HomeMy WebLinkAbout2011/01/18 Item 8~.:-
®~ ~~~.~ =~, CITY COUNCIL
AGENDA STATEMENT
~~~ CITY OF
----- CHULAVISTA
01/18/11 Item
ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING TO CONSIDER APPROVING AN
ADDENDUM TO THE FINAL ENVIl20NMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT, FE1R-06-O1
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING THREE MINOR AMENDMENTS TO THE
URBAN CORE SPECIFIC PLAN TO: 1) RECLASSIFY
THIRD AVENUE BETWEEN E AND H STREET FROM A
FOUR LANE TO A TWO LANE DOWNTOWN
PROMENADE; 2) MODIFY THE RESIDENTIAL PARKING
STANDARDS FOR THE CORRIDORS DISTRICT; AND 3)
ADD OUTDOOR DINING DESIGN GUIDELINES AS AN
APPENDLY TO THE URBAN CO SPECIFIC PLAN.
ASSISTANT CITY MANAGE$~CTOR OF
DEVELOPMENTSERV CES
CITY MANAGER
4/STHS VOTE: YES ~ NO
BACKGROUND
The Urban Core Specific Plan adopted by Council May 15, 2007 classified Third Avenue
between E Street and H Street as a Downtown Promenade Street (two or four lanes). The
amendment under consideration would classify Third Avenue between E Street and H
Street as a two lane Downtown Promenade and amend the parking requirements for the
outlying azeas of the Urban Core to provide additional parking.
The Urban Core Specific Plan provides design standards for the Development and the
Public Realm within the Third Avenue Village District. A special pedestrian oriented
"cafe" environment for the downtown Village is a stated goal of the Urban Core Specific
Plan. The outdoor dining design guidelines developed by the Third Avenue Village
Association will provide overall standards for the use of outdoor dining areas along Third
Avenue and adjoining streets. By including these guidelines as an appendix to the UCSP,
the assurance of quality outdoors dining areas, al fresco, will assist in chazacterizing the
8-1
01/18/11, Item ~
Page 2
Third Avenue Village.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
The Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed project for compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the
project was covered in previously adopted Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) for
the Chula Vista Urban Core Specific Plan (UCSP), FEIR-06-O1. The Development
Services Director has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to FEIR-
06-O1 are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the
State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent document have
occurred. Therefore, the Development Services Director has prepared an Addendum to
FEIR-06-O1. Additionally, because the proposed project will be utilizing federal
Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) monies, the Development Services
Director has also reviewed the proposal for compliance with the National Environmental
Policy Act (NEPA) as implemented by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban
Development (HUD) Environmental Guidelines. The Development Services Director has
determined that the project qualifies for a Categorical Exclusion (subject to 58.5)
pursuant to Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 24, Section 58.35(a). Thus no
further NEPA environmental review is required.
RECOMMENDATION
Council conducts the public hearing and adopts the draft Ordinance.
BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
At their meeting on December 22, 2010, the Planning Commission approved a resolution
recommending that the City Council approve an Ordinance to approve the Addendum to
FEIR-06-O1 and Amend the UCSP.
DISCUSSION
Specific Plan Amendment
The UCSP was adopted by Ordinance and implements the adopted General Plan by
establishing land uses, development standards and'design guidelines all within the
Specific Plan Focus Areas. Chapter 5 -Mobility; Chapter 6 -Land Use and
Development Regulations; and Chapter 8 -Public Realm Guidelines are the affected
Chapters in the UCSP.
The UCSP allows for amendments as often as deemed necessary by the legislative body.
The subject amendments are being initiated by the City in accordance with all terms and
conditions imposed during the original approval of the UCSP and in accordance with
terms and conditions pertaining to the Chula Vista Municipal Code. hi accordance with
Chapter 11, Section "D", of the UCSP, these amendments maybe considered minor in
8-2
01/18/11, Item
Page 3
nature and would generally only require administrative review and approval. Staff
decided, however to obtain Council action of these amendments so that the subject
amendments would be fully vetted with Council and the public.
Third Avenue Traffic Lane
The Third Avenue streetscape Master Plan proposes to improve the segment of Third
Avenue between H Street and F Street with pedestrian and bicyclists' amenities to
provide a more attractive destination and encourage walking within the village. The
general plan vision for the urban core sees the urban core containing the greatest diversity
of public commercial, civic, financial, cultural, and residential uses emphasizing its role
as the hub of the City. The diversity of the Urban Core in character, architectural style,
pedestrian-friendly environment, will enhance the traditional residential neighborhoods
that surround the Urban Core. The streetscape master plan will accomplish this by
providing an environment commensurate with a "pedestrian safe" and "pedestrian
enjoyable" setting. The Third Avenue streetscape Master Plan design will change the
current two - to four lane configuration of Third Avenue between E Street and H Street
to a consistent two-lane downtown promenade. The two-lane configuration will enhance
pedestrian safety and support the smart growth design principals envisioned by the 2005
General Plan and the UCSP. The change will provide fora "well-balanced" urban
environment. Additionally, these public realm improvements will serve to improve the
area's visual quality and act as an investment catalyst for property upgrades and new
developments.
With the proposed reduction in the number of lanes from four lanes to two, the traffic
model is now indicating fewer ADT trips on Third Avenue between E and H Streets. The
two-lane capacity of Third Avenue is adequate for the new vehicular volumes. No new
ADT impacts on local surrounding streets were discovered. The final design has resulted
in an enhanced multi-modal design of this segment of Third Avenue with multi-modal
circulation including; enhanced public amenities, the incorporation of pedestrian refuge
islands and bulb-outs and a Class III bike lane. Staff has modeled the changes to traffic
patterns to ensure that unintended congestion does not occur as a result of the proposed
two-lane configuration. Using the San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG)
traffic model which projects population increases and their associated trips to the year
2030, the level of service for the subject street segment is maintained within the City's
Growth Management thresholds, all the while providing an opportunity for some of those
trips to occur on foot.
Public Participation
Outreach meetings to various community groups were held during the months of January
and February 2010 to present and discuss the proposed 2-lane configuration. Outreach
groups included the Northwest Civic Association, Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce,
8-3
01/18/11, Item
Page 4
Chula Vista Civic Association, Third Avenue Village Association (TAVA) Design
Committee and Crossroads II. All were provided an overview of the proposed re-
configuration of lanes. Staff received comments and it was staff s general impression
that outreach participants supported the streetscape master plan and the traffic lane re-
configuration.
Residential Parking Standards
The UCSP provides parking standards for residential parking within the Land Use and
Development Regulations section. Council directed staff to review how the existing
residential parking requirements in the Comdors District area are performing. Based on
this review by staff, staff recommends modifying the parking requirements from the
current UCSP standard of 1.5 spaces per dwelling unit and 1 space per 10 dwelling units
for guests to the city wide standard of 1.5 spaces for studios and one bedroom units and
2.0 spaces for dwelling units with 2 bedrooms or more. The proposed amendments to the
parking requirements affect only the corridor districts, which are areas of the Urban Core
that are the furthest away from the center of the Urban Core and have accessibility to
transit services.
Third Avenue Village Outdoor Dining Design Guidelines
The City of Chula Vista permits outdoor dining along Third Avenue and adjoining streets
in the Village azea through an administrative permitting process. The UCSP includes
Development Guidelines for both the private and public realm, to provide guidance for
the design and enhancement of buildings and the street scene within the Urban Core. The
Design treatment desired for the Village area supports and encourages a special
pedestrian oriented "cafe" environment for the downtown Village.
The Third Avenue Village Association believes that the outdoor dining areas along Third
Avenue should comply with the intent of the UCSP and has prepared Guidelines for
outdoor dining to maintain a quality appearance for the "cafe" environment desired for
the downtown Village. The guidelines prescribe the standards for the selection of street
furniture, preferred appurtenances and furnishings that would be considered acceptable
within the Third Avenue Village azea. These guidelines will be included in the UCSP
plan as an Appendix.
DECISION MAKER CONFLICTS
Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found a conflict; in
that council member Castaneda has property holdings within 500 feet of the boundazy of
the UCSP areas, which is the subject of this action
CURRENT YEAR FISCAL IMPACT
There are no impacts to the General Fund for Amending the UCSP.
8-4
01/18/11, Item
Page 5
ONGOING FISCAL IMPACT
Amending the UCSP does not have on-going fiscal impacts. Any development, which
may occur under the UCSP, could have on-going impacts, which would be identified
with each subsequent development project.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Amendments
2. Addendum to FEIR-06-O1/FEIR-06-O1 Executive Summary
3. White Paper Analyzing Reclassification of Third Avenue between E and H
Street
4. Third Avenue Village Outdoor Dining Design Guidelines.
Prepared by.' Garry B. Williams, Project M¢rtager, Development Services Deportment
8-5
Attachment 1
URBAN CORE SPECIFIC PLAN AMENDMENTS
Third Avenue Streetscape Master Plan:
The Third Avenue Streetscape Master Plan (TASMP) design will change the current
two/four lane configuration of Third Avenue between E Street and H Street to a
consistent two lane downtown promenade. The final design, developed though the
Streetscape master plan process, has resulted in an improved multi-modal design of this
segment of Third Avenue with better traffic circulation; enhanced safety for pedestrians,
and incorporation of a Class III bike lane. To reflect the design of the TASMP, the
following amendments are proposed to the Urban Core Specific Plan:
Page V-20 -Figure 5.11 is revised as follows:
*Third Avenue will be designed as a two lane downtown promenade from E Street to H
Street pursuant to the Third Avenue Streetscape Master Plan.
Page V-22 is revised as follows:
a.. Third Avenue
The cross section of Third Avenue varies greatly between E Street and H6 Street. The
roadway varies between 72 feet and 101 feet. The roadway will be modified from its
n,^~.Q..,'^'^~ current two and four lane configuration between E Street and H6
Street, to a consistent two-lane downtown promenade between E Street and H Street. A
transition back to four lanes occurs iust north of H Street T'^^ ~^ ^'^~'^• ^' Tom'..,
e..^^ a ~,. r et.^^+ ..: n ~~^., ~„ ttie a^~ s„ ~ i^.,^ ..^^a .. ..,~~,. It IS proposed t0
retain the existing lap rated median, with additional planted medians to be constructed as
part of the TASMP. Diagonal parking will be provided for most parts of Third Avenue.
Page Vllt-8 is revised as follows:
3. Streetscape Treatments for Third Avenue
Third Avenue is intended to function as a destination shopping and Village oriented
venue where a number of activities can take place. The street has the following
segments:
8-6
a. E Street to H6 Street
This portion is the heart of the traditional Village area. Within this segment the street will
be designed to have one er-I:ws travel lanes in each direction with diagonal or parallel
parking. The design of this section will provide mid-block pedestrian crosswalks, curb
extensions at mid-block and intersections, and wide sidewalks throughout.
b. H6 Street to K Street
This portion of Third Avenue provides an opportunity to expand the traditional village
and improve the village pedestrian environment. This segment will have parallel parking
on both sides, two travel lanes in each direction, and a center left turn lane. The design
of this segment will provide occasional mid-block crossings, curb extensions at mid-
block crossings and intersections, and wide sidewalks throughout the length of the
section.
8-7
A
Corridors Districts -Changes to Residential Parking Standard:
The following revisions are made to the residential parking standard for the. Corridors
Districts C-1; C-2; and C-3. These revisions incorporate the multi-family residential
parking standard that is applicable elsewhere in the city of Chula Vista. The parking
standard of 1..5 parking spaces for studio and one bedroom units; and two parking
spaces for two or more bedroom units is more reflective of low rise auto oriented
development rather than the more urban standard applied throughout the rest of the
urban core which is reflective of a multi-modal environment. The following edits are
proposed to the Zoning Sheets for the Corridors Districts Parking Standards:
Pages VI-37 through VI-39 are revised as follows:
Delete UCSP Residential Parking Standard and reference parking standard established
by Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 19.62.050 for multiple family residential uses.
3
8-9
G 1 Third Avenue South
(Neighborhood Transition Combining District)
Urban Reguiatlons
1. Floor Area Ratio:
Min: N/A Max LO
2. Lot Coverage:
Min: N/A Max: TO%
3. Building Nelght:
Mln: 18' Max 60'
4. Bul/d/ng5tepbaclc Not mandatory
5. Street Wall Frontage: 50% Min
'' r
6. Setbacks:
Street Min: 10' Street Max: 20'
Nei hborhoad Transition: See Section
~. for additional setbacks for parcels
adjacent to R-1 and R-2 district
7. Open Space Requirement: N/a ~
8. PrlmaryLand Uses: g
Reta1L 100% Max (4Yest of Third Avenue) E
Office: 100% Max (East of Third Avenue) ~ -..
' r ~-
ResidentiaL• 40% Max
a - o' ~
Parking RegutaUons
1. Parking Locations: ~=
Anywhere orr~sde s
~.
2. Residential Parklr g,,,~
' : LSspa~s sd.Kaik
Guest ace/10~ SeeCVMC - - -
0 Min: 19.62.050 ~-- ~ ~~
3. Non-ResldenUat Parking:
Min: 2 spaces/i,000 sf ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Onsite Min: 50% n , ~ ~°+
Summary sheet does not reflect all regulations ....... ~.. _ ..J
that may appty to each property. Please consult
the remainder of the chapter for all criteria.
8-~~
C-2 Broadway South
(Neighborhood Transition Combining District)
- Urban Regulations
_ .' 1. Floor Area Ratio:
Min: N/A Max: 1..0
2. Lot Coverage:
Min: 35% Max 75%
3. 8u/!ding Height:
;~! Min: 28' Max: 45'
_ 4. BulldingStepback: Noimandatory
5. Street Wail Frontage: 50% Min
6. Setbacks:
Streat Min: 10' Sireei Max: 20'
7. Open Space Requirement: N/A
& Primary Land Uses:
~ Retail 50% Max
' Office: 50% Max
~
~ Residential: 70%Max
~
i - _
Parking Qegulatlons
1. Parking Locations:
Anywhere on-site
2. Residential Parking:
Mi Z5 space See CVMC
Guest: ce/l0 du 19.62.050
O Min: 1
3. Non-Residential Parking:
Min: 2 spaces/1,000 sf
Onsite Min: 50%
Summary sheet does not reRect all regulations
that may apply to each property. Please consult
the remainder of the chapter forall criteria.
$-~~
C-3 ~raaa~way Barth
UrDaa Regulations
1. Flaar!lrea Ral1a:
Min: N/A Max LO
2. to! Coverage:
Min: 35% Max: 75%
3. Sultdtng Height:
Min: 18' Max: 45'
4. BuildingStepback: Notmartdatory
5. Street Wall Frontage: 50% Min
6. Setbacks:
Sleet Mln: 10' Sleet Max 20'
7. Cpen Space Ragairamert: N/A
S. P~Imary Land Uses:
Retail: 50% Max
Oince: 50% Max "v
ResidentraL• 70%Max
3farklrfg RPguia#ious
1. Parking iocaflons:
Anywhere on-site
2. Resldentfaf Parking• _
• L5 space/du -
See CVMC
Guest Lode X9.62..050 $D"e~
in: % ' Sidewalk
3. Non-Residential arking: - !~~
Min: 2 spaces/1,000 sf ~~ ! , ~
Onsre Mrn: 50% ~ ~ i , ~.;_~~ ~ •' `
R.
