HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/2001/04/25
ACTION AGENDA
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Chula Vista, California
6:00 p.m
Wednesday, April 25, 2001
Council Chambers
276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista
CALL TO ORDER
Present: Chair Thomas, Commissioners Castaneda, Hall, Cortez, Willet,
McCain and O'Neil
ROLL CAWMOTIONS TO EXCUSE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE and MOMENT OF SILENCE
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission on any
subject matter within the Commission's jurisdiction but not an item on to day's agenda.
Each speaker's presentation may not exceed three minutes.
1. WORKSHOP: East lake III
Project Planner: Luis Hernandez, Principal Planner
No Action Taken
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Close of public review period for Draft Environmental Impact
Report for East lake III EIR.
Project Planner: Joan Isaacson, Environmental Planning
No Action Taken
3. PUBLIC HEARING: SUPS-01-01; Consideration of an extension of an existing Special
Use Permit for the Continuation of an Auto Dismantling and
Recycling Business at 800-834 and 825 Energy Way and Resolution
_ Recommending that the Redevelopment Agency Board
approve the proposed Special Use Permit extension in accordance
with the attached draft Agency Resolution based on the findings
and subject to the conditions contained therein.
Project Planner: Brian Hunter, Planning and Environmental Manager
Action: Denied (7-0-0-0)
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution of the Redevelopment Agency of Chula Vista amending
the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Procedures Manual
Section III B (rules and regulations for the filing and processing of
plans and proposals for the redevelopment of the otayValley Road
project area, major projects) to add Sub-paragraph 3, Precise Plan
Projects, and amending the Otay Valley Road Project Area
Implementation Plan/Design Manual addendum to add Section
5.3(5), allowing for the administrative approval of designs and
owner participation agreements within agency approved Precise
Plan Developments.
Planning Commission
- 2 -
April 25, 2001
Project Planner: Patricia Beard, Sr. Community Development Specialist
Action: Approved (7-0-0-0)
5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC-01-07; Appeal of Conditional Use Permit to install 4 panel
antennas on each of the 4 sides of an existing church building with
radio equipment located in the basement, at 940 Hilltop Drive.
Staff is recommending that public hearing be continued to a date certain
of May 9, 2001.
Project Planner: Harold Phelps, Associate Planner
Action: Continued (7-0-0-0)
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:
ADJOURNMENT:
C:\!v1y Documents\P C ACTION AGENDA4-2S-01 .doc.doc
AGENDA
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Chula Vista, California
6:00 p.m
Wednesday, April 25, 2001
Council Chambers
276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CAWMOTIONS TO EXCUSE
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE and MOMENT OF SILENCE
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission on any
subject matter within the Commission's jurisdiction but not an item on today's agenda.
Each speaker's presentation may not exceed three minutes.
1. STAFF OVERVIEW: East lake III
Project Planner: Luis Hernandez, Principal Planner
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Close of public review period for Draft Environmental Impact
Report for East lake III EIR.
Project Planner: Joan Isaacson, Environmental Planning
3. PUBLIC HEARING: SUPS-01-01; Consideration of an extension of an existing Special
Use Permit for the Continuation of an Auto Dismantling and
Recycling Business at 800-834 and 825 Energy Way and Resolution
_ Recommending that the Redevelopment Agency Board
approve the proposed Special Use Permit extension in accordance
with the attached draft Agency Resolution based on the findings
and subject to the conditions contained therein.
Project Planner: Brian Hunter, Planning and Environmental Manager
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Resolution of the Redevelopment Agency of Chula Vista amending
the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Procedures Manual
Section III B (rules and regulations for the filing and processing of
plans and proposals for the redevelopment of the Otay Valley Road
project area, major projects) to add Sub-paragraph 3, Precise Plan
Projects, and amending the Otay Valley Road Project Area
Implementation PlanlDesign Manual addendum to add Section
5.3(5), allowing for the administrative approval of designs and
owner participation agreements within agency approved Precise
Plan Developments.
Project Planner: Patricia Beard, Sr. Community Development Specialist
Planning Commission
- 2-
April 25, 2001
5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC-01-07; Appeal of Conditional Use Permit to install 4 panel
antennas on each of the 4 sides of an existing church building with
radio equipment located in the basement, at 940 Hilltop Drive.
Staff is recommending that public hearing be continued to a date certain
of May 9, 2001.
Project Planner: Harold Phelps, Associate Planner
DIRECTOR'S REPORT
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:
ADJOURNMENT:
COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), requests
individuals who require special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a City
meeting, activity, or service, request such accommodations at least forty-eight hours in advance for
meetings, and five days for scheduled services and activities. Please contact Diana Vargas for
specific information at (619) 691-5101 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TOO) at 585-
5647. California Relay Service is also available for the hearing impaired.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item .3
Meeting Date 04/25/01
PUBLIC HEARING:
Consideration of an extension of an existing Special Use Permit for the
Continuation of an Auto Dismantling and Recycling Business at 800-834 and
825 Energy Way and Resolution_Recommending that the Redevelopment
Agency Board approve the proposed Special Use Permit extension in
accordance with the attached draft Agency Resolution based on the findings
and subject to the conditions contained therein.
The project is the continuation of an existing use, Conditional Use Permit #PCC-73-27, effective date December 12,
1973, for automotive dismantling and the sale of auto parts, and scrap metal collection, compaction, cutting,
shredding in preparation for the scrap market, and other related uses. The project was approved by the
Redevelopment Agency for a thirteen year extension on December 8, 1992 which moved the expiration date of the
Permit until 2005. On November 10, 2000 staff received an application for an extension of this permit until 2025.
The Planning and Environmentai Manager for the Community Development Department has determined that no new
environmental impacts that have not been previously addressed will occur, and the project is consistent with the
previous environmental review.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt attached Resolution _ recommending that the Redevelopment Agency approve the proposed Special
Use Permit Extension in accordance with the attached draft Redevelopment Agency Board Resolution based on the
findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
DISCUSSION:
1. Site and Proiect Characteristics
The proposed project is an extension of the existing Special Use Permit for the existing automotive recycling facilities
located at 800-834 and 825 Energy Way, doing business as Ecology Auto Wrecking, Inc.. The site's discretionary
history for this use goes back to Conditional Use Permit # PCC -73-27, effective date December 12, 1973, which
was extended at the direction of a Settlement Agreement relating to the Otay Valley Road widening, entered into by
both the City of Chula Vista, the Redevelopment Agency, and the applicant, on December 8, 1992 for a period of 13
years until 2005.
Under the terms of the Settlement Agreement the City of Chula Vista was to issue a Special Use Permit (SUP)
conditioned only by code required off street parking; landscape planting and irrigation; and fencing and other
appropriate comparable cost screening measures to ameliorate adverse visual impacts. The Agreement further
states that the applicant is not required to deviate substantially from the plans previously submitted, reviewed, and
recommended for approval. The Settlement Agreement, Section III K, indicates that "if at any time between the
effective date of this Agreement and December 31, 2017 the City denies a Plaintiff a Special Permit, or other such
required permit which may be necessary for the continued use of the Lots for the use identified above upon the
conditions herein specified, then such Plaintiff may give the City written notice of the rescission of the Agreement and
... the Action may be recommenced in its entirety..." .
2. General Plan, Zoninq, and Land Use
GENERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT LAND USE
Site: Otay Valley Road Auto Recycling
Research and Limited Redevelopment (OVR)
Industrial IP (Industrial Precise Plan)
North: Open Space S80 Otay Disposal Site
South: Research and Limited OVRlIP vacant
Industrial
East OVRlIP Construction Residue RecyclingNehicle
Auctions
West OVRlIP Auto Recycling/Contractors Yard
3. PropOsal
No additional physical construction activities are proposed at this time. Applicant is requesting an extension of their
existing Special Use Permit from 2005 until December 12, 2025.
4. Analvsis
The benefits to the society as a whole of auto recycling of end life vehicles (EL Vs) is manifested in obvious cost
savings in recycled parts, energy conservation, parts availability, reduction in abandoned vehicles and land filling,
raw material supply, and reduced insurance rates via reducing costs of repairs and providing a market for totaled
vehicles. In addition, Ecology Auto is also an approved location as an authorized State of California and City of
Chula Vista oil recycling center. The administration of the "Old Vehicle Buy Back program" for the County of San
Diego/Air Pollution Control District occurs here. Annual review by City staff (Community Development and Code
Enforcement performed a compliance inspection on May 24, 2000), as well as a complete inspection of the site as
part of this permit, indicates this operation sets the standard locally for this use for stormwater filtration, fire
suppression measures, as well as hazardous waste extraction, and storage and handling of vehicles.
As this permit is an extension of an existing permit that has a history of over 25 years, the project is and has been
supported by the Chula Vista General Plan, the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan, and the City's Zoning
Ordinance. The existing Settlement Agreement further delineates the City of Chula Vista's responsibility and limits in
this area. Community Development staff would like the Planning Commission to consider, in keeping with the project
area goal of eliminating visual blight due to incompatible uses, staffs desire to conduct a study of Energy Way uses
during the next several months. The five-year implementation plan for the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project
Area calls for an evaluation of the potential for alternate uses for properties now housing auto wreckers and recyclers
prior to the consideration of SUP extensions for those uses. The majority of the SUP's will expire between 2004-
2006.
It is recognized in the implementation plan that auto recycling is a necessary and beneficial land use for a region.
However, the Agency's goal is to determine whether a portion or all of the properties in this area can be redeveloped
to a higher and better use more consistent with the goals of the project area to produce an officenight industrial park.
The General Plan and Zoning for this area is Research and Limited Industrial.
A feasibility study would include an analysis of the demand for and location of existing auto wreckers/recyclers,
perhaps to include a perfonnance standard based on population/demographics, any environmental remediation
needed to redevelop the area to light industrial uses and, finally, the market and likely absorption rate in attracting
iight industrial uses to the area.
Staff believes now is the appropriate time to conduct the study, since this penn it is the first application for extension
of the Special Use Pennits issued in the area, and while staff presently recognizes the need for at least one recycler
in the area, particularly considering the Settlement Agreement, such a study may provide us with the basis for further
discretion during consideration of future extensions. Additionally, the infonnation provided by the study will provide
valuable direction for the General Plan update.
Conclusion:
The proposed land use is supported by the Chula Vista General Plan, the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan,
and the City's Zoning Ordinance, as well as the Settlement Agreement between the City of Chula Vista, the
Redevelopment Agency, and the applicant. As the Settlement Agreement speaks to a period inclusive of December
31, 2017, staff supports an extension (a little over 12 years from the present expiration date) to this date to meet the
tenns and conditions of that agreement, rather than the 20 year period requested by the applicant.
Attachments
1. Planning Commission Resolution
2. RedevekJpment Agency Resolution
3. Settlement Agreement (AgOl1cy Resolution 1290ICity Resolution 16924)
4. Location Map
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVE THE SPECIAL USE PERMIT
EXTENSION UNTIL DECEMBER 31, 2017 FOR ECOLOGY AUTO WRECKING LOCATED AT 800-834
AND 825 ENERGY WAY IN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
WHEREAS, on November 11, 2000 Ecology Auto Wrecking, filed an application for an extension of their
existing Special Use Permit located at the above address; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and EnvironmentalManager has determined that no new environmental impacts
that have not been previously addressed in the previously granted Conditional and Special Use Permits for this use will
occur; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on the Special Use Permit extension
and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation
in the city and its mailing to property owners within 300 feet of the exterior boundaries of the real property that is the
subject of the hearing at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6;00 p.m., April 25, 2001, in
the City Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter
closed; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby recommends that
the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista adopt the attached draft Agency Resolution in the forms attached
with said minor modification as may be approved by the City Attomey in accordance with the findings and subject to
the conditions contained therein.
