Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2009/08/11 Item 13CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT +, „~ ~~ CITY OF ~~ `~ CHULA VISTA August 11, 2009, Item No.: ~3 ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-09-14 Consideration of amendments to the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM 00-11) in order to allow educational and training uses, modify the provisions for temporary and accessory uses, and other miscellaneous amendments. The 4.46 acre site is located at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and "H" Street. Applicant-Gateway Chula Vista 2, LLC ORDINANCE: of the City of Chula Vista approving amendments to the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM 00-11) for 4.46 acres at the northwest corner of the intersection of "H" Street and Third Avenue. SUBMITTED BY: Director of Devel pment Services/Deputy City Manager, ~ `~ ~ REVIEWED BY: City Manag 4/Sths Vote :Yes X No BACKGROUND On December 12, 2000 the City Council and Redevelopment Agency adopted the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan ("Specific Plan"). The purpose was to ensure the orderly redevelopment and viability of the new development of the 4.46 acre project site and provide a model for similar redevelopment of the surrounding Towne Center 1 Redevelopment Area. The site is located approximately halfway between the Chula Vista Mall and the central business area along Third Avenue. The Specific Plan establishes design, landscape, and parking standards for the site, and defines the type and amount of development permitted within Phases 1-3 of the Gateway redevelopment project. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project was covered in previously adopted Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-99-24. The 13-1 Meeting Date: 08/11/09 Page 2 Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the prepazation of a subsequent document have occurred; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared an addendum to this document, Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-99-24, referred to as "Gateway Chula Vista: H Street and Third Avenue." RECOMMENDATION That the City Council adopt Ordinance to 1) consider the addendum to Mitigated Negative Declazation IS-99-24 and 2) adopt ordinance approving amendments to the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM 00-11) for 4.46 acres at the northwest comer of the intersection of "H" Street and Third Avenue. BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION: On July 22, 2009 the Planning Commission considered the addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24 and the request to amend the Gateway Specific Plan and voted (6-0-1-0) recommending that the City Council approved the project. On July 23, 2009, the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation considered the addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24 and the request to amend the Gateway Specific Plan and voted (5-0-1-1) recommending that the City Council approve the project. DISCUSSION Site Location and Surrounding Uses: A description of the surrounding land uses, General Plan, and Zoning designations is outlined below: Existing General Plan, Specific Plan, Land Use Designations and land use General Plan Zoning Urban Core Existing Land Use Site Transit Focus Area Gateway Specific Plan North Transit Focus Area R3/UC2 South PQ CC East Transit Focus Area R3 West Transit Focus Area UC2 Professional Office Transit Focus Area Buildings/Retail,vacant (Phase III)t UC2(portion) aparhnents UCS(portion) courthouse N/A church campus UC2 Vacant 13-2 Meeting Date: 08/11/09 Page 3 Project Description: Gateway Chula Vista 2, LLC ("Gateway," the "applicant," or the "developer") is requesting an amendment to their Specific Plan in order to change the type and distribution of allowable uses within the project area covered by the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan. The amendments would allow educational and training uses, modify provisions for temporary and accessory uses and other miscellaneous modifications within the 4.46-acre project site. The proposed amendments are more specifically described below: Land Use Regulations Education and Training Amend Section 2.2 and Table 2 to add additional pennitted land use category "education and training schools" and delete Section 2.5 to remove this category as a prohibited use. (See Attachment SA) Land Use Regulations: Temporary and Accessory Uses Amend Sections 23 and 2.4 to modify provisions for temporary and accessory uses. (See Attachment SA) Off-Street Parking Amend Section 4.7 Off Street Parking to update available parking and indicate how proposed changes in land uses can be accommodated; Amend Appendix C to reflect updated Shared Parking Analysis. (See Attachment SB) Circulation and Streets Amend Sections 4.8 Circulation and 5.5 Streets to reflect clarification regarding proposed pedestrian bridge and revised trip generation based upon new traffic study. (See Attachment SC) ~ecific Plan: Miscellaneous Amendments/ilpdates • Amend Section 1.7 to update the figures regarding the existing/proposed sizes of Buildings. 13-3 Meeting Date: 08/11/09 Page 4 • Modify Table 2 of Section 2.1 to: a) reduce the restaurant square footage by 6,000 square feet and b) update the total building square footages to reflect a 15% increase previously approved by substantial conformance review per Section 6.7 of the Specific Plan. • Amend Section 6.2 to update figures. • Modify Exhibits 6 and 7 to reflect updated development concept Specific Plan and H Street Elevation. (See Attachment SD) ANALYSIS: Land Use Regulations The 4.46 acre project site is zoned Transit Focus Area (TFA). This designation is based upon the land use classifications contained in the Urban Core Specific Specific Plan (UCSP). However, because the Specific Plan was adopted prior to the UCSP, the land use and development standazds and related provisions contained in the UCSP aze superceded by the Specific Plan. Section 2.0 of the Specific Plan titled "Land Use Regulations" outlines the various types of land uses, which are permitted or not permitted within the project area. The primazy amendment being requested to the Specific Plan is to add the land use category "Educational & Training Uses" as a permitted use, currently described as prohibited. Staff believes this use to be an appropriate use for this location as compatible with other types of land uses currently permitted. Squaze footages of other land use categories have been reducedin order to accommodate this newly permitted land use category. These include a reduction in the "restaurant" category based upon the applicant's request that the amount allocated to restaurant use be reduced due to changes in economic conditions. hi addition to specifying categories of land uses, Table 2 of the Specific Plan (see Attachment SA) shows the distribution of square footages by both building phase and total square footage. Currently, flexibility is provided as to how these square footages are allocated between building phases as long as the maximum (total) square footage of each category is adhered to. Staff recommends modifying existing text language in order to provide for additional flexibility regarding distribution of square footages between land use categories while providing safeguards that negative impacts to the surrounding area will not occur. Specifically, new language proposed will require that the amount of allowed space per land use category shall not be exceeded unless there is no increase in average daily trips (ADT's) or required parking. Square footage changes must be approved by the Director of Development Services (see Attachment SA). As noted above, subsequent to the preparation of the original Specific Plan document, the applicant has increased the overall allowable building square footage by approximately 15% as authorized per Section 6.7 (which, under substantial conformance, allows a one time increase or decrease of up to 15% substantial conformance). The requested one time increase in squaze 13-4 Meeting Date: 08/11/09 Page 5 footage allowed per this section was granted by the City Manager in a letter dated March 16, 2007. Thus, the revised Table 2 not only shows the new category of allowed land uses and revised distribution of square footages within and between land use categories but also incorporates new larger total square footages allowed based upon this previously approved substantial conformance allowance. Parking The existing Specific Plan utilized the Chula Vista Bayfront Specific Plan (Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.85.008) as precedence for determining the parking requirements for this project. The Bayfront Specific Plan allows shared parking to be utilized where supported by appropriate studies. Per that Municipal Code section (19.85.008), the criteria and standards provided by the Urban Land Institute (iJLI) should be utilized to assess parking needs. The Specific Plan has incorporated this same criteria into its off street parking ratio requirements. The Specific Plan originally provided for a minimum of 1,117 parking spaces on site based upon a previously adopted shared parking agreement. This capacity has now been updated to reflect site design and land use changes and which now include 1,229 parking spaces. This updated figure is based upon information provided by the applicant in an updated draft traffic study submitted on July 9, 2009 (which included the revised shared parking study). It should be noted that this study is based upon the revised distribution of land uses shown in Table 2 and the pazking analysis. This includes the reduction in restaurant usage previously discussed. As mentioned above, the original number (1,117 spaces) was achieved by performing a parking analysis (Appendix C of the original Specific Specific Plan) considering the project's mix of uses, time of use, day of use, and seasonal demand. With the change in project land uses, the project's highest hourly demand for parking is now calculated in two stages. Two stages were required because the pazking structure is presently two thirds built. Therefore, the first portion of the parking study included the addition of educational land uses to the site as well as corresponding reductions in the remaining land uses for Phase I & II only. For this study period, the demand is approximately 699 on weekdays while the supply consists of 981 parking spaces provided for a surplus of 282 parking spaces at the end of Phase I & II. For the ultimate condition, that is, Phases I, II & III combined, 1,229 parking spaces will be provided for an estimated demand of 1,078 spaces, resulting in a surplus of 151 spaces. In order to accommodate the 1,229 parking spaces on site, the following parking space standard has been set for the Specific Plan. The specific existing standards include that all pazking spaces shall be a minimum width of 8.5 feet and all aisles 21 feet. The length of a parking space shall be 20 feet for standard and 15 feet for compact. Off Street loading spaces include an internal delivery area behind Building 2. The street level parking structure will be a minimum height to accommodate delivery trucks in this area. Based upon the above discussion, Section 4.7 of the Specific Plan will be updated to reflect additional parking spaces which will be provided for the project. The total number of parking spaces to be provided will increase from 1,117 to 1,229. The updated breakdown of parking spaces between phases 1-3 is shown in revised Appendix C. (see Attachment SB) 13-5 Meeting Date: 08/11/09 Page 6 Traffic/Streets A revised traffic study dated July 9, 2009 analyzes the potential impacts of altering project land uses including adding an educational and training facility for up to 600 students. The San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) trip generation rates were applied to the land uses as was done in the original study. The City of Chula Vista completed a General Plan Amendment (GPA) concurrently with the processing of the original Specific Plan. The purpose of the GPA was to reclassify H Street from a six lane collector to a four lane collector road in the Circulation Element and has been accomplished. A traffic study was originally prepared for the GPA, which forecast traffic volumes at buildout for the Specific Plan, the South Bay Regional Center expansion and the Scripps Hospital expansion. A new traffic study was conducted which included the updated project land uses but without the South Bay Regional Center expansion involved. The new study determined that the proposed land uses in the updated Gateway Chula Vista project would generate 9,298 Average Daily Trips (ADT) with 922 trips in the AM peak hour and 1,032 trips in the PM peak hour. These volumes compaze favorably to the adopted traffic study in that the first traffic report predicted 9,939 with 879 in the AM peak and 1,084 trips in the PM peak hour. Overall trip generation on a daily basis has been reduced due to the change in land uses. Trips have decreased 640 trips on a daily basis. Trips increased in the AM peak hour from 879 to 922 (+43) due to operating characteristics of the project but have decreased by 52 trips in the PM peak hour going from 1,084 to 1,032. The traffic study concluded that the increase in a.m. peak hour trips will not result in a significant traffic impact. The city reviewed its Growth Management Oversight Committee (GMOC) roadway segments in the area and found none that were failing in the last year. The city found that the proposed changes to the land uses led to slight incremental increases to certain traffic volumes in the local area. It was estimated that future peak period travel speeds in the study area will continue to operate at adequate Levels of Service (LOS). Additionally, during review of the original traffic study, impacts to the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue were identified. However, mitigation measures remain in the Specific Plan's conditions of approval, which will reduce the traffic impacts to acceptable levels. Based upon the above discussion, Section 5.5 of the Plan will be updated to reflect the revised ADT volumes (see Attachment SC). Miscellaneous Amendments/IJodates In addition to the above, other sections/pages within the Specific Plan are also being amended/update to reflect revised figures, including building square footages. (See attachment 5D) 13-6 Meeting Date: 08/11/09 Page 7 DECISION-MAKER CONFLICTS: Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property, which is subject to this action. CURRENT FISCAL YEAR IMPACT: The applicant has paid for all costs associated with the processing of this project. ONGOING FISCAL YEAR IMPACT: There will not be any ongoing fiscal impacts associated with the project as it involves text changes to the Gateway Specific Plan. The original Disposition and Development Agreement (DDA) contemplated a Class "A" restaurant which is not financially feasible due to local demographics and therefore the sales tax revenue estimated to come from a Class A restaurant will not be realized. However, the action will not preclude other restaurant facilities from occupying space in the Gateway office complex which could generate sales tax revenue. Attachments 1 Locator 2 Planning Commission Resolution 3 CVRC Resolution 4 Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration IS 99-24 5 Figures 6 Ownership Disclosure Form Prepared by: Jeff Steichen, Associate Planner, Development Services Depamnent J:\planning\I'arget Rezone.doc 13-7 ATTACHMENT 1 LOCATOR MAP 13-8 LOCATOR MAP 13-9 ATTACHMENT 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 13-10 RESOLUTION N0. PCM-09-14 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHIJLA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERS THE ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS-99-24 AND APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO THE GATEWAY CHULA VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM 00-1 I) FOR 4.46 ACRES AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTIONS OF "H" STREET AND THIRD AVENUE WHEREAS, on Apri123, 2009, a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula Vista Developmental Services Department by Gateway Chula Vista 2, LLC ("Developer"), requesting approval of amendments to the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan for 4.46 acres located at the intersections of "H" Street and Third Avenue (Project); and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Enviromnental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project was covered in previously adopted Mitigated Negative Declazation (MND), IS 99-24. The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the prepazation of a subsequent document has occurred; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared an Addendum to Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-99-24, referred to as "Gateway Chula Vista: H Street and Third Avenue"; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission fmds that the Addendum to MND IS 99-24 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 WHEREAS, the Development Services Director set the time and place for a hearing on the Project, and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and it mailing to property owners and within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property, at least 10 days prior to the heazing; and WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m, July 22, 2009, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and the hearing was thereafter closed. NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED by the Planning Commission ofthe City of Chula V ista that the following Findings aze hereby made and adopted: The proposed amendments to the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan are consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan. The proposed amendments to allow educational and training uses, modify provisions for temporary and accessory uses and other miscellaneous amendments will not result in additional traffic generation 13-11 nor demand for additional parking and are consistent with other types of uses currently permitted by the Specific Plan. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista recommends that the City Council approve the Amendment to MND IS 99-24 and adopt the attached Draft City Council Resolution and Ordinance approving the Project in accordance with the Findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED by the Planning Cotmission of the City of Chula Vista that a copy of this Resolution and the draft City Council Ordinance be transmitted to the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED by the Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista, this 22nd day of July, 2009, by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ATTEST: Diana Vazgas, Secretary Presented by: Scott Vinson, Chairperson Gazy Halbert, P.E., AICP Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director Approved as to form by: es e1d-~ ik)~; 13-12 Planning Commission Minutes - 3 - July 22, 2009 3. Public Hearing: 6:27:13 PM PCM 09-14; Consideration of amendments to the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan in order to allow educational and training uses, modify the provisions for temporary and accessory uses, and other miscellaneous amendments. The 4.46-acre site is located at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and H Street. Applicant: Gateway Chula Vista 2, LLC. Background: Jeff Steichen reported that the Gateway Specific Plan was adopted on December 12, 2000, which established design, landscape, and parking standards and defines the type and amount of development permitted within Phases 1 thru 3 of the Gateway redevelopment project. The applicant is requesting an amendment to their Specific Plan in order to change the type and distribution of allowable uses within the project area and would allow educational and training uses, modify provisions for temporary and accessory uses and other miscellaneous modifications within the 4.46-acre project site. StafF Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCM 09-14 recommending that the City Council approve the ordinance for the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan Amendment. Commission Comments: There was discussion regarding the reduction to the restaurant square footage and an increase in overall allowable building square footage. 6:38:00 PM Cmr. Tripp stated that traffic mitigation measures outlined in the traffic study appear to be intended for implementation at the time of build-out of the Specific Plan. He noted that the intensity level of this project might not warrant implementation of the mitigation measures, and questioned at what point would a substantial conformance review of traffic volumes and operation of the site be triggered. 6:39:19 PM Dave Kaplan, Traffic Engineer, stated that after Phase II is completed and with the commencement of Phase III, a traffic study will be conducted for amid-block traffic signal on H St. between 3rtl and 4th for access to Phase III and the entire specific plan, as well as a reassessment of traffic volumes and operation of the site. Cmr. Felber stated that locating amedical/technical training school at this location is an excellent choice, he pointed out that another good choice would be a school in the criminal justice field since the courthouse and law-enforcement complex is across the street. 6:48:20 PM Public Hearing Opened. 6:48:29 PM Jim Pieri stated they are allowed aone-time increase or decrease of up to 15% in square footage and height and they decided not to increase the height, staying within the guidelines of Phase I & II, and a square footage of 140,000 instead of 155,000. Mr. Pieri stated they are excited about the prospects of partnering with an educational institution. Regarding the reduction of restaurants square footage, he reassured the Commission that every effort was made to market the site as such, but they were unsuccessful. 13-13 Planning Commission Minutes - 4 - July 22, 2009 6:53:51 PM Cmr. Spethman spoke of student mode of transportation and inquired if any thought had been given to the use of off-site parking through a partnership agreement with another entity and shuttling to and from the parking lot to the school. 6:54:53 PM Mr. Andy Schlafley, of Urban Systems, gave an overview of how their parking and transportation analysis is done using data from SANDAG trip generation rates and the Urban Land Institute parking rates. 7:12:00 PM Cmr. Clayton stated that with the education venue, ancillary uses such as child care might be warranted and asked if any, consideration has been given to accommodating safety precautions for these type of uses. Mr. Pieri stated that some training schools do provide within themselves day care services. Their objective is to remain flexible and accommodate the various needs of their tenants and one way of doing that is by providing full-time security within the parking structure. The following individuals were present at the meeting and filled out a speaker slip indicating they were in support of the project, however, they declined to speak during public testimony: Chris Greenlee, Tony Neely, James Reid, Daniel Rosenberg, Tom Axsin, Paula Whitsell, Michael Gorski, Summer Scace, Dave Stanton, Salina Vijarro, Jen Moreno, Flor Peralta, Charles Felkins, Gaby Reyes, James Haug, Anthony Davis. 7:17:52 PM Jose Cortez, voiced his supports for the amendment to the Specific Plan and stated it was vital for the revitalization of western Chula Vista. 7:18:09 PM Leo Conde stated adequate traffic analysis was done and concluded that there are no significant impacts; he urged the commission's approval of the project. 7:20:18 PM Steve Estes, Executive Director for Third Avenue Village Assoc. read into the record a letter supporting the amendment to the Gateway Specific Plan to allow educational training stated it will lead to future development of this area. 7:21:34 PM Kevin O'Neill stated that amedical/technical training schools is an excellent choice because of the demand for trained professional in this field; he urged its approval. 7:23:43 PM Ricardo Muro, businessman wholeheartedly supports the amendment because it will bring revitalization to the downtown area by bringing feet to the street. 