Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout2013/03/05 Item 09ITY COUNCIL STATEMENT ~~~ CITY OF ---- CHULAVISTA March 5, 2013, Item No.: ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING PCM-12-19 CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER (EUC) SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN AND ASSOCIATED REGULATORY DOCUMENTS, FOR 207-ACRES OF LAND IN THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER OF THE OTAY RANCH PLANNED COMMUNITY. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERING THE ADDENDUM (IS-13-001) TO EIR 07-01 AND APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN FOR 207 ACRES OF LAND IN THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER PORTION OF THE OTAY RANCH. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN PLAN (FORM BASED CODE) FOR 207 ACRES OF LAND IN THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER PORTION OF OTAY RANCH. SUBMITTED BY: Assistant City REVIEWED BY: City Manager BACKGROUND Manag evelopment Services Director ~ (f, i</ The Applicant, SLF IV/McMillin Millenia 7V, LLC (McMillin), filed an application to amend the approved EUC SPA Plan, and Form Based Code (FBC) to change the minimum building height within certain EUC Districts and to redistribute the land use mix (residential and commercial) within various EUC Districts. McMillin is requesting the changes in response to current market conditions affecting the first phase of development. The entire EUC, a.k.a. Millenia, includes approximately 230 acres and comprises tlu'ee different ownerships, with McMillin owning approximately 207 acres. The project is located along the SR 125 tollway between Birch Road and Hunte Parkway (Attachment 1), and is approved for more than 3.4 million square feet of commercial space (office and retail), and 2,983 multifamily housing units. 9-1 Meeting Date: 03/05/13 Page 2 Although the EUC contains a total of 10 Districts (described more fully in the Discussion section of this report) most of the proposed changes only involve Districts within the first Phase of Development (Districts 2, 3, 4, 7 and 10), approximately 89 acres out of 207. The proposed amendment would allow a change in minimum building height for internal lots fronting along Eastlake Parkway, and transferring non-residential uses from District 7 to Districts 3 and 4 (Attachment 3, Figure A, Site Utilization Plan). There is a minor text clarification affecting the "High" column ofnon-residential square footage affecting all 10 Districts. As proposed, the Project will require amendments to the EUC SPA Plan, and Planned Community District Regulations (i.e, the "FBC"). The proposed amendments are further discussed in this staff report. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW The Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project was covered in previously adopted Final Second Tier Environmental Impact Report, EIR 07-01. The Development Services Director has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent document have occurred; therefore, the Development Services Director has prepared an addendum to the Final Second Tier Environmental Impact Report, EIR 07-01 (Attachment 5). RECOMMENDATION That the City Council (1) Consider the Addendum to the Final Second Tier Environmental Impact Report, EIR 07-01 (IS-13-001); (2) Adopt Resolution amending the EUC SPA Plan and (3) Adopt the Ordinance amending the EUC SPA Plan Form Based Code. BOARDS/COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION On Febuary 27, 2013 the Planning Commission will make a recommendation on the project and a verbal report will be given at the Council Meeting. DISCUSSION Ex1St1IIE Site Characteristics The site is located adjacent to and east of SR-125, adjacent to and west of Eastlake Parkway, adjacent to and south of Birch Road and the Otay Ranch Town Center, and north of the future extension of Hunte Parkway (Attachment 1, Locator Map). 9-2 Meeting Date: 03/05/13 Page 3 The site is vacant and the mass-grading permit was issued in January of 2011 (Grading Plans #10-044). At the beginning of year 2012, the Developer started the design process for a construction change to the Grading Plans to reflect more detail for the area associated with the first phase of work. Grading of the first phase is expected to start in Spring/Summer of 2013. Existing General Plan, SPA Plan Land Use Designations and Existing land uses General Plan PC District Land Existing Land Use Use Desi¢nation Site EUC, PQ, PRK, OS North FWC, OS South PART OF DEFERRAL AREA East MUR, PQ West PRK, PQ, RLM EUC Millenia Overview: SPA Plan and FBC PC VacanUEUC FC-1 CommerciaUORTC PC VacanUV9 RM-1; RM-2 Mixed use ResidentiaW l 1 SF4; RM2 ResidentiaW7 The adopted SPA Plan, approved on September 15, 2009, establishes the vision for Millenia, and defines the land use character and mix, design criteria, transportation system, and public infrastructure requirements for the project. The SPA Plan proposes a flexible regulatory framework that provides for a variety of possible land use scenarios for each district and is intended to allow the project to respond to market cycles. The FBC incorporates both the PC District Regulations and the Village Design Plan and is based on the concept that the activities within the building are less. important than the form and relationships between building and public spaces. The SPA Plan implements the General Plan and General Development Plan (GDP) by providing a comprehensive urban design plan incorporating a mixture of land uses connected by a grid system of public streets and pedestrian paths, urban parks and plazas, outdoor dining, public buildings, and commercial activities designed to promote a safe pedestrian environment. The EUC Site Utilization Plan, includes density, non-residential square footage, and a number of residential units, and is consistent with the General Plan and GDP as adopted. Within each district there is a character description, overall guidelines, and standards that will guide design dealing with site planning requirements, architecture, and landscape. Each District also contains a "Table of Requirements" that identifies the Dominant Land Use, number of dwelling units/non-residential square footage permitted, Building Setback, minimum range and average height of buildings, and access requirements and limitations. In accordance with the approved SPA Plan, all districts in Millenia permit multiple uses and most are required to contain more than a single use. However, with the proposed SPA amendment, District 7 would now become only residential. These districts are: 9-3 Meeting Date: 03/05/13 Page 4 • Residential Districts (Districts 2, 3, 8, 9, 101: Millenia accommodates up to 2,983 dwelling units in a variety of urban residential products. While the greatest residential densities will surround the Main Street, Millenia also incorporates a series of residential neighborhoods organized around neighborhood parks. The location of the residential districts in relationship to the Main Street, and the ability to locate non-residential land uses within these districts will allow neighborhoods serving goods and services to be provided in close proximity to all residential units in Millenia. • Business District (District 4): This district will provide a major office campus within the South County region. The business district is perceived as a complement to other uses in the district, bringing expanded employment opportunities to the community, energizing the Main Street, introducing a significant daytime population, and providing riders for area transit. • Main Street District (District 6): This district will be the most active and urban component of the project, amixed-use, pedestrian environment that combines office and residential uses over ground floor retail. • Mixed-Use Civic/Office Core (District 5): The GDP envisions Millenia as the civic core of the Otay Ranch. This district. functions as the symbolic and ceremonial focus of community government and cultural activities such as public library, museum, multipurpose venue and/or concert hall. • Gateway Mixed-Use Districts (District 1, 7): These districts will serve as the portals that serve as a transition from surrounding areas into the core of Millenia, including landmark buildings announcing that Millenia is a special place. The Eastern Gateway Districts will provide a retail transition from the Otay Town Center commercial north of Millenia, while the Eastern Gateway District will announce arrival with landmark architecture. The SPA Plan provides guidance for future development at the subdivision and improvement plan level, and is the basic reference for determining permitted land uses, densities, total units, and required public facilities. Proiect Description The applicant has applied to amend the Site Utilization Plan contained within the EUC SPA Plan and the District Regulations and Design Guidelines and Intensity Transfer provisions contained within the FBC (PC District Regulations/Village Design Plan) in order to: 1) allow reduction in building heights for lots fronting along Eastlake Parkway; 2) transfer all of the non-residential density out of District 7; and 3) remove all reference to District 10 as an alternative school site. In order to accomplish these objectives, the following amendments to the document are required (please refer to Attachment 6): 9-4 Meeting Date: 03/05/13 Page 5 1. SPA, Site Utilization Plan (SPA Tab, Exhibit III-6, Page 4 of 39): a. The Site Utilization Plan would be amended to change the Eastern Gateway District (District 7, lots 12 and 20) from mixed use to residential by transferring non-residential square footage as follows: i. Half of the 10,000 sq. ft. within the "low" column would be transferred to District 3 for a total of 10,000 sq. ft., and the other half to the Business District, District 4, for a total of 505,000 sq. ft. ii. The 170,000 sq. ft. within the "target" column would be transferred to District 4 for a total of 1,532,000 sq. ft. iii. The 400,000 sq. ft. within the "high" column would be reduced to "0" with no transfer to another district. b. The note stating that District 10 may also be an alternative for the Elementary School Site would be removed. 2. Form Based Code a. District 4, Table of Requirements (Exhibit II-9a, Page 11 of 39): i. The Non-Residential Intensity Range would be increased as stated above in SPA, Site Utilization Plan, Section A. b. District 7, Lots 12 and 20 (See Table of Requirements and Exhibit II-23b, pages 13 and 15 of 39 respectively): i. The Dominant Land Use would be changed from Mixed Use to Residential and the non-residential square footage would be transferred as stated above in SPA, Site Utilization Plan, Section a. ii. The minimum Building Height Range would be reduced from 3-12 stories to 2-12 stories. All buildings in Lots 12 and 20 would be 2-story except when fronting "D" Street (see Exhibit II-23b, pg. 15 of 39). In addition, buildings fronting Eastlake Parkway and "H" Street would include enhanced architectural treatments and punctuate the top building line with vertical elements to avoid a continuous 2-story roof line. The northwest and southwest corners of the intersection of Eastlake Parkway and "H" Street, would have either 3-story buildings or 2-story buildings with enhanced vertical features to emphasize height at intersection (see pages 34, 35, and 37 of 39.) 9-5 Meeting Date: 03/05/13 Page 6 iii. The Minimum Average Building Height remains unchanged; however, all buildings on hots 12 and 20 would be exempt from height averaging (see Chapter 03.09.002b vi, pages 34, and 35 of 39.) c. District 2 Lot 4: i. The Building Height Range for lot 4 would be increased from 2-7 stories to 3-7 stories (see Table of Requirements and Exhibit II-28b, pages 18 and 20 of 39.) d. District 3: i. The Non-Residential Intensity Range would be increased as stated above in SPA, Site Utilization Plan, Section a (see Table of Requirements, page 22 of 39.) ii. The Building Height Range on Lot 11 would remain as currently approved, (2-7 stories) with the exception that there would no longer be a requirement for building height averaging, and that all buildings fronting on "D" Street must contain a minimum building height of 3-stories (Exhibit II-30b, page 24 of 39 and Chapter 03.09.002b vi, pages 34, and 35 of 39). In addition, buildings fronting Eastlake Parkway and "F" Street would include enhanced architectural treatments and punctuate the top building line with vertical elements to avoid a continuous 2-story roof line. The northwest corners of the intersection of Eastlake Parkway and "F" Street, would have either 3-story buildings or 2-story buildings with enhanced vertical features to emphasize height at intersections (see pages 34, 35, and 37 of 39.) e. District 10: Lot 21 i. Buildings on Lot 21 would be 2-story in height, with a 3-story minimum building height when fronting "D" Street (Exhibit II-36b, page 28 of 39). Buildings fronting Eastlake Parkway and "K" Street would include enhanced architectural treatments and punctuate the top building line with vertical elements to avoid a continuous 2- story roof line. The northwest comers of the intersection of Eastlake Parkway and "K" Street, would have either 3-story buildings or 2-story buildings with enhanced vertical features to emphasize height at intersections (see pages 34, 35, and 37 of 39.) ii. The Minimum Average Building Height remains unchanged; however, all buildings on Lot 21 would be exempt from height averaging (see Chapter 03.09.002b vi, pages 34, and 35 of 39.) 9-6 Meeting Date: 03/05/13 Page 7 Lot 27 i. The Building Height Range would be increased from 2-7 stories to 3-7 stories (see Table of Requirements and Exhibit II-36b, pages 26, and 28 of 39.) £ Administration: The language in Section 04.05.001, Intensity Transfers, would be revised to require that reductions in `9ow" and "target" intensities in any district must be met with a corresponding increase in another district and vice versa. Reductions in the "high" category would not require a corresponding increase in another district (page 38 of 39.) ANALYSIS: Change in dominant land use within Districts The above descriptions (Millenia Overview Section) of the various Districts contained within the EUC shows how they are categorized by their "dominant" land use. Currently, District 7 is identified as a Mixed-Use District as it is not dominated by either non-residential nor residential. However, the proposed amendment would result in District 7 changing from a "Mixed Use" District to a "Residential District." The resulting loss of "non residential" square footage is fiirther analyzed below. Aesthetics The reduction in building height in District 7 and portion of District 10 which front along Eastlake Pazkway will have less than significant effects upon the overall aesthetics of Millenia. In exchange for allowing a reduction in minimum building height from three (3) to two (2) stories for buildings fronting primarily along Eastlake Parkway, there is an added requirement that a 2- story minimum building height will only be allowed if they provide additional architectural treatment and punctuate the top building line with vertical elements to avoid the continuous two-story roof line. In addition, buildings facing "D" Street must now contain a 3- story minimum height, and buildings at corners of various intersections of Eastlake Parkway could either be a 3-story or have enhanced vertical features to emphasize height. This additional requirement for architectural treatment would also apply to any 2-story buildings within Lot 11 (District 3) fronting on Eastlake Parkway. From an aesthetic standpoint, the requirement for these additional architectural elements and punctuating the roof lines with vertical elements of future two-story buildings would eliminate any negative visual effects to the overall "urban chazacter" of Millenia which might otherwise occur. Land Use Millenia contains a mixture of residential and non-residential uses (retail and office) which are distributed within and between the various land use districts. The proposal includes the removal 9-7 Meeting Date: 03/05/13 Page 8 of all 10,000 non-residential square footage from District 7, which changes the category of this District from "Mixed Use" to "Residential." The 10,000 square feet within the "low" category ofnon-residential use will be transferred with half being added to the "low" category of District 3 and other half added to District 4. The 170,000 sq. ft. within the "target" category in District 7 would be transferred into the "target" category of District 4. In regards to the transfer of "low" and "target" square footage, while there may be minor effects in terms of the proximity of retail within walking distance to future residents. By adding half of the commercial sq. ft into the "low category" of District 3, the intent of providing convenient commercial within the eastern part of the EUC is maintained, and as a result, there is no significant impact created by this internal redistribution. The applicant is also proposing to remove the 400,000 sq. ft. contained within the "High" non- residential category of District 7. Presently, Section 04.05.001 requires that any reduction in intensity in any district must be met with a corresponding increase in another district and vice versa. Amended language is being proposed to only require such transfer in the case of the square-footage or unit count within the "low" and "target" category. Because the "low" category indicates the minimum amount which must be constructed and the sum total of the "target" category indicates the maximum amount that may be constructed, the removal of this transfer requirement from the "high" category will have no impact on the resultant amount of residential units or commercial acreage actually constructed. Given that the EUC's approvals were based on the "target" land use amounts, the only way any square footage or unit counts within the "high" category can be constructed within any District would require the corresponding removal of square-footage/unit count within the "target" category of another District. This would ensure that the maximum allowable amount is not exceeded. Thus, the removal of the 400,000 square-feet currently shown within the "High" category of District 7 would now be allowed, once the amended language is adopted, and have no impact on the overall project constructed on the site. School Site Location In a letter dated September 10, 2012, the Chula Vista Elementary School District indicated that Lot 26 (District 9) is acceptable with a more vertical plan for the school building(s), and that Lot 27 (District 10) will not be needed for use as a school site (see Attachment 3, Figure B.) There is no impact resulting from the removal of District 10 as an alternative location for the elementary school as the SPA Plan already assumes District 9 as the primary school location. DECISION MAKER CONFLICTS: Staff has reviewed the property holdings of the City Council and has found no property holdings within 500 feet of the boundaries of the property which is the subject to this action. Staff is not independently aware, nor has staff been informed by any City Council member, of any other fact that may constitute a basis for adecision-maker conflict of interest in this matter. 9-8 Meeting Date: 03/05/13 Page 9 CURRENT YEAR FISCAL: The application fees and processing costs aze paid for by the Applicant. ONGOING FISCAL: The development phasing assumptions and variables used in the Fiscal Impact Analysis (FIA) prepared for the EUC SPA Plan have not changed; therefore, the EUC's ongoing fiscal is not affected by this amendment. Attachments 1. Locator Map 2. Planning Commission Resolution 3. Figures: Figure A, Site Utilization Plan Figure B, Letter from the Chula Vista Elementary School District 4. Ownership Disclosure Form 5. Addendum to EIR 07-01 (IS-13-001) 6. EUC SPA Plan Amendment Prepared by Patricia Ferman, Project Manager, Development Services Department Project Planner: Jeff Steichen, Associate Planner, Development Services Department 9-9 ATTACHMENT 1 LOCATOR MAP 9-10 ATTACHMENT 1 LCD N ~ BIRCH RD ~~~~ PROIECi N LOCATION W~E S Case File:\ M-12-19 CHULA VISTA DEVELOPMENT SERVICES DEPARTMENT LOCATOR PROJECT APPLICANT SLFIV / McMillin Millenia LV, LLC PROJECT Southwest Corner of Birch Rd ADDRESS: and Eastlake Parkway SCALE: _ _ _ PILE NUMBER: PROJECT DESCRIPTION: MISCELLANEOUS Request: Proposed Eastern Urban Center SPA Amendment. LlDai FileAocamrTT/PCM/PCM-12-09 10.31.2012 ATTACHMENT 2 PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION 9-12 ATTACHMENT2 RESOLUTION NO. PCM-12-19 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL CONSH)ER THE ADDENDUM (IS-13-001 TO EH2 07-O1) AND APPROVE AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN AND PLANNED COMMUNITY (PC) DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN PLAN (FORM BASED CODE) FOR 207 ACRES OF LAND IN THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER PORTION OF THE OTAY RANCH WHEREAS, on October 17, 2012 a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula Vista Development Services Deparhnent by SLF IV/McMillin Millenia JV, LLC (the "Applicant," "Owner" and "Developer") requesting approval of amendments to the Eastern Urban Center SPA Plan and Eastern Urban Center- Planned Community District Regulations and associated regulatory documents for 207 acres located at the southwest corner of Birch and Eastlake Parkway (Project); and WHEREAS, the project consists of amending the approved EUC SPA Plan, and Form Based Code (FBC) to change the minimum building height within certain EUC Districts, to redistribute the land use mix (residential and commercial) within various Districts, and to remove reference to District 10 as an alternative school site. The proposed amendments mostly affect the first phase of development, approximately 89 acres out of 207; and WHEREAS, the Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project was covered in previously adopted Environmental Impact Report, Second-Tier Final Environmental Impact Report, EIR #07-01. The Development Services Director has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessazy and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the prepazation of a subsequent document have occurred; therefore, the Development Services Director has prepared an addendum to EIR #07-O1; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the Addendum (IS-13-001) to EIR #07-01 has been prepazed in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista; and WHEREAS, the Development Services Director set the time and place for a hearing on the Project, and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property, at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and 9-13 WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and the hearing was thereafter closed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Draft City Council Resolution and Ordinance approving the Project in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA THAT a copy of this Resolution and the draft City Council Resolution and Ordinance be transmitted to the City Council PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 27th day of February 2013, by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTAIN Lisa Moctezuma, Chairperson ATTEST: Pat Laughlin, Secretary 9-14 ATTACHMENT 3 FIGURES 9-15 INTRODUCTION ,__ Potential Public Components Park Library pica Station Potential Elementary School'` CPF Site Site Northeastern Neighborhood District Eastem Gateway Neighborhood District Business District Mixetl Use CiviGCPoee Core District Main Street District Eastern Gateway District Southwestern Neighborhood District Central Southern Neighborhood District Southeastern Neighborhood District Total' `Does not include perimeterarierial highways Proposed Amendments subject to City Council Approval Non-residential Residential Ama S mbols Eastern Urban Center Districts Sq. Ft, (OOb's} Permitted Dwelling Units Permitted y Low Target High Low Target High '~ Gateway Mixed Use Commercial District 100 { 400 700 0 50 100 2 Northeastern Neighborhood District 2 I 120 200 150 300 500 $ Eastem Gateway Neighborhootl District {ri0 ' S0 250 150 400 750 4 Business Disvict bBa 5e5 t;g3P 1,900 0 100 150 rj Mixed Use Civic/0ffice Core District 100 900 1,000 0 2tk? 300 6 Main Street District 80 240 400 100 533 800 7 Eastem Getaway District ;@~ 0 -}~@~ p ig$ 0 5D ZDD 300 $ Scutttwestem Neighborhood l7istric[ 2 50 200 300 50D 700 g Central Southern Neighborhood District 2 45 140 130 500 6S0 1 d Southeastern Neighbohood District 2 150 _ 200 200 200 d50 Maximum , Nat to Exceed, 7otats 3,A87 2,983 Notes: f. ' Numeric Area Syrrbals do not represent phases. 2. The allocation of intensity in each dislrrat sha11 be based on the building height regulations in the EUG Form Based Code, Chapter 03.02002b vi, therein. `• `~ Eastern ~Trban Center cH w visa Cl'I'AY ~ANCI~ {~f99~ 1/30/13 I-23 9m/6 ATTACHMENT 3 -FIGURE A Utilization Plan (Proposed) Urban Design: RTKL Cinti land Punning .m a.w.aUrgmrar ,r'LS'1 [~ 1 /30/13 Exhibit III-6 Proposed SPA PLAN Page 4 of 39 ATTACHMENT 3 -FIGURE B CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 84 EAST "J" STREET •CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 •619 425-9600 EACH CHILD IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH September 10; 2012 Mr. Todd Galarneau Vice President McMillin Land Development P.O. Box 85104 San Diego, CA 92186-5104 RE: PROPOSED SCHOOL SITE LOCATION IN THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER Dear Mr. Galarneau: In January 2009, Mr. Tooker, CDE Consultant, indicated that, given the unique nature and urban environment of the EUC project, the site you presented for the CVESD elementary school (Lot 26) will be acceptable with a more vertical plan for the school building(s). The Initial Site Evaluation, signed by Mr. Tooker, gave Lot 26 a high rating of "2." Therefore, this site remains acceptable to the District as the site of the elementary school for the Millennia Project. As a result, the District has determined that Lot 27 in the Eastern Urban Center Millennia Project will not be needed for use as a school site by the CVESD. We look forward to working with McMillin Land Development on the school site in the future. Sincerely, 'Y~ ' Oscar Esquivel Assistant Superintendent for Business Services and Support OE:cs/cd cc: Scott Donaghe, City of Chula Vista BOARD OF EDUCATION DAVID BEJARANO • LARRY CUNNINGHAM • DOUGLAS E. LUFFBOROUGH, 111 • PAMELA B. SMITH • GLENDORA M. TREMPER SUPERINTENDENT FRANCISCO ESCOBEDO, Eo.D. 9-17 ATTACHMENT 4 OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM 9-18 ATTACHMENT4 s1i/i ~~ cm of CHULA VISTA Disclosure Statement D e ve l o p m e n t S e Planning Division ~ Development Processing APPLICATION APPENDIX B' Pursuant td City Council Policy 701-01-, prior to any action on a matter that requires discretionary-action by the City Council, Planning Commission or other official legislative bodyof the City, a statement of disclosure of certain ownerships, finahcial interest, payments, and campaign contributions must be filed. The following information must be disclosed: 1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the project that is the subject of the application, project or contract (e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier). 2. If any person* identified in section 1. above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals with an investment of $2000 or more in the business (corporation/partnership) entity. ~~~' ~ rr'~9~ I'~//~!l/rr~ ~/r~ ~S~ rcnt/a~ Li G C-fiv ~f11rr,C ~i~ nr! ~zt~77;{ ~JL{_~~ 3. If any person* identified in section 1. above is anon-profit organization or trust, list the names of any person who is the director of the non-profit organization or the names of the trustee, beneficiary and trustor of the trust. 4. Please identify.every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors, whom you have authori~ d to r//epresent you before the City in this matter. f~i/ll~ ~{'1 %Yr7 ~ J l(k17~ ~i~in SU~17f1 5. Has any person *identified in 1., 2., 3., or 4:, above, or otherwise associated with this contract, project or application, had any financial dealings with an official** of the City of Chula Vista as it relates to this contract, project or application within the past 12 months? Yes No If yes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the official** may have in this contract. 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista9_ J California I 91910 I (619) 691.5101 ram APP. B Pev 03.10 / P91Q ~t~i'/ ~r ~~ cm of CHULA. VISTA i D e v e l o p m e n t S e r v i c e s D e p a r t m e n t Planning Division ~ Development Ptocessing APPLICATION APPENDIX B Disclosure Statement - Page 2 6. Has any person *identified in 1., 2., 3., or 4., above, or otherwise associated with thiscontract, project or application,-made a campaign contribution of more than $250 within the past (12) months to a current member of the City of Chula Vista Council ? Yes No ~ if yes which council member? 7. Has any person *identified in 1., 2., 3., or 4., above, or otherwise associated with this contract, project or application, provided more than $420 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official** of the City of Chula Vista in the past (12) months? (This includes any payment that confers a personal benefit on the recipient, a rebate or discount in the price of anything of value, money to retire a legal debt, gift, loan, etc.) Yes No_J,~ If yes, which official** and what was the nature of the item provided? 8. Has any person *identified in 1., 2., 3., or 4., above, or otherwise associated with this contract, project or application, been a source of income of $500 or more to an official** of the City of Chula Vista in the past (12) months? Yes No / If yes, which official** and the nature of the item provided? Date ~~l?T. * Person is identified as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint veriture, association, social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city, municipality, district, or other political subdivision, or any other groupdr combination acting as a unit. ** official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner, Member of a board, commission or committee of the City, and City employee or staff members: ***' This disclosure Statement must be completed at the time the project application, or contract, is submitted to City staff for processing, and updated within one week prior to consideration by legislative body. Last Updated: March 16,2010 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista California 91910 (619) 691.5101 9-I O Form App.B flev 03.10 pyvz Print or type name of Contractor/Applicant ATTACHMENT 5 ADDENDUM TO EIR 07-01 (IS-13-001) 9-21 ATTACHMENT 5 ADDENDUM TO SECOND-TIER FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EIR 07-O1 PROJECT NAME: EUC SPA and FBC Amendment PROJECT LOCATION: Properties within the Eastern Urban Center (EUC) bounded by Birch Road on the north, Eastlake Pazkway on the east, Hunte Parkway on the south and SR 125 on the west. PROJECT APPLICANT: SLF 1 V/Mcmillin Millenia JV, LLC CASE NO: IS-13-001 DATE: February 13, 2013 I. BACKGROUND/SCOPE OF ANALYSIS The purpose of this Addendum is to address the proposed project, an amendment to the EUC Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and Form Based Code (FBC) to address the mix and distribution of land uses and building heights within Districts 3, 4, 7 and 10. As the lead agency for the project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA, Public Resources Code, Sec. 21000 et seq.), the City of Chula Vista prepared and conducted an environmental analysis (Second-Tier Environmental Impact Report (EIR-07-O1). The Final Second Tier Environmental Impact Report (EIR 07-01) for the Otay Ranch EUC SPA Plan, Tentative Map and related items was certified on September I5, 2009. The EIR addressed the development of the the207 acres of the Otay Ranch. There aze no new environmental impacts not examined in the certified Program EIR prepared for the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (EIR 90-O1) and the Gneral Plan Update EIR (EIR-OS-O1) except. as described in the Second-Tier Final EIR 07-01. The proposed amendments to the EUC SPA Plan and FBC. are based on requested changes to the distribution of land mixes within various districts as shown on the Site Utilization Plan a well as allowable changes in building height as described in the FBC. Mitigation measures from the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRPs) associated with FEIR 07-01 aze still valid and applicable to this project. The physical development of the 207 acres has been previously addressed in the certified EIR. Thus, this Addendum focuses on the proposed EUC SPA and FBC amendment. The environrental analysis presented in this document addresses the modification of the previously approved SPA Plan and FBC. Because the modifications to the SPA plan, and associated FBC/ Development Standards would not result in any increase in allowable units nor an adverse expansion of the limits of grading, the proposed SPA and FBC 9-22 amendment is considered to be adequately covered under FETR 07-O1 and no further analysis is warranted. II. PROPOSED AMENDMENTS The applicant has applied to amend the EUC SPA and Development Standards/FBC in order to 1) change the allowable building heights within the Project area 2) redistribute nonresidential sq. ft. between districts and 3) remove District 10 as an alternative location for the elementary school. Entitlements applied for include the following: a) Amend the land use distribution table associated with the Site Utilization Plan to allow for transfer of units between the various districts b) Removal of potential location of school site within District 9. c) Amend the Development Standazds/FBC to allow modifications to the land use distribution and to the minimum building height requirements. III. CEQA REQUIREMENTS Sections 15162 through 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines discuss a lead agency's responsibilities in handling new information that was not included in a project's certified environmental document. Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides: (a) When an ETR has been certified or a negative declazation adopted for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: (1) Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; (2) Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the previous EIR or negative declaration due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; of (3) New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the previous EIR was certified as complete or the negative declaration was adopted, shows any of the following: a. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the previous EIR or Negative Declaration; b. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the previous EIR; a Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or d. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the previous EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. Section 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines provides that: A. The lead agency shall prepare an addendum to a previously certified EIR if some changes or additions are necessary but none of the conditions described in Section 15162 calling for preparation of a subsequent EIR have occurred. B. An addendum need not be circulated for public review but can be included in or attached to the final EIR. C. The decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the final EIR prior to making a decision on the project: D. A brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to Section 15162 should be included in an addendum to an EIR, the lead agency's required findings on the project, or elsewhere in the record. The explanation must be supported by substantial evidence. This Addendum has been prepared pursuant to the requirements of Sections 15162 and 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines. The proposed changes to the project do not constitute a substantial change to the previously approved project. The modifications proposed would not result in any environmental effects that were not considered in the Second-Tier Final EIR 07-01, nor would the changes increase the severity of any of the impacts identified in this EIR. There has been no significant material change in 9-24 circumstances relative to the project, and no new information of substantial importance has become available after the preparation of the EUC EIR. The mitigation measures identified in Second-Tier Final EIR 07-O1 would be equally applicable to the revised project. Therefore, in accordance with Sections 15162 and 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, the City has prepazed this addendum to Second Tier FEIR 07-01. IV. ANALYSIS No new significant impacts were identified beyond those identified in Second-Tier Fina] EIIZ 07-01. Therefore, no new additional mitigation measures or modifications to existing mitigation measures are required. Aesthetics The reduction in building height in District 7 and portion of District 10 which front along Eastlake Parkway will have less than significant effects upon the overall aesthetics of Millenia. In exchange for allowing a reduction in minimum building height from three (3) to two (2) stories for buildings fronting primarily along Eastlake Pazkway, there is an added requirement that a 2- story minimum building height will only be allowed if they provide additional architectural treatment and punctuate the top building line with vertical elements to avoid the continuous two-story roof line. In addition, buildings facing °`D" Street must now contain a 3-story minimum height, and buildings at comers of various intersections of Eastlake Parkway could either be a 3-story or have enhanced vertical features to emphasize height. This additional requirement for architectural treatment would also apply to 2-story buildings within Lot 11 (District 3) which front along Eastlake Parkway. From an aesthetic standpoint, the requirement for these additional architectural elements and punctuating the7oof lines with vertical elements of future two-story buildings would eliminate any negative visual effects to the overall "urban character" of Millenia which might otherwise occur. Land Use Millenia contains a mixture of residential and non-residential uses (retail and office) which are distributed within and between the various land use districts. The proposal includes the removal of all 10,000 non-residential square footage from District 7, which changes the category of this District from "Mixed Use" to "Residential". The 10,000 square feet within the "low" category ofnon-residential use will be transferred with half being added to the "low" category of District 3 and other half added to District 4. The 170,000 sq. ft. within the "tazget" category in District 7 would be transferred into the "tazget" category of District 4. In regards to the transfer of "low" and "target" square footage, while there maybe minor effects in terms of the proximity of retail within walking distance to future residents. By 9-25 adding half of the commercial sq. ft into the "low categor}~' of District 3, the intent of providing convenience commercial within the eastern part of the EUC is maintained, and as a result, there is no significant impact created by this internal redistribution. The applicant is also proposing to remove the 400,000 sq. ft. contained within the "High" .non-residential category of District 7. Presently, Section 04.05.001 requires that any reduction in intensity in any district must be met with a corresponding increase in another district and vice versa. Amended language is being proposed to only require such transfer in the case of the square-footage or unit count within the "low" and "target" category. Because the "low" category indicates the minimum amount which must be constructed, and the sum total of the "target" category indicates the maximum amount that may be constructed, the removal of this transfer requirement from the "high" category will have no impact on the resultant amount of residential units or commercial acreage actually constructed.. Given that the EUC's approvals were based on the "target" land use amounts, the only way any square footage or unit counts within the "high" category can be constructed within any District would require the corresponding removal of square- footage/unit count within the "target" category of another District. This would ensure that the maximum allowable amount is not exceeded. Thus, the removal of the 400,000 square-feet currently shown within the "High" category of District 7 would now be allowed, once the amended language is adopted, and have no impact on the overall project constructed on the site. CONCLUSION Pursuant to Section 15162 and 15164 of the State CEQA Guidelines, and based upon the above discussion and substantial evidence in the record supporting said discussion, I hereby find that the proposed project will result in only minor technical changes or additions which are necessary to make the Environmental Impact Reports adequate under CEQA. Jeff Steichen Associate Planner Attachments: 1. Project Site Plan(s) 2. Executive Summary to EIR 07-01 References: City of Chula Vista Environmental Review Procedures City of Chula Vista General Plan Update Second Tier EIR #07-01 9-26 INTRODUCTION • `• `::.Eastern Urban Center a-~uw v~srn OTAY RANCH (10/6/09) I-7 9-27 Cinti Land Planning ,rLn m. Exhibit I-1 ~ SPA Ptah -... INTRODUCI]ON Location/SPA Boundary Exhibit I-2 (10/6/09) SPA PLAN I_g. 9-28 •'•:~~.Eastern Urban Center ~`="=°"°~°"`""9 r`n ~ a,u°i",visc. OTAY RANCH "°°" EXECUTIVE SUMMARY This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) is an informational document intended for use by the City of Chula Vista, other public agencies, and members of the general public in evaluating the potential environmental effects of the proposed Eastern Urban Center (EUC) Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan located in the Otay Ranch subregion of the City. The proposed SPA Plan is a document that refines and implements the land use plans, goals, and objectives of the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP) for the development of the EUC CEQA Statute Section 21002 requires that an EIR identify the significant effects of a project on the environment and provide measures or alternatives that can mitigate or avoid these effects This Draft EIR evaluates the environmental effects associated with development of the proposed EUC SPA Plan and discusses the manner in which the SPA Plan's significant effects can be reduced or avoided through the implementation of mitigation measures or feasible alternatives to the proposed project, In accordance with Section 15130 of the CEQA Guidelines, this EIR also includes an examination of the effects of cumulative development. The Otay Ranch GDP Program Final EIR (EIR 90-01, SCH #89010154) is incorporated by reference in accordance with CEQA Guidelines Section 15168(d) This Draft EIR addresses environmental issues associate with the EUC that were not evaluated at a project level in the Otay Ranch GDP Program Final EIR and updates information in the Otay Ranch GDP EIR pertaining to the EUC SPA Plan area This summary provides a brief synopsis of the project description, project alternatives, and the results of the environmental analysis presented in this EIR document PROJECT LOCATION AND SETTING The Otay Ranch GDP planning area lies within the East Planning Area of the City of Chula Vista.. The EUC is located in the northeastern portion of the approximate 9,500-acre Otay Valley Parcel of the Otay Ranch GDP project area, Telegraph Canyon Road and the Eastlake Community bound the Otay Valley parcel on the north; Lower Otay Lake and the Arco Olympic Training Center from the eastern limits; the Otay River Valley encompasses the southern limits; and other recent development, including Sunbow I and II, the Otay Landfill, and the Coors Amphitheater and Water Park, comprise the western limits The EUC is an approximately 237- acre parcel located at the east side of State Route 125 (SR-125) between Birch Road and Hunte Parkway, The proposed EUC SPA Plan site comprises approximately 207 acres, or approximately 90 percent, of the total EUC land area. Easlrrn Urban Center SeUional Planning Area DR State Cleannghouse No. 2007041D74 Page ES-1 City of Chula Vista May 2D09 9-29 Executive The EUC parcel consists of fairly flat mesa tops and gently rolling hills within the high point of the Otay Ranch, with elevations ranging from approximately 520 feet above mean seal level (MSL) in the southeast corner of the site to a high of approximately 640 feet above MSL in the center of the property. The EUC area has historically been used for grazing and agriculture and no development presently occurs on the site.. The project site is surrounded by existing Otay Ranch development, including the Otay Ranch Town Center (Planning Area Twelve) to the north, north of Birch Road; Village Seven to the west, west of SR-i25; and Village Eleven to the east; east of Eastlake Parkway. 2. PROJECT BACKGROUND The proposed EUC SPA Plan is part of the designated EUC planning area within the Otay Ranch GDP The Otay Ranch GDP was adopted by both the Chula Vista City Council and the San Diego County Board of Supervisors in October 1993 Both agencies were involved in the development and approval of the plan because the planning area included land falling within the jurisdiction of both agencies The GDP was amended in December 2005 The GDP establishes land plans, design guidelines, objectives, policies, and implementation measures that apply to all portions of Otay Ranch while supporting a balance of housing, shops, workplaces, schools, parks, civic facilities, and open spaces on a total of approximately 23,976 5 acres. The majority of development is intended to be clustered in villages, with conveniently located features and well-defined edges such as the Chula Vista greenbelt, open spaces, and wildlife corridors. Under the implementation program for the Otay Ranch GDP, review and City Council approval of SPA plans is required before final development entitlements can be considered. The GDP defines the EUC as a regional center that would contain the most intense development in Otay Ranch and would serve as the urban heart of the region. Uses and intensities are intended to create a lively 24-hour environment, with a creative combination of uses, building types and amenities. These uses include regional retail commercial, hotel, office uses, and medium to high density residential uses. Retail and office development within the EUC would be of an intensity compatible with a °downtown" urban center. The most intense development is concentrated near the transit station, with building heights and sizes gradually decreasing near the edge of the planning area 3. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project consists of four components, including (1) the EUC SPA Plan, (2) the off- site Soils Stockpiling Area (SSA); (3) off-site Salt Creek Sewer Lateral Improvement Area (SCSL); and (4) the off-site Poggi Canyon Sewer Improvement Area (PCSI) Fastam Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Siate Clearinghouse No. 2007047074 Page ES-2 City o! Chula Visfa May 2009 9-30 Executive Summary A. EUC SPA Plan The proposed SPA Plan is comprised of the following land uses: a maximum of 2,983 multi- family residential units; a maximum of 3487 million square feet of non-residential floor area; approximately 16 acres of urban parks; a potential approximately 5 5-acre elementary school site; an approximately one-acre fire station site; and approximately 30 acres of street right-of- way. Development would occur in ten specific districts, including five residential neighborhood districts, two gateway districts, a business district, amixed-use civic/office core district, and a main street district. Although the orientation of specific districts may be more residential or non-residential in character, mixed use would be permitted within all districts The EUC SPA Plan establishes density/intensity ranges for each district, although density/intensity may be transferred between districts The SPA Plan would feature an internal grid street system, with a primary (4-lane major) north- south street providing uninterrupted access between Birch Road and Hunte Parkway The SPA Plan would provide two access points on Birch Road, three access points on Eastlake Parkway, and two access points on Hunte Parkway A greenway trail linking with the City's Greenway Trail system would enter the EUC via Bob Pletcher Way on the west and exit the EUC via a pedestrian bridge across Eastlake Parkway on the east. The EUC would provide a transit station and guideways for Bus Rapid Transit (BRT) and Chula Vista Transit (CVT). Transit stops would be located within Y< mile of the majority of uses in the EUC Site preparation and grading for the EUC would occur under one of two options: Grading Option 1 and Grading Option 2 The estimated earthwork quantity under Grading Option 1 would be approximately 3.6 million cubic yards of cut and fill. Earthwork would be balanced between the EUC and off-site locations, with 2.5 million cubic yards of fll to remain in the EUC and 1 .1 million cubic yards to be exported off-site to an approximately 30,3-acre parcel to the south in the designated Village Nine. Grading Option 2 recognizes that adjacent property owners may not consent to off-site grading and balances quantities within the project site and a portion of the remainder of the EUC, including the Hunte Parkway right-of-way. Under this option, the estimated earthwork quantity under Option 2 would comprise 3.2 million cubic yards of cut and fill. Under this option, the grading necessary for the construction of the off-site portions of Streets A, B, C and M, and Hunte Parkway is evaluated Development of the EUC SPA Plan would occur non-sequentially to allow flexibility based on market changes or regulatory constraints and public infrastructure needs/requirements It is assumed that construction could begin in late 20D9 with buildout of all residential units within the EUC SPA Plan area by Year 2020, along with approximately two million square feet of non- residential uses, The remainder of the project is estimated to be built out by Year 2030. The proposed EUC SPA Plan is consistent with the maximum residential development and non- residential floor area set forth in the Otay Ranch GDP and no amendments of the General Plan or GDP are required, EasMrn Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No 2007041074 Page ES-3 CiTy of Chula Vista Nay 2009 9-31 Executive B. Off-site Soils Stockpiling Area (SSA) Under Grading Option 1, the approximately 59-acre off-site SSA to the south would be affected ,Therefore, stockpiling on the SSA is evaluated in the ElR as. a potential component of the proposed project, Stockpiling activities include grading and compaction of fill soils. Grading would be completed in one or two phases. Under the single phase, stockpiling and grading would be completed in approximately 12-18 months and under the two-phase, the first phase would be completed in 9 months and second phase would be completed in 12 months C. Off-site Salt Creek Sewer Lateral Improvement Area (SCSL) The SCSL would involve the addition of a 173-foot, 15-inch diameter sewer line to the Salt Creek trunk sewer within an approximate 1.44-acre area. The proposed sewer pipeline would be installed using a combination of conventional open trench excavation and boring and jacking. The SCSL will also include modification of an upstream manhole. This project would be short-term in nature D. Off-site Pogoi Canvon Sewer Improvement Area (PCSI) The PCSI involves the replacement of a section of 18-inch line with a section of 21-inch line within the Olympic Parkway and Brandywine Avenue intersection. The PCSI project would require an approximately 8-foot-wide, 14-foot-deep excavation trench This project would be short-term in nature. E. Discretionary Actions A discretionary action is an action taken by an agency that calls for the exercise. of judgment in deciding whether to approve or how to carry out a project. The following discretionary actions are associated with the proposed EUC project and would be considered by the Chula Vista Planning Commission and City Council: (1) Adoption of the SPA plan and associated documents including, but not limited to: - SPA Plan, - Form Based Code (Planned Community District Regulations & Village Design Plan), - Public Facilities Financing PlanlFiscal Impact Analysis, - Air Quality Improvement Plan, - Wafer Conservation Plan, - Non-renewable Energy Conservation Plan, Eastern Urban Center SeMional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No 200704'1074 Page ES-4 City of Chula Vista May 2009 9-32 F~ecutive Summary - Affordable Housing Plan, and - Urban Parks, Recreation, Open Space & Trails Plan, (2) Approval of Tentative Subdivision Map to establish the layout of land uses, developable and open space lots, and infrastructure requirements for the EUC; (3) Certifcation of a Final EIR and adoption of a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEtZA). Potential future discretionary actions may include approval and adoption for a Parks Agreement and a Development Agreement If it is determined that either of the agreements deviates from the impacts analyzed in this EIR, additional environmental review will be conducted prior to approval of the Agreement, in accordance with CEQA In addition, this EIR may be used by other responsible agencies to implement the proposed project, including the Regional Water Quality Control Board. 4. ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS Table ES-1, Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures, on page ES-8 summarizes the project's impacts according to established thresholds under each environmental issue, proposed mitigation measures, and potential significant and unavoidable impacts after the implementation of all feasible mitigation measures as analyzed in detail in Section 4 0 of this EIR. 5. PROJECT ALTERNATIVES Three project alternatives have been evaluated in the Draft EIR. These include: (1) the "No Project" Alternative;" (2) the "Reduced Density Alternative;" and (3) the "Adjusted Land Use Mix" Alternative,. The No Project Alternative assumes that no SPA Plan would be developed within the EUC, and the existing land uses within the project site would remain unchanged Accordingly, this alternative would be equivalent to the conditions discussed under existing conditions for each category analyzed in this Draft EIR. The project site would remain in agricultural use or remain fallow, Since nc development would occur, environmental impacts associated with construction and development would be avoided. The No Project Alternative would avoid the proposed EUC SPA Plan's significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the permanent change in visual character of the project site from open space to dense urban development; construction and operation air emissions; cumulative traffic impacts on three segments of the I-805 freeway; and permanent loss of Farmland of Local Importance However this alternative would be less beneficial than the project in meeting the General Pian and GDP objectives that call for the Eastern Urban Center to function as the high-density, mixed use downtown and regional heart of the Otay Ranch Subarea and East Planning Area, Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No 2007041074 Page ES-5 City of Ghula Vista May 2009 9-33 Executive In addition, the No Project would be less beneficial in that it would not provide a link in the City's Greenway Trail; it would not remediate existing stockpiled soils that have the potential to impact downstream habitat; it would not remediate soils containing OPCs associated with the former use of pesticides in the project site; and it would not provide affordable housing, as would the proposed project. fihe No Project Alternative would not achieve any of the project objectives and would be inconsistent with the General Plan and GDP. As school, fre, and library sites would not be provided this alternative would result in a significant impact on these region-serving public services. The Reduced Density Alternative ("Alternative 2") would reduce overall development by 25 percent, resulting in a total 2,237 residential units and 2..62 million square feet of non- residential floor area, This alternative assumes that the project's library and fire station would be respectively reduced commensurate with reduced demand. The Greenway Trail would be developed as under the proposed EUC SPA Plan. In addition, a 5- to 6-acre school site would be provided as under the proposed project, However, parkland and in lieu fees would be proportionately reduced by 25 percent for a total of 11 72 acres of parkland and in lieu fees equivalent to 5 8 acres, for a total equivalent to 17.5 acres. Alternative 2 would meet the basic objectives of the projects, but assumes that the EUC would have an overall lower building profile than anticipated under the Otay Ranch GDP, In contrast to the proposed project, this alternative would be inconsistent with the General Plan and GDP and would, therefore, require a General Plan Amendment and GDP Amendment. Alternative 2 would reduce impacts that are population based and, therefore, would have incrementally less impact on services and utilities Due to reduction in daily and peak hour trafFc, this alternative would incrementally reduce impacts associated with mobile air quality, mobile noise, and traffic, including four previously significantly impacted intersections prior to mitigation, However, this alternative would not reduce the project's significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the permanent change from open space to dense urban development, construction and operation air emissions, cumulative traffic on three segments of 1-805, and the permanent loss of Farmland of Local Importance. The Adjusted Land Use Mix Alternative ("Alternative 3") would change fhe project's mix of land uses, including a 62.5 percent increase in residential units and a 53.5 percent decrease in total non-residential floor area, Alternative 3 would provide 1.62 million square feet of non- residential uses (including an elementary school) and 4,850 residential units, Other changes from the EUC SPA Plan would be a 40 percent reduction in hotel roams, and an increase in parkland (2037 acres of parkland and seven parks, compared to the proposed project which would provide 15 63 acres of parkland and six parks). Although Alternative 3 would provide 30 percent more parkland than the proposed project, as residential uses would increase 62.5 percent, parkland obligation would respectively increase High Rise CommerciallOffice floor area and civiGpublic facilities would be the same as under the proposed project and the reduction in non-residential floor area would be primarily made with respect to regional and local retail uses. Alternative 3 would generate 52,097 fewer trips than the proposed project. There would be a corresponding reduction in A.M and P.M peak hour trips, As with the proposed project, all impacts to the study area intersections and roadway segments would be Eastern Urban Center Sectional Placrting Nea EIR Stale Clearinghouse No 2007041074 Page E&6 City of Chula Vista May 2009 9-34 6cecutive Summary reduced to less than significant. Significant and unavoidable impacts along three segments of the I-805 freeway would not be avoided with the alternative, Alternative 3 would not implement the GDP in providing amixed-use environment in which residential uses are intermixed with a strong retail component to the same extent as the EUC SPA Plan, In addition, it would exceed the GDP and General Plan estimated residential units for the EUC by &2 5 percent The 53 5 percent reduction in non-residential floor area would be less in keeping with the objective to establish a flexible and responsive land use and facility plan which assures project viability in existing and future economic cycles, since Altemative 3 is predominantly residential Due to the change in the balance of residential and non- residential uses, Alternative 3 would not implement the goals, objectives, and policies of the Chula Vista General Plan and the Otay Ranch. GDP to achieve amixed=use urban place that sets itself apart from surrounding suburban villages to the same extent as the proposed project, Amendments to the General Plan and GDP would be required to implement this alternative. Alternative 3 would have the same significant and unavoidable impact as the project regarding the change in the open space character of the project site to dense urban use and would not avoid the project's significant and unavoidable impact construction and operation air emissions; permanent loss of Farmland of Local Importance; and cumulatively significant and unavoidable impacts on three segments of the I-805 freeway. In addition, unlike the proposed project, Alternative 3 would have a significant and unavoidable impact on schools Alternative 3 would have an incrementally greater impact on geology, fire, police, library, water, wastewater, solid waste, and population, The No Project Alternative would be the environmentally superior alternative, as it would entirely avoid the proposed project's significant and unavoidable reduction of open space, air quality, loss of agricultural (ands, and cumulative impacts on the I-805. However, as the No Project Altemative is determined to be environmentally superior, an environmentally superior alternative must also be identified among the remaining alternatives. Thus, Alternative 2 is identified as the environmentally superior alternative as it would incrementally reduce traffic; mobile and stationary operaiional air emissions; operational noise; biological resources, water quality, exposure to geologic hazard; demand for fire and emergency services, police services, schools, libraries, water supply, wastewater, solid waste services; and impacts affecting global climate change. However, as with Alternative 3, this alternative would not eliminate any of the project's significant and unavoidable impacts associated with the change in the open space character of the project site; construction and operation emissions, and loss of Farmland of Local Importance Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No.2tx17041074 Page ES-7 City of Chula Vista May 20D9 9-35 ~~41j ~~ CITY OF CH ULA VISTA Otay Ranch Eastern Urban Center (EUC) Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan Final Second Tier Environmental Impact Report Second Tier EIR #07-01 SC'.H No. 2007041074 September 2009 276 Fourth Ave. Chula Vista Cali#ornia 91410 9-36 F~cecutive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures . ca I w J Land Use: Threshold 1: Phvsicallv divide an established community (incomoalibility with adjacent and surrounding uses. Construction and operation of the project (EUC SPA Plan and off-site SSA, SCSL, and PCSI) would not physically encroach upon or physically divide existing established communities or land uses. The proposed project would be compatible with existing and planned adjacent land uses. Therefore, impacts with respect to this threshold would be less than significant. Threshold 2: Conflict with anv aoplicable land use plan, oolicv, regulation or agency with iunsdiction over the oroiect. adopted for the ouroose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect. Construction and operation of the project would be consistent with all applicable land use plans and policies, and other regulatory plans. Therefore, impacts with respect to [his threshold would be less than significant. Threshold 3: Conflict with anv applicable habitat conservation plan or natural community habitat conservation Dian. Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified, and no mitigation Less than signifcant measures are required. As no significant impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than significaht measures are requred. Construction and operation of the proposed protect As -no significant impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than significant would be consistent with the MSCP and RMP ~ measures are required. regarding preservation standards, sensitive resource studies, maintenance and monitoring programs, and Eastern Urban Canter Seetlonal Planning Nea EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 CI[y o! Ghula Vista May 2909 Page ES-8 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures control of water runoff and water quality and, therefore, Impacts with respect to this threshold would be less than significant. Landform Alteration/Aesthetics: Thresholds 1 and 2: Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista Substantially damage scenic resources including but not limited to. trees rock outcroooings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway. Constmction and operation of the project would not significantly impact view resources. However, a co mitigation measure is recommended to ensure that I future development in an 89-foot portion of the pWO protect site along Hunte Parkway would meet the Citys Scenic Roadway standards. Threshold 3: Substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings. Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mitigation Measure 4.2-1: Less than significant with Pdor to approval of landscape improvement plans that involve the mitigation 89-foot portion of the EUC SPA Plan's District 10 abutting Hunte Parkway, the Applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that future development, slope grading and landscaping, signage and utilities will enhance the scenic quality of the route. Development of the site would change the No feasible mitigation measures have been identified that would Significant and unavoidable undeveloped, open character of the project site to reduce this impactto a less than significant level. impact regarding the visual one of high-density urbanized uses, which is change from open space to considered to be a potentially significant impact. urban development. Threshold 4: Be inconsistent with General Plan. GDP or other objectives and ooliaes regarding visual . character thereby resulting in a significant physical impact, Eastern Urhan Center Seegonal Planning Area EIR City of Chula Vista Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 May 2009 Page ES-9 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures m I w cc Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation The protect would be consistent with the General No sign cant impacts have been identified, no mRigation Less than signifcant Plans policies that address aesthetic character and measures are required. landform. Therefore, potential impacts with respect to this threshold would be less than significant. Threshold 5: Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Light and glare impacts would be less than significant. However, because potential impacts associated with shade, shadow and wend access impact cannot be determined until the specific locations, sizes, and orientation of future buildings are established, this impact is considered potentially significant. Threshold 6: Alter areas of sensitive landforms or grade steep slopes that may be visible from future development and roadways that negatively detract from the prevailing aesthetic character of the site or surrounding area Mitigation Measure 4.2-2: In accordance with Section 04.04.001 of the FBC, prior to design review approval for any stmcture eight stories and above, the Applicant shall prepare to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director, a light, shadow and wind pattern analysis demonstrating that adjacent shadow-sensitive uses are not shadowed for more than 3 hours between 9:00 A.M. and 3:00 P.M. during the winter or for more than 4 hours between 9:00 A.M. and 5:00 P.M, during the summer or any approved City-standard in place at the time the light, shadow and wind pattern analysis is performed. Less than signifcant with mitigation. Exposed slopes and other alterations in EUC SPA As no significant Impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less thansignficant Plan area or the SSA would not detract from [he measures are required. prevailing aesthetic character of the site or surrounding area. Grading associated with off-site roads under Grading Option 2 would be temporary Eastern Urhan Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale geannghouse No. 20D7042074 Clly of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-10 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures Mitigation until the adjacent property is developed with planned uses and ultimate grades. Thus, landform alteration impacts would be less-than-signircant. Transportation: Threshold 1: Cause an increase in traffic which is substantial In relation to the existing traffic load and caoacity of the street svslem (i.e.. result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips the volume to capacity ratio on roads. or congestion at in[ersectionsl. Intersections: fD Potentially significant Impacts would occur at the A following intersections: ~ Horizon Year 2010 With Project: Horrzon Year 2010 Wth Protect: • Intersection #7 Mitigation Measure 4.3-1: • Intersection #B Intersection #7: Pdor to implementation of the first phase of the protect (with 1" EDU) at the intersection of Olympic ParkwaylBrandywine Avenue, the Applicant shall secure or construct the re-striping of the northbound approach to indude one thru lane and one shared thruiight lane and coordinate SB 1- 805 Ramps through Brandywine on Olympic Parkway. Horizon Year 2015 With Project: Mitigation Measure 4-3-2: • Intersection #8 Intersection #8: Prior to implementation of the first phase of the protect (with 1s' EDU) at the Intersection of Olympic Parkway! Heritage Road, the Applicant shall secure or construct the addition of a southbound right-turn overlap phase. Eastern Urhan Center Sectional Planning Mea EIR Slate Cleannghouse No.?.007041074 City of Ghula Visa May 2009 Page ES-11 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures Mitigatlon Horizon Year 2020 With Project: Horizon Year 2020 With Project. Less than significant with Intersection #19 Mitigation Measure 4.3-3: mitigation. • Intersection #19: Prior to implementation of the third phase of the project (3,070 proposed proect EDU's) at the intersection of Main StreetlHeritage Road, the Applicant shall secure or construct the addition of dual northbound and dual eastbound right-turn lanes. Horizon Year 2030 With Project: Horizon Year 2030 With Project: • Intersection #1 Mitigation Measure 4.3x1: • Intersection #7 cfl Intersection #15 ~ Intersection #16 J • Intersection#19 • Intersection #21 Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Mea EIR Stele Clearinghouse No. 2 00704 7 0 74 Intersection #1: Prior to implementation of the final phase of the project (5,270 proposed project EDU's) at the intersection of Telegraph Canyon Road/Hedtaga Road, the Applicant shall secure or construct the addition of an exclusive westbound right- turn lane and widening of the north leg to provide three thin lanes. Mitigatlon Measure 4.3-5 Intersection #15: Prior to Implementation of tha trial phase of the project (at 5,270 proposed project EDU's) at the intersection of Birch RoadlLa Media Road, the Applicant shall severe or construct the conversion of a westbound thru lane into a shared westbound thru/right-tum lane. Mitigation Measure 4.3~: ' Intersection #16: Prior to implementation of the foal phase of the project (at 5,270 proposed project EDU's) at the intersection of - Birch Road/Magdalena Avenue, the Applicant shall secure or construct the addition of an exclusive eastbound dght-turn lane. City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-12 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mitigation Measure 4.3.7: cc I a N Roadway Seoments: If the SR-125/Otay River Valley interchange is not consUucted, the Hunte Parkway segment between SR-125 and Street A would operate over capacity under Year 2030 with Proiect conditions. All other road segments would operate at acceptable levels of service because Intersections along the road segments would operate at acceptable levels of service. Mitigation Measure 4.3-g: Intersection #19: Pdor to implementation of the final phase of the project (at 5,270 proposed project EDU's) at the intersection of Main StreeUHeritage Road, the Applicant shall secure or construct the addition of a dual northbound and a dual eastbound right-turn lanes and the addition of a dual southbound right-tum ovedap phase. Mitigation Measure 4.3-8: Intersection #21: Prior to implementation of the final phase of the protect (at 5,270 proposed project EDU's) at the Intersection of Rock Mountain Road/Magdalena Avenue, the Applicant shall secure or construct the addition of a dual southbound left-turn lane and a dual northbound dght-turn lane. Hunte Parkway (SR-125 to Street A): Prior to 5,270 EDU's and if SR-125 and the Otay Valley Road interchange is not constructed, the Applicant shall secure or construct two auxiliary lanes on this roadway segment as determined necessary by the City Engineer. Freeway Segments: No mitigation measures are available to reduce the protects Significant and unavoidable Potentially signifcant Impacts would occur In the significantcumulatlveimpactwithrespecttofreewaysegmenls. impact: following Horizon years: ~ NB Interstate 805 - Telegraph Canyon Road to Olympic Eastern Urhan Center Sectional Planning Area Slate Clearinghouse No. 2007641074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-13 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures Mitigation Year 2015 With Project: Parkway (202D and • SBlnterstate805-Telegraph Canyon Road 2030-Cumulative) to Olympic Parkway SB Interstate 805 - Year2020 With Project : Telegmph Canyon Road to Olympic • NB Interstate 805-Telegraph Canyon Road Parkway (2015, 2020, to Olympic Parkway and 2030 - Cumulativej • SB Interstate 805 -Telegraph Canyon Road to Olympic Parkway SB Interstate BO5 - to p r Year 2030 Build-Out With ProJecf: (2030 Main Street ce NB Interstate 805 -Telegraph Canyon Road Cumulative) I to Olympic Parkway A W SB Interstate 805- Telegraph Canyon Road to Olympic Parkway • SB Interstate 805 -Olympic Parkway to Main Street Project Boundary Intersections: Mltlgation Measure 4.3-10: Less than significant with Potentially significant impacts would occur in the Prior to completion of the entire project (8,035 proposed pmlect mitigation Year 2030 Build-Out With Proiect: EDU's), at the Hunte Parkway/Eas[Lake Parkway intersection, • Hunte Parkway and Eastlake Parkway the Applicant shall secure or construct aright-turn overlap phase for the eastbound, westbound, and northbound movements. • Hunte Parkway and Street A. Mitigation Measure 4.3-11: Upon connection of Street A to Hunte Parkway, the Applicant shall secure or construct the Hunte Parkway/ Street A intersection Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Gity of Chula Vista Slete Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 May 2009 Page ES-14 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures OtherTraffc Issues: Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation with a fourth eastbound through lane, a dual northbound left-turn lane, and a southbound right-turn overlap phase. Mitigation Measure 4.3-12: Less than significant with mitigation The project would have a potentially significant The Applicant, m cooperation with the City of Chula Vista, shall impact with respect to consistency with the PFFP monitor the necessary timing to construct the SR-125 and Rock thresholds. Mountain Road interchange to ensure that this improvement is constmcted poor to surpassing the PFFP threshold of 5,270 proposed project EDU's. Mitigation Measure 4.3-13: cD .A ~P GMOC Analysis Threshold 2: Exceed. either individually or cumulatively. a LOS standard established by the County CMP aaencv for desionated roads or hiahwavs. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Nea EIR Slate Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 The Applicant shall constructor enter into an agreement with the City of Chula Vista to construct and secure, m accordance with Section 18.16.220 of the Municipal Code, the required street improvements, including traffic signals, prior to the approval of the final map that contains the cumulative EDU Digger. Mitigation Measure 4.3-14: On-site streets and boundary intersections shall be constructed in accordance with the PFFP. Boundary intersections shall be constructed to their full-proposed build-out geometry when the connecting on-site links are constructed. All street improvement plans shall show project boundary Intersections to the satisiaction of the City Engineer. No mitigation measures are necessary. City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-15 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental-Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impacts on CMP roadway segments (both directions of Olympic Parkway between I-805 and Hunte Parkway) in both peak periods would operate at LOS C or D, with and without the proposed project. Thus, impacts with respect to CMP roadway segments would beless-than-significant. Threshold 3: Conflict with adopted policies, plans or programs supporting altemative Uansoortation (e.g. bus turnouts, bicycle racksl. Alternative Transportation The proposed project would be consistent with ~ General Plan and GDP policies regarding alternative I transportation. Significant Uaffc delays along BRT a routes due to stop controlled intersections could ~ occur. This is considered to be a potentially significant impact. Air Quality Threshold 1: Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air auality plan or General Plan olo icies• The EUC SPA Plan would conflict with SDAPCD's currently approved RAGS, which are based in part on the City's prior General Plan (adopted in 1992 and updated in 2001). Threshold 2: Violate any air auality standard or conVibute substantially to an existing or protected eir uality violation. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation No significant impacts have been ident~ed, and no mitigation Less than signifcant measures are required. Mitigation Measure 4.3-15: The Applicant shall install traffic signals in sheets with exclusive BRT transitways throughout the entire site so that future transit signal priority treatments can be used and signals can be interconnected. Less than signifcant with mitigation No feasible mitigation measures have been identified that would Significant and unavoidable reduce this impact to a less than significant level. impact with respect to inconsistency with SDAPCD's current 8405. City of Chula Vista Mav 2009 Page ES-16 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures m rn Impact Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Maximum construction-related regional emissions Mitigation Measure 4.4-1: Sign cant and unavoidable would exceed the daily significance thresholds for Prior to approval of any grading permits, the following Impact: The protect would PM,o, PMZS, CO, NOx and VOC- requirements shall be placed on all grading plans, and shall be exceed the signifcance Regional operation-related emissions at milestone Implemented during grading of each phase of the protect to thresholds for VOC, NOz, CO, PMte and PMz s during years (2010, 2015, 2020 and 2030) would exceed the minimize construction emissions: . the most intense daily significance thresholds for NOx, CO, VOC, PMto and PMZ but are not expected to exceed the S All unpaved construction areas shall be sprinkled with construction period and . , thresholds for SOx water or other acceptable dust control agents during site project operation. . grading or demolition activities at least twice daily; Localized CO hotspots analysis demonstrates a less Additional watering shall be applied during windy days or than-significant impact for all study intersections. until dust emissions are not visible; Trucks hauling dirt and debris shall be properly covered or maintain at least 12 inches of freeboard to reduce windblown dust and spills; • A 20 mile-per-hour speed limit on unpaved surfaces shalt be enforced; Dirt and debris spilled onto paved surfaces shall be swept up immediately to reduce re-suspension of particulate matter caused by vehicle movement; • On-site stockpiles of excavated material shall be covered or watered; • Approach routes to the site shall be cleaned daily of construction-related dirt; ~. Pave permanent roads as quickly as possible to minimize dust; Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Neo EIR City of Chula Vista Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 May 2009 Page ES-17 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation • Apply chemical stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of internal travel path within the construction sKe prior to public road entry; • Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior to vehicle entry on public roads; • Remove any visible track-out into traveled public streets within 30 minutes of occurrence; • Wet wash the construction access point at the end of each workday if any vehicle Vavel on unpaved surtaces has occurred; rD I J • Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent washout of silty material onto public roads; • Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units; All construction equipment shall be properly tuned and maintained in accordance with manufacturer's specifications. All equipment shall have catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment and infection liming retaM for diesel-powered equipment; • General contractors shall maintain and operate construction equipment so as to minimize exhaust emissions. During construction, tracks and vehicles in loading and unloading queues should turn their engines off when not in use to reduce vehicle emissions; and Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Ctty of Chula Vista Mav 2009 Page ES-18 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures I a tp Threshold 3: Result in a cumulatively considerable net Increase of any criteria pollutant for which the protect region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard. Project emissions would exceed thresholds for PMto. No mitigation measures are available to reduce cumulative PMZS, and, as the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB) is emissions during praject operation. currently classified as non-attainment far these emissions, emission levels would be significant. Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation • Electricity from power poles rather than temporary diesel- or gasoline-powered generators shall be used to the extent feasible. Signif cant and unavoidable: No feasible mkigation exists to reduce VOC, NO„ CO, PMto and PM2,5 to less than threshold levels during operation. Threshold 4: Expose sensitive receptors to substantial oollutant concentrations. Temporary fugitive dust emissions during mass grading would exceed the significance threshold. Impacts related to localized mobile-source CO and Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC) emissions during construction and operation would be less than sign cant. However, to ensure compliance with established TAC thresholds, a mitigation measure Is recommended. Mitigation Measure 4.4-1, above, shall be implemented to reduce dust emissions and other particulates during construction. Mitigation Measure 4.4.2: Pricr to approval of the building permit far any uses which are regulated for TAC emissions by the SDAPCD, the Applicant must demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building that the use complies with established critega (such as those established by SDAPCD Rule 1200). Significant and Unavoidable: No mitigation measures are available that would reduce temporary fugitive dust during construction, to less than significant levels. Protect trafFc can contribute to microscale carbon monoxide "hot spots;' however, project-generated traffic would have a negligible effect on projected 1- hour and 8 hour CO concentrations at respective Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stele Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City o/ Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-19 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures cD I co intersection locations. The proposed project would not cause any new or exacerbate any existing CO hotspots. Thus, impacts related to localized mobile- source CO emissions would be less than signifcant. Toxic Air Contaminants (TAC) emissions related to diesel particulate emissions during construction would be temporary by nature and would not result in significant impacts with respect to long-term "Individual Cancer Risk." Therefore, project-related toxic emission impacts during construction would be less than significant. As the proposed development is predominantly residential and commercial, it is not expected to introduce new substantial stationary sources of TAC emissions during operation. The project may expose new residential and other sensitive-receptor uses to off-site (non-project) TACs associated with mobile sources (traffic on SR 125). The project's health risk assessment (HRA), based on a 9-year exposure duration, estimated that the cancer incidence risk associated with siting residentialuses in the vicinity of the highway would be below 10 in one million, and, when added to the overall background risk from regional emissions, would result in total risk within or near the range of existing background risk m the area. With regard to the future school site, an HRA to address a potential future elementary school will be performed under future separate environmental Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Nee EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mitigation Measure 4.4J: Prior to design review approval for any development that includes sensitive uses within 500 feet of the centerline of SR-125, such as residential, schools, day care facilities and parks, the Applicant shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services consistency with any city, State or federal standard, regarding airborne cancer risks from mobile emissions from the highway, in place at the time. The Applicant may use data from the health risk assessment conducted for this EIR to determine compliance with a new standard. If inconsistent with the standards, site-specific design measures shall be implemented, to the satisfaction of the Director of Development Services, to reduce the potential Impact to meet the adopted standards. City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-20 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures CO I rn 0 review by the school district. However, the general locafion of the proposed school site in the south- central portion of the protect site is consistent with CARB's siting recommendations regarding compatible adjacent and nearby land-uses. Threshold 5• Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Odor impacts associated with construction materials, As no significant impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than significant uses, and the off-site Otay Landfill would be less than measures are required. significant. Noise: Thresholds 1 and 4: Result in a substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the protect Expose persons to or generation of excessive groundborne vibration or aroundborne noise levels. Potential sources of noise related to the proposed project include temporary construction noise, traffic generated noise, noise from on-site land uses, including the elementary school, parks, and noise from commerdal uses. Future an- or off-site sensitive receptors within 250 feet on- (with the project site) or off-site (SSA, SCSL Improvement, or PCSI) grading activities or construction could experience short term nuisance noise levels during such activities. However, Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Nea EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Mitigation Measure 4.5-1: Prior to approval of any grading permit, the following measures shall be placed as notes on all grading plans, and shall be implemented during grading of each phase of the protect to minimize construction noise impacts: a) Grading and exterior construction activities within 250 feet of noise sensitive uses shall be prohibited Monday through Friday from 10:00 P.M. to 7:00 A.M., and from 10:00 P.M. to 8:00 A. M. on Saturdays and Sundays, Less than significant with mitigation City or Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-21 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation compliance with the City's Municipal code would in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Municipal reduce this impact to below a level of significance. Code Section 17.24.OSO.J. Exposure to ground-borne vibration would be less b) Noise-generating equipment operated at the project site than significant. shall be equipped with effective noise control devices, Noise impacts associated with the fire station I.e., mufflers, lagging, and/or motor enclosures. All emergency generator would be potentially significant. equipment shall be properly maintained to assure that no additional noise, due to worn or improperly maintained parts, would be generated. c) ConsWction track routes and equipment shall, to the extent feasible, avoid residential areas and roadways adjacent to noise sensitive receptors. cD G7 J Mitigakion Measure 4.5-4 Concurrent with the first submittal of construction plans for the fre station, a noise study shall be prepared to ensure that appropriate noise attenuation measures are Implemented capable of reducing the eMerior generator noise at the property lines consistent with Table III of Chapter 19.68 of the Municipal Code. Thresholds 2 and 3: Expose persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards established in the Chula Vista General Plan or noise ordinance or applicable standards of other agencies; and result in a substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels In the oroiect vicinity above levels existino without the oroiect. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City or Chula vista May 2009 Page ES-22 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Impact Mitigation Measures Significance after Mltlgation An increase of 4.1 and 5.4 dBA CNEL along the Mltlgation Measure 4.5-2(a): Less than significant with highest traveled roadway segments of Birch Road mitigation would exceed the significance threshold, Project- prior to approval of design review pennils for residential uses on related traffic would be below the 3,0 dBA lots directly adjacent to a proposed park site or the future EUC significance threshold and less than audible. elementary school site, a detailed acoustical analysis report shall be prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant to ensure that On-site noise sensitive uses would be exposed to interior noise levels due to exterior sources will be at or below noise levels that exceed the Citys exterior noise 45 CNEL. Building plans will be available during design review standard of 65 CNEL for residential development and and will permit the accurate calculation of building acoustical other noise sensitive uses. evaluation Including wall structures sound transmission loss for Noise impacts due to on-site stationary sources such habitable rooms. For these lots, ii may be necessary for the as roof-top HVAC egwpment would be signifcant. windows to be able to remain closed to ensure that Interior noise ~ levels meet the interior standard of 45 CNEL. Consequently the Outdoor noise generated by schools and parks, design for these units may need to include mechanical ventilation N Including sports activities, is considered to have ro or air conditioning systems to provide a habRable Interior potentially significant impact on adjacent sensitive environment with the windows closed based on the results of the uses. detailed interior acoustical analysis. Mitigation Measure 4.5-2(b) As part of the review process for final EUC park designs, park site plans shall be reviewed by the City to ensure that hardcourt areas (basketball, tennis, etc.) and active play fields are located as far as feasible from existing or proposed residential uses with outdoor patios or gathering areas. The goal and performance standard for this measure is to avoid outdoor noise levels that exceed 65 CNEL for residential uses that include outdoor patios or common gathering areas that are located adjacent to park sites. This measure shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City prior to final approval of applicable park site plans. Eastern Urhan Center Sectional Planning lvea EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City or Chula Vista Mav 2009 Page ES-23 Executive Summary Table ES•1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mitigation Measure 4.5-2(c): co w The City shall consult with the Chula Vista Elementary School District prior to or during the environmental review process for the proposed elementary school to recommend that the school site is planned such that hard-court areas and active play felds are located as far as feasible from existing or proposed residential uses with outdoor patios or gathering areas. The goal and performance standard for this measure is to avoid outdoor noise levels that exceed 65 CNEL for residential uses with outdoor patios or common gathering areas that are located adjacent to a school site. Mitigation Measure 4.5-3: Prior to approval of design review permits for commercial and public buildings. the following shall be implemented: a) Air conditioning, cooling and ventilatlng equipment and any other noise-generating equipment shall be screened, shielded and/or sound buffered from surrounding streets and land uses. An acoustical analysis shall be performed ' by a qualified acoustical consultant to verity the specifc details of this mitigation measure Including; geometrical dimensions and construction materials. b) Loading docks and trash collection areas shall properly be screened or enclosed and shall riot be oriented toward adiacent sensitive uses. Eastern Urban Center 5¢ctlonal PWnning Area EIR Sfaie Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 l:Ily of Gnala VI6[a May 2009 Page ES-24 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mitigation Measure 4.5-5 Prior to approval of design review permits for sensitive uses, such as residential use, libraries, daycare facilities, neighborhood parks and playgrounds, planned tar areas forecasted to exceed an eMerior noise level oT 65 CNEL (based on Table 4.5-7 of the EIR), the following shall occur: cD I .P a) An acoustical analysis shall be performed for residential structures to ensure that interior noise levels due to exterior sources will be at or below 45 CNEL. Outdoor use areas such as terraces and balconies sFrall not be encouraged for residential structures that front motor roadways, such as SR-125, Birch Road, Eastlake Parkway, and Hunte Parkway. For these residential use areas, it may be necessary fot the windows to be able to remain closed to ensure that Interior noise levels meet the interior design standard of 45 CNEL. Consequently the design for these units may need to include mechanical ventilation or air wnditioning systems to provide a habitable interior environment with the wmdows closed based on the results of the Interior acoustical analysis. b) To reduce exterior noise levels to 65 CNEL or lower at outdoor sensitive uses (i.e., residential courtyards, parks, and passive recreation areas), a combination, of sound barrier walls, earthen berms, and landscaping shall be designed and implemented by a qualified acoustical consultant. Alternatively, outdoor uses shall be located behind buildings (not facing traffic corridors) in a manner that shields outdoor sensitive uses from roadway noise Eastern llrhan Center a¢ctional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 any ~, ..,,,.,a . ~„A May 2009 Page ES-25 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitlgation Measures Mitigation and reduces the exterior noise level to 65 CNEL or below. Mitlgation Measure 4.5~: cc Athletic fields if placed in development areas where noise from traffic exceeds or is forecasted to exceed 70 dBA CNEL (based on Table 4.5-7 of the EIR), shall incorporate the following: a) Sound barrier walls or earthen berms of sufficient height and length shall be designed by a qualified acoustical consultant to reduce exterior noise levels io 70 CNEL or lower, or b) Passive recreation areas, such as picnic tables, shall be located away from the roadway as far as possible. Mitigation Measure 4.5.7: The applicant may, at any time during implementation of the proposed protect, submit a revised noise study prepared by a qualified acoustical consultant that takes into consideration site grading based on final grading plans and locations of intervening structures to establish new noise contours on the site. The noise study shall be approved by the City, and may be used to implement the noise mitigation measures of this section. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City or May 2009 Page ES-26 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Threshold 5: Be inconsistent with General Plan GDP or other ohiectives and policies regarding noise thereby resulting in a significant physical impact. The protect would be consistent with General Plan Environmental Element policies that pertain to noise. Cultural Resources: Thresholds 1 and 2: Cause a substantial adverse change m the significance of a historical resource as ~p defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5: Cause a substantial adverse chanoe in the signifcance of an rs archaeological resource as defined in CEQA °~ Guidelines Secton 15064,5. The proposed project would not result in a significant impact on known archaeological resources, but could result m significant impacts to archaeological resources that maybe uncovered during clearing and grading. (Note Mitigation Measure 4.6-3 has been stricken from this summary table because there is no Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation As no significant impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than significant measures are required. Mitigation Measure 4.6-1: Less than significant with mitigation Mitigation Measure 4.6-3 Eastern Urhan Center Sectional Planning Meg EIR State Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 Prior to issuance of land development permits, including clearing or grubbing and grading permits, the applicant shall provide writteri confirmation and incorporate Into grading plans, to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator, that a orinclpal investigator (PIl as listed by the Secretary of the Interior (36 CFR 611 has been retained in an oversight capacity to ensure that an archaeological monitory will be present during all cutting of previously undisturbed soil. If these cutting activities occur in more than one location multiple monitors shall be provided to monitor these areas as determined necessary by the P.I. City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-27 Executive Summary Table ES•1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mitigation Measure 4.6-2: cc I J During the initial grading of previously undisturbed soils within the EUC SPA Plan area, limits of grading or site preparation for either Grading Options 1 or 2, and SCSL Improvement Area, prehistoric and historic resources may be encountered. In the event that the monitor identifies a potentially significant site, the archaeological monitor shall secure the discovery site from Turther impacts by delineating the site with staking and flagging, and by diverting grading equipment away from [he archaeological site. Followmg notification to the City, the archaeological monitor shall conduct investigations as necessary to determine if the discovery Is significant under the criteria listed in CEQA and the environmental guidelines of the City. If the discovery is determined to be not significant, grading operations may resume and the archaeological monitor shall summarize the findings in a letter report to the City following the completion of mass grading activities. The letter report shall describe the results of the on-site archaeological monitoring, each archaeological site observed, the scope of testing conducted, results of laboratory analysis (if applicable), and conclusions. The letter report shall be completed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator prior to release of orading bonds. Any artifacts recovered during the evaluation shall be curated at a curation facility approved by the City. For those prehistonc/histonc resources that are determined to be significant, alternate means of achieving mitigation shall be pursued. In general, these forms of mitigation include: 1) site avoidance by preservation of the site in a natural state in open Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Geannghouse IJO. 2007041074 Clly of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-28 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures Mitigation space or In open space easements, 2) site avoidance by preservation through capping the site and placing landscaping on top of the fill, 3) data recovery through Implementation of an excavation and analysis program, or 4) a combination of one or more of the above measures. Procedures for implementing the alternative forms of mitigation described herein are further detailed in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted as part of the Otay Ranch General Development Program EIR, EIR 90-01. For those sites that are found to be significant resources and for which avoidance and preservation is not feasible or appropriate, the Applicant shall prepare a Data Recovery Plan. co The plan will, at a minimum, include the following: 1) a I statement of why data recovery is appropriate as a mitigating ~ measure, 2) a research plan that explicitly provides the research questions that can reasonably be expected to be addressed by excavation and analysis of the site, 3) a statement of the types and kinds of data that can reasonably be expected to exist at the site and how these data will be used to answer important research questions, 4) a step-by-step discussion of feld and laboratory methods to be employed, and 5) provisions for curation and storage of the artifacts. notes, and photographs will be stated. In cases involving historic resources; however, archival research and historical documentation shall be used to augment field-testing programs. . Grading operations within the affected area may resume once the site has been fully evaluated and mitigated to the satisfaction of ' the Environmental Review Coordinator. All signficant artifacts Eastern Urhan Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vlsta May 2009 Page ES-29 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation collected during the implementation of the Data Recovery Plan shall be curated at a facility approved by the City. (Note: This SummarvTable does not include Mitioation Measure 4.6-31. Mitigation Measure 4.6-4: rD I cD Threshold 3' Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unlaue aeoloaic feature. Geological formations underlying the EUC SPA Plan area and off-site Improvement areas have a high sensitivity for paleontological resources. Therefore, on-site grading and off-site site preparation with either grading option as well as off-site excavation associated with the SCSL Improvement Area have Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Following the completion of mass grading operations, the Applicant shall prepare a plan that addresses the temporary onsite presentation and interpretation of the results of the archaeclogical studies for the proposed project. This could be accomplished through exhibition within a future community center, civic building and/or multi-purpose building. This exhibition will only be for temporary suratiendisolav of those materials being actively used for interpretation and display, and that permanent curation of artifacts and data will be at a regional repository that meets the standards of the Stale Historical Resource Commission's Guidelines for the curation of Archaeolocica/ Co//ecfions dated Mav 7. 1993wheR-eae-is~ established. All significant artifacts collected during the implementation of the Data Recovery Plan shall be permanently curated at a facility approved by the City. Mitigation Measure 4.6.6: Prior to the Issuance of grading permits for the EUC SPA Plan Area, limits of grading for either Grading Options 1 or 2, and the SCSL Improvement Area, the Applicant shall confirm to the City that a qualifed paleontologist has been retained to carry Less than stgnifcant with mtigation City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES30 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures Mitigation the potential to result In significant impacts to out an appropriate mitigation program. (A qualified paleontological resources. - No impact to paleontologist is defined as an Individual with an M.S. or Ph.D. paleontological resources is anticipated in the PCSI in paleontology or geology who is familiar with paleontological Area due to the fact that the site has been previously procedures and techniques). A pre-grade meeting shall be disturbed by construction of the Poggi Canyon sewer. held among the paleontologist and the grading and excavation contractors. Mitigation Measure 4.6.7: m I rn O A paleontological monitor shall be onsite at all times during the original cutting of previously undisturbed sediments of highly sensitive geologic formations (i.e., San Diego, Otay, and Sweetwater formations) to inspect cuts for contained fossils. (A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials.) The paleontological monitor shall work under the direction of a qualified paleontologist. The monitor shall be onsite on at least a half-time basis during the original cutting of previously undisturbed sediments of moderately sensitive geologic formations (i.e., unnamed river terrace deposits and the Mission Valley Formation) to inspect cuts for contained fossils. a) The monitor shall be onsite on at least a quader-time basis during the original cutting of previously undisturbed sediments of low sensitivity geologic formations (i.e., Lindavista Formation and Santiago Peak Volcanics Imetasedimentary portion only) to inspect cuts for contained fossils. He or she shall periodically (every several weeks) inspect original cuts Eastern Urban Center Seclicnel Planting Area FJR Slate Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 May 2009 Page ES-31 Executive Table ES•7 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures rb I rn Eastern Urban Cenler Sectional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation in deposits with an unknown resource sensitivity (i.e., Quaternary alluvium). b) In the event that fossils are discovered in unknown, low, or moderately sensitive formations, the Applicant shall increase the per-day field monitoring lime. Conversely, if fossils are not discovered, the monitoring, at the discretion of the Planning Department, shall be reduced. A paleontological monitor is not needed during grading of rocks with no resource sensitivity (i.e., Santiago Peak Volcanics, metavolcanic portion). Mitigation Measure 4.6-6: When fossils are discovered, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall recover them. In most cases, this fossil salvage can be completed in a short period of time. However, some fossil specimens (such as a complete whale skeleton) may require an exiended salvage time. In these Instances, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall be allowed to temporarily direct, divert, or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. Because of the potential for the recovery of small fossil remains such as isolated mammal teeth, it may be necessary in certain instances and at the discretion of the paleontological monitor to set up ascreen-washing operation on the site. Mitigation Measure 4.6-9: Prepared fossils along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps shall be deposited in a scientific mslitution city May 2009 Page ES32 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures ca I rn N Threshold 4• Disturb anv human remains including those interred outside of formal cemeledes. On-site grading and off-site site preparation with either gmding option as well as off-site construction associated with the SCSL Improvement Area have the potential to result in significant impacts to human remams. No impact to human remains Is antidpated in the PCSI Area due to the fact that the site Fias been previously disturbed by construction of the Poggi Canyon Sewer. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Slate Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation with paleontological collections such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. A final summary report shall be completed. This report shall include discussions of the methods used, stratigraphy exposed, fossils collected, and significance of recovered fossils. Mitigation Measure 4.65: Less than signifcant with If human remains are discovered dudng grading or site mitigation preparation activities within the EUC SPA Plan area, Itmits of grading for either Grading Options 1 or 2 and the SCSL Improvement Area, the archaeological monitor shall secure the discovery site from any further disturbance. State Health and Safety Code Section 7050.5 mquires that no further disturbance shall occur until the San Diego County Coroner has made the necessary findings as to the origin and disposition of the remains pursuant to PRC Section 5097.98. It the remains are determined to be of Native American descent, the coroner has 24 hours to notify the Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC). The NAHC~will [hen identify the person(s) thought to be the Mosi Likely Descendent (MLD) of the deceased Native American. The MLD will assist the Ciiy in determining what course of action shall 6e taken to deal with the remains. Grading operations within the affected area may resume once the site has been fully,evaluated and mitigated to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator. The Archaeological Monitor shall summarize the findings in a letter report to the City following the completion of mass grading activities. May 2069 Page ES-33 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Threshold 5: Be Inconsistent with General Plan cultuml and paleontological policies thereby resulting In a signifcant physical impact. The project and off-site construction sues would be consistent with the General Plan's cultural resources policies and would be less than significant with respect to this threshold. Biological Resources Threshold 1: A substantial adverse effect. either directly or through habitat modifications. on any species identifed as a candidate sensitive or special ~D status species In local or regional plans policies or ~ regulations or by the California Department of Fish W and Game or U.S. Wildlife Service. Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation As no significant impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than significant measures are required. The protect would have the following substantial Mitigation Measure 4.7-1: Less than sign cant with adverse effect, both directly and through habitat mitigation modifications, on sensitive wildlife species. Prior to issuance of any land development permits, including I d bbin or radio ermits for the EUC project site • Ground nesting raptor species, Including the northern harrier and burrowing owl, would be impacted within the EUC SPA Plan and SSA. The northern hamer, burrowing owl, white- tailed kite, and San Diego black-tailed jackrabbit would be impacted by the lass of 159.2 acres of agricultural lands utilized as foraging habitat. c Baring an gru g g g p and the SSA, the applicant shall retain aCity-approved biologist to conduct focused surveys for the northern harrier to determine the presence or absence of this species within 900 feet of the construction area, ii constmction will occur during the breeding season (January 15 through July 31) (excluding areas west of SR-125). The pre-construction survey must be conducted within 10 calendar days poor to the start of constuction, the results of which must ba submitted to the Clty for review and approval. If alive nests are detected by the City-approved biologist, -a biological monitor should be on-site during construction to Eastern Urban Center aectienal Planning Area EIR State Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 City of Ghula Vista May 2009 Page ES-34 Executive Summary Tahle ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures cD 1 rn Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation The coastal California gnalcatcher would be minimize construction impacts and ensure that no nests are temporadly impacted within the SCSL removed or disturbed until all young have fledged. Improvement Area. The project may have significant indirect effects on the MSCP Preserve associated with construction noise avian breeding seasons, water quality, introduction of non-native exotic plant species following construction, and human intrusion. Modifications associated with the SCSL would temporary impact 0.16 acre of Diegan coastal sage scrub. Mrtlgatron Measure 4.7-2: Prior to issuance of any land development permits (including cleenng and grabbing or grading permits) for the EUC project site and the SSA, the applicant shall retain aCity-approved biologist to conduct focused pre-construction surveys for burrowing owls. The surveys shall be performed no earlier than 30 days prior to the commencement of any clearing, grubbing, or grading activities. If occupied burrows are detected, the CRy-approved biologist shall prepare a passive relocation mitigation plan subject to the review and approval by the Wiidlite Agencies and City includinc env subsequent burrowing owl relocation plans to avoid impacts from construction-related activities. Mitigation Measure 4.7~: For any work proposed to be initiated hetween February 15 and August 15, prior to issuance of any land development permits, including clearing, grubbing, grading, and construction permits associated with improvements to the off-site SCSL, a pre- construction survey for the coastal California gnatcatcher must be performed in order to reaffirm the presence and extent of occupied habitat. The pre-construction survey area for the coastal California gnalcatcher shall encompass all habitat within the protect work zone as well as a 300-foot buffer extending from the study area as delineated on Figure 5 of the HELIX biological technical report. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning yvea EIR Staie Cleannyhouse No. 2007041074 ~,.y ~, ..,,~,o .,,.a May 2009 Page ES-35 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigafion Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation CO tT The pre-construction survey must be performed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Goordinator (ERC) by a qualified biologist familiar with the Citys MSCP Subarea Plan. The results of the pre-construction survey must be submitted in a report to the ERC for review and approval prior to the issuance of any land development permits and poor to initiating any construction activities. If the coastal California gnatcatcher is detected, a minimum 300-foot buffer delineated by orange biological fencing shall be established around the detected species [o ensure that no work shall occur within the occupied habitat from Febmary 15 through August 15 and on-site noise reduction techniques shall be incorporated, as appropriate. The ERC shall have the discretion to modify the buffer width depending on site-specific conditions. If the results of the pre-construction survey determine that the survey area Is unoccupied, the work may commence at the discretion of the ERC following the review and approval of the pre-construction report. Mitigation Measure 4.7.5: Prior to issuance of land development permits, including clearing, grubbing, grading and consWction permits for the off-site SCSL protect, the applicant shall provide a revegetation plan for 0.16 acre of Diegan coastal sage scrub to the satisfaction of the Citys Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC). The revegetation plan must be prepared by a qualified City-approved biologist familiar with the Citys MSCP Subarea Plan and must include, but not be limited to, an implementation plan; appropriate seed mixtures and planting method; irrigation method; quantitative and qualitative success criteria; maintenance, monitoring, and reporting program; estimated completion time; and contingency measures. The Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Nee EIR City of Chula Vlata Slate Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 May 2009 Page ES-36 Executive Tabte ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitioation Measures .Mitigation applicant shall also be required to implement the revegetation plan sublect to the oversight and approval of the ERC. Mitigation Measure 4.7-6: cD rn rn Prior to issuance of land development permits, including clearing or grubbing and grading and/or construction permits for the off- site SCSL, the applicant shall insfall fencing in accordance with CvMC 17.35.030. Prominently colored, well-installed fencing and signage shall be in place wherever the limits of grading are adjacent to sensitive vegetation communities or other biological resources, as identified by the qualifed monitoring biologist. Fencing shall remain in place during all construction activities. All temporary fencing shall be shown on grading plans for the off-site SCSL, Prior to release of grading and/or improvement bonds, a qualifed biologist shall provide evidence that work was conducted as authorized under the approved land development permit and associated plans. Mitigation Measure 4.7.7: A biological monitor shall attend all pre-construction meetings and be present during the removal of any vegetation associated with the modifcations to the off-site SCSL. Prior to issuance of land development permits, including clearing or grubbing and grading and/or construction permits for the SCSL project, the applicant shall provided written confirmation that aCity-approved biological monitor has been retained and shall 6e on-site during clearing, gnibbing, and/or grading activities to ensure that the approved limits of disturbance are not exceeded and provide oeriodic monitorno of the Impact area includino but not limited to trenches stockpiles storage areas and fencine. The biological monitor shall also be on-sfte during the placement and removal of Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chute Vista May 2009 Page ES-37 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation the proposed High Line to ensure that removal or damaging of native vegetation does not occur. The biological monitor shall be authorized to halt all associated project activities that may be in violation of the City`s MSCP Subarea Plan. Mitigation Measure 4.7-8: fO Threshold 2~ A substantial adverse effect on any I ~ riparian habitat or other sensitive natural community ~+ Identified in local or regional plans policies. regulations or by the California Department bf Fish and Game or U. S. Fish and Wildlife Service: Careless placement of the temporary high line facility in the off-site SCSL area could impact sensitive biological resources. Also, the proposed jack and bore process In the off-site SCSL area has the potential to cause "frac-out". These impacts would be considered significant. Prior to issuance of land development permits, and prior to construction activities occurring in areas containing sensitive biological resources within the off-site SCSL, all workers shall be educated by aCity-approved biologist to recognize and avoid those areas which have been marked as sensitive biological resources. See Mitigation Measures 4.7-7 and 4.7-8, above. In addition the Less than significant with following mitigation measure is required: mitigation Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 l:+[y or cnwa vista Mav 2009 Page ES-38 Mitigation Measure 4.7-12: Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation the federal Clean Water Act Section 16D0 of the California Department of Fish and Game Code and Porter Cologne Water Quality Act have been obtained. In addition. P-aerorior to issuance of any grading permits associated with the off-site SCSL, the Applicant shall prepare a Frac-Ou[ Contingency Plan (FCP) shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the City's ERC. The FCP shall establish operational procedures and responsibilities for the prevention, containment, notification, and clean-up of the inadvertent release of drilling fluid (frao-out) that could potentially occur with the proposed directional drilling under Salt Creek. Issues addressed in the plan shall include but not be limited to: co rn W • Spoil stockpile management; • Hazardous materials storage and spill cleanup; • Site•specific erosion and sediment control; • Procedures for timely detection of frac-outs; and Any other BMPs to ensure protection of sensitive biological resources in the adjacent Preserve areas and minimize water quality impacts as described m the SWPPP If a frac-out event were to oaur during fhe boring and tacking process, work should cease immediately, and measures should be taken to contain the frac-gut slurry in as small an area as possible. The biological monitor shall contact the City and appropriate resource agencies within 24 hours of the frac-out and provide an initial assessment of impacts to native vegetation. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR City of Chuia Vista Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007047074 MaY 2009 Page ES-39 Executive Summary cc rn cc Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Mitigation Measures Impact Signlflcance after Mitigation _ Mitigation for the impacts will be coordinated in conjunction with the City and resource agencies. Threshold 3: A substantial adverse effect on Federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including but not limited to marsh vernal pool coastal. etc.) through direct removal filing. hydrological interruption. or other means. No impacts to wetlands would occur within the EUC See Mitigation Measure 4.7-12, above. The fallowing mitigation Less than significant with SPA Plan, SCSL, or PCSI areas. However, measures also apply: mitigation potentially significant Indirect impacts may occur to the jurisdictional feature downstream of the SSA due Mitigation Measure 4.7:7: to changes in surface runoff. Prior to issuance of land development permits, including clearing or grubbing and grading and/or construction permits for the EUC project site (including the off-site SSA) or SCSL; the applicant shall provide written confirmation that Mitigation Measure 4.9.2 (Hydrology and Drainage), requiring a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit (NPDES) and Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), has been fulfilled to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Mitigation Measure 4.7-10: Prior to issuance of land development permits, including clearing or grubbing and grading and/or conshuction permits for the off- sReSSA, the Applicant shall install temporary orange biological fencing along the limits of grading in areas adjacent to sensitive biological resources to avoid impacts on such resources. All fencing, including temporary fencng, shall be shown on the Eastern Urban Center sectional Planning Area EIR Chy of Chub Vista Slate Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 MaV 2009 Page ES-40 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mitigation Monitor shall verify that biological fencing is properly installed and maintained. Mitigation Measure 4.7-11: Threshold 4: Interfere substantially with the ~ movement of any native resident or migratory fish or I wildlife soecies or with established native resident or ~.I p mieratorv wildlife corridors, or Impede the use of native wildlife nurseN sites. Impacts to the California gnatcatcher could result if construction activities occur within occupied habitat dunng the breeding season for this species (February t 5 and August 15). The project would impact nesting bird species protected by the MBTA and Califorrna Fish and Game Code occurring within the EUC SPA Plan, SCSL Improvement Area, and SSA. To protect the tunsdictional feature downstream of the off-site SSA, aCity-qualifed biologist shall attend apre-construction meeting prior to initiating grading on the off-site SSA. The biologist shall be on-site to monitor all vegetation clearing and periodically thereafter to ensure implementation of appropriate resource protection measures. Mitigation Measure A.7-13: Less than significant with To avoid eny direct impacts to raptors and/or any migratory birds, mitigation . removal of habitat that supports active nests on the proposed area of disturbance (within the EUG project site, SCSL, or SSA) should occur outside of the breeding season for these species (January 15 tc August 31). Ii removal of habitat on the proposed area of disturbance (within fhe EUC project site, SCSL, or SSA) must occur during the breeding season,ihe applicant shall retain a City-approved biologist to conduct apre-construction survey to determine the presence or absence of nesting birds on the proposed area of disturbance. The pre-construction survey must be conducted within 10 calendar days prior to the start of construction, the results of which must be submitted to the City for Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-41 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Threshold 5 and 6: Conflict with. anal policies or ordinances protecting biological resources such as a ~ tree preservation policy or ordinance Conflict with the I.I provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation Plan. Natural Community Conservation Plan. or other approved local reaional or State habitat conservation plan. The proposed protect would have an indirect, long- term, potentially significant impact related to biological resources management unless the Otay Ranch regional open space is preserved proportionally and concurrently with development Agricultural Resources: Thresholds 1 and 2 Convert Prime Farmland Unique Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the FMMP of the Califorrra Resources Aaencv to nonagricultural use' and/or Involves other chances in the existing environment which, due to Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation review and approval poor to initiating any constmction activities. If nesting birds are detected, a letter report or mitigation plan as deemed appropriate by the City, shall be prepared and include proposed measures to be implemented to ensure that disturbance of breeding activities is avoided. The report or mitigation plan shall be submitted to the City for review and approval and implemented to the satisfaction of the City. The City's Mitigation Monitor shall verify and approve that all measures identified in the report or mitigation plan are in place prior to and/or during construction. Mitigation Measure 4.7.3: Prior to recordation of each final map, the applicant shall convey land within the Otay Ranch RMP Preserve at a ratio oT 1.188 acres For each acre of development area, as defined in the RMP. Less than significant with mitigation Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Slate Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City of Ghula Vista Mav 2009 Page ES-42 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures cD I r N changes in the existing environment which, due to their location or nature could result in conversion of farmland to nonagricultural use• Conflict with existing zoning for agncultural use or a Williamson Act Significance after Mitigation Measures. Mitigation contract Impacts associated with the permanent removal of approximately 207 acres of designated Farmland of Local Importance are considered potentially signifcant. The implementation of Grading Option 1, which would transport and stockpile soils from the pro)ect site to the SSA, would further affect approximately 59 acres of adjacent Farmland of Local Importance (remainder of the EUC and a portion of Village Nine). Grading Option 2, which would transport and stockpile soils to the remainder of the EUC including the Hunte Parkway right-oi-way (approximately 28.5 acres) would similarly result in the loss of Farmland of Local Importance in this area. In addition, without implementation of the proposed Agricultural Plan, noise, odors, insects, rodents, and chemicals associated with interim agricultural operations on the site could create indirect, short- term, potentially significant impacts between the agricultural uses and urban uses. No impacts regarding the Williamson Act contract lands, or conflicts with existing zoning for an agncultural use would occur in the EUC SPA Plan area, the SSA, or the SCSL Improvement Area and PCSI area. :The construction of the SCSL Improvement and PCSI Mitigation Measure 4.8.1: The Agricultural Plan included in the EUC SPA Plan shall be implemented as development proceeds in the proposed EUC SPA Plan area. The following measures shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the City of Chula Vista's Development Services Director. • Prior io approval of each building permit, the Applicant shall ensure that a 200-foot fenced buffer shall be maintained between development and ongoing agricultural operations on the property; • In those areas where pesticides are to be applied, the farmland owner shall utilize vegetation to shield adjacent urban development (within 400 teat) from agriculture activities. If permitted interim agricultural uses require the use of pesticides, the farmland owner shall notify adjacent developed property owners of potential.' pesticide application a minimum of 10 days prior to application through advertisements in newspapers of general circulation. Limits shall be established as to the time of day and type of pesticide applications that may be used. Significant and unavoidable: Impact on interfacing agncultural and urban uses would be reduced to below signifcance. However, no mitigation measures are available to reduce the incremental and cumulative loss of Farmland of Local Importance to a less than significance level. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Nea EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2 00704 7 074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-43 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures m I w would have no impact with respect to agricultural activities. Threshold 3: Be inconsistent with General Plan agricultural resource policies thereby resulting in a significant physical impact. Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation The use of pesticides shall comply with federal, state, and local regulations. As the EUC SPA Plan includes an Agricultural Plan As no significant impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than significant that addresses the opportunity for limited measures are required. agricultural and related uses to occur as an Interim land use within the EUC SPA Plan area. Therefore the proposed project is consistent with applicable objectives and policies of the General Plan. Project construction would alter the quantity and composition of surface runoff through grading of site surfaces, construction of impeMOUS streets, building development, introduction of urban pollutants, and Irrigation for landscaped areas which are considered potentially significant impacts to water quality. Project operation would increase Mitigation Measure 4.9.1: Prior to issuance of each grading permit for the EUC'SPA Plan, the SSA. the Salt Creek Sewer Lateral Improvement, and the Poggi Canyon Sewer Improvement Area or any land development permit, including clearing and grading, the Project Applicant(s) shall submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) and obtain coverage under the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Less than signifcant with mitigation Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Slate Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City of Ghula Vista May 2009 Page ES-44 Hydrology and Water Quality: Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures J the amount of surface water runoff due to the introduction of impermeable surtaces and would increase urban pollutants in surface waler runoff. This is also considered to be a potentially significant water quality impact. In addition, the potential presence of DDT In on-site soils is considered to be a potentially signifcant Impact to surface water quality. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation System (NPDES) permit for Construction Activity from the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB). The permit requires development of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and Monitoring Plan that shall be submitted to the City Engineer and the Director of Public Works. The SWPPP shall be incorporated into the grading and drainage plans and shall provide for implementation of construction and postconstruction Best Management Practices (BMPs) on site to reduce the amount of sediments and pollutants in consVUCtion and postconstruction surface runoff before it is discharged into off-site storm water facilities. The BMPs shall indude measures to mitigate potentially sign~canl Indirect impacts to the Jurisdictional feature approximately 300 feet downstream of the off-site Soils Stockpiling Area. The grading plans shall note the condition requiring a SWPPP and Monitoring Plans. Mitigation Measure 4.9.2 Prior to issuance oT each grading permit, a detailed drainage system design study shall be prepared in accordance with the City of Chula Vista's standards and shall be reviewed and approved by the City Engineer. Mitigation Measure 4.93: Permanent treatment controls BMPs shall be Included' as part of the proposed project in accordance with Section 2c ofthe Cdy of Chula Vista SUSMP, the City of Chula Vista Development Storm Wafer Manual, 2006, and the final Water Quality Technical Report for McMillin Eastern Urban Center (WC1TR) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. City of Chula Vista May 2909 Page ES~5 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mitigation Measure 4.9.4: I J As development plans for individual parcels are prepared, parcel owners shall choose from the on-site storm water management measures included in the menu in Appendix I of the final Water Quality Technical Report for McMillin Eastern Urban Cen[er (WQTR) and submit a supplemental report to the WQTR to verity sizing to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. If an option other than what is shown on the menu is chosen by the parcel owner, a proiecl-specific WQTR shall be prepared for each parcel, referencing the final WQTR for information relevant to regional design concepts (e.g., downstream conditions of concern) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Mitigation Measure 4.9-5: Upon development, each land use shall be divided into Drainage Management Areas (DMA). This will include oat only streets wthin the parcel, but also buildings, parking lots or structures, and other areas. As each DMA would generally drain to an IMP, the specific design of these features, including their proximity to stmcfures and how runoff would be collected and discharged from them, shall be subject to approval by the Geotechnlcal Engineer for the proposed protect. This shall be evaluated on a lot by lot basis after rough grading is completed and prior to constructing any improvements or stmctures. All development within the proposed protect shall be subject to the City of Chula Vista's SUSMP at the time of grading permit issuance. Eas[em Urban Center Sectional Planning Mea Eln Slate Geannghouse No. 2007041074 ary or coma vista MaY 2009 Page ES-46 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mitigation Measure 4.9.6: Should Grading Option 2 be Implemented, the interim condition above ground detention bash in the southern drainage shall be reassessed and approved by the City Engineer when the pads within the triangular wedge are developed in order to detain for the ultimate condition. Mitigation Measure R.9-7: cD I J rn In the preparation of all site plans, the Applicant(s) shall implement Low Impact Development Best Management Preclices (LID BMPs), unless underground treatment and detention facllities such as sand fliers, underground storage and infiltration facilities, etc., are proposed. The Applicant(s) shall monitor and mitigate any erosion in downstream locations that may occur as a result of on-site development. Mitigation Measure 4.9-8: The Applicant(s) shall comply with the City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual Limitation of Grading requirements, which limit disturbed soil area to 100 acres, unless expansion of a disturbed area is specifically approved by the Director of Public Works. With any phasing resulting from this limitation, if required, the Applicant shall provide erosion and sediment control BMPs in areas that may not be completed, before grading of additional area begins. Mitigation Measure 4.9-9: As a result of the NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. 89-2007- 0001, and phasing of the EUC SPA Plan development, the Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Nea EIR Slate Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 cry or cnma wsta May 2999 Page ES-47 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mltigallon Measures Mitigation Applicant(s) shall comply with the Ci[ys Interim Hydromodif cation Criteria or Hydrograph Modification Management Plan, as applicable, addressed regionally at the EUC SPA Plan level concurrent with Grading and Improvement Plans for major sVeets. Mitigation Measure 4.9-10: m I J Eastern Urhan Center Secllonal Planning Area EIR Stale Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 Prior to the issuance of any building permit resulting In an increase in permanent impermeable area, each Applicant wanting to develop within the EUC SPA Plan Is required to develop and implement postconsVUCtion SUSMP and BMPs in accordance with the most recent regulations at the time of Grading or Building Permit issuance. In particular, Applicants are required to comply with the requirements of the NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. R9-2007-0001, and the City of Chula Vista Development Storm Water Manual dated January 2008, or any re-issuances thereof. Specifically, Applicants shall incorporate in the proposed project design structural on-site design features to address Site Design and Treatment Control (BMPs) as well as LID and HMP requirements. Any of said requirements may be waived if the applicant demonstrates, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, that regional facilities exist to address such requirements. City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-48 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures cc J While grading at the proposed EUC SPA Plan could result in shifts in tha direction of groundwater flow on amicro-scale, the overall flow of groundwater would not change. The principal aqu'rfer, Otay River would ultimately receive the additional runoff to replenish groundwater in addition to the existing basin discharge. Therefore, no significant impacts to groundwater supply/quantity would occur. Filtering would occur during percolation and the groundwater quality Is currently poor; however, development of the protect could result In Increased exposure to urban pollutants that could affect groundwater quality. This is considered a potentially significant impact. In addition, the potential presence of DDT In on-site soils is considered to be a potentially significant impact to groundwater quality. Threshold 3' Substantially alter the exlstina drainage pattern of the site or area including throuoh the alteration of the course of a stream or river. in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site or Citv of Chula Vista Engineering Standards for storm water flows and volumes. The protect, which would involve the replacement of the permeable surfaces and exposed soils, would substantially change the amount of impervious surface area on the project site. Site- generated surface water runoff would be directed from the protect site to off-site drainage facilities. Nonetheless, with the project site entirely Eastern Urhan Center Sectional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation See Mitigation Measures 4.9-2 through 4.9-4, above. Less than significant with mitigation See Mitigation Measures 4.9-5 through 4.9-7, above. Less than significant with mitigaton. City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-49 Executive Summary Table ES-t Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures CO J CD Significance after impact Mitigation Measures Mitigation developed, paved, or landscaped, stormwater runoff could result in substantial off-site erosion to downstream facilities or flooding. These are considered to be potentially slgniflcant impacts. As implementation of the proposed project would result In the project site being converted to urban uses with minimal exposed soils areas that could be subject to erosion, on-site erosion Impacts are considered to be less-than-significant. hazard delineation map which would Impede or redirect flood flows. The proposed project, which would involve the replacement of the permeable surfaces and exposed soils, would substantially change the amount of impervious surface area on [he project site. Site-generated surface water runoff would be directed from the project site to off-site drainage facilities. With the site entirely developed, paved, or landscaped, a substantial increase in the rate or amount of water surface runoff could occur, resulting in flooding on- or off-site. This Is considered to be a potentially significant Impact. See Mitigation Measure 4.9-4, above. Less than significant with mitigation Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Cleannghouso No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-50 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures Mitigation Even though the project includes features to reduce the amount and rate of runoff, features are also prescribed as mitigation measures to assure implementation and facilitate monitoring through buildout of the project. As the off-site improvements do not Involve development of habitable structures or other permanent impermeable surfaces that would cause a permanent increase in surface water runoff or off- site Flooding, no signifcant Impacts would be associated with the improvements under this threshold. ca Threshold 5: Create or contribute runoff water, I which would exceed the capacity of existing or 00 o planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff. See Threshold 1, above, regarding water quality impacts. See Threshold 3, above, regarding decreased permeability. Regarding stormwater runoff, runoff would be directed from the protect site to off-site drainage facilities. While the existing drainage facilities serving the nonhern and central drainage basins would accommodate the stormwater, the existing downstream facilities serving the southern basin would not. Thus, Impacts to the storm water system serving the southern drainage basin are considered to be potentially significant. Even though the project proposes drainage facilities for the southern basin, a mitigation measure is included to address this Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning P.rea EIR City o(Chula Vista State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 May 2009 Page ES-51 Exeative Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance aker Measures - Mitigation potential impact to ensure implementation and facilitate monitoring through buildout of the project. Threshold 6: Be inconsistent with General Plan GDP or other objectives and policies regarding water quality thereby resulting in a signifcant physical impact. The project would be consistent with the General As no significant impacts have keen identified, no mitigation Less than significant Plan's Environmental Element policies that pertain measures are required. to protection of water quality. Geology and Soils: ~ Threshold 1: Expose people or structures to potential I substantial adverse effects. including the risk of loss. ~ tniurv or death involving rupture of a known J earthquake fault, strong seismic around shaking seismlcrelated ground failure, including liquefaction. and/or landslides. Due to the presence of potential liquefiable soils in the EUC SPA Plan area and SCSL Improvement Area, seismlo-related impacts regarding unstable soils are considered to be potentially significant. Also, grading activities associated with either of the two grading options in combination with future Irrigation and changes In drainage could result in potentially significant slope instabilities or landslides within the EUC SPA Plan area. The exposure of people and structures to severe ground shaking generated from potential earthquakes along active faults in the region would be less than significant Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Nea EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Mitigation Measure 4.10.1: Less than significant with Prior to the Issuance of each grading permit within the EUC SPA mitigation Plan area, the Applicant shall verify that the applicable recommendations in the Geotechnical Investigation prepared by Geotechnics Incorporated, dated March 1, 2007, and the Updated Seismic Design Parameters report prepared by Geotechnics Incorporated, dated December 15, 2008 for the Eas[em Urban Center have been incorporated into the project design and construction documents to the satisfaction of the City Engineer of the City of Chula Vista. CIty of Chula Vista Ivtav 2009 Page ES-52 Executive Summary co I W N Table ES-7 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures Mitigation since future development protects would be Mitigation Measure 4.10-2: constructed in accordance with the City's Grading Prior to the approval of grading permits for placement of soils Ordinance current seismic design specifications, within the off-site SSA, the Applicant shall ensure that the current UBC standards and other regulatory applicable recommendations in the Geotechnical requirements. Recornmendation for Proposed Import Soils Second Revision, Otay Ranch Parcel "C", dated July 10, 2007, and the Prefimrnary Geotechnical Investigation Parcel °C" Portion of Otay Ranch, dated August 30, 2006, both prepared by Pacific Soils Engineering, Inc., have been incorporated into the grading plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer of [he City of Ghula Vista. Mitigation Measure 4.10-3: Threshold 2: Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Compliance with applicable regulatory requirements and [he recommendations contained within applicable geotechnical reports would ensure that erosion and loss of topsoil would be less than significant during construction activities. However, heavy seepage and deep saturation . Prior to Issuance of the grading permit for the SCSL Improvement, the City shall ensure that the applicable recommendations in the Geotechrica/ Investigation for the Proposed Salt Creek Gravity Sewer Interceptor Project, Leighton 8 Associates, dated October 2000, have been incorporated into the protect to the satistaction of the City Engineer of the City of Chula Vista. See Mitigation Measures 4.10-1 through 4.10-3, above. Less than significant with mitigation Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Mea EIR Stale Cleanngrwuse No. 2007041074 City of ChuW Vista May 2009 Page ES-53 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Slgnlflcance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation resulting in surficial slope failures, soil erosion, and/or loss of topsoil is considered potentially significant. Threshold 3: Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable. or that would become unstable as a result of the protect. and potentially result in dn- or off-site landslide. lateral spreading, subsidence. liquefaction or collapse. The presence of loose compressible materials on the protect site, including residuum, colluvium, alluvium and the surface of the fill slope in the southeast ce portion of [he site, could became unstable as a result I of the proposed project. As a result, the potential for W land sliding, lateral spreading, liquefaction and/or collapse is considered to be potentially significant See Mitigation Measures 4.10-1 through 4.103, above. Less than significant with mitigation Threshold 4: Be located on expansive soil as defined in Table 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property. The predominately clayey sand and sandy clay materials within the Olay Formation, as well as the colluvium, alluvium, and residuum, have a moderate to high expansion potential. Development of stmdures on these soils could create substantial asks to life or property. This is considered a potentially significant impact. See Mitigation Measures 4.10-1 through 4.103, above. Less than significant with mitigation Eastern Urban Cen[er Sectional Planning Nea EIR State Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Viata Mav 2009 Page ES-54 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures co .A Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Threshold 5: Be inconsistent with General Plan aeotechnical policies thereby resullina In a sianificanl physical impact. The proposed project would be consistent with the As no signifcant Impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than significant General Plan policies that pertain to geology and measures are required. soils. emergency seMCes. The analysis of the EUC SPA Plan's construction impacts assumes the development of the proposed fre station, Construction impacts are analyzed in Sections 4.4, Air Quality; 4.5, Noise; 0..6. Cultural Resources; A.7; Biological Resources; 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality; and 4.10, Geology and Soils of the EIR. See construction mitigation measures under Air Quality; Noise; Cultural Resources; Biological Resources; Hydrology and Water Quality; and Geology and Soils, above. See construction significance levels under respective Air Quality, Noise, Cultural Resources, Cultural Resources, Biological Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Soils and Geology sections, above. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Slate Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-55 Fire Services: Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures co 1 Threshold 2: Reduce the ability of prooerN eauioped and staffed fire and medical units to respond to calls throughout the Citv within seven minutes in 80 percent of the cases. The anticipated increase in residential population of 7,696 people and the employment base of 3.4 million square feet of non-residential development would increase demand on fire and emergency medical services. The increase in demand would be significant if a fully operational and appropriately equipped and staffed fre station is not provided commensurate with the demand on fire and emergency medical services. Fire flow requirements for individual projects within the EUC could be significant depending upon the ultimate building height and structure type. Significance aker Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mitigation Measure 4.11.1-1: Pior to the approval of each building permit, the Applicant shall pay Public Facilities Development Improvement Fees (PFDIF) in accordance with the fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance and phasing approved in the PFFP_ Mitigation Measure 4.11.1-2: In order to determine the SPA Plan's increased demand on fire services and potential to exceed GMOC standards, the City of Chula Vista shall continue to monitor the Chula Vista Fire Department responses to emergency fire and medical calls and report the results to the GMOC on an annual basis. Mitigation Measure 4.11.13: Prior the approval of each building permit and to the satisfaction of the Ciry of Chula Vista Fire Marshall, the proposed project shall meet the provisions of the Citys adopted California Fire Code. In meeting said provisions, the protect shall also meet the,minlmum fire flow requirements based upon construction type and square footage. Mitigation Measure 4.11.1-M1: The applicant shall deliver a site for a future fre station in accordance with the triggers/phasing prescribed In the PFFP: Less than signifcanf with mitigation Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Nea EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 CiTy o(Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-56 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mitigation Measure 4.11.1-5: Subject to approval of the City Council, in lieu of paying the required impact fee, the Applicant may satisfy that requirement through a written agreement by which the Applicant agrees to either pay the fee or build the facility in question, pursuant to the terms of the agreement Threshold 3: Be inconsistent with General Plan GDP and ocher obiectives and policies regardina fire protection and emergency medical services thereby resulting in a significant physical impact. The EUC SPA Plan would be consistent with General No significant impacts have been identified, and no mitigation Less than significant fO Plan and GDP obiectives and policies that pertain to measures are required. ~ fire services and emergency medical services. rn Police Services: Threshold 1: Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities need for new or physically altered governmental facilities. the construction of which could cause sianificant environmental impacts in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times. or other performance obiectives for police protection services. Eastern Urhan Center Sectional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula V ista May 2009 Page ES-57 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures tD to J Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures Mitigation The CVPD currently does not meet GMOC thresholds for responses to Priority II calls. The proposed EUC SPA Plan would Increase demand on police protection, which could increase response times if additional police officers are not provided commensurate with demand. This is considered a significant impact prior to mitigation. No slgniflcant impacts have been identified, and no mitigation Less than significant with measures are required. mitigation. Mitigation Measure 4.11.2-1: Prior to the issuance of each building permit for any residential dwelling units, the Applicant(s) shall pay Public Facilities Development Impact Fees (PFDIF) in accordance with the fees in effect at the time of building permit issuance and phasing approved in the PFFP, unless stated otherwise in a separate development agreement. Mitigation Measure 4.11.2-2: The City of Chula Vista shall continue to monitor the CVPD responses to emergency calls and report the results to the GMOC on an annual basis. Less than signifcant with mitigation Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning P,rea EIR Slate Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-58 Future growth associated with the proposed EUC SPA Plan is anticipated in the General Plan and would not require the construction of new or expanded police facilities. Existing physical facilities are adequate to handle police protection for the proposed protect. Executive Summary Table ES•1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Mitigation Measure 4.11.2-3: Prior to approval of each design review permit, site plans shall be reviewed by the CVPD to ensure the incorporation of CPTED features and other recommendations of the CVPD, including, but not limited to, controlled access points to parking lots and buildings; maximizing the visibility along building fronts, sidewalks, paesos, and public parks: and providing adequate street, parking lot, and parking structure visibility and lighting. Threshold 3' Be inconsistent with General Plan. GDP or other objectives and oolicies regarding police protection Iherebv resulting in a signitirant ehvsical ~p im act. 0o The EUC SPA Plan would be consistent with the As no significant impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than significant Oo General Plan policies that pertain to police services. measures are required. Schooi Services: - services. Mitigation Measure 4.11.3-1: Less than signifcant with mitigation Protect implementation would result in a significant impact to elementary schools unless construction of an elementary school coincides with student generation and associated service demands. Prior to the issuance of each building permit, the Applicant(s) shall provide the City with evidence or certification by the CVESD Eastern Urban Center 5ecllonal Planning Nea EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-59 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures Mitigation Provision of school facilities is the responsibility of that any fee charge, dedication, or other requirement levied by the the school district when additional demand school district has been complied with or that the district has warrants, determined the tee, charge, dedication or other requirements does not apply to the construction. Mitigation Measure 4.11.3-2: Prior to approval of a final map for private development on lots 26 or 27 of the Tentative Map, the Applicant shall provide evidence from the CVESD that the site has not been determined by the district to be needed for use as a school site. Threshold 2' The proposed SPA Plan project locates See Geology and Soils and Hazards and Risk of Upset, above Less than significant with ~ schools: (Mitigation Measures 4.10-1 and 4.12-g, respectively). mitgation I 1. In areas where disturbino factors such as ' co traffic hazards. aimorts or other incompatible land uses are present: 2 In areas where they are not integrated into the system of alternative transportation corridors. such as bike lanes ridino and hiking trails and mass transit: 3. Where private elementary and secondary schools are not spaced far enough from public schools and each other to prevent a concentration of school impacts: 4. Without at least 10 usable acres for an elementary school' Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Nea EIR State Cleannghouse No. 2007047074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-60 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures 5. Without a central location to residential development; 6. Adjacent to a street or road which cannot safely accommodate bike, foot, and vehicular traffic: 7. In areas not adjacent to parks, thereby discouraging joint feld and recreation facility uses B. At an unsafe distance from contaminants or toxins in the soil or groundwater from cD landfills fuel tanks agricultural areas power I lines. utility easements. and soon: or cD ~ 9. Inslde of floodolains~ on unstable soils: or near fault lines: The potential exists for OCPs, methane, or other organic gases at the future school site to exceed CVESD and State standards and for potential unstable soils to occur on-site. These Issues are addressed to Sections 4.10. Geology and Soils and 4.12, Hazards and Risk of Upset. Threshold 3: Be Inconsistent with General Plan, GDP or other oblectives and polices regarding school faalities thereby resul6na In a sianifcant physical impact: The proposed EUC SPA Plan would he consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan objectives and Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation See Mitigation Measures 4.11.3-1 and 4.11.3-2, above: Less than sign cant with mitigation Eastern Urban Center Sectional Pianning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Ciry of Chula VISU May 2009 Page ES-61 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures m m J polities pertaining to schools primarily because the Applicant has been working with the school district to obtain the preferred site and vision for the elementary school. In addition, the PFFP will identify the school requirements for the EUC and will identify measures to ensure the site is delivered when needed by the district. The proposed project would be consistent with the GDP's description of the EUC because an elementary school is being provided. Library Services: Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation See construction mitigation measures under Air Quality; Noise; Cultural Resources; Biological Resources; Hydrology and Water Quality; and Geology and Soils, above. See construction significance levels under respective Air Quality, Noise, Cultural Resources, Cultural Resources, Biological ~ Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Soils and Geology sections, above. Eastern Urban Cenfer Sectional Planning Fvea EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 200704107A City of Chule Vista May 2009 Page ES-62 The analysis of the EUC SPA Plan's construction impacts assumes the development of a library. Construction impacts are analyzed in Sections 4.4, Air Quality; 4.5, Noise; 4.6, Cultural Resources; 4.7; Biological Resources; 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality; and 4.10, Geology and Soils of the EIR. Executive Table ES•1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures cc I co N Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures Mitigation Threshold 2: Fail to provide 500 square feet of library space, adequately equpped and staffed. per 1 000 population. Impacts would be signifcant if the proposed library Mitigation Measure 4.11.4-1: Less than signifcant with were not provided commensurate with demand. prior to the issuance of each building permit for any residential mitigation dwelling units, the Applicant shall pay required Public Facility Development Impact Fees in accordance with the fees to effect at the time of building permit issuance and phasing approved in the PFFP. Mitigation Measure 4.11.4.2: The Applicant shall deliver a site for the public library in accordance with the PFFP Mitigation Measure 4.11.4-3: Subject to approval of the City Council, in lieu of paying the required impact fee, the Applicant may satisfy that requirement through a written agreement by which the Applicant agrees to either pay the fee or build the facility in question, pursuant to the teRns of the agreement. Threshold 3: Be inconsistent with General Plan GDP or other objectives and ooliGes regarding library services thereby resuRing in a significant physical ' im act. The protect is consistent with General Plari objectives No .signifcant Impacts have been identified, and no mitigation Less than signifcant and policies pertaining to library services. measures are required. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Slate Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 City o(Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-63 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Parks and Recreation, Open Space and Trails: Threshold 1: Increase use of existing neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated. The project would have a less than significant impact As no slgnifcant impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than signifcant with respect to the physical deterioration of existing measures are required. park and recreational facilities. Threshold 2' The pro~ec[ would require the constmction or expansion of recreational facilities which mioht have an adverse physical effect on the ~ environment. I CO The analysis of the EUC SPA Plan's constmction See construction mitigation measures under Air Quality; Noise; w impacts assumes the development of parks and Cultural Resources; Biological Resources; Hydrology and Water recreational facilities. Construction impacts are Quality; and Geology and Soils, above analyzed in Sections 4.4, Air Quality; 4.5, Noise; 4.6. Cultural Resources; 4.7; Biological Resources; 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality; and 4.10, Geology and Soils of the EIR. Threshold 3' The protect fails to meet the Ciiv`s threshold standard of three acres of neighborhood and community parkland per 1 000 residents. See construction significance levels under respective Air Quality, Noise, Cultural Resources, Cultural Resources, Biological Resources, Hydrology and Water Quality, and Soils and Geology sections, above. A potentially significant impact could result, due to Mitigation Measure 4.11.5-1: less than significant with increased demand on existing parkland and facilities, ~ pdor to approval of the final map(s), or for protects not requiring a mitigation if dedication of parkland and development of new final map prior to building permit approval, for residential projects, Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Fvea EIR State Cleannghouse No. 2D07041D74 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-64 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures SigniFicance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation recreation facilities does not coincide with project the Applicant(s) shall dedicate parkland and pay in lieu fees for implementation and project population growth. the area covered by the final map(s). The delivery of said parkland and payment of in lieu fees shall be In accordance with the fees and phasing approved in the Public Facilities Financing Plan for the SPA Plan and an EUC Park Agreement, subject to approval of tho Directors of Recreation and Development Services. Mitigation Measure 4.11.5-2: cD I co A Prior to issuance of each building permit for any residential dwelling units, the Applicant(s) shall pay recreation facility development impact fees (part of the Public Facilities Development Impact Fee) in accordance with the fees in effect at the time of building permR issuance and phasing approved in the PFFP for the SPA Plan, subject to approval of the Directors of Recreation and Development Services. Mitigation Measure 4.11.5.3: The Applicant may, sublect to City Council approval, enter into a written agreement with the City identifying the Applicant's parkland acreage dedication, park development improvements, and in lieu fee obligations and the timing and method of satisfying those obligations. If the Applicant and the City enter into such an agreement, the Applicant may satisry its parkland .dedication, improvement and in lieu fee obligations pursuant to the terms of thal agreement. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-65 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Threshold 4' Be inconsistent with General Plan. GDP or other relevant plan objectives and policies regarding parks thereby resulting In a significant physical impact. The proposed project would be consistent with applicable policies of the General Plan, GDP; Greenbelt Master Plan, and Parks and Recreation Master Plan. Water Services: Threshold 1' Require or result in the construction of c>, new water facilities or expansion of existing facilities. I the construction of which could cause significant m environmental effects. The impact to wafer storage and pumping facilities would be significant if construction of facilities does not coincide with anticipated growth. As fire flow requirements are a function of the size and materials of structures, and no structure locations or specifcations are available at this time, fire flow pressure requirements are not known at this lime and could be significant. Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation No signifcant Impacts have been identified, and no mitigation Less than significant. measures are required. Mitigation Measure 4.11.6-2: Prior to approval of the frst final map, the applicant shall provide a Sub-Area Master Plan (SAMP) to the Otay Water District. Water facilities improvements shall be financed or Installed on-site and off-site in accordance with the fees and phasing in the approved PFFP and SAMP. The SAMP shall include, but shall not be limited to: Existing pipeline locations, size, and capacity; The proposed points of connection and system; The estimated water demands and/or sewer flow calculations; Governing fire departmenTS flow requirements (flow rate, duration, hydrant spacing, etc); Less than signiTcant with mitigation Eastern Urhan Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Ciry of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-66 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures m I co rn Threshold 2' Have suffiaent water supplies available to serve the protect from existing entitlements and resources or reouire new or expanded entitlements The increase In demand for water would not have a significant Impact on the ability of OWD to provide service to the proposed project. Mitigation measures are recommended to ensure water availability. Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Threshold 3' Inroads would be signifcant if the protect exceeded the City`s Growth Management threshold standards which seek to ensure that adequate supplies of quality water appropriate for intended uses are available. Standards reouire the following actions: Less than signifcant with mitigation Agency Master Plan; • Agency's planning criteria (see Sections 4.1 through 4.3 of the Water Agencies Standarts) • Water quality maintenance; and Size of the system and number of lots to be served. Mitigation Measure 4.11.6-1: Prior to issuance of each building permit, the permit applicant shall deliver to the City service availability letters from the appropriate water district. Mitigation Measure 4.11.63: Prior to approval of the first Final map, the applicant shall obtain OWD's approval of a Sub Area Master Plan (SAMP) for both potable and recycled water. Any on-site and off-site facilities identified in the SAMP required to serve a final mapped area shall be secured or constructed by the applicant prior to the approval of the fnal map. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Fvea EIR Slate Clearinghouse No. 2007047074 Gityof cnula Vista May 2009 Page ES-67 Executive Summary Table ES-7 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitiqation Measures Mitiqation The applicant must request and deliver to the City service availability letters from the appropriate water distdct for each protect: The applicant is regutred to submit a Water Conservation Plan along with the SPA Plan appllCatlgn; The protect plans shall ensure an adequate supply of water on a long-term basis prior fo the development of each Otav Ranch SPA. The protect would comply with the City's service As no significant Impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than slgnifcant crD I availability requirements and would be consistent measures are required. CO with the Citys threshold standards that seek to `~ ensure adequate supplies of water. Threshold 4: Be inconsistent with General Plan GDP or other relevant objectives and policies regarding water supply thereby resulting in a significant physical impact. The project would be consistent with applicable As no significant impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than significant water services policies and with Objective GM-1 of measures are required. the General Plan regarding the City's commitment to ensuring adequate public services commensurate with need. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-68 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures to Wastewater Services: Threshold 1: The project would result in a determination 6v the wastewater treatment provider which serves or may serve the project that it has inadequate capaciiv to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the providers existing commitments. The development of the EUC would be consistent with the growth anticpated by the Otay Ranch GDP and would not result in a determination by the City of Chula Vista or METRO that it has inadequate capacity to serve the proposed project's projected demand in addition to the providers' existing commitments. Although additional capacity may need to be acquired from METRO or other sources to support buildout of the proposed project and other anticipated development in the City, building permits within the EUC would only be issued once the City Engineer has determined that adequate treatment capacity exists. As no development would occur in the absence of adequate treatment capacity, no impacts associated with inadequate treatment capacity would occur. Threshold 2: The project would require the construction of new wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities the construction of would cause significant environmental effects. Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation No significant Impacts have been identified, and no mitigation Less than significant measures are required. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 C(ry of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-69 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures co I cD cc Measures With respect to the capacity of off-site sewage conveyance lines, mitigation measures are recommended to ensure that the proposed project would not exceed the capacity of any line in the existing wastewater conveyance system by more than 75 percent of pipe capacity for pipes greater than 12-inch in diameter or 50 percent for pipes 12- inch or less in diameter. Construction of sewer facilities has the potential to result in significant short-term air emissions (including dust; noise; impacts on biological, archaeological, and paleontological resources; erosion; and ground water contamination. (Please see Sections 4.4, Air Quality; 4.5 Noise; 4.6 Cultural Resources; 4.7, Biological Resources; and 4.9, Hydrology and Water Quality, above which provide mitigation for any construction impacts of off-site Improvements.) In addition, the proposed project would require sewage treatment beyond the City's existing wastewater treatment capacity rights and allocated additional treatment capacity. Therefore, additional capacity would need to be acquired from METRO or other sources. The means by which additional treatment capacity would be acquired Is unknown and the development of additional capacity may require construction of new treatment facilities. As the location and scope of construction for any newly developed treatment facilities Is unknown, the development of treatment capacity beyond the City's existing and allocated capacity may result in Mitigation Measure 4.11.7.1: Prior to design review approval and in accordance with the Intensity Transfer provisions in the EUC SPA Plan, the Applicant(s) shall provide a wastewater technical report with each proposed protect requesting an intensity transfer. The technical report shall demonstrate to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that adequate wastewater infrastructure will be available to support the transfer. The transfer of residential density shall be limited by the ability of sewerage facilities to accommodate Flows (as shown in Figure 4.11.7, Allowable EDU's in the On-site Sewer System). Mitigation Measure 4.11.7-2: Prior to issuance of the first building permit related to any uses within the portion of the EUC served by the Poggi Canyon System, and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, the developer shall: Bond Tor the improvement of the constrained reach at Brandywine Avenue (Reach P270) with the first final map for theproled. • Monitor sewer flows within the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and submit quarterly reports to the City upon the issuance, of the first building permit for the EUC; • Obtain the approval for the improvement plan and any necessary environmental permits for Reach P270 poor to the first final "B" map, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer; Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Nea EIR Slate Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 Significance after Mitigation Less than signifcanl with mitigation with respect to conveyance systems. Significant and unavoidable with respect to constmction of new wastewater treatment facilities. City of Chula Vista Mav 2009 Page ES-70 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures cD I J 0 0 a potentially significant environmental impact, even understanding that such protects would likely be subject to envronmental review Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation • Commence construction of Reach P270 upon reaching a d/D of 0.75, unless otherwise approved by the Ciry Engineer; • Complete construction of Reach P270 the sooner of one year after occupancy of the first unit sewenng to the Poggi Canyon System, or a d/D of 0.85, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer; Not seek building permits within the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basln if any segment of the Poggl Canyon Trunk Sewer achieves a d/D of 0.85, or the City Engineer has determined, at his sole discretion, that there is not enough San Diego METRO treatment capacity for the proposed prgect; and • Upon the completion of the Rock Mountain Trunk Sewer, divert those Village Seven flows from the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin that were ultimately designed to Clow to Salt Creek Sewer Basin so that additional capacity Is provided for the EUC's permanent flaws. Mitigation Measure 4.11.7.3: Prior to issuance of the frst building permit related to any uses within the portion of the EUC served by the Village Eleven sewer lateral to the Salt Creek Sewer Interceptor, and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer, the developer shall: • Bond for the improvement of the constrained reach along the Village Eleven lateral into the Salt Creek Sewer Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR State Cleannghouse No. 2 00704 7 074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-71 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Interceptor with the first final map for the proposed project cD 1 1 0 Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stata Cleannghouse No. 200704'1074 • Monitor sewer flows within the constrained reach along the Village Eleven lateral Into the Salt Creek Sewer Interceptor to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and submit quarterly repods to the City upon the issuance of the first building permit for the proposed project that sewers to the Salt Creek System; • Obtain the approval for the improvement plan and any necessary environmental permits for the constrained reach along the Village Eleven lateral into the Salt Creek Sewer Interceptor prior to the frst final "B" map covenng any parcel that sewers to the Salt Creek System, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer; Commence construction of the constrained reach along the Village Eleven lateral into the Salt Creek Sewer Interceptor upon reaching a d/D of 0.75, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer; • Complete construction of the constrained reach along the Village Eleven lateral into the Salt Creek Sewer Interceptor the sooner of one year after occupancy of the first unR sewenng to the Salt Creek Syslem, or a d/D of 0.85, unless othelwlse approved by the City Engineer; Not seek building permits within the Salt Creak Sewer Basin if any portion of the constrained reach along the Village Eleven lateral into the Salt Creek Sewer CITy or Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-72 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Measures Mitigation Interceptor achieves a d/D of 0.85, or the City Engineer has determined, at his sole discretion, that there is not enough San Diego METRO treatment capacity for the proposed protect; and • Upon the completion of the Rock Mountain Trunk Sewer, divert those temporary flows from the constrained reach along the Village Elevan lateral to the sewer within Bab Pletcher Way. Mitigation Measure 4.11.7.4: cD O N Prior to issuance of each building permit, the applicant shall pay the DIF at the rate in effect at the time of building permit issuance and corresponding to the sewer basin that the building will permanently sewer to, unless stated otherwise in a development agreement that has been approved by the City Council. Threshold 3: Sewage flows and volumes shall nol exceed City Englneenno Standards: L1175 portent of capacity for mains over 12 inches and 50 percent of capacity for mains 12 inches and smaller, and (21 a cleanine velocity of 2 fps or a minimum slope of 1 percent. See Threshold 2, above. See Mitigation Measures 4.11.7-2 and 4.11.7-3, above. Less than significant with mitigation Eastern Urban Cenler Sectional Planning P.rea EIR Stale Cleannghouse No, 2007041074 City of Chula Vista Mav 2009 Page ES-73 Executive Table ES-7 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Threshold 4' Be inconsistent with Geneml Plan GDP or other relevant obiectives and policies regarding water supply thereby resulting in a significant physical impact. Significance after Mitiaation Measures Mitigation The protect would be consistent with General Plan No significant impacts have been identified, and no mitigation Less than significant objectives and polices pertaining to wastewater measures are required. services. Solid Waste Services: Threshold 1' The protect would be served by a landfill with insuffaent permitted capacity to ~ accommodate the proiecYs solid waste disposal I needs. o The proposed protect is included in, and consistent W with, the General Plan's protected population growth, for which adequate future landfill capacity is anticipated. With the availability of adequate solid disposal capacity and the implementation of the City's recycling policies and solid waste reduction programs that are applicable to the EUC and City at large, no significant solid waste impacts have been identified for the proposed EUC SPA Plan. Thus, the project would have a less than significant impact with respect to solid waste disposal capacity. Threshold Z' The protect does not comply with federal state and local statutes and regulations relating to solid waste: No significant impacts have been identified, and no mitigation Less than signficant. measures are required. As no significant impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than significant measures are required. The project would be consistent with all applicable statutes and regulations and would have a less than Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Cleannghouse No. 2007041tl74 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-74 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance aker Mitigation Measures Mitigation signifcant impact with respect to solid waste collection and management. Hazards and Risk of Upset: Threshold 1: Is located on a site that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Govemmenl Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result. a signifcant hazard to the public or the environment would ba created. The EUC SPA Plan, SSA, SCSL, and PCSI areas Mitigation Measure 4.12-6: Less than signifcant. are not listed in any regulatory databases. However, Concurrent with the frst submittal of construction plans for the ~ the proposed fire station would require the use fuel fire station, the fre station design shall demonstrate to the j storage tanks containing hazardous materials. satisfaction of the Director of Development Services and Fire p Marshal that the above-ground fuel tanks comply with ~ applicable local, State and Federal fuel storage and containment regulations. Thresholds 2 & 3: Creates a significant hazard to the public or environment through the routine transport. use or disposal of hazardous materials: Creates a sl~c nlficant hazaM to the public or reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment. Potentially signifcant impacts could result from the Mitigation Measure 4.12.1: Less than significant with exposure of construction workers and the public to prior to approval of grading permits, the following note shall be mitigation any OCP-containing soils in Areas A, 8, and C of the placed on the grading plans to the satisfaction of the City EUC SPA Plan area. Exposure may result from any Engineer: "Grading with Areas A, B, and C, as shown in Figure 2 OCP-containing soils that would be released or Eastern Urban Center SeGional Planning Area EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-75 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance aker impact Mitigation Measures Miligatlon become airborne during excavation, be left unwvered on-site, or exported off-site. Mitigation Measure 4.12-2: cD J 0 Threshold 4: Emits hazardous emissions or handle hazaMous or acutely hazardous materials. substances or waste within one[7uarter mile of an existing or proposed school. of the Organic Pesticide Assessment and Soil Reuse Plan (prepared by Geocon dated June 5, 2007, revised October 4, 2007), shall be managed in accordance with the remediation measures included in the Organic Pesticide Assessment and Soil Reuse Plan (prepared by Geocon dated June 5, 2007, revised October 4, 2007) to the satisfaction of the City Engineer." The grading plans shall demonstrate compliance with the 2007 Geocon report. In accordance with the City's waste management ordinances and Stormwater Manual, the applicant shall implement Best Management Practices in Areas A, B, and C, during the excavation and placement of soil from the upper two feet of existing grade, so that dust, erosion, excessive pooling, and Stormwater runoff do not pose a problem at the site to the satisfaction of the City Englneer. Mitigation Measure 4.12-3: Prior to issuance of ;suildiRg occupancy permit, the developer shall post information regarding Pacific Waste Services' Households Hazardous Waste Collection Facility °~~'.~~' within each residential unit. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-7fi Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures cD 0 rn Measures The presence of organic toxins and gases at the See Mitigation Measures 4.12-1 and 4.123, above. future school site may exceed CVESD and state standards for public schools; thus the protect would have a potentially significant impact with respect to this threshold. Thresholds 5 & 6: Is located within an almort land use plan or where such a plan has not been adopted within two miles of a public airoorl or public use aimort and would result in a safety hazard for people residinq or workinq in the project area; Is located within the vicinity of a private airstrip and would result in a safety hazard for oeopie residinq or workinq In the protect area. Hazards associated with the poor visibility of tall structures under construction or rooftop cranes may contribute to an airport-related hazard, due fo the proximity of Brown. Field and aircraft over flight of the EUC under VFR or circle-to-land procedures. Also, as buildings, rooftop cranes and other temporary construction equipment in the EUC may exceed 170 feet in height, these sructures would be approximately 270 feet higher than the Brown Field runway elevation. This may present an aircraft safety hazard. Eastern Urhan Center sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Mitigation Measure 4,12.4: Prior to issuance of building permits, the FAA shall be notified of each high-rise building, structure or construction equipment that would be 800 feet or more above MSL (275 feet above Brown Field ground level). FAA recommendations regarding marking and/or lighting shall be incorporated into unfinished high rise buildings, rooftop cranes, finished high rise buildings, and any other tall structures. Significance after Mitigation Less than significant with mitigation. Less than significant with mitigation CiTy of Chula Vista Mav 2009 Page ES-77 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures Mitigation Threshold 7: Impairs implementation of or physically interferes with an adopted emeraencv response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Impacts with respect to emergency preparedness As no significant impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than significant and evacuation would be less than significant. measures are required. Threshold 8: Expose aeople or structures to_a significant dsk or loss. iniurv or death involving wildland fires including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas. Although the EUC SPA Plan area is not designated ~ as 'wildlands," vacant lands in which weeds and brush have not been controlled in close proximity to p occupied uses may present a potentially significant -t wildfire hazard. Threshold 9: Increase in urbanization would result in an increase in the uses transport storage, and disposal of hazardous waste materials and an associated increase in the risk of an upset condition In the area. Operation of the protect would involve the routine use of common landscaping, consUuction, and cleaning materials that may be hazardous to the environment, if not managed according to stale statutes and manufacturos' recommendations. Mitigation Measure 4.12-5: Brush and weed control within open space and undeveloped areas of the EUC not used for agricultural purposes, shall be implemented as applicable in accordance with the Citys Urban- Wildland Interface Code. Mitigation Measure 4.12-3: Prior to issuance of building permit, information regarding Pacific Waste Services' Households Hazardous Waste Collection Facility shall be posted within each residential unit. Less than significant with mitigation Less than signif cant with mitigation Eastern Urban Center Sectional Pla Slate Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Nea EIR City o(Chule Vista May 2009 Page ES-78 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures - Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures Mitigation Threshold 10: Historic use oT pesticides which would result in soil wntamination and health effects. Potentially signifcant impacts could result from the See.Mitigation Measures 4.12-1 and 4.12-2, above. Less than sign cant with exposure of construction workers and the public to mitigation any OCP-containing soils In Areas A, B, and C of the EUC. Threshold 11: Be inconsistent with General Plan, _ GDP. and other objectives and policies regarding hazards lherebv resulting in a sianificarit physical im act. m The project would be consistent with the General As no significant impacts have been ident~ed, no mitigation Less than significant Plan oblectives and policies that pertain to brush measures are required. o management and the handling and disposal of pp hazardous materials. Housing and Population: Threshold 1: Induce substantial population growth in an area either directly (i.e.. through the development of new homes or businesses) or indirectiv (i.e., through extension of roads or other Inimstmcture. The proposed prolect's maximum development level No significant impacts have been identified, and no mitigation Less thansignifcant would not induce substantial population growth in the measures are required. area beyond that already planned under the Otay Ranch GDP and Chula Vista General Plan. Thus, population growth Inducement would be less than significant. Eastern Urban Center Secticnal Planning lvea EIR City oT Chula Vista State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 May 2009 Page ES-79 Executive Summary Table ES•1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures Significance after Impact Mitigation Measures ~ Mitigation Threshold 2' Displace substantial numbers of existing households or people. necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere. The project would not displace any existing As no impacts have been identified, no mitigation measures are Less than significant households or people. No impacts with respect to required. this threshold would occur. Threshold 3: Is inconsistent with Chula Vista General Plan and GDP Houslng Objectives. The proposed protect would be consistent with the As no significant Impacts have been identified, no mitigation Less than signifcant General Plan's and GDP's housing objectives and measures are required. ca policies. Impacts with respect to these plans would be less than significant, J o Global Climate Change: fD Thresholds 1' Conflict with or obstruct goals or strategies of the Cal'rfornia Global Solutions Act of 2006 (AB321 or related Executive Orders. By incorporating proposed project features, the No signifcant impacts have been identified, and no mitigation Less than significant protect would result in GHG emission retes 31 measures are required. percent lower than "business as usual". Because these project features would reduce project GHG emissions and are consistent with the State's CAT strategies, the project would not conflict with or obstruct the State's goals regarding global climate change and impacts In this regard would be less than significant Regarding GHG emissions from consWction activities, construction of the proposed project would incorporate construction "best practices "that would reduce GHG emissions These Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR City of Chula Vista State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 May 2009 Page ES-80 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures co I 0 "best practices" represent an improvement above conventional construction practices, and thus are an improvement above "business as usual " Therefore, impacts In this regard would be less than significant. Threshold 2' A substantially increased exposure of the protect from the potential adverse effects of global warming identified In the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 (AB32. The project has the potential to result in one or more of the potential adverse effects of global warming identified in the California Global Warming Solutions Act of 2006 because of the identified signifcant air quality impacts. Regarding water supply, it is considered premature and speculative to make an assessment of impacts under CEQA of how climate change would affect water availability for the protect. With implementation of Air Quality mitigation measures and water conservation protect features, Impact would be considered less than significant. Cumulative Impacts: Land Use Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation See Air Quality, Transportation, and Water mitigation measures, Less than significant with above. mitigation The cumulative analysts Incorporates the General No signifcant impacts have been identified, and na mitigation Less than significant Plan EIR by reference. The General Plan EIR measures areregwred. includes projects within the four planning areas, and encompasses the Otay Ranch GDP In the East Planning Area. The protect would be consistent with applicable objectives and policies Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR State Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 C{ty of Chula Vista MaV 2009 Page ES-61 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures m I J of the General Plan, including policies relevant to the scale and type of development envisioned by the GDP. Of two large-scale, related protects encompassed by the General Plan analysis (the Chula Vista Bayfront Master Plan and the Otay Ranch General Development Plan), the EIR for the Village Two, Three, and a Portion of Four SPA Plan (within the Otay Ranch GDP) identified a significant and unavoidable inconsistency with General Plan policies. However, the proposed protect would not cumulatively contribute to this land use impact as the protect was determined to be consistent with all applicable land use and land compatibility policies. Therefore, cumulative impacts with respect to land use would be less than signitican[. Landform/Aesthetics The General Plan EIR finds that future development would result in substantial changes to landforms and visual quality in currently undeveloped portions of the East Planning Area. The General Plan EIR concluded that the conversion of open, rolling hills to developed condition would be cumulatively signifcant. In addition, the Otay Ranch GDP Program EIR, states that, as the proposed EUC SPA Plan would convert undeveloped, rural land to dense urbanized uses, impacts regarding the change in the existing visual character or quality of the site are considered significant. No feasible mitigation measures would Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Fvea Ela Stele CleanngMuse No. 2007041074 SigniFlcance aRer Mitigation Measures Mitigation No feasible mitigation measures have been identified that would Significant and unavoidable reduce this cumulative impact to a less than significant level. cumulative impact regarding the reduction of open space due to urban development. city or cnma viars May 2009 Page ES-82 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mtigation Measures reduce this impact to a less than significant level, as any development of the EUC would impact existing open space. The proposed project and related projects m the Easi Plamm~g Area would cumulatively contribute to the diminishment of open space. Therefore, the proleci and related pro)ects would have a cumulatively significant aesthetic impact. Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Transportation The General Plan and the Otay Ranch GDP Program EIRs conclude that, even though cc mitigation measures exist to reduce traffic-related I impacts, the incremental cumulative impacts of future projects would remain significant and rv unmitigable. The project and related projects, including the Village Two, Three, and a Portion of Four SPA Plan would mitigate traffic impacts on streets segments and intersections to less than significant levels. However no feasible mitigation measures are available to the pro)ect and related protects to reduce impacts on the I-805 freeway to less than significant levels. Therefore, the project and related projects would have a significant and unavoidable cumulative impact with respect to this freeway. See Mitigation Measures 4.3-1 through 4.3-15, above regarding street and intersection impacts. No mitigation measures are available to reduce the significant cumulative impact with respect to freeway segments. Less than significant with respect to streets and Intersections. Significant and unavoidable cumulative impact on three sections of the 1-805 freeway: Air Quality The proposed EUC SPA Plan would have No mitigation measures are available to reduce the significant Significant and significant direct impacts on ambient air quality due cumulative air quality impact. unavoidable cumulative to emissions of CO, NOx, VOC, PM1n and PMZS impact with respect to Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area Stale Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-83 Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures fD W Impact Mitigation Measures Significance after Mitigation that would exceed the Cily of Chula Vista's inconsistency with VOC, significance thresholds. Emissions above NO„ CO, PMfa and PMzs threshold standards would occur during both threshold standard and the project's construction and operation phase. The SDAPCD's cunent RAQS. EIR for the related project, the Village Two, Three, and a Portion of Four SPA Plan, similarly concludes that significant cumulative impacts with respect to attainment and PMfa and other emission standards would occur. Therefore, the proposed protect combined with the related development within the EUC SPA Plan Area and other related protects In the region would result in a cumulatively significant impact. A health risk assessment was performed to quantity cancer risk above background for residences proposed to be built near SR-125. However, the absence of adopted numeric standards directly related to the increased exposure to TACs resulting from the location of proposed residences in close proximity to highly utilized roadways makes it too speculative to determine significance at the protect level. There are currently no standards adopted by federal, State, or regional agencies establishing acceptable levels of cumulative exposure to or health risks from airborne TACs. Consequently, a determination as to the cumulative level of significance related to potential health risks resulting from implementation of the proposed Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR City of Chula Vista State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 May 2009 Page ES-84 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures m I Significance after Imnact Mitigation Measures Mitigation development and related proiects Is also too speculative at this point in time. Noise The prolecl and related proiects represented by the General Plan EIR could exacerbate noise levels to a magnitude that significantly impacts receivers where traffic volumes are projected to result in noise level increases of more than 3 d6, particularly at key intersections. As mitigation to reduce high noise levels at existing receiver sites is not available, the General Plan EIR concluded that, noise impacts are cumulatively considerable, significant, and not mitigated. Protect-related traffic is estimated to increase mobile noise from 0.4 to 2.4 dBA and would be. below the 3.0 dBA significance threshold. The proposed project EIR concludes that project-specife mitigation measures would reduce noise impacts to less than significant. Nonetheless, the cumulative noise Increase resulting from the proposed protect in combination with related projects is expected to exceed the 3.0 dBA significance threshold on kay roadway segments and is considered cumulatively significant. Archaeoloaical and Historic Resources See mitigation measures 4.5-1 through 4.5-7, above. Signifcani and unavoidable cumulative impact with respect to noise level increases at key intersections The prolecl and related proiects encompassed in ~ See Mitigation Measures 4.6-1 through 4.6-5, above. Significani and the General Plan would extend development Into unavoidable cumulative areas that may contain historical or archaeological _ impact with respect to Eastern Urban Canter Sectional Planning Area EIR State Cleanngtwuse No. 2007047074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-85 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures CD I J resources. The proposed project would not result in a significant impact on known archaeological resources, but could result in significant impacts on archaeological resources that may be uncovered during project development. Impacts associated with related projects in the area have been determined to be significant and unavoidable. The protect has proposed mitigation measures to reduce project-related impacts on cultural resources to a less than significant level. However, while any individual project may avoid or mitigate the direct loss of a specific resource, the effect would be considerable when considered cumulatively. Therefore, the protect and related protects would have a significant cumulative impact with respect to historical and archaeological resources. '. Slgnlffcanceafter Mitigation Measures Mitigation archaeological resources. Paleontological Resources The protect and related projects encompassed in the General Plan would extend development into areas that may contain paleontological resources. The proposed project would not result in a significant impact on known paleontological resources, but could result in significant impacts on paleontological resources That may be uncovered during project development. Impacts associated with related projects in the area have been determined to be significant and unavoidable. The See Mitigation Measures 4.6-6 through 4.6-9, above. Less than significant with mitigation Easlem Urban Center Sectional Planning Area State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vide May 2009 Page ES-86 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental impacts and Mitigation Measures co I rn project has proposed mitigation measures to reduce project-related Impacts on paleontological resources to a less than significant level. However, similar to the conclusion of She Village Two, Three and Portion of Four EIR, mitigation measures would reduce cumulative paleontological impacts to below significance due to the fact that the discoveries of paleontological resources would contribute to important scientific information about the natural history in southwestern San Diego County. Biological Resources The General Plan EIR concluded that cumulative Impacts on biological resources would be less than significant, with compliance with the MSCP Subarea plan (which prevents significant impacts on biological resources). The proposed project would have temporary direct and indirect impacts on the Subarea Plan's designated Preserve during the SCSL Improvement. These impacts within the Preserve are addressed and mitigated in accordance with the requirements of the MSCP. Because compliance with the MSCP Subarea Plan avoids cumulative impacts on biological resources and, because the proposed project provides measures that meet the obligations of the plan, the project and related protects, which would be required to comply with applicable MSCP policies, would not have a significant cumulative impact on biological resources. Eastern urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Clearinghcusa No. 20 0704 7 074 Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation See Mitigation Measures 4.7-1 through 4.7, above. Less than significant with mitigation Ciry of Chula Vista Mav 2009 Page ES-67 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures cc v Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation Agncultural Resources Tha General Plan EIR concluded that, as no farmlands of Statewide Importance existed in the city, cumulative impacts would be less than slgnificanL However, fhe proposed project would result in the loss of Farmland of Local Importance and, as such, have a significant and unavoidable impact wish respect to agricultural resources. The EIR for the related Village Two, Three, and a Portion of Four SPA Plan also concluded that development would result in the permanent loss or impairment of agricultural lands. Therefore, the protect and related projects would have a cumulatively significant impact with respect to agricultural resources. See Mitigation Measure 4.8-1, above. Significant and unavoidable cumulative impact with respect to agricultural resources Hvdroloov and Water Quality The General Plan EIR concluded that compliance with General Pian policies EE2.5, which require construction and land development techniques pursuant to applicable SWRCB and RWQCB requirements, including compliance with all federal, state, and regional water quality objectives, and General Plan Public Facilities objectives would ensure that hydrology and water quality impacts would be self-mitigating and not significant. The project and related projects would be to compliance with existing regional water quality protection programs and City drainage standards. in addition, potential impacts would be reduced to less than significance through the implementation See Mitigation Measures 4.9-1 through 4.9-1D, above. Less than significant with mitigation Eastern Urban Canter Sectional Planning Nee EIR State Ciean~ghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-88 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures cD Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation of proposed mitigation measures. Therefore, the project and related projects would have a less than significant impact with respect to water quality and hydrology. Geology and Soils General Plan policies require an engineering analysis to identify potential seismic hazards poor to construction and allow for project-specific design to avoid seismic hazards. Significant geological impacts could occur within the project site and region due to the presence of potentially liquefiable soils (although the potential is identified as low in the project's geotechnical report), slope instability, or soils expansion. The City's Grading Ordinance current seismic design specifications, current UBC standards and other regulatory requirements would be implemented to address geological hazards. Although the proposed project and related projects could result in potentially significant geological impacts associated with liquefaction or other land failure, impacts are site specific and not cumulative in nature, Therefore, the project and related protects would not have significant cumulative impact with respect to geology and soils. See Mitigation Measures 4.10-1 through 4.10-3, above. Less than significant with mitigation Fire Services The protect and related protects encompassed in .See Mitigation Measures 4.11.1-1 through 4.11.1-5, above. the General Plan. would increase demand for fire servir:es. According to the General Plan EIR, the Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Nea EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 Less than significant with mitigation Mav 2009 Page ES-89 Executive Table ES•1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures m co City's threshold standards regarding fire service prohibit projects that are out of compliance with those standards. In addition, the City's Growth Management regulations tie the pace of development in the EUC SPA Plan to the provision of public facilities and improvements. The impacts of the proposed project and related projects on fire services would be reduced to less than significance by compliance with their respective PFFP's. The proposed EUC SPA Plan also Incorporates a fire station site to [he Mixed-Use Civic/Office Core District that would meet the minimum demand of the proposed EUC SPA Plan and surrounding area. With the implementation of mitigation measures, the protect and related protects would not have significant cumulative impact on fire services. Police Services The protect and related projects would increase demand on police services. Gity's threshold standards regarding police services prohibit projects that are out of compliance with those standards. In addition, the City's Growth Management regulations tie the pace of development in the EUC SPA Plan to the provision of public facilities and improvements. The impacts of the proposed proiecl and related projects on police services would be reduced to less than significance through compliance with their respective PFFP's. However, the CVPD currently Eastern Urban Center Secaonal Planning Area EIR State Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation See Mitigation Measures 4.11.2-1 through 4.11.23, above. Less than signifcant with mitigation City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-90 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures does not meet the GMOC thresholds for Priority II calls and, as development of the proposed project would increase demand on police services, including five additional officers, project impacts on police services would be significant. However, with the implementation of mitigation measures, the impact of the proposed project, combined with the related projects, would not have a significant cumulative impact on police services Schools The project and related projects would increase demand on schools and result In the need for I additional schools. The provjsion of schools is the J ro responsibility of the school district when additional o demand is warranted. Impacts resulting from development completed m conformance with the proposed General Plan are considered to be self- mitigating because policies of the General f Ian accommodate projected student population, ensure that school services and facilities are concurrent with need, and are based on a quantitative threshold standard. The implementation of PFFP requirements attached to new development would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Therefore, the project and related projects would not have a significant cumulative impact on school services. Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation See Mitigation Measures 4.11.3-1 and 4.11.3-2, above. Less than significant with mitigation Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Cleannghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-91 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures cc N J Libraries The protect and related projects would increase demand for library services. The City's threshold standards for libraries may prohibit projects that are out of compliance with those standards. In addition, the City's Growth Management regulations tie the pace of development in the EUC SPA Plan to the provision of public facilities and improvements. The Impacts of the proposed protect and related projects on libraries would be reduced to less than signiTicance by compliance with their respective PFFP's. The proposed EUC SPA Plan also incorporates a library site in the Mixed-Use Civic/Office Core District that would to serve the population of the EUC and would help to alleviate the current deficiency in library space in the City. With Implementation of mitigation measures to ensure PFFP compliance, the project and related protects would not have a significant cumulative impact on library services. Parks Recreation Ooen Soace. and Trails The project and related projects would increase demand on parks, open space, and recreational facilities. The City's threshold standard of three acres of park land per 1,000 population for all new development is considered self-mitigating. Projects that are out of compliance with this standard may be prohibited. In addition, the City's Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation See Mitigation Measures 4.11.4-1 through 4.11.43, above. Less than signifcant with mitigation See Mitigation Measures 4.11.5-1 through 4.11.5-4, above. Less than significant with ' mitigation Eastern Urban Cen[er Sectional Planning Nea EIR State Clearinghouse No. 2007041074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-92 Execuiive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures m N N Growth Management regulations tie the pace of development in the EUC SPA Plan to the dedication of park land or in lieu fees. The proposed project and related protects are required to provide for parkland and, if necessary, equivalency fees to meet the City's GMOC Threshold for parks. However, a potentially signifcant impact could result if dedication of parkland does not cojncide with project implementation. With [he implementation of mitigation measures and GMOC requirements, the proposed protect and related projects would not have a significant impact on park resources. Water The project and related projects would increase demand for potable and recycled water. The development of the project would be consistent with the growth anticipated by the Olay Ranch GDP and would not result in a determination by the. City of Chula Vista or OWD that it has inadequate capacity to serve fhe projects' protected demand in addition to the providers' existing commitments. Building permits for the project and related projects would only be issued once the OWD has determined that adequate water supply exists. Although the regional water supplier has concluded that water available to service the proposed project would be adequate, impacts associated with water supply and infrastructure are considered cumulatively Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Cleannghwse No. 2007041074 Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation See Mftigation Measures 4.11.6-1 through 4.11.6-3, above Signifcant and unavoidable impact with respect to water supply and infrastructure. City of (:hula Vista May 2009 Page ES-93 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures significant, in accordance with the General Plan EIR. Wastewater ~ related projects would increase demand on ~, wastewater services. Based on recent flow IV analysis as part of the City's Wastewater Master fa Plan, the City has begun discussions with the Clty of San Diego to identiy a mechanism for the provision of additional treatment capacity. The project's estimated daily sewage rate of 0.852 mgd of wastewater combined with demand from other planned projects would require sewage treatment capacity beyond the City's existing capacity rights and allocated additional treatment capacity. As discussed under Wastewater Threshold 2, above, additional capacity would need to be accuired from METRO or other sources and may include the construction of new or expanded treatment facilities As the location and scope of construction for env future expanded or newly developed treatment facilities is unknown .potential construction of new or expanded treatment Significance after Mitigation Measures Mitigation No mitioation measures are available to reduce the oroiect's ' ^~s-..,`s^ :-sSignifcant wish sicnificant unavoidable cumulative impact with respect to miEigaiienand unavoidable potential construction of new or expanded treatment impact facilities ne• • ~.,........^ n ~ ~ z~ .~.^ ^~. n . n ~ n above. Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR. State Cleannyhousa No. 2007041074 GIty OT Gnula Vista May 2009 Page ES-94 Executive Summary Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures co I N facilities may result in potentially significant and unavoidable cumulative impacts >PFit#~Rten'tter+ng-ef ~.~a...,~.~e._~,.apao trpd Gl;Hill#k3k~VEly-6ignlflG2nt' Solid Waste The project and related projects would increase demand on the Otay Landfill, which is expected to have sufFlcient capacity until 2028. City policies to reduce the solid waste stream, including recycling and waste-to-energy programs, could further reduce demand on the landfill. Cumulative impacts could also be reduced by additional solid waste and recycling facilities, transporting trash outside the region to less impacted areas, and meeting state-mandated recycling goals. As the proposed project Is included in, and consistent with, the General Plan's projected population growth and protects and related projects would be required to comply with the City's waste disposal policies, the project and related projects would have a less than significant impact with respect to solid waste management. Hazards/Risk of Upset The project and related projects may use hazardous materials, which are subject to existing state and federal regulations, during wnstruction and operation phases. In addition, General Plan Objective EE 19 Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Slate Clearinghouse No. 2007047074 Significance after Mitigation Measures ~ Mitigation No signifcant impacts have been identified, and no mitigation Less than slgnificant measures are required. See Mitigation Measures 4.12.1 through 4.12-6, above. Less than significant with mitigation City oTChula Vista May 2009 Page ES-95 Executive Table ES•t Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures m N assures that new development would not be approved if a potential exists for hazardous materials use and transport to affect residents. The project would mitigate potentially significant impacts associated with the exposure of construction workers and the public to OCPs occumng in soils in Areas A, B, and C of the EUC, or high-rise buildings in the proximity of Brown Field approach or departure flight paths. With compliance with mitigation measures and existing regulations, the project and related projects would not have a sgnifidant cumulative impact with respect to hazards and risk of upset. Housing and Population The project and related projects would increase population growth in the region. Forecasted growth Is based on existing adopted land use designations and zoning, including Specific Plan areas and the GDP_ The proposed project would be consistent with the General Plan's growth protections based on the Otay Ranch GDP's multi- family housing designation for the EUC SPA Plan of 2,983 units and protected population of 7,696. Related projects in the region have been determined to be less than significant with respect to housing and population impacts. As the proposed protect and related projects would not be significant with respect to housing and population, cumulative Impacts would be less than significant: Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Cleannghouse No. 2D07041074 Significance after Mltigafion Measures Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation Less than significant measures are required. City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-96 Executive Table ES-1 Summary of Environmental Impacts and Mitigation Measures cD N rn Measures Global Climate Chanoe The project 'is estimated to represent a net increase of O.D37 percent of 2004 State-wide total emissions at buildout in 2030, although a sizeable percentage of the operational GHG emissions are already generated through future occupants' and visitors' current activities. Executive Order S-3-05 establishes GHG emissions targets for the state and has resulted in the Californja Climate Action Team (CAT)'s published recommendations and sirategles for reducing GHG emissions and reaching the targets established in the executive order. The proposed protect, by implementing GHG reducing protect features, results m an estimated increase of only D.037 percent in 2004 State-wide emissions and supports of the State's goals related to the reduction of greenhouse gases. Thus, cumulative Impacts with respect to GHG would 6e less than significant. Significance after Mitigation See Transportation, Air Quality, and Water mitigation Less than significant with measures, above. mitigation Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area EIR Stale Cleannghouse No. 2007047074 City of Chula Vista May 2009 Page ES-97 ATTACHMENT 6 EUC SPA PLAN AMENDMENT 9-127 ATTACHIViENT 6 Eastern Urban Center (EUC) Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Otay Ranch GDP REVISED AMENDMENT DRAFT February 5, 2013 Project Sponsor McMillin Otay Ranch, LLC P.O. Box 85104 San Diego, CA 92186 Contact: Todd Galarneau (619)794-1204 ~alameauna mcmillin.com Prepared by Cinti Land Planning PMB 101, PO 439030 San Diego, CA 92143 Contact: Gary P. Cinti (619) 223-7408 garv~a cinti.com 9-128 INTRODUCTION B. Record of Amendments 1 Amendment to the Site Utilization Plan to chanee the Eastern Gateway District from mixed use to residential and deleting_reference to an alternative school site. (Date to be inserted ugon approval ofthe amendment) t4f4fB9j 1/21/]3 SPAPuN I-4 9-129 Page 2 of 39 INTRODUCTION Site Utilization Plan (Existing) 1 4 _~ ~, ~ ~~ /¢ '~ ~y P~ac~;er 1 f; P ~; .\ Potential Public Components Park tJbrary +® Fre Station Potential Elementary School' CPP Site 2 7 Symbol Eestem Urban Center Districts Arses '~ Gateway Mixed use Commercial District 22.7 Nartheastam Nerghborlropd Distict 73.2 3 Eestem Gateway Neighborhood District 17.2 ~, Business District 25.4 Yj .: Mixed Use CIviGOfgce Core District 23.3 s Main Stroe! Distdd 34.7 7 Eestem Gateway District 8.8 8 SO~thw9atam Neighborhood Dislrid 12.5 9 Central Southern Neighborhood District X4.4 '~ Q Southeastern Neigfi¢rorfiood Dts[rict 23.8 Total" .208.6 ':Does not include perimeter arterialhighweys l ~a J I Eastern Utben CenterDistricls Sq. Ft (OQO's) Permitted Dwelling Units Permitted Symbol' _ T Mined Use CivictOflice Core D(striM Main Street District Easiem Gateway District Notes: Note: District 4d maY afro be an atlemaUve )ar (he 7: `Numeric Area SymtrolsUO rtat raprasentphases. Elementary Schoot Site. 2. 7ha atiacatron ofin~ensityln each dishict shall be based on the building height regulations in the EUC Form Based Coda. Eastern ITrban Center aHUwvisrA O'K'AY RANC~I Urban Design: RTKL Ci^e ti Land~Planning a~ > Exhibit III-6 (4/1/04) SPA PLAN 1-23 Page 3 of 39 INTRODUCTION Site Utilization Plan (Proposed) Eastern Urban Center Districts Atxas iatewaY Mixed Use Commercial District 22.7 tonheastem Neighborhood Distrito 13.2 tastem Gateway Neighborhood Dislriet 17.2 3usiness District 25.4 rllxed Use ClvidCiBce Core District 23.3 Aain Street Distrito 34.7 iastem Gateway r7istria 9.6 >ou8nvastem Neighborhood District 12.5 ;antral Southern Neighborhood District 24.4 Southeastern Neighborhood District 23.6 'otal" 206.6 'Does not include perimeter arterial highways Proposed Amendments subject to Ctty Council Approval Potential Public Components Park Library Firs Station Potential Elementary School" CPP Site +~`r/~ :~. Eastern r'~TIl' VF CHULA VISTA Nqn-residential (000'sJ Permitted Sq. FL Residential Dwelling Units Pertnltted _ Low Target High Low fierget High 100 4D0 700 0 50 100 2 120 200 150 300 50D $10 50 250 15D 400 750 t;iG9 505 t:532 1,900 0 100 i50 5 Mixed Use CiviUOffice care District 100 900 1.000 0 200 300 s Main Street District 60 240 40D 100 533 BOD ] EaslemGalewayDislricf 490 -'~0 ~A90 50 200 300 $ Southwestern Neighborhood Dislrid 2 50 204 300 500 T00 g Central Southern NeighborhooU District 2 45 100 130 500 650 10 Southeasiem Neighborhood District 2 150 200 200 200 450 Maximum , Not to Excwd, Totals 3,A87 2,983 Hates: t.. `Numeric Area Symbols do nqt represent phases. 2_ The allocafion of intensity in each district shall be based an the bw7ding height regulations in the EUC Form Based Code, CheP1er03,09.002b vi, therein. Urban Center QTAY RANCH (-~f69j 1/30/13 I-23 ~~°"~~ Urban Design: RTKL Cinti LCtnd Planning 1~ ~~ ~ m 113`0/13 Exhibit III-6 Proposed SPA PLAN Page 4 of 39 FORM BASED CODE PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS & VILLAGE DESIGN PLAN Eastern Urban Center Sectional Planning Area {SPA) Otay Ranch GDP REVISED AMENDMENT DRAFT February S, 2013 Project Sponsor: McMillin Otay Ranch, LLC F.O. Box 35104 San Diego, CA 92l 86 Contact: Todd Galarneau (619)794-1204 tgal arneau@mcmillin. com Prepared by: Cinti Land Planning PMB 101, PO 439030 San Diego, CA 92143 Contact: Gary P. Cinti (619)223-7408 gory@cinti. eo2n Page 5 of 39 ~ ~3z SYMBOL (from. Site Utilization Plan) DOMINANT BUILDING TYPE DESCRIPTION EUC-1 Business/Retail Gateway Mixed Use Commercial District EUC-2 Residential Northeastern Neighborhood District :EUC-3 Residential Eastern Gateway Neighborhood District :EUC-4 Business/Retail Business District EUC-5 Mixed Use/Civic Mixed Use Civic/Office Core District EUC-6 Mixed Use Main Street District EUC-7 use Residential Eastern Gateway District EUC-$ Residential Southwestern Neighborhood District EUC-9 Residential Central Southern Neighborhood District EUC-10 Residential Southeastern Neighborhood District 01.08.0001 Adoption of Regulatory Districts Maps The Regulatory Districts Maps for the Otay Ranch Eastern Urban Cent in Chapter 02, District Regulations and Design Provisions,. which requirements, maps. of each district as District Requirements. These i~ notations, references, data, district boundaries and other information in + part ofthese Eastern Urban Center SPA Planned Comnnunity District R+ concurrently herewith. Ol .08.0002 Amendments to the Regulatory Districts Maps Changes to the boundary of the .EUC, in accordance with Chapter 04, of a tentative or f nal map znay be made to the Regulatory Flans as nmvirlPrl fnr in C"hantPr (14 1,P.YP.1n Clarification of Ambiguity land .mission decision can be appealed to 1 ~r on appeal, by the City Council, the I-8 in the iiremi the di and i Page 6 of 39 INTRODUCTION EASTERN URBAN CENTER SPA BUILDING TYPE DISTRICTS DEFINITIONS °!' ~,~ INTROllUCTION Should any provision of these regulations conflict with the regulations of the Municipal Code, the requirements herein shall apply. References to the Chula Vista Municipal Code incorporate the Code provisions in effect on the date of project approval. 01.10.000 Effect of Regulations The provisions of this Ordinance governing the use of land, buildings, structures, the size of setbacks abutting buildings and structures, the height and bulk of buildings, standards of performance, design requirements, and other provisions are hereby declared to be in effect upon all land included within the boundaries of each and every regulatory district established by this Ordinance. 01,11.000 Amendments Any amendment made to the EUC FBC after initial adoption shall be described below: Amendment Date of Ordinance Number A o tion Number General Description to be lrrser•ted upon adoption Amended to change the Eastern Gateway District from mixed use to residential and establish 3-story minimums frontine on "D" Strset and in lots 4 and 27. Reduced the minimum height in lots 11 and 21 to 2- story, with 3-story minimum frontine "D" street, and adding, specific locations for enhancements. ~~r/ 1/2l/13 I-9 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS Page 7 of 39 ...e Chapter 02 District Regulations and Design Guidelines 02.00.000 Purpose and Intent The purpose of this Chapter is to provide regulations and design guidelines for each of the ten EUC Districts. It is intended that these regulations and guidelines are used to supplement the other requirements in the FBC and related documents. This Chapter identifies six dominant land use categories and each of the EUC districts that fall within each ofthose categories. Districts correspond to those identifies in Exhibit II-1 (Districts). Refer also to Chapter III for additional requirements and exceptions. The requirements for each district include a range of urban form guidelines and then concludes with a diagram indicating district specific regulations, including: a. Land use b. Permitted intensity c. Pedestrian corridor widths d. Building setbacks e. Building height regulations f. Access management regulations g. Parking requirements dlSf I'ICfS (Existing) Exhibit II-1 ($/1/09) II-1 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS ~-~~. Page 8 of 39 Chapter 02 District Regulations and Design Guidelines 02.00.000 Purpose and Intent The purpose of this Chapter is to provide regulations and design guidelines for each of the ten EUC Districts. It is intended that these regulations and guidelines are used to supplement the other requirements in the FBC and related documents. This Chapter identifies six dominant land use categories and each of the EUC districts that fall within each of those categories. Districts correspond to those identifies in Exhibit II-1 (Districts). Refer also to Chapter III for additional requirements and exceptions. The requirements for each district include a range of urban form guidelines and then concludes with a diagram indicating district specific regulations, including: a. Land use b. Permitted intensity c. Pedestrian corridor widths d. Building setbacks e. Building height regulations f. Access management regulations g. Parking requirements Districts (Proposed) DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES i District 4 -Table of Requirements (Existing) _~ Dominant Land Use ~~ ~ m A~;. ~_wa7< r~ n=ay Law Target Hi h Residential Dwelling Units Permitted 0 10D 150 Non-Residential Intensity Range Low Tar et High (in 000's Sq. Ft-) 500 1,362 1,900 0'-10' 0-i5'+ Building Setback Stories or height in feet Minimum Average Building Height 1 5 25' 70' MH1 MH5 1-7 3-15 Building Height Range (stories) Access Management Category o v Z J Exhibit II-9a (8/1/09) II-12 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS °~~ Page 10 of 39 DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES District 4 -Table of Requirements Pro osed~ Low Target High Residential Dwelling Units Permitted 0 100 150 Non-Residential Intensity Ran e Low Target High g (in000'sSq. Ft.) X99-505 -1~6s~- 1,532 1,900 0'-10' 0-15'+ Building Setback 'i't.3<"". 