BE IT FURTHER RESOL VED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the Redevelopment Agency
of the City of Chula Vista.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNiA, this 25" day of April, 2001, by the following vote, to wit:
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE EXTENSION OF THE SPECIAL USE
PERMIT SUPO-01-01 UNTIL DECEMBER 31, 2017 FOR ECOLOGY AUTO
WRECKING LOCATED AT 800-834 AND 825 ENERGY WAY AND
DIRECTING STAFF TO PROCEED WITH AN EVALUATION OF THE
POTENTIAL FOR ALTERNATE USES FOR PROPERTIES NOW HOUSING
AUTO WRECKERS AND REOYCLERS PER THE DIRECTION OF THE
ADOPTED FIVE YEAR IMPLEMENTATION PLAN FOR THE OTAY VALLEY
ROAD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2000 the City of Chula Vista did receive an application for an extension
of an existing Special Use Permit, SUPO-01-01 (formerly identified as CPE 53, SLVP 24, and PCC-73-27)
until December 12, 2025, and this constitutes a formal application; and
WHEREAS, Conditional Use Permit #PCC-73-27, effective date December 12, 1973 originally
allowed the automotive recycling facilities located at 800-834 and 825 Energy Way and known as Ecology
Auto Wrecking; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, and the
applicant entered into a Settlement Agreement relating to the Otay Valley Road widening on December 8,
1992, which resulted in the immediate extension of the previously mentioned permit until 2005; and
WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement limits the conditions of the Special Use Permit to the
following: required off street parking; landscape planting and irrigation; and fencing and other appropriate
comparable cost screening measures to ameliorate adverse visual impacts; and
WHEREAS, annual review of the project indicates that all conditions of the previously issued permit
have been met; and
WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement further indicates that if at any time between the effective date
of this Agreement and December 31, 2017 the City denies a Plaintiff a Special Permit, or other such required
permit which may be necessary for the continued use of the Lots for the use identified above upon the
conditions herein specified, then such Plaintiff may give the City written notice of the rescission of the
Agreement and ... the action may be recommenced in its entirety; and
WHEREAS, the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area Implementation Plans 2000-2004,
adopted on November 9, 1999, calls for an evaluation of the potential altemate uses for properties now
housing auto wreckers and recyclers.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista to
direct staff to conduct a study of auto wrecking/recycling uses in the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment
Project Area to evaluate .the potential for alternate uses more compatible with the surrounding land uses, to
determine environmental or market constraints to redevelopment, and to determine the density of auto
wrecking/recycling uses appropriate in the Project Area.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that Special Use Permit SUPO-01-01 is hereby APPROVED with an
expiration date of December 31, 2017 according to the following findings and subject to the conditions
contained herein:
FINDINGS
1.
That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable to provide a
service or facility which contributes to the general well being of the neighborhood or
the community in that the recycling of End Life Vehicles (ELVs) results in cost savings
in recycled parts, energy conservation, parts availability, reduction in abandoned
vehicles and land filling, raw material supply, and reduced insurance rates via
reducing costs of repair and providing a market for totaled vehicles. Ecology Auto
Wrecking also acts as an approved oil recycling center.
2.
That such use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental
to the health safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity since the land use is considered
an interim use, and is regulated for safety and health concerns via local and state
agencies, as well as via the conditions of this permit, which speak to adequate
offstreet parking, landscaping, and screening of the visual impact. Surrounding land
uses include other auto wreckers, the landfill, auto auctioneers, contractors yard, and
construction material recycling.
3.
That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the
Municipal Code for such use as modified by the Settlement Agreement.
4.
That the granting of the special use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan
of the City of Chula Vista or the adopted plan of any governmental Agency since the
General Plan is Industrial and the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Implementation
Plan recognizes auto wrecking as a transitional use.
CONDITIONS
1. Required off street parking shall be maintained in a manner consistent with the Chula Vista
Municipal Code.
2. Landscaping and irrigation shall be maintained in a manner consistent with the Landscape
manual.
3. Fencing and other appropriate comparable-cost screening measures to ameliorate adverse
visual impacts shall be maintained.
PRESENTED BY
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY
Chris Salomone
Director of Community Development
John M. Kaheny
Agency Attorney
/
I
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ,) Q.... "6- b
Meeting Date: 12/8/92
(Is)
Agency Resolution j;) 1 () Approving the Settlement Agreement between
the City, Agency and various parcel owners within the Otay Valley Road
Widening Assessment District, AD 90-2, and Authorizing the Chairman
to execute Same on Behalf of the Agency, and Appropriating the
Necessary Funds.
City Resolution /61:2 'f Approving the Settlement Agreement between
the City, Agency and various parcel owners within the Otay Valley Road
Widening Assessment District, AD 90-2, and Authorizing the Mayor to
execute Same n ~iff of the City of ChuJa Vista
City Attorney Iro
ITEM TITLE:~)
SUBMITTED BY:
Agency: 4/Sths Vote: Yes]LNo
Council: 4/Sths Vote: Yes No-X..
On June 23, 1992, by Resolution No. 16643, the City Council formed Assessment District No.
90-02 for the purpose of financing in part a $13.4 million (approximately) project to widen the
Otay Valley Road from the 1-805 to a point approximately 2 miles easterly (just before said Road
crosses the river bed). Owners of six properties within the Assessment District ("Plaintiffs")!'
1. The two northwesterly lots, to wit: 825 Energy Way (aka AD Nos. 72 and 73, Map 8147
Lot No. 12 and 13), is owned by Charles B. Siroonian, Linda 1. Mandel, Charles D. Pratty II,
Louis P. Pratty, and Caroline A. Pratty;
The two southwesterly lots, to wit: 820 - 834 Energy Way (aka AD Nos. 80 and 81,
Map 8147 Lot Nos. 21 and 22), is owned by Otay Industrial Park (Karl Turecek and Charles
Turecek are the general partners of Otay Industrial Park) and under lease to Ecology Auto
Wrecking; .
The two easterly lots, north and south of Energy Way, to wit: 850-855 Energy Way (aka
(continued. ..)
siroon.1l3
December 4, 1992
".
A 113 reSiroonian Settlement
Page 1
,-1 -j
.".., -........-...-
commenced a lawsuit contesting the environmental review over the road widening and protesting
that the spread was inappropriately narrow (i.e., that it should be broadened to include more
property owners).
After months of negotiation, the City Attorney's office and the staff negotiated a relatively
complex Settlement Agreement which the Agency and Council are being asked to approve by
the attached resolutions.
Boards and Commissioners Recommendation:
None applicable. The Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee has reviewed and approved
for referral to the Agency Board three special permit requests involving the Plaintiff's land use
rights. These three special permit requests are the subject of the sUQsequent public hearings.
Recommendation:
Adopt the attached resolutions approving the attached Settlement Agreement and authorize
the Mayor/Chairman to execute same, and appropriating the necessary funds.
Discussion:
The Proiect
The Otay Valley Road Widening Project consists of widening Otay Valley Road, between
I-80S and a point approximately 2 miles easterly thereof. The project has been estimated to cost
approximately $13.4 million, $5.4 million of which was being contributed through a variety of
accounts and funding sources, from the City or the Agency, and the balance of which is being
financed from the assessment bonds.
Consequence of the Litigation
The mere filing of the suit, regardless of the merits of the suit, and projected length of
litigation, was impairing our ability to issue bonds contemplated by the assessment district
proceedings, which in turn was impairing our ability to finance the construction of the road
widening project and jeopardizing a $1.16 million (approximately) SB 300 reimbursement grant
1. (...continued)
AD Nos. 74 and 79, Map 8147 Lot Nos. 14 and 20), are owned by Otay Industrial Park, and
leased to separate enterprises as follows: Lot 14 is leased to F.I. Willert Contracting for
contracting offices and storage of heavy equipment, and Lot 20 is leased to A to Z Enterprises
for impounding, storage and dismantling of automobiles. Neither of these lessees are plaintiffs.
siroon .113
December 4, 1992
A 113 re Siroonian Settlement
Page 2
Q--,!
~) c-->
from the State of California used as a partial funding source for the project and an Army Corps
of Engineers Section 404 Permit".
How the Agreement Operates
The agreement consists of "operative provisions" which become effective only after
. certain "conditions precedent" occurY
The Conditions Precedent
In the process of negotiating a settlement, it was discovered that the conditional
use permits~' for the Plaintiffs' property have expired and, in fact, one parcel is engaged in a
use (to wit: "lien sale of impounded vehicles"--a variant of "auto auctions") which is not an
authorized use in "I-p"1' zones. The continued entitlement of the property owners to engage
in the uses that they have historically been engaging in was a key factor in determining their
willingness to settle on the "operative provisions" .
Therefore, there are four "conditions precedent" to the Agreement:
Conditions Precedent Nos 1 - 3:
Ecology, A - Z Enterprises and F.J. Willerts Contracting have to apply for
special permits to engage in their existing uses. While the City is not required
to grant these special permits, if they are granted on terms no more onerous than
certain specified terms, the "condition precedent" has been met, and if all other
conditions precedent are similarly met, the "operative provisions" of the
Settlement Agreement go into effect. If the special permits are not granted, the
"operative provisions" do not go into effect and the matter will proceed to trial
in approximately two months.
Condition Precedent No 4:
2. This is a permit to perform construction work in a wetland which was due to expire on
January 13, 1993.
3. This structure was necessary because it is inappropriate for the City to become committed
by contract to exercise its governmental authority in one manner or another.
4. Conditional Use .Permits within a Redevelopment Project Area are referred to as "Special
Permits", but the terms are interchangeable and refer to the same land use regulatory device.
5. 'T'ndustrial, with development permitted only by advance approval of a "P"recise Plan.
siroon.l13
December 4, 1992
A1l3 re Siroonian Settlement
Page 3
~~3
~
., '~-'-"..-'-
The fourth condition precedent is that the City initiate, by the commencement of
an initial study~/, a zone text change which would allow the land use: "lien sale
of impounded vehicles" to be conducted in an I-P zone.
The Plaintiffs have already made the required special permit applications, which were
scheduled before the Project Area Committee on December 7 and the Redevelopment Agency
on December 8 coincident with, but prior to, the scheduling of this Settlement Agreement
approval.
Status of Conditions Precedent
Therefore, . holding the subsequent public hearings and adoption of the three
Agency Resolutions granting the Special Permits, in the form presented, will constitute
satisfaction of the Conditions Precedent Nos. 1 through 3.
Because of this .. conditional" contract structure, approval of this agreement does
not oblige the City to approve the Special Permits. Further, if the Council does not approve the
Settlement Agreement, staff will request deferral of the Special Permit Applications.
As in Condition Precedent No.4, the Planning Department, at the request of
Agency staff, has already initiated the zone text change, which will eventually be brought to you
for amendment of the Zoning Code.
The Operative Provisions
If the special permits are granted, and the City initiates the zone text change
amendment (completion of which could take 4-6 months), the suit will settle as follows:
1. Loans and Amounts.
The City will loan the Plaintiffs $140,336.75, based on the following lot
ownerships, the proceeds of which are to be paid into the Assessment District to
the credit of and to reduce the final confirmed assessment of the designated
Plaintiffs.
6. The first step in the process of environmental review under CEQA.
siroon.ll3
December 4, 1992
A 113 re .siroonian Settlement
Page 4
JrLf
Lot of
Parcel
MaD 8147
Assess-
ment No.
Final Con-
firmed Ass-
essment
Unpaid
Assessment
Assessment
Prepayment
Prepay-
ment
Amount
Note to Ecology Auto Wrecking for North and South Parcels:
12
13
72 $96,323.00 $61,691.85 $34,631.15 $33,101.34
73 $97,445.00 62,410.59 $35.034.41 $33.486.80
Total North Parcels: $69.665.56 $66.588.14
80 $79,303.00 50,790.96 $28,512.04 $27,252.54
81 $69,951.00 44,801.46 $25.149.54 $24.038.58
Total South Parcels: $53.661.58 ~51.291.11
21
22
Note to Otay Industrial Park for North East Parcel:
14
74
$78,123.00 $62,171.01 $15,951.99 $15,247.33
Note to Otay Industrial Park for South East Parcel:
20
79 $71,032.00
Total East Parcels:
63,488.70
7.543.30
$23.495.29
$ 7.210.16
$22.457.49
Total Loan Amounts:
$140.336.75
2. Theory of Settlement
The loans will have the effect of deferring the affected property owners
assessment rate from, on average, about 46.5 cents per square foot to 27.5 cents per square foot
until the property is substantially redeveloped, at which time the property owners will bear their
full share of the assessment immediately by commencing a repayment of the loan, due in full
by the 25th year from now. In essence, the settlement is an attempt to defer a portion of the
assessment until the property is redeveloped to such an economic utility to the landowners that
it can afford to pay the higher assessment.
3. Security for the Loans.
follows:
Those loans will be secured by Deeds of Trust against four of the six parcels as
The North Parcel Loan (Lots 12 and 13, aka Parcels 72 and 73), in the amount
siroon .113
December 4, 1992
Al13 re Siroonian Settlement
Page 5
j~5
of $66,588.14, will be secured by Parcels 72 and 73. The other two loans, i.e., the South
Parcel Loans (Lots 21 and 22, aka Parcels 80 and 81) and the East Parcel Loans (Lots 14 and
20, aka Parcels 74 and 79) will both be secured just by Parcels 80 and 8J.11
The City will be required to subordinate the Deeds of Trust, but not to a point
that will jeopardize the value of our security. That is, we will not have to subordinate to any
loan that will cause our position to be greater than an 80% loan to value ratio.
4. Other Loan Terms--No Interest.
The terms of the loans are as follows: There will be no interest, but
commencement of repayment of the principal will be required as follows:
,
If the Due Date (December 31, 2017) occurs before the Repayment Trigger
occurs, then the Note is due and payable in full on the Due Date. Otherwise,
commencing on the first day of the next succeeding month after the date on which
the Repayment Trigger occurs, the Note shall be payable in equal monthly
installments in an amount that will result in the complete satisfaction of the Note
by the Due Date, or 10 years, whichever is less. If the payment commencement
date is more than ten (10) years before the Due Date, then the Note shall have
a term of ten (10) years repaid on the sooner of 25 years or when there is a
substantial improvement in the property. A substantial improvement in the
property is defined to be an improvement in a single instance of over $500,000
or in cumulative instances of greater than $1 million (exclusive of the
improvements required by the special permit).
