Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1987/01/28 AGENDA City Planning Commission Chula Vista, California Wednesday, January 28, 1987 - 7:00 p.m. City Council Chambers PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE - SILENT PRAYER INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ORAL COMMUNICATIONS 1. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-87-5M: Consideration of request to construct a new clubhouse at 88 'L' Street San Diego Country Club (Continued) 2. REPORT: Part I - Draft Montgomery Specific Plan 3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-87-3: Consideration of a tentative subdivision map for Theoka Village, Chula Vista Tract 87-3 located at 325-345 'K' Street (Continued) 4. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-87-4: Consideration of a tentative subdivision map for Bayfront Units No. 1-10, Chula Vista Tract 87-4, located between the I-5 Freeway, the mean high tide line of San Diego Bay, 'G' Street and 'D' Street extended - Chula Vista Investment Company (Continued) 5. PUBLIC HEARING: EIR-86-3: Town Centre II (Expansion of Chula Vista Shopping Center) Draft Environmental Impact Report DIRECTOR'S REPORT COMMISSION COMMENTS ADJOURNMENT AT to the Regular Business Meeting of February 11, 1987 at 7:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers City Planning Commission Agenda Item 1 Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 TO: Chairman and Members Planning Commission FROM: George Krempl, Director of Planning ~9~~ SUBJECT: Consideration of Major Use Permit for San Diego Country Club The Board of the San Diego Country Club has selected a consultant to perform a structural and architectural survey on the existing clubhouse based upon the Historical Building Code. Staff anticipates receipt of the analysis at the end of January. Therefore, staff is requesting continuance of the hearing to the meeting of February 25, 1987 to allow the additional information to be included in the hearing on the application scheduled for the Montgomery Planning Committee Workshop Meeting on February 18, 1987. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 1 2. REPORT: Consideration of Part I of the Draft Montgomery Specific Plan A. BACKGROUND 1. The territory known as Montgomery was annexed to the City of Chula Vista on December 31, 1985. After determining that the area needed more detailed land use planning guidance, the City Council directed that a specific plan be prepared for the Montgomery Community. Accordingly, a work program was prepared which divided the project into three major parts. Part I contains the introduction, city planning survey, evaluation, and trends, analysis, and forecasts. Part II includes the goals, general objectives, policies, principles and standards, and a statement of the planning and urban design proposals. Part III sets forth the implementation proposals and the conclusion of the Montgomery Specific Plan. The work program calls for a public review upon the completion of each major part of the specific plan project. It is anticipated that this review will be accomplished by public hearings conducted consecutively by the Montgomery Planning Committee, City Planning Commission, and City Council. 2. Part I of the Draft Montgomery Specific Plan has been completed and is submitted for public review. It contains information relative to historical reference, existing land use conditions, growth trends and analysis, and growth forecasts. Part I constitutes the foundation or basis for the plan proper, the purpose of which is to provide a comprehensive guide for the orderly growth development, redevelopment, and conservation of the Montgomery Community. 3. The Montgomery Planning Committee considered Part I at its public hearing of January 7, 1987. The Committee approved Part I unanimously and recommended that it be adopted by the City Planning Commission and City Council. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Adopt a motion approving Part I and recommending its adoption by the City Council. C. ANALYSIS 1. Part I of the Draft Montgomery Specific Plan consists of three sections. Section I, the Introduction and City Planning Survey, narrates the planning history of the Montgomery Community and presents an overview of the specific plan. Details of the planning and development of Montgomery's five sub-communities of Castle Park, Otay, Harborside, West Fairfield, Woodlawn Park-East Woodlawn Park, and Broderick Acres are discussed. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 2 2. Section II, the Evaluation, presents the findings of an intensive parcel-by-parcel land use field survey, and the statistics relating to present land use and general economic conditions. Furthermore, visual and functional development patterns and the basic needs of the community are analyzed for both Montgomery at-large, and on a sub-community basis. 3. Section III, the Trends, Analysis and Forecasts, identifies trends as well as forecasting residential, commercial, and industrial development. Furthermore, it contains forecasts of population growth and increases in traffic volumes. D. CONCLUSION Part I of the Draft Montgomery Specific Plan is the basis for the plan proper, which will embody the specific plan's goals, objectives, statements of policy and standards, growth development, and conservation policies. Part I documents a large amount of detailed information relative to historical development, existing conditions, and future of the Montgomery Community. FISCAL IMPACT: None WPC 321 7P City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 1 3. PUBLIC HEARING PCS-87-3 - Consideration of tentative subdivision map for Theoka Village, Chula Vista Tract 87-3 - Alkiviadis Vassiliadis (continued) A. BACKGROUND 1. The applicant has submitted a tentative subdivision map known as Theoka Village, Chula Vista Tract 87-3 in order to subdivide for a one-lot condominium project consisting of 65 units on 2.15 acres on the north side of "K" Street between Third and Fourth Avenues. The development is currently under construction as apartment units. 2. This matter was continued from the meeting of January 14, 1987, because a potential conflict of interest resulted in the lack of a quorum for the item. 3. Initial studies, IS-84-9 and IS-86-12, of possible adverse environmental impacts of the project have been conducted by the Environmental Review Coordinator. The Environmental Review Coordinator conducted that there would be no significant environmental effects and recommends readoption of the Negative Declarations. B. RECOMMENDATION 1. Find that this project will have no significant environmental impacts and readopt the Negative Declarations issued on IS-84-9 and IS-86-12. 2. Based on the findings contained in Section "E" of this report, adopt a motion to approve the tentative subdivision map for Theoka Village, Chula Vista Tract 87-3, subject to the following conditions: a. The developer shall remove existing driveway approaches from "K" Street and replace with monolithic curb, gutter and sidewalk, except at the new driveway locations. The new driveways shall be of a width approved by the City Traffic Engineer. The minimum radii for all curb return shall be 10 feet. A construction permit will be required for all work done within the public right of way. b. The structural section of the private driveway shall be desiqned to meet flexible pavement structural design criteria based on "R" Values and a minimum traffic index of 4. All onsite paving including parking areas except those within carports will be inspected by the Engineering Department. c. The design of the structural section shall be reviewed and approved by the Director of Public Works/City Engineer. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 2 d. The developer shall be responsible for the installation of a 250 watt HPSV street light at the west end of the property on "K" Street. The location of said street light shall be approved by the City Traffic Engineer. e. The developer shall dedicate to the City an additional two feet of right of way along the north side of "K" Street adjacent to the subdivision as shown on the Tentative Subdivision Map. f. The developer shall be responsible for the relocation of the fire hydrant on the proposed western driveway to an approved location. g. The developer shall grant to the City street tree planting and maintenance easements along "K" Street adjacent to the subdivision. Said easement shall extend from the property line to a line 10 feet from the back of the sidewalk. h. The school districts shall notify the City in writing that they have reached on equitable agreement with the subdivider regarding school facilities prior to Council action on the final map. i. In addition, the following map revisions are required: (1) Show alley-type driveways with pedestrian ramps at both entrances to the subdivision. {2) Show proposed sewer and drainage facilities. C. DISCUSSION The project has been approved by the Design Review committee and is currently under construction as apartment units. The one standard unique to condominiums and not required of apartments is the provision of private storage. Since this has been designed into the project, it is appropriate to recommend approval of the tentative map based upon the following findings. D. FINDING Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the tentative subdivision map for Theoka Village, Chula Vista Tract 87-3, is found to be in conformance with the various elements of the City's General Plan based on the following: 1. The site is physically suitable for the residential development and the proposal conforms to all standards established by the City for such projects. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 3 2. The design of the subdivision will not affect the existing improvements -- streets, sewers, etc. -- which have been designed to avoid any serious problems. 