Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Development Agreement topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Commission backs third amendment to Winchester Hills development agreement, restoring original term
Summary
Planning staff said rescinding a prior extension reinstates the original development agreement terms and allows the property owner to pursue fee exemptions from WRCOG and RCA; the commission recommended approval 4-0.
The Planning Commission recommended that the City Council approve a third amendment to the development agreement affecting the Winchester Hills/Harveston property. Planning staff said the amendment rescinds a prior extension and reinstates the original term of the development agreement, which staff said would allow the property owner to seek an exemption from regional fees.
Scott Cooper, senior planner, described the amendment as requested by the applicant and noted that rescinding the first amendment would return the agreement to its original terms. Cooper explained that Western Riverside Council of Governments (WRCOG) and the Riverside County Agency (RCA) had taken the position that any change to the original development agreement could remove the owner’s fee exemption; by rescinding the extension and reinstating the original term, staff said the project again qualifies for the exemption process with WRCOG and RCA.
Cooper summarized the administrative history: the city council previously approved the original development agreement and a first amendment that extended its term; the second amendment (approved January 2023) had the same text as the third amendment but applied to a different parcel; the third amendment before the commission mirrors that second amendment and was requested by the applicant.
Steve Berry, who identified himself as owner of Winchester Hills 1 and related Harveston entities, confirmed the project's historical ownership and the chain of entities, saying the staff report was "very accurate." Berry explained the ownership changes were done to satisfy lender requirements when the project was refinanced.
After limited public comment (none), Commissioner Hagel moved to recommend approval of the third amendment; Commissioner Solis seconded. The motion passed 4-0.
Staff recommended the Planning Commission adopt the proposed resolution recommending City Council approval of the amendment. Cooper said the project is exempt under CEQA statistical treatment cited in staff materials (staff referenced CEQA section 15163/the general rule for subsequent EIRs in the report). The amendment affects property within portions of planning area 12 of the Harveston Specific Plan and does not change development standards beyond reinstating the original term.
