The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRDA Packet 1996/07/16 Tuesday, July Iii, 1996 Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. Public Services Building (immediately following the City Council meeting) Joint Meeting of the Redevelopment Agencv/Citv Council of the Citv of Chula Vista CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: Agency/Council Members Alevy -, Moot -' Padilla_, Rindone -' and Chair/Mayor Horton - 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 28, 1996 and June 18, 1996 3. WRITfEN COMMUNICATIONS: CONSENT CALENDAR (Item 4) The staff recommendations regarding the following items listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by the Agency by one motion without discussion unless an Agency, a member of the public or City staff requests that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items, please fill out a "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency or the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak in favor of the staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the staff recommendation.) Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Action Items. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business. 4. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1505 ADOPTING MITIGATED DECLARATION IS-90-20, ADDENDUM 96-14 THERETO AND THE RELATED MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM; AND APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH W.W. GRAINGER, INC. AND APPROVING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF A 17,250 SQ. FT. WHOLESALE SHOWRooM/ WAREHOUSE BUILDING AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS AT 1150 BAY BOULEVARD--Grainger plans to construct and occupy a wholesale showroom/warehouse on a site located within the boundaries of the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area and the coastal zone. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development Director) * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * "I declare un.-!er nM~ltv of neriury that 1 am emo"lo"c':'bo't'c:;¡t'c;'",,'oVstainthe 0 Commun to¡ [;e"o 0°-" ~ 0 '0' n! ~nd that 1 posted th'" Acen,:hl" , -' the P~~lic"Ser~-œ"u n ",t! I~ DATE~(z-f"1IoS;:',';E.:J~ 0 .' .- - . Agenda -2- July 16, 1996 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 Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency or the City Clerk prior to the meeting. (Complete the green form to speak infavor of the staffrecommendation; complete the pinkform to speak in opposition to the staffrecommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. 5. PUBLIC HEARING: JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO CONSIDER A LOAN FROM THE REDEVELOPMENT BROADWAY VILLAGE BUSINESS HOMES, LoP" DATED AUGUST 2, 1995-- The Disposition and Development Agreement was approved by the Agency/Council on 8/2/95 for redevelopment of the former Fuller Ford site. Due to protracted processing time and added expense, the Agency is requested to defer payment of permit fees. The Agency conceptually approved a loan for this purpose and authorized staff to negotiate specific terms. Staff recommends the Agency/Council hold the public hearing and continue to the meeting of 8/6/96 at 4:00 p.m. (Community Development Director) 6.A. PUBLIC HEARING: TO CONSIDER THE SALE OF SPACE 145 AT ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK LOCATED AT 521 ORANGE AVENUE, CHULA VISTA, CALlFORNlA--On 11/21/95, the Agency adopted Resolution 1476 authorizing the sale of Space 145 at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park. The Agency has received an offer to purchase same for its appraised value. Staff recommends the Agency hold the public hearing and approve the resolution. (Community Development Director) B. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1506 AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE A NEW PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS FOR SPACE 145 AT ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK 7.A. PUBLIC HEARING: SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUPS-96-04; REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 865 STELLA STREET; COMPOSED OF A 37 FOOT 9 INCH TALL MONOPOLE SUPPORTING SIX (6) DIRECTIONAL (PANEL) ANTENNAS AND TWO RADIO EQUIPMENT CABINETS - PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SERVICES--Pacific Bell Mobile Services is requesting permission to construct and operate a wireless communications facility. They are also applying for permission to reduce the rear yard setback and increase the height allowance for the monopole. Staff recommends the Agency hold the two public hearings and approve the resolutions. (Planning Director) B. PUBLIC HEARING: VARIANCE ZAV-96-16; REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 15 FEET TO 6 FEET AND TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT FROM 35 FEET TO 37 FEET 9 INCHES IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THE ABOVE FACILITY C. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1507 APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT ALLOWING A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 863/865 STELLA STREET D. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1508 APPROVING VARIANCES TO ALLOW A REDUCTION IN THE REAR YARD SETBACK AND AN INCREASE IN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED HEIGHT IN THE M-52 ZONE FOR A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 863/865 STELLA STREET - . Agenda -3- July 16, 1996 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 Council on such a subject, please complete the yellow "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency or City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak, please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up action. Your time is limited to three minutes per speaker. ACTION ITEMS The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by the Agency, staff, or members of the general public. The items will be considered individually by the Agency and staff recommendations may in certain cases be presented in the alternative. Those who wish to speak, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form available in the lobby and submit it to the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency or the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Public comments are limited to five minutes. 8. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1509 APPROVING A SHARED LOSS PROPOSAL ON THE AGENCY'S $16,875 LOAN (PRINCIPAL AND EQUITY SHARE) ON SPACE 71, ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK, 521 ORANGE AVENUE--The heirs of Space 71, Orange Tree Mobilehome Park want to sell the property. The Redevelopment Agency, State Department of Housing and Community Development, Orange Tree Homeowner's Association and a real estate broker have negotiated a shared loss payoff to all parties. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development Director) 9. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1510 WAIVING COMPETITIVE BIDDING REQUIREMENTS AND APPROVING A CONTRACT WITH KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, INC. FOR THE PROVISION OF CONSULTING SERVICES FOR AMENDMENT OF THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DELETE TERRlTORY--Pursuant to recent agreements with San Diego County, staff is proceeding with an amendment to the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan to delete the County Landfill site. To ensure all required reports, hearings, and Council/Agency actions take place, staff is requesting to hire Keyser Marston to review and direct staff work. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development Director) 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. Public comments are limited to five minutes per individual. OTHER BUSINESS 10. DIRECTOR'S/CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) 11. CHAIR'S/MAYOR'S REPORT(S) - Agenda -4- July 16, 1996 12. AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT The meeting will adjourn to a closed session and thence to the Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting on August 6, 1996, at 4:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council meeting, in the City Council Chambers. ..... 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 ofiJI!ill 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 iJI!ill 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. 13. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING: Anticipated litigation pursuant to Government Code Section 54956,9(B) . Chula Vista Auto Park developers South Bay Chevrolet and Fuller Ford/HondalKia v. City/Redevelopment Agency based on administrative claims filed on November 15, 1995, and subsequent requests for Preference Proceedings under the Disposition and Development Agreement. 14. REPORT OF ACTIONIS) TAKEN IN CLOSED SESSION ...... COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), request individuals who require special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service request such accommodation at least forty-eight hours in advance for meetings and five days for scheduled services and activities. Please contact the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency for specific information at 619.691.5047 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDD) at 619.585.5647. California Relay Service is also available for the hearing impaired. [C ,\ WP51 IAGENCYlAGENDAS\O7 -16-96.AGD] - . MINUTES OF A SPECIAL JOINT MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, May 28, 1996 Council Chambers 11:30 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Agency/Council Members Alevy, Padilla, Rindone, and Acting Chair/Mayor Pro Tern Moot ABSENT: Cbair/Mayor Horton ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, Director/City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, Agency/City Attorney; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk MSC (Moot/Alevy) to excuse Chair/Mayor Horton's absence due to surgery, approved 4-0-1 with Horton absent. BUSINESS 2.A. RESOLUTION 18319 AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING THE PREPARATION AND EXECUTION OF CERTAIN LEASE FINANCING DOCUMENTS, AUTHORIZING THE PREPARATION AND DISTRIBUTION OF A PRELlMlNARY OFFICIAL STATEMENT IN CONNECTION WITH THE OFFERING AND SALE OF CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION RELATING THERETO, AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CERTAIN ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO--Certificates of Participation (COPs) were issued in 1987. Staff was directed in March 1996 to determine feasibility of refunding the COPs and it appears the City/Agency would benefit by an average savings of more than $50,000 per year on annual debt service payments as a result of refunding under current market conditions through the Association of Bay Area Governments Finance Corporation. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Finance/Treasurer) B. RESOLUTION 1501 AUTHORIZING, APPROVING AND DIRECTING EXECUTION OF CERTAIN DOCUMENTS AND AUTHORIZING AND DIRECTING CERTAIN ACTIONS WITH RESPECT THERETO Robert Powell, Director of Finance, stated Council had directed him to authorize the hiring of a financial advisor and to study the feasibility of refinancing the 1987 Series B Certificates of Participation the Agency issued. Staff determined there would be significant savings from a refinancing at the present time and to achieve further savings that they be issued by an existing joint power authority, Association of Bay Area Governments, which would allow Cbula Vista to join with two other cities and share the cost of issuance. That would result in the savings of $25,000 - $35,000. Member Rindone questioned how often COP's could be reissued. Mark Nortbcross, Public Finance Associates, replied the city was allowed one advance refunding over the life of the issue, if issued after 1986. It was a refunding of a pre-1986 issue, therefore the city was allowed two advance refundings. 1987 was the first advance refunding and the present action would be the second and last. The city would be allowed as many current refundings as could be done. It was anicipated that the savings would be approximately $50,000/year . RESOLUTION 18319 AND 1501 OFFERED BY MEMBER RINDONE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-0-1 with Horton absent. 02.-/ Minutes May 28, 1996 Page 2 3. REPORT AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR FISCAL YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1995-- Presented for Council/Agency information and acceptance are the Audited Financial Statements and Management Letters for the fiscal year ended 6/30/95 as prepared by the independent audit firm of Moreland & Associates. Also presented is staffs response to the Internal Control Management Letter. Staff recommends the Council/Agency accept the fiscal year 1994-95 Financial Statements, Management Letters, and staff response to the Management Letter on Internal Control. (Director of Finance) Member Rindone questioned why it took staff six months to bring the report to the Agency/Council. He noted that the date from Moreland and Associates was 12/15/95. Robert Powell, Director of Finance, responded that the statements were not received until approximately one month ago. Patricia Rives, Moreland and Associates, stated 12/15/95 was the last physical date of their field work. Due to the number of prior period adjustments it took them two months to prepare the reports. Staff then reviewed the reports and a consensus was reached with staff. Member Rindone stated the changes recommended were significant and he hoped that when there was such a concern regarding internal control that it be brought to the Agency/Council sooner. Mr. Powell stated staff had the draft internal control recommendations in November/December and began implementing many of those before the reports were issued. There were also recommendations that were not considered as material by the auditors that were directed to him that had also been implemented. Member Rindone questioned the reason for not implementing the "check log system". Mr. Powell responded that staff felt the purpose of the recommendation was to keep track of every check that was issued and that was the sole purpose for the log. Staff accomplished that purpose with the reconciliation system in place in which all checks were entered and tracked. Member Rindone questioned if there was a system for control of invoices in place. Mr. Powell replied that invoices were tracked, but he was unaware whether there was a log. Member Rindone questioned if the internal control of having someone independent to supervise journal entries had been implemented. Mr. Powell responded that had been implemented several months ago. MSC (Padilla/ Alevy) to accept the fiscal year financial statements, management letters, and staff response to the management letter on internal control. Approved 4-0-1 with Horton absent. 4.A. REPORT ON NATURE CENTER FUNDING--At its 8/15/95 meeting Council requested a report regarding alternatives other than loans from the City or Agency to fmance operation and maintenance of the Nature Center. Staff recommends the Council/Agency accept the report. (Executive Director, Bayfront Conservancy Trust) B. RESOLUTION 18321 [lJ RESCINDING COUNCIL RESOLUTION # 18188; [2J ACCEPTING A $100,000 GRANT FROM THE SAN DIEGO PORT DISTRICT'S CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT PROGRAM; [3J APPROVING THE AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA TO EXECUTE AN AGREEMENT WITH THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT; AND [4J REAPPROPRIATING $100,000 TO CIP PROJECT #GG 155 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF A CIRCULATING SEAWATER SYSTEM AT THE CHULA VISTA NATURE CENTER--At its 1/23/96 meeting the Council ;¿-;L - Minutes May 28, 1996 Page 3 approved Resolution #18188 accepting the grant and approved the Agreement which included language which Port staff initially approved but the Port's Attorney subsequently responded that language was unacceptable. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. [4/5ths Vote ReQuired! C. RESOLUTION 18322 and RESOLUTION 1502 AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR/CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE TWO AGREEMENTS WITH THE CALIFORNIA STATE COASTAL CONSERVANCY TO PROTECT THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN THE SEAWATER SYSTEM, TO PROVIDE PUBLIC ACCESS AND TO QUALIFY THE BA YFRONT CONSERVANCY TRUST FOR LIMITED PUBLIC ENTITY TORT lMMUNlTY--At its 12/5/95 meeting the Council approved a $400,000 grant from the State Coastal Conservancy for a flow-through seawater system. The Conservancy requires execution of two agreements to protect the public interest prior to release of the grant. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. RESOLUTION 18321, 18322, AND 1502 OFFERED BY MEMBER ALEVY, reading of the text was waived. Member Rindone stated he did not see any significant change recommended that would have a substantial impact on the on-going debt incurred by the BCT. He questioned if there were any other recommendations that were coming forth. Stephen Neudecker, Executive Director, responded that the development of the mid-bay front had always been the idea of funding the long term operation and maintenance of the Nature Center. He felt the report outlined several steps taken in terms of revenue generation. Discussion had been held regarding the restructuring of the board and making them a separate fund raising arm of the BCT. They were looking at all different sources of revenue generation while in the past their fund raising strategies had been on specific programs and exhibits rather than general operating support. Member Rindone questioned if operational funds were included in the grant applications if it would make the grants less competitive. Dr. Neudecker responded that with individual funders it did make a difference. Large foundation grants usually allowed overhead support. Member Rindone questioned the $46,607 debt in sewer funds. Jim Thomson, Deputy City Manager, stated when the sewer line was laid it could have been paid for out of the sewer funds without being booked as a loan. It was a legitimate use of sewer funds. It was booked as a loan with the possibility of having it repaid. Member Rindone stated the total debt without interest was over $4 million and questioned if interest charges were being calculated. Dr. Neudecker replied that all the interest charges were included, i.e. from 1988 through 1995. FY 1995/96 had not been booked. Member Padilla commended Dr. Neudecker on his efforts. Staff was working with very little until there was a mid- bayfront project. Unless the Nature Center received large foundation grants and more fee oriented presentations and programs, the onus was on the city. There was a difference between a general positive impact on the city and economic impacts on city government's budget. His concern was that there was an increasing need for city subsidy for the Center. It was important that the Agency/Council move forward with realistic discussion on the mid- bayfront project. VOTE ON RESOLUTIONS: approved 4-0-1 with Horton absent. ;<,-3 Minutes May 28, 1996 Page 4 5. RESOLUTION 1503 AUTHORIZING A WAIVER OF OUTSTANDING CONDITIONS TO CLOSE ESCROW UNDER 2.4a OF THE DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND BROADWAY VILLAGE BUSINESS HOMES, L.P., CONCERNING THE PROVISION OF EVIDENCE OF ACCEPT ABLE CONSTRUCTION FlNANCING--Slaff has made the determination that San Diego National Bank's new, conditional loan commitment letter does not meet all of the requirements of Section 2.4a of the Disposition and Development Agreement. A waiver of outstanding conditions of the DDA will be necessary in order to close escrow. Slaff recommends that the Agency adopt the resolution. (Community Development Director) Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, slated it was anticipated that escrow could close as early as Friday and the city attorney's office had indicated that there was very little risk at that point based on the letters from the banking institution and the lenders letter of eminent approval of financing. RESOLUTION 1503 OFFERED BY MEMBER PADILLA, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 4-0-1 with Horton absent. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None OTHER BUSINESS 6. DIRECTOR'S/CITY MANAGER'S REPORTIS) - None 7. CHAIR'S/MAYOR'S REPORT IS) - None 8. AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS - None AD JOURNMENT ADJOURNMENT AT 11:50 P.M. to the Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting on June 4, 1996 at 4:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council meeting, in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMCIAAE, City Clerk by: ~-t - MINUTES OF A JOINT MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, June 18, 1996 Council Chambers 10:11 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Agency/Council Members: Alevy, Moot, Rindone, and Chair/Mayor Horton ABSENT: Council member Padilla ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, Director/City Manager; Ann Moore, Interim Agency/Cily Attorney; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: May 21, 1996 MSC (Rindone/Horton) to approve the minutes of May 21, 1996 as presented, approved 4-0-1 with Padilla absent. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items pulled: none CONSENT CALENDAR OFFERED BY CHAIR/~IA YOR HORTON, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved 3-0-1-1 with Padilla absent and Rindone abstaining. 3. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None submitted. 4.A. RESOLUTION 1504 AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT OF THE EXCHANGE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT TO EXTEND THE CLOSE OF ESCROW FROM JUNE 1, 1996 TO SEPTEMBER 1, 1996 FOR THE VETERANS HOME PROJECT--On 10119/95 escrow was opened with a closing date of 12/1/95. Due to State legislation delays. escrow was extended. Due to additional time needed to complete this transaction, the exchange agreement again needs to be amended. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. B. RESOLUTION 18348 AUTHORIZING AMENDMENT OF THE EXCHANGE AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, AND SWEETWATER UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT TO EXTEND THE CLOSE OF ESCROW FROM JUNE 1, 1996 TO SEPTEMBER 1, 1996 FOR THE VETERANS HOME PROJECT . . END OF CONSENT CALENDAR' . PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES 5. PUBLIC HEARING: JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO CONSIDER A LOAN FROM THE REDEVELOPMENT BROADWAY VILLAGE BUSINESS HOMES, LoP., DATED AUGUST 2, 1995--The Disposition and Development Agreement was approved by the ~-5 - . Minutes June 18, 1996 Page 2 AgencylCouncil on 8/2/95 for redevelopment of the termer Fuller Ford site. Due to protracted processing time and added expense, the Agency is requesled to det", payment of permit fees. The Agency conceptually approved a loan for this purpose and authorized stan to negotiate specific terms. Staff recommends the Aeency and Council open the Public Hearing and conlinue the Public Hearine 10 a date and time certain. that heine Tuesday. July 16, 1996 at 6:00 o.m. immediatelv followin~ the Citv Council medine. (Community Development Director) This being the time and place as advertised, the public hearing was declared open. MSC (Horton/Alevy) to continue the public hearing to July 16, 1996, approved 4-0-1 with Padilla absent. 