3. The project is in substantial conformance with the Chula Vista General Plan Elements as follows: a. Land Use - The project received authorization for location within a commercial designation under PCC-84-6 and PCC-86-7. b. Circulation - The project is served by existing streets and no streets are required across the property to serve adjacent uses. c. Housing The project will provide additional home ownership opportunities for residents of the community. d. Conservation - The site is located within an urbanized area and was previously developed. e. Park and Recreation, Open Space - The developer is required to pay Park Acquisition and Development fees in lieu of dedicating and improving parkland. f. Seismic Safety - The property is not near any known earthquake faults. g. Safety - The site is well within the response time of existing fire stations. h. Noise - The units meet the requirements of the U.B.C. with regarding to noise. i. Scenic Highway - The site is not adjacent to a designated scenic route. j. Bicycle Routes - The adjoining street is not a designated bike route but will accommodate bicycles. k. Public Buildings - No public buildings are proposed on the site. 4. Pursuant to Section 66412.2 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Commission certifies that it has considered the effect of this approval on the housing needs of the region and has balanced those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City and the available fiscal and environmental resources. WPC 3468P/2659P POST OFFICE MFD M~ O~ICES REN[~ Ii ~ II ~' ~ ST. MFD NFD ~ I ~ ~ IFOCD I PCS 87 3 negative leclaration PROJECT NAME: Snug Haven Condominiums PROJECT LOCATION: 325-345 "K" Street PROJECT APPLICANT: Mary Kaye CASE NO: IS-84-9 DATE: February 3, 1984 A. Project Settin~ The project site involves 1.68 acres of property located 300 feet west of Third Avenue on the north side of "K" Street. The site has been partially cleared for development and one existing warehouse-type structure is presently located on the property. The adjacent land uses consist of a welder supply business and "K" Street to the south, multiple family, and an equipment rental business to the east, multiple family to the north and multiple family and professional offices to the west. The project site is void of any significant vegetation or wildlife and there are no significant natural or manmade resources present. No known geologic hazards have been identified at the project vicinity. B. Project Description The proposed project consists of 51 condominum units (all two bedroom) located in three 3-story structures. In addition, the proposed project contains 93 on-site parking spaces. Two 24-foot wide access drives from "K" Street will serve the proposed project. C. Compatibility with Zonin9 and Plans Multiple family units are permitted in the C-O and C-C zones subject to approval of a conditional use permit. Approval of a proposed 10-foot high wall between the adjacent welders supply land use and the proposed project will require approval of the Planning Commission. The project is in basic conformance with the General Plan. D. Identification of Environmental Effects 1. Soils Adverse soil conditions have been addressed in a soils report submitted by the applicant (Southern California Soil Testing, Inc., 1981). Recommendations included in the report will reduce impacts to a level of insignificance. city of chula vista planning department environmental review section 2 2. Schools The local elementary and junior high schools are operating above capacity. The additional students (10 elementary and 15 junior high) generated from this project will further tax an existing condition of overcrowding. The developer shall comply with School District requirements to assure that adequate classroom space will be available. 3. Parks This project will increase the need for park facilities in this area. Standard development requirements dictate that the applicant will be required to pay park in-lieu fees for acquisition and development of future park land. 4. Fire Safety Adjacent land use to the south and east of some of the proposed residential units is a welders supply business which routinely stores flammable products within existing commercial structures. A 10-foot high masonry wall is proposed by the applicant to provide fire safety to the proposed project. The City's Fire Marshal indicates that the wall is necessary to provide a reasonable degree of protection for the future residents. E. Mitigation necessary to avoid significant effects 1. A lO-foot high masonry wall shall be constructed along the north and west property lines of the adjacent welders supply land use. (The following measures are standard development requirements): 2. Recommendations contained in the soils report submitted by the applicant shall reduce impacts to a level of insignificance. 3. The developer shall comply with the public services element of the General Plan relating to school facilities. 4. The developer shall pay park acquisition and development in-lieu fees concurrent with the final subdivision map. F. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. The project site is void of any significant natural or manmade resources. Adverse soil conditions have been addressed with recommendations contained in a previously prepared soils report (Southern California Soil Testing, Inc., 1981) 2. The residential proposal is consistent with the General Plan and associated elements and is not anticipated to achieve short term to the disadvantage of long term environmental goals. - 3 - 3. No impacts are anticipated to occur which could interact to create a substantial cumulative effect on the environment. 4. The project will result in limited additional vehicle and no significant increase in related emission or noise will occur. The proposed 10'+ high wall will preclude any significant impact on human beings. - G. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista Steve Griffin, Associate Planner Duane Bazzel, Assistant Planner Ted Monsell, Fire Marshal Tom Dyke, Building Department Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer Laurence Reuden - Applicant's designer 2. Documents IS-80-54, Snug Harbor Condominiums Soils Report (Southern California Soil Testing, Inc. 1981) The Initial Study application and evaluation forms documenting the findings of no significant impact are on file and available for public review at the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010. ~rENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR WPC 0745P EN 6 (Rev. 12/82) city of chela vista planning department -. environmental review section EN 6 (Rev. 12/82) negative declaration PROJECT NAME: Theoka Village II PROJECT LOCATION: 341 "K" Street PROJECT APPLICANT: Mary Kaye, 4175 The Hill Road, Bonita, CA 92002 CASE NO: IS-86-12 DATE: October 10, 1985 A. Project Setting The project site consists of a 120' x 170' (20,400 sq. ft.) lot located at 341 "K" Street. A welding supply warehouse is currently located on the project site. The adjacent land uses consist of vacant property (approved for multiple-family development) to the north, east and west. Located to the south is a multiple-family complex across "K" Street. The project site is void of any significant vegetation or wildlife and there are no significant natural or manmade resources present. No known geologic hazards have been identified in the project vicinity. B. Project Description The proposed project consists of 18 condominium units (all two-bedroom) located in one three-story structure and a recreation building. In addition, the proposed project contains 11 on-site parking spaces with the remaining required parking to be located on the adjacent lot, which will contain a previously approved, but not built, 51-unit condominium development. C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans The project site is currently zoned C-C (Central Commercial). The project is proposed to be combined with the adjacent 51-unit condominium project and, therefore, requires a Conditional Use Permit for multiple family development in a commercial zone. The allowable density for the combined project amounts to a total of 65 units (30 d.u./ac.) based on the R-3 zoning standards of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. In addition to a Conditional Use Permit the applicant is requesting approval of a variance to permit the proposed 18 units totaling a combined 69 units (32 d.u./ac.). The proposed density conforms to the General Plan and associated elements. D. Identification of Environmental Effects 1. Soils A soils report prepared by Southern California Soil Testing, Incorporated in 1981 was submitted to staff for the adjacent 51-unit project site. As a standard development requirement, the soils "- city of chula vista planning department environmental review section report shall be expanded to include the proposed project site. Recommendations from the expanded report shall be incorporated into the project to reduce impacts to a level of insignificance. 2. Schools An additional 4 elementary school children and a total of 9 junior and senior high school students will be generated by the 18-unit project and will further tax an existing condition of overcrowding within local schools. The developer shall comply with School District requirements to assure that adequate classroom space will be available. 3. Parks This project will increase the need for park facilities in this area. Standard development requirements dictate that the applicant will be required to pay in-lieu fees for the acquisition and development of future parkland. E. Findings of Insignificant Impact 1. The project site is void of any significant natural or manmade resources. Potentially adverse soil conditions will be addressed by an expanded soils report required through standard development requirements. 2. The residential proposal is consistent with the General Plan and associated elements although the approval of a zone variance by the Planning Commission will be necessary to construct the requested number of units. 3. No impacts are anticipated to occur which could interact to create a substantial cumulative effect on the environment. 4. The project will result in limited additional vehicle traffic and no significant increase in related emissions or noise. No significant adverse impacts on human beings are anticipated with project implementation. F. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista: Mando Liuag, Associate Planner Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer Duane Bazzel, Assistant Planner Gene Grady, Building and Housing Department Carol Gove, Fire Marshal Chuck Glass, Traffic Engineer Applicant's Agent: Lawrence Rueden, Designer 2. Documents IS-80-54, Snug Harbor Condominiums IS-84-9, Snug Haven Soils Report (Southern California Soil Testing, Inc. 1981) The Initial Study application and evaluation forms documenting the findings of no significant impact are on file and available for public review at the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010. ENVIRONMENTAL REV/JEW COORDINATOR WPC 2240P EN 6 (Rev. 5/85) ~,~; city of chula vista planning department " environmental review section ~N R (R~v. 12/R2~ / CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATE~[NT APPLICANT'S STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS I WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PART OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application. List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. 3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No ~<[' If yes, please indicate person(s) Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, ~ club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, district or other political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit." (NOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary.) ~ .~ ~. Signature of applicant/date WPC 0701P F~_ ~J~__~ A-110 .~ Print or type name of applicant City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 1 4. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of tentative map for CVT-87-4; Chula Vista Bayfront - Units 1 through 10 A. BACKGROUND: The applicant, Chula Vista Investment Company ICVIC), has filed a tentative map identified as Chula Vista Bayfront Units 1 through 10, CVT-87-4, and is proposing to subdivide approximately 125 acres located in the Chula Vista Midbayfront area. In the latter part of 1986, the Chula Vista Planning Commission and Chula Vista City Council approved the amended Chula Vista Local Coastal Program and Bayfront Specific Plan of which the Midbayfront is a part thereof. Prior to approval of both items, the Planning Commission and City Council certified the various EIRs and supplement thereto; therefore, no additional environmental process is required to approve this subdivision map in accordance with the conditions being recommended. B. RECOMMENDATION: Based on the findings contained in Section D of this report, adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve tentative subdivision map for the Chula Vista Bayfront Area - Units 1 through 10, reference CVT-87-4, subject to the following: 1. Subject to the Disposition and Development Agreement and City participation, the developer shall be responsible for the construction of full public improvements for all streets shown on the Tentative Map within the Subdivision. Said improvements shall include but not be limited to: A.C. pavement, base, curb, gutter, sidewalk, landscaped medians, sewer and water facilities, drainage facilities, street trees, street lights and signs. Said improvements shall be guaranteed prior to approval of each Final Subdivision Map in accordance with a phasing plan approved by the City Engineer prior to the recordation of the first final map. 2. The grades on all public streets shall be subject to approval by the City Engineer. Said streets shall be constructed at such elevations as to meet the dry lane requirements contained in the Subdivision Manual and shall be passable by vehicles during the lO0-year storm event. Said improvements shall be guaranteed prior to approval of each Final Subdivision Map in accordance with a phasing plan approved by the City Engineer prior to the recordation of the first final map. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 2 3. Subject to the Disposition and Development Agreement and City participation, the developer shall be responsible for the right-of-way dedications, design and guarantee of construction of the following streets to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works and prior to approval of the first final map. Said improvements shall be guaranteed prior to approval of each Final Subdivision Map in accordance with a phasing plan approved by the City Engineer prior to the recordation of the first final map: a. Tidelands Avenue between Marina Parkway and the railroad right-of-way. A temporary cul-de-sac shall be required at the north end of Tidelands Avenue at the easterly property line. b. Lagoon Drive between Marina Parkway and the "F" Street bridge crossing I-5. c. Bay Boulevard between "F" Street and north of the new I-5 southbound freeway ramps. d. Marina Parkway and Lagoon Drive between Units 7 and 9, and Unit 2. For purposes of approval of the Tentative Map, the alignment of Tidelands Avenue shall be as shown on the Tentative Map as submitted October 24, 1986. 4. Prior to approval of any Final Map for the subject property, the Disposition and Development Agreement between the Agency and the developer shall specify and guarantee the construction of full improvements in Marina Parkway from the southerly subdivision line of the subject property to the existing Tidelands Avenue alignment south of "G" Street. Conceptual Plans for said alignment shall be prepared and shall be the basis of determination for the dollar amount needed to fund the construction. The funding program and conceptual plans shall include required pedestrian signals and fencing along Marina Parkway/Tidelands Avenue to safely control pedestrian traffic between the Rohr facility and the parking lots west of the roadway. Said facilities to be located and constructed to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works. Said improvements shall be guaranteed prior to approval of each Final Subdivision Map in accordance with a phasing plan approved by the City Engineer prior to the recordation of the first final map. 5. A feasibility study shall be prepared evaluating the following improvements. The feasibility study shall be approved by the City Engineer prior to approval of any final subdivision maps. Facilities identified in the study as necessary shall be incorporated in the improvement phasing plan as required offsite improvements subject to the Development and Distribution Agreement. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 3 a. Provide exclusive "free" right turn lanes at the freeway ramps for the following turning movements: I-5 N/B off to E/B "E" Street I-5 S/B off to W/B "E" Street I-5 N/B on from W/B "E" Street I-5 S/B on from W/B "E" Street I-5 S/B on from E/B "E" Street b. Provide six traffic lanes and raised median on "E" Street between the I-5 northbound on-off ramps and the easterly trolley station entrance. c. Reconstruct the southbound I-5 freeway on-off ramps to connect directly with Bay Boulevard south of "E" Street including the addition of a southbound to westbound right-turn lane. d. Provide dual left turn lanes at the I-5 N/B off-ramp to W/B "E" Street. e. Widen the "E" Street bridge to provide a wider pedestrian walkway. f. Widen the "E" Street bridge to provide two additional lanes of traffic. 6. The developer shall provide bus turnout lanes on Marina Parkway. Locations and design standards to be determined by the Director of Public Works. The design of the bus shall be included in the Bayfront Design Manual. 7. Developer shall provide street striping plans and street lighting plans with all street improvement plans. 8. All on-street parking shall be prohibited on Marina Parkway, Lagoon Drive, Gunpowder Point Drive, Tidelands Avenue, Bay Boulevard, "A" Street, "Private Drive" and "E" Street. 9. Marina Parkway shall be designed to Chula Vista Major Street Standards except that the typical section shall be as shown on the revised tentative map and in accordance with the Certified Local Coastal Program. 10. Lagoon Drive, and Tidelands Avenue north of Marina Parkway shall be designed to Chula Vista Collector Street Standards, except that the typical sections shall be as shown on the revised tentative map and in accordance with the Certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 4 ll. The owner shall make irrevocable offers of dedication for the private drive between Marina Parkway and Lagoon Drive and Street "A". "Private Drives" shall be designed to City Collector street standards (except for typical section). Plans for the Private Drive and Street "A" shall be approved by the City Engineer. Access easements (minimum 30' in width) from Street "A" to the adjacent SDG&E right- of-way shall be provided on the recorded subdivision map to the satisfaction of the Planning Director and City Engineer. 12. The following vehicular access restrictions shall apply to this tract: a. Unit 1, Lots 3 and 6 - No vehicular access to Lagoon Drive. b. Unit 6, Lot 1 - No vehicular access to Lagoon Drive. c. Unit 4, Lots 1, 2, and 3 - No vehicular access to Marina Parkway. d. Unit 8, Lot 1 - No vehicular access on Tidelands Avenue within 350 feet of the centerline of Marina Parkway, or on Marina Parkway within 200 feet of the centerline of Gunpowder Point Drive. Any other direct vehicular access to Marina Parkway or Tidelands Avenue shall be restricted to right-turn only ingress and egress. e. Unit 7, Lot 2 - No vehicular access on Lagoon Drive within 200 feet of the centerline of Marina Parkway. f. Unit 7, Lots 1 and 2, and Unit 5, Lot 1 All vehicular access on Marina Parkway shall be restricted to "right-turn only" ingress and egress, except that one driveway with a median break to allow left-turn ingress and egress will be permitted in proximity to the common lot line between Unit 7, Lot 1 and Unit 5, Lot 1. g. Unit 5, Lot 2 Vehicular access to Marina Parkway shall be restricted to "right-turn only" ingress and egress, except directly opposite Gunpowder Point Drive. h. Unit 3, Lot 2 - No vehicular access to Marina Parkway within 200 feet of the centerline of Tidelands Avenue. i. Unit 3, Lots 1 and 2 - All direct vehicular access to Marina Parkway shall be restricted to "right-turn only" ingress and egress. 13. Direct vehicular access from any public street to any off-street parking lot shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works. Access to any future off-street parking areas using SDG&E right-of-way shall be subject to Director of Public Works approval. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 5 14. The developer shall be responsible for design and construction of railroad safety protection devices at the railroad crossings on Marina Parkway, Lagoon Drive, and Bay Boulevard, including obtaining all required approvals and/or easements, rights of entry, etc. (PUC, MTDB, etc.), prior to occupancy of any buildings. 15. No development or parking lot designs shall be permitted which encourage mid-block pedestrian crossings of public streets. 16. No driveways shall be permitted within bus turnout lanes or within right turn lanes on public streets. 17. Provide vehicular access easements to Lot 1 in Unit 4 from Tidelands Avenue through Lot 2 and/or Lot 3 or design Unit 4 so that all lots have vehicular access frontage on Tidelands Avenue. 18. A traffic signal shall be installed by the developer at the intersection of Tidelands Avenue and Marina Parkway prior to the issuance of building permits for Unit 8. The design and construction of the signal installation shall be subject to the approval of the Director of Public Works. 19. Developer shall be responsible for the payment of all direct and incidental costs for provision of two sewage metering stations to the San Diego Metropolitan Sewer System interceptor line as shown on the Tentative Map. Said stations are to be provided under the terms of a pending agreement between the Cities of San Diego and Chula Vista for the acquisition, installation and maintenance of metering devices to measure sewer flow. 20. The gravity sewer main in Lagoon Drive shall be extended to the westerly property line of Unit 1 unless the force main is constructed in conjunction with the surface improvements for Unit 1. 21. The sewer pump station shall have an overflow storage capacity to retain peak sewer flows for a period of three hours without spillover into the bay or wetlands in the event of pump system malfunction. 22. Developer shall provide for the perpetual maintenance of all sewer and storm drain pump stations prior to approval of Final Maps for units which require these systems. 23. Paved access shall be provided to all sanitary sewer manholes and sewer and storm drain pump stations. Graded access shall be provided to all storm drain structures including inlet and outlet structures. 24. Private streets within each unit will be subject to detailed review for compliance with City standards. Preliminary plans for said private streets shall be submitted to the City Engineer for review prior to issuance of building permits. NOTE: Plan checking and inspection fees to be paid for by the developer. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 6 25. The developer shall grant easements for all off-site public sewer and storm drain prior to approval of any final map requiring those facilities. A joint use agreement with SDG&E may be required within SDG&E easement. 26. Sewer manholes shall be provided at all changes of alignment and grade. Sewers serving 10 or less equivalent dwelling units shall have a minimum grade of 1%. 27. Specific methods of handling storm drainage are subject to detailed approval by the City Engineer at the time of submission of improvement and grading plans. Design shall be accomplished on the basis of the requirements of the Subdivision Manual and the Grading Ordinance and in accordance with the Certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program. 