Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Packet 1994/05/17 Tuesday, May 17, 1994 Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. Public Services Building (immediately following the City Council meeting) Joint Meeting of the RedeveloDment Agencv/Citv Council of the Citv of Chl!la Vista CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: Agency/CoUDcil Members Fox -, Honon -' Moore -' Rindone -, and Chainnan/Mayor Nader -' 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: AprilS, 1994 and April 19, 1994 CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 3 through 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. 3. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None. 4. RESOLUTION 1403 APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH IDM SATELLITE DIVISION, INC., FOR THE REMODELLING OF BUILDING AT 311 F STREET--On 4/5/94 the Agency approved an Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) with IDM Satellite Division, Inc. for the remodelling of 311 F Street. Subsequent to approval of the OPA the applicant had to make changes to the floor plans. The change requires the OPA be amended. This item was continued from the meeting of Mav 3. 1994. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development Director) . . END OF CONSENT CALENDAR' . 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 staff recommendation; complete the pink form to speak in opposition to the staffrecommendation.) Comments are limited to five minutes per individual. 5. PUBLIC HEARING APPLICATION FOR A SPECIAL LAND USE PERMIT FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN AUTO DISMANTLING BUSINESS AT 791 ENERGY WAY WITIIIN THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA--The establishment of an auto Agenda Page 2 May 17, 1994 dismantling land use within the Otay Valley Redevelopment Area requires a Special Land Use Pennit. The suhject application has been reviewed by staff and the Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee and has received Negative Declaration IS-94-14. The application is now presented to the Agency for final determination. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development Director) RESOLUTION 1405 ADOPTING NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS-94-14 AND APPROVING A SPECIAL LAND USE PERMIT FOR THE ESTABLISHMENT OF AN AUTO DISMANTLING BUSINESS AT 791 ENERGY WAY 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. 6. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1390 ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUDGET FOR FY 1993-94 AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR-- The FY 1993-94 Redevelopment Agency Budget was reviewed as part of the City hudget approval process. As the Redevelopment Agency is a separate legal entity, it is necessary to approve the budget separately as required by California Community Redevelopment Law. The fonnal Agency adoption of the budget had been delayed in order to detennine the full impact of State budget resolutions and to complete the evaluation of staffing needs for the Economic Development function in the Community Development Department as directed by City Council during and subsequent to the City's budget review process. This item was continued from the meeting of Aoril 19. 1993. Staff reauests the AI!eucy hold a Soecial Meetinl! on Tuesday. May 24. 1994. (Community Development Director) {4/5ths Vote Required] 7.A. COUNCIL RESOLUTION 17478 APPROVING ClllJLA VISTA DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION 1994 BUDGET AND ACCEPTING THE ASSOCIATION'S 1993 ANNUAL REPORT --In accordance with Chula Vista Municipal Code, the Chula Vista Downtown Association (aka, Downtown Business Association, DBA) is required to submit an armnal report and budget for Council's approval. A copy of the Association's Annual Report and 1994 Work Plan and Budget is being submitted for CoUllcil's consideration. In 1991 the Agency agreed to fund the Town Manager ponion through fiscal year 1993-94. Staff is Agenda Page 3 May 17, 1994 recommending the agreement and funding be extended through one additional fiscal year. Staff reQuests the AI!encY hold a Soecial Meetinl! on Tuesday. May 24. 1994. (Community Development Director/Interim Finance Administrator) B. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1404 APPROVING A ONE-YEAR EXTENSION TO CIruLA VISTA DOWNTOWN ASSOCIATION AGREEMENT FOR TOWN MANAGER 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 8. DIRECTOR'S/CITY MANAGER'S REPORTIS) 9. CHAIRMAN'SIMA YOR'S REPORTIS) 10. AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS CLOSED SESSION Unless the City Attorney/Agency General Counsel, the City Manager/Executive Director, or the Redevelopment Agency/City Council states otherwise at this time, the Redevelopment Agency/City Council will discuss and deliberate on the following items of business which are permitted by law to be the subject of a closed session discussion, and which the Agency/Council is advised should be discussed in closed session to best protect the interests of the City. The Agency/Council is required by law to return to open session, issue any reports of fiI1gJ 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/Council's return from closed session, reports of fiI1gJ action taken, and adjournment will not be videotaped. Nevertheless, the report offinal action taken will be recorded in the minutes which will be available in the Secretary to the Redevelopment or City Clerk's Office. 11. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR REGARDING: 1. Instructions to negotiators pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 . Property: 746 Ada Street and 750 Ada Street (APN 622-020-20 and 622-020-03) at the northwest comer of Ada Street and Industrial Boulevard . Negotiating Parties: Redevelopment Agency staff and for the Propeny Owner (Trolley Terrace Development, Inc., a California Corporation) . Under Negotiation: Instruction to negotiators will concern price and terms of payment. Agenda Page 4 May 17, 1994 ADJOURNMENT The meeting will adjourn to the Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting on June 7, 1994 at 4:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council meeting, in the City Council Chambers. ****** COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans With Disabilities Act (ADA), request individuals who may need special accommodation to access, attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service contact the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency at (619) 691-5047 for specific infonnation on existing resources/or programs that may be available for such accommodation. Please call at least fony-eight hours in advance for meetings and five days in advance for scheduled services and activities. Califoruia Relay Service is available for the hearing impaired. [C:I WP51 IAGENCYIAGENDASIO5-17-94.AGD AN ADJOURNED JOINT REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND A JOINT REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA Tuesday, April 5, 1994 Council Chambers 7:51 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Agency/Council Members Fox, Horton, Moore, Rindone, and Chairman/Mayor Nader ALSO PRESENT: Sid Morris, Assistant Director/Assistant City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, Agency/Council Attorney; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: November 9, 1993, March 1, 1994, March 15, 1994, and March 22, 1994 MSUC (Rindone/Fox) to approve the minutes of November 9, 1994, March I, 1994, and March 22, 1994 as presented. CONSENT CALENDAR (Items pulled: none) BALANCE OF THE CONSENT CALENDAR OFFERED BY AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously. ITEMS UNDER THE CONSENT CALENDAR ARE AGENDIZED FOR THE JOINT REGULAR MEETING OF APRIL 5. 1994 3. WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS: None. 4.A. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1395 APPROVING ADVANCE ASSISTANCE AND MOVING EXPENSE RELOCATION CLAIMS IN THE AMOUNT OF $9,850 PURSUANT TO THE ADOPTED RELOCATION PLAN FOR THE RENTAL UNIT HOUSEHOLDS LOCATED AT 459 F STREET WITHIN THE TOWN CENTRE II REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA--The City and Redevelopment Agency recently purchased the property at 459 F Street as part of the adopted Chula Vista Master Plan Expansion Project. The property contains one single-family residence and five rental units on the parcel. In order to utilize the property, the five rental households need to be relocated pursuant to the previously adopted Relocation Plan. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Community Development Director) B. COUNCIL RESOLUTION 17436 AUTHORIZING THE EXPENDITURE OF $9,850 FROM THE CMC CENTER EXPANSION PROJECT (#GG-130) CIP FOR THE PAYMENT OF ADVANCE ASSISTANCE AND MOVING EXPENSE RELOCATION PAYMENTS TO THE RENTAL UNIT HOUSEHOLDS LOCATED AT 459 F STREET 5.A. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1396 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CIruLA VISTA, CIruLA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TO SHARE TAX INCREMENT REVENUES GENERA TED TO THE AGENCY ,2_1 Mioutes AprilS, 1994 Page 2 FROM THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA--CalifomiaRedevelopment Law Health and Safety Code Section 33401 authorized Community Redevelopment Ageocies to enter iota agreements to pay any taxing agencies with territory withio a redevelopment project area the appropriate amount of money necessary to alleviate any fmancial burden or detriment caused to the taxing agency by the adoption of the redevelopment project. A fmal negotiated Agreement for Cooperation with the County seeks to alleviate the potential negative financial impact by sharing a portion of the tax iocrement revenue generated io the project area. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Community Development Director) B. COUNCIL RESOLUTION 17437 AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION OF AN AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CIruLA VISTA, CIruLA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND THE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO TO SHARE TAX INCREMENT REVENUES GENERA TED TO THE AGENCY FROM THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA 6. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1397 APPROVING AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT (NUMBER TCI/OPA 94-1) WITH MR. DAN JORDAN FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF AN OFFICE ADDITION TO THE BUILDING AT 281 G STREET --Mr. Jordan proposes to construct a 657 square foot addition to the existiog office building as well as a 400 square foot open deck over the existing garage. The Design Review Committee reviewed the proposal and recommended approval subject to cenain conditions. Mr. Jordan's proposal is presented to the Agency for consideration and approval of plans through an Owner Participation Agreement. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development Department) 7. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1398 APPROVING AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT (NUMBER TCIIOPA 94-2) WITH IDM SATELLITE DIVISION, INC., FOR THE REMODELLING OF THE COMMERCIAL BUILDING AT 311 F STREET --The applicant proposes to remodel the existing commercial buildiog by adding 630 square feet of space to the existiog 6246 square foot buildiog. The remodelliog also iocludes modification to the facade and exterior landscaping. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development Director) 8. REPORT ACCEPTANCE OF CITY OF CIruLA VISTA AUDITED FINANCIAL STATEMENTS FOR THE YEAR ENDED JUNE 30, 1993 AND AUDITOR'S OPINION--The City's Audited Financial Statements for the Fiscal Year ended 6/30/93 were prepared by the independent audit firm of Deloitte & Touche. A Redevelopment Agency Statement was also prepared. Staff recommends the Agency accept the reports. (Interim Fioance Administrator) * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES None submitted. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None ACTION ITEMS ITEMS #9. #10. AND #11 ARE ADJOURNED REGULAR JOINT MEETING ITEMS CONTINUED FROM THE MEETING OF MARCH 22. 1994 1--1- _.~ -. I Minutes April 5, 1994 Page 3 9. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1392 APPROVING FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AMENDED PALOMAR TROLLEY CENTER DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT AND AUTHORIZING CHAIRMAN TO EXECUTE SAME--On 7/23/93 the Agency approved the Amended Palomar Trolley Center Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) for the development of an approximately 190,000 square foot high-volume retail center in two phases on 18 acres on Palomar Boulevard between Iodustrial Boulevard and Broadway. This First Amendment to the Amended DDA incorporates specific mutual efforts to provide a day care facility near the Center. The Ameodment also clearly restates the understanding of the panies regardiog extent of mutual exposure to potential litigation costs associated with condemnation suits and freezes the existing rate of City fees which will be applicable to Phase 2 of the project. Staff recommends the item be continued to a date not certain. (Community Development Director) MS (Nader/Horton) to continue the item indefinitely. Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, informed the Ageocy that negotiations were ongoing and he did not have a certain date as to wheo it would be brought back. Chainnan Nader questioned if the Child Care Commission supponed the staff recommendations. Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager, responded that staff had missed sending the item to the commission. Once that omission was detected they went back to the commission and talked to the Chair and would work with them in the future. Chainnan Nader stated it should be noted in the staff repon to the Agency with appropriate minutes attached for reVIew. Agency Member Rindone questioned if staff was continuing negotiations and if the day care center was within the realm of possibility. Mr. Salomone stated that was correct and staff would be returning with options for review. VOTE ON MOTION: approved unanimously. IO.A COUNCIL RESOLUTION 17412 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH ANDERSON & BRABANT, INC. FOR PROVIDING APPRAISAL SERVICES FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS--Several capital improvement projects are currently budgeted which require additional right-{)f-way for construction. To expedite the acquisition process, staff must first appraise the value of the property and proposes to contract for property appraisal services for a period of one year with a renewable clause for an additional year. Staff has evaluated the proposals for providing professional appraisal services and recommends Aoderson & Brabant, Inc. to provide these services. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works) B. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1393 APPROVING AGREEMENT WITH ANDERSON & BRABANT, INC. FOR PROVIDING APPRAISAL SERVICES FOR VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS Agency/Council Member Moore questioned the rationale utilized in choosing the firms recommended. Clifford Swanson, Deputy Public Works Director/City Engineer, responded that it was the expertise and relative ranking of each of the finns in the interview process. The finns that rated highest had the strongest skills in the area. RESOLUTIONS 17412 AND 1393 OFFERED BY AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE, reading of the text was waived, passed and approved unanimously. ,2-3 Minutes April 5, 1994 Page 4 I1.A COUNCIL RESOLUTION 17413 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH RYALS & ASSOCIATES FOR PROPERTY ACQillSITION SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR HIS DESIGNEE TO SIGN THE ACQUISITION AGREEMENT(S) AND MAKE PAYMENTS FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY OF UP TO $25,000 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BUDGETED PROJECTS--Several capital improvement projects are currently budgeted which will require additional right-of-way for construction. To expedite the acquisition process, staff proposes to contract for property acquisition services for a period of one year with a renewal clause for an additional year. Staff has evaluated the proposals and recommends Ryals & Associates to provide these services. Staff recommends approval of the resolutions. (Director of Public Works) B. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1394 APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH RYALS & ASSOCIATES FOR PROPERTY ACQUISITION SERVICES IN CONNECTION WITH VARIOUS CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT, ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT AND REDEVELOPMENT PROJECTS AND AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR OR illS DESIGNEE TO SIGN THE ACQillSITION AGREEMENT(S) AND MAKE PAYMENTS FOR RIGHT-OF-WAY OF UP TO $25,000 FOR CONSTRUCTION OF BUDGETED PROJECTS RESOLUTIONS 17413 AND 1394 OFFERED BY AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER MOORE, reading of the text was waived. * * * Agency/Council Member Horton left the meeting at 7:59 p.m. * * * Agency/Council Member Moore questioned whether either of the companies were based, or had an office in Chula Vista. Agency/City Attorney Boogaard stated the contract required the companies obtain a business license. Chairman/Mayor Nader questioned whether a local firm had bid on the project. Clifford Swanson, Deputy Director of Public Works/City Engineer, responded that he did not have the list of firms with him. He would provide the Agency/Council with a report listing all of the firms that responded on both items. Chairman/Mayor Nader questioned whether the item was time sensitive. Mr. Swanson responded the City was in the middle of acquisition on several projects that were being held up for approval. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated he would defer to staff on the issue, but it was surprising that the information was not included in the report. Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager, responded that staff would provide that information in the future. VOTE ON MOTION: approved 4-0-1 with Horton absent. ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR Items pulled: none. The minutes will reflect the published ageoda order. OTHER BUSINESS 12. DIRECTOR'S/CITY MANAGER'S REPORT(S) - None .2-1 Mioutes AprilS, 1994 Page 5 * * * Agency/Council Member Horton returned to the meeting at 8:02 p.m. * * * 13. CHAIRMAN'S/MA YOR'S REPORTIS) 13a. Suspension of Bayfront Negotiations Pendiog Satisfaction of City/Agency Conditions Chairman/Mayor Nader gave a brief background on the project. He had not seen any indication that Mr. Barkett was on the verge of comiog through with an agreement that met conditions as defmed by the Ageocy/Council. He felt there was an extraordinary amount of staff time being spent on those negotiations. It was his sense that the Community Development Department could use more staff hours on many other projects to the benefit of the City, but the City was contiouing to negotiate with someone who was not coming through with anythiog to meet the conditions established by the Agency/Council. It was time to send a message to Mr. Barkett that the City was serious about the cooditions and parameters set on the Bayfront Plan and would not compromise on the quality or what had to be included. The way to send that message would be to stop going back to Mr. Barkett and tell him to come back to the City when he met the City's conditions with a specific response that could be taken to the Agency/Council. MS (Nader/Fox) to direct staff to suspend negotiations on a development agreement with Mr. Barkett until such time as he comes forward with a proposal, or someone ahle to execute a proposal, comes forward with a proposal that substantially meets conditions that the Agency/Council set. Agency/Council Member Fox questioned whether more would be accomplished by suspending negotiations. Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager, responded there was a fundamental legal question that required City staff to negotiate with the owner of the propeny based on previous Agency direction. In terms of the specific negotiatioos with Mr. Barkett, staff had a series of on-going meetiogs which had been frustrating at times and fruitful at times. Staff had been able to reach agreement on a variety of issues and believed there was probably light at the end of the tunnel. In terms of specific timing he felt it would be brought back to the Agency/Council in about two months with a draft disposition and development agreement or owner participation agreement with the propeny owner. Chris Salomone, Director of Community Development, felt it would be back before the Agency/Council in approximately sixty days. Agency/City Attorney Boogaard stated the City granted entitlement for a specific plan and general development plan cooditiooed on executing a development agreement with the developer. The City could not condition the entitlements on negotiating a development agreement and refuse to participate in negotiations. The statement put fonh by the Mayor was different than what had been legally analyzed to the extent that the Mayor had suggested that the City had already negotiated in good faith by laying down a set of conditions, which the City found acceptable, and to suspend further debating about them until the City received a response, which was not a suspension entirely of negotiations, but more a matter of putting the ball in his court to come up with a last, best, and final offer. What was being proposed was not quite a suspension of negotiations, but requiring him to come back with a proposal. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated he way saying that the Agency/Council had stated the conditions and parameters they were looking for, the ball should be in the developers coun for a meaningful response for consideration. Agency/City Attorney Boogaard stated the three avenues were: 1) continue negotiations as presently being done; 2) put down a last, best, and final offer; and 3) remove the condition of the entitlement that there must be a development agreement. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated he did not want to remove the condition and his intent was not to put the owner in a position where he could not develop. His iotent was to stop sending him the message, which he felt the City had been sending, that the majority of the Agency/Council did not have to be taken seriously regarding the terms J-5 -.~-. Minutes April 5, 1994 Page 6 because staff would meet with him regardless of whether he came close to meeting those tenDS. He needed to understand that if he could not meet those tenDS he should seek participation from an agency such as the Port District or a consortium of other local developers. He was not trying to suggest that the City would not conclude a development agreement with the developer, he was trying to be very clear about what kind of conditions that would be necessary to conclude a development agreemeot. He felt the weekly meetings were sending a mixed message on that point. Agency/Council Member Rindone concurred with the assessment that the City should not grant any conditions unless a DDA was completed. The last major vote on the Bayfront was a 4-1 vote and he voted 00 as be felt they should not move forward until there was a development agreement as that was the nexus of the issue before them. He questioned if the Agency/Council could refer the item back to staff to develop an agenda item recommending the suspension of Bayfront negotiations and also allow the developer a chance to participate and respond to that and provide a justification as to why the Agency/Council should not suspend negotiations. Agency/City Attorney Boogaard stated in his business judgement, given the history of negotiations, the Agency/Council should request a report from staff as to the status of negotiations and to propose for Agency/Council approval a last, best, and final offer rather than to phrase it in tenDS of order to show cause why the City should not suspend the negotiations. Chairman/Mayor Nader questioned whether that would meet Agency/Council Member Rindone's intent. Agency/Council Member Rindone responded that it covered the intent and would provide an opportunity for the developer to assess whether he was interested in continuing under those conditions. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated it would fulfill his intent. He felt the City had made its last, best, and final offer at the last meeting and he did not want to send a message that they were backing off that, but staff could draft something that embodied the previous Agency/Council discussion and direction and bring that back as a last, best, and fmal offer and put that on the table. Agency/Council Member Rindone the concern was whether it was financially feasible, which was the nexus of the entire situation. Agency/Council Member Moore stated he had seen many strong economic effons fail or be suspended. He did not feel the City should be disappointed that a major project, such as the Bayfront, was not on a platter and ready to go in such economic times. The City would not win by ignoring one of the major property owners of the most valuable property in Chula Vista. The City could not stop negotiations. Redevelopment meant the Agency/City was a partner. Agency/Council Member Fox felt Member Moore was correct, it was not an easy issue. He did not want to be personally responsible for slowing things down. While the motion was well intended, be felt the unintended results would be the disruption of negotiations and even funher delays. Staff felt they would be returning in sixty days with a DDA. Mr. Salomone stated staff was at a point in the negotiations where the developer would have to spend a lot of money to discover the things that the City needed to know, i.e. engineering constraints on the site, soil conditions, costs of putting in the underground facilities, ability of the shale beneath to support the high rise buildings. The developer was willing to do that and he suspected that he would use the resources from the sale of the parcel in National City to do that discovery on the project. He did not feel staff could bring back a development agreement, but the framework of a development agreement within sixty days. He felt it would be the end of the year before they had the development agreement because of the geotechoical, soil, and physical analysis that had to be done. Chairman/Mayor Nader questioned if Mr. Barkett needed to get all the information described in order to continue fruitful negotiations for a DDA. c2-b Mioutes AprilS, 1994 Page 7 Mr. Salomone responded that the DDA would talk to the feasibility of the project, the fmancial partners, etc. and there were key elements that were uokoown. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated he understood that and agreed with it, but if there were key elements that needed to be known before concludiog a DDA, why was the City sitting down in weekly negotiatiog sessions instead of sayiog that the agreement would be hammered out when all the informatioo was available. Io the mean time staff could be spending that time developing the high techfbio tech zone, negotiatiog with firms interested io locating io Chu1a Vista, etc. Mr. Salomone responded that staff was providing the developer with time frames, fee structures, and the type of data he needed to know, i.e. how long it would take for him to get his grading permit, how much his fees would be, etc. Chairman/Mayor Nader felt that could be provided without extensive staff time. Agency/Council Member Moore questioned what percent of the Economic Development Manager and associated staff time was allocated to the Bayfront. Mr. Salomone responded that none of her time was allocated to the Bayfront. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated she was very short staffed and other personnel io the Community Development Department should be available to assist her. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: (Nader) direct staff to develop, based on past Agency/Council discussion and direction, a proposed last, best, and final offer to he hrought back to the Agency/Council for consideration so that it would he clear to the Council, staff, and Mr. Barkett what the City's terms and goals were that needed to he met. Motion died for lack of second. SUBSTITUTE MOTION: (Rindone/Moore) direct staff to hring hack within thirty days an updated progress report and recommendation on continuing the negotiations. Agency/Council Member Moore questioned if the Maker of the Motion would agree to the inclusion of scheduled intents so the report would deal with the past, present, and future. Agreed to hy the Maker of the Motion. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated one of his concerns was that there was a very small window of opportunity with the Port District. He questioned whether it would be the intent of the motion that staff would, as pan of the report, present options for pursuing Port involvement or any options that would assure that the project would actually be built in a way that would be a credit to the City. Options would include, Port iovolvement or persuading or inducing Mr. Barkett to involve other developers or partners. He was very concerned when lookiog at what happened in National City with the hotel and marina project. He wanted staff to start lookiog at other optioos. Ageocy/Council Member Rindone stated he did not have a problem with that. Staff had indicated that there were several decision poiots that the developer had to meet or fold and that would be within the thiny days. Mr. Salomone stated he did not want to classify it as being within that thiny days, but he felt it was within sixty days. Staff would have the report back to the Agency/Council in thiny days which would focus the issue for the developer and the City. Agency/Couocil Member Rindone stated he would not support sixty days for the report and assessment. He felt they oeeded something in hand to review and evaluate. J~7 Minutes AprilS, 1994 Page 8 Agency/Council Member Horton stated it was her understanding that the motion on the floor was for sixty days. She would not support thirty days as she did not feel it gave staff or the developer enough time to work on the report. Agency/Council Member Fox felt due to the time sensitivity for pon participation they should move up the date to thirty days for a progress report on potential Port participation. AMENDMENT TO MOTION: (FoxlHorton) to direct staff to return in sixty days (6/7/94) with a progress report and recommendations on continuing the negotiations, and a report in thirty days (5/17/94) regarding the potential of Port involvement in the project. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated the current motion was that the first increment of the report dealing with only the Port participation would be due in thirty days and the second increment of the report and the final offer by the City would be due in sixty days. Agency/Couocil Member Rindone stated he could support the thirty day period for a report on pon panicipation but could not suppon sixty days for the remainder of the repon and final offer. Therefore, he would vote against the motion. Chairman/Mayor Nader agreed with Member Rindone's comments. VOTE ON MOTION AS AMENDED: approved 3-2 with Nader and Rindone opposed. 13b. Chairman/Mayor Nader stated he wanted to see the Bayfront developed in a quality fashion. He suggested that prior to approval of the specific development plan that 1-2 members of the City Council and Design Review Commission pick out 2-3 examples of where water related urban high rise was done successfully and visit those projects. 14. AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS - None ****** URGENCY ITEM OFF AGENDA: AGENCY RESOLUTION 1399 AUTHORIZING THE USE OF REMAINING FUNDS IN CIP RD#217 FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A RAMP FROM THE SOUTHERLY TERMINUS OF BRANDYWINE AVENUE TO THE PROPOSED BRANDYWINE PARK SITE--One of the conditions of approval of the Auto Park was the provision of a site for a neighborhood park which was designated in the City's General Plan in the vicinity of the Auto Park site. To access the park site from Brandywine Avenue, a ramp must be provided traversing the slope. The Agency is requested to authorize use of funds remaining in Auto Park Site Acquisition Account for this purpose and to direct the City Manager to authorize Granite Construction Company to complete this work prior to landscaping work being completed on the slope and before Granite Construction removes its equipment from the vicinity in order to save the City money. Staff recommends approval of the resolution. (Community Development Department) Ageocy Member Moore stated the grading equipment was currently on site and the contract was running out. The ramp needed to be in place before the planting could be done and action by the Agency would make the project more economical. Agency Attorney Boogaard stated the item arose after the preparation of the agenda and could not wait out of necessity until the next agenda. It would take a 4/5th's vote by the Agency to place it on the agenda for discussion. Fred Kassman, Redevelopment Coordinator, infonned the Agency that it would be more costly if action was not taken. Staff received the bids on Monday. j-,t Minutes AprilS, 1994 Page 9 MSUC (Nader/Moore) to find that an urgency existed, that the item arose after the posting of the agenda and due to necessity couId not wait until the next agenda. Agency Attorney Boogaard recommended the Agency adopt the resolution to allow using the remaining funds in the auto park project to construct the ramp, waive the bidding process, and authorize the expenditure for the ramp. RESOLUTION 1399 OFFERED BY MEMBER FOX, reading of the text was waived. Chairman Nader requested clarification of where the ramp provided access to. He questioned if the park would be developed in cooperation with the River Valley Regional Park. Agency Attorney Boogaard responded that it was from the top of the slope to the proposed park site at the bottom of the slope behind the auto park. Jess Valenzuela, Director of Parks & Recreation, responded that it would eohance the plans for the River Valley Regional Park. VOTE ON RESOLUTION 1399: approved unanimously. ADJOURNMENT ADJOURNMENT AT 9:07 P.M. to the Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting on April 19, 1994 at 6:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council meeting, in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk . . \ 1 (\ . by: ,"".iL" "-"":':;;'-~l!',-" Vicki C. Soderquist, Depu '¿~y Clerk ;<-1 Thís yage íntentíonaIly lift blank. r:2. - )D MINUTES OF A JOINT MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/ CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CIruLA VISTA Tuesday, April 19, 1994 Council Chambers 9:23 p.m. Public Services Building CALL TO ORDER 1. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Agency/Council Members Fox, Horton, Moore, Rindone, and Chairman/Mayor Nader ALSO PRESENT: John D. Goss, Director/City Manager; Bruce M. Boogaard, Agency/Council Attorney; and Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES: December 28, 1993 and January 28, 1994 MSUC (Fox/Moore) to approve the minutes of December 28, 1993 and January 28, 1994 as presented. CONSENT CALENDAR None submitted. * * END OF CONSENT CALENDAR * * PUBLIC HEARINGS AND RELATED RESOLUTIONS AND ORDINANCES Nooe submitted. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS None ACTION ITEMS 4. AGENCY RESOLUTION 1390 ADOPTING THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY BUDGET FOR FY 1993-94 AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR--The FY 1993-94 Redevelopment Agency Budget was reviewed as part of the City budget approval process. As the Redevelopment Ageocy is a separate legal entity, it is necessary to approve the budget separately as required by California Community Redevelopment Law. The formal Agency adoption of the budget had been delayed in order to determine the full impact of State budget resolutions and to complete the evaluation of staffmg needs for the Economic Development function in the Community Development Depanment as directed by City Council during and subsequent to the City's budget review process. This item was continued from the meetinl! of March 15. 1993. Staff recommends the Agency: [a] continue the item to the next regular meeting of May 3, 1994; or, [b) call a Special Meeting of the Agency on April 26, 1994 following the regular Council meeting. (Community Development Director) MSUC (Nader/Moore) to continue the item to the meeting of May 3, 1994. ~---/I ---. Minutes Apri119, 1994 Page 2 OTHER BUSINESS 5. DIRECTOR'S/CITY MANAGER'S REPORTIS) - None 6. CHAIRMAN'S/MA YOR'S REPORT IS) . Chairman/Mayor Nader stated there were vacancies on the Southwest Project Area Committee that needed to be filled and he needed the requirements for appointments before that could be done. 7. AGENCY/COUNCIL MEMBER COMMENTS - None ADIOURNMENT ADJOURNMENT AT 9:26 P.M. to the Regular Redevelopment Agency Meeting on May 3, 1994 at 4:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council meeting, in the City Council Chambers. Respectfully submitted, BEVERLY A. AUTHELET, CMC, City Clerk by: >", \è ~,~ c~ Vicki C. Soderquist, Deputy . ~lerk :l~/.2- REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT Item ~ Meeting Date 05/17/94 ITEM TITLE: Resolution /L-fo3 Approving Amendment to Owner Participation Agreement with roM Satellite Division, Inc. for the Remodelling of Building at 311 F Street SUBMITTED BY: Comm""'<y DM!""m,,' M\" c. c" , REVIEWED BY: Executive Director~ ~ ./Y (4/5ths Vote: Yes - No--X...) Council Referral Number: N/A BACKGROUND: On April 5, 1994, the Redevelopment Agency approved an Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) with roM Satellite Division, Inc. for the remodelling of the building at 311 F Street located within the Town Centre I Redevelopment Project Area (see attached locator map). Approval of the OrA included approval of the remodelling plans attached to the agreement as Exhibit A. Subsequent to the approval of this OrA, the applicant had to make a change to the floor plans, which includes the construction of a second floor inside the building. This requires the incorporation of the second floor plans to the original orA. The construction of the second floor also triggers the payment of an additional parking fee. The applicant has requested that this payment be made at the time the tenant improvement permits for the second floor are issued. These changes can be implemented through and amendment to the orA, which is being presented to the Agency for consideration. RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency adopt the resolution approving amendment to the orA with roM Satellite Division, Inc. and allowing the developer to pay the parking fee for the second floor space at the time when tenant improvement permits for said second floor are issued with the condition that the developer pay the fee in effect at that time. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: No review by any committee is necessary because this amendment does not involve any land use or exterior design issue. DISCUSSION: The applicant, roM Satellite Division, Inc., is in the process of remodelling the building at 311 F Street (see locator map). The remodelling plans were approved by the Redevelopment Agency at its regular meeting of April 5, 1994 through an Owner Participation Agreement. The remodelling plans presented to the Agency at that meeting involve the modification of the building elevations, increasing the height of the building, and expanding the floor area by approximately 630 square feet. The subject building is being proposed as the site for the City of Chula Vista's future Telecenter. The Telecenter will provide office space and technological facilities for office employees who normally commute from Chula Vista to other areas of the County. The purpose of the Telecenter is to reduce the number of daily automobile trips and thus reduce traffic on the highway system and its impacts on the environment. 1-/ Page 2, Item ~ Meeting Date 05/17/94 Subsequent to Agency approval of the orA and remodelling plans, the applicant had to make a change to the interior floor plan. This change was required after it was found by the applicant's engineer that the existing structure could not support the proposed additional height of the building. The solution was the construction of a steel structure and platform around the interior perimeter of the building in order to add strength to the existing struc1ure so that it would support the additional height (see new floor plan attached as Exhibit A). The added structure basically createS a second floor to the building in the area that was supposed to be open area within the building. However, no tenant improvements will be undertaken at this time. The applicant's new floor plans have to be incorporated into Exhibit A (remodelling plans) of the OPA. This has to be done through an amendment to the current OPA. The additional space created by the second floor area also changes the parking requirement. The floor area to be added by the second floor is approximately 3, 117 square feet. This will require ten additional parking spaces. Since the project is within the parking district boundaries, the project qualifies under the In-lieu Parking Fee Policy to pay the parking fee instead of providing the parking spaces. The applicant has agreed to pay the fee. However, the applicant has indicated that he does not have a tenant ready to occupy the second floor space and he does not plan to improve the second floor until he has secured a tenant. (The proposed Telecenter will occupy the first floor area.) He has requested that he be allowed to pay the parking fee at the time when he applies for tenant improvement permits for the second floor on the basis that there will be no parking impacts until it is fully improved and occupied. Staff supports the Developer's request for the following reasons: 1. The developer is making extensive improvements to the building which will enhance the building and the surrounding area. This will contribute to the overall improvement of Downtown. 2. All city fees for the improvement of the building, except parking fees related to the creation of a second floor, will be paid by the developer at the time of permit issuance. This includes improvements to the building's exterior and the first floor area. 3. The developer will not be making the tenant improvements to the second floor at this time. This will leave the second floor unusable until a tenant is secured. 4. The actual parking impacts from the second floor space will not take place until after this area is occupied. The parking fee will be paid at the time of issuance of permits for the second floor tenant improvements. While Staff has determined that the proposed deferral is consistent with the existing In-lieu Parking Fee Policy, the Redevelopment Agency should be made aware that this is a liberal interpretation of the policy. The policy indicates that the fee has to be paid"... prior to the issuance of a Building Permit for such new building or addition." Staff believes that the deferral of the parking fee is consistent with the policy because the payment will be made in the future 1-Þ -.---. Page 3, Item ~ Meeting Date 05/17/94 but prior to the issuance of permits for the second floor improvements. This is also consistent with the spirit of the policy because the parking impacts will not be caused until the second floor is occupied. If the Redevelopment Agency/City Council decide to increase the In-lieu Parking Fee before the developer applies for tenant improvement permits for the second floor, the developer will be responsible for paying the higher fee (the current fee is $1,750 per parking space). Neither the Town Centre Project Area Committee nor the Design Review Committee are required to review this amendment because it does not involve any land use or exterior design Issues. FISCAL IMPACT: The applicant will is responsible for paying the parking fee for one parking space generated by the expansion of the building area ($1,750). This fee has to be paid now. At the time of issuance of tenant improvement permits for the second floor, the applicant will be responsible for paying the fee for ten parking spaces at the rate in effect at that time. The improvement of the building will generate 1 % of the project's valuation in tax increment revenues. [FlLE,\MZT DISK VIll\A,\IOMSATELRYT 1-}-3 -"- - Thís ,age íntentíonaIIy lift blank. ;f--i . ~ . - - .-1,... ----- ... --- -- ::> ::> n. -- Z Z .. . -- > .-. > -- « « D -- -- c ;; ~ I-- E;~ .. E-:~ -.. u.. -.- -J~ .- ..- .... .- - - - - I--- -- . .. - .-- -- - -- - ..",.........~ct.~'('("" :FRleÑosHIP PARK" " : ~.. '.. ~~ ~. "J/: ... " u. ;:,:~.=r.:(", "h'~,J; -- .. "~c,~,,'t;~".:"""""r.'"f.r.ro:: ... n 0:: « .... - CHULA VISTA C) [~' PUBLIC LIBRARY : -'- - . .. -- .. . . JORGE V ALE;ADI ,r 311. F Street LOCATOR ) Office Addition DRC-94-35 ~1-ð '-- '. Thís yage íntentionaIly lift blank. 1-~ Recording Requested By: CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 When Recorded Mail To: CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 (Space Above This Line For Recorder) AMENDMENT TO OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT IDM SATELLITE DIVISION, INC. THIS AMENDMENT TO OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT (hereinafter referred to as "Amendment") is entered into by the CIruLA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, a body corporate and politic (hereinafter referred to as "AGENCY"), and IDM Satellite Division, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "DEVELOPER"). WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER desires to remodel real property within the TOWN CENTRE I REDEVELOPMENT Project Area which is subject to the jurisdiction and control of the AGENCY: and, WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER has presented plans for remodelling of said propeny to the Redevelopment Agency; and, WHEREAS, said plans for development have been approved by the Agency and incorporated into that certain Owner Participation Agreement between Agency and Developer approved by Agency on AprilS, 1994 per Resolution Number 1398 (the "Original Agreement"); and WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER had to make changes to said plans in order to make the building structurally sound; and, WHEREAS, said changes caused the construction of a second floor which increases the usable office space requiring the payment of an In-lieu Parking Fee for ten parking spaces; and WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER has indicated that while the second floor will be constructed, it will not occupied for some time; and, WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER has requested that the payment of the In-lieu Parking Fee for ten parking spaces be deferred until such time when the second floor tenant improvement permits are issued by the City. NOW, THEREFORE, the AGENCY and the DEVELOPER agree as follows: 1. The foregoing recitals are hereby incorporated into this Amendment and acknowledged to be true by the parties hereto. 2. The property to be developed is described as Assessor's Parcel Number 568-152-28 located at 311 F Street, City of Chula Vista, California. 3. The DEVELOPER covenants and agrees by and for himself, his 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 tf- 7 proposal attached hereto as Exhibit' A' and on file with the AGENCY Secretary, as Document No. RACO-13A-94 (TCI/OPA 94-2). This 'Exhibit A' shall replace and supersede Exhibit A attached to the Original Agreement in its entirety. B. DEVELOPER shall pay the City of Chula Vista an In-lieu Parking Fee in the amount of $1,750 for one parking space as required by City Council Policy adopted by Resolution 9943. An additional In-lieu Parking Fee for ten parking spaces shall be paid to the City at the time when permits for the second floor tenant improvements are issued. The developer shall pay the fee at the rate io effect at that time. 4. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that the covenants of the DEVELOPER expressed herein shall run with the land. DEVELOPER shall have the right, without prior approval of Agency, to assign its rights and delegate its duties under this Amendment. 5. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that the covenants of the DEVELOPER expressed herein are for the express benefit of the AGENCY and for all owners of real property within the boundaries of the Town Centre I Redevelopment Project Area as the same now exists or may be hereafter amended. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that the provisions of this Amendment 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 Town Centre I Redevelopment Project Area. 6. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that this Amendment to the Original Agreement may be recorded by the Agency in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, California. 7. Except as specifically provided herein all terms and conditions of the Original Agreement shall remain in full force and effect. REDEVEWPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA "AGENCY" DATED: By: Tim Nader, Chairman "DEVELOPER" DATED: By: Dr. Jorge Valerdi, Chief Operating Officer IDM Satellite Division, Inc. APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Bruce M. Boogaard, Agency General Counsel NOTARY: Please attach acknowledgment card. Town Center I [FILE,\MZT DISK VIIIIAIIDMSATELOPAJ 1~¡ RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AN AMENDMENT TO 0 WNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH IDM SATELLITE DIVISION, INC. FOR THE REMODELLING OF BUILDING A 311 F STREET WHEREAS, IDM Satellite Division, Inc. (hereinafter referred to as "Developer") desires to remodel real property within the Town Centre I Redevelopment Project Area which is subject to the jurisdiction and control of the Redevelopment Agency; and, WHEREAS, the Developer presented plans for remodelling of said property, located at 311 F Street in Chula Vista, California, to the Redevelopment Agency; and, WHEREAS, said plans for remodelling have been approved by the Agency and incorporated into that certain Owner Participation Agreement between Agency and Developer approved by Agency on April 5, 1994 per Resolution Number 1398 (the original agreement); and, WHEREAS, the Developer, upon advice by his engineer, had to make changes to said plans, after said plans had been approved by the Agency, in order to make the building structurally sound; and, WHEREAS, said changes resulted in the construction of a second floor which increases the usable office space and requires payment of the In-lieu Parking Fee for ten parking spaces; and, WHEREAS, the Developer has indicated that said second floor will not be occupied for some time; and WHEREAS, the Developer has requested that payment of the In-lieu Parking Fee for ten parking spaces be deferred until such time when the second floor tenant improvement permits are issued by the City. WHEREAS, this requires amending the original agreement subject to review and approval by the Redevelopment Agency. NOW, THEREFORE, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby find, order, detennine, and resolve as follows: 1. The Chairman of the Redevelopment Agency is hereby authorized to execute the subject Amendment to the original Owner Participation q/1 Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency and IDM Satellite Division, Inc including such amendments and additional documents, including a promissory note, as the City Attorney may require in order to secure payment of the deferred In lieu Parking fee, with interest at a minimum rate of 5 %, by no later than 180 days after the issuance of the first building permit for the project. 2. The Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency is hereby authorized and directed to record said Amendment to the Original Owner Participation Agreement in the office of the County Recorder of San Diego, California. Submitted by ~~ ~,~ Bruce M. Boogaard and Community Development Director Agency General Couns 1 [FILE,\MZT DISK VJII\A,\IDMSATEL.RES] tf - /ò AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT Item ~ Meeting Date 05/17/94 ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING - Application for a Special Land Use Permit for the Establishment of an Auto Dismantling Business at 791 Energy Way within the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area RESOLUTION /1~ Adopting Negative Declaration IS-94-14 and Approving a Special Land Use Permit for the Establishment of an Auto Dismantling Business at 791 Energy Way SUBMITTED BY: Comm~;~ DOWlopm'"Mt ( .c, . REVIEWED BY: Executive Directo~ ~Ò ../7 (4/5ths Vote: Yes - No_) BACKGROUND: The establishment of an auto dismantling land use within the Otay Valley Redevelopment Area requires a Special Land Use Permit. The subject application has been reviewed by staff and the Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee and has received a Negative Declaration. The application is now presented to the Agency for final determination. RECOMMENDATION: That the Agency adopt Negative Declaration IS-94-14, make the requisite findings and conditionally approve a Special Permit for the establishment of an auto dismantling business at 791 Energy Way. BOARD/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: The Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee, at their meeting of april 25, 1994, adopted Negative Declaration IS-94-14, made the requisite findings and recommended approval of a Special Land Use Permit for an auto dismantling business at 791 Energy Way. The Minutes of the PAC's April 25 meeting are attached as Exhibit A. DISCUSSION: Over the last two years, City staff has been working with several well-established auto dismantling businesses in the vicinity of this project in order to bring them into conformance with City/Agency requirements as related to parking, landscaping, etc. These land uses were originally approved under PCC- 73-27 in 1973 which allowed the continuance of these businesses for fifteen years. Most of these businesses have reapplied for extension of their land use permits to continue their auto dismantling businesses in their current locations. Most of the applications that were submitted have been approved by the Redevelopment Agency within the last year for a period of approximately 13 years. It is staff's opinion that new applications for auto dismantling businesses on Energy Way should also be allowed to apply for special use permits from the Redevelopment Agency and be approved if they are limited to the same site span and can meet the conditions of approval. In the case of this project, because it is being considered almost one year after the first group of approvals for 13 years, it will be conditioned to expire at the same time as the first group, or in July, 2006. 5-1 Item .5 Meeting Date 05117/94 Page 2 The proposal calls for the establishment of an auto storage, recycling and dismantling business, European Parts Club, on the parcel situated at 791 Energy Way, located on the easement that runs northward from the cul-de-sac at the western end of Energy Way (map attached). The site has most recently been used as a contractors storage yard. The Otay Valley Road Implementation Plan/Design Manual Addendum restricts outdoor storage areas to 20% of the building area and requires landscaping of 20% of the site. The subject proposal could meet these requirements if the operation were enclosed in an industrial building. However, this is considered impractical and financially unrealistic because the businesses approved under recent special use permits were previously legal under a master conditional use permit issues over a decade ago, but are now existing, non-conforming uses that are being brought into conformance through the Special Use Permit (SUP) process. The proposed use can be allowed with a SUP. The pre-existence and temporary nature of the SUP (12 years with a possible 13 year extension) does not justify the normal requirement for enclosures. To ensure against storm water contamination, the applicant is required to participate in the State of California's storm water program by implementing what are called "Best Management Practices" (BMP) developed for such businesses by the State and industry. The applicant must submit proof that application has been made to the State for the "Notice of Intent" (NOI) number (proof that they are participating in the program), or correspondence indicating the issuance of the NOI number itself must be submitted. In the process of reviewing other similar businesses, one issue that was brought up concerned the paving requirements for customer, employee and storage areas which requires that such areas associated with a permanent use be paved with asphalt. Apparently, when these uses were approved in 1973, the requirement that was enforced at the time was permanent paving for the customer and employee areas, allowing the storage and periodic customer parking areas to be covered with decomposed granite (DG), which is the standard for temporary uses. Staff was concerned that storing auto hulks on DG could pollute storm water and soil. The requirement for permanent paving would allow for controlled drainage. However, auto dismantling businesses are required by State law to be involved with the program described above. Since the majority of auto dismantlers on Energy Way place auto hulks on the ground after completely draining all fluids, and because there is no proof that the storm water is being polluted from this area by these uses, staff is proposing modification of the precise plan requirements for Otay Industrial Park to include revised paving requirements which will allow temporary paving to remain in place. This item will be submitted to the City Council under a separate cover. The applicants shall implement the requirements pertaining to trash enclosures, off-street parking, landscaping, and fencing as established by the City of Chula Vista's Municipal Code, as may be applied to this land use proposal. The proposed use shall conform to the landscape and off-street parking guidelines of the Otay Valley Road Implementation Plan/Design Manual Addendum. Weed abatement shall be maintained within the property lines to prevent S-þ Item ~ Meeting Date 05/17/94 Page 3 fire spread to other properties. Erosion control measures must be considered when weeds are removed or cut. The subject land use is allowed by the City's zoning regulations with a Special Use Permit. Its conditional phase-out over the next 12 years is supported by the Chula Vista General Plan and the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan. The property may be redeveloped to a higher land use in compliance with the Implementation Plan/Design Manual Addendum at the time that the surrounding properties redevelop. RECOMMEND A nONS 1. An Initial Study, IS-94-14, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project has been conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator (ERe). The ERC concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommends that the Negative Declaration be adopted. 