DATE: October 13, 2016
SUBJECT:
Title
NATIONAL CITY BAYFRONT PROJECTS AND INTEGRATION WITH THE NATIONAL CITY MARINA DISTRICT BALANCED LAND USE PLAN:
A) PRELIMINARY PROJECT REVIEW PRESENTATION REGARDING GB CAPITAL HOLDINGS, LLC’S PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT AN RV PARK, DRY BOAT STORAGE, ENVIRONMENTAL LIVING UNITS, AND UP TO FOUR HOTELS NORTH AND WEST OF THE PIER 32 MARINA LEASEHOLD
B) PRELIMINARY PROJECT REVIEW PRESENTATION REGARDING PASHA AUTOMOTIVE SERVICES’ PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT CONNECTOR RAIL TRACK NORTH OF WEST 32ND STREET
C) INFORMATIONAL PRESENTATION ON SYCUAN TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT’S PROPOSAL TO CONSTRUCT A HOTEL AND COMMERCIAL USES NORTH OF BAY MARINA DRIVE, OFF OF DISTRICT TIDELANDS
D) DIRECTION TO STAFF REGARDING GB CAPITAL HOLDINGS, PASHA AUTOMOTIVE SERVICES, AND SYCUAN TRIBAL DEVELOPMENT PROPOSALS AND STAFF RECOMMENDATION TO INCORPORATE THOSE PROPOSALS INTO THE ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE NATIONAL CITY MARINA DISTRICT BALANCED LAND USE PLAN
Body
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY:
On September 23, 2015, the Board of Port Commissioners (Board) directed staff to study land use changes in the National City Marina District (Marina District) and the permanent alignment of Segment 5 of the Bayshore Bikeway in National City. The land use plan that resulted from that public planning process is commonly known as the “National City Marina District Balanced Land Use Plan” (Balanced Plan) (see Attachment A)1, which was presented to the Board on April 14, 2016. The Balanced Plan proposes to reconfigure the land uses to optimize recreational, maritime and commercial uses within the Marina District. At that Board meeting, staff also presented updates on Pasha Automotive Service’s (Pasha) Tidelands Avenue Closure project and the siting of a permanent alignment of Segment 5 of the San Diego Association of Government’s (SANDAG’s) Bayshore Bikeway in National City, and introduced the March 2016 project submittals from GB Capital (commercial development), Pasha (connector rail track), and Sycuan Tribal Development Corporation (Sycuan) (commercial development in the jurisdiction of the City of National City (City) and off District tidelands). The Board directed staff to proceed with environmental review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and processing a Port Master Plan Amendment (PMPA) for the following:
• Land use changes associated with the Balanced Plan;
• Pasha’s Tidelands Avenue Closure Project; and
• Permanent alignment of Bayshore Bikeway in National City.
In addition, the Board directed staff to continue to work with GB Capital and Pasha to ensure complete project submittals for the commercial development and connector rail track, respectively. Then, after receipt of all necessary information, return to the Board at an upcoming Board meeting for preliminary project review and direction to staff for those projects, as well as an informational presentation and direction to staff on the Sycuan project, which is located off of District tidelands outside of the District’s jurisdiction. The GB Capital, Pasha [connector rail], and the Sycuan projects are the subject of this agenda sheet. Attachment B shows the location of the Balanced Plan, Tidelands Avenue Closure, Bayshore Bikeway, GB Capital, Pasha [connector rail], and Sycuan projects.
As proposed by GB Capital, its project is a phased commercial development consisting of a luxury recreational vehicle (RV) park, environmental living units, dry boat storage, and in-water improvements such as docks and transient vessel moorings, and eventually up to four hotels. Staff believes the GB Capital project, as submitted, is not consistent with the Balanced Plan as it relates to the Balanced Plan’s public access corridors, maritime/commercial buffer area, and the expanded park space. As a result, staff recommends continuing to work with GB Capital to make modifications to their project so that it is consistent with the Balanced Plan that the Board directed staff to process on April 14, 2016.
The Pasha connector rail project is construction of a rail track to connect the existing rail and loop track located west of the National Distribution Center to additional rail car storage spots at the existing Burlington Northern Santa Fe (BNSF) National City Yard east of the National Distribution Center. The connector rail would enable Pasha to have both rail and rail car storage capacity to potentially build a second daily unit train, which could increase throughput at the National City Marine Terminal (NCMT).
The Sycuan project is a commercial development on two parcels owned by the City located north of the Best Western Marina Gateway hotel, north of the Marina District. The Sycuan project includes development of a 5-story hotel, restaurant and convenience/retail space, and a gas station. This project is outside of the District’s jurisdiction; however, the City has requested that the Sycuan project be included in the CEQA review for the Balanced Plan because it is the primary entryway into the National City waterfront area and Marina District.
Staff recommends the Board receive preliminary project review presentations from GB Capital and Pasha, an informational presentation from Sycuan, and a presentation from District staff on the integration of these projects with the Balanced Plan. Staff also recommends the Board direct staff to request that GB Capital revise their proposed project to be further in line with the Balanced Plan, as described below in the DISCUSSION section. Staff recommends that the Board direct staff to incorporate the GB Capital (as revised per Board direction), Pasha [connector rail], and Sycuan projects into the environmental impact report (EIR) that will analyze the land use changes associated with the Balanced Plan, the Tidelands Avenue Closure Project, and the permanent alignment of Segment 5 of the Bayshore Bikeway. Additionally, staff recommends that the GB Capital (as revised per Board direction), and Pasha [connector rail] projects be included in the Balanced Plan PMPA.2 Staff recommends that the EIR cost be shared evenly with all five parties - the District, City, Pasha, GB Capital, and Sycuan. Details on these staff recommendations are provided below in the DISCUSSION section.
RECOMMENDATION:
Recommendation
Receive the preliminary project review presentations from GB Capital and Pasha and the informational presentation from Sycuan, then direct staff to incorporate those projects, subject to possible Board modifications, as recommended by staff, to the GB Capital project, and a cost sharing arrangement between the District, City, Pasha, GB Capital, and Sycuan, into the EIR for the National City Marina District Balanced Land Use Plan.
Body
FISCAL IMPACT:
Costs for this project are associated with preparing an EIR. Staff proposes all EIR costs be shared evenly between all five parties. Agency contributions will be covered through the 2014-2018 Capital Improvement Program. All other parties’ costs are subject to Board of Port Commissioners Policy No. 106 - Cost Recovery User Fee Policy should the Board direct staff to proceed.
Compass Strategic Goals:
This agenda item supports the following Strategic Goals.
• A Port that the public understands and trusts.
