HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 2013-160 RESOLUTION T'O. 2013-160
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUI�'CIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA CERTIFYING THE FII�'AL
ET�'IRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR-]0-0�/SCH
201111107) FOR THE PALOMAR GATE�i'AI' DISTRICT
SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM-10-24) AND RELATED ZOI�'Ii`'G
CH.AI�'GES: MAK1I�'G CERTAII�' FIND[NGS OF FACT:
ADOPTII�'G A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDIi�'G
COt�'SIDERATIONS: AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION
MONITOWNG AI�'D REPORTING PROGRAM PURSUAI`iT
TO THE CALIFORI�TIA EI�TVIRONMEI�TTAL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, the azea of land �vhich is the subject of this Resolution contains all
properties N�ithin the boundaries of Exhibit "A," attached hereto and incorporated into this
Resolution by this reference, and includes approzimately 100 eross acres of land aenerally
located around the intersection of Palomar Street and Industrial Boulevard and is kno«�n as the
Palomaz Gateti�ay District (PGD) and is located in Southwest Chula Vista; and
VJHEREAS; on December 13. 200�; an update to the City`s General Plan H�as approved
��fiich provides a contemporan� ��ision for the PGD, as one of five "Areas of Chanse" ���ithin the
South���est of Chula Vista. The General Plan Vision for the PGD states that the PGD is an azea
where more intensi��e development. re��italization and/or redevelopment are proposed to occur.
The General Plan vision for PGD includes a Transit Focus Area on and surrounding the Palomar
Transit Station, higher residential intensity, a neighborhood park and retail to the south of the
Transit Focus Area. The goal is to provide additional housing and mixed uses (residential and
commercial) that take advantaee of a major transit station N�ithin «�alking distance; and
�4'HEREAS, the Land Use and Transportation Element of the General Plan calls for the
adoption of a specific plan or other zoning regulations to implement the ne��� land uses; in
particulaz mixed use and hi�h densit�� residential zoning districts, to ensure the systematic
implementation of the 200� General Plan; and
WHEREAS. Citv staff determined that. eiven the characteristics and conditions of the
PGD, the best tool to implement the General Plan ��ision ���ould be a specific plan; and
R'HEREAS, the specific pla� �i�ill sen�e as the tool to direct and guide the development
of the PGD to�razds this goal by directiv reeulatine land use and establishing a focused
de��elopment scheme and process for the area; and
WHEREAS, Chula Vista A4unicipal Code Section 19.07.010 adopts by reference
Sections 6�4�0 throueh 6�4�7 of the Califomia Go��emment Code that authorizes the local
le2islative bod}� to initiate the preparation of a specific plan to implement the policies of a
general plan; and
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 2
WHEREAS, the requirement to have zoning consistent ��ith the City's General Plan is
established in Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC) Section 19.06.030 and California
Government Code 6�860: and
WHEREAS, prior to engaging in the prepazation of the Specific Plan for the Palomar
Gateway District (hereinafrer referred to as the "PGDSP"), City staff undertook an extensive
public engagement strategy ��ith the community and that this community outreach effort was
designed to invol��e the ��arious citizens and interest groups of Chula Vista in the PGDSP
process; and
WHLREAS, from this community outreach process and other activities, City staff
identified and reached out to a group of individuals with interest, knowledge of the area, and
]eadership abilities to participate in tl�e Southwest Working Group (SWWG) and the SWWG
represented a cross-section of the southwest community, including community organizations,
businesses, and residents. The SWWG was tasked both with providing oversight for the
southwest planning efforts, and with working to engage other members of the community with
the process; and
WHEREAS, the preparation of the PGDSP was facilitated by the financial participation
of the San Diego Association of Govemments (SANDAG) and the CiYy's Redevelopment
Agency, which agencies provided a grant from SANDAG's Smart Growth Incentive Program in
the amount of $400;000 while the Redevelopment Agency contributed matching funds in the
amount of$150,000, for the preparation of the PGDSP and EIR; and
WHEREAS, City staff and the SWWG began the active preparation of the PGDSP in
January 2010; and
WHEREAS, meetings of City staff and the SWWG were held from January 2010 through
March 2012; in H�hich meetings the SWWG provided input on significant planning issues such as
ne�v permitted land uses, development standards, design guidelines, and infrastructure
improvements; and
WHEREAS, the drafr of the PGDSP was completed in March 2012, presented to the
SWWG at its meeting of Marcl� 21, 2012, and thereafrer posted on the City's website for public
review: and
WI-IEREAS, the finished PGDSP document bears the mazk of this extensive public
outreach process and that City staff and SWWG members worked hard to develop a plan that
both allows transit-oriented development in the PGD, a�d at the same time does not overburden
this area��ith additional auto trips; and
WHGREAS, the PGDSP has been prepared pursuant to the authority granted in the
CVMC Chapter ]9.07, Specific Plans. and the California Government Code, Title 7, Division 1,
Chapter 3, Article 8, Sections 65450 through 65457 and contains all the mandatory elements
identified in Government Code Section 65451; and
Resolution No. 20]3-160
Paae No. 3
WHEREAS. PGDSP Chapters 3. 4, and � contain the Land Use and De��elopment
Regulations; Design Guidelines. and lnfrastrucrure and Public Facilities. respectively, and
pro�ide the plan and mechanisms to ensure public facilities and services occur commensurate
with subsequent development; and
WHEREAS. Environmental Impact Report EIR-10-0� (SCH No. 2011111077)
(hereinafter referred to as the "PGDSP EIR") has been prepared for the PGDSP as a Program
EIR and includes an evaluation of the ero�tinh management qualit�� of life thresholds at a
proerammatic level. The Final EIR Mitigation b4onitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
provides a summan� of the impacts anal��sis and/or mitigation measures that address provision of
public senices and facilities and requires subsequent development projects to contribute to the
provision of public sen�ices and facilities commensurate ti�ith their impact as de�elopment occurs
o��er the course of the nexi 20 ��eazs: and
V�'HEREAS, a Notice of Preparation for the PGDSP EIR �vas circulated on No��ember 30,
2011 pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section ]�082; and
V�'HEREAS. a PGDSP EIR scopine meeting ti�as held on December 1�, 2011; and
N'HEREAS. Drafr PGDSP EIR. together �i�ith the technical appendices for the project.
was issued for a 4� day public revie�v period on April 1�, 2013; and �i�as processed throu2h the
State Clearinghouse; and
V�'HEREAS, the public revie���period closed on Ma}� 30, 2013; and
WHEREAS, during the public comment period, the Citv received comments on the Drafr
PGDSP EIR and consulted with all responsible and trustee aeencies, other regulatory agencies
and others pursuant to CEQA Guideline Section 1�086 and pursuant to Seciion 1�088, all
comments recei��ed Here responded to in writing; and
WHEREAS, the Development Services Director set the time and place for a hearine of
the Planning Commission on the proposed PGDSP and Grafr PGDSP EIR for June 26, 2013 and
notice of said hearine. together �+�ith its purpose, ���as given pursuant to Califomia Govemment
Code 6�091 and 6�092 at least ten da��s prior to the hearine: and
R'HEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namel�� on June 26.
20li at 6:00 p.m. in the Cit�� Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Plannin2
Commission and said hearine was thereafter closed: and
WHEREAS. the Planning Commission considered all reports. e��idence, and testimon}�
presented at the public hearing with respect to the Public Hearino Drafr PGDSP and Final E[R:
and
�i'HEREAS. at said public hearing the Planning Commission recommended through a
vote of 4-1-1-0 that the Cih� Council adopt the Resolution certifi�ine the Final EIR-10-�. mal:ing
certain Findings of Fact, adoptine a Statement of Ovemding Considerations, and adopting a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Proeram for the PGDSP; and
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 4
WHEREAS, the Development Semices Director set the time and place for a hearing of
the City Council on the proposed PGDSP and Final EIR for August 6, 2013, and notice of said
hearing, together with its purpose, was given pursuant to Califomia Government Code 65091
and 6�092 at least ten days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely on August
6, 20li at 2:00 p.m. in the City Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council
and said hearing was thereafrer closed; and
WHEREAS, the City Council considered all reports, evidence, and testimony presented
at the public hearing with respect to the Drafr PGDSP and Final EIR; and
WHEREAS, to the extent that the Findings of Fact and Statement of Ovemding
Consideration dated June 20Li (Exhibit "B" of this Resolution) conclude that proposed
mitigation measures outlined in the Final EIR are feasible and have not been modified,
superseded or withdrawn, the City of Chula Vista hereby binds itself to implement those
measures. These findings are not merely information or advisory, but constitute a binding set of
obligations that will come into effect when the City Council adopts the Resolution approving the
PGDSP. The adopted mitigation measures contained within tl�e Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program, Exhibit "C" of this Resolution, a copy of which is on file in the office of the
City Clerk, are expressed as conditions of approval. Other requirements are referenced in the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted concurrently with these Findings of Fact
and will be effectuated through the process of implementing the project.
� NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby determine, resolve and order as follows:
I. Final EIR ]0-OS CONTENTS
That the Final EIR 10-OS consists of the following:
l. Drafr PGDSP EIR for the Project(including technical appendices); and
2. Comments and Responses
(All hereafter collectively referred to as "Final EIR")
II. ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENTS TO Final EIR
1. Findin�s of Fact and Statement of Overriding Consideration (Exhibit "B" of this
Resolution); and
2. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit "C" of this Resolution).
Resolution I�'o. 2013-160
Pase No. �
III. CERTIFICAT[ON OF COMPLIANCE �VITH CALIFORi\'lA
ENVIRONA4ENTAL QUALITI' ACT
That the Cit�� Council does herebvi certifi� that Final EIR-10-0�. and the Findinas of Fact
and Statement of Ovemdine Considerations (E�:hibit "B") attached to this Resolution, a
copy of H�hich is on file ���ith the office of the Cit}� Clerk, and the Mitieation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (E�hibit "C") attached to this Resolution. are prepared in
accordance ���ith the requirements of CEQA (Pub. Resources Code, �21000 et seq.), the
CEQA Guidelines (Califomia Code Rees. Title 14 §1�000 et seg.), and the
En��ironmental Re�iew Procedures of the Citv of Chula Vista.
IV. INDEPENDENT JUDGAZENT OF CITY COUNCIL
That the City Council finds that Final EIR-10-0� reflects the independent judement of the
Cin� Council of the Citv of Chula Vista.
V. CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT, STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
COn'SIDERATIONS, AND A4ITIGATION A10NITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAAI
A. Adoption of Findines of Fact
The Cim Council does hereb�� approve. accepts as its o��m, incorporate as if set
forth in full herein, and make each and e��ery one of the findines contained in the
Findines of Fact. Exhibit "B" of this Resolution.
B. Mitieation Measures Feasible and Adopted
As more fullv identified and set forth in Final EIR-10-0� and in the Findines of
Fact for this.project, ���hich is E�hibit "B" to this Resolution, the City Council
hereby finds pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA
Guidelines Section 1�091 that the mitieation measures described in the abo��e
referenced documents are feasible and ���ill become bindin� upon the entin (such
as the project proponent or the Cit��) assiened thereb�� to implement the same.
C. Infeasibilitv of Altematives
As more full�� identified and set forth in Final EIR-]0-0� and in the Findines of
Fact. �i�hich is E�hibit "B" to this Resolution. [he Citv Council hereb�� finds
pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section
1�091 that alternatives [o the projec[, ���hich were identified in Final E1R-10-0�;
were not found to reduce impacts to a less than significant le��el or meet the
project objecti��es.
Resolution t��o. 2013-160
Page No. 6
D. Statement of Overridine Considerations
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any feasible
altematives, certain significant or potentially significant environmental effects
caused by the project or cumulatively will remain. Therefore, the City Council of
the City of Chula Vista hereby issues and approves pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 1509� a Statement of O��erriding Considerations in the form set forth in
Exhibit "B," a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk identifying
the specific economic, legal, social, technological, and other considerations that
render the una��oidable significant adverse emironmental effects acceptable.
E. Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
As required by Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the Ciry Council hereby
adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program set forth in Eshibit "D"
of this Resolution. The City Council further finds that the Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program is designed to ensure that, during project implementation,
the perniittee/project applica�t and any other responsible pariies implement the
project components and comply with the mitigation measures identified in the
Findings of Fact and the Mitigation Monitoring�and Reporting Program.
VI. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
That the Director of Development Services of the City of Chula Vista is directed afrer
City Council approval of this Resolution to ensure that a Notice of Determination is filed
��ith the County Clerk of the County of San Diego. These documents, along with any
documents submitted to the decision-makers, including documents specified in Public
Resources Code Section 21167.6, subdivision(s), shall comprise the entire record of
proceedines for any claims under the California Gnvironmental Quality Act (`CEQA")
(Public Resources Code §21000 er sey.).
BE IT FURTHER RGSOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista certify
that Final EIR-10-0�, the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit
"B" to this Resolution) and tl�e Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Exhibit "C" to
this Resolution) have been prepared in accordance with the requirement of CEQA (Pub.
Resources Code_ §21000 et seq.), CEQA Guidelines (Califomia Code Regs. Title 14 §]5000 et
scy.), and the Em�iromnental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista and therefore, should
be and is hereby certified.
Presented by Approved as to form by
�
Kel � roughton, FASLA len R. ogin
Director of Development Sen�ices C� rney
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 7
Exhibits to this Resolution:
Exhibit "A"— Location Map
Exhibit "B"— Findinas of Fact and Statement of O�emdine Considerations
Exhibit "C"—Mitigation b4onitoring and Reporting Program
PASSED. APPROVED. and ADOPTED b�� the Citv Council of the Cit�� of Chula Vista.
Califomia, this 6th da�� ofAugust 2013 by the follo��ine ��ote:
AYES: Councilmembers: Aeuilaz. Bensoussan. Salas and Cox
NAYS: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ABSTAII�': Councilmembers: Ramirez
�/�-e.�J�-1�—
Chervl Cos. Ma � r
ATTEST:
u,ca— ` 0
Donna R. Noms. A4C. Citv Clerk
STATE OF CALIFOR�\'IA )
COiJNTY OF SAI�' DIEGO )
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I. Donna R. 1�'orris. Citv Clerk of Chula Vista. Califomia, do herebvi cenifi� that the foresoine
Resolution I�'o. 20li-160 ���as dul�� passed, approved, and adopted by the Citp Council at a
regulaz meetine of the Chula Vista Cirv Council held on the 6th day of August 2013.
Executed this 6th day of August 2013.
/1� /�- ✓�o�S.J(.��
—�
Donna R. I�'orris. CMC. Citv Clerk
' - • � � 1 .1
' � .
+1 �� „- � ,.��. "'.- ��," ���f..c-`' ° � ,. • t,�, -,4 , :
t 1 r�� �� i ,� s .. . :
� v'=�• � ..� Y,
i � � v ,'��` '�i=--=` �?� � i`Y��` � ', --
' �' I ��.L' .����� ���1�, �..,+�,t.S� i S. �. � C Y t aY-�t+t; �,
ji � ♦ i` q. W ^+-.y..- �� �. i �� > �
. �I 1. � ,, � �� k .d .� HT ��: . �'f ,,�-` ,.
�3 � I �-S3 , h � 1; s ti� °' � ici' . ,3 {�.. �*
,� . I�� :3; F ,:` +r ��' ' `� <• y''° �sq -°- \
i � ��..-y} >�J 1 �' '!9 .� �, t� � o � :
� (i; ,�At �� -C- ry an �a� i ,� t �, ri. " °'� � � �.
I z� � l� �'s40i ^� �t � i� . 4 1� �Y -t 1��, 5 �.
f� T• �� '� . � � 4j i i1� -r�! y � k •
�,,f .� � �1F4z s� �� `��. � ���` ��� �� � <. �
/" \ , .� t�,�c4 ;%'� � � f. ,:
j t ' � �: -�
d _�I � 1� it� '�t � 4 ` � �`�. .�� ����.
y. s `�� -t�' � l �� F ��.i � ' i' �e1 , .4 ai.i� _ �
�.`�'��-. t�t, h,4 � a �2�i Aj�j� .�i r� -�� .�� _
.J_ [ � Iql}J, � 4 .� ;�
� .)� 1 I�!��? � "� 6�+��1 '..43 ���F�g �� � .
J �.M1 �� 6
I A M�Y� •��y�l�ep�a t} V
�\ . � I�f �} 1 f . 3 � _ '� ___ Y ..`f 5 � •`� �;.
'��i � I � � �� ��. �� 0 v,c �.., ; \ �t+-F _
y, l C �'• � �G.L ' �
>"l� . �1��E �, �z�' C i �'�j�r , �i I:1 i� ...+� _ !
��1�stl„e��� fT '� . - _ �� ::. �� ,: � � ��x 's'� y5�'
� � ' iL�t �' ` �_ .��i� 2 � j K � 4�� ��_ ?4 ,g�!{'{� -
l f � '7r
�r i � �3i 4 y � �,a � ` �_.� t .
� �} t � St � , { 4 � � � 9 t �- r r���� � ti
l4 k q � � :.�rs ��. � �� 1 T�_ .
�= �_;� � ai w�- � . �- , �— �t
� • �{ft •�� � : . ` -\ H_`iy '3't 6 I- 3� ?�..
1 _~
ty�' �1 1 �_ .� q l• 3_�... � � 4 I c ..
`�!�f i . �f l � J t _ �a.�—P 1l - .
� �Y
t � �, �w i-�„` 3� t � ���i `� s <�` �.! `'�� i::
.�: � . � .tiY . � �, -+ y �� -
z � �� �� 1�'. �/♦ _�� . ` `�� ta „ ��l 'O�� z.v._i: � _ .' .�
.�� zt 'z � � ;� �� r�^� � � : :
j�r� D.. ��' 2 , I-�` '� � �� ;tri< � S" �� "e '�.'t �±�,_, A7CTtit �_
� ��;�f ��a A '
..� �� i �c �i�� . . �. �_0 "i2 :r �r�`�< t ���.
. 4 Or, I � r `^ �� � 4
�� P�i ;;j c : � ��k3� ° y� �' '� „��`� t��:,�qt, „ 7'',
z �' �'3
� 'L �31 �: a t� k i� �° --s .� � _ P�R�C �'4 � `
��i I�4' �� �' ,�, ,i 53 � �e
i {r•r � z ' '
_s - (. �rY E " �.a. ' t x 6' � l .i?i �.
4 - �__ i ..h: r � / 1 _ s f . C:i [g�-'' � � -.� �.
k .: �5 ��� �� ���� �4f�-� � ,' � � � -
:� ..� �-�Bp � ,
L: i. � 4, ', , _ . t
----. -
�� �I .{ .�_ __ � A=
r �. F ' E� F �'� f - -�
�s��' �k I�, �� � ; i ' � �-i+i� �4 h - �' �i
� t, � �
i si CI " 1 t � +-� ' � :.i ' '1� f F't � - i
�`' ���r I � .' " � .� � � '4j�l' � 1 ;�. Y � m
� f.,`�E c _ �__ :' _`- •--� ._ `� �� �a_ 43._ ,t ��L
__ . . . V
.� � . . .
.
Resolution No. 2013-160
� Paee I�'o. 9 �
�3�:-�'BIT 3
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT (EIR-10-05)
FOR THE
PALOMAR GATEWAY DfSTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM-10-24)
CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT
AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
JUNE 2013
_ _
Resolution I�'o. 20]3-160
Pa�e No. 10 �
TABLE OF CONTENTS
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUlJD..............................................................................�
II. ACRONYti1S ........................................................................................................................2
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION...................................................................................................3
IV. BACKGROUND ...................................................................................................................4
V. R�CORD OF PROCEEDINGS............................................................................................5
VI. FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA...............................................................................6
VII. IEGAI EFFECTS OF FINDINGS........................................................................................8
VIII. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM .............................................9
IX. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES .................................................9
X CUMULATIVE SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS 8� MITIGATION MEASURcS ............................47
XI. FEASIBILI'iY OF POTENTIAL PROJECT ALTERNATIVES.............................................57
XII. STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS ......:...............................................60
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 11
BEFORE THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNqL
RE: Palomar Gateti�ay Distnct Specifc Plan (PC�v1-�0-24) Program Environmental Impact
RepoR (PEIR); EIR-10-O5; SCH No. 20�11�1077
FINDINGS OF FACT
I
INTRODUCTIOtJ AND BACKGROUND
l'ie Final Prog2m Environmenial Impact Report (PEIR) prepared for Palomar Gateway Disirict
Specitic Plan (PGDSP) addresses the poteniial environmental effects 2ssociated v.�th
impl�mentation of the pro;ect. In addition, tfie Final PEIR evaluates three atiernatives to the
project. These altematives include the following: (1) No Project (Existing Plan) Altemative; (2)
Reduced Project Alternative; and (3) Modified Land Use Arrangement Alternative.
These findings have been prepared in accordance with requirements of California
cnvironmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, § 21000 ei seq.) and ihe CEQA
Guidelines (Cal. Code Regs., Tiile 14, § 15000 et seG.).
1
_ _ _ . _ _
Resolution No. 2013-160 ��
Page No. 12
II.
ACRONYMS
ADT . Average Daily Trips
CDFVJ Cali�ornia Depertment of Fish and VJildlifa
Caltrans Cali�ornia Department of Transportation
CEQA Caliiomia Environmental Quality Act
CRHR Calitomia Register of.Historical Resources
CV��A Clean�Nater Act
Ciry City of Chula Vista
CVNiC Chula Vsta Municipal Code
FTA Federal Transit Administration
GMOC Growth Management Oversight Commission
HLIT Habitat loss and Incidental Take
I-5 Interstate 5
LOS Level of Sen�ice
MBTA Migrziory Bird Treaty Act
MMRP Mitigaiion Monitoring and Reporting Program
MTS Metropolitan Transit System
R1SCP Multiple Species Conservation Program
MU-1 Palomar Transit Plaza
R4U-2 Palomar Mixed Use Corridor
NRNP National Register of Historic Places
NAHC Native Amencan Heritage Commission
NOx Nitrogen Oxides
NSIU Noise Sensitive Land Uses
PEIR Program Environmental Impact Report
PGD . Palomar Gateway District
PGDSP Palomar Gateway District Specific Plan
PNRC Palomar Neighborhood Retail Clusier
PRV Palomar Residential Vllage
PCBs Polychlorin2ted biphenyls
RCP Regional Compre.hensive Plan
RWQCD Regional Water Quality Control 8oard
SANDAG San Diego Association of Govemments
SCAQMD South Coast Air Quality Management District
USACE United States Army Corps of Engineers
VOC Volatile Org'anic Compounds
2
Resolution No. 20li-160
Paee No. 13
ill.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION •
The ?GDSP is loc2ted in fhe southwest comer of the City oi Cnula Vista (City), near tne
interchange of P2lomar Street and Interstate 5 (IS), within the Couny of San Diego, Califomia
(see PEIR Figure 3-1, Regional Location Map). The proposed PGDSP is approximately four
miles north of lhe international border with Mexico. The boundaries of the PGDSP include
approximately 100yross acres surrounding the Palomar Transit Station at the intersection of
Pabrnar Street and Industrial Boulevard (see PEIR Figure 3-2, Loc2tion Map). The PGDSP
area includes the properties north of Palomar Street around VJzlnut Street, Trenton Street and
Industrial Boulevard. Further east, the PGDS? also extends nor[h from Palomzr.Street to
Oxiord Sireet. Souih oi Palomar Street, the PGDSP exiends along.lndust�al Boulevard and
Frontage Road to Hnita Street. A San Diego Trolley liaht rzil transit station, Palomar Trar.sit
Station, is located within the PG�SP at ihe infersection of Palomar Streei and Industrial
Boulevard.
The PGDSP estabfishes the appropriate distribution, mix, iniensity, physical form, and functional
relaiionships of land uses within4he Palomar Gate�vay District(PGD). The PGDSP land use and
development regulations are intended to encourage and facilitate fnfill devetopment, mlxed
uses, pedestrian scale, urban amenities, transit use, creative design, and fhe general
revitalization of ihe PGD. The PGDSP contains several land use categories including
residential, publiGquasi-public and institutional, commercial o�ce, commercial-service oriented,
commerci2l-retail, and accessory uses.
The PGD is divided into the following four sub-districts based on similar building and use types:
i. PalomarTransitPlaza (MU-1)
2. Palomar h4ixed Use Corridor(MU-2)
3. Palomar Residential Vllage(PRV) "
4. Palomar Neighborhood Retail Cluster(PNRC)
The projected build-ouf of the PGD and its four sub-districis for the 20-year planning horizon is
presented in Table 1, below.
TABLE 1. PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT FOR PGDSP BUILD-OUT{'•z� -
Projected Total Estima'ed Build-Out by Sub-District
. Existlng Additional Estimated MU-1 !dU-2 PRV ( PNRC I
Development Development Build-Out t3.5 acres) (31.5 acres) (43.5 acres) (1.5 acres)
���ee���aieu,n5> Soo I +.aoo I iaoo iso�'� � �;o�`� I �oo I — I
Retail(Sq.Ft.)�'� 200.000 100,000 � 3D0.000 10.000 85,000 � — � 5,000
Office(Sc. Ft.)"� — 50,000 � 50,000 5,000 a0,000 � — � 5.000 (
Incus:rizl(SQ.Ft.) 30,000 — � — — — � — — �
� O1 Nur.vhers zre aDGmzinalia�s.
a�Pr,�eG^d resicenual unis a:id:.omr..ercial sq�are footages are:.zs�[on;he rr�xrket stuc•>(Ga:con,Inc 2077).
w?`njecled resiLe:icial�nits fo: 1.1U-1 Suhi�shie are based on L5e Cesig;uled F�vZ hiLh L`�e pro�ortio.ul mrtunerdal deveb�ment
in�raLC in Note 5.bela.i.
"�Su�x+istrirls IdU-2 a;w.PRV r=_siCential units were es6mateE pnp�rtbnal:o the subdistid land area.
a�ne'z�lOffice square footz�_s are zssurt�M 50-perunV5J-?ercent sdit of pmjedeC builc�n,t be;ween Ne MU-1/MU-2 Sub-disLi�s. �
w:�ich is�oughly pmpo:�ion21 W uyE SUbCiSCiC:Wn�3R2.
Souu:?GDSP
3
_ __ _
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee No. 14
DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
The discretionary actions b be taken by the City Council include the�ollowing;
■ PGDSP Adopfion
■ Related Rezoning P,ciions
Future development proposed in accordance with the PGDSP would require discretionary
approvals. Such future discretionary actions are anticipated to include (bui are not be limited to)
the iollowing: Design Revieiv Permiis, Conditional Use Permits, Tentative Maps, and poien:ially
some Demoliiion Permits, and Grading Permits. 1Nhile future discretionary actions will require
future environmernal review, once certified, this PEIR can be relied upon for relevant
environmeni anatysis. The City Council will determine wheiher the Final PEIR is compleie and .
in compliance with CEQA and the CEQA Guidelines as part of the certification process.
PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
As speci8ed in the Final PEIR, the primary goals and objectives oi the project are as follows:
■ Objective 1: Create a vibrant, safe, pedesirian friendly live/workJplay environment that
emphasizes the area as a southern gateway to th'e City of Chula Vista.
■ Objective 2: Achieve a compact pattem of development conducive to walking and
bicycling.
■ Objective 3: Encourage light rail transit use and convenient access to services and jobs.
■ Objective 4:Allow Sor a mix of uses, designed to attract pedestrians.
■ Objective 5: Maintain an adequate level of parking and access for auiomobiles and
integrate auiomobile use safely with pedestrians, bicyclists, and other users.
■ Objective 6: Provide su�cient density of employees, residents, and recreational users to
support transit.
■ Objective 7: Generate a relatively high percentage of trips serviceable by transit.
N.
BACKGROUND
The preparation of the PGDSP follows the direction provided in the City of Chula Vista.General
Plan to prepare and adopt a more detailed vision, regulations, and guidelines for future
deveiopment in ihe PGD.
The PGDSP has been prepared as a neighborhood-level planning document which provides
updated zoning regulations, land use and developmeni regulations, and design guidelines to
implement the planned land uses, as envisioned in the Chula Vsta General Plan. In addition to
being a land use regulatory document, the PGDSP also outlines the framework for ihe provision
of urban amenities and oiher public improvements associated with new development. 7he
4
Resolution No. 2013-160
Pase No. 1�
planning horizon for the PGDSP is year 2030, with provisions for periodic evaluation oi progress
in mee;ing plan cozls.
The proposed Iand �5es and developmenl regulations identified in tne PGDS? v.�ould replace
the provisions of tne Chula Vsta Municipal Code (CVFAC) Chapters 19.20, 19.30, i9.3o, i9.40,
znd 19.�, znd the provisions of the San Diego County Zoning Ordinance C36 and S94 use
regulations. 1Nhere the CVMC conflicis with the development standards or other provisions of
the PGDSP, the ?GDSP would apply; ti-here the PGDSP is silent, the CVMC would apply. The
de inifions found in CVF.AC Ch2pter i9.04 would ap�ly to the ?GDSP, excepi where specific
definitions are provided in ihe PGDSP. '
/111 zoning-related portions of the PGDSP (i.e. land use matrix, permitted uses, and development
regulations) v.�ould serve as regulatory provisions and supersede other City regulations and
ordinances for the con:rol of land use and development voithin the PGD. Oiher poRions of the
PGDSP, such as ihe development design guidelines, would provide direction for future planning
and oublic improvement efforts. Future development projects, su�-�divisions, public improvement
projects, and other implementing programs wou(d be required to be consistent v.�th ihe PGDS2, .
once adopted.
V.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For purposes of CEQ.4 and the findings set forth below, the administrative record of the City
Council decision on the environmental analysis of this project shall consist of ihe�ollowing:
■ The �olice of Preparation and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunciion
with the projecf; .
a The Draft and Final PEIR for the project (EIR n�0.05), including appendices and
technical reports;
■ All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public
comment period on ihe Draft PEIR;
. All reports, sfudies, memoranda, maps, staf{ reports, or other planning documents
relating to the project prepared by the City, consultants to the Ciry, or responsibie or
trusfee agencies v✓ith respect to the City's compliance v.�ith the requiremenis of CEQA
and the City's actions on the project;
■ All documents, comments, and correspondence submitted by members of the public and
public agencies in connecuon with this project, in additiori to comments on the PEIR for
the project;
■ A!I documents submitted io the City by other public agencies or members oi ihe public in
conneciion with the PEIR, up ihrough the close of the public hearing;
■ Minutes and vsrbatim transcripts of all workshops, ihe scoping meeting, other public
meetinos, and public hearings held by the City, or videotapes.where Vanscripts are not
available or adequate;
a Any documentary or other evidence submiCed at workshops, public meeiings, and public
hearings for this project;
5
_ . . . _ .
Resolutio�� No. 2013-160
� Page No. 16
e All findinas and resolutions adopted by City decision makers in connection with this
project, and all documenis cited or referred to therein; and
■ Maiters of common kno�.��ledge to the City v,�hich the members of the Ciry Council
considered regarding this project, including federal, state, and Iocal laws and
regulatio�s, and including, but not limited to, the follov.�ing:
o Chula Vs�a General Plan;
o Gene21 Plan Update Final EIR (EIR ;OS-01, SCH �20040810&6) and associated
Miiiga#ion R4onitoring and Reporting Program;
o Relevani poriions of the Zoning Code of the City;
o Cih� of Chufa Vsta Mul�iple Species Conservation Program Subarea Plan; and
o Any other materials required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources
Code sedion 2i'167.6, su6division (e).
The cusiodian of the documents comprising the record of proceedings is Donna Norris, Ciy
Clerk,whose office is located at 276 Fourih Avenue, Chula Vsta, Califomia 9i910.
The City Council has relied on all of the documents lisied above in reaching its decision on the
project, even if every document was not formally presented to the City Council or City staff as
part of the City nles generated in connection with the project. Withouf exception, any documents
set forth above but not found in the project files fall into iv✓o categories. Many of them reflect
prior planning or legislative decisions with which the City Council was aware in approving the
project (see City of Santa Cruz v. Local Agency Formation Commission (�978) 76 Cal.App.3d
381, 391-392 [�42 Cal.Rptr. 873]; Dominey v. Department of Personnel Administiation (1988)
205 Cal.App.3d 729, 738, in. 6 [252 Cal. Rp[r. 620]). Other documents influenced the expert
advice provided to City staff or consultants, who then provided advice to the City Council. For
that reason, such documents form part of the underlying factual basis for the City Council's
decisions relaiing to the adoption of the projeci (see Pub. Resources Code, section 2'1167.6,
subd. (e)(10); 8rowing-Ferris lndustries v. City Council of City of San Jose (1986) 18'I Cal.
App.3d 652, 866 [226 Cal.Rptr. 575]; Stanislaus Audubon Society, Inc. v. County of Stanislaus
(1995)33 Cal.App.4`' 144,.'153, 155 [39 Cal.Rptc2d 54]).
�.
FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA
Public Resources Code section 21002 provides that "public agencies should not approve
projects zs proposed if there are feasible aRematives or feasible mitigation measures availablz
which would substantially /essen the significant environmental effects of such projects."
(emphasis added.) The same statute states that the procedures required by CEQA "are
intended to assist public agencies in systematically identi"rying boih the significant effects of
proposed projects and.the.feasible.altematives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid.
or substantially /essen such signincant effects" (emphasis added). Section 2�002 goes on to
state thal "in the event (thatj sp2cific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such
project alternatives or such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of
on= or more significant effects.°
6
Resolucion No. 20]3-160
Paee I�o. 17
The mandate and principles a�nounced in Public Resourc=s Code secuon 21002 are
implem=nted, in paR, through the requiremenf that agencies must aoopt indings before
approving projects for which clRs are required (see Pub. Resou�ces Code, § 2 i08'I, subd. (a);
CcQA Guidelines, § �5091, subd. (a)). =or each sign�cant em�ironmental e�fect identiried in an
�IR for a proposed project, 1he approving agency must issue z v:rii'en finding reaching one or
more or three permissible conclusions. Th= first such finding is that "[c]hanaes o� 2IIEfations
have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substan5ally lessen th=
significant em�ironmental effect as identified in the final EIR" (CEQ.4 Guidelines, § i5097, subd.
(a)('I)). The second permissible finding is that °[s]uch changes or alterations �re wiihin the
responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not ihe agency making the finding.
Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such
otner agency" (C�QA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. (a)(2)). The third poteniial finding is ihat
"[s]pecific economic, legal, social, iechnological, or other considerations, including provision o(
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation mezsures or
project alternatives identified in the final EIR° {C�QA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. (a)(3)). Public
Resources Code secfion 21061.1 defines "fzasible' to mean "capable of being accomplished in
a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic,
environmenial, social and technological factors.° CEQA'Guidelines section 'I5364 adds another
factor. "legal' consider2tions (see also Citizens of Go/eta VaHey v. Board of Superviso�s (1990)
52 Cal:3d 553, 565[276 C21.Rptr. 410]).
The concept of`feasibility" also encompasses the question of v:hether a particular alternative or
mitigation measure promotes the underlying goals and objectives of a project (see City of Del
Mar v. City of Sah Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 490, 417 [�83 Cal.Rptr. 898j). ' '(Fjeasibility'
under CEQA encompasses 'desirability' to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable
balancing of the relevant economic; environmental, social, and technological factors' (Ibid.; see
also Sequoyah Nills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oak/and(i993) 23 Cal.App.4th 704, 7�5 [29
Cal.Rptr2d 182]).
The CEQA Guidelines do not define the difference behveen "avoiding' a significan�
environmental e�iect and merely "substantially lessening" such an effect. ihe City must
therefore glean the meaning of these terms from the other contexts in which ihe terms are used.
Pubiic Resources Code section 2 i081, on which CEQA Guidelines section 15091 is based,
uses the term °mitigate" rather than "substantially lessen." The CEQA Guidelines theretore
equate 'mitigating°with"substantially lessening." Such an undersianding of the statutory term is
consisient with the policies underlying CEQA, which include the policy that `public agencies
should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasiblz mitigation
measures avzilable which would substantially lessen the signi5cant environmenial ef�ects of
such projects" (Pub. Resources Cod=, § 21002).
For purposes of these findings, the term °avoid" relers to fhe effectiveness of one or more
mitigation measures to reduce an otfienvise significant eYect to a iess than significant level. In
contrast, the term 'substaniially lessen" refers to the effectiveness of such measure or
measures to substantially reduce the severity of a significant effect, but not to reduce that e�fect
to a less ihan significant level. These interpretations appear to be mandated by :he hoiding in
Laurel Hi/ls Nomeowners Associatron v. City Council ('i978) 83 Cal.App.3d SiS, 5'19-527
[1S7 Cal.Rptr. 8�2), in which the Court of Appeal held thal an agency had satis�ied ifs obligation
b substantialiy lessen or avoid significant effecis by adopting numerous mitigation measures,
noi all of which rendered the signi9cant impacts in question I�ss tnan significant.
7
Resolution No. 2013-160 �
Paee No. l 8
Alihough CEQH Guid2lines section 15091 requires only that approving agencies specify that a
particular signiticant e�fect is °zvoid[ed) or substaniially lessen(ed)," ihese findings, ror purposes
o� clariy, in eacn case �vill specify �t•hether the eYect in quesiion hzs been reduced to a less
than signiricant Ievel or has simply been substantially lessened but remains significant. -
hhoreover, although section �5091, read Iiterally, does not require findings to address
environmental effects that an EIR identifies as merely "potentiaity significant," these findings will
never�heless iully account for all such effects identified in the Final SEIR.
In short, CEQA 2quires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or aliernatives, where
feasibl=, to substantially lessen or avoid significant environmental iinpacis that would otherv✓ise
occur. Project moditications or alternatives are not required, however, where such changes are
infeasible or v.�here the responsibiliy for modifying the project lies wiih some o#her agency
(CEQA Guidelines, § 15091, subd. (a), (b)).
