HomeMy WebLinkAbout2007 07-12 CC CDC ADJ AGENDA PKTAgenda Of An Adjourned Regular Meeting - National City City Council /
Community Development Commission of the City of National City
Council Chambers
Civic Center
1243 National City Boulevard
National City, California
Adjourned Regular Meeting - Thursday — July 12, 2007 — 5:00 P.M.
Open To The Public
Please complete a request to speak form prior to the commencement of the meeting and submit it to
the City Clerk.
It is the intention of your City Council and Community Development Commission (CDC) to be receptive
to your concerns in this community. Your participation in local government will assure a responsible and
efficient City of National City. We invite you to bring to the attention of the City Manager/Executive
Director any matter that you desire the City Council or Community Development Commission Board to
c nsider. We thank you for your presence and wish you to know that we appreciate your involvement.
ROLL, CALL
Pledge of Allegiance to the Flag by Mayor Ron Morrison
Public Oral Communications (Three -Minute Time Limit)
NOTE: Pursuant to state law, items requiring Council or Community Development Conunission action must be
brought back on a subsequent Council or Community Development Commission Agenda unless they are of a
demonstrated emergency or urgent nature.
Tilton request, this agenda can he made available in appropriate alternative formats to persons with a disability in
compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act. Please contact the City Clerk's Office at (619) 336-4228 to
request a disability -related modification or accommodation. Notification 24-hours prior to the meeting will enable
the City to make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting.
Spanish audio interpretation is provided during Council and Community Development Commission Meetings. Audio
headphones are available in the lobby at the beginning of the meetings.
Audio interpretacidn en espanol se proporciona durante sesiones del Consejo Municipal. Los audiofonos
estdn disponibles en el pasillo al principio de la junta.
i7
Council Requests That All CeII Phones
And Pagers Be Turned Off During City Council Meetings
OPIES OF THE CITY COUNCIL OR COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETING AGENDAS AND MINUTES MAY
BE OBTAINED THROUGH OUR WEBSITE AT www.cl.nationalcity.ca.us
CITY COUNCIUCOMMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AGENDA
7/12/07 - Page 2
CITY COUNCIL
CONSENT CALENDAR
Consent Calendar: Consent calendar items involve matters, which are of a
routine or noncontroversial nature. All consent calendar items are adopted by
approval of a single motion by the City Council. Prior to such approval, any item
may be removed from the consent portion of the agenda and separately
considered, upon request of a Councilmember, a staff member, or a member of
the public.
1. Approval of a motion to waive reading of the text of the Ordinances
considered at this meeting and provides that such Ordinances shall be
introduced and/or adopted after a reading of the title only. (City Clerk)
NON CONSENT RESOLUTION
2. Resolution of the City Council of the City of National City adopting the
Community Development Commission's written responses to written
objections on the proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the
National City Redevelopment Project. (Community Development
Commission)
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
NON CONSENT RESOLUTION
3. Resolution of the Community Development Commission of the City of
National City approving the proposed 2007 Amendment to the
Redevelopment Plan for the National City Redevelopment Project.
(Community Development Commission)
CITY COUNCIL/COMMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AGENDA
7/12/07 - Page 3
CITY COUNCIL
ORDINANCE FOR INTRODUCTION
4. An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City ("City Council")
approving the proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the
National City Redevelopment Project ("2007 Amendment') (Community
Development Commission)
STAFF REPORTS
MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
ADJOURNMENT
Next Regular City Council and Community Development Commission
Meeting - Tuesday — July 17, 2007 - 6:00 p.m. — Council Chamber - National
City.
TAPE RECORDINGS OF CITY COUNCIIJCOMMUNITY
DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION MEETINGS ARE AVAILABLE
FOR SALE IN THE CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
City of National City
Office of the City Clerk
1243 National City Boulevard, National City, CA 91950-4397
Michael R. Dalla, CMC - City Clerk
(619) 336-4228 Fax: (619) 336-4229
To: Honorable Mayor and Council
From: Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk
Subject: Ordinance Introduction and Adoption
ITEM #1
7/12/07
It is recommended that the City Council approve the following motion as part of
the Consent Calendar:
"That the City Council waive reading of the text of all
Ordinances considered at this meeting and provide that such
Ordinances shall be introduced and/or adopted after a
reading of only the title."
eRecycled Paper
MEETING DATE July 12. 2007
City of National City, California
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
AGENDA ITEM NO
2
/TEM TITLE A resolution of the City Council adopting the Community
Development Commission's written responses to written objections on the
proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the National City
Redevelopment Project.
PREPARED BY '4J' DEPARTMENT
Patricia Beard, Redevelopment Manager Community Development Commission
EXPLANATION The Community Development Commission ("CDC") is proposing an
amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the National City Redevelopment Project ("2007
Amendment") to: extend the CDC's authority to acquire property through eminent domain for
certain commercial and industrial zoned properties until 2019, change the current exclusion of
eminent domain on single-family homes to include all lawful residential land uses, to modify the
redevelopment plan text as it pertains to redevelopment actions and permitted land uses in the
Transportation Center, and revise the Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvement Projects
exhibit. On June 19, 2007, the City Council and the CDC held a joint public hearing where they
received testimony on the 2007 Amendment. Califomia Community Redevelopment Law
Section 33363 mandates that, "the legislative body shall respond in writing to the written
objections received before or at the noticed hearing". Therefore, at the conclusion of the public
hearing, City Council directed the CDC to prepare written responses. At this joint meeting, City
Council is being asked to consider and adopt the CDC's written responses to written objections
\ on the 2007 Amendment prior to considering an ordinance approving the 2007 Amendment.
Environmental Review
A negative declaration was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
and approved by the City Council and the CDC at the joint meeting on July 10, 2007.
Financial Statement
Staffs recommendation will have no affect on the City's General Fund.
Account No.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION Adopt the resolution.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not applicable.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Background Report
2. Written responses as Exhibit A to the resolution
Resolution No.
L
A-200 (9/80)
Attachment 1
Background Report
Background:
The City Council of the City of National City ("City Council") and the Community
Development Commission ("CDC") held a joint public hearing on the proposed
amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the National City Redevelopment Project
("2007 Amendment") on June 19, 2007. CDC staff and consultants presented the
reasons for the proposed 2007 Amendment, and the City Council/CDC received
testimony regarding the 2007 Amendment and the Negative Declaration for the 2007
Amendment ("Negative Declaration"). CDC staff was then directed to prepare written
responses to written objections and to present them at the July 3, 2007, joint meeting.
In order to provide staff with adequate time to prepare the written responses, City
Council consideration of written responses was delayed until this joint meeting of the
City Council and CDC.
Since testimony presented at the public hearing did not question the process the CDC
used to conduct an environmental review of the 2007 Amendment, the City Council and
the CDC considered and approved the Negative Declaration on July 3, 2007.
At this joint meeting, the City Council is being asked to consider and approve the CDC's
written responses to written objections on the 2007 Amendment.
Pursuant to California Community Redevelopment Law ("CRL") Section 33363, the City
Council, who is the legislative body, shall evaluate;
"...all evidence and testimony for and against the adoption of the plan and
shall make written finding in response to each written objection of an
affected property owner or taxing entity. The legislative body shall
respond in writing to the written objections received before or at the
noticed hearing...".
During the joint public hearing written objections to the 2007 Amendment were
presented from affected property owners (no objections were received from taxing
entities). In accordance with CRL Section 33363, CDC staff has prepared written
responses, which are included as Attachment A to City Council Resolution No.
Said written responses describe the disposition of the issues raised, provide reasons for
not accepting specified objections, and include a good -faith, reasoned analysis.
By adopting the attached resolution, City Council is adopting the CDC's written
responses to written objections received from affected taxing agencies and
property owners on the 2007 Amendment.
1
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 — 166
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
ADOPTING THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION'S
WRITTEN RESPONSES TO WRITTEN OBJECTIONS RECEIVED FROM
AFFECTED TAXING AGENCIES AND PROPERTY OWNERS ON
THE PROPOSED 2007 AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, in accordance with the California Community Redevelopment Law
("CRL") (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et. seq.), the Community Development
Commission of the City of National City ("CDC") prepared and submitted to the City Council of
the City of National City ("City Council") a proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for
the National City Redevelopment Project ("2007 Amendment"); and
WHEREAS, on June 19, 2007, the City Council and the CDC held a joint public
hearing to consider adoption of the 2007 Amendment; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2007-163, adopted on July 10, 2007, the
City Council approved the Negative Declaration for the 2007 Amendment to the National City
Redevelopment Plan. A copy of said Negative Declaration is on file in the office of the City
Clerk, and incorporated herein by reference; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has provided an opportunity for all persons to be
heard, and has considered all written comments received and all evidence and testimony
presented for or against any and all aspects of the 2007 Amendment; and
WHEREAS, CRL Section 33363 provides that, before adopting a redevelopment
plan, the City Council, who is the legislative body, shall make written responses to each written
objection received from an affected taxing agency or property owner received before or at the
noticed public hearing.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council hereby adopts as
its findings the written responses to the written objections received from affected taxing
agencies and property owners as set forth in Exhibit "A", and incorporated herein by reference.
PASSED and ADOPTED this 12th day of July, 2007.
Ron Morrison, Mayor
ATTEST:
Michael R. Dalla, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
George H. Eiser, III
City Attorney
Exhibit A
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
2007 AMENDMENT TO THE NATIONAL CITY
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN OBJECTIONS FROM THE
INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE
(LETTER SIGNED BY MS. BERLINER)
Pursuant to California Redevelopment Law ("CRL") Section 33363 the National City
Community Development Commission ("CDC") shall respond in writing to the written
objections received prior or at the public hearing on the National City Redevelopment
Plan Amendment ("2007 Amendment.") The written responses must describe the
disposition of the issues raised. The legislative body shall address the written objections
in detail, giving reasons for not accepting specified objections and suggestions. The
legislative body shall include a good -faith, reasoned analysis in its response and, for this
purpose; conclusionary statements unsupported by factual information shalt not suffice.
In the following responses, the Report to the City Council on the National City
Redevelopment Plan Amendment is referred to as the ("RTC") and the response to the
written objections are referred to as the ("Response.")
There are three relevant CRL requirements that deal with redevelopment plan
amendments.
1. Section 33354.6 describes the type of amendments that require a long -
form plan amendment including identification of remaining blight and
which portions of the project area are no longer blighted. The 2007
Amendment does NOT include any of these types of amendments (such
as increase in the limit on tax increment or increase in the bonded
indebtedness limit).
CRL Section 33333.2(a)(4) provides that time limitations for eminent
domain authority may be extended by amendment of the redevelopment
plan after the agency finds, based on substantial evidence, both that
significant blight remains within the project area, and that this blight
cannot be eliminated without use of eminent domain. This section is
pertinent to the 2007 Amendment that will extend eminent domain
authority.
CRL Article 12 commencing with Section 33450 outlines the "short -form"
amendment process that may be used for most plan amendments which
is pertinent to the 2007 Amendment in combination with Section
33333.2(a)(4). CRL Section 33451.5 describes amendments that require
a specific Report on Blight to be sent to the Department of Finance and
Department of Housing and Community Development and none of the
2007 Amendments fall within these categories.
1
OBJECTION 1: FAILURE TO PROVIDE REPORT AND REDEVELOPMENT
PLAN AMENDMENT IN TIMELY MANNER.
Ms. Berliner's Objection 1 contains five separate subparts, generally objecting to
the amount of time the CYAC had to review the Report to the City Council, the
Ordinance, and other relevant documents. The Response to the Objection
addresses each subpart, by referencing the subpart and specific title of the
objection.
Multiple findings, each supported by documented evidence, are required
for a valid finding of blight and a valid approval of the 2007 Amendment.
Ms. Berliner's objection lists the requirements for physical and economic blight. Ms.
Berliner states that "[apl this information and documentation should be included in the
Proposed Ordinance under §33367 and the Report to the City Council prepared by the
CDC under §33352 [hereinafter "Report'], neither of which was available to the CYAC or
anyone else until June 14, 2007." Ms. Berliner comments that the Report and Ordinance
were available on June 14, 2007. This appears to be a procedural argument, as
opposed to a substantive objection to the 2007 Redevelopment Plan Amendment.
The 2007 Redevelopment Plan Amendment includes an extension of the eminent
domain authority. Pursuant to Health & Safety Code section 33333.2(a)(4), time
limitations for eminent domain authority may be extended by amendment after the
agency finds, based on substantial evidence, both that significant blight remains within
the project area, and this blight cannot be eliminated without the use of eminent domain.
Health & Safety Code section 33031 describes the physical and economic conditions
that cause blight. All the appropriate findings and required documentation are included in
the Ordinance and Report to the City Council. While Ms. Berliner comments on the
timing of the Report and Ordinance's availability, it should be noted Section 3345 1
requires the reports and information required by Section 33352 for a proposed
amendment "shall be ... made available to the public prior to the hearing on such
amendment." There is no time requirement under the statute specifying how long before
the hearing the materials must be made available to the public. The Report was released
to the public when it was released to the City Council, five days prior to the hearing.
Thus, the City has complied with the procedural requirements.
B. The CYAC and other members of the public must see the evidence
supporting the blight finding and other findings in order to review and
challenge them.
Ms. Berliner's objection is focused on receiving the Report five days before the City
Council hearing. This appears to be a procedural argument, as opposed to a substantive
objection to the 2007 Redevelopment Plan Amendment.
As stated above, the Report was released to the public when it was released to the City
Council, five days prior to the hearing. Thus, the City has complied with the procedural
requirements. It should be noted that while Ms. Berliner argues that the CYAC did not
have sufficient time to object to the 2007 Redevelopment Plan Amendment, voluminous
objections, comprised of two large stacks of documents and approximately six three-inch
binders, were submitted to the City Council. These objections contained Ms. Berliner's
2
thirty-four (34) page objection letter, Attorney Jeff Rowes' objection letter, and numerous
(approximately 28) letters and "statements" of objections by others affiliated with the
CYAC or hired as experts by CYAC's counsel. Thus, Ms. Berliner and her client did
receive the information needed to make their objections. While Ms. Berliner and her
client may have been inconvenienced, they were not denied the opportunity to present
objections both in writing and orally.
C. The CYAC has been trying to obtain the necessary documents since May
15, 2007, but the draft Report and limited other evidence did not become
available to the public until June 14, 2007.
Ms. Berliner's objection describes the steps taken by the CYAC and the institute for
Justice in obtaining the draft 2007 Redevelopment Plan Amendment, the Report, and
"other relevant documents". Ms. Berliner's objection is to when the Report and other
documents were made available to the public. This objection is not a substantive
objection to the 2007 Redevelopment Plan Amendment, but rather a procedural issue.
On April 17, 2007, the draft 2007 Redevelopment Plan Amendment was on the agenda
before City Council, and was available to the public. On this date, the City Council
approved a resolution to open the public comment period for the Draft 2007 Amendment
to the Redevelopment Plan. To the extent Ms. Berliner argues she could not obtain the
Draft Redevelopment Plan Amendment until June 14, 2007, such argument is
erroneous. To the extent Ms. Berliner objects to the timing of the release of the
documents to the public which was done on the same day the documents were made
available to the City Council, please see the responses to the two objections above.
D. No one- not lawyers, not experts, not the CYAC, and not ordinary
citizens- could possibly review, analyze, and evaluate a study of 600
properties in five days.
Ms. Berliner's objection focuses on the five days between the time the Report was made
available and the public hearing. Ms. Berliner argues that this is an insufficient amount of
time to evaluate "a study covering more than 600 properties in an overall project area
that is over 2,000 acres." In addition, Ms. Berliner refers to statements and letters
included as part of the Institute for Justice's written objection to the City Council.
The Draft 2007 Redevelopment Plan Amendment was made available in April, 2007. At
that time, it was clear that part of the Amendment included an extension of the existing
eminent domain authority and an expansion of the properties excluded from such
authority (from single-family to both single-family and multi -family residences). Moreover,
the area subject to the eminent domain authority is significantly smaller than the overall
project area. The area subject to eminent domain authority is very limited, as illustrated
on Exhibit A to the 2007 Redevelopment Plan Amendment (available since April, 2007),
as opposed to the 2000 acres Ms. Berliner describes. Accordingly, any independent
investigation that either CYAC or the Institute for Justice desired to undertake could
have commenced in April, 2007. Lastly, independent investigation parcel -by -parcel is not
necessary for objecting to or challenging the findings related to continued blight. The law
does not require a parcel -by -parcel determination of blight, but rather looks to the project
area as a whole. "A project area need not be restricted to buildings, improvements, or
lands which are detrimental or inimical to the public health, safety or welfare, but may
consist of an area in which such conditions predominate and injuriously affect the entire
3
area. A project area may include lands, buildings, or improvements which are not
detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, but whose inclusion is found
necessary for the effective redevelopment of the area of which they are a part.... "
Health & Safety Code § 33321. To the extent Ms. Berliner's objections include those
already made by their experts or clients, those objections have already been responded
to in the Responses to Written Objections.
E. The lack of time afforded to review the blight study violates California
statutes and Due Process under the California and United States
Constitutions.
Ms. Berliner argues that providing the "Report and other supposed documentation of
blighting conditions less than a week before the public hearing" amounts to a violation of
California statutes and both state and federal constitutional law.
As responded to in the objections above, the statutory requirements require that the
Report be made available prior to the hearing. In this instance, the Report was made
available to the public and the City Council on June 14, 2007, five days before the
hearing. The Draft 2007 Redevelopment Plan Amendment was made available April 17,
2007. As evidenced by the voluminous objections, both written and oral, there was no
denial of due process, statutory violation, or constitutional violation, based on making the
Report and other materials available on June 14, 2007.
OBJECTION 2: THE PROCESS DECLARING THE EMINENT DOMAIN AREA
"BLIGHTED" IS A SHAM IN WHICH THE "BLIGHT"
DETERMINATION WAS A FOREGONE CONCLUSION AND
ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP'S SPECIFIC OBJECTIVE WAS
TO SUPPLY NATIONAL CITY WITH A "BLIGHT" PRETEXT
FOR THE USE OF EMINENT DOMAIN FOR PRIVATE
ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT.
Ms. Berliner argues that the City's finding of blight is a foregone conclusion because it
has contracted with consultant RSG to study whether there is continued blight for the
purposes of a plan amendment. Specifically, Ms. Berliner argues "that contrary to law
and procedural due process, the entire series of events leading up to the impending
blight declaration and re -authorization of eminent domain have been a deliberate fraud
in which the finding of blight was a foregone conclusion."
This objection is not a substantive objection to the 2007 Redevelopment Plan
Amendment, but rather an inflammatory allegation without evidentiary support. The City
Council retains its complete discretion in deciding whether to approve the ordinance
approving the 2007 Redevelopment Plan Amendment which includes extending the
eminent domain authority and findings that significant blight remains within the project
area. While Ms. Berliner accuses the City of having made a decision in advance of the
public hearing, there is no evidence to support such allegation. The fact that RSG was
directed to document the conditions of blight does not negate the fact that the City
Council is the legislative body that makes the final decision whether to accept or reject
both the evidence contained in the Report and the 2007 Redevelopment Plan
Amendment. An e-mail to a consultant asking them to begin research to "substantiate
blight" does not negate the evidence of blight. Conditions of blight exist, regardless of
4
whether they are looking for blighting conditions or conducting an "independent and
objective evaluation of property conditions." Ms. Berliner's argument that somehow
asking about code violations is an inappropriate manner in which to determine whether
there is blight is nonsensical considering code violations are listed in the conditions that
cause blight, pursuant to Health & Safety Code section 33031. There is no evidence that
the blight does not exist, nor is there any evidence that RSG conducted their evaluation
inappropriately. Ms. Berliner's argument that "it is difficult to imagine that National City
and RSG now understand their relationship as anything but cash for blight" is a
sensational, inflammatory, speculative, and unsubstantiated argument, unsupported by
any evidence. A consultant's reputation is built upon its ability to produce quality work
that will withstand challenge —a consultant that merely arrives at unsupported
conclusions in exchange for money will have a short lived professional life. Ms. Berliner
also argues that "there is no way that the City Council can have had time to engage in
the focused consideration and evaluation required by California Statutes."
Nothwithstanding the insulting nature of the comment, there is no evidence to support
the allegation that the City Council has failed to comply with its duties in hearing this
matter. While most of this objection is a philosophical disagreement with how the State
of Califomia defines blight and the reality that consultants conduct the studies, the
balance of the objection contains unsubstantiated allegations.
OBJECTION 3: ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP SHOULD NOT BE INVOLVED
1N REVIEWING THE CYAC'S OBJECTIONS OR THOSE OF
ANY OTHER PROPERTY OWNER
Ms. Berliner objects to RSG preparing responses to written comments and asks that
RSG be removed from such duties.
There is no legal requirement precluding a consultant from drafting responses to
comments. This objection is a philosophical disagreement with the reality that
consultants are paid to work on redevelopment plan documents.
OBJECTION 4: INSUFFICIENT DOCUMENTATION UNDER CAL. HEALTH &
SAFETY CODE §§ 33352 AND 33367, STATUTORY AND/OR
DUE PROCESS VIOLATIONS
Ms. Berliner argues that "the underlying data behind the blight 'study' prepared by RSG"
was required to be produced under Sections 33352 and 33367. In the alternative, Ms.
Berliner argues that if the "underlying data" was not statutorily required to be produced,
then the hearing procedure itself violates procedural due process.
The City complied with Sections 33352 and 33367. It is unclear exactly what particular
documentation Ms. Berliner seeks, however, it appears to be what could be best
described as the raw data. Such data is not required to be independently produced by
the statutes cited, nor was this information requested by Ms. Berliner or CYAC. While
the raw data may be referenced, relied upon, and used to arrive at the information that is
included in the Report, the raw data itself need not be separately attached to the Report.
Ms. Berliner has not cited any case law requiring this raw data be produced pursuant to
Sections 33352 or 33367. The cases cited by Ms. Berliner do not stand for her argument
that raw data must be produced per the statutes. Due process does not compel a
5
different conclusion. Ms. Berliner and CYAC had sufficient time to produce voluminous
comments, appear and object orally, coordinate speakers to object to the amendment,
and submit at least six volumes of materials as part of their objection. Ms. Berliner and
CYAC were afforded due process.
OBJECTION 5: FINANCIAL INCENTIVES IN REDEVELOPMENT LAW VIOLATE
DUE PROCESS.
Ms. Berliner objects that the "structure of redevelopment activities in California diverts
huge amounts of money from actual public services like fire and police and into
redevelopment agencies and redevelopment activities. Redevelopment decision -making
is fatally biased by the enormous financial incentives toward massive Tax Increment
Financing area designations."
Ms. Berliner's objection is a political one. The objection is to the Redevelopment Law,
not to this particular plan amendment. Ms. Berliner's has a political disagreement with
the State Legislature and the laws it has adopted. To the extent Ms. Berliner argues that
Redevelopment Law violates due process, such argument is not supported by case law.
Moreover, there is no evidence that the Redevelopment Law statutes that permit state
action in economic affairs are arbitrary or without reason, thus there is no due process
violation. While Ms. Berliner alleges that "the amount of money the CDC is able to divert
through tax increment financing creates a powerful incentive for National City to
systematically exaggerate the incidence of blight', this is merely an unsubstantiated
allegation based upon conjecture.
OBJECTION 6: NATIONAL CITY IS MISUSING ITS EMINENT DOMAIN AND
REDEVELOPMENT POWERS SIMPLY TO REPLACE EXISTING
VIABLE USES WITH OTHER ONES.
Ms. Berliner argues that the City is misusing its eminent domain authority to "make a
better use of some of the commercial areas of National City than the current, viable
businesses. The area that the city wishes to re -designate as blighted is a vibrant area
including both businesses and residences."
Substantial evidence supports finding that significant blight remains within the project
area. This objection does not object.to any of the evidence documenting the blight, but
instead focuses on one particular parcel, the CYAC parcel. As stated earlier in these
responses, the law does not require a parcel -by -parcel determination of blight, but rather
looks to the project area as a whole. "A project area need not be restricted to buildings,
improvements, or lands which are detrimental or inimical to the public health, safety or
welfare, but may consist of an area in which such conditions predominate and injuriously
affect the entire area. A project area may include lands, buildings, or improvements
which are not detrimental to the public health, safety or welfare, but whose inclusion is
found necessary for the effective redevelopment of the area of which they are a part... .
" Health & Safety Code § 33321. The City has been redeveloping the project area
steadily over the years, however much work remains. The redevelopment is for the
purpose of eliminating blight. Ms. Berliner's argument is not supported by the facts or the
law.
6
OBJECTION 7: Overwhelming majority of the area included only for the
purpose of TIF Financing
The boundaries of the National City Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") and
the area currently subject to eminent domain authority have been established for more
than fourteen years. The CDC proposes to extend its existing eminent domain authority
in the areas that are currently subject to eminent domain. The CDC is not proposing to
add property to the Project Area, expand the area that is currently subject to eminent
domain authority, nor is it proposing to amend provisions of the Redevelopment Plan
pertaining to tax increment revenue. The 2007 Amendment does not need to reevaluate
past findings substantiating the boundaries of the Project Area or the boundaries of the
area currently subject to eminent domain authority. CRL Section 33333.2(a)(4) provides
that time limitations for eminent domain authority may be extended by amendment of the
redevelopment plan after the agency finds, based on substantial evidence, both that
significant blight remains within the project area, and that this blight cannot be eliminated
without use of eminent domain.
Though the proposed 2007 Amendment specifically excludes any use of eminent
domain against residential property, residential properties are not excluded from the
possibilities of redevelopment. The CDC would maintain the option to pursue the
acquisition and consolidation of residential properties demonstrating conditions of blight
through open market transactions, the CDC could offer to owners of residential
properties that have been identified as having blighting conditions home improvement
loans through the CDC or in those cases where there is a willing seller of residential
properties located within the Project Area there may be assistance/benefit packages
. available to the residential property owner under redevelopment law.
OBJECTION 8: No showing that significant blight remains or that the specific
remaining blight can not be eliminated without eminent
domain
The National City Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") has been established for
a number of years. Issues and conditions used to establish the Project Area have been
documented in the original Preliminary Report and Report to Council used in adopting
the Project Area, later documented in the Preliminary Reports and Reports to Council
prepared in 1995, and 2001 which were used to amend the National City
Redevelopment Plan ("the Plan"), as well as in the Report to Council prepared for the
2005 Amendment which was subsequently withdrawn. Based on the 2007 windshield
survey, many of the issues and conditions are still present. Review of the previous
reports, which are available through the CDC and the city clerk's, office is a reliable
method of identifying the basis of the blight designation. Under Article 12 Section
33451.5 (c)(2) of the CRL the CDC is required to provide a description of the remaining
blight and is not required to re-establish the Project Area as blighted. CRL Section
33333.2(a)(4) provides that time limitations for eminent domain authority may be
extended by amendment of the redevelopment plan after the agency finds, based on
substantial evidence, both that significant blight remains within the project area, and that
this blight cannot be eliminated without use of eminent domain.
7
RSG has served as a redevelopment consultant to the City of National City for several
years and has completed amendments to the National City Redevelopment Plan in 2001
and 2003. RSG was the consultant for the proposed 2005 Amendment to the
Redevelopment Plan at which time a parcel by parcel survey was also completed over a
two month process. As such, RSG has a substantial working knowledge of the Project
Area and an in-house database of properties in the Project Area. In addition to
reviewing previous documents such as the 1995, 2001 and 2005 Reports to Council that
record blighting conditions in the Project Area the needed to be verified, the existing
database was queried and property conditions for properties with the proposed 2007
Amendment area were verified in the April 2007 windshield survey. Furthermore,
discussions with city code compliance staff, city fire and police department officials as
well as local real estate professionals was used to verify conditions of blight that remain
in the Project Area. The RTC for the 2007 Amendment documents the presence of
significant remaining blight and why eminent domain authority is needed to assist with
the elimination of blighting conditions.
As stated in the RTC for the 2007 Amendment, the CDC's overall efforts have been
limited, due to the inability to negotiate land purchase transactions with private property
owners. While the CDC has pursued land acquisition and consolidation through open
market transactions and limited eminent domain actions, the lack of eminent domain in
many commercial and industrial corridors has constrained redevelopment efforts.
Because the CDC cannot forcefully encourage property owners to either redevelop or
sell abandoned and dilapidated properties, many of these properties continue to be
neglected 12 years later. Adopting the 2007 Amendment will extend the Redevelopment
Plan's eminent domain authority and afford the CDC one additional tool to eliminate
blight in the Project Area, through the facilitation of land assemblage activities or the
purchase of dilapidated properties within the areas.
OBJECTION 9: No Explanation or documentation why inclusion of CYAC or
other non -blighted property is necessary for redevelopment
A. Neither the proposed 2007 Amendment nor the draft report provide any evidence
or explanation of why the inclusion of non -blighted property is necessary for
redevelopment.
As previously noted, there are three relevant CRL requirements that deal with
redevelopment plan amendments.
1. Section 33354.6 describes the type of amendments that require a long -form
plan amendment including identification of remaining blight and which
portions of the project area are no longer blighted. The 2007 Amendment
does NOT include any of these types of amendments (such as increase in
the limit on tax increment or increase in the bonded indebtedness limit).
2. CRL Section 33333.2(a)(4) provides that time limitations for eminent domain
authority may be extended by amendment of the redevelopment plan after
the agency finds, based on substantial evidence, both that significant blight
remains within the project area, and that this blight cannot be eliminated
without use of eminent domain. This section is pertinent to the 2007
Amendment that will extend eminent domain authority.
8
3. CRL Article 12 commencing with Section 33450 outlines the "short -form"
amendment process that may be used for most plan amendments which is
pertinent to the 2007 Amendment in combination with Section 33333.2(a)(4).
CRL Section 33451.5 describes amendments that require a specific Report
on Blight to be sent to the Department of Finance and Department of Housing
and Community Development and none of the 2007 Amendments fall within
these categories.
Evidence of the presence of blight was provided in 1995 when the Project Area was
established. The purpose of the Report to Council for the 2007 Amendment was to
describe the fact that substantial blight remains. CRL Section 33333.2(a)(4) provides
that time limitations for eminent domain authority may be extended by amendment of the
redevelopment plan after the agency finds, based on substantial evidence, both that
significant blight remains within the project area, and that this blight cannot be eliminated
without use of eminent domain. The RTC for the 2007 Amendment documents the
presence of significant remaining blight and why eminent domain authority is needed to
assist with the elimination of blighting conditions.
B. Removal of the CYAC is unnecessary and will increase, not decrease blight in
the project area
The 2007 Amendment does not target the CYAC property located at 1030 National City
Blvd, or any other specific property. The Redevelopment Plan for the 2007 Amendment
is not a specific plan for the redevelopment of the Project Area; instead, it establishes a
process and framework for implementation.
The 2007 Amendment will extend the CDC's existing authority to acquire property, as a
last resort, through eminent domain to vacant property, and all commercial and industrial
zoned properties in those areas which are currently subject to eminent domain authority
within the Project Area. The 2007 Amendment does not constitute a specific plan
authorizing the acquisition of any property (by eminent domain or other legal means),
nor does it call for the closing or removal of any business or enterprise in the Project
Area. Furthermore, if the City Council approves the 2007 Amendment it does not imply
that the CDC will automatically go forth to acquire businesses in the Project Area. If
approved, the 2007 Amendment would allow the CDC to acquire property through
eminent domain only:
• After the CDC first elects to pursue a redevelopment proposal;
• After property owner and business tenants are given the first right to submit
proposals to participate in the redevelopment proposal;
• After the CDC determines (during a public meeting) that property owners and
business tenants located within the site specific redevelopment area do not have
the capacity to participate in the redevelopment proposal;
• After MAI (an appraiser who is a Member Appraisal Institute member) appraisals
are prepared for all properties (by State law, the CDC must value properties
based upon the current fair market value for similarly zoned and developed
property in the market area) that must be purchased in order to facilitate the
redevelopment proposal;
9
• After a relocation plan is prepared and adopted by the City Council (after
property and business owner, tenant and public review) that details how the
specific relocation needs will be accommodated;
• After the CDC approves MAI appraisals and directs staff to submit property
purchase offers and to initiate property acquisition negotiations;
• After appraisals are prepared to identify the leasehold interest value of each
tenant's lease;
• After property acquisition negotiations do not result in a negotiated property
purchase and the CDC determines that it must proceed with property acquisition
using eminent domain;
• After the CDC holds a public hearing to consider the property owner's testimony
as to why their property should not be purchased through eminent domain;
• After four of the five CDC governing board members vote to proceed with
property acquisition through eminent domain; and
• After the CDC files a Superior Court action to acquire the property through
eminent domain.
This is a long and expensive process, and historically, the CDC has not used its existing
eminent domain authority to acquire property unless it is implementing a site specific
redevelopment project that is both economically feasible and will benefit the greater
Project Area.
OBJECTION 10: No showing that redevelopment is necessary because private
enterprise is unlikely to accomplish the curing of blight
See response to comment 9A.
OBJECTION 11: Use of federal funds for eminent domain in National City
Redevelopment Plan Area is prohibited by federal law
Comment noted. The CDC does not nor does it intend to use federal government funds
for any eminent domain actions should eminent domain as a method to acquire property
within the Project Area become necessary.
OBJECTION 12: The proposed 2007 Amendment and supporting draft report
lack a provision for relocating the CYAC
The CDC has previously approved the Relocation of Persons Displaced ("Method of
Relocation"), which was amended on July 18, 1995. The Method of Relocation meets
the requirements of CRL Section 33411and State Law, and is incorporated into the RTC
by reference and is on file with the Secretary of the CDC.
The 2007 Amendment will extend the CDC's existing authority to acquire property, as a
last resort, through eminent domain to vacant property, and all commercial and industrial
zoned properties in those areas which are currently subject to eminent domain authority
10
within the Project Area. The 2007 Amendment does not, however, constitute a specific
plan authorizing the acquisition of the CYAC or any property (by eminent domain or
other legal means), nor does it call for the closing or removal of the CYAC or any other
business or enterprise in the Project Area. No legal action to acquire the CYAC property
has occurred. Furthermore, if the City Council approves the 2007 Amendment it does
not imply that the CDC will automatically go forth to acquire businesses in the Project
Area. If approved, the 2007 Amendment would allow the CDC to acquire property
through eminent domain only:
• After the CDC first elects to pursue a redevelopment proposal;
• After property owner and business tenants are given the first right to submit
proposals to participate in the redevelopment proposal;
• After the CDC determines (during a public meeting) that property owners and
business tenants located within the site specific redevelopment area do not have
the capacity to participate in the redevelopment proposal;
• After MAI (an appraiser who is a Member Appraisal Institute member) appraisals
are prepared for all properties (by State law, the CDC must value properties
based upon the current fair market value for similarly zoned and developed
property in the market area) that must be purchased in order to facilitate the
redevelopment proposal;
• After a relocation plan is prepared and adopted by the City Council (after
property and business owner, tenant and public review) that details how the
specific relocation needs will be accommodated;
• After the CDC approves MAI appraisals and directs staff to submit property
purchase offers and to initiate property acquisition negotiations;
• After appraisals are prepared to identify the leasehold interest value of each
tenant's lease;
• After property acquisition negotiations do not result in a negotiated property
purchase and the CDC determines that it must proceed with property acquisition
using eminent domain;
• After the CDC holds a public hearing to consider the property owner's testimony
as to why their property should not be purchased through eminent domain;
• After four of the five CDC governing board members vote to proceed with
property acquisition through eminent domain; and
• After the CDC files a Superior Court action to acquire the property through
eminent domain.
This is a long and expensive process, and historically, the CDC has not used its existing
eminent domain authority to acquire property unless it is implementing a site specific
redevelopment project that is both economically feasible and will benefit the greater
Project Area.
11
OBJECTION 13: Redevelopment Project Area does not meet blight criteria
Ms. Berliner's statements/comments in Objection 13 are primarily grounded by the
premises that 1) the draft RTC was made available to the public only five days prior to
the public hearing and that this time period was not adequate for CYAC, its counsel, and
its experts to conduct a "real review" of the claims made in the draft RTC; and 2) the
draft RTC did not provide the underlying data used to determine that blighting conditions
exist and that this made it difficult to evaluate the blighting conditions discussed by the
draft RTC.
Both comments described in the preceding paragraph were previously responded to in
detail by the CDC in response to other letters submitted on behalf of CYAC. In response
to premise number 1, stated above, please refer to the CDC's responses titled, Letter 1-
Comments from Institute for Justice (Jeff Rowes, Staff Attorney) and Letter 2- Affidavit of
David A. Philips (refer to comment/response #27). In response to premise number 2,
stated above, please see the introductory comments of this document and response to
Letter 2- Affidavit of David A. Phillips (refer to comment/response #29).
A. Impossible to tell how many properties were evaluated, which were found lighted,
and why
RSG, consultant to the CDC, acknowledges that the map required by CRL Section
33352(b) was erroneously left out of the Appendices to the RTC, and inadvertently in its
place was attached the Project Area Map depicting the area subject to eminent domain
authority as proposed by the 2007 Amendment. Four maps which indicate where in the
Project Area physical blighting conditions exist are included here by reference and are
attached to the CDC's Responses to Written Objections on the 2007 Amendment. Each
of the said four maps shows the location where physical blighting conditions were
observed to exist in the Project Area. The physical blighting conditions depicted in the
maps are 1) defective design, 2) structural obsolescence, 3) incompatible adjacent uses,
and 4) deterioration and dilapidation. It should be further noted that these four maps will
be included as attachments to the final draft of the RTC.
Furthermore, Ms. Berliner's statement that the RTC does not provide any information
about how, by whom, or of what property the study was conducted is a
misrepresentation of the RTC. The study's methodology, who conducted the study, and
a description of what property was included in the study are clearly stated in the RTC.
Please see Section B of the RTC under the subheading "Study Approach and
Methodology" for a detailed description.
Ms. Berliner is correct in pointing out that the report inaccurately states that there are
692 blighted parcels in the Project Area when in fact there are not. The statement in the
RTC which Ms. Berliner is referring to currently says, "Of the 692 parcels identified as
being blighted, there were 493 occurrences of dilapidation and deterioration in the 2007
Amendment Area (71.2%)". In this statement of the RTC, "as being blighted" is a
typographical error. The statement should have indicated that "Of the 692 parcels
identified, there were 493 occurrences of dilapidation and deterioration in the 2007
Amendment Area (71.2%)".
12
Ms. Berliner states that the RTC uses photos from the 2005 RTC and that it is possible
that portions of the study may not have been conducted recently. Please see response
to Letter 2- Affidavit of David A. Phillips (refer to comment/response #1 &# 2).
For a response to Ms. Berliner's reiteration of Michael Pallamary's doubts that a cursory
examination of the Project Area could be conducted in a single month, please see the
CDC's response to Letter 4- Pallamary & Associates Land Use Consultants (refer to
comment/response #2)
B. Impossible to tell if the identified conditions are so substantial and prevalent that
they satisfy Cal. Health & Safety Code Section 33030(b) & 33352(6)(2) and whether they
predominate the area, as required by Cal. Health & Safety Code Section 33321,
because the draft RTC does not identify the location of the supposed blighting conditions
The comments which follow in response to part "B" of Objection 13 have been previously
discussed in the written responses addressing written objections made by other
individuals and representatives of the CYAC. The following comments have been
reiterated again in an attempt to underscore the true facts of the matter with regards to
objections made over the adequacy of the RTC's documentation of blighting conditions.
It should first be noted that the blight findings required to extend existing eminent domain
authority are not the same as the blight findings required to prove blight as a prerequisite
to adopt a new redevelopment project area or adoption of new eminent domain authority
for existing redevelopment project areas. Since the boundaries of the Project Area are
not being changed, the detailed blight findings required by CRL Section 33031 for
adoption of a new redevelopment project area is not required for the 2007 Amendment.
Page 2 of the RTC acknowledges that said document supplements the documentation
and evidence contained in previous Reports to the City Council ("Original Reports") and
that, "Much of the information normally required that pertains to adopting a
redevelopment plan was previously documented and presented in the Original Reports".
There are three relevant CRL requirements that deal with redevelopment plan
amendments.
Section 33354.6 describes the type of amendments that require a long -form plan
amendment including identification of remaining blight and which portions of the
project area are no longer blighted (such as increase in the limit on tax increment
or increase in the bonded indebtedness limit). The 2007 Amendment does NOT
include any of these types of amendments
2. CRL Section 33333.2(a)(4) provides that time limitations for eminent
domain authority may be extended by amendment of the redevelopment
plan after the agency finds, based on substantial evidence, both that
significant blight remains within the project area, and that this blight
cannot be eliminated without use of eminent domain. This section is
pertinent to the 2007 Amendment that will extend eminent domain
authority.
13
3. CRL Article 12 commencing with Section 33450 outlines the "short -form"
amendment process that may be used for most plan amendments which
is pertinent to the 2007 Amendment in combination with Section
33333.2(a)(4).
CRL Section 33451.5 describes amendments that require a specific
Report on Blight to be sent to the Department of Finance and Department
of Housing and Community Development and none of the 2007
Amendment fall within these categories.
Therefore CRL Section 33457.1 (in combination with Section 33333.2(a)(4)) is most
relevant to the level of documentation required for the 2007 Amendment. Section
33457.1 states "To the extent warranted by a proposed amendment...(1) the ordinance
adopting an amendment...shall contain the findings required by Section 33367, and (2)
the reports and information required by Section 33352 shall be prepared and made
available to the public prior to the hearing on such amendment. The Report to the City
Council for the 2007 Amendment documents the presence of significant remaining blight
and why eminent domain authority must be extended to assist with the elimination of
blighting conditions.
Furthermore, it is important to highlight that blight findings were made when each of the
seven constituent project areas were originally adopted. These findings were reaffirmed
in the 1995 RTC when the Project Area was established. The 1995 RTC was approved
by the CDC and supported findings for the ordinance that adopted the Project Area.
This ordinance was not contested. Pursuant to CRL Section 33368, these findings are
considered to be final and conclusive.
In response to the statement that the RTC does not identify the location of the supposed
blighting conditions please see the CDC's response to part A of Objection 13.
C. Impossible to tell if physical blight exists in the proposed eminent domain area.
i. Impossible to tell if supposed serious building code violations in the
proposed eminent domain area are serious, prevalent, or even violations
of the building code
This comment is similar to those made by David A. Phillips and Michael J. Pallamary on
behalf of CYAC. Please see responses to Letter 2- Affidavit of David A. Philips (refer to
comment/response #5 & #6) and Letter 4- Pallamary & Associates Land Use
Consultants (refer to comment/response #3).
11. Impossible to tell if there is serious dilapidation or deterioration in the
proposed eminent domain area
Please see responses to Letter 2- Affidavit of David A. Phillips (refer to
comment/response #7, #8, #9, #10, and #11) and response to part B of Objection 13.
Furthermore, comments made by Ms. Berliner with regards to the following caselaws
pertain to the original adoption of a redevelopment plan or adoption of new eminent
domain authority for existing redevelopment project areas and therefore do not relate to
the 2007 Amendment; Bunker Hill, County of Riverside v. City of Murrieta, Mammoth,
14
Diamond Bar, Graber v. City of Upland, Gonzalez v. City of Santa Ana. Again, the blight
findings required to extend existing eminent domain authority are not the same as the
blight findings required prior to project area adoption and/or adoption of new eminent
domain authority for existing redevelopment project areas. Since the boundaries of the
Project Area are not being changed, the detailed blight findings required by CRL Section
33031 for plan adoptions of new redevelopment project areas are not required for the
2007 Amendment
In addition, please see response to Letter 2- Affidavit of David A. Phillips (refer to
comment/response #2 & #8) for a response to Ms. Berliner's comment regarding
multiple photos of the same building and the inclusion of photos from the draft 2005
Report to City Council, and please see response to comment/response #9 of same letter
regarding her reiteration of comments made by Mr. Phillips with regards to exposed
wiring.
mpossible to tell if claimed "serious dilapidation or deterioration" causes
buildings to be "unsafe or unhealthy" to live or work in
Please see responses to Section B & C(ii) of Objection 13.
iv.
mpossible to tell the prevalence of the "physical factors" that prevent or
substantially hinder the economically viable use of buildings or lots
Please see response to Section B of Objection 13.
v. Impossible to tell if there are adjacent or nearby incompatible uses
Please see response to Section B of Objection 13.
vi. Impossible to determine if conditions prevent or substantially hinder
economically viable use
Please see responses to Section B of Objection 13. Furthermore, it should be noted that
the CDC is aware that the CRL does not permit the condemnation of private property for
the purpose of transferring ownership under the same or similar use and that the new
uses must be in compliance with the Redevelopment Plan and work towards the
betterment of the community, which includes the removal of blighting conditions. The
CDC will operate all eminent domain actions in accordance with the CRL and all other
applicable laws.
vii. Impossible to tell if catch-all provision is supported by evidence
Please see response to Section B of Objection 13. Furthermore, comment noted that
the RTC does state, that even if all code enforcement violations were corrected, the
blighting factors such as...unsafe traffic conditions would still remain in the Project Area.
However, the RTC does not rely on unsafe traffic conditions as a blighting condition, as
Ms. Berliner suggest, and is a misrepresentation of the facts. The RTC identifies three
physical blighting conditions and three economic blighting conditions that currently
remain within the Project Area. The physical blighting conditions identified within the
15
Project Area and discussed in the RTC are 1) buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy
for persons to live or work, 2) conditions that prevent of substantially hinder the viable
use or capacity of buildings or Tots, and 3) adjacent or nearby incompatible land uses
that prevent the development of those parcels or other portions of the Project Area.
Economic blighting conditions identified within the Project Area and discussed in the
RTC include 1) impaired property values, due in significant part, to hazardous wastes, 2)
abnormally low lease rates, and 3) a high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to
public safety and welfare.
D. Impossible to tell if there is any economic blight in the proposed eminent domain
area.
i. There are no depreciated or stagnant property values
Please see response to part B of Objection 13. It should be further noted that
depreciating or stagnant property values is just one economic condition indicating blight,
and that CRL Section 33030 does not require that all blighting conditions described in
CRL Section 33031 be present in a project area determined to be blighted; rather CRL
Section 33030(b)(2) requires that one or more physical condition of blight and one or
more economic conditions of blight, as set forth in CRL Section 33031, characterize a
blighted area.. The RTC identifies the following three physical blighting conditions in the
Project Area; 1) buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work, 2)
conditions that prevent of substantially hinder the viable use or capacity of buildings or
lots, and 3) adjacent or nearby incompatible land uses that prevent the development of
those parcels or other portions of the Project Area. In addition, the following economic
blighting conditions are identified in the Project Area and discussed in the RTC; 1)
impaired property values, due in significant part, to hazardous wastes, 2) abnormally low
lease rates, and 3) a high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to public safety and
welfare. Since the RTC, identifies three physical and three economic blighting
conditions still remaining in the Project Area, it is not necessary that property values be
depreciating or stagnant in order to render a Project Area blighted.
ii. Impossible to tell if there are property values impaired due to hazardous
waste
Comment noted. The section referencing Impaired Property Values Due in Significant
Part to Hazardous Waste indicates the existence of contaminated sites within the
proposed 2007 Amendment Area. The section also cites the Brownfield's Grant Study
Project ("Study") undertaken by the CDC and the United States Environmental
Protection Agency which determined the extent of pollution in the Harbor District. The
RTC indicates that based on the Study there were sites with soil and groundwater
contamination. The RTC further indicates that according to environmental attorneys
involved with the Study Project and the creation of the City's Brownfield Redevelopment
Information System, sites located within the 2007 Amendment Area that have already
undergone remedial action are not necessarily presumed suitable for all uses. The
existence of hazardous waste and property contamination is well documented. The
presence of such waste and contamination becomes a clean-up cost, which can exceed
the value of the land. The presence of hazardous waste and contamination lower the
value of property because of the remediation cost, and it also lowers the value of
surrounding properties due to their proximity to hazardous waste and contamination, and
the concern of possible contamination migration.
16
(11. Impossible to tell if the proposed eminent domain area has abnormally low
lease rates.
Please see response to Section B of Objection 13. In addition, see Letter 2- Affidavit of
David A. Phillips (refer to comment/response #25) for additional responses related to low
lease rates.
iv. Impossible to tell if there is disproportionate amount of crime in the proposed
eminent domain area.
Ms. Berliner suggests that comparing city-wide crime rates for National City and other
comparable cities is an improper comparison but does not indicate why such a
comparison is improper. The CDC would like to note that a prevalently high crime rate in
National City when compared to other comparable cities is a clear indication of the
conditions plaguing the City when compared with neighboring areas. As discussed in
the RTC, for 2006, National City had a higher rate of robbery, aggravated assault,
burglary, and motor vehicle theft than the Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego, and the
San Diego County average. The RTC further discusses how the 2006 National City
crime rate is 39% higher than the San Diego County average and 32% and 20% higher
than the Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego, respectively. Moreover, providing
information on the city-wide high crime rate in National City coupled with factual
evidence provided by the National City Police Department, which shows that 12.6% of
the City's total reported crimes occurred in the Project Area, further validates the claim
that a high crime rate occurs in the Project Area.
OBJECTION 14: No evidence that specific planned projects will alleviate
identified blighting conditions
See Response to comment 9A.
17
Exhibit A
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY
2007 AMENDMENT TO THE NATIONAL CITY
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
RESPONSES TO WRITTEN OBJECTIONS FROM THE INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE,
AND FROM PROPERTY OWNERS AND AFFECTED TAXING AGENCIES
Pursuant to California Redevelopment Law ("CRL") Section 33363 the National City Community
Development Commission ("CDC") shall respond in writing to the written objections received
prior or at the public hearing on the National City Redevelopment Plan Amendment ("2007
Amendment.") The written responses must describe the disposition of the issues raised. The
legislative body shall address the written objections in detail, giving reasons for not accepting
specified objections and suggestions. The legislative body shall include a good -faith, reasoned
analysis in its response and, for this purpose; conclusionary statements unsupported by factual
information shall not suffice. In the following responses, the Report to the City Council on the
National City Redevelopment Plan Amendment is referred to as the ("RTC") and the response
to the written objections are referred to as the ("Response.")
There are three relevant CRL requirements that deal with redevelopment plan amendments.
1. Section 33354.6 describes the type of amendments that require a Tong -form plan
amendment including identification of remaining blight and which portions of the project
area are no longer blighted. The 2007 Amendment does NOT include any of these
types of amendments (such as increase in the limit on tax increment or increase in the
bonded indebtedness limit).
2. CRL Section 33333.2(a)(4) provides that time limitations for eminent domain authority
may be extended by amendment of the redevelopment plan after the agency finds,
based on substantial evidence, both that significant blight remains within the project
area, and that this blight cannot be eliminated without use of eminent domain. This
section is pertinent to the 2007 Amendment that will extend eminent domain authority.
3. CRL Article 12 commencing with Section 33450 outlines the "short -form" amendment
process that may be used for most plan amendments which is pertinent to the 2007
Amendment in combination with Section 33333.2(a)(4). CRL Section 33451.5 describes
amendments that require a specific Report on Blight to be sent to the Department of
Finance and Department of Housing and Community Development and none of the 2007
Amendments fall within these categories.
1
LETTER 1 -
COMMENTS FROM INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE (JEFF ROWES, STAFF ATTORNEY)
Mr. Rowes represents the Community Youth Athletic Center ("CYAC") of 1018 National City
Boulevard in its objection to the proposed 2007 Amendment. Mr. Rowes does not present
specified objections or suggestions to the 2007 Amendment. Mr. Rowes writes for the specific
purpose of stating the steps he took to acquire information and documentation relevant to the
proposed 2007 Amendment documentation.
1. In summary Mr. Rowes' letter comments on the availability of and difficulties in obtaining the
documentation associated with the 2007 Amendment. Additionally, he states that there was no
ability for a citizen to prepare an objection to the blight designation and the re -authorization of
eminent domain without knowing what the basis of the blight designation would be.
The RTC and all other documentation associated with the 2007 Amendment were made
available to the public at the same time as it was available to the City Council. The National
City Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area") has been established for a number of years.
Issues and conditions used to establish the Project Area have been documented in previous
reports and many of the issues and conditions are still present. As a point of departure, review
of previous reports is a reliable method of identifying the basis of the blight designation. Under
Article 12 Section 33451.5 (c)(2) of the CRL the CDC is required to provide a description of the
remaining blight and is not required to re-establish the Project Area as blighted. CRL Section
33333.2(a)(4) provides that time limitations for eminent domain authority may be extended by
amendment of the redevelopment plan after the agency finds, based on substantial evidence,
both that significant blight remains within the project area, and that this blight cannot be
eliminated without use of eminent domain. The RTC for the 2007 Amendment documents the
presence of significant remaining blight and why eminent domain authority is needed to assist
with the elimination of blighting conditions.
2
LETTER 2 —
AFFIDAVIT OF DAVID A. PHILLIPS
Mr. David A. Phillips was hired by the CYAC to review and comment on the alleged conditions
of blight as noted in the RTC for the 2007 Amendment. Mr. Phillips' submittal is summarized by
the following 29 objections. This response is organized to address each objection (shown in
italics) on an individual basis. Responses follow summary of each objection.
1. Mr. Phillips indicates that the statement in the report that the survey was completed in April
of 2007 is an inconsistency compared to the time he estimates as being sufficient to complete a
parcel by parcel field survey.
RSG has served as a redevelopment consultant to the City of National City for several years
and has completed amendments to the National City Redevelopment Plan in 2001 and 2003.
As noted by Mr. Phillips RSG was the consultant for the proposed 2005 Amendment to the
Redevelopment Plan at which time a parcel by parcel survey was also completed over a two
month process. As such, RSG has a substantial working knowledge of the Project Area and an
in-house database of properties in the Project Area. The existing database was queried and
property conditions were verified in the April 2007 windshield survey. It is acknowledged that
the survey did not include building -by -building interior inspections. Given the number of
buildings it was not feasible to take this approach because of the significant cost. City code
enforcement personnel were interviewed to ascertain their opinion of the conditions in the
Project Area.
2. The Report to City Council states that the survey was completed in April of 2007, however,
photos numbered 8, 11, and 15 are from the 2005 Report to City Council. (paragraph 21)
Photo 8 depicts a residential building between two industrial uses which underscores the
incompatibility for both residential occupants and industrial uses. Although this photo was taken
in 2005 the uses at this site have not changed. Furthermore, photos 11 and 15 depict a forklift
driver transporting goods to a nearby site using a public road shared by other motorists, and a
loading area that is inadequate for the size of delivery being made which has resulted in a
blocked access way. These conditions are a direct result of inadequate lots sizes that have
resulted in unsafe conditions for the forklift driver and a lack of loading and vehicle access.
These conditions still exist in the Harbor District area of the Project Area regardless of the fact
that these two photos were originally taken in 2005.
3. "The RSG Draft Report to the City Council appears to use language in Section 33030(b)(1)
of the California Health and Safety Code in the report on page 24 under the heading
`PHYSICAL AND ECONOMIC BURDEN ON THE COMMUNITY' to find blight." (paragraph 22)
California Health and Safety Code Section ("H&SC") 33000 et. seq. sets the legal standard for
determining blight. It should be expected that any analysis of the physical and economic
conditions in the Project Area would include language from the H&SC.
4. "Section B of the RSG Draft Report lists those Physical and Economic Blighting Conditions
RSG relied on to justify a determination of blight in the conclusions on page 24. Each of the
RSG items is reviewed in part together with my time estimate for a reasonable review process in
the following paragraphs". (paragraph 23)
This does not appear to be an objection so no response is warranted.
3
5. The Report to City Council does not provide specifics or addresses for code enforcement
violations and it is Mr. Phillips' experience that when an inspector identifies a violation which is
then cleared after one or more follow up inspections, the violation was not serious and no longer
exists. (paragraph 24)
Due to the high volume of code enforcement violations it would be, unwarranted to list the
addresses and specifics of all code enforcement violations in the RTC. As discussed in the
RTC, even if all code enforcement violations were corrected in the properties affected by the
2007 Amendment, blighting factors such as environmental contamination, flooding, inadequately
sized parcels and unsafe traffic conditions would still remain and the 2007 Amendment would
still be justified and beneficial for the Project Area.
6. The RSG Draft Report does not list serious building code violations and instead lists mostly
parking, loading and storage issues, extension cords, canvas, and plastic tarps. Further, Mr.
Phillips states that because there is not quantifiable evidence it is impossible to review these
statements. (paragraph 25)
The following quotes were taken from the RTC. These statements from the RTC are provided
as affirmation that the RTC does identify serious building code violations:
"Canvass or plastic tarps were often observed being used as Tong -term roof
covering or to creating an unsafe building addition as well as permanent outdoor
work areas" pg. 18 (emphasis added)
"Residential structures converted to non-residential uses without proper permits.
Without proper permitting/inspections residential structures cannot be properly
evaluated if they are suitable for industrial conversion. For example, multiple
residential structures that were being used for commercial/industrial uses were
observed to have excessive storage facilities (over 120 square feet of area) in
the dedicated setback area, creating a fire hazard" pg. 19
Mr. Phillips' states that there is a Zack of quantifiable evidence for which it is impossible to
review statements regarding code enforcement violations. As mentioned in the previous
Response, a list of the specific code enforcement violations is unwarranted due to the high
volume of infractions. It is important to further note that the code enforcement violations listed in
the Project Area are mostly observable from the public right-of-way. Therefore, anyone wishing
to make a review of the statements pertaining to code enforcement violations could reasonably
do so by performing a "walk-through" examination of the commercial and industrial corridors of
the Project Area. By so doing, one could observe and determine if the statements are true or
false. It is possible that since Mr. Phillips' business address is located in Minneapolis, MN he
may not have visited the Project Area nor taken time to personally observe code violations.
Even if the RTC had provided quantifiable data that Mr. Phillips believes is necessary he would
not have been able to determine the data's credibility without visiting the Project Area and
confirming that the code violations do or do not continue to exist. That there is a need for
significant code enforcement activity in the areas speaks to the fact that the area includes
properties that are dilapidated. This dilapidation contributed to the presence of blight
documented at the time the Project Area was established and the fact that these conditions
have not yet been remedied.