6. PUBLIC HEARING: JOINT PUBLIC HEARING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY TO CONSIDER CONDEMNATION OF INTEREST IN CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 9978 SQUARE FEET, LOCATED AT 40 NORTH FOURTH AVENUE (TARGET SHOPPING CENTER), CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA--As a condition to issaance of building permits for the project, the Final Environmenta Impact Report and Precise Plan required a fully signalized concentric intersection be constructed al North Fourlh Avenue and Brisbane in order to mitigate traffic impacls. The purpose of this public hearing is to determine puhlic necessity to acquire the property hy means of eminenl domain. Staff recommends the Agency/Council hold the puhic hearing and approve the resolutions. [4/5tI15 Vote Required] (Community Development Director) RESOLUTION 18253 and RESOLUTION 1493 FINDING AND DETERMINING PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR ACQUIRING AND AUTHORIZING THE CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY COMPRISED OF APPROXIMATELY 9978 SQUARE FEET LOCATED AT 40 NORTH FOURTH AVENUE, CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA AND AUTHORIZING TilE COMMENCEMENT OF CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS BY OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO ACQUIRE RIGIIT-OF-WA Y Chris Salomone, Director of Communily Development, stated the item had heen continued for tive weeks while it was determined whether the Rule of Necessity was deemed appropriate as two Memhers appeared to have contlicls of interests. With Member Padilla absent a 4/5Ih's vote could not ohtained. TheretÒre, staff recommended thai the item be continued to a special meeting on Tuesday, June 25th. A three week delay could create a construction problem. Mrs. Moore stated two Members had a contilct of inlerest and the city ohtained an FPPC ruling that one memher could participate by envoking the Rule of Necessity. However, lhere was still a need ((]f an additional Memher to be present. In order to continue lhe item to lhe 6/25/96 meding, the process described by the FPPC would have to be followed so the public hearing could be opened and continued to a specialmeding. If the Rule of Necessity was not invoked, it would automalically be continued to the next scheduled RDA medll1g which was 7/16/96. Member Moot questioned if under the Rule of Necessity hoth he and Memher Alevy would he allowed to vote on the item. Mrs. Moore felt the Rule of Necessity should be envoked as set forth hy the FPPC which stated one Memher could participate. She questioned whelher Members Alevy and Moot agreed to the application of the Rule of Necessity with respect to their participation in the decision. Members Alevy and Moot stated lhey agreed. Mrs. Moore stated the city clerk would toss a coin. Memher Alevy would call, if Memher Alevy correctly called the coin toss he would participalale, if he incorrectly called the coin toss Member Moot would he required to participate. She stated it was for all purposes regarding he decision. Member Alevy called heads. City Clerk Aulhelet tlipped lhe coin which landed heads. Member Moot lelt the dais. :¿~h Minutes June 18, 1996 Page 3 Mrs. Moore read the following into the record, "Member Scott Akvy wa, employed by Nelson Communications Group. Nelson Group had been, and was expected to be in the future, under contract with Gatlin to provide governmental relations consulting services !Ór lhe benefit of Gatlin's development projects. Although Nelson Group had provided no services in connection with Gatlin's project within the city. Nelson Group had received or may reasonably be expected to receive in excess of $10,000 of payments from Gatlin Development Company in consideration of such services. Nelson Group had also been under contract with WaMart Stores, Inc., the primary owner/operator of lhe shopping center. Under those circumstances Member Akvy may have a conflict of inlerest that would usually preclude his participation in any actiun with respect to tbe resolution." MSC (Rindone/Horton) to continue the item to a special medin( of the RDA on 6/25/96, approved 3-0-1-1 with Padilla absent and Moot abstninin(. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None ACTION ITEMS None Submitted. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR Items pulled: none. The minutes will reneet the published agenda order. OTHER BUSINESS 7. DIRECTOR'S/CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) - None 8. CHAIR'S/MA YOR'S REPORTfS) - None 9. AGENCY/COUNC£L MEMBER COMMENTS - None ADIOURNMENT ADJOURNMENT AT 10: 14 P.M. to a Joint Regular Redevelopment Agency/City Council Meeting on July 16, 1996 at 6:00 p.m., immedialely tÓllowing the City Council meeting, in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, by: ~,V~~~:~T ~~C/ AAE, City Clerk Vicki C. SOÙeflluist, CM puty Cily Cerk J.~7 - . REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT Item~ Meeting Date 07/16/96 ITEM TITLE: AGENCY RESOLUTION /50.5 Adopting Mitigated Declaration 15-90-20, Addendum 96-14 thereto and the related Mitigation Monitoring Program; and approving and authorizing the execution of an Owner Participation Agreement with W.W. Grainger, Inc. and approving the proposed development of a 17,250 sq. Ft. wholesale showroom/warehouse building and related improvements at 1150 Bay Boulevard SUBMmED By, Co~""" D~'opm"," o,,~ <:, . REVIEWED BY: Executive DirectorJ~ ~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes- No.lÙ ..------; BACKGROUND: WOW. Grainger, Inc., is currentl asing a building in the Otay Valley Road project area. The company recently purchased a vacant 3.8 acre parcel located on the northwest corner of Palomar and Bay Boulevard (1150 Bay Boulevard) just south of the Bayside Business Park. The proposed site is located within the boundaries of the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area and is also located within the City's coastal zone. Grainger plans to construct and occupy a new 17,250 sq. ft. wholesale showroom/warehouse building on the site upon the termination of their current lease. The company is a contractor's warehouse that sells mechanical/construction supplies and equipment to construction contractors. RECOMMENDATION: It is recommended that the Agency Board approve the resolution adopting Mitigated Declaration 15-90-20, Addendum 96-14 thereto and the related Mitigation Monitoring Program; and approving and authorizing the execution of an Owner Participation Agreement with wow. Grainger, Inc. and approving the proposed development of a 17,250 sq. Ft. wholesale showroom/warehouse building and related improvements at 1150 Bay Boulevard BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Design Review Committee (DRC) reviewed and unanimously approved, with conditions, the site plan and architecture for the project on January 8, 1996. (DRC's letter approval is provided as Attachment 4) Since the project does not require a discretionary land-use approval, the project was not required to be presented to the Southwest Project Area Committee for their review. DISCUSSION: Proposed Project Included as Attachment 1 is the proposed site plan and building elevations for the project. Currently, it is contemplated that the project will consist of a 17,250 sq. ft. wholesale showroom/warehouse building oriented toward the southeasterly corner of the site. The project has two access driveways from Bay Boulevard and 46 parking spaces. Grainger indicates that there are currently no plans for future expansion as provided in the site plan. Typically, the company tends to purchase more property than is immediately required in order to have the ability to expand in the future depending on market conditions. 1/ - J - . 4- Page 2, Item - Meeting Date 07/16/96 However, in order to mitigate the potential eyesore of an open field, the project was conditioned in the design review process to irrigate and landscape the balance of the site (see attachment 4). The "extra" landscaping is proposed since the entire site has previously been graded (thus no natural or sensitive habitat is present) and is overgrown with weeds. In the event that future expansion does occur, Grainger has preliminarily planned up to another 37,750 sq. ft. of building space along with an additional 90 parking spaces and the movement of the northerly driveway entrance to the northeast corner of the site. Environmental Review The Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial Study for the subject project and issued a Mitigated Negative Declaration for public review in November and December 1990, and also prepared a Mitigation Monitoring Program. No project development has occurred on the site since that time. The subject project proposes minor revisions to the project described in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. For that reason and for purposes of determining if environmental conditions have not changed substantially since the time of preparation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, an Addendum to the Mitigated Negative Declaration has been issued. No additional environmental review is required and all requirements of CEQA have been satisfied. Owner Participation Agreement Attachment 3 to this report is the proposed Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) with W. W. Grainger, Inc. The CPA has been approved by the corporate real estate division in Skokie, Illinois and contains the basic language of standard CPA's executed by the Agency in the Southwest Project and the other respective project areas. The agreement will be recorded with the property and contains provisions relative to ensuring that the proposed development is maintained in a "first class" condition and that the project benefits the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area. FISCAL IMPACT: The project will have a positive fiscal impact on the City and Agency. Although the applicant is currently located in the city (Otay Valley Road project area), they will now own the property and improvements thereby illustrating their long-term commitment to Chula Vista. The site improvements are estimated to cost approximately $950,000 with a new land value of approximately $870,000 ($5.25/sq. ft.). This will result in a net increase in assessed valuation of $1 ,634,185 which should accrue approximately $9,800 a year in new revenue to the Agency after the required payments to the various taxing districts. At this time, there is not another tenant planned to backfill Grainger's current building although there will be a motivated effort to do so. M,\HOME\COMMDEVISTAFF.REP\7.'6-96\g"ioge,.1 13 [J,'y I I. '99. (3,sapm» 1-2- - . ,- !I ,I' t:;.1 ATTACHMENT 1 ¡ ~ Ii Ii ! I '! ¡ I¡ II i ,i; h ;; Ii ,I 11 , II, ¡¡ Ii 1 ¡¡; II ~ -, - -. --~. \ \ \ \ \ ' \ \ \ '\ ' \ I ) I ,,- - - -\ , OJ 1 " '.!'_~.: - -----r",-,--~~:r-o\- - i - \ ,» Ir,:~ !'_:: :=J I - I " -_J I ,-( -, ,,'- ¡ .'. : II ., " ., I 'c~-= ~ft- OJ ~!:~,-" , ¡ : ~~~;~~'~' ~\; 0 . :- ,t- I -- ä x, , , .' .- m C ~¡ iI- --¡:¡--, I~- ~!, - - -' ,. I '0 ;- ~, I' \ ,r -m':-",,-:.',T~ ~~,,~,",..,f"," ; I C~ ~~~\, ,~ \ 1 8\, \-- ~-c, 'I I -- -- \I.! m ,,! :- -_c ¡r" -- -- .. .:L --, Hili 1 :-- --~ ',< 1\", ',t- ; --" 1:111; I ,.- ._~ ' , ",'-,,--- --' 1 '! ~~ ~ , \,» \':,,!I-+- ~ Iii I ,_~ ~- \ 'I.-~ I I I r-- 1 .",,",1 ,~- 'I ' ._-~' :IJ "¡-'~"' . .-- , ,','¡.t- ; --~ I 1"- -- , " fl-- 1-- .- -- I CJ '~L- I - I I - --J " ~=r~:::~_,~~;:..= -~~::~~)~_~m:~d -'~'. :. r=1ID ~ i !' ~,., , ';;j!"I"; ~ \T7 J:;;::l ~~ !- '2 0 , II' ~ ~ !! !:PI¡¡¡ljF £ ' ,I:...' ïl!¡!,1I1 "I, Iii !!!¡ I¡'¡! ~ï ~3"',,!lI! '¡I¡¡d,11 . ; II! l;h I . ~, . I' I" 'i 'rb!/l1lm!,!¡! ~o ~Ri,", ! , ill!! !¡,!I¡ '-/ I' I!' '. I ~', ' i , ¡ I,.! i¡li . !:I ~, ~ , , III ¡ ., II ' ì I j ¡ ¡ . i ¡ I ~ . ~" , ' I , -' ¡ ¡ I '¡II' ~ I' :!!.:. i¡ ¡ . : --- ':, I II ¡¡II :1 i . . i '....::- II ;¡ i! I!'¡ ~\D));\~f<>l\D) SaI.mo/UvingstonArch~.cts --.- - [0, m ~~I.EJtJ.s - - [0, ; :¡> ~ . !:II :-":'" [0, . - - ~~~ 1mb\1f ~LIE1IM~ -.- -.-.- [0, ---- ------.- [0, CIiInJU\ 11m£, ~ e-ue-u~ -- ~-;.::.==-==:- ,-- [0, 1,:3 . òZ ~§ J: ~ 0 Z ¡¡ II :t ~ ~ i', " ,. ': :':' ,:' " " ~ -c G ¡~ , ,: í I' , ': ' !: ' - --0 ! . \ "\ 1- :, :: I'~ i ¡ ¡~ I" I'. .11 ' ¡ I ~ ~ ~ ~ Õ' ¡ I ! Ib ¡ [; ¡I! III r ¡¡ ~I ¡nq¡¡!i¡ ¡;; ¡¡Ii; !! ¡I Ii BI I!¡!¡,i ~ !!¡!I " II In qliPI" II! n .I! ! ¡dl !I in 111,11 ;inn¡ ¡I! 1 tf : II ii, ¡ I II - ¡ O¡ 0 . I~~ Q\õ)f;:¡~¡qJ\õ) Sa""no/UvtngslonAn:hlteds --'--6, ::¡> ãi ~~/.}S. =.: == .... ~ lIm~lI'~OOI.l!1/~ ===-, a -..- 6 ~IIUI \118'ii'&, Cl/¡I.DfOOIll& œ-ßœ-ß =. =':::.::;::===-- ,-- == ATTACHMENT 2 ADDENDUM TO IS-90-20 BAY BOULEVARD INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENT PROJECT NAME: W.W. Grainger/1150 Bay Boulevard PROJECT LOCATION: 1150 Bay Boulevard City of Chula Vista PROJECT APPLICANT: W.W. Grainger, Inc. PROJECT AGENT: Salerno/Livingston Architects CASE NO.: IS-96-14 DATE: January 3, 1996 I. INTRODUCTION The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista aJlow the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERe) to prepare an addendum to a Mitigated Negative Declaration, Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report, if one of the following conditions is present: 1. The minor changes in the project design which have occurred since completion of the IS- 90-20 have not created any new significant environmental impacts not previously addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. 2. Additional or refined information available since completion of the Mitigated Negative Declaration regarding the potential environmental impact of the project, or regarding the measures or aJternatives available to mitigate potentiaJ environmental effects of the project, does not show that the project will have one or more significant impacts which were not previously addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. This addendum has been prepared in order to provide additionaJ information and analysis concerning traffic and public service impacts as a result of the proposed land use. Initial Study IS-90-20 and the mitigated negative declaration prepared on the same site anaJyzed the impact of Western Business Park, two concrete tilt-up light industriaJ buildings totaling 65,800 square feet with 122 off-street parking spaces. The property is now proposed as a wholesaJe/showroom warehouse to be constructed in two phases - totaling 55,000 sq. ft. and 80 on-site parking spaces. As a result of this anaJysis, the basic conclusions of the Mitigated Negative Declaration have not changed. Public service impacts are found to be less than significant for the proposed project. Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City has prepared the following addendum to IS-90-20. 4-5 II. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is comprised of two phases. Phase I is located in the western portion of the site and will consist of construction of a 17,250 sq. ft., wholesale showroom/warehouse with mezzanine. Phase II is a 37,750 sq. ft. expansion to be located to the east of Phase 1. The maximum height of the building will be 30 feet. The land area of the project will be approximately 165,525 sq. ft. or approximately 3.8 acres. Approximately 3 acres of earth will be graded. 160 customers per day will be accommodated. Major access is from Bay Boulevard on the east. There will be one shift per day with 10 employees. There will nonnally be 2 deliveries per day. The hours of operation will be from 8:00 a.m. until 5:00 p.m. III. PROJECT SETTING The proposed project is located at 1150 Bay Boulevard, on a'3.8 acre lot. The average graded slope of the site is I percent and the maximum slope of the site is 4 percent. The adjacent land uses include: light industrial to the north, undeveloped land to the west, Bay Boulevard to the east and salt ponds to the south. The site is zoned ILP (Limited Industrial subject to a Precise Plan) and has a General Plan designation ofIL (Research and Limited Industrial). IV. COMPATIBILITY WITH ZONING AND PLANS The existing land use designation is employment park. The proposed project will be in compliance with the Zoning Ordinance. Although the property is within the City's Coastal Zone, the Coastal Commission has pennit jurisdiction over this particular area. The discretionary actions include: Design Review approval and a Coastal Development Pennit prior to the issuance of building pennits as well as the execution of an Owner Participation Agreement pursuant to the requirements of the Southwest Redevelopment Plan. V. IDENTIFICATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL EFFECTS A. Public Services Imnacts Fire The Fire Department will require the following improvements to the project site: . fIre flow will be 3,500 gpm on-site . the installation of an automatic fIre sprinkler system may be required . a minimum of four fIre hydrants must be installed tf-b - . The nearest Fire Station (Station #4) is located 4.0 miles away. This station could provide service to the site within 5 minutes. The Fire Department can adequately deliver service to the site without an increase in equipment or personnel. Police Department The estimated response times of 4 minutes and 25 seconds for Priority 1 calls and 6 minutes and 24 seconds for Priority 2 calls are within the recommended thresholds. Staff at the police department recommend a security evaluation by crime prevention personnel prior to building construction. Schools Payment of school fees will be required pursuant to Government Code No. 65995 (Developer fees) prior to issuance of building pennits. B. Utility and Service Systems Drainage The Engineering Department has detennined that a drainage system consisting of catch basins and stonn drains may be required as part of the grading pennit process. Traffic The Engineering Department has indicated that the developer is responsible for the widening of Bay Boulevard to 52' from curb to curb from the existing easterly curbline. Also the missing curb, gutter and 8' wide sidewalk in addition to one streetlight (just south of the center driveway) are needed. C. Geolo~y/Soils The soils report as submitted is feasible provided that the recommendations are followed. D BioIol!Y and Visual Mitil!ation The previous project proposed three mitigation measures, (please see attached Mitigated Negative Declaration). The fITst two mitigation measures have been incorporated into the revised site plan, the third measure will be a Condition of Approval and will be implemented during project construction. The 118,500 square 1M, Ih-I,'aMinglkei thladdendum. theater) Page' 1-- 7 - . foot landscape coverage is acceptable for the flI"st phase. Landscaping plans are also required to be submitted and approved for the second phase of construction prior to the granting of a building pennit for that expansion. VI. CONCLUSION Public service and traffic impacts are found to be less than significant for the proposed project, with confonnance to all City requirements, Pursuant to Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines and based upon the above discussion, I hereby fmd that the project revisions to the proposed project will result in only minor technical changes or additions which are necessary to make the Mitigated Negative Declaration adequate under CEQA. tf:L¿~dtk/ ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR REFERENCES Chula Vista General Plan (1989) Tille 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code City ofChula Vista Environmental Review Procedures IS-90-20 and Mitigated Negative Declaration, Western Business Park 1M, \home\pla=1ng\keith\addendum. theatet) Page' ~~cf - . ATTACHMENT 2A --- PROJECT NAME: Western Business Park PROJECT LOCATION: Northwest corner of Bay Boulevard and Palomar' Street (APN #617-011-04, ptn) PROJECT APPLICANT: Western Salt Company, 7220 Trade St., Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92121 CASE NO: IS-90-20 DATE: December 13. 1989 A. Project Setting The 4.62-acre project site is located at the northwest corner of Bay Boulevard and Palomar Street in the Coastal Zone.'. The site is presently undeveloped and has been previously graded., An abandoned well is located at the northeast portion of the site. The well was capped recently in response to Department of Health Services safety concerns. Surroundi ng 1 and uses include the Nellcor light ii1dustria1 park to the north, Western Sa1 t Company and adjacent salt ponds to the south and west and light industrial/retail development. to the east. The San Diego and Arizona Eastern railroad lines transect the easterly portion of the site from north to south. An uniniproveddrainage channel lies east of the property and west of Bay Bou1 evard. The si te 1 i es at the southernmost portion of the City of Chu1a Vista's Local Coastal Program. B. Project Description The proposed project consi sts of two 1 i ght industrial concrete ti It-up buildings. The project totals 65,880 sq. ft. with 122 adjacent parking spaces. The primary access will be off Bay Boulevard. An internal servi ce court wou1 d be provi ded for deli very access, and servi ce access would be provided at the northeast corner of the site off Bay,Bou1evard. C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans The Chu1a Vi sta General Plan designates the site "Research & Limited Industrial", and the current zoning designation is (IL) Limited Industri a1. The proposed light industrial use is in conformance with the zone and the General Plan. To conform to the requi rements of the Chu1 a Vista Coastal Zone,theapp1icant must obtain a coastal development permit prior to the issuance of building permits. The site is in the portion of the Coastal Zone subject to the review of the Ca 1 i forni a Coastal Conuni ssi on. Jj - ~ - . -2- -~- D. Compliance with the Threshold/Standards Policy 1. Fire/EMS The Threshol ds/Standards Pol icy requires that fi re and medi cal units respond to calls within 7 minutes or less in 95% of the .cases and within 5 minutes or less in 75% of the cases. The estimated response time is 6 minutes, and the nearest fire station is 1.5 miles away. The proposed project is in compliance with this threshold standard. The Fi re Department wi 11 be requiring the installation of one (1) on-site fire hydrant and may require the installation of an automated sprinkler system. 2. Police The Thresholds/Standards Policy, requires that police units must respond to Priority 1 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Pri ori ty 1 call s. of 4.5 mi nutes or less. Police units must respond to Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes or. less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The proposed project is in conformance to this 'threshold standard because the Po.l ice Department indicated it is maintaining an acceptable ,level of service in this area. . . 