Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRDA Packet 2004/07/20 ~{ft.. -!I!- - ::: mY OF CHULA VISTA TUESDAY, JULY 20,2004 COUNCIL CHAMBERS 6:00 P.M. PUBLIC SERVICES BUILDING (immediately following the City Council meeting) REVISED ,JOINT MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY I CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CALL TO ORDER ROLL CALL Agency/Council Members Davis, McCann, Rindone, Salas; Chair/Mayor Padilla CONSENT CALENDAR The staff recommendations regarding the following item(s) listed under the Consent Calendar will be enacted by the Council/Agency by one motion without discussion unless an Council/Agency member. a member of the public or City staff requests that the item be pulled for discussion. If you wish to speak on one of these items. please fill out a "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the Redevelopment Agency or the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Items pulled from the Consent Calendar will be discussed after Public Hearing items. Items pulled by the public will be the first items of business. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May 25, 2004, June 1, 2004, June 15, 2004, June 23, 2004 2. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $51,754 FROM THE AVAILABLE BALANCE OF THE MERGED PROJECT AREA FUND TO COVER ADDITIONAL COSTS OF WASTE DIRT REMOVAL FROM FORMER AGENCY PROPERTY AT 760 BROADWAY - In June 2004, the Agency sold the property at 760 Broadway to the Bitterlin Development Corporation. As a condition of the sale, the Agency agreed to remove waste dirt from the site. The Agency obtained an estimate and contracted with Pacific Waste Services; however, the amount of dirt removed from the site was over two times the amount originally estimated. (Community Development Director) 4/5ths VOTE REQUIRED STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Agency adopt the resolution. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS This is an opportunity for the general public to address the Redevelopment Agency on any subject matter within the Agency's jurisdiction that is not an item on this agenda. (State law, however, generally prohibits the Redevelopment Agency from taking action on any issues not included on the posted agenda.) If you wish to address the Agency on such a subject, please complete the "Request to Speak Under Oral Communications Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency or City Clerk prior to the meeting. Those who wish to speak, please give your name and address for record purposes and follow up action. PUBLIC HEARING The following item(s) have been advertised and/or posted as public hearings as required by law. If you wish to speak to any item, please fill out the "Request to Speak Form" available in the lobby and submit it to the Redevelopment Agency or the City Clerk prior to the meeting. 3. CONSIDERATION OF (A) RE-ZONING A 1.2-ACRE SITE AT 1030/1034 BROADWAY FROM THE THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL PRECISE PLAN (C-T-P) ZONE TO THE CENTRAL COMMERCIAL PRECISE PLAN (C-C-P) ZONE, INCLUDING ADOPTION OF PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS ALLOWING REDUCTION IN BUILDING SETBACKS AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS; (B) SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A MIXED-USE PROJECT THAT INCLUDES A 5,000 SQ. FT. OFFICE BUILDING, AND 30 RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS, ALONG WITH PARKING, OPEN SPACE, ACCESS AND CIRCULATION, AND LANDSCAPED AREAS The applicant is requesting an amendment to the zoning map, rezoning 1.2 acres on the west side of Broadway between Moss and Naples Street from Commercial Thoroughfare, Precise Plan (CTP) to Central Commercial, Precise Plan (CCP). The applicant is also requesting a Special Use Permit to allow the construction and operation of an office commercial/residential mixed-use project at the same location. (Director of Community Development) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Agency/Council conduct the public hearing; and that (1) Council place the ordinance on first reading; and (2) Agency adopt the resolutions. a. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION IIS-03-034) AND AMENDING THE ZONING MAP ESTABLISHED BY SECTION 19.18.010 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, REZONING A 1.2 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 1030/1034 BROADWAY FROM THE CTP (THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL, PRECISE PLAN) ZONE TO THE CCP (CENTRAL COMMERCIAL, PRECISE PLAN) ZONE AND ADOPTING PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS b. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SUPS 04-07) FOR A MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL AND OFFICE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 1030/1034 Redevelopment Agency, July 20, 2004 Page 2 BROADWAY WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA c. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE MIXED-USE PROJECT AND ENTERING INTO AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE PHARUS DEVELOPMENT GROUP, LLC FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF PROFESSIONAL OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS, ALONG WITH PARKING, ACCESS AND CIRCULATION, AND LANDSCAPED AREAS AT 1030 BROADWAY WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA ACTION ITEMS The items listed in this section of the agenda are expected to elicit substantial discussions and deliberations by the Agency/Council, staff, or members of the general public. The items will be considered individually by the Agency/Council and staff recommendation 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 Redevelopment Agency or City Clerk prior to the meeting. 4. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (1) AUTHORIZING THE FORMATION OF A 501C3 CORPORATION FOR PURPOSES OF CONDUCTING CHARITABLE BUSINESS IN THE FORM OF REDEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREAS OF CHULA VISTA; (2) SELECTING A NAME FOR THE 501C3 CORPORATION; (3) DIRECTING THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ESTABLISH A TECHNICAL COMMITTEE; AND (4) DIRECTING THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE TO REPORT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL BY OCTOBER 2004 WITH DRAFT ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, BY LAWS AND A PROPOSED OPERATING AGREEMENT - On 2/3/04, Council/Agency directed staff and consultants to prepare an analysis and discussion paper on the creation of a 501 c3 Redevelopment Corporation. As part of the preparation for this report, two facilitated workshops were held on the formation of a 501 c3 Corporation. Staff will give a presentation on the report of the conclusions and recommendations the workshops, (Community Development Director) STAFF RECOMMENDATION: Council/Agency adopt the resolution. OTHER BUSINESS 5. DIRECTOR'S REPORT 6. CHAIR REPORT Redevelopment Agency, July 20, 2004 Page 3 7. AGENCY COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT The Redevelopment Agency will adjourn to a Regular Meeting on August 3, 2004, at 4:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers. AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA), request individuals who require special accommodates to access, attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service request such accommodation at least 48 hours in advance for meetings and five days for scheduled services and activities. Please contact the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency for specific information at (619) 691-5047 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDD) at (619) 585-5647. California Relay Service is also available for the hearing impaired. Redevelopment Agency, July 20, 2004 Page 4 MINUTES OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETINGS OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CONCURRENT WITH A MEETING OF THE BOARD OF PORT COMMISSIONERS OF THE SAN DIEGO UNIFIED PORT DISTRICT May 25, 2004 4:00 p.m. Adjourned Regular Meetings of the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista, concurrent with a meeting of the San Diego Unified Port District Board of Commissioners, were called to order at 4:08 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Agency/Councilmembers: Davis, McCann, Rindone, Salas, and ChairIMayor Padilla Port Commissioners: Spane, Cushman, Rios, Van Deventer, Bixler, Hall (Vice Chairperson), and Davis (Chairperson) ABSENT: Agency/Councilmembers: None Port Commissioners: None ALSO PRESENT: Executive Director/City Manager Rowlands, City Attorney Moore, and Deputy City Clerk Bennett ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were none. ACTION ITEMS 1. PRESENTATION BY CONSULTANT TEAM ON THE THREE DRAFT LAND USE PLANS FOR THE CHULA VISTA BAYFRONT MASTER PLAN AND PROVIDE POLICY DIRECTION Through an extensive public outreach and participation program, three draft Chula Vista Bayfront Master Plans (CVBMP) have been designed to achieve a world-class waterfTont through a unique mix of land and water uses, and have been developed to provide maximum policy flexibility. Port and City staff and the Citizens Advisory Committee preferred the draft land use plan identified as Option C, which contains equal or greater open space than the total parkland within all land under Port jurisdiction. This option also creates three unique districts and acknowledges the environmental sensitivity of surrounding areas. In staffs view, this option best achieves the Port/City objectives. Land use policy direction is needed before design guideline preparation, a financial feasibility analysis, and an environmental review can commence. There will be additional public outreach and citizen group meetings as the CVBMP process proceeds. (Director of Community development). 1- I ACTION ITEM (Continued) Community Development Director Madigan introduced the project consultants. ACTION: Commissioner Hall moved to direct staff to present Options B and C only for purposes of moving the process forward. It was the consensus of all members to have presentations on Options B and Conly. Gordon Carrier, representing Carrier Johnson, presented the Chula Vista Bayfront Master Plan, stating that the Council could expect to see a world-class waterfront. Leslie Wade, sub-consultant for Carrier Johnson/Cooper Robertson, presented an overview of the public outreach forums. At 4:28 p.m., Mayor Padilla declared a recess due to technical difficulties with the presentation equipment. The meeting reconvened at 4:36 p.m. with all members present. Mr. Morton presented the Citizens Advisory Committee's (CAC) priority ranking with regard to economic development; infrastructure; the bay; cross-category; and potential residential sites. He stated that the three land districts, Sweetwater, Otay and Harbor, would become one bayfront that would include a park system, an active waterfront, and new development. Mr. Morton then presented the plan alternatives. The following members of the public spoke in support of Option C: Diane Takvorian, Environmental Heath Coalition (EHC) David DiDonato, EHC Jennifer Badgley, mEW Local 569 Christine Gonzalez, EHC Youth Group Dick Wolè, Chula Vista Yatch Club John McLaren David McClurg, Chula Vista Downtown Business Association/Chamber of Commerce The following persons did not speak but indicated support of Option C: Theresa Acerro Bill Tripp Julie Gelfat Alexandra Hart Susan Fuller, Chair of the CAC, reported on the meetings that resulted in the recommendation to support Option C and encouraged the Council to foster continued community participation. Laura Hunter, representing the Environmental Health Coalition, encouraged the Council to adopt Option C as amended to include the following recommendations by the Citizens Advisory Committee: (I) A serene getaway for local residents, workers, and visitors to the area to relax, exercise, retreat, and conference; a research center, ecotourism infrastructure to attract the public to the area, civic buildings, a civic plaza, and protection of the mud flats; (2) Inclusion of the electric train concept to move people in a clean, non-polluting way ttom the National City historic train depot along the right-of-way to the salt works; (3) Civic buildings that would appear appropriate in a natural environment, a bungalow-style hotel, a vision of a signature park in the harbor district, an exciting 24-hour district with restaurants, shopping, cultural experiences, and an opportunity to live on the bay, a hotel concept similar to that of the Huntington Beach Hotel and Conference Center, cultural activities, and the idea of a bi-national or international theme for the area. Page 2 CounciliRDAIPort Minutes 1- ;L OS/25/04 --- ACTION ITEM (Continued) Kevin Ketchuam, representing the California Yacht Marina, requested assurance that the land use plans would be consistent with the needs of the marina. Carl Harry encouraged flexibility for the plan to include a major theme park and more visionary ideas. Judy Cascales opposed residential development in the Sweetwater area. Sharon Floyd said she was disturbed by a letter sent to residents by Pacifica attempting to gain support for more condominiums on the bayfront. Jim Peugh, representing the San Diego Audobon Society and member of the CAC, supported Option C with the CAC's recommended modifications. He also spoke in support of the land swap and proposed the incorporation of storm water measures into the project. John Chàvez encouraged adoption of the resolution as written. He believed that it may be premature to designate Option C as the preferred option, since design guidelines, land use planning, and financial feasibility studies have not yet been addressed. Lupita Jiminez, representing South Bay Greens, asked that sustainable and energy-efficient buildings be included in the plan, and she urged continued community participation in the process. Christopher Lewis, representing the Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, supported Option C with the caveat that the land swap be included in the plan. Richard Campbell, representing Pacifica, stated that the land exchange would need to be economically feasibility. In order for the land exchange contract to work, it would be vital for the City, Port and Pacifica to continue its dialogues with Goodrich and other interested agencies and public industries to ultimately resolve the issues. Nick Aguilar, representing the County Board of Education, expressed concern about educational implications, particularly with regard to infrastructure. He asked that the education community be included in future discussions of the plan. Additionally, he requested that the City and Port step up to the financial plate to maintain a high standard for school facilities. Ian Gill, representing Lamda Alpha International, encouraged the Council to move forward with Option C as a fÌamework. Steve Molski, representing several local mobilehome parks, requested that F Street not be closed completely, that the marina be moved southward and the RV park northward, and that the Council not support residential developments on the mid-bayfront area north of J Street. He also encouraged the use of solar power. Bill Roe encouraged consideration of a performing arts center in the plan. Page 3 CouncillRDAIPort Minutes 1-3 OS/25/04 ACTION ITEM (Continued) Patricia Aguilar, representing Crossroads II, supported a bayfront development that would attract the public, stating that residential and office parks should not be a priority. She spoke regarding the proposed site for an events center south of the Goodrich campus and suggested that the site would be better suited for a use such as commercial recreation. Jerry Butkiewicz, representing the San Diego Imperial Counties Labor Council, requested that priority be given to local residents for new job opportunities that would be created as a result of the proposed project. He expressed the need to ensure that the proposed project would not threaten good jobs that currently exist at B.F. Goodrich. Karen McElliot, representing the Chula Vista Marina and RV Resort, expressed the need to retain the RV park in the harbor district. She requested consideration of a l4-acre parcel for relocation of the RV park. Allison Rolfe, representing San Diego Baykeeper, spoke in support of Option C, including the proposed amendments by the CAC. She requested that the Council direct staff to include the stormwater measures and water quality plans in the development of the design guidelines. She also spoke in support of sustainable development. Norma Cazares, representing South Bay Forum, stated that Option C would be acceptable but not a preferred option, since the group had major concerns regarding densities and intensities contained in the plan. Josè Paul Moretto, Grano Designs, Incorporated, presented illustrations of potential designs for a performing arts center on the bayfront. Dee Peralta, representing the Chula Vista Elementary School District, asked that options be kept open for schools west of the freeway. Frances LeBoux McCruz requested that senior citizens' needs not be overlooked. Patty Weiss suggested that areas of the bayfront be set aside for beaches and asked for height restrictions on buildings. Lorraine VanCleef expressed concern with water pollution in the bay and suggested the inclusion of swimming pools in the plan. ACTION: Commissioner Hall moved to (I) include the provisions contained in the Environmental Health Coalition's proposal that are additive to Option C, including such items as the need to modify the two designated, southernmost residential parcels in Option C to reflect environmentally friendly, alternative energy and R&D renewable energy device production efforts in association with the Apollo project; and to (2) instruct staff to reinsert the "Wow" factor, the dramatic architectural features, and performing arts and public arts suggestions that have been considered by the CAC to-date; and he offered the following resolution so amended, heading read, text waived: Page 4 CounciilRDNPort Minutes 1-4 OS/25/04 .- - ACTION ITEM (Continued) COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2004-167, AND AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 1874, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (1) GRANTING PRELIMINARY APPROVAL OF THE LAND USE DESIGNATIONS FOR THE PLANNING AREA; AND (2) DIRECTING STAFF TO PREPARE DESIGN GUIDELINES TO PREPARE A FINANCIAL FEASIBILITY PROGRAM, AND TO COMMENCE THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS The motion carried unanimously, including all members of the San Diego Unified Port District Commissioners and the Chula Vista City Council. ADJOURNMENT At 7:00 p.m., ChairlMayor Padilla adjourned the City Council to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on May 27, 2004 at 6:00 p.m., at the John Lippitt Public Works Center, thence to the Regular Meeting on June 1,2004 at 4:00 p.m., thence to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on June 1,2004, immediately following the Regular Meeting at 4:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers, and thence to an Adjourned Regular Meeting on June 2, 2004 at 4:00 p.m. in the John Lippitt Public Works Center. He adjourned the Redevelopment Agency to the Regular Meeting on June I, 2004, immediately following the City Council Meeting at 4:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers. ~ Lorraine Bennett, Deputy City Clerk Page 5 CouncillRDA/Port Minutes I-S' OS/25104 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND A REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA June 1,2004 4:00 p.m. An Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council and a Regular Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista were called to order at 5:53 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Agency/Councilmembers: Davis, McCann, Rindone, Salas and ChairlMayor Padilla ABSENT: Agency/Councilmembers: None ALSO PRESENT: Executive Director/City Manager Rowlands, Agency/City Attorney Moore, and City Clerk Bigelow CONSENT CALENDAR Item No.2 was pulled from the Consent Calendar and continued indefinitely at the request of staff. 1. APPROVAL OF MINUTES - May 4, 2004 Staff recommendation: Agency/Council approve the minutes. 2. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $23,465 FROM THE AVAILABLE BALANCE OF THE MERGED PROJECT AREA FOR THE PURPOSE OF AN INCENTIVE PAYMENT DUE TO PEOPLE'S CHEVROLET PURSUANT TO A 1993 DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT In 1993, the Agency adopted a disposition and development agreement (DDA) for Chula Vista Auto Park Phase I, including a provision for payment of incentives to auto dealers if they exceeded a threshold of sales tax receipts to the City during the first 15 years of operations. The auto dealer incentives are based on a formula contained in the DDA. Based on the formula, People's Chevrolet exceeded the sales tax threshold in 2003 and is due an incentive payment. (Community Development Director) Staff recommendation: Council adopt the ordinance. ACTION: Agency/Councilmember Rindone offered Consent Calendar Item 1, heading read, text waived. The motion carried 5-0. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were none. 1- G. PUBLIC HEARING 3. CONSIDERATION OF THE SALE OF SPACE 115 AT ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK In November 1987, Orange Tree Mobilehome Park converted to resident ownership. The Agency assisted residents in purchasing their park with a $60,000 acquisition loan, which was converted to loans for lower income residents to help them purchase spaces they had been renting. At that time, 29 residents either did not wish to purchase their mobilehome space or could not afford to do so. The Redevelopment Agency agreed to purchase the remaining spaces after the newly formed homeowner's association was unable to secure the financing to purchase them. Residents who did not purchase their spaces remained as renters in the park. It was also the Agency's intent to sell these remaining spaces as new mobilehome buyers moved into the park, or to sell the spaces to the current residents when in the position to buy. (Director of Community Development) Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice. ChairlMayor Padilla opened the public hearing. There being no members of the public wishing to speak, ChairlMayor Padilla closed the public hearing. ACTION: Agency/Councilmember Rindone offered Agency Resolution No. 1875, heading read, text waived: AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 1875, RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR TO EXECUTE A PURCHASE CONTRACT AND RELATED DOCUMENTS FOR SPACE 115 AT ORANGE TREE MOBILEHOME PARK The motion carried 5-0. OTHER BUSINESS 4. DIRECTOR/CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS There were none. 5. CHAIR/MAYOR'S REPORTS There were none. 6. AGENCY/COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS There were none. ADJOURNMENT At 5:55 p.m., ChairlMayor Padilla adjourned the meeting to the Regular Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency on June 15,2004, at 6:00 p.m., immediately following the City Council Meeting in the Council Chambers. ~us~~~Mg~~ Page 2 Council/RDA Minutes 1- Î 06/01104 MINUTES OF AN ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OF THE CITY COUNCIL, A REGULAR MEETING OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY AND HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA June 15, 2004 6:00 P.M. An Adjourned Regular Meeting of the City Council, a Regular Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency, and a Special Meeting of the Public Financing Authority and Housing Authority of the City of Chula Vista were called to order at 7:23 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL PRESENT: Agency/ Authority/Councilmembers Davis, McCann, Rindone and ChairlMayor Padilla ABSENT: Agency/ Authority/Councilmembers: Salas ALSO PRESENT: Executive Director/City Manager Rowlands, Agency/Authority/ City Attorney Moore, City Clerk Bigelow CONSENT CALENDAR Item No. I was removed ttom the Consent Calendar at the request of staff for the purpose of providing a report to the Council. It was considered later in the meeting. 2. COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. 2004-213 AND AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 1876, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WAIVING CONFLICT OF INTEREST IN CONNECTION WITH RUTAN AND TUCKER, LLP'S REPRESENTATION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND CALIFORNIA BANK & TRUST Rutan & Tucker, LLP represents the City and Agency on a variety of legal issues. Rutan & Tucker, LLP have been asked by California Bank & Trust to represent it with respect to environmental and regulatory issues on the Auld Golf Course project in Chula Vista. Although primary discussion will take place with the federal and state regulatory agencies, it is possible that their representation could involve discussion with the City of Chula Vista. Because of the conflict of interest associated with representing two clients in adverse positions, Rutan & Tucker, LLP needs a waiver of this conflict of interest to continue representing all parties. (City Attorney). Staff recommendation: Council! Agency adopt the resolutions. ACTION: Chair/Mayor Padilla moved to approve staffs recommendation and offered Consent Calendar Item 2, heading read, text waived. The motion carried 4-0. i-V ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were none. ACTION ITEMS 3. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE MASTER PLAN AND THE DESIGN BUILD AGREEMENT WITH HIGHLAND PARTNERSHIP, INCORPORATED FOR RENOVATIONS TO THE CITY'S CIVIC CENTER COMPLEX The Council previously approved Project No. GG-139, which involves renovations of the Civic Center complex. Since the execution of the designlbuild agreement with Highland Partnership, Incorporated, a number of substantive design changes have been proposed that will result in higher costs but will add significant value to the overall project. Adoption of the resolution approves the proposed amendments to the Master Plan and to the designlbuild agreement with Highland Partnership, Incorporated. (Director of General Services) A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AMENDING THE CNIC CENTER MASTER PLAN B. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE DESIGN BUILD AGREEMENT WITH HIGHLAND PARTNERSHIP, INCORPORATED FOR THE PROVISION OF SERVICES REQUIRED FOR THE DESIGN AND CONSTRUCTION OF RENOVATIONS TO THE CITY'S CIVIC CENTER COMPLEX PURSUANT TO THE AMENDED MASTER PLAN, AND APPROVING THE GUARANTEED MAXIMUM PRICE OF $33,904,000 FOR DESIGNIBUILD SERVICES FOR THE RENOVATIONS OF THE CNIC CENTER COMPLEX, AND AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE SAID AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT ChairlMayor Padilla announced that Items 3 and 4 would be conducted concurrently. Notice ofthe hearing on Item 4 was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice. Chair/Mayor Padilla opened the public hearing on Item No.4. Agency/Authority/Councilmember Rindone stated that he would support a motion to continue Items 3 and 4 to July 13, 2004, but that he would be abstaining from voting on the items on July 13,2004 due to the proximity of his residence to the project. ACTION: ChairlMayor Padilla moved to continue Items 3 and 4 to July 13, 2004. Agency! Authority/Councilmember Davis seconded the motion, and it carried 4-0. Page 2 CounciJ/RDA Minutes 1- 9 06/15/04 PUBLIC HEARINGS 4. CONSIDERATION OF THE EXECUTION, SALE AND DELIVERY OF CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION IN ORDER TO FINANCE CERTAIN PUBLIC CAPITAL IMPROVEMENTS The Council has previously approved a capital project to renovate the Civic Center Complex, and directed staff to return with recommended long-term financing. This financing plan includes funding for the first phase of the Civic Center Complex renovation (demolition and construction of City Hall) and infrastructure improvements in Western Chula Vista. Staff is recommending approval of a long-term borrowing by issuing Certificates of Participation in an amount not-to-exceed $39,000,000. (Director ofFinance/Treasurer). A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MAKING REQUIRED FINDINGS AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE SALE AND DELIVERY OF NOT-TO-EXCEED $27,000,000 2004 CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION, (CIVIC CENTER PROJECT PHASE 1), APPROPRIATING $14,207,022 FROM PROCEEDS AND $3,000,000 FROM PUBLIC FACILITY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FUND TO THE CIVIC CENTER COMPLEX PROJECT (GG-139), AND REIMBURSING UP TO $6,820,450 TO THE PUBLIC FACILITY DEVELOPMENT IMPACT FUND FOR MONIES PREVIOUSLY SPENT ON THE PROJECT BASED ON ANTICIPATED PROCEEDS FROM THE SALE OF THE CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION, AND AUTHORIZING CERTAIN DOCUMENTS AND DIRECTING CERTAIN ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH B. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA MAKING REQUIRED FINDINGS AUTHORIZING THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF DOCUMENTS RELATING TO THE SALE AND ELIVERY OF NOT-TO-EXCEED $12,000,000 2004 CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION, (WESTERN CHULA VISTA INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT), APPROPRIATING $9,000,000 FROM PROCEEDS TO THE WESTERN CHULA VISTA INFRASTRUCTUREK PROJECT (GG-I8), AND AUTHORIZING CERTAIN DOCUMENTS AND DIRECTING CERTAIN ACTIONS IN CONNECTION THEREWITH C. RESOLUTION OF THE PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A LEASEIPURCHASE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF CHULAV ISTA AND CERTAIN OTHER DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF THE 2004 CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION (CIVIC CENTER PROJECT - PHASE 1) IN A PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT-TO-EXCEED $27,000,000 D. RESOLUTION OF THE PUBLIC FINANCING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A LEASEIPUECHASE AGREEMENT WITH THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AND CERTAIN OTHER DOCUMENTS IN CONNECTION WITH THE EXECUTION AND DELIVERY OF THE 2004 CERTIFICATES OF PARTICIPATION (WESTERN CHULA VISTA INFRASTRUCTURE PROJECT) IN A PRINCIPAL AMOUNT NOT-TO- EXCEED $12,000,000 See Item 3 above for the action taken. Page 3 Council/RDA Minutes 1-10 06/15/04 PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) 5. CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF THE OPERATING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGETS FOR THE CITY, REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY, AND THE HOUSING AUTHORITY FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2005 The City Council has received and considered the City Manager's proposed operating and capital improvement budgets for the City and the operating budgets for the Redevelopment Agency and Housing Authority for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2005. Two work sessions were held to consider and deliberate on the recommendations contained in the fiscal year 2004-2005 proposed budget. The budget submitted at this time for formal adoption represents the City Manager's initial proposed budget amended to reflect (I) changes adopted by Council since the proposed budget was printed; and (2) various additional staff recommendations. (Assistant Director of Budget and Analysis) Notice of the hearing was given in accordance with legal requirements, and the hearing was held on the date and at the time specified in the notice. Mayor Padilla opened the public hearing. Agency/Authority/Councilmembers Rindone and McCann stated that they would be abstaining from Item 5D, due to the proximity oftheir residences to the project area. There being no members of the public wishing to speak, Mayor Padilla closed the public hearing. ACTION: Agency/Authority/Councilmember Rindone offered Council Resolution No. 2004-214, Agency Resolutions Nos. 1877 and 1878, and Housing Authority Resolution No. 25, headings read, texts waived. A. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-214, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE OPERATING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGETS FOR THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005 AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR B. AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 1877 AND HOUSING AUTHORITY NO. 25, JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND THE HOUSING AUTHORITY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE OPERATING BUDGET AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGETS FOR THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AND HOUSING AUTHORITY EXCLUDING THE BAYFRONT/TOWN CENTRE I AND SOUTHWEST/TOWN CENTRE II OTAY V ALLEY PROJECT AREAS FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005 AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR C. AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 1878, RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPOTING THE OPERATING AND CAPTIAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGETS FOR THE BAYFRONT/TOWN CENTRE I PROJECT AREA FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005 AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR The motion carried 4-0. I-II 06/15/04 Page 4 Council/RDA Minutes PUBLIC HEARINGS (Continued) ACTION: Chair/Mayor Padilla moved to continue Item No. 5D to June 23, 2004. Agency/Councilmember Davis seconded the motion, and it carried 4-0. D. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE OPERATING BUDGET AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGETS FOR THE SOUTHWEST/TOWN CENTRE II OTAY VALLEY PROJECT AREA FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005 AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFOR ITEMS PULLED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR LA RESOLUTION NO. 2004-211, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE AGREEMENT WITH THE FIRM OF HB CONSULTING GROUP FOR ALIGNMENT STUDIES FOR THE SOUTH CIRCULATION NETWORK, AND APPROPRIATING AND TRANSFERRING FUNDS THEREFORE B. RESOLUTION NO. 2004-212, RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA WAIVING THE CONSULTANT SELECTION PROCESS AND APPROVING AN AGREEMENT WITH THE FIRM OF HB CONSULTING GROUP FOR ENGINEERING SERVICES RELATED TO ROCK MOUNTAIN ROAD, THE POGGI CREEK CHANNEL, AND THE EASTERN CHULA VISTA TRAFFIC CAPACITY ENHANCEMENT PROGRAM, AND APPROPRIATING AND TRANSFERRING FUNDS THEREFORE The City retained the services of HB Consulting Group to provide project management services related to the preliminary aligmnent studies for the south circulation network (Main Street, Heritage Road and Rock Mountain Road). It is recommended that the scope of work be expanded to include additional roadway segments and Wolf Canyon sewer alternatives and to retain the services of HB Consulting Group related to various infi"astructure needs. (Director of General Services/City Engineer) Staff recommendation: Council/Agency adopt the resolutions. City Engineer AI-Agha referenced a memorandum to the Council dated June IS, 2004 that clarified the details of the proposed agreement between the City and HB Consulting Group, namely the recommendation by staff to delete two work assigmnents fi"om the scope of work, namely the Growth Management Ordinance for $35,000 and additional infi"astructure needs for $30,000. He explained that the work to be carried out under these contracts would be performed by HB Consulting Group and approved sub-consultants. Additionally, staff would be providing a quarterly report to the Council on the rate of expenditures under this contract. ACTION: ChairIMayor Padilla offered Resolution Nos. 2004-211 and 2004-212, headings read, texts waived. The motion carried 4-0. I-/~ Page 5 Council/RDA Minutes 06/15/04 OTHER BUSINESS 6. DIRECTOR/CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS There were none. 7. CHAIR/MAYOR'S REPORTS There were none. 8. AGENCY/COUNCILMEMBER COMMENTS There were none. 9. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATOR - Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 Property: Assessor Parcel No. 624-060-2700 (1.36 acres located north of the Otay River Valley and immediately east of the right-ofDway for 1- 805) Negotiating Parties: Laurie Madigan (Redevelopment Agency), Vince Davies, Phillip Davies, Claude Yacoel, and State of California (Property Owners) Under Negotiations: Instructions to Negotiators No reportable action was taken on this item. ADJOURNMENT At 8:00 p.m., ChairlMayor Padilla adjourned the Special Meetings of the Public Financing Authority and Housing Authority until further notice; and the Redevelopment Agency to an Adjourned Meeting on July 13, 2004, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers. ~~~~~ ~. ./ Susan Bigelow, CMC, City Clerk 1-13 Page 6 CounciVRDA Minutes 06/15/04 MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OFTHE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA June 23, 2004 6:00 p.m. A Special Meeting of the Redevelopment Agency of the City ofChula Vista was called to order at 10:18 p.m. in the John Lippitt Public Works Center, 1800 Maxwell Road, Chula Vista, California. ROLL CALL: PRESENT: Agencymembers: Davis, McCann, Rindone, Salas, and Chair Padilla ABSENT: Agencymembers: None ALSO PRESENT: Executive Director Rowlands, City Attorney Moore, and City Clerk Bigelow CONSENT CALENDAR Kevin O'Neill stated that although he has concerns about traffic flow and access on H Street and Roosevelt Street, he felt confident that those issues would be addressed in the design and planning process for the project. He, therefore, urged the Agencymembers to enter into the proposed agreement. 1. AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 1879, RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING A SEMI-EXCLUSIVE NEGOTIATING AGREEMENT WITH ESPAÑADA CV, LLC FOR DEVELOPMENT OF A MIXED USE REAL ESTATE PROJECT LOCATED ALONG THE NORTHERN PORTION OF H STREET BEWTEEN THIRD AND FOURTH A VENUE AND AUTHORIZING CHAIR TO EXECUTE SAID AGREEMENT Españada CV LLC is proposing the development of a mixed-use real estate project located at 4th and H Street. The project would include the development of 200 residential units within two 200-foot condominium towers and an adjacent 16-unit townhouse complex. The other uses of the site include retail, comprising approximately 13,000 square feet, and a restaurant with 8,600 square feet. The land uses would be further refined based upon a detailed market study, site plans, and requirements of govermnent entities. (Director of Community Development) ACTION: Agencymember Davis offered Agency Resolution No. 1879, heading read, text waived. The motion carried 5-0. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS There were none. 1-1'-1 PUBLIC HEARING 2. CONSIDERATION AND ADOPTION OF THE OPERATING AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGETS FOR SOUTHWEST/TOWN CENTRE II OTAY VALLEY PROJECT AREA FOR THE FISCAL YEAR ENDING JUNE 30, 2005 (CONTINUED FROM THE MEETING OF 6/15/04) On 6/15/04, the Agency considered three resolutions related to the adoption of the FY 2005 operating and capital improvement budgets for the Redevelopment Agency. At that time, the Agency adopted two of the resolutions and continued the third resolution to 6/23/04. (Assistant Director of Budget and Analysis) Chair Padilla noted that the public hearing was opened on June 15,2004, and continued to this date. Agencymembers Rindone and McCann stated that they would abstain trom discussion and voting on this item due to the proximity of their respective residences to the project. They then recused themselves and left the meeting room. There being no members of the public wishing to speak, Chair Padilla closed the public hearing. ACTION: Chair Padilla offered Agency Resolution No. 1880, heading read, text waived: AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. 1880, RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE OPERATING BUDGET AND CAPITAL IMPROVEMENT BUDGETS FOR THE SOUTHWEST/TOWN CENTRE IIIOTAY VALLEY PROJECT AREA FOR FISCAL YEAR 2005 AND APPROPRIATING FUNDS THEREFORE The motion carried 3-0-2, with Agencymembers Rindone and McCann abstaining. OTHER BUSINESS 3. DIRECTOR'S REPORT There was none. 4. CHAIR REPORT There was none. 5. AGENCY COMMENTS There were none. ADJOURNMENT At 10:24 p.m., Chair Padilla adjourned the meeting to an Adjourned Meeting on July 13, 2004, at 6:00 p.m., in the Council Chambers. ~ éLu~ ~îl-.<9--'" Susan Bigelow, CMC, City Jerk I-IS- Page 2 - Redevelopment Agency Minutes June 23, 2004 PAGE 1, ITEM NO.: ~ MEETING DATE: 07/20/04 REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM TITLE: RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $51,754 FROM THE AVAILABLE BALANCE OF THE MERGED PROJECT AREA FUND TO COVER ADDITIONAL COSTS OF WASTE DIRT REMOVAL FROM FORMER AGENCY PROPERTY AT 760 BROADWAY SUBMITTED BY: vtA REVIEWED BY: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 4/5THS YOTE: YES Œ]NO D PROJECT PROPOSAL Staff is requesting an appropriation from the Merged Project Area Fund in the amount of $51,754 to cover the cost for removal of waste dirt from the property at 760 Broadway, In June 2004, Redevelopment Agency (Agency) sold property located at 760 Broadway to the Bitterlin Development Corporation, et al for the development of 0 commercial/residential mixed-use project. As a condition of the sale, the Agency was to remove a pile of waste dirt prior to close of escrow. Agency staff complied with and implemented this condition through a contract with Pacific Waste Services. However, the amount of dirt removed from the site was over two times the amount of dirt originally estimated. The amount of funds originally allocated to this task was not sufficient to pay for the increased amount of dirt and additional funds are necessary in order to pay for the outstonding balance. RECOMMENDATION It is recommended that the City of Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency odopt the resolution oppropriating $51,754 from the unappropriated balance of the merged project area. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. DISCUSSION The Agency acquired the property at 760 Broadway in 1992, as part of the relocation of the auto dealerships (Fuller Ford and South bay Chevrolet) to the Chula Vista Auto Park. In 1995, the Agency removed the structures that housed the Fuller Ford dealership. After demolition of the structures it was discovered that the hydraulic lifts leaked hydraulic fluid into the soil. A soils remediation program was implemented by the Agency, in 1998, to remove the hydrocarbons and clean up the soil. The Bitterlin Development Corporation hired a consultant to check the condition of the dirt pile to determine remaining levels of contamination. The consultant determined that, while the level of contamination was very low and was not considered hazardous, the dirt was considered waste dirt. Prior to the close of escrow the developer required the Agency to remove the waste dirt from the site. 0:;-1 PAGE 2, ITEM NO.: ~ MEETING DATE: 07/20/04 Staff made arrongements wifh the City's franchise hauler, Pacific Waste Services, to remove the dirt from the site and dispose of it at the Otay Landfill. At the time of entering into the contract with Pacific Waste, information from the City and Developer consultants indicoted thot the amount of waste dirt was opproximotely 750 fans. However fhe actuol amount of dirt removed from the site wos 2,008 fans. The difference between the originol estimate ond the actual amount of waste dirt removed was because of the irregular shape of the dirt pile. For example, the pile had several peaks and valleys in its forms and extended further below grade level than expected. These irregularities led to an inaccurate original estimate. The original amount set aside for this contract was $32,873 while the final cost was $84, 626.71 (this amount includes a 10.5% Franchise Fee to be returned to the City's General Fund as port of the Franchise contract between the City and Pacific Waste) leaving a balance remaining of $51,754. It should be noted that this expenditure is 0 result of soil contamination created by Fuller Ford. Fuller Ford is responsible for all the costs of remediation. The costs of remediation at the time of purchase will be subject to reimbursement by Fuller Ford. FISCAL IMPACT A total of $51,754 will be approprioted from the merged project area. As indicated above, this omount will be subject to reimbursement by Fuller Ford as part of the contracts for the sale of property to the Agency in 1992. J:\COMMDEV\STAFF.REP\O7-20-04\760 Broadway D;rt Removol Fund, Appropr;at;on d-~ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROPRIATING $51,754 FROM THE AVAILABLE BALANCE OF THE MERGED PROJECT AREA FUND TO COVER ADDITIONAL COSTS OF WASTE DIRT REMOVAL FROM FORMER AGENCY PROPERTY AT 760 BROADWAY WHEREAS, in June 2003, Redevelopment Agency ("Agency") sold the property at 760 Broadway to the Bitterlin Development Corporation, et al for the development of a mixed-use commercial/residential project; and WHEREAS, as a condition of this sale it was the Agency's responsibility to remove certain waste soil from the site prior to the close of escrow; and WHEREAS, all waste soil has been removed from the site; and WHEREAS, the final amount of waste soil removed from the site is higher than it was originally estimated; and WHEREAS, additional funds need to be appropriated to cover the full cost of soil removal. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista does hereby appropriate $51,754 from the available balance of the Merged Project Area to cover the full cost of the waste soil removal from the property at 760 Broadway. PRESENTED BY APPROVED AS TO FORM BY Laurie Madigan Director of Community Development J:\COMMDEV\RESOS\760 Broadway Dirt Removal Fund Appropriation - July 07 04 ~-3 PAGE I, ITEM NO.: ~~ MEETING DATE: 07/20/2004 JOINT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY / CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER: (A) RE-ZONING A 1.2-ACRE SITE AT 1030/1034 BROADWAY FROM THE THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL PRECISE PLAN (C-T-P) ZONE TO THE CENTRAL COMMERCIAL PRECISE PLAN (C-C-P) ZONE, INCLUDING ADOPTION OF PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS ALLOWING REDUCTION IN BUILDING SETBACKS AND PARKING REQUIREMENTS; AND (B) SPECIAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW FOR A MIXED-USE PROJECT THAT INCLUDES A 5,000 SQ. FT. OFFICE BUILDING, AND 30 RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUM UNITS, ALONG WITH PARKING, OPEN SPACE, ACCESS AND CIRCULATION, AND LANDSCAPED AREAS a. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DECLARATION (IS-03-034) AND AMENDING THE ZONING MAP ESTABLISHED BY SECTION 19.18.010 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, REZONING A 1.2 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 1030/1034 BROADWAY FROM THE CTP (THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL, PRECISE PLAN) ZONE TO THE CCP (CENTRAL COMMERCIAL, PRECISE PLAN) ZONE AND ADOPTING PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS b. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING SPECIAL USE PERMIT SUPS 04- 07 FOR A MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL AND OFFICE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 1030/1034 BROADWAY WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA c. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE MIXED-USE PROJECT AND ENTERING INTO AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE PHARUS DEVELOPMENT GROUP, LLC FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF PROFESSIONAL OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS, ALONG WITH PARKING, ACCESS AND CIRCULATION, AND LANDSCAPED AREAS AT 1030 BROADWAY WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT A ~ vVl. SUBMlnED BY: REVIEWED BY: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 4/STHS VOTE: YES 4-1 PAGE 2, ITEM NO.: -L MEETING DATE: 07/20/2004 BACKGROUND The applicant is requesting an amendment to the zoning map, rezoning 1.2 acres on the west side of Broadway befween Moss and Naples Street (see Locator) from Commercial Thoroughfare, Precise Plan (CTP) to Central Commercial, Precise Plan (CCP). The opplicant is also requesting a Special Use Permit to allow the construction and operation of an office commercial/residential mixed-use project at the same location. The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study, 15-03-034 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator determined that the project could result in effects on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, 15-03- 034. RECOMMENDATION That the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency take the following actions: a) Adopt the City Council Ordinance adopting the Mitigated Negative Declaration and amending the Zoning Map; b) Adopt the Redevelopment Agency resolution approving the Special Use Permit for the mixed use project; c) Adopt the Redevelopment Agency resolution approving the Owner Participation Agreement (OPA)for the mixed-use project with the Pharus Development Group, LLC and accept the recommendation of the Design Review Committee to approve the project subject to the conditions outlined in Exhibit B of the OPA. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION On April 19, 2004, the Resource Conservation Commission voted 4-0-0-3 to recommend adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration, 15-03-034, Public comment was received on April 25, 2003 (see minutes, Attachment 1). On May 17, 2004, the Design Review Committee voted 3-0- 1- 1 to recommend that the Redevelopment Agency conditionally approve the design of the project (see minutes, Attachment 2). On June 16, 2004, the Planning Commission considered the Rezone and Special Use Permit and, after hearing staff's presentation, voted 7-0 to recommend adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS 03-034) and approve the project in accordance with the findings and 4-~ PAGE 3, ITEM NO.: 4 MEETING DATE: 07/20/2004 subject to the conditions and regulations contained in City Council Ordinance and Redevelopment Agency resolutions (see minutes and PC Resolution, Attachment 3). DISCUSSION 1. Existing Site Characteristics The project is located on the west side of Broadway, between Moss and Naples Street. The site is located in an urbanized area in the Southwest Redevelopment Area. The project site contains 2 contiguous parcels. The larger of the two (1030 Broadway) is approximately .85 ocres and is currently vacant but previously developed with a mobile home park. The smaller of the two (1034 Broadway) is opproximately .36 acres and contains an old one-story triplex building. The overall project site is generally rectangular in shape with the larger of the two parcels (1030 Broodway) approximotely 36 feet deeper (see Locator Mop). Surrounding land use regulations and actual uses are as follows: General Plan Montgomery SP Zoning Current Land Use Site: Retail MCO (Mercantile/Office Comm.) CTP Vacant/triplex-building North: Retail/Res. MCO/HDR (High density res.) CTP/R3 Retail/Apartments South: Retail MCO/LOR (Low density res.) CT/R1 Animal Hosp./Vac. Res. East: Retail MCO (Mercantile/Office Comm.) CTP Retail Commercial West: LM Res. LDR (Low density res.) R-1 Single family residential 2. Project Description The proposed project involves two entitlements. A rezone to change the existing and underlying zone from Thoroughfare Commercial, Precise Plan (CTP) to Central Commercial, Precise Plan (CCP) and incorporation of precise plan standards into the existing precise plan modifying district; and a Special Use Permit to construct and operate a residential/office commercial mixed use project. The application includes a request to consider shared parking. The mixed-use project features: 1) 30 residential condominium units; 2) 5,000 square foot office building; 3) 19,314 square feet of open spoce 4) 73 on-site parking spaces (4 spaces would be designated shared parking spaces). Additional on-street parking spaces will be available on Broadway along the project frontage. Access to the off-street parking for the project will be from Broodway by a driveway located at the south end of the project site. The applicant will also be submitting an application for a 2-lot tentative parcel map (TPM) to place the office building on one lot, and the 30 condominium units on a second lot. 3. Development Standards Table The mixed-use development project has been evaluated using the CC zone development standards for the office commercial component and the R-3 standards for the residential component. 4-3 PAGE 4, ITEM NO.: 4 MEETING DATE: 07/20/2004 CATEGORY REQUIRED PROPOSED Zoning CTP- Thoroughfore CCP-Cenfrol Commercial, Cammercial, Precise Plan Precise Plan General Plan CR-Commercial Retail CR-Commercial Retail Montgomery Specific Plan MCO-Mercantile Office MCO- (Mercantile Office Desi¡:¡nation Commercial Commercial) Lot Area 1.2 acres 1.2 acres Parking Residential (30 units) 60 spaces 56 spaces Office (1 space/300 sf) lZ spaces lZ spaces Total 77 SDaces 73' ComDact SDace Allowonce 10% /8 SDaces\ 21% (16 spaces)" Lot Coveraee 50 Dercent 22.3% percent Setbacks (CYMC) Office (CC standards) Front Yard 25 feet 3 ft. (single-story arcade)" 8 ft. (2-story bldg.)" Side Yard None, except when 0 ft. (north; 4 ft. (south tower abutting SF residential element) Distance between bldgs 10 feet 15 feet between office bldg. and res. Bide. #1 Residential (R3 standards) Side Adjacent to commercial 7 feet 5-1/2 feet (north side)" 74 feet (south side) Adjacent to R- 1 15 feet 10 feet (so./adj. to R- 1 )" Rear Building 17 feet 15 feet' Balcony 17 feet 13 feet Montgomery Specific Plan Front Yard 15 feet 3 ft. (single-story arcade)" 8 ft. (2-storv bide.)" Building Height Office (CC zone) None, unless adjacent to 2-story, 30 feet CO or residential zone Residential (R3zone) 2 Y, story/28 feet 3 story, 35 feet'" maxImum , Applicant requesting approval of shared parking for 4 parking spaces. " Deviations from typical applicable requirements will be accommodated by Precise Plan standards discussed later in this report. '" Increase in height limit allowed per Section 19.28.060(A)(2), as recommended by the Design Review Committee on May 17, 2004 4-4 PAGE 5, IIEM NO.: 4 MEETING DAlE: 07/2012004 4. Analysis The project has been evoluated in accordance with the goals and objectives of the Southwest Redevelapment Plan area and Chapter 10, Section 5.9, of the General Plan (see Attachment 4), The General Plan states that medium to high density residential development is potentially desirable alang certain sections af Broadway in order ta break up the cantinuous strip af retail cammercial. Implementation of this goal began last year with the approval of mixed use projects ot 760 and 825 Broadway. The General Plan states that mixed-use development should consider access, oppropriote setbocks and screening from ony adjacent non-compatible uses, ond thot implementation of this palicy should consider a special zone ar land use overlay that would establish specific development criteria while visually and economically enhancing the orea and promoting a beneficial development for the general welfare of the citizens in the areo and the City. The praposed rezane and precise plan standards are being requested in order to provide this development criteria. The Special Use Permit will ensure development of a project whose individual commercial and residential components will function cohesively with the existing surrounding uses. In regards to land use compatibility, on May 17, 2004, the Design Review Committee reviewed the project design for the proposed mixed use project. The Committee discussed the issue of land use compatibility based upon a letter received by one of the nearby property owners expressing privacy concerns with the proposed project in terms of its proximity to adjacent single- family residential properties to the west. Part of this concern was bosed on the proposed three story/35 foot building heighf for the residential buildings. Based upon section 19.28.060(2) the Design Review Committee, on May 17, 2004, reviewed and is recommending the proposed 35 feet/3 story height limit for the project. This recommendotion was based upon the Committees finding that the height, bulk, mass and proportion of all structures is compatible with the site, as well as in scale with the structures on adjoining and surrounding properties in the area. Staff had concurred that the residential buildings have been designed and placed an the site in a way that maximizes the use of open space/landscape areas and breaks up the vertical appearance of the three story buildings. The project will provide approximately 16,099 square feet of usable open space. Usable open space includes: the front and rear open courtyard/gross areas; the two covered kiosk/lawn areas, the rear grass area and the private patio/balconies. In addition, given the location of existing single family residences west of the proposed project (at least 150 feet away), a 6 foot high wall and enhanced landscaping is proposed along the west property line, Staff, the Design Review Committee and the Planning Commission have all concluded that adequate visual screening has been provided. Also, given the combination of wall and landscaping, it is anticipated that only the 2 third story balconies of Buildings 3 and 4 (which is 2 out of the total 30 patio/balconies for the project) will have any views over the westerly adjacent properties. Staff spoke to the neighbor who has now expressed satisfaction with the modified plans. No one attended the DRC or Planning Commission meetings to elaborote on their concerns. The DRC did not recommend any additional modifications. 