HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Packet 2004/07/13
I
Notice is hereby given that the Chairman of the Public Financing Authority has called and will
convene a special meeting of the Public Financing Authority, Tuesday, July 13, 2004, at 6:00 p.m.,
immediately following the City Council meeting in the Council Chambers, 10 in the Public
Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California to nsider, ¡berat and act upon
the following:
crN OF
CHUlA VISTA
TUESDAY, JULY 13, 2004 COUNCIL CHAMBERS
6:00 P.M. PUBLIC SERVICES BUILDING
(immediately following the City Council meeting)
SPECIAL MEETING OF THE
PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY
MEETING JOINTLY WITH THE
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY I CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL
Agency/Council/Public Financing Authority 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 by one motion without discussion unless an Agency 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 Redevelopment Agency or the City Clerk
prior to the meeting. Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Public Hearing items.
Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business.
1. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS-04-016, AND
APPROVING AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH YIH-RUEY
AND YUNG CHANG FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A 22 ROOM ADDITION
AND EXPANSION OF THE RODEWAY INN AT 772 AND 778 BROADWAY
WITHIN THE MERGED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
The Applicant proposes to develop a 22-room addition to the existing two
and three-story Rodeway Inn located at 778 Broadway. The new additions
will be constructed partially on the existing Rodeway Inn property, and
partially on 772 Broadway, location of the vacant Moana Court hotel. The
hotel will be demolished to make way for the project. (Community
Development Director)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Agency adopt the resolution.
2. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF THE OPTION TO PURCHASE REAL
PROPERTY AGREEMENT AND PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW
INSTRUCTIONS AND MEMORANDUM OF OPTION FOR PROPERTY OWNED
BY MRS. JUDI SHINOHARA IN THE OTAY VALLEY PROJECT AREA
In 2000, the Agency entered into a settlement agreement which provided
the Agency an option agreement to purchase a 1.6 acre property in the Otay
Valley Redevelopment Project Area. The option expires on 7/27/04, but
includes the ability to extend for two years. Staff is recommending
extension of the option to purchase the Shinohara stockpile site until
07/27/06. (Community Development Director)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Agency adopt the resolution.
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This is an opportunity for the general public to address the Redevelopment Agency on any subject matter
within the Agency's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda. (State law, however, generally prohibits
the Redevelopment Agency from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish
to address the Agency on such a subject, please complete the "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications
Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency or City Clerk prior to
the meeting. Those who wish to speak, please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up
action.
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.
3. CONSIDERATION OF THE EXECUTION, SALE AND DELIVERY OF
CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION IN ORDER TO FINANCE CERTAIN
PUBLIC CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS - [Director of Finance/Treasurer]
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council/Authority continue the public hearing
to July 20, 2004.
ACTION ITEMS
The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by
the Council, staff, or members of the general public. The items will be considered individually by the Council
and staff recommendation may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. Those who wish to speak,
Redevelopment Agency, July 13, 2004 Page 2
please fill out a Request to Speak form available in the lobby and submit it to the Redevelopment Agency or
City Clerk prior to the meeting.
4. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE MASTER PLAN AND THE
DESIGN BUILD AGREEMENT WITH HIGHLAND PARTNERSHIP, INC. FOR
RENOVATIONS TO THE CITY'S CIVIC CENTER COMPLEX - (Director of
General Services)
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council continue this item to July 20, 2004.
OTHER BUSINESS
5. DIRECTOR'S REPORT
6. CHAIR REPORT
7. AGENCY COMMENTS
ADJOURNMENT
The Public Financing Authority will adjourn to an adjourned meeting of the Public
Financing Authority on July 20, 2004, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers.
The Redevelopment Agency will adjourn to a Regular Meeting on July 20, 2004, at
6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers.
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), request individuals who
require special accommodates to access, attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service
request such accommodation at least 48 hours in advance for meetings and five days for scheduled services
and activities. Please contact the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency for specific information at (619)
691-5047 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TOO) at (619) 585-5647. California Relay Service is
also available for the hearing impaired.
Redevelopment Agency, July 13, 2004 Page 3
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM NO.: I
MEETING DATE: 07/13/04
ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 15-
04-016, AND APPROVING AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
WITH YlH-RUEY AND YUNG CHANG FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF A
22 ROOM ADDITION AND EXPANSION OF THE RODEWAY INN AT
772 AND 778 BROADWAY WITHIN THE MERGED REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AREA
SUBMlnED BY: "'"
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR r!9v
REVIEWED BY: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO0
PROJECT PROPOSAL
Yih-Ruey and Yung Chang ("Applicant") proposes to develop a 22 room addition and expansion
of their existing Rodeway Inn at 778 Broadway, which is located within the boundaries of the
Merged Redevelopment Proiect Area. The new two and three story additions total 8,166 SF, and
will be constructed partially on the existing Rodeway Inn property, and partially on the adjacent
772 Broadway property where the vacant Moana Court hotel will be demolished to make way for
the project. Once complete, the total building square footage will increase from 25,119 SF to
33,285 SF, and the guest room unit total will increase from 46 units to 68 units.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION
On May 18, 2004, the Zoning Administrator recommended approval (DRC-04-32) of the 22-
room addition and expansion of the Rodeway Inn at 772 and 778 Broadway.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Agency:
1. Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration 15-04-016 and Mitigation Monitoring Reporting
Program; and,
2. Approve an Owner Participation Agreement with Yih-Ruey and Yung Chang for the
development of a 22 room addition and expansion of the Rodeway Inn at 772 and 778
Broadway.
1- (
PAGE 2, ITEM NO.: I
MEETING DATE: 07/13/04
DISCUSSION
Site Characteristics
The project site is located along the highly traveled Broadway corridor, which is characterized with
a variety of commercial land uses. The .99-acre project site consists of two parcels, which
includes a 30,492 SF parcel at 778 Broadway (Rodeway Inn) and a narrow 12,632 SF parcel at
772 Broadway (vacant and dilapidated Moana Court hotel). The project site is relatively flat and
contains landscaping, paved parking areas, concrete block walls along the western and northern
site boundaries and wooden fences along the southern site boundary.
On-site improvements include a 71-space parking lot, enhanced landscaping, six to nine foot
high concrete masonry walls, and the restuccoing of the existing perimeter concrete walls to
match the new buildings. The proposed expansion will also incorporate enhanced security
measures such as motion detector lighting, visibility of blind corners, closed-circuit television
cameras placed at strategic areas of the hotel, parking lot and public areas, and placement of
security walls at strategic property boundaries. Off-site improvements shall include a new
driveway along Broadway, and reconstruction of sidewalk, curb, and gutter improvements along
the property frontage.
The proposed hotel expansion is consistent with the project site's zoning and land use
designation, which are Commercial Thoroughfare (CTP) and Retail Commercial (CR), respectively.
Surrounding uses and zoning include the following:
Current land Use General Plan Zonina
North: Future Residential/Retail Project Retail Commercial CCP
South: Various Commercial Uses Retail Commercial CTP
East: Various Commercial Uses Retail Commercial CTP
West: Single-Family Residential Residential R-1
Architectural Desian & Landscapina
The proposed hotel expansion will be architecturally integrated into the existing hotel, and will be
compatible with the character and scale of the existing hotel and adjoining land uses. The
existing hotel is eclectic and incorporates Spanish and Tuscany architectural style elements, such
as mission red barrel tile roofing, stucco (ivory) siding, and occasional arches. The proposed
addition will repeat the existing forms, materials, and colors for consistency and aesthetic unity.
A portion of the proposed three-story addition will be visible from the single-family residential
properties that are located to the west. In order to properly screen and minimize the intrusiveness
to the single-family residences, the three-story addition is set back approximately 80-feet from the
western property line. The Applicant has also agreed to enhance landscaping along the
I-d
PAGE 3, ITEM NO.: (
MEETING DATE: 07/13/04
perimeter and construct a 9-foot high concrete block wall that will replace the existing 6-foot high
wall along the western property line.
The proposed landscaping for the expansion complies with the requirements of the City's
Landscape Manual. The existing landscaping at the Rodeway Inn totals 3,366 SF. The proposed
expansion will provide an additional 1,290 SF of landscaping, which will consist of ground cover,
shrubbery, and large eucalyptus trees native to southern California. The existing street trees
along Broadway will be supplemented with additional trees.
On May 18, 2004, the Zoning Administrator recommended design approval (DRC-04-32) for the
proposed Rodeway Inn expansion.
Parkina & Accessibility
The proposed hotel expansion will increase the parking space total from 51 to 71 parking spaces,
which complies with City parking regulations. The proposed expansion will also provide a new
driveway near the most northerly property line, which will match the 24-foot driveway located
near the most southerly property line.
Environmental Review
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has conducted an Initial Study, 15-04-016, in
accordance with CEQA. 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 to the project made by or agreed to by the Applicant would 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, 15-04-016.
Conclusion
The proposed expansion will enhance and renovate an existing business, and provide for the
reconstruction of needed sidewalk, curb, and gutter improvements. The expansion will eliminate a
blighting condition by removing the vacant and dilapidated Moana Court hotel. Overall, the
expansion is consistent with the City's Municipal Code and General Plan, and the Merged
Redevelopment Project Area Plan.
OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
Since the proposed expansion is located within the Merged Redevelopment Project Area, the
Applicant will be entering into an Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) with the Agency. The
OPA runs with the land and outlines the Applicant's responsibilities. Among other requirements, the
Applicant will be required to:
1-3
PAGE 4, ITEM NO.: I
MEETING DATE: 07/13/04
1. Develop the property in accordance with the approved development proposal subject to the
conditions of all City Departments, the City's Zoning Administrator, and the Redevelopment
Agency.
2. Secure all necessary permits in a timely manner.
3. Maintain the property in first class condition.
4. Demolish of the Moana Court Motel.
FISCAL IMPACT
The proposed expansion will create an estimated $BOO,OOO of additional assessed property tax
value, which will generate approximately $B,OOO in annual gross tax-increment revenue. This
amount would be divided as follows: Twenty percent (20%) $1,600 for the Housing Set-Aside fund;
of the remaining $6,400, fifty three percent (53%) $3,392 will be allocated to other taxing entities as
part of the tax sharing pass thru agreements; the remainder $3,00B will accrue to the Merged
Redevelopment Project Area fund. The expansion will also generate transient occupancy tax
revenues, which will accrue to the City's General Fund.
