HomeMy WebLinkAboutAttachment 6 - Appeal Application redactedDocuSlgn EnvelopeI D: 90E6BCE 7-92FD-4F93-8388-B8A930B37E9F
Development Services
Planning Di vision I Depa rtmentDevelopmentProcessing
oworCHUlAVISTA APPEAL APPLI CATI ON FO RM
Appeal the decision of the: STAFF USE ONL Y
D Zoning Administrator
iiPlanning Commission
Oate Rec:elvl.'d : _________ _
Fee: ____________ _
Receipt # __________ _
Caie •--····-·-··-·---·---···----
Application Information
Name of Appe l lant Golden Stale Environme ntal Justice A\llan_ce ______ _Phone 951 -279-4697
Add rm 2:_5 - Main SI Suite 151 , Corona, CA92880 ---------------------
13usiness Ad dreH 765 N Main St. S uite 151 , Coro-'"-n_a'-, c_A_9 2 __ sa_o ________________________ _
Project Address Parcel # 644-040-01 ; Chula Vista, CA 9191 1; BrandywineAve nue northerlyof Main Street
Project Description _hinohara BusinessCenter; a 178 .156 square lootIndustrial bulkling for warehous ingon a 9 .72 acre parcel.
hample: vari n e, conditional u e permit, des\gn review, etc.}
Please use the space below to provide a response to the dedslon you are appeal ing. Attach additional sheets, If necessary.
Grou nds fo r an appeal mu st be based on at least one of the fo llowlng:
1) Factual Error, The statements or evidence relled upon by the decision maker wheri approving, conditionally
a pprovlng, or d eny1ng a permit, map, or other matter was Inaccurate;
2)New Information. New inform ation Is avail able to the applicant or the Interested person that was not avallab1e
through that person's reasonable effo rts or di.ledtrigence at the ti.me of the decision; or
3) Findings Not Supported . The decision maker's stated fin dings to approve, conditionally approve, or denythepermit, map, or other matter are not supported by the Information provided to the decision maker.
In order fo r an appeal to be valid, detailed respo nses must be incl uded wh fch cite at least one of the above rea sons fot the appeal
alo ng with substantiation of the fa cts and circumstances on which the claim of theappeal Is based. If an appeaJis fil ed within the
time limit specified, and determined to be vatid, it automatlcallysta ys proc eedi ngs In the matter untll a determination is made by
the City Coundl.
FINDINGS NOT SUPPORTED • ln approvingthe Shinohara Project, theCity violated provisions ofCEQA requiring that an EIA be
prepared to ade quately analyze significantadverseenvironmentalimpacts. The level of re viewadopted by the City wasinsufficient
and therefore did no! al low decision makers to intelligently conslde r the environmental consequencesof the Project CEQA requires
an a9.ency to adopt feasible mitigatklnmeasures and to describethem in theMNO. The MND for this project fails to imposeall
feasible mitigation measures to reduceimpacts to Jess than significantlevels See attachment fo r additional reaso ns.
Appeal Form Directions
Pursuant to the Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance Chapter 19.14, an Interested party may appeal the decision ofthe Zoning Administrator,
or Ptannlng Commission to the City Councll, The appellant must be an Interested party: An Interested party means a person who was
present at a pubI ic hearing fromwhich an appea I a rose and who had flieda speaker s l ipwith the decision maker at that pubile hearing,
or a person who expressed an Interest In the project in wrltlng 10 that declslon maker before the dose of the public hearl ng or a decision
on an action from which an appeal may be fl led, The appe!lant must fl le a com plete appeal application fo rm w i thIn the specified appeal
period (1 O business days after the decision has been made), complete the Discl osure Statement. and pay the requlred fee. Once a valid
appealform is filed, the appe 1 will be scheduled fo r a hearing by the City Council wi thin 30 days.
Signature of Appellant
DO NOT WRITE IN THIS SPACE
The above matter has been scheduled fo r publlc hea rlng before the: 0 City CounciI
Devel opment Services Department ___________ (ity Clerk
1of1 276 Fourth Avenue Chu l a ViHa l Cal!fo rnla I 91910
By
Appeal Letter
A-1
DocuSign Envelope ID: 90E6BCE7-92FD-4F93--8388--B8A930B37E9F
Page 1 of?