• A thriving and modern maritime seaport.
• A vibrant waterfront destination where residents and visitors converge.
• A Port with a comprehensive vision for Port land and water uses integrated to regional plans.
• A Port that is a safe place to visit, work and play.
• A financially sustainable Port that drives job creation and regional economic vitality.
DISCUSSION:
The discussion is divided into the following sections:
I. National City Marina District Balanced Land Use Plan and Previous Direction to Staff
II. Additional National City Bayfront Projects and Integration into the Balanced Plan
III. Recommended Direction to Staff, Next Steps and Cost Recovery
I. National City Marina District Balanced Land Use Plan and Previous Direction to Staff
A. National City Marina District Balanced Land Use Plan and September 2015 Board Direction to Staff
On September 23, 2015, the Board held a special meeting to discuss balanced development in the National City Bayfront (see Attachment C). At that meeting, the Board directed staff to further study the land use changes in the Marina District and the permanent alignment of Segment 5 of the Bayshore Bikeway in National City. The Marina District includes a mix of park/plaza, marine terminal, marine related industrial, commercial recreation, recreational boat berthing, and street land use designations (see Attachment D) and is located entirely within District-owned property. It also contemplates the District-owned Lot K and Port Parcel 027-047 would be incorporated into the Port Master Plan through the PMPA associated with the NCMT Tank Farm Paving approvals or as a result of the Balanced Plan approval by the Board and certification by the California Coastal Commission.
In response to the Board’s direction, staff and the District’s consultant, UDP International, completed a public planning process for the Marina District. That public process, and the resulting Balanced Plan (see Attachment A), were presented to the Board on April 14, 2016. The Balanced Plan proposes to reconfigure the land uses to optimize the recreational, maritime and commercial uses within the Marina District. The main features of the Balanced Plan are as follows:
• Pepper Park expanded contiguously, approximately 1.5 acres to the west, onto the existing First Point of Rest, and also north and east of the boat launch ramp, for a total park increase of 2.5 acres;
• Northeastern boundary of the First Point of Rest extended east by approximately 0.88 acre and the existing western entrance to Pepper Park shifted eastward (the location of the First Point of Rest is shown on Attachment D);
• Connector rail track through “Lot K” in a manner that allows for double-tracking on the north side of the rail track (the location of “Lot K” is shown on Attachment D);
• Marina Way realigned west to be along the new connector rail track;
• Buffer area located between connector rail track and realigned Marina Way;
• Habitat buffer area adjacent to Paradise Marsh;
• West 32nd Street proposed to be closed, from Tidelands Avenue to Marina Way, to vehicular traffic;
• Public access (i.e., pedestrian, bicycle, visual) corridor along the existing alignments of Marina Way and existing West 32nd Street; and
• Commercial recreation land uses reconfigured to provide a more contiguous development footprint.
The Balanced Plan proposes that the existing alignment of Marina Way be re-designated as a 40-foot-wide public access corridor to provide visual, pedestrian, bicycle, and emergency access and views to the waterfront and would be consistent with and expand upon the 20-foot-wide view corridor that was established on the Pier 32 Marina leasehold. The existing alignment of West 32nd Street, which is proposed to close as part of the Balanced Plan, is also proposed to provide visual and non-vehicular public access. These public access corridors are also utility access corridors and are proposed as no-build zones. Further, maintaining these spaces as public access corridors would be consistent with comprehensive ideas identified in the November 2015 Integrated Planning Framework Report. More specifically, the proposed public access corridors would further ideas such as the “Green Necklace” and “An Accessible Bayfront” by connecting parks and open spaces as well as creating awareness and a sense of place beyond the immediate waterfront. In addition, some attendees of the January 2016 design charrettes for the Balanced Plan wanted to ensure that access was preserved in any future commercial recreation development in order to discourage the potential feeling of privatization of the site.
The new connector rail track and realigned Marina Way serve as the separation of maritime and commercial land uses within the Balanced Plan. The Balanced Plan is proposed to have a buffer zone between the new connector rail track and the realigned Marina Way. The buffer zone width is proposed be a minimum of 26 feet wide, which could accommodate a minimum 15-foot-wide rail service area on the southern side of the connector rail track, and also a buffer wall and wide sidewalk. A buffer wall is proposed to be located in the buffer zone to help minimize any potential noise and visual impediments between the commercial development and the maritime operations.
B. April 2016 Board Direction to Staff
As discussed above in Section I.A., at the April 14, 2016 Board meeting, staff presented a summary of the public planning process for the Marina District and the resulting Balanced Plan. At that Board meeting, staff also presented updates on Pasha’s Tidelands Avenue Closure project and the siting of a permanent alignment of SANDAG’s Bayshore Bikeway in National City, and introduced the March 2016 project submittals from GB Capital (commercial development), Pasha (connector rail track), and Sycuan (commercial development in the City’s jurisdiction and off District tidelands). The Board directed staff to proceed with CEQA review and process a PMPA for the following:
• Land use changes associated with the Balanced Plan;
• Pasha’s Tidelands Avenue Closure Project; and
• Permanent alignment of Bayshore Bikeway in National City.
In addition, the Board directed staff to continue to work with GB Capital and Pasha to ensure complete project submittals for the commercial development and connector rail track, respectively. Then, after receipt of all necessary information, return to the Board at an upcoming Board meeting for preliminary project review and direction to staff for those projects, as well as an informational presentation and direction to staff on the Sycuan project, which is located off of District tidelands. Summaries of the GB Capital, Pasha [connector rail], and Sycuan projects and staff’s recommended next steps for those projects are provided in detail in Section II below and summarized in Section III.A below.
C. Work Completed Since April 2016 Board Meeting
Since the April 2016 Board meeting, staff has selected a CEQA consultant to prepare the EIR for the Balanced Plan, Tidelands Avenue Closure Project, and permanent alignment of Segment 5 of the Bayshore Bikeway in National City. Once staff obtains additional direction from the Board and is able to finalize the consultant’s scope of work, staff will return to the Board for authorization to enter into an agreement with the CEQA consultant and formally commence environmental review. Staff’s recommendation for commencing preparation of the EIR is provided below in Section III.A.
