HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports 2003/05/28
AGENDA
PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING
Chula Vista, California
Wednesday, May 28,2003,6:00 p.m.
Joseph Casillas Elementary School
1130 East J Street, Chula Vista,CA
CAll TO ORDER: Hall
Madrid O'Neill Cortes Castaneda Hom
Felber
ROll CAll/MOTIONS TO EXCUSE
PLEDGE OF AllEGIANCE and MOMENT OF SilENCE
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission on
any subject matter within the Commission's jurisdiction but not an item on
today's agenda. Each speaker's presentation may not exceed three minutes.
1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCA 01-02; Consideration of an amendment to the
Municipal Code (Title 19) to define and provide local
provisions for surface mining operations within the City of
Chula Vista.
Staff tecommends this item be continued to the June 11,2003 Planning Commission
meeting.
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Draft Greenbelt Master Plan; a plan for implementation of
a 28-mile open space and trails system surrounding the
City of Chula Vista.
Project Manager: Duane Bazzel, Principal Planner
Planning Commission
- 2-
May 28, 2003
3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM 02-04; Consideration of the Auto Park North Specific
Plan and adoption of a Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS 02-06)
and introduce an Ordinance approving a Specific Plan for
the Auto Park North Expansion. (knowlton Realty
Advisors, LLC & Otay Mesa Ventures II, LLC).
Project Manager: Raymond Pe, Senior Planner
4. REPORT:
General Plan Update Draft Vision & Goals.
Ed Batchelder, General Plan Project Manager
5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC 03-55; Conditional Use Permit to allow a second-
story addition, which includes an attic, to a single-family
dwelling that exceeds the allowed height limit in the R-1
Zone. The project site is located at 626 Second Avenue.
Applicant: Joseph Bustamante.
Project Manager: Michael Walker, Associate Planner
6. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM 03-35; Consideration of the City of Chula Vista Air
Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines and recommending
its adoption.
Project Manager: Mary Venables, Associate Planner
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
1 he City of Chula Vista, in complying with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), requests
individuals who require special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a City
meeting, activity, or service, request such accommodations at least forty-eight hours in advance
for meetings, and five days for scheduled services and activities. Please contact Diana Vargas for
specific information at (619) 691-5101 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TOO) at
585-5647. California Relay Service is also available for the hearing impaired.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No.: 2
Meeting Date: 5/28/03
ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: Draft Greenbelt Master Plan - a plan for
implementation of a 28-mile open space and trails system
surrounding the city. City initiated.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building
The proposed Greenbelt Master Plan consists of an implementation plan for a open space
and trails system encircling the city. This plan is intended to implement the Greenbelt
Concept identified in the adopted General Plan and join together a variety of open space
programs through a connected trail system that links parks and activity centers around the
perimeter of the city. The Greenbelt can serve to remforce the identity of the city, as it
serves to provide a distinct visual break between communities, something that is lacking
with most communities. The master plan proposes trail guidelines and standards as well
the maintenance approach for this 28-mile open space area. Additionally, the master plan
identifies issues and implementation recommendations within eight individual segments
of the Greenbelt and identifies management issues.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission accept public input
regarding the Draft Greenbelt Master Plan (PCM-03-38), provide its input on the plan,
and direct staff to return to the Commission at its July 9, 2003 regular meeting for
consideration of a final recommendation to the City Council.
DISCUSSION:
I. Background
In 1989 the City Council adopted a comprehensive update of the city's General Plan,
within this plan the concept of a Greenbelt that would encircle the city was introduced.
The Greenbelt concept described in the General Plan would consist of a series of open
space segments connected by a 28-mile trail system that would connect both regional
parks and local parks surrounding the city. The General Plan describcs the major
components of this Greenbelt as "the backbone of an open space and park system that
extends throughout thc city."
The city has hired Peggy Gentry, of Chapin Land Management, Inc.. as a consultant to
assist in the preparation of a master plan for implementation of the Greenbelt.
Page 2, Item No.: _
Meeting Date: 5/15/03
2. Proposed Master Plan
The intent of the proposed Greenbelt Master Plan is to provide goals and policies, trail
design standards and implementation tools that guide the creation of a system of multi-
use trails through open space corridors surrounding thc city (see Attachment I for map).
Open space areas that make up the Greenbelt consist of habitat preserves and refuges,
regional parks, designated pennanent open space linkages within new master-planned
communities and new corridors to be set aside as planned for in the city's General Plan.
The Greenbelt is intended to link existing and future parks that occur within and nearby.
The Greenbelt includes the Sweetwater and Otay Valley Regional Parks, the arca
surrounding and including the Upper and Lower Otay Lakes, the intcrfacc with the San
Diego Bay and a series of habitat conservation lands to be set aside through
implementation of the Multiple Species Conservation Plan (MSCP).
The planned Greenbelt includes land areas that fall within several political jurisdictions
besides the City of Chula Vista, including: the City of National City, the City of San
Diego, the County of San Diego, the Unified Port District. Public and quasi-public land
ownership and stewardship within the Greenbelt involve several agencies, including the
United States Fish and Wildlife Service, California Department of Fish and Game,
Sweetwater Authority and Otay Water Districts, Caltrans, San Diego Gas & Electnc. the
Olympic Training Center and the Metropolitan Transit Development Board.
The primary goals of the Greenbelt Master Plan are as follows:
1. To establish a comprehensive and coordinated trail network that visually
reinforces the natural character of the community and integrates umque
historic and cultural resources, open space areas, creeks, and trails.
2. To provide connected open space areas within and surrounding Chula Vista to
enhance the natural beauty and to preservc native biological and cultural
resources.
3. To establish a Greenbelt that ensures public access within the Greenbelt itself
to other trails, parks and open space areas to expand opportunities for passive
recreation.
4. To provide a trail system that receives the necessary resources for trai I
development, mamtenance. and to establish volunteer programs.
5. To identify a designated staff person or department who serves as the trail
manager responsible for acquISItIon, obtaining funds, coordination,
implementation, and ongoing maintenance of the Greenbelt.
Page 3, Item No.: _
Meeting Date: 5/15/03
Greenbelt Segments
The master plan identifies eight individual segnlents ofthc Greenbelt and identifies Issues
specific to that segment, as well as recommendations for long-ternl implementation of
each. Issues include where gaps exist in the continuous trail system and wherc
coordination with other jurisdictions or agencies is necessary for implementatIon. The
individual segments include:
I. Lower Sweetwater
2. Sweetwater Regional Park
3. San Miguel
4. Otay Lakes
5. Salt Creek Corridor
6. Otay Ranch Village Greenway
7. Otay Valley Regional Park
8. The Bayfront
Trail Guidelines and Construction Costs
The Greenbelt Master Plan includes design critena and standards for multi-use and rural
trails and the development of staging areas that would occur where opportunities exist
around the Greenbelt. Guidelines are included for the siting and construction of trails
through sensitive habitat areas (consistent with MSCP guidelines), for arterial road
crossings, urban runoff, accessibility, signage, for trail sizing and materials, and fencing.
In addition, estimated costs for construction of future trails and maintenance of each
segment of trail are included.
Greenbelt Maintenance
Maintenance of open space and trails within the Greenbelt are addressed using several
mechanisms. The Greenbelt is currently comprised of several different maintenance
entities, including: regional park public maintenance, homeowner associations, and
maintenance assessment districts. Estimated annual maintenance costs for trails are
included within the master p1an, as well as possible future funding sources.
Greenbelt Management
Management of the Greenbelt is anticipated to occur in several ways. Because thc
Greenbelt is addressed through many different agencies and existing open space
programs, the management of each segment is anticipated to occur through individual
jurisdictions and through individual open space programs. Management of trails within
the City of Chula Vista will occur through management commitments with individual
development projects, through cooperative agreements with multiple jurisdictions and
will need to be identified as individual projects are implemented within cach segment.
Page 4, Item No.: _
Meeting Date: 5/15/03
3. Public and Other Boards and Commissions Input
Public Workshop
A public workshop was held on May 5, 2003 at City Hall to present the draft Greenbelt
Master Plan and to solicit input. Among the comments received at the workshop were
concerns about the need to establish a management entity and inter-jurisdictional
authority for the entire Greenbelt; the need to increase emphasis on the open space
aspects of the Greenbelt; that greater emphasis on how the Greenbelt connects existing
and future parks; and, the need to delineate where open space programs currently exist
within the Greenbelt. Notes from the public workshop are attached (see Attachment 3).
A letter has been received from the Crossroads II citizen group with additional comments
(see Attachment 4).
Parks and Recreation Commission
A public meeting was held before the Parks and Recreation Commission on the Draft
Greenbelt Master Plan on May 15, 2003. The commission opened the public meeting and
received a presentation by staff. Two speakers from the public provided input regarding
the master plan and the commission decided to continue its review of the master plan to
its next regular meeting on June 19. 2003 to provide it more time to review the proposal
and obtain additional public input.
ANALYSIS:
The Draft Greenbelt Master Plan relies heavily on a variety of open space and trails plans
and programs that are in varying stages of implementation. The following are some of
those and the agencies/jurisdictions that administer portions of the Greenbelt:
.
Multiple Species Conservation Program (Cities of San Diego and Chula Vista;
County of San Diego)
San Diego National Wildlife Refuge (Otay-Sweetwater and Southbay Units)
Sweetwater Marsh Refuge
Sweetwater Regional Park
Sweetwater Bikeway Plan
San Miguel Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and Homeowners
Association (HOA)
Rolling Hills Ranch SPA Plan and HOA
EastLake Trails, Vistas and Woods SPA Plans and HOAs
Olympic Training Center
Otay Ranch Resource Management Plan
Otay Valley Regional Park
Bayshore Bikeway
Port Authority of San Diego
City of National City
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
.
Page 5, Item No.: _
Meeting Date: 5/15/03
To ensure that implementation of the Greenbelt occurs in a coordinated and
comprehensive manner, the City of Chula Vista will need to identify a managing entity
with defined roles and responsibilities. This entity should also pursue funding
opportunities for the construction of new trai Is and interpretive signage, and for
development of staging areas. Inter-jurisdictional and interagency coordination will be
necessary in order to identify where trail connectivity issues exist, where management
issues occur and to set appropriate implementation priorities.
The City of Chula Vista will be preparing a city-wide trails and open space master plan
that will address other connecting trail systems and open space linkages within the core
of the city. It is anticipated that through the preparation and adoption of such a master
plan that the Greenbelt manager (entity) will be identified and that this manager will also
be responsible for managing the city-wide trail system. This city-wide trails system
should include connecting trails that not only link community activity centers, including
parks, but should also link back to the Greenbelt.
CONCLUSION:
Adoption of the Greenbelt Master Plan will recognize the multiple open space and trails
planning and development efforts throughout the City of Chula Vista, as well as areas
adjacent to the city that make up the connected Greenbelt system. The Greenbelt Master
Plan will serve to standardize details, provide guidance for new trail and staging area
development, as well as provide a unifying system for the development of a city-wide
trails and open space master plan. An implementation plan that includes departmental
roles and responsibilities, budget and staff commitments is expected to be prepared either
prior to or concurrent with a city-wide trails plan [or the remal11ing portions of the city.
It is anticipated that revisions may be made to the master plan based on comments
received and that it will be returned for a final recommendation by the Planning
Commission at its regular meeting of July 9,2003.
Attachments:
I. Draft Greenbelt Master Plan map
2. Draft Greenbelt Master Plan document
3. Notes from public forum
4. Correspondence received
(J:\Planning\Duane\Greenbelt Master Plan\Reports\PC Greenbelt Agenda Stutcmcnt.doc)
Public Workshop May 5, 2003
Greenbelt Master Plan
City of Chula Vista
Duane Bazzel introduced himself and the consultant, Peggy Gentry. He
presented a PowerPoint slide show of the Greenbelt Master Plan touching on the
key elements:
. General Plan Concept
. Goals
. Specific Segment Issues and Recommendations
. Implementation and Management
He stated that the Greenbelt Master Plan would be presented to the Parks and
Recreation Commission at their meeting on May 15, the Planning Commission at
a public hearing on May 28 and tentatively to the City Council at a public hearing
on June 17. The Planning Commission hearing is planned to be held at an
undecided location in east Chula Vista.
Duane proceeded to go over the specific segments and the issues and
recommendations related to each. He stated that the Otay Valley Regional Park,
Otay Ranch, and the Bayfront are all independent planning efforts. He also
indicated that one issue remained to be resolved and that is the identification of a
trail manager to coordinate the efforts of the whole system. He indicated that the
City will be embarking on a citywide trails master plan in the near future and it is
anticipated that identification of a city trails manager will need to occur by then.
Duane concluded his presentation of the greenbelt segments and opened it up
for comments.
The following are comments and questions were noted:
1. The Master Plan should have target dates and costs for completion.
2. Why was Wolf Canyon not included in the Otay Valley Regional Park?
3. The General Plan directed that the Greenbelt Master Plan should be a
more expanded Implementation Plan.
4. The greenbelt should be entitled "Greenbelt Park" and thereby the
Parks Department can manage it.
5. Create a multi-jurisdictional agency or joint power to manage the Park
system similar to that of the Otay Valley Regional Park that would
focus on implementation.
6. Did not see much discussion of open space and parks - more of a
trails master plan. Need more "green buffer" between and around
communities.
7. Who has responsibility to oversee the successful development and
operation?
8. Suggest an exhibit that reflects the type of open space or actual
program boundaries within the greenbelt - e.g. MSCP, wildlife refuges,
etc.
9. Suggest use of interpretive signs that identify types of wildlife, water
quality benefits, etc.
10. Encourage use of permeable surfaces for the trail.
11. Need an equestrian trail connecting Sweetwater Valley with the two
lakes - this was a condition of the Auld Golf course permit.
12. The greenbelt should instead include Rice Canyon so that trail issues
in this area would be viewed as a high priority.. .it is a priority of the
Sweetwater Planning Group
13. What efforts are being made to acquire more open space?
14. How will our comments be relayed to the Parks and Recreation
Commission and Planning Commission?
It was noted by John Willett, Chairman of the Otay Valley Regional Park Citizen
Advisory Committee, that there would be a public workshop on the Otay Valley
Regional Park on June 27 focusing on trails between 1-5 to 1-805.
Duane closed the workshop and encouraged the attendees to sign in so that they
could be notified of upcoming meetings.
CROSSROADS II
Citizens Working Together to Keep Chula Vista a Good Place to Live
Steering CommiUee
Patricia Aguilar
President
Lupita .Iimene:
Vice President
Susan Wafry
Memhershil'
Coordinator
Sandy Duncan
Secretal)'/Treasurer
Peter Waff")'
Newslelter Editor
Tom Davis
Trunspnrfation
Issue Coordinator
Sharon Floyd
Will Hyde
.Jim Peterson
Carlene Scott
Jerry Scott
Duane Bazzel
Planning and Building Department
City of Chula Vista
May 14,2003
SUBJECf: DRAFT GREENBELT MASTER PLAN
Dear Duane,
We have reviewed the Draft Greenbelt Master Plan and have several
observations noted below:
o We are delighted to see a detailed plan for the Greenbelt prepared. The
original Crossroads enthusiastically supported the Greenbelt concept when it was
proposed in the 1989 General Plan. We believe the Greenbelt concept will help
establish a unique identity for Chula Vista. Establishing a unique identity for our city
is one of Crossroads II's core values.
o We believe that the trails are over-emphasized. While the idea of a trail
linking the Greenbelt together is a good one, the Greenbelt serves many other
important functions that are under-emphasized in the Plan. Among these are (a) the
idea of a linked system of parks and golf courses; b) important habitat for endangered
and sensitive plant and animal species; c) a buffer serving to separate Chula Vista
from neighboring jurisdictions. This last point is especially important to avoid the
kind of urban fonn so prevalent in Orange County where cities have no visible
edges. We believe these functions are as important as trails and should be given
"equal time" in the Plan.
o We believe that the chapter on Implementation should include much more
detail. We recognize that many governments and agencies have some authority in
various parts of the Greenbelt, therefore the Master Plan should take the first steps to
outline potential ways to develop a coordinated and cooperative inter-agency body to
implement the Plan, as resources permit. We think that the Joint Powers Agreement
established for the Otay Valley Regional Park could serve as a model. As one
option, consideration should be given to incorporating the Otay Valley Regional Park
authority into a larger ChuJa Vista Greenbelt authority. Establishment of some inter-
governmental implementation body will be essential if the Chula Vista Greenbelt is to
become a reality on the ground.
o Finally, one of Crossroads II's core values involves citizen participation in
the planning process. We are disappointed that no citizen participation was involved
in preparation of the Greenbelt Master Plan. The schedule you have set, which calls
Chula Vista CA 91910
E-mail: xroads2(@cox.net
619.427.7493
262 Second A venue
for quick review by the Parks and Recreation and Planning Commissions.
culminating in approval by the Council next month. leaves insufficient time to
address such substantive issues as those we have outlined above. We suggest one of
two courses as a remedy: a) stay on the current review schedule, but do not request
approval by the two commissions and Council. Instead, consider the sessions
currently scheduled infonnational, for comment only. After soliciting comments,
revise the Plan accordingly, then go through the approval process. b) Significantly
extend the approval process to pennit time for substantive changes between action by
the three approval bodies.
Thank you for your consideration of these comments. We look forward to
receiving your response.
T~~;}'~~de",
Crossroads II
cc: Steering Committee Members
Bob Leiter. Director
Planning & Building Department
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: -3
Meeting Date: 05/14/03
ITEM TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-02-04; Consideration of the Auto Park North
Specific Plan. The Auto Park North Specific Plan encompasses
approximately 39 acre and would allow the future development and northerly
expansion of the Chula Vista Auto Park including three dealerships along the
north side of Main Street with supporting uses to the rear of the site.
Applicant: Knowlton Realty Advisors, LLC and Otay Mesa Ventures II, LLC
On January 1,2003 Knowlton Realty Advisors, LLC and Otay Mesa Ventures II, LLC ("Developer")
filed an application requesting a Specific Plan (PCM-02-04) for the development of auto dealership
and supporting uses on an approximately 39-acre site located on the north side of Main Street,
between Brandywine A venue and Maxwell Road. The project would provide an orderly expansion
of the existing Chula Vista Auto Park located immediately to the southwest of the project site. The
project site is located within the Otay Valley Redevelopment Project Area and would be developed
pursuant to the Auto Park North Specific Plan described further below.
The City's Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study, IS-02-006 in
accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of the Initial
Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator has detennined that the project could result in
significant effects on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the
applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects
would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, IS-02-006.