With respect to a project for which significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened
either through the adoption.of feasible mitigation measures.or a feasible environmenCally
superior alternative, a public agency, after adopting proper findings, may nevertheless approve
the project if the agency first adopts a statement of overriding considerations seriing forth the
specific reasons why the agency found that the projecYs "benefits" rendered °acceptable° its
"unavoidable adverse environmental effects° (CEQA Guidelines, §§ 15093, 15043, subd. (b);
see also Pub. Resources Code, § 21081, subd. (b)). The Califomia Supreme Court has stated
that, "�t]he wisdom of approving . . . any development project, a delicate task which requires a
balancing of interesfs, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local o�cials and their
constituents v+ho are responsibie for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply it simply
requires thai those decisions be informed, and therefore balanced° (Goleta, supra, 52 Cal.3d
553, 576).
�I.
LEGAL EFFECTS OF FINDINGS
To the extent that these findings conclude that proposed mitigation measures outlined in the
Final PEIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded, or withdrawn, ihe Ciry (or
"decision makers") hereby binds itselt and any other responsible parties, including the applicant
and its successors in inierest (hereinafter reierred to as °Applicant°), to implement those
measures. These findings, in other words, are not merely in�ormational or hortatory, but
constitute a binding sel of obligations that will come into e�fect when the Ciy adopts the
resolution(s) approving the project.
Th= adopted mitigation measures are express conditions of approval. Other requirements are
referenced in the Mitigation R9onitoring Reporting Program (�Ah4RP) adopted concurrently w�th
these findings and.wiil be effec[uated through #ne process of.implementing the project.
The mitigaiion measures are referenced in the �AMRP adopted concurrently with these 5ndings,
and will be effec[uat2d both through the process of implementing the PGDSP and through the
process of conswcting and implementing [he project.
8
Resolution I�'o. 2013-160
Page No. 19
vll1.
MITIGATION MONITORING ,4h'D REPORTING PROGRANI
ks required by Public Resources Code section 21089.6, subd. (a)(1), the City, in adopting these
findings, also concurrently adopts a N�MRP. The progrem is designed to ensure ihat during
project implementation, the applicant and any other responsible parties comply with the ieasible
mitigation measures identified beiow. The program is descrified in ihe document entiiled
Palomar Gateway District Specific Plan (PC�✓1-10-2?J lvli;igation Moniioring Reporfing Program.
The City will use the MMRP to track compliance v.�th project mitigation measures. The MMRP
vriil be available �or public review during the compliance period.
The MMRP is dynamic in that it will undergo changes as additional mitigation measures are
identified and addiiional conditions of approval are placed on the projecF throughout the project
approval process. The monitoring program will serve the dual purpose of verifying completion of
the mitigation measures for the project and generating in�ormaUon on the e�ectiveness of the
mitigation measures to guide future decisions. The program includes moniioring team
qualifications, specific monitoring activities, a repo�ing system, and criteria for evaluating the
success of the mitigation measuras.
IX
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
SUMMARY OF EFFECTS
The Final PEIR identified a number of direc[ and indirect significant environmental effects (or
"impacts") resulting from the projec[. Some of ttiese significant effects can be fully avoided
through the adopiion of feasible mitigation measures. Others cannot be fully mitigated or
avoided by the adoption of feasible mitigation measures or feasible environmentally superior
alternaiives. However, these efrecis are ouh�aeighed by overriding considerations set forth in
Section XII below. This Section QX) presents in greater detail the City Council's findings with
respect to the environmental effects of the project.
The project v�ill result in direct and/or cumulative significant environmental changes with regard
to the foliowing issues: transportation, circulation, and access; air qualify; noise; cultu2l.
resources; paleontological resources; biological resources; geology and soils; public services
and utilities; hazards and hazardous ma?erials; and housing and population. These significant
environmenfal changes or impacts are discussed in the Draft PEIR in Chapier 1., Table 1-i, and
various subsections of Chapter 5, Environmental Impact Analysis. No significant effects were
identified for land use, planning and zoning; landrorm alterations/aesthetics; gtobai climate
change;hydrology and drainage; agriwltural and forestry resources; and mineral resources.
IMPACTS THAT CAN BE NITIGATED TO BELOW A LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE
The Ciy, having reviewed and considered tne information contained in the PcIR, the
appendices to �ne ?EIR, and the administrative record, finds the ?roject m�hich would mitigate,
9
_
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 20
avoid, or substantially lessen io below a fevel of significance the following potentially sicnincznt
environmen:al effects identified in the PEIR in the following categories tra�ic, circulation, and
access; noise; cultural resources; paleontological resources; biological resources; geology and
soils;,public services and utilities; and hazards and hazardous materials. N brief summary of
each environmental topic thzt v.�ould be mitigaied io belov✓ a level of significance is provided
belov.�.
Treffic. Circulation, and A'ccess
Absent mitigation, approval of#he project v.�ould result in potentially significant impacts to traffic
hazards and emergency access within the PGDSP.
Noise
Absent mitigation, approval or the project v✓ouid result in potentially significani excessive noise
levels and excessive groundborne vibration. - -
Cultural Resources
Absent mitigation, approval of the project would result in potentially significant impacts to
historical resources and archaeologicai resources. Cumulative impacts associated with ihis
issue are discussed in Section X, below.
Paleontoloqical Resources
y Absent mitigation, approval of the projeci would result in potentially significant impacts to
paleontological resources. Cumulative impacts associated wiih this issue are discussed in
Section X, below.
Bioloqical Resources
Absent mitigation, approval of the project would result in potentially significant impacts to
special-status species; sensitive natural communities; weilands; and local policies, ordinances,
and adopted conservation plans.
GeologyandSoils " - .
Absent mitigation, approval of the project would result in potentially significant impacts to soil
hazards.
Public Services and Utilities .
Absent mitigation, approval of fhe project would result in potentially significant impacts to fire
protection and emergency medical services, police services, schools, libraries, parks and
recreation, and wastewater.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Abs2nt mitigation, approval of the project would result in potentially signi icant impacis So
hazardous materiais transport, use, disposai, or release; and hazardous material sites.
10
Resolution?�'o: 2013-160
Pa�e No. 21
DETAILED ISSUES DISCUSSION FOR IMPACTS THAT CA� BE MITIGATED TO BELOW A
LEVEL OF SIGNI=ICANCE
Tre�a Circulation, and Access
Thresholds of Significance
The proposed project would result in a significant impact to Yraffic, circulafion, and access if it
vmuld:
1. Substantiaily increase hazards due to a design feature (e.g., sharp cun�es or dangerous
intersecfions) or incompatible uses (e.g., fzrm eqaipment).
2. Resuli in inadequate emergency access.
Impact: Traffic Hazards - '
PGDSP build-out would generate additionel pedestnan, bicycle, and vehicular Gaific along
P2lomar Streei, v.�hich could futher increase traFfic hazards at existing intersections. In addition,
existing conditions at the Transif Cenier/Palomar Street intersection v.�ould have the pbtential to
res�lt in t2ffic h2zards associated �+�th PGDSP implementation. Therefore, direct impacts
associated with trafric hazards are considered to be po!eniially significant (Final PEIR
Section 5.3.4.3).
Explanation
The existing condition of the PGD coniains potential hazards associated ti�th.vehicle-trolley-
bicycle-pedesfrizn conflicts. The additional growth allowable under the PGDSP would increase
the potential for conflicts to occur. Muitiple pedestrian and bicyGe collisions have occurred along
segments of Palomar Street 2nd Indusirial Boulevard in the PGDSP. The abundance of
driveways along Palomar Street exposes pedestrians to potential pedestrian-vehicle conflicts.
The Palomar StreeUlndustrial Boulevard iniersection is considered a high risk locafion given the
conFlicts with vehicies, the at-grade trolley crossing, pedestrians and bicyclists. In addition, the
unrestricted tum movements at the VJalnut Avenue/Palomar Street intersection allow vehicles to
travel across muliiple lanes of traffic on Palomar Streei. Further, due to the intersection offset a[
the Transit CentedPalomar Street interseciion, the existing condition o£ this intersection
represents a con�lict with vehicles, pedestrians and bicyclists. PGDSP build-out ti�ould generate
additional pedestrian, bicycle, and vehicular traiiic along Palomar Street, which could further
increase iraffic conflicts at ihese intersections. Therefore, a potentially significant impact would
occur(Final PEIR Section 5.3.4.3).
rAitigation Measures
5.3-1 Walnut Avenue/Palomar Street Intersection Raised Median and Walnut Avenue
Reconfiguretion. Prior to the approval of any consfrucfion associated with PGDSP
devefopment projects, the City shall implement a raised median across ihe
intersection and VJalnut Avenue shall be reconfigured to aliow righl-in/rightout
movements only. This improvement is required to restrict minor street lef-fum
mov.ements from VJalnut Avenue across multiple lanes of traric on Palomar Street.
Pedestrians shall be prohibited from crossing Palomar Avenue at this intersection
and shall be required to utilize ihe Industrizl Boulevard/Palomar Street intersection to
1i
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee No. 22
cross Palomar Street. Because left-turn movements would be restricted at the
Walnut Avenue/Palomar Sireet intersection, easibound vehicles on Palomar Sireet
intending to turn left at VJalnut Avenue v,�ould need to make a u-tum at the Palomar
StreeUlndustri2l 6oulevard iniersection. Similarly, westbound left-turning vehicles at
lNalnut Avenue would be required [o make a left-turn at the Palomar StreeUlndusirial
Bouleyard intersection and tum nght on Ada Street. This improvement has been
added io the City's CIP for 2013 and is now fully funded.
5.3-2 Grade Separetion for Trolley at Industrial Boulevard/Patomar Street
Intersection. To improve,vehicular oper2tions, the A4TS trolley rail crossing shall be .
grade-separated at the Industrial Boulevard/Palomar Street intersection to improve
vehicular operations. The proposed trolley grade-separation on Palomar Street is
induded on the regional priority list for rail grade-separation projects in the 2050 RTP
in the Revenue Constrained Plan to be completed by year 2020. This improvement
would result in no additional vehicular delay during a trofley crossing. Wiih the grade-
separaiion, this intersection is calculated to operate at LOS D or better. Grade-
separation would also eliminate vehicle, pedestrian, and bicycle confiicts with ihe
trolley.
5.33 Industrial Boulevard/Palomar Street Intersection Left-Turn Lane Signal
Change. The left-turn lane signal phasing at the Industrial BoulevardlPalomar.Street
iniersection shall be changed from permiried-protected to protected at zll iniersection
approaches. The timing of implementation of this improvement shall be deiermined
by the results of the annual study conducied under the City's Traffic Management
Program.
5.3-4 Transit Center Place/Palomar Street Intersection. The following improvements
shall be implemented to improve pedestrian access and safety at the Transit
Center/Palomar Street intersection:
i. Realign the north leg of the interseciion to align with the south leg, which would
eliminate intersection offset. This improvement would also benefit pedesirians by
allowing shorter walking disiances.
ii. Install pavement markings after realignment on ihe noRh leg ot the intersection
sho��dng an exdusive left-tum lane and shared through-right Ianes.
Finding
Implementation of traffic improvements, as described in mitigation measures 5.3-1 through 5.3�
above, would reduce potentia� impacts associated with tra�c hazards to a less than signiicant
level.
Impact:.Emergency Access .
Temporary roadway closures and deYours during construction of future PGDSP development
projects within roadway rights-of-way coufd poteniially impede emergency access if the
appropria:e authorities are not properly notifled prior to construction. Therefore, direct impacts
associated with emergency access are considered io be poientially significant (Final PEIR
Section 5.3.4.4).
12
Resolution No. 2013-160 �
Pase I�'o. 23
Explanation
Consiruction of future PGDSP development projects within roadway nghts-of-way may require
i2mpor2ry roadv.�ay closures and detours, which would 2ffect Iocai traffic circulation. Changes to
the traf�ic circulation pattern could potentially impede emergency access if the appropriate
authorities are not properly notifi>d prior to construction. Follov.�ing construction, future PGDSP
development projects would be required to provide ap�ropriate access in accordznce with the
Califomia Fire Code and would not result ih inadeGuate emergency access during operation.
i herefore, a signi icant impaci.related to inadequate emergency access v.�ould have the
potential to occur during construction of individual development projects vn;hin the PGD.
Therefore, a potentially significant impact would occur(Firial P�IR Sec:ion 5.3.4 4).
Miiigation Measure .
5.3-5 Traffic Controi Plans. Prior to construction of futurz development projects in the
PGDSP that require temporary roadway closures and detours, project applicanis
shall submit a iraffic control plan to the City Engineer for review and approval. The
traffic control plan shall be prepared by a licensed traffic engineer in accordance with
the California Manual on Uniform"Tra�c Control Devices. The traffic control plan
shail identlfy the location and tlming of anticipated roadway closures and the
aliemative routes to be utilized during project conslruction.
Finding
Implemenlation of tra�c control plans, as described in mitiga�ion measure 5.3-5 above, would
reducs polential impacts associated with emergency access to a less than significant level.
Noise .
i Thresholds of Significance
The proposed project would result in a significant impact to noise if it would:
1. Expose persons to or generate noise levels in excess of standards established in the
local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies.
This includes exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of the
inlerior noise standard o{ 45 dBA CNEL in single and multi-family residences, or noise
levels that violate the Chula Vista Noise Control Ordinance (CVMC Chapter 19.68).
2. Expose persons to or generate excessive groundborne vibration or groundborne noise
levels. '
Excessive ground'oome vibration is defined as groundbome vibrafion equal to or in
excess of 0.2 inch per second PPV. Construction activities within 200 feet and pile
driving within 600 feet ot a vibration sensitive use would be potentially disruptive to
vibration-sensitive operations.
13
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 24
Impact: Excessive Noise Levels
Implementation of ihe proposed PGDSP would have the potential to result in exposure of noise
sensitive land uses (NSLU) to excessive noise levels irom operational and transpoRation noise.
sources. There�ore, direct impacts associated with excessive noise 12vzis are considered
signi icani(Final PEIR Section 5.6.4.1).
Explanation
Operationel noise sources 'with implementation of the PGDSP would be similzr to existing
conditions because land uses �vould be similar, as described fur�her .below; however,
development intensiry wouid increase v.�ith implementation of the PGDSP. Implemenlation of the
PGDSP would accommodate a total of 3,300 new dwelling units, 100,000 square feei of
additional retail use development, and 50,000 square feet of new ofice use development
compared to existing conditions. Therefore, noise levels would have the potential to increase in
the PGD from the intensificaiion of uses. .
The PGDSP proposes intensified commercial, multi-family residential, and mixed-use
development along area roadways. Approximately half of the PGD is located within the roadway
noise contour where noise levels would exceed "00 dBA (CNEL). Multi-family residential
development and commerci2l development would likely be placed along major roadways, and
would have ihe potential to be located within the roadway noise contour where noise levels
would exceed 65 dBA (CNEL). This contour extends approximately 600 #eet from the centerline
of Palomar Street and 150 feet from the centerline of Industrial Boulevard, affecting interior
noise levels and onsite exterior recreational areas. This would result in a potentially significant
impact associated with exposure to traific noise.
Therefore, a potentially significant impact�vould occur in regards to excessive noise levels from
operational and transpoRation noise sources (Final PEIR Section 5.6.4.'I).
� Mitigation Measure '
5.6-1 Site-Specific Acoustic Analysis — Multi-Family Residences. Concurrent with
Design Review and prior to the approval of building permits for the following uses, an
acoustical analysis shall be performed to ensure that interior noise levels due to
extenor noise sources shall be below 45 dBA CNEL:
i. Multi-famity resideniial units where the firsl and/or second floor exterior noise
levels exceed 60 dBA CNEL;
ii. A4ulti-family ouidoor usable areas (patios or balconies). where noise levels
exceed 65 dBA CNEL;
iii. AAulti-family residential units iocated within the same buiiding as commercial
developmeni;
iv. 1�4u1ti-family residential units located near a structure requiring a heating,
ventilating, and air conditioning system, or near a school, park, or community
center.
�4
Resolution \'o. 2013-160
Pa�e No. 2�
Building olans shall bz availablz during design r=view and shall demonst��#e the accura�=
calcula4ion o( noise aY�enuation �or ha5itable rooms. �or these areas, it may be necessary for
ih° \ti9it(j0\M15 to be able to remai�� Gosed to ensure �hat interior noise leveis meei t�e intenor
siandard o( �5 doA C�EI. ConsequenUy, based on tne ;esulis or the interior acoustical
analysis, the desiyn ior buildinas in these areas mzy need io include a ventilation or air
condi5oning system to provid= 2 n2bitable interior environmen{µ���h the�vindo�•.5 Gosed.
Finding
Implementation of site-specific acoustic analysis ior multi-family residences, 2s described in
mitiga6on mezsure 5.6-1 above, would reduce potential impacts associated with excessive
noise levels to a less than signiican# level.
Impact: Excessive Groundborne vbration
Implemen'tation ot ;he proposed PGDSP would have #he poteniial to resuli in the exposure of
vibration sensitive land uses to excessive.ground'oorne vibreiion 7om trolleylraiiroad operations
and construction activities (Final PEIR Section 5.6.4.2).
Explanation
Vbrtion sensitive instruments and operations may require special consideration during
consiruction. Vbration criieria tor sensilive equipment and operations are not defined and are
o'rtien case specinc. In general, the_ criferia must be determined based on manuiacturet
specifications and recommendaiions by the equipment user. As a guide, major construction
activiy ��,�ihin 200 feet and pile driving within 600 feet may be potentially disruptive to vibration
sensitive instruments and ope2tions. Generel cons#ruction activity in the PGD in close proximiy
to vibretion sensitive land uses would have the potential io resuli in a significant impact.
An additional potential source ot groundborne vibration is the Blue Line light rail trolley line,
which bisects the eastern portion of Ihe PGD. The Federal Transii Administration (FTA)
provides screening distances for land use categories to screen projecis that may be subject to
vibra#ion impacts from a com�ruier railroad. For Ca[egory 1 land uses (vibra#ion sensitive
equipment), the screening distance from raiiroad rights-of-way is 600 teet. For_Ca:egory 2 land
uses (residences and buildings where peopie rrom211y sleep), the screening distance from
railroad rights-of-way is 200 feet. The screening disiance for Category 3 land uses (institutional
land uses) is 120 teet. The PGDSP would potentially accommodale Category 1 land uses in the
h4U-1 and MU-2 Sub-districts; Category 2 land uses in fhe AhU-1, A4U-2, and PRV Sub-districts;
and Category 3 land uses in the AAU-1 and MU-2 Sub-districts. Therefore, implemeniation of the
°GDS? has the potential to locale new vibration sensitive land uses within tne screening
distance of the Blue Line ligh# rail trolley line. Nev+ development that is proposed v.�ihin the
screening distance of ihe Blue �ine light rail trolley line v:ould require furEher analysis to
detemine vibretion impacts. Thus, a potentially signRicant impaci v:ould occur.
There�ore, a pofantially. significant impact �+•ould occur-in..regards to excessive groundborne
vibration rrom construction and ihe Blue Line light rail frolley line (Finai PEIR Section 5.6.4.2).
Mitigation Measure
5.6-2 Site-Specific Groundborne Vibration Analysis. Concur[ent v:ith design review and
prior to issuance oi building permits, future projects shall implement the FTA and
15
Resolution No. 2013-160 �
Page No. 26
FRk guidelines, where appropriate, to limit the extent of exposure that sensitive uses
may have to groundborne .vibration from trains, consiruciion equipment, and other
sources. Speciticalfy, Category 'I uses (vibration-sensitive equipmeni) within
600 feet, Category 2 uses (residences and buildings where people normally sleep)
v,�ithin 2C0 feet, and Category 3 uses (institutional land uses) within 120�eet of
railroad nghts-of-way or other major sources of groundborne vibration shall reGuire a
site-specific groundbome vibration analysis conducted by a qualified groundborne
vibration specialist in accordznce with FTA and FRA guidelines. Vibration control
measures deemed appropriate by the site-speci ic groundborne vibretion an2lysis
shall be implemented by the project applicant.
Finding
Implementation of site-specific groundborne vibration analysis, as described in mitigation
measures 5.6-2 above, would reduce potential impacts associated with excessive groundbome
vibration to a less than significant level. - -
Cultural Resources
Thresholds of Significance
The proposed project would result in a significant impact to cultural resources if it would:
1. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an historical resource as
defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
2. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
Impact: Historical Resource
Because three buildings that have been recommended as Historical Resources (California
Historical Resource Status Code SS3) and the six buildings that have been recommended for
further evaluation (California Historical Resource Status Code 7N)were identified in the PGD, it
is possible that fuiure PGDSP development projects couid cause a substantial adverse change
in the significance of an historical resource (Final PEIR Section 5.7.4.1). Cumulative impacts
associated veitn this issue are discussed in Section X, below.
F�planation
Based on the results of the comprehensive citywide historic resources survey, it was determined
that of approximately 59 potential historical resources, three buiidings (805 Dorothy Street,
753/765 Dorothy Street, and 755 Ada Street) are considered Historical Resources (California
Historical Resource Status Code 553 — appears to be incJividually eligible for local listing or
designation through survey evaluation); ,s:x buildings require further evaluation (Califomia
Historical Resource Status Code 7N — needs to be reevaluated); and the remaining buildinas
are not considered Hisiorical Resources (California Historical Resource Status Code 6Z—found
ineligible for National Register of Historic Places (NRHP), California Register of Historical
Resources (CRHR), or local designation through survey evaluation). If future PGDSP
development projects occur on or in the vicinity of the three buildings that have been
recommended as Histoncal Resources (Califomia Historical Resource Status Cbde 553) or the
16
Resolution\'o. 2013-160
Paee I�o. 27
six buildings tha# have b=en racommended for �urtner historicai resources evaluation (C�lirornia
Historiczl Resource Status Code iN), and result in demoli:ion, alteration, or any other zdverse
changes in the signi5cance of ihese his#oncal resources, a poien;ially signi9canf impact would
occur(�inal P�IR Secfion 5.7.4.i).
Mitigation Measures
5.7-'I Historical Resources Mitigation Program. Future PGDSP development projects
shall b=_ required fo implemen#the iolloiving measures to prevent poleniial impacts to
historical resources:
i. Impacts to any resource(s) ihzt is/are listed in a 1-listorical Resources Survey as
being a historical resource, or that nas been substaniiated th�ugh complztion of
a D'?R Form, an Exper Technical Analysis report, or by the City, to be an Eligible
Hisbricai Resource, as defined in CVi�1C Sec#ion 21.03AS4, sh211 require a
Cer�iBcate of Appropriafeness and shall foilow the reouiremenis set forth in
CVA4C Seciions 21.07.070 and 21.07.080.
ii. ?rior to any modi5cation or alteration, as defined in CVMC Section 25.03.002, to
a resource 45 years or older that may meet the findings of fact and eligibility
criteria established in CVMC Section 21.04.100, or any resource that has been
de#ermined through a survey io need further evaluation (Califomia Hislorical
Resource Siatus Code 7N), zn evaluation of fiistorical signi5cance shall be
conducted pursuani to CVMC Section 21.07.020. Any resource deiermined to be
an Eligibie Historical Resource, as defined in CVMC Seciion 21.03.044, shall
�ollow the procedure described in Item (i)above.
Finding
Impl=mentation of a hisiorical resources miiigation program, as described in mitigation measure
5.7-i above, would reduce potential impacts associated �ti�ih historical resources to a less than
signiricant level.
Impact: Archaeological Resources
Secause presently obscured or buried archaeological resources may occur within the PGD, it is
possible ihai ground-disturbing activities associated v.�ith construction of future PGDSP
development projects could cause a substan:ial adverse change in the signi icance of an
archaeological resource (Final PciR Section 5.7.4.2). Cumulativz irnpacts associated wiih this
issue are discussed in Section X, below.
Explanation
One previously recorded historic linear feaiure (P-37025680, San Diego and Arizona Easlern
Raik•ray) was iden#ified within.fhe °GD.during the December 2011. archaeological resources
survey. A segment of the San Diego 2nd Arizona Eastem Railway ��.�as rewmmended as
eligible for listing in the City oi San Diego Historic Resources Register, however, it is not
anticipated fhai tne railway line v+ould be aYected by th_ proposed PGDSP.
Whil� no new archaeological resources wzrz identified within the PGD as a resuii of the field
survey, and a �a5ve American Heritage Commission (�AHC) records search ot the Sacred
57
Resolution No. 20]3-]60
Paee No. 28
Lands File did noi identify Native American cultural resources within a half-mile radius of the
PGD, the extent of ground disturbance within the PGD is unknown. Thus, it is possible th�t
presently obscured or buried archaeological resources may occur within the PGD. If unknown
archaeological resources are encountered during ground-disturbing activities associated with
the construction of future PGDSP development projects, thereby resulting in damage or any
other adverse changes in the significance of an archaeological resource, a potentially significani
impact would occur (rinai PEIR Section 5.7.42).
f✓litigation Measures
5.7-2 Archaeological Resources Mitigation Program. Future PGDSP development
projects that involve ground disturbance beyond that previously disturbed shall be
required to implement the follow�ing measures to prevent potential impacts to
archaeological resources:
i. Cultural resource significance evaluations shell be requi�ed when new resources
are identified as a result of a survey, when previously recorded resources that
have not been previousiy evaluated are relocated during a survey, and when
previously recorded sites are relocated during the survey and if there is a
likelihood that the resource still exists. A property shall be reevaluated if its
condition or setting has eiiher improved or deteriorated, if new information is
available, or if the resource is becoming increasingly rare due to the loss of other
similar resources. In such cases, an archaeological testing program shall be
required, vahich includes evaluating the horizontal and vertical dimensions of a
site, the chronological placement, site function, artifacUecofact density and
variability, presence/absence of subsurface features, and research potenlial. It
should be noted that Tribat representatives and/or Native American monitors
shall be involved in making recommendations regarding the significance of
prehistoric archaeological sites during this phase of the process. The testing
program may require reevaluation of the project in consultation with the Native
American representative which could result in a combination of project redesign
to avoid and/or preserve significant resources as well as mitigation in the form of
- data recovery and monitoring (as recommended by the qualified archaeologist
and Native American representative).
ii. If significant cultural resources are identified within the proposed PGDSP project
site, those resources may be eligible for designatlon for the NRHP, CRHR, or
local register. If no significant resources are found, then no further action is
required. Resources found to be non-significant as a result of a survey and/or
assessment will require no further work beyond documentation of the resources
on the appropriate DPR 523 site forms and inclusion of results in the survey
andlor assessment report. If no signifcant resources are found but results of the
initial evaluation and testing phase indicates there is still a potential for resources
to be present in portions of the property that could not be tested, then mitigation
monitoring shall:be required. Preferred-mitigation for cuttural resources is fo
avoid the resource through project redesign. If the resource cannot be entirely
avoided, all prudent and feasible measures to minimize harm shall be taken.
iii. For archaeological resources where preservation is not an optlon, a dala
recovery program shall be implemented. The data recovery program shall be
�8
Resolutiorr No. 2013-160
Paee No. 29
based on a �vritten research desig��, whicn will outiine research quesfions znd
daia recovery methodology, and is suoject to ihe provisions outlined in CEQA
SecSon 2�083.2. Archaeological moniioring may be required during buildi��g
demolition and/or construciion grading when signi5cant resources are knavn or
suspected to be present on the proposed PGDSP project site, but cannot be
recovered prior io grading due fo obstructions such as, but not Iimited fo, existing
development or dense vegetalion.
iv. A I�'aiive American observer shall be reiained for all subsurface investigations,
includi�g geotechnical testing and other ground disturbing activities whenever a
�a[ive American T2di�ional Cultural Property or archaeological siie �vithin the
proposed PGDSP project site would be impacied. The Native American monitor
shali be consulted during the prepara:ion of the v:ri«en repor#, at vfiich time they
mey express concems aboui the treatment of sensitive resources. If the Naiivz
American communily requests par�icipation ot an observer For subsurface
im�esiigations on private properfy, ihe req�esi shali be Fionored.
Finding � � .
Implementation ot an 2rchaeological resources mitigation program, as described in mitigation
measure 5.7-1 above, would reduce potential impacts associated with arch2eological-resources
to a less than signiiicant level.
Paleontoloqical Resources
Thresholds of Significance
The proposed projeci would result in a significant impact io paleontological resources if it would:
1. Direcily or indirecily destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or unique geoiogic
feature. '
Impact: Paleontological Resources
Ground-disturbing activities during future development associated with PGDSP buildout may
expose the underlying Bay Point Formation, which has a moderafe paleontological sensitiviry
level and resource potential 2ting, and could poteniially damage or destroy unique
paleontological resources (Final PEIR, Section 5.8.4.�). Cumulative impacts associated with ihis
issue are discuss_d in Section X, below.
Ezplanation
Future develo�men[associated with PGDSP buifd-out w�ouid involve ground-disturbing activities _
such as grading and excava:ion. Sased on the moderate paleoNological sensitivity of the Bay
?oini Formation and unnamed nearshore marine sandstone underlying the PGD, exposure o�
ihis geologic formation during ground-disturbing activi5es has a moderate potenlial to uneadh
fossil remains. Secause the specific location znd significanc= of potential tossil remains are
unknown, ground-disturbing activities could potentially damage or destroy unique
paleontological resources. Since #he PGD is highly developed, grading activities associated x�th
future PGDSP development projects would typically be minimal, �viih the exception of sub-
garages or sub-noors. The grading ;hresholds shov:n in Table 5.8-1 would be used io determine
79
_ _ _ . ..... . .. _ ___ _ .. _ _ _. .. .
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 30 � �
v✓hether future PGDSP development projects would potentially result in significant impacts to
sensitive paleontological resources, and thus require mitigation. Due to the moderate '
paleonioiogical sensitivity of the Bay Point Formation underlying the PGD, future PGDSP
devzlopment projects that propose grading in excess of 2,000 cubic yards volume and five feet
depth would represent a potentially significant impact io sensitive paleontological resources
(Final PEIR Section 5.8.4.1).
� Mifigation Measures � � �
5.8-1 Paleontological Resources Mitigation Program. Future PGDSP development
projects that propose grading in excess of 2,000 cubic yards volume and five feet
depth shall be required to implement a pre-construction or construction mitigation
program, or both, as a condition of approval. All mitigation programs sha11 be
performed by a qualified professional paleontologist, defined as an individual with a
M.S. or Ph.D. in paleontology or geology who has proven'experience in San Diego
County paleontology and who is knowledgeable in professional paleontological
procedures and techniques. Fieldwork may be conducted by a qualified
paleontological monitor, defined as an individual who has experience in the.collection
and salvage of fossil materials. The paleontological monitor shall always work under
the direction of a qualified paleontologist.
Pre-construciion miiiqalion. This method of mitigation is only applicable to instances
where v,�ell-preserved and significanf fossil remains, discovered in the assessment
phase, would be destroyed during initial brush clearing and equipment move-on. The
individual tasks of this program include:
' i. Surface prospeciing for exposed fossil remains, generally involving inspection of
existing bedrock outcrops but possibly also excavation of test trenches;
ii. Surface collection of discovered fossil remains, #ypicaliy involving simple
excavation of the exposed specimen, but possibly also plaster jacketing of large
and/or fragile specimens or more elaborate quarry excavations of richly
fossiliferous deposits;
iii. Recovery of st�atigraphic and geologic data to provide a context for the
recovered fossil remains, typically including description of lithologies of fossil-
bearing strata, measurement and description of the overall stratigraphic section,
and photographic documentation of the 9eologic setting;
iv. Laboratory preparation (cleaning and repair) of collected fossil remains, generally
invoiving removal of enclosing rock material, stabilization of fragile specimens
(using glues and other hardeners), and repair of broken specimens;
v. Cataloging and identificetion of prepared fossil remains, typically invoiving
scientific identification of specimens, inventory of specimens, assignment of
ca[alog numbers, and entry of data into an inventory database;
vi. Trznsferral, for storage, of cataloged fossil remains to an accredited institution
(museum or universify) that maintains paleon:ological collections (induding the
20
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee No. 31
tossil specimens, copies o� all field noies, maps, s�2tigraphic seciions, 2nd
p�tioiographs); and
vii. ?reparaiion of a 5nal reporf summarizing the ield and laborafory meihods used,
t�-�e s:ratigraphic units inspecied, ihe iypes o{ tossils recovered, and ihe
signi�icance of th= curated collection.
Construciion mitiaation. Under this program, mitigation occurs while excava5on
operations are underv.�ay. The scope and pace of excavation generelly dictate ihe
scope 2nd pace of mitigation. The individual iasks oi a construction miliga5on
progam shall typically inGude:
i. A�fonitoring o{ exrzvation operations to discover uneaRhed fossil remains,
generaity involving inspecfion o� ongoing excavation exposures (e.g., sheet
graded pads, cut slopes, roadcuis, basement excavafioas, and trench sidewalis);
ii. Saivzge of unearthed tossil remains, typically invoiving simple excavation of the
exposed specimen but possibly also plaster jacketing of farge and/or fragile
specimens, or more elaborate quarry excavations of richly iossiliterous deposits;
iii. Recovery of stratigraphic and geologic data #o provide a context tor the
recovered fossil remains, typically including description of lithologies ot iossil-
bearing sirata, measurement and description oi the overall stratigraphic section,
and photographic documentation ot ihe geologic se�ting;
iv. laSoratory preparation (cleaning and repair) of collected tossil remains, 9eneralty
im•olving removal of enclosing rock material, stabilization of fragile specimens
(using glues and other hardeners), znd repair of broken specimens;
v. Cataloging and identification of prepared fossil remains„ typically irn�olving
scieniific identification oi specimens, inventory of specimens, assignment of
catalog numbers, and entry of data into an inventory database;
vi. Transferral, for storage, of cataloged tossil remains to an accredited institution
(museum or university) that maintains paleontological collections, including the
fossil specimens, copies of all field notes, maps, stratigrephic sections and
phoEogrephs; and
vii. Prepa2tion of a final repori summarizing the field and laboratory methods used,
the stratigraphic units inspected, the types oi fossils recovered, and •.he
significance or the curated collection. .
Finding , .
Implementation of a paleontologiczl resources mitigation program, as described in miiigation
mezsure 5.8-1 above, would reduce potential impacis associated with paleontological resources
to a less than sign�ficant level.
21
_
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 32
Bioloqical Resources
Thresholds of Significance
The proposed project�vould result in a significant impact to biological resources if it would:
L Hzve a substantial adverse ef(ect, sither directly or through habitat modifications, on any
species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional
plans, policies, or regulations, or by the CDFW or USFWS.
2. Have a substaniial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensltive natural
community identified in local or regional plans, policies, and regulations or by the CDFW
or USFWS.
3. Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by
Section 404 of the CWA (including, but not limited .o, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.)
through direct removal, filling, hydrological in,erruption, or other means.
4. Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources, such as a
tree preservation policy or ordinance; or conflict with the provisions of an adopted
Habltat Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved
local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan
Impact: Special-status Species
Future PGDSP development projects would result in potentially significant impacts to special-
slatus plant and animal species if project applicants of future PGDSP development proposals
within those portions of the MU-2 and PRV sub-districts that are characterized by non-native
grassland or disturbed wetland do not provide an updated, project-level biological resources
survey and report to document the current conditions and biological resources impacts
associated with each specifc project. In addition, implemehtation of the proposed PGDSP
would �esult in potentially significant impacts to nesting birds tha[ are protected under the
Migratory Bird Treaty Act (NBTA) and California Fish and Game Code (Final PEIR
Section 5.9.4.�).
Ezplanation .
tJo special-status animal and plant species were determined to have a high potential to occur
within the survey area due to lack of suitable habitat and other factors. However, limited portions
of the PGD were determined to support non-native grassland or disturbed wetland habitat,
which are designated under the City's Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea
Plan as sensitive Tier III and Wetland habitat types, respectively. Wetland habitats are further
regulated 2s jurisdictional resources under federal and state policy. Therefore, project
applicants oi future PGDSP development proposals within those portions of the PGD that are
characterized by non-native grassland or disturbed veetland habitat may be required to provide
an updated, project-level biological resources suroey and report to document the current
conditions and biological resources impacts associated with each specific project, and cor�flrm
that no sensitive species have the potential to occur onsite. The sub-districts within the PGD
that support non-native gressland and disturbed wetland include ihe Palomar Mixed Use
Corridor Sub-district (MU-2) and Palomar Residential Village Sub-district (PRV). Therefore,
22
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee No. 33
iu.ure PGDSP development orojects could resu4 in poteniialty significant imp2c's to speciai-
status plzni and animal species.
Although no special-status animal specizs would be expec,ed to occur, the project survey area
and immediaie vicinity confain Vees, shrubs, and man-made structures (e.g., buildings) that
provide'suitable n>_sting habitat ior common (non-sensitive) birds, inGuding comrnon raptors,
prolected under ine �46TA and Caliiornia Fish and Game Code. Future ?GDSP developm_n{
projects couid resuli in the removal or irimming of trees 2nd shrubs during ihe oeneral bird
nesiing seasoh (January 15 through August 3�). Direct impacts could occur as a result oi .
removal ot vegeta[ion supporting an aciive nest. Indirect impacts could occur zs a resutf ot
construction noise and vibretion in the immediate vicinity oi an actn�e nest, such ihai ihe
disiurbance resuiis in a nest failure. Thereiore, PGDSP implementation vrould result in
poientially signiticani impacts to nesting birds in violation of the AABTA and CFG Code.
P.dditionally, fuiure PGDSP development projects vrithin portions o� the NiU-2 and PRV-sub-
districts could result in ihe removal of non-native grassland thai provides margi�al foraqing
opportunities for raptors knov.�n to occur in the region. The potential loss o� raptor foraging
habitat at this location is nol aniicipated to have a substantial adverse effect on the long-term
survival of any rapior species due to ihe relatively small size and poor quality of the existing
habifat and the presence oi additional raptor Toraging habitzt in the local area. However, direct
impacts to non-nativa grassland, which is designated under fhe City's MSCP Subarea Plan as
sensitive Tier III habitat type, would be considered signiricant (Final PEIR Section 5.9.4.1).