District staff, along with staff from SANDAG, United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and the County of San Diego, have met with California Coastal Commission (Coastal Commission) staff regarding the siting of a permanent alignment of the Bayshore Bikeway in National City. Most stakeholders believe that the best alignment for the bikeway south of Bay Marina Drive is adjacent to the former Metropolitan Transit System (MTS) right-of-way, in an area for which the Coastal Commission may have coastal development permit authority. Coastal Commission staff expressed concerns regarding potentially sensitive habitat in this area and their desire for the alignment to be located on Marina Way south of Bay Marina Drive, instead of adjacent to the former MTS right-of-way. As presented to the Board in April 2016, the EIR will analyze three different alignments of the bikeway, including alignments that are located adjacent to the MTS right-of-way (as recommended by stakeholders) and on Marina Way (as recommended by Coastal Commission staff). In addition, District staff has commissioned preparation of a biological resources analysis and wetland delineation in advance of preparation of the EIR. That study is nearing completion and will enable District and Coastal Commission staffs to continue discussions regarding the siting of the bikeway in this area and start to work through any concerns Coastal Commission staff may have regarding the area adjacent to the former MTS right-of-way.
II. Additional National City Bayfront Projects and Integration into the Balanced Plan
A. GB Capital Commercial Project
Background
In June 2012, the City and District staff issued a joint Statement of Interest and Qualifications (SOIQ) solicitation for developers interested in leasing and developing all or portions of an up to 20-acre area that includes all of Lot K, as well as the other areas that are proposed for commercial recreation land uses in the Balanced Plan. GB Capital, the current tenant and operator of the Pier 32 Marina, was the sole respondent to the SOIQ. GB Capital’s response to the SOIQ consisted of a destination RV resort with 165 high-end rental sites (primarily for, but not limited to, RVs), and on-site amenities such as a pool/spa, community room, bike and pedestrian paths, picnic areas, sports court, workout center with shower rooms, and potential retail opportunities (“2012 Project”). GB Capital’s 2012 Project was presented to the Board on December 11, 2012 and the Board directed staff to work jointly with the City to enter into an exclusive negotiating agreement with GB Capital for the 2012 Project.
Negotiations with GB Capital commenced, however, GB Capital indicated in October 2013 that the 2012 Project was not economically feasible due to entitlement costs and associated entitlement risks at that time. Although GB Capital was diligent in ongoing negotiations, an exclusive negotiating agreement was not executed. After continued studies and discussions with the City and other stakeholders, GB Capital indicated further interest in a commercial project in March 2015 and stated that they can develop an economically feasible project within the current land use designations (see Attachment D for existing land use designations in the Marina District). It is staff’s opinion that GB Capital has continued to negotiate toward a project that incorporates the objectives of the Balanced Plan and exclusive negotiations should continue; provided, however, modifications to the project, discussed below, are necessary to ensure the project is consistent with the Balanced Plan.
On March 14, 2016, GB Capital submitted a tenant project application (“March 2016 Project”) to construct a commercial development north and west of the Pier 32 Marina, generally on the premises designated “commercial recreation” in the Balanced Plan. The March 2016 Project also acknowledged a “Master Plan” for the expansion of Pepper Park and development of two City-owned parcels located north of the Best Western Marina Gateway hotel. The proposed development on the two City-owned parcels is described in more detail below in Section II.C. The March 2016 Project includes two phases - Phase 1 is the construction of a 140-site luxury RV park, environmental living units and dry boat storage; and Phase 2 is the construction of up to four hotels totaling up to 478 rooms as market conditions allow (Phase 1 & Phase 2 combined are the “March 2016 Project”). The March 2016 Project did not account for the Balanced Plan’s proposed public access corridors along the existing alignments of Marina Way and West 32nd Street.
Staff reviewed the March 2016 Project and deemed the submittal incomplete. Additional information was requested from GB Capital, including but not limited to, the March 2016 Project being revised to include the public access corridors along the existing alignments of Marina Way and West 32nd Street, and relocating the proposed dry boat storage to an area that is proposed to be designated with a commercial recreation land use. Based on the certified Port Master Plan and existing dry boat storage sites on other areas of District tidelands, staff believes that dry boat storage is a use appropriate for the “commercial recreation” land use designation. Staff provided a brief summary of GB Capital’s March 2016 Project at the April 14, 2016 Board meeting and the Board directed staff to continue to work with GB Capital to ensure a complete project submittal and return to the Board for preliminary project review at a future Board meeting.
Current Proposal
A revised GB Capital project was submitted to the District on August 29, 2016. The revised project includes an RV park and the ultimate development of up to four hotels with a total of up to 397 rooms (“Current Project”). Phase 1 of the Current Project is a luxury RV resort with up to 126 sites (reduced from 140 sites in the March 2016 Project) including ancillary amenities such as a clubhouse, pool, activity courts, restrooms and laundry facilities, dry boat storage adjacent to the realigned Marina Way, and up to 38 “environmental living units” (modular structures, such as recycled shipping containers which will be operated like a hotel) along the eastern side of the site and along the marina breakwater. Additionally, the Current Project includes connecting with the District’s planned expansion of Pepper Park. Pedestrian and bicycle paths are proposed to run in a north-south direction along the eastern perimeter of the site, as well as in an east-west direction between the existing and proposed improvements in order to connect with Pepper Park. The Current Project also proposes in-water improvements including new dock space, up to 78 moorings for transient vessels, a water taxi, potential aquaculture opportunities south of the marina in the Sweetwater Channel, and a new pier and gangway (northeast of the National City Aquatic Center) to launch boats that have been in dry storage.
Phase 2 of the Current Project includes the development of up to four hotels as market conditions allow. The hotel breakdown includes: (i) an 11-story hotel and conference center, with 216 rooms and a parking structure, and (ii) up to three smaller boutique hotels with a total additional 181 rooms. The 11-story hotel and conference center and a smaller 81-room boutique hotel are proposed on the westernmost part of the RV Park, eliminating approximately 35 RV sites. Two additional boutique hotels are proposed on the northeast side of the existing marina buildings - one adds approximately 40 rooms and the other adds approximately 60 rooms with the elimination of an additional 21 RV sites. All hotels would be built when “economically viable.” The Current Project is shown on Attachments E and F. Part of the Current Project is located within property owned by San Diego Gas and Electric (SDG&E), as shown on Attachment C.
Preliminary Project Review
Staff has reviewed the preliminary design renderings and project description and the proposed Current Project generally incorporates the land-use concepts of the Balanced Plan. Phase 1 of the Current Project includes several uses intended to provide public space and public access, provide new visitor-serving recreational and retail uses, and incorporate sustainable design features.
Based on the proposed improvements (RV park, dry boat storage, environmental living units, and moorings) in Phase 1, GB Capital’s proforma estimates incremental revenue to the District of $2.26 million after five years and $6.2 million after ten years.