.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt:
. Resolution PCM-02-04 recommending that the City Council I) Adopt the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Resolution, based on the findings and conditions contained therein
for the Auto Park North Specific Plan, and 2) Introduce an Ordinance to Approve the Auto
Park North Specific Plan.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: On April 21, 2003, the Resource
Conservation Commission (RCC) considered the Mitigated Negative Declaration for the project and
recommended that the Planning Commission and City Council and Redevelopment Agency find the
document adequate per the requirements ofthe California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and
adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-02-006.
\
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date: 05/14/03
The RCC further recommended that the landscaping for the site confonn with sustainable
environmental principals and they include the type of plants that will contribute to aesthetics, water
availability and also contribute to enhanced air quality and water quality on the project site and
adjacent roadways; and that canopy trees should be placed on the slope, the area adjacent to Main
Street and large parking areas.
DISCUSSION:
A. Background
The following provides a brief summary of the land use history of the site. For a full discussion
please refer to the environmental document prepared for the Auto Park North Specific Plan
(Attachment 5). Land use history at the site dates to 1947 when an animal by-products processing
plant was constructed on-site, operated by the Omar Rendering Company (referred to as Omar). The
Omar plant produced meat and tallow by-products until 1962, when it was sold to the Royal Tallow
and Soap Company (referred to as Royal). Royal held the operation for only 3 years, when it was
sold in 1965 to the Darling-Delaware Company (referred to as Darling). Darling operated the plant
until it was closed in 1981. Royal and Darling also used the site as a processing plant for the
production of animal by-products.
Since 1983, the fonner Omar Rendering Plant site has lain vacant, undevelopable due to
environmental contamination. Despite the clean up of580,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil in
1981-82 and a satisfactory health risk assessment tTom the Department of Toxic Substances Control,
groundwater contamination remained on the site. Although two development projects were
considered for the site between 1986 - 2000, both proved infeasible due to the inability to reach
regulatory agency closure for the groundwater conditions.
In 1999 LandBank Inc. (LandBank) acquired the site. Subsequently the finn contracted Hooper
Knowlton III/Knowlton Realty Advisers, L.L.c. (Knowlton) to create a development proposal. After
studying the feasibility of a warehouse/distributing project for the site, it was detennined that the
highest and best use for the property was auto dealer development linked to the expansion of the
Chula Vista Auto Park. Knowlton proposed a Specific Plan to allow the "North" Auto Park
expansion and City staff detennined the project was consistent with the Otay Valley Road
Redevelopment Plan and Five Year Implementation Plan for 2000 - 2004.
Concurrent with the entitlements, regulatory closure for the groundwater conditions was required. In
May 2003, the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) agreed to a Polanco Act
Agreement with the City Council and Redevelopment Agency. The Polanco Act Agreement allows
the Agency to pass its immunity from regulatory action to Knowlton so that development can
proceed while the R WQCB Clean Up and Abatement Order for the groundwater can be completed.
The Polanco Act Agreement was an enabling action to allow the entitlements, and subsequently site
improvements, sales to auto dealers and the issuance of building permits to dealers.
2.
Page 3, Item:
Meeting Date: 05/14/03
B. Project Site Characteristics and Surrounding Uses
The project site is located along Main Street, approximately one half mile east of Interstate 805,
between Brandywine A venue and Maxwell Road (Attachment I). The site includes approximately
38.81 acres on the north side of Main Street and is approximately 1,284 feet deep with 1,323 feet of
frontage along Main Street. The site was previously subdivided into 18 lots and is primarily
undeveloped with the exception of partial street improvements (Delniso Court and Roma Court) and
other infrastructure. The site has been previously rough graded and terraced by a previous property
owner. There is an elevation difference of over I OO-feet between the frontage along Main Street and
the northern boundary line.
Immediately adjacent land uses include single-family residences to the north (situated at elevations
greater than 70 feet above the site building pads and more than 200 feet away), light industrial uses
to the east and west (including the City's Public Works Center to the east), and the site for the
proposed easterly expansion of the Auto Park on the south side of Main Street (proposed Auto Park
East Specific Plan). The existing Chula Vista Auto Park is located to the southwest of the project
site along the south side of Main Street. The Otay Valley Regional Park is located to the south of the
existing Auto Park and the proposed easterly expansion of the Auto Park. The Otay Landfill is
located to the northeast of the project site.
C. Specific Plan - Purpose and Objectives
The Auto Park North Specific Plan has been prepared to plan and implement the northerly expansion
of the Chula Vista Auto Park. The guiding rationale behind the Specific Plan is to ensure the orderly
and viable development of the site and the implementation ofthe policies of the General Plan and the
Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area by establishing permitted land uses, development
standards, design guidelines, and entitlement processes. The comprehensive and coordinated
development of the site will benefit the City and the Redevelopment Project Area by removing blight
and facilitating new development that will expand commercial opportunities and the employment
base.
The Auto Park North Specific Plan is a policy and regulatory tool that will guide the development of
the site using a focused development scheme. It provides a bridge between the broad policies of the
General Plan and the detailed development objectives for the site. The Specific Plan establishes land
use and development regulations that are specifically adapted to the proposed development of the
site. The provisions of the Specific Plan are intended to be responsive to constraints and
opportunities on the site and the objectives of the project while implementing adopted policy.
The primary objectives of the Auto Park North Specific Plan are to:
. Expand the existing Auto Park to create a regional destination automobile sales and service
park with supporting uses;
· Create a distinct identity for the Auto Park and a thematic link to other attractions in the
Otay Valley through the Main Street Streetscape Master Plan;
· Coordinate the development, operation, and maintenance of the site;
Page 4, Item:
Meeting Date: 05/14103
. Improve the image of the Main Street corridor and adjacent land uses; and
. Ensure the provision of all necessary infrastructure, serviGes, and facilities.
D. Development Concept
The Chula Vista Auto Park is intended to be a regional automobile sales and service destination.
The existing 24-acre Auto Park was constructed in 1991-1995. The Auto Park North expansion will
add approximately 39 acres, and the proposed Auto Park East expansion will add approximately 29
acres to the Auto Park for a total of approximately 92 acres.
There are two development concepts for the Auto Park North Specific Plan: Option I consists of
eleven parcels (Attachment 2); Option 2 consists of seven parcels (Attachment 3). Both options
propose three lots with frontage on Main Street that would be developed with new car dealerships.
Lots to the interior of the site would be developed with supporting uses such as automotive services
and inventory parking lots.
In both options, vehicle access to lots would only be acceptable from two proposed streets (Delniso
Court and Roma Court); no access would be provided directly from Main Street. Roma Court would
only serve two of the dealerships fronting on Main Street. Delniso Court would serve two
dealerships and the supporting uses to the rear of the site. Both intersections would be fully
signalized.
The Specific Plan would allow the construction of up to 130,000 square feet of dealers hip buildings.
The floor area for these buildings would vary depending on the development proposals submitted for
individual dealerships. These buildings would typically include showrooms, offices, service stations,
and parts departments. The Specific Plan would also allow up to 93,450 square feet offJoor area for
supporting automotive uses.
Each of the jots may be developed independently, in accordance with the Specific Plan, including the
development standards, design guidelines, and performance standards and conditions. These
provisions establish lot configurations, maximum lot coverage and floor area, maximum height,
minimum setbacks, parking requirements, landscape requirements, and sign requirements.
Most of the Specific Plan's standards are consistent with the underlying zone or appropriate
provisions of the Zoning Ordinance. Specific requirements that are unique to the Specific Plan take
into consideration the project site and the objectives for the Auto Park; for example, only new auto
dealerships are pennitted on the lots with frontage on Main Street, while supporting uses are only
allowed on interior lots.
The Specific Plan's design guidelines require landscape consistency within the Auto Park and street,
signage, and landscape improvements that are consistent with the Main Street Streetscape Master
Plan. These design controls are intended to create a coordinated theme and image for the Auto Park
and the Main Street corridor.
3
Page 5, Item:
Meeting Date: 05/14/03
Perfonnance standards and conditions would insure that the operations and maintenance of the land
uses in the Auto Park do not become detrimental to other uses or surrounding areas. These standards
and conditions address hours of operation, promotional displays and events, deliveries and loading,
outdoor speakers and pagers, test driving, car washing, facilities maintenance, and lighting.
E. Development Entitlements
In addition to the Specific Plan (PCM-02-04) and Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-02-006), the
project applicant is requesting a Tentative and a Final Parcel Map to re-subdivide the existing IS-lot
subdivision into II lots and an Owner Participation Agreement (OPA) with the Redevelopment
Agency to address the negotiable development considerations for the project and perfonnance
requirements for the developer. After these development entitlements have been obtained,
development proposals for individual lots would be subject to the design review process.
ANAL YS1S:
A. General Plan and Zoning Consistency
The Auto Park North Specific Plan is consistent with the General Plan's Research and Limited
Industrial land use designation for the site. Automobile sales are conditionally pennitted uses under
the I - General Industrial zone classification that implements the land use designation. The Specific
Plan would limit the range of uses otheIWise permitted by the I - General Industrial zone in order to
achieve the objectives of the Redevelopment Plan for the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project
Area, specifically the expansion of the Auto Park and creation of a regional-serving auto center.
The I - General Industrial zone penn its a wide range of uses such as manufacturing, processing,
assembling, research, wholesale, and storage uses; stone and monument works; trucking yards and
terminals; electrical generating plants and liquefied natural gas plants. Conditionallypennitted uses
include motels, restaurants, service stations, retail distribution centers and outlets, brewing or
distilling ofliquor, meat packing, foundries, automobile salvage and wrecking operations, metal and
waste rag, glass and paper salvage, recycling collection centers, vehicle and equipment auctions, and
hazardous waste facilities.
The Specific Plan considerably reduces the potential range of land uses on the project site by
specifying four categories of permitted uses, all of which are consistent with the underlying zone
classification. These are automobile sales (new car dealerships), inventory parking, supporting
services, and accessory uses. Supporting services include a range ofland uses that would support the
auto dealership uses in the Auto Park. These include automobile parts and accessories sales;
automobile repair and service; collision repair; detailing and car washes; restaurants; other vehicle
sales and service; car rentals; and automobile finance and leasing offices.
4
Page 6, Item:
Meeting Date: 05/14/03
B. Specific Plan Statutory Requirements
Specific Plans maybe adopted by ordinance in accordance with Chapter 19.07, Specific Plans of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code and Sections 65450-65457 of the California Government Code.
Chapter 19.07 adopts and incorporates Government Code Sections 65450-65457 by reference as
though set forth in full. The Specific Plan supersedes the zone regulations for the project site.
Where in conflict with the Zoning Ordinance, the Specific Plan applies; and where it is silent, the
Zoning Ordinance and other applicable policies and regulations apply.
The proposed Auto Park North Specific Plan meets the statutory requirements ofGoverrunent Code
Section 65450-65457. Specifically, the following required sections are provided, as noted:
I) The distribution of land uses in the area covered by the plan (Section II);
2) The provision of essential facilities to support the land uses (Section VI);
3) Standards for development (Section III, IV, and V);
4) Implementation measures (Section VII); and
5) The relationship of the Specific Plan to the General Plan (Section I).
CONCLUSION:
The Auto Park North Specific Plan proposes land uses that would implement the General Plan land
use designation for the site and the Redevelopment Plan's goals and objectives for a regional Auto
Park within the Otay Valley Road Project Area. The provisions ofthe Auto Park North Specific Plan
would implement existing guidelines relative to design, on-site landscaping, and the Main Street
streetscape. Therefore, staff recommends approval of the Auto Park North Specific Plan and related
documents.
ATTACHMENTS:
.
I. Locator Map
2. Option I
3. Option 2
4. Draft Planning Commission Resolution No. PCM-02-04
5. Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-02-006)
6. Application Documents with Disclosure Statement
7. Draft City Council Ordinance
8. Draft Specific Plan
;
ATTACHMENT 1
LOCATOR MAP
~
1m
I?
I
I VACANT
~
I
w
::J
Z
w
;;: INDUSTRIAL
w BUILDINGS !
z
~3:
>-
J~
MAIN STREET
~ AUTO
i
r PARK
I
OTAY LANDFILL
/"
o
<(
o
'"
-'
-'
w
:;:
)(
<(
:e
/ '
,
.',
'/
SIGN CT
Ij},'N S
Tt<f'f'r
VACANT
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS LLC PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPLICANT: and OTAY MESA VENTURES II. LLc.
PROJECT NORTH OF MAIN STREET BETWEEN Request: Proposed Specific Plan for future development
ADDRESS: BRANDYWINE AV. AND MAXWELL RD. of the northerly expansion of the Chula Vista Auto Parle
The project site consists of approximately 39 acres.
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: Related Case: IS-02-006
NORTH No Scale PCM-02-04
CIDAIFILE\locators\pcm0204.cdr 4/29/03
1
ATTACHMENT 2
OPTION 1
B
:r:
I-
a:
Q
:z
:::.:::
a:
c:~~....
Q.....J.-
I- a.. CJ) c:
:::>
c:x::0;>.0
c:x::u..~~
I-Olt!c.
en UJ
-a..C:o
> en .-
::i E
:::>
:r:
o
UJ
:r:
I-
c:
It!
"" ,,;
"" ~, ;@
.. .. ..
~; u u g ,
22 ~@ ~ .~
~~, ~~ ~ 0 " ~~
-. ". N _ en :! ..
~~ ~~-. . , .
" . " " .. .~ ~ ~ ~ ai ": ,0
.. ~ ~ ~ ~ " o.
". ~~~ ~ ~ ~ !!i~ ~... 0
N_ N N f-
~ ~ ~ in ~ g id ,~
i ~ ! ~ - ~ - of'
<XJ ~ i 1 '" ~ i 1 T"" ~ 'i E ~ ~ ~" '-~r~
..... ~ ~" '" "&
(5,9 rrI ~.q ~.q (5 j9 ~j~f (5 ,~ ~~d' d: j h
-l ('J:f ;f: ,g h " .3 ~! a. ...J ! iD ,,-,,- ....J ('J J iD "- a..
, I,'
~I
'[ j!
: J I
rJJ
ID
U
.~
ID
CJ)
o
-
:J
<(
~ ctS @? ~; ~j " ~~, " ;~ " ~~, " III!
~ Cij ;;;; ; N - ,;" ; ~ ~ ~ ~ ,; ~. i ~ ~. P !~
~ ~ H ~;,,~ H ~ ~~ ~~:;~ ~~ ;'.~~ ~~ ..~~ :. .;;;~. 11;1
<( .~~ii ~ Nfd(')fn~!vh~~L"hh!",fU~inUU
c: ~ h fl~f ~ j~ f ~ j~ f~~I ~ j~ f~~f ~ j~ d~f ~ h f~h ~ H!~!
I---------~~-~r---~r:---:-:-----~~,~--,~-, ,:
.-- --- I b = " I'
I .--,-/' ~\ r- ~ I' ~ - = J
~~-~-" ~ ! , cr, 0 n I! ~
I:~~:Q,-~-', ;l I~ ~__'
.3 ,~.'c ~ I I: I' II I ·
J ~ \:~r~ f - r-~ 1 I ~t,,:: If n =
'0 , ~ --:1' r, ' ~:' ~ ! ", 'I
I...J 'oj ,,::;c J "" ='~ _ [7 j
I C - r I,' r' ':::' ' ',-= 0 ,
I ~q"~.=;' ~. ~.- ,. '~~!,:'iL i Ic_~ ";)Jj )~ !I
',- ~ " 1, d'L,...[: 'J:> BWO!:! o-:.:Jki
' .3j~~~:F,- -II. :..- J~_,i;~YI
{-,'fiJ' 'I"! , ~ '-....j '_,
I ~ 'j ....~ I III ~ , I
" - IJ '", ] .J I :( f I". ~ . I' CII'I'
'I ~ ~ - :-lJ - 1'.' 1 I ~ CD ! =;1 I, = = ~!; ;!
,- --=--~ (, L (5 N r - - ; ~CIJ '(
G~ .1.;1 '-\ \, ( #,1:'0' c - !.:I,
E \ 1; = i . Q i i ca ,I
· : -: i~\ \,\~...." ~,,: :: ';f 'f 1 ~ If :1 ~II
cry I . c, J C M / I "
-[ '-~" 0 ==0 C ", IJ
0, ,- \ ..;..J
...J ~~- .'~ ,J '~I '1, /+,-~~I
rr -~\ "~~~,":;~~I~. -., l~'\ t'!'1I
, , f;l , = - r n = /LIC:j ="',' II
\\ 0 11)1' If ~ - b ~ ~"I I'
c,)-\ / t: 'I =J = f ~ ~If ~ I II
-! ~=-- ':: = c= '7 = =,0::1: i'
L~__~ -__--=_______J-=--=-'.C2_~_~~=_ 1
c..
( ~
r:::i
ID
~
c..
'j
ATTACHMENT 3
OPTION 2
10
:r:
I:c c
o ro
:z: CfJ
::.::: a.. OJ
a: ()
<t::z: OJ '2:
~::s .... C\1 J5
I- a.. (f) c 0
:::>0 -
<t: - >-.~ ~
<C!:!:: ~ +-' """'- ..<< H"i H H ~< ~
I- 0 ro c...:.:: ." ~~ !i !~
~ ~ c 0 ro CO H ~~ ~~ ~ l, _j
>- CJ) ca ~ ~ : ('< ~ ~~ @~
::s Eg.O ~H~"~ H ~ ~~ ~~~~ !H! .
:::> ::; ...... .. N - ,~ t~
:r: Q) <{ U 5 j ~ " ~ ji!Jj
o .~~~g ~ $5~ 5 " ~.\hg
~ ... 0 <n ~ ~ ~" C\j ~ ~ < '" ~ ~ ~" ~~ i_,tw
-'- a.. tt ~~jj~ ~!~i :5 ~H :5 ~~ ~Bi . _
~ -~-~>. [~,>; -,r-:C-' .... c-:c--?X;'::-~1
' -J.-------" ,; ie,.o" j if:J
~~ __-- I , : I I ~ " :,1 Q
,~-- I I I ~ _______'.J
I ~ =
I,' ~
1
f
~
~
~
it, J
. ~ i! ~ ~ i b = ~ ,,:
t,. it n = _ Ii ".'
:1 \~ 1 ~
~./ /"J
"<t if, ,t--. --.' /',.