4
7. The Report to City Council does not identify a single address or specific instance of
dilapidation and deterioration. (paragraph 26)
The RTC states that there were 493 occurrences of dilapidation and deterioration in the Project
Area. This fact is derived from a parcel by parcel survey conducted by the CDC's consultant,
RSG. Furthermore, the RTC describes how structures were determined to be dilapidated or
deteriorated; if they were suffering from deteriorating roofing or eaves, peeling paint, damaged
exterior building material, exposed wiring or plumbing, and/or if the buildings were constructed
with substandard building materials. To identify all 493 observed occurrences of dilapidation
and deterioration would prove repetitive and unwarranted for the RTC. However, in contrast to
Mr. Phillips statement that specific instances of dilapidation and deterioration were not identified,
pages 9 and 10 of the RTC include sample photos of dilapidated and deteriorated buildings,
captions explaining the conditions being observed in the photos, and street names for where the
structures are located.
8. 'With the claim of 493 instances of dilapidation and deterioration it would be reasonable to
expect numerous photographs of the conditions and problems. Instead there are just four
photos. Two of those photos are of the same building." (paragraph 27)
Mr. Phillips is correct that two photos (photo 1 and 2 on page 9) in the RTC are of the same
building which is located along Civic Center Drive. However, the two photos provide different
angles of the building for better viewing of multiple conditions. Photo 1 depicts a rusting metal
roof which indicates the lack of weather proofing materials and Photo 2 is a closer shot
revealing the building's damaged exterior building materials. It is noteworthy to mention that
structures exhibiting multiple signs of deterioration and dilapidation further support findings that
serious dilapidation and deterioration exist. Please see the preceding Response to paragraph
26 of Mr. Phillips' submittal for additional comments pertaining to the RTC's limited site specific
documentation of deteriorated and dilapidated structures.
9. Evidence of dilapidation includes peeling paint, exposed wiring and plumbing and
substandard building materials for which it is impossible to determine from the Report to City
Council if the exposed wiring is electrical service from the power company or if the plumbing is
rain leaders and downspouts. Mr. Philips further states that five days is not sufficient time for
an effective review of these items. (paragraph 28)
Substantiation of blight in the Project Area was documented twelve years ago when the Project
Area was initially established. Those blight documents have been available since that time.
The RTC for the 2007 Amendment is focused on substantiating that the previously documented
conditions continue to exist in a substantial number of instances. It should be noted that the
RTC for the 2007 Amendment and other pertinent documents were available per the City's
typical review time. Furthermore, since business owners, tenants, and residential property
owners affected by the proposed 2007 Amendment were notified more than three (3) weeks in
advance of the joint public hearing all interested parties had ample time to meet with staff and
consultants to discuss the proposal and potential impact on their property.
10. The "conditions" listed do not appear to be serious and in a coastal region it is not
unusual/unexpected to find rust on metal roofs. The Report to City Council does "not even
claim a leaking roof" and without specific, quantifiable evidence the claims in the Report to City
Council cannot be evaluated. (paragraph 29)
5
Mr. Phillips is correct in that the RTC does not make claims of leaking roofs. The survey did not
include building -by -building interior inspections. Given the number of buildings, and the
difficulty in gaining access to building interiors, it was not feasible to take this approach because
of the significant cost. However, the presence of rusted roofs visible from the right-of-way was
identified as a condition of blight possibly resulting from lack of proper weather proofing. While
Mr. Phillips suggest that this is not unexpected in a coastal region these conditions were
exhibited during the 2001 analysis as well as the 2005 analysis. Allowing metal roofs to
continue to rust could lead to a leaking roof if in fact leaks do not already exist.
11. The Report to City Council does not identify seismic or geologic hazards or
faulty/inadequate water or sewer utilities. (paragraph 30)
Although the CRL provides that dilapidation and deterioration caused by construction that is
vulnerable to serious damage from seismic or geological standards is a physical blighting
condition it is not a requirement that the Project Area suffer from said condition in order to be
designated blighted.
12. Canvas and plastic tarps are counted for a second time under the subheading
"Substandard or Defective Design" of the Report to City Council and said report does not
identify specific addresses or instances of this condition. (paragraph 31)
See the Response to Item number 5 of this letter.
13. The Report to City Council uses former wood frame residential structures that have been
converted to industrial use as an example of substandard design or defective design even
though Section 18.76.010 of the City code states in part;
"A structure or building intended or designed to be used as a dwelling unit may
be used in the commercial and industrial zones for a permitted commercial or
industrial use, subject to the provisions of this chapter." (paragraph 32)
Mr. Phillips is correct in that Section 18.76.010 of the City zoning code states that "A structure or
building intended or designed to be used as a dwelling unit may be used in the commercial and
industrial zones for a permitted commercial or industrial use, subject to the provisions of this
chapter." Though this practice allowable under the current City zoning code, the zoning code
section also indicates that such conversion are subject to the provisions of the chapter.
Interviews with city staff indicates that often times these conversions are made without proper
permitting.
14. The Report to City Council lists corrugated metal panels on existing buildings as a blighting
condition and that such material is not permitted according to City code even though Section
18.18.240 of the National City Land Use Code ("NCLUC") allows metal buildings in the industrial
zones and Section 18.108.020 of the City Code allows the materials to continue.
Mr. Philips is correct in that Section 18.18.240 of the National City Land Use Code ("NCLUC")
allows metal buildings in the industrial zones and Section 18.108.020 of the City Code allows
the materials to continue. However, in full Section 18.18.240 states that all metal buildings shall
have the architectural appearance of conventionally built structures and an exterior surface that
includes either stucco, plaster, glass, stone, wood, brick, decorative masonry or wood
6
sheathing. The buildings referred to in the RTC are older metal buildings that do not include the
use of either stucco, plaster, glass, stone, wood, brick, decorative masonry or wood sheathing
on the exterior surface. The existing buildings as constructed could not currently be duplicated
under this code.
Section 18.108.020 allows any lawful nonconforming use existing at the time of adoption of the
National City Land Use Code to be continued, provided such use is continually maintained and
occupied. However, a nonconforming use in either a conforming building or a nonconforming
building, structure, or portion of either shall neither be extended to any portion of the building or
structure not so used nor be enlarged or extended to any other portion of the lot not actually so
occupied at the time said use became nonconforming, except as otherwise provided in this
chapter. Under these conditions if is an operation outgrows its space it would not be able to
expand its facilities to accommodate the growth, thus, possibly resulting in outdoor
manufacturing and the storage of materials out of doors.
15. Parking, loading and storage are considered blighting factors for a second time under the
subheading "Structural Obsolescence" on page 12 of the Report to City Council and such claims
are impossible to review without specific, quantifiable evidence. (paragraph 34)
See the Response to Item number 5 of this letter.
16. The Report to City Council states that there are 87 instances where residential property is
located adjacent to commercial and/or industrial property and that review time is needed in
order to determine if these are the adjacencies contemplated in Section 18.18.021 of the
NCLUC, which allows in the light manufacturing/residential ("MLR") zone, "the continuation...in
the area...which contains a mix of residential along with industrial, commercial and institutional
uses". Mr. Phillips states that more time is also needed to determine if the 87 adjacencies are
caretaker residences allowed in all manufacturing zones as shown in Table X of NCLUC
Section 18.18.070 and to compare the "NCLUC- Zone Matrix", which shows that single family
homes are permitted in all tourist, limited, general, medium, and heavy commercial districts.
Furthermore, Mr. Phillips states that Photo 9 on page 13 of the Report to City Council shows a
residential use along 22nd Street adjacent to an industrial use and that the MLR district is
bounded on the south by 22nd Street. (paragraph 35)
This does not appear to be a specified objection. Mr. Phillips appears to indicate that he needs
more time to make findings. As such, no response is needed.
17. The Report to City Council's statement that, "neighborhood commercial development
generally require at least a two -acre site and a four acre site for light industrial development"
without citing any authority. Mr. Phillips sites Section 18.16.290 of the NCLUC which provides
for a minimum lot size of 5,000 sq. ft. for most commercial development, and 15,000 sq. ft. for
automobile service stations ("Section 18.18.190 for Industrial uses lists the same five thousand
sq. ft, and fifteen thousand square feet minimums and adds a seven thousand five hundred
square feet foot minimum for truck repair'). Plus, he states that he has "built many commercial
uses on sites of less than one acre instead of two acres and industrial uses on sites much Tess
than four acres". (paragraph 36)
Each of the provisions of the NCLUC need to be reviewed together to determine the appropriate
site size for development. For example, when determining the appropriate size for a
7
development site, it is essential to also review the parking and setback requirements to insure
that all the land use provisions are met under the NCLUC. In many instances under today's
market conditions, a site size that is larger than the minimum acceptable lot size is required.
Moreover, the Report to City Council documents conditions within the Project Area that would
indicate that current lot sizes are not adequate enough given the types of businesses operating
within the Project Area. Those observed conditions include, 1) improper loading areas which
result in sidewalk and/or street loading due to the lack of adequate on -site space, 2) use of the
public rights -of -way for the storage of commercial trucks, and 3) forklifts using public right-of-
ways for transporting goods and materials to nearby Tots when companies are unable to find
consolidated sites demanded by their type of operations.
18. Many small industrial parcels are protected by the City's Light Manufacturing/Residential
Zone and the mix of smaller parcels appears to be ordinary and typical for this area and
encouraged by the NCLUC. (paragraph 37)
This does not appear to be a specified objection. As such, no response is needed.
19. The Report to City Council generally discusses parking and loading issues relating to lot
size and "incredibly canvas tarps are now triple counted as a blighting factor for lot size".
(paragraph 38)
See the Response to Item number 5 of this letter.
20. The Report to City Council does not identify subdivided lots that are under multiple
ownership and whose physical development has been impaired by their irregular shapes or
inadequate sizes. (paragraph 39)
Staff agrees with Mr. Phillips' statement that the Report to City Council does not identify
subdivided lots that are under multiple ownership and whose physical development has been
impaired by their irregular shapes or inadequate sizes, and nor has staff attempted to identify
said condition as a blighting condition in the Project Area. It should be noted, however, that the
CRL does not require that every blighting condition described in CRL Section 33031 be present
within a project area in order for it to be designated as blighted.
21. The Report to City Council does not identify 'Depreciated or stagnant property values" and
the City's website shows that the median home value has increased 235% and the median
condominium value has increased 260% between 2000 and 2004. (paragraph 40)
It should first be noted that the RTC, which describes the physical and economic conditions in
the Project Area and serves as the factual basis for the 2007 Amendment, only pertains to the
Project Area. The CDC has not made blight findings on any area outside of the Project Area.
Depreciating or stagnant property values is just one economic condition indicating blight.
According to CRL Section 33030, a blighted area, in addition to being predominantly urbanized,
is one that contains one or more physical blighting condition and one or more economic
blighting condition. Therefore, property values do not necessarily need to be depreciating or
stagnant to render a project area as blighted. The RTC, which summarizes the existing physical
and economic conditions within the Project Area, identifies low lease rates, impaired property
8
values due in part to hazardous wastes, and a high crime rate as the primary economic blighting
conditions noted in the Project Area.
22. The Report to City Council does not document or provide evidence of impaired property
values dues to hazardous waste. (paragraph 41)
With the above three comments, Mr. Phillips seems to suggest that every condition described in
CRL Section 33031 must be present in the area and discussed in the RTC. To extend eminent
domain authority, the Agency must only show that significant blight remains in the area. CRL
Section 33030(b) (2) indicates that blight is present if an area is characterized by one or more
conditions set forth in Section 33031 (a) and one or more in Section 33031 (b). Not every
condition must be present, only one or more.
23. The Report to City Council does not indicate where the 343 Haz-Mat permits are issued nor
how many are in the Project Area. Mr. Phillips further argues that because there were 15 Haz-
Mat related or hazardous release calls to locations within the Project Area that it appears users
in the City are following the established law and practices with regard to hazardous materials
and that compliance is not a blighting condition. (paragraph 42)
A specific inventory of the precise location of the 343 hazardous material use permits was not
available from a reliable source. This information was included in the Report to City Council as
an attempt to provide an indication of the large quantity of businesses handling hazardous
materials that operate within the City. In preparing the Report to City Council, RSG, consultant
to the CDC, collected this data from the County of San Diego Department of Environmental
Health. An attempt was made to acquire information from the County as to how many Haz-Mat
permits were specifically issued in the Project Area, however, the County responded by stating
that they could only provide such data at a Citywide/zip code level. However, since hazardous
material use permits are almost exclusively associated with commercial and industrial land
uses, and given the fact that virtually all of the commercial and industrial properties in the City
lie within the boundaries of the Project Area, one can deduct that the majority of the hazardous
material use permits involve property within the Project Area.
Moreover, staff does not believe that the 15 Haz-Mat related or hazardous release calls made to
the National City Fire Department are evidence that businesses and property owners within the
Project Area are fully in compliance with regards to Haz-Mat regulations and State Law.
Frequently, the Fire Department finds that these calls for service are a result of improper
release, storage or handling of toxic materials that is in conflict with local laws and practices.
Further, based on the experience of Fire Department officials most familiar with Project Area
properties and environmental regulations, it is the City's position that their claim that the number
of permits is less than the number of actual users suggests that many Project Area users may
be operating outside of laws and procedures.
24. The Report to City Council has several instances where counting of blighting factors are
double, triple, and more; including canvas tarps which are quadruple counted as "a blighting
factor of Impaired Property Values Due in Significant Part to Hazardous Waste". (paragraph 43)
An area is not determined blighted by the types of conditions that cause blight but whether it has
one or more physical condition of blight and one or more economic condition of blight. It is true
that canvas and plastic tarps were used to indicate several blighting conditions in the Report to
City Council; however, canvas and plastic tarps were not the sole causes of the blighting
conditions identified within the Project Area.
9
The Report to City Council identifies three physical blighting conditions and three economic
blighting conditions that currently remain within the Project Area. The physical blighting
conditions identified within the Project Area and discussed in the Report to City Council are 1)
buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work, 2) conditions that prevent
of substantially hinder the viable use or capacity of buildings or lots, and 3) adjacent or nearby
incompatible land uses that prevent the development of those parcels or other portions of the
Project Area. Economic blighting conditions identified within the Project Area and discussed in
the Report to City Council include 1) impaired property values, due in significant part, to
hazardous wastes, 2) abnormally low lease rates, and 3) a high crime rate that constitutes a
serious threat to public safety and welfare.
25. The Report to City Council does not identify abnormally high business vacancies or
abandoned buildings as a blighting condition and office and retail lease rates are sourced by
Grubb & Ellis but do not include a time frame for the lease rates. In addition, the Report to City
Council does not make the claim that lease rates are abnormally low. (paragraph 44)
According to Grub and Ellis market research publications, San Diego's retail and industrial
markets recorded low vacancy rates for the second half of 2006 and the first quarter of 2007,
and are even among the lowest vacancy rates nationwide. The County's overall low lease rates
are in large part due to the limited supply of available retail space for -lease. Accordingly, when
available options for leasing space are limited businesses may be forced to occupy Tess
desirable buildings by the fact that few alternative options exist. Although older centers in less
desirable locations are likely to have higher vacancy rates it is difficult to surmise accurate
vacancy rate specific to the Project Area; the reason being that real estate publications reporting
on market trends typically do not report on submarkets smaller than the city.
Furthermore, RSG regrets not indicating the time -frame for which the office and retail lease
rates represent; however, we assure you that office and retail lease rates used in the RTC for
National City, Chula Vista, and the County were taken from first quarter 2007 market trends as
published by Grubb and Ellis.
Although, the RTC does not use language which specifically states that lease rates are
abnormally low, statistics mentioned in this section of the RTC are indicative of the fact. As
reported in the RTC, retail lease rates in National City are $0.88 (70%) per square foot lower
than surrounding markets and office lease rates are $0.35-$0.44 (18%-22%) per square foot
lower than surrounding markets.
26. The Report to City Council does not identify a lack of necessary commercial facilities,
serious residential overcrowding, or an excess of bars, liquor stores and adult business.
(paragraph 45)
Although the CRL provides that dilapidation and deterioration caused by a lack of necessary
commercial facilities, serious residential overcrowding, or an excess of bars, liquor stores and
adult business a blighting condition it is not a requirement that the project area suffer from said
conditions in order to be designated blighted.
27. it is Mr. Phillips' opinion that five days is a grossly inadequate time period to review a blight
report involving 692 parcels and that a reasonable time would be 4-6 months for comment and
review. (paragraph 46)
10
The RTC and other pertinent documents were available to the public at the same time they were
available to the City Council. Furthermore, since business owners, tenants, and residential
property owners affected by the proposed 2007 Amendment were notified more than three (3)
weeks in advance of the joint public hearing all interested parties had ample time to meet with
staff and consultants to discuss the proposal and potential impact on their property. The
documentation that substantiated the area as blighted was initially prepared in 1995 and was
available at that time.
28. The Report to City Council does not contain the map required by CRL Section 33352(b).
Omission of said map, which is to show where in the Project Area conditions exist, makes a
review of factual accuracy of the conditions impossible. (paragraph 47)
RSG, the consultant to the CDC, acknowledges that the map required by CRL Section 33352(b)
was erroneously left out of the Appendices to the RTC, and inadvertently in its place was
attached the Project Area Map depicting the area subject to eminent domain authority as
proposed by the 2007 Amendment. Four maps which indicate where in the Project Area
physical blighting conditions exist are attached for reference.
29. The Report to City Council completely lacks the necessary descriptions which contain
"specific, quantifiable evidence" required by CRL Section 33352 (b). (paragraph 48)
There are three relevant CRL requirements that deal with redevelopment plan amendments.
1. Section 33354.6 describes the type of amendments that require a long -form plan
amendment including identification of remaining blight and which portions of the project area
are no longer blighted. The 2007 Amendment does NOT include any of these types of
amendments (such as increase in the limit on tax increment or increase in the bonded
indebtedness limit).
2. CRL Section 33333.2(a)(4) provides that time limitations for eminent domain authority
may be extended by amendment of the redevelopment plan after the agency finds, based
on substantial evidence, both that significant blight remains within the project area, and that
this blight cannot be eliminated without use of eminent domain. This section is pertinent to
the 2007 Amendment that will extend eminent domain authority.
3. CRL Article 12 commencing with Section 33450 outlines the "short -form" amendment
process that may be used for most plan amendments which is pertinent to the 2007
Amendment in combination with Section 33333.2(a)(4). CRL Section 33451.5 describes
amendments that require a specific Report on Blight to be sent to the Department of
Finance and Department of Housing and Community Development and none of the 2007
Amendments fall within these categories.
Therefore CRL Section 33457.1 (in combination with Section 33333.2(a)(4)) is most relevant to
the level of documentation required for the 2007 Amendment. Section 33457.1 states "To the
extent warranted by a proposed amendment...(1) the ordinance adopting an amendment...shall
contain the findings required by Section 33367, and (2) the reports and information required by
Section 33352 shall be prepared and made available to the public prior to the hearing on such
amendment. The Report to the City Council for the 2007 Amendment documents the presence
of significant remaining blight and why eminent domain authority is needed to assist with the
elimination of blighting conditions.
11
30. /t is Mr. Phillips' opinion that there is no substantial evidence or any real evidence that
physical and economic blight is prevalent in the Project Area as present by the Report to City
Council.
Evidence of the presence of blight was provided in 1995 when the Project Area was
established. The purpose of the Report to Council for the 2007 Amendment was to described
the fact that substantial blight remains.
12
LETTER 3 —
SAN DIEGO COUNTY OFFICE OF EDUCATION
The San Diego Office of Education (SDCOE) states that the SDCOE provides services
throughout the County and is affected by new development wherever it occurs in the County.
SDCOE's letter lists SDCOE programs that could be affected by development. The SDCOE
expresses it's support for the use of redevelopment and offers to work with the
CDC to reduce the impacts of new development.
This is not an objection letter. Furthermore, the project is an amendment to the National City
Redevelopment Plan and does not involve the direct development of a specific land use project.
As such no Response is needed.
13
LETTER 4 —
PALLAMARY & ASSOCIATES LAND USE CONSULTANTS
1. Michael J. Pallamary states the Report to City Council is based on a very limited
investigation of the Project Area and that because the Report to City Council is based on a
narrow investigation there is ample reason to question the validity of the RTC and the accuracy.
He uses as example a statement on page 7 of the Report to City Council:
An important data source was a field survey conducted by RSG, consultants to the CDC,
in April of 2007. The Survey encompassed those areas of the Project Area currently
subject to eminent domain. Existing physical and economic conditions of each parcel,
as observed from the public right-of-way, were documented. (Emphasis added)
Mr. Pallamary is suggesting that because RSG's investigation of the Project Area was
conducted from the public right-of-way that it is an inadequate investigation of the Project Area.
Neither the CDC nor RSG have the authority to trespass onto private property and, therefore, an
internal survey of the structures located within the Project Area was not feasible. Furthermore,
a field survey conducted from the public right-of-way does not mean it was a limited
investigation. RSG also used and discussed other sources used in the evaluation. Additionally,
RSG has served as a redevelopment consultant to the City of National City for several years
and has completed amendments to the National City Redevelopment Plan in 2001 and 2003.
RSG was the consultant for the proposed 2005 Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan at
which time a parcel by parcel survey was also completed over a two month process. As such,
RSG has a substantial working knowledge of the Project Area and an in-house database of
properties in the Project Area.
2. Mr. Pallamary indicates that an inspection from the public right-of-way of 692 parcels in such
a short amount of time is inadequate and insufficient and the absence of an inspection of the
balance of the properties interior, roof, rear, sides and ancillary areas along with interviews of
the property owners to determine rehabilitation or improvement plans supports the inadequacy
of a drive -by inspection.
RSG has served as a redevelopment consultant to the City of National City for several years
and has completed amendments to the National City Redevelopment Plan in 2001 and 2003.
RSG was also the consultant for the proposed 2005 Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan at
which time a parcel by parcel survey was also completed over a two month process. As such,
RSG has a substantial working knowledge of the Project Area and an in-house database of
properties in the Project Area. The existing database was queried and property conditions were
verified in the April 2007 windshield survey. It is acknowledged that the survey did not include
building -by -building interior inspections. Given the number of buildings it was not feasible to
take this approach because of the significant cost. City code enforcement personnel were
interviewed to ascertain their opinion of the conditions in the Project Area.
3. Mr. Pallamary indicates that the RTC is silent as to the history and nature of the the code
violations as well as the basis for these findings. He states that it is important to determine if the
affected properties were ever cited and if so, did the owners refuse to comply with the corrective
orders or was the city simply lax I its enforcement efforts, solely to advance its redevelopment
agenda.
A list of the specific code enforcement violations is unwarranted due to the high volume of
infractions. It is important to further note that the code enforcement violations listed in the
14
Project Area are mostly observable from the public right-of-way. Therefore, anyone wishing to
make a review of the statements pertaining to code enforcement violations could reasonably do
so by performing a "walk-through" examination of the commercial and industrial corridors of the
Project Area. By so doing, one could observe and determine if the statements are true or false.
4. Mr. Pallamary indicates that in his opinion, the issuance of a Negative Declaration is
premature and suspect. He indicates that it is probable that a more thorough study would
disclose more significant issues than those discussed in the report.
The 2007 Amendment would not have any substantial adverse environmental effects because
development is not directly proposed in conjunction with the adoption of the 2007 Amendment.
The 2007 Amendment 1) extends the authority of the CDC to use eminent domain until 2019, 2)
amends the current exclusion of eminent domain on single-family homes (Exhibit D) to include
all residential land uses, 3) updates the Transportation Center section governing the Mile of
Cars and 4) revises Exhibit C — "Public Facilities/Infrastructure Improvement Projects. The 2007
Amendment does not propose any public or private development projects that could have
substantial adverse environmental effects.
5. Mr. Pallamary indicates that he is unable to comment on arguments associated with
"economic blight."
This does not appear to be a specified objection or suggestion. As such, no Response is
needed.
6. Mr. Pallamary indicates his concern that the references and source documents selected
were 'cherry picked" by the city and handed to the consultant and those that were not favorable,
were either not considered or rejected in total.
To support the 2007 Amendment, the Agency must substantiate that significant blight remains
that warrants the 2007 Amendment. The fact that the redevelopment tools have been available
and used in the Project Area for the last twelve years has resulted in some improvements to the
conditions of blight. The purpose of the RTC for the 2007 Amendment is to describe the
remaining conditions of blight, and therefore, the focus of the document is to describe the
remaining problem conditions.
7. Mr. Pallamary comments on the adequacy of the environmental findings and suggest that an
underlying report must be completed. Assuming that the report is based on some contrary
information or more substantial documentation, it would influence the tone of the resultant
environmental documentation.
See Response number 3 of letter number 4.
8. Mr. Pallamary notes that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) necessitates an
analysis of historical buildings. He indicates that because the RTC asserts that older buildings
are one of the causes of blight, it may mean older buildings are historic. He also indicates that
according to section 15064.5 of CEQA the significance of impacts to archeological and historic
resources must be determined.
In May of 2007 an Environmental Initial Study checklist was completed and the underlying
explanations were prepared. It was concluded that the 2007 Amendment would not cause a
substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource because development is
15
not directly proposed in conjunction with the adoption of the 2007 Amendment. The 2007
Amendment 1) extends the authority of the CDC to use eminent domain until 2019, 2) amends
the current exclusion of eminent domain on single-family homes (Exhibit D) to include all
residential land uses, 3) updates the Transportation Center section governing the Mile of Cars
and 4) revises Exhibit C — "Public Facilities/Infrastructure Improvement Projects. The 2007
Amendment does not propose public or private development projects that would adversely
impact a historical resource.
Indirectly, the 2007 Amendment could result in development in the Project Area if eminent
domain is used to acquire property and buildings are either historical or candidates as historical
buildings. The CDC and/or city would evaluate all projects for potential historical resource
impacts at the time development plans are submitted for approval. If it is determined that a
historical resource could be impacted, the CDC and/or city would require measures to ensure
the protection of the resource in compliance with the law. If resources suspected of being
historically significant were uncovered during construction the city would evaluate the resources
and protect it in compliance with CEQA Guideline §15064.5, as applicable.
9. Mr. Pallamary indicates that it is opinion that given the recent ruling in Neilson vs. City of
California City, (146 Cal. App. 4'h 633 — Cal. Rptr. 3d) (No. F049143. Fifth Dist. Jan. 9th 2007],
the notion of substandard lots must be examined more diligently. Moreover the RTC does not
identify the location of the lots. It is possible these could be more usable through minor
manipulation, assuming they are in fact defective.
RSG, the consultant to the CDC, acknowledges that the map required by CRL Section 33352(b)
was erroneously left out of the Appendices to the RTC, and inadvertently in its place was
attached the Project Area Map depicting the area subject to eminent domain authority as
proposed by the 2007 Amendment. Four maps which indicate where in the Project Area
physical blighting conditions exist are attached for reference.
16
LETTER 5 —
THORSNES BARTOLOTTA MCGUIRE, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
(Representing property owners of 1401 Cleveland)
1. The law firm of Thorsnes Bartolotta McGuire ("TBM') represents the owners of 1401
Cleveland, located in the Project Area, and asserts that the 2007 Amendment is improper and
legally unjustified in extending the time -limit for eminent domain authority, because the Report
to City Council fails to demonstrate the findings required by California Community
Redevelopment Law ("CRL") Section 33367.
CRL Section 33367 identifies the required contents/findings of an ordinance adopting a
redevelopment plan; not for a redevelopment plan amendment. By referring to the findings that
are required by Section 33367, it seems that TBM implies that the blight findings required to
extend existing eminent domain authority are the same as the blight findings required prior to
project area adoption and/or adoption of new eminent domain authority for existing
redevelopment project areas. Since the boundaries of the Project Area are not being changed,
the same detailed blight findings required by CRL Section 33031 for plan adoptions of new
redevelopment project areas are not required for the 2007 Amendment. Page 2 of the RTC
acknowledges that said document supplements the documentation and evidence contained in
previous Reports to the City Council ("Original Reports") and that, "Much of the information
normally required that pertains to adopting a redevelopment plan was previously documented
and presented in the Original Reports".
Blight findings were made when each of the seven constituent project areas were originally
adopted. These findings were reaffirmed in the 1995 RTC when the Project Area was
established. The 1995 RTC was approved by the CDC and supported findings for the
ordinance that adopted the Project Area. This ordinance was not contested. Pursuant to CRL
Section 33368, these findings are considered to be final and conclusive.
CRL Section 33333.2(a)(4) provides that time limitations for eminent domain authority may be
extended by amendment of the redevelopment plan after the agency finds, based on substantial
evidence, both that significant blight remains within the project area, and that this blight cannot
be eliminated without use of eminent domain. The Report to the City Council for the 2007
Amendment documents the presence of significant remaining blight and why eminent domain
authority is needed to assist with the elimination of blighting conditions.
2. TBM also argues that the property located at 1401 Cleveland is not blighted and that the
Project Area may only include non -blighted property where there have been specific findings
that their inclusion is necessary for redevelopment, which has not been proven in the Report to
City Council.
CRL does not require that every property within a redevelopment project area be blighted. CRL
Section 33321 provides that a project area need not be restricted to buildings, improvements, or
lands which are detrimental or inimical to the public health, safety, or welfare, but may consist of
an area in which such conditions predominate and injuriously affect the entire area. As such, a
nonblighted property may be included in the Project Area if it is found necessary for the effective
redevelopment of the area of which it is a part. Again, the CDC is not adding property to the
Project Area and as such, it does not need to evaluate past findings as to why non -blighted
property was included in the Project Area when it was established in 1995. In fact the Agency
has implemented blight remediation activities since the Project Area was adopted in 1995 and
17
some areas have been improved. However, not all blighting conditions have been addressed
over the last twelve years as documented in the Report to Council for the 2007 Amendment.
3. It is stated by TBM in their objection letter that the Report to City Council does not contain an
explanation as to why eminent domain is necessary to effect change.
Contrary to TBM's statement, all of the following information is provided on Page 4 of the RTC -
The CDC's overall efforts to eliminate blight in the Project Area have been limited, due to the
inability to negotiate land purchase transactions with private property owners. While the CDC
has pursued land acquisition and consolidation through open market transactions and limited
eminent domain actions, the lack of eminent domain in many commercial and industrial
corridors has constrained redevelopment efforts. The CDC is undertaking the 2007 Amendment
in order to expand its ability to assemble sites, thereby facilitating commercial and industrial
redevelopment projects in the Project Area.
4. TBM claims that eminent domain has stagnated properties within the Project Area and that
by removing eminent domain authority, property owners could move forward with development
plans.
Eminent domain is an affective tool for facilitating redevelopment projects and active
redevelopment projects help stimulate private investment which enhances value. Since TBM
does not provide supporting facts or evidence for their claim that eminent domain has stagnated
properties within the Project Area, and because no property owner has proposed alternative
development plans prior to or during the joint public hearing, no further Response is required. In
fact CRL Section 33399 makes provision for property owners to take action to have the Agency
either purchase their property or exempt it from eminent domain authority. Property owners that
believe eminent domain authority is somehow stagnating their property may seek to remove the
potential use of eminent domain authority on their property.
5. TBM asserts that the Report to City Council provides general information without discussing
information required by CRL Section 33367(d)(7) and that families and persons shall not be
displaced prior to the adoption of a relocation plan.
The CDC has previously approved the Relocation of Persons Displaced ("Method of
Relocation"), which was amended on July 18, 1995. The Method of Relocation meets the
requirements of CRL Section 33411and State Law, and is incorporated into the RTC by
reference and is on file with the Secretary of the CDC.
6. TBM feels that there is no evidence or justification for imposing involuntary property seizures
in place of private market transactions.
As mentioned earlier, the CDC's overall efforts to eliminate blighting conditions have been
limited due in part to the inability to negotiate land purchase transactions with private property
owners. As a result, many abandoned and dilapidated properties continue to be neglected 12
years later because the CDC has been unable to forcefully encourage property owners to
redevelop or sell their properties. It is important to note, however, that extending the time -limit
on the CDC's eminent domain authority does not imply that the CDC must use its authority to
condemn property or that it will. With the ability to acquire property through eminent domain, as
a last resort, the CDC will be better able to assemble lots for redevelopment projects which may
greatly further redevelopment efforts in the Project Area.
18
7. The Report to City Council does not provide any information on what projects will be
completed or what projects that have been accomplished in the previous 12 years as a
demonstration of the viability of continuance as related. This comment was made by TBM
directly following an excerpt from CRL Section 33367(13), which in summary says that the time
limitation and limitation on the number of dollars that are allocated to the CDC should be
reasonably related to the proposed projects to be implemented in the project area.
The CDC is not adopting a redevelopment plan, adding property to the Project Area, or
amending provisions of the Redevelopment Plan pertaining to tax increment revenue and as
such, it does not need to reevaluate past findings that substantiated limitations set on the
collection of tax increment revenue which were determined for the Project Area when it was
established in 1995. The 2007 Amendment does not deal with proposed or past projects in
detail or because it is not required by the CRL.
19
LETTER 6 —
THORSNES BARTOLOTTA MCGUIRE, ATTORNEYS AT LAW
(Representing property owners of 1720,2205,2205 1/2 , and 2207 Cleveland, and 2220, 228
Mckinley)
The law firm of Thorsnes Bartolotta McGuire ("TBM") representing the property owners of 1720,
2205, 2205 '/�, and 2207 Cleveland, and 2220, 228 McKinley, located in the Project Area, has
submitted a letter that is almost identical to the letter sent by TBM on behalf of the property
owner of 1401 Cleveland. Responses that were provided in connection with the letter submitted
by TBM on behalf of the property owner at 1401 Cleveland are incorporated herein by reference
and serve in part as a Response to this letter. Since this letter includes additional
comments/concerns which were not expressed in TBM's objection on behalf of 1401 Cleveland,
Responses to said comments/concerns follow:
1. According to TBM, the property owners that he is representing have low lease rates because
the threat of eminent domain forces properties to be leased from month to month rather than
long-term basis and that generally properties in the Project Area have lower assessed values
too as a result of eminent domain.
The Harbor District Redevelopment Project Area ("Harbor District") has satisfied all legal
requirements for blight findings required at the time of its adoption in 1995; this adoption
included eminent domain authority over all properties, except properties occupied for residential
use, in the Harbor District. Since the Harbor District was included in the Project Area, property
values have increased and there is evidence that tenants have been able to obtain long term
leases.
2. TBM claims that the Report to City Council is misleading because the crime statistics
reported in said report groups low crime areas together with high crime areas which include City
Hall, the Police Station, and Fire Department Headquarters. For crime prevention purposes,
TMB indicates that it would be more "productive" to condemn City Hall than "our property".
It is possible that within the Project Area there exist certain areas where a higher concentration
of crimes occur and areas where crimes occur less frequently. However, reporting crime
statistics for the Project Area is not misleading based on presumptions that crimes are not
occurring evenly throughout the Project Area. It seems that TBM is implying that the properties
owned by his clients should not be included in the Project Area because reported crimes occur
less frequently in the area surrounding their properties than they do at other locations within the
Project Area. It is important to note that a high crime rate is only one of several blighting
conditions observed within the Project Area and that blight findings for the Project Area, were
made when each of the seven constituent project areas were originally adopted and then later
reaffirmed by the 1995 RTC. Pursuant to CRL Section 33368, the findings made by the 1995
RTC are considered to be final and conclusive. The Report to the City Council for the 2007
Amendment documents the presence of significant remaining blight and why eminent domain
authority is needed to assist with the elimination of blighting conditions.
3. TBM claims that National City's demographics would indicate that the City's population would
be unable to negotiate with developers or afford legal services to help with negotiations.
It is the CDC's intent to work with existing property owners and tenants to effectuate
redevelopment whenever and wherever possible. In accordance with the CDC adopted Owner
Participation Rules, in the event that the CDC decides to move forward with a redevelopment
20
project, the property owner and business tenants are given the first right to submit proposals to
participate in the redevelopment proposal. In addition, it should be noted, that under the 2007
Amendment all residential uses will be excluded from eminent domain.
4. TBM argues that through tax increment financing funds will be diverted away from the City's
General Fund.
The CDC funds redevelopment through tax increment revenue. When a redevelopment project
area is established, the current value of all property in the project area is added up. This is
called the Base Year value. All taxing agencies who receive revenue from a project area
continue to receive property tax revenue generated from the Base Year value. As property
values in a project area increase above the Base Year value, due to public and private
investment, a redevelopment agency receives a portion of the property tax revenue generated
from the incremental increase in property values.
Through redevelopment the CDC receives 80% of the property tax revenue generated in the
Project Area. If redevelopment was eliminated, the City would receive only 18% of the property
tax revenue generated in the Project Area, with the rest allocated to other non -City
governmental agencies. The 2007 Amendment does not deal with whether or not the CDC's
redevelopment program should continue. If the 2007 Amendment is not approved, the existing
redevelopment program would remain in place until 2040, however, implementation activities
could be stymied if the Agency loses the authority to use eminent domain.
21
LETTER 7 —
APPENDIX VOLUMES I -VI OF COMMENTS RECEIVED FROM INSTITUTE FOR JUSTICE
(ON BEHALF OF CYAC)
On behalf of the Community Youth Athletic Center ("CYAC"), the Institute for Justice has
submitted written objections to the 2007 Amendment in the form of a six volume document.
Volume I is composed of a series of 27 statement letters authored by various board members,
volunteers, and other advocates of CYAC which state their support of CYAC and objection to
the 2007 Amendment. In addition to said statement letters, Volume I contains other documents
such as generic anti -eminent domain publications, public records request letters, newspaper
articles on CYAC, and a list of CYAC Board Members.
Volume II includes a compilation of photos taken in the 2007 Amendment Project Area,
however, there is no context or reference to suggest how to interpret these photos within any of
the volumes submitted by the Institute for Justice. In Casillas Statement No. 2 of Volume III, Mr.
Casillas states that he spent time photographing every property in the Project Area and that his
photographs are included in the CYAC-Appendix. It is presumed, but not confirmed, that these
photos are the photos taken by Mr. Casillas.
Volume III is primarily composed of National City public documents, such as the FY '06= 07
Budgetary Summary and previously adopted CDC resolutions. Volume III also includes a
written objection by Mr. Casillas.
Volume IV includes the1995, 2001, and 2005 Reports to City Council on proposed
Redevelopment Plan amendments and other supporting documents from the 1995 Amendment.
Volume V encompasses additional National City documents, such as the National City General
Plan and National City Downtown Specific Plan. Also included in Volume V are U.S. Census
Bureau data downloads for National City dating from 1997-2004.
Volume VI includes miscellaneous City documents for National City and miscellaneous
documents regarding the Home Depot redevelopment project, Park Village website information,
and tentative decision for Gross & Holmes, LLC v. All Interested Persons. In addition, said
Volume contains 4 statement letters from various individuals.
Written responses to written objections to the 2007 Amendment as provided in Volumes I -VI of
CYAC Objection to Proposed 2007 Amendment to the National City Redevelopment Plan and
Re -Authorization of Eminent Domain ("CYAC Objection) are provided in the following pages.
The documents contained within Volumes I -VI of CYAC Objection, which do not present
comments or objections regarding the 2007 Amendment or are otherwise incorporated into a
written objection by reference, such as newspaper articles about the CYAC or the City's
Budgetary Summary, have no basis for which to form a response and, therefore, were not
responded to. Written responses follow for each of the 32 statement letters objecting to the
2007 Amendment that were included among Volumes I -VI of CYAC Objection.
Overall, in response to the materials submitted on behalf of CYAC, it is the CDC's position that
the proposed. 2007 Amendment does not necessarily pose a specific threat to the continued
operation of the center, as the Amendment does not authorize the acquisition of any property
(by eminent domain or other legal means), nor does it call for the closing or removal of this or
any other business or enterprise in the Project Area. Such allegations are misrepresentations of
22
the facts of the scope of the Amendment, as well as the circumstances involving property
acquisition and relocation should site acquisition be necessary. The language contained in the
proposed 2007 Amendment is part of the record and clearly does not state any specific use of
eminent domain, business closure or any other redevelopment proposal.
Should redevelopment ultimately lead to the potential displacement of this or any other
enterprise or occupant, the CDC is subject to the requirements of the Health and Safety Code
which in part mandate the extension of relocation assistance to affected occupants, and does
not necessarily result in the automatic closure of any such enterprise.
VOLUME I
Response to Nunez Statement No. 1
Nunez Statement No. 1 states Mr. Nunez's support of CYAC and that the City Council of the
City of National City (`City Council") desires to replace the CYAC with an expensive
condominium complex. The letter further requests that CYAC remain in its current building and
that the City Council not approve the time -limit extension on the City's eminent domain
authority.
The 2007 Amendment will extend the CDC's existing authority to acquire property, as a last
resort, through eminent domain to vacant property, and all commercial and industrial zoned
properties in those areas which are currently subject to eminent domain authority within the
Project Area. The 2007 Amendment does not, however, constitute a specific plan authorizing
the acquisition of any property (by eminent domain or other legal means), nor does it call for the
closing or removal of this or any other business or enterprise in the Project Area. Furthermore,
if the City Council approves the 2007 Amendment it does not imply that the CDC will
automatically go forth to acquire businesses in the Project Area. If approved, the 2007
Amendment would allow the CDC to acquire property through eminent domain only:
• After the CDC first elects to pursue a redevelopment proposal;
• After property owner and business tenants are given the first right to submit proposals to
participate in the redevelopment proposal;
• After the CDC determines (during a public meeting) that property owners and business
tenants located within the site specific redevelopment area do not have the capacity to
participate in the redevelopment proposal;
• After MA1 (an appraiser who is a Member Appraisal Institute member) appraisals are
prepared for all properties (by State law, the CDC must value properties based upon the
current fair market value for similarly zoned and developed property in the market area)
that must be purchased in order to facilitate the redevelopment proposal;
• After a relocation plan is prepared and adopted by the City Council (after property and
business owner, tenant and public review) that details how the specific relocation needs
will be accommodated;
• After the CDC approves MAI appraisals and directs staff to submit property purchase
offers and to initiate property acquisition negotiations;
• After appraisals are prepared to identify the leasehold interest value of each tenant's
lease;
• After property acquisition negotiations do not result in a negotiated property purchase
and the CDC determines that it must proceed with property acquisition using eminent
domain;
• After the CDC holds a public hearing to consider the property owner's testimony as to
why their property should not be purchased through eminent domain;
23
• After four of the five CDC governing board members vote to proceed with property
acquisition through eminent domain; and
• After the CDC files a Superior Court action to acquire the property through eminent
domain.
This is a long and expensive process, and historically, the CDC has not used its existing
eminent domain authority to acquire property unless it is implementing a site specific
redevelopment project that is both economically feasible and will benefit the greater Project
Area.
The CDC did approve the Park Village development proposal on February 22, 2005 to build a
condominium complex at the current CYAC property. Such action, which may require that the
CYAC relocate (and not necessarily close), is not related to the 2007 Amendment. It is
important to emphasize, however, that the City has a history of working with the CYAC, which
includes financial assistance in the amount of $210,000. If the City did not value CYAC's
services, or intended to force CYAC out of National City, such assistance would never have
been granted to begin with. In the event that the CYAC is forced to relocate, the CDC will be
required to assist with relocation of the CYAC program to another facility of comparable
amenities in accordance with State Law.
Response to Nuf ez Statement No. 2
Mr. Nunez does not present specified objections or suggestions to the 2007 Amendment. It
appears that Mr. Nunez has written for the specific purpose of stating the steps he took to
acquire information and documentation relevant to the proposed 2007 Amendment
documentation.
1. In summary Mr. Nunez's letter comments on the availability of and difficulties in obtaining the
documentation associated with the 2007 Amendment.
The RTC and all other documentation associated with the 2007 Amendment were made
available to the public at the same time as it was available to the City Council. The Project Area
has been established for a number of years. Issues and conditions used to establish the Project
Area have been documented in previous reports and many of the issues and conditions are still
present. As a point of departure, review of previous reports is a reliable method of identifying
the basis of the blight designation. Under Article 12 Section 33451.5 (c)(2) of the CRL the CDC
is required to provide a description of the remaining blight and is not required to re-establish the
Project Area as blighted. CRL Section 33333.2(a)(4) provides that time limitations for eminent
domain authority may be extended by amendment of the redevelopment plan after the agency
finds, based on substantial evidence, both that significant blight remains within the project area,
and that this blight cannot be eliminated without use of eminent domain. The Report to the City
Council for the 2007 Amendment documents the presence of significant remaining blight and
why eminent domain authority is needed to assist with the elimination of blighting conditions.
Response to Casillas Statement No. 1
In Casillas Statement No. 1 the author supports CYAC's "objection to the renewal of the city's
urban renewal plan and renewal of eminent domain authority". Mr. Casillas does not consider
the Project Area to be blighted but does not provide facts or evidence to contradict the Report to
City Council. He further states that over the last couple of years the CDC and a developer, Jim
Beauchamp, have been threatening to acquire the CYAC property through the power of eminent
domain.
24
The 2007 Amendment and all supporting documents were prepared in accordance with the
California Community Redevelopment Law ("CRL") (Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et.
seq.). The CRL sets the legal standard for determining whether an area is blighted and
describes the conditions that cause blight. According to the CRL, an area is blighted if the area
is; 1)• predominantly urbanized and contains a combination of the conditions set forth in CRL
Section 33031 that it be so prevalent and so substantial that it causes a reduction of, or lack of,
proper utilization of the area to such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical and
economic burden on the community that cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or
alleviated by private enterprise or governmental action, or both, without redevelopment, and 2)
characterized by one or more physical blighting condition and one or more economic blighting
condition.
There are three relevant CRL requirements that deal with redevelopment plan amendments.
1. Section 33354.6 describes the type of amendments that require a long -form plan
amendment including identification of remaining blight and which portions of the project
area are no longer blighted. The 2007 Amendment does NOT include any of these
types of amendments (such as increase in the limit on tax increment or increase in the
bonded indebtedness limit).
2. CRL Section 33333.2(aX4) provides that time limitations for eminent domain authority
may be extended by amendment of the redevelopment plan after the agency finds,
based on substantial evidence, both that significant blight remains within the project
area, and that this blight cannot be eliminated without use of eminent domain. This
section is pertinent to the 2007 Amendment that will extend eminent domain authority.
3. CRL Article 12 commencing with Section 33450 outlines the "short -form" amendment
process that may be used for most plan amendments which is pertinent to the 2007
Amendment in combination with Section 33333.2(a)(4). CRL Section 33451.5 describes
amendments that require a specific Report on Blight to be sent to the Department of
Finance and Department of Housing and Community Development and none of the 2007
Amendments fall within these categories.
Therefore CRL Section 33457.1 (in combination with Section 33333.2(a)(4)) is most relevant to
the level of documentation required for the 2007 Amendment. Section 33457.1 states "To the
extent warranted by a proposed amendment...(1) the ordinance adopting an amendment...shall
contain the findings required by Section 33367, and (2) the reports and information required by
Section 33352 shall be prepared and made available to the public prior to the hearing on such
amendment. The Report to the City Council for the 2007 Amendment documents the presence
of significant remaining blight and why eminent domain authority is needed to assist with the
elimination of blighting conditions.
The Report to the City Council for the 2007 Amendment was made available to the public for
review prior to the City Council and CDC joint public hearing. The RTC serves as the factual
basis for the 2007 Amendment and Section B of the RTC includes a description of the physical
and economic blighting conditions that currently exist in the Project Area.
In preparing the RTC, several data sources were utilized to quantify the existing blighting
conditions of the properties within the Project Area. An important data source was a field survey
of the parcels encompassing the Project Area conducted by Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
("RSG"), consultant to the CDC, in April of 2007. Physical and economic blighting conditions
observed in the project area included deterioration and dilapidation, structural obsolescence,
incompatible adjacent land uses, defective/substandard design and inadequate parcel size.
25
Survey results show that 71% of the Project Area exhibits signs of deterioration and dilapidation
and 55% of the Project Area exhibits signs of substandard or defective design. Furthermore,
information from Grubb and Ellis indicates that retail and office lease rates are generally $0.88
and $0.35-$0.44 per square foot lower than surrounding markets, respectively. For additional
information on the blighting conditions present in the Project Area please see Section B of the
RTC.
With regards to the comments made about condemnation threats, it should be noted that only
the CDC can condemn property for redevelopment purposes. Any other threats over the use of
eminent domain could not have been carried out without formal consent by the CDC Board.
The CDC has retained eminent domain authority in the Project Area, which includes hundreds
of other properties similarly subject to eminent domain, since its adoption in 1995. Moreover, in
the last 12 years the CDC has exercised this authority in only a limited number of
circumstances.
Response to Barragan, Sr. Statement
Barragan, Sr. Statement claims that the CYAC youth program has made tremendous
contributions to the City and concludes that, "After reading the numerous support letters from
National City residents, Educators, Law Enforcement and kids that pursue their dreams in our
center's four walls, it demonstrates that our neighborhoods our not blighted, but rather vibrant
and thriving".
Mr. Barragan claims that the Project Area is not blighted, based on evidence that numerous
letters supporting CYAC were received. This is not sufficient evidence to contradict evidence
presented in the RTC which describes the existing blighting conditions of the Project Area.
Similar to Casillas Statement No. 1, Mr. Barragan, Sr.'s claim that the Project Area is not
blighted neglects to provide any facts or evidence to support his claim. Since Mr. Barragan,
Sr.'s letter of objection would require similar comments and Responses to those provided in
Response to Mr. Casillas, please refer to Response to Casillas Statement No. 1. for additional
information.
Response to Barragan, Jr. Statement
Barragan, Jr. Statement discusses the current CYAC programs available and indicates that
CYAC has had to move twice before and that every time they move kids get lost along the way
and they have to recruit kids again. They do not want to move or close their doors for even a
few months. Furthermore, the letter states that, "The area that National City is calling blighted is
not blighted. It's home to many long-time residents and many thriving businesses, businesses
that in the past have supported our program and made our youth center a reality".
As previously explained in preceding comments, it is the CDC's position that the proposed 2007
Amendment does not necessarily pose a specific threat to the continued operation of the center,
as the Amendment does not authorize the acquisition of any property (by eminent domain or
other legal means), nor does it call for the closing or removal of this or any other business or
enterprise in the Project Area. Such allegations are misrepresentations of the facts of the scope
of the Amendment, as well as the circumstances involving property acquisition and relocation
should site acquisition be necessary. The language contained in the proposed 2007
Amendment is part of the record and clearly does not state any specific use of eminent domain,
business closure or any other redevelopment proposal. Moreover, it is the CDC's intent to work
with existing property owners and tenants to effectuate redevelopment whenever and wherever
possible. In accordance with the CDC adopted Owner Participation Rules, in the event that the
CDC decides to move forward with a redevelopment project, the property owner and business
26
tenants are given the first right to submit proposals to participate in the redevelopment proposal.
As previously noted in Response to Nunez Statement No. 1, the CDC's approval of the Park
Village development proposal was a separate action voted on by the CDC Board and is not
related to the 2007 Amendment.
As in some of the other letters incorporated in CYAC Objections, Mr. Barragan, Jr. does not
provide facts or evidence, warranted by the CRL, to support his claim that the Project Area is
not blighted. Therefore, please refer to Response to Casillas Statement No. 1 which adequately
responds to Mr. Barragan's claim that the Project Area is nonblighted.
Response to Farrow Statement
Farrow Statement voices support for CYAC and the program's objection to the renewal of
eminent domain authority and the city's urban renewal plan. According to Dr. Farrow, the CYAC
building could serve different functions, is located in a nicely kept business area with easy
access to transportation and safe parks, and the adjoining businesses are efficiently running
and neat in appearance; not blighted structures. Furthermore, he suggests that the City has
threatened CYAC with "forcible eviction through eminent domain" and that they, "have
repeatedly told the City that other locations offered would not work".
CRL Section 33030 and 33031 outline the criteria for determining that an area is blighted.
These criteria are based on area -wide findings and do not require a parcel -by -parcel
determination of blight. CRL Section 33321 provides that the Project Area need not be
restricted to buildings, improvements, or lands that are detrimental or inimical to the public
health, safety, or welfare, but many consist of an area in which such conditions predominate
and injuriously affect the entire area. In accordance with the CRL, the RTC describes and
substantiates that blighting conditions are prevalent in the Project Area and prevent or
substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of buildings or lots.
Since Dr. Farrow does not present evidence nor describe instances of condemnation threats
made by the City it is difficult for staff to provide a direct response. With regards to the
comments made about condemnation threats, it should be noted that only the CDC can
condemn property for redevelopment purposes. Any other threats over the use of eminent
domain could not have been carried out without formal consent by the CDC Board. The CDC
has retained eminent domain authority in the Project Area, which includes hundreds of other
properties similarly subject to eminent domain, since its adoption in 1995. Moreover, in the last
12 years the CDC has exercised this authority in only a limited number of circumstances.
It should be noted, however, that the CDC seeks to work with existing property owners and
tenants to effectuate redevelopment whenever and wherever possible. Should the CDC decide
to move forward with a redevelopment project, it is the CDC's policy, as mentioned in the Owner
Participation Rules, that the property owner and business tenants are given the first right to
submit proposals to participate in the redevelopment proposal.
Response to Lopez Statement
Lopez Statement voices support for CYAC and states that City Council has devised a scheme
to terminate CYAC and that the City Council and CDC have broken relocation promises.
The 2007 Amendment does not target the CYAC property located at 1030 National City Blvd, or
any other specific property. The Redevelopment Plan for the 2007 Amendment is not a specific
plan for the redevelopment of the Project Area; instead, it establishes a process and framework
for implementation. Since Mr. Lopez does not indicate how the CDC has broken relocation
27
promises it is impossible to give a direct response. The Redevelopment Plan includes a
description of the City's relocation program, however, the 2007 Amendment does not include
agreements between the CDC and any private party. Therefore, any statement with regards to
broken relocation promises is not relevant to the 2007 Amendment.
Response to Thompson Statement
Thomas Statement voices support for CYAC, stales that closing the CYAC would be a detriment
to the community, and requests that CYAC be permitted to remain in its current location.
The 2007 Amendment is not a specific plan for the redevelopment of the Project Area and does
not include specific plans to acquire the CYAC property. Instead, the 2007 Amendment
provides a framework for the implementation of redevelopment activities in the Project Area. By
adopting the 2007 Amendment,. the CDC will not automatically go forth to acquire real property
in the Project Area and will only do so when implementing a site specific redevelopment project
that is both economically feasible and will benefit the greater Project Area. The
2007Amendment does not authorize the acquisition of any property (by eminent domain or other
legal means), nor does it call for the closing or removal of this or any other business or
enterprise in the Project Area. It should be noted that the CDC's approval of the Park Village
development proposal is a separate action, unrelated to the 2007 Amendment. Therefore,
concerns that the CYAC will be forced to relocate, as a result of the CDC approving the Park
Village development proposal, are not relevant. Such allegations are misrepresentations of the
facts of the scope of the Amendment, as well as the circumstances involving property
acquisition and relocation should site acquisition be necessary.
Response to Rivera Statement
Rivera Statement voices support for CYAC and objects to reauthorizing the CDC's eminent
domain authority because of concerns that the CYAC will be forced to relocate.
The concerns raised by Mr. Rivera are nearly identical to those in Thomas Statement. Please
refer to Response to Thompson Statement for a Response to this objection.
Response to Russell Statement
Russell Statement voices support for CYAC.
The letter is a general statement proclaiming support for the CYAC. Since the letter makes no
objections to the 2007 Amendment no Response is required.
Response to Carrillo Statement
Carrillo Statement voices support for CYAC and states that once the program is removed it will
be unable to start over again due to financial reasons.
It has been previously mentioned that by adopting the 2007 Amendment, the CDC will not
automatically go forth to acquire real property in the Project Area and will only do so when
implementing a site specific redevelopment project that is both economically feasible and will
benefit the greater Project Area. The 2007_Amendment does not authorize the acquisition of
any property (by eminent domain or other legal means), nor does it call for the closing or
removal of this or any other business or enterprise in the Project Area.
It is acknowledged, however, that the CYAC property is currently subject to condemnation and
would continue to be so if the 2007 Amendment is adopted. Should redevelopment ultimately
lead to the potential displacement of this or any other enterprise or occupant, the CDC is subject
28
to the requirements of the Health and Safety Code which in part mandate the extension of
relocation assistance to affected occupants, and does not necessarily result in the automatic
closure of any such enterprise.
Response to Varela Statement
Varela Statement voices support for CYAC and objects, "to the city's urban renewal plan and
renewal of eminent domain authority". The letter urges City Council to, "put an end to these
proceedings" and concludes with a statement that City Council can send a positive message to
the community that they choose children over a condominium complex.
Since Mr. Varela's letter does not provide reasons for objecting, it is unclear as to why he
objects to the 2007 Amendment. However, it appears that Mr.Varela's opposition to the 2007
Amendment stems from his belief that by adopting the 2007 Amendment, the City Council would
be choosing a condominium complex over children. It should be noted, however, that the 2007
Amendment only provides the authority to acquire property by one of many legal means, and
even without eminent domain, the fate of the center cannot be guaranteed. Through adopting
the 2007 Amendment City Council is not authorizing the development or redevelopment of any
specific site. Before any new development can occur within the Project Area, the project
proposal will have to undergo the proper approval process which includes a public hearing.
Response to Diamond Statement
Diamond Statement voices support for CYAC.
The letter is a general statement proclaiming support for the CYAC. Since the letter makes no
objections to the 2007 Amendment no Response is required.
Response to Talaro Statement
Talaro Statement is written on behalf of Turning the Hearts Center, Inc. In addition to voicing
support for CYAC, the letter states that the Turning the Hearts Center, Inc. wishes to continue
partnering with CYAC.
The letter is a general statement proclaiming support for the CYAC. Since the letter makes no
objection to the 2007 Amendment no Response is required.
Response to Silva Statement
Silva Statement affirms that the South Bay Technology Academy desires to collaborate with
CYAC to establish a partnership that will utilize boxing as a delinquency deterrent.
The letter is a general statement proclaiming support for the CYAC and the South Bay
Technology Academy's desire to partner with CYAC. Since the letter makes no objections to
the 2007 Amendment no Response is required.
Response to Flores Statement
Flores Statement is a personal testimony of his experience and involvement with CYAC.
Since the letter makes no objections to the 2007 Amendment no Response is required.
Response to Vargas Statement
Vargas Statement voices support for CYAC and provides a personal testimony.
Since the letter makes no objections to the 2007 Amendment no Response is required.
