HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Packet 2003/06/03
~ {fl declare under oenalty of p,,~jury ttiat' sm"___u
~Io.'ed b".! t~e C;~t'.! of Chu:a V:ota in the '
~:TIUi"!t/ C(L'S'~,r,l,,'nt U-,~;"Jr,'m>:nt. and that I posted
- i: '--";'-' ^,.,,....,...-.'~JI "'; , ,"', .,. ... ,_
ellY ""'[" :.J,I";.,\:",.", ''',' _ .__', I ',(: L;,;W::i:,n ci,;z\r:1 at the
TUESDAY, JUNE 3, 2003 CHUlA ~St\ :ceN.cos .:'",::n ~ InJ a'C8&Ne~leAAMBERS
4:00 P.M. :J,"',T", '::rj~O'3SIGj'jEfJPIIRI~&s BUILDING>'
(immediately following the City Council meeting)
JOINT MEETING OF THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY / CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
Agency/Council Members Davis, McCann, Rindone, Salas; Chair/Mayor Padilla
CONSENT CALENDAR
The staff recommendations regarding the following item(s) listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by the
Agency/Council by one motion without discussion unless an Agency/Council member, a member of the public or City
staff requests that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a
"Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency or the City
Clerk prior to the meeting. Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Action items. Items pulled
by the public will be the first items of business.
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 6,2003; May 13, 2003
2. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE F.A.E. ROOFING
SUPPLY COMPANY FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 3,000 SQ. FT. TWO STORY
SALES DISPLAY/OFFICE BUILDING, A 7.400 SQ. FT. METAL WAREHOUSE
BUILDING, AND THE ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS AT 2615 MAIN STREET
WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA - The F.A.E. Roofing
Supply company is proposing to construct a 3,000 sq. ft. sales display and office
building and a 7,400 sq. ft. metal warehouse building at 2615 Main Street within the
boundaries of the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area. The project includes
associated site improvements such as access, parking and landscaping.
[Community Development Director]
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the resolution.
3. JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING ISSUANCE OF COASTAL
DEVELOPMENT PERMIT NUMBER 77 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 30,000
SQUARE FOOT BUILDING FOR RETAIL/WAREHOUSE USES AT 830 BAY
BOULEVARD - The applicant, Foster Investment Corporation, is seeking approval
of a Coastal Development Permit for a Retail/Warehouse project previously
approved by the Redevelopment Agency on May 6, 2003. The request for
approval for a Coastal Development Permit is made in accordance to the provisions
of the Bayfront Specific Plan/Coastal Development Permit Procedures Manual. The
project design has also been reviewed and approved by the City of Chula Vista
Design Review Committee on March 17, 2003. The Planning and Environmental
Services Manager has determined that this project will not have a significant
adverse impact on the environment and has filed a categorical exemption with the
San Diego County Clerk's Office pursuant to the requirements of 'the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). [Community Development Director]
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council/ Agency adopt the resolution.
PUBLIC HEARING
The following item(s) have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required
by law. If you wish to speak to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Form"
available in the lobby and submit it to the Redevelopment Agency or the City Clerk prior
to the meeting.
4. a. CONSIDERATION OF ADOPTING A SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM-02-041 FOR THE AUTO
PARK NORTH EXPANSION (KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS L.L.C. & OTAY
MESA VENTURES II, L.L.C.I - The proposed project consists of a 39-acre auto
dealer development including three auto dealerships fronting on Main Street,
inventory parking areas and auxiliary uses on the interior of the site (Delniso
Court). Main Street right of way improvements and landscaping will be consistent
throughout the Auto Park on the south and north sides of Main Street. Design
guidelines will be consistent with the existing Auto Park and will also be
incorporated into future Auto Park expansion projects. [Community Development
Director; Director of Planning and Building]
4. b. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING
A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM IIS-02-0061 AND A SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM-02-041 FOR THE
AUTO PARK NORTH EXPANSION (KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISERS, L.L.C. &
OTAY MESA VENTURES II, L.L.C.I
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: City Council place the ordinance on first reading.
5. CONSIDERATION OF (A) A PARCEL REZONE FROM THE THOROUGHFARE
COMMERCIAL PRECISE PLAN (C-T-PI ZONE TO THE CENTRAL COMMERCIAL
PRECISE PLAN (C-C-PI ZONE AND A (BI PRECISE PLAN (PCM-03-211 TO ALLOW
FOR A MIXED-USE PROJECT THAT INCLUDES: (11 41 APARTMENTS
AFFORDABLE TO LOW-INCOME SENIOR CITIZENS WITH ASSOCIATED SUPPORT
SERVICES; (2) ONE MANAGER'S APARTMENT; (31 2,219 SQUARE FEET OF
RETAIL SPACE; AND (4) REDUCTIONS IN SETBACKS, PARKING AND OPEN
SPACE LOCATED 825 BROADWAY TO BE DEVELOPED BY THE METROPOLITAN
AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE (MAACI PROJECT - [Director of Community
Development; Director of Planning and Building]
Continued from the meetina of Mav 27, 2003
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Continue the public hearing to the meeting of June
10, 2003.
Redevelopment Agency, June 3, 2003
Page 2
.,
MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL
AND A REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
May 6, 2003
4:00 p.m.
An Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council and a Regular Meeting of the
Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista were called to order at 4:48 p.m. in the
Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista,
California.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT:
Agency/Councilmembers: Davis, McCann, Rindone, Salas, and
Chair/Mayor Padilla
ABSENT:
Agency/Councilmembers: None
ALSO PRESENT: Executive Director/City Manager Rowlands, Agency/City
Attorney Moore, and City Clerk Bigelow
CONSENT CALENDAR
1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES OF February 18, 2003, April 8, 2003, and April 15, 2003
Staff recommendation: Council/Agency approve the minutes.
2. AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 1815, RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING OWNER
PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE JENNINGS FAMILY PARTNERSHIP
FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 2,040 SQUARE FOOT SHOWROOM/OFFICE
BUILDING AND TWO REDWOOD LUMBER STANCHION RACKS AT A
VACANT SITE AT 3817 MAIN STREET WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
The Jennings Family Partnership is proposing to construct a 2,040 square-foot
showroom/office building and two 1,680 square-foot covered stanchion racks at 3817
Main Street, within the boundaries of the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area. The
project is being constructed on a vacant lot and includes the construction of a parking lot
and landscaped areas. (Community Development Director)
Staff recommendation: Agency adopt the resolution.
3. AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 1816, RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING DESIGN REVIEW
PERMIT (DRC-03-11) AND ADOPTING AN OWNER PARTICIPATION
AGREEMENT TO ALLOW THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 30,000 SQUARE-FOOT
BUILDING FOR RETAIL/WAREHOUSE USES AT 830 BAY BOULEVARD
WITHIN THE BA YFRONT SPECIFIC PLAN (FOSTER INVESTMENT
CORPORATION)
/ - (
CONSENT CALENDAR (Continued)
The applicant has filed applications for a Design Review Permit and a Coastal
Development Permit to develop the subject property. The Bayfront Specific Plan/Coastal
Development Permit Procedures Manual procedurally governs development proposals for
the Bayfront Redevelopment Area and Coastal Zone. The Design Review Committee has
reviewed the application for a Design Review Permit and has forwarded a
recommendation to the Redevelopment Agency. After the Design Review Permit has
been approved, a Coastal Development Permit may be issued by the City Council if the
project is found to be consistent with the policies and provisions of the Local Coastal
Program. The Planning and Environmental Manager has determined that this project will
not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and is categorically exempt
from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) under Class 32, Infill
Development Projects. (Community Development Director) CONTIUED FROM THE
MEETING OF APRIL 15.2003.
Staff recommendation: Agency adopt the resolution.
ACTION:
Chair/Mayor Padilla moved to approve staffs recommendations and offered the
Consent Calendar, headings read, texts waived. The motion carried 5-0.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were none.
OTHER BUSINESS
4. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
There were none.
5. CHAIRIMAYORREPORTS
There were none.
6. AGENCY/COUNCIL COMMENTS
There were none.
CLOSED SESSION
7. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING LITIGATION
PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(A)
City/Agency vs. IT Group, Inc., et. al. [Case No. 02-10118 (MFW)]
This item was not discussed and no action was taken.
Page 2 Council/RDA Minutes
/ - 2...
05/06/03
ADJOURNMENT
At 4:51 p.m., Chair/Mayor Padilla adjourned the meeting to an adjourned meeting of the
Redevelopment Agency on May 13, 2003, at 6:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council
meeting.
----==- ,~'.-.--}
-- ~.~ ~__L.&.~
Susan Bigelow, CMC, City Clerk
Page 3 Counci1/RDA Mioutes
/-3
05/06/03
MINUTES OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINGS OF
THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
May 13,2003
6:00 p.m.
Adjourned Regular Meetings of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of
Chula Vista were called to order at 7:19 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in the Public
Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California.
ROLL CALL:
PRESENT:
Agency/Councilmembers: McCann, Rindone, Salas, and
Chair/Mayor Padilla
ABSENT:
Agency/Councilmembers: Davis (excused)
ALSO PRESENT: Executive Director/City Manager Rowlands, Agency/City
Attorney Moore, and Assistant City Clerk Norris
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
There were none.
ACTION ITEMS
1. REPORT AND UPDATE ON THE PROGRESS OF THE CHULA VISTA URBAN
DEVELOPMENT COMMITTEE REGARDING THE POTENTIAL FORMATION OF
A NEW CITY-SANCTIONED ENTITY TO FOCUS ON THE REDEVELOPMENT OF
THE CITY'S URBAN CORE
The Urban Development Committee (UDC) is a group of Chula Vista business leaders
with expressed interest in the redevelopment revitalization of the City's urban core. The
UDC has hired Keyser Marston Associates to prepare a study to examine alternative
redevelopment management structures and make recommendations to the City Council.
(Community Development Director)
Community Development Director Madigan stated that the purpose of the UDC is to investigate
the potential for forming a new entity focusing on revitalization efforts in the City's urban core.
Christopher Lewis, president of the UDC, presented the background, proposed accomplishments,
and goals of the UDC. He stated that the City is missing investment opportunities and should
also be attracting investment capital. The City has an outdated redevelopment strategy that
includes idle and non-productive real estates assets, such as the bayfront, that serve no purpose
and provide no revenue to the City and no access for the citizens; and under-utilized areas in the
Southwest Redevelopment Area, Otay Valley area, and Montgomery area. A disproportionate
amount of investment is being afforded the eastern area versus the western area, and housing
alone will not support the infrastructure. He explained that there is a lack of business input in
the redevelopment process and little focus on a redevelopment strategy, which the UDC believed
projects a lackluster image to the investment community.
I -t/-
ACTION ITEMS (Continued)
Gerald Trimble, representing Keyser Marston Associates, discussed the advantages and
disadvantages of four possible reorganization plans considered by the UDC, including remaining
as an existing City department, forming an independent redevelopment agency, forming a
community development commission, and creating a non-profit development corporation.
Chair/Mayor Padilla commended and thanked the UDC members for their work and time on the
various issues. He stated that the City should explore the formation of a private, non-profit
community development corporation for the City, similar in structure to the one that has been so
successful in the City of San Diego. Chair/Mayor Padilla expressed the need to conduct a
workshop in the near future to discuss and address issues and to give direction to staff.
ACTION:
Chair/Mayor Padilla moved to direct the City Manager and Community
Development staff to calendar appropriate workshops within a 60-day timeframe
to present the information. Agency/Councilmember Rindone seconded the
motion, and it carried 4-0.
Agency/Councilmember McCann stated that the City must become more aggressive in driving
investment and capital into the City to revitalize the western portion of the City. He also
commended the UDC on its future goals for the City.
Agency/Councilmember Salas stated that the UDC would provide a good opportunity to examine
specific plans for the City and added that the City needs to consider what impact the state budget
will have on its ability to act as a Redevelopment Agency.
2. COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2003-200 AND AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 1820,
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATION
AGREEMENT WITH PACIFIC SCENE HOMES FOR DEVELOPMENT OF THE
CHULA VISTA @ LANDIS PROJECT PROPOSAL LOCATED ON LANDIS
AVENUE BETWEEN E STREET AND F STREET
An initial concept plan has been drafted to develop a state-of-the-art infill project with
lofts, townhomes, flats, and live-work spaces that will complement and enhance the
downtown village environment. The proposal will also create new public and shared
parking for patrons of downtown businesses, as well as a potential mixed-use paseo
linking the project with Third Avenue. The proposed exclusive negotiation agreement
will cover negotiations on City-owned property along Landis Avenue currently in use as
surface parking lots. (Commlmity Development Director)
Redevelopment Manager Estes presented the exclusive negotiation agreement, project site plan
and project benefits.
Agency/Councilmember Rindone spoke regarding the separate mixed-use paseo development,
stating that the proposed development component is an important link to creating an ambiance
for the area.
Page 2 CounciVRDA Minutes
-
(-:::.
05/13/03
ACTION ITEMS (Continued)
Agency/Councilmember McCann commended staff and the applicant, stating that the proposed
project is exactly what is needed for Third Avenue.
Agency/Councilmember Salas believed that the proposed project would be one of many projects
that Chula Vista will attract.
ACTION:
Agency/Councilmember McCann offered Council Resolution No. 2003-200 and
Agency Resolution No. 1820, heading read, text waived. The motion carried 4-0.
3. COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2003-201 AND AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 1821,
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A JOINT PLANNING
AGREEMENT WITH SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT TO
FACILITATE PLANNING AND REDEVELOPMENT OF MISCELLANEOUS
DISTRICT PROPERTIES
The proposed joint planning agreement establishes a framework for joint evaluation and
participation by the Sweetwater Union High School District and City staff to facilitate the
planning and possible redevelopment of a number of District-owned properties in Chula
Vista. Outreach to community representatives and stakeholders will be an integral part of
the planning process. (Community Development Director)
ACTION:
Agency/Conncilmember McCann offered Council Resolution No. 2003-201 and
Agency Resolution No. 1821, heading read, text waived. The motion carried 4-0.
OTHER BUSINESS
4. DIRECTOR'S REPORTS
There were none.
5. CHAIRlMAYORREPORTS
There were none.
6. AGENCY/COUNCIL COMMENTS
There were none.
CLOSED SESSION
7. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING LITIGATION-
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9(a)
City/Agency vs. IT Group, Inc., et. al. [Case No. 02-10118 (MFW)]
This item was not discussed, and no action was taken.
Page 3 CounciVRDA Minutes
(- to
05/13/03
ADJOURNMENT
At 8:16 p.m., Chair/Mayor Padilla adjourned the meeting to an Adjourned Regular Meeting of
the Redevelopment Agency on May 13, 2003, at 6:00 p.m., immediately following the City
Council Meeting in the Council Chambers.
J ~ ~MVL
Donna Norris, Assistant City Clerk
Page 4 CounciVRDA Minutes
(- 7
05/13/03
PAGE 1, ITEM NO.: d-
MEETING DATE: 06/03/03
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TIlLE: RESOLUTION APPROVING OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
WITH THE FA.E. ROOFING SUPPLY COMPANY FOR THE
CONSTRUCTION OF A 3,000 SQ. FT. TWO STORY SALES
DISPLAY/OFFICE BUILDING, A 7,400 SQ. FT. METAL WAREHOUSE
BUILDING, AND THE ASSOCIATED SITE IMPROVEMENTS AT 2615
MAIN STREET WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
AREA
SUBMI"ED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTO
. ,
REVIEWED BY:
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR _ \v
4/5T"S VOTE: YES c=J NO
IT]
BACKGROUND
The F.A.E. Roofing Supply Company, owner of the subject site, is proposing to develop the site
locoted ot 2615 Main Street between Industrial Boulevard and Broadway (see Locator Map attached
to the Owner Participation Agreement as Exhibit C). The proposed improvements include the
construction of a 3,000 sq. ft. sales display and office building and a 7,400 sq. ft. metal warehouse
building, as well as the associated site improvements including access, parking, and landscaping
(see the proposed Design Plans attached to the OPA as Exhibit A).
The proposed land use is consistent with the development regulations under the General Plan,
Southwest Redevelopment Plan, and Zoning Ordinance. The City's Environmental Review
Coordinator reviewed the proposed project pursuant to the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act and determined that the proposed project is a class 32 (in-fill
Development) exemption from CEQA.
Since the proposed project is within the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area, the Owner
Participation Agreement (which includes the design plans and a list of conditions) is being presented
to the Redevelopment Agency for consideration and approval.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Redevelopment Agency adopt the resolution approving, subject to
conditions, the Owner Participation Agreement for the development of the subject project at 2615
Main Street.
c2 - I
PAGE 2, IIEM NO.:
MEETING DATE: 06/03/03
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
The Design Review Committee reviewed the proposed project plans an March 17, 2003 (see
Minutes in Attachment A) and recommended approval af the project as described in Exhibit A
and subject to conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Owner Participation Agreement.
DISCUSSION
Site Charaderistics
The project site is a 1.26-acre parcel located on south side of Main Street at the south terminus of
Sylvas Street, west of Broadway. The subject site is located within the boundaries of the
Montgomery Specific Plan and Southwest Redevelopment Project Area. The site was recently
acquired by FAE. Roofing Supply Company to locate the roofing supplies business operation,
which was previously located (under the name Mousier Roofing Supplies) at 3601 Main Street.
The FAE. Company also purchased the property to the east of the subject site with the idea of
developing that site for future expansion of its business or to develop it for other users.
The subject site is part of the Main Street light industrial business district and is adjacent to and
across from other industrial uses. The site is mostly undeveloped and is currently occupied by a
temporary office trailer and supply inventory, which was permitted on a temporary basis by the
City through a Special Use Permit for the operation of the roofing supply business until the site is
formally developed with the proposed improvements. One of the conditions of the Permit was
that the property owner would provide some improvements to the site as part of the temporary
installation of the trailer and business operation. These improvements include a masonry wall
along the street frontage of the two properties and a 15-foot landscape buffer. These
improvements have already been installed as required.
Proiect Description
The proposed project consists of the construction of a 3,000-sq. ft. two-story wood-frame
building with sales display area, office space, restrooms and employee break room. This
building will have a tile roof, stucco walls and a decorative stone veneer wainscot approximately
three feet in height from the base of the building. This building fronts on Main Street, but is set
back approximately thirty feet from the sidewalk. It should be noted from the discussion in the
minutes that the Design Review Committee recommended approval of a building design that is
slightly different from the one proposed by the applicant. The difference is basically in the use
and location of the brick veneer, which is used as a decorative item. The applicant proposed to
add a vertical veneer stripe at each of the corners of the building and two additional vertical
stripes on the north elevation of the building. The Design Review Committee felt that these
vertical stripes were not an appropriate element, and instead chose to have the horizontal stripe
at the bottom of the south, east and west building elevations. The applicant's arChitect intended
to use the vertical veneer elements to break the blankness and monotony of the building facades.
However, the architect has indicated he will abide by the Committee's recommendation, and will
provide the horizontal veneer at the bottom of the building elevation.
d(-,;)...,
PAGE 3, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE:
06/03/03
The project also includes the construction of a 7,400-sqare foot metal warehouse building (40
feet wide by 185 feet long) for the storoge of material supplies. This warehouse will be located
along the west side of the site and set back approximately eighty feet from the street, which will
attenuate its presence and view from the street.
The associated site improvements that are part of this project include a 13-space parking lot for
customers and employees. Seven of those spaces will be located on the northwest area of the lot
between the entrance to the site and the warehouse building. The other eight spaces, including a
handicap parking space, will be located on the south side of the main building, with close access
to the building's entrance.
As indicated before, a 15-ft. landscape buffer is located on the site along the Main Street
frontage, as well as a masonry and wrought iron fence and a rolling gate at the entrance to the
site. Additional landscaped areas are located on the west side of the main building and parking
area, the north side of the warehouse building, and in front of the west parking area. An existing
chain link fence and barbwire will remain on the west, east and south sides of the site. This
fencing will not be easily seen from the street since it will be screen by the proposed structures
and landscaping on the front of the property. An existing retaining wall along part of the west
and south property lines will also remain. Finally, a refuse and recycling structure will be built at
southeast corner of the site.
Land Use Oesianations
The General Plan land use designation for the site is Research and Limited Manufacturing, and
the Montgomery Specific Plan land use designation is Research and Limited Industrial. The
Zoning is Limited Industrial with a Precise Plan modifying district overlay (ILP). The surrounding
land use designations, zoning and existing land uses are:
General Plan & Montaomery Specific Plan
Land Use Desianation:
Zoninq:
Existina Land Use:
North:
South:
West:
East:
Commercial Retail/Heavy Commercial
Resea rch& Li m ited I n d ustri a 1/ Ma n ufact.
Resea rch& Li m ited I nd ustri a 1/ Ma n ufact.
Resea rch& Li m ited I n d ustri a 1/ Ma n ufact.
CTP
ILP
ILP
ILP
Ernie's Auto Sales
Pallet Yard
Leaf Sales Yard
Vacant Lot
The table below depicts, the development standards for the Limited Industrial Zone as they relate
to the proposed project:
STANDARDS:
Front Building Setback:
Interior Side Setback:
Rear yard setback:
Building Height:
Parking Spaces:
REQUIRED:
20-ft.
lS-ft.
O-ft.
4S-ft.
13 spaces
PROPOSED:
25-ft.
20-ft.
20-ft.
22-1/2-ft.
13 spaces
0<.-3
PAGE 4, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE:
06/03/03
The site and surrounding land use designations allow a variety of light industrial and heavy
commercial activities, including building materials yards such as the one being proposed as part of
this project. Based on type of business that will occupy the facility, the proposed project is consistent
with the General Plan, the Southwest Redevelopment Plan, and the Zoning Ordinance.
Compliance with ReClulations
The proposed project is consistent with the City's required land use and development standards. As
indicated before, the proposed land use (building material supplier) is appropriate for an area such
as Main Street with a variety of light industrial and heavy commercial uses. The access, circulation
and parking provided meet the required standards. The architecture and design of the building
structure, as well as the landscape plan, were found to be in conformance with the City's Design
Manual by the Design Review Committee, who recommended approval of the project subject to the
conditions listed in Exhibit B of the OPA. The list of conditions includes the normal details and
housekeeping items that will insure the project is built per City codes and requirements. The
applicant has agreed to comply with all those conditions.
Conclusion
It is staff's opinion that the construction of the proposed buildings and the associated
improvements will be beneficial for the City, because it will put a vacant parcel to a higher and
better use, bring new development to the area, retain a successful business in the area, and will
contribute to the elimination of blighting influences, which further the goals and objectives of the
Southwest Redevelopment Plan. Consequently, staff recommends approval of the project subject
to the conditions attached to the OPA.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed project is small in scale and improvements are estimated at approximately $400,000.
Consequently the tax increment generated by this project will be minimal.
ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A - Design Review Committee Minutes of March 17, 2003
Attachment B - Owner Participation Agreement with the following:
Exhibit A - Design Plans
Exhibit B - Design Review and Agency Conditions of Approval
Exhibit C - Locator Map
J:\COMMDEV\5TAFF.REP\05-20-03\26'5 Main 5lre,el Agency Report.doc [05/0412003 4:59 PM]
d--4
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING OWNER PARTICIPATION
AGREEMENT WITH THE F.A.E. ROOFING SUPPLY COMPANY FOR
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 3,000 SQ. FT. TWO STORY SALES
DISPLAY/OFFICE BUILDING, A 7,400 SQ. FT. METAL
WAREHOUSE BUILDING, AND THE ASSOCIATED SITE
IMPROVEMENTS AT 261 S MAIN STREET WITHIN THE
SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the FAE. Company, LLC owns the property at 2615 Main Street, which is
diagrammatically shown In the Locator Map attached as Exhibit C to the Owner Participation Agreement and
incorporated herein by reference; and,
WHEREAS, the FAE. Company, LLC has presented development plans for the construction of a
3,OOO-square foot sales display and office building, a 7,400-square foot metal warehouse building, as well as the
associated parking, access and circulation, and landscape areas (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the site for the proposed Project is located within the Southwest Redevelopment Project
Area under the jurisdiction and control of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista; 2nd,
WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator reviewed the proposed Project and
determined It is exempt (Class 32, In-fill project) from CEQA; and,
WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee reviewed and recommended that the Redevelopment
Agency approve the proposed Project subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Owner Participation
Agreement; and,
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista has been presented an Owner
Participation Agreement, said agreement being on file in the Office of the Secretary to the Redevelopment
Agency, approving the construction of the Project at 2615 Main Street, depicted in Exhibit A and subject to
conditions listed in Exhibits B of said agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does
hereby find, order, determine and resolve as follows:
1. The proposed Project is exempt from environmental review as a Class 32, in-fill development
project, in accordance with CEQA
2. The proposed project is consistent with the Southwest Redevelopment Plan and shall implement
the purpose thereof; the project shall assist with the elimination of blight in the Project Area.
3. The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista hereby approves the Owner Participation
Agreement with the FAE. Company, LLC for the construction of the Project at 2615 Main
Street, in the form presented in accordance with plans attached thereto as Exhibit A and subject
to conditions listed in Exhibits B of said agreement.
4. The Chairman of the Redevelopment Agency is hereby authorized to execute the subject Owner
Participation Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency and the FAE. Company, LLC,
4. The Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency is authorized and directed to record said Owner
Participation Agreement in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego, California.
c:< - $'
Presented by:
Laurie A. Madigan
Community Development Director
;2..-(p
Recording Requested By:
CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista. CA 91910
When Recorded Mail To:
CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista. CA 91910
Attn: Linda Welch
(Space Above This Une For Recorder)
APN: 622-140-23
OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
F .A.E. ComDllnv. LLC
2615 Main Street
THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA. a
public body corporate and politic (hereinafter referred to as "AGENCY"), and the F .A.E. Company, LLC, Subject
Prope~ Owner hereinafter referred to as "DEVELOPER") effective as of May 20, 2003.
WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER desires to develop real property within the SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AREA ("Project Area") which is subject to the jurisdiction and control of the AGENCY; and.
WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER has presented plans for development to the Design Review Committee for the
construction of a 3.000-square foot sales display and office buDding, a 7.400-square foot metal warehouse bulding, as well
as the associated parking, access and circulation, and landscape areas (the "Project"); and.
WHEREAS, said plans for development have been recommended for approval by said committee; and,
WHEREAS, the AGENCY has oonsidered the Design Review Committee's reoommendation and has approved
the Project and design plans subject to certain terms and oonditions; and,
WHEREAS, the AGENCY desires that said Project be implemented and oompleted as soon as tt is practicable in
accordance with the terms of this Agreement .
NOW, THEREFORE, the AGENCY and the DEVELOPER agree as follows:
1. The property to be developed is described as AlIS88SOr's Parcel NlI1lbers 622-14G-23located al2615
Main Stree~ Chula Vista, CA., shown on locator map attached hereto and by this reference
incorporated herein rproperty").
2. The DEVELOPER covenants and agrees by and for himself, his heilS, executolS, administratolS and
assigns and all persons claiming under or through them the following:
A. DEVELOPER shall develop the Property with the Project in accordance with the AGENCY
approved development proposal attached hereto as Exhibit " A".
B. DEVELOPER shall obtain all necessary federal/state and local governmental permits and
approvals and abid~ by all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations, policies and
approvals in oonnection with the development of the Project. DEVELOPER further agrees that
~-7
this Agreement is contingent upon DEVELOPER securing said permits and approvals.
DEVELOPER shall pay all applicable development impact and processing fees.
C. DEVELOPER shall obtain building permits within one year from the date of this Agreement
and to actually develop the Property with the Project within one year from the date of issuance
of the building permits. In the event DEVELOPER fails to meet these deadlines, the Agency's
approval of DEVELOPER's development proposals shall be void and this Agreement shall
have no further force or effect.
D. In all deeds granting or conveying an interest in the Property, the following language shall
appear.
'The grantee herein covenants by and for himself, his heirs, executors,
administrators and assigns, and all persons claiming under orthrough them,
that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person
or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, national origin or
ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or
enjoyment of the premises herein conveyed, nor shan the grantee himselfor
any pelSOllS claiming under or through him esteblish or permit any such
pracIice of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection,
location, number, use oroccupancyoftenants, lessees, subtenantlessees,
or vendees in the premises herein conveyed. The foregoing covenants
shall run with the land. .
E. In all leases demising an interest in all or any part of the Property, the following language shall
appear.
'The lessee herein covenants by and for himself, his heirs, executolS,
administrators and assigns, and an persons claiming underorthrough him,
and this lease is made and accepted upon and subject to the following
conditions:
That there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person
or group of persons, on account of race, color, creed, national origin, or
ancestry, in the leasing, subleasing, transfening use, occupancy, tenure, or
enjoyment of the premises herein leased, nor shall the lessee himself or
any persons claiming under or through him, establish or permit any such
practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection,
location, number or use, or occupancy of tenants, lessees, sublessees,
subtenants, or vendees in the premises herein leased. .
3. The Property shall be developed subject to the conditions imposed by the Design Review Committee,
and the AGENCY as described in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
DEVELOPER acknowledges the validity of and agrees to accept such conditions.
4. DEVELOPER shall maintain the premises in FIRST CLASS CONDITION.
A. DUTY TO MAINTAIN FIRST CLASS CONDITION. Throughout the term of this Agreement
DEVELOPER shall, at DEVELOPER's sole cost and expense, maintain the Property which
includes all improvements thereon in first class oondttion and repair, and in acoordance with all
applicable laws, permits, licenses and other governmental authorizations, rules, ordinances,
orders, decrees and regulations now or hereafter enacted, issued or promulgated by federal,
state, oounty, municipal, and other governmental agencies, bodies and oourts having or
claiming jurisdiction and all their respective departments, bureaus, and offICials.
.;2. - r
If the DEVELOPER fails to maintain the Property in a 'first class condition', the
Redevelopment Agency ofthe City of Chula Vista or its agents shall have the rightto go on the
Property and perform the necessary maintenance and the cost of said maintenance shall
become a lien against the Property. The Agency shall have the right to enforce this lien either
by foreclosing on the Property or by forwarding the amount to be collected to the T axAssessor
who shall make iI part of the tax bill.
B. DEVELOPER shall promptly and diligently repair, restore, alter, add to, remove, and replace,
as required, the Property and all improvements to maintain or comply as above, or to remedy
all damage to or destruction of all or any part of the improvements. Any repair, restoration,
alteration, addition, removal, maintenance, replacement and other acl ofoompliance under this
Paragraph (hereafter oollectively refemld to as 'Restoration') shall be completed by
DEVELOPER whether or not funds are avaiable from insurance proceeds or subtenant
contributions.
C. In order to enforce all above maintenance provisions, the parties agree that the Community
Development Director is empowered to make reasonable determinations as to whether the
Property is in a first class oondition. If he determines it is not he (1) will noliIytheDEVELOPER
in writing and (2) extend a reasonable time to cure. If a cure or substantial progress to cure
has not been made wilhin that time, the Director is authorized to effectuate the cure by City
forces or otherwise, the cost of which will be prompliy reimbursed by the DEVELOPER.
D. FIRST CLASS CONDITION DEFINED. Firsiclass condition and repair, means an e100ientand
attractive condition, at least substantially equal in quality to the condition which exists when the
Project has been completed in accordance with all applicable laws and oonditions.
5, AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that the covenants of the DEVELOPER expressed herein shaD run
with the land. DEVELOPER shall have the right without prior approval of AGENCY, to assign its rights
and delegate its duties under this Agreement Such assignment or delegation shall not be effective until
DEVELOPER has notified AGENCY in writing. Besides the assignee's or delegate's name, the notice
shall include the new contact information for the assignee or delegate.
6. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that the covenants of the DEVELOPER expressed herein are for the
express benefit of the AGENCY and for all owners of real property within the boundaries of the
PROJECT AREA as the same now exists or may be hereafter amended. AGENCY and DEVELOPER
agree that the provisions of this Agreement may be specifically enforced in any court of competent
jurisdiction by the AGENCY on its own behalf or on behalf of any owner of real property within the
boundaries of the PROJECT AREA.
7. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that this Agreement may be recorded by the AGENCY in the Office
of the County Recorder of San Diego County, California.
8. DEVELOPER shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect. defend and hold harmless AGENCY
and the Cily of Chula Vista, and their respective Council members, ofl"lCElrs, employees, agents and
representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs,
including oourt oosts and reasonable allomeys' fees (collectively, 'Iiabilities') incumld by the AGENCY
arising, directly or indireclly, from (a) AGENCYs approval of this Agreement, (b) AGENCY's or City's
approval or issuance of any other permit or action, whether discretionary or non-<:liscretionary, in
connection with the Project contemplated herein, and (c) DEVELOPER's construction and operation of
the Project permitted hereby.
9. In the event of any dispute between the parties with respect to the obligations under this AGREEMENT
that results in litigation, the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover its reasonable attomey's fees and
court costs from the non-prevailing party. 0< - 9
10. Time is of the essence for each and every obligation hereunder.
11. If DEVELOPER fails to fulfill its obligations hereunder after due notice and reasonable opportunity to
cure, DEVELOPER shall be in default hereunder, and in addition 10 any and all other rights and
remedies AGENCY may have, at law or in equity, AGENCY shall have the rightto terminate its approval
of the Project and this Agreement.
12. Developer and Agency agree that. notwithstanding Section VI (A), Types of Participation, Conforming
Owners of the Rules Goveming Participation and Re-Entry Preferences for Properly Owners, Operators,
or Businesses, and Tenants in the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area, adopted by the Agency on
September 1990, the Agency expressly retains its right to exercise its eminent domain powers as it
relates to the Property.
13. All notices, demands or requests (hereinafter 'notices') provided for or permitted 10 be given pursuant 10
this Agreement must be in writing. All notices to be sent to any party shall be deemed to have been
properiy given or served ~ personally served or deposned in the United States mail, certified or
registered, retum receipt requested, addressed to such party at the addresses listed below. A party may
change the address where notices are to be delivered by giving notice pursuant to this SectDn, but shall
not require a party to serve or mail notices to multiple address.
AGENCY: CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
DEVELOPER: F.A.E. Company, LLC
3645 Long Beach Boulevard
Long Beach, CA 90807
Signature Page Follows
d..- { D
Signature Page
IN WITNESS WHEREOF THE PARTIES HAVE ENTERED INTO THIS AGREEMENT EFFECTIVE AS OF THE DATE
fiRST WRITTEN ABOVE.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
. AGENCY"
DATED:
By:
Stephen Pad~la, Chairman
Je Lessel, Presiden
F iII.E. Company, LLC
DATED:
ICALlFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT
Colitorr\iCL-
County of ~
on~ ~l, ~OO~ before me, .5andrQ L. morQn
personally appeare:te . ~rru J.P.~ Name Md Title of Off'"" (e.g., "Jone "DO, No"~ ",'lio") ,
T Name(s) of Slgner(s)
~rSOnallY known to me - OR - 0 proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the personl)(
whose nameOiS is/~ subscribed to the within instrument
and acknowledged to me that he/~~ executed the
same in hisltljtf/t~r authorized capacity(i~, and that by
hislh)6t~ signature~on the instrument the person~,
or the entity upon behalf of which the person{.ll:T acted,
executed the instrument.
State of
~------------
lWIDRA L MORAN
i@ Commlufon.1312878 I
!. Nolary Publlo . ClIIt10mIa I
~ Loe Ange.. County f
_ _ _ ~~~~~'2.:~ .
WITNESS my hand and official seal.
~tI~~ q1,,~~/},rB
OPTIONAL
Though the information below is not required by Jaw, it may prove valuable to persons relying on the' document and could prevent
fraudulent removal and reattachmer.( of this form to another document.
o<-({
Description of Attached Document
EXHIBIT A
Design Plans
Owner Participation Agreement
F.A.E. Company, LLC
2615 Main Street
Chula Vista, CA
Exhibit A
Design Plans
0< --I :L
'"
-_.~---_.-
..-
..........
r
I
.,., --...----
=
r
I
...-
- - - - --- - - - - _.- - - - --
-~--_.- l.OO.IQ.DOS
:!lli~ ~ _' ~u 'iii' ""i "l"iS "il ~tllq;illilil!lim 1I!11~~i;1 m lUll ~
h:1I ~ - -!, ~ Ii; II III ~I i 1111 iI!IIIIUiillllill~I::1 'II ~
Illd q 9 q 111111 ~I! il ii~ii i!i1Mil~~ ! ri ~
i!,elll ! ~ ,~1 .' II , , I' I 'IUb II I!lil !~hl ',I I
ill ..;g l! H I:l ~ U l:l rl!H ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ u~, II ,I ''i'!d IP,p I i El
)11 II ii: 11,:111 L ,! II ,'11'11:1;1 WI llil I il'll! !'i"'!
I: ;.. I I ; ; III !I III, '1. II I I"
d- - r3
I
I I
I I I
I €I ,
,
~ I
-, ,
I , ,
, , e
'I , ~ , I
I I
II I I e
f I, I I
I I I
I I ~S I
I I
I
I
I ~~
I
I
I
I I
I
I
~~ I
-- ___J ~
{~ , 1
I ! e
~ I ~ I
. '
~ I e
, --
f 7__,.:-_
I @! e
a , I!J
I e !
- ,
Gl I --
,
I @
a . Til
~
I
I I -
II -
-
II ~I [[I
- I,
- I
I
DJ~i: ~ ii] I en
II'! ! ~ ; B I
..11 I ~ I
u'l
1111 t--""-I ~ I ..
llll ! BJ~i IJ ~ I
il.: I I
.lil
"II 0] I
l!11i
~ O<.-/Y
II,
I"
I"
I
'.
~l I
I~ U U 1;11111 ~
H:; ~Iilalll
( ( ( ( .1 I'! ~
. I'I'I~ I
I l'lllli I
,
.
I
'I
I
I ll, I
I Ih
n
~;
"
~
D Il!l
~~
'1 ~~
p: < ~
~~ I
I
(G 'I 'I l
I I, i
" h
~ D I 'I
I !h 'I I,
3 I h
Q I I
I ~I 'Iii
I I I.'
! I n ! I
. I II, .
h
- -... --
02. -IS:-
ID
,
I
~
~
~
II
II
"I
rB
-e
t~
'lij
c."
~
,
. .
r-i- - - - -,~
, ;
,
, !
,
,
,
,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
~---------..
i. c(
,
,
~ ,
,
,
,
,
,
,
.... , I.
,
~ ~---------..
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,
,--------.-1
, ,
, "'--'1' I ,
, ,
, I ,
, I : I ,
, ,
, ,
, .---' 1 ,
, ,
, ,
, I '
.---------.
!----------?'i
I I I
, I '
, ,
, ,
, ,
I I I
, I '
, ,
, ,
j ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
~---------..
i. c(l
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
, ,
Ll-________~~
~_________________________J T
I
~
-e
i
<>
~
1:0
~~
~~
-e
~
<>
i
-e
-e
~
~
--11--
+-
~
.
~
o\!.
I
I
~
~
.