3. Tra ffi c The Threshol ds/Standards Pol i cyrequi res that all intersections must operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "c" or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D"may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections. Intersections west of I-80S are not to operate at a LOS below thei r 1987 LOS. No i ntersecti on may reach LOS "F" during the average weekday peak hour. Intersections, of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this pol icy. The Engineering Department has reviewed the proposed project and has determi ned that it woul d not adversély impact 1 evel s of service on surrounding roads or intersections. The Engineering Department wi 11 be requiring street improvements, as specified in Section E of this document. 4. Parks/Recreation The Thresholds/Standards Policy for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/l,OOO population. This threshold standard appl i es only to residential projects, therefore, the proposed i ndustri a 1 project is exempt from the threshol d standard for Parks and Recreati on. J/--/6 - . -3- -- ~~.__Qr:~i_,!a[e ---------- ------------ --00 ,--- The Engineering Department will require that a detailed hydraulic and hydrology study be compl eted to properly locate the fl ood lines on the site. Future pad elevations shall be a minimum of one foot above the lOO-year inundation 1 ine. Additionally, the natural drainage channel east of the site shall be stabilized to prevent erosion. Specific drainage issues are discussed in Section F of this document. 6. Sewer Review of the specific development proposals by the City will ensure that sewage flows and volumes not exceed City engineering standards. The proposed project will be required to connect to an existing B-inch sewer main on Bay Boulevard. An i nd.ustri a 1 user discharge pennit shall be obtained from the Metropolitan.SewageSystem prior to issuance of building pennits; 7. Water The Thresholds/Standard Policy requires that adequate storage, 'treatment and transmi ssi on facilities be constructed concurrently with planned growth and that water quality standards are not jeopardi zed duri ng growth and .constructi on. The project will not exceed the threshold standards for water resources. E. Identification of Environmental Effects An initial study conducted by the City of Chula Vista detennined that al though the proposed project could 'have a significant envi ronmental effect, subsequent revisions in the proj ect design have implemented specific mitigation measures. Potential impacts deemed to be potentially significant include: biology and visual impacts. Potential impacts deemed to be less than significant include: hydrology, geology/soils, and traffic. Biology Impacts Potential biology impacts are associated with the proximity of the site to habitat used by a variety of sensitive species. The Belding's Savannah Sparrow, Cal Horni a Least Tern, Black Skimmer, Elegant Tern, and Snowy Plover are known to use the levees and salt ponds on the adjacent Western Salt Work I s property to' the south and west. Al though the project site, itself, is devoid ,of vegetation due to previous grading, potential biology impacts to adjacent habitatcoul d result from lighting and gl are impacts .to the adj acent salt ponds. Potential bi 01 ogy impacts woul d al so resul t duri ng the constructi on phase of the project from di sturbance associ ated with construction-equipment noise and dust. . q-/I -- -4- ~ --~-- The salt ponds of the Western Sal t Company are uti li zed as resting and feeding areas for a variety of species of water birds which utilize the bay. The di kes whi ch border the sal t ponds support nesting col oni es of both elegant and least terns. The salt pond dikes support the only nesting colony of elegant terns in the United States,and the least tern is state and federally-l i sted endangered speci es. The Snowy .Plover, a federa 11 y-li sted Category II species, also uses the dike as' a nesting site. The dikes are also used to support nesting colonies of Caspians & Forster's terns and black-necked stilts. San Diego Bay and the Salton Sea are the only two nesting places remaining in Southern California for Forster's terns. The salt marsh savannah sparrow has also been known to use the adjacent salt works area. ' Visual. The project's location within the Coastal zone, immediately adjacent to the Chula Vista Bayfront, is assoèiated with potential visual impacts. Development within the Bayfront should be given special design attention to ensure that development is properly sited and to minimize adverse visual impacts. Potential visual impacts associated with .the proposed project are deemed to be, less than significant. S'ite design requirements, including di recti onal 1 i ghting to prevent unnecessary glare and li ght impacts to adjacent levees will minimize disturbance to sensitive bird species. To ensure the reduction of anypotenti a 1 visual impacts, the location of parking areas and the lighting of parking areas will be reviewed at the design review stage. The provision of adequate landscaped buffers will be required in conformance to City Landscape requirements. These site design techniques will ensure that the views from Bay Boulevard will be enhanced and that the site proximity to the Bayfront will be considered. The following impacts have been deemed to be less than significant: Geology/Soils An initial soils investigation was conducted on the site by Geocon (January 1990). The survey determi ned that there are no adverse soil or geologic conditions existing on the site which preclude the project development, provided that the recommended site preparation standards are followed. The site is not located on any known, active fault trace, however, The Rose Canyon Fault Zone is located within 1/2 mile of the site to the west. All grading on site shall be performed in accordance wi th Geocon I s Soil s Report (Appendi xC) and wi th City of Chul a Vi sta Gradi ng . standards. " Although the site has been previously graded, there is no record on file of a previous gradi ng permi t approved by the City. Thi s wi 11 require special handling by the,Engineering Department. ~-IÞ-- - . -5- -- With compliance to site preparation standards, potential geology impacts, are deemed to be less than significant. Hydrology The project site is adjacent to the bayfront and falls within the southernmost portion of the City of Chula' Vista Local Coastal Program. The proj ect boundaries are not represented on the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) floodplain maps, therefore, the Engineering Department does not have sufficient infonnation to detennine whether the site falls within the 100-year floodplain. Due to the lack of hydrological i nfonnëiti on on site, the Engineering Department will be requiring a detailed hydrology~nd hydraulic study for the próject,prior to the issuance of grading. .pennits. Future pad elevation should ,be a minimum of one foot ,above the 100-year inundation lines. With the provision that a hydraulic study be required, the potential hydrology impacts are deemed to be less than significant. l!:ill!£ The proposed project is accessed off Bay Boulevard, and the projected amount of traffic generated by the proposed project. is 1,506 ADT. Currently, this segment of Bay Boulevard is operating at Level of Service (LOS) "A" with 4,840 ADL After the project is completed, the estimated LOS would remain "A", with a total of 5,896 ADT. The Engineering Department has i ndi cated that the primary access roads are adequate to serve this project, provided specific traffic engineering standards are impl emented. Traffic Engineering standards to reduce traffic impacts include full street improvements, including 26 ft. half street pavement improvements to match existing northerly segment of roadway; and curb, gutter, and sidewalk with ramps. Traffic signal fees will be assessed, and 36 ft. half street improvements will be required. Addf.ti onally, one 250 watt HPSV street light will be required just south of the main driveway. With impl ementati on of these speci fi c traffic engi neeri ng measures, potenti al traffic impacts are considered to be less than significant. F. Mitigation necessary to avoid significant effects Specific mitigation measures have been required to reduce potentially si gni fi cant bi 0 logy and vi sual impacts. Potenti al impacts deemed to be less than significant include geology, hydrology, and traffic. No specifi c mi ti gati on measures have been requi red for these impacts. G. Findings of Less than Significant Impact A Negative Declaration has been prepared pursuant to Section .15070 of the State ~EQA guidelines and the following findings have been made. t/-/3 - . -6- -- Based on the following findings, it is determined that ,although the project described above could have a significant eflvironmental imfact, no environmental impact report will be required because specific bio ogy and visual mitigation has been included in the project design. Through the provision of mi ti gati on measures, potentially si gni fi cant, impacts have been reduced to a level of less than significant. 1. The project has the potential to' substantially degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species. cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining, levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal col1llluni ty, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or elimfnate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. . '. Although, the proposed Western Business ParI<. Project could have a significant adverse effect 'upon thequa1ity of the natural environment, it will not have a significant effect because specific mitigation measures have been required to reduce potential impacts to a level of less than si gnificant. The project conditions will ensure that any potentially adverse impacts will be reduced to a level of less than significant. Mitigation of potenti ally significant biology and visual impacts are set forth in Section F of this document. . 2. The project has the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals. The project is consistent with the General Pl an and zone. The project will not achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of long-term goals because these long-term goals would be achieved through comp 1 i ance wi th City' threshol d standards, site preparation standards and specific mitigation measures set forth in Section F of thi s document. 3. The project has possible effects which are individually limited but cumulatively considerable. As used in the subsection, .cumul atively considerable" means that the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects. Al though the proposed project woul d create cumul àti ve impacts, such as temporarynoi se impacts rel ati ng to constructi on activiti es, these impacts are short-term and are not considered significant, since they would occur during the construction phase of the project. t-f - Ii - . -7- -,~U -- The impacts to the surrounding community will be incremental and the improvements will not. cause significant growth in the surrounding community. There is no significant growth inducement nor cumulative impact associated with the project, provided that City standards are complied with. 4. The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. The Geocon' Report (January, 1990) did not identify any hazardous materi a 15 on the property. The project will not emit any hazardous gases, noise, vibratîon, or radiation which would impact human beings. There wi 11 be temporary nofse impacts associ ated wi th the construction phase of the project,' but these will be short-tenD only. The project will not cause any substanti al adverse impact to human beings, since no potential human health impacts were identified in the Initial Study. H. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chu1a Vista: Maryann Miller, Environmental Review Coordinator Phil Landowski, Chu1a Vista Fire Department M. J. Donnelly, Engineering Department EugeniaA. Franco, Engineering Department Robin Putnam, Community Development Samir Nuhaily, Engineering Department Bill Wheeler. Building and Housing Carol Gove, Fire Marshal Captain Keith Hawkins, Police Department Ed Batchelder, Planning Department Shauna Stokes, Parks and Recreation Sweetwater High School District: Thomas Silva Applicant's Agent: Bob Sawyer, Land Use Planner Western Salt Co. 7220 Trade St., Suite 102 San Diego, CA 92121 2. Documents Chul a Vi sta General P1 an . Chu1a Vista Municipal Code IS-88-15 Rohr Industries Buildings 99 and 100 IS-85-21 , Bayside Business park, Bay Blvd. and Palomar Street Dept. of Fi sh & Game, "The Natural Regi on of San Di ego Bay," Oct. 1973 Survey of Belding's Savannah Sparrows in California, Sept. 1986 J-j~/5 - . . Attachment 2B Mitigation Monitoring Program .-ìfesl:eríflrüS i nes sPar1<- ,-- Northwest corner of Bay Boulevard and Palomar Street, IS 90-20 This Mitigation Monitoring Program is prepared for the Western Business Park project, in order to comply with AB 3180. This legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate mitigation measures are implemented on mitigated negative declarations, such as 15-90-20. AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant or si gnifi cant impacts. The mitigation monitoring program for the Western Business Park ensures mitigation for the following potentially significant impacts: - Biology Impacts - Visual Impacts Due to the relatively small seal e of the propo$ed project and the nature of the issues, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinator (MCC) shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC) for the City of Chula Vista. It shall be the responsi bi 1 ity of the appl i cant to ensure that the condi ti ons of the Mitigation Monitoring Program are met. Biology and Visual Mitigation The proposed project is associ ated wi th" potenti ally si gnifi cant bi 01 ogy and visual impacts on the site. Mitigation of Potentially Significant Biology and Vi sua 1 Impacts will be accomplished by the following: 1. Design and construction of parking areas shall be reoriented away from the salt dikes whi ch border the property. Site redesi gn shall occur duri ng design review. 2. A redesign of the parking areas will serve to mi ti gate 1 i ght and gl are impacts to the salt dikes from lighting in the parking area. 3. Gradi ng and constructi on equi pment shall not intrude into the salt dike areas. Wi th i mpl ementati on of these miti gati on measures, the proposed project will not have a significant effect on the environment. These mitigation measures will be implemented during the design review process. WPC 7206P 1-/~ _. Recording Requested By ATTACHMENT 3 and When Recorded Return to: The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Attn: Lyle Haynes Assistant to the Director [Space above for Recorder's use only] OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY and W. W. GRAINGER. INC. THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a public body corporate and politic [hereinafter referred to as "AGENCY"]. and W. W. Grainger, Inc. [hereinafter referred to as "DEVELOPER"]. WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER desires to develop real property within the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area which is subject to the jurisdiction and control of the AGENCY; and, WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER has presented plans for development to the Design Review Committee for the Project; and, WHEREAS, said plans for development have been recommended for approval by said Committee; and, WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER has applied for and received environmental clearance for the Project pursuant to Addendum Negative Declaration (lS-96-14) and the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA); and, WHEREAS, the AGENCY hereby approves the development proposal as submitted by the DEVELOPER; and, WHEREAS, the AGENCY desires that said development proposal be implemented and completed as soon as is practicable. NOW, THEREFORE, the AGENCY and the DEVELOPER agree as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are incorporated into this Agreement. 2. The property to be developed is described as Assessor's Parcel Number 617-011-07 located at 1150 Bay Boulevard, Chula Vista, CA said map attached hereto and by this reference incorporated herein. p~ t./--17 - , 3. The DEVELOPER covenants by and for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through them the following: A. That the property will be developed in accordance with the AGENCY approved development proposal attached hereto as Exhibit A and on file in the Office of the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency, known as Document No. OPA SW 96-01. B. DEVELOPER has made application for the appropriate building permit, and will pursue its issuance with due diligence with the intention of obtaining an approved permit within one year from the date of this Agreement and to actually develop the property pursuant to the phasing plan described in Section II of the Addendum to 18- 90-20 dated January 3, 1996. Developer agrees to develop Phase I of the property within one year from the date of issuance of the building permits. In the event DEVELOPER fails to obtain such Phase I building permits within one year or fails to obtain an extension to obtain said permits, the approval of DEVELOPER'S development proposals shall be void and this Agreement shall have no further force or effect. C. That in all deeds granting or conveying an interest in the property, the following language shall appear: "The grantee herein covenants by and for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through them, that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons on account of race, color, creed, national origin or ancestry in the sale, lease, sub/ease, transfer, use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of the premises herein conveyed, nor shall the grantee himself or any persons claiming under or through him establish or permit any such practice of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenant lessees, or vendees in the premises herein conveyed. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land. " D. Developer will use good faith efforts to ensure that in all leases demising an interest in all or any part of the property, the following language shall appear: "The lessee herein covenants by and for themselves, their heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through him, and this lease is made and accepted upon and subject to the following conditions: "That there shall be no discrimination against or segregation of, any person or group of persons, on account of race, color, creed, national origin, or ancestry, in the leasing, subleasing, transferring use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of the premises herein leased, nor shall the lessee himself or any persons claiming under or through him, establish or permit any such practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number or use, or occupancy of tenants, lessees, sublessees, subtenants, or vendees in the premises herein leased." 4. DEVELOPER agrees to accept the attached conditions imposed by the Design Review Committee and the Redevelopment Agency as described in Exhibit "B." DEVELOPER p~ vi-It - . further agrees to comply with the mitigation measures set forth in the Mitigation and Monitoring Program for IS-96-20. 5. DEVELOPER agrees to maintain the premises in FIRST CLASS CONDITION. "A. DUTY TO MAINTAIN FIRST CLASS CONDITION. Throughout the term of this Agreement, DEVELOPER shall, at DEVELOPER'S sole cost and expense, maintain the Premises and all Improvements in first class condition and repair, and in accordance with all applicable laws, permits, licenses, and other governmental authorizations, rules, ordinances, orders, decrees, and regulations now or hereafter enacted, issued or promulgated by federal, state, county, municipal, and other governmental agencies, bodies, and courts having or claiming jurisdiction and all their respective departments, bureaus, and officials. If the owners fail to maintain the property in a "first class condition", the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista or its agents shall have the right to go on the property and perform the necessary maintenance and the reasonable cost of said maintenance shall become a lien against the property. The Agency shall have the right to enforce this lien either by foreclosing on the property or by forwarding the amount to be collected to the Tax Assessor who shall make it part of the tax bill. B. Unless DEVELOPER, in its sole discretion, elects to demolish in its entirety the building improvements on the premises, DEVELOPER shall promptly and diligently repair, restore, alter, add to, remove, and replace, as required, the Premises and all Improvements to maintain or comply as above, or to remedy all damage to or destruction of all or any part of the Improvements. Any repair, restoration, alteration, addition, removal, maintenance, replacement and other act of compliance under this Paragraph [hereafter collectively referred to as "Restoration"] shall be completed by DEVELOPER whether or not funds are available from insurance proceeds or subtenant contributions. The Restoration shall satisfy the requirements of any sub-sublease then in effect for the Premises or Improvements with respect thereto or, if no sub-sublease is then in effect, shall be repaired or restored in the building standard shell condition existing immediately prior to the date of such damage or destruction. C. In order to enforce all above maintenance provisions, the parties agree that the Community Development Director of the City of Chula Vista is empowered to make reasonable determinations as to whether the property is in a first class condition. If he determines they are not, he (1) will notify the owners in writing and (2) extend a reasonable time to cure. If a cure or substantial progress to cure has not been made within that time, the Director is authorized to effectuate the cure by City forces or otherwise, the reasonable cost of which will be promptly reimbursed by the owners. In the event that there is a dispute over whether property is in a first class condition or over the amount of work and expense authorized by the Director to cure, the parties agree to choose a mutually agreeable qualified real estate or property management professional to resolve that dispute and both parties shall be bound by his/her decision. DEVELOPER agrees to bear all reasonable cost of such qualified professional to settle the dispute. In the event that the Director decides without dispute, or such professional decides in dispute, that the City has to cure and the amount of cure, then owners agree to reimburse the City within thirty (30) days of demand. If not reimbursed, it constitutes a lien and City is authorized to record said lien with the County Recorder, upon the premises. pa~ ;/-/1 - . D. FIRST CLASS CONDITION DEFINED. 'First class condition and repair, means Restoration which is necessary to keep the Premises and Improvements in efficient and attractive condition, at least substantially equal in quality to the condition which exists when the condition(s) in attached Exhibit B are completed." 6. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that the covenants of the DEVELOPER expressed herein shall run with the land for the term of this agreement. DEVELOPER shall have the right, without prior approval of AGENCY, to assign its rights and delegate its duties under this Agreement, and shall thereafter have no further liability hereunder. 7. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that the covenants of the DEVELOPER expressed herein are for the express benefit of the AGENCY and for all owners of real property within the boundaries of the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area as the same now exists or may be hereafter amended. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that the provisions of this Agreement may be specifically enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction by the AGENCY on its own behalf or on behalf of any owner of real property within the boundaries of the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area. 8. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that this Agreement may be recorded by the AGENCY in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, California. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA "AGENCY" Dated: By: Shirley Horton, Chairman W. W. GRAINGER, INC. Dated: By: Richard Quast, Vice President Real Estate Approved as to form by: Ann Moore, Interim Agency Attorney [M ,IHOMEICOMMDEVIHA YNESIOP ASIGRAIN GER. OP A] pa~ 1--;D ""'.. "W"~ 'U'UU w_......." --.---. ._n- . ---- --- - . D. EIRST CLASS CONDITION D!!FINED. 'First class condition and r8øalr, means Restoration which is nøc&eSaty to keep the Premises and Improvsmentli Ira efficient and atb'l1ctive condition, at Is!!st substantially equal In quality to the condition which exists when the conditionlsl in ett8ched Exhlb¡'t B 'It.. completed." ß. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that thfi covenants of the oeVJ:LOP¡¡R expressed herein sh311 run with tM land for the term ':It this agreement. DEVeLOPER sl1l1l1 haw the right. without prior IIpproyal Of AGENCY. to assign ItS rights and delegiltllltB dUties under this Agreement. and shall thereafter hsve no further liability l'Iereunder. 7, AGENCY end DEVELOPER eoree that the oavenents Clf the DEVELOPER eXQr88Sed herein ere for the express benefit of the AGENCY and for all owners of reel property wIthin the boundaries of the SoUthwest Redeve/opmefU: Project Area as the .ame now eJdata or may be he/Baftllr amended. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agr.. that the provisions of this Agreement may be specl1lcally enforced In any court of competent jurisdiction by the AGENCY on its own behelf or on behalf of any owner of real property within the boundtries of the SouthweSt Redevelopment Project A/ee, 8. AGENCY and O¡;VELOPER agree that this Agree(l1ent may be reCOtcl8c1 by the AClENr;v in the Office of ~e County Recordar of San Dia~o CountY. Califomia. REDI:V!!LOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA "AGENCY" Oilited; .. By: Shirley Horton, Chairman Dated: 7} (ý~ By: ~~.ð.- JL, Richard Quast. Vlee President Real Estate ~ Approved as to form by: Ann Møore. Acting Agency Counsel 1M' \H ()lI~I<::OMMDIMH'" YIoIIIS\OP AS\CII.AJNC¡¡R.oP AJ 7' 1-;1 TOTRL P. 002 ATTACHMENT 4 ,(~-','-" '--= :~~" -c'....... '-'_:1,.. ::f~C ~= ON OF CHULA ViSTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT COMMUNITY DEVElOPMENT DEPARTMENT I ~30~ I January 10, 1996 Salerno/Livingston Architects 363 Fifth Avenue, Suite 300, San Diego, CA 92101 Attn: Bob Evans Subject: DRC-96-09 Dear Applicant: On January 8, 1996, the Design Review Committee considered the site plan and architecture for the construction of a new 55,000 sq. ft. showroom/warehouse building at 1150 Bay Boulevard, Chula Vista, to be constructed in two phases, begininning with 17,250 sq. ft. in Phase 1. Included 111 Phase I are 46 parking spaces, and associated landscaping and site improvements. The Committee, after hearing staff's presentation, and following discussion of the proposal, together with further presentation by the applicant's architect, adopted the addendum issued on IS-96-20 and approved the p'roject by unanimous vote, subject to the following conditions: a) The screening solution for the ground-mounted satellite dish shall be submitted to staff for review and approval. b) The undeveloped future expansion site shall be irrigated and the final landscape solution shall be submitted to staff for final approval. c) The maill signage on the east elevation shall illuntiuateu channel etters aud applied directly to the block. The lower lines of signage shall be of a non- illuminated type. You have the right to appeal this decision to the Planning Commission. A completed appeal form, along with a deposit areount of $2,000 must be received by this office within 10 days of 1-{-Z-2- r-ur"_-,,.,.,-, "r", r. ,-_c. . "ro- ro- ~.-<. ,_. . ",,-..--.- --~---.- -. . DRC-96-09 - 2 - January 10, 1996 the date of this letter. Forms are available from .lhe Planning Department. In the absence of said appeal, the decision of the Design Review Committee is final. Failure to use this permit within one year from the date of this letter shall cause the permit to become null and void unless a written request for an extension is received and granted prior to the expiration date. If you have any questions, please call me at 691-5101. ---- .. Ann Pedder P se Design Review Coordinator! Assistant Planner 1-;2-3 r'TV ,",0 ru'" ^ ",on - . RESOLUTION NO. - RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OFCHULA VISTAADOPTING MITIGATED DECLARATION 15-90-20, ADDENDUM 96-14 THERETO AND THE RELATED MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM; AND APPROVING AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH W.W. GRAINGER, INC, AND APPROVING THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT OF A 17,250 SQ, FT, WHOLESALE SHOWROOM/WAREHOUSE BUILDING AND RELATED IMPROVEMENTS AT 1150 BAY BOULEVARD WHEREAS, W.W. Grainger, Inc., (hereinafter referred to as 'Developer") desires to develop their property at 1150 Bay Boulevard (APN 617-011-07) with a 17,250 sq. ft. wholesale showroom/Warehouse, 46 on-site parking spaces and related improvements ('proposed developmenf'); and WHEREAS, the site for the proposed development is located within the boundaries of the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area; and WHEREAS, Developer has presented plans for the proposed development to the Design Review Committee for their review and approval; and WHEREAS, Developer's proposed development has been evaluated pursuant to the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act which has resulted in the preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration finding that the only potentially significant environmental impacts would reduced to less than significant levels; this document was circulated for public review in accordance with CEQA; and WHEREAS, Addendum 96-14 to Mitigated Negative Declaration 15-90-20 has been prepared to reflect the revised project description and no substantial changes in environmental conditions on the site nor in the proposed project that would result in any change in environmental impacts discussed in 15-90-20 have occurred; and WHEREAS, pursuant to the requirements of the Southwest Redevelopment Plan, the proposed development is subject to the approval and execution of an Owner Participation Agreement with the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find order determine and resolve as follows: 1. The Redevelopment Agency hereby adopts Mitigated Negative Declaration 15-90-20; Addendum 15-96-14 thereto and the related Mitigation Monitoring Program. 2. The Redevelopment Agency hereby finds that the proposed development is consistent with the Southwest Project Area Redevelopment Plan 3. The Redevelopment Agency hereby approves the proposed development and authorizes the execution of an Owner Participation Agreement with W.W. Grainger, Inc., in substantially the form presented, for the development of a 17,250 sq. ft. wholesale warehouse/showroom and related improvements at 1150 Bay Boulevard pursuant to the plans approved by the Design Review Committee; and the Chairman is hereby authorized and directed to execute same Presented by Approved as to form by: (J~~---- ;¡ ~;2i Chris Salomone Director of Community Development - . REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT Item~ Meeting Date 7/16/96 ITEM TITLE: JOINT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING PURSUANT TO HEALTH AND SAFETY CODE SECTION 3343 AND 33433: To Consider a loan from the Redevelopment Agency to Broadway Village Business Homes, loP. Dated August 1, 1 995 SUBMITTED BY: Community Development Director C) J REVIEWED BY: Executive Directo~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes lL No_I Council Referral Number: - RECOMMENDATION: Staff recommends that the Agency open the public hearing and continue it to a date and time certain, that being Tuesday, July 23, 1996. 5-1 - . REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT Item ~/.....; b Meeting Date 7/16/96 ITEM TITlE: ;4. PUBLIC HEARING: TO CONSIDER THE SALE OF SPACE 145 AT ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK LOCATED AT 521 ORANGE AVENUE, CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA ß. RESOLUTION /.5 0 G., AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE A NEW PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS FOR SPACE 145 AT ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK SUBMITTED BY: C~m""üy """opm~' D're~t ' REVIEWED BY: Executive Direct°:.J~ ~ (4I5ths Vote: Yes- No'x'l ./'. BACKGROUND: On November 21,1995, the Redevelopment Agency adopted Resolution 1476 authorizing the sale of Space 145 at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park located at 521 Orange Avenue. In October 1995 a bonafide offer to purchase this space was received by the Community Development Department followed by an approved purchase agreement which was executed by both parties. On June 3, 1996 the purchaser withdrew the offer to purchase this space due to financial hardship. Recently, the Department received a new offer to purchase this space for the appraised value of $30,000. RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency adopt the resolution authorizing the Community Development Director to execute a new purchase agreement and escrow instructions for space 145 at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. . DISCUSSION: This is a request to authorize the Community Development Director to execute a new purchase agreement and escrow instruction for the sale of space 145 at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park. The sales price is based upon an appraised value of $30,000. The City Attorney's office has recently recommended changes to the purchase contract. Such changes include an "as-is" clause including a provision indemnifying the City against any future liability after the sale of the mobilehome. Final form of these agreements will include such provisions. FISCAL IMPACT: The Agency has an outstanding loan of approximately $19,230 from the Bank of America for this space with an original loan amount of $23,488. Proceeds of the sale will be used to payoff this loan. The balance of $10,770, less closing costs, will be deposited into the Agency's Low and Moderate Income Housing Set-Aside Fund. M,IHOME\COMMDEVISTAFF.REP\7-16-96\RENEW145,113 [J"', 11, 1996 (,,"Opmll ¿" - ( - . EXHIBIT A REAL ESTATE PURCHASE CONTRACT AND RECEIPT FOR DEPOSIT This is more than a receipt for money, It is intended to be a legally binding contract. Read it carefullv, CITY OF CHULA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT ****Standard Form**** Chula Vista, California ,19 - Received from herein called Buyer, the sum of ($ ), evidenced by [circle one] [a] Cash [b] Cashier's Check [c] Personal Check [d] Other payable to Spring Mountain Escrow, to be held uncashed until acceptance of this offer, as deposit on account of purchase price of $ dollars ($ ), for the purchase of property, situated in Chula ViSla, County of San Diego, California, described as follows: SEE ATTACHED LEGAL DESCRIPTION (More commonly known as space - at the Orange Tree Mobilehome Park at 521 Orange Avenue, Chula Vista, California) 1. Buyer will deposit in escrow with Spring Mountain Escrow the balance of purchase price as follows: a. b. Balance of $ to be deposited in escrow on for before COE. 2. Deposit will will not be increased by $ to within days of acceptance of this offer. 3. Buyer does - does not - intend to occupy subject property as his/her/their residence. 4. Buyer and Seller shall deliver signed instructions to the escrow holder within 7 days from Seller's acceptance, which shall provide for closing within days from Seller's acceptance. Escrow and other fees to be paid as follows: G -.;). By Seller: 1. Owner's Title Insurance Policy 2. One-half of Escrow Fee 3. Record of Reconveyance 4. Document Preparation Fee 5. IRS Tax Report 6. One-half of Transfer Fee of Homeowners Association 7. Proration of Property Taxes and Homeowners Association Fee By Buyer: 1. One-half of Escrow and Homeowners Association Transfer Fee 5. If the sale is not completed due to fault of the Buyer, Buyer shall be responsible for any escrow or related fees. 6. Approval of this sale shall be contingent upon: a. Final approval of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista b. Receipt of any prorated rent from seller of the mobilehome through to COE. 7. If Buyer has not previously acquired ownership of the mobilehome situated on the Property, this sale shall be contingent upon the concurrent acquisition of said mobilehome. 8. Buyer acknowledges having received copy of the Declarations, of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions and all amendments hereto, if any, governing the described property, together with a copy of the By-laws of the Orange Tree Homeowners Association. 9. Buyer and Seller acknowledges receipt of copy of this entire document, which is comprised of two pages, this page constituting page 2 of 2. 10. This agreement constitutes the entire agreement. Any amendments to this agreement shall be in writing and shall be signed by both parties. 11. If a lawsuit is filed in connection with this agreement, the prevailing party shall be entitled to be compensated for legal expenses including reasonable attorney's fees. Buyer Date Buyer Date Seller Date Seller Date t:, -3 DESCRIPTION A Condominium Comprised Of: PARCEL I: An undivided 1/154th interest in and to Lots I and 2 of CHULA VISTA TRACT NUMBER 87- 5 (ORANGE TREE MOBILE HOME PARK), in the City ofChula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, according to Map thereof No. 11835 fifled 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 of Official Records of San Diego County. (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 I and 2 described in Parcell above, as designated as Exclusive Use Areas on the Condominimum Plan referred to above as appurtenant to Parcels I and 2 above described. EXCEPTING THEREFROM any personal property, if any, located within Parcel 2 above described. ¿- 1 - - ~~~ ::: ~ --:; ~-~~ CllY OF CHUIA VISTA COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VITA, CALIFORNIA Notice is hereby given, pursuant to Section 33431 of the California Health and Safety Code, that a Public Hearing will be held by the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA to consider the sale of space 145 at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park located at 521 Orange Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91911. Spaces are proposed to be sold . to the mobilehome owners currently either residing at or acquiring the Agency-owned spaces at the appraised values. Any comments or questions, prior to the public hearing may be directed to Judith Foland of the Community Development Department at 585-5722. Said Public Hearing will be held Tuesday July 16, 1996, beginning at 6:00 P.M. in the Council Chambers located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California, at which time any interested person may appear. If you wish to comment on this matter, you may do so at the public hearing or in written correspondence delivered to the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency at or prior to the Public Hearing. Dated: July 1, 1996 ~ ~ Chris Salomone Community Development Director ¿ .- s- 276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5047 RESOLUTION /-6-0 Co RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DEPARTMENT TO EXECUTE A NEW PURCHASE AGREEMENT AND ESCROW INSTRUCTIONS FOR SPACE 145 AT ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency currently owns mobilehome spaces at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park located at 521 Orange Avenue, Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, on November 21, 1995, the Redevelopment Agency adopted resolution 1476 approving the sale of space 145 at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park and authorizing the Community Development Director to executive a purchase agreement and escrow instructions; and WHEREAS, on June 3, 1996 the offer to purchase space 145 at Orange Tree Mobilehome park was withdrawn; and WHEREAS, a new offer to purchase space 145 at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park has been received by the Community Development Department for the appraised value. WHEREAS, Article 11, Section 33431 of the California Community Redevelopment Law requires that a Public Hearing be held for any sale of lease of Agency- owned property; and WHEREAS, said Public Hearing has been conducted pursuant to Section 33431 for the sale of Orange Tree space number 145. NOW THEREFORE, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby find, order, determine and resolve to (a) approve the resolution authorizing the Community Development Director to execute a new purchase agreement, in substantally the same fonn attached hereto as Exhibit A, and escrow instructions each in a final fonn approved by the Agency Attorney, and with such additional provisions as may be deemed necessary or appropriate thereby; and (b) to take such other action as deemed necessary to consummate said sale of space 145 at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park. PRESENTED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: ~( ~ ~ Chris Salomone, Executive Secretary and Community Development Director ¿; - G? r enc to REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT Item 1a,Þ, c.,! Meeting Date 07/16//96 ITEM TITLE: 1/. Public Hearing: Special Use Permit SUPS-96-04; request to construct and operate a wireless communications facility at 865 Stella Street; composed of two radio equipment cabinets and a 37 foot 9 inch tall monopole supporting six (6) directional (panel) antennas - Pacific Bell Mobile Services ß, Public Hearing: Variance ZAV-96-16; request to reduce the rear yard setback from 15 feet to 6 feet and to increase the height from 35 feet to 37 feet 9 inches in order to accommodate the above facility - Pacific Bell Mobile Services C, Resolution No. /Sð7 A Resolution of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista approving a Special Use Permit allowing a wireless communications facility at 863/865 Stella Street D , Resolution No.¿54:f A Resolution of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista approving variances to allow a reduction in the rear yard setback and an increase in the maximum allowed height in the M-52 Zone for a wireless communications facility at 863/865 Stella Street SUBMITTED BY: e lopment L S ' Jt,tt (plf{&'b REVIEWED BY: City Manag~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No-X) ./? Pacific Bell Mobile Services (Applicant)' requesting permission to construct and operate a wireless communications facility at 863/865 Stella Street. The technology involved is the newer generation of personal communications system (PCS), which operates similar to conventional cellular in that the system operates based on cells, but the technology is digitally based rather than based on analog signals. The applicant is also applying for permission to reduce the rear yard setback from 15' to 6', and increase the height allowance for the monopole from 35' to 37' 9" in order to accommodate the facility. The facility will consist of two equipment cabinets which will take up about 200 square feet, and a monopole supporting up to six panel antennas. The monopole is proposed to stand 37'9" tall, 2'9" above the allowable height in the zone. The project is exempt from environmental review as Class 3(e) and Class 5(a) exemptions pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act. 7-1 - . Page #2 RECOMMENDATION: That the Redevelopmenl Agency approve Special Use Permit SUPS- 96-04 and Variance ZA V -96-16 pursuant to the attached draft Redevelopment Agency Resolutions. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On June 12, 1996, the Planning Commission voted 6-to-0 to recommend that the Redevelopment Agency approve Special Use Permit SUPS-96-04 and Variance ZA V-96-16 in accordance with the attached draft Redevelopment Agency Resolutions. DISCUSSION: 1. Site Characteristics: The property is currently occupied by an industrial building in which leisure boats are constructed. The parcel is at the junction of Stella Street and Frontage Road south of Palomar Street. The two story building is approximately 4,400 square feet in size and is 21 feet tall at the highest point. This is the only structure on-site. 2. Zoning, Land Use and Setback/Height Requirements Zoning Land Use Site: M-52 (County) Industrial/Manufacturing North: M-52 Industrial/Manufacturing South: M-52 Residential (Non-conforming) East: Interstate 1-5 Freeway West: M-52 Industrial/Manufacturing (Open storage) M-52 Zone rear yard setback requirement: 15 feet from the property line Requested variance: Six feet from the property line M-52 Zone height requirement: 35 feet Requested variance: 37 feet 9 inches . The property lies in the West Fairfield area of the Montgomery Specific Plan, and still retains the County's M-52 zoning. The area is characterized by a variety of mixed land uses ranging from industrial to residential. The West Fairfield area is designated a "Special Study Area" on the General Plan and eventually it will be rezoned to an appropriate City zoning district. It should be noted, however, that the Montgomery Specific Plan recognizes this as an industrial area. . To the east, 1-5 passes to the north and south. Beyond 1-5, within the City, there are commercial and residential areas which are 500 to 600 feet east of the easterly property line of the subject parcel. . The parcel also lies within the Southwest Redevelopment Area. Under the provisions of the Southwest Redevelopmenl Plan, in order to construct and operate the proposed facility, a special use permit must first be obtained from the Redevelopment Agency. 7---2- Page #3 Item 10.), c"L . The Applicant is requesting a variance from the rear yard setback and height requirements. Normally, in the M-52 Zone, structures are required to meet a 15 foot rear setback and a 35 foot height. The circumstances for the request are described below. 3. Proposed Land Use: In order to implement their area-wide personal communications system (PCS), Pacific Bell Mobile Services is proposing to install two 5'9" X 2'4" equipment cabinets and a 40' monopole at the southwest corner of the subject parcel within the rear yard setback area. The monopole will slightly exceed the 35' height limitation specified in the County Zoning Ordinance for the M-52 Zoning District, therefore, the applicant is requesting a variance for both rear yard setback and height, as well as a special use permit for the facility itself. 