29
Response to Vallejo Statement
Vallejo Statement voices support of the, " CYAC's objections to the renewal of the city's urban
renewal plan and renewal of eminent domain authority" and states that, " moving the gym will
jeopardize the valuable history that draws the community's youth and family's to the gym".
Furthermore, Mr. Vallejo objects to the "blight designation renewal'; arguing that he does not
believe the area is blighted because it is, "full of youth with hard working families that need a
safe place to go".
The letter does not explicitly reveal why Mr. Vallejo objects to the 2007 Amendment. Based on
additional statements in his letter, it appears that his objection stems from fear that the 2007
Amendment is forcing CYAC to move locations. The 2007 Amendment, however, is not a
specific plan for the redevelopment of the Project Area and does not include specific plans to
acquire the CYAC property. Instead, the 2007 Amendment provides a framework for the
implementation of redevelopment activities in the Project Area. By adopting the 2007
Amendment, the CDC will not automatically go forth to acquire real property in the Project Area
and will only do so when implementing a site specific redevelopment project that is both
economically feasible and will benefit the greater Project Area. It should be noted that the
CDC's approval of the Park Village development proposal is a separate action, unrelated to the
2007 Amendment. Concerns that the CYAC will be forced to relocate, as a result of the CDC
approving the Park Village development proposal, are not relevant.
Response to Juarez Statement
Juarez Statement asks for assistance in keeping CYAC open.
The letter makes no objection to the 2007 Amendment but requests assistance for keeping
CYAC open without specifying what type of assistance is being requested. Without additional
information as to the type of assistance desired it is difficult for staff to respond. It should be
noted, however, that any concerns that CYAC may be closed as a result of the CDC's approval
of the Park Village development proposal are not related to the 2007 Amendment.
Response to Tanner Statement
Tanner statement voices support for CYAC, provides personal testimony, and requests that the
gym's closure be reconsidered.
The 2007 Amendment does not target CYAC or any other property for closure or condemnation.
The 2007 Amendment is not a specific plan and only provides a framework for implementation
of redevelopment activity. Furthermore, should the CDC exercise its power of eminent domain
in the Project Area, State Law would require that the CDC provide business relocation
assistance which includes relocation advisory assistance and payments for actual moving and
related expenses. On July 18, 1995, the CDC approved the Relocation of Persons Displaced,
which details the method or relocation plan when nonprofit local community institutions are to be
temporarily or permanently displaced. A copy of the Relocation of Persons Displaced may be
obtained from the Secretary of the CDC.
Furthermore, if adopted, eminent domain can only be used after existing property owners and
business tenants are offered the first right to participate in the redevelopment proposal, MAI
appraisal are prepared to determine the fair market value of each property, acquisition
negotiations take place, relocation needs are determined, and the CDC determines after a
public hearing and four of the five members vote yes, that the property is needed for a
redevelopment purpose and it must seek acquisition through eminent domain.
30
Response to Sifuentes Statement (Sifuentes Statement was written in Spanish and translated
into English by Noreen Johnson. Our response is therefore provided in Spanish and followed
by an English translation.)
- La declaracion por Sifuentes habla de su apoya para CYAC.
-Sifuentes Statement voices support for CYAC.
- Como la carta no hace objeciones a la Enminda 2007 no se requiere respuesta.
-Since the letter makes no objections to the 2007 Amendment no Response is required.
Response to Jurado Statement
Jurado Statement voices support for CYAC.
Since the letter makes no objections to the 2007 Amendment no Response is required.
VOLUME III
Response to Casillas Statement No. 2 on National City Real Estate Price Trends
In Casillas Statement No. 2 the author states his disbelief that the City of National City is
blighted. In his letter, Mr. Casillas presents a blight definition according to the American
Heritage College Dictionary and makes the statement that residential and commercial property
values have increased substantially over the last six years; he uses research obtained from
Sandicor, a San Diego County Regional Multiple Listing Service, and persona/ experience to
back his belief.
It should first be noted that the RTC, which describes the physical and economic conditions in
the Project Area and serves as the factual basis for the 2007 Amendment, only pertains to the
Project Area. The CDC has not made blight findings on any area outside of the Project Area.
The 2007 version of the CRL is the State of California's adopted doctrine under which the CDC
exists as a public body, both corporate and politic, and it is the CRL that sets the legal standard
for determining whether an area is blighted. Any attempt to prove or disprove blight in an area
is subject to the standards set in CRL Sections 33030 & 33031. Therefore, Mr. Casillas' use of
the American Heritage College Dictionary's definition of blight as, "Something that frustrates
hope or impedes progress and prosperity" is not a valid determinate of what is and is not
blighted.
In his letter, Mr. Casillas argues that real estate prices have not depreciated and nor are they
stagnant. His methodology, however, for arriving at this point is faulty. Based on an increasing
average yearly home price from 2000 through 2006, he concludes that property values within
the Project Area are not stagnant. A review of Mr. Casillas data, however, shows that his data
is based on all properties sold Citywide; it is unclear whether his statements hold true for the
Project Area. In addition, Mr. Casillas arrives at the yearly average sale price by performing an
"apples to oranges" comparison of the multiple listing services. Anyone involved in the real
estate industry, as Mr. Casillas is, knows that comparable sales analysis require comparison of
"like" properties.
Moreover, depreciating or stagnant property values is just one economic condition indicating
blight. According to CRL Section 33030, a blighted area, in addition to being predominantly
31
urbanized, is one that contains one or more physical blighting condition and one or more
economic blighting condition. Therefore, property values do not necessarily need to be
depreciating or stagnant to render a project area as blighted. The RTC, which summarizes the
existing physical and economic conditions within the Project Area, identifies low lease rates,
impaired property values due in part to hazardous wastes, and a high crime rate as the primary
economic blighting conditions noted in the Project Area.
VOLUME VI
Response to Hamaguchi Statement
Hamaguchi Statement voices support for CYAC, states that the authors, "have just become
aware of the plan to destroy and dissolve the National City Youth Organization", and that they
have seen the high-rise hotels and condos around CYAC as well as, the "cutting of programs for
the National City children".
The 2007 Amendment does not target CYAC or any other property for closure or condemnation.
The 2007 Amendment is not a specific plan and only provides a framework for implementation
of redevelopment activity. Statements that the City Council and/or the City are devising a "plan
to destroy and dissolve the National City Youth Organization" are erroneous and furthermore
unsupported by any evidence from Mr. & Mrs. Hamaguchi. It should be noted, however, that
the CDC's approval of the Park Village development proposal is not related to the 2007
Amendment. Therefore, any concern that the CYAC will be forced to relocate as a result of the
CDC's approval of the Park Village development proposal is not relevant to the 2007
Amendment. If the CDC were to move forward with condemning the CYAC property, under
State Law, the CDC would be required to provide business relocation assistance which includes
relocation advisory assistance and payments for actual moving and related expenses. On July
18, 1995, the CDC approved the Relocation of Persons Displaced, which details the method or
relocation plan when nonprofit local community institutions are to be temporarily or permanently
displaced.
Response to Reynoso Statement
Reynoso Statement voices support for the CYAC program and states opposition to the
redevelopment plan; acknowledging that redevelopment would bring financial rewards to the
City, but it would serve detrimental to the development of the youth participating at CYAC.
Ms. Reynoso is opposed to the redevelopment plan because, to her, the Redevelopment Plan
will be harmful to youth development. Since the letter does not provide supporting evidence of
Ms. Reynoso's belief that the Redevelopment Plan will be a detriment to the City's youth, nor
does it suggest any other reason for believing this, staff is unable to respond.
Response to Alba Statement
Alba Statement voices support for CYAC and opposition to the National City Redevelopment
Plan because it would affect CYAC.
Mr. Alba is opposed to the Redevelopment Plan because it would affect the CYAC. In his letter,
Mr. Alba does not explain why the Redevelopment Plan would affect CYAC and he does not
provide other concerns with regards to the 2007 Amendment, therefore, it is difficult for staff to
respond,
32
It should be noted, however, that the 2007 Amendment is not a specific plan; instead it provides
a framework for implementation of redevelopment activities. Although the CDC approved the
Park Village development proposal on February 22, 2005 to build a condominium complex at
the current CYAC property, said action is not related to the 2007 Amendment.
Response to Decker Statement
Decker Statements says that it is wonderful to have CYAC and that it keeps children out of
trouble.
Since the letter is general in nature and does not make any objections to the 2007 Amendment
no response is required.
33
LETTER 8 — •
COMMENTS FROM SUZANNE AND ROBERT C. LEIF (Properties located at 1720, 2205,
22051/2, 2207 Cleveland and 2220, 2228 McKinley)
Mr. and Ms. Leif owns property located at 1720 Cleveland Avenue and is filing an objection to
the proposed 2007 Amendment. They present specified objections or suggestions to the 2007
Amendment. They have also incorporated substantiating documents to support objections.
They have previously had property condemned using eminent domain and feel it was taken
because the City had an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement with another party.
1. Ms. Leif's letter comments on the misconception that her property located at 1720 Cleveland
Avenue has been cited for code violations related to outdoor storage of lumber. She states that
they have never been cited for code violations and their tenants repair hydraulic systems and
maintain and immaculate yard.
The Report to Council for the 2007 Amendment is part of the record and does not include
information that specifically identifies 1720 Cleveland as having a code violation. Code violation
information included in the Report to Council is a list of code violations observed by City staff in
the commercial and industrial corridors of the properties affected by the 2007 Amendment.
Pictures were taken of properties in the 2007 Amendment Area to show examples of blighting
conditions including outdoor storage. A picture of this property was not included in RTC.
2. Ms. Leif's letter comments on the fact that the City entered into an exclusive Negotiation
Agreement with Pacific Steel and Home Depot and subsequently solicited their interest in
participating in the development. They question how the CDC could legally accept participation
by another entity if the CDC is committed to an ENA.
The Exclusive Negotiation Agreement is a separate action from the proposed 2007 Amendment.
The 2007 Amendment , if adopted, would only extend the authority for the CDC to use eminent
domain. The 2007 Amendment does not approve any specific acquisition of property, and does
not affect the CDC's existing or future use of an Exclusive Negotiation Agreement. The 2007
Amendment does not approve any specific property for development or any other
redevelopment proposal. Questions about existing or future Exclusive Negotiation Agreements
should be separately addressed to the CDC.
3. Mr. Leif's letter comments on the lack of notification and availability of the documentation
associated with the 2007 Amendment. He claims that he and his family were not notified nor
provided documentation relating to the proposed 2007 Amendment.
The RTC and all other documentation associated with the 2007 Amendment were made
available to the public at the same time as it was available to the City Council. In compliance
with Section 33452 of the California Community Redevelopment Law, notices of the proposed
2007 Amendment were sent to last known assesses of each property as it appears on the
County of San Diego Equalized Assessment Roll. Notices were mailed by first class mail and
were also published in the San Diego Union -Tribune and the National City Star News for three
consecutive weeks prior to the joint public hearing.
4. Mr. Leif states that the proposed 2007 Amendment Report to Council is "worthless" because
it was not compared to data from "control areas" such as the "Old" part of La Jolla or Mission
Beach. Furthermore, he states that only lease rates were compared to control areas and were
not adjusted for ethnic composition.
34
Chula Vista is the nearest neighboring city to National City and it is the opinion of RSG that
adjoining cities are more comparable than cities more than 10 miles away. Comparison to
areas such as La Jolla and Mission Beach are more than 10 miles away and generally would
have higher property values and lease rates. Use of these as comparable areas would likely
cause many reviewers to criticize the analysis for purposefully selecting as comparable areas
locations where values were known to be higher and therefore not similar to National City.
Wither regard to not making adjustment for ethnic composition, blighting conditions are typically
not analyzed based upon ethnic data. Ethnicity is not a factor when identifying physical and
economic blight accordingly to CRL.
5. Mr. Leif states that the City is rewarding the Pacific Steel Incorporation (PSI) by allowing
them to participate in a redevelopment project. He also states that PSI is under court order to
cleanup their site and partnership with the City allows them to slow this process down and be
relieved of some of their cleanup responsibilities. He feels that if they were required to cleanup
their site without the help of the City it would speed up the process and eliminate the need for
eminent domain use. He states that the neighboring properties are being held guilty by
association with PSI.
The Exclusive Negotiation Agreement between the City and Home Depot is a separate
unrelated action from the proposed 2007 Amendment. Mr. Leif's comment that he feels the site
would be cleaned up more quickly if the CDC was not involved, is no founded in fact. In fact, as
the Pacific Steel Incorporation (PSI) Project Status Update report dated 1/11/07 indicates,
unless the CDC staff can persuade the DTSC to used their new EOA for RDAs process (which
will speed up the process), it may take in excess of 12 years for the site to be cleaned up. Thus
this existing blight in the Project Area would continue for a longer period of time unless
redevelopment tools can be utilized.
6. Mr. Leif states that the CDC is using the presence of pollution as an excuse to use eminent
domain and transfer land from one private party to another. He feels that the real reason is to
promote economic development.
Section 33031 of the California Community Redevelopment Law defines a condition of
economic blight as impaired property values due to hazardous waste on property where an
agency may be eligible to use its authority as specified under the Polanco Redevelopment Act.
The Polanco Redevelopment Act allows an agency to take any actions determined necessary to
and that are consistent with state and federal laws to remedy or remove hazardous waste.
Property owners can use their own means to clean up hazardous materials or, if within a
redevelopment project area, may partner with the Agency to effectuate clean-up. The CDC
seeks to promote economic development and to the extent that property owners do no privately
clean up hazardous waste, the CDC is interested in working with owners and developers who
are willing to work with the CDC.
35
LETTER 9 -
COMMENTS FROM TED GODSHALK (Property located at 2142 Cleveland Avenue)
Mr. Godshalk owns property located at 2142 Cleveland Avenue.
1. Mr. Godshalk feels that property owner should be allowed to reinvest in their own properties
and expand their business without the interference by the CDC. He doesn't believe that public
funds should be diverted from public services to private development. He also adopts the
objections of all those submitting them even if they are withdrawn.
The CDC encourages all property owners to reinvest in their property, expand their business
and to the extent property owners are willing to undertake such activity, the CDC does not
interfere with such activity. Use of tax increment to carry out redevelopment is frequently the
only way to fund the extraordinary cost of clean-up, replacement of outdated public
infrastructure, demolition of dilapidated buildings, and other activities typically associated with
reuse of older properties.
2. Mr. Godshalk states that the proposed 2007 Amendment Area is not blighted.
The proposed 2007 Amendment required substantiation of both physical and economic blighting
conditions. The Report to Council on the proposed 2007 Amendment details the remaining
blighting conditions found in the Project Area.
36
LETTER 10- COMMENTS FROM TONY BEDFORD
Comments were submitted through Suzanne Leif and it is unclear what his comments are. We
received page 15 of an unspecified document with Mr. Bedford's name on it. No comments
were identifiable on the document.
37
LETTER 11-
STEPHANIE LEIF (Property owner of 4052 Gros Ventre Ave, San Diego, CA 92117)
1. The properties referenced in the Exclusive Negotiation Agreement ("ENA') must be declared
blighted in order for the ENA to hold; however, before the Report to City Council was even
drafted, the CDC adopted Resolution No. 2006-244 at their meeting of November 21, 2006. Ms.
Leif claims that if the Report to City Council were not blighted than the CDC would not have the
power to enforce the ENA. Furthermore, she states that the CDC would receive direct financial
benefit if these properties were found to be blighted and that "the CDC planned redevelopment
based on the blight designation even though there is no blight on the parcels not occupied by
PSI."
According to Ms. Leif, of the parcels in the following list, only those parcels owned by PSI are
blighted and "do have a problem":
-559-051-09 -559-076-02
- 559-051-11 -559-076-09
- 559-051-12 -559-076-10
- 559-056-03 -559-076-11
- 559-071-04 -559-076-04
- 559-076-01 -559-076-15
Furthermore, she contends that these parcels are designated blighted so that the CDC "can use
the power of eminent domain in order to achieve the Redevelopment Plan as outlined in the
ENA".
Based on discussion with city staff this statement is directed towards an Exclusive Negotiating
Agreement and does not pertain, and is not a specified objection to the 2007 Amendment. As
such no response is required.
38
LETTER 12-
CHUCH DICKERHOFF (Property owner of 1513 Roosevelt Avenue)
1. Mr. Dickerhoff indicates that the City shall not take private property
subsequently turn it over to developers. And that this language
resolution.
This letter does not appear to make any specified objections to the
response is required.
by eminent domain and
should be adopted by
2007 Amendment. No
39
LETTER 13-
RUTAN & TUCKER, LLP- ATTORNEYS AT LAW
(Representing property owner of 1145 National City Boulevard)
Rutan & Tucker's ("R&T") letter on behalf of the property owner at 1145 National City Boulevard
was dated July 3, 2007 (though it shows July 2, 2007 on the second page) and received by the
City Clerk on July 3, 2007 at 3:33 pm. The letter represents that their client objects to the
proposed 2007 Amendment and approval of the negative declaration. Pursuant to the notice of
public hearing, any written objections to the 2007 Amendment were due not later than the hour
set for the joint public hearing, which occurred on June 19, 2007, and closed that same
evening. Because the R&T objection to the 2007 Amendment was received 14 days after the
published deadline for objections, no response is necessary. However, in that the objection
largely "incorporates by reference any and all comments submitted by any public or private
entity...", staff refers to these objections elsewhere in this Response.
With respect to the Negative Declaration objection, staff notes that the public review period on
the negative declaration closed on June 28, 2007, 20 days following the date the notice of intent
published in San Diego Union Tribune on June 8, 2007, and that the July 3, 2007
correspondence came in after this review period concluded. Further, the R&T letter states that
"the negative declaration has failed to adequately address all of the environmental impacts
attendant to the redevelopment plan..." but provides no further detail to substantiate this
position.
40
•
Structural Obsolescence \
Di,' Or
Su: DIEGC
.111 uu^_ 11I1Inuu+11117. uuYA1 v...11111111111 II`,I' ' k
=111Ii 1{1�111 G. 61111l•ililill,i IIIIRIIII IIII+III1I171, .�,,, m.
—. outer • 711 Itit NI 1"1 "'1I�_ta
...mill R �.e, =
raw ..—�uu■pu uuuull,ll =1� .
n runul..-
IIIIILl1111!r
. 11111■■Ilil--
:I11111. 1I11_
..... llu111i:
— r ... 1 Plaza olva
.{e t Ill is .� c
S al �I +p ,. r4 a z.•it ��.ii .,,,, 1u
f Y/ x �.. L- ir.vu—
I
a - ■
a Ile
.1
�n. • ii.lit . �dil i. „1=
1 ' 1 11
_t�rr� 1�111.�. �r•t � _ill!- ��li'
f��1� ...I I!IE .I� �I1-.. �i.r�qrq••��•yy� IL '. e.l ��=�
lla��;I• lid IIl.i1 `
l.ie r.a I 11 i„:
1
-i� r:-
30th St/Sweetwater
is
National City Redevelopment Project
Project Area 6o.lnCary 70;;7,°.I n1,^.1L11cr•;
IMurinp.l! Bou'lcary _:„'-��.� tiV w.b irsl OL:.cc,ce.'ce
C• 1.11.4 VISTA
r�u 1I.lt .1
1n. pu■ rr
Source: National City P!unn g
tricoittpattate
Adjacent Uses,
�1z
C. TY o-
SA.N JaG(.
tl J V
Fiational City Redevelopment Project
QProject Area Boundary ICE 200/ A:nendment
Munidpa: Boundary ` Inoorn atlple Adlacen; Ilses
•v-�. :'r
'f ., .—/III„ ... .,:zIIIIIUnil 1 L•u11'/It.
It_C. i1.11L.141111.i; 11ann)iullnu111 L •d'�,`l
.Irma Il II ea, qu'.61 -- �I..
® Ili tilt-l/III InIIIIIIq �
1I 1`Illil ll1.II _-_
111 ll l;111 1. == =.
- Illllll llt`I -
.IittIL1L11I1E
r LII.IIII IL71
III/ _-L�11�• .L.i 1�11111 ..I1M
t:I-111_;1•III'.I111 iuul.l► ■1111/1 `I
111 I�L� III• E�=11-111.
r.111.=�11..- r11111-a
il
11111'—"71n—I
- III .1IL111
^11
I IIIImI11
•jl$77z _L7l}l� 1
f
'j— 1 —III
mo' 'III Ili
, II Ill.
p�._ Ib:. qPr dll.i
I - MP.st.m-.
.-ii.
inn'
III
30th St/Sweetwater
UIIJLA'JIJIA
Sourcu: IVJ(iunDI Griy Planning
.r:
Deterioration &
Dilapidation
Westside Areas
it
144•Miiiincz.m.....-.—ar.
//:
CI I Y 0'
5:AN DIECO
;:,, i r r_ •-_.'-ii:_r_:.- IN Alilir0111r147---
• -
11 ,. imall.111111. .•....11111111111 ill “Li Pffi..
ll III II NE T.' .1.11i911111111r. , iiiiiiiii I MI1111111 .....;70.,
bon „„....
'III 1111 lill ...
...fititi IL it .....,, .. =-- •=7=k,
..4.• -firoviiiiii.-I:: LY•lit,
I s. „„,,. ,„6..„:„ ..3.„„„.1,11!:11,11ti, W. Eh.
am 'Norm MN ' ==..=:—.
- '''' " ffil '1= -.mil! Li:!!'::1:11: --== •=..
. III
OM 111
a ,,,,:,,-,. loom Egg ,, ..!E ..."1"•2
:11111 11111.1E ;II !i:t.
—.. L.
I". 111119M NUE M
.-:
•, witi II En r,;; RH
, „„
MID OS El
MR
We
111111eill!
, ..__
...„,
14,157r,-;
ilirrzl
lr ulltpli En ,,iii.l.' FAT! :- ; i
'
IMII ,E1,71mir
..,„, ,, .. .„,
......... temft-4 ,..
30th St./Sweetwater _ 1!*,...44'
MI NI=
. WM Pr
Palm Ave
8th Street Corridor
!III MIA
National City Redevelopment Project
.1.L.,G,Cnisg= =WS
Project Area Boundary FIE 200 / Awimidment
Munict pa: Bouncaiy Detertoral.:11 Dilapidation
C. IJLA VISIA
Source. National Gil)/ Planning
Detective tlesigA
Without Parking-
CIT, OF
SAN DIE(.,
#11 ,,"1--,7,--,
44.io.L
iE.F-L-..,ftee.
• ,.." -.- -,,,
I eli1:::=E4..Q. '•
.,--111- INN Ali
.,-v-"-iirairiviq:lho....ti--kk.
" ...i. 1.11i kTalell•ij,
,1.14e*, ..iimiviiiiii,g.•21 41j.i..14_.74.1,
.11
IN iiiimIlli liffiliiii, .....-
away% j.,....... =,_ IIII I_ ,„„..i.v, ,--
ultil... '.1'=.-- ••••-,
Ea 111111.1111PIE
.A$.111111.1.!
Palm Ava
,I,I!.-:;;-,..1:"..ilti;;P:Nzt,Ii[iie7,-",x.i7:F. ,••...I, it , ...,, ... da.
- — !' 7 '.1' Na!! mill- 212-0!•--qvit•-... t.
‘ .11. .1.11111; =•0771111.041117.: jilt. luileil,11111.
4. o "room c WEVIlltile pip11111r- ... 2 .. lirmii
;11:Viiiii gill
410
...via..
• Tiii,ii 1 7;11
•
•=7-1,1:71114
..-r-- -,itlii - —1"—
.''•:'''..4'• L". •-•'iIIP.1I:I,I-.-!,
M_5, — 1.
'
l• *i:!il. : ' -.- :1:.'I'm-m.- •.•mi•••-.I i :'. ir.. . iI' ...... ...7..•..
2:-- r..-
12
, s i-[l.
•--14-17-i ;
A .
.LIII.4. It
1
' Ir.71-• :.;-'; „,
:17.• , • ,
iii li:
•rir
"
,
11 ___:7 III g 17
..
Nil•7 - --
MR 1.-,...,-
i. , . Tv 7.
t.
Ira 41 17
Hationai City Redevetlopettent Project
CJAVIStp,
Pmject Area Boundary ME 2007 Arnnnd:rent
"=n1
Municapal Boundary 71 Defurin, 1),•,;:on W,thn,ut arking
Source- National City Planning
10,
National City
Environmental Sites By Sy
Lead Agency
•
•
•
San Diego County
Dept. Environmental
Health
California Regional Water
Duality Control Board
California Dept of Toxic
Substances Control
i MM own .varvnM M morn
n-vwa r.•
City of National City, California
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
MEETING DATE - July 12, 2007 AGENDA ITEM NO 3
(ITEM TITLE
(ITEM
resolution of the Community Development Commission approving the
proposed 2007 Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the National City
Redevelopment Project.
PREPARED BY rR DEPARTMENT
Patricia Beard, Redevelopment Manager Community Development Commission
text 47.551
EXPLANATION The Community Development Commission ("CDC") has prepared an
amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the National City Redevelopment Project ("2007
Amendment") in accordance with Califomia Community Redevelopment Law ("CRL") (Health
and Safety Code Sections 33000 et. sea.). As proposed, the 2007 Amendment would: 1)
extend the CDC's authority to acquire property through eminent domain for certain commercial
and industrial zoned properties until 2019, 2) change the current exclusion of eminent domain
on single-family homes to include all lawful residential land uses, 3) modify the redevelopment
plan text as it pertains to redevelopment actions and permitted land uses in the Transportation
Center, and 4) revise the Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvement Projects exhibit. The
City Council and the CDC received testimony for and against the 2007 Amendment at a joint
public hearing held on June 19, 2007. In accordance with CRL Section 33363, the CDC
responded in writing to all written objections received on the 2007 Amendment on or before the
June 19 hearing, and City Council has considered and adopted the CDC's written responses.
CDC staff is now recommending that the CDC adopt the attached resolution. By adopting the
attached resolution, the CDC is approving the 2007 Amendment and recommending to the City
Council that they adopt an ordinance, thus approving the 2007 Amendment.
Environmental Review
A negative declaration was prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act
and aooroved by both the City Council and the CDC on July 10. 2007.
Financial Statement
Staffs recommendation will have no immediate or direct fiscal impact. However, implementation of
the 2007 Amendment may result in future CDC expenditures.
J
STAFF RECOMMENDATIONS Staff was requested to advise the Board on options for reducing
the duration of the Amendment. The duration of the Amendment up to a maximum of 12 years,
if approved, is at the sole discretion of the Board. Staff recommends the Board provide direction.
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION Not applicable.
ATTACHMENTS
1. Redevelopment Plan for the 2007 Amendment as
Exhibit A to the resolution
Resolution No.
A-200 (9/80)
RESOLUTION NO. 2007 -- 167
RESOLUTION OF THE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY APPROVING
THE PROPOSED 2007 AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
WHEREAS, the Community Development Commission of the City of National
City ("CDC"), is a combined housing authority and redevelopment agency (a public body,
corporate and politic) duly created, established and authorized to transact business and
exercise its powers, all under and pursuant to the Community Redevelopment Law (Part 1 of
Division 24,.commencing with Section 33000, et. seq. of the Health and Safety Code of the
State of California); and
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of National City ("City Council") has
adopted and subsequently amended the Redevelopment Plan for the National City
Redevelopment Project ("Redevelopment Plan"), on November 18, 1969, by Ordinance No.
1233; on June 24, 1975, by Ordinance No. 1471; on April 13, 1976, by Ordinance No. 1505; on
December 13, 1977, by Ordinance No. 1610, and subsequently amended on December 1,
1981, by Ordinance No. 1762; on May 22, 1984, by Ordinance No. 1821; on April 16, 1985, by
Ordinance No. 1851; on June 18, 1991, by Ordinance No. 91-2013; on June 18, 1995 by
Ordinance No. 95-2095; and on June 19, 2001, by Ordinance No. 2001-2187, incorporated
herein by reference, (the "Previous Ordinances"), and has designated the Redevelopment Plan
as the official redevelopment plan for the National City Redevelopment Project ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Redevelopment Plan, as adopted and amended, granted the
CDC the authority to acquire certain property within the National City Redevelopment Project
Area ("Project Area") through eminent domain; and
WHEREAS, on July 18, 1995, the City Council adopted Ordinance No. 95-2095,
pursuant to which the City Council approved and adopted the Redevelopment Plan for the
National City Redevelopment Project; said Plan provides that no eminent domain proceeding to
acquire property within the Project Area shall be commenced after twelve (12) years from the
date of adoption by Ordinance No. 95.2095; and
WHEREAS, CDC staff and consultants have determined that blighting conditions
still remain in the Project Area and that the use of eminent domain is necessary to implement
future Redevelopment Plan projects and programs; and
WHEREAS, the CDC has undertaken an amendment to the Redevelopment Plan
that will extend the CDC's authority to acquire property through eminent domain for certain
commercial and industrial zoned properties until 2019, change the current exclusion of eminent
domain on single-family homes to include all lawful residential land uses, modify the
redevelopment plan text as it pertains to redevelopment actions and permitted land uses in the
Transportation Center, and revise the Public Facilities and Infrastructure Improvement Projects
exhibit ("2007 Amendment"), said 2007 Amendment will not modify the boundaries of the
Project Area; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Resolution No. 2007-163, adopted on July 10, 2007, the
City Council approved the Negative Declaration for the 2007 Amendment to the National City
Redevelopment Plan. A copy of said Negative Declaration is on file in the office of the City
Clerk, and incorporated herein by reference.
Resolution No. 2007 — 167
July 12, 2007
Page 2
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Community Development
Commission of the City of National City hereby finds and determines that each of the above
recitals is true and correct, and the CDC hereby approves the 2007 Amendment, as attached
hereto and incorporated herein by reference, and recommends that the City Council adopt the
2007 Amendment, attached hereto as Exhibit "A".
PASSED and ADOPTED this 12th day of July 2007.
Ron Morrison, Chairman
ATTEST:
Brad Raulston, Secretary
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
George H. Eiser, I11
Legal Counsel
EXHIBIT "A"
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE
NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Prepared:
May 8, 1995
Adopted:
July 18, 1995
Amended:
December 1, 1981
May 22, 1984
April 16, 1985
June 18, 1991
July 18, 1995
June 19, 2001
July ___, 2007
Prepared for:
Community Development Commission
of the City of National City
140 E. 12th Street, Suite B
National City, California 91950-3312
619-336-4250
Prepared by:
Rosenow Spevacck Group, Inc.
540 North Golden Circle, Suite 305
Santa Ana, California 92705
714/541-4585
619/967-6462
cNdoaa ants:ual Wlu µs ddawUocal sydid.sVemporuy imcuuct Idcsblk&nllimn doe Adopted 7/18/95
l
SECTION I. (100) INTRODUCTION 1
A. (101) General 1
SECTION II. (200) BACKGROUND 2
SECTION III. (300) GENERAL DEFINITIONS 2
SECTION IV. (400) PROJECT AREA BOUNDARIES 4
SECTION V. (500) REDEVELOPMENT PLAN GOALS 4
SECTION VI. (600) REDEVELOPMENT ACTIONS 5
A. (601) General 5
B. (602) Property Acquisition 7
C. (605) Participation by Owners and Persons Engaged in Business 8
D. (609) Implementing Rules 9
E. (610) Cooperation with Public Bodies 10
F. (611) Property Management 10
G. (612) Payments to Taxing Agencies 10
H. (613) Relocation of Persons Displaced by a Project 11
I. (616) Demolition, Clearance, Public Improvements, Site Preparation and Removal 11
J. (621) Rehabilitation, Moving of Structures by the CDC and Seismic Repairs 13
K. (625) Property Disposition and Development 14
L. (630) Provision for Low and Moderate Income Housing 16
SECTION VII. (700) USES PERMITTED IN THE PROJECT AREA 20
A. (701) Map and Uses Permitted 20
B. (702) Major Land Use Designations (as now provided in the General Plan) 20
C. (703) "Transportation Center 21
D. (704) Public Uses 22
E. (707) Conforming Properties -)2
F. (708) Nonconforming Uses 23
G. (709) Interim Uses 23
H. (710) General Controls and Limitations 23
I. (720) Design for Development 25
J. (721) Building Permits 26
SECTION VIII. (800) METHODS FOR FINANCING TIIE PROJECT 26
A. (801) General Description of the Proposed Financing Methods 26
B. (802) Tax Increment Revenue 27
C. (803) CDC Bonds 33
D. (804) Other Loans and Grants 34
cAdneu ens and srttmgOddnvisLLxAl vningeneu posy intern. fi1s10&6rNrdp6n doc
Adopted 7/1 g/95
E. (805) Rehabilitation Loans, Grants, and Rebates 34
SECTION IX. (900) ACTIONS BY THE CITY 34
SECTION X. (1000) ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT 35
SECTION XI. (1100) DURATION OF THIS PLAN 35
SECTION XII. (1200) PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT 36
EXHIBIT A 37
EXHHBIT B 38
EXIIIBIT C 39
EXHIBIT D 40
c Vdo:aucm+ aW wring•MNa.•Vo.al 11,16illgxVa, my interact ti1t4tlk6eVd tan doe
Adopted 7/18/95
3
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE
NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
SECTION I. (100) INTRODUCTION
A. (101) General
This is the Redevelopment Plan for the National City Redevelopment Project as amended
("Plan"), located in the City of National City, County of San Diego, State of California.
It consists of the text (Sections 100 through 1100), the Project Area Map of
Redevelopment Project Area No. 1 ("Project Area") (Exhibit A), the legal description of
the Project Area boundaries (Exhibit B), a listing of the proposed public facilities and
infrastructure improvement projects (Exhibit C), and a map of the properties potentially
subject to acquisition by eminent domain (Exhibit D).
This Plan has been prepared by the Community Development Commission (the "CDC")
pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code
Section 33000, et seq.), the California Constitution and all applicable laws and
ordinances. It does not present a specific plan for the redevelopment, rehabilitation and
revitalization of any area within the Project Area; instead, it establishes a process and
framework for implementation. This Plan is based upon the Preliminary Plan formulated
and adopted by the National City Planning Commission and the CDC on March 7, 1994
and March 15, 1994, respectively.
This Plan supersedes, by amendment and restatement, the Redevelopment Plan for the
National City Downtown Redevelopment Project adopted by Ordinance No. 1762 on
December 1, 1981, as amended by Ordinance No. 1821 adopted on May 22, 1984,
Ordinance No. 1851 adopted on April 16, 1985, mil -Ordinance No. 91-2013 adopted on
June 18, 1991, Ordinance No. 95-2095 adopted on July 18, 1995, and Ordinance No.
2187 adopted on June 19, 2001. This Plan was amended again by Ordinance No.
adopted on July , 2007. This Plan will amend the preexisting Redevelopment Plan as
follows:
• extend the CDC's existing eminent domain atheurity-authority by 12 years in those
areas currently subject to eminent domain;
• add a provision for the CDC to pay all or part of the value of the land and the cost of
the installation and construction of any publicly owned building, facility, structure, or
other improvement within or without the Project Area pursuant to Health and Safety
Code Section 33445;
• modify Section VII (c), thus allowing for used auto and truck sales when part of a new
vehicle dealership and located on land within the Transportation Center district.
docunrms sul seuiugAddav&Jncel snrmgs temporal), laraucl ldesba6eNirlaa.dne 1
Adopted 7/18/95
SECTION II. (200) BACKGROUND
The preexisting National City Downtown Redevelopment Project was comprised of seven
separate project areas. Between 1969 and 1978, the City Council of the City of National City
("City Council") adopted four redevelopment projects: the E.J. Christman Business and
industrial Park Redevelopment Project by Ordinance No. 1233 on November 18, 1969, the South
Bay Town and Country Redevelopment Project by Ordinance No. 1471 on June 24, 1975, the
Center City Redevelopment Project by Ordinance No. 1505 on April 13, 1976, and the E.J.
Christman Business and Industrial Park Redevelopment Project Amendment No. 2 by Ordinance
No. 1610 on December 13, 1977. On December 1, 1981, the City Council adopted the National
City Downtown Redevelopment Project by Ordinance No. 1762, merging the four preexisting
redevelopment projects and incorporating additional properties to establish a 2,080-acre merged
project area. The merged National City Downtown Redevelopment Project has been amended
three times since its adoption: Amendment No. 1 adopted on May 22, 1984 by Ordinance No.
1821, Amendment No. 2 adopted on April 16, 1985 by Ordinance No. 1851, and Amendment
No. 3 adopted on June 18, 1991 by Ordinance No. 91-2013, Amendment No. 4 adopted on July
18, 1995 by Ordinance No. 95-2095, and Amendment No. 5 adopted on June 19, 2001 by
Ordinance No. 2187. Of these amendments, only Amendment No. 2 increased the size of the
project arca, adding approximately three acres, and enlarging the merged National City
Downtown Redevelopment Project Area to approximately 2,083 acres.
SECTION III. (300) GENERAL DEFINITIONS
The following definitions will be used generally in the context of this Plan unless otherwise
specified herein:
A. "Added Area" means the territories included in the Project Area by Ordinance No.
95-2095 adopted by the City Council on July 18, 1995, as depicted on Exhibit A
and described in Exhibit B.
B. "Annual Work Program" means that portion of the CDC's annual budget that sets
forth programs and goals to be accomplished by the CDC during the fiscal year.
C. "CDC" means the Community Development Commission of the City of National
City, California.
D. "Center City Area" means the territories originally included in the Center City
Redevelopment Project Area by Ordinance No. 1505 adopted by the City Council
on April 13, 1976, and subsequently merged into the Existing Area.
E. "City" means the City of National City, California.
F. "City Council" means the legislative body of the City.
c:W,x xmvs and scninµs,ddasnVuu1 serting<4ngamry mallet liksbk&4dplan dn-
2
Adopted 7/18/95
5
G. "County" means the County of San Diego, California.
II. "Disposition and Development Agreement" means an agreement between a
developer and the CDC that sets forth terms and conditions for improvement and
redevelopment.
I. "Downtown Original Area" means the territories originally added to the Existing
Area by Ordinance No. 1762 adopted by the City Council on December 1, 1981.
J. "Downtown 1985 Amendment Area" means the territories originally added to the
Existing Area by Ordinance No. 1851 adopted by the City Council on April 16,
1985.
K. "E.J. Christman I Area" means the territories originally included in the E.J.
Christman Business and Industrial Park Redevelopment Project Area by
Ordinance No. 1233 adopted by the City Council on November 18, 1969, and
subsequently merged into the Existing Area.
L. "E.J. Christman2 Area" means the tcnitories originally included in the E.J.
Christman Business and Industrial Park Redevelopment Project Area Amendment
No. 2 by Ordinance No. 1610 adopted by the City Council on December 13, 1977,
and subsequently merged into the Existing Area.
M. "Existing Area" means the merged National City Redevelopment Project Area
originally formulated by Ordinance No. 1762 adopted by the City Council on
December I, 1981, and subsequently amended by Ordinance No. 1821 on May 22,
1984, Ordinance No. 1851 on April 16, 1985, and Ordinance No. 91-2013 on June
18, 1991, as depicted on Exhibit A.
N. "General Plan" means the City's General Plan, a comprehensive and Tong -term
General Plan for the physical development of the City as provided for in Section
65300 of the California Government Code.
O. "Map" means the Map of the Project Arca attached hereto as Exhibit A.
P. "Method of Relocation" means the methods or plans adopted by the CDC
pursuant to Sections 33352(0 and 33411 of the Redevelopment Law for the
relocation of families, persons and businesses to be temporarily or permanently
displaced by actions of the CDC.
Q. "2007 Ordinance" means City Council Ordinance No. adopted on July
2007 amending this Plan.
c45nasnanu and scuwga4ldavuVbcal sertings4rmry.rary immn« filestA100.1dplmikx 3 Adopted 7/ 18/95
Q. "Owner Participation Agreement" means an agreement between the CDC and a
property owner or tenant which sets forth terms and conditions for improvement
and redevelopment.
RS. "Person" means an individual(s), or any public or private entities.
ST. "Plan" means the redevelopment plan for the Project as amended.
TU. "Project" means the National City Redevelopment Project.
E3V. "Project Area" means the National City Redevelopment Project Area, inclusive of
the Existing Arca and Added Area, which is the territory this Plan applies to, as
shown on Exhibit A.
¥W. "Redevelopment Law" means the California Community Redevelopment Law
(Health and Safety Code, Sections 33000, et sue.) as it now exists or may be
hereafter amended.
WX. "South Bay Town and Country Area" means the territories originally included in
the South Bay Town and Country Redevelopment Project Area by Ordinance No.
1471 adopted by the City Council on June 24, 1975, and subsequently merged into
the Existing Area.
XY. "State" means the State of California.
SECTION IV. (400) PROJECT AREA BOUNDARIES
The boundaries of the Project Area are illustrated on the map attached hereto and incorporated
herein as Exhibit A. The legal description of the boundaries of the Project Area is as described
in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECI'ION V. (500) REDEVELOPMENT PLAN GOALS
Implementation of this Plan is intended to achieve the following goals:
• Eliminate and prevent the spread of conditions of blight including: underutilized
properties and deteriorating buildings, incompatible and uneconomic land uses,
deficient infrastructure and facilities, obsolete structures, and other economic
deficiencies in order to create a more favorable environment for commercial, office,
industrial, residential, and recreational development.
• Unify City's Harbor District with the downtown area through enhanced
employment, commercial, and maritime development opportunities.
• Expand the commercial base of the Project Area.
cmocumrds and seningsW anawal eeningcxamp s,an• tutnrct niksau6acYdian d r 4 Adopted 7f t5f9S
7
• Improve public facilities and public infrastructure.
• Improve inadequate drainage infrastructure.
• Improve and/or provide electric, gas, telephone, and wastewater infrastructure to
both developed and undeveloped properties within the Project Area.
• Promote local job opportunities.
• Encourage the cooperation and participation of residents, businesses, business
persons, public agencies, and community organizations in the
redevelopment/revitalization of the Project Area.
• Implement design and use standards to assure high aesthetic and environmental
quality, and provide unity and integrity to developments within the Project Area.
• Address parcels of property that are: of irregular form and shape, are inadequately
sized for proper usefulness and development, and/or are held in multiple ownership.
• Remove impediments to land disposition and development through the assembly of
property into reasonably sized and shaped parcels served by improved infrastructure
and public facilities.
• Recycle and/or develop underutilized parcels to accommodate higher and better
economic uses while enhancing the City's financial resources.
• Promote the rehabilitation of existing housing stock.
• Increase, improve, and preserve the community's supply of housing —affordable
housing for very low, low and moderate income households.
SECTION VI. (600) REDEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
A. (601) General
The CDC proposes to eliminate and prevent the recurrence of blight, and improve the
economic base of the Project Area by:
1. Acquiring, installing, developing, constructing, reconstructing,
redesigning, replanning, or reusing streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, traffic
control devices, utilities, flood control facilities and other public
improvements and public facilities.
2. Rehabilitating, altering, remodeling, improving, modernizing, or
reconstructing buildings, structures and improvements.
cAldaamd and senmpOhlavicVxal sedingAbdapolaty m[cmu fikabhfeYdplan.dnc
5 Adopted 7/ I8/95
3. Rehabilitating, preserving, developing or constricting affordable housing
in compliance with State law.
4. Providing the opportunity for owners and tenants presently located in the
Project Area to participate in redevelopment projects and programs, and
extending preferences to occupants to remain or relocate within the
redeveloped Project Area.
5. Providing relocation assistance to displaced residential and nonresidential
occupants, if necessary.
6. Facilitating the development or redevelopment of land for purposes and
uses consistent with this Plan.
7. Acquiring real property by purchase, lease, gift, grant, request, devise or
any other lawful means (including eminent domain on a limited basis),
after the conduct of appropriate hearings.
8. Combining parcels and properties where and when necessary.
9. Preparing building sites and constructing necessary off -site improvements.
10. Providing for open space.
11. Managing property owned or acquired by the CDC.
12. Assisting in procuring financing for the construction of residential,
commercial, and office buildings to increase the residential and
commercial base of the Project Area, and the number of temporary and
permanent jobs in the City.
13. The disposition of property including, without limitation, the lease or sale
of land at a value determined by the CDC for reuse in accordance with this
Plan.
14. Establishing controls, restrictions or covenants running with the land, so
that property will continue to be used in accordance with this Plan.
15. Vacating or abandoning streets, alleys, and other thoroughfares, as
necessary, and dedicating other areas for public purposes consistent with
the objectives of this Plan.
16. Providing replacement housing, if any is required.
e:ldocuments awl se ingsNda isUucal ecttigs tenMtuty uxntat t",ksbOt&kdpt ndoc
6 Adopted 7/18/9S
9
17. Applying for and utilizing grants, loans and any other assistance from
federal or State governments, or other sources.
18. Taking actions the CDC determines are necessary and consistent with
State, federal and local laws to make structural repairs to buildings and
structures, including historical buildings, to meet building code standards
related to seismic safety.
19. Taking actions the CDC determines are necessary and consistent with
State, federal and local laws to remedy or remove a release of hazardous
substances on, under or from property within the Project Area or to
remove hazardous waste from property.
20. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445, pay all or part of the
value of the land and the cost of the installation and construction of any
publicly owned building, facility, structure, or other improvement within
or without the Project Area provided: (1) the buildings, facilities,
structures, or other improvements are of benefit to the Project Area; (2) no
other reasonable means of financing the buildings, facilities, structures, or
other improvements are available to the City; and (3) the payment of funds
for the acquisition of land or the cost of buildings, facilities, structures, or
other improvements will assist in the elimination of blight within the
Project Area.
To accomplish these actions and to implement this Plan, the CDC is authorized to use the
powers provided in this Plan, and the powers now or hereafter permitted by the
Redevelopment Law and any other State law.
B. (602) Property Acquisition
1. (603) Acquisition of Real Property
Without limitation, the CDC may acquire real property, any interest in property,
and any improvements on it by any means authorized by law including, without
limitation, by gift, grant, exchange, purchase, cooperative negotiations, lease,
option, bequest, or devise.
In addition, the CDC may also employ eminent domain in projects involving land
acquisition of any real property identified in Exhibit D incorporated herein.
To the extent required by law, the CDC shall not acquire real property on which
an existing building is to be continued on its present site and in its present form
and use without the consent of the owner, unless: (1) such building requires
structural alteration, improvement, modernization or rehabilitation; or (2) the site
or lot on which the building is situated requires modification in size, shape or use;
c docunrms and settity4lJavAsty,cy settings trrry.rary Welt. 1'Je..rlk4rWplan t4x 7
10
Adopted 7/18/95
or (3) it is necessary to impose upon such property any of the standards,
restrictions and controls of this Plan and the owner fails or refuses to participate in
the Plan by executing an Owner Participation Agreement.
Except as otherwise provided herein, or otherwise provided by law, no eminent
domain proceeding to acquire property within the Project Area shall he
commenced within the Center City Area, the Downtown Original Area, the
Downtown 1985 Amendment Area, and the Added Area after twelve (12) years
following the date of adoption of the 2007 Ordinance amending ordinance
adopting this Plan. Such time limitation may be extended only by amendment of
this Plan.
The CDC shall not employ eminent domain in acquiring property within the E.J.
Christmanl Area, the E.J. Christman2 Area, or the South Bay Town and County
Area or in acquiringany residential property in the Project Area.
2. (604) Acquisition of Personal Property
Where necessary in the implementation of this Plan, the CDC is authorized to
acquire personal property in the Project Area by any lawful means.
C. (605) Participation by Owners and Persons Engaged in Business
1. (606) Owner Participation
This Plan provides for participation in the redevelopment of property in the
Project Area by the owners of all or part of such property if the owners agree to
participate in the redevelopment in conformity with this Plan.
Opportunities to participate in the redevelopment of property in the Project Area
may include without limitation the rehabilitation of property or structures; the
retention of improvements; the development of all or a portion of the participant's
property; the acquisition of adjacent or other properties from the CDC; purchasing
or leasing properties in the Project Arca; participating with developers in the
improvement of all or a portion of a participant's properties; or other suitable
means consistent with objectives and proposals of this Plan and with the CDC's
rules governing owner participation and re-entry.
In addition to opportunities for participation by individual persons and firms,
participation, to the extent it is feasible, shall be available for two or more
persons, firms or institutions, to join together in partnerships, corporations, or
other joint entities.
The CDC desires participation in redevelopment activities by as many owners and
business tenants as possible. However, participation opportunities shall
crAL[ ctemea[5 iflJ WlY1gs411evi,yx'al NotiecAgrmporary Y11c(,Cl Adopted 7/1S/95
necessarily be subject to and limited by such minimum factors as the expansion of
public or public utilities facilities; elimination and changing of land uses;
realignment of streets; the ability of the CDC and/or owners and business tenants
to finance acquisition and development activities in accordance with this Plan;
and whether the proposed activities conform to and further the goals and
objectives of this Plan.
2. (607) Reentry Preferences for Persons Engaged in Business in the Project Arca
The CDC shall extend reasonable preferences to persons who are engaged in
business in the Project Arca to relocate and reenter in business in the redeveloped
area, if they otherwise meet the requirements prescribed by this Plan and the
CDC's rules governing owner participation and re-entry.
3. (608) Owner Participation Agreements
Under an Owner Participation Agreement, the participant shall agree to
rehabilitate, develop, or use the property in conformance with this Plan and be
subject to the provisions hereof. In the Owner Participation Agreement,
participants who retain real property shall be required to join in the recordation of
such documents as are necessary to make the provisions of this Plan applicable to
their properties.
In the event a participant breaches the terms of an Owner Participation
Agreement, the CDC may declare the Agreement terminated and may acquire the
real property or any interest therein, and may sell or lease such real property or
interest therein for rehabilitation or development in accordance with this Plan. If
conflicts develop between the desires of participants for particular sites or land
uses, the CDC is authorized to establish reasonable priorities and preferences
among the owners and tenants.
Where the CDC determines that a proposal for participation is not feasible, is not
in the best interests of the CDC or City, or that redevelopment can best be
accomplished without affording a participant an opportunity to execute an Owner
Participation Agreement, the CDC shall not be required to execute such an
agreement.
D. (609) Implementing Rules
The provisions of Sections 605-608 of this Plan shall be implemented according to the
rules adopted by the CDC prior to the approval of the ordinance amending this Plan,
which may be amended from time to time by the CDC. Such rules allow for Owner
Participation Agreements with the CDC.
c:Yloaimcros and scniugsWda.is meal rninpsVrmporry iutauct liksbh6cYAplaaton: 9 Adopted 7/ I8/95
I Vim/
E. (610) Cooperation with Public Bodies
Certain public bodies are authorized by Statc law to aid and cooperate, with or without
consideration, in the planning and implementation of activities authorized by this Plan.
The CDC shall seek the aid and cooperation of such public bodies and shall attempt to
coordinate the implementation of this Plan with the activities of such public bodies in
order to accomplish the purposes of redevelopment and to achieve the highest public
good.
Property of a public body shall not be acquired without its consent. The CDC shall seek
the cooperation of all public bodies which own or intend to acquire property in the Project
Area. Any public body which owns or leases property in the Project Area will be
afforded all the privileges of owner and business tenant participation if such public body
is willing to enter into an Owner Participation Agreement with the CDC. All plans for
development of property in the Project Area by a public body shall be subject to CDC
approval.
The CDC may impose on all public bodies the planning and design controls contained in
and authorized by this Plan to ensure that present uses and any future development by
public bodies will conform to the requirements of this Plan. The CDC is authorized, to
the extent permissible by law, to financially (and otherwise) assist public bodies in the
cost of public land, buildings, facilities, structures or other improvements (within or
outside the Project Area) where such land, buildings, facilities, structures, or other
improvements are of benefit to the Project Area.
F. (61 1) Property Management
During such time as property, if any, in the Project Area is owned by the CDC, such
property shall be under the management and control of the CDC. Such properties may be
rented or leased by the CDC pending thcir disposition.
G. (612) Payments to TaxingAgencies
The CDC may pay, but is not required to pay, in any year during which it owns property
in the Project Area directly to any City, County or district, including, but not limited to, a
school district, or other public corporation for whose benefit a tax would have been levied
upon such property had it not been tax exempt, an amount of moncy in lieu of taxes.
The CDC may also pay to any taxing agency with territory located within the Project
Area, other than the City, any amounts of money which the CDC has found are necessary
and appropriate to alleviate financial burden or detriment caused by the Project pursuant
to an agreement executed prior to January 1, 1994. The payments to a taxing agency
pursuant to such an agreement in any single year shall not exceed the amount of property
tax revenues which would have been received by that taxing agency if all the property tax
revenues from the Project Area had been allocated to all the affected taxing agencies
cAdcurema and ktwbtWdavi{\local ,ettavAtatp+rnry mterat IJn4olk6e4dpWt.A.x 10
Adopted 7/18/95
without regard to the division of taxes required by Section 33670 of the Redevelopment
Law, except that a greater payment has been established by agreement between the CDC
and one or more taxing agencies, except a school district, if the other taxing agencies
agreed to defer payments for one or more years in order to accomplish the purposes of the
Project at an earlier time than would otherwise be the case. The amount of any greater
payments shall not exceed the amount of payment deferred. The payments shall have
been approved by a resolution, adopted by the CDC, contained findings, supported by
substantial evidence, that the Project will cause or has caused a financial burden or
detriment to the taxing agency and that the payments are necessary to alleviate the
financial burden or detriment.
In the event that such an agreement described in the above paragraph does not exist
between the CDC and an affected taxing agency, the CDC shall remit payments to any
such taxing agency in a manner consistent with Section 33607.7 of the Redevelopment
Law.
H. (613) Relocation of Persons Displaced by a Project
1. (614) Relocation Program
In accordance with the provisions of the California Relocation Assistance Law
(Government Code Section 7260, et.), the guidelines adopted and
promulgated by the California Dcpartment of Mousing and Community
Development (the "Relocation Guidelines") and the Method of Relocation
adopted by the CDC, the CDC shall provide relocation benefits and assistance to
all persons (including families, business concerns and others) displaced by CDC
acquisition of property in the Project Area or as otherwise required by law. Such
relocation assistance shall be provided in the manner required by the Method of
Relocation. In order to carry out a redevelopment project with a minimum of
hardship, the CDC will assist displaced households in finding decent, safe and
sanitary housing within their financial means and otherwise suitable to their
needs. The CDC shall make a reasonable effort to relocate displaced individuals,
families, and commercial and professional establishments within the Project Area.
The CDC is also authorized to provide relocation for displaced persons outside
the Project Area.
2. (615) Relocation Benefits and Assistance
The CDC shall provide all relocation benefits required by law and in conformance
with the Method of Relocation, Relocation Guidelines, Relocation Assistance Act,
the Redevelopment Law, and any other applicable rules and regulations.
I. (616) Demolition, Clearance, Public Improvements, Site Preparation and Removal
of Hazardous Waste
c:4Y,cm,eots v,J u4,ings,ddavi,uxnl sn,mgAtrnw,nry erc,rc, fiksbhh4dpLw.du. 1 1
Adopted 7/18P)5
1. (617) Demolition and Clearance
The CDC is authorized, for property acquired by the CDC or pursuant to an
agreement with the owner of property, to demolish, clear or move buildings,
structures, or other improvements from any real property as necessary to carry out
the purposes of this Plan.
2. (618) Public Improvements
To the extent permitted by law, the CDC is authorized to install and construct or
to cause to be installed and constructed the public improvements and public
utilities (within or outside the Project Area) necessary to carry out the purposes of
this Plan. Such public improvements include, but are not limited to: over or
underpasses; bridges; streets; curbs; gutters; sidewalks; street lights; sewers; storm
drains; traffic signals; electrical distribution systems' natural gas distribution
systems; cable TV and fiber optic communication systems; water distribution
systems; parks; plazas; playgrounds; motor vehicle parking facilities; landscaped
areas; schools; civic; cultural; and recreational facilities; and pedestrian
improvements. A list of proposed public facilities and infrastructure improvement
projects is set forth in Exhibit C and incorporated herein by reference.
The CDC, as it deems necessary to carry out the Plan and subject to the consent of
the City Council, may pay *all or part of the value of the land for and the cost of
the installation and construction of any building, facility, structure or other
improvement which is publicly owned either within or outside the Project Arca,
upon both the CDC Board and the City Council making the applicable
determinations required pursuant to the Redevelopment Law.
When the value of such land or the cost of the installation and construction of
such building, facility, structure or other improvement, or both, has been, or will
be, paid or provided for initially by the City or other public corporation, the CDC
may enter into a contract with the City or other public corporation under which it
agrees to reimburse the City or other public corporation for all or part of the value
of such land or all or part of the cost of such building, facility, structure or other
improvements, or both, by periodic payments over a period of years. Any
obligation of the CDC under such contract shall constitute an indebtedness of the
CDC for the purposes of carrying out this Plan.
3. (619) Preparation of Building Sites
The CDC may develop as a building site any real property owned or acquired by
it. In connection with such development it may cause, provide, or undertake or
make provisions with other agencies for the installation, or constniction of streets,
utilities, parks, playgrounds and other public improvements necessary for carrying
out in the Project Area this Plan.
c\d.cwmWn aaJ m�in�4ldnv,,\b.nal settinec\�enxvmry vtauuti tiles` ,Ik60.d,".do,
12
Aduptul7/18/95
/t
4. (620) Removal of Hazardous Waste
To the extent legally allowable, the CDC may take any actions which the CDC
determines arc necessary and which are consistent with other State and federal
laws, to remedy or remove a release of hazardous substances on, under, or from
property within the Project Arca.
J. (621) Rehabilitation, Moving of Structures by the CDC and Seismic Repairs
1. (622) Rehabilitation and Conservation
The CDC is authorized to rehabilitate and conserve, or to cause to be rehabilitated
and conserved, any property, building or structure in the Project Area owned by
the CDC. The CDC is also authorized to advise, encourage, and assist (through a
loan program or otherwise) in the rehabilitation and conservation of property,
buildings or structures in the Project Area not owned by the CDC to the extent
permitted by the Redevelopment Law as it exists now or may be hereafter
amended. The CDC is authorized to acquire, restore, rehabilitate, move and
conserve buildings of historic or architectural significance.
It shall be the purpose of this Plan to allow for the retention of as many existing
businesses as practicable and to enhance the economic life of these businesses by
a program of voluntary participation in their conservation and rehabilitation. The
CDC is authorized to conduct a program of assistance and enforcement to
encourage owners of property within the Project Area to upgrade and maintain
their property consistent with this Plan and such standards as may he developed
for the Project Area.