Staff has had discussions with several RV park consultants and brokers regarding market conditions. Based on comments received, the demand for RV sites and related on-site accommodations such as the proposed environmental living units in San Diego is very strong, especially near the bay. The RV industry is reporting a record number of new RV’s being sold along with the increasing number of retirees entering the market place. In addition, the Bernardo Shores RV Park in Imperial Beach recently closed reducing the supply by 124 spaces in the immediate market area.GB Capital has engaged a RV park consultant and staff has requested GB Capital provide a market report to support the feasibility of the proposed RV park.
Phase 2 of the Current Project includes the development of up to four hotels and the removal of some RV sites to allow for the hotel development. However, according to a hotel market feasibility study (completed by Jones Lang La Salle (JLL) for GB Capital), which takes into consideration existing proposed District projects, the development of four hotels may not be economically feasible in the long-term. JLL concluded that the South Bay submarket has shown significant growth in recent years and the South Bay submarket may be able to support the 11-story conference hotel by 2022. JLL’s report further indicated the South Bay submarket would not be able to support additional hotel rooms over the next eight years or until the South Bay submarket indicates the new hotel room supply has been absorbed.
Design Comments and Consistency with the Proposed Balanced Plan
Staff compared the Current Project to the Balanced Plan and determined that there are three main areas of inconsistency - public access corridors, the buffer area between maritime and commercial uses, and the expanded park space. Staff also consulted with UDP International, the District’s consultant that prepared the Balanced Plan, for an urban design and planning opinion and review of the Current Project. A comparison of the Balanced Plan and Current Project as they relate to these three issue areas, as well as staff’s recommendation to further align the Current Project with the Balanced Plan, is provided below.
i. Public Access Corridors Comparison
Attachment G provides a comparison of the public access corridors identified in the proposed Balanced Plan and the Current Project.
Balanced Plan
The Balanced Plan’s intent is to provide a public access corridor along the existing alignment of Marina Way in order to provide visibility to the marina and a bicycle and pedestrian-friendly environment to move between the marina and the area to the north, while also providing a sense of orientation for pedestrian, bicyclists, and vehicles entering the Marina District. The Balanced Plan proposes the public access corridor along the existing Marina Way (north-south orientation) and the public access corridor along the existing West 32nd Street (east-west orientation) to both be 40 feet wide. Both public access corridors are proposed to be no-build zones and utility access corridors, and the public access corridor along the existing alignment of Marina Way is proposed to build off of the existing 20-foot-wide view corridor located at Pier 32 Marina. The provision of the public access corridors is also consistent with comments from Coastal Commission staff. In March 2016, Coastal Commission staff provided written comments on the Balanced Plan, stating that the existing alignments of Marina Way and West 32nd Street should be protected as view corridors and that the PMPA associated with the Balanced Plan should include “clear and strong policy language” indicating such use. Further, in a June 2016 letter, Coastal Commission staff indicated that the City’s Harbor District Specific Area Plan included an extension of Marina Way (the current alignment of Marina Way and formerly known as the Harrison Avenue Public Access Corridor) into the Marina District to connect to West 32nd Street as “an important component to allow for continuous physical and visual access to and along the bay,” and that closing the existing Marina Way and West 32nd Street would have “a detrimental effect on public access” (mainly due to the loss of parking on those roadways). Further, quality ample-sized public access corridors demonstrate alignment with the Integrated Planning Vision such as Guiding Principle I., Honor the Water and Guiding Principle II., and Guarantee the Public Realm. Thus, it is important to maintain public access corridors along all or most of the existing Marina Way and West 32nd Street alignments.
GB Capital’s Current Project
The Current Project includes a 24-foot-wide public access corridor along a portion of the existing alignment of Marina Way, which is approximately 16 feet less in width than what is proposed by the Balanced Plan. The northern entry into the public access corridor is proposed to be 50-feet wide. In the Current Project, this public access corridor is proposed to be located within a drive aisle of the RV park and not in a pedestrian-priority area, which is inconsistent with the proposed Balanced Plan. The Current Project also proposes a 9-foot-wide bicycle and pedestrian corridor along the southern edge of the existing alignment of West 32nd Street, and a 24-foot-wide view corridor through the existing Pier 32 Marina parking lot. This is inconsistent with the Balanced Plan which proposes a 40-foot-wide visual, pedestrian/bike, and emergency access corridor down the existing alignment of West 32nd Street.
The Current Project also proposes a 24-foot-wide view corridor along the realigned Road D1 (see Attachment A for the location of Road D1), near the existing main entrance into Pepper Park at the existing terminus of Tidelands Avenue. No view or designated public access corridors are proposed along the realigned Road D1.
Another main feature of the Current Project is the addition of a 12-foot-wide bicycle path and a separate 6-foot-wide walking path along the eastern perimeter of the site. These paths are proposed within the 200-foot-wide habitat buffer area adjacent to Paradise Marsh, in which low-impact, non-motorized uses such as public access and trails are allowed if they are over 100-feet away from the marsh. This could potentially be the location of the Bayshore Bikeway through this area of National City. Currently, the EIR that includes the Balanced Plan, Tidelands Avenue Closure Project, and a permanent alignment of the Bayshore Bikeway is proposed to study three potential alignments of the Bayshore Bikeway, including one that is consistent with the alignment shown in the Current Project.
Staff Recommendation for Public Access Corridors
Based on the Balanced Plan, staff recommends that the public access corridors be maintained along the existing alignments of Marina Way and West 32nd Street, however, to a greater extent than that proposed with the Current Project. The public access corridor along the existing alignment of Marina Way should also expand upon the existing 20-foot-wide view corridor located at Pier 32 Marina. While not yet approved by the Board, staff believes the Bayshore Bikeway is better suited in the habitat buffer area that is proposed to be along the eastern perimeter of the Current Project. If the public access corridor along the existing alignment of Marina Way does not serve as the Bayshore Bikeway link, then staff believes that a width narrower than 40 feet, but no less than 30, would be acceptable. Further, if the Bayshore Bikeway link is provided within the habitat buffer, staff recommends that the bike path and any additional low-impact, non-motorized recreational features be located within the westernmost 100 feet of the habitat buffer area. Given that the Current Project includes the Bayshore Bikeway along its eastern perimeter, staff believes that a 30-foot-width for the public access corridor along the existing alignment of Marina Way is acceptable over the 40-foot width identified in the Balanced Plan because the public access corridor won’t also serve as the primary Bayshore Bikeway route. Further, 30 feet is a width that is consistent with other areas around District tidelands, such as those on the Embarcadero. However, if the Bayshore Bikeway link is located within the public access corridor along the existing alignment of Marina Way, staff recommends that this public access corridor be no narrower than 40 feet as it would be more heavily traveled and a wider width would be necessitated.