Summary sheet does not reflect ail regulations ~ ...._ ...r,... ~ ....._ .......1
that may apply fo each property. Pfease consult _ ----.-..-
the remainderofthe chapierfora7f criteria. ' _
8-~2
Attachment 2
ADDENDUM
TO THE
FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA URBAN CORE SPECIFIC PLAN
EIR-06-O1
SCH #2005081121
PROJECT NAME: Minor Amendments to the Urban Core Specific Plan
(UCSP)-Reclassification of Third Avenue between E & H
Street from a Four Lane to a Two Lane Downtown
PROJECT LOCATION:
PROJECT APPLICANT:
CASE NO:
DATE:
I. INTRODUCTION
Promenade; Modification to the Residential Pazking
Standazd in the Corridor District, and incorporation of the
Third Avenue Outdoor Dining Guidelines as an Appendix
to the UCSP
Third Avenue between "E" Street and "H" Street
City of Chula Vista
PCM-10-03, Minor Amendment to UCSP
November 16, 2010
This Addendum has been prepazed to provide additional environmental information and analysis
to the Final Environmental Impact Report 06-O1 ("EEIR") for the City of Chula Vista Urban
Core Specific Plan ("Project"). The FEIR was certified by the City Council on Apri126, 2007.
As background, the City of Chula Vista ("City"), as lead agency for the Project under the
California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (Pub. Resources Code, §21000 et seq.),
prepared and conducted an environmental analysis of the Project. A Notice of Preparation was
issued on August 18, 2005. A Draft Environmental Impact Report ("DEIR") was publicly
circulated from May 30, 2006 to July 13, 2006. After a 45-day public comment period, the City
prepared responses to those comments and included them in the FEIR. The FEIR evaluated the
environmental effects of the Project. On April 26, 2007, the City Council certified the FEIR
(EIR 06-01) and approved the Project. The Project copyists of planning documents for the future
development of high-density multi-family residential units, mixed use development, community
facilities, and commercial acreage for the Urban Core Specific Plan.
Minor amendments to the Urban Core Specific Plan aze proposed, which would reclassify Third
Avenue from afour-lane Downtown Promenade to a two-lane Downtown Promenade but
maintaining the same right-of--way area. Figure 1 shows the proposed two-lane configuration
and the street landscape features. In addition, residential pazking standazds for the Corridor
District are proposed to be changed to the current citywide standard for multiple dwellings
referenced in Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC) Section 19.62.050.
to EIR 06-O1
8-13
II. CEQA REQUIREMENTS
Sections 15162 through 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines discuss a lead agency's
responsibilities in addressing new information that was not included in a project's fmal
environmental impact report. Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides:
(a) When an EIlZ has been certified or a negative declazation adopted for a project, no
subsequent EIR shall be prepared for thaf project unless the lead agency
determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record,
one or more of the following:
(1) Substantial changes aze proposed in the project which will require major
revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the
involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial
increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects;
(2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which
the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the
previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new
significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of
previously identified significant effects; or
(3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and
could not have been known,with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the
time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative
declazation was adopted, shows any of the following:
a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed
in the previous EIR or Negative Declazation;
b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more
severe than shown in the previous EIR;
c. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be
feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce
one or more significant effects of the project, but the project
proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or altemative;
or
d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which aze considerably
different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would
substantially reduce one or .more significant effects on the
environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the
mitigation measure or altemative.
Addendum to EIR OG-01
2
8-14
In the event that one of these conditions would require preparation of a subsequent EIR but "only
minor additions or changes would be necessary to make the [Final] EIR adequately apply to the
project in the changed situation," the lead agency could choose instead to issue a supplement to
the Final EIR. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15163, subd. (a)). Thus, the City must consider under the
standazds articulated above whether there will be previously undisclosed significant
environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously disclosed impacts.
(CEQA Guidelines, §§15162, 15163, 15164, subd. (a).)
As the discussion below demonstrates, implementing the Project with the modifications to the
Urban Core Specific Plan would result in no new significant environmental impacts, or no more
severe impacts, than were disclosed in the FEIR for the Project. Therefore, if is appropriate for
the City to prepaze an addendum pursuant to CEQA Guidelines, § 15164.
Section 15164 states that an addendum should include a "brief explanation of the decision not to
prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162" and that the explanation needs to be
supported by substantial evidence. (CEQA Guidelines, § 15164, subd. (e).) The addendum need
not be circulated for public review but may simply be attached to the Final EIIZ. (Ibid.; CEQA
Guidelines, § 15164, subd. c.)
A minor amendment to the Urban Core. Specific Plan as described in Chapter XI of the UCSP
does not constitute a substantial change to the previously approved Project, nor would substantial
changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the Project would be undertaken. In
addition, no new information of substantial importance has been identified that shows that the
proposed project will result in significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or significant
effects that would be more severe than those identified in the previous EIR.
Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has
prepazed an addendum to FE1R 06-O1 to address the proposed changes to the Project.
III. PROJECT SETTING
MinorAmendment- Third Avenue Rec/assification
The Street Reclassificaton project will take place on Third Avenue between E Street and H Street
in the downtown azea of Chula Vista. Third Avenue, between E Street and H Street is Chula
Vista's downtown corridor that is surrounded by retail businesses, restaurants, professional
offices and a pazk. Third Avenue between E Street and F Street already exists as a two-lane
downtown promenade. There are existing landscape planters on both sides of Third Avenue
between E and F Street. The segment of Third Avenue between F and H Streets widens out to
four lanes with areas providing either diagonal pazking or pazallel pazking. Landscape planters
and other older street furnishings occupy the sidewalk area adjacent to the travel lanes and on-
street pazking azeas.
to
8-15
Minor Amendment- Change in Residentia/ Parking Standards for Corridor Districts (on/y1
The Corridor District in the UCSP occurs along Third Avenue and Broadway south of H Street
and along Broadway north of E Street. The area currently consists lazgely of commercial uses
with some multi-family residential uses adjacent to single-family and multi-family
neighborhoods.
IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
One of the proposed minor amendments to the Urban Core Specific Plan would reco~gure
Third Avenue from a four lane downtown promenade to a two lane downtown promenade from
E Street to H Street. The proposed amendment is the result of the City of Chula Vista's desire
to make the downtown area more inviting to pedestrians. The Third Avenue Streetscape Master
Plan was identified as a priority catalyst project through public outreach efforts. Subsequently,
traffic engineering analysis and design determined that two lanes would better serve the multi-
modal concepts and be more pedestrian friendly. The Third Avenue downtown corridor would
thus be reduced to allow for slower vehiculaz traffic, shorter pedestrian crosswalks and the
opportmiity to beautify the azea with appropriate landscape features. Additional upgrades would
include special lighting, medians and benches. The proposed amendment would create a more
functional and pedestrian friendly downtown area. The proposal would maintain street lane
consistency with that portion of Third Avenue located between E Street and F Street and the
street design would be consistent with sound civil engineering techniques and practices.
The second proposed minor amendment to the UCSP would involve a change to the Residential
Pazking Standards for the Corridor Districts (only) to the citywide standazds cited in CVMC
19.62.050. The pazking standard would therefore change from 1.5 sp/du plus 1 sp/10 du for
guests (UCSP) to a range of 1.5 pazking spaces for studios and one-bedroom units and 2.0
pazking spaces for units with two bedrooms and more.
The third proposed minor addition to the UCSP would consist of including the Outdoor Dining
Guidelines as an appendix. Outdoor dining azeas aze proposed as a major venue within the Third
Avenue Corridor to activate and energize the street. The guidelines provide a means by which to
maintain the physical and visual integrity of the downtown district and avoid the visual clutter
that would detract from the Third Avenue Corridor streetscape improvements. The guidelines
would help regulate the furniture type, style, material and colors for any proposed outdoor dining
setting. Along with the proposed streetscape improvements, the Outdoor Dining Guidelines
would help contribute to the Third Avenue Comdor's "sense of place" and community.
V. ANALYSIS
The General Plan Circulation Element classifies Third Avenue as a two (2) or four (4) lane urban
promenade. The final EIlZs for the General Plan and for the Urban Core Specific Plan analyzed
this segment of Third Avenue as a four lane downtown promenade. The proposed Third Avenue
reclassification addressed in this Addendum (and described above) would not result in new or
different significant environmental impacts than that which were described in the FEIR for the
Urban Core Specific Plan. The proposed change to Third Avenue would not result in either a
to
4
8-16
change in significant impacts or to the adopted mitigation measures. A summary of the traffic
analysis is presented in the "White Paper Analyzing Reclassification of Third Avenue between E
Street and H Street", with respect to the reclassification ofThird Avenue is discussed below.
Methodology
The City of Chula Vista Engineering Section analyzed potential traffic impacts as a result of the
reclassification of Third Avenue from a four lane to a two-lane downtown promenade.
Engineering staff reviewed the traffic study prepared for the Urban Core Specific Plan as well as
the original and updated SANDAG traffic models. Engineering staff also analyzed and
compared north-south traffic on pazallel streets to determine if there would be any spill over
traffic as a result of the proposed configuration. The performance of traffic on the affected
intersections was also reviewed as recommended by the Urban Core Specific Plan EIR, to ensure
that these intersections would continue to provide adequate capacity with the proposed two-lane
configuration on Third Avenue.
Traffic Analysis Summary
In the original traffic study and EIR, the SANDAG traffic model assigned a volume of 21,000
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) to Third Avenue. With this traffic volume the traffic model
indicated a Level of Service (LOS) F for narrowing Third Avenue from afour-lane facility to a
two-lane facility for the subject street segment. The Urban Core was remodeled with an updated
SANDAG traffic model in February 2010. The updated traffic model indicates that the traffic
volume on Third Avenue for the subject street segment is 13,600 ADT. This traffic volume
decreased due to the updated traffic model assigning fewer trips to a two-lane rather than four-
lane facility. The updated traffic analysis found that the SANDAG traffic model, which provides
for 24 hour ADT, systematically assigns greater numbers of traffic to a designated four lane
street simply because the model perceives it as a roadway capable of carrying more vehiculaz
traffic and not because of actual traffic being generated through the four lane street. The updated
traffic analysis, therefore, modeled Third Avenue between Eand HStreet as atwo-lane street
and, as indicated above, utilized the more updated SANDAG Series 11 traffic model. The results
showed a significant lowering of projected traffic along Third Avenue. An acceptable LOS D
was shown for this two-lane downtown promenade.
The SANDAG Series 11 traffic model recognizes that general plans and growth assumptions
change over time. As municipalities grow and policies change, it can be expected that future
forecasts will result in different outcomes. The City's General Plan and Urban Core Specific
Plan traffic studies and EIRs used the SANDAG Series 10 projections. The results, therefore, of
this latest traffic analysis reflect traffic modeling technological updates and actual land use plan
changes.
The updated traffic analysis, which relies on the SANDAG Series 11 model, concludes that with
the reconfiguration of Third Avenue from afour-lane to a two-lane downtown promenade, there
would be fewer ADT on Third Avenue between E and H Streets, when compazed to the Urban
Core Specific Plan's prior traffic analysis. Based on the updated traffic analysis, the fewer
ADTs on this road segment would accommodate the traffic flow on the reclassified two-lane
to EIR
5
5-17
road segment, and would be adequate to accommodate the projected vehiculaz volumes.
Additionally, an analysis of local surrounding streets did not demonstrate any new ADT impacts
requiring mitigation. The traffic mitigation strategies as required in the Urban Core Specific Plan
EIR would continue to be in effect. As an example, Mitigation Measure 5.8.5-3 is currently
being implemented and would assist in funding the existing mitigation measures found in the
UCSP EIR.
Proposed Parking Revision Summary
Providing for vehicular parking is an indispensable part of the transportation system. A review
of the adopted parking standards for the UCSP reveals that the parking regulation formula for
residential uses resulted in fewer parking spaces being required than those required by the
current CVMC. The reasoning behind the adoption of the UCSP pazking standazd had to do with
the fact that the urban core is more reflective of a multi-modal environment. The CVMC parking
standard is more applicable to suburban developments with little or no significant transit
ridership. However, the proposed revision is recommended to establish pazking requirement
uniformity with the adopted CVMC for those azeas furthest from the urban core and with less
accessibility to transit service.
The proposed residential parking standard of 1.5 pazking spaces for studio and one bedroom
units; and two pazking spaces for two or more bedroom units would apply to the UCSP Corridor
Districts C-1, C-2 and C-3. Pages VI-37 through VI-39 are revised as follows: Delete UCSP
Residential Parking Standard and reference pazking standard established by Chula Vista
Municipal Code Section 19.62.050 (13) for multiple family residential uses.
Proposed /ncorporation of Outdoor Dining Guidelines Summary
Incorporation of the Outdoor Dining Guidelines as an appendix to the UCSP would assist in the
orderly implementation of a cohesive design character for the Third Avenue downtown comdor.
The guidelines would contribute greatly to establishing the downtown street area as a public
domain, which would accommodate both pedestrian and vehiculaz movements. The guidelines
would regulate the visual features of the dining areas and place a greater emphasis on the
cohesive and aesthetic value of the overall streetscape domains.
VI. CONCLUSION
The proposed modification to the Urban Core Specific Plan would not cause any new or more
severe significant environmental impacts, nor require any additional mitigafion measures that
were not akeady addressed in the transportation section of the FEIR.
Pursuant to Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines and based upon the above discussion, I
hereby find that the revisions to the proposed Project will result in only minor technical changes
or additions to the Project, and that none of the conditions for preparing a subsequent or
supplemental EIR, as identified by State CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163, exist.
Therefore, prepazation of this Addendum is appropriate and adequate under CEQA.
to EIR 06-O1
6
a-ia
~~
B njamin uerrero
Senior Planner
References: City of Chula Vista Urban Core Specific Plan
Final Environmental Impact Report 06-01
City of Chula Vista General Plan
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
White Paper Analyzing Reclassification of Third Avenue Between E Street and H
Street; 2/2010
Addendum to EIR 06-O1
8-19
1.0 Executive Summary
1.0 Executive Summary
1.1 Introduction
This summary provides a brief synopsis of: (1) the proposed Urban Core Specific Plan,
(2) the results of the environmental analysis contained within this Environmental Impact
Report (EIR), (3) the alternatives to the proposed plan that were considered, and (4) the
major areas of controversy and issues to be resolved by decision-makers. This
summary does not contain the extensive background and analysis found in the
document. Therefore, the reader should review the entire document to fully understand
the project and its environmental consequences.
The purpose of this Program Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is to evaluate the
environmental effects of the proposed City of Chula Vista Urban Core Specific Plan
(UCSP). The UCSP includes proposed land use objectives, development regulations
(zoning), and development design guidelines to implement the recenfly adopted General
Plan Update (GPU) vision for the Chula Vista urban core. The UCSP land use
development regulations and design guidelines would be used 6y the City to guide day-
to-day decision-making regarding future proposals for new infill development and
redevelopment of the urban core so that there is continuing progress towards attainment
of plan objectives.
1.2 Project Description and Location
The subject of this Program EIR is a proposal to adopt and implement the UCSP which
would govern the development and revitalization of the urban core of the City of Chula
Vista. The City of Chula Vista is located in southern San Diego County, in the northwest
portion of the City of Chula Vista, approximately 4a$ miles north of the U.S.-Mexico
border and 135 miles south of Los Angeles. The urban core of Chula Vista
encompasses approximately 1,700 acres of the traditional downtown area east of I-5,
west of Del Mar Avenue, north of L Street, and south of C Street. Within this larger area
is a smaller 690-gross-acre area, which was determined to be most in need of
redevelopment due to conditions of blight and underutilization. This smaller area
comprises the "Subdistricts Area" of the UCSP and is the focus of all the regulatory land
use provisions of the UCSP. The new zoning, development standards, and design
guidelines proposed in the UCSP will apply only to the Subdistricts Area of the UCSP.
Existing zoning and land use regulations will not be changed in the remaining portion of
the UCSP study area outside the Subdistricts Area. The remaining portion of the UCSP
study area outside the Subdistricts Area consists of stable residential neighborhoods not
expected to transition within the planning horizon of the UCSP, were not proposed for
Page 1-1
8-20
1.0 Executive Summary
change under the adopted GPU, and were thus excluded from the regulatory provisions
of the proposed UCSP.
