b, 6, 7 & 8 constructed by PLC submitted & being reviewed by City a Collect and segregate drainage fees from other C. Collect and segregate drain age fees from other development for reimbursements to PLC. development for reimbursements to PLC d. Condition new development to pay additional d Canditon new development to pay additional improvement fees where appropriate. improvement fees v.here appropriate. 5 Recia"rmed Water $2,138,000 40°n' 5223.8D0 5846.400 Orange County Water District None—wdstrng reimbursement agreement with OGWD. Reimbursement from OC VD appropriate. Facilities S. Sewer Fadldies $1,361,000 30% Undetermined Undetermined Sewer Fees a. Allocate costs of Reach 3 to benefitGng properties and a PLC allocation includes non -PLC owned properties in development Development Agreement area. $70,000 estimated potential reimbursable costs. b Approve credit & reimbursement agreernent with PLC. b. No credits against fees will be given for (aGhtres constructed by PLC. c. Collect and segregate sewer fees from other c Collect and segregate sewer fees from other development for reimbursements to PLC development for reimbursements to PLC. d. Condition new development to pay additional d Condtian new development fo pay additional improvement fees where appropriate. improvement fees where appropriate. r, ' Incrudes all budgeted facildies, including nonreimbursatite faaldies Aclual construction costs may vary from estimated costs 2 Page 8 - Council/Agency Agenda - 01/21/97 (8) E.11. (City Council) Library Board Of Trustees Appointment- Barbara Marrs -To Fill The Vacancy Created By The Resignation Of Edward Borowiec (110 20) - Approve the appointment of Barbara Marrs to fill the unexpired term of Edward Borowiec on the Library Board of Trustees which expires June 30, 1999 Submitted by the Library Services Department [Approved 6-0, Green: Absent] E-12. (City Council) Amendment - Boyle Engineering Corporation - Waiver of Insurance Requirement - Professional Services Contract - Study Related To The Holly- Seacliff Development Agreement (600 10) -Approve the recommendations of the Settlement Committee regarding the professional services contract between the city and Boyle Engineering Corp for the Holly-Seacliff Reimbursement Study for excess capacity as follows 1. accept a deductible of $25,000 on the general liability insurance rather than requiring no deductible and 2. accept a 10 day notice of cancellation rather than the usual 30 days notice of cancellation in the event of non- payment of premium Submitted by Administration (Agreement Approved on December 16, 1996) [Approved 6-0, Green: Absent] E-13. (City Council) Professional Services Contract - Bovle Enaineerina Corporation -Waiver Of Insurance Requirement - Options Available Water Services To The Development Planned For Bolsa Chica (600 10) - 1. Authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute a Professional Services Contract between the City of Huntington Beach and Boyle Engineering for Engineering Services with Boyle Engineering Corp in the amount of $50,000, combining three individual agreements previously approved administratively ($27,400) plus anticipated additional professional services of $22,600 2. appropriate $50,000 from the Water Fund to Account No E-EW-PW-921-3-90-00 Financial Impact Statement is attached to Request for Council Action from the Community Development Department dated January 21, 1997 and 3 approve the Settlement Committee Recommendation to waive certain insurance requirements for Boyle Engineering Corp (allow a $25,000 deductible on the general liability policy and 10-day notice in the event of cancellation for non-payment of premium). Submitted by the Public Works Department, Community Development Department, Administrative Services Department and Administration `Approved 6-0, Green: Absent] E-14. (City Council) Amendment No. 3 - To Legal Services Agreement - With George E. Dalton & Associates - Re: City v. McDonnell Douglas (600 10) - 1. Approve and authorize execution by the Mayor and City Clerk of "Supplemental Agreement No 3 to Agreement dated October 2, 1995 by and between the City of Huntington Beach, a municipal corporation hereinafter as the "City'; and George Dalton & Assoc., sole proprietorship, hereinafter as "Contractor" to assist with Huntington Beach v. McDonnell, et al USDC " (Case No SA CV 94-29) subject to City Attorney approval of appropriate insurance certificate renewal and 2. appropriate $76,000 from the Equipment Replacement Fund to cover legal fees and costs Submitted by the City Attorney's Office [Approved as amended re: insurance deductible $10,000 6- 0, Green: Absent] (8) Page 10 - Council/Agency Agenda - 12/16/96 (10) F-2. (City Council) Hollv-Seacliff