4. Analvsis: The monopole approach to this site is supported by staff after much study and consideration of alternatives. When PBMS first submitted their application they proposed mounting the panel antenna along the edge of the building above the roof line. Staff felt this was an unacceptable solution because of the visual impacts. After studying several alternatives, including raising the parapet wall, constructing a penthouse structure and rearranging the locations, both staff and the Applicant determined that the monopole approach is the most desirable given the circumstances. Because the monopole will be at the southwest corner of the property and there are many intervening trees, it will not be visible from 1-5, which is about 15 to 20 feet lower in elevation than the parcel. This is less visually impactive than placing the panels as originally proposed. If the monopole were placed along the eastern wall of the building it would be very visible from the freeway, whereas the Palomar Street exit and the building shield it from view from southbound traffic. Any views from northbound traffic are blocked by mature trees. In addition to the above, a variance is justified in view of the unusual combination of the building, lots and streets, which create a hardship. Because Frontage Road meets Stella A venue at a less-than-acute angle (greater than 90') the lots and building are oddly angled along the freeway side. The building's west wall sits on the property line, the area on the north side of the building is used for parking, and the east side is too narrow to accommodate the equipment. The only logical, and most desirable, place is the southwest corner because of its distance from the freeway and because there is adequate space. Included in the draft Redevelopment Agency Resolution are two conditions which contain wording related to electro-magnetic fields (EMF). The first condition, No.4, requires that the Applicant comply with the standards adopted by the Federal government through the American National Institute of Standards (ANSI). Any violation of the Federal standards may invoke additional conditions of approval or actual revocation of the use permit. 7-3 - . Page #4 Item 1a.,k, t:-) Meeting Date 07/16/96 The second condition, No.7, is an indemnification condition requiring the Applicant to cover any costs incurred as a result of a legal action against the City for having approved such a facility. It should be kept in mind the recently passed Communications Act prohibits denial of a wireless communications facility based on EMF. The two referenced conditions, staff believes, will not lead to such an action. They will, however, ensure a level of protection for the City in the event the Applicant no longer meets the minimum Federal standard. 5. Conclusion: Based on the Applicant's submittal package, staff has concluded that the monopole at the proposed location will not adversely impact the surrounding land uses, and a variance is fully justified because of the unusual lay of the building, lots and streets. This wireless communication's facility will enhance commerce, emergency communications and the general well being of the citizens insofar as their ability to quickly communicate will be greatly expanded. FISCAL IMPACT: All staff time related to this project is either covered through the deposit for the variance paid by the applicant or covered by the Southwest Redevelopment account for the special use permit through the Community Development Department. Because this project was in the pipeline, there was no charge for the special use permit staff time. Staff has committed to return with an analysis of redevelopment fees in the future. Attacbments I. Draft Council and Planning Commission Resolutions 2. Exhibits: Locators, Site Plans, Elevations 3. Planning Commission minutes of 6/12/96 4. Disclosure Statement (m,lhomolplanninglmortinlpbmslstdlal0416a.113) 7 - if - . A TT ACHMENT 1 DRAFT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. AND PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUITON NO. SUPS-96-04 7-5 D R AFT RESOLUTION NO. /501 A RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A SPECIAL USE PERMIT ALLOWING A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 863/865 STELLA STREET WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a special use permit (SUPS-96-04) was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department on January 15, 1996 by Pacific Bell Mobile Services (Applicant); and WHEREAS, said application requests permission to construct and operate a wireless communications facility at 863/865 Stella Street composed of a 37 foot 9 inch tall monopole supporting up to six (6) directional (panel) antennas, and two radio equipment cabinets; and WHEREAS, the project is exempt from environmental review as Class 3(e) and Class 5(a) exemptions pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project on June 12, 1996 and voted 6 to 0 to recommend that the Redevelopment Agency approve the Project in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution SUPS-96-04; and, WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency set the time and place for a hearing on said application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 4:00 p.m. July 16, 1996 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Redevelopment Agency and said hearing was thereafter closed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY hereby finds, orders and determines as follows: I. Planning Commission Record on Application The proceedings and all evidence on the Project introduced before the Planning Commission at their public hearing on this Project held on June 12, 1996, and the minutes and resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding. II. Environmental Determination The project is exempt from environmental review as Class 3(e) and Class 5(a) exemptions pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; and (m: Ihomelplanninglmaninlphm,l,¡ellal9604ra. res) 1-10 Resolution No. Page #2 Ill. Special Use Permit Findings The Redevelopment Agency hereby makes the following findings based upon the evidence and testimony in the record: 1. That the proposed use at the location is necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or the community. The proposed facility will provide a necessary and desirable service in the following ways: Mobile communications service provided by such facilities is growing in general use for both large and small businesses as well as individuals. The technology allows for mobile business communications of two-way messaging information. The growing importance of mobile communication devices makes such service necessary for the future business climate of the City of Chula Vista. The wireless messaging service is also of use for families and individuals to allow instant communication with others as well as providing mobile contact with the 911 emergency service system, thus contributing to the general well being of the community. 2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity. Wireless communications facilities such as that proposed operate on low-power radio waves, Emissions from wireless communications antennas have been shown to be below any levels that would cause hazardous biological effects. In addition, wireless communications antenna emissions are so far below all recognized safety standards that they constitute no hazard to public health or safety. 3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the code for such use. The proposed facility will comply with all the regulations of the Municipal Code. Further, the Zoning Administrator does hereby find that the conditions herein imposed on the grant of permit or other entitlement herein contained is approximately proportional both in nature and extent to the impact created by the proposed development. 4. That the granting of this Special Use Permit will not adversely affect the general plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency. (m, Ihomelplanninglmaninlphmslstellal9604ra. "s) 1-7 Resolution No. Page #3 The proposed Project is consistent in all respects with the General Plan of the City and the Redevelopment Plan for the Southwest Redevelopment Area. Land use patterns within the City of Chula Vista will not be affected by the granting of SUPS-96-04 for subject facility. The monthly maintenance visits the facility will generate will not result in the intensification of traffic or the use of the site. The minimal number of trips per month this facility will generate are an insignificant increase in traffic for the neighborhood. IV. Grant of Permit The Redevelopment Agency hereby conditionally grants the Special Use Permit subject to the following conditions, whereby the Applicant shall: 1. Construct the Project as described in the application, except as modified herein or as may be necessary to accommodate one or more simüar uses pursuant to Condition No. 3 below, and/or as required by the Municipal Code. 2. Paint the monopole 'and antennas flat gray, if not already that color. 3, Cooperate with other communications companies in co-locating additional antenna on pole structures and/or on the tops of buildings provided said co-locatees have received a Special Use Permit for such use at said site from the City. Permittee shall exercise good faith in co-locating with other communications companies and sharing the permitted site, provided such shared use does not give rise to a substantial technical level- or quality-of-service impairment of the permitted use (as opposed to a competitive conflict or financial burden). In the event a dispute arises as to whether permittee has exercised good faith in accommodating other users, the City may require a third party technical study at the expense of either or both the applicant and complaining user. 4. Comply with ANS1 standards for EMF emissions. Within six (6) months after the issuance of its occupancy permit, Applicant shall submit a project implementation report which provides cumulative field measurements of electromagnetic and radio frequency (EMF/RF) power densities of all antennas installed at subject site. The report shall quantify the EMF/RF emissions and compare the results with currently accepted ANS1 standards. Said report shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning for consistency with the project proposal report and the accepted ANSI standards. 1f on review, the City finds that the Project does not meet ANS1 standards, the City may revoke or modify this Special Use Permit. Review of said report may require the execution of a third party agreement in order to have the report properly reviewed by an expert(s) in the field of electromagnetic fields/radio frequency, 5. Ensure that the project does not cause localized interference with reception of area television or radio broadcasts. 1f on review the City finds that the project interferes with such reception, the City may revoke or modify the Special Use Permit. (m: Ihomelplanoinglmaninlpbm, "tellal9604ra. ",;) 1rt - . Resolution No. Page #4 6. Obtain all necessary permits from the Chula Vista Building Department and Fire Department, The design of the equipment shelter and antenna array shall comply with the requirements of the Zoning Administralor and with the edition of the Uniform Building Code and the Uniform Fire Code in effect at the time of issuance of any permit. 7. Applicant/operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless City, its Council members, officers, employees, agents and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attorneys' fees (collectively, "liabilities") incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City's approval and issuance of this Special Use Permit, (b) City's approval or issuance of any other permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein, and (c) Applicant's installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including, without limitation, any and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic/radio frequency fields or other energy waves or emissions. Applicant/operator shall acknowledge their agreement to this provision by executing a copy of this Special Use Permit where indicated below. Applicant's/operator's compliance with this provision is an express condition of this Special Use Permit and this provision shall be binding on any and all of Applicant's/operator's successors and assigns. 8. This permit shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted conditions imposed after approval of this permit to advance a legitimate governmental interest related to health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose after advance written notice to the Permittee and after the City has given to the Permittee the right to be heard with regard thereto. However, the City, in exercising this reserved right/condition, may not impose a substantial expense or deprive Permittee of a substantial revenue source which the Permittee can not, in the normal operation of the use permitted, be expected to economically recover. 9. This Special Use Permit shall become void and ineffective if not utilized or extended within one year from the effective date thereof, in accordance with Section 19.14.260 of the Municipal Code. 10, Execute the attached Agreement (Attachment "A") indicating that you have read, understand and agreed to the conditions of approval contained herein, and will implement same. 11. This permit shall expire ten (10) years after the date of its approval. After the first five (5) years, the Zoning Administrator shall conduct a special review of this Special Use Permit for compliance with the conditions of approval, and (m, \home\planniog\martin\phmslstellal9604ra. res) 1-1 - . Resolution No. Page #5 shall determine, in consultation with the Applicant, whether or not the facility should be discontinued or the project otherwise modified from iJs original approval. 12. Applicant shall pay all costs associated with implementing any of the above conditions of approval. This Special Use Permit shall become void and ineffective if the same is not utilized within one year from the date of this resolution in accordance with Section 19.14.260 of the Municipal Code. Failure to comply with any condition of approval shall cause this permit to be reviewed by the City for additional conditions or revocation. V. NOTICE OF EXEMPTION The City Council directs the Environmental Review Coordinator to prepare a Notice of Exemption and file the same with the County Clerk. VI. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated; and that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution and the permit shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio. Presented by Chris Salomone Community Development Director (m, \home\planning\martin\pbms \stel'a\9604<a, res) 1-10 AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND PACIFIC BELL MOBILE SERVICES AND THE PROPERTY OWNER OF 863/865 STELLA STREET RELATED TO THE CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF SUPS-96-04 AND ZA V-96-16 The property owner and the applicant shall execute this document by signing the lines provided below, said execution indicating that the property owner and Applicant have each read, understood and agreed to the conditions contained in Resolution No, , and will implement same to the satisfaction of the City. Upon execution, this document and a copy of Resolution No, - shall be recorded with the County Clerk of the County of San Diego, at the sole expense of the property owner and/or applicant, and a signed, stamped copy returned to the City Clerk. Failure to return a signed and stamped copy of this recorded document within thirty days of recordation to the Planning Department shall indicate the property owner/applicant's desire that the project, and the corresponding application for building permits and/or a business license, be held in abeyance without approval. Signature of Property Owner Date Signature of Representative of Date Pacific Bell Mobile Services Attachment: Resolution No. - 1rll . . D R AFT RESOLUTION NO. /506' . RFSOumON OF TIIE REDEVElDPMENT AGENCY OF TIIE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING VARIANCES TO ALLOW A REDUCI10N IN TIIE REAR YARD SEIBACK AND AN INCREASE IN TIIE MAXIMUM All.OWED HEIGHT IN TIIE M-52 ZONE FOR A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 863/865 STELLA STREET WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a variance (ZAV-96-16) was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department on May 7, 1996 by Pacific Bell Mobile Services (Applicant); and WHEREAS, said application requests reduction, of the rear yard setback from 15 feet to 6 feet and to increase the height from 35 feet to 37 feet 9 inches in order to accommodate the wireless communications facility requested pursuant to SUPS-96-04; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a public hearing on June 12, 1996 and voted - 6 to 0 recommending that the Redevelopment Agency approve ZA V-96-16; and WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency set the time and place for a hearing on said variance application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely July 16, 1996 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Redevelopment Agency and said hearing was thereafter closed; and WHEREAS, the project is exempt from environmental review as Class 3(e) and Class 5(a) exemptions. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY hereby finds, orders and determines as follows: 1. That a hardship peculiar to the property and not created by any act of the Applicant exists. Said hardship may include practical difficulties in developing for the needs of the Applicant consistent with the regulations of the zone; but in this context, personal, family or financial difficulties, loss of prospective profits, and neighboring violations are not hardships justifying a variance. Further, a previous variance can never have set a (m, Ihomolplonn;nglmart;nlpbm,l"olla 1% 16m.",) Î -- /'J-' Resolution No. Page #2 precedent, for each case must be considered only on its individual merits. Due to the configuration of the parcels, building and streets, as set forth in the staff report, both the reduction in the setback and the increase in height are justified in that applying the standard M-52 criteria would pose a hardship and render the project more visually impactive than desirable. 2. That such variance is necessary for the preservation and enjoyment of substantial property rights possessed by other properties in the same zoning district and in the same vicinity, and that a variance, if granted would not constitute a special privilege of the recipient not enjoyed by his neighbors. These variances are necessary to allow the Applicant the opportunity to provide customers with a wireless communications facility of at least the same quality as other similar facilities in the vicinity. It therefore does not constitute a special privilege. 3. That the authorizing of such variance will not be of substantial detriment to the adjacent property and will not materially impair the purposes of the Zoning Ordinance or public interest. The approval of ZA V-96-l6 will not be detrimental to adjacent property in that the variance is minor in nature and is justified because of the combination of parcel sizes, building location and parking area all require that the facility be placed in the proposed location. 4. That the granting of such variance will not adversely affect the general plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency. The approval of the variance requests is consistent with City policies and the policies and elements of the General Plan and the Redevelopment Plan for the Southwest Redevelopment Area, and as such, will not adversely affect same. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY hereby grants the requested variances set forth in ZAV-96-16, subject to the conditions contained in SUPS-96-04, and subject to the condition that (m, \home\pl,nniog\martin\pb=\'tell,\% 16,"",,) 7 ~ 13 Resolution No. Page #3 said variances shall only apply to this request and the nature and extent of the encroachments shown on the plans submitted with the application.. This request for variances shall become void and ineffective if same is not utilized within one year from the date of this resolution in accordance with Section 19.14.260 of the Municipal Code. Presented by Chris Salomone Community Development Director (m, Ihomelplanninglm.ninlph=I'tell.19616m. ,..) 7 -/1 RESOLUTION NO. ZAV-96-I6 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ADOPT A RESOLUTION APPROVING VARIANCES ALLOWING A REDUCTION IN THE REAR YARD SETBACK AND AN INCREASE IN THE MAXIMUM ALLOWED HEIGHT IN THE M-52 ZONE FOR A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY WHEREAS, a duly verified application for variances (ZAV-96-16) was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department on May 7, 1996 by Pacific Bell Mobile Services (Applicant); and WHEREAS, said application requested reduction of the rear yard setback from 15 feet to 6 feet and an increase in the maximum allowed height from 35 feet to 37 feet 9 inches in order to accommodate the wireless communications facility requested pursuant to SUPS-96-04; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said variance application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely June 12, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed; and WHEREAS, the project is exempt from environmental review as Class 3(e) and Class 5(a) exemptions; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby recommends Redevelopment Agency approval of the attached draft Redevelopment Agency Resolution approving variances for the Project, based on the findings contained therein. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to the Redevelopment Agency. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this day 12th day of June, 1996 by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: William C. Tuchscher II, Chairman Nancy Ripley, Secretary (m"hom,'planning\martin \pbms \stella \9616pc. res) 1,/5 RESOLUTION NO. SUPS-96-04 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY GRANT A SPECIAL USE PERMIT FOR A WIRELESS COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 863/865 STELLA STREET WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a special use permit (SUPS-96-04) was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department on January 15, 1996 by Pacific Bell Mobile Services (Applicant); and WHEREAS, said application requested permission to construct and operate a wireless communications facility at 863/865 Stella Street composed of a 37 foot 9 inch tall monopole supporting up to six (6) directional (panel) antennas, and two radio equipment cabinets; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on said special use permit application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the project is exempt from environmental review as Class 3(e) and Class 5(a) exemptions pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely June 12, 1996 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby recommends Redevelopment Agency approval of the attached draft Redevelopment Agency Resolution for the Project, based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to the Redevelopment Agency. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this day 12th day of June, 1996 by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: William C. Tuchscher II, Chairman Nancy Ripley, Secretary (m, \homc\plannlng\martln\pbm, \"dla\ 9604pc, cpt) ? -- /¿ - . A TT ACHMENT 2 LOCA TO R MAP & SITE PLANS 1-/? . Z -\ m ~ (j) ~ ~i~' ru~ rnm fITn \ I I I /I I CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR PROJECT Pacific Bell DESCI!II'I1ON: C) APPLICANT: Mobile Service SPECIAL USE PERMIT ~Jg: 865 Stella Street REQUEST: To construct and operate a wireless , communication facjlily. ' SCALE: I FIlf NUMBER: 7 ¡,ð' NORTH No Scale I SUPS - 96 - 04 - ~~." 'I 1111 ~I:I Ø! mm,: ~ I ;~r """ Oi!~ _I YJ¡I 115 I rt; I! ! ¡ ~ .', E-< I :III I~~~ !if 1 " ! I M hl!1 I I :11', ..' I ill II Q) ", I :il h M ! ,1 e ï r I Q) L, 'I ~ i I j¡Mi !! if ; , @'iò <~ II . IIII 'I I . ( , @ ...... ¡lliit ; i!il II ;!;III .¡ I ! hi ~I l!J) z a= ~ ~ b '0 @) () rx. &ìJ ¡::...... """....:1 @ ,~ = 0 u ¡ !!i I . I I I I a= 0 . I' I ¿§) - "" '. I r r I I I @ rn ~ X III II; I ¡'I"'ld'" e'l ! ~ o+J E-< ......... I¡I II'ÚI lIill! Ilif! I'm - i ~ ¡... UJ hI II¡ " @ ~(t:::M III III. I II I II. I II I i d p-.'" 0 U¡ ::g d 0 <~ I I ....:I Q) ....:I l!) , lli1!J ~ rn ::J l!) I I : @:Q) p-'Q)~O Æ)'i ..... u I I 'I I -£3 ~ ~ I i. ..... ~ en ; ! lt1 » ¡:: > ~ ~ i ,S ~3 = o+J '> l!:!b (t:~ = Z : ~ I <1; "" I ....:I II!!. ,I "I' I II ~ ....:I 1111111 11111 11111111111 !.II I. 1111 111111111 ~ ,....., ...."....,::....... ..".. ........1 ~ E-< . ., . I~ en I :~ ;::~~!~ ;~~ ;: ~~ ;::~: ;~~::~~ ;:::~~~ I ,~¡ l!) ¡ Ii. <0 d n I ,II II' !D " III h, . I ¡II " 1111111111111 .1 1~jl 'II 1 I '"' II 'i 1111 ...1111 11111111 Ihllill 11111 hilI i". \ . ~4$0~~ .....,.....II....lIh. ""....,........... . . -, I I e<:~"1 ' LU~' - Iii -'B:~ !, IA¡ ~ .""" olld I yj! ~]8 " 115 ~ ~ H I .f=. ~.II II ~~~ i¡¡(¡¡ I! ! I:!~ ' " .' -o::t: .In ..11 o.zo. I J¡¡., I I I Ii ~II ¡ I ,'hi::! I I II 111i!¡( I :,1 I II I I I B 1.11111 I !Ii i , . I ( ! II I , i i " I ~ , ~ I i Ii ) Ii E- ,,~ .' ~a I !I '¡ "I! Ii -I ,i ~I ¡ '1'" II II 'ill,; I '" i ¡ I . ~ . , ~ : a ~ I I ~ ~ .1' t:Þ,. i ~ rJ I W ' u E . -' ¡ , L:, ~ d I".",,;. .- 1~'~ - ¡; 7 ~ ;2 0 oä'" ü~~~ cui: f! .. ú Ii I 6i¡~ ,till It 1~]~~ ::1; IU ~.3i. ~ 1ft;; 1:i.1 J~,:Ji,i! 15~ 11:1 ; I I ! . .. I I I' , "';' , ,~,:;; I, 11'lii : " , it ~~. ~I= i ~ r ,.. ~.. .1' I " '; WI :¡i , '~ ! : I i I. ! III . ¥! Ii r!' I L] ill. II' . ,III II ~ ; 0 = 'Cr- .~; I I ~ I ~! ,,¡:-, --; ~ ãl N' I '. 8 w'" ) ,. <.,'~" ~. ", .. >" \-\i'.': ¡e ", 'ii,"""'" I -? ""'2,j;' ¡,"',.J; ." \, ¿ ,~ LÚ",~.,¡, ." ",Ç>" J \~; <.. Zo' ~jI ¡.~' '1 ,,:, I~ I; IW i ~.~~ (:: ' ; ;, ': ff ~~,,~;~}\'r í"; .'; I ATTACHMENT 3 PLANNING COMMISSION MINUTES FROM THE MEETING OF JUNE 12, 1996 ? ~ 22- - . Excerpt from Draft Planning Commission Minutes of 6/12/96 ITEM 3. PUBLIC HEARINGS: SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUPS-96-04; REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE A WIRELESS COMMUNICA nONS FACILITY AT 865 STELLA STREET, COMPOSED OF A 37 FOOT 9 INCH TALL MONOPOLE SUPPORTING SIX (6) DIRECTIONAL (PANEL) ANTENNAS AND TWO RADIO EQUIPMENT CABINETS - Pacific Bell Mobile Services VARIANCE ZAV-96-16; REQUEST TO REDUCE THE REAR YARD SETBACK FROM 15 FEET TO 6 FEET AND TO INCREASE THE HEIGHT FROM 35 FEET TO 37 FEET 9 INCHES IN ORDER TO ACCOMMODATE THE ABOVE FACILITY Associate Planner Miller presented the staff report and recommended approval of the special use pennit and variance. He noted this area was in the southwest redevelopment area and the project would move forward to the Redevelopment Agency rather than the City Council. It was being brought before the Planning Commission rather than the Southwest Project Area Committee since the PAC did not have enough sitting members presently to fonn a quorum. Commissioner Tarantino said he thought the cellular companies were going to work together to cluster their systems on a single pole. He questioned if all three major cellular companies were represented or if someone else would come in and request another pole as well. Mr. Miller stated that the GT Mobile Net and AirTouch Cellular monopoles were 1/4 to 1/2 mile to the south. It might be a possibility that there would be others. Staff usually encouraged roof-mounted antennas, but because of the situation at this particular site, staff focused on the monopole. Principal Planner Griffin stated that the clustering of antennas was kept in the conditions of the pennits so that staff could analyze that and require them to be clustered if it was preferable. It is not something that is required on each company but a capability staff has with that condition in each pennit. Commissioner Ray asked if going further west would diminish the area that could be covered. He questioned why the monopole on Quail Court could not be used. Mr. Miller stated that Quail Court was off of 1-805 and was designed to cover the 805 corridor. This facility was off of 1-5 and was designed to cover the 1-5 corridor. Because of FCC regulations and requirements and limitations on their signal strength and how far that signal goes, the one on Quail Court was not designed nor could it go all the way to 1-5 because of FCC restrictions. Answering Commissioner Ray, Mr. Martin explained the differences between the cellular and PCS systems and their service radii. This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened. '7 - ;2~ - . PC Minutes -14- June 12, 1996 Kirk Dakan, 9610 Granite Ridge Dr., SD, stated this was the first time the City had recommended that their company install a monopole. He agreed that was the best, from a technical standpoint, and the easiest way to design a system. He felt the staff position was logical from a land use standpoint, from a visual and aesthetic standpoint. The primary viewshed they were trying to protect was the freeway. In reply to Commissioner Tarantino, Mr. Dakan stated they would be willing to share monopoles if it were necessary and City staff requested it. However, when co-locating, there would be less poles, but the poles would become more visible because of more antennas. He felt it was better to have a larger number of minor-impact facilities than a smaller number of really obvious designs. Commissioner Thomas asked if this design was consistent with the changes that were made on "H" Street. Mr. Miller stated that the poles were fundamentally different. The pole proposed on "H" Street was a 70' tall pole with 15' tall whip antennas on top. The recommendation of the Planning Commission was to remove those whip antennas on top. AirTouch's system requires them to have both panel and whip antennas. The system being considered did not require that. They only have the panel antennas. It was fundamentally different from the traditional cellular tower that also incorporated a dish antenna, as well as the panel and whip antennas. Commissioner Thomas asked if there would be additional dishes; if this was the maximum. Mr. Miller replied that if the applicant wanted to add anything to it, they would have to come back for a modification. Chair Tuchscher asked Mr. Dakan if there was any potential that PacBell would come back to the City at some point in the not-too-distant future with a master plan showing all the potential locations that might be necessary within Chula Vista. Mr. Dakan stated that could not be done because of several reasons including competition and unexpected need for coverage. No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed. MSC (Thomas/Willett) 6-0 (Commissioner Salas absent) to accept staff's proposal. 7-'-t - . ATTACHMENT 4 DISCLOSURE STATEMENT FOR SUPS-96-04 J- '-5 r l THE CrrY OF anJLA VJST A D ISa.OSURE ST A ThMENT You arc l'CCuired to file a 51alemenl of Disclosure of ceÌ1ain ownership or financial IntereSts. payments, or campaign :onlrlhullons, on all mailers which will require discretionary action on the pan of Ihe City Council. Planning Commission, and ill olher official bodies. The following Information mUSt be disclosed: t. Ust the namcs of all persons having a financial iniercsi in Ihe propeny which is the subject of the application or the contract, co¡., _ocr, applicanl, contractor. subcontractor, material supplier, Donna J. Schneider - Kenneth J. .schneider 2. If any person" Idenlified pursuant 10 (I) above Is I corporation or partnership, Ilsllhe nlmes Of all Individuals owning more tban 10<(' of the sharcs in the corpora lion or owning any pariliership inleresl In Ihe partnership. N/A 3. If any person" Identified pursuant to (I) above is non-profil orpnlzallon or a IrusI, list the names of any person serving as direclor of Ihe non-profil organization or as trUSlce or beneftclary or !ruslor of Ihe trusL N/A 4. Have you had more Ihan S2S0 worlh of business Iral\S3Cled wilh any member of Ihe City Slarr, Boards, Commissions, Commillees, and Council wilhin the past twelve months? Yes- No~ If yes, please Indicale person(s): - S, Please idcDlity each and every person, including any agents. employees, consullanls, or Independent contraCtors who you bave assigned to represenl you before the City in this maller, Matt Brown. Pacifi~ Bell Mnnih ~"'-vices - 6. Have you and/or your officers or agenlS, in the a&lrepte, contributed more than SI,OOO to a Councllmember In tbe curren I or preceding election period? Yes- No,L.. If yes. Stale which Councllmember(s): . . . (NOTE: Allada additional pagel . 1ICICIi88II}') . . . Date: 9-21-.:{5 Áur~ í~2!o Signalure of CODtractOrlappUClDt Matt Brown Print or type name of conlractorlapplicaDt . f!!l!!!! ù dcJfnd III: "A,."lttdit>idluJ/, fin... co-fHI"1oenhip. joiN - _UuiOtl, _i.øJ d..b,fNw>UII """,1ÙJJIiOtl, c."".".,øøn. - ...... ~ "...uc..... IIW ",", "", odw CØIUU)\ city """ COW"'Y. city mwlkipG/ity. diIIti", or 01116 pøIi¡jct>l IIIbdiIÜiøn, '" "", odw rouP or combilllJj"" ø</ÍIII_. 18ÚL. - . NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CITY REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY will hold a public hearing to consider the following: A special use permit and a variance request for the property located 863/865 Stella Avenue to construct and operate a wireless communications facility, and to place said wireless communications facility in the setback area and exceed the maximum height requirement. The wireless communications facility will consist of a 37' 9" monopole and two equipment cabinets. The entire facility will take up approximately 200 square feet. There will be no habitable areas associated with this project. If you wish to challenge the Agency's action on this application in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Redevelopment Agency at or prior to the public hearing described in this notice. A copy of the applications and accompanying documentation and/or plans are on file and available for inspection and review at the City Planning Department, or call Martin Miller, Project Planner, at (619) 476-5335 with questions or comments. SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY on Tuesday, July 16, 1996, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear. Dated: July 3, 1996 Case No: SUPS-96-04, ZA V-96-16 1~/-7 - . REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM TITLE: Item <;? Meeting Date 07/16/96 -09 RESOLUTION /6 APPROVING A SHARED LOSS PROPOSAL ON THE AGENCY'S $16,875 LOAN (PRINCIPAL AND EQUITY SHARE) ON SPACE 71, ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK, 521 ORANGE AVENUE Community Development Dire{$\to 0 ' Executive Director~Gt W ~ U ~- (4/5ths Vote: Yes L No ~ SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: BACKGROUND: In 1987, both the Redevelopment Agency and the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) issued loans to Mr. and Mrs. Steele, low-income residents at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park, to assist them in purchasing their space when the park converted to resident ownership. Mr. and Mrs. Steele passed away and their heirs would like to sell the property. Staff has been working with the State Department of HCD, a real estate broker, and Orange Tree Homeowner's Association (HOA) to negotiate a fair payoff to all parties given the special circumstances of the sale. RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency adopt the attached resolution approving the shared loss proposal on the Agency's $16,875 loan (principal and equity share) on Space 71 at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: The heirs to Mr. and Mrs. Steele's estate have been attempting to sell Space 71 at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park for approximately two years. The property has been vacant since December 1994 and the Orange Tree Mobilehome HOA have not been receiving space rent. The space rent is the monthly fee charged to the tenants of Orange Tree Mobilehome Park for general maintenance of the park. The heirs commissioned a mobilehome dealer to assist them in selling the space since they do not reside in California. The dealer commission is negotiated between the dealer and the sellers. Staff contacted the State HCD Mobilehome Ombudsman Office regarding the industry standard on mobilehome dealer commission. The Ombudsman office stated that a mobilehome dealer can negotiate a commission and it is not unusual for the dealer to charge a commission in excess of 10% since the price of a mobilehome is well below the price of a single-family home or condominium. q _ f T Page 2, Item ~ Meeting Date 07/16/96 An offer to purchase Space 71 for $35,000 has been received by the Community Development Department. This offer is not enough to payoff the loans to the Agency and the State HCD. In order to make this deal work, staff contacted the State HCD to discuss their participation in a shared loss proposal. The State has agreed to participate in staff's proposal. In telephone conversations with the State HCD representative, the City proposal was discussed and accepted. It has been detennined this was not an unusual request and the State regularly participates in this type of arrangement. Attached as Exhibit A is the letter of acceptance from the State HCD. When the space was acquired by Mr. and Mrs. Steele in 1987, the price of the space was $26,588 plus $3,787.79 in closing costs for a total of $30,155. The State HCD (in first position) lent $15,200 and the Agency (in second position) lent $14,955. The mobilehome was owned free and clear and was used as security for both loans. Currently, the indebtedness on the space is as follows: Loan Amount Interest/Equitv Share Total Due State HCD $15,200 $8,751 . $24,191 City of Chula Vista $14,955 $1,920 . $16,875 Sales Commission $ 4,000 Orange Tree HOA $ 1.946 Total $47,012 . The State HCD's interest is accruing at an annual rate of 7%. On a daily basis that is equivalent to $2.90 per day. . The Agency's equity share is 56.24 % or $1,920. This figure is based upon the appraised value of $30,000 minus the original purchase price of $26,588 times the equity share percentage of 56.24. The Community Development Department received an offer to purchase Space 71 for $35,000. A recent appraisal valuated the space at $30,000 and the mobilehome at $5,159 for a total of $35,159. The mobilehome is a double wide (two bedroom, one and a half bath) and is in need of repair. The interior ceiling panels show signs of water damage and the carpet needs to be replaced: The master bedroom closet and all the entry steps, decks, and ramps show signs of tennites and are in need of repair or replacement. An inspection will be perfonned to detennine the extent of the repairs. The buyers have opted to fix-up the mobilehome, and it is the responsibility of the sellers to pay for the cost of bringing the mobilehome up to code. However, since the seller's are suffering financial hardship, staff recommends that the cost of the repairs come from the City's Mobilehome Rehabilitation Program in the fonn of a grant. Since the buyers are seniors and low-income, they would qualify to receive financial assistance under the program guidelines. It is estimated that the repairs will cost approximately $3,000. This will include tennite eradication and any health and safety code violations which need to be repaired. ?? - '-~ - . Page 3, Item ~ Meeting Date 07/16/96 If the Agency votes to approve the shared loss proposal recommended by staff, the breakdown would be as follows: Total Due Shared Loss Total Received State HCD $24,191 $6,222 $17,969 City of Chula Vista $16,875 $4,321 $12,554 Sales Commission $ 4,000 $ 968 $ 3,032 Orange Tree ROA $ 1.946 L2Q.l $ 1.445 Total $47,012 $12,012 $35,000 The City proposed to the State HCD that all parties involved share equally in the loss of equity in the amount of $12,012. This is accomplished by dividing the loss of $12,012 by the total amount due of $47,012, which would be a shared loss of approximately 26% as shown above. Each party will share equitably in the loss and the heirs to Mr. and Mrs. Steele's estate will not receive any proceeds from the sale. The heirs agree to this proposal and would like to be relieved of the financial responsibilities of owning the mobilehome. They are requesting and encouraging the City and State to consummate this deal. The proposed shared loss proposal is an attempt to provide a fair split of the loss in equity in the land and space, and give all parties the ability to recoup some of their costs associated with the property. FISCAL IMPACT: The shared loss proposal proposed by staff will allow the Agency to recoup some of its original investment in Space 71; $12,554 (minus closing costs estimated at $500). The terms proposed would mean that the Agency would forego $4,321 in equity. Without a work out situation, the State RCD (in first position) would need to foreclose and would receive all their principal and interest ($24,191), and costs of foreclosure. The payback of the Agency loan would be from the remaining proceeds of the foreclosure sale, if any. Without this shared loss proposal, the Agency would lose even more money. The State RCD is in first lien position so they could foreclose to recoup their principal, accrued interest, and foreclosure costs. The Agency, in second lien position, would receive any remaining funds. A foreclosure sale would likely not produce a buyer who would pay any more than the $35,000 currently offered. The State RCD would receive $24,191 plus foreclosure costs, so the return to the Agency would be minimal or zero. ~-3 JUL-02-1996 14:37 FROM HCD BOND UNDERoJRITlNG TO 916195855698 P.01 : : I ; bATE OF CAJ'FO ,.¡ - BUSINESS TRANSPORT, TlON I D HoustNG AGENCY pm WILSd DEPARTME T OF HOUSING AND COrt1MUNITY DEVELOPMENT '! DMSION rn!, MMUNITY AFFAIRS ' 800lHIRD " EXHIBIT "A" foe. BOX 952ØS4 SACRAMENT<!. 94252-2054 {916) ~.1S6O r ; (91ii) 445.0117 I ! I I I I i J\11y 2, 1996 i I I i CìtylofCl1ù\a Vista i I Coclm*nity Development Department ¡ Attllll: ~udith Foland II' ~e:,' Space 71" Orange Tree ~obilehome Park, . Borrower: Steele , I I I ' ! J'~~ I I p a~t to our conve~sation today,: please be advised that the Department will agrbe to I' ,ace. '$17,969 as payment in full for our note and deed of trust recorded against tJ!te , abmfe ~efer, enced P,roperty. , ' . , ,I I ¡ If yo,u ¡¡ave any questions please give me a call at 91~322-2045. i II I J I . ¡ Sinlre¡y, ß i Iv,: " /' n,', ,~1 ~ ! <-Sandy {k?~ . I Ii' I I j . I 1 ; ! I . ' Ii: I ; , ¡'i , I ¡ I 1 1 : : i I ' ! . I , I I i . : 1 I i ' g-<I TOTAL P.01 RESOLUTION /.:509 RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A SHARED LOSS PROPOSAL ON THE AGENCY'S $16,875 LOAN (PRINCIPAL AND EQUITY SHARE) ON SPACE 71, ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK, 521 ORANGE AVENUE WHEREAS, the Agency provided a loan to Mr. and Mrs. Steele, low-income residents at Orange Tree Mobilehome Park to assist them in purchasing their space when the park converted to resident ownership; and WHEREAS, the borrower's are deceased and their heirs want to sell the property; and WHEREAS, the Agency has determined that the property and home (used as security on the Agency's loan) does not have sufficient equity to repay all parties given the condition of the home and the current real estate market; and WHEREAS, the Agency desires to participate in a shared loss proposal to maximize the payback to the Agency on their loan and to cooperate with the other parties (the State Department of Housing and Community Development, the real estate broker, and the Orange Tree Homeowner's Association) to ensure that all parties are paid back a portion of the original investment. NOW THEREFORE, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby find, order, determine and resolve to participate in a shared loss proposal valued at $4,321 on the Agency's $16,875 loan (principal and equity share) to Mr. and Mrs. Steele, Orange Tree Mobilehome Park, 521 Orange Avenue, Space 71, subject to the terms and conditions of an agreement between the parties in a form approved by the City Attorney. PRESENTED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: rL,C;(~~ g~~ Chris Salomone, Executive Secretary and Community Development Director ~-::Ç; REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT Item c; Meeting Date 07/1t96 RESOLUTION 15/tJ Waiving Competitive Bidding Requirements and Approving a Contract with Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. (KMA) for the Provision of Consulting Services for Amendment of the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan to Delete Territory Community Development Di:tt:or [, ~ ' Executive Director \r. ~ ~~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes No_l ~ 0 ;.,...-:. Council Referral Number: BACKGROUND: Pursuant to recent agreements with San Diego County, staff is proceeding with an amendment to the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan to delete the County Landfill site. In the past, staff has used consultants to prepare new redevelopment plans and plan amendments due to the complexity of the process and amount of documentation. The deletion of territory is not anticipated to be complicated and will be processed primarily by staff. To ensure that all required reports, hearings and Council/Agency actions take place, staff is requesting to hire KMA to review and direct staff work. ITEM TITLE: SUBMITTED BY: REVIEWED BY: RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency adopt the Resolution waiving competitive bidding and approving a contract with KMA for consulting services for the deletion of territory from the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area for an amount not to exceed $14,000. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: As part of the negotiations with the County for annexation of portions of the Otay Ranch to the City of Chula Vista, it was agreed to de-annex the County landfill and remove it from the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan. The Council approved an agreement with the County at its meeting of May 14, 1996 confirming the City's intent to carry out the de-annexation from the City and Redevelopment Plan. Amendment of the Redevelopment Plan to delete the landfill will require a number of steps including: . Revised legal system description and map, . Preparation of a Preliminary Report, Preliminary Plan amendment and Redevelopment Plan amendment, . Notices to and consultation with taxing entities, . Planning Commission and Project Area Committee actions, . Report to the City Council, . Public hearing notices and letters, . Post public hearing actions including notifications and recordation of the Plan amendment. 