HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 1992-16467 RESOLUTION NO. 16467
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA TO APPROVE THE MIDBAYFRONT CONCEPTUAL DEVELOPMENT
PLAN (SUBCOMMITTEE ALTERNATIVE) WITH MODIFICATIONS,
MAKING FINDINGS OF FACT RELATING TO THE FEASIBILITY OF
MITIGATION MEASURES AND PROJECT ALTERNATIVES, ADOPTING
A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, AND A STATEMENT OF
OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
WHEREAS, a draft Environmental Impact Report, dated August 1990, evaluating
the proposed Midbayfront Local Coastal Program (LCP) Resubmittal was prepared and
was transmitted by the City of Chula Vista, as lead agency, to all concerned
parties for review and comment; and,
WHEREAS, notice of the availability of the draft Environmental Impact
Report was given as required by law; and,
WHEREAS, written comments from the public on the draft Environmental Impact
Report were accepted from August 6, 1990 to September 26, 1990; and,
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission held a public hearing and accepted
public testimony on the draft Environmental Impact Report on September 26, 1990;
and,
WHEREAS, at this hearing, CHULA VISTA INVESTORS (the project applicant)
introduced a new revised concept plan described as Alternative 8; and,
WHEREAS, based on new information raised in the public comment period and
at the public hearing, a Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated
July 1991, was prepared for Alternative 8; and,
WHEREAS, the Recirculated Draft supersedes the previous Draft Environmental
Impact Report; and,
WHEREAS, the Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated July
1991, evaluating the proposed Midbayfront LCP Resubmittal No. 8 Amendment
project, was prepared and was transmitted by the City of Chula Vista to all
concerned parties for review and comment; and,
WHEREAS, notice of the availability of the Recirculated Draft Environmental
Impact Report was given as required by law; and,
WHEREAS, written comments from the public on the Recirculated Draft
Environmental Impact Report were accepted from April 10, 1991 to May 22, 1991;
and,
WHEREAS, the public review period on the Recirculated Draft EIR was
extended until May 24, 1991 to allow additional response time for the U.S. Fish
and Wildlife Service; and,
Resolution No. 16467
Page 2
WHEREAS, the City Planning Commission held a public hearin9 and accepted
public testimony on the Recirculated Draft Environmental Impact Report on May 22,
1991; and,
WHEREAS, agency and public comments have been addressed in the Final
Environmental Impact Report for Midbayfront LCP Resubmittal No. 8 Amendment,
dated July 1991; and,
WHEREAS, the Midbayfront LCP Resubmittal No. 8 project was heard by the
City Plannin9 Commission on July 24, 1991; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission has, by separate resolution (Planning
Commission Resolution No. EIR-89-08) on Jul 24, 1991, certified the Final
Environmental Impact Report (No. EIR-89-08) (hereafter "EIR") pursuant to the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Pub. Resources Code, section 21000
et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regulations, tit. 14, section
15000 et seq.) which analyzes the environmental effects of the proposed
Midbayfront LCP Resubmittal No. 8, Alternative 8; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council certified the EIR on August 20, 1991 wherein the
Project was described as Alternative 8; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 16328 on August 20, 1991,
which neither approved nor disapproved of Alternative 8 but referred same to the
Bayfront Planning Subcommittee for their review and recommendation; and,
WHEREAS, the Bayfront Planning Subcommittee held approximately 15 public
meetings and recommended to the City Council that they approve Alternative 8, as
identified in the EIR, with minor modifications. As so modified by said
subcommittee, the recommendation of said subcommittee is officially referred to
as the Midbayfront Conceptual Development Plan (Subcommittee Alternative}, and
shall hereinafter be referred to as the "Subcommittee Alternative"}; and,
WHEREAS, these minor modifications proposed by the Subcommittee Alternative
to Alternative 8 include the elimination of a previously designated luxury hotel
and placing in its stead a Cultural Arts facility on approximately three acres,
a reduction of the number of residential units from 1400 to 1000 (though the
total square footage remains the same), and minor design modifications to the
northern residential area; and,
WHEREAS, the EIR certified by the City Council on August 20, 1991 addressed
the impacts of such Subcommittee Alternative modifications; and,
WHEREAS, on or about December 10, 1991, an addendum to the EIR was prepared
which identified the proposed Subcommittee Alternative modifications and which
concluded that said modifications did not change the conclusions as contained in
the EIR as to the impacts of the Subcommittee Alternative on the environment;
and,
WHEREAS, public notice was given on December 11, lggl, that the EIR for
