HomeMy WebLinkAbout!Responses to Comments
Otay Ranch Village 8 West
Sectional Planning Area Plan
and Tentative Map
Final Environmental Impact Report
Errata
Comments Received on the Draft EIR and Responses
November 2013
CV EIR #10-03
SCH No. 2010062093
Lead Agency:
City of Chula Vista
Development Services Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91910
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page RTC-1
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional
Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
The City of Chula Vista, as the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), has
prepared this Final Environmental Impact Report (Final EIR) for the proposed Village 8 West Sectional
Planning Area (SPA) Plan and Tentative Map Project, located within the Otay Ranch subregion of the City
of Chula Vista. As described in Sections 15089 and 15132 of the CEQA Guidelines, the lead agency must
prepare a Final EIR before approving a project. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15132, a Final EIR
shall consist of:
a) The Draft EIR or a revision of the draft.
b) Comments and recommendations received on the Draft EIR either verbatim or in summary.
c) A list of persons, organizations, and public agencies commenting on the Draft EIR.
d) The responses of the Lead Agency to significant environmental points raised in the review and
consultation process; and
e) Any other information added by the Lead Agency.
Pursuant to these guidelines, this Final EIR (State Clearinghouse No. 2010062093) includes in the
following order: an Errata, a list of persons, organizations, and agencies that provided comments on the
Draft EIR; responses to comments received on the Draft EIR; the Draft EIR showing revisions made to the
document subsequent to public review. In addition, a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(MMRP) has been prepared and is bound separately but is a component of the Final EIR. The MMRP
provides the mitigation program required to be adopted by the City pursuant to Public Resources Code
Section 2108.6, which will ensure that if the project is approved and developed, all recommended
mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce or avoid significant environmental effects.
ERRATA
After completion and circulation of the Draft EIR, several typographical errors were identified and/or
clarifications to the EIR text were necessary. Minor typographical errors were corrected in the text.
Clarifications are identified below. All of the corrections have been reviewed, and none of them effect
the impact analysis conclusions. The clarifications are summarized below. Modified text is indicated in
underline and strikeout format as follows:
Old Text Revised Text
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page RTC-2
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
Specifically, these changes to the EIR are limited to the following sections:
Executive Summary – The Result of Impact Analysis and Impact Level After Mitigation columns
under the Noise heading of Table 1-2 have been revised to correct references to short-term
significant impacts related to traffic noise. This impact was identified under the first noi se issue in
Table 1-2. References to this impact have been relocated to the third noise issue, consistent with
Section 5.5, Noise. The Mitigation column under the third noise issue was also revised to reflect
that mitigation measure 5.3-20 would ensure long-term noise impacts would be less than
significant. Mitigation measure 5.6-1 was revised consistent with revisions in the Biological
Resources section, described in response to the United States Fish and Wildlife Service
and California Department of Fish and Wildlife comment B-3. A typo in mitigation measure 5.6-3
was also revised to correct the beginning of least Bell’s vireo breeding season from March 25 to
March 15. A typo in mitigation measure 5.3-17 was corrected to include Olympic Parkway: Heritage
Road to La Media Road to the list of cumulative impacts, consistent with this measure in Section 5.3,
Transportation/Traffic.
Land Use and Planning – The evaluation of consistency with Objective PFS 19 in Table 5.1-2, Project
Consistency with Applicable General Plan Land Use Policies, has been revised to clarify the manner
in which the Community Purpose Facility (CFP) requirement for Village 8 West would be provided.
The evaluation consistency for Objective PFS 19 in Table 5.1-2 on page 5.1-25 has been revised as
follows:
Implementation of the SPA Plan would provide 5.8 acres of CPF zone in one planning area. The
balance of the CPF requirements for Village 8 West (2.2 acres) would be provided in the manner
allowed by the CPF Ordinance by the terms of that certain Land Offer Agreement dated April 17,
2008by the City obtaining ownership of land through a separate contractual obligation which is
consistent with the CPF Ordinance.