The proposed UCSP would refine and implement the vision for downtown Chula Vista
expressed in the City's GPU (2005}. As a comprehensive, city-wide document, the
GPU's goals, objectives and policies are necessarily general. The proposed UCSP
would fulfill the role of providing detailed neighborhood-specific land use and
development regulations (zoning), development design guidelines, and numerous other
mobility and public realm guidelines, incentives and programs to revitalize the urban
core in accord with the general goals stated in the GPU. The UCSP would additionally
serve as the basis for a variety of other actions, such as parkland acquisitions and
transportation improvements.
Under the proposed UCSP, the urban core at buildout would consist of an integrated and
connected network of three distinct neighborhoods and districts, including the Village,
Urban Core and Corridors districts. (For planning purposes each of these three districts
are divided into a total of 26 Subdistricts). Each district would contain a mix of primarily
low- to mid-rise (45 to 84 feet in height) high=density commercial, office, and residential
uses and various public amenities such as improved pedestrian streetscapes, bicycle
and transit facilities, public art, and parks, plazas and paseos. Two high-rise (up to 210
feet in height) Transit Focus Areas would be permitted in the areas surrounding the
existing E and H Street trolley stations.
Adoption of the proposed UCSP would replace existing Municipal Cade -Zoning for the
Subdistricts Area with new zoning that permits increased number of buildings, with
increased building heights and mass. This intensification of land use in the Subdistricts
Area is planned to accommodate GPU-projected resident and employment populations.
Ultimate buildout of the UCSP would allow 7,100 net new residential units over the
existing 3,700 for a total of up to 10,800 dwelling units by year 2030. Commercial retail
square footage would increase by up to 1 million square feet over the existing 3 million
square feet for a total of up to 4 million square feet by 2030. Commercial office space
would increase by up to 1.3 million square feet over the existing 2.4 million square feet
for a total of up to 3.7 million square feet by 2030. In addition, up to 1.3 million square
feet of new commercial visitor-serving uses would be allowed in the Subdistricts Area by
2030.
The UCSP land use regulations would supersede existing Municipal Code -Zoning as
well as the land use guidelines of the existing redevelopment plan areas that overlap the
UCSP Subdistricts Area. Specifically, the Town Centre I Redevelopment Plan would be
amended for consistency with the UCSP; the Town Centre I Land Use Policy would be
replaced with the UCSP Land Use Matrix and the Town Centre I Design Manual would
be repealed to defer to the UCSP design guidelines.
Page 1-2
8-21
1.0 Executive Summary
1.3 Environmental Analysis
Section 21002 of CEQA requires that an environmental impact report identify the
significant effects of a project on the environment and provide measures or alternatives
that can mitigate or avoid those effects. This Program EIR contains an environmental
analysis of the potential impacts associated with implementing the proposed UCSP. The
major issues that are addressed in this Program EIR were determined to be potentially
significant based on review by the City of Chula Vista Community Development
Department and public comment received on the Notice of Preparation. The issues
include land use, landform alteration and visual quality, cultural resources, geology and
soils, paleontological resources, population and housing, hydrology and water quality,
traffic, circulation and access, noise, air quality, public services, public utilities, and
public health hazards. The impact analyses for each of these issues are included in
Chapter 5.0. Chapter 9.0 of this Program EIR summarizes the potential environmental
impacts that were not considered significant, consisting of biological, mineral, and
agricultural resources.
Table 1-1, located at the end of this section, summarizes the potentially significant
environmental impacts and proposed mitigation measures by major issue, as analyzed
in Chapters 5.0 and 6.0 of this Program EIR. The last column of this table indicates
whether the impact would be reduced to below a level of significance after
implementation of proposed mitigation measures.
This Program EIR incorporates by reference previous environmental documents
covering environmental issues relevant to the approval of the UCSP. The documents
used during the preparation of this program EIR are noted in the text, where applicable,
and are additionally listed in Chapter 11.0, References Cited, of this Program EIR. The
documents are available for review in their entirety at the City of Chula Vista Planning
and Building Department, 276 Fourth Avenue and the Chula Vista Civic Center Library at
365 F Street in the City of Chula Vista. Selected documents are additionally available
for review on the City of Chula Vista's website documents page at www.ci.chula-
vista.ca.us.
1.4 Project Alternatives
Alternatives to the proposed project are evaluated in Chapter 10.0 of this EIR in terms of
their ability to meet the primary objectives of the proposed project and eliminate or
further reduce identified significant environmental effects. The alternatives considered
are the No Project Alternative, the Reduced Project Alternative, and the Automobile
Priority Alternative.
Page 1-3
a-22
1.0 Executive Summary
The No Project Alternative would continue to implement the existing Municipal Code -
Zoning based on the former General Plan (1989). The Reduced Project Alternative
would reduce development intensity by 25 percent throughout the UCSP Subdistricts
Area compared to the proposed UCSP. The Automobile Priority Alternative would
reprioritize proposed transportation improvement to maximize vehicle flow on area
roadways and at area intersections. A comparative matrix of each of these alternatives
is provided in Table 1-2, located at the end of this section.
1.5 Areas of Controversy and Issues to be
Resolved
In accordance with the requirements of Section 15123 (b) (2 and 3) of the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines, this section identifies the potential areas
of controversy as well as any issues which will likely need to be resolved by decision-
makers in relationship to the environmental effects of the proposed UCSP.
In the course of public meetings concerning the proposed UCSP, local citizens and
organization have expressed concern regarding the following major environmental
issues.
1.5.1 Land Use/Community Character
Concern has been expressed by residents and surrounding neighborhoods regarding
potential land use compatibility issues related to community and visual character, noise,
and air quality. As discussed in Chapters 5.1 ^^~'~.' of this EIR, and summarized in
Table 1-1. no significant impacts with respect to land use compatibility amity-arid
^ ^'~~„~aster-are anticipated due to harmonious land use designations and adequate
vertical or horizontal separation between proposed high-density mid and high-rise uses
and neighboring low-rise and/or single family residential uses. As discussed in Chanter
5.2 of this EIR and summarized in Table 1-1 potentially significant impacts with respect
to visual character would be avoided throuoh adherence of future nroiects to the
development regulations and design guidelines of the UCSP Relevant UCSP
development regulations and design guidelines provide setbacks, stepbacks, screening,
landscaping, building design and other measures to avoid or minimize adjacency issues
such as architectural mass and form, aesthetics, solar access, ventilation, and other
effects. The proposed UCSP permits primarily commercial and residential land uses,
which are similar to and compatible with existing zoning and occupied land uses. The
UCSP regulatory provisions would not permit new uses within the Subdistricts Area
which may create substantial compatibility issues, and would not encourage the
development of new uses surrounding the Subdistricts Area. The area surrounding the
Subdistricts Area would remain subject to existing Municipal Code zoning provisions
which allow low-rise residential uses in areas that are currently occupied by same.
Page 1-4
8-23
1.0 Executive Summary
The proposed UCSP allows for substantial intensifcation of existing land uses within the
UCSP Subdistricts Area to accommodate a projected three-fold increase in population in
the area. The existing community and visual character of the area could potentially
change from existing conditions of mostly low-rise (up to 48 feet in height) single-use
commercial blacks surrounded by multi-family residential blacks, to a future mix of low-
rise (up to 45 feet in height) and mid-rise (up to 84 feet in height) mixed-use
commercial/office and residential blocks, with high-rise structures (up to 210 feet in
height) allowed in the areas surrounding the existing E Street and H Street trolley
stations. Existing visual character blue sky views solar access ventilation and
glare/lighting conditions would be affected by this intensification in land use. While these
physical changes are considered substantial, they are not considered to be adverse,
given adherence of individual future projects to UCSP development regulations and
design guidelines as required by Mitigation Measures 52.5-1 and 5.2.5-2. Provisions in
the UCSP such as the provision of new mixed-use zoning classifications, paseos to
provide walkable access to neighborhoods, reconnection of the street grid pattern in
areas that have been previously disrupted, and linking of bikeways, sidewalks and urban
plazas throughout the urban core, additionally serve to integrate the community rather
than to physically divide it. The principles of smart growth, upon which the UCSP was
developed, emphasize innovative mobility and land use planning tools to create a
vibrant city center that is a combination employment/residential/commercial area with
transit, recreational and other quality of life amenities that serve to create cohesive
neighborhoods. While providing updated infrastructure and community amenities, smart
growth principles also strive to preserve and enhance existing community character by
building upon existing design themes and incorporating local culturally significant
resources into plan design.
As discussed in Chapters 5.9 and 5.10 of this Program EIR,
+aeweve~significant noise and air quality impacts are anticipated for future uses within
the Subdistricts Area. Increased vehicle traffic on area roadways would generate future
noise levels adjacent to the roadways in excess of acceptable standards for noise
sensitive uses such as residential units and outdoor recreation. Mitigation measures are
provided in this Program EIR to ensure that future development within the UCSP
Subdistricts Area reduces noise impacts to below significance. Prior to issuance of an
Urban Core Development Permit or other discretionary permit, all future projects within
the Subdistricts Area with the potential to be exposed to noise in excess of specified
limits shall be required to complete applicable exterior and interior noise analyses and
demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Community Development Director that project-
specific design includes measures to reduce any noise impacts to below a level of
significance.
Due to the San Diego Air Basin being in non-attainment for ozone and particulates,
future air quality emissions, despite being projected to be lower than current emissions
Page 1-5
8-24
1.0 Executive Summary
due to improved energy and transportation efficiencies, would be cumulatively
signifcant. In addition, potentially significant air quality impacts would occur for future
residents within 500 feet of Interstate 5 along the western edge of the Subdistricts Area
due to projected diesel vehicle particulate (PM~o) emissions emanating from the freeway.
The UCSP contains special design guidelines far areas adjacent to Interstate 5 that
would lessen impacts; however impacts would remain cumulatively significant, avoidable
only by source-control measures which are not the jurisdiction of the City of Chula Vista.
Implementation of the proposed UCSP would also pose significant air quality impacts, as
defined by CEQA, through inconsistency with the adopted Regional Air Quality
Standards (RAQS) and State Implementation Plan (SIP). The goals and objectives of
the SIP and RAOS were based upon the former General Plan designated land uses.
The recently adopted GPU land uses are inconsistent with the former General Plan, and
thus the SIP and RAQS. Because the proposed UCSP conforms to the adopted GPU,
the UCSP is in significant conflict with an applicable air quality plan. The only measure
that can lesson this impact is revision of the RAQS based on the recently adopted GPU.
This effort is the responsibility of SANDAG and San Diego APCD and is outside the
jurisdiction of the City of Chula Vista.
1.5.2 Traffic, Circulation, and Parking
Surrounding neighborhoods and current residents/users of the urban core have
expressed a concern that traffic and parking may increase in their neighborhoods due to
the increased development potential under the proposed UCSP. As discussed in
Chapter 5.8, traffic volumes on area roadways are anticipated to substantially increase
by 2030. Roadway and intersection improvements are incorporated as mitigation
measures in the proposed UCSP to avoid future impacts to 19 intersections and 2
roadways segments. However, despite these improvements, three intersections and
one roadway segment would remain at unacceptable levels of service. The intersections
include Broadway at H Street and Third Avenue and J Street within the Subdistricts
Area, and Hilltop Drive and H Street within the study area. The affected street segment
is Third Avenue between E and G Streets. Due to right-of-way constraints and conflict
with the guiding principle of the UCSP to encourage modes of transport other than
automobile, these impacts remain significant and unmitigated. The smart growth
principles of the GPU are reflected in the change in mobility emphasis in the UCSP
which places more emphasis on multi-modal opportunities including pedestrians,
bicycling, public transit and less emphasis on the automobile. By design, the LOS for
the indicated roadway segments and intersection would decline due to improvement in
the streetscape to benefit pedestrians, cyclists and public transit users.
The UCSP development regulations include parking requirements for residential, guest
and non-residential uses. A projected total of 18,560 parking spaces would be required
to serve future development of the proposed UCSP at buildout. While the majority of
new development will provide on-site parking, there are specific locations such as within
Page 1-6
8-25
1.0 Executive Summary
the Village District and transit focus areas that allow some parking needs to be met off-
site and/or through alternative means such as in-lieu fees and shared parking
arrangements. A number of other parking improvement strategies are included in the
UCSP such as parking buffers, parking districts and parking structures. Potential
significant impacts to parking would be reduced to below significance by the
incorporation of these development regulations and design guidelines into subsequent
development projects, as required as part of the UCSP design review process. Parking
improvements will either be made on-site (i.e., where required of subsequent
development projects), or off-site (i.e., in coordination with the City's Parking District or in
Lieu Fee program. Given these UCSP provisions, future parking conditions were
considered to be not significant.
1.5.3 Housing
The issue of the effect of the proposed UCSP on housing has been raised with respect
to the effect of urban core redevelopment on existing affordable housing in areas
surrounding the commercial corridors and in surrounding neighborhoods. If property
values increase in the urban core, property values in surrounding neighborhoods would
likely increase, thereby increasing the cost of housing and rent. These concerns fall into
the general category of soci-economic considerations and are not required by CEQA to
be addressed in an EIR. Section 15131 (a) of the CEQA Guidelines indicates that
"economic or social effects of a projects shall not be treated as significant effects on the
environment." Affordable housing issues would only be addressed if they result in a
physical change in the environment.
There are no issues related to affordability that would translate into unique physical
changes in the environment. Nonetheless, given that Redevelopment Plans overlay the
majority (approximately 70 percent) of the Subdistricts Area, provisions of California
Redevelopment Law will continue to direct funding to low and moderate income housing.
Twenty percent of funds generated through tax increment financing (fees collected within
a redevelopment plan area) are required to be set aside for affordable housing. Due to
future revitalized conditions within the Subdistricts Area and overlapping redevelopment
plans, it is anticipated that more tax increment financing funds would be generated and
made available to serve affordable housing needs.
The physical affects of construction of new housing are considered in this Program EIR
in Chapter 5.6, Population and Housing. Development under the UCSP would result in a
substantial increase in the population of Chula Vista because it would accommodate
growth that is planned to occur locally. The UCSP would have a beneficial impact on
planned population and housing through the implementation of "smart growth" principles,
consistent with the GPU, by directing higher density and intensity development in areas
in and around transit and commercial corridors, and on vacant and underutilized land,
and would provide housing to help meet the regional housing needs as approved by the
Page 1-7
8-26
1.0 Executive Summary
State Department of HCD and SANDAG. The development regulations and design
guidelines of the UCSP are expected to protect existing, stable residential
neighborhoods, reduce urban sprawl, and reduce the direct and indirect impacts of
increased population and housing to below a level of significance. Development in
accordance with the proposed UCSP would not displace substantial numbers of existing
housing or people, necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere
because the overall number of housing units allowed by the UCSP would be sufficient
within the area to accommodate the affected population. The UCSP proposes a net
increase of up to 7,100 residential units over a 25-year period. During redevelopment of
new residential units, existing occupants would be temporarily displaced. These short
term effects were considered in this Program EIR to be not significant due to the
continuous production of additional housing within the urban core and throughout Chula
Vista which would ensure the provision of housing within the same area and would not
require it elsewhere in San Diego county or neighboring counties.
Page 1-8
8-27
Minor amendment- Change in Residential Parking Standards for Corridor Districts (onlyl
The Corridor District in the UCSP occurs along Third Avenue and Broadway south of H Street
and along Broadway north of E Street. The area currently consists largely of commercial uses
with some multi-family residential uses adjacent to single-family and multi-family
neighborhoods.
