HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 1992-16768 RESOLUTION NO. 16768
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING AND IMPOSING AMENDMENTS AND CONDITIONS
ON THE TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AMENDMENT, SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN (SPA), PUBLIC
FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN (PFFP), WATER CONSERVATION
PLAN, AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN, CEQA FINDINGS,
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS AND MAKING THE NECESSARY FINDINGS
(REFERENCE PCM-91-07)
WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject of this ordinance consists
of 112.4 acres of presently unincorporated property located on the north side of
Telegraph Canyon Road directly east of Otay Lakes Lodge mobile home park and
directly south of EastLake Shores (Exhibit 4 of the Sectional Planning Area
Plan); and,
WHEREAS, the project involves a prezoning to P-C Planned Community, an
amendment to the EastLake I General Development Plan and P-C District Regulations
to include the Telegraph Canyon Estates property therein, and a Sectional
Planning Area Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement
Plan and Water Conservation Plan involving a maximum of 350 single family lots,
plus two private recreation areas, two Community Purpose Facility sites, and over
20 acres of open space; and,
WHEREAS, the above referenced plans and documents are incorporated herein
by reference, and the overall project as described in the Final Environmental
Impact Report, EIR-91-05, shall be developed in accordance with the description
therein or as modified by the conditions of approval, and that to the extent the
project describes the measures which will mitigate environmental impacts, the
applicant shall implement those measures contemporaneously with the project; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has by Resolution No. 16767 certified that the
Final Environmental Impact Report, EIR-91-05, was prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental
Review procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and has further certified that the
information contained therein has been reviewed and c~nsidered by them; and,
WHEREAS, the recitals and resolutions of the City Council contained in
Resolution No. 16767 certifying EIR-gl-05 are incorporated herein as if set forth
in full; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council on August 25, 1992, approved the first reading
of an ordinance prezoning the subject property to P-C Planned Community and
adopting amendments to the EastLake I P-C District Regulations to include the
Telegraph Canyon Estates property therein; and,
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on the
Telegraph Canyon Estates Sectional Planning Area Plan, Public Facilities
Resolution No. 16768
Page 2
Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan on
August 12, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received certain evidence on August 12,
1992, as set forth in the record of its proceedings which are incorporated herein
by reference as if they were set forth in full, made certain findings as set
forth in their recommending Resolution No. PCZ-92-A/PCM-91-07, and recommended
to the City Council the approval of said applications and documents based on
certain terms and conditions and findings; and,
WHEREAS, a public hearing was scheduled before the City Council of the City
of Chula Vista on the Sectional Planning Area Plan, Public Facilities Financing
Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan on August 25,
1992; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby find, determine, resolve and order as follows:
1. PIg~NNING COMI~ISSION RECORD
The proceedings before the Planning Commission consisting of a public
hearing on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on July 22, 1992, and
certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report and the
recommendation for approval of the Sectional Planning Area Plan, Public
Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water
Conservation Plan on August 12, 1992, and the minutes and resolutions
therefrom are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
2. EIR COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
As evidenced by their adoption of Resolution No. 16767, the City Council
of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed and considered EIR-91-05, the
environmental impacts therein identified for this project, the Candidate
CEQA Findings, the Mitigation Monitoring Program, and the Statement of
Overriding Considerations. The City Council by certifying EIR-91-05, has
found that it has been prepared in accordance with the requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the
environmental procedures of the City of Chula Vista.
3. AMENDMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The City Council does hereby approve the SPA, PFFP, Air Quality
Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan subject to the following
amendments and conditions.
(1) All mitigation measures contained in EIR-91-05 are hereby made
conditions of project approval.
(2) The Public Facilities Financing Plan shall be approved subject to
the General and Special Conditions contained in the Executive
Summary. The following shall be added to the General Conditions:
Resolution No. 16768
Page 3
The Public Facilities Financing Plan shall be followed with
improvements installed in accordance with said plan or as
required to meet threshold standards adopted by the City of
Chula Vista. In addition, the sequence that improvements are
constructed shall correspond to any future Eastern Chula Vista
Transportation Phasing Plan adopted by the City. The City
Engineer may modify the sequence of improvement construction
should conditions change to warrant such a revision.
An annual fiscal impact report reflecting the actual revenue
and expenditure impacts based upon the development of the
project shall be prepared by the developer. The project shall
be conditioned to provide funding for periods where
expenditures exceed projected revenues. The details of such
a funding program shall be determined prior to approval of the
tentative subdivision map.
(3) The water conservation recommendations and implementation program
discussed on pages 15 and 16 of the Water Conservation Plan, and
as further amended by condition no. 4, are hereby made conditions
of approval of the Water Conservation Plan.
(4) The Telegraph Canyon Estates Water Conservation Plan shall be
revised to include the following language regarding a water offset
policy:
The project shall comply with a City-approved water use
offset policy in which one or more of the following
offsite measures may be required:
Compliance with a regional water use offset
program, to be administered by the San Diego
County Water Authority.
Compliance with a locally administered water use
offset program (such program may be administered
by the City, water district, or a combination of
both);
Implementation of specific water use offset measures for
this project, if neither a regional or locally-
administered water use offset program is in place prior
to issuance of building permits for any portion of this
project.
In the event that a City-approved water offset policy is not in
effect at the time building permits are issued, the requirements
of this plan shall be met through implementation of specific water
offset measures for this project, with the level of offsets and
specific measures to be approved by the City.
Resolution No. 16768
Page 4
(5) The air quality mitigation measures and monitoring program
discussed on pages 24-26 of the Air Quality Improvement Plan are
hereby made conditions of project approval.
{6} Prior to approval of a final map by the City Council, an
affordable housing agreement shall be reached between the
developer and the City. Said agreement shall be in accord with
the adopted Housing Element. In connection with said affordable
housing agreement, the City shall have the option, at a minimum,
to require the Applicant to dedicate fee title, without
reservation or reversion, to sufficient land which, in the
judgment of the City, will permit the construction of housing for
low and moderate income families, as defined in the Housing
Element to the General Plan of the City, in the configuration of
a site plan to be approved by the City, but which will be for not
less than three {3) buildable acres, in a location and of a
character satisfactory to the City.
{7} Approval of a tentative map will be subject to the findings of the
HNTB study of State Route 125 which will provide staff and the
City Council with the necessary information to assist in
determining and/or allocating project approvals.
(8) The SPA Plan shall be amended to provide for (1) the consolidation
and relocation of the CPF acreage adjacent to the project entry
or, in the case of a public street system, adjacent to the central
recreation site, or (2) an agreement providing for a 1.5 acre or
larger CPF site in the first phase of Otay Ranch. If an agreement
for the off-site alternative cannot be reached between the City
and developer prior to tentative map approval, the map shall
indicate a CPF site as noted in (1) above until such agreement is
reached.