Policy LUT 84.4 was also incorrectly identified as Policy LUT 84.2. This typo in Table 5.1-2 on page
5.1-24 has been corrected. In addition, a typo in the anticipated conveyance obligation for Village 8
West has been corrected from 220.6 acres to 232.7 acres on page 5.1-38.
Transportation/Traffic – A typo on page 5.3-21 has been revised to correct the Growth Management
Ordinance threshold for Olympic Parkway from 2,463 equivalent dwelling units to 2,463 dwelling units.
Minor revisions have been made to Table 5.3-22, Project Consistency with Applicable General Plan
Transportation Policies. Policy LUT 73.7 was duplicated as Policy LUT 73.8. Policies LUT 33.1 and LUT
33.2 incorrectly included the text from Policies LUT 31.1 and 31.2. These typos have been corrected. As
a result, the project’s consistency with Objective 33 in Table 5.3-22 on page 5.3-46 has been revised as
follows:
Consistent. The SPA Plan is consistent with these relevant policies because the project would
provide parking facilities in a manner that would enhance aesthetic qualities and minimize
adverse effects on the pedestrian-oriented environment. Section 4.3.7 of the SPA Plan
establishes design guidelines for parking lots and structures. Off-street parking lots are required
to be located behind or to the side of buildings and to be set back from public rights-of-way.
Guidelines for parking structures include providing a pedestrian interface, such a retail spaces
on the ground floor, attractive design elements, and a pedestrian entry space. For example,
each road within Village 8 West would consist of no more than two travel lanes and would
include sidewalks, parallel parking, and a striped bike lane. Reduced street width, shade trees,
minimized setbacks, and urban uses required along the couplet create a visual street frame and
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page RTC-3
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
a pedestrian friendly atmosphere. Additionally, on-street parking and only the minimum
required off-street parking would be provided to reduce the impact of parking lots and
structures on the streetscape and promote the use of bicycles, transit, and alternative modes of
travel.
Biological Resources – A typo in mitigation measure 5.6-3 on page 5.6-30 was revised to correct the
beginning of least Bell’s vireo breeding season from March 25 to March 15.
Public Services – A typo in the first paragraph of this section was revised to correct the reference to the
schools subsection from subsection 5.9 to subsection 5.9.3.
Comments Received on the Draft EIR and Responses
The Draft EIR was circulated for public review on June 7, 2013 through July 22, 2013, in accordance with
the 45-day comment period required under Section 15105(a) of the CEQA Guidelines. A total of eight
comment letters were received on the Draft EIR from agencies, organizations, individuals as shown in
the list below. This Final EIR incorporates the Draft EIR, changes and additions to the Draft EIR based on
comments received during the public review period, as well as minor revisions to further clarify
information presented. Collectively, the revisions do not constitute significant changes to the project or
environmental setting, no new significant environmental effects have been identified for the project,
and the severity of identified environmental impacts would not increase. Changes to the text of the
Draft EIR are shown in strikeout (strikeout) text where deletions have been made and in underline
(underline) text where new text has been added.
A list of the individuals, agencies and organizations commenting on the Draft EIR is provided below:
Letter A State of California, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
(State Clearinghouse) ......................................................................................................... RTC-5
Letter B U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of
Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) .................................................................................................... RTC-8
Letter C California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) ........................................................ RTC-11
Letter D City of San Diego Parks and Recreation ........................................................................... RTC-14
Letter E Chula Vista Elementary School District ............................................................................ RTC-15
Letter F San Diego County Archaeological Society, Inc. ................................................................ RTC-16
Letter G Christian Driscoll ............................................................................................................... RTC-17
Letter H Theresa Acerro ................................................................................................................. RTC-18
Copies of all letters received by the City of Chula Vista regarding the Draft EIR and the responses to
comments follow. The table below identifies the locations of the key changes to the text, tables, and/or
graphics and a brief description of the changes which were made in response to the comments received
during review of the Draft EIR.
Location in the Final EIR Description
Page 5.3-10 Correction made to Table 5.3-5
Page 5.3-15 Clarification added regarding internal capture and transit reduction
Page 5.3-17 Correction made to Table 5.3-8
Page 5.6-29 Correction made to Mitigation Measure 5.6-1
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIR
CV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093 Page RTC-4
City of Chula Vista
November 2013
This page intentionally left blank.