@
ii
~
I
~
-e
..J
-B
-e
-e
-G -G
~ ~
-e -e
--11--
~
-
D2-/b
.-
~
I
~ !~ !gs ~ rEl
~~ ~~
G ~~ -e
..,
q . ~ ~
't: ..
13 I -e
J~ J~
~
~~ ~~
.., ;;:;
~ -e ~ -e
.. . . ..
I I
~ lilllll i
~ .II!!! '"
~ -e it.ll: I i B
I~rll
1
-e J~ . -e
- I
.
qe 1
I I z
Ii
I", ----.
-e !~ I -G
I
! .!
q .
-e -e
.
~ . ~
~
~
r:::l - ( 7
EXHIBIT B
Conditions of Approval
Owner Participation Agreement
F.A.E. COmpany, LLC
2615 Main Street
Chula Vista, CA
DESIGN REVIEW CONDIT10NS
1. Prior to the issuance of any permits required by the Ci4< of Chula Vista for the use of the subjectptopertN
in reliance on this approval, the applicant shall satisfy the following requirements:
Planning and Building Departnient Conditions:
A. Revised building elevations shall be provided incorporating changes required by the Design Review Committee.
The environmental stone veneer shall be used as a horizontal4-fl. high wainscot element around the display and
offICe building, rather than as a vertical element on the comers of the display and offICe building. In addition, the
vertical panel siding material shall be replaced with a stucco finish for the display and offlCB building. Provide
revised elevations for review and approval by the Director of Planning and Building. .
B. A Planned Sign Program shall be submitted for review and approval by the Design Review Committee for any
wall and monument signage. The approval of the Planned Sign Program shall be required prior to issuance of
building permits for a monument sign or any wall signage.
C. The Applicant shall provide Planting and Irrigation and a Water Management Plan incorporating all conditions of
approval for review and approval by the Landscape Planner.
D. A Fencing Plan shall be provided indicating all perimeter fencing to be provided. The fencing plan shall be
required in conjunction with the Planting and Irrigation plans for review and approval by the Landscape Planner
prior to the issuance of building permi!.
E. Lighting for the facilily shown on the site plan shall be in conformance with Section 17.28.020 of the Municipal
Code. A lighting plan shall be provided that includes details showing that the proposed lighting shall be shielded
to remove any glare from adjacent properties and the fIlleway, and shall be reviewed and approved to the
satisfaction of the Planning and Building Director. .
F. A graffiti resistant treatment shall be specified for all wall and building surfaces. This shall be noted for any
building and wall plans and shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Planning & Building prior to the
issuance of building permits. Additionally, the project shall conform to Sections 9.20.055 and 9.20.035 of the
CVMC regarding graffiti control.
G. All building permit plans shall be reviewed for conformance with this Design Review permit The walls of the
display and office building must be one-hour rated when less than 2O-fl. from the property line. Building Plans
shall comply with the 2001 California Building, Mechanical, Plumbing, Electrical Codes and Handicapped
Accessibilily requirements as well as 2001 Tille 24 energy requirements. A soils report and structural calculations
will be required to accompany the building permit
Fire Department Conditions
H. The Fire Department will evaluate the building permit plans further to determine the occupancy classifICation
based on the construction type. The Applicant shall submit detailed construction documents to the Building
Division for review and approval by the Fire Department prior to issuance of building permit
d). -I'?
EXHIBIT B
Conditions of Approval
Owner Participation Agreement
F.A.E. Company, LLC
2615 Main Street
Chula Vista. CA
I. Two on-site fire hydrants shall be required on the property. Building plans must include the installation of a fire
alarm system as required per California Fire Code, Appendix III-B. The fire alarm system and fire hydrants must
be approved prior to issuance of building permit
Resource Recyclina and ConservationlSoecial Operations Coordinator Conditions:
J. The Applicant shall subm~ and implement an Integrated Recycling and Solid Waste Plan acceptable to the
Special Operations Manager. The Applicant shall provide sufficient space for designated IllOfcIabIes, yard waste,
bulky pick-up, and hazardous waste in order to divert the minimum 50 percent waste stream to recycling
requirement ofthe California Integrated Waste Management Act of 1989 and Sections 8.24 and 8.25 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code. Industrial properties must have trash enclosures, bins, or carts that meet design
specifications. The locations and orientation of storage bins and dumpsters must be pre-approved by the City
franchise trash hauling company. Contact the City Resource Recycling and Conservation/Special Operations
Coordinator at 691-5122,
Public Works Department Conditions:
K. The Public Works Department Engineering Division will require fees for sewer capacity and connections,
development impact for public facilities, and traflic signal fees as defined in the development checklist for the
building perm~ application.
l. The Engineering Department will require a construction perm~ to construct a driveway approach per Chula VISta
Construction Standard No. 1 on Main Stree~ the removal of the existing driveways, and the replacement of the
sidewalk per City Standards, and a new sewer lateral from the City sewer main to the property line.
M. A grading perm~ may be required prior to issuance of any building permits. A geo-tecI1nical investigation and
soDs report, including foundation recommendations, corrosivity, and lab-testing results shall also be required at
that time.
N. The project shall conform w~h all applicable provisions of the Model Standard Urban Storm Water MITigation
Plans (SUSMP) requirements for the San Diego Region to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The projectshall
incorporate into the project planning and design effective post-{)()nstruclion Best Management Practices (BMPs)
and provide all the necessary studies and reports demonstrating compliance with ModelSUSMP.
O. The Applicant shall obtain the approval of a maintenance program for the proposed post-oonstruclion BMPs. The
program shall include 1) a manual describing the maintenance activities, 2) an estimate of cost for such
maintenance activities, and 3) a funding mechanism forfinancing the maintenance program. The applicantshal
enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City to ensure the maintenance and operation of said facilities. All
private BMP structures shall be located outside the public street right-of-way.
P. A drainage study is required to demonstrate the amount of ftows contributed by this project and the adequacy of
facilities to handle these ftows. In addition, the project shall be designed such thatftows are directed awayfrom
neighboring properties and will be directed into the storm drain main using catch basins on-s~e. The drainage
study shall also demonstrate the amount of ftows contributed by this project and the adequacy of facilities to
~ -{ 'J
EXHIBIT B
Conditions of Approval
Owner Participation Agreement
F.A.E. Company, LLC
2615 Main Street
Chula Vista, CA
handle these flows. Post-<levetoped flows shall not exceed pre-developed flows, and wit not increase the erosion
potential of the downstream natural channel.
Q. The project is a Priority Development Project according to Section f.1.b. (2)(a) of the Municipal permit of the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) (creation of at least 5,OOO-sq. ft. of impervious
surtaces). The NPDES Municipal Permit Order No. 2001~1 requires compliance with Standard Urban Storm
Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMP) requirements, and numeric sizing criteria.
R. Implement Best Management Practices (BMP's) to prevent pollution of the storm water conveyance systems both
during and after construction. The grading and improvement plans shall include temporary and permanent
erosion control and pollution prevention components, as well as all drainage facilities.
S. Building permit plans shall identify and c1earty label the existing sewer facility that will serve the project, and show
the connection to the existing sewer line. The site plan shall also show that the project will meet ADA
requirements for parking and aooessibllity, and the trash enclosure area shall be covered and bermed 10 prevent
polluted water runoff onto paved areas.
T. The project shall meet the City of Chula Vista Floodplain Ordinance (Chapter 18.54) oflhe Municipal Code and
FEMA requirements per FEMA FIRM panel No. 2152.
U. Development shall comply with the US EPA regulations, and may require applicant to file a Notice of Intent with
the State Water Resourre Control Board to obtain NPDES coverage for storm water construction activity and
implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) for projects over 1 acre after March 10, 2003
subject to Califomia's Statewide General NPDES Permit for Storm Water Discharges.
V. When the second part of the proposed project stated as "Future Devetopmenr is designed, it will be necessary to
verify that the combination of the !;ewage .generated by the office building, storage area, and the future
development will not exceed the sewage volume generated by the existing condition. If the current sewage.
volume is exceeded, there will be the need to analyze the capacity of the 15-in. sewer line 10 verify if this line can
provide adequate service.
Police Department Conditions:
W. The Applicant shall obtain a security survey from the Crime Prevention Unit of the Police Department Specific
recommendations shall be provided for aooess control, surveillance detection, and police response. In addition,
training of management and employees in security procedures and crime prevention shall coincide with the
commencement of operations. The Crime Prevention Unit should be contacted at691-5127 for more information.
Outside Aaencv Conditions:
X. The applicant shall contact the Sweetwater Authority Water District for avaitabllity of water for operational and fire
protection purposes. All fees and deposits shall be provided at the building permit stage.
Y. The applicant shall contact the Sweetwater Union High School District and the Chula Vista Elementary School
District to determine the school fees that shall be paid prior to issuance of the building permit
~-;)...O
EXHIBIT B
Conditions of Approval
OWner Participation Agreement
F.A.E. Company, LLC
2615 Main Street
Chula Vista, CA
2. Prior to use or occupancy of the property in reliance on this approval, the following requlnments shaD be
met:
A. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans that include site plans,
architectural elevations, extelior materials and colors, landscaping, and grading on file in the Planning Division,
the conditions contained herein, Title 19, and the Montgomery Specific Plan.
B. Poor to any use of the project site or business activity being commenced thereon, all Conditions of Approval shall
be completed to the satisfaction of the Planning Director,
C. All landscape and hardscape improvements shall be installed in accordance with the approved landscape plan
and the comments of the City Landscape Planner.
D. All roofing and material storage shall meet high pile storage requirements as referenced in the Califomia Fire
Code 2001 Edition. Any storage racks used that exceed B-ft, in height shall be submitted for additional building
plan review prior to occupancy.
E. The Applicant shall provide a Knox box for the entrance to the buDding. Automated gates are required to have an
Opticom and Knox key switch. The Fire Department connection shall not be Iocaled with the ba::ldklYl preventor.
A one-way check valve between the post indicator valve and the Fire Department connection is required, The
back flow preventor shall be screened from view.
F. The Applicant shall provide a fire exlinguisherfor every 3,QOO-sq. It. of floor area or every 75-ft. of travel distance,
with a minimum rating of2A-10BC.
G. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of
public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming,
and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Planning Director.
H. All roof appurtenances, including air conditioners and other roof mounted equipment and/or projections, shall be
shielded from view and the sound buffered from adjacent properties and streets as required by the Planning
Director. Such screening shall be architecturally integrated with the building design and constructed to the
satisfactiOn of the Planning Director. DetaRs shall be included in buRding plans.
I. The Design Review approval shall expire if building permits are not issued or the approved use has not
commenced within one year from the date of this approval, unless a written request for an extension is received
prior to the expiration date.
3. The following on-golng condition shall apply to the subject property as long as it relies upon this
approval.
A. Approval of this request shall not waive compliance with all sections of Title 19 of the Municipal Code, and all
other applicable City Ordinances in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
.;2~f
EXHIBIT B
Conditions of Approval
Owner Participation Agreement
F.A.E. Company, UC
2615 Main Street
Chula Vista, CA
B. Buildings and Landscaping shall be maintained according to the approved plans unless modilicalions are
approved by the City of Chula Vista.
C. No outdoor storage of materials, industrial activities orvehicular maintenance orwashing shall be pennilted on the
site.
D. The County of San Diego shall be notified of storage of hazardous material on the site.
E. Fire lanes shall have an unobstructed width of not less than 20-11. width and 13-112-11. vertical dearanoe.
F. No storage shall be allowed within 10-ft. of the property lines, and no storage shall be allowed to exceed 20-ft. in
height. Any storage racks 12-ft. in height wah an area of 500-sq. ft. shall be required to have.a high piled storage
penni!. High piled combustible storage must comply with Article 81.
G. A fire flow of 1, 500 gallons per minute for a two (2) hour duration must be provided. An internal notification
device to indicate water flows shall be located in a constanUy attended location along with a manual pull station.
H. This Design Review penna shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted conditions imposed after
approval of this penna to advance a legitimate governmental interest related to health, safety or'Mllfare which the
City shall impose after advance written notice to the Pennittee and after the City has given to the Pennittee the
right to be heard with regard thereto. However, the City, in exercising this reserved right/condition, may not
impose a substantial expense or deprive Penna tee of a substantial revenue souroe which the Pennittee cannot,
in the nonnal operation of the use pennilted, be expected to economically recover.
J:\H0t.4E'G<Mt4DEV\TAPIA\PR0JECTS\261S t-WN SlREET\2615 MAIN STREET OPA(MaYS, 20031:37 PM~
02-.2. '2-
EXHIBIT C
Locator Map
Owner Participation Agreement
F.A.E. Company,LLC
2615 Main Street
Chula Vista, CA
Locator Map
c2 - ..<..3
!
----~
I ~Ir:j~=j t=iJ i ~-, 1-~\ \ ';1;:-" l:~~~iii .,~~.\ ~ ',\. u /"",-,, ' . ." ~
!- ~} l_."l,~) r~"'h,m,._L-1 ! I ,\,--~~~: H ~F-1 ~ ,~ ~-;~-i U~ ~ ~ [~:~ ~-7-~~)
~_ _ _.li~T'T"T.~--i..!.'.___..__,.:..._1 '...... ......._ .. .....,' . '......~ \ -"'.' r-!~.-~ '".'''1''' -, L..L.L..i ... ~) :=l ~- ."-"TT"; '(,,;,
-~.. - .. - .--- ,.' \.----....L,LU:lLLL_LL;~I]IID _ '/ L
- -- If: 'I A_N~T L 1 (\ C---TIT~:TT'I' TIJJJ . 'g;'~1 U\r
i \ \ I i I ~-; :_._~' i: . : i' ~~:!;-,'! l
'--i II - I \ \ "' I II c--~,I ~-i i=P q:::j '.1 .~-~'t"";-'-
f-----' I " \ ~ I" i 111 i I '-, d1 ili 6::j ~LJ ,W,~Lif;L.L 1\
\, rof':m r-',": '--l-'_T__,i'-'--"j~GRANADA' ~-'--l_ "'I',,.l',J,__I_
\ \ ~~~ ~ ~ Ef~ 'liM~;r J ~1.Jjlr~E1t
I I "' \ \ !=1 ,-. . 1-..1....' I.:T" I , . ..1 n--1 ie'
I 1 ""~ \ \ 7, ~~T.i:F'_L' - .... ... I rT" Eh
. '''._--j 'I S ~ ~ \ \ t_-_...._~ 1 \ _L ii, '.L.l't~.i r-rJ L.. :_....._1 i=Lj
~ \ \ jF~lml I' 11 Ffj;B'
r'--T-~~'~~~--i \....., B~ kX:~11'i ~ ~I~ J~f r-"r "",'-r';-'-; , 7~
\. ~~N":RI \ \{ ~ij f=f~ i~ ~ ~ I~ ~ ~I.! : "JI"'I' ~":..-Lr'-'II'.I....
! OFFICESr""1 \ 'Xu,---",.-, Ln:::o m ~I'-'" I' I : .;.
-, \ \ 1m I i:i, ' T
',,"",__.-.1t...___j ,-.",..,..,.~..._...___L._."._,t::iL_... _. ..... ....... ",,:_,,__,-,"-_
r--~
,
i
r
I
I
I
. ' ,
: I i
I DIESEL ' I
!AUTOMOTIVE II SOS I A-STORAGE
i UNLIMITED METALS,INC WAREHOUSE
I '
~"" .-:~-.~~ ,- . J
BUILDING BUILDING PARK \""
---.".''''1
~_...,
t
i-I
__~_iJ
'. ./1'
, .
..:..J..._....J
MAIN ST
...~.:..~,... ~.i. .'.,U. . " ..... ucl.----rl.. ..... I"
..:--~.,';.;\\
'.-3.......,... ,,:.
\- ~.,._..,j ., "! ~ i \
j- ........~ t::~I,-------1 :: I \
, --'1C; I
F..L _J h:~[Pi_J~uJ .JJ~c.._~,'\ \~_ICON~:~~TION
\......r--..-.-.-.-._.. .. ..~ FAIUDE R~
. ". :"T:':""'-"II-'F'-"-'--'~--\ \.------==:
! PROJECI I U I; ; : EX~~~~GE 1\ \
~ lOCAIIONi.1 I I I .. - ---, [ ~ - --~~~, .. ,
1 ,-- ..L -_. ___..1 I \~ I
" ,\~
--.., J ,,,-, 1
_~ ........__.......---.... _ .. _....----. c;.~...BF.c;:H~~ VISTA ' \ ,
.. _.. _.. _.. _ .," _.. _-.. _ .. _ .:-=-:.---......... ;a.._~--......._......... _.Jl _................~..
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO. - .. -.. - .. - .. - .. --.. - .. --.-. -~..
I
,
,
,
I
I
I
!----."
,
\ \
t\ \
1\ ~~~----'~
L \ \
" """......--. ._-...;. '.
.. \
\ \
\ \
\ \
~
-""~::
~
.----..--.--.-.-....--.-------.----....-..
I
--..-1
,
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPUCANT, F.A.E. COMPANY DESIGN REVIEW
PROJECT Request Proposal for the construction of a new office
ADDRESS: 2615 MAIN STREET and warehouse for the purpose of operating wholesale
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: roofing supply business.
NORTH No Scale DRC-03-39 Related Case(s): 15-03-022
ji\home\planning\cherrylc\locators\drc0339.cdr 12.23.02
d. - :L.y
MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE
DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Mondav. March 17. 2003
4:30 p.m.
Council Chambers
Public Service Buildinq
276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista
A. PRESENT:
Members Patricia Aguilar, Jose Alberdi and Cheryl
Mestler
ABSENT:
Peter Morlon and Alfredo Araiza (excused)
STAFF PRESENT:
John Schmitz, Principal Planner
Harold Phelps, Associate Planner
Raymond Pe, Community Development
OTHERS PRESENT:
Ron Snow, Ron Snow Construction
Robin Franklin, Architect
Charles Tiano, Foster Investments Corporation
Rick Davy, Architect
Harold West, Developer
B. INTRODUCTORY REMARKS:
Read into the record by Member Aguilar
C. APPROVAL OF MINUTES:
February 3, 2003 and March 3, 2003
The minutes of February 3, 2003 were continued due to a lack of a quorum for that
meeting.
The minutes of March 3, 2003 were continued for editing purposes.
D. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None
E. PUBLIC HEARING:
1. DRC-03-39
FAE Roofing
2615 Main Street
Chula Vista, CA
Desiqn Review for a two-stOry office buildinq and
warehouse canopy.
Staff Presentation:
Mr. Harold Phelps, Associate Planner reported that this project was a continued public
hearing from the March 3,d DRe meeting. The proposed project will consist of a 3,005
square foot two-story sales display and office building. A 7,400 square foot metal
warehouse canopy building will also be constructed, which will house roofing stock as part
of a contractor's material wholesale business.
c:J. - ~ '.)
Design Review Committee
Minutes
-2-
March 17. 2003
The Design Review Committee had a preliminary review of the elevations on February 1 yth
and then again on March 3'0. The elevations have been modified for a third time
introducing the use of a stone veneer as a building material. This material will also be
incorporated on the north wall of the warehouse canopy, as well as the screening wall
along Main Street.
Staff stated that the site plans shows a customer parking area in front of the sales and
display office building, and employee parking near the entrance driveway. New landscape
planters will be located in front of the employee parking and metal warehouse canopy and
on the side of the of the sales display and office building.
Mr. Phelps reported that as part of the Special Use Permit issued last year, a 6-ft. concrete
masonry unit block wall with 2-ft. wrought iron on top is being installed along the entire
Main Street frontage, behind a 15-ft. landscape buffer. A Planned Sign Program for this
site will be presented to the Design Review Committee at a later date.
Staff believes that the approval of this project will be a significant upgrade to this section of
the Main Street corridor, as there were many illegal and substandard structures that have
been removed from this site. In addition, the revised architectural design including the use
of the stone veneer on the sales and office building, the warehouse canopy, and the
screening wall are consistent with the Design Manual.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION:
Staff recommends that the Design Review Committee approve of the Design Review
application with conditions as noted in the attached draft Notice of Decision.
COMMITTEE DISCUSSION:
Member Mestler stated that at the last DRC Meeting the applicant had agreed to the
committee's recommendations that the office structure consist of a stucco finish with a 4-ft.
horizontal brick wainscot around the base of the building. In looking at the design, she felt
that the applicant had not complied because the design depicted a metal siding on the
building, as well as a vertical veneer at the corners of the building.
Mr. Ron Snow, Contractor, stated that he had tried to compromise with both the owner of
the building and the Design Review Committee. However, the owner felt that it was not
economically feasible to use stucco in place of the metal siding on the structure. The
owner also believed that a horizontal wainscoting around the base of the building was n.ot
practical because it would not be seen between the screen wall and the building. A
horizontal wainscot had been used under the entranceway. Mr. Snow further stated that if
the committee were to deny the project based on the issues concerning the material being
used, he would use the recommended stucco finish and the 4-ft. horizontal wainscoting
around the base of the building.
Member Alberdi stated that from a design point of view, in his opinion, a stucco finish and
a horizontal banding of the veneer would look more elegant than what was being
presented. He had stated this opinion in the last two meetings. Member Alberdi believed
that he would not be able to approve of the project as shown.
J:\HOME\PLANNI NG\ROSEMARIE\ORC\MIN3-17 -03
c::2 - d2 ~
Design Review Committee
Minutes
-3-
March 17. 2003
Member Mestler also stated that she would have to vote against the project only because
the applicant had agreed to the stucco and horizontal veneer treatment at the last meeting
and did not follow through.
Member Aguilar stated that while she understood the owner's position with wanting to
construct the most efficient building possible and the economics involved, their jOb as a
Design Review Committee was to try to get the best quality of design that they can for the
City. Per the staff report, Mr. Phelps has indicated that they are satisfied with the
architecture of the building. However, Member Aguilar felt that in order to get a vote of
approval the applicant was going to have to change their design to include the stucco
finish and the 4-ft. wainscot around the building.
Member Mestler commented about the site plan with regard to the ingress and egress of
the driveways. She asked if the (easterly) driveway for the future development was
currently paved. Member Mestler felt that an unpaved driveway could present traffic
problems and wanted to know if this issue had been addressed with the Engineering
Department.
Mr. Phelps responded that per the Engineering Department the second parcel for the
future development did not have to be paved at this time. Staff stated that trucks would be
discouraged from using it until the development occurred.
Mr. Snow further added that 99% of the trucks would be coming in from the westerly
driveway because the easterly driveway was difficult to enter due to the island in the
middle of Main Street.
MSC (Aguilar/Mestler) (3-0-0-2) to approve DRC-03-39 project with the conditions as
presented in the Draft Notice of Decision with an amendment to Condition No.1. B.
that will state that an environmental stone veneer shall be used as a horizontal 4-ft.
wainscot element around the display and office building, rather than as a vertical
element on the corners of the display and office building. In addition, the vertical
panel siding material shall be replaced with a stucco finish for the display and office
building. Provide revised elevations for review and approval by the Director of
Planning and Building. Motion carried.
2. DRC-03-37
242 Kennedy Street
Chula Vista, CA
Desiqn Review for a proposed new apartment complex
at 242 Kennedv Street. There will be 7 triplex
apartment buildinqs for a total of 21 apartments. 7-
units will be 2-bedroom apartments. and 14-units will
be 3-bedroom apartments.
Staff Presentation:
Mr. Harold Phelps, Associate Planner stated that this proposal is for an apartment
complex located at 242 Kennedy Street. The project will consist of 7 triplex buildings for a
total of 21 apartments. Seven units will be 2-bedroom apartments and 14-units will be 3-
bedroom apartments.
J :\HOME\PLANN I NG\ROSEMARIE\DRC\MIN3-17 -03
d.-d.7
PAGE 1, ITEM NO.: ...3
MEETING DATE: 06/03/03
JOINT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY / CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE: JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING ISSUANCE OF COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
NUMBER 77 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 30,000 SQUARE FOOT
BUILDING FOR RETAIL/WAREHOUSE USES AT 830 BAY
BOULEVARD
SUBMITTED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTO
REVIEWED BY: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR V If- ~
4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO D
BACKGROUND
The Applicant, Foster Investment Carporatian, is seeking approval of a Coastal Development Permit
for a Retail/Warehouse project previously approved by the Redevelopment Agency on May 6, 2003.
The request for approval for a Coastal Development Permit is made in accordance to the provisions
of the Bayfront Specific Plan/Coastal Development Permit Procedures Manual. The project design
has also been reviewed and approved by the City of Chula Vista Design Review Committee on
March 17, 2003. The Planning and Environmental Services Manager has determined that this
project will not have a significant adverse impact on the environment and has filed a categorical
exemption with the San Diego County Clerk's Office pursuant to the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Joint City Council/Agency adopt a resolution approving Coastal
Development Permit No. 77, based on findings of fact and subject to conditions of approval.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS/AGENCY RECOMMENDATION/APPROVAL
On May 6, 2003, the Redevelopment Agency approved Design Review Permit (DRC-03-11) and
adopted an Owner Participation Agreement, based on findings of fact and subject to conditions
of approval. On March 17, 2003, the Design Review Committee voted (3-0) to recommend that
the Agency approve Design Review Permit (DRC -03-11), based on findings of fact and subject to
conditions of approval.
-3 - (
PAGE 2, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE: 06/03/03
DISCUSSION
The applicant is proposing to develop the subject property with a 30,000 square foot building for
retail/warehouse uses. The subject site is principally undeveloped with certain areas paved and
improved for parking. The proposed building materials are proposed to be used in both a
functional and highly decorative manner. The proposed canopy and supporting structures will serve
as shelter/screening while contributing a unique aesthetic quality. The irregular footprint of the
building and the proposed inclined walls offer an interesting design feature and greatly complement
the irregular shaped parcel. The conceptual landscape plan provides for lawn areas, ground cover,
shrubs and trees throughout the subject site. The proposed use is consistent with the Bayfront
Specific Plan, Subarea 2, land use classification of General Industrial. The Bayfront Specific Plan is
incorporated in its entirety into the City's General Plan as the Bayfront Community Plan by reference
and is therefore consistent with the General Plan.
Conformance with Chula Vista Local Coastal Proaram
Based on the following, the proposed project has been found to be consistent with the policies of the
Certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program.
1. The project is consistent with the Bayfront Specific Plan which is the Implementation
Program for the certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program (LCP) - Land Use Plan.
2. The site is designated within Subarea 2- Industrial of the Bayfront Specific Plan and is
designated as Subarea 2- Industrial Area in the certified Chula Vista LCP - Land Use
Plan. The Subarea 2 anticipates development with uses allowed in the I-General
Industrial zone, including retail/warehouse uses; therefore the proposed land use would
implement the certified Chula Vista LCP.
3. The project would implement the Areawide Objectives and Policies set forth in the
certified Chula Vista LCP, specifically as they apply to industrial uses in limited locations
within the boundaries of the LCP Land Use Plan.
4. The project would implement the Subarea's Development Objectives and Polices
contained in the certified Chula Vista LCP. Specifically, the objectives for the Subarea are
to provide aesthetic improvements to existing and new industrial uses. The project would
develop existing underutilized land and improve the visual quality of the Bayfront through
the construction of high quality development consisting of unique architecture design and
landscaping features.
FISCAL IMPACT
The total valuation of the proposed improvements is estimated to be $1,200,000. Consequently,
the annual net tax increment is estimated to be approximately $12,000, with $2,400 set-aside for
the low/moderate income housing fund.
J:\COMMOEV\STAFF,REP\06.03.03\830 Bay Blvd,dac
3-.2.
~
-----,
\~
DUKE
ENERGY
POWER
SERYlCES
:L\
, ,
~,
P1"'.A~\
MEDICAl ~~
NSTITUTE'
\
SAN DIEGO
BAY
SDG&E
POWER
Pt.ANT
PROJECT /
lOCATION
CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPT.
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT OESCRIPTlON:
C) APPLICANT: FOSTER INVESTMENT CORP.
PROJECT REQUEST: Approval of a coastal development
ADORESS: 830 BAY BOULEVARD permit for proposal to construct a 30,000 sq.ft. shell
SCALE: ALE NUMBER: building consisting of concrete tilt-up panels for
NORTH No Scale CDP #77 retail/warehouse use.
j:lhomelplanninglcherrylcllocatorsldrc0311.cdr 08.28.02 .3-3
AGENCY RESOLUTION NO.
AND
COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO.
JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING ISSUANCE OF COASTAL DEVELOPMENT PERMIT
NUMBER 77 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A 30,000 SQUARE FOOT
BUILDING FOR RETAILNVAREHOUSE USES AT 830 BAY BOULEVARD
WHEREAS, Foster Investment Corporation, (Applicant) has submitted to the City of Chula Vista a
Coastal Development Permit Application (No. 77); and
WHEREAS, The City of Chula Vista Local Coastal Program (LCP) has been certified by the California
Coastal Commission; and
WHEREAS, said LCP includes Coastal Development procedures determined by the commission to be
legally adequate for the issuance of Coastal Development permits and the City of Chula Vista has assumed
permit authority of the Chula Vista Coastal Zone; and
WHEREAS, a public hearing was duly noticed and conducted on June 3, 2003, in accordance with
said procedures; and
WHEREAS, the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, as "approving
authority", have reviewed the project proposal to construct a 30,000 square foot building for retaillwarehouse
uses at 830 Bay Boulevard; and
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista Planning and Environmental Services Manager has determined
the proposed project to be categorically exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
has prepared and filed a Notice of Exemption in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, and the
Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista; and
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of
the of the City of Chula Vista do hereby find, order, Qetermine and resolve as follows:
1. The Notice of Exemption filed by the Planning & Environmental Services Manager is adequate
and in conformance with the certified Local Coastal Program.
2. The project is consistent with the Bayfront Specific Plan which is the Implementation Program for
the certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program (LCP) - Land Use Plan.
3. The site is designated within Subarea 2- Industrial of the Bayfront Specific Plan and is designated
as Subarea 2- Industrial Area in the certified Chula Vista LCP - Land Use Plan. The Subarea 2
anticipates development with uses allowed in the I-General Industrial zone, including
retaillwarehouse uses; therefore the proposed land use would implement the certified Chula Vista
LCP.
4. The project would implement the Areawide Objectives and Policies set forth in the certified Chula
Vista LCP, specifically as they apply to industrial uses in limited locations within the boundaries of
the LCP Land Use Plan. .
5. The project would implement the Subarea's Development Objectives and Polices contained in the
certified Chula Vista LCP. Specifically, the objectives for the Subarea are to provide aesthetic
improvements to existing and new industrial uses. The project would develop existing
underutilized land and improve the visual quality of the Bayfront through the construction of high
quality development consisting of unique architecture design and landscaping features.
3 -y
Page 2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council/Redevelopment Agency hereby approve Coastal
Development Permit No. 77 for the above described proposal to construct a 30,000 square foot building for
retail/warehouse uses at 830 Bay Boulevard subject to attached conditions.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
k
Laurie Madigan
Director of Community Development
J:\COMMOEVlRESOS\830 Bay Blvd.doc
...3 - ~
PAGE 1, IIEM NO.:
MEETING DATE:
4
06/03/03
JOINT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY / CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT
AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TO CONSIDER ADOPTING
A SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM-02-04) FOR THE AUTO PARK NORTH
EXPANSION (KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS L.L.C. & OTAY MESA
VENTURES II, L.L.C.)
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (IS-02-
006) AND A SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM-02-04) FOR THE AUTO PARK
NORTH EXPANSION (KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISERS, L.L.C. &
OTAY MESA VENTURES II, L.L.C)
SUBMITTED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
PLANNING AND BUILDING DIRECTOR
REVIEWED BY:
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Gl D (2...
4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO ~
BACKGROUND
Since 1983, the former Omar Rendering Plant site on Main Street in the Otay Valley Road
Redevelopment Proiect area has lain vacant, undevelopable due to groundwater contamination.
Despite the clean up of 580,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil in 1981-82 and a satisfactory
health risk assessment from the Department of Toxic Substances Control, groundwater
contamination remained. Although two development projects were considered for the site between
1986 - 2000, both proved infeasible due to the inability to reach regulatory agency closure for the
groundwater conditions.
In 1999 LandBank Inc. (LandBank) acquired the site. Subsequently the firm contracted with Hooper
Knowlton III/Knowlton Realty Advisers, L.L.c. (Knowlton) to create a development proposal (see
Attachment A). After studying the feasibility of a warehouse/distributing project for the site, it was
determined that the highest and best use for the property was auto dealer development linked to the
expansion of the Chula Vista Auto Park. Knowlton proposed a Specific Plan to allow the "North"
Auto Park expansion and City staff determined the project was consistent with the Otay Valley Road
Redevelopment Plan and Five Year Implementation Plan for 2000 - 2004.
In May, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) approved the Polanco Act Agreement
previously adopted by the City Council and Redevelopment Agency (Council/Agency) in April. That
agreement allows the Agency to pass its immunity from regulatory action to Knowlton so that
q~/
PAGE 2, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE:
06/03/03
development can proceed while a RWQCB Clean Up and Abatement Order for the groundwater is
completed. In short, the Polanco Act Agreement has enabled the entitlement processing and
subsequent development of auto dealer uses to take place.
Staff has processed the project through a Specific Plan, Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND), and
is in final negotiations for the Owner Participation Agreement (OPA). The ordinance and resolution
presented with this staff report represents the entitlements for the Auto Park North expansion on the
former Omar Rendering Plant site. The resolution for approval of the final OPA will be presented
with the second reading of this ordinance.
RECOMMENDATION
It is recommended that the City Council and Redevelopment Agency conduct the Public Hearing
to consider adopting a Specific Plan for the Auto Park North Expansion.
It is recommended that the City Council place on first reading the Ordinance adopting a
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-02-006)
and a Specific Plan (PCM-02-04) for the Auto Park North Expansion (Knowlton Realty Advisers,
L.L.c. & Otay Mesa Ventures II, L.L.C)
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION
On April 21, 2003, the Resource Conservation Commission (RCC) considered the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for the Project and
recommended that the Planning Commission and the City Council find the document adequate
pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and adopt the MND and MMRP (IS-
02-006}.
The RCC further recommended that the landscaping for the site conform with sustainable
environmental principles and they include the type of plants that will contribute to aesthetics,
water availability and also contribute to enhanced air quality and water quality on the project site
and adjacent roadways; and that canopy trees should be placed on the slope, the area adjacent
to Main Street and large parking areas.
On May 28, 2003, the Planning Commission recommended that the City Council adopt a
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-02-006).
based on the findings and conditions contained therein for the Auto Park North Specific Plan, and
introduce an ordinance approving Specific Plan (PCM-02-04) for the Auto Park North Expansion
(see Attachment D). The Planning Commission further recommended that the freeway signage
program for the Auto Park include public participation prior to review and approval. In addition,
the Planning Commission recommended that Section VII. F. be added to the Specific Plan to read
as follows:
F. A master Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) shall be required for the
implementation of the Auto Park North Specific Plan.
4-,;)-
PAGE 3, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE:
06/03/03
DISCUSSION
SUMMARY PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
The proposed project consists of a 39-acre auto dealer development including three auto
dealerships fronting on Main Street, inventory parking areas and supporting uses on the interior
of the site (Delniso Court). Main Street right of way improvements and landscaping will be
consistent throughout the Auto Park on the south and north sides of Main Street. Design
guidelines will be consistent with the existing Auto Park and will also be incorporated into future
Auto Park expansion projects.
CEQA - MND:
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study (IS-02-006) in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of the Initial
Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could result in
significant effects on the environment. However, revisions, which have been incorporated into the
project, will avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects
would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated
Negative Declaration (IS-02-006) (Attachment B).
SPECIFIC PLAN:
Purpose and Objectives
The Auto Park North Specific Plan (Attachment 2) has been prepared to plan and implement the
northerly expansion of the Chula Vista Auto Park. The guiding rationale behind the Specific Plan is
to ensure the orderly and viable development of the site and the implementation of the policies of
the General Plan and the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area by establishing permitted
land uses, development standards, design guidelines, and entitlement processes. The comprehensive
and coordinated development of the site will benefit the City and the Redevelopment Project Area by
removing blight and facilitating new development that will expand commercial opportunities and the
employment base.
The Auto Park North Specific Plan is a policy and regulatory tool that will guide the development of
the site using a focused development scheme. It provides a bridge between the broad policies of the
General Plan and the detailed development objectives for the site. The Specific Plan establishes land
use and development regulations that are specifically adapted to the proposed development of the
site. The provisions of the Specific Plan are intended to be responsive to constraints and
opportunities on the site and the objectives of the project while implementing adopted policy.
4-3
PAGE 4, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE:
06/03/03
The primary objectives of the Auto Park North Specific Plan are to:
. Expand the existing Auto Park to create a regional destination automobile sales and service
pork with supporting uses;
. Create a distinct identity for the Auto Park and a thematic link to other attractions in the Otay
Valley through the Main Street Streetscope Master Plan;
. Coordinate the development, operation, and maintenance of the site;
. Improve the image of the Main Street corridor and adjacent land uses; and
. Ensure the provision of all necessary infrastructure, services, and facilities.
Project Site Characteristics and Surrounding Uses
The project site is located along Main Street, approximately one half mile east of Interstate 805,
between Brandywine Avenue and Maxwell Road. The site includes approximately 38.81 acres on
the north side of Main Street and is approximately 1,284 feet deep with 1,323 feet of frontage along
Main Street. The site was previously subdivided into 18 lots and is primarily undeveloped with the
exception of partial street improvements (Delniso Court and Roma Court) and other infrastructure.
The site has been previously rough graded and terraced by a previous property owner. There is an
elevation difference of over 1 DO-feet between the frontage along Main Street and the northern
boundary line.
Immediately adjacent land uses include single-family residences to the north (situated at elevations
greater than 70 feet above the site building pads and more than 200 feet away), light industrial uses
to the east and west (including the City's Public Works Center to the east), and the site for the
proposed easterly expansion of the Auto Park on the south side of Main Street (proposed Auto Park
East Specific Plan). The existing Chula Vista Auto Park is located to the southwest of the project site
along the south side of Main Street. The Otay Valley Regional Park is located to the south of the
existing Auto Pork ond the proposed easterly expansion of the Auto Park. The Otay Landfill is
located to the northeast of the project site.
Development Concept
The Chula Vista Auto Park is intended to be a regional automobile sales and service destination.
The existing 24-acre Auto Park was constructed in 1991-1995. The Auto Park North expansion will
add approximately 39 acres, and the proposed Auto Park East expansion will add approximately 29
acres to the Auto Park for a total of approximately 92 acres.
There are two development concepts for the Auto Pork North Specific Plan: Option 1 consists of
eleven parcels (Appendix A of Specific Plan); Option 2 consists of seven parcels (Appendix B of
Specific Plan). Both options propose three lots with frontage on Main Street that would be developed
with new car dealerships. Lots to the interior of the site would be developed with supporting uses
such as automotive services and inventory parking lots.