7:24:57 PM Gabe Gutierrez stated this project, specifically the training school, will be a great asset to the community and urged commission to vote for its approval. 7:25:51 PM Deacon Greg Smith at St. Rose Lima and member of TAVA reiterated their unanimous support and urged Commission's approval. 7:27:05 PM Riner Leal stated this is a no-brainer and allowing the completion of Gateway III is a win-win situation; jobs, training for our own people in medical field, and feet to the street. 7:28:41 . PM Patricia Aguilar representing Crossroads II stated they are not opposed to having a vocation school in Chula Vista and support redevelopment to the extent that it does not impose undue negative impacts on the adjacent neighborhood, however, they do have 13-14 Planning Commission Minutes - 5 - July 22, 2009 concerns in the following three areas: additional traffic generation and parking created by the school; the CEQA analysis does not address a ground to planned analysis and does not address current conditions on the ground; and are extremely disappointed that the sit-down restaurant is being eliminated because the original plan for Gateway was sold on the assumption that a restaurant would be added. Ms. Aguilar stated they would ask that staff work with traffic engineering to correct the incorrect parking assumptions and faulty CEQA analysis in the traffic report and look at this proposal again once that is completed. 7:37:24 PM Steve Power stated that pursuant to CEQA regulations an addendum may be prepared if minor technical changes or additions are necessary. None of the conditions described in State law calling for the preparation of a Subsequent EIR or Negative Declaration have occurred and in staffs opinion there are no real changes that would necessitate additional mitigation measures. Traffic is negligible and parking has been satisfied, therefore, the addendum is appropriate pursuant to State law. 7:38:28 PM Teresa Acerro stated she is concerned with placing a school in that location, which is a busy corner and is very disappointed that there won't be a sit-down restaurant. 7:42:32 PM Lisa Cohen, CEO Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, voiced her support on behalf of their membership who support the Gateway project and change in the Specific Plan. She commended the applicant for investing in the development of Chula Vista and being a visionary in siting an educational institution that will train our future workforce in Chula Vista. 7:44:50 PM Earl Jentz address a couple of items of concern in the parking ratios and the way the DDA and resolution are written eliminating the restriction for educational uses. Close Public Hearing. The Planning Commission expressed an overall support of the project; thought the school use is a good choice for that location; are extremely disappointed about the sit-down restaurant going away and although they would have liked to have seen more in-depth traffic analysis, they are confident the recommended mitigation measures will address them, therefore, they collectively supported the amendment to the Specific Plan. 8:04:31 PM Cmr. Clayton stated that her office is in the vicinity of this .project and felt uncomfortable in voting on it, therefore, she recused herself from the dais. 8:06:31 PM MSC (Felber/Tripp) (6-0-1-0) that the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCM 09-14 recommending that the City Council approve the ordinance for the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan Amendment. Motion carried with Cmr. Clayton abstaining. 13-15 ATTACHMENT 3 CVRC RESOLUTION 13-16 CVRC RESOLUTION NO. 2009-006 RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL (1) CONSIDER THE ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS-99-24 AND (2) APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO THE GATEWAY CHULA VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM 00- 11) FOR 4.46 ACRES AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF "H" STREET AND THIRD AVENUE WHEREAS, the pazcel, which is the subject matter of this resolution, is represented in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and for the purpose of general description is located at the intersections of "H" Street and Third Avenue ("Project"); and WHEREAS, on April 23, 2009 a duly verified application for a Specific Plan amendment (PCM-09-14) was filed with the City of Chula Vista by Gateway Chula Vista 2, LLC, requesting approval of amendments to the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan; and WHEREAS, on July 22, 2009, a Planning Commission hearing time and place was set for said amendment 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 ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, a hearing at the time and place as advertised, namely July 22, 2009, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, was held before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission reviewed and considered the addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission after considering all evidence and testimony presented recommended by a vote of 5-0-1-1 that the City of Chula Vista City Council approve the Specific Plan amendment (PCM 09-14); and WHEREAS, a hearing time and place was set by the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation for consideration of the Project 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 ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation held a duly noticed public hearing to consider said application at the time and place as advertised, namely July 23, 2009 at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, said hearing was thereafter closed. 13-17 CVRC Resolution No 2009-006 Page 2 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation does hereby find, determine, and resolve as follows: A. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION That the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with .the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and has determined that the project was covered in previously adopted Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-99-24. The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent document has occurred; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared an Addendum to Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-99- 24, referred to as "Gateway Chula Vista: H Street and Third Avenue." B. CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN That the proposed amendments to the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan aze consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan. The proposed amendments to allow educational and training uses, modify provisions for temporary and accessory uses and other miscellaneous amendments will not result in additional traffic generation nor demand for additional parking and are consistent with other types of uses currently permitted by the Specific Plan. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation, after considering all evidence and testimony presented, does hereby recommend that the City of Chula Vista City Council consider the addendum to Mitigated Negative Declazation (IS-99-24) and approve the Specific Plan amendment (PCM-09-14). BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this Resolution be transmitted to the City Council. Presented by: Approved as to form by Jim Sandoval Chief Executive Officer Bart C. Miesfeld General Counsel 13-18 CVRC Resolution No 2009-006 Page 3 PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation of the City of Chula Vista, this 23rd day of July 2009, by the following vote: AYES: Directors: Munoz, Paul, Reyes, Salas, and Lewis NAYS: None ABSENT: Directors: Desrochers ABSTAIN: Directors: Flores Christopher H. Lewis, Chair ATTEST: Eric C. Crockett, Secretary STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) CITY OF CHULA VISTA ) I, Eric C. Crockett, Secretary of the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing CVRC Resolution No. 2009-006 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation at a special annual meeting of the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation held on the 23rd day of July 2009. Executed this 23rd day of July 2009. Eric C. Crockett, Secretary 13-19 EXHIBIT A 13-20 DRAFT MINUTES OF THE SPECIAL ANNUAL MEETING OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION (CVRC) Date: July 23, 2009 4:00 P.M. The Special Annual Meeting of the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation was called to order at 4:03 p.m. in the Council Chambers, located in City Hall, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California CVRC ROLL CALL PRESENT: Directors: Paul, Flores, Munoz, Reyes, Salas, and Chair Lewis ABSENT: Director Desrochers ALSO PRESENT: Deputy City Manager/Development Services Director Halbert, City Attorney Miesfield, Redevelopment Manager Crockett, Principal Planner Power, Transportation Engineer Kaplan, Sr. Project Coordinator Do, and Senior Administrative Secretary Laughlin PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE, MOMENT OF SILENCE CONSENT CALENDAR 1. ELECTION OF CHAIR AND VICE-CHAII2 Director Salas nominated Chair Lewis to remain as chair for the coming year. The motion to confirm was made by Director Salas and seconded by Director Flores. Chair Lewis asked for nominations for Vice-Chair and nominated the incumbent, Director Paul. Director Salas stated that his nomination and motion was also include Director Paul as Vice-Chair. Motion to approve Chair and Vice-Chair carved unanimously. PUBLIC COMMENTS There were none. PUBLIC HEARINGS 2. PCM-09-14 CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE GATEWAY CHULA VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM-00-I I) Gateway Chula Vista 2, LLC ("Gateway," the "applicant," or the "developer") is requesting an amendment to their Specific Plan in order to change the type and Page 1 of 5 CVRC -Minutes -July 23, 2009 13-21 DRAFT distribution of allowable uses within the project area covered by the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan. Principal Planner Power gave a PowerPoint presentation on Gateway Chula Vista 2 to include photos and conceptual plans. Planner Power provided the current Table 2 showing the existing permitted land use categories. He stated the principal purpose of the amendment was to add a new land use category i.e. educational and training schools. He then showed the Proposed Table 2 to include the educational and training school land use and specified that other provisions were being modified in the a) Accessory Uses and b) Temporary Uses to provide flexibility subject to the approval of the Director of Redevelopment. Planner Power then provided the Board with a pazking site plan which showed the existing shared parking plan and then an updated shazed pazking plan. The updated shared pazking plan was created after an analysis conducted by Urban Systems and is based on updated assumptions based in terms of land uses and total squaze footage. The parking analysis was explained and slides included charts on trip generation, elevation models and staff recommendation. The following people were present to speak: Steve Eastes (Tava), Patricia Aguilar (Crossroads II), Eazl Jentz (resident), Reiner Leal (Chula Vistans for Community Action), Tiffany Vinson (Chula Vistans for Community Action), Lisa Cohen (Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce), Kevin O'Neill (resident), Deacon Greg Smyth (Third Avenue Village Association & St. Rose de Lima). Others present but not wishing to speak: Juan Pablo Mariscal, Leo Conde, Jose Cortes, Cecilia Mesia, Ricardo Muro, and Richard D'Ascoli. There was an additional party wishing to speak that should have been covered under Public Comment, but the Chair allowed him to speak during this time. A packet of information was handed out to Board members. Antonio Munoz spoke/translated for Jose Munos on complaints of residents at the Edwazds Arms Apartments and the disagreements with owner Jim Pieri of Mountainwest Properties. Director of Development Services Halbert called the Board's attention to the fact that the addresses that the speaker was referring to are off-site to the project before the Board and that the project does not affect those properties. Another speaker on item #2, Frank Zurelli (resident) spoke on the traffic at intersections and the velocity requirements. His concern was that there was no room for aright-hand turn lane at Third Avenue and H Street. Chair Lewis deviated from the normal agenda to have staff reply to questions from the Board and the public. Director Reyes asked questions regarding a) net rental factor/reduction of square footage, 2) if the plan used the .82 increase or .21, 3) what happens to allotted parking if educational youth numbers increase or decrease and 4) are spaces to be marked or unmarked? There was also a question from Director Flores and Director Salas. Page 2 of 5 CVRC -Minutes -July 23, 2009 13-22 DRAFT Chair Lewis deferred to staff for answers. Traffic Engineer Kaplan referred to a book called Parking Generation which was put out by the Traffic Institute of Engineers and sited examples of how statistics were gathered and how the parking ratio/allotment was developed. Director Halbert, who was a former Traffic Engineer, also expounded on the use of the land for a technical college and also the parking allocations. Staff went on to answer the remaining questions presented by the Boazd. It was stated that mazking spaces for time limit would be appropriate, but that if it was marked per business it would not be shazed parking by definition. Director Paul had questions regazding if whether the DDA spoke to spaces being converted from non-paying to paid parking in the future and whether, with the upcoming environmental restrictions, that the trip generation could change. Principal Planner Power answered the questions and Director Munoz questioned the handicapped parking allotments. ACTION: Director Salas moved to adopt CVRC Resolution No. 2009-006 heading read, text waived: CVRC RESOLUTION NO: 2009-006 RESOLUTION OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT CORPORATION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL (1) CONSIDER THE ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS-99-24 and (2) APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO THE GATEWAY CHULA VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM-00-11) FOR 4.46 ACRES AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF "H" STREET AND THIRD AVENUE Director Munoz seconded the motion and it carved 5-0-1-1, with Director Desrochers absent and Director Flores abstaining. City Attorney Miesfeld clarified that the abstaining vote was not due to a conflict of interest. ACTION ITEMS 3. EIGHTH AMENDMENT TO THE GATEWAY DISPOSITION AND DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT (DDA) Sr. Project Coordinator Do gave a brief presentation and stated that the proposed actions aze to 1) allow educational and training uses, 2) remove the first class restaurant requirement and 3) to define the financial GAP formula for Phase III. Chair Lewis addressed Mr. Jenz and asked if he wished to speak because he had had a speaker slip on Items 2 and 3. Mr. Jenz advised Chair Lewis that his comments for Item 2 could be incorporated into Item 3. Director Salas presented a question regarding the matrix of percentages and asked how the GAP analysis would be formed. Questions were answered by Development Director Crockett. Page 3 of 5 1 3_23 CVRC -Minutes -July 23, 2009 ATTACHMENT 4 ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS 99-24 13-24 ADDENDUM TO MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION IS-99-24 (Gateway Specific Plan) PROJECT NAME: PROJECT LOCATION: Gateway Specific Plan Amendment 333 H Street, Chula Vista, CA PROJECT APPLICANT: Mountain West Real Estate CASE NO: DATE: I. BACKGROUND IS-99-24 July 13, 2009 The purpose of this Addendum is to discuss proposed minor amendments to the previously adopted Gateway Specific Plan. The Gateway Specific Plan was originally approved by the City of Chula Vista in the year 2000. The specific plan calls for the construction of three Class "A" commercial buildings with associated parking structure. Included within the specific plan is a list of allowed and prohibited uses. Amendments to the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan would be made in order to allow educational and training uses, modify the provisions for temporary and accessory uses, and make other minor miscellaneous amendments. As the lead agency for the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, Sec. 21000 et seq.), the City of Chula Vista ("City") prepared and conducted an environmental analysis (Mitigated Negative Declazation IS-99-24) for the Gateway Specific Plan. Mitigated Negative Declazation IS-99-24 contains a comprehensive disclosure and analysis of potential environmental effects associated with the implementation of the Gateway Specific Plan project. The final MND was certified and the Gateway Specific Plan was approved by the Chula Vista City Council in December of 2000. The proposed specific plan amendment does not result in any new significant impacts beyond those previously identified in Mitigated Negative Declazation IS-99-24, nor an increase in severity of any previously identified impacts in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24. The environmental analysis presented in Mitigated Negative Declazation IS-99-24 addresses all potential impacts associated with the Gateway Specific Plan. Because the Gateway Specific Plan amendment would not result in any new potentially significant impacts, nor increase the severity of any impacts identified in Mitigated Negative Declazation IS-99-24, the project is considered to be adequately covered under Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24. No further environmental analysis is warranted. 13-25 Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declazation IS-99-24 July 13, 2009 II. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS Section 2.0 of the Gateway Specific Plan titled "Land Use Regulations" outlines the various types of land uses which are permitted or not permitted within the project area. In addition to specifying categories of land uses, it also places further restrictions as to the maximum allowable size (square-footage) of these categories of land uses. The primary change requested by the applicant is to show the land use category "Educational & Training Schools" from a currently prohibited land use to a use that is permitted by right. Reductions in square footages of other categories have been made in order to accommodate this shifting of the available square-footage necessary to accommodate this newly permitted land use category. Subsequent to the preparation of the original Plan document, the applicant has increased the overall allowable building square-footage by approximately 15% as allowed per Section 6.7 of the specific plan. Thus, the revised square-footage table in the specific plan not only shows the new category of allowed land use distribution of squaze footages, but also incorporates the new larger total squaze footage allowed pursuant to Section 6.7 of the specific plan. The 15% squaze footage allowance was included in the updated traffic and pazking analysis performed for the specific plan amendment and has not resulted in any environmental impacts beyond those previously identified and mitigated in the project MND. The California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines (§15162) establishes the conditions under which subsequent EIRs and negative declazations shall be prepazed. A. When an EIR has been certified or negative declazation adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole public record, one or more of the following: 1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the EIR or negative declazation due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions to the EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or negative declazation was adopted, shows any of the following: (A) The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or negative declazation; (B) Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24 ~3~26 Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24 July 13, 2009 (C) Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or (D) Mitigation measures or alternatives are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. B. If changes to a project or its circumstances occur or new information becomes available after adoption of a negative declaration, the lead agency shall prepaze a subsequent EIlt if required under Subsection A. Otherwise the lead agency shall determine whether to prepare a subsequent Negative Declazation, an addendum, or no further documentation (Guidelines § 15162). Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides that: A. The lead agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for prepazation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. B. An addendum to an adopted negative declaration may be prepazed if only minor technical changes or additions are necessary or none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for the prepazation of a subsequent EIR or negative declaration have occurred. C. An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR or adopted negative declazation. D. The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR or adapted negative declazation prior to making a decision on the project. E. A brief explanation of the decision not to prepaze a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's required findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence. This addendum has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Sections 15162 and 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines. The proposed specific plan amendment does not constitute a substantial change to the previously approved project. The proposed specific plan amendment. would not result in any environmental effects that were not previously considered in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24, nor would the changes increase the severity of any of the impacts identified in said MND. There has been no material change in circumstances relative to the project, and no new information of substantial importance has become available after the prepazation of the project MND. The mitigation measures identified in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24 would be equally applicable to the specific plan amendment. Therefore, m Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24 1327 Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24 July 13, 2009 accordance with Sections 15162 and 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has prepared this Addendum. III. ANALYSIS Summarized below are issue areas potentially affected by the project. As the discussion outlined below indicates, however, the proposed specific plan amendment does not result in any impacts beyond those identified in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24. Land Use Compatibility The proposed specific plan amendment would not result in any physical changes to existing structures nor future structures to be built on site. Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24 concluded that the Gateway Specific Plan was prepazed in accordance with Sections 65450- 65457 of the Government Code and Chapter 19A7 of the City of Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance. The specific plan and proposed amendments aze consistent with the goals and objectives of the Urban Core Specific Plan, as well as the General Plan. Traffic Circulation and Parking Tra zc A traffic and pazking study conducted by traffic engineering consultants Urban Systems Associates, Inc., dated July 9, 2009 was performed for the proposed specific plan amendment. The traffic and pazking analysis included all squaze-footage attributable to the site, inclusive of the 15% floor area increase allowed pursuant to the specific plan. The study compared average daily trips and peak hour trips for the project and concluded the following: • The total daily traffic is reduced from 9,939 trips to 9,298 trips. • Total AM peak hour traffic is increased by 43 trips. • Total PM peak hour traffic is reduced by 52 trips. The traffic analysis demonstrates that the proposed specific plan amendment would result in mostly favorable traffic impacts due to the reduction of total daily traffic by approximately seven percent. Although the AM peak hour trips are slightly higher with the specific plan amendment, the results of the traffic analysis in the approved traffic study for the Gateway project performed by BRW, Inc. on October 23, 2000, would not change. The City Traffic Engineer has determined that the existing level of service on H Street and Third Avenue, as well as intersection function at Third and H Street, is within City guidelines. Therefore, no new traffic impacts would result from the specific plan amendment, and the results of the original project traffic study remain valid. The city reviewed its Growth Management Oversight Committee (GMOC) roadway segments m the area and found none that were failing in the last year. The city found that the proposed Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24 ~ ~2$ Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24 July 13, 2009 changes to the land uses led to slight incremental increases to certain traffic volumes in the local azea. It was estimated that future peak period travel speeds in the study azea will continue to operate at adequate Levels of Service (LOS). Additionally, during review of the original traffic study, impacts to the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue were identified. However, mitigation measures remain in the Specific Plan's conditions of approval, which will reduce the traffic impacts to acceptable levels. Parlance The parking analysis performed by Urban Systems Associates, Inc., (dated July 9, 2009) addressed the provision of parking on the Gateway site. The Gateway Specific Plan utilized the Chula Vista Bayfront Land Use Plan (Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.85.008) as precedence for determining the parking requirements for the project. The Bayfront plan allows shazed pazking to be utilized where supported by appropriate studies. Per Municipal Code Section 19.85.008 the criteria and standards provided by the Urban Land Institute (ULI) should be utilized to assess pazking needs. The Chula Vista Gateway Specific Plan has incorporated this same criteria into its off street parking ratio requirements. The Specific Plan originally provided for a minimum of 1,117 pazking spaces on site based upon a previously adopted shared pazking agreement. This capacity has now been updated to reflect site design and land use changes and which now include 1,229 parking spaces. This updated figure is based upon information provided by the applicant in an updated traffic study. It should be noted that this study is based upon the revised distribution of land uses shown in Table 2 of the Gateway Specific Plan and the parking analysis. This includes the reduction in restaurant usage previously discussed. The original number (1,117 spaces) was achieved by performing a parking analysis (Appendix C of the original Gateway Specific Plan) considering the project's mix of uses, time of use, day of use, and seasonal demand. With the change in project land uses, the project's highest hourly demand for parking is now calculated in two stages. Two stages were required because the parking structure is presently two-thirds built. Therefore, the first portion of the parking study included the addition of educational land uses to the site as well as corresponding reductions in the remaining land uses for Phase I & II only. For this study period, the demand is approximately 699 spaces on weekdays while the supply consists of 981 pazking spaces providing for a surplus of 282 parking spaces at the end of Phase I & II. For the ultimate condition, that is, Phases I, II & III combined, 1,229 parking spaces will be provided for an estimated demand of 1,078 spaces, resulting in a surplus of 151 spaces. In order to accommodate the 1,229 parking spaces on site, the following parking space standard has been set for the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan. All parking spaces shall be a minimum width of 8.5 feet and all aisles 21 feet. The length of a parking space shall be 20 feet for standazd and 15 feet for compact. Based upon the above discussion, Section 4.7 of the Plan will be updated to reflect additional parking spaces which will be provided for the project. The total number of parking spaces to be Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24 1`~-29 Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declazation IS-99-24 July 13, 2009 provided will increase from 1,117 to 1,229. The updated breakdown of parking spaces between phases 1-3 is shown in revised Appendix C (see Attachment SB). IV. CONCLUSION Pursuant to Section 15162 and 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, and based upon the above discussion and substantial evidence in the record supporting said discussion, I hereby find that the proposed project will result in only minor technical changes or additions to Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24, and, therefore, an Addendum has been prepazed in accordance with state law. phen P er, AICP Principal lznner Attachment 1 -Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24 References: General Plan, City of Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance, Title 19/City of Chula Vista Gateway Specific Plan Addendum to Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-24 130-30 ATTACHMEN"t' C Mitigated Negative Declaration PROJECT NAME: Gateway Chula Vista: H Street and Third Avenue PROJECT LOCATION: 16 sepazate parcels at the northwest corner of Third Avenue and H Street in the city of Chula Vista ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 5681150-34 to 49 PROJECT APPLICANT: Gateway Chula Vista, LLC CASE NO: PCM-00-11 Date: October 23, 2000 A. Proiect Settine The proposed project site is located in the city of Chula Vista, the second largest city in the county of San Diego and the largest in the South Bay area. The city is located approximately six miles south of the city of San Diego's downtown core and approximately eight miles north of Tijuana, Mexico, and the international border (Figures 1 and 2).. The "Gateway Chula Vista" project site occupies the northwest corner of Third Avenue and H Street in the city of Chula Vista's urban cote. The site consists of 16 separate but contiguous parcels zoned for commercial and professional office use. Existing on-site uses include a flower stand lawn mower service, three office/professional buildings, print shop, furniture store, San Diego County Credit Union, and three single-family residences. Some of the parcels ate currently vacant or underutilized (Table 1).. Surrounding off-site uses to the east include atwo-story office building and Saint Rose of Lima Church and School complex. Located to the north and west are several complexes of two-story apartment buildings. Uses to the south of H Street and the site include government offices associated with the South Bay Courts, Sweetwater Authority offices, and medical offices.. Additional medical. professional, and financial service facilities aze located west of the development site along H Street.. ~/- i 9 13-31 13-32 Map Source: U.S.CcS. 7.5 Miaute topograP6ic maps, I IUloll National City and Imperial SeacL quadrangles ® ~ b FEET ZDDO 4000 R-IDS8E FIGURE 2 Project Vicinity 13-33 TABLE 1 EXISTING LAND USES Assessor Parcel No.. Existing Use _ Acreage Building Area 568-450-340 & 350 C..V.. Lawn Mower Repair' 0.31 1,000 s £ 568-450-3b0 & 360 Office building 0..34 7,000 s.f. 568-450.380 Eumie Inc. Print Shop 0.17 1,350 s.f. 568-450-390 Flower stand 0.17 9Z4 s,.f. 5681150-400 Furniture saleslwarehouse 0..63 12,000 s.f. 5681<50-410 Vacant 0.11 NA 560-450-420 Vacant 0.09 NA 568-450-430 San Diego County Credit 0..50 4,000 s.f. Union 568-450-440 H Sheet Plaza office bldg 0..38 8,500 sf. 568-4.50-450 Vacant 0.08 NA 568-450-460 Single-family residence 0.09 1,000 s,.f. 56850-470 Single-family residence 020 1,OOOs..f. 568-4501180 Single-family residence 0..23 1,000 s f. 568-450-490 Bahia Professional Center 1.3.3 5,400 s.f. 4 ~-a a 13-34 Approximately '75 percent of the proposed project site is located in Subazea 2 of the City's designated Town Centre I project area. The Town Centre I project azea encompasses the urban redevelopment azea as described in the Chula Vista Town Centre Redevelopment Plan and EIR. tinder the adopted redevelopment plan, the area is divided into three subazeas: Subazea l is the northernmost area and comprises the historic Central Business Ihstrict. Subazea 2 comprises a connector snip between the Central Business District and the H Street commercial complex. South of H Street is Subarea 3, the Courthouse Addition (Figure 3). The three I own Centre subazeas extend from E Street to I Street and generally from Fourth Avenue and the Civic Center to Del Maz Avenue at its widest expanse. The Town Centre project azea is planned for redevelopment consistent with the goals and vision outlined in the Town Centre Design Manual (City of Chula Vista 1980). B. Proiect Description Commercial Buildings The project proposes acquisition, demolition, and redevelopment of 16 separate but contiguous parcels that comprise the northwest corner of Third Avenue and H Street (Figure 4). These existing 16 assessor parcels within the project site will be consolidated into three legal lots. Each of the lots will contain one mid-rise commerciaVoffice building with a corresponding portion of'the parking snucture.. The proposed project has a combined total of 334,860 squaze feet of leaseable area on 4.46 acres. There will be two 6-story buildings that stand 86 feet 8 inches in height and one 5-story building that stands 72 feet 2 inches high. This is consistent with the City of Chula Vista's General Plan for chid- to high-rise development. The buildings will include the use of different facades to create azchitectura] variety and promote a pedestrian scale at street ]evel. Buildings will be separated by landscaped pedestrian passages to facilitate access between the buildings and H Street or the parking structure (Figure 5). Figure 6 shows an artist's rendering of the projeM from the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue. Pazking A four- or five-level, 1,117-space parking structure will be constructed along the north side of the buildings. The project provides two access driveways on Third Avenue, one access driveway on H Street, and a valeddrop-off loop on H Street. The use of nonexclusive center [rnn lanes on both H Street and Ihird Avenue will be provided into al] of the site access driveways (see Figure 5). the project's mix of uses creates a shared pazking scenario resulting in an excess of spaces at the highest hourly demand 0 5`" 13-35 J W W GJ I 1 w Vl i I 34 ' W a0 Q 49 48 A5 42 41 36 ~ i 36 ~ T C O ' ~ ~ 37 ~ I ~ t 43 ~ C I ~ ~ 48 47 I\J 38 I I I ' I I 39 1 ' 1 -._r«~.L..~ru Fi ST. CC Specific Plan Boundary o Source: Mooney & Assoc~ales 8/00 0 FEET f00 200 Il^ aoisee CC 'Centtat commercial zone CO Adtnmtstmtive and professional office wne COP Admioistrative and professtonat office zone with precise plan regwrement R3 ApaAment residential zone ~~ FIGURE 4 Existing Zoning and Parcel Map W W l~B""~` _ -_ --Mull-Level '-" - Pais-kl-ng Structure '- - -Sheet Level LOacYg Zore AcceSSed han Pcaprg ShuohN1__~di0l_-- ~i-' with Roo( ioP LonGscaP~9 r P~sible PedeslAan --.- -- 'Bridge IJrYOng euYdng to Soulh Bay Regbnal __ ---. _ cents Expansion s~.~.: r~x,..~.,av~ ~,~ /IC Nor ro scue ~^ xame TWO- and ltvee-Stay E#en4on ol8ulldhg 1 Incaporated hto Parking Shucture ~' '-- ;ourryard ~ - ~ Valei POrklrg pop•Off ~ CourNad a_. ------- --~ _ H Sheet--..__. _.-.-- oiNeway Accessing ~ Reserved Pa~kirg N C ~~ i~ ~~ ~ III Second Level Courtyad pNeway Accessng Generd Perking -Comer Na=a ~ ~ ~ I ~/- zG FIGURE 5 Development Concept Plan W w ...... tia 11T1~ 1'11'1'1 '1'1 ~ ~1111)it 111 .. -, .~: , „~ ~~,~ ~~ -: ..,_ ~, Source: Mooney & Assocseles R/00 flE~~N FIGURE 6 n Fsar !oo zoo Perspective from Intersection of H Street and Third Avenue Ra~axe Project Phasing The Gateway Chula Vista project will be constructed in three phases as shown on Figure 7. Phase 1 of the project will redevelop the eastern area; Phase ?, the central area; and Phase 3, the western azea of the project site. It is possible that a combination of the project's phases may be constructed simultaneously depending on funne mazket demand. Ihscretionazy Approvals the following permits aze required for project implementation: • Specific Plan for the Gateway Chula Vista project, • General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element to reclassify H Sheet from asix-lane major street to a four-lane major skeet east of Fourth Avenue to Third Avenue. Lead Agency In conformance with Section ]5050 and 15367 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines, the City of Chula Vista will be the "lead agency," which is defined as the "public agency which has the principal responsibility for caztying out or approving a project." Responsible Agencies Regional Water Quality Control Boazd (National Pollutant Dischazge Elimination System permit) C_ Comoatibiliri with Zonins and Plans Zoning T'he Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan has been prepared in accordance with Sections 65450-65457 of the Government Code and Chapter 19.D7 of the City of Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance. The two underlying zones on the site from east to west aze CC-Cenual Commercial Zone and CO-Administrative and Ptvfessional Office Zone (see Figure 4).. The specific plan's regulations and guidelines are compatible with the underlying zoning for the area, including minimum Sot sizes, building heights, and setback requirements in order to enhance the community character of the area. 1D cl.z8 13-40 W General Plan and Land Use Element The City of Chula Vista initiated a General Plan Amendment to reclassify H Street east of Fourth Avenue to Third Avenue from asix-lane to a four-lane major street in the City of Chula Vista's General Plan. The adopted Chula Vista Genera] Plan currently classifies H Street as a six-lane major' street along the project frontage.. This classification for H Street was established in the 1989 General Plan Update and Final F.IR based on ttaffic projections at Utat time. The current traffic analysis for the Gateway Chula Vista project has indicated that acceptable roadway operations can be provided on H Street with the existing four-lane section of H Street (BRW Inc- 2000). The Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan complies with all the applicable goals, objectives, policies, and guidelines of the Chula Vista General Plan. Redevelopment of the site with high-quality commercial and office uses as well as a landscaped corner plaza, streetscapes, and courtyazds will act as a catalyst for the Town Centre redevelopment azeas. In addition, redevelopment will increase the employment bases of Chula Vista's urban core. Circulation Element Designations The Gateway Chula Vista redevelopment site is located approximately halfway between Interstate 5 (I-5) and Interstate 805 (I-805). The project provides two access driveways on Third Avenue, one access driveway on H Sneer, and a valeUdrop-off loop on H Street.. The use of nonexclusive center turn lanes on both H Street and Third Avenue will be provided into all of the site access driveways Currently, H Street is classified as a six-lane major street in Chapter ?, Section 5.4, of the Chula Vista General Plan from i-5 to I-805.. Major streets are designed to carry high volumes of traffic and serve to distribute traffic to and from the freeway system. A General Plan Amendment to reclassify H Street from asix- lane to a four-lane major street east of Fourth Avenue to Ihird Avenue has been initiated by the City of Chula Vista. In the General Plan, afour-lane major street should be 80 feet wide in100 feet of right-of-way and provide fom through lanes, a 16-foot-wide median left-nun lane, and 8-foot curbside parking or bike lanes.. H Street currently has two through lanes in each direction and varies in width from 62 to 10.3 feet in the project vicinity, with parking allowed mid-block on both sides of the street. The traffic analysis included the AM and PM peak traffic generated by [he Scripps Hospital expansion and the South Bay Regional Center expansion. The average navel speeds and corresponding segment levels of service with project buildout az'e expected to decrease from existing speeds by no more than 3 8 miles ,~ ~-30 13-42 per hom' (mph) doting the AM peals and 24 mph doting the PM peak. This will be in compliance with the acceptable level of service (LOS) of C or better.. The northbound approach to the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue will experience LOS F delays at the PM peak due to the proposed project and the expansion of the South Bay Regioval Center or other similaz projects.. However, without expansion of the South Bay Regional Center, the intersecfion of H Street at Ihird Avenue would operate at LOS D in the PM peak. Iherefore, no improvements to existing intersection geomettics aze required at the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue until the expansion of the Soudt Bay Regional Center occurs or any other future project that will impact this intersection occurs. The project buildout traffic volumes were compared to Year 2020 traffic volumes generated by the SANDAG Series 9 TRANPLAN regional forecasting model and virtually no increase in the study area traffic volumes by the Yeaz 2020 was anticipated. The traffic analysis for the Gateway Chula Vista groject has indicated that acceptable roadway operations, with buildout of all known projects in the study area, can be provided on H Street with the existing four-lane section. Existing intersection and geometry and traffic control is sufficient to provide acceptable LOS D operations during the AM and PM peak hours, except for the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue. A northbound right-turn lane will be necessary to accommodate the combined increase in traffic caused by the expansion of the South Bay Regional Center and consnuction of the proposed project; however, it should only be constructed in conjunction with the South Bay Regional Center expansion or any other future project that will impact the intersection. This would facilitate traffic flow and improve overall intersection operations. Pedestrian circulation will flow through the courtyaz'ds and building entrances along H Street. the primary building entrances are located on the second floor, which is connected to the pazking saucture.. Public Facilities Growth Management Th.°sholds There will be adequate water, sewer, and solid waste facilities to serve the project site. Pacific Waste Inc.. is ctrrrendy contracted by the City of Chula Vista to dispose of all solid waste materials within the city boundaries, They have indicated that tbey can provide service to the project site up to seven days a week, it needed. Solid waste from the proposed project will be trucked to the Otay Landfill, which is estimated to have capacity to receive solid waste for the next 25 years.. The Sweetwater Authority provides water services to the proposed project and has determined based on fire flow requirements and projected land use that sufficient supplies of water aze planned to be available. No new sewer improvements az'e necessary other than conjnvction of six-inch sewer laterals to 13 ~~ 3 r 13-43 each building. A sewage participation fee will be paid to the City for each phase of the project at the time of connection to the public sewer.. At present, the sewerage participation f'ee for the project is $2,220..00 per 83..16 equivalent dwelling units.. Assuming the same rate for all three phases, the project will generate just over $184,615..20 by completion.. The proposed project would redevelop the existing site, which is primazily covered with paving or similaz impervious surfaces, and will retain the existing drainage structures in the area. Redevelopment of the site is not expected to increase the rate of runoff of the site; however, the following will be required with the first submittal of the improvement/grading plans: (1) a hydraulic study to show that the postdevelopment flow rate does not exceed the predevelopment flow rate and (2) incorporation of drainage facilities into the desio t. The Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan proposes that no hazardous waste materials will be generated at the project site, other than a potential for small amounts of medical wastes which will be disposed of in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal regulations. Therefore, the proposed redevelopment will comply with all the goals and objectives of the public facilities that serve the project site. The traffic thresholds will not be exceeded due to the proposed project except at the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue; however, this intersection's thresholds will only be exceeded at Phase i of the proposed project and development of the South Bay Regional Center of other similar projects.. All other project study area roads will operate at an acceptable LOS C or better and intersections will operate at an acceptable LOS D or better at project buildout. The H Street and Third Avenue intersection will drop to LOS E during the PM peak bouts. The northbound approach to this intersection will experience LOS F delays, resulting from the combined increase of traffic from the proposed project and the South Bay Regional Center expansion.. A separate analysis of project buildout conditions without development of the South Bay Regional Center expansion indicates that the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue would operate at LOS D doting the PM peak.. Construction of a northbound tight-turn lane will be necessazy to accommodate the combined increase in traffic caused by the expansion of the South Bay Regional Center and construction of the proposed project; however, it should only be constructed in conjunction with the South Bay Regional Center expansion or any other future project that will impact the intersection. This would facilitate traffic flow and allow for all intersections in the study area to operate at LOS C or better at non-peak hours and IAS D during peak hours of the day, which ate consistent with the City's threshold standards. 14 ~-3a 13-44 D. Identification of Environmental Effects An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached Environmental Checklist Fotm) detetmitted that the proposed project could have a significant environmental effect, but that the effects would be mitigated by the measures incorporated into the project. Therefore, preparation of an environmental impact report will not be required.. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepazed in accordance with Section 15070 of the State (.'EQA Guidelines. E. Mitieation A discussion of potentially significant impacts from the proposed project and mitigation measures to reduce these impacts to below a level of significance is provided below.. BRW, Inc. prepared a traffic study to determine the environmental effects of a commercial development of this nature on the redevelopment azea. This and the adopted planning and environmental documents applicable to site development are available for review at the City of Chula Vista Community Development Depaztment, located at 430 Davidson Street. Suite B, Chula Vista, California 91910. Noise Section 19.68.030 of the City of Chula Vista Noise Ordinance limi[s noise levels on weekdays to 60 A-weighted decibels [dB(A)] from 7 a.M. to 10 P.rn.. (8 A.M. to 10 P.M. on weekends) and 50 dB(A) from -10 P.M. [0 7 A..M. (10 P.M, to 8 A.M. on weekends). Normal operation and maintenance of the commercial buildings is not anticipated to result in noise levels that would exceed these standards. The project design incorporates an enclosed storage azea, off-street loading spaces, an interior loading dock, and trash enclosures to mittimize the impacts of noise.. The parking strucnu~ will be consnucted adjacent to existing multi-family residential on the west and north. In some azeas, the minimum separation between the residential structures and the parking structwe will be approximately ZO feet. Activities in the portions of the suvcture that may remain open after 10 r.M. have the potential to exceed the nighttime noise ordinance standazd. Additionally, car alazms and power sweeping of the structure are potential sources of nuisance noise.. Therefore, the following measures will be incorporated into the project to lessen the noise impacts to below a significant level: [) Access to upper levels of the parking structure will be closed between the hours of 7:00 P..M. and 7:00 A.M. t0 lirrtit potential noise impacts to neighboring properties.. ~. r,33 15 13-45 2) The north and west areas of the pazking structure will be closed at the levels that remain open during the evening and nighttime hours. 