IV. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
One of the proposed minor amendments to the Urban Core Specific Plan reconfigures Third
Avenue from a four lane downtown promenade to a two lane downtown promenade from E
Street to H Street. The proposed amendment is the result of the City of Chula Vista's desire to
make the downtown area more safe and inviting to pedestrians. The Third Avenue Streetscape
Master Plan was identified as a priority catalyst project through public outreach efforts.
Subsequently, traffic engineering analysis and design determined that two lanes would better
serve the multi-modal concepts and consequently improve pedestrian safety. The Third Avenue
downtown corridor would thus be reduced to allow for slower vehiculaz traffic, shorter
pedestrian crosswalks and the opportunity to beautify the area with appropriate landscape
features. Additional upgrades would include special lighting, medians and benches. The
proposed amendment will create a more safe, functional and pedestrian friendly downtown area.
The proposal would maintain street lane consistency with that portion of Third Avenue located
between E Street and F Street and the street design will be consistent with sound civil
engineering techniques and practices.
The second proposed minor amendment to the UCSP involves a change to the Residential
Parking Standazds for the Corridor Districts (only) to the citywide standards cited in CVMC
19.62.050. The pazking standazd would therefore change from 1.5 sp/du plus sp/10 du for quests
(UCSP) to a range of 1.5 pazking spaces for studios and one-bedroom units and 2.0 parking
spaces for units with two bedrooms and more.
The third proposed minor addition to the UCSP consists of including the Outdoor Dining
Guidelines as an appendix. Outdoor dining areas aze proposed as a major venue within the Third
Avenue Corridor to activate and energize the street. The guidelines provide a means by which to
maintain the physical and visual integrity of the downtown district and avoid the visual clutter
that would detract from the Third Avenue Corridor Streetscape improvements. The guidelines
would help regulate the fiuniture type, style, material and colors for any proposed outdoor dining
setting. Along with the proposed Streetscape improvements, the Outdoor Dining Guidelines will
help contribute to the Third Avenue Corridor's "sense of place" and community.
V. ANALYSIS
The General Plan Circulation Element classifies Third Avenue as a two (2) or four (4) lane urban
promenade. The final EIR for the General Plan and for the Urban Core Specific Plan analyzed
this segment of Third Avenue as a four lane downtown promenade. The proposed Third Avenue
reclassification addressed in this addendum (and described above) would not result in new or
different impacts than that which were described in the FEIR for the Urban Core Specific Plan.
Addendum to EIR 06-01
4
8-28
The proposed change to Third Avenue would not result in either a change in significant impacts
or to the adopted mitigation measures. A summary of the traffic analysis with respect to the
reclassification of Third Avenue is discussed below.
Methodology
The City of Chula Vista Engineering Section analyzed potential traffic impacts as a result of the
reclassification of Third Avenue from a four lane to a two-lane downtown promenade.
Engineering staff reviewed the traffic study prepared for the Urban Core Specific Plan as well as
the original and updated SANDAG traffic models. Engineering staff also analyzed and
compazed north-south traffic on pazallel streets to see if there would be any spill over traffic as a
result of the proposed configuration. The performance of traffic on the affected intersections
was also reviewed as recommended by the Urban Core Specific Plan EIR, to ensure that these
intersections would continue to provide adequate capacity with the proposed two-lane
configuration on Third Avenue.
Traffic Analysis Summary
The traffic analysis found that the SANDAG traffic model (which provides for 24 hour Average
Daily Traffic (ADT) systematically assigns greater numbers of traffic to a designated four lane
street simply because the model perceives it as a roadway capable of carrying more vehicular
traffic and not because of actual traffic being generated through the four lane street. The
engineering study, therefore, modeled Third Avenue between E and H Street as a two-lane street
and utilized the more updated SANDAG Series 11 traffic model. The results showed a
significant lowering of projected traffic along Third Avenue. An acceptable Level of Service
(LOS) C was shown for atwo-lane downtown promenade.
The SANDAG Series 11 traffic model recognizes that general plans and growth assumptions
change over time. As municipalities grow and policies change it can be expected that future
forecasts will result in different outcomes. The City's General Plan and Urban Core Specific
Plan traffic studies and EIRs used the outdated SANDAG Series 10 projections. The results
therefore, of this latest traffic analysis reflect traffic modeling technological updates and actual
land use plan changes.
The traffic analysis concludes that with the reconfiguration of Third Avenue from afour-lane to
a two-lane downtown promenade, the SANDAG Series 11 model shows fewer ADT trips on
Third Avenue between E and H Street. The two-lane capacity of Third Avenue would, therefore,
be adequate to accommodate the projected vehiculaz volumes. Additionally, an analysis of local
surrounding streets did not demonstrate any new ADT impacts requiring mitigation. The traffic
mitigation strategies as required in the Urban Core Specific Plan EIR would continue to be in
effect. As an example, Mitigation Measure 5.8.5-3 is currently being implemented and will
assist in funding the existing mitigation measures found in the UCSP ELR.
Addendum to EIR 06-01
5
8-29
Proposed Parking Revision Summary
Providing for vehicular parking is an indispensable part of the transportation system. A review
of the adopted pazking standazds for the UCSP reveals that the parking regulation formula for
residential uses resulted in fewer pazking spaces being required than those required by the
current City of Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC). The reasoning behind the adoption of the
UCSP pazking standazd had to do with the fact that the urban core is more reflective of a multi-
modal environment. The CVMC pazking standard is more applicable to suburban developments
with little or no significant transit ridership. However, for purposes of establishing pazking
requirement uniformity with the adopted CVMC for those areas furthest from the urban core and
with less accessibility to transit service the proposed revision is being made.
The proposed residential pazking standazd of 1.5 pazking spaces for studio and one bedroom
units; and two pazking spaces for two or more bedroom units will apply to the UCSP Corridor
Districts C-1, C-2 and C-3. Pages VI-37 through VI-39 are revised as follows: Delete UCSP
Residential Parking Standard and reference parking standazd established by Chula Vista
Municipal Code Section 19.62.050 (13) for multiple family residential uses.
Proposed /ncorporation of Outdoor Dining Guidelines Summary
The incorporation of the Outdoor Dining Guidelines as appendix to the UCSP will assist in the
orderly implementation of a cohesive design chazacter for the Third Avenue downtown corridor.
The guidelines will contribute greatly to establishing the downtown street area as a public
domain, which. can and should accommodate both pedestrian and vehiculaz movement in comfort
and safety. The guidelines will regulate the visual features of the dining azeas and place a greater
emphasis on the cohesive and aesthetic value of the overall streetscape domains.
VI. CONCLUSION
The proposed modification to the Urban Core Specific Plan would not cause any new or more
severe physical impacts nor require any additional mitigation measures that were not already
addressed in the transportation section of the FEIR. As such, the analysis and conclusions
presented in the FEIR are not changed by the proposed action.
Pursuant to Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines and based upon the above discussion, I
hereby fmd that the revisions to the proposed Project will result in only minor technical changes
or additions to the Project, and that none of the conditions for preparing a subsequent or
supplemental EIR, as identified by Sections 15162 and 15163, exist. Therefore, the prepazation
of this Addendum is appropriate to make the FEIR adequate under CEQA.
a~t,~e
~itienl in Guerrero
Senior Planner
Addendum to EIR 06-01
6
8-30
References: City of Chula Vista Urban Core Specific Plan
Final Environmental Impact Report 06-01
City of Chula Vista General Plan
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
White Paper Analyzing Reclassification of Third Avenue Between E Street and H
Street; 2/2010
Addendum to EIR 06-01
5-31
Attachment 3
WHITE PAPER ANALYZING RECLASSIFICATION OF TH]RD AVENUE BETWEEN E
STREET AND H STREET
The City of Chula Vista, Land Development Section has been requested to analyze the potential
impacts of reclassifying Third Avenue from a Four Lane Downtown Promenade to a Two Lane
Downtown Promenade from E Street to H Street. The General Plan Circulation Element
classifies Third Avenue as a " 2 OR 4" Lane Downtown Promenade, Attachment 1. The EIR for
the General Plan and for the Urban Core Specific Plan analyzed this stretch of Third Avenue as a
Four Lane Downtown Promenade. This paper describes the impacts of re-classifying the section
of Third Avenue as a Two Lane Downtown Promenade from E Street to H Street.
Problem Statement
Analyze potential impacts along and azound Third Avenue between E Street and H Street after
Third Avenue is re-classified, modeled and operated as a two lane facility instead of a four lane
facility, as was originally contemplated and accomplished in the General Plan Update and Urban
Core Specific Plan E]R's.
Methodology
1. Review original SANDAG modeling plots far Preliminary Series 10 land use
assumptions from General Plan Update traffic studies. (Attachments 2 & 3)
2. Review new SANDAG modeling plats from Series 11 using General Plan land use
assumptions and proposed two lane configuration on Third Avenue. (Attachments 4 & 5)
3. Review results of Urban Core Specific Plan Traffic Study prepazed by Kimley-Horn and
Associates dated October 2005.
4. Review Urban Core Specific Plan EIR, Section 5.8, "Traffic, Circulation and Access"
dated September, 2006.
5. Review and compare North-South traffic on pazallel roadways (Fourth and Second as
well as East-West Traffic on E, F, G and H Streets to see if there is any spill over traffic.
6. Review intersection geometrics recommended in Urban Ccre Specific Plan EIR to ensure
they will continue to provide adequate capacity with two lane reclassification along Third
Avenue.
Average Daily Traffic Discussion
The SANDAG traffic model provides 24 hour Average Daily Traffic (ADT). The General Plan
and Urban Core EIR's analyzed Third Avenue as a four lane roadv~ay from E Street to F Street.
As a four lane facility, the SANDAG computer model tends to assign more vehiculaz traffic to
the relatively lazger four lane street than a neazby smaller two lane road. Consequently, higher
volumes were shown on Third Avenue during the original General Plan/Urban Core analysis
which utilized the Series 10 projections. The computer model attempts to reflect or mimic the
real-world phenomenon of a lazger street attracting more drivers and vehicles than a smaller
street, i.e. four lanes versus two.
8-32
The Urban Core amendment being contemplated includes the proposed reduction in total number
of lanes on Third Avenue between E and H Street. Most recently, the Traffic Planning Section
modeled Third Avenue between E and H Street as a 2 lane facility. The outcome of the aew
model now indicates that the 24 hour ADT traffic volumes are lower along Third Avenue, as one
might expect. As shown on Table 1, the average ADT on Third Avenue as calculated from the
new Series 11 model is 13,600 trips which equates to a Level of Service of D for a Two Lane
Downtown Promenade. As shown on Attachment 6, LOS D for a Two Lane Downtown
promenade is acceptable. The original EIR analysis of Third Avenue as a four lane facility,
utilizing the Series 10 projections was indicating an average ADT of 18,500 trips with an LO5 of
A for a Four Lane Downtown Promenade.
Table 2 summarizes neighboring streets azound the Third Avenue corridor and indicates no
appreciable increases in traffic. All neighboring streets continue to operate within city limits of
ADT.
SANDAG Modeling Discussion
SANDAG is presently utilizing their 2030 Regional Growth Forecast or "Series 11" assumptions
and models. As stated on the SANDAG Internet site, `The 2030 Regional Growth Forecast
Update is based solety on the current, adopted general and community plans of the 18 cities, and
the most recent (June 2006) version of the County's General Plan update. It includes Ito
assumptions about how local plans and policies might evolve over time in respor:se to the
region's cmttinuing growth. The current forecast provides an assessment of where our plans of
today, if left unchanged will likely take us in coming decades. The creation of the first Regional
Comprehensive Plar: (RCP) was one of the catalysts far taking this approach io the 2030
Regional Growth Forecast Update. "
"However, general plans do change over time. bVhile the forecast looks out to the year 2030, the
horizon year of current local plans is typically 2010 or 2020. As chose plans evolve, future
forecasts ntay result in different outcomes. The RCP is inte»ded to provide guidance for future
plan changes. Basing our forecasts on existing plans mtd policies provides us with an in:por•tartt
tool to help monitor the RCP progress in maintaining and improving the region's quality of life. "
As stated above, SANDAG forecasts have changed in the past and will continue tc evolve in the
future. What is important to take from this discussion is that the General Plan and Urban Core
Specific Plan Traffic Studies and E1R's utilized the outdated Series 10 projections. The analysis
for the amendment shall be utilizing the updated Series 11. In general, the model's most recent
changes were due to amendments in the following variables;
Series 10 Series 11
Base Yeaz 2000 2003
16 modes
Mode Choice 9 modes
Speed reductions Mode choice congestion pricing
Tolling 2003 2007
RTP UNIX Windows XP
Platform Tranplan TransCAD
Soflw~aze
8-33
The discussion here describing changes to the model's forecast is important because some of the
traffic volumes in and azound Third Avenue on the latest ADT plots aze lower than the original
plots. It would be difficult if not impossible to accurately determine what assumptions in the new
model aze responsible for changes in the new traffic volume plot. Simply put, Changes to model
output aze due to technology updates and real world land use plan changes.
Peak Hour Intersection Analysis
An important note to know about the SANDAG model is that it only provides accurate 24 hour
Average Daily Traffic (ADT) from which traffic studies are written. The model itself does not
provide reliable peak hour intersection tum volumes which aze another component of traffic
studies. Peak hour turn movements are typically obtained by a consultant manually adjusting
existing counts. The Urban Core Specific Plan EIR was the only document to prepaze peak hour
analysis for the intersections azound Third Avenue. For analysis of the proposed amendment, and
to remain conservative in our analysis, the city intends to utilize the original, higher peak hour
volumes obtained when Third Avenue was modeled as a four lane facility in the eazlier studies. It
is the city's conservative recommendation to continue to preserve the calculated impacts and
continue requiring the original mitigations at the E/F!G & H intersections with Third Avenue as
determined from the original UCSP traffic study. All intersection mitigations as shown is the
original traffic study and EIR aze to remain in effect in the Third Avenue corridor. (Attachment
7)
Vehiculaz Speeds along Third Avenue
It is reasonable to assume that constructing Third Avenue as a four lane facility with a resulting
Level of Service of A would promote accelerated speeds along the street in direct conflict with
General Plan and Urban Core golicies advocating a slower, more pedestrian friendly
environment along the corridor as stated in numerous Goals, Policies and Objectives in the two
documents. It is then reasonable to assume that a two lane facility is more apt to keep speeds
lower and foster a more pedestrian friendly environment in the corridor in line with city policies
and directives.
Conclusion
1. With the proposed reduction in the number of lanes from four lanes to two, the model is
now indicating fewer ADT trips on Third Avenue between E and H Streets. The two lane
capacity of Third Avenue is adequate for the new vehiculaz volumes. No new ADT
impacts on local surrounding streets was discovered.
2. Maintain mitigation strategies as determined in Urban Core Specific Plan E1R Measures
5.8.5-1 and 5.8.5-2. Mitigation Measure 5.8.5-3, the West Bch a llpassist in
Development Impact Fee program is now an adopted city program
funding the existing mitigation measures found in the UCSP traffic study and EIIt.
J:~EngineerU.ANDDEV\Projects\Taaffic Projects (Dave)\Third Avenue White Paper dek 9-28-10.doc
8-34
Circulation Plan -West
Figure 5-13W
i4 7~+«/~IF.N-r 1
8-35
~_, ~
,
~
~
' pp
' ;1
~~~ .
'
`~
' .
:
• ~ ~. adr~
'
~
p.. ~r
~
'
..
r
yYy
/~
~~ -
f µk J'
~~ rl~ Ai.~ S
111
' ,
t
1.
~
i
.r _. ..