4-c.f-
PAGE 5, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE:
06/03/03
A Parcel Map would be the implementing mechanism by which one of the two options would be
selected by the developer of the Project. If a development proposal deviotes from either option, a
substantial conformance finding must be made and must be adequately addressed by the adopted
Mitigated Negative Declaration. If such findings cannot be made, then an amendment to the
Specific Plan may be submitted to the City Council for consideration.
In both options, vehicle access to lots will only be acceptable from two proposed streets (Delniso
Court and Roma Court); no access shall be provided directly from Main Street. Roma Court will only
serve two of the dealerships fronting on Main Street. Delniso Court will serve two dealerships and
the supporting uses to the rear of the site. Both intersections will be fully signalized.
The Specific Plan would allow the construction of up to 130,000 square feet of dealership buildings.
The floor area for these buildings would vary depending on the development proposals submitted
for individual dealerships. These buildings would typically include showrooms, offices, service
stations, and parts departments. The Specific Plan would also allow up to 93,450 square feet of
floor area for supporting automotive uses.
Each of the lots may be developed independently, in accordance with the Specific Plan, including the
development standards, design guidelines, and performance standards and conditions. These
provisions establish lot configurations, maximum lot coverage and floor area, maximum height,
minimum setbacks, parking requirements, landscape requirements, and sign requirements.
Most of the Specific Plan's standards are consistent with the underlying zone or appropriate
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. Specific requirements that are unique to the Specific Plan take
into consideration the project site and the objectives for the Auto Park; for example, only new auto
dealerships are permitted on the lots with frontage on Main Street, while supporting uses are only
allowed on interior lots.
The Specific Plan's design guidelines require landscape consistency within the Auto Park ond street,
signage, and landscape improvements that are consistent with the Main Street Streetscape Master
Plan. These design controls are intended to create a coordinated theme and image for the Auto
Park and the Main Street corridor.
Performance standards and conditions would insure that the operations and maintenance of the
land uses in the Auto Park do not become detrimental to other uses or surrounding areas. These
standards and conditions address hours of operation, promotional displays and events, deliveries
and loading, outdoor speakers and pagers, test driving, car washing, facilities maintenance, and
lighting.
General Plan and Zoning Consistency
The Auto Park North Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan's Research and Limited
Industrial land use designation for the site. Automobile sales are conditionally permitted uses under
the I - Genera/Industrial zone classification that implements the land use designation. The Specific
4-~
PAGE 6, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE:
06/03/03
Plan would limit the range of uses otherwise permitted by the I - General Industrial zone in order to
achieve the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan for the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project
Area, specifically the expansion of the Auto Park and creation of a regional-serving auto center.
The I - General Industrial zone permits a wide range of uses such as manufacturing, processing,
assembling, research, wholesale, and storage uses; stone and monument works; trucking yards and
terminals; electrical generating plants and liquefied natural gas plants. Conditionally permitted uses
include motels, restaurants, service stations, retail distribution centers and outlets, brewing or
distilling of liquor, meat packing, foundries, automobile salvage and wrecking operations, metal
and waste rag, glass and paper salvage, recycling collection centers, vehicle and equipment
auctions, and hazardous waste facilities.
The Specific Plan considerably reduces the potential range of land uses on the project site by
specifying four categories of permitted uses, all of which are consistent with the underlying zone
classification. These are automobile sales (new car dealerships), inventory parking, supporting
services, and accessory uses. Supporting services include a range of land uses that would support
the auto dealership uses in the Auto Park. These include automobile parts and accessories sales;
automobile repair and service; collision repair; detailing and car washes; restaurants; other vehicle
sales and service; car rentals; and automobile finance ond leasing offices.
Specific Plan Statutory Requirements
Specific Plans may be adopted by ordinance in accordance with Chapter 19.07, Specific Plans of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code and Sections 65450-65457 of the California Government Code.
Chapter 19.07 adopts and incorporates Government Code Sections 65450-65457 by reference as
though set forth in full. The Specific Plan supersedes the zone regulations for the project site. Where
in conflict with the Zoning Ordinance, the Specific Plan applies; and where it is silent, the Zoning
Ordinance and other applicable policies and regulations apply (see Attachment C).
The proposed Auto Park North Specific Plan meets the statutory requirements of Government Code
Section 65450-65457. Specifically, the following required sections are provided, as noted:
1) The distribution of land uses in the area covered by the plan (Section II);
2) The provision of essential facilities to support the land uses (Section VI);
3) Standards for development (Section III, IV, and V);
4) Implementation measures (Section VII); and
5) The relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan (Section I).
OPA
The Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) (to be presented at second reading) addresses the
negotiable development considerations and performance requirements for the proiect. Many of
these provisions are standard to Owner Participation Agreements in Chula Vista Redevelopment
Proiect Areas. Special provisions pertaining to this project include dates by which site improvements,
4-Cc
PAGE 7, ITEM NO.:
MEETING DATE:
06/03/03
dealership construction and deolership operations will begin. No financial incentive will be
requested by the Applicant for the project, however the OPA will set out agreed-upon deliverables to
cause the project to be developed in a timely manner. The Specific Plan requires that an OPA be in
effect for the project. This requirement, in conjunction with the OPA benchmarks, will give the
Agency tools to encourage timely delivery of the economic benefits and quality of development the
community is seeking from the Chula Vista Auto Park.
FISCAL IMPACT
If the project is approved and fully developed, the ultimate tax increment expected is $267,750
annually and the anticipated annual sales tax receipts to the general fund from this portion of the
Chula Vista Auto Park expansion are estimated at $1,000,000.
ATTACHMENTS
A - Development Processing Application
B - Mitigated Negative Declaration
C - Specific Plan
D - Planning Commission Resolution dated May 28, 2003
J:\COMMDEV\STAFF.REP\06-03-03\Joint - HK auto park expansion.doc
4-7
ORDINANCE NO,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ADOPTING A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (IS-02-006) AND ADOPTING A
SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM-02-04) FOR THE AUTO PARK NORTH EXPANSION
(KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS, LLC & OTAY MESA VENTURES II, LLC).
I. RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the areas of land, which are the subject of this Ordinance, are represented in
Exhibit "A" and for the purpose of general description herein consist of 38.81 acres located on the
north side of Main Street between Brandywine Avenue and Maxwell Road ("Project Site"); and
B. Project; Application
WHEREAS, on January 14, 2003, Knowlton Realty Advisors, LLC and Otay Mesa
Ventures II, LLC ("Developer") filed an application requesting the adoption of a Specific Plan
(PCM-02-04) for the development of auto dealership lots and supporting use lots on the Project
Site ("Project"); and
C. Planning Commission Record on Applications
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on this Project
on May 28, 2003, and voted to recommend that the City Council adopt the Specific Plan (PCM-
02-04); and
WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning
Commission at their public hearing on this Project held on May 28, 2003, and the minutes and
resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding; and
D. City Council Record on Applications
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the City Council on
June 3, 2003 on the application and to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission
and to hear public testimony with regard to the same,
II. The City Council does hereby ordain as follows:
A. Certification of Compliance with CEQA
The City Council does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-02-006) have been prepared in accordance with
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines,
and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and hereby adopts the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-02-006).
B. Independent Judgment of City Council
The City Council does hereby find that in the exercise of their independent review and
judgment, the Mitigated Negative Deciaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(IS-02-006) in the form presented has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the
Ordinance
Page 2
California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of
Chula Vista.
C. Adoption of Specific Plan
The City Council does hereby adopt Specific Plan (PCM-02-04), attached hereto and
Incorporated herein as though set forth in full, finding that It Is consistent with the General Plan
and would implement the Redevelopment Plan for the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project
Area, and that the public necessity, conveniences, general welfare, and good zoning practice
supports its approval and implementation.
III. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the City Council that Its adoption of this Ordinance 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 Ordinance shall be deemed to
be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab Initio.
IV. EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall take effect and be In full force on the thirtieth day from and after its
adoption.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Laurie Madigan
Community Development Director
~
=
I
~
;]
EXHIBIT "A"
OTAY LANDFILL
VACANT
W
:0
Z
W
~
W
Z
~
o
z
~
III
INDUSTRIAL
BUILDINGS
o
<(
o
'"
-'
-'
w
~
:2
SIGN CT
MAIN STREET
~I
AUTO
PARK
VACANT
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS LLC PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
(!) APPLICANT, and OTAY MESA VENTURES II. LLc.
PROJECT NORTH OF MAIN STREET BETWEEN Request: Proposed Specific Plan for future development
ADDRESS, BRANDYWINE AV AND MAXWELL RD. of the northerly expansion of the Chula Vista Auto Park.
The project site consists of approximately 39 acres.
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: Related Cese: IS-02-006
NORTH No Scale PCM-02-Q4
C:\DAIFILE\locatorslpcm0204.cdr 4/29/03 LI-tO
~U?-
~
- - -~
- - ~~
01Y OF
[HUlA VISTA
ATTACHMENT A
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Planning & Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
(619)69 I -510 I
Development Processing
Application Form - Type B
Page One
II TYPE OF REVIEW REOUESTED (staff use only) Case No.: peA;( -~;2 -tJL./
o General Plan Amendment o Zone Change / / /If /03 Be.
Filing Date: By:
o General Development Plan o Tentative Subdivision Assigned Planner: PC:
o Amendment Map Receipt No.:
~ SPNSpecific Plan o Annexation Project Acct: A~. -,l.f':;
0 Amendment Deposn Acct: O().- ref'/-
o Redevelopment o Other: Related Cases: IS .-0 ~ - tJtJ{p
0 Amendment SPECIFIC PLAN OZA Q(PUblic Hearing
IAPPLICANT INFORMATION I
Applicant Name KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS, LLC Phone No.
OTA Y MESA VENTURES I, LLC 801-582-5347 I 801-541-0953
303-763-8500 Ex!. 11 I 303-807-3969-
Applicant Address 1445 CANTERBURY DR., SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84108
141 UNION BLVD., LAKEWOOD, CO 80228
Applicant's Interest in Property If applicant Is not owner, owne(s authorlzaflon
~Own o Lease ~ In Escrow o Option to purchase Is required to process requesf. See signature
on Page Two.
Engineer/Agent HOOPER KNOWLTON III 801-582-5347/801-541-0953
ERIC SWANSON 303-763-8500 ext. 11 /303-807-3969 _
ngineer/Agent Address 1445 CANTERBURY DR., SALT LAKE CITY, UT, 84108
141 UNION BLVE.. SUTIE 330. LAKEWOOD. CO 80228
IGENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION (for all types) I
Project Name I Proposed Land Use(s):AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP
CHULA VISTA AUTO PARK NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN BUS TRANSIT PARKING
General Description of Proposed Project
(Please use Appendix A to provide a full description and Justification for the prOject)
SEE PROJECT DESCRIPTION STATEMENT
SEE PROJECT JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT
..
ISUBJECT PROPERTY INFORMATION (for all types) Ii
Location/:itreet Address
MAIN STREET BETWEEN BRANDYWINE AND MAXELL RD.
Assessor Parcel No. (ANoch lisl11 necessarYJI Total Acreage Redevelopment Area llf applicabie)
1644-041-01 thru 14; & 17 thru 19 38.81 acr YES 90 - 02 I
I Plannea community (if applicable) I
Current General Plan Designation rcurrenr Lone ueslgnOTlon
INDUSTRIAL / COMMERCIAL
,
I-..;urrent Land Use lis tnls In Montgomery :iY.) J
V ACANT LAND
FORM B. /pAGE 1 OF 2)
4-11
11i99
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Planning & Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
(619)691-5101
Development Processing
Application Form - Type B
Page Two
::nv OF
-.... .LllA VISTA
I (staff use onlv)
Case No.:
IGENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN I
General Development Plan Name
Total Acres
ProDOsed Land Uses
Commercial: 38.81 Acres Industrial: 38.81 Acres
Parks: Acres Schools: Acres
Community Purpose: Acres Circulation: Acres
Public/Quasi: Acres Open Space: Acres
Residential Range
Single Family Detached'---_to Units Acres
Single Family Attached: __to Units Acres
Duplexes: to Units Acres
--
Apartments: to Units Acres
--
Condominiums: to Units Acres
--
Totals: to Units Acres
--
19ENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT I
f )sed Land Use Designation
Please state why the General Plan should be changed
NOT APPLICABLE
IANNEXATION I
Prezoning I ~ . ~-.J l~eT, No.
NOT APPLICABLE
ITENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP I
Subdivision Name I CV Tract No.
Minimum Lot Size NO. OT unITs Average Lot Size
IWNE CHANGE NOT APPLICABLE I
o Rezoning 0 Prezoning o Setback Proposed Zoning
HOOPERKNOWLTONIP '-~~
j5' iJplicant or Agent Name Ap~ A 't:;e't'CI~
01' A Y MESA VENTURES I, LLC
Print Owner Name Owner Signature
(Required if Applicant is not Owner)
4 - I 2....
~""_I~7"" '7~'! ,zaJ}t
ate .'
Date
07/00
Appendix A
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND JUSTIFICATION
PROJECT NAME: CHULA VISTA AUTO PARK NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN
KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS, LLC
APPLICANT NAME: OTAYMESA VENTURES II, LLC
Please describe fully the proposed project, any and all construction that may be
accomplished as a result of approval of this project and the project's benefits to yourself,
the property, the neighborhood and the City of Chula Vista. Include any details
necessary to adequately explain the scope and/or operation of the proposed project.
You may include any background information and supporting statements regarding the
reasons for, or appropriateness of, the application. Use an addendum sheet if
necessary.
For all Conditional Use Permits or Variances, please address the required "Findings" as
listed in listed in the Application Procedural Guide.
Description & Justification.
SEE PROJECT DESCRIPTION STATEMENT
SEE PROJECT JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT
4 _/3
\
Appendix B
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments,
- campaign contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City
Juncil, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having financial interest in the property which is the subject of the
application or the contract, e.g., owner applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
OT A Y MESA VENTURESn, LLC
KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS, LLC
2. If any person" identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest
in the partnership.
NOT APPLICABLE
3. If any person" identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of
any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of
the trust.
NOT APPLICABLE
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff,
Boards, Commissions, Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No
If yes, please indicate person(s):
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or
independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a
Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No X If yes, state which
Councilmember(s):
(NOTE: ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES AS NECES
Date: AUGUST 9TH, 2002
pplicant ,tJ~
,
~ HOOPER KNOWLTON III '
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
. Person is defined as' "Any individual, firm, co-partnership,joint venture, association, social dub. freaternal organization, corporation.
estate, trust, receiver. syndicate, this and any other county. city and co~n;ry. city municipality, district. or other political subdivision. or any
other group or comhination acting as a unit. " q - I 'f-
PROJECT JUSTIFICATION
CHULA VISTA AUTO PARK NORTH
SPECIFIC PLAN
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
The justifications for the Chula Vista Auto Park North Specific Plan in Chula Vista, California,
are as follows:
DEMAND FOR AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP PROPERTY
Presently there is a demand for automobile dealerships property in Chula Vista. This is
underscored by the fact that both Daimler Chrysler and Toyota have determined that the
Chula Vista area and population basis will support new dealerships. Toyota spend nearly
18 months analyzing the market area and dynamics as they "cleared" the area for a potential
dealership. Their announcement on May 16th, 2002, that a new Toyota dealership "point"
would be awarded to Chula Vista underscores the present demand for automobile dealership
development and expansion of the present Chula Vista Auto Mall. Additionally, this is
supported by Chryslers desire to have a new dealership which is south of their present Dodge
/ Chrysler dealerships in National City.
ECONOMIC
Since the closure of the Darling Delaware rendering facility in 1982, the Darling property
has provided the City of Chula Vista with virtually no economic tax base beyond a raw
ground value. AB a result the City has had minimal property tax from this 38.81 acre
property. The current property tax roll for the 18 lots contained in the 38.81 acre site owned
by Otay Mesa Ventures II, LLC, is $26,266.92. The proposed Chula Vista Auto Park North
property will have an economic valuation in excess $30,000,000 upon completion of all
dealership construction and economic stabilization. If the property tax mill levy is .085%,
the base property tax yield for the property will provide the City of Chula Vista with and
annual revenue of $267, 750, or a ten-fold increase in property taxes. Considering
only the economic basis of the proposed development should provide the City with
justification to approve the Chula Vista Auto Park North Expansion. The greater economic
benefit to the City of Chula Vista is the City's participation in the sales tax revenue. It is
anticipated that the proposed dealerships in the Chula Vista Auto Mall expansion will have
a combined annual sales revenue in excess of$100,000,000. It is anticipated that the taxable
revenue will exceed $75,000,000. With the City's 1% sales tax participation, the City
should anticipate sales tax revenue of approximately $750,000. Therefore, the
combined property tax and sales tax revenue should exceed $1,000,000 to the City
of Chula Vista.
4-(~
Project Justification
Chula Vista Auto Park North Expansion
August 8'", 2002
Page 2
TAX INCREMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
Further economic incentive for the projects justification is that the property lies within the
City of Chula Vista's Redevelopment District 90-02, created in April of 1993. Because the
property is within an RDA district, the increase in property tax valuation will significantly
add to the RDA's tax increment and thereby further support the RDA's ability to sponsor
redevelopment of areas within the RDA's boundaries. This continued effort on the part of
the RDA to upgrade the economic basis of the RDA district supports the purpose for the
RDA in assisting the economic development of the City of Chula Vista.
INCREASED EMPLOYMENT BASE FOR THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Given the approximate 158,400 to 200,000 square feet of anticipated dealership and
dealership support services, that is contemplated in the proposed development, the range of
employment will be between 150 to 300 employees. This increased employment basis
provides additional justification for the approval of the proposed project.
IMPROVEMENT OF BLIGHTED AREA and RAW GROUND UTILIZATION
Since the formation of the Redevelopment District 90-02 in April of 1993, there have been
a number of economic improvements to the RDA district. The construction of the Fuller
Honda & Ford automobile dealership together with People's Chevrolet have had a
significant economic impact on the RDA. The utilization of raw undeveloped ground has
added to the economic basis of the RDA and provided increased property values.
Additionally, the sales tax revenue generated by the automobile sales has enhanced the City
of Chula Vista's overall general fund. The proposed project will add to the improved real
estate values in the immediate area and will provide greater utilization of the existing
property so as to achieve its highest and best use.
VISUAL ENHANCEMENT TO MAIN STREET
As an in-fill property, the proposed project will add significantly to the streetscape of Main
Street. Upon completion, the projects landscape theme along Main Street and the
architectural detail of the buildings will provide a significant improvement to the overall
visual aesthetics of Main Street. The Chula Vista Auto Mall will add to the Cars & Guitars
theme that is being promoted by the Community Development Department.
4-/l,;,
ATTACHMENT B
Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT NAME:
Auto Park North Specific Plan (pCM-02-04)
PROJECT LOCATION:
Main Street Between Brandywine Avenue and Maxwell
Road
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.:
644-041-01 through 14; and 644-041-17 through 19
PROJECT APPLICANT:
Knowlton Realty Advisors, LLC; Otay Mesa Ventures II,
L.L.C.
CASE NO.:
IS-02-006
DRAFT DATE:
March 17, 2003
RCC MEETING:
April 21, 2003
FINAL DATE:
A. Proiect Setting
The project site consists of 18 contiguous parcels on approximately 39 acres of land in an
industrial area located in southern Chula Vista. The project site is located on Main Street
between Brandywine A venue and Maxwell Road in the Otay Valley Redevelopment Area
(please see Exhibit A - Location Map). No animal or plant species listed as rare, threatened,
or endangered by local, State, or Federal regUlatory agencies are known to be present on this
highly disturbed industrial property. The project site was previously used for intensive
industrial uses (including a rendering plant and liquid waste management operation) and has
been subjected to extensive grading.
Land uses surrounding the project site consist of the following:
North: Residential development
South: Vacant industrial land
East: Industrialland
West: Industrialland
B. Proiect Description
The project involves the development of an automobile sales park on the 38.86-acre site and
would be processed by the City of Chula Vista under a specific plan application (PCM-02-
04). The Auto Park North Specjfic Plan calls for the construction of approximately 99,650 to
130,000 square-feet of dealer showrooms and ancillary automobile support buildings ranging
from 8,250 square-feet to 93,450 square-feet. Total developable square-footage will range
from approximately 158,400 square-feet to over 200,000 square-feet. The variable in the
I
'-I -II
project's total buildable square footage is the area of the specific design requirements that
each individual manufacturer and dealership requires.
The Specific Plan includes two site plans, Site Plan Option I and Site Plan Option 2. Both
site plans are identical with respect to the layout for automobile dealerships which front on
Main Street. The difference in the site plans is the proposed lot and building sizes that would
be developed on lots #3 through #7 under Site Plan Option 1. With Site Plan Option I, lots
#3 through #7 would be smaller and would be used for auto dealership support services with
buildings ranging in size from 8,250 square-feet to 16, I 00 square-feet. Under Site Plan
Option 2, lots #3 through #7 would be consolidated into one large lot #3, which would
accommodate a 93,450 square-foot multi-tenant building that would provide automobile
support services. Both site plan options have been analyzed and considered in this document.
C. Compliance with Zouing and Plans
The project site has a zoning designation of Industrial and a General Plan designation of
Limited Industrial (IL). The project site is situated in the Otay Valley Redevelopment Area.
The proposed autopark is consistent with the applicable zoning and General Plan
designations for the property.
D. Public Comments
On January 23, 2003, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners within a
500-foot radius of the project site. The 10-day public comment period ended February 3,
2003; no comments were received.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached Environmental
Checklist form) determined that the proposed project will not have a significant
environmental effect, and the preparatiOIt of an Environmental hnpact Report will not be
required. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section
15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Hazards
Past History of the site
Land use history at the site dates to 1947 when an animal by-products processing plant was
constructed on-site, operated by the Omar Rendering Company (referred to as Omar). The
Omar plant produced meat and tallow by-products until 1962, when it was sold to the Royal
Tallow and Soap Company (referred to as Royal). Royal held the operation for only 3 years,
when it was sold in 1965 to the Darling-Delaware Company (referred to as Darling). Darling
operated the plant until it was closed in 1981. Royal and Darling also used the site as a
processing plant for the production of animal by-products.
The rendering plant was situated in the central-southeast portion of the property. Initially,
the rendering plant wastewater and the wash-down operations wastewater were discharged to
2
L,( - (<i?
the natural drainage system, a tributary to the Otay River. The wastewater contained soluble
proteins and fat. No other solid wastes were generated as a part of the rendering operation.
Some time later, likely in the late 1950s, the plant disposed of its non-hazardous wastewater
into on-site lagoons, as authorized by RWQCB Resolution 59-R2. In the early 1970s, an
aeration system was installed in the wastewater ponds to abate odors. The aeration system
was operated until the plant was counected to the local sewer system in 1978 by RWQCB
Order No. 78-56, which rescinded Resolution 59-R2. After closure of the rendering plant in
1981, all physical structures associated with the plant were removed.
In addition to the .rendering plant, other industrial operations were occurring on-site at the
same time. Between 1958 and 1964, an auto-wrecking yard was operated on the southwest
comer of the site. In the 1950s, Omar operated a fleet of trucks to transport Class I liquid
wastes. These trucks transported liquids from waste-producing companies in the area to the
Mission Bay Sanitary Landfill in San Diego. Three underground storage tanks (USTs) that
contained diesel and gasoline were located north of the rendering plant and were used in
support of the trucking operations. All three tanks were removed in 1987, and one was found
to be leaking. The contaminated soil was removed from the tank excavation and a
groundwater monitoring well was installed down gradient. Subsequently, the County of San
Diego Department of Environmental Health (DEH) closed the UST regulatory case with a
determination of no further action needed for this area.
The Project site was also used as a Class I liquid waste management operation from about
1958 until 1978. Omar constructed Class I waste disposal ponds in the northeastern portion
of the site to receive industrial wastes from third parties (RWQCB Resolution 59-RI5).
Ultimately, six impoundments were built for Class I liquid waste by 1970. Discharge records
at the RWQCB suggest that over 1 rnillion gallons per year of wastes were disposed in the
Class I operation. In August 1978, the site ceased receiving Class I wastes, the residual
fluids were removed from all impoundments, and the impoundments were temporarily
covered with fill soil until a closure plan could be developed.
Discharge records and the results of chemical testing of the soils at the time of impoundment
closure in 1978 indicate that the waste consisted of alkaline and acid fluids, with lesser
amounts of chlorinated solvents, chlorinated pesticides, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs),
petroleum wastes, and organic wastes. Darling operated the Class I facility until 1981.
In about 1981, the liquid contents of the six Class I wastewater ponds were removed and
disposed off-site by the BKK Corporation at their disposal site in West Covina, California.
Following approval of the closure plan by the RWQCB in 1980 (Closure Order 80-06),
underlying impacted soil was excavated and was placed in a clay-lined and capped disposal
cell in the northwest comer of the Project site. The depth of the excavation of the wastewater
ponds ranged from 25 to 35 feet below the bottom of the impoundments.
The site was subsequently graded and clean fill soil was placed over the former pond areas.
The clay-lined containment cell was excavated to depths between 18 and 65 feet below
ground surface before the contaminated soil was placed in it. A 3-foot-thick clay liner was
placed at the bottom of the cell. The sides of the cell were also clay lined during the
placement of the containment structure. Finally, a 3-foot-thick clay cap and an additional
3
4 -/9
cover of soil between 7 to 10 feet thick were placed on the top of the containment structure.
Approximately 130,000 cubic yards of soil were placed in the containment cell.
Following construction of the containment cell, the entire site was then graded into five
distinct topographic zones that still exist today: the lowland terrace adjacent to Main Street;
three upper terraces (Terraces 1, 2, and 3); and the waste cell. A total of approximately
580,000 cubic yards of soil were moved during the entire grading process, including the
130,000 cubic yards of soil that were placed in the containment cell.
In 1986, Darling sold the property to Rio Otay Industrial Properties. Rio Otay subdivided the
property into 17 lots and improved the site by constructing two on-site roads, storm drains,
sewers, water mains, and electrical lines. In 1987, Darling purchased the property back from
Rio Otay, after the RWQCB required a site assessment. In December 1999, Otay Mesa
Ventures 1, LLC purchased the property from Darling. Ownership was subsequently
transferred to Otay Mesa Ventures 11, L.L.C. on May 3, 2002.
Regulatory History of the Site
In April 1995, the California Environmental Protection Agency (CaVEPA) Site Designation
Committee designated the RWQCB to be the lead administering agency for the site pursuant
to Chapter 6.65 of the California Health & Safety Code, Section 25260. The RWQCB
established a consultative working group, consisting of representatives from the California
Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), the County DEH, the City of Chula Vista,
and the California Department ofFish and Game (CDFG).
A$ discussed above, in 1981 the impacted soil from beneath the Class I ponds was placed in a
lined and capped waste cell in the northwest comer of the site (RWQCB Order No. 80-06-
Closure Requirements for the Omar Rendering Company Dumpsite in the Otay River Valley).
The waste cell has since been maintained and monitored per RWQCB Order No. 87-141
(Waste Discharge Requirements for the Omar Rendering Company Closed Class I Disposal
Site, including Technical Change Order No.1, Monitoring and Reporting Program) and
subsequent amendments (RWQCB Order No. 97-40 - Waste Discharge Requirements for
Closure and Post-Closure Maintenance for the Class I Waste Management Containment
Cell, Omar Rendering Facility, Darling International, including the Monitoring and
Reporting Program 97-40). The waste discharge requirements (WDRs) include the
following activities: (I) maintenance of the waste cell, (2) NPDES storm water monitoring
and reporting, and (3) groundwater detection monitoring and reporting.
In regard to past maintenance reports prepared for the waste cell, no significant maintenance
issues have been identified. The waste cell cap and grounds must continue to be maintained
in good condition, and the reports indicate that they have been adequately maintained since
site closure. The second WDR component, the NPDES storm water runoff plan, was
prepared by the IT Corporation in July 2000 and has been implemented.
The third component of the WDRs is the groundwater detection monitoring and reporting
program. This program involves semiannual monitoring of four groundwater wells.
Monitoring activities conducted during the last 15 years have led to the conclusion that the
waste cell has not released constituents of concern to groundwater (IT Corporation 2000).
4 4- - 2.-0
However, RWQCB Order No. 97-40 requires the continuation of groundwater detection
monitoring as a means of confirming that constituents of concern are not being released from
the waste cell..
Residual impacted site soil was known to be present in two locations as described above - in
the area of the former wastewater ponds and encapsulated in the containment cell. Due to the
depth of the buried soil as described above, direct human contact with impacted soil has
historically not been a concern; extensive soil, groundwater, and soil vapor samples were
collected for Darling in 1988, 1989, and 1995. These tests included exploratory borings for
soils and vapor sampling and multiple groundwater investigations, including the installation
of 18 on-site wells and 12 off-site wells.
These site assessment activities detected various chlorinated solvents across the site in the
soil, soil vapor, and groundwater. The collective data were then evaluated in a risk
assessment study prepared by Risk-Based Decisions (1996). Risk-Based Decisions concluded
that residual concentrations of chemicals in the groundwater, soil, and soil vapor did not pose
any significant human health risk for commercial/industrial workers. In a memo dated June
6, 1996, the DTSC concurred with the risk assessment and recommended that a deed
restriction be placed on the property to prevent future use of the site for residential purposes
because residential uses were not evaluated in the risk assessment. The RWQCB requested
that in the unlikely event that impacted soil is encountered during future construction, a Soil
Management Plan be prepared to address future intrusive construction activities. The soils
management plan has been prepared by the applicant and will be administered by the
RWQCB or their designee (County Department of Environmental Health).
In terms of groundwater-related impacts, the estimated depth of groundwater varies due to
the topography of the site and ranges from 30 feet below ground surface in the lowlands of
the site to 85 feet below ground surface in the vicinity of the waste cell, which is at a higher
elevation. The groundwater beneath the site has been impacted with volatile organic
compounds (VOCs), semi volatile organic compounds (SVOCs), and inorganics in varying
degrees. The VOCs have been observed sitewide and off "site to the south and east, but are
mostly concentrated in the vicinity of the former waste ponds. The SVOCs were detected in
two observation wells immediately down gradient of the former Class I ponds. The inorganic
impacts were also detected only in wells closest to the former waste ponds.
Regulatory Status of the Impacted Groundwater
A Work Plan was prepared by the IT Corporation (November 2000) on behalf ofOMV I in
an effort to continue the work begun by Darling, the former property owners, to obtain a
containment zone (CZ) designation for the impacted groundwater at the Project site. A CZ
designation is defined as a specific portion of a water-bearing unit where the RWQCB finds
it is unreasonable to actively remediate impacts to the level that achieves water quality
objectives. In response to Darling's application, the RWQCB prepared a draft Cleanup and
Abatement Order (CAO) to formalize the CZ but asked Darling to provide additional
information before issuing a revised and final CAO. The additional information request
included three items: (1) a comprehensive study of the site hydrogeology, including
verification that the groundwater monitoring wells are providing representative data; (2) a
5 4- - ~I
revised CZ boundary that reflectedoff-site groundwater impacts; and (3) a revised method for
deriving chemical-specific limits for the CZ monitoring.
These items are the subject of the Work Plan. The hydrogeologic investigation conducted by
the IT Corporation indicated that VOCs still occur below and down gradient of the former
Class I ponds, but decrease in concentration with increasing distance from the ponds. The
wells located at the perimeter of the site had nondetectable concentrations or had trends
toward decreasing concentrations ofVOCs.
Risk-Based Decisions (1996) had previously determined that it was not reasonable or
economically feasible to achieve water quality objectives by means of active remediation.
They determined that residual VOC impacts in the soil and groundwater cannot be
economically remediated, despite source removal conducted earlier, as described above, and
that the residual soil and groundwater VOC impacts do not pose a significant vapor risk to
site occupants. They further determined that remediation of VOC and total dissolved solids
(IDS) impacts is not practical for a number of reasons, including the natural IDS of the
aquifer that makes the groundwater nonpotable; the aquifer characteristics; and the tight,
clayey soils that underlie much of the area. Monitoring well data indicate that groundwater
concentrations have been stable or decreasing and are the reason the former and present
owners of the property have pursued a CZ designation for the site.
A CAO was issued by the RWQCB on March 27,2003. The CAO formalizes the voluntary
semi-annual groundwater monitoring program that has been conducted on the site to date;
requires additional off-site groundwater monitoring; and details the steps necessary to
evaluate remedial options and ultimately support a revised CZ application by the current
owners. Ihe CAO also requires the owner to post financial assurances for the estimated
costs of additional groundwater monitoring and long-term operation and maintenance of the
waste cell.
On April 9, 2003, the RWQCB authorized the Executive Officer to enter into a Polanco Act
agreement with the City of Chula Vista. A Remedial Action Plan has been prepared to
support the Polanco Act application. Upon completion of the soils requirements outlined in
the RAP, a No Further Action (NFA) determination for soils will be issued by the RWQCB.
It is anticipated that the work necessary to obtain the NF A for soils will be completed by Fall
2003. Groundwater assessment and monitoring will continue under the RAP, which was
prepared in conformance with the CAO, until the RWQCB determines that all obligations
have been met.
Level of Impact
The RWQCB is the lead agency for the continued groundwater assessment and monitoring of
the site. Future remediation of the site, if required by the R WQCB, can be performed even if
the property were developed, because remedial alternatives addressing groundwater pollution
could be implemented in a very small footprint and would not result in human health risks.
The construction and relatively minor grading activities associated with the Auto Park North
project will not adversely affect the impacted ground water, since ground water is located
well below the site. According to the above mentioned risk assessment report prepared by
Risk Based Decisions (1996), which conclusions were accepted by DISC, the site is suitable
.6 4-2-1-
for commercial/industrial uses, and its development will not present any adverse impacts due
to soil vapors and contaminated soils. hnplementation of the Cleanup and Abatement (CAO)
Order issued by the RWQCB on March 27,2003 (Attaclunent "A") will result in a less than
. significant impact to ground water quality. hnpacts due to the potential exposure of people
to hazardous materials during grading of the site can mitigated to a level of less than
significant through the mitigation measure outlined in Section F requiring a soils
management plan.
Air Qualitv
Based upon the Air Quality hnpact Analysis prepared by Edaw dated March 7, 2003, the
proposed project will generate an incremental increase in short- and long-term emissions as
development occurs. Air pollutants will be generated during both the construction and
operation phases of the project. Fugitive dust would be created during construction
operations as a result of clearing, earth movement, and travel on unpaved surfaces. Although
air quality impacts resulting from construction-related operations are potentially significant,
they are considered short-term in duration since construction-related activities are a relatively
short-term activity. Dust control measures implemented during grading operations would be
regulated in accordance with the rules and regulations of the County of San Diego Air
Pollution Control District (APCD) and the California Air Resources Board. Construction
operations will be subject to the mitigation measures outlined below in Section F, which will
mitigate impacts to less than significant.
The proposed automobile dealership would generate vehicle travel and, therefore, a potential
for oroiect related mobile source emissions during operation. The air quality technical study
performed by EDA W, dated March 7, 2003, demonstrates that the emissions occurring as a
result of the operation of the Auto Park North project will not exceed significance threshold
standards. This project has been identified in the Five-Year Implementation Plan for the area
as well as applicable environmental reviews. As this and other projects in the Otay Valley
Road Redevelopment Area are included in the City's General Plan, they are included in the
SANDAG projections for the region, which are included in the APCD's air quality
projections and evaluations. As a result, the proposed project will not result in cumulatively
considerable impacts on regional air quality.
Geoohvsical
The approximately 39-acre site was graded and terraced by a previous property owner in the
early 1980s. Minimal on-site grading would be required for the Project. The preliminary
grading plan calls for a balanced cut and fill grading operation. The estimated volume of soil
to be moved during grading is anticipated to be 126,900 cubic yards; the objective is to
balance the overall site grading.
Geological investigations of the project site were conducted in order to evaluate the on-site
geology and potential geologic hazards that might affect the proposed project. According to
the preliminary geotechnical study prepared by Petra Geotechnical, Inc. dated December 13,
2002, the nearest known active faults to the project site are the Rose Canyon fault located
approximately 16 kilometers to the west of the site, and the offshore Elsinore Fault Zone,
located approximately 70 kilometers east of the project site. According to a 1986 report by
7 ~ - 2..3
Geocon, a strand of the relatively inactive La Nacion fault is located approximately 600 feet
west of the site. Geocon indicates that there is a steeply dipping, north-south trending fault in
an existing cut slope in the northwestern comer of the site that is a secondary feature of the
La Nacion fault. According to the Geocon study, the probability of a significant seismic
event on the La Nacion fault during the life of the project is remote. Grading of the site wili
be subject to the mitigation measures in Section F below, which will mitigate impacts to
below a level of significance.
Water OualitvIDrainage
The project site is not located within the 100-year floodplain; no flooding impacts would
result from the development of the site with the uses proposed in the specific plan.
The preliminary drainage study for the site indicates that existing storm drain improvements
located within Delniso Court, Roma Court, and Main Street are adequately sized to handle
ultimate flow generated by the site when the project is fuliy built out. According to the
Engineering Division of the Public Works Department, the proposed preliminary on-site
drainage improvements appear to be adequate to handle the increased drainage that would be
generated by the project.
The proposed project would not adversely affect ground water quality. As stated above,
.impacted ground water under the site would continue to be monitored via monitoring wells
located on site. Future remediation of impacted ground water (if required by the RWQCB)
could be accomplished in accordance with the Cleanup and Abatement Order issued by the
RWQCB in March of 2003. The development of the auto park would not preclude
remediation efforts in the future should they be deemed to be necessary by the R WQCB.
Compliance with National Poliutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Order No.
2001 and implementation of appropriate Best Management Practices (BMP's) to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer are required during and after construction to prevent erosion
and sedimentation, as weli as the discharge of other poliutants into the downstream storm
drain system. NPDES Order No. 2001-01 requires all parking lots of 5,000 square-feet or
more, or with 15 or more parking spaces, and potentially exposed to urban runoff to provide
appropriate post-construction BMP's.
All grading operations will be performed in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Grading
Ordinance (Ordinance 1797, as amended). Short-term erosion of the cut and fili slopes would
be reduced to a less than significant level by the installation of temporary desilting and
erosion control devices to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. These devices include
desilting basins, berms, hay bales, silt fences, dikes, and shoring. Protective devices wili be
provided at every storm drain inlet to prevent sediment from entering the storm drain system.
Additional erosion control measures wili be instalied as required by the City Engineer.
Compliance with NPDES Order No. 2001-01, through the implementlltion of appropriate
BMP's, as specified below in Section F, would mitigate potentialiy significant water quality
impacts to below a level of significance.
8 4 -L<f
Traffic and Circulation
A traffic study dated December 13, 2002, was performed for the project by Lindscott, Law,
and Greenspan. The traffic study analyzed the traffic impacts associated with the
approximately 8,000 vehicle trips that would be added to area roadways as a result of the
project. The traffic study indicated that the project would result in direct significant traffic
impacts (LOS F) to the intersections of Main StreetIRoma Court and Main StreeVDelniso
Court. The traffic study indicated that the installation of traffic signals at these intersections
would mitigate the impacts to these intersections to a level of less than significant (LOS B).