5. Set Aside Rights:
There are four set aside rights in the Agreement. The set aside rights will permit
the Plaintiffs to set aside the Agreement (and the consequent duty to drop the litigation) in only
four circumstances and then will only entitle them to damages if (1) they return the consideration
given by the City and (2) return any Special Permits received, (3) are successful in their lawsuit
and even then their remedy will be limited merely to damages in the amount of the then present
value of the remaining amount of the assessment against their property at the time their set aside
7. Note that, due to private business reasons of the Plaintiff, Otay Industrial Park, there is a
shift between the seCurity for repayment (The South Parcels) and the trigger that may accelerate
repayment, which may occur on either the South Parcels or the East Parcels. Note that the East
Parcels are under lease to two separate tenants, but are both owned by Otay Industrial Park.
siroon.ll3
December 4, 1992
All3 re Siroonian Settlement
Page 6
j-b
right is exercised.~' The set aside rights exist in the following circumstances:
A. The agreement is collaterally attacked and voided by a third party
(paragraph J).
B. If at the end of 13 years, their special permits are not renewed on
the same terms and conditions (paragraph K).
C. The lien sale of impounded vehicles zone text change does not
come to fruition (this set aside right only applies to the Plaintiff of
Lot 20 - maximum risk $7,210.16) (Paragraph K 1/2).
D. The issuance of the Special Permits 'are collaterally attacked.
(Paragraph DD).
Once again, even if the set aside rights are exercised at all, the Plaintiffs will not
be able to have, as a remedy, the dissolution of the Assessment District 90-2. They have agreed
to be limited to damages, and then, only in the amount of the then present value of the amount
of the impressed assessment, and then, only if they return the loan proceeds, special permits and
attorney fees, and then, only if they prevail on their theory in court.
6. Dismissal of Action
Of course, the Agreement requires the dismissal of the pending action, without
prejudice, but then only with the right of reinstituting same if a set aside right matures. The
Agreement requires Plaintiff to not contest the formation of the Assessment District in any way.
7. Attorneys' Fees Payment
The Agreement also proposes to compensate Ecology Auto Wrecking $32,500 in
attorneys' fees incurred by Ecology in both the administrative and legal process. Ecology has
provided documentation showing that they have incurred greater than this amount of money and
the attorneys for Plaintiffs were instrumental in helping to achieve the Settlement Agreement.
Furthermore, if there is any set aside of the Settlement Agreement, the rescinding Plaintiffs have
to compensate the City the $32,500 back before they are entitled to commence suit regardless
of whether it is rescinded by Ecology or not.
Policy AS!JeCts of the Settlement:
8. This remedy will diminish over the duration of the 25 years because of the reducing
assessment amount.
siroon.1l3
December 4, 1992
All3 reO Siroonian Settlement
Page 7
3 ~7
1. The Settlement Agreement does not abdicate selective assessments against
property owners. The assessments remain the same as have been uniformly
imposed against all property owners within the assessment district. The Agency
is merely loaning some of the money with which to pay the assessment against
the protesting Plaintiffs, funds which will be returned to the City when the
property is more fully utilized or in 25 years from now, whichever occurs first.
2. Because of the limitation on remedies to damages, the Settlement Agreement will
permit the sale of bonds to occur without fear by the underwriters or bondholders
that the formation of the assessment district can be undone.
FISCAL IMPACT:
Source of Funds:
This settlement will have an immediate cash impact on the City of $0, and on the Agency
of $172,836.75; $100,000.00 of which staff proposes that the Agency appropriate from Account
No. 996-9960-ST123 (balance of an Agency Loan Receivable from the City for City's Purchase
of a Mitigation Site); and $72,836.75 of which staff proposes that the Agency appropriate from
revenues the Agency expects to receive from the Agency's sale of the Right of Way to the
Assessment District, 90-2.
Use of Funds:
The $172,836.75 will be spent as follows:
1. $32,500 in attorney fees will be paid to Ecology Auto Wrecking in 30 days after the
Operative Provisions become effective.
2. $140,336.75 will be loaned without interest to Ecology and Otay Industrial Park
which will be repaid to the Agency at the time of redevelopment of the sites, but not beyond 25
years from now (2017).
The net present value cost of the transaction to the Agency, in the worst case scenario
(assuming no redevelopment for 25 years of any of the sites), assuming money is worth 7%, is
$ 2/
9. This calculation will be performed and Council/ Agency will be advised at the meeting. The
author estimates that it will be approximately $140,000 due to the recovery over time of the
loaned proceeds.
siroon .113
December 4, 1992
A1l3 re Siroonian Settlement
Page 8
3 -f
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
This Settlement Agreement ("Agreement") is dated as of
November 25, 1992 and is effective as of the date last executed
by the parties, by and between, on the one hand, THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, a municipal corporation; ("THE CITY"); the
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ("Agency"); and,
on the other hand, CHARLES B. SIROONIAN, an individual, LINDA L.
MANDEL, an individual, CHARLES D. PRATTY II, an individual, LOUIS
P. PRATTY, an individual, CAROLINE A. PRATTY, an individual, OTAY
INDUSTRIAL PARK, a California general partnership, KARL TURECEK
and CHARLES TURECEK, general partners of OTAY INDUSTRIAL PARK;
and ECOLOGY AUTO WRECKING, a California corporation, ("Plain-
tiffs") with reference to the following:
I. RECITALS
1. Plaintiffs warrant and represent to the City that they
have the interest in certain properties within the City of Chula
vista described as follows:
a. North Parcels. AD Parcels 72 and 73.
CHARLES B. SIROONIAN, LINDA L. MANDEL, CHARLES D.
PRATTY II, LOUIS P. PRATTY, and CAROLINE A. PRATTY
(herein, "Individual Plaintiffs") now own and have
at all times relevant herein owned as tenants in
common that certain property known as Lots 12 and
13 of Otay Industrial Park according to Map
thereof 8147, filed in the office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, July 18, 1975. Such
property is Assessor's Parcel Nos. 644-182-01 and
02 and its street address is 825 Energy Way, Chula
Vista, California. By the assessment proceeding
identified herein below THE CITY purported to
establish Otay Valley Road Assessment District No.
90-2 ("AD 90-2") wherein Lot 12 is identified as
Assessment No. 72 and Lot 13 is identified as
Assessment No. 73. (Herein, "Parcels 72 and 73";
or "the North Parcels.")
b. South Parcels. AD Parcels 80 and 81.
ECOLOGY AUTO WRECKING is and has at all times
relevant herein been the lessee under the Lease
Agreement of February 1, 1988 with Lessor, OTAY
INDUSTRIAL PARK, of that certain property identi-
fied as Lots 21 and 22 of the Otay Industrial Park
according to Map thereof 8147, filed in the office
of the County Recorder of San Diego County, July
18, 1975. Such property is Assessor's Parcel Nos.
644-182-11 and 644-182-12 and its street address
is 820-834 Energy Way, Chula Vista, California.
OTAY INDUSTRIAL PARK is now and has at all times
relevant herein been a California general
partnership whose general partners are
Petitioners/Plaintiffs KARL TURECEK and CHARLES
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re Otay Valley Road Widening
1992 1 Page 1
'?_a
'-') /
-.-.-....-.-,.,.--.+ ,.
TURECEK. (Herein, jointly "OTAY.") OTAY is now
and has at all times herein been the owner of Lots
21 and 22. By AD 90-2, THE CITY purported to
establish an assessment district wherein Lot 21 is
identified as Assessment No. 80 and Lot 22 is
identified as Assessment No. 81. (Herein,
"Parcels 80 and 81"i or "the South Parcels.")
c. East Parcels. AD Parcels 74 and 79.
OTAY now owns and has at all times relevant herein
owned that certain property known as Lots 14 and
20 of the Otay Industrial Park. Such property is
Assessor's Parcel Nos. 644-182-03 and 644-182-10
and its street address is 855 and 850 Energy Way,
Chula Vista, California. By AD 90-2 THE CITY
purported to establish an assessment district
wherein Lot 14 is identified as Assessment No. 74
and Lot 20 is identified as Assessment No. 79.
(Herein, "Parcels 74 and 79"; or "the East
Parcels". )
2. Current Entitlements.
The land use designation of the above-described 6 lots under
the Chula vista General Plan is "Research and Limited Manufactur-
ing," and the designation of such lots under the Otay Valley Road
Redevelopment Plan, is "Limited Industrial/Research". Consistent
with such plans, the zoning classification of such properties is
"IP-General Industrial Precise Plan." Appropriate permits con-
sistent with these zoning and land use designations have been
issued, and development on the properties has proceeded consis-
tent with those permits. Specifically, Parcels 72 and 73, Par-
cels 74 and 79, and Parcels 80 and 81 have been dedicated to and
improved with the uses authorized and permitted by Conditional
Use Permit #PCC-73-27 ("C.U.P.") The C.U.P. was effective
December 12, 1973 and continued by its terms to July 1, 1986.
3. Formation of Assessment District 90-2; Julv 23 Meetinq.
On or about July 23, 1991, THE CITY, through its City
Council, adopted the following Resolutions in furtherance of
formation of AD 90-2:
(a) Resolution 16274 making appointments in Assessment
District No. 90-2 (Otay Valley Road).
(b) Resolution 16275 Adopting a map showing the proposed
boundaries of Assessment District No. 90-2 (Otay Valley
Road) .
(c) Resolution 16276 Approving a proposed resplution of
intention and requesting consent and jurisdiction for
Assessment District 90-2 (Otay Valley Road) .
4. Formation of AD 90-2; April 21 Meetinq.
On or about April 21, 1992, THE CITY, through its city
Council, adopted the following resolutions in furtherance of
formation of AD 90-2:
(a) Resolution 16599 of the City Council of the City of
siroon9.wp Settlement Agreement re Otay Valley Road Widening
November 25, 1992 2 Page 2
/).-/eJ
,-')
Chula Vista certifying the Final Environmental Impact
Report and Addendum thereto on the Otay Valley Road
Widening Project (EIR 89-01), SCH #89083004.
(b) Resolution 16600 of the City Council of the city of
Chula Vista adopting map showing amended boundaries of
Assessment District No. 90-2 (Otay Valley Road).
(c) Resolution 16601 of the City Council of the city of
Chula vista declaring intention to order the
installation of certain improvements in a proposed
assessment district; declaring the work to be of more
than local or ordinary benefit; describing the district
to be assessed to pay the costs and expenses thereof;
and providing for the issuance of bonds for Assessment
District No. 90-2 (Otay Valley Road).
(d) Resolution 16602 of the City Council of the City of
Chula vista passing on the "report" of the Engineer,
giving preliminary approval, and setting a time and
place for the public hearing in Assessment District No.
90-2 (Otay Valley Road).
5. Formation of AD 90-2; June 23 Meetinq.
On or about June 23, 1992, THE CITY, through its City
Council, formed and established AD 90-2 upon the adoption of the
following resolutions:
(a) Resolution 16639 Approving agreement for execution in
Assessment District No. 90-2 (Otay Valley Road) and
authorizing the Mayor to sign said agreements.
(b) Resolution 16641 Ordering certain changes and
modifications to the Engineer's Report in Assessment
District No. 90-2 (otay Valley Road).
(c) Resolution 16642 Overruling and denying protests and
making certain finding in Assessment District No. 90-2
(Otay Valley Road).
(d) Resolution 16643 Confirming the assessment, ordering
the improvements made, together with appurtenances,
approving the Engineer's Report, making CEQA findings,
and adopting a statement of Overriding Considerations
and a Mitigation Monitoring Plan regarding Assessment
District No. 90-2 (Otay Valley Road).
6. Environmental Findinqs.
Resolution Nos. 16599 and 16643 purport to set forth and
contain the findings and determinations required by the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA" [!i 21000 et seq. of
the Pub. Res. Code]) and by the Guidelines for Implementation of
CEQA (14 Cal. Code of Regulations, !i 15000, et seq.), based upon
the Final Environmental Impact Report and the Addendum thereto.
(Herein, "the EIR.")
7. Claims in Litiqation.
On or about July 22, 1992, Plaintiffs instituted Case No.
654274 in the Superior Court of the state of California by filing
their petition and complaint. (Herein, "the Action.") Plaintiffs
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re Otay Valley Road Widening
1992 3 Page 3
~j -/ /
by the Action allege, among other things, that THE CITY in
adopting the foregoing resolutions and in certifying the adequacy
of the EIR proceeded without or in excess of jurisdiction; failed
to provide Plaintiffs a fair hearing; and abused its discretion.
Based thereon, Plaintiffs seek issuance of a peremptory writ of
administrative/traditional mandamus directing THE CITY to set
aside and revoke the foregoing resolutions and the certification
of the adequacy of the EIR; seek a declaration that the foregoing
resolutions and EIR are illegal, invalid and void; and seek other
relief. THE CITY claims and contends that the foregoing
resolutions and the EIR and each and everyone of them are valid,
enforceable and consistent with all legal requirements, and that
Plaintiffs are entitled to no relief.