Resubmittal No. 8 would be used as the EIR for the Midbayfront Conceptual
Development Plan (Subcommittee Alternative}; and,
Resolution No. 16467
Page 3
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission conducted a public hearing on December 18,
1991 for the purpose of hearing public testimony as to the Subcommittee
Alternative and the proper and adequate preparation of the EIR, and at a
continued meeting thereof held on January B, 1992, by the adoption of their res-
olution, PC No. 89-08A, recommended to the City Council the certification of the
EIR and approval of the Subcommittee Alternative with additional minor
modifications ("Planning Commission Alternative); and,
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the City Council on January 14,
1992 for the purpose of approving Midbayfront Conceptual Development Plan
(Subcommittee Alternative) providing, among others, for the development of the
site in the manner described by the Subcommittee Alternative, and for the further
purpose of certifying the EIR, making findings and adopting a mitigation and
monitoring program and statement of overriding considerations; and,
WHEREAS, at their meeting of January 14, 1992, the City Council did conduct
and close said public hearing, certified the proper preparation of the EIR for
the Subcommittee Alternative by their adoption of Resolution No. 16466, proposed
amendments to the concept plan (which as so amended, shall hereinafter be re-
ferred to as the "Council Alternative", or alternatively hereinafter as the
"Project"), and directed staff to prepare and return to the Council a revised
approval resolution which incorporates their proposed amendments; and,
WHEREAS, the EIR certified by the City Council on August 20, 1991 and again
on January 14, 1992 addressed the impacts of the Council Alternative; and,
WHEREAS, the EIR identified certain significant and potentially significant
adverse effects on the environment caused by the Project; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council is required, pursuant to CEQA, to adopt all
feasible mitigation measures or feasible project alternatives that can
substantially lessen or avoid any significant environmental effects; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council desires, in accordance with CEQA, to declare
that, despite the occurrence of certain significant and potentially significant
effects that cannot be substantially lessened or avoided through the adoption of
feasible mitigation measures or feasible alternatives, there exist certain
overriding economic, social, and other considerations for approving the Project
that the City Council believes justify the occurrence of those impacts.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY
FIND, DETERMINE, RESOLVE, AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
1. Project Approval
The City Council approves the Midbayfront LCP Conceptual Development Plan
(Subcommittee Alternative) as herein modified ("Concept Plan") and by
doing so, directs the staff to process, and return to Council for approval
of, an LCP Resubmittal for the territory of the Midbayfront, a
Redevelopment Plan Amendment and a General Plan Amendment that provides a
plan for the development of the Midbayfront consistent with the
Midbayfront LCP Conceptual Development Plan (Subcommittee Alternative),
Resolution No. 16467
Page 4
with the following changes, conditions, information and additional
processing direction:
A. Informational Conditions
At the time the General Plan Amendment and the LCP Resubmittal are
returned to the Council for review and approval, they shall be
accompanied by the following types of information:
(1) Economic Feasibility
An Economic Feasibility Analysis ("EFA") shall be prepared,
submitted to the Council, and approved prior to, or
concurrently with, the approval of the LCP Resubmittal and
General Plan Amendment. The report shall be prepared in a
format acceptable to the City's Director of Finance and be
available with adequate lead time for a thorough staff review.
The criteria for approval of this report shall be that it
demonstrates clearly that the project/phasing proposed is
economically feasible. The report shall include a supportable
statistical basis for marketing (revenue/absorption) and costs
associated with the feasibility analysis.
(2) Minimal Residential Density to Permit Economic Feasibility.
An economic feasibility analysis that demonstrates the minimum
number of residential units that can be built and still permit
the project to remain economically feasible.
(3) Shipbuilding Jobs
One or more optional plans for the Council's approval and
implementation that will permit the preservation of jobs
otherwise provided by the shipyard at the foot of F Street
that may be dislocated by the Project. One such plan may
include the relocation of the shipyard facility.
(4) Coordination with Coastal Commission Processing
Staff is directed to review with the Coastal Commission what
other communities have done with regard to mass transit
programs and how such programs affects traffic and to work
with the Coastal Commission staff as to the acceptability of
the proposed building heights and other project features.