;4 r., ..k, ,fix t:~; :.. -p tv ,' l>f`rr~.+yT; /~.i~:Cu k~'. r.••~~k~' v v
,' ]11t~~~.E µP )'t~ c '~` ~ [,.~d~' l~ltlr~.~1f i { C~ ~ \
, s i ~ L i52t li' 17~11,~ yt 1i f 3J f ~ i y
r~tAf yi o ].t ~ c. t'Gy'[ *~F -0Y j , r'I`1 "i1 Y •.d ~, \J j;J~ '.!'
rt P'1 r ~f [~a r~4aY ~l '~,t'lF {`~,~`. '`rf .~in dEO' t Y f"Pkl.Fi x ~vr hr t r
1 ,' ~ rfJ~Al lnil Y.• b~~x: a~~lr 7`L cl~Yf ,)11 _ si~~c ~} -~
<I` t`iaY " 1 iF i~~~ •{ .r '~~' " ,s~ s']+v~.~~ i t . e t° t ~yG~k , C ~ Y, ~
yip, 1, -,{r~~'~.[ s~.n 71{ [+F.ti~~~~ ASS CI"1 \ I y~r 4Z f+xVS~f .. ii UV ~1F f 1.L ~~~
r `, 'C~ I,~1Trr~f•~{i+n lnr rj 11. `~"1 ('(: ~y'^ di 1fS'~1'~.II~~~ i~ a,.' P Yrtt 4`~~. ~ 1 L v ~ 1v'~`.
•, } i i{~{ rl.~,/~ ~ta~.'Rf' nyT {" ~'N y F .' L d ~ 1 t ~• d [ ~ • ~ ~ ~ ~ I
~; n4, r"T, t'il M ~ 1Ar'r,54 aT~ 'r' 4^~;+~ \ ~ ~ ~ riz 1 ,55 I s ty 4'f; ~ ~ `~, .'
'r`~ id='^~~i+IZL f~ Y~y viJ ri j~d ~ '"d 1 I.Y ~ L4 ft [~~~~ r +q'~ ~ t 1 VV
?5 ~ ~ a +rf1t ~ j~r ~ ,27~ 4r{~' :Y~ Q W l[{j .' i b 5 ~ ~ y '. t ~j
r i y_ !4 4 T "ll ';lff ~{ 1 a~r~ hM1~kt~~ ~ 1 Y .SLL~~~~` l~\ t J ~~l .y 0
~4. i t 1 f \J 1 ~" ! t •> ,~y6{R~ [ f .{fi,5 sa,~ ` .~ ° M w
r ~ r r•F \~ 4 ~S'. ~v ~~#'sr ' S ~ ..t1~ }'r _ '" ~ . p r ~ xi'. j, +!'F..ya I ~ ,
... ~41~ri1 _ -.? ~~11 't rI ~~.t.i 6>f~ ~ v1V ~ .r ~ ~~.. ~..r ..If, ° ._c~ _ { ~-GY,~
.._:1 r ~4-. ~ ]. rT S'tl.L•ir /Ear r n.. ~. r ~ ~ i ~::J
w[aY ~.'~Ma'°~. t ~ -,.rt;"_ "rq's ~:.iei?<.I~,r~4tC`t Fl ;~.i~a.Jp~ .-'r. jg( ~:a:.~ '•Q.. ,/. '
. ` .: a.:'p;.ii''. .,qL j •:1'[n.b1:i~,hc. .~.ti..` ;il. ..~ ,'.'q' 'i. 'i. :-.y c?Ly.. .
~~i `11 .4: a ''~~
:.u" • 5: a ....r
\ . i. ~4 -~l:\' ~ i:'1~kY. ~Q 6x. rl r~ 'llt~p'J: M. - ~ L "..• • I[~"" \,e ~ .., S`'d
`~." -.:{xvyl.~.j;: ..:,;~ .Jl' r4±,~y j:•'.S'f.i .,air .... •:~Y .2.]~ ~~1R ~~~~~~ '~
~Iv '...,r.: .3 _ ~ r ~ 1' ~z' ~ "~- \rt'7'.' R~ ''t ~.w~tM`xi ~ ~ ~ ~ a~. r~ s
._,. _
a,~", A J ~ +`_ N `2- ~R.v."r'J*d~w ~ ! n5~ ,I'~ ` ~~ ~npWrn• Q t ~~ ' ~ p o
~~ rl ..r'^" !h Q Jr ~ 't yn~y"°Ct1 till .`dtj ~ ~- • t~ "°'ii s L~ ~v •.~ t o
•~ .~'"°~ r s~sR. dR [?~1'r to aswN`'~~R ~~ ~ C'1 aQ•~ ..r' ~•- ~ ~ ~ . ~ T ~ _ . GJ'~ p(7 ~ ydna~~ n*6''/M .
t q ~ \ 01 ~!:. 2y ~ ~ .\ d d
a cy • \
~~ atl !v ,~ , i,~xr"~5 Z d \ ~ K~m~r u>RxdF'.' ~~y c+\ ` ~ ~ .rra° ~~ $~/~ \ '1.
`~~ l,~ V . 3 tsic~ '~ r w 'ZE' 1 ~ . [Nr•'"rf" Q. ~` ~ N -r ..rv~*.
~~ ~ ~ •~. M ~ P[r ~ e~FJ. N \/ ~ tD Cf ). '~6 .'7 ~\ x ~ x.ern" 5..:.
r. £j _
.yt~ ~ . . cs s3 ,L ~
I~ • J • Y ~, -r-, .. R-V .~ •i, \ ~1S .r~W'!~raKr ~ / N Y /{ O ~p,,:t"~6 ~ ~ . SZ
r '
,4 ~' a.~,a:N"' ., - 1 ~, L.rvrA•"' '. ~6 ~ ~ Sn N e+~an'' ,Aar'v `v" ~^~~
m+ ` '~
]~.~~xuM~e# ~~ ~ ~`a~*~eW~[~ O t ('l ~`J ~ /~. \ CQ .~ r{»^fi`P ~'!'~d r' Q~J,,.r' '~ •'3
^ ~/ ~ F
• , 7
.•~'~ "'~ ~} Y' 0>`+Q+ 231 '~ j"''e • °:?~ '.iqY?
~ ~} ., i Z$ 3 ! 30.8 w 33.5 ~i 't»- :!~
,Zo 19'~ 3g 8 ' 1b. 1. 1~ ~ 38
f 19 ~ io9 .1'3? L,~- :<:g 9 ~-,. ~ eo ~y~,.E =r,~ ' ,~ 3.1
h
;°': •= a .~- ' ,..~ 142, •' ast,~--~--~ .._. _ ~- ~yo z
f .r:a= yr~I~ .... ~._
/f J~~[4~•~/ i
•. ~ ~ • ice' f ~-.Y.~, ~S' M1~Y.lyn
,.rry:s .
,~ ~ ~ -
'pis. ~ .:.Y •~ .} ~,
1 ~~i.:;urr' rMyT•I. ~:D''lf;X'.'.h~. :,•Af•G~ W ~ ~ ', ~~~~
i F"
ffls ,'~•'~ ~6~N~¢~.`=~`~ap'T''r. 'i im ,VVV i ~; ~ ~~]$.'x-=an
8~ f ~9'•'tiw56 v~ .~5e~,x,~'.,~.,vf ff ~Q~C~ou ~ ~ ~~.~.°~+\
. -~+1_:.::.::: :1 w ~ 2a 5
. =4-- z , •A l;'~ - -'a 3 ~ "~ ~ 'J Z }•.~ aA ~.' ~ 5 i ~3 .20'~°'``'w
~ •t ~~.w .,;;9 w '~+ ~ 2 3-~ ' 27;16
~ 2'..` N ~ N ~, 'tow ,~~#p~,~g~ .w `s ..,'i.7 ~~: 5
'~ 't,~ :%' ~ bt Q.9..fiTy,1 ;N i ,, ~''s ~ S ~ 3,4 ~,
",W,p~ ,,.:~7'6"'w,ta~7, ~ o,.;1T '- a st 1 •W 3A' ' .33ta ~ ;~s
~w, •~ ..~~ ':~05 ~'y`:o •~,:. ~ ~ ~ _ 6 N34 is -
WO iT1 ~ 18 3!"'-"'~ 1 :.t ~° S 1,~'s !•T. ~ 'v.9N m ~ .,;.,,~; ~+•~
;1.8 ~~ x~8 ~ W -• 3•,~ p•.b _ 9 ~ o ~ .:.<,=~'. w w
Z ~~ ~{ . • V7 L 1Ai Fes[ '~ F'P"
., 2 ~
" • N .W 1 .a-'~~~~~W ~e g ~° ~ ~tn Ts~`r-~ W ~ '9 g. ~ Q 7 :? u ~~a
fir' . ~~ . ~ti, ,.,, a.3 , .. ,.:.. .._ F ~ ~ 3 ~ 5 ~ - ~' ,d
9W A ~'+ x
' ~,> , ~ ~ ¢ a !'o Yx 6 6 0.1 e'er :?:? ....~+
~v..... o .•~ °A
,co '~' ,
~ ~ N 7 ~. ';• 6.7 , ~ 6'>3,~ i'0 4 p~ 1tf .f . g5.
I>~~ 8' 9901 14~~ ~ .,;~~ :r c ~26~322~~b~7
• 2fl
4.5 Sato ? '.~~ $:-13~.3~:~,~• 4. ..:o,,~ .4~
,N w ~8.3 26 ~~ ~ c h+
• ~li~ $ Q .6 if 21w ~ ~ • •. ?' ~~ `' ?.N .W , 4 3 ~ 2 / t 2 S l
~ ~...fi~g T'lw4• a•' N°~ ~ °. 5.~p-w 4,6 ..,, 4b j~ ~/Q"~-Ft~
8-37
7
~~, b ,. ~.
w" 1 > o „i
:: 5 ~3 ~'3P'
5 3 > o i„:
:; i+tn w~ 35 .s 3 1 1 N ,w,-, 3S .. w
~~ 35 1 • ~ o• •.~~" 0>
... 1 ~: ~0 to - _ N ~ 3030.+ 3 .~.
N t3s y~ , 1 ~ ~}J~ r
`' ~'` N v+ 30'; 30 ~ 3P1' 1 N ~ ;; :,_ ; > c 3 j 225 2y
' 'E 35 Z ~ 1
3p', p 1 1 >}~cNi1 .• ,, '~' <v, 35 2 1
a 3 Z wo > o
'1 N w i.. j. N v+ 5 35 3 2> o r.'~: w
~ `~~ 30
:, .j;•'.- ,~w 35 32.2 ~~w > o > 030
3 0 1
N ~ ; 3 5i - 2 N~swys •i, '. :...., wo 30 •, 3 w 1
35 .352 > ~~ .•: ~w >~`"'" 30 1 1 > °
m 5'- ~ 2~~, 2 N ~, •' t:;s N9"' 0 303 1 . 1 > a
~ } ':ir''i 1~` 5^:i• >~u~ 30 E 30 ~ 3 1 ~ 1 1 ~ v, w > 030
>~ w 5 1 4w ~ >~ > o g0
~ NqN N ~ 0 1 N'},r ;:?~i, '~ 0 11
> v~` N~"'3y 35 3 >~v, 4~v+ 3 ~30 G;0>'w'1 ~a:..: o
3`s 35 Us,. 1 • • 1 `~' ~ ~' "i _ .. ~c cwi+ 30 +' 30 ~i~ 1 0 > °
+OON ~~2" ~cwr+ ~+ t7rv: w >i`l~ 30 .,~„~1 t
:r 0 30 1 N;~ ~ ; o > ~ gg 3y 32
w N 3 >~ 2 `~wo
~v' r' > ~ 3y 35 2 >
..:i.t o .::•;. ~~ >~Nn 35 32 9,~~3Z 2 ~`"~sw" w >~ c
`~ > ° 30
>
~> ~ ^'q~ N ~Tm 3 2 N'~ N~ w 30 301 ~ 1 1i
35 i ~ 30 •~:?t
3342 3y ': 3 N w N}~ 0 . 30 . 1 ~1 : _:=::+ o
v~ , 3
35 3 ':.~•: 30 1 1 N~w„
~ 3y2 2 , :.~ :, N ~ 30 30 301 1 N ~ _ _ • ~ > c 30 , 30
>~~, ~ w 30 1
e.:,: 30 30 30 1 ;:.; AST' ;~ N4~` 30 1 w 1
1 1 ~,, w ~ 30 1 > o
1 ~
'~ ,s .. ~ ~ 1 cnw 30 ~~30 3aNN~~1 N 0 > o -~..t+..
w ... ~ : ; 35 1 1 :~ ~ sw 30K 1 '~
N ~ 5 35 2 N~~ .: ~4 N~~y~ 30 30 1 1 > o
3 2 >~ N 30 1 N~ws w
35 3 2 • ~ ~ w ~~ 30 1 ° 1 '~ > 0 5
2 N°' 30 1 Nw .mow ~ 3
' -i a i Z5 301 1 >~ o S ,~ r t -'e S ~ 1
... ,,, 2, 1 N v, - ~~ N~"`g5 C ire~~a.'~tO4
v+ S
3y> i 35 32 ;~ w tL (~ ctit 2 '~~
. ~ N 0 35 Z N~s7` s ~~ /
~..~: 3y 2 2 >~Nr 1 ~ ~ / / ~ Ll
g 5 3' 2 Nj~ .~., r'~w35 - -
8-38
"rr
. ~
't ~'r1 it7 .;fie R `9S -
519 ' ~ 1 ? d X42 1T °'•~ `~v a'
28 0.4.' r.-' ~ y
r2
' 0.4 ; $ ti~ ;
4°-`;
,~.~ N11fi B.g < ry .~ m o' M
'~,~ •w }
a3 1 g. w w •g. ~r ,3
g ~ `,~ a ~' _ "',~2i1•I w .i 3 ae :,~~ o ~ 5 • ~`,~
a ~~,1.1 ; 19 ~'" _ ~~` 32_...;4.:•2• a m~' 0• ' 2A 5E
~•.. ., -ZB A ~ 9 w 3.1
`~ 3b ~ A3 Q':6~ ; G71~ 62 ''',' '"~i~0;2 151. 164 ~~ ~`'}42l c ~ .1 ~j cni
• a' 1 'rAy ~; g 125 1 '-° 3 -~:i'i `s :loo-; ~c ~ 9 8
2 " 8
s`t~13o ~.i '"'• Zp9~ :S~ ~ ~y . 3 ~ 5 " 1' iw
• '13A s, 55 ~ ~ •'t 1~• N ; p81g' s w°' o+
255 5 ~• 2~ 1 rn 5 ;~g5 6 ._ ~ .
,~ N ra?14 `„~ '` 123 13 ~ ~ `,.,,-•- 3.
4 `~ 6 i 1 ~ N ~N 6.~ 49 ....~
1A' ~_ ~1 9 9 ••y 'acs 5~ 0 •9 ,~ ~t_ fi 3~ ~ q~-3(,
:517•,'1 y 96 ~; a' w t~ ~~~'Z 73 N1 A•"'. p9 ` ~ `r c
• i4 11 g• ltd,?5(i3~ `• ; 9 "Nw.• 53 i5~.g2 ~ ~ `y~:?",15.1 .
1~3 _E„r, iN ~ 'r3~~_s s ,~ 5 ~„ w.:6.5 ..a ~ ,. w°' 4 31 4
^ '~ ~.d' 2 r- 0 2 N 31'4
~> ~ 1p. ~ a0 n ~! ~~ ~ n ~ ;<l2?; ? p3 m 8 ~ 21 5 ..a
,~, ,, ~ ~ u 59 ` .a w ~ 1 ~ 2~ s p e~
~,~68 -~ '(.. ~.~ Q-`'~ 16'L8 a ••• ,.