28. Storm drain pump and force main shall be capable of handling the runoff from a design storm of 100 year frequency. Provisions shall be made for trapping debris at all pumps. Developer shall provide evidence that the downstream channel is capable of accepting storm drainaae generated by the project. Developer shall provide evidence that p~mp stations have sufficient storage capacity to retain the in flow of a lO0-year design storm for a two-hour period in the event of pump failure. 29. Storm drains to be maintained by the City shall have a minimum of 1 foot of cover over the top of pipe. 30. The developer shall grant to the City street tree planting and maintenance easements along all public streets within the subdivision. Said easements shall extend to a line 10 feet from the back of sidewalk except as noted for meandering walk designs. 31. Lots shall be so graded as to drain to the street or approved drainage systems. Drainage shall not be permitted to flow over slopes. 32. Lot lines shall be located at the top of slopes, except where conflicts with buffer design would be created. 33. The developer shall obtain notarized letters of permission for any off-site grading prior to issuance of grading permits. 34. An erosion and sedimentation control plan shall be included as part of the grading plans and shall be prepared in accordance with the Certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program. 35. All buildings subject to inundation on a design storm of 100 year frequency shall meet current Federal Flood insurance standards and the Local Coastal Program conditions. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 7 36. A concrete brow ditch will be required along the easterly boundary of Unit 1. All concrete drainage ditches shall be designed in accordance with the requirements of the Subdivision Manual. 37. Developer shall enter into a development agreement with the City to accomplish the following: a. Provide a phasing program specifying off-site improvement requirements. b. The developer shall comply with all relevant Federal, State and Local regulations. The developer shall be responsible for providing all required testing and documentation to demonstrate said compliance as required by the City Engineer. c. Concurrent or prior to final map recordation all park and open space identified on a tentative map shall be addressed in the Development Agreement concerning dedication and improvements identifying the timing and responsibility between the developer and the Redevelopment Agency. Said improvements shall include all pedestrian and bicycle routes as identified in the Bayfront Specific Plan. 38. The developer shall request vacation of right-of-way along Tidelands Avenue within Unit 2 and the City of Chula Vista owned parcel to the north of said Unit 2 at a time agreeable to the City. 39. The Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions shall include provisions assuring maintenance of the private drive within Units 3 and 6 and shall require that the private drive be kept open to through traffic at all times, unless said closure is approved by the City Engineer. The CC&Rs shall also require that any traffic or speed control devices shall not be installed until permission is obtained from the City Engineer. The City of Chula Vista shall be named as a party to said Declaration authorizing the City to enforce the terms and conditions of the Declaration in the same manner as any owner within the subdivision. A hold harmless agreement for the City shall be approved by the Chula Vista City Attorney. 40. Developer shall submit preliminary development plans for subsequent development of each unit to the City Engineer. The City Engineer and City Planning Director shall review said preliminary plans and determine whether to recommend that the streets within the development should be public or private. 41. Developer shall be responsible for the installation of signs directing the public to public coastal parklands concurrent with the development of the parks. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 8 42. A Development Agreement between the City of Chula Vista and the subdivider identifying the parties responsible for financing and implementation of public improvements and facilities and the wetland/upland enhancement plans shall be approved by the City prior to the recordation of the final map. 43. All measures in the FEIR, SEIR, and related environmental documents required to mitigate potential environmental impacts due to the implementation of the proposed subdivision map must be incorporated into the subdivision map prior to the recordation of final map. 44. All public improvement plans must conform to designs and requirements set forth in the Certified LCP, reference Section 19.87 of the Bayfront Specific Plan must be reviewed, and regulations applied. Special note should be made of Section 19.87.07 which regulates grading and drainage. Rights-of-way, licenses, easements, etc. necessary to implement public improvements and utilities must be obtained prior to the recordation of final map. 45. Provisions of the wetland/upland enhancement program as approved by the City of Chula Vista shall be incorporated into the improvement plans prior to the recordation of the first final map. All work to be performed by the developer on parcels located adjacent to wetlands and areas subject to restoration as identified in the enhancement program shall be in conformance with said program. 46. All land areas to be publicly owned shall be dedicated to the appropriate public body and accepted via the subdivision map. This should be accomplished prior to or concurrent with the recordation of the final map. 47. All grading and drainage improvements within lots l, 2, and 3 of Unit 1 will be restricted so as to not require permits from the U. S. Army Corps of Engineers under Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. Said areas will be identified on any grading, drainage, or site plan submitted to the City. 48. Any intended use of the San Diego Gas & Electric right-of-way for use of parking shall be subject to a specific site plan approval involving all necessary easements and control of access points. 49. A master landscaping concept plan encompassing all of the park areas, public open space, and street median shall be developed prior to the issuance of any building permits. Said plan shall include cost estimates as well as the responsibility for development. All park planning shall be coordinated through the Parks and Recreation Commission. Prior to the recordation of any final map, a design manual shall be approved by the Agency addressing design issues such as street furniture, fencing standards, hardscape, entry points, lighting, and design principles for building and site planning. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 9 50. Additional 10 foot right-of-way or easement shall be provided adjacent to Marina Parkway to provide for a meandering sidewalk design. 51. A maintenance district shall be established for, but not limited to, park, open space, street sweeping, and drainage maintenance. 52. Residential area Units 7 and 5 shall be retained as a single lot until such time as a development plan is approved by the City. Said plan must incorporate open space to provide public connection, both physical and visual, between Unit 9, the bayside park area, and Unit 10, the central park area. The developer shall record an open space easement on the final map. 53. All storm water that originates outside the park areas shall not be detained on the surface of the parkland with the exception of the desiltation basin included in the wetlands enhancement program. 54. The maximum slope angle for the berm areas shown throughout the bayfront area shall be variable. 55. All public and private streets shall be named concurrent with the recordation of the final map. 56. Street signs shall be constructed in accordance with the design and materials specified in the sign program of the Certified Chula Vista Local Coastal Program as modified by the Redevelopment Agency's design guidelines. 57. The following map revisions are required: a. Show tree planting and maintenance easements on cross sections of all public streets. b. Provide typical sections for Tidelands Avenue at the 63 ft. and 64 ft. right-of-way segments. c. Show Tidelands Avenue, Bay Boulevard and the ultimate southbound I-5 on- and off-ramps as currently approved in the Local Coastal Program. d. Provide details showing Bay Boulevard and the interim southbound I-5 on- and off-ramp configurations per current CalTrans plans. e. Revise the typical section of the proposed "E" Street section. Eastbound curb to curb dimensions vary from 50 to 61 ft. Westbound curb-to-curb dimensions vary from 46 to 77 ft. f. All typical sections listed above, and those provided on the revised Tentative Map submitted to the Engineering Department on January 5, 1987, are subject to approval by the City Engineer. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page l0 58. A Coastal Development Permit must be issued by the City of Chula Vista prior to the approval of the first final map. 59. Upon approval by the City Council, this map shall expire three (3) years from the date of approval. Note: After said date, the developer may apply for a time extension as provided by the Map Act. C. ANALYSIS: 1. Basic land description and location. The subject 125 acres proposed for subdividing represents a majority of the Midbayfront area bounded by the San Diego Gas & Electric right-of-way to the east, San Diego Bay to the west, Rohr Corporation to the south, and the undeveloped wetlands area to the north. Unit 1 includes ll-1/2 acres, the balance of the industrial land identified in the plan. Unit 2 and a portion of Unit 9 total approximately 24 acres of wetland and buffer area. Units 3, 6, and 8 comprise all of the 45 acres of office park planned for the Midbayfront which includes a commitment to approximately 4 acres of specialty retail per the Local Coastal Program. Unit 4 consists of 3-1/2 acres of highway commercial use. Units 5 and 7 are identified as 16-1/2 acres of residential development which is obligated to provide 2 acres of parkland open to the public. Units 9, 10, and a portion of Unit 2 complete the approximately 21 acres of identifiable parkland located within the subdivision boundaries. 2. Disposition and Development Agreement. A Disposition and Development Agreement IDDA) between the Redevelopment Agency and the developer is proposed to be prepared and finalized prior to the issuance of the first final map. The DDA will allocate costs for all the public improvements within the area of the Subdivision Map. The DDA will address the bonding guarantees for the construction of these improvements and identify the parties responsible for financing and implementation of various improvements and facilities, including the wetland/upland enhancement plans. All conditions of approval outlined and identified in this report shall be the responsibility of the subdivider unless separately addressed in the Disposition and Development Agreement with responsibility assigned elsewhere. 