In addition, staff recommends that the public access corridor be clearly delineated and separated from vehicles and the proposed RV sites and not have shared access with vehicles, with the exception of an occasional maintenance or emergency vehicle.
In addition, staff recommends that the Current Project incorporate a 20-foot-wide public access corridor along the existing alignment of West 32nd Street, as opposed to the 9-foot-wide public access corridor currently proposed by the Current Project in this location. That width would provide a safe width for pedestrians and bicycles to share the path and also provide a visual accessway and adequate space for emergency vehicle access.
A table summarizing staff’s recommendations for the public access corridor widths, and how they relate to the Balanced Plan and the Current Project, is provided below.
ii. Maritime/Commercial Buffer Area Comparison
Attachment H provides a comparison of the maritime/commercial buffer area identified in the proposed Balanced Plan and the Current Project.
Balanced Plan
The Balanced Plan proposes to realign Marina Way to the west to be along the new connector rail track and to provide a buffer area, including potentially a buffer wall, between the connector rail track and realigned roadway. This area of the Balanced Plan is proposed to be designated with a “marine related industrial” land use. Under the Balanced Plan, the realigned Marina Way is proposed to be the gateway into the Marina District and the only public road in and out of the area; however, emergency access is proposed to be provided within the closed Tidelands Avenue and on the public access corridor located on the existing alignment of Marina Way. Under the Balanced Plan, the realigned Marina Way is proposed to be 70 feet wide, which would allow for one travel lane in each direction, plus parking on both sides of the road. The realigned Marina Way is identified as Road D3 on Attachment A. The Balanced Plan proposes the buffer area between the road and the new connector rail track to be 26 feet wide, which could accommodate a required rail service area on the southern side of the connector rail track, plus a buffer wall and a landscaped pedestrian pathway.
GB Capital’s Current Project
The Current Project proposes to narrow and shift the realigned Marina Way to the southeast, to change the land use in this area to “commercial recreation,” and to place dry boat storage in the area that the Balanced Plan proposes as a buffer area. The Current Project proposes a 5-foot-wide sidewalk between the dry boat storage and the realigned Marina Way.
Additionally, the proposed dry boat storage would effectively create a remnant parcel of approximately 1.3 acres along the rail track and that remnant parcel may be difficult to have a future use other than dry boat storage (see Attachments E and H for the dry boat storage location proposed in the Current Project). The dry boat storage is proposed to be located adjacent to the realigned Marina Way, which is the only public road in and out of the Marina District. Placing and removing boats from dry boat storage requires considerable maneuverability, and although staff understands that boats typically remain in storage for long durations and are not moved on a frequent basis, it is concerning that there may be moments where access along this primary access route is restricted in order to place the boats in their storage location.
The Current Project initially proposes to have the boats stored on open racks and may eventually phase into up to three levels of stacked boat storage that may be covered in a decorative building. Furthermore, it is unclear what type of delineation (e.g., a security fence) is proposed between the dry boat storage and the realigned Marina Way.
Staff Recommendation for Maritime/Commercial Buffer
Staff recommends maintaining the Marina Way realignment identified in the Balanced Plan and continuing to work with GB Capital to identify an appropriate location for dry boat storage and staff does not recommend creating a remnant parcel. This staff recommendation would maintain the proposed location and width (approximately 70 feet, including travel lanes and parking on both sides of the road) of the realigned Marina Way that is identified in the Balanced Plan, and ensure that the gateway to the Marina District is aesthetically pleasing by not storing boats in this location.
iii. Expanded Park Space Comparison
Attachment I provides a comparison of the expanded park space identified in the proposed Balanced Plan and the Current Project.
Balanced Plan
The Balanced Plan proposes to increase park space in the Marina District by 2.5 acres. Approximately 1.5 acres of that expansion is proposed to be accomplished by expanding Pepper Park contiguously to the west. An additional one acre increase is proposed to occur to the north and east of the boat launch ramp.
GB Capital’s Current Project
The Current Project maintains the existing marina parking in part of the area that is proposed for the park expansion (northeast of the existing boat launch ramp). This area is currently part of GB Capital’s leasehold. Parking is allowed in park space; however, this area of the Current Project appears to be only for GB Capital’s Pier 32 leasehold. In addition to maintaining this area for marina parking, GB Capital is also proposing that that area be used to access a new gangway and boat launch that the Current Project proposes to be located immediately northeast of the National City Aquatic Center. The Current Project proposes to use the new gangway and boat launch to launch stored boats. Also, it is unclear to what extent the RV sites north of the boat launch ramp extend into the area proposed for the expanded park space.
Staff Recommendation for Expanded Park Space
Staff recommends that if stored boats are included in the Current Project that they continue to utilize the existing boat launch facility, or a more suitable location on the Current Project’s premises, for launching, instead of creating a new gangway and boat launch for stored boats.
Further, staff recommends continuing to work with GB Capital on the Current Project to negotiate with GB Capital to swap the area of marina parking that is currently in the Pier 32 leasehold and part of the expanded park space in the Balanced Plan (within the area identified as P1 on Attachment A), in exchange for adding the jetty parcel, which is the location proposed for environmental living units in the Current Project, to the GB Capital leasehold (see Attachment I). Alternatively, if GB Capital is unwilling to remove the marina parking area that is part of their leasehold, the park expansion that was proposed northeast of the boat launch ramp (shown in purple on Attachment I) could instead be added to the park expansion area north of the boat launch ramp (shown in orange on Attachment I).
Staff also recommends that the Board direct that the Current Project’s RV sites north of the boat launch ramp do not extend into the Balanced Plan’s expanded park space north (within the area identified as P1 on Attachment A) of the boat launch ramp. This area is not located within GB Capital’s Pier 32 leasehold.
Summary of Staff Recommendation on GB Capital Commercial Project
Staff recommends incorporating the revised GB Capital project into the EIR and PMPA (required because the GB Capital project would be considered an “appealable” development and needs to be added to the “project list” in the Port Master Plan) for the Balanced Plan, Tidelands Avenue Closure Project, and the permanent alignment of Segment 5 of the Bayshore Bikeway. Moreover, staff has reviewed the Current Project from GB Capital and is recommending the Board direct staff to continue to process and work with GB Capital on revisions to the Current Project’s public access corridors, maritime/commercial buffer area, and expanded park space. Staff’s specific recommendations for those revisions are summarized below.
Public access corridors
• Existing alignment of Marina Way: 30-foot-wide public access corridor if Bayshore Bikeway is located along eastern perimeter of site within the habitat buffer, or 40-foot-wide public access corridor if the corridor also serves as the Bayshore Bikeway alignment. Expand upon the existing 20-foot-wide view corridor at Pier 32 Marina.