8. Settlement Not An Admission of Liabilitv.
The parties by this settlement do not admit or acknowledge
that the position of the other is correct, but enter into this
settlement for the purpose of minimizing their risk; avoiding
expensive and protracted litigation; and for the other purposes
identified herein.
9. Assessment Imposed on Affected Parcels.
THE CITY has determined that the net assessable square
footage, credits allocated to and final confirmed assessment
levied against each of the Parcels is as follows:
Assess- Net Assess- Slope Credit Improvement
ment No. able Acreaqe Credit
5.15 $ -0-
5.21 -0-
5.19 18,949
5.30 28,096
4.24 -0-
3.74 -0-
10. General Intent of Aqreement
By the foregoing resolutions identified in Recitals 3, 4 and
5 hereto, THE CITY determined to and did levy assessments on all
properties within AD 90-2 at the rate of approximately $.4652 per
net assessable square foot. The parties have agreed that, in
settlement of the Action, the Final Confirmed Assessments for the
affected parcels specified in Recital 9 hereto shall be partially
prepaid from the proceeds of loans made by the City to the
Plaintiffs pursuant to the provisions of this Agreement so that
the remaining unpaid assessments against such affected parcels
following such prepayment shall be approximately $0.275 per net
. ,
assessable square foot. The partles have further agreed that
such loans shall be repaid in accordance with the terms and
provisions of this Agreement.
11. city Representations Reqardinq Basis for Calculation
for Assessment.
THE CITY represents and warrants that the following figures
calculated by THE CITY set forth in subparagraph (e) below truly
72
73
74
79
80
81
$
8,028
8,122
8,090
8,262
6,610
5,830
Final Con-
firmed
Assessment
$ 96,323
97,445
78,123
71,032
79,303
69,951
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re otay Valley Road Widening
1992 4 Page 4
~~/'~
~~ ~
and correctly reflect the following as to each Assessment Parcel:
(a) the Final Confirmed Assessment is calculated by
multiplying the assessment rate of $0.4652 per net
assessable square foot by the total net assessable
square footage of each of the Assessment Parcels and
deducting slope and improvement credits therefrom;
(b) the Unpaid Assessment is calculated by multiplying
the assessment rate of $0.275 per net assessable square
foot times the total net assessable square footage of
each Assessment Parcel without further reduction due to
slope or improvement credits;
(c) the Assessment Prepayment was calculated by
deducting the Unpaid Assessment from the Final
Confirmed Assessment; and,
(d) the Prepayment Amount, i.e., the amount of the loan
proceeds applicable to each respective parcel, was
calculated by deducting from the Assessment Prepayment
the financing costs which would otherwise have been
attributable to the Assessment Prepayment had bonds
been issued to represent such remainder;
(e) Specifically, the following applies:
Assess- Final Con-
ment No. firmed Ass-
essment
72
73
Total
$96,323.00
$97,445.00
North Parcels:
80
81
Total
$79,303.00
$69,951.00
South Parcels:
74
79
Total
$78,123.00
$71,032.00
East Parcels:
Unpaid
Assessment
$61,691. 85
62,410.59
50,790.96
44,801.46
$62,171.01
63,488.70
Assessment
Prepavrnent
$34,631.15
$35.034.41
$69,665.56
$28,512.04
$25.149.54
$53,661.58
$15,951.99
7.543.30
$23.495.29
Prepavrnent
Amount
$33,101. 34
$33.486.80
$66,588.14
$27,252.54
$24,038.58
$51. 291.12
$15,247.33
$ 7.210.16
$22.457.49
12. Existinq Litiqation and Applicable Statutes of
Limitations.
The partiBs hereto understand and believe that (1) the
Action is the only pending litigation in which the resolutions
identified in Recitals 3, 4 and 5 hereto, and the ErR, and any of
them, are challenged; and (2) that applicable statutes of
limitation have expired and preclude the commencement of any such
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re otay Valley Road Widening
1992 5 Page 5
j-/J
action, except as provided in Paragraph J, infra.
13. Attornev Fees and other Costs Incurred bv Ecoloqv.
THE CITY has been provided with appropriate invoices,
billings, and all other appropriate documentation and has
satisfied itself that ECOLOGY AUTO WRECKING has paid in excess of
THIRTY TWO THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS ($32,500) for attorneys'
fees, expert fees and consulting fees. Those fees were incurred
for (1) presentations made for and on behalf of ECOLOGY at the
administrative level when the foregoing resolutions were before
the city Council of the city of Chula vista for its review and
consideration; and (2) this litigation.
II. CONDITIONS PRECEDENT
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties irrevocably agree that if the
duties of Plaintiffs are performed as set forth in subparagraph
II.A, and the condition precedent set forth in subparagraph II.B.
occurs as therein stated, the rights and duties' set forth in the
subsequent section III. ("Obligatory Provisions") shall be in
full force and effect; otherwise, they shall be of no force and
effect whatsoever.
A. Plaintiffs, who have made application for Special
Permits from the Agency permitting uses specified below on the
Lots, and will, within 5 days, amend such application to request
a Special Permit for Lien Sale of Impounded Vehicles to be
effective if and when the City's Zoning Code is amended to allow
said use by Special Permit, agree to diligently prosecute said
applications, and Agency will, to the best of its efforts, cause
the expeditious processing of same.
B. Plaintiff Turecek will deliver to the City the sum of
$2,500.00 to be applied to a portion of staff processing costs,
and therefrom permit the City to pay the City's total costs for
processing a zone text change to permit a land use, to wit: "the
lien sale of impounded vehicles", to occur in an I-P designated
zone subject to securing a conditional use/special permit ("Lien
Sale Zone Text Change"). All costs for processing the Lien Sale
Zone Text Change in excess of $2,500.00 shall be borne by the
City, including, but not limited to, staff time, outside
consultants, environmental reports and any other such expense.
Nothing herein shall commit the City to incur litigation costs
regarding the Lien Sale Zone Text Change.
C. without constituting a covenant to cause same to happen,
the condition precedents ("Condition Precedents") to the
effectiveness of the Obligatory Provisions shall be as follows:
.
Condition Precedent No.1. Initiation of Lien Sale
Zone Text Change Processing. City shall commence,
within 20 days of the effective date of this Agreement,
an initial study for the Lien Sale Zone Text Change,
which shall be deemed to be the initiation of the
process to accomplish a Lien Sale Zone Text Change.
Nothing herein contractually commits the City to
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re Otay Valley Road Widening
1992 6 Page 6
J3 ~ F!
implement the Lien Sale Zone Text Change.
Condition Precedent No.2. Existing Entitlement
Special Permits are Granted. The Agency shall, within
20 days after the effective date of this Agreement,
grant Plaintiffs Special Permits ("Existing Zoning
Special Permits") covering the Lots listed below in
this subparagraph II C.2.(1) through (3) and for the
uses indicated for those Lots in that listing, for the
terms indicated therein and on conditions no more
onerous than those set forth in section II.C.2.a.
(1) Lots 12, 13, 21 and 22 for (1) auto-
dismantling and sales of auto parts uses, and
(2) scrap metal collection, ,compaction,
cutting, shredding in preparation for the
scrap market; and other related uses, for a
term not less than 13 years;
(2) Lot 14 for (1) storage, maintenance and
repair of heavy equipment; (2) support
equipment and vehicles requisite to general
contracting; (3) storage and distribution of
fuel; (4) general contractor's offices, shops
and related storage of parts, tools,
machinery, etc.; (4) processing of
construction site residue for reuse,
recycling, or sale; and related uses, for a
term not less than 13 years;
(3) Lot 20 for impound, storage and
dismantling of automobiles, general offices
and storage of records and related uses for a
term of not less than 13 years;
a. Conditions Attached to Existing Zoning Special
Permits. The Conditions Precedent will be deemed
to have been met if the Special Permits above
mentioned are issued on conditions no more onerous
than the following:
(1) Plans shall be submitted in an accepta-
ble form to the City within three (3) months
after the Special Permit has been approved
for review to the otay Valley Road Project
Area Committee and for approval by the Agency
indicating cOde-required off-street parking;
landscape planting/irrigation; fencing and
other appropriate comparable-cost screening
measures to ameliorate adverse visual
siroon9.wp Settlement Agreement re otay Valley Road Widening
November 25, 1992 7 Page 7
.3 ~ j!J
impacts. The plans shall be prepared by a
Registered Landscape Architect. Plans
approved by the City shall be implemented by
the Permittee ("Plans"). Such Plans shall be
implemented within eighteen (18) months of
their approval by the City.
(2) The Special Permits shall become void
and ineffective if not utilized within one
year from effective date thereof, in
accordance with Section 19.14.260 of the
municipal code. Failure to comply with any
condition of approval shall cause this permit
to be reviewed by the City for additional
conditions or revocation.
(3) Should such final Special Permits issue,
any failure by the permittee under any
Special Permit to fulfill any condition or to
proceed thereunder, or otherwise violate
same, such failure or violation shall not
affect the validity of any other Final
Special Permit.
Condition Precedent No.3. Future Zoning Special
Permits are Granted.
If the Plaintiff who is the owner of Lot 20 ("Lot 20
Plaintiff") amends his pending Special Permit
application in a manner and form reasonably acceptable
to the City in 5 days after the effective date of this
Agreement to request a Special Permit for Lien Sale of
Impounded Vehicles on the condition that, and not
effective until, the zoning code is amended to allow
said use by Special Permit in an IP Zone ("Lien Sales
Special Permit"), an additional Condition Precedent
(i.e., Condition Precedent No.3) is as follows: The
Agency shall, within 20 days after the effective date
of this Agreement, grant Lot 20 Plaintiff a prospective
Lien Sales Special Permit covering the Lot 20, to be
effective if the City eventually adopts the Lien Sale
Zone Text Change, which Lien Sales Special Permit will
permit the use of said Lot 20 for lien sales of
impounded vehicles for a term of 13 years on conditions
no more onerous than those set forth above as
conditions for Existing Zoning Special Permits.
D. Rules Interpretinq the Occurrence of a Condition
Precedent.
siroon9.wp Settlement Agreement re otay Valley Road Widening
November 25, 1992 8 Page 8
q-Ih
'-
1. The issuance of the Special Permits shall be final
for purposes of completing the Condition Precedent in this Sub-
paragraph II.B. upon the expiration of any period for requesting
reconsideration of the decision to issue such Special Permits
under the ordinance and codes of the City or the Agency. Should
the City have the power, the city may waive any reconsideration
period that may exist by so stating in any resolution issuing
such Special Permits, and upon so doing, the Special Permit shall
be deemed final w~en the resolution is effective.
2. If such uses or any of them do not require a
Special Permit because they are now permitted as of right by
virtue of the zone in which the Lots are currently located, then
the City and the Agency shall issue a letter stating such uses
are permitted as of right and do not require a Special Permit or
any other permit.
3. All Plaintiffs will be deemed to have accepted
more onerous conditions if they fail to deliver written notice of
objection to same within 15 days after final imposition of same.
Upon such acceptance, the Conditions Precedent will be deemed to
have been met.
4. If the Conditions Precedent do not occur within the
time provided, but do occur prior to delivery to the City by any
of the Plaintiffs of a written renunciation of the Agreement on
the basis that the Conditions Precedent did not occur within the
time frames stated, the Plaintiffs waive the right to thereafter
declare that the Conditions Precedent did not occur, and the
Conditions Precedent will be deemed to have timely occurred.
III. OBLIGATORY PROVISIONS
NOW, THEREFORE, for and in consideration of performance by
the parties of the respective promises made herein, and on the
occurrence of the Conditions Precedent hereinabove set forth in
Section II., the parties agree and promise as follows:
A. Recitals Included.
The foregoing Recitals are incorporated herein and are
agreed to, confirmed and ratified and constitute a part of this
Agreement.
B. Omitted.
C. city Dutv to Make Loans.
Upon receipt of title insurance in the amount of the loans,
determination of a loan (as fully subordinated) to value ratio of
less than or equal to 80%, and receipt of an "additional insured"
endorsement on the Plaintiff's property insurance, THE CITY will
make two loans as follows: one loan to CHARLES B. SIROONIAN,
LINDA L. MANDEL, CHARLES D. PRATTY II, LOUIS P. PRATTY, and
CAROLINE A. PRATTY in the principal amount of $66,588.14 to be
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re Otay Valley Road Widening
1992 9 Page 9
/) . 7
. . ~/
,J
evidenced by a note secured by deed of trust ("Note") and secured
by a Trust Deed recorded against Lots 12 and 13j and one loan to
OTAY INDUSTRIAL PARK in the principal amount of $73,748.61 to be
evidenced by a note secured by a deed of trust ("Note") and
secured by a Trust Deed recorded against Lots 21 and 22.