Page RTC-5
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
A-1.
Letter A – State Clearinghouse (July 22 and July 23)
A-1 The comment letters from the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research
(OPR) confirm that the Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) was
submitted to select State agencies for review. The July 22, 2013 letter
confirms that the Draft EIR public review period closed on July 19, 2013
and no state agencies had submitted comments to OPR by that date.
However, the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the
California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) submitted comments
directly to and were accepted by the City of Chula Vista by the close of
public review. A second letter from ORP dated July 23, 2013 confirms
receipt of the letter from Caltrans. No further response is required. The
comments from CDFW are included as Letter B, and the comments from
Caltrans are included as Letter C.
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
Page RTC-6 City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
Page RTC-7
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
A-1.
cont.
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
Page RTC-8 City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
B-1.
Letter B – United States Fish and Wildlife Services and California Department of Fish and Wildlife
B-1 This comment introduces the commenter and states that the proposed
project is identified as a “covered” project in the City’s Multiple Species
Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan (SAP). This comment
introduces the comments that are addressed in responses to comments
B-2 through B-5. Refer to the responses to these comments.
B-2 This comment recommends early coordination with the wildlife agencies
regarding the active burrowing owl burrows within the project site. The
City will coordinate with the wildlife agencies as necessary following the
results of the pre-construction surveys described in mitigation measure
5.6-4. As stated in mitigation measure 5.6-4 in Section 5.6 of the Draft
EIR, if occupied burrows are detected during pre-construction surveys,
the city-approved biologist shall prepare a passive relocation mitigation
plan subject to the review and approval by the wildlife agencies and city
including any subsequent burrowing owl relocation plans to avoid impacts
from construction-related activities. Therefore, coordination with the
wildlife agencies has already been incorporated into mitigation for the
proposed project and will be included in the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program (MMRP) for Village 8 West. No revision to the Draft EIR
is necessary as a result of this comment.
B-3 This comment requests additional background information in the EIR
regarding mitigation for maritime succulent scrub and coastal sage scrub.
As stated on page 4-20 of the Biological Resources Report (Appendix E of
the Draft EIR), impacts to maritime succulent scrub would be mitigated
at a 1:1 ratio, pursuant to the Otay Ranch Resource Management Plan.
Mitigation measure 5.6-1 in Section 5.6 of the Draft EIR, Biological
Resources, has been revised consistent with page 4-20 of the Biological
Technical Report (see Final EIR page 5.6-29):
5.6-1 Maritime Succulent Scrub Restoration Plan. Prior to the
issuance of any land development permits (including clearing and
grubbing or grading permits) the applicant shall prepare a restoration
plan to restore 1.05 acres of maritime succulent scrub impacted
maritime succulent scrub at 1:1 ratio, pursuant to the Otay Ranch
Resource Management Plan. A total of 1.05 acres of maritime
Page RTC-9
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
B-1.
cont.
B-2.
B-3.
B-4.
B-5.
B-6.
succulent scrub will require restoration. The restoration plan shall
include, at a minimum, an implementation strategy; species salvage
and relocation, appropriate seed mixtures and planting method;
irrigation; quantitative and qualitative success criteria; maintenance,
monitoring, and reporting program; estimated completion time; and
contingency measures. The maritime succulent scrub restoration shall
be prepared by a city-approved biologist pursuant to the Otay Ranch
Resource Management Plan restoration requirements. The applicant
shall also be required to implement the revegetation plan subject to
the oversight and approval of the Development Services Director (or
their designee).
This minor clarification does not constitute significant new information
pursuant to Section 15088.5 of the California Environmental Quality
Act (CEQA) Guidelines that would require recirculation of the Draft EIR.
As stated in Section 15088.5 of the CEQA Guidelines, significant new
information includes: a new significant environmental impact that would
result from the proposed project or a new mitigation measure proposed to
be implemented; a substantial increase in the severity of an environmental
impact would result unless mitigation measure are adopted that reduce
the impact to a level of insignificance; a feasible project alternative or
mitigation measure considerably different from others previously analyzed
would clearly lessen the environmental impacts of the project, but the
project’s proponents decline to adopt it; or the draft environmental impact
report was so fundamentally and basically inadequate and conclusory in
nature that meaningful public review and comment were precluded. The
Draft EIR revision does not meet any of these criteria; therefore, it does
not trigger recirculation.
