The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRDA Packet 1997/06/24 Notice is hereby given that the Chairman of the Redevelopment Agency has called and will convene a special joint meeting of the Redevelopment Agency on June 24, 1997, at 6:00 p.m., immediately following the regular City Council meeting, in Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California to consider, deliberate and act upon the following: ul de,.'......... ...... .~- . ~"'I_\h' ~f "",f':!,,I"r'.1 that 1 am 'on lhe em:,!.. ',nd that' posted Co:rl~'-'. ' ." r" at the t:1',:; " P \~~'f" ".'." ('Y. ': r , ~ _,~ '.dlon U>e,,, ....".... . . . p,t .. DATiO:~:;ICi.:W "Yf} "1 ~, 1 Tuesday, June 24, 1997 6:00 p.m. (immediately following the City Council meeting) ~irman Council Chambers Public Services Building Soecial Meeting of the Redevelooment Agencv of the Citv of Chula Vista CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: Agency Members Moot _' Padilla_, Rindone _' Salas _' and Chair Horton_ CONSENT CALENDAR (Item 2) (Will be voted on immediately following the Council Consent Calendar during the City Council meeting) The staff recommendations regarding the following item 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 this item, please fill out a "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency or the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Action Items. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business. 2. REPORT: FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS FOR THE EXTENSION OF "H" STREET WEST OF BAY BOULEVARD--As part of its lO-year Capital Improvement Program for projects in the City of Chula Vista, the San Diego Unified Port District commissioned a feasibility study for the extension of "H" Street west of Bay Boulevard through the Rohr campus to Sandpiper Way. This study, undertaken with full cooperation from Rohr, has been completed and is presented to the Redevelopment Agency for review and comment. Staff recommends that the Agency accept the report and direct staff to work with Port District staff and Rohr officials to develop a timetable and funding plan for the extension of "H" Street. (Director of Community Development and Director of Public Works) . . . END OF CONSENT CALENDAR' . . ADJOURNMENT TO CITY COUNCIL MEETING .,. Agenda -2- June 24, 1997 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 pU1poses and follow up action. PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES The following items 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. PUBLIC HEARING: PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY SECTION 33431 REGARDING THE SALE OF SPACE NUMBER 152 AT ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK--In November 1987, Orange Tree Mobilehome Park converted to resident ownership. The Agency assisted the residents in purchasing their park with a $600,000 acquisition loan which was converted to loans for lower income residents to help them purchase their spaces. At that time, 29 residents did not wish to purchase their space, and the Agency agreed to purchase these spaces after the newly-formed homeowner's association was unable to secure financing to purchase these unsold spaces. The residents who did not purchase their space remained as renters. The Agency's desire is to sell these spaces as new home buyers move into the park. The Agency currently owns 17 spaces, having sold 12 spaces. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Director of Community Development) APPROVING THE SALE OF SPACE NUMBER 152 AT ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK AND AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE A PURCHASE AGREEMENT RESOLUTION 1545 ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR This is the time the Redevelopment Agency will discuss items which have been removed from the Consent Calendar. Agenda items pulled at the request of the public will be considered prior to those pulled by Agency Members. OTHER BUSINESS 4. DIRECTOR'S REPORTlS) 5. CHAIR'S REPORTlS) 6. AGENCY MEMBER COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT The meeting will adjourn to a closed session and thence to the Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting on July 15. 1997 at 6:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council meeting, in the City Council Chambers. T Agenda -3- June 24, 1997 * * * * * CLOSED SESSION Unless Agency Counsel, the Executive Director, or the Redevelopment Agency states otherwise at this time, the Agency will discuss and deliberate on the following item(s) of business which are permitted by law to be the subject of a closed session discussion, and which the Agency is advised should be discussed in closed session to best protect the interests of the City. The Agency is required by law to return to open session, issue any reports of final action taken in closed session, and the votes taken. However, due to the typical length of time taken up by closed sessions, the videotaping will be terminated at this point in order to save costs so that the Agency's return from closed session, reports of final action taken, and adjournment will not be videotaped. Nevertheless, the report of final action taken will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the Office of the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency and the City Clerk's Office. 7. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 . Instructions to negotiators regarding purchase price and terms for disposition of Agency-owned property at 760 Broadway (Parcel Nos. 571-200-13,14,15,16,17), Redevelopment Agency (Chris Salomone) and Broadway Village Business Homes, L.P. ~ REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT Item Ot Meeting Date 06-24-97 ITEM TITLE: REPORT: FEASIBILITY ANALYSIS FOR THE EXTENSION OF "H" STREET WEST OF BAY BOULEVARD Community Development Director GS, Director of Public Works ~ C\ Executive Director V\ '~hJ'f\ ~ '\J ./> (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ No..xJ SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: As part of its ten year Capital Improvement Program (CIPI for projects in the City of Chula Vista, the San Diego Unified Port District commissioned a feasibility study for the extension of "H" Street west of Bay Boulevard through the Rohr campus to Sandpiper Way. This study, undertaken with full cooperation from Rohr, has been completed and is presented to the Redevelopment Agency for review and comment. RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency accept the report and direct staff to work with Port District staff and Rohr officials to develop a timetable and funding plan for the extension of "H" Street pursuant to alignment alternative 1 A. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The final feasibility analysis has been distributed to the Unified Port District Commissioners. The study will also be discussed by the Chula Vista Yacht Harbor Coalition at their next meeting of June 27, 1997. DISCUSSION: The "H" Street Extension Feasibility Study was undertaken by Boyle Engineering Corporation under commission from the Port District. The project was funded out of the Port District's CIP Program allocation to the City of Chula Vista. The final study, submitted to Port District staff on June 1, 1997, analyzes three alternative alignments for the extension of the roadway. Two of the alternatives have "partial construct" sub.alternatives. Each of the alternative alignments was further analyzed under three grade separation scenarios: two elevated profiles which seeks to minimize conflicts with operations of the Rohr plant, and an "at grade" profile. The impacts of each alternative alignment under all three profiles is discussed in the study and cost estimates for all configurations were developed. A copy of the Final Report is attached. A description of the alternatives and summary of the findings is presented below: OJ -, .,. Page 2, Item :L Meeting Date 06-24-97 General Alignment Guidelines The District, City, and Rohr provided general guidelines to consider in developing alignment alternatives within the corridor. These guidelines include the following: A. "H" Street alignments should stay slightly to the south so as to minimize impacts to Rohr facilities north of the east/west primary access road. B. Consider an "H" Street alignment that could be constructed as an interim phase of the full width alignment; interim meaning that the alignment is in the ultimate location, but a portion of the road would be constructed in order to minimize potential impacts to buildings north and south of the east/west primary access road. The full width alignment would then be constructed at a later date. C. Consider an "H" Street alignment that would tie into the existing intersection of Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way. This alignment would eliminate the need for a separate intersection. D. The proposed future extension of "H" Street west of Marina Parkway should avoid impacting Buildings 910, 911, and 912 on District property west of Marina Parkway. E. Consider a grade separated "H" Street alignment over the north/south arterial access road within Rohr facilities. This would minimize security concerns and allow Rohr unconstrained access for heavy-duty forklifts, small tractor-trailers, and bicycles making frequent trips between buildings north and south of the proposed alignment. F. Adhere to the planning guidelines and design standards of the City of Chula Vista where applicable. Description of Alignments and Alternatives The alignments and alternatives described below were developed in response to the general guidelines listed above. Street sections for "H" Street and Marina Parkway are based on information obtained from the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Mid-Bayfront Project local Coastal Plan (lCP), which identifies projected buildout average daily traffic (ADT) volumes of 11.800 for "H" Street and 17,400 for Marina Parkway. A. "H" Street Alignment 1: The purpose of this alternative alignment is to minimize impacts to Rohr facilities south of the east/west primary access road. This alignment begins at "H" Street just west of Bay Boulevard and extends west, following the primary east/west access road within Rohr facilities, intersecting with Marina Parkway (See Exhibit A). The alignment is approximately 1,300 feet in length. A proposed future alignment would continue west of Marina Parkway through District property to Sandpiper Way. Ol-;J.. T Page 3. Item .:L Meeting Date 06-24-97 B. "H" Street Alignment 1 A, Interim: This alternative is a variation of Alignment 1 in that it could be constructed as an interim phase of the full width alignment; interim meaning that the alignment is in the ultimate location, but that one-half of the road would be constructed in the first phase. The full width alignment would then be constructed at a later date. This alternative alignment is basically the same as Alignment 1. The difference is that the interim alignment is less than full width thereby minimizing potential impacts and reducing initial construction costs. C. "H" Street Alignment 2: The purpose of this alternative alignment is to minimize impacts to Rohr facilities north of the east/west primary access road. Alignment 2 is approximately 50 feet south of Alignment 1. The "H" Street portion of this alignment begins at "H" Street just west of Bay Boulevard and extends west, following the east/west primary access road within Rohr facilities, intersecting with Marina Parkway (See Exhibit B). The alignment is approximately 1.300 feet in length. A proposed future alignment would continue west of Marina Parkway through District property to Sandpiper Way. D. "H" Street Alignment 2A, Interim: This alternative is a variation of Alignment 2 in that it could be constructed as an interim phase of the full width alignment; interim meaning that the alignment is in the ultimate location, but that one.half of the road would be constructed in the first phase. The full width alignment would then be constructed at a later date. This alternative alignment is basically the same as Alignment 2. The difference is that the interim alignment is less than full width thereby minimizing potential impacts and reducing initial construction costs. E. "H" Street Alignment 3: The purpose of this alternative alignment is to tie into the existing intersection of Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way (See Exhibit C). This eliminates the need for a separate intersection as required with Alignments 1 and 2. The "H" Street portion of this alignment begins at "H" Street just west of Bay Boulevard and extends southwest with 1,100 foot reversing curves through Rohr facilities, tying into the existing intersection of Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way. The alignment is approximately 1.350 feet in length. F. Marina Parkway Alignment: The purpose of this alignment is to extend Marina Parkway north to the mean high tide line. This alignment corresponds with all of the "H" Street alternative alignments (See Exhibit D). The alignment begins at Sandpiper Way and extends north of "G" Street with two 1. 1 00 foot reversing curves. ~-~ T Page 4. Item .;J... Meeting Date 06-24-97 The City may eventually extend Marina Parkway north of the mean high tide line to connect with "E" Street. The alignment of Marina Parkway north of the mean high tide line has not been identified. For purposes of this study, the assumption was made that the alignment needed to avoid impacting the environmentally sensitive area at the northeast corner of "G" Street and Marina Parkway. G. "H" Street Profile A: The purpose of this grade separation alternative profile is to provide Rohr unconstrained access along the north/south arterial access road within their facilities. From just east of Marina Parkway the grade separation profile begins with a crest vertical curve crossing over the north/south arterial access road then dropping back down to existing grade just west of the SD&AE Railroad;; crossing it at-grade (See Exhibit E). The combination of the proposed and existing profile creates a back-to-back crest/sag/crest vertical curves causing a "roller-coaster" effect. H. "H" Street Profile B: The purpose of this grade separation alternative profile is to provide Rohr unconstrained access along the north/south arterial access road within their facilities. This alternative profile differs from Profile "A" in that it minimizes the "roller-coaster" effect by using an existing north/south arterial access road that is approximately 300 feet east of the north/south arterial access road in Profile A. From Marina Parkway the profile begins a crest vertical curve to cross over the north/south arterial access road and the SD&AE Railroad. I. "H" Street Profile C: This at-grade alternative profile generally matches the existing profile grade and provides for an at-grade intersectin at the existing north/south arterial access road within Rohr facilities (See Exhibit E). Discussion of Impacts The following is an overall summary of the impacts of each alignment alternative: Alignment 1: This alignment has significant impacts associated with traffic circulation and security at Rohr. The circulation impacts relate to the proposed intersection of "H" Street and the north/south arterial access road. There is currently a substantial amount of vehicle and equipment traffic at this location and the proposed intersection would constrain access and result in a time delay for vehicles and equipment waiting to cross the intersection. .;1-4 'T Page 5. Item .;J.. Meeting Date 06-24-91 Significant security impacts also relate to the proposed intersection of "H" Street and the north/south arterial access road. Security gates and guards would be required at the north and south entrance of this proposed intersection. A number of buildings would need to be removed or have partial demolition and reconstruction as a result of Alignment 1. These impacts are considered potentially significant. Profiles "A" and "B" would have significant impacts to utilities within Rohr facilities because of retaining wall foundations, abutment foundations, and earthen fill placed on top of the shallow underground utilities. Utility impacts associated with Profile "C" are not considered significant. The extension of "H" Street between Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way may have potentially significant impacts associated with bi-secting District land. This includes possibly limiting development opportunities, impacting long-term lease agreements, and impacting the use of Buildings 910 and 911. The distance between the proposed intersection of Marina Parkway and "H" Street and the existing intersection of Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way does not meet established City design criteria, but it is not considered a significant constraint. When and if Rohr consolidates their facilities north of the proposed alignment. most of these constraints would be eliminated. Alignment 1 A: This alternative alignment has basically the same significant and potentially significant impacts as Alignment 1. The main difference is the cost associated with constructing a portion of the road versus constructing the entire road. Alignment 2: This alternative has considerably greater significant impacts than Alignment 1 because of its proximity to Buildings 3 and 45. Alignment 2 cuts off access to these buildings creating a significant impact. When and if Rohr consolidates their facilities north of the proposed alignment, most of these constraints would be eliminated. Alignment 2A: This alternative alignment has basically the same significant and potentially significant impacts as Alignment 2. The main difference is the cost associated with constructing a portion of the road versus constructing the entire road. Alignment 3: This alternative alignment has significant impacts associated with traffic circulation and security at Rohr. The circulation impacts relate to the proposed intersection