(9) If a CPF site(s) is to be provided on-site, the SPA Plan shall be
amended to include the CPF provisions from the Municipal Code.
(10) The P-C District Regulation amendment and related discussion in
the SPA Plan shall be revised to correctly identify the RS-5
regulations as applying to the larger lot product, and the RS-7
regulations as applying to the intermediate and smaller lot
products.
(11) The project shall incorporate public rather than private streets,
the design of which shall be subject to review and approval of the
City Engineer.
(12) If a public street system is required as a condition of approval
of the SPA Plan, the central north-south collector shall be cul-
de-saced at its northerly terminus and the configuration of lots
and street designs shall be adjusted accordingly subject to review
and approval of the City Engineer. If the north-south collector
is cul-de-saced, a pedestrian easement or right-of-way shall be
Resolution No. 16768
Page 5
provided at the end of the cul-de-sac or other acceptable
alternative to accommodate the proposed trail component subject to
review and approval of the City Engineer and Director of Parks and
Recreation.
(13) If a public street system is required as a condition of approval
of the SPA Plan, the PFFP shall be revised to incorporate the
facilities and fiscal impacts thereof.
(14) Should the project be served by public rather than private
streets, it may be necessary to review and modify the proposed
improvements for the central recreation area, i.e., no pool or
spa, but perhaps play structures, etc. Any changes to the
proposed improvements shall be subject to review and approval of
the Planning Commission and City Council with the tentative map.
(15) If the project retains private streets, the walls adjoining open
space districts shall be located outside the district boundary.
Should the project be served by public streets, the walls shall be
located within the district boundary.
(16) The development and design of the private recreation areas shall
be subject to review and approval of the Director of Planning
prior to approval of a tentative map.
(17) Grading for the open space district lot shall provide a level,
clear area at least three feet wide, as measured from face-of-wall
to beginning-of-slope, along the length of any wall abutting said
area as approved by the City Engineer and Director of Parks and
Recreation.
(18) Flag lot design shall adhere to the requirements and standards for
panhandle lots contained in the Municipal Code (Section
19.22.150).
(19) Final recreation trail and fence design and location shall be
subject to approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation.
(20) The CC&R's for the project shall prohibit the parking of RV's or
boat trailers in the development.
(21) The SPA Plan shall be revised to include the requirement that each
lot shall be served by at least one on-street parking space within
200 ft. of the lot it serves. (Failure to meet the standard may
reduce the number of lots.)
(22) Design details for the bridge-like structure at the project entry
shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer and
Director of Planning prior to approval of a tentative map.
(23) The use of street signs other than the City standard is subject to
the review and approval and requirements of the City Engineer.
Resolution No. 16768
Page 6
(24) Specific proposals for enhancing the development edge along the
Telegraph Canyon Road scenic corridor, i.e., varied heights and
setbacks, architectural treatment, and decorative landscaping and
walls, shall be subject to review and approval with the tentative
map.
(25) The SPA Plan is hereby amended to reflect permanent rather than
temporary irrigation of open space districts unless an exception
is granted by the Director of Parks and Recreation Department
prior to approval of a tentative map.
(26) All plant materials, sizes and locations, and provisions for
irrigation of open space maintenance areas shall require review
and approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation prior to the
issuance of a grading permit.
(27) Access points to open space maintenance areas shall be subject to
review and approval by the Director of Parks and Recreation prior
to approval of a tentative map. The access road along the
easterly boundary will be continuous from the multi-purpose
courts, southerly to the Telegraph Canyon drainage channel.
(28) Graded access shall be provided to all storm drain cleanouts,
inlets and outlets, and paved access shall be provided to all
sewer manholes. Exceptions may be determined on a case by case
basis by the City Engineer.
(29) Transit stop locations and designs, including benches and
shelters, shall be subject to review and approval by the Transit
Coordinator and the Director of Planning prior to approval of a
tentative map.
(30) The installation of transit facilities shall be concurrent with
transit service availability. Since this may not coincide with
project development, prior to approval of a tentative map the
developer shall commit to fund these facilities.
(31) A 5 ft. wide d.g. trail with a post and rail fence component shall
be located adjacent to the existing sidewalk on the north side of
Telegraph Canyon Road subject to review and approval of the
Director of Parks and Recreation.
(32) The method of conveyance and maintenance and land to be reserved
for future right-of-way along proposed SR-125 shall be determined,
to the satisfaction of the Director of Public Works, prior to
approval of a tentative map.
(33) A 3 ft. wide solid base shall be provided on all walls fronting
upon an open space district.
Resolution No. 16768
Page 7
(34) The specific treatment of between lot and rearyard slope
conditions will be subject to review and approval in conjunction
with the tentative map.
(35) The three lots south of the water tank along the westerly property
line, in the RS-5 large lot area, shall have their side property
lines extended to the subdivision boundary to delete this area
from the open space maintenance district.
(36) Telegraph Canyon Estates shall submit annual building permit
reports, traffic counts and fiscal impact analysis to the City
commencin9 with the construction of the project and scheduled to
coincide with the annual review of the Growth Management Oversight
Commission.
(37) Approval of the SPA does not constitute approval of final lot
yields or configurations or street alignments or design as shown
on the SPA Plan. Modifications may be made by staff, the Planning
Commission or the City Council during the consideration and review
of the tentative map.
(38) Ten bound, loose leaf copies of the final approved SPA Plan and
related documents, incorporatin9 all conditions and corrections,
shall be filed with the Planning Department prior to approval of
a tentative map.
(39) The SPA, PFFP, WCP and AQUIP Plans shall all be implemented in the
manner therein described except as hereby amended, or except as
may, from time to time, be amended by the City Council.
Failing said conditions, the approvals herein 9ranted may, at the option
of the City, to be exercised by the City Council at a public hearing,
notice of which shall be 9iven to the project applicant, be revoked,
modified or supplemented.
4. CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN, P-C PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONE, GENERAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT AND SECTIONAL PLANNING ARFJ~ PLAN FINDINGS.
P-C Planned Community zone and General Development Plan amendment.
1. The proposed development as described by the general development
plan is in conformity with the provision of the Chula Vista
general plan.