3. Parks. The approved Local Coastal Program for the Midbayfront area identified 26+ acres of parkland. As indicated in the BACKGROUND portion of this report, the subdivision boundaries include approximately 21 acres of identifiable parkland with an additional 2 acres to be either dedicated for park purposes or developed with a visual landscaping element through the residential area providing a City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page ll public accessway from the park in the center of Unit 10 west to the bayside park adjacent to Marina Parkway. In addition, there are approximately 4 acres of parkland identified on the south side of Lagoon Drive, both west and east of Marina Parkway. Further, there is an existing 1 acre park at the northwest corner of Lagoon Drive ("F" Street) and Bay Boulevard. Thus, the subdivision map, in conjunction with the adjacent parklands outside the boundaries of the subdivision, would comply with the park requirements of 26+ acres outlined in the LCP without dedication of 2 acres of park within the residential area. Based on the City's Park Ordinance and predicated on the actual number of residential units to be constructed on Units 5 and 7, the developer would be obligated to improve between 2 and 3 acres of parkland. Thus, the amount of park area shown within the subdivision boundaries and that identified on the LCP substantially exceed the obligations typically required of a developer. Based on this information, the actual park improvement to be required of the developer should be negotiated in the Development Agreement. The proposed grading plan and lack of any identifiable phasing program has resulted in the developer proposing to use the identified park areas as detention basins during storm conditions. The City's Director of Parks and Recreation has clearly stated that such a program is not acceptable to his department. Therefore, a condition is being placed on the plan precluding the use of the parks as detention basins and requiring that prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the Midbayfront area that a revised grading plan be approved by the City Engineer identifying private property to be used for detention basins for an interim period. An EIR/EIS is being prepared for the Bayfront projects requiring federal approvals, and it is anticipated that in approximately 1 year a Section 404 permit would be issued eliminating the need for the detention basins and, thus, allowing construction to proceed on the lots designated for this interim use. It is staff's recommendation that public parkland not be used as detention basins. The Parks and Recreation Director is further recommending that a concept plan be developed at this time to identify the intended use and design for the park and open space areas. The Planning Department concurs that it would be advisable to develop a concept plan at the earliest possible date and that the actual timing for both design and construction of the parkland and open space areas should be clearly identified in the Development Agreement. 4. Phasing. The developer has submitted an improvement phasing document which outlines the intended improvements for each of the units identified in the tentative map. The program, as a developer envisions it, City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 12 would allow for each of the units to be developed independent of the others. The Planning Director and City Engineer have concluded that a true phasing plan identifying specific sequencing of developments, with the associated infrastructure requirements, is a necessary follow-up document to be approved by the City Engineer prior to the recordation of any subdivision maps. 5. Improvements. 1) There are a number of significant public improvements being required as part of this subdivision map process, many of which relate to the proposed circulation element. Marina Parkway is stubbed to the south property line of the subdivision boundary interfacing with property under the jurisdiction of the Port District. The approved LCP design extends Marina Parkway to the south with an alignment continuing further to the east to connect with Tidelands Avenue. The Port District has indicated that they are generally agreeable to such a connection; however, the specific design solution has not been agreed upon at this time. Because of the uncertainty of the design solution and the fact that the extension of the road represents an off-site improvement necessary for the recordation of this subdivision map, staff is recommending that the funding and dedication necessary to guarantee construction be addressed in the Disposition and Development Agreement. 2) The developer is proposing that Street "A" which serves the industrial development south of Lagoon Drive and the private drive identified to connect Marina Parkway with Lagoon Drive both be identified as private streets rather than public. Both the Planning and Engineering Department have no specific objections as long as the proper easements and structural sections are designed in accordance with approved Planning and Engineering standards and recorded prior to any development of any of the parcels affected by those private streets. The developer should recognize that the utilization of private streets in these areas will not cause any adjustments to required setbacks or limits on floor area ratios since those figures will be based on the net lot area exclusive of these private streets which would function the same as a public street. 3) In the Certified LCP (as amended), a condition was established for the applicant to prepare a feasibility study addressing the potential widening of the "E" Street bridge at I-5 to accommodate seven to nine lanes concurrent or prior to the Midbayfront tentative subdivision map approval. The applicant's tentative map reflects a six-lane bridge in conjunction with a modified loop design located on the west side of the freeway. A plan showing the physical impacts of the road widening relating to the bridge and "E" Street east and west of the bridge is City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 13 being prepared by the applicant and will be available at the meeting. A more detailed feasibility study addressing ramp modifications identified in the "Conditions" portion of this report and costs associated with widening construction will be required prior to map recordation. Construction will likely involve the acquisition of additional right-of-way to comply with the design criteria. 4) The tentative map has recently been revised to reflect a change at the northwest quadrant of I-5 and "E" Street representing a substantial departure from the approved LCP. The I-5 southbound off-ramp as depicted in the LCP would "T" into "E" Street aligned with Bay Boulevard to the south. Under the new revised tentative map, the southbound off-ramp actually "T"s into Bay Boulevard several hundred feet north of "E" Street. This was done to accommodate a design change based partially on the fact that utilities exist within Bay Boulevard which cannot be modified at this time and would require easements which are unacceptable to CalTrans because of their linear nature. The second part of the design change provides one northbound lane of traffic from "E" Street extending to the highway commercial property located between the I-5 freeway and the San Diego Gas & Electric right-of-way. In addition, Tidelands Avenue, which was shown in the Certified LCP as extending northerly from Marina Parkway in a curvilinear manner then extending parallel with the easterly boundary of the San Diego Gas & Electric right-of-way to the north, has been modified resulting in Tidelands Avenue "T"ing into an extension of Bay Boulevard. This combination of changes, which is neither acceptable to CalTrans nor the City Traffic Engineer, would result in a group of traffic signals in a small quadrant of land encompassed by Bay Boulevard, Tidelands Avenue, and Marina Parkway, which has not been addressed from the standpoint of traffic impacts or an amended LCP. Therefore, the staff is recommending that Tidelands Avenue be realigned in accordance with the alignment shown on the Certified Local Coastal Program and that the northbound traffic shown on Bay Boulevard for the area north of "E" Street be eliminated. These changes would bring the map into conformance with the adopted LCP. 5) Pedestrian Overpass. The LCP required that the developer submit a feasibility study regarding the construction and the location of a pedestrian overpass to provide pedestrian access between residential Units 5 and 7 and the proposed bayside park. The intent of such study was to determine the cost and both the feasibility and desirability of having a pedestrian connection between the central park area identified in Unit 10 and the bayside park area identified as Unit 9. The developer has submitted a very brief analysis and design study showing that a pedestrian bridge located at this point would cost between City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 14 $500,000 and $600,000 and, in their opinion, would represent a rather negative visual impact due to the required ramping necessary to meet the handicapped standards. The pedestrian bridge itself would have to have a minimum of an 18-1/2 foot clearance from the road bed because of the road classification of Marina Parkway. It is staff's opinion that the linear nature of the bayside park and the logical location of parking and activity areas, which would be located closer to the Marina Parkway/Gunpowder Point Drive intersection and also Marina Parkway/Lagoon Drive intersection, negate the need for the pedestrian overpass. On-street parking is prohibited on all of the public streets including Marina Parkway, and it is anticipated that signalization will occur both at the Lagoon Drive/Marina Parkway intersection and the Marina Parkway/Gunpowder Point Drive intersection. Pedestrians will be able to cross at those two points which are within reasonable walking distance from any point along the bayside park area. 6) San Diego Gas & Electric right-of-way. The 150 foot wide San Diego Gas & Electric right-of-way which runs along the easterly boundary of the subdivision map is not included as part of the subdivision; however, it is shown in the Certified LCP as a heavily landscaped parking area. The opportunity for the Midbayfront lots to utilize this parking area and increase the development potential on the lots is something that needs to be explored by the developer. The right-of-way area lying south of Lagoon Drive is now under lease by the Rohr Corporation and is intended to be used for their parking expansion. Access to the lot will be required via lots fronting Street "A". The adjacent lots created within the subdivision would certainly benefit if this area could be utilized for parking; therefore, we would encourage the mutual cooperation of the applicant and SDG&E. 7) Residential. The residential area identified as Unit 5 and 7 on the map is proposed to be divided into five lots ranging from just under 3 acres in size to just over 4 acres in size. It is staff's recommendation that this area should remain as a single lot until such time as a Development Plan is submitted giving staff an opportunity to review the location of buildings, open space, parking areas, and the landscaped park area which will connect the public park identified in Unit lO and the bayside park identified in Unit 9. This linkage can be accomplished on private property through the use of easements with the adjacent landscaping to be maintained by a homeowners' association or an apartment owner, if a condominium map is not filed. However, in absence of any plan submitted, it is our opinion that the project should remain as a single lot. It should also be noted that the LCP includes a residential area just over 18 acres in size with a density range of between 15 and 30 dwelling units per acre authorized resulting in a project of 270 - 540 units. With the area reduced to 16-1/2 acres and a commitment of approximately 2 acres for the public accessway, the developable area is only approximately 14-1/2 acres. Therefore, the minimum number of dwelling units per acre should be established at 20, City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 15 which would result in a project of approximately 280 units. This would allow the development to remain within the density range established in the LCP. The following are Code requirements: 1. The developer shall pay Traffic Signal Participation fees in accordance with City Council policy prior to issuance of building permi ts. 2. The developer shall pay all applicable sewer fees, including but not limited to Sewer Participation Fee, prior to issuance of building permits. 