Mitigation Measures �
5.9-1 Project-Level Biological Resources Surveys and Reporting. During the design
and environmental review phase, and prior to ihe consiruciion of fu#ure PGDSP
development projects that include those portions of the Palomar Ahixed Use Corridor
Sub-District (MU-2) and Palomar Residential Vllage Sub-District (PR�
characterized by non-native grassland or disturbed �vetland, as depicied on Figure
5.9-1, project applicants shall retain a City-approved biologist to conduct an updated,
project-level biologicai resources technical study of the proposed PGDSP project
site, to include an updated biological survey and report prepared in accordance with .
ihe City's FASCP Subar=_a Plan and HLIT Ordinance. The updated biological survey
shall indude an inventory of the current existing condition at the proposed PGDSP
project siie and verity whetner the projec{�ti�ould occur on or in the immediate vicinity
of sensitive natural habiiaf, inciuding wetlands, in addition to habitat suitable for
special-sfatus species. The updated biological resources report shall provide
documentation of the resulis of the updated biological survey, and shall also identity
potenfiai direct and indireci impacis to sensitive biological resources and project-
level measures to m�igate the poteniial impacts. The updated biological resources
repor� shall be submi«ed to fhe Ciy in support of CEQA documenFation and the
issuance of any subsequent discretionary actions or p=rmits identiiied for ihe future
development proposal.
5.9-2 Pre-Construction Nesting Bird Surveys. To avoid any direct impacts to raptors
and/or any migrafory birds, removal oi habitat that supports ac`�ive nests on the
proposed area of disturbance should occur ouisid= of{he breeding season Eor these
species (January 15 to August 37). I� r=moval of habitai on ihe proposed area ot
disiwbance must occur during ihe breeding season, projeci applican�s shall retain a
23
_ _ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ . __ _
- Resolution No. 20li-160
Page No. 34
City-approved biologisi b conduct a pre-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 priot to ihe sta�i of
construciion zctivities (including removal of vegetation). Project applicants shall
submit the resulis of the pre-construction survey to the City for review and approval
prior to initiating any construction activities. If nesting birds are detected, a letter
report or mitigaiion plan as deemed appropriate by the City, shall be prepzred and
include prbposed measures to be implemented to ensure that disturbance of
breeding activities is avoided. The report or mitigation plan shall be submi�ted to the
Ciiy for review and approval and implemented to the satisfaction of the City. The
City's AAitigation Monitor shail verify and approve that all measures identified in ihe
report or mitigztion p}an �re in place prior to and/or during construction.
Frnding
Impfementation of a project-level biologic2l resources surveys and repbrts and pre-construction
nesting bird surveys, as described in mitigation measures 5.9-1 and 5.9-2 above, would reduce
potential impacts associated to special stztus species to a less than signifcant level.
Impact: Sensitive Natural Communities . . �
Future PGDSP development projects within poriions of the A4U-2 and PRV sub-districts would
have the poiential to result in the loss of non-native grassland and disturbed wetland habitat
(Final PEIR Section 5.9.42).
6rplanation
Although the majority of future PGDSP development impacts would occur on exisiing developed
land or disturbed land, PGDSP build-out could result in impacts to the existing 8.42 acres of
non-native grassland and 0.68-acre of disturbed wetland habitat within the MU-2 and PRV sub-
districts, which are designated under the City's A�SCP Subarea Plan as sensitive Tier III and
Wetland habitat types, respectively. Future PGDSP development projects irt these areas could
resull in the removal of the existing non-native grassland and disturbed wetland habitat. Despite
the low quality of the existing habitat, impacts resulting in the permanent Ioss of sensitive Tier III
and Wetland habitat types would be considered significant per the City's MSCP Subarea Plan.
Future PGDSP projecC construction could also occur immediately adjacent to non-native
grassland and disturbed wetland habitai. Construction activities could result in adverse impacts
due to inadvertent encroachment into adjacent habitat by consiruction vehicles and personnel.
Therefore, PGDSP implementation would result in potentially significant direct impacts to
sensitive natural communities (Final PEIR Seclion 5.9.4.2).
Mitigation Measures
5.9-3 In-Kind Habitat-Based Compensatory Mitigation. Permanent and temporary
impacts to non-native grassland and disturbed wetland habitat associated with future
PGDSP developmeni projects in fhe MU-2 and PRV sub-districts shall be mitigated
by the project applicant in-kind (i.e., the same type of habitat as ihat which is
impacted), or an alternative type of habitat w�hich provides equivalent or superior
mitigation, through implementation of any one or combination of ihe following
measures, as aoproved and/or amended by the USACE, RWQCB, and/or CDFW in
24
Resolution I�'o. 2013-160
Pase No. 3�
federal and state permits or by the Ciry during the HLIT permit and \Metlands
Protection ?rogram proc2sses, as applicable:
i. On-site as creation of new habitat ��thin avoided and preserved areas ai the
project site;
ii. On-site as �estoration of existing habifat within temporary impact areas and/or
avoided and preserved areas at the proj=ct site;
iii. On-site as enhancement of existing habitat within avoided and preserved areas
at ih< project site;
iv. Of�-site as purchase of habitat credits from a Ciy-approved oi-site mitigafion
bank in the region, as determined through agreements with the City. Unless
otherwise required by the City, USACE, RWQCB, and/or CDFW, ihe mitigaYion
shall include off-site areas loc2.ed vrithin the boundaries of the Ciys MSCP
Subarea Plan;
v. Off-site as acquisition of land for the purposes of habitat preservation, creation,
restoration, andlor enhancement within other properties or approved mitigation
programs available ai the time of grading. Unless otherwise required by the City,
USACE, RWQCB, and/or CDFVd, the mitiga[ion shall include off-site areas
- located within the boundarizs of the City's MSGP Subarea Plan; or
vi. A combination of the above.
In-kind habitat-based mitigation for impacts to non-native grassland shall be
mitigated at a ratio of 0.5:1 (i.e., 0.5 acre of mitigaiion land (or every 'I.0 acre of
habifat impacied) to 1:1. The required mitigation ratio for nori-native 9rassiznd shall
be o.5:1 if the mitigation will occur within a designated Preserve area under the City's
MSCP Subarea Plan, and i:t if the mitigation wilt occur outside of a designated
Preserye area, such as on-site.
In-kind habitat-based mitigation for impacts to disturbed wetland shall be mitigated at
a ratio of 1:1 to .2:1 to ensure there is no-net-loss, as defermiried through
agreements with the City, and if required, through the acquisition of federal and state
permits irom the USACE, RWQCB, andlor CDFW.
Prior to the issuance of any land development permits (including clearing and
grubbing or grading permits) for projects requiring on- or otf-site creation, restoration,
andlor enhancemeni mitigation, project applicants shall prepare a resto2tion plan for
impacts to sensitive biological resources. The'restoretion plan shall be prepared by a
City-approved biologist and fo ihe satisfaction of the City's Development Services
Director (or his designeej. The restoration plan shall include, at a minimum, an
implementation strategy, aapropriate seed mixtures and planting method; irrigation;
quantitative and qualitative success criteria; maintenance, monitoring,.and reporting •
prog2m;'estim2ted completion time; and contingency measures. Project applicants
shall also be required to implement the restoration plan subject to ;he oversight and
approval by the City's Development Services Director (or his designee). If required,
?J
Resolution i�'o. 2013-160
Page No. 36
res[oration plans prepared for �vetland habitat mitigation shall be approved by the
USACE, RVJQCB, and/or CFDG prior to vegetation clearing, gr2ding, andlor
construction 2ctivities.
Project applicants shall be required to record a biotogical open space easement or
conservation easement over land that is to be used as mitiyation, if such an
easement does not already exist, designating it as a preserve for biologicai
conserv2iion purposes. Nitigation proposed within the City shall be accompanied
with an conservation easement'or other mechanism approved by the City, USFWS,
USACE, RIA�QCB, and/or CDFW, as appropriate, as being suYcient to insure that
lands are protected in perpetuity.
In the event that a project applicant is unable to secure mitigation through an
established mitigaiion bank approved by the City and Wildlife Agencies, the project
applicant sha11 secure the required mitigation ihrough the-conservation of an area
coniaining in-kind habitat within the City's MSCP Sutiarea Plan or MSCP Planning
Area in accordance v.�ith the mitigation ratios contained in Table 5-3 of the City's
MSCP Subarea Plan and subject to Wildlife Agency concurrence.
5.9-4 Construction Fencing. Prior to issuance of any land development permii, and to ihe
satisfaction and oversight of ihe City's Development Services Director (or his
designee), the applicant shall secure the parcel(s) that will be permanentiy preserved
for in-kind habitat impact mitigation, prepare a long-term Management and
Monitoring Plan (MMP) for the mitigation area, secure an appropriate management
eniiN to ensure that long-term biological resource management and monitoring of
the mitigation area is implemented in perpetuity, and establish a long-term funding
mechanism for the management and monitoring of the mitigation area in perpetuiry.
The long-term MA1P shall provide management measures to be implemented to
sustain the viability of the presen�ed habitat and identiy timing for implementing the
measures prescribed in the M�AP. The mitigation parcel shall be restricted from
fuiure development and permanently preserved through the recordation of a
conservation easement or other mechanism approved by the Wildlife Agencies as
being sufficient to insure that the lands are protected in perpetuity. The conservation
easement or other mechanism approved by the Wildlife Agencies shall be recorded '
prior to issuance of any land development permits.
The project applicant shall be responsible for maintaining the biological integrity of
the mitigation area and shall abide by all managemeni and monitoring measures
identified in the MAAP until such time as the established long-term funding
mechanism has generated sufficient revenues to enable a City-approved
management entity to assume the long-term maintenance and managemeni
responsibilities.
Finding
Implementation of a project-level biological resources surveys and reports, in-kind habitat-based
compensatory mitigation program, and consiruction fencing, as described in mitigation
measures 5.9-1, 5.9-3, and 5.9� above, would reduce poteniial impacts associated to sensiti��e
natural communities to a less ihan significant Ievel.
26
Resolution I�`o. 2013-160
Pase No. 37
Impact: VVetlands
Future PGDS? development projecis v,�ithin portions oi the MU-2 and PRV sub-districts ti�ould
have the poteniial fo result in khe loss of distur5ed vaetland habitat (rinal PEIR Section 5.9.4.3).
Explanation
Al�hough the m2jority of ruture PGDSP oevelopmeni impacts v✓ould occur on existing developed
I2nd or disturbed land, PGDS? build-out could resul� in impacfs to th2 existing O.oB-acre of
disturbed wetland habitat v,�ithin ihe AqU-2 and PRV sub-districts, vehich is designated under the
Ciry's h4SCP Subarea °lan as sensitive Wetland habitat. In addition, all or poRions o� the
exisfing disturbed wetland habitat could suppoR the physical characteristics to be considered
vraters of the United States under the regulatory jurisdiction of the Unifed States Army Corps of
Engineers (USACE) pursuanf to Sec.ion 404 of the Clean Water Act (CWA); waters of the State
under the regulatory junsdiction of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RVJQCB)
pursuant to S>ction 401 of the CWA and the Porte;-Cologne VJater Quality Control Act; and/or
jurisdictional streambed under the regulatory jurisdiction of the California Department of Fish
and VJildlife (CDF\N) pursuant to CFG Code Sections 7600 et seq. Temporary and permanent
filis, discharges, and dredging associated v.�th future PGDSP project construction or operation
activities in jurisdiciional wetlands would be considered significant. Fu[ure PGDSP project
consiruction could also occu� immediately adjaceni to existing jurisdictional wetlands.
Consiruction zctivities could result in adverse impacts due to inadvertent encroachment in?o
adjacent v.�etlands by construction vahicles and personnel. Theretore, PGDSP impfementation
would result in poteniiaily significant direct impacts to wetlands (Final PEIR Section 5.9.4.3).
Mitigation Measures
5.9-5 Project-Level Wetland Delineation Studies. Prior to construction of future PGDSP
development projects within portions of ihe MU-2 and PRV sub-districts that could
result in impacts to disturt�ed wetland habitat, project applicants shall retain a
qualified biologist to perform a formal wetland delineafion in order to Gualify and
quantify existing wetland resources potentially subject to 'the regulatory jurisdiction of
the USACE, RVdQCB, andlor CDFW. Wetland delineations shall be conducted
according to ihe methodologies and current regulatory guidance recommended by
these agencies. The results of the wetland delineation shall be documented in a
report to determine project impacts and avoidance, and if required, tacilitate the
acquisition of federal and state permits.
5.9-6 Wetland Permits. Prior to construction of future PGDSP developmeni projects within
porions of ihe MU-2 and PRV sub-districts that have been confirmed to result in
poiential impacis to jurisdictional wetlands, as identified through implementation of
mitigation measure 5.9-5 above, project applicants shzll obtain the required federal
and state permits irom fhe USACE, RVJQCB, and/or CDFW, as specified below:
i. An application for a natiornvide or Individual Permit, depending upon the exteni
of impacts, shall be submitted by the project applicant to ihe USACE pursuant to
Section 404 of the CWA. If required, the projeci applicant shall obtain a -
Nationwide or Individual r'ermit irom the USACE for ail impacts, temporary
and/or permanent, to any areas within the proposed project which are
determined to qualiy as waters of the United States subject io USACE
j�Jrisdiction.
27
_ _ __ __ __. _. . _. . _ _. _ . . .. . . _
Resolution No. 20li-160
Pase No. 38
ii. For any future PGDSP developmeni projects requiring a federal license or permit
to construct or operate, which may result in any discharge into waters of the
United States, th2 project applicant shall submit to the RWQCB a request for
V��ater Quality Standards Certification pursuant to Section 40� of fhe CVJA to
connrm that the discharge would compty with applicabie �a�ater quality and
discharge provisions.
iii. A Notifica5on of Lake or Streambed Alteration shall be submitted by the project
applicant to the CDFW pursuant to CFG Code Section 1602. li required, a
Streambed Alteration Agreement shall be obtained from the CDFW for all
impacls, temporary andlor permanent, to any areas within the project which are
determined to qualify as sireambed and/or riparian subject to CDF\N jurisdiciion.
In accordance with permit requirements, project applicants shall miiigate the loss of
jurisdictional weilands through the implementation of the in-kind habitaFbased
compensatory mitigation proposed within mitigation measure 5.93 above, unless
othenvise conditioned by [he USACE, RWQCB, and CDFVJ in federal and siate ,
permits or by the City during the HLIT permit and VJetlands Prot2ction Program
processes.
Finding
Implementation of a project-level biological resources surveys and reports, in-kind habiia#-based
compensatory mitigation program, construction fencing, project-level wetiand delineation
studies, and wetland permits, as described in mitigation measures 5.9-1, 5.9-3, 5.9-4, 5.9-5, and
5_9-6 above, would reduce potential impacts associated to weilands to a less than significant
level.
Impact: Local Policies, Ordinances, and Adopted Conservation Plans
Prior to mitigation, future PGDSP development projects within those portions oi ihe AdU-2 and
PRV sub-districts that are charecterized by non-native grassland or disturbed m�etland would
have the potential to conflict with the City's MSCP Subarea Plan and CVMC Chapter.17.35.
(Final PEIR Section 5.9.4.5).
Ezplanation
Project applicanis of future PGDSP development proposals ��ithin those po�ions of the MU-2
and PRV sub�listricts that are characterized by non-native grassland or disturbed wetland may
be required to provide an updated, project-level biological resources sun�ey znd report to
document the current conditions and biological resources impacts associated �vith each specific
project. There(ore, future PGDSP development projects could result in potentially significant
impacis to special-status plant and animal species.
Fur�hermore, due.lo the fact tfiat future development associated with PGDSP buildout would be
focated within Development Areas Outside of Covered Projects and could result in impacts to
sensitive Tier III and N�etland habitat types, future PGDSP development projects v✓ithin those
portions of the MU-2 and PRV sub-dist�icts that are characterized by non-native crassland or
disturbed wetland would be subject to the Habitat Loss and Incidental Take (HLIT) Ordinance
(CVNC Chapter 17.35) and Vdetland Protection Program (Section 5.2.4 of th> City's MSCP
28
Resolution No:2013-]60
Paee No. 39 '
Explanation
YJith regard to expansive soils, fhe PGD may contzin locali�ed arzas of compressible and/or
expansive soils. Tnus, future PGOSP developmenk projects v:ould potentially be located on
oompressibie and/or expansive soils that could c;eaie subsianiial isks to life or property. This
represents a poteniially signi5cant impact (Final PEIR Section 5.1 i.4.3). ,
Mitigation Measures
5.'I1-1 Site-Specific Geoiechnical Investigation. Prior to the construction of fufure
PGDSP development projects, project applic2nts shall submit a siie-speciiic
geotechnical im�estigation to the City Engineer and/or 3uiiding O�cial for review and
approval. The investigation shail be prepared by a Iicensed geotechnical engineer in
order to evaluate the specific geologic conditions of the proposed PGDSP project
site, determin2 v:hefher potential geologic hazards exist, and provide
recommendations for project design and wnstruciion to minirnize such hazards. The
invesligation shall include (but not be timited to) a delineation of speci5c locations
where compressible and expansive soils would a(fect sirvctural siabiliy.
Compressible and expansive soils shall be removed �rom the siie and replaced wiih
compactad fill.
Finding
Implementation of a site-specific geotechnical invesiigation, as described in mitigation measure
5.i1-1 above, �vould reduce potential impacts associated to soil hazards io a less than
significant level.
Public Services and Utilities �
Thresholds of Significance
The proposed project would result in a significant impact to public services and utili[ies if it
Y�ould:
'I. Result in ihe inability of the Ciry to provide an adequate level of fi�e protection and
emergency medical services in accordance v.�th the adopied standards and threshold as
foilows: properly equipped and staffed fire'and. medical units shall respond to calls
throughoui the City k�thin 7 minutes in 80 percent of the cases.
2. Resuli in ihe inability of the City to provide an adequate level of police services in
accordance v.�ih the adopted siandards and thresholds as folfows: �) property equipped
and sia�ed police units shall respond to 81 percent ot Prioriy One emergency calls
v.�{hin 7 minutes and maintain an average response time #o all Rriority One emergency
calls of 5.5 minutes or less, and 2) properiy eGuipped and staf�ed police units shall
respond to 57 percent ot Priority Two urgent cails �vii]-�in 7 minutes and maintain an
average response time io all Priority T�vo calls of 7.5 minutzs or less.
3. Result in tl-�e inability of fhe public school system to provide adequate school facilities in �
accotdance �•.�th studenUteacher and facilities ratios established for the Chula Vista
Elementary School District (CVESD) and Sweeiv.�ater Union High School District
(SUHSD).
30
Resolution No. 2015-160 �
Pase No. 40
Subarea Plan) roquirements. �ailure o� iuturz PGDS? oevelopment projects to apply for and
obtain a HL1T permit from the City, if required, would conflict with CVMC Chapter '17.35.
Thereforz, PGDSP implementztion v.�ould result in potentially significant impacts related io local
policies, ordinances, and adopied conservation plans (Final PEIR Section 5.9.4.3).
Mitigation Measures
5.9-7 Habitat Loss and Incidental Take Permit. Prior to consiruction of future PC�DSP
development projects within portions of the MU-2 and PRV sub-districts that could
result in impacts to non-native grassland (Tier III) and disturbed wetland (\4�etland)
habitat, project applicants shall submit for approval to the City of Chula Vista an
application for a HLIT permit, to include all relevant submittal requirements 2nd
required fndings in accordance with CVMC Chapter 17.35. Project applicants shall
provide all necessary information to allow the City to take action on the HLIT permit
application and meet the required findings for an HLIT permit to be issued.
In accordance �a�ith FlLIT permit requirements, project applicants shall mitigate the
loss of non-native grassland (Tier III) and disturbed wetland (Wetland) habitat
through the implementation of ihe in-kind habiiat-based compensatory mitigation
proposed within mitigation measure 5.9-3, unless othenvise conditioned by the
USACE, RWQCB, and CDFW in federal and state permits through the
implementation of mitigation measure 5.9-6.
Finding
Implementation of a project-level biological resources surveys and repoRs, in-kind habitat-based
compensatory mitigation program, construction fencing, project-level wetland delineation
studies, wetland permits, and habitat loss and incidental take permits, as described in mitigation
measures 5.9-1, 5.9-3, 5.9-4, 5.9-5, 5.9-6, and 5.9-7 above, would reduce potential impacts
associated to local policies, ordinances, and adopted conservations plans to a less than
significant level. �
Geoloqy and Soils
Thresholds of Significance
The proposed project would resuli in a significant impact to geology and soils if it would:
1. ee Iocated ori a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading,
liquefaction, or collapse.
Impact: Soil Hazards
Future PGDSP development. projects would..potentially. be located..on compressible andlor
expansive soils, which could create substantial risks to life or property (Final PEIR
Section 5.11.4.3).
29
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee No. �1
4. Result in ihe inability of the Ciry to provide an adequate level of library facilities in
accordance with the adopted standerds and threshold as follows: populaiion rtio of
500 square feet of adequaiely equipped and staied library facilities per �,000
population.
5. Result in the inability of the Ci1y to provide an adequate level of parics and recreation
areas iri accordance with the adopted standzrds and threshold as follows: dedication of
3 acres of parkland with appropriate facilities per 'I,000 residents.
o. Result in a determination 5y tne wastewafer treatment provider which serves or may
serve ihe project fhat it does not have adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to ihe provider's exisiing commitments.
Impact: Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services
PGDSP build-out v.�ould allow for inueased development densities and associated population
growth in the PGD, thereby inGeasing the demand for fire protection and emergency medical
services, wnich could hinder response times. If the provision of additional personnel does not
coincide with the PGDSP's projected population growth and associaled demand for fire
protection and emergency medical services, a potentially significani impact would occur (Final
PEIR Section 5.12�.4).
Explanation ,
The PGDSP includes an assessment of enhancements to fire protection and emergency
medical services in relation to projected build-out of ihe.PGDSP o'ver the 20-year pfanning
horizon. Through the Growth Management Program and Fire Station Master Plan, the City
would continue to monitor fire pFotection and emergency medical services needs. Public
Facilities Development Impact Fee programs v.�ould provide capital funding for additional
facilities. Flowever, if the provision of additional personnel does not coincide with the PGDSP's
projected population growth and associated demand for fire protection and emergency medical
services, response times could be adversely affected such that ihey are no longer in compliance
v.�th the threshold standard. This represents a potentially significant impact associated with fire
protection and emergency medical services (Final PEIR Section 5.12.1.4).
� !✓litigation Measures �
5.12•1 Adequate Level of Fire Protection and Emergency Medical Services. The
lollowirig measures shall be implemented to ensure that adequate fire proiection and
emergency medical services are maintained in accordance with the adopted
standards and Quality of Life Threshold Standard:
i. Prior to approval, future PGDSP development projects shall demonstrate
provision of adequate access for fire vehicles (pursuant to Generai Plan
Policy PFS 6.1) and adequate �ti�ater pressure to new buildings (pursuant to
Generel Pian Policy PFS 6.2).
ii. As a condition of project approval, each individual developer shall pzy ihe Public
Facilities Development impact =ees at the rate in e�ect at the time the building
permit is issued.
31
_ . _. __ _ . _ ._... . .. ... . . . _ _ . _
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 42
iii. As p2rt of ihe annual budge#ing process, the City shall assess the need for
addiiional �ire personnel to provide fire protection and emergency medical
services consistent �vith esiablished Ciy service levels and commensurate with
the increase in popul2tion.
Pursuant to City oi Chula Vfs!a Growth ��anagement Policy GM1.11, the City of
Chula Vsta establishes the authoriy to withhold discretionary approval and
subsequent building permits from projects demonstrated to be oui of compliance wiih
applicable threshold standards.
Finding
Implementation of mitigation measure 5.�2-1 vaould reduce poiential impacts to fire protecfion
and emergency medical services to a less ihan significant level by ensuring emergency access
and w�ater supply, payment of fees #o support fire protection services, and a commitment from
the Ciy to 2ddress potential fire personnel shorfages.
Impact: Police Services � -
PGDSP build-out would allow for increased development densities and associated population
growth in the PGD, thereby increasing the demand for police services, vehich could hinder
response times. If the provision of additionaf personnel does not coincide with the PGDSP's
projected population gro��fh and associated demand for police services, a potentially significant
impact�vould occur (Final PEIR Section 5.122.4).
Explanation
The PGDSP includes an assessment of enhancements to police services in relation to projected
build-out of the PGDSP over lhe 20-year planning horizon. Through the Growth Management
Program, the Ciry would continue to monitor police services needs. Public Facilities
Development Impact Fee programs would provide capital funding for additional facilities.
However, if the provision of additional personnel does not coincide with the PGDSP's projected
population grov✓th and associated demand for police services, response times could be
adversely affected such ihat they are not in compliance with the Quality of Life Threshold
Standards. This represents a potentially significant impact associated with police services (Final
PEIR Section 5.12.2.4).
Mitigation Measures
5.12•2 Adequate Level of Police Services. The following measures shall be implemented
lo ensure that adequate police services are maintained in accordance with the
adopted Qualiry of Life Threshold Standards:
i. Prior to approval, future PGDSP development projects shall demonstrafe
provision of adequate access for police vehicles (pursuani to General Plan
Policy PFS 6.1) and integretion of CPTED techniques (pursuant to General Plan
Policy PFS 6.3).
ii. As a condition of project approval, e2ch individual developer shall pay ihe Public
Facilities Development Impact Fees at the rate in etfect at the time the building
permit is issued.
32
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee No. 43
iii. As pan of :he annual budgeting process, ?he Ciy shall ass2ss the need for
zdditional pofice personnel to provide police services consisteni with esiablished
City servic= leveis and commensuraie with the increase in population.
?ursuant to City of Chula Vista Grow4h Management Policy GI�41.11, the City of Chula Vista
es�ablishes the auihority to wi�hhold discretionary approval and subsequent building permits
irom projects demonsirated to be out of compiiance with applicable threshold sta�dards.
Finding �
Implementation of mitigation measure 5.12-2 would reduce potential impacts to police s2rvices
to a less than significant level by ensuring payment ot lees lo support police services and a
commitment from the Ciy to address pofential police personnel shortages.
Impact: Schools - -
PGDS? build-out would allow for increased development densities and associated populatio�
crovth in Ihe PGD, thereby increasing the demand �or schools:If the construciion or expansion
of school facilities does not coincide with the PGDSP's student generation and associaied
demand for schools, a potentially significant impact would occur(Final PEIR Section 5.12.3.4).
Explanation
Tlie Pubfic Services and Facilities Element of Ehe General Plan addresses issues related to
school facilities {Policy PFS 9.1 through PFS 9.5), including coordination v�ith local schooi
districts to identiEy needs, school sites, sources of funding for school expansion, nev.�
approaches io accommodate enroliment, and review of land use issues requiring discretionary
approval to provide adequate school facilities. In conformance with ihe objectives and policies of
the General Plan, the PGDSP addresses improvements to school .facilities in relation to
projectad buiid-oui of the PGDSP over the 20-year planning horizon. Through the Grov.�th
Management Program and CIP process, the City would schedule and monitor public
educaiional services improvemenfs in coordination with local school districts. School mitigation
�ees v:ould providz capital funding for needed facilities. However, if the construction or
expansion of school facilities does not coincide with the PGDSP's student generaiion and
associated demand forschools, the capacities of the CVESD and SUHSD could be exceeded. .
This represents a potentially significani impact associated witn schools (Final PEIR
Section 5.12.3.4).
IVlitigation Measures
5.12-3 Adequate Levet of School Facilities. Prior to approval of future PGDSP
development projects, each individual developer shall pay the statutory school
impact fees at the rete in eYect at the time the building permit is issued.
Finding
Implementation o� mitigation measure 5.12-3 v+ould reduce potenfiai impacts to school to a less
than significant level by ensuring payment oi fees to support schools.
33
__ _ _ _ _
_ _
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 44
Impact: Libreries
PGDSP build-oui would allow ior increased development densities and associated poputation
gro«4h in ihe °GD, thereby increasing the demand for libreries, w�hich could contribuie io ihe
exisiing shortage of library space if the City's plans for additional library development continue
to be unrealized. If the construction or expansion oi library facilities does not coincide with the
PGDSP's projected population growth and associated demand for libraries, a potentially
significant impact would occur (Final PEIR Section 5.12.4.4).
Explanation
The PGDSP addresses improvements to library facilities in relation to projected build-out of the
PGDSP over the 20-year planning horizon. Through ihe Growth Management Program, CIP
process, and Public Library S.rategic Facilities ?lan, the City would schedule, evaluate, and
monitor public library services improvements to coordinate timing of new facilities with new
developmenL Public Facilities Development Impact Fee programs would'provide capital funding
for needed facilities. However, if the construction or expansion of library facilities does not
coincide with the PGDSP's projected population growth and associated demand for libraries, the
Chula Vista Public Library System would continue to be in norncompliance with ihe Quality of
�ife Threshold Standard. Th+s. represenis a potentially significant impact associated with
libraries (Final PEIR Section 5.12.4.4).
Mifigation Measures
5,�2-4 Adequate Level of Library Facilities. Prior to approval, future PGDSP development
projects shall demonstrate that significant impacts to libraries resulting from the
individual project have been addressed. As a condition oi project approval, each
individual developer shall pay the Public Facilities Developmeni Impact Fees at the
ra[e in effect at the time the building permit is issued.
Findrng
Implementation of mitigation measure 5.12-4 would reduce potential impacts to libraries to a
less[han significant Ievel by ensuring payment of fees to suppo�t libraries.
Impact: Parks and Recreation
PGDSP build-out would allow ior increased development densiiies and associated population
growth in the ?GD, thereby increasing the demand for parks and recreetion facilities. If the
dedication of parkland and construction of recreation facilities does not coincide with the
PGDSP's projected population growth and associated demand for parks and recreation
facilities, a potentially significant impact would occur(Final PEIR Section 5.12.5.4).
Explanation
Scarce land tends io make parkland acquisition costs (in terms of cost of land and
displacement) in westem Chula Vsta significantly higher compared to eastem Chula Vsta.
While future growth would result in the need and requirement for additional parklands and
recreational facilities, there wouid be increased difficulty in securing appropriate park and
recreation sites in westem Chula Vista where land is largely built-ouf. Lack of vacant and
underutilized land and/or competing demands for land provide challenges to increasing the
parks and recreation facilities inventory in western Chula Vsta. Maximizing the utility of existing
34
Resolution No. 2013-160
Pase I�o. 4�
pah:s and recreaiion facilities ihrouoh renovation and expansion and fhe consideeation of non-
active recreaiional uses vriihin existing recreation areas is im�o��ant in �,•estern Cnula Visia;
v.�hile this shategy v:ould not provide additional pzrk acreage, i; would partially meet the
recreational reeds oi future residents. Implementation of future.park sit=s along witn integration
of urban parks in infill arezs in v✓estem Chula Vsta would saiisfy some future park and
recreation demanes resulting from new residential developm=nl. ro�•�ever, if ihe dedic-ation of
parkland and construction of recreation facilities does not coincide with ihe PGDSP's projecied
population gro��th and associated demand for parks and recre�tion facilities, the reueational
needs of residents woutd not be met. This represents a potentially significant impact associated
with parks and recreation (Final PEIR Section 5.'12.5.4).
Nritigafron Measures
5.'12-5 Adequate Level of Parks and Recreation Facili:ies. Prior to approv2l, future
PGDSP development projects shall establish to the satisfaction of the Development
Services Director that the project meets the City's parkland dedication requiremeni.
As a condition of project approval, each individual developer shall provide required
parkland and recreational facilities consisteni with potenti2l site locations ideniified in
the PGDSP and the Parks and Recreation Master Plzn; or stiall pay �he applicable
parkland acquisition and parktand development fees and recreation facility
development impact fees at the rete in effect at the time building oermiis are issued.
Finding
Implementation of mitigation measure 5.12-5 would reduce petential impac�s to parks and
recreation to a less than significant level by ensuring payment of fees to support parks and
recreation facilities.
Impact: Wastewater
PGDSP buildout would allow for increased development densiiies and associated population
growth in the PGD, thereby increasing the demand for sev.-er service. If the construction or
expansion oi sewer facilities does not coincide with the PGDSP's projected populafion growth
and associa:ed demand for sewer service, non-compliance with the City's Quality of Life
Threshold Standard for sewer service may result such that a potentially signific2nt impaci would
occur(Final PEIR Section 5.12.7.4).
Explanation
The Ciy is c�rrenity in the process of upgrading approximately 1.350 linear teei of main in
Industrial Boulevard beriv=en Main Street and Anita Street. ihe preferred impmvemeni
alternative consisfs of installing a new 15-inch sewer main parallel to the existing 12-inch line
between Main Street and Anita Sireet. This improvement alternative would also divert Industrial
Boulevard flows into.the Sali Creek Interceptor and abandon portions of the existing sewer
within Industrial Boulevard. This diversion �vould relieve existing capacity constraints in Ihe 18-
inch sewer in Holiister Street south of RAain Street. If the construction or expansion of seveer
facilities does not coincide with the PGDSP's projected populziion grov✓th and zssociated
demand for sev:er se;vice, non-compliance�vith the Ciy's Quality of Life Threshold Standard for
szwer service may result. This represents a potentially sign;ficant impact associated v;ith
v.�astewater (Final PEIR Section 5.12J.4).
35
. . .. _ . _ __ _ ___ _ . _ _ _ .
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 46
Mitigation Measures
5.12-6 Sewer System Upgredes. Commensurate �vith population grovih in the PGDS°,
the Ciy shzl! implement Ihe preferrzd improvement alternative, Proposal 2, as
identirred in the PGDS� Sewer Study(Aikins 2012c). Proposal 2 consists of installing
a new 15-inch se��er main parallel to the existing 12-inch line betv+een A4ain Street
and Anita Street, and would also divert Industrial Boulevard flows into the Salt Creek
Interceptor and abandon portions of the existing sevaer within Industrial Boulevard.
5.12-7 Sewer Development Impact Fee. The City shall establish a seH�er development
impact fee or other similar fee structure to charge future PGDSP development
projects tor their portion of sewer upgrades. Prior to issuance of building permits,
future PGDSP development projects shall pay the applicable sewer development
impact i2e at the rate in eftect at ihe time building permits are issued.
Findrng
Implementation of mitig2tion measures 5.12-6 and 5.12-7 v.�ould reduce poteniial impacts to
seti�er capacity to a less ihan significant level by ensuring payment of fees to support sewer
development and a sewer system upgrade.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Thresholds of Significance
The proposed project would result in a significant impact to hazards and hazardous materials if
it would:
�. Creaie a significant hazard to the public or the environment through the rouiine
transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials; or create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accideni conditions
involving the release of hazardous materials into the environmen[.
2. Be located on a sife that is included on a list of hazardous materials sites compiled
pursuani to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, create a significant
hazard to the public or the environment.
3. Impair implementation of or physically interfere v,�ith an adopted emergency response
plan or emergency evacuaiion plan.
Impact: Hazardous Materials Transport, Use, Disposal, or Release
Demolition or renovation activities involving buildings constructed prior to the 1980s, as well as
ground-disturbing activities in soils with elevated levels of lead or pesticides, would have the
potential to expose construction workers to hazardous building materials, which could pose
substantial health�isks (Final PEIR Section 5.13.4.�).
Explanation
Given the ag2 of most of the structures within the PGD (pre-dating the eariy 1980s), the
poiential for hazardous building materials such as PCBs (polychlorinaied hiphenyls), treated
36
Resolution\o. 2013-160
Pase I�'o. 47
wood, asbesios-containing materials, lead-based paint, and ofher Universal V�aste is
considered likely. There is also the potential for the presence of lead and pesticides in shallow
soi!s adjacent to andlor beneath these siructures (where crawl spaces are preser,t)from pzeling
paint and/or application of pesticides. Demolition or renovation acfivifies invoNing buildings
constructed prior to the 1980s, as �vell as ground-dis:urbing activities in soils with elevated
Ieveis of lead or pesticid2s, would have the potential to expose construciion workers to
h2z2rdous building materials, v.�hich could pose su4stantial health risks. This represents a
potentially signitic�nt imp2ct (FinaIPEIR Section 5.'13.4.1).
lAitigation Measures
5.13-1 Hazardous Building Materials Surveys. Prior io demolition or renovation activities
associaied with future PGDSP developmert projects, a hazardous building materials
survey shall be performed at buildings �hat were consirucied prior to �980. This type
of survey typically addresses asbestos-containing materials, lead-based paint, PCBs
in electrical equipment, mercury switches, and he2ting/cooling systems. The
hazardous building materials survey shall be conducted under the direct supervision
of a certified asbesfos consultant and cerified lead inspector/assessor. If asbestos-
containing materials, lead-based paint, or other hazardous materials are identified
during the hazardous building materials survey, a licensed abatement removal
coniractor shall remove and properly dispose of the hazardous materials in
accordance with applicable federal, state, and local regulations. A certified consultant
shall prepare a bid specification document, and perform abatement project planning,
site and air monitoring, oversight activities, and reporting activities.
Finding
Implementation of mitigation measure 5.13-t would reduce potential impacts associated with
hazardous materials transport, use, disposal, or rele2se to a less ihan significant level by
ensuring hazardous building materials surveys.
Impact: Hazardous Materials Site
Due fo releases and/or historical uses, sites containing contaminated groundwafer and/or soiis
have been identified in the PGD. Contaminated groundwater andlor soil may pose significant '
hazards to public health and safety during construction or long-term use of future PGDSP
development projects on hazardous materials sites (Final'PEIR Section 5.13.4.3).