of "H" Street and the north/south arterial access road. There is currently a substantial amount of vehicle and 01-5"' T Page 6, Item ~ Meeting Date 06-24-97 equipment traffic at this location and the proposed intersection would constrain access and result in a time delay for vehicles and equipment waiting to cross the intersection. Significant security impacts also relate to the proposed intersection of "H" Street and the north/south arterial access road. Security gates would be required at the north and south entrance of this proposed intersection. A number of buildings would need to be removed or have partial demolition and reconstruction as a result of Alignment 3. These impacts are considered potentially significant except for the impact to Building 45, which is considered significant because of the impact to Rohr's operations. Utility impacts associated with Profile "C" are not considered significant. When and if Rohr consolidates their facilities north of the proposed alignment, most of these constraints would be eliminated. Conclusions After an extensive review of opportunities and constraints, and discussions with the District, City, and Rohr; Alignment 1; Profile "C", was selected as the recommended alignment. This recommendation is based on the finding that Alignments 2 and 3 have considerably greater impacts to Rohr facilities and operations and much greater costs than Alignment 1. FISCAL IMPACT: An opinion of probable construction costs was developed for each alignment alternative. These construction costs include building demolition, building relocation, utilities, drainage, street lighting, traffic signals, railroad signals, pavement, security fencing, security gates, right-of.way, and other miscellaneous items. Costs for right-of-way include the land required for the full width alignment east of the mean high tide line. Relocation costs for Pacific Bell and SDG&E facilities are included in the construction costs. It is anticipated that these agencies will share in the cost of relocating their facilities thereby reducing the total cost of the project. The opinion of probable construction costs does not include the following: . Costs or contingencies for existing or potential environmental liabilities associated with historical uses of the property, current site operations, and the conditions of the surrounding properties. . Costs for landscaping the buffer area outside the street right-of-way. This buffer area varies in width from B feet to 20 feet. 01- f. T Page 7. Item .:L Meeting Date 06-24-97 . Costs for the proposed future extension of "Hn Street from Marina Parkway to Sandpiper Way. The following is a summary of probable construction costs: Description Alignment Alignment Alignment Alignment Alignment 1 1A 2 2A 3 Profile A $10,617,175 N/A $11,272.175 N/A N/A (Grade Sep.) Profile B $13,274,954 N/A $13,929,954 N/A N/A (Grade Sep.) Profile C $ 6,851,052 $ 6,292,431 $ 7,708,852 $ 6,089,631 $14,821,302 (At-grade) Notes: 1) N/A refers to not applicable. Grade separated profiles are not considered feasible for these alternative alignments. 2) Alignments 1 A and 2A are interim improvements to "H" Street. 3) A breakdown of costs for each alignment alternative is included in Appendix nAn. Potential Sources of Revenue A. Redevelopment Funds The proposed extension runs through the Bayfront Redevelopment Project area and the Port District Tidelands. Staff is currently processing a redevelopment plan amendment for the Bayfront Project Area to include the Tidelands which will, as the Tidelands development, provide additional tax increment revenues which may be applied to this project. Any use of redevelopment funds will require findings that the proposed improvements benefit the project area and that no other reasonable sources of financing are available for the project. B. T ransdif The City could create a separate Transdif to fund this road as well as others in the Bayfront. The costs would be collected from each project as it was built. C. Port District CIP The Port District's ten year CIP could be amended to include assistance for the final planning of this project and future construction. 02-7 ...,....... Page 8, Item OJ- Meeting Date 06-24-97 D. Other Assessment District could be used to build this road as well as the remaining infrastructure. It would require a feasibility study to determine costs of all the prospects to include and the preliminary assessments on each parcel. Then it would have to be determined if the land could carry the debt. Also, a ballot of all assessees would have to occur. The extension of "H" Street will be very expensive. The least costly alternative is the equivalent of over $27 million per mile compared to $3-5 million per mile average for other city road construction projects. If the Agency and Port District agree to proceed with this project, the next steps will include: 1. Development of a timetable and funding plan. 2. Development of final plans, specifications, and a construction schedule. It is recommended that the Agency direct staff to work with Port District staff and Rohr officials to determine a timetable and financing plan for the extension of "H" Street. It should be noted that further review and determination will be required by the Agency as this project proceeds in the planning stage, and such approvals will be subject to appropriate environmental review and approvals. (FK) H:\HOMEICOMMOEV\STAFF.REPI06-24.97\H _ ST _ EXT [June 18, 1997 110:31am}] .;J..-~ .,. ".~. "H" Street Extension Feasibility Study Final Report June 1, 1997 c:J-' .,. "H" Street Extension Feasibility Study BCfwlLE San Diego Unified Port District Client Representative Nael Areigat Boyle Engineering Corporation Project Manager Jim Neal Project Engineer Dane Schilling FINAL REPORT June 1,1997 0')-10 7807 Convoy Court, Suite 200, San Diego, CA 92111 Telephone 619-268-8080 T San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 Table of Contents 1.0 Introduction........................... ......................... ........... .....1 1.1 General.....................................................................l 1.2 Background: ............................................................. 1 2.0 Executive Summary .......................................................2 3.0 Existing Conditions......... ................................... ............7 3.1 General..................................................................... 7 3.2 Utilities.............. ............................................. ........ ..8 3.3 Drainage................................................................. ..9 4.0 Conceptual Alignments..................................................9 4.1 General Alignment Guidelines ................................9 4.2 Description of Alignments and Alternatives.......... 10 4.3 Opportunities and Constraints................................ 13 5.0 Opinion of Probable Construction Costs .....................20 6.0 Summary............... ................................................ .......21 6.1 General...................................................... ........... ..21 6.2 Conclusions....... ................. ....................... ........ ... ..23 7.0 Exhibits A. "H" Street Extension Alignment 1 B. "H" Street Extension Alignment 2 C. "H" Street Extension Alignment 3 ~-If 130",LE T San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1, 1997 D. "H" Street Extension Alignment 1,2, & 3 (Marina Parkway) E. "H" Street Extension Profiles 8.0 Appendix A. Conceptual Cost Estimates B. Field Notes C. Photographs D. Mid-Bayfront LCP FEIR, Traffic Data List of Figures Figure 1 - Location Map 01 -I do.- ii ElOVLE SAN DIEGO B/W \ \ . V~\ N ~ \ W~E S PROPOSED "H" STREET EXTENSION PROPOSED MARINA PKWY EXTENSION Figure 1, Location Map i'lot to Scale c2-/.3 BDI,JLE .nrslnfifiRlnrs CORPORRTlon . ""'T'"--"'-"-" San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 1.0 Introduction 1.1 General This report presents a description of alternatives and issues considered regarding alignment concepts for the extension of "H" Street west of Interstate 5 (I-5) in the city of Chula Vista (See Figure 1). Supplemental to the extension of "H" Street is the extension of Marina Parkway from Sandpiper Way to the mean high tide line just north of "G" Street. The San Diego Unified Port District (District) initiated this study to evaluate opportunities, constraints, and costs associated with extending "H" Street, west ofI-5, through the Rohr, Inc. (Rohr) facility and of extending Marina Parkway, north of Sandpiper Way, to just north of "G" Street. Potential development of the District's property and the Chula Vista bayfront may necessitate the need for better public access to this area via "H" Street and Marina Parkway. Periodic meetings were held with staff of the District, the city of Chula Vista (City), and Rohr to obtain information and feedback regarding opportunities and constraints. The information obtained from this cooperative effort was used in the preparation of this report. 1.2 Background: The project site is located within the Chula Vista Local Coastal Zone, the District's Planning District 7, and the Bayfront Redevelopment Area of the City. The study corridor consists ofland owned by the District, the San Diego & Arizona Eastern (SD&AE) Railroad, and Rohr. The SD&AE Railroad owns the railroad right-of-way and leases a portion of the right-of-way to San Diego Gas & Electric (SDG&E). Within this study area the District holds in trust the land west of the mean high tide line and, except for the SD&AE Railroad right-of-way, Rohr owns the land east of the mean high tide line. Rohr leases the land west of the mean high tide line and east of Marina Parkway from the District. Rohr owns the buildings and irnprovements on this leased land. Valle Dorado Ltd., leases the land west of Marina Parkway and east of Sandpiper Way. ..;)-,.J 1 BOYLE T San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 The site is currently zoned as Aviation-Industrial, however, there is a proposed amendment to the District's Master Plan that would change the zoning designation to Industrial-Business Park in order to allow a mix of commercial and industrial development; including manufacturing companies, office buildings, hotels, entertainment center, and shopping center. Additionally, the Chula Vista Mid- Bayfront, which is north of this project site, is expected to develop into a major resort area with hotels and water related activities. As these developrnent plans progress there will be a need to provide convenient public access from the region. 2.0 Executive Summary The District, City, and Rohr provided general guidelines to consider in developing alignment alternatives within the study corridor. These guidelines primarily related to minimizing impacts to Rohr facilities and operations. Three alignment alternatives were identified for extending "H" Street to Sandpiper Way. These alignments and variations of these alignments were considered and carried forth in this study. The variations include alternative profiles which provide for a grade separation over north/south access roads within Rohr facilities. Other variations include allowing for "H" Street to be constructed in phases in order to minimize impacts to Rohr. Various alignments were identified for extending Marina Parkway north past "G" Street. Only one alignment was carried forth for consideration. Opportunities associated with the alternative alignments identified for "H" Street include: . Possible reduction in traffic congestion at buildout. . Provides for improved pedestrian, automobile, and transit link of the regional and local area to and from the Bayfront. . Provides for a primary east/west connection from the downtown urban core to and from the Bayfront. ~-IS" 2 ElOVLE San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 There are a number of constraints associated with each alternative alignment. These constraints include: . Impacts to vehicle and equipment circulation associated with bisecting Rohr facilities. . Security impacts associated with bisecting Rohr facilities. . Impacts to Rohr buildings requiring removal, relocation, and or reconstruction. . Impacts to utilities. . Intersection spacing not conforming to established City design criteria. The following is a brief description of the alignment alternatives and variations considered. A. "H" Street Alignment 1: The purpose of this alternative alignment is to minimize impacts to Rohr facilities south of the east/west primary access road. This alignment begins at "H" Street just west of Bay Boulevard and extends west, following the primary east/west access road within Rohr facilities, intersecting with Marina Parkway (See Exhibit A). The alignment is approximately 1,300-feet in length. A proposed future alignment would continue west of Marina Parkway through District property to Sandpiper Way. Constraints associated with Alignment 1 include: . Impacts to vehicle and equiprnent circulation associated with bisecting Rohr facilities. . Security impacts associated with bisecting Rohr facilities. . Impacts to Rohr buildings requiring removal, relocation, and or reconstruction. . Impacts to utilities. . Intersection spacing not conforming to established City design criteria. OJ-I(, 3 SaYLE ~ San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1, 1997 B. "H" Street Alignment lA, Intcrim: This alternative is a variation of Alignment I in that it could be constructed as an interim phase of the full width alignment; interim meaning that the alignment is in the ultimate location but that one-half of the road would be constructed in the first phase. The full width alignment would then be constructed at a later date. This alternative alignment is basically the same as Alignment I. The difference is that the interim alignment is less than full width thereby minimizing potential impacts and reducing initial construction costs. C. "H" Street Alignment 2: The purpose of this alternative alignment is to minimize impacts to Rohr facilities north of the east/west primary access road. Alignment 2 is approximately 50- feet south of Alignment I. The "H" Street portion of this alignment begins at "H" Street just west of Bay Boulevard and extends west, following the east/west primary access road within Rohr facilities, intersecting with Marina Parkway (See Exhibit B). The alignment is approximately 1,300-feet in length. A proposed future alignment would continue west of Marina Parkway through District property to Sandpiper Way. Constraints associated with Alignment 2 include: . Impacts to vehicle and equipment circulation associated with bisecting Rohr facilities. . Security impacts associated with bisecting Rohr facilities. . Impacts to Rohr buildings requiring removal, relocation, and or reconstruction. . Impacts to utilities. . Intersection spacing not conforming to established City design criteria. D. "H" Street Alignment 2A, Interim: This alternative is a variation of Alignment 2 in that it that could be constructed as an interim phase of the full width alignment; interim meaning that the alignment is in the ultimate location but that one-half of the road 02-/7 4 F.30VLE San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 would be constructed in the first phase. The full width alignment would then be constructed at a later date. This alternative alignment is basically the same as Alignment 2. The difference is that the interim alignment is less than full width thereby minimizing potential impacts and reducing initial construction costs. E. "H" Street Alignment 3: The purpose ofthis alternative alignment is to tie into the existing intersection of Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way (See Exhibit C). This eliminates the need for a separate intersection as required with Alignments 1 and 2. The "H" Street portion of this alignment begins at "H" Street just west of Bay Boulevard and extends southwest with 1,100-foot reversing curves through Rohr facilities, tying into the existing intersection of Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way. The alignment is approximately 1 ,350-feet in length. Constraints associated with Alignment 3 include: . Impacts to vehicle and equipment circulation associated with bisecting Rohr facilities. . Security impacts associated with bisecting Rohr facilities. . Impacts to Rohr buildings requiring removal, relocation, and or reconstruction. . Impacts to utilities. F. Marina Parkway Alignment: The purpose of this alignment is to extend Marina Parkway north to the mean high tide line. This alignment corresponds with all of the "H" Street alternative alignments (See Exhibit D). The alignment begins at Sandpiper Way and extends north of "G" Street with two 1,1 OO-foot reversing curves. The City may eventually extend Marina Parkway north of the mean high tide line to connect with "E" Street. The alignment has not been identified at this time, therefore, for purposes of this study, the assurnption was made that the alignment needed to be west of the environmentally sensitive area at the northeast comer of"G" Street and Marina Parkway. e:J -/~ 5 130VLE .,. San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment SbJdy June 1,1997 Constraints associated with the Marina Parkway Alignment include: . Impacts to utilities. G. "H" Street Profile A: The purpose of this grade separation alternative profile is to provide Rohr unconstrained access along the north/south arterial access road within their facilities. From just east of Marina Parkway the grade separation profile begins with a crest vertical curve crossing over the north/south arterial access road then dropping back down to existing grade just west of the SD&AE Railroad; crossing it at-grade (See Exhibit E). The combination of the proposed and existing profile creates a back-to-back crest/sag/crest vertical curves causing a "roller- coaster" effect. Constraints associated with Profile "A" include: . Impacts to Rohr buildings requiring removal, relocation, and or reconstruction. . Impacts to utilities. H. "H" Street