-":=0 'lor E ~ ,\)":-...::::d/
I~ ~ :; ~ -+[;~,~;-i-; II
P:; "i'i t [~,~:" 0 'c' r ~~111:11
,~ \ ~ c::::- . = = ~ h ! ;.", i ,= [J: ~ 'I
'-- I ~-( ~ It) ~ i' r ~'! 1(1)
& .--- I I - / I I
I ' i, L.5 i,'} r lie i
I ' =0 I'i \ \ I 0 I ..J . = ,! I _1'1,
" \ \ I' ==Q 0 0 " I,ea\
8 I I' \ \. t,; J JI iJ ~ ,~ 9 ~J~:I:!:il
I ~ L~ )\ \"~~~, ~, 'I~':/)~'
r------~~,~~--- pn:;~IUlaa =-~/_- .' -,11
III C ). ~ . " ~ - IT - '.______ - :ijf;.---=: . ~,
\ l ~'- 'I .~
:1 \\' --2-'!l_ ':JI = = ,"---" ==--/.J?: ~ '1;" II
. l., = = ~ = = ~f i I
',' ~I~,\ __ ,-' I'~ i ~f' o Ji'l:: I I
IS'" -- .. i~ -=~~ ~ Il~_ -"-- 1 ,: .~ =cfj i :1
L- _ _-~ _ - _ - - - - - - - -
E
I
I
! II
I
I
E
~ ~ .!
I
=- -,
E
"
.110 ,,>; ~~:~
""
";.";, ~~ ~~ ~~ :~~i!
00 ." " ;1;~..,-_
~~ ~. ~" NN _ -:--:-';'~
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ # .. en :e~~a:>
u , " S ~!~~
:s! ~ .; ~ ~ ~ to;;; :;o~ "':lJ .N ~ ~
~~ , .. ~,,; ~~- 0
l-
S' S' co i& ~~ ! ~ ! !hoj
~d U1iti .... ~ ~~
..,. ~ ~ - <n ~ j ~ i o " ~!: !
o ,-' r - ~ i o '. ~!~ Cl. ",h
-.J ~J: 0- S c; ~ 0- ...J 0z u..c.. ..Je
'1 ~i
'\ I!
':.I I
( ~
Cl
-
, .
-.
II
A TT ACHMENT 4
DRAFT PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION No. PCM-02-04
12-
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-02-04
A RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY
COUNCIL ADOPT A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
AND l\HTIGA TION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
(IS-02-006) AND INTRODUCE AN ORDlNM"CE APPROVING A
SPECIFIC PLAN (pCM-02-04) FOR THE AUTO PARK NORTH
EXPANSION (KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS, LLC & OTAY
MESA VENTURES II, LLC).
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a Specific Plan was filed with the City of Chula Vista
Planning and Building Department; and
WHEREAS, the application requests the adoption of a Specific Plan for the development of the Auto
Park North Expansion on 38.81 acres ofland on the north side of Main Street between Brandywine Avenue
and Ma.xwell Road and represented on Exhibit "A"; and
WHEREAS, the Specific Plan would implement the Redeve10pment P1an for the Otay Val1ey Road
Redevelopment Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the Specific Plan would be consistent with the Genernl Plan; and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-
02-006) has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act,
the State CEQA Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City ofChula Vista; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said application and notice
of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of genernl circulation in
the City and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least
ten days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely on May 14,2003 at6:00
p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was
thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered all reports, evidence, and testimony presented at the
public hearing with respect to the application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION does hereby
recommend that the City Council adopt a Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (15-02-006), based on the findings and conditions contained therein for the Auto Park
North Specific Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION does hereby find that the
proposed Auto Park North Specific Plan is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan and is
supported by public necessity, convenience, genernl welfare, and good zoning practice.
/3
ResolutIOn No. PCM-02-04
Page No.2
BE IT FURTHER RESOL VED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION does hereby recommend
that the City Council introduce an ordinance approving Specific Plan (PCM-02-04) for the Auto Park North
Expansion.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 14th day of May, 2003, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
Russ Hall, Chair
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
14
A TT ACHMENT 6
APPLICATION DOCUMENTS WITH DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
15"
TYPE OF REVIEW REOUESTED (staff use only) Case No.: PCA;! ~/)) -tJLJ
o General Plan Amendment o Zone Change fiN /0.3 Be
Filing Date: By:
o General Development Plan o Tentative Subdivision Assigned Planner: PC:
o Amendment Map Receipt No.:
i5Q SPNSpecific Plan o Annexation Project Acct: AC';<f'>-
0 Amendment Depos~ Acct: O{)- r C;if
o Redevelopment o Other: Related Cases: /S -0). - tJC7(p
0 Amendment SPECIFIC PLAN OZA Q(PubliC Hearing
IAPPLICANT INFORMATION II
Applicant Name KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS, LLC Phone No.
OT A Y MESA VENTURES I, LLC 801-582-5347/80t-54t-0953
303-763-8500 ExL 11 / 303-807-3969-
Applicant Address t445 CANTERBURY OR., SALT LAKE CITY, UT 84108
t41 UNION BLVD., LAKEWOOD, CO 80228
Applicant.s Interest in Property II applicant is not owner. owners authorization
~Own o Lease ~ In Escrow o Option to purchase is required to process request. See signature
on Page Two.
Engineer/Agent HOOPER KNOWLTON III 801-582-5347/801-54]-0953
ERIC SWANSON 303-763-8500 ext. 11 f 303-807-3969_
.'1QineerfAgent Address 1445 CANTERB UR Y DR., SALT LAKE CITY, UT, 84108
141 UNION BLVE.. SUTIE 330. LAKEWOOD. CO 80228 ,
IGENERAL PROJECT DESCRIPTION (for all types) I
Project Name I Proposed Land Use(s):AtJTOMOI3ILE DEALERSHIP
CHULA VISTA AUTO I)ARK NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN BUS TRANSIT PARKING
General Description of Proposed Project
(Please use Appendix A to provide a fuli description and jusi/ticatlon for the prOject]
SEE PROJECT DESCRIPTION STATEMENT
SEE PROJECT JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT
-
I
ISUBJECT PROPERTY INFORMATION (for all types) Ii
localion/Street Address
MAIN STREET BETWEEN BRANDYWINE AND MAXELL RD.
Assessor Parcel No. {Altach I~' "necessorvi[ Total Acreage Redevelopment Area {if applicable! I
I
644-041.0] thru 14; & 17 thm ] 9 38.8] acr YES 90 - 02 i
~U!Tent General Plan \Jeslgnatlon J~urrenTTone Designation fJlanned community (il applicable) I
INDUSTRIAL f COMMERCIAL
l~ufTent Land Use Is Iris In Montgomery S.P? I
V ACANT LAND ~
~V?-
~
""""'-- ~
"""':-..-- -
01Y OF
:HULA VISTA
FOfIM B. (PAGE 1 OF 2)
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Phuming & Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
(619)691-5101
Development Processing
Application Form - Type B
Page One
/fo"/QQ
~(~
-.-
"--- --
~=~~
CITY Of CHULA VISTA
Planning & Building Department
276 fourth Avenue
(619)691-5101
Development Processing
Application Form - Type B
Page Two
I (staff IJSe ontv)
Case No.:
:JTY Of
,-, .JlA VISTA
IGENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
General Development Plan Name
r
Total Acres
Prooosed Land Uses
Commercial:
Parks:
Community Purpose:
Public/Quasi:
Residential
Single Family Detached:
Single Family AtJached:
Duplexes:
Apartments:
Condominiums:
Totals:
38.81 Acres
Acres
Acres
Acres
Industrial:
Schools:
Circulation:
Open Space:
38.81 Acres
Acres
Acres
Acres
Range
to
to
to
to
to
to
Units
Units
Units
Units
Units
Units
Acres
Acres
Acres
Acres
. Acres
Acres
\l9ENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
r >sed Land Use Designation
t Please state why the General Plan should be changed
I NOT APPLICABLE
IANNEXATION rV;~ffi:Ref. No. \'
Prezoning
NOT APPLICABLE
,
V ,
I
,ITENTATI E SUBDIVISION MAP
I SubdMsion Name
I CYTract No.
t
I
I
i Minimum Lot Size No. orUnrts Average Lot Size
!
IZONE CHANGE NOT APPLICABLE I:
o Rezoning 0 Prezoning o Setback I Propased Zoning
,1J"~~,~:',I~~J~;~: Il' ~~~~
OTA Y MESA VENTURES 1, LLC~ti
Prrnt Owner Name Owner Signature
(Required if Applicant is nor Owner)
ri~./$7" <7~" .tcoit
te .'
Date
/77/00
Appendix A
PROJECT DESCRIPTION AND JUSTIFICATION
PROJECT NAME CHULA VISTA AUTO PARK NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN
KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS. LLC
APPLICANT NAME: OTAY MESA VENTURES II, LLC
Please describe fully the proposed project, any and all construction that may be
accomplished as a result of approval of this project and the project's benefits to yourself,
the property, the neighborhood and the City of Chula Vista. Include any details
necessary to adequately explain the scope and/or operation of the proposed project.
You may include any background information and supporting statements regarding the
reasons for, or appropriateness of, the application. Use an addendum sheet if
necessary.
Fot all Conditional Use Permits or Variances, please address the required "Findings" as
listed in listed in the Application Procedural Guide.
Description & Justification.
SEE PROJECT DESCRIPTION STATEMENT
SEE PROJECT JUSTIFICATION STATEMENT
/6
Appendix B
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
You are required to file a Statement of Disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests. payments,
- campaign contributions, on all matters which will require discretionary action on the part of the City
Juncil, Planning Commission, and all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having financial interest in the property which is the subject of the
application or the contract, e g., owner applicant, contractor. subcontractor, material supplier.
OT A Y MESA VENTURESn, LLC
KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS, LLC
2. If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corpotation or owning any partnership interest
in the partnership.
NOT APPLICABLE
3. If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is non-ptofit organization or a trust, list the names of
any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of
the trust.
NOT APPLICABLE
4 Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff,
Boards. Commissions, Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No
If yes, please indicate person(s):
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or
independent contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggtegate, contributed more than $1.000 to a
Councilmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No X If yes, state which
Councilmember(s):
Date:
(NOTE: ATTACH ADDITIONAL PAGES AS NECES
AUGUST 9TH, 2002
e of . pplicant ,tl~
, ./
~HOOPER KNOWLTON III'
Pnnt or type name of contractor/applicant
. Person IS defined 1.15 "Anv I1ldIVldu.al, firm. co-partflersJllp. Joml venture, association. soclQi club. /reaterno/ or1!QI1l::011Of1, corpora/IOn,
".Huh', (rust. reCt'I\','r, SVndICQIl', this alld om' olher cO/mfv, elf" Gild cOllnlry, elf\' mUniCIpality. district, or other po/wcal suhd/\'/SlrJfI, or oln'
,)[I:e,. proUt) or t'OmhlllJl/()f! actin>: 0.\ <1 unll .
'"
PROJECT JUSTIFICATION
CHULA VISTA AUTO PARK NORTH
SPECIFIC PLAN
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Thejustifications for the Chula Vista Auto Park North Specific Plan in Chula Vista, California,
are as follows:
DEMAND FOR AUTOMOBILE DEALERSHIP PROPERIT
Presently there is a demand for automobile dealerships property in Chula Vista. This is
underscored by the fact that both Daimler Chrysler and Toyota have determined that the
Chula Vista area and population basis will support new dealerships. Toyota spend nearly
18 months analyzing the market area and dynamics as they "cleared" the area for a potential
dealership. Their announcement on May 16'h, 2002, that a new Toyota dealership "point"
would be awarded to Chula Vista underscores the present demand for automobile dealership
development and expansion of the present Chula Vista Auto Mall. Additionally, this is
supported by Chryslers desire to have a new dealership which is south of their present Dodge
/ Chrysler dealerships in National City.
ECONOMIC
Since the closure of the Darling Delaware rendering facility in 1982, the Darling property
has provided the City of Chula Vista with virtually no economic tax base beyond' a raw
ground value. As a result the City has had minimal property tax from this 38.81 acre
property. The current property tax roll for the 18 lots contained in the 38.81 acre site owned
by Otay Mesa Ventures II, LLC, is $26,266.92. The proposed Chula Vista Auto Park North
property will have an economic valuation in excess $30,000,000 upon completion of all
dealership construction and economic stabilization. If the property tax mill levy is .085%,
the base property tax yield for the property will provide the City of Chula Vista with and
annual revenue of $267, 750, or a ten-fold increase in property taxes. Considering
only the economic basis of the proposed development should provide the City with
justification to approve the Chula Vista Auto Park North Expansion. The greater economic
benefit to the City of Chula Vista is the City's participation in the sales tax revenue. It is
anticipated that the proposed dealerships in the Chula Vista Auto Mall expansion will have
a combined annual sales revenue in excess of$100,000,000. It is anticipated that the taxable
revenue will exceed $75,000,000. With the City's 1% sales tax participation, the City
should anticipate sales tax revenue of approximately $750,000. Therefore, the
combined property tax and sales tax revenue should exceed $1,000,000 to the City
of Chula Vista.
20
Project Justification
Chula Vista Auto Park North Expausion
August 8", 2002
Page :2
TAX INCREMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT DISTRICT
Further economic incentive for the projects justification is that the property lies within the
City of Chula Vista's Redevelopment District 90-02, created in April of 1993. Because the
property is within an RDA district, the increase in property tax valuation will significantly
add to the RDA's tax increment and thereby further support the RDA's ability to sponsor
redevelopment of areas within the RDA's boundaries. This continued effort on the part of
the RDA to upgrade the economic basis of the RDA district supports the purpose for the
RDA in assisting the economic development of the City of Chula Vista.
INCREASED EMPLOYMENT BASE FOR TIlE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Given the approximate 158,400 to 200,000 square feet of anticipated dealership and
dealership support services, that is contemplated in the proposed development, the range of
employment will be between 150 to 300 employees. This increased employment basis
provides additional justification for the approval of the proposed project.
IMPROVEMENT OF BLIGHTED AREA and RAW GROUND UTILIZATION
Since the formation of the Redevelopment District 90-02 in April of 1993, there have been
a number of economic improvements to the RDA district. The construction of the Fuller
Honda & Ford automobile dealership together with People's Chevrolet have had a
significant economic impact on the RDA. The utilization of raw undeveloped ground has
added to the economic basis of the RDA and provided increased property values.
Additionally, the sales tax revenue generated by the automobile sales has enhanced the City
of Chula Vista's overall general fund. The proposed project will add to the improved real
estate values in the immediate area and will provide greater utilization of the existing
property so as to achieve its highest and best use.
VISUAL ENHANCEMENT TO MAIN STREET
As an in-fill property, the proposed project will add significantly to the streetscape of Main
Street. Upon completion, the projects landscape theme along Main Street and the
architectural detail of the buildings will provide a significant improvement to the overall
visual aesthetics of Main Street. The Chula Vista Auto Mall will add to the Cars & Guitars
theme that is being promoted by the Community Development Department.
21
ATTACHMENT 7
DRAFf CITY COUNCIL ORDINANCE
22-
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
ADOPTING A SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM-02-04) FOR THE AUTO PARK NORTH
EXPANSION (KNOWLTON REALTY ADVISORS, LLC & OTAY MESA
VENTURES II, LLC).
I. RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the areas of land, which are the subject of this Ordinance, are represented in
Exhibit "A" and for the purpose of general description herein consist of 38.81 acres located on the
north side of Main Street between Brandywine Avenue and Maxwell Road ("Project Site"); and
B. Project; Application
WHEREAS, on January 1, 2003 Knowlton Realty Advisors, LLC and Otay Mesa Ventures
II. LLC ("Developer") filed an application requesting the adoption of a Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
for the development of auto dealership lots and supporting use lots on the Project Site ("Project");
and
C. Planning Commission Record on Applications
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on said Project
on May 14, 2003, and voted to recommend that the City Council adopt the Specific Plan (PCM-
02-04); and
WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning
Commission at their public hearing on this Project held on May 14, 2003, and the minutes and
resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding; and
D. City Council Record on Applications
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the City Council on
May 27, 2003 on the application and to receive the recommendations of the Planning
Commission and to hear public testimony with regard to the same; and
E. Owner Participation Agreement
WHEREAS, at the same City Council meeting at which this Ordinance was introduced for
first reading (May 27, 2003), the City Council approved Resolution No. by which it
approved an Owner Participation Agreement with the Project applicant.
II. NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby finds, determines,
and ordains as follows:
A. Certification of Compliance with CEQA
The City Council does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-02-006) has been prepared in accordance with
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-02-006).
23
Ordinance
Page 2
B. Independent Judgment of 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 and Reporting Program
(IS-02-006) in the form presented has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of
Chula Vista and hereby adopt same.
C. Adoption of Specific Plan
The City Council does hereby adopt Specific Plan (PCM-02-04), attached hereto, finding
that it is consistent with the General Plan and would implement the Redevelopment Plan for the
Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area, and that the public necessity, conveniences,
general welfare, and good zoning practice supports its approval and implementation.
III. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Ordinance is dependent upon
the enforceability of each and every term, provision, and condition herein stated; and that in the
event that anyone or more terms, provisions, or conditions are determined by a Court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal, or unenforceable. this Ordinance shall be deemed to
be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
IV. 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
Laurie Madigan
Community Development Director
Ann Moore
City Attorney
z1
ATTACHMENT 8
DRAFT SPECIFIC PLAN
2,5
AUTO PARK NORTH SPECIFIC PLAN
2~
TABLE OF CONTENTS
VII. Implementation
VIII. Environmental Review
Page I
Page I
Page 1
Page I
Page I
Page 2
Page 2
Page 2
Page 2
Page 3
Page 4
Page 4
Page 5
Page 6
Page 6
Page 7
Page 7
Page 7
Page 7
Page 7
Page 7
Page 7
Page 7
Page 8
Page 8
Page 8
Page 8
Page 9
Page 9
Page 9
Page 9
Page 9
Page 9
Page 9
Page 10
Page 10
Page 10
Page 10
Page 10
Page II
Page 11
Page 12
Page 12
Page 12
Page 12
Page 13
27
I. Introduction
A. Purpose
B. Statutory Authority
C. Relationship to Other Plans and Policies
D. Specific Plan Objectives .
E. Site Location
F. Surrounding Uses
G. Site Characteristics
H. Issues and Opportunities
I. Development Concept
II. Land Use Regulations
A. Land Use Distribution
B. Permitted Uses
C. Prohibited Uses
D. Outdoor Uses Prohibited - Exceptions
III. Development Standards
A. Lot Configuration
B. Lot CoveragelFloor Area
C. Height
D. Building Setbacks
E. Parking
F. Landscaping
G. Signs
IV. Design Guidelines
V. Performance Standards and Conditions
A. Hours of Operation
B. Promotional Displays and Events
C. Deliveries and Loading/Unloading
D. Outdoor Speakers and Pagers
E. Test Driving
F. Carwash Facilities
G. Facility Maintenance
H. Rideshare Incentives
I. Lighting
VI. Infrastructure and Services
A. Water
B. Wastewater
C. Storm Water and Drainage
D. Solid Waste and Recycling
E. Energy
F. Streets and Circulation
IX. Amendments to the Specific Plan
X. Auto Dealer Association
XI. Enforcement
I. INTRODUCTION
A. Purpose
The Auto Park North Specific Plan, ("Project"), is a policy and regulatory tool that will guide the
development of the Project site using a focused development scheme. It provides a bridge between
the broad policies of the General Plan and the detailed development objectives for the site. This
Specific Plan supercedes the applicable zoning provisions for the site by establishing land use and
development regulations that are specifically adapted to the proposed development of the Project
site. The provisions of this Specific Plan are intended to be responsive to constraints and
opportunities on the site and the objectives of the Project while implementing adopted policy.