The proposed amendment to the EastLake I General
Development Plan is consistent with the Chula Vista
General Plan in that it shows the Telegra h Canyon Estates
property as Low-Medium Residential ~-6 du/ac) and
establishes a substantial open space reservation along the
Telegraph Canyon scenic corridor. The proposed net
residential density of 4.3 du/ac is below the 4.5 du/ac
midpoint of the General Plan LM range. It has been
Resolution No. 16768
Page 8
concluded that this proposed density is consistent with
Section 6.2 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan,
which requires consideration of 1) compatibility with
existing and proposed surrounding land use patterns; 2)
sensitive response to the physical characteristics of the
site; and 3) achievement of a variety of housing types.
2. A planned community development can be initiated by establishment
of specific uses or sectional planning area plans within two years
of the establishment of the planned community zone.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates Sectional Planning Area Plan
has been submitted for concurrent consideration with the
P-C prezoning and EastLake I General Development Plan
amendment.
3. In the case of proposed residential development, that such
development will constitute a residential environment of sustained
desirability and stability; and that it will be in harmony with or
provide compatible variety to the character of the surrounding
area, and that the sites proposed for public facilities, such as
schools, playgrounds and parks, are adequate to serve the
anticipated population and appear acceptable to the public
authorities having jurisdiction thereof.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates development consists of three
residential lot sizes in order to provide for varied and
balanced single family residential opportunities within
the project. Private recreation sites and common open
space areas will contribute to the long term livability
and stability of the neighborhood. Recommended
alternative provisions for Community Purpose Facilities
will ensure sites are properly located and of an adequate
size to serve their intended use.
4. In the case of institutional, recreational, and other similar
nonresidential uses, that such development will be appropriate in
area, location and over-all planning to the purpose proposed, and
that surrounding areas are protected from any adverse effects from
such development.
The provision of two private recreation areas will
supplement public park and recreation facilities for the
residents of Telegraph Canyon Estates and their location
in the central and eastern portions of the property will
protect surrounding areas from any adverse impacts.
Recommended alternative location for Community Purpose
Facilities will also protect surrounding residents from
potential adverse impacts.
5. The streets and thoroughfares proposed are suitable and adequate
to carry the anticipated traffic thereon.
Resolution No. 16768
Page 9
The streets have been designed to City standards and are
adequate to carry the anticipated traffic. The
recommendation to use public rather than private streets
will incorporate the project's streets into the
surrounding circulation network.
6. The area surrounding said development can be planned and zoned in
coordination and substantial compatibility with said development.
Surrounding areas are already planned, zoned and developed
with compatible single family and mobile home uses.
Section Planninq Area Plan.
1. The proposed sectional planning area plan is in conformity with
the general development plan of the P-C zone, any adopted specific
plans, and the Chula Vista general plan and its several elements.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates Sectional Planning Area Plan
reflects the land use, circulation, open space and other
policies and elements of the EastLake I General
Development Plan and Chula Vista General Plan.
2. The proposed sectional planning area plan would promote the
orderly, sequentialized development of the involved sectional
planning area.
The SPA Plan and Public Facilities Financing Plan contain
provisions, requirements and standards to ensure the
orderly development of the project in a manner consistent
with the land use policies and facilities needs of the
City and other public agencies. The Telegraph Canyon
Estates SPA is proposed to be developed in a single phase
with a 3 to 4 year build-out.
3. The proposed sectional planning area plan would not adversely
affect adjacent land use, residential enjoyment, circulation, or
environmental quality.
The SPA Plan as conditioned will be compatible with
surrounding uses and will not adversely affect the
environment quality or circulation requirements of
adjacent areas.
5. CEQA FINDINGS, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS
Adoption of Findinqs.
The City Council does hereby approve and incorporate as if set forth full
herein the CEQA Findings for EIR-91-05, a copy of which is attached hereto
as Exhibit A.
Resolution No. 16768
Page 10
Adoption of Mitiqation Monitoring Proqram.
As required by Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council
hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for EIR-91-
05, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B, and incorporates it
herein by reference as if set forth in full. The City Council finds that
the program is designed to ensure that, during the project implementation
and operation, the project applicant and other responsible parties
implement the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation
measures identified in the findings and program.
Adoption of Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and
alternatives, 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, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Section 15093, adopts the Statement of Overriding Considerations for EIR-
91-05, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A, identifying the
specific economic, social, and other considerations that render the
unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects still significant
but acceptable.
6. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
The Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista is
directed, after City Council approval of this project, to ensure that a
notice of determination, together with a copy of this resolution, and all
ordinances and resolutions passed by the City Council in connection with
this project, if filed with the County Clerk of the County of San Diego.
Presented by ~t~for ~
Robert A. Leiter Bruce M. Boogaard '
it A
Director of Planning C y ttorney
Resolution No. 16768
Page 11
EXHIBIT A
TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES
CEQA
CANDIDATE FINDINGS AND STATEMENT
OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT EIR # 91-0S
(SCH # 91071033)
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 21081
OF THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QU,iI,Vfy
ACT
AND SECTIONS lS091 AND lS093 OF TITLE 14 OF THE
CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
Resolution No. 16768
Page 12
1. INTRODUCTION
It is the policy of the State of California and the City of Chula
Vista that a project shall not be approved if it would result in a
significant environmental impact if it is feasible to avoid or
substantially lessen the impact to a level below significant. Only
when there are specific economic, social, or other considerations
which make it infeaeible tO mitigate an impact, can a project with
significant impacts be approved.
Therefore, when an EIR has been completed which identifies one or
more potentially significant environmental impact, one of the
following findings must be made|
1. Changes or alternatives which avoid or substantially lessen
the significant effects as identified in the FEIR have been
required or incorporated into the project, or
2. Such changes or alternatives are within the responsibility and
Jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency
making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such
other agency or can and should be adopted by such other
agency, or
3. Specific economic, social or other considerations make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives
identified in the FEIR.
[Public Resources Code Section 21081]
A draft environmental impact report, dated May 1992 (the "Draft
EIR"), was prepared for the Project and circulated for 45 days for
public comments. A public hearing was held on July 22, 1992. A
final environmental impact report, dated July, 1992 (the "Final
EIR" or "FEIR"), was prepared based on comments received on the
Draft EIR, including those received after the close of the public
comment period. The Final EIR consists of two parts: the EIR (with
technical revisions), and the comment letters and responses to
comments ("Response to Comments"). The Final EIR was also made
available to commentors August 5, 1992 to August 12, 1992 for
review, although this did not reopen the public review period.
The following Findings are made by the Decisionmaker(s) relative to
the conclusions of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR #91-
05) for the proposed Telegraph Canyon Estates project (the
"Project") located in the City of Chula Vista.
Resolution No. 16768
Page 13
II. PROJECTDESCRIPTION
The 112.4-acre Telegraph Canyon Estates project site is in the
Eastern Territories Planning Area of the City of Chula Vista. It
is north of Telegraph Canyon Road (Stay Lakes Road), m~ediately
west of the proposed future extension of State Route 125 (S.R.