The coastal sage scrub restoration requirement was removed from the
Otay Ranch Resource Management Plan as part of the Village Two, Three,
and a Portion of Four Sectional Planning Area Plan. Refer to page 3-35
of the Final Second Tier EIR for the Village Two, Three, and a Portion of
Four Sectional Planning Area Plan (SCH #2003091012). The Otay Ranch
Resource Management Plan as amended does not include a coastal sage
scrub requirement; therefore, a discussion of previous requirements is
not applicable to the proposed project. No revision to the Draft EIR is
necessary.
B-4 This comment states that, to ensure consistency with the MSCP SAP, the
wildlife agencies should be provided drafts of the Maritime Succulent
Scrub Restoration Plan, Resource Salvage Plan, Revegetation Plan, Preserve
Edge Plan, and the Area-Specific Management Directives associated with
the proposed project. With the exception of the Preserve Edge Plan,
these plans are required as mitigation for the proposed project in Section
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
Page RTC-10 City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
5.6 of the Draft EIR, Biological Resources. These plans are required in
mitigation measures 5.6-1 (Maritime Succulent Scrub Restoration Plan),
5.6-2 (Resource Salvage Plan), 5.6-2 (Revegetation Plan), and 5.6-19 (Area
Specific Management Directives). The City will coordinate with the wildlife
agencies to provide the above plans associated with the proposed project
at the time of preparation. The Preserve Edge Plan is included as Appendix
D to the Village 8 West SPA Plan and has been made available for review.
No revision to the Draft EIR is necessary as a result of this comment.
B-5 This comment requests clarification regarding mitigation for impacts to
foraging raptors. Impacts to foraging raptors as a result of loss of habitat
on-site are mitigated through revegetation (mitigation measure 5.6-5) and
preservation of habitat in the Otay Ranch Preserve in accordance with
the MSCP SAP (mitigation measures 5.6-17 through 5.6-19). In addition,
the MSCP Subregional Plan, as implemented through the Chula Vista
MSCP Subarea Plan and other Subarea Plans, is designed to mitigate
for the direct, indirect, and cumulative impacts of development within
the respective Subregional and Subarea Planning Areas. The project’s
consistency with the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan is addressed in
Section 5.6.3(E) of the Draft EIR. No revision to the Draft EIR is necessary as
a result of this comment.
B-6 This comment provides a closing statement to the letter and does not raise
a significant environmental issue for which a response is required.
Page RTC-11
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
C-1.
C-2.
C-3.
C-4.
C-5.
Letter C – California Department of Transportation (Caltrans)
C-1 This comment introduces the commenter and requests an analysis of
Interstate 805 (I-805) and State Route 125 (SR-125). Trip distribution on
I-805 and SR-125 are shown in traffic impact analysis Exhibits 8 through
12 for each traffic scenario year (Appendix B to the Draft EIR). Analysis
of the I-805 main lanes is provided under Threshold 1 in Section 5.3 of
the Draft EIR, Transportation/Traffic, based on the analysis in Table 29
on page 63 of the traffic impact analysis (Appendix B to the Draft EIR).
The analysis determined that a future cumulative impact would occur
to I-805; however, the proposed project would not result in a significant
direct impact. As stated on page 16 of the traffic impact analysis, SR-125
is analyzed as a tolled facility and the 2030 freeway volumes from the
SANDAG traffic model, which includes traffic from the project, assume SR-
125 remains a toll freeway. As such, the freeways have been included in
each traffic analysis scenario. No revision to the Draft EIR is necessary as a
result of this comment.
C-2 This comment requests documentation regarding the application of a trip
reduction of 38 percent to the Existing Plus Project scenario. As stated in
the Otay Ranch Village 8 West Traffic Impact Analysis Report (Appendix B
of the Draft EIR, p. 21), because “of the lack of existing transit service and
the isolated nature of the project in this study scenario, neither internal
capture nor transit reductions were applied in this analysis.” Therefore,
the 38 percent trip reduction was not applied to the Existing Plus Project
scenario. This detail has been added to the Final EIR on page 5.3-15.