.,.f"( ~ ~~fg iii 09 `,.3 ~
~ _,~-~`'~ ,~ S4 ' .~~ 316 ~ •y. _:.. .-~ Y
8
'`^~83 4y 470 2~5 ,~ w+a 32 }, ~ 5 ~N' 68 ~ A6
1 0 ~~ 23 5 ` h~~•: 3 '.vim 5,edt 2 S
3 p _.•r_
> > ~ Al • ~ 6 ~ 6. yr (!/a ! C
A ~ 4 /
A2 ~ A4 a ~ ~, 3 ~ 5 S~'~, ~ 9- ~ •. ` 5 ,. c,'* 6 ~O f/ wt ~ f
C~ _ Q N 113.•.._ "•$;~ o G -•~ ~'
A ~ ~`, `~ .182• Y•. }.
8-39
LAND USE AND TRANSPORTATION ELEMENT
CHAPTER 5
TABLE 5-9
STREET SEGMENT PERFORMANCE STANDARDS AND VOLUMES
Acceptable Volume
Street Classification Acceptable LOS (~.1.)
Expressway C 70,000
Prime Arterial
Major Street (six lanes)
Major Street (four lanes)
Towa Center Artezal
Class I Collector
Gateway Street
Urban Arterial
Commercial Boulevard
C 50,000
C 40,000
C 30,000
C 50,000
C 22,000
61,200 (six lanes)
D 43,200 (four lanes)
D 37,800
D 33,750
DowntoavPromenade D 14,400
A roadways capacity is primarily a function ofthe number of lanes provided to carry traffic
volumes, and whether or notthe roadway is divided with a median or centertum lane Typlolly,
the more lanes provided, the more capacity the roadway has to accommodate traffic demand
The peak hour capacty of a roadway is Influenced by a number of variables, including: the type
of Intersection controls; signal timing; the presence and frequency of driveways; on-street parking;
the percentage ofthe daily traffic in the peak hour, the direction oftraffic In the peak hour; and
other factors.
5.3.1 Analyzing and Measuring Traffic lmpatts ___^ _ ___:__ _ _ .
The City of Chula Vista conducts traffic analyses and planning through a three tiered system that
allows the C'~ty to cover a broad range of time fames and conditions spanning from 20-year
future forecasts, to near-term project evaluations, to actually driving the roadways to determine
real-time current performance. These three analyses have different degrees of precision in
determining impacts based on several considerations which include: the type of project being
considered; the study years chosen; whether the analysis will consider short tern impacts, long-
term impacts or both; and whetherthe analysis is being concluded to satisfy a CEQA requirement
or Is strictly a C'dy traffic review.
-.+
Page LUT-65 ~~,
T /
8-40
5.0 Environmental Impact Analysis 5.5 Traffic, Circulation, and Access
Mitigation Measure
5.8.5-1 Intersection Improvements
The impacts to the intersections fisted in 5.5.3.1 (a) above will be mitigated to
below significance by the implementation of improvements that have been
divided into three tiers for phased implementation based on need and
enhancement of the overall street network. Generally, time frames associated
with the tiered improvements are anticipated as short-. mid- and long-term. In
each tier, the City's existing TMP will determine the order in which projects are
implemented during the biannual CIP program review. The Tier 1 improvements
would 6e included in the current CIP and subsequently monitored for
improvement within the first five years of implementation of the UCSP. It should
be noted that three of the intersections (#7, #16, and #21) are proposed as
project features rather than as needed to improve intersection !OS and most
likely will be related to and timed with implementation of streetscape
improvements along Third Avenue.
The intersection numbers in the improvements described below correspond to
the Intersection numbering system used in the TIA (Appendix C):
a. Tier 1 improvements
#1 Bay Boulevardli-5 Southbound Ramp/E Street: Add an eastbound
through and right-turn lane, southbound right-turn Zane, and northbound
right-tum lane. Coordination with Caitrans will be required for this
improvement.
#2 1-5 Northbound Ramp/E Street: Add a westbound right-tum lane.
Coordination with Caitrans will be required for this improvement.
#7 Third Avenue/E Street: Convert the northbound and southbound
,C~ shared right-through lane into exclusive right tum lanes.
t • J #16 Third AvenuelF Street: Separate the southbound sharedthrough-
t."J right lane into an exclusive through and right-turn lanes, convert the
northbound shared through-right lane into an exclusive right-turn lane.
#21 Third AvenuelG Street Convertthe northbound/southbound shared
through-right lane into exclusive right-tum lanes.
• #241-5 Southbound RamplH Street: Add a southbound left, eastbound
through and right-turn lanes. Coordination with Caitrans will be required
for this improvement
Page 5-1 B1
~/ /
8-41
Chu/a Ysta Urban Core Traffic Study
"
~.
ll
ir
S
'
,. . Y ktiJ ~e
~`
""
k~
~
- P
v(
c ~ 2~E ;
. B :$1, ~ _ .. 8
~S
? , c'`
_ _
T_~:.
.
`/y
`free F~ I I I
W
~ LEI
~
~
'
I '
y ~
/
!jr WW
~
E~
W y
3 ~
6
.
~
a
a . ~~ ~~~ ~T~
~
~ ~ ~ ~
-~ • -~
Assumes LR79~ de seporallon _ _ _
`~-~ may„ .:. '. ~:'°"~ _
a am _ 'FJ'i57~-` d. ~ . 2z-~v,-
n ._ ~
E- a:_.
i KIL I I ~ I I I
~
W y ~
b WfW 51 L~ !L Sl
i ~- E-
. f f
~ ~' ~~~ _~
~
_~
~r y --~
~,
Assumes LRT gr ade seporoliort'
~
- ..
~~ ~ fJB
SH n _ A
.. I Il
~-
~ IIl'
I ~II.I~
~
~ I
~W~ _
~
~
W `
WWyy
~
` • , ~~ N
~
~ ~ ~ 1 1 1 1 1 1
~
~~~~ ~
W
Assumes LRT cads se ambon
:-s'S~s" " ~ _..`A'~gmodtvo'.~.5 5dyVVB' x
afrt -~
... ~~
c
~
EB!A ~ ~ -
~ srs '~_~, f ~v
_ ~ '~t
'
~ ~-
:
,~ `_,9}#hSf t ~ ve •a ~
_ ' ~~ c'S ~ _
,
s
:
~~~~~ ~
g ~~~~ ~ ~~ ~ ~~~
I
TT TT ~ ~ ~TT~
~ ~ ~Tf --y>
s •-y -y
s
.
Leaend•
I ~ Q halRc sign al _
Q v Stop Sipn ~overl New Overla p Phase
• Tha `ighl 9a9T :,i C~vcsl s n E Sf f nd 5 of will h
arvfe~~rwn Ida ve~iicu~or fm~ o9ong E ~ael and ~
e
d -~ EsisRng lon
ffeB6e _~ pmPosed f e • ~
mprovemonl
qJ. ~ q queue Jum
psr
p
gra
e s
•• To imPNVe f~+is infersaction,1ra !~ Nm hosing from P
fha md¢ase movemenlsn be anye fo pnfacffve+ armisc j _ ! Lane fo be
ire. 'alterad'
3 ~ Fgure 6-11
e X17 Year 2D30 witf~ Improvements
P~~oRN ana/SOCVlES /ntersections Geometri rs
8-42
THIflD AVENUE ANALYSIS
TNrd Avenue
Ew HSheat
Increased. Level
al
AAOdewg Volumes In
ThousarWs volumes a
Decrease
Service
Sodas 19 Avers a Values
~.4 Ln When Adawl 1@5
Decrease A
Serves 17 Avem a Valdes 13.8 D
2 Ln Urhon Analel
TABLE t
TABLE 2
1+
W
NEIGHSOflING STflEET A
bbdeln9 Voluma9 81
Theu¢aMs NALYSIS
Faunh Avenue
E to H SUeal Inceased
voYmle¢ or
4 Ln Ufian Aderlal decrease
Level
al
Servlce
Second Avenue
E to H Slreel
Clesa III Co0.
Increased
vol9me5 or
decneesa
Level ESlreel
of 2nd b Fourth Ava. Inaeesed
voumes or
Service 4ln Urban AnarWl tlecreasa Level
of
Servla: H SUeei
2ntl w Fourth Ava.
4 Ln Uman Anedel
l~raased
volumes or
deaeesa Leval
of
Servlca
A 3i
4 C
Series 79 Avere a V¢luea 19.5 InLlC85e A 5.9 IIIQee6e B 21.2 Deaaa6G
A .
5
29 GaLfea¢0
C
Sedes 11 Avers a Vewas 22.4 A TS C 19.8 .
JiErglneartteruldav/PHOJEGTSRHAFFIG PflOJECTS (DAVE)/Thkd Avarwo Amandmenl Volume Awlyal¢
ATTACHMENT ~'
v
er
ao
CiTy of Chula Vista
..._ r...
Pcepa~ect kzy~i~MS,T~ e~ *~~ nbla~~q~co~6~aratlon ~~t ~~ c v~~h41~, roc
Village"~`s5tieiattons!~°•"•,~°~_°-°^~,s„~~.~~~. ~'- .~°~~" cmoF
CHULA VISTA
Table of Contents
Purpose of Guidelines...........
................................................ 3
Background ........................
................................................ 4
Application Processing and Procedures ............................................ 5
Chapter 1: Barriers ..................................................................... 6
1.1 Barrier Design Applications ........................................ 7
1.2 Barrier Measurements ................................................ 10
1.3 Access and Openings ................................................. 12
1.4 Landscape Elements .................................................. 12
Chapter 2: Street Furniture and Fixtures ........................................ 15
2.1 Types of Street Furniture and Furnishings ......................... 17
2.2 Tables and Chairs ......... . ........................................... 17
2.3 Umbrellas and Stands .................................................22
2.4 Sidewalk Coverings ................................................... 25
2.5 .Unobstructed Pedestrian Circulation ............................... 25
2.6 Signage and Applications ............................................ 27
City of Chula Vista 2
v
w
Purpose of Guidelines
The purpose of these Outdoor Dining Design Guidelines ("Design Guidelines") is
to provide overall standards for the use of outdoor dining areas along Third
Avenue and adjoining streets. This achieves a quality appearances and maintains
the Third Avenue Village character. Central to the process of permitting outdoor
dining along one of the south county's older downtown avenues is the necessity of
ensuring that the street fumiture and other items placed along the street will
complement the overall character of the Village and not detract from the Village's
architectural and character vision.
The City of Chula Vista permits outdoor dining along Third Avenue and
adjoining streets in the Village area through an administrative permitting process
Including the issuance of an encroachment permit if within the public right of
way.
This document contains further description for the implementation of these
guidelines for street furniture, preferred appurtenances and furnishings that are
considered acceptable within the architectural and cultural framework of the Third
Avenue Village area.
cc
v
Background
The City of Chula Vista and the Third Avenue Village Association are pleased to
offer existing and encourage future restaurants within the Village the option of
utilizing the public sidewalks as outdoor dining areas. Outdoor dining gives
restaurant patrons an amenity that has become an increasingly popular feature
within the southern California area, due to its sunny weather and mild climates
year around.
While the City supports the use of outdoor dining arrangements, restaurant
operators must be aware of three (3) important factors in determining how to use
an outdoor dining area:
1) Public safety and visibility
2) Circulation flow of pedestrian traffic and
3) Visual appropriateness within Village's character.
These Outdoor Dining Design Guidelines are intended to ensure that restaurants
use the public sidewalk for outdoor dining in a way that is safe for pedestrians,
does not present handicap constraints for the visually impaired, encourages
interactions, and supports a pleasant outdoor dining experiences.
The Outdoor Dining Design Guidelines has blended elements of the existing
Resolution No. 1410 with the current visions and strategies, USCP guidelines,
other communities downtown guidelines and local knowledge to create a set of
visual pictures to describe the intent and application. We hope this document will
encourage more restaurants or cafes to that this opportunity to create an outdoor
dining experience within the Village area.
r
v
I
m
Application Processing and Procedures
Outdoor dining is permitted within the Village along Third Avenue and adjoining
streets through an administrative approval process. This administrative process
will save time and expense by establishing standards that must be followed for all
outdoor dining locations.
To apply, a restaurant owner or his/her designee needs to complete the following:
Application Form: The applicant should fill out the a brief form with
basic information about the restaurant, proposed number of seats and how
these are to be arranged within the proposed outdoor space.
Site Plan: A plan showing the proposed outdoor dining area with specific
measurements (including a representation showing that at least 5 feet of
unobstructed sidewalk space within the public right-of--way will remain for
pedestrian circulation).
Photos or DrawinE of Street Furniture: Photos or other graphic
representation (including color and materials) of fumiture, umbrellas,
stands, fences and/or railings needed for the City to verify that the
proposed furniture conforms to these Design Guidelines.
For application forms, information or questions regarding the outdoor dining
design guidelines, please contact the Development Services at (619) 691-5101 or
visit in person at City Hall located at 276 Fourth Street, Chula Vista.
l,~t<<,,~a~'I
: ;
.~ ,t ,
,.
;; 3 ;
,`~.,.
.,;
~,,
ao
d °
. ~
,L
k.~. ~
~~.;;
.r;.
~ r.. ~
i
„Sr, i ;
~_
:
it
^ ' ~
;
~:,.J~,., ~,.
.c ~ ~
,,: ,
-t ~
S:- ~ 4 1 .d ll:J
f' .:%4
;~
.
t
i
;
,
;
1{ ~ ~
,
e ,
.r
;,
Chapter l: Barriers
Dining area barriers (fences, gates, ropes etc.) are visually appealing and help to
define and separate the dining area from the public sidewalk. All barrier material-
must be maintained in good visual appearance, without visible fading, dents, tears,
rust, corrosion, or chipped or peeling paint.
Barriers are required in the followin¢ instances:
Required for Leading Edge of all Dinin¢ Areas: A solid detectable
barrier is required for the leading edge of all outdoor dining areas to
ensure that visually impaired pedestrians using canes can detect the
dining areas safely. The leading edge, illustrated to the right in orange, is
defined as the section of a dining area that is at or near a perpendicular
angle to the building wall and/or curb line.
Required for Full Perimeter of Some Dining Areas: A solid detectable
barrier is required for the full perimeter (with the exception of access
openings) when the outdoor seating area extends more than 3 feet into the
public right-of-way. The perimeter includes both the leading edges and
parallel edges. Restaurants which do not serve alcohol and whose outdoor
seating area extends less than 3 feet into the public right-of--way are not
required to enclose the full perimeter of the seating area, but may do so on
an optional basis.
• Required for Full Perimeter of All Outdoor Dinine Areas Serving
Alcohol: State law requires that outdoor dining areas where alcohol is
served or consumed must enclose the area, with only one opening to the
sidewalk for access.
rn
v
I
w
Barrier Designs
1.] Barrier Design Applications
A wide variety of styles and designs are permissible for outdoor dining area
barriers:
Sectional Fencing: Sectional fencing (generally defined as rigid fence segments
that can be attached together to create a unified fencing appearance) is the most
desirable solution for outdoor seating areas using barriers. Such fencing is easily
portable, but cannot be shifted by patrons or pedestrians, as can less rigid forms of
enclosures. Sectional fencing must be of metal (aluminum, steel, iron, or similar)
or of wood construction and must be of a color (either painted or stained).
Rope or Chain Rails: Rope or chain-type barriers (generally defined as
enclosures composed of a rope or chain suspended by vertical elements such as
stanchions) are permitted only if they meet the following criteria:
Rooe/Chain Diameter: The rope or chain must have a minimum diameter
of ]inch, in order to be detectable by the visually impaired.
Posts: Vertical support posts (stanchions, bollards, etc.) must be con-
structed of wood or metal (aluminum, steel, iron, or similar).
Stanchion Base Must Not Be A Tripping Hazard: If a stanchion or other
vertical supporting device is attached to as base, that base must be flat and
must measure no more that one-half (]/2) of an inch above the sidewalk
surface. Typically stanchion have a minimum height of 36". No domed
stanchion bases are permitted.