Explanation
Based on Ihe environmenial database search and records review, the majorify o{ the identified
potentially hazardous materials sites do not represent a significant hazard to the public or ihe
environment due to their distance from the PGD and/or case status (i.e., soil rele2se only or
case closed). Contaminated groundwater and/or soil may pose significani hazards to public
healih and saiety during construction or long-term use of future PGDSP devefopmeni projects
on hazardous materials sites. This represents a potentially significant imp2ct (Final PEIR
Section 5.13.4.3).
i
37
_ _ _
_ _ _ _ _ __
Resolution No. 20li-160
Page No. 48
Mitigation Measures
5.13-2 Risk Assessments. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit ot tuture PGDSP
developmeni projects on sites v✓here contamination has been identified, or if
contaminztion is discovered dunng construction activi[ies, work shall be immeciately
suspended and a risk assessment shall be periormed to address risks posed by any
residual coniamination and establish appropriate mitigation measures, such as
naturel at�enuation, active remediaiion, and engineering controls, that would be
protective of human health and i'ne environment. All assessment and remediation
activities shall be conducied in accordance with a \Nork Plan ihat has been approved
by the regulatory agency with oversight. In zddition, the following precautions shall
be observed, as applicable:
i. Pre-project activities (e.g., planning or early design) shall take into consideration
siie-specific environmentaf evaluation to address hazardous materials concerns
related to worker and community health and saiety, waste generation and
disposal, and regulatory requirements.
ii. If a site v.�as historically used for agricultural purposes, there is the potential for
on-site soil or groundwater to be impacted with pesticides, herbicides, or other
related contaminants. Prior to construction, these sites shall be evaluzted for
potential impacts reiated to the agricultural land use.
iii. Caution shall be taken during excavation activities near the facilities associated
with unauthorized releases because of the potential for encouniering
documented and undocumented releases of contaminants and hazardous
materials or wastes that may have occurred within or adjacent to these sites.
' Excavation and soil monitoring shail be conducted by professionals trained in the
identification and management of hazardous materials or wastes, such as
contaminated soil or groundwater.
iv. li hazardous or regulated wasies are generated during construction or demolition
activities, the v.�astes shall be handled and disposed of in accordance with
applicable federal, state, and local regulations.
v. A human health risk assessment shall be performed, as.necessary, to evaluate if
a release or releases of hazardous materials presenis an unacceptable risk to
human health.
vi. Appropriate references regarding the potential to encounter contaminated soil or
groundv.�ater shall be included in construction specifications.
vii. A Site Safety Plan shail be prepared and implemented prior to initiation of
construction activities fo reduce potentiaf health and safety hazards to workers
and the public.
viii.lf dev.aiering is necessary in instances��here groundwater is encountered during
construciion activities, it shall be noted ihat dewatering activities require
obtaining a tlischarge permit from ihe state and/or city. The discharge permit
38
Resolution No. 2013-160
� Paee No. 49
requir<ments may include sampling, treatment, and appropriate siorage and
disposal of grounewater.
ix. During consiruc:ion activities, it may be necessary to excavate existing soil, or to
bring iill soils �o future ?GDSP project sites from o`-site locations. In areas that
have been documsnted as being contamin2ted or where soil contamination is
sus�cted, sampling shall be performed. Characterization of the soil is suggested
prior to any excavation or removal aciivity and contaminated soil not sui;able for
onsite reuse shall be property disposed of at an o�f-site facilify. Fill soils shali 21so
be evaluated or sampled to document that imported soil does not contain
unacceptable concentrations of contamin2lion.
x. Caution shall b2 taken during excavation acfivities near existing groundwater
moniEoring wells so that they are not damaged. Existing groundK�ater monitoring
wells may have to be abandoned and reinstalled if they-are locaied in an area
that is undergoing redevelopment. The locations of existing groundwater
monitoring wzlis can be found at the following web address:
h Y�o:/!q e o!ra c ke r.wa te r b o a rd s.ca.c ov.
xi. Illegal dumping of potentiafly hazardous wastes may have occurred on sites
containing vacant land. Potentially hazardous �vastes shail be appropriately
disposed of prior to initiating redevelopment aciivities.
xii. Any USTs that are removed during redevelopment activities shall be removed
under a permii by the DEH or other regulatory agency, as appropriate. The soil
and groundwater within the vicinity of the USTs shall be adequately
characterized and remediated, i( necessary, to a standard that would be
protective ot water quality and human heallh, based on future site use.
xiii. In the event that USTs or undocumenied areas of contamination are encountered
during future redevelopment activities, work shall be discontinued until
appropriate health and safety procedures are implemented and appropriate
notifications are made. A contingency plan shall be prepared to address
contractor procedures tor such an event, to minimize the potential for costly
construction delays. In addition, it shall be.determined ii regulatory notification is
required regarding the contamination. Each regulatory agency and prog2m
within the respective agency has its own mechanism for initiating an
invesiigation. The appropriate program shall be selected based on ihe nature of
ihe contamination identified (e.g., DEH Local Oversight_Program for tank release
cases, DEH Voluntary Assistance Program for non-tank release cases, RWQCB
for non-tank cases involving groundv�ater contamination, and Local Enforcement
Agency (LEA)/APCD for landfi3l-related contamination issues). In general, LEA
oyersighUnotification is needed for work conducied wiihin 'I,000 feet of a landfill.
The coniamination remediation and removal activities shall be conducied in
accordance wiih pertinent federal, state, and local regulatory guidelines, under
the oversight of the appropriate regulatory agency.
39
_ . __ _ __ _ _ . .. . _ _ .
Resolution No. 20]3-160
Page No. 50
Finding ,
Implementation of mitigation measure 5.13-2 �vould reduce potential impacts associated with
hazardous maierials sites to a Iess than significant level by ensuring risk assessments are
performed on sites where contamination has been identified.
impact: Emergency Response and Evacuation Plans
Temporery roadway closures and detours during construc[ion of future PGDSP development
projects within roadway rights-of-way could potentielly interfere with emergency response
and/or evacuation routes and impair the implementation of the Operational Area Emergency
Plan if the appropriate authorities are not properly notified prior to construction (Final PEIR
Section 5.13.4.5).
Explanafion , _
The comprehensive emergency response pfan for the County of San.Diego a�d all jurisdictions
within the County is the San Diego County Operational Area Emergency Plan (Unined San
Diego County Emergency Services Organization 2010). In the event of a major disaster, vrhere
a large p.art of Chula Visfa may.require evacuation, the primary circulation routes serving the
PGD include I-S, Pa{omar Street, Industrial Boulevard, Broadway, and Main Street. Construction
of future PGDSP development projects within road�a�ay rights-of-vray may require temporary
roadway dosures and detours, which would affecl Iocal traffic circulation. Changes to the traffic
circulation pattem could potentially interfere with emergency response and/or evacuation routes
and impair the implementation of ihe Operational Area Emergency Plan if the appropriate
authorities are not properly notified prior to construction. This represenis a potentially significani
impact(Final PEIR Section 5.13.4.5).
Mitigation Measures
5.3-5 Tra�c Control Plans. Prior to construction of fu!ure development projecis in the
PGDSP that require temporary roadway closures and detours, project applicants
shall submit a tra�c conVol plan to the City Engineer for review and approval. The
traffic control plan shall be prepared by a licensed traffic engineer in accordance v✓ith
the Califomia Manual on Uniform Trafic.Control Devices. The traffic control pian
shall identi� ihe location and timing of anticipated roadway closures and the
alternative routes to be utilized during project construction.
Finding
Implementation of mitigation measure 5.3-5 (described above) which requires ihe submittal of a
project-specific traffic control plan to the City Engineer for review and approval, would reduce
potential impacis associated with emergency response and evacuation plans to a less than
signincant level.
SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE DIRECT IMPACTS
CEQA requires the decision-making agency to balance, as applicable, the economic, legal,
social, technological or other benefiis of a proposed project against its unavoidable
environmental risks when determining whether to approve the project. If the specific economic,
40
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. �]
legzl, social, tecnnological, or other benefiis of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable
adverse environmental =ffec:s, ihe adverse environmental eriects may be considered
`accepiable.'
7he project wiA implemeni mitigation measures to reduce significant environmental changes to a
less ihan sigr.ificant level for all issues except ihe following, v�hich would result in signi;icant 2nd
unavoidable direct andlor cumulative impacis: transporation, circulation, and access; air qualiN;
cultural resources; paleontological resources; public services and utilities; and housing and "
population. A brief summ2ry ot each environmental lopic that would result in a signiiicant and
unavoidable impact is provided below.
Traffia Cirwlation. and Access
Absent mitigation, approval oi the projeci will result in significant direct impacts along
intersections and road:vay segments, and significani cumulative impacts along intersections and
roadway segments. Cumulaiive impacts associated with this issue zre discussed in Section X,
below.
Air Qualitv
The projec[would resuli in a cumulatively considerable contribution to air quality impacts during
construction and operation of future projects in the PGD due to ozone precursor emissions,
volatile organic compounds (VOC) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) Cumulative impacts associated
with this issue are d'+scussed in Section X, below.
Cultural Resources
Regardless of the effors to avoid impacts to cultural resources, the more that larid is converted
to developed uses, fhe greater the potential is for impacts to cultural resources. Whi1e any
individual project may avoid or miiigate the direct loss of a specific resource, the ehect would be
considerable when considered cumulatively. Cumulative impacts associated wilh this issue are
discussed in Section X, below.
Pateontoloqical Resources
Regardless of the eKoris to avoid impacts to paleoniological resources, the more that land is
converted to deveioped uses, the greater the potential is for impacts to paleontological
resources. VJhile any individual project may avoid or mitigate ihe direct loss oi a specific
resource, the eYect would be considerable when considered cumulatively. Cumulative impacis
associated with this issue are discussed in Section X, below.
Public Services and Utilities (Enerqv Resourcesl
While future development �viihin the project area would be required to implement the Ciiy s
Energy Strategy and Action Plan, Transii First Plan, and conform to objectives confained in the
General Plan, �here is no long-ierm assurance that energy supplies will be available as needed.
Thereiore, direct and cumulative impacts associated with energy consumption are considered ,
significant. Cumulative impacis 2ssociated wiih this issue 2re discussed in Section X, below.
41
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. �2
Housinq and Population
Because gro��4h thal would occur under the General Plan would be considered cumulativ2ly
considerable and unavoidable, the projecYs contribution to grov✓th in Chula Usta is also
consid2red cumuiaiively considerable and unavoidable. Cumulative impacts associated wi`h this
issue 2r2 discussed in Section X, below.
DETAILED ISSUES DISCUSSION FOR SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE DIRECT
IMPACTS
The project would result in signi�icant and unavoidable direct impacts to traffic, circulation and
access and public services and utilities (energy). A discussion of the impacts and mitig2tion for
these issues is provided belov✓.
Tratfic: Circulation, and Access �
Thresholds of Significance
The proposed project would result in a significant lra�c impact if it would:
i. Conflict with 2n applicable plan, ordinance, or policy establishing measures of
efFeciiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all
modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation system, including but not limited to interseciions, streeis,
highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit.
2. Conflict with an applicable congestion management program, including, but not limited io
level of service standards and travel demand measures, or other standards established
by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways.
City of Chula Vista Traffic Impact Criteria
Short-Term Impacts (Study Horizon Year 0 to 4)
intersections:
a. P;oject-specific(direct) impact, if both the follov✓ing criteria are met:
i. Level of service is level of service (LOS) E or LOS F.
ii. Project trips comprise.5 percent or more of entering volume.
b. Curc�ulative impact if only(i)is met.
Streef Link.s/Segments:
a. Project-specific impact if all the following criteria are met:
i. Level of sen�ice is LOS D for more than hvo hours or LOS E1LOS F for one hour or
more (Grov�h A4anagement Oversight Commission (GMOC) method only).
ii. Project irips comprise five percent or more of segment volume.
iii. Project adds greater than 800 ADT to the segment.
42
Resolution No. 20li-160
Paee No. �3
b. Curnulative impact if only criteria (i) is met However, ir th= intersections 21ong a LOS D
or LOS C segment all operai2 at LOS D o; b�tte;, Tn= segment impaci is consid=_red not
sienificant since iniersection analysis is more indicative ot actual roadway system
operations ihan street segment analysis. If 2 segm=nt operzi2s at LOS F, :he impact is
significant regardless of i�iersection level o� service. However, ii the inEersections along
a LOS D or LOS E segment all operate at LOS D or better, the segment impact is
considered not significant, since intersection analysis is more indicative of actual
roadw2y system operations than street segment analysis. If the segment LOS is LOS F,
the impact is signiFicznt regardless of intersection IOS.
Impact: Increased Traffic Demands
As sho�vn on Tzbles 5.3-3 and 5.3-4 of the Draft PEIR, two infersections and three street
segmsnts are projected to result in significant direct impacts �or short term impacts. These
inciude:
■ Walnut AvenueLPalomar Street: LOS F—AM.and PM peak periods
a Industrial BoulevardlPalomar Street(at-grade trolley): LOS E-DM peak period
■ Palorr�ar Sireet—I-5 to Walnut Avenue: LOS F
e Palomar Street—Walnut Avenue fo Industrial Boulevard (at-grade trolley): LOS E
o Palomar Street—Industrial Boulevard to Transit Center Place (at-grade trolley): LOS E
Explanation of Impact
Sha�t Term (Existing + P�oject) Impacts
An Existing + Project analysis v.�as conducted that measures the project's buildout trafFic
volumes added to the existing tra�c volumes and roadway configuraiion. While tha project is
riot anticipated to reach full buildout until after ihe Year 2030, this analysis presumed the
existing environment as the baseline condition to�vhich full buildout of ihe project was added.
Table 5.3-3 of ihe Draft PEIR summarizes the Existing + Project intersection operations during
peak hour conditions. All study area in[ersections are calculated to operate at LOS D or better,
with ihe exceptian of the tollowing:
■ Walnut Avenue/Palomar Street: LOS F—AM and PM peak periods
s Industrial 6oulevard/Palomar Street (at-grade trolley): LOS E—PM peak period
Street segment analyses were conducted tor the roadv�ays in the PGD for the Existing + Project
scenario. Table 5.3-4 of the Dra�t PEIR summarizes the Existing + Project street segment
operations on a daily basis. All the following street segments are calculated to operate at LOS E
or LOS F:
o Palomar Street—I-S to Walnut Avenue: LOS F
o Pzlomar Sireet—VJalnut Avenue to Industrial Boulevard (at-crade trolley): LOS E
■ Palomar Sireet—Industrial Boulevard to Transit Center Piace (al-grade trolley): LOS E
43
_ .... _ _ _ _ _ . _.... _ _
Resolution No. 2013-160 �
Page No. 54
Mitigation IJleasures
A4itigaEion ior Short-te�m (cxisting= ?roj=ct) lmpads
Implementation of mitigation measures 5.3-1 throu9h 5.3-2 �vould reduce potential shor�-term
(Existing ' ?roject) impacis to interseciions and sireet segments io a less than significant Iev2L
Specifically, mitigation measure 5.3-1 would reduce impacts zssociated with the Walnut
Avenue/Palomar Street iniersection and the segment of Palomar Street between I-5 and V��a�nut
Avenue. I�Aitigation measure 5.3-2 v.�ould reduce impacts 2ssociated vrith Fhe Industrial
BoulevardlPalomar Sireet intersection, ihe segment of Palomar Sireet beiween I-5 and \Malnut
Avenue, the segment of Paiomar Streei bei�•✓een VJalnut Avenue and Industrial Boulevard, and
the segment of Palomar Street beh�:ee� Industrial Boulevard and Transit Center Place.
5.3-1 Walnut Avenue/Palomar Street Intersection Raised Median and Walnut Avenue
Reconfiguration. Prior to the approval of any construction associated with PGDSP
development projects, the City shall implement 8 raised median across the
intersection and Walnut Avenue shall� be reconfigured to allow right-in/right-out
movements only. This improvement is required [o restrict minor street left-tum
movements from VJalnut Avenue across multiple lanes of traffic on Palomar Stre=L
Pedes:rians shall be.prohibited irom crossing Palomar Avenue at this intersection
and shall be required to utilize the Industrial Boulevard/Palomar Street interseciion io
cross Palomar Street. Because left,turn movements would be restricted ai the
1Nalnut AvenuelPalomar Sireet interseclion, eastbound vehicles on Palomar Street
intending to turn left at Walnut Avenue would need io make a u-turn at the Palomar
StreeUlndustrial Boulevard intersection. Similarly, wesibound left-turning vehicles at
Walnut Avenue would be required to make a left-tum at the Palomar StreeVindustrial
Boulevard intersection and turn right on Ada Street. This improvement has been
added to the City's CIP for 20i 3 and is now fully funded.
5.3-2 Grade Separation for Trolley at Industrial Boulevard/Palomar Street
Intersection. To improve vehicular operations, the'MTS trolley rail crossing shall be
• grade-separated at the Industrial Boulevard/Palomar Street intersection to improve
vehicular operations. The proposed trolley grade-sepa�ation on Palomar Street is
included on the regional pnoriy list for rail grade-separation projecis in the 2050 RTP
in the Revenue Constrained Plan to be completed by year 2020. This improvement
would result in no additional vehicular delay during a trolley crossing. With the grade-
separation, this intersection is calculated io operaie at LOS D or better. Grade-
separation would also eliminate vehicle, pedestrian; and bicycle conflicis v.�ith ihe
trolley.
Finding
VJith timely implementation of mitigation measures 5.3-1 Shrough 5.3-3 (See Section X), all
intersections and roadways would operate at an acceptable level of service, and Existing +
Project impacis would be reduced to a less than signifcant level. It is wholly within the City's
purview to imolement mitigation measures 5.3-1 and 5.3-3 (See Section X). Impiementation of
mitigation measure 5.3-1 would ensure impacts to the following facility are reduced to below a
level of signi icance. '
■ VJalnut Avenue/Palomar Street intersection ,
44
Resolution No. 2013-160
Pase No. »
VJhite implem=niation of mitigation m=zsure 5.3-3 (See Section X) would reduce impacts �o the
Industrial Boul=vare/?alomar Stree[ intersection, it would not by itself reduce impacts to ihis
faciliiy to a less ihan signiricant IeveL In order to do so, mitig2tion measure 5.3-2 must also be
implemented. However, mitig2tion m2asure 5.3-2 (Gr2de Separ2tion for Trolley at Industnal
6oulevard/Palom2r Street Intersection) is outside of the jur.sdic:ion of the City o� Chuia Vista. .
Implementation of this improvement would reGuire coordination with California D=partmenf oi
Transoor�ation (Caltrans) and San Dieco Associztion of Govemments (SAND;,GuAAetropoiitan
Transit System (MTS) and a combination of local, st�te, and tederal iunding sources.Therefore,
the Ciy cannot ensure the implen=ntation or timing of mitigation me2sure 5.3-2. As such,
operztional improvement of ihe following facilities cannot be guaranteed and ihe impacfs to
�hes= facilities are not considered to be fully mitigated to a less ihan significant level. Impacts
would remain significant and unavoidable unti! mitigation mezsure 5.3-2 is imp!emented by
other a9encies.
VJhile implementation of the Reduced Project aliernative wouid reduce.this impact compared to
the project, because less development would occur, if �vould noi be reduced to below a level of
significance. Pursuant to seciien 'f 509'i(a)(3) oi the CEQA Guidelines, sp°cific economic, legal,
social, technological, or other considerations make this alternative infeasi6le. Additional fndings
related lo the project alternatives are discussed in Section XI, below.
Because there are no applicable or feasible mitigation measu:es within the control of the Ciy at
this time to reduce impacts to iraffic to below a level of significance, impacts would remain
significant and unavoidable until mitigation measure 5.3-2 is implemented by other agencies.
Adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations �vill be required should the decision
makers choose to approve the project.
Enerqv Resources
Thresholds of Significance
The proposed project would resuli in a si9nificant impact to energy if it would:
v Reduce tne available supply of energy resources below a level considered suf icient to
meet fhe Cify's needs or cause a need for ne�v and expanded facilities:
impact: Increased Energy Demands
VJhile future development would be required to implement the City's Energy Strategy.and Action
Plan, Transit First Plan, and conform to objectives contained in the City's General Plan, there
are no long-term assurances that energy supplies v.•ill be available as needed. Therefore, direct
impacls associated with energy consumption are considered significant (Final PEIR
SecYion 5.i2.9). Cumulative impacts associa[ed witn this issue are discussed in Section X,
below.
Explanation
Implementation"of :he project �+�ould allow an increase in development poteniial wiihin the PGD
beyond �^.�hat wzs analyzed in the General Plan. Tables 5.12-20 and 5.12-21 of the PEIR show
the projected increases in eiectrici•,y and natural gzs consumption, respectively, by the project
land use type. �uture individual projecis v;ouid be required to meet the mandatory energy
stana2rds of ihe City including: Ciy of Chula vsta Energy Code (tJiunicipal Code sections
45
_ _ .. _ . _
Resolution No. 2013-]60
Page No. �6
�5.26, et seq.); CCR Tille 24 Parf 6 California Energy Code; Part �1 Cali�omia Green 6uilding
Standards; and the City's Green Building Standards. Additionally, General Plan policies seek fo
reduce mobiie-source energy consumption by optimizing traffic flow, directing higher-densiry
housing within walking distance ot transit facilities, promoting use of alternatives to vehicular
[ravel, and generally reducing vehicle trip length through improved community design. Although
ihese programs and policies would. result in more eificient use of energy, they do not ensure
that increased resources �vill be available when needed. Therefore, because there are no
assurances oi a long-term supply of energy in the �uture, the increase in energy consumption
associ2ted witn the project vaould be significani.
Mrtigation Measures
Compatibility wiih City regulations and policies alone will not reduce impacts to a less than
significant level. Implementation oi the follov�ing mitigation measure, as ideniitied in the General
Plan, is required to be incorporated into the projeci. __
5.'12-8 Energy Strategy and Action Plan. The City shall implement the Energy Strategy
and Action Plan, which addresses demand side management, energy e�cient and
renewable energy outreach programs for businesses and residents, energy
acquisition, power generation, and distributed energy resources and legislative
actions, as well as the Carbon Dioxide Reduction Plan, in order to lessen the extent
of impacts associated v.�th energy supply.
Finding
While miiigation measure 5.12-8 is feasible and shall be required as a condition of approval and
made binding on the applicant, it would not substaniially lessen the significant environmental
effect as identified in the Draft PEIR. The impact wili only be reduced to less than significant
when a determination is made assuring energy resources would be available to adequately
secve the projected increase in population and land uses resulting from implementation of the
projeci.
While implementation of the Reduced Project aiternative would reduce this impact compared to
the project, because less development would occur, it wouid nol be to below a level of
significance. Pursuant to section 15091(a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, specific economic, legai,
social, technological, or other considerations make the alternative infeasible. Addi:ional findings
related to the project alternatives are discussed in Section XI, below.
Because there are no applicable or feasible mitigation measures wi.hin the control of the City at
this time io reduce impacls to energy resources to below a level of significance, impacts to
energy resources �vould remain significant and unmitigated. Adoption of a Statemeni of
Overriding Considerations will be required should the decision makers choose to approve the
projeci.
�6
Resolution\'o. 2013-160
Paae No. �7
X
CUMULATIVE SIGNIFICANT EFrECTS & MI7IGATION MEASURES
Cumulative impacts are those which "are consioered v✓hen viewed in conneciion v,dth the effects
of past projects, the efect of other current projecis, and the effects ot,probable future orojecs
(Pub. Resources Code Seciion 21082.2 subd. (b)). These 'current or probable future°
development proposals can aYect many of the same natural resources and public infrastructure
zs developmeni of the project. Potentialiy significant cumulative impacts are associated with
development of the project in conjunction��ith those projects specifically within the project area.
A detailed discussion of cumulative impacts is included in Section 6.0 of the Draft PEIR.
In formulating mitigation measures for the project, regional issues and cumulative impacts have
been taken into consideration. Due to the programmatic nature of the analysis contained in ihe
PEIR, most of the mitigation measures adopted for the cumulative impacts are the same as ihe
"project" I=vel mitigation measures.•The project, along with o:her related projects, will result in
irreversible cumulative environmental changes to traffic, circulation and access; air quality;
cultural resources; paleontological resources, public services and utilities (energy); and housing
and population.
Treffia Circulation, and Access
Thresholds of Significance
The proposed project would resuft in a significant fraffic impact if it would:
i. Conflict v.dth an applicable pEan, ordinance, or policy estabiishing measures of
effectiveness for the performance of the circulation system, taking into account all
modes of transportation including mass transit and non-motorized travel and relevant
components of the circulation sysiem, including but not limited to intersections, streets,
highways and freeways, pedestrian and bicycle paths, and mass transit.
2. Conflict vrith an applicable congestion management program, including;but not limifed to
level of service standards 2nd tra'vel demand measures, or other standards established
by ihe county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways.
City of Chula Vista Treffic Impact Criteria
Long-Term Impacts (Study Norizon Year 5 and Later)
Intersections
a. Project-specific(direct) impact, if both the following criteria are met:
i. �evel of service is LOS E or LOS F.
ii. Project trips comprise 5 percert or more of entering t•olume.
b. Cumula:ive impact if only(i) is met.
47
_ _ _ _ . . . _ _ .
Resolution I`'o. 20li-160
Paee No. �8
Streat Links7Segments
a. Project-specinc (direci) impact i�211 the �oilo�ving criteria are meL
i. Level of service is �OS D, l05 E, or LOS F.
ii. Project trips comprise � percent or more of total segment Jolume.
iii. Project adds grezter than 800 average daily trips (ADT) to the segment. .
b. Cumulative impact, it only (i) is met.
However, if the inierseciions along a �OS D or LOS E segment alf operate at LOS D or beYer,
the segment impact is considered not significant, since interseciion analysis is more indicative
of actual roadway system operations than street segment analysis. If the segment LOS is
LOS F, the impact is significant regardless of intersection LOS.
Impact: Increased Traffic Demands
As shown on Tables 5.3-7 and 5.3-8 of ihe Draft PEIR, two intersections and four street
segments are projecied to result in significant cumulative impacts at build-out of ihe project
(PEIR Seciion 5.3.4.�, pages 5.3-21 ihrough 5.3-32). These include:
■ Walnut Avenue/Palomar Street: LOS F—AM and PM peak periods
■ _Industrial Boulevard/Palomar Street (at-grade trolley): LOS E—P:M and PM peali p2riods
e Palomar Street—l-5 to Walnut Avenue: LOS E
■ Palomar Sireet—Walnui Avenue to Industrial Boulevard (at-grade trolley): LOS E
■ Palomar Street—Industrial Boulevard to Transit Center Place (grade-separated trolley
and at-grade trolley): LOS E and LOS �, respectively
■ Industrial Bouievard—North of Palomar Street (grade-separated irolley and at-grade
irolley): LOS E and LOS F, respeciive�y
Explanation oflmpact
Long Term (Year 2030)_Impacts
A Year 2030 analysis uses full build-out conditions of the project land uses. Intersection
capacity analyses were conducted for the study area intersections under Year 2030 conditions.
Table 5.3-7 of the Draft PEIR summarizes the Year 2030 intersection operations during peali
hour conditions. All study intersections are calculated to operate at LOS D or better'in Year
2030, with the exception of the follo�a-ing:
■ VJalnut Avenue/Palomar Street: LOS F—AM and PM peak periods
■ Industrial BoulevardlPalomar Street (at-grede trolley): LOS E—AA4 and PM peak periods
Under the grade-separated trolley altem�five, the Industri2l Boulevard/Palomar Street
intersection is calculafed to operate at LOS D or better. The grade-separated alternative
removes vehicle-trolley conflicts, thereby improving vehicular delay and iraffic operaiions on
Palomar Street and Industrial 3oulevard.
46
Resolution No. 20li-160
Paee No. �9
Stre=t s=gmeni anafyses were conducted ior roadways in tne PGD for the Year 2030 scenario.
Tcble 5.3-8 oi the Dra°� PEIR summarizes Year 2030 street segment operations on a daily
basis. .4s shown in Table 5.3-8, .he following sfreei segm�nts are calculated io operate zt
lOS c or LOS � in Year 2030:
u Palomar Street—I-S io VJalnut Avenue: LOS E
o Palomar Streei-1Malnut:;venue to Industnzl Boulzvard (at-grade trolley): LOS E
■ Palomar Sireet—Industrial Boulevard to Transi[ Center PI2ce (grade-separeted trolley
and at-grade trolley): LOS E and LOS �, respeciR�ely ,
a Industrial Boulevard—North of Palomar S?reet (grade-separated trolley and at-grade
trolley): LOS E and LOS �, respectively
Mitigation Measures - �
f✓litigafion ior Long-term (Year 2030) Impacts
Implemeniation of mifigation mszsures 5.3-1 ihrough 5.3-2 (described above in Section IX), zs -
well 2s mitigation. measure 5.3-3 (described belo�v), K�ouid reduce potential long-term (1'ear
2030) impacis to iniersections and street segments to a less than significant level. Mitigation
measure 5.3-3 would reduce impacts associated wifh the Industrial 3oulevardl Palomar Street
intersection.
5.3-3 Industrial BoulevardlPalomar Street Intersection Left-Turn Lane Signal
Change. The left-turn lane signal phasing at the Industrial Boulevard/Palomar Street
intersection shall be changed from permitted-protected to protected at all intersection
approaches. The timing of implemenlalion of this improvement shall be determined
by the results of the annual study conducted under the City's Traffic A6anzgement
Program.
Finding
With timely implementation of mitigation.measures 5.3-� through 5.3-3, all intersections and
roadways would operate at an acceptable level of service, and 2030 impacts would be reduced.
to a less than significant level. It is wholly within the City's purview to implement mitigation
measures 5.3-1 and 5.3-3. Implementation of mitigation neasure 5.3-'I �.vould ensure impacts to
the following facility are reduced to beiow a level oi s�gnificance.
■ Walnut Avenue/Palomar Street intersection
While implemenFation of mitig2.ion measure 5.3-3 would reduce impacts to the Industrial
Boulevard/Palomar Street in.ersection, it would not by itself reduce impacts to this facility to a
less than significani level. in order to do so, mitigation measure 5.3-2 must also be
impfemented. However, mitigation measure 5.3-2 (Grade Separ2tion for Trolley at industrial
6oulevard/?alomar Street Iniersection) is outside of the jurisdiction of the City of Chula Vista.
Impl=mentation of this improvement would require coordination.with California Department of
Transportation (Caltrans) and San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAGUh4eiropolitan
Tr2nsit System (MTS) and a combination of local, sta!e, and iederal funding sources. Therefore,
the City cznnot ensure the implementation or timing of mitigztion measure 5.3-2. As such,
operationai improvement of the follo�ving facilities cannoi be guaranteed and :he impacts to
these �acilities are not considered to.be �ully mi;igated to a iess t��an significant level. Impacts
49
_ __ _ _ .__ _ _ ..... _ . .
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paoe No. 60
would remain significant and unavoidablz until mitigation measure 5.3-2 is implemen{�d by ,
other agencies. Therefore, the oroposed projecYs contribution would be cumul�tively
considerable.
VJhile implementztion of the Reduced Project altemative would reduce this impact compared to
t'ne project, because less development would occur, it ti�ould not be reduced to below a levei of
significance. Pursuant to section 'ISD91(a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, specific economic, legal,
social, technological, or other considerations make this 2lternative in�easible. Additional findings
refated to:he project aliematives are discussed in Section XI, below.
Because there are no applicabie or teasible mitigation measures �^+ithin the control of ihe City at
this time to reduce impacts to tre���c to below a Ievel of significance, impac(s ��ould remain
significant and unavoidable untii mitigation measure 5.3-2 is implemented by other agencies.
Adoption of a Statement of Overriding Consideraiions will be required should the decision
makers choose to approve the pro}ect. -
Air Qualitv
Thresholds of Significance
The proposed project would result in a signifcant impaci to air quality if it would:
1. Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria polluiant for which the
project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or siate ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors). The City uses the Souih Coast Air Quality Management Disirict (SCAQMD)
thresholds shown in Table 5.5-4 of the Draft PEIR to assess the significance of air
quality impacts.
Impact: Result in a cumulatively considerable increase of any criteria pollutant for which
the project region is in non-attainment.
Implementation o{ the projeci would increase operational air emissions beyond that analyzed in
the General Plan EIR. In addilion, construction activities required for the development of the
project will result in signifcant air quality impacts due to ozone precursor emissions (VOC and
NOx) (Section 5.4.4.3).
Explanation
The region is not in compliance wiih the ozone standards, and ihe project would increase ozone
precursors (VOC and NOx) emissions. As shown in Table 5.4-5 of the DraK PEIR, maximum
simultaneous emissions resuliing from the worst-case construction scenario for the project
would exceed the significance thresholds for VOC and NOx At this programmatic level of
analysis, the exact number and timing of future development projects that could occur are
unkno��n. Upon application for individual development projects, the City would use the
SCAQMD construction thresholds to assess potentiat impacts. Additionally, future projects _.
would be required io implement standard dusi and emission control measures during grading
operations to reduce potential impacts. �orivithstanding the regulatory requirements for reduced
construction emissions, impacts could remain significanl.
50
Resolution No. 2013-160
Pa¢e No. 61
Operztion2l source emissions would originate from ira�5c generated wi[hin cr 2s a resuli o5 :he
project. .Area source emissions would result from activities such as use of natural gas,
=.ireplaces, and consumer produc,s. !n addiiion, ianoscapi�g maintzn2nce ac?ivities associated
with the proposed land uses would produce pollutant emissions.
Mitigation Measures
5.4-1 Construction Emissions Reduction Measures. Constructi�n contractors for futu;e
°GDSP development projects sh211 implemen[ the tollowing measures to reduce
construction emissions during all co^struction activities:
i. Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple const�vciio� equipment uniis (i.e.,
�hase construc:ion to mirrmize impacts).
ii. Use Iow pollutant-emitting consiruclion equipment.
iii. Use ei=ctrical construction equipment.
iv. Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment.
v. Use injection timing retard for diesel-powered equipment.
vi. All unpaved construction areas shall be sprayed with w�ter or other acceptable
� dust control agents tv✓ice daily during dust-generating aciivities to reduce dust
emissions. Additional watering. or acceptable dust control agents shall b=
applied during dry weather or on windy days until dust emissions are not
visible.
vii. Trucks hauling dirt and debris shall be property covered to reduce windblov.�n
dust and spills.
viii. A 75 mile per hour speed limit on unpaved surfacz shall be enforced.
ix. On dry days, dirt and debris spilled onto paved surfaces shali be swept up
immediately to reduce re-suspension of parliculate matter caused by vehicle
. movement. Approach routes to construction si:es shall be cleaned daily of
construction-related dirt in dry weather.
x. On-site stockpiles of excavated material shall be covered or watered.
xi. Disturtied areas shall be hydros=eded, landscaped, or developed as quickly as
possible and as directed by the Ciy to reduce dust generation.
5.4-2 Operational Emissions Reduction Measures. The City shall implement the
following measures to reduce operational emissions by further re�ucing vehicle use
associated with PGDSP imp�ementation:
i. Require Transportation Demand Management Plzns from employers within the
PGDSP, which could include ride-sharing p�ogrems, vanpools/shurles, etc.
ii. Synchronize fra�c signals to ninimize idling and reduce emissions due to
traffic congestion.
iii. Require parking fees within the PGDSP to encourage transit use.
iv. Limit parking supply to encourage fransit use.
v. Require emp�oyers within ihe PGDSP to provide transit subsidies.
51
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 62
Frnding
Implementaiion of mitigafion measure 5.?-1 would reduce the projeci's construction-related
emissions oi VOC and ��Ox, but not to a less than significant le��el. There are no o:ner �easible
mitigation measures that could be applied :o reduce construciion emissions to below a level oi
signiicznce. 7hus, impacts related to the project's cumulatively considerabie consiruction
emissions would remain significant and unavoidable. Individual development projects v+ould be
required to evaluaie the potential significance of their construction-related emissions as they
proceed througti the permitting process with tne City.
Implementation of mitigation measure 5.4-2 would reduce the projecYs operational emissions of
VOC and NOx, but not to a less than significant level. Operational emissions are mainly
at[nbu#able fo motor vehicfes. The project already incorporates measures to reduce vehicle use,
including a five percent reduction fora mix of uses and a 10 percent reduction for access to
trznsit. In addition, �uture vehicle emissions may be lower ihan estimaied due to increasingly
stringent California fuel efficiency requirements. However, some mitigation measures cannot be
impiemented at the specific plan level, such as having employers require flexible work
schedules or allow telecommuting for employees. Furthermore, there are currently.no available
mitigation measures to regulate consumer product emissions without regulating the purchases
of individual consumers. Thus; impzcts related to the project's cumulatively considerable
operational emissions would remain significant and unavoidabie. Individual development
projects vrould be required to evaluate the potential significance of their operational emissions
as [hey proceed through the permiriing process with the City.
While implementation of the Reduced Project altemative would reduce this impact compared to
the project, because less development would occur, it would not be reduced to below a level of
significance. Pursuant to section 15091(a)(3) of ihe CEQA Guidelines, specific economic, legal,
social, technological, or other considerations make the alternative infeasible. Additional findings
related to the project aRernatives are discussed in Section XI, below.
Because there are no applicable or feasible mitigation measures within the control of the City at
this time to reduce emissions to below a level of significance, impacts to air quality would
remain significant and unmitigated. Adoption of a Stateme�t of Overriding Considerations will be
required should the decision makers choose to approve the project.
Cultural Resources
Thresholds of Signiflcance
The proposed project would result in a significant impact to cultural resources if it would:
1. Cause a substantial adverse chan9e in the significance of an historical resource as
de8ned in CEQ,4 Guidelines Section 15064.5.
2. Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of an archaeological resource
pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5.
Impact: Cultural Resources '
The projeci plus cumula'tive development�aould incrementally convert more land into developed
uses, resuliing.in a significant cumulative impact to historic and archaeological resources.
52
Resolucion?�o. Z013-160
Pa�e No. 63
, cxplanation
Tne General Plan EIR determined that tne continued pressure io develop or r=dev�lop areas
would result in incremental impacis to the historical record in the San Dieao rzgion. Regardless
of the a�oRs to avoid impacts to. culfural r=sources, the more tnat land is conve�=d to
developed uses, the greaier ihe potential is for impacts to cultural resources. While any
indi��dual project may avoid or mitigate the direct bss of a speci5c resource, ihe erect woufd be
considerable when considered cumulafively. The General Plan EIR concluded thai the loss of
historic or prehisioric resources from the pasi; present, and probable future projecis in the
southern Califomia/northern Baja Caliiornia, Mexico areas v.�ould contribute to cumulatively
signiticant impacts to cultural resources.