AnACHMENTS
Attachment A - Resolution
Attachment B - Owner Participation Agreement
Exhibit A - Locator Map
Exhibit B - Design Plans
Attachment C - Notice of Decision, DRC-04-32
Attachment D - Mitigated Negative Declaration, 15-04-16
J:\COMMDEV\STAFF.REP\O7-13-04\Rodeway Inn Expansian_NEW FORMAT. DOC
1- ~
AGENCY RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION 15-04-016, AND APPROVING
AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH YIH-
RUEY AND YUNG CHANG FOR THE DEVELOPMENT OF
A 22 ROOM ADDITION AND EXPANSION OF THE
RODEWAY INN AT 772 AND 778 BROADWAY WITHIN THE
MERGED REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
WHEREAS, Yih-Ruey and Yung Chang proposes to develop a 22 room addition
to the Rodeway Inn located at 778 Broadway; and
WHEREAS, the .99-acre project site consists of two parcels located at 772 and
778 Broadway within the Merged Redevelopment Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the new guest rooms will be constructed partially on the existing
Rodeway Inn property, and partially on 772 Broadway where the vacant and dilapidated
Moana Court hotel will be removed to make way for the hotel expansion; and
WHEREAS, the hotel expansion will be architecturally integrated into the
Rodeway Inn, and will be compatible with the character and scale of the existing hotel
and adjoining land uses; and
WHEREAS, on May 18, 2004, the City's Zoning Administrator recommended
approval (DRC-04-32) of the 22-room addition and expansion of the Rodeway Inn at
772 and 778 Broadway; and
WHEREAS, an Owner Participation Agreement between the Redevelopment
Agency and Yih-Ruey and Yung Chang has been prepared; and
WHEREAS, the City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the
proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
and has conducted an Initial Study, IS-04-016, in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, based upon the results of Initial Study IS-04-016, the Environmental
Review Coordinator has determined that the project could result in significant effects on
the environment; and
WHEREAS, revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the applicant would
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-04-016; and
1- ~
... -
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista has exercised
its independent judgment and concurs with the Environmental Review Coordinator's
determination that the proposed project is adequately covered in Mitigated Negative
Declaration 18-04-016, and that said document was prepared in accordance with the
requirements of CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review
Procedures of the City of Chula Vista; and
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA do hereby find as follows:
1. The project will not have a significant impact on the environment; accordingly
Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-O4-016 was prepared and is hereby
adopted in accordance with CEQA.
2. The Owner Participation Agreement is consistent with the Merged
Redevelopment Project Area Plan because the expansion will eliminate and
prevent the spread of blight; remove a vacant and dilapidated building;
facilitate the enhancement and renovation of an existing business; and
provide for the reconstruction of infrastructure improvements.
3. The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve
an Owner Participation Agreement with Yih-Ruey and Yung Chang for the
development of a 22 room addition and expansion of the Rodeway Inn at 772
and 778 Broadway within the Merged Redevelopment Project Area.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Chairman of the Agency is hereby
authorized to execute the Owner Participation Agreement with Yih-Ruey and Yung
Chang and all other related documents and agreements (collectively, the "Agreements")
for development of the project; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that staff is hereby authorized and directed to take
any and all necessary and appropriate actions to implement the Agreements.
Presented by Approved as to form by
)j¡D
Laurie A. Madigan
Director of Community Development
I-t.ø
Recording Requested By:
CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
When Recorded Mail To:
CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY
276 Fourth Ayenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
AIIn: Linda Welch
(Space Above This Line For Recorder)
APN: 571-200-18 and 571-200-1900
OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT
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 YIH-RUEY CHANG and CHAN-YUNG
CHANG, Trustees of Yih-Ruey Chang and Chang-Yung Chang Reyocable Trust dated June 23,2001, (hereinafter
referred to as "DEVELOPER") effective as of July 13, 2004.
WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER desires to develop real property within the City of Chula Vista located at 772 and
778 Broadway, Chula Vista, Califomia (APNs 571-200-18 and 571-200-1900) ("Property") as further described in the
map attached hereto as Exhibit A.
WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER has presented plans for the deyelopment of the Property with a 21 room
expansion and restuccoing oflhe exterior or the existing Rodeway Inn located at 778 Broadway, Chula Vista, Califomia to
match the expansion building (the "Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Project is within the Merged Redevelopment ProjeclArea within the jurisdiction oflhe AGENCY;
and
WHEREAS, the AGENCY and DEVELOPER desire that the Project be developed in accordance with the tenns
of this Agreement.
NOW, THEREFORE, the AGENCY and the DEVELOPER agree as follows:
1. DEVELOPMENT OBLIGATION,
The DEVELOPER covenants and agrees by and for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators
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
approyed development proposal attached hereto as Exhibit "B",
B. DEVELOPER shall obtain all necessary federaVstate and local goyemmental pennits and
approyals and abide by all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations, policies and
approyals in connection with the deyelopment of the Project. DEVELOPER further agrees
that this Agreement is contingent upon DEVELOPER securing said penn its and approvals.
DEVELOPER shall pay all applicable development impact and processing fees. Subject to
1- 7
applicable laws, AGENCY staff agrees to exercise good faith efforts to expedite the
processing and final consideration of all entitlements and permits necessary for the Project.
C. DEVELOPER shall apply for, and diligently pursue obtaining a demolition permit from the City
and shall demolish the existing improvements at 772 Broadway on the Property at
DEVELOPER'S sole cost by no later than sixty (60) days after City issuance of such permit.
If DEVELOPER fails to complete the demolition as required above, upon 30 days written
notice to DEVELOPER, AGENCY, or its agents, shall have the right to go on the Property
and perform the necessary demolition work. DEVELOPER shall reimburse AGENCY all
costs incurred in completing such work immediately upon AGENCY demand. If DEVELOPER
fails to pay AGENCY within thirty days of AGENCY demand, the cost of said demolition shall
become a lien against the Property. The Agency shall haye the right to enforce this lien
either by foreclosing on the Property or by forwarding the amount to be collected to the San
Diego Tax Assessor who shall make it part of the tax bill for the Property.
D. DEVELOPER shall apply for all necessary building permits to develop the Project within one
year from the date of this Agreement, shall diligently pursue obtaining such building permits
and shall actually develop the Property with the Project within one year from the date of
issuance of the building permits. In the eyent DEVELOPER fails to meet these deadlines,
the Agency's approyal of DEVELOPER's deyelopment proposals shall be void and this
Agreement shall haye no further force or effect.
2, MAINTENANCE OBLIGATION,
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, the
exterior Project improyements, and the interior public spaces, in "first class condition and
repair'. First class condition and repair means an efficient and attractiye condition, at least
substantially equal in quality to the condition which exists when the Project has been
completed, ordinary wear and tear excepted; remaining Project improyements shall be kept in
accordance with applicable hotel industry standards. All Project improvements, both exterior
and interior, public and private, shall be kept in accordance 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, county,
municipal, and other governmental agencies, bodies and courts haYing or claiming
jurisdiction and all their respectiYe departments, bureaus, and officials.
B. DEVELOPER shall promptly and diligently repair, restore, alter, add to, remoye, and replace,
as required, the Property and all Project improvements to maintain or comply as above, or to
remedy all damage to or destruction of all or any part of the improvements.
C. In order to enforce all above maintenance provisions, the parties agree that the Community
Development Director ('CD Director') is empowered to make reasonable determinations as to
whether the Property is in a first class condition. If the CD Director determines it is not, the
CD Director (1) will notify the DEVELOPER in writing, and (2) extend a reasonable time to
cure. If a cure or substantial progress to cure has not been made within that time, the CD
Director is authorized to effectuate the cure by City forces or otherwise, the cost of which will
be promptly reimbursed by the DEVELOPER. If the DEVELOPER fails to maintain the
Property in a 'first class condition", the AGENCY, or its agents, shall hayethe right to 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 San
2 1- r
Diego Tax Assessor who shall make it part of the tax bill for the Property. Either party may
request non-binding arbitration in connection with any dispute oyer the first class condition of
the Property.
3, NON.DISCRIMINA TION COVENANTS.
DEVELOPER shall refrain from selecting contractors or restricting the rental, sale or lease of the Site on the
basis of sex, marital status, race, color, creed religion, ancestry or national origin of any person. All deeds, leases or
contracts shall contain or be subject to substantially the following nondiscrimination or nonsegregation clauses:
A. In deeds: "The grantee herein coyenants by and for itself, its successors and assigns, and all
persons claiming under or through them, that there shall be no discrimination against or
segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of sex, marital status, race, color,
creed, religion, national origin or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use,
occupancy, tenure or enjoyment ofthe land herein conyeyed, nor shall the grantee itself or
any person claiming under or through it, establish or permit any such practice or practices of
discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or
occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or vendees in the land herein
conveyed. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land."
a. In leases: "The lessee herein covenants by and for itself, its successors and assigns, and all
persons ciaiming under or through them, 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 sex, marital status, race, color, creed, religion, national origin or
ancestry in the leasing, subleasing, renting, transferring, use, occupancy, tenure or
enjoyment of the land herein leased, nor shall lessee itself, or any person claiming under or
through it, establish or permit such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with
reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees,
sublessees, subtenants or yendees in the land herein leased."
C. In contracts: "There shall be no discrimination against or segregation of any person orgroup
of persons on account of sex, marital status, race, color, religion, creed, national origin or
ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure or enjoyment of the
land, nor shall the transferee itself or any person claiming under or through it, establish or
permit any such practice or practices of discrimination or segregation with Reference to the
selection,location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenants, sublessees or
yendees of the land."
4. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that the covenants of the DEVELOPER expressed herein shall run
with the land for the duration of the term of the Merged Redevelopment Project Area, as it may be
amended from time to time. DEVELOPER shall have the right, without prior approval of AGENCY, to
assign its rights and delegate its duties under this Agreement.
5. 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
MERGED REDEVELOPMENT 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 MERGED REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AREA.
3 1- e¡
. -
6. 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.
7. DEVELOPER shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless AGENCY
and the City of Chula Vista, and their respective Council members, officers, employees, agents and
representatives (collectiyely, the "Indemnified Parties"), from and against any and all liabilities, losses,
damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and reasonable attomeys' fees
(collectively, 'liabilities') arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) AGENCY's approval of this Agreement,
(b) AGENCY's or City's approyal or issuance of any other permit or action, whether discretionary or
non-discretionary, in connection with the Project contemplated herein, and (c) DEVELOPER's
construction and operation of the Project permitted hereby.
8. 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 recoyer its reasonable attomey's fees
and court costs from the non-preyailing party.
9. Time is of the essence for each and every obligation hereunder.
10. 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 to any and all other rights and
remedies AGENCY may have, at law or in equity, the AGENCY shall haye the right to terminate its
approyal of the Project and this Agreement.
Signature Page Follows
4 (-10
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 C. Padilla, Chairman
APPROVED AS TO FORM BY:
Ann Moore
Agency Attorney
"DEVELOPER"
DATED: By:
Yih-Ruey Chang, Trustee for Yih-Ruey
Chang and Chang-Yung Chang
Reyocable Trust dated June 23, 2001
By:
Chan- Yung Chang, Trustee for Yih-Ruey
Chang and Chang-Yung Chang
Reyocable Trust dated June 23, 2001
NOTARY: Please attach acknowledgment card.
J:\AttomeylEHulfAgreementS778 Broadway OPA 6 30 04.doc
(-I (
EXHIBIT A
LOCATOR MAP
6 1-1'2-
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT OESCRIPTION:
ø APPLICANT: RODEWAY INN EXPANSION INITIAL STUDY
PROJECT
ADDRESS: 778 BROADWAY Request: Proposal to expand the existing hotel by
SCALE: I FILE NUMBER: 22 new guest units.