• If Bayshore Bikeway located within habitat buffer, must be located within the westernmost 100 feet of the habitat buffer area.
• Existing alignment of West 32nd Street: 20-foot-wide public access corridor.
• Clearly demarcated public access corridors, separated from vehicles and no shared access with vehicles, with the exception of an occasional maintenance or emergency vehicle.
Maritime/Commercial Buffer Area
• Maintain width and location of Marina Way realignment identified in the Balanced Plan, which includes a 70-foot-wide roadway and a 26-foot-wide buffer area between the roadway and new connector rail.
• Relocate dry boat storage to a more appropriate “commercial recreation” site within the project area.
• Do not create a remnant parcel.
Expanded Park Space
• Boats in dry boat storage should continue to use the existing boat launch facility or a more suitable location on the site, instead of creating a new gangway and boat launch for stored boats.
• Negotiate with GB Capital to swap some existing marina parking [located northeast of the National City Aquatic Center] in GB Capital’s Pier 32 leasehold for the jetty area. The existing marina parking is proposed to be part of the expanded park space and the jetty, which is currently not in the GB Capital leasehold and is a location where GB Capital is proposing to construct environmental living units. If GB Capital is unwilling to remove the marina parking area that is part of their leasehold, the park expansion that was proposed northeast of the boat launch ramp could instead be added to the park expansion area north of the boat launch ramp.
• No RV sites shall extend into the Balanced Plan’s expanded park space north of the boat launch ramp.
B. Pasha Connector Rail Project
Background and Proposed Connector Rail Project
On March 18, 2016, Pasha submitted a tenant project application to construct a connector rail track on Lot K with an estimated project cost of $2.7 million. The alignment of the connector rail track is consistent with that identified in the Balanced Plan. The connector rail track would connect the existing rail and loop track located west of the National Distribution Center to additional rail car storage spots at the existing BNSF National City Yard east of the National Distribution Center. Additional rail car storage could be provided by adding a second track in parallel to, and inside (north of) the connector track. The connector rail track would add approximately 3,500 feet of train storage (40 train cars), and the second track could provide storage space for an additional 20 train cars. Improvements to the exiting BNSF National City Yard would be required in order for the connector track to be constructed and operational; however, as the BNSF National City Yard currently serves other industrial customers in the area, BNSF may proceed with improvements to the BNSF National City Yard regardless of whether or not the connector rail track is constructed. The connector rail track would connect the BNSF National City Yard directly to the existing rail loop and loading tracks on NCMT, and would allow for Pasha to have both rail and car storage capacity to build a second daily unit train and potentially increase throughput at NCMT.
The proposed connector rail project would increase rail storage and rail operation efficiencies to allow for new maritime business growth opportunities. The connector rail project would allow Pasha to increase throughput per acre due to lower dwell times for rail delivered product versus truck delivered product. Additionally, the connector rail would allow Pasha to move up to 120,000 additional vehicles by rail annually and increase the overall capacity of NCMT.
At the April 14, 2016 Board meeting, staff introduced this project submittal to the Board and indicated that the submittal was not complete and requested additional information from Pasha. Additional information was subsequently provided by Pasha on August 29, 2016. The August 2016 submittal included additional project details that were requested by staff, but the project remains generally consistent with the March 2016 project submittal.
Preliminary Project Review/Design Comments/Consistency with the Proposed Balanced Plan
The Pasha connector rail project is consistent with the alignment identified in the Balanced Plan. It is, however, noted that the rail alignment has not been fully engineered and the ultimate alignment may vary slightly from that identified in the Balanced Plan, but it is anticipated to be in substantial conformance with it.
Staff Recommendation on Pasha Connector Rail Project
The connector rail project would provide additional rail and rail car storage capacity to build a second daily unit train, which could increase throughput at NCMT without increasing the footprint of the operation. Staff recommends that the Board direct that the connector rail project is required to be located within the marine related industrial land use footprint identified in the Balanced Plan. Further, staff recommends the Board direct staff to incorporate the connector rail project into the EIR and PMPA for the Balanced Plan, Tidelands Avenue Closure Project, and the permanent alignment of Segment 5 of the Bayshore Bikeway.
C. Sycuan Commercial Development Project (Off District Tidelands)
On March 17, 2016, the City received an unsolicited proposal from Sycuan for development of a commercial project (Sycuan Project) on two City-owned parcels located on the north side of Bay Marina Drive between Marina Way and Interstate 5 (I-5), just north of the Best Western Marina Gateway hotel (Attachment J). The Sycuan Project includes development of a 5-story hotel with up to 120 rooms and a 5,000 square foot restaurant with an outdoor terrace on the west site (Parcel B) which is bordered by the historic train depot museum on the north, Cleveland Avenue on the south, West 23rd Street on the east and Bay Marina Drive on the west. The hotel is proposed to have a rooftop terrace and ground floor amenities that “spill out” into an adjacent pedestrian plaza that serves as a gateway to the existing historic train depot museum.
In addition, the Sycuan Project proposes to have 10,500 square feet of fast-casual restaurant space, a 6,000 square foot gas station, and a 6,000 square foot convenience store/retail space on the east site (Parcel A) which is bordered by Cleveland Avenue on the north, the southbound I-5 off-ramp to the south, West 23rd Street to the east, and Bay Marina Drive to the west. Due to its close proximity to I-5, the east site incorporates highway amenities with the gas station designed for access by RVs and semi-trucks. The Sycuan Project also includes new “gateway” signage adjacent to Bay Marina Drive and the southbound I-5 off-ramp. An alignment of the Bayshore Bikeway, consistent with that being analyzed in the EIR for the Balanced Plan, is included in the Sycuan Project. The Sycuan Project is located in the City and outside of District jurisdiction and is not subject to the Public Trust. It is located within the California Coastal Zone and the City’s Local Coastal Program. Implementation of the Sycuan Project will require amendments to the City’s General Plan, Zoning Code, and Local Coastal Program. City staff received direction from City Council to work with Sycuan to develop an entitlement application at the September 6, 2016 City Council meeting.
Consistency with the Proposed Balanced Plan
The Sycuan Project is located on City property approximately 0.3-mile north of the Balanced Plan area boundary. Although not located on District property or within the boundaries of the Balanced Plan, the City has requested that the Sycuan Project be included in the CEQA review for the Balanced Plan because of its location adjacent to I-5 and because it is the primary entryway into the National City waterfront area and Marina District.
Staff Recommendation on Sycuan Commercial Development Project
Staff recommends that the Board direct staff to incorporate the Sycuan Project into the EIR for the Balanced Plan, Tidelands Avenue Closure Project, and the permanent alignment of Segment 5 of the Bayshore Bikeway. This would ensure a more holistic and comprehensive CEQA review and should also result in time and cost savings, as it is anticipated that Sycuan and the City would financially participate in the cost of the EIR preparation.