Immediately upon making the loans referred to hereinabove, THE
CITY shall transfer the proceeds of the loans to the Improvement
Fund of AD 90-2 and shall credit such amounts as cash payments
against the Final Confirmed Assessment on each of the respective
Assessment Nos. 72, 73, 80, 81, 74 and 79. As a result of
applying the proceeds of the loans to the Prepayment Amount, the
Unpaid Assessment shall be the amount of the remaining unpaid
assessment levied against each of the respective parcels pursuant
to AD 90-2.
D. Plaintiff's Dutv Not to Contest Formation of Assessment
District.
Plaintiffs, and each and everyone of them, will not con-
test or dispute the formation of AD 90-2, or the City's authority
to form same, or any alleged defects in the City's attempt to
form same, including alleged defects or omissions in the
environmental review or the assessment district proceedings, the
levy and collection of an assessment in the amount of the Unpaid
Assessment or the issuance of bonds for the assessment district
representing the unpaid assessments, including the Unpaid
Assessments, on properties within AD 90-2. The "cash paydown
period", which is the period of time an assessed parcel owner has
within which to paydown an assessment without charge for
financing costs, shall be extended until 15 days after the
effective date of this agreement, during which time the
Plaintiffs shall have the option to payoff all or a portion of
the Unpaid Assessment at the "cash paydown price" (i.e., at or
about .9558 of the Unpaid Assessment amount) or, thereafter, to
make annual payments on said Unpaid Assessment calculated in the
same manner as is applicable to all other parcels within AD 90-2,
or to payoff all or any portion of the then remaining balance of
the Unpaid Assessment during the term of the assessment period in
the same manner as is applicable to all parcels within AD 90-2.
The actual annual payment required will depend, in part on the
interest rates at which the bonds are sold which rates cannot now
be determined.
E. Form and Contents of Notes.
The two Notes shall have the form and content of the Notes
attached hereto as Exhibit A, (Herein, "the Notes.") but if not
attached, each of the promissory notes shall contain customary
and usual provisions and, in addition, shall provide as follows:
a. Payment will commence, only at such time as a
building or other development permit, or permits,
as identified below is, or are, issued on any of
the parcels which are the security for that Note,
(i.e., on Parcel 72 or Parcel 73 for the North
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re Otay Valley Road Widening
1992 10 Page 10
3-/!
.-.-,--,,_....,...-
Parcels Note; and on Parcels 80, 81, 74 or 79 for
the South and East Parcels Note), but not later
than December 31, 2017. Issuance of a building
permit will trigger the commencement of the
repayment obligation only if the City's Director
of Building reasonably determines that the value
of the authorized construction under such permit
exceeds $500,000; or reasonably determines that
the value of all improvements permitted since the
effective date of this Agreement exceeds
$1,000,000.00, whichever occurs sooner ("Repayment
Trigger"), except that any construction activity
needed to specifically satisfy conditions of
renewal or issuance of a final Special Permit
shall not be applicable toward calculating the
Repayment Trigger.
b. No Note shall bear interest.
c. If the Due Date (December 31, 2017) occurs before
the Repayment Trigger occurs, then the Note is due
and payable in full on the Due Date. Otherwise,
commencing on the first day of the next succeeding
month after the date on which the Repayment
Trigger occurs, the Note shall be payable in equal
monthly installments in an amount that will result
in the complete satisfaction of the Note by the
Due Date, or 10 years, whichever is less. If the
payment commencement date is more than ten (10)
years before the Due Date, then the Note shall
have a term of ten (10) years;
d. It is the intention of the parties that the
Plaintiffs not be personally liable on the
promissory notes but that the land will act as the
security for their repayment.
F. Trust Deeds; Number; Security; Subordination.
Each Note will be secured by a Deed of Trust. The North
Parcels Note will be secured by a Deed of Trust on Parcels 72 and
73, and the South and East Parcels Note will be secured by a Deed
of Trust on Parcels 80 and 81, but repayment of the Note that is
secured by Parcels 80 and 81 will commence if the Repayment
Trigger occurs as to anyone or more of Parcels 74, 79, 80 and
81. The Deeds of Trust shall be subordinate to any future deed
of trust to secure a loan ("New Note") from a lender ("Lender")
provided (a) the proceeds of the New Note shall be used first to
pay in full any other loans secured by the property, any
mechanic's liens or other charges levied or leviable against the
property beca~se of any improvements made to the property by
Trustor, and any trust deeds securing any other such loans, liens
or other charges shall be reconveyed to the property owner as to
any property for which the City Deed of Trust is security; (b)
the total amount of the New Note shall not exceed eighty percent
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re Otay Valley Road Widening
1992 11 Page 11
j -/q
'""-'-"'-'-'--'~--'
(ao%) of the value, as determined by the Lender making the New
Note, of the property as improved by Trustor or his or her
successor in interest; (c) the New Note shall not bear interest,
exclusive of late charges, penalties, or fees payable in case of
default, greater than fifteen (15%) per annum; and (d) the
remaining terms and provisions of the New Note shall be as
required by the Lender.
within ten days after receipt of a written request therefor
from Trustor and proof of the aforementioned conditions having
been met, City/Beneficiary shall execute a separate agreement of
subordination, in recordable form, in favor of the lender of the
New Note to which the city Deed of Trust will be thereby
subordinated, and deliver the subordination agreement to the
Lender or Lender's title company designated by Trustor. The
terms of any such subordination agreement shall prevail over the
subordination provisions provided in the City Deed of Trust or
this agreement.
G. Specified Contents of Trust Deeds.
The City Deeds of Trust will be executed in favor of
THE CITY and will contain the following:
(a) At the top of each City Deed
of Trust the word "subordinated"
must appear in at least lO-point
bold face type unless it is
typewritten, and if it is
typewritten the term must appear in
capital letters and must be
underlined. civil Code Section
2953.2(a).
(b) Immediately following the word
"subordinated", the type of the
security instrument must be
identified--to wit, a Trust Deed.
(c) Immediately below the above
information, the statutory notice
must appear in capital letters if
typewritten and at least in a-point
bold-face type as follows:
"NOTICE: THIS DEED OF TRUST
CONTAINS A SUBORDINATION CLAUSE
WHICH MAY RESULT IN YOUR SECURITY
INTEREST IN THE PROPERTY BECOMING
SUBJECT TO AND OF LOWER PRIORITY
THAN THE LIEN OF SOME OTHER OR
LATER SECURITY INSTRUMENT."
(d) The following notice must
appear directly above the signature
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re Otay Valley Road widening
1992 12 Page 12
" ~jLJ
0.
of the beneficiary, and the notice
must be in at least a-point bold
face type and, if typed, must be in
capital letters:
"NOTICE: THIS DEED OF TRUST
CONTAINS A SUBORDINATION CLAUSE
WHICH ALLOWS THE PERSON OBLIGATED
ON YOUR REAL PROPERTY SECURITY
INSTRUMENT TO OBTAIN A LOAN, A
PORTION OF WHICH MAY BE EXPENDED
FOR OTHER PURPOSES THAN IMPROVEMENT
OF THE LAND."
(e) The language reflecting the' agreement of the
parties as contained in paragraph III.F. above.
H. Payment of Plaintiffs Attornev's Fees. .
THE CITY agrees to pay within thirty (30) days after the
effective date of this Agreement a total of $32,500 to ECOLOGY
WRECKING YARD for attorneys' fees, expert fees and consultant
fees incurred by it to date. Otherwise, the parties, and each
and everyone of them, will bear their own costs, including but
not limited to, attorneys' fees, expert fees and consultant fees.
I. Dismissal of Action.
Upon the occurrence of the Conditions Precedent, Plaintiffs,
and each and everyone of them, agree to dismiss the Action in
its entirety without prejudice which designation (Le., "without
prejudice") shall not be construed as inconsistent with the
provisions of this Agreement. However, should the Action, or any
cause of action pleaded in the Action, or any cause of action
which could have been pleaded based on the same set of facts
alleged in the Action be commenced under circumstances not
authorized by this Agreement, City may tender the release
contained herein and otherwise available statute of limitations
as a complete defense in support of a motion for dismissal.
J. Set Aside of Aqreement on Successful Collateral Attack
on Aqreement. .
Should a third party commence an action or proceeding
challenging this Agreement, or any part of it, THE CITY agrees to
defend vigorously such action or proceeding at its own individual
cost and expense but with the vigorous cooperation of Plaintiffs,
and each of them. The pendency of such an action or proceeding
shall not, by itself, cause the delay or postponement of the
implementation and the performance by the parties of their
executory obligations as provided herein. In the event that
injunctive, declaratory or writ relief is ordered restraining and
enjoining THE CITY from giving effect to this Agreement or
determining by a final judgment that this Agreement is
unenforceable and/or invalid, the parties hereto agree that the
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re Otay Valley Road Widening
1992 13 Page 13
~ -:1-/
,-
Action may be recommenced in its entirety upon return of all
consideration for this Agreement to the parties, but Plaintiffs'
remedy, jointly or individually, if successful, will be limited
to damages and in an amount not in excess of the then present
value of the remaining amount of the assessment against each of
their respective parcels, and attorney fees and costs may be
awarded to the prevailing party. specifically, Plaintiffs,
either jointly or individually, shall not be entitled to injunc-
tive, declaratory or any other form of equitable or other relief
whatsoever the effect of which would, directly or indirectly,
invalidate or have the effect of invalidating any or all of the
following, or any combination thereof: the proceedings to form
AD 90-2, the levy of the assessments within AD 90-2 as confirmed
in the AD 90-2 proceedings, the assessment liens on the proper-
ties within AD 90-2 upon which unpaid assessments remain, the
collection of the unpaid assessments on the properties within AD
90-2 upon which unpaid assessments remain and any bonds issued by
the City representing the unpaid assessments, or any portion
thereof, within AD 90-2. Subject to the limitation on remedies
contained in the preceding sentence, should the action be
recommenced, the parties agree that Plaintiffs have not waived,
relinquished nor shall they be legally or equitably estopped from
asserting any of the causes of action now sought in the Action,
but that their sole remedy, jointly or individually, if
successful, is limited to damages and in an amount not in excess
of the then present value of the remaining amount of the
assessment against each of their respective parcels. It is
agreed that all parties reserve any and all other rights they may
have other than as agreed to hereinabove.
K. Set Aside of Aqreement If Final Special Permits Not
Issued.
If at any time between the effective date of this Agreement
and December 31, 2017, THE CITY denies a Plaintiff a Special
Permit, or other such required permit which may be necessary for
the continued use of the Lots for the use identified above upon
the conditions herein specified, then such Plaintiff may give the
City written notice of the rescission of the Agreement, and, upon
tender of the return of all consideration given by the City (The
Special Permits issued to non-rescinding Plaintiffs need not be
re-tendered.), the Action may be recommenced in its entirety,
except that the Plaintiffs' sole remedy, if they are successful
on the causes of action, shall be damages and in an amount not in
excess of the then present value of the remaining amount of the
assessment against each of their respective parcels.
Specifically, Plaintiffs, either jointly or individually, shall
not be entitled to injunctive, declaratory or any other form of
equitable or other relief whatsoever the effect of which would,
directly or indirectly, invalidate or have the effect of
invalidating any or all of the following, or any combination
thereof: the proceedings to form AD 90-2, the levy of the
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re otay Valley Road Widening
1992 14 Page 14
,,) - c1L
assessments within AD 90-2 as confirmed in the AD 90-2
proceedings, the assessment liens on the properties within AD 90-
2 upon which unpaid assessments remain, the collection of the
unpaid assessments on the properties within AD 90-2 upon which
unpaid assessments remain and any bonds issued by the City repre-
senting the unpaid assessments, or any portion thereof, within AD
90-2. Subject to the limitation on remedies contained in the
preceding sentence, should the action be recommenced, the parties
agree that rescinding Plaintiffs have not waived, relinquished
nor shall they be legally or equitably estopped from asserting
any of the causes of action now sought in the Action, but that
their sole remedy, jointly or individually, if successful, is
limited to damages and in an amount not in excess of the then
present value of the Final Confirmed Assessment against each of
their respective parcels. It is agreed that all parties reserve
any and all other rights they may have other than as agreed to
hereinabove.
K 1/2. Set Aside of Agreement as to Lot 20 if Lien Sales
Zone Text Change Not Made or Lien Sales Special Permit Related
Thereto Not Granted.
A. IP Zone Change Application. The Lot 20 Plaintiff
may apply to the City for a Lien Sale Zone Text Change ("Lien
Sales Zone Text Change Application") to permit the lien sales of
impounded vehicles in the I-P Zone of the City.
B. Use Allowed as "of right". If the City grants such
Lien Sales Zone Text Change, the Lot 20 Plaintiff shall have no
further rights to set aside this Agreement under this paragraph
(K 1/2).
C. Use Denied. If the City denies such Lien Sales'
Zone Text Change Application, the Lot 20 Plaintiff shall have the
special set aside right hereinbelow set forth in Subparagraph D
("Lot 20 Set Aside Right").