NORTH ND Scale 18-04-016 Related Case(s): DRC-O4-32
j:\cherylc\IDcatorsliocators04\is04016(rev).cdr 01.29.04 1-/3
Exhibit A
EXHIBIT B
REDUCED COPIES OF DESIGN PLANS
7 1-/1
. 'i'I' 111i!
! Ii!,!!!
, lib, Iii!
I ,¡!¡I i 'I
I Iii-' ili)1
¡I!: Ii! ¡ -., ""'i1:1
~þ~ . a ~
Iii .¡¡" , " .."...., ,-
I! 'i"- = ....
Ii i ¡ ", ö @¡ 6 e
¡ ¡ Ii": .
:1" ¡Iii @ ; I
¡'Ii' i¡,!
,! >¡," .. .-
ii h ¡ ". I
i . u--u_-uu--.--I
"I ,¡ H i!i i ! ! !,
' .. "I; , j'
I j¡!¡¡ -
! ¡
1ì -!!!""I,'I!¡irl!!! I!!I!E,!' ¡, '¡Pii,'I,!:!!!,
~~II"!¡jii¡i¡¡i¡!t!i~!¡ j LI!i!
HI :." i,'¡PIII"! ir' ,., ¡¡51
; ¡ ", i" >, ¡,! "¡ '¡'
I" i',! "I"'! i. , II', ;!
" , 'I"~ ." I' , "
. ;~ I Ii ¡ ¡..:L ~ "¡-- - n 'I'
;' , Ii. ,~. , ¡ "¡,,, ,',
! ' '" '" , - ",'" "
, ,.l"
~
"=~
:;ç~
o~
"=~
:::1',,0 0
"100
1Jil'"J
0[= ~
~ ~N
'I :EN
1"1'" >IC') ~
";~ :< <=
'I "l'"JO
F!Z ¡III! ãoo, ..
-;; ,¡¡I! ¡:..¡~
.. '-I;;!I ;::::;ç ~
~ ,1111 ~81 0
z :.; þ~! ~
>.
..j g trj
a.~
~ ~~
" ~I ~
". ~
II ~
,
II; [
m~I,!I!~I,
~
. It III ~I---RODEWAY INN -1 HAGM~~W..-!:-!ESAlAl
...... ~~Q!~~!"mCUESTROOI!1M'DITI()_N]! ""':'.~':::'~~~;,':¡:;""" I
"'-----, m."""",~,.,!"",^,-.._-..,_..J ",,>........
.',
I
i
" ~
'" "'
';: gi "i;
'" "'
~ ~ ~
.. " "
¡: "" h
~ " ~
" "0 "
'0 c 9
'" ¡;¡ "
II ;..;.1.1'. i i5i "" ¡. ~
¡ ::' ¡ 0 'i
!¡ g,! ~ ~ ï.' ~
'I Ii'" 'I g~
;: .,," :-.~ ~ .1
I! ~
, ~i
~g ) i
;¡! I: r
!'
. $ '. V"" .' ...". "
I¡ 11.--= "T. ..~-~"..--. ..:...'¡" .~ .' - ,::
. if . ¡¡ ¡ ¡ í"~
j Ü ~ j'. 1'1
IU lillm!l ~ ~ ~ ;1
m ~¡ri~~~l-------"o~-~~_:~ N U ----. ------
~i~ ¡î IT, ' ., . ... . ..
, I' ~ 1" II"; ,...." 'i"lq"
~~.. ~ I nia! ;11 !!iIl'li 1;11 !'H
1'1 "'! loll! !Iii ¡,¡'II;: 11'! ~!I:i
< , I~ ili" . Iii' ,¡,!ili-
! ..~...." 'Ii. ~. ,. ~"I¡! ¡'¡i,: '¡1
~ ! ~ ~I!i~! .! ¡IIiH}¡ ¡;¡I¡!~
, II! ;jill! ¡jp!¡;m
m.RkH1¡1¡1!1'¡II~ 1:1 I' /-/G, hl'I'!!! I. Uli
lJur11'¡"¡-é!! ILl! ;I!!.;
N ¡ ~¡¡¡ !i ¡¡ Ii
~------
---~-~,-,---'-'.l, " '~"-J' ~
,,'...... " ' , ' ""'.
~~------ .'",..:" 'I :".", t-1il[IT';~ .CJ I
;:. ~~f-=L_+_-=_~_~~L-_~=-::r~~~_~lT.-- ' -=t~~f~n1,¡ - - to-
! i * , ,I Iii I'.
~ <-I'
.- I -+
I, ~ i
hi I't I .
, ,I , I,', ,"
:.1'-
I': :-1
I
,,1 I
';:,1 I
, ~+--L
~: ---... , -----Þ
," 1--~~,C===iï- ", uuj 1,-
~~ i' -- --- ,i',
iT '1'1 ,I , ---,u---=-.',l--H, '" ..,' ."',,
I ! H I' ~- ¡
I' I ¡¡ ,- "" ~~-- I'. 1
i I ¡ii ,i ---~---l I
~-I ""I.!' - I !\': i
1:- '~i,!',í -----,--"~,,,-,+--i,'1
I oj" i _oj 'I
'" ; l ¡ ~- :
I I, -0 , "
1O" '--.'----. "',
I i ~ 1 .---¡-t.!
I "'; I ~. ", "
I "", I ¡¡: ,to
I' ~ U !f Iq-
H--~~~ ' , I
: 1- I
I ' t I
r~ I ------ i,-I
. ' , I
I~- !
:'1
I I
I
I: ", I "
- ~ -
1----- , ,
+- ----- ----------------' - j
, I'll [---RODEWAYIN~I' [HAG~~J'SAIA
t.H. - ~POSED"'GUESTROQ.M ADD.!!!~ "" ~"::=-~:.';:::[""
- .___~BROÀDWÀYC.ULAVHIT"'~J ------_J!!!!.!."""
~~~_.
-------""",,' -..--------..- ¡ ...'..i'
.j;. ,.'.",' ,..~ ,"'. '
I
I
I
~--~.."~,-
,
,
',-
ii
i IDlI¡ i
I . II
I II
I!- II'li .
". ..
I
¡
\:
, Ii,
, I I II I
I I ' ! I I
~~~ iJ -~~-¡o~~--lL~
--~--------------C.__.,- ,.¿..I' - I
- r
. It I I I l~ODEW AY INN----l, [ HAGMA..!~~~~LES AI.\I
". . 11\.0PO, SEDl1'GUESTROOM_@!>ITI@j ...J! "".'::<."".:',~'::'.~r;,':'.';"'" I
--__~~_'!!1ADWAYCHU~",,","'C"---- -- ("~-
111 ¡¡¡;¡!!i ^"¡d!;m:¡¡¡;m;;¡,i¡¡Î¡¡i¡;!¡;I;¡;iIIi
! It~, 1!IIII!i!!I¡I'iiilill~II!llllii~¡! illil!IIII!!1
i ~/,,/~~~ Iii 111',1 ¡!lilll,II,!'!.!! ill il¡I!I¡I¡I!¡:I!.IiIiHII! Illil
/ +í¡¡1! li!¡i'il¡¡,¡,,¡...¡.!,¡I¡-ï!
! ¡ ! i.1 !'¡ !i Ii ! ¡¡Ii I,! ,!I ^ III i ¡II Ii ¡! ! ,i ¡ I.,
...: 9;:;' IIImll!1 111111111111111111111111111 IIi
-~ ~ 1i'¡¡!¡¡I!!!!'¡'I,!¡e!,!¡^I¡!!'
!' - ,¡, 'e " ,¡
t=~-==--=-.--:: --=~'L-'c.~od_~i----;"- ..,.~-----+
,..",' ,>'-0:
fì
'r1
~
c.J
" y
~
1¡11'lil
¡I'il
'Ii'
I¡I!I
'rl! I
!: I
t:
j:;J '~:' i
'- ¡'II
¡g :' I
~ Iii i
0 ~ .
0 '---'
"
..
'"'
iž
I
',¿-'
. I' I I I ¡---iioDE-W A Y INN --I LG~~~J.J¡s AIA
! . "" W.RED""'D""'U""'"
U1 i !'l!QPOS!ill~-'¡!Lrg~QQ.JI!.<DDITIO¡¡ I SANDUGO,CA."".
I m"DAÐW--",-Q!"!,'vosrA.C-"----, --- ".",...... --
!
!
I
,,",,---...---, ,
'Imnj!!'IH' !
II! i' ,nhll
II i ¡1!1!
, ¡ U r,
¡- ¡:
I
¡ ,
i 1
I - 20
. I. r 11'1-~RODli-WAyiNN--li [IiAGMAN & ASSOCIATES AlA I
""~-;;;;:::<:¡;~,,,'
=" I ~<m>SED.'!Ç~T..ROOMADDmoNi I. 'ANDlEGo,C~"'"
'--_~__2'!'RO"'W'VCHOLA=~__J --~-----<!!!t'-""'" -----;c-- ---=
r~=~::"' ~~c~
II ~.
18 .}! cj
'!"ni I !
~ .l . ¡
it< "r ,
~ ~
~ ~~-
..,
:¡¡
"
..,
...
> ~
'" ,
-A ~ I¡ ~
W! iI
Ii
I mm¡
. 0 "HI,
~ '¡í..'.'" "'. \ 1 i i. .1
~ ~
! :,! ! I ¡ ¡ 1!l1!'
, .1' . " . "§ ¡ I
! :' ì ¡ ¡ i ¡, ,
¡¡ I ; ¡ ¡'
, !I ' " , "- -- ~^'
. Ii ¡ --t- -+-- - ~-----+---"-""-
IRODEW A Y INN-- -1 r---¡¡AGM~~~!.!'SAIA 1
I L~§SE!!~.!!J'STROOMAD.!!mg1'! I ""'iA~.:'='~::';:~i""" i
.. -_-."""OADW^,""ULA"',"!~,,-__.-----.! -----"-"-~.!.~--- "' ,
~~~ Zoning Administrator
-.-
"- ...;0: -
-::.- - --
CllY OF NOTICE OF DECISION
CHULA VISTA On DRC-O4-32; Rodeway Inn
772 and778 Broadway
Notice is hereby given that the Zoning Administrator has considered DRC-O4-32, design
review approval for 22 additional guest rooms to an existing motel located at 772 and 778
Broadway in the Thoroughfare Commercial Zone (CT).
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study, IS-04-
016, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of
the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has detennined that the project
could result in significant effects on the environment. However, revisions to the project
made by or agreed to by the applicant would 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-O4-016.
The Zoning Administrator recommends to the Redevelopment Agency approval of said
request based upon the following findings of facts:
1. That the proposed development is consistent with the development regulations of
the Thoroughfare Commercial Zone and the General Plan.
The proposed motel expansion is consistent with the purpose of the Thoroughfare
Commercial Zone to provide for centers for retail, commercial, entertainment,
automotive and other appropriate highway-related activities. Further, the proposed
expansion meets Goal 2 Objective 8 of the General Plan Land Use Element to
maintain, renovate, and redevelop existing centers within the community.