3. The developer shall underground all existing overhead facilities lying within the Subdivision. All utilities serving the subdivision shall be undergrounded. 4. All grading work shall be done in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Landscape Manual and Grading Ordinance 1797 as amended. 5. The developer shall comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Preparation of Final Maps and all plans shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act, Subdivision Ordinance and the Subdivision Manual of the City of Chula Vista. 6. Fire Department - see attached. D. FINDINGS: 1. Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act Tentative Map for Chula Vista Bayfront Subdivision, Reference CVT-87-4 is found to be in conformance with the various elements of the Chula Vista General Plan, which is the Certified Local Coastal Program, based on the following: a. The site is physically suitable for the proposed development and conforms to all of the standards established by the City for such projects based on the recommended conditions. Such determination is based on the approval of the Bayfront Specific Plan and the Land Use Plan which are consistent with the proposed Tentative Map. b. The design of the Subdivision will not affect the existing improvements, street service, etc. which have been designed to avoid any serious problems. The Subdivision has been designed to connect into and complement existing streets and drainage systems, and the services have been designed to handle the proposed capacities. c. The project is in substantial conformance with the Chula Vista General Plan elements as follows: City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 16 1) Land Use. The proposed development is in keeping with the land use pattern as adopted by the Land Use Plan and the Bayfront Specific Plan. 2) Circulation The proposed route connections and off-site street improvements as noted on the conditions of approval will provide the necessary grid pattern to link this project with existing and proposed developments which abut on all sides. The proposed conditions of approval will allow the project to proceed by mitigating all adverse impacts identified in the environmental review documents. 3) Housing The proposed development is designed to provide housing at a medium density for the upper middle to middle income categories. This represents an extension of the densities of the closest residential area now existing on the east side of the I-5 freeway. The residential area is surrounded by open space which will be part of the wetlands program and land proposed to be developed for park purposes, 4) Conservation The map identifies over 24 acres of wetland and buffer areas to be incorporated within this project as well an additional 23 acres of park land. In addition, conditions are imposed to ensure that the land will be developed in accordance with the certified LCP and the wetlands enhancement plans now being prepared. 5) Parks and Recreation Open Space The plan reflects approximately 23 acres of parkland which is well in excess of the amount of parkland required by the City's Parkland Dedication Ordinance. The proposed park and open space area is consistent with the Certified LCP. 6) Seismic Safety The subject property is not traversed by any known earthquake faults or traces, although the San Diego Bay Fault lies approximately a mile to the west in the middle of San Diego Bay running approximately in a north-south direction. 7) Safety The development is located within the acceptable response time of the Chula Vista Fire Station located near the corner of Fourth and "F" Streets in Chula Vista. The City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 17 proposed conditions of approval and standard requirements as set forth by the City Ordinances will provide for the proper water pressure and access routes for emergency vehicles to the various projects proposed within the subdivision. 8) Noise Those portions of development which are adjacent to major road systems will require additional environmental review depending on the type of project proposed to ensure compliance with City and State noise regulations. The proposed dwelling units will be required to meet the standards specified in the Uniform Building Code for noise criteria. 9) Scenic Highways Both the extension of "E" Street and Marina Parkway are identified on the Scenic Route Element of the Chula Vista General Plan. The Design Manual being developed for the Chula Vista Bayfront area will set forth the design criteria for landscaping and building elements necessary to carry out the intent of the Scenic Route Plan. Recordation of this subdivision map is predicated upon completion and incorporation of the Design Manual as part of the Subdivision Map Process. 10) Bike Routes The proposed street sections and open space areas identified on this subdivision map together with the conditions imposed will ensure the continued linkage of the bike system within the Midbayfront area to the adjoining Bayfront properties to the south as well as the remaining City area to the east. Bicycle lanes and paths will be provided in accordance with the Certified LCP. ll) Public Buildings Public buildings are neither proposed or required on the project site with the exception of limited bus shelters which will be provided at major loading areas. WPC 3501P December 10, 1986 To: Ken Lee, Principal Planning Dept. From: Carol Gove ~,~ Fire Marshal Subject: Bayfront Plan The following comments are offered as requested. Requirements will be generalized until such time as more specific information becomes available to the fire department. 1. Provide roadway access for fire apparatus with all weather driving surface of not less than 20 feet of unobstructed width, with adequate roadway turning radius capable of sup- porting the imposed loads of fire apparatus and having a minimum of 13 feet 6 inches of vertical clearance. UFC 10.207 (a). 2. The access roadway shall be extended to within 150 feet of all portions of the exterior walls of the first story of any building. Where the access roadway cannot be provided, ap- proved fire protection system or systems shall be provided as required and approved by the Chief. UFC 10.207 (c). 3. An approved water supply capable of supplying required fire flow for fire protection shall be provided to all premises upon which buildings or portions of buildings are hereafter constructed. When any portion of the building protected is in excess of 150 feet from a water supply on a public street, there shall be provided, when required by the Chief, on-site fire hydrants and mains capable of supplying the required fire flow. UFC 10.301 (c). 4. When fire protection facilities are to be installed by the developer, such facilities including all surface access roads shall be installed and made serviceable prior to and during the time of construction. UFC 10.301 (d). 5. Fire extinguishers will be required. 6. Fire alarm systems are required in apartment houses three or more stories in height or containing more than 15 apartments; in hotels either three stories or more in height or containing 20 or more guest rooms. 7. Automatic fire extinguishing systems may be required dependent upon the type of occupancy, building area and fire flow requirements. 8. The fire flow requirements are based on floor area and occupancy classification. (Guide is attached) /CG/1 attach. -- FIRE FLOW REQUIREMENTS ~ FIRE FLOW DURATION FIRE HYDF DISTRICT CLASSIFICATION ~ P~QUIREMII~TS REQUIREMENTS SPACINC (gpm) (Hours) (In Feet I. SinGle Family Residential · 1000 ~ 300 Limited Multiple R~sidence " 1 and 2 Stories · Apar U~ ~-n t/Tener~_nt s/Do rmi- ~-~ tories , ' Building Size in Square Feet on ~. First Floor (Notes 1,2,3 & 6) '.' ..-- Less than 5000 square feet . 1500 3 '- 300 5000 or nore square feet 2000 4 300 10,000 or more square feet ·2500 5 300 15,000 or more square feet ·3000 5 300 20,000 or ~re square feet 3500 5 300 II. Unlimited Rasidence Three Story and Higher Hotels - High Rise - Etc. Building Size in Square Feet on First Floor (Notes 1,2, 4, 6 & 7) Less than 10,000 square feet 2000 4 300 10,000 or more square feet 2500 5 300 15,000 or more square feet 3000 5 300 20,000 or more square feet - 3500 5 300 25,000 or more square feet 4000 5 300 30,000 or more square feet 4500 5 300 35,000 or more square feet 5000 5 300 III. C~mmercial or Industrial Building Size in Square Feet on First Floor (Notes 1,2,4,5, 6 & 7) Less than 10,000 s~]~re feet 2000 4 300 10,000 or more square feet 2500 5 300 15,000 or more squs/e feet 3000 5 300 20,000 or mOre square feet 3500 5 300 25,000 or mOre square feet 4000 5 '300 30,000 or mOre square feet 4500 5 300 35,000 or more Square feet 5000 5 300 IV. Schools · A. Elementary 2000 4 300 B. Interm~diate (Jr. High) 2500 5 300 C. Senior High 3000 5 300 D. University - College 5000 5 300 V. Other - Per standards of recognized Public Fire Protection Grading and Rating Agencies. 1. Wqnen development occurs in a mountainous area, at least two-thirds of tits required duration should be provided from storage located at an elevation capable of delivering the fire flow by gravity. 2. When multiple buildings are constructed on the same property, the req,~ed f~re flow shall be based upon the largest building on the property. Full consideration n~st be given to the distance provided between such b ~ui!dings. 3. 500 gallons per minute should be added for each additional floor level ~--n addition to the first floor to a total required fire flow not to ex ~cee_d 3,500 gallons per minute. 4. 500 gallons per minute should be added for each additional floor level ~n addition to the first floor to a total required fire flow not to exceed 5,000 gallons per minute. -~ 5. 5,000 gallons per minute should be required for industrial and/or cu~rcial subdivisions where lend use or zoning allows the construction of bu~].~ings that justify such a flow. 6. W~nere buildings are provided with an automatic sprinkler system throughout re~:ired fire flows may be reduced by as much as 50%. Ail such reductions should be predicated on recognized standards and recommendations of t~he public fire protection grading and rating agencies providing that service. 7. Whenever the required fire flow for any building exceeds 3,500 gallons per minute, the authority having jurisdiction may re_c~ire an automatic sprJ-~kler system be installed throughout the building. 