4-~ PAGE 6, ITEM NO.: ~ MEETING DATE: 07/20/2004 Rezone The proposed rezone from the CTP to CCP zone is requested by the developer because the CCP zone allows mixed-use development while the CTP zone does not. The Urban Core Specific Plan, currently underway, will provide more specific zone district and development standards for mixed use projects. However, currently the CC zone is the only viable zone district to develop mixed-use projects. Bath zones are consistent with the Generol Plan land Use Element, which designates this area Retail Commercial. The proposed CCP zone is also consistent with the existing MOC (Mercantile Office Commercial) designation of the Montgomery Specific Plan, and will contribute to the public convenience and generol welfare by further assisting the City's efforts to sotisfy the goals and objectives of Redevelopment Agency and Chapter 10, Section 5.9, of the General Plan (see Goals & Objectives, attachment 7). Exhibit B of Attachment 3 delineates the proposed zone for the project site in relation to the existing surrounding zoning. Addinq P Modifier to ZoninQ DesiQnation Section 19.56.041 of the CYMC indicates that the evidence of one or more specific circumstances must be evident in order to add a P modifier to a zoning designation. One such circumstance, delineated in 19.56.041 (C) is that the basic or underlying zone regulation does not allow the property owner ond/or city appropriote control or flexibility needed to achieve an efficient and proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent zone. Because the project is surrounded by a combination of existing commercial and residential uses, one of the criteria used to determine the preferred design of the project has been to insure that the commercial portion of the project was situated adjacent to commercial uses and the residential portion was most adjacent to existing residential uses. Precise Plan Standards The proposed Precise Plan standards deviate from the adopted Zoning Ordinance and Mantgomery Specific Plan, while respecting the surrounding land uses. Proposed zoning ordinance deviations include both Setback reductions and Parking deviations. These proposed development standards are shown in the "proposed" column of the Project Data Table shown above and more specifically outlined in Exhibit C of the Droft City Council Ordinance (see Attachment 3). Setback Reductions In order to meet the goal of a more urban, pedestrian-oriented project, the proposed development standards ollow for certain encroochments into the required setbacks. Setback reductions include: a)reducing front yard setback from 25 feet to 3 feet (single story arcade) and 8 feet (two story building); b) reducing side yard setbacks from 7 feet to 5 1/2 feet an north side and from 15 feet to 10 feet on south side (adjacent to vacant R- 1 lot); c) reducing rear yard setback from 17 feet to 15 feet (building) and 13 feet (balconies). 4-~ PAGE 7, ITEM NO.: -4 MEETING DATE: 07/20/2004 Staff is of the opinion that emphasis on a more urban and pedestrian oriented design is in keeping with the existing development design trends. Both the CC zone and Montgomery Specific Plan standards were adopted at a time when emphasis was on having buildings set bock behind a landscaped/parking area. Adoption of the proposed precise plan development standards will allow reduced building setbacks which are conducive with the above stated goals of encouraging a mixed-use project which is in keeping with the goals of achieving a more urban, pedestrian-oriented project. The reduction in building setbacks will allow the above referenced goals to be achieved by 1) allowing the office commercial component of the project to be located close to the sidewalk along Broadway, thereby achieving the pedestrian oriented nature of the project; 2) allow for a better balance between open space and buildings on the lot. Larger open space areas as well as pedestrian corridors can be provided between building structures while, at the same time, mointaining the desire density of the project. Due to the orientation of existing development on adjocent properties, no negative impact is anticipated as a result of the proposed setback reductions. Parkino Parking deviations include: a) increase allowable compact parking spaces from 10% to 21%; b) allow four required off-street porking spaces to be shared parking by residential and commercial tenants. These 4 shored parking spaces should be counted towards meeting the parking requirements for office use and be considered guest parking for the residential component, thereby reducing the residentiol parking requirement by said 4 spaces. Staff further believes these four guest spoces can be shored with the required office parking spaces since the primary need for guest parking will be during the hours when offices will be closed (i.e. evenings and weekends). These 4 spaces will be avoilable by guests of the residential units, especiolly during off-peak hours. The four parking spaces must be designated as shared parking and a reciprocal parking or other similar type of agreement will be required to insure said spaces remain always available for shared parking. Due to the hours of operation of the office building, it is anticipated there will not be a conflict in allowing said parking spaces to be utilized by guests of the residential units on evenings and weekends. An increase in allowable compact spaces along with the allowance for shared parking will allow for a reduction in the size of the required parking field. This reduction will allow a mixed use project to be designed with more areas of open space to visually reduce the bulk of project while still achieving the goal of being on urban/pedestrian-oriented development. Special Use Permit Under the proposed CCP zone designation, section 19.36.030(0) of the Zoning Ordinance requires that a mixed use project only be ollowed by an approved conditional use permit. Because the site is located within the Southwest Redevelopment Area, a special use permit is required which will require approval by the Redevelopment Agency. In addition to the normal required findings for the granting of a use permit, outlined in section 19.14.080, the approval of 4- Î PAGE 8, IIEM NO.: 4 MEETING DAlE: 07/20/2004 use permit for a mixed-use project is also subject to compliance to the specific standards and guidelines outlined in section 19.58.205 of CYMe. The following poragraphs discuss, how the proposed project meets these standards. The proposed site plan and elevations are shown in Attachment 5. The use permit shall be reviewed and approved by the City Councilor Redevelopmenf Agency. Because the project falls within the Southwest Redevelopment Area, the Redevelopment Agency will review and take action on this request. The commercial and residential componenfs shall be planned and implemenfed fogefher. The office and residential components of the project have been designed to complement each other yet stand alone in terms of functional usage. The office component contains the required amount of parking in the vicinity of the southerly properly line. Due to the orientation of the project close to the street, pedestrian access to the building is readily available from Broadway as well as the adjacent parking area. The residential units are located to the rear of the site and, other than 4 shared parking spaces, contain a separate parking field separated from the office use by a gate. Separate pedestrian access from the parking areas are provided between the office and residential uses. The maximum allowable residenfial density will be governed by the provisions of fhe R-3 zone based upon the total projecf orea, less any area devofed exclusively to commercial use, including commercial parking and circulation areas. The approved density may be significanfly less than fhe maximum allowable density depending on site-specific factors, including fhe density and relationship of surrounding residenfial areas, if any. The proposed 30 units comply with the allowable density based upon excluding the land devoted to office use and exclusive office parking from the calculation. A total of 43,395 square feet of the project site constitute the residential component of the 1.3-acre site. Based upon section 19.28.070 of the CYMC a total of 43,380 square feet are required for the proposed twenty-four 2-bedroom and six 3-bedroom units. Parking, access and circulafion shall be largely independenf for the commercial and residenfial componenfs of the pro;ect. Each use component shall provide off-street parking in accordance with city sfandards. The office parking will be closest to Broadway and separated from the residential parking area to the rear by a security gate. As allowed under the proposed precise plan standards, concurrently being considered for approval, four shared parking spaces are proposed which will occommodate both office parking as well as parking for guest of the residential units, primarily during off-peak hours. The residential componenf shall meet fhe private and common open space requirements of the R-3 zone. 4-f PAGE 9, ITEM NO.: 4 MEETING DATE: 07/20/2004 The proposed project exceeds both the private and common open space requirements. A total of 12,480 square feet of open space are required for the 3D-unit residential component of the project. Of this total amount required, a minimum of 2,800 square feet of private open space are required with the remainder being common open space. The applicant is providing 2,802 square feet of private open space and 13,297 square feet of common open space for a total of 16,099 squore feet of open space. The conditional use permit may include a restricfion on commercial uses and/or business hours in order to avoid conflicts wifh residenfial units. The fact that the proposed commercial use is an office building will provide a use, which is compatible with nearby residential development and should not require any restrictions on hours of operation. In addition, the orientation of the office building towards Broadway will limit any potential negative impact on residential units located behind the building on the same site. Desian Features: The Design Review Committee is in favor of the project design and recommends approval by the Redevelopment Agency. Specific design features for which the Committee gave a favoroble response included: . Architecturol compatibility between rear of office building and front of the closest residential building (Building No.1) . The additional tower element added along the south elevation to provide symmetry with the proposed tower at the north end of the project site. . The use and location of plaza features between buildings. . Placement of the office building close to Broadway in order to allow for more open/plaza areas between the buildings. CONCLUSION: Staff believes that the requested project entitlements allow for a mixed use project which meet the goals and objectives of providing a more urban pedestrian oriented project at this location. As discussed in this report, the project will achieve the goal of Chapter 10, section 5.9 of the General Plan, which encourages development of mixed-use projects along Broadway which are integrated into the surrounding development. It is hoped that such a project will enhance the area and potentially become a model for architectural design fur future development of this area along Broadway. For the reasons discussed in this report, staff recommends approval of the proposed project. 4-Cj PAGE 10, ITEM NO.: 4 MEETING DATE: 07/20/2004 FISCAL IMPACT The applicant has paid for all costs associoted with the processing of the Rezone, Special Use Permit and Design Review applications and will be responsible for paying corresponding Development Impact fees and other applicable development and processing fees. The proposed development project has an estimated net valuation of $6,250,000. This would generate approximately $62,500 in annual tax-increment revenue. This amount would be divided as follows: Twenty percent ($12,500) for the Housing Set-Aside fund; of the remaining $50,000, fifty three percent ($26,500) will be allocated to other taxing entities as part of the tax sharing pass thru agreements; the rest ($23,500) will accrue to the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area fund on an annual basis. AnACHMENTS 1. Minutes of Resource Conservation Committee 2. Minutes of Design Review Committee 3. Planning Commission minutes and Resolution. 4. Chapter 10, Section 5.9 of the General Plan 5. Figures 6. Mitigated Negative Declaration 7. Comment letter on Negative Declaration 8. Disclosure Statement H:\COMMDEV\TAPIA\Pharus Plaza Project - All dacs\Pharus Plaza Joint Agenda Statement - July 20 04.doc 4-1 () ATTACHMENT 1 DRAFT MINUTES OF A REGULAR MEETING OF THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION April 19, 2004 Ken Lee Building Conference Room 430 "F" Street MEETING CALLED TO ORDER by Vice-Chair Doug Reid at 5:08 p.m. ROLL CALUMOTION TO EXCUSE MSC (JasekiBensoussan) to excuse Chair Terry Thomas and Commissioner John Chávez. Vote: (4-0-0-1) with Means absent. Commissioner Tracy Meanš- was not excused. MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice-Chair Doug Reid, Commissioners Pamela Bensoussan, Stanley Jasek and Juan Diaz STAFF PRESENT: Paul Hellman, Environmental Projects Manager Maria Muett, Associate Planner Linda Bond, Recording Secretary APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. NEW BUSINESS 1. IS-03-034 - Pharus Plaza, 1030-1034 Broadway Ms. Maria Muett (Associate Planner) described the project location and site and summarized the proposed project. She stated that oral comments were received in response to the Notice of Initial Study from two members of the public regarding aesthetics/privacy to adjacent single-family residential properties. building bulk, parking on side streets, traffic and density. She also stated that no oral or written comments were received on the adequacy of the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration. Ms. Muett summarized the primary environmental issues addressed through the Initial Study and in the Mitigated Negative Declaration. including the proposed mitigation measures to reduce potentially significant air quality and hazards and. hazardous materials impacts to below a level of significance. Commission Comments Commissioner Jasek asked how the oral comments were received. Ms. Muett responded that they were received by telephone. *1-- II DRAFT DRAFT RCC Minutes - 2 - April 19. 2004 Vice-Chair Reid asked if residential development is permissible through a use permit in the CT Zone. Ms. Muett stated it is not permissible, which is the reason why the proposal includes the rezoning of the property from CTP to CCP. Vice-Chair Reid asked if the rezoning would trigger a greater requirement for scheol fees. Mr. Paul Hellman (Environmental Projects Manager) 'indicated that the Chula Vista Elementary School District's còmment letter ericourageä th.e developer to participate in alternative financing mechanisms in lieu of developers fees, but did not state that this wouid be required. Commissioner Jasek inquired about who is responsible for assessing impacts from the proposed increase in density on existing sewer facilities. Mr. Hellman indicated that the Engineering Division reviews the adequacy of sewer and other City facilities and that in this case the Sweetwater Authority assessed the adequacy of water facilities. MSC (DiazlJasek) that the RCC determine that the Initial Study is adequate and recommend that the Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted. Vote: (4-0-0-3) with Thomas, Chávez and Means absent. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR COMMENTS: None. CHAIR COMMENTS: None. COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: None. ADJOURNMENT: Vice-Chair Reid adjourned the meeting at 5:28 p.m. to a regular meeting on Monday, May 3, 2004, at 6:00 p.m. in the Ken Lee Building Conference Room, 430 "F" Street, Chula Vista, CA 91910. Prepared by: Linda Bond, Recording Secretary (J:IPlanningIRCC\2004IRCCO41904Mins.doc) 4-12- DRAFT ATTACHMENT 2 ¡;i}~, ,.,c" y' MINUTES OF A REGULAR ,>,,'1' '~,' >',,-," MEETING OF THE DESIGN REVIEW COMMITTEE 'b" CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Council Chal!lbers Mondav. May 17. 2004 Public Service BuildinQ 20 4:30 p.rn, . 276 Fourth AI/ènue, Chula Vista ifJ;/- '.'h A. PRESENT: Chair Araiza, Merpcers Patricia Aguilar, Jose and Cheryl fv!~stler Î.- ABSENT: Cynthia PrjÍKe, (excused~- //'? "~~ " ,cj)i "'q"i"\ STAFF PRESENT: John Schmitz, P. nn'er Michael Walker, Planner Ray Pe, Senior Plan Jeff Steichen, Associa ner ,'~f!!!¡ Miguel Tapia, Principal C ., unl!.Y'5evelopment tricia Beard, Sr. Communiteyelopment Specialist OTHERS PRESENT B. the record by Vice Chair Aguilar C. Motion carried None Pharus Plaza 1030/1034 Broadway located on the east side of Broadway, south of Moss Street Mixed-use project consistina of a 5 000 s.f. two-stOry professional office buildina alona Broadway and 30 condominium units to the rear. Mr. John Schmitz, Principal Planner noted that Mr. Jose Alberdi would be recusing himself from this discussion. 4-13 Design Review Committee -3- Minutes Mav 17. 2004 opportunity to do something within the site, but the way the buildings are loca1ec(it is just too tight to put a canopy tree along the front of the property. , " ". ':/ Vice Chair Aguilar stated that she didn't mean along the property. Since the Washingtonia Palms are so widely spaced she was suggesting that some canopy trees, be placed between the palms within the parkway (all within the city right-of-way). '~"" Member Mestler asked about the tower to the south of the driveway, which indicated, on the plans that it would be leased. P'. '-:-~', , -1) ""'.'};" Mr. Steichen said he thought the applicant was pro g to use'this area for some sort retail but he would let the applicant address her quÊ¡!Stion. ""P" "iW} -'11> Mr. Carlos Madrazo, Developer, (101 Plazél~Escalante, Chula Vista, CA 91910) said per the DRC's recommendation at the last meè¡¡ñg~the addedå.;r'element on the south side to give it a more uniformed look along Broadway ycã1ne'up with this tower feature, which would be a ground floor retail area that might b lh1éd for a key-shop. Chair Araiza noted that on the elevations' for the offic jlding itil1ðicated a standing seam metal roof and barrel he thought it might be a typó "ed for clarification. Mr. Schmitz said that l~g! and should be deleteci;Tl using the same material that recommendation to the Redevelopment claration, 18-03-034 is approved. Motion Dodge/Chrysler/Jeep Dealership (Tony McCune) Proposal to develop a new auto dealership on the north side of Main Street between Delniso Court and Roma Court. Mr. Ray Pe, Senior Planner said the applicant is requesting preliminary review of their project for comments and feedback from the committee. The applicant is proposing to develop a new auto dealership on the north side of Main Street between Delniso Court and Roma Court. Staff noted that the streets had been renamed to Auto Park Place and 4-1'1 J :IHOME'PLANNINGIROSEMARIEIDRCIMIN-5-17 -04 ATTACHMENT 3 MINUTES OF THE CITY PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIF"ORNIA Council Chambers 6:00 p.m. Public Services Building Wednesday, June 16, 2004 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista ROLL CALL/ MOTIONS TO EXCUSE: Present: Castaneda, Madrid, O'Neill, Hall, Cortes, Hom, Felber Staff Present: Luis Hernandez, Deputy Planning Director John Schmitz, Principal Planner Jeff Steichen, Associate Planner Ann Pease, Associate Planner Caroline Young, Senior Planning Technician Dave Hanson, Deputy City Attorney I PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE/SILENT PRAYER INTRODUCTORY REMARKS: Read into the record by Chair Castaneda APPROVAL OF MINUTES: Apri I 28, 2004 MSC (Cortes/Felber) (6-0-0-1) to approve minutes as submitted. Motion carried. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: No public input. 1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ 04-01; Consideration of an amendment of the Zoning Map or Maps established by Section 19.18.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code rezoning 1.2 acres at 1030 and 1034 Broadway from Thoroughfare Commercial, Precise Plan (CTP) to Central Commercial, Precise Plan (CCP). SUPS 04-07; Consideration of a Special Use Permit to allow the construction and operation of an office commercial/multi-family residential mixed-use project at 1030 and 1034 Broadway within the Southwest Redevelopment Area. 4-1S" Planning Commission Minutes .2. June 16, 2004 Background: Jeff Steichen, Project Manager, reported that the proposal is to amend the zoning map, rezoning 1.2 acres at 1030 and 1034 Broadway from CTP to CCP, and a Special Use Permit to allow the construction and operation of an office commercial/ residential mixed-use project at the same location. Mr. Steichen indicated that the main reason for requesting the rezone is because the CT zone does not allow a mixed-use project, whereas, the CC zone does allow this type of use subject to the approval of a Special Use Permit. One of the goals of the City's General Plan is to promote the development of mixed- use projects along portions of Broadway. The project proposes that the on-site parking be reduced by four parking spaces; this will be made up by considering four of the required office/commercial parking spaces as shared spaces. These 4 spaces will be available by guests of the residential units, during off-peak hours. Regarding the Special Use Permit; the proposal consists of 5,000 sf of office use, facing and closest to Broadway, as well as 30 condominium units. In order to grant the Special Use Permit, the project must meet the density requirements as set forth in the R-3 zone, A total of 43,395 sf are required for the density being proposed; the project has slightly over that amount, therefore, the proposed 30 units comply with this density requirement. Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCS 04-0l/SUPS 04-07 recommending adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of the project in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions and regulations contained in the City Council Ordinance and Redevelopment Agency Resolutions. Commission Discussion: Cmr. Hall asked for clarification on the justification for a 35 foot building height that is being proposed, as oppose to the 28 foot height limit in the R-3 zone. Mr. Steichen responded that the R-3 standard does state a 28 foot height limit, however, there is another section that allows up to three stories (35 feet) based upon certain findings. Upon review of the project, the Design Review Committee found that the bulk, mass and proportion of the structure is compatible with the site and in scale with structures in the surrounding area. Cmr. Hom inquired if staff received any other opposition to the project beside the letter that was included in staff's report. <;I-/~ Planning Commission Minutes .3- June 16, 2004 Mr. Steichen responded that no other opposition was received, verbal or in writing, other than the one letter received from Mr. Fields expressing privacy concerns. He further noted that staff spoke with Mr. Fields and informed him that the project was going to be modified with some additional architectural features, removed some tot lots and a change in the fence, which appeased Mr. Fields's concerns. Public Hearing opened and closed. MSC (O'Neill/Cortes) (7-0) that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCS 04-01/SUPS 04-07 recommending adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration and approval of the project in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions and regulations contained in the City Council Ordinance and Redevelopment Agency Resolutions. Motion carried. 4-/7 RESOLUTION NO. PCZ-04-01 and SUPS 04-07 RESOLUTION OF THE PLAì'iNING COM:YnSSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOM:\oIEDI:'iG THAT CITY COT..:è'iCIL APPROVE A REZONE (PCZ-O4-01) fOR A CHA:\GE FROM THOROUGHFARE COM:YIERCIAL/PRECISE PLA:i" (CTP) ZO:'iI TO CENTR~L COM:YIERCIALIPRECISE PLAJ.'i (CCP) ZONE ALONG WITH PRECISE PLAN.~TAJ.'iDARDS AND THAT THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION (IS-03-034) AJ.'D APPROVE SPECIAL USE PER""UT (SUPS 04-07) ALLOWI:i"G THE DEVELOPl\IENT OF A RESIDENTIAL AND OFFICE COMMERCIAL MIXED-USE PROJECT LOCATED AT 1030/1034 BROAD'\VAY. WHEREAS, a duly venfied application for a Rezone was filed on July 25, 2003, ,md a duly verified application for a Special Use Permit was filed on April 23, 2004, with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department by Carlos Madrazo "Developer"; and WHEREAS, said Developer requests approval of the Rezone and a Special Use Permit to allow for a mixed-use project that includes 30 condominium units, 5,000 square feet of office pace, open space and off-street parking. The project site is located in a Thorougruare Commercial (C-T) zoning district; and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator, has reviewed the proposed projec: for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study, IS-03-034 in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could result in significant effects on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental Rev.iew Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-03-034; and. WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said Rezone (with precise plan standards) and Special Use Permit and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners and residents within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely June 16, 2004, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed; and WHEREAS, after considering all reports, evidence, and testimony presented at said public hearing with respect to the conditional use permit application, the Planning Commission voted - to recommend adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration (15-03-034) and approval of the Rezone (PCZ-04-01) and Special Use Permit (S1JPS 04-07); and ~ -/~ Resolution No. PCZ-O4-01 and 5UP5-04-07 Pa(!e 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLAÌ'I"NING COMMISSIO)i does hereby recomme:¡d that the City Council adopt the draft Ordinance for Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS 03-03<1) and Rezone (PCZ04-01) and recommends that the Redevelopment Age:¡cy adopt the draf¡ Resolution for Speciall'se Permit (SUPS 04-07) in accord~nce \vith ¡he findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. BE IT HJRTHER RESO¡:"VED that a copy of this. Resolution .be transmitted to the Redevelopment Agency and the De,:eloper. PASSED A",l) APPROVED BY THE PLA~pJING COM?v1ISSION OF THE C11-,- OF CHULA VISTA, CAlIFOR1~, this ló¡h day of June, 2004, by th~ following vote, to wi¡: AYES' C"',",d,. "de". 0' ,,;11. ,,11, Coct" , H'.. F!lb" A - 1 NOES' -0- 1T;tcé !Ì j ABSTAIN: -0- " I lu- I~~ Stevj<Ldaneda, Chair ATTEST: ~. "'\ ", D ~~~~ -,?o- ~~~ ~~ "-'::'>;"""';;"'" ,< ~~ ~ Diana Vargas, Secretary ~ J\Planning'Michael\PCC Re?o~s'J'OI-O3-15 4 -I c¡ ATTACHMENT 4 Ce:¡tr::¡] Chula ViS7.a not bç~::¡ pla:cr:d to incluåe this con.¡:ec::cn c::è Üè~:-efore may have c:-e;¡¡ed obstacles to 1,S Ì.I:::ple:nemation. In aååition, inåividucl proposed deve!opmems may propose an align::èe:-Jt bUt it may not be one Ll:1at resultS L., the most ciearand cominuous ove:-all syste:TI. 1:1 addition, a portion of this segment of the Gree::¡belt falls within the boundaries of Ì';ational Cif}. Close coope:-ation and coordination will be ne:::essarj if the plans of beÙ cities are to i::c:~d~ the Gree:1celt "nå provide the ne:::ess"r:¡ ongoing support to assure its ìr:¡p 1 e;;:;:::¡,:¡tion. It is re:::ommended that a detail alignment and design study be undertaken to establish tbs rcute in detail. This could b~:part of the Chula Vista Greenbelt Master Plan 'or as an iITJIleèiate separate srudy item. IiS- focus should be to assure that de:::isic¡-.s are not ;::ade Ùat weulè preclude the completion of this connection or necessitate a àifñc1.l1t and expensive sch:tion. It should also s:::rve to inform affe:::ted prope¡-z¡ ewners of L'1e importance of this ope;¡ space connection anà how it should be accomplished. 5.9 BROADWAY RESIDEN1L<U. DEVELOPYIEfl.l Tne introàuction of medium and high àensity resièemial is seen as potentially desirable L., cer.ain se:::tions of Broaàway to break the continuous scrip of retail commercial. The a,e:l mes: suitabie for the introàuction of residential land us:::s is between Flowe:- Street on the nCfL1-¡ and I Street on the south. Tne development of residential land uses in ¡þjs area can be mixeå use conune:-cial/resiàe;¡tial typically with L'1e commercial as the fIrSt level and residential units above. It can also be only residential uses. In either case, the introduction of reside::¡tial uses on Broadway should carefully consider access, the appropriate setbacks from the roadway and screening from any "',àdjacem non-compatible land uses. The future imulementation of this policy should include consideration of a suecial zone or land use overlay which would establish more specific criteria for project design." 4-:7...0 10-19 ATTACHMENT 5 IÕ~ E!m I~ CIJà ¡P .....