The traffic report also states that significant traffic safety impacts can be mitigated through
the construction of a westbound right turn lane on Main Street at the Roma and Delniso
Court intersections.
A cumulative traffic impact would occur at the southbound 1-805 and Main Street on-ramp.
The traffic study indicates an existing LOS D at this intersection in the p.m. peak hour. The
existing+project+cumulative scenario indicates a level of service of "E" during the p.m. peak
hour at this on-ramp. This impact would be mitigated to a level ofless than significant (LOS
D) through the contribution of traffic development impact fees toward the construction of an
additional westbound left turn lane on Main Street at the southbound 1-805 on-ramp. All
traffic-related impacts can be mitigated to a level of less than significant through
implementation of the mitigation measures outlined in Section F.
Biological Resources
The existence of mature trees on the site, as identified in the biological survey performed by
EDA W, dated June 2001, results in potential impacts to raptors that may be nesting in said
trees during their breeding Season which is from December I through July 31. Also, the
project could result in potential impacts to coastal California gnatcatcher due to Diegan
Coastal Sage Scrub habitat located to the north and northeast of the site. The biological
survey indicated that no sensitive plant or animal species were detected on site, and that no
gnatcatchers were observed onsite or off site. The mitigation measures in Section F reduce
impacts to sensitive species to a level of less than significant.
Aesthetics
The Project would not result in significant negative aesthetic impacts to the area surrounding
the project site. The development would be similar in scale and form with existing industrial,
commercial, and auto dealership uses in the vicinity. Additionally, the Project site would be
landscaped to provide some screening of the buildings to be constructed on the site. Views in
the general area are predominantly urban in character, as exemplified by existing
commercial, industrial, and residential development that is in the immediate vicinity of the
site. Development of the site will be subject to the review and approval of the City ofChula
Vista Design Review Committee. For these reasons, there would be no significant impacts to
the aesthetics of the general area as a result of this Project.
The Project would create a new source of light and glare on the currently undeveloped
property. Lighting would be brightest near the auto dealership buildings and would range
9 4-2..~
from 10 to 80 foot-candles immediately adjacent to the source. In the center of the site,
lighting would range from 5 to 40 foot-candles adjacent to the source. Toward the back of
the Project site, illumination would range from 0 near the northern property boundary to
approximately 40 foot-candles adjacent to the source. Foot-candles would range from 0 to a
maximum of 157.1 at the source (on the light pole), with an average of 24.6 foot-candles for
the entire site (Spaulding Lighting, Inc. 2002).
Light poles would be 22 feet in height. There would be a total of 259 lighting fixtures
provided at the site, with four different tyPes of fixtures used. As a result of the proposed
lighting arrangement, there would be no off-site spill oflighting at the property line. Off-site
properties to the north would be further protected from lighting due to the elevational
difference between the Project site and the residential area, a difference of approximately 80
feet. Residences are located approximately 150 feet away from the property line of the site.
Aesthetic impacts of the project are mitigated to less than significant through the mitigation
measures outlined in Section F below.
F. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Imoacts
Hazards
1. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit a soils management
plan to the RWQCB for review, approval, and implementation by the RWQCB or their
appointed designee, the County Department of Environmental Health.
2. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer that grading of the waste cell parcel is consistent with requirements
ofthe RWQCB as contained in the WDR permit for the waste cell, as may be modified to
allow additional soil to be placed on the cell.
Air Oualitv
3. Project construction shall implement enhanced dust control measures to maintain a less
than significant impact associated with air quality during construction. Dust control
measures shall be called out as notes on the project grading planes).
4. All unpaved construction areas shall be sprinkled with water or other acceptable dust
control agents during dust-generating activities to reduce dust emissions. Additional
watering or dust control agents shall be applied during dry weather or on windy days
until dust emissions are not visible.
5. Trucks hauling dirt and debris shall be properly covered to reduce windblown dust and
spills.
6. A 20-mile-per-hour speed limit on unpaved surfaces in connection with the Project shall
be enforced.
10 4--2-10
7. On dry days, dirt and debris spilled onto paved surfaces shall be swept up immediately to
reduce fe-suspension of particulate matter caused by vehicle movement. Approach routes
to the site shall be cleaned daily of construction-related dirt in dry weather.
8. On-site stockpiles of excavated material shall be covered or watered.
9. Following construction, disturbed areas shall be hydroseeded, landscaped, or developed
as quickly as possible and as directed by the City to reduce dust generation.
10. Heavy-duty construction equipment with modified combustion/fuel injection systems for
emissions control shall be utilized during grading and construction activities. Catalytic
reduction for gasoline-powered equipment shall be used. Also, construction equipment
shall be equipped with prechamber diesel engines or equivalent together with proper
maintenance and operation to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxide, to the extent available
and feasible.
Geoohvsical
11. Prior to the issuance of grading permits for the site, a soils report with foundation
recommendations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for review and
approval. Due to the existence of the waste cell on site, an accurate site plan showing any
building locations relative to the waste cell will be required with the soils study.
12. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit further evaluation of
the existing cut slope at the northwest of the site, addressing the north-south trending
fault line identified in the Geocon report dated 1986.
Water Oualitv
13. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall complete all applicable Forms
and comply with the City Of Chula Vista's Strom Water Management Standards
Requirements Manual.
14. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction
of the City Engineer that Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be implemented to
prevent pollution of the storm. water conveyance systems, both during and after
construction. Permanent storm water requirements shall be incorporated into the project
design and be shown on the project plans. Any construction and non-structural BMP
requirements that cannot be shown graphically must be either noted or stapled on the
plans.
15. The project shall comply with the requirements of the NPDES. Municipal Permit Order
No. 2001-01. According to said permit, development of the Project is a Priority
Development Project. Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMP) and
Numeric Sizing Criteria are applicable to this project. Adequate provisions shall be made
in the planning and design stages of the project to facilitate compliance with such
requirements.
11 4-2....7
16. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a water quality study shall be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer that demonstrates compliance with the requirements of the
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction and Municipal
Permits, including Stantard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMP) and Numeric
Sizing Criteria requirements, in accordance with the City's Manual.
Traffic
17. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall contribute to the Traffic
Development Impact Fund (TDIF) toward the construction of a second westbound left-
turn lane to be provided at the Main Street/I-805 southbound ramp intersection.
18. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with
the City Of Chula Vista to design, construct, and secure a fully actuated traffic signal,
including interconnect wiring, mast arms, signal heads, and associated equipment,
underground improvements, standards and luminaries at the Main Street/Delniso Court
intersection.
19. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with
the City Of Chula Vista to design, construct, and secure a fully actuated traffic signal,
including interconnect wiring, mast arms, signal heads, and associated equipment,
underground improvements, standards and luminaries at the Main StreetJRoma Court
intersection.
20. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with
the City Of Chula Vista to design, construct, and secure a 120 foot westbound right turn
lane on Main Street at the Roma Court and Delniso Court intersections.
Biological resources
21. Prior to the removal or alteration of any mature trees or commencement of construction
activities during the raptor nesting season, identified as December 1 through July 31 in
the Draft Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-
construction survey of such trees as well as those within the construction impact area
established by the biologist. In the event that a nest(s) is found during the survey,
appropriate construction setbacks deemed appropriate by a qualified biologist to protect
young birds until they are no longer dependent upon the nest shall be established. No
restrictions with respect to tree removal or construction setbacks shall apply outside the
raptor nesting season.
22. During the gnatcatcher breeding season, between February 15 "and August 15, noise
levels generated by project-related construction activities shall not exceed 60 decibels
(dB) Leq within any area containing an occupied nest or, if no occupied nest exists,
within the area occupied by a potential breeding pair, in order to prevent construction
noise from negatively impacting breeding success. Where the ambient noise level is
greater than 60 dBI Leq, the ambient noise level shall not be exceeded as a result of
project-related construction. If an occupied nest or potential breeding pair is identified
during a pre-construction survey, noise mitigation techniques, such temporary noise walls
12 4 - L?f
or berms or modifications to construction activities, deemed necessary to attenuate
construction noise levels to 60 dBI Leq or less, shall be formulated by a qualified
biologist and qualified acoustician, shall be implemented during breeding season. The
qualified acoustician shall monitor the success of any noise attenuation measures that are
implemented; where a violation of the noise level limit is identified, the acoustician shall
immediately notify the Environmental Review Coordinator so that construction activities
can be halted or reduced to avoid further exceedances of the limit until sufficient alternate
or modified noise attenuation measures, if any, can be implemented.
Aesthetics
23. The applicant shall install lighting as illustrated on the lighting plan prepared by
Spaulding Lighting, dated December 14, 2002. Project lighting shall be consistent with
the City of Chula Vista lighting regulations (Section 17.28 of the CYMe) and shall not
spill onto neighboring residential properties.
G. Consultation
I. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista:
Marilyn Ponseggi, Planning and Building
Paul Hellman, Planning and Building
Alex Al-Agha, Engineering
Frank Rivera, Public Works Department-Engineering Division
Jeff Moneda, Engineering
Muna Cuthbert, Engineering
Sylvester Evetovich, Engineering
Majed Al-Ghafry, Engineering
Bill ffilrich, Public WorkS Department-Operations Division
Raymond Pe, Community Development
Ben Guerrero, Community Development
2. Documents
City of Chula Vista General Plan, 1989
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
13 4-21
3. Initial Study
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any comments
received on the Initial Study and any comments received during the public review period
for this Mitigated Negative Declaration. The report reflects the independent judgement
of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review of
this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 91910.
0~O~~.
Marilyn R. . Ponseggi
Environmental Review Coordinator
Date: May 8, 2003
14
4-3-0
W
:J
Z
W
~
W
Z
~
Z
~
lD
,~ / ""J I "l
~ If Ir (
~ -f' -- ~I~
r --I \-1-' -{ J- H '[ - f-
_ l ~ r-r-- RDBINHO~D r
fiJ t:f'-11 POINT ..--r\--
.q "-- '-ll-, 70~?O~ ). :1 I
Zi-f'''''''' e- 1/ ~ 'I HH
_ ~ J lJif: n /"D \J.y
't!J~ ~ 1-, 1 ;--," "
VACANT I-l t- -j I-' -j t
-= =---,-.
-= --,
/1:::/ '-'
~~~~
~~~~ ~ ~~~~
;;;;~~~
~~~~~;~
OTAY LANDFILL
;J
~
~
mw
\ ~
/ 7
c
<(
0
a::
'-... .J
.I ncs CT _______ iil
~
:;;
MAIN STREET
;]~
PARK
~~~
~/ !
VACANT ~
"'- ECT
lOCATION
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT KNOWLTON REALlY ADVISORS, LLC. PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPUCANl: OTAY MESA VENTURES I, LLC.
PROJECT NORTH OF MAIN STREET BETWEEN Request: Proposal to a-eate 11 lots for auto mall expansion
ADDRESS: BRANOYWINE AV. AND MAXWELL RD. on approximate 38.75 acres. The development will consist
of: 11 new auto related bundings fClrtotal of 158,400
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: square feet.
NORTH No Scale 18-02-006 Related Case: PCM-02-04
C:\DAIFILE\locators\lS02006.cdr 01/21/03
4-3(
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1.
Name of Proponent:
Knowlton Realty Advisors
2.
Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
3.
Address and Phone Number of Proponent:
1445 Canterbury Drive
Salt Lake City, Utah 84108
Attn: Hooper Knowlton III
Phone: (801) 582-5347
Fax: (801) 583-8939
4.
Name of Proposal:
Auto Park North Specific Plan
5.
Date of Checklist:
April 10, 2003
Project Description
The Auto Park North Specific Plan is a proposal to develop the property at 4826 Main Street in the
southeastern portion of the City of Chula Vista. The site currently consists of graded and terraced pads, a
benn along the northern boundary, and one paved access road that currently serves as a temporary automobile
storage facility. The 38.86 acre project site was formerly an animal rendering facility and liquid waste
management operation that was closed in the early 1980s. A discussion of the land use history of the Project
site is included in the Environmental Checklist Form.
The main access to the Project site is from Main Street with two secondary access points of ingress and egress
at Roma Court and Delniso Court. The intersection of Main Street at Roma Court would be the main Auto
Park North entry drive and focal point for this Project. Traffic lights are planned for both Roma Court and
Delniso Court to regulate the flow of project traffic to and from Main Street.
--
Potentially 81_ Lou ....
-- u.,." SlpUkaDt No
Im_ MId...... Im_ Im_
I. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would
the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation 0 0 0 IllI
or zoning?
b) Conflict with applicable 0 0 0 IllI
environmental plans or policies
adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
over the Project?
1
.4-3~
c) Affect agricultural resources or
operations (e. g., impacts to soils or
farmlands, or impacts from
incompatible land uses)?
d) Disrupt or divide the physical
arrangement of an established
community (including a low-income
or minority community)?
o
o
o
IlII
o
o
o
IlII
Comments:
a) The Project would not conflict with the City of Chula Vista's General Plan designation or zoning
designation. The property is designated in the Chula Vista General Plan as Limited Industrial, and
has a zoning designation of Industrial. The Industrial Zone allows the sale oflarge scale or bulky
items such as. automobiles. The Project would include auto dealership/auto inventory facilities,
customer parking, and auto-related uses. These uses would be compatible with the land use
designation and with uses in the surrounding area, which are oriented to commercial and light
industrial uses. The existing Chula Vista Auto Mall is located in the Industrial Zone, just to the
west of the project site on the south side of Main Street. The Auto Park North Specific Plan calls
for automobile sales and related uses consistent with the project plans.
Two development options are proposed. The Specific Plan identifies 11 lots to be created on the
property in Option 1. Under Option I, Lot 1 would be for an auto dealership with associated
vehicle parking, a showroom, offices, and service bays. Lot 2 would be for excess inventory
parking. Lots 3 through 7 would be for auto-related uses, and each lot would contain a small
building and associated parking. Lots 8 and 9 would be designated for inventory parking. Lots 10
and 11 would each contain an automobile dealership with vehicle parking, a showroom, offices,
and service bays. Specific businesses that would use these lots would be determined later in the
planning process from a list of approved uses. Table I outlines the relevant project data for these
lots using Option 1.
JDtion
Lot Gross Bldg. Sq. Parking Proposed Uses
Number Acreaee Ft. Spaces
Lot 1 4.41 25,650 322 Auto dealership with service department and inventory &
customer parking
Lot 2 5.0 None 428 Inventory parking
Lot 3 2.4 16.100 50 Auto related commercial/retail
Lot 4 1.26 11,250 39 Auto related commercial/retail
lotS 1.26 .10,500 39 Auto related commercial/retail
loU 1.24 8,250 36 Auto related commercial/retail
Lot 7 2.35 12,650 56 Auto related commercial/retail
Lot 8 2.38 None 340 Inventory parking
Lot 9 1.89 None 236 Inventory parking
Lot 10 6.67 39,800 468 Auto dealership with service department and inventory &
, customer DarkiDl!.
Lotll 6.45 34,200 456 Auto dealership with service department and inventory &
customer Darkimz.
Total 35.31 158,400 2,470
Table 1
Proposed Specific Plan Uses
o . 1
2
4 -33
Under Option 2, Lot I would be used for an auto dealership with associated vehicle parking, a
showroom, offices, and service bays. Lot 2 would be for excess inventory parking. Lot 3 would
be for auto-related uses, with one large building covering much of the lot, and with associated
parking. Lots 4 and 5 would be designated for inventory parking. Lots 6 and 7 would each
contain an automobile dealership with vehicle parking, a showroom, offices, and service bays.
Specific businesses that would use these lots would be determined from the list of approved uses
later in the planning process. Table 2 outlines the relevant project data for these lots under Option
2.
Table 2
Proposed Specific Plan Uses
Option 2
Lot Gross Bldg. Sq. Parking Proposed Uses
Number Acreal!e Ft. Suaces
Loll 4.41 25,650 322 Auto dealership with service department and inventory &
customer Darkin~
Lot 2 5.0 None 428 Inventory parkine.
Lot 3 8.49 93,450 205 Auto related commercial/retail
Lot 4 2.38 None 340 inventory oarkin.
lotS 1.89 None 236 Inventory parking
Lot 6 6.67 39,800 468 Auto dealership with service department and inventory &
customer parking
Lot 7 6.45 34,200 458 Auto dealership with service depanment and inventory &
customer parking
Total 35.29 193,100 2,457
As the Project is compatible with the City of Chula Vista General Plan and Zoning Ordinance,
there would be no conflicts with the General Plan or zoning designation from the proposed use.
.
.
b) The Project would not conflict with applicable environmental plans or policies adopted by agencies
with jurisdiction over the Project. Among the plans and policies reviewed were the City of Chula
Vista General Plan (1995), the City of Chula Vista Redevelopment Plan for the Otay Valley Road
Redevelopment Project Area (1985), and the Otay River Valley Regional Park Concept Plan
(2001).
Chula Vista General Plan (1995)
The Project is consistent with the Land Use Element of the Chula Vista General Plan because it
would provide auto dealership development to support the economic base of the city (Goal I,
Objective I - Identify potential areas for location of new light manufacturing and businesses and
facilitate their development; Goal I , Objective 4 - Continue the orderly industrial redevelopment
of the Otay Valley Road area). The Project site and surrounding areas are also identified as the
Otay Mesa Industrial Park in the Land Use Element.
In regard to the Circulation Element, the Project site fronts on Main Street, designated as a Six-
Lane Prime Arterial on the City of Chula Vista Circulation Element map. Major improvements
have been' made to this portion of Otay Valley Road, from the Interstate 805 (1-805) interchange
eastward past the Project site. Therefore, the Project is consistent with the Circulation Element
because improvements to this street, which provides primary site acces~, have substantially been
completed, and any future improvements needed as a result of this Project would be completed as
a condition of Project approval.
3
4-3Y
The Project was reviewed for consistency with the Eastern Territories Area Plan and no conflicts
were identified. The plan inventoried 222 acres of existing industrial uses and 819 acres of
planned industrial uses within the 37,600-acre planning area. The Project would support future
industrial uses on this 38-acre parcel that are consistent with the plan.
City of Chula Vista Redevelopment Plan for the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project
Area (1985)
The Project is located in the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area (OVRRPA), which
establishes goals, policies, and objectives intended to eliminate blight and provide for orderly
growth, conservation, amenities, and economic development in the Otay Valley Road area. The
plan sets urban design standards for the OVRRPA, as well as specific land use goals that are
supportive of industrial uses. These uses include light manufacturing, warehouses, distribution
centers, research institutions, and product development plants. All land uses permitted in the I-L
Limited Industrial zone are permitted in the OVRRP A.
The Project is consistent with the OVRRPA because it proposes uses that are consistent with the
General Plan, zoning classifications, and with the OVRRP A plan that allows for these uses in this
area.
Otay Valley Regional Park Concept Plan
The Project would not impact recreational parks, plans, or programs because the project site is
currently vacant and zoned for industrial use. No significant impacts to the Otay Valley Regional
Park Concept Plan or to park plans or programs have been identified, as the site is located to the
north of the park across Main Street.
Multiple Species Conservation Plan (MSCP)
The project site located on the north side of Main Street approximately 700 feet away from the
MSCP preserve area located south of Main Street. The project would not impact the MSCP
preserve.
c) The Project would not affect agricultural resources or operations because the property is vacant
land, has been previously graded, and was used for industrial purposes as an animal rendering and
hazardous waste facility between 1947 and 1981. As a part of the site remediation effort,
described in detail below, the contents of the former Class I hazardous waste ponds were removed
from the site and were disposed at an approved Class I facility. Subsequent to their removal, the
property was graded and the underlying soils were redeposited into an on-site, clay-lined,
hazardous waste cell in the northwest comer of the property to remediate the impacts of the soils
by the hazardous waste ponds. There are no present agricultural uses on the site and no
agricultural uses have been identified in the immediate vicinity of the Project site that would be
affected by this Project. Additionally, the property is zoned for industrial uses, not agricultural
uses.
d) The Project would not disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of the surrounding community
because the proposed use is compatible with the surrounding area. Existing uses are primarily
light industrial or commercial, including properties immediately adjacent to the east and to the
west. There is a proposal for an automobile dealership on the property directly south of the
Project site across Otay Valley Road, a use similar to the proposed use and to the two auto
4
4 -2S"'
II.
dealerships farther to the west. Other nearby uses include light industrial buildings to the west and
east, a private landfill operated by Allied Industries to the northeast, and other land zoned as
industrial in the vicinity. The City of Chula Vista has constructed a Public Works facility on
industrial land adjacent to the Project site. Therefore, because of the existing and developing
adjacent industrial uses, there would be no impacts from the proposed auto dealership~.
POPULATION AND HOUSING.
Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional
or local population Projections?
b) Induce substantial growth in an area
either directly or indirectly (e. g. ,
through Projects in an undeveloped
area or extension of major
infrastructure)?
c) Displace existing housing, especially
affordable housing?
Comments:
PoIeD_
Poteadally Sl&nIfkut Unless Less tllaa
SigDUkant Impact MItlpted SipiDcaDt Impad
No
Impllct
o
o
o
IlII
o
o
o
IlII
o
o
o
IlII
a) The Project would not exceed official regional or local population projections. Growth forecast
information predicts that there would be approximately 14,258 housing units built in the City of
Chula Vista between 2000 and 2005 (Chula Vista 2000) to accommodate population expansion.
Therefore, it is anticipated that the expanding local labor force would fill jobs resulting from the
proposed use. The Project would not directly affect regional and local populations because the
Project would create industry-related development and does not propose to construct residential
development. Indirect impacts from the creation of new jobs would not exceed the local growth
forecasts or expansion already planned through the construction of new housing developments.
b) The Project would not induce significant growth in the region because the local area is already
developed with commercial and industrial uses. To the east and west of the Project site, industrial
areas already exist. Two auto dealerships are southwest and another is planned directly south of
the Project site, which are uses similar to the proposed Project. The Project is not planned in an
undeveloped region nor is it an unproportionately large development compared to surrounding
development. New roadways that could indirectly facilitate additional growth would not be
created as a result of the Project, as the proposed driveways are completely self-serving to the
Project.
c) The Project would not displace existing housing, affordable or otherwise, because the Project site
is currently vacant and has been previously used for heavy industrial purposes. Therefore, the
Project does not necessitate the construction of new or replacement homes elsewhere. There are
no existing residential uses on the Project site, and the area is zoned by the City of Chula Vista for
general industrial use.
III.
GEOPHYSICAL. Would the proposal
result in or expose people to potential
impacts involving:
--
Potentially Sipiftcaat UDIess Less tIuPI
Slgnlfic8Dt Impact Midpted SJpU1Cllllllmpact
No
Im_
5
4 -3.("
a) Unstable earth conditions or changes
in geologic substructures?
b) Disruptions, displacements,
compaction or overcovering of the
soil?
c) Change in topography or ground
surface relief features?
d) The destruction, covering or
modification of any unique geologic
or physical features?
e) Any increase in wind or water
erosion of soils, either on or off the
site?
f) Changes in deposition or erosion of
beach sands, or changes in siltation,
deposition or erosion which may
modify the channel of a river or
stream or the bed of the ocean or any
bay inlet or lake?
g) Exposure of people or property to
geologic hazards such as
earthquakes, landslides, mud slides,
ground failure, or similar hazards?
Comments:
o
o
III
o
o
III
o
o
o
o
III
o
o
o
III
o
o
III
o
o
o
o
III
o
o
o
III
o
a) The Project would not significantly expose people to unstable earth conditions or changes in
geologic conditions. The Project site is located in an area generally consisting of Salinas Clay loam
and Linne Clay loam soils. Salinas Clay loam, located on 2 to 9 percent slopes, is found throughout
the entire southern half and portions of the northern half of the Project site. Linne Clay loam soil,
generally on 9 to 30 percent slopes, is located in the northern portion of the site, mainly in the
northeast corner (USDA 1973). The Project site was graded to considerable depth in 1982 to deal
with on-site contaminated soils. The site was subsequently graded and terraced by a previous
property owner in the 1980s after the soil remediation efforts, therefore minimal on-site grading
would be required for the Project (see preliminary grading plan by Partners Planning and
Engineering on file with the City of Chula Vista Planning and Building Department). The
preliminary grading plan calls for a balanced cut and fill. The estimated volume of soil to be moved
during grading is anticipated to be 126,900 cubic yards; the objective is to balance the overall site
grading. As a result, the geologic substructures of the site would not be substantially changed or
altered.
b) The Project would not significantly disrupt, displace, compact, or overcover the soil on the Project
site. The majority of the site has previously been disrupted by land altering activities. The site
was then extensively covered with fill and formed into a series of terraces. The current layout of
the Project site has been incorporated into the Project design. Therefore, the Project would
require only minimal site work.
Grading and earthwork may encounter expansive and compressible soils that exist on-site. Where
improvements are planned in these areas, remedial grading measures would be necessary to reduce
6
4_3-7
the potential for expansion during or after the construction process. Compressible soils include
topsoil, alluvium, and residual soils that are subject to settlement under increased loads or due to
increased moisture. These materials should be removed and replaced as compacted fill in areas that
would be subject to new fill or structural loads. Petra Geotechnical (2002) completed a geotechnical
due diligence investigation of the Project site that discussed recommended removals, potential for
settlement, and expansion potential. Removals of 2 to 5 feet of expansive soil may be required in
some isolated areas to accommodate building structures; however, overexcavation will not be
required for paved areas. Petra Geotechnical determined that future settlement of site soils is not
expected to exceed 1.2 inches during the next 100 years. Differential settlement is not expected to
exceed 0.5 inch over a horizontal distance of 30 feet. Petra Geotechnical recommended that
overexcavation be used to mitigate the cut/fill transition for buildings constructed in the northeast
quadrant of the Project site. Petra Geotechnical determined that the expansion potential of near
surface soils is low to medium and is not expected to adversely impact the proposed development.
The waste cell parcel is composed of engineered fill soil. The waste cell parcel would be graded in
order to accommodate a dealer inventory parking lot. No buildings or other structures would be
constructed on top of the waste cell. A mitigation measure requires that grading of the waste cell
parcel be performed in accordance with the grading guidelines of the RWQCB. Compliance with the
RWQCB grading guidelines would reduce grading impacts associated with the grading of the waste
cell parcel to a level ofless than significant.
c) The Project would have a less than significant impact on topography or ground surface relief
features. The existing terraces on the site have been incorporated into the Project design.
Construction of the Project would have minimal impact on topography and ground surface relief
features of the Project site because grading would occur in already disturbed areas. The Project
site is situated at the base of a steep slope on the northern border. Though the northern Project site
property line is located part way up the slope, the Project has been designed to avoid altering the
slope.
d) The Project would not impact any unique geological or physical features. The Project site does
not contain any unique geologic or physical features because nearly the entire area has been
previously graded or excavated and covered with fill.
e) The Project would have a less than significant impact on wind or water erosion, both on- and off-
site. Salinas Clay loam soils have a slight to moderate erosion hazard, and erosion hazard for
Linne Clay loam soil is moderate to slight (USDA 1973). Currently, the majority of the Project
site is very sparsely vegetated with large areas of bare soil that are subject to the erosion. All
areas of the Project site that are currently unpaved would be paved or landscaped. The surrounding
lands are developed and the slope to the north would remain unchanged.
The Project could have a potentially significant effect on on-site or off-site erosion. However, the
Project would be subject to the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES), and the applicant would be required to obtain a General Construction Storm
Water Permit from the RWQCB for the construction process. The permit includes provisions for
minimizing off-site erosion and sediment transport that could result in significant impacts during
construction. Implementation of a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) using Best
Management Practices (BMPs) would be required prior to construction of the Project. This is
discussed in more detail in Section IV.
Paving of the waste cell will reduce the precipitation infiltration into the waste cell, which reduces
the potential for leachate releases to groundwater. The paving could potentially increase the
7
4-3"6
precipitation runoff the waste cell slopes, causing erosion, but proper drainage design will prevent
this.
The postclosure management of the waste cell parcel is governed by Waste Discharge
Requirements (WDRs) that were issued by the RWQCB in Order 97-40. The WDRs state that any
modifications of the waste cell must be reviewed and approved by the RWQCB prior to
construction. The RWQCB review and approval process is primarily concerned with maintaining
the integrity of the waste cell and ensuring that modifications to the waste cell do not cause a
release from the waste cell. Use of landfills as paved parking lots has been done widely in
California and is generally acceptable to the RWQCB.
Furthermore, the waste cell is currently managed under an industrial NPDES permit and SWPPP,
in accordance with a requirement in the WDRs. The current owner is maintaining/following that
SWPPP. If the waste cell is developed as parking, then the industrial SWPPP shall be updated at
that time.
f) The Project would not significantly impact deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in
siltation, deposition, or erosion that could modify the channel or bed of any water resource. The
Project is not near beach areas and would therefore have no impact on the deposition or erosion of
beach sand. The Otay River is located approximately 0.25 mile south of the Project site. Runoff
would be directed to appropriate drainage facilities and would not carry sediment to the Otay
River. Additionally, as discussed above, a SWPPP would be prepared prior to implementation of
the Project to control erosion and runoff during construction, and BMPs will be incorporated into
the final design in accordance with current storm water regulations.
g) The IT Corporation prepared a report for the Project site entitled A Draft Geologic Investigation
Reportfor the Auto Park Way Commerce Center (July 20CH) that is on file with the City OfChula
Vista. In regard to the potential for faulting and seismicity on the property, a review of the
geological literature indicates that a strand of the La Nacion fault is located approximately 600 feet
west of the site. The surface trace of the fault is beneath and parallel to Brandywine Road. The
fault strikes north to northwest and dips steeply to the west. This high angle normal fault, with
down to the west movement has been documente<lto have had no movement in the last 12,000
years.
Geocon (1986) reports a steeply dipping, north-south trending fault in an existing cut slope in the
northwest corner of the site. Geocon believed that this fault was a secondary feature of the La
Nacion fault zone. They considered the feature to be relatively minor, given that the remnant
deposits of the San Diego Formation that cap the hilltops to the north do not exhibit a significant
elevation change with the contact of the underlying Otay Formation. The fault hazards with
respect to surface rupture are judged to be extremely low on the Project site.
Potential peak ground acceleration is estimated to be 0.4 to 0.5g for the maximum credible
earthquake of magnitude 7.0 along the Newport-Inglewood-Rose Canyon fault zone, located about
10 miles west of the site. A maximum credible earthquake on the La Nacion fault system of
magnitude 6.5 under Brandywine Road may be expected to produce ground accelerations of about
O.52g. The probability of a seismic event of this magnitude on the La Nacion fault zone during
the lifetime of the Project is considered remote, since the fault is not known to offset Holocene
sediment (Hart 1974). The degree of seismic risk is considered to be comparable to that for other
sites within the area.
8
4 -39
Liquefaction potential of the formational material on-site is very low and does not represent a
significant geological hazard because of the high density and gradation of the soils underlying the
site. As a result, there would be less than significant liquefaction impacts on the Project site.
---
PoteJItiaBy SIgDUkmlt UDleu Less than No
Slpificut Impact MJtipted SlpdfkaDt Impact Impact
IV. WATER. Would the proposal result in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, 0 IllI 0 0
drainage patterns, or the rate and
amount of surface runoff?
b) Exposure of people or property to 0 0 0 IllI
water related hazards such as
flooding or tidal waves?
c) Discharge into surface waters or 0 IllI 0 0
other alteration of surface water
quality (e.g., temperature, dissolved
oxygen or turbidity)?
d) Changes in the amount of surface 0 0 0 IllI
water in any water body?
e) Changes in currents, or the course of 0 0 0 IllI
direction of water movements, in
either marine or fresh waters?
1) Change in the quantity of ground 0 0 0 IllI
waters, either through direct
additions or withdrawals, or through
interception of an aquifer by cuts or
excavations?
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of 0 0 0 IllI
groundwater?
h) Impacts to groundwater quality? 0 0 IllI 0
i) Alterations to the course or flow of 0 0 0 IllI
floodwaters?
j) Substantial reduction in the amount 0 0 0 IllI
of water otherwise available for
public water supplies?
Comments:
a) The Project would result in changes to absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the
rate and amount of surface runoff. Additional impervious surfaces would be
constructed on the Project site in the form of parking lots and buildings that would
change absorption rates, but the Project site would be landscaped, and absorption of
rainfall runoff would continue in the landscaped areas. Drainage patterns would be
altered during site development, but drainage improvements would be required by
9
4-40
the City of Chula Vista to address both on-site and off-site runoff. The rate of runoff
may increase slightly because of the addition of impervious surfaces, but the increase
would be minor and would be controlled by appropriate drainage facilities.
Moreover, per the requirements of the NPDES, a SWPPP would be prepared prior to
implementation of the Project. Additionally, BMPs would be incorporated into the
design to control the rate and amount of runoff from the Project site. Approximately
82 percent of the site would contain the proposed new facilities.
b) The Project would not expose people or property to water-related hazards, such as
flooding or tidal waves, because no increased flooding would result from the Project.
The rate and amount of runoff may slightly increased due to the addition of
impervious surfaces on the site; however, this increase would be minor and would be
controlled by appropriate drainage facilities, including BMPs as needed. The site is
not near the coastline, so there would be no threat from tidal waves that may be
generated from offshore sources. The Project site is not within the 100-year
floodplain of any drainage.
c) The Project would not discharge into surface waters or alter surface water quality
since appropriate storm drain facilities would be required, and BMPs would be
implemented pursuant to the SWPPP that would be prepared for the Project site.
This could include the installation of biofilters and stormwater pollution drainage
units as needed.
Additionally, recent regulations of the RWQCB and the City of Chula Vista mandate
implementation of measures during design and after construction to reduce the type
and amount of runoff from development areas. Both Source Control and Structural
BMPs can be adopted. Source Control BMPs that could be implemented include (I)
control and eliminate non-storm water discharges to drains, which reduces the
potential for on-site, non-storm water discharges; (2) minimize outdoor
loading/unloading of materials, which reduces the discharge of pollutants to
stormwater;and (3) provide building and ground maintenance, which reduces
discharges of pollutants by using small amounts of water for daily operations.
Structural BMPs that can be implemented for the Project include the use of on-site
biofilters and storm water pollution units. Biofilters consist of vegetated swales
constructed at the inside of curbed areas along road and parking lot edges, and next
to property and lot boundaries. From the biofilters, storm water can then be directed
to an underground storm drain system or may continue on to detention basins. The
Project would implement BMPs to comply with the new City of Chula Vista
Stormwater Management Plan that would include on-site biofilters and storm water
pollution units.
d) The Project would not result in changes in the amount of surface water in any water
body because appropriate storm drain facilities would be constructed such that
velocities of storm water runoff would remain 'relatively the same as at present.
e) The Project would not result in any changes in currents, or alter the course or
direction of water movements in either fresh or marine waters because appropriate
storm drain facilities would be constructed such that velocities of storm water runoff
would remain relatively the same as at present.
10
4-4- (
f) No change in the quantity of groundwater would occur as a result of the Project
because the Project would be connected with the Chula Vista water supply and would
not use groundwater.
g) There would be no impacts to the direction or rate of flow of groundwater due to the
Project because the Project would use the local imported water supply.
h) In tenus of groundwater quality, the previous use of the site, that of an animal
rendering and hazardous waste operation, has been shown to have already altered
existing groundwater quality. Both on- and off-site groundwater have been impacted
by previous site uses. Remediation efforts began at the site in 1982. Groundwater
conditions continue to be monitored per the RWQCB. The lead agency for this issue
is the RWQCB. A study conducted by Risk-Based Decisions (1996) concluded that use
of the site for light industrial or commercial purposes would not pose an unacceptable
human health risk and that development could proceed while monitoring continues
(DTSC 1996).
i) The Project would not alter the course or flow of floodwaters because appropriate
storm drain facilities would be constructed such that storm water runoff velocities
should remain relatively the same as at present. The Project site is not within the
100-year floodplain of any drainages.
j) The Project would not result in a substantial reduction in the amount of water that
would otherwise be available for public water supplies because the Project would use
the locally imported water supply that is available to all users in the region.
......1aDy
Potentially slpllkaat Low ....
SIpUkaDt u..... SIgDl1kant No
1m.." ......t... 1m.." Im_
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or 0 IliI 0 0
contribute to an existing or Projected air
quality violation?
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? 0 0 IliI 0
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or 0 0 0 IliI
temperature, or cause any change in
climate, either locally or regionally?
d) Create objectionable odors? 0 0 IliI 0
e) Create a substantial increase in 0 0 Il!I 0
stationary or non-stationary sources of
air emissions or the deterioration of
ambient air quality?
Comments:
The Project is located within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB). The SDAB is "in
attainment" for all federal criteria pollutant standards except ozone (0.). The SDAB is
11
4-4-L
"in attainment" for all state criteria pollutant standards except 03 and fme particulate
matter (PMJO). .
a) The San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) is the agency responsible for
the administration of federal and state air quality laws. The APCD does not have
quantitative emissions limits designating significant impacts for construction
activities, nor for long-term emissions that may result from increased vehicle use. In
this analysis, evaluation methods from the South Coast Air Quality Management
District (SCAQMD) California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Air Quality
Handbook were used. Use of this handbook is accepted throughout California.
SCAQMD screening thresholds for significant construction air quality impacts would
not be exceeded. Grading for the proposed project is expected to last approximately 6
months. Grading would result in gaseous and particulate emissions from construction
equipment engine exhausts and fugitive dust emissions generated from earth-moving
activities. The primary source of air pollutants during construction would be the
engine exhaust from construction equipment. The operation of construction
equipment would result in emissions of CO, Nox, VOC, oxides of sulfer (SOx) and
PMJO. Construction emissions for the project have been evaluated in a report
prepared by EDAW, dated March 7,2003. Construction emissions were evaluated
by the use of factors and methods from the CARB emissions program URBIMIS
2001. The results of the calculations for the project indicate that significance
thresholds would not be exceeded for construction related impacts.
The primary source of ongoing operation air pollutant emissions for the project is
from vehicle exhaust emissions. Vehicles and automobiles represent over 60 percent
of air pollutant emissions. URBIMIS 2001 was used to estimate operational (long
term) emissions based on area -source and mobile-source emissions. The following
table demonstrates that the project does not exceed operational thresholds of
significance.
Tahle 3
Operations Emissions from Project - Lbs. per day
Reactive Fine
Carbon Oxides of Organic Particulate
Monoxide Nitrogen Compounds Matter
Source (CO) (NOx) (ROC) (PMlo)
Operation 437.80 48.00 47.35 19.89
Emissions
SCAQMD 550 55 55 150
Thresholds
The above table demonstrates that the operational emissions of the project do not
exceed threshold standards, and are, therefore, not significant. The proposed project is
located within the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area which identifies similar land
uses for the areas surrounding the project site. The only known project identified in the
vicinity of the Auto Park North site is the Chula Vista Auto Center, another auto-
related use that is proposed to the south of the project site. Both projects have been
identified in the Five-Year Implementation Plan for the area as well as applicable
environmental reviews. As these projects are included in the City's General Plan, they
are included in the SANDAG projections for the region, which are included in the
APCD's air quality projections and evaluations. Additionally, other projects have been
12
4-43
developed in the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area, including the industrial parks
to the east and west of the site, in accordance with the requirements of the City Of
Chula Vista. As a result, the proposed project wiII not result in cumulatively
considerable impacts on regional air quality.