The Auto Park North Specific Plan has been prepared to plan and implement the northerly expansion
of the Chula Vista Auto Park, ("Auto Park"), on Main Street in the City ofChula Vista. The guiding
rationale behind this Specific Plan is to ensure the orderly and viable development of the Project site
and the implementation of the policies of the General Plan and the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment
Project Area. The comprehensive and coordinated development of the northerly expansion of the
Auto Park will benefit the City and the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area by removing
blight and facilitating new development that will expand commercial opportunities and the
employment base.
B. Statutory Authority
The Auto Park North Specific Plan is adopted by ordinance in accordance with Chapter 19.07,
Specific Plans, ofTitle 19, Zoning, of the Chula Vista Municipal Code and Sections 65450-65457 of
the California Government Code. Chapter 19.07 adopts and incorporates the Government Code
Sections 65450-65457 by reference as though set forth in full.
C. Relationship to Other Plans and Policies
The Auto Park North Specific Plan implements the broad policies of the General Plan and the
Redevelopment Plan for the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area by establishing
permitted land uses, development standards, design guidelines, and entitlement processes for the
expansion of the Chula Vista Auto Park. This Specific Plan supersedes the zone regulations for the
Project site. Where in conflict with the Zoning Ordinance, this Specific Plan shall apply; and where
this Specific Plan does not address a topic, the Zoning Ordinance and other applicable policies and
regulations shall apply.
D. Specific Plan Objectives
The primary objectives of the Auto Park North Specific Plan are:
I. The expansion ofthe existing auto park to create a regional destination automobile sales and
service park with supporting uses.
2. A distinct identity for the Auto Park and a thematic link to other attractions in the Otay
Valley through the Main Street Streetscape Master Plan.
3. The comprehensive and coordinated development, operation, and maintenance ofthe Project
site.
2f1
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
4. An improved image of the Main Street corridor and adjacent land uses.
5. The provision of all necessary infrastructure, services, and facilities at the time of need.
E. Site Location
The Auto Park North Specific Plan site is located along Main Street within the City of Chula Vista,
approximately one half mile east oflnterstate S05. The Project site consists of approximately 38.81
acres on the north side of Main Street to the east of Brandywine A venue and to the west of Maxwell
Road.
F. Surrounding Uses
Immediately adjacent land uses include single-family residences to the north, light industrial uses to
the east and west (including the City's Public Works Center to the east), and the site for the proposed
easterly expansion of the Auto Park on the south side of Main Street (Auto Park East Specific Plan).
The existing Auto Park is located to the southeast of the Project site along the south side of Main
Street. The Otay Valley Regional Park is located to the south of the existing Auto Park and the
proposed easterly expansion of the Auto Park. The Otay Landfill is located to the northeast of the
Project site.
G. Site Characteristics
The Project site includes approximately 3S.Sl acres on the north side of Main Street and is
approximately 1,284 feet deep with 1,323 feet of rrontage along Main Street. The site was
previously subdivided into IS lots and is primarily undeveloped with the exception of partial street
improvements (Delniso Court and Roma Court) and other inrrastructure. The site has been
previously rough graded and terraced by a previous property owner. There is an elevation difference
of over I OO-feet between the rrontage along Main Street and the northern boundary line.
H. Issues and Opportunities
The depth of the site and the elevation differences on the site could contribute to visibility and
accessibility issues for certain types ofland uses on the rear portion of the site. In addition, the prime
arterial designation for Main Street is a consideration for suitable types of land use for the site.
However. these same attributes present opportunities for appropriate types ofland uses such as the
proposed Auto Park North expansion. The Specific Plan addresses these and other issues and
opportunities through land use and development regulations.
1. Issues
a. The depth of the site is a development consideration for land uses that require or desire
visibility and/or rrontage along the primary street serving the site.
b. The elevation differences on the site and the terraced building pads could pose an
accessibility and visibility challenge for certain types ofland uses.
c. The adjacent residential uses to the north require consideration and could limit the desirable
Page:; (':-13
~
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
types of non-residential uses of the site.
d. The previous uses of the site and current environmental conditions could limit the types of
uses and improvements that could be allowed on portions of the site.
e. Main Street is designed as a prime arterial intended to move large volumes of traffic at
relatively high speeds with minimal access. Adequate access to the developed site would
require signalized intersection(s) to allow safe access.
f. Key intersections and the Main Street corridor east of Interstate 805 lack identity and the
existing streetscapes have no unifYing theme.
2. Opportunities
a. The planned development of the site will provide for an appropriate use of the under-utilized
property and further the redevelopment objectives of the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment
Proj ect Area.
b. Comprehensive planning and design will result in efficient circulation, safe access, and the
effective use of infrastructure and other improvements.
c. There are adequate public facilities and services that now exist or that can be easily provided
to serve the site.
d. The relative elevation difference between the site and the adjacent residential development to
the north creates a natural and effective aesthetic, light, and noise buffer.
e. Key intersections can be used to create urban focal points, and this segment of Main Street
can be unified under one streetscape and landscape theme.
f. Close proximity to Interstate 805, the water park, the amphitheater, the river valley, and other
potential land use attractions in the Otay Valleycreate the opportunity to develop a
coordinated theme and image for the Main Street corridor.
I. Development Concept
The Chula Vista Auto Park is intended to be a regional automobile sales and service destination
located within the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area. The existing 24-acre Auto Park
was constructed in 1991-1995. The Auto Park North expansion will add approximately 39 acres, and
the proposed Auto Park East expansion will add approximately 29 acres to the Auto Park for a total
of approximately 92 acres.
There are two development concepts for the Auto Park North Specific Plan: Option 1 consists of
eleven parcels (Appendix A); Option 2 consists of seven parcels (Appendix B). Both options
propose lots with frontage on Main Street that would be developed with new car dealerships. Lots to
the interior of the site would be developed with supporting uses such as automotive services and
inventory parking lots. Each of the lots may be developed independently, in accordance with the
Auto Park North Specific Plan.
This Specific Plan would allow the construction of up to 130,000 square feet of dealership buildings.
The floor area for these buildings would vary depending on the development proposals submitted
for individual dealerships. These buildings would typically include showrooms, offices, service
stations, and parts departments. This Specific Plan would also allow up to 93,450 square feet of
floor area for supporting automotive uses.
Page 3 of IJ
30
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
II. LAND USE REGULATIONS
A. Land Use Distribution
The Auto Park North Specific Plan allows the development of new automobile sales dealerships
and supporting uses. The distribution of permitted uses shall be consistent with either Option I
or Option 2 below.
---;~rce;--- --j--- Automobile
Sales
P
I
2
3
4
-. ---.__._._--~
5
6
. .___..____n________ . _. _.__ _ _
7
8
.---------------..------..-+.-.
9
10
II
"n___'
--'--
Option 1
i AutomobilelInventory I
I l'~rking :
Supporting
Services
---_.._-_..~.
P I
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
P
Option 2
r-
!H
Parcel
Automobile
Sales
p
i AutomobilelInventory
i Parking
Supporting
Services
I
-----....-..-.,.--.---.--.....--
2
3
-.-.-- ---,---------------"".. --
4
5
6
7
P
P
-~-i
~,-_.
P
P
,
~-~---_...,------
.__.______..__n_______n_
--...-...---
....-..-...-.-.----+.-.-
P
P
.. ~_._._----_._-
.--- -...----..---
- -------------------.,.
Page 4 of 13
31
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
B. Permitted Uses
The following are the uses pennitted within the Auto Park North Specific Plan:
I. Automobile Sales. Automobile, as used in this Specific Plan, shall mean passenger cars,
light trucks, and motorcycles.
a. Retail sales, leasing, and display of new automobiles;
b. Fleet sales and wholesaling of new automobiles when incidental to on-site retail sales of
new automobiles;
c. Retail sales, leasing, and display of used automobiles when incidental to on-site retail
sales of new automobiles and not exceeding 50 percent of total inventory;
d. Automobile rentals when incidental to on-site retail sales of new automobiles;
e. Automobile inventory parking when incidental to on-site retail sales of new automobiles;
f. Automobile service, maintenance, and repair when incidental to on-site retail sales of
new automobiles.
2. Automobile inventory Parking
3. Supporting Services
a. After Market Automobile Accessories Sales, Installation, and Service
b. A TV Retail Sales and Service
c. Auto Glass Repair and Auto Glass Tinting
d. Auto Parts Sales
e. Auto Tuning
f. Auto Upholstery
g. Automobile Audio and Video Display Sales, Installation, and Service
h. Automobile Detailing
1. Automobile Finance and Leasing Office
J. Automobile Parts and Inventory Warehousing
k. Car Rental
I. Car Washing
m. Collision Repair
n. Custom Wheels / After Market Specialty Wheels
o. Lube Service
p. Motorcycle Retail Sales and Service
q. Muffler Repair
r. Office
s. Restaurant / Deli
t. RV Sales, Parts, and Service
Page 5 of 13
3~
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
u. Tire Sales, Installation, and Service
v. Transmission Repair
w. Truck Rental and Trailer Rental
x. Used Car Sales / Specialty Used Car Sales
4. Accessory Uses and Structures
Accessory uses and structures that are customarily appurtenant to the above permitted uses,
provided that such uses and structures are screened from public view or incorporated into the
architecture and design of this Specific Plan and subsequent development plans.
C. Prohibited Uses
Any use not expressly pennitted by this Specific Plan is prohibited.
D. Outdoor Uses Prohibited - Exceptions
Outdoor uses and storage are prohibited, and all permitted uses shall be conducted within completely
enclosed buildings, except for the following:
I. Automobile display.
2. Automobile inventory parking.
3. Parking and loading facilities.
4. Dining
Page 6 of 13
.13
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
III. DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS
A. Lot Configuration
Lot configuration shall substantially conform to either Option I or Option 2.
B. Lot Coverage/Floor Area
The maximum lot coverage shall not exceed 50 percent. The total floor area for dealership buildings
shall not exceed 130,000 square feet on the Project site. The total floor area for supporting use
buildings shall not exceed 93,450 square feet on the Project site.
C. Height
The maximum height of buildings and other structures shall not exceed 45 feet, except as provided in
the Zoning Ordinance for architectural features and other exceptions.
D. Building Setbacks
I. Main Street Setback: 40 feet.
2. Internal Street Setback: 25 feet.
3. Side and Rear Setbacks: 20 feet.
E. Parking
Off-street parking and loading shall be provided pursuant to the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance.
On-street parking shall be allowed, except along Main StTeet.
F. Landscaping
A minimum of20 percent of the Project site shall be landscaped. Lots shall be landscaped to a depth
of at least I 0 feet along property lines, except for approved driveways, parking areas, display areas,
loading areas, and other approved facilities. Landscape plans shall be consistent with the Design
Guidelines (Section IV) and shall be submitted with the required development plans to the Design
Review Committee for design review (Section VII).
G. Signs
In addition to the following specific requirements, the Municipal Code provisions regulating signs
shall apply to signs within the Auto Park North Specific Plan.
I. A planned sign program shall be prepared for each parcel and shall be submitted with the
required development plans to the Design Review Committee for design review (Section
VII). Planned sign programs shall be consistent with the Design Guidelines (Section IV).
Page 7 of 13
.34
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
2. Off-site signs shall only be permitted through an off-site sign program that has been
approved by the Design Review Committee through design review (Section VII). Off-site
sign programs shall be consistent with the Design Guidelines (Section IV).
3. The following signs are prohibited, except when approved as part of a promotional display or
event (Section V.B.):
a. Pole signs.
b. Roof signs.
c. Painted signs.
d. Message boards.
e. Marquee signs.
f. Window signs.
g. Portable signs.
h. Flashing, animated, or moving signs or signs that simulate movement.
1. Banners.
J. Pennants.
k. Streamers.
I. Balloons.
m. Inflatables.
IV. DESIGN GUIDELINES
The City of Chula Vista Design Manual and Landscape Manual and the Main Street Streetscape
Master Plan shall apply to the Auto Park, including individual parcels. The landscape design of
individual parcels shall also be consistent with the approved landscape design of the existing Auto
Park. Improvements and landscaping in the Main Street right-of-way and adjacent setbacks shall be
consistent with the Main Street Streetscape Master Plan.
V. PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND CONDITIONS
The perfonnance standards of the Zoning Code shall apply to land uses in the Auto Park. In
addition, the following standards and conditions of operation shall apply to land uses in the Auto
Park.
A. Hours of Operation
The hours of operationlbusiness hours shall be limited to 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Monday through
Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Saturday, Sunday, and federal holidays. The hours of operation
for collision repair facilities shall be limited to 7:30 a.m. to 6:00 p.m., Monday through Friday.
B. Promotional Displays and Events
Promotional displays and events (Including signs listed in Section III.G.3.) may be allowed for each
dealership up to 60 days each calendar year subject to the review and approval of plans by the Zoning
Page 8 of 13
.35
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
Administrator.
C. Deliveries and Loading/Unloading
Deliveries and loading and unloading shall be prohibited in the public right-of-way.
D. Outdoor Speakers and Pagers
The use of outdoor speakers, intercoms, sound systems, and audible pagers shall be prohibited.
E. Test Driving
Each dealership shall submit a map designating areas for test driving to the Zoning Administrator for
review and approval prior to occupancy. Test driving in residential areas shall be prohibited.
F. Carwash Facilities
Car washing within the Project area shall only be allowed at an approved carwash facility. Carwash
facilities shall include water recycling, and runoff/pollution prevention features.
G. Facility Maintenance
Facilities, grounds, and appurtenant off-site improvements, including buildings, structures, signs,
landscaping, irrigation, parking lots, streets, medians, parkways, slopes, and drainage systems shall
be maintained as provided in the covenants, conditions, and restrictions (Section X).
H. Rideshare Incentives
Businesses shall provide employees with rideshare or alternative commuting incentives. Preferential
parking shall be provided for carpools and vanpools.
I. Lighting
Lighting plans shall be submitted as part of the Design Review process for the development of
individual lots. The lighting plans shall be consistent with the plan prepared by Spaulding Lighting,
dated December 14, 2002. Non-security lighting shall be turned offby 10:00 p.m.
Page 9 of 13
j~
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
VI. INFRASTRUCTURE AND SERVICES
A. Water
Development shall be consistent with the requirements of the Otay Water District and shall comply
with the following water conservation measures: I) facilities shall be fitted with low flow water
fixtures, dual flush toilets, waterless urinals, high-efficiency dishwashers (in restaurants), air-cooled
ice machines (in restaurants), conductivity meters (on cooling towers), and pre-rinse sprayers (in
restaurants); 2) water efficient landscaping shall be used, including native vegetation and drought
tolerant plant materials; 3) water efficient irrigation systems shall be used, including
evapotranspiration.(ET) controllers, rain sensors, soil moisture measuring devices, low flow emitters,
and drip irrigation; 4) carwash facilities shall be equipped with water-recycling features; 5) landscape
plans shall comply with the City Landscape Manual, including the preparation of a water
management plan; 6) reclaimed water shall be used when feasible; 7) all hot water pipes shall be
insulated; 8) pressure reducing valves shall be installed at all meters; and 9) all individual tenants
shall be submetered. Other measures may be proposed pursuant to the City ofChula Vista Water
Conservation Plan Guidelines.
B. Wastewater
Sewer service to the Project site would be provided by the City, which operates and maintains its
own wastewater collection system, which connects to the City of San Diego Metropolitan Sewer
System. A sewer study/analysis shall be prepared for all development within the Project. Any
necessary easements for the installation, operation, and maintenance of sewer facilities shall be
provided. A sewage participation fee and other applicable sewer fees shall be paid at the time of
connection to the public sewer.
C. Storm Water and Drainage
All development shall comply with the City of Chula Vista Stonn Water Management Standards
Requirements Manual and shall employ Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent pollution of
the stonn water conveyance systems, both during and after construction. In addition, all
development shall comply with the requirements of the National Pollution Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) Municipal Pennit, including Standard Urban Stonn Water Mitigation Plans
(SUSMP) and Numeric Sizing Criteria. A Stonn Water Pollution Prevention Program (SWPPP)
shall be implemented concurrently with the commencement of any grading activities in the Project
area.
D. Solid Waste and Recycling
All development plans shall provide recycling and trash enclosures with sufficient capacity to
provide for the separate collection of trash, mixed paper, rigid container, and yard waste generated by
each business with not more than five weekly collection stops per material per week. Enclosures
shall be sized pursuant to the Recycling and Solid Waste Plan Guide. A solid waste and recycling
plan for each business shall be submitted to the Special Operations Manager forreview and approval
Page 10 of 13
37
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
prior to construction. Automotive businesses may take part in the City sponsored State Certified
Used Oil and Filter Drop Off Program.
E. Energy
Energy-efficient measures shall be incorporated into all development plans pursuant to established
building efficiency programs or a custom program using construction methods that exceed California
Title 24, Part 6, Energy Efficiency Standards by at least 10 percent.
F. Streets and Circulation
Main Street is designated as a prime arterial. The development of the Project site and appurtenant
off-site facilities shall be consistent with the standards and specifications for this roadway
classification, unless otherwise modified by discretionary action.
Signalized intersections shall be provided at all Main Street intersections to allow for protected
turning movements. Street alignments and intersections shall be considered and coordinated with the
alignments and intersections of streets on the south side of Main Street.
Driveway access shall not be allowed along Main Street. The numbers and locations of driveway
approaches shall be minimized. Parallel on-street parking shall be allowed within the Project
boundaries.
Public transit improvements shall be integrated into the Project design as detennined by the
responsible transit agencies. These improvements may include, but are not limited to, bus turnouts,
shelters, and benches. Pedestrian, bicycle, and other transportation modes shall be accommodated as
appropriate or required within the public right-of-way and on individual lots. All improvements
shall meet ADA requirements for parking and accessibility.
Page 11 of 13
38
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
VII. IMPLEMENTATION
A. The City's review of applications and plans shall be governed by the provisions of this Specific
Plan, any existing or future agreements, the adopting ordinances and resolutions, and applicable
federal, state, or local ordinances.
B. Modifications to provisions of this Specific Plan may be made by the Zoning Administrator upon
findings of substantial confonnance with this Specific Plan. Ifthe Zoning Administrator is unable to
make findings of substantial confonnance, then an amendment ofthis Specific Plan may be proposed
(Section IX).