ATTACHMENT TO GOLDEN STATE ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE ALLIANCE'S
APPEAL FROM THE CITY'S AND THE PLANNING COMMISSION'S DECISION
APPROVING THE SIDNOHARA BUSINESS CENTER MND (SCH NO. 2022080431)
1.0 Summary
The Shinohara Business Center Project proposes to construct and operate a single, one-storyindustrialdistributioncenterbuilding. Warehouse space is proposed at 168,926 square feet (sf), office space at 4,506 sf, mezzanine/office space at 4,724 sf, for a total building area of 178,156 sf. The project requires discretionary approval for Design Review-.. DR21-0032. Hours of operationareproposedastwenty-four hours a day, seven days a week. Deliveries will be through semi-trailer trucks, utilizing the 25 truck docks. The environmental analysis assumes the tenant willoperateasadistributionfacility. The difference between warehouses and distribution facilities isthatawarehouseisprimarilydevotedtothestorageofmaterialswithlocalandregionaltrips. Incomparison, distribution facilities can be used for storage and numerous fulfillment anddistributionservices, such as product mixing and packaging. In addition, a warehouse generallygeneratesfivetripsper1,000 square feet of warehouse space. In contrast, a very busy distributionfacilitycangenerateupto25tripsper1,000 square feet of distribution facility space.
1.2 Project Piecemealing
The MND does not accurately or adequately describe the project, meaning "the whole of an action, which has a potential for resulting in either a direct physical change in the environment, or areasonablyforeseeableindirectphysicalchangeintheenvironment" (CEQA § 15378). TheprojectproposedbyShinoharaBusinessCenterisapiecemealedportionofalargeroverallprojecttobedevelopedwithintheCitybytheprojectapplicant. The proposed project is preceded by atleastoneotherindustrialprojectlocatedat821MainStreetinChulaVista (APN: 644-050-13-00), approximately 0.17 miles from the Shinohara site, This second project (known by its entitlementrecordnumberDR21-0024) will develop 3 industrial buildings and one storage facility for a totalof296,753 square feet on 13.31 acres and was submitted to the City on September 27, 2021
1•
Cumulatively, these two piecemealed development projects will construct and operateapproximately474,909 sf of industrial space. CEQA § 15165 - Multiple and Phased Projects requires that "Where individual projects are, or aphasedprojectis,
to
be undertaken and where the total undertaking comprises a project withsignificantenvironmentaleffect, the Lead Agency shall prepare a single program BIR for theultimateprojectasdescribedinSection15168." The MND misleads the public and decision
1 DR 21-0024, Chula Vista Citizen PermitAccess
https://pennits.chulavistaca. gov /CitizenAccess/Cap/CapDetai l.aspx'lModule=Planning&TabName=Planning&capID
I =21 CAP &capID2=00000&capID3"'°056V &agencyCode=CHULAVIST A&IsToShowlnspection""
A-2
A-3
DocuSlgo Envelope ID: 90E68CE7-92FD-4F93-8388-B8A930B37E9F
Page2 of7
makers by circumventing adequate and accurate environmental analysis for the whole of theaction
construction and operation of all related industrial buildings as a whole, including at minimum
ShinoharaBusiness Center and DR 21-00242 • Everysection of environmental analysis throughout
the :MND is flawed and understates theimpacts of the proposed project because it excludes its
piecmealed counterpart, DR 21-0024. An BIR must be prepared which accurately represents the
whole of the action without piecemealing the project intoseparate, smaller development projects
to present unduly .low environmentalimpacts.
III. AirQuality, VI. Energy, and VIII. Greenhouse Gas Emissions
The MND does not include for analysis relevant environmental justice issues in reviewing
potential impacts, including cumulative impacts from the proposed project. This is especially
significant as the surrounding community is highly burdened by pollution. According
to CalEnviroScreen 4.0\ CalEPA's screening tool that ranks each census tract in the state for
pollution and socioeconomic vulnerability, the proposed project's census tract ( 6073013 312) ranks
among other highly polluted areas of the state. The surrounding community, including residences
immediately adjacent to the project site at the north and westproperty lines, and Valle Lindo
Elementary School to the north, bears the impact of multiple sources of pollution and is more
polluted than average on several pollution indicators measured by CalEnviroScreen. For example,
the project census tract ranks in the 76th percentile for traffic impacts, 69th percentile for
particulate matter 2.5 impacts, and 62nd percentile for diesel particulate matter impacts. All of
these factors are typically attributed to heavy truck activity in the area, Trafficimpacts represent
the vehicles in a specified area, resulting in hwnan exposures to chemicals that are released into
the air by vehicle exhaust, as well as other effects related to large concentrationsof motorvehicles4 ,
Further, the census tract is a diverse community including 73% Hispanic, 6% African-American
and 4% Asian American residents, which are especially vulnerable to the impacts of
pollution. The community has a high rate of low educational attainment, meaning 64% of the
census tract over age 25 has not attained a high school diploma, which is an indication that they
may lack health insurance oraccess to medical care. Medical care is vital forthis census tract as
it ranks in the 73rd percentile for incidence of asthma and 50th percentile for incidence of
cardiovascular disease.