'i Si Stories or height in feet Minimum Average Building Height. 1 5 25' 7d' MH1 MH5 1-7 3-15 Building Height Range (stories) N ~ Vl ~ a Access Management Category z +- Exh%bit II-9~ ~.]-Qf6f@c}j 2/( 5/13) jI-I Z EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS '.°"~ " Page 11 of 39 DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES District 7 -Table of Requirements (Existing} Low Target High Residentia! Dwelling Units Permitted 50 200 300 Non-Residential Intensity Range Low Target High (in 000's 5q. 1"t.) 10 170 400 0'-5' 0'-10' 0-15'+ Building Setback Average Building Height 3-12 Building Height Range (stories) N ~~ N N Access Management Category z m ~ ¢~ a ¢ ~- ($/1109) II-34 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS ~~! Page 12 of 39 DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES District 7 -Table of Requirements (Proposed} Dominant Land Use '~ . ~ Low Target High Residential Dwelling Units Permitted 50 200 300 Non-Residential Intensity Range Low Target Hi h (in 000's Sq. Ft.} 0 ~9- ~& D -469 D 0'-5' 0'-10' 0-15'+ Building Setback ~.~~4, Stories or hei ht in feet Minimum Auerage Building Height 3 (Refer also fo exceptions rn i (l~` '~ 2bi t d 40' er p n an rap _ MH3 2-312 Building Height Range (stories} N N O~ ~ ~ ~ N Access Management Category o ~ ~ ~ a z m ._ ,. _,~,-v. F}6f6f99j l /21/13 it-34 EUC PC DISTRICT REGIn.ATIONs Page 13 of 39 DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES District 7 Requirements DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES District 7 Requirements :t ~~ f}6f6f99j 1/21/13 iI-35 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS Exhibit II-23b (Proposed) f Page I S of 39 ~~d DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES Residential Neighborhoods (Existing) Residential Neighborhoods (Proposed (-1-6fCrf99j 1/21/13 II-37 EUCPCDISTRICTREGUI,ATIONS Page 16 of 39 ~^",,~ l Exhibit II-24 (Existing Exhibit II-24 (Proposed) DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES District 2 -Table of Requirements (Existing) a Dominant Land Use '~, o' Low Target High residential Dwelling Units Permitted 150 gpp 500 Non-Residential Intensity Range ow Target High (in 000's Sq. Ft.) 2 120 200 0'-10' Bullding Setback Stories or height in feet Minimum Average Building Height 1 3 25' 40' MH1 MH3 B ildin e (stories) H i ht Ran 1-7 2-7 g u g g e Access Management Category d a z° a ~ J ~ N o ~ ~ ~ ~ d ~, t '~ RI/RO Notes: Minimum height for buildings fronting arterials is 3 stories. Rafer to Exhibit Pedestrian Corndors"for widths and locations. Exhibit II-28a (s/l/o9} II-44 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS °`"~7 Page 17 of 39 DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES District 2 -Table of Requirements (Proposed) Land Use Low Target High Residential Dwelling Units Permitted 150 300 500 Nan-Residential Intensit Range Low Target High y (in 000's Sq. Ft,) 2 120 200 0'-10' Building Setback . Stories or height in feet Minimum Average Building Height 1 3 25' 44' MH1 MH3 1-7 3 ~-7 Building Height Range (stories) -- y N ~ U ~ J ~ N y Q Access Management Category a a Z a°' ~ a "~ F.. Exhibit II-28a (Proposed) f9}-(1130/13) II-44 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS ~~ Page 18 of 39 District 2 w ~ _ _.~.~- _ _ _ i _ ._-- ing) Fsc ~ how exhibit. Exhibit II-28b (8/1/091 II-45 EU(' PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES Requirements .._-_~~_~,_ _ _ ~ r-,__lrict Page I9 of 39 DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES Exhibit II-28b (~9f6f99j 1./21/13 II-45 EUC PC DISTRICr REGULATIONS ~ r ~r Page 20 of 3y ~"~°~ / DIS?ltICTREGLILAT]ONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES _ District 3 - Table of_Requirements (Exsting)_ _____ .~ Dominant Land Use Low ?arget High Residential Dwelling Units Permitted C t5D 400 750 Non-Residential Intensity Ran e Low Target High g (in 000's Sq. Ft.) 5 50 250 ildi B S tb ck 0'-5' Q'-10' u ng e a Stories or height. in feet Minimum Average Building Height 3 5 40' 7Q' MH3 MH5 2-7 gilding Height Range (stories).. yNy y ' N N ' 'O ~ N (C J ~ to Aocess Management Category U z ~ !l N O [ m~¢ ~ - u e ~ -~ d ~ a ti- ~ ~ ~ ~~ Notes: A?inimum height for buildings fronting eKerials Is 3 stones. Refer to Exhrbrt Pedestrian Comdors"for widths and locations. 9) 1/21/13 ,- ~' ~'~~. ~~ ;. Exhibit II-3Oa (Existing) '; `y j _ ~ ^~5~'~ .. ~ II-48 EUC PC D{STRICT REGULATIONS ! ~./ ~~ Page 21 of 39 DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINIaS District ~ - Table of Requirements (Proposed) Use Low Target High Residential Dwelling Units Permitted 150 400 i50 Non-Residential Intensity Range Low Target High (in D00's Sq. Ft.) ~ 0 -~- 50 250 ~ ~ ~ N ~ J N ~ U Q Q ~C~ -6 C _ fy ]y ~ c~ Access Management Category z ~ m ~ ¢ ~ ~ a a ~- _._ ,~ Notes: Minimum height for buildings fronting arterials is 3 stones. Refer fo Exhibit °Pedesfrian Comdors" for widths and locations. -(-~-{if89-} 1130113 ~ II-48 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS Page 22 of 39 0'-5' 0'-10' Building Setback DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES ~~..- Exhibit II-30b ($!1/09) II-50 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS District 3 Requirements Eastern Gateway Neigh orhood District (Existing) ~-P~ Page 23 of 39 DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES District 3 Requirements Eastern Gateway Neigh orhood District (Proposed) DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES District 1 Q -Table of Requirements (Existing) .~ Dominant Land Use ~y Low Tar et High Residential Dwelling Units Permitted 204 204 454 Non-Residential Intensity Range Low Tar et High (in 004's Sq. Ft.) 2 150 200 4'-5' 0'-10' 0-15'+ Building Setback ':ryas. rr-s-oz - Stories or height in feet I+Ainimur+'t Average iuilding Height 1 3 5 25' 40' 70' MH1 MH3 MH5 1-7 2-7 3-12 Building Height Range (stories} Access Management Category N c Z ~ 7 U a ~a .~ ~ E ~ ao ~ "~.+ ~ ~~ Notes: Minimum height for buildings fronting arterials is 3 stories. Referto Exhibit °t'edestrian Comdors"for widths and locations. Exhibit II-36a (8/1/09) II-6O EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS ~-~~2 Page 25 of 39 DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELIN1tiS District 1Q -Table c~ Requirements (Proposed .~ a Dominant Land Use ~~ a Low Target Hi h Residential pwelling Units Permitted 200 200 450 Non-Residential Intensity Range ow Target igh (in 000's Sq. Ft.) 2 150 200 0'-5' 0'-10' 0-15'+ building Setback Stories or height in feet RQinimum Average Building Height 1 3 5 Note:. The minimum building height 25' 4t)' 70' in Lot 27 is 3-story MH1 MH3 MH5 1-7 2-7 3-12 Building Height Range (stories) ~j ~ t.7 Q N O ~ ~ N ~ d U Access Management Category n ~ Z J ~ E € a a m ~ ~~ Exhibit II-36a (Proposed) (}9f6>'993 1 /21 /13 Ii-60 FUC AC DISTRICT REGUi.ATTONs Page 26 of 39 ~/ ~'~.. DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN GUIDELINES i-lictrir-t 1 t'1 Rc-ry~ ~irr~mant~ Exhibit II-3bb (g/1/09) II-61 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS ~~ Page 27 of 37 (-~-9f6~f99j ] /2l / 13 District 10 Southeastern DISTRICT REGULATIONS ARID DESIGN GUIDELI2VE5 Requirements Neighborhood District (Proposed) Exhibit II-36b (Proposed) GL.f38ALREGtILATIOt~[3 AND DESIG7J F120VI$t0NS 03.02.002 Business/Retail. Dominant. District: This district allows mixed uses as described in the mixed use district description but also allows single Use structures for offices, retail,. hotels, and business support services. Residential and civic uses are also permitted in mixed use and stand alone formats, but within the district shall be secondary to business and retail activities. Streetscape uses including concessions such as street vendors in the nearby town square are appropriate in this district. In addition. to the dominant land uses of the district, the inclusion of services such as child care facilities and adult education, which complement or support the primary land uses contemplated for the district, should be encouraged either asstand-alone formats or as a part of large employment users. Childcare facilities provided in either of these formats will qualify for credit as Community Purpose Fay 03.02.003 Mixed Use/Civic Dominant District: the uses need not consume the majority c uses located in the EUC shall be to concessions such as street. vendors in In addition to the dominant land use care facilities which complement ar district, should be encouraged. either be Gated within this district. Streescape uses including the civic plaza park. are appropriate in this district. s of the district, the inclusion of services such as child support the primary land uses contemplated far the as stand-alone formats or as a pert oflarge employment in either of these formats will qualify for credit as 03.02.004 Residential .Dominant Districts: There are -f-r~e six distinct residential surrounding a centralized park facility. Each shall be the EUC, east four l1Rg, WILII lC~1LLG11Lld1 UJGJQUVVG. I1U1i111V11Q11~',LVJ1UV11lICt111VV-VYVln, 11~,A-arrt~VV VI iva~ are permitted. These combined uses will be categorized according to the amount of re fo©tage of non-residential, and number of residential units included for intensity Rations. Flex-space will be considered non-residential, Building Type'District Boundaries cries of Building type districts. witkln the EUC SPA are shown on Exhibit III-1 Plan -Dominant Land C1sel. The Building type district boundaries shown an the map III-2 of lines. Changes to ht-of--way, or lot line the Building Type Di EUC PGDISTR[Cr REGUL Page 29 of 39 9-ts~ GLOBAL REGULATIONS ANB DESIGN PROVISIONS Regulating Plan n~m~nant Land Use (Existing) BusinessJRetail Mixed Use Mixed Use/Civic Residential ~lE/~ Eastern Urban Center ca-,uwv~srA STAY RANCH 98/ll09) III-4 ~?~1 Ulan Design: RTKL Crr;tr Land Planning wac~.v.~wo.nm,.e. ` \~ Exhibit III-1 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS Page 30 of 39 GLOBAL REGULATIONS AND DESIGN PROVISIONS Regulating Plan n~m~nant Land Use (Proposed) business/Retail Mixed Use Mixed Use/Civic Residential ~ Amendment consists of convertin # e Eastern Gatewa Ois#nct rom Mrxe Use to Resi entral ~`•.. ~. E astern Urban Center CHULA VISTA OTAY RANCID f8f~-f99j (1/21/13) III-4 Urban Design. RTKZ Cir.t; land Planning ! u ~ LJ ~~,o„z Exhibit III-1 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS Page 31 of 39 `7 °"" j~ ~ .,;: ~ ~, . :.M, I pit i::~ ';~'S' ~'; 1': ~. GLOBAL REGULATIONS AND DESCGN PROVISIONS Urban Form District Map (Existing) (9/22/ 12) IIT-64 ~~d~~ EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS tilj tT ~ ~ 1l ~~ ~ ,,. ~~„ ~~il ~;~. y; ~ ~, ''~ Page 32 of 39 -I~,~}(1 /21 / 13) III-64 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATTON3 Page 33 of 39 GLOBAL REGULATIONS AND. DESIGN PROVISIONS Average :Height Example ~~ ~; ,,v. J~: ~;: ~~ vi. Exceptions: Exceptions will be considered that are not factared into height averaging, specifically buildings that represent iconic architecture, including towers, that punctuate important intersections, prominent locations, or similar .conditions. Similarly, specific uses requiring single story buildings (such as high end restaurants, clubhouses, and civic buildings}. - ~~(1/21/13) III-67 EUC PC DlsTtucT REGULATIONS Page 34 of 39 9 -~ Exhibit III-48 intersections. Southwest corner of intersection of Eastlake Pasrkwav and "F" Street (at this location. 3-story buildings are encouraged, but hot required); GLOBAL REGULATIONS AND DESIGN P120VISfONS ,~ Northwest and southwest corners of the intersection of Eastlake Parkway and "H" Street: and, ~ Northwest corner of the intersection of EasLake Parkway and "K" Street. Along the "F" Street frontage of lot 11, to enhance the urban apaearance and to provide a transition to the 3-story buildings of the "D" Street frontage; All 2-story buildings fronting internal streets and main pedestrian All buildingheig_hts shall be determined in accordance with Section 03.09.002 of this Form Based Code. Form Based Code. GLOBAL REGULATIONS AND DESIGN PROVISIONS Regulating Plan . . `. `: Eastern Urban Center ~ u visra UTAY RANCH (9/22/12) III-69 Urban Design: RTKL Cintl Land Planning s^waoup~ryusa+a ~ ~ 2!9/09 Exhibit III-49 EUC PC DISTRICT REGULATIONS. Page 36 of 39 ~~~ Regulating Plan Building Heights (Proposed) Mfnfmum Average Berifde`rtg Heighi'' Stories Feet 1 25 2 35 3 40 5 70 ~•~: E~.stern Urban tenter ~r.4 ~-~. cH w visra OTAY RANCH t meet either stories or feet ~t that 7-stony buildings must ninimum of 25' in herght. Weight f]istdd Boundary `~~'~~~ Locations where taller buildings are `'`~~;~t ~~ \•~~.l v. approPr7aie 3-Story minimum heightaAjaeeNt- ~ ~ (g-6e4esipfs fronting adjacent street Buildings on these lots should be taller than those on lNatn Street Potential school location, which does not factor in to height averaging cafculation8, 3story buiidings or bulltlings with enhanced © yenical features to emi:has¢e height al mtersecttans Provide enhaneed architectural treatmenl& ~~~+*~ unctuate the to bwldm Ime with vertical e emen s to avoi a continuous -story roo~oo ine. (Refer a so to ChzGter D=-09.002b vi Urban Design: RTKL Cinii Land Planning we w+po, up+ryna~~+w p~lm 11/2512 Page 37 of 39 ~~ f~DA4INISTR4TION That any deviation will not result in a reduction of the minimum average building height required in the overall minimum average height district boundary; ii. That any deviation is otherwise consistent with the urban form standards specified in Chapter 02, herein; iii. That the project is otherwise consistent with the character description and design vision (Chapter 02) for the district in which the proposed project is located; iv. That the project applicant has received a recommendation for approval of the intensity transfer from the Master Developer, and written approval from all property owners that would have any change in their intensity. 04.04.003 Site. Plan and Architectural Review: Site Plan and Architectural Review shall include those requirements specified in Chapter 19.14.420 et. seq. CVMC. 04.05.000 Intensity Transfers 04.05.001 Purpose: The purpose and intent of the Eastern Urban Center is to create a vibrant mixed use center serving Otay Ranch and surrounding areas in Eastern Chula Vista. The Site Utilization Plan provides arangeofresidential andnon-residential intensities in ten districts, which provide some latitude in the proportion ofresidential and non- residential uses intended for the EUC. There may be development proposals where the intended character and purpose of the EPIC can be maintained, yet result in inconsistencies with the total intensity established for a particular district, or for the total intensity of all districts. To provide for these instances, the fol lowing regulations are established to permit and regulate these transfers of intensity. Every project, other than those at the target intensity, shall require an intensity transfer to insure that the maximum intensity is achieved at full maturity. Any reduction in low and target intensity in any district must be met with a corresponding increase in another district and vice versa. 04.05.002 Transfers Within Intensity Range of a District Unless a proposed project is exactly consistent with the target intensity shown on the Site Utilization Plan, an intensity transfer is required. If it is within the intensity ranges for intensity indicated, then it shall be assumed to be consistent with intended (4/24!09) IV-11 Page 38 of 39 ~~ N f11 w Updated as of: Non-Residential Intensity Monitoring Table Zoning Administrator's Signature Non-Residential Intensity Square Feet Transfers Land Use District {in 000's Sq. Ft,) Actual Development Square Feet {Based Approved Within S Util Pl Notes (from Site on Actual Design an ite _ Utilization Plan) Review Approvals} Range (yeslno) Transfenred Transferred Low Target High In Out Gateway Mated C Use District `"' NW Neigh. Dist. NE Neigh. Dist. Business Dist. Mixed Use Civic! Oboe Core Dist. to n Main Street Dist. b n C7 E. Gateway Dist. -~ z n . SW Neigh. Dist. -~ k Central So. Neigh. Dist. a o C SE Neigh. Dist. rn N 'b A 6q W b W b 100 400 700 0 yes 0 0 2 120 200 0 yes 0 0 -5-10 50 250 0 Yes 0 0 5 381 1,5 1,900 0 yes 0 0 100 900 1,000 0 yes 0 0 80 240 400 0 yes 0 0 ~ 0 ~g.0 -4g0- 0 0 yes 0 0 2 50 200 0 yes 0 0 2 45 100 0 yes 0 0 2 150 200 0 yes 0 0 ATTACHMENT 8 EUC SPA PLAN AMENDMENT 9-167 RESOLUTION RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL CONSIDERING THE ADDENDUM (IS-13-001) TO EIR 07-01 AND APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN FOR 207 ACRES OF LAND IN THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER PORTION OF THE OTAY RANCH I. RECITALS A. Project Site WHEREAS, the area of land that is the subject of this Resolution is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated into this Resolution, and commonly known as the Eastern Urban Center (EUC), and for the purpose of general description herein consists of 207 acres located adjacent to and east of SR-125, adjacent to and west of Eastlake Pazkway, south of Birch Road and the Otay Ranch Town Center, and north of the future extension of Hunte Pazkway (Project Site); and B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula Vista Development Services Department on October 17, 2012 by SLF IV/McMillin Millenia JV, LLC (the "Applicant," "Owner" and "Developer" requesting approval of an EUC Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and Form Based Code (FBC) amendment to change the minimum building height within certain EUC Districts, to redistribute the land use mix (residential and commercial) within various Districts, and to remove reference to District 10 as an alternative school site. The proposed amendments mostly affect the first phase of development, approximately 89 acres out of 207 (Project); and C. Prior Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of various entitlements and agreements, including: 1) a SPA Plan including Planned Community District Regulations/Design Guidelines, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Affordable Housing Program and other regulatory documents approved by City Council Resolution No. 2009-224 on September 15, 2009; and 2) Planned Community District Regulations approved by City Council Ordinance No. 31422839 on October 6, 2009; and D. Environmental Determination WHEREAS, the Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project was previously covered in adopted Second-Tier Final Environmental Impact Report, EIR 07-01. The Development Services Director has determined that only 9-168 Resolution No. Page 2 minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the prepazation of a subsequent document have occurred; therefore, the Development Services Director has prepared an addendum (IS 13-001) to EIR 07-O1;and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Addendum (IS 13-001) to EIR 07-01 has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, and the Environmental Procedures of the City of Chula Vista; and E. Planning Commission Record of Application WHEREAS, the Development Services Director set the time and place for a hearing on the Project, and notice of the hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundary of the Project Site at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project and voted to adopt Resolution PCM-12-19 recommending that the City Council amend the EUC SPA Plan; and WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at the public hearing on the Project and the minutes and Resolution resulting therefrom, are incorporated into the record of this proceeding; and F. City Council Record of Application WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project application and notices of said hearing, together with its purposes given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the Project Site at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the duly noticed and called public hearing on the Project was held before the City Council in the Council Chambers in the City Hall, Chula Vista Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue, to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to the same. 9-169 Resolution No. Page 3 NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby finds, determines, and resolves as follows: IL CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA The City Council finds that, in the exercise of their independent review and judgment, the addendum to EIR 07-O1 in the form presented, has been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista and adopts the Addendum to EIR-07-O1. III. SPA FINDINGS A. THE SPA PLAN, AS AMENDED, IS IN CONFORMITY-WITH THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN AND ITS SEVERAL ELEMENTS. The proposed amendments are consistent with the previously approved plans and regulations applicable to surrounding sites and, therefore, the proposed amendments can be planned and zoned in coordination and substantial compatibility with said development B. THE SPA PLAN, AS AMENDED, WILL PROMOTE THE ORDERLY SEQUENTIALIZED DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVOLVED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREAS. The Eastern Urban Center SPA Plan as amended, will maintain existing provisions and requirements to ensure the orderly, phased development of the project prior to or current with the need for said public facilities. C. THE SPA PLAN, AS AMENDED, WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND USE, RESIDENTIAL ENJOYMENT, CIRCULATION, OR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY. The land uses within the EUC SPA Plan are designed to provide compatible development intensities adjacent to Birch Road and Eastlake Parkway and Village 11. A comprehensive transit planning program and street network serves the Project and provides for access to off-site adjacent properties. The proposed SPA Plan follows all existing environmental protection guidelines and will avoid unacceptable off-site impacts through the provision of mitigation measures specified in the EUC Final Second-Tier Environmental Impact Report (EIR 07-01). 9-170 Resolution No. Page 4 IV. FINDINGS REGARDING INTENSITY RANGE OF A DISTRICT A. THAT THE TRANSFER MAINTAINS THE INENDED MDfED USE CHARACTER OF THE EUC. The transfer of intensity, as proposed, maintains the intended mixed use character of the EUC. B. THAT A CORRESPONDING INCREASE OR DECREASE IN ANOTHER DISTRICT IS INCLUDED IN THE PROPOSED TRANSFER SO THAT OVERALL SPA INTENSITIES WILL NOT BE EXCEEDED OR REDUCED. The 10,000 sq.ft. within the "low" category of non-residential would be transferred into the "low" category within Districts 3 and 4. The 170,000 sq.ft. within the "target" category would be transferred into the "target" category of District 4. The applicant is also proposing to remove the 400,000 sq. ft. contained within the "High" non-residential category of District 7. Amended language is being proposed to only require such transfer in the case of the square-footage or unit count within the "low" and "target" category. Because the "low" category indicates the minimum amount which must be constructed and the sum total of the "target" category indicates the maximum amount that may be constructed, the removal of this transfer requirement from the "high" category will have no impact on the resultant amount of residential units or commercial acreage actually constructed. Given that the EUC's approvals were based on the "target" land use amounts, the only way any squaze footage or unit counts within the "high" category can be constructed within any District would require the corresponding removal of square-footage/unit count within the "target" category of another District. This would ensure that the maximum allowable amount is not exceeded. Thus, the removal of the 400,000 squaze-feet currently shown within the "High" category of District 7 would now be allowed, once the amended language is adopted, and have no impact on the overall project constructed on the site. C. THAT THE PROJECT APPLICANT HAS RECEIVED A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE INTENSITY TRANSFER FROM THE MASTER DEVELOPER. The Project Applicant is SLF IV/McMillin Millenia JV, LLC, the Master Developer. 9-171 Resolution No. Page 5 D. THAT -THE PROJECT APPLICANT HAS RECENED A RECOMMENDATION FOR APPROVAL OF THE INTENSITY TRANSFER FROM THE MASTER DEVELOPER, AND WRITTEN APPROVAL FROM ALL PROPERTY OWNERS THAT WOULD HAVE A CHANGE fN THEIR INTENSITY. The Project Applicant is SLF IV/McMillin Millenia JV, LLC, the Master Developer, and at this time, there are no other property owners affected by the intensity transfer. V. APPROVAL OF SPA AMENDMENTS Based on the fmdings above, the City Council approves the EUC SPA Plan as amended and shown in Attachment 6 that accompanies the staff report subject to the conditions set forth below: Prior to the 30`h day after the accompanying Ordinance becomes effective, the Applicant shall prepare a clean copy of the SPA Plan document by deleting all strike out/underlines and shading. Where the document contains an existing and proposed exhibit, the previous existing exhibit shall be removed and substituted. In addition, the revised text, document format, maps and statistical changes within the EUC SPA and Form Based Code shall be approved by the Director of Development Services for printing prior to incorporating said revisions into the final document. 2. Prior to the 30th day after the accompanying Ordinance becomes effective, the Applicant shall submit to the Development Services Department 10 copies and a CD of the approved amendment to the EUC SPA Plan and Planned Community (PC) District Regulations. 3. Applicant to comply with all the conditions of approval of the Otay Ranch EUC SPA Plan incorporated in Resolution 2009-224 and adopted SPA Plan. VI. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS If any of the forgoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, and any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to the their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted, deny or fixrther condition issuance of future building permits, deny, revoke or fm-ther condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted, instituted and prosecute, litigate or compel their compliance or seek damages for their violations. No vested rights are gained by Applicant or any successor in interest by the City approval of this Resolution. 9-172 Resolution No. Page 6 VII. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon enforceability of each and every term provision and condition herein stated; and that in the event that any one or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, if the City so determines in its sole discretion, this Resolution shall be deemed to be revoked and of no further force or effect ab initio. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council hereby adopts this Resolution approving the Project in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained herein. Presented by: Gary Halbert, P.E., AICP Assistant City Manager/ Development Services Director Approved as to form by: en oog' ~~City Attorney 9-173 ORDINANCE ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND DESIGN PLAN (FORM BASED CODE) FOR 207 ACRES OF LAND IN THE EASTERN URBAN CENTER PORTION OF THE OTAY RANCH I. RECITALS A. Project Site WHEREAS, the area of land that is the subject of this Ordinance is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated into this Ordinance, and commonly known as the Eastern Urban Center (EUC), and for the purpose of general description herein consists of 207 acres located adjacent to and east of SR-125, adjacent to and west of Eastlake Parkway, south of Birch Road and the Otay Ranch Town Center, and north of the future extension of Hunte Parkway ("Project Site"); and B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula Vista Development Services Department on October 17, 2012 by SLF IV/McMillin Millenia JV, LLC (the "Applicant," "Owner" and "Developer" requesting approval of an EUC) Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and Form Based Code (FBC) amendment to change the minimum building height within certain EUC Districts, to redistribute the land use mix (residential and commercial) within vazious Districts, and to remove reference to District 10 as an alternative school site. The proposed amendments mostly affect the first phase of development, approximately 89 acres out of 207 (Project); and C. Prior Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of various entitlements and agreements, including: 1) a SPA Plan including Planned Community District Regulations/Design Guidelines, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Affordable Housing Program and other regulatory documents approved by City Council Resolution No. 2009-224 on September 15, 2009; and 2) Planned Community District Regulations approved by City Council Ordinance No. 31422839 on October 6, 2009; and 9-174 Ordinance No. Page 2 D. Environmental Determination WHEREAS, the Development Services Director has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has determined that the project was covered in previously adopted Environmental Impact Report, Second-Tier Final Environmental Impact Report, EIR 07-01. The Development Services Director has determined that only minor technical changes or additions to this document are necessary and that none of the conditions described in Section 15162 of the State CEQA Guidelines calling for the preparation of a subsequent document have occurred; therefore, the Development Services Director has prepazed an addendum (IS 13-001) to this document, EIR 07-01, and WHEREAS, the City Council finds that the Addendum (IS 13-001) to EIR 07-01 has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, and the Environmental Procedures of the City of Chula Vista; and E. Planning Commission Record of Application WHEREAS, the Development Services Director set the time and place for a hearing on the Project, and notice of the hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundary of the Project Site at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project to adopt Resolution PCM-12-19 recommending that the City Council amend the EUC SPA Plan; and WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at the public hearing on the Project and the minutes and Resolution resulting therefrom, are incorporated into the record of this proceeding; and F. City Council Record of Application WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project application and notices of said hearing, together with its purposes given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the Project Site at least ten (10) days prior to the hearing; and WHEREAS, the duly noticed and called public hearing on the Project was held before the City Council in the Council Chambers in the City Hall, Chula Vista Civic Center, 276 Fourth Avenue, to receive the recommendations ofthe Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to the same. 9-175 Ordinance No. Page 3 II. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find, determine and ordain as follows: A. CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN The City Council finds that the proposed amendments to the EUC Planned Community District Regulations and Design Guidelines (Form Based Code) are consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan because the proposed changes do not change the proposed land uses and, therefore, remain consistent with the General Plan. B. APPROVAL OF PROPOSED AMENDMENTS The City Council hereby approves the amendments to the Eastern Urban Center Planned Community District Regulations and Design Guidelines (Form Based Code) as represented in Exhibit B attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference. III. EFFECTIVE DATE This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its adoption. Presented by Gary Halbert, AICP, PE Assistant City Manager/Director of Development Services Approved as to form by: oogi ~nCity Attorney 9-176