As described in comment B-3, this minor revision does not constitute
significant new information pursuant to Section 15088.5 of the CEQA
Guidelines that would require recirculation of the Draft EIR. No revision to
the Draft EIR is necessary as a result of this comment.
C-3 This comment states that the project trip distributions do not add up in
Exhibit 8 and 9 of the Traffic Impact Analysis (Appendix B of the Draft
EIR). These exhibits present different information and are not intended to
match or add up. Exhibits 8 through 12 of the Otay Ranch Village 8 West
Traffic Impact Analysis Report (Appendix B of the Draft EIR) are provided
to illustrate the project trip generation for each study scenario. Exhibit
8 provides the project’s trip distribution under the Existing Plus Project
study scenario, which assumes the existing street network and buildout
of the proposed project (Appendix B of the Draft EIR, p. 21). Exhibit 9
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
Page RTC-12 City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
C-5.
cont.
C-6.
provides the project’s trip distribution under the 2015 Project study
scenario, which includes project trip generation from 105 single family and
246 multi-family residential dwelling units, and the 2015 roadway network
(Appendix B of the Draft EIR, p. 25). Due to differences in the assumed
roadway network and phased on-site development (see Table 5.3-7 that
shows the phasing for each scenario year), trip distribution differs between
the two scenarios. No revision to the Draft EIR is necessary as a result of
this comment.
C-4 This comment states that the geometry for the southbound SR-125 ramp
at Birch Road is incorrect and needs to be revised. The Otay Ranch Village
8 West Traffic Impact Analysis Report (Appendix B of the Draft EIR) has
been revised accordingly to reflect the correct existing lane geometry
at Intersection #13. Draft EIR Table 5.3-5, Existing Intersection Level of
Service, and Table 5.3-8, Existing Plus Project Intersection Level of Service,
have been revised accordingly. This minor geometry revision resulted in
changes in the level of service (LOS) at the Birch Road/SR-125 southbound
ramps intersection from LOS A to LOS B under the Existing and Existing
Plus Project scenarios. This change does not affect any of the significance
conclusions or mitigation requirements for the proposed project. As such,
as described in comment B-3, this minor revision does not constitute
significant new information pursuant to Section 15088.5 of the CEQA
Guidelines that would require recirculation of the Draft EIR. No further
response is required.
C-5 This comment states the Olympic Parkway and I-805 ramps cannot be
mitigated with Transportation Development Impact Fees (TDIF) and
that this impact should be considered significant and unavoidable. The
project’s impact to the Olympic Parkway / I-805 Northbound Ramps
was identified as a cumulative impact for the Year 2015 and Year 2020
scenarios (see Draft EIR page 5.3-54). The City of Chula Vista requires
construction of improvements to mitigate direct impacts, and allows
payment of TDIF fees to mitigate cumulative impacts. Pages 29 and 30
of the traffic impact analysis (Appendix B to the Draft EIR) acknowledge
that the Olympic Parkway / I-805 ramps are not within the City’s TDIF
program. The analysis also explains that there are a number of planned
improvements within the TDIF program as well as planned improvements
by Caltrans for the I-805 corridor which would reduce the traffic volume
through the Olympic Parkway/I-805 interchange, including the Palomar
Street Direct Access Ramps and construction of Heritage Road. The
project’s payment of TDIF fees, as required in mitigation measure 5.3-17,
will contribute to funding these improvements that would reduce traffic
volume at the Olympic Parkway / I-805 ramps. Therefore, implementation
of mitigation measure 5.3-17, which requires the payment of the TDIF for
Page RTC-13
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
network improvements that would mitigate impacts to the Olympic Parkway/
I-805 ramps, would reduce the cumulative impact to a less than significant
level. No revisions to the Draft EIR are required in response to this comment.