3) Power' sweeping of the structure will be limited to the hours of '7 A.M. to 10 P.M.. on weekdays and 8 A,M. to 10 P M. on Saturdays and will be prohibited on Sundays. During construction, equipment would generate temporary noise. At times these temporary noise level increases could be significant at the adjacent residential structures. Although construction and demolition activities aze not subject to the exterior noise requirements of Municipal Code Section 19..68.030, restricting the construction activities to weekdays and Saturday only during the daytime hours (7:00 A..M. to 7:00 P..M.) would mitigate the temporary noise increases due to construction below a level of significance. Incorporation of these measures, as well as compliance with the general noise ordinance standazds, will ensure that no significant noise impacts will occur. Transnonationlfraffic The City of Chula Vista's Threshold Standazds Policy requires that all inter- sections must operate a[ LOS C or better, with the exception that LOS D may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections. Project Direct Impacts A traffic study was prepared for the proposed project in September 2000. The project study area was approximately 2.5 miles long, with the H SneeUThud Avenue intersection located approximately 1.1 miles east of I-5 and 1.4 miles west of I-805. The traffic analysis included the AM and PM peak traffic generated by the Scripps Hospital expansion and the South Bay Regional Center expansion, The project was assumed to be three commercial buildings using 334,860 square feet on the 4.46-acre project site.. T'he proposed project type was calculated to add 879 peak AM hour tries (766 inbound/113 outbound) and 1,084 peak PM hour trips (348 inboundl736 outbound) to the city strroet system. The combined peak period nips contributed by the project (1,963 nips) are estimated to be 15 percent of project average daily traffic (ADT) contributed to the system.. Neaz'-Term Cumulative the project study at'ea roads consisted of H Street between I-5 and I-805 and Third and Fourth Avenues between E Sneer and J Street, All project study azea roads will operate at an acceptable LOS C or better and all study azea roadways I6 ~ 3 13-46 and intersections will operate at acceptable LOS D or better with the exception of the intersection of H Street and Third Avenve. This intersection will drop to LOS E doting the PM Peak hours based on cumulative impacts, The northbound approach to this intersection will experience sOedS Fro ett and then5ouroh Bay combined increase of traffic from the propo p j Regional Center expansion or other sitnilaz' projects All other approaches to this intersection will operate at LOS D for two hours or less.. A separate analysis of project buiIdout conditions without development of the South Bay Rcgional Center expansion indicates that the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue would operate at LOS D dining the PM peak. Construction of a northbound right- mtn lane will be necessity to accommodate the combined increase in traffic caused by the expansion of the South Bay Regional Center and construction of the proposed project; however, it should only be constructed in conjunction with the South Bay Regional Center expansion or any other future project that will impact this intersection. This would facilitate traffic flow and allow for all intersections in the study area to operate at LOS C or better at non-peak hoot's and LOS D during peak hours of the day. In order to mitigate this impact, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the thud phase of the project, the developer shall post a cash deposit in an amount equal to the entire cost of providing aright-mrn-only lane at the northbound approach of Third Avenue and H Street.. The cost of the right-turn-only lane shall include all direct and indirect costs associated with acquisition of right-of-way, cleating, demolition, and reconstructing of existing public and private improvements and the design and construction of the lane to the specifications to be established by the Director of Public Works. These costs shall be as determined solely by the Director of Public Works. The City shall use its best efforts to ensure that other' projeczs that have been determined to signi£candy conhibute to the impact at this intersection shall contribute [heir proportional fair' share into a reimbursement district fund.. In getting reimbursement, the City will determine the proportional share of the project to detetrnine the reimbursement amount („xe determined, the fair-share contribution will represent each project's entire contribution and additional contributions shall not be secured by the City. A four- or five-level, 1,117-space pazlcing structure will be constructed along the north side of the buildings. The project p[ovides two access driveways on Third Avenue, one access driveway on H Street, and a valeddrop-off loop on H Street. The project's mix of uses creates a shared parking scenario resulting in an excess of spaces at the highest hourly demand. The analysis of the site access driveways indicates that there will be sufficient gaps in traffic to allow vehicles to enter and exit the p['oject site. There will be 17 T_j`j 13-47 acceptable delays to vehicles entering and exiting the site without the need for signalization at any of the site driveways, provided that the following measures aze implemented: 1. Left turns out of the H Street driveway may be prohibited under projec[ buildout conditions. Traffic will exit onto Third Avenue and then proceed left onto H Street.. 2.. Left-tutu storage will be provided at all site driveways where feasible, to remove left-turning vehicles from the through travel lanes. 3. The existing movement of haffic onto H Street from the site will be permitted prior to buildout of the project. Continuous monitoring of traffic operations a[ this site driveway will be required dwing interim time frame to determine the future implementation of appropriate traffic control. City engineers will determine if a siamtal is wazranted with futttre redevelopment of the South Bay Regional Center or other' similar projects and will reevaluate the need for a signal when more specific information is known about the site plan 4, All access driveways will be constructed to connect the on-site (internal) circulation system to both Ihitd Avenue and H Street under interim development conditions associated with Phases 1 and 2. Long-Term Cumulative Impacts The project buildout traffic volumes were compared to Yeaz' 2020 traffic volumes generated by the SANDAG Series 9 TRANPLAN regional Forecasting model to determine whether additional background traffic is anticipated in the area by the year 2020. It was found that the estimated ADT volumes at project buildout aze greater than the Yeaz 2020 ADT volumes estimated by the SANDAG model.. Therefore, study azea levels of service in the Yeat 2020 are not anticipated to decrease below the levels associated with buildout of the proposed redevelopment project (BRW 2000) F• Consultation Individuals and Or~attizations City of Chula Vista: Brian Hunter, Planning and Environmental Manager Byron Estes, Community Development Benjamin Guerrero, Environmental Manager Marilyn Ponseggi, Environmental Review Coordinator la ~-3~0 13-48 Ralph Leyva, Senior Civil Engineer Dino Serifini, Civil Engineer Applicant's Agent: Tom McCabe, McCabe Haztis Architects 2. Dowments The following documents used doting the prepazation of the initial study/enviromnental checklist are available for review at the City of Chula Vista Community Development Department, located at 430 Davidson Street, Suite B, Chula Vista, California 91910. BRW, Inc. 1999 H Street Traffic Operations Analysis in the City of Chula Vista. .June. 2000 Gateway Project Traffic Study in the City of (.'hula Vista. September. California Air Resources Board 1998 Emission Inventory 1996.. Prepared by Technical Support Division, Emission inventory Branch.. October.. Chula Vista, City of 1978 General Plan.. 1980 Town Centre Design Manual.. 2d ed. (January 1980).. 1989 Chula Vista General Plan, July 1989.. Update_ 1996 Draft Subarea Plan -Multiple Species Conservation Program. 2000 Specific Plan for the Gateway Chula Vista Redevelopment Project. Geocon Incorporated 1999 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment for Gateway Chula Vista, Chula Vista, Califorrda. November.. 2000 Geotechnical Investigation for Gateway Chula Vista, Chula Vista, California, August. Mooney and Associates 2000 P.rchaeological Investigation of the Gateway Chula Vista Redevelopment Project. Letter to Mr'. Brian Hunter, September 7. 19 ~-37 13-49 San Diego, County of 1992 1991/1992 Regional Air Quality Strntegy. Air Pollution Control District...June. 1996 Integrated Waste Management Plan. San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control Disnict 1999 URBIIVII57G Computer Program User's Guide and program, version 3..2. September 28.. 3. Initial Srudv This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any comments received on [he Initial Study, and any comments received doting the public review period for this Mitigated Negative Declazation.. The report reflects the independent judgment of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regazding the environmental review of this project is available from the Chula Vista Cotnmunity Development Depamnent, 430 Davidson Street, Suite B, Chula Vista, CA 91910,. 20 ~-3$ 13-50 ATTACHMENT SA Land Use Regulations: Education and Training Use Temporary and Accessory Uses Section 2.1 Section 2.1, Table 2 Section 2.2 Section 2.3 Section 2.4 Section 2.5 13-51 2.0 LAND USE REGULATIONS 2.1 Introduction The project's list of uses allowed and prohibited on-site has been prepazed in accordance with the Disposition and Development and Owner Participation Agreement (DD&A) entered into and between the City of Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency and Gateway Chula Vista, LLC. Since the Gateway Chula Vista project has been designed as an interrelated and cohesive development, the Specific Plan applies one single zone to the entire site. Urban Commercial Zone. The goal of the Urban Commercial Zone is to provide an azea for complementary and mutually reinforcing officers, restaurants, and retail commercial business that serve workers and residents of the urban core, the City of Chula Vista, and the surrounding region. In cases where the Specific Plan is mute, the Director of the Redevelopment Agency shall rely on the shall rely on the underlying CO and CC zoning to provide guidance in making this decision. The Specific Plan's land use distribution is provide on Table 2. This table establishes the total amount of azea allocated for each of the principal uses and provides a conceptual distribution of uses per phase. Retail and service uses have been combined in this table in order to comply with the combined limits set by the DD&A. It is important to stress that since all future tenants could not be identified at this state in the project's development; the distribution of uses between the three buildings is conceptual only and may change. However, the totahverell amount of space allowed allecated per Table 2. Land Use Plan and Conceptual Distribution Building Lot Building Office Retail & Restaurant 'Educational & Phase Size Size Uses Service Uses Uses : & Training '. Schools* 1 1.4 acres oven "c ~y.SBOs}' ~n~~,,n "a }~gt~p~ ', 20,000 sf .' (02;329 sf 62,D24 sf 14,000 s£ 6,300 sf 2 1.52 acres ~23 -188;8S0-sf -1 X543-,.f "n non "o '. 2p,000 sf ` 132;334 sf 40,789 sf 14,825 sf i,720 sf 3 1.42 acres , no~x c ..F o, arc ..a , < o~,~n ..c ~ ni~.,.,~a .None 140;500 sf { 30,440 sf 10,06i1'sf None Streets 0.12 acres Total 4.46 acres "^~o~" °` °"~-o"` "` '°~` "` 2&000sf 4Q000 sf 375;163 sf 283,258sf 43,8&Ssf 8,020sf *maximum 600 students and'SO staff 2.2 Principal Uses The following are the principal uses permitted within the Urban Commercial Zone. A. Professional and Administrative Offices. Uses allowed within this designation shall be primarily devoted to professional and administrative offices and personal services, rather than for sale of commodities. These uses shall be allowed on floors two and higher. Offices space shall be used for the following. Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-0O-I l) is 13-52 1. Administrative and Executive Offices, including institutions of a philanthropic or eleemosynary nature. 2. Professional Offices, for accountants, azchitects, attorneys, consultants, engineers, insurance agencies, planners, credit bureaus, collection agencies, and real estate offices; 3. Medical and dental offices, including oculists, chiropractors, and other practicing healing arts for human beings. 4. Any other compazable use approved by the Director of the Redevelopment Agency. B. Retail Commercial. Retail commercial uses shall be allowed only on the first and second floors of the project and are primarily intended to provide commodities. Retail commercial uses shall include but not limited to the following: 1. Art Galleries and Studios; 2. Apparel and Shoe Stores; 3. Bakery, Candy, and Confectioneries Stores; 4. Books, Gigs, and Stationary Stores; 5. Cigaz Stores and Smoking Lounges; 6. Florists 7. Jewelry Stores 8. Toy Stores 9. Any other compazable use approved by the Director of the Redevelopment Agency. C. Services. Uses allowed within this designation shall be primarily intended to provide specialty services for persons working in the immediate azea of the project and residents within the entire City of Chula Vista. Service uses may include but not be limited to the following: 1. Financial Offices, including Banks, Savings and Loans, and Financial Brokerage Offices; 2. Related commercial uses incidental to offices, including real estate offices, travel agencies, beauty salons and day spa, childcaze, full service laundry and dry cleaner business with off-site cleaning plants, pharmacy, and public/private postal services and facilities. 3. Any other comparable use approved by the Director of the Redevelopment Agency. D. E. 2.3 Accessory Uses Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-00-11) Is 13-53 Restaurants. Restaurant uses permitted within the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan shall be primarily associated with the provision of food and beverages and may include nightclubs and cocktail lounges. Restaurant uses shall be located only on the first and second floors of the primary buildings. Except they may be allowed on the top floor if approved by the Director of Redevelopment Agency. A. Incidental Storage Facilities. The use of storage facilities shall be limited to file storage resulting from the conduct of an existing and permitted use on-site. Storage facilities shall be entirely enclosed and shall be limited to only areas within the pazking structure. B. Roof-mounted Satellite Dish Antennas. Only roof-mounted satellite dish antennas will be allowed when they comply with the Specific Plan's Development Standards and Section 19.22.030F of the City of Chula Vista Zoning Ordinances. C. Wireless Communication Facilities. Wireless communication facilities shall be allowed on rooftops and faces if connected from view and incorporated into architectural design. D. Kiosks. The use of retail and informational kiosks shall be allowed except within the public right-of-way. E. Outdoor Dining Areas. These accessory uses shall be allowed when they are associated with a permitted Restaurant Use on-site, provided the size and design of these uses comply with the requirements and conditions of the Specific Plan's Development Standards and all applicable health codes. Outdoor dining areas will be encouraged and may occupy up to 50 percent of the total encompassed within each of the project's courtyards. No kitchen equipment shall be installed in the courtyards. However, the outdoor seating areas may contain portable heaters, umbrellas, awnings, and canopies. F. Car Detailing. Mobile caz detailing will be allowed only within the project's parking garage in designated pazking spaces. G. Other Uses. 2.4 Temporary Uses All temporary uses must be reviewed and' approved': by the Director of khe Redevelopment Agency subject to two weeks notification.>` 2.5 Prohibited Uses The following is a list of uses expressly prohibited on-site A. Car washes (except for car detailing) and gasoline sales; B. Industrial uses; C. Coin-operated Laundromats, coin-operated dry cleaners, laundry and/or dry cleaner plant operations D. Manufacturing uses; E. Warehousing and wholesale uses (not including discount or off-price stores which are classified as a retail use discussed above).. F. Cazd rooms Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-00-11) 16 13-54 r r a t a t, t t n _ a r ti, t Czr3iom2r".r. H. Auto parts and/or accessories sales, motor vehicle repair, service or installation of any auto and other vehicles related parts or accessories; and I. Arcades, virtual reality, laser tag and related amusement businesses; and J. Drive-through fast food restaurants; K. Adult businesses or adult bookstores L. Other uses deemed unacceptable by the Director of the Redevelopment Agency. Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-00-1 l) n 13-55 ATTACHMENT SB Section 4.7 Off Street Parking Appendix C Shared Parking 13-56 4.6 Lighting Streetlights shall be placed approximately 75 feet apart and a minimum of two and one-half feet back of the curb face measured to the center of the pole shaft. Photo electric control units shall be used to operate the street light system. All other light sources within the project shall be shielded in such a manner that the light is directed away from the streets, adjoining properties, and the sky. Illuminators shall be integrated within the azchitecture of the buildings and landscaping. The intensity of light at the boundary of the Specific Plan shall not exceed seventy-five (75) foot lamberts from a source of reflected light. 4.7 Off Street Parking The Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan shall provide a total of t~ 'a~.' ;:: pazking spaces on-site, in accordance with the required pazking ration of one space per 300 s.f. of floor azea. This pazking ratio is recommended by the Urban Land Institute for shared pazking projects, such as Gateway Chula Vista. The pazking analysis provided in Appendix C demonstrates that the project's mix of uses and operating hours will create a shared pazking demand that can be easily accommodated on-site. Specifically, the pazking analysis considered the project's mix of uses, time of us, day of use, and seasonal demand. It determined that the projects highest hourly demand for pazking will be approximately 3-997'x(8 spaces at 2:00 p.m. on weekdays. Given the Specific Plan requirement for a total of ~-Fa.~r~ pazking spaces, the project is expected to have an excess of 29 ~5~ pazking spaces during meet peak demand pazking periods. In order to accommodate the t~ I,22h pazking spaces on-site, the following specialized parking space standazd has been set for the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan. A. Standard Spaces. All standazd pazking spaces aze required to be a minimum of 8.5 feet wide and 20 feet long. B. Compact Spaces. All compact spaces are required to be a minimum of 8.5 feet and 15 feet long. No more than 55% of the project's total pazking spaces shall be compact spaces. C. Aisles. All aisles shall be required to be 21 feet wide. ti, n ,.t.. a., ,.,r D. Off-Street Loading Spaces. od2Er,-1 ~ t~ ~ a on 'ta~ o ..a .. _...... e.. a FC C. rn..:L1:.... All commercial vehicles will use the off-street loading spaces to be provided wrthm the street level of the pazking structure, immediately behind Building 2. The street level parking structure shall be a minimum of I S feet cleaz in height to accommodate delivery trucks. Siting the off-street loading spaces within the pazking structure. ensures that adjacent residences will not be adversely affected by noise and views commonly associate with such activities. Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-0O-I t) 30 13-57 EXISTING APPENDIX C GATEWAY CHULA VISTA APPENDIX C SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS May 15, 2009 1 able A - 76,775 sf of gross office area 0.83 Net rentable factor 38,085 sf of gross retail area 0.95 Net rentable factor 20,000 sf of gross area 0.95 Net rentable factor Total Square Feet: 276,775 Office 38,085 Retail 20 000 Rest'nt 334,860 Total Table B -Peak Parking Demands Per Use Type: Office: 3.3 spaces per 1,OOOsf GLA Weekdays 0.5 spaces per 1,OOOsf GLA Saturdays 758.09 spaces 114.86 spaces Retail: 3.8 spaces per 1,OOOsf GLA Weekdays 137.49 spaces 4.0 spaces per 1,OOOsf GLA Saturdays 144.72 spaces Restaurant: 20 spaces per 1,OOOsf GLA Weekdays 380.00 spaces 20 spaces per 1,OOOsf GLA Saturdays 380.00 spaces Table C -Summary of Shared Peak Parking Demands: Scenario HOURLY demand SEASONAL demand Analysis: The project's peak parking demands were first calculated for each of the three use types based on the Urban Land Institute (ULp net rentable factors (Table A) and demand ratios (Table B). Since the project's uses have varied operating characteristics and hours, the total parking demands were then determined using the ULI shared parking ratios for highest hourly and seasonal demands. Table C shows that the project's mix of uses creates a shared parking scenario resulting in an excess of 20 spaces at the highest hourly demand (Weekdays; 2pm) an excess of 43 spaces at the highest seasonal demand period (December; Weekdays; 2pm). The tables on the following pages provide the calculations for these parking demands. Table D demonstrates that the project's three use types will have staggered highest hourly demand periods. This staggering provides the opportunity for the project to successfully function with a total of 1,117 spaces and demonstrates that the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan standard of one parking space per every 300 square feet of floor area is acceptable. Project Program and Cumulative Parking Demand 13-5 8 OS/15/2009 GATEWAY CHULA VISTA SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS Table D -Hourly Demand Percentages Per Use TyF 7 am 20% 20% 8% 30% 2°/ 2% 8 am 63% 60% 18% 10% 6% 3% 9 am 93% 80% 42% 30% 10% 6% 10 am 80% 68% 45% 20% 8% 11 am 871 73 % 30°/ 10 i ~ ~..,.., anw 97% 86% 50 % 30 2 pm 97% 60%~ 97% 60%~ 45% 4 nm 93 % 40% ~ 95% 60% 45 5 pm- 47% 20% 79% 76% 70%I 6U% r F nm 23% 20% 82% 65% 90% 90% 7pm 7% 20% 89% 60% yb~° 8 pm 7% 20% 87% 55% 9 pm 3% 0 % 61 % 40% 10 om 3% 0% 321 38% 90% 96%_ 13 Table E -Number of Spaces Required based upon Hourly Demantls based upon Peak Demand 13-5 9 Recommended demand based upon use and hour of day. 05/15/2009 Spaces needed to meet HIGHEST hourly demand Spaces Required based upon 2pm Peak and Seasonal Percentage :es Required based upon f pm Peak Seasonal Percentage Mar ch -- 735 93 205 1034 March ~ 682 96 239~~ 1018 01 yes Required based upon tlam Seasonal Percentage Spaces Required based upon 12pm Peak and Seasonal Percentage so needed to meet highest hourly and seasonal demand Hourly Demands basetl upon Peak Demand 13-60 05/15/2009 PROPOSED APPENDIX C PART 1 OF 1 GATEWAY CHULA VISTA APPENDIX C SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS 9-1u1-09 7ahla A - Protect Proeram fExistine Gateway I and II + surface lot) Office 152,818 sq. k. of Gross area Total square Feet: 0.83 NM flen[able Factor 126,839' ib. k.. of GIA 152,818 Office Retail 33,825 sq. ft of Grass area 33,825 Retail 0.83 Net Rentable Factor 28,075, iq.k of GL4. - 8,020 Restaurant Restaurant 8,020 sq. ft. of Gross area d0~000 Educational 0.95 NeI Rentable Factor ],619 iq::ft o! GL4 234,663 Total Educational 40,000 iq. k. of Gross area 0.83 Net Rentable Factor 33,200. sq: k. of GLA 234,663 sq. k. Total Gross Area 195,733 sq. k. Tp[aI GIA Table B -Peak Parking Demands per Use Type: Office 3.3 spaces per 1,000 sq. k GLA an Weekdays 419 spaces _ 0.5 spaces per 1,000 sq. k, GtA on Saturdays _ 63 spaces Retail 3.8 spaces per 1,000 sq. k. GLA On Weekdays 107 spaces 4.0 spaces per 1,000 sq. k. G1A an Saturdays 112 spaces Restaurant 20 spaces per l,OW sq. ft. GlA an Weekdays 152 spaces 20 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. GIA on Saturdays 152 spaces Educational 0.21 spaces per student (600 students/50 sfaff)Weekdays 13] spaces O spaces per student (600 students/SO SIaff)Weekdays spaces table C - Summary of Shared Peak Parking Demands: Parking Provided' Parking Req'd Parking Scenario Under Parked Over Parked 1981 699:'.. Highest HOURLY demand `282 690 Highest SEASONAL demand -'291 Existing Parking Calculation: Existing Gateway) Parking Structure 3R Parking Spaces Existing Gateway ll Parking Structure 552 Parking Spaces Existing Surtace Parking LOt (future Gateway 111 site) 57 Parking Spaces Total .:981 Existing Parking Spaces Analysis The prajeR's peak parking demands were first calculated for [he three use types (Office, Retail & Restaurant) based on the Urban Land Institute (ULI) net rentable factors (Table AI and demand ratios (Table Bl. The Educational Use tlemand was based on 600 enrolled students+SO staff for a total of 650. The 650 was multiplied x.21 Average Peak Period Parking Demand per page 130 of the ITE Parking Generation Manual, 3rd Edition. Since the project's uses have varied operating characteristics and hours, the Total parking demands were then determined using the ULI shared parking ratios for highest hourly and seasonal demands forthe Offce, Retail and Restaurant uses. The Educational Use used the RE Weekday Data for Junior/Community College Per<en[ of Peak Period parking data. Table C shows [ha[ the ProjeR's mix of uses creates a parking scenario resulting in an excess of 282 parking spaces at the highest hourly demand (Weekdays; 2:00 PMI, and an excess of 291 spaces is provided at the highest seasonal demand period (December; Weekdays; 2:00 PM) The tables on the following pages provide the calculations for these parking demands. Table D demonstrates that the project's four use types will have staggered highest hourly demand periods. This staggering provides the opportunity for the project to successfully function with a total of 981 parking spaces and demonstrates that the Existing project provides adaquate parking for the proposed uses. 13-61 Table D -Hourly Demand Percentages Per Use Type HOUr of Offtce Retail Restaurant Educat ional Oay Week Sat Week Sat Week Sat. Week Sat. 6:00 AM 3% D% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7:00 AM 20% 20% 8% 30% 2% 2% ]96 0% 8:00 AM 63% 60% 18% 10% 5% 3% 54% 0% ' 9:00 AM 93% 80% 42% 30% SO% 6% 82% 0% 10:00 AM 100% 80% 68% 45% 20% 8% '100% 0% 11:00 AM I00% :100% 87% Ti% 30% 30% ]8% 0% 12 noon 90X -`<''- 300% 97% 85% 50% 30% ]6% 0% 1:00 PM 90% 80% -7.