The extent of rehabilitation in the Project Area shall be subject to the discretion of
the CDC based upon such objective factors as:
a. Compatibility of rehabilitation with land uses as provided
for in this Plan.
b. Economic feasibility of proposed rehabilitation and
conservation activity.
c. Structural feasibility of proposed rehabilitation and
conservational activity.
d. The undertaking of rehabilitation and •conservation
activities in an expeditious manner and in conformance
with the requirements of this Plan and such property
rehabilitation standards as may he adopted by the CDC.
c:tdoti,mrots end sr. ingstddavisLLxvl ecttiugsVenporery Murat filcs\n@fie rdpLm.doc 13
Adopted 7/IR/95
e. The need for expansion of public improvements, facilities
and utilities.
f. The assembly and development of properties in accordance
with this Plan.
The CDC may adopt property rehabilitation standards for the rehabilitation of
properties in the Project Area.
2. (623) Moving of Structures
As necessary in carrying out this Plan, the CDC is authorized to move, or to cause
to be moved, any building structures or other improvements from any real
property acquired which can be rehabilitated to a location within or outside the
Project Area.
3. (624) Seismic Repairs
For any project undertaken by the CDC within the Project Area for building
rehabilitation or alteration in construction, the CDC may, by following all
applicable procedures which are consistent with local, State, and federal law, take
those actions which the CDC determines are necessary to provide for seismic
retrofits.
K. (625) Property Disposition and Development
I . (626) Real Property Disposition and Development
a. (627) General
For the purposes of this Plan, the CDC is authorized to sell, lease,
exchange, subdivide, transfer, assign, pledge, encumber by mortgage or
deed of trust, or otherwise dispose of any interest in real property. To the
extent permitted by law, the CDC is authorized to dispose of real property
by negotiated lease or sale without public bidding. Except as otherwise
permitted by law, before any interest in property of the CDC acquired in
whole or in part, directly or indirectly, with tax increment moneys is sold
or leased for development pursuant to this Plan, such sale or lease shall be
first approved by the City Council after public hearing.
Except as otherwise permitted by law, no real or personal property owned
by the CDC, or any interest therein, shall be sold or leased to a private
person or private entity for an amount less than its fair market value, or the
fair reuse value at the use and with the covenants, conditions and
development costs authorized by the sale or lease.
rNxumenu:md xning*Id, sLL.ti4l smingAtenpowcy iutewet filetAANV ' dplmndoc 14
Adupta► 7/18/95
l7
The real property acquired by the CDC in the Project Area, except
property conveyed to it by the City, shall be sold or leased to public or
private persons or entities for improvement and use of the property in
conformance with this Plan. Real property may be conveyed by the CDC
to the City, and where beneficial to the Project Area, to any other public
body without charge or for an amount less than fair market value.
All purchasers or lessees of property from the CDC shall be obligated to
use the property for the purposes designated in this Plan, to begin and
complete improvement of such property within a period of time which the
CDC fixes as reasonable, and to comply with other conditions which the
CDC deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this Plan.
During the period of redevelopment in the Project Area, the CDC shall
ensure that all provisions of this Plan, and other documents formulated
pursuant to this Plan, are being observed, and that development of the
Project Area is proceeding in accordance with applicable development
documents and time schedules.
All development, whether public or private, must conform to this Plan and
all applicable federal, State, and local laws, including without limitation
the City's planning and zoning ordinances, building, environmental and
other land use development standards. Such development must receive the
approval of all appropriate public agencies.
h. (628) Purchase and Development Documents
To provide adequate safeguards to ensure that the provisions of this Plan
will be carried out and to prevent the recurrence of blight, all real property
sold, leased, or conveyed by the CDC, as well as all property subject to
Owner Participation Agreements, shall be made subject to the provisions
of this Plan by leases, deeds, contracts, agreements, declarations of
restrictions, provisions of the planning and zoning ordinances of the City,
conditional use permits, or other means. Where appropriate, as
determined by the CDC, such documents or portions thereof shall be
recorded in the office of the Recorder of the County.
Leases, deeds, contracts, agreements, and declarations of restrictions of the
CDC may contain restrictions, covenants, covenants running with the land,
rights of reverter, conditions subsequent, equitable servitudes, or any other
provisions necessary to carry out this Plan.
The CDC shall reserve such powers and controls in Disposition and
Development Agreements or similar agreements as may he necessary to
c:Ykxvuents and settmRs4NarislkwN .•ettingsUatgrxay in¢rort filrSnlir6tt4Jplawln 15
/,
Adopted 7/ 18/95
prevent transfer, retention, or use of property for speculative purposes and
to ensure that redevelopment is carried out pursuant to this Plan.
The CDC shall obligate lessees and purchasers of real property acquired in
redevelopment projects and owners of property improved as part of a
redevelopment project to refrain from discrimination or segregation based
upon race, color, creed, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, or marital
status in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use occupancy, tenure or
enjoyment of property in the Project Area. All property sold, leased,
conveyed, or subject to Disposition and Development Agreements shall be
expressly subject by appropriate documents to the restriction that all deeds,
leases, or contracts for the sale, lease, sublease or other transfer of land in
the Project Area shall contain such nondiscrimination and non -segregation
clauses as are required by law.
2. (629) Personal Property Disposition
For the purposes of this Plan, the CDC is authorized to sell, lease, exchange,
subdivide, transfer, assign, pledge, encumber, or otherwise dispose of personal
property.
L. (630) Provision for Low and Moderate Income Housing
1. (631) Definition of Terms
The terms "affordable housing cost", "replacement dwelling unit", "persons and
families of low or moderate income", "substantially rehabilitated dwelling units"
and "very low income households" as used herein shall have the meanings as
defined by the Redevelopment Law and other State and local laws and regulations
pertaining thereto.
2. (632) Authority Generally
The CDC may, inside or outside the Project Area: acquire real property, buildings
sites, buildings or structures, donate real property, improve real property or
building sites, construct or rehabilitate buildings or structures, and take any other
such actions as may be permitted by the Redevelopment Law, in order to provide
housing for persons and families of low or moderate income.
3. (633) Replacement Housing
Except as otherwise permitted by law, whenever dwelling units housing persons
and families of low or moderate income are destroyed or removed from the low
and moderate income housing market as part of a redevelopment project, the CDC
shall, within four years of such destruction or removal, rehabilitate, develop or
construct, or cause to be rehabilitated, developed or constructed, for rental or sale
Wan:mats:ad saMgAddnvis\local scniugavrnpxrrury ime,m, fik,bUbe4dptuaduc 1 6
Adopted 7/18/95
/9
to persons and families of low or moderate income, an equal number of
replacement dwelling units which have an equal or greater number of bedrooms as
those destroyed or removed units at affordable housing costs within the territorial
jurisdiction of the CDC. Except as otherwise permitted by law, seventy-five
percent (75%) of the replacement dwelling units shall replace dwelling units
available at affordable housing costs in the same income level of very low income
households, lower income households, and persons and families of low and
moderate income as the persons displaced from those units destroyed. The CDC
may replace destroyed or removed dwelling units housing persons and families of
low or moderate income with a fewer number of replacement dwelling units if the
replacement dwelling units have a greater or equal number of bedrooms and are
affordable to the same income level of households as the destroyed or removed
units to the extent permissible by law as it now exists or may hereafter be
amended.
4. (634) New or Rehabilitated Dwelling Units Developed Within the Project
Area
Except as otherwise permitted by law, at least thirty percent (30%) of all new and
substantially rehabilitated dwelling units developed by the CDC shall be available
at affordable housing cost to persons and families of low or moderate income and
of such thirty percent (30%), not less than fifty percent (50%) shall be available to
and occupied by very low income households. At least fifteen percent (15%) of
all new and substantially rehabilitated dwelling units developed within the Project
Area by public or private entities or persons other than the CDC shall be available
at affordable housing cost to persons and families of low or moderate income and
of such fifteen percent (15%), not less than forty percent (40%) shall be available
at affordable housing cost to very low income households. The percentage
requirements set forth in this Section 634 shall apply independently of the
requirements of Section 633 of this Plan and in the aggregate to the supply of
housing to be made available pursuant to this Section 634 and not to each
individual case of rehabilitation, development or construction of dwelling units.
Pursuant to Section 33413(b)(4) of the Redevelopment Law, the CDC shall
prepare and adopt a plan to comply with the requirements set forth above, for the
Project Area. The plan shall he consistent with, and may be included within the
Housing Element of the City's General Plan. The plan shall be reviewed and, if
necessary, amended at least every five (5) years in conjunction with the housing
element cycle. The plan shall ensurc that the requirements of this section are met
every ten (10) years.
Except as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall require, by contract or other
appropriate means, that whenever any low and moderate income housing units are
developed within the Project Area, such units shall be made available on a priority
basis for rent or purchase, whichever the case may be, to persons and families of
low or moderate income displaced by the Project; provided, however, that failure
c:lbcmams and .tenitgOct/Isis tkw,lsem%aUmµtuy Interat fiksbOdic \ dip Im.dnc 17
Adopted 7/18/95
to give such priority shall not affect the validity of title to the real property upon
which such housing units have been developed.
5. (635) Duration of Dwelling Unit Availability
The CDC shall require the aggregate number of dwelling units rehabilitated,
developed or constructed pursuant to Sections 633 and 634 of this Plan to remain
available at affordable housing cost to very low income, low income, and
moderate income households for the longest feasible time, as determined by the
CDC, but for not Tess than the period of the residential land use controls
established in Section 1100 of this Plan.
6. (636) Relocation Housing,
If insufficient suitable housing units are available in the City for use by persons
and families of low and moderate income displaced by a Project, the CDC may, to
the extent of that deficiency, direct or cause the development, rehabilitation or
construction of housing units within the City, both inside and outside the Project
Area.
7. (637) Increased and Improved Supply
Except as otherwise permitted by law, not less than twenty percent (20%) of all
taxes which are allocated to the CDC pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 33670
of the Redevelopment Law and Section 602(2) and (3) of this Plan shall be used
by the CDC for the purposes of increasing, improving and preserving the City's
supply of low and moderate income housing available at affordable housing cost
as defined by Section 50052.5 of the Califomia Health and Safety Code, to
persons and families of low or moderate income, as defined in Section 50093 of
the California Health and Safety Code, and very low income households, as
defined in Section 50105 of the California Health and Safety Code, unless one or
more applicable findings are made pursuant to the Redevelopment Law.
The funds for this purpose shall be held in a separate Low and Moderate Income
Housing Fund until used. Any interest earned by such Low and Moderate Income
Ilousing Fund shall accrue to the Fund.
In implementing Section 637 of this Plan, the CDC may exercise any or all of its
powers including, but not limited to, the following:
1. Acquire real property or building sites.
2. Improve real property or building sites with on -site or off -site
improvements, but only if either (a) the improvements are made as
part of a program which results in the new construction or
cMcicw ents and sceuy;s`ddavuVucal sea'wgs'empnrvsv Merv-2 fiksblkGeWtAaua,. 18
Adopted 7/ 15/95
021
rehabilitation of affordable housing units for low- or moderate -
income persons that are directly benefited by the improvements, or
(h) the CDC finds that the improvements are necessary to eliminate
a specific condition that jeopardizes the health or safety of existing
low- or moderate -income residents.
3. Donate real property to private or public persons or entities.
4. Finance insurance premiums.
5. Construct buildings or structures.
6. Acquire buildings or structures.
7. Rehabilitate buildings or structures.
8. Provide subsidies to, or for the benefit of, very low income
households, as defined by Section 50105 of the California Health
and Safety Code, lower income households, as defined by Section
50079.5 of the California Health and Safcty Code, or persons and
families of low or moderate income, as defined by Section 50093
of the California Health and Safety Code, to the extent those
households cannot obtain housing at affordable costs on the open
market. Housing units available on the open market are those units
developed without direct government subsidies.
9. Develop plans, pay principal and interest on bonds, loans,
advances, or other indebtedness or pay financing or carrying
charges.
10. Maintain the community's supply of mobile homes.
11. Preserve the availability to lower income households of affordable
housing units in housing developments which are assisted or
subsidized by public entities and which are threatened with
imminent conversion to market rates.
The CDC may use these funds to meet, in whole or in part, the replacement housing
provisions in Section 633 of this Plan. These funds may be used inside or outside the
Project Area; however, these funds may be used outside the Project Area only if findings
of benefit to the Project Area are made pursuant to the Redevelopment Law.
8. (638) Duration of Affordability
aA
c,doctuncnve and •enings4fdnvisUnce1 satingsVasgorny inema f'Ju olktc4dpbn.do< 19
Adopted 7/18/95
Except as provided in Section 33334.3 of the Redevelopment Law, all new or
substantially rehabilitated housing units developed or otherwise assisted with moneys
from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund pursuant to an agreement approved by
the CDC shall be required to remain available at affordable housing cost to persons and
families of low or moderate income and very low income households for the Longest
feasible time, but for not less than the following periods of time:
a. Fifteen years for rental units. Ilowever, the CDC may replace rental units
with equally affordable and comparable rental units in another location
within the City if (i) the replacement units are available for occupancy prior
to the displacement of any persons and families of low or moderate income
residing in the units to be replaced and (ii) the comparable replacement units
arc not developed with moneys from the Low and Moderate Income
Housing Fund.
b. Ten years for owner -occupied units. However, the CDC may permit sales
of owner -occupied units prior to the expiration of the 10-year period for a
price in excess of that otherwise permitted under this subdivision pursuant
to an adopted program which protects the CDC's investment of moneys
from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund.
SECTION VII. (700) USES PERMITTED IN THE PROJECT AREA
A. (701) Map and Uses Permitted
The Map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein illustrates the location of
the Project Area boundaries, the immediately adjacent streets, and existing public
rights -of -way and public easements. The land uses permitted by this Plan shall be those
permitted by the General Plan, City zoning ordinances and the local Coastal Plan as they
now exist or may hereafter be amended.
B. (702) Major Land Use Designations (as now provided in the General Plan)
The following land use categories are presently permitted by the General Plan:
RESIDENTIAL
Single -Family Large Lot (RS-1)
Single -Family Small Lot (RS-2)
Single -Family Extendible (RS-3)
Two Family (RT)
Multifamily Extendible (RM-1)
Multifamily Limited (RM-2)
Senior Citizen Housing (RM-3)
COMMERCIAL
e:Vscsorcns and vettmpsWdavesWnal xttiugsVest}innay interne flesblkGeYdplyiJkx 20
Adopted 7/18/95
General Commercial (CG)
Medium Commercial (CM)
Limited Commercial (CL)
Tourist Commercial (CT)
Automotive Commercial (CA)
Heavy Commercial (CH)
INDUSTRIAL
Light Manufacturing (ML)
Medium Manufacturing (MM)
Heavy Manufacturing (MH)
Tidelands Manufacturing (MT)
INSTITUTIONAL
Civic Institutional (IL)
Private Institutional (IP)
OPEN SPACE
C. (703) Transportation Center
This use district encompasses all parcels located within ef-the Commercial Zones (CA
and CH), any part of which zones are adjacent to National City Boulevard, south of 18th
Street to 33rd Street. This use is designed primarily to furnish areas for new and used
automobile and truck sales and services. The objective is to provide for a complete sales
and service unit for each new car dealership on land within the Transportation Center
District. Independent used car sales, services, or repairs will not be permitted unless such
activity is an integral part of a new vehicle dealership. Permitted uses in the
transportation center use district include:
• New automobile and truck sales, leasing, and rentals.
• Used auto and truck sales when part of a new vehicle dealership and located on
contiguous land within the Transportation Center district.
• Service and repair of trucks and automobiles when provided by new vehicle dealer on
ceps -adjacent property.
• Sale of vehicle parts and accessories when provided by new vehicle dealership on
Deus -adjacent property.
• Sale or rental of campers, camper trailers, vacation trailers, self-propelled mobile
homes, boats, and other sporting and pleasure equipment which is substantial in size.
This activity must be incidental to the principal activity of the automobile and/or truck
dealership.
n,sedie redevelop vopN Owl amendment rdpla n m.rwr.K d . 21
Adopted _!`/07
• Other related uses, with the review and recommendation of the Planning Commission,
which are consistent with the objectives of this Han.
D. (704) Public Uses
1. (705) Public Street Layout, Rights -of -Way and Easements
The public street system for the Project Area is illustrated on the Project Area
Map identified as Exhibit A. The street system in the Project Area shall be
developed in accordance with the Circulation Element of the General Plan.
Interstates 5 and 805 connect the Project Area to the greater metropolitan region.
Primary streets in the Project Area include: Tidelands Avenue, Harrison Avenue,
National City Boulevard, Highland Avenue, 8th Street, Civic Center Drive, and
24th Street.
Certain streets and rights -of -way may be widened, altered, abandoned, vacated, or
closed by the City as necessary for proper development of the Project Area.
Additional easements may be created by the CDC and City in the Project Area as
needed for proper development and circulation.
The public rights -of -way shall be used for vehicular, bicycle and/or pedestrian
traffic as well as for public improvements, public and private utilities, and
activities typically found in public rights -of -way. In addition, all necessary
easements for public uses, public facilities, and public utilities may be retained or
created.
2. (706) Other Public and Open Space Uses
Both within and, where appropriate, outside of the Project Area, the CDC may
take actions to establish, or enlarge public, institutional, or non-profit uses,
including, but not limited to, schools, community centers, auditorium and civic
center facilities, criminal justice facilities, park and recreational facilities, parking
facilities, transit facilities, libraries, hospitals, educational, fraternal, philanthropic
and charitable institutions or other similar associations or organizations. All such
uses shall be deemed to conform to the provisions of this Plan provided that such
uses conform with all other applicable laws and ordinances and that such uses are
approved by the City. The CDC may impose such other reasonable restrictions as
are necessary to protect development and uses in the Project Area.
E. (707) Conforming Properties
The CDC may, in its sole and absolute discretion, determine that certain real properties
within the Project Area meet the requirements of this Plan, and the owners of such
properties may he permitted to remain as owners of conforming properties without an
Owner Participation Agreement with the CDC, provided such owners continue to operate,
c:Wkaa¢rcms wd,euur`>41daisWxal scilmga4emporary iacruet tdcsW1k6e4drlan.d.r 22
Adoptcd 7/18/95
use, and maintain the real properties within the requirements of this Plan. An owner of a
conforming property may be required by the CDC to enter into an Owner Participation
Agreement with the CDC in the event that such owner desires to (1) as provided in the
land use code, construct any additional improvements or substantially alter or modify
existing structures on any of the real property described above as conforming; or (2)
acquire additional property within the Project. Arca.
F. (708) Nonconforming Uses
The CDC is authorized but not required to permit an existing use to remain in an existing
building in good condition if the use does not conform to the provisions of this Plan,
provided that such use is generally compatible with existing and proposed developments
and uses in the Project Area.
The CDC may take actions to, but is not required to, authorize additions, alterations,
repairs or other improvements in the Project Area for buildings which do not conform to
the provisions of this Plan where, in the determination of the CDC, such improvements
would be compatible with surrounding Project Area uses and proposed development.
G. (709) Interim Uses
Pending the ultimate development of land by developers and participants, the CDC is
authorized to use or permit the use of any land in the Project Area for interim uses not in
conformity with the uses permitted in this Plan. Such interim use, however, shall
conform to all applicable City codes.
H. (710) General Controls and Limitations
All real property in the Project Arca is hereby made subject to the controls and
requirements of this Plan. No real property shall be developed, redeveloped,
rehabilitated, or otherwise changed after the date of the adoption of this Plan except in
conformance with the goals and provisions of this Plan and all applicable City codes and
ordinances. The land use controls of this Plan shall apply for the periods set forth in
Section 1100 below. The type, size, height, number and use of buildings within the
Project Area will be controlled by the applicable City planning and zoning ordinances as
they now exist or may hereafter be amended from time to time.
1. (711) New Construction
All construction in the Project Area shall comply with all applicable State and
local laws in effect from time to time. In addition to applicable City codes,
ordinances, or other requirements governing development in the Project Area,
additional specific performance and development standards may be adopted by the
CDC to control and direct improvement activities in the Project Area.
iloctuteW nod sntetgsWJavis\local setttaps\cnnpnmy mtvuet Wesblk(c'tdplan dne 23
Adopted 7/18/95
2. (712) Rehabilitation
Any existing structure within the Project Area which the CDC enters into an
agreement for retention and rehabilitation shall be repaired, altered, reconstructed,
or rehabilitated in such a manner that it will meet the following requirements: be
safe and sound in all physical respects, be attractive in appearance and not
detrimental to the surrounding uses.
3. (713) Number of Dwelling Units
The total number of dwelling units in the Project Area shall be regulated by the
General Plan. As of the date of adoption of the Plan, there are 10,107 dwelling
units, not including mobile home units, in the Project Area.
4. (714) Open Space and Landscaping
The approximate amount of open space to be provided in the Project Area is the
total of all areas so designated in the Land Use Element of the General Plan and
those areas in the public rights -of -way or provided through site coverage
limitations on new development as established by the City and this Plan.
Landscaping shall be developed in the Project Area to ensure optimum use of
living plant material in conformance with the standards of the City.
5. (715) Limitations on Type, Size and Height of Buildings
The limits on building intensity, type, size and height, shall be established in
accordance with the provisions of the General Plan and the zoning ordinances, as
they now exist or are hereafter amended.
6. (716) Signs
All signs shall conform to the City's requirements. Design of all proposed new
signs shall be submitted prior to installation to the appropriate governing bodies
of the City and/or the CDC for review and approval pursuant to the Municipal
Code of the City and procedures permitted by this Plan.
7. (717) Utilities
The CDC, in conformity with municipal code and City policy, shall require that
all utilities be placed underground whenever physically possible and economically
feasible on projects funded in whole or in part by the CDC or subject to a
Disposition and Development Agreement or an Owner Participation Agreement.
8. (718) Subdivision of Parcels
c:hkxwmnt, and seuegArklavis\local rneyzAtemporay moan. fi4sMhfir\rdplandx 24
Adopted 7/I8/95
a7
No parcels in the Project Area, including any parcel retained by a participant, shall
be consolidated, subdivided or re -subdivided without the approval of the City.
9. (719) Variations
The CDC is authorized to permit variations from the limits, restrictions and
controls established by this Plan. In order to permit any such variation, the CDC
must determine all of the following:
a. Any variation must to be considered must first be consistent with the
Land Use Code, Title 18.
b. The application of certain provisions of this Plan would result in
practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the
general purposes and intent of this Plan.
c. There are exceptional circumstances or conditions applicable to the
property or to the intended development of the property which do
not apply generally to other properties having the same standards,
restrictions, and controls.
d. Permitting a variation will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the area.
e. Permitting a variation will not be contrary to the objectives of this
Plan.
No such variation shall be granted which permits other than a minor departure
from the provisions of this Plan. In permitting any such variation, the CDC shall
impose such conditions as are necessary to protect the public health, safety, or
welfare, and to assure compliance with the purposes of this Plan.
1. (720) Design for Development
Within the limits, restrictions, and controls established in this Plan, and subject to the
provisions of Sections 701 and 710 herein, the CDC is authorized to establish heights of
buildings, land coverage, setback requirements, design criteria, traffic circulation, traffic
access, and other development and design controls necessary for proper development of
both private and public areas within the Project Area.
No new improvement shall be constructed, and no existing improvement shall he
substantially modified, altered, repaired, or rehabilitated except in accordance with this
Plan and any such controls approved by the CDC. In the case of property which is the
subject of a Disposition and Development Agreement or an Owner Participation
Agreement with the CDC, such property shall be developed in accordance with the
provisions of such Agreement. One of the objectives of this Plan is to create an attractive
c Adocu rcues and wtiugsWav(sWeal sertrtpNenpurary mtcruct Itks,olk6OWp4tn.dne 25
Adopted 7/18/95
and pleasant environment in the Project Area. Therefore, such plans shall give
consideration to good design, open space and other amenities to enhance the aesthetic
quality of the Project Area. The CDC shall not approve any plans that do not comply
with this Plan except as permitted by Section 719 of this Plan.
J. (721) Building Permits
Any building permit that is issued for the rehabilitation or construction of any new
building or any addition, construction, moving, conversion or alteration to an existing
building in the Project Area from the date of adoption of this Plan must he in
conformance with the provisions of this Plan, any design for development adopted by the
CDC, any restrictions or controls established by resolution of the CDC, and any
applicable participation or other agreements.
The CDC is authorized to establish permit procedures and approvals required for
purposes of this Plan. A building permit shall be issued only after the applicant for same
has been granted all approvals required by the City and the CDC at the time of
application.
SECTION VIII. (800) METHODS FOR FINANCING THE PROJECT
A. (801) General Description of the Proposed Financing Methods
Upon adoption of this Plan by the City Council, the CDC is authorized to finance
implementation of this Plan with assistance from local sources, the State and/or the
federal government, property tax increment, interest income, CDC bonds, donations,
loans from private financial institutions or any other legally available source.
The CDC is also authorized to obtain advances, borrow funds, issue bonds or other
obligations, and create indebtedness in carrying out this Plan. The principal and interest
on such indebtedness may be paid from tax increment revenue or any other funds
available to the CDC. Advances and loans for survey and planning and for the operating
capital for administration of this Plan may be provided by the City until adequate tax
increment revenue or other funds are available to repay the advances and loans. The City
or other public agency, as it is able, may also supply additional assistance through
issuance of bonds, loans and grants and in -kind assistance. Any assistance shall be
subject to terms established by an agreement between the CDC, City and/or other public
agency providing such assistance.
As available, gas tax funds from the State and sales tax funds from the County may be
used for the street system.
The CDC may issue bonds or other obligations and expend their proceeds to carry out this
Plan. The CDC is authorized to issue bonds or other obligations as appropriate and
feasible in an amount sufficient to finance all or any part of Plan implementation
r:4locuaeula and stariupspcnmpsVeuµiuy interne.. fiksb114e4dpi.sudoc 26
Adopted 7/18/95
activities. The CDC shall pay the principal and interest on bonds or other obligations of
the CDC as they become due and payable.
B. (802) Tax Increment Revenue
All taxes levied upon taxable property within the Project Area each year by or for the
benefit of the State, County, City or other public corporation (hereinafter called "Taxing
Agency" or "Taxing Agencies") after the effective date of the ordinance, shall be divided
as follows:
That portion of the taxes which would be produced by the rate upon which
the tax is levied each year by or for each of said Taxing Agencies upon the
total sum of the assessed value of the taxable property in the Project Area
as shown upon the assessment roll used in connection with the taxation of
such property by such Taxing Agency, last equalized prior to the effective
date of the Ordinance, shall be allocated to and when collected shall be
paid to the respective Taxing Agencies as taxes by or for said Taxing
Agencies on all other property are paid (for the purpose of allocating taxes
levied by or for any Taxing Agency or Agencies which did not include the
territory in the Project Area on the effective date of the Ordinance but to
which such territory has been annexed or otherwise included after such
effective date, the assessment roll of the County last equalized on the
effective date of the Ordinance shall be used in determining the assessed
valuation of the taxable property in the Project Area on said effective
date).
2. That portion of said levied taxes each year in excess of such amount shall
he allocated to, and when collected shall be paid into, a special fund of the
CDC to pay the principal of and interest on loans, monies advanced to, or
indebtedness (whether funded, refunded, assumed, or otherwise) incurred
by the CDC to finance or refinance in whole or in part, the Project and this
Plan. Unless and until the total assessed valuation of the taxable property
in the Project Area exceeds the total assessed value of the taxable property
in the Project Arca as shown by the last equalized assessment roll referred
to in paragraph (1.) hereof, all of the taxes levied and collected upon the
taxable property in the Project Area shall be paid to the respective 'faxing
Agencies. When said loans, advances, and indebtedness, if any, and
interest thereon, have been paid, all monies thereafter received from taxes
upon the taxable property in the Project Area shall be paid to the
respective Taxing Agencies as taxes on all other property are paid.
3. That portion of the taxes in excess of the amount identified in paragraph
(1.) above which is attributable to a tax rate levied by a Taxing Agency for
the purpose of producing revenues in an amount sufficient to make annual
repayments of the principal of and interest on any bonded indebtedness for
c:hMn+ova ota au1 settogs1ddaviNoxz1 xttings\mmporzy dtuuet tdcsbU:6ct+dplan dac 27
Adopted 7/ I8/95
the acquisition or improvement of real property shall be allocated to, and
when collected shall be paid into, the fund of that 'faxing Agency. This
paragraph (3.) shall only apply to taxes levied to repay bonded
indebtedness approved by the voters on or after January 1, 1989.
4. This Plan applies to redevelopment projects adopted by the CDC from
1969 through 1985. As such, the last equalized assessment rolls used to
calculate taxes to be allocated to the Agency pursuant to Section 802,
paragraphs (1) and (2) herein, will be those in effect when the following
ordinances creating these redevelopment project areas were adopted:
• E.J. Christmanl Arca adopted by Ordinance No. 1233 on November
18, 1969.
• South Bay Town and Country Area adopted by Ordinance No. 1471 on
June 24, 1975.
• Center City Area adopted by Ordinance No. 1505 on April 13, 1976.
• E.J. Christman2 Area adopted by Ordinance No. 161.0 on December 13,
1977.
• Downtown Original Arca adopted by Ordinance No. 1762 on December
1, 1981.
• Downtown 1985 Amendment Area adopted by Ordinance No. 1851 on
April 16, 1985.
The CDC is authorized to make pledges as to specific advances, loans and indebtedness
as appropriate in carrying out the Project. The portion of taxes allocated and paid to the
CDC pursuant to subparagraph (2.) above is irrevocably pledged to pay the principal of
and interest on loans, monies advanced to, or indebtedness (whether funded, refunded,
assumed, or otherwise) incurred by the CDC to finance or refinance, in whole or in part,
the redevelopment program for the Project Area.
The number of dollars of taxes which may be divided and allocated to the CDC pursuant
to Section 33670 of the Redevelopment Law, inclusive of payments to taxing agencies,
shall not exceed $300 million, adjusted annually in accordance with the San Diego
County Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers (CPI-U) or a comparable
inflationary index should the CPI-U cease to exist, except by amendment of this Plan.
With respect to the E.J. Christman1 Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety code Section
33333.6(a), (c), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not pay
indebtedness with the proceeds of property taxes received pursuant to Heath and Safety
Code Section 33670 or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section
33670 after November 18, 2019. These limitations shall not be applied to limit the
allocation of taxes to the CDC to the extent required to eliminate project deficits created
under subdivision (g) of Health and Safety Code Section 33334.6 in accordance with the
plan adopted pursuant thereto for the purpose of elinunating the deficits or to the extent
cAdocweds rd wstimj'd(iavlt io 4 satingc\nrtrr.r ry nip!. d c
28 Adopted 7/18/95
3,
required to implement a replacement housing program pursuant to Health and Safety
Code Section 33413. In addition, these limitations shall not affect the validity of any
bond, indebtedness, or other obligation, including any mitigation agreement entered into
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33401, authorized by the City Council, or the
CDC pursuant to the Redevelopment Law, prior to January 1, 1994, or the right of the
CDC to receive property taxes, pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 to pay
the bonds, indebtedness, or other obligation.
With respect to the South Bay Town and Country Area, notwithstanding any other
provision of this Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety code
Section 33333.6(a), (c), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not
pay indebtedness with the proceeds of property taxes received pursuant to Heath and
Safcty Code Section 33670 or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code
Section 33670 after June 24, 2025. These limitations shall not be applied to limit the
allocation of taxes to the. CDC to the extent required to eliminate project deficits created
under subdivision (g) of Health and Safety Code Section 33334.6 in accordance with the
plan adopted pursuant thereto for the purpose of eliminating the deficits or to the extent
required to implement a replacement housing program pursuant to Health and Safety
Code Section 33413. In addition, these limitations shall not affect the validity of any
bond, indebtedness, or other obligation, including any mitigation agreement entered into
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33401, authorized by the City Council, or the
CDC pursuant to the Redevelopment Law, prior to January 1, 1994, or the right of the
CDC to receive property taxes, pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 to pay
the bonds, indebtedness, or other obligation.
With respect to the Center City Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this Plan,
and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety code Section 33333.6(a),
(c), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not pay indebtedness
with the proceeds of property taxes received pursuant to Heath and Safety Code Section
33670 or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 after
April 13, 2026. These limitations shall not be applied to limit the allocation of taxes to
the CDC to the extent required to eliminate project deficits created under subdivision (g)
of Ilealth and Safety Code Section 33334.6 in accordance with the plan adopted pursuant
thereto for the purpose of eliminating the deficits or to the extent required to implement a
replacement housing program pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33413. In
addition, these limitations shall not affect the validity of any bond, indebtedness, or other
obligation, including any mitigation agreement entered into pursuant to Ilealth and Safety
Code Section 33401, authorized by the City Council, or the CDC pursuant to the
Redevelopment Law, prior to January 1, 1994, or the right of the CDC to receive property
taxes, pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 to pay the bonds, indebtedness,
or other obligation.
With respect to the E.J. Christman2 Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety code Section
33333.6(a), (c), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not pay
eido.vupys ami sotingsbdava bcal vitinpAsetquray msatct tdcsbiktierdplan dnc 29
Adopted 7/18/95
indebtedness with the proceeds of property taxes received pursuant to Heath and Safety
Code Section 33670 or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section
33670 after December 13, 2027. These limitations shall not be applied to limit the
allocation of taxes to the CDC to the extent required to eliminate project deficits created
under subdivision (g) of Health and Safety Code Section 33334.6 in accordance with the
plan adopted pursuant thereto for the purpose of eliminating the deficits or to the extent
required to implement a replacement housing program pursuant to Health and Safety
Code Section 33413. In addition, these limitations shall not affect the validity of any
bond, indebtedness, or other obligation, including any mitigation agreement entered into
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33401, authorized by the City Council, or the
CDC pursuant to the Redevelopment Law, prior to January 1, 1994, or the right of the
CDC to receive property taxes, pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 to pay
the bonds, indehtedness, or other obligation.
With respect to the Downtown Original Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety code Section
33333.6(a), (c), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not pay
indehtedness with the proceeds of property taxes received pursuant to Heath and Safety
Code Section 33670 or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Codc Section
33670 after December I, 2031. These limitations shall not be applied to limit the
allocation of taxes to the CDC to the extent required to eliminate project deficits created
under subdivision (g) of Health and Safety Code Section 33334.6 in accordance with the
plan adopted pursuant thereto for the purpose of eliminating the deficits or to the extent
required to implement a replacement housing program pursuant to Health and Safety
Code Section 33413. In addition, these limitations shall not affect the validity of any
bond, indebtedness, or other obligation, including any mitigation agreement entered into
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33401, authorized by the City Council, or the
CDC pursuant to the Redevelopment Law, prior to January 1, 1994, or the right of the
CDC to receive property taxes, pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 to pay
the bonds, indebtedness, or other obligation.
With respect to the Downtown 1985 Amendment Area, notwithstanding any other
provision of this Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety code
Section 33333.6(a), (c), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not
pay indebtedness with the proceeds of property taxes received pursuant to Heath and
Safety Code Section 33670 or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code
Section 33670 after April 16, 2035. These limitations shall not be applied to limit the
allocation of taxes to the CDC to the extent required to eliminate project deficits created
under subdivision (g) of Health and Safety Code Section 33334.6 in accordance with the
plan adopted pursuant thereto for the purpose of eliminating the deficits or to the extent
required to implement a replacement housing program pursuant to Ilealth and Safety
Code Section 33413. In addition, these limitations shall not affect the validity of any
bond, indebtedness, or other obligation, including any mitigation agreement entered into
pursuant to Health and Safety Codc Section 33401, authorized by the City Council, or the
CDC pursuant to the Redevelopment Law, prior to January 1, 1994, or the right of the
c.4lncurnants red settings Clam lu.1 set ingsV..mprvr m[c,un Iilea4,@G:Vdplan.dac 30
Adopted 7/18/95
CDC to receive property taxes, pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 to pay
the bonds, indebtedness, or other obligation.
With respect to the Added Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this Plan, and
except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code Section 33332(a), or as
otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not pay indebtedness with the proceeds of
property taxes received pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 or receive
property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 after 45 years following
approval of the ordinance adopting this Plan. These limitations shall not be applied to
limit the allocation of taxes to the CDC to the extent required to implement a replacement
housing program pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33413.
With respect to the E.J. Christman1 Arca, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code Section
33333.6(a), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or
indebtedness to be repaid from such allocations of taxes established or incurred by the
CDC to finance in whole or in part the Redevelopment Project shall be established or
incurred after January 1, 2004. Such loan, advance or indebtedness may be repaid over a
period of time longer than such time limit. Such time limitation may be extended only by
amendment of this Plan. This limit shall not prevent the CDC from incurring debt to be
repaid from the I.ow and Moderate Income Housing Fund or establishing more debt in
order to fulfill the CDC's housing obligations under Health and Safety Code Section
33413. In addition, this limit shall not prevent the CDC from refinancing, refunding, or
restructuring indebtedness after January 1, 2004, if the indebtedness is not increased and
the time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the data on which
the indebtedness would have been paid.
With respect to the South Bay Town and Country Area, notwithstanding any other
provision of this Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code
Section 33333.6(a), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or
indebtedness to be repaid from such allocations of taxes established or incurred by the
CDC to finance in whole or in part the Redevelopment Project shall be established or
incurred after January 1, 2004. Such loan, advance or indebtedness may be repaid over a
period of time longer than such time limit. Such time limitation may be extended only by
amendment of this Plan. This limit shall not prevent the CDC from incurring debt to be
repaid from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund or establishing more debt in
order to fulfill the CDC's housing obligations under Health and Safety Code Section
33413. In addition, this limit shall not prevent the CDC from refinancing, refunding, or
restructuring indebtedness after January 1, 2004, if the indebtedness is not increased and
the time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the data on which
the indebtedness would have been paid.
With respect to the Center City Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this Plan,
and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code Section 33333.6(a),
(g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or indebtedness to be
repaid from such allocations of taxes established or incurred by the CDC to finance in
3�
e.kkxtaemtr end sertmRsYklavisllxN seeimgsVemporary istanet fdealulk6cYdptm.doc 31
Adopted 7/18/95
whole or in part the Redevelopment Project shall he established or incurred after January
1, 2004. Such loan, advance or indebtedness may be repaid over a period of time longer
than such time limit. Such time limitation may be extended only by amendment of this
Plan. This limit shall not prevent the CDC from incurring debt to be repaid from the Low
and Moderate Income Housing Fund or establishing more debt in order to fulfill the
CDC's housing obligations under Health and Safety Code Section 33413. In addition,
this limit shall not prevent the CDC from refinancing, refunding, or restructuring
indebtedness after January 1, 2004, if the indebtedness is not increased and the time
during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the data on which the
indebtedness would have been paid.
With respect to the E.J. Christman2 Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Plan, and except as provided in this Section and health and Safety Code Section
33333.6(a), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or
indebtedness to be repaid from such allocations of taxes established or incurred by the
CDC to finance in whole or in part the Redevelopment Project shall be established or
incurred after January 1, 2004. Such loan, advance or indebtedness may be repaid over a
period of time longer than such time limit. Such time limitation may be extended only by
amendment of this Plan. This limit shall not prevent the CDC from incurring debt to be
repaid from'the Low and Moderate Income IIousing Fund or establishing more debt in
order to fulfill the CDC's housing obligations under Health and Safety Code Section
33413. In addition, this limit shall not prevent the CDC from refinancing, refunding, or
restructuring indebtedness after January 1, 2004, if the indebtedness is not increased and
the time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the data on which
the indebtedness would have been paid.
With respect to the Downtown Original Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code Section
33333.6(a), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or
indebtedness to be repaid from such allocations of taxes established or incurred by the
CDC to finance in whole or in part the Redevelopment Project shall be established or
incurred after January 1, 2004. Such loan, advance or indebtedness may be repaid over a
period of time longer than such time limit. Such time limitation may be extended only by
amendment of this Plan. This limit shall not prevent the CDC from incurring debt to be
repaid from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund or establishing more debt in
order to fulfill the CDC's housing obligations under Health and Safety Code Section
33413. In addition, this limit shall not prevent the CDC from refinancing, refunding, or
restructuring indebtedness after January 1, 2004, if the indebtedness is not increased and
the time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the data on which
the indebtedness would have been paid.
With respect to the Downtown 1985 Amendment Area, notwithstanding any other
provision of this Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code
Section 33333.6(a), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or
indebtednessto be repaid from such allocations of taxes established or incurred by the
c,d,amayrs and ,cuiugs4kLvuUocal seuuprsVemporary mrerrcr filesk+lkfieWplandot: 32
Adopted 7/18/95
CDC to finance in whole or in part the Redevelopment Project shall be established or
incurred after April 16, 200.5. Such loan, advance or indebtedness may be repaid over a
period of time longer than such time limit. Such time limitation may be extended only by
amendment of this Plan. This limit shall not prevent the CDC from incurring debt to be
repaid from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund or establishing more debt in
order to fulfill the CDC's housing obligations under Health and Safety Code Section
33413. In addition, this limit shall not prevent the CDC from refinancing, refunding, or
restructuring indebtedness after April 16, 2005, if the indebtedness is not increased and
the time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the data on which
the indebtedness would have been paid.
With respect to the Added Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this Plan, and
except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code Section 33333.2(a), or as
otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or indebtedness to be repaid from such
allocations of taxes established or incurred by the CDC to finance in whole or in part
activities authorized under this Plan shall be establishedor incurred after 20 years
following approval of the ordinance adopting this Plan. Such loan, advance or
indebtedness may he repaid over a period of time longer than such time limit. Such time
limitation may be extended only by amendment of this Plan. This limit shall not prevent
the CDC from incurring debt to be repaid from the Low and Moderate Income Housing
Fund or establishing more debt in order to fulfill the CDC's housing obligations under
Health and Safety Code Section 33413. In addition, this limit shall not prevent the CDC
from refinancing, refunding, or restructuring indebtedness after 20 years following
approval of the ordinance adopting this Plan, if the indebtedness is not increased and the
time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the date on which the
indebtedness would have been paid.
C. (803) CDC Bonds
The CDC is authorized to issue bonds and other obligations from time to time, if it deems
it appropriate to do so, in order to finance all or any part of Plan implementation
activities.
Neither the members of the CDC nor any persons executing the bonds arc liable
personally on the bonds or other obligations by reason of their issuance.
The bonds and other obligations of the CDC are not a debt of the City or the State; nor are
any of its political subdivisions liable for them; nor in any event shall the bonds or
obligations be payable out of any funds or properties other than those of the CDC; and
such bonds and other obligations shall so state on their face. The bonds and other
obligations do not constitute an indebtedness within the meaning of any constitutional or
statutory debt limitation or restriction.
c:4k,cwnetns en1 eeltiag041.1v.Vooal a ntvt(sVary+nrnry mtxnet 11ks1olkbeYJp4udoo 33
Adopted 7/18/95
The amount of bonded indebtedness, to be repaid in whole or in part from the allocation
of taxes pursuant to Section 33670 of the Redevelopment Law, which can be outstanding
at one time shall not exceed $100.0 million, except by amendment to this Plan.
D. (804) Other Loans and Grants
Any other loans, grants, guarantees or financial assistance from the federal government,
the State, or any other public or private source will be utilized, if available, as appropriate
in carrying out this Plan. In addition, the CDC may make loans as permitted by law to
public or private entitics for any of its redevelopment purposes.
E. (805) Rehabilitation Loans, Grants, and Rebates
The CDC and the City may commit funds from any source to rehabilitation programs for
the purposes of Loans, grants, or rebate payments for self -financed rehabilitation work.
The rules and regulations for such programs shall be those which may already exist or
which may be developed in the future. The CDC and the City shall seek to acquire grant
funds and direct loan allocations from State and federal sources, as they may be available
from time to time, for the carrying out of such programs.
SECTION IX. (900) ACTIONS BY TILE CITY
The City shall aid and cooperate with the CDC in carrying out this Plan and shall take all
reasonable actions necessary to ensure the continued fulfillment of the purposes of this Plan and
to prevent the recurrence or spread in the Project Area of conditions of blight. Actions by the
City may include, but shall not be limited to, the following:
Institution and completion of proceedings for opening, closing, vacating,
widening, or changing the grades of streets, alleys, and other public rights -
of -way, and for other necessary modifications of the streets, the street
layout, and other public rights -of -way in the Project Area. Such action by
the City shall include the requirement of abandonment and relocation by
the public utility companies of their operations in public rights -of -way as
appropriate to carry out this Plan, provided that nothing in this Plan shall
be deemed to require the cost of such abandonment, removal, and
relocation to be borne by others than those legally required to bear such
costs.
2. Institution and completion of proceedings necessary for changes and
improvements to publicly -owned parcels and utilities in the Project Area.
3. Performance of the above, and of all other functions and services relating
to public health, safety, and physical development normally rendered in
accordance with a schedule which will permit the redevelopment of the
cAdocwnsxc and vvlogs\ddavuVtxvl srni gAtemlxuary interne fiL.b&6eVdplau.due 34
Adopted 71 t 8195
3�
Project Area to be commenced and carried to completion without
unnecessary delays.
4. Imposition, whenever necessary, of appropriate design controls within the
limits of this Plan in the Project Area to ensure proper development and
use of land.
5. Provisions for administration/enforcement of this Plan by the City after
completion of development.
6. The undertaking and completion of any other proceedings necessary to
carry out the Project.
7. The expenditure of any City funds in connection with redevelopment of
the Project Area pursuant to this Plan.
8. Revision of the City zoning ordinance, adoption of specific plans or
execution of statutory development agreements to permit the land uses and
facilitate the development authorized by this Plan.
SECTION X. (1000) ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT
Upon adoption, the administration and enforcement of this Plan or other documents
implementing this Plan shall be performed by the City and/or the CDC, as appropriate.
The provisions of this Plan or other documents entered into pursuant to this Plan may also be
enforced by litigation or similar proceedings by either the CDC or the City. Such remedies may
include, but arc not limited to, specific performance, damages, re-entry onto property, power of
termination, or injunctions. In addition, any recorded provisions which are expressly for the
benefit of owners of property in the Project Area may be enforced by such owners.
SECTION XI. (1100) DURATION OF THIS PLAN
With respect to the E.J. Christmanl Area, except for the nondiscrimination and nonsegregation
provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire on November 18,
2009. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to this Plan except
to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenants, contracts, or other
obligations.
With respect to the South Bay Town and Country Area, except for the nondiscrimination and
nonsegregation provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire
on June 24, 2015. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to this
Plan except to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenants, contracts,
or other obligations.
c Vlouur rms and sea 'vtgs\gIJevislk,vy uctingsucnpormy inwnet fikssolkGc\aJylmJoc 35
Adopted 7/ I $/9i
With respect to the Center City Area, except for the nondiscrimination and nonsegregation
provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire on April 13,
2016. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to this Plan except
to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenants, contracts, or other
obligations.
With respect to the E.J. Christman2 Area, except for the nondiscrimination and nonsegregation
provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire on December 13,
2017. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to this Plan except
to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenants, contracts, or other
obligations.
With respect to the Downtown Original Area, except for the nondiscrimination and
nonsegregation provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire
on December 1, 2021. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to
this Plan except to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenants,
contracts, or other obligations.
With respect to the Downtown 1985 Amendment Area, except for the nondiscrimination and
nonsegregation provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire
on April 16, 2025. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to
this Plan except to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenants,
contracts, or other obligations.
With respect to the Added Area, except for the nondiscrimination and nonsegregation provisions
which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire 30 years following adoption
of the ordinance approving this Plan. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to
act pursuant to this Plan except to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing
covenants, contracts, or other obligations.
SECTION XII. (1200) PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT
This Plan may be amended by means of the procedure established in Sections 33450-33458 of
the Redevelopment Law or by any other procedure hereafter established by law.
c�dnamrms and satingOddn.is'y.cal settings `+rnY..ruy iutctw fleSnhG:Wplau.kn 36
Adopted 7/18/95
EXHIBIT "A"
..I •I .F-I' IIII _'Il uli I I1:1.'J ri: . Iii:ll ily:li lii .r111�.1.,i 'r
❑mit:t'lel 'i'In r:NLlla_ •11111,ll. ur nll:r l, -1D �� Palm
Ct 711'*
'Blau 'uulI.0 IIi ❑, u�. =ii .
.■ :I JIIIIII II ILu1I. 1•.�1., :'r�-- -i •�
-u I I: I II II - In n1! 11• :II III:llllllllllllll �.=. ,
:I: (•l1± 'I,• :III IIr 111111'II: 11�11
IIIIII IIII IIII' - = i'•� I:i It liI •jj- =�
�IIIP :III III L'. Inr n 11.. 1 ■ 111111YIIIIIL'.=1, =•••• •�
11 n1 i.ul�1=� _L �_ .I� ■ • 11i1 9T),_'...11 INlllila iI ll.I.
iil11 IIII IIIII .I' -- - ••-. 1. :r_ _I.r..11111111=1�� l.`1 ,
•.. •O:
.I llllli•.I1� I I:
G 111 .-1J11�,: ai.]IIn 171j cu)�
1N • ,•. 'Ir .f 611 ■II �I�LIJr 1111:lIll
Erpiusie =311
4-N111111 ^II'
.11,f P° spat i.* 1.0111
I Li �JKasta
`'YY• ai:It-„f1 Illalllll
Inli 1:1MAa71,IIlu
Illullll: tI!It i7
National City Redevelopment Project - Parcels Subject to the 2007 Amendment
OProject Area Boundary - 2007 Amendrnent Area
Municipal Boundary
Source: National City Planning
O1h O)5
EXHIBIT "B"
DEVELLOPMENT
COMMISSION
OF THE
NATIONAL CITY
National City
Redevelopment
Project Area
J
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
EXISTING AREA
AREA "A"
The perimeter description of this Project, situated in the City of National
City, County of San Diego, State of California, is as follows:
All that portion of the incorporated territory of the City
of National City, County of San Diego, State of California,
described as follows:
Beginning at the point of intersection of the centerlines
of Division Street and Highland Avenue, being on the
common boundary line between the City of National City
and the City of San Diego; thence South 72' 14' 16" West
along said centerline of Division Street 3035 feet more
or less to the Easterly line .of Interstate High -...ay
Route 5: thence along' said Easterly line as follows:
Sc::th 12' 50' 02" East 73.38 feet; thence South 50' 10'
East 28.46 feet; thence Southerly along the arc of a
200 foot radius curve 65.72 feet; thence South 17° 45' 15'
East 1706.82 feet; thence South 12' 02' 37' East 80.40
feet; thence South 17° 45' 15" mast 290.36 feet; thence
South 72° 14' 25" West 110.07 feet to a tangent 31 foot
radius curve concave Easterly; thence Southerly along
the arc of said curve 48.69 feet; thence South 17° 45' 15"
East 36.78 feet; thence South 3° 59' 30" West 172.85 feet;
thence South 17° 45' 15" East 61.98 feet; thence South
72' 14' 25" West 136.32 feet; thence South 16° 06' 59"
West 96.36 feet; thence South 17° 45' 15" East 59.01 feet;
thence South 18° 07' West 235.91 feet; thence Southerly
along the arc of a 144 foot radius curve concave Easterly
159.60 feet; thence South 18° 08' 56" West 66.10 feet;
thence South 5° 35' 40' East 22.37 feet; thence South
18' 08' 56" West 210.39 feet; thence North' 72° 14' 25"
East 69.20 feet; thence South 17° 07' 17' West 294.76
feet; thence South 5' 17' West 58.63 feet; thence South
14. 51' 00" West 432.91 feet; thence South 41' 43' West
23.92 feet; thence Southerly along the arc of a 162 foot
radius curve concave Southeasterly 144.17 feet; thence
South 8° 15' West 55.65 feet; thence South 17° 45' 09"
East 76.61 feet; thence South 54' 39' East 132.23 feet;
thence South 72. 14' 25" West 208.44 feet; thence South
9. 15' West 191.03 feet; thence South 17° 45' 40" East
186.31 feet; thence South 0' 40' 00" East 119.07 feet;
thence South 17' 45' 40" East 1050.81 feet; thence South
17° 44' 00" East 7440 feet more or less to the Southerly
line of Quarter Section 160 of Rancho de la Nacion on
the common boundary line between the City of National
City and the City of Chula Vista; thence along said
boundary North 72° 08' 04' East 1940 feet more or less
to the Easterly line of National City Boulevard, 100 feet wide;
thence Northerly along said Easterly line 2306 feet to
the Southerly line of Lot 1 of Quarter Section 151 of said
Rancho de la Nacion Map No. 166; thence Easterly along said
Southerly line 600 feet more or less to the Easterly line
of the Westerly half of said Lot 1; thence Northerly along
said Easterly line 330 feet to the Northerly line of said
Quarter Section 151; thence Easterly along said Northerly
line 660 feet to the North and South centerline of Quarter -
Section 151; thence Southerly along said line 1317 feet -
to the Southwest corner of Lot 13; thence Easterly along
said Southerly line 240 feet to the centerline of Sweet-
water River; thence along said centerline Southwesterly
300 feet more or less to the Westerly line of Lot 12 of
Quarter Section 151; thence Southerly along the Westerly
line of Lots 12 and 11, a distance of 370 feet to the
Northerly line of the Southerly 130 feet of. said Lot 11;
tnence Easterly along said Southerly line 1274 feet to
the Westerly line of Highland Avenue; thence Northerly
along said Westerly line 502 feet to the Westerly prolonga-
tion of the Northerly line of Trousdale Drive; thence
Easterly along said prolongation 100 feet to the Easterly
line of said 'Highland Avenue; thence Northerly along said
Easterly line 1342 feet to the Northerly line of Quarter
Section 135 of Rancho de la Nacion; thence North 70° 42' 39"
East along said Northerly line 1144.85 feet to an angle
point on the Easterly line•of Parcel 2 of Parcel Map No.
1308; thence along said line North 43° 34' 25" East 17.09
feet; thence North 7' 25' 35" West 125 feet; thence North
1° 08' i5" West 66.84 feet; thence North 40' OH' 25" East
170.40 feet to the Easterly Line of Lot 4 of Quarter Sec-
tion 134 of said Rancho de la Nacion; thence North
19° 07' 45" West along said Easterly line 419.48 feet
to the Northerly line of 30th Street, Road Survey No. 1323;
thence Easterly along said Northerly line to the Westerly
line of Edgemere Avenue, Road Survey No. 670; thence
Southeasterly along said Westerly line to the Northerly
line of State Highway Route 54; thence Easterly along said
Northerly line to the Southwesterly corner of Sweetwater
Town s Country Shopping Center Mao No. 8432; thence along
the boundary line thereof, North 82° 33' 20" East 243.83
2
feet; thence Easterly along the arc of a 1700 foot radius
curve 391.13 feet; thence South 79° 21' 42" East 809.08
feet; thence South 81° 09' 17" East 223.73 feet; thence
Easterly along the arc of a 225 foot radius curve 155.79
feet to a compound curve having a radius of 100 feet;
thence Northerly along said curve 204.61 feet; thence North
58' 13' 38" West 176.15 feet; thence Northerly along the
arc of a 350 foot radius curve 222.34 feet; thence North
22' 06' 31" West 282.67 feet; thence North 71' 15' 46"
West 105.74 feet; thence North 69" 22' 14" West 209.66
feet; thence North 78' 34' 34" West 208.58 feet; thence
Westerly along the arc of a 957 foot radius curve 350 feet
more or less to a point On the boundary line of Course
No. 6 of the City'of National City Ordinance No. 1019;
thence along said boundary being along the Southerly pro-
longation of the Easterly line of Lot 52 of Lincoln Acres
Map No. 1740, North 29° 17' 30" West 150 feet to the North-
easterly corner of said Lot 52; thence Northeasterly along
the Southeasterly line of Grove Street as shown on said
Map No. 1740, 215 feet; thence Northwesterly 185.26 feet
to a point on the Easterly line of Lot 4 of said Map No.