2 ViaWest Industrial Joint Venture in Chula Vista https://viawestgroup.com/2022/03/viawest-group-grows-san-
diego-portfotio-with-acquisition-in-escondido/
3 CalEnviroScreen 4.0https://oehha.ca. gov/calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen-40
4 OEHHA CalEnviroScreenReport
https:/ /oehha.ca. gov/media/ downloads/ calenviroscreen/report/calenviroscreen40reportf2021,pdf
A-3
cont.
A-4
A-5
DocuSign Envelope ID: 90E6BCE7-92FD-4F93-8388-B8A930B37E9F
Page 3 of7California's Building Energy Code Compliance Software (CBECC) is the State's only approvedenergycompliancemodelingsoftwarefornon-residential buildings in compliance with Title 245 • CalEEMod is not listed as an approved software. The CalEEMod-based modeling in Appendix Fdoesnotcomplywiththe2022BuildingEnergyEfficiencyStandardsandunder-reports theproject's significant Energy impacts and fuel consumption to the public and decisionmakers. Since the MND did not accurately or adequately model the energy impacts in compliancewithTitle24, a finding of significance must be made. An EIR with modeling using the approvedsoftware (CBECC) must be circulated for public review in order to adequately analyze the project'ssignificantenvironmentalimpacts. This is vital as the MND utilizes CalEEMod as a source in itsmethodologyandanalysis, which is clearly not the approved software, There are multiple discrepancies in the metric tons of CO2e (MT CO2e) calculations for projectconstructionandoperationsintheAirQualityanalysiscomparedtotheGreenhouseGasEmissionsanalysis. For example, the CalEEMod output sheets in the Air Quality Appendix concludes theMTCO2eforprojectoperationsis20,038 MT CO2e during the winter (19,943 MTCO2e as aresultfrommobilesourceemissions (passenger cars and trucks)). The summer analysis concludestheMTCO2eforprojectoperationsis20,900 MT CO2e during the summer (20,805 MTCO2e asaresultfrommobilesourceemissions). The annual analysis reduces these emissions to 3,660MTCO2e (3,309 MTCO2e as a result from mobile source emissions). The GHG analysis hasreducedtheoperationalMTCO2ebyapproximately82% from the summer and winter analysis (an 84% reduction was applied to mobile sources) without
an
explanation for the reductions givenorthemannerinwhichthereductionswereachieved. Reducing the emissions from mobile sources is notably misleading as the operational nature ofindustrial/warehouse uses involves high rates of truck/trailer activity (mobile sources of GHGemissions) due to traveling from large regional distribution centers to smaller industrial parks andthentotheirfinaldeliverydestinations. The project's truck/trailer activity is unable to utilize publictransitoractivetransportationanditismisleadingtothepublicanddecisionmakerstoartificiallyreducetheproject's GHG emissions, including those from mobile sources. Further, the project's use as a distribution center involves high rates of medium duty trucks (Sprinter vans, box trucks, and delivery trucks)
to
deliver packages to consumers in the "local andsubregionalSanDiegoCountyarea," as stated in the MND. The CalEEMod mode1ing inAppendixChasreducedtheproject's emissions from mobile sources by reducing the overall VMToftheprojectfrom14;251,839 VMT annually to 9,522,333 VMT, This is achieved by reducing
5 California Energy Commission 2022Energy Code Compliance Software
https://www.energy.ca.gov/programs-and-topics/programs/building-energy-efficiency-standards/2022-
building-energy-efficiency-1
A-6
A-7
A-8
DocuSlgn Envelope ID: 90E6BCE7-92FD-4F93-8388-B8A930B37E9F
Page 4 of7theoverallnumberofvehicletripsbyclassifying5% as "diverted trips" and 3% as "pass-by trips." As an industry standard, pass-by trips are a subset of trip generation that only applytocommercial/retail developments6 • Pass-by trips are drivers already on the road that stop by the siteastheyarcdrivingpast. This will not occur at the project site because there are no attractors forthegeneralpublicdrivingby. People driving past the site will not stop at the property unless theintentoftheirdrivingtripwastocometothesiteastheirdestination. The same is true for divertedtrips, which do not apply to industrial developments, either. The pass-by and diverted tripreductionsmustberemoved. as part of an EIR. Additionally, Appendix C must be revised to include a higher VMT per average daily trip. TheMNDstatesthatthewarehouse/distribution center is "proposed to serve the local and subregionalSanDiegoCountyarea." Currently, the MND assumes an average trip length of 7.99 miles pervehicle. The limits of the subregional San Diego County area extend north to Oceanside ( 46 milesfromtheprojectsite), east to Ocotillo