8. Ail required fire flows are to be available at 20 pounds per square Lncin residual operating pressure. In order to arrive at a standard fire flow requiren~nt, the above requirements were agreed to by the following jurisdictions: Chula Vista Fire Deparh~mnt Montgome~f Fire Protection District National City Fire Depart~mnt Imperial Beach Fire DeparL~nt Bonita/Sunnyside Fire Protection District Coronado Fire Depamh~emt T~M/m 11/16/82 VIEW OF OVERHEAD POWER L~ES OBSCURED BY TREE CANOPY FUTURE BUILDING SITE EXISTING RESTAURANT POWER LINES,TOWERS AND PARKING LOTS SCREENED DEFINED PEDESTRIAN ROUTE BY THE STREET TREES -- ~5 TROLLEY MAP 9 LANDSCAPE CONCEPT AT E-STREET GATEWAY 7O SAN DIEGO BAY VENER MARSH VENERPOND / BAY -. I-5 MAP 8 SEQUENCE OF VIEWS ALONG THE BAYFRONT GATEWAY MAP 11 MIDBAYFRONT DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT GUIDELINES 42 APPENDIX B CITY OF CHULA VISIA DISCLOSURE STATEMENI APPLICANT'S' STATEMENT OF DISCLOSURE OF CERTAIN OWNERSHIP INTERESTS ON ALL APPLICATIONS WHICH WILL REQUIRE DISCRETIONARY ACTION ON THE PARI OF THE CITY COUNCIL, PLANNING COMMISSION AND ALL OTHER OFFICIAL BODIES. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the application. A. Chula Vista Investment Company B. Santa Fe Land Improvement Company a partnership and Joint Venture a Corporation List the names of all persons having any ownership interest in the property involved. A. Chula Vista Investmen't Company B. Santa Fe Land Improvement Company 2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership interest in the partnership. as to A. above: equally owned by Watt Industries~ San Diego~ Inc. of which the stock is owned by Raymond A. Watt and Joseph D. Davis; and by the Chula Vista Bayfrontlnvestment Company. 3. If any person identified pursuant to {1) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust. 4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of City staff, Boards, Commissions, Co,~ittees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes No NO If yes, please indicate personls) Person is defined as: "Any individual, firm, copartnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, this and any other county, city and county, city, municipality, district or other political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit." INOTE: Attach additional pages as necessary. · ~./~/~j~ Nov. 11~986 Signature ~f appliCant/date ~ro]ect Co- ~ / ordinator; WPC 0701P/1748H Jack H. Dimond, for Chula Vista Investm( A-110 Print or type name of applicant Company B City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 1 5. PUBLIC HEARING: EIR-86-3: Town Centre II (Expansion of Chula Vista Shopping Center} Draft Environmental Impact Report A. BACKGROUND This EIR involves the renovation and expansion of the Chula Vista Shopping Center including the closure of Fifth Avenue. The Draft EIR was issued for public and agency review on December 24, 1986. B. RECOMMENDATION Open the public hearing, take any testimony regarding the adequacy of the Draft EIR and schedule consideration of the Final EIR for February ll, 1987. C. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The Chula Vista Town Centre II project is located on approximately 65 acres within the City of Chula Vista's Town Centre Project No. II Redevelopment Plan area and is known as the Chula Vista Shopping Center. This EIR is supplemental to EIR-78-13 which, in 1978, assessed the establishment of the Town Centre No. II Redevelopment Plan Area. The project site is bounded by "H" Street, "I" Street, Broadway, and approximately 100 feet west of Fig Avenue. Presently, the project site consists of two separate areas bisected by the block of Fifth Avenue, between "H" Street and "I" Street. The proposed project involves the expansion and renovation of the existing Chula Vista Shopping Centre to provide one contiguous shopping center of unified design to ensure continuity for pedestrian and vehicular circulation. The proposed expansion of 141,400 square feet of gross leaseable areas in new, primarily single story, mall shops would be accomplished by connecting the two portions of the existing shopping center, now separated by Fifth Avenue. The project proposes the closure of the block of Fifth Avenue between "H" Street and "I" Street, with a new mall expansion added at grade between the existing Broadway and Sears department stores. In addition, the existing shopping mall would be modified and renovated so as to be compatible with the newly constructed expansion area. The shopping center is proposed to be primarily single-level with an open-air confi§uration. D. IMPACT ANALYSIS 1. Traffic Total cumulative future traffic volumes were calculated consisting of the current traffic, the through traffic diverted from Fifth Avenue, the additional traffic generated by the shopping center expansion, City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 2 the traffic generated by the Chula Vista Bayfront Project and a 3 percent per year growth factor for 1.25 years of other unknown future developments. The proposed project would result in direct increased traffic on several streets in the study area from the diversion of traffic from the vacated Fifth Avenue between "H" and "I" Streets. The estimated peak hour "through" trips diverted to surrounding streets range from 265-345 for southbound trips and from 240-310 for northbound trips, depending on the particular peak hours. The traffic analysis concluded that a net increase of approximately 4,200 daily trips would be associated with the shopping center expansion. The increased cumulative traffic volumes would result in a significant reduction in the level of service at the Broadway/"H" Street intersection from Level of Service E to Level of Service F, exceeding the roadway capacity. The Fourth Avenue/"H" Street intersection would worsen from Level of Service D to Level of Service E with project implementation. These are regarded as significant environmental impacts associated with traffic. The applicant is proposing the implementation of several mitigation measures at the intersection of Broadway/"H" Street, Fourth Avenue/"H" Street, Fourth Avenue/"I" Street, and Fifth Avenue/"I" Street. With implementation of the measures, potential traffic impacts associated with the project would be fully mitigated. One intersection, Broadway/"H" Street, would continue to operate at LOS E during the p.m. peak hour even with implementation of the proposed mitigation measures. The LOS E at this intersection would occur with or without the proposed project and is the result of general development in the area, not directly the result of implementation of the proposed project. Mitigation measures proposed by the project would actually improve the Level of Service at this intersection from E to D during the mid-day peak hours. Additionally, the applicant is proposing the cul-de-sacing of Fig Avenue, just north of Shasta Street, to eliminate the possibility of motorists driving on Fig Avenue as a bypass street after the vacation of Fifth Avenue. With that change, the integrity of the residential neighborhood would be preserved. 2. Noise Noise levels were measures along sensitive residential streets affected by the Center. The change in future noise levels resulting from project implementation was calculated and compared to Chula Vista noise standards. An estimated 0.4 dB(A) increase in noise levels would result with the implementation project for those residences along Fig Avenue. This 0.4 dB(A) increase would not significantly affect those residences. Noise levels for residences that have a common boundary with the shopping center are, therefore, currently within the City's performance standards and would remain so with implementation of the proposed project. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 3 3. Utility Relocations The closure of Fifth Avenue associated with the project would require the relocation of two high pressure gas mains located in Fifth Avenue. According to SDG&E, these existing lines serve major portions of the South Bay area and relocation of these lines would have potentially significant impacts. The significance of these impacts would depend upon the ultimate plans for the relocation of the gas mains and their compatibility with SDG&E's operating objectives. According to SDG&E, complete mitigation of potential impacts associated with relocation of the gas lines in Fifth Avenue could only occur through a redesign of the project which would permit retention of the lines in Fifth Avenue. Such alternative redesigns are presented in the alternatives section of this EIR. It should also be possible to develop a relocation plan which would be acceptable to SDG&E. Such a relocation should be closely coordinated with SDG&E, the City and the applicant. 4. Fiscal Analysis Anticipated net revenues to the City of Chula Vista generated by the project are the property tax increment, to be utilized by the City's Redevelopment Agency, and an increase in the share of sales tax revenue to the City. If, as initially proposed, only the tax increment is utilized, there would not be sufficient funds to cover debt service associated with the share costs to be financed by the Redevelopment Agency, even assuming 90% of the increment to be allocated to the City. From the perspective of the City, however, the project may generate substantial revenues from increased sales taxes and from forestalling a potential decline in sales taxes, if no redevelopment were to occur. Based on projected sales after redevelopment, property tax increment plus increase in sales tax over the estimated 1986 level will be sufficient to cover debt service for the proposed project, under all assumptions regarding the allocation of tax increment between the City and other jurisdictions. The project will have a positive net fiscal impact, if the City authorizes the application of a portion of increased sales tax to the Redevelopment Agency for debt service and other project costs. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 4 E. ALTERNATIVES 1. No Project Under this alternative, there would be no change from existing conditions. The shopping center would not be expanded or renovated and there would be no change to Fifth Avenue between "H" Street and "I" Street. The Chula Vista Shopping Center would continue to be bisected by Fifth Avenue. The applicant has indicated that sales at the shopping center are diminishing. It is their projection that under the No Project Alternative a further reduction in sales would occur and the departure of the J. C. Penney and Broadway stores are likely. This alternative would not take advantage of this opportunity for redevelopment of the shopping center consistent with the Town Centre II Redevelopment Plan. The No Project Alternative would avoid significant traffic impacts and potential significant impacts associated with relocation of utility lines which would result under the proposed project. The alternative of undertaking no redevelopment would likely lead to a reduction in sales tax revenues, a reduction which might exceed any temporary increase in property tax resulting from reassessment at the time of transfer. 