Profile B: The purpose of this grade separation alternative profile is to provide Rohr unconstrained access along the north/south arterial access road within their facilities. This alternative profile diners from Profile "A" in that it minimizes the "roller-coaster" effect by using an existing north/south arterial access road that's approximately 300-feet east of the north/south arterial access road in Profile A. From just east of Marina Parkway the profile begins a crest vertical curve to cross over the north/south arterial access road and the SD&AE Railroad; it then drops back down to existing grade just west of Bay Boulevard (Sce Exhibit E). Constraints associated with Profile "B" include: · Impacts to Rohr buildings requiring removal, relocation, and or reconstruction. -' -I' 6 ElO",LE San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment SbJdy June 1,1997 I. "H" Street Profile C: This at-grade alternative profile generally matches the existing profile grade and provides for an intersection at the existing north/south arterial access road within Rohr facilities (See Exhibit E). After an extensive review of opportunities and constraints, and discussions with the District, City, and Rohr; Alignment I; Profile "C" was selected as the recommended alignment. This recommendation is based on the finding that Alignments 2 and 3 have considerably greater impacts to Rohr facilities and operations and much greater costs than Alignment L 3.0 Existing Conditions 3.1 General "H" Street is a major east-west arterial through the city of Chula Vista; the westerly termination point is Bay Boulevard, west ofI-5. Just west of Bay Boulevard is the Coronado Branch of the SD&AE Railroad which has very minimal traffic. From Bay Boulevard west to Marina Parkway the study corridor is within Rohr facilities, which is a secured site - having security guards at each entrance and barbed-wire fence around the perimeter. This corridor is the east/west primary access road within Rohr. Heavy- duty forklifts, small tractor-trailers, and bicycles make frequent trips between buildings along this east/west primary access road and north/south arterial access roads that cross it. These north/south arterial access roads parallel the east and west sides of Building 3. Except for the access roads, which are concrete, the entire area is asphalt paved. Building 16, a cafeteria and office, lies in the center of the corridor. A little further west of Building 16 is Building 25, the transportation facility . Marina Parkway is constructed as a four-lane major arterial from 1-5 and "J" Street, west to Sandpiper Way. North of Sandpiper Way, it transitions to a two-lane collector and continues north creating a tee- intersection at "G" Street. Approximately 250-feet west of this tee- intersection, along "G" Street. is another tee-intersection where Marina Parkway continues north meandering through vacant marsh land and eventually connecting with 'T' Street/Lagoon Drive. .2-.20 7 I3C1VLE T San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1, 1997 3.2 Utilities A field reconnaissance and record research was conducted to identify utilities within the study corridor. Additionally, discussions with Rohr staff provided approximate horizontal locations for those utilities within Rohr facilities. V erticallocalions were not identified for Rohr facilities but are presumed to be shallow. The following utilities were identified: · SDG&E 69kv transmission lines at "H" St. baseline Sta. 27+30. · City of San Diego 78-inch and 18-inch sanitary sewer lines at "H" St. baseline Sta. 27+00 and Sta. 26+50 respectively. · Rohr utility vault at "H" St. baseline Sta. 23+00, which includes high pressure gas, argon, telecoll1munications, and electric. · Rohr chilled water and steam supply and return lines at "H" St. baseline Sta. 22+00. · SDG&E overhead electric line crossing the "H" St. baseline at Sta. 14+50 and paralleling Marina Parkway 40-feet right of the Marina Parkway baseline. · City ofChula Vista lO-inch ACP water main crossing the "H" St. baseline at Sta. 14+50 ancl paralleling Marina Parkway 12-feet right of the Marina Parkway baseline. · City ofChula Vista 8-inch VCP sewer main crossing the "H" St. baseline at Sta. 13+90 and paralleling Marina Parkway on the Marina Parkway baseline. · City of Chula Vista I O-inch ACP water main paralleling Sandpiper Way 19-feet right of the baseline. · SDG&E overhead electric line crossing the "H" St. baseline at Sta. 7+40 and paralleling Sandpiper Way 30-feet right of the baseline. · Pacific Bell underground telephone crossing the "H" St. baseline at Sta. 7+40 and paralleling Sandpiper Way 30-feet right of the baseline. · City ofChula Vista lO-inch ACP water main crossing the "H" St. baseline at Sta. 7+10 and paralleling Sandpiper Way 6-feet right of oJ-OJ , 8 BO'r'LE San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment SbJdy June 1, 1997 the baseline. · City ofChula Vista 8-inch VCP sewer main crossing the "H" St. baseline at Sta. 6+90 and paralleling Sandpiper Way 6-feet left of the baseline. · SDG&E 2-inch high pressure gas line crossing the "H" St. baseline at Sta. 6+80 and paralleling Sandpiper Way l6-feet left of the baseline. · District 60-inch RCP paralleling the "H" Street baseline from Sta. 22+00 to Sta. 15+00, then turning south crossing the baseline. 3.3 Drainage Drainage catch basins are located along the east/west primary access road and north/south arterial access roads within the Rohr facility. Drainage inlets and catch basins are also located along Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way. Observation of drainage patterns and drainage systems during the recent heavy rain of this December and January did not reveal any noticeable drainage problems. Surface water appears to effectively drain into existing catch basins with no major ponding of water observed outside the close proximity of catch basins and inlets. The ponding water observed appeared to diminish quickly as rain intensity reduced. 4.0 Conceptual Alignmen1s 4.1 General Alignment Guidelines The District, City, and Rohr provided general guidelines to consider in developing alignment alternatives within the corridor. These guidelines include the following: A. "H" Street alignments should stay slightly to the south so as to minimize impacts to Rohr facilities north of the east/west primary access road. B. Consider an "H" Street alignment that could be constructed as an interim phase of the full width alignment; interim meaning that the alignment is in the ultimate location but a portion of the road would be constructed in order to minimize potential impacts to 0) . ;l 01.. 9 BO."LE .,. San Diego Unified Port Disbicl "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1, 1997 buildings north and south of the east/west primary access road. The full width alignment would then be constructed at a later date. C. Consider an "H" Street alignment that would tie into the existing intersection of Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way. This alignment would eliminate the need for a separate intersection. D. The proposed future extension of"H" Street west of Marina Parkway should avoid impacting Buildings 910, 911, and 912 on District property west of Marina Parkway. E. Consider a grade separated "H" Street alignment over the north/south arterial access road within Rohr facilities. This would minimize security concerns and allow Rohr unconstrained access for heavy-duty forklifts, small tractor-trailers, and bicycles making frequent trips between bui Idings north and south of the proposed alignment. F. Adhere to the planning guidelines and design standards of the city ofChula Vista where applicable. 4.2 Description of Alignments and Alternatives The alignments and alternatives described below were developed in response to the general guidelines listed above in Section 4.1. Street sections for "H" Street and Marina Parkway are based on information obtained from the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Mid- Bayfront Project Local Coastal Plan (LCP), which identifies projected buildout average daily traffic (ADT) volumes of 11,800 for "H" Street and 17,400 for Marina Parkway. A. "H" Street Alignment 1: The purpose of this alternative alignment is to niinimize impacts to Rohr facilities south ofthe east/west primary access road. This alignment begins at "H" Street just west of Bay Boulevard and extends west, following the primary east/west access road within Rohr facilities, intersecting with Marina Parkway (See Exhibit A). The alignment is approximately 1,300-feet in length. A proposed future alignment would continue west of Marina Parkway through District property to Sandpiper Way. ~ - ..13 10 BO'r'LE San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 B. "H" Street Alignment lA, Interim: This alternative is a variation of Alignment I in that it could be constructed as an interim phase of the full width alignment; interim meaning that the alignment is in the ultimate location but that one-half of the road would be constructed in the first phase. The full width alignment would then be constructed at a later date. This alternative alignment is basically the same as Alignment I. The difference is that the interim alignment is less than full width thereby minimizing potential impacts and reducing initial construction costs. C. "H" Street Alignment 2: The purpose of this alternative alignment is to minimize impacts to Rohr facilities north of the east/west primary access road. Alignment 2 is approximately 50- feet south of Alignment I. The "H" Street portion of this a] ignment begins at "H" Street just west of Bay Boulevard and extends west, following the east/west primary access road within Rohr facilities, intersecting with Marina Parkway (See Exhibit B). The alignment is approximately 1,300-feet in length. A proposed future alignment would continue west of Marina Parkway through District property to Sandpiper Way. D. "H" Street Alignment 2A, Interim: This alternative is a variation of Alignment 2 in that it that could be constructed as an interim phase of the full width alignment; interim meaning that the alignment is in the ultimate location but that one-half of the road would be constructed in the first phase. The full width alignment would then be constructed at a later date. This alternative alignment is basically the same as Alignment 2. The difference is that the interim alignment is less than full width thereby minimizing potential impacts and reducing initial construction costs. E. "H" Street Alignment 3: The purpose of this alternative alignment is to tie into the existing intersection of Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way (See Exhibit C). This eliminates the need for a separate intersection as required with Alignments 1 and 2. The "H" Street portion of this alignment begins at "H" Street just 01- 0l..J 11 BOVLE T San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 west of Bay Boulevard and extends southwest with 1,IOO-foot reversing curves through Rohr facilities, tying into the existing intersection of Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way. The alignment is approximately l,350-feet in length. F. Marina Parkway Alignment: The purpose of this alignment is to extend Marina Parkway north to the mean high tide line. This alignment corresponds with all of the "H" Street alternative alignments (See Exhibit D). The alignment begins at Sandpiper Way and extends north of"G" Street with two 1,IOO-foot reversing curves. The City may eventually extend Marina Parkway north of the mean high tide line to connect with "E" Street. The alignment of Marina Parkway north of the mean high tide line has not been identified. For purposes of this study, the assumption was made that the alignment needed to avoid impacting the environmentally sensitive area at the northeast corner of "G" Street and Marina Parkway. G. "H" Street Profile A: The purpose of this grade separation alternative profile is to provide Rohr unconstrained access along the north/south arterial access road within their facilities. From just east of Marina Parkway the grade separation profile begins with a crest vertical curve crossing over the north/south arterial access road then dropping back down to existing grade just west of the SD&AE Railroad; crossing it at-grade (See Exhibit E). The combination of the proposed and existing profile creates a back-to-back crest/sag/crest vertical curves causing a "roller- coaster" effect. H. "H" Street Profile B: The purpose of this grade separation alternative profile is to provide Rohr unconstrained access along the north/south arterial access road within their facilities. This alternative profile differs from Profile "A" in that it minimizes the "roller-coaster" effect by using an existing north/south arterial access road that's approximately 300-feet east of the north/south arterial access road in Profile A. From Marina Parkway the profile begins a crest vertical curve to cross over the north/south arterial access road and the SD&AE dJ- .:lS- 12 I3ClVLE San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 Railroad; it then drops back down to existing grade just west of Bay Boulevard (See Exhibit E). I. "H" Street Profile C: This at-grade alternative profile generally matches the existing profile grade and provides for an at-grade intersection at the existing north/south arterial access road within Rohr facilities (See Exhibit E). 4.3 Opportunities and Constraints An extensive review of site conditions and field analysis was conducted of the study corridor to identify opportunities and constraints associated with extending "H" Street and Marina Parkway. Additionally, periodic meetings were held with staff of the District, City, and Rohr to obtain information and feedback regarding opportunities and constraints. Costs are not a factor in the consideration of opportunities and constraints. However, costs are considered in the evaluation of alignments. Opportunities and constraints are described to be in one of the following categories: · Significant: An opportunity or constraint is described as significant if it substantially changes existing conditions. A constraint that substantially changes existing conditions is not necessarily a fatal flaw. · Potentially Significant: An opportunity or constraint is described as potentially significant if it rnoderately changes existing conditions. . Not Significant. An opportunity or constraint is described as not significant if it does not change existing conditions or if the changes are minimal. Identified opportunities and constraints associated with extending "H" Street and Marina Parkway are listed below. Additionally, possible mitigation measures have been identified for constraints. ,;)-.2.(", 13 F.30VLE T San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment SbJdy June 1,1997 Opportunities include, but are not limited to: A. Improved Traffic Circulation: Alignments 1,2, and 3 provide for possible reduction in traffic congestion at buildout due to the additional circulation element of "H" Street. This opportunity may be potentially significant. B. Improved Regional Access: Alignments 1,2, and 3 provide for an improved pedestrian, automobile, and transit link of the regional and local area to and from the Bayfront via "H" Street. This opportunity may be potentially significant. C. Improved Local Access: Alignments 1,2, and 3 provide for a primary east/west connection from the downtown urban core to and from the Bayfront via "H" Street. This opportunity may be potentially significant. Constraints include, but are not limited to: A. Circulation Impacts at Rohr: "H" Street Alignments I, 2, and 3 bisect Rohr facilities resulting in significant constraints to vehicle and equipment access along the north/south arterial access roads within Rohr facilities. In order to provide access for Rohr vehicles and equipment, a signalized intersection would be provided at "H" Street at approximately the same location as the existing north/south arterial access road. Rohr vehicles and equipment would be able to make right turns in and out of the arterial access road and cross "H" Street north and south. However, there is a substantial amount of vehicle and equipment traffic at this location and the constrained access and resulting time delay of waiting at a signalized intersection would be considered a significant constraint. Since the Rohr facility is a secured site, security gates would be required at the north and south entrance of the arterial access road at this intersection. This constraint is discussed below under "Security Irnpacts at Rohr". Alignment Profiles "A" and "B" provide for a grade separated "H" Street alignment crossing over the north/south arterial access roads. These alternative profiles were developed specifically to provide unconstrained access along the north/south arterial access roads within Rohr facilities. However, there are significant constraints tJ-;l."7 14 BOVLE San Diego Unified Port District "H" street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 associated with the construction of a grade separation. These constraints are discussed below under "Impacts to Existing Utilities" . It's possible that Rohr rnay eventually consolidate their facilities to the north side of the proposed "H" Street alignment. When and if this consolidation occurs, the access across "H" Street would no longer be a constraint to Rohr vehicles and equipment. B. Security Impacts at Rohr: "H" Street Alignments 1,2, and 3 bisect Rohr facilities resulting in the need for an intersection at "H" Street and the north/south arterial access road. Security gates would be required at the north and south entrance of this newly created intersection. Additionally security fencing would be required along or near the right-of-way of "H" Street. The addition of security gates may be potentially significant Operational aspects of this security gate would need to be addressed early in the design phase. It's possible that Rohr may eventually consolidate their facilities to the north side of the proposed "H" Street alignment. When and if this consolidation occurs, the additional security gates and fencing would no longer be required on the south side of"H" Street. C. Building Impacts at Rohr: As shown on Exhibits "A" through "C", each of the "H" Street Alignments impact a number of buildings and some equipment within Rohr facilities. These impacts are listed below for each alignment alternative. Alignment 1: This alignment provides an area on either side of "H" Street for Rohr vehicles and employees circulating between buildings. The following buildings are impacted: · Building IS (Administrative Offices): The alignment impacts approximately 40-feet of the south end of this building requiring partial demolition and minor reconstruction of this one-story wood structure. · Building 51 (Guard Shack): The alignment impacts the entire building requiring total demolition of this one story metal structure. 