2. That the Agency make the following findings: a. Special Use Permit SUPO-94-14 does not constitute a substantial detriment to the Project Area or adjacent areas in that it is compatible with surrounding uses. b. Special Use Permit SUPO-92-14 generally promotes the orderly physical and economic development of the Project Area in that its establishment contributes to the local economy by providing a needed service. c. Special Use Permit SUPO-93-14 is generally consistent with the townscape/planning and urban design objectives of the Implementation Plan/Design Manual Addendum, and contributes to the amenity of the Project Area in that the project must implement any requirement related to landscaping, exterior structural alterations, etc. 3. That the Agency grant the requested Special Use Permit, with the conditions as stated below. Conditions: 1. This Special Land Use Permit is approved until July 13, 2006. The permit may be extended by the Zoning Administrator provided a written request for extension is received and approved prior to expiration. The Zoning Administrator's decision may be appealed to the Redevelopment Agency. Factors to be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator in considering a request for extension include but are not limited to: I) the degree to which surrounding auto dismantlers have or have not be supplanted by alternate land uses; 2) the economic S-3 Item - Meeting Date 05/17/94 Page 4 feasibility of redeveloping the site with alternate land uses; and 3) the quality of site and landscape maintenance. 2. In addition to the site plan and architectural approval pursuant to c.Y.M.C § 19.14.420, such plan shall include landscaping plantinglirrigation, parking and paving, fencing, and other appropriate screening measures which ameliorate adverse visual impacts, and must meet current minimum City standards related to such impacts. The plan shall comply with the Otay Industrial Park Precise Plan Guidelines, as amended May 24, 1994 including the reduced paving requirement therein, the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan, and or other applicable C.Y.M.C provisions. The plans shall be prepared by a Registered Landscape Architect, and shall be implemented within 90 days of the approval of this permit. 3. The applicant shall provide parking at a ratio of one (I) space for each 400 square feet of gross floor area for any enclosed structure within the lease area of APN 644-181- 21. Parking on Energy Way or within the Energy Way easement to the north and at the western terminus of Energy Way is prohibited. 4. Within thirty (30) days of the approval of this special use permit, the applicant or owner shall provide proof that the owner/operator of the auto dismantling business has either applied for or received a "Notice of Intent" (Nor) number from the State of California, State Water Resources Control Board, and that the facility is covered by the General Storm Water Permit. 5. This special land use permit shall become void and ineffective if not utilized within one year from the effective date thereof, 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/Agency for additional conditions or revocation. 6. This special land use permit shall not become effective until proof is submitted to the Director of the Community Development Department that same is recorded in the Office of the County Recorder against subject property. This special land use permit runs with the land, and is not transferable to another property. Code Reminders: 1. Design Review Approval (C.V.M.c.§19.14.583) 2. Site plan and architectural approval (c.V.M.c.§ 19.14.420) FISCAL IMPACT: Since improvements on the site will be limited, property tax increment will be negligible. The operation of an auto dismantling and parts resale business does, however, generate sales tax revenue for the City. The proposed business will also employ 6-10 workers. c,lkassman\<a4s\791ene<.<a4 ..s~f EXHIBIT A DRAFT Minutes OTAY VAllEY ROAD PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE Monday, April 25, 1994 Conference Rooms 2&3 9:00 a.m. Public Services Building 1. ROll CAll PRESENT: Chairman Casillas, Members Palumbo, McMahon, Nava ABSENT: Member Hall (excused) ALSO: J. Justice of Calument Auto Wrecking; Bill Martinez, Consultant; John McCormack, property owner; Joe Kellegin, Ecology Wrecking Yards; STAFF: Redevelopment Coordinator Kassman; Associate Planner Miller; CD Specialist Rofoli 2. APPROVAL OF MINUTES from the meeting of February 14, 1994. MSC (Palumbo/McMahon) to approve the minutes of February 14, 1994 (4-0-1; Hall absent). Chairman Casillas took this opportunity to introduce Rosalinda Nava, newly appointed member of the Project Area Committee. Ms. Nava is a graduate student in City Planning and lives near the Otay Valley Road Project Area. 3. PUBLIC HEARING: Application for a Special land Use Permit to establish an Auto Dismantling Business at 791 Energy Way Chairman Casillas opened the public hearing. Mr. Bill Martinez, consultant representing the applicants wishing to establish an auto wrecking use at 791 Energy Way indicated that the project had gone through all the environmental revview and now they were processing the Special land Use Permit. Chairman Casillas asked if all the questions concerning the Negative Declaration had been ironed out. Mr. Martinez indicated that the applicants had been before the Conservation Commission and all the environmental documentation is recommended for approval by them. Member Palumbo made a motion to accept staff recommendations approving the project. Chairman Casillas closed the public hearing. MSC (Palumbo/McMahon) to adopt the Negative Declaration issued under IS-94.14, make the requisite findings and recommend approval of a Special Use Permit as conditioned by staff in report SUPO-93-14 (4-0.1; Hall ahsent). Staff indicated to the applicant that the request for a Special Permit would go before the Redevelopment Agency at their meeting of May 17, 1994. 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Modification of the Precise Plan Guideline for Otay Industrial Park for Specified lots Along Energy Way 5-.5 Thís yage íntentíonaIly lift blank. S-~ 1HE CITY OF CHUl.A VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT You arc required 10 file a Slatemenl of Disclosure of œrlain ownership or financial interests. paymcnts, or campaign contrihulions, on all matters which wilt require discrclionary aclion on the part of the City Council. Planning CommiS5ion, and all other official bodics. The following information must be disclosed: J. Lisl the namcs of all persons having a financial inlercsl in lhe properly which is Ihe subject of lhe application or the conlracl, e.g., owner, applicant, COntraclor, subcontractor. material supplier. : ~ Jose Caves t'lilliam w. Martinez Rassoul Ghannadian Habbib Ghannadian 2. If any person' idenlified pursuanllo (I) above is a corporation or parlnership, list the names of all individuals owning more lhan 10% of the sharcs in the corporation or owning any parlnership intcrcsl in the parlnership. N/A . 3. If any person' idenlified pursuant 10 (1) above l' non-profil organization or a trust, list the namcs of any person serving as director of Ihe non-profil organization or as trustee or benet'iciary or IruSlor of the lrus!. Jose Caves 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of busincss transacted wilh any meh of the City staff, Boards, Commissions, Commillecs, and Council wilhin the past twelve months? Ycs- No If ycs, please indiC3tc person(s): - .. 5. Please idenlify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who you have assigned to reprcscnt you before the City in this mailer. wi', i om W MorHnp? SO. Ca. Land Use Consultants 6. Have you and/or your offiœrs or agenls, in the aggregale, contributed more than $1,000 to a Councilmember in the Current or preceding eleclion period? Ycs- NoX- If yes, state which CounciImember(s): , . '(NOT& Attach additional pa~ ,,?£y~: := Date: lnl '~I ql . ø~y- ~~ J . Signature ~ {applicant S-7 William W Marrinez Print or type name of contractor/applicant , Penon ¡, d<[mcd as, "Any imij,id"al. finn, ca-parrnenhip, jaw venn"c. a.uociarim, socUú club, fra/mw/ or¡;atlizarim, <o'/'Orarior, <:IW/<, rrwr, r«<iva, syndicn/<, thi.r ""'/ at,y o<ha counry, ciry ",1<1 couwr)', ciry rnwlicip"hry, tiisuic\ or oula ¡x;lirical ",btii.Ùior, or at/)' oula {7oup or combination "cring as a w<iL . Thís ,age ínttnüonnIly left blank. S-! SPECIAL LAND USE PERMIT APPLICA nON CIty of ChuJa VIsta Case No: Planning Department Filing Date: Receipt #: Zoning: DZ.A. ; D PAC This form shall be used for projects within redevelopment areas which are subject to processing through the Redevelopment Agency, in lieu of the Conditional Use Penn it application form. Name of Applicant: Ghannadian Rassoul and Habbib WI Fi"l Mailing Address: 2730 (;i'Jrnet Ave Work Phone: (619) 275-5572 No. St=t <;~n n;pgn r~ Q?lOS Home Phone: (619) None City Sla!c Zip Applicant's Interest: DOwn DLease BIn Escrow DOption to purchase Redevelopment Area: Town Centre I Town Centre II - Bayfront- Southwest - Otay Valley -.lQL Project Address & Location: 791 Energy Way Chula Vista, Ca 91911 Legal Description of Site: APN 644-181-21 Brief Description of the Project: ""Tn n; ~m'nT1; ng ~n;¡ R"""y,..l;ng Rl1c:;npc:c: Existing Use of Property: Constuction Equipment Storage Assessor's Parcel Numberls: APN 644-181-21 ALL LETTERS, PLANS, ELEVATIONS, AND SHEETS SUBMITTED WITH THIS APPLICATION ARE AN INTEGRAL PART THEREOF. Willaim W. Martinez 1f/~ 10-15-93 Print Name of Applicant/Agent Signature Date No",: In onder for a SpeciaJ Land Use Pennit to be grn¡t<:d. the following fmdings must be made: I) That the proposed use at the panicular locanon is necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which contribu", to the general well-being at the neighborhood ur the community. 2) That such use will not. under the circumsoÎnces of the panicular 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. J) That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and condinons specified in the MunicipaJ Code for such use. 4) That the granting uf this condinonal use pennit will not adversely affect the General Plan of the City of Chula Vista or the adopted plan of any governmental agency. S ~ I 1 .J .J ?} ------ - -- ------ -ZOJ1JU4--_L__u._-1---:_~ - .- J.W¿lbJJ?IAI:: ~~-/D .-- - . negative declaration PROJECT NAME: European Parts Club PROJECT LOCATION: 791 Energy Way, Chula Vista ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 644-181-21 PROJECT APPLICANT: Rassoul and Habbib Ghannadain CASE NO: IS-94-14 DATE: January 19, 1994 A. Pro-iect Settinq The project site at 791 Energy Way is a 1. 39 acre parcel (60,548 sq. ft.), with an average graded slope of 1% and a maximum graded slope of 50% (perimeter embankments), at 791 Energy Way in the Otay Valley Road Redevlopment Area, with an existing 5000 square foot metal building. The building covers 12.11% of the project site. The site is 85% paved and is fenced. There is partial Landscaping, 20% and Irrigation an System. 20% of the site is landscaped. The project is currently designated Industrial in the Redevelopment Plan and Industrial Research & Limited Manufacturing in the General Plan. The site is zoned I-P. The previous use of the site was for construction equipment storage. All surrounding land is zoned I-~. Auto dismantling businesses are to the north, east and west of the project site. A truck dismantling business is tothe south of the site. B. Pro-iect Description The project will involve the use of the existing 5000 sq.ft. metal structure for an auto dismantling and recycling business. The project will not involve the construction of new buildings and there will be nine parking spaces provided, although five are required per Chapter 19, Section 62.050 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, Title 19-Zoning. The spaces are for employees and customers and one of the nine spaces provided is for the physically disabled. The hours of operation will be 8am to 5pm M-F and 9am to 2pm Sat. Tow trucks are expected to drop off four cars a week for the first six months to the site and then one car per month there after. The cars will be European luxury cars, which will be dismantled by employees, when a part is requested by a client. The applicant expects ten to fifteen clients per day. Many clients will be dealerships. ~{ft.. S -/1 --- ~~~ city of chull vlltl planning department 01Y Of environmental review Hctlon. CHUIA VISTA -.- _. The new owners will improve the existing landscaping and irrigation system and add a trash enclosure and provide designated public and employee parking spaces. The applicant will be required to obtain a Special Use Permit approval from the Redevelopment Agency from the City of Chula Vista. The Speicial Use Permit review will involve land use change issues. Also, the applicant is required to obtain a NPDES General Permit for Stormwater Discharches, from the State Water Resources Control Board, associated with industrial activities and will be required to file an information form describing the proposed project with the County Department of Hazardous Materials Management Division to ensure that no possible hazardous substances are generated by the site. A conditional of approval of the site will involve non-storage of cars in the 15% of the project site that is not paved to ensure that there are no environmental impacts to the exposed soil. The applicant will be required to meet police crime prevention guidelines as outlined in the Initial Study. C. Compatibilitv with Zoninq and Plans The project is designated Industrial in the Redevelopment Plan and Industrial, Research and Limited Manufacturing. The project is zoned is I-P. This use, an auto dismantling and recycling business, in regard to its location and size is consistant and compatible with the Industrial zone. Granting of a Special Use Permit will not require a General Plan Amendment and will be in compliance with the Redevelopment Plan. D. Identification of Environmental Effects An initial study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including the attached Environmental Checklist Form) determined that the proposed project will not have a significant environmental effect, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. This Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Although there are no potential significant environmental impacts as part of this project the applicant is required to obtain the necessary permits prior to issuance of a business license. E. Findinqs of Insiqnificant Impact Based on the following findings, it is determined that the project described above will not have a significant impact 5 - /;2- - and no environmental impact report needs to be prepared. 1. will the project have the potential to 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 community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant animal or eliminate important examples or the major periods of California history or prehistory? The proposed project will involve the use of a currently developed site with a metal structure for an auto dismantling and recycling business. The project will not involve any new construction. The already developed site is in an industrially designated area and there is no evidence of any sensitive species. 2. will the project have the potential to achieve short-te~ goals to the disadvantage of long-te~, environmental goals? (A short-te~ impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time, while long-te~ impacts will endure well into the future.) The proposed project will not involve any new construction. An existing structure will be used as an office for a auto dismantling and recycling business. The project is compatible with existing land uses surrounding the site and will not significantly impact the project area, from a land use perspective. The short-term environmental goal of the project will be to use an unoccupied ßite for an viable industrial purpose. This type of us", will be allowed for twel ve years. Thus, the proj ect will serve as a viable industrial use in the short-term. The long-term environmental goal of the project is as an industrial use in an industrial zone, reducing the demand for this use in any other area of the city. The auto dismantling and recycling business will be compatible with the current land use in the area and will avoid new construction of industrial property, within the city, and thus avoid long-term environmental impacts. 3. will the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) The proposed project will not involve an increased demand on resources. All drainage, water, sewer and transportation facilities and service are adequate to serve the project and are within the City threshold standards for those municipal services. The proj ect will not place a demand on these facilities and no new facilities will be required to service the project site. The project will not generate impacts which S~/3 ... are individually limited, but cumatively considerable. The total sum of impacts are negligible. 4. will the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? The project will involve the use of an existing structure and will not involve new construction or cause the disturbance of any human beings. The proposed auto dismantling & recycling business will employ four people. This small number will not impact population changes or generate a demand on housing. The proposed project is an auto dismantling and recycling business. Because of this industrial use, the applicant will be required to comply with state regulations regarding hazardous materials. For this reason, all engines and auto fluids associated with the auto dismantling will be drained and removed off site. The applicant will be required to obtain a general permit from the State Water Resources Control Board (Regional Water Quality Board) and meet any standards established by County Hazardous Materials Management Division. Compliance with the standards set by these agencies will ensure that the project will not have a significant impact on soil or groudwater contamination. The project is in compliance with the General Plan and with the Otay Valley Road Revelopment Plan. The project is an industrial use and is being proposed in an area designated and zoned for this type of use. The project will not cause adverse substantial adverse environmental effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. F. Consultation 1. Individuals and Orqanizations City of Chula Vista: Susan Vandrew, Planning Barbara Reid, Planning Martin Miller, Planning Roger Daoust, Engineering Cliff Swanson, Engineering Hal Rosenberg, Engineering Bob Sennett, Planning Ken Larsen, Director of Building&Housing Carol Gove, Fire Marshal Crime Prevention, MaryJane Diosdada Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation Dept. Rich Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson Sweetwater union High School District: Tom Silva Applicant's Agent: So. Ca. Land Use Consultants S-/tf ---_. . 