C. Subsequent to the adoption of the Auto Park North Specific Plan and final map approvals,
development plans for individual parcels shall be submitted to the Design Review Committee for
review and approval pursuant to the design review process of the Zoning Ordinance and prior to the
issuance of permits for the parcel.
D. All required off-site improvements, including, but not limited to landscaping, medians, parkways,
streets, sidewalks, curbs and gutters, streetlights, traffic signals, signs, utilities, and other facilities,
services, and infTastructure, shall be completed prior to issuance of final occupancy.
E. All land divisions and consolidations, improvement plans, grading plans, landscape plans, and
building plans shall comply with local, state, and federal codes, regulations, standards, and
guidelines; this Specific Plan; and any existing or future agreements.
VIII. Environmental Review
A Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND) has been prepared for the Auto Park North Specific Plan,
pursuant to the California Environmental Act (CEQA), finding that the Project with mitigation will
not create significant environmental impacts. This environmental document shall be considered
adequate and no other environmental review shall be required for subsequent development plans,
provided the plans are in confonnance with the Auto Park North Specific Plan. The project revisions
and/or mitigation measures contained in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
shall be implemented by the Project and, where in conflict with the provisions ofthe Specific Plan or
other applicable policies, the MMRP shall apply.
IX. Amendments to the Specific Plan
The Auto Park North Specific Plan may be amended pursuant to applicable state and local laws,
codes, and regulations.
X. Auto Dealer Association
An auto dealer association shall be established and maintained for the duration of the Project. All
auto dealerships and other business and property owners within the Auto Park North Specific Plan
shall be required to maintain membership at all times with the association. Articles ofincorporation,
by-laws, and covenants, conditions, and restrictions (CC&R's) shall be prepared and submitted to the
Page 12 of 13
PI
Auto Park North Specific Plan (PCM-02-04)
Redevelopment Agency for review and approval and shall take effect prior to occupancy.
The CC&R's shall include provisions for the maintenance and operation of dealerships and all other
land uses, including appurtenant rights-of-way and off-site facilities. These provisions shall include
maintenance standards for buildings, structures, signs, landscaping, irrigation, parking lots, private
streets, medians, parkways, slopes, drainage systems, and all other infrastructure.
XI. Enforcement
The provisions of the Auto Park North Specific Plan shall be enforced pursuant to the provisions for
enforcement contained in the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
Page 13 of 13
40
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item:
Meeting Date: OS/28/2003
6
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Conditional Use Pennit PCC-03-55, proposal to allow a
second-story addition, which includes an attic, to a single-family dwelling
that exceeds the allowed height limit in the R-l zone. The project site is
located at 626 Second A venue. The applicant is Joseph Bustamante.
The applicant proposes first and second story additions totaling 2,413 square feet of floor area to an
existing 1,079 square foot single-family dwelling. The second story addition will exceed the 28-foot
height limit in the R-I zone.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has concluded that this project is a Class 3(a) categorical
exemption from environmental review CEQA Section 15303, New Construction or Conversion of
Small Structures.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt the attached Resolution PCC -
03-55 based on the findings and conditions contained therein.
DISCUSSION:
I. Background
The project site is located within the 600 block of Second Avenue. The block is developed with a
range between single-story and three-story single-family homes; some of which are historically
designated and listed on the City's Registry of Historical Homes. The proposed project requires a
conditional use permit because a portion ofthe project will exceed the allowable 28-foot height limit
requirement in the R-I zone. Section 19.24.060 of the Chula YistaMunicipal Code (CYMC) allows
an increase to the height limit with the approval of a conditional use permit.
The project would typically be an administrative conditional use permit considered by the Zoning
Administrator. However, the Zoning Administrator referred the project to the Planning Commission
because neighbors submitted a petition opposing the project's height (Attachment 3). The neighbors
believe that the project will be out of scale and character with the neighborhood. However, the
applicant is adamant about developing his house and property in the manner proposed. The applicant
submitted a petition from neighbors supporting the project with his application. Additionally, staff
had recently received letters from neighbors who support the project (Attachment 4). Since it
appears that any decision by the Zoning Administrator would be appealed, it is appropriate to place
the matter directly before the Planning Commission.
/
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date: OS/28/03
2. Site Characteristics
The property is 17,488 square-feet in size, narrow and deep, and contains a 1,079 square-foot single-
story, single-family dwelling and an 800 square foot detached garage. The uses adjacent to the
property include single-family dwellings in all directions.
3. General Plan. Zoning and Land Use
Site:
North:
South:
East:
West:
General Plan
Residential, Low-Medium
Residential, Low-Medium
Residential, Low-Medium
Residential, Low-Medium
Residential, Low-Medium
Zoning
R-I
R-I
R-I
R-I
R-I
Current Land Use
Single-family residential
Single-family residential
Single-family residential
Single-family residential
Single-family residential
4. Proposal
The proposed project is 2,413 square feet of first and second-story additions to the existing dwelling
that will result in a total livable floor area 4,292 square feet.
5. Development Standards
DEVELOPMENT STANDARD
Height
Lot Coverage
Setbacks:
Front 25 feet 40 feet
Rear 20 feet 184 feet
Sides 10 feet each side 12 feet and 12.6 feet
Parking 2 spaces 2 spaces
Floor Area Ratio (FAR) 45 percent 25 percent
'Section 19.24.060 states that the height can be increased with a conditional use permit.
ALLOWEDIREQUIRED
28 feet (2.5 stories)
40 percent
PROPOSED
34 feet'
15 percent
ANAL YSIS:
The property is located in the R-I zone. The existing dwelling is adjacent to single-story dwellings
on each side. The proposed additions on the first floor are to the front and rear of the dwelling and
will maintain the existing 12 and 12.5-foot side yard setbacks. The second floor addition will
include an attic that the applicant will use as a hobby room. This will result in a 34-foot tall (3-story)
dwelling that exceeds the 28-foot height limit for the R-I zone. With the exception ofthe requested
height increase, the project meets all the other development standards for the R-I zone.
Staff surveyed the 600-block and identified a housing stock that ranges between single-story and
three-story dwellings with varying architectural styles. Three of the houses on the block appear to
exceed the height limit (Attachment 5). Staff believes that the proposed project is not out of
character, and will not be a detriment to the neighborhood because there are other two and three-
-2.
Page 3, Item:
Meeting Date: OS/28/03
story houses on the block. Furthermore, the proposal to build up rather than outward on the
narrow lot will preserve the large yard area, which is consistent with other properties on the
block.
CONCLUSION:
The proposed project has both supporters and opponents. After an analysis and field survey, staff
concludes that the project will not be out of character within the context of the other houses in the
neighborhood regarding height, and that the property is consistent with other properties on the block
with the intent to preserve the large open space area. The project meets all the development
standards of the R-I zone with the exception of the height. However, approval ofthis conditional
use pennit will allow the project to meet the R-I zone development requirements therefore; statI
recommends approval of the application request to exceed the height limit in accordance with the
findings and conditions of approval in the attached Planning Commission Resolution PCC-03-55.
ATTACHMENTS:
I. Locator Map
2. Resolution PCC-03-55
3. Petition/Opposition Letters
4. Petition/Support Letters
5. Aerial Photo of the 600 Block
J:\Planning\Michael\PCC Reports\PCC-03-55
3
,
\-,-' "'z '<.
'\, " '/'~ "". /,/ ,/A '). ..
,', ,'x, / '" '-.. \
..'- ',..' ""<" ./ , ,,'
/'" " /' ">, / // '""" ~_?
,>- ".,/' " -"" ,/ ^"
, ~" /'/ r'~'"-(--",~
. ,'., , ". , , '.
,"-..(/ / ;, v / "" / f \
--, / . ',' / I '
'j /'" '< / '" : .~/\
<, " '\ \ "< ,.,/' ,.- \
':'-.. I '\1\-
,. -'- , '.-
" \i('-
') ./'-\'i. \
\~ \'
.~-\~ \./
It/> I
I '
\~ \,
\- ,
..-\
_ A TT ACHMENT 1
~.\/' \ \ \___-v/ \ \ \ }_ .--.__
/ " '" \ \...r--: \ " \ l.-.-' _.r)" \
/ I \ ,~" - '\ 1\ I _\/' ___"\' \ \
, \.\..- \ \ \ ,..J--" '\--- \ \ \
\-'''\/ I \ , \..,).~~'!-r' S"{ \/ \ ",\\-"1/'\\
\ \ '. .c ..,.",~ I I },..,;..-.,.- , \ I
, ,""-~_l~-" ~. _ .r"'\""- \ \ \ _\__ \' \ \ \/.
\ J."-,,,- ._,""..,~ \ \ \ \ /,J....- \ \ " \_J/''-
\ ,-' \ ~~'T-'-c \ \ '. \_--'" \," \ ",.--
~.' \ ; \ \ " \__./\ '\' \ \ \,--~
, "\ I \ ' , - I' '\"
\/ " ,\..I \ \-1"'-' \ I I _\../,/ /-'\\
\ \ " I ,~/-'1 \ \ " \ /V"..-'-"I 0"
-\ \. .,.",- . _\/ \ \ \ \ _.\-__J."- _".__ "\- \ " \
\ 'I _,-{ I \ \ .5," V' /'\/'c '\ \ ., ,\",,,1\
'\ \ ,...." \ \- )/'-'~ -." \ \,\-.-;"#\--\ \ \
'\ \"-~~:s.~,-\ -\ /r\~\ \~"~~ \ ~\j".-"
/ /"\,/\ \ \ \J/\ ~ \ / /\----~y \-~'''--c\/ \\
. " \ \ " \ ~"",,#"', '~",1 '\ '
\ \ ",.,..-,,-- " '. ...,,''''- \. __ ..--- I \. ~..~r"'" \. .._ \,
\ \.~ , /.\-. .,- \___1 .' ~..r ....\ f '\'-- \.' ......-1-.-
\ ..,' _~..... r' \. ....,-- ,._~ .----- __.~\ I- \
-\ ~'::::, ;::r::'. '\ \/, ,,,1,,(\ \\,/ /,,)~ \ \
" \' ,,, I ,oj,\," I \. I 'i / 'Ii. ,--",0
\ -/; 1.~"\' ,\ \ 0
,........\ - \ \-..-" \ _,''--": \ " \ \ \ \-....-....- 00\
.... ). " , .- -" \. 'I ,. ......- --,-.,...., \. \. 'I \ _.J.--'-~ -.--.-- _.
\.-J~\\ \, / - '1,/ \ \ \ \\,)../' "",,,-,"1' --'\~
\' . . " ._.-, ' \ ,...."-.... .,-1- \. \ \ ....-. \
\, ; \ \ \-..~ \:.-_ .,\-- ,....S;~ __ S\_~~\-/\ \ \' II \"}\
\ /C'~ I ,o" ...p.\':"" , I, L '
\ " .--::>-'" .....- p.~' \. \ \ \ \, -'~, \
\" ,. \::::::/ \, /\ \ I .\ \, \,,,,.\ '''''\ \,0,0--1(
, ,"\ //A ( \ \ \ \,"VI \. \ /,
\ \/ ." ,..' ,,~\ \, ,- vv,' / \ t/> \//\ \,_"J,',\" \ \ \ \. \" 7
~1 \ / / \/ /, .v\~,~~:J:\\ \ /\\" .'\\-.\~;~-:;/\/ _<\,o\
' \ \ /\/ // ///~I ~ \//tAU!~'\/\ \ \ _,y
'".~L\ORCOIJ!ICOiN" \:\; - /t~\-\/. \ \"" ..\ \ \.. i,,\'~,,:;"':C\
/\ "II -//~_\~~\~~,. ,," ',,_\/~>;)~:~~~~\ \..//~\'~~{\\'i\\\-~'\\-\ \
\,,, /,v\ I ,,/ /-" \ -,,/,\,,- '\ \ / \ n\ \
,/ '\ // ).\ '1/ /v',. \ \/ ..).-'t' \ \/,,'~,
" ' --\ " /"", ,oj, I _ I , ,/-t" I \ \ },./
,-//A' //'-\\/-'-/ ~\ .-\ \\\/v/ ,,/'\
.' \- -,,\/ " \ \,. /'// /\- -\ -\ \ \",1-r /1"/-1 \.._/
" i Ill'\'\ \ \ \ ~' //\/.\\\ \-j..,/'j \//'
, , ,,' I \" '" \ \ \ 1/' "S, " \ / " \
\ -:\ j \'/\1'\ ,\/J.."'/ ~ J",:_'//\ \// )"/'\'''/''/'''\ '~/-
\ _,,",..e' ...\ _.r'.- '\ \ J- 4,"-\ \ .r \ ~. .-
\\j~C\- ~\ I \ / ,- ' 'I C \ \/'-' -\ ,/ //--1 \-/ ---:/ " .
\ -,\ \ \./ . .J \ \ \,'/ ,\ \/ ,/\ k/,,)
\" -....- .-<, . \__\../- -..' \-- ->". \.,/- --.. \ .-~ \.----
,
,
\
\
,
"
~ /
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DE PARTM E NT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
(!) APPLICANT, JOSEPH BUSTAMANTE C01JDmoIJAL u:se. FERMI'
PROJECT
ADDRESS, 626 SECOND AVENUE Request: Proposal for a variance on a residential
SCALE. additions that would exceed the current height
FILE NUMBER limitation on 28' feet.
NORTH No Scale ZAV-03-08
j:lhome\planninglcherrylcllocatorslzav0308,cdr 01.22,03 'I
ATTACHMENT 2
RESOLUTION NO. PCC 03-55
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,
PCC-03-SS FOR ADDITIONS TO A SINGLE-FAMILY
DWELLING INCLUDING A SECOND-STORY ADDITION
THAT EXCEEDS THE HEIGHT LIMIT IN THE R-t ZONE
LOCA TED AT 626 SECOND AVENUE.
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a conditional use pennit was filed with the
City of Chula Vista Planning Department on January 14, 2003, by Joseph Bustamante
"Applicant"; and
WHEREAS, said Applicant requests a conditional use pennit for additions to a single-
family dwe1ling inc1uding a second-story addition that exceeds the 28-foot height limit for the R-
I zone located at 626 Second Avenue. The second-story addition includes: three bedrooms, two
baths and a study; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator, in compliance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has concluded that this project is a Class 3 categorical
exemption from environmental review CEQA Section 15303, new construction and location of
limited numbers of new, small facilities or structures); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said
conditional use pennit 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 May 28,
2003, at 6:00 p.m. at Joseph Casillas Elementary School, 1130 East J Street, Chula Vista, 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 pennit application, the Planning Commission
voted to approve the conditional use permit; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista does hereby make the
findings required by the City's ru]es and regulations for the issuance of conditional use pennits,
as herein below set forth, and sets forth, there under, the evidentiary basis that permits the stated
finding to be made.
I. That the proposed use at this location is necessary or desirable to provide a service or
facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or the
community.
s-
The proposed additions to the existing single-family dwelling include a second-story
addition that will result in a 34-foot tall dwelling. The proposed height exceeds the 28-
foot height limit established for the R-I zone. Section 19.24.060 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code state that the building height of the main dwelling can be increased with
approval of a conditional use permit. The use on the property will not change or be
intensified as a result of the proposed project.
2. That such use wilJ 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.
The project will not impact the adjacent dwellings because the additions will maintain the
required setbacks. The neighborhood will not be impacted because the use on the
property will not be intensified. The project is not out of character with the other houses
on the block because there are other houses on the block that exceed the height limit
therefore; the project wilJ not be a detriment to the neighborhood. Additionally, the
project is subject to meeting all health, safety and general welfare standards and
regulations set forth by the City of Chula Vista
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the
code for such use.
The approval of the conditional use pennit for the additions to the single-family dwelling
requires compliance with all conditions, codes and regulations, as applicable, prior to the
final issuance of any permit for or occupancy of any new building on the property.
4. That the granting of this conditional use permit wilJ not adversely affect the General Plan
of the City or the adopted plan of any goverrunent agency.
Issuance of the conditional use permit and compliance with the conditions of approval
maintain the project's compliance with the City's General Plan and the Chula Vista
Municipal Code.
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista grants Conditional Use
Permit PCC-03-55 subject to the following conditions required to be satisfied by the applicant
and/or property owner(s):
Planning & Building Department
1. The Applicant shall comply with the 2001 Energy requirements, all requirements of the
Building Division and the following codes:
. California Building Code
. California Plumbing Code
. California Electrical Code
. California Mechanical Code
f.o
2. If the attic is used for living space and is in excess of 500 square feet of floor area, the
Applicant shall provide two exits.
3. A graffiti resistant treatment shall be specified for aH wall and building surfaces. This
shall be noted for any building and wall plans and shall be reviewed and approved by the
Director of Planning & Building prior to the issuance of building permits. Additionally,
the project shall conform to Sections 9.20.055 and 9.20.035 of the CVMC regarding
graffiti control.
4. All exterior lighting shaH include shielding to remove any glare from adjacent uses.
Details for said lighting shall be included in the architectural plans and shall be reviewed
and approved to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building.
5. Building plans (construction documents) that include proposed colors and materials shall
be submitted in conformance with the conceptual plans and elevations to ensure that the
additions wi1l be architecturally compatible with and/or match the primary single-family
dwelling. Said plans shall be kept on file in the Planning Division, in compliance with
the conditions contained herein and Title 19 of the CVMC, subject to the approval of the
Planning and Building Director.
Fire Department
6. The Applicant shall install smoke detectors in all bedrooms and hallways and shall be
hand wired and interconnected with a battery backup so that anyone activator will sound
all new detectors at the same time.
Sweetwater Authority
7. Prior to the issuance of a building pennit, the Applicant/owner shall obtain a letter stating
fire flow requirements from the Chula Vista Fire Department and submit the letter to the
Sweetwater Authority.
Chula Vista Elementary School District
8. Prior to the issuance of building pennits, the Applicant shall pay all appropriate school
fees.
Standard Conditions
9. The conditions of approval for this pennit shall be applied to the subject property until
such time that the conditional use pennit is modified or revoked, and the existence of this
use permit with approved conditions shall be recorded with the title of the property. Prior
to the issuance of the building pennits for the proposed additions, the Applicant/property
owner shall provide the Planning Division with a recorded copy of said document.
10. The site shall be developed and maintained in accordance with the approved plans dated
January 14, 2003 (including a site plan and floor plan) on file in the Planning Division;
the conditions contained herein; and Title 19 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code
7
II. This conditional use permit shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted
conditions imposed after approval of this permit to advanct: a legitimate goverrunental
interest related to health, safety or welfare which the City shall impost: after advance
written notice to the Permittee and after the City has given to the Permittee the right to be
heard with regard thereto. However, the City, in exercising this reserved right/condition,
may not impose a substantial expense or deprive Permittee of a substantial revenue
source which the Pennittee cannot, in the nonnal operation of the use permitted, be
expected to economically recover.