All industry that occupies the proposed auto dealerships is subject to the rules,
regulations, and permitting procedures of the APCD. Any industry releasing toxic air
pollutants would be required to meet all regulations and standards of the APCD
concerning toxic emissions . Short-term air quality impacts could occur during the
construction phase but would be temporary and would cease upon Project
completion. Measures to mitigate short-term air quality construction impacts are
provided in Section XIX of this Environmental Checklist Form.
b) The Project would not significantly expose sensitive receptors to pollutants. The
surrounding land uses are mainly industrial parks. The nearest sensitive receptor is a
residential neighborhood located north of the Project site at the top of a 40-foot-high
slope, approximately 300 feet away. All future industrial uses on the Project site will
be subject to regulations concerning pollutants. In addition, auto dealerships would
not have toxic emissions other than gas and oil.
c) The Project would not alter air movement, moisture, temperature, or climate
conditions because the Project is not of the magnitude necessary to result in such
meteorological alterations. The surrounding area is already developed with similar
structures and all structures resulting from the Project would be constructed in
accardance with the City regulations concerning height.
d) Potential odors generated by the Project would be limited to construction and/or
vehicular sources such as dust and exhaust. Because the site has previously been
used for operations that generated strong odors, residential neighbOlhoods in the area
were built in a manner limiting their exposure to the odors by providing setbacks
from the slope to limit direct exposure to odors. Auto dealerships would not have
sources of significant odors.
e) The Project would not result in a significant increase in stationary or nonstationary
sources of air emissions or the deterioration of ambient air quality. Please see
comments for subsection (a) above.
.....lIaDy
SigniIkllat
Impa"
Poteatl8u,.
.........'
U"""'
MJtlgatod
.....thaD
stpdftcllDt
Impoct
No
Impoct
VI. TRANSPORT A TION/CIRCULA TION.
Would the proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicle trips or traffic
congestion?
b) Hazards to safety from design features
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses
(e.g., farm equipment)?
c) Inadequate emergency access or access
to nearby uses?
o
IllI
o
o
o
IllI
o
o
o
o
o
IllI
13
4-4~
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or
off-site?
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or
bicyclists?
f) Conflicts with adopted policies
supporting alternative transportation
(e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)?
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
h) A "large Project" under the Congestion
Management Program? (An equivalent
of 2400 or more average daily vehicle
trips or 200 or more peak-hour vehicle
trips.)
Comments:
o
o
o
IIlI
o
o
IIlI
o
o
o
IIlI
o
o
o
IIlI
o
o
o
o
IIlI
Linscott, Law, and Greenspan (LL&G) prepared the traffic analysis for the Project
site, dated December 2002. The LL&G report is available at the City of Chula Vista
for review.
a) Roadways studied as a part of the traffic analysis that would be directly affected by
. the Project include I-80S, Main Street, and Brandywine Avenue. I-80S is an eight-
lane freeway that generally runs in a north-south direction. A full interchange is
provided at Otay Valley Road in the Project area. Main Street is a Six-Lane Prime
Arterial in the City of Chula Vista Circulation Element and generally runs east to
west. From I-80S east to Brandywine Avenue, Main Street is a six-lane undivided
roadway, while east of Brandywine it is a six-lane divided roadway. Brandywine
A venue is an unclassified four-lane roadway immediately west of the Project area
that runs in a north-south direction. Delniso Court and Roma Court are on-site
unclassified roadways; both of these roads are partially constructed on the Project
site.
Existin~ Traffic Volumes
The Project site was analyzed during the weekday AM and PM peak hours using trip
generation rates obtained from the SANDAG Trip Generation Guide (April 2002) for
the auto sales (dealer and repair), auto repair center, and standard commercial office
for the small industrial building proposed on the site.
The Project is calculated to generate 8,294 ADT, with 365 inbound/l24 outbound
trips during the AM peak hour and 270 inbound/458 outbound during the PM peak
hour.
14
4-4~
Table 4
Existing Daily Traffic Volumes
Auto Park North Specific Plan
Street Sel!lDent Year 24-Hour Volume (ADT)
Interstate 805
Oran.e Avenue to Olav Valley Road 1999 139,700
Olav Valley Road to Palm Avenue 1999 135,600
Main Street
Hilltoo Drive to Melrose Avenue 2001 27,500
I-80S to Oleander Avenue 2001 24,300
Oleander A venue to Brandvwine Avenue 1999 18,300
Brandvwine A venue to Herita2e Road 2001 13.100
BrandYWine Avenue
Seouoia A venue to Olav Vallev Road 1999 4,700 <e)
Source: Caltrans/City of Chula Vista Count Records.
<e) =Estimated volume based on lbe relationship of peak hour counts to lrnown ADT
Intersection Analysis Methodology
Five intersections and several street and freeway segments within or near the Project
area were analyzed to determine potential impacts of the Project. Different
methodologies were used to analyze signalized intersections, unsignalized
intersections, street segments, and freeways as discussed below. LOS is a measure
used to describe the conditions of traffic flow, and range from LOS A through LOS
F. LOS A represents the best-case conditions, and LOS F represents the worst case.
Signalized intersections were analyzed for AM and PM peak hours by determining
the average delay per vehicle entering the intersection. Unsignalized intersections
were analyzed by determining the delay and LOS based on ,Chapter 17 of the
Caltrans Highway Capacity Manual (HCM 2000). Street segments were analyzed at
buildout by comparing buildout ADT to the City of Chula Vista Roadway Capacity
Standards table. The freeway segment LOS was determined based on a Caltrans
District 11 HCM method.
All signalized intersections are currently operating at LOS D or better during the AM
and PM peak hours and would remain at LOS D or better under the Existing +
Project scenario, with the exception of the southbound on-ramp at 1-805, which
would become LOS E in the PM peak hour. The Existing + Project + Cumulative
Projects scenario LOS would remain LOS E at the southbound on-ramps at 1-805 in
the PMpeak hour, while the northbound on-ramps at 1-805 would result in LOS D in
the PM peak hour under the same scenario.
Based on the traffic analysis, a significant impact (LOS F) is calculated at the
existing unsignalized intersections at Delniso Court/Main Street and Roma
Court/Main Street. These intersections would fail without the installation of traffic
signals. A mitigation measure requires the signalization of these intersections. These
intersections would operate at an LOS of B with signalization.
Based on the traffic analysis, a significant impact is calculated at the Main Street/I-
805 southbound ramps intersection during the PM peak hour, since LOS E is
projected to occur at this intersection. The improvement necessary to mitigate this
15
4.-4(.,
impact would be the provision of a second westbound left-turn lane on Main Street at
the 1-805 southbound ramps, which would result in an acceptable LOS D. This action
is required as a traffic mitigation measure for the Project to reduce this significant
impact to below a level of significance. (Section XIX provides mitigation measures
required for the project.)
b) The Project would not result in hazards to safety from design features, such as sharp
curves or dangerous intersections because the property fronts on a major roadway,
Main Street, which has been improved and has adequate sight distance in both
directions. The project traffic impact report identifies the need for a dedicated
westbound right turn lane serving the site, in order to address significant traffic
safety impacts associated with vehicles entering the site via driveways located on
Main Street. The westbound turning lane would provide a slow down area for
vehicles entering the site from Main Street and would reduce impacts to less than
significant.
c) The Project would not result in inadequate emergency access to nearby uses because
no emergency access would be affected by the implementation of this Project.
Adequate on-site and off-site access for emergency vehicles currently exists at the
Project site, and no impacts would occur.
d) The Project would include on-site parking spaces for a maximum of 2,470 vehicles
under Option I and 2,457 vehicles under Option 2, most of which would
accommodate vehicle inventory, which is in compliance with City of Chula Vista
ordinances related to parking required for these uses. Thus, the Project would not
result in insufficient parking capacity on- or off-site. There would be no reduction in
on- or off-site parking spaces as a result of the proposed Project.
e) The Project would not create hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists because
appropriate site entrances and exits are available at the site and would comply with
the City's Driveway Construction Permit Requirements.
f) The Project would not impact policies supporting alternative transportation. The
Project site is located along Main Street. There is currently no bus route along this
road. The nearest bus route is located northwest of the site along a portion of
Brandywine Avenue. Therefore, driveways into the Project site would not interfere
with bus turnouts or routes. No other alternative modes of transportation are in
proximity to the Project site.
,g) The Project would not impact rail, waterborne, or air traffic. There are no railways in
proximity to the Project site. The nearest body of water that could accommodate
waterborne traffic is San Diego Bay, located approximately 3.5 miles west. The
Project would not affect air traffic because all buildings would be constructed in
accordance with the height limit set by the zoning.
h) SANDAG's Congestion Management Program (CMP) requires an Enhanced CEQA
Review for all large Projects that are expected to generate more than 2,400 ADT or
more than 200 peak hour trips. Since the Project is calculated to generate traffic
above these thresholds, a CMP review is required for the Project.
Per these guidelines, the following regionally significant arterial and freeway
16
4-4-7
segments were analyzed as required by the CMP: Main Street from 1-805 to Nirvana
Avenue; 1-805 north of Main Street; and 1-805 south of Main Street.
Main Street is calculated to operate at acceptable LOS D or better in both directions
during AM and PM peak hours with the Project and cumulative Project traffic
volumes. The freeway segments both north and south of Main Street are calculated
to operate at LOS C or better for all scenarios. No Project or cumulative Project
impacts are anticipated under the CMP.
--
-- -.. Lou....
-.. U"""' _., No
Im_ ......... Im_ Impoct
Vll. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, sensitive species, species 0 IlII 0 0
of concern or species that are candidates
for listing?
b) Locally designated species (e.g., 0 0 0 IlII
heritage trees)?
c) Locally designated natural communities 0 0 0 IlII
(e.g., oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian 0 0 0 IlII
and vernal pool)?
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration 0 0 0 IlII
corridors?
t) Affect regional habitat preservation 0 0 0 IlII
planning efforts?
Comments:
a) No endangered or sensitive species, species of concern, or species that are candidates
for listing were detected on the Project site during a biological survey conducted by
EDA W San Diego/KEA Enviroumental biologists in March 2001. The site consists
of previously graded soils and highly disturbed vegetation with a large percentage of
nonnative species present. Additionally, no larval host plants of the Quino
checkerspot butterfly were observed on-site, and the species is not expected to occur.
The biological survey indicates potential coastal California gnatcatcher habitat just off
site to the north and northeast of the development. The biological survey also
indicates that eucalyptus and other mature trees are present on the site. Although the
biological survey indicated that there were no nests on site, mature trees can serve as
nesting areas for raptors. The biological survey indicated that no gnatcatchers were
observed off-site in coastal sage scrub habitat areas located to the north and northeast
of the site. Mitigation measures have been outlined in Section XIX that address
potential impacts to raptors and gnatcatchers as a result of the project.
b) No locally designated species, such as heritage trees, exist on the Project site. The
site is highly disturbed with limited native species present.
17
4 -cf q
c) No locally designated natural habitats occur on the Project site. The vegetation
communities consist of Disturbed Habitat and Urban/Developed areas on the majority
of the Project site. The nearest native habitat is Diegan coastal sage scrub, located
adjacent to the property off-site to the northeast.
d) No wetland habitat occurs on the Project site. The site has been graded and padded
by previous owners, and no native habitat remains on the site.
e) No wildlife dispersal or migration corridors exist on the Project site. The area has
been completely disturbed and EDA W /KEA Environmental biologists noted no areas
suitable for wildlife corridors.
The Project would not affect regional wildlife planning efforts because no native habitat
would be affected and there are no sensitive plant or animal species that could be
impacted by the Project.
PuteatiaUy
-II>' _.. Lao.....
SI....,.... u..... SIpifkaD' N.
"po" _led Im_ "po"
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL
RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy 0 0 0 IlII
conservation plans?
b) Use non-renewable resources in a 0 0 0 IlII
wasteful and inefficient manner?
c) If the site is designated for mineral 0 0 IlII 0
resource protection, will this Project
impact this protection?
Comments:
a) The Project would not conflict with adopted energy conservation plans because it is
consistent with the measures set forth in the City of Chula Vista CO Reduction Plan
and adopted by the Chula Vista City Council on November 14, 2000 (Chula Vista
2(00).
b) The Project would not use nomenewable resources in a wasteful and inefficient
manner because the proposed use of the Project site would consume nomenewable
resources in a manner consistent with other similar land uses.
c) The Project site is classified as a Mineral Resource Zone (MRZ) 2 area (State
Department of Conservation 1996). An MRZ2 zone is defined as an area where
adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where
it is judged that a high likelihood exists for their presence. This classification is
based on the potential for sand and gravel resources within the area. Because the
Project site is dominated by clayey soils and has previously been excavated and
filled, there is minimal potential for the property to produce significant sand or
gravel resources. No sand or gravel resources are known to exist on the Project site.
Mining of bentonite clay occurred in the general area in the past, but there is no
record of mining activity on the property (Weber 1963). Use of the Project site for
18
4-4-9
industrial purposes would not significantly impact mineral resources in the local area
or in the region.
.........,
...- __I .....th~
_at u..... SlplfIcaDt No
Im_ _,m Im_ Im_
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release 0 0 0 IlII
of hazardous substances (including, but
not limited to: petroleum products,
pesticides, chemicals or radiation)?
b) Possible interference with an emergency 0 0 0 IlII
tesponse plan or emergency evacuation
plan?
c) The creation of any health hazard or 0 0 IlII 0
potential health hazard?
d) Exposure of people to existing sources 0 IlII 0 0
of potential health hazards?
0 0 0 IlII
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with
flammable brush, grass, or trees?
a) The Project would not result in a significant risk of explosions or release of
hazardous substances because all known existing hazardous materials located on the
Project site are enclosed in a clay-lined waste cell located in the northwest corner of
the site. On-going management and monitoring of the waste cell is performed by the
RWQCB pursuant to Order No. 87-141. (Waste Discharge Requirements for the
Omar Rendering Company Closed Class I Disposal Site, including Technical Change
Order No. I, Monitoring and Reporting Program) and subsequent amendments
(RWQCB Order No. 97-40 - Waste Discharge Requirementsfor Closure and Post-
Closure Maintenance for the Class I Waste Management Containment Cell, Omar
Rendering Facility, Darling International, including the Monitoring and Reporting
Program 97-40). The WDRs include the following activities: (1) maintenance of the
waste cell, (2) NPDES storm water monitoring and reporting, and (3) groundwater
detection monitoring and reporting. A clean up and abatement order was issued for
the site by the RWQCB in March of 2003.
b) The Project would not interfere with an emergency response plan or emergency
evacuation plan and no Project components would block or obstruct Main Street, which
is listed as a major disaster evacuation route (Chula Vista 1995).
c) The Project would not create a significant health hazard or potential health hazard.
Please see the discussion under Item (a) above.
d) The Project could result in the exposure of people to hazards due to the potential to
encounter impacted soils during grading of the site. Mitigation measw;es calling for a
soils management plan and conformance with RWQCB grading guidelines have been
placed on the project. '
19
4 -S7)
A site-specific human health risk assessment prepared by Risk-Based Decisions in
1996 concluded that the planned use of the site for light industrial purposes does not
pose an unacceptable human health risk and that development could proceed while
groundwater monitoring continued. Risk-Based Decisions determined that residual
soil and groundwater VOC impacts would not pose a significant vapor risk to site
occupants.
e) The Project would not increase flTe hazards due to brush, trees, and shrubs. The site is
currently vacant and has been padded and graded to form industrial lots. On-site
landscaping is minimal and there is no present danger from fire hazards. Development
of the property for industrial use would not increase fire hazards because the site would
be landscaped and maintained to minimize the risk of a fire hazard.
......-
PoteatiaDy SipilkaDt lAY....
SipIlkaDt U""'" SipUkant No
1m",,, MItlgatod 1m..... 1m",,,
x. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? 0 0 181 0
b) Exposure of people to severe noise 0 0 181 0
levels?
Comments:
a) A noise study was prepared for the Project by EDA W, Inc., in December 2002 and
is available for review at the City Of Chula Vista. Noise levels were measured at
residences near the Project site to assess current sound levels. Nearest residences are
located in the Robinhood Ridge subdivision to the north. Nighttime and AM Peak
Hour noise measurements were obtained for existing conditions. The two receptors,
the nearest of which is located approximately 150 feet from the project site, were the
focus of the noise analysis since they are the closest habitable structures to the
proposed use.
Implementation of the Project would result in daytime noise. Auto dealerships would
be open during the day. The dealerships would be located in the southernmost portion
of the site directly adjacent to Main Street, so the noise generated by the dealerships
would be attenuated by intervening terrain and distance from the residents. The
dealerships would be located 1,100 feet away from the closest sensitive receptor.
Therefore, noise generated from auto dealership operation on the southern edge of the
property would not increase noise levels above existing conditions.
Auto dealership operations on the middle to northern end of the property would include
inventory parking, generating minimal noise from auto starts. Additional noise would
occur with the unloading of transport trucks delivering inventory during daytime hours.
Noise at the two residential structures nearest to the Project site during daytime hours
would be approximately 50 dBA Leq which is below the Noise Ordinance Limits, and,
therefore, in compliance with the Noise Ordinance for daytime use.
Occasional nighttime noise associated with the delivery of inventory vehicles could
occur with implementation of the Project. Noise associated with inventory delivery
20
4-S"1
truck operations would be a maximum of25 dBA Leq at the nearest sensitive receptor,
with some peak levels of 53 dBA at the nearest sensitive receptor. During nighttime
hours, the auto dealerships and commercial/retail uses would be closed and would not
generate noise.
Daytime noise contours from auto-related uses were also plotted and are shown in the
Noise Report on file with the City Of Chula Vista. Impacts to the nearest residential
uses would not be significant due to the reduction caused by the steep topography and
soft surface. A calculation of 47 dBA L.., is an accurate representation of the actual
noise level expected at the nearest residential receptor.
In summary, operational noise impacts from the Project would result in noise levels
that may be audible at times during daytime hours but would be in compliance with the
City of Chula Vista Noise Ordinance.
Nighttime operation noise impacts from occasional inventory delivery would be within
the Noise Ordinance standards and may result in peak noise levels that would be
audible, but would not be sleep disturbing.
Construction noise would be short term and temporary in duration. Hourly average
noise levels during construction would be anticipated to be 65 to 75 dBAL.., and would
attenuate such that impacts would not be significant, as described in the Noise Report.
The nearest residence is approximately 200 feet north of the nearest planned
construction activities. This residence may experience peak short-term construction
noise levels of approximately 73 dBA. Hourly average noise level would be
approximately 63 dBA 1-... These noise levels do not include the reduction that would
result from the steep slope, soft ground, and the berm located between the construction
activities and the residences, which would decrease noise levels experienced at the
residences by at least 5 dBA. Construction noise would be audible at the Robinhood
Ridge subdivision, but noise impacts would be short term and limited in duration and
would not be significant. Construction related noise is exempt from the Chula Vista
Noise Ordinance standards.
The following measures would be incorporated into the Project design to minimize
noise during construction activit!es:
. The contractor shall comply with all local noise level standards, regulations, and
ordinances that apply to any work performed pursuant to the contract.
. Construction activity would be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. Monday
through Friday, and 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. on Saturday and Sunday.
. Each internal combustion engine shall be equipped with a muffler of a type
recommended by the manufacturer. No internal combustion engine shall be
operated on the Project site without said muffler.
. If traffic control and construction signs that require power for lighting or flashing
are located near residences, the source of power shall be batteries, solar cells, or
other quieter sources.
b) The Project would not significantly expose people to severe noise levels because the
noise associated with the Project would be limited to temporary daytime construction
noise, increased traffic noise, and sounds accompanying the future uses of the site as
provided for the in the specific plan. The nearest receptors are located
approximately 150 feet to the north at the top of a slope, but most are 300 feet away
21
c/ - 5' d...
from the Project Site. The slope has im elevational change of approximately 40 feet
from the Project site to the residences. The residences do not have a direct line of
sight to the Project area and therefore most noise generated on-site would be
absorbed by the slope and distance. Please refer to Item (a) above for additional
details.
PoteDtiIIDy
..........,. SlPiJkaat .........
--. u...... _.. No
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal Impo" MJdpted Im_ Im_
have an effect upon, or result in a need for
new or altered government services in any
of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? 0 0 0 IlII
b) Police protection? 0 0 0 IlII
c) Schools? 0 0 0 IlII
d) Maintenance of public facilities, 0 0 0 IlII
including roads?
e) Other governmental services? 0 0 0 IlII
Comments:
a) The Project would not result in the need for new or altered fIre service. Chula Vista
has six fIre stations currently serving the City (CVFD). Station 3 on East Oneida
Street is the closest station to the Project site. This station is located approximately
1.5 miles northwest of the Project site.
b) The Project would not result in the need for new or altered police services. The
Chula Vista Police Department is located at 276 4th A venue, approximately 5 miles
away from the Project site.
c) The Project would not result in the need for new or altered school systems in Chula
Vista. The Project would not create new residential developments that could
signifIcantly increase population.
d) The Project wOilld not result in the need for additional maintenance of public
facilities. Project-generated trafflc would not increase local trafflc to a level that
could necessitate additional road maintenance. No additional effects concerning
maintenance of public facilities have been identifIed.
e) No effects on other governmental services have been identifIed that could occur from
the Project.
POWDdally
--.
Im_
........,.
SIgaIftom.
u......
MJdpted
o
.........
-
Impo"
No
Im_
XII. THRESHOLDS. Will the proposal
adversely impact the City's Threshold
Standards ?
o
o
IlII
22
1-.5"-3
As described below, the Project does not adversely impact any of the City's
Threshold Standards.
a) Fire/EMS
The Threshold Standards require that fire and medical units must be able to
respond to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85 % of the cases and within 5
minutes or less in 75 % of the cases. The City of Chula Vista has determined that
this threshold standard will be met because fire services would be provided in
accordance with the EMS Master Plan.
.....-
.....- - Lou.....
S_I u..... - No
1m.." Ml",,,, 1m.." 'lmpoct
0 0 0 181
Comments: The Project would not result in the need for increased fire or EMS services
that would exceed the City's threshold.
PoteDtillDy
.....- SIplI\cu>I Lou.....
_nt u..... Significut No
Impoct .......... 1m.." 1m.."
b) Jiolice 0 0 0 181
The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84 % of
Priority 1 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to
all Priority 1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.1 % of
Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to
all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less.
Comments: The Project would not result in the need for increased police services
exceeding the City's threshold because these response times can be met by
the nearest police station.
PoteJItiaUy
SIplI\cu>I
1m.."
Potentially
SlplJkant
u.....
MItigated
Lou.....
S_nt
Impoct
No
1m.."
c) Traffic
o
o
o
181
1. City-wide: Maintain LOS "C" or better as measured by observed average
travel speed on all signalized arterial segments except that during peak hours
a LOS "D" can occur for no more than any two hours of the day:
2. West of 1-805: Those signalized intersections that do not meet the standard
above may continue to operate at their current 1991 LOS, but shall not
worsen.
Comments: The Project would result in 8,294 ADT and would not degrade the LOS on
Main Street or other vicinity roadways as described above. Impacts
identified on the 1-805 ramp will be mitigated by improvements proposed by
the City. Therefore, the Project would not exceed City threshold standards.
........,
PoIeDtia1l1 51_I Lou....
SIplI\cu>I u..... __I No
Impoct .......... Impoct 1m.."
d) Parks/Recreation 0 0 0 181
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres of neighborhood and
community parkland with appropriate facilities per 1,000 residents east ofl-805.
23
4-s-cI
Comments: The Project would not create residential neighborhoods and, therefore, would
not exceed the Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation.
.........,.
SIpllkoDI
1m.."
o
-
SIpllkoDI
u.....
MId.....
o
.........
__,
1m.."
o
No
1m.."
IlII
e) Drainage
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows and volumes not
exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual Projects will provide
necessary improvements consistent with the Drainage Master Plan(s) and
City Engineering Standards.
Comments: The Project site has existing storm drains along Delniso Cowt and immediately
off-site along Main Street (Chula Vista 1986; Iribe 2001). The Project
incorporates landscaping to absorb rainfall and reduce runoff. The Project
would be subject to requirements of the NPDES and RWQCB as described in
Section ill and would comply with City Thresholds.
......-
......- SipiflcaDt .........
- u..... Sipl1kaDI No
Impact Mitipted Im_ 1m.."
t) Sewer 0 0 0 IlII
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes not
exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual Projects will provide
necessary improvements consistent with Sewer Master Plan(s) and City
Engineering Standards.
Comments: Currently, there are sewer lines to the Project site along Delniso Cowt and
Roma Court (ebula Vista 1986; Iribe 2001). The City ofChula Vista's Salt Creek Gravity
Sewer Interceptor Project is under construction. This project will increase the capacity of
sewage that can be handled by city utilities. The new sewer pipe will run along Main Street,
starting at 1-5 and continuing eastward. It is expected that with this increased sewer
capacity, the Project would not exceed City Thresholds. Any minor on-site improvements
that may be necessary would be in accordance with the Sewer Master Plan and City
Engineering Standards and would comply with City Thresholds.
Pol_
.........,. - ..... ....
- u..... - No
1m.." MitIp.... 1m.." Im_
g) Water 0 0 0 IlII
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and
transmission facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that
water quality standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction.
Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever water conservation
or fee off-set program the City of Chula Vista has in effect at the time of
building permit issuance.
Comments: The Project is consistent with the planned growth and development of Chula
Vista and would not jeopardize adequate water storage, treatment, and
transmission facilities.
24
4 -~-s-:
-u,.
XllI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. - SIpIlkaot Lao ....
_.t u..... SipIlIcont N.
Would the proposal result in a need for new Impact -" Impact Impart
systems, or substantial alterations to the
following utilities:
a) Powet or natural gas? 0 0 IlII 0
b) Communications systems? 0 0 IlII 0
c) Local or regional water treatment or 0 0 IlII 0
distribution facilities?
d) Sewer or septic tanks? 0 0 IlII 0
e) Storm water drainage? 0 0 IlII 0
f) Solid waste disposal? 0 0 IlII 0
Comments:
a) The Project would not result in the need for new systems or substantial alterations to
electrical or natural gas lines. Electrical lines extend from Main Street into Delniso
Court and Roma Court (SDGE 2001a). These lines do not continue farther into the
property. Minor extensions of these lines would be necessary to accommodate the
Project site. Also, gas lines exist on the Project site. The existing gas lines are
located within the entire length of Delniso Court and Roma Court (SDGE 2oo1b).
b) The Project would not result in the need for new communication systems or require
substantial alterations to existing communication systems. Minor extensions of
communication systems lines may be necessary to facilitate future industrial use of
the site.
c) The Project would not create the need for new water treatment or distribution
systems or substantial alterations to regional water treatment or distribution facilities.
The Project site is located within Division 1 of the Otay Water District (OWD).
Water lines currently exist along Main Street. Extension of water lines onto the
property would be the responsibility of the developer.
d) The Project would not result in the need for new sewage systems or require
substantial alterations to existing sewers or septic tanks. The site has existing sewer
lines that are located along the length of Delniso Court and Roma Court (Chula Vista
1986; Iribe 2001). Minor extensions of the sewer lines would be necessary to
facilitate possible future uses of the Project site. Any minor improvements that may
be necessary would be in accordance with the Sewer Master Plan and City
Engineering Standards. The Project would neither use nor impact any septic tank
systems.
e) The Project would not result in the need for new storm water systems or require
substantial alterations to existing systems. Storm drains currently exist on Main
Street and on-site along Oelniso Court (Chula Vista 1986; lribe 2001). Portions of
the Project site would be landscaped to absorb rainfall. The Project would be subject
to requirements of the NPDES and RWQCB permitting process as described in
Section III.
25
4 - ~r.o
t) The Project would result in the need for solid waste disposal in a similar capacity as
other comparable nearby uses. This minor increase in demand for solid waste
disposal services would not result in the need for new systems or substantial
alterations to existing service providers.
......-
.......1Iy - Loa.....
SIpUlaDt u..... -- No
XIV. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal: Im_ - - Im_
a) Obstruct any scenic vista or view open 0 0 0 IlII
to the public or will the proposal result
in the creation of an aesthetically
offensive site open to public view?
b) Cause the destruction or modification of 0 0 IlII 0
a scenic route?
c) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic 0 0 0 IlII
effect?
d) Create added light or glare sources that 0 0 IlII 0
could increase the level of sky glow in
an area or cause this Project to fail to
comply with Section 19.66.100 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code, Title 19?
e) Produce an additional amount of spill 0 IlII 0 0
light?
A visual analysis was conducted of the Project site in May 2001 and was updated in July 2002 based
on the proposed change in land use. The visual analysis is on file with the City Of Chula Vista.
a) The Project would not obstruct any scenic vista or view. The visual character of the Project site
is dominated by man-made industrial, commercial, and residential buildings and transportation-
related development. The primary landscape feature is the Otay River and floodplain south of
the Project site across Main Street. Low-lying commercial and industrial buildings and their
associated parking lots presently characterize views of the Project' site from Main Street.
Construction of the Project would be conSistent with the scale and form of these buildings.
Views across the Project from adjacent residential buildings are predominantly urban in
character. The introduction of Project development into these views would be consistent with
the overall urban character of the area. The slope along the northern property line will be
landscaped in accordance with City of Chula Vista requirements, as will other manufactured
slopes on the property.
b) The Project would not cause the destruction or modification of a scenic route. The Project
would generally be visible from Main Street and 1-805. Views toward the Project from the
south, east, and west would predominantly be from people traveling in their cars along Main
Street and 1-805. With the exception of Main Street, views from these roadways are not
considered sensitive since they have not been classified as scenic roads, and views are limited to
a duration of a few seconds as the vehicle passes by the site. Main Street is identified as a
scenic highway/road. Therefore, treatment oflandscaping of the site should be compatible with
the overall goals and policies of the General Plan. With implementation of appropriate site
landscaping, the visual impacts associated with this Project would not be significant.
26
4- -51
c) The Project would not have a demonstrable, negative aesthetic effect. The development would
be similar in scale and form with existing industrial, commercial, and auto dealership uses in the
vicinity. Additionally, the Project site would be landscaped to provide some screening of the
buildings to be constructed on the. site. Views in the general area are predominantly urban in
character, as exemplified by existing commercial, industrial, and residential development that is
in the immediate vicinity of the site. For these reasons, there would be no significant impacts to
the aesthetics of the general area as a result of this Project.
d) The Project would create a new source oflight and glare on the currently undeveloped property.
I1Iumination of the site is important for display of inventory stock and for safety and security of
the buildiIi.gs and outlying parking lots. Because auto dealership uses are proposed, nighttime
illumination of the individual dealerships would be the brightest at the buildings where auto
sales take place. The three dealerships shown on both site plans would be located on pads close
to Main Street and near current industry-related uses. The nearest residential uses are removed
approximately 1,000 feet to the north of the auto dealership buildings. Uses closer to the
residential area would be primarily fleet inventory parking lots or auto-related industrial uses,
which would have the lowest level of illumination on the Project site.
A study was conducted at the Project site that illustrates the level of lighting that would be
anticipated given the proposed use. As described above, lighting would be brightest near the
auto dealership buildings and would range from 10 to 80 foot-candles immediately adjacent to
the source. In the center of the site, lighting would range from 5 to 40 foot-candles adjacent to
the source. Toward the back of the Project site, illumination would range from 0 near the
northern property boundary to approximately 40 foot-candles adjacent to the source. Foot-
candles would range from 0 to a maximum of 157.1 at the source (on the light pole), with an
average of 24.6 foot-candles for the entire site (Spaulding Lighting, Inc. 2002).
Light poles would be 22 feet in height. There would be a total of 259 lighting fixtures provided
at the site, with four different types of fixtures used. As a result of the proposed lighting
arrangement, there would be no off-site spill of lighting at the property line. Off-site properties
to the north would be further protected from lighting due to the elevational difference between
the Project site and the residential area, a difference of approximately 40 feet. For these
reasons, the lighting proposed for the automobile dealership use would not create a significant
impact to the residential area.
e) The Project would create a new source of light and glare on the currently undeveloped property.
A mitigation measure requires project lighting to be consistent with the project lighting plan, as
well Chula Vista lighting regulations (CVMC 17.28).
........,
Pot"""'.,. s_ .....-
XV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the - v..... ........... No
proposal: 1- Mitipted Im.- Im.-
a) Will the proposal result in the alteration of or 0 0 0 IllI
the destruction or a prehistoric or historic
archaeological. site?
b) Will the proposal result in adverse physical or 0 0 0 IllI
aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic
building, structure or object?
c) Does the proposal have the potential to cause a 0 0 0 IllI
physical change that would affect unique ethnic
27
4-58
cultural values?
d) Will the proposal restrict existing religious or
sacred uses within the potential impact area?
e) Is the area identified on the City' s General
Plan EIR as an area of high potential for
archeological resources?
Comments:
o
o
o
III
o
o
o
III
a) The Project would not result in the alteration or destruction of a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site. A cultural resource record check and a field investigation of the Project site
were conducted by a qualified archaeologist (EDA W San Diego/KEA Enviromnental) in March
2001 and resulted in negative fmdings for cultural resource sites. The Project would not affect
prehistoric or historic sites, and no impacts would occur.
b) The Project would not result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic
building, structure, or object because no cultural resource sites or historic structures are located
on the property or are in the immediate area.
c) The Project does not have the potential to cause a physical change that could affect unique
ethnic cultural values because no cultural resource sites are located on the property or are
affected by the Project.
d) The Project would not restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the Project vicinity.
e) The Project site is not identified in the City's General Plan EIR as an area of high potential for
archaeological resources, and no such resources were identified through the record check or the
field investigation of the Project site as described above.
..........,.
...........
1m....
......tlaD1
--
u.....
.........
Loa ....
SIgnUkaD'
Impa..
No
Impact
XVI. PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES.
Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the
destruction of paleontological resources?
Comments:
o
o
III
o
Thomas Demere, Ph.D., Curator of Paleontology at the San Diego Natural History Museum,
conducted a paleontological study of the Project site.
The Project would not significantly impact paleontological resources. The Project site contains
the following geological formations: the Otay Formation, Quaternary alluvium, and recent
artificial fill/colluvium materials. Both the alluvium and the artificial fill/colluvium have low to
no potential for the occurrence of paleontological resources. The Otay Formation is considered
to have a high paleontological resource potential and the potential deposits on-site are assigned a
high resource value.
The Quaternary alluvial/colluvial deposits occur in the low-lying portions of the site along Main
Street but are largely buried by about 10 feet of artificial fill material. There are no records at
28
4-s:-a;
the San Diego Natural History Museum of fossil localities occurring within the alluvial deposits
on-site.
The Otay Formation consists of Oligocene-age mudstones, sandstones, and gritstones. This
formation is well exposed in the large cut slopes along the north and east sides of the elevated
building pads at the terminus of Delniso Court. There are no records at the San Diego Natural
History Museum of fossil localities occurring within the Otay Formation at the Project site.
For these reasons, no significant impacts to paleontological resources would occur. High
significance formations known to occur in the area would not be affected by the Project.
1'01_
..........,. _1IauIt Lea ....
-... u""" -- No
XVII. RECREATION. Would the proposal: Impa" -" Impact Impact
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or 0 0 0 III
regional parks or other recreational facilities?
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? 0 0 0 III
c) Interfere with recreation parks & recreation 0 0 0 III
plans or programs?
Comments:
a) The Project would not increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other
recreational facilities. Because the Project proposes an industrial land use of the site, there
would not be a significant increase in local or regional population related to the Project.
Therefore, the Project would not create a significant demand for recreational facilities.
b) The Project would not impact existing recreational opportunities because the Project site is
currently a vacant lot that is not used for recreational purposes. The Project site is not situated
adjacent to any recreational areas and would not limit access to or restrict activities at local
parks.
b) The Project would not impact recreational parks, plans, or programs. The Project site
is surrounded by and zoned for industrial use and the site is undesirable as a
park/recreation area due to past land use described above. The site is located within the
OVRP planning area. The OVRP draft plan shows a potential park site located
southwest of the Project site on the southem side of Main Street. This identified park
site, southwest of the Project, has not been acquired by the public agencies, and
development of the park would be physically constraiued due to surrounding
development. Most of the land presently acquired for the regional park is located
east ofI-80S. The nearest existing park, Valle Lindo Park, is located approximately 0.5
mile to the northwes~ of the Project site.
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE: See Negative Declaration for
mantlatory findings of significance. If an EIR is
needed, this section should be completed.
a) Does the Project have the potential to degrade
the quality of the environment, substantially
29
PoteatlaUy
--
Impact
-
SIpIIi<oa'
u.....
>II.......
Lea ....
-..
Impact
No
Impact
o
o
o
III
4-'00
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop
below self-sustaining levels, threaten to
eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce
the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
Comments:
The Project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment because the
property would be developed in conformance with the General Plan and zoning. Impacts from the
former animal rendering facility have been remediated. The groundwater issue does not pose a
health threat (Risk-Based Decisions 1996) and will not be adversely impacted by the project.
Remediation of ground water issues, if determined to be necessary by the RWQCB, can be
accomplished through the measures outlined in Attachment "A". Monitoring of the site would
continue as required by the RWQCB without harmful effects to future users of the site (Risk-Based
Decisions 1996). The Project would not substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant
or animal community, or reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal because the site has been previously graded and padded for development and does not
contain significant biological resources. No significant biological impacts would occur. The Project
would not eliminate important examples of California history or prehistory because no
archaeological or historical resources were located during the field investigation of the Project site
by a qualified archaeologist.
b) Does the Project have the potential to achieve
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals?
Comments:
.........,.
..........,. Sipdlkaot ""'than
- u..... -.. No
Impact ......... 1m.... Impact
0 0 0 III
The Project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the
disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. The Project site is entirely disturbed with limited
native vegetation and has been graded and padded by a previous owner. The impacts of the animal
rendering facility have been remediated, with the exception of residual groundwater impacts that
would continue to be monitored under the direction of the RWQCB. The property would be
developed with industrial uses that are consistent with the General Plan, zoning, and the OVRPA.
No short-term versus long-term environmental impacts have been identified for this Project.
..........1
-..
1m....
PoteatiaUy
SIgnUkaD'
u"""
MItiga...
Lea....
--
Impact
No
Impact
c) Does the Project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
o
o
o
III
30
4 -G I
means that the incremental effects of a Project
are considerable when viewed in connection
with the effects of past Projects, the effects of
other current Projects, and the effects of
probable future Projects.)