~~~ III~I 1 I a:5 ,:::1 ::>5':¡ ""'18A""""""",","'" :~~ ~m !t ; :im ¡ I~~ ¡i¡ 'GAl8 ).:v'MG\fOH8 vcm/ocm ;' !U~ i ~ <is wi! ¡ ~ ¡h ¡j¡ \fZ\ild SnH\fHd ¡ ! ¡ ¡ ~~§ ¡ I II ! '. "r' ',-- ....,':.." I!U¡!.~! ...... ,all." '~'"U! n n n! . d .' I .. ¡¡ ¡¡ 'II hi! i H i Idl'! I~ I~ I~ d IiI ill ¡11I1111!!~i II II II iii !! I III « g! N « ~ ~. x ~~ z !ž ~ e ä I j ~ i~ « ~ ~ ¡ E~ II t ; n d di Ii Ii ~ i II , ..J lL ~ IIi!;! ~1Ii!! IIIn I nl!H~ illn:~ ~ ~!~h ~ ih a... <i. ~ lit. § hi". § mU"" § hi." § In." § Udu 1111 0 I I ! a I ~ nUn" .~, CJ)<{ :) I-- ". .; " '\ ..., . . !" i j-. -,.." " '" ,; Cf) en 'I . ,¡, . ", !' . ,.. .,. . a::>~iji.:îi¡i¡¡¡'¡' ~~!I'!¡:!¡ii¡d 13\ «~I¡¡!:¡,!:Iji~¡Uen¡i¡!~~;'!I'I~!¡!i .' '\~:,' « ,1¡'Ã'i'¡!I'~I'~i!.I!":I..i jli'! IL ,'.~ :5 fß ~¡¡ ~ :~¡ t ;f ~ J ~ I!!: I! 5 ¡ H!H ~ in: ~ ~".',~~' :~ "\ \ \1 ' II8:~¡~!:'!l!i'!I I<tii;i!i~l!i~r~~¡~!: ~ \\'.\',i ..; i¡I¡¡;!li!i~!h~;! ffi .lï::1!Î "~'¡~¡!~ ;:; z ,-..': t \1."",,,,- OQi¡;'lj~i;l!jil!¡¡Z'¡'I~I~¡'¡:Ii¡,I!!!! ~ ::";::O.A'-->- a... ~ li,g"i'!!!!!' .~,I W !:J'.¡j:!I;i'-i~,n!!'id Ii! ",~.",..,.:-- ~,~ 1II""ì'.,¡i!a""'°I'"Ii,,;¡-"jlj .-., ..; ~~¡'iIi'.~.i~~. I.U,¡¡¡:¡i¡~:il!¡!U" ,~... \. ""', .~, ,-.. ~ ¡1i1I!r'¡¡¡¡;!.!;~ i~q~:iii!ï:li!i! '¡PI! ".", ,.-'" ~m}Ø~!I~!li ~!!~!1~I:I}!Ë¡!¡;'::; . , .¡!II :,1: " "I' -I¡. '.1, ! ~ .! ,¡. . ." I-! ~I.., ." 'I'" 113! ~ ::1 'I¡ :1~~¡I't en 1:;1!!I!I¡~¡qi!i!ii!~i!¡!:¡:!~::~I' ~ !,Ï!,I'¡i !I¡:¡I¡¡!:¡' § 1~¡III!!I¡I¡,!i!¡g~¡!Ü¡!I:¡:¡III!¡!~~;i,¡,! III ii, 'Ii" "a'l~¡"~"!tI'i'-'~"'¡"!¡"'¡ q,~!~, I,!II M ,I iIi!iil!iil,¡iI~I~III,It,1 4_., ~!-i!i!" !-Ilill' , u'I/!"!'II¡"I'!!I:'¡'f.!!!I!"¡!"¡'/I.¡ß,,!!¡ ; '" ~m¡!dil¡ m!!¡!¡¡!¡ :1!11,:I!,~,;,~!j; f!í!!I;ï~,!I!,!:!I¡¡..~:I:~ r im¡l~ ~¡!¡: ~~~~I 111'1 II ~ I ~. ~~":':......:~ I, ! wI ~¡!b 1[1 ¡¡¡ "GA18 Á'v'Ma'v'OI:l8 17£O~/O£O~ , ! ~¡ !¡¡¡!! I~! ,i; 'v'Z'<tld Snl:l'v'Hd II ,i III ! 'I ¡. II [?Jill ¡ :1 ~ -- . Ih , . , , I . ~ . f . . . I 4-~ r i~¡¡! 'ffi\ g¡¡ ~¡; ~-:-.~::= '¡l,iil I. ~ \ a:' WI ~¡i¡l; i~iJH 'Œl8 AVMO'v'Oì:!8 V£m/or.m ,1\'1 <D" ,1 <: ..J; ~, ",,1, . ¡..; ,I; 'v'Zv'ld Sm:!VHd ¡I!;" Ii N <::I ;?; 0 d :0 <D Z <: ...J c.. a: 0 0 ...J LL 0 ~~a~ 0 z 0 0 UJ (J) ~ g; LL - <::I ;?; 0 d => <D I , 4-¡3 \ 10J ¡1m I ill! CJ:Ij ¡P """'~o~~":-~ 1,\ 1'1 \ I 0:\ ~:::¡ =>, ':¡ 'C,nUYM""""_= 1 d: ¡ (') '~1 ;¡m. ,i, .~{ m, °O^l8 ÀVMOVO!:j8 v£m/o£m j..,II,j¡~ i <i ~3 ~¡d' ¡ ![~ ¡!, VZVld SntlVHd . ¡:j¡¡jH ,j I 1 "., I oM ~". \ \ I " ..,.\ \ \ '~,\~ I ~¡ """ LL \ I ':'0 ~ ~ '-"' ,I ~ " ~~ ~ '\' g i; . c: ~ 0 " W III N ì ~ W - ..J .- I~ ~,-, ~.. ~~ ~, II I !§ ;1 Ii .: ~ . LL ¡ I (¡') . 0 ;\ g ',' l; ~ i ~ ~ I' :::J. " ::2>: ---Î 0- 'I 0 'I ¡s ~ .I ~ I " (') I I I ¡ ._';:,., I 4-.2. t.J 1\_' ..q'!\l~ ,.,- . III \ j \1 ,,¡ ,(", (fJ,"'; ~X"""-"""'" ..,,3' . æ\ ~:;;¡ :J' t;, ',,^"4~M-g:..;;;~ ;'I'! '~{ ~¡¡~! ,: !1i!;\ 'OAla ^ VMOVp!:J8 tBŒ/,oBm ,~!J¡,,1 !,! ~ \ <, .".. 1, 'c...~ .,. V LVld snU',-fHd 'I""' , , . ""-"~"~"- ov ",. " I I I !~ j; ¡ i z i Q if- ~ (¡j~ I~ ..J. .- ~ w> ~ i¡!: \ ~ ~ I . 0 en I c .Q Cd > ID 1) ... cO ~~ < -0> ... cO ~ ... :;:¡ 0 () ~ ! i \ I 4-2-S- I I I _J \21 ¡¡¡n\lllil gs¡ ¡¡~ ~~~:=~ \:1,1;: \ \ ~1 :¡¡~1 ¡ . !~! Hi 'OAl8 À'VNlO'VO'd8 Þ£m/O£G~ ¡i \"I! ¡! ~ «0 ,d;1 : 0., ,.: 'v'Z'v'íd sm:!'VHd ,It¡,¡ ¡ ¿ I I I " \' ~ I ~ J: ! I~ \ . z z'" ¡;¡ 0 0" I F ¡ F. I « ¡ ~¡! li~!1 ->.' Ilw'l wI! -;¡:I 1-1 5 ¡¡j 0 ;: (J) ;E . c:: 0 z 4-2.k \21 ¡~¡n\~\ ¡g¡ ¡¡~ ~,~~?::-: \:,¡,¡¡\ \ \ 51 \~H\; i~! H\ 'GAl8 ÀVMOVO'd8 t~m/o£m '[1 li:¡ .oJ """ :0.., a¡ VZVld ~nI:JVHd ¡I!"" " II \ \\,11 I\\;/!j~~!~\ I: ¡ II'¡:\ I . . '.'" '\ Hi ! ¡;;¡, i ::¡' ! ;::il i¡ " , 'I'll. 1:1 i ~:\I., II 1;;: ;: .1nl.: ,\ sl~ ~l .'";! I I!lf~¡ ~\¡¡¡¡i II \ I -.2. Î UJ ::> z '.u > < z :) '1) Ii '-'. +. "j \\-- '- -L-- .J ~i I .- . I i I -!.. ¿-I ß\ 4-:2.." ~ .¡ - ~ ATTACHMENT 6 Mitigated Negative Declaration PROJECT NAME: Pharos Plaza PROJECT LOCATION; 1030-1034 Broadway ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 618-110-11 and618-110-12 PROJECT APPLICA..:.,<T Pharos Development Gro~p, F~C CASE NO.: IS-03-034 DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT: March 29. 2004 DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING: ADril 19.2004 DATE OF FINAL DOCUJv!ENT: Mav 3. 2004 Revisions made to this document snbsequent to the issuance of the notice of availability of the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration are denoted by underline, A. Project Setting The project site is a partially vacant L23-acre site consisting of two parcels, located at 1030-1034 Broadway. The site is located in an urbanized area in the central western portion of the city of Chub Vista within the Southwest Redevelopment Area (see Exhibit A - Location Map). The project site was previously developed \vith a mobile home park including a one-story residential triplex building containing three rental units and accessory structure, Currently, the project site contains the one-story triplex building, broken asphalt foundations, disrepaired paving and fencing. Land uses surrounding the project site consist of the following: North: Commercial Shopping Center, Self-Storage and Apartments South: Professional Office and vacant lot East: Broadway/Commercia] retail uses West: Single-Family Residences B. Project Descr1ution The proposed project consists of the demolition of the existing one-story triplex building and the construction of 30 residential condominium units within three separate three-story buildings and a detached two-story 5,000 square-foot professional office building fronting Broadway (see Exhibit B- SiteP]an). The total proposed parking is 77 spaces (74 spaces on-site and 3 spaces on-street); 60 residential spaces and ]7 office spaces. The redevelopment of the project site would include landscape treatments, lighting, drainage facilities, paved parking lot, right of way improvements, retaining wails and fencing along the perimeter of the property. The proposed grading quantities are estimated at ],020 cubic yards cut and ],520 cubic yards fill. The project includes retaining walls with decorative five-foot high-capped wooden fencing on top in accordance with the City's Design Manual guidelines, along the western and northern perimeters, and separates fencing' continuing around the southern and northern perimeters. The proposal requires approval of Design Re\iew, Precise Plan, Conditional Use Pennit Tentative Map and Rezone from CTP to CCP (Ce~tra! CommercialiPrecise Plan) and all necessary redevelopme:u a.:tions by the Chula \"ista Redevelopment Agency. 4-2..Cf ] , C. ColTIoliance with Zoning and Phns The project site is within the CTP (Thoroughfare CommerciallPrecise Plan) Zone and is designate:! MCa (ìv!ercantile and Office Commercial) under the Montgomery Specific Plan and CR (Retail Cor:.mercial) under the Chula Vista Ge:!eral PIa:!. Tne proposal ir.cludes the rezcnir.g of ,he site froG CTP to CCP (Central Cornrnercia1fPrecise Plan), ailowing for the proposed mixed-use ¿e'¡elopeer., subject to the provisions of the Chula Vista Municipo! Code Chapter 19.36 with the approval of a Conditional Use Permit. Tne project would be consistent witht~~-proposed zoning and existing Genera! Plan designation of the prc!pèrty. D. Public Comments On March 9, 2004, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners within a SOO-foot radius of the project site. The public comment period e:!ded on March 18, 2004. No written comments were received; however, oral comments were received from two persons regarding aesthetics/privacy to adjacent~~gle-family residential properties, building bulk, and parking on side streets, traffic and density issUes: On March 30. 2004. the Notice of Availabilitv ofthe Pwoosed Mitigated Nezative Declaration for the project was posted in the CountY Clerk's Office and circulated to PropertY owners within a SOO-foot radius of the Proiect site. The 30-dav public comment period dosed on Avril 29. 2004: r;vo '-'-nlte;) comment letters were received. The Chula Vista Elementarv School District identified the statutorY deve101,er fee reQuirements and recommended annexation to CommunitY Facilities District CFD) 10 as an alternative to the fee' no comments regardim! the adeauacv of the Mitigated Negative Declaraticn were included. In a comment letter from a member of the public. concerns were exuressed regarding uroiect densitY. building heights. building setbacks from the residential urouerties to the west. congestion. school imuacts. noise. parking overflow from uroiect residerns .'onto Broadwav and adiacent side streets: however. the adeauacv of the draft Mitigated Ne!Zative Declaration was not addressed. The issues identified in this comment letter were adeQuate1v addressed in the draft Mitigated Negative Declaration. E. Identification of Environmental Effects An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached Environmental Checklist fonn) detennined that the proposed project would not have a significant environme::!ta1 effect, and the preparation of an Environmental hnpact Report will not be required. Tnis Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Aesthetics There are fo\!! parcels which abut the project site to the west; two are vacant and two contain single- family residences. The closest single-family residence to the project site is situated approximately 54 feet from the northwest comer of the project site. Within the CC (Central Commercial) Zone, no building shall exceed three and one-half s,ories or 45 feet in height whe:! loc:lted adj:lcent 10 any C-O or residential zone. The western f:JÇ:lde of the proposed tJ-J"ee-swry 35-fool high residential building ne:lrest to the western property line would be se: back 15 fee: from the property line. The project site is separ:lted from t..'1e singie-far:.i1y resi¿~::::aì propenies to the west by an existing five-foot high chain link fe:1ce and portions of disreraired wocde:1 fe:1ce. A five-foot high decorative 4~e3.;°de:1 fe:1ce (above re:aini::g walls in c~r:a::: ry locations) is proposed along the project's perimeter. Therefore, a porticn of the proposed residential building would be visible from the rear portion of single-family residential properties to the west, To achieve a greater degree of vegetative screening of the proposed residential buildings from the west, ne',V 24-gal10n CaITotWood, 36-inch box Southern Magnolia, 24-inch box EvergTeen Pear, and 24- inch box Chinese Flame trees would be planted in betWeen interminent moderate sized shrubs along the western property line. Tne proposed mixed-use professional office/residential project as proposed would be an allowable land use within the proposed CCP (Central CommerciallPrecise Plan) zone. The proposed five-foot high decorative wooden fence, retaining walls, r,ew trees along the western propert'j line, and 15-foot rear yard setback would screen anq'ininimize the intrusiveness of the 'proposed three-storj reside:nial buildings relative to the single-family residences to the west. Given the location of the site on an established, intensively developed commercial corridor, and the relatively moderate height and bulk of the proposed structures, the impact of this change would not rise to a level of significance under the California Environmental Quality Act as implemented by the City of Chula Vista. The proposal includes downward-facing, non-spill exterior lighting within parking areas, and along portions of the site perimeter,:îhe proposed lighting would comply with the lighting regulations of the Chula Vista Municipal cõae and, therefore, would not result in a significant lighting impact. Air Qualitv Based upon the relatively minor amount of site grading that would be necessary to accommodate the proposed development, the amount of project-generated traffic that is anticipated and the consistency of the project with the City's General Plan, the proposal would not result in the violation of any air quality standard or contribute to an existing or projected air quality violation, The proposed project would potential1y generate sufficient construction vehicle emissions and dust during construction- related operations to result in a short-term significant, but mitigable, impact to air quality, Fugitive dust would be created during construction operations as a result of clearing, earth movement, and ."travel on unpaved surfaces. Dust control during grading operations would be regulated in accordance with the rules and regulations of the County of San Diego Air Pollution Control District and the California Air Resources Board, Compliance with the ¡pitigation measures outlined below in Section F would reduce this potentially significant impact to below a level of significance. Geolo!!V and Soils The project site has been previously graded and developed with a mobile home park and multifamily residential units. The preliminary grading plans specify 1,020 cubic yards of cut and 1,520 cubic yards of fill, which would require a grading permit. The, preparation and submittal of a final soils report will be required prior to the issuance of a grading permit as a standard engineering requirement. There are no known or suspected seismic hazards associated 'with the project site. The site is not within a mapped Earthquake Fault Zone, Tnerefore, project comþliance with applicable Uniform Building Code standards would adequately address any building safety/seismic concerns. -. The potential discharge of silt during construction activities could result in siltation impacts downstream. Appropriate erosion control measures would be identified in conjunction with the prepara:ion of final grading plans and would be implemented during construction. Tne implementation of water quality best management practices (BNlPs) during construction would be required in ac:or¿:mce with ì'<'PDES Or¿er No. 2001-01. An portions of the development area djs~rbed during construction would either be developed or would be appropriately landscaped in compliance with the Chula Vista }.[unicipal Code, Sections 19.36.090 and 1 °'6 110. Compliance 4 -.3 ( - - . ~ with BMPs and NPDES Order No, 2001-01 would be required and would be monitored by the City. Too-.ofore, the potential for the discharge of silt into the drainage system would be less than si;:¡:::ificant. Hazards and Hazardous },!aterials Le:::.d and Asbestos Removcl T~e e;Òting triplex building, accessory stT~ctures a!:d broken foundations on-site (1030 Broaci'W"ay) thot are proposed to be demclished pOtentially coma::! asbestos- and-lead-based Fa;;]"~ ',.¡::iÒ c~u!d be released if not properly abated. To.~tigate this potentially signiflcanfimpact, prior to a:q demolitio:! activities the presence of asbestos and lead-based paint will be determined and if present, abatement shall be performed by a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor in accordance to all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations, including San Diego County AI Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard for Demolition and Renovation. The miti"ation measure contained in Section F below would mitigate potential impacts associated with ¡be rele-;'se c; asbestos and lead to below a level of significance. HvdroloQ:V and Water Oualitv"- The proposed project site is not located within the 100-year floodplain. Public drainage system facilities consist of a 60-inch corregated metal pipe (CMF) and a 66-inch reinforced carregated pipe (RCP) along Broadway. The conceprual grading plan indicates the installation of storm drain facilities necessary to collect and carry site drainage to the existing storm drain along Broadway. No sheet flow is proposed to Broadway or adjacent properties. A final drainage study, t.'1at includes existing plus developed drainage conditions, 'Will be required in conjunction with the ¡:reparation of final grading and improvement plans. Propdy designed drainage facilities 'Will be ¡'-¡stalled at the time of site development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. No significant impacts to the City's .. storm drainage system are anticipated to result from the proposed development. Due to the size and existing condition of the project site, the preparation and imple:::et1tation af a "Construction Storm Water Management Plan" (CSwr.IP) prior to the issuance of any permit such as a Construction/Improvement Permit is required. Compliance with provisions of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San Diego Region Order No. 2001-01 with respe:t to construction-related water quality BtvIPs would be required. Water quality Best Management Practices (BfvIPS) shall be incorporated into the design of the proje:\. Such measures shall be designed to minimize discharge of pollutants into the storm drainage system. Preliminary proposed BMPs include storm drain inlet protection system, source control, protection of stockpiles, protection of slopes, protection of all disturbed areas, protection of access, and perimeter con\ainment measures including landscaped treatments throughout the project site. Construction and post-construction water quality best management practices (BMFs) will be required to be incorporated into the final grading plans, Based upon"the project design "ith proposed conceptual BMFs, conditions of the Precis~ Pla.'1 that include compliance with the NPDES Permit requirements, and standard engineering requirements, storm drainage and water quality impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance. 4 -,3:J.. .. Noise Eilar Associates prepared the "Pharus Plaza Acoustical Analysis Report" for the proposed project, Óted March 19,2004. This report is available for review at the Cit'j of Chula Vista Planning and BuilÒng Department counter and is summarized below: Existing Conditions The partially vacant project site fronts Broad'",'ay with parking allowed along bot:! sides of the street. According to the City of Chula Vista Engi.neering DivisionfI:ransportation Section, this section of Broadway carries a traffic volume!Jf approximately 20,450 avei-ag'e'daily trips (ADT). Tne primary noise source affecting the proposed development consists of vehiCle irãffic traveling along Broadway. The existing noise level at the eastern property line adjacent to Broadway is 69.2 decibels Community Noise Equivalent Level «dB Q-<-:EL), which is attributable primarily to traffic noise. The City of Chula Vista has not adopted any specific numerical noiselland use compatfoility levels to estab1ish significance criteria. However, as a matter of policy, the City employs the noise standards set forth in the Noise Element of the City of San Dïego Progress Guide and Ge:Jeral Plan as guidelines for the purpose o(CEQA analysis. The City's exterior noise level standard for noise- sensitive areas, which include residences and outdoor recreational areas, is 65 dB C"N-:EL The City's exterior noise standard for office development is 70 dB CNEL. Exterior Conditions Plus Proposed Project Future traffic volumes were based upon a buildout traffic mode! run in March 2002. The future projected buildout traffic volume along Broadway, south of "L" Street, is 25,300 ADT. The project site will be subjected. to future trafñc noise g~nerated from automobile and truck trafñc along Broadway. Based upon this projected trafñc volume, the overall future traffic noise level at the eastern property line, adjacent to Broadway, is estimated at 70.2 dB CNEL According to the City's CEQA thresholds, residential outdoor use areas shall not exceed 65 dB CNEL. The future traffic noise calculations show that.with the development of the proposed ofñce and residential structures, all of the proposed outdoor use areas (courtyards, barbeque areas, patios, and balconies) will be exposed to noise levels ranging from 39.8 to 60.7 dB Cl'ŒL. Therefore, based upon the results of the acoustical analysis, no significant exterior noise impacts are identified. Future Interior Conditions With Proposed Project State Building Code (part 2, Title 24) requires that interior noise levels not exceed 45 dB CNEL or less for multi-family units, Prior to the issuance of buildingpennits for the residential structures, building construction plans wiU be required to reflect any special design consideration (i.e., mechanical ventilation, enhanced glazing with the wall and window assemblies) as deemed necessary to attenuate interior noise levels to 45 dB CNEL. T ranSDortatiòn!T raffi c The proposal is projected to generate 340 average daily vehicle trips (ADTs). Based upon the projected level of project traffic generation and the level of service of the surrounding street netWork, the Engineering Division has determin~d that the proposal does not have the potential to r,sult in any significant traffic impacts; therefore, the preparation of a traffic study was :Jot required. Th~ primary access street in the vicinity of th~ project site, Broadway, cUITent1y operates at acce"rable level of service (LOS) A and is proj~cr~d to continue to op~rate at LOS A after project develoFm~:Jt. Acc~sS to the project sire is proposed trom th~ ~xisting driveway on the northern parce!. 4 -.3 3 5 Parking Based upon the Chub Vista Municipal Code parking ratio require;nent for professional office of 1 parking space per 200 square feet of gross floor area, and the parking ratio requirement for multi- ["roily dwelling units of 2 par!<ing spaces per each resi¿e::tial unit, the required pddng for the pro¡::osal is 77 spaces. Prc ;osed on-site parking is 74 parking spaces; the applicant re,,'.1ests that the additional 3 required parking spaces be a]]owed to be provided on-street (Broadway), which requires approval of a Precise Plan. S~aff conCUI5 that the required findings can be maàe to support the proposed minor parking deviation, establishing that no significant impacts woulà result. Therefore, .. no significant parking impacts are aIÎticipated to result from the proposal. F. Miti2ation NecessarY to Avoid Si2J1ificant ImDacts Air Qualitv The following air quality mitigation requirements shall be shown on an applicable demolition, grading, and building plans aso-details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and shall not be deviated from unless approved in advance in writing by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator. 1. During construction, dirt and debris stall be washed down or swept up as soon as practicable to reduce the resuspension of particulate matter caused by vehic1e movement over such material. Approach routes to the construction area sha]] be cleaned daily of construction-related dirt and debris. 2. In accordance with California Vehicle Code Section 23114, vehicles transporting loads of aggregate materials must coverltarp the material, or if not covered, the material must be no nearer than six inches from the upper edge of the container area where the material contacts the sides, front, and..back of the cargo container area, and the load shall not extend, at its peak, above any part ofthe upper edge of the cargo container area. This measure shall also apply to the transport of any materials associated with demolition, grading, or building activities that can potentially become airborne. 3. Construction equipment shall be maintained in proper working order and shall be periodically tuned in order to minimize air pollutant emissions; use of low pollutant-emitting constrUction equipment, inc1uding electrical-powered equipment, shall be used as practical. . 4. Soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces shall be suspended when wind speeds exceed 25 miles per hour. 5. All unpaved construction areas shall be sprinkled with water or other acceptable dust control agents during dust-generating activities as necessary to minimize dust emissions to the ma;dmum extent practicable. . Additional watering or dust control agents shall be app1ied duf.ng dry weather or on wi1fdy days Until dust emissions are not visible. Hazards and Hazardous Materials The following hazards mitigation requirement shall be shown on all demolition plans as a ;note. 6. Asbestos and lead-based paint abatement shall be performed by a lice;:sed and registered asbestos and lead abatement contr:1c:or in accordance to.all applicable local, ,,:1Ie and fç~çral laws a¡:¿ 4~.3-t./ 6 regulations, including San Diego County Air Pollution Control District Ruie 361.145 - Standards for Demolition and Renovation: G. Cor.sultation I. Individuals and Or~a!Jizations City of Chula Vista: Maril;!1l R.F. Ponseggi, planning and Building Paul Hellman, Planning and Building -, Maria C. Muett, Planning and E)ui1ding Luis Hernandez, Planning and Building Jeff Steichen, Planning and Building Brad Remp, Planning and Building Duane Bazzel, Planning and Building Frank Herrera-A, Planning and Building Garry Wi11iams, Planning and Building Miguel Tapia, Community,Development Frank Rivera, Engineeri¿g- - . Beth Chopp, Engineering Sandra Hernandez, Engineering Anthony Chuk',vudolue, Engineer.ng Muna Cuthbert, Engineering Silvester Evetovich, Engineering Ben Herrera, Enginèering Dave Kaplan, Engineering Joe Gamble, Building & Park Construction G. Edmonds, Fire Department Richard Preuss, Police Department - Crime Prevention Applicant: Pharos Development Group/Carlos Madrazo Others: Sweetwater Authority Chula Vista Elementary School District 2. Documents 'City ofChula Vista General Plan, 1989 Title 19,Chula Vista Municipl Code Acoustical Analysis Report/l030-1034 Broadway-Chula Vista, Eilar Associates, March 19, 2004. ~ .,3Ç" Î 3, Initial Studv This environmental determination is based on the attached biria] Study, and any comments received in response to the Notice of Initial Study. The report reflects the indepe:ldent judgme:1t of the Cit'j of Chula Vista, Ferche, information r~garding the e:wi,onmenta] re'¡iew of tilis project is available from the Chula Vista Planning and Building Department, 2ï6 Fourch Avenue, ChuJa Vista, CA 91910, -..- .' ~~/¡;J~~. Date: 5)3/01 Marilyn R, F, Ponseggi ' Environmental Review Coordinator -- J:\Planning'MAR.!AIlniria¡ StudyIIS,O3-O34Fina¡M:-<D.doc 4.u, 8 -----\ \, \.------- \ ~ \,/""\ -,-,-~:=--\ ' ' ~ II, \ I \~ ~(~" r'"\ ----- \, \ ., .~\ 'C:::;;/\, ,-. \/ ',I \ \ I, I \)-, '\ \, \,~I I '" ., ...\~--<-\/' '. IS~UTcS,"Y \. I....; ... ---,--~'~ '.,----1 ,~' SAe.iS,C:-;UP.C::..-----', -------.---- -- \-"----'\~ :.. \ \1 I" \~, ' . I ,- -- - \, ~~\ \ I,,"> C~",=-~ ~ ,V~ ""iI"," \ ,,"^~\ ~, "----I~ \' "~ \~ , , Ii' - ' I" \ '" ",,~"",-'- \ "II'" ~\ " ,..~' \ \. \\ II" I\\~' , \\ \, \ \ \ ' \ \~ " 'I. '. I ,I I I I \ , " '\ \, \'" ,,'. '" 1\', "0$- " \ "'----"', \ \', '., '. '\ ' \ ,j'~~~ ~- \ I VILLA',"R"'A ~ \-----\ \ 'Y----', .', ~~, \ APARTME:,r,s C~5 5' I \-----~ ""'--- ...--..-/-, , I \ I I I ,\ - ,\ " I ' '. \ "" I I , \ ~-,,',\I \ ~ :~~~ \1,"'11' ... '\1" 1"----\ ,~==\ 11\1' \/ æ'~\ 'I, ' IAP.AP..TMENTS, \ I~ ,::;; ~,~ ~\~ ~ý-',jJ- -----I 1:::..--\' I I~ /7'/... "'. " , :::=-\PHOJEC '~' " ~ '~ ",, . i\ I ~\ I j "\ '\ ).------ . ~U]CAll0fr\ \-,,>.-' I [--,~\ \ ... (,>~\ \....-. -í ~ "/--1',----,,' 1<;;'" '., ~ \ .~'" .' ---\ "---11 I" \..----\ VIVA, IiI' \æ 'd-!l'~ 1âê"c?H ~ 'd ~::;,¡,:" '\í,'~. , I, -=,~'J ' die' ICI....-----^. 1-;0 , -cl""- Iv' (p' '. '4 I () -,~~.~~~~:ø\~\~ \ æ ~o \~~\~~' r;:a. .~I :3Ç3 æ~ æ~ ê?/ y--, p, I ž' ,(", 'Z-' ,-----, ,., . VIL'~ \ \~\'6. " ~ I ,~ \ \ 6"----- \ SëV;CL= ~ .,j~ ' ~e.""~ '\ ~ ' HOME ~ CLUB , CENTER ~1 ' < ~~ \ I CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR P.RCJE,:T ?RCJE':T CE'CRlP7IC", ,. ø APPLiCANT, ?,;,'.R.US PL,".:.; INITIAL SïUDY ?RCJE.:;T ,ICC"""', 1::C."O:4 EF.CAC\"W ".eques!: Precise Pian fcr 30 ccnèc,"ir,iw"s, c' ',:sii. 3C=, I "'Le ,"\lee-, .,nd 5,5iJOsq It ci ¡:rciesslcnal offices, . . -. ' _'I I ~elated Case(s1: PC....\~4-JI, PCZ.O4-01 NORTH No S~s¡; IS-O3-03i i:'cc,¿C!lc'.lcC3¡crs\lccs:crsC~\lsC23~ ~"r C2.C~,è~ -oW'( ExhiþjJ A, .,~~;..~ I ¡-,'---- i.l, ~!.-, J' ;: 1i::J~ 'd-.-- 411)' - \ I:.V---",," -- ~ ~. . . , - t:.",'-"--~--- ':' . " - ." . D'¡ , ~,,:,----:--= 't<V-.: . ~~:::~:-="j--.";. Ii ~ . '. -. \' I , , . ¡ --,----- I ,ill . . I ii, '---,---- '. " . ", ; , , , 'f -----. 1i I . II ' ----.-----, '.' ':' " " --. Ii 'C,,'s ",VMOVO<JS !I! " ATTACHl'YlENT "A" MITIGATION MONITORlNG AND REPORTING PROGR.A.M (M?vlRP) Pharus Plaza -15-03-034 This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Prcgrao has been )Jrep~red by the City of Chula Vista ,. in conjunction with the proposed PQ~s Plaza project The proposèd project has been evalUê.ted in an 1,itial StudyfMitigated Negative Declaration prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State CEQA Guidelines (1S-03-034). The legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate mitigation measures are irnplerne:;ted and monitored for Mitigated Negative Declarations, AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts. The Mitigation Monitoring ,:and Reporting Program for this project ensures adequate implementation of mitigation for the following potential impacts(s): 1. Air Quality 2. Hazards and Hazardous Materials MONITORING PROGRAM Due to the nature of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinators shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator, and City Engineer of the City of Chula Vista. Tho:: applicant shall be responsible to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are met to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. Evidencè in written form conflIIDing compliance with the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration 1S-03-034 shall be provided by the applicant to the Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. The Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer "ill thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have been accomplished. ., . Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist, lists the mitigation measures contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Effects, of Mitigated Negative Declaration 1S-03-034, which will be implemented as part of the project. In order to determine if the applicant has implemented the measure, the method and timing of verification are identified, along with the City department or agency responsible for monitoring/verifying that the applicant has completed each mitigation measure. Space for the signature of the verifying person and the date of inspection is provided in the last column. J:lJ'lanning\MARlAllniri31 StudyIIS-Q;-Q34MMRPtoxt.doc .. 4-J' ~I ~ CI ~I " ~ ~ C, Õ ~ u .SI -, ~\ a \ ~i I 1 ~.J: .' \ ...t \ \ \ ~ ! tr \ \ \ \ \ " § õ i 2 L,'.~ ~ co ~ J J : < c'::: ~ ~ ~ ,"'C> "'0 ~ ~~ " ~.~ ,".~ '"~ ~§ ;: <-' ~ ,y ""e5 ôc§ ~C5 a:¡¡ ~~ ~ c< I~". In in In I~ u ~ HI I \ \ \ \ ~ "'~¡ \ \ \ \ ~ Õ.§ Hi >< >< >< x :< UJ g>~ cui ~ -'-.' ¡ \ \ \ \ \ ~ ~ ~ ~£]¡\ x x x:<- ~j. \ I I ~ 0 t: _c ~ ~ . 2 ' zoo <f) <f) <f) (jj co 0 ¡¡~ ~C ~e ~c ~e UC :;¡¡ ~ ~ ;; 6 -ß 6 -ß 6 -ß 6 -ß 6-ß z ::¡~ c,' e~ e~ e~ e~ =~ o~'. '" " "'" '" " '" " " " ¡:,). ¡¡:e ¡¡¡:E ¡¡:e ¡¡:c ¡¡:E (§ ""~o'CE,§ . ,£~g '£" -¡¡¡..; i;<i~ E~~g-g~ ! 2~~ e~ ~h~ H ~~ ~~~ §~_~n :;¡¡ i':'¡¡.ë'1P~ ~,,~.9~ gE~£§¡¡~~E~ ~d.~¡g'¡¡~ ~'~!J:5~~ .~:.,,'C-'C~ ".c."" u.-Eu~>-->- ",=>_'C~" .~'C-'C" ...¡¡g§-~8 ~;;~~5 Æê,-gem.~:¡¡::gE ~i-~-51ó~~ ~;:i!J.;,1Jê EÒ~:;;~ ~g.ce.:: .~Q;";;"jj.!!!~~'õ;g E<i!JE]'t:Ë -:õ'Ë"'ê:E . ~Eæ-~ø ;;;'C¡¡.¡¡o 5g>J!<i50~".5 ø,s;,;"È!J¡¡¡'" ~ß'ëJ1"~ .. :-~_'3¡¡:ØO> "'~3"-'" o,,8uEU'¡¡"8.~ .coe~ø'C'" ."'Ëü~E ~ g c.!! §:~ .¡¡ .E t'J ~ ~ ~ õ õ .; J! ~-" ~ ê ~ ~ ~.~ .H_:: n :; g .9 ~ j¡ ~ '" :;¿i!"m .!!2~c.'C :c"eo;-t'J~m"'c~ o;ø~=-¡¡;Q.U æ§1;'-.c!! ~ g~~o-~¡¡ '¡¡H~~ ~~5g~~;§~~:ê J5:;§¡¡'¡¡_si1 ::~:J5.§;; e "'0 -E 'C'-E"'. ",- .c-=-~-c" _",-e-e"' """'Xcë ° . gE::¡Se 2!~."jjU 'ëg>-æ::~Õ:¡¡g,õ -. 1.¡¡gg¡¡0¡¡ ~.g1J~ß= 'Ii 'Ë-êt;Eg ~~:!!"ß .§;:]~~tj,;¡¡:;.§§ ~'C;§2n~ ~.!1~=~~ .!? >-. -e¡: .",,=E=. 'iiig",~"""euc.=u ego;;",¡:!!"' c-§ " Eo.!!! ~ ~:g~:;;UJ ¿~~.¡¡~~ oê~~~~Hæ-~J5 EQ;~§~:;;~ '§~:~§,; ¡¡'uo.!!-" 0°"=>". """"c.-e.=o.>- c.'C"u]¡,,~ =".cu' i! I um mm mmmn nmn U\I\11 ~ ;¡:¡::ii%ii3 ð:S~E8~ E:::iEEæ£::E1ó: 8~:s8.'¡¡lg¡; ;¡:~ß¡;33> Hi õ= \ \ \ \ 4- t./ (J I I 0.1 :: . '"' 6 = ""' \'~ <'i -i \..-; \ -I .- . \ \ ;'; ;;¡ ~ ----=------ ~ t ~ ~ c: " '=1 ~ .. ~i :2' ~ , '. .§I :â '" ul . ~r . ..... '" 3 co I- ~ ,,~~~¿ ~æ1š.-g:;g .0 ~ æ-<3 c:: g: H'iii.5.:g g HH~~ ~-g g~g æ g ~$-E¡¡'§§ ;i .g'~§~';;'8 ¡: ë~mæ.2E ::¡ IE's ~:ä~ ::E -g:a~~š ~ ~ ~~~~!ê ~ ii.!18.!!ëi1i ~ ~-;ë" 15 æ ~ :;,..~ æ (J ¡¡; .= æ;~~g,1 or. ;:;; ~ ~~~ð~ c -;;~m-, -: ,,"I ~.g-g::¡ æ¡¡:;::!ô 4- t./ I C\ ~~~o"""' '" - ' « c.-- "'" ~ ~ ~ - ~\ ~ ~I ~ <¡;; ;\,,1 ~- ~!It- .~ E¡-',ìRO:-r"'Œ;'rIAL CHECKLIST F ORvI CHóLA ~ SïA 1. Name of Proponent: Carlos A. Madraza Pharos Development Group, LLC 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: Cit)'oLChuJa Vista ." Planning and Building Department 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 3. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 629 Third Avenue, Suite F Chula Vista, CA 91910 (619) 407-4014, ext. 12 4. Name of Proposal: Pharus Plaza 5. Date of Checklist: March 29,2004 6. Case No. : IS-03-034 El't,ìROl't~IENTAL A1'1ALYSIS Q1.1ESTIONS: Less Than Significont Potentially With Less Thon Issues: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incnrporoted Impact I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 II b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, 0 0 0 . but not limited to, tress, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing ~isual character or 0 0 II 0 quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of subst:mtial lig.'n or glare, 0 0 ÌI 0 which would adversely affect dly or nig.ÌJttime ~iews 4- c./ 2- 1 Less Th.n Potentj,lly Significant Less Thon With Issues: Significont Mitigotion Significant No Impoct Impoct Incorporoted Impoct in the areo.? Comments: a-b) Landscape treatments along.Broadway are proposed in a"ccordance with the City ofChula Vista Municipal Code and Montgòmery Specific Plan landscape and site architectural requirements and design review guidelines. These landscape improvements would ensure that aesthetic impacts to Broadway creo.te a positive image. The project site contains no sce:1ic vistas or views open to the public, and is not in proximity to a state scenic highway. c-¿) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Miti~ation: No mitigation m~åsures are required. II. AGRICULTUR.c\.L RESOURCES, Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Fannland, or 0 0 0 :II Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Fannland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California Resources A¥ency, to non-agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or 0 0 0 II a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, 0 0 0 a which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use? Cornm~nts: a-c) The project site is n.either in current agricultural production nor adjacent to property in agricultural production and.contains no agricultural resources or designated fannJand. Mitiaation: No mitigation measures are required. ill. AIR QVALlTY. Would Ù1e projeç:: 4-43 2 Less Than PotentiaUy Signm"nt Less Than Issues: With Significant Mitigation Signm"nt No Impact Impact Incorporated Impac' a) Conflict with or obs1ruct implementation of the 0 0 0 II applicable air quality plan? . - .. b) Violate any air quality standard"" or contnoute 0 D 0 0 substantial1y to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumuJatively considerable net 0 0 0 D increase of any criteria poUutant for which the project region is non-attamment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions, which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 iii 0 0 concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial 0 0 0 II number of people? Comments: a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Mitigation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F, IV.BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or 0 0 0 II" through habitat modifications, efi any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, er special slams species in local or regional pla.'1S, Folicies, or regulations, or by the California Department ofFish 4-.Jt/ 3 Less Thon Potentially Signir.cant Less Than Issues: With Signir.cant Mitigotion Signir.cont No Impa" Impact Incorporated Impact and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian 0 0 0 1'1 habitat or other se:1sitive natural community. " .. identified in local or regional. plans, policies, regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally 0 0 0 :J protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (includ;ng: but not lirrùted to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) throug:.}¡ direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any 0 0 0 D native resident or rrùgratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or rrùgratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native .. wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances - 0 0 0 D protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat 0 0 0 . Conservation Plan, Natural Community C;onservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? ~. 4- c/r- 4 Loss Th,n P,tentiolly Si~nifi"nt Less Th,n With Issues: Si;nifi"nt ;o.¡¡Ii~..;'n Signifi"nt '"" Imp'" Imp'oI lncorp""'ù Impoet Comments: a) T:.e project site .,..::.s ¡ore-,iously de'¡e!o¡oed ..,iÜI a mobile hcce ¡oark and C"cr:e:.tly one s::d] 'odd:;:; ccc:.:c:e: t~.~ SOUL\-¡ COQe-. of ù:e ;;rûpe;ry. Based L-pon the Chub Vis~ ),rscp S""ar~a :Olan, L'":e ~roiec: site is èesig::aœd a3 a èe-¡e!c¡oce-.,t a¡-~ç; based q::on a field ir~ectionby Cic:/ S""df,.r,o c,.,::ÒÒte, se:1siti'ie, cr s:;eclal s:.?rt:s s-peoies are prese::t wit.1-rin or ÍIr,¡r,ediately adjac=nt to the prO¡ODsed ¿eyelcpm<::1t area, Non-native wee::.s e:Ó¡ Gn the illlpaved portions of the project sire. b) Eased ucon the Chu]a Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and f:eld u,~~c:ion bv Cit'i st.:.,'f, no se::s::i':e :.,:-=:.1 coITIrnt!p:ities are present "iÙ1i.11 or irmndiate:y adjac""t to the ~rc~~c<:: èe':e¡oprn~:.t area, c) Based u¡oon the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and field ins¡.ect'.cn by City stafÎ, no wetla1'1ås are Fese::¡ within or immediately adjace;1t to the proposed development area. d) Based upon the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and field ins-çection by City staff, no native reside:ot cr r:jg:rawrj "iidhfe corridors or native ',;':è]jfe m=se:y sites e:c:s: .~'t~.:.-; cr :r:.:::~èl,.,tel:¡ c¿:'c~:.t to ~':e 7:~cs~è development area. e) };o b.ological resourc~s woulà be affected by the proposal and no comìic¡s ';vim local ¡oohoies or crd:;:mc~s protecting biological resources woulà result. f) The propDsal is consiste::!t "ith the Cnula Vista MSCP Sücareë. Pì,.,::! s;'"ce the project site is "it:-,L-:! t:te designated deveìopme:.t area purs=t to the Plan. iY!itization: Nò' rr~tig:tion measur~s are required. V. CGLTURALRESOlTRCES. Wouldtheprcject: a) Cause a substantial aàverse change in the 0 0 0 D significance of a historical resource as defined in State CEQA Guiàe1ines § 1506.+,5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 0 0 0 II significance of an arÒaeologica] resource pursuant to State C¥QA Guidelines § l506.+.5? c) Directly or indir~ctly d~stroy a unique 0 0 0 III paleontological resource or sj¡~ or unique geologic fòature" 4-"(, J LmThan Potenti3l1y SignióC3nt Less Th.. With Issues: Si:¡nmC3nt :'olitig3tion Si:¡nific3nt No I",pact Impact Incorpof3ted Impact d) Disturb any human remains, including those intem:d 0 0 0 a outside offorrnal cemeteries? -. -, - .' Comments: a) No historic resources are knovm or are expected to be present withi,1 the project impact area. Th,,-,e:cre, no substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defmed in Section 1506-\.5 is a.'1ticipated. b) Based on the level of previouS disturbance to the site associated with the development of a mobile home park and residences, and the reJatìvely minor amount of additional grading that would be necessary to cons;r~ct the proposed project, the potential for impacts to archaeological resources is considered to be less than signific2J1t. c) The project site is identified as an area of low potential for paleontological resources in the City's General Plan HR. Based on the leve] of previous disturbance to the site and the relatively minor amount of aèèi:ior.ol grading for the proposed project, the potential for impacts to paleont010gical resource or is considered to 1:e le" than significant. No unique geologic features are present on the site. d) No human remains:u:e anticipated to be present within the impact area of the project. Mitigation: Nomitigation measures are required. VI. GEOLOGY Ai,<ì) SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: i. Rupture of a mown earthquake fault, as 0 0 0 D delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo . Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State . Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence ora mown fault? ,- ii. Strong seismic ground shabng? 0 0 . 0 iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including 0 0 0 ¡¡ liquefaction? 4-41 < Less Thon Potentially Significant Less Than Issues: With Significant MitigJrion Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 0 I'iI 0 0 enviromnent through reasonably forese~able. .. upset and accident conditiçns involving the re1ease of hazardous materials into the enviromnent? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or 0 0 0 1.'1 acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mi)~. of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is incJuded on a list of 0 0 0 D hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the en,iromnent? e~ For a próject located within an airport land use 0 0 0 g plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard - for people residing or wor1ång in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private 0 0 0 II airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or wor1ång in the project area? g) .hnpair implementation of or physically interfere 0 0 0 II with an adopted emergency response plan or emerg~cy evacuation plan? .. h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of 0 0 0 II loss, injury or death invohing wildland fires, including where \,ildlands are adjaœnt to urbanized areas or where residences are intemrixed \,ith wildlands? ~-" tf s LmTh'n Potenti,lIy Significant Lm Th'n With Issues: Significant Mitigation Signific,nt ;;0 Impact Impact Incorporated Imp,ct Comments: Se~ Mitigated Negative Dec1aration, Se:tion E. l\ !hi:!ation: Se~ Mitigated Negative Dec1aration, Section F. .',- " VITI. HYDROLOGY Al'iD WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Result in an increase in po11utant discharg~s to 0 0 !3 0 receiving waters (including,}mpaired water bodies pursuant to the Clean Water:Act Section 303(d) list), result in significant alteration of receiving water quality during or fo11owing construction, or violate any water quality standards or waste discharge requirements? b) Substantia11y deplete groundwater supplies or 0 0 iii 0 interfere substantia11y with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the Iocal groundwater table Ievel (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a level which wou]d not support - existing Iand uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? ResuIt in a potentia11y significant adverse impact on groundwater quality? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 0 D II 0 site or area, inducting through the alteration of the course of a stre:ml or river, in a manner, which would resuJt in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the -' 0 0 D 0 site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stre:ml or river, substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site, or place structures within a lOa-year flood h=rd area which 4-t./l:J 9 Less Th3n Potentially Significant Less Than Issues: With Significant Mitigation Significant No Imp3" Impa.: Incorp°r31c'¡ Imp"t would impede or redirect flood flows? e) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of 0 0 0 kl loss, injury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure ~f,~ levee or àam? f) Create or contribute ronoff water, which wou1d 0 0 0 1.'1 exceed the capacity of existing or planned stOITIlwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? --- Comments: See Mitigated Negahvè Declaration, Section E. ì'vlitigation: No mitigation measures are required. IX. LA.l\ID USE A.1\¡"D PLA.J""'NING. Would the project: a) Physically diVide an established community? 0 0 0 11 b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or 0 0 II 0 regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation 0 0 0 II plan or natural community conservation plan? 4-~~ 10 Less Than Potentiolly Significant LmThan With Issues: Significont Mitigation Significont No Impa" Impact Incorporated Impact Comments: a) Tr.e proposed commercial projeçt would be cor.siste:Jt with the charac:e-: of the surrounding area and, tl:e:<:.:ore, would not disrupt or di;ide an es1:!blished community. b) --- Tne projeçt site is withID the CT:_lfnoroug.11fare CommerciallPrecise Plan) Zone a.-::d MCO (Mercar.tiJe and Office Commercial) area wiû'lln the Montgome-:.¡ Spedfic Plan and designated CR (Re:aiì Commercial) under tr.e Ge:1eral Plan. The proposed project would be consiste:1t "'1m the applicable zoning regulations under t!:e pro¡:osed CCP (Central CornmerciallPrecise Plan) zone. c) Tne project would not conflict wim any applicable adopted environmental plans or ¡:olicies. Furth=ore, me project would not encroach into or indirectly affect me Habitat Preserve area of me adopted Chula Vista ~[SCP Subarea Plan. -- l'rIitigation: No mitigation measures are required. X. "-ITh'ERAL RESOURCES. Would me project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral 0 0 0 D resource that would be of value to t1¡e region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally 0 0 0 I!I important mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific pl3I1 or other land use plan? Cornnients: a) The proposed project would not reS'Jlt in the loss of availability of a kno\;TI mineral resource of ','olue ¡o t'1e region or the residents of the State of California. - b) Pursuant to me Environmental Impact Report for the City of Chula Vista Gen=l Plon, Ü,e State of C~1ifoIT~~ Departme:1t of Conservation has not desig!'.ated me project site for mineral resçmrce proteo:ion. .- l'rIitigation: No mitigation measures are required. 4-S1 11 Less Thon Potentially Significant Less Than Issues: With Significant M;¡¡gotion Significant No Impact Impact Incorporalod Impact Xl. l'iOlSE. Would the project result in: a) Exposur~ ofpmons to or generation of noise levels 0 0 a 0 in excess of standm'ds established in the local - .. . - - general pbn or noise ordina~c.e, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Ex¡:osure of persons to or generation of excessive 0 0 0 C groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels? c) A subst:mtia1 permanent in'ð:ease in ambient noise 0 0 a 0 levels in the project vicinity above levels existing "ithout the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in 0 0 B 0 ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan 0 0 0 II or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within two roi1es of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working - in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, 0 0 0 1'1 would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? -. 4 -~:L 12 -- LmTh3n PotcnH311y SignifiC3nt Les, Th3n With Issues: SignifiC3nt Mitig3tion Signific3nt No Impoet Impact Incorporated Imp3ct Comments: a, c and d) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. b) It is not anticipated that persons will be exposed to excessive g:coundbome ,ibration or noise levels, as the-.e ,viil not be any heavy industrial equipm~nt or machinery operated on-sife beyond short-term construction acti,ites. e) Tœ project is not located within an airport land use plan nor within two miles of a public airport or pubEc use airport; therefore, the project would not expose people working on-site to excessive noise levels. f) The project is not located within the vicinity of a private amtrip; therefore, the proposed development would not expose people working on-site to excessive noise levels. Mithation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F. XlI. POPULATION At'ID HOUSL'iG. Would the project: a) Induce substantial popuJation g:cov.1h in an area, 0 0 iii 0 either directly (for :exarnpJe, by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example, through extension of road or other infrastructure)? b) DispJace substantiaJ numbers of existing housing, 0 0 0 II necessitating the construction of replacement - housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, 0 0 0 II necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: a-c) Based upon the size and nature of the proposal, no significant population displacement or population g:cowth inducement is anticipated. Although existing housing would be displaced, the proposal would result in a net ;r,cre~e in housing. ]\litigation: No mitigation measures ¡¡re required. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project: 4_5".3 13 Less Thon Potontblly Significont Lm Thon With Issues: Significont Mitigotion Significont No Imp'ct Impoct Inc"p"OIcd Imp'c! Resu1t in subst:Jntial adve;se physical impacts associated \vith the pro\ision of new or physically altered govemrnent:Jl facilities, need for new or physically altered govemment:JI facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environme:¡¡;Ü impacts, in orde;- ' ., .',' ,- to maint:Jin accept:Jble service ratios;,resr-onse times or other performance objeçtives for anypubEc services: a. Fire protection? 0 0 0 :2 b. Police protection? 0 0 0 r;¡¡ .-' 0 !1 c. Schools? 0 0 d. Parks? 0 0 0 ¡¡ e. Other public facilities? 0 0 0 ]3 Comments: a) According to the Fire Department, adequate fjre protection services can continue to be provided to the site without an 'increase of personnel; however, the installation of a fue hyàrant on-site is required. Tne Fire Department's estimated time of arrival is 'Within 5 minutes. The applicant is required to submit plans fer a f.::e sprinkler system prior to building construction, to comply with the Fire Deparonent policies for new bcilding cons1ruction. The proposed project would not have a- significant effect uJxm or result in a need for ;:e'N or altered fue protection services. The City performance objectives and thresholds will continue to be met. b) According to the police Deparonent, adequate police protection services can continue to be provided upon completion of the proposed project. Tne proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or res-JÌt in a need for substmtial new or altered police protection services. The City performance objectives and thresholds will continue to be met. c) The proposed project would not induce population growth; therefore, no significant adverse impacts to public schools would result. Furthennore, the applicant would be required to pay the statutory building permit schooJ fees for the proposed commercial office space and residential development. d) The proposal would not induce population growth and thus would not create a sÜmific:mt dem:L"1d for neighborh~d or regional parks or faciliTIes. -. - e) The proposed projeçt would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or e."( )anded governmental ser;ices :md would continue to be served by existing public infr:ls:ructure. , 4-.rl H .- Less Thon Potcntiolly Sig~~~~onl Less Thon Issues: Signifieont :l<litigonon Signifieont No Imp": Imp oct Ineorporoled Impoet XIV. RECREATIO;-;. Would the project: a) Increase the use of exisring neighborhood and 0 0 0 111 regional parks or other recreational facilities such: . - that substantial physical deterior.:tion of the faciE!)' . - would occur or be accelefilted? b) Does the project inc1ude recreational facilities or 0 0 0 Ð require the cons1ruction or expansion of recreational facilities, which have an adverse physical effect on the environment? . :.;- Comments: a) Because the proposal is sman, it would not induce significant population growth and thus not create a significant demand for neighborhood or regional parks or facilities, or alter or deteriorate e:Òti::g recreational facilities in the area. b) The project does not inc1ude the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. According to the Parks and Recreation Element of the General Plan, the project site is not planned for any future parks and recrenticn facilities or programs. Miti!!ation: No mitigation measures are required. XV. TRANSPORTATION / TR\FFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in 0 0 . 0 relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either th.e number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at- intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level 0 0 Ò . of service standard est::lblished by the county congestion management agency for designated roads 4-~ 15 Less Thon Pot,nriolly Signincon"t Less Thon Issues: With Signin.ont Mitigorion Signin..nt No Impo" Impo" In.orporol,d Import or highways? c) Re;u]t in a change in air traffic patterns, including 0 0 0 t1 either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial~safety risks? d) Substantial1y increase hazards due to a design 0 0 0 ß feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatJ"ble uses (e.g., fann equipment)? .. e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 0 0 0 11 f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 0 0 a [] g) Conflict ""ith adopted policies, plans, or programs 0 0 0 D supporting a1tematlve transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Comments: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E, MitÏ!!ation: No mitigation measures required. XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the 0 0 0 II , applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? - b) Require or result in the construction of new water or 0 0 0 a wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant emiromnental effects? c/-~f. 16 LmThan Pot.ntially Sig~~~ant Loss Than Issues: Significant Miti"'ion Significant :"0 Imp", Impact Incorporated Impact c) Require or result in the construction of new storm 0 0 0 a water drainage facilities or expansion of existing f¡¡ciEties, the construction of which could cause signiñcant environmental effect.s'f~ - . - d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the 0 0 0 ¡:¡¡ project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment 0 0 0 ¡a provider, which series or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landñ11 with sufficient permitted 0 0 II 0 capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and 0 0 . 0 regulations related to soEd waste? 4-$"7 17 Less Thon Potcntiolly Signifieont Less Thon With Issues: Signifieont Mitigotion Signifieont No Impoet Impoet Ineorporotoù Impoet Comments: a) The project site is located within an urban area that is served by all necessarj utilities and se--..ice systems. No exceedance of wastewater requirements of the Regional Water Qualirj Control Boarà woulà resu1t from the proposed project . - b) , See XVI.a. No construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or the expansion of existing facilities woulà be necessary. c) 1'io construction of new sto= drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities woulà be neoessë.:;/. d) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater Authority. Pursuë.nt to correspondence from the ~?,eetwater Authority, the project may be serviced from existing potë.bJe water mains. No new or expand¿'èlenÙlements would be necessary to serve the proposed project e) See XVI.a. and b. f) The City of Chula Vista is served by regional landfills with adequate capacirj to meet the solid waste needs of the region in accordance with State law. g) The proposal would comply 'With federal, state anà local regulations related to solid waste. MitÌ!!ation: No mitigation measures are required. Xvil. THRESHOLDS Will the proposal adversely impact the City's Threshold Standards? A) Librarv 0 0 0 D The City shall cons1rUct 60,000 gross square feet (GSF) of additional library space, over the June 30, 2000 GSF total, in the area east of Interstate 805 by buildout :me construction of said facilities shall be phased suéh that the City will not fall below the city- .. wide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000 population, Library facilities are to be adequately equipped and staffed. 4 - ~-r 13 Less Thon Potentially Significant LmThon Issues: With Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact B) P01ice 0 0 IJ 0 a) Emergency Response: Properly equipped and s'.affed poJice urjts shall respond to 81 percent of "Priority One" emergency calls within seven (7) minutes and maintaL'1 an average response time to all "Priority One" emergency calls of S.5 minutes or less: b) Respond to 57 percent of "Priority Two" urgent calls within seven (7) minutes and maintain an average response time to all "Priority Two" calls of 7.5 minureë or Jess. C) Fire and Emergencv Medica1 -.-=--. 0 0 a 0 Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fITe and medical units shall respond to calls throughout the Cit'j within 7 minutes in 80% of the cases (measured annually). D) Traffic 0 0 D 0 The Threshold Standm'ds require that all intersections must operate at a Level of serVice (LOS) "C" or better, "ith the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D" may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections. Signalized intersections west ofI-80S are not to operate at a LOS below their 1991 LOS. No intersection may reach LOS "E" or "F" dur'.ng the average weekday - peak hOUT. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this Standm'd. E) Parks and Recreation Areas 0 0 0 . The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres .,of neighborhood and community parkJand with appropriate facilitiesJ1,000 population east ofI-80S. F) Draina~e ~- 0 0 ø 0 The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standm'ds. Individual projects "i11 provide ne<:essary improvements consistent "ith the Drainage Master Planes) and City EngiJ1e::ring StJn6rds. 4-S"'} 19 Less Thon Potentiolly Si;nifico;¡t Lm Thon Issues: With Significont Mitigotion Significont No Impoct Impoct Incorporotcd Impoct G) Sewe-: 0 0 m 0 The Tnreshold Standards require that sewage flows and. .. volurr.es not exceed City Engineering Standards. .' Individual projects win provide nece~šary improvements consiste:¡t with Sewer Master Planes) and City Engineering Standards. H) Woter D D !11 D The Tnreshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatme:¡t, and transmission fàçi1ities are constructed concurre:¡tly with planned growth and that water quality standards are not jeopardized during growth and constmction. AppJicants may also be required to participate in whatever water conservation or fee offset program the City of Olula Vista has in effect at the time of building pemrit iSsuarlce. .' .. c/-' 0 20 Less Th.. Potcnti,Jly Significoni Lm Tn,n Wit" Issues: Significont Mitig,tion Significont No Imp", Imp,et Ineorpo"tcd Imp,et Comments: a) ~;a adverse impact to the City's Libr:;r; Tnr~s~cld s=dords wodd OC~'-lr os a :~:u!t ofth, ,,:posed Foje".:. b) Þ.s~Gr¿¡¡lg to the Police Depa:tn:e:Jt, adequo" police proteo::ion so-"ices con conti,'lue to te pro\ided qcn c~:::pleticn of the proposed project. Tile ¡:reposed mL"{ed use projéctwould not have a si?iDC:mt effect '-'pc: or result in a need for substantial'new or altered police protection services. No adverse impact to the City's Po:lce Threshold standards would OCO'J as a reS"~lt of the proposed project. c) Þ,ccording to the Fire Department, adequate [ITe protection and e:nerg":1cy medical se-.,ices c:m be pro\ièed to 'h~ s;:~. T~e Fire Stltians thot ';dl pro',ièe 50-.,"ses to '_'oe ;:r~posed ¡OFjec: 0:-, ~ "::OI:: ; :< 5 \\iu1 estimated t:¡;e of arrivals from 3-5 minutes. TIle proposed project would not have a signiiic;)J::t effes: upon or result in a need for new or altered fire protection ser,ices. No adverse impact to the City's Fìrô ""¿ Emergenc;' ¡"!e~icol Tnreshold standards would DC.Cur as a result of the proposed project. d) Þ_ccording to the Tramc Engineering Section, wÜh the addition of projected ge:;erated traffic, ail roadway segments and intersections within the study area are estimated to continue to operate at !eve] of service "c" or better in compliance with the City's Traffic Threshold St""dards, e) Because the project site is located wes: ofL-nerstate 805, this Tnreshold Stanèarè is not appiicabJe. 1) A drninage study will be prepored in conjunction with the [mal gradi..-¡g and irnprove:::e::t plans and drai..-¡age facilities desi<med iIi- accordance wiu1 the Drainage Moster Planes) and Citv Eré.nee-'.2~ s"'-'1dards \\il1 be ir,s+called at fue time of site development. Tne applicant proposes new ~d i;'proved- drainage facilites incorporated within the proje".t site. No adverse impacts to the City's stonn drainage sySle:n or City's Drainage Threshold standards will occur as reS"~lt of the proposed project. g) Tne sewer facilities serving the project site consist 1)f two 8-inch sewer mains ="'1ing southerly aìoI:g Broadway. The Engi.neering Division has detemrined that these facilities are adequate to serve the proposed project. No new sewer facilities are anticipated to be required and no adverse impactS to the City's Sewer Threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project. h) Pursuant to correspondence received from the Sweetwater Authority, dated August 6, 2003 and March 19, 2004, there is an 8-inch water main 10cated on east side of Broadway and there are currently two dooestic water services cUITently serving the project site, As noted in the March 19, 2004 letter ptoject impacts to the Authority's storage, treatment, and transmission facilities would be less than significant. - -. . <f-fÞ/ 21 Less Th3n Pot,nti3l1y SignifiC3nl Less Th3n With Issues: Significonl Milig3tion Significont No Imp3tt Imp3ct Incorpo'"tcd Imp3ct XVIII. ìvL~.l'...l)ATORY FI~l)L."GS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the 0 0 0 II quaJity of tl1e environment, substantidly reduce the . habitat of a fish or v.ildlife spec!es, cause a fish or wi!dJife population to drop be!ow self-sustaining !evels, threaten to eliminate a p!ant or aruma! community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered p!ant or animal or eJiminate important examp!es of the major periods of CaJifornia history or prehistory? .. b) Does the project have impacts that are individuany 0 0 II 0 limited, but cumulative!y considerable? ("Cumu1ative1y considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerab!e when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current project, and the effects ofprobab1e future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which 0 0 a 0 win cause substantial' adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? Comments: a) The project site is located within an established urbanized area, and is within the designated deve!òpment area of the adopted Chu!a Vista MSCP Subarea Plan. There are no known sensitive plant or animal species or cultura1 resources on the site. b) A5 descn"bed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, significant direct project impacts would be mitigated to be!ow a leve! of significance through the required mitigation measures. No curnuJatively considerable impacts associated with the project when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, other current projects and probable future projects have been identified and none are contemplated. c) See the "Hazards and Hazardous Materials" and "Air ~aJity" discussions in Section E of the ìvIitigated Negative Declaration; an identified potential impacts would be mitigated to below a level of significance. ~ 4-1&, 2- 22 XIX. PROJECT REVISlOl'iS OR lYllTIGATION MEASURES: Project mitigation measures are contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts, and Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, of Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-O3-034. :x.X. AGREEMENT TO ThlPLE;V!El'iT MITIGATION MEASURES By signing the line(s) provided below, ¡ile Appiicant and/or OperatPr S¡jpuJate that they have each read, understood and have their respectivè. company's authority to arid dó agree to the mitigation measures contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator. Failure to sign below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative Declaration with the County Clerk shan indicate the Applicant and/or Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval and that the Applicant and/or Operator shaH apply for an Environmental Impact Report. -:Pi{MU'.:> J;::çú¡:L.Oí'~ÑI btt&Jp L.\.c.. (4/lí.Q":, MA'\':fl..AZO Printed Name and Title of Applicant (or authorized representative) 3);z'ljO/ Date Printed Name and Title of Operator (if different from Applicant) Signature of Operator Date ,', (if different from Applicant) po '0 1- '-.3 ~. -.) XXI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTE"'~L~LL Y AFFECTED: The e:l'Iironmental factors checked below would be pote:nia11y affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Pote:1tially Significant Un1ess Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the previous pages. 0 Land Use and Planning OTransportationlTrafñc 0 Public Services 0 Population and Housing 0 Biological Resources ..0 Uti1ities and Service Systems 0 Geophysical 0 Énergy and Mineral 0 Aesthetics Resources 0 Agricultural Resources 0 Hydrology/Water ill Hazards and Hazardous 0 Cultural Resources Materials II Air Quality .p Noise 0 Recreation 0 Paleontological 0 Mandatory Findings of Significance Resources -. 4 -foe¡ 24 x..'Œ. DETE~"IIl'!ATION: On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the 0 environment, and a Negative Declaration win be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the B environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have b,en lldded to the project. A Mitigated Negative Dec!aration wj ] be prepared. I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment, 0 and an Environmental Impact Report is required. I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but 0 at least one effect: 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earJier document pursuant to appJicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as deSçribed on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentia11y significant impacts" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An Emironmental Impact Report is required, but it must ana1y:.e only the effects that remain to be addressed. 0 I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because a11 potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR. pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. An addendu:n has been prepared to provide a record of this detell11ination. M~~~ta~~. 5/3/01 Date/ Environmental Review Coordinator City ofChula Vista -. J:lJ'lanning\MARIA\lnitial StudyIIS-O3-o34CheckliSt.doc 4-tø~ 25 ATTACHMENT 7 DAVE FIELD JR 1036 Jefferson Ave. Chula Vista. Ca 91911 (619)691-5911 sdmobius@juno.com April 26, 2004 City ofChula Vista Planning and Building Dept. 276 Fourth Ave. Chula Vista, Ca 91910 Attn: Jeff Steichen .. Case Number: DRC 04-40 Mr. Steichen. This lecter is in response to the proposed Pharus Plaza project to be located at 1030-1034 Broadway. Here are several concerns regarding the proposed project: 1. Height of buildings ftom current residential properties to the Westside of proposed project. 2. Building setback ftom residential properties to the West. 3. High density of proposed project for already congested urban area. 4. School impact for Harborside Elementary 4. Parking overflow from residents onto Broadway and adjacent side streets. Property owners quality of life to the Wests ide of the project will be adversely affected. Some type of design change is needed for the noise, congestion and visual intrusion this will be to residents who live next to and around this proposed project. Please feel ftee to contact if you have any additional questions or comments. Sincerely, Dave Field Jr. (6l9)691-5911/~ . '.. - ~.~ ~ ~- Go (. ~,~ , ATTACHMENT 8 ~ ::: Planning & Building- Department cm OF Planning Division I Development Processing (HUlA VISTA APPLICATION APPENDIX 8 Disclosure Statement Fursuant to Council Folicy 101-01, prior to any action upcn matters that will require discretioner¡ action by the Council, Flanning Ccmmission and ail other official bodies of the City, a statameRt of-disclosure of certain cwnership cr financial . . interests, payments, or campaisn contributicns fcr a City cf Ceula Vista .èiecticn must be filed. ¡ce follcwins ir.fcrmaiion . must be disclosed: . 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the applicaticn cr the contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. :PHAf2U:;' ])"J~e"f\.lT fÓ1w p .. 2. If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of ail individuals with a $2000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity. Cl'lI1..u:>" N. Ai)tl ",",z,o /..l.tiï Poo,tJe-as I J..JIW ì='. MA-'Ua.,q.-ZO a¡r",~ìI4l¡J? .u.A-Da..¡::;~o 3. If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or trust, list the names of any perscn serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustcr of the trust.. 4. Please identify every person, including any agents. employees, consultants, or independent contractcrs ycu have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. Jo~~ A-l~{1..û¡ cllL.. ("A1'\..(..()";. A-IADiU\7.D 5. Has any person' associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an officiai" of the CitY of Chula Vista as it relates to this contract within the past 12 months. Yes V No- Jó$t. AL.~""2..D r J{2... If Yes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the offioial- may have in this contract. "DEsI,GN CON" WL.. "t"A-AJï - 6. Have you made a contribution of more than $250 within the past twelve (12) months to a current member cf the Chula Vista City Council? No VYes_lfyes, which Council member? : 4 -Go 7 2i6 Fcurth .\venue I Chuia Vista I Caliiarnia I 91910 (61916,:-5101 ~Ift- ~ I a n i & B u i I d i ::: p n n g n g D e p a rtment CITY OF PIJnnin~ Division I Deve!opment Processing (HULA. VISTA AFFLICATION AFFENDIX B Disclosure Statement - Fage 2 7. i-'.a'/e ycu provided more than $340 (cr an item cf e<:~i'/~le,.¡ '/ai~e) tc an cmcial'" cf the Citj of Chula Vista in the past tNelve (12) months? (ïhis indudes being a scurce cf incGrne;rncney to retire a le,;al debt. gift, Ican, etc.) Yes- ~Io~.: . ' If Yes, which official'" and what was the nature of item provided? Date: "1/1/0'/ aLJ~ Signature cf ~3n¡ y~¡<:., .'JFlf",1.J..,""lj./-=I-.J"T &'2æP Frint cr tjpe name of Ccntractor/.A.pplicant . Fer30n is defined as: any individual. firm, cG-~artnership, joint venture. association, social cleb. ;;:;terc.al org:;nization. corporation, estate, trust, re<:aiver. syndicate, any other caunty, c'ty, municipaiity, district, or ether pclitical subdivision. -or any other group or combination acting as a unit. .. Official indudes. but is not limited to: Mayor, Counc:1 member, Flanning Commissioner, Member of a bcard, commission. or committee of the Cll-j, employee, or staff members. .. ¿¡-G:.i' èï6 Fourth .~venue ChulJ VistJ I CJliforniJ I 919' 0 (6191 6~1-5'Ol ORDINANCE NO. ~ ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHUlA VISTA ADOPTING THE NEGATIVE DEClARATION (IS- 03-034) AND AMENDING THE ZONING MAP ESTABLISHED BY SECTION 19.18.010 OF THE MUNICIPAL CODE, REZONING A 1.2 ACRE PARCEL LOCATED AT 1030/1034 BROADWAY FROM THE CTP (THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL, PRECISE PLAN) ZONE TO THE CCP (CENTRAL COMMERCIAL, PRECISE PlAN) ZONE AND ADOPTING PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS I. RECITALS A. Project Site WHEREAS, the area af land, which is the subject of this ordinance is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference, ond for the purpose of general description herein consist of one acre located at 1030/1034 Broodwoy ("Project Site or Site"); and B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval WHEREAS, on July 25, 2003, a Rezone application was filed by Carlos Madrazo ("Developer") with the Planning and Building Department of the City of Chula Vista requesting an amendment to the adopted Zoning map or maps established by Section 19.18.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code in order to rezone a 1.2-acre parcel located at 1030/1034 Broadway from CTP, Thoroughfare Commercial/Precise Plan to CCP, Central Commercial/Precise Plan with precise plan standards that would allow a mixed-use project that includes 30 condominium units and 5,000 office building reductions in setbacks and allowonce for 4 shared parking spaces ("Project"); and C. Prior Approvals WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee held an advertised public hearing on the project on May 17, 2004, at 4:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue and, after hearing staff presentation and public testimony, voted 3-0-1-1 to recommend thot the City Council approve the Project, in accordance with the findings listed below; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project on June 16, 2004, and after hearing staff presentation and public testimony, voted 7-0 to recommend that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-03-034) and approve the Rezone and Precise Plan in accordance with the findings listed below; and D. Planning Commission Record on Application WHEREAS, the Planning Department set the time and place for a hearing on said Project, and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a 4-6, if Ordinance No. - Page 2 newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 ft. of the exterior boundary of the Project, at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project on June 16, 2004, ot 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue and, after hearing staff presentation and public testimony, voted 7-0 to recommend that the City Council approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Rezone and Precise Plan, in accordance with the findings listed below; and WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at the public hearing on the Project held on June 16, 2004, and the minutes and resolution resulting there from, are hereby incorporated into the record 01 these proceedings; and E. City Council Record on Application WHEREAS, the City Council held an advertised public hearing on the Project on July 20, 2004, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue and, alter hearing staff presentation and public testimony, the City Council voted - to adopt and approve the Mitigated Negative Declaration (15-03-034), Rezone and Precise Plan in accordance with the findings listed below; and WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project applications and notices of said hearings, together with its purposes given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 It. 01 the exterior boundaries of the Project site at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and F. Discretionary Approval of Ordinance WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing on the Rezone and Precise Plan was held before the City Council of the City of Chula Vista to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to the same. II. The City Council of the City Chula Vista does hereby ordain as follows: A. Certification of Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has determined that the proposed project was adequately covered in Mitigated Negative Declarotion (15-03-034). The City Council has reviewed and considered Negative Declaration (15-03-034) and finds that no further environmental review or documentation is necessary. B. Independent Judgment of the City Council The City Council does hereby find that in the exercise of their independent review and judgment, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring ond Reporting Program (15-03-034) in the form presented have been prepared in accordance with the requirements 01 the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA 4-70 Ordinance No. Page 3 Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (15-03-034). C. Precise Plan Findings 1. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particulor 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. The proposed precise plan standards will not have a negative impact on the surrounding neighborhood. While such standards allow the necessory flexibility to creote a project which is more urban and pedestrian oriented, they also insure that a mixed use project will maintain the continuity of the surrounding existing commercial and residential development. Such standards will also allow the necessary flexibility in development standards necessary to minimize the mass or structures, as visible from surrounding areas, by providing room for adequate open space/courtyard areas between buildings on-site. 2. That such plan sotisfies the principle for application of the "P" modifying district as set forth in CVMC 19.56.041. Section 19.56.041 (C) provides for the application of the "P" modifying district if the basic or underlying zone regulation does not allow the property owner and/or city appropriate control or flexibility needed to achieve an efficient and proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent zone. Because the project is surrounded by a combination of existing commercial and residential uses, one of the criteria used to determine the preferred design of the project has been to insure that the commercial portion of the project was situated adjacent to commercial uses and the residential portion was most adjacent to existing residential uses. 3. That any exceptions gronted which may deviate from the underlying zoning requirements shall be warranted only when necessary to meet the purpose and application of the Precise Plan. Development of the lot using the development standards of the CC and R3 zone would limit the ability of the applicant to propose a design which aJ meets the goal of providing an urban, pedestrian oriented design and b) configure the placement of the office and residential uses on the site in a way that provides a natural extension of the established separation on adjacent parcels between commercial and residential land uses and also provides for additional open space and pedestrian walkways between buildings in order to reduce the bulky appearance of the mixed use project. The requested deviations under the precise plan are warranted in order to achieve these goals. 4-71 Ordinance No. - Page 4 4. The approval 01 this plan will conform to the General Plan and the adopted policies of the City Of Chulo Visto. The project has been evaluated in accordance with the goals and objectives of Chapter 10, Section 5.9 of the General Plan relative to mixed-use development along Broadway. The Precise Plan, as described, will allow the project to be consistent with the goals and objectives of the General Plan, Southwest Redevelopment Area Plan and the Chula Vista Municipal Code. D. The rezoning provided for herein is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan, public necessity, convenience and the general welfare and good zoning practice support the omendment to the Municipal Code. E. The City Of Chula Vista Zoning Map established by Section 19.18.010 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code is hereby amended to rezone the site as depicted in Exhibit "B" from CTP (Thoroughfare Commercial, Precise Plan) to CCP (Central Commercial, Precise Plan). F. The Precise Plan Standards as depicted in Exhibit "C" are hereby adopted and are supported by the required findings (CVMC Section 19.56.041, as outlined in section lite) above. III. EFFECTIVE DATE. This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. Presented by Approved as to form by Do-- ? l-4~'fop. James D. Sandoval Ann Moore Planning and Building Director City Attorney 4-72... -------- '~ \ \ ~ ~ ~~/ . <'.' ~ .. .. ' . "". " .~ c:,'¡ . \ \.-----,' :¿. . ""O00 ;::7, /~~~ ~,' - ----" /" ~ . ---- .. ~ ../ ::----/ ~~\~~ ---- ." '\ ......' \ ~ \ \ " ./"' \ \.~., ' \""'~ \ \ ,\ \ . "I,'" ~ \ \~t;.",,\"\ \ c.' \ ..~\~ \ \ ~.'\' /'-..../ " '. ~" .' R.tcH \ 0 \ ,0uO<; , Cant., C ~ PeorT,e. ~ \ ~ ~\ A¡:orrmems ~ ' ~.. \ \. \ '~/\ \ \' \ \/~, LOCATOR 4-73 EXHIBIT A EXHIBIT B EXHIBIT C PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS Modified CC/R3 District Standards PARKING Shared Parking allowance: The on-site parking requirement in this precise plan area shall be reduced by four (4) parking spaces. These four spaces will be considered "shared parking" with four of the required office/commercial parking spaces. Said four spaces must be in a location available for guests of the residential units during off-peak hours for accompanying businesses. Compact Parking Spaces: The maximum amount of compact parking spaces is 21 % of total required parking spaces (instead of 10%). SETBACKS Office/Commercial: Front Yard: 3 feet (single story arcade) 8 feet (two story building) Residential: Side Yard: If Ad¡acent to Commercial 5 '12 feet If Ad¡acent to R- 1 10 feet Rear Yard: For Building 15 feet For Balcony 13 feet ~-7~ RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING SPECIAL USE PERMIT (SUPS 04-07) FOR A MIXED-USE RESIDENTIAL AND OFFICE COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT LOCATED AT 1030/1034 BROADWAY WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA I. RECITALS A. Project Site WHEREAS, the area of land, which is the subject of this ordinance is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference, and for the purpose 01 general description herein consists 01 1.3 acres located ot 1030/1034 Braadway ("Project Site"); and B. Project; Applications lor Discretionary Approval WHEREAS, on April 23, 2004, a special use permit application was filed by Carlos Madraw ("Developer") with the Planning and Building Department 01 the City 01 Chula Vista requesting a special use permit to construct and operate a mixed-use praject that includes 30 condominium units, 5,000 square leet 01 office, and reductions in setbacks and parking requirements ("Project"); and C. Prior Approvals WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee held an advertised public hearing on the project on May 17,2004, at 4:30 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue and, after hearing staff presentation and public testimony, voted 3-0- 1 - 1 to recommend that the Redevelopment Agency approve the proposed Project, subject to" the conditions contained herein; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project on June 16, 2004, and alter hearing staff presentation and public testimony, voted 7-0 to recommend that the Redevelopment Agency consider and adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-03-034) and approve the Project in accordance and subject to the lindings and conditions listed below; and D. Planning Commission Record on Applications WHEREAS, the Planning Department set the time and place lor a hearing on said Project, and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in 0 newspaper 01 general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 It. 01 the exterior boundary 01 the Project, at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; ond WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project on June 16, 2004, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue and, 4-"7fÞ RDA Resolution No. Page 2 after hearing staff presentation and public testimony, voted 7-0 to recommend that the Redevelopment Agency consider and adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-03-034) ond approve the Project in accordance and subject to the findings and conditions listed below; and WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at the public hearing on the Project held on June 16, 2004, and the minutes and resolution resulting there from, are hereby incorporated into the record of these proceedings; and E. Redevelopment Agency Record on Applications WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency held an advertised public hearing on the Project on July 20,2004, at 6:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue and, after hearing staff presentation and public testimony, the Redevelopment Agency voted - to adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-03-034) and approve the Project in accordance and subject to the findings and conditions listed below; and WHEREAS, the Clerk for the Redevelopment Agency set the time and place for the hearing on the Project applications and notices of said hearings, together with its purposes given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 1,000 ft. of the exterior boundaries of the Project site at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing. II. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the Redevelopment Agency does hereby find, determine and resolve as follows: A. Certification of Compliance with California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has determined that the proposed project was adequately covered in Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-03-034), previously adopted by the City Council. The Redevelopment Agency has reviewed and considered Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-03-034) and finds thot no further environmental review or documentation is necessary. B. Independent Judgment of Redevelopment Agency The Redevelopment Agency does hereby find that in the exercise of their independent review and judgment, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-03-034) in the form presented have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-03-034). C. SPECIAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS 4-77 RDA Resolution No. Page 3 The Redevelopment Agency does hereby make the findings required by the City/Redevelopment Agency's rules and regulations for the issuance of special use permits, as herein below set forth, and sets forth, there under, the evidentiary basis that permits the stated finding to be made. 1) That the proposed use at the particular location is necessary or desirable to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the general well-being of the neighborhood or community. The mixed-use project is desirable at this location and will introduce new office and residential uses to an area surrounded by existing commercial ond residential uses in a way that provides a harmonious integration of both land uses which could not be achieved by segmenting the development of these land uses onto separate parcels. The urban and pedestrian oriented nature of the project helps foster the current development goals of increasing the livability and viobility of the area. 2) That such use will not, under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity, or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity; It is anticipated that the project will not be detrimental to health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity. The project complies with the adopted precise plan development standards for the site, which were approved based upon the findings outlined in section 19.14.576 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. In oddition, the applicant has taken measures to minimize any negative visual impacts to surrounding land uses through the use of increased landscaping and wall height along the western property line. 3) That the proposed use will comply with regulations in this title for such use. The project complies with all regulations of the CC zone as modified by precise plan standards adopted for the subject parcel based upon section 19.14.576 ofthe Chulo Vista Municipal Code. 4) That the granting of this special use permit will not adversely affect the general plan of the city or the adopted plan of any governmental agency; The proposed project complies with the General Plan of the City of Chula Vista. The adopted precise plan standards for the project site allow for the modificotion of front yard setback otherwise required by both the Montgomery Specific Plan. III. TERMS OF GRANT OF PERMIT 4-7ti' RDA Resolution No. - Page 4 The Redevelopment Agency hereby grants Special Use Permit SUPS 04-07, subject to the following conditions. A. land uses within the office component of the mixed use project is limited to office or reloted uses. No retail uses shall be permitted. B. Approval of this Special Use Permit is contingent upon approval of the related rezone (PCI 04-01) and the Ordinance entered into effect. Planning and Building Deportment Conditions: C. The site sholl be developed and mointoined in occordonce with the plans for DRC - 04-40 opproved concurrently with this application for Special Use Permit. D. The colors ond materiols specified on the building plans the must be consistent with the colors and moteriols shown on the site plan ond rnateriols board approved by the Design Review Committee on Moy 17, 2004. E. A lighting pion conforming to CVMC Section 17.28.020 sholl be provided ond adhered to. The lighting sholl be shielded to remove ony glare from odjocent properties. F. All ground-mounted utility oppurtenances such os transformers, AC condensers, etc., sholl be located out of public view ond odequately screened through the use of 0 combinotion of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or londscaping to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building. G. Applicont sholl construct the approved six-foot high mosonry/wood screen woll olong the north, south and western perimeter of the project site. H. All roof-mounted equipment sholl be fully screened frorn on-site porking oreos ond adjacent public streets or residential view. I. Prior to occupancy, applicont sholl submit 0 copy of 0 reciprocol porking ogreement or other legal mechonism to insure that the 4 shored porking spaces will be remain ovoiloble for both office and guest porking for residential units. Soid agreement must be reviewed ond opproved by the Director of Plonning. J. Applicant shall comply with the following parking stondards: 1) Standard (61, including 4 shored) 2) Compact (5) 3) Disabled (1) 4) Mointoin 0 90-degree ongle bock-up area with 0 24-foot aisle distonce between parking stalls. K. Applicant sholl comply with 011 requirements of the City's Building Division including the following: 1) Obtoin all necessary permits. 4-79 RDA Resolution No. Page 5 2) Submit architectural plans for building permit review that ore stamped and signed by a licensed architect. Pions sholl include 0 site plan ond building elevations that are consistent with this ORC opproval. 3) Structural pions ond colculations must be stamped ond signed by 0 Colifornio Registered Civil/Structural Engineer. 4) Project sholl comply with 2001 Energy Requirements 5) Project sholl comply with 2001 CBC, CPC, CEC, ond CMc, Seismic Zone4; wind speed 70 mph exposure C. 6) A soils report sholl be included with plans submitted for permits. 7) 1 hour separation required where buildings do not meet set back requirements from adjacent buildings. L. A graffiti resistont treatment shall be specified for all woll and building surfaces. This shall be noted for ony building and wall plans and shall be reviewed ond approved by the Director of Plonning ond Building prior to the issuonce of building permits. Additionally, the project sholl conform to Sections 9.20.055 ond 9.20.035 of the CVMC regarding groffiti control. M. Submit 0 "Recycling ond Solid Waste Monagement Plan" to the Conservotion Coordinator for review and approval os part of the permit process. The plan shall demonstrate those steps the applicant will take to comply with Municipal Code, including but not limited to Section 8.24 ond 8.25, and meet the Stote mondote to reduce or divert at least 50 percent of the waste generated by all residentiol, commerciol ond industrial developments. The opplicont sholl contract with the City's fronchise houler throughout the construction ond occuponcy phase of the project. N. The project must stoy in compliance with the Stote mandote to reduce woste generated by all residences and must comply with the Recycling ond Solid Waste Pion filed with the City of Chulo Vista Manoger of Special Operations office. O. The property must be kept sanitary and litter free as per Chula Vista Municipal Code 8.24.060. P. Applicont shall coordinate with the City's Conservation Coordinator regarding the correct size or trash enclosures. Q. Aliiondscoping ond hordscape improvements shall be installed in occordonce with the approved landscape pion ond the comments of the City Landscope Plonner, including the following: 1) Provide a detailed landscape plan for review ond approvol with the building permit submittol. 2) Provide ond odhere to 0 Water Manogement Plan, Fencing Pion, ond Plonting and Irrigation Plan. 3) Install opproved root borriers for trees planted within 5 feet of ony curb or hardscape surfoce such as sidewolks. 4) Concurrent with the building permit pockage show the ultimote locotions of any transformers. Instolled transformers shall not interfere with londscape planter oreos. Where transforrners must be locoted in opproved plonter oreo 4 -r; 0 RDA Resolution No. - Page 6 an equal and similarly useful planter orea shall be provided as a replocement planter oreas as approved by the City Plonning and Building Deportment. 5) Install a 6-inch concrete mow curb throughout the site to seporate lown use from shrub/ground cover oreas. R. All trees and shrubbery are to be mointained. Trees are to be cleared up at leost six feet and shrubbery is to be cleo red to three feet toll. S. Building plans and construction shall reflect requirements of the Uniform Fire Code (UFC) to the satisfaction of the Chulo Vista Fire Department. Hydrants, extinguishers and other requirement of the UFC shall be installed. T. Comply with 011 requirements of the Crime Prevention Unit of the Chulo Visto Police Department. This includes scheduling 0 security evoluation by the Police Deportment. Security hordware should be indicoted on building plans ond security rneosures sholl be in ploce prior to occupancy. U. The opplicant shall implement to the sotisfaction of the City's Planning and Building Department the mitigation measures identified in the Pharus Plaza Mitigoted Negative Declaration (IS-03-034) and Mitigotion Monitoring and Reporting Program. Engineering Deportment Conditions V. The following fees will be required based on the final building pions submitted (refer to Development Checklist for more infarmotion): 1) Sewer Copacity Fees. 2) Traffic Signol Fees. 3) Public Focilities Development Impact Fees. W. AT entotive Porcel Mop and Final Parcel Mop shall be required in order to create the 24 condominium unit/one lot condominium map. X. A grading permit will be required. A drainage study ond geotechnicol/soils study ore required with the first submittal of grading plans together with co leu lotions for the proposed drainage system. Y. Obtain 0 construction permit ond obide by the required stondards (including those set forth in this subsection) when performing any work in the City's right of way, or future sewer eosements, which may include, but not limited to: 1) Construction of 0 driveway opprooches; if opplicoble ADA pedestrion romps in occordonce with federol, state ond City low/standards sholl be instolled. 2) Installation of traffic signs at the proposed driveway and in the existing median for directionol traffic. 3) Instollation of on 8-inch public sewer with monholes built to City Standards olong the moin drivewoy. Improvement pions for the public onsite sewer system is required. 4-~ ( RDA Resolution No. Page 7 4) Construction of a driveway over the public sewer shall meet H2O wheel loading standards. A six-inch thick PCC driveway over four-inch approved base material is an acceptable structural section. 5) Sewer, Storm drain, and other utilities connected to public systems. 6) Demolition of existing buildings moy need to be carried out under supervision of 0 qualified hazardous moteriols expert. Z. Streets, driveways and onsite drainoge facilities within the complex shall be designated ond maintained as 0 private drive. M. A Geotechnicol investigotion is required ot the grading plan submittal stoge, which will include, but not be limited to: 1) Foundotion recommendotions based on the proposed structure. 2) Povement recommendations if new povement is proposed. BB. The applicant is required to comply with the City of Chula Vista's Storm Water Monogement Standords Requirement Monuol, including but not limited to the following: 1) Development of the proiect sholl comply with 011 opplicoble regulotions, established by the United Stotes Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), as set forth in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements for urbon runoff ond storm water dischorge, ond ony regulotions odopted by the City of Chula Visto pursuont to the NPDES regulations and requirements. Further, the applicont sholl file 0 Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resource Control Baard to obtain coverage under the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associoted with Construction Activity ond sholl implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) concurrent with the commencement of grading activities. The SWPPP sholl include both construction ond post-construction pollution prevention and pollution control meosures, and sholl identify funding mechanisms for the mointenance of post-construction control meosures. 2) The applicont is required to implement Best Monogernent Proctices (BMPs) to prevent pollution of the storm water conveyonce systems, both during ond after construction. Permonent storm water requirements shall be incorporoted into the proiect design, and shall be shown on the plans. Any construction and non-structural BMPs requirements that connot be shown grophicolly must be either noted or stopled on the pions. 3) A water quolity study will be required to demonstrate complionce with the requirements of the Notionol Pollutont Discharge Elimination Systern (NPDES) Construction ond Municipol Permits, including Stondard Urbon Storm Woter Mitigation Plans (SUSMP) and Numeric Sizing Criteria requirements, with the first submittol of groding/improvements plans in accordonce with the City's Storm Woter Monagement Stondords Monuol. 4 - t¡ 2.... RDA Resolution No. Page 8 4) Prior to opprovol of any building permit for the Project, the Applicont sholl provide evidence sotisfoctory to the Director of Planning and Building and the Director of Engineering demonstroting that the trash storage areos of the praject site have been designed to meet the following requirements: o. Paved with on impervious surfoce, designed not to allow run-off from odjoining oreos, screened or wolled to prevent offsite transport of trash; ond b. Provide attoched lids on all trash containers that exclude roin; or roof or owning to minimize direct precipitotion. 5) The opplicont is required to complete opplicoble forms in the Development ond Redevelopment Storm Water Monogement Requirements Monual, and comply with requirements of said Manuol. 6) Water quality ond watershed pratection principles sholl be incorporated in the design of the project. Such measures shall be designed to rninimize discharge of pollutonts into the storm drainage systems. 7) The applicant is required to comply with the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Pions (SUSMP) and Numeric Sizing Criteria of the NPDES Municipal Permit Order No. 2001-01. 8) A Hydrology study will be required with the first submittal of the Grading/Improvement pions. Such study shall demonstrate thot post- developrnent flow rate for 0 given design storm does not exceed the pre- development flow rate at the outlet of the site. 9) Adjacent storm drain inlets sholl be protected ot 011 times during the demolition of existing buildings, and construction of the new building ond improvements. 10) Project plans should show pravisions for the installation of a greose pre- treatment device (greose trap or interceptor) to treat runoff generated in the porking lot. Cc. This Special Use Permit will be subject to any and all new, modified, or deleted conditions imposed after approval of this permit to advance a legitimate governmental interest related to health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose alter advance written notice to the Permittee and alter the City has given to the Permittee the right to be heard with regard thereto. However, the City, in exercising this reserved/condition, may not impose a substantial expense or deprive Permittee of a substantial revenue source which the Permittee cannot, in the normal operation of the use permitted, be expected to economically recover. 4 - t¡.3 RDA Resolution No. Page 9 IV. EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL The property owner and applicant shall execute this document by making a true copy of this Resolution and signing this original Resolution on the lines provided below, said execution indicating that the property owner and applicant have each read, understood and agreed to the conditions contained herein, and will implement same. Upon execution, this document shall be recorded with the County Recorder 01 the County of San Diego, at the sole expense of the property owner and/or applicant, and a signed, stamped copy returned to the City's Planning and Building Department. Failure to return the signed true copy of this document within ten (10) days of recordation shall indicate the property owner/applicant's desire that the project, and the corresponding application for building permits and/or a business license, be held in abeyance without approval. Signature of Property Owner Date Signature of Representative Date V. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS If any 01 the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City/Agency shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted, deny, or further condition issuance 01 all future building permits, deny, revoke, or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. Developer or a successor in interest gains no vested rights by the Agency's approval of this Resolution. VI. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION It is the intention of the Redevelopment Agency that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon the enforceability of each and every term, provision, and condition herein stated; ond that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions, or conditions are determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable, this resolution and the permit shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio. Presented by Approved as to form by Do.- 7. I-k...-. I"ott.. Laurie A. Madigan Ann Moore Community Development Director Agency Attorney 4- J?'! ! ---------- ~' -------- " \ \ , " ------- ----- ---- ' .L ~, -------- ~ ':=:, .--- C o:.~ , \ .------- -;. ~cr,-"",'/"-------,' ~" ~ ------------ '" '::'---' -- ,/ ------ -~ ----- ~...-""""---- .------ . --..........-- --~::..-/-- -- .-----' .------- - , ----- --- --- - - -.- .------- ,..----- . , ~ " .. ~ ' ~ /---- \ ~/-- ," -------/~/ ~' \ , ' \~~/ '---------- ------------ '," \ ~ / 'Y°':-"-- ------- ~;f: 0:.;;- co \ Re'" '~'ß.'C,: : ~\O:" w' \ ,.tell Ô I COO"~. ! '. '" c."., C '::::.:-------- . ~ '-IS_Sf,-' C, , ?c,"" ------ , - II ~-' , '\ \ MF '::. I -----', ", ~=o"menrs ------ ~S' '..---- I C"----- ' ..----- Sf Sf Sf 'f -"-, ',," ' ---------- ,,~I~, Sf I Sf '.'" / S~" I', ~~-¿~ " ~ ~'~~f' ,- ',~I Sf.,' I~ .. '\S-\-'\\Sf" " ~ ~~" '~\~~'- I Sf I\~~'f ' \ ~¡e;' 1P HOJIe""" ~,~" ?,o.O ,. , - , .------- ----------, ,'. ~ \ ~" S~f'" \ Sf ------ ,.,~:,n~~, ,"" ~!.: ' " ~- --------------------~~, ~CC------- \ " \Retcll' i!J!--.J;P""" ] nOR""lHHJ ~"---------,...------í------------, I' '~I--<---', ;F I', -;F " \~, \' RetciI' I Enfe,";,e , iI.'3.HJl'11HJH / ~-----------, I -' 'I SF ~I \RenfACo"~ ' \~----/'~I ~I~I \ Sf V£F II\RefCiI'", ""~\\ ", - ------------~\ ~I~~- I 5- ~ '. ........----' \ Retcil \-'-------~' I~~ S' I Sf I SF, '. ' ---------- I~' 1\ \ I SF ~,eò'èù'\'le ~'f- \ SF ~~ySF \le"n~el" \ Retoll I \ , ----~ Cle- 5- \ Sr SF 0 rsF ~ \.------::::::\ ' ""----- '. - I r SF I - \ c,.' - \ \ '--Reicil I , Sr ,SF \...., ,---s: ~'I"Ø 1~1\,RefCH ,\, '----------\" ..' æ Sf' SF ~ ~\ 3--- ~' Si'..----' , I ' \ \ ~I~I~'~ ~ 7.IGepF etCII-, , "ct. I , . ,.--'""\' 1\° ~~ \ 'b ~\~ "'- SF Relcil \ \ , , C \ Sr -;I - I - I ' "-------I"¿"------------~""" \~,',,~',~,SF\ Sf 17..,,~Sr- I S,F \ ~r ~,ReICiI.\, ~\~~11 ", '.."',' . -------.. ~,~ ~~\ ~ '~~S- \ - \ ~r SF SF"""--- -----\ ' ; 0, - r r I \ \î;"11 ....------' 0 \ I -;I 5- 5" I \ SF 5- 5-' erol I ' ~\% ----------~I~'~'\ ~ y\~ \ I , .-/"', \"'::.---------'."---------~ I~\~,~SF \ 5-, I \---s;~\ , " \ ..----- -;I ~ I ,r-- ~I"'::----~ ' I! ------, " I,' SF' SF " '",--- -' 7. " I Sf \ " \g~~ ~\ - I / ~ \~\ Costae I~\ ~\ ~ -------~ Waf-Man \ / /------, LOCATOR. - q-8£ EXHIBIT A RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE MIXED- USE PROJECT AND ENTERING INTO AN OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE PHARUS DEVELOPMENT GROUP, LLC FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF PROFESSIONAL OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS, ALONG WITH PARKING, ACCESS AND CIRCULATION, AND LANDSCAPED AREAS AT 1030 BROADWAY WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA WHEREAS, the Pharus Development Group, LLC owns the property at 1030- 1034 Broadway, which is diagrammotically shown in the Locator Map attached os Exhibit C to the Owner Participation Agreement and incorporated herein by reference; and WHEREAS, the site for the proposed Project is located within the Southwest Redevelopment Project Area under the jurisdiction and control of the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, the Pharus Development Group, LLC has presented development plans to the Design Review Committee and the Planning Commission for the construction of a mix-use project consisting of professional office and residential condominiums, along with parking, access and circulation, and landscaped areas ("Project"); and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has determined that the proposed project was adequately covered in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-03-034, adopted by the City of Chula Vista City Council; and WHEREAS, the Design Review Committee reviewed the proposed Project and recommended that the Redevelopment Agency approve the Project subject to the conditions listed in Exhibit B of the Owner Participation Agreement; and, WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed Project ond recommended that the Redevelopment Agency approve Special Use Permit SUPS 04- 07; ond WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista has been presented an Owner Participation Agreement, said agreement being on file in the Office of the Secretary to the Redevelopment Agency, approving the construction of 4 -"" the Project at 1030 Broadway, depicted in Exhibit A and subject to conditions listed in Exhibits B of said agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby find, order, determine and resolve as follows: 1. The Redevelopment Agency does hereby find that in the exercise of their independent review and judgment, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigotion Monitoring and Reporting Program (15-03-034) in the form presented have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and hereby adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program IS-03-034. 2. The proposed project is consistent with the Southwest Redevelopment Plan and shall implement the purpose thereof; the project shall assist with the elimination of blight in the Project Area. 3. The Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista hereby approves the Owner Participation Agreement with the Pharus Development Group, LLC for the construction of the Project at 1030-34 Broadway, in the form presented in accordance with plans attached thereto as Exhibit A and subject to conditions listed in Exhibits B of said agreement. 4. The Chairman of the Redevelopment Agency is hereby authorized to execute the subject Owner Participation Agreement between the Redevelopment Agency and the Pharus Development Group, LLc. 5. The Secretary of the Redevelopment Agency is authorized and directed to record said Owner Porticipation Agreement in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego, California. Presented by Approved as to form by: Dw-.- '7, ~ "'~ Laurie A. Madigan Ann Moore Community Development Director Agency Attorney 4-97 THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY/AGENCY ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE FORMALLY SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY Do..- 7 . l~II>.~ Ann Moore City/ Agency Attorney Dated: July 8, 2004 OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT WITH THE PHARUS DEVELOPMENT GROUP, LLC FOR THE CONSTRUCTION OF A MIXED USE PROJECT CONSISTING OF PROFESSIONAL OFFICE AND RESIDENTIAL CONDOMINIUMS, ALONG WITH PARKING, ACCESS AND CIRCULATION, AND LANDSCAPED AREAS AT 1030 BROADWAY WITHIN THE SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA 4 -'I 8' Recording Requested By: CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 When Recorded Mail To: CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Attn: Agency Secretary (Space Above This Line For Recorder) APN: 618-110-11 and 12 OWNER PARTICIPATION AGREEMENT Pharus Development Group, LLC 1030 & 1034 Broadway THIS AGREEMENT is entered into by the REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, a public body corporate and politic (hereinafter referred to as "AGENCY"), and Pharus Deyelopment Group, LLC ,Subject Property Owner hereinafter referred to as "DEVELOPER") effective as of July 20, 2004. WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER desires to develop real property within the SOUTHWEST REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA ("Project Area") which is subject to the jurisdiction and control of the AGENCY; and, WHEREAS, the DEVELOPER has presented plans for deyelopment to the Design Reyiew Committee and the Planning Commission for the construction of a mix-use professional office and residential condominiums, along with parking, access and circulation, and landscaped areas (the "Project"); and, WHEREAS, said plans for deyelopment have been recommended for approyal by said committee and said Commission; and, WHEREAS, the AGENCY has considered the Design ReYiew Committee's and Planning Commission's recommendations and has approved the Project and design plans subject to certain terms and conditions; and, WHEREAS, the AGENCY desires that said Project be implemented and completed as soon as it is practicable in accordance with the terms of this Agreement. NOW, THEREFORE, the AGENCY and the DEVELOPER agree as follows: 1. The property to be developed is described as Assessor's Parcel Numbers 618-110-11-00 & 618- 110-12-00 located at 1030 & 1034 Broadway, Chula Vista, CA., shown on locator map attached hereto as Exhibit "C" and by this reference incorporated herein ('Property'). 2. 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. DEVELOPER shall deyelop the Property with the Project in accordance with the AGENCY approved development proposal attached hereto as Exhibit "A", 4 -e9 Owner Participation Agreement 1030 & 1034 Broadway Chola Vista, CA B. DEVELOPER shall obtain all necessary federal/state and local goyemmental permits and approyals and abide by all applicable federal, state and local laws, regulations, policies and approyals in connection with the development of the Project. DEVELOPER further agrees that this Agreement is contingent upon DEVELOPER securing said permits and approvals. DEVELOPER shall pay all applicable development impact and processing fees. C. DEVELOPER shall obtain building permits within one year from the date of this Agreement and to actually deyelop the Property with the Project within one year from the date of issuance of the building permits. In the event DEVELOPER fails to meet these deadlines, the Agency's approyal of DEVELOPER's deyelopment proposals shall be void and this Agreement shall have no further force or effect. D. In all deeds granting or conveying an interest in the Property, the following language shall appear: 'The grantee herein covenants by and for himse/~ his heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through them, that there shall be no discrimination against or segregation o~ any person or group of persons on account of race, colo~ creed, national origin or ancestry in the sale, lease, sublease, transfe~ use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of the premises herein conveyed, nor shall the grantee himself or any persons claiming under or through him establish or permit any such practice of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number, use or occupancy of tenants, lessees, subtenant lessees, or vendees in the premises herein conveyed. The foregoing covenants shall run with the land.' E. In all leases demising an interest in all or any part of the Property, the following language shall appear: 'The lessee herein covenants by and for himse/~ his heirs, executors, administrators and assigns, and all persons claiming under or through him, and this lease is made and accepted upon and subject to the following conditions: That there shall be no discrimination against or segregation o~ any person or group of persons, on account of race, colo~ creed, national origin, or ancestry, in the leasing, subleasing, transferring use, occupancy, tenure, or enjoyment of the premises herein leased, nor shall the lessee himself or any persons claiming under or through him, establish or permit any such practices of discrimination or segregation with reference to the selection, location, number or use, or occupancy of tenants, lessees, sublessees, subtenants, or vendees in the premises herein leased." 3. The Property shall be developed subjectto the conditions imposed by the Design Review Committee, the Planning Commission, and the AGENCY as described in Exhibit "8" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. DEVELOPER acknowledges the validity of and agrees to accept such conditions. 4-90 Owner Participation Agreement 1030 & 1034 Broadway Chula Vista, CA 4. DEVELOPER shall maintain the premises in FIRST CLASS CONDITION. A. DUTY TO MAINTAIN FIRST CLASS CONDITION. Throughout the term of this Agreement, DEVELOPER shall, at DEVELOPER's sole cost and expense, maintain the Property which includes all improyements thereon in first class condition and repair, and in accordance with all applicable laws, permits, licenses and other goyemmental authorizations, rules, ordinances, orders, decrees and regulations now or hereafter enacted, issued or promulgated by federal, state, county, municipal, and other goyemmental agencies, bodies and courts haYing or claiming jurisdiction and all their respectiYe departments, bureaus, and officials. If the DEVELOPER fails to maintain the Property in a "first class condition", the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista or its agents shall have the right to go on the Property and perform the necessary maintenance and the cost of said maintenance shall become a lien against the Property. The Agency shall haye the right to enforce this lien either by foreclosing on the Property or by forwarding the amount to be collected to the Tax Assessor who shall make it part of the tax bill. B. DEVELOPER shall promptly and diligently repair, restore, alter, add to, remove, and replace, as required, the Property and all improvements to maintain or comply as above, or to remedy all damage to or destruction of all or any part of the improvements. Any repair, restoration, alteration, addition, removal, maintenance, replacement and other act of compliance under this Paragraph (hereafter collectively referred to as "Restoration") shall be completed by DEVELOPER whether or not funds are ayailable from insurance proceeds or subtenant contributions. C. In order to enforce all aboye maintenance provisions, the parties agree that the Community Development Director is empowered to make reasonable determinations as to whether the Property is in a first class condition. If he determines it is not, he (1) will notify the DEVELOPER in writing and (2) extend a reasonable time to cure. If a cure or substantial progress to cure has not been made within that time, the Director is authorized to effectuate the cure by City forces or otherwise, the cost of which will be promptly reimbursed by the DEVELOPER. D. FIRST CLASS CONDITION DEFINED. First class condition and repair, means an efficient and attractive condition, at least substantially equal in quality to the condition which exists when the Project has been completed in accordance with all applicable laws and conditions. 5. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that the coyenants of the DEVELOPER expressed herein shall run with the land. DEVELOPER shall haye the right, without prior approyal of AGENCY, to assign its rights and delegate its duties under this Agreement. 6. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that the coyenantsofthe DEVELOPER expressed herein are for the express benefit of the AGENCY and for all owners of real property within the boundaries of the PROJECT AREA as the same now exists or may be hereafter amended. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that the provisions of this Agreement may be specifically enforced in any court of competent jurisdiction by the AGENCY on its own behalf or on behalf of any owner of real property within the boundaries of the PROJECT AREA. 4 -'11 Owner Participation Agreement 1030 & 1034 Broadway Chula Vista, CA 7. AGENCY and DEVELOPER agree that this Agreement may be recorded by the AGENCY in the Office of the County Recorder of San Diego County, California. 8. DEVELOPER shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless AGENCY and the City of Chula Vista, and their respectiYe Council members, officers, employees, agents and representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and reasonable attorneys' fees (collectively, "liabilities") incurred by the AGENCY arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) AGENCY's approyal of this Agreement, (b) AGENCY's or City's approyal or issuance of any other permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the Project contemplated herein, and (c) DEVELOPER's construction and operation of the Project permitted hereby. 9. I n the event of any dispute between the parties with respect to the obligations under this AGREEMENT that results in litigation, the preyailing party shall be entitled to recoyer its reasonable attorney's fees and court costs from the nofl-prevailing party. 10. Time is of the essence for each and every obligation hereunder. 11. If DEVELOPER fails to fulfill its obligations hereunder after due notice and reasonable opportunity to cure, DEVELOPER shall be in default hereunder, and in addition to any and all other rights and remedies AGENCY may have, at law or in equity, AGENCY shall have the right to terminate its approyal of the Project and this Agreement. Signature Page Follows 4~92- Signature Page IN WITNESS WHEREOF THE PARTIES HAVE ENTERED INTO THIS AGREEMENT EFFECTIVE AS OF THE DATE FIRST WRITTEN ABOVE. REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA "AGENCY" DATED: By: Stephen Padilla, Chairman "DEVELOPER" DATED: 7,/{, / 0-1 By: en Group, LLC, Property Owner NOTARY: Please attach acknowledgment card. APPROVED AS TO FORM BY: Ann Moore, Agency Attorney 4 -93 CALIFORNIA ALL-PURPOSE ACKNOWLEDGMENT STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF San Diego ) On '7!f/t; r/ before me, Yolanda Ramos, Notary Public DATE NAME, TITLE OF OFFICER - E.G.., "JANE DOE, NOTARY PUBLIC" personally appeared, (? H-iLJ,J d /l~U2ó pOlrs0aally læe nU tv me (or proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence) to be the person(s) whoòe name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in hislher/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by hislher/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument. WITNESS my hand and official seal. - VÔLÂÑOA AAMOS ( COMM. # 1289345 1:: TARY PUBllC-CAllFORNIAGJ (SEAL) SAN DIEGO COUNTY () caMM, EXP, JAN, 31,2005"' Yolanda Ramos, Notary Public 355 K Street Suite F Chula Vista, CA 91911 (619) 420-6652 OPTIONAL INFORMATION THJS OmONAL <NFORMA TlON SECTION IS NOT REQUIREO BY LAW BUT MAYBE BENEFICIAL TO PERSONS REL YJNa N THIS NOTARIZED OOCUMENT TITLE OR TYPE OF DOCUMENT A 77{!//'¿ff/'/D l-&' /;T/~......u / DATE OF DOCUMENT NUMBER OF PAGES .5 SIGNER(S) OTHER THAN NAMED ABOVE -it"fdG7<-/ ~ ~ ~1~ / MpL£; Y SIGNER'S NAME SIGNER'S NAME RIGHT THUMBPRINT RIGHT THUMBPRINT 4- -q"¡ EXHIBIT A IÕ~ ¡¡m I ~ Wi 11: ...."~~~ III~I .' I I trl oo,.¡ =>, 'OJ 'Oh"AVMQY,,",,><O!/OEOI Z ~. .~ ~~ ;¡m ¡ I~¡¡¡¡ 'GAl8 Á'tMG'tOI::J817Cm/OCm ~ '!i~~ ! ¡:: <i!s wi! ¡ ¡ih 511 'tZ\fld Snl::J'v'Hd ¡!¡¡ai§ i , " ~ '," . ":' .. .." : ~~" i! i!! ~!.! ......,all¡""'"U% n~~~~!~'1 I"' .. .¡ iô qm hi -I -I 1 f de'! ¡Itllhlt ! I n~ !I ~ lillilllmH II II II nil!! III « g: N « ~ a. x ~~ z'Z ~ ! Æ f ! ~ i « ~ ~ I~ Ei I 1!! III ~ ~ gdi Iii Ii ~ j ~ I! j ~ ..J LL ~ ~i¡;; ! ~IIU! Iii!!: llin ~~ ili!!:! ~ ~MI ~ In (L <i ~ let. § h!.. ~ ~~!.. ~ In.. ~ In.. ~ Udn 1111 0 I I ¡ ¡IN ¡um õ ~!, (f)<ë :J I-Cf) ¡;J ... ,. '"\....., , . . " I .. ,.,' .;. en "I . Ii < . -" !' - ,.." . ,- ~. a::>w:;:..,!<gj't':' "..I:II",;.! !¡~- f-.;,.'!I!',,~ ""I""!,II ., «~i¡¡!~.~!!'I¡~~eni;I¡;~~'¡i!i¡!!!' ... ..Y-: en' I~~~!:¡"¡:I!:!'!ï!~q;!:;!..¡nj:: 0... , ;\,'.\ « ..J ill I?h¡!!~! I~~'! ~ ~!~i!~! :îL!'P!i :¡! ~ ,/'"~'::.~' >", \ ,"1 ::>o,'I:¡I!I~"!¡¡!' ...JiI¡,II:".,;!!,!:!",-. 0,"" '\~','; I I 0 '!¡"'ä'::¡!'~'i!1 1 ..: ¡~Oi ~: ¡¡I!':I~I ;! ¡ ~ \\ \ ".\ ,¡ ":'¡'Ii~!" " a:",i""',"..¡"~",, Z .-' . ,1--- 0 Q !,.,p,I.¡¡.!¡I'i! ~ 1¡!i¡;I~,,!!~I;¡¡ï 1 q I Q "'<::,."°_1' / n w!i¡¡¡,:!;¡I!~'¡' W}i!!.i:¡~'!~!;¡,¡¡I¡ > -;:~"-«-". LL. ïï! ,!g.¡¡,!¡~!:!:~ 0 !¡I!.!¡-I~~¡~:¡iH!¡ 111,'---;'- ~ ,..~' ":j>!I,i'II¡,.,'I,o;. ,..ii!."":¡I~'!!i!I", ~ \ eni!'¡~r;¡i¡;'i;:! '~";:U~I;" "I':i!¡ "it ã ~!~~!i~I!!!i!~ !i!!~..~~¡:¡.'!!!!¡;¡u I " :!!I¡ i,111, 11 !Î: .,¡!Hi ¡ f-!.¡! !"!'I' en ¡¡¡I"I,!¡¡OPII,,¡I~¡,::,¡"!'I! ~ !'!!i; !iII:,h I!:! "'¡!I.!¡'i!i!!¡¡!,¡!!!!'¡¡!~d!¡!~~i'l¡ ~ ¡!!,¡¡i¡ ¡!:!il!! ~1!!:III!!I¡I,¡:i;!¡¡¡~¡!I:'I':!¡I¡!~:~!!;:.'¡~ m I! i' . II i'" ...J' ",' '1"1-<"':1"'111' I " ¡"" i>. ¡ 1;. ! ~ I~ II! !I.~!~ .11 ìIÎI!.j~IU~¡i!llllll! A - 9 !'ì¡Ì:'!I~¡ ,¡!Ii'!'", 1';!I'.I¡':ð~I'i!¡II¡!I'!'!!!'~'¡.!'¡!I!'¡"I¡¡iI!!i':~'i""'f ".:" -,i". "',¡~,,!'-:"i';I!'-"r.!.,!: m!ll!li: ~¡¡!!I!¡li: ~!:!¡:':'~'~I:!I~!!¡!¡¡;':I!,~!!;I!Lgï'.~1 I~¡ i!¡P I~ ~¡ :!: ""'~=~ III'I¡~ I I ~¡ ;¡!¡I, í~I¡!¡ '<JAl8ÁVMaVO~8t>£m/O~m . I ¡:i d om!! ,n.! 'Is VZVld Sn~VHd i Ii. i ! I, ill . 'I! ¡>J", , ~ Ii : Ib . . ~ I 4 9' 1~1 mil I ~ ~¡ ¡;; ~~~~~ 11 'il! I I :¡¡¡ :¡d, ¡~¡ j¡; "Œl8 Á'VMO'VO!:J8 17£m/o£m ".' I-'¡ j ~ ¡;!; 55,!! ¡ ¡ f¡ ,¡, 'VZìtld sn!:J'VHd ¡I! ¡~ i '" CJ z Õ --J 5 l!J Z «: --J '- a: 0 0 --J LL 0 ~~~! .t:::~Q~ 0 z 0 () w UJ ~ UJ a: ¡¡: CJ z Õ --J 5 l!J I 4 -q? "- r mn I ~ WI ~F -'" =... I" I" l ~ I 0:; ,""" ;:¡o :,¡ '",n"y""""""""""",,, ,Idl.. ¡¡jj :¡Hi, ,~H!¡ 'O^l8 ^,V"MO'ltOt!8 v£m/o£m il"llj¡~ ..J1 11 ~ ~¡ ;:,!! ¡ ! ït~ ¡i, 'v'Z'v'ld Snt1'v'Hd ¡ l,Ù J Ii ' I ."" n ~," ~ ¡I , II 0 ì W ,',,' LI "" ~," ~"" -"" -,~ ",," . II ¡ ì , . I H "" , I "" :;;: :s I II "",. ","" ." Õ3 ;¡m I ~ ClJâ 1" ....~~~':-~ 1011'1 I I fI=\ ¡:;;¡ ::J~ ,;; 'CA."VMCV"""""'lCtU .;;! -q . ~~.' ;!ii¡. .' ¡~Ug. 'OAl8 Xv'MO'ifOt:!8 v£Œ/O£Œ ~II.! ! <: ;¡!¿ ¡¡!iJ ¡ ¡ 1E~ 51, 'VZ'Vld Snl:l'VHd .]1 ¡¡ ¡ ! I z is 4: ìu. L ....J¡ .~ ! W' d I I ! ~ 0 UJ ! I I! Ii I. Ii 4-9' - I. --'- 131 ""'I~ "I'" "'-,~." III" I I ~¡ mH. .~j¡¡¡ 'Œl8Å'v'Ma'v'O!:J8;~b7/';m ;i'[!I! li~ <Ii ¡¡,i! ¡ !iE;'¡; 'v'Z'v'ld sn!:J'v'Hd ¡i!.:¡ Ii ,:;,¡r~--, \:'7:, I ::! I ;; § ¡ ã t5 , Fi , <, I~¡! liil " ~ 0 z 4-100 r m!¡I.~ ¡¡n¡¡ .Œl8 AV'MOV'O!:J8 p"f~~iâ 1:I'¡111 I. ~ I ffi~ 5¡ II -' ..: ¡¡,¡! ¡ ¡..;;Ì¡ V'ZV'ld Snl::!V'Hd j ! ¡:¡ 1,1 . . 1:IBi'~ ~I 11 ! !,,!1 =-~Ì!!.1 ~ : II Ii! I I!!!!' 1;1 ¡ I"~ f :il::! :;: Ii!' '1 ¡ il:!f: ~ II!! ¡ ¡¡ i .¡~¡¡¡ ¡ .,.1 r 21"" Ie .,\1 I ~¡¡t ¡¡imll < ".1 . ~ II!!!! i!H !i:,'oj " ~¡ ~,,¡,¡¡ I 4 101 I I Q."e--M<,.o.e ;:1 EXHIBIT B Design Review Conditions 1030 & 1034 Broadway Chula Vista, CA A. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the plans for DRC -04-40 approved concurrently with this application br Special Use Permit. B. The colors and materials specified on the building plans the must be consistent with the colors and materials shown on the site plan and materials board approyed by the Design Reyiew Committee on May 17, 2004. C. A lighting plan conforming to CVMC Section 17.28.020 shall be proYided and adhered to. Thelighting shall be shielded to remove any glare from adjacent properties. D. All ground-mounted utility appurtenances such as transformers, AC condensers, etc., shall be located out of public view and adequately screened through the use of a combination of concrete or masonry walls, berming, and/or landscaping to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building. E. Applicant shall constructthe approved six-foot high masonry/wood screen wall along the north, south and westem perimeter of the project site. F. All roof-mounted equipment shall be fully screened from on-site parking areas and adjacent public streets or residential yiew. G. Prior to occupancy, applicant shall submit a copy of a reciprocal parking agreement or other legal mechanism to insure that the 4 shared parking spaces will be remain available for both office and guest parking for residential units. Said agreement must be reviewed and approved by the Directorof Planning. H. Applicant shall comply with the following parking standards: 1) Standard (61, including 4 shared) 2) Compact (5) 3) Disabled (1) 4) Maintain a gO-degree angle back-up area with a 24-foot aisle distance between parking stalls. I. Applicant shall comply with all requirements of the City's Building Diyision including the following: 1) Obtain all necessary permits. 2) Submit architectural plans for building permit review that are stamped and signed by a licensed architect. Plans shall include a site plan and building elevations that are consistent with this DRC approval. 3) Structural plans and calculations must be stamped and signed by a Califomia Registered Civil/Structural Engineer. 4) Project shall comply with 2001 Energy Requirements 5) Project shall comply with 2001 CBC, CPC, CEC, and CMC, Seismic Zone4; wind speed 70 mph exposure C. 6) A soils report shall be included with plans submitted for permits. 7) 1 hour separation required where buildings do not meet set back requirements from adjacent buildings. q-Io,- EXHIBIT B Design Review Conditions 1030 & 1034 Broadway Chula Vista, CA J. A graffiti resistant treatment shall be specified for all wall and building surfaces. This shall be noted for any building and wall plans and shall be reyiewed and approyed by the Director of Planning and Building prior to the issuance of building pennits. Additionally, the project shall confonn to Sections 9.20.055 and 9.20.035 of the CVMC regarding graffiti control. K. Submit a "Recycling and Solid Waste Management Plan" to the Conservation Coordinator for review and approval as part of the pennitprocess. The plan shall demonstrate those steps the applicant will take to comply with Municipal Code, including but not limited to Section 8.24 and 8.25, and meet the State mandate to reduce or diyert at least 50 percent of the waste generated by all residential, commercial and industrial developments. The applicant shall contract with the City's franchise hauler throughout the construction and occupancy phase of the project. L. The project must stay in compliance with the State mandate to reduce waste generated by all residences and must comply with the Recycling and Solid Waste Plan filed with the City of Chula VIsta Manager of Special Operations office. M. The property must be kept sanitary and litter free as per Chula Vista Municipal Code 8.24.060. N. Applicant shall coordinate with the City's Conservation Coordinator regarding the correct size or trash enclosures. O. All landscaping and hardscape improyements shall be installed in accordance with the approved landscape plan and the comments of the City Landscape Planner, including the following: 1) ProYide a detailed landscape plan for review and approval with the building pennit submittal. 2) Provide and adhere to a Water Management Plan, Fencing Plan, and Planting and Irrigation Plan. 3) Install approYed root barriers for trees planted within 5 feet of any curb or hardscape surface such as sidewalks. 4) Concurrent with the building pennit package show the ultimate locations of anytransfonners. Installed transfonners shall not interfere with landscape planter areas. Where transfonners must be located in approved planter area an equal and similarly useful planter area shall be provided as a replacement planter areas as approved by the City Planning and Building Department. 5) Install a 6-inch concrete mow curb throughout the site to separate lawn use from shrub/ground cover areas. P. All trees and shrubbery are to be maintained. Trees are to be cleared up at least six feet and shrubbery is to be cleared to three feet tall. Q. Building plans and construction shall reflect requirements of the Unifonn Fire Code (UFC) to the satisfaction of the Chula Vista Fire Department. Hydrants, extinguishers and other requirement of the UFC shall be installed. R. Comply with all requirements of the Crime Preyention Unit of the Chula Vista Police Department. This includes scheduling a security evaluation by the Police Department. Security hardware should be indicated on building plans and security measures shall be in place prior to occupancy. 4 -103 EXHIBIT B Design Review Conditions 1030 & 1034 Broadway Chula Vista, CA S. The applicant shall implement to the satisfaction of the City's Planning and Building Department the mitigation measures identified in the Pharus Plaza Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-03-034) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Engineering Department Conditions T. The following fees will be required based on the final building plans submitted (refer to Development Checklist for more information): 1) Sewer Capacity Fees. 2) Traffic Signal Fees. 3) Public Facilities Deyelopment Impact Fees. U. A Tentative Parcel Map and Final Parcel Map shall be required in order to create the 24 condominium uniUone lot condominium map. V. A grading permit will be required. A drainage study and geotechnical/soils study are required with the first submittal of grading plans together with calculations for the proposed drainage system. W. Obtain a construction permit and abide by the required standards (including those set forth in this subsection) when performing any work in the City's right of way, or future sewer easements, which may include, but not limited to: 1) Construction of a driveway approaches; if applicable ADA pedestrian ramps in accordance with federal, state and City law/standards shall be installed. 2) Installation of traffic signs at the proposed driyeway and in the existing median for directional traffic. 3) Installation of an 8-inch public sewer with manholes built to City Standards along the main driyeway. Improvement plans for the public onsite sewer system is required. 4) Construction of a driveway over the public sewer shall meet H2O wheel loading standards. A six-inch thick pce driveway over four-inch approved base material is an acceptable structural section. 5) Sewer, Stonn drain, and other utilities connected to public systems. 6) Demolition of existing buildings may need to be carried out under supervision of a qualified hazardous materials expert. X. Streets, driyeways and onsite drainage facilities within the complex shall be designated and maintained as a priyate drive. Y. A Geotechnical investigation is required at the grading plan submittal stage, which will include, but not be limited to: 1) Foundation recommendations based on the proposed structure. 2) Pavement recommendations if new pavement is proposed. 4-10'1 EXHIBIT B Design Review Conditions 1030 & 1034 Broadway Chura Vista, CA Z. The applicant is required to comply with the City of Chula Vista's Storm Water Management Standards Requirement Manual, including but not limited to the following: 1) Development of the project shall comply with all applicable regulations, established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), as set forth in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements for urban runoff and storm water discharge, and any regulations adopted by the City of Chula Vista pursuant to the NPDES regulations and requirements. Further, the applicant shall file a Notice of Intent (NOI) with the State Water Resource Control Board to obtain coyerage under the NPDES General Permit for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Actiyity and shall implement a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) concurrent with the commencement of grading activities. The SWPPP shall inciude both construction and post- construction pollution prevention and pollution control measures, and shall identify funding mechanisms for the maintenance of post-construction control measures. 2) The applicant is required to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to preyent pollution of the storm water conveyance systems, both during and after construction. Permanent storm water requirements shall be incorporated into the project design, and shall be shown on the plans. Any construction and non-structural BMPs requirements that cannot be shown graphically must be either noted or stapled on the plans. 3) A water quality study will be required to demonstrate compliance with the requirements of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) Construction and Municipal Permits, including Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMP) and Numeric Sizing Criteria requirements, with the first submittal of grading/improyements plans in accordance with the City's Storm Water Management Standards Manual. 4) Prior to approval of any building permit for the Project, the Applicant shall provide evidence satisfactory to the Director of Planning and Building and the Director of Engineering demonstrating that the trash storage areas ofthe project site have been designed to meet the following requirements: a. Payed with an impervious surface, designed not to allow run-off from adjoining areas, screened or walled to prevent offsite transport of trash; and b. Provide attached lids on all trash containers that exclude rain; or roof or awning to minimize direct precipitation. 5) The applicant is required to complete applicable forms in the Development and Redevelopment Storm Water Management Requirements Manual, and comply with requirements of said Manual. 6) Water quality and watershed protection principles shall be incorporated in the design of the project. Such measures shall be designed to minimize discharge of pollutants into the storm drainage systems. 7) The applicant is required to comply with the Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans (SUSMP) and Numeric Sizing Criteria of the NPDES Municipal Permit Order No. 2001-01. 4-10':;- EXHIBIT B Design Review Conditions 1030 & 1034 Broadway Chula Vista, CA 8) A Hydrology study will be required with the first submittal of the Grading/lmproyement plans. Such study shall demonstrate that post-deYelopmentflow rate for a given design storm does not exceed the pre-deyelopment flow rate at the outlet of the site. 9) Adjacent storm drain inlets shall be protected at all times during the demolition of existing buildings, and construction of the new building and improvements. 10} Project plans should show provisions for the installation of a grease pre-treatment device (grease trap or interceptor) to treat runoff generated in the parking lot. 4-10(., ¿ EXHIBIT C - . ~ \ \------\ " ..' I. '\ "\ \ \ \ \~' , ',\ ,,~' \'--..) -------~~ .~- >~~' .- ------- ,--- .~' .~;--- -- ,'..-' " " ' '----~ ' '" \ \ '.. '",\';:;'\" ~"'.---= '~\\ \\~""'.o" -- ~'o..' , \~ ~ ,< """'~' "," \'\ I. y:.~ ;::~'/ \ \ ~-----'.' \ ',..","", ",,' '; \, ", \ \ \ ^~-"""" ." --- . , " , "~"~'"^ " ' " ,<-:::: . ^~"m,"~ ~ . \' '.' ". .-- . ", "", ~ ' \......-.', \ ' ". ,.-"" ~ .'.'\ \ \,~~~cy . 'v' '.' ,\ " ~ &-, .~~' ' \ ê e,.^' ~ .~ æ"X/~é"'~^'~;¡'" ,,' .'~ ----'PH '~'X'~"" .'. '. ,¿ mEeT ~~s /z.. ~ ],ç->-" .cU1iJAYIO!È' v-" ' ' '. '.------- ~ .~ ,_.~ ~ \ \ ' ,~< ----" ~' \~~~.x'6v /' ?~ \ ~ ' """'~ ,x' ", " ---- 0 ~\ X a::::~ ~~~" ,< " ,"'" - . ' ",:---- l' ~,~ D .~ "", " . ~.::::?C æ'-X" c::::c' " ?, m"""ii-, ;; .. \ ~~"i ' ,> :::::-t:::'~,---,Vc ,,' " í'~'~. ~"~.~' ,---' Y" ~ 6----- ~,~,~,~'~"' '% V ,,~~6é3'~;æ '?f" " ~' \..--1 ' ' ' " , X-' ".' ' , ,~i~;<'6'--{ ,_J ~ ..' '6' ',' ' ," , "'~ ~~æ ðD~' ' wn-' ' , """ , ,,' ~. ' 0' '. " \ """",,.. , - \ ,,~' ' ':--- \ ' ,ee" " , ' '~' ' , ' " " ~ e"~ ._" ~ ~ ~I II ::~:. /. \ \ \ ,~",'~ " " \ \ I. \ \ ( \ \ LOCATOR 4-107 JOINT REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY/CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT - ~ ITEM NO.: -1£ MEETING DATE: 07 /20/04 ITEM TITLE: JOINT RESOLUTION (1) AUTHORIZING THE FORMATION OF A 501C3 CORPORATION FOR PURPOSES OF CONDUCTING CHARITABLE BUSINESS IN THE FORM OF REDEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREAS OF CHULA VISTA; (2) SELECTING A NAME FOR THE 501C3 CORPORATION; (3) DIRECTING THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ESTABLISH A TECHNICAL COMMITTEE; AND (4) DIRECTING THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE TO REPORT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL BY OCTOBER 2004 WITH DRAFT ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, BY LAWS AND A PROPOSED OPERATING AGREEMENT SUBMITTED BY: COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT DIRECTOR REVIEWED BY: EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR 4/5THS VOTE: YES D NO 0 BACKGROUND On February 3, 2004, the City Council directed staff and consultants to prepare an analysis and discussion paper on the creation of a 501c3 Redevelopment Corporation. As part of the preparation for this report, fwo facilitated workshops were held on the formation of a 501 c3 Corporation. The workshop participants included three representatives from the Urban Development Committee (UDC), Mayor Padilla, Councilman McCann, the City Manager, City Attorney, City Finance Director and the City Community Development Director. The attached report builds upon the conclusions and recommendations from these workshops and the recent analysis prepared by Keyser Marston Associates (KMA) in their report presented to City Council on October 20, 2003. RECOMMENDATION 1. Authorize the formation of a 501 c3 Corporation for the purposes of conducting charitable business in the form of redevelopment and planning activities within the redevelopment areas of Chula Vista; 2. Select a name for the 501 c3 Corporation; 3. Direct the City's Redevelopment Agency Executive Director to establish a Technical Committee consisting of the: ~--I PAGE 2, ITEM NO.: ~ MEETING DATE: 07/13/04 0, Mayor b. City Council member(s) c. City Manager d. City Attorney e. Community Development Director f. City Finance Director g. Chair of the Urban Development Corporation 4. Direct the Technical Committee to report back to the City Council by October 2004 with draft Articles of Incorporation, by-lows, and a proposed Operating Agreement subject to the following guidelines: a. The Board of Directors sholl include regional representation with recommendations for selected professional categories as discussed by the workshop participants. b. The 501 c3 Corporation is to be staffed by City employees and include all redevelopment territory under its authority. c. The 501 c3 Corporation Chief Executive Officer initially shall be the Community Development Director. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION Not applicable. DISCUSSION The City of Chula Vista's Redevelopment Agency was formed in 1972 and became fully functional in 1975. The goals of the Redevelopment Agency are to reduce blight and to encourage new development, reconstruction, and rehabilitation of residential, commercial, industrial, and retail uses. Much of a Redevelopment Agency's success depends on its ability to time projects to correspond with market opportunities, respond to the needs of investors, and maintain sufficient financial capacity to leveroge private investment. The City of Chula Vista has a number of resources that makes the proposal of the 501 c3 Corporation well timed. These include: . Chula Vista's physical location, within 7 miles of downtown San Diego, which is experiencing a magnificent urban revival, provides the City great potential to attract development capital. . A strong real estate market has created opportunities for rejuvenation in the City's urbanized areo, particularly given the high demand for housing units and retail space. . Chula Vista's Bayfront is one of a few remaining prime undeveloped bayfront properties on the west coast, providing significant future development opportunities for the City, '--~ PAGE 3, ITEM NO.: (.. MEETING DATE: 07/13/04 . Chula Vista's close proximity to Mexico provides an economic odvantage whose potential remains largely untapped. . The political-will to support and encourage redevelopment opportunities throughout the City, particularly in the older more urbanized areas. The attached report is focused upon evaluating four 501 c3 Corporation structural alternatives against important tangible factors within the control of the City Council and its management staff: operational efficiency, developing and maintaining a strategic advantage, alignment of the 501c3 Corporation goals and objectives with the City's goals and objectives and financial impact/gain to the City. This approach ensures results in the areas most critical to the success of the City and allows for the formation of a 501c3 Corporation to occur as a model speoking to the unique needs and situation of Chula Vista. FISCAL IMPACT There is no fiscal impact at this time. ATTACHMENTS Attachment A - Report on the Formation of the Chula Vista 501 c3 Corporation J:\COMMDEV\ST AfF.REP\07 .20.04\501 c3 corporation.dOC , -3 AGENCY RESOLUTION NO. AND COUNCIL RESOLUTION NO. JOINT RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL AND THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA (1) AUTHORIZING THE FORMATION OF A 501C3 CORPORATION FOR PURPOSES OF CONDUCTING CHARITABLE BUSINESS IN THE FORM OF REDEVELOPMENT AND PLANNING ACTIVITIES WITHIN THE REDEVELOPMENT AREAS OF CHULA VISTA; (2) SELECTING A NAME FOR THE 501C3 CORPORATION; (3) DIRECTING THE REDEVELOPMENT AGENCY EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR TO ESTABLISH A TECHNICAL COMMITTEE; AND (4) DIRECTING THE TECHNICAL COMMITTEE TO REPORT BACK TO THE CITY COUNCIL BY OCTOBER 2004 WITH DRAFT ARTICLES OF INCORPORATION, BY LAWS AND A PROPOSED OPERATING AGREEMENT WHEREAS, on February 3, 2004, the City Council and Redevelopment Agency directed staff and consultants to prepare an analysis and discussion paper on the creation of a 501c3 Corporation; and WHEREAS, two facilitated workshops were held on the formation of a 501c3 Corporation; and WHEREAS, the workshop participants included three representatives from the Urban Development Committee (UDC), Mayor Padilla, Councilmember McCann, the City Manager, City Attorney, City Finance Director and Community Development Director; and WHEREAS, a report resulted which builds upon the conclusions and recommendations from the workshop participants and the analysis prepared by Keyser Marston Associates dated September 15, 2003; and WHEREAS, the report evaluates four 501c3 Corporation structural alternatives against important tangible factors within the control of the City Council/Redevelopment Agency and its management staff. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council and the Redevelopment Agency of the City of Chula Vista do hereby: 1. Authorize the formation of a 501 c3 Corporation for the purposes of conducting charitable business in the form of redevelopment and planning activities within the redevelopment areas of Chula Vista; 2. Select a name for the 501 c3 Corporation; 3. Direct the City's Redevelopment Agency Executive Director to establish a Technical Committee consisting of the: a. Mayor b. City Council member(s) c. City Manager d. City Attorney e. Community Development Director f. City Finance Director g. Chair of the Urban Development Corporation ~-c.{. 4. Direct the Technical Committee to report back to the City Council by October 2004 with draft Articles of Incorporation, By-Jaws, and a proposed Operating Agreement subject to the following guidelines: a. The Board of Directors shall include regional representation with recommendations for selected professional categories as discussed by the workshop participants. b. The 501c3 Corporation is to be staffed by City employees and include all redevelopment territory under its authority. c. The 501c3 Corporation Chief Executive Officer initially shall be the Community Development Director. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the name selected for the 501c3 by the City Council and Redevelopment Agency will be Presented by Approved as to form by Laurie Madigan Ann Moore Director of Community Development City Attorney and Agency Counsel J :ICOMMOEVIRESOSI07 -20-04 \501 c3 .doc ~ -S"""