125). The site is not presently a part of the City of Chule Vista,
but it is within the "Special Study" area of the City's General
Plan, meaning that it will require action by the Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO) to be included into the Chula Vista
Sphere of Influence and annexed into the City.
The project is proposing to develop a maximum 350 single-family
dwelling units (du's), two private park areas, and two community
purpose facility sites on approximately 82 acres of the 112.4-acre
site, yielding a net density of 4.3 du/ac. Approximately 30.2 acres
of the property will be in open space.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates project area was originally included
as a part of the Stay Ranch area and has been included in previous
studies conducted for that larger project. Because the project
area is physically separated from the rest of the Otay Ranch
property by Telegraph Canyon Road, and because the site is adjacent
to the Eastlake Community, it is now being proposed as a
development separate from Otay Ranch. If approved, it will be
developed in a manner similar to and compatible with the Eastlake
Planned Community and will be processed as an amendment to the
Eastlake General Development Plan, Sectional Planning Area Plan,
and Planned Community District Regulations.
IlL DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
The discretionary actions for the proposed project involve the
following permits/approvals and the Decisionmaker(s) who will take
such actions:
· an Annexation (Decisionmakers: LAFCO, the Chula Vista
Planning Commission, and the Chula Vista City Council)
· a Chula Vista Sphere of Influence Amendment
(Decisionmakers: LAFCO, the Chula Vista Planning
Commission, and the Chula Vista City Council)
· a General Development Plan (GDP) Amendment
(Decisionmakers: the Chula Vista Planning Commission and
the Chula Vista City Council)
Resolution No. 16768
Page 14
· a Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Amendment
(Decisionmakers: the Chula Vista Planning Commission and
the Chula Vista City Council)
· a Tentative Subdivision Map (TM) (Decisionmakers: the
Chula Vista Planning Commission and the Chula Vista City
Council)
These Findings are made by the Decisionmaker(s) pursuant to Section
21081 of the California Public Resources Code, and Section 15091
and 15093 of the California Administrative Code, title 14.
IV. THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
For purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")
and the findings hereinafter set forth, the administrative record
of the Decisionmaker(s) shall include the Draft Environmental
Report ("Draft EIR"), and the Final Environmental Impact Report
("Final EIR") and its appendices~ Response to Comments on the Final
EIR~ all reports prepared by staff and their consultants, all
documents submitted by members of the public and interested
agencies in connection with the EIRs and the Project generally~ and
any documents embodying the Decisionmaker(s) or other action on the
Project, including staff reports and resolutions and the minutes of
public hearings on the Project.
V. TERMINOLOGY
Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines (Ca1. Code of Regulations,
tit. 14) requires that, for each significant environmental effect
identified in an EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency
must issue a written finding reaching one or more of three
allowable conclusions. The first is the "[c]hanges or alterations
have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which
would avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect as identified in the Final EIR." The second potential
finding is that ',[s]uch changes or alterations are within the
responsibility and Jurisdiction of another public agency and not
the agency making the finding. Such changes have not been adopted
by such other agency." The third permissible conclusion is that
"[s]pecific economic, social, or other considerations make
infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternatives
identified in the Final EIR."
Resolution No. 16768
Page 15
VI. LEGAL EFf'ECTOFHNDINGS
To the extent that these findings conclude that mitigation measures
outlined in the EIR avoid or substantially lessen potentially
significant environmental effects, are feasible and have not been
modified, superseded, or withdrawn, the Decisionmaker(s) hereby
binds itself to require implementation of those mitigation measures
on the Project applicant and any assigns or successors in interest.
These findings constitute a banding set of obligations that will
come into effect when the Dec~siormaker(s) adopts a resolution
approving the Project.
VII. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
As required by Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the
Decisionmaker(s), in adopting these findings, also adopts a
mitigation monitoring and reporting program designed to ensure
that, during project implementation, the Project applicant, and any
other responsible parties comply with the feasible mitigation
measures identified below. That program is contained in the Final
EIR at pp. 211-223.
VII!. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT AND SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND
MITIGATION MEASURES
The EIR sets forth environmental effects of the Project that would
be potentially significant or significant in the absence of
mitigation measures. These effects (or "impacts") are set forth
below, along with any mitigation measures adopted that will avoid
those potentially significant or significant effects. Also set
forth are certain significant effects that cannot be substantially
lessened or avoided even with the adoption of all feasible
mitigation measures proposed in the Draft and Final EIRS. In
adopting these findings, the Decisionmaker(s) also adopts a
statement of overriding considerations setting forth the economic,
social and other benefits of the Project that will render that
significant effect acceptable. That Statement of Overriding
Considerations is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A.
Public testimony, written correspondence, and comments on the FEIR
indicate that there are differences of opinion as to the
conclusions in the FEIR and that the Project could result in
cumulatively significant and unmitigable impacts on air quality,
cu~ulatively significant and unmitigated impacts on water
availability, and significant and unmitigated impacts on biological
resources. The following presents theDecisionmaker(s) findings on
the impact of the Project.
4
Resolution No. 16768
Page 16
IX. FINDINGS
The EIR sets forth environmental effects of the Project that would
be potentially significant or significant in the absence of
mitigation measures. These effects (or "impacts") are set forth
below, along with any mitigation measures adopted that will avoid
those potentially significant or significant effects. Also set
forth are certain significant effects that cannot he substantially
lessened or avoided even with adoption of all feasible mitigation
measures proposed with the Draft and Final EIRs.
1. Geology/Soils
Impact. Development of the site could expose the project to
geologic hazards associated with compressire and expansive soils
found on-site, and to hazards from regional seismic activity.
Findinc. Potentially significant geological impacts can be avoided
by adhering to the remedial grading measures set forth in the
geotechnical report prepared for the project, and by monitoring
during project grading. All grading and drainage plans will be
reviewed and approved by the City*s Engineering Division prior to
issuance of a grading permit. A Testing and Observation Report
will be prepared and submitted to the City*s Engineering Division
to verify that all requirements have been met.
P~eontologicalSemiti~
Impact. The Oligocene Otay and Sweetwater Formations which occur
on-site have a high potential for containing significant fossils.
Project grading may expose or destroy subsurface fossil-bearing
strata, providing new and important paleontological data. Adverse
impacts to paleontological resources could occur.
F~ndin~. A paleontological monitor will be on-site at 811 times
during original cutting of previously undisturbed sediments mapped
within the Sweetwater and Otay Formations. Project construction
will be temporarily halted, if necessary, to allow recovery of
fossil resources.