2. Documents Chula Vista General Plan (1989) and EIR (1989) Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code Otay Valley Road Reve1opment P1an(1983) California Storm Water Best Management Handbook 3. Initial Studv This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any comments received on the Initial Study and any comments received during the public review period for this Negative Declaration. The report reflects the independent judgement of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review of this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910. ~mf:'~ ~ (¿7~ ENVIRO NTAL R IEW CO RDINATOR EN 6 (Rev. 5/93) S~/5 _._~ -. Thís ,age íntentíonaIIy lift blank. 5-/& - , APPLICA nON CANNOT Bl: .CCEPTED UNLESS SITE for Office Use Only PLAN IS FOLDED TO FIT INTO AN 8-112 X 11 FOLDER Case No. IS- (11-/- N Dpst.Arnm./Ditl N'f RecèiptNO.12ÁY7'/ INITIAL STUDY I)ateRec'd.I~PI.3 Accepted by~ City of Chula Vista J'rojectNo.FA-~\. 4 D¡jst/No.DQ-Q4.\ Application Fonn ClPNo. A. BACKGROUND Related Case No. - 1. Project Title 1'.lIrODean Parts Club 2. Project Location (Street address or descripúon) 791 Enerqv Wav Chula Vista, Ca 91911 Assessors Book, Page & Parcel No. 644-181-21 3. Brief Project Description Auto Dismantling and Recycling Business I , I 1 4. Name of Applicant Rassoul and Habbib Ghannadain Address 2730 Garnet Faxli 233-1931 Phone 275-5572 City San Dieqo State Ca Zip 92105 5. Name of Preparer/Agent So. Ca. Land Use Consaultants. Address 7<,7 WP~t Ivv Street Fax# 233-1931 Phone 233-6176 City Snn !")p;oo State Ca Zip 92101 Relation to Applicant Aoent- Bill Martinez 6. Indicate ill permits or approvals and enclosures or documents required by the Environmental Review Coordinator. a. Permits or approvals required. \ - General Plan Amendment ~ Design Review Application - Specific Plan Rezone/Prezone - Tentative Subd. Map --- Conditional Use PermÜ - Grading PermÜ - Redevelopment Agency OPA Variance - Tentative Parcel Map - Redevelopment Agency DDA - Coastal Developmenl ~te Plan & Arch. Review - Public Project - Other Pennit Special Use Pennit - Annexaûon If project is a Genera! Plan Amendment and/or rezone, please indicate the change in designation from to b. Enclosures or documents (as required by the Environmental Review Coordinator). - Grading Plan Arch. Elevations - Hydrological Study - Parcel Map = Landscape Plans - Biological Study Precise Plan - Tentative Subd. Map - Archaeological Study = Specific Plan - Improvement Plans Noise Assessment - Traffic Impact Report - Soils Report = Other Agency Pennil - Hazardous Waste Assessment - Geotechnical Report - Other - 5-/7 WPCoFoIHOME\PL\..'<NING<iTORED\J021-A.9:J (Rd- 1020.931 (R,I. 1022.93) Page 1 B. PROPOSED PROJECT 1. a. Land Area: square footage 60,548 or acreage 1. 39 Ace. If land area to be dedicated. state acreage and purpose. N/A b. Does the project involve the construction of new buildings. or will existing structure be utilized? Existina Stucture to be Utilized 2. Complete this section if project is residential or mixed use. N/A a. Type of development:- Single Family - Two Family - Multi Family - Townhouse - Condominiwn b. Total number of structures N/A c. Maximum height of structures N/A d. Number of Units: 1 bedroom - 2 bedroom - 3 bedroom - 4 bedroom - Total Units - e. Gross density (DU/total acres) N/A f. Net density (DU/total acres minus any dedication) N/A g. Estimated project population N/A h. Estimated sale or rental price range N/A i. Square footage of structure N/A j. Percent of lot coverage by buildings or structures N/A k. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided "i.. I. Percent of site in road and paved surface "I.. 3. Complete this section if project is commercial or industrial or mixed use. a. Type(s) of land use Corrunercial b. Aoor area 5000 sq ft Height of structures(s) 20 feet c. Type of construction used in the structure Existing Metal Structure d. Describe major access points to the structures and the orientation to adjoining propenies and streets Only access is from Enerqv Wav e. Number of on-site parking spaces provided 9 Parkinq Spaces f. Estimated number of employees per shift 4 Number of shifts 1 Total 4 g. Estimated number of customers (per day) and basis of estimate Unknown. .. WPC'¡>:'B:)MI!II'IANNIN<MTOItEINO21-A.93 (Rd. 1020.93) (Rd. ttl22.93) S - / cf' Pile 2 h. Estimated number of deliveries per day ¡¡nknown i. Estimated range of service area and basis of estimate South Bay Area j. Type/extent of operations not in enclosed buildings Storage of Autos k. Hours of operation 8 AM to 5 PM M-F 9AM to 2 PM Sat. I. Type of exterior lighting Existing 4. If project is other than residential, commercial or industrial complete this section. a. Type of project Auto Dismantlinq and Recvclinq Business b. ..type of facilities provided n"'n ni~m"'n'linn rtnn Rpr.vr.lina F"r.ititv I c. Square feet of ehclosed structures <; nnn"q <'t- d. Height of structure(s) - maximum N/A e. Ultimate occupancy load of project N/A f. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided 9 Parking Spaces g. Square feet of road and paved surfaces. h. Additional project characteristics All Surrounding Businesses are Auto Dismantlinq And Recyclinq C. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS 1. Will the project be required to obtain a permit through the Air Pollution Control District (APCD)? No 2. Is any type of grading or excavation of the property anticipated? N/A If yes, complete the following: a. Excluding trenches to be backfilled, how many cubic yards of earth will be excavated? None b. How many cubic yards of fill will be placed? N/A c. How much area (sq. ft. or acres) will be graded? N/A d. What will be the: Maximum depth of cut N/A Average depth of cut N/A Maximum depth of fill N/A Average depth of fill N/A - WPC,EIHOMEll'U.NNINGlSTORED\JO2t.A.93 (Ro!. tO20.93) <1(,1. 1022.93) S-/? Page 3 3. Describe all energy consuming devices which are pan of the proposed project and the type of energy used (air conditioning, electrical appliance, heating equipment, etc.) M/n 4. Indicate the amount of natural open space that is pan of the project (sq. ft. or acres) Existinq, Site N/A - 5. If the project will result in any employment opportunities describe the natUre and type of these jobs. This Operation Will Reouire Four (4) New Emplovees 6. Will highly flammable or potentially explosive materials or substances be used or stored within the project site? ,~nne all Engines and Auto Fluids are Drained and Removed Off Site. 7. How many estimated automobile trips, per day, will be generated by the project? Unknown 8. Describe (if any) off-site improvements necessary to implement the project, and their points of access or connection to the project site. Improvements include but not limited to the following: new streets; street widening; extension of gas, electric, and sewer lines; cut and fill slopes; and pedestrian and bicycle facilities. Nnnp F."i~t-ina Sit-p D. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING I. Geology Has a geology study been conducted on the propeny? No (If yes, please attach) Has a soils repon on the project site been made? No (If yes, please attach) 2. Hydrology Are any of the following featUres present on or adjacent to the site? (If yes, explain in detail.) a. Is there any surface evidence of a shallow ground water table? Nn .. WPC,F,IIIOMElPLANNlNG\STOREI:NO21-A.93 (R,I. tO2D.93) (Rd. 1022.93) -5-;J-O Page 4 -- .-. b. Are there any watercourses or drainage improvements on or adjacent to the site? No ¥ c. Does runoff from the project site drain directly in to or toward a domestic water supply, lake, reservoir or bay? ,,~ d. Could drainage from the site cause erosion or siltation to adjacent areas? No e. Describe all drainage facilities to be provided and their location. Existinq Drainaqe Facilities are in Place 3. Noise a. Are there any noise sources in the project vicinity which may impact the project site? "n b. Will noise from the project impact any sensitive receptors (hospitals, schools, single- family residences)? No 4. Biology a. Does the site involve any Coastal Sage Scrub vegetation? No b. Is the project site in a natural or partially natural state? No c. If yes, has a biological survey been conducted on the property? Yes - No ~ (Please attach a copy.) d. Describe all trees and vegetation on the site. Indicate location, height, diameter, and species of trees, and which (if any) will be removed by the project. Note: Attached Site Plan 5. Past Use of the Land a. Are there any known historical or archeological resources located on or near the project site? NO b. Are there any known paleontological resources? NO NO c. Have there been any hazardous materials disposed of or stored on or near the project site? NO d. What was the land previously used for? Constuction Equipment Storage. , WI'C:F:'BOMElPl.ANNlNG\ITOItE!NO2t-A.93 (Rd. tO20.93) (Rd. 1022.93) 5-;2-1 Page 5 6. Current Land Use a. Describe all Structures and land uses culTently existing on the project site. 5,000 SQ. FT. Metal Building b..~ Describe all Structures and land uses currently existing on adjacent property. North Autb Dismantling and Recycling South ¡ Dismantling and Recycling Truck East Auto Dismantling and Recycling West Street 7. Social a. AIe there anr residents on site? No ;' If so, how many? b. Are there arty current employment opportunities on site? No If so, how ~any and what type? II . 8. Please provide any other information which may assist in the evaluation of the proposed project. Note Attached Discription. . .. WPC,F,'<JQMlN'U.NNlNG\SI'ORED\1021.A.93 (Rof. 1020.93) <Ref. 1022.93) S--1~ Page 6 European Parts Club Auto Dismantlinq and Recyclinq Business 791 Energy Way Chu1a Vista, Ca. 91911 Project Description The subject site is a 1.39 acre parcel, with an existing five thousand (5,000.) square foot metal building. The site has existing Paved AC and a Rod-Iron Front Gate and Fence. The remainder of the site has a Chain Link Fence. There is partial Landscaping and Irrigation System. The site in the past was use as a storage site for construction vehicles of the Caves Construction Company. European Parts Club is purchasing the site to establish a Auto Dismantling and Recycling Business. The new owners will improve the existing landscaping and irrigation system. Add a trash enclosure and provide designated public and employee parking spaces. ~-~3 E. CERTIFICATION I, as owner/owner in escrow* Print name or I'~~L-age~k/ ~.-cß - ~~7'.""" -- William W. Martinez ~ Print name HEREBY AFFIRM, that to the best of my belief, the statements and infonnation herein contained are in all respects true and COITeCt and that all known infonnation concerning the project and its setting has been included in this application for an Initial Study of possible environmental impact and any enclosures for attachments thereto. / ' ~ 1~r:4 / Owob/Owner in Eirow Signature ( d/.o< . ~~/ .:!bá ~ ';/. /~ Consultant or Agent Signature William W. Martinez, Date 101 15/93 *If acting for a corporation, include capacity and company name. ... WPC:F:1IIOMEIfI.ANNIN021.A.93 (Ref. 1020.93) (Ref. t022.93) S -,,2 1- Page 7 - INITIAL STUDY PROCESSING AGREEMENT Name of Applicant: European Parts Club (Jose Caves) Address: 1287 5 th Street Phone 661-1612 City: Imperial Beach State Ca Zip 91932 Name of Authorized Representative (if signatory): William W. Martinez Address: 707 West Ivv Street Phone 275-5572 City San ni eao State Ca Zip 92101 Agreement Date: 10/ 5/ 93 Deposit Amount: One Thousand Dollors ($ 1.000.00 ) TIús Agreement ("Agreement") between the City of Chula Vista, a chartered municipal corporation ("City") and the forenamed applicant for an Initial Study ("Applicant"), effective as of Ihe Agreement Date set forth above, is made with reference to the following facts: Whereas, Ihe Applicant has applied 10 the City for an Initial Study of the type aforereferenced ("Initial Study") which Ihe City has required to be obtained as a condition to permitting the Applicant to develop a parcel of propeny; and, Whereas. the City will incur expenses in order to process said Initial Study through the various departments and hefore the various boards and commissions of the City ("Processing Services"); and, Whereas, the pwpose of this agreement is 10 reimburse the City for all expenses it will incur in connection willi providing the Processing Services; Now, Iherefore, the panies do hereby agree, in exchange for the mutual promises herein contained, as follows: I. Applicant's Duty to Pay. The Applicant shall pay all of the City's expenses incwred in providjng Processing Service rela1ed 10 applicant's Initial Study, including all of the City's direct and ovemead costs related thereto. This duty of the Applicant shall be ref CITed to herein as Ihe "Applicant's Duty to Pay." A. Applicant's Deposit Duty As partial performance of the Applicant's Duty 10 Pay, the Applicant shall deposit the amount aforereferenced ("Deposit"). 1. The City shall charge its lawful expenses incwred in providing Processing Services againstlhe Applicant's DeposiL If, afler Ihe conclusion of processing the Applicant's Initial Study, any portion of the Deposit remains. Ihe City sha1I return said balance to Ihe Applicant wilhout interest thereon. If. during Ihe processing of the Applicant's Initial Study, the amount of Ihe Deposit becomes exhausted, or is imminently likely to become exhausted in Ihe opinion of the City, upon notice of same by the City, the Applicant shall forthwith provide such addiûonal deposit as the City sha1I calcu!ale as reasonably necessary to continue to provide Processing Services. The duty of the Applicant 10 initia1ly deposit and 10 supplement said deposit as herein required shall be known as the "Applicant's Deposit Duty". U. City's Duty The City shall, upon Ihe condition Ihat the Applicant is not in breach of the Applicant's Duty to Payor Ihe Applicant's Deposit Duty, use good faith to provide processing services in relation to the Applicant's Initial ... Study application. WPC,f,'HOMElPLANNlNGISTOREDII02t.A.93 (Ref. 10211.93) (Ref. 1022.93) .!J~ -;¿S Page 8 A. The City shall have no liability hereunder to the Applicant for the failure to process the Applicant's Initial Study application, or for failure to process the Applicant's Initial Study within the time frame requested by the Applicant or esûmated by the City. B. By execution of this agreement, the Applicant sha11 have no right to direct or otherwise influence the conduct of the Initial Study roc which the applicant has applied. The City sha11 use its discretion in evaluating the Applicant's Initial Study application without regard to the Applicant's promise to pay for the Processing Services, or the execution of the Agreement. ID. Remedies A. Suspension of Processing In addition to all other rights and remedies which the City sha11 otherwise have at law or equity, the City has the right to suspend and/or withhold the processing of the Initial Study which is the subject matter of this Agreement, as well as the Initial Study which may be the subject matter of any other Pennit which Applicant has before the City. B. Civil Collection In addition to all other rights and remedies which the City shall otherwise have all law or equity, the City has the right to collect all sums which are or may become due hereunder by civil action, and upon instituting litigation to collect same, the prevailing party shall be entitled to reasonable auomey's fees had costs. IV. Miscellaneous A. Notices All notices, demands or requests provided for or pennitted to be given pursuant to this Agreement must be in writing. AU notices, demands 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 cenifieð, with return receipt requested, at the addresses identified adjacent to the signatures of the parties represented. B. Governing LawNenue 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 coons 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 he the City of Chula Vista. C. Multiple Signatories If there are multiple signatories to this agreement on beha1f of Applicant, each of such signatories sha11 be jointly and severally liable for the perfonnance of Applicant's duties herein set forth. D. Signatoty Authority The signatory to this agreement hereby warrants and represents that it is the duly designated agent for the Applicant and has been duly authorized by the Applicant to execute this Agreement on behalf of the Applicant. Signatory shall be personally liable roc Applicant's Duty to Pay and Applicant's Duty to Deposit in the event it has nol been authorized to execute this Agreement by the ApplicanL - W!'C,p,IIIOMEll'LANNlNGISTOREtNO2t.A.93 (Ref. tO20.93) (Ref. 1022.93) .5 -;21:. Page 9 E. Hold Harmless Applicant shall defend, indemnify 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 OIIt of processing Applicant's Initial Study. except only for those claims arising from the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the City. incurred by the City, its officers. agents. or employees in defending against such claims. whether the same proceed to judgement or not Further, the Applicant, 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. Applicant's indemnifcation of the City shall be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the ApplicanL F. Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures. No suit or 3Ibitration shall be brought arising out of this agreement, against the City unless a claim has fust been presented in writing and filed with the City of Chula Vista and acted upon by the City of Chula Vista in accordance with the procedures set fonh 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 the reference as if fully set forth herein. and such policies and procedures used by the City in the implementation of same. Upon request by the City. the Applicant shall meet and confer in good faith with the City for the pwpose of resolving any dispute over the terms of this AgreemenL Now. therefore, the parties hereto. having read and understood the terms and conditions of this agreement, do bereby express their consent to the terms hereof by setting Iheir hand hereto on the date set fonh adjacent thereto. City City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue :::" ~o ø¿j Dated: ~ '7.3 Applicant (or authorized representative) Caves Jose William Martinez Dated: 10/ 15/ 93 .. WPC~,1HCJMEIP1.ANNIN02t.A.93 (bf. 1020.93) (bf. t022.93) 5-~7 Pas" 10 --- .-. Thís 'page íntentíonaIly left blank. S-:L? THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Statement of disclosure of cettain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons have a financial interest in the contract, Le., contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. Jose Caves I<assou~ c,nann"o~"n "no Habhib (;hannadian Wi"i~m W M~rt-i np7 2. If any person identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. "In 3. If any person identified pursuant to (I) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustcc or beneficiary or trustcc of the trust. Jose Caves 4. Have you had more than $250 wonh of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committccs and Council within the past twelve months? "In S. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employ~s, consultants or independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. Will ;"m W M"rtine7 Rohfert 'l'urfek 6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Council member in the CUrTCnt or preceding election period? Yes Þ<J\I No [ ] If ycs, state which Council member(s): . PeIlOO is defiaed u: . Aay iadividual. firm. co-parIIIenbip. joim vemu... wociatioo. lOCiai club. tn..l1111 0'1_00. corpontioo, ....... ws!, receiver, syadica... dW lad aay olberCOUDl)', cil)' lad coumy. city.lllllllÍ<:ipo1ity.districl orolberpolilica1lUbdivisioa.or my olberpoup or combiaatioooctiD¡ u . IUÙt.. (NO'Œ: - addiåoaal PAlOI u aocessary) .~ 10/ 15/ 93 A¿' Date: .~Z SignatUre of contractor/applicant /"",--' William W. Martinez - Print or type name of contractor/applicant 5 -02 9 WPC,F,\HOME\PLANNING\STORED\l021'A.9~Rer. 1020.93HRet. 1022.93) Pa¡ell ,.- -. Thís ¡age íntentíonaIly left blank. S-3D '\ r... ~ south~m càlifoihj~ji!ng use consultants ~ - C,,"D.æ>e co",u""", ,ccC"c.oc"" 'DV~,;;;n: 10/15/1993 LETTER OF AUTHORIZATION To whom it may concern, I h.re~y give authorization to william Martinez of Southern California Land Use Consultants to sign on and for my ~ehalf on the matter of processing a CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FOR AN AUTO DISMANTLING AND RECYCLING BUSINESS through the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California. Property is APN 644-181-21 EUROPEAN PARTS CLUB, 791 Energy Way, Chula Vista, Ca. 91911. W/15/1993 DATE 10/15/1993 DATE ) .' /.///. d¿ ----~ 10/15/1993 /~~7¿~ ~/~r -<"'-;-, E WILLIAM MARTINEZ for Southern Californi d Use Consultants 5580 La Jolla Blvd. suite 124 La Jolla, Ca. 92037 (619) 233-6176 ,6-3{ 757WestlvyStreet'S"nO:ego.c.-\9ZIOI"óI91233-öI70'--X\ 01"'233-;931 Mailing Adoress - 5580 L., lalla Blvd.. Suite 124. L¡¡ ,vIla. '-" "IO3? Thís yage íntentíonaIIy lift blank. 5-.3~ W' '~~-7"'o::..~'~::;:'?!"i~":t~"'.r.," '--'f'-~'~7;' "~?;~ . ;, '.'{' IMPERIAL BEACH QUADRANGLE'" ~ir:'#' CALIFORNIA-BAJA CALIFORNIA NORTE. ~~, 7.5 MINUTE SERIES (TO~OaRAPHIC) ,~~ \ 2'30" '97 ,17&0000 FEET '98 '99 117'00' " ,.>, 'f 'c' ',,' \'~";:~I~ ',j . ""--,'~' ..è;;:~,,;,;>.;"-.I":-'r'iO~ C"'.;' - 32' 37'30~., ~,\,:"-',\...::~ad"'," ",--1\'"6..<',,1"'" .' . " \\~'t-,~, . 'L. " ¿~ ï"'i,","'" " ' ',:, , ~~'I ,'. - ",.~';:;,.:r?"'" .' ,~~q \, , I "., ,...,.."'~" '.., ~~' I \ , K""",,- '\ I,. ,~, iV\., -, 0.., 3,',",~, '\""') ,', (('\'- ,,<"""~.... ~,"~",_..J.,' 'c,'- '~' \, ",O"", -1--~,----:--"--' ¡) r ----¡'--r-' ", "09 . ./" . ""'\:)"~ , ; \' :ð~- .'1\1/1 ' ' \. ~:;-""t;:"" I, , ,.;,..' , , ,,°," .'~,"",-,,71'\~_--,'--,,\ ~~_v,¿. 'r~, :,'" ,,:) Cr\\ w;". Ì' . " \ N ,~~ L 0." / . " t\~,'~ r .,'=, , '!ò-""-,- 1."",,-, '," .~I< ',..," ~~,\\ , ,t;."rl.a.,,>1'~~ '. ';',-\,' ,,~:;,,+\ /:J' L4 'D"Gr' ,6;;.~r'~""r-'f"\":" /,'~'~~~ ',,~. ~,\"",,~;,,~'/\:'~I~ -'/', - ~5""" ";~ . -,~a",,:,\,--,","",""'c.. '," " I?--, /'~.-'.'----::::'", "',""" ~\: ,'"'~',,, ,'"--",, ' -'~. . ::~r.' ---\.,.._.y~~--, ~~..----- --- '" '\ ,'..<7'" ,,> !"-*" .. ---~.,-- '::r::,r",~!"';' ~ ,n,"I",/-:p."'.~,',.,"" '\ 'ì~'" r--r"., /, "':',-~' -, " "'"IoS,", ..-.1'1 'v'.'" , I.d'jV '~<' .' .. " " . - ", "','." " " , ..-<t .0 I . o' / -- "t--""'o ...',y"', ~3,,'_,~'0 . ~--,', "......,," A-,L,. --~v->"",c,..¡,--.-'o'..¿," "',"--L::.." ~,,'" ~' 'r'-~-~," -'"08 . ~~~'i';.,'" .~'/~"lli;""! ;:.:..-" 1\ '{¡, '~\ ,-,,', "\'\ I .....i'7't' v',',': .,...-r":..J\'\'.'«'"," ".-r--.,,",.,,- '.. > , " ., , ,^", '--.J'-.-..- "........... <\\," " .'1'.. ¡ /' ,II" " ',,:...ßv-"-:"/',",'~".'-' \. ( ,I , \, \.. \;: '..' ':J' , / ~~ 1 ,.:---:" f ,.". --' ..,/'0-.: ~, 'e ,~':-" ~¡ ~ ." I"" ¡.. ';~," ~--- F ,.¡ PoggJ-. ~ \--'" . """ 1É'~"'ì'J"','-5'i ',.'~,,~"',: \',"~,::""l-"/-'.,//,"'~,,,' '.",\ """\""""~",,,\.,,, ." ,';" ,,"---:~\":(',' ,... ~':i /~;>~ ,r ----... ') '.'" "-.... '"" ' ~7 -,-"", ~, ..r~, , ,~ ' -------;J ) ~.'~, r--'--";", " '17 ,.J / - :"d'::-~_-('::'-'~'~'~ . /j ',1/ ,...:~,., \,,;;:"'<:::;, '~" "~'U;:i ""..7 ¡ -~,'3 " ; , '. ~...S ",j ,o:r ',' ", fl, <..,' ; ~ ,~,...~,I "¡c,,c, ^<,;i.. . ," ""c . " ,\ ' _.~ "..' J~O J,/'",.,-",_.A" ,./°' ",'", :-1"1("1'....:--:,..:..."...\, " , ---"--'---'" .[lj.~..-... ,. .,...w.....1'~' "--"',',_""'¿,h_-O"_--","",,., '~~" -"""",---" '~'-','-+- -. -, -,~ " ~. , . - . "...W"" ; 'Jr".:... --, /"'.,,~ ,.' ' ~ ;:;""'" I ~ , ~'V""",', ,"-,~"',',!~i~'I,;f ,~,' -,'- ....------ "-".',',', ,'K' ';"',"":',',""'-,", "",',",,'_'-"7 " \-.,-t! ;-~/¡~ ~;: ¡ ,:;, ( /:""/"'J, ( ""-:r: ~:~:-¡:). -~y /--'0 ~'x.,," , "¡-r';' J;,1.;""','>, JI~"'/':',:\Ii.::e'o..,":,::'::' ' '"",. _n'::~--d+:::~ /./-...L~ ~~i-._::;_':":..._-~--J,j_\-,~~U :~ '" -':}:;~ ',:- . .,.::"t;'o" r-/w, :,= ',~~, -,./ fWT' '1' """', wT"':-/'J\_/ê, ,< ~':;...:~~ :(,-:; k~ '~\1~ .. ag~ \:;;;::;:' , ~ ,~,' """"""""""( II~' .4:), . uij' '.'CÞ?" , \; . ~,.' \,,\,,~' ,.,,--'!-,-,.' .~,..,-..,.,:~, ',,"", ,'------,' '/;l.,' ,"'\\ ", ""'+';"--'~ .-<-' r<-.\~,,-;.. I, ~ )1"\, '.,', , )\-...., "~, ~ "'C. ".. -'\..::': f /":,/J/ /<t;à:,;"'\" ~ ',' '\ "~,,:. ?~-~~~f§~~~ -- ....Z~, --/~~":::'-~~ ~~,'~,?~;~' +~"'n..~~i-\';;~~~7::j~ ",.,ff,n, -,W:::WT, r "+~-'.""'".l.J,"",""'"Mt5J""",,, ,-BI,,',ne,,'......... "'-1",/I,r:----:,,""--""";"""'c/".,'"""",."."""""",.,_.'.."",.."t.<,""~".'",-, ...,.., - '_'~'~""';:4...~~,\...-,-= ,ill 'riM'" ::::::T .". - - .. ,'" -:,,',~'>-'-:_,' ,:~.: "..J,3--;)""",{S""¡.---.,, C~,-,..' ~;,,~..:;it"}'-.'->4 -'C_,,~. .. ,f,.. \11. I~l" Y""~""""!'"'.~ :;,:;;, '," '.V"'¿¡," ""'r',,',>',"\;<:,Ü:~,"~~' :,~,-- ---f oV-'!::'> I\:~~/,- ,\.~ - "" ( , "'-'-:""'" .":,:¿;.",,,~ :::-.:: .. h \:f ¿ ""'fr (.. ì , ~ ~. ,~-'~ - ---- L- J-". lHUlY:iIJ~JA L., 2o .J/l-J~ ~ S -3'f _. - -. I , '- i ÈN~RGY WAY'. --- ; \ ~ !Þ i~ n :: r!J -< -< --- ]I: þ : "V ~ ~ ï ~ ~ R ~ ' ... ~. w~ ~ - ~ - ~ ~ :; t' N '" » ... .., "V ~ ~ \II : ~' -~"\ r , I II .-- ~ ' ~ j.j '. ,~ '. ~ "t " I I, ~ , \II ~ I ~ !~'Iil~¡i"." ." 1~_;J ~ I'i:, I. "i,I~I'~'"" ",i..".:,. ,n".., , ~, "t ~J .. ~ ~ ~ ~, ~ I .1.. ,J ,~ i ~ ¡¡.¡ , ~'I, Ii, ,::' ~ I' ~ ¡, '" -" I ',~,I :~: [ z,ii lill,.i~:, "I' 'v' , -. ::;""" '§ '11,1"", , " , ~ :0 'tfl:I,I,i.',I,'.I,'":,,.,I,1",~I,'I,,:,", i~~-. -<'" I ~:II: ¡,I 'I I": i! Þ -< ~ I II," I "II, :, ' n ' liJ,", ~1~1~,,~,~{,t,~' ~J~b, ~<~ ~~, ~ 1> ~ ~ I " ,~ ~:~ ~~r~~ H~~~?~~' r ~ ~ ... !'~".',' IIII~I':.~I,B.,.~,,',!'. ~, ',.!.,j.".,~.",.~,',.,.,.i,~,'~" ¡¡,':, :"':,,'~,',. ! z [> ~ 2 I ¡ i .!I¥~ f~~ '~I'~~~~'~~ n ~ I 111:1~.l;~ijl~"O ~ ~ 1 , ,,11 ,',' II~, .~3 ii' I II,; 1"I,I!¡,~,~.~"lli':'i~,w~..t~,I,li,11,1 g , ¡ IIIII"'~": I~~~~~II S35 ,I'II'~' ~~~R~ ~ 'I, I!:I!I,I:,I~ ; ...,-.",--=-==,-",,=---.-..- a donlapmon!a! 8118 plan 10' ..bo" 'add torok n,c,aÜ, -----=:::._----- ~~::"'-SH'ET EUROÞEAN AUTO CLUS ARC HIT E C T ~~:::==':";::i~§.~ \',',:ili 1 chule ,18'e co oen dloga oeillatnie :='::"~--=-':.:..-=-:.:.::- ,..11,- ThiJ yage íntentíonally lift blank. S-3~ Case No. /.s-9~-/~ APPENDIX III CITY DATA SHEET PLANNING DEPARTMENT L Cumnt ZoninS! on site: :¡::.- L.. North South East West Does the project confonn to the current zoning? Yes wi:T:11 ~ ø.P. j; ~v. , . . ll. General Plan land use designation on site: ~+""O\.I , ~..-d1 -æ L, 1'\'\' f-ed North~c,+"'I"'-\ . ~ «L. 1J.'uu......fc.i\+u.~ SOUthef~' ~å I- " ~~~t au "':'~: I ~~L :: Is the project compatible with the General Plan Land Use Diagram? Y e.s Is the project area designated for conservation or open space or adjacent to an area so designated? No Is the project located adjacent to any scenic routes? ~ (If yes, describe the design techniques being used to protect or enhance the scenic quality of the route). m. Schools If the proposed project is residential. please complete the following: N fA Students Units Generating Generated School Capacity Enrollment Prooosed Factors From Project Elementary .30 Junior High .29 Senior High .10 IV. Remarks: ~/ /:5/-9'( D ' WPC:F~GISTORED\IO22.93 (Ref. 1021.93) (Ref. 10211.93) 5-37 PI !e1 YS-5B7 Case No. r-:;~I.f-It.f INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMENT SHEETS ENGINEERING DIVISION I. Drainage A. Is the project site within a flood plain? N D . IT so, state which FEMA Floadway Frequency Boundary. NM.. . B. What is the location and description of existing on-site drainage facilities?~~ Fl..cWro ~== ~ ~C~';:~D ;::J~= C. Axe they adequate to serve the project? y,¿ç,. 'brr.<:.H .Al..o...s.r-"rUE": ~ Hnot, please explain briefly. N,IA: . L.Y ~E/i!::rY LI¡..(E. 11-fIS :PrQ:H f=l-bWS 11..1 A <6o~az.- t..YDrl'r;-,._-r-/oo..l . D. What is the location and description of existing off-site drainage facilities? 2. Of tI Cc:,P ( âUJ.J- ~.41--' 'Pff'¡!)WI+/rJ.f 'br¿;"'V'R&.E;c., -r7> A 4A"c.ç:.plMlhc.l.;f f?tJrJ~ N6IZ.T1f 'TD GOV-nf Af..¡þ r<=. t r.rj,-"T1iiEh 'R4-RAu...EL ~ AI-lÞ ~r 0",", Alrl2¥A.I.IA. E. Axe they adequate to serve the project? YE<; A~UE . IT not, please explain briefly. 1J 4\. . ll. TransDortation ~q? A. What roads provide primary access to the project? l:>ï:3. Y VAlLEY ~ ~b NItZ..V-^NA AV&J.~ . {O B. What is the estimated number of one-way auto trips to be generated by the project (per day)? l7B APr (,QS- A 17r c>¡/EI<. Ex r~nN¡{¡ f X£). C. What are the Average Daily Traffic (A.D.T.) volumes on the,primary access roads before and after project completion? Street Name Before cttiJ> aT;A Y VAl..l£Y ~T:J ¡?p,?f> #J rtl:.VAAJA AVE'NUF- ~ DC::> Zqqrs Do any of these volumes exceed the City's Level-of-Service (L.O.S.) "C" design ADT volume? IT yes, please specify. /J.D, U'lA'Ý VALLEY ~I:> IS CU'U:>F~.J7?.Y ßel#l~ û>1J.9rl>, v:-n:;:b ÏZ> S/)(-lAAJP::: MAJ1:>J:l ~~<:, 7?:> AA1Eer FL1"T1JÆE. "D~T') ÄALb ~I ~ UL"T7MA'TIE£ 'PfEJ/EE"u:::PMe..l"r 'DEÅISI77E6. WPC,¡>,\IIOMEIPLANNINGISTOREI1\tO22.93 (ltd. 102t.93) (Ref. 1020.93) S-3S- Pa¡e2 . YS-587 Case No. I<:;-""-I-l~ If the A.D.T. or LO.S. "C" design volume is unknown or not applicable, explain briefly. ~. .D. Axe the primary access roads adequate to serve the project? YtE~. If not, please explain briefly. "{fA. E. Would the project create unacceptable Levels of Service (LOS) at intersections adjacent to or in the vicinity of the project site? ¡.ID. If so, identify: Location N fA Cumulative L.O.S. ~IA F. Is the proposed project a "large project" under the Congestion Management Program? (An equivalent of 2400 or more average daily vehicle trips or 200 or more peak-hour vehicle trips). If yes, a Traffic hnpact Analysis (TIA) will be required. In this case the TIA will have to demonstrate that the project will not create an unmitigatable adverse impact, or that all related traffic impacts are not mitigated to a level of non-significance. Yes X No The following questions apply if a Traffic hnpact Analysis is not required. G. Is traffic mitigation required to reduce traffic impacts that will result from implementation of the proposed project? - Yes )<.. No If yes, please describe. IJIA. . H. Is the project con~istent with the criteria established in the City's Transportation Phasing Plan, General Plan Traffic Element, and all other pertinent traffic studies? Please reference any other traffic impact studies for roadway segments that may be impacted by the proposed project. )lEG. L Is a traffic study required? Yes X No J. Is there any dedication required? No. If so, please specify. ¡.J/A . , WPC-P:\HOMElFl.ANNING\5TOREI:II1022.93 (JIrf. 1021.93) (Ref. 1020.93) S~3r Pagc3 . YS-!i'87 Case No. rS-Cf'f-I'j K. Is there any street widening required? ND . If so, please specify. N./A . L. Are there any other street improvements required? ND, If so, please specify the general nature of the necessary improvements. N/A. M. Will the project and related public improvements provide satisfactory traffic service for existing conditions and future buildout General Plan conditions? (Please provide a ~rief explanation). y~. ß4.= I~W{'n'(IAI THE CJ77l.Y VALLEY ~þ A!;<:FS<;M~~r :D/ST7lI£:r" AAJ 0 U;. ïJ.fElZF'F~, PA£rIc.rp,AT".J~ IN T1-fF r.L:&-r ð1= /'L1IJ~- 77N(;. lJl-rlMA..T1!:. IMPRÐVEt:AAç;:Al~ ^A! .-'}ny VAllLY ~""J klu/~u ~ m. Soils &r$e:.O ufb,.¡ VL. r O\l1A77= ~e:.1!A c..... P£AÇ.J ÞeVEt-CFIAE"" NIA . No ¡..[£;w CÞl.Ç7WCT7cN (~~5:P A. Are there any anticipated adverse geotechnical conditions on the project site? B. If yes, specify these conditions. C. Is a Soils Report necessary? IV. Land Fonn A. What is the average ~ope of the site? 1-/0 B. What is the maximum~lope of the site? 5C>% C-ft::I<.IM~~ EMBAN.tCM~) V. Noise Are there any traffic-related noise levels impacting the site that are significant enough to justify that a noise analysis be required of the applicant? 1--10. VI. Waste Generation How much solid and liquid (sewer) waste will be generated by the proposed project per day? Solid IN~[J~¡;;:ICrE:,.¡r INFo/ZMknoAl ~/=I:>. Liquid Lfqo~(.L.(:fo.~/J::I ,V (I.BS ~plJc:) What is the location and size of existing sewer lines on or downstream from the site? (D" PoII.t:.. PRlvA71S $Ewe::;" '-'MF Â'-Afl'"- W~-n:;:I2_-'...Y PRBPEI2:rv 1?OCJ#JbAILYJ VVl-ffC+l cÞNMEC;:rI;. "1Z> AN ß"'P.V.c.. PUB.l..IC- SE:WE:JIZ. I.-WË t¡.,J F.AI.E¡¿c'V WAy. Are they adequate to serve the proposed project? (If no, please explain) YE4 S~L{o WPC'¡:'\IIOMEIPLANNINCMTOREINO22.93 (JId. 1021.93) (Ref. 1020.93) Page 4 - YS-SB7 Case No.:rS ...q'i -JLf Vll. National Pollutant Dischafl!e Elimination Svstem CNPDES) Stonnwater Reauirements Will the applicant be required to me a Notice of Intent with the State Water Resources Control Board for coverage under an NPDES Stonnwater Permit? YEi-S. . IT yes, specify which NPDES pemùt(s) and explain why an NPDES pemùt is required. . APPL./C4;1Jí W,l.L &r:'- f4Çqu/~ 7?:> C>ll.774-W A C-FAlI:f,I?A' t:ËlUArr R¥2. SirE?P.MIAlATE£... 7:"!fk.J64~.f;.Aç<-.,~ WI'TU INbc.J9rlt?JAl- Å.~ïrVlrlE:.';; 'B Er  U ~ J1.f IE: ~ R:> SEX> t JIC.r 15 A 1ZEc.Yc.L.I"'~ ~/LrrY. Will a Stonn Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) be required for the proposed project? X Yes _No Additional comments NEAR.E'l!,""- ~C.e:¡¡/I^,r.. WAn::1t. «;; -n.fEE:' crrAY ~VE.Æ, , W/.I((;H Þ/~HÅIZ¡;E<; "n> "rUE. Sw Ì)/~ BAY. Vll. ~ Please identify and discuss any remaining potential adverse impacts. mitigation measures, or other issues. Tu-E. 5frF- PLAN !>uAJ.ArT'1"Jl<:I:> WIT1-I IN l'r7A-L S-rvC:>Y A F'PL-I CÄTI(:».../ {"'Þfc;,..."7"E~ ï1IAr 'íJl.E. ~ Sf77E 'FJA.t:i"r~,- IS SHowN. ON ~12Ie.I='- MA.P NO. Lf 877. THIS ,S ,^,CJoPll.&rr-lT" IS SftolA/AI OM 'R1+R£.E:.L- /vfkP No. L!¡"77. 11/1113 Date WPC""~GIS1'O1!EINO22.93 (Ref. 1021.93) (Ref. 1020.93) S - 1-1 PastS . ... Case No. ..LS'-99- /9' FIRE DEPARTMENT A. What is the distance to the nearest fire station? And what is the Fire Department's estimated reaction time? 4~ miles. 71-; minutes B. Will the Fire Department be able to provide an adequate level of fire protection for the proposed facility without an increase in equipment or personnel? Yes C. Remarks Applicant must provide a fire lane with a minimum width of 20 feet and a turn around for fire apparatus. a hammerhead with a minimum width of 24 feet and a minimum width of 75 feet. Fire access must be marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE" This access must be provided from the street to the east end of the property line. Please indicate where this will be on the site plan. Any storage or handling of hazardous materials shall comply with Articles 79 & 80 of the 1991 ~NIFORM FIRE CODE. Lad 7.Ljo/ Nov. I, 1993 Fire Marshal Date WPC'¡:,\HOME\fLANNINO\STORED\iO22.93 (Rd. 1021.93) (Ref. 102D.93) s-'f:L- Paae6 . - Case No. .zs--7>'Y-/ý' PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT A. Is project subject to Parks and Recreation Threshold requirements? I'b IT not, please explain. H'f" I~\~~ ~. B. How many acres of parkland ~ necessary to serve the proposed project? r lb. C. Are existing neighborhood and community parks near the project adequate to serve the populaûon increase resulting from this project? Neighborhood ~(¡>. Community Parks ~/~. D. IT not, are parkland dedications or other mitigation proposed as part of the project adequate to serve the populaûon increase? p/~ Neighborhood Community Parks ~/~. E. To meet City requirements, will applicant be required to: Provide land? ~ Pay a fee? ~. F. Remarks: tf-. ~~ \C-,,"i.'i? Parks and Recreation Director or Representative Date 'fIPC:F~on!J3 ~. 1021.93) ~. 10:11).113) 5-+3 Page 7 -.- _. Thís ,age íntentíonaIIy left blank. S - 1lf Cl1ULA VISTA POLICE DEPARTME" l' CRIME PREVENTION UNIT PLAN REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS F: - :--h.. - """ "-, NOV2 DAlE: Ii - II - q.3 2 7993 /) / - f...;:; TO: /hA,^Ô,A-Y>11 ¡J¡~/k.r----, rt'tl:'/JI(f """'. VIA: U:: -:..hrr¡ -;Y1{(¡'t:~ ..f--nv, .[)IV, FROM: fl'lf ÒJOSc!lLc!O, .j('jJS PROJECT: ..L 5 - q '1-- l.if éur°f'e~ ßr-f-s de< G Following are recommendations to insure proper uûlization of security hardware/alarms and lighting/landscaping to reduce criminal activity, The intent is to heighten crime prevention awareness through the concept of "defensible space" and environmental design. ACCESS CONTROL V Upgrading perimeter security / óa£'~ Doors 0 t...--' Steel door frames ~lid core doors _Astragals ............- Deadbolts, flushbolts, and electrolÙc locks Glass - Window security _Sliding glass door(s) _Glazing ~ - Security hardware _Security system(s); eameras ~ Fencing and gates and special applications SURVEILLANCE ElECTION ~ Upgrading lighting ---><:::::.... High pressure sodium _Low pressure sodium ~Meta1 Halides _Break resistant/tamper proof fixtures - Transitional lighting ~Minimum pole height '(15-feet) - Placement ~ ->L..Landscape application ~ Trees/shrubbery; maintained _Graffiti detem:nt - Placement ~ Visibility factors - Exterior view fencing - Wrought iron - Tubular steel - Chain link v'Security alarm systems _Perimeter _Motion detection _RobberylHold Up ~ Burglary/lntrusion 'B",~ Page I of 2 ,5"- c.¡ S- CPTED Rown¡¡ Fonn PDlcpu 06193 --¡ - CHULA VISTA POLICE DEPARTMENT CRIME PREVENTION UNIT PLAN REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS POLICE RESPONSE V Addressing - Access to property """""""-Knox Box V Visibility; allowing patrol officers to monitor activity - Reporting procedures POLICE SERVICES V Training of management and employees in security procedures and crime prevention awareness ~ Security survey perfonned by the Crime Prevention Unit SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS: - 4'f'¿ ~<VTt-ci 1:1 y"¿ J(,I,~¿d cfc )~'¿ a t5-¡7(!V;'J- f¡/t<L~J.c-;¡ fl^I[7 Ie DU,;f7¡, ~5 Cf¡IIJ . ¿v,c£'~~i7l-- ~. ¿xI¡?v¡r¡ tJI;l4!/««!L;"1 ;s. r<?(i~/')';Þ>en de d, ~If¿[ /:J!t1:J ".5 Y£;.'-- jaéUT , t~jJf'¡/¿; lÞ~f7 þ¿ v?) /3 J.e tLl"; ~ á1'J d ~H41 !tß.-L ~ -5/ ~ (cc!a~ð71 , Ii ,j} I" !I J ¡ {w:, s ,.6. , "q or dc,.~ ß. (/' <!r-f t;J ,r ¡;;'u, (;; lú(l~ í I cÞ-l,,-:tJj/J ~¿ 5~t I IS é5S-¿';L ~.' - , J[uJt jn~ .;: ~ ?í~<I-o Á//U/L I~fr~r 1(1 'it,", d1ann'~J (?ðC."', '1 :t'" /"".11 Ánð J,"ui","., crtu ù wn--t e..r fH.é . cc: Brookover, SCA 5 - Cfio CPTED Routing Form PD/cpu 06193 - ROUTING FORM DATE: October 26, 1993 TO: Ken Larson, Building & Housing John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only) Cliff .S~anson, Engineering (EIR only) Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only) Roger Daoust, Engineering (ISj3, EIRj2) Riçhard Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney (EIR only) Carol Gove, Fire Department Marty Sçhmidt, Parks & Recreation Crime Prevention, Poliçe Department Current Planning Gordon. Howa~d, Advanfe Plan~ 1f!,".,"~¥'JIII~.' t ob Leiter, Planning Direçtor Chula vista Elementary sçhool Distriçt, Kate Shurson . Sweetwater Union B.S. District, Tom Silva (IS & EIR) Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR) Other FROM: Maryann Mill er Environmental seçtion SUBJECT: Appliçation for Initial Study (IS-94-14jFA- 644 /DO~) Cheçkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR-----/FB-----/DO-----) Review of a Draft EIR (EIR-~/FB-----/DP-----) Review of Environmental Review Reçord FC- ----ERR- ----) The Projeçt çonsists of: The use of the existing metal structure for an auto dismantling and recycling business. Loçation: 791 Ener9Y Way Please review the doçument and forward to me any comments you have by 11-2-93 . Comments: ¿ ~A-/O6c..