As discussed in PEIR Seciion 5.7, Cultural Resources, implementation of the PGDS° would
have ihe potential to result in poientially significant direct impzcts to historic and archzeological
resources. Mitigation measures 5.7-1 and 5.7-2 would reduce direct- impacts to a less th2n
significant level. These mitigation me2sures would reduce incremental cumul2tive impacts
associated with implementation of the.PGDSR, but ihey would not reduce the cumulative impact
to cultural resources to below a level ot significance due to the General Plan EIR's conclusion
that any loss oi cultural resources would be significant. The cumulative effect on cultural
resources resulting from the adopiion of the PGDSP, .in conformance with the General Plan
Update, is therefore significant and unmitigated.
Mitigation Measure �
No mitigation is available to reduce this cumulatively significant impact to a less than signi5cant
level.
Finding
There is no feasible mitigation measure to reduce this impact to below significance. Pursuant to
section 15091(a)(3) of _the State CEQA Guidelines, specific economic, legal, social,
technological, or other considerations make infeasi6le the mi;igation measures or project
alternatives identified in the Final EIR. Ve�hile implementation of the Reduced Project alternative
would reduce this impact compared to the projeci, it v.-ould not be reduced io below a level of
signi icance. Additional_findings rela[ed to ihe project alternatives are discussed in Section XI,
below.
Because there are no applicable or feasible mitigaiion measures ���thin the control of the City zt
this [ime to reduce impacls to belo�v a level of significance, impacfs .o cultural resources would
remain si9nificznt and unmitigated. Adoption of a Statemeni of Overriding Considerations will be
required should ihe decision makers choose to approve the proiect.
Paleo�toloqical Resources
Thresholds of Significance
The propos=d project veould result in a significant impact to paleontological resources if ii would:
1. Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or uniqu= geologic
feature.
53
_ _. _.. __
Resolution No. 2013-160
Pa�e No. 64
Impact: Paleontological Resources
The project plus cumufative development would incrementally com�ert more land into developed
uses, resulting in a signi�icant cumulative impact io paleontological resources.
Explanation
The General Plan EIR determined that, zs with archaeological and historic resources, ihe
continued pressure to develop undeveloped areas v.ould result in incremental impacts to the
paleontological record in the S2n Diego region. Regardless of the efforls to avoid impacts to
these resources, the more that land is converted to developed uses, the greater the potential is
for adverse impac#s to paleoniological resources. While any individual project mzy avoid or
mitigaie the direct loss of a specific resource, the eYecf is considerable when considered
cumulatively.
As discussed in PEIR Section 5.8, Paleontological Resources, the PGD overlies geologic
formations assigned a moderate sensitivity rating..Since the PGD is highly developed, grading
activities associated �adth futur8 PGDSP development projecis would typically be minimal, with
the exception of sub-garages or sub-floors. However, future PGDSP development projects that
propose greding in excess of 2,000 cubic yards volume and five feet depih would represent a
potentially significant impact to sensitive paleontologicaP resources. Mitigation measure 5.8-1
would reduce incremental cumulati've impacts associated with implementation of the PGDSP,
but vaould noi reduce the cumulative impact to paleontological resources to below a level of
significance due to the General Plan EIR's conclusion that.any loss of paleontological resources
would be significant. The cumulative effect on paleontological resources resulting from the
adoption of the PGDSP, in conformance with the General Plan Update, is therefore signific2nt
and unmitigated.
Mitigation Measure
No mitigation is available to reduce this cumula[ively significant impact to a,less than significant
level.
Finding
There is no feasible mitigztion measure to reduce.this impact to below signi5cance. Pursuant to
section 15091(a)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, specific economic, legal, social,
technological, or oiher considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project
altematives identified in the Finzl EIR. While implementation of the Reduced Project altemative
would reduce fhis impact compared to the project, it would not be reduced to below a level ot
significance. Additional findin9s reiated to the pwject altematives are discussed in Section XI, ,
belo�v.
Because there are no applicable or ieasi6le mitigation measures within the control of the City at
this time to reduce impacts to below a level of significance, impacts to paleontological resources
�vould remain significant and unmitigated. Adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations
will be required should the decision m2kers choose to approve the project.
5,�
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee No. 6�
Public Services and Utiiities (Enerqy}
Thresholds o`Significance
The proposed project�vould resuit in a significant impact to energy resources if it v+ouid:
1. Resuli in the available supply of energy to fall below a 12ve1 considered su�ci�nt to meet
the City's needs or cause a need for new and expanded facilities.
Impact: Energy
The proiect plus cumulative development would incremen;ally increase energy us2, resulting in
an increase in energy demand for which the fu[ure supply cannot be assured, resulting in a
signific2ni cumulative impact to energy.
Explanation
The General Plan EIR determined thaf, as population increzses, demand for energy also
increases. Because the development and managemeni of energy resources are not presentty
within the conirol of the City, there is no assurance that an,adequate supply of energy would be
available. While ii is anticipated that an adequate supply of energy would b2 available, history
has shown ihat shortages in energy supply can occur. Although.the City has taken steps to limit
the expanding need for energy through its Energy Strategy and Action Plan and CO2 Reduction
Plan, ihe potential increase in developme�t represented by the proposed General Plan Update
has the potential to add incrementally to ihis demand and represents a signi5cant cumulative
impaci.
Bui1d-out of the PGDSP would increase the demand for gas and electricity. Alfhough
development in the PGD�vould continue to implement the City's plans and ordinances to reduce
energy use, and the proposed mixed use development wouid reduce vehicle miles traveled,
implementation of ihe proposed land uses identified in the PGDSP has the potential to result in
imoacts to energy resources as a result of aniicipated growth. Mi;igation measure 5.12-8
ioeniified in PEIR Seciion 5.i2, Public Services and Utilities, would reduce significant direct
energy impacts. While ihis mitigation measure would incremenially reduce the cumulative gas
and electricity impact associated with implementation of the PGDSP, the measure �a�ould not
reduce ihe cumulative energy impacf to below a tevel of significance becaus2 future energy
supplies cannot be assured. Therefore, the proposed project.would resulf in a significant and
unavoidable cumulative-impact to energy.
I'drtigatron Measure
No mitigaiion is available to reduce this cumulafivel.y significant impaci to less than significant
lev�ls.
Finding
i here is no feasib!e mitigation m<asure to reduce this impact to below significance. Pursu2nt to
section 15091(a)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, specific economic, legal, soaal,
technological, or other considerations make in�easible the mitigation measures or projeci
2lternatives identified in the Final EIR. VJhile implementation of the Reduced Project alternative
would reduce ihis imoact compared to the project, it ti�ouid not be reduced to below a level of
5� '
Resolution i�io. 2013-160
Page No. 66
signi8cance. Additional 5ndings relzied io the project aiternatives ar= oiscussed in Section XI,
belo�v.
Because there zre no applicable or feasible mitigation measures�vithin the control of the City at
this time to reduce impacts to belov✓ a level of significance, impacis to energy would rem2in
significant and unmitigaied. Adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations will be
required should the decision makers choose to approve the project.
Housinq and Population
Thresholds of Significance
The proposed projec[would resuli in a significant impact to housing and population if it would:
1. Induce substantial populaiion growth in an area, either directly (e.g., by proposing ne�.v
homes or businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other
inirastructure)
Impact: Housing and Population
Because growth thai would occur under the General Plan would be considered cumulatively
considerable and unavoidable, the PGDSP's contribution to growth in Chula �sta would result
in a significant cumulative impact:
Explanation
The General Plan EIR states thai the General Plan would result in a substantial increase in the
Chula Vista population. Because the General Plan would induce growth it would have a
significant impact with respect to population growth. The growth projeciion for buildout of ihe
project is consistent with the General Plan. Therefore, implementation of the project �vould not
generate unplanned growth. However, because grov✓th that vaould occur under the General Plan
would be considered cumulatively considerable and unavoidable, :he proposed proj2cYs
contribution _to growth in Chula Vista is also considered cumulatively considerable and
unavoidable.
Mrtigation Measure
No mitigation is available to reduce this cumulatively significant impact to less than significant
levels.
Frnding �
There is no feasible mitigation measure to reduce this impact to below significance. Pursuant to
section 15091(a)(3) of the State CEQA Guidelines, specific economic, legal, social,
technological, or'other considerations make infeasible the mi[i9ation measures or project .
alternatives ideniifed in th2 Final EIR. While implementation of the Reduced Project al:emative
would reduce tnis impact compared to the project, it would not be reduced to below a level of
significance. Addiiional findings related to the project alternatives are discussed in Section XI,
below.
56
Resolution No. 2013-160
Pase No. 67
oeczuse tnere 2re no zopficable or ieasiole mitication measur=s within ;he control of the City at
ihis `ime to reduce impacis io below a level of signir"icance, impzcts to housing and population
v.�ouid remain significant and unmitigat=d. Adoption o�a Statsment o4 Overriding Considerations
�a�ll oe required should ihe decision makers choos� io approv= the proj2ci.
XI.
FEASIBILITY OF POTENTIAL °ROJECT ALTERNATIVES
�ecause the project �+�if cause significant environmental effects, as outlined.above, the City
must consider the fezsibility of 2ny environmentaily superior alternative to the project as finally
approved. The Ciy must evaluate wheiher one or more of these alternatives could avoid or
subsiantially lessen the significani environmental effects. VJhere no significant em�ironmental
effects remain a'er applicaiion o� all teasible mitigation mezsures identiiied in the EIR, the
decision makers must still evaluate the project-alternatives identified in the EIR. Under these
circumstances, CEQA r2quires findings on ;he fezsibility of project altematives.
In general, in preoaring and adopting fndings, a lead agency need not necessarily address
teasibility when contemplaiing the approval of a project with signific2nt impacts. lNhere the
signiricant impacis can be mitigated to an acceotable (insignificant) level soleiy by ihe adoption
of mitigation measures, the agency, in draYing ifs findings, tias �o obligation to consider the
feasibility of environmentally superior alternatives, even if their impacts would 'oe less severe
than ihose oi [he projects 2s mitigated (Laurel Heignts Improvement Association v. Regents of
the Universiry of Caiifornia (1°88) 47 Cal.3d 376 [253 Cal.Rptr. 426]; Laurel Niils Homeowne�s
Association v. CiEy Council (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 515 [147 CaLRptr. 842]; Kings County Farm
Sureau v. City of Hanforci (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692 [270 Cal.Rptr. 650]). Accordingly, ior this
project, in adopting the findings concerning project altematives, the City Council considers onfy
those environmental impacts that, tor the finally approved project, are significant and cannot be
avoided or substantially lessened ihrough miiigaiion.
If project alternatives are feasibie, the decision makers must adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations vriih regard to the project. If there is a feasibl= aitemative to the project, the
decision makers must decide whether it is environmentally superior to the proiect. Proposed
project alternatives considered must be ones that °could feasibly attain the basic objectives of
the project' However, the CEQA Guidelines also require an EIR to examine alternatives
"capable o(eliminating" environmental effects, even if these alternatives "would impede to some
degree the aitainmenf of the project objectives"(CEQA Guidelines, section �5126).
The City has properly considered and reasonably rejected project alternatives as `infeasible°
pursu2ni to CEQA. CEQA provides the following definition of the term `feasible' as it applies to
the findings requirement: "feasible m�ans capable of being accomplished in a successEul
manner within a reasonable period of time, faking into account economic, environrr�ental, social,
and technologicai factors" (Pub. Resources Code, section 2'1051.1). The CEQA Guidelines
providz a broadzr definition of "feasibility° that also encompasses '9egal° faciors. CEQA
Guidelines section 15364 sia:es, °the 12ck of legal powers of an agency to use in imposing an
alternative or mitigation mezsure may be as g:eat a limitation as any eco�omic, environmenial,
social, or technological factor" (see also Cifizens of Goleta Valley v. Board oi Supervisors
(�990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 565{27o Cai.Rptr.:10]}.
57
__. __ __ ____ . . . _ .. . .
Resolution I�'o. 2013-]60
Pa;;e No. 68
Accordingly, "feasibility" is a term of art under CEQA and thus may not be a�forded a direrent
mzaning as may b� providzd by Wabster's dictionary or any other sources. A9oreover, Pubfic
Resources Code section 21081 governs the "findings" requirement under CEQA with regard to
the fezsibility of alt2rnatives. Specifically, no public agency shall approve or carry oui a projecf
for which an EIR has been cer'�ified which identifies one or more signiricanl ef�ects on the
environment that �:�ould occur if the project"is approved or carried out unless the pubiic agency
makes one or more of fne follov✓ing findings:
"Changes or alternations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant ern�ironmental effect as identifed
in the final EIR° (CEQA Guidelines, section 15091, subd. (a)(1)).
`Such chznges or alterations are vaithin the responsibility and jurisdiction of another
public agency and not the agency making the flnding. Such changes have been
edopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other
zgency° (CEQA Guidelines, section 15091, subd. (a)(2)).
°Specific ecoriomic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including
provisions of employment opportunities.for.highly trained workers, make infeasible
the mitigation measures or project altematives identified in the final EIR° (CEQA
Guidelines, section 15091, subd. (a)(3)).
The concept of"�easibility' also encomoasses the question of w�hether a particuiar alternative or
mitigation measure promotes the underlying goals and objectives of a project(City of Del l�la�v.
City of San Diego (1982) 333 Cal.App.3d 410, 417 [183 Cal. Rptr. 898]). " '[F]easibility' under
CEQA encompasses 'desirability' to the eutent that desirebility is based on a reasonable
balancing of the relevant economic, environmental, social, and technological factors" (Ibid.; see
a�so Sequoyah Nills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.App.4'� 704, 715 [29
Cal.Rptr.2d �82j).
These findings contrast and compare the alternaiives where appropriate in order to demonstraie
that the selection of the finally approved project, while stiil resulting in significant environmenfal
impacts, has substantial environmental, planning, fiscai, and other benefits. In rejecting certain
aliematives, the decision makers have examined the finally approved project objectives and
weighed ihe ability of the various alternatives to meet objectives. The decision makers believe
that the project best meeis the finally approved project objectives with the least environmental
impact.
The detailed discussion in Section IX and Section X demonstrates that all but six significani
environmental effects of the project have been either substantially lessened or.avoided through
the impositlon oi existing policies or regulations or by .the adoption of addiiional, formal
mitigation measures recommended in the EIR. The remaining unmitigated impacts are the
follo�ving:
■ Transportation, Circulation and Access (direct and cumufative impacts — mitigation
measure 5.3-2, Grade Separation for Trolley at Industrial Boulevard/Palomar Sireet
Intersection, is outside of i'ne jurisdiction of the City)
■ Air Qualiy(wmulative impact— construction and operatiornrelated emissions) '
■ Cultural Resources (cumulative impad—any loss of cultural resources is significant)
58
Resolution\o. 2013-160
Pase No. 69
e Pafeontoiogical Resources (cumulaiive irnpact— any ioss oi paleontologiczl resources is
signi5cznt)
■ Energy (direct and cumula;ive impacis — abs=nce of long term assurance ot energy
supolies)
o Housing and Population (cumulative impaci— population grov.�'�h)
To fuily account �or these unavoidzble significant effects and th2 extent to w�hich particular
21;ernatives might or might not be er.vironmentaly superior with respect to them, these rindings
v.�ll not tocus solely on the impacls listed above, but may also address the environmenfal meri�s
oi the alternatives with respect to ail broad categories of impacts — even though such a fa�-
ranging discussion is not required by CEQA. 7he findings vrill also assess whether each
alternative is feasible in light of the City's objectives for the proj=ci.
Th2 City's review of project alternativ2s is guided primarily by ihe need to reduce potential
impacts associated v+ith.the project, while still achieving the b2sic objectives of ihe project.
Here, the City's prim2ry objective is to comprehensively ptan, coordinate, and implement
development over a large area. hAore specific objectives include those previously lis!ed in
Section III. -
The City evaluated three alternatives lo the pcoject, which are discussed below (No Project
(Existing Plan) Alternative, Reduced Project Altemative, and Modified Land Use Arrangement
Altemative). Table 11-3 in the PEIR provides a summary table comparing each of the
alternatives. As the following discussion vaill show, no identified zlternative qualifies as both
feasible and em�ironmentally superior with 2spect to the unmitigated impacts.
NO PROJECT(EXISTING PLAN) ALTERNATIVE
C=QA Guidelines 15126.6(e)(3}(A) states that when a project is the revision o( an existing land
use or regulatory plan, policy, or ongoing operation, the "no project" altemative will be the
continuation ot ihe existing plan, policy, or operation into the future.
The No Project (Existing Plan) Alternative v:ould continue to implement the curreni adopted
Chula Vista Municipal Code Zoning and General Plan land use designations in the PGD. The
existing zoning designations include single and multi-family resideniial, commercial, industrial,
and utility corridor designations. No mixed use and oniy limited high-densily residential
development w•ould be accommodated in ihe PGD based on the existing zoning designations,
and existing zoning v:ould not accommodate the development of a Transit Focus Area
surrounding the Palomar Transit Center. A comparison of the potential buildout of this
2lternative compared to the project is provided in Table 11-1 in :he PEIR. Po;enfial residential
build-out in the PGD would be higher under the ezisting General Plan designations as
compared to the projeci. Hov,rever, under this alternative, the AAobility Plan component of the
project would not be implemenied to i�nprove oedestrian and bicycle accessibiliy in ihe PGD.
�mpacts
Transpo.Ration, Circulation, and Access
The No Project(Existing Plan)Aliernative would result in additional impacts.related to tra�c and
level of sen�ice siandards compared to the project b=cause this aRemative �:�ould result in a
59
_ _ _ _ _ _
Resolution No. 2013-]60
Page No. 70
higher density residential build-out(2,400 units)compared to ihe project (1,700 uni;s) and would
not impl°ment the R400ility Plan corriponent of the project to encourage non-vehiculzr trips.
Because the Ahobiliy Plan would not be implemented, this zliernative would also result in
greater impacts related �o alternative transpo�ation racilities. Similar to the project, mitigztion
measure �.3-2 is outside the control of the City and its implementation and timing cannot be
guaranteed. Therefore, some ir�tersection and segment impacts under this aliernative are likely
io be significant and un2voidable, similar to the project.
Air Quality
The No Project (�xisting Plan) ?.liemative �+�ould resuit in gre2ter direct 2nd significant and
unavoidable cumulative impacis related io criteria air pollutant zmissions as compared to ihe
project because more residential construction and development would occur under this
21tem2tiv2, and the project R4obility Rian would not be implemented to reduce vehicular tnps.
Cumulaiive impacts related to the emission oi criteria air pollutants_WOUId be significant and
unmitigated.
Cultural Resources
The No Project (Existing Plan) Alternative would result in similar significant impacts related to
cuitural resources due to the General Plan EIR's conclusion that any loss of c�ltural resources
would be significant. Similar to the project, cumulative impacts on cultural resources would be
significant and unmitigaied.
Paleontological Resources
The ��o Project (Existing Plan) Alternative would Yesult in similar significant impacts related to
paleontological resources due to the General Plan EIR's conclusion that any loss of
paleontological resources would be significant. Similar to ihe project, cumulative impacts on
paleontological resources would be significant and unmitigated.
Energy
The No Project (Existing Plan) Alternative would result in increased impacis to energy
compared to the projec[ because more residential development would occur under this
alternative. Because there is no assurance of a long-term supply of energy in the future, the
increased projected energy demand associated with tfiis alternative could potentially result in
the available supply oi energy to tall below a level considered sufficient to meet the Ciry's needs
or cause a need tor new and expzndsd facilities. Therefore, energy impacts would be increased
as compareii to the project, and impacts v+ould be considered significant and unavoidatile.
Housing and Population � -
The No Project (Existing Plan) Altemative would result in greater population gro�vth in the PGD
than ihe pro}ect because more residen:ial development v;ould be accommoda:ed. The project's
cumulatively considerabla and unavoidable impact related io population grov✓th would also
occur under this alternative because ihe population in the PGD would increase, similar to the
project.
60
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee No. 71
Findinas .
The No Project (Existing Plan) Alternative would increzse th� project's signirlca�t impac.s
associated v.�ith appticable land usa plans, policy, or regulation; visual character, alternative
lransportation facilities; cumulaiively considerable emissions; direct and indirect generaiions of
GF'Gs; applicable GHG emissions reduction plan, policy, or rea.:lations; excessiv= noise levels;
excessive groundbome vibration; permanent incre2ses in ambient noise levels; fire and
emergency medical sen�ices; police sen�ices; schools; libraries; parks and recreation; water,
w2stewater; solid vr2ste; and energy. All other ern•ironmental i�npacts would be similar to the
project. This alternative would not lessen any of ih= projecPs sianificant and unavoidable
impacts associated •.a�ith transpoRation, circulation, and access; air qu2lity; enargy; cumulative
loss of cul[ural and paleontological resources; and cumuiative population growth.
The No Project {Existing Plan) Alternative wouid not fully meet any of the seven project
objeciives. It would partially meet iour of :he project objectives and would not meet the
rem2ining three objectives. The No Project (Existing Plan) Afternative would not impiement the
Niobiliry Plan: therefore is would not create a pedestrian friendly mixed-use environment
(Objective 7), achieve compact development conducive to walking and biq�cling (Objective 2),
or maintain adequate ozrking and integrate non-motorized transportation (Objective 5). This
alternative would provide similar land uses to the proposed project wiih e higher residential
build-out; however, it would not accommodate the development of a Transit Focus Area or
mixed use development. 7herefore, it�vould only paAially result in growfh ihat d,�ould encour2ge
light rail transi't us� (Objective 3), provide a rnix of uses to attract pedestrians (Objective 4),
provide sufficieni density to support iransit (Objective 6), znd provide for additional trips
serviceable by transit (Objective 7). However, development under this alternaiive would nof be
subject to the land use regulations and design guidelines proposed in the project to ensure
organized and compatible development across the PGD. In addition, it limits the objective of de
emphasizing the automobile, and placing greater reliance on transi; and pedestrian circulation.
Therefore, pursuant to section 15091(a)(3) of ihe CEQA Guidelines, specific economic, legal,
social, technological, or other considerations make this alternz�ive infeasible.
REDUCED PROJECT ALTERNATIVE
The Reduced Projeci"Alternative woufd reduce build-out in the PGD by 25 percent compared to
fhe projected build-out thai would be accommodated under the project. The 25 percent
reduction vrould be applied evenly across the PGD so that overall developmeni intensity would
be reduced. A ioial of 1,275 residences would be accommodated under this alternative, as
compared to 1,700 under the proposed project, for a net increase in residential uniis under this
alternative of 875 new homes. Commercial developm�nt would be reduced to 225,000 square
teet, compared fo 300,000 square feet under the project, for a total net increase in commercial
development of 25,000 square feet. Office development under this alternative�a•ould be reduced
to 37,500 square feet of new developmenf, compared to 50,000 square feei of new
development under the proposed PGDSP. Similar to the project, this alternative does noi
propose any nev✓ industriai developm=nt. Under the Reduced Project Aliernative, the PGDSP
hAobiliy Plan to enhance the use of transit, reduce vehicular trips and provide pedesirian and
bicycle facilities thai enhance connectiviy in the PGD would be implemenYed.
b�
_ __ . _.
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee No. 72
Impacts
Transportation, Circulation, and Access
The Reduced Project Alternative would result in reduced impacts related to tra�ic and level of
service siandards as compared to the project because this altemative would resuit in fewer
averagz daily trips tnan the project and would also implement the t�Aobi(ity ?lan component of
the projeci to encourage non-vehicular irips. However, due to the amouni of development that
vrould still occur, impacis would li<ely still be significant and mitig2tion would still be requir2d
under this altemative. Similar to ihe project, miiigation measure 5.3-2 is outside the control of
the Ciy and-its impiementation and timing cannot be guaranieed. Therefore, some intersection
and segment impacts under ihis altern2tive would be signiflcant and unavoidable, similar to ihe
projecL
Air Quality _ ,
The Reduced Project Aitemaiive vrould resutt in approximately 25 percent fe�t�er criteria air
pollutant emissions than the project because overall development would be reduced by
approximatety 25 percent, and the project I�4obility Pian would still be implemented to reduce
vehicular trips and associated criteria air poiluiant emissions. However, the 25 percent reduction
would not likely reduce the significant and unavoidable cumulative VOC and NOz construction
and operation impacts identified for the proposed project to a less than significant level.
Culturel Resources
The Reduced Project Altemative would result in similar significant impacts related to cultural
resources. Mitigation measures 5.7-1 and 5.7-2 would reduce incremental cumulative impacts,
but they would not reduce the cumulative impact to cultural resources to below a level of
significance due to ihe General Plan EIR's conclusion that any loss of cultural resources would
be significant. Similar to [he project, cumulative impacts on cultural resources would be
significant and unmitigated.
�Paleontological Resources � -
The Reduced Project Alternative would result in similar significant impacts related to
paleoniological resources. Nitigation measure 5.8-1 would reduce incremental cumulative
impacfs, but would not reduce the cumulative impact to paleontological resources to below a
level of significance due to the General Plan EIR's conclusion that any loss of paleontological
resources �o�ould be signiticant. Similar io the project, cumulative impacts on paleontofogical
resources v:ould be signi icant and unmitigated
Energy
The Reduced Project Alternative wvuld result in similar significant impacts related to energy
because there is no assurance of a long-term supply of energy in Ihe future, the increased
projected energy demand associated with this alternative could potentially result in the available
supply of energy to sall below a level considered sufficient to meet the City's needs or cause a
need for new and expanded iacilities. Therefore, while reduced as compared to the project,
energy impacts would still be significant and unavoidable.
62
Resolution No. 2013-160
Pase No. 73
Housing and Population
The Reduced Project Alternative would resuft in approximztely 25 perce�t Isss population
gro��h in :he PGD compared to the p�oject beczuse 25 percent less residen;ial d=velopment
would be accommodzted. The cumulatively considerable and unavoidable impact related io
population grov.ih identified �or the project v;ould also occur under this altemative b=cause the
population in the PGD would increase.
Findinqs
The Reduced Projeci Alternative v�ould lessen the project's signi�ic�nt impacts associated with .
traffic and level of service siandards; cumulatively considerable emissions; excessive noise
levels; excessive groundborne vibration; fire and emergency medical services; police services;
schools; libraries; parks and recreation; wastewater; energy; hazardous materials iransport,
use, disposal, or release; and hazzrdous materials sites. All oiher environment2l impacts.would
be si�nilar to the project. This alternative would also lessen but not avoid any ot ihe projeci's
significant and unavoidable impacts associated v.�ith transportation, circulation, 2nd access; air
quality; energy; cumulative loss of cultural 2nd paleontological resources; and cumulative
population grov.2h.
The Reduced Project Alternative V�O�JId meet hn�o of the seven project objectives and would
partially meet the remaining iive objectives. Tne Reduced Project Alternative would implement a
specific plan for the PGD, including a Mobiliry Plan to increase altemative transportation modes;
theretore, it would encourage use of light rail transit (Objective 3) and maintain adequate
parking 2nd integrate non-moforized transportation (Objective 5). This alternative would provide
a mix of land uses. Fiowever, development intensity would be reduced across the PGD as
compared to ihe proposed project; therefore, this alternative would only partially create a
pedestrian triendly mixed-use environment (Objective 1), achieve compact development
conducive to walking and bicycling (Objective 2), provide a mix of uses to attract pedestrians
(Objective 4), provide sufficient density to support transit (Objective 6), and provide for
additional trips serviceable by transit(Objective 7).
The Reduced Project Alternative resulis in a less dense development compared to the project.
In addition, by reducing densiry, ihe Reduced Project Aliernative does not fulfill the objectives
associated with buildi�g a high density community providing inieractive opportuniiies including
economics, pedes[rian mobifity, and universiiy support. Therefore, pursuant to section
'15091(a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other
considerations make this alternative inieasible.
MODIFIED LAND USE ARRANGEMENT ALTERNATIVE
The Modified Land Use Arrangement Alternative v:outd accommodzte the same total projected
number of residential u�its in the PGD as vrould be accommodaled under the project (1,700
units). However, the development density v,�ould 'oe increased in Ihe �4ixed Us= Corridor(MU-2)
Sub-district and d2creased in ihe Palomar Residential Vllage (PRV) Sub-district. Under the
ModiSed Land Use Arrangemen, Altemative, :he residential density in ,he PRV would be
reduced from approximztely 76 units per acre to i0 units per acre. The residential density in the
A4U-2 Subt+istrict ti�ould be incr2zsad from an average of 2pproximately �4 dw�elling units per
acre to approximately 23 dwelling units per acre. This would be accomplished by increasing tne
allowable building hei9ht to 00 feef across the en:ire Iv1U-2 Sub-district, rather inan just in the
03
__ _
_
_ _ _
Resolution No. 20li-160
Page No. 74
�
designaied gate�a�ay areas. This alternative �a�ould accommodate an additional i00,000 squzre
feet of commercial land uses and does not propose any new industrial development, similar to
the project. This altemztive would implement the °GDSP Mobility Plan to increase transit use,
reduce v=hicle trips, and provide pedestrian and bicyde facilities that enhance connectivity in
ihe PGD.
Impact5
Land Use, Pianning, and Zoning
The Modifizd Lznd Use Arrangement Altemative would result in a conflict with the General Plan
because the land use iniensity ior ihe PRV sub-disirict of'10 units per acre is not consistent�+�th
the General Plan land use designation for this area of Residenti2l High (18-27 units per acre).
Therefore, the �4odiried Land Use Arrangement Altemative �vould result in an increzsed land
use impact compared to the project.
7ransportation, Circulafion, and Access
The Modined Land Use Arrangement Alternative would result in similar significant impacts
related to traffic and level of service standards as were identified for the projeci because this
aliernative would generate the same number of vehicle trips due to the same amount of overall
development proposed for the PGD. This alternative would also implement the Mobility Plan
component of the PGDSP io encourage the use of transit and reduce vehicular trips. Mitigation
measures would be required to reduce impacts, although they may be slightly different than
ihose ideniified for the projeci due to the change in intensity of land uses in the PRV and MU-2
Sub-districts. Due io the current at-grade trolley crossing at the intersection of Industrial
Boulevard/Palomar Street, it is likely that this aiternative would have similar impacts to this
intersection as proposed project. As discussed for the project, mitigation measure 5.3-2 to
grade-separaie the trolley crossing is outside the control of the City and its implementation and
timing cannoi be guaranteed. Similar to the project, some iniersection and segment impacts
under this aliernative are likely to be significant and unmitigated.
Air Quality
The Modified Land U.se Arrengement Alternative would result in the same criteria air pollutant
emissions as were identified for the project because total build-out w�ould be the same as the
project. Similar to ihe project, cumulative impacts related to the emission of criteria air pollutznts .
(VOC and.NOX)would be significant and unmitigated.
Cultural Resources
The Modified �and Use Arrengement Alternative would result in similar significant impacts
related to cultural resources. Mitigation measures 5.7-1 and 5.7-2 would reduce incremental
cumulaiive impacts, but they �vould not reduce the cumulative impact to cultural resources to
below a level of significance due to the General Plan EIR's conclusion that any loss oi cultural
resources would be significant. Similar to ihe project, cumulative impacts on cuftural resources
would be significant and unmitigated.
Paleontological Resources
The Modified Land Use Arrangement Aitemative would result in similar signi5cant impacts
related to paleontological resources. R4itigation measure 5.8-1 would reduce incremental
b4
' Resolution No. 20li-160
Paae No. 7�
cumulative impac`s, but would not reduce the cumuia:ive impact to paleontological rasources to
below a level of significance due to th= Gene�al Plan EIR's conGusion that any loss of
paleontolooical resources would be sigrr�ican!. Si�r.ilar to [he omject, cumulative imp2cts on
paleontologiczl rasources would be significant and unmitigated.
Energy
The Modified Land Use Arrangement Alternafive would result in simiiar signific2ni impacfs
relaizd to energy. The General Plan EIR.determined that, as population increases, demand for
energy also increases. Because :he development and management of energy resources are not
presently v.�ithin the control oT the City, there is no assurance that an adequate supply oi energy
would 'oe avail�ble. VJhil= it is anticipated that an aaequate supply of energy would b2 avail2ble,
history has shown that shoriages in energy suppry can occur. Although the City has taken steps
to limit ihe expanding need for energy through iis Energy Sirategy and Action Plan and CO2
Reduciion Plan, the potential incre2se in d2velopment represented by the proposed General
Plan Update hzs the poteniial to add incremenizlly to this demand and represenis a significani
cumulative impact. �vlitigation measure 5.12-8 v✓ould reduce significant direct energy impacts.
\��hile this mitig�tion measure would incremenfally reduce the cumulative gas and electricity
impact, the measure would not reduce the cumulative energy impact to bebw a level of
significance because �uture energy supplies cannot be assured. Similar to the project,
cumulative impacts on energy v+ould be significant and unmitigated.
Housing and Population
The Modified Land Use Arrangement Alternative would result in similar signifirani impacts
related to housing and popul2tion. The General Plan EIR states that the General Plan would
result in a substantial increase in the Chula Vista population. Because the General Plan would
induce grov.�h ii would have a significani impaci v✓i;h respect to population growth. No mitigation
is available to avoid this eHect, and the General Plan EIR concludes that cumulative population
grov.�th would be significant and unavoidable. The grow2h projection for buildout of the Modified
Land Use Arrangement Altemative would be consistent with the General Plan. However,
because grov.4h that would occur under fhe General Rlan would be considered cumulatively
considerable and unavoidable, the ModiSed Land Use Arrangement Alternative's coniribution to
grov.�fh in Chula Usia is also considered cumulatively considerzbie and unavoidable.
Findinqs
The Modified Land Use Arrangement Alternative would increase the projecYs significant impacts
associated v.�ith applicable land use plans, policy, or regulation. All oiher environmental impacts
would be similar to the project. This alternative would not lessen any of the projecYs significant
and unavoidable impacis associated with transportation, circulation, and access; air quality;
energy; cumulative loss of cultural and paleontological resources.; and cumulative population
grov✓�h.
The Nodified Land Use Arrangement Allemative would meet fNe of the seven projecf objectives
and partialiy fulfill the remaining hvo objectives. The Modified Land Use Arrangement Alternative
would implement ihe PGDSP, including the Mobility Pizn component to increase transit use and
decrease vehicle irips; therefore is would create a pedestrian friendly mixed-use environment
(Objective 1), acnieve compact development conducive to w2lking znd bicyciing (Objective 2),
encourage use o` light rail transit (Objective 3), provide a mix of uses to attrect pedestrians
(Objective 4), maintain adequate parking and infegrate non-motorized transportation (Objective
o�
_ _ _ .. . . .__ ..
Resolution No. 2013-160 �
Page No. 76
5). 7nis aliemative �vould increase density compared to existing conditions, bui not to the extent
planned �or the Transit Focus Area. Ther2fore, it���ould only pa�iially provide suft"icient density io
support tra�sit(Objeciive 6) and provide tor additional trips sen�iceable by iransii(Objective 7).
The A4odi5ed Land Use Arrangement Aliemative ��:ould not result in the lessening of any
poteniially significani impacts. 1Nhife most project objectives would be met under ihis alternative,
it fails to yield reduced impacts. Therefore, pursuant to section 1509�(a)(3) of the CEQA
Guidelines, specific economic, leg�l, social, technological, or other considerations make this
aliernztiv2 infeasible.
ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
CEQA requires that an EIft identi� the environmentally superior alternative among all of the
altern2fives considered, including the project. If any No Project alternative is selecied as
environmentally superior, then ihe EIR is required to identify an environmentally superior
altemative among ihe other altemaii��es.
The Reduced Project Altemative would be the environmentally superior aliernative, as it v.�ould
lessen the projecYs signifcani impacts associated with transporiation, circulation, and access;
air quality, noise, public services and utilities, and hazards and hazardous materials. This
alternative would atso lessen bu[ not avoid any of the project's signiflcant and unavoidable
impacts associated with transpoRation, circulation, and access; air qualily; energy; cumulative
loss of cultural and paleontological resources; and cumulative population growth. This
altemative v+ould meet two of.the proposed project objectives, but would only partially meei the
projeci objectives to create a pedestrian friendly mixed-use environment (Objeciive 1), achieve
compact development conducive to walking and bicycling (Objective 2), provide a mix of uses to
attract pedestrians (Objective 4), provide su�ficient density to support transit (Objective 6), and
provide ior additional trips serviceable by transit(Objective 7). The findings as to the infeasibili'ry
of�he Reduced Project Alternative are provided above. _
XII.
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
The project would have significant, unavoidable impacts on the follovaing areas, described in
detail in Section IX of these Findings of Fact:
■ Transporfation, Circula#ion and Access
■ Air Quality
■ Cultural Resources
■ Paleontological Resources
■ Energy
■ Housing and Population
The City has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to these impacts. Although in
some instances these mitigation measures may substantially lessen these signiticant impacts,
adoption of the measures will, for many impacis, not fully avoid the impacts.
66
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee I�o. 77
h4or=_over, the City has examined z rezsonable ranee of alternativas to :he projec't. 32sed on
this ex2mination, the City has deie�nined thai non_ o� .he al;ematives: (1) meets project
objecfives, 2nd (2) is environmentally preie-able to th= proizct.
`r.s a resuli, to approve ihe projeci, tne Cify must adop; a "statement of overridina
considerations' pursuani to C�Q.4 Guidelines eections 15043 and 15093. This provision allo�vs
a 1=ad agency to ciie a orojecYs oeneral economic, social, or other ben2fits as a justification for
choosing to allow the occurrencz of specitied significant ernironmental eiects that have not
been avoided. Th= provision explains why, in the agency's judgment, ihz projecYs benefits
ouv�eigh the unavoidable significant e�fects. Where 2nother substantive faw (e.g., the California
Clean Air Act, :he Federal Clean Air Act, or the California and ;ederal Endangered Species
kcts) prohibits the lead agency from taking cer�ain actions u�ith environmental impacts, a
stafement of overriding considerations does not relieve the Iead agency from such prohibitions.
Rather, the decision-maker has recommended mitigation me2sures based on the analysis
contained in the Final PEIR, recognizing th2t other;esource agencies have the abiliry to impose
more stringenf siandards or measures. "
CEQA does not require lead agencies .to analyze °beneficial impacts° in an EIR. Rather, EIRs
are to focus on potential "signi icant effects on the environment," defin=d to be "adverse."