Wells (95 miles from the project site), and south to theCaliforniaborderwithMexico (10 miles from the project site). The average trip length must beincreasedinordertoadequatelyandaccurateJyanalyzetheproject's stated goal to serve thesubregionalSanDiegoCountyarea, which involves traveling significantly greater distances than7.99 miles, XIV. Population andHousingSANDAG's Regional Growth Forecast7 notes that the City will add 42,107 jobs between 2016 -2050. Utilizing the MND's forecast of 600 employees (3 daily shifts with 200 employees pershift), the project represents 1.5% of the City's employment growth from 2016 - 2050. A singleprojectaccountingforthisamountoftheprojectedemploymentover34yearsrepresents asignificantamountofgrowth. An EIR must be prepared
to
include this analysis and also provideacumulativeanalysisdiscussionofprojectsapprovedsince2016andprojects "in the pipeline" todetermineiftheprojectwillexceedSANDAG's employment growth forecast for the City. Additionally, an EIR must also provide demographic and geographic information on the locationofqualifiedworkerstofillthesepositionsinordertoprovideanaccurateenvironmentalanalysis. Additionally, the MND has not presented any information regarding the location of employees tofulfillitsconstructionoroperationalneeds. Relying upon the labor force of the greater San Diegoregiontomeettheemploymentdemandsoftheproposedprojectwillexponentiallyincrease theVMTperemployee. The geographic location -of qualified employees for construction and
6
https://www .ite.org/ITEORG/assets/Fi1e/frip%20Generation%20Appendices%20PUBLISHED/ Appendices/Pass-By%20Tables%20-%20Trip%20Generation%20Manual%2011 tb.%20Ed.xlsx
7 SANDAG Regional Growth Forecast https ://sdforward.com/docs/default-source/finalM202 l -regional-
plan/appendix-f---regional-growth-forecast-and-scs-land-use-patte:rn.pdf}sfvrsn=8fc 1 fd65 2
A-8
cont.
A-9
A-10
A-11
DocuSign Envelope ID: 90E6BCE7-92FD-4F93-8388-B8A930837E9F
Page
5
of? operations must be provided in an EIR in order to provide an adequate and accurate environmentalanalysis. XVII.TransportationThe VMT analysis concludes the project will generate less than significant VMT impacts becausetheprojectsiteis "located in a VMT efficient area (at or below the base year averageVMT/employee) based on the applicable location-based screening map produced by SANDAG." The baseline average regional SANDAG VMT/employee is 18.9 while the project is expected togenerate15.32 VMT/employee based on census tract data in the City's VMT/employee screeningtool8, The City's Transportation Study Guidelines9 state that 'Industrial Employment projects locatedwithinaVMT-efficient area may be presumed to have a less than significant impact absentsubstantialevidencetothecontrar_y." Multiple factors regarding the proposed project demonstratethatthereissubstantialevidencethattheprojectisnotVMTefficientandwillhave a significantVMTimpact. The VMT analysis presented in the MND does not adequately or accuratelyrepresenttheVMTimpactsoftheproposedprojectandanBIRmustbepreparedtoreflect this. Itisnotappropriatetoutilizeonlytheproject's home-based work employee VMT in determiningtheproject's potentially significant VMT impacts because other operational factors (truck/trailertrips, sprinter van/distribution trips made during the course of business by employees, etc) presentsubstantialevidencethattheprojectwillgenerateVMTthatishigherthantheprojectcensus tract (15 VMT/employee) and the baseline average regional SANDAG VMT/employee of l 8.9. First, the operational nature of industrial/warehouse uses involves high rates of truck/trailer VMTduetotravelingfromports (San Diego, Los Angeles, Long Beach, Victorville Inland Port Airport)
to
large regional distribution centers to smaller industrial parks and then to their final deliverydestinations. The project's truck/trailer activity is unable to utilize public transit or activetransportationanditismisleadingtothepublicanddecisionmakerstoexcludethetruck/traileractivityfromVMTanalysis. Second, Table 4.2 Trip Summary of the CalEEMod output sheets in Appendix C indicates that theprojectwillgenerateapproximately14,251,839 annual VMT (14,251,839 / 365 days = 39,046dailytotalVMT). This is exponentially higher than the 15 VMT per employee reported in theMNDtodeterminetheprojectwillhavelessthansignificantimpacts. lnfonnation in the MND
8 Chula Vista VMT/Employee Screening Tool
https:/ /cvgis.maps.arcgis.com/anps/webappviewer/index:.html?id"-"d80a3cddc 1964flk88dafe:f234147e98
9 Chula Vista Transportation Study Guidelines
https://www,chulavistaca.gov/home/shovaiublisheddocwnent/24299/637847624897770000
A-11
cont.