2. Hydrology/Water QualiW/Gwundwater
Impact. Short-term erosion impacts could occur during project
grading and construction. Existing erosion problems associated
Resolution No. 16768
Page 17
with past agricultural uses will be eliminated after site
development, but the amount of runoff will increase with added
hardscape. The project could potentially degrade water c/uality in
· Telegraph Canyon Creek from urban pollutants.
~indin~. Mitigation will require lmplemen~mtion of an erosion
control plan during construction, construction of the storm drain
plan proposed in the SPA, and adherence to National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements for urban runoff
and stormwater discharge. All plans shall be designed and
constructed to meet City Engineering Standards.
3. Land~rm A/teradon/Aestheti~
I~act. The project will require a balanced cut and fill of
830,O00cubic yarris. The grading plan has been developed to follow
the dominant site landforms, and the project is proposed to be
constructed in a terraced fashion. The maximum manufactured slopes
will be 50 feet in height and the deepest cut will be 45 feet on
the eastern knoll.
Findind. Because the project area is adjacent to Telegraph Canyon
Road, which is designated a Scenic Highway by the City of Chula
Vista, the SPA has been developed to conform with the Telegraph
Canyon Scenic Highway Criteria. The project will provide setbacks
from the canyon floor; preserve and enhance the natural stream
corridor and trail system; ensure that the project's architectural
design, height and siting of structures, and landscaping and signs
are considered in the development; and provide landscaping to
beautify the adjacent portion of the scenic route inside the
project area. The project's design concept is based on design
elements of the Eastlake Design Manual Guidelines, in order to
assure compatibility with the adjacent Eastlake communities.
4. Air Qu~i~
Impact. The project will create short term impacts from dust and
emissions during project construction. It will incrementally add
to cumulative impacts to the San Diego Air Basin by adding
pollutants from increased traffic and household emissions.
Finding. Mitigation for short term effects will require
implementation of dust control measures duringproject grading, and
compliance with the requirements of the APCD and ARB. Long-term
impacts will be reduced by adherence to the Air Quality
· Implementation Plan prepared for the SPA. However, because the San
Diego region is a non-attainment area for ozone and particulars
matter, cumulative air quality impacts will remain significant and
unmitigable. 'Specific economic, social, or other considerations
6
Resolution No. 16768
Page 18
make infeasible other mitigation measures or project alternatives.
The remaining unavoidable significant cumulative impacts are
acceptable when balanced against the facts set forth above and in
the attached Statement of Overriding Considerations.
5. Biolo~cal Resources
Impact. The majority of the project site is characterized by
disturbed and weedy vegetation associated with past agricultural
uses. The project will eliminate this vegetation, along with 0.9
acres of wetland habitat.
Fi~dinc. Although the wetland habitat ks fragmented and of low
quality, its loss is still considered a significant impact. Its
loss could be mitigated by the applicantts dedication of 0.9 acres
of wetland habitat off-site (Otay Ranch), to be preserved in
conjunction with adjacent wetland habitat. Until specific off-site
mitigation for biology is imposed and adopted, the impact to the
freshwater marsh would be considered significant and unmitigated.
6. Transportation
Impact. The project will generate a maximum of 3500 average daily
trips (ADT). The level of service (LOS) will be lowered from C to
D on Telegraph Canyon Road between Otay Lakes Road and Eastlake
Parkway, from B to C between Crest Drive and Paseo Del Rey, and
from A to B between Paseo del Rey and Paseo Ladera, but
~ntersections will operate at acceptable levels and no significant
direct impacts will occur.
Findina. The applicant will pay its fair-share of area
improvements to reduce cumulative impacts. These may include
roadway widening, restriping, or installation of other signals~
this will be determined by the City Engineering Department during
its annual review of cumulative impacts of all projects in the
Eastern Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan (ECVTPP). While
the project will not require a traffic signal on Telegraph Canyon
Road, the applicant Is proposing to fund and provide a signal.
7. No~e
ImPact. Construction of the project wtll expose existing residents
to short-termnoise impacts. The project will not ~ncrease Rmhient
noise levels significantly, but portions of the property will be
subject to long-term adverse noise impacts from traffic on S.R.
125.
7
Resolution No. 16768
Page 19
Findino. Mitigation will require construction of a noise wall
along the eastern portion of the site, and possibly the use of
noise-reducing construction materials and techniques. All noise
walls will be constructed in conformance with the design guidelines
set forth in the SPA, which follow the Eastlake I Design
Guidelines. All noise mitigation measures shall be made conditions
of the final map. Prior to issuance of building permits, the City
of Chula Vistams Noise Abatement Division shall review final
grading plans to determine whether additional noise materials are
required for second stories of homes which may be impacted by
future noise from S.R. 125.
8. Land Use/Gener~ Plan/Zo~ng
Impact. The pro~ec~ area will require annexation to the City of
Chula Vista, which will require approval by the Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO). The proposed density is consistent
with the City's General Plan designation for the site and conforms
with guidelines set forth in the Eastlake Planned Community
District Regulations, General Development Plan, and Sectional
Planning Area Plan. No significant land use impacts have been
identified.
Findind. The project includes a 1.5-acre Community Purpose
Facility (CPF) site, which meets the net acreage requirement of the
City. The required 10 percent affordable housing requirement will
be met by dedication of a parcel off-site for this purpose, payment
of in-lieu fees, or a combination of these measures.
9. Parh/Re~eation/Open Space
ImPact. The project will increase park/recreation use demand by
bringing approximately 1,134 new residents into the City. Under
the provisional standards for parks set forth by the City of Chula
Vista, the Telegraph Canyon project is required to set aside a
total of 3.4 acres as dedicated park land.
Findind. The SPA proposes to dedicate 30.2 acres (27%) of the
total 112.4 project acreage to parks, recreational areas, and open
space. These will include private neighborhood parks and mini-
parks. A portion of the central natural swale and the entire
drainage channel adjacent to Telegraph Canyon Road will be
preserved as open space, as will the eastern property boundary
abutting the proposed S.R. 125 freeway. These open space easements
will constitute approximately 20 acres. A San Diego County Water
Authority easement, in the center of the site, will be developed as
a linear garden totalling 3.1 acres. A public trail is also
proposed to connect the project to the Eastlake Community and to
the proposed community recreation center. Private
Resolution No. 16768
Page 20
parks/recreational and open space areas totalling 5.3 acres are
proposed. These consist of a of a recreational center with a
changing cabana, pool and spa, a private multi-purpose court area,
and the linear garden mentioned above. To provide additional
mitigation for impacts to park facilities, the applicant shall pay
in-lieu park fees in conformance with Section 17.10 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code. This will be done prior to or as a condition
of the Final Map.