Comments:
The Project would not result in impacts that are individually limited but cumulatively considerable.
The Project site is located in the OVRRPA, with industrial development on two sides. A Public
Works Yard for the City of Chula Vista has recently been built adjacent to the property near the
northeast corner of the site. A flat graded pad across Otay Valley Road to the south is slated for use
as an automobile dealership. Property at the top of the slope and to the north is used for residential
purposes. Farther to the east is the Otay Landfill, a privately operated trash disposal facility. No
cumulative impacts have been identified with the implementation of this Project.
......tlaD1
SIgnUkaD.
1m....
1'oI~_
SIgnUkaD'
u.....
MItlgaled
Lea_
SIgnUkaD'
1m....
No
Impa"
d) Does the Project have environmental effects,
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
o
III
o
o
The Project could have adverse environmental effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly,
that are associated with the hazardous materials that formerly existed on-site. The Project could also
result in short-term, construction-related air quality and storm water runoff impacts. However, all
environmental impacts identified in this analysis can be adequately mitigated as discussed in detail
above. Specific mitigation measures are identified in the next section and are summarized as
follows.
Issues related to on-site hazards from former use of the site as an animal rendering facility have
been mitigated through the remediation efforts implemented at the site since 1982. Removal of the
contents of the former hazardous waste ponds has been accomplished, and the contaminated soil that
was located beneath the ponds was removed in compliance with RWQCB direction. The only
hazards remaining are residual impacts to on-site and off-site groundwater, which continue to be
monitored as required by the RWQCB. According to a study prepared by Risk-Based Decisions
(1996), use of the site for commercial or industrial purposes would not pose a significant health risk
to users of the site.
Air quality impacts would be short term and are related to dust during construction. These impacts are
temporary and less than significant; nevertheless, mitigation measures would be implemented to lessen
the on-site and off-site air quality impacts that could result during the construction phase.
Impacts associated with runoff during the construction phase would be less than significant but would
be controlled further through the use ofBMPs and the preparation of a SWPPP.
31
4- -G 2-
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES
Hazards
1. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit a soils management plan to the
RWQCB for review, approval, and implementation by the RWQCB or their appointed designee the
County Department of Environmental Health.
2. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer that grading of the waste cell parcel is consistent with requirements of the RWQCB
as contained in the WDR permit for the waste cell, as may be modified to allow additional soil to
be placed on the cell.
Air Quality
3. Project construction shall implement enhanced dust control measures to maintain a less than
significant impact associated with air quality during construction. Enhanced dust control measures
shall be called out as notes on the project grading plan(s) and shall include the following:
4. All unpaved construction areas shall be sprinkled with water or other acceptable dust control agents
during dust-generating activities to reduce dust emissions. Additional watering or dust control'
agents shall be applied during dry weather or on windy days until dust emissions are not visible.
S. Trucks hauling dirt and debris shall be properly covered to reduce windblown dust and spills.
6. A 20-mile-per-hour speed limit on unpaved surfaces in connection with the Project shall be
enforced.
7. On dry days, dirt and debris spilled onto paved surfaces shall be swept up immediately to reduce
re-suspension of particulate matter caused by vehicle movement. Approach routes to the site shall
be cleaned daily of construction-related dirt in dry weather.
8. On-site stockpiles of excavated material shall be covered or watered.
.
9. Following construction, disturbed areas shall be hydroseeded, landscaped, or developed as quickly
as possible and as directed by the City to reduce dust generation.
10. Heavy-duty construction equipment with modified combuStion/fuel injection systems for emissions
control shall be utilized during grading and construction activities. Catalytic reduction for gasoline-
powered equipment shall be used. Also, construction equipment shall be equipped with
prechamber diesel engines or equivalent together with proper maintenance and operation to reduce
emissions of nitrogen oxide, to the extent available and feasible.
Geophysical
II. Prior to the issuance of grading permits for the site, a soils report with foundation
recommendations shall be submitted to the Engineering Department for review and approval. Due
to the existence of the waste cell on site, an accurate site plan showing any building locations
relative to the waste cell will be required with the soils study.
32
4-03
12. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit further evaluation of the
existing cut slope at the northwest of the site, addressing the north-south trending fault line
identified in the Geocon report dated 1986.
Water Quality
13. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall complete all applicable Forms and
comply with the City Of Chula Vista's Strom Water Management Standards Requirements Manual.
14. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the
City Engineer that Best Management Practices (BMP's) will be implemented to prevent pollution
of the storm water conveyance systems, both during and after construction. Permanent storm water
requirements shall be incorporated into the project design and be shown on the project plans. Any
construction and non-structural BM P requirements that cannot be shown graphically must l1e
either noted or stapled on the plans.
15. The project shall comply with the requirements of the NPDES Municipal Permit Order No. 2001-
01. According to said permit, development of the Project is a Priority Development Project.
Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMP) and Numeric Sizing Criteria are
applicable to this project. Adequate provisions shall be made in the planning and design stages of
the project to facilitate compliance with such requirements.
16. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, a water quality study shall be reviewed and approved by
the City Engineer that demonstrates compliance with the requirements of the National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction and Municipal Permits, including Stantard
Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMP) and Numeric Sizing Criteria requirements, in
accordance with the City's Manual.
Traffic
-
17. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall contribute to the Traffic Development
Impact Fee Program (TDIF) toward the construction of a second westbound left-turn lane to be
provided at the Main StreetlI-80S southbound ramp intersection.
18. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City
Of Chula Vista to design, construct, and secure a fully actuated traffic signal, including
interconnect wiring, mast arms, signal heads, and associated equipment, underground
improvements, standards and luminaries at the Main StreetlDelniso Court intersection.
19. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City
Of Chula Vista to design, construct, and secure a fully actuated traffic signal, including
inter~onnect wiring, mast arms, si2nal heads, and associated equipment, underground
improvements, standards and luminaries at the Main StreetlRoma Court intersection.
20. Prior to the issuance of building permits, the applicant shall enter into an agreement with the City
Of Chula Vista to design, construct, and secure a 120 foot westbound right turn lane on Main
Street at the Roma Court and Delniso Court intersections.
33
4 -, If
Biological resources
21. Prior to the removal or alteration of any mature trees or commencement of construction activities
during the raptor nesting season, identified as December I through July 31 in the Draft Chula Vista
MSCP Subarea Plan, a qualified biologist shall conduct a pre-construction survey of such trees as
well as those within the construction impact area established by the biologist. In the event that a
nest( s) is found during the survey, appropriate construction setbacks deemed appropriate by a
qualified biologist to protect young birds until they are no longer dependent upon the nest shall be
established. No restrictions with respect to tree removal or construction setbacks shall apply
outside the raptor nesting season.
22. During the gnatcatcher breeding season, between February 15 and August 15, noise levels
generated by project-related construction activities shall not exceed 60 decibels (dB) Leq within
any area containing an occupied nest or, if no occupied nest exists, within the area occupied by a
potential breeding pair, in order to prevent construction noise from negatively impacting breeding
success. Where the ambient noise level is greater than 60 dBl Leq, the ambient noise level shall not
be exceeded as a result of project-related construction. If an occupied nest or potential breeding
pair is identified during a pre-construction survey, noise mitigation techniques, such temporary
noise walls or berms or modifications to construction activities, deemed necessary to attenuate
construction noise levels to 60 dBl Leq or less, shall be formulated by a qualified biologist and
qualified acoustician, shall be implemented during breeding season. The qualified acoustician shall
monitor the success of any noise attenuation measures that are implemented; where a violation of
the noise level limit is identified, the acoustician shall immediately notify the Environmental
Review Coordinator so that construction activities can be halted or reduced to avoid further
exceedances of the limit until sufficient alternate or modified noise attenuation measures, if any,
can be implemented.
Aesthetics
23. The applicant shall install lighting as illustrated on the lighting plan prepared by Spaulding
Lighting, dated December 14, 2002.
34
4-c'S-
Lighting, dated December 14, 2002.
XX. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant(s) and/or Operator(s) stipulate that they have each
read, understood, and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures
contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator.
Failure to sign the line(s) provided below prior to adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration shall
indicate the Applicants' and/or Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval.
Knowlton Realty Advisors, L.L.C.,
a Utah limited liability company
Hooper Knowlton III
Manager
Authorized Repr entative of Owner
Si
C/<,J Ie, La?J
ate
Otay Mesa Ventures II, L.L.C.
A Lonisiana limited liability company
Owner
By: LandBank Properties, L.L.C.,
A Louisiana limited liability company,
Its sole member
a~4f'~?-
Signature of Ow
W. P. Lynott
President
,y/// /03
Date
35
q-Co ro
XXI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this Project, involving at least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as
indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
D Lind Use and Planning
D Population and Housing
. Geophysical
. Water (Construction
Impacts)
. Air Quality
(Construction Impacts)
D Paleontological
Resources
Attachments:
. Transportation/Circulation
D Biological Resources
D Public Services
D Utilities and Service
Systems
. Aesthetics
D Cultural Resources
D Energy and Mineral Resources
. Hazards
o Noise
o Recreation
. Mandatory Findings of Significance
A - Regional Water Quality Control Board - Cleanup and Abatement Order (CAO) No. R9-2003-0080
B - Project Site Plans
C - Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
36
4-~7
XXII, DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the Project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a
NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I fmd that although the Project COULl> HAVE a significant effect on the environment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described
on an attached sheet have been added to the Project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the Project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
I find that the Project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at least one
effect (1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal
standards, and (2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis
as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impacts" or
"potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I fmd that although the Project could have a significant effect on the environment, there
WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (1)
have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and
(2) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the Project. An addendum has been prepared to
provide a record of this determination.
s7::z::::~/u~~'
s/e-Jo:-
Date' ,
Marilvn R.F. Ponseggi
Environmental Review Coordinator
City ofChula Vista
37 .
4-b~
o
.
o
o
o
e
California Regional Water Quality Control Board
San Die20 Reltion
Intcmct Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/-rwqcb91
9174 Sky Puk Court, Suite lOll, San Diego. CaIifamia 92t23-4340
PhllllC (858) 467-2952 . FAX (858) 571-6972
e
Gray Do';"
Governor
Winston H. Inckox
Stcnrary for
EnvifOll1fU1Ua1
Protection
March 27, 2002
File: 06-0215.02
-- CERTIFIED MAIL -
Return Receipt Requested
7002 1000 0004 6879 0585
Mr. Ray Hendry
Otay Mesa Ventures II, LLC
Limdbank, Incorporated
141 Union Boulevard, Suite 330
Lakewood, Colorado 80228
Dear Mr. Hendry: .
RE: CLEANUP AND ABATEMENT ORDER (CAO) NO. R9.2003.0080: THE FORMER
OMAR RENDERING SITE, CHULA VISTA
Enclosed is a copy of California Regional Water Quality Control Board; San Diego Region
("RWQCB") Cleanup and Abatement Order (CAO) No. R9-2003-0080 requiring the cleanup and
abatement of environmental pollution from wastes discharged at the former Omar Rendering site.
I strongly urge your prompt compliance with all the directives of CAO No. R9-2003-0080.
You may contest the issuance of Cleanup and Abatement Order (CAO) No. R9-2003-0080 by
requesting a public hearing on the matter before the Regional Board. In order to schedule a
hearing, this office must receive a written request at least 30 days prior to the Regional Board
Meeting. Be aware that a request for a hearing does not stay any of the deadlines in the CAD.
Please contact Mr. Brian McDaniel of my staff at (858) 627-3927 or via e-mail at
mcdab@rb9.swrcb.ca.aov if you have any questions regarding this matter.
~inCerelY . ..
.~~...
J H. ROBERTUS
Executive Officer
JHR:jro:bkm
Enclosure: Cleanup and Abatement Order R9-2003-0080: Former Omar Rendering Site.
Cc: Ms. Patricia Beard, City of Chula Vista - Community Development Department, 276 Fourth
Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 wI enclosure
California Environmental Protection Agency
Recycled Paper
>0
4- "9'
Attachment A
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUAUTY CONTROL BOARD
SAN DIEGO REGION
CLEANUP AND ABATEMENT ORDER NO. R9-2003-0080
OTA Y MESA VENTURES IT, L.L.C.
FOR THE
FORMER OMAR RENDERING FACILITY
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region (hereinafter
RWQCB) finds that:
1. The Omar Rendering Company was owned and operated by Darling International,
Incorporated (formerly Darling Delaware Inc.). Darling International Inc.
operated an animal rendering facility and Class I disposal operation on a 40-acre
site located at 4826 Otay Valley Road, Chula Vista from 1947 to 1982.
2. Waste disposal records maintained by Omar Rendering indicated that a variety of
hazardous waste liquids and waste sludge was accepted for disposal. The liquid
wastes primarily consisted of acids and acid sludge (hydrochloric, hydrofluoric,
sulfuric, chromic, and nitric) and alkaline fluids. Lesser amounts of chlorinated
solvents, chlorinated pesticides, petroleum wastes, PCBs, and organic wastes
were also discharged to the surface impoundments.
3. To comply with California Water Code Section 13273.1, a Solid Waste
Assessment Test (SWAT) was conducted during 1988-1989 for the waste
management unit. The results from that investigation are included in a report
entitled "Report Site Investigation Former Omar Rendering Company Site, Chula
Vista, California", prepared by Dames and Moore and dated June 15, 1989.
Dames and Moore reported detectable levels in groundwater of the following
volatile organic compounds (VOCs): Methylene Chloride, Chloroform, 1,1,1-
Trichloroethane, Carbon Tetrachloride, Trichloroethene, Tetrachloroethene and
1,I-Dichloroethene as well as infrequent detections of freons, benzene, toluene,
ethylbenzene and xylenes.
Further, the Dames and Moore Report reported results from a soil boring (B-14)
"n. completed through aformer pond, located immediately west of the former
Class I impoundments." The soil sample collected from a depth of 40 feet in
boring B-14 contained the following VOCs: 1,I-Dichloroethene, 1,1-
Dichioroethane, trans-I, 2-Dichloroethene, 1,1.1- Trichloroethane,
Trichloroethene, 1,1 ,2- Trichloroethane, Toluene, Ethylbenzene and total Xylenes..
The concentration of these VOCs in that soil sample ranged from 0.75 to 120
mglkg. Dames and Moore concluded that results from their soil-sampling
program were "... suggesting that the remedial excavation was not c(Jmplete"
(page 42).
4-,0
. Order R9-2003-OO80:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
-2-
March 27, 2003
4. On November 26, 1990, the RWQCB received a technical report of results
entitled "Report of Additional Groundwater Sampling ArW.zyses Otay Valley
Industrial Park, Chula Vista, California, "prepared by Woodward Clyde
Consultants and dated November 15, 1990. The Otay Valley Industrial Park
(OVIP) is located east of the former Omar Rendering facility. The results of
ground water sampling on the OVIP property indicate that the following
maximum concentrations of groundwater pollutants were measured in ground
water samples collected from wells located on the OVIP property:
Constituent OVIP Well Maximum State
Concentration MeLt
1, I-Dichloroethene MW-l 21 6
1,I-Dichloroethane MW-l 12 5
Trichloroethene MW-l 890 5
Tetrachloroethene MW-l 10 5
1,1,1- Tetrachloroethane MW-4 2 200
1,1,2,2- Tetrachloroethane MW-4 2 1
1,2-Dichloroethane MW-6 2 0.5
1 = Primary maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) from RWQCB Basin Plan (p. 3-10,
incorporated by reference from California Code of Regulations. Title 22, ~ 64444).
The highest concentrations reported by Woodward Clyde Consultants were
observed from wells located adjacent to the eastern boundary of the former Omar
Rendering site.
S. Groundwater monitoring wells continue (in 2002) to detect volatile organic
constituents (VOCs) in addition to concentrations of inorganic and metal
constituents elevated above water quality objectives established for the Otay
Valley Hydrologic Area (910.20). The maximum concentrations of pollutants and
the corresponding maximum contaminant level (MCL) for groundwater pollutants
are as follows:
Organic Constituents Maximum Observed California MCL'
Concentration (j,tgIL)
(11,,/1.)
1,1,2 Trichioroethane 14 5
1,I-Dichloroethane 790 5
1,2-Dichloroethane 2.6 0.5
1,I-Dichloroethene 38 6
Benzene 53 1
cis-l,2-Dichloroethene 3400 6
Tetrachloroethene 220 5,
Trichloroethene 1400 5
1 = Primary maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) from RWQCB Basin Plan (p. 3-10,
incorporated by reference from California Code of Regulations, Title 22, ~ 64444).
4 -7 (
Order R9-2003-OO80:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
-3-
March 27, 2003
Inorganic Constituents Maximum Observed California MCL'
Concentration (Ihg/L)
(ml!!L\
Chromium 0.62 0.05.
Nickel 6.7 0.12
Selenium 0.11 0.05.
Thallium 0.01 0.002'
Chloride 15,000 500'
Sulfate 1,800 500"
IDS 27,000 1500'
2 = Primary maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) from RWQCB Basin Plan (p. 3-
8. incorporated by reference from California Code of Regulations, Title 22, fi
64431).
3 = Water Quality Objective RWQCB Basin Plan (Table 3-3: page 3.31)
6. On June 11, 1997, the RWQCB adopted Order No. 97-40, Waste Discharge
Requirements for Closure and Post-Closure Maintenance, Class I Waste
-Management Containment Cell, Former Omar Rendering Facility, Darling
International. Order 97-40 revised the monitoring and reporting program in order
to address current State and RWQCB policies, regulations, and the current status
of the project.
7. Otay Mesa Ventures I, LLClLandbank, a subsidiary of the IT Group/Corpomtion,
assumed title to the 40 acre former Omar Rendering Facility parcel in December
1999. On January 16, 2002, the IT Group, Inc. announced that it had signed a
letter of intent with The Shaw Group Inc. as the result of the IT Groups'
bankruptcy. Subsidiaries and affiliates of The Shaw Group acquired certain IT
Group assets formerly held by the IT subsidiary known as "Landbank,
Incorporated," including those held by the Otay Mesa Ventures I, llC (the
"Site"). On May 3, 2002, Otay Mesa Ventures I, LLC transferred ownership of
the site to Otay Mesa Ventures II, L.L.C., a Shaw subsidiary.
8. The current property owner,Otay Mesa Ventures II, L.L.C., has assumed
responsibility for the cleanup and abatement of conditions of pollution or
nuisance caused by past discharges of wastes at the former Omar Rendering
facility. Accordingly, Otay Mesa Ventures IT, L.L.C. is named as the discharger
responsible for compliance with this cleanup and abatement Order.
9. The Water Quality Control Plan for the San Diego Basin (9) (Basin Plan) was
adopted by the RWQCB on September 8, 1994 and subsequently approved by the
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) on December 13, 1994. The
Basin Plan designates beneficial uses of water resources, water quality objectives,
and an implementation plan; which are applicable to the cleanup of wastes as
required by this Order.
4-72.-
Order R9-2oo3-OO80:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
-4-
March 27, 2003
10. The former Omar Rendering Site is located in an area where ground water has
been designated as snitable for uses including municipal ahd domestic public
water supplies. The former Omar Rendering site is located in proximity to surface
waters (i.e., the Otay River) that support beneficial uses including RECl, REC2,
WARM, WILD, and RARE. Past discharges of waste at the site are creating a
condition of pollution in that the discharges are causing groundwater to exceed
applicable water quality objectives and threatening to cause water quality
objectives in the Otay River to be exceeded.
11. Pursuant to State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) Resolution No. 92-
49, the RWQCB shall require the discharger to conduct investigation and cleanup
and abatement in a progressive sequence comprised of the following steps: a.)
preliminary site assessment, b.) soil and water investigation, c) proposal and
selection of cleanup and abatement action (to evaluate feasible and effective.
cleanup and abatement actions); d.) implementation of cleanup and abatement
action; and e.) monitoring to confirm the short-and long-term effectiveness of
cleanup and abatement.
12. Under the terms of Resolution No. 92-49, the RWQCB is obligated to have a
presumptive cleanup goal to require cleanup to attain background water quality
conditions. The RWQCB will establish a cleanup level above background water
quality conditions, only if the RWQCB determines that it is technologically or
economically infeasible to achieve background water quality conditions. If the
RWQCB makes such a determination, the Board will then select a cleanup level
that is based on the lowest levels which are technologically or economically
achievable and that will not unreasonably affect present and anticipated beneficial
uses of waters of the Region. This approach provides for determining and
establishing a level of water quality protection, which is reasonable without
allowing or causing an unreasonable effect on water quality.
13. State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) regulations governing waste
discharges to land (CCR, 23, Division 3, ChapterlS - Discharges of Hazardous
Waste to Land) require that cleanup and abatement actions intended to contain
waste at the place of release shall implement the applicable provisions of that
division, to the extent feasible (CCR, Title 23, Division 3, ~ 2510 et seq.).
Further, the requirements of CCR Title 23, Chapter 15 are used in establishing
cleanup levels (~ 2550.4) and undertaking corrective actions where discharges of
waste are subject to California Water Code Section 13304.
14. This enforcement action is exempt from the provisions of the California
Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code ~ 21000 et seq.) in
aocordance with ~ 15321, Chapter 3, Title 14, California Code of Regulations.
4-73
Order R9-2003-OO80:
Cleanup and Abatement of GroWldwater
Pollution: Fonner Omar Rendering Site
-5-
March 27,2003
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED, pursuant to Section 13304 of the California Water Code,
Otay Mesa Ventures II L.L.C. (hereinafter the "discharger") shall comply with the
following Directives: .
A. PROHIBmONS
1. Odors, vectors, and other nuisances of waste origin beyond the limits of the landfill
property boundary are prohibited. .
2. RWQCB Basin Plan waste discharge prohibitions shall not be violated.
3. The discharge of any wastes or waste constituents to land or waters of the State are
prohibited, unless the discharge is permitted under the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) or by issuance of Waste Discharge Requirements by
the RWQCB under Section 13260 ofthe Califomia Water Code.
4. The management and discharge of contaminated soils and ground water shall not
violate applicable federal, state and local regulations or requirements.
B. COMPREHENSIVE SITE INVESTIGATION REPORT
The discharger shall submit to the RWQCB a complete site investigation report by
Aums! 30, 2003. The final technical report shall contain all site-specific data collected
during the investigation, including the following information:
1. Characterization of wastes in sonrce area: Characterization of the source
area(s) of the pollutants of concern [as listed in Section B.2l including:
a) Location and delineation of soils or ground water which are polluted with
mobile or immobile concentrations of nonaqueous phase liqnids (Le.,
NAPLs),
b) Location and delineation of soils which are polluted with leachable
concentrations of soluble pollutants, and
c) An estimate, including the technical basis, of the volume(s) of residual soils
identified and delineated pursuant to Directives B.l(a) and B.1(h) above.
2. Complete delineation of impacts to water quality: The nature and extent of the
pollution of water resources cansed by the release of waste constituents and
"degradation products" that may result from the natural degradation of waste
constituents discharged at the site.
Initially, the site investigation should focus on the delineation of the following waste
constituents (pollutants of concern):
'c/-7c.f..
Order R9-2003-OO80:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
-6-
March 27, 2003
PoUntants of Concern
1,1,1- Tetrachloroethane
1,1,2- Tetrachloroethane
1,1,I-Trichlorethane
1,1,2 Trichloroethane
1,I-Dichloroethane
1,2-Dichloroethane
1,I-Dichloroethene
Benzene
Toluene
EthyIbenzene
Total Xylenes
cis-l,2-Dichloroethene
trans-l,2-Dichloroethene
Tetrachloroethene
Trichloroethene
Chromium
Nickel
Selenium
Thallium
Chloride
Sulfate
IDS
The RWQCB may amend this list to include new waste constituents, or associated
degradation products, detected during the site investigation or remediation of the site.
Delineation shall continue until the maximum extent of ground water pollution from
waste constituents (i.e., to non-detectable concentrations) has been determined in the
horizontal and vertical directions. The assessment shall include a determination of
the spatial distribution and'concentration of each .constituent of concern throughout
the zone affected by the release. Delineation of groundwater pollution must include
on and off-property areas of the site.
3. Site Conceptual Model: The discharger shall provide the RWQCB with a Site
Conceptual Model (SCM). The SCM is a written or pictorial representation of the
, release scenario, the likely distribution of wastes at the site, as well as potential
pollutant migration pathways and receptors. The SCM shall identify and describe the
types of wastes present including their distribution in space and time, and how the
wastes are changing in space and time.
The SCM shall also identify the potential, current and future receptors in the area;
link potential sources to potential receptors through transport of wastes in the air, soil
4-7~
Order R9-2003-OO80:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
-7-
March 27, 2003
and water; and identify the fate and transport characteristics of the site. The SCM
shall describe or show the physical characteristics and properties of the subsurface
and identify the environmental issues that need to be investigated (as well as those
issues that do not need to be addressed). The initial SCM shall include a discussion of
the level of uncertainty of conclusions, outline data gaps remaining in the conceptual
model, and describe the additional work needed to fill identified data gaps. To the
extent possible, the dischargers shall confirm their site conceptual model using a
combination of existing site-specific data and additional data developed during the
site investigation process.
The SCM shall be refmed and updated as site characterization data become available.
Updates to the SCM shall be included.as an appendix to the semi-annual monitoring
reports submitted to the RWQCB. The initial SCM shall be submitted to the
RWQCB by Mav 30. 2003.
C. EV ALVA TION OF REMEDIAL OPTIONS AND FEASIBILITY STUDY (FS)
1. Consideration of Remedial Technologies
At a minimum, the discharger shall consider the following cleanup and abatement
methods or combination thereof, to the extent that they may be applicable to the
discharge or threat thereof:
a) Source removal and/or isolation;
b) In-place treatment of water or soil:
1. Bioremediation
2. Aeration
3. Fixation
c) Excavation or extraction of soil, waste, or gas for on"site or off-site treatment
by the following techniques:
1. Bioremediation
2. Thermal destruction
3. Aeration
4. Sorption
S. Precipitation, flocculation, and sedimentation
6. Filtration
7. Fixation
8. Evaporation
d) Excavation or extraction of soil, water, or gas for appropriate recycling, re-
use, or disposal.
4-7~
Order R9-2003-0080:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
-8-
March 27, 2003
2. Comprehensive Feasibility Stndy(FS)
The discharger shall submit to the RWQCB a complete comprehensive FS by
December 30, 2003.-The discharger shall submit a Comprehensive Feasibility
Study (FS) Report containing an evaluation of at least 5 ootential remedies or
"corrective measures. " A corrective measure may be comprised of a single
remediation technology or a combination of remedial technologies to aChieve the
most effective treatment of site specific groundwater pollutants.
The comprehensive FS shall include the following minimum components:
a) Assessment of Corrective Measnres (ACM) for each potential remedy shall
include an assessment of the following minimum criteria:
1. The performance, reliability, ease of implementation, and potential
impacts of appropriate potential remedies, including safety impacts,
cross-media impacts, and control of exposure to any residual pollution;
2. The time required to begin and complete the proposed remedy
[including the proposed suite of corrective action measures (CAM)];
3. The costs of implementing the proposed remedy;
4. State and/or local permit requirements or other environmental or public
health requirements that may substantially affect implementation of the
remedy. .
5. The discharger shall assess each corrective measure for attainment of the
following ground water protection standards as specified in CCR 23,
Chapter 15, ~ 2550.4:
i. A concentration limit for each pollutant of concern not to exceed
the background value of constituents [per CCR Title 23, Chapter
15, S 2SS0.4(a)(I)]. Background concentrations for naturally
occurring constituents must be established pursuant to CCR Title
23, Chapter 15, ~ 2SS0.7(e)(1l)(A). There should be no
"background concentrations" for organic waste constituents (e.g.,
volatile organic constituents (VOCs) and chlorinated VOCs).
Therefore, the water quality protection standard or
"concentration limit" for organic waste constituents is the
practical quantitation limit (PQL) for organic waste constituents
using the appropriate analytical method selected per Directive
D.l (a) of this Order. And,
ii. For a corrective action program, the discharger may propose and
the R WQCB may consider establishing a concentration limit
greater than background (CLGB) for each pollutant of concern.
The discharger must demonstrate to the RWQCB that the
proposed CLGB is the lowest concentration, not exceeding the
4-77
Order R9-2003-OO80:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
-9-
March 27, 2003
water quality objective designated in the Basin Plan, applicable
statutes or regulations with a factor of safety, that is
technologically and economically achievable [CCR 23, Chapter
15, ~ 2SS0.4(e)]. The applicable numerical water quality
protection st.andards are identified in Directive C.2 (a)(6) of this
Order.
6. Maximum numerical water quality protection standards. The numerical
water quality protection standards for the maximum concentrations of
the constituents of concern are as follows:
OI'l!anic Constituents California MCL 1 (;:;:;JL)
1,1,1- Tetrachloroethane 200
1,1,2- Tetrachloroethane 1
1,1 , I-Trichlorethane 5
1,1,2 Trichloroethane 5
1,I-Dichloroethane 5
1,2-Dichloroethane 0.5
1,I-Dichloroethene. 6
Benzene 1
Toluene . 150
Ethvlbenzene 700
Total XVlenes 1,750
cis-l ,2- Dichloroethene 6
trans-l,2-Dichloroethene 10
Tetrachloroetbene 5
Trichloroethene 5
Chromium 50"
Nickel 106'
Selenium 50"
Thallium 2"
Chloride 500"
Sulfate 5003
IDS 1500'
1 = Primary maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) from RWQCB Basin
Plan (p. 3.10, incorporated by reference from California Code of
Regulations, Title 22. ~ 64444). Concentration units for organic
constituents are indicated in I-lgIL.
2 = Primary maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) from RWQCB Basin
Plan (p. 3-8; incorporated by reference from California Code of
Regulations, Title 22, ~ 64431). Concentration units for organic
constituents are indicated in ~gIL
4-7f:'
Order R9-2003-OO80:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
3 = Water Quality Objective RWQCB Basin Plan (Table 3-3: page 3-31).
Concentration units for chloride, sulfate and TDS are indicated in
mgIL.
-10-
March 27, 2003
b) Selection of Remedy (SOR) shall address the following minimum criteria:
1. The selected remedy must meet the following minimum requirements:
i. Protection of human health. The selected remedy must result in
a cumulative carcinogenic risk level of no greater than lxI0-6,
including all exposure pathways for residual waste constituents.
The non-carcinogenic effects from exposure to waste
constituents shall be quantified as the hazard index (HI), derived
from. summation of hazard quotients (HQ) for individual residual
waste constituent, shall be less than 1 (HI < 1). These methods
for quantifying carcinogenic risk and non-carcinogenic hazards
may be found in USEP A Risk Assessment Guidance for
Superfund (1989, Chapter 8 also see
http://www.epa.gov/superfundlprogranlSlriskltooIthh.htm).
ii. Attainment of the ground water protection standards in CCR
23, Chapter 15, ~ 2550.4(a). The selected remedy shonld able to
achieve background concentrations of constituents of concern per
Directive C.2 (a)(5)(i) of this Order. If the selected remedy
includes a proposal to establish a groundwater cleanup level
greater than background [per Directive C.2 (a)(5)(ii) of this
Order]; then the SOR shall also include a technical evaluation of
all the potential adverse effects on groundwater and surface
water quality listed in CCR Title 23, Chapter 15 [S 2SS0.4(d)(l)
and (d)(2)].
ili. Source ControllRemoval. The selected remedy must result in
effective removal and/or control of the source(s) of soluble
ground water pollutants [see description in Directive B.l of this.
Order] so as to reduce or eliminate further releases of ground
water pollutants from the source area(s);
iv. Waste management. The selected remedy must comply with all
waste management requirements as specified in applicable State
and federal regulations.
v. Compliance with water quality objectives. The selected
remedy must not result in water quality less than that prescribed
in: 1) the Basin Plan and Policies adopted by the State and
Regional Boards, including beneficial uses, water quality
4-79
Order R9-2003;()()80:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
objectives and implementation plans; 2) State and Regional
Water Board policies including State Water Board Resolutions
No. 68-16 (Statement of Policy with Respect to Maintaining
High Quality of Waters in California) and No. 88-63 (Sources of
Drinking Water); and 3) relevant standards, criteria, and
advisories adopted by other state and federal agencies.
c) The discharger shall support the technical and economic evaluation of various
remedial technologies by providing the RWQCB with acceptable
documentation of field performance of remedial technology from other sites
with similar characteristics, evaluations of site-specific data, and/or on-site
pilot testing of potential remedial technologies.
-11-
March 27,2003
d) The discharger must provide the RWQCB with a proposed schedule for
initiating and completing the selected remedy for cleanup and abatement of
groundwater pollution from the site.
e) The discharger shall propose a selected remedy to ensure that the groundwater
protection standards assigned by the RWQCB are attained at all monitoring
points and throughout the zone affected by the telease, including any portions
thereof that extend beyond the facility boundary [pursuant to ~ 2SS0.10(c)].
f) If, the discharger determines that the release has crossed the facility boundary;
the discharger shall, within 30 days of such determination, provide the
RWQCB with a list of the names and addresses of all "affected parties" [all
persons who currently own or reside upon land that overlies the release]. The
RWQCB may invite these affected parties to a Regional Board meeting at
which the potential corrective measures are discussed and either chosen or
revised.
g) The discharger shall install any additional ground water, soil pore liquid, soil
pore gas, or surface water monitoring devices necessary to comply with this
Order.
D, WATER QUALITY MONITORING
1. Monitoring Provisions
a) Unless otherwise permitted by the RWQCB Executive Officer, all analyses
shall be conducted at a laboratory certified for such analyses by the State
Department of Health Services. Specific methods of analysis must be
identified. If the discharger proposes to use methods other than those
included in the most current version of "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid
Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, SW-846" (U.S. Environmental Protection
Agency), the exact methodology must be submitted for review lU)d must be
approved by the RWQCB Executive Officer prior to use. The director of the
laboratory whose name appears on the certification shall supervise all
4~'60
Order R9-2oo3-{)080:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
-12-
March 27, 2003
analytical work in his/her laboratory and shall sign all reports of such work
submitted to the RWQCB..
b) If the discharger monitors any pollutants more frequently than required by this
Order, using the most recent version of "Test Methodsfor Evaluating Solid
Waste, Physical/Chemical Methods, SW-846", the results of this monitoring
. shall be included in the calculation and reporting of the data submitted in the
discharger's monitoring report. The increased frequency of monitoring shall
also be reported.
c) The discharger shall report all instances of noncompliance not reported under
Reports Filed with the RWQCB, Direetive F.5 of this Order at the time
monitoring reports are submitted. The reports shall contain the information
listed in Reports Filed with the RWQCB, Directive F.5 of this Order.
d) All monitoring instruments and equipment used by the discharger to fulfill the
prescribed monitoring program shall be properly calibrated and maintained as
necessary to ensure their continued accuracy.
2. Records of monitoring information shall include:
a) The date, identity of sample, Monitoring Point from which it was collected,
and time of sampling or measurement;
b) The individual(s) who performed the sampling or measurements;
c) Date and time that analyses were started and completed, and t\1e name of the
personnel performing each analysis;
d) The analytical techniques or method used, including method of preserving the
sample and the identity and volumes of reagents used;
e) Calculation of results; and
f) Results of analyses, and the Method Detection Limit for each parameter.
g) Laboratory quality assurance results (e.g.,. percent recovery, response factor)
3. Ground Water Quality Monitoring
The following shall constitute the ground water monitoring program for the
former Omar Rendering site:
4-~ f
Order R9-2003.oo80:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
a) Ground Water Flow RatelDirection
-13-
March 27, 2003
For each monitored ground water body, the discharger shall measure the water
level in each well and determine ground water flow rate and direction at least
semi-annually, including the times of expected highest and lowest elevations
of the water level for the respective ground water body. Ground water
elevations for all background and downgradient wells for a given ground
water body shall be measured within a period of time short enough to avoid
temporal variations in ground water flow which could preclude accurate
determination of ground water flow rate and direction.
b) Well Purging
i.
Prior to sampling monitoring wells, the presence of an
immiscible layer in all wells (floating and/or at bottom of well
screen) shall be determined at the beginning of each sampling
event. This shall be done prior to any other activity that may
disturb the surface of the water in a well, e.g. water level
measurements. If an immiscible layer is found, the RWQCB
shall be notified within 24 hours. .
.,
ii. Prior to purging each monitoring well, the static water level shall
be measured.
iii. Field logs used during well purging shall be included in the
monitoring reports. The information contained in field logs shall
include: the method(s) of monitoring field parameters,
calibration data for the field equipment, method of purging (if a
pump is used, include pump placement and pumping rate), date
each well was purged, well recovery time, method of disposal of
the purged water, an estimate of volume of water purged from
each well, the results of all field analyses, well number, depth to
ground water, method of measuring the water level and field
personnel signatures.
c) Ground Water Sampling and Analysis
i. At a minimum, the ground water monitoring network shall
consist of the following monitoring wells - MW -OIR, MW -04,
BGW-02, SVGW-lO, MW-09, MW-I0MW-14, MW-1SA, and
MW-1SB.
ii. The discharger shall collect semiannual samples from all ground
water monitoring wells listed in Directive D.3(c)(l) and analyze
those samples for the following constituents:
4-'62-.
Order R9-2oo3-OO80:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
-14-
March 27, 2003
CONSTITUENT UNITS SAMPLING AND
REPORTING
FREOUENCY
pH IpH Semi-Annually
Snecific Conductance urnhoslcm Semi-Annually
Total Dissolved Solids mlZll Semi-Annually
Calcium mlZll Semi-Annually
Iron mlZll Semi-Annually
Mal!llesium mlZll. Semi-Annually
Sodinm mlZll Semi-AnnualIv
Potassium mlZll Semi-Annually
Carbonate mlZll Semi-Annually
Bicarbonate mlZll . Semi-Annually
Chloride .mlZll Semi-Annuallv
Sulfate m,g/l Semi - Annually
Nitrate as Nitrol!en mlZll Semi-Annually
Total Phosphate mgj! Semi-Annually
Alkalinity (CaC03) mlZll Semi-Annually
Volatile Organics lLgi1 Semi-Annually
(VOCs)
Semi-volatile Organics lLgi1 Every 5 years
(SVOC)
Arsenic mlZll Annuallv to biannually'
Barium mg/\ Annuallv to biannually'
Cadmium mlZll Annuallv to biannually'
Calcium m,g/l Annually to biannually'
Chromium ml!!l Annually to biannually'
Copper mJl!]. Annuallv to biannuallv 1
Iron ml!!l Annually to biannually'
Lead mlZll Annuallv to biannually'
Mal!llesium ml!!l Annually to biannually'
Manganese mlZll Annually to biannually 1
Mercury ml!!l Annually to biannuallY'
Molybdenum nilZll Annually to biannually'
Nickel ml!!l Annually to biannually'
Potassium mgi1 Annually to biannually 1
Selenium mlZll Annuallv to biannuallv .