B. Project Related Conditions
At the time the General Plan Amendment and the LCP Resubmittal are
returned to the City Council for their review and approval, they are
to be returned in a manner that proposes, among such other
conditions that the staff deems appropriate, the following
conditions:
Resolution No. 16467
Page 5
(1) Cultural Arts Facility
Upon determination by the City Council that a cultural arts
facility of the type described herein ("Facility") is most
appropriately placed within the territory of the Concept Plan,
the Developer shall dedicate the land sufficient for the
Facility (including parking for the facility), within the
territory of the Concept Plan, and develop and present to the
Council for approval, a feasible (in the judgment of the City
Council) financing plan that will permit the design and
construction of a multi-functional cultural arts center with
a minimum goal of 2,000 seat capacity of such a design that
meets with the satisfaction of the City Council, and which, as
part of said financing plan, will provide for significant
Developer contribution to such a project, and which may
further provide for Port participation.
(2) Ice Rink/Park
The Developer shall dedicate the space and parking for same,
within the territory of the Concept Plan, and either cause the
design and construction of, or fund the design and
construction of, a 62,000 square foot, 5,000 seat capacity ice
rink of such a design that meets with the satisfaction of the
City Council; or, in the alternative, a park or other recrea-
tional facility designed and constructed to the satisfaction
of the City Council.
(3) Limited Number of High Rises
The General Plan Amendment and LCP Resubmittal shall be
processed to provide no more than four (4) "high rise" struc-
tures. The term "high rise structure" means any building more
than ten (10) stories tall.
(4) Parking
A minimum of 75 percent of the required parking for the Resort
and Residential uses shall be provided in subterranean or
concealed parking structures;
(5) Bike/Hiking Trails
An integrated trail system to maximize trail and visual access
to the bayfront shall be provided and shall provide linkage to
the Chula Vista Greenbelt (as described in the General Plan);
(6) Water Access
A location for future direct access to the Bay shall be
identified on the final plan in the event that future Federal,
State, and Port Di strict approval s would permit such access;
Resolution No. 16467
Page 6
(7) Traffic
The Project shall not cause traffic in the Project vicinity to
be reduced to below accepted City Thresholds as articulated in
the Growth Management Program. A traffic monitoring program
shall be established as an implementation and phasing
requirement;
(8) Conversion of Hotels
Hotels may not be converted for residential use, and
authorized but not-built hotel units are not contemplated for
residential use;
(9) Affordable Housing
The project shall address the City's policy and practice of
providing a 10 percent Affordable Housing goal (per City's
Housing Element), and in this regard, the City Council may
entertain fees in lieu of construction;
(10) Air Quality
An Air Quality Improvement Plan (as defined in the Growth
Management Ordinance) shall be required for approval -
concurrently with the project submittal (SPA Plan);
(11) Water Conservation
A Water Conservation Plan (as defined in the Growth Management
Ordinance) shall be required for approval concurrently with
the project submittal (SPA Plan);
(12) Schools
An agreement will be reached between the Districts, applicant,
and City to assure that facilities for students generated by
the project will be available when needed;
(13) Nature Interpretative Center Benefit or Assessment District.
The properties enjoying the benefits of the Nature
Interpretative Center (including the Midbayfront) will be
included within a yet to be established Benefit or Assessment
District which will contribute full operational costs of
Center programs); and,
(14) Private Lagoon
The private lagoon in the northern residential area would be -
a private amenity for that area;
Resolution No. 16467
Page 7
(15) Phasing
Entitlements to develop the Project shall conditioned on a
Phasing Plan acceptable to the City Council which Phasing Plan
shall be programmed to ensure fiscal benefits to the City, and
early implementation of public parks and the Cultural Arts
Facility. Updated and objective market, economic, and fiscal
analyses shall be provided prior to the commencement of any
phase of development. Phasing program shall be conditioned to
require performance guarantee of developer.
(16) Assurances of Development--Development Agreement
The General Plan Amendment or the LCP Resubmittal, and any
entitlements therein conveyed, shall be conditioned upon the
City and the Developer reaching an agreement ("Development
Agreement") which addresses, among other things as the parties
may desire, those matters hereinbelow set forth as Development
Agreement Conditions.