10. Public Services and U~ides
Impact. The project will introduce 102 new elementary school
students and 105 secondary students into the area. Because the
Chula Vista School District elementary schools and the Sweetwater
Union High School District secondary schools are operating above
permanent capacities, the addition of these students will create
significant adverse impacts.
Findind. The applicant is currently negotiating with the Chula
Vista Elementary School District to form a CFD for Salt Creek Ranch
and the Telegraph Canyon Estates project (CFD 7). The project will
annex into the CFD prior to the Final Map. The applicant has also
met with the Sweetwater Unified High School District to begin
negotiations to form a new Community Facilities District (CFD 7).
The project will be required to annex into CFD 7 prior to the Final
Map. Annexations into this new CFD will fully mitigate impacts to
the districts.
Impact. Implementation of the project will increase demand on
water. Based on the Central Area Water Master Plan Update average
of 600 gallons per day per dwelling unit, the proposed 350-unit
project will result in an estimated daily residential water use
rate of 210,000 gallons. The SPA projects an average potable water
demand of 190,432 gallons per day, and an average reclaimed water
demand of 92,463 gallons per day, for a total daily water demand
projection of 282,895 gallons.
Findina. While increased water consumption is a major regional
issue, the project is capable of providing water to residents. The
Central Area Water Master Plan has specified an infrastructure that
will allow a sufficient amount of water to serve the project, and
barring general regional unavailabllity, water can be supplied to
the project. The project will meet water Threshold/Standards.
However, on a project specific basis, water impacts shall remain
significant but mitigable pending the requirement to obtain a will-
serve letter from the OWD once building permits are issued.
In response to regional water shortage, the Telegraph Canyon
Estates project proposes additional conservation measures for
individual households, including use of ultra-low flow indoor
9
Resolution No. 16768
Page 21
fixtures and appliances (low-flush toilets, showers and faucets),
pressure reducing valves.
It is estimated that approximately 92,463 gallons of potable water
per day could be saved if reclaimed water is used to irrigate
common areas (parks and open space) within the project. While
reclaimed water is not currently available for use within the
proposed project, the project is providing a system to use
reclaimed water irrigation when it becomes available. As this
proJect's contribution, the applicant shall either install the line
across project frontage or pay a proportional share of the line, as
determined by the Otay Water District. The size of the line will
be determined by the City of Chula Vista and the OWD, based on the
demand for reclaimed water in the proJect's vicinity. Since
reclaimed water is not currently available for the project to
offset water demand, water availability impacts are deemed
significant and unmitigable on a cumulative regionwide basis. If
reclaimed water service becomes available in the future, this
cumulative water availability impact will be mitigated.
11. Public Heath
Impact. The data available at the present time are not sufficient
to warrant a determination of health and safety hazards to future
residents from proximity to the existing SDG&E transmission lines.
Findinc. While the determination of a significant impact cannot be
concluded at this time, the project applicant shall comply with any
future EMF policy adopted by the City of Chula Vista prior to
consideration of the Final Map. This measure would reduce
potential impacts to below a level of significance.
B. Public Resources Code Section 21081(b)
The Decisionmaker(s) having reviewed and considered the information
contained in the FEIR for the project, and the information in the
Administrative Record, finds that there are no further changes or
alterations to the project that would avoid or substantially lessen
the significant environmental impacts that are within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and should
be adopted by such other agency.
10
ResolLtion No. 16768
Page 22
C. Public Resources Code Section 21081(c~: The Infea~ibili~yJ;d.Miligal~Me~ures
and Pro.iect Alternatives Other Than the Proposed ~ .C, aR.Y.O,D Estates.
The Decisionmaker(s) approval of the Project as proposed will cause
significant adverse environmental effects which cannot be fully
mitigated to biological resources, cumulative air quality, and
cumulative water availability. The mitigation measures outlined in
Section A of these Findings will reduce impacts to biological
resources to below a level of significance. However, until the
mitigation parcel is recorded, the biological impacts shall remain
significant. The unmitigable effects to cumulative air quality and
regional water availability cannot be fully mitigated on a project
specific basis, at this time.
The Decisionmaker(s) has also considered whether any of the project
alternatives outlined in the EIR could feasibly substantially
lessen or avoid this effect while satisfying the objectives of the
Telegraph Canyon Estates Project. (See Citizens foroualitvGrowth
v. City of Mount Shasta (1988) 198 Ca1. App.3d 433, 433-445 [243
Cal.Rptr. 727]= ~e also Pub. Resources Code, section 21002.) As
will be explained below, the Decisionmaker(s) concludes that none
of the proposed alternatives could feasibly both meet the Project~s
objectives and substantially lessen or avoid the unavoidable
significant effects of the Project, and thus has decided to approve
the Project as proposed with all feasible mitigation measures
outlined above.
However, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(c), the
Decisionmaker(s) find and conclude that the following independent
economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the
project alternatives or other possible mitigation measures as
identified in the EIR. The Decisionmaker(s) further find that each
independent consideration, standing alone, would be sufficient to
make infeasible the following project alternatives.
1. No Pro_iect Alternative/No Development Alternative and Alternative Site ~alvsis
This alternative consists of no annexation, GDP, SPA, or TSM for
the project. The site will remain under County Jurisdiction, and
will remain under limited control under the S-S7 (Special Study
Area) land use designation until studies were completed to enable
reclassification of the property. At this point, it would be
speculative to determine what type of development will be allowed,
but it is anticipated that it will be required to provide either a
transitional land use from adjacent undeveloped land to more
densely developed land (such as that present at Eastlake Shores)~
or be developed consistent with other types of residential uses on
adjacent parcels within the City of Chula Vista. It is probable
11
Resolution No. 16768
Page 23
that an overall development plan, such as a specific plan, will be
required by the County, to avoid piecemeal development on a lot-by-
lot basis.
If the property were developed under the existing land use
designation and zoning, the 2.5-acre minimum lot size would allow
a gross maximum of 44 single-family dwelling units on the lla-acre
parcel. This number will likely be lower, in reality, given the
constraints on developable land (easements for SDG & E and the
SDCWA, wetland area, and setbacks for scenic highways and S.R.
125). All grading will be subject to the County's Resource
Protection Ordinance. Impacts to landform alteration/aesthetics,
air quality, biological resources, traffic, air quality and
hydrology will probably be reduced. Impacts to geology/soils,
noise, and public health will be similar to the proposed proJect's
impacts under this alternative. Impacts regarding social factors,
community tax structure, and demands on public services will likely
be greater. Given the site's proximity to the City of Chula Vista,
these impacts will directly affect the City (schools, parks,
sewers, water supply, emergency services, etc.) and
Threshold/Standards Policy would probably be exceeded. This
alternative would not be consistent with the Cityts General Plan or
Zoning Ordinance. Due to these social considerations, this
alternative is considered infeasible.