12. This conditional use permit shall become void and ineffective if not utilized within one
year from the effective date thereof, in accordance with Section 19.14.260 of the
Municipal Code. Failure to comply with any conditions of approval shall cause this
pennit to be reviewed by the City for additional conditions or revocation.
] 3. Any deviation from the above noted conditions of approval shall require the approval of a
modified conditional use pennit.
] 4. The Applicant/operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and
hold harmless City, its City Council members, officers, employees and representatives,
from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs,
including court costs and attorney's fess (collectively, liabilities) incurred by the City
arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City's approval and issuance of this Conditional
Use Pennit, (b) City's approval or issuance of any other permit or action, whether
discretionary or non-discretionary, in connt:ction with the use contemplated herein, and
(c) Applicant's installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby, including,
without limitation, ant and all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of
electromagnetic fields or other energy waves or emissions. Applicant/operator shall
acknowledge their agreement to this provision by executing a copy of this Conditional
Use Pennit where indicated be]ow. Applicant's/operator's compliance with this
provision is an express condition of this Conditional Use Pennit and this provision shall
be binding on any and all of applicant'sfoperator's successors and assigns.
] 5. Execute this document by making a true copy of this letter of conditional approval and
signing both this original letter and the copy on the lines provided below, said execution
indicating that the property owner and applicant have each read, understood and agreed to
the conditions contained herein, and will implement same. Upon execution, the true copy
with original signatures shall be returned to the Planning Department. Failure to return
the signed true copy of this document shall indicate the property owner/applicant's desire
that the project, and the corresponding application for building pennits and/or a business
license, be held in abeyance without approval.
Signature of Property Owner of
626 Second Avenue
Date
Signature of Representative
Date
~
16. It is the intention of the Planning Commission that its adoption of this Resolution is
dependent upon the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein
stated; and that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are
detennined 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.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
does hereby approve Conditional Use Pennit PCC-03-55 in accordance with the findings and
subject to the conditions contained in this resolution.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 28th day of May, 2003, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
Russ Hall, Chair
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
9
-'
.1",-:..:.:.i
b.!.'j4...' , 14,,1
,'AI..:;=-
111
ATTACHMENT 3
March 17,2003
Mr, Michael W. Walker, Planning Department
Public SeJ:VIces Building
Chula Vista Civic Center
276 Fourth Avenue
ChuJa Vi...., Ca 9\9\0
Re: Case No. PCC~3-55
Dear Mr. Walker:
As owners of the home at 2281 Street, a historic 1917 Craftsman, we are responding to the notice we
=ived concerning a request for a conditional use permjt by the owners of the propert)" located at 626
Second Avenue.
We have owned our property for over 40 years and our ancestors are one the pioneering families who came
to Chula Vista in 190 I. Although, we no longer live in our first home at 228 I Street, we are the owners of
the Historic Site #25, Leo ChriSI)' House, huilt by our grandparents in 1928, The neighborhood around
Second is full of wonderful old historic h<moes and single family homes. It is full of c~r, giving us
the feeling of a country community with its wide islands, inset sidewalks and horoes set back off of the
= with plentv of room in between the lots. We have recently reviewed the proposed plans and we are
very strongly opposed to the granting of tills request. This ad<:lition would be totally out of character and
inawopriale for a neighborhood that. the CIty Council, Chula Vista citizens and locals homeowners have,
over the years, tried 10 preserve.
We just recently read another 1= and a patagraph in it sunts up our feeling on these efforts. "We
=gnize tMt the City does not yet have the mechanism to create a historic overlay dislrict, but we know
that such a process is under consideration within the new general plan- It would be unfonunate if the good
intentions of this plan were to be undermined by the shon-sighted approval of the above-mentioned
conditional use permit. fustoric designation is meant to protect the charJlcter of individual homes and the
neighborhood as a whole. If the Zoning Administrator were to approve an over-scaledaddition more striled
to a high-rise apartment building than to a single-family dwelling, it would de-,'atue the City's fledgling
effbns 10 promote and preserve ils historic neighborhoods."
We must all work together to come up "ith a better way to preserve what little of the older character Chula
Vista has left. We are, more and more becoming a fragmented, ill planned community. We would like to
think that the City Councils wish to bring the city together would stan by pn:=ving its past. We have far
too many houses that look aliJce. We have the rules on the books for a reason. Variances have their place.
Granting this Conditional Use Permit is certainly not appropriate when the owner can add to Ius living
space by building back, not up. Adding an addition which would mimic an apartment building. nOl a
home. is NOT appropnate to the character of the neighborhood, nor fair to Ihe .maller homes on either
side.
Again, we very strongly voice our opposition to the granting of this conditional use pennit.
Sincerely,
~.().,.L7~
JOHND. PARKS
124 fulltop Drive
Chula Vista, California 91910
6t9-427-1471
~~~
CC: Ail Chula Vista City Councti Members
City Managcr David Rowtands
/0
Michael Walker
From:
Sent:
To:
Cc:
Subject:
Jim Sandoval
Friday, April 04, 20034:06 PM
'john.nancy1@juno.com'
Dave Rowlands; Michael Walker; John Schmitz
626 Second Street
Dear John and Nancy Parks:
Your e-mail regarding the proposed development at 626 Second Ave. was recieved by The City Mnimager's Office and
forwarded to Planning and Building. We will insure that the e-mail expressing your concerns is passed along to the
decision making body for this projecUf you have any questions please contact the Project Planner Mr. Michael Walker at
409-5472 or me at 691-5002.
Sincerely,
Jim Sandoval
Assistant Planning director
/I
t
Jim Sandoval
From:
Sent:
To:
Subject:
Bob Leiter
Thursday, April 03, 2003 5:29 PM
Jim Sandoval; John Schmitz
FW: For Your Information
FYI
-----Original Message-----
From: Donna Toledo
Sent: Thursday, April 03, 2003 2:01 PM
To: Bob Leiter
Subject: FW: For Your Information
-----Original Message-----
From: john.nancyl@juno.com [mailto:john.nancyl@juno.com]
Sent: Monday, March 17, 2003 4:24 PM
To: dtoledo@ci.chula-vista.ca.us
Subject: For Your Information
Mr. Rowlands
John and I are forwarding a copy of our remarks about an upcoming review
for a Conditional Use Permit for a second story addition at 626 Second
Ave in the middle of the wonderful historic homes, South of I Street.
This very insensitive, over-scaled addition would be very inconsistent
with the preservation of this historic district if this were to be
approved.
We are looking forward to working with the city on the upcoming historic
home tour. Thank you for all of your assistance.
John and Nancy Parks
I)..,
1
J. Carlos Fox
344 Hilltop Drive
Chula Vista, CA 91910
March 17, 2003
Mr. Michael W. Walker, Planning Department
Public Services Building, Chula Vista Civic Center
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re: Case No. PCC-03-55
Dear Mr. Walker:
I too must voice my opposition to the granting of the above conditional use pennit.
The City of Chula Vista has entered into binding contracts with the historical
homeowners of the city. These contracts represent a commitment by the homeowners to
preserve the historical integrity of the property. Should the City of Chula Vista grant the
conditional use pennit to Mr. Bustamante as presently requested, the city would be
violating both the spirit and intent of the Mills Act and the underlying contracts that have
been negotiated by and between the city the various homeowners.
How can the city on the one hand undertake the extensive resources required to pass,
implement and promote the Mills Act, while at the same time allowing adjacent
construction that destroys the quality of the very neighborhood the city has contracted
with others to protect?
Accordingly, I must ad my voice and name to the opposition to the construction project
requested by Mr. Bustamante, and request that the conditional use pennit he has
requested by denied.
Very truly yours,
J. Carlos Fox
13
'J
.'.'0. .3
Mi<?, .
644 Second Avenue
Chula Vista. CA 91910
March 17,2003
Mr. Michael W. Walker, Planning Department
Public Services Building, Chula Vista Civic Center
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re: Case No. PCC-03-55
Dear Mr. Walker:
We strongly oppose the granting of a conditional use permit in the above-mentioned case,
located at 626 Second Avenue. We live three doors south of the proposed addition in the
historic home at 644 Second Avenue.
Having reviewed Mr. Bustamante's proposed plans, it is clear that the addition would
adversely affect the quality and character of the entire neighborhood. This is one ofChula
Vista's most historic areas, with six designated historic homes in our block alone; several
others abut the property in the 600 block of Del Mar Avenue. Many of these homes are
protected by the Mills Act, which prohibits the owners ITom destroying the historical
integrity of the property. Unfortunately, as this case demonstrates, that integrity can also
be destroyed by neighboring homeowners.
We recognize that the City does not yet have the mechanism to create a historic overlay
district, but we know that such a process is under consideration within the new general
plan.. It would be unfortunate if the good intentions ofthis plan were to be undermined by
the short-sighted approval of the above-mentioned conditional use permit. Historic
designation is meant to protect the character of individual homes and the neighborhood as
a whole. If the Zoning Administrator were to approve an over-scaled addition more suited
to a high-rise apartment building than to a single-family dwelling, it would devalue the
City's fledgling efforts to promote and preserve its historic neighborhoods.
Although we certainly appreciate Mr. Bustamante's desire to expand his living space,
there is no compelling reason for him to build "up" rather than "back." The project site is
certainly large enough to accommodate an addition of the proposed size without soaring
above the height limit, and it is deep enough that a properly sited addition could be built
without dwarfing the smaller homes on either side or the historic homes beyond.
/~
Re: PCC-03-55
March 17, 2003
Further, Mr. Bustamante has demonstrated hllnselfto be insensitive to the aesthetics of
the neighborhood. Prior to our historic home tour last May, we notified every neighbor of
the event in writing, urging them to "put their best foot forward" for the weekend. Mr.
Bustamante's contribution on the morning of the tour was to drive his truck up over the
curb and through his front yard -- which was then and continues to be composed entirely
of dirt -- leaving muddy tire tracks across the sidewalk. He then parked his truck in the
front yard for the 1,300 tour-goers to view as they walked between the historic homes on
tour. This obviously is not a person who respects the neighborhood or who appreciates
the tenn "curb appeal."
Finally, Mr. Bustamante misrepresented the project to us and to several others in the
neighborhood, presenting the plans as a basic two-story addition. Although we did not
sign his petition seeking approval, several others did, based on the false information he
presented to them. As a result, you should question the validity of any petition he may
present to you in support ofthis project.
Thank you for considering our concerns. We strongly urge you to deny Mr. Bustamante's
request and to continue to preserve the integrity of the planning process and of Chula
Vista's historic neighborhoods.
d?4~'
es R. McVeigh
Imozelle T. McVeigh
cc : Council member Mary Salas
Council member John McCann
Carlos Fox, Esq.
Ie)
Comments on Bustamante Conditional Use Permit PCC-03-55
Comment #1: The applicant states: "This project will consist of expanding an existing
residence with first floor addition/remodel and a second floor addition."
. This is not just a "second floor addition." To even the untrained eye, the proposed
addition includes a third floor.
Comment #2: The applicant states: "The current house is relatively undersized for the
neighborhood, so the increase will bring consistency with the surrounding homes. "
. This is not true. The applicant's existing one-story house is consistent with the
vast majority of homes in the area.
. Of the 38 houses on the 600 block of Second A venue, 79% (30) are single-story
houses of approximately the same size as the existing house.
. The houses on either side of the applicant's property are nearly identical in size
and scale (Figure 1,622,626 and 630 Second Avenue). The proposed addition
would be completely inconsistent with the scale and character of the surrounding
properties.
Comment #3: The applicant states: "Also, 3 lots to the south there are 2-two story homes
which exceed the height limit. "
. This is not true. At 644 Second A venue, the Jennie McDonald House is a
Transitional Victorian Four-square built in 1888 and the front house on this
property. It does not exceed the 28 foot height limit. This is a historic property on
its original site and obviously predates City zoning ordinances.
. At 642 Second Avenue, the Frank-Garretson House is a Queen Anne built in 1889
and set back more than 200 feet from the street. Although it exceeds the height
limit, it is not surrounded by any other structure. Careful and expensive planning
went into the placement of this home to showcase its historic lines. It can in no
way be compared to the proposed addition, which will be less than 50 feet from
the street and 20 feet from the neighboring structures.
Comment #4: The applicant states: "In addition, two lots to the north is residence which
exceeds the height limit and directly across the street from that is another residence
which exceeds the height limit. "
. At 616 Second Ave, the Greg Rogers House is the largest example of Craftsman
architecture in Chula Vista. It is set back more than 200 feet from the street and
screened by trees from view on Second A venue. It is not noticeable from the
street. (Figure 2, 616 Second Avenue from sidewalk facing west.) Again, it can in
no way be compared to the proposed addition, which will be in direct view of the
street.
l.R. McVeigh Comments on Conditional Use Permit Application PCC-D3-55
March 27, 2003 / /p
Page I on
· At 613 Second Avenue, the Byron Bronson House, built in 1888, is the premiere
example of a Queen Anne Victorian Chula Vista "orchard home." It is set back
more than 150 feet off the street. This house can in no way be compared with or
used as a justification for the proposed addition. The Bronson House, like the
MacDonald House, is on its original site and predates City's zoning ordinances.
Comment #5: The applicant states: "All 4 of these homes are historic buildings. "
· There are, in fact, eleven historic sites recognized by the City of Chula Vista
within a 600-foot radius of the applicant's property. This is highest density of
historic properties in the City. Five of these homes have been featured in Chula
Vista's Historic Home tours in 2001 and 2002. These homes were chosen for
their historic attributes and architectural quality. The applicant's proposed project
will exhibit neither of these traits.
· It is possible to remodel homes in architectural styles consistent with the
neighborhood standards. Two nearby houses (616 Del Mar and 695 Del Mar)
have been successfu]]y remodeled in architectural styles consistent with this
neighborhood.
Comment #6: The applicant states: "Please see the attached letter with signatures in
support of the proposed design and request for Conditional Use Permit to exceed the
current height limit of28 feet. "
· This "support" for the proposed project is suspect due to the manner in which the
petition was presented to the neighbors.
. The applicant misrepresented the proposed project as a second-story addition
when in actuality it is an addition of three stories.
· The applicant made no attempt to show the proposed project in the context of its
visuaJ impact on the site.
Comment #7: The applicant states: "The propose(d) addition/remodel with French
Coulltry architecture will be a desirable contribution to the neighborhood and will be
an enhancement to the community as a whole. "
· Nothing cou]d be further from the truth. This project is a detriment to the
neighborhood in both architecture and scale. Faux-French country architecture is
in no way consistent with a neighborhood filled with late-nineteenth century
Victorians and early twentieth-century Craftsman homes. It is likely that this
style was chosen to conceal the fact that this is a three-story structure. The scale
of proposed project is completely out of proportion to the neighboring homes.
The three-story structure wi]] tower over the adjacent properties and will be an
architectural eyesore in the middle of Chula Vista's most historic neighborhood.
· It is interesting that the applicant now purports to be concerned about
"contributing to the neighborhood" and community enhancement. The subject
property's front-yard landscaping of dirt and weeds is singular blight in the
J.R. McVeigh Comments on Conditional Use Permit Application PCC-D3-55
March 27, 2003 17
Page 2 of3
neighborhood. This is an area in which the majority of homeowners take great
pride in the appearance of their properties. The proposed project's disregard for
both the architectural style and scale appears to be consistent with the applicant's
track record with regard to his concern for the neighborhood's appearance.
Comment #8: The applicant states: "The current structure is located 50 feet from the
front property line and will maintain its current locati.on on the lot."
. This not true. According to the site plan submitted with the application, the new
front wall of the house will extend several feet toward the street. This will ruin
the continuity of the current line of homes. The proposed project will not only
protrude upward but also outward toward the street.
Comment #9: The applicant provides no rationale, compelling or otherwise, for a
project that exceeds the 28-foot height limit. There are no site constraints. The
applicant's lot is 294 feet deep. There is no reason that the applicant cannot build a
house in a style consistent with the historic neighborhood within the 28' height limit.
Comment #10: For the zoning commission to grant this use pennit, there must be a
finding that the proposed project is either necessary or desirable and will contribute to
the general well being of the neighborhood and/or community. The above comments
clearly show that this project fails to meet both standards and should be denied.
Respectfully submitted,
~M~
Ja es R. McVeigh
6 Second Avenue
J.R. McVeigh Comments on Conditional Use Permit Application PCC-m-55
March 27, 2003 I 'l
Page 3 on
l.C)
l.C) ......
I (J)
Cf) (l)
0 ~
I
0 0')
0 c:
a- ()
(Ij
c: ......
0 ::s:.
...... (Ij
(Ij
() ~
0- (l)
"'0
0- (J)
~
;!::: (l)
E >
.... ~
(]) "'0
a- c:
(l) 0
(J) ()
::::> (l)
en
(Ij E
c:
0 0
....
;!: ......
"'0 (l)
c: :J
0 c:
0 (])
>
(l) ~
......
c: "'0
(Ij c:
E 0
(Ij ()
...... (l)
(J) Cf)
:J
en <D
c ,-
<D
0 I
(J)
...... C\J
c:
(l) (l)
E ....
:J
E 0')
0 i.L
0
1'1
L!)
L!)
I
Ct)
0
I
()
()
0...
c:
0
+-'
cU
U
0- 0)
0- :J
<( c:
+-' 0)
E >
<(
.....
0) "0
0... c:
0) 0
u
en 0)
~ U)
cU 0
c: Ct)
0 CD
.t: 06
"0
c: CD
0 C\J
() CD
-
0) C\J
+-' C\J
c:
cU CD
E I
cU ~
+-' ~ Q)
en
:J .....
CO :J
C>
c: LL
0
en \
+-'
c:
0) .
I
E
E i
0 I
() \
I
I
.'
-.
March 24, 2003
TO: Michael W. Walker
Planning Department
City of Chula Vista
FROM: Peter Watry
SUBJECT: 626 Second Avenue, Case No. PCC-03-SS
Dear Mr. Walker,
I have become aware that the owner of 626 Second A venue has requested a conditional use
permit in order to increase the height of his home to higher than the height limit in that area.
I have been a volunteer docent at the Chula Vista Heritage Museum, 360 Third A venue. for
some eight years. Probably the most historic and valuable "artifact" that Chula Vista has from its
history are the old "orchard homes" that date from when Chula Vista was the "lemon capital of the
world." <;:hula Vista, a century ago, produced more lemons than anywhere else in the United
States. The groves are all gone, the packing houses are all gone, but many of the grand orchard
homes remain.