-rJ 100% 95% 70% 45% 75% 0% 2:00 PM 97% 60Y 97% --s 100% 60% 45% 72% 0% 3:00 PM 93% 40% 95% ..: `100% 60% 45% fi3% 0% 4:00 PM ]]% 40% 87% 90Y= 50% 45% 48% 0% S:DD PM 47% 20% 79% 75% 70% 60% 56% 0% 6:00 PM 23% 20% 82% 65% 90% 90% 69% 0% - - -""7fOD76n 7% - ~20% - 89% ~ -60% f100% -' - 95% 69% 0% - B:00 PM ]% 20% 87% 55% .. .100% i; -100% 0% 0% 9:00 PM 3% 0% 61% 40% 100% ':. ..100% 0% 0% 10:00 PM 3% 0% 32% 38% 90% 95% 0% 0% 11:00 PM 0% 0% 13% 13% 70% 85% D% 0% 12 mid. 0% 0% 0% 0% 60% 70% 0% 0% Tahle E - Number of Spaces Required based upon Peak Demand and Hourly Percentages Hour of Office Re[ait Restaurant Educational Totals Oay Week Sac Week Sat Week Sac Week Sat. Week Sat. 6:00 AM 13 - - 13 - 7:OOAM 84 13 9 34 3 3 10 105 49 8:00 AM 264 38 19 11 B 5 74 - 364 54 9:00 AM 389 51 45 34 15 9 112 - Sfil 94 10:00 AM 419 51 73 51 30 12 137 - fi68 113 11:00 AM 419 63 93 82 46 15 106 - 664 161 12 noon 37] 63 103 95 76 46 104 - 660 205 1:00 PM 377 51 107 107 107 fig 102 - 692 22fi 1100 PM 3:00 PM a06 389 38 25 103 101 112 112 9L 91 -' 69 69 98 86 - 699 668 119.. 206 4:00 PM 322 25 93 101 76 69 66 - 55] 195 5:00 PM 197 13 84 84 107 91 ]6 464 188 6:00 PM 96 13 8] ]3 13] 13] 94 - 415 223 7:00 PM 29 13 96 67 152 145 94 - 371 225 8:00 PM 29 13 93 62 152 152 - - 274 227 9:00 PM 13 65 45 152 152 230 197 10:00 PM 13 34 43 137 145 184 187 11:00 PM 14 15 107 130 - - 121 144 12 mid. 76 107 - 76 30] Spaces needed to meet HIGHEST hourly Demand - 699 13-62 Table F-Seasonal Percentages Per Use Type Month Office Retail Restaurant Education January 100% 66% BO% 100% February 100% 66% ]S% 100% March 100% 70% 90% 100% April 100% 70% 90% 1W% May 100% ]0% 95% 100% June 100% 75% 100% 100% July 100% 76% 100% 100% August 100% ]9% 86% 100% September 100% 75% 80% 100% OROher 100% I6% 60% 300Y= November 100% 80% 80% 100% December 30D% 100% 90% 500% Spaces Required based upon 2 PM Peak and Seasonal Percentages MbBih' - Offce -" Retail fte3tauPaht Education Totals --- Spaces Required based upon 1 PM Peak and Seasonal Pe rcentages Mbb[H - - Office -- Retail"- _-- Restaurant Educ00dn-- Td[81s January 406 67 73 98 645 January 377 fig 85 102 634 February 406 67 69 98 640 Fehruary 377 fig 80 102 628 March 406 72 82 98 659 March 37] 75 96 302 650 April 406 ]2 82 98 659 April 37] ]S 96 102 650 May 406 ]2 8] 98 664 May 37] 75 101 102 655 June 406 ]8 91 98 673 June 37] BO 30] 102 666 July 406 78 91 98 673 July 377 80 107 102 666 August 406 78 78 98 660 August 377 80 91 102 650 September 40fi ]8 ]3 90 655 September 3]] 80 86 102 644 OROber 406 ]8 73 98 655 October 37] 80 86 102 644 November 406 83 73 98 660 November 377 85 85 102 650 Decetn8er, ~ 406; I03 82 '98 690 December 377 107 96 102 682 Spaces Required based upon 11 AM Peak and Seasonal Percentages Month office Retail Restaurant Education Totals Spaces Required based upon 10 AM Peak and SeasonalPercentages Month Offce Retail Restaurant Education Totals January 419 60 3] 106 622 January 419 a7 24 137 627 February d19 60 3a 106 620 February 419 47 23 137 625 March 419 65 41 106 631 March 419 51 27 13] 633 April 419 65 41 106 631 April 419 51 2] 13] 633 May 419 fib 43 106 633 May 419 51 29 137 635 June 419 70 46 lOfi 640 June 419 54 30 137 640 lu ly 419 70 46 lOfi 640 July 419 54 30 137 640 Au ust 419 70 39 106 634 August 419 54 26 137 635 September 419 ]0 37 106 631 September 419 54 24 137 634 October 419 70 37 106 631 Oc[aber 419 54 24 137 636 November 419 74 37 106 636 November 419 58 24 137 637 December 419 93 41 106 659 December 419 ]3 2] 13] 655 Spaces needed to meet HIGHEST hourly and seasonal demand ;. .:690 13-63 PROPOSED APPENDIX C PART 2 of 2 GATEWAY CHULA VISTA APPENDIX C SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS 9-1u1-09 Table A -Project Program (Gateway I, II and III) Office 280,758 sq. k. of Gross area Total Square Feet: 0.83 Net Rentable Factor 233,029 sq. ft. of GLA 280,758 Office Retail 46,385 sq. ft. of Gross area 46,385 Retail 0.83 Net Rentable Factor .38,500 sq. ft: of GL4 e,@0 Restaurant Restaurant 8,020 sq. ft of Grosz area 400_00 Educatonal 0.95 Net Rentable Factor 7,614 sq. ft. bf'GIA 375,163 Total Educational 40,000 sq. ft. of Gross area 0.83 Nei Rentable Fattor ':33,200 50. ft.. of GUS 3]5.163 sa. ft Total Gross Area 312,348 sq. ft. Total GL4 Table B -Peak Parkine Demands per Use Type: Office 3:3 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. GLA On Weekdays 7fi9 spaces 0.5 Spaces per 1,000 sq. ft. GLA On Saturdays 117 spaces Retail 3.8 spaces per 1,000 sq. k. GLA On Weekdays 146 spaces 4.0 Spaces per 1,000 sq. k. GL4 on Saturdays 154 spaces Restaurant 20 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft.GN on Weekdays 152 spaces 20 spaces per 1,000 sq. ft GLA on Saturdays 152 spaces Educational 0.21 spaces per student (600 studentr/50 staff)Weekdays 137 spaces O spaces per student (600 students /50 staff)Weekday5 - spaces l'ahle c -Summary of Shared Peak Parkine Demands: Parking Parking Under Over Provided" Req'd Parking Scenario Parked Parked 1,229 '. 1,078 Highest HOURLY demand 151 Q,068 Highest SEASONAL demand ':=161 Existing Parking Calculation: Existing Gateway I Parking Structure Existing Gateway II Parking Structure Gateway III Parking Structure Total Analysis: 372 Parking Spaces 552 Parking Spaces 305 Parking Spaces 1,229 Existing Parking Spaces The project's peak parking demands were first calculated for the three use types (Offce, Retail & Restaurant) based on the Urban Land Institute (ULI) net rentable factors (Table A) and demand ratios (Table B). The Educational Use demand was based on 600 enrolled students i 50 staff far a total of 650. The 650 was multiplied x.21 Average Peak Period Parking Demand per page 130 of the ITE Parking Generation Manual, 3rd Edition. Since the project's uses have varied operating charatterstia and hours, the total parking demands were then determined using the UU shared parking ratios for highest hourly and seasonal demands for the Office, Retail and Restaurant uses. The Educational Use used the ITE Weekday Data for luniar / Community College Percent of Peak Period parking data. Table C shows that the Project's mix of uses creates a parking scenario resulting In an excess of 151 parking spaces at the highest hourly demand (Weekdays; 2:00 PM), and an excess of 161 spaces is provided at the highest seasonal demand period (December; weekdays; 2:00 PM) The tables on the fallowing pages provide the calculations for these parking demands. Table D demonstrates that the project's four use types will have staggered highest hourly demand periods. This staggering provides the opportunity for the project to successfully function with a total of 1,229 parking spaces and demonstrates that the Garyeway Chula Vista Specif c Plan standard of one parking space per every 300 square feet of floor area is acceptable. A shared parking analysis done for the existing Gateway I & II phases determined that an excess of 282 spaces is provided during the highest hourly demand (Weekdays; 2:00 PM) and an excess of 291 spaces was provided aC the highest seasonal demand period (December; Weekdays; 2:00 PM). During construction of the Gateway 111 Office huilding and parking structure 57 surface parking spaces used in the analysis will be lost. Therefore, during construction of Gateway III an excess of 225 spaces will he provided at the highest hourly demand period and an excess of 234 spaces will be provided during the highest seasonal demand period. 13-64 Table D - Hourly Demand Percentages Per Use Type Hour of Office Re tail Restaurant Educational Oay Week Sat Week Sat. Week SaC Week Sat. 6:00 AM 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 7:00 AM 20% 20% 8% 30% 2% 2% 7% 0% 8:00 AM 9:00 AM 63% 93% 60% 80% 18% 42% SO% 30% 5% SD% 3% 6% 54% 82% 0% 0% 10:00 AM 11:00 AM 100% .100% 80% 100% 68% 87% 45% 73% 20% 30% 8% 10% :100% 78% 0% 0% 12 noon 1:00 PM 90% 90% 100% 80% 97% :: -100% 86% 95% 50% 70% 30% 45% 76% 75% 0% 0% 2:00 PM 3:00 PM 97% 93% 60% 40% 97% 95% - 100% ': 100% fi0% fi0% 45% 45% R% 63% 0% 0% 4:00 PM 77% 40% 87% 90% 50% 45% 48% 0% 5:00 PM 47% 20% _ 79% _. 75% . 70% 60% 56% D% 6:00 PM 23% 20% 82% 65% 90% 90% 69% 0% 7:00 PM 7% 20% 89% 60% "::'. lpp% 95% 69% 0% 8:00 PM 7% 20% 87% 55% 300% -: 100% 0% 0% 9:00 PM 3% 0% 61% 40% '.r 100% '100% 0% 0% 10:00 PM 3% 0% 32% 38% 90% 95% 0% 0% 11:00 PM 0% 0% 13% 13% 70% 85% 0% 0% 12 mid. 0% 0% 0% 0% 50% 70% 0% 0% Table E - Number of Spaces Required based upon Peak Demand and Hourly Percentages Hour of OfFce Retail Resta urant Educational Totals Oay Week Sai. Week Sat. Week Sat. Week Sat. Week Sac 6:00 AM 23 _ _ _ 23 - 7:OOAM 154 23 12 46 3 3 10 - 178 73 8:00 AM 484 70 26 15 8 5 74 592 90 9:00 AM 715 93 61 46 15 9 112 904 149 10:00 AM 7fi9 93 99 69 30 12 137 1,035 175 11:00 AM 769 117 127 112 46 15 106 1,048 244 12 noon 692 117 142 131 76 46 104 - 1,014 293 1:00 PM 692 93 146 146 107 69 102 - 1,047 308 !2:00 PM Z46 70 142 154 91 ':.69 ': 98 1,078 '. `292 3:00 PM 715 47 139 154 91 69 86 - 1,032 269 4:00 PM 592 47 127 139 7fi 69 66 861 254 6:OD PM 3fi1 23 116 135 107 91 76 - 660 230 6:00 PM 177 23 120 100 137 137 94 528 2fi1 7:00 PM 54 23 130 92 152 145 94 - 431 260 8:00 PM 54 23 127 85 152 152 - 333 2fi0 9:00 PM 23 89 62 152 152 - 265 214 10:00 PM 23 47 59 137 145 - - 207 203 11:00 PM 19 20 107 130 - 126 150 12 mid. - 76 107 - - 7fi 107 Spaces needed to meet HIGHEST hourly Demand ..1;078 13-65 Table F -Seasonal Percentages Per Use Type Mon[h ice Retail Restaurant Educaton January 100% 66% 80% 100% Fehruary 100% 69% 79% 100% March 100% 70% 90% 100% April 100% 70% 90% 100% May 100% 70% 95% 100% June 100% 76% 100% 100% July 100% 76% 100% 100% August 100% 79% 86% S00°h September 100% 79% 80% 100% OROber 100% 79% 80% 100% November 100% 80% 80% 100% December Y00% 100% `i 90% " ''100% Spaces Required based upon 2 PM Peak ~~~ - - andSeasonalPercentages - -~- Spaces Required based upon 1 PM Peak - - -- -- an Seasona Percen ages Month Office Retail Restaurant Education Totals Month Office Retail Restaurant Education Totals January 746 92 73 98 1,010 January fi92 95 85 102 975 February 746 92 69 98 1,005 Fehruary 692 95 BO 102 970 March 746 99 82 98 1,026 March 692 102 96 102 993 April 746 99 82 98 1,026 April 692 102 96 102 993 May 746 99 87 98 1,030 May 692 102 101 102 998 June 746 106 91 98 1,042 June 692 110 107 102 1,011 July 746 lOfi 91 98 1,042 July 692 110 107 102 1,011 August 746 lOfi 78 98 1,@8 August fi92 110 91 102 995 September 746 106 73 98 1,024 September 692 110 85 102 990 October 746 106 73 98 1,024 OROber 692 110 85 102 990 Navem ber 746 114 73 98 1,031 Navem her 692 117 86 102 997 December 746 - 142 ' 82 98 '1;068 Decem her 692 146 96 102 1,037 Spaces Required based upon 11 AM Peak and SeasonalPercentages Spaces Required based upon 10 AM Peak and Seasonal Percentages Month Offire Retail Restaurant Eduction Totals Month Office Retail RestauranC Education Totals January 7fi9 83 37 106 995 January 769 65 2a 137 995 February 769 63 34 106 992 February 769 65 23 137 993 March 769 89 41 106 1,006 March 769 70 27 137 1,003 April 769 89 41 106 1,006 April 769 70 27 137 1,003 May 769 89 43 106 1,008 May 769 70 29 137 1,004 June 769 95 46 106 1,017 Lune 769 75 30 137 1,011 July 769 96 46 106 1,017 July 769 75 30 137 1,011 August 769 99 39 106 1,010 August 769 75 26 137 1,006 September 769 95 37 SOfi 1,007 September 769 76 26 137 1,004 October 769 9S 37 106 1,007 October 769 75 24 137 1,004 November 769 102 37 106 1,014 November 769 80 24 137 1,009 De<emher 769 127 41 106 1,044 December 769 99 27 137 1,032 Spaces needed to meet HIGHEST hourly and seasonal demand '.. 1,068 13-66 ATTACHMENT 5C Section 4.8 Circulation Section 5.5 Streets 13-67 4.8 Circulation The Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan shall have two ingress and egress points. The primary access point shall be from H Street at the southwestern comer of the site. Both access points shall directly lead into the project's parking structure. Thus creating an internal circulation system, which runs behind the project's three primary buildings, between the southwestern and the northwestern comers of the site via the parking structure. Pedestrian circulation will enter the project site from the cour2yazds and building entrances along H Street. Primary building entrances aze from the second floor of the pazking stmcture into major two story space. An additional access route is envisioned via a pedestrian bridge crossing H Street and linking one eF-five of the Gateway Chula Vista buildings to the future expansion of the South Bay Regional Center The pedestrian bridge will directly access the second floor of the buildings ~?~?esternmos~~uilcTing providing a link between the project's offices and fiiture courthouse expansion. It should be noted that the pedestrian bridge is not a necessary component of the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan and subject to further review by the City. If it becomes appazent that such a bridge is impractical or economically infeasible, the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan may be implemented without construction of the pedestrian bridge. Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-0O-I l ) if 13-68 To aid the City in the cost of processing sewerage generated by the project, a sewage participation fee shall be collected for each phase of the project at the time of connection to the public sewer. The current fee is $2,220.00 per Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU). The fee is prorated using the following formula for commercial projects based on Equivalent Fixture Units (EFUs). (Total EFUs x 14 GPD)/ 265 GPD x $2,220 =Total Sewage Participation Fee Credits for existing sewer facilities shall be factored into the based upon chart provided in Appendix E. 5.4 Solid Waste The City of Chula Vista currently contracts with Pacific Waste Inc. to dispose of all solid waste materials within the City boundaries. Pacific Waste has indicated that they can provide service to the Gateway Chula Vista project up to seven days a week, if desired. Solid waste generated by the City of Chula Vista is currently trucked to the Otay Landfill, which is estimated to have capacity to receive solid waste for the next 25 years. Currently, the City requires 50% of materials generated on-site to be diverted to a recycling center. Pacific Waste Inc. provides recycling services for cazdboazd, paper, glass and aluminum. Future tenants of the Gateway Chula Vista project shall be required to contract with Pacific Waste or another private entity for their recycling needs. 5.5 Streets The City of Chula Vista initiated a General Plan Amendment (GPA) concurrently with the processing of the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan. The purpose of the GPA was to reclassify H Street from a six lane collector to a four lane collector road in the Circulation Element. A traffic study was prepazed for the GPA, which forecasted traffic volumes at buildout for the Specific Plan, the South Bay Regional Center expansion and the Scripps Hospital expansion. The study area included the following roadway segments: 1) H Street between Interstate 5 and 805; 2) Fourth Avenue between E Street and I Street; and 3) Third Avenue between F Street and I Street. The study determined that the Gateway Chula Vista project would generate an additional 8~9 ~'~ trips in the AM peaks and X084 ~~tY~Z trips in the PM peak hours. This was a conservative estimate since the traffic study did not remove the existing trips associated with the uses currently on-site. The traffic study concluded that "widening of H Street to six lanes I not required to accommodate the increase in traffic at project buildout "This was based upon the determination that future peak period travel speeds in the study azea will continue to operate at Level of Service (LOS) C or better. Impacts to the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue were identified. However, mitigation measures have been included in the Specific Plan's conditions of approval, which will reduce the traffic impacts to acceptable levels. Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-00-11) 13-69 ATTACHMENT SD Section 1.7 Section 2.1, Table 2 Section 6.2 Exhibits 6 and 7 13-70 1.7 Development Concept and Design Principals The Gateway Chula Vista project has been designed to be one of Chula Vista's premier commercial sites. It consists of three Class "A" commercial buildings totaling "^~_ - ° s,, and a 1~'F caz parking stmcture. The project is intended to infuse the azea with a high intensity urban level of activity by providing space for a variety of corn_mercial uses, such as restaurants, professional ~~-.:~ _ ~" a er services. The main buildin facades will be offices, retai] shops, ~a-~=.=~e~ b~'u ~ ~~ g oriented towards H Street and Third Avenue. However, use of landscaping, paving, and public art will invite the public into the project's interior courtyards and encourage pedestrian access to the parking structure at the rear of the site. The intersection of H Street and Third Avenue will also be improved as a comer plaza with urban amenities. This will create a dynamic focal point for the site, surrounding neighborhood, and the southern portion of the Town Centre I Redevelopment Area. The existing 16 assessor pazcels within the project site will be consolidated into 3 legal lots prior to building permit. Each of the lots will contain one commercial building and a corresponding portion of the parking structure. The first building shall be located at the eastern end of the project site, fronting on both Third Avenue and H Street. The building shall be approximately ~I99 12 square feet in size and shall be five stories, except for atwo-story portion extending in front of the eastern end of the pazking structure. The purpose of this extension is to: 1) screen views of the pazking structure; 2) enhance the urban experience along the project's entire Third Avenue frontage; and 3) emphasize the projects connection with the existing Town Cenffe area. The second and cenffal building will be a maximum of six stories and up to -1~9;6~5 '~~f~~# square feet in size. Two restaurants shall be allowed on the street level of this building, with direct access to both of the project's courtyards. The third building located on the western end of the site shall also be six stories and approximately }$&}3~ ~ squaze feet. The multi-level pazking structure will be fully integrated into the project's azchitecture and screened from view. It will include an enclosed storage azea, off street loading spaces, and flash enclosures to serve the project. A potential pedestrian bridge crossing H Street is also envisioned. The bridge would link the second steries ' of the project's eentFal 2$tetig~,}??S~ building to the future expansion of the court house complex located at the South Bay Regional Center, directly south of the project site. Exhibits 6 and 7 present the preliminary development concept for the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan. Future development of the site will be required to conform to this concept plan and strictly adhere to the land use regulations, development standazds, and design guidelines to follow. However, it is reasonable to anticipate that the need for deviations may become evident as the design, market needs, and construction progress. In that case, the Substantial Conformance Regulations included in the Implementation Section of the Specific Plan maybe used. Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-00-11) 13-71 2.0 LAND USE REGULATIONS 2.1 Introduction The project's list of uses allowed and prohibited on-site has been prepazed in accordance with the Disposition and Development and Owner Participation Agreement (DD&A) entered into and between the City of Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency and Gateway Chula Vista, LLC. Since the Gateway Chula Vista project has been designed as an interrelated and cohesive development, the Specific Plan applies one single zone to the entire site. Urban Commercial Zone. The goal of the Urban Commercial Zone is to provide an azea for complementary and mutually reinforcing officers, restaurants, and retail commercial business that serve workers and residents of the urban core, the City of Chula Vista, and the surrounding region. In cases where the Specific Plan is mute, the Director of the Redevelopment Agency shall rely on the shall rely on the underlying CO and CC zoning to provide guidance in making this decision. The Specific Plan's land use distribution is provide on Table 2. This table establishes the total amount of area allocated For each of the principal uses and provides a conceptual distribution of uses per phase. Retail and service uses have been combined in this table in order to comply with the combined limits set by the DD&A. It is important [o stress that since all future tenants could not be identified at this state in the project's development; the distribution of uses between the three buildings is conceptual only and may change. However, the totahverell amount of space allowed alleested per lar,tt vice cate¢nrv . '--ml~,.~d~ase as-wifl as irtdicated iti the table belay shall notbe exceeded be Table 2. Land Use Plan and Conceptual Distribution Building Lot Building Oftice Retail & Restaurant 'Educational & Phase Size Size Uses Service Uses Uses !. & Training ~ Schools* .,. l 1.4 acres 9~-1-00-sf ~6~00-sf ''" x~" '` ^Io<. o-~-~ =•~~"°'' 20,0€10 sf . 102;329 sf 62,029af 14,000'~sf 6,300 sf 2 1.52 acres -F2s1,62-5 4-08;080-sf X345-sf °" "~" "` 120,000 sf . 132;334 sf 90,789 sf t9,825 sf '.1,720 sf 3 L42 acres , "e-.