9~/ 'T Page 2. Item L Meeting Date 07/16/96 Necessitv for Consultant Services Recent changes in Redevelopment Law have affected the plan adoption and amendment procedures including the preparation of specific reports, resolutions and notifications to taxing agencies. Since Redevelopment Plan Adoption and Amendment are processes that occur infrequently and irregularly, City/Agency staff do not have specific expertise in these areas and generally" rely upon consultants to guide or carry out these activities. The plan adoption/amendment process is also time consuming. The processing entails the preparation of numerous documents which must comply with State law, noticing holding public hearings, and notifying and negotiating with taxing agencies. The process takes approximately five months to complete. Although this work could be done by staff, the current staffing level and number of priority projects being processed precludes consistent attention to the amendment process and will add to the processing time. While City staff will prepare and process many of the required documents, it is recommended that a consultant be hired to guide staff through the process and provide pro-forma resolutions and notification where appropriate. This will save considerable staff time and expense, particularly in the City Attorney's office and Community Development which have both recently been impacted by loss of staff. Since the Agency is also considering an amendment to the Bayfront Redevelopment Plan to incorporate the tidelands area, the information gained by going through the amendment process can be applied to the Bayfront project without additional consultant costs. Solicitation of Consultant Services The Agency has had a good working relationship with KMA over the past several years. While KMA was in the process of analyzing the proposed Bayfront Plan Amendment, staff consulted them concerning their assistance in amending the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan expeditiously and in a manner which would minimize consultant cost by utilizing City staff to their maximum availability. The result was a negotiated contract for a maximum amount of $14,000 based upon specific assistance from KMA. KMA has expertise in economic development, redevelopment and project financing. In addition to assisting staff in the analysis of the eligibility of the tidelands for inclusion in the Bayfront Redevelopment Project Area, they have assisted the Agency in the financial analyses of the MCA and Waf-Mart projects. Since the nature of the work proposed requires a negotiated contract, expediency and a flexible working relationship, staff recommends approval of the contract with KMA without competitive bidding. FISCAL IMPACT: KMA has agreed to provide the required services for an amount not to exceed $14,000, based upon their schedule of fees attached to the contract which is average for the industry. Funds are available to cover this amount in the Otay Valley Road Professional Services account. 1-2-- Page 3, Item î Meeting Date 07/16/96 KMA has a cumulative amount of $26,921.35 in consultin9 contracts with the City of Chula Vista for FY 1996. In FY 1995, the company completed contracts worth $16,110. [M,HOME\COMMOEV\'",m,n\,,',lkm,ov',"'] 7~3 - . ~5(~5(1995 ~9: 55 21352252~4 KEYSER MARSTON LA PAGE e2 J(EYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES [111 C. JlDvrso", It" REAL EstA're 500 5oUTI< GRANO AVENUI, 5u,,' 1480 ~t>8\'ELOPMEIIT ~ AN""". o."'O""A 90071 EcoNOMIC PzvELOI'MWC 213/622-8090 PAX 2t3/6zz..52D4 F""AL [NPACT ""'Ñ«;E"" RIotMo 1.. Barn c.LVUI E. Howsol1 KATIitJ!B< H. HlAD SAN DllGO June 5,1996 GuAwM. TOIMIL! I!oo.... J, W""""", PAULC-M.u<aA SAN F MH<t<CD Mr. Fred Kassman "'- J .... i<»>.. Redevelopment Coordinator '["""",C.ICnLY KAn E.....I'UNK City of Chula Vista DEN...¡¡.c<Jo/1.!'( 276 Fourth Avenue DEB... M. );0... Chula Vista. Califomia 91910 . Dear Mr. Kassman: Keyser Marston Associates. Ine. (KMA) has prepared this revised scope of services based on our primary role as redevelopment advisor. KMA will provide the Agency with advisory services on a time and material basis for the preparation and process of amending the Redevelopment Plan for the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project. (The sole purpose of the Amendment is to delete territory.) KMA services will also include attendance at key meetings and review of key documents prepared by Agency staff. Agency staff will bO responsible for preparation of reports and documents and overall management. including actions required for environmental review. The KMA costs to complete the tasks outlined in this scope of services are estimated based on a maximum slx-month amendment adoption process. Services will be performed on a time and materials basis (see attached hourly rate schedule) within a total budget of $14,000. In the event unanticipated circumstances or scheduling delays occur, or KMA is requested to expand its role beyond a review and advisory capacity, we will advise the Agency as to any budget Impacts. Since costs are estimated, budgeted amounts may be transferable between tasks. 9-f 66/65/1996 69:55 2136225264 KEYSER MARSTON LA PAGE 63 Mr. Fred Kassman June 5.1996 page 2 SCOPE OF SERVICES The following tasks, with estimated budgets, will be provided by KMA; Task 1 Preparation of Schedule of Actions $ 1,000 KMA will prepare 8 master schedule of actions that details 1I1e actions required in the redevelopment plan amendment process. Responsible parties and required documents will be listed. A summary of the n'laeter schedule will also. be prepared and updated as necessary. Task 2 Coordination $1,200 KMA will assist Agency staff in coordinating the preparation and transmittal of required documents and reports as scheduled. Task 3 Taxing Agency Notice and Mailing Liet $ 600 KMA will prepare the mailing list of affected taxing entities and draft the notice and transmittal letter pursuant to Section 33327 of the Community Redevelop- ment Law. The preparation of 1I1e map end legal description, the filing fee, end the mailing will be the responsibility of Agency staff. ' Task 4 OutlIne and Review of Preliminary Report $ 1,000 KMA will outline the Preliminary Report requirements based on Section 33344.5 of the Community Redevelopment Law. The Preliminary Report is to be prepared as it applies to the proposed Amendment to delete territory. I<MA will review the Preliminary Report prepared by Agency staff. Task 5 Meeting Attendance $ 2,000 KMA will attend up to 1I1ree (3) key public meetlngslhearings In connection with the Amendment. This would include the joint public hearing on the Amendment. KEYSER MARSTON AssoCIATES INÇ 9-5 - . 1:15/1:15/1995 1:19:55 213522521:14 KEYSER MARSTON LA PAGE 1:14 Mr. Fred Kassman June 5, 1996 . page 3 Task 6 Public Hear1ng Notices and Letters S 1,500 I<MA will prepare drafts of the public notice of the joint public hearing on the Amendment and the transmittal letters to taxing agencies. occupanw. property owners and others. Publishing and mailing of notices would be undertaken by Agency staff. Task 7 Joint Public'Hearing Mateña\s S 1,000 . KMA will prepare organizational, procedural, and public ¡ntannation materials for the joint public hearing on the Amendment Materials do not Include resolutions on ordinances, Task 8 Post Public Hearing Notices and Recording S 1,000 KMA will prepare drafts of notices, transmittal letters, and documents required for the filing and recording of the Amendment once adopted. Agency staff will transmit, record. and file. Task 9 Advisory Services S 3,000 KMA will provide Agency staff with on-going advise on the process of amendîng the Redevelopment Plan as necessary. Services would include discussions on the scheduling and coordination of redevelopment plan amendment activities, Amendment content, scheduling, and related matters. Expenses $ 1,500 TOTAL PROJECTeD KMA COST: $13.100 Sincerely, 4&SOCIATES' INC. Calvin E. Hollis CEH:gbd KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATiS INC 9-6 ~ór~5r199ó ~9: 55 213ó2252~4 KEYSER MARSTON LA PAGE eJ5 KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES, 1Nc. HOURLY FEE SCHEDULE ~ A. JERllYKEYSER* $160,00 SENIOR PRINCJP ALS" 5155.00 PRINCIPALS" $150.00 SENIOR ASSOCIATES $130.00 ASSOCIATES $115.00 SENIOR ANALYST $100.00 ANALYST $ 90.00 TECHNICAL STAFF $ 55.00 ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF 5 50.00 DiIwtly rdated job expenses not included in the above rates are: autO mileage, air fares; hotels and motels, meals, ¡;a[' rentals, taxifls. telephone calls, deliverY, electronic data processing. graphics and printing. DiœctIy related job expenses will be billed at 110% of ~ost. . Monthly billings for staff'time and expenses inCt1J1'ed during the period will be payable within thirty (30) days of invoice date. A charge of 1% per month will be added to all past due accounts. "Rates for individuals in these categories will be ïncrWed by SOOA, for time speut in coun testimony. 9-7 - . Agreement between Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista and Keyser Marston Associates Inc. Assistance in Amendment of the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan Advisory Services This agreement ("Agreement"), dated June 18, 1996 for the purposes of reference only, and effective as of the date last executed unless another date is otherwise specified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 1 is between the City-related entity as is indicated on Exhibit A, paragraph 2, as such ("City"), whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 3, and the entity indicated on the attached Exhibit A, paragraph 4, as Consultant, whose business form is set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 5, and whose place of business and telephone numbers are set forth on Exhibit A, paragraph 6 ("Consultant"), and is made with reference to the following facts: , Recitals WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") wishes to amend the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan by deleting certain territory from the Redevelopment Project Area; and, WHEREAS, it is the desire of the Agency to hire a consultant with the expertise to assist staff in amending the Redevelopment Plan in accordance with Community Redevelop- ment Law; and, . WHEREAS, Keyser Marston Associates has proposed to assist the Agency in accordance with an Agreement between the Agency and Keyser Marston Associates; and, WHEREAS, the Agency has found that City staff has varied expertise in amending Redevelopment Plans; and, WHEREAS, the Agency has found that Keyser Marston Associates is experienced with the subject and would be the most efficient and effective firm to provide assistance; and, WHEREAS, Consultant warrants and represents that they are experienced and staffed in a manner such that they are and can prepare and deliver the services required of Consultant to Agency within the time framers) herein provided all in accordance with the terms and conditions of this Agreement; WHEREAS, the Agency desires that funds be set aside as a contingency for any additional work that may need to be undertaken to amend the Redevelopment Plan. (End of Recitals. Next Page starts Obligatory Provisions.) 9' -? Page 1 Obligatory Provisions Pages NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED thatthe City and Consultant do hereby mutually agree as follows: 1. Consultant's Duties A. General Duties .Consultant shall perform services described on the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 7, entitled "General Duties"; and,' . B. Scope of Work and Schedule In the process of performing and delivering said "General Duties", Consultant shall also perform all of the services described in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, entitled" Scope of Work and Schedule", not inconsistent with the General Duties, accordingfo, and within the time frames set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, and deliver to City such Dèliverables as are identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 8, within the time frames set forth therein, time being of the essence of this agreement, The General Duties and the work and deliverables required in the Scope of Work and Schedule shall be herein referred to as the "Defined Services". Failure to complete the Defined Services by the times indicated does not, except at the option of the City, operate to terminate this Agreement. C. Reductions in Scope of Work City may independently, or upon request from Consultant, from time to time reduce the Defined Services to be performed by the Consultant under this Agreement. Upon doing so, City and Consultant agree to meet in good faith and confer for the purpose of negotiating a corresponding reduction in the compensation associated with said reduction. D. Additional Services In addition to performing the Defined Services herein Set forth, City may require Consultant to perform additional consulting services related to the Defined Services ("Additional Services"), and upon doing so in writing, if they are within the s.cope of services offered by Consultant, Consultant shall perform same on a time and materials basis at the rates set forth in the "Rate- Schedule" in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11 (C), unless a separate fixed fee is otherwise agreed upon. All compensation for Additional Services shall be paid monthly as billed. E. Standard of Care Consultant, in performing any Services under this agreement, whether Defined Services or Additional Services, shall perform in a manner consistent with that level of care and skÎII ordinarily exercised by members of the profession currently practicing under similar conditions and in similar locations. F. Insurance Consultant represents that it and its agents, staff and subconsultants employed by it in connection with the Services required to be rendered, are protected against the risk of loss q-? Page 2 by the following insurance coverages, in the following categories, and to the limits specified, policies of which are issued by Insurance Companies that have a Best's Rating of "A, Class V" or better, or shall meet with the approval of the City: Statutory Worker's Compensation InSI!ranCe and Employer's Liability Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in the attached Exhibit A, Paragraph 9. Commercial General Liability Insurance including Business Automobile Insurance coverage in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, combined single limit applied separately to each project away from premises owned or rented by Consultant, which names City and Applicant as an Additional Insured, and which is primary to any policy which the City may otherwise carry ("Primary Coverage"), and which treats the employees of the City and Applicant in the same manner as members of the general public ("Cross-liability Coverage"). Errors and Omissions insurance, in the amount set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 9, unless Errors and Omissions coverage is included in the General Liability policy. G. Proof of Insurance Coverage. \ (1) Certificates of Insurance. Consultant shall demonstrate proof of coverage herein required, prior to the commencement of services required under this Agreement, by delivery of Certificates of Insurance demonstrating same, and further indicating that the policies may not be canceled without at least thirty (30) days written notice to the Additional Insured. (2) Policy Endorsements Required. In order to demonstrate the Additional Insured Coverage, Primary Coverage and Cross-liability Coverage required under Consultant's Commercial General Liability Insurance Policy, Consultant shall deliver a policy endorsement to the City demonstrating same, which shall be reviewed and approved by the Risk Manager. H, Security for Performance. (1) Performance Bond. In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Performance Bond (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Performance Bond"), then Consultant shall provide to the City a performance bond by a surety and in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the space adjacent to the term, "Performance Bond", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A. (2) Letter of Credit. In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Letter of Credit"), then Consultant shall provide to the City an irrevocable Letter of Credit callable by the City at their unfettered discretion by submitting to the bank a, letter, signed by the City Manager, stating that the Consultant is in breach of the terms of this Agreement. The letter of credit shall be issued by a bank, and be 9 '" /0 Page 3 in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney which amount is indicated in the sp'ace adjacent to the term, "Letter of Credit", in said Paragraph 19, Exhibit A. (3) I. Other Security In the event that Exhibit A, at Paragraph 19, indicates the need for Consultant to provide security other than a Performance Bond or a Letter of Credit (indicated by a check mark in the parenthetical space immediately preceding the subparagraph entitled "Other Security"), then Consultant shall provide to the City such other security therein listed in a form and amount satisfactory to the Risk Manager or City Attorney. I. Business License Consultant agrees to obtain a business license from the City and to otherwise comply with Title 5 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. , 2. Duties of the City A. Consultation and Cooperation City shall regularly consult the Consultant for the purpose of reviewing the progress of the Defined Services and Schedule therein contained, and to provide direction and guidance to achieve the objectives of this agreement. The City shall permit access to its office facilities, files and records by Consultant throughout the term of the agreement. In addition' thereto, City agrees to provide the information, data, items and materials set forth on Exhibit A, Paragraph 1O, and with the further understanding that delay in the provision of these materials beyond 30 days after authorization to proceed, shall constitute a basis for the justifiable delay in the Consultant's performance of this agreement. B. Compensation Upon receipt of a properly prepared billing from Consultant submitted to the City periodically as indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, but in no event more frequently than monthly, on the day of the period indicated in Exhibit A, Paragraph 18, City shall compensate Consultant for all services rendered by Consultant according to the terms and conditions set forth in Exhibit A, Paragraph 11, adjacent to the governing compensation relationship indicated bya "checkmark" next to the appropriate arrangement, subject to the requirements for retention set forth in paragraph 19 of Exhibit A, and shall compensate Consultant for out of pocket expenses as provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 12, All billings submitted by Consultant shall contain sufficient information as to the propriety of the billing to permit the City to evaluate that the amount due and payable thereunder is proper, and shall specifically contain the City's account number indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 18 (C) to be charged upon making such payment, 3. Administration of Contract Each party designates the individuals ("Contract Administrators") indicated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 13, as said party's contract administrator who is authorized by said party to represent them in the routine administration of this agreement. q ~I/ Page 4 4. Term. This Agreement shall terminate when the Parties have complied with all executory provisions hereof. 5. Liquidated 'Damages The provisions of this section apply if a Liquidated Damages Rate is provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14. It is acknowledged by both parties that time is of the essence in the completion of this Agreement. It is difficult to estimate the amount of damages resulting from delay in per- formance. The parties have used their judgment to arrive at a reasonable amount to compensate for delay. Failure to complete the Defined Services within the allotted time period specified in this Agreement shall result in the following penalty: For each consecutive calendar day in excess of the time specified for the completion of the respective work ~ssignment or Deliverable, the consultant shall pay to the City, or have withheld from monies due, the sum of Liquidated Damages Rate provided in Exhibit A, Paragraph 14 ("Liquidated Damages Rate"). Time extensions for delays beyond the consultant's control, other than delays caused by the City, shall be requested in writing to the City's Contract Administrator, or designee, prior to the expiration of the specified time. Extensions of time, when granted, will be based upon the effect of delays to the work and will not be granted for delays to minor portions of work unless it can be shown that such delays did or will delay the progress of the work. 6. Financial Interests of Consultant A. Consultant is Designated as an FPPC Filer. If Consultant is designated on Exhibit A, Paragraph 15, as an "FPPC filer", Consultant is deemed to be a "Consultant" for the purposes of the Political Reform Act conflict of interest and disclosure provisions, and shall report economic interests to the City Clerk on the required Statement of Economic Interests in such reporting categories as are specified in Paragraph 1 5 of Exhibit A, or if none are specified, then as determined by the City Attorney. B. Decline to Participate. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant shall not make, or participate in making or in any way attempt to use Consultant's position to influence a governmental decisiòn in which Consultant knows or has reason to know Consultant has a financial interest other than the compensation promised by this Agreement. C. Search to Determine Economic Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant warrants and represents that Consultant has diligently conducted a search and inventory of Consultant's economic interests, as the term is used in the regulations promulgated by the Fair Political Practices Commission, and has determined that Consultant does not, to the best of Consultant's knowledge, have an economic interest which would conflict with Consultant's duties under this agreement. 