1740;. thence North 31' 54' West to the Northeast corner
of•said Lot 4; thence South 71' 05' West 49.37 feet;
thence South 58' 06' West along the Northerly lines of
Lots 4 and 3 a distance of_101.80 feet to the Easterly
line of Lot 20 of said Map No. 1740; thence North
52' 06' West along said line 106.44 feet to the North
line of the South 100'feet of Lots 20 and 21 of said Map
No. 1740; thence along said line South 58' 06' West 230
feet to the West line of said Lot 20; thence North
18° 55' West along the West line of said Map No. 1740
a distance of 370 feet more or less to an angle point on
the boundary line of the City of National City, Ordinance
No. 1061; thence Easterly along the Southerly line thereof
50 feet to the Easterly line of Lincoln Court; thence
Northerly along said Easterly line 48 feet to the South
line of Lot 15 of said Map No. 1740; thence North 61* 12' 30"
East 296.52 feet to the Southeast corner of said Lot 15; _
thence.North 28° 47' 30" West 142.40 feet along the West-
erly line of Lots 11 and 12 to the Southerly line of the
North 20 feet of said Lot 12; tnence North 61' 12' 30"
East 85 feet more or'less along said Southerly line to
an angle point on said boundary line of the City of
National city last mentioned; thence Northerly along the
Easterly line thereof 92.16 feet to the Southerly line of
said Lincoln Court; thence North 72° 49' 00" East along said
Southerly line 82.20 feet to the Southerly prolongation of the
Westerly line of Lot 27 of said Map No. 1740; thence along
said prolongation and along said line North 19' 03' 00"
West 330 feet to the Northwesterly corner of said Lot 27;
thence North 44° 14' East 111.90 feet to the Southwest
corner of Lot 30 of said Map No. 1740; thence North
19' 03' 00" West 230 feet to the Northwest corner of Lot 31
of said Map No. 1740; thence South 81' 34' 00" East
162.79 feet to a point on the bounaary line of Rae Place
as shown on said Map No.e1740; thence Northeasterly along
the arc of a 40 foot radius Curve 62.83 feet to the West-
erly line of Lot 33 of said Map No. 1740; thence North
19° 03' 00" West 43 feet along said Westerly line to the
Southerly line of Lot 4 of Las Palmas Park Villas, Map
No. 9128; thence along said Southerly line North 72° 13'
East 120 feet to an angle point thereon; tnence South
17° 53' 09" East 97 feet; thence North 73° 13' East 120
feet; thence South 17" 53' 09" East 2.82 feet; thence
North 71' 57' 37" East 255 feet more or less to the East-
erly line of Newell Street as shown on the Westerly line
of Interstate Route 805; thence along said Westerly line
of said Interstate Route 805 as follows: Northerly along
the arc of a 330 foot radius curve 43.99 feet; thence
North 12' 07' 40" West 258.68 feet; thence Northerly
3
along the arc of a 1030 foot radius curve 98.37 feet;
thence North 17. 36' West 685.32 feet; thence Northerly
along the arc of a 1030 foot radius curve 93.65 feet:
thence North 22' 48' 34" Wes: 263.55 feet; thence Northerly
along the arc of a 970 foot radius curve 88.19 feet; thence
North 17° 36' West 809.97 feet; thence North 10° 47' 26"
East 42.23 feet; thence North 17' 41' 02" West 200.33
feet; thence North 25° 18' 39" West 474.78 feet; thence
North 45° 50' 36" West 67.83 feet; thence North 17' 43' 57"
West 125.00 feet; thence North 31° 33' 50" West 688.61
feet; thence South 78° 59' 11" West 26.20 feet; thence
North 45° 54' 02" West 17.68 feet; thence South 78. 59' 11"
West 96.00 feet; thence North 15° 23' 31" West 30.29 feet;
thence North 43° 19' 20" West 105.88 feet; thence North
17. 44' 49" West 20 feet; thence North 56° 59' 46" East
106.76 feet; thence North 23° 34' 11" West 190.01 feet;
thence North 3. 36' 49" West 142.30 feet; thence North
17. 53' 05" West 540.09 feet; thence North 27° 06' 55"
East 35.36 feet; thence North 17. 53' 05" West 308.70
feet; thence North 25' 49' 53" West 180.84 feet; thence
North 17. 53' 05' West 200 feet; thence North
21' 47' 45" West 250.59 feet; thence North 28° 01' 52°
West 99.44 feet; thence South 61. 58' 08" West 42.24 feet:
thence North 17. 52' 10" West 236.99 feet; thence North
57° 37' 09" West 172.52 feet; thence North 39° 07' 16"
West 452.83 feet; thence South 72° 13' 30" West 6.64 feet;
thence North 17° 46' 30" West 89.72 feet; thence North
46. 21' 02' West 113.63 feet; thence South 72' 00' 25"
West 50.35 feet; thence North 40' 42' 58" West 283.16
feet; thence North 55° 54$ 39" West 457.20 feet; thence
North 50. 24' 12" West 661.84 feet; thence Northerly
along the arc of a 30 foot radius curve 64.23 feet; thence
North 59' 31' 47" West 107.30 feet; thence Northerly along
the arc of a 30 foot radius curve 33.50 feet; thence North
43' 45' 17" West 244.18 feet; thence Northerly along the arc
of a 599 foot radius curve 114.56 feet; thence North
74° 26' 28" West 222.29 feet; thence North 28" 30' 14"
West 28.97 feet; thence North 48° 01' 12" West 188.16 feet
to the common boundary line of the City of San Diego and
the City of National City; thence along said line South'-
0° 45' 45" West 50.99 feet to an angle point thereon:
thence South 89' 58' West along said line 637.21 feet to
the West line of Lot 70 feet Horton's Purchase Man No.
283; thence North 0° 01' 30" East along the test line
thereof 218 feet to the centerline of Delta Street; thence
along said centerline South 89° 55' 25" West 1335.78 feet
to the centerline of Highland Avenue: thence Southerly
along said centerline being along said common boundary
1500 feet more or less to the point of beginning.
The land area contained within the Project Boundary is approximately
2,080 acres.
4
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
ADDED AREA
AREA "B"
Those properties located in the City of National City, County of San Diego, State of
California, described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the Southerly Right-of-way of 8th Street and the
Westerly Right-of-way of Interstate 5; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way the
following courses: South 17°45'09" East 150.03 feet; thence South 12°04'00" East
-100.63 feet; thence South 08°26'44" East 284.00 feet; thence South 13°50'25"
West 152.72 feet; thence South 16°06'34" West 332.55 feet; thence South
17°45'40" East 186.36 feet; thence South 08 ° 23' 31 " West 499.35 feet; .thence
South 15°38'16" West 108.99 feet; thence South 20°20'00" West 89.72 feet;
thence South 49°07'00" West 25.00 feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way
South 06°41'56" East 233.22 feet to an angle point in said Westerly Right-of-way;
thence continuing along said Westerly Right-of-way the following courses: South
17°45'40" East 604.39 feet; thence South 26930'24" East 52.61 feet; thence South
17°45'40" East 2245.01 feet; thence South 02°39'23" East 333.59 feet; thence
South 52°52'19" West 24.46 feet; thence South 72°14'00" West 260.17 feet;
thence South 17°45'40" East 80.00 feet; thence South 88°45'34" East 182.30 feet;
thence South 79°41'54" East 120.04 feet; thence South 31°19'37" East 268.23
feet; thence South 30°11'05" West 66.08 feet; thence South 27°10'57" East 34.34
feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way along the boundary of Record of -
Survey 11749, South 72°16'11" West 307.21 feet; thence South 17°43'49" East
164.89 feet; thence South 72° 16' 1 1 " West 316.34 feet to the beginning of a non -
tangent 1652.28 foot radius curve concave Southwesterly, to which a radial line
bears North 76°38'43" East; thence Southeasterly along the arc of said curve and the
Easterly Right-of-way of the San Diego and Arizona Eastern Railroad as shown on said
Record of Survey 11749 through a central angle of 02°26'51" a distance of 70.58
feet; thence South 10°54'26" East 504;27 feet to the beginning of a tangent
1213.11 foot radius curve concave Northeasterly; thence Southeasterly along the arc
of said curve through a central angle of 06°22'46" a distance of 135.07 feet; thence
North 72°42'48" East 10.00 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent 1203.11 foot
radius curve concave Northeasterly, to which a radial line bears South 72°42'48"
West; thence Southeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of
34°14'07" a distance of 718.88 feet; thence South 51°31'18" East 233.81 feet to
the beginning of a non -tangent 598.69 foot radius curve concave Southwesterly, to
which a radial line bears North 38°57'27" East; thence Southeasterly along the arc
of said curve through a central angle of 33°18'19" a distance of 348.01 feet; thence
South 17°44'14" East 71.01 feet; thence South 17°42'10" East 971.98 feet to the
City of National City/Chula Vista City boundary; thence leaving said Easterly railroad
Right-of-way Southwesterly along said City boundary as shown on Miscellaneous Map
564 South 72°15'22" West 1629.76 feet to the intersection of the Southerly
prolongation of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue; thence along said
prolongation and the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue North 17°45'40"
West 1031.20 feet to the intersection of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands
Avenue and the Southerly Right-of-way of 32nd Street; thence North 23°03'04"
West 108.46 feet to the intersection of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue
and the Northerly Right-of-way of 32nd Street; thence along the Easterly Right-of-way
of Tidelands Avenue North 17°45'40" West 2430.00 feet to the Southerly Right-of-
way of 24th Street; thence North 17°07'00" West 80.00 feet to the Northerly Right-
of-way line of said 24th Street said point being also on the Easterly Right-of-way of
said Tidelands Avenue; thence along the Easterly Right-of-way line of said Tidelands
Avenue North 15°00'40" West 15.02 feet, said point being a prolongation of the
Right-of-way of said 24th Street; thence leaving said Easterly Right-of-way of
Tidelands Avenue South 72° 14'20" West along said prolongation and Northerly Right-
of-way of said 24th Street 360.37 feet to an angle point in said Northerly Right-of-
way of 24th Street; thence continuing along said Northerly Right-of-way of 24th
Street South 17°45'40" East 15.00 feet to an angle point in said Northerly Right-of-
way of 24th Street; thence along said Northerly Right-of-way of said 24th Street and
a prolongation thereof South 72°14'20" West 715.55 feet to a point on the. U.S.
Bulkhead Line; thence along said U.S. Bulkhead Line North 06°35'32" West 314.21
feet to a point on the boundary of the San Diego Unified Port District lands; thence
along said boundary North 83°24'28" East 107.43 feet; thence North 06°35'32"
West 160.57 feet to the beginning of a tangent 564.18 foot radius curve concave
Southeasterly; thence Northeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central
angle of 74°24'15" a distance of 732.64 feet; thence North 06°35'32" West
1037.74 feet; thence North 83°24'28" East 269.08 feet; thence North 06°35'32" -
West 1587.95 feet; thence North 83°24'28" East 583.96 feet to a point on the
Westerly Right-of-way line of Tidelands Avenue; thence leaving said Port District lands
along said Westerly Right-of-way line of Tidelands Avenue North 10°03'44" East
365.20 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way line of Civic Center Drive (formerly 13th
Street); thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East 147.09 feet
to a point on the Westerly Right-of-way of the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe
Railroad; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way North 05°48'13" East 67.47 feet
to the beginning of a tangent 5679.65 foot radius curve concave Westerly; thence
Northerly along said curve through a central angle of 02°29'39" an arc distance of
247.24 feet to an intersection with the centerline of 12th Street (now closed); thence
leaving the. said Westerly Railroad Right-of-way along said centerline North 72° 14'20"
East 474.70 feet to the Westerly Right-of-way of McKinley Avenue; thence along said
Westerly Right-of-way North 17°45'40" West 40.00 feet to the Northerly Right-of-
way of 12th Street; thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72° 14'20" East
40.00 feet to the centerline of McKinley Avenue (now closed); thence along said
centerline North 17°45'40" West 330.37 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way of 11th
Street (now closed); thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72° 14'20" East
290.25 feet to the Westerly Right-of-way of Taft Avenue; thence along said Westerly
Right-of-way North 17°45'07" West 910.30 feet to the Southerly Right-of-way of
8th Street; thence along said Southerly Right-of-way North 72°14'25" East 466.14
feet to the Point of Beginning.
Containing 317 acres more or Tess.
The above description was compiled or calculated from existing available record
information and not a field survey by Rick Engineering Company. -
Chris D. Ciremele L.S. 5267
1-24-94 J-12174
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
BOUNDARY OF HARBOR DISTRICT PRELIMINARY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
Those properties located in the City of National City, County of San Diego, State of
California, described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the Southerly Right-of-way of 8th Street and the
Westerly Right-of-way of Interstate 5; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way the
following courses: South 17°45'09" East 150.03 feet; thence South 12°04'00" East
100.63 feet; thence South 08 ° 26'44" East 284.00 feet; thence South 13 ° 50'25"
West 152.72 feet; thence South 16°06'34" West 332.55 feet; thence South
17°45'40" East 186.36 feet; thence South 08°23'31" West 499.35 feet; thence
South 15°38'16" West 108.99 feet; thence South 20°20'00" West 89.72 feet;
thence South 49°07'00" West 25.00 feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way
South 06°41'56" East 233.22 feet to an angle point in said Westerly Right-of-way;
thence continuing along said Westerly Right-of-way the following courses: South
17°45'40" East 604.39 feet; thence South 26°30'24" East 52.61 feet; thence South
17°45'40" East 2245.01 feet; thence South 02°39'23" East 333.59 feet; thence
South 52°52'19" West 24.46 feet; thence South 72°14'00" West 260.17 feet;
thence South 17°45'40" East 80.00 feet; thence South 88°45'34" East 182.30 feet;
thence South 79°41'54" East 120.04 feet; thence South 31°19'37" East 268.23
feet; thence South 30°11'05" West 66.08 feet; thence South 27°10'57" East 34.34
feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way along the boundary of Record of
Survey 11749, South 72°16'11" West 307.21 feet; thence South 17°43'49" East
164.89 feet; thence South 72°16'11" West 316.34 feet to the beginning of a non -
tangent 1652.28 foot radius curve concave Southwesterly, to which a radial line
bears North 76°38'43" East; thence Southeasterly along the arc of said curve and the
Easterly Right-of-way of the San Diego and Arizona Eastern Railroad as shown on said
Record of Survey 11749 through a central angle of 02°26'51" a distance of 70.58
feet; thence South 10°54'2a" East 504.27 feet to the beginning of a tangent
1213.11 foot radius curve concave Northeasterly; thence Southeasterly along the arc
of said curve through a central angle of 06°22'46" a distance of 135.07 feet; thence
North 72°42'48" East 10.00 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent 1203.11 foot
radius curve concave Northeasterly, to which a radial line bears South 72°42'48"
West; thence Southeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of
34°14'07" a distance of 718.88 feet; thence South 51°31'18" East 233.81 feet to
the beginning of a non -tangent 598.69 foot radius curve concave Southwesterly, to
which a radial fine bears North 38°57'27" East; thence Southeasterly along the arc
of said curve through a central angle of 33 ° 18' 19" a distance of 348.01 feet; thence
South 17°44'14" East 71.01 feet; thence South 17°42'10" East 971.98 feet to the
City of National City/Chula Vista City boundary; thence leaving said Easterly railroad
Right-of-way Southwesterly along said City boundary as shown on Miscellaneous Map
'[g
564 South .72°15'22" West 1629.76 feet to the intersection of the Southerly
prolongation of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue; thence along said
prolongation and the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue North 17°45'40"
West 1031.20 feet to the intersection of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands
Avenue and the Southerly Right-of-way of 32nd Street; thence North 23°03'04"
West 108.46 feet to the intersection of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue
and the Northerly Right-of-way of 32nd Street; thence along the Easterly Right-of-way
of Tidelands Avenue North 17°45'40" West 2430.00 feet to the Southerly Right-of-
way of 24th Street; thence North 17°07'00" West 80.00 feet to the Northerly Right-
of-way line of said 24th Street said point being also on the Easterly Right-of-way of
said Tidelands Avenue; thence along the Easterly Right-of-way line of said Tidelands
Avenue North 15 °00'40" West 15.02 feet, said point being a prolongation of the
Right-of-way of said 24th Street; thence leaving said Easterly Right-of-way of
Tidelands Avenue South 72° 14'20" West along said prolongation and Northerly Right-
of-way of said 24th Street 360.37 feet to an angle point in said Northerly Right-of-
way of 24th Street; thence continuing along said Northerly Right-of-way of 24th _
Street South 17°45'40" East 15.00 feet to an angle point in said Northerly Right-of-
way of 24th Street; thence along said Northerly Right-of-way of said 24th Street and
a prolongation thereof South 72°14'20" West 715.55 feet to a point on the U.S.
Bulkhead Line; thence along said U.S. Bulkhead Line North 06°35'32" West 314.21
feet to a point on the boundary of the San Diego Unified Port District lands; thence
along said boundary North 83°24'28" East 107.43 feet; thence North 06°35'32"
West 160.57 feet to the beginning of a tangent 564.18 foot radius curve concave
Southeasterly; thence Northeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central
angle of 74°24'15" a distance of 732.64 feet; thence North 06°35'32" West
1037.74 feet; thence North 83°24'28" East 269.08 feet; thence North 06°35'32"
West 1587.95 feet; thence North 83°24'28" East 583.96 feet to a point on the
Westerly Right-of-way line of Tidelands Avenue; thence leaving said Port District lands
along said Westerly Right-of-way line of Tidelands Avenue North 10°03'44" East
365.20 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way line of Civic Center Drive (formerly 13th
Street); thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East 147.09 feet
to a point on the Westerly Right-of-way of the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe
Railroad; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way North 05 °48' 13" East 67.47 feet
to the beginning of a tangent 5679.65 foot radius curve concave Westerly; thence
Northerly along said curve through a central angle of 02°29'39" an arc distance of
247.24 feet to an intersection with the centerline of 12th Street (now closed); thence
leaving the said Westerly Railroad Right-of-way along said centerline North 72° 14'20"
East 474.70 feet to the Westerly Right-of-way of McKinley Avenue; thence along said
Westerly Right-of-way North 17°45'40" West 40.00 feet to the Northerly Right-of-
way of 12th Street; thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East
40.00 feet to the centerline of McKinley Avenue (now closed); thence along said
centerline North 17°45'40" West 330.37 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way of 11th
Street (now closed); thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East
290.25 feet to the Westerly Right-of-way of Taft Avenue; thence along said Westerly
Right-of-way North 17°45'07" West 910.30 feet to the Southerly Right-of-way of
8th Street; thence along said Southerly Right-of-way North 72°14'25" East 466.14
4p9
feet to the Point of Beginning.
Containing 542 acres more or less.
The above description was compiled or calculated from existing available record
information and not a field survey by Rick Engineering Company.
Chris D. Ciremele L.S. 5267
1-24-94 J-12174
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
SUBAREA 1 OF HARBOR DISTRICT PRELIMINARY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
These properties located in the City of National City, County of San Diego, State of
California, described as.follows:
Beginning at Point "A", as described in Subarea 3 of Harbor District Preliminary
Redevelopment Plan; thence South 17°45'40" East 80.00 feet; thence South
88°45'34" East 182.30 feet; thence South 79°41'54" East 120.04 feet; thence
South 31°19'37" East 268.23 feet; thence South 30°11'05" West 66.08 feet;
thence South 27° 10'57" East 34.34 feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way
along the boundary of Record of Survey 11749 on file in the office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, South 72° 16' 1 1 " West 307.21 feet; thence South
17°43'49" East 164.89 feet; thence South 72° 16' 1 1 " West 316.34 feet to the
beginning of a non -tangent 1652.28 foot radius curve concave Southwesterly, to
which a radial line bears North 76°38'43" East; thence Southeasterly along the arc
of said curve and the Easterly Right-of-way of the San diego and Arizona Eastern
Railroad as shown on said Record of Survey 11749 through a central angle of
02°26'51" a distance of 70.58 feet; thence South 10°54'26" East 504.27 feet to
the beginning of a tangent 1213.11 foot radius curve concave Northeasterly; thence
Southeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 06°22'46" a
distance of 135.07 feet; thence North 72°42'48" East 10.00 feet to the beginning
of a non -tangent 1203.11 foot radius curve concave Northeasterly, to which a radial
line bears South 72°42'48" West; thence Southeasterly along the arc of said curve
through a Central angle of 34°14'07" a distance of 718.88 feet; thence South
51 °31'18" East 233.81 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent 598.69 foot radius
curve concave Southwesterly, to which a radial line bears North 38°57'27" East;
thence Southeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 33° 18' 19"
a distance of 348.01 feet; thence South 17°44'14" East 71.01 feet; thence South
17°42'10" East 971.98 feet to the City of National City/Chula Vista City boundary;
thence leaving said easterly railroad Right-of-way Southwesterly along said City
boundaries shown on Miscellaneous Map 564 South 72°15'22" West 1629.76 feet
to the intersection of the prolongation of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands
Avenue; thence along said prolongation and the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands
Avenue North 17°45'40" West 1031.20 feet to the intersection of the Easterly Right-
of-way of Tidelands Avenue and the Souhterly Right-of-way of 32nd Street; thence
North 23°03'04" West 108.46 feet to the intersection of the Easterly Right-of-way
of Tidelands Avenue and the Northerly Right-of-way of 32nd Street; thence along the
Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue North 17°45'40" West 2430.00 feet to
the Southerly Right-of-way of said 24th Street; thence North 17°07'00" West 80.00
51
feet to the Northerly Right-of-way line of said 24th Street; thence along said Northerly
Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East 1600.52 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 126 acres more or less.
The above description was compiled or calculated from existing available record
information and not a field survey by Rick Engineering Company
CA,„, r,,,o Qk
Chris D. Ciremele 1-24-94
L.S. 5267 (Job No. 12174)
sa
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
SUBAREA 2 OF HARBOR DISTRICT PRELIMINARY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
Those properties located in the City of National City, County of San Diego, State of
California, described as follows:
Beginning at Point "A", as described in Subarea 3 of Harbor District Preliminary
Redevelopment Plan; thence Westerly along the Northerly Right-of-way of 24th Street
South 72°14'20" West 389.83 feet to a point on the Westerly Right-of-way of
Harrison Avenue, said point being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing
along the Northerly Right-of-way of said 24th Street South 72°14'20" West 1210.69
feet to the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue; thence Northerly along the
Easterly Right-of-way of said Tidelands Avenue North 15 °00'40" West 15.02 feet;
thence leaving said Right-of-way along the Northerly Right-of-way of 24th Street
South 72°14'20" West 360.37 feet to an angle point in said Northerly Right-of-way
of 24th Street; thence continuing along said Right-of-way South 17°45'40" East
15.00 feet; thence South 72°14'20" West 715.55 feet to the U.S. Bulkhead line as
shown on Miscellaneous Map 564; thence along said line North 06°35'32" West
314.21 feet to a point on the boundary of the San Diego Unified Port District lands;
thence along said boundary North 83°24'28" East 107.43 feet; thence North
06°35'32" West 160.57 feet to the beginning of a tangent 564.18 foot radius curve
concave Southeasterly; thence Northeasterly along the arc of said curve through a
central angle of 74° 24' 15" a distance of 732.64 feet; thence North 06°35'32" West
1037.74 feet; thence North 83°24'28" East 269.08 feet; thence North 06°35'32"
West 1587.95 feet; thence North 83°24'28" East 583.96 feet to a point on the
Westerly Right-of-way line of Tidelands Avenue; thence Leaving said Port District lands
along said Westerly Right-of-way line of Tidelands Avenue North 10°03'44" East
365.20 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way line of Civic Center Drive (formerly 13th
Street); thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72° 14' 20" East 102.64 feet
to the centerline of Harrison Avenue; thence Southerly along said centerline South
17°45'40" East 3301.70 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way line of 23rd Street;
thence along said Northerly Right-of-way line of 23rd Street South 72°14'20" West
40.00 feet to the Westerly Right-of-way of Harrison Avenue; thence along said
Westerly Right-of-way South 17°45'40" East 330.20 feet to the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
Containing 113 acres more or Tess.
The above description was compiled or calculated from existing available record
information and not a field survey by Rick En•ineering Company.
C))LYC
Chris D. Ciremele 1-24-94
L.S. 5267 (Job No. 12174)
53
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
SUBAREA 3 OF HARBOR DISTRICT PRELIMINARY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
Those properties located in the City of National City, County of San Diego, State of
California, described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the Southerly Right-of-way of 8th Street and the
Westerly Right-of-way of Interstate 5; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way the
following courses: South 17°45'09" East 150.03 feet; thence South 12°04'00" East
100.63 feet; thence South 08°26'44" East 284.00 feet; thence South 13°50'25"
West 152.72 feet; thence South 16°06'34" West 332.55 feet; thence South
17°45'40" East 186.36 feet; thence South 08°23'31" West 499.35 feet; thence
South 15°38'16" West 108.99 feet; thence South 20°20'00" West 89.72 feet;
thence South 49 °07'00" West 25.00 feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way
South 06°41'56" East 233.21 feet to an angle point in said Westerly Right-of-way;
thence continuing along said Westerly Right-of-way the following courses: South
17°45'40" East 604.39 feet; thence South 26°30'24" East 52.61 feet; thence South
17°45'40" East 2245.01 feet; thence South 02°39'23" East 333.59 feet; thence
South 52°52'19" West 24.46 feet; thence South 72°14'00" West 260.17 feet to
a point on the Northerly Right-of-way of 24th Street, said point herein after referred
to as Point "A"; thence along said Northerly Right-of-way of said 24th Street South
72°14'20" West 389.83 feet to a point on the Westerly Right-of-way of Harrison
Avenue; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way of Harrison Avenue North
17°45'40" West 330.20 feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way North
72°14'20" East 40.00 feet to the centerline of said Harrison Avenue; thence along
the centerline of said Harrison Avenue North 17°45'40" West 3301.70 feet to the
Northerly Right-of-way of Civic Center Drive (formerly 13th Street); thence along said
Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East 44.45 feet to a point on the Westerly
Right-of-way of the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad; thence along said
Westerly Right-of-way North 05°48'13" East 67.47 feet to the beginning of a tangent
5679.65 foot radius curve concave Westerly; thence Northerly along said curve
through a central angle of 02°29'39" an arc distance of 247.24 feet to an
intersection with the centerline of 12th Street (now closed); thence leaving said
Westerly Railroad Right-of-way along said centerline North 72°14'20" East 474.70
feet to the Westerly Right-of-way of McKinley Avenue; thence along said Westerly
Right-of-way North 17°45'40" West 40.00 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way of 12th
Street; thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East 40.00 feet
to the centerline of McKinley Avenue (now closed); thence along said centerline North
17°45'40" West 330.37 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way of 11th Street (now
closed); thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East 290.25 feet
to the Westerly Right-of-way of Taft Avenue; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way
5�
North 17°45'07" West 910.30 feet to the Southerly Right-of-way of 8th Street;
thence along said Southerly Right-of-way North 72°14'25" East 466.14 feet to the
POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 78 acres more or less.
The above description was compiled or calculated from existing available record
information and not a field survey by Rick Engineering Company.
C l A .�, b. ClAf hAYf
Chris D. Ciremele 1-24-94
L.S. 5267 (Job No. 12174)
55
REVISED I-24.94
....:-Qi
�.. 1rWI. ( (fin
'. • Ir11•M'1 Sian
Y lr q•I.1 r
i1 i•46'J . 1 1a0
■ 1.11'1f 1 111.x
• 4101'11• ( xaM
1 Y a. 3•111• t Ill as
10141
Y 11x'M t 117,4
iP11 q' i 1L11
w" Pl. Y'1a'1
• )r11.1r 1 alax
II T4'OrI 11aw
. rr r.,. • 1111.
SA N
I lrll•x• I IAx
1 N•1. it I W.1i
Y 1r,,•Sr 1 1x.M
N'Y..r 1 :p,N
0N'M' I M.*
• 1FIrw
HWY
INTERSTATE
I Ina« r»�—�+�Yi
41. 1a 11'14,1' TX.,
IN. a n.11.:. U..N
4d. , Se 'II'n• IIa_
413.11 • •y. 1.11
11(1..1 rx'u. 11.w
I AIA
r xr[
BOUNDARY PLAT FOR
NA.TtONAL CITY
EELPDISTRICT
PREL1Mf ARY REDEVELOPMENT NT PLAN
SUBAREA 1
CRAM( f(.t( I. 1G24'
...,)",11w.L.l,11.21 ,.qM
'111
,..11
•
EXHIBIT C
PUBLIC FACILITIES AND
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS
Project Description:
Public Facilities/infrastructure improvement project to be constructed/implemented during the
life of the Redevelopment Plan shall include but not he limited to:
I STREET IMPROVEMENTS: Street improvements, including hut not limited to street
construction, median construction, drainage improvements, landscaping and street furniture
throughout the Project Area and the construction of additional streets to improve circulation.
Ii TRAFFIC SIGNAL, TRAFFIC CALMING, PARKING & LIGHTING
IMPROVEMENTS: To facilitate improved circulation flow and reduce traffic congestion for
motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists.
lli PARK AND RECREATION IMPROVEMENTS, LIBRARY ANI) ARTS FACILITIES:
To provide safe, attractive, and well -maintained park and recreation facilities for the public by
rehabilitating and/or installing improvements and amenities at parks, recreation and open space
locations throughout the Project Area.
IV CAPITAL FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS: To develop and rehabilitate community
facilities to meet the needs of the City's residents.
V ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: Public facility and infrastructure improvements
within the Project Arca to facilitate a more robust economic environment and to increase
commerce.
VI HOUSING PROGRAMS: To preserve, rehabilitate, increase and improve the
community's supply of housing affordable to very low, low and moderate income households
and to increase opportunities for home ownership throughout the Project Area.
VII PUBLIC SAFETY AND SECURITY: To provide physical and technological
enhancements to enhance public safety and protection. Examples of such improvements may
include but are not limited to fencing of properties, the rehabilitation or construction of police
storefronts, physical and technological improvements at Police Station(s) and Fire Stations
within the Project Area.
h 4dc redcvdopment'f.wrcapade,ivakvelnpn plan anrmin'.cra'aekrlan-dnfidrafi.doe
Adopted /_/07
57
EXHIBIT D
LOCATION OF REAL PROPERTY POTENTIALLY
SUBJECT TO ACQUISITION BY EMINENT DOMAIN
Pursuant to Section 603 of this Plan, the CDC may acquire the following properties through the
use of eminent domain:
Existing Area (as defined in Section 300 of this Plan)
• All parcels located immediately east and adjacent to National City Boulevard, between
Division Street and the south City limits.
• All parcels located immediately west and adjacent to National City Boulevard, between
Division Street and State Route 54.
• All parcels located immediately north and adjacent to Civic Center Drive, between Interstate
5 and National City Boulevard.
• All parcels located immediately south and adjacent to Civic Center Drive, between Interstate
5 and National City Boulevard.
• All parcels located immediately north and south and adjacent to 8th Street, between Interstate
5 and "D" Avenue.
Added Area (as defined in Section 300 of this Plan)
All property in the Added Area, excepting the San Diego Unified Port District property.
IN EXISTING ANT) ADDED AREAS, SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTI -FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ARE SPECIFICAI.I,Y EXCLUDED FROM TIIE USE OF
EMINENT DOMAIN. The residential exemption applies to those single-family and multi -family
residences that are:1) a lawful conforming use or lawful nonconforming use as a residence;2) a
dwelling as defined by National City Municipal Code section 18.04.208 as it currently exists or is
hereafter amended; and 3) the primary intended use of the stricture is for a residential use.
5g
natkuylndid
CM Properties• designated as Transportation Center
by the Redevelopment Plan
\ 1
• 1
, • -1- Exhibit "E"
• ' - t • -
-14 t , , -
. _
- •
,
•
•
•••
•- '
• -
: • ,
4#r •
,
• Vr,..:.r:a •
= •
;J.
City of National City, California
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
MEETING DATE July 12, 2007
AGENDA ITEM NO. 4
(ITEM TITLE An ordinance of the City Council of the City of National City ("City"
Council") approving the proposed amendment to the Redevelopment Plan for the
National City Redevelopment Project ("2007 Amendment")
PREPARED BY ay- DEPARTMENT
Patricia Beard, Redevelopment Manager Community Development Commission
Ext. 4255
EXPLANATION The Community Development Commission ("CDC") has prepared the 2007
Amendment in accordance with California Community Redevelopment Law ("CRL") (Health and
Safety Code Sections 33000 et. Seq.). As proposed, the 2007 Amendment would: 1) extend the
CDC's authority to acquire property through eminent domain for certain commercial and industrial
zoned properties until 2019, 2) change the current exclusion of eminent domain on single-family
homes to include residential land uses, 3) modify the redevelopment plan text as it pertains to lawful
actions and permitted land uses in the Transportation Center, and 4) revise the Public Facilities and
Infrastructure Improvement Projects exhibit. In accordance with the CRL, City Council and the CDC
have taken the proper steps with regards to the 2007 Amendment which include; 1) preparing
redevelopment plan text modifications, 2) noticing the public hearing, 3) approving the Report to City
Council, 4) receiving testimony at a joint public hearing of the City Council and CDC, 5) approving
environmental findings, and 6) adopting written responses to written objections. In addition, at this
joint meeting the CDC approved the 2007 Amendment and recommended to the City Council that
they adopt the 2007 Amendment. At this time, staff recommends that the City Council consider the
Ordinance approving the 2007 Amendment by number and title only and waive first reading. Second
reading and adoption of the Ordinance would occur at the regularly scheduled City Council meeting}
on July 17, 2007.
Environmental Review A negative declaration was prepared in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act and approved by both the City Council and the CDC on July 10, 1007.
Financial Statement Staffs recommendation will have no affect on the City's General Fund.
However, implementation of the 2007 Amendment may result in future CDC expenditures.
Account No
STAFF RECOMMENDATION
Hear the first reading of the title
BOARD / COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION
r
ATTACHMENTS
1) Background Report
2) Report to City Council
3) Ordinance adopting the 2007 Amendment to
the Redevelopment Plan, with Amended Plan
attached as Exhibit "A".
A-200 (9/80)
Resolution No.
Attachment 1
Background Report
The Community Development Commission ("CDC") authorized staff to initiate proceedings to
amend the Redevelopment Plan for the National City Redevelopment Project ("2007
Amendment").
Such proceedings include preparation of the 2007 Amendment, a Negative Declaration, and a
Report to the City Council on the proposed 2007 Amendment ("Report to City Council"). The
Report to City Council details the rational for the 2007 Amendment, identifies the physical and
economic blighting conditions that continue to exist in the Project Area and serves as the
factual basis for the 2007 Amendment. By previous resolutions, the CDC approved the draft
2007 Amendment and the Report to City Council, which were prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the Califomia Community Redevelopment Law (`CRL") and made available for
public inspection.
Such proceedings also include the City Council and the CDC holding a joint public hearing on
the proposed 2007 Amendment and the Negative Declaration, and preparing
written responses to written objections on the 2007 Amendment received prior to
or during the joint public hearing. The joint public hearing was opened and
subsequently closed on June 19, 2007. Written responses to written objections
were prepared pursuant to the CRL and previously adopted by a resolution of the
City Council.
In order to proceed with consideration of the ordinance the City Council hereby finds and
determines, based on the evidence in the record, including, but not limited to, the Report to the
City Council, and all documents referenced therein, and based upon evidence and testimony
received at the joint public hearing held on June 19, 2007, and received at the public hearings
held prior to the adoption of the Previous Ordinances referred to hereinabove, that:
1. The Project Area is a blighted area, the redevelopment of which is necessary to
effectuate the public purposes declared in the Community Redevelopment Law.
(a) This finding is based on the City Council's findings contained in the Previous
Ordinances that various blighting conditions, as that term was then
defined, characterize the Project Area, and upon the Report to the City
Council, which demonstrates that these blighting conditions continue to
exist in the Project Area.
(b) The City Council hereby finds that, despite the CDC's efforts, significant
blighting conditions still exist in the Project Area and continued
redevelopment is necessary to effectuate the public purposes contained
in the Community Redevelopment Law.
(c) Such conditions in the Project Area are causing, and will increasingly cause,
a reduction and lack of proper utilization of the Project Area to such an
extent that it constitutes a serious physical and economic burden on the
community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or
alleviated by private enterprise or govemmental action, or both, without
redevelopment, thus requiring redevelopment in the interest of the health,
safety, and general welfare of the people of the City and the State.
Evidence supporting this finding includes the fact that governmental
action, available to the City without redevelopment, would be insufficient
to cause any significant correction of the blighting conditions; and, that
the nature and costs of the public improvements and facilities and other
actions required to correct the blighting conditions, are beyond the
capacity of the City and cannot be undertaken or borne by private
enterprise acting alone or in concert with available governmental action.
2. The Amended Redevelopment Plan will redevelop the Project Area in conformity
with the Community Redevelopment Law and in the interests of the public peace,
health, safety and welfare. Evidence supporting this finding includes the fact that
the purposes of the Community Redevelopment Law would be attained through
the implementation of the Amended Redevelopment Plan by: the elimination of
physical and economic conditions, which exist in the Project Area and which
cause the Project Area to be a blighted area; by the replanning, redesign, and/or
redevelopment of areas, which are stagnant or improperly utilized and which
could not be accomplished by private enterprise or governmental action, or both,
without redevelopment; and, by protecting and promoting the sound
development and redevelopment of the Project Area and the general welfare of
the citizens of the City by remedying such injurious conditions through the
employment of all appropriate means.
3. The adoption and carrying out of the Amended Redevelopment Plan is economically
sound and feasible. Evidence supporting this finding includes the fact that under
the Amended Redevelopment Plan, the Commission will be authorized to seek
and utilize a variety of potential financing resources, including property tax
increment; that the nature and timing of redevelopment assistance will depend
on the amount and availability of such financing resources, including tax
increment generated by new investment in the Project Area; and, that the
financing plan included within the Report to Council demonstrates that sufficient
financial resources will be available to carry out the redevelopment activity in the
Project Area.
4. The Amended Redevelopment Plan conforms to the General Plan of the City of
National City, including, but not limited to, the housing element of the General
Plan, which substantially complies with the requirements of Article 10.6
(commencing with Section 65580) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the
Government Code.
5. The carrying out of the Amended Redevelopment Plan will promote the public
peace, health, safety, and welfare of the community and will effectuate the
purposes and policies of the Community Redevelopment Law. Evidence
supporting this finding includes the fact that redevelopment will benefit the
Project Area by correcting conditions of blight, and by coordinating public and
private actions to stimulate development and improve the economic and physical
conditions within the Project Area, and by increasing employment opportunities
within the City.
6. The condemnation of real property is necessary to the execution of the Amended
Redevelopment Plan, and adequate provisions have been made for payment for
property to be acquired as provided by law. Evidence supporting this finding
includes the need to assemble sites for certain public facilities, to assemble
developable units for economic activity, and to eliminate the existence of and
prevent the recurrences of blight.
7. The CDC has adopted a feasible method and plan for the relocation of families and
persons who might be displaced temporarily or permanently from housing
facilities in the Project Area. The CDC also has a feasible method and plan for
its relocation of businesses. Evidence supporting this finding includes the fact
that the CDC has adopted the method of relocation for the National City
Redevelopment Project, which sets forth a plan for relocation of families and
persons who may potentially be displaced by Commission projects; the fact that
the Amended Redevelopment Plan provides for relocation assistance according
to law; and, the fact that such assistance, including relocation payments
constitutes a feasible method for relocation.
8. (a) There are (or are being) provided, within the Project Area or within other
areas not generally Tess desirable with regard to public utilities and public
and commercial facilities and at rents or prices within the financial means
of the families and persons who might be displaced from the Project
Area, decent, safe, and sanitary dwellings equal in number to the number
of the available to such displaced families and persons and reasonably
accessible to their places of employment. Evidence supporting this
finding includes provisions contained in the 1995 Amendment of the
Redevelopment Plan that state, in the event that persons are to be
displaced, there are sufficient existing dwellings which would be available
to persons displaced by the implementation of the Amended
Redevelopment Plan.
(b) Families and persons shall not be displaced prior to the adoption of a
relocation plan pursuant to Sections 33411 and 33411.1 of the
Community Redevelopment Law; and, dwelling units housing persons
and families of low or moderate income shall not be removed or
destroyed prior to the adoption of a replacement housing plan. Evidence
supporting this finding includes the fact that the 1995 Amendment of the
Redevelopment Plan requires the CDC to adopt such plans prior to any
such displacement.
9. All noncontiguous areas of the Project Area are either blighted or necessary for
effective redevelopment and are not included for the purpose of obtaining the
allocation of taxes from the Area pursuant to Government Code Section 33670
without other substantial justification for their inclusion. Evidence supporting this
finding includes the fact that all properties within the Project Area boundaries
were included because they were under-utilized because of blighting influences,
or were affected by the existence of blighting influences, or were necessary
either to accomplish the objectives and benefits of the Amended Redevelopment
Plan or because of the need to impose uniform requirements on the Project Area
as a whole. Such properties will share in the benefits of the Amended
Redevelopment Plan.
10. Inclusion of any lands, buildings, or improvements (which are not detrimental to
the public health, safety, or welfare) is necessary for the effective redevelopment
of the entire area of which they are a part; and, any such area is not included
solely for the purpose of obtaining the allocation of tax increment revenues from
such area pursuant to Section 33670 of the Community Redevelopment Law
without other substantial justification for its inclusion. Evidence supporting this
finding includes the fact that all properties within the Project Area boundaries
were included because they were under-utilized because of blighting influences,
or were affected by the existence of blighting influences, or were necessary
either to accomplish the objectives and benefits of the Amended Redevelopment
Plan or because of the need to impose uniform requirements on the Project Area
as a whole. Such properties will share in the benefits of the Amended
Redevelopment Plan.
11. The elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the Project Area could not
reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise, acting alone
without the aid and assistance of the Agency. Evidence supporting this finding
includes the existence of blighting influences as set forth in the Report to the City
Council and the inability of individual owners and developers to economically
remove these blighting influences without substantial public assistance.
12. The requirement that a project area be predominantly urbanized as defined by
Section 33320.1(b) of the Community Redevelopment Law is applicable only to a
project area for which a final redevelopment plan is adopted on or after January
1, 1984, or to an area which is added to a project area by an amendment to a
redevelopment plan, which amendment is adopted, nor after January 1, 1984.
Because at the time of adoption of their respective redevelopment plans, the component project
areas which comprise the Original Area either were not subject to this requirement or were
determined to be predominantly urbanized, there is no need to make a finding that the Original
Area is predominantly urbanized. As set forth in the Report to the City Council, there is
sufficient evidence to support the fact that the Added Area is a predominantly urbanized area.
13. The time limitation and the limitation on the number of dollars to be allocated to the
CDC that are contained in the Amended Redevelopment Plan are reasonably
related to the proposed projects to be implemented in the Project Area and to the
ability of the Commission to eliminate blight within the Project Area. This finding
is based upon the fact that the limitation on the number of dollars allocated to the
CDC reflects the anticipated costs of the public improvement projects proposed
to be undertaken by the CDC pursuant to the Amended Redevelopment Plan
and the time limitation contained in the Amended Redevelopment Plan reflects
the anticipated time for the CDC to undertake such projects.
The City Council is satisfied that permanent housing facilities will be available within
three years from the time residential occupants of the Project Area, if any, are
displaced, and that pending the development of such facilities, there will be
available to any such displaced residential occupants temporary housing facilities
at rents comparable to those in the City at the time of their displacement.
Evidence supporting this finding includes the City Council's finding that no
persons or families of low and moderate income shall be displaced from
residences unless and until there is a suitable housing unit available and ready
for occupancy by such displaced persons or families and must be decent, safe,
sanitary and otherwise standard dwellings.
Attachment 2
CITY OF NATIONAL CITY COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
140 E 12th St, Ste B, National City, CA 91950
Draft
Report to the City Council
2007 AMENDMENT
NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
0 INTELLIGENT COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
RSG
June 2007
ROSENOW SPEVACEK GROUP INC. T 714 S41 4585
309 WEST 4T11 STREET F 714 5411175
SANTA ANA, CALIFORNIA E INFO(aWEI3RSG.COM
92701-4502 WEEIRSG.COM
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
TABLE OF CONTENTS
i. Introduction
Plan Amendment 1
A. Reasons for the Proposed Amendment and Description of Specific
Projects Proposed and How These Projects Will Improve or Alleviate
Blighting Conditions Found in the Project Area Introduction 4
B. Description of the Physical and Economic Conditions Existing in the
Project Area
Physical Blighting Conditions 6
Economic Blighting Conditions 6
Study Approach and Methodology 7
Economic Conditions that Cause Blight 11
Parcels Needed for Effective Redevelopment 24
Physical and Economic Burden on Community 24
C. Five -Year Implementation Plan 26
D. Why the Elimination of Blight and Why Redevelopment Cannot
be Accomplished by Private Enterprise Acting Alone
or by the Agency's Use of Financing Alternatives
Other Than Tax Increment 27
E. Method of Financing 28
F. Method of Relocation 29
G. Analysis of the Preliminary Plan 30
H. Report and Recommendations of the Planning Commission 30
I. Report of the Project Area Committee 30
J. General Plan Conformance 31
K. Environmental Documentation 31
L. Report of the County Fiscal Officer 31
M. Neighborhood Impact Report 32
N. Summary of Agency Consultation with
Affected Taxing Agencies 32
Attachment 1 — Project Area Map With Current Eminent Domain 33
Attachment 2 -- Negative Declaration 34
C:\Documents and Settings':ddavislocal Settings\ Temporary Internet Files'\Ot K6L\D aft 2007 RTC 6-5 07 (3).doc
INTRODUCTION I
PLAN AMENDMENT
The Community Development Commission of the City of National City ("CDC") is
processing an amendment ("2007 Amendment") to the Redevelopment Plan for the
National City Redevelopment Project ("Redevelopment Plan"). As proposed, the
amendment will extend the Commission's existing authority to acquire property, as a last
resort, through eminent domain to vacant property (as defined in the National City
Municipal Code Section 7.06.20), and all commercial and industrial zoned properties in
those areas which are currently subject to eminent domain authority within the National
City Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area"). The current exemption for single
family residences would be expanded so that all housing uses, whether single-family or
multi -family, are specifically excluded from the use of eminent domain. The CDC
currently has the authority to acquire property through eminent domain until July 18,
2007 in the following areas:
• Properties located immediately east and adjacent to National City Boulevard,
between Division Street and the south City limits.
• Properties located immediately west and adjacent to National City Boulevard,
between Division Street and State Route 54.
• Properties located immediately north and adjacent to Civic Center Drive,
between Interstate 5 and National City Boulevard.
• Properties located immediately south and adjacent to Civic Center Drive,
between Interstate 5 and National City Boulevard.
• Properties located immediately north and south and adjacent to 8th Street,
between Interstate 5 and "D" Avenue.
• Properties west of Interstate 5, excepting the San Diego Unified Port District
property.
• Specific properties located immediately southwest of the intersection of Plaza
Boulevard and Highland Avenue.
This amendment will extend the CDC's authority to acquire property through eminent
domain within these areas until 2019.
The 2007 Amendment also includes the addition and modification of redevelopment plan
text as it pertains to redevelopment actions and uses permitted in the project area. As
proposed the amendment would add a provision for the CDC to pay all or part of the
value of the land and the cost of the installation and construction of any publicly owned
building, facility, structure, or other improvement within or without the Project Area
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445. The 2007 Amendment would
modify Section VII (c) of the Redevelopment Plan, thus allowing for used auto and truck
sales when part of a new vehicle dealership and located on land within the
Transportation Center district. The 2007 Amendment will also change the current
exclusion of eminent domain on single-family homes (Exhibit D) to include all residential
land uses, as well as revising Exhibit C — "Public Facilities/Infrastructure Improvement
Projects".
RSG
Page 1
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
No other changes to the Redevelopment Plan for the Project Area are included in this
amendment.
This document is the CDC's Report to the City Council ("Report") for the proposed 2007
Amendment, and has been prepared pursuant to Section 33457.1 and 33352 of the
California Community Redevelopment Law, Health and Safety Code Section 33000 et
seq. ("Law"). Pursuant to Section 33352 of the Law, the Report provides information,
documentation and evidence to assist the City Council of National City with their
consideration of the 2007 Amendment and in making the various determinations in
connection with its adoption. This Report supplements the documentation and evidence
contained in previous Reports to the City Council ("Original Reports"), prepared in
connection with the original Redevelopment Plan and subsequent amendments; the
Original Reports are incorporated herein by reference.
Section 33457.1 of the Law dictates the required components of this Report. More
specifically, Section 33457.1 states that the information required by Section 33352 is the
only information warranted by the 2007 Amendment. Much of the information normally
required that pertains to adopting a redevelopment plan was previously documented and
presented in the Original Reports.
Contents of this Report
The contents of this Report are presented in fourteen (14) sections, which generally
correspond to the subdivisions presented in Section 33352 of the Law.
The sections are as follows:
A. Reasons for the Proposed Amendment and a Description of Specific Projects
Proposed and How These Projects Will Improve or Alleviate Blighting Conditions
Found in the Project Area
B. Description of the Physical and Economic Conditions Existing in the Project Area
C. Five -Year Implementation Plan
D. Why the Elimination of Blight and Why Redevelopment Cannot be Accomplished
by Private Enterprise Acting Alone or by the Agency's Use of Financing
Alternatives Other Than Tax Increment
E. Method of Financing
F. Relocation Plan
G. Analysis of the Preliminary Plan
H. Report and Recommendations of the Planning Commission
I. Report of the Project Area Committee
J. General Plan Conformance
RSG
Page 2
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
K. Environmental Documentation
L. Report of the County Fiscal Officer
M. Neighborhood Impact Report
N. Summary of Agency Consultation with Affected Taxing Agencies
RSG
Page 3
SECTION A
Reasons for the Amendment and Description of Specific Projects
Proposed and How these Projects will Improve or Alleviate Blighting
Conditions Found in the Project Area
The CDC seeks to amend the Redevelopment Plan and extend the CDC's eminent
domain authority (subject to all required procedures under California law) within the area
identified as the 2007 Amendment Area as illustrated in Attachment 1. Specifically
excluded from eminent domain are properties that are used for residential purposes.
The CDC's authority to use eminent domain to acquire property shall run for 12 years
from the effective date of the 2007 Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan.
The 2007 Amendment also includes the addition and modification of redevelopment plan
text as it pertains to redevelopment actions and uses permitted in the project area. As
proposed the amendment would add a provision for the CDC to pay all or part of the
value of the land and the cost of the installation and construction of any publicly owned
building, facility, structure, or other improvement within or without the Project Area
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445. The 2007 Amendment would
modify Section VII (c) of the Redevelopment Plan, thus allowing for used auto and truck
sales when part of a new vehicle dealership and located on land within the
Transportation Center district. The 2007 Amendment will also change the current
exclusion of eminent domain on single-family homes (Exhibit D) to include all residential
land uses, as well as revising Exhibit C — "Public Facilities/Infrastructure Improvement
Projects".
The 2007 Amendment does not amend, modify, change or affect in any way modify the
Project Area boundaries. The CDC is undertaking the 2007 Amendment in order to
expand its ability to assemble sites, thereby facilitating commercial, industrial and
residential redevelopment projects in the Project Area.
The CDC adopted the 1995 Redevelopment Plan authorizing the current limited eminent
domain authority. The 1995 Report to the City Council ("1995 Report") cited
socioeconomic conditions such as low median household income, high unemployment,
high proportion of residential tenants versus home owners and low residential rents as
blighting factors. The 1995 Report also discussed the mixture of land uses many of
which are incompatible and/or obsolete as well as small parcel sizes and limited public
infrastructure as additional blighting conditions. To facilitate the elimination of the above
blighting conditions the CDC has initiated public right-of-way improvements, specific
plans for development and environmental remediation of toxic sites over the last 12
years.
Unfortunately, these efforts alone have not been successful in the elimination of blight
from the Project Area. The CDC's overall efforts have been limited, due to the inability
to negotiate land purchase transactions with private property owners. While the CDC
has pursued land acquisition and consolidation through open market transactions and
limited eminent domain actions, the lack of eminent domain in many commercial and
industrial corridors has constrained redevelopment efforts. Because the CDC cannot
forcefully encourage property owners to either redevelop or sell abandoned and
dilapidated properties, many of these properties continue to be neglected 12 years later.
RSG
Page 4
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
RSG
Adopting the 2007 Amendment will extend the Redevelopment Plan's eminent domain
authority and afford the CDC one additional tool to eliminate blight in the Project Area,
through the facilitation of land assemblage activities or the purchase of dilapidated
properties within the areas identified in Attachment 1.
Page 5
SECTION B
Description of the Physical and Economic Conditions Existing in the
Project Area
This section summarizes the existing physical and economic conditions within the 2007
Amendment Area.
PIIYSICAL BLIGHTING CONDITIONS
Section 33031(a) of the Law describes physical conditions that cause blight as follows:
1. Buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work, These
conditions may be caused by:
a. Serious building code violations,
b. Serious dilapidation and deterioration caused by Tong -term neglect,
c. Construction that is vulnerable to serious damage from seismic or
geologic standards,
d. Buildings suffering from faulty or inadequate water or sewer utilities.
2. Conditions that prevent or substantially hinder the viable use or capacity of
buildings or lots. These conditions may be caused by:
a. Buildings of substandard, defective, or obsolete design given present
general plan, zoning, and other development standards.
3. Adjacent or nearby incompatible land uses that prevent the development of those
parcels or other portions of redevelopment project areas.
4. The existence of subdivided lots that are in multiple ownership and whose
physical development has been impaired by their irregular shapes and
inadequate sizes, given present general plan and zoning standards and present
market conditions.
ECONOMIC BLIGHTING CONDITIONS
Section 33031(b) of the Law describes the following economic conditions that cause
blight:
1. Depreciated or stagnant property values.
2. Impaired property values due to significance in the presence of hazardous waste
where the agency may be eligible to use its authority as specified in Article 12.5.
3. Abnormally high business vacancies, abnormally low lease rates, or an
abnormally high number of abandoned buildings.
RSG
Page 6
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
4. A serious lack of necessary commercial facilities such as those normally found in
neighborhoods including grocery stores, drug stores, and banks and other
lending institutions.
5. Serious residential overcrowding that has resulted in significant public health or
safety problems. As used in this paragraph, 'overcrowding' means exceeding the
standard referenced in Article 5 (commencing with Section 32) of Chapter 1 of
Title 25 of the California Code of Regulations.
6. An excess of bars, liquor stores, or adult -oriented businesses that has resulted in
significant public health, safety, or welfare problems.
7. A high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to the public safety and
welfare.
STUDY APPROACH AND METHODOLOGY
Several data sources were utilized to quantify existing conditions of the properties within
the 2007 Amendment Area. An important data source was a field survey conducted by
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc. ("RSG"), consultants to the CDC, in April of 2007. The
survey encompassed those areas of the Project Area currently subject to eminent
domain. Existing physical and economic conditions of each parcel, as observed from
the public right-of-way, were documented. The observed physical and economic
blighting conditions included deterioration and dilapidation, structural obsolescence,
incompatible adjacent land uses, defective/substandard design and inadequate parcel
size. Photographs illustrating the observed blighting conditions are included as
Attachment 2 to this Report.
The analysis and assessment of the blighting conditions found within the 2007.
Amendment Area, is based upon the following sources:
1. The April 2007 field survey by RSG.
2. Commercial and industrial lease rates and vacancy rates from Grubb and Ellis,
CB Richard Ellis, Inc. and CoStar Commercial Real Estate.
3. Information and data from the City of National City's General Plan.
4. Information from the City of National City Code Violation Department.
5. Information from the National City Fire Department
6. Information from the National City Police Department
While RSG believes all information sources to be reliable, it is not responsible for the
accuracy of data provided by such sources.
The survey and supplementary research included analyzing the 2007 Amendment Area
to determine the conditions of blight present. The primary blighting conditions observed
during the survey were dilapidation and deterioration of buildings and buildings with
Q RSG �S
Page 7
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City ui National City
substandard or defective design. A summary of these blighting conditions is presented in
Table B-1.
Physical Blighting Conditions in 2007 Amendment Area Exhibit B-1
National City Community Development Commission
Physical Blighting Condition
No. of % of 2007
Occurrences Amendment Area
Detrioration.and Dilapidation
Substandard or Defective Design
493 71.24%
386 55.78%
Note: Some parcels have one or more blighting conditions.
Source: RSG Field Survey
Buildings Unsafe/Unhealthy to Live or Work In
Section 33031(a)(1) of the Law describes physical conditions that cause blight to include
"Buildings in which it is unsafe or unhealthy for persons to live or work. These conditions
may be caused by serious building code violations, serious dilapidation and deterioration
caused by long-term neglect, construction that is vulnerable to serious damage from
seismic or geologic hazards, and faulty or inadequate water or sewer utilities." The
following discussion substantiates the presence of serious dilapidation and deterioration
caused by Tong -term neglect in the 2007 Amendment Area.
Serious Dilapidation and Deterioration
Structures were determined to be dilapidated or deteriorated if they were suffering from
deteriorating roofing or eaves; peeling paint; damaged exterior building material;
exposed wiring or plumbing; and/or if the buildings were constructed with substandard
building materials. Of the 692 parcels identified as being blighted, there were 493
occurrences of dilapidation and deterioration in the 2007 Amendment Area (71.2%).
RSG
Page 8
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
Photo 1: This photo depicts a
building along Civic Center
Drive showing signs of a
rusting metal roof indicating
lack of weather proofing
materials.
Photo 2: Damaged exterior
building material on a building
along Civic Center Drive.
Photo 3: Along Cleveland
Avenue this photo depicts a
building showing signs of a
rusting metal roof indicating
lack of weather proofing
materials. The property also
has broken windows and
damaged exterior building
materials.
RSG
Page 9
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
Photo 4: Along Civic Center
Drive this building has
damaged or deteriorating roof
eaves and damaged exterior
building materials.
Physical Factors that Prevent or Substantially Hinder the
Economically Viable Use of Buildings or Lots
Section 33031(a)(2) of the Law describes physical conditions that cause blight to include
"Factors that prevent or substantially hinder the economically viable use or capacity of
buildings or lots. This condition can be caused by a substandard design, inadequate
size given present standards and market conditions, lack of parking, or other similar
factors." The following discussion substantiates the presence of inadequate lot and
building size, lack of parking, substandard design and obsolescence.
Substandard or Defective Design
There were several examples of substandard building materials observed in the
properties affected by the 2007 Amendment. Corrugated metal sheeting is a primary
example and is not a permitted building material according to the City code. The
corrugated metal readily deteriorates from the weather and becomes more structurally
unsound as it warps from the elements. Canvas and plastic tarps are also prevalent and
are not permitted to be used as building materials by the City. The results of the field
survey indicate approximately 429 incidences of substandard or defective designs were
present in the 2007 Amendment Area.
The industrial parcels affected by the 2007 Amendment represent the older style of
development, offering limited or no amenities. Modern industrial buildings often use
concrete tilt -up walls that can withstand the physical demands associated with industrial
uses. The Project Area has multiple examples of wood -frame residential structures
converted to industrial use. Residential wood -frame buildings are not designed to
withstand industrial use requirements that may include production equipment or storage
mounted to the walls as well as the high level of wear and tear associated with these
non-residential activities. These activities cause the wood -frame structure to become
dilapidated and wear down prematurely from the high -demands of industrial as well as
commercial usage. Other inadequacies of older structures built for other uses include
insufficient electrical supply, storage, and indoor manufacturing areas.
RSG
Page 10
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DFVEI OPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
Photo 5: Substandard building
materials and obsolete design
of an abandoned building
located on Cleveland Avenue.
Photo 6: Substandard building
materials and obsolete design
of a vacated building located
along Harrison Avenue.
Photo 7: This photo depicts
structures on a property along
Civic Center Drive
constructed with substandard
building material. The
structures also show signs of
deterioration and dilapidation.
RSG
Page 11
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City ut National City
Structural Obsolescence
While inadequate loading, parking and storage are characteristics of small lot size, these
deficiencies are also indicative of properties 25 years or older. The deficiencies
associated with many older properties are often referred to as obsolescence.
Obsolescence is the result of a combination of blight factors, including the age of
buildings, lack of maintenance, and a lack of desirable amenities such as parking and
tenant improvements that occur as contemporary market standards evolve. For these
reasons, obsolescence results in factors that substantially hinder the economically viable
use of buildings and Tots.
Commercial and industrial development standards have changed significantly since the
1965 when over 40% of the commercial and industrial properties in the Project Area
were developed. Modern industrial developments offer larger floor and lot sizes along
with amenities such as landscaping, on -site parking and adequate loading areas for
larger delivery vehicles. Commercial and industrial uses without adequate area often
negatively affect surrounding properties through competition for on -street parking and
on -street deliveries that restrict access to surrounding properties.