D. Integrated Planning Vision
The Integrated Planning effort is: “The link of vision, priorities, people and the physical institution in a flexible system of evaluation, decision-making, and action.” It is a multi-faceted and comprehensive approach to the District’s future. Integrated Planning includes various District initiatives, including, but not limited to, asset management, the Port as a Service business efforts (i.e., parking, advertising, etc.), a fiscal growth and sustainability framework, environmental initiatives, leasing policies, and land and water use planning and development bay wide. At this time, land and water use planning is anticipated to be developed over a multi-year process involving several phases, including the Port Master Plan Update (PMPU), larger site-specific planning, and redevelopment efforts.
One of the aspects of the Integrated Planning effort was the Board’s acceptance of the Assessment Report, Vision Statement and Guiding Principles in August 2014, and the Framework Report in November 2015 (collectively referred to as the “Integrated Planning Vision”). The Integrated Planning Vision provides the basic foundation for establishing the goals, objectives and policies of the future PMPU, as well as other Integrated Planning efforts. It also provides guidance in the review of development proposals that come forward during the PMPU process in accordance with the District’s Board Policy No. 752 “Guidelines for Conducting Project Consistency Review Related to the Integrated Port Master Plan Update.” The Integrated Planning Vision was developed as a result of an extensive public engagement process and is intended to serve as a unifying planning tool that connects all development on tidelands, as well as other Integrated Planning efforts.
For example, while not binding, the Planning Principles are filters by which the District strives to: achieve synergy among partnering agencies and stakeholders; promote clean air, healthy communities and environmental justice; ensure job creation, prudent economic policies and financial sustainability; preserves the working Port as a dynamic and thriving element of the region’s economy and cultural history; and incorporate state of the art sustainability practices. The Framework Report works in a similar manner and also specifies that it could be a tool to be used in site specific planning and development efforts.
Based on the above summaries of the GB Capital and Pasha projects, their alignment with the Integrated Planning Vision will remain an important consideration. At this early stage of the review process, many of the features of the GB Capital project, including activating the Marina District; expanding visitor serving uses to an undeveloped area of District tidelands; and providing additional public access corridors, are examples of qualities that generally demonstrate alignment with the Integrated Planning Vision. Specifically, the GB Capital project will align with Guiding Principle I., Honor the Water and Guiding Principle II., Guarantee the Public Realm provided the project is refined as recommended by staff to ensure consistency with the Balanced Plan and to bring the proposed public access elements to an appropriate level. In addition, the Pasha connector rail project would allow for Pasha to have both rail and rail car storage capacity to build a second daily unit train, which could increase throughput at NCMT, which aligns with Guiding Principle III., Ensure Job Creation, Prudent Economic Policies, and Financial Sustainability and Guiding Principle IV., Preserve the Working Port as a Dynamic & Thriving Element of the Region’s Economy and Cultural History. However, as staff recommends, the proposal should be directed to ensure the rail supporting the increased throughput is appropriately placed within the marine related industrial footprint as identified within the Balanced Plan.
E. Port Master Plan Update Approach
One of the ongoing efforts as part of the Integrated Planning process involves drafting of the PMPU document, including the development of elements, goals and policies as presented in the proposed format and content outline endorsed by the Board at the July 22, 2015 Integrated Planning Study Session.
The proposed PMPU is anticipated to include new topical sections, or elements, that provide baywide guidance related to Land Use, Water Use, Mobility, Public Access and Recreation, Natural Resources, Safety and Resilience, and Economic Development. As appropriate, in the coming months staff intends to advance specific policy issues related to these topics for the Board’s discussion and consideration.
In addition, the PMPU will provide policies and standards, as well as identify proposed appealable category projects for the ten Planning Districts. The Planning Districts will include redefined Sub-District areas intended to simplify the numerous planning sub-areas currently contained in the Port Master Plan. The use of Sub-Districts, such as the Marina District, will allow staff to establish planning goals specific to certain geographic areas and will help to organize the Planning District text and project list. This structure will allow staff to establish focused planning policies specific to each area that appropriately guide redevelopment efforts being conducted on parallel tracks.
In contrast to other redevelopment efforts around the Bay, redevelopment plans for the Marina District are considerably more defined and are further ahead on the entitlement path. Based on Board direction regarding the proposed Balanced Plan, staff has clear direction regarding the configuration of proposed land use designations. These land use designations are anticipated to be incorporated into the PMPU, and studied under CEQA. However, staff and the General Counsel’s Office are still evaluating the appropriate entitlement and CEQA process due to the accelerated timing of the Balanced Plan and the proposed developments. Regardless of the entitlement process, staff will stay closely coordinated to ensure that the most expeditious and defensible path is created and maintained.
III. Recommended Direction to Staff, Next Steps and Cost Recovery
A. Recommended Direction to Staff and Next Steps
Staff is seeking direction on the GB Capital and Pasha project proposals and incorporating the GB Capital, Pasha and Sycuan projects into the EIR for the Balanced Plan. Similar to the Balanced Plan, the GB Capital and Pasha projects require a PMPA. The PMPA is proposed to include language that would establish design standards recommended as part of the Balanced Plan, such as, but not limited to, the establishment of public access corridors along the existing Marina Way and West 32nd Street alignments, and incorporation of habitat buffers along the eastern perimeter of the Marina District.
Staff recommends the Board direct staff to continue to process GB Capital’s Current Project subject to the revisions recommended by staff in relation to the Balanced Plan, which are summarized below. Alternatively, the Board may choose to direct staff otherwise.
Public access corridors
• Existing alignment of Marina Way: 30-foot-wide public access corridor if Bayshore Bikeway is located along eastern perimeter of site within the habitat buffer, or 40-foot-wide public access corridor if the corridor also serves as the Bayshore Bikeway alignment. Expand upon the existing 20-foot-wide view corridor at Pier 32 Marina.
• If Bayshore Bikeway located within habitat buffer, must be located within the westernmost 100 feet of the habitat buffer area.
• Existing alignment of West 32nd Street: 20-foot-wide public access corridor.
• Clearly demarcated public access corridors, separated from vehicles and no shared access with vehicles, with the exception of an occasional maintenance or emergency vehicle.
Maritime/Commercial Buffer Area
• Maintain width and location of Marina Way realignment identified in the Balanced Plan, which includes a 70-foot-wide roadway and a 26-foot-wide buffer area between the roadway and new connector rail.