9 ~/J-, Page 5 D. Promise Not to Acquire Conflicting Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consultant further warrants and represents that Consultant will nçt acquire, obtain, or assume an economic interest during the term of this Agreement which would constitute a conflict of interest as prohibited by the Fair Political Practices Act. E. Duty to Advise of Conflicting Interests. Regardless of whether Consultant is designated as an FPPC Filer, Consulta"nt further warrants and represents that Consultant will immediately advise the City Attorney of City if Consultant learns of an economic interest of Consultant's which may result in a conflict of interest for the purpose of the Fair Political Practices Act, and regulations promulgated thereunder. F. Specific Warranties Against Economic Interests. Consultant warrants and represents that neither èonsultant, nor Consultant's immediate family members, nor Consultant's employees or agents ("Consultant Associates") presently have any interest, directly or indirectly, whatsoever in any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, or in any property within 2 radial miles from the exterior boundaries of any property which may be the subject matter of the Defined Services, ("Prohibited Interest"), other than as listed in Exhibit A, Paragraph 15. Consultant further warrants and represents that no promise of future employment, remuneration, consideration, gratuity or other reward or gain has been made to Consultant or Consultant Associates in connection with Consultant's performance of this Agreement. Consultant promises to advise City of any such promise that may be made during the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months thereafter. Consultant agrees that Consultant Associates shall not acquire any such Prohibited Interest within the Term of this Agreement, or for 12 months after the expiration of this Agreement, except with the written permission of City. Consultant may not conduct or solicit any business for any party to this Agreement, or for any third party which may be in conflict with Consultant's responsibilities under this Agreement, except with the written permission of City, 7. Hold Harmless Consultant shall defend, indemnify, protect and hold harmless the City, its elected and appointed officers and employees, from and against all claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including without limitation attorneys' fees) arising out of the negligent or willful conduct of the Consultant, or any agent or employee, subcontractors, in connection with the execution of the work covered by this Agreement, except only for those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City, its officers, or employees, Consultant's indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents, or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same proceed to judgment or not. Further, Consultant at its own expense shall, upon written request by the City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City, its officers, agents, or employees arising from Consultant's negligence or willful conduct. Consultants' 9 --13 Page 6 - indemnification of City shall not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Consultant. ' 8. Termination of Agreement for Cause If, through any cause, Consultant shall fail to fulfill in a timely and proper manner Consultant's obligations under this Agreement, or if Consultant shall violate any of the covenants, agreements or stipulations of this Agreement, City shall have the right to terminate this Agreement by giving written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof at least five (5) days before the effective date of such termination. In that event, all finished or unfinished documents, data, 'studies, surveys, drawings, maps, reports and other materials prepared by Consultant shall, at the option of the City, become the property of the City, and Consultant shall be entitled ,to receive just and equitable compensation for any work satisfactorily completed On such documents and other materials up to the effective date of Notice of Termination, not to exceed the amounts payable hereunder, and less any damages caused City by Consultant's breach. 9. Errors and Omissions t In the event that the City Administrator determines that the Consultants' negligence, errors, or omissions in the performance of work under this Agreement has resulted in expense to City greater than would have resulted if there were no such negligence, errors, omissions, Consultant shall reimburse City for any additional expenses incurred by the City. Nothing herein is intended to limit City's rights under other provisions of this agreement. 10. Termination of Agreement for Convenience ot City City may terminate this Agreement at any time and for any reason, by giving specific written notice to Consultant of such termination and specifying the effective date thereof, at least thirty (30) days before the effective date of such termination, In that event, all finished and unfinished documents and other materials described hereinabove shall, at the option of the City, become City's sole and exclusive property. If the Agreement is terminated by City as provided in this paragraph, Consultant shall be entitled to receive just and equitable compensation for any satisfactory work completed On such documents and other materials to the effective date of such termination. Consultant hereby expressly waives any and all claims for damages or compensation arising under this Agreement except as set forth herein. 11. Assignability The services of Consultant are personal to the City, and Consultant shall not assign any interest in this Agreement, and shall not transfer any interest in the same (whether by assignment or novation), without prior written consent of City. City hereby consents to the assignment of the portions of the Defined Services identified in Exhibit A, Paragraph 17 to the subconsultants identified thereat as "Permitted Subconsultants". 12. Ownership, Publication, Reproduction and Use of Material All reports, studies, information, data, statistics, forms, designs, plans, procedures, systems and any other materials or properties produced under this Agreement shall be the sole and exclusive property of City. No such materials or properties produced in whole or in part under this Agreement shall be subject to private use, copyrights or patent rights by Consultant in the United States or in any other country without the express written consent of City, City 9-/i Page 7 shall have unrestricted authority to publish, disclose (except as may be limited by the provisions of the Public Records Act), distribute, and otherwise use, copyright or patent, in whole or in part, any such reports, studies, data, statistics, forms or other materials or properties produced under this Agreement. 13. Independent Contractor City is interested only in the results obtained and Consultant shall perform as an independent contractor with sole control of the manner and means of performing the services required under this Agreement, City maintains the right only to reject or accept Consultant's work products. Consultant and any of the Consultant's agents, employees or representatives are, for all purposes under this Agreement, an independent contractor and shall not be deemed to be an employee of City, and none of them shall be entitled to any benefits to which City employees are entitled including but not limited to, overtime, retirement benefits, worker's compensation benefits, injury leave or other leave benefits, Therefore, City will not withhold state or federal income tax, social security tax or any other payroll tax, and Consultant shall be solely responsible for the payment of same and shall hold '~he City harmless with regard thereto. 14. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures No suit or arbitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City unless a claim has first been presented in writing and filed with the City and acted upon by the City in accordance with the procedures set forth in Chapter 1.34 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, as same may from time to time be amended, the provisions of which are incorporated by this reference as if fully set forth herein, and such policies and procedures used by the City in the implementation of same, Upon request by City, Consultant shall meet and confer in good faith with City for the purpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this Agreement. 15. Attorney's Fees Should a dispute arising out of this Agreement result in litigation, it is agreed that the prevailing party shall be entitled to recover all reasonable costs incurred in the defense of the claim, including costs and attorney's fees. 16. Statement of Costs In the event that Consultant prepares a report or document, or participates in the preparation of a report or document in performing the Defined Services, Consultant shall include, or cause the inclusion of, in said report or document, a statement of the numbers and cost in dollar amounts of all contracts and subcontracts relating to the preparation of the report or document. 17. Miscellaneous, A. Consultant not authorized to Represent City Unless specifically authorized in writing by City, Consultant shall have no authority to act as City's agent to bind City to any contractual agreements whatsoever. 9-/5 Page 8 B. Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman If the box on Exhibit A, Paragraph 16 is marked, the Consultant and/or their principals is/are licensed with the State of California or some other state as a licensed real estate broker or salesperson. Otherwise, Consultant represents that neither Cons,ultant, nor their principals are licensed real estate brokers or salespersons. C. Notices All notices, demands or requests provided for or permitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. All notices, demänds and requests to be sent to any party shall be deemed to have been properly given or served if personally served or deposited in the United States mail, addressed to such party, postage prepaid, registered or certified, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified herein as the places of business for each of rhe designated parties. D. Entire Agreement . This Agreement, together with any other written document referred to or contemplated herein, embody the entire Agreement and understanding between the parties relating to the subject matter hereof. Neither this Agreement nor any provision hereof may be amended, modified, waived or discharged except by an instrument in writing executed by the party against which enforcement of such amendment, waiver or discharge is sought. E. Capacity of Parties Each signatory and party hereto hereby warrants and represents to the other party that it has legal authority and capacity and direction from its principal to enter into this Agreement, and that all resolutions or other actions have been taken so as to enable it to enter into this Agreement. F. Governing Law/Venue This Agreement shall be governed by and construed in accordance with the laws of the State of California. Any action arising under or relating to this Agreement shall be brought only in the federal or state courts located in San Diego County, State of California, and if applicable, the City of Chula Vista, or as close thereto as possible. Venue for this Agreement, and performance. hereunder, shall be the City of Chula Vista. [end of page. next page is signature page.] 9-/~ Page 9 Signature Page to Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista and Keyser "!'arston Associates Inc. for Assistance in Amendment of the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan Advisory Services IN WITNESS WHEREOF, Agency and Consultant have executed this Agreement thereby indicating that they have read and understood same, and indicate their full and complete consent to its terms: Dated: ,19- Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista by: John D. Goss, Executive Director Attest: Beverly Authelet, City Clerk Approved as to form: g:~l) ~ Dated: ,19- Keyser Marston Associates Inc. By: Calvin E. Hollis II Senior Principal Exhibit list to Agreement ( X ) Exhibit A. ( X ) Exhibit B: [BBIC:IWP51 IAGENCYICONTRACTS\KEYSER-2.PTY¡ 9-/7 Page 10 - - Exhibit A to Agreement between City of Chula Vista and Keyser Marston Associates Inc. 1. Effective Date of Agreement: June 18, 1996 2. City-Related Entity: () City of Chula Vista, a municipal chartered corporation of the State of California (X) Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, a political subdivision of the State of California () Industrial Development Authority of the 'City of Chula Vista, a ( ) Other: ("City") 3. Place of Business for City: Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 4. Consultant: 5. Business Form of Consultant: ( ) Sole Proprietorship ( ) Partnership (X) Corporation 6. Place of Business, Telephone and Fax Number of Consultant: 500 South Grand Avenue, Suite 1480 Los Angeles, California 90071 Voice Phone (213) 622-8095 Fax Phone (213)622-5204 7. General Duties: Keyser Marston Associates (KMA) will provide guidance to City staff in amending the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan under criteria set forth in the Community Redevelopment Law. Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement f-/I Page 1 - . 8. Scope of Work and Schedule: The City is considering amending the existing Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan to delete adjacent territory referred to as the Otay Landfill and would like guidance in undertaking this process pursuant to Community Redevelopment Law. SCOPE OF SERVICES Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. proposes to provide the requested services within specific tasks described below: Task 1 - Preparation of Schedule of Action. KMA will prepare a mas.ter schedule of actions that details the actions required in the redevelopment plan amendment process. Responsible parties and required documents will be listed. A summary of the master schedule will also be prepared and updated as necessary. Task 2 - Coordination. KMA will assist Agency staff in coordinating the preparation and transmittal of required documents and 'reports as scheduled. Task 3 - Taxing Agency Notice and Mailing List. KMA will prepare the mailing list of affected taxing entities and draft the notice and transmittal letter pursuant to Section 33327 of the Community Redevelopment Law. The preparation of the map and legal description, the filing fee, and the mailing will be the responsibility of Agency staff. Task 4 - Outline and Review of Preliminary Report. KMA will outline the Preliminary Report requirements based on Section 33344.5 of the Community Redevelopment Law. The Preliminary Report is to be prepared as it applies to the proposed Amendment to delete territory. KMA will review the Preliminary Report prepared by,Agency staff. Task 5 - Meeting Attendance, KMA will attend up to three (3) key public meetings/hearings in connection with the Amendment. This would include the joint public hearing on the Amendment. Task 6 - Public Hearing Notices and Letters. KMA will prepare drafts of the public notice of the joint public hearing on the Amendment and the transmittal letters to taxing agencies, occupants, property owners and others. Publishing and mailing of notices would be undertaken by Agency staff. Task 7 - Joint Public Hearing Materials. KMA will prepare organizational, procedural, and public information materials for the joint public hearing on the Amendment, Materials do not include resolutions or ordinances. Task 8 - Post Public Hearing Notices and Recording. KMA will prepare drafts of notices, transmittal letters, and documents required for the filing and recording of the Amendment once adopted. Agency staff will transmit, record, and file. Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement 9-/; Page 2 Task 9 - Advisory Services. KMA will provide Agency staff with on-going advise on the process of amending the Redevelopment Plan as necessary. Services would include discussions on the scheduling and coordination of redevelopment plan amendment activities, Amendment content, scheduling, and related matters. FEE AND TIME FRAME The described analysis will be performed on a time and materials basis and not to exceed the amount of $14,000. Time and materials shall be in accordance with the schedule of rates listed under attached Exhibit B; Hourlv Fee Schedule. The advisory services will be complete within a six month period contingent upon completing scheduled actions. Additional services, if requested, would be performed 'on a time and expenses basis at KMA's current hourly rates listed under attached Exhibit B, Hourlv Fee Schedule. Such additional services could include but not be limited to the followin¡;¡: 1) Preparation of reports and documents not'indicated under paragraph 8. 2) Attendance at meetings beyond those specified under paragraph 8, including public meetings. A. Date for Commencement of Consultant Services: (X) Same as Effective Date of Agreement ( ) Other: B. Dates or Time Limits for Delivery of Deliverables: Not Applicable Deliverable No, 1: Subject to "Schedule of Actions" to be provided. C, Date for completion of all Consultant services: Six (6) months following effective date of agreement and receipt of required data from City and County. 9. Insurance Requirements: (X) Statutory Worker's Compensation Insurance () Employer's Liability Insurance coverage: $1,000,000. (X) Commercial General Liability Insurance: $1,000,000. () Errors and Omissions insurance: None Required (included in Commercial General Liability coverage). () Errors and Omissions Insurance: $250,000 (not included in Commercial General Liability coverage). 10. Materials Required to be Supplied by City to Consultant: Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement tf-.2ö Page 3 (a) Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan, including all amendments, original adoption ordinance, origin'al report to City Council, and AB 1290 Implementation Plan; (b) Meeting dates for Agency Board, City Council, and Planning Commission; (c) Map and legal description of area (Otay Landfill) to be deleted by amendment; and (d) Other information and data to be requested by KMA. 11. Compensation: City agrees to pay and Consultant agrees to accept compensation on a time and materials basis according to the Hourlv Fee Schedule (Exhibit B) which will remain in effect through December 31, 1996, at which point new rates may be negotiated. (a) Maximum Compensation. The total compensation for all services performed pursuant to this Agreement shall not exceed the sun'; of FOURTEEN THOUSAND DOLLARS ($14,000), without prior approval of the City. (b) Method of Payment. Consultant shall submit monthly requisitions to City specifying the amount due for services performed by Consultant's staff and a list of incurred expenses for the past calendar month. Upon approval of the services performed and the requisition, City shall pay Consultant in accordance with such requisition up to the agreed-upon maximum. Monthly billings will be payable within thirty (30) days of invoice date. A charge of 1 % per month will be added to all past due accounts. 12. Contract Administrators: City: Chris Salomone, Community Development Director Community Development Department 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 (619) 691-5047 Consultant: Cal Hollis Keyser Marston Associates Inc. 500 South Grand Avenue, Suite 1480 Los Angeles, CA 90071 (213) 622-8095 13. Liquidated Damages Rate: Not applicable 14. Statement of Economic Interests, Consultant Reporting Categories, per Conflict of Interest Code: (X ) Not Applicable. Not an FPPC Filer. Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement 1--;2/ Page 4 15. ( ) Consultant is Real Estate Broker and/or Salesman Not applicable 16, Permitted Subconsultants: Not applicable 17. Bill Processing: A. Consultant's Billing to be submitted for the following period of time: (X) Monthly ( ) Quarterly ( ) Other: 8. Day of the Period for submission of Consultant's 8il,ling: Not applicable ( ) First of the Month ¡ ) 15th Day of each Month ( ) End of the Month ( ) Other: C. City's Account Number: 100-0261-5201 18. Security for Performance Not applicable Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement Page 5 f - ;2~ EXHIBIT B KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES INC. HOURLY FEE SCHEDULE 1995 A. JERRY KEYSER. $160.00 SENIOR PRINCIPALS. $155.00 PRINCIPALS. $150.00 SENIOR ASSOCIATES $130.00 ASSOCIATES $115.00 SENIOR ANALYSTS t $100.00 ANALYST $ 90.00 TECHNICAL STAFF $ 55.00 ADMINISTRATIVE STAFF $ 50.00 Directly related job expenses not included in the above rates are: auto mileage, air fares, hotels and motels, meals, car rentals, taxies telephone calls, delivery, electronic data processing, graphics and printing. Directly related job expenses will be billed at 110% of cost. Monthly billings for staff time and expenses incurred during the period will be payable within thirty (30) days of invoice date. A charge of 1 % per month will be added to all past due accounts. .Rates for individuals in these category will be increased by 50% for time spent in Court testimony. [BBIC,I WP5lIAGENCYlCONTRACTSIKEYSER-2.A 'IT] Exhibit A to Standard Form Agreement Page 6 9-~3 RESOLUTION /.:;;,-ro RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WAIVING COMPETITIVE BIDDING AND APPROVING A CONTRACT WITH KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES. INC. FOR THE PROVISION OF REDEVELOPMENT CONSULTING SERVICES FOR THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD REDEVELOPMENT PLAN TO DELETE TERRITORY WHEREAS. The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista ("Agency") wishes to delete certain territory from the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area, which will require an amendment of the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan ("Plan"); and, WHEREAS. although Agency has determined that staff has varied expertise in amending Redevelopment Plans, the processing requirements in Community Redevelopment Law require specialized expertise; and. WHEREAS. it is the desire of the Agency to hire a consultant with the expertise to assist staff in amending the Plan; and. WHEREAS. Keyser Marston Associates. Inc. has proposed to assist staff in accordance with an Agreement between Keyser Marston Associates. Inc.. and the Agency, attached hereto; and. WHEREAS. Keyser Marston Associates. Inc. are highly qualified and have expertise necessary to provide assistance to staff in amending the Plan; and. WHEREAS. Keyser Marston proposed fees for this service are within the industry average; and. WHEREAS. staff requests. in order to expedite this process. that Keyser Marston Associates be selected without competitive bidding due to their expertise and past performance for the Agency. NOW THEREFORE. THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby find. order. determine and resolve as follows: 1. The competitive bidding process is hereby waived in light of the unique professional qualifications and experience of Keyser Marston. 2. The Redevelopment Agency hereby approves the contract with keyser Marston Associates. Inc.. copy on file in the office of the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency as RACO-XX-96, in a form approved by Agency Attorney for the provision of redevelopment consulting services concerning amendment of the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area to delete territory and authorizes the Executive Director to execute same. 3. Adequate funds are available in the Bayfront Professional Services Account 994-9940-5201. PRESENTED BY: APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: ~~ ~ ~ Chris Salomone r¡ -2'1 Community Development Director - .