The 600 block of Second A venue is the grandest site of them all. There is the Bronson
House and Carriage House at 613 Second A venue. the Greg Rogers House which has been moved
to 616 Second Avenue. The MacDonald House at 644 Second Avenue, and the Garrettson-Frank
House which has been moved to 642 Second A venue. When I take groups on history-tours I start
at the north end of Second A venue, at the Gillette House at 44 North Second A venue. and then
work my way south. I save the best for last. the 600 block of Second A venue.
Please do not allow one owner to deface that historic block. There are reasons for
regulations and zoning laws, so that no one home owner can ruin it for the others. Please deny
any exceptions. particularly to height limits and in this block.
u
w~
Peter J. Watry Jr.
81 Second A venue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
~I~ :~2: :~\~
U Ul \
Pl ANNING
~I
PETER J. WATRY JR.
81 Second Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
[5) re ({: IE D \'Q lE ~
ml. MAY 20 2003 l1lJ
May 20, 2003
PLANNING
TO: Members of the Planning Commission
City of Chula Vista
c/o Michael W. Walker, Project Planner
FROM: Peter Watry
SUBJECT: 626 Second Avenue, Case No. PCC-m-55
Dear Members of the Planning Commission:
This is in regard to the request by the owner of 626 Second A venue for a Conditional Use
Permit to exceed the height limit on a proposed second story addition.
I strongly urge you to DENY the request. I have been a volunteer docent at the Chula Vista
Heritage Museum, 360 Third A venue, for some eight years. Probably the most historic and valuable
"artifact" that Chula Vista has from its history are the old "orchard homes" that date from when Chula
Vista was the 'lemon capital of the world.' Chula Vista, a century ago, produced more lemons than
anywhere else in the United States. The groves are all gone now, as are all the packing houses, but
many of the grand orchard homes remain.
The 600 block of Second Avenne is the grandest site of them all. There is the Bronson House
and Carriage House at 613 Second, the Greg Rogers House at 616 Second, the MacDonald House at
644 Second, and the Garrettson-Frank House at 642 Second Avenue. When I take groups on
history-tours I start at the north end of Second A venue, at the Gillette House at 44 North Second
Avenue, and then work my way south. I save the best for last, the 600 block of Second Avenue.
There are reasons for regulations and zoning laws, so that no one home owner can ruin it for
his neighbors. There are no overriding reasons even offered in either the application or in the zoning
officer's ruling why this applicant should be allowed to exceed [he rules. Please do not let one owner
to deface that historic block, particularly for no reason. Please DENY any exceptions, particularly to
height limits and in this block.
Sincerely,
.~r ,/jJ~~'~..
, . /1
(/7 Y
Peter J. Watry Jr.
81 Second Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 9J91O
.,J~
[J
ERIC FOTIADI
ARCHITECT & ENGINEER
3241 Fifth Avenue SAN DlEGO, CA 92103
Tel.: (619) 293-3530
Fax.: (619) 293-3522
March 26, 2003
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Attn: Michael W. Walker, Associate Planner
Re: ZAV-03-08 changed to PCC-03-55, Application for Exceeding Height Limit
Joseph Bustamnte, owner, 626 Second Avenue, Chula Vista
Dear Mr. Walker:
I have a copy of a public document dated March 3, 2003, mailed to one of the property owners
near 626 Second Avenue.
We are challenging the City's action on this application.
1. The proposed development with its 34 foot height is not in keeping with the street fac;ade of
the adjacent homes. The proposed structure will be 40 feet from the front property line (not
50 feet as stated in the document submitted by the architect, Tim P. Jones.
2. The front historical home 2 lots south was built prior to height limits. It is more than 50 feet
from the street property line. The other historic home on the rear lot is 250 feet from the
street property line. Neither residence visually impacts the street fac;ade. The lots are 100
feet wide. These justifications made by the architect are not valid.
3. The proposed sttucture for 626 Second Avenue is 37.5 feet wide on a 60 foot wide lot. It is
12'-6" from the north property line. The adjacent one story 1100 s.f. residence to the north,
with only a 6 foot side yard setback, will be in the shadows of this proposed 38 foot tall by 56
feet long unarticulated structure. The proposed structure will cast its shadow with a winter
sun on the north house. The health and welfare of the north neighbor will be impacted.
4. The proposed addition with French country architecture mayor may not be desirable for the
neighborhood, but this in itself is not a valid justification to exceed the height limit. In any
case the architect states that the French country design of his project will maintain the
architectural style of these existing structures. Not true and not a valid justification.
5. The proposed project is out of scale with the neighborhood and out of character with the
bungalows to the north and to the south, on either side of the street.
6. The applicant's representative, Mr. Kevin O'Neill was the contractor for a residence 2 doors
south of the applicant property and in the rear of that property. The architectural features of
that residence would lead one to believe that the proposed structure of the applicant will be
more in keeping with that built residence. The French country character will be achieved
tastelessly by gluing precast river rock on a plain stucco box with aluminum sliders for
~5
windows and flat concrete roof tiles. Is this the architectural character that merits a variance?
7. The huge attic hides another third floor. Skylights and windows dot the roof and gables.
Does this design maintain the architectural style of the neighborhood? Do you need 10
windows to provide daylight to an attic? From the windows of this potential third floor this
property owner will overlook the neighboring properties, thus ruining the privacy currently
enjoyed by the neighbors.
8. The underlying purpose of this application requesting an increase to the roof height limit is to
provide more square footage and more density to a residence and keep it on a very small
footprint by using the attic as a habitable space at a later date. There is no justification for
raising the height unless one plans to add 800 sJ. to a potential third floor. There is no
hardship, unless the hardship is not to be able to add a third floor per the current city
ordinance.
9. The applicant can meet the current ordinance without requesting a variance from the height
limit. He can design a 2 story structure by going further west in the lot. There are no unique
circumstances that would prevent the applicant from meeting the current ordinance, unless
he has intentions of adding a second home to the rear of his property, thus wanting to keep
the lot coverage to the front, increasing the massing and damaging the environment.
I do not see any justification for allowing the applicant to build beyond the confines of the current
City ordinance. No justifiable hardship was provided by the applicant to merit the granting of a
variance by means of a conditional use permit. The proposed structure does not conform to the
neighborhood.
urs,
~y
Case #PCC-03-55 Conditional Use Permit Application to exceed the height limit
Site Address:
626 Second Ave. Chuta Vista
REVISED
Applicant:
Joseph Bustamante
Consideration Date March 27, 2003
I am the owner of a designated historical house at 642 Second Avenue, just a 3 lots south of the
property at 626 Second Avenue. I am strongly opposed to the city permitting the owner to
build an addition to his residence that would exceed the zoning ordinance height limit by SIX feet.
I request a public hearing on this application to allow interested residents to give their opinions on
this application. Our property values are stake here, and it is our right to be heard.
The Description and Justification statement that was submitted to the city by the architect, Tim P.
Jones for this project, contains several misrepresentations and false statements as noted below.
The Description and Justification states that "the current house is relatively undersized for the
neighborhood, so the increase will bring consistency with the surrounding homes". The fact is
that the two adjacent houses to the south of this property, and the two adjacent houses to the
north of it are all small single story houses. To permit the building of a 34 foot structure to tower
over these small adjacent houses would be totally out of proportion and scale!!
A. In reference to the historic houses on this block, permitting the construction of this out of scale
plan would be a huge detraction to one of our city's oldest, historic neighborhoods. The
justification letter further states that the "French Country design will maintain the architectural
style ofthese existing structures". The existing historical houses are ofthe Victorian and
Craftsman style, and they were buitt during those periods of our cities history. There are no
French Country style houses here, and the city zoning ordinances apply to NEW construction.
The lot at the site in question (626 Second Ave.) is only 60 feet wide. The lot of the two
Victorian houses on this block are on a 100 foot wide lot. The requested scale for this plan would
be out of proportion to the lot. This is a deep, narrow lot and the building should extend back
onto the lot - not up in the air.
B. The elevations clearly show that the plan is for a 34 foot high, THREE story structure - with
TEN windows on the third floor! This plan would not be in compliance with the required height
limit - or the fire code. The expense for windows & skylights would not be made if this space was
not intended as a living space!! Why else would this height be required??
This could be an attractive addition to the neighborhood if it were built in proportion to the lot size
and in scale to the surrounding houses. This can be accomplished by adhering to the height limit
of 28 feet, and removing the third floor and all those little side windows/skylights. They make the
north and south e1evations tooks like an ark!
I want to be certain that no special allowances are being allowed in this case. Of note is the fact
that a member the planning commission is named as an agent for the owner on his application,
which is on file with the city. Please do not ruin this historic neighborhood with another out of
proportion structure -like the Joe Raso residence on Mumay St. How did that get buiit??
Please contact me regarding a public hearing. I would like the time to prepare a petition.
-
.2~
i!~:[E ~ ~ ~ W [E I~
i: I i MAR 2 5 2003 d- /
rOo - '~I
I J
L Pl ANiJ!~~_____ J
Corinne McCall ~~~
642 Second Ave., Chula Vista 619-422-7490
PETmON IN oPPosmON TO GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO
EXCEED THE HEIGHT LIMIT FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO THE
EXISTIN.G SINGLE-FAMILTY DWELLING AT 626 SECOND AVENUE, CHULA
VISTA (APN: 573-180-14-00)
CASE # PCC-03-55
ENVIRONMENTAL STATUS: The Project is a Class 1 exemption rrom the California
Environmental Quality Act, under Section 15301
APPLICANT: Joseph Bustamante
CONSIDERATION DATE: March 27, 2003
The following Chula Vista residents are OPPOSED to the applicant's request
to exceed the height limit of the city building code and zoning ordinances.
.
NAME
[/
c:2?
PETITION IN OPPOSITION TO GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO
EXCEED THE HlEGHf LIMIT FOR A SECOND STORY ADDITION TO THE
EXISTING SINGLE-FAMILY DWELLING AT 626 SECOND AVENUE, CHULA
VISTA. (APN 573-180-14-00) CASE # PCC-03-55
APPLICANT: JOSEPH BUST AMANTE
CONSIDERATION DATE MARCH 27,2003
The undersigned Chula Vista residents previously signed a petition in favor of granting
the above Conditional Use Permit. This petition supercedes that previous document.
I hereby withdraw my previous endorsement of granting the above permit. I am
OPPOSED to granting a permit to exceed the height limit of the city building code and
zoning ordinances on the above referenced property.
NAME I J4.-
. C~'--:, W~ \AJ
:~~
~~ I~ ~~00tJSS~~
· YJ~ ~~~
.
.
ADDRESS
~~q-;l~
DATE
J -'Lc,-d3
o 'S (!) 2.7(y
b CiS' d.'/tJl'.
{,Is~~
o [~ Stcot'9 A \f~.
~ 10 SUcJ~P ~v~_
.-./~
.3 ~bC):S
3-.1-(,. .,.-t.>J
M I..b r 2.00,3
311~ /0
Vze ~3
c27
January 5, 2003
To Whom It May Concern:
ATTACHMENT 4
JAN 1 4 2003
We, the undersigned support the approval of a conditional use pennit allowing the house at 626
2nd A venue to exceed the 28 foot height limitation.
NAME
,
It~u ,;'" (') Ve vA
ADDRESS
62.l Dcl,..r1<V\
:1.__,,'
'1 .
{ J'-'-.- _ U
( ~-'_/
-"-ICY
M'L.,",,~I ~Dw,1il
',.;7~~:t?~~/V'-
~~~ ~t1/L
~ t? 12lJ~~
~1'~
])~ V ~ V--U/fW'v--
S~M~
W e~zd6
· ~_~~l,!t:f-
~tl~
~c.~
-"-' I -'
',u n'f":'.J,
~('1 2~ ~
{Y/0 2rvt ~
to;J. cJ. J-nd. ~
b2:l.. ~~ ~
{p? ;; 0 ~{V..-0 V Y' ~
h 3 Z- 2-- VLcL !tv e..
G 7b ;J--/-'P /~
077'-" ;z.fr'C! ~
~r7 d€Y 4-;c'
b~~ 2~~,
d.~~
(p't,'f
~&'
~
~
b~
Vf,~~'
.
"
G1 ~
(,<7.1-
Lr~L
b'1"
G )/
6 {(
(. uS
~)iJ. ~ c. v
>: 'fic 0 w &tZ- c.. v
j . V
(.<.-0,.. / f-... L.-
$ <:z.JS~ eol P v'<.... c..'-'"
;) (~ ~"- c: J
~U/'
~
c'\.Jb c'\I g(=r0
J~ ~ GI/
/' '.J'
)_ -!1,X-;;Z .......:-
G)D
~Cj
~
II
JAMES & MARJORIE ROBERTSON
622 SECOND AVENUE
CHULA VISTA, CA 91910
PHONE (619)420-4781
....--~~.~;;"::~_: ,:~-_. j- ,
ir\ ::~ !(-': \~:; \;1: \::. '~i,:
\\f(:A~;~--'~\~\
\ PLAt'-lN\NG j
May 7, 2003
Mr. Michael W. Walker, Planning Department
Public Services Building
Chula Vista Civic Center
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91.91.0
Re: Case No. PCC03-55
Site Address: 626 Second Avenue, Chula VISta
Applicant: Mr. Joseph Bustamante
Dear Mr. Walker:
As owners of the home at 622 Second Avenue, we are responding to the notice we received
concerning a request for a Conditional Use Permit by the owner of the aforementioned
property. Since we are unable to attend the Public Hearing slated for May 1.4, 2003, we
would like to respond in writing.
As Mr. Bustamante's immediate neighbor to the north, we do not oppose the granting of a
Conditional Use Permit. It should be noted that there are several two story homes on Second
Avenue and we feel the construction of this new home would be an attractive addition to the
neighborhood.
The Petition signed by the majority of the homeowners on Second Avenue, including the
Vice-President of the Heritage Museum, Indicates approval of the Conditional Use Permit.
We understand that there have been a few negative comments from homeowners outside of
the Second Avenue area and we feel they are unfair and should not be considered.
Thank you for your consideration in the matter.
~o~
James O. Robertson
A~~Ce~htJ
Marjorie A. Robertson
3D
5/6/03
10 Who. It May Conlepn,
'l'h!a h in J'uponee to the Ireaol!eltne or the. hoae at 628
, -
S..and ATe. I own the ,~o,ejty at 6)0 Second AYe and haTI no ,aQ-
Ue. with so.eone wantine \0 ti,.oYe the.e hoie. I only irtan that
I had the ioney to ~o the aalie.Belne a 1r.eBldent or Oh.la Vista 1',,1iI
.53 yeah I ai a"~lIe or the Mat()jbdl.oite ue.. and anueta-te thei
..t, tot haTe to adiU:t the lie a.e a rew h01llles on this .10111: that aile
nGt .. nile all othai., aine "lIIelnc,' ene otftheA:e.nd. i,. .jletchloi.the
othe.. I haTe .een told that soie ot the Jleaident'. aile wo~.ted
that the jeioldlng 01' th1s ho*e 10.ld aate the a~ea loot lad. We
haTe all .een the IHtepl'.ttrte and 1'0:1 anyone to irottJly a.oat 1-t h
.eyond ae. Did anyone lo_platn a.oat the ne'ire~ hO.llel that haTe .een
..nt on this ,loek? Did they reel these t1t in ? It so the.e .hoal,d
Ie no ,:rojle. !t loieone want. to llaUd on to a I!.oille-that haa leen
fl.". een.e..t1l9 ,iectninc, &nd lelonc. helke.
'!hank 'l.i,
./
J1adt B0ieJl8.
~! 1[1C_{UUI;,/~
II. I,,' .141\. Y . .. ~..,:In.
) (', i'j I t.jj
J . .
t-.:.:....__~_ .
'. ..~.,,--_...- .J
I~, ' p~ :~\ r'.I.~n~"n ----,
. .'"'...."'~'"~...1.:!: _':'"'1"~':I"i~::-"';.f1:i"::_;r'''''''~''~'rI'' '" '"
...- .
31
ATTACHMENT 5
Historic House Exceeding
28 feet in Height "3~
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: G,
Meeting Date: OS/211/01
ITEM TITLE:
Consideration of Resolution PCM-03-35 recommending that the City
Council adopt the City of Chula Vista Air Quality Improvement Plan
Guidelines
The City conducted an air quality and energy conservation pilot study of three SPA Plan projects in
August 2002. Staff was directed to draft guidelines for future Air Quality Improvement Plans using
the information contained in the pilot study and report. Proposed guidelines for the preparation of
Air Quality Improvement Plans as required by the Growth Management Ordinance have been
completed.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed action for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that there is no possibility
that the action may have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, pursuant to Section
15061 (b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the action is not subject to CEQA, thus no
environmental review is necessary.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCM-03-35 recommending that the City Council
adopt the City of Chula Vista Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
On May 5, 2003, an informational presentation was made to the Resource Conservation
Commission (RCC) regarding the Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines. No action was
taken.
BACKGROUND:
The City of Chula Vista is recognized as a leader in air quality and energy conservation
programs. The City's Growth Management Ordinance, Municipal Code Section 19.09.050B,
requires an Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) to be submitted with all Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) Plans. If aSP A Plan is not required, an Air Quality Improvement Plan is required to
be submitted with Tentative Subdivision Maps. The Growth Management Program further
requires that an Air Quality Improvement Plan be submitted for all major development projects,
defined as residential projects consisting of 50 dwelling units or greater, or commercial and
industrial projects with equivalent air quality impacts to a residential project of 50 dwelling units.
In accordance with the Growth Management Program, the Air Quality Improvement Plan must
provide an analysis of air pollution impacts that would result from the project. In addition the
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date: 'jIJ!jIIH
AQIP must demonstrate the best available design to reduce vehicle trips, maintain or improve
traffic flow, reduce vehicle miles traveled, implement traffic control measures and other means
of reducing emissions, as well as defining a program to monitor compliance.
The City of Chula Vista C02 Reduction Plan provides for consideration of land use and energy
efficient measures in new development to reduce C02 emissions, energy consumption and air
pollution. In addition, the Chula Vista GreenStar Building Incentive Program, an action measure
contained in the C02 Reduction Plan, was broadened to include air quality and energy
conservation at the SPA Plan and individual construction project level in new developments. As
a result of the City's expanded efforts to reduce air pollutants and increase energy conservation, a
pilot study was conducted.
The goal of the pilot study was to assess potential site design as it relates to air quality and energy
conservation including construction features in new developments. Three SPA plan projects,
EastLake III, Otay Ranch Village Six, and Otay Ranch Village Eleven participated in the pilot
study and Air Quality Improvement Plans were prepared based on the pilot study results.
The City retained a consultant to develop a customized computer model and prepare a report
containing analyses of various site design, air quality and energy conservation features and the
results of the pilot study. Although Air Quality Improvement Plans have been prepared for
previous projects, these are the first guidelines to be developed for the preparation of an Air
Quality Improvement Plan.