2. The design features of the proposed development are consistent with, and are a
cost effective method of satisfying, the City of Chula Vista Design Manual and
the City of Chula Vista Landscape Manual.
The project meets the requirements ofthe Chula Vista Design Manual. The proposed
expansion is compatible with the character and scale of the existing hotel and
adjoining land uses, The expansion will be architecturally integrated into the existing
hotel and 15% of the overall site will be landscaped as required by the Chula Vista
Landscape Manual.
1-.2-~
DRC-O4-32
2
Approval ofDRC-04-32 is conditioned upon the following:
1. Prior to the issuance of any pennits required by the City of Chula Vista for the use of
the subject property in reliance upon this approval, the applicant shall satisfy the
following requirements:
A.) The property owner and the applicant shall execute this document by making a
true copy of this Notice of Decision and signing both this original notice and the
copy on the lines provided below, said execution indicating that the property
owner and applicant have each read, understood and agreed to the conditions
contained herein, and will implement same. Upon execution, the true copy with
original signatures shall be returned to the Planning Department. Failure to return
the signed true copy of this document prior to submittal for building pennits to the
Planning Department shall indicate the property owner/applicant's desire that the
project, and the corresponding application for building pennits and/or a business
license, be held in abeyance without approval.
Signature of property owner Date
of 772 and 778 Broadway
Signature of Authorized Representative Date
Planning and Building Department Conditions:
B.) The colors and materials specified on the building plans for all the must be consistent
with the colors and materials shown on the site plan and materials board submitted at
part ofthe application, DRC-04-32,
C.) Provide a detailed Planting and Irrigation plan for review and approval by the
Landscape Planner.
D.) A Water Management Plan and a Fencing Plan shall be provided in conjunction with
Planting & Irrigation Plan.
E,) Lighting for the facility shown on the site plan shall be in confonnance with Section
17.28.020 of the Municipal Code. A separate lighting plan shall be provided and shall
include details that show the proposed lighting throughout the site including
walkways, room entrances, stairs and building entrances. Motion detector lighting
can be an effective fonn of lighting for problem areas. All lighting shall be shielded
to remove any glare from adjacent properties.
F.) This design review application is subject to approval by the Redevelopment Agency
through the Owner Participation Agreement.
I -.'2..3
DRC-O4-32
3
G.) Comply with all requirements of the Building Division including the following:
1) Obtain all necessary pennits.
2) Submit architectural plans for building pennit review that are stamped and
signed by a licensed architect. Plans shall include a site plan and building
elevations that are consistent with this DRC approval.
3) Structural plans and calculations must be stamped and signed by a California
Registered Civil/Structural Engineer.
4) Project shall comply with 2001 Energy Requirements
5) Project shall comply with 2001 CBC, CPC, CEC, and CMC, wind speed 70
mph exposure C.
6) A soils report
H.) 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
pennits. Additionally, the project shall confonn to Sections 9.20.055 and 9.20.035 of
the CVMC regarding graffiti control.
1.) All ground mounted utility appurtenances such as transfonners, AC condensers, etc.,
shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a
combination of concrete or masonry walls, benning, and/or landscaping to the
satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building.
J.) To detennine water sufficiency for this project, a letter from the Chula Vista Fire
Department stating fire flow requirements must be submitted to Sweetwater
Authority.
K.) The applicant shall pay all applicable school fees.
L) The City of Chula Vista Recycling and Solid Waste Plan must be completed and
approved by the City's Conservation Coordinator and a copy must be submitted to the
Planning Department to be filed as a part ofDRC-O4-32.
M.)Prior to, or in conjunction with the issuance of each building pennit, pay all
applicable fees, including pennit processing, development impact fees and any and all
outstanding fees due to the City Of Chula Vista,
1- 2..</
DRC-O4-32
4
Engineering Department Conditions
N.) The applicant must comply with all conditions of the Engineering Department
including but may not be limited to:
1.) The applicant shall pay all applicable development fees (i.e., sewer capacities
fees, traffic signal fees, and development impact fees.)
2.) If applicable, grading plans and a grading permit ftom the Engineering
Division shall be required prior to issuance of any building pennits.
Pennanent stonn water runoff treatment devises shall be installed to comply
with current NPDES rules and regulations. The applicant is required to
complete the applicable Stonn Water Compliance Fonns and comply with the
City of Chula Vista's Stonn Water Management Standards Requirements
Manual and all National pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
pennit requirements.
3.) Park Acquisition and Development (PAD) fees will be required.
4.) A construction pennit will be required to perfonn any work in the City right
of way.
5.) If applicable, improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer shall
be approved prior to issuance of a construction pennit.
6.) The project must comply with all the applicable provisions of the Model
SUSMP for the San Diego Region to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
The project shall incorporate into the project planning and design effective
post-construction Best Management Practices and provide all the necessary
studies and reports demonstrating compliance with Model SUSMP and the
requirements of the NPDES Municipal Pennit, Order No.2001-01. The
applicant is required to complete the applicable Stonn Water Management
Fonns (provided to applicant May 9, 2003). The applicant shall implement a
Stonn Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) concurrent with the
commencement of any grading activities, A water quality study will be
required to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the National
Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction and
Municipal Pennits, including Standard Urban Stonn Water Mitigation Plans
(SUSMP) and Numeric Sizing Criteria requirements.
Fire Department Conditions:
0.) As per California Fire Code 1003.2.9 the three-story addition will have to be fully fire
sprinklered using quick response heads.
-
1 - 2..S
DRC-O4-32
5
P.) A new on-site hydrant may be required depending on the location of the Fire
Department Connection and any existing hydrants within a 300 foot distance.
Q,) A fire alann system must be provided for the two and three story additions unless the
units/attics have a one hour fire resistive fire occupancy separations or an approved
supervised fire sprinkler system is installed. A separate submittal is required for the
fire sprinkler system, the fire alann system and underground supply system,
Police Department Conditions:
R.) Extemallighting and closed circuit television system plans must be submitted to the
Police Department for approval.
S.) All unit front doors shall be solid core doors and should fit tightly into their frames.
The door must be set to deny attempts to pry the door and expose the lock, or give
access to the hinges. The front door should also be equipped with one-inch deadbolts,
two-inch screws for mounting deadbolt lock strike plates, and a peep hole with a
minimum of 180 degree range of view. The front door locking device should be of a
design that allows a closed door to lock automatically.
T.) Windows must meet AAMA Forced Entry Resistance Standards.
U,) Sliding glass doors must have Track or Channel Locks.
V.) All lighting must be break resistant/tamper proof fixtures.
II. Prior to Occupancy the following conditions shall apply to the subject property:
A.) The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the plans submitted
and approved by the Planning Department on May 18th, 2004.
B.) The property must be kept sanitary and litter free as per Chula Vista Municipal Code
8.24.060.
C.) All trees and shrubbery are to be maintained.
D.) The project must stay in compliance with the State mandate to reduce waste
generated by all residences and must comply with the Recycling and Solid Waste
Plan filed with the City of Chula Vista Manager of Special Operations office.
E.) The fire sprinkler system must be supervised and maintained in working condition.
F,) All lighting and closed-circuit television systems (CCTV) must be maintained and the
CCTV must be monitored as approved by the City of Chula Vista Police Department.
(- LG,
DRC-O4-32
6
G.) All landscaping shall be maintained in a way that minimizes crime opportunities and
maximizes the perception of ownership.
H.) 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 pennit issuance.
1.) The Crime Prevention Unit may perfonn a security survey of the premises.
J.) This Design Review pennit shall be subject to any and all new, modified, or deleted
conditions imposed after approval of this pennit to advance a legitimate
governmental interest related to health, safety, or welfare 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
Pennittee of a substantial revenue source which the Pennittee cannot, in the nonnal
operation of the use pennitted, be expected to economically recover,
EXECUTED BY THE ZONING ADMINISTRATOR OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 18th day of May 2004.
John Schmitz, Zoning Administrator
J:\PlanninglLynnette\administrative review\NODldrc-O4-32 Rodeway Inn.doc
1-;1..1
Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT NAME: Rodeway Inn Expansion
PROJECT LOCATION: 772 and 778 Broadway
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 571-200-1900,571-200-1800
PROJECT APPLICANT: Yih-Ruey & Yung Chang
CASE NO.: IS-04-016
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT: March 2. 2004
DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING: March 15. 2004
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT: April 2. 2004
A. Project Setting
The 0.99-acre project site, comprised of two parcels, is located at 772 and 778 Broadway,
within the urbanized central western portion of the City of Chula Vista (see Exhibit A -
Location Map). The two parcels are each developed with individual hotels, one of which is
currently in operation and another, which is not. The parcel at 772 Broadway contains the
vacant Moana Court hotel and the parcel at 778 Broadway contains the operating Rodeway
Inn. The project site is relatively flat with main vehicular access from Broadway. The site
contains ornamental landscaping, paved parking areas, concrete block walls along the
western and northern site boundaries and wooden fences along the southern site boundary.
The land uses surrounding the project site are as follows:
North: Future Mixed Use Project (Multi-Family Residential/Retail)
South: Commercial Retail Shops
East: Broadway/Car dealership
West: Single-Family Residential
B. Project Description
The proposed project consists of the addition of a total of 22 new guest units to the existing
two-story and three-story buildings comprising the 46-unit Rodeway Inn hotel located at 778
Broadway. The new units will be constructed partially on the existing Rodeway Inn hotel
property and partially on the property immediately to the north (772 Broadway). The
proposed project includes the demolition of the vacant Moana Court hotel located at 772
Broadway. Proposed on-site improvements include a 71-space parking lot, landscaping, 6-
foot to 9-foot high concrete masonry walls, and the restuccoing of existing perimeter
concrete walls to match the new buildings.
I - 2ft'
1
. - .
Off-site improvements include a new driveway along Broadway, and reconstruction of
sidewalk and curb and gutter improvements along the property frontage.
In accordance with the City of Chula Vista Hotel/Hotel Program and the City of Chula Vista
Police Department/Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design Model, the project
design will include enhanced security measures such as security lighting and motion detector
lighting, visibility of blind comers, closed-circuit television cameras placed at strategic areas
of the hotel, parking lot and public areas and placement of security walls at strategic property
boundaries.
The proposed project requires a lot consolidation, the approval of Design Review by the
Design Review Committee and all necessary redevelopment actions by the City
CounciVChula Vista Redevelopment Agency. The owner is required to enter into an Owner
Participation Agreement with the Redevelopment Agency in order to develop the project site
as a portion of it is located within the Southwest Redevelopment Area.
C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans
The project site is within the CT (Thoroughfare Commercial) Zone and the CR
(CommerciaI/Retaj]) General Plan designation and is located within the Southwest
Redevelopment Area. The CT Zone and CR designation allow for the proposed hotel use,
subject to the provisions ofthe Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.58.210.