0
u7
1
w
figure I : Use of rope or chain barrier must have a minimum diameter
of one (l") inch. Note the approved connection to the stands.
figure 2: Acceptable use of a sectional fence.
Note appropriate base and connection to the fence.
City of Chula Vista
Figure 4: Here is an example of a stanchion
that is not permitted within the outdoor area.
N
Figure 5: A great example of the outdoor
sectional fencing that is linked together with
a great design and has a low profile
stanchions.
City of Chula Vista
figure 3: Good example of a preferred
stanchion base that is flat and no more than
1/2" above the sidewalk surface.
Freestanding: Any barrier (whether sectional fencing or rail-type) must be
freestanding, without any permanent or temporary attachments to buildings,
sidewalks or other structures.
Prohibited Barrier Styles:
Fabric Inserts: Fabric inserts (whether natural or synthetic fabric) of any
size are not permitted to be used as part of a barrier.
Chain-link and Other Fencing: The use of chain-link, cyclone fencing,
chicken wire or similar appurtenances is strictly prohibited. Materials not
specifically manufactured for fencing or pedestrian control (including, but
not limited to filled buckets, food containers, tires, tree stumps, vehicle
parts, pallets, etc.) and not expressly permitted elsewhere in these Design
Guidelines, may not be used as components of a barrier.
1.2 Barrier Measurements
To ensure their effectiveness as pedestrian control devices and to be detectable by
persons with visual impairments, barriers must meet the following measurement
guidelines:
Height: The highest point of a barrier (such as a stanchion) must measure at least
36 inches in height, with the exception of planters.
Open Appearance: Fences or other perimeter enclosures with a height of
between 36" and 50" must be at least fifty percent (50%) open (see-through) in
order to maintain visibility of street level activity. Any enclosure with a height
over 50" must be at least eighty percent (80%) open (see-through).
M
u7
I
Figure 8: In all cases where the applicant is
proposing a rope or ohain barrier, the center
of the barrier must be 27" from the sidewalk,
as measured 12" from the side stanchions.
City of Chula Vista
Figure 7: The Height of the sectional
Figure 6: Fencing with fabric inserts are not permitted to be fence must be at least 36" along the
used as part of the barrier. entire fenced outdoor dining m~ea.
Maximum Distance from Ground: All barriers must be detectable to visual
impaired pedestrians who employ a cane for guidance. Therefore the bottom of
barriers must be no greater than 24 inches above the sidewalk surface.
How to Measure Rope/Chain Distance from Ground: In the case of a rope or-
chain enclosure, the rope/chain must not exceed 27 inches in height when
measured 12 inches or more away from a vertical post (stanchion, bollard or
other such support).
1.3 Access and Openings
Minimum Access Width: Any enclosure opening within the barrier must
measure no less than 44 inches in width.
Location: Enclosure openings should be placed in a location that will not create
confusion for visually impaired pedestrians.
1.4 Llndscape Elements
Landscape Elements, such as planters or freestanding potted plants may be used
in addition to, or in place of, other barrier designs. In addition, planters may be
used in situations where no barrier is required (for example, where the outdoor
.dining areas do not extend more than three (3') feet onto the sidewalk) in order to
'provide added visual interest, or to create a more attractive and welcoming
atmosphere..
Maximum Height of Planters: Planters may not exceed a height of 36 inches
above the level of the sidewalk. (This pertains only to planters, not the plants
contained therein.)
u7
I
ao
ao
figure 9: Flere is' an acceptable outdoor dining area that uses
planters, materials and chain barrier.
City of Chula Vista 13
Figure lo: Planters height may vary but in all
cases must no[ exceed a maximum of 8' Ii~om
sidewalk to top of plant materials.
r
w
Figure I I: I-lere are some good examples of planter design
and USES Ot matEfl8~5.
City of Chula Vista 14
Maximum Height of Plants: Plant material may not exceed a height of 108
inches (9 feet) above the level of the sidewalk.
Planted Material: All planters must have plants contained within them. If the
plants within a planter die, the plants must be immediately replaced or the planter
removed from the public right-of--way. Artificial plants, empty planters, or
planters with only bare dirt, mulch, straw, woodchips or similar material are
strictly prohibited. Seasonal or thematic planter displays are encouraged.
Chapter 2: Furniture and Fixtul es
Commercial and Service Retail liveliness depends on maintaining an attractive
and high-quality atmosphere. As stated in the Urban Core Specific Plan, within
the Public Realm Strategies, the Third Avenue Village and the City of Chula
Vista want to create an unified and visually attractive environment which
promote a sense of place, encouraging people to dine, explore and seek a variety
of shops.
The quality of the streetscape and street furnishing is vitally important to that
sense of place for the Third Avenue Village retail and pedestrian ambiance. The
streetscape, landscaping and the adjacent buildings and/or outdoor spaces are the
most significant overall elements in providing a dynamic visual environment.
Outdoor dining furniture becomes a prominent part of the streetscape when used
in the front or along the sides of buildings, and such fumiture needs to uphold the
high standards applied to buildings and other improvements within the Third
Avenue Village.
The pedestrian experience whether strolling along Third Avenue or sitting at a
sidewalk cafe plays an important role in the functionality of the overall
economic health of the Village and most important a sense of safety.
m
ao
Not permitted within the outdoor
divine area.
rn
Figure 12: The outdoor dining area is for tables and chairs only.
O[her appurtenances or famishing arc not permitted within this area.
Nole the services tables and trash receptacles, these are not permitted.
City of Chula Vista 16
A wide range of furniture styles, colors and materials is permitted. All furniture
and fixtures must be maintained in good visual appearance, without visible fading,
dents, tears, rust, corrosion, or chipped or peeling paint. All furniture and fixtures
must be maintained in a clean condition at all times. All furniture and fixtures
must be durable and sturdy construction as not to blow over with normal winds.
To ensure a quality visual appearance in keeping with the Third Avenue Village
vision, common standards and conditions on the following pages apply to outdoor
dining furniture such as tables and chairs.
2.1 Types of Street Furniture and Furnishings
Prohibited Furniture or Furnishings: All furniture or furnishings other than
tables, chairs and umbrellas are prohibited. This includes but is not limited to
serving stations, bar counters, shelves, racks, sofas, televisions, trash receptacles,
torches, etc.
Freestanding: Furniture and fixtures must not be secured to trees, lampposts,
street signs, hydrants, or any other street infrastructure by means of ropes, chains or
any other such devices, whether during restaurant operating hours or at times when
the restaurant is closed.
12.2 Tables and Chairs
Tables need to be functional, not only for patrons, but also for pedestrians, given
the limited space available for outdoor dining on many of the Third Avenue Village
sidewalks.
rn'~'
r ~ ~~
tf r2 !4 r
_,
s; ~~ ~ £.
~T ~ ~,;
` ~y
,; j - _
~,; _
~ ;: o
r ,;; ~ c: ~
ao
~ ~ 4: i} ~
~~
~' ,. ,..} - r.
} } ,~
I
: ,
~
n .:;
rs
} a
-
r v>
a .;.
i ,~ } ~ -
~: , ,... ,
::_.
~ ,:
t:
,c
}~
Figure 13: Here is a great example of an outdoor dining
setup and furnishing. The chairs may be of dark a'
natural unpainted materials.
r
cc
City of Chula V ista 18
Figure 14: These smaller bistro style tables and chairs are more
eflicicnt, along use of the sidewall: and could be applied to various
streets within the Third Avenue Village area.
Figure I5: Plastic white or fluorescent furniture
is not permitted under any circumstance within
the Third Avenue Village area.
N
I
Figure 17: Use of white plastic furniture is not permitted within
the Third Avenue Village.
City of Chula Vista 19
Figure 16: Combination behveen the chairs and tables is acceptable
as long as they match each other, as shown in photos above and
below.
Outdoor dining furniture must also contribute to the overall atmosphere of Third
Avenue's entertainment/retail/restaurant district and be complementary in both
appearance and quality.
Color: Tables may be colored or of a natural unpainted material (i.e., wood,
metal, etc.). Tables are not permitted to be white plastic or of any fluorescent or
other strikingly bright or vivid color.
Size and Shape: The size and shape of tables strongly affects the functionality
of an outdoor dining area. Due to Third Avenue's sidewalks configurations,
restaurants should strive for space-efficient seating layouts and furniture siting
while creating a usable space that is not to crowded and allows for easy
circulation.
Square or Rectangular Tables Preferred: Square or rectangular tables are
strongly recommended for use in Third Avenue's outdoor dining areas.
Better Fit: Square or rectangular tables may fit flush against a building's wall
and can permit more usable surface area for patrons while at the same time
leaving more space available for pedestrian circulation.
More Flexibility: Square or rectangular tables are more flexible for use in
outdoor dining areas. Such tables may be combined to seat larger parties much
more effectively than can round tables.
Smaller Tables Preferred: Smaller tables work better than larger tables and are
more effectively and flexible. Although optimal table size varies by each
restaurant's specific outdoor dining layout, smaller tables are preferred.
M
cc
1
w
Chairs, like other outdoor dining elements, must contribute to the overall
atmosphere of Third Avenue's commercial/retail district and must be
complementary in both appearance and quality.
Color: Chairs may be colored or of a natural unpainted material (i.e., wood,
metal etc.). Chairs are not permitted to be white plastic or of any fluorescent or
other strikingly bright or vivid color.
Upholstery: Upholstered chairs are permitted. Upholstery is not permitted to be
of any fluorescent or other strikingly bright or vivid color. Although not
discourage, however, material covered chairs tend to be higher maintenance due
to the cleaning aspects. These types of material chairs must be maintained in
good visual appearance, without visible fading, dents, tears, rust, corrosion, or
chipped or peeling paint.
Matching: All chairs used within a particular establishment's outdoor seating
area much match each other by being of visually similar design, construction and
color.
Service Podiums: Podiums may be constructed of either wood or metal. The
color palette shall match the outdoor dining areas theme for that given restaurant.
Like other furnishings the podiums must be maintained in good visual
appearance, without visible fading, dents, tears, rust, corrosion, or chipped or
peeling paint. A small unobtrusive light maybe mounted on the podium, but
must not create a visual or safety concern for the diners or nearby pedestrian
areas. The location of the service podium may not create confusion for visually
impaired pedestrians or create a blocking situation.
v
cc
ao
2.3 Umbrellas and Stands
Umbrellas can add a welcoming feel to outdoor dining areas and provide shelter
from the elements, making their use desirable for outdoor dining applications.
Appropriately design and sized umbrellas are permitted for use under this
outdoor dining program. Umbrellas must be free of advertisements and
contained within the outdoor dining area, and the lowest dimension of an
extended umbrella must be at least 7 feet above the sidewalk surface. All
umbrellas must comply with the following conditions.
Contained Within the Outdoor Seating Area: To ensure effective pedestrian
flow and safety, all parts of any umbrella (including the fabric and supporting
ribs) must be contained entirely within the outdoor seating area. No overhanging
onto neighboring sidewalk (s) or landscaped areas will be allowed.
Minimum Height for Sidewalk Clearance: When extended, the umbrella must
measure at least 7 feet above the surface of the outdoor dining area in order to
provide adequate circulation space below. This measurement must include not
only the umbrella frame and panels, but also any decorative borders such as
fringes, tassels, or other such ornamentation.
Maximum Height: Any part of an umbrella used in an outdoor seating area may
not exceed a height of 120" (10 feet) above the level of the sidewalk, in order to
avoid causing an undue visual obstruction or safety concern to other businesses.
Colors: Umbrellas must blend appropriately with the surrounding built
environment. There fore, umbrella fabric is not permitted to be of any
fluorescent or other strikingly bright or vivid color. Umbrella covers must be of
one solid color.
u~
co
I
ao
Size and Shape: The size and shape of an umbrella strongly affects its
functionality within a constrained space such as an outdoor dining area. Due to
the narrow measurements of most restaurants outdoor dining areas, restaurants
using umbrellas should strive for space-efficient umbrella designs.
Square or Rectangular Umbrellas Preferred: Square or rectangular umbrellas,
as opposed to round or octagonal umbrellas, are strongly recommended for use in
Third Avenue's outdoor dining areas.
Market-Style Umbrellas Preferred: Market-style umbrellas -those designed
specifically for patio or outdoor restaurant use -are preferred for outdoor dining
purposes.
Material: Umbrella fabric must be of a material suitable for outdoor use, and
must be canvas-type. No plastic fabrics, plastic/vinyl-laminated fabrics, or any
type of rigid materials are permitted for use as umbrellas within an outdoor
seating area.
Signage or Wording Prohibited: Umbrellas must not contain signage for the
restaurant or for any other entity in the form of wording, logos, drawing, pictorial
or photographic representations, or any other likewise identifying characteristic.
I
ao
Pigw'es 18, I
use of metal
within the TI
r
m
Figure 21 : This photo offers another good example of e
outdoor umbrella application.
City of Chula Vista 24
2.4 Sidewallc Coverings
The basic floor of outdoor seating area should be uncovered sidewalk material
(such as concrete, concrete pavers, stamped concrete, etc.) as to provide
continuity with the adjacent public right-of-way. Floor coverings or raised
platforms may not be used within outdoor dining areas.
Prohibited Sidewalk Coverings:
Carpet: Prohibited sidewalk coverings include carpet or other flooring material
constructed of fabric, canvas, wool, tile, linoleum, nylon, vinyl, or any covering
that is intended to resemble turf.
Platforms: Raised decks, platforms, or other such surfaces are not permitted
within outdoor dining areas.
2.5 Unobstructed Pedestrian Circulation
As established in the Outdoor Dining Ordinance, all outdoor dining areas must
leave at least five (5') feet of unobstructed pedestrian space outside of the
proposed outdoor dining area. These 5 feet of pedestrian space must be clear of
obstruction caused by trees, tree wells, posts, hydrants, parking meters or any
other infrastructure. In addition, no part of an outdoor dining areas (including
plants) may extend into the Sfeet-unobstructed zone.
ao
ca
w
City of Chula V ista 26
Figure 21: Overall this photo illustrates the minimum clearances required for mi outdoor dining application.
Note that there is ample dining area reserved and the public has a safc clearnnec behveen the outdoor dining
area and other street obstacles, such as the street trees. This also includes other appurtenances such as park-
ing meters, siens or poles that may be found within the public rights-of--ways.
2.6 Signage and Applications
Signage is permitted within outside dining areas af£xed only to the building
structure and with a valid City permit. No extra or additional Signage is
permitted solely as a result of an establishment's participation in this outdoor
dining program. No free standing signs or banners will be allowed within the
boundaries of the outdoor dining areas or hanging from the perimeter fencing.
2.7 Adjacency to Other Businesses
Restaurants need to be mindful of adjoining businesses when using outdoor
dining areas, making sure that neighboring businesses remain visible to
pedestrians and motorists, and are not negatively affected by noise, odors, etc:
pursuant to CVMC 19.66 and 19.68
A restaurant may be required to adjust the outdoor seating area's layout,
dimensions or distance from the property line (2 feet or more) to ensure that
these performance standards are maintained.
0
r
I
ORDINANCE NO.
ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING
THREE MINOR AMENDMENTS TO THE URBAN CORE
SPECIFIC PLAN TO: 1) RECLASSIFY THIRD AVENUE
BETWEEN E AND H STREET FROM A FOUR LANE TO A
TWO LANE DOWNTOWN PROMENADE; 2) MODIFY THE
RESIDENTIAL PARKING STANDARDS FOR THE
CORRIDORS DISTRICT; AND 3) ADD OUTDOOR DINING
DESIGN GUIDELINES AS AN APPENDIX TO THE URBAN
CORE SPECIFIC PLAN
Recitals
Project Boundaries
WHEREAS, the Urban Core Specific Plan (UCSP), which is the subject of .this
Ordinance, and for the purpose of description is generally located east of I-5, west of Del Mar
Avenue, north of L Street, and south of C Street as shown on Exhibit "A".