D. Lot 20 Set Aside Right. If the provisions of
subparagraph C above apply, the Lot 20 Plaintiff shall have the
following special right to set aside this agreement:
1. Such Lot 20 Plaintiff may give the City
written notice of the rescission of the Aqreement on the basis of
this provision, and, upon tender of the return of all consid-
eration given by the City, including any Special Permits issued
to the Lot 20 Plaintiff for any of the Lots under this Agreement
and $32;500 paid by the City, the parties hereto agree that the
Action may be recommenced in its entirety, except tpat the Lot 20
Plaintiffs' sole remedy, if they are successful on the causes of
action, shall be damages and in an amount not in excess of the
then present value of the remaining amount of the assessment
against Lot 20. Specifically, Lot 20 Plaintiff, either jointly
or individually, shall not be entitled to injunctive, declaratory
or any other form of equitable or other relief whatsoever the
effect of which would, directly or indirectly, invalidate or have
the effect of invalidating any or all of the following, or any
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re otay Valley Road Widening
1992 15 Page 15
,)_-1::.?,
,..) ""'--'
combination thereof: the proceedings to form AD 90-2, the levy
of the assessments within AD 90-2 as confirmed in the AD 90-2
proceedings, the assessment liens on the properties within AD 90-
2 upon which unpaid assessments remain, the collection of the
unpaid assessments on the properties within AD 90-2 upon which
unpaid assessments remain and any bonds issued by the City repre-
senting the unpaid assessments, or any portion thereof, within AD
90-2. Subject to the limitation on remedies contained in the
preceding sentence, should the action be recommenced, the parties
agree that rescinding Lot 20 Plaintiff has not waived, re-
linquished nor shall it be legally or equitably estopped from
asserting any of the causes of action now sought in the Action,
but that its sole remedy, jointly or individually, if successful,
is limited to damages and in an amount not in excess of the then
present value of the Final Confirmed Assessment,against Lot 20.
~ Specific Dutv to Return Attornev Fee Consideration Paid
bv city.
Should ECOLOGY be one of the rescinding Plaintiffs who re-
commence the litigation (in accordance with the rights provided
herein), then it is agreed that ECOLOGY will restore to and
reimburse to THE CITY the sum of $32,500.00 representing the
total amount of the payment provided for in Paragraph H, supra.
If ECOLOGY is not one of the rescinding Plaintiffs who recommence
such litigation, then only the rescinding Plaintiffs are require
to pay to THE CITY said sum of $32,500.00.
M. Waiver of Statutes of Limitations if Aqreement Set
Aside.
THE CITY waives and relinquishes any and all limitation
periods, including but not limited to those set forth in the
California Environmental Quality Act, Public Resources Code
Section 21000, et seq.; those set forth in Streets and Highways
Code Section 10400; and such other limitation period, legal,
equitable or otherwise, which might otherwise be applicable but
for the agreement of the parties as set forth herein, but only as
to the rescinding Plaintiffs, only until 30 days after (1) final
judgement is entered effectively setting aside or invalidating
this Agreement; (2) renewal of a Special Permit is sought and
denied; or (3) as to the Lot 20 Plaintiff, the Lot 20 Set Aside
Right has accrued, but in no event later than December 31, 2017.
The foregoing waiver and relinquishment is intended to be broadly
construed to also apply to such limitation periods which may be
otherwise applicable by reason of a failure to make service of
process, failure to request the matter be set for trial or
otherwise. Finally, the parties will cooperate to obtain an
order providing for the foregoing. The waiver and relinquishment
of the limitations periods set forth in this paragraph shall not
constitute a waiver or relinquishment in any way whatsoever of
nor diminish in any way whatsoever the limitation of the remedies
of Plaintiffs set forth in Paragraphs J. and K. hereto.
N. Benefit of Reimbursement Districts.
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re Otay Valley Road Widening
1992 16 Page 16
3-,iLj
The Unpaid Assessment will be subject to reduction if a
reimbursement district or districts are formed and reimbursement
fees collected from such district or districts are allocated to
AD 90-2 and such fees are deposited into the Redemption Fund for
AD 90-2 for the purpose of calling bonds of AD 90-2. Any such
reduction shall be pro rata among all properties within AD 90-2
which were subject to the levy of an assessment for AD 90-2. For
example, it is contemplated that there will be an Auto Park
Reimbursement District adopted which may result in a reduction of
the balance due on the Final Confirmed Assessment.
~ Siqnature in Counterparts.
This Agreement may be signed in counterparts and the
signature pages may be attached hereto.
E. Parties Receipt of Leqal Advice.
All parties hereto have received independent legal advice
from their respective attorneys regarding the advisability of
entering into this Agreement.
Q. Parol Evidence.
Except as expressly stated herein, no party has made any
statement or representation to any other party regarding any fact
relied upon in entering into this Agreement, and no party hereto
relies upon any such statement or representation in executing
this Agreement.
E. Investiqation.
Each party hereto has made such investigation of the facts
pertaining to this Agreement it deems necessary.
~. Aqreement Read and Understood.
Each party hereto, responsible officer, or governing body
thereof has read this Agreement and understands the contents
thereof.
T. Mutual Limited Release.
By this mutual limited release, THE CITY and Agency release
the Plaintiffs from any and all causes of action, and demands,
and the Plaintiffs release THE CITY, Agency, TIM NADER, SHIRLEY
GRASSER-HORTON, JERRY RINDONE, DAVID MALCOLM, and LEONARD MOORE,
in their capacity as Members of the city Council of The City of
Chula Vista; and JOHN GOSS, in his capacity as City Manager of
The City of Chula Vista, from any and all causes of action and
demands alleged in or related to the allegations contained in the
complaint and petition in the Action. This release does not
apply to Defendants inter se nor does it apply to Plaintiffs
inter se. with such exceptions, the Defendants and Plaintiffs do
hereby release and discharge the other from any and' all claims,
demands or causes of action, known or unknown, which the
Defendants or Plaintiffs now own or hold, or have at any time
heretofore owned or held as against the other arising from the
facts, events, causes of action and rights to relief alleged in
the complaint and petition in the Action and such claims, demands
or causes of action which reasonably relate thereto.
This release does not apply to riqhts and duties created bv
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re Otay Valley Road Widening
1992 17 Page 17
j~ ;L5
this Aqreement.
11. Notice.
Any notice to be given or document to be transmitted
hereunder shall be in writing and shall be deemed given as of the
date of actual delivery to the address or addresses set forth
below. All of such notices shall be directed to the parties,
with copies as indicated, at the following addresses, unless
notice of a different address is given in accordance with this
section:
Notice as-to CHARLES B. SIROONIAN, LINDA L. MANDEL, CHARLES
D. PRATTY II, LOUIS P. PRATTY, CAROLINE A. PRATTY and/or
ECOLOGY AUTO WRECKING:
To: Charles D. pratty II
Ecology Auto Wrecking
13780 E. Imperial Highway
Santa Fe Springs, CA 90670
with a copy to:
Worley, Schwartz, Garfield & Rice
Attn: Charles V. Berwanger, Esq.
William J. Schwartz, Jr., Esq.
1150 First Interstate Plaza
401 "B" Street
San Diego, CA 92101
Notice as to OTAY INDUSTRIAL PARK, KARL TURECEK and/or
CHARLES TURECEK:
To: Karl Turecek
Otay Industrial Park
2423 Camino del Rio South
suite 212
San Diego, CA 92018
with a copy to:
Sullivan, Delafield, McDonald, Allen
& Middendorf
Attn: William A. Bramley, III
1200 Third Avenue, suite 1405
San Diego, CA 92101
Notice as to THE CITY and Agency and each and everyone of
THE CITY Defendants to:
To: John Goss, City Manager
City of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
with a copy to:
siroon9.wp
November 25,
Settlement Agreement re Otay Valley Road Widening
1992 18 Page 18
-? - ") ~
-J c'-
Bruce M. Boogaard, City Attorney
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
y. Execution of collateral documents.
Each party hereto agrees to execute all such documents as
may be necessary or helpful to carry out the provisions of this
Agreement, and each party irrevocably authorizes its attorney to
execute such documents.
N. Entire Aqreement.
This Agreement is the entire agreement between the parties
with respect to the subject matter hereof and is to supersede all
prior and contemporaneous oral and written agreements and
discussions. This Agreement may be amended only in writing.
X. No Construction Aqainst Draftinq Partv.
All parties have cooperated in drafting and preparing this
Agreement. Any construction to be made in this Agreement shall
not be construed against any party.
X. No Admission of Liabilitv.
The parties hereto declare that this is a settlement of
disputed claims, not an admission of liability on the part of any
party hereto.
~. Successors and Assiqns.
This Agreement shall inure to. the benefit of the parties
hereto and their assigns, successors, heirs, executors,
administrators, officers, directors, employees, servants,
insurers, privys, attorneys and agents.
AA. Attornev Fees and Costs.
In the event any action or proceeding is commenced between
the parties hereto with respect to this Agreement, the prevailing
parties shall be entitled to recover fees, costs, and expenses
incurred by it in connection with such action or proceeding,
including reasonable attorneys' fees.
BB. Authoritv of Siqnatories.
The parties represent and warrant that the signatories
hereto are authorized and empowered to execute and enter into
this Agreement. THE CITY further represents that its City
Council has adopted any and all required Resolutions and taken
all other action necessary to approve and authorize this
Agreement.
CC. Estoppel Certificates.
Plaintiffs will issue such estoppel certificates for
reliance by bond underwriters and bond holders of AD 90-2 bonds,
as may be requested by the City certifying that the terms and
conditions of. this agreement are in full force and effect, and
cooperate with the City in executing such documentation as may be
required by the City, City's bond counsel, or Assessment District
underwriters consistent with the terms of this Agreement
including acknowledgement as to the limitation of remedies.
siroon9.wp Settlement Agreement re otay Valley Road Widening
November 25, 1992 19 Page 19
~~7
11-3,0-,92 10.1 7AM
FROM WSG&R
TO 4256184
P005/005
~~ _ .~31e9210<~
____..~ _ ._. COOK:> E01.rEY DEl..TA
'704 PB2
NO\) 30 '92
113'02
a; .,~~,.d.1,.I\4
- . .... ~ --- .. . ,...... Q1t'l --
....-... ... ~ .. ... ~.::... ~ ,.. ...
"" ...... ....._. ..... .....f:... ... ...~... ~ oJ
....._ - .... ....- .. '.=- oJ -"'" .. ~
......."'... ""t.0!:!:. .._~.:.......;-...-..,... .. ... · ~.'o
~~i.. ~.." pw.' WoO ,.....- s:' ~~- w ~ ~"i... o~ -...
.. ... ....-".. a;A~. ~... ... - .... ...
o~ "U"'- .. ,,~, .~.... ,,-,,-,," ......
""""tai --.. - ... ...... ... -~', ...........
':.'.. --... ~~~.:.-'" ~
-"..:t 't:.~ ... -'"' ....".. ...... ~~ :"
~...... ... .~~ .......J~ 0:.. ~ ,J: ..
~. .,u ..' __.!:'I....... -...... -'" .. ...
- oJ ... ..... --'- ~..."'-' ... .-
.__ ....... ..... oJ ~~ 0;::-......''''' ........
._ .... - - .. __ ".... 1- ..
-........... ............ ...~~;;~.. ....--'" '"
;;.0>,......"'. _,,~ ..", __ ...... -.;..,... too ......
'1::: :::r. .~.~." ; ........... ,...,.........- too
~ .. _~...... ... .. "" .. ... ..""""", 0'" ':/. ......
__- ____. ....,.;...00.... GO ~ .. .... ....
.. ... -- .,,,,,, .. _ .. -~...-.. ..-
~~~.:..:~... ~~ ~Zt..
...... __ on ... ~ ~ ...... ~ t:. ~''''
-,a -- -'" ~ ~~-"""
~... ... -"'" ... . o. .......
..!.~ ~90.1.
... ,:;., ~.~ 'S.::~~~~ ~y
~-".. ~0"I~i.01\I ~__c.
'L'P _t9S!~ Bto~S_~-
~_ 1~' ~ .-0 l1li-
~IIOJ&S'
oa.dD'
~I
"t.'fSIU _ '* ').., ~9~
-
~.. .....-. ..._.. _ u1'" _.-
... .... ... -
\
R-95%
l' !
<oj 09Z18f!4a
11-30-92
10:QOAN
i'002 :t;:12
/) . ~
,') .- ').r
'1'OJ-25-'92 JJ,l~~~!-2.6<!~__~COLOGY DELTR
--
692 PeJ3
NOU 25 '92 15:3121
l)JI.'rlttH
I /~ #-.& ,q"J-, -
It--'^S~
-
DATED;
<nAY UOUS'r1UAL 1iIAU. .. c.lit~nia
Ganeral partne~hlp,
BYt
DATE!)S
1(-;;' S -GJCJ-..