C-6 This comment requests that the City incorporate the Caltrans Project Study
Report (PSR) for the Main Street, Rock Mountain and Otay Valley Road
interchanges into the Draft EIR. As stated by the commenter, this report is
currently being prepared and therefore was not available for incorporation
into the Draft EIR traffic analysis. As of publication of the Final EIR, the PSR
has not yet been received by the City of Chula Vista. No revision to the Draft
EIR is required in response to this comment.
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
Page RTC-14 City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
From: Hyatt, Joel [mailto:JHyatt@sandiego.gov]
Sent: Wednesday, July 17, 2013 9:07 AM
To: Marni Borg
Subject: Village 8 Draft EIR questions/comments
Hi Marni,
This is Joel Hyatt in the City of San Diego Park and Recreation Open Space
Department. We are not sure if our department will provide any comments on
the Village 8 West project mostly because we are not sure of the proximity of
the project to the OVRP boundary. In any case, our comment would be that, if
possible, we would like to see reasonable connections or trails from Village 8
West to the adjacent OVRP Open Space area.
We are most interested in learning what is “Planning Area 20” located south of
the Village 8 West Project.
Attached is the NOP with a map of the land uses for your quick reference. (Figure
#2).
Thank you for your input.
Joel Hyatt
Senior Planner
619-685-1359 w
D-1.
D-2.
Letter D – City of San Diego Park and Recreation
D-1 This comment introduces the commenter and states that the proposed
project should provide reasonable connections or trails to the adjacent
Otay Valley Regional Park open space area. The proposed Village 8 West
SPA Plan would provide a trail connection to the OVRP. As described in
Section 3.3.1 of the Draft EIR, Village 8 West SPA, an off-site utility corridor
would extend from the southern end of the project site to the Otay River.
A 12-foot paved utility access road would be included within the 30-foot
utility corridor. This utility access road would provide access for the off-site
utilities and would also serve as a recreational trail connection to the Otay
Valley Regional Park trail system. This trail is depicted in Figure 3-7 of the
Draft EIR, Pedestrian Circulation System and Transit Stops. Therefore,
this comment has already been incorporated into the Draft EIR, and no
revisions to the Draft EIR are necessary as a result of this comment.
D-2 This comment request details in regards to Planning Area 20. Planning Area
20 is not part of the proposed project, but is identified in the Otay Ranch
General Development Plan as an active recreation area as part of the Otay
Valley Regional Park. This comment does not pertain the adequacy or
accuracy of information provided in the Draft EIR. No further response is
required.
Page RTC-15
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
E-1.
E-2.
E-3.
Letter E – Chula Vista Elementary School District (CVESD)
E-1 This comment introduces the commenter and states that there is a
possibility that the Chula Vista Elementary School District (CVESD) will not
approve the elementary school site proposed in the Village 8 West SPA
Plan. The Draft EIR includes this information on page 3-24 of Chapter 3.0,
Project Description, which states, “If the district decides not to acquire
the elementary school site, it would be re-designated for multi-family
residential uses, but is not allowed to increase the overall residential
dwelling unit yield and density of the village.” No revisions to the Draft EIR
are necessary as a result of this comment.
E-2 This comment recommends utilizing Community Facilities districts in
lieu of developer fees for mitigation of impacts to schools. Mitigation
measure 5.9.3-1 in Section 5.9.3, Schools, requires that applicants
provide the city with evidence or certification by the CVESD that any fee
charge, dedication, or other requirement levied by the school district has
been complied with or that the district has determined the fee, charge,
dedication or other requirements does not apply to the construction. In
accordance with mitigation measure 5.9.3-1, applicants will consult with
the CVESD to determine the appropriate fee charge, dedication, or other
requirements appropriate for the proposed development. This comment
has already been incorporated into the Draft EIR. No revisions to the Draft
EIR are necessary as a result of this comment.
E-3 This comment concludes the letter and requests a copy of an approved
tentative map for Village 8 West. This comment has been noted. No
response is required.
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
Page RTC-16 City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
F-1.
Letter F – San Diego County Archaeological Society (SDCAS)
F-1 This comment states that the commenter has reviewed the cultural
resources analysis contained in the Draft EIR and concurs with the analysis
and mitigation. No response is required.