~-~x c _~ o, o~c "o }c "e~~ "F *~"• o,,~-fs,,,,--°'' None 140;500 sf 130,440 sf 10,060 sf None Streets 0.12 acres Total 4.46 acres 334;869s€ °"~.,''c "` 1Q "~a~~c "` 2A;000s€ 40,1)00 sf 375i63sf 283,2~8sf 43,885'st 8,020sf *maximumb00 students~aud50staff 2.2 Principal Uses The following aze the principal uses permitted within the Urban Commercial Zone. A. Professional and Administrative Offices. Uses allowed within this designation shall be primarily devoted to professional and administrative offices and personal services, rather than for sale of commodities. These uses shall be allowed on floors two and higher. Offices space shall be used for the following. Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-00-11) l4 13-72 6.0 IMPLEMENTATION 6.1 Introduction The actual construction envisioned in this Specific Plan shall be undertaken by the Developer. The City of Chula Vista shall have the important role of ensuring that the development follows the provisions outlined in this plan. 6.2 Development Phasing Development of the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan will be completed in three phases to ensure construction of necessary infrastructure and amenities for each phase at the project progresses. The Conceptual Phasing Plan (Exhibit 14) depicts the currently anticipated mazket demand for commercial development. It is possible that a combination of the project's phases, such as Phase 1 and 2 or Phase 2 and 3, may be construction simultaneously depending upon future market demand. Listed below are the key features of each phase: • Phase 1: Construct 9 ~-190 ©~,~2`~~sf building at southeastern comer of project site. Construct associated portion of pazking gazage and ramps, with temporary walls at the eastern end to provide screening and a finished appearance. Construct permanent access driveways onto Third Avenue. Construct temporary access driveway onto H Street west of building. Construct public right-of--way improvements only within Phase 1 boundary. Construct and install comer plaza landscaping. • Phase 2: Construct d~3 3sf building on central portion of project site. Construct associated portion of pazking gazage and ramps, with temporary walls at the eastern end to provide screening and a finished appearance. Construct temporary H Street driveway & remove temporary driveway. Construct/install courtyazd landscaping between Buildings I and 2. • Phase 3: Construct 49&,4-33 t4~t~Q4sf building at southeastern comer of project site. Constmct associated portion of pazking garage and ramps. Constmct permanent H Street driveway & remove temporary driveway. Constmct public right-of-way improvements only within Phase 3 boundary. Constmct/install courtyazd landscaping between Buildings 2 and 3. 6.2 Development Phasing With the approval of the Gateway Chula Vista Specific and implementing permits, the developer shall be entitled to construct, lease and/or sell the three Class "A" commercial buildings described within this document, provided all of the Specific Plan regulations, standard, and guidelines aze Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-0O-I I) ~a 13-73 Cz~f',r~lridil6 PROPOSED v ti street ~ieva~tiiou PROPOSED C-~t~hil>it T ATTACHMENT 6 OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM 13-76 Disclosure Statement Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary action by the Council, Planning Commission and all other official bodies of the City, a statement of disclosure of certain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign contributions for a City of Chula Vista election must be filed. The following inicrmation must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the application or the contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier. Gateway Chula Vista, LLC Gateway Chula Vista 2, LLC Gateway Chula Vista 3, LLC 2. If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals with a $2000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity. Coast Pacific Properties, LLC Sames V. Pieri, member LLC n ~ c ~~ o ti, C t1-uTa tT• r n M~ ~aA~ent, 3. If any person' identifed pursuant to (1) above is anon-profit organization or trust, list the names of any person serving as director of tha non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. N/A 4. Please identify every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. Cortes Communications, LLC 5. Has any person* associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an official** of the City of Chula Vista as it relates to this contract within the past 12 months. Yes_ No % If Yes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the official'* may have in this contract. 6. Have you made a contribution of more than $250 within the. past twelve (12) months to a current member of the Chula Vista City Council? No Yes _ If yes, which Council membe(? 13-77 pa t twelver(12)emonths? (Ths3noludesnbengoa sourcel of i aometomoneyl tolretore aelegal debthgft~lloan, etc.) Yes _ No X If Yes, which official" and what was the nature of item provided? Gateway Chula Vista, LLC ~~ Gateway Chula Vista 2, LLC & Gateway Chula Vista 3 Date:_ gif ntr Ctor/A licant LLC Print or type name of Contractor/Applicant Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city, municipality, district, or other political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a unit. Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation member, Planning Commissioner, member of a board, commission, or committee of the City, employee, or staff members. September S, 2006 13-78 ORDINANCE NO. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE GATEWAY CHULA VISTA SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM-00-11) FOR 4.46 ACRES AT THE NORTHWEST CORNER OF THE INTERSECTION OF "H" STREET AND THIRD AVENUE L RECITALS A. Project Site WHEREAS, the area of land, which is the subject of this Ordinance is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and commonly known as Gateway Chula Vista, and for the purpose of general description consists of 4.46 acres located at the northwest corner of the intersection of "H" Street and Third Avenue ("Project Site" or "Project"); and B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, a duly verified application was filed with the Development Services Department on April 23, 2009, by Gateway Chula Vista 2, LLC, requesting approval of amendments to the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan; and C. Prior Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of various entitlements and agreements, including: (1) adopting a Mitigated Negative Declazation and approving a General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element to reclassify H Street between Third and Fourth Avenue from a six lane major street to a four lane major street previously approved by Redevelopment Agency Resolution No 1708 (Council Resolution 2000-465) on December 12, 2000; and 2) approving a Specific Plan (PCM-00-11) approved by City Council Ordinance No.2828 on December 19, 2000; and D. Planning Commission and Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation Record of Application WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on the Project, and notice of the hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundary of the Project, at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public heazing on the Project on July 22, 2009, and voted 6-0-1-0 to forwazd a recommendation to the City Council on the Project; and 13-79 Ordinance No. Page 2 WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at the public hearing on the Project held on July 22, 2009, and the minutes and resolution resulting therefrom, aze hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding; and WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation held an advertised public hearing on this Project on July 23, 2009, at 4 p.m. in the City Council Chambers at 276 Fourth Avenue and after heazing staff presentation and public testimony, voted 5-0-1-I to recommend that the City Council approve the Specific Plan amendment, in accordance with the finding listed below; and WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced on this Project before the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation at their public hearing held on July 23, 2009, and the minutes and resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding; and E. City Council Record of Application WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the heazing on the Project application and notices of the hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the Project at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held before the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on August 11, 2009, in the Council Chambers in the City Hall, City of Chula Vista Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue, at 4:00 p.m. to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to the same; and F. Discretionary Approvals Ordinance WHEREAS, at the City Council heazing at which this Ordinance was introduced for first reading, the City Council approved amendments to the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan; and G. Environmental Determination WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and has determined that the proj ect was covered in previously adopted Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS- 99-24. The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document aze necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the prepazation of a subsequent document has occurred; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared an Addendum to Final Mitigated Negative Declazation, IS-99-24, referred to as "Gateway Chula Vista: H Street and Third Avenue." 13-80 Ordinance No. Page 3 II. NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED, that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find and determine as follows: A. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA That the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") and has determined that the project was covered in previously adopted Final Mitigated Negative Declazation, IS- 99-24. That the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document aze necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent document has occurred; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared an Addendum to Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-99-24, referred to as "Gateway Chula Vista: H Street and Third Avenue." B. INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT OF CITY COUNCIL That the City Council has exercised their independent review and judgment and concurs with the Environmental Review Coordinator's determination that the Project was covered in previously adopted Final Mitigated Negative Declazation, IS-99-24. and that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent document has occurred; and therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared an Addendum to Final Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-99-24, referred to as "Gateway Chula Vista: H Street and Third Avenue." C. CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN The City Council finds that the proposed amendments to the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan are consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan. The proposed amendments to allow educational and training uses, modify provisions for temporary and accessary uses and other miscellaneous amendments will not result in additional traffic generation nor demand for additional parking and aze consistent with other types of uses currently permitted by the Specific Plan. III. NOW THEREFORE BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve the amendments to the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan as represented in Exhibit B. 13-81 Ordinance No. Page 4 IV. EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its final adoption. Presented by Gary Halbert Deputy City Manger/Development Services Director J:V+ttorney\Michael5h\Gateway\SP\GatewaySpecificPlanAmendmentCC-Ord-7.22.09-Drag 2.dac 13-82 Approved as to form by EXHIBIT A 13-83 ExxzBIT B 1.7 Development Concept and Design P><~ncipals The Gateway Chula Vista project has been designed to be one of Chula Vista's premier commercial sites.. It consists of three Class "A" commercial buildings totaling 375,163 s f, and a 1,229 caz parking structure. the project is intended to infuse the azea with a high intensity urban level of activity by providing space for a variety of commercial uses, such as restaurants, professional offices, retail shops, educational and other services. the main building facades will be oriented towazds H Street and Thud Avenue.. However, use of landscaping, paving, and public azt will invite the public into the project's interior courtyazds and encourage pedestrian access to the parking structure at the rear of the site.. The intersection of H Street and Third Avenue will also be improved as a comer plaza with urban amenities. Ihis will create a dynamic focal point for the site, surrounding neighborhood, and the sQUthernpottiQnsithe7.owaCentre_IRedevelnpmentAtea __ .. __ _ __.. __ __ _- -_ __.. _ - _ _. the existing 16 assessor parcels within the project site will be consolidated into 3 legal Tots prior to building permit. Each of the lots will contain one commercial building and a corresponding portion of the pazking strucnue. the fast building shall be located at the eastern end of the project site, fronting on both Ihird Avenue and H Sheet. the building shall be approximately 102,329 square fee[ in size and shall be five stories, except for a two~tory portion extending in front of the eastern end of the parking structue, the purpose of this extension is to: 1) screen views of the pazking structure; 2) enhance the wban experience along the project's entire Ihird Avenue frontage; and .3) emphasize the projects connection with the existing Iown Cenhe azea.. The second and central building will be a maximum of six stories and up to 132,334 square feet in size.. Two restaurants shall be allowed on the street level of this building, with direct access to both of the project's couttyazds. The third building located on the western end of the site shall also be six stories and approximately 140,500 square feet. the multi-level parking sttuctate will be fully integrated into the project's architecture and screened from view It will include an enclosed storage azea, o$ street loading spaces, and Hash enclosures to serve the project A potential pedestrian bridge crussing H Street is also envisioned the bridge would link the second story of the project's Westernmost building to the future expansion of the court house complex located at the South Bay Regional Center, directly south of the project site. Exhibits 6 and 7 present the preliminary development concept for the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan. Fumre development of the site will be required to conform to this concept plan and shictly adhere to the land use regulations, development standazds, and design guidelines to follow, However; it is reasonable to anticipate that the need for deviations may become evident as the design, mazket needs, and consnuction progress In that case, the Substantial Conformance Regulations included in the Implementation Section of the Specific Plan may be used. Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-00-I 1) 13-84 2.0 LAND USE REGULATIONS 2.1 Introduction The project's list of uses allowed and prohibited on-site has been prepared in accordance with the Disposition and Development and Owner Pazticipation Agreement (DD&A) entered into and between the City of~Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency and Gateway Chula Vista, LLC. Since the Gateway Chula Vista project has been designed as an interrelated and cohesive development, the Specific Plan applies one single zone to the entire site. Urban Cormercial Zone.. The goal of the Urban Commercial Zone is to provide an area for complementazy and mutually reinforcing officers, restaurants, and retail commercial business that serve workers and residents of the ru~ban core, the City of Chula Vista, and the surrounding region. Tn cases where the Specific Plan is mute, the Director of the Redevelopment Agency shall rely on the shall rely on the underlying CO and CC zoning to provide guidance in making this decision The Specific Plan's land use distibution is provide on Table 2, Ihis table establishes the total amount of area allocated for each of the principal uses and provides a conceptual distribution of uses per phase Retail and service uses have been combined in this table in order to comply with the combined limits set by the DD&A. It is important to sh~ess that since all fuhue tenants could not be identified at this state in the project's development; the distribution of uses between the tftree buildings is conceptual only and may change. However; the total amount of space allowed per land use category as indicated in the table below, shall not be exceeded, unless there is no increase in average daily hips (ADI's) or required parking and unless approved by the Director of the Redevelopment Agency, cable 2. Land Use Plao and Conceptual Distribution Building Lot Building OfRce Retail & Restaurant ............... .. ....... ~Edpcadana[ & Phase Size Size Uses Service Uses Uses &'€ratvlhg ~ odls* 'Scti I I a ages 2a;,aatt~se 102,329 sf 62,029 sf 14 000 sf 6,300 sf __..1_ 2 l 52 acres '2q;9QQ sf ~ ': 132,334 sf 90,789 sf I9,825 sY 1,720 sf 3 l 42 acres None ] 40,500 sf 130,440 s£ 10,060 sf None Streets 0.12 acres Total 4.46 acres 40,000 sf - ' 3'75,163 st 283,258 sf~ 43,885 sE 8,020 sf •maximum 600 students and 50 staff 2..2 Principal Uses the following are the principal uses perrtritted within the Urban Commercial Zone.. A.. Professional and Administrative Offices. Uses allowed within this designation shall be primazily devoted to professional and administrative offices and personal services, rather than for sale of commodities Ihese uses shall be allowed on floors two and higher Offices space shall be used for the following.. Gateway Chula Vista Spceitc Plan (PCM-00-11) la 13-85 1 Admitrishetive and Executive Offlces, including institutions of a philanthropic or eleemosynazy nature. 2, Professional Offices, for accountants, architects, attorneys, consultants, engineers, insurance agencies, planners, credit bureaus, collection agencies, and real estate offices; 3 Medical and dental offices, including oculists, chiropractors, and other practicing healing azts For human beings. 4, Any other comparable use approved by dre Director of the Redevelopment Agency. B. Retail Commetciat Retail commercial uses shall be allowed only on the first and second floors of~ the project and aze primarily intended to provide commodities. Retail commercial uses shall include but not limited to the following: 1. Art Galleries and Studios; 2. Appazel and Shoe Stores; - ... 3---Sakery,-candy,and-Confectioneries3tores,- _.. _ _ __-...--- ...... 4, Books, Gifts, and Stationazy Stores; 5, Cigar Stores and Smoking Lounges; 6. Florists 7. Iewehy Stores 8. Ioy Stores 9.. Any other compazable rue approved by the Director of the Redevelopment Agency. C. Services. Uses allowed within this designation shall be primazily intended to provide specialty services for persons working in the immediate area of the project and residents within the entire City of Chula Vista. Service uses may include but not be limited to the fbllowing: 1, Financial Offices, including Banks, Savings and Loans, and Financial Brokerage Offices; 2. Related commercial uses incidental to offices, inchrding real estate offices, Navel agencies, beauty salons and day spa, childcare, full service laundry and dry cleaner business with off-site cleaning plants, phazrrtacy, and public/private postal services and facilities 3, Any other comparable use approved by the Director of the Redevelopment Agency. D.. Restaurants.. Restaurant uses permitted within the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan shall be primarily associated with the provision of food and beverages and may include nightclubs and cocktail lounges. Restaurant uses shall be located only on the first and second floors of the primary buildings. Except they may be allowed on the top floor if' approved by the Director of Redevelopment Agency, E. Educational and Iraining Schools.. Educational and training schools, such as beauty schools, bazber colleges, modeling schools, medical and vocational schools, places of instruction or other operation catering primarily to students of trainees rather than customers, Gateway Chula Vism Specific Plan (PCM-00-11) 13-86 2.3 Accessory Uses A, Incidental Storage Facilities The use of storage facilities shall be limited to file storage resulting 5~om the conduct of an existing and permitted use on-site. Storage facilities shall be entirely enclosed and shall be limited [o only areas within the parking shucmre B. Roof-mounted Satellite Dish Antennas. Only roof-mounted satellite dish antennas will be allowed when they comply with the Specific Plan's Development Standards and Section 19.22..030E of the City of Chula Vista Zoning Ordinances. C. Wireless Communication Facilities, Wireless communication facilities shall be allowed on rooftops and faces if connected from view and incorporated into azchitectttral design. -II: I';iasks.- `1'tie vse 6t`tetaiY-aYt~ i3[f6fni3ffonal-rct`osks sHaTl Yee allowed eXCepf witTiin tfie pubhc" tight-of=way. E. Outdoor Dining Areas. These accessory uses shall be allowed when they are associated with a permitted Restaurant Use on-site, provided the size and design of these uses comply with the requu~ements and conditions of the Specific Plan's Development Standards and all applicable health codes. Outdoor dining azeas will be encouraged and may occupy up to 50 percent of the total encompassed within each of the project's courtyards. No kitchen equipment shall be installed in the courtyards. However, the outdoor seating azeas may contain portable heaters, umbrellas, awnings, and canopies, F. Car Detailing. Mobile cat detailing will be allowed only within the project's parking garage in designated pazking spaces G. Other Uses.. Other accessory uses not listed in this section may be considered by the Director of the Redevelopment Agency subject to two week notification., 2..4 Temporary Uses All temporary uses must be reviewed and approved by the Director of the Redevelopment Agency subject to two weeks notification. 2.5 Prohibited Uses the following is a list of uses expressly prohibited on-site. A.. Car washes (except for car detailing) and gasoline sales; B. Industrial uses; C. Coin-operated Laundromats, coin-operated dry cleaners, laundry and/or dry cleaner plant operations D.. Manufacturing uses; E. Wazehousing and wholesale uses (not including discount or off=price stores which are classified as a retail use discussed above). Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-00-I I) 16 13-87 F,. Cazdrooms G, Auto pats and/or accessories sales, motor vehicle repair, service or installation of any auto and other vehicles related parts or accessories; and H. Arcades, dvtual reality, laser tag and related amusement businesses; and L, Drive-through fast food restaurants; J.. Adult businesses or adult bookstores K. Other uses deemed unacceptable by the Director of [he Redevelopment Agency. Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-00-I 1) n 13-88 4.6 Lighting Streetlights shall be placed approximately 75 feet apart and a minimum of two and one-half feet back of the curb face measured to the center of the pole shaft. Photo electric control units shall be used to operate the sheet light system, All other light sources within the project shall be shielded in such a manner that the light is directed away from the streets, adjoining properties, and the sky.. Illuminators shall be integrated within the azchitecture of the buildings and landscaping,. the intensity of light at the boundary of the Specific Plan shall not exceed seventy-five (75) foot lamberts from a source of reflected light. 