2-~' 15 BOYLE .,. San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1, 1997 · Building 16 (Offices and Cafeteria): The alignment impacts the entire building requiring total demolition of this two- story stucco structure. . Building 3 (Production Facility): The alignment impacts the masonry block wall extending off of the north side of the building requiring demolition of the block waiL The structure of Building 3 is not impacted. · Fuel Tanks (Near Building 25): The fuel tanks would likely be within the public right-of-way which would require them to be relocated outside the public right-of-way. . Building 341 (Transportation Equipment Repair): The alignment impacts approximately 60-feet of the south end of this building requiring partial demolition and minor reconstruction of this one-story metal and concrete structure. · Building 46 (Office): The alignment impacts the entire building requiring total demolition of this one-story block structure. · Building 81 (Garage): The alignment cuts off access to the building requiring total demolition of this one-story metal structure. · Building 68 (Oualitv Assurance Facility): The alignment cuts off access to the building requiring total demolition of this one-story wood structure. · Building 88 (Salvage Yard Office Trailer): The alignment cuts off access to the trailer requiring it to be relocated. . Building 52 (Citv BECA Program Office): The alignment impacts approximately 40-feet of the south end of this building requiring partial demolition and minor reconstruction of this one-story metal structure. This building houses the Cities BECA Program. Alignment 2: This alignment does not provide sufficient area on the south side of"H" Street for Rohr vehicles and employees circulating between buildings. The following buildings are .l-.l' 16 BDVLE San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1, 1997 impacted: · Building 15 (Administrative Offices): The alignment impacts approximately 40-feet of the south end of this building requiring partial demolition and minor reconstruction of this one-story wood structure. · Building 51 (Guard Shack): The alignment impacts the entire building requiring total demolition of this one story metal structure. · Building 16 (Offices and Cafeteria): The alignment impacts the entire building requiring total demolition of this two- story stucco structure. · Building 3 (Production Facilitv): The alignment impacts the masonry block wall extending off of the north side of the building requiring demolition of the block wall. Access to the north entrances of Building 3 is completely cut off creating a significant impact. · Building 45 (Production Facilitv): The alignment impacts the transformers on the north side of the building requiring demolition and relocation. Access to the north entrances of Building 45 is completely cut off creating a significant impact. · Building 46 (Office): The alignment impacts a portion of the building requiring total demolition of this one-story block structure. · Building 81 (Garage): The alignment impacts the entire building requiring total demolition of this one-story metal structure. · Building 88 (Salvage Yard Office Trailer): The alignment impacts the entire trailer requiring it to be relocated. Alignment 3: This alignment provides area on either side of"H" Street for Rohr vehicles and employees circulating between buildings. The following buildings are impacted: · Building 15 (Administrative Offices): The alignment ';}.,3.o 17 I3DVLE .,. San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1, 1997 impacts approximately 40-feet of the south end of this building requiring partial demolition and minor reconstruction of this one-story wood structure. · Building 51 (Guard Shack): The alignment impacts the entire building requiring total demolition of this one story metal structure. · Building 16 (Offices and Cafeteria): The alignment impacts a portion of the building requiring total demolition ofthis two-story stucco structure. · Building 3 (Production Facility): The alignment impacts approximately lOa-feet of the north side of the building requiring demolition and reconstruction of this large one- story block structure. . Building 45 (Production Facility): The alignment impacts the transformers on the norlh side of the building requiring demolition and relocation. The alignment also significantly impacts approximately 200-feet of the north portion ofthis building requiring demolition and reconstruction of this large one-story block structure. · Building 58 (Production Facility): The alignment impacts the entire building requiring total demolition of this steel rigid frame structure. D. Impacts to Existing Utilities: Existing utilities within the right-of- way of the current Marina Parkway alignment will to be relocated within the proposed Marina Parkway alignment. This constraint is not considered significant. Potentially significant impacts to underground utilities within Rohr facilities are possible. The yerticallocation of underground utilities has not been identified, but discussions with Rohr staff haye indicated that utilities are shallow and may be as close as two-feet below existing grade. It's anticipated that the proposed profile grade of the "H" Street Alignments would be similar to the existing profile grade, as shown in Alignment Profile "COO, thereby minimizing excayation and potential impacts to underground utilities. f:2-3 , 18 BOVLE San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 Alignment Profiles "A" and "B" would have significant impacts to underground utilities because of retaining wall foundations, abutment foundations, and because of the amount of earthen fill placed on top of the shallow utilities. Potentially significant utility impacts may also be associated with the removal of buildings. E. Intersection Spacing Not Conforming to Established City Design Criteria: "H" Street Alignments I and 2 create a separate intersection spaced approximately 320-feet to 360-feet apart from the existing intersection at Sandpiper Way and Marina Parkway. Discussions with City staff have indicated that this short spacing does not conform to established City design criteria which requires SOO-feet between intersections. The initial review of alignrnent alternatives considered an alignment that would intersect with Marina Parkway SOO-feet north of the Sandpiper Way intersection. It was concluded that this alternative alignment would not be feasible because of significant impacts to Rohr's operations; which would be considered unacceptable. Other possible mitigation measures were considered that would minimize potential constraints associated with the intersection spacing. These mitigation measures included: . Allowing only right turns from Sandpiper Way. . Adding a raised median at the intersection of Sandpiper Way and Marina Parkway to eliminate left turns into and out of Sandpiper Way. . Signalizing the intersections Discussions with City staff have indicated that these mitigation measures are probably not required but they should be reviewed in the design phase. The issue of the intersection spacing is not considered a significant constraint. 01- 4.;1. 19 BOVLE 'T . San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 5.0 Opinion of Probable Construction Costs An opinion of probable construction costs was developed for each alignment alternative. These construction costs include building demolition, building relocation, utilities, drainage, street lighting, traffic signals, railroad signals, pavement, security fencing, security gates, right-of-way, and other miscellaneous items. Costs for right-of- 'Way include the land required for the full width alignment east of the mean high tide line. Relocation costs for Pacific Bell and SDG&E facilities are included in the construction costs. It's anticipated that these agencies will share in the cost of relocating their facilities thereby reducing the total cost of the project. The opinion of probable construction costs does not include the following: · Costs or contingencies for existing or potential environmental liabilities associated with historical uses of the property, current site operations, and the conditions of the surrounding properties. · Costs for landscaping the buffer area outside the street right-of- way. This buffer area varies in width from 8-feet to 20-feet. · Costs for the proposed future extension of "H" Street from Marina Parkway to Sandpiper Way. The following is a summary of probable construction costs. Description Alignment Alignment Alignment Align ment Alignment 1 IA 2 2A 3 Profile A $10,617,175 N/A $11,272.175 N/^ N/A (Grade Sep,) Profile B $13,274,954 N/A $13,929,954 N/^ N/A (Grade Sep.) Profile C $6,851,052 $6,292,431 $7,708,852 $6,089,631 $14,821,302 (At-grade) Notes: 1) N/A refers to not applicable. Grade separated profiles are not considered feasible for these alternative alignments. 2) Alignments lA and 2A are interim improvements to "1-1" Street. 3) A breakdown efcosts for each alignment alternative is included in Appendix "A". 02 - 43 20 BDVLE San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1, 1997 6.0 Summary 6.1 General The following is an overall summary of the each alignment alternative: A. Alignment 1: This alignment has significant impacts associated with traffic circulation and security at Rohr. The circulation impacts relate to the proposed intersection of "H" Street and the north/south arterial access road. There is currently a substantial amount of vehicle and equiprnent traffic at this location and the proposed intersection would constrain access and result in a time delay for vehicles and equipment waiting to cross the intersection. Significant security impacts also relate to the proposed intersection of "H" Street and the north/south arterial access road. Security gates and guards would be required at the north and south entrance of this proposed intersection. A number of building would need to be removed or have partial demolition and reconstruction as a result of Alignment I. These impacts are considered potentially significant. Profiles "A" and "B" would have significant impacts to utilities within Rohr facilities because of retaining wall foundations, abutment foundations, and earthen fill placed on top of the shallow underground utilities. Utility impacts associated with Profile "c" are not considered significant. The extension of"H" Street between Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way may have potentially significant impacts associated with bisecting District land. This include possibly limiting development opportunities, irnpacting long-term lease agreements, and impacting the use of Buildings 910 and 911. The distance between the proposed intersection of Marina Parkway and "H" Street and the existing intersection of Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way does not meet established City design criteria but it's not considered a significant constraint. When and ifRohr consolidates their facilities north of the proposed alignment, most of these constraints would be eliminated. OJ -.3 Y 21 BOVLE .,. San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 B. Alignment lA: This alternative alignment has basically the same significant and potentially significant impacts as Alignment 1. The main difference is the cost associated with constructing a portion of the road versus constructing the entire road. C. Alignment 2: This alternative has considerably greater significant impacts than Alignment I because of its proximity to Buildings 3 and 45. Alignment 2 cuts off access to these buildings creating a significant impact. When and if Rohr consolidates their facilities north of the proposed alignment, most of these constraints would be eliminated. D. Alignment 2A: This alternative alignment has basically the same significant and potentially significant impacts as Alignment 2. The main difference is the cost associated with constructing a portion of the road versus constructing the entire road. E. Alignment 3: This alternative alignment has significant impacts associated with traffic circulation and security at Rohr. The circulation impacts relate to the proposed intersection of "H" Street and the north/south arterial access road. There is currently a substantial amount of vehicle and equipment traffic at this location and the proposed intersection would constrain access and result in a time delay for vehicles and equipment waiting to cross the intersection. Significant security impacts also relate to the proposed intersection of "H" Street and the north/south arterial access road. Security gates would be required at the north and south entrance of this proposed intersection. A number of buildings would need to be removed or have partial demolition and reconstruction as a result of Alignment 3. These impacts are considered potentially significant except for the impact to Building 45, which is considered significant because of the impact to Rohr's operations. Utility impacts associated with Profile "c" are not considered significant. When and ifRohr consolidates their facilities north of the proposed alignment, most of these constraints would be eliminated. o'I-3S' 22 130VLE San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1, 1997 6.2 Conclusions After an extensive review of opportunities and constraints, and discussions with the District, City, and Rohr; Alignment I; Profile "C", was selected as the recommended alignment. This recommendation is based on the finding that Alignments 2 and 3 have considerably greater impacts to Rohr facilities and operations and much greater costs than Alignment I. .1-3(, 23 F.3D'r'LE .,. .,. San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 7.0 Exhibits A. "H" Street Extension Alignment 1 B. "H" Street Extension Alignment 2 C. "H" Street Extension Alignment 3 D. "H" Street Extension Alignment 1, 2, & 3 (Marina Parkway) E. "H" Street Extension Profiles ~-4r "T 130VLE , _~?~;;t"~~~:~~~;~Ii~~Ldf~~~~~~~~;~~':~~~?~::;'":~;"":~t"~:~':':~~:~t:;"'" ",., ,.~',:i,_'_>'h~":';'''~\''~~ ,..:.:,.~_~,",~.:-~"_:_;,,~~.--~.<.. ~:.:~H:~ _ .:'~l'-"-"'- ",':_'-'~:': ". i;~ " , /. ~~~ II 9 31. V 1.S~31.NI -'--." --',T"'," ;,:', '"<I, ';," c'<:.:' ""'",',::::~2~ji:;1ilif=:~,";=i":, "' ,,,-. I tr '" o << z ~ 0<f.(f) ~~(f) I- w-w ~b:fj w<-<( -'1. --,' ">i ~',~;,\ j,' co '" t- W W a: t- 'I/) . :I: ~ -~ COf- -(J) """W,,,., '"" " f- ~ .. '" << o 0:: '-'>-(J) ZO::(J) i=<(W ~~U x"'u Wtl.<< ~L --1- ":v"- '-"~ --I'~, !. ;' A~_____.. o a: ,/" ~N13~ 1'191 . 01> . . 11 '3 ~ '3N '" '" ~ J.l ",oOH"'}) [Lv'U+\:k Id o to '" o + " " u ,,,,,,,9,, ,'..,' ;4 ,.;:,:O;.:.:;::~",:.,",-:_.u.c,c_,.~" '" Z _W 0 -U1Wu> C>>Oa:::Z tl.::>W 'Of-f- O:l::::::)X Cl..lL.W '" Ii I{: , _i -:7 'Ol'''v+L .ed ,'" .:-~::;!C ~:'::':i-;\;r,.'::;\: .tJ :;.~_.":":;:,.-":,~ ; ['-, .-, L i' ~ 1, "'-",+"-.,,, "OL I f- ::> .g". .,,,Ut,,,.,.,. ~- -- '.' --, iu-::.-';:'.,..'-....,"~~~'S"~ Ii: 0- Oz C3 t- o:: G<f.Cf) ~O::(J) .J f-WW ~I-U_ l"c;, "r-"'; . .<.<.,,",~ <0 t<] "to N _.,-~,-'.'-- .-. N I'- <0 <0 N t<] ~; '" a ,- ,,...;w" ,v,.... - ",'.','. ;",~-~~"~' ,',-t';':;..>":.,,,.-;.,,-,:' AVM)!HVd~ CJ~vrr'''''~ .. ";;'. ,.) ; j' 'i" "F i ">- }< ,!~ ,:\!.~ : ~a: , ~W . ~ D.. ,- ill- .B.,Q '''Z ;J;oC "'.1/) ! L :)i , '~- ." '.:- , ,\::i i:j" C Z W e) W .J ... t- OO ~- Wa: IU~ -l- OCI) z ZC 0 <Ct- (f) ~I 0a: z ... LLO Wt- t-Z 00. Xw B 1-0 W~ a:!:!:! t-Z c~ o!:!:: We) w- o.Z a:.J ~ ::::> 1-< (f) tal . :I: . < t- as J: x w ... I- W W :I: en ..... CD CD ... w z ;:) ~ .... o ~ " 0:: a " "' '" " " t<] -:.,. Ol ~ ~ 0... ro 0:::: <(0 '" ZI- -U O::::w '" <(-I L-IW a lL.o~ OUVJ 0 '" 1-"- Z N (j')(j') L5(j') ro .5 I-U (j') : I : ~ " '" lL. o~ Z~ 00... (j')<(0:::: Zzo w_1- I-O::::U ro x<(w WLjw N -' WLL 0('; a 0:::: 0 U(J) -:.,. ~ 0 0 I-I-('.JZ N [2(j')(j') W(j') ___to o:S:S W 'U (j')1- o(j') 0.... a. o:::::I 0... " " t<] " '" ui a ,-- z o (j') ro Z W '" 1-0:::: xo W-:J N <(w ~L~ :S:W(J) ~Zo N ~S Z 0...1 N <( """ ro Z 0:::: <( L N N '" "' t<] ro ro N N '" '" N ro '" ~ o ::; w '" w W ~ (J) '-' Z o -' 5 w (J) w ~ o o Z w a:: ::> f- o ::>w g:a:: w Ul~ a:: www ~u F a::cra:: ww g~ W ~w F~~ ~~ ~1- ~ ~~ uuu ~~ mCf) ~ I-~ ~~~ 00 ~ w~0w Cf)0 ~~~ ~~~~~WF~~ w~ ~~~~ ~~~uoa:: a::I-W ::::!:~ I-I-I-~I-ug~oa::~ ~~ ~~~~ UlUlUa::UlZa:: ~~Ul a:: u~~~ ~~~~ 101-ya::05 u..o ~ I I I uu~ ~UUlU~~ 00 a::~~~ ggVJooo<ig~~5 0~ lJi~~~ mmo~ Zl-roUUl~ ~ www >->-g~I<~&g~Q -'& ~t;:;t;:;t;:; ~~~Ul~~romw~ ~~~ ~555 l-~rrUWa::~r~O ~Ul~ zzz Ul a::a::~~o a:: II- rOoO I I o au.. tn~Or~ >-wg a::uuu ~~~~o~IZ~~U a::6~ ~>->->- 00 I I wowO II- w~ trieJUlcra::a:: wO>I-Z WUlWcrcf) I 000 WWz~~Cf)OWZJI~ ~~Wl-I-~ ~001-~1 00wl-l-w>-~~Z~~Ul 9;9; O::w I 9; ZOUZf-t;:;~o I I I :J:) I I ~6 :) I Ol-~O~~ I ~~~ r r Ul~~ f; I W:::lot;) I ~>- I 000 w~~l~ ~~w ~a::w~www >->-uwo u~~~VJ-,~ OU '-''-''-' 5~Ew~5~~~~~t~~triE~SS~ ooo~zuz~zl ~~~~oz ~~wu<(~Ql.J..Q~f;>-lL~zoQ I I I >0 u..~ l--:o---la:: oa::l--: ZZ~ G <z< - zen ~~www QQ~~~6~Q~~~~Q~lr~Cf)Cf)Cf) bbl-Cf)~~000~~Cf)0~ww~666 ~~~wwu~~~owW~CG~~III oo~o~wzoza::~ZO---l~>zwww oo::;~,-,tl.<o<<<~oo<o::-,<o::o::o:: ~~O~ZUlZ~~~~~ ~~~~~~~~ ~~~OW_I-~I-GO ~O~Cf)I->>> ~ t')il1<OOlNl[)l!1(()....N ..- ..-..-..