D. Public Comments
On January 30,2004, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners within a
500-foot radius of the proposed project site. The public review period ended February 9,
2004. No verbal or written comments were received.
On March 3. 2004. the Notice of Availabilitv of the Proposed Mitigated Negative
Declaration for the project was posted in the Countv Clerk's Office and circulated to propertv
owners within a 500-foot radius of the project site. The 30-dav public comment period
closed on April I. 2004. No written or verbal comments were received fÌom the public.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including the attached Environmental
Checklist fonn) detennined that although the proposed project could have a significant
environmental effect, there would not be a significant effect in this case because mitigation
measures described in Section F below have been added to the project. Therefore, the
preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. This Mitigated
Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of the State
CEQA Guidelines.
Aesthetics
The proposed three-story addition is set back approximately 80-feet fÌom the western
property line. The building addition is separated fÌom the rear yards of the single-family
2 (-2-9
residential properties to the west by an existing six-foot high concrete block wall. A portion
of the proposed three-story addition would be visible from the single-family residential
properties to the west. To achieve a greater degree of vegetative screening of the existing
three-story building and the proposed addition from the west and to screen vehicles parked
along the western perimeter of the parking lot, the project includes additiona] landscaping
along the western site boundary. The original proposal included a six-foot high concrete
block wall along the western property boundary. As a result of security concerns expressed
by the City of Chula Vista Police Department regarding foot traffic from the adjacent
convenience store across the hotel property and single family residential properties to the
west, the applicant has agreed to construct a 9-foot high concrete block wall instead of a 6-
foot high wall along the western boundary property line.
The proposed 9-foot high concrete block wall, existing and proposed landscaping, 80-foot
separation between the 9-foot high wall and the western facade of the three-story building
would screen and minimize the intrusiveness of the proposed three-story addition relative to
the single-family residences to the west. Therefore, the aesthetic impacts of the proposed
project would not rise to a level of significance under the California Environmental Quality
Act as implemented by the City of Chula Vista.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Lead and Asbestos Removal
Existing hotel buildings on-site (Moana Court hotel - 772 Broadway) that are proposed to be
demolished potentially contain asbestos and lead-based paint, which could be released if not
properly abated. To mitigate this potentially significant impact, prior to any demolition
activities the presence of asbestos and lead-based paint will be detennined and if present,
abatement shall be perfonned by a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement
contractor in accordance to all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations,
including San Diego County Air Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard for
Demolition and Renovation. The mitigation measure contained in Section F below would
mitigate potential impacts associated with the release of asbestos and lead to below a level of
significance.
Hvdrologv and Water Qualitv
Hydrology
According to the FEMA Floodway Frequency Mapping, the project site is located in Zone X
(outside the 500-year floodplain). Existing on-site facilities consist of paved drainage areas,
which sheet-flow towards Broadway. Stonn drain inlets and associated stonn drain mains
exist along the eastern side of Broadway. The proposed project would not increase runoff
from the site. All drainage facilities constructed in conjunction with the project will be
designed in accordance with City Engineering standards and requirements.
(-3,-0
3
Water Quality
Based on the City of Chula Vista Standard Urban Stonn Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP),
post-construction pollutants of concern associated with the proposed project include trash,
debris, oil and grease. Per the requirements set forth in the SUSMP and the City's Stonn
Water Management Standards Manual, best management practices (BMPs) shall be designed
to treat runoff generated by the Water Quality Design Stonn having a rainfall intensity of 0.2
inches per hour. The City Engineer will ensure that the requirements of the SUSMP and the
Stonn Water Management Standards Manual will be met prior to the issuance of
grading/improvement or construction pennits for the proposed project. Based upon the
requirements of the SUSMP and the Stonn Water Management Standards Manual,
construction and post-construction project-related water quality impacts would be less than
significant; therefore, no mitigation measures beyond established requirements are required.
A discussion of the proposed construction and post-construction BMPs for the proposed
project are discussed below.
Construction BMPs
The applicant shall be required to complete Fonn 5504 "Construction Storm Water
Management Plan" (CSWMP) prior to issuance of grading, improvement and construction
pennits. During construction, BMPs from the California Best Management Practices
Handbook will be used, which have been frequently used on job sites and have been proven
effective. Examples of construction BMPs include silt fences, sandbags, and hay bales,
which are strategically placed around curb inlets, catch basins, and driveways in order to
prevent silt and sediment from entering the stonn drain system.
Post-Construction BMPs
Proposed Best Management Practices (BMPs) include grass swales/filter strips along the
western and northwestern boundaries. The Engineering Department indicated that grass filter
strips are typically adequate for small infill projects and has detennined that the proposed
BMPs should be adequate.
Required post-construction BMPs will be subject to the approval of a project-specific water
quality study by the City Engineer and may, therefore, vary to some degree :from the
proposed BMPs described above. However, the overall result must be the same regardless of
the specific BMPs approved. The City Engineer will take all necessary steps to ensure that
the approved BMPs will be implemented and will be sufficient to treat site runoff prior to
exiting the site and entering the public stonn drain system in accordance with the applicable
established water quality standards.
All trash container areas shall be designed not to allow run-on from adjoining areas and be
screened or walled to prevent off-site transport of trash in accordance with the City's Solid
Waste and Recycling standards.
4 1-3/
.-
Noise
Short-Term Construction Noise
Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(J) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, construction work in
residential zones that generates noise disturbing to persons residing or working in the vicinity
is not pennitted between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Friday and between
10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. Saturday and Sunday, except when necessary for emergency repairs
required for the health and safety of any member of the community. Due to the presence of
residential development immediately west of the project site, this provision ofthe Municipal
Code applies to the project, which would ensure that residents would not be disturbed by
construction noise during the most noise sensitive periods of the day. The proposal would be
required to comply with this regulation of the Chula Vista Municipal Code; thus, project
related construction impacts would be at a level ofless than significance.
T ransporta ti on/T raffi c
Based upon the proposed hotel building addition, the proposal is projected to generate 220
average daily vehicle trips beyond the volume of traffic generated by the current facility.
Based upon the projected level of traffic generation and the level of service ofthe
surrounding street network, the City's Engineering Department has detennined that the
proposal does not have the potential to result in any significant traffic impacts; therefore, the
preparation of a traffic study was not required. The primary access street in the vicinity of
the project site, Broadway, currently operates at acceptable level of service (LOS) A and is
projected to continue to operate at LOS A after project development.
Access to the project site is proposed !Tom the existing driveway on the southern portion of
the site and a new driveway at the northern comer of the site.
Parkinf!
Based upon the Chula Vista Municipal Code parking ratio requirement for hotels, hotels, and
motor hotels of 1 parking space per each living or sleeping unit, plus one space for every 25
rooms or portion thereof to be provided on the same lot as use, the required off-street parking
for the proposal is 71 spaces. The proposed off-street parking is 71 parking spaces; therefore,
the project would not result in any significant parking impacts and no mitigation measures
are required.
F. Mitigation Necessarvto Avoid Significant Impacts
Hazards and Hazardous Waste
The following hazards mitigation requirement shall be shown on all demolition plans as a
note.
1. Asbestos and lead-based paint abatement shall be perfonned by a licensed and
registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor in accordance to all applicable
5 / -.3~
local, state and federal laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air
Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standards for Demolition and Renovation.
G. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City ofChula Vista:
Luis Hernandez, Planning and Building Department
Paul Hellman, Planning and Building Department
Jolm Schmitz, Planning and Building Department
Lynnette Tessitore-Lopez, Planning and Building Department
Maria Muett, Planning and Building Department
Carolyn Dakan, Planning and Building Department
Garry Williams, Planning and Building Department
Miguel Tapia, Community Development Department
Sohaib AI-Agha, Engineering Department
Frank Rivera, Engineering Department
Alex AI-Agha, Engineering Department
JeffMoneda, Engineering Department
Muna Cuthbert, Engineering Department
Silvester Evetovich, Engineering Department
Ben Herrera, Engineering Department
Majed AI-Ghafi-y, Engineering Department
Michael Maston, Engineering Department
David ManuITo, Public Works/Operations
Jessica Madson, Fire Department
Lynn France, Conservation and Environmental Services Department
Others:
Dee Peralta, Chula Vista Elementary School District
Hector Martinez, Sweetwater Authority
2. Documents
City ofChula Vista General Plan, 1989.
Final Environmental Impact Report, City of Chula Vista General Plan Update, EIR No.
88-2, May 1989.
City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, February 2003.
1- 33
6
3. Initial Studv
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 judgment of
the City ofChula Vista. Further infonnation regarding the environmental review of this
project is available from the Chula Vista Planning and Building Department, 276 Fourth
Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910.
~~'é?~~ Date: ~/.2/b¡
I I
Environmental Review Coordinator
f-.3c.f
7
CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DE PARTME NT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPLICANT; RODEWAY INN EXPANSION INITIAL STUDY
PROJECT
ADORESS: 778 BROADWAY Request: Proposal to expand the existing hotel by
SCALE: I FILE NUMBER: 22 new guest units.
NORTH No Scale 18-04-016 Related Case(s): DRC-04-32
j:\cherylc\locators\locators04\is04016(rev).cdr 01.29.04 (-.3 ~
Exhibit A
,-
.ï ~
..Q
"""'O"" . ..-1' !
~"~ ----_J"':""!j::,,¿;~-_. ._---("'-<I"Î--'.~I --__n._. --:.~;~,
1: 0-'< I .lV!:':';:~4" I ~'l?- " - .",:-+l~"ç~~ --~~- t ~~~~'
~~"- I ,I' ",~~~/,::,',"<;_~; II I " , . , ~~~!,
:¡ li'.J..¡"";"~ilj
-f n_--_.. ,0-"",,-
-~-~
-I
'1
:¡i
I ""'. ~~,~ I
' 'j-<'~ -O:¡«
~r ; '",
~! -~
I~ ~ !
i~ ' ¡j
I~ .; Ii.
~ qa
ì !~!
- ~t
:!" ~-- r Ii
,; ~~ ;<; ~~
~~
-,
0
1-.3(ç.
ATTACHMENT "A"
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
Rodewav Inn Expansion - IS-O4-0 16
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed Rodeway Inn Expansion project. The proposed project has
been evaluated in an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared in accordance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State CEQA Guidelines (IS-04-
016). The legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate mitigation measures are
implemented and monitored for Mitigated Negative Declarations.
AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this project ensures adequate
implementation of mitigation for the following potential impacts(s):
I. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
MONITORING PROGRAM
Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinators
shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer of the City of Chula Vista.
The applicant shall be responsible to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program are met to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator and
City Engineer. Evidence in written form confinning compliance with the mitigation measures
specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-04-016 shall be provided by the applicant to the
Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. The Environmental Review Coordinator
and City Engineer will thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have
been accomplished.
Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist, lists the mitigation measures
contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Effects, of Mitigated Negative
Declaration IS-04-016, 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.
J:\PlanningIMARlA\lnitial Study\IS-O4-{]16MMRPtext.doc
1-.37
-
1;t
~
...