(Pub. Resources Code Section 2'1068.) The Legislature amended the definition to focus on
°adverse" impacts after the California Supreme Cour� hGd held that beneficial impacts must also
be addressed (See, Wildlrfe Alrve v. Chickering (1976) 18 Ca1.3d 190, 206 [132 Cal.Rptr. 377]).
Nevertheless, decision-makers benefit from information abou( project benefits. These benefits
can be cited, if necessary, in a siatement of overriding considerations (CEQA Guidelines
Section 15093).
The Ciry finds that ihe project would 'nave the following subs:anlial benefits. Any one of the
reasons for approval cited betow is su�cient to justify approval of the project. Thus, even if a
court were to condude that not =very reason is supported by substantial evidence, the Cily
Council would stand by its determination ihat each individual reason is su�cient. The
substantial evidence supporfing the various benefits can be found in the preceding findings,
which are incorporated by reference into this Seciion, and in the documents found in the Record
of Proceedings, as defined in Section IV.
The Ciy, after balancing the specific economic, legal, social, technological or other benefits of
the project, including considerations for the provision of employment opportunities, determines
and rinds that the unavoidable adverse environmental effects may be considered °acceptable"
due to ihe following specific considerations.
The primary goal of the PGDSP is to stimulafe reinvestmeni in older and underutilized
properties to provide housing and commercial uses that v,�ould result in the.re-creation of a
dynamic southern gateway area to the City. The PGDSP would be used as a tool to guide and
cirect new redevelopment, economic development, streetscape and traffic improvements,
parking, pedesirian ameni:ies, and mixed land uses in the specific plan area. The project would
develop four sub-district planning areas, each of which provides specific types of development
opporfunities. A fotal of 1,300 nev.� dwelling units and 150,000 additional square feet (SF) of ,
relail and office development is proposed forlhe PGDSP, compared to the existing condiiion..
67
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 78
PROJECT BENEFITS
Through implemeniation of the project, the iollo�ving benefits m�ould be provided to the sp=cific
plan araa, and the Cify as a whole:
'i) Community Revitalization Benefits
a) Dvnamic Southern Gate�•.�av Area. The primzry goal of the PGDSP is io stimulate
reirn�estment in olde� and underutilized'properties to provide housing 2nd commercial
uses ihat�•�ould result in the re-creation of a dynamic southern gatevaay area io the City,
consistent with �he City's General Plan.
b) Smart-GrovRh Community. The PGDSP would e�hance the southern 9ate�:�ay area and
renew interest and activity in the area by creating a place where residents can live, v✓ork,
shop, and. play. The revitalization proposed by the_PGDSP would allow residents in the
specific plan area to shop and work in thieir community by providing attractive amenities
close to home.
c) Commerci�l Destination. Usi�ors from the surrounding areas would be encouraged to
visit the PGDSP because it would provide a variety of commercial, retail, and housing
oppoRunities in one area. The PGDSP wouid create new shopping destinations.
Specitiqlly, the PGDSP �a�ould create higher intensiry residential uses, as well as mixed
use developments that offer a combination of pedestrian-friendly residential, office, and
retail uses with strong linkages to ihe Palomar Transit Station.
2) Economic Benefits
a) Emplovment Opportunities. The PGDSP would help grow the Ibcal economy in several
ways. Il will create new employment opportunities in the City with the provision of new
proposes retail, office, service-oriented commercial and institutionai uses that �vould
create a variety of employment opportunities. The construction of development under ihe
PGDSP would generate substaniial revenue to the Iocal economy. and provide a
significant number of construction-related jobs over a 20+ year construction period.
Those lhat would benefit from employmenl from development under the PGDSP would
range from students and adults filling part-time and full-time positions, skilled tradesmen
riiling certain industrial and commercial positions, and professionals filling commercial,
office, and institutional positions. Persons that live in the residential porlion of the
specifc plan area could be prime candidates for employment opportunities created by
the redevelopment oi the ?GDSP.
b) Benefits to Local Businesses. The exisiing busines5es in neighboring areas are
expected to benefit from the increased residential activity accommodated by the
proposed project, and from the visitors generated from the revitalization of the area as a
commercial/retail destinaiion.
c) New Propertv and Sales Tax Revenue. Development of vacant parcels and poiential
redevelopment of underutilized parcels will result in an increase of propery tax revenues
over the 20+ year build-oui period. In addition, it is anticipated that the PGDSP area
68
Resolution I�'o. 2013-160
PaQe No. 79
could generzie an addiiior�al 150,000 square Seei of commercial retail and o��ice space
v.�hich�•+ould generate signi�icant s21es 'ax dollars.
3) Aesthetic Beneiits
a) Land Use and Develo�ment Requlations. The speci�� Iznd uses and d=v=lopment
regulations proposed in the PGDSP would enhance the visual charecter and quality of
the ?GD. The general development regulations that v.�ould create cohesn�e and
enhanced visual Guality in the PGD include the following:
i) Land Use Regulafions
ii) Large-Scale Commercial
iii) Streets and Sidewalks
iv) Sign �egulaiions
v) Par!cing and Loading Regul2[ion
vi) Vehicular Access .
vii) Loading, Service and Refuse Area Screening
viii) Design Guidelines
Typic2l design guidelines include requiremenis for strong architeciurai design siandards,
streetscape amenities, building orientation, vehicle zccess and zvoidance of features
tha[ v+ould create pedestrian or vehicular conflicts. Landscape requirements are also
inciuded to soften the appearance ot building facades and hzrd surfaces, ard provide
shade for residents and visitors.
4) Recreational/Public Space Benefits
a) Public Soace Development Reouirements. The PGDSP identifies the following potential
locations within or adjacenl to the PGD that may be improved with pzrks, plazas, or
open spaces:
i) The 4.5-ac�e sife located within the San Diego Gas & Electric right-os-�vay south of
the Palomar Transit Station provides an oppor'unity for a neighborhood park and
would sen�e to fulfill ihe General Plan vision for a park in :he vicinity of the PGD.
ii) The 1.3-acre A4etropolitan Transit Service site located be4ween Palomar Streei and
Oxford Skreet jUSt east of the railroad iracks would be sui:able for zn urban park.
iii) The PGD provides opportunities to provide plazas v.4tnin private properties. Some
of the sites fhat oter opportunities for ptazas are the Pzlomar Tr2nsit Siation and
the formzr°Pumpkin Paich° site along Palomar Str�et west of Industrial 8oulevard,
as well as the large privale parcels located behveen Palomar. Sfreet and Oxford
Streef eask of Industrial Boulevard.
iv) The existing drainage that runs east-west from Indusuial 3oulevard to Frontage
Road along the rear of private oroperies located sou�� of Ada Street and north of
69
_ _... _. . .. ..__.
Resolution No. 2013-]60
Paee No. 80
Dorotny Street represents an oppo�unity for a privcfe greenw�ay that could be
preserved and ennanced for the enjoyment of the contiguous prope�y ovaners.
v) The standards for mixed-use projects require outdoor space to be a minimum of
200 square re=t.
b) Commercial/Ret2il Uses. The proposed project would provide approximately
150,000 square feet of ne�a� commercial/retail space that v.�ould include commercial
centers, rei2ii shops, restaurants and other enieRainment, and offices.
5) Housing Benefits �
a) Reqional �eed ior Housina. The project will help meet a projected long ierm regional
need ior housing ihrough the provision of future additional housing. SANDAG housing
capacity studies indicate a shortage of housing v.�ill occur in thetegion within the next 20
years. O��er the 20+year anticipated build out, the project could increase the housing
stock in the City by approximately 1,300 d�aelling units. Phasing will occur in response to
market condiiions, which will help fulfill ihe demand for housing.
b) Reduce Reqional Cost of Housina. The PGDSP may additionally help to reduce Ihe
regional cost of housing because the project wili increase the spatial extent and density
of land designated for residential development by providing for mixed use zoning thai
aliows residential uses to co-occupy blocks or parcels previously confined to just
commercial and o�ce uses. Thus, the PGDSP will result in additional housing that will
promote affordability, sustainability and socioeconomic diversity, features the City finds
both important and desirable.
The Ciy finds [hat there is subsiantial evidence in the adminisirative record of benefits to
community revitalization, employment, economic effects, aesthetics, recreational/pubiic space,
and housing which would directly result from approval and implementation of the project. The
City finds that the need for these benefits specifically overrides the impacts of ihe project on
transporfation, circulation and access; air qualiry; cultural resources; paleontological resources;
energy; and housing and population. Thus, the adverse effects of the project are considered
acceptable.
70
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee No. 81
F�IIBIT C �
^',� PALOMAR GATEWAY DISTRICT SPECIFIC PLAN (PCM-10-24)
PROGRAM ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT(EIR-IO-OS)
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
Introduc>ion .
This mitigation monibring and reporting program (MMRP) was prepared `or the Palomar Gateway
District Specific Plan (PGDSP) (PCM-10-2�) to compty wi.h Public R2sources Code sedion 21081.6,whicn
requires public agencies to adopt such programs to ensure e��ective implementztion of mitigation
mezsures. This moni:oring program is dynzmic in that it will undergo changes as additional mitigation
measures are identified and zdditional conditions of approval are placed on the project throughoui the
project approval process. Pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081,6(a)(2), the Ciy of Chulz
Vista designates the Development Services Director and the City Clerk as the custodians of the
documents or their material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which its decision is
based.
This moniioring program will serve a dual purpose of verifying completion of the mitigacion identified in � �
the Program Environmental Impact Report(PEIR) and generzting information on the euectiveness of the
miYigation measures to guide future decisions. The program includes ihe following:
• Monitor qualifications
� • Specific monitoring activities
• Reporting system � .
• Criteria for evalua:ing the success of Yhe mitigztion measures .
The PGDSP is located in the southwest corner of the City of Chula Vista (City), near the interchange of
Palomar Street and Interstate 5 (I-5), within the County of 5an Diego, California (see PEIR Figure 3-1,
Regional Location Map). The proposed PGDSP is approximately four miles north of the international �
border wiih Mexico. The boundaries of ihe PGDSP include approximately 100-gross acres surrounding
the Palomar Transii Station at the intersection of Palomar Street and Industrial Boulevard (see PEIR
Figure 3-2, Location Map).-The PGDSP zrea indudes the properties north of Palomar Street around
Wzlnut Street,Trenton Street and Industrial Boulevard. Further east, the PGDSP also.extends north from
Palomar Street to Ox�ord Street. South of Palomar Street,the PGDSP extends along Industrial Boulevard
and Frontage Road to Anita Street. A San Diego Trolley light rail :ransit station, Palomar Transit Station,
is located within the PGDSP at the intersec:ion of Palomar Street and Industrial Boulevard. �
The PGDSP establishes the approprizte distribution, mix, intensity, physical form, and functional
relztionships of land uses within the Palomar Gztewzy District (PGD). The PGDSP Iznd use and
development regulztions are intended to encourzge and facilitate infill development, mixed uses,
pedestrian scale, ur5an amenities, transit use, creative design, and the general revitalization oi the PGD.
The PGDSP contains several land use categories including residential, public/quasi-public and
ins�iwtional,commercial o�fice, commer�izl-service oriented,commzrcial-retail, and accessory uses.
Palomor Gatewoy Disirid Sp=ciSC Plon PdR City a Chula Ysa
SCri no.207 1 11 7077 Pa9` � June 20i3
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 82
Mitigotion Monitoring and Reporiing Progrom
The PGD is divided into the follo�ving four sub-districts based on similar building and use types: �
1. PalomarTransit Plaza (MU-1)
2. Pzlomzr Mixed Use Corridor (MU-2) �
3. Palomar Residential Village (PRV)
4. Palomar Neighborhood Retail Cluster(PNRC)
The projected build-out of the PGD and its four sub-districts for the 20-year planning horizon is
presented in Table.l, below.
TABLE 1
PROJECTED DEVELOPMENT FOR PGDSP BUILD-OUT��'��
Projected Total Estimated Build-Out 6y Su6-District
Ezisting Additional Estimated MU-1 MU-2 PRV PNRC
Development Development euild-Out (3.5 acres) (31.5 acres) (43.5 acres) (1.5 acres)
Residential(Units) 400� 1,300 . I 1,700 150�'� 450�°� 700 --
Retail(Sq.Ft.)�s� 200,000 I 100,000 300,000 10,000 85,000 -- 5,000
Office(Sq.FiJ�s� -- 50,000 SQ000 5,000 40,000 -- ' S,000
Industrial�Sq.Ft.) 30,000 ' -- — -- -- -- -- �
�'�Numbers are approzimations. �
��� Projecied residential units and commercial square footages are based on ihe Markei Study for the PGD prepared hy �
� Gafcon,Inc.in luly 2011. - . -
� �3� Projected residential units for MU-1 Sub-district are based on the designated Floor Area Ra[io wi[h the proportional .
commercial d=velopment indicated in Note 5,below. � .
�d�Sub-distric's MU-2 and PRV residential units were estimated proportional to the sub-district land area. . - -
�s� Retail/O�ce square footages are assumed 10-percent/90-percent split of projected build-out between ihe MU-1/MU-2
Sub-dls[ricts,which is roughly proportional to the sub-district Iand area.
Source:PGDSP �
The Proposed Project is described in the PEIR text. The PEIR, incorporated herein as referenced,focused
on issues determined to be potentially significant by the City. The issues addressed in the PEIR include
land use, planning, and zoning; landform alteration/aesthetics; transportation, circulation, and access;
air quality; global climate change; noise; cultural resources; paleontological resources; biological
resources; hydrology and drainage; geology and soils; public services and utilities; hazards and
hazardous materials; and housing/population. The environmental analysis concluded that for all of the
environmental issues discussed, some of the significant and potentially significant impacts muld be
avoided or reduced through implementation of recommended mitigation measures. Potentially
� significant impacts requiring mitigation were identified for transportation, circulation, and access; air ,
quality; noise; cultural resources; paleontological resources; biological resources; geology and soils;
public services and utilities; and hazards and hazardous materials.
Public Resources Code section 21081.6 requires monitoring of only those impacts identified as
significant or potentially significant. The monitoring program for the Proposed Project therefore
addresses the impacts associated with only the issue areas identified above.
Pciomar Gateway Dizind Specific Plan PcIR Cify oi Chula visia
SCH No.2011 7 1 7 077 . Paae 2 - . June 2013
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee I�'o. 83
" N,iiigciion Moniioring cnd Reporing?rogram �
^:��� IJiitiEZtion Monitorin2 Tez�
The monitoring activi;i=s would be zccomplished by individuals identified in the a<iached A40.9RP table.
\Nnile specific quzli�ications should 'oz determined by:he City, the monitoring team should possess the
�ollowing capabilities:
• Interpersonal,decision-making,and managemeni skills with demonstrated experi=nce in working
under trying�ield circumstances;
• Knowledge o�and appreciation�or the general environmental attributes and special features �ound
in.he projedarea;
• Knowledge of the .ypzs of environmentaf impacts associated with construction o�cosFe�ective
miYigation options; zr�d
• Excellent communicztion skills. �
� Proeram Procedural Guidelines �
Prior to any construction activities, meetings should take place behveen all the pzrties im�olved to �
initiate the moni:oring program znd establish the responsibility and authority of the participants.
Mitigation measures thai need to be de�ined in greater detail will oe addressed p;ior to?ny project
approvals in follow-up meetings designed to discuss specific monitoring e�fiects.
In zddition to the list oi mitigation measures, the monitors will have mitigation monitoring repor�
(MNiR) forms, wi:h each mitigation measure wriYen out on the top o� the form. Below the staYed
mitigation measure, the form will have a series of questions addressing the effectiveness of the
mitigation measure. The monitors shall complete the MMR and file it with the Mitigation Monitor
" �ollowing the monitoring activity. The Miiigztion Monitor will then include the conclusions of the MMR
into an interim and iinal comprehensive construction report to be submi��ed to the City. This report will
describe the major accomplishments of the monitoring program, summarize problems encountered in
achieving the goals o`the program, evaluate solutions developed to overcome problems, and provide a
list ot recommendations for future monitoring programs. In .addition, and if appropriz:e, each
Environmental Monitor or Environmental Specialist will be required to fill out and submit a daily log
report to the Mitigation Monitor. The daily log report will be used to record and account for the
monitoring activities of the monitor. Weekly and/or monthly status reports, as de.ermined zppropriate,
will be generated �rom the daily logs and compliance reports and will include supplemental material
(i.e., memoranda, telephone logs, and letters). This type of feedback is essential for the City to confirm
the implementation and efrectiveness of the mi:igation measures imposed on the project.
Actions in Case of Noncomoliance
There are generally three separa.e categories of noncompliance associa.ed with the adopted conditions
o�zpprovzl: � '
• Noncompliance requiring an immediate halt to a specific task or piece of equiprr�ent; � �
• In�raction tha:warren•`s an immediate corrective zction, but does not result in work or task delay;
and
• Inrraction th�;does not warrant immedizte corective action and results in no work or task delay.
There are a number of options .he City may use ;o enforce this program should noncompliance �
continue. Some methods commonly used by other lead agencies include "stop work" orders, fines and
� penzliies (civil), restitution, permii revocations, citations, and injunctions. It is essential thai all paries
Polomar Gatewcy D'airiC SpeCiSC PIGn P`_IR City of ChVla Vs�c �
� SC4 No.20i 1117077 � Paa=3 � !une ZOi3
_ _ . _ _ _ _ _ .__ __ _ . . _
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 84
Mitigofion Monitoring and Reporting Pro�ram
involved in the progrzm understand the authority and responsibility of the on-site monitors. Decisions
regarding actions in case of noncompliance are the responsibility of the City.
�SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES � �
The foilowing table summarizes the potentially significant project impacts and lists the associated
mitigation measures and the monitoring efforts necessary to ensure that the measures are properly
implemented. All the mitigation measures identified in the EIR are recommended as conditions of
project approval and are stated herein in language appropriate for such conditions. In addition,the City
will further refine the mitigation measures during various stages of implementation, as necessary.
Palomar Gaieway Disirici Speci5c?lon PEIR , City of Chula\'isia
SCH No.2071111077 Page 4 June 2013
Resolution No. 2013-160
Pase No. 8�
> __ _ � — — —
� � =-= - � � s = > :
= <
_ _ . _. . _ _ _ _
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page N . 86
� �
> - -
� o
m �, > �
c "c > > > o m
o < „ r_a - m 35
m � , � �
� .� � � �
O D U U Q �
� G O O O T .
c � . . � _ -, � U :
u u :�' u
o Z' � � -
.m N � o o n ? : '
°�' E o n o _i - c . .
w a
E y ; o
$ c o ` v � � - - �u
o v > � -� E m o ,` .
v o w m � � a y y i :,!
E E -O ' w ° -O � ° ' o
A �
v � ' � o > Q o
w � ? w � 'D y .n m
E a �, ° � ° � '° '° � ; � .
}- Q a n a` � � �' - o
f t
m o0 �_'•�
c v E o c `� v� v � .
� -3 � a � E 3 m ' n
0
. c V � N c n c � u _ � n j -o y .
'� E v � � m o c a� i o . 'o .N.> > .
w u N o � �. v m � -a a
� o o � � cr N c � c n _'� ..� _ � � � c .
� � a 3 �' - .a � o � ° m �'t�. `o � y . . .. m ` 3
c' � u � n .. ' o
� � m� � i "�' c = V � o � ._- � v ° � � � � '
p � c m c w n` a - � � m V v c
l7 m 3 n �v E ° ` u y -a - o ° w - 3 , .
c 3 v v
� o p � v c � ° .. u u - ,� v E L � m
C . v cu O � t s Z. c a v
d = Y c w w ti 9 � o � � :
� � r. N � > O_ u C � vi = � � v
(� � W N .� S] 4.� N y p� ` N v O 0 t] W .
Z . o o � v v no 3a .o „ v � . v _ a o .
C I� L v v� N O ' vi .
I- • C m u � � C i J � C .a L•'.... O m O C v Y y w �> 'O
� > ° �n _-O � � w ° � v i,n-..:. u � ` v E 3 > „� o v .
� � o a � ° v v D � o ` _- . ; .. . E a �t, � � c v
w � m N m 3 3 y m o D q `o o j��:' ` o ai c w '9 Q 3 � m m o
� � •--, m a � � c � � � '� o � 3 n a � �:=,li o ° '_ o E a °i a c '`v �,
� 'a a v V ow o s :. w � o . -�..,' m v �u w ° v . � m � � �
N a c
Z � � .. � fO E � °-° ` w �>y ' � ` ��_�� � � � g Q a^�' w � v � ° n
Q C y v' u c ° > m o „ � � o y �`-�-3 � � o �. v w 3 °' � o � o �
� � � .L. C O O C U .i=_:. 0 y .y � C 3 O U pp i, �E p _
U� a _ C - - ' _ r. � y,
Z O d ` S ° � a�v ° � 'oa... m !.c _ � v � E � v n 'n � � � °' ,� ��
C � rn � w N-� � ` � « � m °' ` « �r� v' n �' 0 2 E c w N a � � -
� E c �
p L onc v - v ` � `ov 'm'= t � f_ry. zEo ° " c '? o � � c� ? �
pp y O c ~ u � 2 O W q 1- m �o _ t` 6 O Q v� O � .. N .
Z p \ o " v m � � n � �9 v v �� � o � `° m E m m °° .a n a m � `
�
' � r " n � - ` on � a m m'u N " � ,' � � � °�° .p°�N Y O o m � 2 � > �
ti a E m o � � '.°'e '-° n `o « w 'w o � ' E w $ � ' G o v ° -o � a
E ' ` o o �
� � u ° C m ° y � � O E o � o �, �'. � a�9 � 2 w u � m ` y m-o .,
F- v y w v ,s.`. � 3 E '� � `{ � > � 3 -: � � o = E � o � E � 3 `v 3 a
� J u � N o Y ,°.' ° m coi a - n o 'O ir i'� � m N o ° � _ v r. o � «. a m
E ` u c °_ m v ,V-` a n v 8 � _....- ,. a�E E o o ._ °- o � v 3 0 �
f d q W E : _W_� > N q W � n� 'O . 'N:_av- C O v d 'a. d H >' � � n O J
y n � W C .. p C N ` 3 = ry C a ':
� o � E � " � 3 x �' y o a F n � ��. � � � E ,. o y � � � ° � � x
.. �u � m �E o 3 u � u m �E 'y ` gkjt� a i c c w w w u ? � ? v ` -
m v � v = e� � - `m in 'n � � o �� -� ��;z�� .. �n .. �� ° � � 7 � G ° ¢ 3 F °_
' - c o ` - = � _ ..'. � o _ _
� vi h u _ - �+i i (a H � `o ° -`y�' vi a - _ - = i `> '>
+_;N" _ '
> - y
-. � V N C N . ' . '
o � a 3 v a � � o c
v �n $ i : �
� � v � c o _ o o `o „ w ,. -o w o o - � ,
� � A � o a .'^. � ' x o c � -
� � i _ ^ u � L u �c , 3 . � .E ` .
9 V W ` C 1 T h0 V � �I.._�.. � a �+ N C
u � y ci J J C � - { . vl � n O
q � t � C O . 3 j T m v !.: � v N C y
a 3 > � o � a 3 v 3 � o. � } o l0 a `-. 9 `
E a -a' �v- r'-o o `o v ° - a �m-��� .
� � o n o ° -- = m T c o m ° '^ v `a z v �
'° o u e`r � v !° o v o w o -°- v o- 0.
V C C C � �
.0 7 T y = F S � d ` t N v �Y u d p p � U
� � o .. oo v ? � " ` _ � n V' � _
a � 3 c = o- E c 3 v 1° >. o .
� O c ' m � ? f� � � n=. c a .r. i � o , � n
� � ,
v c v vn m o ° ° � � m ° -''t � _ __ o c ° � �E 3 n�
o .o a � v " o � a m 5 � o E o y n� � .
c u � � � � .. ¢ a � , m .. :� ��' '''� 'uvc o �
° a � ' ° > � m . ,� o
E c n ... c m c w o
fq jE � � � .�+ � C V J E � � D ':..J= � C � 0.. U� N
= o c = m� 5 c u v n n a o .;,�'i m E m � 2 ' o 0
- �- r�.`_' ` w � c� :°� v � 0 2 Ut' o v v o .. E Z
� =po �- mmoc ° v > pn.o i'Ci� ��naoc OT
H" � � � �R « v c E � v o a'� - o E w o o U
.. c� w . a � ��� u uo o � �n
Resolution No. 20li-]60
Paee No. 87
on
V
C � `�
C L v m ^
� L' 7 � �.
� G ' _ _ J
. .:.`� - � = = U l �
J � V U j
� � j 0 �
u T T U
V V
L
O N
� u c �
_�
m � = � J o
- � ` v
. � �� u L > 3 �' " v
u 0 �. ' _
� ^ n � n � ,_ � o
E ° -c°� o � c '
n . y j .. � O :� r �
U � _ O O
F O T�O O > 'J p J �
� � u o - ` ._.
r - - n - � :�
, � u
> � � ' - c >
u u �' = .: � -°
� : o � � u u o t E _ �
� ` _ _ > � c � _
� � c n ° ° c+ - < - � � o _ -
e < �_, _ _ = '^�a > N � ?
c � � J n vi O u V tC U Q �.�i^
G - C `� �' [J U J V � > - - L' v�
Q = U L V E '� � � � C '�l N 'S O ;J � (:
C � E ,'''J �g u `u 'N m � o �°,- E o .. _ 3
U, < u n . Q .. > ` o LL "� o y o :_ 5 ,� p
� u � y � " � N � p '.' _ y.
O� � y E _ � ra 5 S > � c . c p � � o � G Dcr � ,
a o � cr.c � a = � ° � o ci � c a� � � J '� J o
3 n . � o
l7 a = V � o° '^ � E u '" � 3 u >? o n 3 o ai n �
Z n v 2 o m � � u � c N � � _ 3 = o � �
a N >' � > "u `_' E � "� � �� > j o uC � „� .c
f" - v a C EJ V tJ " O t v i O Q � � 5 O C y ..
a ° 't" r`-. �" `o o ° °- F: > c o v m - ° � - � n y � '- _ � .
W � o. N � � v'-� � � n o � c u : _ _ o = = c
� � � N n �
' � V u ` a � ? a n u � c ._. � � o - ? � n - y � � ? u � - '
C O C . �i � L � �
_" Q C o m c r c � a -- � � E ' � o � n '^ n c ° o � � ° � 0 7
(7 ' � C � � - ° E n ° � � c ° t� a ° ° °o < _ � o `'� �
C n .�'K C � � � � o - o � - u y ' ' =
Z O � � o p ° � � " c � ° o p � v� � � ` i - > � N � c
C � ° a � � � � 3 0 0 � a .E U' '� � ° ` o = u o :.
� p � o u o _ E u D � �� � v m = ° � a � n a °' � o = >°w °
F �. .-1 � - C `.V S C � E "-� � `� U '-` O v O � � v� �
Z N d N fi a � C O `V E t � C O V C C J _ V. _ - C � J'
O � O `� n L � � U ^ V N � C � v ' :J U � V .�. V V ('
� � � O '.� K � V v�i j n OC � � 3 y .'r. C � = o- O u f C � N .
N . C U � J W 'O F O . y u N 'C L � N
Z C C O O � U '= J U' U T N > 'VJ, V U F F � V O
O � u v - > - o - a v v n � N c � � . - E �
r 'o -' a ' _ _ =' c o `o � - a " _ "" 3 -, L '�^ ' u u
� '
Q L` N v�i �6 U i � O l'J � C � � _� O y J C � O U v C n V
U� U � ` � s n !] J � 1] J N . � C � �] ^ Q T 7 J '`` S J
'S n - -O J " ` C C fJ � � .`. 7 >
c V 'O . H � O '3 W
C - � � O J C) � O E 3 � V O y � '.]. U N �`n V n �' '� v p dd.
F T 4 fJ ^ n i O J �p V j p r p V C ' V U = • vJi
•" y J C �n C .V � � V E U - .� C 0 > i �
G O ° ° 3 O O : ev o 'N _ 3 �n °v - - m y a ° n o _ a'
' � �
' C P �+ V U u f U v U
�> X X �'f � .� _ = > Vf Y � 1- � 2.`�_ O
Y
V � O
V
u p � - -
n u '
n o p � p
= �
p U
C O - �
p J p -
� V � �
C _ - , U
� _ � _
h _ _ C _
' J J f /11
1 � 3 - OO
'-.�. 1 c � v� - 3 _
" u °
�\� � ' u N = � � _
1 v V' u .• -
_ 3 _ V o
> V J `��', v O
o ' : Z
- - o 0 0-
_ c = �U
� > _ o - v�
_ _ __ _ _ _. . _ _ _ _ _ _ _. .
_ _ _ _
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No. 88 _ __
T _ �M
m — ' � O
u :_� � � O U
' .o � ___� > > > �
� _ m � �
c � U
o °"� u u � .. ���.7 .
� � _ ' "
`o `o > `
C 's.�•�' � � U
'-_� u u
c
o -';G c cp c m - .
'_ - m _ m c
.� ��i � 0 3 w v � a
•• o j O �
� L O ' T' t O d _
-`Y�� T � u T .
`o .�`�".'.i'_+ 3 n m � . 3 n m
u =;.�ii:! .. � - .. v
:_Wr� � � o . � � o
_ ' v � v
� -�9' � �
u 'v�:i '-c3i o �E � v � �E
E :.,�.;� c > n � c > n �
-_-_14; o v n m o v n v
F , U C n ' - U ¢ n
�:"
:yn��
__� p � — y °
m m Z' a a� .y m ` o
�'-'�'T `o_ a c ,� " $ '° 3 3 Y E Z' o o ..
�-' t � a 'D h _ O N � O O V ' � . m
•� % � W � V V W C -O •> d OO � j � � v �
:�.�.�, 3 � m � U - . .c � v m O > � v � w � " � - J T S >
� �':4? ` � o . �o m ` > m v E � m v m m v o u m � o � v ° .
�Y. � y. V J - C) p0 ' i � N C � Y '� � L � � C :� �Y � p
Q ' .i � C J Z O j C N Y T_ N � L � LL 3 p � � v O m�
fZ '�-ai .3 a �� E ._ .. m Y �
l7 - '. o u w E u � E N _ '- t w v w w 'w � � � LL �
;;� u o � v x N o v ,.. o . 3 Y c n � m � � o
� F� > u s � y o � o �3 w ' � ° a
�. . O � J O in � u O v� C � u C � L 6 N � O N � d'
a rt� c �.N o � � m � a v o o v E v v �> > vi o � � _ - .
U' _.-'v ' v "o w -o m a - E v m 'v v � o = v °� E v ri .. ° �LL �v .
H =-'"' 9 � c > 0 3 'B � 0 1O v � « `'° > c ° LL � � � u E � y n
K '=�`.Et � � ° 'S � a �' � � « E � o E � � o m� v a . m .
O '^d i E .�.. w '^ ai w w o v y a h °i u - � ai ,v. = � 3 ,�
a � :-_-��`� y c N o c � w Y m u°. -o d a '-^ N ° '.'-. t u -' o ? v v �
w � r� E a � o h � . °i v � v _ - , v � � � �
� A _:nl nn t �O `-' � m '^ .
y � � � d N N N C R � N „ � N � � 'O ?
O m a ;�.- LL ° "' Z � � i . '> o v � ^' a Q °i ° ., m ` ° m c ° v p- .
Z ❑ � .^1--54`� o --O_ v -_ o � o v ° 0 2� ,o c ° E ,.: o `" 3 .. n
a C -° �' � ' � � �` o = � u m °-' v a�i c .'°„ o n a � c � y o � � � « '_.
'.- .. � � v � v v a � v � -@ .� o v
� C m �.'i=' � `o u E Y 'q 3 o q v m m Q m m 1O o � � E s ' �
Z O =�_k:i � - o E v n v v � a � o v o � a` n .. 3 m o �'_-" n�o
K � � 4:s�;:y �> > a u° « w m m � �-° > � ° °a �� 3 a"c cy�o m `a
� � �::x�C,_.,', � � E m 3 °� o o c � L c u° � v c •'".• ¢ u v �� a � ¢� :
Z €a�`;= ¢ °- o � � " � � ° -o ° v � o 0 o E n o o °' >o . E >
�_,. .. � m � d - = m c .` a E _ � a c v �
O - � � < �� � 'c 'c E o Z � n -o a w c � n ., a o m .o
� �r,: � $ ¢ ; o 0 0 ..°i m '-� ° � m o �� m v °' 2 '� E �n �° .m..
, Z � _.�;� o o v � y � � n N �� � a a° '°' E o � � v " v o` � N � v �
....-, a ' .� � s c o w
:. Q o _ � c � o c c c� a� m � a y V�' a c v o v v ` � �> N E
� �+,�.� - " v a Z � cr ' v c v :: w m �+ u o m � _ � m � m
�_ .> .. - n� a u E -a v � n m � Q $ N = a - o ° _ ` v � .
a �?s� �u � N = � a o v .. v ° � N o o = m �a o � .E c �m ma `� 'Q a° E E
� :e's��:r. v4i � ��N >v > w > c > 'v � ° -° _� v°'i u - +`' '" v c d � ° v
F- :e��:;` dr 3 _ 'E o 'E z '� � 'E o ° p � .o a ° o o E � v � - � a .
� �':.' in > r � � � � Q .C' o .P � � � '� o 'c° � �n � '.. at° m 3 3 N � � "
Ei=e-' u m � _, o .1 d .:. w "`. 'n 4 0 ' � m c @ b °- c a ° m o �
u�. C � � 7 � � � > > 7 V o�0 � � �. ti O O = 0. O �> C ? O N . -
i:i;l1'' .r co � N � m � m � � � m D � ✓ � o . v N ° � m -o � m - m T
'::-y%�r e m $ 'o _ S _ m $ `° o i? � v n a v '� ° � �� � �
=•. vi � . o ._ _ - 2 ^� � � 5 m o � vi n G '> > � 1' > Q> n
��
g� � �
0
:`-'�,'w v '
z , y _O �
;:• ' o � o o ' � - .
�r� - w � o v � a
� > � 3
_ C .� .y � J y O �
_ O C N O 2 O N � .
S� � p � � d ry � C
E t-4. O O N V' N U T � U
- �fa_�, v °- c 'o c a w x m �_ _ ,
� �_.� E � 2 c o 'c�i � w o � U ,
m - - v ° o m U
- _ � �'^ p t` 0 C �+ Q
V d > W ��• lt 6 u C
�C _ E S i '-' � � 7 j O � U .
- vmi rMar N � °1 o y �- w "= � .= ,,
o c ` w a c �
. m -!;� > 'o j � . o � $ = � � �� � .
� � c �
� -�� � 3 �n � v `o a � � o = -
p �.__� N ,�j z � o o � �'-' > a d: �..
n =-.-"`�: 'o � o � ++ °i c m � p �
�=y. Z c m m � � o N � o.
= a � 3 a y c a o�� U' w
�T � V O 7 v N � 1� O O O
'?�� '" o c �v . . H � � � a '� F Z
rin: V 2 x v y a > � � � �_
. 'z¢:j w n S o x E .t 'S m o �,U.�
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee No. 89
-= � � -�
> ' - —
;` _ - > �
L V ;fy=, Ji'. v. `^ �" �
- _ G ��- > > � . � J
� ..� — - ? U
�., � C :.� � � . �
O " _�=� V �U U O
� O �� j O O �
u �� > � � U
� V v �
4 -� � � o >- _
, _ ' V o ' _ -
` � y ' - V ^ �
. ��, _ J � o o ` o ; o j
� :3y� - = = : V � > J
o �v:._,.:: ° ` c � o � � .� .
�:.:.. � � ° � o o n ° ' u �
- ° o S o � a o 'o u �
° - o'V „ o ° o ` j� ? �
U � V :, u >
O T O O o �' O C � N p
F �i„}: _ .� 1 G � C C �V .0 Ti G
c� •
�. O .�3 > >
"c , w V ` _ ' �
� O � F � � � . .'J 7 � ^ j � � O J � � y V J � .
c�K:. :' .- ... �n U - � • � � > V — � n �
•� �� .. y n �V 3 ° v 5 n ° � � v v � � u ` � � -' o _
i�: c � � � u � o _ c �E - ' E � '�.. � m „>, � ° c -=; un 'c "' ° -
� "�_ � _ � m � _= ° > � � � � _ ° _ � ° ._.� o u E ° �o � � o � °
J V .- � � y
C ,--� � C '� � y �. L C O f� '� U L � ` r J U � O U n � C V
p � N p p rl "y V 6 u ._ 9 O u 3 u d ._. �V � i G
U� ..Cy� U C v ^ ..
O U •"] N � U U 'L C S) r, m � �
� '-'+' U D V 6 � ' [O O .'� � _ V a � � N O � - � � � � - C n u ` �
� � o n V o - - � _ V ._ u o ��- _ o c , �
a :��' _ ' o E n'y � � = � - v c -� � 3 � v � c ^_' o
C7 Lc:_ � o u ° � �c � o v�i u - o c ° � � >, � 3 � � � �� b � o � � C � .
Z 'R'� U > � = vf � � fl V � .r'. vf y ' j v v 'S � � r = N p 'J � C .. .. � .
�. „ ` n u O n � 6�J � O V � L tJ Q ti '� _ .= O � y O V v y � U u _yn. .
. �?r=: O �p C m O n U .'^1' j 'C f, � 1 U '� „ � C V u rvJ.•' J Z .
ar:i Kiv 3 .-^. G > c o c c o o _ - v E a _ � � � ° o _ y c � n o
w N 2+'^g ° ° - ° _ � 4 0 � = � _ � � � � � J � s r '� z ,� � �f �° o y
. C f] �3. v�i r 1'] C L 1� C `� O 3 .O � O � �• � � J aUi � C
( � � cU . � C r L V 0 O U �� f�] �. � 6 V � � � �l DU O V > E r � C
d C � � N C C y N � C D C � � 7 7 .� N ") U 'J � � � O�
'�.J' Z C c x -- ` E o � � ' n N � � 0 3 = c _ o o ° N � -a -- � 4 m � > i m .