-NN.q..q.l!)l[) "-O"-N 00(0"-<<)-.;1-..-..-..- l[) to lXJ(()t')Ol 0'10'1 ~~ o o " II S 3.1 V .1SI:13.1NI 'k'", V' :.S .,-,- .,",...-,.".".,.,..........,-,,,..,-,.. y. ",......,......";..;~A1~~~i~':::":.,~::.,,~.. (f) --"-"...;>, .,,",-- I >- '" 0 o << z ~ G<tU1 ~iYUl I-WW ~1--0 X",O w <(-<( r~: Q '" '.\. I- W .W . II: \1- .u) , 0' . J: .~ ic.'..-. "~l... iii3NI13dld 110 -.6 ~ 'i",~ : .' PC. 2~-f<\5; "...- Q>- PfIl ..w_ .~" '- >- \Q W -~ -.'- I- >- ::J . "l1t.-.5.CI?;;.~;;;, ,', . .,.", I W ~ 0- o ~ I- z '" '-':ciUl ~",fIl..J >-WW ~1-0 _ X~o J'<<~ pT o << o '" C>>-fIl ~~fIl t;)~W __0 X"'O WCL<< l') P <;Q'<;Hll x o a: ------ ~NV3V1 . :301). -:3~11 '. . ~,..~._\~~,-_;~O !"'k. '" . '0 . '" '. J'i.o ' '" Co N N I'- Co Co N '" '0 ~ i...., ...~~' " if) .\10), lP, \\ \\ .._.,...:-._.._../gVi~-'" ',~~\\ .,ij --:\~'_0 .- _ _' '. ,,:;,,"';;.- :V"~"'r_'.,.. '.;;"~-.""W:''- , ,0''- "''';'>''~'''.'..-. ..,.c.,.....,.,.:,....,.'..., ^ V M>lI:IV d'VNll:IVri . ,,",' . .;~i' C '--."," ".:,,:..- o lD 0[') o + ... ... ., j ~\:',rB+{;~"ld 0; i,~~_~~, II €~\ L .n "'! 0[') I .' , 10+66.3 1"T , 0':- "',' o ~11\ i~! 'f .~, '~j :;; -, . 51' Q o z W 0 -- (f)wcn ;; oo::::z g,~~ "'::JX CLLLW '" P Q 'l~'60+6 :JcJ ,~j c-':'_' .1 ~----- o z w e" w ..J I- m 00 l- e!)- iii Wa: IU~ ~ -l- x 022 z w ZC 0 <I- en ~I - ClJa:. ZC\l I- u.O W W 1-1- W OD.. ><Z :J: WW e en 1-0 1-2 a:!:!:! wZ D~ o!!: w~ ,... a.z a:..J Ii al ::> 1-< al en ra! - . i W :I: Z . :J .., - 0 00 '" '- '" 0 'in r-- .n ... r-- '" -..,. 0> r-- r-- '" ... in .n '0 ~ '" '- '" LL o~ Z~ 00... N (/)<(0::: ZzO w_tJ N I-O:::w N X<(---1 0[') '" WL---1W ...J wLL025 O:::OUfIl-..,. io :) 00 io I- NZ~ :::)1- LL(f)(f) W(f) O~::5 N N "' W 'U 0[') (/)1- o(f) 0.... N Co O' o::::?= 0... ~ ~ 0... io <(0::: N z2 -u O:::w N <(---1 L.-JW 0 LL03 OUfIl 0 N 1-"- Z N (f)(f) <((f) io ~:5 I-U (f) . I N z o (f) io Z W N 1-0::: xo N W:;t W ~L~ ~Wfll ~zo N 9i:5 Z 0...1 N v <( a:J Z 0::: <( L '0 !~ --~ o W > o ;" W '" W '" o >- fIl C> Z o ...J ::J '" fIl W ~ o o ~ W '" ::J t; :::Jw "'''' W >-:::J Ull- lr www ~() ~ lrlra:: o::J 0 ::J:::l::J ww o~ W :::lW ~~I- a:: a:: ~I- ~ a:: a:: ouu ::J::J wrn~::J I-::J ::J::J::J ~1- lr W~0W UlG lra::a:: gg~~~t;:;::J::J~ w::J wlnlnln "'''':::J 0 1-a::I-W ~a:: a:: I-I-I-gl-~Ul-ua::~ <I- ::J~~~ ~~Ua::~Z::JUl::J::J~ a::Ul 0::J::J::J ~~::JI- I O~~a::tJ5 lJ...o ::J I I I UUa::UlWUUlU~::J 0 a::~~~ 00>- Z 0 ",4 00 >---- ~~UlOOO~~~I-~ G~ Ull-I-I- rnrno~ z~rnuUl::J ~ ~~ww O::JI<<W>-O...JI >- <<wt;:;t;:; ~~OI-Ul~~a::ffi<O d~w Wlrlrlr OO"'fIlw~>-O t;:;LL W>-'" ;"000 1-1- ~uwa::I-~~a I-Ul::J zzz UlUl~O::~~OUla:: Ulll- rOOO I 'oolL. I-~O>-~ rW~ o::uuu ~~~~o~~z~~u a::~a:: ~>-r>- 00 I I WowO I >- w~ In'''fIl''''''''' wwwO~~Zw~Ul~a::~1 ~wo~~ C>C>~~~IOC>O~>-~w~<i<zlnfllfll "'''' "'w I <r: Z Oz>->-"'O I 1 10 <<4 I I >-z :S 100::J0:JW>- WWW ~~ UlO 1-0:: -~ IZZ~ I I Ul~~ ~ I Wu::Jot:) I ~~ I a. ooo..-r wo::~l~ _<w IJ...a::W www' 55E~~~~5~~~~5~~E~~~~ ooo~o~ 0 I ;"O~IOz:S...J:S~ ~~~u~~Q~Q~~>-~~~og 1 I I -00 ~Z~U~O::ZUlO~<www ~6~~~Z~Q~~~~Q~lr~UlUlUl tt~Ulffi~otJOUllL.UltJ wW~666 ::J::J~wwu~::J~OWW::J~~~UlIII ooZUZWZo~a::ozo~~>zwww OO~~~CLfIl<<O <<~OO<<"'...J<<"''''''' lra::O~Z 0::0:: ::JIJ... a::::J<~o::~<< ~~<OW~I-~I-Ga ~O~UlI-~~~ ~ '-f"l~~~~~~~U:;~ .-O.......C'\J COCO.......CO-.t................... U1 1.0 OOQ) f"l0l 0101 ..J .! I- 0 0(,) l- e!)- iii WC:: :I: -I- IUs x O!'!2 Z w ZO 0 j:: <I- en ~I ... Wc:: Z CI) I- u.0 W w 1-1- w 00.. XZ J: WW B en " 1-0 I-::E ~'" c::W D~ -,. wZ o!!: We!' "'" " a.z II:...I ~ 0) ::> 1-< 0) (J) I! ,.... . ~ W :I: Z . ::::> .., ... 0 '" ~ '-- y a: a 0... 'io 0:::: llO ,,0 ~ <(0 '" Zl- " .0 N -U ... " O::::w r '" <(-l f- (J) ::J N ~-l w 0 ",,,,JI) u....O ...J W '-.-,- u~ "'-',"'-~".-' -.,-..- << "W "' ." -;,. a u I OU 1Il 0 f- OJ << a: 0- 0 I- 0 0 << N ~ Z a: Z ~I- f- <.:l>-1Il 0<i..U1 " (f)(f) ...I :;;::!J:1Il :;;::"' 1Il ...I " '" N <((f) ~ f-::;w 'in ~-u f-ww ... ~:5 xa:u ~ !fll--O_ .0 'io 0 wa.<< 00.0 i'J!)(~o c( '1.'1." 'I' ,;. a f-U "c (f) LL. .z ~ a: : :r: ~~ o o N ,II 9 3.l V .lStl3.lNI -" "> ."-",.eo'""""""*"",_,,,,\.>,, , _ ""PJ\ls',).'va- " ".~ ""'-"''''~"''~'~:':~~'::';~:i;:'--:'--' '~__. '" '" ","""~,~"~-,,,,, ,.:c I- -"-._..~-- <'.; =' 'g." "" ,"'," I f- a: 0 o << Z ~ c.:l:i(f) ~a:{f} ~w'~ -f-o i'J!J:<< o II: a: ::I: - o II: ---- ~N~3W ~r\9)." . 101 . . 11 ~ .. ;IN ., - '-~~-"''''''"''--~-'''''''.~'-- 4:''': !.-, ^VM~liIVd"VNll:ivrr' . , ~ ,_, ,." ;'~.:t::~<:--;;~'~~:~'~~iJ:?:::~:':-:~';;':"':",:;~',,~'::~-:::.':~:: b" ~! ." 1': ,- ~.; '~''''"'"r:.:-'-''''''';~: .~i^:~:- _M ~, 't!. T' : ;) ., .. ,.~.~-, ;;~~~";:.;,c_ '" Iii "i !:~ ;:{ ,:f: -~ i,S ~ ~ '" ~' , '" o ~ o ::; w a: w w o f- 1Il <.:l z o =o! ::J W 1Il W !;( U o Z "'''';'''0" ., .. '.. . _h"~"~' ,~ , ,. _ r l!i ',- .",.,;-.,;;~':.":'.:~:':~':1.;f.': :~~:.?~,C;o.::?:!~~_;_~~~e!~~:::~~~~~~_~::",V;:~~;,~,:':-_ :~: ,~:-.' _", 'c"- _.. ". "..:~_,. .,. ~',:~,. ~':;;~:\':~~:',,;..':_~_~:~:~'":~:~~:~i. ~. ~":;_'-:~:,L~;'"..~i.~_~~.,,-.t. \:. ";;\_,,..~A...).._ .~:.....~,~)...~:':,'__./;;,.,. _ ~ .,: i or.>'"",,," .- .....-.._- o z w " W ...I ~ ,.-' '-~".C, ,~. ~,'''' ,,~._.~....- .'", ,r, :."." I" ...." .;'," - N Z o (f) 'io Z W N f-O:::: XO WJ <(w ~L5 3:WlIl ~Zo N~:5Z 0...1 N <( ~ OJ Z 0:: <( L N N '" '" -.... OJ 0 'io N N '" '" N 'io N w a: ::0 to ::Ow a: a: t:)=> W I-- cr www ~~ ~ crOCe::: 0-' U ::::)::>::> WW ocr W ::>w 1--1--1-- era::: ~1-- 0::: erO::: uuu ::>::> wm~w::> ......=> ::>::>::> bb 0::: WO:::bW W0 ~~~ ::>::>~~~~::>::>~ w::> w~~~ O:::O:::::>uocrI--O:::I--W ~O::: a:: 1--1--1--::>I--UOl--ua::~ ~1-- ::>~~~ ~~uO:::~z::>~::>::>~ O:::~ b::>::>::> ~~::>I- I O~~Cl:::t:;5 LLO ::> I I I ou~~~u~o~::> 00 O:::~~~ ggwooo~g~~~ 0~ ~~~~ rnmD~ z~muw::> ~ w~~ >-r8?1~~~g~o --1& ~/:;jww O:::O:::~~~~ ~m~ WOW WO:::~~ OO>~W~r~ ~~ w~oc ~uuu ~~rr~WOC~r~O ~~~ zzz ~~~~o OC I~ rOOD ~~oo~ ~~Or~ rW~ OCUUU ZZ~~O&~Z~~O OC5~ ~rrr 00 r I WowO J ~ W~ l/)OCVlO:::OCO:::-- WW~O~~5w~f~oc~,~~w~~~ <.:l<.:l0~<<1 00wf-~Wr<<~ZlIlllllll a: a: f"w I ~ ZOUZf-/:;jf"O I I I I ::)::) I I ~6 ~ I o~~o~~ I ~~~" 111Il<<~ ~IW...Jot;;l~ 1000", w~~I~ ~~w ~&W~WWW ~~g~~i::~~~~~~~w~g~~~~ =o!=o!~~o~~=o!o ...J/:;j=o!~lIl~lIl~~~ uuO<zoz~zl ~~<IOz ~~WU<<t:QLLQ~~r~Q;~oO 1 I I >0 lLt-: I-:u~oc ......oocl= zz~ 0 ~z~<- z~ <~www 00~~~6~Q~I~~Q~lr~Vl(/)~ ~~~(/)ffiFObO(/)~(/)0 ww0556 ~~~W~~~~~OWW~~G~~III oo_U_ ZOzo:::UZO~<>ZWWW OO::;~0~<<O<<<<~00<<~...J<<~~~ [~~~~~~[~5~ ~6G~~~~~ ~n~~~~~~~;n~ ~O~N roa:J~CJJ<l::t~~~ LC)(()a:JOOt")mo>m \ UJ Z ~ --' UJ Cl ~ l- I. <!l He :r. Z. <( .,' ,'W:", '" o .r ,O~ ,w3; ~~ ul>: g'l w'\\' Q:t'Fc:r.: ifZ w:- QJ'~c~" ,3;;; fTo :'&1W J~! ' \ ~ -';:. o "' '''',> ,;];33....1 ,.' ~,.'" ..::;".,..~e~';<~ ":- " ",;\'-", . 0;' ~ \,\'6S ::Jil o <0 fig'or';: 9 ::Jd W l>: ~ ~ ::>"-'" 111"f( ~~~ 0(1)<0: II o..zz I II '. ~~~ II~W;;; /1 t II O~ C!JO wa: -l- OCI) ZO <I- Cl)a: u.O OD.. ~O a:!Y o!!: a..z ::> Z 0(') ~~ W(\I l- X": WI- I-Z Hf~ a:z I-C!' CI)- ..../ . 0( J: . C I- m IUs ~ ~I ~ .... ~ ~ D~ II: "" Mi m lIII i ~ -. - o rot ~ , '\ ~ itl- w Ii: "':;; '" w f-, 2 o W<( ",~?i O...J (f)~ o <( o '" (f) (f) w ~l3 <( -' <( (2 W f-, '" <( <(?;( H,~3t ~o:'" <(0: ~~ 0: w a. eJa::~ ,0" ~ ~ (f) ~ g o N ~ 9!..iL -:An3 .6'09+9<: J/Id '~ 9Z'8 -An3 ,~ !f~'LN~.Ld M01 <( ''j G: o 0: a. 90'8 ~ ... -'3l3 !fS'L9+tZ .1J\d o~'or '" ATI3 SS'LSi+ ~Z Ihl 30tMlY3lO I'int'ftNft:' :.Si~ S9'Ll; -!- ^-ll3 SS'LStSl 0Ad ~' 8 ' o N .. o o 2 ::J o 0: -' <( 2 (3 (2 o ~ ~ g w (xn~ - An3 ~8 ';OO.~l+L~",lIId. i+ !~ OS'Ol:-~ OO~~l-a-n :)hi .. g q 6'" N ..-.,._~_. '0." 0_ 00 NN <( II " , . ~~ W.... -.l ww ...J...J - <(<( lL. uU o V> V> 0::: . . 0.. ~~ O:w 0> I '0 ,0 1+ Iv :1') iO i~ ,n in '0 o ,+ 'N 'n '0 :~ ;;; ,0 '0 , ,+ ,g I '0 o + ,m IN '0 ;0 '+ 'w ;N '0 ,0 -,+ ,~ :N , 10 ,0 ,+ '0 iN :0 ,0 .. !~ :0 '0 i+ i" 'N o '0 ,~ 'N '0 '0 1+ .N iN \0 '0 .;;t )N '0 '0 i+ 10 iN '0 '0 ,+ i~ !8 iib i- '0 '0 .. ;~ \8 ;+ i~ :g :~ i ,g ~+ ;~ ;0 {'f IN ~.... :g '.1+ !:: ,g 1+ i~ 10 o ,+ ,~ I f~ ,w i8 i+ I~ Iii. w f-, ~ "'(f) '" W f-, ~ o W<( "'~~ 0-' (f)i'? o (lj 0: (f) (f) w ~t3- <( -' " 0: W f-, '" <( <(~ -Z3:- ~a::~ <(0: :;:;.~ 0: w a. ~a::~ .."J;:)'..... ~ ~ (f) 3::lIMN3l:l .9- ZZ 3O~rno nnnlNI" ,Si I ~ ~ ~ m..o~," A313 OO'n:t-91,:JAd. .--'0 n o N o o ~ '~: i .~ o ;-5 o ,0: <0 ...J :< 2 :{3 ,(2 ;0 iOS'U - i\313 'OO'~~+Ll :1/v;I ~ &. OS'S - A3l .oo~~a+.tl ~~ ;:!: n~,(. ."-'0. 0_ 00 NN "" 1111 LU, . W.... -.lWW ...J...J - <(<( lL. UU o V> V> 0::: . . Il..Nf-, -0: O:w 0> I o ,0 ,;:: 'n '0 '0 .',+ n In '0 '0 ",+ ,N 'n o o !+ ;;; !g -!; 1'" '0 o ,+ :~ o ,0 -i+ ,0 N ~o '0 '+ ~ ,N ,g ,+ 'w 'N I o !~ ~ N :0 o "+ v if'll '0 o ,+ ,n ,N '0 '0 ,+ 'N if'll !g + it;i ,0 o -16 'N o 10 '+ ~~ !g + ,w I- I o o !C is ':Ji - 18 + ,~ 1- '8 + n ,- 10 o + N ,- o ';~ i~ ;~ , ,8 ,+ !~ :g 1+ o '0 o + ~ Iii w f-, ;5 "'(f) 0: W f-, ~ o W<( ",~o 0'3 (f)~ <(~ Z3t" ~O::~ <('a' :;:;'CL 0: w a. .~a::~ !il" <( ~ (f} .,. 0_ 00 NN UIIII , . W.... -.l 'j 'j - <(<( lL. UU o V> V> 0::: . . a.. !:::!~ O:w 0> I ~ o 0 n N g :;; o . rz'ol- "" A313 .S'~+9Z 0fv;I u'~r:= -1\313 l~'t'HrZZ Ihl lS'6' - .\3U OO'9Si+0~ Ihl ~~ U W -' G: o 0: a. '0 N l- OU ~- ilia: -I- COO ZC <I- 00 a: LLO aD. I-C a:!:Y a!!: D.Z ::> ig ,+ ,m lS'O~ "" 11313 fN tS'09+B'Z IIId .. g n d I '0 ,0 ,+ ,~ iN 19'O i _ A313 i Ll,.,~+tl:.IJId i 8: 1+ i~ 19'Ol - i\313 . l~'K:+lZ'~ :0 '0 ,+ iN "l M g, n d , ~~ ~, cii ,I;' ZI'8 --,\313 ig OO.90+i: r.1J\d + Z~'8 -A313 " "00"'90+6 'Old + m K' g, ",:: d'-- .'-"0.'." ...-.'......0..... o 2 ::J 0' 0: <0 -' <( 2 C3 (2 o ..I.. z o en z ~oo XW W:::! I-lL wO Wa: a:Q. I- en ~ :x: ~ ig '. '0 in :0 '0 ,+ (lID ~N !o ,0 ..~ + ,~ iN , , 10 10 i~ iN i ~tg 5j~ 0' n ;g i+ ''''I iN o '0 ,+ '0 iN , , ~o i~ i- '0 ,0 .,+ l~ , i~ i~ , , ,0 ,0 1+ ;~ ;8 ,+ i~ ; 00 '0 -;+ . 1- is ,+ 'n !- g + ~~ ~ ng + ~ o o + o 8 + ~ IUs ~~i ~ u De I Mi "'fi W I- III :E x w " 0) 0) ... W z ::::> "') ... o -' <( 2 (3 (2 o w Ii: :;:;'2 x3t 00 O:I o..(f) !lco 2 '"::l i!!o 00: 2<0 ~ , ~ San Diego Unified Port District "H" Street Extension Alignment Study June 1,1997 8.0 Appendix A. Opinion of Probable Costs: An opinion of probable construction costs was produced for each of the conceptual alignment alternatives. These costs are included, herein, as Appendix A. B. Field Notes: Field reconnaissance was conducted of the Rohr site within the "H" Street extension study corridor. Locations of buildings, utilities, and other physical obstructions were documented with stations and offsets along a baseline. These field notes are included, herein, as Appendix B. C. Photographs: Photographs were taken throughout the "H" Street extension study corridor. These photographs arc included, herein, as Appendix C. D. Mid-Bayfront LCP FEIR, Traffic Data: Average daily traffic (ADT) volumes were taken from the Mid-Bayfront LCP Final Environmental Report. c2 -c/'-I BO,.,LE '.".'~ i I L " 'c-"'-" ~~: ~e <_~M,,"~.~:~;i~~i~~i ",,~;^,~~1:!:~:::;\f~~. i~~~'''''" i,<. "'~l~'~k.\',.~'*fr;:'" p_pendlx A" ~;;,:;;:'~r~?i~~;:~~;~i;~fL:;';f~ ;.'" Opi n itin~6f 'Proba'b";' 'I"e{ 'C' '0'" "Si!' 't'''s'~:/('\'''' :___-:'-,~<";. . ,~,'_':., '..t; -, 'j~:-:::/.'.>f)f~\> _;~';"~~:'::<::~i-,~.c,~,~_~>-" 'c ,<,/~'""'~".: ,t:~~ttl"{"'!:~~~'-~::~ _cO,'. fi f.: "'.:~:.;,~(t\: ,,', .. " ( T Summary San Diego Unified Port District H Street Extension Opinion of Probable Costs Description Alignment 1 Alignment 1A Alignment 2 Alignment 2A Alignment 3 Profile A (Grade Separation) $ 10,617,175 N/A $ 11,272,175 N/A N/A Profile B (Grade Separation) $ 13,274,954 N/A $ 13,929,954 N/A N/A Profile C (At-Grade) $ 6,851,052 $ 6,292,431 $ 7,708,852 $ 6,089,631 $ 14,821,302 The opinion of probable construction costs does not include the following: 1) Costs or contingencies for existing or potential environmental liabilities associated with historical uses of the property. current site operations, and the conditions of the surrounding properties. 2) Costs for landscaping the buffer area outside the street right-ot-way. This buffer area varies in width from 8-feet to 20-feet. 3) Costs for the proposed future extension of "H" Street from Marina Parkway to Sandpiper Way. Costs.xls6/2/97 01-4" .,. Alignment 1 San Diego Unified Port District Grade Separation H Street Extension (Profile A) Opinion of Probable Construction Costs No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Cost 1 Roadway Excavation CY 27300 $ 6 $ 163,800 2 Embankment CY 51500 $ 7 $ 360,500 3 Grade Separation SF 4700 $ 130 $ 611,000 4 Retaining Wall SF 14000 $ 40 $ 560,000 5 AC Pavement (3") Ton 5800 $ 45 $ 261,000 6 Class 2 AB (8") CY 7800 $ 49 $ 382,200 7 Curb & Gutter (Type G) LF 7240 $ 13 $ 94,120 8 Curb & Gutter (Type B-2) LF 6840 $ 13 $ 88,920 9 PCC Sidewalk (4") SF 35700 $ 4 $ 124,950 10 10" ACP Water Line LF 1300 $ 63 $ 81,900 11 8" VCP Sewer Main LF 1300 $ 73 $ 94,900 12 Relocate Pacific Bell UG Telephone LS 1 $ 170,000 $ 170,000 13 Relocate SDG&E UG 2" HP Gas Line LS 1 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 14 Relocate SDG&E OH Electric LS 1 $ 175,000 $ 175,000 15 Misc. Utilities (Rohr) LS 1 $ 900,000 $ 900,000 16 Misc. Drainage (Rohr) LS 1 $ 320,000 $ 320,000 17 Drainage LS 1 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 18 Landscaping/I rrigation SF 35700 $ 5 $ 178,500 19 Railroad Signal EA 1 $ 137,000 $ 137,000 20 Traffic Signal (4x2) EA 0 $ 127,000 $ - 21 Street Lighting EA 8 $ 4,500 $ 36,000 22 Security Fence LF 3000 $ 14 $ 42,000 23 Secu rity Gates LS 2 $ 40,000 $ 80,000 Subtotal $ 5,136,790 24 Right-ol-way SF 66100 $ 10 $ 661,000 25 Bldg. Demolition LS 1 $ 360,000 $ 360,000 26 Relocation Costs LS 1 $ 915,000 $ 915,000 27 Mobilization (4% 01 Subtotal) % 4% $ 205,472 28 Contingency (35% 01 Subtotal) % 35% $ 1,797,877 29 Admin/Eng/Const (30% 01 Sub) % 30% $ 1,541,037 Subtotal $ 5,480,385 Total $ 10,617,175 Notes: 1) It's anticipated that Pacific Bell and SDG&E will participate in the cost of relocating their facilities thereby reducing the total cost of the project. The following s a breakdown of Pacific Bell and SDG&E costs. A) Pacific Bell Facilities: $170,000 B) SDG&E Facilities: $300,000 2) The opinion of probable construction costs does not include the following: A) Costs or contingencies for existing or potential environmentalliabilltles associated with historical uses of the property, current site operations, and the conditions of the surrounding properties. B) Costs for landscaping the buffer area outside the street right-of.way. This buffer area varies In width from a-feet to 20-feel C) Costs for the proposed future extension of "H" Street from Marina Parkway to Sandpiper Way. Costs.xls6/2/97 ~-47 Alignment 1 San Diego Unified Port District Grade Separation H Street Extension (Profile B) Opinion of Probable Construction Costs No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Cost 1 Roadway Excavation CY 19000 $ 6 $ 114,000 2 Embankment CY 62000 $ 7 $ 434,000 3 Grade Separation SF 14100 $ 130 $ 1,833,000 4 Retaining Wall SF 27500 $ 40 $ 1,100,000 5 AC Pavement (3") Ton 4900 $ 45 $ 220,500 6 Class 2 AB (8") CY 5900 $ 49 $ 289,100 7 Curb & Gutter (Type G) LF 7040 $ 13 $ 91,520 8 Curb & Gutter (Type B-2) LF 6640 $ 13 $ 86,320 9 PCC Sidewalk (4") SF 35200 $ 4 $ 123,200 10 10" ACP Water Line LF 1300 $ 63 $ 81,900 11 8" VCP Sewer Main LF 1300 $ 73 $ 94,900 12 Relocate Pacific Bell UG Telephone LS 1 $ 170,000 $ 170,000 13 Relocate SDG&E UG 2" HP Gas Line LS 1 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 14 Relocate SDG&E OH Electric LS 1 $ 175,000 $ 175,000 15 Misc. Utilities (Rohr) LS 1 $ 900,000 $ 900,000 16 Misc. Drainage (Rohr) LS 1 $ 250,00Q $ 250,000 17 Drainage LS 1 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 18 Landscaping/I rrigation SF 35200 $ 5 $ 176,000 19 Railroad Signal EA 1 $ 137,000 $ 137,000 20 Traffic Signal (4x2) EA 0 $ 127,000 $ - 21 Street Lighting EA 8 $ 4,500 $ 36,000 22 Security Fence LF 3000 $ 14 $ 42,000 23 Secu rity Gates LS 2 $ 40,000 $ 80,000 Subtotal $ 6,709,440 24 Right-of-way SF 66100 $ 10 $ 661,000 25 Bldg. Demolition LS 1 $ 360,000 $ 360,000 26 Relocation Costs LS 1 $ 915,000 $ 915,000 27 Mobilization (4% of Subtotal) % 4% $ 268,378 28 Contingency (35% of Subtotal) % 35% $ 2,348,304 29 Admin/Eng/Const (30% of Sub) % 30% $ 2,012,832 Subtotal $ 6,565,514 Total $ 13,274,954 Notes: 1) It's anticipated that Pacific Bell and SDG&E will participate in the cost of relocating their facilities thereby reducing the total cost of the project. The following s a breakdown of Pacific Bell and SDG&E costs. A) Pacific Bell Facilities: $170,000 B) SDG&E Facilities: $300,000 2) The opinion of probable construction costs does not include the following: A) Costs or contingencies for existing or potential environmental liabilities associated with historical uses of the property, current site operations, and the conditions of the surrounding properties. B) Costs for landscaping the buffer area outside the street right-of-way. This buffer area varies in width from 8.feet to 20-feet. C) Costs for the proposed future extension of "H" Street from Marina Parkway to Sandpiper Way. Costs.xls6/2/97 01- 9~ .,. Alignment 1 At-Grade San Diego Unified Port District H Street Extension Profile CJ Opinion of Probable Construction Costs No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Cost 1 Roadway Excavation CY 27300 $ 6 $ 163,800 2 Embankment CY 9600 $ 7 $ 67,200 3 Aerial Structure SF 0 $ 130 $ - 4 Retaining Wall SF 0 $ 40 $ - 5 AC Pavement (3") Ton 5100 $ 45 $ 229,500 6 Class 2 AB (8") CY 6800 $ 49 $ 333,200 7 Curb & Gutter (Type G) LF 7340 $ 13 $ 95,420 8 Curb & Gutter (Type B-2) LF 6940 $ 13 $ 90,220 9 PCC Sidewalk (4") SF 36700 $ 4 $ 128,450 10 10" ACP Water Line LF 1300 $ 63 $ 81,900 11 8" VCP Sewer Main LF 1300 $ 73 $ 94,900 12 Relocate Pacific Bell UG Telephone LS 1 $ 170,000 $ 170,000 13 Relocate SDG&E UG 2" HP Gas Line LS 1 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 14 Relocate SDG&E OH Electric LS 1 $ 175,000 $ 175,000 15 Misc. Utilities (Rohr) LS 1 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 16 Misc. Drainage (Rohr) LS 1 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 17 Drainage LS 1 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 18 Landscaping/I rrigation SF 36700 $ 5 $ 183,500 19 Railroad Signal EA 1 $ 137,000 $ 137,000 20 Traffic Signal (4x2) EA 1 $ 127,000 $ 127,000 21 Street