Incompatible Adjacent Uses
Incompatible adjacent uses where commercial and/or industrial properties are directly
adjacent to residential uses were noted on 87 of the properties within the area affected
by the 2007 Amendment. Outdoor manufacturing was commonly observed without any
noise buffers to surrounding residences. Toxic dust created by outdoor industrial repairs
and production drifts in an airborne state to surrounding residential properties,
presenting a significant detrimental health and safety condition to these residents.
Photo 8: Along McKinley
Avenue a residential building
between two industrial uses is
incompatible for both
residential occupants and
industrial uses as there are no
buffers between the two.
RSG
Page 12
REPORT TO COUNCIL_
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
Photo 9: Residential use
along 22nd street adjacent to
an industrial use.
Photo 10: Residential use
along Cleveland Avenue
adjacent to an industrial use.
Inadequate Lot Size
Small parcel sizes particularly in the commercial corridors of 8th Street as well as the
industrial portions of the Westside area north of 22nd Street hinder these parcels ability
to be rehabilitated and redeveloped. Current development standards for neighborhood
commercial development generally require at least a two -acre site and a four -acre site
for light -industrial development. There are only 10 properties of four or more acres and
34 properties of two or more acres affected by the 2007 Amendment with 585
commercial or industrial properties being less than one-half acre.
Inadequate lot size results in development that either (1) lacks adequate parking, loading
and vehicle access; or (2) prohibits redevelopment and reuse of parcels because the
density of development that exists today would not be allowed without provisions for
adequate parking, loading and vehicle access. New development constructed to
modern development standards would be required to provide adequate parking, loading.
and vehicle access, which many commercial and industrial parcels in the Project Area
RSG .
Page 13
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY r)EVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City el National City
cannot accommodate. Once these amenities are included, the small lot sizes yield
development that is substantially below allowed floor -area -ratios (density) and cause
new development to be incapable of supporting the going land values in the Project
Area.
Photo 11: Along Cleveland
Avenue If companies cannot
find a consolidated site for
operations they use nearby
sites and have to transport
goods between the areas.
This is an unsafe condition for
other vehicles as well as the
driver of the forklift.
Photo 12: The staging of
vehicles to be repaired on the
sidewalk is shown in this
picture of a property along
14th Street.
Photo 13: Another instance of
staging of vehicles to be
repaired on the sidewalk.
RSG
Page 14
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DFVELOPMENr COMMISSION
City of National City
Photo 14: Another instance of
staging of vehicles to be
repaired as well as the repair
of vehicles on the sidewalk.
Excessive site coverage can also hinder the economically viable use or capacity of
buildings or lots. There are industrial buildings in the area which lack adequate floor
space for inside manufacturing and storage. As operations overflow outside into already
constrained parking areas, there is nowhere for the parking needs to be met, except for
the already congested street area.
Inadequate loading is another typical characteristic of properties with insufficient lot size.
Often small Tots must employ sidewalk and/or street loading due to the lack of adequate
on -site space. Unloading in the right-of-way; impedes access to businesses, reduces
vehicle sight lines for pedestrian and other vehicular traffic as well as restricts traffic flow
creating a hazardous traffic condition.
Photo 15: Along Cleveland
Avenue, the loading area for
this industrial building is
inadequate to accommodate
larger delivery vehicles such
as the one pictured. This
creates access issues for the
other vehicles seeking to
enter and exit the area.
RSG
Page 15
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DFVFI OPMENT COMMISSION
City of Nation& City
Photo 16: The loading and
delivery area for this industrial
building along 14th Street is
inadequate to accommodate
larger delivery vehicles such
as the one pictured.
Photo 17: The loading area
for this industrial building
along Cleveland Avenue
shows signs of inadequate
space.
Outdoor storage and manufacturing is common throughout the Project Area for both
commercial and industrial properties. Commercial properties often use outdoor storage
for excess materials, trash and other items. The presence of outdoor storage is an
indicator that the existing building stock provides inadequate building space for existing
business activities. Businesses are using temporary canvas tarp (tent) buildings as
permanent additions to existing areas for outdoor manufacturing and production. The
2007 Amendment will provide the CDC with a tool to assemble adequately sized
properties, in which site development can meet modern market standards.
RSG
Page 16
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVFLOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
Photo 18: Along Tidelands
Avenue, this photo depicts the
use of outdoor areas for
storage of materials.
Photo 19: This photo
indicates outdoor storage of
materials on a property along
Civic Center Drive.
Photo 20: This photo
indicates outdoor storage of
materials on a property along
Civic Center Drive.
RSG
Page 17
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNI! Y DFVEI OPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
Photo 21: Along McKinley
Avenue This photo indicates
outdoor storage of materials.
Code Enforcement Violations
Violations of local or state building codes are a blighting condition identified under
Section 33031(a) of the Law. Buildings and structures that do not meet current uniform
building requirements, or other local codes mandated to ensure human health and
safety, pose a threat to the workers, patrons, and residents of an area.
Based on discussions with City staff, most code enforcement cases require at least one,
if not two to three additional follow up visits to make sure the violation is not reoccurring.
The following is a list of code violations observed by City staff in the commercial and
industrial corridors of the properties affected by the 2007 Amendment:
• Unsafe wiring such as extension cords being used as permanent wiring, this fire
hazard was typically observed in residential structures converted to commercial and
industrial uses:
• Public right-of-way (streets and sidewalks) being used for manufacturing and repair
area, particularly for auto related businesses, which leads to manufacturing debris
and pollution being left in the public right-of-way and a hazard to pedestrians;
• Due to overcrowding on street parking in commercial and industrial areas,
commercial and industrial vehicles are stored on nearby residential streets. Small
parcel size also leads to parking of vehicles on grass and other non -paved surfaces,
which has contributed to environmental contamination of the Project Area;
• Public streets being used for loading and unloading of merchandise, usually blocking
or impairing traffic, which is a safety hazard for drivers and pedestrians;
• Canvass or plastic tarps were often observed being used as long-term roof covering
or to creating an unsafe building addition as well as permanent outdoor work areas;
RSG
Page 18
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
■ Inadequate securing of trash in dumpster enclosures leads to unsanitary conditions;
• Illegal dumping of trash (including vehicles) was observed throughout the Project
Area, particularly on vacant property or abandoned commercial and industrial
properties;
• Residential structures converted to non-residential uses without proper permits.
Without proper permitting/inspections residential structures cannot be properly
evaluated if they are suitable for industrial conversion. For example, multiple
residential structures that were being used for commerciaVindustrial uses were
observed to have excessive storage facilities (over 120 square feet of area) in the
dedicated setback area, creating a fire hazard;
• Outdoor chemical usage in addition, to toxic manufacturing with exhaust and particle
venting not to code. This was often observed with outdoor auto repair shops, which
in multiple cases are next to residential uses;
It is important to note that if all code enforcement violations were corrected in the
properties affected by the 2007 Amendment, blighting factors such as environmental
contamination, flooding, inadequately sized parcels and unsafe traffic conditions would
still remain and the 2007 Amendment would still be justified and beneficial for the Project
Area.
ECONOMIC CONDITIONS THAT CAUSE BLIGHT
The preceding section discussed physical conditions, which are indicators of physical
blight within the proposed 2007 Amendment Area. This section will present existing
economic conditions that are indicative of blight. To accurately represent existing
economic conditions, the 2007 Amendment Area has been analyzed and information
has been gathered from the City, the County, and private sources to document the
deteriorating economic conditions of the 2007 Amendment Area.
The primary economic blighting conditions noted in the 2007 Amendment Area were low
lease rates, impaired property values due in part to hazardous wastes, and high crime
rates.
Lease Rates
Based on real estate market publications, the Project Area has an average lease rate of
$1.25 per square foot for retail properties, which is $0.88 per square foot lower than
surrounding markets. Office lease rates are generally $1.98 per square foot or $0.35 -
$0.44 per square foot lower than surrounding markets. Overall lease rates within the
Project Area tend to be lower than in the surrounding markets because the buildings in
the Project Area are older and lack amenities and do not provide opportunities for
expansion.
Table B-2 shows retail and office lease rates for the Project Area are in the low range
when compared to the City of Chula Vista and the County average.
RSG
Page 19
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
Lease Rates TABLE B-2
National City Community Development Commission
Lease Rate
Office Retail
National City
Chula Vista
San Diego County
Source: Grubb & Ellis
$1.98
$2.33
$2.42
$1.25
$2.13
$2.13
According to real estate professionals there are a number of issues that act in concert to
impede the economic success of real estate within the some of the older industrial and
commercial corridors of the Project Area. For example, when the area developed, the
standards for industrial development allowed for smaller lot sizes than would be
permitted today and reduced set -backs from other properties. It was also noted that the
age of many industrial and commercial buildings renders them obsolete in today's
market. Deficiencies mentioned include: Small building size; Lack of parking on -site and
off-street; Lack of access to industrial sites; Lack of other amenities or inadequate
amenities such as loading and storage; Low ceiling heights which restrict indoor
operations and lead to outdoor manufacturing and/or storage.
The overall lack of amenities offered by a majority of industrial and commercial
properties in the Project Area attracts Tess desirable uses which impacts the rents
landowners are able to charge. Lower lease rates generally result in little net income to
reinvest in buildings to improve their condition. An adequate revenue stream is
necessary to enable property owners to perform routine maintenance of their properties.
Without funding for repairs, deferred maintenance issues could become health and
safety concems. This may be especially true for older buildings.
Impaired Property Values Due in Significant Part to Hazardous Waste
The Project Area has multiple locations of environmental concern, most of these sites
are found in the area affected by the 2007 Amendment, particularly the Harbor District.
Generally there are three land -uses generating environmental contamination in the 2007
Amendment area; large industrial uses (particularly in the Harbor District) along with
auto repair facilities, and small-scale industrial manufacturing.
The Harbor District is approximately 300 acres of industrial and distribution area at the
westem edge of the Project Area between Interstate 5 and the San Diego Unified Port
District ("Port District") Property along San Diego Bay. In 2003 the CDC undertook a
Brownfield's Grant Study Project ("Study Project") with the United States Environmental
Protection Agency to determine the extent of the pollution in the Harbor District. The
Study Project divided the Harbor District into thirteen (13) sites for individual analysis
and concluded that each of the sites likely suffered from hazardous materials
contamination, while for some sites there was positive confirmation of contaminated soil
and groundwater.
RSG
Page 20
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DFVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
Historically the Harbor District was developed between 1885 and 1925 as a railroad
staging area for transferring goods to ships on San Diego Bay. Industrial uses in the
Harbor District over the last 100 years include: oil recycling and other oil
distribution/refining facilities that used underground and aboveground storage tanks
(including several gas stations), an ordnance company, aircraft parts manufacturer, a
battery manufacturer, tank cleaning businesses, automotive servicing (including
wreckers), machine and lumber storage, tool machining and metal. fabrication, finishing
and plating companies and gravel operations. At the time some of these businesses
operated protective environmental regulations that are in place today did not exist.
According to the Study Project many of these uses have resulted in the following types
of pollution: soil and groundwater contamination with oils, lubricants, solvents, lead, and
asbestos, PCBs, corrosives, petroleum hydrocarbons, metals and volatile organic
compounds ("VOC's"). Many of these uses generated hazardous wastes that in several
cases were illegally disposed of onsite. At least 10 monitoring wells have been installed
in the Harbor District to investigate subsurface conditions, with elevated petroleum
hydrocarbons having been detected in soil as well as the presence of petroleum
hydrocarbons, metals and VOCs confirmed in groundwater monitoring wells.
In addition, data obtained in connection with the Study Project shows that environmental
sites requiring remedial investigation or that have recently undergone remedial action
are highly concentrated in the Project Area. Available data for said environmental sites
includes properties for which investigation and/or clean-up efforts are headed by one of
the following lead agencies; San Diego Department of Environmental Health, California
Regional Water Quality Control Board, and the Califomia Department of Toxic
Substances Control. Furthermore, according to environmental attorneys involved with
the Study Project and the creation of the City's Brownfield Redevelopment Information
System, sites located within the 2007 Amendment Area that have already undergone
remedial action are not necessarily presumed suitable for all uses. While the CDC
currently has eminent domain authority in the Harbor District and along National City
Blvd, it is set to expire in July of 2007 and the 2007 Amendment would extend the CDC's
eminent domain authority until 2019 to assist, if necessary, in the clean up of these
properties.
Photo 22: This Property along
National City Boulevard
suffers from environmental
contamination and cannot be
built upon for the foreseeable
future. Storage activities are
the only usage this site is able
to maintain until the pollution
subsides and the ground
stops sinking.
RSG
Page 21
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNt f Y OFVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
Photo 23: Along Bay Marina
Drive this site suffers from
environmental contamination
and is under remediation.
However remediation does
not guaranty that the site can
be built upon in the
foreseeable future.
The National City Fire Department ("Fire Department") in conjunction with the County
issues permits for businesses handling hazardous materials ("Haz-Mat"). Currently,
there are approximately 343 Haz-Mat permits in the City, with a high percentage of these
being issued in the commercial and industrial corridors of the 2007 Amendment area.
Fire Department staff believes the number of actual hazardous materials users or
businesses with Haz-Mat permits that do not list all of the hazardous materials used on
site, is often times much higher than the actual number of permits issued. During the
time period between April 2006 and April 2007, the National City Fire Department
responded to 15 Haz-Mat and hazardous release investigation calls inside the 2007
Amendment area.
Outdoor manufacturing is a cause of hazardous materials being released in the outside
environment, particularly with automobile related businesses. Many auto body shops
were observed to be doing grinding of parts and spraying of toxic materials outside. This
practice sends these hazardous materials airbome, often to surrounding residents.
When these contaminants settle to the ground they either soak into the soil or run into
the storm drains as contaminated urban runoff. This runoff eventually finds its way into
San Diego Bay.
Further, contributing to these conditions are some of the storage practices for chemicals
and debris observed during the field survey. Approximately 40% of properties were
found to have signs of garbage, debris, stagnant water and/or combustible materials on
site. Outdoor storage while being unsightly is also dangerous as holding containers are
subjected to weather elements and decompose more rapidly. Numerous substandard
building additions were observed to be used for hazardous materials storage. Many of
these sheds are made of plywood or canvass tarps that in and of themselves present a
fire hazard, but when these substandard structures are combined with hazardous
materials storage and usage, it become a significant environmental and fire hazard to
the surrounding structures many of which are residential.
RSG
Page 22
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
Crime
A high crime rate that constitutes a serious threat to public safety and welfare is a
condition of economic blight. In order to assess the impact of crime within the Project
Area, information regarding the incidence of violent and other serious property crime
reported by the National City Police Department was analyzed.
All police agencies in the County report their crime statistics to the Automated Regional
Justice Information System ("ARJIS"), which is a regionally standardized system that
enables comparison of the number of crimes reported by jurisdictions across the County.
ARJIS reports to the same categories as the nationally recognized Federal Bureau of
Investigation ("FBI") Crime Index. The Index includes four violent offenses (willful
homicide, forcible rape, robbery, and aggravated assault) and three types of property
crimes (burglary, larceny theft, and motor vehicle theft). The offenses included in the FBI
Index were selected due to their serious nature and/or volume, as well as the probability
that these crimes will be reported to the police. Crime rates in Table B-3 were computed
by occurrence per 1,000 persons using San Diego Association of Govemment 2006
population estimates.
The regional crime rate based on ARJIS incorporates both local jurisdictions and
unincorporated areas in the County. The 2006 County crime rate based upon ARJIS is
34.2 crimes per 1,000 persons. The 2006 crime rate for the Cities of Chula Vista and
San Diego are 35.8 and 39.4 respectively. The 2006 crime rate in National City is 47.4
per 1,000 or 39% higher than the County average and 32% and 20% higher than the
Cities of Chula Vista and San Diego respectively.
The table on the following page uses data from the 2006 calendar year for all
jurisdictions. In addition to having the highest overall crime rate in 2006, National City's
crime rates were higher for the following individual categories; robbery, aggravated
assault, burglary, and motor vehicle theft. The City had the second highest theft rate
and similar murder and rape rates as the rest of the County. Due to the reporting format
of ARJIS, crime data for National City is city-wide, which is larger than the proposed
2007 Amendment area. However, it is furthermore determined that a disproportionate
share of the City's crime occurs within the boundaries of the 2007 Amendment Area.
With the assistance of National City Police Department crime analysts, it is presumed
that approximately 12.6% of the City's total reported crimes occurred within the
boundaries of the 2007 Amendment area even though the area only constitutes
approximately 8.5% of the City's total area
PARCELS NEEDED FOR EFFECTIVE REDEVELOPMENT
Section 33321 of the Law states that a project area need not be restricted to buildings
and properties that are detrimental to the public health safety or welfare, but may consist
of an area in which such conditions predominate and injuriously affect the entire area. A
project area may include lands, buildings or improvements which are not detrimental to
the public health, safety or welfare, but whose inclusion is found necessary for the
effective redevelopment of the area. Areas cannot be included for the sole purpose of
obtaining the allocation of tax increment revenue but must have substantial justification
that they are necessary for effective redevelopment.
Page 23
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
This Report documents that in the area affected by the 2007 Amendment there are
parcels that do not exhibit blighting conditions but that they are interspersed with parcels
that are blighted and necessitate inclusion in the 2007 Amendment area. The number of
and severity of blighted parcels in the Project Area negatively affects the non -blighted
parcels because of their appearance and proximity. In addition, there are certain types
of blighting conditions that cannot be directly linked to a particular parcel such as
substandard on -street parking, which is a cumulative factor.
If only parcels that exhibited blighting conditions were included, the 2007 Amendment
would not be a contiguous area. The intention of the CDC through the 2007 Amendment
is to facilitate rehabilitation programs that will cure health and safety issues and
improving the appearance of the Project Area.
PHYSICAL AND ECONOMIC BURDEN ON COMMUNITY
When evaluated in whole, the numerous physical and economic conditions described in
this section of the Report are a serious physical and economic burden on the
community. This burden cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed or alleviated by
private enterprise and/or existing governmental authority, without the 2007 Amendment.
A summary of the issues includes:
• The documented presence of environmental contamination in the industrial
corridors of the Project Area, causes safety hazards to area occupants and the
cost of removal of these substances increases rehabilitation costs. These
conditions are an economic burden on the community as property owners
choose to maintain obsolete buildings on polluted sites, instead of pursuing new
development which would likely require an expensive cleanup of pollutants.
• Obsolete buildings attract lower commercial and industrial lease rates, which
provide less revenue for property owners to make regular repairs and upgrades.
Without periodic maintenance, buildings become deteriorated or even dilapidated
due to lack of reinvestment in the properties.
• The higher crime rates in the City/Project Area require more calls for service
which increases municipal costs and creates an additional burden on community
services as public resources are diverted.
• Incompatible adjacent uses where commercial and/or industrial properties are
directly adjacent to residential uses could subject residents to toxic dust created
by outdoor industrial repairs and production.
• Response -based code enforcement is unable to address all of the health and
safety code violations that exist in the commercial and industrial corridors of the
Project Area. The added municipal cost of code enforcement activity is also a
burden on the community as municipal resources are diverted from other
programs to address code violations.
• Inadequate lot size compounds blighting conditions in the Project Area, as these
parcels are not of adequate area to accommodate the necessary parking and
RSG
Page 24
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
loading amenities, while maintaining safe access to the site. Redevelopment of
the small sized parcels in the Project Area is not economically viable for private
development, which results in a lack of investment in new development that
continues to negatively impacting the surrounding community.
The extension of eminent domain authority would provide another tool to assist the CDC
in correction of these and other blighting conditions for the properties affected by the
2007 Amendment. The private marketplace has not been successful in achieving the
needed lot consolidations for new development due to limited number of property
owners willing to enter into negotiations. Utilizing eminent domain would provide the
CDC with a greater ability to achieve the Redevelopment Plan goals. The 2007
Amendment would provide the CDC with the ability to rectify the inadequately sized
properties, improve circulation, make improvements to the commercial and industrial
properties and remove substandard dilapidated buildings.
Page 25
SECTION C
Five -Year Implementation Plan
On June 14, 2005, the CDC adopted its current Five -Year Implementation Plan
("Implementation Plan") for the Project Area. The Implementation Plan was prepared
pursuant to Section 33490 of the Law and contains specific goals and objectives for the
Project Area, the specific projects, and expenditures to be made during the five-year
planning period, and an explanation of how these goals, objectives and expenditures will
eliminate blight within the Project Area. The Implementation Plan is not affected by the
proposed 2007 Amendment. The Implementation Plan is incorporated herein by
reference.
RSG
Page 26
SECTION D
Why the Elimination of Blight and Why Redevelopment Cannot be
Accomplished by Private Enterprise Acting Alone or by the CDC's
use of Financing Alternatives other than Tax Increment
Section 33352(d) of the Law requires an explanation of why the elimination of blight in
the Project Area cannot be accomplished by private enterprise alone, or by the CDC's
use of financing alternatives other than tax increment financing. This information was
previously provided in the supporting documentation prepared and provided at the time
of the adoption of the existing Project Area. The 2007 Amendment will not make any
changes that would affect the validity of the previously prepared documentation
supporting the need for tax increment.
RSG
Page 27
SECTION E
Method of Financing
The method of financing redevelopment activities was provided in the Original Reports
when the Project Area was adopted. The 2007 Amendment will not alter the Project
Area boundaries, affect the base year value or change the proposed method of
financing. Therefore the 2007 Amendment does not warrant that the method of
financing be reviewed.
RSG
Page 28
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of Nallonal City
SECTION F
Method of Relocation
Sections 33352(f) and 33411 of the Law require the CDC to prepare a method or plan
for the relocation of families and persons who may be temporarily or permanently
displaced from housing facilities located within the Project Area. The Law also requires
a relocation plan when nonprofit local community institutions are to be temporarily or
permanently displaced from facilities actually used for institutional purposes in said
Project Area. In addition, the Law requires relocation assistance for commercial and
industrial businesses displaced by redevelopment activities. The CDC has previously
approved the Relocation of Persons Displaced ("Method of Relocation"), which was
amended on July 18, 1995. The final Method of Relocation is incorporated herein by
reference and is on file with the Secretary of the CDC.
RSG
Page 29
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
SECTION G
Analysis Of The Preliminary Plan
An analysis of the Preliminary Plan was provided in the supporting documentation
prepared at the time the Project Area was adopted. Pursuant to Section 33457.1 of the
Law, because the analysis of the Preliminary Plan remains the same and is not affected
by the 2007 Amendment, additional analysis is not required.
SECTION H
Report And Recommendation Of The Planning Commission
Section 33352(h) of the Law requires inclusion of a report and recommendation of the
National City Planning Commission ("Planning Commission"). The report and
recommendation of the Planning Commission was provided in the supporting
documentation prepared at the time the Project Area was adopted. The CDC did not
request a new report and recommendation from the Planning Commission for the 2007
Amendment, because it does not affect the Plan's land use provisions and it was
previously determined that the existing Plan was in conformance with the adopted
General Plan of National City. Therefore, it was not necessary to require the Planning
Commission to make additional findings.
SECTION I
Report Of The Project Area Committee
Pursuant to the Law, a redevelopment agency shall call upon the property owners,
residents, business tenants and existing community organizations in a redevelopment
project area, or amendment area, to form a project area committee ("PAC") if: (1)
granting the authority to the agency (CDC) to acquire by eminent domain property on
which persons reside in a project area in which a substantial number of low- and
moderate -income persons reside; or (2) add territory in which a substantial number of
low- and moderate -income persons reside and grant the authority to the agency to
acquire by eminent domain property on which persons reside in the added territory.
The CDC did not form a PAC because the 2007 Amendment specifically excludes
properties that are used for residential purposes, and no projects or programs have been
identified that will displace low- and moderate -income persons. Therefore, it was not
necessary to form a PAC pursuant to Section 33385.3 for the purposes of making
additional findings.
RSG
Page 30
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
SECTION J
General Plan Conformance
The 2007 Amendment does not contain provisions which would after land use
designations, nor does the proposed 2007 Amendment affect the land use provisions of
the Plan. Information that determined the Plan was in conformance with the General
Plan was provided in the documentation prepared at the time the Project Area was
adopted. Therefore, Section 33352(j) of the Law requiring a report of General Plan
conformance per Section 65402 of the Government Code is not required.
SECTION K
Environmental Documentation
Section 33352(k) of the Law requires environmental documentation to be prepared
pursuant to Section 21151 of the Public Resources Code. Concurrent with the adoption
of the Plan and the subsequent amendments, the CDC undertook appropriate
environmental documentation as necessary. For the 2007 Amendment, a Negative
Declaration (Initial Study) was prepared pursuant to Califomia Environmental Quality Act
guidelines, which found that the proposed 2007 Amendment to extend eminent domain
authority would not have a significant adverse impact on the environment. A copy of the
Negative Declaration follows as Attachment 3.
SECTION L
Report of the County Fiscal Officer
The proposed 2007 Amendment will not enlarge the Project Area; therefore, it is not
necessary for the CDC to request a base year report from the County of San Diego
pursuant to section 33328 of the Law. Project Area fiscal information was provided in
the supporting documentation prepared and provided at the time the Project Area was
adopted. Because the proposed 2007 Amendment will not alter the boundaries of the
Project Area, this report is not needed or required.
RSG
Page 31
REPORT TO COUNCIL
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT COMMISSION
City of National City
SECTION M
Neighborhood Impact Report
Section 33352(m) of the Law requires the inclusion of a Neighborhood Impact Report.
This information is presented in the Original Reports that were prepared and provided at
the time Project Area was adopted. Because the proposed 2007 Amendment will not
enlarge the Project Area; pursuant to Section 33457.1 of the Law no additional analysis
would be appropriate or required.
SECTION N
Summary of the Agency Consultation with Affected Taxing Agencies
Because the 2007 Amendment does not add area to the Project Area, submission of a
request to the County to prepare a report pursuant to Section 33328 of the Law was not
required or appropriate. Therefore, a summary of this report is not included. With
regard to consultations, the taxing agencies received all notices regarding the 2007
Amendment and they were invited to contact the CDC Executive Director regarding the
2007 Amendment. The 2007 Amendment does not affect the financing in any way nor
does it change land uses or public improvement projects.
RSG
Page 32
APPENDICES
ATTACHMENT 1 — PROJECT AREA MAP WITH CURRENT EMINENT
DOMAIN
RSG
See attached Project Area Map following this page, with eminent domain authority as
proposed by the 2007 Amendment. Attachment 1 illustrates the Project Area boundaries
and identifies the properties affected by the proposed 2007 Amendment to extend
eminent domain authority by an additional twelve years.
Page 33
Attachment 1
HOI
,ram ::; .U/II y
p i`C t; vn t4 /
' /rt
!I!Nr1I ;
e Rfr•. ••, _ ■ 1. i___- 1,.,.,I��, rnn.. e
1 ==_14II111l1111_1 ill 11, 11011111111: .111unw..1111111pigoil`Il III
:111I1'1111111� I1111 11.11 IIIi11 IIIIIIIlul 1!II! 11111111116 �1,'.
inn mum. //1111111 :1111: '• oIIIIIIIII•. III_ ,�
1:111 : :maim 111111■l: 511.111111 111111111111,11111n ,,11
.Il:
i
4.,161
1111.1
1111
CITY OF
SAN DIEGO
III
111111
11
111 I
1111111
111111111IN
= 11111 •
11 1111I '
®
11111
nn
11111
eG
1111
11111
111
11111
1111
11=
LIC
ELIIE®
ar.
11111
■11111ic
■e
z.,
.11111111U
.1.
11
:111
1�
—■ -1 411111111
'-.nuu401
u1u mmII111 I I uu
1)
e1l!
I:
11
111111lul111:2
1111151111111
1-!
Re
EE
r
8th Street Corridor
uu _ II
rlllll '111
=:
111rt
IIIIB�='1
.211I11:
ti1111:
EKE
3t-
1111 WT.
'e
Jai II.
111 ISO
11
=11111111
21■111:
cdmi IIIC
m =
MH11!
131101
Eli a=
11111.u111:
=5111a
•Ilvull
uiagralg
i{It
miffi
J- Ili'
.ol1.,
:111111111
51 11111
:11111
• 11 11
Plaza Blvd
Highland Ave
..
::
11
•
•
fkl-'ad
.. .-
�:�ie ...... Ii
ale
St
1
1 u•ul
-111111 iIIlultIIII
._ 1111111
30th St/Sweetwat
:1111111'•
..
1111,1
1111•
1111{11.1
11
■■I
.■�1111-
,I.
:t �{1111111•
ix: \1
.�I muu.:
11111111••
illl..l: i
V 11 1j181111111
�dim—
( nllul
• __s:
151
■■ :11
r +iil n!I
ml1-=•
1=
gE•
ME mr:
I;-111111
=Nig
.t1 qn
er
CHULA VISTA
11
National City Redevelopment Project - Existing Eminent Domain Authorit'
f
Project Area Boundary - Existing Eminent Domain Authority
Municipal Boundary
0 0125 020
0.rs
1-1
144.1
i
APPENDICES
ATTACHMENT 2 — NEGATIVE DECLARATION
See attached Negative Declaration following this page.
RSG
Page 34
Community Development Commission of National City
1243 National City Boulevard
National City, California 91950-3312
Telephone (619) 336-4250
Fax (619) 336-4286
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
Redevelopment Plan Amendment 2007 - Negative Declaration
A. INTRODUCTION
The Community Development Commission of the City of National City (the "CDC") prepared a
Negative Declaration for the proposed 2007 Redevelopment Plan Amendment to extend the
authority to use eminent domain. The CDC proposes to extend the CDC's existing authority to
acquire property, as a last resort, through eminent domain to vacant property (as defined in the
National City Municipal Code Section 7.06.20), and all commercial and industrial zoned
properties in those areas which are currently subject to eminent domain authority within the
National City Redevelopment Project Area. The current exemption for single family residences
would be expanded so that all housing uses, whether single-family or multi -family, are
specifically excluded from the use of eminent domain.
The Commission currently has the authority to acquire property through eminent domain until
July 18, 2007 in the following areas:
• Properties located immediately east and adjacent to National City Boulevard, between Division
Street and the south City limits.
• Properties located immediately west and adjacent to National City Boulevard, between Division
Street and State Route 54.
• Properties located immediately west and adjacent to Civic Center Drive, between Interstate 5 and
National City Boulevard.
• Properties located immediately south and adjacent to Civic Center Drive, between Interstate 5 and
National City Boulevard.
• Properties located immediately north and south and adjacent to 8th Street, between Interstate 5
and "D" Avenue.
• Properties west of Interstate 5, excepting the San Diego Unified Port District property.
• Specific properties located immediately southwest of the intersection of Plaza Boulevard and
Highland Avenue.
This amendment will extend the Commission's authority to acquire property through eminent
domain within these areas until 2019.
The 2007 Amendment also includes the addition and modification of redevelopment plan text as
it pertains to redevelopment actions and uses permitted in the project arca. As proposed the
amendment would add a provision for the CDC to pay all or part of the value of the land and the
cost of the installation and construction of any publicly owned building, facility, structure, or
other improvement within or without the Project Area pursuant to Health and Safety Code
Section 33445.
The 2007 Amendment would modify Section VIl (c) of the Redevelopment Plan, thus allowing
for used auto and truck sales when part of a new vehicle dealership and located on land within
the Transportation Center district. The 2007 Amendment will also change the current exclusion
of eminent domain on single-family homes (Exhibit D) to include all residential land uses, as
well as revising Exhibit C — "Public Facilities/Infrastructure Improvement Projects".
No other changes to the Redevelopment Plan for the National City Redevelopment Project are
included in this amendment.
Community Development Commission of National City — Negative Declaration Page 1
Extension of the Authority to Use Eminent Domain
The Negative Declaration for the 2007 Amendment evaluated the potential environmental
impacts that could occur with making the proposed amendments to the existing Redevelopment
Plan. The Negative Declaration was mailed for a 20-day public review period beginning June 7,
2007 and is scheduled to end on June 27, 2007. Comments on the 2007 Redevelopment Plan
Amendment Negative Declaration should be submitted during this public review period. The
Negative Declaration will be considered for approval July 3, 2007.
The commercial and industrial properties within the Project Area that are now subject to the use
of eminent domain arc shown on the attached map. The change to the 2007 Redevelopment Plan
Amendment to extend the eminent domain time limit in the existing project area, revising
Exhibit D to exclude all residential land uses, revising the transportation center section and
revising Exhibit C — public facilities and infrastructure is now referred to as the 2007
Redevelopment Plan Amendment, which reflects the stated change.
B. CEQA PROVISIONS
As stated above, a Negative Declaration was prepared for the 2007 Redevelopment Plan
Amendment pursuant to Section 15070 of the California Environmental Quality Act Guidelines
(CEQA Guidelines). The revision to the 2007 Amendment is now reflected by the 2007
Amendment, which did not cause or generate any significant effects.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
"The Negative Declaration did not identify any significant or adverse environmental impacts
associated with the extension of the eminent domain time limit in the existing project area,
revising Exhibit D to exclude all residential land uses, revising the transportation center section
and revising Exhibit C — public facilities and infrastructure. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15073.5(c)(2), the Negative Declaration is adequate in its analysis of the 2007
Redevelopment Plan Amendment.
Community Development Commission of National City — Negative Declaration Page 2
Extension of the Authority to Use Eminent Domain
ORDINANCE NO. 2007 —
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL
OF THE CITY OF NATIONAL CITY AMENDING
THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN FOR THE NATIONAL CITY
REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT THROUGH THE ADOPTION OF
THE 2007 AMENDMENT TO THE REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of National City ("City Council") has
adopted and subsequently amended the Redevelopment Plan for the National City
Redevelopment Project ("Redevelopment Plan"), on November 18, 1969, by Ordinance No.
1233; on June 24, 1975, by Ordinance No. 1471; on April 13, 1976, by Ordinance No. 1505; on
December 13, 1977, by Ordinance No. 1610, and subsequently amended on December 1,
1981, by Ordinance No. 1762; on May 22, 1984, by Ordinance No. 1821; on April 16, 1985, by
Ordinance No. 1851; on June 18, 1991, by Ordinance No. 91-2013; on June 18, 1995 by
Ordinance No. 95-2095; and on June 19, 2001, by Ordinance No. 2001-2187, incorporated
herein by reference, (the "Previous Ordinances"), and has designated the Redevelopment Plan
as the official redevelopment plan for the National City Redevelopment Project ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Community Development Commission of the City of National
City ("CDC") has requested that the City Council consider the 2007 Amendment to the
Redevelopment Plan ("2007 Amendment") to extend eminent domain authority to acquire
vacant property, and commercial and industrial zoned properties currently subject to eminent
domain authority within the National City Redevelopment Project Area ("Project Area"), as a last
resort, to July 2019; and
WHEREAS, the CDC has requested that the City Council consider the 2007
Amendment which allows the CDC to pay all or part of the value of the land and improvements
for a publicly owned building, facility, structure, or other improvement within or outside of the
Project Area; and
WHEREAS, the CDC has requested that the City Council consider the 2007
Amendment which allows used auto and truck sales when part of a new vehicle dealership and
located on land within the Transportation Center District; and
WHEREAS, the CDC has requested that the City Council consider the 2007
Amendment which revises Exhibit "C" of the Redevelopment Plan" — "Public
Facilities/Infrastructure Improvement Projects" to clarify project objectives, to eliminate the
specific street names under the Street Improvements projects, and to add a Public Safety and
Security project that will fund physical and technological enhancements to enhance public
safety and protection; and
WHEREAS, the CDC has requested that the City Council consider the 2007
Amendment which changes the current exclusion of eminent domain on single-family homes
(Exhibit "D") to include all lawful residential land uses; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (Public
Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), the Guidelines for Implementation of the Califomia
Environmental Quality Act (14 California Code Regulations Section 15000 et seq., and the local
procedures adopted by the CDC pursuant thereto, the City Council and the CDC have prepared
and approved a proposed Negative Declaration for the 2007 Amendment; and
Ordinance No. 2007 —
Page 2
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 33363 of the Health and Safety Code, part of
the Community Redevelopment Law (the "Law"), the City Council has adopted the CDC's
written responses to written objections received from affected taxing agencies and property
owners on the 2007 Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 33352 of the Health and Safety Code, the City
Council has acknowledged receipt from the CDC of the CDC's Report to the City Council
regarding the 2007 Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 33452 of the Califomia Health and Safety Code,
public notice has been duly given, and a full and fair noticed public hearing was held on the
proposed 2007 Amendment on June 19, 2007.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT ORDAINED by the City Council of the City of National City
as follows:
Section 1. The 2007 Amendment to the National City Redevelopment Plan, a copy
of which is attached hereto as Exhibit "A" and incorporated herein by this reference, is hereby
adopted and approved as the official Redevelopment Plan of the Project Area.
Section 2. The City Council hereby finds and determines, based on the evidence in
the record, including, but not limited to, the Report to the City Council, incorporated herein by
reference, and all documents referenced therein, and based upon evidence and testimony
received at the joint public hearing held on June 19, 2007, and received at the public hearings
held prior to the adoption of the Previous Ordinances referred to hereinabove, that:
1. Significant Blight remains within the Project Area. The Project Area is a blighted
area, the redevelopment of which is necessary to effectuate the public purposes
declared in the Community Redevelopment Law.
(a)
This finding is based on the City Council's findings contained in the
Previous Ordinances that various blighting conditions, as that term was
then defined, characterize the Project Area, and upon the Report to the
City Council, which demonstrates that these blighting conditions continue
to exist in the Project Area and that significant blight remains within the
project area.
(b) The City Council hereby finds that, despite the CDC's efforts, significant
blighting conditions still exist in the Project Area and continued
redevelopment is necessary to effectuate the public purposes contained
in the Community Redevelopment Law.
(c) Such conditions in the Project Area are causing, and will increasingly
cause, a reduction and lack of proper utilization of the Project Area to
such an extent that it constitutes a serious physical and economic burden
on the community which cannot reasonably be expected to be reversed
or alleviated by private enterprise or governmental action, or both, without
redevelopment, thus requiring redevelopment in the interest of the health,
safety, and general welfare of the people of the City and the State.
Ordinance No. 2007 —
rage 3
Evidence supporting this finding includes the fact that governmental
action, available to the City without redevelopment, would be insufficient
to cause any significant correction of the blighting conditions; and, that
the nature and costs of the public improvements and facilities and other
actions required to correct the blighting conditions, are beyond the
capacity of the City and cannot be undertaken or borne by private
enterprise acting alone or in concert with available governmental action.
(d) Maps depicting the locations of Structural Obsolescence, Incompatible
Adjacent Uses, Deterioration and Dilapidation, and Defective Design
Without Parking, all evidencing significant remaining blight in the Project
Area, are attached hereto as Exhibits "B", "C", "D" and "E", respectively
2. The Amended Redevelopment Plan will redevelop the Project Area in conformity
with the Community Redevelopment Law and in the interests of the public peace,
health, safety and welfare. Evidence supporting this finding includes the fact that
the purposes of the Community Redevelopment Law would be attained through
the implementation of the Amended Redevelopment Plan by: the elimination of
physical and economic conditions, which exist in the Project Area and which
cause the Project Area to be a blighted area; by the replanning, redesign, and/or
redevelopment of areas, which are stagnant or improperly utilized and which
could not be accomplished by private enterprise or govemmental action, or both,
without redevelopment; and, by protecting and promoting the sound development
and redevelopment of the Project Area and the general welfare of the citizens of
the City by remedying such injurious conditions through the employment of all
appropriate means.
3. The adoption and carrying out of the Amended Redevelopment Plan is
economically sound and feasible. Evidence supporting this finding includes the
fact that under the Amended Redevelopment Plan, the Commission will be
authorized to seek and utilize a variety of potential financing resources, including
property tax increment; that the nature and timing of redevelopment assistance
will depend on the amount and availability of such financing resources, including
tax increment generated by new investment in the Project Area; and, that the
financing plan included within the Report to Council demonstrates that sufficient
financial resources will be available to carry out the redevelopment activity in the
Project Area.
4. The Amended Redevelopment Plan conforms to the General Plan of the City of
National City, including, but not limited to, the housing element of the General
Plan, which substantially complies with the requirements of Article 10.6
(commencing with Section 65580) of Chapter 3 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the
Government Code.
5. The carrying out of the Amended Redevelopment Plan will promote the public
peace, health, safety, and welfare of the community and will effectuate the
purposes and policies of the Community Redevelopment Law. Evidence
supporting this finding includes the fact that redevelopment will benefit the
Ordinance No. 2007 -
Page 4
Project Area by correcting conditions of blight, and by coordinating public and
private actions to stimulate development and improve the economic and physical
conditions within the Project Area, and by increasing employment opportunities
within the City.
6. The condemnation of real property is necessary to the execution of the Amended
Redevelopment Plan, and adequate provisions have been made for payment for
property to be acquired as provided by law. The extension of the eminent domain
authority is necessary because the significant blight that remains within the
project area cannot be eliminated without use of eminent domain. Evidence
supporting this finding includes the need to assemble sites for certain public
facilities, to assemble developable units for economic activity, and to eliminate
the existence of and prevent the recurrences of blight.
7. The CDC has adopted a feasible method and plan for the relocation of families
and persons who might be displaced temporarily or permanently from housing
facilities in the Project Area. The CDC also has a feasible method and plan for its
relocation of businesses. Evidence supporting this finding includes the fact that
the CDC has adopted the method of relocation for the National City
Redevelopment Project, which sets forth a plan for relocation of families and
persons who may potentially be displaced by Commission projects; the fact that
the Amended Redevelopment Plan provides for relocation assistance according
to law; and, the fact that such assistance, including relocation payments
constitutes a feasible method for relocation.
8. (a) There are (or are being) provided, within the Project Area or within other
areas not generally less desirable with regard to public utilities and public
and commercial facilities and at rents or prices within the financial means
of the families and persons who might be displaced from the Project Area,
decent, safe, and sanitary dwellings equal in number to the number of the
available to such displaced families and persons and reasonably
accessible to their places of employment. Evidence supporting this finding
includes provisions contained in the 1995 Amendment of the
Redevelopment Plan that state, in the event that persons are to be
displaced, there are sufficient existing dwellings which would be available
to persons displaced by the implementation of the Amended
Redevelopment Plan.
(b) Families and persons shall not be displaced prior to the adoption of a
relocation plan pursuant to Sections 33411 and 33411.1 of the
Community Redevelopment Law; and, dwelling units housing persons
and families of low or moderate income shall not be removed or
destroyed prior to the adoption of a replacement housing plan. Evidence
supporting this finding includes the fact that the 1995 Amendment of the
Redevelopment Plan requires the CDC to adopt such plans prior to any
such displacement.
Ordinance No. 2007 —
Page 5
All noncontiguous areas of the Project Area are either blighted or necessary for
effective redevelopment and are not included for the purpose of obtaining the
allocation of taxes from the Area pursuant to Government Code Section 33670
without other substantial justification for their inclusion. Evidence supporting this
finding includes the fact that all properties within the Project Area boundaries
were included because they were under-utilized because of blighting influences,
or were affected by the existence of blighting influences, or were necessary
either to accomplish the objectives and benefits of the Amended Redevelopment
Plan or because of the need to impose uniform requirements on the Project Area
as a whole. Such properties will share in the benefits of the Amended
Redevelopment Plan.
10. Inclusion of any lands, buildings, or improvements (which are not detrimental to
the public health, safety, or welfare) is necessary for the effective redevelopment
of the entire area of which they are a part; and, any such area is not included
solely for the purpose of obtaining the allocation of tax increment revenues from
such area pursuant to Section 33670 of the Community Redevelopment Law
without other substantial justification for its inclusion. Evidence supporting this
finding includes the fact that all properties within the Project Area boundaries
were included because they were under-utilized because of blighting influences,
or were affected by the existence of blighting influences, or were necessary
either to accomplish the objectives and benefits of the Amended Redevelopment
Plan or because of the need to impose uniform requirements on the Project Area
as a whole. Such properties will share in the benefits of the Amended
Redevelopment Plan.
11. Existing blight within the Project Area cannot be eliminated without the use of
eminent domain. The elimination of blight and the redevelopment of the Project
Area could not reasonably be expected to be accomplished by private enterprise,
acting alone without the aid and assistance of the Agency. The extension of the
eminent domain authority is necessary because the significant blight that remains
within the project area cannot be eliminated without use of eminent domain.
Evidence supporting this finding includes the existence of blighting influences as
set forth in the Report to the City Council, incorporated herein by reference, and
the inability of individual owners and developers to economically remove these
blighting influences without substantial public assistance.
12. The requirement that a project area be predominantly urbanized as defined by
Section 33320.1(b) of the Community Redevelopment Law is applicable only to a
project area for which a final redevelopment plan is adopted on or after January
1, 1984, or to an area which is added to a project area by an amendment to a
redevelopment plan, which amendment is adopted, nor after January 1, 1984.
13. Because at the time of adoption of their respective redevelopment plans, the
component project areas which comprise the Original Area either were not
subject to this requirement or were determined to be predominantly urbanized,
Ordinance No. 2007 -
Page 6
there is no need to make a finding that the Original Area is predominantly
urbanized. As set forth in the Report to the City Council, there is sufficient
evidence to support the fact that the Added Area is a predominantly urbanized
area.
14. The time limitation and the limitation on the number of dollars to be allocated to
the CDC that are contained in the Amended Redevelopment Plan are reasonably
related to the proposed projects to be implemented in the Project Area and to the
ability of the Commission to eliminate blight within the Project Area. This finding
is based upon the fact that the limitation on the number of dollars allocated to the
CDC reflects the anticipated costs of the public improvement projects proposed
to be undertaken by the CDC pursuant to the Amended Redevelopment Plan and
the time limitation contained in the Amended Redevelopment Plan reflects the
anticipated time for the CDC to undertake such projects.
Section 3. The City Council is satisfied that permanent housing facilities will be
available within three years from the time residential occupants of the Project Area, if any, are
displaced, and that pending the development of such facilities, there will be available to any
such displaced residential occupants temporary housing facilities at rents comparable to those
in the City at the time of their displacement. Evidence supporting this finding includes the City
Council's finding that no persons or families of low and moderate income shall be displaced
from residences unless and until there is a suitable housing unit available and ready for
occupancy by such displaced persons or families and must be decent, safe, sanitary and
otherwise standard dwellings.
Section 4. Pursuant to Resolution No. 2007-163, adopted on July 10, 2007, the City
Council approved the Negative Declaration for the 2007 Amendment to the National City
Redevelopment Plan. A copy of said Negative Declaration is on file in the office of the City
Clerk, and incorporated herein by reference.
Section 5. A full and fair noticed public hearing having been held on the 2007
Amendment on June 19, 2007, and the City Council having considered all evidence and
testimony for and against the adoption of the 2007 Amendment and all written and oral
objections thereto, and the City Council having adopted written responses to the written
objections received from any affected taxing agency or property owner before or at the noticed
public hearing of June 19, 2007, and this City Council being fully advised in the premises, all
written and oral objections to the 2007 Amendment to the extent not otherwise addressed in the
Redevelopment Plan or not otherwise responded to are hereby overruled, and the 2007
Amendment to the National City Redevelopment Project is hereby approved.
Section 6. The City Clerk shall publish a copy of this Ordinance as required by Law.
Section 7. The City Clerk is hereby directed to send a certified copy of this
Ordinance to the CDC, whereupon the CDC is vested with the responsibility for carrying out the
2007 Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan.
Ordinance No. 2007 —
Page 7
Section 8. Pursuant to Section 33456 of the Health and Safety Code, the City Clerk
is hereby directed to record, with the County Recorder of San Diego County, a description of the
land within the Project Area affected by the 2007 Amendment, and a general description of any
change to any limitation upon the use of eminent domain resulting from the 2007 Amendment.
Section 9. The City Clerk is hereby directed to transmit a copy of the description and
statement recorded by the City Clerk pursuant to Section 7 of this Ordinance, a copy of this
Ordinance, and a map or plat indicating the portions of the Project Area affected by the 2007
Amendment, to the Auditor -Controller and Assessor of the County of San Diego, to the
governing body of each of the taxing agencies which receives taxes from property in the Project
Area, and to the State Board of Equalization, within thirty (30) days following the adoption of the
Amendment to the Redevelopment Plan.
Section 10. The City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to certify to the passage
of this Ordinance and to cause the same to be published in a newspaper of general circulation
that is published and circulated in the city.
Section 11. If any part of this Ordinance or the Amended Redevelopment Plan which
it approves is held to be invalid for any reason, such decision shall not affect the validity of the
remaining portion of this Ordinance or of the Amended Redevelopment Plan; and the City
Council hereby declares that it would have passed the remainder of the Ordinance or approved
the remainder of the Amended Redevelopment Plan if such invalid portion thereof had been
deleted.
PASSED and ADOPTED this day of July, 2007.
Ron Morrison, Mayor
ATTEST:
Michael Della, City Clerk
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
George H. Eiser, III
City Attomey
EXHIBIT "A"
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR THE
NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
Prepared:
May 8, 1995
Adopted:
July 18, 199.5
Amended:
December 1, 1981
May 22, 1984
April 16, 1985
June 18, 1991
July 18, 1995
June 19, 2001
July 2007
Prepared for:
Community Development Commission
of the City of National City
140 E. 12th Street, Suite B
National City, California 91950-3312
619-336-4250
Prepared by:
Rosenow Spevacek Group, Inc.
540 North Golden Circle, Suite 305
Santa Ana, California 92705
714/541-4585
619/967-6462
cArlocvmcros rad zltingsVidari++bcal znneEsVcirforary intern. li1cs4011.46,4p1sadoc
7I)
Adopted 7/18/95
SECTION 1. (100) INTRODUCTION 1
A. (101) General 1
SECTION 11. (200) BACKGROUND 2
SECTION III. (300) GENERAL DEFINITIONS 2
SECTION IV. (400) PROJECT AREA BOUNDARIES 4
SECTION V. (500) REDEVELOPMENT PLAN GOALS 4
SECTION VI. (600) REDEVELOPMENT ACTIONS 5
A. (601) General 5
B. (602) Property Acquisition 7
C. (605) Participation by Owners and Persons Engaged in Business 8
D. (609) Implementing Rules 9
E. (610) Cooperation with Public Bodies 10
F. (611) Property Management 10
G. (612) Payments to Taxing Agencies 10
H. (613) Relocation of Persons Displaced by a Project 11
I. (616) Demolition, Clearance, Public Improvements, Site Preparation and Removal 11
J. (621) Rehabilitation, Moving of Structures by the CDC and Seismic Repairs 13
K. (625) Property Disposition and Development 14
L. (630) Provision for Low and Moderate Income Ilousing 16
SECTION VII. (700) USES PERMITTED IN THE PROJECT AREA 20
A. (701) Map and Uses Permitted 20
B. (702) Major Land Use Designations (as now provided in the General Plan) 20
C. (703) Transportation Center 21
D. (704) Public Uses 22
E. (707) Conforming Properties 22
F. (708) Nonconforming Uses 23
G. (709) Interim Uses 93
H. (710) General Controls and Limitations 73
I. (720) Design for Development 25
J. (721) Building Permits 26
SECTION VIII. (800) METHODS FOR FINANCING THE PROJECT 26
A. (801) General Description of the Proposed Financing Methods 26
B. (802) Tax increment Revenue 27
C. (803) CDC Bonds 33
D. (804) Other Loans and Grants 34
C2)
c:Wa mnents nui vnlrtgSdf,isWnul seuings\ rni,rtry interact tileablkGeVdpla doe
Adopted 711 R/95
E. (805) Rehabilitation Loans, Grants, and Rebates 34
SECTION IX. (900) ACTIONS BY THE CITY 34
SECTION X. (1000) ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT 35
SECTION XI. (1100) DURATION OF THIS PLAN 35
SECTION XII. (1200) PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT 36
EXHIBIT A 37
EXHIBIT B 38
EXHIBIT C 39
EXIIIBIT D 40
rNoauneots mud eatings ddavi,Uxal scuuc.a tempo my imcsoet ldcssolkGcWplan dnc
Adopted 7I18/95
REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
FOR TILE
NATIONAL. CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT
SECTION I. (100) INTRODUCTION
A. (101) General
This is the Redevelopment Plan for the National City Redevelopment Project as amended
("Plan"), located in the City of National City, County of San Diego, State of California.
It consists of the text (Sections 100 through 1100), the Project Area Map of
Redevelopment Project Arca No. 1 ("Project Area") (Exhibit A), the legal description of
the Project Area boundaries (Exhibit B), a listing of the proposed public facilities and
infrastructure improvement projects (Exhibit C), and a map of the properties potentially
subject to acquisition by eminent domain (Exhibit D).
This Plan has been prepared by the Community Development Commission (the "CDC")
pursuant to the California Community Redevelopment Law (Health and Safety Code
Section 33000, et seq.), the California Constitution and all applicable laws and
ordinances. It does not present a specific plan for the redevelopment, rehabilitation and
revitalization of any area within the Project Area; instead, it establishes a process and
framework for implementation. This Plan is based upon the Preliminary Plan formulated
and adopted by the National City Planning Commission and the CDC on March 7, 1994
and March 15, 1994, respectively.
This Plan supersedes, by amendment and restatement, the Redevelopment Plan for the
National City Downtown Redevelopment Project adopted by Ordinance No. 1762 on
December 1, 1981, as amended by Ordinance No. 1821 adopted on May 22, 1984,
Ordinance No. 1851 adopted on April 16, 1985, -Ordinance No. 91-2013 adopted on
June 18, 1991, Ordinance No. 95-2095 adopted on July 18, 1995, and Ordinance No.
2187 adopted on June 19, 2001. This Plan was amended again by Ordinance No.
adopted on July , 2007. This Plan will amend the preexisting Redevelopment Plan as
follows:
• extend the CDC's existing eminent domain may -authority by 12 years in those
areas currently subject to eminent domain;
• add a provision tor the CDC to pay all or part of the value of the land and the cost of
the installation and construction of any publicly owned building, facility, structure, or
other improvement within or without the Project Area pursuant to Health and Safety
Code Section 33445;
• modify Section VII (c), thus allowing for used auto and truck sales when part of a new
vehicle dealership and located on land within the Transportation Center district.
r4Neanems and asuugsWAavuYocal s..nmpsVn,inrary IJesb166ripk.n Anc 1 Adopted 7/I8/95
SECTION II. (200) BACKGROUND
The preexisting National City Downtown Redevelopment Project was comprised of seven
separate project areas. Between 1969 and 1978, the City Council of the City of National City
("City Council") adopted four redevelopment projects: the E.J. Christman Business and
Industrial Park Redevelopment Project by Ordinance No. 1233 on November 18, 1969, the South
Bay Town and Country Redevelopment Project by Ordinance No. 1471 on June 24, 1975, the
Center City Redevelopment Project by Ordinance No. 1505 on April 13, 1976, and the E.J.
Christman Business and Industrial Park Redevelopment Project Amendment No. 2 by Ordinance
No. 1610 on December 13, 1977. On December 1, 1981, the City Council adopted the National
City Downtown Redevelopment Project by Ordinance No. 1762, merging the four preexisting
redevelopment projects and incorporating additional properties to establish a 2,080-acre merged
project area. The merged National City Downtown Redevelopment Project. has been amended
three times since its adoption: Amendment No. 1 adopted on May 22, 1984 by Ordinance No.
1821, Amendment No. 2 adopted on April 16, 1985 by Ordinance No. 1851, an4 Amendment
No. 3 adopted on June 18, 1991 by Ordinance No. 91-2013, Amendment No. 4 adopted on July
18, 1995 by Ordinance No. 95-2095, and Amendment No. 5 adopted on June 19, 2001 by
Ordinance No. 2187. Of these amendments, only Amendment No. 2 increased the size of the
project area, adding approximately three acres, and enlarging the merged National City
Downtown Redevelopment Project Area to approximately 2,083 acres.
SECTION III. (300) GENERAL DEFINITIONS
The following definitions will be used generally in the context of this Plan unless otherwise
specified herein:
A. "Added Area" means the territories included in the Project Area by Ordinance No.
95-2095 adopted by the City Council on July 18, 1995, as depicted on Exhibit A
and described in Exhibit B.
B. "Annual Work Program" means that portion of the CDC's annual budget that sets
forth programs and goals to be accomplished by the CDC during the fiscal year.
C. "CDC" means the Community Development Commission of the City of National
City, California.
D. "Center City Arca" means the territories originally included in the Center City
Redevelopment Project Area by Ordinance No. 1505 adopted by the City Council
on April 13, 1976, and subsequently merged into the Existing Area.
E. "City" means the City of National City, California.
F. "City Council" means the legislative body of the City.
e:Wtavnrnts and seniugs'ddans Incni sennq,Vcmpcwary v,tenset tdea4.&6ckdptan doe 2
Adoptcd 7/18/95
G. "County" means the County of San Diego, California.
H. "Disposition and Development Agreement" means an agreement between a
developer and the CDC that sets forth terms and conditions for improvement and
redevelopment.
1. "Downtown Original Area" means the territories originally added to the Existing
Area by Ordinance No. 1762 adopted by the City Council on December 1, 1981.
J. "Downtown 1985 Amendment Area" means the territories originally added to the
Existing Area by Ordinance No. 1851 adopted by the City Council on April 16,
1985.
K. "E.J. Christman1 Area" means the territories originally included in the E.J.
Christman Business and Industrial Park Redevelopment Project Area by
Ordinance No. 1233 adopted by the City Council on November 18, 1969, and
subsequently merged into the Existing Area.
L. "E.J. Christman2 Area" means the territories originally included in the E.J.
Christman Business and Industrial Park Redevelopment Project Area Amendment
No. 2 by Ordinance No. 1610 adopted by the City Council on December 13, 1977,
and subsequently merged into the Existing Area.
M. "Existing Arca" means the merged National City Redevelopment Project Area
originally formulated by Ordinance No. 1762 adopted by the City Council on
December 1, 1981, and subsequently amended by Ordinance No. 1821 on May 22,
1984, Ordinance No. 1851 on April 16, 1985, and Ordinance No. 91-2013 on June
18, 1991, as depicted on Exhibit A.
N. "General Plan" means the City's General Plan, a comprehensive and long-term
General Plan for the physical development of the City as provided for in Section
65300 of the California Government Code.