No Development. Under this alternative, the project area will
remain vacant and land use will remain unchanged. No impacts to
geology, hydrology, landform alteration, air quality, biological
resources, traffic, noise, public facilities, parks, or public
health will occur. Like the no project alternative, this
alternative would not be consistent with the City of Chula Vista's
or County of San Diego's land use designations for residential
development, and it would result in loss of tax revenue for the
City. It is also considered to be infeasible due to these social
factors; additionally, it would not achieve the basic objectives of
· the proposed project.
2. Alternative
This alternative will be a reduced project developed at a low-
medium residential density (R-1-7). A total of 280 single-family
homes would be constructed on approximately 70 acres resulting in
a density of 4.0 dwelling units per acre. Open space would
increase to 31.6 acres and would encompass a larger portion of the
central swale on-site. The Community Purpose Facility would remain
the same as in the proposed project.
No circulation plan has been designed for this alternative, but
access points-would be the same as those in the proposed project,
12
Resolution No. 16768
Page 24
and the overall street and cul-de-sac system would be similar. If
~his alternative is adopted, the following impacts are expected to
occur.
GeologY/Soils. Impacts would be similar to those of the proposed
project. Constraints from these factors would not expected to be
more or less difficult under this alternative or the proposed
project.
HvdroloaV/water Oualitv/Groundwater. In terms of project drainage
effects on water quality, the discharge into the Telegraph Canyon
Creek Channel is regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit requirements~ as such, neither
the proposed project nor this alternative (or any alternative) can
have a discharge that significantly degrades (as defined by the EPA
in the NPDES requirements) the water quality in the receiving
channel. Fewer houses would probably translate to fewer vehicles
using and parking on the streets, resulting in less material to be
carried off during rainstorms. While this could allow easier
attainment of the NPDES requirements, the reduction in material is
not likely of sufficient magnitude to affect the way the system
would be designed to meet NPDES requirements.
This alternative may result in less runoff, as there would likely
be less hardscape and more permeable surface (yards, open space).
Even with the same design the reduction would not be proportional
to the drop in units, as the road system could not be reduced
proportlonally. Calculations on storm drainage capacity in
Telegraph Canyon Creek channel showed that the proposed project's
input is less than significant, and that the channel would still be
well under capacity. This alternative may result in less runoff~
but the amount of runoff was not found to have a significant impact
with the proposed project.
With the inclusion of much of the central swale in open space there
would likely be somewhat more input of fertilizers, pesticides, and
- herbicides into the drainage than under the proposed project, as
there would likely be private yards adjacent to the swale. Private
use of these chemicals is difficult if not impossible to control.
Landform Alteration/Aesthetics. landform alteration would be
similar under the proposed project and this alternative. The
overall landformwould be retained, and the street system must be
created, regardless of the 60-unit difference.
Aesthetics is a subjective environmental issue. People who object
to the placement of a 350-unit residential project on this site
would likely object to the placement of a 280-unit project.
Conversely, even with having to maintain the street system, a
reduction in units may allow the designers to create a more
aesthetically .pleasing project. Given that a street system is
necessary, it is likely that the proposed project and a design
13
Resolution No. 16768
Page 25
under this alternative would be considered aesthetically similar by
most passers-by.
Within the project, the retention of the marsh area would likely
have mixed reactions from the residents. Small areas of marsh do
not have the wildlifethatpe~le fix~mttractive. The marsh would
quickly become a solid band of cattails if left alone. This is not
considered aesthetically pleasingbymastpeople. =taeodors of the
decomposing vegetation in the s-m~er and the presence of mosquito
and biting flies would be objectionable to residents living near
the marsh. Prom an aesthetics perspective, the landscaping of the
proposed project and the elimination of the biting insects would
likely be considered preferable by the majority of residents.
air Oualitv. Prom a project perspective, the reduction in units
associated with this alternative would result in lesser air quality
impacts, as fewer vehicles would be present, and fewer fireplaces
and furnaces would be used. Prom a regional perspective, impacts
depend on whether it is assumed that the 60-unit difference
disappears, or if it is fulfilled elsewhere. The main source of
air pollution in the county is from vehicles. If the 60 units will
be supplied else~dlere, and if that compositely creates more travel
for the inhabitants to work and shop, then greater air quality
effects will occur than with the proposed project. If the 60-unit
difference disappears, or if the "displaced" inhabitants select
housing that will result in less travel, then lesser air quality
effects will occur than with the proposed project. However, this
alternative would still result in cumulatively significant
unmitigable impacts.
Blolo~ical Resources. As noted in the Biological Resources
technical report, and in the EIR section, the marsh area is not of
high value. Potentially adverse impacts associated with
preservation of the wetland within the development are discussed
above under aesthetics. While preservation on-site of resources is
usually the preferable choice, given the size and isolated nature
of the marsh area to be retained, preservation of higher quality
habitat off-site, as in the proposed project, would result in
greater ecological value.
~ltural Resources. There is no impact on cultural resources with
either the proposed project or this alternative.
Transnortation. The number of projected ADTs for the proposed
project is 3500~ with this alternative that ~,-~er would be reduced
to 2800. ~ss traffic would be considered a ~neficial impact,
although cumulative impacts would still occur and mitigation
measures similar to those required for the proposed project would
be needed.
Noise. The noise generator for this project is largely the future
State Route 125 and Telegraph Canyon Road. These noise sources are
14
Resolution No. 16768
Page 26
independent of the project density. Under this alternative more
redesign may be possible as a part of the noise mitigation, but
features such as noise walls would probably still be required.
Land Use/General Flan/Zoning. Both the proposed project and this
alternative are in general compliance with these Issues. The
Issue of affordable housing and community purpose facilities will
be met with the proposed project and this alternative.
Community Sociel Factors. Neither the proposed project nor this
alternative would have Impacts to community social factors.
Community Tax Structure. This alternative would generate lesser
fees, as it results in lesser density. Fewer units would be built,
resulting in lower property tax assessments. Fees paid to
schools, parks, the water district, and other public facilities
would be reduced.
Parks/Recreation/Open space. More open space would be created with
this alternative than with the proposed project. The tennis
courts, pool, and jacuzzi facilities associated with the proposed
project are eliminated in this alternative. The decreased number
of units would result in fewer funds for public park land and no
private recreational facilities would be provided.
Public Services and Utilities. Lesser demands would be placed on
public services and utilities with this alternative. The number of
students projected would reduced from 105 to 84, but the project
would still be required to annex into a CFD to fully mitigate
impacts.