Q)
:ã
IV
I-
0>
-o~g> ¿
~ 11m I I
' "00.,. ,
. ",gO, ,
.. Ii,~,: ,
>' HhS. ,
=: "!". ,
~¡ ..~;,^ ~
.. 'o.o~ "
'~h~.~~ ,
. H !h,~~ ,
9 II ";,,, ¡
, ~ ..!.q ¡
" ,~ :'!H~ J
.. ".O" ~
co õ~13o'::-æ"..: ~ .S
-, "' 00- <
,J; 0>0 ~o>æocn<,,>.3 ~
c '" '" « "-- - I -
.~. - .
" ~
w
c
.£
co
;:
Q)
"C
0
<>::
~If?
~-
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CfJYOf
CHUIA VISTA
1. Name of Proponent: Yih-Ruey & Yung Chang
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City ofChula Vista
Planning and Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
3. Addresses and Phone Number of Proponent: 2806 Lloyd Street
San Diego, CA 92117
(619) 276-5185
4. Name of Proposal: Rodeway Inn Expansion
5. Date of Checklist: March 2, 2004
6. Case No. IS-04.016
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS QUESTIONS:
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 .
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, 0 0 0 .
but not limited to, 1ress, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or 0 . 0 0
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, 0 . 0 0
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
/-39
1
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation S;gnificant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
Comments:
a-b) As designated in the City's General Plan, the project site is within the Southwest Redevelopment Area.
Landscape treatments along Broadway and within the project site area are proposed in accordance with
the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code and landscape and site architectural requirements and design
review guidelines. These landscape improvements would ensure that no adverse aesthetic impacts to the
Broadway corridor would result. The project site contains no scenic resources, vistas or views open to
the public, and is not in proximity to a state scenic highway.
c) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
d) See I.c. above.
Miti!!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Convert Prime FannJand, Unique FannJand, or 0 0 0 .
FannJand of Statewide Importance (Famùand), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the FannJand
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or D D D .
a Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, D D D .
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Fannland, to non-agricultural use?
Comments:
a-c) The project site is neither in current agricultural production nor adjacent to property in agricultural
production and contains no agricultural resources or designated fannland.
Miti!!ation: No mitigation measures required.
1-40
2
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
ill. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 0 0 0 .
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute 0 0 . 0
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net 0 0 0 .
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions, which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 0 0 .
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial 0 0 0 .
number of people?
1-4 (
3
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
Comments:
a-e) The project site is located within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB). The proposed project will result
in an increase in air pollutants during both the construction and operational phases of the project.
Fugitive dust would be created during demolition, grading and construction activities. Although air
quality impacts resulting ITom construction-related operations are potentially significant, they are
considered short-tenD in duration since grading and construction-related activities for the proposed
project are relatively minor and short-tenD in nature. Dust control measures indicated as grading
notes on the grading plans and 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. The proposed project is consistent with the
Commercial designation of the project site under the adopted Chula Vista General Plan. Therefore,
the proposed commercial land use has been included in regional air quality projects and plans and will
not conflict with or violate any applicable air quality plans or standards. For these reasons, the
proposed project would not result in any significant long-tenD loca] or regional air quality impacts.
Miti!!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directJy or 0 0 0 .
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regiona] plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department ofFish
and Game or u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantia] adverse effect on any riparian 0 0 0 .
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department ofFish
and Game or u.s. Fish and Wildlife Service?
1-42-
4
Less Than
Potenôally Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
C) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally D D D .
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any D D D .
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any 1DCal policies or ordinances D D D .
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat D D D .
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
1- q3
5
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant MWgat;on Significant No Impact.
Impact Incorporated Impact
Comments:
a) The project site was previously developed. Based upon the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, the project site is
designated as a developable area; based upon a field inspection by City staff, no candidate, sensitive, or special
status species are present within or immediately adjacent to the proposed development area. Non-native weeds
exist on the unpaved portions of the project site.
b) Based upon the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and field inspection by City staff, no sensitive natural
commlll1ities are present within or immediately adjacent to the proposed development area.
c) Based upon the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and field inspection by City staff, no wetlands are present
within or immediately adjacent to the proposed development area.
d) Based upon the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and field inspection by City staff, no native resident or
migratory wildlife corridors or native wildlife nursery sites exist within or immediately adjacent to the proposed
development area.
e) No biological reSOillCes would be affected by the proposal and no conflicts with local policies or ordinances
protecting biological reSOillCes would result.
1) No impacts to local, regional or state habitat conservation plans would result since the project site is a
designated development area pursuant to the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan.
Mitil!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 0 0 0 .
significance of a historical resource as defined in
State CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 0 0 0 .
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to State CEQA Guidelines § 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique 0 0 0 .
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
I-t/'-Í
6
Less Than
Potentially Sigoificant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impa"
Impact Incorporated Impact
d) Disturb any human remains, including those inteITed 0 0 0 .
outside offonna] cemeteries?
Comments:
a) No historic resomces are known or are expected to be present witlrin the project impact area. Therefore, no
substantia] adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defmed in Section ]5064.5 is
anticipated.
b) Based on the level of previous disturbance to the site, and the relatively minor amount of additional grading that
would be necessary to construct the proposed project, the potential for impacts to archaeological resources is
considered to be less than significant.
c) The project site is identified as an area ofJow potentia] for paleontological resources in the City's General Plan
E]R. Based on the level of previous disturbance to the site and the relatively minor amount of additional
grading for the proposed project, the potential for impacts to paleontological resource or is considered to be less
than significant. No unique geologic features are present on the site.
d) No human remains are anticipated to be present within the impact area of the project.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantia] adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury or death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as 0 0 0 .
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Prio]o
Earthquake Fau]t Zoning Map issued by the State
Geo]ogist for the area or based on other
substantia] evidence of a known fault?
ii. Strong seisnllc ground shaking? 0 0 0 .
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including 0 0 0 .
liquefaction?
iv. Landslides? 0 0 0 .
7 I-t/Ç
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of 0 0 . 0
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is 0 0 0 .
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on-
or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, creating substantia] 0 0 0 .
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the 0 0 0 .
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
Comments:
a-e) Proposed grading consists of 620 cubic yards of fill placement, over 4,500 square feet of the site and the
maxini.um depth of fill is anticipated to be I-foot. Due to the previous development of the site and minimal grading
required for the proposed project, no significant geological impacts are anticipated. The submittal of a soils report
will be required prior to the issuance of grading and construction pennits to determine existing soil conditions and to
provide foundation and pavement recommendations.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 0 0 . 0
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 0 0 . 0
8 1- 4lø
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Signifieant Mitigation S;gnifi<ant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or 0 0 0 .
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of 0 0 0 .
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an aitpOrt land use 0 0 0 .
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private 0 0 0 .
airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
g) hnpair implementation of or physically interfere 0 0 0 .
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of 0 0 0 .
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,.
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intennixed with wildlands?
I-t./?
9
Less Than
Potentially Sigaificant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mlögaöon SIgnificant No Imp"'t
Impact Iocorporated Impact
Comments: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Miti!!ation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F.
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project:
a) Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to 0 0 . 0
receiving waters (including impaired water bodies
pursuant to the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list),
result in significant alteration of receiving water
quality during or following construction, or violate
any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or 0 0 . 0
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which pennits
have been granted)? Result in a potentially
significant adverse impact on groundwater quality?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 0 0 . 0
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner, which
would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 0 0 . 0
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site, or place
structures within a ] OO-year flood hazard area which
(-c{.V'
10
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impnct
would impede or redirect flood flows?
e) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of 0 0 0 .
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
f) Create or contribute runoff water, which would 0 0 0 .
exceed the capacity of eJcisting or planned
stonnwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
Comments: See Mitigated Negative Declaration Section E.
Mitil!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
project:
a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0 0 .
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or 0 0 0 .
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an enviromnental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation 0 0 0 .
plan or natural community conservation plan?
1-c/-9
II
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
Comments:
a) The proposed commercial project (hotel expansion) would be consistent with the character of the suITOlmding
area and, therefore, would not disrupt or divide an established community.
b) The project site is within the cr (Thoroughfare Commercial) Zone and CV (Visitor Commercial) General Plan
designations. Motor hotels are permitted under Chapter 19.40 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, subject to the
provisions of 19.58.210 (Hotels and hotels). The project has been found to be consistent with the applicable
zoning regulations and General Plan.
c) The project would not conflict with any applicable adopted environmental plans or policies. Furthennore, the
project would not encroach into or indirectly affect the Habitat Preserve area of the adopted Chula Vista MSCP
Subarea Plan.
Mitil!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral 0 0 0 .
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a 10cal1y 0 0 0 .
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
Comments:
a) The proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the
regIon.
b) Pursuant to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Chula Vista General Plan, the State of CaJifomia
Department of Conservation has not designated the project site as a mineral resource zone.
Mitil!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
I-~-o
12
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels 0 0 . 0
in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive 0 0 0 .
groundborne vibration or groundborne noise levels?
c) A substantial pennanent increase in ambient noise 0 0 . 0
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in 0 0 . 0
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan 0 0 0 .
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, 0 0 0 .
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
I-S (
13
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Signifi<ant Mitögaûon Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
Comments:
a, c and d) Due to the lack of proposed noise generating uses the project is not anticipated to result in any significant
noise impacts to noise-sensitive land uses in the immediate vicinity. Furthermore, compliance with the noise control
ordinance of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, which regulates the rnaximwn one-hour average sound level that can
be generated at or beyond the boundary of a property, is mandatory for any activities occmring on-site.
b) It is not anticipated that persons will be exposed to excessive groundbome vibration or noise levels, as there will
not be any heavy industrial equipment or machinery operated on-site beyond short-term construction activities.
e) The project is not located within an airport land use plan nor within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport; therefore, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise
levels.
f) The project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip; therefore, the project development would not
expose people working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
Mitil!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, 0 0 0 .
either directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of road or other inftastructure)?
b) Displace substantial nwnbers of existing housing, 0 0 0 .
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, 0 0 0 .
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
I-::rd-.
14
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
Comments:
a-c) No residential development is proposed that would induce substantial population growth in the area or require
substantial infi-astructure improvements. The manager's unit is the only permanent housing existing on the
project site and no displacement of housing or people would occur as a result of the proposed project. Based
upon the size and nature of the proposal, no population growth inducement is anticipated. The project is an
allowable retail use per the Zoning Ordinance and in compliance with the General Plan land use designation.
Mitil!:ation: No mitigation measures are required.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain
acceptable service ratios, response times or other
performance objectives for any public services:
Fire protection? 0 0 0 .
Police protection? 0 0 0 .
Schools? 0 0 0 .
Parks? 0 0 0 .
Other public facilities? 0 0 0 .
1- :$"".3
15
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Signifi"nt Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
Comments:
a) According to the Fire Department, adequate flTe protection services can continue to be provided to the site
without an increase of equipment or personnel. The Fire Departments estimated time of arrival is within 5
minutes. The applicant is required to submit plans for a fire sprinkler system prior to building construction and
is required to comply with the Fire Department policies for new building construction.