Lighting EA 8 $ 4,500 $ 36,000 22 Security Fence LF 3000 $ 14 $ 42,000 23 Security Gates LS 2 $ 40,000 $ 80,000 Subtotal $ 2,910,090 24 Right-of-way SF 65800 $ 10 $ 658,000 25 Bldg. Demolition LS 1 $ 360,000 $ 360,000 26 Relocation Costs LS 1 $ 915,000 $ 915,000 27 Mobilization (4% of Subtotal) % 4% $ 116,404 28 Contingency (35% of Subtotal) % 35% $ 1,018,532 29 Admin/Eng/Const (30% of Sub) % 30% $ 873,027 Subtotal $ 3,940,962 Total $ 6,851,052 Notes: 1) It's anticipated that Pacific Bell and SDG&E will participate in the cost of relocating their facilities thereby reducing the total cost of the project. The following s a breakdown of Pacific Bell and SDG&E costs. A) Pacific Bell Facilities: $170,000 B) SDG&E Facilities: $300,000 2) The opinion of probable construction costs does not include the following: A} Costs or contingencies for existing or potential environmental liabilities associated with historical uses of the property. current site operations, and the conditions of the surrounding properties. B) Costs for landscaping the buffer area outside the street right-of-way. This buffer area varies In width from 8-feet to 20-feel C) Costs for the proposed future extension of "H" Street from Marina Parkway to Sandpiper Way. Costs.xls6/2/97 .:J-c/f:j Alignment 1 A At-Grade Interim (Profile C) San Diego Unified Port District H Street Extension Opinion Of Probable Construction Costs No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Cost 1 Roadway Excavation CY 22500 $ 6 $ 135,000 2 Embankment CY 6800 $ 7 $ 47,600 3 Grade Separation SF 0 $ 130 $ - 4 Retaining Wall SF 0 $ 40 $ - 5 AC Pavement (3") Ton 4200 $ 45 $ 189,000 6 Class 2 AB (8") CY 5600 $ 49 $ 274,400 7 Curb & Gutter (Type G) LF 5970 $ 13 $ 77,610 8 Curb & Gutter (Type B-2) LF 5570 $ 13 $ 72,410 9 PCC Sidewalk (4") SF 29850 $ 4 $ 104,475 10 10" ACP Water Line LF 1300 $ 63 $ 81,900 11 8" VCP Sewer Main LF 1300 $ 73 $ 94,900 12 Relocate Pacific Bell UG Telephone LS 1 $ 170,000 $ 170,000 13 Relocate SDG&E UG 2" HP Gas Line LS 1 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 14 Relocate SDG&E OH Electric LS 1 $ 175,000 $ 175,000 15 Misc. Utilities (Rohr) LS 1 $ 220,000 $ 220,000 16 Misc. Drainage (Rohr) LS 1 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 17 Drainage LS 1 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 18 Landscaping/I rrigation SF 29850 $ 5 $ 149,250 19 Railroad Signal EA 1 $ 137,000 $ 137,000 20 Traffic Signal (4x2) EA 1 $ 127,000 $ 127,000 21 Street Lighting EA 6 $ 4,500 $ 27,000 22 Security Fence LF 3000 $ 14 $ 42,000 23 Security Gates EA 2 $ 40,000 $ 80,000 Subtotal $ 2,579,545 24 Right-of-way SF 65800 $ 10 $ 658,000 25 Bldg. Demolition LS 1 $ 360,000 $ 360,000 26 Relocation Costs LS 1 $ 915,000 $ 915,000 27 Mobilization (4% of Subtotal) % 4% $ 103,182 28 Contingency (35% of Subtotal) % 35% $ 902,841 29 Admin/Eng/Const (30% of Sub) % 30% $ 773,864 Subtotal $ 3,712,886 Total $ 6,292,431 Notes: 1) It's anticipated that Pacific Bell and SDG&E will participate in the cost of relocating their facilities thereby reducing the total cost of the project. The following s a breakdown of Pacific Bell and SDG&E costs. A) Pacific Ben Facilities: $170,000 B) SDG&E Facilities: $300,000 2) The opinion of probable construction costs does not include the following: A} Costs or contingencies for existing or potential environmental liabilities associated with historical uses of the property, current site operations, and the conditions of the surrounding properties. B) Costs for landscaping the buffer area outside the street right.of~way. This buffer area varies In width Irom 8-leet to 20-leet. C) Costs for the proposed future extension of "H" Street from Marina Parkway to Sandpiper Way. Costs.xls6/2/97 ~ -;)-0 ."." Alignment 2 San Diego Unified Port District Grade Separation H Street Extension (Profile A) Opinion of Probable Construction Costs No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Cost 1 Roadway Excavation CY 27300 $ 6 $ 163,800 2 Embankment CY 51500 $ 7 $ 360,500 3 Grade Separation SF 4700 $ 130 $ 611,000 4 Retaining Wall SF 14000 $ 40 $ 560,000 5 AC Pavement (3") Ton 5800 $ 45 $ 261,000 6 Class 2 AB (8") CY 7800 $ 49 $ 382,200 7 Curb & Gutter (Type G) LF 7240 $ 13 $ 94,120 8 Curb & Gutter (Type B-2) LF 6840 $ 13 $ 88,920 9 PCC Sidewalk (4") SF 35700 $ 4 $ 124,950 10 10" ACP Water Line LF 1300 $ 63 $ 81,900 11 8" VCP Sewer Main LF 1300 $ 73 $ 94,900 12 Relocate Pacific Bell UG Telephone LS 1 $ 170,000 $ 170,000 13 Relocate SDG&E UG 2" HP Gas Line LS 1 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 14 Relocate SDG&E OH Electric LS 1 $ 175,000 $ 175,000 15 Misc. Utilities (Rohr) LS 1 $ 900,000 $ 900,000 16 Misc. Drainage (Rohr) LS 1 $ 320,000 $ 320,000 17 Drainage LS 1 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 18 Landscaping/I rrigation SF 35700 $ 5 $ 178,500 19 Railroad Signal EA 1 $ 137,000 $ 137,000 20 Traffic Signal (4x2) EA 0 $ 127,000 $ - 21 Street Lighting EA 8 $ 4,500 $ 36,000 22 Security Fence LF 3000 $ 14 $ 42,000 23 Security Gates LS 2 $ 40,000 $ 80,000 Subtotal $ 5,136,790 24 Right-of-way SF 66100 $ 10 $ 661,000 25 Bldg. Demolition LS 1 $ 630,000 $ 630,000 26 Relocation Costs LS 1 $ 1,300,000 $ 1,300,000 27 Mobilization (4% of Subtotal) % 4% $ 205,472 28 Contingency (35% of Subtotal) % 35% $ 1,797,877 29 Admin/Eng/Const (30% of Sub) % 30% $ 1,541,037 Subtotal $ 6,135,385 Total $ 11,272,175 Notes: 1) It's anticipated that Pacific Bell and SDG&E will participate in the cost of relocating their facilities thereby reducing the total cost of the project. The following s a breakdown of Pacific Bell and SDG&E costs. A) Pacific Bell Facilities: $170,000 B) SDG&E Facilities: $300,000 2) The opinion of probable construction costs does not include the following: A) Costs or contingencies for existing or potential environmentalllabilities associated with historical uses of the property. current site operations, and the conditions of the surrounding properties. B) Costs for landscaping the buffer area outside the street right-ot-way. This buffer area varies In width from 8-feet to 20-feet. C) Costs for the proposed future extension of "H" Street from Marina Parkway to Sandpiper Way. Costs.xls6/2/97 t::l-~-' Alignment 2 San Diego Unified Port District Grade Separation H Street Extension (Profile B) Opinion of Probable Construction Costs No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Cost 1 Roadway Excavation CY 19000 $ 6 $ 114,000 2 Embankment CY 62000 $ 7 $ 434,000 3 Grade Separation SF 14100 $ 130 $ 1,833,000 4 Retaining Wall SF 27500 $ 40 $ 1,100,000 5 AC Pavement (3") Ton 4900 $ 45 $ 220,500 6 Class 2 AB (8") CY 5900 $ 49 $ 289,100 7 Curb & Gutter (Type G) LF 7040 $ 13 $ 91,520 8 Curb & Gutter (Type B-2) LF 6640 $ 13 $ 86,320 9 PCC Sidewalk (4") SF 35200 $ 4 $ 123,200 10 10" ACP Water Line LF 1300 $ 63 $ 81,900 11 8" VCP Sewer Main LF 1300 $ 73 $ 94,900 12 Relocate Pacific Bell UG Telephone LS 1 $ 170,000 $ 170,000 13 Relocate SDG&E UG 2" HP Gas Line LS 1 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 14 Relocate SDG&E OH Electric LS 1 $ 175,000 $ 175,000 15 Misc. Utilities LS 1 $ 900,000 $ 900,000 16 Misc. Drainage LS 1 $ 250,000 $ 250,000 17 Drainage LS 1 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 18 Landscaping/I rrigation SF 35200 $ 5 $ 176,000 19 Railroad Signal EA 1 $ 137,000 $ 137,000 20 Traffic Signal (4x2) EA 0 $ 127,000 $ - 21 Street Lighting EA 8 $ 4,500 $ 36,000 22 Security Fence LF 3000 $ 14 $ 42,000 23 Secu rity Gates LS 2 $ 40,000 $ 80,000 Subtotal $ 6,709,440 24 Right-ot-way SF 66100 $ 10 $ 661,000 25 Bldg. Demolition LS 1 $ 630,000 $ 630,000 26 Relocation Costs LS 1 $ 1,300,000 $ 1,300,000 27 Mobilization (4% ot Subtotal) % 4% $ 268,378 28 Contingency (35% ot Subtotal) % 35% $ 2,348,304 29 Admin/Eng/Const (30% ot Sub) % 30% $ 2,012,832 Subtotal $ 7,220,514 Total $ 13,929,954 Notes: 1) It's anticipated that Pacific Bell and SDG&E will participate in the cost ot relocating their facilities thereby reducing the total cost of the project. The following s a breakdown of Pacific Bell and SDG&E costs. A) Pacific Bell Facilities: $170,000 B) SDG&E Facilities: $300,000 2) The opinion of probable construction costs does not include the following: A) Costs or contingencies for existing or potential environmental liabilities associated with historical uses of the property, current site operations, and the conditions of the surrounding properties. B) Costs for landscaping the buffer area outside the street right-ot-way. This buffer area varies In width from a-feet to 20-feet. C) Costs for the proposed future extension of "H" Street from Marina Parkway to Sandpiper Way. Costs.xls6/2/97 Ol- ~--.. .,. Alignment 2 At-Grade (Profile C) San Diego Unified Port District H Street Extension Opinion of Probable Construction Costs No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Cost 1 Roadway Excavation CY 27300 $ 6 $ 163,800 2 Embankment CY 9600 $ 7 $ 67,200 3 Grade Separation SF 0 $ 130 $ - 4 Retaining Wall SF 0 $ 40 $ - 5 AC Pavement (3") Ton 5100 $ 45 $ 229,500 6 Class 2 AB (8") CY 6800 $ 49 $ 333,200 7 Curb & Gutter (Type G) LF 7340 $ 13 $ 95,420 8 Curb & Gutter (Type B-2) LF 6940 $ 13 $ 90,220 9 PCC Sidewalk (4") SF 36700 $ 4 $ 128,450 10 10" ACP Water Line LF 1300 $ 63 $ 81,900 11 8" VCP Sewer Main LF 1300 $ 73 $ 94,900 12 Relocate Pacific Bell UG Telephone LS 1 $ 170,000 $ 170,000 13 Relocate SDG&E UG 2" HP Gas Line LS 1 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 14 Relocate SDG&E OH Electric LS 1 $ 175,000 $ 175,000 15 Misc. Utilities (Rohr) LS 1 $ 320,000 $ 320,000 16 Misc. Drainage (Rohr) LS 1 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 17 Drainage LS 1 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 18 Landscaping/I rrigation SF 36700 $ 5 $ 183,500 19 Railroad Signal EA 1 $ 137,000 $ 137,000 20 Traffic Signal (4x2) EA 1 $ 127,000 $ 127,000 21 Street Lighting EA 8 $ 4,500 $ 36,000 22 Security Fence LF 3000 $ 14 $ 42,000 23 Security Gates LS 2 $ 40,000 $ 80,000 Subtotal $ 3,030,090 24 Right-of-way SF 65800 $ 10 $ 658,000 25 Bldg. Demolition LS 1 $ 630,000 $ 630,000 26 Relocation Costs LS 1 $ 1,300,000 $ 1,300,000 27 Mobilization (4% of Subtotal) % 4% $ 121,204 28 Contingency (35% of Subtotal) % 35% $ 1,060,532 29 Admin/Eng/Const (30% of Sub) % 30% $ 909,027 Subtotal $ 4,678,762 Total $ 7,708,852 Notes: 1) It's anticipated that Pacific Bell and SDG&E will participate in the cost of relocating their facilities thereby reducing the total cost of the project. The following s a breakdown of Pacific Bell and SDG&E costs. A) Pacific Bell Facilities: $170,000 B) SDG&E Facilities: $300,000 2) The opinion of probable construction costs does not include the following: A) Costs or contingencies for existing or potential envlronmentalliabilltles associated with historical uses of the property. current site operations, and the conditions of the surrounding properties. B} Costs for landscaping the buffer area outside the street right-of-way. This buffer area varies in width from 8-feet to 20-feet. C) Costs for the proposed future extension of "H" Street from Marina Parkway to Sandpiper Way. Costs.xls6/2/97 01- S3 Alignment 2A At-Grade Interim (Profile C) San Diego Unified Port District H Street Extension Opinion of Probable Construction Costs No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Cost 1 Roadway Excavation CY 22500 $ 6 $ 135,000 2 Embankment CY 6800 $ 7 $ 47,600 3 Grade Separation SF 0 $ 130 $ - 4 Retaining Wall SF 0 $ 40 $ - 5 AC Pavement (3") Ton 4200 $ 45 $ 189,000 6 Class 2 AB (8") CY 5600 $ 49 $ 274,400 7 Curb & Gutter (Type G) LF 5970 $ 13 $ 77,610 8 Curb & Gutter (Type B-2) LF 5570 $ 13 $ 72,410 9 PCC Sidewalk (4") SF 29850 $ 4 $ 104,475 10 10" ACP Water Line LF 1300 $ 63 $ 81,900 11 8" VCP Sewer Main LF 1300 $ 73 $ 94,900 12 Relocate Pacific Bell UG Telephone LS 1 $ 170,000 $ 170,000 13 Relocate SDG&E UG 2" HP Gas Line LS 1 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 14 Relocate SDG&E OH Electric LS 1 $ 175,000 $ 175,000 15 Misc. Utilities LS 1 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 16 Misc. Drainage LS 1 $ 100,000 $ 100,000 17 Drainage LS 1 $ 150,000 $ 150,000 18 Landscaping!1 rrigation SF 29850 $ 5 $ 149,250 19 Railroad Signal EA 1 $ 137,000 $ 137,000 20 Traffic Signal (4x2) EA 1 $ 127,000 $ 127,000 21 Street Lighting EA 6 $ 4,500 $ 27,000 22 Security Fence LF 3000 $ 14 $ 42,000 23 Security Gates EA 2 $ 40,000 $ 80,000 Subtotal $ 2,459,545 24 Right-of-way SF 65800 $ 10 $ 658,000 25 Bldg. Demolition LS 1 $ 360,000 $ 360,000 26 Relocation Costs LS 1 $ 915,000 $ 915,000 27 Mobilization (4% of Subtotal) % 4% $ 98,382 28 Contingency (35% of Subtotal) % 35% $ 860,841 29 Admin!Eng!Const (30% of Sub) % 30% $ 737,864 Subtotal $ 3,630,086 Total $ 6,089,631 Notes: 1) It's anticipated that Pacific Bell and SDG&E will participate in the cost of relocating their facilities thereby reducing the total cost of the project. The following s a breakdown of Pacific Bell and SDG&E costs. A) Pacific Bell Facilities: $170,000 B) SDG&E Facilities: $300,000 2) The opinion of probable construction costs does not include the following: A) Costs or contingencies for existing or potential environmental liabilities associated with historical uses of the property, current site operations, and the conditions of the surrounding properties. B) C()sts for landscaping the buffer area outside the street rlght~of-way. This buffer area varies in width from 8-feet to 20-feet. C) Costs for the proposed future extension of "H" Street from Marina Parkway to Sandpiper Way. Costs.xls6!2!97 ~ - ::J-'! '"T Alignment 3 At-Grade (Profile C) San Diego Unified Port District H Street Extension Opinion of Probable Construction Costs No. Item Unit Quantity Unit Price Cost 1 Roadway Excavation CY 27300 $ 6 $ 163,800 2 Embankment CY 9600 $ 7 $ 67,200 3 Grade Separation SF 0 $ 130 $ - 4 Retaining Wall SF 0 $ 40 $ - 5 AC Pavement (3") Ton 5100 $ 45 $ 229,500 6 Class 2 AB (8") CY 6800 $ 49 $ 333,200 7 Curb & Gutter (Type G) LF 7340 $ 13 $ 95,420 8 Curb & Gutter (Type B-2) LF 6940 $ 13 $ 90,220 9 PCC Sidewalk (4") SF 36700 $ 4 $ 128,450 10 10" ACP Water Line LF 1300 $ 63 $ 81,900 11 8" VCP Sewer Main LF 1300 $ 73 $ 94,900 12 Relocate Pacific Bell UG Telephone LS 1 $ 170,000 $ 170,000 13 Relocate SDG&E UG 2" HP Gas Line LS 1 $ 125,000 $ 125,000 14 Relocate SDG&E OH Electric LS 1 $ 175,000 $ 175,000 15 Misc. Utilities (Rohr) LS 1 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 16 Misc. Drainage (Rohr) LS 1 $ 200,000 $ 200,000 17 Drainage LS 1 $ 175,000 $ 175,000 18 Landscaping/I rrigation SF 36700 $ 5 $ 183,500 19 Railroad Signal EA 1 $ 137,000 $ 137,000 20 Traffic Signal (4x2) EA 1 $ 127,000 $ 127,000 21 Street Lighting EA 8 $ 4,500 $ 36,000 22 Security Fence LF 3000 $ 14 $ 42,000 23 Security Gates LS 2 $ 40,000 $ 80,000 Subtotal $ 2,935,090 24 Right-of-way SF 66100 $ 10 $ 661,000 25 Bldg. Demolition LS 1 $ 800,000 $ 800,000 26 Relocation Costs LS 1 $ 8,400,000 $ 8,400,000 27 Mobilization (4% of Subtotal) % 4% $ 117,404 28 Contingency (35% of Subtotal) % 35% $ 1,027,282 29 Admin/Eng/Const (30% of Sub) % 30% $ 880,527 Subtotal $ 11,886,212 Total $ 14,821,302 Notes: 1) It's anticipated that Pacific Bell and SDG&E will participate in the cost of relocating their facilities thereby reducing the total cost of the project. The following s a breakdown of Pacific Bell and SDG&E costs. A) Pacific Bell Facilities: $170,000 B) SDG&E Facilities: $300,000 2) The opinion of probable construction costs does not include the following: A) Costs or contingencies for existing or potential environmental liabilities associated with historical uses of the property, current site operations, and the conditions of the surrounding properties. B) Costs for landscaping the buffer area outside the street right-of-way. This buffer area varies In width from a-feet to 20-feet. C) Costs for the proposed future extension of "H" Street from Marina Parkway to Sandpiper Way. Costs.xls6/2/97 OJ- !J-~ I '-j I " ',:' Building Descriptions Bldg. No. 1 3 15 16 19 22 25 45 46 51 52 58 68 81 88 341 910 911 912 Description Production Facility - large one-story block structure Production Facility - large one-story block structure Administrative Offices - one-story wood structure Offices and Cafeteria - two story stucco structure Engineering and Administrative Offices - one-story block structure Inspection Facility - one-story rnetal and concrete structure Transportation Facility - one-story metal structure Production Facility - large one-story block structure Transportation Office - one-story block structure Guard Shack - small one-story metal structure Office Facility Leased to the city of Chula Vista - one-story metal structure Production Facility - steel rigid frame structure Quality Assurance Facility - one-story wood structure Garage - one story metal structure Salvage Yard Office - trailer Transportation Shop - one-story rnetal structure Warehouse -large one-story concrete tilt-up structure Warehouse -large one-story concrete tilt-up structure Warehouse -large one-story concrete tilt-up structure ~-S7 -r" Rohr Facilities Boyle Field Notes of Site Visit on December 12, 1997. The baseline used for these field notes is the prolongation of the south curb line of building 16. Stationing and offsets are approximate. Stationing/Offset Description 0+00/3.5' L Face of the east gate 0+ 14/29.5' L Flagpole 0+25.5/3.5' R Telephone manhole 0+33.5/0' 4'-4" x 4'-4" Utility vault (unknown) 0+44/36.5 R 12" x 18" Drainage grate 0+45.5/69.5' L NW Corner of Building 19 0+58/76,5' L Drainage grate 0+65/69.5' L NE corner of building 3 0+65/140,5' R SE corner of building 1 1+15/36.5' L Drainage grate marked as #49 1+15/TR SE corner of building 16 1+56,5/70' L Center of Door 3-3 on building 3,14.5' opening 1+92/38.5' L Drainage grate marked as #56 1+94/9' L Drainage grate 2+02/34.5' L Buried manhole? 2+17/70'L Center of Door 3 on building 3-2, 15.5' opening NE corner of block wall off of building 3 2+25.5/40' L 2+42.5/19.5' R 24' diameter manhole marked "F" 2+69/40' L NW corner of block wall off of building 3 2+69/70' L Gas propane stub outs at NW corner of building 3 2+77.5/70' L Center of Door 3-1 on building 3, 15'opening 01 - ~..., 2+85.5/40' L 3+19/40' L 3+28.5/2.5' L 3+ 36.5/8. 