AgdaPkt 2014-07-28 Closed, Special and Joint SA

Browse Search

7.2.D. - Page 19 constructed all at one time as a single project rather than individual "piecemeal" per -lot construction, deferring to the City Council the question of whether the Property Owners should be responsible for constructing the Right -of -Way Improvements and to what extent. P. Disputes have arisen between City and Property Owners as described in the following recitals. As used in this Agreement, the term "Disputes" shall mean and include all the contentions and assertions described in these recitals with respect to the obligations of Property Owners to install the Right -of -Way Improvements, as well as the underlying known and unknown facts and circumstances of those contentions and assertions. Q. City contends, that Property Owners are obligated to complete the Right -of -Way Improvementswhich was a condition of approval on both the annexation of the Property and the subdivision that created the Property —, at their sole cost and expense, as a condition precedent to developing the Property. R. Property Owners conversely contend that the condition to construct the Right -of- Way Improvements is not enforceable as against them because no Subdivision Improvement Agreement was ever entered into or recorded against the Property prior to final map approval pursuant to Subdivision Map Act (Gov. Code §66462(a)) and the City's Subdivision Ordinance (Municipal Code §§ 30.29, 30.79, 30.82). To the extent the condition is enforceable, Property Owners contend that it is only enforceable against them with respect to the Right -of -Way Improvements that front their Property. S. In an effort to resolve the Disputes and move forward with development of the Property, the Parties met and conferred and have reached an agreement to resolve the Disputes and proceed with Property Owners' proposed development of the Property. Each Party disputes and denies each of the other Party's claims, allegations, contentions and assertions. Without admitting liability or wrongdoing of any kind, the Parties desire by this Agreement to, among other things, finally and completely resolve the Disputes, and all claims, demands, assertions and liability arising from and in any manner related to the Disputes. T. The City Council acknowledges and agrees that there is no benefit to the City in having the Property remain as vacant lots. U. City and Property Owners desire to enter into this Agreement in order to, among other things, (i) waive the requirement that property Owners construct and install the full length of the Right -of -Way Improvements along Alameda de las Pulgas from Harding Avenue to the Hetch Hetchy; (ii) waive the requirement that the Property Owners enter into a construction agreement to construct said Right -of -Way Improvements; (iii) provide for Property Owners to prepare and submit design drawings for the full length of the Right -of -Way Improvements to the City Engineer's satisfaction or pay the City an in -lieu design fee to fund the cost of designing the full length of the Right -of -Way Improvements; (iv) provide for Property Owners to pay the City an in -lieu construction fee to fund their proportional share of constructing the Right -of -Way Improvements; (v) provide for City to include the Right -of -Way Improvements in the City's Capital Improvement Program ( "CIP "), fund the cost of the Right -of -Way Improvements not covered by the in -lieu construction fee, and construct the Right -of -Way Improvements within ATTY /AGR/2014.125/ ROW IMPROVEMENT AGREEMENT — ALAMEDA DE LAS PULGAS REV: 07 -21 -14 VR Page 3 of 15