As of July 2003, the remodeling of Fire Station 4 and as of September 2003, the opening of new Fire Station 7
on the eastern side of the City have improved fire services and response times throughout the City. The
proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or altered fire protection
services. The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or altered
flTe protection services. The City perfonnance objectives and thresholds will continue to be met.
b) According to the Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be provided upon
completion of the proposed project. At the request of the City Police Department, the applicant has agreed to
provide the following security measures within the project design: 9-foot high masoruy wall along the west
property bOlmdary line, specialized windows, lighting, open space exposure. The proposed hotel expansion
project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for substantial new or altered police
protection services. No adverse impact to the City's Police Threshold standards would occur as a result of the
proposed project.
c) The proposed project would not induce population growth; therefore, no significant adverse impacts to public
schools would result. Furthermore, the applicant would be required to pay the statutory building permit school
fees for the proposed new commercial building.
d) Because the proposed project would not induce population growth, it would not induce significant population
growth and thus not create a demand for neighborhood or regional parks or facilities or impact existing park
facilities.
e) The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or expanded
governmental services and would continue to be served by existing public inftastructure.
Miti!!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and D D D .
regional parks or other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or D D D .
require the construction or expansion of recreational
I-~
16
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
facilities, which have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
Comments:
a) Because the proposed project would not induce population growth, it would not create a demand for
neighborhood or regional parks or facilities nor impact existing neighborhood parks or recreational facilities.
b) The project does not include the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. According to the Parks and
Recreation Element of the General Plan, the project site is not pl8Ill1ed for any future parks and recreation
facilities or programs.
Miti2ation: No mitigation measures are required.
XV. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIc. Would the
project:
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in 0 0 . 0
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level 0 0 0 .
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads
or highways?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including 0 0 0 .
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design 0 0 0 .
feature (e.g., shalp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., fann
equipment)?
I-SS-
17
-
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Sign;f¡cant Mitigation Sign;f¡cant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? D D D .
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? D D D .
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs D D D .
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Commeuts: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitil!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
XVl. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the D D 0 .
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or 0 0 0 .
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the constmction of new stonn 0 0 D .
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the 0 0 0 .
project fi-om existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
(-~~
18
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant MHiga,;on Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment 0 0 0 .
provider, wlrich serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
1) Be served by a landfill with sufficient pennitted 0 0 . 0
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and 0 0 . 0
regulations related to solid waste?
Comments:
a) The project site is located within an urban area that is served by all necessary utilities and service
systems. No exceedance of wastewater requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board would
result from the proposed project.
b) See XV1.a. No construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or the expansion of existing
facilities would be necessary.
c) No construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities would be
necessary.
d) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater Authority. Pursuant to
correspondence /Tom the Sweetwater Authority, the project may be serviced /Tom existing potable water
mains. No new or expanded entitlements are anticipated for the proposed project.
e) See XV1.a. and b.
1) The City of Chula Vista is served by regional landfills with adequate capacity to meet the solid waste
needs of the region in accordance with State law.
g) The proposal would comply with federal, state and local regulations related to solid waste.
Mitil!ation: No mitigation measures are required.
(-.'S7
19
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation S;gnificant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
XVII. THRESHOLDS
Will the proposal adversely impact the City's
Threshold Standards?
A. 1.iQrm:y 0 0 0 .
The City shaIl construct 60,000 gross square feet
(GSF) of additional library space, over the June 30,
2000 GSF total, in the area east of Interstate 805 by
buildout. The construction of said facilities shall be
phased such that the City wiIl not faIl below the city-
wide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000 populatioo. Library
facilities are to be adequately equipped and staffed.
B) Police 0 0 . 0
a) Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed
police units shaIl respond to 81 percent of "Priority One"
emergency calls within seven (7) minutes and maintain
an average response time to all "Priority One"
emergency calls of5.5 minutes or less.
b) Respond to 57 percent of "Priority Two" urgent caIls
within seven (7) minutes and maintain an average
response time to all "Priority Two" calls of 7.5 minutes
or Jess.
C) Fire and Emergencv Medica] 0 0 . 0
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fm:
and medica] units shall respond to calls throughout the City
within 7 minutes in 80% of the cases (measured annually).
D) Traffic 0 0 . 0
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must
operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the
exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D" may occur
during the peak two hours of the day at signalized
intersections. Signalized intersections west ofI-80S are not
to operate at a LOS below their ]991 LOS. No intersection
may reach LOS "E" or "F" during the average weekday
peak hour. Intersectioos of arterials with fi-eeway ramps
are exempted fi-om this Standard.
I-~~
20
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
E) Parks and Recreation Areas 0 0 0 .
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3
acres of neighborhood and coTIlImmity parkland with
appropriate facilities/I ,000 population east on-805.
F) Drainage 0 0 . 0
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 Planes) and City
Engineering Standards.
G) Sewer 0 0 . 0
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and
volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master Planes) and City Engineering
Standards.
H) Water 0 0 . 0
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage,
treatment, and transmission facilities are cons1ructed
concUlTently with planned growth and that water quality
standards are not jeopardized during growth and
cons1ruction.
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 pennit
Issuance.
1-~1:J
21
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
Comments:
a) The project is not a housing development; therefore, no impacts to library facilities would result. No adverse
impact to the City's Library Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
b) According to the Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be provided upon
completion of the proposed project. At the request of the City Police Department, the applicant has agreed to
provide the following security measures within the project design: 9-foot high masonry wan along the west
property boundary line, specialized windows, lighting, open space exposure. The proposed hotel expansion
project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for substantial new or altered police
protection services. No adverse impact to the City's Police threshold standards would occur as a result of the
proposed project.
c) According to the Fire Department, adequate fire protection and emergency medical services can continue to be
provided to the site. As of September 2003, the remodeling of Fire Station 4 and as of September 2003, the
opening of Fire Station 7 on the eastern side of the City have improved fife services and response times
throughout the City. The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new
or altered fire protection services. No adverse impact to the City's Fire and Emergency Medical Threshold
standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
d) According to the Traffic Engineering Section, with the addition of projected generated traffic, an
roadway segments and intersections within the study area along Broadway are estimated to continue to
operate at level of service "C" or better in compliance with the City's Traffic Threshold Standards.
e) Because the project site is located west of Interstate 805, this Threshold Standard is not applicable.
f) A drainage study will be prepared in conjunction with the final grading and improvement plans and drainage
facilities designed in accordance with the Drainage Master Plan{s) and City Engineering standards win be
installed at the time of site development. The applicant proposes new and improved drainage facilities
incorporated within the project site. No adverse impacts to the City's storm drainage system or City's Drainage
Threshold standards will occur as result of the proposed project.
g) The sewer facilities serving the project consist of a 8-inch sewer line rurming westerly along K Street, south of
the project site and an 8-inch sewer line rurming northerly on Riverlawn Avenue, west of the project site. The
Engineering Division has determined that these facilities are adequate to serve the proposed project. No new
sewer facilities are anticipated to be required and no adverse impacts to the City's Sewer Threshold standards
will occur as a result of the proposed project.
h) Pursuant to correspondence received ITom the Sweetwater Authority, dated December 4, 2003, there is an 8-
inch water main located on the east side of Broadway. Additionally, there are three existing domestic water
services and one existing 8-inch fife service that clDTently services the project site. Project impacts to the
Authority's storage, treatment, and transmission facilities would be less than significant.
1- (.0
22
Less Than
Potentially S;gnmcant Less Than
With
Issues: Significant Mhigation S;gnificant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the 0 0 0 .
quality of the environment, 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
conununity, reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
Califonria history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually 0 0 0 .
linrited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" 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 project, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental effects, which 0 0 0 .
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
a) The project site is currently developed and located within an established urbanized area, and is within the
designated development area of the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan. There are no !mown sensitive
plant or animal species or cultural resources on the site.
b) As described in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, significant direct project impacts would be mitigated to
below a level of significance through the required mitigation measures. No cumulatively considerable
impacts associated with the project when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, other current
projects and probable future projects, including the recently approved Broadway Village mixed-use
retail/residential project located innnediately north of the project site (760 Broadway), have been identified
and none are contemplated.
c) See the "Hazards and Hazardous Materials" discussion in Section E of the Mitigated Negative Declaration;
potential impacts associated with the demolition of existing buildings and improvements containing asbestos-
containing materials would be mitigated to below a level of significance.
1-(,1
23
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES:
Project mitigation measures are contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant
Impacts, and Table I, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, of Mitigated Negative
Declaration IS-04-016.
XX. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and Operator 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 posting of this Mitigated Negative Declaration with
the County Clerk shall indicate the Applicant's and Operator's desire that the Project be held in
abeyance without approval and that the Applicant and Operator shall apply for an Environmental Impact
Report.
'(¡If k?v~/ CHA-t.6 OWMG"R
Printed Name and Title of Applié'ant
(or a z re resentative)
~/ó4
Date
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Signature of Operator Date
(if different !Tom Applicant)
I - ",)..,
24
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 previous pages.
0 Land Use and Planning DTransportationff raffic 0 Public Services
0 Population and Housing 0 Biological Resources 0 Utilities and Service Systems
0 Geophysical 0 Energy and Mineral 0 Aesthetics
Resources
0 Agricultural Resources
0 Hydro10gyfWater . Hazards and Hazardous 0 Cultural Resources
Materials
0 Air Quality 0 Noise 0 Recreation
0 Paleontological 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
Resources
1- ,:3
25
XXII. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the 0
environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could 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 proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, 0
and an Environmental Impact Report is required.
I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but 0
at least one effect: I) 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.
0
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to
applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR,
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project.
An addendmn has been prepared to provide a record of this determination.
~~/¿?~}i. "f /.2 j/J ¡
Marilyn R.F. Ponseggi Dáte '
Environmental Review Coordinator
City ofChula Vista
C:\My Document,IIS-04-Q16Checkli't.doc
1- ,,'I
26
PAGE 1, ITEM NO.: .;2.
MEETING DATE: 7/13/2004
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF THE OPTION TO
PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY AGREEMENT AND PURCHASE
AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS AND MEMORANDUM
OF OPTION FOR PROPERTY OWNED BY MRS. JUDI SHINOHARA IN
THE OTAY VALLEY PROJECT AREA
SUBMITTED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR :ç.<v
REVIEWED BY: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR I ('
4/5THS VOTE: YES c=J NO ŒJ
PROJECT PROPOSAL
In 2000, Redevelopment Agency (Agency) entered into a settlement agreement with Mrs. Judi
Shinohara which provided the Agency an option agreement to purchase a 1.6 acre property in the
Otay Valley Redevelopment Project Area. The option is scheduled to expire on July 27, 2004. A
subsequent mediation agreement between the Agency and Mrs. Shinohara includes the right of the
Agency to extend for two years provided certain conditions have been satisfied.
Agency staff has been working vigorously during this three-year period to expand the Auto Park.