7' L 3+45/40' L 3+4517' R 3+53.5/4.5' R 3+70/36.5' R 3+97.5/59' L 3+97.5/42' L 4+01/30.5' L 4+04.5/32' L 4+ 17/68.5' L 4+ 17/49,5 L 4+25/68.5 L 4+ 31.5/28.5' L 4+46/1 04' R 4+70/49.5 L 4+80/104' R 4+80/40' L 5+01/40' L 5+05/68,5' L 5+63/68.5' L 5+81.5/9.5 L 6+21/68.5' L NE comer of block wall off of building 3 NW comer of building 3 and block wall off of building 3 Handhold (unknown) Drainage grate Drainage grate SW comer of building 16 Handhold (unknown) Circular valve cover marked as sc-22 Drainage grate Drainage grate Water valve Utility vault( unknown) NE comer of building 45 NE comer of OH crane coming out of building 45, abandoned Center of Door 45-1 on building 45, 14.5' opening Utility vault(unknown) SE comer of building 25 NW comer ofOH crane coming out of building 45, abandoned SW comer of building 25 NE comer of substation 4A NW comer of substation 4A Center of Door 45-19 on building 45, 14.5' opening Center of Door 45-18 on building 45, 14.5' opening Drainage grate Center of Door 45-17 on building 45,14.5' opening -' -~.., __..'.....,....__n..'._. 6+43/68.5' L 6+87/68.5' L 6+87/31.5' R 7+ 15/31.5' R 7+19/31.5' R 7+28/31.5' R 7+67.5/23.5' R 7+72/68.5' R 7+80.5/29' R 7+88/42.5' R 7+91/9' L 8+50/25' L 9+22/18,5' L 9+ 25/25' L 9+34/25' L 9+38/9.5' L 9+48/15' L 9+51/87' R 9+63/15' L 9+68/14' R 9+94/87' R 10+25/16' L 10+32/0' 10+ 32/60' R 10+92/60' R Water line on building 45 Water line on building 45 SE comer of building 46 Water line on building 46 Center of Door 45-16 on building 45, 15..5' opening S W comer of building 46 Drainage grate NW comer of building 45 & 54 24" Manhole marked sc-35 Manhole marked sc-34 Drainage grate NE comer of building 452 Utility vault marked "E" NW comer of building 452 Utility vault (unkno\\n) Drainage grate NE comer of building 81 SE comer of building 68 NW comer of building 81 Manhole (unknown) SW comer of building 68 utility vault (unkno\\1l) West gate SE comer of building 52 SW comer of building 52 0)_'-0 .;'-.., .,. "H" Street Extension Study 1 Looking west to Rohr entrance and SDG&E electric lines -.O::_~__-:: -,.--~--~'-:~.'.~ ,-)-h~~J;-:;tfJJ! ~<#f:";"'#"'b' ,j-;~~'~(/t~~,:,. ~ ~ .-;;~.,; 1:lo;:;iiiM . """1"1 I ' ~_;;r~~"U_,~_ , -"-''''''1' "V:~~h~ J;J ]ijj Jill i:FfJ Looking west between Buildings 16 & I 01- ,,~ Boyle Engineering Corporation "'P"'--"_._.__.__._"......~_. -,- ^.-".~~--~--_._- .:.)t.f8r~~*j ," c -" ~_ . '~:;..::~~ : _ " ,= ,'....... ~ ~ I U 3 Looking west between Buildings 3 & 16 4 Looking SWat the water supply and transportation area near Building 25 01-'3 Boyle Engineering Corporation ~ 5 Looking east between Buildings 16 & 3 6 Looking south at the arterial access road ..]-6" Boyle Engineering Corporation ,..._~.--'.._._-~,-<---_.".. 7 Looking north at the arterial access road 8 Looking SE at the transportation area near Building 25 OJ-"~ Boyle Engineering Corporation ---------- ---- ----- 9 ----- Looking southeast toward Building 3 & 45 10 Looking south at arterial access road between Buildings 45 & 58 07..'" Boyle Engineering Corporation -.....-.-- 11 Looking SW toward Sandpiper Way, Marina Parkway, and Bldg 910 12 Looking west toward Buildings 52, 910 & 911 0)-'1 Boyle Engineering Corporation iVjI I' \ , . I " I . I i: 1\ L ; ~! ;\ " , ~ . , 1 . , .1 -~." - .. -~.~. ::;:-~ .: 13 Looking east toward Buildings 1 & 16 Looking west towards Buildings 88, 68, & 52 and at west entrance 02-'1' Boyle Engineering Corporation T . -,-~~.__......,._.,. ~~J~ll~~W~?~~~:~~t~{t~:~\frt';~~,." ;.'0, .... -..;;,0 15 -_.~ .:) 'O'or "_ '..1 .:JO Looking east toward Buildings 16 & 45 ~~~~~J~~j~;i~'~?~~~~:~"f~t~.':'0~f)<5~L~.:,: ""c.'__;..",." ',', ~"~.' :C:";:'1\r#~ ., :,-:~.-~;~~~~;'1j; .- ~"..- . ''fiYJ;*:4~:';,,:~! Lookin,g"west at the west entrance off of Marina Parkway 0')-' , Boyle Engineering Corporation 17 Looking northeast towards the west entrance off of Marina Parkway 18 Looking north at Marina Parkway and Sandpiper Way 0)-70 Boyle Engineering Corporation --.--....'..".- 19 Looking south at Marina Parkway and Buildings 910, 911, & 912 20 . . . : _ . :'. -.,:' . '.'" _..,,~; 1l!:' J"<<"-..1 "c. -.; - i . Looking north at Marina Parmy' from"G" Street ,;)-7/ Boyle Engineering Corporation ;.:,,:.;. "~-~~- 21 Looking south at Marina Parkway and "G" Street 22 Looking west at "G" street from Marina Parkway o'J - ., d.. Boyle Engineering Corporation .,. 23 Looking south at Sandpiper Way behind Buildings 910 & 911 24 Looking east between Buildings 911 & 910 01- 73 Boyle Engineering Corporation .,,' " 'il/II ;1 ti,'i Ii ! ~.,I;;I I. I ';'-/F)r<;litt~~;tJ~li$~,;'~' .', i 'I' ; .1:; h '; :; '0, -:,;:;' ':'" ..~~, ~",:,: ~"", :~"'" "'I" ",' "".:""" "",,'. ',,' .,. '.,.. '. ~.,' '"".,:,',..~". '".,:~".,:, /",~',~;~",:.',,', f ',,' ' , i; If j,j1iq~-j ,?~f:// ":;;; II ! / .: {',I " ~,/:",vt,'1 ;,l,' PI[ :Jl i,' ~ I i,l ;il ", \'., \ ' , " ..- ,"~,-'-""" 'I' ,';.! i'" 1'.:. ~'i . 0' ';'~"""_ \~""':"I"':"!I""""'~":-"'""_""" ,: I i /; !/ '/, .-'7' I! of:'): 'j; ,r,,:;. " 'OL.J , " _. ", i! If / ),' ) 'ff'i" 'i'i if 'J {:1S I, \'" I': i;,';1 /' ",::.._';;;..:/~\,;"C::' ,!,Ii ~"" ,f~,')!" 'i " ,"L.~ <I(' l"~,, 1/ "" ;'.'.'. 1 ", " " ,tt', " n ',,: 07"1,1 ',",y>/ """,'iil',,i iN' fl _ 110' i;, " 1,\ ','" 11"/1 ". ., IV 'j ill,l Iii Ii , Ci"/f-"".', Ii ,:/ JI\:h h ,:Jj: jJ fit ',i,,/ if 8 ; l ii, :;-,,;'!~:"l.,'~;.:l,L _;",::,1:1/ ' , '..,' ",-" ',' ~ " '" i; jjj Cf.O j' i!,Jti::::;t-j'IH Ii c.' j!i I( ii!"!i " "1 1,1., " '" 1..1./ 'r ,"'~ i f. ",.' !:4: ~ " "lj ,.t ,<-~ ,J Ii '-il;' ,j ,,' i ' Ii " ", ,Ji,: f "" ;.. ~ " 1-' I"N' HI r.. Ir~ ---_ "_1 ", II ,/,/,~,/'~J,:!' l // ,~,',j ,i,l,r,;]",!.-Y".",'.D'\~~:~"~:','""f""-5.~ _, ,_ i '...0 '1 II " c' I 'i ''''''ll'!';)'] /1,,,_,, '"-,,__,,_,, Ic':;; ;! lli;"..__ /' t llt>l I,i !!Ilnr it"! i'--~flJ ,f /,,'] ;1,' 'il II ,1-, )i!"ti.,)! r, r{ i 'ii"C',i:"I"i: Ii .'F ;':_.f .~,'i h-I~_I\<! Iff,' ,1 jii/ j}' , " ,,"', ''''''''''--....,,1.' ,1,,11 i", 1',1 _'_ !1j Jt-)!'~:;::~'IJ1H Ij'lt!! " , _ ;b ",,' e-'"..~~:I,I J" II, ,,;;! I ' ;;f !i! t~"!I",.,,I" I,',,' 'f " (~~_r,_;"-,~,p","'t'[,I,,f '!:"I ' 1.1;J"',,,-,./,,: :,,: ',I:,t'.;""i" :;1,"/,,1,1 ;' l1&~T' _,~__"___ t H gf i i"-="~="'__"-') IIHdl ',' ",' ~ i n J ';!~!lH~~k 1/ Mi'===~~-~~:~~~i',1/t~tl,f~I{"I":.:,__,,,l-d,. .,"',,_.,' I,' 1'1 ;1 I/! N1 jiJ I 'L~""_",,... , JII/ 'fl "," '0- ~, "'," P 1"'-, ""~::;O;'J I'!'I: / N .., ilL,} !''''''L~__( -i" !1 ,_,_ iY' (L."_ l '-"~"O'''''~"_"i' tI ',- :,,.-, F",.,~".,\,_"" ,:{:' ""~ :1 ~:ii'=~~' ..,.,-"~~,L,";.~!~,i"~."(",,[,,i,~t';,,r'~,il,'j~l)~~1 ii ~o ',. ': ii'!111 If! ~) . " 1:1 ",~:",!':",..r_"',~",,,:,.'_;:.,,'."~:~;lj (, !i) ili;1 '1/ ,: /,' 'r, ;: ;/r;"J" Ii! "I a: , ;; ,:,: ii', ,,';i:,',' t if ,,If f j::' ;J I ~,! ,f:".! I f .-.~_.;_, ;~:;, oil I,:, .~ Ii I:: ;1,,0'1:,. i!1 .~II . l, !l@:,\ 'J li,,~j_. ; ) ,\1 :J') r I'!J ' , '1; ::.... i" ,;,,~,i i, ' . ~ ~i" i"I': 1,4" hi', , i, < ,_,r," " ' ; " '" , ,,,'.. ", : i ") I,} ," I' j if' '. ,:}I"; I, "ii;. i} ,"1 !II}\ I: i', - ~-=~-- "" 1" :'" j, ,I "I:, " !; I'jl , I'll, 'I I I,i ';1;>-, " '" ',",I! Ii! U, 'I 'If,,"", !' '."...1,',,", '), I, I"" " I~ ',,~ '" I '. I 'I " 'i~, " , ~ : t :- >-.-..-~u"lt " , ,I_'~J' '_1 J, ':i~'I"1 ~.=. __~ ,,~ (iq "'I ' :", i, ,j ," ,S.:-~': c_,"_._, 'I,' 11~' ....,.. _'", ,[~_; i"-"''''~'J_____.:,..",_""_.~"".~.."_".~,, i'V ," '.1 .' ,,'. .. _" 'i'~".i . i ,.,.i'" i.. _ "" ' '-'. " , co, , ,. ,." , , . eil.i.' _ ......____ 1'-, 'ii .;'I! , I, ': ''''', 'I " , ""...",." -'''i~';:'',.._.c, i~_. 1,- ''', ,I" '.i, ";""""--"_i"",V"', '. J ~\,t_ r--- f!(,;,lj 1/ I'I!!! if ~I i"li" ;~di! \':::;!;.1 ,:--'-"_____._{ lih!;:;i'iS ;'" I I' 'f 1 1) "I , L ..... ~~~, L flU);' f'-' I .. 1"1" :'i_O<- 1"(:;.. -',,",", \'Y" ~J I11I I' III'--~l___ I .:!.- ~~I_"'~ 1,'~li I '", !,";';/jI!.'.';._".~I\ 1'""'\... ;''''''''" '.., (,,,:' i ,'!, 'J~". """ "'~'" . "", f-"'~ "'.I';:h'~. "~Ii :,111..1;:\"---::;' IU'f /,1:;:1 i-! OJllP'c,:'Cc""'; )""J33lUS .1-1.1 I" 7'1, ~L_',: C't) '~,:;;:.,:,,, \0'" I', -' '''~", _ '~ \"'fL, [', ::! fi, '''ji':)Cr -'--------f'''---''''-/Piil il<"lj\' "-'----""'''' \ " .Ii /1 I~J --....., [/----- -----::.'~__~ ---/....1-,= .t""~:Jr" ~___"__ ---.-.-----.~J;{,'.'.!jif"..."'.,~, I I ~" --."- -:,;::-,'"" -'"""- b~-=,.._ ~i~ ,I 1 ' .. It IU -~ /'/ - -~ ,~_ _::: It'I I, J ") ! f [JI@tiJP"'7-- ' , . ", /-" { II r "'j , 'I I-~-I I" f'" -,,'" " '1 ~ _ .~ ii, T l\ .,' I" ) //,' - i'lll' N -....-:.---- -- ' I -,'''f ,il, ~! ~_"i' il 11.../ , } _ -'.'J,'._',,~ t, N ~'"\ . i' \ f HI 1 r#! tH'" 'qJ J I, D '---. I _ __ ,'I., 1.\ I / ,,,f / '_/ , 'I~I \ ~ 1 f r'f'(j-----.... ".' ;;:(7. [I [J "',~,,, :' ,'i.! /"J' " iJ: ,I ,; ,-, l,iI-;?ii;~~--I,~~~ ~!, ,r" ,t.t.:'1 I'.'t!-.[ t ~ 'I ~~(f)d" 'I, "...1" : I'", I '! :"I'IIII!V1, 1"',li !i);i/ . ~-,Jr{:+:, I"fjif" "~~G.~,~,- .,.",t"I' ~ li-~'-j-II'-rJi "i ","_' 1"I,ii'iJ'il'.~lii,' 11-!'\'~-'~ '-', Te, i,."'~_< -, ..a.... 'I '''- 'l~i~I':'1 f r, " i'i!",',':>,p ! .f c, 1"1 J,,_II-_-=-'1 <-;7 I"" ( -!J 'if, , j , 'JJ II ,',I I ! :"lli!"~_'-'f( " ., "j I t I '1/ 'j ... I ' "V , i "', " . : ", '" "",",,', i M,., ,,' , , " "" _ '_.'.., _" ,i _ , " , , "" . .. i i ,,~/(! I' .~/{ ({,r-\/ u ' p ,-- \ ''''" 'j I' iii" "~" !lill"'r, " ' '/"";' I" 0::1./111 i .{: fI"};', I, ' ,.,,, ,",:',; "'-'''''_., dl"I',,""!/i' '1.1 ! 1>..II! "'- ".",'1 " .\ ~-'. 1~'IIl- ,. -, -}....,"..'.I~,LJj !' ' If f , 1,;",; i"'~.-"-""',,'''''. ':',~' ':!CI/ J f.L , I' J ,~;! I 'I )' I I _ 'H ,~ I ii, " ",I ",I iI!'_"" ,', ,II,'."""" ,: t--I,' J ';') f ~ -'''Wi i $",:Vi J1 ,,; .1 ,I! flu I.! ;."',:'1,'1'1.,_" "1 . I "} ", , " ,- "I J{(,~'}i II~'~' r.,,-,. ,i" I.' ,;._ f l II " , ", "~I ," , , -'-, !::! i ",p i ' "'-"'oj I ' ,I I: "j r; ""'~J' ,. I / f ii ! /-;,) i:i F'---I;i.,-~.I_" I 1'-1, , r _ 'I" : !~"'II Iii 1 t' ""___'" "'i,' W fil-;:o.. ~ ,; ,'i' II ,.' i!111' ,ii", f.j J '-H'! I >Nr): il""!! I il Ii /'j l _,.~! ~!.~1~'i!iitl.S":~~(~~ li-/} "i,:'i, r .,. _Ii " , I.' ., 'r' !,'" Ci-, , i-~, , " "';1,' J: ,~i /J !!JI{1 h.';I,1 ! j '{' (\ ii""I/ . Ill. u] II iC'J 'j", I} 'I "("11 f..- 'r f f'i .' ~"I ::-', , '~ ~ . ',"-. 'I 'I II, I ,.., _, r co, .... ' I I "., ii' "I { 'I!, , " 'oq, I -e- I 1, 'I 'I T ' II li~':::~----! L_ i. lt4: ,._ 1,--'\ Ili..f')I" .Jili)','i!:,!; IL '!I. 11'1"--";" Jliil """",' d',", ,U,lIn,1 " ""'P,'I II"b__~~ 1'_1 '."< i/II It', {I i I /l/il iiill!1 I a: 't'. '.':::::::::.' " "1"01: ! ill.------.:--:~.:~: "'C::'-_'o:-_;~'\___I_-' jN~"l:-::"'::_-:: :,/ ! ,,, l f1~'I~ 'Ii N I I ." Ii 11 ,I" '''I ) c.___J. ," ,!;I ,'/, If ,-- I' I , 'f"'" ",I;.."....J " ,'"' i.' I' 1<11' I J H i-'.,...c~"',,,,-,,-_=~,,i.:'_: -~~;:O::!.!r " l' /f\\ I I --.",\ .----.-~-. 'I 0 {, I if '-'f1t!T ' , I ' , i 11f"; I'; I I[ Ii' '1.IIii;"! ",/ .;,,;\: !i,i";"'i",,,,~.,\,, .,,,]1 ;1; ~)!I ,1 L., a: Ii f'l !.:;~I jJ'J ,':'io 1\ " ',," I"~ - 1/- I ':,1 "~', ,.,~.., . i,! , I'i Iii! ,,\ , ,- " I; ,), " ,'~ Ii t' is': ,'.til'l!! I , -'"cc- , " '! II! ']I II'! I! X;'!';'I,JI ;:_ljll'(" 'III ,;; I L.. "<------",,,,,_ -"'"..I,;} il!....,1 tI,;, 'I .( i il ili!JI~:f;:!-;i :\ ' l___ -. /i Ii 1~I~i"~:'7~-1-(I:"t~~:. i-; :: ;I@ L'~"!I fiN/Ii 'I ! ,\ l' '-._~ 1 ,~-~- . l ' ", "" , "'( ~. I. ,.., I -".-1--,-_-::._:_- ~_IJ 1', I,;, ,J ,) "r -~ ~ -,~ f'I,~_, 'I I' ~-,I -,1 - J! 1,; -I' '-, I ,f ,"/ _ ,.f ':\i';! I' :l ""/ i /' , . , 'I ",' "I . I -II - 1.""/' '['! I, , : '". I, ", , 'I 'f ,.., Ie', " 'I I ! i{ {i,1< , :' , ) ~ ,-. ~ - -~i7:'; ~ ~1; 1,1 \~ ~I' 'L :/,'""', , \ i J Iii L Iii ~ fJ r"I" J, : IiI IF" 'r!: i~(__:j t I-It> , ,-! iJ I;:!' Ii I '- - f P:.I, ;, , J I ; II' I I ,,,," 11 ! { " ',' ", ',' _ i ", '" ",.I!, . '~--" -'-H "-..--,,,.-,,,---..:c'_, !-"J"-~ i{,'~--" J".:J "k"J '.Jiili'! _ 'if ", 'II!II' fl~::'ic~LJl'ti;~>t~f~~:it1r:c.j~'''t~;::I~~}1''l~~;~.<;:~i;:;!Jjb LL~,._ii I Ii}' I... ,j '" 1"[:;,"-;:'.---.1' I I -.' ,/ )~j j,l \, I; I ' , 1<" I r-- --~._.,.,_., , '/i'\ I Ii 'I' L)L"l2';;;5,;;JLi_ ff1 ii ,~ I- 00 CJo: W~ OW ZO cCl- WeI: u.0 OQ. 1-0 o:UJ O!!: Q.Z ~ c,.. 1\J ,.I ,I, ' " ",-, .--~'-T"""- Q. cC z:s Oz 000 z- WI- 1-< )(0 wO ..J I-::I: WQ. W< a: a: I-CJ (/)0 . I- ~O ::I: a... 1111: ! ~I .,.1 D~ i _I "'Ii r-. 0) 0) ... >- a: < ::> z < ~ ... ('I) ~ "'" I C) ; , "_:. .,,-, '~ j I . . l . . I it . I . I I . . I: I- I- FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT MIDBAYFRONT LCP RESUBMITTAL NO.8 AMENDMENT Prepared by: Keller Environmental Associates, Inc. 1727 Fifth Avenue San Diego, California 92101 Juiy 1991 VOLUME II < - ~~~ ~ , ---- --- ------ ~ ~._----- -- - ---- CllY OF CHULA VISTA Environmental Impact Report 0}-7'- -'T'"---''~''''' In -& .:. 184.7" 17.8 17.6 .J 31.0 FE Street c,:: ~ :...- 11.6' ::;.; 10.1 '" , ,.-...; , 4.8: ,. co ;~ c::: "to co =<. 4.9 8.3 F Street I', 5.9 r l 'ti r ,. \, ii:i G Street "- co co " I~ i' ! i. ,. 11.8 27.5 H Slreet , i , " ~ ~ I1l I Street c:: In 't:: .:. I1l ~ 5.7 14.8 18.7 J Street 'I 161.8 ! I Figure .3- XXI 2000 Projected ADT (1000's) at Bayfront Buildout Alternative q .;J-77 jhk 6< ..~ .- Itl -& ..:. 187.7' 19.3 18.7' 8.2 23.7 33.7 E Slreet p 12.6~ ~ '" 10.5 5.8 c: 'c: os ::a 5.4 9.0: F Street 6.3 'ti '" 10 G Street '" os co I l . , [I ,,I , ~ ~ u ~l , , r ," t, r l i , I I I I I I i 11.8 27.7 H Street ~ ct os c: '<: ~ Itl ..:. I Street 5.7 15.5 19.1 J Street 164.4 I I , Figure 3- XX 2000 Projected ADT (1000's) at Bayfront Buildout Alternative 4 . 0)-7 j h k 6: "ooci..,,, - ~ , l' In ..!. 183.7 -& 17.2 4.1 21.6 33.0 E Street f- 11.3 it, 11.5 4.5 '" c: 'l:: '" :;, 3.9 9.6 F Street as 'ti 6 G Street ::... '" Ol :l il ., I' } I'! H 11.8 27.9 H Street ~ ~ '" I:: '1:: ~ In ..!. J Street 5.7 15.3 19.0 J Slreet 161.6 i I , Figure ~- XIX 2000 Projected ADT (1000's) at Bayfront Buildout Alternative 2 . '- 01- j hk &. uooci>= 14.3 16.9 24.5 8.0 13.3 21.7 FStreet 16.2 6.0 In .. ~ E 28.5 ~ l:! ~ ~ S '" " 6.2 8.0 '" ! " ~ " 27.5 S ~ ~ 11.8 35.8 ~ 35.8 H Street 31.5 ~ " ~ " 30.8 ::: 14.0 g ; . "' 1;0.7 ...... N 24.4 31.6 26.2 23.8 E Street il I J '1 Ii I,: Ii Ie , 4.5 I Street 8.0 27.5 '" ~ " 20.4 20.0 e JStreet 14.0 '" 30.2 180.0 S'lOnlement::\l TT'i\ffir: D(\l~ Amd""is IRK & Associates Figure 3~XVIII PROJECTED AnT (IN THOUSANDS) AT BAYFRONT BUILDOUT NO BUILD/ALTERNATIVE 1 YEAR 2000 01 -go - 16.0 29.7 206.8 .A- N , , II i I :I I 16.9 25.1 34.5 28.5 20.4 E Street 17.4 25.5 11.0 16.8 24.7 F Street 18.2 8.0 '" .. 1: ;;; 29.0 'E g: ~ ~ S " " 6.2 8.0 !Xl , .. " t: g: '" 28.0 l' ~ " 11.8 36.8 ~ 36.8 32.5 ~ HStreet ~ ~ " .~ " :::; 31.3 4.5 I Street 8.0 28.0 >., ~ " 17.4 22.4 22.0 e 15.0 !Xl J Street 30.7 192_2 Sll1"'olemrnf::\l Tftl.ffic D~f~ ,An~lvc:.i~ JRK & Associates Figure 3-XVII PROJECTED ADT (IN THOUSANDS) AT BAYFRONT BUlLDOUT PROPOSED PROJECT YEAR :!OOO 01-11 , A- I; i< \. ~. N u; F 149.0 h 23.2 ~. .: 39.7 E Street 24.2 i:. 10.1 (:' :1: "':' 33.6 , c ) 1 ::> c: t c ~ 22.5 9.8 8.0 c: 3: " '8 f 4.2 6.3 ~ 10.3 F Street 11.2 I , 4.5 '" I c iii 26.5 " 'E n; c > :E c "5 5.2 G Slreet 6.5 0 CD ;;- CD c ::> c: 25.5 c ~ <( c: >- " 3: 3: " " '8 " 0 30.6 0 cD H Street ~ 30.6 29.5 I >- I " ] n; c. " I .5 n; :::: I ] I 10.0 I i I ! --~._.... 28.8 4.0 I Street 7.5 26.5 16.9 J Slreet 12.0 16.9 141.0 28.2\ Sunnkmrnl:'\l Tl.1.ffic D:ll\'\ An:'llvc::ic:: lHK & Associolc, AVERAGE DAILY TRAFFIC VOLUME (IN THOUSANDS) EXISTING YEAR 1990 07- 6~ Figure 3-XV REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM TITLE: SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUNO: Item .3 Meeting Date 06/24/97 PUBLIC HEARING: PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA HEALTH AND SAFETY SECTION 33431 REGARDING THE SALE OF SPACE NUMBER 152 AT ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK RESOLUTION /:rclr APPROVING THE SALE OF SPACE NUMBER 152AT ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK AND AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE A PURCHASE AGREEMENT C~_", D.."~ootmre"" C(\~ ' Executive Director .jC\ ~6ci~ \ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_ Noll) In November 1987, Orange Tree Mobilehome Park converted to resident ownership. The Agency assisted the residents in purchasing their park with a $600,000 acquisition loan which was converted to loans for lower income residents to help them purchase their spaces. At that time, 29 residents did not wish to purchase their space, and the Agency agreed to purchase these spaces after the newly. formed homeowner's association was unable to secure financing to purchase these unsold spaces. The residents who did not purchase their space remained as renters. The Agency's desire is to sell these spaces as new home buyers move into the park. The Agency currently owns 17 spaces, having sold 12 spaces. RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency conduct a public hearing, consider testimony, and adopt the resolution approving the sale of Space 152 at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park at 521 Orange Avenue for $22,500. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: This is a request to authorize the sale of a vacant parcel known as space 152 at Orange Tree Mobile home Park. In this case, space number 152 was a rental space owned by the City and the tenants have moved to another location. On April 6, 1996 the Redevelopment Agency approved selling the coach, thereby leaving the space vacant. The Community Development Department currently has a buyer interested in purchasing the vacant property. The value of the property has been appraised at $25,000 and the buyers have offered to purchase the lot for $22,500. The lot is being sold for its approximate fair market value. Staff recommends accepting the offer since the property has been vacant for over one year and have not received any other offers to purchase the lot. ..3-1 "T,........