C. Development Agreement Conditions
The Developer shall commit, in the form of a proposed and executed
Development Agreement, to, and provide the City with, security
sufficient, to the City's reasonable satisfaction, to insure that
the different phases of the project prior to commencement of any
such phase will be completed. It is the intent of this paragraph
that the completion of all public infrastructure shall be guaranteed
or otherwise suitably bonded prior to commencement of any such
infrastructure and that the completion of each private structure
shall be guaranteed or suitably bonded prior to the commencement of
construction of any such private structure. The Council may
consider waiving the security sufficiency requirement for a
Developer that is a governmental agency.
(1) Cultural Arts Facility Contribution
As part of financing plan required by the conditions of this
resolution hereinabove set forth, Developer shall provide for
significant Developer contribution to the design and
construction of such a Facility, and which may further provide
for San Diego Unified Port District participation.
By approving the Concept plan, the City Council intends only to give, and
gives only, development processing direction to the staff of the City in
order that staff may efficiently and effectively develop an LCP Amendment
and General Plan Amendment. Such approval is not intended to, and shall
not, constitute final approval of the plan at this stage nor is it
intended to, and shall not, convey any entitlement or expectation of
development to the developer; finally, approval of the concept plan is not
intended to, and shall not, commit the Council to approval of the LCP
Resubmittal, the General Plan Amendment, or the Redevelopment Plan
Resolution No. 16467
Page 8
Amendment, or any other land use right. Rather, the Council shall retain
full and unfettered discretion to consider the LCP Resubmittal, the
General Plan Amendment, and the Redevelopmerit Plan Amendment without
consequence, despite its decision to approve the Concept Development Plan.
Developer shall receive no vested rights to develop prior to the entering
into a final Development Agreement with the City of Chula Vista, and/or
the City of Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency, and such rights shall then
be only those conferred by such Development Agreement, but in the absence
of reaching terms as to a Development Agreement wherein the City confers
vested rights in the Developer, the Developer shall receive no vested
rights to develop prior to the commencement of construction pursuant to
validly issued building permits.
{2) The Development Agreement shall provide that the first phase
of development shall include development of the core area
comprising the lagoon, core hotels, retail/commercial with
residential above, and sports complex. Residential
development in the northern area (north of Marina Parkway) may
be included to a maximum of 25 percent of the total number of
units.
2. CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations
A. Adoption of Findings
The City Council does hereby approve, accept as its own, incorporate
as if set forth in full herein, and make each and every one of the
CEQA Findings attached hereto as Exhibit A or on file in the City
Clerk's Office and known as document number C092-013.
B. Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted
As more fully identified and set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto
or on file in the City Clerk's Office and known as document number
C092-013, the City Council hereby finds, pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091, that
certain of the mitigation measures described in the EIR as feasible
are feasible, and will become a binding condition or conditions upon
the Project.
C. Infeasibility of Mitigation Measures and Alternatives.
As set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto or on file in the City
Clerk's Office and known as document number C092-013, the City
Council finds that the remainder of the proposed mitigation
measures, identified therein as infeasible, and none of the proposed
Project alternatives set forth in the Final EIR can feasibly
substantially lessen or avoid the potentially significant effects
that will not be substantially lessened or avoided by adoption of
all feasible mitigation measures.
Resolution No. 16467
Page 9
D. Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring Program.
As required by Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the City
Council hereby adopts the mitigation monitoring program {"Program"),
set forth in Exhibit B, incorporated herein by reference or on file
in the City Clerk's Office and known as document number C092-014.
The City Council finds that the Program is designed to ensure that,
during Project implementation, the Project applicant, and other
responsible parties, implement the Project components and comply
with the feasible mitigation measures identified in the Findings.
E. Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and
alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant adverse
environmental effects caused by the Project will remain. Therefore,
the City Council hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section
15093 and as set forth in Exhibit A attached hereto or on file in
the City Clerk's Office and known as document number C092-013, a
statement of overriding considerations identifying the specific
economic, social, and other considerations that render that
unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable.
Presented by ro as to rm
Chri stopher Sal omone ~)ruce M. Boogaa~(~
Director of Community Development City Attorney
Resolution No. 16467
Page 10
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, California, this 4th day of February, 1992 by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers: Grasser Hotton, Malcolm, Moore, Nader,
Rindone
NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None
Tim Nade~r~ 'Mayor
ATTEST:
~everly ~(. Au{helet, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 16467 was duly passed, approved,
and adopted by the City Council held on the 4th day of February, 1992.
Executed this 4th day of February, 1992,
Bever~ A. Authelet, City Clerk