O. "Map" means the Map of the Project Area attached hereto as Exhibit A.
P. "Method of Relocation" means the methods or plans adopted by the CDC
pursuant to Sections 33352(f) and 33411 of the Redevelopment Law for the
relocation of families, persons and businesses to be temporarily or permanently
displaced by actions of the CDC.
Q. "2007 Ordinance" means City Council Ordinance No. adopted on July
2007 amending this Plan.
c,ckwu news and Y d ,i \.oc,1 settinp<Vemporaty tacobOc6cV Iplm.
3 Adopted 7I1 YJ95
49E. "Owner Participation Agreement" means an agreement between the CDC and a
property owner or tenant which sets forth terms and conditions for improvement
and redevelopment.
RS. "Person" means an individual(s), or any public or private entities.
ST. "Plan" means the redevelopment plan for the Project as amended.
T!J. "Project" means the National City Redevelopment Project.
UV. "Project Area" means the National City Redevelopment Project Area, inclusive of
the Existing Area and Added Area, which is the territory this Plan applies to, as
shown on Exhibit A.
VW. "Redevelopment Law" means the California Community Redevelopment Law
(Health and Safety Code, Sections 33000, et seg.) as it now exists or may be
hereafter amended.
WX. "South Bay Town and Country Area" means the territories originally included in
the South Bay Town and Country Redevelopment Project Area by Ordinance No.
1471 adopted by the City Council on June 24, 1975, and subsequently merged into
the Existing Area.
XY. "State" means the State of California.
SECTION IV. (400) PROJECT AREA BOUNDARIES
The boundaries of the Project Area are illustrated on the map attached hereto and incorporated
herein as Exhibit A. The legal description of the boundaries of the Project Area is as described
in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein.
SECTION V. (500) REDEVELOPMENT PLAN GOALS
Implementation of this Plan is intended to achieve the following goals:
• Eliminate and prevent the spread of conditions of blight including: underutilized
properties and deteriorating buildings, incompatible and uneconomic land uses,
deficient infrastructure and facilities, obsolete structures, and other economic
deficiencies in order to create a more favorable environment for commercial, office,
industrial, residential, and recreational development.
• Unify City's Harbor District with the downtown area through enhanced
employment, commercial, and maritime development opportunities.
• Expand the commercial base of the Project Area.
r{dlrnnrNs and scUaysWJavi:Unul s.lsingsnamnoray internal filesMik(esedrinndoc 4 Alrjptesr 7/18/95
• Improve public facilities and public infrastructure.
• Improve inadequate drainage infrastructure.
• Improve and/or provide electric, gas, telephone, and wastewater infrastructure to
both developed and undeveloped properties within the Project Area.
• Promote local job opportunities.
• Encourage the cooperation and participation of residents, businesses, business
persons, public agencies, and community organizations in the
redevelopment/revitalization of the Project Area.
• Implement design and use standards to assure high aesthetic and environmental
quality, and provide unity and integrity to developments within the Project Area.
• Address parcels of property that are: of irregular form and shape, arc inadequately
sized for proper usefulness and development, and/or are held in multiple ownership.
• Remove impediments to land disposition and development through the assembly of
property into reasonably sized and shaped parcels served by improved infrastructure
and public facilities.
• Recycle and/or develop underutilized parcels to accommodate higher and better
economic uses while enhancing the City's financial resources.
• Promote the rehabilitation of existing housing stock.
• Increase, improve, and preserve the community's supply of lasing affordable
housing for very low, low and moderate income households.
SECTION VI. (600) REDEVELOPMENT ACTIONS
A. (601) General
The CDC proposes to eliminate and prevent the recurrence of blight, and improve the
economic base of the Project Area by:
1. Acquiring, installing, developing, constructing, reconstructing,
redesigning, replanning, or reusing streets, curbs, gutters, sidewalks, traffic
control devices, utilities, flood control facilities and other public
improvements and public facilities.
2. Rehabilitating, altering, remodeling, improving, modernizing, or
reconstructing buildings, structures and improvements.
e.,t3oeu nCMs p] YCNQ,steklevislo l cettingraempaniny urtesues tiks4rtlitic4dpIxn.dne
5 Adopted 7/18/95
3. Rehabilitating, preserving, developing or constructing affordable housing
in compliance with State law.
4. Providing the opportunity for owners and tenants presently located in the
Project Area to participate in redevelopment projects and programs, and
extending preferences to occupants to remain or relocate within the
redeveloped Project Area.
5. Providing relocation assistance to displaced residential and nonresidential
occupants, if necessary.
6. Facilitating the development or redevelopment of land for purposes and
uses consistent with this Plan.
7. Acquiring real property by purchase, lease, gift, grant, request, devise or
any other lawful means (including eminent domain on a limited basis),
after the conduct of appropriate hearings.
8. Combining parcels and properties where and when necessary.
9. Preparing building sites and constructing necessary off -site improvements.
10. Providing for open space.
11. Managing property owned or acquired by the CDC.
12. Assisting in procuring financing for the construction of residential,
commercial, and office buildings to increase the residential and
commercial base of the Project Area, and the number of temporary and
permanent jobs in the City.
13. The disposition of property including, without limitation, the lease or sale
of land at a value determined by the CDC for reuse in accordance with this
Plan.
14. Establishing controls, restrictions or covenants running with the land, so
that property will continue to be used in accordance with this Plan.
15. Vacating or abandoning streets, alleys, and other thoroughfares, as
necessary, and dedicating other areas for public purposes consistent with
the objectives of this Plan.
16. Providing replacement housing, if any is required.
c:Wxtiment<. I settingsddLv Alma! sot inp,s4emporary nttctna ri4sbhCeWrInn doe 6
Adopted 7/18/95
17. Applying for and utilizing grants, loans and any other assistance from
federal or State governments, or other sources.
18. Taking actions the CDC determines are necessary and consistent with
State, federal and local laws to make structural repairs to buildings and
structures, including historical buildings, to meet building code standards
related to seismic safety.
19. Taking actions the CDC determines are necessary and consistent with
State, federal and local laws to remedy or remove a release of hazardous
substances on, under or from property within the Project Area or to
remove hazardous waste from property.
20. Pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33445, pay all or part of the
value of the land and the cost of the installation and construction of any
publicly owned building, facility, structure, or other improvement within
or without the Project Area provided: (1) the buildings, facilities,
structures, or other improvements are of benefit to the Protect Area; (2) no
other reasonable means of financing the buildings, facilities, structures, or
other improvements are available to the City; and (3) the payment of funds
for the acquisition of land or the cost of buildings, facilities, structures, or
other improvements will assist in the elimination of blight within the
Project Area.
To accomplish these actions and to implement this Plan, the CI)C is authorized to use the
powers provided in this Plan, and the powers now or hereafter permitted by the
Redevelopment Law and any other State law.
B. (602) Property Acquisition
1. (603) Acquisition of Real Property
Without limitation, the CDC may acquire real property, any interest in property,
and any improvements on it by any means authorized by law including, without
limitation, by gift, grant, exchange, purchase, cooperative negotiations, lease,
option, bequest, or devise.
In addition, the CDC may also employ eminent domain in projects involving land
acquisition of any real property identified in Exhibit D incorporated herein.
To the extent required by law, the CDC shall not acquire real property on which
an existing building is to be continued on its present site and in its present form
and use without the consent of the owner, unless: (1) such building requires
structural alteration, improvement, modernization or rehabilitation; or (2) the site
or lot on which the huilding is situated requires modification in size, shape or use;
rVincumows and seuugsWlvrolkxd serrmgs4ryporyry o,remrt Sk.:W&6e4dp1.e.Joc
7 Adopted 7/18/95
or (3) it is necessary to impose upon such property any of the standards,
restrictions and controls of this Plan and the owner fails or refuses to participate in
the Plan by executing an Owner Participation Agreement.
Except as otherwise provided herein, or otherwise provided by law, no eminent
domain proceeding to acquire property within the Project Area shall be
commenced within the Center City Area, the Downtown Original Area. the
Downtown 1985 Amendment Area, and the Added Area after twelve (12) years
following the date of adoption of the 2007 Ordinance amending erdixanee
adapting this Plan. Such time limitation may be extended only by amendment of
this Plan.
The CDC shall not employ eminent domain in acquiring property within the E.J.
Christmanl Area, the E.J. Christman2 Area, or the South Bay Town and County
Area or in acquiring any residential property in the Project Arca.
2. (604) Acquisition of Personal Property
Where necessary in the implementation of this Plan, the CDC is authorized to
acquire personal property in the Project Area by any lawful means.
C. (605) Participation by Owners and Persons Engaged in Business
1. (606) Owner Participation
This Plan provides for participation in the redevelopment of property in the
Project Area by the owners of all or part of such property if the owners agree to
participate in the redevelopment in conformity with this Plan.
Opportunities to participate in the redevelopment of property in the Project Area
may include without limitation the rehabilitation of property or structures; the
retention of improvements; the development of all or a portion of the participant's
property; the acquisition of adjacent or other properties from the CDC; purchasing
or leasing properties in the Project Area; participating with developers in the
improvement of all or a portion of a participant's properties; or other suitable
means consistent with objectives and proposals of this Plan and with the CDC's
rules governing owner participation and re-entry.
In addition to opportunities for participation by individual persons and firms,
participation, to the extent it is feasible, shall be available for two or more
persons, firms or institutions, to join together in partnerships, corporations, or
other joint entities.
The CDC desires participation in redevelopment activities by as many owners and
business tenants as possible. Ilowever, participation opportunities shall
CAI... uro.:u1 se[,ingaMMn,isUocJ aettingAtenyv,ay vncroa hlesbh&4�Im�.hrc
8
Adopted 7/18/95
necessarily be subject to and limited by such minimum factors as the expansion of
public or public utilities facilities; elimination and changing of land uses;
realignment of streets; the ability of the CDC and/or owners and business tenants
to finance acquisition and development activities in accordance with this Plan;
and whether the proposed activities conform to and further the goals and
objectives of this Plan.
2. (607) Reentry Preferences for Persons Engaged in Business in the Project Area
The CDC shall extend reasonable preferences to persons who arc engaged in
business in the Project Area to relocate and reenter in business in the redeveloped
area, if they otherwise meet the requirements prescribed by this Plan and the
CDC's rules governing owner participation and re-entry.
3. (608) Owner Participation Agreements
Under an Owner Participation Agreement, the participant shall agree to
rehabilitate, develop, or use the property in conformance with this Plan and be
subject to the provisions hereof. In the Owner Participation Agreement,
participants who retain real property shall be required to join in the recordation of
such documents as are necessary to make the provisions of this Plan applicable to
their properties.
In the event a participant breaches the terms of an Owner Participation
Agreement, the CDC may declare the Agreement terminated and may acquire the
real property or any interest therein, and may sell or lease such real property or
interest therein for rehabilitation or development in accordance with this Plan. If
conflicts develop between the desires of participants for particular sites or land
uses, the CDC is authorized to establish reasonable priorities and preferences
among the owners and tenants.
Where the CDC determines that a proposal for participation is not feasible, is not
in the best interests of the CDC or City, or that redevelopment can best be
accomplished without affording a participant an opportunity to execute an Owner
Participation Agreement, the CDC shall not be required to execute such an
agreement.
D. (609) Implementing Rules
The provisions of Sections 605-608 of this Plan shall be implemented according to the
rules adopted by the CDC prior to the approval of the ordinance amending this Plan,
which may be amended from time to time by the CDC. Such rules allow for Owner
Participation Agreements with the CDC.
e^d.nuutcuta eat settvugsWdasas, oval settus((sUesgturary Intern-, fik,Nalk6eWpb .do.
9 Adopted 7/18/95
E. (610) Cooperation with Public Bodies
Certain public bodies are authorized by State law to aid and cooperate, with or without
consideration, in the planning and implementation of activities authorized by this Plan.
The CDC shall seek the aid and cooperation of such public bodies and shall attempt to
coordinate the implementation of this Plan with the activities of such public bodies in
order to accomplish the purposes of redevelopment and to achieve the highest public
good.
Property of a public body shall not be acquired without its consent. The CDC shall seek
the cooperation of all public bodies which own or intend to acquire property in the Project
Area. Any public body which owns or leases property in the Project Area will be
afforded all the privileges of owner and business tenant participation if such public body
is willing to enter into an Owner Participation Agreement with the CDC. All plans for
development of property in the Project Area by a public body shall be subject to CDC
approval.
The CDC may impose on all public bodies the planning and design controls contained in
and authorized by this Plan to ensure that present uses and any future development by
puhlic bodies will conform to the requirements of this Plan. The CDC is authorized, to
the extent permissible by law, to financially (and otherwise) assist public bodies in the
cost of public land, buildings, facilities, structures or other improvements (within or
outside the Project Area) where such land, buildings, facilities, structures, or other
improvements are of benefit to the Project Area.
F. (611) Property Management
During such time as property, if any, in the Project Area is owned by the CDC, such
property shall be under the management and control of the CDC. Such properties may be
rented or leased by the CDC pending their disposition.
G. (612) Payments to Taxing Agencies
The CDC may pay, but is not required to pay, in any year during which it owns property
in the Project Area directly to any City, County or district, including, but not limited to, a
school district, or other public corporation for whose benefit a tax would have been levied
upon such property had it not been tax exempt, an amount of money in lieu of taxes.
The CDC may also pay to any taxing agency with territory located within the Project
Area, other than the City, any amounts of money which the CDC has found are necessary
and appropriate to alleviate financial burden or detriment caused by the Project pursuant
to an agreement executed prior to January 1, 1994. The payments to a taxing agency
pursuant to such an agreement in any single year shall not exceed the amount of property
tax revenues which would have been received by that taxing agency if all the property tax
revenues from the Project Area had been allocated to all the affected taxing agencies
c-VInctinrols aal settingsWtlavuUut-d :ntin Vrnporrry mtnoet tikaNlt6edd4, .do 10
Adopted 7/ 18195
without regard to the division of taxes required by Section 33670 of the Redevelopment
Law, except that a greater payment has been established by agreement between the C'DC
and one or more taxing agencies, except a school district, if the other taxing agencies
agreed to defer payments for one or more years in order to accomplish the purposes of the
Project at an earlier time than would otherwise be the case. The amount of any greater
payments shall not exceed the amount of payment deferred. The payments shall have
been approved by a resolution, adopted by the CDC, contained findings, supported by
substantial evidence, that the Project will cause or has caused a financial burden or
detriment to the taxing agency and that the payments are necessary to alleviate the
financial burden or detriment.
In the event that such an agreement described in the above paragraph does not exist
between the CDC and an affected taxing agency, the CDC shall remit payments to any
such taxing agency in a manner consistent with Section 33607.7 of the Redevelopment
Law.
H. (613) Relocation of Persons Displaced by a Project
1. (614) Relocation Program
In accordance with the provisions of the California Relocation Assistance law
(Government Code Section 7260, et seq.), the guidelines adopted and
promulgated by the California Department of Housing and Community
Development (the "Relocation Guidelines") and the Method of Relocation
adopted by the CDC, the CDC shall provide relocation benefits and assistance to
all persons (including families, business concerns and others) displaced by CDC
acquisition of property in the Project Area or as otherwise required by law. Such
relocation assistance shall be provided in the manner required by the Method of
Relocation. In order to carry out a redevelopment project with a minimum of
hardship, the CDC will assist displaced households in finding decent, safe and
sanitary housing within their financial means and otherwise suitable to their
needs. The CDC shall make a reasonable effort to relocate displaced individuals,
families, and commercial and professional establishments within the Project Area.
The CDC is also authorized to provide relocation for displaced persons outside
the Project Area.
2. (615) Relocation Benefits and Assistance
The CDC shall provide all relocation benefits required by law and in conformance
with the Method of Relocation, Relocation Guidelines, Relocation Assistance Act,
the Redevelopment Law, and any other applicable rules and regulations.
I. (616) Demolition, Clearance, Public Improvements, Site Preparation and Removal
of Hazardous Waste
Orinclmrms arf sovingstdAsv&{kwil vn ingsQempnrxy nutmeg flesb1k6e4dpiw.Jw:
11
Adopted 7,08/95
1. (617) Demolition and Clearance
The CDC is authorized, for property acquired by the CDC or pursuant to an
agreement with the owner of property, to demolish, clear or move buildings,
structures, or other improvements from any real property as necessary to carry out
the purposes of this Plan.
2. (618) Public Improvements
To the extent permitted by law, the CDC is authorized to install and construct or
to cause to be installed and constructed the public improvements and public
utilities (within or outside the Project Area) necessary to carry out the purposes of
this Plan. Such public improvements include, but are not limited to: over or
underpasses; bridges; streets; curbs; gutters; sidewalks; street lights; sewers; storm
drains; traffic signals; electrical distribution systems' natural gas distribution
systems; cable TV and fiber optic communication systems; water distribution
systems; parks; plazas; playgrounds; motor vehicle parking facilities; landscaped
areas; schools; civic; cultural; and recreational facilities; and pedestrian
improvements. A list of proposed public facilities and infrastructure improvement
projects is set forth in Exhibit C and incorporated herein by reference.
The CDC, as it deems necessary to carry out the Plan and subject to the consent of
the City Council, may pay all or part of the value of the land for and the cost of
the installation and construction of any building, facility, structure or other
improvement which is publicly owned either within or outside the Project Area,
upon both the CDC Board and the City Council making the applicable
determinations required pursuant to the Redevelopment Law.
When the value of such land or the cost of the installation and construction of
such building, facility, structure or other improvement, or both, has been, or will
be, paid or provided for initially by the City or other public corporation, the CDC
may enter into a contract with the City or other public corporation under which it
agrees to reimburse the City or other public corporation for all or part of the value
of such land or all or part of the cost of such building, facility, structure or other
improvements, or both, by periodic payments over a period of years. Any
obligation of the CDC under such contract shall constitute an indebtedness of the
CDC for the purposes of carrying out this Plan.
3. (619) Preparation of Building Sites
The CDC may develop as a building site any real property owned or acquired by
it. In connection with such development it may cause, provide, or undertake or
make provisions with other agencies for the installation, or construction of streets,
utilities, parks, playgrounds and other public improvements necessary for carrying
out in the Project Arca this Plan.
C.docurnzurs mad St I4u61ddavi\tu[:8t 4•tlings,tvaporar)' intenw ftIrs oO(:Xhit�.W.doc 1 2
Adopted 7/18/95
4. (620) Removal of Hazardous Waste
'1'o the extent legally allowable, the CDC may take any actions which the CDC
determines are necessary and which are consistent with other State and federal
laws, to remedy or remove a release of hazardous substances on, under, or from
property within the Project Area.
J. (621) Rehabilitation, Moving of Structures by the CDC and Seismic Repairs
1. (622) Rehabilitation and Conservation
The CDC is authorized to rehabilitate and conserve, or to cause to be rehabilitated
and conserved, any property, building or structure in the Project Area owned by
the CDC. The CDC is also authorized to advise, encourage, and assist (through a
loan program or otherwise) in the rehabilitation and conservation of property,
buildings or structures in the Project Area not owned by the CDC to the extent
permitted by the Redevelopment Law as it exists now or may he hereafter
amended. The CDC is authorized to acquire, restore, rehabilitate, move and
conserve buildings of historic or architectural significance.
It shall be the purpose of this Plan to allow for the retention of as many existing
businesses as practicable and to enhance the economic life of these businesses by
a program of voluntary participation in their conservation and rehabilitation. The
CDC is authorized to conduct a program of assistance and enforcement to
encourage owners of property within the Project Area to upgrade and maintain
their property consistent with this Plan and such standards as may be developed
for the Project Area.
The extent of rehabilitation in the Project Area shall be subject to the discretion of
the CDC based upon such objective factors as:
a. Compatibility of rehabilitation with land uses as provided
for in this Plan.
b. Economic feasibility of proposed rehabilitation and
conservation activity.
c. Structural feasibility of proposed rehabilitation and
conservational activity.
d. The undertaking of rehabilitation and conservation
activities in an expeditious manner and in conformance
with the requirements of this Plan and such property
rehabilitation standards as may be adopted by the CDC.
A:Ad.. cuts sad Qn'ry{. id viNnc l WtY,gadawdLaty mterat fikAollrfierdpl dov 13
Adopted 7/15/95
e. The need for expansion of public improvements, facilities
and utilities.
f. The assembly and development of properties in accordance
with this Plan.
The CDC may adopt property rehabilitation standards for the rehabilitation of
properties in the Project Area.
2. (623) Moving of Structures
As necessary in carrying out this Plan, the CDC is authorized to move, or to cause
to be moved, any building structures or other improvements from any real
property acquired which can be rehabilitated to a location within or outside the
Project Area.
3. (624) Seismic Repairs
For any project undertaken by the CDC within the Project Area for building
rehabilitation or alteration in construction, the CDC may, by following all
applicable procedures which are consistent with local, State, and federal law, take
those actions which the CDC determines are necessary to provide for seismic
retrofits.
K. (625) Property Disposition and Development
1. (626) Real Property Disposition and Development
a. (627) General
For the purposes of this Plan, the CDC is authorized to sell, lease,
exchange, subdivide, transfer, assign, pledge, encumber by mortgage or
deed of trust, or otherwise dispose of any interest in real property. To the
extent permitted by law, the CDC is authorized to dispose of real property
by negotiated lease or sale without public bidding. Except as otherwise
permitted by law, before any interest in property of the CDC acquired in
whole or in part, directly or indirectly, with tax increment moneys is sold
or leased for development pursuant to this Plan, such sale or lease shall be
first approved by the City Council after public hearing.
Except as otherwise permitted by law, no real or personal property owned
by the CDC, or any interest therein, shall be sold or leased to a private
person or private entity for an amount Tess than its fair market value, or the
fair reuse value at the use and with the covenants, conditions and
development costs authorized by the sale or lease.
c:VbcsmeW asulmatinrkIdavis \local smiugsUcururary mt.i,et fiksblkGeWpla..kx 14
Adopted 7/18/95
The real property acquired by the CDC in the Project Area, except
property conveyed to it by the City, shall be sold or leased to public or
private persons or entities for improvement and use of the property in
conformance with this Plan. Real property may be conveyed by the CDC
to the City, and where beneficial to the Project Area, to any other public
body without charge or for an amount less than fair market value.
All purchasers or lessees of property from the CDC shall be obligated to
use the property for the purposes designated in this Plan, to begin and
complete improvement of such property within a period of time which the
CDC fixes as reasonable, and to comply with other conditions which the
CDC deems necessary to carry out the purposes of this Plan.
During the period of redevelopment in the Project Area, the CDC shall
ensure that all provisions of this Plan, and other documents formulated
pursuant to this Plan, are being observed, and that development of the
Project Area is proceeding in accordance with applicable development
documents and time schedules.
All development, whether public or private, must conform to this Plan and
all applicable federal, State, and local laws, including without limitation
the City's planning and zoning ordinances, building, environmental and
other land use development standards. Such development must receive the
approval of all appropriate public agencies.
b. (628) Purchase and Development Documents
To provide adequate safeguards to ensure that the provisions of this Plan
will be carried out and to prevent the recurrence of blight, all real property
sold, leased, or conveyed by the CDC, as well as all property subject to
Owner Participation Agreements, shall be made subject to the provisions
of this Plan by leases, deeds, contracts, agreements, declarations of
restrictions, provisions of the planning and zoning ordinances of the City,
conditional use permits, or other means. Where appropriate, as
determined by the CDC, such documents or portions thereof shall be
recorded in the office of the Recorder of the County.
Leases, deeds, contracts, agreements, and declarations of restrictions of the
CDC may contain restrictions, covenants, covenants running with the land,
rights of reverter, conditions subsequent, equitable servitudes, or any other
provisions necessary to carry out this Plan.
The CDC shall reserve such powers and controls in Disposition and
Development Agreements or similar agreements as may be necessary to
c.lhxsanrats and seninratida.inIncal seetiogsnempuray YYetnet ftlesbh6e4rtpLm 1Y 15
Adopted 7/18/95
prevent transfer, retention, or use of property for speculative purposes and
to ensure that redevelopment is carried out pursuant to this Plan.
The CDC shall obligate lessees and purchasers of real property acquired in
redevelopment projects and owners of property improved as part of a
redevelopment project to refrain from discrimination or segregation based
upon race, color, creed, religion, national origin, ancestry, sex, or marital
status in the sale, lease, sublease, transfer, use occupancy, tenure or
enjoyment of property in the Project Area. All property sold, leased,
conveyed, or subject to Disposition and Development Agreements shall he
expressly subject by appropriate documents to the restriction that all deeds,
leases, or contracts for the sale, lease, sublease or other transfer of land in
the Project Area shall contain such nondiscrimination and non -segregation
clauses as are required by law.
2. (629) Personal Property Disposition
For the purposes of this Plan, the CDC is authorized to sell, lease, exchange,
subdivide, transfer, assign, pledge, encumber, or otherwise dispose of personal
property.
L. (630) Provision for Low and Moderate Income Housing
1. (631) Definition of Terms
The terms "affordable housing cost", "replacement dwelling unit", "persons and
families of low or moderate income", "substantially rehabilitated dwelling units"
and "very low income households" as used herein shall have the meanings as
defined by the Redevelopment Law and other State and local laws and regulations
pertaining thereto.
2. (632) Authority Generally
The CDC may, inside or outside the Project Area: acquire real property, buildings
sites, buildings or structures, donate real property, improve real property or
building sites, construct or rehabilitate buildings or structures, and takc any other
such actions as may be permitted by the Redevelopment Law, in order to provide
housing for persons and families of low or moderate income.
3. (633) Replacement Housing
Except as otherwise permitted by law, whenever dwelling units housing persons
and families of low or moderate income are destroyed or removed from the low
and moderate income housing market as part of a redevelopment project, the CDC
shall, within four years of such destruction or removal, rehabilitate, develop or
construct, or cause to be rehabilitated, developed or constructed, for rental or sale
a.sdneonrnts and acltingstdda.ia\kscat sciungs,acu;vrary mu-n-so fiksblknaadpLndw; 16 Adopted /18
to persons and families of low, or moderate income, an equal number of
replacement dwelling units which have an equal or greater number of bedrooms as
those destroyed or removed units at affordable housing costs within the territorial
jurisdiction of the CDC. Except as otherwise permitted by law, seventy-five
percent (75%) of the replacement dwelling units shall replace dwelling units
available at affordable housing costs in the same income level of very low income
households, lower income households, and persons and families of low and
moderate income as the persons displaced from those units destroyed. The CDC
may replace destroyed or removed dwelling units housing persons and families of
low or moderate income with a fewer number of replacement dwelling units if the
replacement dwelling units have a greater or equal number of bedrooms and arc
affordable to the same income level of households as the destroyed or removed
units to the extent permissible by law as it now exists or may hereafter be
amended.
4. (634) New or Rehabilitated Dwelling Units Developed Within the Project
Area
Except as otherwise permitted by law, at least thirty percent (30%) of all new and
substantially rehabilitated dwelling units developed by the CDC shall be available
at affordable housing cost to persons and families of low or moderate income and
of such thirty percent (30%), not less than fifty percent (50%) shall be available to
and occupied by very low income households. At least fifteen percent (15%) of
all new and substantially rehabilitated dwelling units developed within the Project
Area by public or private entities or persons other than the CDC shall be available
at affordable housing cost to persons and families of low or moderate income and
of such fifteen percent (15%), not less than forty percent (40%) shall be available
at affordable housing cost to very low income households. The percentage
requirements set forth in this Section 634 shall apply independently of the
requirements of Section 633 of this Plan and in the aggregate to the supply of
housing to be made available pursuant to this Section 634 and not to each
individual case of rehabilitation, development or construction of dwelling units.
Pursuant to Section 33413(b)(4) of the Redevelopment Law, the CDC shall
prepare and adopt a plan to comply with the requirements set forth above, for the
Project Area. The plan shalt be consistent with, and may be included within the
Housing Element of the City's General Plan. The plan shall be reviewed and, if
necessary, amended at least every Live (5) years in conjunction with the housing
element cycle. The plan shall ensure that the requirements of this section are met
every ten (10) years.
Except as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall require, by contract or other
appropriate means, that whenever any low and moderate income housing units are
developed within the Project Area, such units shall be made available on a priority
basis for rent or purchase, whichever the case may be, to persons and families of
low or moderate income displaced by the Project; provided, however, that failure
c: domnenu and xn'ngs4Wawcknal sclimgs4emponry wcnrt fileclnkGeWpLw.kk : 17
Ackyted 7/18/95
to give such priority shall not affect the validity of title to the real property upon
which such housing units have been developed.
5. (635) Duration of Dwelling Unit Availability
The CDC shall require the aggregate number of dwelling units rehabilitated,
developed or constructed pursuant to Sections 633 and 634 of this Plan to remain
available at affordable housing cost to very low income, low income, and
moderate income households for the longest feasible time, as determined by the
CDC, but for not less than the period of the residential land use controls
established in Section 1100 of this Plan.
6. (636) Relocation Housing
If insufficient suitable housing units are available in the City for use by persons
and families of low and moderate income displaced by a Project, the CDC may, to
the extent of that deficiency, direct or cause the development, rehabilitation or
construction of housing units within the City, both inside and outside the Project
Area.
7. (637) increased and Improved Supply
Except as otherwise permitted by law, not less than twenty percent (20%) of all
taxes which are allocated to the CDC pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 33670
of the Redevelopment Law and Section 602(2) and (3) of this Plan shall be used
by the CDC for the purposes of increasing, improving and preserving the City's
supply of low and moderate income housing available at affordable housing cost
as defined by Section 50052.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, to
persons and families of low or moderate income, as defined in Section 50093 of
the California Health and Safety Code, and very low income households, as
defined in Section 50105 of the California Health and Safety Code, unless one or
more applicable findings are made pursuant to the Redevelopment Law.
The funds for this purpose shall be held in a separate Low and Moderate Income
Housing Fund until used. Any interest earned by such Low and Moderate Income
Housing Fund shall accrue to the Fund.
In implementing Section 637 of this Plan, the CDC may exercise any or all of its
powers including, but not limited to, the following:
1. Acquire real property or building sites.
2. Improve real property or building sites with on -site or off -site
improvements, but only if either (a) the improvements are made as
part of a program which results in the new construction or
cAdvcw,>;ms and acutop`ddavaWzal vatintAten orary utnnct files'ag6eWplando 18
Adopted 7/18/95
rehabilitation of affordable housing units for low- or moderate -
income persons that are directly benefited by the improvements, or
(b) the CDC finds that the improvements arc necessary to eliminate
a specific condition that jeopardizes the health or safety of existing
low- or moderate -income residents.
3. Donate real property to private or public persons or entities.
4. Finance insurance premiums.
5. Construct buildings or structures.
6. Acquire buildings or structures.
7. Rehabilitate buildings or structures.
8. Provide subsidies to, or for the benefit of, very low income
households, as defined by Section 50105 of the California Ilealth
and Safety Code, lower income households, as defined by Section
50079.5 of the California Health and Safety Code, or persons and
families of low or moderate income, as defined by Section 50093
of the California Health and Safety Code, to the extent those
households cannot obtain housing at affordable costs on the open
market. Housing units available on the open market are those units
developed without direct government subsidies.
9. Develop plans, pay principal and interest on bonds, loans,
advances, or other indebtedness or pay financing or carrying
charges.
10. Maintain the community's supply of mobile homes.
11. Preserve the availability to lower income households of affordable
housing units in housing developments which are assisted or
subsidized by public entities and which are threatened with
imminent conversion to market rates.
The CDC may use these funds to meet, in whole or in part, the replacement housing
provisions in Section 633 of this Plan. These funds may be used inside or outside the
Project Area; however, these funds may be used outside the Project Area only if findings
of benefit to the Project Area are made pursuant to the Redevelopment Law.
8. (638) Duration of Affordability
c:llcxwtents And settingsNdevislbnl settiuxalutpuray wtesnct file.11c6:4dpI due
19
Adopted 7/18/95
Except as provided in Section 33334.3 of the Redevelopment Law, all new or
substantially rehabilitated housing units developed or otherwise assisted with moneys
from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund pursuant to an agreement approved by
the CDC shall be required to remain available at affordable housing cost to persons and
families of low or moderate income and very low income households for the longest
feasible time, but for not less than the following periods of time:
a. Fifteen years for rental units. However, the CDC may replace rental units
with equally affordable and comparable rental units in another location
within the City if (i) the replacement units are available for occupancy prior
to the displacement of any persons and families of low or moderate income
residing in the units to be replaced and (ii) the comparable replacement units
are not developed with moneys from the Low and Moderate Income
Housing Fund.
b. Ten years for owner -occupied units. However, the CDC may permit sales
of owner -occupied units prior to the expiration of the 10-year period for a
price in excess of that otherwise permitted under this subdivision pursuant
to an adopted program which protects the CDC's investment of moneys
from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund.
SECTION VII. (700) USES PERMITTED 1N THE PROJECT AREA
A. (701) Map and Uses Permitted
The Map attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein illustrates the location of
the Project Area boundaries, the immediately adjacent streets, and existing public
rights -of -way and public easements. The land uses permitted by this Plan shall be those
permitted by the General Plan, City zoning ordinances and the local Coastal Plan as they
now exist or may hereafter be amended.
B. (702) Major Land Use Designations (as now provided in the General Plan)
The following land use categories are presently permitted by the General Plan:
RESIDENTIAL
Single -Family Large Lot (RS-1)
Single -Family Small Lot (RS-2)
Single -Family Extendible (RS-3)
Two Family (RT)
Multifamily Extendible (RM-1)
Multifamily Limited (RM-2)
Senior Citizen Housing (RM-3)
COMMERCIAL
chkx:urtno< . M 'db, Uucal:ennF+\tert}u.u) wpxrra filesblk6Ordpim.Joc 20
Adopted 7/18/95
General Commercial (CG)
Medium Commercial (CM)
Limited Commercial (CL)
Tourist Commercial (CT)
Automotive Commercial (CA)
Heavy Commercial (CH)
INDUSTRIAL
Light Manufacturing (ML)
Medium Manufacturing (MM)
Heavy Manufacturing (MH)
Tidelands Manufacturing (MT)
INSTITUTIONAL
Civic Institutional (IL)
Private Institutional (IP)
OPEN SPACE
C. (703) Transportation Center
This use district encompasses all parcels located within of -the Commercial Zones (CA
and CH), any part of which zones are adjacent to National City Boulevard, south of 18th
Street to 33rd Street. This use is designed primarily to furnish areas for new and used
automobile and truck sales and services. The objective is to provide for a complete sales
and service unit for each new car dealership on land within the Transportation Center
District. Independent used car sales, services, or repairs will not be permitted unless such
activity is an integral part of a new vehicle dealership. Permitted uses in the
transportation center use district include:
• New automobile and truck sales, leasing, and rentals.
• Used auto and truck sales when part of a new vehicle dealership and located on
contiguous land within the Transportation Center district.
• Service and repair of trucks and automobiles when provided by new vehicle dealer on
contigt►ects-adjacent property.
• Sale of vehicle parts and accessories when provided by new vehicle dealership on
eentigueus-adjacent property.
• Sale or rental of campers, camper trailers, vacation trailers, self-propelled mobile
homes, boats, and other sporting and pleasure equipment which is substantial in size.
This activity must be incidental to the principal activity of the automobile and/or truck
dealership.
b \,& redevelomerriVIAMIX,ndeoce rftkvelnpsnrm plan amak neuiVJ-draNdrdf dne 2 I
Adopted _/_/07
• Other related uses, with the review and recommendation of the Planning Commission,
which are consistent with the objectives of this Plan.
D. (704) Public Uses
1. (705) Public Street Layout, Rights -of -Way and Easements
The public street system for the Project Area is illustrated on the Project Area
Map identified as Exhibit A. The street system in the Project Arca shall be
developed in accordance with the Circulation Element of the General Plan.
lnterstates 5 and 805 connect the Project Area to the greater metropolitan region.
Primary streets in the Project Area include: Tidelands Avenue, Harrison Avenue,
National City Boulevard, Highland Avenue, 8th Street, Civic Center Drive, and
24th Street.
Certain streets and rights -of -way may be widened, altered, abandoned, vacated, or
closed by the City as necessary for proper development of the Project Area.
Additional easements may be created by the CDC and City in the Project Area as
needed for proper development and circulation.
The public rights -of -way shall be used for vehicular, bicycle and/or pedestrian
traffic as well as for public improvements, public and private utilities, and
activities typically found in public rights -of -way. In addition, all necessary
easements for public uses, public facilities, and public utilities may be retained or
created.
2. (706) Other Public and Open Space Uses
Both within and, where appropriate, outside of the Project Area, the CDC may
take actions to establish, or enlarge public, institutional, or non-profit uses,
including, but not limited to, schools, community centers, auditorium and civic
center facilities, criminal justice facilities, park and recreational facilities, parking
facilities, transit facilities, libraries, hospitals, educational, fraternal, philanthropic
and charitable institutions or other similar associations or organizations. All such
uses shall be deemed to conform to the provisions of this Plan provided that such
uses conform with all other applicable laws and ordinances and that such uses are
approved by the City. The CDC may impose such other reasonable restrictions as
are necessary to protect development and uses in the Project Area.
E. (707) Conforming Properties
The CDC may, in its sole and absolute discretion, determine that certain real properties
within the Project Area meet the requirements of this Plan, and the owners of such
properties may be permitted to remain as owners of conforming properties without an
Owner Participation Agreement with the CDC, provided such owners continue to operate,
c:41uaun+•• and:vidngs4{darisVocal eettetys4em nrary intrinet filesblkbe4dpb doe 22
Adopted 7/18/95
use, and maintain the real properties within the requirements of this Plan. An owner of a
conforming property may he required by the CDC to enter into an Owner Participation
Agreement with the CDC in the event that such owner desires to (1) as provided in the
land use code, construct any additional improvements or substantially alter or modify
existing structures on any of the real property described above as conforming; or (2)
acquire additional property within the Project Area.
F. (708) Nonconforming Uses
The CDC is authorized but not required to permit an existing use to remain in an existing
building in good condition if the use does not conform to the provisions of this Plan,
provided that such use is generally compatible with existing and proposed developments
and uses in the Project Area.
The CDC may take actions to, but is not required to, authorize additions, alterations,
repairs or other improvements in the Project Area for buildings which do not conform to
the provisions of this Plan where, in the determination of the CDC, such improvements
would he compatible with surrounding Project Area uses and proposed development.
G. (709) Interim Uses
Pending the ultimate development of land by developers and participants, the CDC is
authorized to use or permit the use of any land in the Project Area for interim uses not in
conformity with the uscs permitted in this Plan. Such interim use, however, shall
conform to all applicable City codes.
H. (710) General Controls and Limitations
All real property in the Project Area is hereby made subject to the controls and
requirements of this Plan. No real property shall be developed, redeveloped,
rehabilitated, or otherwise changed after the date of the adoption of this Plan except in
conformance with the goals and provisions of this Plan and all applicable City codes and
ordinances. The land use controls of this Plan shall apply for the periods set forth in
Section 1100 below. The type, size, height, number and use of buildings within the
Project Area will be controlled by the applicable City planning and zoning ordinances as
they now exist or may hereafter be amended from time to time.
1. (711) New Construction
All construction in the Project Area shall comply with all applicable State and
local laws in effect from time to time. In addition to applicable City codes,
ordinances, or other requirements governing development in the Project Area,
additional specific performance and development standards may be adopted by the
CDC to control and direct improvement activities in the Project Area.
cA3xwrcntc and vatinpsyl,kavisUncal setsu gsWatipwcy imetuet files,u1k6Oniplan Mu
23
Adapted 7/18/95
2. (712) Rehabilitation
Any existing structure within the Project Area which the CDC enters into an
agreement for retention and rehabilitation shall be repaired, altered, reconstructed,
or rehabilitated in such a manner that it will meet the following requirements: be
safe and sound in all physical respects, be attractive in appearance and not
detrimental to the surrounding uses.
3. (713) Number of Dwelling Units
The total number of dwelling units in the Project Area shall be regulated by the
General Plan. As of the date of adoption of the Plan, there are 10,107 dwelling
units, not including mobile home units, in the Project Area.
4. (714) Open Space and Landscaping
The approximate amount of open space to be provided in the Project Area is the
total of all areas so designated in the Land Use Element of the General Plan and
those areas in the public rights -of -way or provided through site coverage
limitations on new development as established by the City and this Plan.
Landscaping shall be developed in the Project Area to ensure optimum use of
living plant material in conformance with the standards of the City.
5. (715) Limitations on Type, Size and Height of Buildings
The limits on building intensity, type, size and height, shall be established in
accordance with the provisions of the General Plan and the zoning ordinances, as
they now exist or are hereafter amended.
6. (716) Signs
All signs shall conform to the City's requirements. Design of all proposed new
signs shall be submitted prior to installation to the appropriate governing bodies
of the City and/or the CDC for review and approval pursuant to the Municipal
Code of the City and procedures permitted by this Plan.
7. (717) Utilities
The CDC, in conformity with municipal code and City policy, shall require that
all utilities be placed underground whenever physically possible and economically
feasible on projects funded in whole or in part by the CDC or subject to a
Disposition and Development Agreement or an Owner Participation Agreement.
8. (718) Subdivision of Parcels
cAdocutttcotf pod settwys4Wavistbgl sntingavrttputay itumwt filesM@6c4dplen floc 24
Adopted 7/18/95
No parcels in the Project Area, including any parcel retained by a participant, shall
be consolidated, subdivided or re -subdivided without the approval of the City.
9. (719) Variations
The CDC is authorized to permit variations from the limits, restrictions and
controls established by this Plan. In order to permit any such variation, the CDC
must determine all of the following:
a. Any variation must to be considered must first be consistent with the
Land Use Code, Title 18.
b. The application of certain provisions of this Plan would result in
practical difficulties or unnecessary hardships inconsistent with the
general purposes and intent of this Plan.
c. There are exceptional circumstances or conditions applicable to the
property or to the intended development of the property which do
not apply generally to other properties having the same standards,
restrictions, and controls.
d. Permitting a variation will not be materially detrimental to the public
welfare or injurious to property or improvements in the arca.
e. Permitting a variation will not be contrary to the objectives of this
Plan.
No such variation shall be granted which permits other than a minor departure
from the provisions of this Plan. In permitting any such variation, the CDC shall
impose such conditions as are necessary to protect the public health, safety, or
welfare, and to assure compliance with the purposes of this Plan.
I. (720) Design for Development
Within the limits, restrictions, and controls established in this Plan, and subject to the
provisions of Sections 701 and 710 herein, the CDC is authorized to establish heights of
buildings, land coverage, setback requirements, design criteria, traffic circulation, traffic
access, and other development and design controls necessary for proper development of
both private and public areas within the Project Area.
No new improvement shall be constructed, and no existing improvement shall be
substantially modified, altered, repaired, or rehabilitated except in accordance with this
Plan and any such controls approved by the CDC. In the case of property which is the
subject of a Disposition and Development Agreement or an Owner Participation
Agreement with the CDC, such property shall be developed in accordance with the
provisions of such Agreement. One of the objectives of this Plan is to create an attractive
�:Nocuwenta and ttningsYNavisdocnl wninvVenponry Idca,o0are rdplandoc 25
Adopted 7/18/95
and pleasant environment in the Project Area. Therefore, such plans shall give
consideration to good design, open space and other amenities to enhance the aesthetic
quality of the Project Area. The CDC shall not approve any plans that do not comply
with this Plan except as permitted by Section 719 of this Plan.
J. (721) Building Permits
Any building permit that is issued for the rehabilitation or construction of any new
building or any addition, construction, moving, conversion or alteration to an existing
building in the Project Arca from the date of adoption of this Plan must be in
conformance with the provisions of this Plan, any design for development adopted by the
CDC, any restrictions or controls established by resolution of the CDC, and any
applicable participation or other agreements.
1'he CDC is authorized to establish permit procedures and approvals required for
purposes of this Plan. A building permit shall be issued only after the applicant for same
has been granted all approvals required by the City and the CDC at the time of
application.
SECTION VIII. (800) METHODS FOR FINANCING THE PROJECT
A. (801) General Description of the Proposed Financing Methods
Upon adoption of this Plan by the City Council, the CDC is authorized to finance
implementation of this Plan with assistance from local sources, the State and/or the
federal government, property tax increment, interest income, CDC bonds, donations,
loans from private financial institutions or any other legally available source.
The CDC is also authorized to obtain advances, borrow funds, issue bonds or other
obligations, and create indebtedness in carrying out this Plan. The principal and interest
on such indebtedness may be paid from tax increment revenue or any other funds
available to the CDC. Advances and loans for survey and planning and for the operating
capital for administration of this Plan may be provided by the City until adequate tax
increment revenue or other funds are available to repay the advances and loans. The City
or other public agency, as it is able, may also supply additional assistance through
issuance of bonds, loans and grants and in -kind assistance. Any assistance shall be
subject to terms established by an agreement between the CDC, City and/or other public
agency providing such assistance.
As available, gas tax funds from the State and sales tax funds from the County may be
used for the street system.
The CDC may issue bonds or other obligations and expend their proceeds to cany out this
Plan. The CDC is authorized to issue bonds or other obligations as appropriate and
feasible in an amount sufficient to finance all or any part of Plan implementation
e:Nncun.:as ad settitesVdmislocal scttitKs\tenrnrtvy item. tdcaao66ebdplan doc 26
Adopted 7/18/95
activities. The CDC shall pay the principal and interest on bonds or other obligations of
the CDC as they become due and payable.
B. (802) Tax Increment Revenue
All taxes levied upon taxable property within the Project Area each year by or for the
benefit of the State, County, City or other public corporation (hereinafter called "Taxing
Agency" or "Taxing Agencies") after the effective date of the ordinance, shall be divided
as follows:
That portion of the taxes which would be produced by the rate upon which
the tax is levied each year by or for each of said Taxing Agencies upon the
total sum of the assessed value of the taxable property in the Project Area
as shown upon the assessment roll used in connection with the taxation of
such property by such Taxing Agency, last equalized prior to the effective
date of the Ordinance, shall be allocated to and when collected shall be
paid to the respective Taxing Agencies as taxes by or for said Taxing
Agencies on all other property are paid (for the purpose of allocating taxes
levied by or for any Taxing Agency or Agencies which did not include the
territory in the Project Area on the effective date of the Ordinance but to
which such territory has been annexed or otherwise included after such
effective date, the assessment roll of the County last equalized on the
effective date of the Ordinance shall be used in determining the assessed
valuation of the taxable property in the Project Area on said effective
date).
2. That portion of said levied taxes each year in excess of such amount shall
be allocated to, and when collected shall be paid into, a special fund of the
CDC to pay the principal of and interest on loans, monies advanced to, or
indebtedness (whether funded, refunded, assumed, or otherwise) incurred
by the CDC to finance or refinance in whole or in part, the Project and this
Plan. Unless and until the total assessed valuation of the taxable property
in the Project Area exceeds the total assessed value of the taxable property
in the Project Area as shown by the last equalized assessment roll referred
to in paragraph (1.) hereof, all of the taxes levied and collected upon the
taxable property in the Project Area shall be paid to the respective Taxing
Agencies. When said loans, advances, and indebtedness, if any, and
interest thereon, have been paid, all monies thereafter received from taxes
upon the taxable property in the Project Arca shall be paid to the
respective Taxing Agencies as taxes on all other property arc paid.
3. That portion of the taxes in excess of the amount identified in paragraph
(1.) above which is attributable to a tax rate levied by a Taxing Agency for
the purpose of producing revenues in an amount sufficient to snake annual
repayments of the principal of and interest on any bonded indebtedness for
c.Wlxumetu and .scttnys4k1a,i,\kval settittbsVempk tay a ctoet fiksblk4c4dplan.da 27
Aduplai 7/1 R/95
the acquisition or improvement of real property shall be allocated to, and
when collected shall be paid into, the fund of that Taxing Agency. This
paragraph (3.) shall only apply to taxes levied to repay bonded
indebtedness approved by the voters on or after January 1, 1989.
4. This Plan applies to redevelopment projects adopted by the CDC from
1969 through 1985. As such, the last equalized assessment rolls used to
calculate taxes to be allocated to the Agency pursuant to Section 802,
paragraphs (I) and (2) herein, will be those in effect when the following
ordinances creating these redevelopment project areas were adopted:
• E.J. Christman) Area adopted by Ordinance No. 1233 on November
18, 1969.
• South Bay Town and Country Area adopted by Ordinance No. 1471 on
June 24, 1975.
• Center City Area adopted by Ordinance No. 1505 on April 13, 1976.
• E.J. Christman2 Area adopted by Ordinance No. 1610 on December 13,
1977.
• Downtown Original Area adopted by Ordinance No. 1762 on December
1, 1981.
• Downtown 1985 Amendment Area adopted by Ordinance No. 1851 on
April 16, 1985.
The CDC is authorized to make pledges as to specific advances, loans and indebtedness
as appropriate in carrying out the Project. The portion of taxes allocated and paid to the
CDC pursuant to subparagraph (2.) above is irrevocably pledged to pay the principal of
and interest on loans, monies advanced to, or indebtedness (whether funded, refunded,
assumed, or otherwise) incurred by the CDC to finance or refinance, in whole or in part,
the redevelopment program for the Project Area.
The number of dollars of taxes which may be divided and allocated to the CDC pursuant
to Section 33670 of the Redevelopment Law, inclusive of payments to taxing agencies,
shall not exceed $300 million, adjusted annually in accordance with the San Diego
County Consumer Price Index for all urban consumers (CPI-U) or a comparable
inflationary index should the CPI-U cease to exist, except by amendment of this Plan.
With respect to the E.J. Christmanl Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety code Section
33333.6(a), (c), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not pay
indebtedness with the proceeds of property taxes received pursuant to Heath and Safety
Code Section 33670 or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section
33670 after November 18, 2019. These limitations shall not be applied to limit the
allocation of taxes to the CDC to the extent required to eliminate project deficits created
under subdivision (g) of Health and Safety Code Section 33334.6 in accordance with the
plan adopted pursuant thereto for the purpose of eliminating the deficits or to the extent
e7Wucnntenta ad xttinEaAl7MvisVocalwt¢y>Vemporry interne, fil-AntkbeWplauck, 28
Adopkxl 95
required to implement a replacement housing program pursuant to Health and Safety
Code Section 3341.3. In addition, these limitations shall not affect the validity of any
bond, indebtedness, or other obligation, including any mitigation agreement entered into
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33401, authorized by the City Council, or the
CDC pursuant to the Redevelopment Law, prior to January 1, 1994, or the right of the
CDC to receive property taxes, pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 to pay
the bonds, indebtedness, or other obligation.
With respect to the South Bay Town and Country Area, notwithstanding any other
provision of this Plan, and except as provided in this Section and IIealth and Safety code
Section 33333.6(a), (c), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not
pay indebtedness with the proceeds of property taxes received pursuant to Heath and
Safety Code Section 33670 or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code
Section 33670 after June 24, 2025. These limitations shall not be applied to limit the
allocation of taxes to the CDC to the extent required to eliminate project deficits created
under subdivision (g) of Health and Safety Code Section 33334.6 in accordance with the
plan adopted pursuant thereto for the purpose of eliminating the deficits or to the extent
required to implement a replacement housing program pursuant to IIealth and Safety
Code Section 33413. In addition, these limitations shall not affect the validity of any
bond, indebtedness, or other obligation, including any mitigation agreement entered into
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33401, authorized by the City Council, or the
CDC pursuant to the Redevelopment Law, prior to January 1, 1994, or the right of the
CDC to receive property taxes, pursuant to health and Safety Code Section 33670 to pay
the bonds, indebtedness, or other obligation.
With respect to the Center City Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this Plan,
and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety code Section 33333.6(a),
(c), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not pay indebtedness
with the proceeds of property taxes received pursuant to Heath and Safety Code Section
33670 or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 after
April 13, 2026. These limitations shall not be applied to limit the allocation of taxes to
the CDC to the extent required to eliminate project deficits created under subdivision (g)
of Health and Safety Code Section 33334.6 in accordance with the plan adopted pursuant
thereto for the purpose of eliminating the deficits or to the extent required to implement a
replacement housing program pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33413. In
addition, these limitations shall not affect the validity of any bond, indebtedness, or other
obligation, including any mitigation agreement entered into pursuant to Health and Safety
Code Section 33401, authorized by the City Council, or the CDC pursuant to the
Redevelopment Law, prior to January 1, 1994, or the right of the CDC to receive property
taxes, pursuant to IIealth and Safety Code Section 33670 to pay the bonds, indebtedness,
or other obligation.
With respect to the F.J. Christman2 Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety code Section
33333.6(a), (c), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not pay
29
Woryrcmi and vvingss'ldavu\kocal scuiugs4cuyurary vacrarr fiirSnik6e4dpt,adm
Adopted 7/ 18/95
indebtedness with the proceeds of property taxes received pursuant to Heath and Safety
Code Section 33670 or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section
33670 after December 13, 2027. These limitations shall not be applied to limit the
allocation of taxes to the CDC to the extent required to eliminate project deficits created
under subdivision (g) of Health and Safety Code Section 33334.6 in accordance with the
plan adopted pursuant thereto for the purpose of eliminating the deficits or to the extent
required to implement a replacement housing program pursuant to Health and Safety
Code Section 33413. In addition, these limitations shall not affect the validity of any
bond, indebtedness, or other obligation, including any mitigation agreement entered into
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33401, authorized by the City Council, or the
CDC pursuant to the Redevelopment Law, prior to January 1, 1994, or the right of the
CDC to receive property taxes, pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 to pay
the bonds, indebtedness, or other obligation.
With respect to the Downtown Original Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety code Section
33333.6(a), (c), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not pay
indebtedness with the proceeds of property taxes received pursuant to Heath and Safety
Code Section 33670 or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section
33670 after December 1, 2031. These limitations shall not be applied to limit the
allocation of taxes to the CDC to the extent required to eliminate project deficits created
under subdivision (g) of Health and Safety Code Section 33334.6 in accordance with the
plan adopted pursuant thereto for the purpose of eliminating the deficits or to the extent
required to implement a replacement housing program pursuant to Health and Safety
Code Section 33413. In addition, these limitations shall not affect the validity of any
bond, indebtedness, or other obligation, including any mitigation agreement entered into
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33401, authorized by the City Council, or the
CDC pursuant to the Redevelopment Law, prior to January 1, 1994, or the right of the
CDC to receive property taxes, pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 to pay
the bonds, indebtedness, or other obligation.
With respect to the Downtown 1985 Amendment Area, notwithstanding any other
provision of this Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety code
Section 33333.6(a), (c), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not
pay indebtedness with the proceeds of property taxes received pursuant to Heath and
Safety Code Section 33670 or receive property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code
Section 33670 after April 16, 2035. These limitations shall not be applied to limit the
allocation of taxes to the CDC to the extent required to eliminate project deficits created
under subdivision (g) of Health and Safety Code Section 33334.6 in accordance with the
plan adopted pursuant thereto for the purpose of eliminating the deficits or to the extent
required to implement a replacement housing program pursuant to Health and Safety
Code Section 33413. In addition, these limitations shall not affect the validity of any
bond, indebtedness, or other obligation, including any mitigation agreement entered into
pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33401, authorized by the City Council, or the
CDC pursuant to the Redevelopment Law, prior to January 1, 1994, or the right of the
cAdo.:wnw and vnings4Warisklu,a1 scuingntempnrsry mtrtnct HesWlkGc4Jplao An, 3t1
Adopted 7/18/95
CDC to receive property taxes, pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 to pay
the bonds, indebtedness, or other obligation.
With respect to the Added Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this Plan, and
except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code Section 33332(a), or as
otherwise permitted by law, the CDC shall not pay indebtedness with the proceeds of
property taxes received pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 or receive
property taxes pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33670 after 45 years following
approval of the ordinance adopting this Plan. These limitations shall not be applied to
limit the allocation of taxes to the CDC to the extent required to implement a replacement
housing program pursuant to Health and Safety Code Section 33413.
With respect to the E.J. Christmanl Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code Section
33333.6(a), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or
indebtedness to be repaid from such allocations of taxes established or incurred by the
CDC to finance in whole or in part the Redevelopment Project shall be established or
incurred after January 1, 2004. Such loan, advance or indebtedness may be repaid over a
period of time longer than such time limit. Such time limitation may he extended only by
amendment of this Plan. This limit shall not prevent the CDC from incurring debt to be
repaid from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund or establishing more debt in
order to fulfill the CDC's housing obligations under Health and Safety Code Section
33413. In addition, this limit shall not prevent the CDC from refinancing, refunding, or
restructuring indebtedness after January 1, 2004, if the indebtedness is not increased and
the time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the data on which
the indebtedness would have been paid.
With respect to the South Bay Town and Country Area, notwithstanding any other
provision of this Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code
Section 33333.6(a), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or
indebtedness to be repaid from such allocations of taxes established or incurred by the
CDC to finance in whole or in part the Redevelopment Project shall be established or
incurred after January 1, 2004. Such loan, advance or indebtedness may be repaid over a
period of time longer than such time limit. Such time limitation may be extended only by
amendment of this Plan. This limit shall not prevent the CDC from incurring debt to be
repaid from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund or establishing more debt in
order to fulfill the CDC's housing obligations under Health and Safety Code Section
33413. In addition, this limit shall not prevent the CDC from refinancing, refunding, or
restructuring indebtedness after January 1, 2004, if the indebtedness is not increased and
the time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the data on which
the indebtedness would have been paid.
With respect to the Center City Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this Plan,
and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code Section 33333.6(a),
(g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or indebtedness to he
repaid from such allocations of taxes established or incurred by the CDC to finance in
sp
cAdtaanuada and xuugAddavaUocal xlningaVempnrary intrne+ fdcatnik6ekdplaa dnc 31
Adopted 7/18/95
whole or in part the Redevelopment Project shall be established or incurred after January
I, 2004. Such loan, advance or indebtedness may be repaid over a period of time longer
than such time limit. Such time limitation may be extended only by amendment of this
Plan. This limit shall not prevent the CDC from incurring debt to be repaid from the Low
and Moderate Income Housing Fund or establishing more debt in order to fulfill the
CDC's housing obligations under Health and Safety Code Section 33413. In addition,
this limit shall not prevent the CDC from refinancing, refunding, or restructuring
indebtcdness after January 1, 2004, if the indebtedness is not increased and the time
during which the indebtedness is to he repaid does not exceed the data on which the
indehtedness would have been paid.