The Shinohara parcel is included in these efforts, however, staff is not prepared to recommend
exercising this option by the July 27, 2004 deadline. Instead, staff desires to extend the Agency's
option to purchase the Shinohara stockpile site until July 27, 2006. Final disposition of the parcel
will be recommended within the two-year extension period/before July 27, 2006.
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the Agency adopt the resolution approving an (1) Extension to the Option
to Purchase Real Property Agreement and Purchase Agreement and Escrow Instructions; and (2)
Memorandum of Option for property owned by Mrs. Judi Shinohara in the Otay Valley
Redevelopment Project Area.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION
Not applicable.
ó1.-1
PAGE 2, ITEM NO.: ~
MEETING DATE: 7 /13/2004
DISCUSSION
Pursuant to the Mediation Agreement, the Agency option shall be extended subject to, among
others, the following conditions:
1. The Shinohara's will not be responsible for removing any encumbrances which occur after
the extension period is exercised, with the exception that the Shinohara's may not create
any security interest, mortgage, deed of trust or monetary lien against the property without
the consent of the Agency.
2. Agency will be responsible for all assessments and taxes on the property after the expiration
of the original option period.
3. Agency will be responsible for all reasonable attorney's fees incurred by Shinohara arising
from the Agency's extension of the option,
The Shinohara stockpile (legal description of the property is incorporated into the agreement) was
created during development of Phase I of the Auto Park on Otay Valley Road (now Main Street).
During predevelopment activities, it was discovered that the entire 24-acre Phase I site was
contaminated with non-hazardous burn ash containing heavy metals. With approval by the San
Diego County Department of Environmental Health, in April and May, 1993 the site surface was
scraped and stockpiled onto a 1.6 acre remainder parcel at the southeast corner of the project.
The stockpile site was originally included in Phase I of the Auto Park and was analyzed in the
Environmental Impact Report for the project.
Seven years later, in November, 2000, the Agency, Mrs. Shinohara, the County and State agreed
to a plan to excavate the site and refill it with clean soils in preparation for redevelopment. The
Agency conducted the clean up, with participation from the California Integrated Waste
Management Board, and completed the project on July 27,2001.
The Agency's objective has always been to reincorporate the site into the Auto Park, and to
facilitate this, Mrs. Shinohara provided the Agency the option to purchase the site for $1 within
three years of completing the clean up.
FISCAL IMPACT
The Agency will be responsible for all assessments and taxes on the property after the expiration
of the original option period, and for all reasonable attorney's fees incurred by Shinohara arising
from the Agency's extension of the option. Fees and assessments are unknown at this time. Staff
will return with a request for appropriation in the future.
JJ:\COMMDEY\STAFF.REP\O7-13-04\2Shinohoro option extension.doc
oJ. -~
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN EXTENSION OF THE OPTION
TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY AGREEMENT AND PURCHASE
AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS AND
MEMORANDUM OF OPTION FOR PROPERTY OWNED BY MRS.
JUDI SHINOHARA IN THE OTAY VALLEY REDEVELOPMENT
PROJECT AREA
WHEREAS, in April, 1993 a remainder parcel was created to contain a stockpile of non-
hazardous contaminated soils found on lands owned by Mrs. Judi Shinohara and planned as Phase
I of the Chula Vista Auto Park; and
WHEREAS, in November, 2000; the Redevelopment Agency and Mrs. Shinohara agreed to
a settlement and clean up for the site; and
WHEREAS, the site clean up was completed on July 27, 2001; and
WHEREAS, the Settlement Agreement provided to the Agency an Option to Purchase the
remainder parcel within three years of the completion of the clean up; and
WHEREAS, a subsequent mediation agreement set forth a method for extending said Option
to Purchase for two years; and
WHEREAS, retaining the ability to purchase the site Is consistent with the redevelopment
goals for the Otay Valley Redevelopment Project Area.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby approve an Extension of the Option to Purchase Real Property and Purchase
Agreement and Escrow Instructions and Memorandum of Option for property owned by Mrs. Judi
Shinohara in the Otay Valley Project Area.
PRESENTED BY APPROVED AS TO FORM BY
Laurie Madigan
Director of Community Development
J:\COMMDEVIRESOS\O7-13-04\Shinohara Option Extension.doc
d-3
EXTENSION OF
OPTION TO PURCHASE REAL PROPERTY
AND
PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS
(Shinohara Property)
THIS EXTENSION OF OPTION AGREEMENT (this "Extension Agreement") is made
as of ,2004 by and between Judi S. Shinohara, Trustee UTD October 21,
1987, Trust No.2 ("Shinohara") and Redevelopment Agency of the CITY OF CHULA VISTA,
a political subdivision of the State of California ("Chula Vista"), with reference to the following
facts:
A. Whereas, Shinohara and Chula Vista entered into that certain Option to
Purchase Real Property and Purchase Agreement and Escrow Instructions
effective as of November 13,2000 (the "Option Agreement") pursuant to
which Shinohara agreed to sell to Agency, pursuant to the tenns described
therein, the real property described therein (the "Option Property").
B. Whereas, Chula Vista and Shinohara entered into a Mediation Agreement
as a result of mediation conducted on November 12, 2001 in the matter of
Redevelopment Agency of the City Of Chula Vista v. Judi Shinohara,
individually and as Trustee of the Shinohara Family Trust.
C. Whereas, Shinohara and Chula Vista acknowledge that the Option
Agreement is due to expire by the tenns and conditions of said Option
Agreement on July 27, 2004.
D. Whereas, the Mediation Agreement provides the Option Agreement shall
be extended an additional two years ("Extended Option Period"), so that
said option shall expire five years after the date the Remediation Work
was completed, which completion date is July 27, 2001 subject to those
conditions identified in said Mediation Agreement.
E. Whereas, Chula Vista has complied with the provisions of said agreement
and Shinohara does hereby grant the requested extension.
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and other good and
valuable consideration, the receipt and sufficiency of which are hereby acknowledged, Shinohara
and Chula Vista agree as follows:
1. Extension of Option Period. Effective as of the date of this Extension Agreement,
Shinohara and Chula Vista each acknowledge and agree the Option Period shall be extended for
an two years pursuant to the Mediation Agreement.
-1- Ql- Ý
2. Full Force and Effect. Except as expressly modified by the provisions of this Extension
Agreement of the Mediation Agreement, all of the terms and conditions of the Option Agreement
shall remain in full force and effect.
3. Successors and Assigns. This Extension Agreement shall be binding on Shinohara,
Chula Vista, and their respective successors and assigns.
4. Governing Law. This Extension Agreement shall be governed by and construed in
accordance with the laws of the State of California, excluding any laws that direct the application
of another jurisdiction's laws.
s. Counterparts. This Extension Agreement may be executed in counterparts, and by
facsimile signature, each of which shall be deemed an original, and all of which taken together
shall constitute one and the same instrument.
(Signature page follows.)
-2- ,d)-S"
.- .
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Shinohara and Chula Vista have executed this Extension
Agreement as of the date first set forth above.
Sinohara
By:
Name:
Title:
REDELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA
By:
Name:
Title:
J:lAttomeyIEHulllAgreements\Shinohara Option Extension.doc
-3- d<-G.
MEMORANDUM OF OPTION
This MEMORANDUM OF OPTION ("the Memorandum") is made and entered
into on ,2004 by and between Judi S. Shinohara, Trustee U.T.D. October 21,
1987, Trust No.2 ("Shinohara"), and Redevelopment Agency of the City ofChula Vista,
a political subdivision of the State of California ("Chula Vista"), who agree as follows:
1. Extension of Option to Purchase Property.
Shinohara and Chula Vista made and entered into the Option to Purchase Real
Property and Purchase Agreement and Escrow Instructions ("Option Agreement") dated
November 13,2001. Shinohara and Chula Vista made and entered into the Extension of
Option Agreement dated , 2004 (the "Extension Agreement"), concerning
the unimproved real property located in the City ofChula Vista, and more particularly
described as follows (the "Property"):
That portion of the Remainder Parcel as shown on Parcel Map No. 17917, in
the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the
Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, August 18, 1993,
described as follows:
Beginning at the Southwest comer of said Remainder Parcel; thence North
00°25'58" East along the boundary line thereof 468.59 feet to the true point of
beginning; thence continuing along said boundary line North 00°25'58" East
306.24 feet; thence South 88°57'04" East 254.70 feet; thence South
01 °02'56" West 226.85 feet; thence leaving said boundary line South
73°31 '42" West 263.64 feet to the true point of beginning.
Pursuant to the Option Agreement and Extension of Option Agreement,
Shinohara granted to Chula Vista, and Chula Vista acquired ITom Shinohara and has, the
exclusive right and option to purchase and acquire the Property ("the Extended Option").
Shinohara and Chula Vista desire to enter into and record this Memorandum
to place of record the existence of the Extension of Option Agreement.
2. Extended Option Period.
The term of the Option Period began on November 13,2000, and will expire
five (5) years after the date that the Remediation Work (as described in the Option
Agreement) is completed ("Option Period").
3. Memorandum.
All of the rights and obligations of Shin ohara and Chula Vista with respect to
the Option and the Property, and the other terms and provisions of the Option, are as set
forth in the Option Agreement, Mediation Agreement and Extension of Option
~-7
Agreement. This instrument is merely a memorandum of the Extension of Option
Agreement and is subject to all tenns and provisions of the Option Agreement, Mediation
Agreement and Extension to the Option Agreement. This Memorandum is binding on and
will inure to the benefit of the successors and assigns of Shinohara and Chula Vista.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, this Memorandum of Option is made and entered into on
the date first written above.
REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a
political subdivision of the State of
California
By:
Judi S. Shinohara, Trustee U.T.D. Steve Padilla
October 21,1987, Trust No.2 Chainnan
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By:
Ann Moore
Attorney for Agency
cJ-y
PAGE 1, ITEM NO.: .3
MEETING DATE: 07/13/04
JOINT PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY / CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE: CONSIDERATION OF THE EXECUTION, SALE AND DELIVERY OF
CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION IN ORDER TO FINANCE
CERTAIN PUBLIC CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS
SUBMlnED BY: DIRECTOR OF FINANCE/TREASURER
REVIEWED BY: CITY MANAGER "'r O~
/f
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the public hearing be continued to the Joint Public Financing Authority/City
Council meeting of July 20, 2004.
nCOMMDEV\STAFF.REP\O7 -13.04\COPs.doc
J-I
PAGE 1, ITEM NO.: -L
MEETING DATE: 07/13/04
JOINT PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY / CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
ITEM TITLE: CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE MASTER PLAN AND
THE DESIGN BUILD AGREEMENT WITH HIGHLAND
PARTNERSHIP, INC. FOR RENOVATIONS TO THE CITY'S CIVIC
CENTER COMPLEX
SUBMITTED BY: DIRECTOR OF GENERAL SERVICES
REVIEWED BY: CITY MANAGER (9r~\V
,y'
RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends this item be continued to the Joint Public Financing Authority/City Council
meeting of July 20, 2004.
J:\COMMDEY\STAFF.REP\O7-13-04\Civic Cenler.doc
4- I