A-12
DocuSlgn Envelope ID: 90E6BCE7-92FD-4F93-8388-B8A930B37E9F
Page 6 of7concludestheprojectwillgenerate600employees. These 600 employees would only generate9,000 VMT daily if they adhered to the 15 VMT of the project site's census tract. This is aminuscule0.06% of the project's total VMT as stated in Appendix C. This evidence supports thefactthatthemajorityoftheproject's VMT occurs from activities other than home-based workemployeetrips, such as the vast number of VMT generated by employees as they do their job -driving around delivery vans to deliver packages. This is especially notable considering MND states that the warehouse/distribution center is "proposed to serve the local and subregional San Diego County area," indicating that the tenant ofthebuildingwillmakedeliveriestoallareasofSanDiegoCounty, which extends north toOceanside (46 miles from the project site) and east to Ocotillo Wells (95 miles from the projectsite). Third, the MND has not presented any information regarding the location of employees to fulfillitsconstructionoroperationalneeds. Relying upon the labor force of the greater San Diego regiontomeettheemploymentdemandsoftheproposedprojectwillexponentiallyincreasetheVMT peremployee. An EIR must be prepared to reflect a project-specific quantified VMT analysis that includestruck/trailer activity, VMT generated by employees as they do their job (driving around deliveryvehiclestodeliverpackages) during the course of business, and provide detailed informationregardingthegeographiclocationofqualifiedemployeestoadequatelyandaccuratelyanalyze theproject's potentially significant transportation impacts pursuant to the project's stated goal to servethesubregionalSanDiegoCountyarea, which involves traveling significantly greater distancesthan15milesperemployee. Further, the City's Transportation Study Guidelines andTransportationStudyRequiredContentForm
10
require that. the Study contain a statementregardingtheproject's consistency with SB 743's legislative intent. The MND nor Appendix 0containanystatementregardingtheproject's consistency with SB 743's legislative intent. An EIRmustbepreparedtoincludethisinformation, The MND has not adequately analyzed the project's potential to substantially increase hazards duetoageometricdesignfeature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment); or result in inadequate emergency access. The MND has not provide atruckaccessorturningradiusexhibitanalysistodemonstrateifthesingleprojectdrivewayorthenearbyintersectionaresizedtoaccommodateheavytrucks. A turning radius and curb radiusexhibitmustbeprovidedtodemonstrateifthereissufficientspacefortruckstoexecuteturning
1 °
Chula Vista Transportation Study Required Content Formhtt;ps://www .chulavistaca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/21082/63 7786227015170000
A-12
cont.
A-13
A-14
DocuSign EnvelopeID: 90E6BCE7-92FD-4F93"8388-B8A930B37E9F
Page 7 of7maneuvers. This is vital as the project is accessed by all vehicles, including heavy trucks anddeliveryvans, via a single driveway. There must also be sufficient space for trucks to maneuverthroughtheparkinglotandmaneuverintotheloadingdocks. If there is not sufficient space, twotrucksorvehiclesmaycollideiftheyweretoenterandexitthesitesimultaneously (which is alikelyoccurrenceasthereisonlyonedriveway) because there is not adequate maneuveringspace. An BIR must be prepared to include this analysis.
XXI.Thresholds and XXII. Mandatory Findings of
SignificanceAn BIR must be prepared to discuss the cumulative impacts of the project in relation to itspiccmealedcounterpart, DR 21 0024.
Conclusion
For the foregoing reasons, the Shinohara MND is flawed and an BIR must be prepared andcirculatedforpublicreview.
A-14
cont.
A-15
A-16