Silver ml!!l Annually to biannually'
Sodium mlZll Annually to biannually'
Thallium mlZll AnnUallV to biannually:'
Vanadium ml!!l Annually to biannually'
Zinc mgi1 Annually to biannually'
4 -'63
Order R9-2003-OO80;
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution; Fonner Omar Rendering Site
-15-
March 27, 2003
1 = Analyze groundwater samples for metals annually for the frrst 3
years following well installation, then every 2 yean thereafter.
Note: mg/l = mi1Iigramslliter and p.gIl = microgramslliter
d) . Any gronndwater monitoring wells installed, as a result of subsequent
investigation, shall follow the same ground water sampling requirements
listed in Directives D.3 (a) and D.3.(b) of this Order. For all additional
groundwater wells, the discharger shall report analytical results for all
constituents listed in Directive D.3(c)(ii) for the first round. Unless otherwise
directed by the RWQCB, all subsequent groundwater samples from additional
investigation wells [other than those specified in Directive D.3(c)(i) of this
Order] shall be collected semi-annually and may be analyzed only for VOCs.
e) Groundwater samples from additional ground water monitoring wells shall be
analyzed for general minerals analyses (major ions) annually. Reported results
from general minerals analyses shall be accompanied by an evaluation of the
results from a cation-anion balance calculation in addition to other laboratory
quality assurance and quality control (QNQC) data.
f) All additional groundwater-monitoring wells shall be properly developed after
construction and prior to collecting samples for the purpose of complying with
the water quality monitoring requirements in this Order. The discharger shall
provide a description of the "development method(s)" employed at each new
monitoring well in an appendix to the next available semi-annual report.
4. All monitoring reports shall be signed by an authorized person(s) as required by
Report Declaration, Directive G of this Order.
E. SITE MAINTENANCE
1. The discharger shall perform inspections of the site as defmed in this Order and
report the results semi-annnaUy. The report shall contain information on the
conditions observed at the site and a discussion of any significant findings with
regard to:
a) General site condition;
b) Surface cover and slope;
c) Drainage facilities;
d) Groundwater monitoring networks;
e) Observation of seepage from the site; and
f) Maintenance activities at the site.
4 -<6 t/
Order R9-2003..()()80:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Oniar Rendering Site
-16-
March 27. 2003
F. REPORTS TO BE FILED WITH THE RWQCB
All reports shall be submitted no later than one month following me end of the respective
Reporting Period. The reports shall be comprised of at least the following in addition to
the specific contents listed for each respective report type:
1. Transmittal Letter
A letter summarizing the essential points shall be submitted with each report.
The transmittal letter shall include:
a) A discussion of any violations of this Cleanup and Abatement Order found
since the last such report was submitted and shall describe actions taken or
planned for correcting the violations. If the discharger has previously
submitted a detailed time schedule for correcting the violations, a reference to
the correspondence transmitting such schedule will be satisfactory. If no
violations have occurred since the last submittal, this shall be stated in the
transmittal letter;
b) In order to assist the RWQCB in processing of correspondence and reports
submitted in compliance with this cleanup and abatement order, the discharger
shall include the following code number in the header or subject line portion
of all correspondence or reports submitted to the RWQCB: LAND 06-
0215.05.
2. Semi-Annual Summary Report
The discharger shall submit a semi-annual report to the RWQCB covering the
previous six months. The semi-annual Reporting Periods end on September 30
and March 30, respectively. The semi-annual report shall contain, but not be
limited to the following:
a) Site maintenance - A summary of quarterly inspections and a discussion of
any significant findings as described in Site Maintenance, Directive E of this
Order.
b) Flowrateldirection - For each monitored groundwater body, a description and
graphical presentation (e.g., arrow on a map) of the velocity and direction of
ground water flow under/around the site, based upon water level elevations
observed during the collection of the water quality data submitted in
compliance with this Order.
c) Welllnformation - For each monitoring well the discharger shall provide: a
description of the method and time of water level measurement; a description
of the method of purging used both before sampling to remove stagnant water
4 -$5 :)
Order R9-2003-0080:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
-17-
March 27. 2003
in the well, and a description of purging method used to collect groundwater
samples from the well.
.
d) Samuling Information - For each Monitoring Point and Background
Monitoring Point addressed by the report, a description of the type of pump -
or other device - used and its vertical placement for sampling, and a detailed
description of the information contained in Records of Monitoring
Information, Directive D.2 of this Order.
e) Map - A map (or copy of an aerial photograph) showing the locations of
observation stations all Monitoring Points, and all Background Monitoring
Points.
3. Annual SununaryReport
The discharger shall submit an annual report to the RWQCB covering the
previous monitoring year. The annual Reporting Period ends March 30. This
report may be combined with the Winter/Spring semiannual report. The annual
report shall include, but not be limited to the following:
a) Graphical Presentation of Anaivtical Data - For each monitoring point, submit
in graphical format the laboratory analytical data for all samples collected
within at least the previous five calendar years. Each graph shall plot the
concentration of the constituent over time for a given monitoring point, at a
scale appropriate to show trends or variations in water quality.
b) Compliance Record Discussion - A comprehensive discussion of the
compliance record, result of any corrective actions taken or planned which
may be needed to bring the discharger into full compliance with the waste
discharge reqnirements.
c) Summary of Changes - A written summary of the monitoring results and
monitoring system(s), indicating any changes made or observed since the
previous annual report.
d) Map - A topographic map at appropriate scale, showing the direction of
ground water flow at the landfill site.
4. Schedule for Monitoring Reports
Monitoring reports shall be submitted to the RWQCB in accordance with the
following schedule:
4-'8'b
Order R9- 2003..()()80:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Rendering Site
-18-
March 27, 2003
Annual
Re ort Period
April to September
October to March
A iiI to March
Re rt Due
October 30
A ril 30
A '130
S. Notification of Emergency Conditions
The discharger shall notify the RWQCB by telephone or facsimile within 24-
honrs of any conditions that is created by the discharge of wastes to land or water
resources resulting from corrective actions taken at this site. The initial
notification must be followed by a detailed written description of the discharge,
an explanation of the conditions which lead to the discharge of wastes and the
emergency remedial actions taken to mitigate the effects of the discharge. The
written notification shall be sent to the RWQCB by registered mail.
G. REPORT DECLARATION
All applications, reports, or information submitted to the RWQCB shall be signed and
certified as follows:
1. Use of Registered Professionals.
The discharger shall ptovide documentation that plans and reports required under
this Order are prepared under the direction of appropriately qualified professionals.
California Business and Professions Code Sections 6735, 7835 and 7835.1 require
that engineering and geologic evaluations and judgements be performed by or under
the direction of registered professionals. A statement of qualifications and
registration numbers of the responsible lead professionals shall be included in all
plans and reports submitted by the discharger. The IeaQ professional shall sign and
affix their registration stamp to the report, plan or document.
2. Required Signatures and Certification Statement
All written reports submitted to the RWQCB in compliance with this Order shall
be signed by the discharger and contain the following certification statement:
"I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar
with the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that,
based on my inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining
the information, I believe that the information is true, accurate, and complete. I
am aware that there are significant penalties for submitting false information,
including the possibility of civil liabilities imposed administratively by the
RWQCB or imposed by the Superior Court."
4-~7
Order R9-2003.o080:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Former Omar Renderiug Site
-19-
MaICh 27, 2003
H. REPORTING TO THE RWQCB
All monitoring and technical reports shall be submitted to:
Executive Officer
Califomia Regional Water Quality Control Board
San Diego Region
9174 Sky Park Court, Suite 100
San Diego, CA 92123-4340
Attn: Supervisor Land Discharge Unit
I. NOTIFICATIONS
1. The California Water Code Section 13350 provides that any person who
intentionally or negligently violates any cleanup and abatement order issued,
reissued, or amended by this RWQCB is subject to administrative civil liability of
up to five thousand (5,000) dollars per day of violation. The Superior Court may
impose civil liability of up to fifteen thousand (15,000) dollars per day of violation.
2. The California Water Code Section 13268 provides that any person failing or
refusing to furnish technical or monitoring program reports, as required under this
Order, or falsifying any information provided in the monitoring reports is guilty of a
misdemeanor and may be liable civilly in accordance with this section.
3. Pursuant to cwc 9 13304(c), the RWQCB is entitled to, and may seek
reimbursement for, all reasonable costs actually incurred by the RWQCB to
investigate unauthorized discharges of waste and to oversee cleanup of such waste,
abatement of the effects thereof, or other remedial action, required by the Order.
Ordered B
.4 -<6 '8
Order R9-2003-OO80:
Cleanup and Abatement of Groundwater
Pollution: Fonner Omar Rendering Site
-20-
March 27, 2003
.
TABLE 1:
SUMMARY OF COMPUANCE DAlES
OTA Y MESA VENTURES n, L.L.C.
FORMER OMAR RENDERING FACILITY
SUMMARY OF COMPliANCE DATES FOR ORDER NO. 2003-0080
DIRECTIVE NO. SUBMITTAL TO RWQCB DUE DATE
B.3 Initial Site Concepmal Model May 30, 2003
B.4 Comprehensive Site Investigation August 29, 2003
RetJort
C.2(f) Identification of affected Property Within 30-days after
Owners and Occupants determination of offsite
mhrration of Dollutants
C.2(h) Comprehensive Feasibility Study December 30, 2003
Reoort
F.l, F.2; F4; andH Semiannual Monitoring Reports October 30
Anril 30
F.l, F.3; F4; and H Annual Monitoring Reports April 30
.
_ cf -? ~
:::I:
Ii: c:
o t\1
Z III
::..:: ll. B
~ ~ CD ';E
c..; _ CD
o .- T"' en
~ D... en c: .s
<eQ>oo..;!
<LL .-....
~(.,).......-...
Cl)Wl'llc..x
-D... c: 0 <<l
> CI) .- c.
:5 E .9
:::> :l
:::I: CD <(
U ...
W ll.
F=
~.
.~
~~ .
_f ~
i i i- ill ill
~ ~ .; ~ s ~ ~ i !! il
,.. It J ! CD It i Q) ft i ~ It IJ ! :: fit !
!uh H s d J s d J ~ d I H s d Ilu
~,,: '~ sl
....... ~
~i~1 l -
.. ~~ ~ ~ l I
co 1Illillli .
~im~
I"-
~Iidj (ij
Ii: hh ~ i
..
. .
..
..
~;
n~
i i il_
;s. ott....::;si
..or> R!:!"":;f
~~
n~
Wi ~_
3~ t;~ i
~~
ii
':i':i
n
..
~~
u
.. +l
":";' 'ti
n ~_
:; lQ;~i
ii jL jL ~j . ii 1111
i;ii -j!'ti ~~-; ~.-; .I~ ,.i
Ii Ii -H Ii Ii 8 - Ii' I- a III li -- a Ii a - I~ ~
~~, ~~ i;~2 !!! ~;~. !~ .;~. 3. ;t;~. 'i ~&
N I II <') If II ! · fl IJ L" II 'I ! CD II 'J ! III-Ii
,; i g,; """ g 1': "~g ,; .... g _ .... g !l~218
.:dn..:dl' h .:lh. ~l! .:lh. h .sId h_.~~.i
a;
1U
o
"0
Q) f"" it
'0'" t . ~
c: ~ d ,IH
I I i!l!
==
-c- t
~1:::
,
~=
+~
~
-:!..
.-;< -
<, CD
" lD
....
-- ..
=
/.:, -
:< en
,"
I i 1111
ii Ii
= ~! A iJ
II
~,i
~!
~:::c c::::::II ('. C
= '*' ~il 11~l..H,iHF...JmI =J;> m
!t ~.q. I":F-~ t;j If :&
ct::l cr::l ; '. - - I, - !"'.,,_._:_:>~- ~IJ
,.,~.I
--- "..- ~II
'I C\I-
'-
<'->-,'>.:">..<<'-. "';",
==
,'7===;
-- tJf~
q::C,D ~"
Attachment B
.
. ~ ;~ II
:c . . .. .. .. ,..;.......
b: ';i";j ';i':i ':i':i ';I'"ii p~~
c: U ~~ u n~ "!~Il
0 tll U !Hi: !~lt~
:z: a a ~ ' . . aq. .. . . , i
CI) u. Wi ~. .. pi;
:::.::: a.. Q) .. !! I :: a~~i ;~ ~~~~ ]I ~n.
() "" ~-
a: v flU) f I <0 II' L..lp- !
~5 Q) .~ ~ I _
- C\I Q) ~ jof ( ~
en :9 II f :9 II f ~ II UH :9 h U~ f
I-- a.. enc:o a..lh C~
~c..:> -
>.O::J
~~ -<(
... - .. . . ..
tll Co:;- ~~ ~-; ";';1 II II
cnw ~ U u
- a.. c: .. U
>cn ._ 0 tll ii: ,- U:
:5 E g- . . . .~ aif'
e a Ii ill: +l Ii Ii +l Ii 1&
- .:1 'ri~a ~~ G ~~ s;~~
:::> ::J '0 .. tQ-"":
:c Q) <( '" f- I <') ,. ! UII;
c..:> CD _ _
.. '[:; If II
w a.. :9 I! f :9 I! ,IH i..~I~!;
:c a...sh'~
I--
\ i.:-.
!
I i
,i i ,
I; I I
r 1 I
I'; .. "
'[ III , "
, [- .. , :/
I, -
i
I
,
'i
I
==
II
_."..~
::::r:
=~
--.
= .',:-
_n, "
.
>: I;
=
~
I i
!i
I
'I
I
"
,I
t')
/::9 .,~
. -... ---I ~__
?'f::C: .'--
,; ,
I
, A .' = =
';:\. Iii I tJ}.. :~
/'\""-' 41'-/ ",,-- = ~
',C\1 -', '- ',"",' r,! --,pc -- erc
I' .? "I'" ,',.;1. lCc= =
b.~" =- -=-:0-_' _ = =- _~:o =--==- _-il ~_
,'11,,1
:t
=
""W
1U,
Iii
:: r-
=
-
,Gl
'[ Gl
La.
!-
f/)
=
I lilt
,-f
-7/._'."
=
.nl
:: It ~'~-'I~"I~:lr~ ~ I,.
~ ~ [fTh'i o'-r"ilTITif-r+"-u V",
......-.- !IG!
~.--::<<.<-:;..>., ~.,--'>"'_..>-'/>/ "-:">S~ I
--- ..-- ~II
c
III
:E
=
'-'<".',"'\"'-"',
','<-. ",
-
:::E:
==.
; ~Jf:'
~ 1<
== .
ATTACHMENT "C"
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
Chula Vista Auto Park North Specific Plan (IS-02-006)
MMRP REQUIREMENTS
The Mitigation Monitoring Program is prepared for the City of Chula Vista in conjunction with the
proposed Chula Vista Auto Park North (IS-02-006) project. The proposed project has been evaluated
in an Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration (ISIMND) prepared in accordance with the
Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State CEQA guidelines. The legislation
requires public agencies to ensure that adequate mitigation measures are implemented and monitored
on Mitigated Negative Declarations, such as IS-02-006.
AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts. The
Mitigated Monitoring Program for this project ensures adequate implementation of mitigation for the
following potential impacts:
1. Hazards
2. Air Quality
3. Geophysical
4. Water Quality
S. Traffic
6. Aesthetics
MONITORING PROGRAM
Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinator shall be
the Environmental Review Coordinator for the City of Chula Vista It shall be the responsibility of the
applicant to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring Reporting Program are met to the
satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator. The applicant shall provide evidence in written
form confirming compliance with the mitigation measures specified in MNDIIS-02-006 to the
Environmental Review Coordinator. The Environmental Review Coordinator will thus provide the
ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have been accomplished.
Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, lists the mitigation measures listed in Section F,
Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts, of the Mitigated Negative Declaration which will be
implemented as part of the project. In order to determine if the applicant has implemented the measure,
the method and timing of verification are identified, along with the City department or agency
responsible for monitoring/verifying that the applicant has completed each mitigation measure. Space for
the signature of the verifying person and the date of inspection is provided in the last column.
H:\HOME\PLANNING\MARlAIMISCIIS-OI-034.rnnup.doc
4-qL.-
J!l
c:
a>
E
E
o
CJ
...
S
..
Q.
E
o
CJ
..
:is
~~
011
Q.ll.
..
..
0::
::e
~
Cl
o
0::
ll.
Cl
Z
~
o
ll.
W
0::
o
Z
0(
Cl
Z
a:
o
I-
Z
o
::e
Z
o
~
Cl
E
::e
_ c:
O.!!
"''lii
c: u
's !E
.- ..
I-~
_c:
00
"D;:;
o ~
~!E
.. ..
::ea>
>
I!!
:>
..
II
..
::e
c:
o
..
II
'"
..
ii
c: a>
0..
:w::s .
II .. 0
"'"Z
;:;CD
ii::e
.!!J.Ol
cu_
:.;::om
'cO
$
c:'~
11"
._ UJ
&:~
<(0
I;;
~
C'~
11"
._ UJ
~~
<(0
..... .
~~
ll.CJ
OJ.,:
C'w
';:c ><
:>.0
oCJ
x
<oJ
....
... c ><
1l.0
CJ
::e
...=
x
CD
o
o
~
~
I;;
..
~
..J
Cl
"
'C
E
Cl
'0
~
~
',.
!!
..,."
.- ..
OQ.
- -'- m 'iftm c:
~~'a;"E .c:5~
U)'S;=a> U> 'I::
c~,-E cffi~
~~05 ~~Ol
=.Eal'S; - ='5>:5
8:cct) c: &:c:5
"'tlOUJ cuUJ'jE
~g~~ ~~"E
.....> c: .....Um
- a:::: Q) ~ en
~Ol~E ~~'u;
E= ffi E- e:
Olo,.,o. Ol08
c.-.c Q) 0. en.
e: Cl .-(D
~.!2c:~ g>g'QiU
'60.,2 c: '6u eO
e! "E.l!l 5 e!.l!! [s::
0)0) ffiU C>>jg_O::
O~E<LJ om~~
C)Q)= .....
l'l~a..,; l'lOl.l!lo
t::mE<l> c:~cnUJ
'" E'- c: m"'" n:l Q)
::I en ::Jo3:c:
~ (1)"0'- ~- :;:
,-::c:<<'- ~Q)
Q)om"'C Q)~.....:2~
rn =;--=-"O :5g'05--
'E .s~~~.c.9~gg ~
:s L...E~'5;::!:,-O'_'- a
ta 0.0 c.a.rn 0 E"C"C ...
:I: &: i1l g. g.~ &: ~ It ~ <
~
N
I;;
~
"
'E '01
.~ Jj
Q...,.
~u
x
x
ti
~
"'"
"
"
..
Q.
Cl
"
'C
..
i5
e e
E 'E
o 0
o 0_
(;}u(;)~
::::) m ::J.~
"C 0.0 e
"E.o.
~::: :5 Q)
c:c;J::
"''''0-
.c:O::JC
cE.b 0
O>cU>cn
_ClCa>
~'iii 8 '0
E C en c:
~~'e ~
0.-
EU).g~
._ t/) 0
=.J!!~"
~ns~~
"'.!: 5- (ij
e:", 0
o c,!::: Q)
:a.-m.a
gm.c=~'
....E~~~
1ii 0 ==.c", c:
e:- cu
o"'al"''''
OOl-Ol2~
_'-(0....
o ::J.- ::J c:
Q) rJ) g f/)._
'O'mU)m~
ctE~E6
M
I;;
~
- "
c: 'm
.~ Jj
Q...,.
~u
x
"
o
tl
~
0.
..
.~
~
~
(f)
..!.- ~
"'cu"
:J e:
.c."C.Q 0)'0
~ e>=6 .~ c:
3:.E"'C ::J CD
"0:;<("'0'-
Q)-c "'0 m
::i2 . Q) (/)
c: (/) Cf)._ C
.~ C Co a. 0
a. Q)'- C.'en
(/)C)~mU)
Ol CU.- Ol'E
~e~~Q)
nJCennJen
..c 0 :::s..c :::s
tno"Otn"O
~enQ>.2li:i
Q) ::J 0 cOl c:
'-"O::J ::J
m Q>"O SP rJ)
c:-Q).",>..
o.c~-co
.- co 0 ~"O
"0............
::Ja.(/)c>..
,-Q> Q) 0"0
....O:;::ooc:
tn 0._ ._
s CO.2: en :c
o'-'O::JI::
Ol "," 0
".c: ~
~o~oo
co '-:p C> '-
a.~~.E~di
5.!~.!m;g
="'OlCUOl'"
<(;:Ol;:;:';;
....
m :0
~ ~
1: .~ 1: .ij,
.11 Jj .~ Jj
Q..?:Q..b
~ 0 ~ 0
"
o
tl
8.
..
.~
.!!
(jj
.9
"
~
Ol
>
8
,.,
;::
Ol
0.
e
0.
Ol
.c
(ij.
.c:.!!J.
~g
.~ (/)
.c "
Ole:
,,'"
-gen
cu-5
~c:
,,;:
0l.Q
c:.c
="0
:0 c:
~jE
"'Ol
'><0
O:J
:J"
~~
LO
x
x
"
o
tl
8-
..
.~
~
~
(f)
.!:
'"
Ol
o
{!!
~-o
al~
>,E
CUe:
I g. Q)
:oOl
e:.c
0=
~~
E '"
=....
o
al.!1!
Ole
~a.
~Ol
:o.c:
0-
.c:.c:
, -
Qi'~
o.e:
tho
'Eo
,Ol
oc:
NC:
<(8
<0
"
1f
0..
4 - '13
I;;
"
1: .~
.~ .li
o.i?>
~u
~
~
C)
o
0::
ll..
C)
Z
~
o
ll..
W
0::
o
Z
<(
C)
z
ii:
o
...
Z
o
~
z
o
~
C)
j::
:E
x
~
o
U
"
0.
'"
.5<
.!!
en
~
o
"
~
al
8
.<::
'Og
U)cOI
Q)olo..C
.~._ a. 0
't: U) 0..-
:J55<(g
UJ Q.. .z
"'OWe(/)
Q)::JQ)C
>'?EO
mOl 0
o.'-CU_
o~i)O
C::J E~
O'C Q) co
"CQ)-""C
Q) ~.2"'O
=.9~~
:;-~> m j
VI JB >.J!! co
'C:: R.'I.Q (J . >
.ou"Cwffi5
Q)Q>Q).,C.c x
"OE~=m Q)
"'OEcuaJQ)_
ffi.- 0"55 ~ 0
t::g-m(1)~m
:S-15'~"Oa
.n5rEal.!:tj
>-3:Ol:5'1::0
~U)lOo:c1ii .
Ol-- Ol"
~.o G (/) ~ :!: t!:!
"'0=.- 0>..... U) Q)
c:cat::"5J2e:rn
O-;s~e~03:
Ol
.0
7ii
.<::
Ul
7ii
.'"
.l!l
m
E
. ....
I;;
"
~
~ 'g
.2 w
8:~
<( U
I;;
"
1: .~
.~ .li
8:~
<( U
x
x
x
~
o
13
"
0.
'"
.5<
.!!
en
~
o
u
8-
'"
.5<
.'!!
en
]Ul-
m Ul
"
"
>-
=32v
~.Q (.)
Ul " "
0""
~
Ul
Ul m 0
III -
~"
m Ol~
a..-
oU
"Qj
Ol > Ol
.oOl.<::
-=,,-
.a
Ul~>-
:.00.0
I;;
"
c .~
.~ .li
o.i?>
~u
x
~
o
'\l
0.
'"
.5<
.'!!
en
"'0 ui Q)~..c '5
Q)mQ).o~:!:
s;..cUl:w= 3= 3: 00
"'0 'S; co c:
OO'-..c"'O~O
E.c U fI) ~Q)'ti.i
r::: m..... c..=.~
8",ai5l!l,Eqj
.<:: oEO"oOl-
-..cn'-c..Q)- ..0
':= 5 tl .- Ol ~ 'in
.- ;::J ::J.Q C .... (tJ
tI) ..= 0'" .- Q)
flJVjQ)-.!!-C-'
'C'E'" 7iig!~"
OlOl8~'lii'50ffi
E Po.. Q)..... cr- Q)
.Q.J2 "C 3: ffi Q) r::: :0
"Ul"'8.E~.Qm
gEmd>a.o~'ffi
J!! OJ.s:'3 U) Q) ~
Ul"'-O"Ola.
1-"'0 c>.._OG)c:O"E
Ol 0 f/) "'0 U) ._ Ol
r: - .- '" e! m '" Cl" ..,
o ~ UOClO>Oc:c:x
ul'l.= 2'- ~UOlmOl
;:l-l!l" 1ii&lClJ22-Ol1!
.be c.C'cc.....a>o_
Ul m Ul 8,-'c.Q ~ ooOl.5 0
c:_CO -::::J-8.-c.....
o ~"Og "'O_Oloi
(.) -0"0 It::: "'0 - "- c"'O
Q) ffi c: .2:' C "C Q) 0 Q)'- 'x
mij1 o:J~~"-JQ.omEo
cQ>G>:c:;-orn=.Q<(E c:
';:Ul:l5e!>."'E:-s:. m~Ol!!!
::>0'- >.0.....- '.c X
.Q~UlOlmE .l!l"oa.o
-"'Ocncw mQ)WOlo..
&~8.:g,:r S]U ~ c.c.~
co
0>
o
~
I;;
"
c 's,
.~ .li
o.i?>
~u
I;;
"
c .~
.~ .li
o..-,?;-
~(3
x
x
x
ti
"
~
u
~
..
ii:
'"
.5<
Ii
~
'0.
~
lU
ti
"
~
U
~
..
ii:
'"
.5<
I;;
"
~
'0.
c
lU
.!Q~ Q) 7d
'5~.10 or; ~
U)E7d1... ~~:o
m.o>oB~ c......c
- ::::J I... 0...... m...... Q) cO
B en c. co 0 .2 cu ..b co
'-Q)c.c- -Q).c0>
i~~ cu_.~.?: ~~g~
......COc..!!m"'OOlUlUlOl
I...or;m.--::::J - ,-
o en U) Q) _.c ::::J or; cu
""'"en3:cl...U)-:,ot::"'O
~c.9l0U)~J!!CJO'l::a
.-o>_c'-.-cc
E'-OlQjooE""
I...ml...o:Cl1)l...cn~Q)
Q) '"C I... ri Q) Q).x...... I...
Q.c.EB oJ:: Q.Q) c>C
D:lQ)......cn--C>Q)co
C E C ~ cn:S c:.c'U) g
'5 E Ol ;>.!:'3' '5- Ul Ol
~8~~;g"O~oe:!C!)
C>Q) to......::::J Q) C)c~ Q)
""'" I... c.-..o I... - 0 m.c
oca>o>.'so+:o _
OloOOl"'"Olmoi'"
0+:0 ocuiiio.2_'-
cmc:>>ce>l...cco'U)'"C
..J cu "C C Q) Q) m> Q)
_ ::::J c.t: (;').5..0 ::::J Q) Q)1t:
..... cn ~ Q).- 3:- cn ,-5:;:;
OU)oQ)xo=cnQ)_'"
-'-~cQ) ~.- Q)
t/) Q) .- ..c:> Q)..c 0
>.c5 e>Q) cn=..ct::_3:!
:I: .......s;UJc5 c 0>0.......2 ~ Q)
0::> om o......~c:
a........t::: Q)......- Q) -.-E::>:=
o 5 O.c Q) Q.(;') 0 .c =:
W'C 0.- ::::J .!! ttI '1::..0 '6 ::::J
eta.. e:!.90'u;:=a.. ~ co!
~
~
'"
~
I;;
"
c .5,
.~ .li
a.~
~C3
x
x
x
~
~
u
~
..
ii:
'"
c
.~
"
"
c
.0.
c
lU
N
~
0..
=-
.:go
Ul~
co
mOlUl
.Q .c "E
c.. +=i co
a..<:: "
~'j ~
.<:: >-cn
......'is.-
.nE'"
~8~
Ol " Ol
Q.c ~
Clm",
"'Ul'"
'5E::!:
100~
c, u. fJ
-Ol>~
0_> m
l'l~ E E
~"'=gm
_ m a. ::<
..;J ::::l Q.(J)
<(l:lIOI/).l!l
::;) --=- c
aOlm.!!! Ol
;; Q).~ E
O:::oQ)>~
w......-CO'-
.... I... 0._ ::::J
<( .g ES.E g
3:0. un::
'"
~
4-9tj
Ii;
..
1: '5
1j ,lJ
-a~
~u
><
><
::ii
~
C!)
o
a:
D.
C!)
Z
~
o
D.
W
II:
c
z
<(
C!)
z
ii:
o
t:: '"
Z t;) c:
0=(1) ,-co
:E roCC -IDe: I
.c U)_ Ole: VI'
z VlrooE!2'iijo
O_..c:.....m:>Q)c c
"'-"'Ui",,,,,,, .!!l
i= BGiGl>.t::-r;"'!=c.
c( =Q)c:(/).9a;tV~Q)
C) Q.CQ)Q)U).~c:o:E
i= g.'c, E g c: ~ ~ ~ c:
- C<l>(tIQ)Q.u 0
::ii ~Wi5.>.", Gl ;:>~'"
_~EQ)m..c:.b:_Q)
J!i6"o; ~ E"O ~ g Q.
.~~~ ~~:5 8 ffi-m
2i:::~.l!lcdl~~o
o_mo-~n:s"'O
Cl",VI~Ue!u;5Gl
~~~ E.5 ~ffiJ!lg
e:!cuCD.9cn8o..ii~
ClUj - t/) c: .... E Gl
o15(/)Q)8.5~Q)€
Gl VI ~ 5 ~ ~ '0"= Gl
o :w Q) "",,::34)
c: Q) oo~'= a.C".o
ro:5e:!cm~Q)~_
~ .9 CL .0 -g U) :5 a. ~
.!!1Gl'E'5IllJ!l"'::iEE
Q)'jD m15 c)c ace >.
5 1;1 ~ ;;.~ ~ ~ ~ ~
.9 c: OJc"t) ~ 0 ;:].-
,-OtUG> .-.r::.t).c
oEc>.c:J(/)2C.
't= co m e!C5 GlC"'w", ~
a.;:;~ 0..0 ,-.0 VJ C)
><
15
..
~
(,)
C
~
ii:
'"
."
Ii;
..
C
'c,
C
W
~
~
Ii;
..
~ .~
.11 ,lJ
-a >-
c. ~
<( (,)
><
><
><
'"
u
..
~
(,)
C
~
ii:
'"
C
'C
..
..
c
'c,
c
W
en _ _
W c: U) ::::;
Cl Q) .- 0)'5
a. E 5.5;>
Z~g.VI.92~
~(I)-a;ffi..9l.!2ffi
.... 0 > -..0 0.=
--a>Q..Ba>Q.
o g>Cl '" ._ 5 E
J!l'-~2i5.", 8
c: 'E .~ m 0..-
Gl80CllllGlGl
E 'I:::.c CD 'C"'"
Q) 0 a..'- .... ca:.m
'=<(Ill::iEIII E=
::J '- m 0
r::r . (/) Q) 'I:: Q) to
Q)......._-Q).c~
~9-r;,g!""=.9
Q)......a;>....co_
50'0'",U.s;: ()
O'-t::C)CI)Q)
..cNCLOCf1J'O'
~. .....'- c: l,;,.
~Ol!!en.!:Ioc.
>.Z.. c: en 'in Q)
- '-_... o'-.c.
Q.mon'c>-
E"'--'::Gle-
805i::lEC.~J!i
=~E'E::::JBQ)c:
m~a.mZmO)Q)
.<:::t::o",,,,".!!lE
en CD Q) c: c: r:T rJJ Q)
-a..>j9m~c:.!:::
lil - Gl,n ~_ Cl"
.~Ill",Wa._'iij CT
e '~..,J"'; -== +of Q) Q)
0.0'- 0"':::' ~",o....
GlC E .~~ .(;'" U
..c~Q)'-cni:::C::J
~ a.Q. __ a. co U)
"'
~
~
i: .~
.11 ,lJ
-a~
~u
><
><
><
15
..
~
(,)
c
~
ii:
go
"fii
..
c
'c,
c
W
'"
~ cuC)-
.a _ --E I:: m
VI III ill::l:!:l E
~:5 Q) 0 "E en <0
iii Gi 5 a. .!!l.!.1::iE
::JCb_Zc(j)(/)
CT.5 o~.!!l E~
~ ClJ!l E en ".-
J!! c C Q.J C)Z ()
co W Q) U) C Q)
~ ~ E >''0 -g 5
co;, ~ (J) ..2 CO.c
-'-".- I:: 0 -
J!l Gl " 0 '" a:-''''
'", 5 5fiii '-.::iE ~
t:>."-I::J!l(l)0
Q.J.c4).-._~c
C.,,5~ Een III
C)Q).cw Q.J-"E
-~>~4)a..(/)~
"Oe~ _c(:S
e!C.GlE!'[.!!!1ll
C)Q,o~-oc.. c
a co I:: 0.- c.-
"O.~ (/) c: 0 -
~ffia.Ei5:1iii~
c: _ C) Q.J
~]8~-gEE
(/)~u)::Jco~~
-~.~ Q)= c "-Gl'5
Q)>-oo_c-
:52?~::u~~
oQ)~co2>cu
_.c0 I::-s::.c
~-EO(l)cQ)
.Qro 1550~
o:f.i~z()U5c)
<D
~
Ii;
..
c .s,
.11 ,lJ
-a~
~ C3'
><
><
><
~
-
o
"'
..
~
~
ll.
Gl
= '"
co -12 Q.
i)i!!::EE
_Cl"m
c:1-_c.
..~,
.Q "0 1i3 -g
a I:: - ::J
c.:J".8
III u. '"
Q)t)::J:5
5 [,lil 5
. E VI VI
~=~:g
t::"'","I'
2t~"'s
C)a.~Q)
c 0 CD Q)
--"Q) U).b
:Q>cocn
-s Q) - c:
..cO O.m
o~5::iE
~e!'fl~
1::1-2;:::
~ Q) 1i) co
Vl5"'"
.!!1 0 8 Gl .
Q) - Q.J:2 6
g=~=~u
tt.9.c-cQ..Q.J
<(oEOiGl~
1I:'",S;;~.c.l!l
&... .a.. x.9 O_c
.....
~
~
"
~
0.
4-- 9'~
Q;
'"
- 0:
l: '0
.11 Jj
Q...,.
~o
x
::i
~
o
o
IX
a.
o
Z
iij
o
a.
w
IX
o
Z
4(
o
Z
ii2
o
....
Z
g 16 ~-g 1::
-=..c ~co :J
zUJoO>- 0
o c: """(;j.{g t)
5: ~-m.g lll.l!i.~
- 'a5~= iii.5
o o.lU-lUEQ)
E lU:;'"Ce:Q)O
::i Q).s=.S!.2' > 'al
=umUJem
uj-.a uia..b
~O l;l E.~~
1::~>'lU'"C.-
8.t5~m5~
o>~mEeOlQ)
.s;;:- Q) _'-=
"C..c::1o,;,.0>Q)_
:=:!:::JC-CCD
.5 ~ &l:5 e: "'
-cn,=~Q)
'0 ~"'Cn~'5i
Q)Ee:a;Q)e:
o Q) lU e: E'E
ffi~tfca.:J
iil gs ~.~:;;
.~ c: (I).m Q) C
Q) lU e:.5 al :::
-5.9 8 OJ""'"E
.s.!: c-.E.~ m
'- '- C)"C U "0
o Q)'- :J 0 c
it~~:g~-m
x
x
'0
..
>-
o 0:
~ '"
~E
m '"
..,.I!!
.- 0>
u..
0)
~
Q;
'"
0:
c: '01
.11 Jj
Q.b
:tti
x
x
x
'0
..
>-
00:
-",
~E
..'"
",'"
:=5>
u..
(ij ---g
.c. ~ co 1::
~.9.gJui 5
e:j9"''"C 0
~",~lll.l!ilU
'a5e!=iiiE
o.lU-lUEO
m'S-ccQ)C:::
Q).s=.S!.2' > 'al
=UmcneCD
.YJ-- -B en o..b
._ 0 _ c: E en
c: .. 1::.- e:
I:: ~ >,lU '"C'-
ClJU=-C(Q
Co .2~:J~
OlQ)lUEeQ)
c: -5 C)r
.- e -~.,
"0;; 0>4).....
=.",:::> e:'"C lU
.5 ::!io ~:5: 5 en
_E f/) ~ _,0>
oQ)"Ctsi::5i
g~~~~.5
mco_ca.E
:Jc>>gS's.2
mro,::,'-C""'C
..-cm,mQ)ffi .
6 Q) lU e:8.5 '"C 6
.- ..c 0 0> Q) en._
ts""'c _c:m"Et>
Q) .9.- c.-.- CtI Q)
f! ~O Q;.2'-g 8-g f!
(I). _U)-U)mQ)
!;~5i~.~~~1;
'"
~
x
x
x
'0
..
1;-
Cii
a.E
.."
",I!!
:='0)
u..
e:
~
- :::>
co ::1::
.s= .s=:J
(/) 0 C) 0
c.-'CO
~j9'"C0
a55.i@
o.lU.8Oi
CO"3tiO
Q)..cQ)-c
=u3:c
~_..... ctI
~og1::
E~- :J
Q)t5~8
c. Q) 'II"""" CO
Ol.s= lU E
.s;;:- Q) 0
;g€:so;:
:J~OQ)
..c_Q)..c
_ c: en.....
0(1)"'0-
Q)Ee:~
OQ)CUQ)
CQ)";Q>
CO '- 0 '-
iil gsw
.~ c: U) c: r.ri
Q) co C'm c:
.s= 0 8::;:.2
-;; c ~ c: ~
:::';:g,oU)
o Q)'- Q) '-
'c"'" en c: Q)
c...ffi~m:E
o
N
..
1: _
" 0
E ~
c: ~._
g.~ "E
> > 0
0: '" 0
W"'u
x
"0 ..
" ~ >
~ me
c: ~ .~ 2:
~Q)~CT a::m
~ m Ql- <5
I;.. >0..1::: :!_
O~.o~5i5
ii1ji:::E1ii
~.- E'!! 5.5
E 8'0 8'.=E
.g:2ij~~g
en.o 0..0 W U
(; ~ co ~ ~~ ~
,-15.(1') .cQ).~~O(l)O
o ~ ~i g ffi (i):S ~1;) ~ 0
~ m~ij: (/)o:;::.'Q) ~ me: ~Ci.