With respect to the E.J. Christman2 Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code Section
33333.6(a), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or
indebtedness to be repaid from such allocations of taxes established or incurred by the
CDC to finance in whole or in part the Redevelopment Project shall be established or
incurred after January 1, 2004. Such loan, advance or indebtedness may be repaid over a
period of time longer than such time limit. Such time limitation may be extended only by
amendment of this Plan. This limit shall not prevent the CDC from incurring deht to be
repaid from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund or establishing more debt in
order to fulfill the CDC's housing obligations under Health and Safety Code Section
33413. In addition, this limit shall not prevent the CDC from refinancing, refunding, or
restructuring indebtedness after January 1, 2004, if the indebtedness is not increased and
the time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the data on which
the indebtedness would have been paid.
With respect to the Downtown Original Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this
Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code Section
33333.6(a), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or
indebtedness to be repaid from such allocations of taxes established or incurred by the
CDC to finance in whole or in part the Redevelopment Project shall be established or
incurred after January 1, 2004. Such loan, advance or indebtedness may be repaid over a
period of time longer than such time limit. Such time limitation may be extended only by
amendment of this Plan. This limit shall not prevent the CDC from incurring deht to be
repaid from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund or establishing more debt in
order to fulfill the CDC's housing obligations under Health and Safety Code Section
33413. In addition, this limit shall not prevent the CDC from refinancing, refunding, or
restructuring indebtedness after January 1, 2004, if the indehtedness is not increased and
the time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the data on which
the indebtedness would have been paid.
With respect to the Downtown 1985 Amendment Area, notwithstanding any other
provision of this Plan, and except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code
Section 33333.6(a), (g), and (h), or as otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or
indebtedness to be repaid from such allocations of taxes established or incurred by the
eAdocuieuas sad seasiogAldavisUn¢d sersingsUmpornry iorernrr fidsbh&WpLuidoc 32
Adopted 7/18/95
CDC to finance in whole or in part the Redevelopment Project shall be established or
incurred after April 16, 2005. Such loan, advance or indebtedness may be repaid over a
period of time longer than such time limit. Such time limitation may be extended only by
amendment of this Plan. This limit shall not prevent the CDC from incurring debt to be
repaid from the Low and Moderate Income Housing Fund or establishing more debt in
order to fulfill the CDC's housing obligations under Health and Safety Code Section
33413. In addition, this limit shall not prevent the CDC from refinancing, refunding, or
restructuring indebtedness after April 16, 2005, if the indebtedness is not increased and
the time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the data on which
the indebtedness would have been paid.
With respect to the Added Area, notwithstanding any other provision of this Plan, and
except as provided in this Section and Health and Safety Code Section 33333.2(a), or as
otherwise permitted by law, no loan, advance or indebtedness to be repaid from such
allocations of taxes established or incurred by the CDC to finance in whole or in part
activities authorized under this Plan shall be established or incurred after 20 years
following approval of the ordinance adopting this Plan. Such loan, advance or
indebtedness may be repaid over a period of time longer than such time limit. Such time
limitation may be extended only by amendment of this Plan. This limit shall not prevent
the CDC from incurring debt to be repaid from the Low and Moderate Income Ilousing
Fund or establishing more debt in order to fulfill the CDC's housing obligations under
Health and Safety Code Section 33413. In addition, this limit shall not prevent the CDC
from refinancing, refunding, or restructuring indebtedness after 20 years following
approval of the ordinance adopting this Plan, if the indebtedness is not increased and the
time during which the indebtedness is to be repaid does not exceed the date on which the
indebtedness would have been paid.
C. (803) CDC Bonds
The CDC is authorized to issue bonds and other obligations from time to time, if it deems
it appropriate to do so, in order to finance all or any part of Plan implementation
activities.
Neither the members of the CDC nor any persons executing the bonds are liable
personally on the bonds or other obligations by reason of their issuance.
The bonds and other obligations of the CDC arc not a debt of the City or the State; nor are
any of its political subdivisions liable for them; nor in any event shall the bonds or
obligations be payable out of any funds or properties other than those of the CDC; and
such bonds and other obligations shall so state on their face. The bonds and other
obligations do not constitute an indebtedness within the meaning of any constitutional or
statutory debt limitation or restriction.
chWcwtolts W scttngAddavt Uxal satulgs\tcapurYy iutauct lileAvik4eNiJphw.tl.R 33
Adopted 7/18/95
The amount of bonded indebtedness, to be repaid in whole or in part from the allocation
of taxes pursuant to Section 33670 of the Redevelopment Law, which can be outstanding
at one time shall not exceed $100.0 million, except by amendment to this Plan.
D. (804) Other Loans and Grants
Any other loans, grants, guarantees or financial assistance from the federal government,
the State, or any other public or private source will be utilized, if available, as appropriate
in carrying out this Plan. In addition, the CDC may make loans as perinitted by law to
public or private entities for any of its redevelopment purposes.
E. (805) Rehabilitation Loans, Grants, and Rebates
The CDC and the City may commit funds from any source to rehabilitation programs for
the purposes of loans, grants, or rebate payments for self -financed rehabilitation work.
The rules and regulations for such programs shall be those which may already exist or
which may be developed in the future. The CDC and the City shall seek to acquire grant
funds and direct loan allocations from State and federal sources, as they may be available
from time to time, for the carrying out of such programs.
SECTION IX. (900) ACTIONS BY THE CITY
The City shall aid and cooperate with the CDC in carrying out this Plan and shall take all
reasonable actions necessary to ensure the continued fulfillment of the purposes of this Plan and
to prevent the recurrence or spread in the Project Area of conditions of blight. Actions by the
City may include, but shall not be limited to, the following:
1. Institution and completion of proceedings for opening, closing, vacating,
widening, or changing the grades of streets, alleys, and other public rights -
of -way, and for other necessary modifications of the streets, the street
layout, and other public rights -of -way in the Project Area. Such action by
the City shall include the requirement of abandonment and relocation by
the public utility companies of their operations in public rights -of -way as
appropriate to carry out this Plan, provided that nothing in this Plan shall
be deemed to require the cost of such abandonment, removal, and
relocation to be borne by others than those legally required to bear such
Costs.
2. Institution and completion of proceedings necessary for changes and
improvements to publicly -owned parcels and utilities in the Project Area.
3. Performance of the above, and of all other functions and services relating
to public health, safety, and physical development normally rendered in
accordance with a schedule which will permit the redevelopment of the
Odnamena, and seatulgsWdevislural settiagAtcmpurary 111liksSulk6erdplon.dnc 34
Adopted 7/11S/95
Project Area to be commenced and carried to completion without
unnecessary delays.
4. Imposition, whenever necessary, of appropriate design controls within the
limits of this Plan in the Project Area to ensure proper development and
use of land.
5. Provisions for administration/enforcement of this Plan by the City after
completion of development.
6. The undertaking and completion of any other proceedings necessary to
carry out the Project.
7. The expenditure of any City funds in connection with redevelopment of
the Project Area pursuant to this Plan.
8. Revision of the City zoning ordinance, adoption of specific plans or
execution of statutory development agreements to permit the land uses and
facilitate the development authorized by this Plan.
SECTION X. (1000) ADMINISTRATION AND ENFORCEMENT
Upon adoption, the administration and enforcement of this Plan or other documents
implementing this Plan shall be performed by the City and/or the CDC, as appropriate.
The provisions of this Plan or other documents entered into pursuant to this Plan may also be
enforced by litigation or similar proceedings by either the CDC or the City. Such remedies may
include, but are not limited to, specific performance, damages, re-entry onto property, power of
termination, or injunctions. In addition, any recorded provisions which are expressly for the
benefit of owners of property in the Project Area may be enforced by such owners.
SECTION XI. (1100) DURATION OF THIS PLAN
With respect to the E.J. ChristmanI Area, except for the nondiscrimination and nonsegregation
provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire on November 18,
2009. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to this Plan except
to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenants, contracts, or other
obligations.
With respect to the South Bay 'i'own and Country Area, except for the nondiscrimination and
nonsegregation provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire
on June 24, 2015. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to this
Plan except to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenants, contracts,
or other obligations.
aNdotautantni and selswn>Wda,“\Weal senvsRStemporary interne. fl sb➢e6c4Jyla.dx 35
Adopted 7/ 18/95
With respect to the Center City Area, except for the nondiscrimination and nonsegregation
provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire on April 13,
2016. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to this Plan except
to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenants, contracts, or other
obligations.
With respect to the E.J. Christman2 Area, except for the nondiscrimination and nonsegregation
provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire on December 13,
2017. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to this Plan except
to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenants, contracts, or other
obligations..
With respect to the Downtown Original Area, except for the nondiscrimination and
nonsegregation provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire
on December 1, 2021. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to
this Plan except to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenants,
contracts, or other obligations.
With respect to the Downtown 1985 Amendment Area, except for the nondiscrimination and
nonsegregation provisions which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire
on April 16, 2025. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to act pursuant to
this Plan except to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing covenants,
contracts, or other obligations.
With respect to the Added Area, except for the nondiscrimination and nonsegregation provisions
which shall run in perpetuity, the provisions of this Plan shall expire 30 years following adoption
of the ordinance approving this Plan. After this time limit, the Agency shall have no authority to
act pursuant to this Plan except to pay previously incurred indebtedness and to enforce existing
covenants, contracts, or other obligations.
SECTION XII. (1200) PROCEDURE FOR AMENDMENT
This Plan may be amended by means of the procedure established in Sections 33450-33458 of
the Redevelopment Law or by any other procedure hereafter established by law.
locuments anal.vetfings ddavia^bcal mteEsUmporary lame fiwolk6evd,,b-dw: 36
Adopted 7/18/95
EXHIBIT "A"
gnt'I III1$ .. ❑' 1 s.II.a„lam
Ell lill1111! 1'lll it latt;II.
11,1: 71/III. •.n II; tins=
111: it I HI., illl.l.l. :l.111.
fir-'
ENV:_ t,♦
ii MW. mi
ii z1E— 111 1111• • . .•
c � Mrs
MINIM
11S;_ 30th SUSweetwater
.lifr•..:11 . ,11111
it III; ❑;.,2: 1 1'I'
-. �0' cL :St7brl
1citiu 11dnn _0 dl_-l+,j
11 •II .iI II I•:1.. .r 1■1
mown •IIII!I:Nllli Ilr =1�
Illl:!Ii1;11.11
111111i11i1•r/_== =
•�.- 9, ]•.Illy ■111�L
E.1111�n..1 ';IL�IIF11;1 Pu _i pHs
`' l`IIII 'r_[ilI
�:ltllill:/II:
!!� w.11
■ .. .Jrttia
National City Redevelopment Project - Parcels Subject to the 2007 Amendment
QProject Area Boundary - 200 / Amendment Area
Municipal Boundary
Source: National City Planning
h 325
EXHIBIT "B"
DEVELOPMENT
MMISSION
OF THE
NATIONAL CITY
National City
Redevelopment
Project Area
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
EXISTING AREA
AREA "A"
The perimeter description of this Project, situated in the City of National
City, County of San Diego, State of California, is as follows:
A11 that portion of the incorporated territory of the City
of National City, County of San Diego, State of California,
described as follows:
Beginning at the point of intersection of the centerlines
of Division Street and Highland Avenue, being on the
common boundary line between the City of National City
and the City o; San Diego; thence South 72. 14' 16" West
along said centerline of Division Street 3035 feet more
o= less to the Easterly line of Interstate Eighxav
Route 5; thence along said Easterly line as follows:
Soul 12' 50' 02" East 75.38 feet; thence South 50° 10'
East 28.46 feet; thence Southerly along the arc of a
1
200 foot radius curve 65.72 feet; thence South 17° 45' 15"
East 1706.82 feet; thence South 12' 02' 37" East 80.40
feet; thence South 17° 45' 15" East 290.36 feet; thence
South 72° 14' 25" West 110.07 feet t.o a tangent 31 foot
radius curve concave Easterly; thence Southerly along
the arc of said curve 48.69 feet; thence South 17° 45' 15"
East 36.78 feet; thence South 3° 59' 30" West 172.85 feet;
thence South 17° 45' 15" East 61.98 feet; thence South
72° 14' 25" West 136.32 feet; thence South 16°- 06' 59"
West 96.36 feet; thence South 17° 45' 15" East 59.01 feet;
thence South 18° 07' West 235.91 feet; thence Southerly
along the arc of a 144 foot radius curve concave Easterly
159.60 feet; thence South 18' 08' 56" West 66.10 feet;
thence South 5° 35' 40" East 22.37 feet; thence South
18' 08' 56" West 210.39 feet; thence North'72° 14' 25"
East 69.20 feet; thence South 17° 07' 17" West 294.76
feet; thence South 5. 17' West 58.63 feet; thence South
14° 51' 00" West 432.91 feet; thence South 41. 43' West
23.92 feet; thence Southerly along the arc of a 162 foot
radius curve concave Southeasterly 144.17 feet; thence
South 8° 15' West 55.65 feet; thence South 17° 45' 09"
East 76.61 feet; thence South 54' 39' East 132.23 feet;
thence South 72° 14' 25" West 208.44 feet; thence South
9' 15' West 191.03 feet; thence South 17' 45' 40" East
186.31 feet; thence South 0° 40' 00" East 119.07 feet;
thence South 17. 45' 40" East 1050.81 feet; thence South
17° 44' 00" East 7440 feet more or less to the Southerly
line of Quarter Section 160 of Rancho de la Nation on
the common boundary line between the City of National
City and the City of Chula Vista; thence along said
boundary North 72° 08' 04" East 1940 feet more or less
to the Easterly line of National City Boulevard, 100 feet wide;
thence Northerly along said Easterly line 2306 feet to
the Southerly line of Lot 1 of Quarter Section 151 of said
Rancho de la Nacion Map No. 166; thence Easterly along said
Southerly line 600 feet more or less to the Easterly line
of the Westerly half of said Lot 1; thence Northerly along
said Easterly line 330 feet to the Northerly line of said
Quarter Section 151; thence Easterly along said Northerly
line 660 feet to the North and South centerline of Quarter -
Section 151; thence Southerly along said line 1317 feet'"
to the Southwest corner of Lot 13; thence Easterly along
said Southerly line 240 feet to the centerline of Sweet-
water River; thence along said centerline Southwesterly
300 feet more or less to the westerly line of Lot 12 of
Quarter Section 151; thence Southerly along the Westerly
line of Lots 12 and 11, a distance of 370 feet to the
Northerly line of the Southerly 130 feet of said Lot 11;
thence Easterly along said Southerly line 1274 feet to
the Westerly line of Highland Avenue; thence Northerly
along said Westerly line 502 feet to the Westerly prolonga-
tion of the Northerly line of Trousdale Drive; thence
Easterly along said prolongation 100 feet to the Easterly
line of said Highland Avenue; thence Northerly along said
Easterly line 1342 feet to the Northerly line of Quarter
Section 135 of Rancho de la Nacion; thence North 70° 42' 39"
East along said Northerly line 1144.85 feet to an angle
point on the Easterly line•of Parcel 2 of Parcel Map No.
1308; thence along said line North 43° 34' 25" East 17.09
feet; thence North 7° 25' 35" West 125 feet; thence North
1° 08' .f5" West 66.84 feet; thence North 40° 08' 25" East
170.40 feet to the Easterly line of Lot 4 of Quarter Sec-
tion 134 of said Rancho de la Nacion; thence North
19° 07' 45" West along said Easterly line 419.48 feet
to the Northerly line of 30th Street, Road Survey No. 1323;
thence Easterly along said Northerly line to the 'Westerly
line oz Edgernere Avenue, Road Survey No. 670; thence
Southeasterly along said Westerly line to the Northerly
line of State Highway Route 54; thence Easterly along said
Northerly line to the Southwesterly corner of Sweetwater
Town & Country Shopping Center Map No. 8432; thence along
the boundary line thereof, North 82° 33' 20" East 243.83
2
feet; thence Easterly along the arc of a 1700 foot radius
curve 391.13 feet; thence South 79° 21' 42" East 809.08
feet; thence South 81' 09' 17" East 223.73 feet; thence
Easterly along the arc of a 225 foot radius curve 155.79
feet to a compound curve having a radius of 100 feet;
thence Northerly along said curve 204.61 feet; thence North
58° 13' 38" West 176.15 feet; thence Northerly along the
arc of a 350 foot radius curve 222.34 feet; thence North
22° 06' 31" West 282.67 feet; thence North 71° 15' 46'
test 105.74 feet; thence North 69' 22' 14" West 209.66
feet; thence North 78' 34' 34' West 208.58 feet; thence
Westerly along the arc of a 957 foot radius curve 350 feet
more or less to a point on the boundary line of Course
No. 6 of the City -of National City Ordinance No. 1019;
thence along said bounaary being along the Southerly pro-
longation of the Easterly line of Lot 52 of Lincoln Acres
Map No. 1740, North 29° 17' 30" West 150 feet to the North-
easterly corner of said Lot 52; thence Northeasterly along
the Southeasterly line of Grove Street as shown on said
Map No. 1740, 215 feet; thence Northwesterly 185.26 feet
to a point on the Easterly line of Lot 4 of said Map No.
1740;. thence North 31' 54' West to the Northeast corner
of•said Lot 4; thence South 71' 05' West 49.37 feet;
thence South 58' 06' West along the Northerly lines of
Lots 4 and 3 a distance of.101.80 feet to the Easterly
line of Lot 20 of said Map No. 1740; thence North
52. 06' West along said line 106.44 feet to the North
line of the South 100"feet of Lots 20 and 21 of said Map
No. 1740; thence along said line South 58' 06' West 230
feet to the West line of said Lot 20; thence North
18. 55' West along the West line of said Map No. 1740
a distance of 370 feet more or less to an angle point on
the boundary line of the City of National City, Ordinance
No. 1061; thence Easterly along the Southerly line thereof
50 feet to the Easterly line of Lincoln Court; thence
Northerly along said Easterly line 48 feet to the South
line of Lot 15 of said Map No. 1740; thence North 61° 12' 30"
East 296.52 feet to the Southeast corner of said Lot 15;
thence.North 28° 47' 30" West 142.40 feet along the West-
erly line of Lots 11 and 12 to the Southerly line of the
North 20 feet of said Lot 12; thence North 61° 12' 30"
East 85 feet more or'less along said Southerly line to
an angle point on said boundary line of the City of
National City last mentioned; thence Northerly along the
Easterly line thereof 92.16 feet to the Southerly line of
said Lincoln Court; thence North 72° 49' 00" East along said
Southerly line 82.20 feet to the Southerly prolongation of the
Westerly line of Lot 27 of said Map No. 1740: thence along
said prolongation and along said line North 19' 03' 00"
West 330 feet to the Northwesterly corner of said Lot 27;
thence North 44" 14' East 111.90 feet to the Southwest
corner of Lot 30 of said Map No. 1740; thence North
19' 03' 00" West 230 feat to the Northwest corner of Lot 31
of said Map No. 1740; thence South 81' 34' 00" East
162.79 feet to a point on the bounaary line of Rae Place
as shown on said Map No."1740; thence Northeasterly along
the arc of a 40 foot radius curve 62.83 feet to the West-
erly line of Lot 33 of said Map No. 1740; thence North
19° 03' 00" West 43 feet along said Westerly line to the
Southerly line of Lot 4 of Las Palmas Park Villas, Map
No. 9128; thence along said Southerly line North 72" 13'
East 120 feet to an angle point thereon; thence South
17° 53' 09' East 97 feet: thence North 73° 13' East 120
feet; thence South 17° 53' 09" East 2.82 feet; thence
North 71° 57' 37" East 255 feet more or less to the East-
erly line of Newell Street as shown on the Westerly line
of Interstate Route 805; thence along said Westerly line
of said Interstate Route 1f05 as follows: Northerly along
the arc of a 330 foot radius curve 43.99 feet; thence
North 12' 07' 40" West 258.68 feet; thence Nortnerly
3
along the arc of a 1030 foot radius curve 98.37 feet;
thence North 17' 36' West 685.32 feet: thence Northerly
along the arc of a 1030 foot radius curve 93.65 feet:
thence North 22. 48' 34" Wes: 263.55 feet; thence Northerly
along the arc of a 970 foot radius curve 88.19 feet; thence
North 17° 36' West 809.97 feet; thence North 10° 47' 26"
East 42.23 feet; thence North 17° 41' 02" West 200.33
feet: thence North 25° 18' 39" West 474.78 feet; thence
North 45' SC' 36" West 67.83 feet; thence North 17' 43' 57"
West 125.00 feet; thence North 31' 33' 50" West 688.61
feet; thence South 78' 59' 11" West 26.20 feet; thence
North 45' 54' 02" West 17.68 feet; thence South 78' 59' 11"
West 96.00 feet; thence North 15° 23' 31" West 30.29 feet;
thence North 43° 19' 20" West 105.88 feet; thence North
17'.44' 49" West 20 feet; thence North 56' 59' 46" East
106.76 feet; thence North 23' 34' 11" West 190.01 feet;
thence North 3' 36' 49" West 142.30 feet; thence North
17' 53' 05" West 540.09 feet; thence North 27. 06' 55"
East 35.36 feet; thence North 17° 53' 05" West 308.70
feet; thence North 25. 49' 53" West 180.84 feet; thence
North 17' 53' 05' West 200 feet; thence North
21' 47' 45' West 250.59 feet; thence North 28° 01' 52"
West 99.44 feet; thence South 61° 58' 08" West 42.24 feet;
thence North 17' 52' 10" West 236.99 feet; thence North
57' 37' 09' West 172.52 feet; thence North 39' 07' 16"
West 452.83 feet; thence South 72' 13' 30" West 6.64 feet;
thence North 17° 46' 30" West 89.72 feet; thence Nortn
46° 21' 02' West 113.63 feet; thence South 72° 00' 25"
West 50.35 feet; thence North 40' 42' 58" West 283.16
feet: thence North 55' 54, 39" West 457.20 feet; thence
North 50. 24' 12" West 661.84 feet; thence Northerly
along the arc of a 30 foot radius curve 64.23 feet; thence
North 59' 31' 47" West 107.30 feet; thence Northerly along
the arc of a 30 foot radius curve 33.50 feet; thence North
43. 45' 17" West 244.18 feet; thence Northerly along the arc
of a 599 foot radius curve 114.56 feet; thence North
74' 26' 28" West 222.29 feet; thence North 28" 30' 14"
West 28.97 feet; thence North 48° 01' 12" West 188.16 feet
to the common boundary line of the City of San Diego and
the City of National City; thence along said line South -
0' 45' 45" West 50.99 feet to an angle point thereon;
thence South 89' 58' West along said line 637.21 feet to
the West line of Lot 70 feet Horton's ?urchase Man No.
283; thence North 0' 01' 30" East along the West line
thereof 218 feet to the centerline of Delta Street; thence
along said centerline South 89' 55' 25" West 1335.78 feet
to the centerline of Highland Avenue; thence Southerly
along said centerline being along said common boundary
1500 feet more or less to the point of beginning.
The land area contained within the Project Boundary is approximately
2,080 acres.
4
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
NATIONAL CITY REDEVELOPMENT PROJECT AREA
ADDED AREA
AREA "B"
Those properties located in the City of National City, County of San Diego, State of
California, described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the Southerly Right-of-way of 8th Street and the
Westerly Right-of-way of Interstate 5; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way the
following courses: South 17°45'09" East 150.03 feet; thence South 12°04'00" East
100.63 feet; thence South 08°26'44" East 284.00 feet; thence South 13°50'25"
West 152.72 feet; thence South 16°06'34" West 332.55 feet; thence South
17°45'40" East 186.36 feet; thence South 08°23'31" West 499.35 feet; thence
South 15°38'16" West 108.99 feet; thence South 20°20'00" West 89.72 feet;
thence South 49°07'00" West 25.00 feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way
South 06°41'56" East 233.22 feet to an angle point in said Westerly Right-of-way;
thence continuing along said Westerly Right-of-way the following courses: South
17°45'40" East 604.39 feet; thence South 26°30'24" East 52.61 feet; thence South
17°45'40" East 2245.01 feet; thence South 02°39'23" East 333.59 feet; thence
South 52°52'19" West 24.46 feet; thence South 72°14'00" West 260.17 feet;
thence South 17°45'40" East 80.00 feet; thence South 88°45'34" East 182.30 feet;
thence South 79°41'54" East 120.04 feet; thence South 31 °19'37" East 268.23
feet; thence South 30°11'05" West 66.08 feet; thence South 27°10'57" East 34.34
feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way along the boundary of Record of
Survey 11749, South 72°16'11" West 307.21 feet; thence South 17°43'49" East
164.89 feet; thence South 72° 16' 11 " West 316.34 feet to the beginning of a non -
tangent 1652.28 foot radius curve concave Southwesterly, to which a radial line
bears North 76 ° 38'43" East; thence Southeasterly along the arc of said curve and the
Easterly Right-of-way of the San Diego and Arizona Eastern Railroad as shown on said
Record of Survey 11749 through a central angle of 02°26'51" a distance of 70.58
feet; thence South 10°54'26" East 504:27 feet to the beginning of a tangent
1213.11 foot radius curve concave Northeasterly; thence Southeasterly along the arc
of said curve through a central angle of 06°22'46" a distance of 135.07 feet; thence
North 72°42'48" East 10.00 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent 1203.11 foot
radius curve concave Northeasterly, to which a radial line bears South 72°42'48"
West; thence Southeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of
34°14'07" a distance of 718.88 feet; thence South 51 °31' 18" East 233.81 feet to
the beginning of a non -tangent 598.69 foot radius curve concave Southwesterly, to
which a radial line bears North 38°57'27" East; thence Southeasterly along the arc
of said curve through a central angle of 33 ° 18' 19" a distance of 348.01 feet; thence
South 17°44'14" East 71.01 feet; thence South 17°42'10" East 971.98 feet to the
City of National City/Chula Vista City boundary; thence leaving said Easterly railroad
Right-of-way Southwesterly along said City boundary as shown on Miscellaneous Map
564 South 72°15'22" West 1629.76 feet to the intersection of the Southerly
prolongation of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue; thence along said
prolongation and the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue North 17°45'40"
West 1031.20 feet to the intersection of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands
Avenue and the Southerly Right-of-way of 32nd Street; thence North 23°03'04"
West 108.46 feet to the intersection of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue
and the Northerly Right-of-way of 32nd Street; thence along the Easterly Right-of-way
of Tidelands Avenue North 17°45'40" West 2430.00 feet to the Southerly Right-of-
way of 24th Street; thence North 17°07'00" West 80.00 feet to the Northerly Right-
of-way line of said 24th Street said point being also on the Easterly Right-of-way of
said Tidelands Avenue; thence along the Easterly Right-of-way line of said Tidelands
Avenue North 15°00'40" West 15.02 feet, said point being a prolongation of the
Right-of-way of said 24th Street; thence leaving said Easterly Right-of-way of
Tidelands Avenue South 72° 14'20" West along said prolongation and Northerly Right-
of-way of said 24th Street 360.37 feet to an angle point in said Northerly Right-of-
way of 24th Street; thence continuing along said Northerly Right-of-way of 24th
Street South 17°45'40" East 15.00 feet to an angle point in said Northerly Right-of-
way of 24th Street; thence along said Northerly Right-of-way of said 24th Street and
a prolongation thereof South 72°14'20" West 715.55 feet to a point on the U.S.
Bulkhead Line; thence along said U.S. Bulkhead Line North 06°35'32" West 314.21
feet to a point on the boundary of the San Diego Unified Port District lands; thence
along said boundary North 83°24'28" East 107.43 feet; thence North 06°35'32"
West 160.57 feet to the beginning of a tangent 564.18 foot radius curve concave
Southeasterly; thence Northeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central
angle of 74°24'15" a distance of 732.64 feet; thence North 06°35'32" West
1037.74 feet; thence North 83°24'28" East 269.08 feet; thence North 06°35'32" -•
West 1587.95 feet; thence North 83°24'28" East 583.96 feet to a point on the
Westerly Right-of-way line of Tidelands Avenue; thence leaving said Port District lands
along said Westerly Right-of-way line of Tidelands Avenue North 10°03'44" East
365.20 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way line of Civic Center Drive (formerly 13th
Street); thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East 147.09 feet
to a point on the Westerly Right-of-way of the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe
Railroad; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way North 05°48'13" East 67.47 feet
to the beginning of a tangent 5679.65 foot radius curve concave Westerly; thence
Northerly along said curve through a central angle of 02°29'39" an arc distance of
247.24 feet to an intersection with the centerline of 12th Street (now closed); thence
leaving the said Westerly Railroad Right-of-way along said centerline North 72°14'20"
East 474.70 feet to the Westerly Right-of-way of McKinley Avenue; thence along said
Westerly Right-of-way North 17°45'40" West 40.00 feet to the Northerly Right-of-
way of 12th Street; thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East
40.00 feet to the centerline of McKinley Avenue (now closed); thence along said
centerline North 17°45'40" West 330.37 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way of 1 1th
Street (now closed); thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East
290.25 feet to the Westerly Right-of-way of Taft Avenue; thence along said Westerly
Right-of-way North 17°45'07H West 910.30 feet to the Southerly Right-of-way of
8th Street; thence along said Southerly Right-of-way North 72° 14'25" East 466.14
feet to the Point of Beginning.
Containing 317 acres more or Tess.
The above description was compiled or calculated from existing available record
information and not a field survey by Rick Engineering Company.
C) , U . CL, ,,&
Chris D. Ciremele L.S. 5267
1-24-94 J-12174
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
BOUNDARY OF HARBOR DISTRICT PRELIMINARY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
Those properties located in the City of National City, County of San Diego, State of
California, described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the Southerly Right-of-way of 8th Street and the
Westerly Right-of-way of Interstate 5; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way the
following courses: South 17°45'09" East 150.03 feet; thence South 12°04'00" East
100.63 feet; thence South 08°26'44" East 284.00 feet; thence South 13°50'25"
West 152.72 feet; thence South 16°06'34" West 332.55 feet; thence South
17°45'40" East 186.36 feet; thence South 08°23'31" West 499.35 feet; thence
South 15°38'16" West 108.99 feet; thence South 20°20'00" West 89.72 feet;
thence South 49°07'00" West 25.00 feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way
South 06°41'56" East 233.22 feet to an angle point in said Westerly Right-of-way;
thence continuing along said Westerly Right-of-way the following courses: South
17°45'40" East 604.39 feet; thence South 26°30'24" East 52.61 feet; thence South
17°45'40" East 2245.01 feet; thence South 02°39'23" East 333.59 feet; thence
South 52°52'19" West 24.46 feet; thence South 72° 14'00" West 260.17 feet;
thence South 17°45'40" East 80.00 feet; thence South 88°45'34" East 182.30 feet;
thence South 79°41'54" East 120.04 feet; thence South 31°19'37" East 268.23
feet; thence South 30° 11'05" West 66.08 feet; thence South 27° 10'57" East 34.34
feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way along the boundary of Record of
Survey 11749, South 72°16'11" West 307.21 feet; thence South 17°43'49" East
164.89 feet; thence South 72°16'11" West 316.34 feet to the beginning of a non -
tangent 1652.28 foot radius curve concave Southwesterly, to which a radial line
bears North 76°38'43" East; thence Southeasterly along the arc of said curve and the
Easterly Right-of-way of the San Diego and Arizona Eastern Railroad as shown on said
Record of Survey 11749 through a central angle of 02°26'51" a distance of 70.58
feet; thence South 10°54'26" East 504.27 feet to the beginning of a tangent
1213.11 foot radius curve concave Northeasterly; thence Southeasterly along the arc
of said curve through a central angle of 06°22'46" a distance of 135.07 feet; thence
North 72°42'48" East 10.00 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent 1203.11 foot
radius curve concave Northeasterly, to which a radial line bears South 72°42'48"
West; thence Southeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of
34°14'07" a distance of 718.88 feet; thence South 51 °31'18" East 233.81 feet to
the beginning of a non -tangent 598.69 foot radius curve concave Southwesterly, to
which a radial line bears North 38°57'27" East; thence Southeasterly along the arc
of said curve through a central angle of 33 ° 18' 19" a distance of 348.01 feet; thence
South 17°44'14" East 71.01 feet; thence South 17°42'10" East 971.98 feet to the
City of National City/Chula Vista City boundary; thence leaving said Easterly railroad
Right-of-way Southwesterly along said City boundary as shown on Miscellaneous Map
564 South •72°15'22" West 1629.76 feet to the intersection of the Southerly
prolongation of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue; thence along said
prolongation and the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue North 17°45'40"
West 1031.20 feet to the intersection of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands
Avenue and the Southerly Right-of-way of 32nd Street; thence North 23°03'04"
West 108.46 feet to the intersection of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue
and the Northerly Right-of-way of 32nd Street; thence along the Easterly Right-of-way
of Tidelands Avenue North 17°45'40" West 2430.00 feet to the Southerly Right-of-
way of 24th Street; thence North 17°07'00" West 80.00 feet to the Northerly Right-
of-way line of said 24th Street said point being also on the Easterly Right-of-way of
said Tidelands Avenue; thence along the Easterly Right-of-way line of said Tidelands
Avenue North 15°00'40" West 15.02 feet, said point being a prolongation of the
Right-of-way of said 24th Street; thence leaving said Easterly Right-of-way of
Tidelands Avenue South 72° 14'20" West along said prolongation and Northerly Right-
of-way of said 24th Street 360.37 feet to an angle point in said Northerly Right-of-
way of 24th Street; thence continuing along said Northerly Right-of-way of 24th _
Street South 17°45'40" East 15.00 feet to an angle point in said Northerly Right-of-
way of 24th Street; thence along said Northerly Right-of-way of said 24th Street and
a prolongation thereof South 72° 14'20" West 715.55 feet to a point on the U.S.
Bulkhead Line; thence along said U.S. Bulkhead Line North 06°35'32" West 314.21
feet to a point on the boundary of the San Diego Unified Port District lands; thence
along said boundary North 83°24'28" East 107.43 feet; thence North 06°35'32"
West 160.57 feet to the beginning of a tangent 564.18 foot radius curve concave
Southeasterly; thence Northeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central
angle of 74°24'15" a distance of 732.64 feet; thence North 06°35'32" West
1037.74 feet; thence North 83°24'28" East 269.08 feet; thence North 06°35'32"
West 1587.95 feet; thence North 83°24'28" East 583.96 feet to a point on the
Westerly Right-of-way line of Tidelands Avenue; thence leaving said Port District lands
along said Westerly Right-of-way line of Tidelands Avenue North 10°03'44" East
365.20 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way line of Civic Center Drive (formerly 13th
Street); thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East 147.09 feet
to a point on the Westerly Right-of-way of the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe
Railroad; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way North 05°48'13" East 67.47 feet
to- the beginning of a tangent 5679.65 foot radius curve concave Westerly; thence
Northerly along said curve through a central angle of 02°29'39" an arc distance of
247.24 feet to an intersection with the centerline of 12th Street (now closed); thence
leaving the said Westerly Railroad Right-of-way along said centerline North 72° 14'20"
East 474.70 feet to the Westerly Right-of-way of McKinley Avenue; thence along said
Westerly Right-of-way North 17°45'40" West 40.00 feet to the Northerly Right-of-
way of 12th Street; thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East
40.00 feet to the centerline of McKinley Avenue (now closed); thence along said
centerline North 17°45'40" West 330.37 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way of 11th
Street (now closed); thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East
290.25 feet to the Westerly Right-of-way of Taft Avenue; thence along said Westerly
Right-of-way North 17°45'07" West 910.30 feet to the Southerly Right-of-way of
8th Street; thence along said Southerly Right-of-way North 72°14'25" East 466.14
feet to the Point of Beginning.
Containing 542 acres more or Tess.
The above description was compiled or calculated from existing available record
information and not a field survey by Rick Engineering Company.
Chi, . C,,.►
Chris D. Ciremele L.S. 5267
1-24-94 J-12174
CPeD
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
SUBAREA 1 OF HARBOR DISTRICT PRELIMINARY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
These properties located in the City of National City, County of San Diego, State of
California, described as "follows:
Beginning at Point "A", as described in Subarea 3 of Harbor District Preliminary
Redevelopment Plan; thence South 17°45'40" East 80.00 feet; thence South
88°45'34" East 182.30 feet; thence South 79°41'54" East 120.04 feet; thence
South 31 °19'37" East 268.23 feet; thence South 30°11'05" West 66.08 feet;
thence South 27°10'57" East 34.34 feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way
along the boundary of Record of Survey 11749 on file in the office of the County
Recorder of San Diego County, South 72°16'11" West 307.21 feet; thence South
17°43'49" East 164.89 feet; thence South 72°16'11" West 316.34 feet to the
beginning of a non -tangent 1652.28 "foot radius curve concave Southwesterly, to
which a radial line bears North 76°38'43" East; thence Southeasterly along the arc
of said curve and the Easterly Right-of-way of the San diego and Arizona Eastern
Railroad as shown on said Record of Survey 11749 through a central angle of
02°26'51" a distance of 70.58 feet; thence South 10°54'26" East 504.27 feet to
the beginning of a tangent 1213.11 foot radius curve concave Northeasterly; thence
Southeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 06°22'46" a
distance of 135.07 feet; thence North 72°42'48" East 10.00 feet to the beginning
of a non -tangent 1203.11 foot radius curve concave Northeasterly, to which a radial
line bears South 72°42'48" West; thence Southeasterly along the arc of said curve
through a central angle of 34°14'07" a distance of 718.88 feet; thence South
51°31'18" East 233.81 feet to the beginning of a non -tangent 598.69 foot radius
curve concave Southwesterly, to which a radial line bears North 38°57'27" East;
thence Southeasterly along the arc of said curve through a central angle of 33 ° 18' 19"
a distance of 348.01 feet; thence South 17°44'14" East 71.01 feet; thence South
17°42'10" East 971.98 feet to the City of National City/Chula Vista City boundary;
thence leaving said easterly railroad Right-of-way Southwesterly along said City
boundaries shown on Miscellaneous Map 564 South 72°15'22" West 1629.76 feet
to the intersection of the prolongation of the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands
Avenue; thence along said prolongation and the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands
Avenue North 17°45'40" West 1031.20 feet to the intersection of the Easterly Right-
of-way of Tidelands Avenue and the Souhterly Right-of-way of 32nd Street; thence
North 23°03'04" West 108.46 feet to the intersection of the Easterly Right-of-way
of Tidelands Avenue and the Northerly Right-of-way of 32nd Street; thence along the
Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue North 17°45'40" West 2430.00 feet to
the Southerly Right-of-way of said 24th Street; thence North 17°07'00" West 80.00
`7/
feet to the Northerly Right-of-way line of said 24th Street; thence along said Northerly
Right-of-way North 72° 14'20" East 1600.52 feet to the POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 126 acres more or less.
The above description was compiled or calculated from existing available record
information and not a field survey by Rick Engineering Company
CAAA-AJ C
Chris D. Ciremele 1-24-94
L.S. 5267 (Job No. 12174)
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
SUBAREA 2 OF HARBOR DISTRICT PRELIMINARY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
Those properties located in the City of National City, County of San Diego, State of
California, described as follows:
Beginning at Point "A", as described in Subarea 3 of Harbor District Preliminary
Redevelopment Plan; thence Westerly along the Northerly Right-of-way of 24th Street
South 72°14'20" West 389.83 feet to a point on the Westerly Right-of-way of
Harrison Avenue, said point being the TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; thence continuing
along the Northerly Right-of-way of said 24th Street South 72°14'20" West 1210.69
feet to the Easterly Right-of-way of Tidelands Avenue; thence Northerly along the
Easterly Right-of-way of said Tidelands Avenue North 15°00'40" West 15.02 feet;
thence leaving said Right-of-way along the Northerly Right-of-way of 24th Street
South 72°14'20" West 360.37 feet to an angle point in said Northerly Right-of-way
of 24th Street; thence continuing along said Right-of-way South 17°45'40" East
15.00 feet; thence South 72°14'20" West 715.55 feet to the U.S. Bulkhead line as
shown on Miscellaneous Map 564; thence along said line North 06°35'32" West
314.21 feet to a point on the boundary of the San Diego Unified Port District lands;
thence along said boundary North 83°24'28" East 107.43 feet; thence North
06°35'32" West 160.57 feet to the beginning of a tangent 564.18 foot radius curve
concave Southeasterly; thence Northeasterly along the arc of said curve through a
central angle of 74°24'15" a distance of 732.64 feet; thence North 06°35'32" West
1037.74 feet; thence North 83°24'28" East 269.08 feet; thence North 06°35'32"
West 1587.95 feet; thence North 83°24'28" East 583.96 feet to a point on the
Westerly Right-of-way line of Tidelands Avenue; thence leaving said Port District lands
along said Westerly Right-of-way line of Tidelands Avenue North 10°03'44" East
365.20 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way line of Civic Center Drive (formerly 13th
Street); thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East 102.64 feet
to the centerline of Harrison Avenue; thence Southerly along said centerline South
17°45'40" East 3301.70 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way line of 23rd Street;
thence along said Northerly Right-of-way line of 23rd Street South 72°14'20" West
40.00 feet to the Westerly Right-of-way of Harrison Avenue; thence along said
Westerly Right-of-way South 17°45'40" East 330.20 feet to the TRUE POINT OF
BEGINNING.
Containing 113 acres more or Tess.
The above description was compiled or calculated from existing available record
information and not a field survey by Rick En.ineering Company.
ChJPU b C ty Q
Chris D. Ciremele 1-24-94
L.S. 5267 (Job No. 12174)
EXHIBIT A
LEGAL DESCRIPTION
SUBAREA 3 OF HARBOR DISTRICT PRELIMINARY REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
Those properties located in the City of National City, County of San Diego, State of
California, described as follows:
Beginning at the intersection of the Southerly Right-of-way of 8th Street and the
Westerly Right-of-way of Interstate 5; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way the
following courses: South 17°45'09" East 150.03 feet; thence South 12°04'00" East
100.63 feet; thence South 08°26'44" East 284.00 feet; thence South 13°50'25"
West 152.72 feet; thence South 16°06'34" West 332.55 feet; thence South
17°45'40" East 186.36 feet; thence South 08°23'31" West 499.35 feet; thence
South 15°38'16" West 108.99 feet; thence South 20°20'00" West 89.72 feet;
thence South 49 °07'00" West 25.00 feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way
South 06°41'56" East 233.21 feet to an angle point in said Westerly Right-of-way;
thence continuing along said Westerly Right-of-way the following courses: South
17°45'40" East 604.39 feet; thence South 26°30'24" East 52.61 feet; thence South
17°45'40" East 2245.01 feet; thence South 02°39'23" East 333.59 feet; thence
South 52°52'19" West 24.46 feet; thence South 72°14'00" West 260.17 feet to
a point on the Northerly Right-of-way of 24th Street, said point herein after referred
to as Point "A"; thence along said Northerly Right-of-way of said 24th Street South
72°14'20" West 389.83 feet to a point on the Westerly Right-of-way of Harrison
Avenue; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way of Harrison Avenue North
17°45'40" West 330.20 feet; thence leaving said Westerly Right-of-way North
72°14'20" East 40.00 feet to the centerline of said Harrison Avenue; thence along
the centerline of said Harrison Avenue North 17°45'40" West 3301.70 feet to the
Northerly Right-of-way of Civic Center Drive (formerly 13th Street); thence along said
Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East 44.45 feet to a point on the Westerly
Right-of-way of the Atchison Topeka and Santa Fe Railroad; thence along said
Westerly Right-of-way North 05 °48'13" East 67.47 feet to the beginning of a tangent
5679.65 foot radius curve concave Westerly; thence Northerly along said curve
through a central angle of 02°29'39" an arc distance of 247.24 feet to an
intersection with the centerline of 12th Street (now closed); thence leaving said
Westerly Railroad Right-of-way along said centerline North 72°14'20" East 474.70
feet to the Westerly Right-of-way of McKinley Avenue; thence along said Westerly
Right-of-way North 17°45'40" West 40.00 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way of 12th
Street; thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72°14'20" East 40.00 feet
to the centerline of McKinley Avenue (now closed); thence along said centerline North
17°45'40" West 330.37 feet to the Northerly Right-of-way of 11th Street (now
closed); thence along said Northerly Right-of-way North 72° 14'20" East 290.25 feet
to the Westerly Right-of-way of Taft Avenue; thence along said Westerly Right-of-way
C��
North 17°45'07" West 910.30 feet to the Southerly Right-of-way of 8th Street;
thence along said Southerly Right-of-way North 72°14'25" East 466.14 feet to the
POINT OF BEGINNING.
Containing 78 acres more or Tess.
The above description was compiled or calculated from existing available record
information and not a field survey by Rick Engineering Company.
C h l.:4, L' L CvAe and
Chris D. Ciremele 1-24-94
L.S. 5267 (Job No. 12174)
REVISED 1-24-94
YI.IOS11aVW1�C v 01n .1 I0ICM1
•<11,
•OA L.I
O. b -. M. w O.
Ll
COSTS[ TAIL[
• 04.011.0 .Ilia • MAIM IIII000I
,r1.•W
•Kw
.rtl'Ir
law
Ira•W
wtT
ryn'
lll.M
1r1.•W
1r woo.
...w
.0.
•rWlr
r.1'W
un
lnri
I w' n'
•4n
M•t•W
Y.i
1r14'W
1rw'N•
I.t.>
1Kw
WII'IY
IrU• 1.•
110,1
1Kw
Ir34'N'
Mlw
1r w'w'
IKM
rs•W
Y')1•W
IK11
1n.00
I r arse
IrWM•
waw
1u.11
IT N'14.
Ir10'11'
t1.w
u1.11
rM'•r
IrM'W
66,116
;K.I
tr w'w•
/rl.'V'
II.w
Valk
rw'w'
Ir1I'M'
• Kw
11..01
1104'41'
IKM
w'N'I4
w1.11
rr N'll'
1,0.0'
10.11
fa. I.
tr u•r'
W11'01'
311.10
1•0.00
WII'w'
Kw
01'11'11'
140.11
11.11•I,'
wan
Ir N'II'
111.11
,r41'l4.
M.O.
I r31v1'
.44.10
mw'1v
Ir.1'w'
lrll'W
111.1.0
• •
N1.11
Afar
1tn•W
1r11'N'
ln.l.
111.11
IKN
..a anl.
rivRICK EAGINELIUNG CoMd a
CURVE TANA
• _ln Yl,. M(
6171.61
1164.11
161.11
1n1.11
1,
611.16
10.1111/1 Y InrYO
11181,114.41, MIA
- IIOI.KC:
iO! iwW
r
4Ih1Y
• S.
- ��LLa MyL.D -•4
VICINITY MAP
rMALL
r'
•�� ® ..s•..-
.r.
CROW K1(( r• 100.
i.
BOUNDARY PLAT FOR
NATIONAL CITY HARBOR DISTRICT
PREL1MINAR'Y REDEVELOPMENT PLAN
.1w
�_ W.1•r0
x��
JIS I CNI&( ..a1.1
(
I{ 4 FIG I la 1'w
(w.O. 1.1
r V.
•lr/(wIL
(i
Q
no4.1 `11I
OR 1 a-! wT
-0rrrta-
-0
Iw /Y• Iw•Y..1111., t I , N(. q1
K 1•n
11
EXHIBIT C
PUBLIC FACILITIES AND
INFRASTRUCTURE IMPROVEMENTS PROJECTS
Project Description:
Public Facilities/Infrastructure Improvement project to be constructed/implemented during the
life of the Redevelopment Plan shall include but not be limited to:
I STREET IMPROVEMENTS: Street improvements, including but not limited to street
construction, median construction, drainage improvements, landscaping and street furniture
throughout the Project Area and the construction of additional streets to improve circulation.
IT 'TRAFFIC SIGNAL, TRAFFIC CALMING, PARKING & LIGHTING
IMPROVEMENTS: 'i'o facilitate improved circulation flow and reduce traffic congestion for
motorists, pedestrians and bicyclists.
111 PARK ANT) RECREATION IMPROVEMENTS, LIBRARY AND ARTS FACILITIES:
To provide sale, attractive, and well -maintained park and recreation facilities for the public by
rehabilitating and/or installing improvements and amenities at parks, recreation and open space
locations throughout the Project Area.
IV CAPITAL FACILITY IMPROVEMENTS: To develop and rehabilitate community
facilities to meet the needs of the City's residents.
V ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT: Public facility and infrastructure improvements
within the Project Area to facilitate a more robust economic environment and to increase
commerce.
V1 IIOT.JSTNG PROGRAMS: To preserve, rehabilitate, increase and improve the
community's supply of housing affordable to very low, low and moderate income households
and to increase opportunities for home ownership throughout the Project Area.
V I I PUBLIC SAFETY AND SECURITY: To provide physical and technological
enhancements to enhance public safety and protection. Examples of such improvements may
include but are not limited to fencing of properties, the rehabilitation or construction of police
storefronts, physical and tecluiological improvements at Police Station(s) and Fire Stations
within the Project Area.
h tcJevdopmeni rnmsWndcnce sulo.clup;tran plan arnmdn-nt`rdplan de!,hati.duc Adopted _/__/07
EXIIIBIT D
LOCATION OF REAL PROPERTY POTENTIALLY
SUBJECT TO ACQUISITION BY EMINENT DOMAIN
Pursuant to Section 603 of this Plan, the CDC may acquire the following properties through the
use of eminent domain:
Existing Area (as defined in Section 300 of this Plan)
• All parcels located immediately east and adjacent to National City Boulevard, between
Division Street and the south City limits.
• All parcels located immediately west and adjacent to National City Boulevard, between
Division Street and State Route 54.
• All parcels located immediately north and adjacent to Civic Center Drive, between Interstate
5 and National City Boulevard.
• All parcels located immediately south and adjacent to Civic Center Drive, between Interstate
5 and National City Boulevard.
• All parcels located immediately north and south and adjacent to 8th Street, between Interstate
5 and "D" Avenue.
Added Area (as defined in Section 300 of this Plan)
All property in the Added Arca, excepting the San Diego Unified Port District property.
IN EXISTING AND ADDED AREAS, SINGLE-FAMILY AND MULTI -FAMILY
RESIDENTIAL PROPERTIES ARE SPECIFICALLY EXCLUDED FROM THE USE OF
EMINENT DOMAIN. The residential exemption applies to those single-family and multi -family
residences that are:l) a lawful conforming use or lawful nonconforming use as a residence;2) a
dwelling as defined by National City Municipal Code section 18.04.208 as it currently exists or is
hereafter amended; and 3) the primary intended use of the structure is for a residential use.
nuacit cxhd
Properties designated as Transportation Center
by the Redevelopment Plan
••• 41.. .11' Exhibit "E"
1 .0%
A
, ' si1.
1 \
1
• - I :
• •
•
•
A
•
s A
%
t 02.4.
1k 44* 00 .0
' @
s
•-•
ti '
A
•*"
- ' -
t,
t
,
.
A -
. '
, .. •
A
4.
•
Structural Obsolescence
Westslde Areas
CI Iv O=
BAN DI EGO
OIIIIIIIIKEI
ii ®E®�SMEE
®®. MAI
AMEN
MININATIONAL
I+®®n
US
®®el®■ !: MEMO
IR OWE 11.E®1�1f .irl
i
'7 61
i_Ln,,„1
II . iffi
I i1:
1 ;I iR i
1` f
1111111
Ii7
IFi•__=1I_
114111a,
�■ ii`'1iUul.
1 1 sl all ylr:.
Fig
li
11.
• ill' - �1
Mk-
11111
u1■
•IIII
111111=
WIG
M=I■
NMI
f1 .
Sr
im
: fMr
!
W I
r
tl� l] iir.. f
=N�C
r. 1�
-, ' -r:.. - _- _ _ =1: f-1uIii= P ,lilt I■11trr.,
• =r .,,I ul nil _ 11 pi I9.Iu1. IIIL ' ' • IIIIII1111j II 'u.1•%-k
b=11IIn11.111:: u1111'il■ul1 1 IIIIIIIILI IIIIIIIIIII:.§. '1'• `�•
Ml
I.
r_ • 111111M u1'I• I ..„2 ' r I1liVII I11P11' •lll�'r�ri&
lllrr rI11111 !l lul•1�11 .,+lilt III
1...•,1ni - r,f
�■ III IIII■ •II `1: 11. -IIII ■IIII Illlllllii,lf :=I -
'-I■1117 toil .1 ..1
■ 11 I17 IIII Ilia "C =11! 11.1'
Ii:III :IIII III' IIII IIII. 111 •�1 ('•1p
■ IIIII nirlo:.GI®®�•G ... .IIII Y11111. 1. ® p�.11
II
" 1r•�1 ul 8th Street Corridor
• ■ :2 II._ _.. •
L' i31®-,dorm. ...1Wlll---•IN.1
L.•IIII . it -i• ;i.11 �dq MEI: III! �1�r
Ir ,�=.u- -r dl'I_ = III r` �_
., .Isla✓ -ammo _„,,,Irf . 1:
r:u II I• � �iI�1s�4 Jp .II•�1 •
ritf•'i!
UP
• puu
. li. IN
no
:IIII INNI II=
u1•1 111111e
11 -1
.111111110111
•-1J11111111
:Im
u_
Eli
_11■1'I.
.r
ECM
r [yi: ,jr:,
I r!'I r•I
rl�r/111 � 1
Palm Ave
�I�'y11i11
.-wv-11 -mace
mil •
Plaza Blvd
-.OWL;
1111/1111
11r'••Ii
7; I I 11 il� ,I1=
r
ria
•4nr
���
ME
NE Es
■i■ •10_l/1
;01111N !Zvi ■
'MGM 'L i I gin"
111rffir
SIIKA
National City Redevelopment Project
30th St/Sweetwater
CHJLA VISTA
OProject Area boundary - 200/ Arnend.rent
Municipal Boundary Structural Obsolescnncu
EXHIBIT "B"
111
111
Source: National City Planning
Incompatible
Adjacent Uses
2
(IiYUF-
4 A\ 7::CO
lnu
EOE"I11 1111IIII;1
■ I� 11 11111L'.' I1. M ®®pD.11 •.0 Y!
M■®®E®®� Ill. EP
ig 1n : �ui�r11®�E®
amommy ma.:
®® III■ i.l♦ I.
WestsideAreas ®®®�rli
4 � t
J+Y, 41vry..*ir )'1
' r ►�' 7 C• •i.}...Ali
0
1
If
• g
i pi.
e '''
1
11 la.
1I
r
i
r
J��EE■
®a®®■ ®®
I!®E®li1 :
nogle. •
ibL"
1
• •IiTTa uI�••• 11 n: In ��.ru1C •I,I: iii11iiiii17 a:'��Iylt►�
!I1.111 : 1I:11:•1'■1111'1, I1111111111 OIIIIIIIIIlu1` ��••7'.
�iII li. 101 n. rI.L Ilr�1�11111 O'•! Il;• l L
I! 1111 f. I'll•'■J: .1■11111 I1 Il n. lnl�.� _ I■`+
■�11111■ 1.11 ep.1n■ ■11111■IIII III!IIIII I-k
:;■II1=.'Ili ply ■y■11'lllll llill!-
-- --
•
_I
9
•Hill;:
11
'II_
lu-. 'I:.c
_
II
111 11
111
MIS
II
1.111
!1-
.-
Palm Ave
.IIII It 11111_ ;II •1 •
__nc u11116117 _❑ 1
8th Strut Corridor
RI:;: Ili. �I■III .'1il l �1a J-
■I jlallll.111
OM= ..
— ., I.1■
■
•
-.q-
■I111.1
1..: _;.11=mma T.1:1
j. �1' ,,''a1i
11I III n� I
enu:=IIII
11111!111 0"
►..'— li IIII
=I1 •111,; 1•l
■.I I I I I ' 111
FP151; Ill.
71111.
.Il■:.= 11 I Iln■uell
Plaza Blvd
--;
■
r■
_= IMMO
=.-
JI l 1' ,
IliI _
Pr
.. _..
Highland Ave
T liE71 �11
.I.:40w .111111
I: IC;
1i{rL�yTmm}VJ17•I-■1=-:riTi
-=! 1111
li t
Ipll'�:�St„
. tS- •.•.
1'y.�'I:.�'ry
►�_'� =1-
Ippr
3Oth St/Sweetwater
O. 4
0
CH. II AV:STA
National City Redevelopment Project
QProject Area Boundary _ 2007Amendment
nMunicipal Boundary lie Incompatible Adjacent Uses
EXHIBIT "C"
Source: National City Planning
Deterioration &
Dilapidation
Westside Areas
Oily O=
SAN OIEGO
III try-1-`
.ni iu IIII •• 11 I:! I,.m./111r :.I!li�111111111111111 1.9117„
_i nnu1.111 'ail cpu O1 r+: 111111InI uuumu:,,,L !�••,j►
•m 11 so. •to •dui: Illl YI'll❑I ��.'' 'I::�
�uuUmnnnup�
MI! nwulu'I
.nn ^purr:n
ilitIMEIMIEM
■®®E®®P gg
Emlipill11[9021
NATIONAI
National City Redevelopment Project
Protect Areal Boundary - 2007 Amencment
Municipal Boundary - Uctcrlo•alion & Dilap.d:aior.
EXHIBIT "D"
8th
Palm Ave
:dI1101.1111c;11
== rnuI1111q 1e _ fu• III
ell
Street Corridor
I
llt: illllau.0 j.- gli`I ' i
Plaza Blvd
Highland Ave
C IULA Vl:i IA
Source: National City Planning
4,1
bell
ci•m
KWH ME
MINI11/1 iII: LII ME y��I
®�I�® m m
�E®®®B®
4111111111•21EME
IN■®®E®®
■u��
Defective Design
Without Parking
National City Redevelopment Project
COProtect Area Boundary - 2007Amendrnen:
Muniapal Boundary al Dete:aive Design Wl:tout Parking
Ali I.1i(f =:
....,..............
1.
61.11i.-: r,a/1rIjuul.{: 11111111,611111i111,..„,,.., ...„,diti a•,�` rift
ill •Il': Iia.T1: .
EXHIBIT "E"
SAN DIEGO
,rural IL 11 I .,,-,1 �- — ..
11� 1111 .Illl Iillllllh: isles
=.1 .IvV. Ir l.!
❑' i IIIIL:PN!� -j��
up4f d: I .
®�.i11100111? �11
/ ii11 :a,l,lallil�-t��l�
:Inc JIL•■161,1X :I
CH... AVISTA
Source: National City Planning