During the pilot study process, staff met with other City departments and the development
community to receive input and include their suggestions where possible. Staff identified a
common desire that the guidelines be easy to understand and administer, flexible, and include
energy conservation programs that qualify for financial incentives while avoiding unreasonable
burdens or delays to the developer.
Following the completion of the pilot study the Planning Commission and City Council held
public hearings and action was taken to accept the INDEX Pilot Test report and approve the
amendments to the SPA Plans of the three projects that participated in the pilot study.
The proposed Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines provide two options to meet the AQIP
requirement. The developer may choose to participate in the Chula Vista GreenStar Building
Program or evaluate the project using the C02 INDEX model developed for the pilot study.
Consistent with the C02 Reduction Plan, participation in the GreenStar Building Program
requires that the developer agree to exceed the California Title 24 Energy Standards by 15% in
the majority (50% or greater) of the residential units in the project. In the case of non-residential
developments the developer must agree to exceed the California Title 24 Energy Standards by
10% in the majority (50% or greater) of the structures. Mixed-use projects must exceed the
Page 3, Item:
Meeting Date: 'jI?o/01
California Title 24 Energy Standards in the majority of the structures with the level of
exceedence determined by the land use within the project.
Evaluation of a project using the C02 INDEX involves the preparation of detailed GIS fiJes that
are modeled and the resulting scores assessed based on the information obtained during the pilot
study. The pilot study identified key indicators having the greatest potential to achieve favorable
scores based on project design. The AQIP Guidelines contain a chart identifying twelve key
indicators and the scores necessary to achieve a positive outcome. The project must show
improvements at or beyond the threshold scores in two out of four indicators in each of the three
categories, land use, transportation and environment. If the initial project scores do not reflect
the necessary improvements then the developer must modify the project design and run the
alternate proposal using the C02 INDEX model.
The Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines include a provision for the use of alternate air
quality and energy conservation measures, including building programs not identified in the pilot
study as well as new technology. Data confirming that comparable energy and air quality
improvements are achieved must be provided and are subject to City review and approval.
CONCLUSION
Staff has concluded that the draft Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines are consistent with
the objectives and results of the pilot study program, requirements of the Growth Management
Ordinance, and goals and policies of the Chula Vista General Plan.
Staff recommends approval of a resolution recommending that the City Council adopt the City of
Chula Vista Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines.
Att;o}c.hmpnts
Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines
RESOLUTION NO. PCM-03-35
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN
GUIDELINES
WHEREAS, The City of Chula Vista Growth Management Ordinance and Growth
Management Program require that a Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) be submitted for
all major development projects (50 dwelling units or greater, or commercial or industrial
projects with equivalent air quality impacts to a residential project of 50 dwelling units); and
WHEREAS, in accordance with the Growth Management Program, the Air Quality
Improvement Plan must provide an analysis of air pollution resulting from the project,
methods to improve traffic flow, reduce vehicle miles traveled, use of traffic control
measures, methods to reduce direct or indirect emissions, and a program to monitor
compliance; and
WHEREAS, a pilot study was conducted to evaluate the effectiveness of various
site design, air quality and energy conservation features and develop guidelines for future
Air Quality Improvement Plans; and
WHEREAS, a report containing analyses of site design, air quality and energy
conservation measures and the results of the pilot study was prepared by Criterion
Plarmers/Engineers Inc., entitled INDEX Pilot Test: SPA Air Quality Improvement Plans,
June 2002, and a copy is kept on file with the City Clerk; and
WHEREAS, the air quality and energy conservation report and pilot study provided
necessary information for staff to use in developing guidelines for the preparation of future
air quality improvement plans; and
WHEREAS, Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines have now been developed
to direct the preparation of required Air Quality Improvement Plans; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed
action for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has
determined that there is no possibility that the action may have a significant effect on the
environment; therefore, pursuant to Section 15061 (b)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, the
action is not subject to CEQA, thus no environmental review is necessary.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING
COMMISSION hereby recommends that the City Council adopt the attached draft City
Council Resolution adopting the City of Chula Vista Air Quality Improvement Plan
Guidelines, a copy of which shall be kept on file in the office of the City Clerk.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this Resolution be transrnitted to
the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 28th day of May 2003 by the following vote,
to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
Russ Hall, Chairperson
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Air Quality Improvement Plan
Guidelines
Part One - General City Requirements
The City of Chula Vista Growth Management Ordinance, Municipal Code Section
19.09.050B, requires an Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) be submitted with all
Sectional Plarming Area (SPA) Plans, or if a SPA plan is not required, Tentative Maps.
The Growth Management Program further requires that an Air Quality Improvement Plan
is required for all major development projects (50 dwelling units or greater, or
commercial or industrial projects with equivalent air quality impacts to a residential
project of 50 dwelling units). (See Part Three for an explanation of EDU's.)
The AQIP shall provide an analysis of air pollution impacts which would result from the
project, and will be required to demonstrate the best available design to reduce vehicle
trips, maintain or improve traffic flow, reduce vehicle miles traveled, including
implementation of appropriate traffic control measures, and other means of reducing
emissions (direct or indirect) from the project, as well as defining a program to monitor
compliance.
To further enhance opportunities to improve air quality and energy conservation, the
action measures contained in the City's Carbon Dioxide (C02) Reduction Plan must be
addressed in the AQIP.
Part Two - Air Quality Improvement Plan Requirements for
Residential and Non-Residential or Mixed-Use Proiects Subiect to
AOIP Requirements.
The following two options are available to meet the AQIP requirement. The Developer
may choose to participate in the Chula Vista GreenStar Building Efficiency Program or
evaluate the project using the Chula Vista C02 INDEX model including any necessary
site plan modifications.
1
AQIP Guidelines
5/12/03
I. CHULA VISTA GREENSTAR BUILDING EFFICIENCY PROGRAM.
Residential Proiects
Consistent with the C02 Reduction Plan, the Developer agrees to exceed the
California 2001 Title 24, Part 6, Energy Efficiency Standards (CA 200ITitle 24)
by 15% in the majority (50% or greater) of the residential units in their project.
The Developer may prepare a streamlined AQIP consistent with the format and
content identified in the Air Quality Improvement Plan Outline for Residential
Projects Participating in the GreenStar Building Efficiency Program as more
particularly described in Attachment A.
Non-Residential Proiects
Consistent with the C02 Reduction Plan, the Developer agrees to exceed the
California 2001 Title 24, Part 6 requirements by 10% in the majority (50% or
greater) of the non-residential structures in their project.
The Developer may prepare a streamlined AQIP consistent with the format and
content identified in the Air Quality Improvement Plan Outline for Non-
Residential Projects Participating in the GreenStar Building Efficiency Program
as more particularly described in Attachment B.
Mixed-Use Proiects
The Developer agrees to exceed the California 2001 Title 24, Part 6 requirements
in the construction of the majority (50% or greater) of the structures in the project.
The required level of CA 2001 Title 24 exceedence is determined by land use
within the project, consistent with the standards above.
The Developer may prepare a streamlined AQIP consistent with the format and
content identified in the Air Quality Improvement Plan Outline for Residential
and Non-Residential Projects Participating in the GreenStar Building Efficiency
Program as more particularly described in Attachments A and B.
2. CHULA VISTA C02 INDEX MODEL
The Developer agrees to model the project using the Chula Vista C02 INDEX
model. A three-party agreement between the City of Chula Vista, the Consultant
providing the C02 INDEX modeling, and the Developer shall be required. The
Developer is responsible for the costs of retaining the Consultant to perform the
C02 INDEX modeling services.
2
AQIP Guidelines
5/12/03
The AQIP document shall be consistent with the format and content identified in
the Air Quality Improvement Plan Outline for Projects Using the C02 INDEX
Model as more particularly described in Attachment C.
Part Three - Alternate Air Quality Measures and Future Air Qualitv
Improvement Technolo!!v.
The Developer may submit an Air Quality Improvement Plan containing alternate air
quality and energy conservation measures, including building programs and technology
not identified in the AQIP Guidelines. The Developer may also submit an AQIP using
C02 INDEX modeling at a broader scope including the General Development Plan level.
Alternate measures must be accompanied by data demonstrating, to the satisfaction of the
City, comparable energy and air quality improvements are achieved.
Part Four - Usinl!: Equivalent Dwellinl!: Units (EDU's) to determine Air
Qualitv Improvement Plan Requirements for Non-Residential and
Mixed Use Projects.
The following equivalencies apply to non-residential or mixed use projects:
. Commercial projects of 12 or more acres.
. Industrial projects of 24 or more acres.
. Mixed Use projects with a cumulative threshold equal to that of 50 dwelling units.
Infill or redevelopment projects that provide information, to the satisfaction of the
Director of Planning and Building or his/her designee, indicating the net threshold
increase resulting from the proposed land use does not exceed the impact of 50 dwelling
units, wil1 not be required to prepare an Air Quality Improvement Plan.
3
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Air Quality Improvement
Plan Outline
Attachment A
RESIDENTIAL AND MIXED USE PROJECTS
PARTICIPATING IN THE GREENSTAR BUILDING
EFFICIENCY PROGRAM
The following outline sets forth the format and content of the Air Quality Improvement
Plan (AQIP) for projects participating in the Chula Vista GreenStar Building Efficiency
Program.
1. Developer must agree to exceed the California 2001 Title 24, Part 6, Energy
Efficiency Standards (CA 2001 Title 24, effective 6/1/01) by 15% in the majority
(50% or greater) of residential dwelling units through participation in a building
efficiency program such as ComfortWise or CA Energy Star, or develop a custom
building efficiency program using construction methods that exceed CA 2001
Title 24 requirements by 15%.
Mixed-Use projects must exceed the CA 2001 Title 24 standards in the
construction of the majority (50% or greater) of the structures in the project. The
required level of CA 2001 Title 24 exceedence is determined by land use within
the project consistent with the residential and non-residential requirements
outlined in the AQIP Guidelines.
In the event that changes to energy and building code standards occur subsequent
to the effective date of the Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines, building
efficiency programs sponsored or endorsed by state agencies or utility companies
will meet the requirement for participation in the Chula Vista GreenStar Building
Efficiency Program regardless of the level of California Title 24, Part 6
exceedence. Custom building efficiency programs consistent with future
organized building programs mentioned above will be permitted in the GreenStar
Building Program.
2. Developer may submit an AQIP m letter form containing the following
information:
I
GreenStar Residential Projects
5/12/03
. Project Description.
. Commitment to participate In the Chula Vista GreenStar Building
Program.
. Identify the specific building efficiency program to be used, or design a
custom building program that exceeds CA 2001 Title 24 requirements by
15%. Custom building programs must be accompanied by data
confirming CA 2001 Title 24 exceedence to the satisfaction of the
Director of Planning and Building or his/her designee.
. Total number of dwelling units committed to participation In the
GreenStar Program.
. Proj ect features incorporated in the land use design that further enhance
energy conservation and reduce harmful emissions and air pollutants, such
as pedestrian and transit friendly features, compact development and
diversity of uses.
2
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Air Quality Improvement
Plan Outline
Attachment B
NON-RESIDENTIAL PROJECTS PARTICIPATING IN
THE GREENSTAR BUILDING EFFICIENCY
PROGRAM
The fol1owing outline sets forth the format and content of the Air Quality Improvement
Plan (AQIP) for non-residential projects participating in the Chula Vista GreenStar
Building Efficiency Program.
I. Developer must agree to exceed the California 2001 Title 24, Part 6, Energy
Efficiency Standards (CA 2001 Title 24, effective 6/1101) by 10% in the majority
(50% or greater) of the non-residential structures in the project through
participation in a building efficiency program such as SDG&E Savings By
Design, or similar non-residential building efficiency programs or develop a
custom building efficiency program using construction methods that exceed CA
2001 Title 24 requirements by 10%.
In the event that changes to energy and building code standards occur subsequent
to the effective date of the Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines, building
efficiency programs sponsored or endorsed by state agencies or utility companies
wil1 meet the requirement for participation in the Chula Vista GreenStar Building
Efficiency Program regardless of the level of California Title 24, Part 6
exceedence. Custom building efficiency programs consistent with future
organized building programs mentioned above will be permitted in the GreenStar
Building Program.
2. Developer may submit an AQIP m letter form containing the fol1owing
information:
. Project Description.
. Commitment to participate m the ChuIa Vista GreenStar Building
Efficiency Program.
I
GrccnStar Non Residential Projects
5/12/03
. Identify the specific building efficiency program to be used, or design a
custom building program that exceeds CA 2001 Title 24 requirements by
10%. Custom building programs must be accompanied by data
confirming CA 2001 Title 24 exceedence to the satisfaction of the
Director of Planning and Building or his/her designee.
. Number of structures committed to participation in the building efficiency
program.
. Project features that are incorporated in the land use design to further
enhance energy conservation and reduce harmful emissions and air
pollutants.
2
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Air Quality Improvement
Plan Outline
Attachment C
PROJECTS USING THE C02 INDEX MODEL
The following outline sets forth the format and content of the Air Quality Improvement
Plan (AQIP) for projects using the C02 INDEX Model. In accordance with the City of
Chula Vista Growth Management Program, the AQIP shall demonstrate the best available
design to reduce vehicle trips, maintain or improve traffic flow, reduce vehicle miles
traveled, identify means of reducing emissions (direct or indirect) from the project, and
define a program to monitor compliance. To further enhance opportunities to improve air
quality and energy conservation, the action measures contained in the City's Carbon
Dioxide (C02) Reduction Plan and the City's Air Quality Improvement Plan INDEX
pilot study results must be considered in the AQIP.
All projects using the C02 INDEX model must be submitted to the City in ArcView
format in both hard copy and electronic format.
In addition, the project AQIP must incorporate the following numbering system
consistent with the Master Planned Communities SPA Plan Outline. For projects that do
not require a SPA Plan a comparable numbering sequence is to be used. (e.g. 11.7.1,
11.7.2 replaced with 1., 2. etc.)
SECTION 11.7
AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN
11.7.1 Executive Summary
Provide a brief summary of the Air Quality Improvement Plan. Particular
emphasis shall be given to the air quality improvement measures identified for
implementation in the project and the results of the modeling effort.
1
-.
AQIP Outline
5/12/03
11.7.2 Introduction
1I.7.2a. Purpose
This section will describe the purpose of providing an Air Quality Improvement
Plan. Provide a brief explanation of the regulatory framework identifying the
authority and scope of the City of Chula Vista, State, and Federal regulations.
Where applicable, explain how the project has addressed regulations and include a
brief discussion of the following:
. Chula Vista's Growth Management Ordinance requires all major
development projects (50 dwelling units or greater, or commercial
or industrial projects with equivalent air quality impacts to a
residential project of 50 dwelling units) to prepare an Air Quality
Improvement Plan (AQIP).
. The Carbon Dioxide (C02) Reduction Plan provides for further
consideration of land use and energy efficient measures in new
development to reduce C02 emissions, energy consumption and air
pollution. The AQIP should include implementation of applicable
measures identified in the C02 Reduction Plan.
11.7.3 Project Description
Project description including land use information, acreage, number of housing
units, unit types and mixed-use areas. Include the Site Utilization Plan illustration
from the Sectional Plarming Area (SPA) Plan document or similar site plan
illustration for those projects that do not file a SPA Plan.
11.7.4 Air Quality Action Measures
List the following action measures as identified in the INDEX Pilot Study report
and the C02 Reduction Plan. Include an explanation that the actions measures
were used to develop the indicators for the C02 INDEX model and that the
indicators address the energy efficiency and emission reduction aspects of the
proposed development.
LAND USE
a. Compact development - Minimize spraw1.
b. Density -Increase intensity of land use.
c. Land Use Diversity - Mix and variety of uses.
d. Orientation toward pedestrian and bicycles.
e. Orientation toward transit.
2
AQIP Outline
5/12/03
BUILDINGS & LANDSCAPING
f. Energy efficient building construction - Reduce energy use by exceeding Title
24 building standards.
g. Solar Use - Solar thermal applications and power generation.
h. Vegetation - Uptakes air pollutants and greenhouse gases and provides
shading to reduce temperatures.
TRANSPORTATION
Important components of Transportation Action Measures include dense street
networks, completeness of sidewalks and direct routes to popular destinations.
1. Pedestrian Facilities - Circulation design and improvements for pedestrian
use.
J. Bicycle Facilities - System design and improvements to encourage bicycle
use.
k. Transit Facilities - Transit system design and improvements to circulation
system.
INFRASTRUCTURE
1. Water Use - Land pi arming that reduces water consumption. Reference the
Water Conservation Plan for the project.
11.7.5 Project Evaluation
Illustrate the C02 INDEX baseline and initial project scores.
As identified in the C02 INDEX Pilot Study, the twelve key indicators listed in
the table below have the greatest potential to achieve favorable scores based on
project design. Initial project scores must reflect improvements at or beyond the
threshold scores in two out of four indicators in each element: Land Use,
Transportation and Environment.
Element Key Indicators Units of Measure Threshold
Scores
Land Use Mix o to I index .4 or higher
Land Use Balance o to 1 index .75 or higher
Land Use Neighborhood
Completeness % of key uses 50 or higher
Internal Connectivity for
Vehicles o to 1 index .75 or higher
3
AQIP Outline
5/12/03
Pedestrian Network Pedestrian
Coverage Routes/streets 1.0 or higher
Ratio
Pedestrian Route Walkable distance
Transportation Directness vs straight-line ratio 1.5 or lower
Transit Service Coverage Stops/sq.mile 10 or higher
Daily Auto Driving Veh-mi./day/capita 20 or less
Park Proximity Distance to closest 1200 ft. or
park lower
Total Residential
Environment Energy Use MMBtu/yr./capita 24 or lower
Total Nonresidential
Energy Use MMBtu/yr./emp. 12 or less
Total Res. & Nonresidential MMBtu/yr./person
Energy Use (capita + ernp) 70 or less
If the initial project scores do not reflect improvements at or beyond the threshold
in two or more of the key indicators in each element then the Developer must
make modifications to the project design and have the alternate proposal run
through the C02 INDEX model.
lJIustrate the results of the modified SPA Plan or site plan proposal (second run
project scores) including an analysis of air quality improvement, energy
conservation, and C02 reduction achieved.
The Developer may propose alternate measures. The proposed alternate Air
Quality measures must be accompanied by data demonstrating, to the satisfaction
of the Director of Planning and Building, comparable energy and air quality
improvements are achieved.
11.7.6 Implementation Measures
List the Action Measures to be implemented in the project including any efforts
involving merchant builders and any other public or private agencies.
Reference the section and page of any mitigation measures contained in the
environmental documents that relate to air quality and construction emissions
impacts.
Reference the technical reports such as URBEMIS7G emISSIOns analysis
contained in the environmental documents.
4
AQIP Outline
5/12/03
References
Appendix
5