4.7 Off Street Parking the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan shall provide a total of 1,229 parking spaces on-site, in accordance with the required pazking ration of one space per 300 s,f of floor area. This pazking ratio is recommended by the Urban Land Institute for shaed pazking projects, such as Gateway Chula Vista. the pazking analysis provided in Appendix C demonstrates that the project's mix of uses and operating hours will create a shared pazking demand that can be easily accommodated on-site. Specifically, the parking analysis considered the project's mix of uses, time of us, day of use, and seasonal demand. It determined that the projects highest hourly demand for pazking will be approximately 1,078 spaces at 2:00 p m. on weekdays. Given the Specific Plan requirement for a total of 1,229 pazking spaces, the project is expected to have an excess of 151 parking spaces during meet peak demand pazking periods.. In order to accommodate the 1,229 puking spaces on-site, the following specialized pazking space standard has been set for [he Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan. A.. Standard Spaces.. AlI standard parking spaces are required to be a minimum of 8.5 feet wide and 20 feet long,. B.. Compact Spaces.. All compact spaces are required to be a minimum of 8.5 feet and 15 feet long.. No more than 55% of the project's total parking spaces shall be compact spaces C.. Aisles. All aisles shall be required to be 21 feet wide. D. Off-Street Loading Spaces„ All commercial vehicles will use the off-sheet loading spaces to be provided within the street level of the parking strucrure, unmediately behind Building 2. the street level pazking shucture shall be a minimum of 15 feet clew in height to accommodate delivery bucks. Siting the off-street loading spaces within the pazking shucrure ensures that adjacent residences will not be adversely affected by noise and views commonly associate with such activities, Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-0O-I I) 30 13-89 4.8 Circulation The Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan shall have two ingress and egress points the primary access point shall be from H Street at the southwestem comer of the site, Both access pointsshall directly lead into the project's parking stucture. Ihus creating an internal circulation system, which mns behind the project's three primary buildings, between the southwestern and the northwestern comers of-the site via the parking shucttue.. Pedestrian circulation will enter the project site from the couttyazds and building enhances along H Street.. Primary building enhances aze from the second floor of the parking structure into major two story space. An additional access route is envisioned via a pedeshian bridge crossing H Street and linking one o_f the Gateway Chula Vista buildings to the future expansron of the South Bay Regional_ - - - _ ---- Center.. The pedestian bridge will directly access the second floor of the Westernmost building providing a ]ink between the project's offices and future courthouse expansion. It should be noted that the pedestian bridge is no[ a necessazy component of the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan and subject to further review by the City )f i[ becomes appazent [hat such a bridge is impractical or economically infeasible, the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan may be implemented without construction of the pedestian bridge.. Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-00-I I ) 31 13-90 Io aid the City in the cost of processing sewerage generated by the project, a sewage participation fee shall be collected for each phase of the project at the time of connection to the public sewer, The current fee is $2,220 00 per Equivalent Dwelling Units (EDU), the fee is prorated using the following formula for commercial projects based on Equivalent Fixture Units (EFUs)., (Iotal EFUs x 14 GPD)/ 265 GPD x $2,220 = Iotal Sewage Participation Fee Credits for existing sewer facilities shall be factored into the based upon chart provided in Appendix E. 5.4 Solid Waste the City of Chula Vista currently conhacts with Pacific Waste Inc to dispose of all solid waste materials within the City boundazies Pacific Waste has indicated that they can provide service to the Gateway Chula Vista project up to seven days a week, if desired. Solid waste generated by the City of Chula Vista is currently bucked to the Otay Landfill, which is estimated to have capacity to receive solid waste for the next 25 years, Currently, the City requues 50% of materials generated on-site to be diverted to a recycling center. Pacific Waste Inc. provides recycling services for cardboazd, paper', glass and aluminum Future tenants of the Gateway Chula Vista project shall be requved to contract with Pacific Waste or another private entity for their recycling needs.. 5.5 Streets the City of Chula Vista initiated a General Plan Amendment (GPA) concurrently with the processing of the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan. the purpose of the GPA was to reclassify H Street from a six lane collector to a four lane collector road in the Circulation Element. A haffic study was prepared for the GPA, which forecasted traffic volumes at buildout for the Specific Plan, the South Bay Regional Center expansion and the Scripps Hospital expansion. the study area included the following roadway segments: 1) H Sheet between Interstate 5 and 805; 2) Fourth Avenue between E Street and I Street; and 3) Ihird Avenue between F Street and .I Street. the study determined that the Gateway Chula Vista project would generate an additional 922 nips in the AM peaks and 1,032 trips in the PM peak hours, Ibis was a conservative estimate since the traffic study did not remove the existing hips associated with the uses currently on-site.. the haffic study concluded that "widening of H Street to six lanes I not required to accommodate the increase in traffic at project buildout" Ihis was based upon the determination that future peak period travel speeds in the study area will continue [o operate a[ Level of Service (LOS) C or better. hnpacts to the intersection of H Sheet and Ihird Avenue were identified, However, mitigation measures have been included in the Specific Plan's conditions of approval, which will reduce the naffic impacts to acceptable levels.. Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan (PCM-00-11) 34 13-91 6.0 IMPLEMENTATION 6.1 Introduction the actual conshuction envisioned in this Specific Plan shall be undertaken by the Developer.. the City of Chula Vista shall have the important role of ensuring that the development follows the provisions outlined in this plan. 6.2 Development Phasing Development of'the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan will be completed in tluee phases to ensure -constructiotrafnecessary-infrashucturearrd-atneni[ies-for-eaclrphaseartlxeprojecrprvgesses fhe Conceptual Phasing Plan (Exhibit 14) depicts the currently anticipated mazket demand for commercial development It is possible that a combination of the project's phases, such as Phase 1 and 2 of Phase 2 and 3, maybe conshuction simultaneously depending upon future mazket demand.. Listed below aze the key features of each phase: • Phase ]: Construct 102,329 sf building at southeastern comer of project site, Conshuct associated portion of pazking garage and ramps, with temporary walls at the eastern end to provide screening and a finished appearance. Construct permanent access driveways onto Ihird Avenue.. Conshuct [emporazy access driveway onto H Sheet west of building. Construct public tightof-way improvements only within Phase 1 boundary Construct and install comer plaza landscaping. • Phase 2: Conshuct 132,334 sf building on central portion of project site Conshuct associated portion of parking gazage and ramps, with temporary walls at the eastern end to provide screening and a finished appearance. Construct temporazy H Sheet driveway & remove temporary driveway, ConshucUinstallcouttyard landscaping between Buildings 1 and 2. • Phase 3: Conshuct 140,500 sf building at southeastern corner of project site. Conshuct associated portion of pazking garage and ramps. Consnuct permanent H Sheet driveway & remove temporary driveway. Conshuct public right-of--way improvements only within Phase 3 boundazy.. Conshucdinstall courryarazd landscaping between Buildings 2 and 3. 61 Development Phasing With the approval of the Gateway Chula Vista Specific and implementing permits, the developer shall be entitled to conshuct, lease and/or sell the three Class "A" commercial buildings described within this document, provided all of the Specific Plan regulations, standard, and gttidelines az'e Gateway Chula Vism Specific Plan (PCM-0O-I t) 3s 13-92 w I co w LarMscape 9ulfer r^t ~b x;',~ 4~_f ~i~ri~~:-~a7~,^4'3'a ~,^'~v'~~h1't~F~'~A-+ `x . _ _ ' _~ .. ~ _ g pp y p 7 ~' , Driveway c 2} ~ i ~ € 17 B ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ I ~ I f~ 0 e ti ~ ~ -5 ~ 4 I~ F <I B B ~ ~ ? Ii ~ ~ ~ 4 I I ~ ! j J70RYH TNt!'_ Aaaa&ng 1 s i ~ s ~ H4~!'r~IHG ~ Reserved .. , . i i~ ~..I ,~. ParMing - Thrap Sbry Estensbn ' ~. ~.';~: 77 yy qq pp ~y' g ~~ I~ BuIWln911ncorporated m[o ~, rX i t f i~ S E ~ , ~ i ~~~ i F~ 9 C~ ~ 6 B .~ ~ k °e` TF .9 n i P !~ Structure - I i "3kr 6emnd i!~~ ti "r ~ ` 3 k ~ J s, a -'~ 4 C ~" . I level 3 - I v ~~ '' -~ t CouM1 ani `id I ~'6=NItl~~rlli'9:~~~~E~I~~~ ~ I~~!1a~ll Idlir '~„ ~' y ~'~ - _. ~ ~ ~ o + ~i PMI4NGSTRUCTURE t ~ I~'~. I . PARKING 6TRUCTURE SVaet level Lsedup Zang - PARKNG STRUCTURE PNASEi I PHASE III Accossed horn Parktrg $ifuclute -:. PHASEII -~~ ~ r .~ ~ ~ t 1 ;y ~. I I Driveway -^. with Roof TOp la,akraPe~ yy s`:4g .I p s. :.r rv f ~ ~ ;9' i I - ^,',"~f."-,: 1 Accessing ~~ ~ ~ .~~a ... ~ ~ I t `/~ I ~ L a S `_ _~ d ~ i i 6 ; ~ ~ Ii tt ~ r ~ ~ ll.~"~r x~l ~ t ~ I ( i Gerrard I 1; I ~! I I ~ w I _~~ ~ f _ ~ I~' a i a ~ ~ i i~ T,.~- ,. ..I ~' ~ _ ; '' ~lc~ ' ~ I ~~ ~ ~ 'ill i _ "u C~y' Y S" Ii~ y ~ ~_ 7=. I' = 1: X. _ „c _ -- :~ ~ ~. .Ek! ~ :'~. ~, ~;rl .~. ~-F~;.. r.~ r.,_:.: L*Jv.b• d3. ..iFat ic'y` i ~,~.!_ 4~i; h "..~; .~ .'.E!:-: ~... _. _... Corner Plaza 'Vale) Parkkg DrgfGtt - -COUr~yaM ' """"" "H" STREET ~. '"Possible Pedesblan ~' Bridge linking BuilGnp 3 to South 8av Regional ,. _"_-.,.,,,. _, Center 6panswn _.. .-..-.. i ~..__-. Z.._.._. _..-_-..- ..-__.._ ._.._.. _. _. - _. -.._.__.. .-._-_- .._..-.._ ..-...~__ n i I I j i ~ w"m Development Concopt Plan t,~f;rfiiib/! 6 W H Street Elevation C-~hib!! T GATEWAY CHULA VISTA APPENDIX C SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS 4Ju1-09 T~kJo a - Prniart Drnpram fEatiStine Gateway I and II + Surface lotl Offiu 152818 sghor Gross area Total Square Feel 0.63 Ne[Pen[able Factor 126,839 sq. k. of GlA 152818 Offire Retail 33,825 sgft of Gross irea 33,825 Retail 0.63 Ne[Rentable Fxtor 28.075 iq.Rdf GIA 0,020 Resaurant ResauranY 8020 sp h of Gross area 400 Edu<atlonal 0.95 Net Rentable Factor ].619 sp. k. of GfA 23x,663 TOtal Eduntional 40,1100 sq R. pf Grou area 0.83 Net Rentable Factor 33,200 sPk: of GlA 234,663 sq. k. Tpbl Gross Area 195,733 sq. k. TptaI GLA Tattle 0. - Paak Darkine Demands Per Use TVPe: Ofnce 33 spaces per 1.000 sq kGIA On Weekdays al9 spaces 0.5 s aces per 1,000 ra. k. GIA on Saturd 63 spies Reml ____3.g eaLaces~10005Rk GW OO Weekdays _._ ..._ ._._.19.Z.}RaCAS.__. 4.OS alts er1,000s .RGUOn Saturtla ]32 saces pertaurant 20 spaces per1000 sq.R GIA On Weekdays ]52 spaces 20 s aces er 1,000 zq. h. GW on Saturdays ts2 spaces Educational 0215paces per student (fiW students/60 staff)Weektlays 137 spaces O spaces per studen[(6005tuden[s/50 sta(fl Weekdays spaces Ta61e C- Summary of Shared Peak Parking Demands: Parking Provided' Parking Reqd Parking Scenario Under Parked Over Parketl " 981 ':699 Ni hlst HOURLY demand 282 690' Xighesf SEASONAL demand 291 Exlrting Parking Cakulatlgn Existing Gateway) Parking Sbucture 372 barking Spaces Existing Gateway ll Parking semcture 552 Parking Spaces Existing Surface Parking LOt lluture Gateway 111 site) 57 Parking Spaces Total 981 Existing Parking sPacO Analysis The project s peak parking demands were first calculated for the three use types lORke, Retail & Res[apran[) based on the Urban Lantl Institute INLI) net rentable fxMrs (Table A) and demand ratios (Table B) The Educa[Ipnal Use demantl was based on 600 enrolletl students+50 soh for a mtal of fi60 The 650 was mupiplied x 21 Average Peak Period Parking Demand per page 330 of[he ITE Parking G¢neralipn Manual, 3rtl Etlitlon 6ince theproject'suses have vari¢d operating charec[erhtirs and hours. the mtal parking demands were [hen tletttminetl using [he Utl shared parking ratios far hi8hest hourly and seasonal tlemantls for [he Offce Retail and Restaurant uses The Eduwtionai Use used the ITE Weekday Data for Junior/Community College Pemen[pf Peak Periotl parking data TableCShows Mai the Pre)eci's mu of uses createsaparking scenadp retailing in an excessaR82 parking spaces atlhe highes[hourly demand lWeekdays:2:00 PMI and an excess of 291 spans 6pmvided at the highest seasonal demand period (Decemher; W eekdays; 2'00 PM) The tables pnthe/ollewing pages provide[he calculadons for these parking demands TableDdemonstrates that the pmjeR's fpur use types will have staggered hlghesl hourly demand periods This s[aggenng provides the opportvniry for Use proJectm zuccessfuily iuncdon with a total of 981 parking spaces and demonrtratei that the Existing project provides atlaqua[e partying for Me proposed uses 13-95 Table D - Hourly Demand Percentages Per Use type Nour of Off ce R etail Pesb urant Edotat ional Day Week Sat Week Sat. weeF Sat. week Sat. 6:00 AM 3% D% 0% 0% 0% O% 0% O% ]:00 AM 20% 30% B% 30X 2% 2% ]% 0% 8:00 AM 63% fi0% 18% 30% 5% 3% 54% 0% 9:Dp AM 93% eo% 43% 30% 303: 6% B2% 0% 30:40 AM IOO% 80% 68% 45% 30% 8% 100% O% 31:00 AM '300% 100% 8]% Ti% 30% 30% ]8% 0% 32 noon 90% 100% W% 86% 60% 30% ]b% 0% 1:00 PM 90% 80% 1130% 95% ]0% 46% ]5% O% i:00 PM 9]% 60% 9]% 100% fi0% 45% R% 0% 3:00 PM 93% 40% 95X IW% 60% 45% 63% 0% 4:00 PM 77% 40% 8]% 909: 60% 45% 48% 0% 5:00 PM 4]% 20% ]9% ]5% ]0% 60% S6% 0% 6:00 PM 23% 20% 82% fi5% 90X 90% 69% 0% ]:00 PM ]% 20% 89% 60X ' 100% 95% 69% 0% _ 5:00'PM -__...a%. ___.20% -_.___~%. ____.._SS% -I00% L0X _-0% _ _--0% 9:00 PM 3Y. 0% 61% 40% lOD% 100% 0% 0% 10:00 PM 3% 0% 32% 36% 90% 96% 0% . 0% 11:00 PM 0% 0% 13% 13% ]0% 85% 096 0% 32 mid. 0% 0% 0% 0% 5096 ]o'h D% O% Table E - Number of Spaces Required based upon Peak Demand and Hourly Percentages Hour of pay Of Week &e Sat Petafl Week Sa[. Rest Week aurant Sat Educa Week tlanal Sat. Totals Week Sac 6:00 AM 13 - 13 ]:00 AM 80 33 9 34 3 3 10 105 49 BMW AM 264 38 39 ]3 8 5 ]4 364 50 9:00 AM 389 53 45 34 15 9 112 561 94 10:00 AM 419 51 )3 91 30 13 13] 658 113 11:00 AM 419 63 93 82 46 15 106 - 664 161 12 noon 3]] 63 103 95 )6 46 100 - 660 205 1:00 PM 3]] 51 10] 10] 102 69 103 692 226 2:00 PM 406 38 103 312 91 69 98 - 699 - 319 390 PM 389 25 101 112 91 69 86 - 668 206 4:00 PM 322 25 93 1D1 )6 69 fib 55] 195 $:Dp PM 19] 13 84 60 1W 93 ]6 464 188 6:00 PM 96 33 SJ T3 13] ]3] 96 415 223 ]:00 PM 29 ]3 95 6] 152 145 94 3]1 225 8:00 PM 29 13 93 62 152 151 2]4 22] 9:00 PM 13 65 49 152 152 230 19] 10:00 PM 13 34 43 13] ]45 184 SS] 11:00 PM 14 15 lOJ 130 121 344 12 mltl. >6 10) ]6 30] Spaces needed to meet HIGHEST hourly Demantl 699 13-96 Table F -Seasonal Percentages Per Use type Mon[h ORCe Re[ail Restaurant Educatlon January 100% 66% BO% 100% february 100% 65% 76% 100% March 100% 70% 9096 100% April 100% ]O% 90% 100% M 100% ]0% 96% ]00% June lOd% ]5% 100% ]00% lul 100% ]5% 100% 300% Augus[ 300% ]5% g6% 100% Se tember 300% JS% BOX 100% October 100% 76% 80% 100% November 100% 80% 80% 1G0% December -100% 100% 90% 1W% Spaces Required based upon 2 PM Peak and Seasonal Percerrtages Spaces Required based upon 1 PM Peak and Seasonal Percentages Man[h O(flce Re[aIl Restaurzn[ Educaton Totals Monty Office Retail Rertaurant Education Totals anal ary -- - Q06 ----6T ~~~---73" ~-~-~--96 ----~-66S lama -- -37]~ 6S 8S 103 X34 Fehruary 406 6] 69 98 640 Febuary 3T1 69 80 102 628 Marrh 40fi 72 ffi 98 659 March 3T] ]fi 96 102 650 peril 406 R 82 98 659 Aril 37] ]5 96 102 fi50 May 406 >2 8J 98 664 May 3P ]5 301 102 655 June 606 78 91 98 6]3 June 37] 80 10J SW 666 July 406 78 93 98 6l3 Ju 3A 80 30) llII 666 Au ust 406 78 ]6 98 660 Au ust 3P 80 91 102 650 September 406 )B ]3 98 655 Se [ember 3A 80 85 102 664 Ottaber 606 78 73 98 655 October 37] 80 85 1@ 644 November 406 83 ]3 98 fifi0 November 3]] 85 85 102 650 December... ...406. -.- 103 8Y 98 690: December 3A 10] 9fi 102 682 Spaces Required based upon I1 AM Peak and Seasonal Percentages Month Office Redil Restaurant Education Totals lanuary 439 fi0 3] 106 622 Spaces Required based upon SO AM Peak and Seasonal Percentages Month ONfice Retail Resauant Educatlon Totals lama 419 47 24 137 62J February 419 60 34 106 620 February 419 47 23 33] 625 Mamh 419 65 41 106 631 March 414 51 Z] 33] 633 April 419 65 41 106 63] April 419 51 2] 137 633 May 419 65 43 306 633 May 439 61 29 137 fi35 June 419 ]0 d6 106 640 June 419 54 30 13] 640 July 619 ]0 46 106 640 lul 419 54 30 13J 640 August 419 ]0 39 106 fi34 August 419 54 26 137 635 September 619 ]0 37 10fi 631 September 619 56 24 13) 634 October 419 ]0 37 106 631 October 419 56 24 137 634 November 419 74 37 106 636 November 419 58 14 137 637 December 419 93 41 106 659 December 419 ]3 2> 337 655 Spaces needetl[o meet NIGNEST hourly and seasonal demand 690 13-97 GATEWAY CHULA VISTA SHARED PARKING ANALYSIS Table A - Project Program (Gateway I, II and III) APPENDIX C 9-1u1-09 Offce 280 J58 5q ft of Gross area Total Square feet 0.83 Net Rentable factor 233,029 sq. h. pf GfA 280.756 Office Retail 46385 sq k. of Gross area 46385 Retail 0.83 Net Rentable Pattor 38,500 sq.ft_of GlA' 8020 Restaurant Restaurant 8,020 sq. k of Gross am 4000 Educational 0.95 Net Rentable Factor 7,619sq. fL Of GtA 375,163 Total Eduotiorral 40.000 sq f[ of Gross area 0.83 Net Rentable Fattor 33,200sq: ft. diGW 375,163 sq. }t. Total Gross Area 312,348 sq. ft Total GlA Table B -Peak Parking Demands per Use Type: Office 33 spaces per 1,000 Sq. k GIA On Weekdays ]fig spaces - -- ----0.5-s aces ert;00PsQ-/rUt4-omSaturtlays" '"'__ -- '-"IITSpaces Rebil 38 spa<esper10005gftGIA On Weekdays lab spaces 4.0 spaces per 1,000 s . k. GLA on Saturtla s 154 spaces Restaurant 20 spaces per1000sq ft GLAOn Weekdays 152 spaces 20 spaces er S,000S .fc GW on Saturdays 152 spaces Educational 021 spaces per student (600 students/SOStaff)WeekdaYS 337 spaces O spaces per student 1600 students/50 staff) Weekdays spaces Table C - Summary of Shared Peak Parking Demands: Parking Provided' Parking Reqd Parking Scenario Under Parked Over Parked 1,229 .1,078. Highest HOURLY demand 151 ' 1,068 Highest SEASONAL tlemand 161 Existing ParMng Calculation: Exising Gateway I Parking Structure Existing Gateway II Parking Structure Gateway III Parking Structure Total Analysis: 3J2 Parking Spaces 552 Parking Spaces 305 Parking Spaces 1,224' Existing Parking 8pa<¢s The profect's peak parking demands were first calmlated for the three use types IOfR[e, Retail & Resbuantl based on the Urban Land lnsUtute(UUJ netrentable facmrs (cable Al and demand ratios (iahle B) The Educational USe demand was based on 600 enrolled students+SOStaff for a fatal of 650 The 650 was multlplletl x 21 Average Peak Period Parking Demand per page 130 ofthe lTE Parking Generation Manual, 3rd Ed'dion Sincethe proiett's uses have varied operating charac[eriztics and hours, the [alai parking demands were then determined using the VU shared parking ratios for highest hourly and seasonal demands farihe Office. Retail and Restaurant uses The Educatlpnal USe used the RE Weekday Data for lunlor/Community College Percent of Peak Period parking data Table C shows that the ProJect's mix of uses creaces a parking scenario resulting in an excessgf 151 parkingspaces at the highesthourlydemand (Weekdays, 2:00 PM) and an excess of 161 spaces is provided at the highest seasonal demand pedod (December; Weekdays; 2:00 PM) The tablesonthefollowing pages provide ffiecai<ulations for these parkingdemands TableD demonstrates that the proletts four use types will have staggered highest houdy demand periods. This staggering provides [he opportunity for the proJett to su¢essfully function with a total of 1,229 parting spaces and demonstrates that the Gatyeway Chula Vlrta Specific Plan standard of one parking space per every 300 square feet of floor area Is acceptable A shared parking analysis done (ar the exisdng Gateway I & II phazes determined that an excess of 282 spas is provided during the highest houdy demand (Weekdays; 2:00 PM) and an excess of 391 spaces was provided aY the highest seasonal demand period (December; Weekdays; 2:00 PM) Duringconstmction ofthe Gateway 111 Office building and parking structure 57 surface parkingspaces used in the analysis will be lost Therefore. during construction of Gateway 111 an excess of 225 spaces will be provided at [he highest hourly tlemand period and an excess of 23a spaces will be provided during the highest seasonal demand period 13-98 Table D -Hourly Demand Percentages Per Use Type Hour of Office Re tail Resta urant Educat ional Day Week Sat Week Sat Week Sat. Week Sat. 6:OOAM 3% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% ]:00 AM 20% 20% 8% 30% 2% 2% ]% 0% B:OOAM 63% 60% 38% 10% 6% 3% 59% 0% 9:OOAM 93% 8D% 42% 30% 30% 6% 82% 0% 10:00 AM 100% 80% 68% 45% 20% 8% 10076 0% 11:00 AM 10095 100% 8]% 73% 30% 10% ]8% 0% 12 noon 90% 100% 97% 86% 50% 30% ]6% 076 S:OOPM 9t]% 80% Y00% 95% 70% 45% 75% D% 2:00 PM 97% 60% 9]% 100% 60% 45% 72% 0% 390 PM 93% 40% 95% 100% 60% 45% 63% trio 4:00 PM ]]% 40% 87°,6 90% 50% 45% 48% 0% 5:00 PM 47% 20% ]9% 75% 70% 60% 56% 0% 6:00 PM 23% _..... _-. 2QK -__--82% _..._ 55% -__9Q% .._ - _.._90% _-._69% ___ -_A% ]:OOPM 7% 20% 89% 60% - 100% 95% 69% 0% R:00 PM ]% 20% 87% 55% '100% 100% D% 0% 9:00 PM 3% 036 61% 40% 100% 100% OY. 0% 10:00 PM 3% 0% 32% 38% 90% 95% 0% 0% 11:00 PM 0% 0% 13% 13% ]0% 85% 0% 0% 12 mid. OY. O% 0% 0% 50% ]0% 0% 0% Table E - Number of Spaces Required based upon Peak Demand and Hourly Percentages Hour of Office R etail Resta urant Educa tional Totals Day Week Sat Week Sat. Week Sat Week Sat Week Sat. 6:00 AM 23 - ~ - 7:OOAM 154 23 12 46 3 3 10 - 178 73 8:00 AM 484 70 Z6 15 8 5 74 592 90 9:00 AM 715 93 61 46 15 9 132 904 149 10:00 AM 769 93 99 69 30 12 13] - 1,035 1]5 11:00 AM ]69 117 127 112 46 15 106 3,048 244 12 noon 692 11] 142 131 ]6 46 104 1,014 293 I:00 PM 692 93 146 146 107 69 102 - 1,04] 308 2:00 PM 74fi 70 142 154. 