-çp/,A../4 -;r¿, /3ð ,Æ5Æ?&:',¿/G#' /"" /,4//'ô Co~P¿ /'4;(../,c ~ ¿A// rh' t9 ,v' Ai? /:J Ø" oS/'6-,A/ /'4 Ai"'<'/ ¿/ A' ¿ , 4 J / '/Ø-/?3 l:~ Lf7 . - Case No. ..n--?-r.r-/;9 LANDSCAPE PLANNING A. Does the project affect native plant communities? H so, please identify which communities. Will the project require native planting? (Please describe) B. Please identify any imponant or highly visible hillsides on or adjacent to the project. What landscaping conditions (if any) will be required for these hillsides? C. Of the total area to be developed, how much, and which areas are expected to be replanted and require supplemental watering? (Please describe). E. Are there any other landscape requirements or mitigation for the project? City Landscape Architect or Representative Date WPC:F:'B>MEli'LANNlNG'STO22.93 (Ref. 1O2t.93) (Ref. 1020.93) S-4~ PageS _.- _. - . Case No. IS-94-14 APPENDIX I ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM (To Be Completed By Lead Agency) Background 1. Name of Proponent: Rassoul and Habib Ghannadin 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 2730 Gamet Ave. San Diego CA 92109 275-5572 3. Date of Checklist: 3-17-94 4. Name of Proposal: European Parts Club 5. Initial Study Number: IS-94-14 Environmental Impacts 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: ~ MAYBE 00 a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substructures? D D . b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or overcovering of the soil? D D . c. Change in topography or ground surface relief features? D D . d. The destruction, covering or modification of any unique geologic or physical features? D D . e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? D D . f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation, deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay, inlet or lake? D D D g. Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? D D . ~-<-fl - Comments: The project will not involve any type of grading or excavation. The project is 85 % paved, will not involve any new construction and there are not any anticipated adverse geotechnical conditions on the project site. The Stonnwater Pollution Prevention Plan, as required by the applicant, in the Storm water General Permit, shall identify measures to reduce sediment in storm water discharge. The applicant submitted a Phase I Site Assessment to staff for evaluation. The document determined that oil stains and hydrocarbon materials in the soil existed on site. The planning department required further review of the site and a letter stating that the site had been removed. A suplemental letter submitted by the Engineer representing the applicant explains that tan additional site visit has been completed. The engineer determined, from a visit with a, that the soil stockpiles have been removed from the site and that there were no visible stains on the soil. 2. Air. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? 0 0 . b. The creation of objectionable odors? 0 0 . c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? 0 0 . Comments: The project will not be required to obtain a permit throught the Air Pollution Control District(APCD). The project will not involve any new construction and traffic impacts will be negligible. The proposed project will not significantly impact the air quality in the project area. 3. Water. Will the Proposal result in: YES MAYBE @ a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? 0 0 . b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff? 0 0 . c. Alterations to the course or flow or flood waters? 0 0 . d. Change in the amount of surface water 5 -<>..'50 - in any water body? 0 0 . e. Discharge into surface waters, or any alteration of surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity? 0 0 . f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? 0 0 . g. Change in the quantity of ground waters, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? 0 0 . h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? 0 0 . i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves? 0 0 . Comments: The applicant will be required to file a Notice of Intent with the State Water Resources Board for coverage under a NPDES Stormwater Permit, because of its industrial activities. The applicant will be required to comply with State regulations. Compliance with stormwater pollution control requirements will ensure that the project will not significantly impact the water quality. 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: Y&S. MA YBE .1:iQ a. Change in the diversity of species, or number of any species of plants (including trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)? 0 0 . b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? 0 0 . c. Introduction of new species of plants into into an area, or in a barrier to the normal replenishment of existing species? 0 0 . d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural crop? D D . 5-51 . Comments: The proposed project will not involve any new building construction and is on a developed site where there are no signs of sensitive plant or animal species. The proposed project will not result in a reduction or change in the diversity of plant or animal species.(#4 & #5) 5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE .lID a. Change in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of animals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)? 0 0 . b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of animals? 0 0 . c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals? 0 0 . d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat? 0 0 . Comments: Please refer to #4. 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE W2 a. Increases in existing noise levels? 0 0 . b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 0 0 . Comments: There are no traffic-related noise levels impacting the site that are significant enough to justify a noise level analysis be required of the applicant. The project is consistent with the criteria established in the City's Transportation Phasing Plan and traffic generation from the project will be negligible. The noise levels will not be significantly impacted by the proposed project. 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce Y&S. MAYBE W2 new light or glare? 0 0 . Comments: . The proposed project will not involve any new construction and will not produce additional glare or light to the area. 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a YES MAYBE NO S--S-y ... substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? 0 0 . Comments: The project is proposed to be located in the atay Valley Road Revelopment Area and is designated Industrial Research & Limited Manufacturing in the City of Chula Vista General Plan and designated Industrial in the atay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan. It is zoned I-P. This use in the I-P zone will require a Special Land Use Permit approval by the Redevelopment Agency. The project, in regard to its location and use, is consistant and a compatible use under the Industrial Zone designation. Therefore, if the project meets City standards, granting of a Special Use Permit would not adversely affect the Genral Plan and would be in compliance with the Redevelopment Plan. 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE 00 a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? 0 0 . Comments: The proposed project will not involve any new construction and will not significantly increase the rate of use of natural resources. 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: YES MAYBE 00 a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including, but not limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions? 0 . 0 b. Possible interference with an emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? 0 0 . Comments: All engines and auto fluids associated with the auto dismantling will be drained and removed off site. The project applicant is required to obtain a General Permit for Stormwater Discharches associated with industrial activities and will be required to file an information form regarding the proposed project with the County Hazardous Materials Management Division to ensure that all State and County standards are meet regarding any possible hazardous substances generated by the site. Compliance with the requirements of the refulatory agencies will insure that the environmental impact is less than significant. II. Population. Will the proposal alter the location ~ MAYBE 00 distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population or an area? 0 0 . Comments: S -53 - . The proposed project will employ approximately four employees. This small number of employees are expected to come from the local community and the project is not expected to alter the location, density, or growth rate of the human population in the area. 12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing YES. MA YBE W housing, or create a demand for additional housing? 0 0 . Comments: As this project will only employ four individuals, it is expected that no significant impacts to housing will result. 13. Transpo rta tio nJ Circu la ti on. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NQ a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? 0 D . b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? D D . c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? D D . d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? 0 D . e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? D D . f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? D D . g. A "large project" under the Congestion Management Program? (An equivalent of 2400 or more average daily vehicle trips or 200 or more peak-hour vehicle trips). D D . Comments: The project applicant is providing two more than the required seven parking spaces on the project site and the proposed project is not a "large project" under the Congestion Management Program. The proposed project will not impact the Level of Service(LOS) at intersections adjacent to or in the vicinity of the project site and is consistent with the criteria established in the City's Transportation Phasing Plan, General Plan Traffic Element. 5-t;;Cf - 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered governmental services in any of the following areas: Y&S. MAYBE NQ a. Fire protection? 0 0 . b. Police protection? 0 0 . c. Schools? 0 0 . d. Parks or other recreational facilities? 0 0 . e. Libraries? 0 0 . f. Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? 0 0 . g. Other governmental services? 0 0 . Comments: All fire, police, and public facility threshold standards are adequate to serve this project. The proposed project will not involve an increase demand on resources. The applicant will be required to have a security evaluation prior to business opening. Evaluation of alarm application is recommended. Proper lighting is the least expensive form of security and essential for site location. Addressing of the site, in order for patrolling officers to locate and in identifying the site, is essential. These measures will be reviewed by the Redevelopment Agency when the proposed project goes to the Agency for approval and to obtain the Special Use Permit for the project. Since no new construction is involved in the project, no school fees are required. The project and related public improvements will provide satisfactory traffic service for existing conditions and future buildout General Plan conditions. The parcel is within the Otay Valley Road Assessment District and is, therefore, participating in the cost of constructing ultimate improvements on Otay Valley Road, which are based upon ultimate General Plan Development. 15. Energy. Will the proposal result in: Y&S. MAYBE NQ a. Use of substantial amount of fuel or energy? 0 0 . b. Substantial increase in demand upon 5-)5 , .... existing sources or energy, or require the development of new sources of energy? 0 0 . Comments: As the proposed project will not involve new construction, no new energy consuming devices(air conditioning, electrical appliance, heating equipment, etc.) are proposed. 16. Thresholds. Will the proposal adversely impact ~ MAYIlli. NQ the City's Threshold Standards? 0 0 . Comments: As described below, the proposed project does not adversely impact any of the seven Threshold Standards. A. Fire/EMS The Threshold Standards requires that fire and medical units must be able to respond to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85 % of the cases and within 5 minutes or less in 75 % of the cases. The City of Chula Vista has indicated that this threshold standard will be met, since the nearest fire station is 1..l.M.. miles away and would be associated with a 7 1/2 minute response time. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. The Fire Department will be able to provide an adequate level of fire protection for the proposed facility without an increase in equipment or personnel. The applicant must provide a fire lane with a minimum width of 20 feet and a turn around for fire apparatus, a hammerhead with a minimum width of 24 feet and a minimum width of 75 feet. Fire access must be marked "NO PARKING FIRE LANE." This access must be provided from the street to the east end of the property line. Also, any storage or handling of hazardous materials shall comply with Articles 79 & 80 of the 1991 UNIFORM FIRE CODE. B. Police The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84% of Priority I calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.10% of Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. The applicant will be required to have a security evaluation prior to business opening. Evaluation of alarm application is recommended. Proper lighting is the least expensive form of security and essential for site locaiton. Addressing S~S~ -T- of the site, in order for patrolling officers to locate and in identifying the site, is essential. These measures will be reviewed by the Redevelopment Agency when the proposed projet goes to the Agency for approval and to obtain the Special Use Permit for the project. C. Traffic The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D" may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections. Intersections west of 1-805 are not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No intersection may reach LOS "E" or "F" during the average weekday peak hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this Standard. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. The proposed project will not impact the Level of Service(LOS) at intersections adjacent to or in the vicinity of the project site and is consistent with the criteria established in the City's Transportation Phasing Plan, General Plan Traffic Element. D. Parks/Recreation The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/l,OOO population. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. The proposed project is not residental and is not suþject to Parks and Recreation Threshold requirements. E. Drainage The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with the Drainage Master Plan(s) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. Existing onsite drainage consists of surface flow to a graded swale along the southerly propoerty line and surface flow to the easterly property line. All flows are discharged to a drainage ditch along the easterly property line. This ditch flows in a southerly direction. A 24 CSP (corrugated steel pipe) which discharges to a 48" CSP which runs north to south and is located parallel to and east of Nirvana Avenue. This pipe is adequate to serve project and the site is not located within a flood plain. F. Sewer 5-5'7 The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with Sewer Master Plan(s) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. Currently a 6" P.V.C. private sewer line exists along the westerly property boundary which connects to an 8" P.V.C.public sewer line in Energy Way. The existing sewer line is adequate to serve the proposed project. G. Water The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that water quality standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever water conservation or fee off-set program the City of Chula Vista has in effect at the time of building permit issuance. The applicant will be required to obtain a general permit for stormwater discharges associated with industrial activities because the proposed use is a recycling facility. The proposed project wiJI not involve any new construction and there wiJI be no additional demands placed on current water resources. 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE 00 a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health? D D . b. Exposure of people to potential health hazards? D D . Comments: The proposed project will not involve any new construction; use of existing structure and facilities. The applicant will be required to obtain a NPDES Stormwater Permit and file an information form regarding the proposed project with County HMMD(Hazardous Material Management Division). Also, all engines and auto fluids will be drained and removed off the project site. Compliance with the requirements of the appropriate regulatory agencies will ensure that there wiJI be no significant exposure of people to potential health hazards from the proposed project. The impact is less than significant. 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE 00 S-SY - a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? 0 0 . b. The destruction, or modification of a scenic route? 0 0 . Comments: The proposed auto dismantling and recycling business being proposed is very similar to surrounding land uses in the Industrial Zone. Although the site is visible from Otay Valley Road, it will look much the same as the other auto dismantling businesses that surround the property site. The project is of the same character of surrounding uses. The project does not obstruct any scenic view or open space. 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an YES MAYBE NQ impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? 0 0 . Comments: The proposed project is not residental and is not subject to Parks and Recreation Threshold requirements. The proposed project will not impact the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities. 20. Cultural Resources. YES MAYBE NQ a. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction or a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? 0 0 . b. Will the proposal result in adverse physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building, structure, or object? 0 0 . c. Does the proposal have the potential to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? 0 0 . d. Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? 0 0 . e. Is the area identified on the City's General Plan EIR as an area of high potential for archeological resources? 0 0 . S--5-~ - ~. - Comments: The proposed project will involve the use of a site in an already developed area, with a existing metal structure, for a auto dismantling and recycling business. This developed site has no history of resources and will not result in the destruction of prehistoric or historic archaelogica1 resources. 21. Paleontological Resources. Will the proposal result in the YES. MAYBE 00 alteration of or the destruction of paleontological resources? 