I }-,;L. 5 -Cf;)--
-
1Oo1Ui ~. General paxtner
~Gc:a1icomia
... M~ . /'-~
B~t ~ ~
. ta Bacretary
DATED:
DA'rBD:
'tHE Ct'rY OF C!:IULA VISTA, II.
munioipal corporation,
DA.TUH
-
TIH .NAf)Z1\, its ..ayor
'rSS pnZWLOpJtDIT AQPC'l OJ' 'tHS
CITY 01" c:mn.a. V15TA, e poli1:.ical
.~1vi.ion of ~. stata of
California.
B'H
TIM NADEll, 1t$l Oairman
Approved &111 to ror'll
DATED: _
Att..t.S
,
Beverly Authulet.. city Clerk BrUce 1&, Bo09&o.1:4. cIty Attorney
siroon9 ,wp settletant A9reement re ot1Sy valley Roa4 Wi4eni.n<J
Nov..er 25. 1n2 11 pa9- 2"
3-.21
11-25-92 lQ:51AM FROM WSG&R
TO 4256184
P002/002
----
1'OJ-25-'92 !oED 11"39 ID:CI'IY IF ou.A VISTR T6.. I();~ 619 691 5l?1
DA'l'ID :
DAfID:
~I
11~'l-<:-q?
J)A'1'BDI
DATIID I
DATED t
~~J:I):
Att..t::
t!352I PI!3
x.ovJ:' P. Paa'l"1'V
~....~......,. A. >>urn:
~~ "'''~io
, &1 P~~
~ AUTO W1t1.........1(0, . california
~~"tion,
.VI
, it:a P-.e1dent:
BYI
, it:a .e=etaQ'
~ em 06 Qlw.A 'n5'rA, .
lIiwIiolpal ..,.__d.oft,
nM 1tIoD..., i_ Htlr-
$8 ~&LOPICIDIT AGEHCY or 1'BB
m:n 07 aIOt.A V%S'1'A, . pgUU.c:al
Ililbdiv1siOD ot the state of
&1itonlia,
HI
'1'1M nDD, its Chairman
Apprgyllll a. tg ror.m
Bevu-ly Authulet, city Clerk Brw:e x. BoogAU'CS, City Attorney
C1roon,.vp S.~~_cn1; AljnOon~ n otay Valley Road W1t1_u.,
.OVQJlJsar 25, 111112 &1 >>119'11 21
R-931(
CITY or CBVLA VI'TA 11-25-Q2 ID,3Q~ '003 #03
..3~Jo
RESOLUTION NO.
/:2 ro
RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE SETTLEMENT
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY, AGENCY AND VARIOUS
PARCEL OWNERS WITHIN THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD
WIDENING ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, AD 90-2, AND
AUTHORIZING THE CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE SAME ON
BEHALF OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Redevelopment
Agency of the City of Chula vista does hereby approve the
Settlement Agreement between the city, Agency and various parcel
owners within the Otay Valley Road Widening Assessment District, AD
90-2, a copy of which is on file in the office of the city Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman of the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista is hereby directed
to execute said Agreement for and on behalf of the Redevelopment
Agency of the City Chula Vista.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the sum of $100,000 is hereby
appropriated from Account No. 996-9960-ST123 (balance of an Agency
Loan Receivable from the City for City's Purchase of a Mitigation
site) and $72,836.75 from revenues the Agency expects to receive
from the Agency's sale of the Right of Way to the Assessment
District, 90-2.
~~
0'])
Presented by
Chris Salomone, Director of
Community Development
Agency
P:\home\aUOrncy\sironRA.rc.s
3~3/
IIlhJo~ [PJIID@@ O[/j)~@ITiJ~O@[/j)IIDOOW O@1flt ibJOIID[/j)~o
3 <')L,
RESOLUTION NO.
It Pr2-1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT
BETWEEN THE CITY, AGENCY AND VARIOUS PARCEL
OWNERS WITHIN THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD WIDENING
ASSESSMENT DISTRICT, AD 90-2, AND AUTHORIZING
THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAME ON BEHALF OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the Settlement
Agreement between the City, Agency and various parcel owners within
the Otay Valley Road Widening Assessment District, AD 90-2, a copy
of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of
Chula vista is hereby directed to execute said Agree nt for and on
behalf of the City Chula Vista.
~~
d~t
ity
Presented by
Chris Salomone, Director of
Community Development
F:\hom~\attorncy\siconCC.res
3-33
i
~
I
)
l'
l-1\
\
,
DTAY! lANDFILL
I
I
ROJECT lOCATION
/
.
, i
i \ i \ !OJ
---l ~~
!~!
-------
COORS AMPHITHEATER
SOAK CITY USA
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DE PARTM E NT
R PROJECT ECOLOGY AUTO WRECKING PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
APPLICANT: SPECIAL USE PERMIT
PROJECT 834 Energy Way
ADDRESS: Request: Proposed time extension of the expiration date for the
- existing special land use permit number OVRCPE 53/SLVP24
= LOCATOR FILE NUMBER: until December 12,2025. No edditional construction or
l No Scale SUPO - 01-02 expansions to the permitted facility are being proposed.
C:\myfiles\locators\SUP00102.cdr 11/27/00
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE:
4
4/25/01
ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF CHULA VISTA
AMENDING THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
PROCEDURES MANUAL SECTION III B (RULES AND REGULATIONS
FOR THE FILING AND PROCESSING OF PLANS AND PROPOSALS
FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD PROJECT
AREA, MAJOR PROJECTS) TO ADD SUB-PARAGRAPH 3, PRECISE
PLAN PROJECTS, AND AMENDING THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD
PROJECT AREA IMPLEMENTATION PLAN/DESIGN MANUAL
ADDENDUM TO ADD SECTION 5.3(5), ALLOWING FOR THE
ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF DESIGNS AND OWNER
PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS WITHIN AGENCY APPROVED
PRECISE PLAN DEVELOPMENTS
SUBMITTED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEWED BY: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
4/STHS VOTE: YES D NO ~
BACKGROUND
In May, 1985, the Redevelopmen1 Agency adopted a Projects Procedure Manual and an
Implementation Plan/Design Manual Addendum as support documents to the Otay Valley Rood
Redevelopment Plan. These documen1s describe the processes the Agency Board should follow
and staff should use in processing developmen1 plans that are presented. It was mean1 10 be
responsive to changing circumstonces and to be amended as necessary to facilitate the smooth
and efficient processing of proposals.
Late in 2000, Landbank, Inc. - the property owner of a formerly contaminated set of parcels
totaling "'arc 11,"1, 30approxima1elv 40 -acres - approoched the Agency to discuss processing of
a light manufacturing industrial park on the site. Development constraints included set backs and
height restrictions caused by the topography of the site, use constraints in some areas imposed by
environmental monitoring requirements, and an aggressive processing schedule desired by the
developer to make the project financially feasible.
Staff in 1he Planning Department, in conjunction with Community Development, determined that
a Precise Pion would allow the development 10 go forward despite the set back and height
restrictions imposed by 1he current zoning. The intent of a Precise Plan is to allow diversification
in the spatial relationship of lond uses, density, buildings, structure, landscaping and open
spaces, as well os design review of architecture and signs through the adoption of specific criteria
as opproved. The Precise Plan would be created by the developer and include a re-mapping of
-_.'~--'-"..'-
PAGE 2, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE: 04/25/01
the project, the layout of buildings, traffic circulation, the an1icipated uses, and' design,
construction and landscaping guidelines for the entire site. The Precise Plan allows the flexibility
to accommodate the construction of the various types of buildings and uses required in a multi-
parcel industrial park.
To allow for ample Agency control of the project but facilitate the streamlined processing
schedule desired by the developer, the Planning and Community Development Departments
request the Agency invoke their authority to delegate certain matters to staff. Staff is therefore
requesting that following Design Review, Planning Commission and Agency approval of the
Precise Plan, administrative approvals be allowed for the review of each development phase~
lona as it is consistent with the overall Precise Pion approved for the development.
Staff is also requesting that following Agency approval of a Mas1er Owner Participa1ion Agreement
(OPA) on the project, administrative approvals be allowed for individuol OPA's upon transfer of the
lond from the developer to individual businesses. As under the Precise Plan. fFhese administrative
approvals of an individual OPA would only be given if the Ph",e "'"iAg preseAted exectl, falla..ed
the 3pu:ifieatior,3 ar"pra,ed ir, tl,c Preci3e PloA and ani, if the OPA conditions exactly matched those
adopted by the Agency in the Mosler OPA. Any Phases requiring Conditional or Special Use Permits
ond the related OPA's would be presen1ed before the Agency for their ar"r"1 a.olconsideration.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended the Agency adopt the resolu1ion, amending the Otay Valley Road
Redevelopment Project Manual Section III B (Rules and Regulations for the Filing and Processing
of Plans ond Proposals for the Redevelopment of the Otay Valley Road Project Area, Major
Projects) to add sub-paragraph 3, Precise Plan Projects, and the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment
Project Area Implementation Plan/Design Manual Addendum, allowing administrative approval
of designs and owner participation agreements within Agency approved Precise Plan
developments.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION
Design Review Recommendation Pending. Planning Commission Recommendation Pending.
DISCUSSION
In many cases 1he blighting constraints of the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area lend
to 1heir planning by Precise Plans. A Precise Plans is a planning tool allowed by 1he City zoning
code intended for larger scale developments consisting either of mul1iple parcels being united
and/or reconfigured, or on a parcel with multiple party ownership and is intended to provide
flexibility from the strict interpretation of development standards. A Precise Plan can overcome
developmen1 constraints common in the Otay Valley Road project area, such as difficult
topography, poor prior planning practices, environmental constraints or the need to unify and re-
map parcels for modern development design.
PAGE 3, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE: 04/25/01
The Landbank parcel, formerly known both as Omar Rendering and Darling Delaware, is an
exomple of a project benefi1ing from a Precise Plan. Because of significant changes of grade on
the site, building height restrictions and required set backs of the IL (light industrial) Generol Plan
designation make industriol development unfeasible. :,135, 131 e. i5u3 en .i, 5nmCI ,lal
c5ntan,ina1i519 5n the 3itenccc33itatc3 that 30me arc", of the de,d5i"ffient bc le1ained a3
"centainl9 ,Cl9t 3itc3". Construction opportunities within the current zoning are Iii "ikd. ,',Iimited by
exis1ina development slandards. The flexibility of the Precise Plan will allow parcels with limited
development potential to be u3cd '" I'""I,in9 lob 51 5tl,CI I "il ,51 U3<::3 CUrl <;1 ,tl, 131 ehibitcd b, tl,c
Cel ,101 al Plan dC3ignati51, al,d wl9in9.developed for hiaher and better uses. because 1he Precise
Plan will supercede the zonina desianation of the si1e.
While the needs of the Landbank site and developer have driven staffs' research and problem-
solving approach in this matter, the amended procedures for reviews and approvals in the Otay
Valley Road project area would extend beyond this specific project. Other developments moy use
o similar process. Currently, the only other Otay Valley Road project intended for development
as a Precise Plan project is Phase II of the Auto Park. This amendment would not affect its review
process, since auto dealers are a conditional use in the IL zone and, under the amendment,
Special Use Permits are required to re1urn for public review before the Agency. However, future
projects unknown at this time may qualify for the streamlined phase approval process 1he
amendment would allow. Additionally, slaff will explore the applicability of this approach for
olher redevelopmen1 project areas.
Staff believes a streamlined approach to the entitlement and OPA approval process is justified in
some instances. Where the Design Review Committee, Planning Commission and Agency have
thoroughly reviewed and approved a dc.cl513,,,cl,t Plejcd,Precise Plan. it is redundant to return
with minor reviews 1hat exoctly mirror prior officio I action. By allowing a more efficient approach,
both staff and officio I time can be saved, as well as developers' expense. Both the Procedures
Manual and the Implementation Plan/Design Manual of the Redevelopment Plan states and imply
that revision 10 the review process 10 streamline approvals in the interest of the public and
developer needs is desirable. Because all CEQA requirements and environmental reviews will be
comple1ed in the Precise Plan process, the Planning and Environmental Monager for the
Community Development Department has determined 1hat no new environmental impacts that
have not been previously addressed will occur.
FISCAL IMPACT
NfAo The approvol of the resolution should result in a more efficien1 and streamlined development
approval process for loraer multi-parcel development in the Otay Valley Road Proiect Area that.
in turn. should result in these potentiol developmen1s beina more financially feasible for
redevelopmen1 and save staff time.