• Relocate dry boat storage to a more appropriate “commercial recreation” site within the project area.
• Do not create a remnant parcel.
Expanded Park Space
• Boats in dry boat storage should continue to use the existing boat launch facility or a more suitable location on the site, instead of creating a new gangway and boat launch for stored boats.
• Negotiate with GB Capital to swap some existing marina parking [located northeast of the National City Aquatic Center] in GB Capital’s Pier 32 leasehold for the jetty area. The existing marina parking is proposed to be part of the expanded park space and the jetty, which is currently not in the GB Capital leasehold and is a location where GB Capital is proposing to construct environmental living units. If GB Capital is unwilling to remove the marina parking area that is part of their leasehold, the park expansion that was proposed northeast of the boat launch ramp could instead be added to the park expansion area north of the boat launch ramp.
• No RV sites shall extend into the Balanced Plan’s expanded park space north of the boat launch ramp.
Staff recommends incorporating the GB Capital, Pasha, and Sycuan projects into the EIR and PMPA2 that will include the Balanced Plan, Tidelands Avenue Closure Project, and a permanent alignment of Segment 5 of the Bayshore Bikeway. In summary, staff recommends one comprehensive EIR be prepared for the following (see Attachment B):
• Land use changes associated with the Balanced Plan;
• Tidelands Avenue Closure Project;
• Permanent alignment of Segment 5 of the Bayshore Bikeway;
• GB Capital Project (revised per Board direction);
• Pasha Connector Rail Project; and
• Sycuan Project.
In order to avoid additional costs and delays associated with modifying the scope and cost of the EIR, staff recommends finalizing the EIR consultant’s scope of work based on Board direction. Staff will return to the Board for authorization to enter into an agreement with the CEQA consultant and formally commence environmental review, as well as authorization of a cost sharing arrangement between the five project proponents - the District, the City, GB Capital, Pasha, and Sycuan.
After that information is received, the CEQA process is anticipated to be complete within 18-24 months. After the EIR and draft PMPA are approved by the Board, the PMPA will be forwarded to the Coastal Commission for certification. The PMPA certification process is anticipated to be complete within 8-12 months following Board approval of the EIR and draft PMPA. Certification of the PMPA and issuance of Coastal Development Permit(s) would be required before any development consistent with the reconfigured land uses or the above-discussed projects [with the exception of the Sycuan project as it is not located in District jurisdiction] could occur.
B. Cost Recovery
Staff has determined that preparation of an EIR is required for the land use changes associated with the Balanced Plan; the Tidelands Avenue Closure Project; the permanent alignment of Segment 5 of Bayshore Bikeway; the GB Capital Project; the Pasha Connector Rail Project; and the Sycuan Project. Staff recommends that the EIR cost be shared evenly with all five parties - the District, City, Pasha, GB Capital, and Sycuan. The District, through a Board-authorized Memorandum of Understanding with SANDAG in May 2016, committed to completing the CEQA review for the permanent alignment of Segment 5 of the Bayshore Bikeway in National City, and as such is one of the parties for which the EIR is proposed to be split. In addition, Pasha, GB Capital, and Sycuan would be responsible for cost recovery fees in accordance with BPC Policy No. 106 - Cost Recovery User Fee Policy.
General Counsel’s Comments:
The General Counsel’s Office has reviewed the agenda sheet and attachments, as presented to it, and approves them as to form and legality.
Environmental Review:
This item would provide direction to staff on whether to further study and incorporate the GB Capital, Pasha, and Sycuan projects into the EIR for the National City Marina District Balanced Land Use Plan. The Board’s direction does not constitute an “approval” of a “project” pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15387 and 15352. The direction will not result in any direct or indirect physical changes to the environment. CEQA requires that the District adequately assess the environmental impacts of its projects. Further, while the Board may request certain project components be included or alternatives studied such direction to staff will not bind the District to a definite course of action prior to CEQA review. Full CEQA analysis will be completed prior to the approval of any entitlements, concept approval, or agreements necessary for the GB Capital and Pasha projects. Moreover, the Board reserves its discretion to adopt any and all feasible mitigation measures, alternatives to the project, including a no project alternative, a statement of overriding consideration, if applicable, and approve or disapprove the GB Capital and Pasha projects and any permits or entitlements necessary for the same. Those decisions may be exercised in the sole and absolute discretion of the Board. Based on the totality of the circumstances and the entire record, the Board’s direction does not commit the District to a definite course of action prior to CEQA review being conducted. Therefore, no further CEQA review is required.
In addition, the proposed Board direction allows for the District to implement its obligations under the Port Act and/or other laws. The Port Act was enacted by the California Legislature and is consistent with the Public Trust Doctrine. Consequently, the proposed Board presentation is consistent with the Public Trust Doctrine.
The proposed Board action does not allow for “development,” as defined in Section 30106 of the California Coastal Act, or “new development,” pursuant to Section 1.a. of the District’s Coastal Development Permit (CDP) Regulations because it will not result in, without limitation, a physical change, change in use or increase the intensity of uses. Therefore, issuance of a CDP or exclusion is not required. However, the District’s projects require processing under the District’s CDP Regulations. If the GB Capital and Pasha projects move forward, the Board will consider approval of those projects and improvements after the appropriate documentation under District’s CDP Regulations has been completed and authorized by the Board, if necessary. The Board’s direction in no way limits the exercise of the District’s discretion under the District’s CDP Regulations.
Equal Opportunity Program:
Not applicable.
PREPARED BY:
Anna Buzaitis
Senior Planner, Planning & Green Port
Ryan Donald
Department Manager, Real Estate
Todd Miller
Asset Manager, Real Estate
Attachments:
Attachment A: Balanced Land Use Plan
Attachment B: Projects Recommended for Comprehensive EIR
Attachment C: National City Bayfront Map
Attachment D: Existing Land Uses in Marina District
Attachment E: GB Capital Project - Phase 1
Attachment F: GB Capital Project - Phase 2
Attachment G: Public Access Corridors Comparison
Attachment H: Maritime/Commercial Buffer Area Comparison
Attachment I: Expanded Park Space Comparison
Attachment J: Sycuan Project
1 Please note: Minor revisions and clarifications were made to the Balanced Plan in June 2016 to ensure accurate mapping of parcels. These June 2016 revisions resulted in acreage distributions that were slightly varied from the Balanced Plan presented to the Board on April 14, 2016. Specifically, the June 2016 revisions resulted in an increase of 0.05 acre of marina, an increase of 0.04 acre of park/plaza, and a decrease of 0.09 acre of street.
2 The Sycuan project will not be incorporated into the PMPA because it is in City, not District, jurisdiction.