Cost Reimbursement Analvsis For Excess Capacit Professional Services Contract - Boyle Engineering Corporation (600 10) Communication from the Public Works Department transmitting a Professional Services Contract Between the City and Boyle Engineering Corporation for a Holly-Seacliff Cost Reimbursement Study For Excess Capacity The tasks for the consultant would include, reviewing the Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement and past approaches presented by the Developer, preparing a separate plan which employs the fairest approach and, ultimately, assisting City staff in their negotiations with the Developer in order to cooperatively develop a final product acceptable to all parties Recommended Action Motion to 1. Approve and authorize the Mayor and City Clerk to execute the Professional Services Contract Between the City and Boyle Engineenng Corporation for a Holly Seacliff Cost Reimbursement Study for Excess Capacity in the amount of $70,000 in payment for the preparation of a Cost Reimbursement Analysis relating to the Holly-Seacliff Development Agreement And 2. Approve a total appropriation of $77,000 from undesignated General Funds which includes $70,000 to fund said agreement with Boyle Engineering Corporation and $7,000 for anticipated change orders ('Approved As Amended - 6-1 (Bauer -- NO) - Council Committee formed (Harman, Garofalo, Dettloffl to meet and keep Council abreast of the cost and nature of study] F-3. (City Council) Budget/Financial Planning 1996/97 Priorities Report (310 20) Communication from the Administrative Service Director transmitting a document titled Budget/Financial Planning 1996197 Pr/onties dated December 6, 1996 Also transmitted is a schedule of proposed Council Budget Study Session topics and dates Recommended Action 1. Direct the City Administrator to continue with the actions necessary to address the priorities listed in the attached BudgebFinancial Planning 1996197 Prionties And 2. Direct the City Administrator to provide status reports at least quarterly on priority budget issues [Approved - 7-0] F-4. (City Council) City Treasurer Summary - Investment Portfolio Activity - October, 1996 (310 20) Communication from the City Treasurer transmitting the October Investment Summary Review for October 1996 Recommended Action Motion to Review monthly report Following review of the report, by motion of Council, accept the Monthly Investment Report for October, 1996, pursuant'to Section 17 0 of the Investment Policy of the City of Huntington Beach [Approved - 7-0] (10) r _Y /- ,Oof , - a,(2,m . /- C'9W - ko-'. Fa.ve), Council/Agency Meeting Held IQ i /9 -7 Deferred/Continued to IHrApproved ❑ C nditional y pproved ❑ Denied -o City Clerk's Sig ature Council Meeting Date January 21, 1997 Department ID Number AD 97-4 CITY OF HUNTINGTON BEACH REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION SUBMITTED TO: HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS SUBMITTED BY: MICHAEL T. UBERUAGA, City Administrrr�/ �— PREPARED BY: Patricia Dapkus, Management Assistant SUBJECT: Accept Amendment to the Insurance Requirements for Boyle Engineering Corporation for a Study Related to the Holly/Seacliff Development Agreement Statement of Issue, Funding Source, Recommended Action, Alternative Action(s), Analysis, Environmental Status, Attachment(s) Statement of Issue: Amend a portion of the usual insurance requirements for Boyle Engineering Corp to perform work related to the Holly/Seacliff Development Agreement Funding Source: N/A Recommended Action: Approve the recommendations of the Settlement Committee regarding the professional services contract between the City of Huntington Beach and Boyle Engineering Corp. for a Holly/Seacliff reimbursement study for excess capacity as follows- 1 Accept a deductible of $25,000 on the general liability insurance rather than requiring no deductible 2. Accept a 10 day notice of cancellation rather than the usual 30 days notice of cancellation in the event of non-payment of premium. Alternative Action(s): None 0 L__ - / C;), I REQUEST FOR COUNCIL ACTION MEETING DATE: January 21, 1997 DEPARTMENT ID NUMBER: AD 97-4 Analysis: At the Council meeting of December 16th the City Council approved at contract with Boyle Engineering to perform a study regarding the potential excess facilities capacity under the Holly Seacliff Development Agreement and develop alternatives to provide reimbursement to PLC if and when appropriate. Given the nature of this study, staff is recommending that we grant the above modifications in the City's insurance requirements. Environmental Status: N/A Attachment(sl: City Clerk's Page Number 1 December 16th Request for Council Action BOYLEINS.DOC -2- 01/16/97 4:12 PM