.r; '--cuentn_
~_.r;1iioa.m!::omQ)e
- C):::J>"E!::o'-J::Q)
Q) Ole: :::J CJ'" Q) _ :0::; 0._ J:::s Q)
'- 0 ~.- ~v U 0 .c
::J't: '- cu L. C-::1- co.9-
~::J= ~~oaJ'--a._Q)
~v"C c:(/),-.r;-U) (,)"0
E tn"-j2 co:::: ~'6>::1 Q)'rn
Q) ~ a.. 0 ;:0 e: 0 0 -e: 0.-
>'"" 1: .- ~ Q) 0 - ",:J
ffi'>Ecot5tn>Q).Q~~o
-1:5 ~ 2 c8 1U_..c c.r;~
OlU~jg1ii ~'~al21.""~
6 c Q) :::J ~ Q) - a.!-5 Q) ~ m
:;:: ,0 0 rn y = c: e n; "'C (/) =
CIle!tlUla.. e:-o.::>~e:lU
W Q) ;:J cu 0 ~.- ~ a. CJ'" &.Q .L:.
o ~ .= -c 0.= .- cu n:J '0 tn
a:: cu en ~~ co'j g~>..5:S~
::),-C!E.:;'O -Q)..o-(/)(,)
o~8C:Q)j9:Jmll~Q)geJll
Cl)CU- U)"Oo ::1_ o~
>O"'C'-c.L:.Q)(I)(tJQ) Q)
W 0_'-> 8-.s= Q)'e: (;jZ",
D::Eccm (1)- a. ~
..J Q) Q) 0 - _ n:J >..= e >..-0 c: 0
II( '- E (I),E16=..o rno.~~.Q en
U Q) Q) lllo.s= !!!'"C.5 0.- "''Olll
_.r;O.^ (/);>ml....cu==::J.^
"'_c:v'~_ .r;:J -..c~'"
va Q) C)cu.!Q tn.~""O""C c: m (/)_
O-EC:'-c)cu- Q):J-cc::'
..J'- :;::;Oocn.c"OEen(/)8""
o.gE(/)Q)OCD.t'!SQ)"OQ) tn
- a.. 8 Q) r'- e "' 0 Q).= Q) ~ Q)
CD t:.."O_Q)_""C.c"OOc:
~
N
....
~
0..
4-9'f.p
1i
~ 0
E 1;;
"'0 ~_!:
....~~
'S> 0
"'''0
WC::U
::E
~
C)
o
a:
11.
C)
Z
~
o
11.
W
a:
Cl
z
<
C)
z
i.i:
g .
Z ~a1 gi g>~.!!l ~ fa m "fi.9.m ~ ci 5 ~ ~n; 32 0 Jl
Om... ,.-.- G>_Ql C>::J ro mij:;+:)_ Q)..s::: 0
2m-~~> --c ::J "B'- -->m
:IE .am-:J w1ii ii) g-.c U) ~ C:15~1ii ~o'~ COca c:
Q) T aJ g ~ 0)- :J ",. 0 Q)..c U') :=Ii c: i 0 c: cu
ZI.L.-~ ~Q)Q)=C:'~Q)'-~0:J~Q)C:EU')S~u
o u~ ",'" -'" 8:t:l Ql
c:..~JQ 015 c: '0 ..c ~ ~ :J B "f Q) m ~ E '- ==
~ CI) 0 Q) c::.;::::; E c: rn C,) li= .!2"!E 0 en mE Q) CO.- 0"2 co >.
~ Q)'-~_C: -~:';::::;C:~_Q)~~ ---u c:
e" ~ 0.'0 .-. Q) e c ~.b c:.c 0 - Q) ..~.Q 1ii co ~ C co
~~Q)'--8.-Q)Q)U)Q)uE~ li=C:O>..s:::C:~Q)
i= Q)..c"'C 0 Q) '.0- - c:"'C J!l ~- (; = 0 C en U Q)'o ~
_.0 - '" Ql8- '" "''''~'''C:~~E
::E -ijlogj""oE", .!!!c:~::ltr::JlllC:Ql",8~::J_
~_wc~cm~~,-.ooQ)Q)~U)m,-.ouoU)U)
~~"'C"'C..c Q)cQ)'ffi~ o~"'Cc>~Q):.;::::; _~
m~m~i.~~E~o.B!~ffi~.~~i8~~j~~
"'Q)uc._~QlQ)~~-E~ ~_~~ Ql-",::J",
~x~a.u,-'- c: CD U)QJ'.,- Q)
C> CD :J2Q)~~~ ..cio'~~ im~..c~E
il~ H.I",I~$ EW~.c::JEQla:Qli
m>cc5c: eL...'-'-G>ooc>U')mS.Q c
~~="'",8~1c..cgol-~~~E~~c:~g
.Q mc>CD U)~ -1ii U') C:-Q)Q)~m_-
Q).c c '- C - 0:.;::::; - J!1 _"'C:J.... Q.~ c: (,) n:I
'-.!e UJ'- m Q) :if c >-- - Q) m 1:1 0 ... CD '5:J
~ug"'Ql~!~~~~.8.~~~}~"'C~o-.~~Ec:mU')j
~-.,;. -UJ :J - ::::J.m 4)"0 .-Q).....
~~~c8c~~m~ 0 :$Q)~cE~-e~um
B-.~ '-o.5u~~ ~ti.~ Q)_m~~~c
m.....nm~.....io~o~.6mgmE~.....~c~~m
c~mm~~mm0~~C ~~~mEW ~-.
C)t>>cffi ~Q)~cmQ)o cc.cQ.Cf)== c 0'0
Q)::JO J!l~~m c2 oo~Ec -Q)O cB
J:: <( .- ~ 0 O).s::. "C .....~.,.- CD .- m en CD .- X C
..... nc.~ c.....~ienmon.....CD~CD>5nQ)"OCD
~~~~~.5~~i.a~~c.~~~~~~~~~~~~
.- '" '" :E - ...: '" '" ~ G 't' '" '" E = ::J '" "'.... '" € '5 -
O's", R~ ll!'ijj ~~~ g ~ ~ 8C: 8C: o~ 8 EQl'o'5 8~_::J oE ~
- C~. ~ m cc .
><
i "iij
!E ~ e
c; tU 'S: a.
co ::J <<bOo
~~tT o::~
i ~ :~ g.E!
_::J..o-c;...
o tII 0 <<b 0
"ii1!i=E1a
~.- E'~ g.s
EOlOOl...."E
.g~'t:~.~ g
tJ>:O 8.:0 W <J
'"
'"
~g
"'.-
c;.~
m>
~a
><
><
0>
'"
."
'"
m
a:
>.
'"
is
"",
13 .2
",.!l
m >
ita
~ 6
~~- _ ~ VJQ)'
= ~ cu._
~..8~~m
-EO=".
5~Q)o~
~Q),s",=
CD 0 ~'N cu
]!ijlj~~
~m"Ec:2
-"OQ)OVJ
= -(j) +:I Q)
U1 0>._ oQl ~
m:a~U)c
~.c 8 ~'C:
.50) UJo
i:::J (I) c.c
.2> ~.c ,g ~
;;.51ij'!!!'(j)
s::2..c: a c
'" ::J '" Ql~' 0
cmC)~.....
;;;~.St>>S
m ;cc-
.c ~ ~= '=51
.^ en.c._.s::.
v, - C) f/)
U-:=-o.....= .....
__CDO 0
tu ~ Iii .!!!..!!l c:
J:a~e.~=
~~~a..>~
UJ m ~N..!!! f/)
wa>co::::J-c
<IE~2R lii
'"
'"
""'
"
~
"-
4-97
AUTO PARK NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN
ATTACHMENT C
~
~
~:
:
~ !TfF~
",J::'<i--~"",,"
.~
s s
: I
s...", t
e.yo
s S iM
S .:.1
.... ------;0;::-- """'" ..
, """" -
Bayo
eN" 0lli000
- I: 'I
. ,
0lli000 Showroom
I
"HI I
CUstomir,- - .,..
I ......... -...
-- t f t
.... .... I~
.. t t 1lI t T .::vI
I ,
OIfIc8s Ii
! U
Showroom ;; ~
!
'U.
"'-c.iiiiirii, . .:~
'?lil ParIdng" W
It t f
f... t,
-
~".-<:". ,..~~. -'=-. :;.~~.
lID
Signalized
Intersection
Main
Street
.^ ...:.~...,.-:~- ~""-t~:.,~ .}~"~~ ,.?:.~ ~~:.,..,,:_~,;~,
lID
Slgnallzed
- ----- ~.- ~~-_.~-
4- 9V
----- "-- ---_._._._,_.__._.~----'-------
-~------_.- ---
:JJ
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. Introduction
A. Purpose
B. Statutory Authority
C. Relationship to Other Plans and Policies
D. Specific Plan Objectives
E. Site Location
F. Surrounding Uses
G. Site Characteristics
H. Issues and Opportunities
I. Development Concept
II. Land Use Regulations
A. Land Use Distribution
B. Permitted Uses
C. Prohibited Uses
D. Outdoor Uses Prohibited - Exceptions
III. Development Standards
A. Lot Configuration
B. Lot Coverage/Floor Area
C. Height
D. Building Setbacks
E. Parking
F. Landscaping
G. Signs
IV. Design Guidelines
V. Performance Standards and Conditions
A. Hours of Operation
B. Promotional Displays and Events
C. Deliveries and LoadinglUnloading
D. Outdoor Speakers and Pagers
E. Test Driving
F. Carwash Facilities
G. Facility Maintenance
H. Rideshare Incentives
I. Lighting
VI. Infrastructure and Services
A. Water
B. Wastewater
C. Storm Water and Drainage
D. Solid Waste and Recycling
E. Energy
F. Streets and Circulation
VII. Implementation
VIII. Environmental Review
IX. Amendments to the Specific Plan
X. Auto Dealer Association
XI. Enforcement
Page I
Page I
Page I
Page I
Page I
Page 2
Page 2
Page 2
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 6
Page 7
Page 7
Page 7
Page 7
Page 7
Page 7
Page 7
Page 7
Page 8
Page 8
Page 8
Page 8
Page 9
Page 9
Page 9
Page 9
Page 9
Page 9
Page 9
Page 10
Page 10
Page 10
Page 10
Page 10
Page II
Page II
Page 12
Page 12
Page 12
Page 12
Page 13
~ - 9 ,
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
The Auto Park North Specific Plan, ("Project"), is a policy and regulatory tool that will guide the
development of the Project site using a focused development scheme. It provides a bridge between
the broad policies of the General Plan and the detailed development objectives for the site. This
Specific Plan supercedes the applicable zoning provisions for the site by establishing land use and
development regulations that are specifically adapted to the proposed development of the Project
site. The provisions of this Specific Plan are intended to be responsive to constraints and
opportunities on the site and the objectives of the Project while implementing adopted policy.
The Auto Park North Specific Plan has been prepared to plan and implement the northerly expansion
of the Chula Vista Auto Park, ("Auto Park"), on Main Street in the City ofChula Vista. The guiding
rationale behind this Specific Plan is to ensure the orderly and viable development of the Project site
and the implementation of the policies of the General Plan and the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment
Project Area. The comprehensive and coordinated development of the northerly expansion of the
Auto Park will benefit the City and the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area by removing
blight and facilitating new development that will expand commercial opportunities and the
employment base.
B. Statutory Authority
The Auto Park North Specific Plan is adopted by ordinance in accordance with Chapter 19.07,
Specific Plans, of Title 19, Zoning, of the Chula Vista Municipal Code and Sections 65450-65457 of
the California Government Code. Chapter 19.07 adopts and incorporates the Government Code
Sections 65450-65457 by reference as though set forth in full.
C. Relationship to Other Plans and Policies
The Auto Park North Specific Plan implements the broad policies of the General Plan and the
Redevelopment Plan for the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area by establishing
permitted land uses, development standards, design guidelines, and entitlement processes for the
expansion ofthe Chula Vista Auto Park. This Specific Plan supersedes the zone regulations for the
Project site. Where in conflict with the Zoning Ordinance, this Specific Plan shall apply; and where
this Specific Plan does not address a topic, the Zoning Ordinance and other applicable policies and
regulations shall apply.
D. Specific Plan Objectives
The primary objectives of the Auto Park North Specific Plan are:
1. The expansion of the existing auto park to create a regional destination automobile sales and
service park with supporting uses.
2. A distinct identity for the Auto Park and a thematic link to other attractions in the Otay
Valley through the Main Street Streetscape Master Plan.
3. The comprehensive and coordinated development, operation, and maintenance ofthe Project
site.
4-(00
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
4. An improved image of the Main Street corridor and adjacent land uses.
S. The provision of all necessary infrastructure, services, and facilities at the time of need.
E. Site Location
The Auto Park North Specific Plan site is located along Main Street within the City ofChula Vista,
approximately one half mile east ofInterstate 805. The Project site consists of approximately 38.81
acres on the north side of Main Street to the east of Brandywine A venue and to the west of Maxwell
Road.
F. Surrounding Uses
Immediately adjacent land uses include single-family residences to the north, light industrial uses to
the east and west (including the City's Public Works Center to the east), and the site for the proposed
easterly expansion of the Auto Park on the south side of Main Street (Auto Park East Specific Plan).
The existing Auto Park is located to the southwest of the Project site along the south side of Main
Street. The Otay Valley Regional Park is located to the south of the existing Auto Park and the
proposed easterly expansion of the Auto Park. The Otay Landfill is located to the northeast of the
Project site.
G. Site Characteristics
The Project site includes approximately 38.81 acres on the north side of Main Street and is
approximately 1,284 feet deep with 1,323 feet of frontage along Main Street. The site was
previously subdivided into 18 lots and is primarily undeveloped with the exception of partial street
improvements (Delniso Court and Roma Court) and other infrastructure. The site has been rough
graded and terraced by a previous property owner. There is an elevation difference of over 100- feet
between the frontage along Main Street and the northern boundary line.
H. Issues and Opportunities
The depth of the site and the elevation differences on the site could contribute to visibility and
accessibility issues for certain types ofland uses on the rear portion of the site. In addition, the prime
arterial designation for Main Street is a consideration for suitable types of land use for the site.
However, these same attributes present opportunities for appropriate types ofland uses such as the
proposed Auto Park North expansion. The Specific Plan addresses these and other issues and
opportunities through land use and development regulations.
1. Issues
a. The depth of the site is a development consideration for land uses that require or desire
visibility and/or frontage along the primary street serving the site.
b. The elevation differences on the site and the terraced building pads could pose an
accessibility and visibility challenge for certain types ofland uses.
c. The adjacent residential uses to the north require consideration and could limit the desirable
Page 2 of 13
4-(O(
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
types of non-residential uses of the site.
d. The previous uses of the site and current environmental conditions could limit the types of
uses and improvements that could be allowed on portions of the site.
e. Main Street is designed as a prime arterial intended to move large volumes of traffic at
relatively high speeds with minimal access. Adequate access to the developed site would
require signalized intersection(s) to allow safe access.
f. Key intersections and the Main Street corridor east of Interstate 805 lack identity and the
existing streetscapes have no unifying theme.
2. Opportunities
a. The planned development of the site will provide for an appropriate use of the under-utilized
property and further the redevelopment objectives of the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment
Project Area.
b. Comprehensive planning and design will result in efficient circulation, safe access, and the
effective use of infrastructure and other improvements.
c. There are adequate public facilities and services that now exist or that can be easily provided
to serve the site.
d. The relative elevation difference between the site and the adjacent residential development to
the north creates a natural and effective aesthetic, light, and noise buffer.
e. Key intersections can be used to create urban focal points, and this segment of Main Street
can be unified under one streetscape and landscape theme.
f. Close proximity to Interstate 805, the water park, the amphitheater, the river valley, and other
potential land use attractions in the Otay Valley create the opportunity to develop a
coordinated theme and image for the Main Street corridor.
I. Development Concept
The Chula Vista Auto Park is intended to be a regional automobile sales and service destination
located within the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area. The existing 24-acre Auto Park
was constructed in 1991- I 995. The Auto Park North expansion will add approximately 39 acres, and
the proposed Auto Park East expansion will add approximately 29 acres to the Auto Park for a total
of approximately 92 acres.
There are two development concepts for the Auto Park North Specific Plan: Option I consists of
eleven parcels (Appendix A); Option 2 consists of seven parcels (Appendix B). Both options
propose lots with frontage on Main Street that would be developed with new car dealerships. Lots to
the interior of the site would be developed with supporting uses such as automotive services and
inventory parking lots. Each of the lots may be developed independently, in accordance with the
Auto Park North Specific Plan.
This Specific Plan would allow the construction of up to 130,000 square feet of dealership buildings.
The floor area for these buildings would vary depending on the development proposals submitted
for individual dealerships. These buildings would typically include showrooms, offices, service
stations, and parts departments. This Specific Plan would also allow up to 93,450 square feet of
floor area for supporting automotive uses.
Pagd of 13
~.(_IO L
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
II. LAND USE REGULATIONS
A. Land Use Distribution
The Auto Park North Specific Plan allows the development of new automobile sales dealerships
and supporting uses. The distribution of permitted uses shall be consistent with either Option I
or Option 2 below.
Option 1
Parcel Automobile Automobile Inventory Supporting
Sales Parking Services
1 P
2 P
3 P
4 P
5 P
6 P
7 P
8 P P
9 P P
10 P
11 P
Option 2
1
2
3
4
5
6
7
Automobile
Sales
p
Automobile Inventory
Parking
Supporting
Services
Parcel
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
p
Page 4 of 13
4- -( 03
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
B. Permitted Uses
The following are the uses permitted within the Auto Park North Specific Plan:
I. Automobile Sales. Automobile, as used in this Specific Plan, shall mean passenger cars,
light trucks, and motorcycles.
a. Retail sales, leasing, and display of new automobiles;
b. Fleet sales and wholesaling of new automobiles when incidental to on-site retail sales of
new automobiles;
c. Retail sales, leasing, and display of used automobiles when incidental to on-site retail
sales of new automobiles and not exceeding 50 percent of total inventory;
d. Automobile rentals when incidental to on-site retail sales of new automobiles;
e. Automobile inventory parking when incidental to on-site retail sales of new automobiles;
f. Automobile service, maintenance, and repair when incidental to on-site retail sales of
new automobiles.
2. Automobile Inventory Parking
3. Supporting Services
a. After Market Automobile Accessories Sales, Installation, and Service
b. A TV Retail Sales and Service
c. Auto Glass Repair and Auto Glass Tinting
d. Auto Parts Sales
e. Auto Tuning
f. Auto Upholstery
g. Automobile Audio and Video Display Sales, Installation, and Service
h. Automobile Detailing
I. Automobile Finance and Leasing Office
J. Automobile Parts and Inventory Warehousing
k. Car Rental
I. Car Washing
m. Collision Repair
n. Custom Wheels / After Market Specialty Wheels
o. Lube Service
p. Motorcycle Retail Sales and Service
q. Muffler Repair
r. Office
s. Restaurant / Deli
t. RV Sales, Parts, and Service
Page 5 of 13
4- lOci
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
u. Tire Sales, Installation, and Service
v. Transmission Repair
w. Truck Rental and Trailer Rental
x. Used Car Sales / Specialty Used Car Sales
4. Accessory Uses and Structures
Accessory uses and structures that are customarily appurtenant to the above permitted uses,
provided that such uses and structures are screened from public view or incorporated into the
architecture and design ofthis Specific Plan and subsequent development plans.
C. Prohibited Uses
Any use not expressly permitted by this Specific Plan is prohibited.
D. Outdoor Uses Prohibited - Exceptions
Outdoor uses and storage are prohibited, and all permitted uses shall be conducted within completely
enclosed buildings, except for the following:
I. Automobile display.
2. Automobile inventory parking.
3. Parking and loading facilities.
4. Dining
Page 6 of 13
-
4 -/ o~
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
III. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Lot Configuration
Lot configuration shall substantially conform to either Option I or Option 2.
B. Lot CoveragelFloor Area
The maximum lot coverage shall not exceed 50 percent. The total floor area for dealership buildings
shall not exceed 130,000 square feet on the Project site. The total floor area for supporting use
buildings shall not exceed 93,450 square feet on the Project site.
C. Height
The maximWll height of buildings and other structures shall not exceed 45 feet, except as provided in
the Zoning Ordinance for architectural features and other exceptions.
D. Building Setbacks
I. Main Street Setback: 40 feet.
2. Internal Street Setback: 25 feet.
3. Side and Rear Setbacks: 20 feet.
E. Parking
Off-street parking and loading shall be provided pursuant to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
On-street parking shall be allowed, except along Main Street.
F. Landscaping
A minimWll of20 percent of the Project site shall be landscaped. Lots shall be landscaped to a depth
of at least I 0 feet along property lines, except for approved driveways, parking areas, display areas,
loading areas, and other approved facilities. Landscape plans shall be consistent with the Design
Guidelines (Section IV) and shall be submitted with the required development plans to the Design
Review Committee for design review (Section VII).
G. Signs
In addition to the following specific requirements, the Municipal Code provisions regulating signs
shall apply to signs within the Auto Park North Specific Plan.
1. A planned sign program shall be prepared for each parcel and shall be submitted with the
required development plans to the Design Review Committee for design review (Section
VII). Planned sign programs shall be consistent with the Design Guidelines (Section IV).
Page 7 of 13
4-/Ob
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
2. Off-site signs shall only be permitted through an off-site sign program that has been
approved by the Design Review Committee through design review (Section V11). Off-site
sign programs shall be consistent with the Design Guidelines (Section IV).
3. The following signs are prohibited, except when approved as part of a promotional display or
event (Section V.B.):
a. Pole signs.
b. Roof signs.
c. Painted signs.
d. Message boards.
e. Marquee signs.
f. Window signs.
g. Portable signs.
h. Flashing, animated, or moving signs or signs that simulate movement.
1. Banners.
J. Pennants.
k. Streamers.
I. Balloons.
m. Inflatables.
IV. DESIGN GUIDELINES
The City of Chula Vista Design Manual and Landscape Manual and the Main Street Streetscape
Master Plan shall apply to the Auto Park, including individual parcels. The landscape design of
individual parcels shall also be consistent with the approved landscape design of the existing Auto
Park. Improvements and landscaping in the Main Street right-of-way and adjacent setbacks shall be
consistent with the Main Street Streetscape Master Plan.
V. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND CONDITIONS
The performance standards of the Zoning Code shall apply to land uses in the Auto Park. In
addition, the following standards and conditions of operation shall apply to land uses in the Auto
Park.
A. Hours of Operation
The hours of operation/business hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Saturday, Sunday, and federal holidays. The hours of operation
for collision repair facilities shall be limited to 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
B. Promotional Displays and Events
Promotional displays and events (Including signs listed in Section 11I.G.3.) may be allowed for each
dealership up to 60 days each calendar year subject to the review and approval of plans by the Zoning
Page 8 of 13
4-f07
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
Administrator.
C. Deliveries and LoadinglUnloading
Deliveries and loading and unloading shall be prohibited in the public right-of-way.
D. Outdoor Speakers and Pagers
The use of outdoor speakers, intercoms, sound systems, and audible pagers shall be prohibited.
E. Test Driving
Each dealership shall submit a map designating areas for test driving to the Zoning Administrator for
review and approval prior to occupancy. Test driving in residential areas shall be prohibited.
F. Carwash Facilities
Car washing within the Project area shall only be allowed at an approved carwash facility. Carwash
facilities shall include water recycling, and runoff/pollution prevention features.
G. Facility Maintenance
Facilities, grounds, and appurtenant off-site improvements, including buildings, structures, signs,
landscaping, irrigation, parking lots, streets, medians, parkways, slopes, and drainage systems shall
be maintained as provided in the covenants, conditions, and restrictions (Section X).
H. Rideshare Incentives
Businesses shall provide employees with rideshare or alternative commuting incentives. Preferential
parking shall be provided for carpools and vanpools.
I. Lighting
Lighting plans shall be submitted as part of the Design Review process for the development of
individual lots. The lighting plans shall be consistent with the plan prepared by Spaulding Lighting,
dated December 14,2002. Non-security lighting shall be turned off by 10:00 p.m.
4_(og
Page 9 of 13
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
VI. INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES
A. Water
Development shall be consistent with the requirements of the Otay Water District and shall comply
with the following water conservation measures: 1) facilities shall be fitted with low flow water
fixtures, dual flush toilets, waterless urinals, high-efficiency dishwashers (in restaurants), air-cooled
ice machines (in restaurants), conductivity meters (on cooling towers), and pre-rinse sprayers (in
restaurants); 2) water efficient landscaping shall be used, including native vegetation and drought
tolerant plant materials; 3) water efficient irrigation systems shall be used, including
evapotranspiration (ET) controllers, rain sensors, soil moisture measuring devices, low flow emitters,
and drip irrigation; 4) carwash facilities shall be equipped with water-recycling features; 5) landscape
plans shall comply with the City Landscape Manual, including the preparation of a water
management plan; 6) reclaimed water shall be used when feasible; 7) all hot water pipes shall be
insulated; 8) pressure reducing valves shall be installed at all meters; and 9) all individual tenants
shall be submetered. Other measures may be proposed pursuant to the City ofChula Vista Water
Conservation Plan Guidelines.
B. Wastewater
Sewer service to the Project site would be provided by the City, which operates and maintains its
own wastewater collection system, which connects to the City of San Diego Metropolitan Sewer
System. A sewer study/analysis shall be prepared for all development within the Project. Any
necessary easements for the installation, operation, and maintenance of sewer facilities shall be
provided. A sewage participation fee and other applicable sewer fees shall be paid at the time of
connection to the public sewer.
C. Storm Water and Drainage
All development shall comply with the City of Chula Vista Storm Water Management Standards
Requirements Manual and shall employ Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent pollution of
the storm water conveyance systems, both during and after construction. In addition, all
development shall comply with the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Municipal Permit, including Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans
(SUSMP) and Numeric Sizing Criteria. A Storm Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP)
shall be implemented concurrently with the commencement of any grading activities in the Project
area.
D. Solid Waste and Recycling
All development plans shall provide recycling and trash enclosures with sufficient capacity to
provide for the separate collection oftrash, mixed paper, rigid container, and yard waste generated by
each business with not more than five weekly collection stops per material per week. Enclosures
shall be sized pursuant to the Recycling and Solid Waste Plan Guide. A solid waste and recycling
plan for each business shall be submitted to the Special Operations Manager for review and approval
Page 10 of 13
4 -( 0 c;
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
prior to construction. Automotive businesses may take part in the City sponsored State Certified
Used Oil and Filter Drop Off Program.
E. Energy
Energy-efficient measures shall be incorporated into all development plans pursuant to established
building efficiency programs or a custom program using construction methods that exceed California
Title 24, Part 6, Energy Efficiency Standards by at least 10 percent.
F. Streets and Circulation
Main Street is designated as a prime arterial. The development of the Project site and appurtenant
off-site facilities shall be consistent with the standards and specifications for this roadway
classification, unless otherwise modified by discretionary action.
Signalized intersections shall be provided at all Main Street intersections to allow for protected
turning movements. Street alignments and intersections shall be considered and coordinated with the
alignments and intersections of streets on the south side of Main Street.
Driveway access shall not be allowed along Main Street. The numbers and locations of driveway
approaches shall be minimized. Parallel on-street parking shall be allowed within the Project
boundaries.
Public transit improvements shall be integrated into the Project design as determined by the
responsible transit agencies. These improvements may include, but are not limited to, bus turnouts,
shelters, and benches. Pedestrian, bicycle, and other transportation modes shall be accommodated as
appropriate or required within the public right-of-way and on individual lots. All improvements
shall meet ADA requirements for parking and accessibility.
Page 11 of 13
4-110
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
VII. IMPLEMENTATION
A. The City's review of applications and plans shall be governed by the provisions of this Specific
Plan, any existing or future agreements, the adopting ordinances and resolutions, and applicable
federal, state, or local ordinances.
B. Modifications to provisions of this Specific Plan may be made by the Zoning Administrator upon
findings of substantial conformance with this Specific Plan. If the Zoning Administrator is unable to
make findings of substantial conformance, then an amendment of this Specific Plan may be proposed
(Section IX).
C. Subsequent to the adoption of the Auto Park North Specific Plan and final map approvals,
development plans for individual parcels shall be submitted to the Design Review Committee for
review and approval pursuant to the design review process of the Zoning Ordinance and prior to the
issuance of permits for the parcel.
D. All required off-site improvements, including, but not limited to landscaping, medians, parkways,
streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, streetlights, traffic signals, signs, utilities, and other facilities,
services, and infrastructure, shall be completed prior to issuance of final occupancy.
E. All land divisions and consolidations, improvement plans, grading plans, landscape plans, and
building plans shall comply with local, state, and federal codes, regulations, standards, and
guidelines; this Specific Plan; and any existing or future agreements.
VIII. Environmental Review
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared for the Auto Park North Specific Plan,
pursuant to the California Environmental Act (CEQA), finding that the Project with mitigation will
not create significant environmental impacts. This environmental document shall be considered
adequate and no other environmental review shall be required for subsequent development plans,
provided the plans are in conformance with the Auto Park North Specific Plan. The project revisions
and/or mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
shall be implemented by the Project and, where in conflict with the provisions of the Specific Plan or
other applicable policies, the MMRP shall apply.
IX. Amendments to the Specific Plan
The Auto Park North Specific Plan may be amended pursuant to applicable state and local laws,
codes, and regulations.
X. Auto Dealer Association
An auto dealer association shall be established and maintained for the duration of the Project. All
auto dealerships and other business and property owners within the Auto Park North Specific Plan
shall be required to maintain membership at all times with the association. Articles of incorporation,
by-laws, and covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared and submitted to the
Page 12 of 13
</.-(1(
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
Redevelopment Agency for review and approval and shall take effect prior to occupancy.
The CC&R' s shall include provisions for the maintenance and operation of dealerships and all other
land uses, including appurtenant rights-of-way and off-site facilities. These provisions shall include
maintenance standards for buildings, structures, signs, landscaping, irrigation, parking lots, private
streets, medians, parkways, slopes, drainage systems, and all other infrastructure.
XI. Enforcement
The provisions of the Auto Park North Specific Plan shall be enforced pursuant to the provisions for
enforcement contained in the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
4-IIL
Page 13 of 13
f='~"-~ u' o:_~_ou '-:r~ '--]~-~-----~~-~---bl
1~lr~=Jl~~.r == l~ ~'1 ~ :ti
/ ,
~o ~~,="",-"-, I I
H""",._ "oelnlsoCour+ --:-~.
II "', I
(/' n" ~ 0 .~'~~- , rj~ ' 't<~-~
Dl ' ~""~. i CO = _I.. ill.~. .~' I
;' . . ~ tOil V'\ ~I i ,
',' . If / t //,'. \ I
en '. . ~ I" = = / / /' 0 a \j I ,
- . ~ i 'I, = I / ~ II " co' \ - . I
; t........~.. '.. .i .r.~1 !.', '/ ,'~." f -'.). jJ ~ ,~
u~-~= 11111 i ',s' '~"-~-~~::I
n~--- ~~~~~~ :~',,',~.;-..,,~ !.O.f.' H..... a,:i
l~~ .~. n i I~ illo;a==r' I. _ "."~'t-01_1
: f LI "'U T D l-t. 1',[ . IX) I r I -' f0 ". - ,
'. ~ l! IJI i"~ i: ,t JrIF ~r
= = ... ~nl ~ kif f ~)\j[r, ~'~ b :,'
r~- L/I . "'11 II ......
I \j. . . I' J . '1-.....1
f H B % % B'~: ~ ~ III ..- I ,:1
= = _2-=-=- .__:c-~I~ 1 lib _ ~~__JJ'~~ _ _~ _ _ _.J
~i~!i rHf!. i[ s Hf! i[ s Hf! i[ s Hf! i[ s! i[ s Hfl i[ ~ 4'
1~1~!~ ~Hf Cl) ~Hf U1 ~Hf ~ ~Hf Co> Hf N ~ .. ~f _.2.
!~ ii .. .. .. .. i.. .. ~
~~~. .""~ "" .co. cc ..~= cc ~c,," c" ~.. IilC"~ ~. -
J~s~ 13w~l'l"" ISN~i:&l ~m~Sl:ll 8l111':...~; H-~~ 1+~"~(1I~ ,...,
'15 do if'! ~ c:.. ~ #!I' ~ ~ "'!I' ~ ~ ~ ~ .:...:. .:.:.. "'!I' ~ ~ ""'"
S 'I .. - .. - .. - "0 "- - - - g)
'i1! H-~~ It.l.n-t; It-~ It~"" "-.:'" It~.~ i-+
! ~ ~e ~~ h ~~ H n ~
It ~ it it 1+ i+ 1+ it it it ::
-I
"'Cl ::c
m
... (")
)> CD ::c
c c::
6' 3 s;::
"C 0 -. en < )>
Dl :J""O_-C
~"CIll~~~
___... _~z
>_."""''';-0
C 0'<(")>;:;
.... c::
o :J 00""0-1)>
~.....~s;::~
:< coZ>-
o' :JJ
CD "'Cl ;;0:;;
CJl Z
III C>
:J ==l
::c
. ~::J ~~~pl
~ ) ~po~~'
.. . ~ n
.. -I
~ ~
Pl 9f
H~pf s H~! i[ b p[ s pf s H~Pf s
~ ~df:::.~ ~df~ I!fco Iff'" ~ ~ f!--l
.
"
~ c c
"u
..
."
n
g: ~~ G~
. ..
.-
~.
~~
...;
~ C"
" ""
.
ii';;~J8
I+....~~
~
"
I '~:
i[
Ie .
,~ .
~
~
"
""
~-/f3
f:C~'I~->~U "~2W~"- --r !-----------~-=----9:l
YI~~, jJ,t. ! Ii ! i 'I <= = ~ -:";t \, ~i
fl ~ ~ f!JL- = c= c= If ; 1:1, ~ \ :
I"" = , , '
"~~W-j~; ~..u~.,_~ .. '0 ,I
ijf3001- __ Delnho Court~, ~_ .~
& ,r~o-'~ o 1ft - r--- ~ ,.'-,
,I~ c:J ~ 6 i'~ = , il /;f:':~~~ .,., , ~ .!
~ 10(. ~ ~ ~ ~! =1!/i'~ ", \\11
;- I ~ rr=T1- Iff \\. //1 I
~ ~ II ill, I . ((~~L ' ~ :1
:' i 1 i
.r: " ~ i ~,~., .J1 I ' ~ I :
' I I II J ,\' 'I
~ i ~ i 'I If j
l; ; ~ ~-c~!-- ~ i'! i i ~" 1", ~~r.> ,~;!
I; = = ...1'-"-____)) ! ;J~.JI ~ _ ~,I
I I' . . . L~.-m--_ -'-""'-----'-~.".,- ----:;/ \-E____J_________~
,,_ -P-----"'-- _ _-'I- ___"",",-- _ _ ____ __
II
=
';.. -"~
m~l~
8~~~g ~
U~U
!H~
Iii;
! :1
H~qn~: Hi Ii Hf~ H ~ a
"" ~ d (0) i ~ ~ N i .. ~~ ~~.
I i ~" " ro
.. " " 0
-
Cl
e.
fl!
...
)> CD
c:
6' 3
~ 0;'
^'C III
---
)> -. ...
1::0'<
-
o ::J en
en -.
CD J\) _
< CD
,;-
CD '"tl
rJl
III
::J
!;l~~_B ~~
.. # ~ ~?
;: ~~
'8~
..
~ ~g:
1+ l'!l'!
".
.,
'8~
..
~ ~ ~P1 ~;
1+ 1'1~ ~ ~
~ !Bi
n
..
;";'"
...
""
""
. ~:::J
~ )
H~! gfi Ii H~! gf, i ~ J gfi Ii Hi ~
""i,~""",,i~~ i~cnl~~
I" "~ I ~'~ Ol I "~ I "~
fPi 41
~, Qt ~.2.
~' Qi ~
-l
0'" 9-
~~.. l!!.
IHl8 en
... ..
~--
- <i\~
~~-
,.il
. '-",
1+ It;'"
"
""
~. -~ ......
~ ~ ~~ s (:;
>>:~ ? ~
~ Iii.
n
;...;...
8i~EJ!l ~~ ~ Bii
ft ill! ~ ~ ~ Pl g
;:- ~~ ~~
~~ H
4 ~"II/'
~ ~~
. .
88
n
""
,-.
I 'I'
Ii ['
I~
J"" I
'"tl
-I
::c
m
(")
::c
c:
en>
-0 <;t>
men."
(") ~;:g
.." __:z
-__0
(") c: ~
-0 -I ><
> 0""
:z)g
:c
;;:0;:
:z
o
:c
-I
::c
ATTACHMENT D
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-02-04
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
(IS-02-006) AND INTRODUCE AN ORDINANCE APPROVING A
SPECIFIC PLAN (pCM-02-04) FOR THE AUTO PARK NORTH
EXPANSION (KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS, LLC & OTAY
MESA VENTURES II, LLC).
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a Specific Plan was filed with the City of Chula Vista
Planning and Building Department; and
WHEREAS, the application requests the adoption of a Specific Plan for the development of the Auto
Park North Expansion on 38.81 acres ofland on the north side of Main Street between Brandywine Avenue
and Maxwell Road and represented on Exhibit "A"; and
WHEREAS, the Specific Plan would implement the Redevelopment Plan for the Otay Valley Road
Redevelopment Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the Specific Plan would be consistent with the General Plan; and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(IS-02-006) has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the Califomia Environmental Quality
Act, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City ofChula Vista; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said application 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 500 feet of the exterior boundaries ofthe property at
least ten days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely on May 28, 2003 at
6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said
hearing was thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered all reports, evidence, and testimony presented at
the public hearing with respect to the application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION does hereby
recommend that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (IS-02-006), based on the findings and conditions contained therein for the Auto Park
North Specific Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION does hereby find that the
proposed Auto Park North Specific Plan is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan and is
supported by public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice.
4-1 / S"
Resolution No. PCM-02-04
Page No.2
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION does hereby recommend
that the City Council introduce an ordinance approving Specific Plan (PCM-02-04) for the Auto Park North
Expansion.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 28th day of May, 2003, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
Madrid, O'Neill, Hall, Castaneda, Horn, Felber
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Cortes
~~Q
Russ Hall, Chair
ATTEST:
~ A~ ~~~
Diana Vargas, Secreta
4-(/(0
PAGE I, IIEM NO.: S
MEETING DATE: 06/03/03
JOINT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY / CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER (A) A PARCEL REZONE FROM
THE THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL PRECISE PLAN (C-T-P)
ZONE TO THE CENTRAL COMMERCIAL PRECISE PLAN (C-C-P)
ZONE AND A (B) PRECISE PLAN (PCM-03-21) TO ALLOW FOR A
MIXED-USE PROJECT THAT INCLUDES: (1) 41 APARTMENTS
AFFORDABLE TO LOW-INCOME SENIOR CITIZENS WITH
ASSOCIATED SUPPORT SERVICES; (2) ONE MANAGER'S
APARTMENT; (3) 2,219 SQUARE FEET OF RETAIL SPACE; AND (4)
REDUCTIONS IN SETBACKS, PARKING AND OPEN SPACE
LOCATED 825 BROADWAY TO BE DEVELOPED BY THE
METROPOLITAN AREA ADVISORY COMMITTEE (MAAC) PROJECT
SUBMITTED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR
REVIEWED BY: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO 0
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the public hearing be continued to the Joint Redevelopment Agency/City
Council meeting. of June 10, 2003.
J,\COMMDEV\ST AFF. REP\05-27 -03\MAAC Project. doc