91' 69 98' 1,078 292 3:00 PM ]35 4] 139 154 91 69 86 1,032 269 4:00 PM 592 47 327 339 76 69 66 861 254 5:00 PM 361 ]3 llfi 115 107 91 ]6 660 230 6:00 PM iT7 23 120 100 13] 137 94 - 528 2fi1 ]:00 PM 59 23 130 92 152 345 94 - 431 260 $9D PM 54 23 12] SS 152 152 333 260 9:00 PM 23 89 62 152 152 265 214 10:00 PM 23 47 59 137 145 - 207 203 11:00 PM 19 20 SO] 130 - 126 150 12 mid. 76 107 - ]6 107 Spaces needed to meet HIGHEST hourly Demand 1,078 13-99 Table F • Seasonal Percentages Per Use Type Month Office Reail Resaurant Eduction January 100% 65% 80% 100% February 100% 69% ]9% 10096 March 100% 70% 90% 100% April 100% 70% 90% 100% May 100% 70% 99% 100% June 100% ]6% 100% 100% July 100% 76% 100% 100% Au ust 100% 76% 8$% 100% September ]00% 79% 80% 100% October 100% 75% 80% 100% November 100% 80% BO% 100% December 100% 100% 90% 100% Spaces Required based upon 2 PM Peak and Seasonal Percentages Month Office Retail Restaurant Education Tonls Spaces Required based upon 1 PM Peak and Se_asonalPercentages Month Office Renil Remurant Eduction Totals lanua 746 92 73 98 1,010 January 692 95 85 102 975 February 746 92 69 98 1,005 February 692 96 BO 102 970 March 746 99 62 98 1.026 March 692 102 96 102 993 April 746 99 82 98 1,026 April 692 102 96 102 993 May 746 99 87 98 1,030 Ma 692 102 101 I@ 998 lone 746 106 91 98 1,042 one 692 110 107 102 1,011 July 746 106 91 98 1,042 lu1Y 692 110 307 102 1,011 August September October 746 746 746 106 106 106 78 ]3 73 98 98 98 3,028 1,024 1,024 August Se [ember October 692 692 692 110 110 110 91 85 fly 102 1@ 102 995 990 990 November 746 114 ]3 96 1,031 November 692 117 85 302 997 December 746 - '142: - 82 98 ' -1;068 December 692 146 96 102 1,037 Spaces Required based upon 11 AM Peak and Seasonal Percentages Spaces Required based upon 10 AM Peak and Seasonal Percentages Month Office Retail Restaurant Educhon Tonls Month office Retail Resnunnt EdpcatlOn Tonls January 769 63 37 106 995 lanuar 769 65 24 137 995 fehrua ]69 83 34 lOfi 992 Februa 7fi9 65 23 137 993 March 769 89 41 106 1,006 March 769 70 27 337 1,003 A ril 769 89 41 106 1.006 Aril ]69 70 27 137 1,003 May 769 89 43 106 1,008 May 769 70 29 13] 1,004 one 769 95 46 106 1,017 one 769 ]S 30 137 1,011 ul 769 95 46 106 1,017 July 769 76 30 137 1,011 August 769 95 39 106 1,030 August 769 78 26 137 1,006 September 769 95 37 106 1,007 September 769 76 24 13] 1,004 October ]69 95 37 106 1,007 October 769 ]5 24 137 I,OC4 November 769 102 37 106 1,014 November 769 80 2a 137 1,009 December 769 127 41 106 1,094 December 769 99 2] 137 1,032 Spaces needed to meet HIGHEST hourly and seasonal demand 1,068 13-100 "'I ~'-' \~ - mv\ g-_\\-o,,\ ~ After reviewing the proposed amendment Suggest the parking requirement for the vocational school is to low and that staff revaluate the requirement and determine a Chula Vista standard for technical school use before setting a precedent. Suggest that a cap be put on for a change of use of over 20% from this amendment, which would allow council input on a change of use that could change the character of the project and protect the public investment. Suggest that redevelopment projects are looked at from a financial standpoint, to see how they are doing to make the best use of taxpayer funds, c--- ,~e~1) Comparison of Parking Requirements for Trade Schools: Chula Vista Gatcway Medical Trade School Use 600 students / 50 staff /40,000 GSF City Minimum Required Parkin!! Rate Total Number Parkin!! Spaces Rcquired for Gatewav Trade School Use Chula Vista - .21 spaces per total population 137 Gateway, using ITE Manual San Diego County City of San Diego Within a transit area: 85% of I per 510 student at maximum occupancy Escondido I space for each 1.5 students + I space 450 for each faculty member California South Gate 3 per school + I for each student 603 + employee school is designed to accommodate parking (does NOT include employee parking) Sacramento I space oer 3 persons 217 Shasta County I space per 3 students + I space per 250 employee Outside California Springdale, AK I space for each 300 sq. ft. or I per 4 ISO students, whichever is greater Mohave County, AZ 1 space for each 2 students 300 Salt Lake City I space per 1 employee plus I space 250 Redevelopment Corp. for each 3 students based Hickory, NC .33 spaces ner student + I per staff 248 Arlington, Mass. I space for each 200 sq. ft. of gross 200 floor area Miami County, KS I space for each faculty member + I 250 for each 3 students Niagara Falls, NY J space per staff member + .75 spaces 500 ner student Madison, WI I space for each 2 employees + I for 145 each 5 students Ft. Smith, Arkansas 1 per employee + I per each 3 250 students Blue Springs, MO I per 3 students + .5 per faculty 225 Hickory, NC .33 per student + 1 per staff 248 Oklahoma City, OK 1 space ner 2 classroom seats 300 San Antonio, TX 1 per 200 Sq. ft. 200 Glenville, NY' I per 2 students 300 . Source: "Parking Standards," published by American Planning Association Prepared by Patricia Aguilar, President Crossroads II 10 Aug. 2009 Gateway Tax Increment Approximate Redevelopment Agcncy Investment in project to datc: $5.3 Million Year Orig Projections Orig Projections London Group Shortfall 2000 2000 2009 Orig Projcctions Keyser Marston Less Phase III vs Table I-A Table I-a London Analysis Current 1:otal-' Current Total Current I.otaJ.. Current '[otgl " Year Year Year Ycar 2000 2001 2002 2003 170,000 170,000 170,000 170,000 155,444 155,444 14,556 14,556 2004 174,000 344,000 174,000 344,000 243,591 399,035 -69,591 -55,035 2005 390,278 734,278 390,278 734,278 54,013 453,048 336,265 281,320 2006 548,138 1,282,416 398,962 1,132,240 284,534 737,582 263,604 544,834 2007 559,321 1,841,737 407,202 1,540,442 553,517 1,291,099 5,804 550,638 2008 569,545 2,411,282 414,443 1,954,885 441,533 1,732,632 128,012 678,638 2009 580,819,2,992,.101 422,695 2,377,580 348,338 2,080;970 232,481 911,131 .. "" 2010 593,135 3,585,236 431,945 2,809,529 476,812 2,557,782 116,323 1,027,454 2011 Notc: Approximately 60% of tax increment funds are rctained by the Agency 20% are set aside for affordable housing 20% are used for a legislatcd settlement for other agencies .- Original Tax Increment Projections by Keyser Marston For the city in 2000 .'" !"'!.' -.",~r'< ... '. KEYSER MARSTON ASSOCIATES INC. 500 SOUTH GRAND AVENUE, SUITE 1480 Los ANGELES, CALIFORNIA 90071 PHONE: 213/622-8095 fAX: 2131622-5204 WEe SITE: WWW.KMAINC.COM ~-'7~.;: "-""- .: ',,',-~. ADVfSORS IN: REAL ESTATE REDEVELOP~E~T AFFORDABLE HOUSING ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT FISCAL IMPACT INFRASTRUCTURE FINANCE V ALUATION AND LITIGATION SUPPORT i I , t L L~6 -~/ Los Ange:les Calvin E. Hollis, II Kathleen'H. Head James A. Rabe MEMORANDUM San Diego Gerald M, Trimble Robert], Wetmore Paul C. Marra From: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. S-lN FRANc/seD A. Jerry Keyser Timothy C. Kelly Kate Earle Funk Denise E. Conley Debbie M. Kern Martha:-i. Pacbrd To: Mr. Byron Estes, Redevelopment Coordinator City of Chula Vista Date: March 3, 2000 Subject: Gateway Chula Vista Project - Response to Comments Based on your February 4, 2000 Gateway Chula Vista Project comment letter, Keyser Marston Associates, Inc (KMA) is providing the following responses to your to your questions which are as follows: . Do the property tax increment projections reflect actual assessment procedures that San Diego County is likely to use with a project of this nature? What are the differences? . City contribution towards developer off-site improvements, $400,000 or $300,000? Property Tax Increment Calculation KMA prepared the property tax increment projections based on the capitalized value of the project. We believe that this method of projecting property tax increment revenues reflects the actual assessment procedures that the County of San Diego is likely to use with a project of this nature. It is conceivable however; that the County of San Diego may use the project development cost method to project property tax increment revenues generated by the project. As shown in Table 1A based on the capitalized value approach to projecting property tax increment revenues, the net present value of the tax increment generated by project would be $5,887,000 which includes the 20% set a side and $4,711,000 less the 20% set a side. 0003006.CV:WDL:emm 11216.001.005 To: , Subject: Mr. Byron Estes, Redevelopment Coordinator Gateway Chula Vista Project - Response to Comments March 3, 2000 Page 2 Assuming expansion of the redevelopment area the project could generate $7,180,000 which includes the 20% set a side and $5,745,000 less the 20% set a side. As shown in Table 1 B, based on the project development cost approach to projecting property tax increment revenues, the net present value of the tax increment generated by project would be $5,580,000 which includes the 20% set a side and $4,463,000 less the 20% set a side. Assuming expansion of the redevelopment area the project could generate $6,832,000 which includes the 20% set a side and $5,464,000 less the 20% set a side. As shown in Table 2, use of the project development cost approach to project property tax increment revenues would result in a small decrease in property tax increment generated by the project. Under the existing project area scenario the decrease would ral)ge from $248,000 to $307,000 without and with the 20% set a side. Under the expanded project area scenario the decrease in property tax increment would range $281,00 to $348,000 without and with the 20% set a side. Contribution to Off-site Improvements With regard to the City's contribution to the Developer off-site improvements, KMA has revised the 33433 and the Reuse Reports to refiect the $300,000 cap on the City's contribution to off- site costs. I I l 0003006.CV:WDl:emm 11216.001.005 " TABLE 1A PROPERTY TAX INCREMENT REVENUES GATEWAY GHULA VISTA CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA ADDITIONAL PROPERTY TAX INCREMENT PROPERTY T fJ.Y.. INCREMENT REVENUES TOTAL T etal Rev. BASED ON EXPANSION OF REDEVELOPMENT AREA TOTAL Total Rev. No. PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 REVENUES less 20% PHAS E 2 PHASE 3 TOTAL REVENUES less 20% 1 $170,000 $0 $0 $170,000 $136,000 $0 $0 $0 $170,000 $136.000 2 174,000 0 0 174,000 139,000 0 0 0 174,000 139,000 3 177,000 202,000 0 379,000 304,000 11,728 0 11,726 390,728 313,382 4 181,000 206,000 52,000 439,000 352,000 11,963 97,176 109,138 548,138 439,311 5 185,000 210,000 53,000 448,000 358,000 12,202 99,119 111,321 559,321 447,057 6 188,000 214,000 54,000 456,000 364,000 12,446 101,102 113,548 569,548 454,838 7 192,000 218,000 55,000 465,000 372,000 12,695 103,124 115,819 580,819 464,655 8 196,000 223,000 56,000 475,000 380,000 12,949 105,186 118,135 593,135 474,508 9 200,000 227,000 57,000 484,000 388,000 13,208 107,290 120,498 604,49~ 484,398 10 204,000 232,000 58,000 494,000 395,000 13,472 109,436 122,908 616,908 493,326 11 208,000 236,000 59,000 503,000 402,000 13,674 111,077 124,751 627,751 501,801 12 212,000 241,000 60,000 513,000 411,000 13,880 112,752 126,632 639,632 512,305 13 216,000 246,000 62,000 524,000 420,000 14,090 114,460 128,550 652,550 522,840 14 221,000 251,000 63,000 535,000 428,000 14,305 116,202 130,506 665,506 532,405 15 225,000 256,000 64,000 545,000 436,000 14,523 117,979 132,502 677,502 542,002 16 229,000 261,000 65,000 555,000 444,000 14,747 119,791 134,537 689,537 551,630 17 234,000 266,000 67,000 567,000 454,000 14,974 121,640 136,614 703,614 563,291 18 239,000 271,000 68,000 578,000 462,000 15,206 123,525 138,731 716,731 572,985 19 243,000 277,pOO 69,000 589,000 471,000 15,443 125.448 140,891 729,891 583,713 20 248,000 282,000 71,000 601,000 481,000 15,684 127,410 143,095 744,095 595.476 21 253,000 288,000 72,000 613,000 490,000 15,931 129.411 145,342 758,342 606,274 22 258,000 294,000 74,000 626,000 500,000 16,182 131,452 147,634 773,634 618,108 23 264,000 300,000 75,000 639,000 511,000 16.438 133,534 149,973 788,973 630,978 24 269,000 306,000 77,000 652,000 522,000 16,700 135,658 152,357 804,357 643,886 25 274,000 312,000 78,000 664,000 531,000 16,966 137,824 154,790 818,790 654,832 NPV of Prop. TI @ 6.0% - All Phases (Including 20% set a side) 15,887,000 NPV of Prop. TI @ 6.0% - All Phases (Including 20% set a sIde) 17,180,000 NPV of Prop. TI @ 6.0% - All Phases (Less 20% set a side) $4,711,000 NPV of Prop. TI @6.0% - All Phases (Less 20% set a side) $5,745,000 Prepared By: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc File Name: I:\wlauderdale\ chrismatt7; debt service; WOL; 2/14/00 " TABLE 18 PROPERTY TAX INCREMENT REVENUES GATEWAY GHULA VISTA CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA ADDJTlONAL PROPERTY TAX INCREMENT PROPERTY TAX INCREMENT REVENUES TOTAL Total Rev. BASED ON EXPANSION OF REDEVELOPMENT AREA TOTAL Total Rev. No. PHASE 1 PHASE 2 PHASE 3 REVENUES Less 20% PHASE 2 PHASE 3 TOTAL REVENUES Less 20"1. 1 $168.000 $0 $0 $168,000 $134.000 $0 $0 $0 $168,000 $134,000 2 171,000 0 0 171,000 137,000 0 0 0 171,000 137,000 3 175,000 185,000 0 360,000 288,000 10,448 0 10,448 370,448 296,359 4 178,000 188,000 48,000 414,000 330,000 10,657 95,101 105,758 519,758 414,606 5 182,000 192,000 49,000 423,000 339,000 10,870 97,003 107,873 530,873 425.299 6 185,000 196,000 50,000 431 ,ODD 345,000 11.088 98,943 110,031 541,031 433,024 7 189,000 200,000 51,000 440,000 352,000 11,310 100,922 112,231 552,231 441,785 8 193,000 204,000 52,000 449,000 359,000 11,536 102,940 114,476 563A76 450,581 9 197,000 208,000 53,000 458,000 366,000 11,767 104,999 116,765 574,765 459,412 10 200,000 212,000 54,000 466,000 373,000 12,002 107,099 119,101 585,101 468,281 11 204,000 216,000 55,000 475,000 380,000 12,182 108,705 120,887 . 595,887 476,710 12 209,000 221,000 56,000 486,000 389,000 12,365 110,344 122.709 608,709 487,168 13 213,000 225,000 57,000 495,000 396,000 12,553 112,015 124,568 619,568 495,654 14 217,000 230,000 58,000 505,000 404,000 12,744 113,720 126,464 631,464 505,171 15 221,000 234,000 60,000 515,000 412,000 12,939 115,459 128,398 643,398 514,718 16 226,000 239,000 61,000 526,000 421,000 13,137 117,233 130,370 656,370 525,296 17 230,000 244,000 62,000 536,000 429,000 13,340 119,042 132,382 668,382 534,906 18 235,000 249,000 63,000 547,000 437,000 13,547 120,887 134.434 681 ,434 544,547 19 240,000 254,000 65,000 559,000 447,000 13,758 122,769 136,527 695,527 556,222 20 244,000 259,000 66,000 569,000 455,000 13,973 124,689 138,662 707,662 565,930 21 249,000 264,000 67,000 580,000 464,000 14,193 126,648 140,840 720,840 576,672 22 254,000 269,000 69,000 592,000 473,000 14.416 128,645 143,061 735,061 587,449 23 259,000 274,000 70,000 603,000 482,000 14,645 130,683 145,327 748,327 598,262 24 265,000 280,000 71,000 616,000 493,000 14,878 132,761 147,638 763,638 611,111 25 270,000 285,000 73,000 628,000 502,000 15,115 134,880 149,996 777,996 621,996 NPV of Prop. TI @ 6.0% - All Phases (Including 20% set a side) $5,580,000 NPV of Prop. TI @ 6.0% - All Phases Oncluding 20% set a side) $6,832,000 NPV of Prop. TI @6.0% . All Phases (Less 20oA. set a side) $4,463,000 NPV of Prop. TI @ 6.0% - All Phases (Less 20% set a side) $5,464,000 Prepared By' Keyser Marston Associates, Inc_ File Name: 1:\w1auderdale\ chrisma1l9; debl service: WDl, 2/29/00 " TABLE 2 CAPITALIZED VALUE vs. DEVELOPMENT COSTS APPROACH TO PROJECTING TAX INCREMENT GATEWAY CHULA VISTA CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA Capitalized Value Development Costs Approach Approach Difference Project Area (Plus 20% set a side) $5,887,000 $5,580,000 $307,000 Project Area (Less 20% set a side) $4,711,000 $4,463,000 $248,000 ,. Expanded Project Area (Plus 20% set a side) $7,180,000 $6,832,000 $348,000 Expanded Project Area (Less 20% set a side) $5,745,000 $5,464,000 $281,000 Prepared By: Keyser Marston Associates, Inc. Filename: I:\wlauderdale\ TI Method Comparison; Comparison; 2/28/00; WDL GATEWAY CHULA VISTA Project: Including Anchor Tenant Occupied SF. Absorption K Properly Tax SunnnarP 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 ,iA1L \ \At I.IIULe\ VIJ 1,\ 1 'Total SF 100,334 100,334 100,33! 100.334 100,334 100,334 100,334 IO0,334 100,334 100,334 100,334 100,334 Occupied SF 70,175 97,899 97,599 97,899 97,899 97,899 97,899 97,899 97,899 97,899 97,899 _ 97,899 Vacant Space 30,159 2,435 2,435 2,435 2,435 2,435 2,435 2,435 2,435 2,435 2,435 2,435 Occupied °G 70 °6 98% 98% 98% 98% 9S% 98% 98% 98% 98% 9S% 98% Total SF Absorbed 27,724 - - - - - - - - - " % of Vacant Space Absorped $2,96 93% 60% 50% $330 $3.52 Cap Rae 773 °'0 775% 775% 775% 7.75% CPI Adjustment for Rents 1 000 1.000 1.035 1.071 1.109 1.148 1.188 1.229 1.272 1.317 1.363 1.411 Av Monthly Rent /SF(Net) $177 $1,94 $2.01 S2 08 $2 -16 $223 $2.31 $2.39 5247 $256 $2.65 $2.74 Cap Rate 775% 775% 775%'o 5.75% 775% 775% 775% 775% 775% 775% 775% 775% Value $19,273541 S29,476,899 530,505,590 $31,576,391 $32,681,565 $33,825,419 535,009309 $36234635 $37,502,847 $38,815,447 540,173,987 $41,580,077 Property Taxes 5192,735 $294,769 $305,086 $315,764 $326,816 $338,254 $350,093 $362,346 $375,028 $388,154 $401740 $415,801 I).AI PN\ AT Itl U[:A V131AG Total SF 129,315 129,315 129,315 129,315 129,315 129,315 129,315 129,315 129,315 129,315 129,315 129,315 Occupied SF 92.274 96,986 116,354 122,549 122,849 122,849 122,849 122,849 122,849 122,849 122,849 122,849 Vacant Space 37,041 32,329 12,932 6,466 6,466 6,466 6,466 6,466 6,466 6,466 6,466 6,466 Occupied% 71% 75% 90% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 95% 93% 95% Total SF Absorbed 4,712 19,397 6,466 - - - - - - - - % of Vacant Spare Absorped $2,96 13% 60% 50% $330 $3.52 Cap Rae 773 °'0 775% 775% 775% 7.75% CP1 Adjustment for Rents 1 000 1 035 1.071 1.109 1.145 1,189 1.229 1.272 1.317 1.363 1,411 1.460 Av Monthly Rent / SF (Net) 52.17 $2.25 $2.33 S2 41 $239 52.58 $2.67 52.76 $186 $2.96 $3.06 $3.17 Cap Rate 775°0 775% 775,. 775% 7.75% 775% 7.75% 775% T75% 775 °b 775% 775% Value S31.043,486 S33,770,823 $41,943,363 $45,823,124 547,426,933 $49,086,876 $50,804,916 552,583,OS8 $54,423,496 $56,328,319 553 299,810 $60,340,303 ei In d.S c1177nu 4419444 4a;8771 4474269 3490869 $508049 $525831 $544,235 $563,283 $582,998 $603403 GAICN'At 111ULA y1J111J Total SF 155,000 155 000 155,000 155,000 155,000 155,000 155,000 155,000 Occupied SF 108,500 124,000 139,500 147,250 147,250 147,250 147,250 147,250 Vacant Space 46,500 31,000 15,500 7,750 7,750 7,750 7,750 7,750 Occupied% 70% 80% 90% 95% 95% 95% 95°0 95% Total SF Absorbed 108,500 15,500 15,500 7,750 - - - - % of Vacant Space Absorped 33% 50% 50% CPI Adjustment for Rents 1.000 1 035 1.071 1.109 1.148 1.188 1 229 1.272 Av, Monthly Rent / SF I Netl $2.76 $2.86 $2,96 $3.06 $3.17 $3.28 $330 $3.52 Cap Rae 773 °'0 775% 775% 775% 7.75% 775% 775% 775% Value 546,441 -188 S54 933,291 $63,962,950 $69,879,523 $72,325,306 $74,856,692 $77,476,676 $80,188,360 property "]-,ties $41649 $42482 543,332 544.199 $464312 $549.333 $639630 $698,795 $723253 $748,567 5774,767 $801,834 Total l'rnject \'aloe $5Q317,026 $63,247,712 S72,451,953 $77,399,514 5126,549,685 $137,845,586 $149,777,176 $158,697,246 $164,251,650 $170,000,458 $175,950,474 5182,108,740 Total l'ro erhl'ax 5544820 $674960 $767,882 $818,194 51,265497 $ 1,378456 $1,497,772 $1586,972 $1,642,516 $1,700,005 $1759,505 $1821,087 Oatcwav Project 'Fax Increment Analysis 5/11/2009 (.rn)~/1 I/~ s~s\fl'u\' lU:lllJJJIII W.1IP{OJd .ic\\Jl~!) r,liJ~ Illun PJp~1I0J ~ ~1I.'~j Jnq till, I' ,iI:~\" 110 l.JJ!d"-" ~~JV p.JIlIlV. (".1,rlvnr.p"lIoJ",nu""'ltlq(,lOt"j ii11ruo'''j!d'~lmll''Ju.\\O.1. ~O()~ ~:lnOj~l SIU;>.U ,~d 'CII~'l11:ro 110 p.svq >:lSUlld (I,lIll!.!':!. ~ ~7inollU SSI'd I.L %lIt 10 IJU S! .,'l'J 01 %0,)., (1"1(1.11 '''.1 (]J:>dOJd.SI'i] S11UllJ (f1110.11 '''.1,\]Jxh''d ".,,,~IU:1Ul.J"'l '11.1, ~ 860'IDt'tl , IL9'S'fO'!il$ 1l11'9lL'9t , , , , , , , 11'6'601 , lt6'l19 , ~n'6to'l S L9,'tll , &,,'66, , t<J,'ti6(j , ..nll , 8"'-L&. , nO'6L6 , .00'S1I , %.',L. , on'6.6 , MS'otl , 906'(9) , ttg'6[6 , 6(,'J"E;::1 , ,St't.. , 1;0&'0;::6 s ~Wl9;::1 , ~S;:'lt. , Ltl'W6 S 1~"6;::1 , II('Oi)" , t.R'fSS s 9tL'tO S 61'.'61. , tI6',9S S tl16',TI , L66'B1. , 6ti'Stll s ti1'6n , i.'/Sf,t , &&O'liS , 9n';:tl S ;:h'S&t , 91l1't1S S 91 ~'.tl S 69<;'Ht , .19'L6L S rn:'6tl s \Zg'g')t , &9i'I~L S I 11l';::.1 s ,9;:'6~t , Itt',9L S Oit'951 S 9(jg'6tt , nll'6tL s Zil'09! S OlL'OH' , Ll.'tEL s 616'i91 S .oL'lit , SO.'6IL S t(,L'L91 S 9L8';:;:t' , i6L'tOL , iH'ILI , ot,'tlt' , L9i'069 , HJ~'fl. S IlU'.lln , (1i'9L6'\ , 6.n;:. , .S9'O<)J'( , nt't(6'\ , r%'LE> , >Li"l'9i\'1 S 6.t'i6S'1 , t'tll'6t. , St6'111'1 , 9t;:'(>S'1 , n.n9S , i6nSO'I s ,tS't[S'1 , al'.L. , (01\')0'1 S ILr,U'\ , Hi 1 '~S. , L9E'i:tO'l , SL(LiL'1 , ton09 , LLD'OW'l , s;:]'ooL'\ , HIl'.19 S t;:;:'SI'i6 , ?Q(P)<)'1 , lb6'U9 S tL(I% , ttl';:O')'l , (;:S':;:9 , tL.'.t6 , i;:9'(:'t'.'1 , .6>'9,9 , ISO'16S , >inSt'! , iO('Oi9 , .,;.(L>1l s 16,"6;:t"1 , S'J.'U9 , r(,'I'OIl , 16('01'(\ , ;:16'LS. , .t9';:iL , HO"I;:;:'l , tin.. , 69&'1")9 , 911'SOI'1 , ll1z't;:i , S9(,'(l9i , t19'919 , t'~O';:!f , EOR'[)t( , ~OO'S% S S9L'iL, , LSO'~Rt , tIR'9Lt' , iOO'60t , (QII'Nlt , Iln:'St( , It'R"9Lt , OZ(,'I");:: , (f,'IM> , tL9't9( , Oll',ii , LI,'r., s O;:S'tf>l , O;:L'OLl , t(~'t'Hl S LM'SE S gllt"Zf , il0'1'. , 9il';:1l1 , .,['~! , 1","'ft;: , Ht"ltl , L<)t'Er, S ttt',,1 , , , , S , , S , , ~.i.t- I~ ,"I!.)OI./o09 llu~w"nlIln.L ~nj1lAlu""d ~~~-. " T, , = - 1I9I'lI:>I'I:>$ 6t6'f6(,'H $ 9M't-90't , OS'Z'9tj,'f , 106'I6I'1I , ,/>II'Ollr6 , - , , s , , , , , S , S , LOlI'O:>O'1 , W;:'U6 , SinL , , , , fOI'orO'1 , LOI'gc. , %(J';:t , , , , 1'00'010'1 , 1;:('6<6 , ;:R9'OL , , , , 661'066 , i06'o;:r, , %t'69 S , , , fIlL'OL6 , 9tnCl6 , RE6'L9 S , S , lIt'L'IS6 , Etr>1l1l , ,09"<)<) , , , , 9S0'Ef6 , LSL' L~'1l , (,{,(>9 , , , , 16L't16 S tLCO,1l , c.IO't') , , , , tslt96i S O6O't'(lI S 1")L';:9 , , , , in'6LIl s HL'Llll S Ei';'19 , , , , itO'l91l S wL'loR , aC09 , , , , StI'St"i S IU..S! S ttl'6. , , , , ts:S'lItl1 , OLS'OU S 1'~6'LS , S , , SOE'tlll S 19t....L , Lt'~'% , , , , nllE'96L S 8t'9'fiI'L , ;:En~ , , , , S9L'OSL , .;:['9;:L s 0t'9't. , , , , <)St'S9L s RSR'I1L S &%"i. , S , , Ltt'OSL , 6t6'L69 , SI.'I> , , , , IfL'Sft , tt;:'t'89 , Sgt"I, , , , , 90f'IlL S StS'OL') S 6Lt'0"; , , , , t69'rn'l , tL9'L~9 , 6~t'6t , O')&'I.Z , t~t'L,q , UI'LIlI' , LS(I60'1 , 6!L'tt'l , .Int' , l'if'9L:: , ,09"tt') , t;:9'Ut , MO:>O'1 , 9(]'tf9 S L9>'LI' , .16'oLt , i96'1(9 , 6~(g')t , lIl9'OIO'1 , (!'L'(d9 , l'i9'9t' , ill'/.9:: S lH'('19 , UO'6,t , t'Ot'IL6'1 S 6S~'L09 , 1l;:C>t' , .6i'09, , i;:t'LO') , ,)LO'O.I' , ES)'If6'1 S 9L9'.6. S t';:g'tt' , O6t'.><= S iln:6, , h;:'ltt , 6S9't611'1 S %6'i&. , !it6'EI' , tSl'O,;: , 9EiiS. , (,finEr , 6OS'LSll'I S ,t~'tL. , fRO"Et , ')Lntt , &gC~H , Lll't;:t' , LIlO'!Z1I'1 , 61i'19> S Sf;:',t , .9>'Ot, S .9['['), , 10S'.11' , SOS'():>L'1 , L(nt', , Olg-Ol' , Oft',E;: s SS[";::t, , on'IOt , SOO'OOL" S L6(,'EZ, S IlEt'6i , IIL.'tt;:: , E,g',;:. , t~t'IlgE , 915',\:'9'1 , U;:'90. , 960'H , 9L6'91;: , 6f["9O. S RW',H , tL6'9lli'1 , L,1'6Rt' , SOOf , 6f9'c.o;: , itlJ'6&t , 9tC;:9( , lLL'L6t"1 , ItL'Lt't S (<J)',f , 6RR'161 , 'J1lt"Ut , (60'0.( , 9St'IlLE'1 , ifnH , 19f"!'i , OOS'\:'91 , SO,'9H , t,nEi , L6t"S9t'1 , SIlO'!>tf , 6f,r'H , t;:('6il , OLD'ltt , 9U'9;:( , S66'ftL , S ~[o',i , , "I'');:t , t9L'.li , OlS'ttL , , ()<)C6Z , S iLO'lki( , no',o( , LLt"If'! , , Ot9"(, , , 690'tli , 69L't6;: , O~t'iOS , , O(L'I;: , s Hl(~~;: , ,,(;:61 , 6t'S'S(,S , , r,.i'1, , , ::I',O( , ~<;O'I'>,);: , LI9'669 , S .tt'SZ , , 09i'~ll' , ,lg't9;: , tlS'IIt , , H)lJ' I I , , L(,I'L,1 , ;:lUS;: , 90f'SLI , , , , , 9oi'RLI , 6SL'Oif S , , , , (,~(O>i , L99'Lst , S , , , L9'n., S , , , , , , , , , S , , S , , , , S '1'(.10.1 .....HIII nll<ld """'l:lll ~'"qd ",\oI'l:lIll""'lJd ',\oIH II "'"Qd '.\oI'lII~lIlJd "IoIlL "IoL ':I.Of ~.f6 "10001 V:~'l:lV O:tnOV I 'IfJL."J.)',:'\\O.L ~~;<<;i&'~fr'-~....;cs;. " " , .'t_~~i~~>i$ r1)"HI'I't , Ifo'OIf"l S SSII'HI , fl'>r%l: s 'iO-:-St'l'lS US'lIotlS , , 6f6'(lf , (,[(,m: , 6f6'(I( , 6[6-0, , 6(6'(1( S 6(6-0( , 6(6'1I'f , Me, ~i , 6E6'Oi" , 6f(,'Oi S 6f6'or , 6(6-U, , 6f6'or , ('i6"~E , 6E6'Of , 6((,n, , 6f6'or , 6(6'O[ , 6f6'or s M:6'n( , 6f6'(I( , 6iG'Oi , 6i6'(I( , (,(6'll( , 6f6'(I( , 6i6'Oi , 6i6'or , &E6'~i , 6f6'or s 6(6'Or , 6i6'or S 6E6-0f , 6f6'Of , 6i6"~( , 6i6'or S 6,6'lf , 6f6'Oi , 6E6"(l( , 6f6'Oi S bE6-0( , Il/f"LSI , &[I;-~( , gl9't , )<)<:'fl , t,('19 , 111z'Lt , lllf'LSI , (,[60[ , ~ 19't' , I~J;:'([ , 1',(19 , (l1;:'L!' , IIlf'L'i1 , 6i6'O( , ~ 19 t , fl9t'0 , t,('I<; , Ol,'!t' , IlI'lLSI , 6((,ni , ~ 19't , (~);:'i1 , 1',(19 , nlt'Lt , Iif"L'i1 , b(6"O, , ijl9'I' , m;:'([ , 1'~C1<) , Oint' , IlOf'LS"1 S 6f(,'Oi , ~ 19'1' , 0<);:'(1 , t.i'19 , Oint , Il/f"LSI , 6(6'Oi , ~ 19't , O'Ji:"il , 1',['19 , OIi:"Lt s I!WLSI , (,[(,uf , ~ l'}'1' , 0<;;:-,1 , t,(j'J , u\Z'Lt , IIlf'LH , 6f60[ , RI'}'t , ()<J,'i! , Hi'1') S 01t'Lt , IIlf'LSI , 6[6.0( , ~ 19 t , 09,"0 , t,i'19 , or,'Lt , IIi'lL:>1 , (i[(i', ; ~! g'l' , O'J,'(1 S 1',(1') . o 1 i;'~t , I!WLSI S (,[(,"()( , &\<;1' , O<;t-[1 , t~['19 , (l1;:'LI' , IIlf'LSI , (,f6.0, , ~ 19-1" , ()<)nl , t',E\? ,. OIZ'Lt S IIlf'LSI , 6((,,)i , ~ 19 t , fl');:'fl , tH't.. -, 01,'it , Illf"LSI S 6[G-Oi , ~ l <; I' , 0'1,'(1 , 1',['['1 , llc"Lt , Il>{"'LSI , 6[6"0( , ~ 19'1" , I~J;:'il , t,C19 , 01;:'Lt s Iif"LSI , li[n'Or , ~ \'J't , 0');:'[1 , tSCl9 , 01;:'Lt , SIS'9i1 , ,HOi , ~ 191" , Ill'''il , t,CI<) , "'I;:"it , 'i99'SSI , ~fL 1'.;:: , &1'1'1' S ,1"(<:1 , t'H'I,) , nl;:"Lt , lri"ts\ s "t'I,;: , ~l'n , ,6t';:1 , 1',(19 , OI;:'Lt , stO'tsl , H>', , ~1<)"t' , fI.:",1 , t,n" , nl;:"Lt , 10i'9T1 , (lifi:: , ~I') t' , H~'6 , I'SE'l9 , OI;:'Lr , 6L6'9E1 , L,9'91 , 1l19't S 6(['L , 1',(19 , 01;:'Lt' , f6t'tZl S LLLL , &19"1' , (in s l',n9 , 01;:"L!' , i9I'LQI , , LI'>I't , , I ~IL'~. , 111;:'[1' , ;:n'tol , , 1,lli , S 1')1'1, , Ol,'!t , ",." , , EL6"~ , , .ll~M , OI;:'Lt S WIts S , ;:cdl , , S~t';::;: , tl.'lli , "",', , , "" , S ')~II'I' , 0(,<)', , -n-..10.1 "~~H III ~'"<ld .....M II ~S1!<ld ....H llI"<ll<ld ....l:f II ~re<ld .....M I ~Rl'qd ',.OL "IoL "I.0f ~.f6 ~',OOI Y:I'l:lVa:HlI.IV I H:U,,:D ~.'t\OL """",~~~~:r~I..i ,V.~a.,' li',,~"~Pt,t"~\..\'j,~.~n'~~~ .. :I"JO.L " O.O~ '" 6H1:: M ~to, "' Lto, L[ <J1il;: '<C .to;: " "'" " iM);: " ;:rm " Ii'll;: " "'" 0( 6(Ot (,~ ~iOZ "' L,O;: " 9iOl 'Ji: .rot " tW;: " [(0;: " liO;: " IEOl " OW;: "' 6;:ot r" ~tO;: " HO;: " 9;:0;: "' .;:0: " HO, " (;:0;: (J ttO;: " no;: II 0;:0;: " 610;: glllt LlOt <J1O;: .10;: tlO;: (to;: ,10, 110;: [ OWt , """ [- SIlOt Wil;: r- 900Z r """ ,. tflot or (1m ,- tOOt ,- """ o. oor;: pO!-'~d m:t GATEWAY CHULA VISTA TAX PAYME"TS 2000 200] 2002 2003 2004 47,210 S 257,667 S 350,759 S 178,306 S 253,312 2005 2006 2007 2008 , Total paid to dale 1,655,337 Gateway Chul.:! Vista], LLC Gateway Chula Vista 2, LLC Gateway Chula Vista 3, LLC G<llrway Project Tax Incremenl Analysis 5/111200iJ s 3,690 S 4,394 S 30,5]4 S 24,117 S 42,479 S 55,0]2 S 59,958 S 65,973 S 157,197 S s 11,1]0 S 23,796 S 264,8]2 406,360 S 32,918 S 269,068 S 305,122 S 40,833 S TOlalf3lespaid S 1,120,670 108,657 2,884,665