-.. Page 2. Item .J.... Meeting Date 06/24/97 recommends accepting the offer since the property has been vacant for over one year and have not received any other offers to purchase the lot. Currently the buyers are attempting to sell their single-family home and they are proposing to pay the City $10,000 down on the lot with the balance of $12,500 plus 7% simple interest due and payable to the City upon sale of their current residence. The time period of the loan is not to exceed eighteen months. Also, the buyers will place a $500 good faith deposit into escrow to purchase the lot. The terms of the Purchase Contract are as follows: · The Buyer agrees to pay $10,000 in cash for the down payment. . Commencing 30 days after the close of escrow on Space 152, Buyer agrees to pay Seller $200 per month until (1) the Buyer's current single-family residence has been sold and balance due paid to the City; or (2) the full $12,500, plus interest, has been paid on or before January 15, 1999. · City to pay City's portion of the closing costs and Buyer to pay Buyer's portion of closing costs on Space 152. If approved, the Community Oevelopment Oirector will be authorized to execute the purchase contract and loan documents for space number 152 in forms approved by the City Attorney. FISCAL IMPACT: The down payment of $10,000 will be deposited into into the Agency's low and Moderate Income Housing Set-Aside Fund. The balance of $12,500 plus accrued interest will be deposited into the low and Moderate Income Housing Set-Aside Fund when the loan has been paid in full. Staff costs are minimal and budgeted in the low-Mod Housing Fund. {JFl H:\HOMEICOMMDEV\STAFF.REPID6-24.97\OTMHP152.113 [June 18, 1997 (3:26pm)] .3-~ 1'" RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE SALE OF SPACE NUMBER 152 AT ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK AND AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE A PURCHASE AGREEMENT WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency currently owns mobilehome spaces at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park located at 521 Orange Avenue, Chula Vista; and, WHEREAS, these spaces are leased to tenants on a month-to-month basis; and, WHEREAS, space 152 is a vacant parcel of land and the City wishes to sell the Agency-owned property at this park; and, WHEREAS, Article 11, Section 33431 of the California Community Redevelopment Law requires that a Public Hearing be held for any sale or lease of Agency-owned property without competitive bidding; and, WHEREAS, said Public Hearing has been conducted pursuant to Section 33431 for the sale of the vacant parcel know as space number 152 in the Orange Tree Mobilehome Park. WHEREAS, the property is being sold for its approximate fair market value. NOW THEREFORE, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby find, order, detennine and resolve to approve the subject sale of the vacant parcel know as space number 152 in Orange Tree Mobilehome Park and authorizes the Community Development Director to execute a purchase agreement, fmancing documents, and related documents on the terms and conditions presented, in final forms approved by the Agency Attorney. PRESENTED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Ck~~ ~--~.~ , ~ ~ --:f">'~ '" --..~.. .~..........., """_~...I ~_"""' (John Kaheny /' ( \ '-\ .~ ~9~neral'~ '-----' Chris Salomone, Executive Secretary and Community Development Director [A:\OTMHP152.RES] J-.3 'T' REAL ESTATE PURCHASE CONTRACT AND RECEIPT FOR DOWN PAYMENT This is more than a receipt for money. It is intended to be and is a legally binding contract. READ IT CAREFULLY CITY OF CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT Chula Vista, California , 1997 WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the city of Chula vista is the owner of Space 152 in the Orange Tree Mobilehome Park and wishes to sell it; and WHEREAS, (name) wishes to buy the real property but does not presently have the full sum with which to purchase the property outright and wishes to have the Redevelopment Agency assipt with purchase terms to make the sale possible at this time; and WHEREAS, in response to such request, the Redevelopment Agency agrees to assist in the financing terms for such purchase. NOW, THEREFORE, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula vista ("Seller") and (name of buyers) (collectively "Buyer") agree as follows: 1. The real property which is the subject of this agreement (hereinafter referred to as "Space 152")is commonly known as Space 152 at the orange Tree Mobilehome Park, 521 Orange Avenue, located in the City of Chula vista, County of San Diego, California, which space 152 is more particularly described as follows: SEE ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPTION 2. Seller will sell and Buyer will purchase Space 152 for the sales price of $22,500 as set forth below. 3. Buyer agrees to pay to Seller $10,000 (TEN THOUSAND DOLLARS) cash as and for Initial Payment towards the purchase of Space 152 leaving a balance of $12,500 (TWELVE THOUSAND FIVE HUNDRED DOLLARS) due and owing Seller. 4. Pursuant to the terms of a promissory note secured by deed of trust to be executed concurrently herewith, Buyer agrees to pay to Seller the balance of $12,500 with interest thereon at the annual rate of 7% ("Balance Due"); commencing 30 days after close of escrow on Space 152, Buyer shall pay to Seller the sum of $200.00, and each and every month thereafter, Buyer shall pay Seller the sum of $200.00 until the earlier to occur of (a) Buyer's close of escrow on that real property commonly known as 310 East 1 J -<I "'?'..-".---- Moss street, Chula Vista, CA 91911; or (b) January 15, 1999 at which point all outstanding amounts owing of the balance due shall be fully due and payable. 5. Seller agrees to convey to the Buyer fee simple title to Space 152 and shall execute for conveyance at close of escrow a grant deed to Buyer for Space 152. 6. Seller shall pay realtor's fees to Americana Realty Mortgage in connection with this transaction. The amount of the fees to be paid is $1,125 (5% of the sales price). 7. Buyer does intend to occupy subject property as Buyer's primary residence. 8. Buyer and Seller agree that Spring Mountain Escrow shall be the escrow agency for the sale closing and that Buyer and Seller shall each pay one-half of all such escrow fees. Upon opening escrow, Buyer shall deposit $500 to escrow. Buyer and Sellgr shall deliver signed instructions to Spring Mountain Escrow within 7 days from Seller's execution of this agreement, which instructions shall provide for closing within 30 days from Seller's execution of this agreement. By close of escrow, Buyer shall have deposited $9500 to escrow as and for the Initial Payment to be paid Seller plus those funds necessary for fees described herein. Seller shall at its own expense, obtain a standard title report as to Space 152 prior to close of escrow. 9. If the sale is not completed due to fault of Buyer, Buyer shall be responsible for all escrow or related fees. 10. Approval of this sale shall be contingent upon: a.) final approval of the Redevelopment Agency of the city of Chula vista; b.) Buyer's execution of a Trust Deed which is to be recorded as a lien against Space 152 as security for performance of this agreement. 11. Buyer, by execution of this agreement, acknowledges that Buyer has obtained and has possession of a copy of the Declarations, of Covenants, Conditions, and restrictions and all amendments thereto, if any, governing Space 152, together with a copy of the By-Laws of the Orange Tree Homeowners Association. 12. Buyer and Seller acknowledge receipt of a copy of this entire agreement. 13. This agreement constitutes the entire agreement between the parties. Any amendments to this agreement shall be in writing and shall be signed by both parties. 2 ...J-S' 'T' 14. If a lawsuit the prevailing party attorney's fees. is filed in connection with this agreement, shall be entitled to recover reasonable IN WITNESS Agreement to be forth. WHEREOF, the parties hereto have caused this executed the day and year first hereinabove set REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA By: Buyer Buyer Attach Notary c: \Agllt\Space152 3 J-f. ..,.. . Order Np: 6829468 05 EXHIBIT "A" DESCRIPTION A CONDOMINIUM COMPRISED OF: PARCEL 1: AN UNDIVIDED 1/154TH INTEREST IN AND TO LOTS 1 AND 2 OF CHULA VISTA TRACT NO. 87-5 (ORANGE TREE MOBILE HOME PARK), CITY OF CHULA VISTA, COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ACCORDING TO MAP THEREOF NO. 11835, FILED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAN DIEGO COUNTY, JUNE 9, 1987. EXCEPTING THEREFROM THE FOLLOWING: (A) ALL UNITS AS SHOWN UPON THE CONDOMINIUM PLAN OF ORANGE TREE MOBILE HOME PARK, RECORDED JULY 27, 1987 AS FILE NO. 87-420716 OFFICIAL RECORDS. (B) THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO POSSESSION OF THOSE PORTIONS DESIGNATED AS EXCLUSIVE USE AREAS ON THE ABOVE REFERENCED CONDOMINIUM PLAN. PARCEL 2: UNIT S-145 AS SHOWN AND DEFINED ON THE CONDOMINIUM PLAN REFERRED TO ABOVE. PARCEL 3: THE EXCLUSIVE RIGHT TO POSSESSION OF THOSE PORTIONS OF LOTS 1 AND 2 DESCRIBED IN PARCEL 1 ABOVE, DESIGNATED AS EXCLUSIVE USE AREAS ON THE CONDOMINIUM PLAN REFERRED TO ABOVE AS APPURTENANT TO PARCELS 1 AND 2 ABOVE DESCRIBED. EXCEPTING THEREFROM ANY PERSONAL PROPERTY, IF ANY, LOCATED WITHIN PARCEL 2 ABOVE DESCRIBED. ..1-1 1 ~" ~aY-~9-97 01:03A Josef & Lenore Citron 619 223-3313 P.02 fJ3road'llJay 13usiness1fomes A J............ EnlBrprises Project Established 1972 Josef & Lenore Citron OWnerB, General Partners May 27,1997 Mr. Chris Salomone, Director Community DevelopmentlRedevelopment Agencies City ofChula Vis1a By: Facsimile Re: Our meeting on the Broadway BusinessHomes Dear Chris: In discussing with you the problems that have plagued the BusinessHomes Village project, we told you that we were again working to finalize construction financing for the project, this time through local banking sources. We also informed you that we were going to ask that the City consider joining with us in this effort. This would include revisiting the project agreements between the City and the Broadway BusinessHomes Village, L.P. in the spirit of clearing away some obstacles left by individuals formerly employed by the City. Weare dedicated to completing what we started in doing this project, and working in this manner, as you suggested, would be preferable to other, more costly and, perhaps, less positive ways. As stated in our last letter. (of May 8), we have asked our present potential lender look at the documents and tell us what they will need in order to proceed. The problem that surfaced first concerns the numbers, (costs). We've discussed how it was in March of 1996, that Bruce Boogaard was bragging to the assembled Port Commissioners about how he had "killed" our project. Over 8 V:. months has elapsed since our last encounter with the Council, as then still led by the former City Attorney, and at which time financing YiiS available for the project. During this time the General Contractor's construction cost of the project has risen by $318,857.00 and the Partnership's carry cost through this period has been an additional $89,469.00, a total of $408,327.00 or $11,342.00 per unit. Because of bank's loan to cost regulations, this calls for an investment of well over a million dollars on our, and our investor's, part. Because of attendant publicity about our struggles with the City on this project, we'd be hard pressed to find more investors willing to put their money into this project, and we have every loose cent of oUT own tied up in our work on the two Chula Vista projects. 4000 Coronado Bay Road ftl Coronado, CA 92118 . (819) 424-44n FAX 423-0814 -l\IaY-29-97 01:03A Josef & Lenore Citron 619 223-3313 P.03 Chris Salomone Broadway BusinessHomes Village Project: May 27, 1997 Page 2 of2 We have cut the profit fuctor for the entire project by more than one.haI( leaving just enough, hopefully, to be able to return our Limited Partner's investment with a bit of profit, which they richly deserve for their forbearance alone. We have determined that this must be done, even though it retains no profitability for the General Partner. But in order to do even that, at this point, we will need for the City to agree to carry back all the fees, not just on the first six units. As a help in working this out, we could perhaps start by expanding the existing agreement to include the first two buildings, -fourteen units in alL We might stage the agreement so that as the early sales were made and an agreed-upon point was reached, the fee agreement would then roll over into the next starts. Let us suggest that we agree that after at least 50% of the first group were sold, the agreement would be extended to the next two bwldings, then in similar manner, to the last two. The other items that can make this "Redevelopment" project work, are the City's extending to the project a complete waiver on at least 'h of all fees, and carrying all of the remediation costs until they have been collected from Fuller. That is the way this deal should have been structured from the beginning. These are not 'favors' we are asking of the City. Chris, as you know, we started this project in 1991 as a combination redevelopment/affordable housing project, with environmentally attractive aspects. I won't go into the whole story again here, but you know that we can amply demonstrate that we, and the project, have been shabbily treated As much as you and other individuals have done for the project, it was far from enough to compensate what others did against it -unreasonably and unjustly. Now is the time to rectify this. Flagship Bank is now waiting for the final numbers from us on the first two buildings, 14 units, and it will be necessary to work these things out before we can get under way. Please let us know how you wish to proceed. ,~/~ . 'Josef A. Lenore S. Citron JAC:ja Cc: Dale Reed, Flagship Bank; Gaye Lang; Sandy Dodge; Peter Kendall, Craige citroll, MMX1~lIHIed.cfOC Jun-12-97 10:45A Josef & Lenore Citron 619 223-3313 P.02 $roadway 'l3usiness!Jlomes A JoeLen EnlBrprl... Project Establlahed 1972 Josef & Lenore Citron owner.. Genera' Partners June 12, 1997 Mr. Chris Salomone, Director Community DevelopmentlRedeveJopment Agencies City ofChula Vista By: Facsimile Re: Broadway BusinessHomes Village Dear Chris: In phone conversation with you yesterday on the above.captioned subject, as 1 understood you, you requested that I repeat the information to you in my letter of May 27th in the form of a direct request fur action by the City. As I had said, we have at this time a lender prepared to take final action to prepare to fund the construction money for us to build the project. The lender is the Flagship Bank which is located in Kearney Mesa at 4493 Ruffin Road, San Diego, 92123, and we are dealing with Mr. Dale Reed, Vice President of their Major Loan department; his phone number is 292-9100, extension 140. They will first fund buildings I and 2, consisting of 14 of the 36 total units. We all agree that funding in phases is the prudent thing to do, but it also adds an additional burden on phase one of the project, requiring much of the off-site work be front-loaded on this phase. We still get at least a call a week from potential interested buyers and feel that once we physically get the project underway we remain confident of being able to sell the 36 units. We will not again go through the litany of problems generated for this project by the malfeasance of a former City official determined to kill it, but suffice it to say that these actions now require ameliorative action by the City to allow the project to live. We will list herewith the required actions that will take the project out of intensive care and allow us together to give it a chance for a normal, suocessfullife. We can break this down to two principal areas. One is cost, the other restrictive covenants. The cost factor has been aggravated by the extended passage of time. the restrictive covenants trouble us and a lender because of concern they will hinder closing sales, and could later come to haunt us. 4000 CoroMdo Bay Road etJ Coronado, CA 82118 . (818) 424-1474 FAX 423-0884 , Jun-12-97 10:45A Josef & Lenore Citron 619 223-3313 P.O eMs Salomone Broadway BusinessHomes Village Project June 12, 1997 Page 2 012 The cost factor is critical, as we are down to less than break-even on our profit margin, and hope only for a return on our investors money, with nothing for us but to be able to hold our heads up in the community: we have never bad a project that failed in over 25 years in business. Just to have sufficient funds to be able to close the construction loan to build the project, we require the following: 1. Extend the City's agreement to carry back fees on the first six units, to cover all 36 units. 2. Reliefby the project from fees such as the Park Acquisition and Development fee, and the residential portion of the Development Impact Fee and relief from full charges for both residential and commercial uses in some categories. 3. The City carry the soil remediation costs until it collects from Fuller Ford or, as a. compromise, interpret DDA Section 3.2 as limiting our share of the total remediation costs carry to $35,000, payable on recordation of this construction loan. 4. Acceptance by staff of OUT schedule of development as per Section 2.3 of the DDA: first two buildings, 14 units, as phase I, the balance as to he approved by the lender, (despite any terms of the DDA Section 2.4 (d) that may he to the contrary). 5. Interpretation of the DDA as acceptable to Flagship Bank, or the City's willingness to change it, especially as concerns the Agency's rights of acquisition with discount or recourse of the loan, and the right of reverter in the event of default, (which last has been deemed unacceptable as written, by all lenders we've dealt with). 6. Direction to the City Attorney's office to provide us at this time with any and all documents requiring lender's approval and/or OUT signature. 7. Certification by the Agency of Flagship Bank's qualification under Section 2.4 of the DDA. The bank will be ready to proceed by next week. Can we please have this settled by then. ~/~ J f A. Citron Lenore S. Citron JAC:ja Cc: Dale Reed, Flagship Bank; Gay!! Lange; Sandy Dodge; Peter Kendall, Craige Citron, NMX1~~dclc