Project Description
WHEREAS, the General Plan Update was approved by City Council on December 13,
2005; and
WHEREAS, the 2005 General Plan Vision for the Urban Core of the City states that the
Urban Core will contain the greatest diversity of public, commercial, civic, financial, cultural,
and residential uses emphasizing its role as the hub of the City; and
WHEREAS, the 2005 General Plan Vision for the traditional residential neighborhoods
that surround the Urban Core states that the attractiveness of living in these areas will be
enhanced by the Urban Core's diversity in character, architectural style, pedestrian-friendly
environment and enhanced access to facilities and services; and
WHEREAS, the Land Use and Transportation Element of the General Plan calls for the
UCSP, or other zoning regulations, to implement the new land uses and vision for the Urban
Core Sub Area identified in the 2005 General Plan; and
WHEREAS, the UCSP was adopted by the City Council on April 26, 2007, (Ordinance
No. 3070); and
WHEREAS, the UCSP provides parking standards in the Corridors District for residential
uses at 1.5 parking spaces per unit plus guest parking at 1 space per 10 dwelling units; and
8-71
Ordinance No.
Page 2
WHEREAS, on January 12, 2010, in response to a request from Crossroads II, the City
Council directed staff Co assess whether the actual demand for residential parking in mixed use
developments is being met in the Corridors District of the UCSP (areas generally south of H
Street on Third Avenue and Broadway, and north of E Street on Broadway); and
WHEREAS, on February 22, 2010, staff conducted an assessment of an existing mixed
use project located on Broadway to determine the parking demand and sufficiency and found that
the parking demand was approximately 1.75 spaces per unit; and
WHEREAS, based on this assessment, staff recommends modifying the parking
requirements within the Corridors District from the current UCSP standard to the city wide
standard for residential parking; and
WHEREAS, the Third Avenue Streetscape Master Planning process commenced in
August 2008, and through the Streetscape master plan process it was recommended that the travel
lanes along the segment of Third Avenue between E and H Street be modified from the current
two to four lane configuration to a consistent two lane configuration; and
WHEREAS, the new two lane configuration will result in an improved multi-modal
design of this segment of Third Avenue with improved traffic circulation; be pedestrian friendly,
and incorporate a Class III bike lane, and include greater support of the smart growth design
principles envisioned by the 2005 General Plan and UCSP; and
WHEREAS, a traffic analysis was conducted that modeled the modifications to the lane
configurations and concluded that the Third Avenue segment would operate at a Level of Service
(LOS) "D" which is established by the 2005 General Plan for Urban Streets; and
WHEREAS, a preliminary Master Streetscape Plan was presented in January and
February 2010 to outreach to community stakeholder groups including the Northwest Civic
Association, Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce, Chula Vista Civic Association, Third Avenue
Village Association (TAVA) Design Committee and Crossroads II, to provide an overview and
to discuss the proposed two-lane configuration and for staff to receive comments; and
WHEREAS, the general input from outreach participants were supportive of the
Streetscape Master Plan and the traffic lane re-configuration; and
WHEREAS, the UCSP provides design standards for development and the Public Realm
within the Third Avenue Village District; and
WHEREAS, a special pedestrian oriented "cafe" environment for the downtown Village
is a stated goal of the UCSP and the outdoor dining design guidelines developed by the Third
Avenue Village Association will provide overall standards for the use of outdoor dining areas
along Third Avenue and adjoining streets; and
WHEREAS, by including these guidelines as an appendix to the UCSP, the assurance of
quality outdoors dining areas will characterize the Third Avenue Village; and
8-72
Ordinance No.
Page 3
WHEREAS, although Chapter XI of the Final UCSP provides a process for making
Minor Amendments to the UCSP and allows the Director of Development Services to approve
minor amendments administratively; and
WHEREAS, although Chapter XI of the UCSP allows the Director of Development
Services to approve minor amendments administratively, the minor amendments are being
presented to the City Council for their consideration due to the extensive community interest
shown throughout the Streetscape Master Plan process and the public request made by
Crossroads regarding the Corridors District parking standards; and
WHEREAS, the Director of Development Services has determined that the proposed
changes to the UCSP are minor amendments as they would not introduce a new land use
designation not contemplated in the Specific Plan; would not change the designation of land uses
affecting two acres or more from that shown in the Specific Plan; would not result in changes to
the circulation system or other community facility which would materially affect a planning
concept detailed in the Specific Plan; would not result in changes or additions to the design
guidelines which materially alter the stated intent of the Specific Plan; nor result in new
significant, direct adverse environmental impacts not previously considered in the FEIR-06-01;
and
WHEREAS, a Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR-06-O1) was prepared and
certified for the UCSP on Apri126, 2007; and
WHEREAS, the Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The proposed Amendment
to the UCSP was evaluated pursuant to FEIR-06-O1 and was found to not result in significant
unmitigated impacts. The Development Services Director has determined that only minor
technical changes or additions to FEIR-06-O1 are necessary and that none of the conditions
described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a
subsequent document have occurred. Therefore, the Development Services Director has
prepared an Addendum to FEIR-06-O1. Additionally, because the proposed project will be
utilizing federal Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) monies, the Development
Services Director has also reviewed the proposal for compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) as implemented by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) Environmental Guidelines. The Development Services Director has
determined that the project qualifies for a Categorical Exclusion (subject to 58.5) pursuant to
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 24, Section 58.35(a). Thus no further NEPA
environmental review is required.
Planning Commission Record
WHEREAS, a hearing time and place was set by the Planning Commission for
consideration of the Project and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, at least ten days prior to the
hearing; and
8-73
Ordinance No.
Page 4
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing on said Project
at the time and place as advertised, namely December 22, 2010 at 6p.m. in the Council
Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, and said hearing was therefore closed; and
WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced on this application before the
Planning Commission at their public hearing held on December 22, 2010, and the minutes and
resolution resulting there from, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
City Council Record
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the City Council
on January 18, 2011 on the Addendum to the Final EIR-06-O1 for the Urban Core Specific Plan
and Amendments to the Urban Core Specific Plan and to receive the recommendations of the
Planning Commission and to hear public testimony with regard to the same.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT ORDAINED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby find and determine as follows:
Section I. Environmental Determination
That the proposed project was reviewed for compliance with CEQA and that the
proposed Amendment to the UCSP was evaluated pursuant to FEIR-06-O1 and was found to not
result in significant unmitigated impacts and that only minor technical changes or additions to
FEIR-06-O1 are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State
CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent document have occurred. The City
Council further finds that because none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State
CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent document have occurred an
Addendum to FEIR-06-O1 may be and is hereby adopted. The City Council further finds that
because the proposed project will be utilizing federal Community Development Block Grant
(CDBG) monies, the proposed project must also be reviewed for compliance with the National
Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) as implemented by the U.S. Department of Housing and
Urban Development (HUD) Environmental Guidelines and the City Council further finds and
determines that the project qualifies for a Categorical Exclusion (subject to 58.5) pursuant to
Code of Federal Regulations (CFR) Title 24, Section 58.35(a) therefore no further NEPA
environmental review is required.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED that the City Council does hereby find and determine as
follows:
Section II. Findings
Finding 1: Changes have occurred in the community since the approval of the original
UCSP, which warrant approving the proposed amendment.
8-74
Ordinance No.
Page 5
On Januazy 12, 2010, in response to a request from Crossroads II, the City Council
directed staff to assess whether the actual demand for residential parking in mixed-use
developments is being met in the Corridors District of the UCSP (areas generally south of H
Street on Third Avenue and Broadway, and north of E Street on Broadway).
The Third Avenue Streetscape Master Planning process commenced in August 2008, and
through the streetscape master plan process it was recommended that the travel lanes along the
segment of Third Avenue between E and H Street be modified from the current two to four lane
configurations to a consistent two-lane configuration.
Finding 2: The proposed amendment is consistent with the General Plan for the City of
Chula Vista.
A special pedestrian oriented "cafe" environment for the downtown Village is a stated
goal of the UCSP and the outdoor dining design guidelines developed by the Third Avenue
Village Association will provide overall standards for the use of outdoor dining areas along
Third Avenue and adjoining streets. By including these guidelines as an appendix to the UCSP,
the assurance of quality outdoor dining areas will characterize the Third Avenue Village.
The new two-lane configuration will result in an improved multi-modal design of this
segment of Third Avenue with improved traffic circulation; create a more pedestrian friendly
atmosphere, and incorporate a Class III bike lane, and greater support of the smart growth design
principles envisioned by the 2005 General Plan and UCSP.
The general plan vision for the Urban Core is an area containing the greatest diversity of
public, commercial, civic, financial, cultural, and residential uses emphasizing its role as the hub
of the City. The diverse character, architectural style and pedestrian-friendly environment, and
easy access to services and facilities will enhance the traditional residential neighborhoods that
surround the Urban Core and is consistent with the vision of the City's General Plan for the
City's urban core area.
Finding 3: The proposed amendment will result in a benefit to the area within the UCSP.
The new two lane configuration will result in an improved multi-modal design of the
subject segment of Third Avenue with better traffic circulation; create a more pedestrian friendly
atmosphere, and incorporate a Class III bike lane, and better support of the smart growth design
principals envisioned by the 2005 General Plan and UCSP.
A traffic analysis was conducted that modeled the modifications to the lane
configurations and concluded that the subject Third Avenue segment would operate at a Level of
Service (LOS) "D" which is established by the 2005 General Plan for Urban Streets.
The proposed amendments to the pazking requirements affect only the Corridor Districts,
which are azeas of the Urban Core that are the furthest away from the center of the Urban Core
and are more auto oriented with less accessibility to transit services.
8-75
Ordinance No.
Page 6
On February 22, 2010, staff conducted an assessment of an existing mixed-use project
located on Broadway to determine the parking demand and sufficiency and found that the
parking demand was approximately 1.75 spaces per unit and based on this assessment, the
parking requirements within the Corridors District shall be modified from the current UCSP
standard to the city wide standard for residential parking.
The Streetscape Master Plan further enhances the vision by providing an environment
commensurate with a "pedestrian friendly" and "pedestrian enjoyable" setting. The Third
Avenue Streetscape Master Plan design will change the current two to four lane configuration of
Third Avenue between E Street and H Street to a consistent two-lane downtown promenade. The
two-lane configuration will support the smart growth design principals envisioned by the 2005
General Plan and the UCSP. The change will provide fora ``well-balanced" urban environment.
Additionally, these public realm improvements will serve to improve the area's visual quality
and act as an investment catalyst for property upgrades and new developments.
Draft design guidelines for outdoor dining have been prepared to maintain a quality
appearance for the "cafe" environment desired for the downtown Village. The guidelines
prescribe the standards for the selection of street furniture, preferred appurtenances and
furnishings that would be considered acceptable within the Third Avenue Village area.
Finding 4: The proposed amendment will not result in significant unmitigated impacts.
The proposed changes to the UCSP are minor amendments as they would not introduce a
new land use designation not contemplated in the Specific Plan; would not change the
designation of land uses affecting two acres or more from that shown in the Specific Plan; would
not result in changes to the circulation system or other community facility which would
materially affect a planning concept detailed in the Specific Plan; would not result in changes or
additions to the design guidelines which materially alter the stated intent of the Specific Plan; nor
result in new significant, direct adverse environmental impacts not previously considered in the
FEIR-06-O1.
Finding 5: The proposed amendment will enable the delivery of services and public
facilities to the population within the UCSP area.
The multi-modal design of this segment of Third Avenue will result in an improved
delivery of services and public facilities to the population; better traffic circulation, create and
pedestrian friendly atmosphere, and the incorporation of a Class III bike lane will support better
smart growth design principals envisioned by the 2005 General Plan and UCSP. Additionally,
the public realm improvements will serve to improve the area's visual quality thus acting as an
investment catalyst for property upgrades and new developments. The change will provide for a
"well-balanced" urban environment with improved access to public Facilities such as roads and
parks in the project area.
The Outdoor Dining Guidelines will enable the delivery of services by maintaining a
quality appeazance for the "cafe" environment desired for the downtown Village. The future
population within the Specific Plan area will provide restaurant patrons within the Specific Plan
8-76
Ordinance No.
Page 7
area an amenity that has become an increasingly popular feature within the southern California
area and will ensure that restaurants use the public sidewalk for outdoor dining in a way that is
safe for pedestrians and does not present handicap constraints for the visually impaired.
BE IT FURTHER ORDAINED, that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does
hereby adopt an ordinance of the City of Chula Vista approving three minor amendments to the
Urban Core Specific Plan to: 1) reclassify Third Avenue between E and H Street from a four lane
to a two lane downtown promenade; 2) modify the Residential Parking Standards for the
Corridors District; and 3) add Outdoor Dining Design Guidelines as an Appendix to the Urban
Core Specific Plan all on file in the Development Services Department and City Clerk's Office.
Section III. Effective Date
This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its
second reading.
Presented by
Gary Halbert, P.E., AICP
Assistant City Manager/Director of
Development Services
8-77
~dGtifi'or~~ .lh~Orrn~tiar~
sfi~~ 8
THIRD AVENUE V ILLAGh: Ati50CIAllON
353 Third Avenue
Chula V istu, CA 91910
(6I9) 422-1982 Phone
(619) 422-1452 Facsimile
www thirdavcnucvillas;acom
2010 Board of Directors
Adam Sparks -President
Lisa Moctezuma -Vice President
Greg Smyth -Secretary
Michael Green -Treasurer
Eric Crockett
Carl Harry
Betsy Keller
Sherry Mesfler
Tom Money
James Pieri. Jr.
Snooky Rico
lan Trotter
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR
Greg Mattson
EVENT MANAGER
Jovita Juarez
OFFICE MANAGER
Heather Marshall
December 1Q 2010
Madame Mayor and City Council Members
City Hall
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re: Third Avenue Streetscape Master Plan (TASMP)
Ladies and Gentlemen:
Since dte initiation of the Urban Core Specific Plan (UCSP) and
associated environmental documents back in 2007, the Third Avenue
Village Association Board and its committees have been actively
supporting, tracking and assisting City staff in the revitalization of Third
Avenue. These have encompassed traffic and parking studies, landscape
designs, sign programs, ordinances, reports, and peer reviews. In
addition, for the past six months, TAVA staff has been holding monthly
meetings to discuss, promulgate positive and constructive messages on
the TASMP components.
It is the opinion of the Third Avenue Village Association (TAVA) Board
of Directors that the Third Avenue Streetscape Master Plan (TASMP)
will provide what Third Avenue needs in order to meet TAVA's vision
of being a premier pedestrian business district. The Design Committee
has been working extensively with the City internal design team for the
past two years to fine tune the plan in order to meet the needs of our
community and showcase Third Avenue as the special historical district
that it is.
During this two year period, TAVA and City staff has developed a great
working team to provide detailed input on the function, operation and
form of the Village District. This includes incorporating TAVA's
Outdoor Design Guidelines, Village Sign Program, Dog Friendly
Program and landscape enhancements. City staff has been designing
logical and safe pedestrian crossings, appropriate lighting standards, sign
applications to move vehicles and pedestrian's alike around the V illage
District in a safe and sound manner.
We are proud to have developed a strong partnership with the City's
design team in order to incorporate our vision for Third Avenue with the
Citys plan. We are looking out into the future years in the design to
accommodate new technologies, lighting electrical and irrigation needs.
The Village community is eager to have the revitalization start in early
2011 to have a vibrant, exciting, and new Village area with outdoor
experiences, landscaping tree lighting and many other wonderful
attributes. The Board of Directors appreciates the hard work the City
staff has put forward in developing the TASMP.
o~C___
Adam Sparks,
President
Greg B. Mattson, AICP
Executive Director