2. Partial Depression of Fifth Avenue and Partial Elevation of Mall Expansion This alternative would maintain north/south travel along Fifth Avenue by partially depressing the street between "H" Street and "I" Street and partially elevating the mall expansion over Fifth Avenue. The extent of the shopping enter expansion and the renovation of the existing mall would be the same as the proposed project. In terms of the partial street depression, by only partially depressing the street, the depression could be accomplished within the one-block area, taking into account the 8-9 foot natural elevation difference between the Sears and Broadway department stores and minimal clearances for expected vehicular traffic. However, due to the location of the top of the ramps for the partial depression of Fifth Avenue at the eastern and western property lines, an internal "ring road" would not be possible under this alternative. The applicant has indicated that a ring road is critical to the economic success of a shopping center. Without such on-site circulation, traffic would not be able to access the site from any point and freely circulate to other desired locations. It may be possible to bridge the "ring road" over Fifth Avenue, however, no specific studies of this have been performed. City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 5 The partial depression of Fifth Avenue would require the reconfiguration and further depression of the water and gas mains now located in Fifth Avenue. The relocation of these utilities is not expected to result in a significant impact. According to SDG&E, however, the potential would exist with either the partial or full depression alternative for the entrapment of gas under the depressed portion of the street. Additionally, the existing sewer and storm drains would be intercepted by the retaining walls for the street depression. The relocation of the sewer line is considered to be relatively routine and no significant impact is anticipated. The interception of the storm drain by the depression of Fifth Avenue could result in adverse impacts. The feasibility of mitigating this impact would require a thorough analysis. A holding tank and pump station would need to be constructed to transfer the storm drainage to another storm drain location off the site. Due to the magnitude of the pump station that would be required, the cost implications would be significant, the combined effects of increased costs and reduced revenues would result in negative fiscal effects under this alternative. 3. Full Depression of Fifth Avenue, Creation of Single-Level Expanded Mall This alternative would maintain north-south travel along Fifth Avenue by fully depressing the street for the one-block area between "H" Street and "I" Street. The shopping center expansion and renovation of the existing shopping center would be the same as that which would occur under the proposed project. In order to comply with street design standards and provide adequate stopping site distances, the vertical curves of the new Fifth Avenue profile (descent and ascent ramps) would have to begin approximately 800 feet north of "H" Street and 800 feet south of "I" Street. As a result of this physical requirement, the study recommended in addition the following improvements: Seven existing streets be rebuilt as cul-de-sacs Two new by-pass road be built Four signalized intersections be created It is anticipated that significant traffic impacts would be associated with the road network changes required under this alternative. The full depression of Fifth Avenue under the shopping center expansion would require the reconfiguration and further depression of the water and gas lines now located in Fifth Avenue. As with the partial depression alternative, this would not be considered as a significant impact, although the potential could exist for entrapment of gas under the depressed portion of the street. Impacts associated with reconfiguration of sewer and drainage facilities would be similar to those described under the City Planning Commission Agenda Items for Meeting of January 28, 1987 Page 6 partial depression alternative. Costs associated with the improvements required under this alternative would be significant. The high improvement costs associated with this alternative would result in adverse fiscal impacts. 4. Full Elevation of Mall Expansion, Retaining Fifth Avenue at Grade Under this alternative, Fifth Avenue would remain at grade as a through street and the shopping center expansion would be elevated above Fifth Avenue. The expansion and renovation of the shopping center would create a contiguous center of unified design. As opposed to the proposed project and all other mall expansion alternatives, the mall would result in a distinct two-level design with the existing shopping center located west of Fifth Avenue remaining single-story and the shopping center expansion area being a full-story elevation higher. As with the No Project and Partial Depression Alternatives, Fifth Avenue would continue to physically bisect the site. An internal "ring road" would not be possible under this alternative, which the applicant has determined to be critical to the success of a regional shopping center. F. COMMENTS ON THE DRAFT EIR Written comments have been received from the Sweetwater Authority and the Resource Conservation Commission (RCC). The RCC comments also include recommendations regarding the project. Copies of these comments are attached. G. FURTHER ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW A Notice of Preparation is currently being circulated for a second EIR for the project. It will concentrate on the change in the financing for the project and will primarily be used by taxing agencies which will be affected by the changes. It is anticipated that this document will be out for public review in mid-February. WPC 3536P S WEETWATER AUTHORITY 505 GARREtt AVENUE POST OFF~CE BOX 2328 CNULA VISTA CALIFORNIA 92012.2328 January 15, 1987 RICHARDG. ZOCtOB Hr. Douglas Reid City of Chula Vista P1 anning Department 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 92010 SUBJECT: DRAFT EIR - CHULA VISTA TOWN CENTER II FIFTH AVENUE, BETWEEN "H" AND "I" STREETS Dear Mr. Reid: We have completed a review of the draft environmental impact report for subject project and wish to offer the following comments: The report only makes reference to the existing 8" water main in Fifth Avenue, the 12" water main in "I" Street and the 8" water main in "H" Street. Actually, there are existing water mains in this area as follows: 1. "I" Street, 8" and 12" mains from Broadway to Fifth Avenue 2. Fifth Avenue, 8" main from "I" Street to "H" Street 3. "H" Street, 6" main from Broadway to Fifth Avenue 4. Broadway, 12" main from "I" to "H" Streets 5. Onsite 8" and 10" mains around Broadway Hale Stores, and between "I" and "H" Streets We have attached a copy of our 1/4 section 148 map, which indicates the location of these facilities. Please note that the 10" water main within the shopping center is the primary source of domestic and fire protection to the shopping center. The utility drawing on page 39 should be corrected to reflect all of these water mains. On page 41 of the report, it indicates the relocation of the 8" main in Fifth Avenue to Fig Avenue. /1 Public ?lgency, Se~vin~ Natt~nal City, Chula Vista and Surroundt~ ~lreas Mr. Douglas Reid City of Chula Vista Planning Department DRAFT EIR, CHULA VISTA TOWN CENTE)~ II FIFTH AVENUE, BETWEEN "H" AND "I" STREETS January 15, 1987 page 2 Your report does not address the effect on other facilities caused by the relocation of this main. Also, the report must address the relocation of the 8" and 10" mains presently serving the existing development. To determine the overall effect of this proposed project, a hydraulic network analysis must be performed. This analysis will determine the location and sizing of water mains necessary to meet the domestic and fire requirements of this proposed development, plus adjacent existing properties. On page 41, under Other Utilities, the report indicates that "additionally, the proposed project will require on-site expansion and upgrading of existing fire mains and fire hydrant systems. No significant impacts with regard to these facilities are anticipated." Until the hydraulic network analysis for this area and development is completed, the exact impact of water facility rearrangement cannot be determined. However, because the water facilities presently serving the existing stores must be rearranged, water outages affecting both domestic and fire protection are anticipated and therefore, an impact is anticipated. On page 66, under Utility Relocation Partial Depression, it is indicated the depression would necessitate the depression of the water and gas lines now located in Fifth Avenue. On page 70, Utility Relocation Full Depression, it is also indicated a further depression of water and gas lines would be required in Fifth Avenue. Both of these alternatives will create low points, which during a failure or maintenance of the water main, will cause a ponding of water in this low point. A method of discharging this water must be constructed to assure no damage is caused by a failure or planned maintenance. The construction of' buildings over this depressed area limits the use of equipment normally employed during the repair or maintenance of water facilities. This will require hand maintenance instead of maintenance with equipment, and a significant increase in cost can be anticipated. An indemnification against these extra costs must be given to the Authority. On page 72, under Full Elevation Alternative, the buildings constructed over the water facilities will again limit access for maintenance and higher costs can be anticipated. The Executive Summary should also be modified to reflect the above comments. In order for the Sweetwater Authority to begin work on the hydraulic network analysis and other studies for the project, the Mr. Douglas Reid City of Chula Vista Planning Department DRAFT EIR - CHULA VISTA TOWN CENTER II FIFTH AVENUE, BETWEEN "H" AND "I" STREETS January 15, 1987 page 3 owner/developer must place a $3,000.00 deposit, submit plans for the proposed development and obtain a letter from the City of Chula Vista Fire Department addressing the required fire demands and fire hydrants and services for the project. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Jim Smyth at 420-1413, ext. 223. Sincerely, SWEETWATER AU~ Operat]~ Manager ARS:JEG:lt enclosure: 1/4 SEC 148 TLT1 :CVTWNCEN RECEIVED PLANi; ,"- r RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION City of Chula Vista Chula Vista, CA 92010 January 21, 1987 Attention: Steve Taylor, Chairman REFERENCE: EIR-86-3 Expansion of Chula Vista Shopping Center An evaluation of the referenced EIR has been completed. The EIR has been found to be adequate in the areas of Traffic Volumes, Noise, Air Quality, Utility Relocation and Fiscal Analysis. In addition, alternative proposals were offered to mitigate the negative financial aspects of the project. However, the feasibility of the project remains questionable. In our opinion, the citizenry of Chula Vista is opposed to the closing of 5th Avenue to through traffic. It would seem prudent to re-evaluate the alternate proposals to: 1. Revise the partial depression proposal to include the ring road around the periphery to bridge over 5th Avenue. 2. Explore a full elevation scheme to improve approach to the 5th Avenue "Tunnel." 3. Redevelop the area between 5th Avenue and Broadway and add a second level of mall shops. It should also be noted that it is our opinion that in order to compete with other '!regional" shopping centers, additional major tenants would have to commit to locate in the shopping center. It would take someone like a Nordstrom's, Robinson's, Neiman-Marcus or Bullock's to draw sufficient shoppers to the area to assure a financial success. Submitted by: T. L. Mitchell Member of Resource Conservation Commission