� 'c ° �%# � c = � u � �` o ° u o � .o E _ o y 2 ° � o a a � � � a ? n � a
Z o n � ` 3 c� � o E o.� _ � :� m � o - u n r � > - v = =
!.: �. 4 o c u c+ -' > > r .. � � m � = m`o s `o
5 � " .p�''�., � a � � ii � t� N � o ° `-' � c � � P 3 -° ' v -- _ � o o .� -
0 � �;. S� � � m � � V ° m N J �o v � � �` � r''' '-�'' � � > o '_ s � ^°+ `a�
t J � $ = � � � � 4 � 3 � w � � d v '_. `o ° �
Z �Y'' � -- � z E � 'c u o � 4 �-' - ° n o =' u c N " r � ° u 3 r a = E .
' O r� � � _ � o ° = o u '" v o � = � ' G v c ° c� ` � � �� � ,
� - � ❑ ° - c u = - o � o u c o ' ` _ - ° _ o.
o � ; n o _ - � o :n � o �� �- � F 2 `o o j p 5 0 � -� � ~ `
Z ','� o o =. _ n � n < � o _ _ � N ' � ti
O �:- u E ° r� u 3 �° c ° � ° ? a �i .� `c� o . '" = y a y c3i o � � ° � �
Q '�, � ° � > > � o o ° o u u i u o � -° i ° " p 2 m � °.� � � °� �
�_.. � _ o r � m l � � _ � � n p � o � � o a_� - p � o
F t-�'�.-. ° ° p d-�' n u � u �v � -r �-o �= � ' -, ° � S .�. n � -° N c ' J �
N 5 L rv c r. � = � Z rv _ � c _ = ° ` _ 3 n � �
� �� S � � G " � p� p � � � = O n p ^ � Q L ° .. � � c r., � � � � � ` � =
�'_ u � s ° n � '.� � o 'o 'n 'o � "u = 'o = ° = � v o J � � o E � o °
u, ' ^ f l V i � O ' J J^ y 1 J fJ " y .i 1� h
.-1 _ `p � � O . 'f � V i V N .'J fi N fJ ` Q V � '� 'N J � C V . -
�—r r ^ O
�� t't _ _ VE C � �
•,�'
O p _
iX° f . �
_-, V ^o V y > _ u
=s�� N C � r U V T � Q � Z
" � V " -
- y p Vl .�.r N O � y ` V ? � U � 'J
��' V - � V V' v > V = .'"., " = C
�i I'_Ti_- � Y O � ~ C ^ � N Q .+ C � 'C n
m R-� o r U F c� u ^ O _
1 �'`^'{r_.. � u O � = F � p d V .-.�. � �n =' V
E � u o � � ° c o � _ ^ _ '3 u a u
.-. � ;nc =' -� � " ? - `, - o� V
�-= � � v o n � ° >' J � o � u a = . vCi
u T�`- ' � _ '_] � 'C � � . O � ._ j U
��o V�- v U �v > O a O — � � t � O G � o N
{/� -1�I1j: J � G r = U' � �� ._ F �
"tJ_ C � — � ` - ' � O \
_.�:� � r�* = p � -� � - _ O o C � p ''n � T�
� . ..r J J � _ M � U� J i ' G�
C F�? V � = .�_. p 3 J '�] y � �' V f_+ ` 3 �
•_� p _O`_ j p � i � Z � % �CJ .`-�-. � �> � � r ��
y nu_ o o _ � � u � u u .�— c v v� i- o O—
`�� v � — a = p � ._. y � _ 'p �O
� �-4- ' � � � u ti a = - o _ � = � = o 'v O
y V 3 � � V C Z
-�'_ V '�] 'J X V v� '� _ - - � V ". .
� i `J ` - - _ _ _ � O
_:_`-: n � ` V ` a � v _ ° _ ° _ C' � - �N
-V= S _ .. :n _ m < ,. o a _ m n -
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page No: 90
� �
> _ �
� � > �
mv �
� Q > > > > a ,
o m � � . � � �
� � � 3 > > � ,
L L
O " U U U U ' p; _'� '
� p. O O O O T . '
. z � � .''. Y U �
u u u u !
p `o o t
- c c � ..
q O D 00 01 O
m fJ N Q '�C- V C
< = 7 � `I A � � .
G
�� u �C � 00 �0 � N �
O y y � d C �
C m m . m m O � � --� d v
C U V' C V p � y d
� - w m � m m oo v
v � 3 'c � 3 �c c +, c ,..
O pp O , O op L � m ` N ...
i= LL n �' u � ` o ° o - 0 3
-o c v m c
C � � t C T . C V V U .
v r�� ti i, m w .°.' °° u a '_ v w .s.
,, o m � `w '
Q> o � _ u � o � �.� "^ o . � N ' o � a � � E a� 5 y .
' m _' w ._ ... .�. o c x v � s a v m E v 3 o u m o c = v a °�°^ .
. � v `w E � o x '� n 3 � `o �r `w � E ° o � .o c o p O Q ._ _ J ` .
� E m c� v Q n o- m o a m v:, o ` m o w � E o ° a 2 � '= z a a w � ° '
Q E n °' n ` a `^ � $ s « a '� � m Z' f° ., a " � °° �o .m. v Q
. � � v o ` � O N � � ` n � 'o o a 01 d -a a > ` � N o � N � o a
U' ° m � . " m v o .>. .°:
� Q � � � ` � 'm` � o N ` v a N m w ° 1 � o a � v n c � ��
C V �p O � 5 C O C p 'J �� N N O y . C � �y fJ p `
d c `w o " c o c N ? ` a � � c P' � E 9 N � mro `o m v .°- � .c w a n E n '
U' Y a � � � n o m o Q E m o v o v o � ° 9 °�' °�° m 3 « = v o o .
Z y n > � �=' - vvro y � 4a � � vrv � n. v N « � N >
F" m " c o .' v Z o -�o _ n% a m N u � m � o o .an '� w N �> $ E � o
� � Aa� z rl v3p � nn � oo � � oomd _ � '30 ��
0 ,� Z - E � .- ' m a N G '« o � - m -
W ? v v 9 0 � y o o � � y u.� � � � � _ �o N °.� � ,� m y ° y E m
O C O O C v Q v
K n o y v w m � a u �' m n � � ° m � o > > O' v v � � a N E E w >
'o w 5 'm 3 0 � o 'c Y v a o Q w a n °� `o D � � '.- i E
Z 'j � m 3 v c -° v �� o �c � n v o u o � � v r u m N v c � 'on u s ',.. 'v �' .
¢ C � � O O C � u O� U '�- N N "' .vf+ 7O C O d N � q C � W � i U O � L Z � '
Vr ' ., o ." a o r �� . z � o v 5 ° `+ .°- m � �' m v °v '_ ° o a m � m E 3 � 5 a '
C m o c�i m '° y �^ .. � a c ¢ « �
Z O c^ � = ° � � a a � � � = v o � °-�O m a � 3 v ° � o � v. m .` n
K � `� f° ° o .'-' v v � m c � " p m � m v L m �� °�° p > _ � > � - �
- v v
� � a o '° E = i0 v � "�'- °�' v ` v 1O � u � 3 'o �= � � y � a' N `w `o z °a u o
Z L C '� _ 7 V ��0'J p D N '�J C 7 C N j �, V � O O W N � m 'u v0 W F C O > .
p m -' E ci Q � _ � ° ° w o ... ° v ` v _ � h Z w �
' � ` w o 3 u o v v v '° m � v n m .y, 0 3 >. ._ m Y .x m � n « v m m
-o v o � � o ti .-
� � m n � v .n '� .. o v �, n m � � � � a Q o o v a y u i a o
Z n c - > -- « c = � v . v n._ v � o a o o m� 3 � o c
O y w . � a m C -d � a .V �n m Y w v - E .c « w w v 5 � a v - � s
� � -• � .> j v � E o.m `o � � � v u � m � m 3 ° � '-' m u Y = E .. N `� � _
� � � tNGi C � n C O N � O u 'm� m ., 7' C �^ � � 'w 0 O S]
Ca7 � c D a u � o ° � ° E m M � o � � -°o m 'v v E '�' v .E E � v � o `o p m
~ O m O u O � N V � m W Ci n N � � U N L E � � C �OG 6 C j S p O O v Q N
� ^ � � .v . � E N � « o �' ` ` � ` N $ �'^ a '.. J '-� 3 ` E 'y v
= > " "c � �°-° '�^ � o '� u m �c `-' � .�-..° o E f° o`o a+ :o �c v 0 � Z o � w e`°i v � Q
`r, � 3 m� - « a �' „�� v`�i �.� 5 �E ° t u°. n v m E 3 0�. m ¢ m r � n � n v
_ �
�
�
C
O
• �
n
E . °
� m
A a
� �
m -
N �
� n
� �n
C O C .
v 3-.: ::�;',
� o . c� �..; .
a p o'
� N
O O
� Z
O -
� U
C N
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paae I�'o. 91
> _- � �
� __= - > :.
L^ � = v. � U
= L- -- � -
_ j � — � � �
_. .''�` .. c ��__ - J i
I ^ _ — -
. o �-� -=5 v p
� °
_ . . . __ . . _ _ _
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page N . 92
> -° "-'
� o .
C � N
C Op � O V
� ¢ > L �
� c � U .
o " u p..:,; _
. . . � °c `o T";::-'
¢ � U
u
c
0
R
m
� o
o �
u
E X C ,
v o
v� m �
�
E `> o
i= o 0
e � � _ � E
o ' cr c hi °1 m � o �.; �
u v v s o �o o `o' o m °' v v $
_� o o ? a � � t
� _ � _ _ c � �
� E E � ° `w v � � � E w n '?v '� � E E � °
v v u a = v a `o � m � E v v- �
y n � o na > v '" � ' > m a � u � o °" m
� _ -o N _ c a � m v c o � o v �n c - � .
o � � a � ° m �n � a � E w ns mE °�° a ° '^ � a �
Q : o . o '� ' � c � _�� - � o o '� .
� . � v = r m � a ,? '_ v � 4 �v « � .o c w �2 :: � . ._ = oo .
L N � O - � rJ O. EG - d O . N p� .
A
O w m E q u � � v m m v `o ` `O E w E o w m �°o > ,�.
� = � m Z' w � _ .. x - ` c v '� �> = � �
a v a 3 �° � _ � � '" v .-. 01 � x � ° - � � v a o � �
Ur � o m N .°.' m o N � v ,t P; _ '� : _, � °' u o m
" s `o o. v ,- n o ,,, � ''^ � o `o Y E � cs ° -o
z � C.o m v � � �. L o? 3 E - ° o u .n o a�i m � . a � v '
�' m � c - w � c � m 9 � a m s m o E • 'q w
p o o `0 c 'o ° � ° � .� m v a o n "v � o o � 'o
v V .= v � v H n .
d � ` C i N � W 'O � N V
W � C d O 'O W D 'V e0 J � C O � J � o0'p O 1] N N C N O 'O d
� °o o �- °' = " v �" `u � v _ � � a° v _ E � '° o � `' �
� v c� E m �v '� � oa E > x. .. p v o r N o � � E N �v '� .
Z � � � � L .r. ° �E o o � c m � m� 1°. � m = m a ° n v u '� 'L-' � .
� C n � � � C O E n i � O C T Y � U C > N ✓ O v O vvi p O A m � U'"
O = N � t� r T . O 00 - O - U
Z D ?c 'o °_� �� n a� � ° - � m° w c � E a n z'� a m '� n �- .
` �" w ° �" Y o �.�i c c � ... ;� � a« �y y v y p m v o �.., m �
p � o °m .��. E v �o 0 o u �'�n c „�m, .� u .G a m m o � n v a o °w .fO". E m
F a � N � � U n � m � E � o m � � � ,� m � o _ � Y a � N �
Z yCn .. 'O 'S�' d � n'pd � n � � mo � � c D � O UCn ... 'O
. � o 'm E °a u -�o '� y � � v � � ° u � n °w =°. v m w v o �m E °a u
� m v c � o o E o t a b oo c � o � c � w
Z q'm .��. � °- � w � .m o N � r m �� v w o m m = E c �._ y _ n
O `o E c° c c o �v '�O _ a t a w m = a 's' '`N° ° m 'w �n�'c° `o E c � � .
F- � n -o ` = o H '2 'V' ' � � o � � - � o ` - t a o m � '� _ o . .
Q � `' '° � ' m 'o °' a j v °' � � � w 'o w � `o c � w v '° ? .
V' ° >_ ° u w. :. r � `o °v � � � '^ 'n a � n E r � o m � >- � .� -
1- m „ � o s o �E . w m c a a o � � > v o m. = -� � s
� c r'o F C �oo o `o � � � � aEi c p o0-a � m v � 'v� � 4�'
G � W O ry - W � C ' V � d D ry A
� v > -o 0 3 o F . v m y � � c � oo;_ o w a
� mv =, c = mE > . N E '> o .- � e� m
q �� � �'n � o o 'o o n _ �v � � ° E v °- � o w m c � � ° o. v m .
°- 2 � '�- > o > � " w � °
r `o � a " 'u „ � m � 5 - vf0i °w c v E �° ��� oo u :a w F `o ° 2 �
c e, �
o �
> > u - E _ _ _ = . > > `>
�
w'
d
O
¢ �
E �
- u
c �
� a
� u
m -
� -
- ��
c. o"
v ; `
o N. -.
6 j'O .
� N
O p
� Z
O I
OU
a �n
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paae I�o. 93
— � v �
>
'� �o
`= � :�' � > o �
� _ ; ,
- ; -�t:� - - -
� .�. _ - U J
. \I � �. - - u � �+ . o
.. � ° � � `o > _
� � � � U
- � U U
T
J )
.. � j � p �
.� hYY - n v ^ �
.� �(aw�: � _ = �
�F
� � _ _ ? ,J � p
U� � _ � O � G � y � v. �
- v. - .�j '� .
� �'�: fJ > � " o] 7 ' iJ
n {{{p��yyy � n O � O - S �
V � fJ . V � J � .
_ +iR- ' 'y^ p � U p �
'r a � � � J � V � �. N �
�'Y = N O � r ? ` f V i O C p � C �
,a`.' c C � - n r� - J � � N m U � P O � O
� � � `. C � - - J ` C � � _ _. � J < O P. C � O " � O ? _ U ^ O
.X:c ., >� c ^ _ _ n n ° � � C1 � n o`� ` - 3 0 � ic ? t :°
=.'.zr4 ° o- _ � c u � _ � � _ N - � c� � �: _ � oa � �
t.:c� � � � � u s � �n h ° � � � -�- � = o o .°_ o � � � � � o � '
� �y� = � O ° _ �' o E o' � � L o ° n`o � „ � ."�. E ° ' � `o � � �° u '� E
a ?}� = � '... ^ V > � � v > � = � E `a o ° o_ ''-' � � `o c - o _u " .. � `o
� � ^ ."', v°i ; ° � 2 0 ; 'o:= ° " `^° - ° ^ n ;. ° `c u o °u 'o >_ ° - ❑ v o
� '� = V ° o - ° '�^ � .'= ° � a � E c y ° _. � � � ° u � a � '' > � H '`. u
K 4: � U = C ^ ` r O Y^ _ �. i C V r n' h N � � C W .+T
a y.... _ O ` a N _ V y O O J J G O ? � v > O N � � 00 - U V �^ U y
Z � � � U L C u O 7.O U' � t�' i a v U n � .�i 0 'O i O ],'O � _ ' � n V = .
p b i ]p O p � �. u x O C .- � • O U u U � V Y 1 D ._.
F �5�.9 U O � � J ^ J v`�i f. � .�.� � �-' " f C � � � � � O `
ti: C � � •v a O _ J _. � N V •- � �
� $.,.v�'.',. ' `o_ � u �� � t�i n � u ° o r o ° o �: � � .5 ° � ' � °r n � - - '
a � "� � -' x [ .. u " � n o n n � �. i °n n n c a n o � � p � n p n o �c
�"A � v�:j�' ` V N � ._ o � ._ �- u .� U j m T'' vOi ` O-� L" i � V p � 'O
C � u � , j � � � � �' C u � - � � � L O = - ~ J � o � u ai n � E 2 .. _ u
u n= nn - ` '-- p •
' �� ` '� = ci r - - . _ � - _' N .
Z � � �"`� o � o s � � ° u n P E � E = u N �- u ... u � = � c -° ^ a u }.. � c -
i Q � ° �. `^ o � _ .�, o u n � ' o � .. u ° > ° - � � � o o -� � � E u '^ o m
_ o �'�-- V y �- " c' n� c a $ 'H o � ' °' a n � � J = � � u o ° - o = u � c�
Z p � cFau ,. o u � �� �- o n _ � � a � a y o �n n v � - � � � � 'a' u ° a E � �
v �" ' ' 'o '" � � n � � ? � = = � E ,"-- >' ,`Jy n y ° °n� � N = ' n � o � „ �
� O O C �L S � � O O '� � ' V v : C C -" ._. r: � O L � b ` m d V � 0
O ' � ��`Y �' C � �_ 7 V V � C O t d� V ,`'J O U C > O '� L T~ O U .^yi O V � J � C]
Z y�t�- � � O vl j � '�n 'V r "' 3 � _ r O- V d " � u L O � � � " _ C � > �
-�% - �� ,; -� a '" .�i o � o - � Z c .. „ c a F
p P p `o � o u � c �m o 3 � -V' u. � n o Z � p ° ° v � .. �E o �E 'V" � ° n�
u a_ u c
� ,�t,.`�d' o = u � .�� �o� � c � _ '� - �o u � � o ' � ? o 0 3 u � `o a? "_ � o
n 3 - o �
. Z i:�" � n ° � � v° ^ ° 5 � ° ° �� � 'o v � � � o E N d � -� - � ° n °> o � �
O � � 3 - � . vi � � 3 c �� v . ` - 0 2 >N � ° � n n � :
t V � � � O � �
Q F�E � > � � m .U' .i � U m v Ya � �. n � y � tui = c � O O m > � J �:n > � �
Ur h v ` � U tC. �C.a pi v� � 'O 'pi � V � V � � U � C ti j D p �'1 r O � � �' G j O
~ 'd-'��-i -� - = - ' ° u � oon� o > 000 � .=� m � ov v3= � � �- n .
� a y i `v � � 3 � n= � a� 3 ` l � � �`�-. � z � � � u � o '� n� r ° ' � ° v .
� c � � � � n v � � `o c � v � � u ` � � � � ` � o ` ° = �cr o E ° � r .
f� .y ° u = � ° '_' y = � � � 000_ � �� n � � o �'� n � uy � uoc
� ° �
°.:'e n � o? = n� u � � - o 0 o n o m c? c ° m ; o c+ - o'` � u ` ` o e
'i� 7 U 1 : �. . O = c 3 - St t] t] � � _ Vf r ... V L 7 '�S> � (' . .
:�
Jf 9 C
�Fw; ? � O � > � = �O � a .
_ _ _ � y V > v . u Oc Y
^=,i � � J ^ v� :. O V C v C - �•
i.; V f. _ '_J � V � O V u "
? y � y
�. v]},�.".` O C O O V O O � ` C �
p �ic.. ;A � � p � u C J ` O
E {'-� � - " � -' � r+ C =
�r. u _ � ° _ � u _ �� u 2 � o "G
- _ - - � o n m = � �
n .'..� � ` '" ' _ ' O - _
V i V ` � ' ') J " N
� � � � �� � V �
� _° 'o � '�3 � -' ° °c o c 2 o u
�, ',n . 3 � .. u = _ .
'^ �u^ " v � � � - � � � � � � O�
_Ce = � O ' N � � 'n ` 3 _'�.' '^' `
__ p ��! V y p p O 'O � _ V n �.=
:.1 � �QN ^ _ ^ 7 C cV.r _ V U p � -
, `u f`?2 �n° � ,_ o = > = - = - - ; _
-� G _u_ - - -
'C_ 1 r�-'• � '� � lJ y0 �p n a p D �j _ �
Y � � C c • C v p 0 �-
�G?� f.J ' V 'J (] V O � � C � ? [�V
fU- � � - - _ - V
. " vf o � o - ° C ° � V V O
.:-U'c _ ^ ^ v H _,
-'Q r u `- ^ u � v _ �' V �= � � � v ' Z
' " - _ � ..
'0= ' cr N c � ° � u c v �� o � � O U
S o� �n -� ' o � � � 3 � � - . 3_ � . � �n
"c:>
_. _ . . . __ _ __ _ . _
Resolution No. 20li-160
Page N . 94
� �
' � > — _ �
" � _ > .
c C � < a �� 'o o �
� 00 C � � N � �
'� c s m ,�,� � o m v � U,
O " U �n ' : "a -
� `o N CI — 'C _ O.:�t
n `o v a c o ° o � � T�.---. .
� >= m " = = n�
. 5 -� ^ o o n �.+ a U
U � U w 3 u u o m �
c
o -
o i9
=° o �
c " w
G J C �
o E v
u � ^ .
E ° -° �
v
o > "
v V
N � Ti L
E � > O
r � n
� -o w
o � ° v w 5 m v .• `.� .s�.
w � - � .., a Y . - � a n .y -
� � m � � � -O � Y N °1 -
a � ' C a � C � � � C � y � O 3 ..�
n J ' O 00�p � C � O �n � N � C � v C N � p '-I
�. � L' ` � W G $� '_ d O C N v m O '-' U L � y �.. �
m t m ° t ° n o `v . � `° � 3 '^ a v y°� '3 �E '"° oa '°
� " y � n 3 u n a v ` c a '-' '
� a i 'E a o � � v � 1° � ` m o v o �a � a a E E r� �
E . "= n v v �E -o vv � - �� w a r
O � c � a � co � v� n `n n v v w u a�i � � � o � a � w �
C '3 � �o - - ._ w � 3 .. -a G n v = � > n�o � -o _ N � o .
2 o N .'_' �c o .�'o v °1 n v `= � — o `w m w v �
(7 o E n � 3 ofOO n � v E �° ° >'N " `' v `° `^ ° o `nt �
Z s � ... ii E u s _ v > v w � � a a ° � v ` v v v N .
H .. n .`. s n a '" � v o w 'V °' 3 n eo � � in
5 0 � n � y c� `i � n o o n w n ._ � `v �:.. y o m � ra
p ` -° = � � o � ° � n Yo`^ � vt o � h '^ a
a ° mva .. `0 3 `" '^ E m � . n .i
0 0 °1 .c o o v �� i°
� m .'_ m� '^ '= � o w w � � � "' s � 3 E °- `o o- � � � `v � v 2
c c «, . m - � >
p � m � � m � m � m 'eu E n 'd p s '3 v � y � a v � c ° o v � � m r.
� o �, 3 � - > $ a "' �o. > " 1O ai � ,t.. � _ � ° m ` m
a. � c _ ovv ob w �� � r� '3 � E E3 n � m m _ � � m `y a .
� ` q � � v � O 0 ❑ y C � ' � O � Y J C � N 2 v � � � � -
Z CO OAG � � 7 N ¢ � O 6._ ✓ � �' � � .0 N �� U n N � C d V � y � A d
y d C N N
K � � � a'v � c > c u o m H 3 s �' � a m ° .r. .t. 3 °o m a E ° � � m .
O � o n � „ ° a >- �� w � m i Y � o � `o o v � :°p�+ A o � w
a u y '" a E E u o o � o �x ., o E w . a o m � i v
Z �` v -O _ � � ° a `o D n r 'x v � � $ ¢S � -c � E w vUi > o 'E o � q
O� w '" _ : t `o w � 'u � 3 w y o n v u -0 1° � w y � o ,.. o m °
-a o1O N � w 3 u m n v c `o .. v s � 3 � � o � � ,� m m � '�' a` �
�y r] '-' ✓ C N Y 00 C O C
Z m�o v ._ o a - o 0 0 � E' v � p a n ° °"0 3 u � y � v �
� �+�'i a u °Y a � .v. u � a` o 'm m u n ..v. u m a N �� � m 'o '� ° c °
F" � Z v C C L C U O O N O ry L U •D ta/1 ~ N �J � � O Y G N � y V
f U C C d `C_' N C N C u W V i > N pj 6 �= M � � m C � O � a m n �
y c o ao � .n E v _ � � � � a �- `: E
� � `-' �' o m n � N o 3 �n �c � :°. .y �
6 5 0 > a � '° a o n a w w a' m u m °c v v a m m m u a � m 'n v i c
o N � � � v v � u .o � . � a � w � °' = .. u h o m d � E s o "3 . o
� a � " E � 0 3 ° � m � � c ° � w Y �o �n ,� ° 3 'o o. � o y 3 .
ao m '^ v � v � '^ `-° O N O O a O z a� � O v n � a Q � p V o0
' 6� ' �J 6 v C � p) � '� d '
� � vi E c �-� E m u° ra 3 ._ ._ _ ? i > . ° � � o E
N
� O
N � � �
L��J w � 'o ' J
y � u r� —
� '
� � `o y � G
n � o w — u
E ' 4 � -
� LL `o i n j
� c n a v�i
- � >
V � a :�
c � � o � � U
� E 3 3 c � .—�,
E � o � p �
� o u � a � >�
vu " ` `o a G.
— � � 3
o � �=o o - �
d n c .n v v . . p o:'
Z � N s � � N
- o '�-" c � FZ
_ fv ° N � O - .
� a � v 'o � ' � �
Resolution \o. 2013-160
Paee No. 9�
>. �: �
>
� u � U
= L
- G � j
, = ` u �
o p
C 0 T
a U
0
f.
L'
C
O
u
V
f
� o in O � V
�n 'J � O _
� O = � - � O �' nJi .� O J _ _ -
J 3 r. 3 U = U j U > = U �> � C = N _ _ �' O
� V O H V J �. (] O` C 'J.fi D ^J N '� = = 3 "
.. J C .+ '� � d �n � 2 U V1
c j � -� � _ oo :� 5n= '^ yVn � � n `o � NU >� � � Y $ �
. G �E �:: '-' y '� - 0 � O O 'J� E F � m J J d O > � C V �L N
Q V F �^ �C U � C .. j 'J V O n C j � � `r ^ J fi - �
5 � :� u f � u n c _ r ° V ° : r�a ` - -° '-' o u _ a ` U n _ _ = a �
� � n � = = u = o n > u '' u E � =' u =' = c r � .' � � c
O = = v c = m n - � o � � E > �... - 0 3 `o_ � Y � - ° n ? 'c'{ o � '
a 'c � .� � ° N o � - o '� � � a n c� �'c � o y � _ ` $ n c .. o '' q
� N C C `
U� m O 'NJ� V�I L C " . � O O d V F r O U ?N y - C � r ^J� V � p n G f .
Z 'J L � .. � O = V ` C ' '� V � ' � �- C � V U " � y. 3]
F _ - n N n V � � _ � � 6 N n C� D � V n U ^ � O '3 U U J " n C N .
� v o n � ' 3 "� � - - ° � .. E c n � .= o' o =� � � � o ' V � �, ,.
� > � � � v: � i.�j V C � O N= ? d� .� V p 2 . E � � V
a � n >� �L '' � � a n b a- E E ._. c r. � � n � E 'a� v o � � ,`o_ c `^ .
a. '^ c o -a ". m m n. N n " a
- W � u c > n � � � u ` E � a n o c � a � o a u o � � E "r � � � 2 v�i ?
� p o v � � `^ ,� `o " _ u � ° � " ° � „ � � ° v '
. C! � C � .�.. ` 'J , C � ` r: 3 � ... �J 6 O � . � � O O N n J - � � U '.'�
✓� a c o ,°_ � o = ° o o �� � c = ° °_ � _ n .. c .J V ° n 3 - v � `o `o m �
� n V � �, a o ., F o o r o y u . :. v '° _ = ° v °_ . � 7
c E , � f _ p � -J-o u - o o w > `o 0 2 � :n - = 3 o p
Z V �� n� " � 2 c ° �$ p° o v°i o u j m� ° t `�' Q n � '^ m P � � °_ � � �- '° �
� E o � � m E o � m'- � = � `o -° :� "' � o �• � � � H • m u
p � ... ,- � - N ° � c °a � 5 = _ ° 'v. � � o " n � _ - � 3 .. in
F- a =� ° � � o ._ = u '- y u � o ' ° ` = v � r �' " ° o ° � � a '
Z o '_ o '� ' o � m > _ v o r � ; a E v ° 'c > : = c ° o "' - = ' `^ �
. O .� p ` � i u O > _ vf O � - C V v� � � "J � J � CJ .�.+ T :J 1 T O V C V
2 � O U j i t O T " 2 tVi v d �'J O r, O - ") c�i > :: � � V : '�] �. t/� a C
Z . .. � ° � N .? o u n m c � � o � c E ,J m o �. o °_ = o N u � c:� � m
O 'c n o - 'o = u u `o `0 2° � �� � x � > u c �� = � '�-`� 3 0. � o o � �� 3 �
� �� - C - 7 J � O ' - l L`_� � U � � ^1 � C
Q '^ °. � °-' 'v '^ � 'c = � � :: : °- E o � u u = n v � ° ' u n 'n o � °v o
V� � C '-' :. O i ry ` � � � E O] O � U n C C � � v C - m G C '� � s �� .`. p. T
'V N ._ �. � �^ _ ._ : U '
� � :n � � 3 � ti c � cr C ai ° � F- u <' a �� � n � o > c � u � � .�. t � �
C 1" � �. n C � U � C
� O � � O � "q � 3 " 1 CJ � .. 'J � v C � � O ' y > V O J � > O � 3 O G.
Q 3 . - y ' o _, > .^ u n `^ - : o - � E �. :� � ... �
?� -° o v 3 �c o � C `o � 3 '� 3
__ _ _ _ _ _ . _ _ _ . _ _ . _
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee No. 96
o �
V � � � T� . L \ >N n p
c � .. E v � LL � E v > �
m o�c j � > a c v o ° � > �` _ o O nJ
^ < = m v 'm >" S `o . v n � 'm>" � �
OC J �0 L m W > O W _ t tc W > U �
p L' U Q V N w0 — U U E '>O . U N "-O C C'::
� d � ` O N d O � � tC > O N d O >'��..
U ).� T= 00 � N O.� T= 00
> � C 7 "' C U
� V > V � U C U m � N V � V C
C v O O N
� TE m v� a O
� Q N
GO v C � � V L O V
. n p � $ a _ � ' ' .
° � � -a -' � �
� v ` � '^ -
d � C " E _ i C �p
� C E . �' L Y C N J a�+ � N
F N v o 3 �o � � ° �3 � v
� � � > � v v p � > >
' o v o � N � � a L
E � c ° ° c � � ° ° c �
� a _ n` n a � =a c n m
v
, o ' ✓ ` m y E oo � c 9 °r m
O y � C C N in y C 'O Y C � - �n 'O V L'
C N t -p v n J H O .- C i C �
� m U � G .v. � p O = ') ." u N i oC0 O � v 0 C T� v � C v _
� " :s � u � „ v -° `o u a E - � o o � a o �-' E � 0 3 0 �o � � �
.. N - �. m E �a o h > � � > `w ��w m L w � p � m ¢` w o w m ° ` 9 a
� E z � a o u _, c� v .. o a ` � , Y a 3- . E -O � c o �y w .
`v n c 'a v -o m a y m m o v m
Q a=ocyEw y. Ev � $ n � ay°°ivs °i o � cs = � m ` vo �m Evv � .
� c � H � c w � � m f0 E c o E � c o N � .� v� w E 9 o E E�= �
l7 v `o � o a ._ m E " � °' � � o - � � h o '.-. .. Q w v � u 3 " u = v Q
� a v o ° m u c c� m p c '� v ° v n m a � '_ m � _ m y i ¢ . v `c n v .
do u � � m n� o �.: o r m o E � �o � � � a = c 'c o E ,'".• � ° E v . '
a o o E E � " � a °pv > c � �m c � p d ' 'E � � s y
('J a v a'a o o v .� v a � � v � � S E « c o � `' � « = � F v m p y °_° � ,
Z �n � .� >�� = � v m � m E_ m ° °° w � ° � - � u i ' �o ° � a o ',� '
�` C � � pp C U - C W � 'p V y d
K � �N C Cl y '� � O E N �u �N u � m O .� Ol 1]O O d N N C � OU C W u U > � � .
p � � ^ E ,. E N v � ` m o c E � E a �J �'Oa " a � � yz v = .
w � m v m n w « '� �'n � y o °�° `o o � D E u a . � � = u q a m�E � w n ' N
CG n -E a � E L v °°.n p 'v � v � n Y °0 � m u � a � v � �`m, - o � c �
a m o n m m`o u ° _ � w � 5 � ° � °9 `� �n � .c � v w � a � a m
Z � � � v � � c c E > c 'E � -o '° v N E E m E w Yn � ° � _' o° a � o v °- `� _ .�. .
Q C �o N v 3 E E 'p m .� w >� `o m n .�^ o m-O v � ° w y v o 0 0 � y v �` N m �a . .
� � m o r m�� �c o m w c ` �' v c ° v c t o °� q $ 'p- o `° � � � pa`o .. � � m° �
m
� o �" �° y�_ n E � `v �� �y Q.-° `o_ a .E = � �n � `o `a G � v - � v o � N m � :
0 0 �
p � o � � p v E ° v o t v Z n � _ � c �w ° n o >-N E '° `-' o ¢ 3 ° '.
v V r � C C E C � pp`� a O N u � ry O H � N �= C .�
1= a � � m c m i '� w " m � -_o w v o. � ❑ '.. � � � m c E ' o c - n .
� � v � o c a y a 4i � � m a p v � o o a Q o a c ai
Z m`o n n � oo n .� �, 3 c o m m � � �. a r c o � . � Y � . � o � .
. � a' � in - c a a
O c � .s. 'i v m r� o `o_,c s 'D � ,c m .� m m � v .-i v .s. `-° -o °� Y = c E « .'". � � a
LL '^ v c - — F ` 1- v m � n �ai � v �n in
O c > � .�°- v m = -s' N � c N � �� '^ N E o `�° vi aa 3 3 ° '^ >'-m -a � � ,.`°_- � w =� .
f u � m oo � E n '� a �+ � n > � - m v t E v �. v d 3 - o � °p m - � 'L-' ° v
� �' `G ai � � . A ._ '—� z.� " c
l7 .�. '�° ? F r`va j � _ � a J i Q `n u "n � N c -°c N .. o` � � c v ° o = `_ _ o G '�^ '
- �- c o i � o °„ � o E « � w �°o °' o i°n °1 :' > m m o a � E w ¢ 3 n h v w o a °'
� �'.G � n�.. �-� mi ' ` E � m " '° � vc Eava ° a � °' mc '3 3 '� EE .
" E m m � c � `o v E '^ �o a v o aC m o E ° m u y � m o Q `o '_ o
� O. .. .:. V .�. O m .T+ � U' N � ` O :.+ G W i i' O �' E ` 00 C N .r � .J .+
° v v � �v o ° o w � c� � v o �-° a � w " m �� a > n� � u � � � a m � .°-' '�¢-' �
vi : $ s � � �a E H '> `a � E n 3 ti E ,t.. H E `G �n n E n v `o r�+ � v m vi 3 n E .
u � `o �
a' w
o'a o �
n� Y p
V C d
v U
c E � ._ _
n a .. U
_ o � > �
� m � v a
3 '
- °' � o
� U
c a 7 - �
m �n � m ,.. = .
`^ � w � � O �
_ � « v s
� y o -0 6 0
a � `o n o ? _ .
v !� � .
c Y
y � o d O -
LL � > 3 �o
D o L v ' O O
� c a � E Z
a z � ,3 O T
" o ^ o U
3 3 3 n a �n
Resolution\o. 2013-160
PaQe 1�' . 97
r ° c n
= u ' - > N
` C � � - > J o
_ O � .] O � � ¢ = J
:.^�) D [ U U f^ -> V U l .
' � C _ �` c > ' O OT .
u n ` ^ - -
Cc° ^ n u U
c
o �
`o �+ �
v .. O - N �n ] _
C ^ O �
�.. � i j y ` N _ r � �
C � r 3 C J r
� C � 7
Q .J S� ... L .�' ` O J V �
� � - o . 0 3 H � o =3 �
, _ - J v > > _ v _
� � " c o - _ �
U - V � L - +
� ` O �0� � — _ '1
F ° =: n � t = - � 3
N V
p� C p � N y p ? —
> � �' C � = 0 3 T O C C V — r
b � O O f' O Jf j � � u U C O °' D � � p '
� � V r — V Q � y (i 3 v � `J � O U ^ O U' i C— T' � �
3 a v o N � o c .� �n � � 0 3 � °- ° � � � °�, ? ..: = ° 4 �
� � � x � � t� �� � „ �Q,��i � ^ ° o N = � o � � � •°- ° - ` n
Q � J C n O C O ,L_, W O V 3 i ti D C C '� y ' O in O .�
rt = 3 ' � _ � E u d � � �, � � � = � i � o • � � n
� = � � � - � y � ° � � �N u 3 "' � o .E �, > o ... � o a ` �
p _ c a ' � u C - a "o .. " n � o 0 0 " ' f n
� .� _ ... .� N a u ✓ " `. � o 0 0 �n ° " n V " _ �_ �
u ` ;u u � - 3 n � `�- � u � m ° ° u h v = =
d v<i " = vGi �o' n n n 3 y � " ti u � ° �E � �i `'' � � .: � 3 -a u �
Z � o � � c G t � o ° E o ' o _ � - Y �n � � a c � � _ 5 � = .