PAGE 4, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE: 04/25/01
ATTACHMENTS
Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Procedures Manual
Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area Implementation Plan/Design Manual Addendum
Map of Otay Valley Road Project Area
J\COMMDEV\STAFF.REP\OS-Ol-Ol\OYR PROCEDURES MANUAl-R&S.doc
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE EXTENSION OF THE SPECIAL USE
PERMIT SUPO-01-01 UNTIL DECEMBER 31,2017 FOR ECOLOGY AUTO
WRECKING LOCATED AT 800-834 AND 825 ENERGY WAY
WHEREAS, on November 10, 2000 the City of Chula Vista did receive an application for an extension
of an existing Special Use Permit, SUPO-01-01 (formerly identified as CPE 53, SLVP 24, and PCC-73-27)
until December 12, 2025, and this constitutes a formal application; and
WHEREAS, Conditional Use Permit #PCC-73-27, effective date December 12, 1973 originally
allowed the automotive recycling facilities located at 800-834 and 825 Energy Way and known as Ecology
Auto Wrecking; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, and the
applicant entered into a Settlement Agreement relating to the Otay Valley Road widening on December 8,
1992, which resulted in the immediate extension of the previously mentioned permit until 2005; and
WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement limits the conditions of the Special Use Permit to the
following: required off street parking; landscape planting and irrigation; and fencing and other appropriate
comparable cost screening measures to ameliorate adverse visual impacts; and
WHEREAS, annual review of the project indicates that all conditions of the previously issued permit
have been met; and
WHEREAS, the Settiement Agreement further indicates that if at any time between the effective date
of this Agreement and December 31,2017 the City denies a Plaintiff a Special Permit, or other such required
permit which may be necessary for the continued use of the Lots for the use identified above upon the
conditions herein specified, then such Plaintiff may give the City written notice of the rescission of the
Agreement and ... the action may be recommenced in its entirety;
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that Special Use Permit SUPO-01-01 is hereby APPROVED
with an expiration date of December 31, 2017 according to the following findings and subject to the conditions
contained herein:
FINDINGS
1.
That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable to provide a
service or facility which contributes to the general well being of the neighborhood or
the community in that the recycling of End Life Vehicles (ELVs) results in cost savings
in recycled parts, energy conservation, parts availability, reduction in abandoned
vehicles and land filling, raw material supply, and reduced insurance rates via
reducing costs of repair and providing a market for totaled vehicles. Ecology Auto
Wrecking also acts as an approved oil recycling center.
2.
That such use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental
to the health safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity since the land use is considered
an interim use, and is regulated for safety and health concems via local and state
agencies, as well as via the conditions of this permit, which speak to adequate
offstreet parking, landscaping, and screening of the visual impact. Surrounding land
uses include other auto wreckers, the landfill, auto auctioneers, contractors yard, and
construction material recycling.
3.
That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the
Municipal Code for such use as modified by the Settlement Agreement.
4.
That the granting of the special use permit will not adversely affect the General Plan
of the City of Chula Vista or the adopted plan of any governmental Agency since the
General Plan is Industrial and the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Implementation
Plan recognizes auto wrecking as a transitional use.
CONDITIONS
1. Required off street parking shall be maintained in a manner consistent with the Chula Vista
Municipal Code.
2. Landscaping and irrigation shall be maintained in a manner consistent with the Landscape
manual.
3. Fencing and other appropriate comparable-cost screening measures to ameliorate adverse
visual impacts shall be maintained.
4. The applicant shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend, and hold harmless
City, its Council members, officers, employees, agents and representatives. from and against
all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims, and costs, including court costs and attorney
fees (collectively, liabilities) incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from a)City
approval and issuance of this Special Land Use Permit extension. b)City's approval or
issuance of any other permit or action, whether discretionary or non discretionary, in
connection with the use contemplated herein, and without limitation, any and all liabilities
arising from the operation of the facility. Applicant shall acknowledge their agreement to this
provision by executing a copy of this Special Land Use Permit where indicated below. The
applicant's compliance with this provision is an express condition of this permit and this
provision shall be binding on any and all of the applicant's successors and assigns.
EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
The property owner and the applicant shall execute this document by signing the lines provided
below, said execution indicating that the property owner and applicant have each read, understood, and
agreed to the conditions contained herein. Upon execution, this document shall be recorded with the County
Recorder's Office of the County of San Diego. and a signed, stamped copy returned to the Community
Development Department. Failure to return a signed and stamped copy of this recorded document within ten
days of recordation to the Community Development Department shall indicate the property owner/applicant's
desire that the Project, and the corresponding application for building permits and/or a business license, be
held in abeyance without approval. Said document shall also be on file in the Community Development
Department's files and known as Resolution No_.
Signature of Property Owner/Applicant.
Date
Signature of Property Owner/Applicant
Date
CONSEQUENCES OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS
If any of the forgoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms to be implemented and
maintained over time, and any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their
terms, the Redevelopment Agency shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted; deny
or further condition issuance of future building permits; deny, revoke, or further condition all certificates of
occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted; institute and prosecute, litigate, or compel
their compliance; or seek damages for their violations. Applicant or successor in interest gains no vested
rights by the Redevelopment Agency approval of this Resolution.
INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the Redevelopment Agency that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon
the enforceability of each and every term, provision, and condition herein stated; and that in the event that
anyone or more terms, provisions, or conditions are determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be
invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, this resolution and the permit shall be deemed to be automatically revoked
and of no further force and effect ab initio.
PRESENTED BY
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY
Chris Salomone
Director of Community Development
John M. Kaheny
Agency Attorney
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 04/25/01
PUBLIC HEARING:
Consideration of an extension of an existing Special Use Permit for the
Continuation of an Auto Dismantling and Recycling Business at 800-834 and
825 Energy Way and Resolution_Recommending that the Redevelopment
Agency Board approve the proposed Special Use Permit extension in
accordance with the attached draft Agency Resolution based on the findings
and subject to the conditions contained therein.
The project is the continuation of an existing use, Conditional Use Pennit #PCC-73-27, effective date December 12,
1973, for automotive dismantling and the sale of auto parts, and scrap metal collection, compaction, cutting,
shredding in preparation for the scrap market, and other related uses. The project was approved by the
Redevelopment Agency for a thirteen year extension on December 8, 1992 which moved the expiration date of the
Penn it until 2005. On November 10, 2000 staff received an application for an extension of this pennit until 2025.
The Planning and Environmental Manager for the Community Development Department has detennined that no new
environmental impacts that have not been previously addressed will occur, and the project is consistent with the
previous environmental review.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt attached Resolution _ recommending that the Redevelopment Agency approve the proposed Special
Use Pennit Extension in accordance with the attached draft Redevelopment Agency Board Resolution based on the
findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
DISCUSSION:
1. Site and Proiect Characteristics
The proposed project is an extension of the existing Special Use Penn it for the existing automotive recycling facilities
located at 800-834 and 825 Energy Way, doing business as Ecology Auto Wrecking, Inc.. The site's discretionary
history for this use goes back to Conditional Use Penn It # PCC -73-27, effective date December 12,1973, which
was extended at the direction of a Settlement Agreement relating to the Otay Valley Road widening, entered into by
both the City of Chula Vista, the Redevelopment Agency, and the applicant, on December 8,1992 for a period of 13
years until 2005.
Under the tenns of the Settlement Agreement the City of Chula Vista was to issue a Special Use Pennit (SUP)
conditioned only by code required off street parking; landscape planting and irrigation; and fencing and other
appropriate comparable cost screening measures to ameliorate adverse visual impacts. The Agreement further
states that the applicant is not required to deviate substantially from the plans previously submitted, reviewed, and
recommended for approval. The Settlement Agreement, Section III K, indicates that "if at any time between the
effective date of this Agreement and December 31, 2017 the City denies a Plaintiff a Special Pennit, or other such
required pennit which may be necessary for the continued use of the Lots for the use identified above upon the
conditions herein specified, then such Plaintiff may give the City written notice of the rescission of the Agreement and
... the Action may be recommenced in its entirety..."
"._._~...._.._.._.- .-....---.. ----_.._---~_..._--_...--
2. General Plan, Zoninq. and Land Use
GENERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT LAND USE
Site: Otay Valley Road Auto Recycling
Research and Limited Redevelopment (OVR)
Industrial IP (Industrial Precise Plan)
North: Open Space S80 Otay Disposal Site
South: Research and Limited OVRfIP vacant
Industrial
East: OVRfIP Construction Residue RecyclingNehicle
Auctions
West: OVRfIP Auto Recycling/Contractors Yard
3. Proposal
No additional physical construction activities are proposed at this time. Applicant is requesting an extension of their
existing Special Use Permit from 2005 until December 12, 2025. Staff supports an extension until December 31,
2017 to coincide with the Settlement Agreement.
4. Analvsis
The benefits to the society as a whole of auto recycling of end life vehicles (ELVs) is manifested in obvious cost
savings in recycled parts, energy conservation, parts availability, reduction in abandoned vehicles and land filling,
raw material supply, and reduced insurance rates via reducing costs of repairs and providing a market for totaled
vehicles. In addition, Ecology Auto is also an approved location as an authorized State of Califomia and City of
Chula Vista oil recycling center. The administration of the "Old Vehicle Buy Back program" for the County of San
Diego/Air Pollution Control District occurs here. Annual review by City staff (Community Development and Code
Enforcement performed a compliance inspection on May 24, 2000), as well as a complete inspection of the site as
part of this permit, indicates this operation sets the standard locally for this use for stormwater filtration, fire
suppression measures, as well as hazardous waste extraction, and storage and handling of vehicles.
As this permit is an extension of an existing permit that has a history of over 25 years, the project is and has been
supported by the Chula Vista General Plan, the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan, and the City's Zoning
Ordinance. The existing Settlement Agreement further delineates the City of Chula Vista's responsibility and limits in
this area as reflected in the Agency Resolution.
Conclusion:
The proposed land use is supported by the Chula Vista General Plan, the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan,
and the City's Zoning Ordinance, as well as the Settlement Agreement between the City of Chula Vista, the
Redevelopment Agency, and the applicant. As the Settlement Agreement speaks to a period inclusive of December
31,2017, staff supports an extension (a little over 12 years from the present expiration date) to this date to meetthe
terms and conditions of that agreement, rather than the 20 year period requested by the applicant.
Attachments
1. Planning Commission Resolution
2. Redevelopment Agency Resolution
3. Settlement Agreement (Agency Resolution 1290/City Resolution 16924)
4. Location Map -
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA RECOMMENDING THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMEND THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT PROCEDURES MANUAL SECTION III B
(RULES AND REGULATIONS FOR THE FILING AND PROCESSING OF
PLANS AND PROPOSALS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT OF THE OTAY
VALLEY ROAD PROJECT AREA, MAJOR PROJECTS) TO ADD SUB-
PARAGRAPH 3, PRECISE PLAN PROJECTS AND AMEND THE OTAY
VALLEY ROAD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA IMPLEMENTATION
PLAN/DESIGN MANUAL ADDENDUM, BY ADDING SECTION 5.3(5),
ALLOWING FOR THE ADMINISTRATIVE APPROVAL OF DESIGNS AND
OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENTS WITHIN AGENCY APPROVED
PRECISE PLAN DEVELOPMENTS
WHEREAS, the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Procedures Manual is a supportive
document to the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, the Procedures Manual allows for revisions and amendments to keep it responsive to the
changing provisions and requirements of the Redevelopment Plan and Implementation Plan/Design Manual,
as well as responsive to the public and the needs of developers and property owners in the Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the use of a Precise Plan/Master Owner Participation Agreement process for larger scale
developments made up of multiple parcels and/or multiple ownership allows for greater responsiveness to the
public interest and needs of the developers and property owners; and
WHEREAS, development projects consisting of multiple parcels and/or multiple property owners are
important to the elimination of blight in the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan works to lessen the impacts of blighting
conditions, including the lack of incentives to improve or re-habilitate unproductive land and to correct past
detriments to development caused by faulty planning;
WHEREAS, the Planning and Environmental Manager of the Community Development Department
has determined that no new environmental impacts that have not been previously addressed will occur;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista
recommends that the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista amend The Otay Valley Road Project
Procedures Manual, Section III B, adding sub-paragraph 3: "Precise Plan Projects", and amend the Otay
Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area Implementation Plan/Design Manual Addendum, by adding Section
5.33(5), as follows, in substantially the following form, which such changes as the City Attorney shall require:
Precise Plan Proiects: All projects deemed to require a Precise Plan must be presented to the
Redevelopment Agency for consideration. Once the Design Review Committee's and the Planning
Commission's recommendation have been established, the proposal shall be placed on the next available
Redevelopment Agency agenda. The standards within the Precise Plan shall serve as the zoning and design
guidelines of the project and shall be consistent with the General Plan.
The Redevelopment Agency shall approve, conditionally approve, or deny the Precise Plan through a
Master Owner Participation Agreement (Appendix E). Thereafter, as phases of a Precise Plan project are
submitted to the Planning Department and the Redevelopment Agency for review, Design Review approval
and Phase OPA approval shall be granted administratively at the staff level, based on the following
conditions: 1) that the Phase plan exactly follow the Precise Plan approved in the Master Owner Participation
Agreement by the Redevelopment Agency & 2) that no conditional or special use permit is required.
PRESENTED BY
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY
Chris Salomone
Director of Community Development
John M. Kaheny
Agency Attorney
H:\HOME\COMMDEVlRESOS\RESO - AGENCY DOWNTOWN PBID.doc