0 0 . Comments: The project site is in an already developed and there is no evidence that the project will result in the alteration of or the destruction of patheontological resources. 22. Mandatory Findings of Significance. YES MAYBE 00 a. Does the project have the potential to 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 community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant animal or eliminate important examples or the major periods of California history or prehistory? 0 0 . Comments: The proposed project will involve the use of a currently developed site with an existing structure for an auto dismantling and recycling business. The project will not involve any new construction. The site is in an industrially designated area with no evidence of any sensitive plant or animal species. No resources nearby the project site will be disturbed. b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of long- term, environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively brief, definitive period of time, while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) 0 0 . Comments: The proposed project will not involve any new construction. An existing structure will be used as an office for an auto dismantling and recycling business. The project is compatible with existing land uses surrounding the site and will not significantly impact the project area. The short-term environmental goal of the project will be to use an unoccupied site for an a viable industrial purpose. This type of use will be allowed for twelve years. Thus, the project will serve as a viable industrial use in the short-term. The long-term environmental goal of the project as an industrial use in a zoned industrial area, is that is will reduce the ~f; - ~tJ - demand for this use in any other area of the city. The auto dismantling and recycling business will also be in compliance with current land use in the area and will avoid new construction of industrial property, within the city, and thus avoid long-term environmental impacts. c. Does the project have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) 0 0 . Comments: The proposed project will not involve an increased demand on resources. All drainage, water, sewer and transportation facility threshold standards will be complied with. The project will not place a demand on these facilities and no new facilities will be required to service the project site. The project will not cause impacts which are individually limited, but cumatively considerable. The total sum of impacts are negligible. d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 0 0 . Comments: As the project will involve the use of an existing structure it will not involve new construction or the disturbance of any human beings. The proposed auto dismantling & recycling business will employ four people. This small number will not impact population changes or generate a demand on housing. The project is an Industrial use and is being proposed in an area designated and zoned for this type of use. The project is in compliance with the General Plan and with the Otay Valley Revelopment Plan. The project will not cause adverse substantial adverse environmental effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. S -c:> ( - Mitigation Measures (To be completed by the Applicant) I, as owner/owner in escrow " Print name or I, consultant or agent" HEREBY AGREE to any mitigation measures required to avoid significant impacts. Signature Date Detennination (To be completed by the Lead Agency. Check one box only.) *95 Choose ND, MND or EIR On the basis of this initial evaluation: . I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. 0 I find the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. 't/1 J/f'~ r...¡c-t 'ð ~"~ ) 1'9 ~c, if Environmental RevIew Coo inator/ ate "If acting for a corporation, include capacity and company name. S-¿;-y - Case No. IS-94-14 APPENDIX II DE MINIMIS FEE DETERMINATION (Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990 - AB 3158) *96 Choose Fee Exemption or Fee Required . It is hereby found that this project involves no potential for any adverse effect, either individually or cumulatively on wildlife resources and that a "Certificate of Fee Exemption" shall be prepared for this project. 0 It is hereby found that this project could potentially impact wildlife, individually or cumulatively and therefore fee in accordance with Section 711.4 (d) of the Fish and Game Code shall be paid to the County Clerk. '~'fh~ Date S-b3 ----. Thís yage íntentíonaIly left blank. 5-~ c¡ , .. ROUTING FORM DATE: October 26,1993 TO: Ken Larson, Building & Housing John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only) Cliff .S...anson, Engineering (EIR only) Hal Rosenberg, E~gineering (EIR only) Roger Daoust, Engineering (IS/3, EIR/2) Richard Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney (EIR only) Carol Gove, Fire Department Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation Crime Prevention, police Department CUrrent Planni4ã. 1!"'~" ----, ...TIIM>t(l:Ig K£/L ¿¿£ ob sennett, City Landscape Architect Bob Leiter, Planning Director Chula vista Elementary School District, Kate Shurson Sweetwater Union H.S. District, Tom Silva (IS & EIR) Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR) Other FROM: Maryann Miller Environmental Section SUBJECT: Application for Initial Study (IS-94-14/FA- 644IDD~) Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR-----/FB-----/DD-----) Review of a Draft EIR (EIR- _/FB- _/DP -----) Review of Environment~l ~vie~Record FC-----ERR-----) ~ ~ ~~J The Project consists of: The/use of the existing metal structure for an auto dismantling and recycling business. Location: 791 Energy Way Please review the document and forward to me any comments you have 5 -'~ ç by 11-2-93 . ~ t;<,.. CPI~.I ;!.<-c.. '. :r: '-/ -¡:P f>Y (lð ';Z.ej'N.! ~ ~~~ f1~' ~ Comments: - ~ ..f? 4= ~ (~~ ."ÝI ~ o.V. {2J. R¿~,-~ '\ (~)~~ 4¡~.- \.>JILL 7("- oc. ~r'...e ~ ~~.Q. ?-ú~t ~rT~ ':1, ~ 2.d~, ~(~. (lL r:t:::::.i/ûT:f ¿.~ XÉq ;øI~ J~ ,I>~ d- O ~ t d ~~ - ~ r .fi,L :;r:n,l 'W>-L, ~ .I(p- ..} /Â..(Ä/V'~ . - ~ -IV. ~ ~ ~ j../'fJ- t;ðr! ~ . ~ ) . '7, ,.f1 . r 5~AA~ ~ I tvJ4Ul'fl'¿' ~"'f;' e.(, 1 ~p ~-d!-, "f,- t?/);'Wr~ tv ~f1 A'{I1llo-:d~ l'-fA< c-t" do- Y ~ G-., /. --- -- --- - - - ,'1"".- - ROUTING FORM DATE: October 26,1993 TO: Ken Larson, Building & Housing John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only) Cliff .'>lIfanson, Engineering (EIR only) Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only) Roger Daoust, Engineering (IS/3, EIR/2) Richard Rudolf, Assistant city Attorney (EIR only) Carol Gove, Fire Department Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation Crime Prevention, police Department ~~~~ðvance Planning Bob Sennett, city Landscape Architect Bob Leiter, Planning Director Chula Vista Elementary School District, Kate Shurson Sweetwater Union B.S. District, Tom Silva (IS & EIR) Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR) Other FROM: Ma ryann Mi 11 er Environmental Section SUBJECT: Application for Initial Study (IS-94-14/FA-~/DQ~) Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR-----/FB-----/DQ-----) Review of a Draft EIR (EIR- "':'-/FB- _/DP-----) Review of Environmental Review Record FC- ----ERR- -) The Project consists of: The use of the existing metal structure for an auto dismantling and recycling business. Location: 791 Energy Way Please review the document and forward to me any comments you have by 11-2-93 . comment., 'Ptl.¿aJ-..;. -t;b ~ V~<P S-(,~ <f?~~ ~ cf p~ ~ßJ. au ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Suls.PJ"'/. ~-:M"'~ ~ :::> ... . Case No. ~ - 99-,Y APPENDIX IV Comments Received During the Public Review Period - No Comments Were Received During the Public Review Period S--b7 . WI'C'¡>~G\STOIIIiI:NO22.93 (Ref. 1021.93) (Rd. 10211.93) Thís yage ínttntíonaIly left blank. S - (pf? - I CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCH()()L DISTRICT 84 EAST "J" STREET' CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . 619425-9600 EACH CHILD IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH BOARD OF EDUCATION November 1, 1993 JOSEPH D. CUMMINGS. Ph.D. LARRY CUNNINGHAM SHARON GILES PATRICKÆJUDD GREG R.SANDOVAl SUPERINTENDENT Ms. Maryann Miller LlBlAS.Gll. Ph.D. Environmental Review Coordinator City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 RE: Notice of Initial Study 94-14 Location: 791 Energy Way, Chula Vista Project: Auto dismantling & Recycling Business in Existing Building Dear Ms. Miller: Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the Notice of Initial Study referenced above. Since it appears no new construction is involved, no school fees are required. Should this situation change, school fees for commercial development would be due. The current fee of $.27/square foot is distributed as follows: $.12 for Chula Vista Elementary School District, $.15 for .Sweetwater Union High School District. Even though no fees appear to be necessary, the District is still required to sign off on the Certificate of Compliance. Sincerely, K~\c~ ~~ Kate Shurson Director of Planning & Facilities KS:dp m=_"win,,"~foo 5-~{ ~-~_. Thís yage íntentíonnIly left blank. 5-70 - ~ , .Re-routed on 12/21/93 to Sweetwater Union H.S. Oist. ' ROUTING FORM .-, ~" ,., '-"Y' ., u' ~L. DATE: October 26,1993 Fi.J""""~",,,,",_,"~J !I'D: .J!en.~1dJJ1r¡~ ..Housing John Lippitt., Eiiglne'érItlg ¡ErR 4:lnly} Cliff .S~anson, Engineering (EIR only) Hal Rose"berg, Engineering (EIR only) «ogu"Daoust,""7:ngineeringìISI3, EIRI2} Richard.Rudolf, ~sistant City Attorney (EIR only) Carol Gove, Fire Department "a~ty schmidt,'Paz:ks_~_Becreation Çr~me Prevention, polJ.c:e .De~þDe~t . CUrrent Planning_.~ . _u Gordon Howard, Advance Planning Bob sennett, city Landscape Architect Bob Leiter, Planning Director Chula Vista Elementary.$chool...Distri.ct,-Kate Shurson ~eetwater Union H.S.'District, Tom Silva (IS« EIR) Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR) Other FROM: Maryann Mill er Environmental Section SUBJECT: Application for Initial Study (IS-94-14IFA-~/DO-O41 ) Check print Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR-_IFB-_IDO_) Review of a Draft EIR (EIR~_IFB- _IDP_) Review of Environmental Review Record FC- _ERR- -) The Project consists of: The use of the existing metal structure for an auto dismantling and recycling business. Location: 791 Energy Way Please rev.:L.ew the document and forward to me any comments you bave by 11-2-93 ~ASAP. ' Comments: The Sweetwater Union High School District does not object to the proposed use because exi sti ng structures are proposed to be used, payment of school fees is not required. Th~~~ 5- 71 Assistant Director of Planning TSlml Thli ¡age íntenüonaIly left blank. 5- í:L NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARINGS BY THE OT A Y V ALLEY PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT SEPARATE PUBLIC HEARINGS WILL BE HELD BY THE OTAY VALLEY PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY of Chula Vista, California, for the purpose of considering an application for a Special Land Use Permit. The application, submitted by Rassoul and Habbib Ghannadian dba European Auto Club. requests permission to establish an auto dismantling and recycling business at 791 Energy Way. A plot plan and legal description is on file in the office of the Planning Department. An Initial Study, IS-94-14, of possible significant environmental impacts has been conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator. A finding of no significant environmental impact has been recommended to the Redevelopment Agency and is on file, along with the Initial Study, in the office of the Planning Department. Any petitions to be submitted to the Redevelopmen1 Agency must be received by the Planning Department office no later than noon of the hearing date. If you wish to challenge the Project Area Committee's recommendation on this special land use permit or the Redevelopment Agency's decision in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearings described in this notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the Community Development Department at or prior to the public hearings. SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE PROJECT AREA COMMITTEE on Monday, April 25, 1994 at 9:00 a.m. in Conference Rooms 2 and 3, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear. SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY on Tuesday, May 17, 1994 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: March 29, 1994 CASE NO. SUPO-93-14 5 - 73 This ¡age íntentíonn1ly left blank. 5- - 7t.f RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS AND APPROVING A SPECIAL LAND USE PERMIT TO JOSE CAVES, ROSSOUL GHANNADIAN AND HABBIB GHANNADIAN FOR CERTAIN DESIGNATED AUTO WRECKING USES AT 791 ENERGY WAY, CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA; PARCEL BEING LOCATED WITHIN THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD PROJECT AREA WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of this Special Land Use Permit ("Special Permit") is commonly known as 791 Energy Way, Chula Vista, California, (Assessor's Parcel No. 644-181-21); and, WHEREAS, Jose Caves, Rossou\ Ghannadian and Habbib Ghannadian soint business as European Parts Club ("Applicant") with respect to the special permit herein granted is the operator of the business located at 791 Energy Way; and, WHEREAS, a Special Permit is required for the uses being requested by the Applicant under the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan; and, WHEREAS, the Otay Valley Road Project Area Committee noticed and held a public hearing on April 25, 1994 to consider the use of the following land uses and made the recommendation to the Agency for approval of the Special Permit to the applicant on certain terms and conditions; and, WHEREAS, the Agency noticed and held a public hearing on Tuesday, May 17, 1994, and that all protests, if any, to the approval of a Special Permit in the manner herein contemplated, were made and received at said public hearing, and no convincing objections to the proposed transaction were found to exist. WHEREAS, An Initial Study, IS-94-14, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project has been conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator who concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommends the Negative Declaration be adopted, NOW, THEREFORE, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby find, order, determine and resolve as follows: Section I. Negative Declaration issued under IS-94-14 is hereby adopted. Section 2. The Agency hereby makes the following findings under the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area Implementation Plan/Design Manual Addendum: a. The proposed Special Use Permit does not constitute a substantial detriment to the Project Area or adjacent areas in that it is compatible with surrounding uses. $- 75 ---. RESOLUTION xxxx Page 2 b. The proposed Special Use Permit generally promotes the orderly physical and economic development of the Project Area in that its continuance contributes to the local economy by providing a needed service. c. The proposed Special Use Permit is generally consistent with the townscape/planning and urban design objectives of the Implementation Plan/Design Manual Addendum, and contributes to the amenity of the Project Area in that the project must implement any requirement related to landscaping, exterior structural alterations, etc. Section 3. The Agency hereby grants to Jose Caves, Rassoul Ghannadian and Habbib Ghannadian doing business as European Parts Club, a Special Permit covering the property located at 791 Energy Way, Chula Vista, California, for the use of the property for auto storage, auto-dismantling and sales of auto parts uses. on the following conditions: 1. This Special Land Use Permit is approved until July 13, 2006. The permit may be extended by the Zoning Administrator provided a written request for extension is received and approved prior to expiration. The Zoning Administrator's decision may be appealed to the Redevelopment Agency. Factors to be reviewed by the Zoning Administrator in considering a request for extension include but are not limited to: I) the degree to which surrounding auto dismantlers have or have not be supplanted by alternate land uses; 2) the economic feasibility of redeveloping the site with alternate land uses; and 3) the quality of site and landscape maintenance. 2. In addition to the site plan and architectural approval pursuant to C.Y.M.c. §19.14.420, such plan shall include landscape planting/irrigation, parking and paving, fencing, and other appropriate screening measures to ameliorate adverse visual impacts. The plan shall comply with the Otay Industrial Park Precise Plan Guidelines, as amended May 24, 1994 including the reduced paving requirement therein, the Otay alley Road Redevelopment Plan, and/or other applicable c.V.M.c. provisions. The plans shall be prepared by a Registered Landscape Architect, and shall be implemented within 90 days of the approval of this permit. 3. The applicant shall provide parking at a ratio of one (1) space for each 400 square feet of gross floor area for any enclosed structure within the lease area of APN 644-181- 21. Parking on Energy Way or within the Energy Way easement to the north and at the western terminus of Energy Way is prohibited. 4. Within thirty (30 days of 1he approval of this special use permit, the applicant or owner shall provide proof that the owner/operator of the auto dismantling business has either applied for or received a "Notice of Intent" (NOl) number from the State of 5 -7¿ -.--. RESOLUTION xxxx Page 3 California, State Water Resources Control Board, and that the facility is covered by the General Storm Water Permit. 5. This special land use permit shall become void and ineffective if not utilized within one year from the effective date thereof, 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/Agency for additional conditions or revocation. 6. This special land use permit shall not become effective until proof is submitted to the Director of the Community Development Department that same is recorded in the Office of the County Recorder against subject property. This special land use permit runs with the land, and is not transferable to another property. Code Reminders: 1. Design Review approval (C.V.M.C. §19.14.583) 2. Site plan and architectural approval (c.V.M.c. §19.14.420) Presented by: ¿t 00 ;rb' ~ ~g~. ..4...- Chris omone, Executive Secretary and Bruce M. Boogaard Community Development Director Agency General C unsel "lkaasmanlresos\791ener.res 5-77 -.- -. This 'page íntentíonaIIy left blmtk. !)- 7 f? ITEMS 6 and 7 MEMORANDUM May 12, 1994 TO: The Honorable Mayor Tim Nader FROM: Chris Salomone, Community Development Department [)}¿ SUBJECT: Special Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency for Tuesday, May 24, 1994 Staff is requesting a Special Meeting of the Agency on Tuesday, May 24, 1994 for the purpose of bringing forward the: [1] Redevelopment Agency 1993/94 Budget item and, [2] Downtown Business Association Budget. Financial information--not previously available--needs to be incorporated into the staff report for the Agency 1993/94 Budget. Staff is in the process of updating the supplementary report and incorporating revised financial projections. cc: Council Members John D. Goss, City Manager Sid Morris, Assistant City Manager [c: I WP51 IAGENCYIMEMOSllNFO94-4 .MEM] ¿- / -.-.-. This yage íntentíonaIly left blank. (:; ,,' :L