-' v u u = � ` c ` '" N c ".�-,' � ._, = ° a n c`� o- � c c= s°
C u E _ y _n 3 0 � �n �v o u u o � � y^. u 'e °- v � o > v � - o ti _ .
p � `o ... � m � ` n a � � 3 � c _ u � 3 � 3 � = � `, u
C v � 1 C C � L" U 'J — _ f] � � _ � .J = _ � `�'' V ^ � O � � _ : > u
W N c`' u - ' c lJ o.` o � � < N s _ � — ° c a � c� c u o � o � N
C , '� � i 4 n ? -� v 3 � - - ` _ ,^- c o ,� J �n - _ � U c c� � �
� � u g � - _ 'n.= � 'a m � � U u N o � � = c � � n c "G c E � v. `o - - � Y '�
f Q c � `o `o � :' . u o Q y _ c = � � ` E o a o c ;' 3 a N `u � � � 't „ 3 � �
� � . O V � > j j J C•� O .+ `� J n u _ U r j C u E � J L1 �j � � V � _ � Gl
Z O Gt C V •_J O � O 6 � 1 7 " .-1 T C U `. O � V C U y Vf Y � �y �-'� � � V L
� � O � C .� fJ r ... ` O � ._. a G � J C �"` n F C F- O = - O
� � � 3 0 � � -' = v o r r � � � � � _ a u E '3 n c� � c � ° = c � �
F- � °- � > `o E c a � j o Q E c ° `u � u u � � c vi � ° � � c � � -
Z ° : 3 -� -' � � o E ' o � o � c ` - " ° �U ° c `o ,. � v � n .
T _. O �
O � ° � 3 - N � > � _ � ° � C ,°� � � �ma3 � �+ � � � = � o=
� � ° � � _ c � � u t � 0 3 n G � � ° ' °�� _ N � 5 -° ° � i Y °
� '' n � v 3 u `o � ,� o n � t „
Z � 3 � � Vv nv N � � � n �' 3 � T= E ... O < N c' " ; �° � �'' ° '�-�
O u � " N u c > ... o n � .� n � _ .. � � a �n vi � h r c
F- � b � ° - m �� � �+ = a J o ' r a a� oo � ° � � = � _ � � c
� ` N ? � � '� o o � ` o n n n c ✓ N y J y u ... u J � n u _ � � � u a
� n N � G � V
F ,- o u � `0 3 c " 5 0 � _° " � o � .�.�. -'� u 3 Z'�� u a ° o � - � °' '
C _ � _ _ � C U O V V !] 3 U � � = V ^ � fi C � � C U r'. C
C � .J V O C ` T 7 O V ? :� U .'�. _ _ O V V C ' J J y � J V
� � ` _ _ 4 ... E � ._. a� a o u = ' ' .� o � c = N a c ��
° >v ° _ _ .. ° c u : E z c � _ ' o � = o ... �, c n v = - > �=
o = _ < � J'i o n 3 ° v = u °u < ° � = � � a V J "� ° � 3 r � ° - _ � u
. ' " �3 = ... o v ° - `- u
� U� ' - - - E ? ° ° z n � ° �i = - c c 3 � ^�
c '�
O j �
v y � 3 Y
j O -
.-. 2
� U U - _ -
u c t � O p V -
� O O C � � p {�j U
� �6 6t L
_ c �o '3 _ � �J - �
- � � ; � n �
� .. _ U
C u � D� � ^ _
� _ C,
r � � v j j " _ � 1� .
� �n v _ O > TO
" C C V � ^ � �
.�,� �v o ,i .. ` _ _ i ; _
_'% o . , o _ ' v '� 3 '
' - . = o u rv o - :n ;n -
� .. > � "= 3 � y (� o
_ v _ n
oi � g : � '> = o0
? u � _ _ ` ° o Z
N C J �
° u �' `o u 3 � v -y
_ . _ . . . . . _ __ _ _ _ _ _._ .
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page o. 98 _- --
- _ _ � �,
> = - - -
� V � ': � � > N �
- > :`},.f` > > O 'rU
o � �
.. m t+.i3! m � 7
� � f�J � ' ', r � V l
� o .+r', � . i �'� � � o :i -
� c � o . �,- o `o T -
� ��n:t. > > > U ' ,
y.J; � . 'u 'u ' ,,
. c �-'h.i: o. -.��.
m
O j� O C Q r : ' L
r S�� v � � . � ,
m :' ° E n ,y.:. u v
._ _t�. o a v _i�i�;'. o v � .
� s=-= " -O = "�t��' - ° �
..-`h. � N `� { > d — .
O ?av"= 'J N ai 1��u'4N: O r�
u' `f6 CUL ' ;.� QN C ;
C �r � v � ' ��'�•!1 � .
n x�", o o � '�iE'�` o a ° y .
' � ` .. ....:..' o � u
c r� `o_ >o �=�"'` `o_ > � o
� �� � 2 � v o � .
a . n "3-"r.;. a` v r� n
F. �,� 3.
nc=',`
�K'� N tJ, O ii':: C r N ti
O ::^, � � �� " ,�-�
-p a`Y 3
� � �a ai p� � ci v .. 9 ��: O � � � Q � n .L..
r �t� u -� . u � �. � i C v � C �
o � u " ' r� z " L � E m .�:s�: o v - . o � � c o 3 c
v . Tr n ��_:, � r ? v - .°1. �`i�t: w m j _ � � °
= 't' � E "' E a ' � v � m a � '" r3 � ti `v O" �o � � a a v rv .
� w m v G `o c ]-�; �'-' o o s � o Y ��t � v � o.�'_ v '� � a .
Q " � o v .. 0 3-lti. ° r n � 3 v °c ° � , .°'i v v .i ri s a o
� w o a .. ° � � ° •� n w w .- N E u '.. 'S � � m `° io v o n
° m v m "?. � ° ,.°�. � c " � _ o � �, � .�. LL LL m � v �
n
O �E y c N E �k Y ` � � ° E ° ° v "s � o 'o c a u n v � � �N .
� _ � o v n E i:� � m c v a� y v i , m �� ° ° > > - E w 2 `� .
> > ., '° E " u
a =� � �c � p ° nsY;E o ." w `v � o ,', ' ° '. q « H m n 'o � �v � �
l7 � = '° � r� � S� � > v „� � m E 1 r: v o 'o -O a � s '^ m =
Z ? �)' y � � Xh.' m n `' m °y' c ' n d 'i'r•.. � a v � o � n m y �m . �
� E .L. � � � � x a� >i� y n N !� o '� � a �
F"' V r O � S W O N v ✓ N � .n g. U � O d 6 N u W
O N �n= � >� o ax, o .. _ � -c � 's,= c ;� °m " ` � 'm ` - E �
� � o a _ m a'.�:. � � m y � c - _r.c: w a; � .
a � u E :�:'i:, o m .= 'o v o � N v�;. m � w w v `y � � � 3
W � V � � C '6 d ''S�C� �� ✓ C L d E u W N �44ii: W ✓ O W, C m C T _ Cl
Q-' O 'V T' N O n L`R Q' J] _ : �. �'i N p . U W -� .
p � � 'o n E � � o r^"'� o � m o o $ � v � ; ` v m 3 c ° ° .D " w °' ° . °_� -
Z 3 0- v o c Y v c� m > > �."' c «. y w .. -c ° s -E c . .
Q c o � 3 ° o ��* m - o m a a a N �>+': n m � E c c � u m m .
' � ' v c a � y m m ' j°N o v v � '� u c �� o « o ¢ N N V y �ri a E
C � v � o � �'�, a r� > a f o v .o o „ V R E �
� O . w y � 3 � ° y�t� _ � `o v n � � v a 3' a � o > a a v G o 0 0 _
� � .� � i r o �i� _ � � � o a�n s v o v A � ,� �- " �
�- ��II � o > �j�1 u n � > u m � N m i , a` o c v�i � °c° � .. °�° v N
Z � L � — E f��T, 1'i N '� aL.r �i t C � '� 1 ,. � � � � L 'O �' �a p) � N
� 'c c v m � n p�s, v u � v `o 'x r o a i t' �` .v. c ° > '� `�,° E a n-
� y ` y � � m � U o o � n � � � � v „_ }y ,' _ w.'� � v .n v a w v
Z ° m c m y t��d� u � w w o -o v -° n'n �il.: m E = °= w o m - v � '
O F F .a � n i. U' °- .�'. n '+' N ,.� u E v r i i c m w ti � o � n E � a N .
yvi3 � >'"r' - 1^ u wv �o E = o �eJ. .� aE _ o n = >
f-. J v .v - o �,+.'� 't v u .n V .a o v v a `.'�rr�: m E v v � � v `o o � o i .
(� -' - � o o .,,,ar' o, ° .. m o m E a `-�' o �:i � � 1O n o � � y �> y o "u
F � n o � m? �i � a ° � m o � o � r �,-5;� v� u .o � n v '_ ❑ - v
C _ � f'J E C ` _J�� u C C C � � C C y u V N � � � C O C N
C l'i U C C vi C 4- ,i N N O O � m O O in 3 .. Q N L u0 j d O U � .C C
V � E � � � �..;- n _o m � � ? m �.v ux4^ . y � v o � v � � v a o �
° � c ._ . F;.h-: ,-� o ... � t �� ., c �, m ' "' 'i � " � c` m 3 a LL a n v
� o c .. `m� � 'L� ti a��i > > a o p '0 2 n ::'.-""t,_-', .-`�i, w °v `' _ '
� = c E [ 3 �n .. ui � � � n ,. m .._s.; �n E E � ._ 'c =
�. a.s�
i5�v' ' ' c
a v
. �3: .. .� y o � " � .L.
[� o w i _ w v o •� . K •
Tu
-i n� y rT� v v n�O n 3 . d �
��y., _. in.w o Y � v v � � = c �
c y TT•, - y a � y
� v v � n m o
�-�l`.' E n 'c� v � oo v .� �� r c =. d �.
. E I� o � v a.�.�.�.i a c m c E b 3 ° w o .
° � � o � Y N�.,, � _ _ w u °' " o w o '� .
�: w o � o. u, . r ° o � v E � m o q ' N ,
n .. �
� a .n � p �' ' v 3 � � m m O $ � � o'
�� � NVrn �� �. m� � � v � om °' uo U
°_° �� ° � 3 `o �.. a`' '° ,� m v n a � - ` 'a = '
'^ u` 3 � m o ', E a w ci n � �^
— 1�' d � W J d � � v C O O h O ❑ n
. � s m ' ° = s_¢.. v o _ 0 2 a � 3 �,n
� �i;o31 > > v ° _��wr'' m 3 w OV' o � � v c o o ° .
o ro'�a �i � '- s r.u� c o v a '... ° y E u 2 N �
n _:zl "� c � :.>_: o c+ v = - w � E ' _
';<,� j w �` �2._ � U a r V m �o� � t ^ �� .
. -.>: q o x !� ::N,� u .� E o o � o a� � (9 w
`l9: N n v � _ `` o a a n o .c �^ c _
�.O_" = a O � .U.: a N p L V' � V N � 0o U _ � Z
f��l 'o � � � !'_7''r'. � l�D w ? � r � cD � E � O U
:��19'. in 3 -::c:. ii a � co 3 o a � c� ' . � w
Resolution No. 2013-160
Paee No. 99
� �;�
r —
- - - > °
� �, „ � � ;
� � > > "> > oc�
' � — — — _ �
� ; _ � U�
T �� O " U U U :J �
� 1 O O O O >
�' T T T � U
U V V U
c
o '=
n ,--�
` .� �
� u
� ° ° � . _ ° _ ° �
> n � '> c i n
`o o .. = o � o �
O G O � C U R U
. E � _ _ '" c q � .
' c n
� . � O `�f' � � D � O
C J
E °- > �$ � °= u °- u
F c` -� ❑ c _ � = -
� ? .. � � - u
J V n �
. 3 � J O _ 'E — = � � E j o —
> s J � u o - � � n O c�,i j oo p � = � v t
� - `��' O `� = J > C _ � � � G > C V ��
c .` � U d v �O _ �' � � � N U 7 _ �'• C j t - _ i
C O 3] .. L Q U' U V 7 ..T. O d v V� p ' ' ^ .. j �
Q � � ° a - � m 3 = � ° u � c -O � t ."'. E y �
s o � - _ = m � � u � = V Q -- "
(� � ? v c " � = c ?� o u U o ' ` `V^ _ � �"`
„ 3 � �- a u � d � -° � � �'_
O � U c u a ._ y = ° � ._ - � 2 . � o c t u
p�, .7 � ° u c E ° = E ° � ,: � n 2 0 � = � =
U � C •y .r.'1 rl N � � V J
V� fl N � N .-. = V J '^ Ll 'J L O r _ i - n .
Z � � 3 u O = O 2 .. ��i. � � t'� 3 > u > > U
�- U� _ � E o - O O V - U 0 L . p U O _
" � v � � 3 > n .. z '� a �
C � > c �: � � � > �".r _ V > � `L. f u n � n ^
p N ._ o _ ° = v _ c u ° - c ° - ° ' N n�` '
a : o A = 3 � o u � - � _ y - o n n � N - �
w o � n c o � 'o V ^ ' - c T_ `o_ = 2 ❑ o = - -° o u v
� v u ai > ° ° n n � o a 'J � c ? o � ° o � = ? NO`
� ^��� 0 u � E � u � c � > > q � o n � 'c `o `v E ? � n � o�
Z 3 v c � t - o r. � � p u o � a o . n'� n
� i Q � o r°'a °- _ r � E � ( i � V a r.�o � � 0 2 = E o E v
U' C n ° ° u v v p ' n °`S = '-�' y � i 'r'� ... o ... O
Z o � � � � .� `r„ u = 'o � � ° N � � � a - �' � = n _' � �
0 ' � � � � �v � i or = � c u � = � � �i � � ii � o °
F O 9 ° v � � v�i = o o ... =o c o o u o p v n �"--' .r u
Z l7 � � o '^ ° �V' > c _ n a o u J � � .r`.�. .t. z � ? p < �
� � 3 � � � 9 ° v > � „ E �� N 3 c � = F � � � �
- � ; o 0 0 '� n u �o u N U J j �o � � o ° o � � `p J N �
e n�n _
Z � a u � v a - - u c o � = n 3 = � " i � =� > � ° _ �
O � = - J � o � a � � n E � � ° 3 '- � � ,� J � ��� =�
�"' V O '^ � L - t� . 1 n - f U O .�: ... n C T� '1 v�i
Q : Cvi P. u O > j V O O O C N u U � O " .V. O r' ti _
U � f] � f' � � � J O ' O > `� C � n O J � � O (Cj C
U -�' =�
F .. U = O � u 6 � C - � � y n F � u V .^.`-r J U� � C J
. � � � � � n ` `o `u .. _ _ E
J � ` Q ~ � � � O 1 � v Tl = U � i V D Q U V Q L t�' 'L" y
C ` ` � � � D 'J V ^1 _ _ U 1 = � _ L '� ' 1 i N L > �
m v. �. j i �.
N ? = j N m _ C n - U' < � _ G 1 C N � � � 1�1 O p Q V V C
j " 'J L � v � _ y 7 � U L `� J .. .�-i O O �
- 'U � N ? U ._ - _ - U G N � C. N 2 d h '�]
U J �
o � �� - - � 3 n a m o �+ �
u 'y � - �' v u a _ u � ; '> � �
� � � �
O � � � � �n V -� V. � C C � O O V � U O d
u - D = O � ^ � T � O ( � � = _ � = O � � ^
� V' �u �
� . ? ' > -c. c o = 3 n > ` � c o ° �_ `- u �
7- O � U V •� � O � J -� C .�•.. i�^r r � V � '.'� U
. E 3 " u t � ' J ''- � u = y � "' � u o " c =
_ � � 3 0 � n p . � � � $ ° ' � °- �`�
f ' ' � ._ ° � _ � = - ^
� = o 0 0 �3 = o � �r � � 3 = ° v > � N
• ' ' v _ � - '
� ? � � ` � _ ; N 3 �' c� � � V ° � `u � 3 = > u
�Ct 3] � U N � C O V O � �' C G O � fJ �
VI ^ � "' V O b ` '-" O �� ^uj n j C .t+ U O n �
_ N O C v U C O = J _ 0 � N j V C �`_ U � �^
f' C � � � � � �
C V R _ O ` O � U v '� ^ N O `) O > C_ � Y ^ }'_J
y _ _ _ 7
� ' � - u � O O V U d O O . N V O O N h V ❑ v O O y C U_
n . v u m- = o o n� u � mD o h � u u c._ � o-
�`. � � c � ° n o o _ ? ^ c .. _ o � ' � - _ 5 c U' �
� � o n u � -. o n � v � � `o ' =
y o �_, c y _ � � 3 N � :. E N � � o o � � ' � o c` o
� o � � 1 O u � � o o � � `n V � � n o � � u _ p?
O V � J '� J � C F . vl V � .�.. J .�+ v� 3 � - .�� � 2 1 vUi
_ _ _ _ _
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page N . 100 �
> - -
m � � �'
C oG > 7 > � .: U
p a N m m ❑ J
C 7 7 J O U �
L ^ L L L
O " U U U U ��..,- -
� d O O O O T�'.�� ' .
� T ? ? ? U
U U U V
C N
O
� L C
m v �
. `a °' ,3 r o `o °'
� - ° 3 v - °
> m o '�' > c
`o o m ° .E o .- '
E � ai � o � `va � i
_ c � E
o n v .� �o 0o p n
p E �" c o
E � " E a o `o .°- `o_ >
° r'� - o o l9 � 5 � m
r c � - U n d d a d 'o
N O m C y C
� o o �O aa 3 � o o 'w >. v .
�- � n y �n v_ � o ..� c N � m � y � .
v n vy � '� :� t 3 v � � w � .3
o v c o `' a � -o n E v a v � .
c a
` !' ° v � y `m mv ' q o 0 0 0 � ,no '� v � .
� - ` '° v v � 5 � �, .'^i ��° � ° CD n m m �Q 3 m
v�i � � � �.�w � � 3 w � w " °� .
a o � . .a a � m t rv w �' � � v v w w v " m ° .
� a v � c � � v � q �n w E � � ` c
O m n a y c c � o o m � � N 3 � n ,L„ �`v � � .
¢ o � � a o � � o� Q > « E � m °1 " a .
� _ `o_ v Q v � '� m o ° :°. v a s -mo �E c °1 `v c > E
Z �a p m � £ Q °.�' = > c i° � a vai n w E c � ..
E °-' °' � '-° o
� u � o v � � ¢ o � � v c v a c -° E v y w c
y
Q � = `o _ w v ? E s w � vi y - v a > = E 'a a x
a � - o � a :c '�` � �� o m N � o D N a c � w .
w N '"° o v '> '- c ' 3 o v = a m `° m
� n 'i u �o o w n v v � � � � o v � � � v � �
Z 3 � o N a n� 'r� o � E � v � -a � �^ u � � E v � N �'. .
� v fO w vn � w � c v v N o
a .Y o u N 'x N o 'n a v � v. 3 s v rL- u N � v � a � a+ =
. � C m y y n v m a� n o w � a o v_� N � � a � p --.
Z o ..�-.^ m _> oa o w > E E °: w � y° LL v o 'a� a o o m � �
o �,
� � q = v w '� > m v u v r s 3 '`-° m P.' `o_ m° v o v E w 'O`o
�-- = Y a _ a w v � w o " o '�-' °' � a Y ,'"_, ' -O �° D �
Z s � y ? � - o � q v � rv a v E v y > E a' � o � .c .
q N
O 6 � Gl 'O N N N W m 6 C �y � C C � V 6 N � W d'S] t'J �
. � o - E �2 v a v .x m > � 'w ` = a u 'N a .
Z vt � n `o ` Y � .t. a= � � n!� a m a,� c
� � � v r � m � E u v v''K m° 3 -O E � "' v ..°S r �' v � .
F- u �o � 3 a � a` E � °i - > "' °i � �� � !? a m � '
(a'J � o v � � :' a� m '�' n v .s. « v � s � o c� r 3 m o� .
F. Q n� > .� '^ ..°7 ° a E. 3 0 � i o p ¢ E m � y . w
� ¢ � t °. o � aci 5 .N = v°ii w = � N � o w L w � v " o n
E �- � " o E � � �°n � v �x � �C E � o � v o N
� o ., � :. n ^� �r o m > v o a . � d � .
u' v d = � w '.E-. `° 'u a c�o y ^ C °-° -� °? Q 3 v o �
,.^ii > v 'o'u � > v .-`�i w m '- o ,"�-� o.'v > ,°� ,�y a c 3 � m
ui -010 o n� c v .t. vi ,t.. « E - `o vi E « 'a � ui m v n u v
° '" >, u 'n --° a .
9 `^ w c c n a c o 'a '° � .�. do N � a°1i
n a v � o m s � o � � � ° " v � '0 3 � r `� . m G � � a u i''
K v .. ; v w a c o 0 0 � -J, ° o � � c = _ �
a� V H � � - � � d Y V - in . C N' O w N V O ' . F C J .
y 'C � .= � i N O .` m m T O O C C J Y v Y 3 � O � 0 .
. 6 O � e0 G C a 'O C 'O d p. C � � N � C � v � � C � v a
. E o 3 � '� � a � m `c° v m ° m `w « °' �'° u `o �o m ` °' t > o U
.. W V - .� Y CI O '^ O p ` T N J Y N .
� � C N '�] C C Y 1��. _ W � = 3 N u � Q N � T G in � � C � N ' �V
� ' n �. a m r � c � o o � � r- p y� w o 0 3 m � ° � 3 � .Na-. Q
� o z m o n °`o '-° n � o c � = " -a `v p E u o v � p _ .
�m ° a n c m ° � o o a 01 m v � w v �m w v .�� n ° « � v m ? '` u �.
'vi � ° y m > �� �. � �n � n � � � � � w " � E �w = n =� 'u r
- - c c - o � o n ° � V' .w. ° � v � v v o � v � � `w ` � .�° � y a �� .
�q � o ° °_' � :. v '_. E 'o a m v vr a s a3i w °�° s � m i v �o � o � T o �
- � m '`m '° N m y w v y ' � c v u � « � O. , �
;; ^� a o -a � y o i• U' 9 3 m � 3 :_ d c� ` o > �+ n 3'
o u � o � ° v a m o = c v o 0 0 ,ai� E ' N ° � n �° " c�� -
a ._ � o= � v u n$ � c � fO � d v o`a v o v 3 m `o � v E o
m 'V -� � O a C � 00 - � 3 � C V m 'o O � � d 'O V � T w _>� O � � � �O .
`c ° p; v 3 a o d c w °- 0 3 m �,.. E m w :: � � ° m � v `o � o 0
� ` � � n g '� w ? v .t. m v ,v, � `-° a n ,s., `-° _ m �c m a �'� v C Z
� ° o c o- �` o � � _ _ � p � 'o m � 'a v °' $ ° E� .°: ' u E p o c� ° 3 -
° ' a a = n n r. ._ � ° $ m � 3 3 5 °a= 0 3 m ° �n n w � n a � � ° � �.Vi
N _ r � 0—� 2� N
Resolution I�'o. 2013-160
Paee No. 101
> .;.; - - -
� �� -;, _ > ;�
-.-„ � -
s � �: > - - - -
- � =r' _ _ _
� ' _
, - - - _ _ _ � �
� � c �F'� o c � � = o
T
° t:�� >- . > - > = U
� :x,?. u v > �- _
L .=�'
O �^�{ „`-� '
r T� � eJ Y'
m - `o - � ^ �
� J �
� � O � •• p 3
��. .._. > �' ` � O
O '� O V ' C � � V O O O �
u �� E � - � u � �o -- o
� t' = `o_ 5t c = 3 � - > °_ _
r. _ `
. � 0 �7 0 � � � c _ � E �
u = -' r - N
� � o ° O _ > '^ � � � = o
F '�4 ° �` i a o � a � o � .
-�+��Y U T j � Y � � ?
=?i: "' ` � 6t O O C C C O � _ r T
� .] N ^ - � ` J � U
'' � > s `o � ° F,, s c '� a � ° E `o o w � i ° c `' -� E
.�_-^:. m a _ � n - � v� _ ' c � � _ ` o = � ."�.
--�'-_' � � � � � c o � ° _ � ° _ • 9 c o 3 0 'o_ - _ a - � o u �
� "r�`: � '� o � C . o = � � `o > � L u ° � � $ � � - - = c '^ c
sa` > n u � 2 '� � u � o u ' � _ u u � - � � _ '-' v � ° � �
Q _'3rJ o � n `o y a o i ° � o y = � E i u 3 2 ° u � c ` o 0 0 0
5 �:�!: c�i _ �t N � o � ` 5 � `o n � � � � o � y � :.' u n _. a 3 _
U' :-"�:- ° � i _' " � � S ^ �u o ` = � o r � ° J �°, o ° � - o - �
O �_r��' _ = o - _ - � °= `o o - � ^ ° ° � � ° -
� �?._. `c = e- a o u � ` `o _ _ � >� o Pa > ? �, � u n
p, �'�' f � o .: ° ��= n � = °- ° � � � � � o • c n '� � ° ° ° � �
_�1.r. O W C C r � � �C � �. � C � r ^ C '�
� �i'�! �p O � d C � O � � 3 U r: 2^ U v C W n .i � � � � U � � V u � .
Z U ` "J L C = Ci `�+ '- (,�j
��yy E � �
F r�.d. � o , _ � °„ v � c � c ± E > = � v n - c � _ j � _ v E
� � -" .. ° .�"- � ? � � c c � u n � - n = E � > N o <�+ _' °_ � = ° °
a ° ys.._ � � c a � ° o � E `o ° � m = � � _ - � o �° m ° -n '> � a
. C � "-'".y,'f„° �� _ � � u °� ^ m _ � ' - � c o p � .. -'n n y n � y c : �.
v u ' � u o� o n � � � � � `a o „ o � v 3 ^ u = � ' Y n o ° z
p p =':El' . v ` v� - � _ N _ v :.. y - Y c' >� v - - .. o
� =a�: ; ° c ,� � n n a r "� a . _ '- - = n m
� Z 3 c �;p:^ � ° N - " o n � a n .. � _ `o " _ c u ? � 3 n u � ... :�
.� � � °- �Y:��^�','' � � o � r w c� .a � r`•+ ° � N �c 3 n �,�,� o N � n � a � � n � n � � � .
' v � '�
Z p � � � � ` � � � � ` � ' ` J " _
n ,y�..� �n � ` E 3 � u H � c o v � " u n > p � �; -� � o � �
� u y '•� � o n 3 c `v N - n � ° � � 'S ° 9 � � ° �. � o � �� � �. � n � 'c
0 v � -:�=�: � -° = E > `o `u > o ° � o ° v � � � .? � � c o n v � � � ° n
H �q C� i t .r.' .: ` - > a t ai � v n o E G o o c n -� z o n � � a cn�i c
O � C � C C N � � y n U C � O N O C 3 C V r 6 � � � � �' C S] O
� � - j O O J O n y . 6 V O u O u _J. > J m . C - U N O
� � �r,} � o = o n��-. � .:n u ,� � � '" N 2 c - - .= �,�` `� T >� � � ° " N
� � V - ° - -� � '� = c � c � o :- �-a � n _ - oo � u .
Z � �i, . ,i � y � o � '• o J o ' v � c '" cr ;�i, -- '� � � - � � n
' � �_ � cr � � ° �- o o ? � c E ° o u E o E u � � � ° = u `o � - m
{- ."" � c _ ° E V o ° N � ° '.. N � n o � � > o :_ F E �o = � � � � �'
� o �
U' •�-x'� � � ° ° v � � c n � `m a N.o` � k o n °� n .o o " t � �i o - p �
..r p N c ` .. -
' . F .' _ `n i E `° ,--.`'i a � � � � = � °a � � c .. � � ;� c � u " _ � _ ° = u
C � � N m ., c c � o a - � � o o �
C j?i;' S � u 7 c ' � = � � o _ n ¢ u � � °- cui E u c o _ � a u � F � il c �
�.� ann .: jr. � j1v � . Foo � <_. m � o p� y � Njn � ° p
� � � j � �� V . O O _ u .: N O � vCi � C uvi � � � u O C - C :a : '
'yi�� .mi ° n n n n � n � a J � �� .m � � ° " " n �' ` a n 3 ° � o o � _ 3 5
r � > . a
n � � 3 0 " . c�
� ";^ N (: � '�] L L L N � N � � CI (J C u 6 �jtl :lll
�131
t�� .
. � O O O = - - J .
:;�°. - � 3 > � O j . `J O �' .�3
� � � U � O � x
_-.' o ° u .o � � a � = � = � ? �
-' n .., s � � J < � . n
V '�� > � � o o S � c ti o � _
. -C� 0 0 o N 3 3• � 'c'r c a = E o -
F `�i y ° o y .- c .- � � = ° a � � U
C . _ U O y V
. sc� � -° n�y ? " � ° o � g 2 m� - �
� ��- `o i ° o � � 3 ' � v _ � � o 0 0 0 .
° m'�� n o ' ° ^ " o' � n � � �:
� c 'u z u c � - o � o ..
. -� _-0_ n ` ` v �. o ' ' _ - _ � U
v. ..Oy N � � j v � = O� � p u `
� C�r F O � B 'J V " N O p U _ �V 6 v�
_ n<2 - C � .. O � ' _ ` O �:�
_ � C_p � � ' � - K v N � v� � 'n-' � " o �•_
� � C yyyp � � C S . _ 'J. F .i C � 3_
�., O ��N' r O � J O p � j f :� n J = p 9 . J
2 �2 � Q � ° > n � = � � u o .�'-,', '0 ir� � p -
.�'N�: ] '> �'_ ,C in _ > > � U J - � N . (� 1
'_'0:� O �.j � 'j 7 V � c J t�i 3 � � .'J C r .
� v 'J
_Gr ^ � -2 V � �� l_" '3 ._ � V .o. J p '_ C �
:.rav w 3 0 > � u � ° - >` ,`� 3 O -
<<�; u > 3 u w N � � . o. u o ., `•� .Un
..x" S _ _ = o � _ V. - = �: E � 2 n _
_ . . _ .. . . .. __ _ _ __. _
Resolution No. 2013-160
Page Np. ]02
��
> � o
C � :V
�° � O 'U
_ G c
p m � J
� c U �
� '� .oi..�..
C � T .
C d
U U
c
0
�
�
�
`o
u
F
ra
u
E
�
� a o v - � m
m
� �° o v � �o a � m � � o > v � E � 3 = i
= E G v m D � E P' __ � � „ �° .. m v v °
� r�i u _ ` E v _`o C i .c H .o ; � � '^ o c 3 = �
� s -o ^ cr � m v '� '� 3 a o v o � 3 � '^ c� > H
`¢ « t c ° m � a m � m ,_.. v a o ' c o c �
� o `o `o = o 'E ° o ooE � ° � � ,�, m °- - � '� ,Lq„ ' . o >
cs n owmo °- ' m oo ° � vy+ '
C �
K o "� ° 3 m � � �� o � '9 �� m 'v � '� a o � � m E v o ' v ?
O E � ` w o ' o .o a v a v o v � ° v o � c m �.c E,'o V o
'p �. c ` � y � ` a� m Y � C N W v O n N Y � O 2
a v � � o -° n � 4 � ,.w. v E n `° o E m'O o a+ �ai -O � u`+ °i �
U' ` c .°: ''' o '^ � o �. n L m '�. a`� � K '... m N ,i0. � � � � v 3 " n v '
Z c -° � � � 'V' .� � a > � '� n� mm � NN � y vova3t � _
o n 3 ..` u c v o m m o m�m v $ o o ._ � n c m o � >_
F- � � o o a o p � o `m � m � � � v - �o o N � m p ° e' E N .
� Q' C > a �r � � W in O ` _ '� C U L C � pp Y
O a X O O � N W � N � a I�CO GO y � �0 v�i �i N y �O - C �> .W f0 C � r � .
K .--. N `= o u o E v c�i �° E .� °' 3 -Oa, ° w � r o �O o � i.5 u '0 � .
� �-- o v o ' � z °' t '" � 0 3 c �3 '�-i �n - -o „�� v 3 3
p v � v v N m a ` n c c � 3 v r ai n .` o c � . � m= > j r...
Z C � a o � � � n n « ° � - y Y y` T `o '� . > o .. m a ° « � o . .
a � r .°: n � m m � a m � u n 'e .m. v N A = m m 4i � � v v .
v '
� C m «. c � y � a `v � � y � w ° ¢ E .. c w o �.- o x a � � N � � '= i
Z O a m . " a n o Q v n y v � � ..°�. w m o c 10 v s t n
� � � � � m 3 -� o � E m � a n q� m � y 'o � '�° a 'm o � ° 'y o -o ? > ..
'° � �... a . w � -
F �v '� o a � �� u 'o v � a � ` a w � �> �n. o u ° .o a �o � t �, � '° E
n �o � .: � � � r- �
p � '-^ � - � m H � � '6 m w � N 'Y" c m � oo v .� . a � w.� � 3 °' c
- � ° " t ° _ ° � ° u � u .. Y p1 ° � � E m °: s - v v m °n o 0
0 o N �r � � r� � � � o � . E a � .°'n o = o o « " o E � 0 6 >
Z 5 '" . `o v 3 �e o � .n a °1 � m ° v � o m v > v E �° o ° -° -° �? �
� � ° '�-u' � `" v � � � n � '- � = '�' oD c '-= w v E o �« m � n > o 'n
a 3 a n � ; m = o n N � �� �v �q 'E o 0 0 � � d n y � � v,u v m � � �
� > 3 � v ai m n � in n w _ � p c a v i .o -.
C7 v � o m Y N L � ° m a; 0 3 p n E c'o E N ° ` � � o m o m � � > �
~C � v H - _� `o °n 3 in u v �G � H �� _ o 00 o w E � ' c d .o a c°pi m.� .
G � V !� �- � — O . Q � Q � — i N � :C � C N �" E U O F o`0._ = C O
u � w > r`,� � � = .� .. = ,.. u � m c �- m � o '° = t v o " .
� c " _. � _ °i n p c � c „� u � w E � °�� c o n a � `o
s ° E m .v Q v .c m . °u n ._ $ �n S n � h v a ° °u E E � n � � ° �n
> � �� ��� �� k rn � .
i u!I �. ri: �$ d� �� . �
�
J i
d
C
O
n �
E �
- u
� U
R Q
N
C V
� _
� _
� ��
- ?
C O� ..
a 3.
o . N.. �::.;
y ao
�n
6 O
EZ
O -y
oV
C y
Resolution No. 20li-160
Paoe No. ]03
> -
� � > °
= � � � c
� < _ _
�>i - ` _
� 'n
U
� o � o
4 '� T
U � -
- U
u
o � u =
� � �
rf'a _ 3 0 � . .
o P�
- u
� > > o
`o
V - `
� �i U 7
� `
O O C C
u n � �
C O � V �
� C _ O
y.
.. : V p = i �. � � _
_ � V 'V `� N � -� �
F G C � ] C � � r � - � Y O n �
�y .�^.. vr�i = O 1 f = � C C « U 'F _ s U O
� � ti � j
- 3 � _ C � y � � u O � � � �
C 7 V �j j N d C - O V - `O "' = 3 = � fJ - - .
G � C .V. c = u rCi :� p 0�� � U F n p '� `O n : �
C r i u - ^ T
� � 0 3 � _ � _- (: ._ 3 � � _ O �
V` r'�c c o = o � = ° � E o v o � � ^ �..._ ;a o
O = o = _ �. o o � � . 3 a � = '
C � `� O � C U � V C V vf V � ` � - U � C'
� J CJ - ^ fC i
�. O G] J'� �E C � O . U N' Y � � vf U V �
r � � n V =
� > U � � C f� � V � C � .�i C C � V .
Z O E � y = V O i O U .L' = � j oG� O p _
� �
� � 4 U f: f � � G i 0 � Ci N O � C � V C � O .
r 6
C ^ ° n ° '+ u � � � � � ` c�� i z E � y �� c V � '
� .. .. G n
� � � � � � � a y y � o u � a ° " N c N u '3 _, �
' Z � c r= « o V v o 0 0 � > a u u d� � `i � o tz- u `o w
c �c
� a •C 4 j '` `na ; ? 3 c o � � � n �+ � 0 3 0 = � � . � .
Z O V n v� ° p o � �? O c = c .° � c o -C+ � � <`.t O -
C `. � . � _ 'o "> = � o ° " n '_ O � � n o > >
p � .. � T � i � � u Sc _ a 3 (.° c N - �� n n � � �
F ° v c '' � r. `n �- � E a 4 � > `u � � ° '
ry C U f�' �' O " �d C � i L � C O . .� '�
. Q `O D �' p N U i � V p �f- � n�` � o�p v V j y
� - > o� o � ° .�i = c T = � c � � 4 - o � � `-' . .
� .. " O � U O L �r � C .�O ? �
O - E = - _ � u ° + � � - � E > o � � o � :� .
� `�- n� , a ° r�- r � � t � G � .-i � � m
� U ` ii1 O C � � ' �^ V U � W O j v�i C U J �
_ ' a w � � 7 3 � � o � e ` v > ° o u o �� z a � � -
l7 � - � ° = ° � ' ��� '- �c � v = c ° �; - a �
c _ � � ,� � '_ _ n s N r „ -. �
F- �v p " � - � � -� U c � � u ' - � � > v .
0 C .�. " � C O - O e.^. D ' C � C
C G =� O >, �� U C y� . . F ._. C V ;J � � C j � � - .
> _ � C � C ? V C J j (�'i J � 'J � +� i � p "
^-� ... _' C C '._.
, . u � .� u :L O V > V ` '� ti � C O O O
x � > ; � ,� a = < :, � _ � 3 . � �
� � ` �
V C
y' `J O �
� O T J
^ a f N V � �
' J C �
. � � C � � U .� .�. -
a � c u � E 'c > _
o p a '� m � - -
1 [y �' 6 '� �� J
F � j � _ U E T O J
- a > - c u c c J
� . � � ' � O �' tl U
� ri d m p
� V - n
S � ° p 3 ° �� _ _ ��
. ' J V u � � - -
� n o - � _ ._ .. r.
U ` �n V '3 V J n 1\
C O � ? � v n p �O '._. �'O
� n z ` E u .- _ _ 3 _
'_ J > u � o = _ � -
O V p O � ` _ _
_ . .. _ 3 � = : .- _
> > o q '; o � F. � (9�
' °i o � � o n O _ o � O
a .. - v v :Z
� - u n _ p _
:� r ° 35 u `o ' = vUi