Page RTC-17
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
OTAY
VALLEY
QUARRY,
LLC
6591
Collins
Drive,
Suite
E-‐11,
Moorpark,
CA
93021
Attn: Marni Borg
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910
mborg@chulavistaca.gov.
RE: PUBLIC NOTICE OF THE AVAILABILITY OF THE VILLAGE 8 WEST SECTIONAL
PLANNING AREA PLAN AND TENTATIVE MAP DRAFT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (EIR 10-03; SCH 2010062093)
Mrs. Borg,
We are writing this letter in response to the above public notice we received.
We are the property owners of the land commonly referred to as “Village 4”
which is directly contiguous to the west of the proposed “Village 8 West”
property listed in the above referenced planning documents.
We have reviewed the above documents in relation to our current land use, as
well as our future proposed land plans. We are hoping to submit our proposed
plans to the City in the near future.
We respectfully request that the VILLAGE WEST 8 EIR incorporates into their
analysis our current and proposed land use plans and allowed density. Please
include a review in all areas, and any associated cumulative impacts, included
but not limited to the following areas:
Land Use and Planning, Aesthetics/Landform Alteration, Transportation/Traffic, Air
Quality, Biological Resources, Geology and Soils, Public Services, Hydrology and
Water Quality, Housing and Population, Public Utilities, Mineral Resources.
Thank you for your consideration. If you have any questions, or need additional
information please contact me directly.
Sincerely,
Christian Driscoll
805.299.8223
direct
805.299.8230
fax
cdriscoll@danskig.com
G-1.
G-2.
G-3.
Letter G – Christian Driscoll
G-1 This comment introduces the commenter as the property owner of Village
4 and states that the commenter has reviewed the Draft EIR in relation to
current land uses and the commenter’s future proposed land plans. No
response is required.
G-2 This comment requests that the EIR incorporate analysis of Village 4 in all
applicable sections and in the cumulative impact analysis. As stated by the
commenter, to date the commenter has not submitted “proposed land use
plans and allowed density” for Village 4 to the City. Therefore, the Draft
EIR addressed cumulative impacts based on development of Village 4
consistent with the approved GP and GDP, as was reasonably foreseeable
at the time of EIR preparation, in accordance with Section 15130 of the
CEQA Guidelines. Cumulative impacts that would result from development
of Village 8 West and Village 4 have been adequately addressed in the
Draft EIR. No modification of the Draft EIR is required.
G-3 This comment provides a closing statement to the letter and does not raise
a significant environmental issue for which a response is required.
Final EIR for the Village 8 West Sectional Planning Area Plan and Tentative Map
Page RTC-18 City of Chula VistaNovember 2013Otay Ranch Village 8 West EIRCV EIR 10-03; SCH No. 2010062093
COMMENTS RESPONSES
From: THERESA ACERRO [mailto:thacerro@yahoo.com]
Sent: Wed 7/17/2013 8:39 PM
To: Marni Borg
Subject: village 8 west
Marni,
I have not yet had a chance to look at full EIR but from the Exec. summary it
appears Main Street will be extended. It is not clear whether this will be before
dev. begins and who will pay for it from the Summary.
My biggest concern is for Wolf Canyon.I believe there needs to be a bridge or at
the very least large culverts allowing wildlife saffe crossing under the road and
hikers, bikers passage back and forth into the Regional Park.
Where exactly would I find this information in the EIR document?
Thanks,
Theresa
H-1.
Letter H – Theresa Acerro
H-1 This comment expresses concern over impacts to Wolf Canyon that would
occur as a result of the extension of Main Street. The Otay Ranch Village 8
West Traffic Impact Analysis Report (Appendix B of the Draft EIR, p. 50, 65-
67) concluded that the westward extension of Main Street is not needed
for the proposed project. Therefore, the extension of Main Street over
Wolf Canyon is not part of the proposed project. However, it is included
in the 2030 traffic analysis assumptions since it is funded by the TDIF
program and is a Capital Improvement Project. Therefore, the extension of
Main Street is a reasonably foreseeable future roadway network condition,
is part of the future circulation network, and was assumed in the traffic
impact analysis.