Public Realth. The lesser density of this alternative may allow
designers to incorporate greater distance from the transmission
lines. At this time it is not possible to determine significance
of the lines to public health.
As discussed above, incorporation of a part of the marsh into the
project allows a source of mosquitoes and biting flies, and
provides a potential for disease. This alternative could introduce
significant health concerns.
Thus, while this alternative would reduce some Impacts, mitigation
measures similar to those required for the proposed project would
still be needed. This alternative would not create significant
impacts to biological resources, but could create impacts to
aesthetics and public health by preserving the marsh on-site.
Cumulative impacts to air quality would remain unmitigated under
this alternative. Therefore, as this alternative does not
substantially avoid or lessen the adverse effects of the proposed
action, it is not considered to he environmentally preferable and
therefore is infeasible.
15
Resolution No. 16768
Page 27
3. Alternative ~ B
This alternative would be identical tothe proposed project, except
the proposed street system would be public rather than private.
All impacts associated with this project would be the same as with
the proposed project, except those related to Community Tax
Structure.
As currently proposed, the project contains approximately 2.5 miles
of private local streets. As such, the City of Chula Vista would
not incur any maintenance costs. Such costs would be borne by the
property owners through a homeowners association. If the streets
were dedicated to the City of Chula Vista as public streets,
however, the City would be required to maintain them within its
repular street maintenance program in its Operations and
Maintenance Budget.
Redesignation of the private streets to public would allow through-
traffic to gain access through the project site. However, volemes
of traffic are not projected to change significantly, and
additional traffic impacts are not expected to occur under this
alternative.
The proposed project would have a net positive fiscal balance for
the City of Chula Vista, with assessed fees and taxes exceeding
costs. With the City assuming the streets and the ensuing
maintenance, that fiscal balance would remain positive, although it
would be reduced. Under the proposed project (private streets) the
net positive fiscal balance in year fifteen would be projected at
$82~,043. Under this alternative (public streets), the projected
net positive fiscal balance would be $454,718. This is a reduction
of $372,325.
This alternative would result in the same impacts as the proposed
project, with the exception of community tax structure. The Cityms
fiscal balance, while still positive, would be reduced under this
alternative. The significant, ttnmitigated impacts with respect to
biological resources and cumulative air quality and water supply
would remain. While this alternative cannot be deemed infeasible
it would not substantially lessen or avoid the adverse effects
created by the proposed project and ts not considered to be
environmentally preferable.
4. Off-SiteA]tematives
The State Supreme Court has recently ruled that ~IRs must include
an analysis of alternative sites for proposed projects, even though
the sites may not be owned by the applicant [Citizens of Goleta
Valley v. Board of Supervisors ("Golets I") (Sd Dtst. 1988) 197
Cal. App. 3d 553 [276 Cal. Rptr. 410]). Three alternative sites
16
Resolution No. 16768
Page 28
were analyzed in the EIR. These are considered infeasible because
the potential environmental effects were found to be greater than
those expected on the proposed project area.
Ranch Alternative ~
This site consists of approximately 500 acres within the Otay Ranch
property and is located southwest of the Telegraph Canyon Estates
site. Like the Telegraph Canyon Estates property, this site is
within the unincorporated area of San Diego County.
This site encompasses a portion of Poggi Canyon. The site is within
the County of San Diego's Otay Subregional Plan and is subject to
land use and zoning regulations defined in that document. The
General Plan's land use classification for the property is
Residential (low-medium density, 3-6 du per acre), and the site is
zoned A-70, Limited Agriculture, allowing i du per 4 or 8 acres).
The proposed Otay Ranch plan would provide low-to-medium density
(3-6 du/acre) residential development on this parcel.
If the Otay Ranch alternative site is chosen, impacts to
geology/soils, hydrology/water quality/groundwater, air guality,
cultural resources, traffic, public services, and public health are
expected to be similar to those which would occur with
implementation of the project as proposed. Fewer impacts related
to landform alteration and noise are expected. However,
impacts to biological resources could potentially increase, and the
effect on community tax structure would be greater. Particularly
in terms of biological resources, this alternative is not
considered to be environmentally preferable.
B. Otay Mesa Alternative Site
This site also consists of approximately 500 acres of vacant land.
It is within the Jurisdiction of the City of San Diego, and is
about 0.5 miles east of 1-805, north of Otay Mesa Road. The site
is presently vacant and is surrounded by vacant land. It is within
the City of San Diego's Otay Mesa Community Planning area and is
designated for mixed land uses (very low to low-medium density
residential, neighborhood commercial, parks, and schools). The
property includes portions of the proposed California Terrace and
Hidden Trails projects. BrownField is approximately one mile east
of the site.
If the Otay Mesa alternative site is chosen, impacts to traffic,
community social factors and tax structure, and public services are
expected to 'be similar to those which would occur with
17
ResolutiOn No. 16768
Page 29
implementatiom of the project as proposed. Fewer impacts would
occur with respect toparks, recreation, and open space. However,
it is anticipated that ~actswouldbegreater to geology/soils,
hydrology/water quality/gr~oum~lwater, land!fore alteration and
aesthetics, biological and c~ltural resources, lar~l use/general
plan elements, and public health.
This 500-acre site is composed of two parcels north and south of
OtayLakes Road and west of~he Lower Otay Reservoir. It is in the
City of Chula Vista~s Eastern Territories and is the easternmost
property within the Eastlake Planned Community. The property is
proposed to be developed as the Eastlake Vistas and Woods
residential neighborhoods.
The site is currently vacant, with development existing to the east
and approved to the west. The future extension of S.R. 125 is Just
over one mile west of the site. Salt Creek, an important
biological and aesthetic resource, is located on-site.
If the Eastlake Vistas and Woods alternative site is chosen,
impacts are expected to be approximately the same as on the
proposed project site for landform alteration/aesthetics, air
quality, traffic, land use, community social factors and tax
structure, utilities, and public health. Impacts related to noise
and parks/recreation/open space would likely be reduced. However,
there is the potential for increased impacts to geolog~/soils,
hydrology, and biological and cultural resources.
18
Resolution No. 16768
Page 30
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS:
Background
The State CEQA Guidelines provide:
"(a) CEQA requires the Decisionmaker(s) to balance the benefits of
a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks
in determining whether to approve the project. If the
benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable
adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental
effects may be considered *acceptable'.
(b) Where the decision of the public agency allows the occurrence
of significant effects which are identified in the Final
but are not at least substantially mitigated, the agency shall
state in writing the specific reasons to support its action
based on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record.
This statement may be necessary if the agency also makes a
finding under Section 15091(a)(2) or (a)(3).
(c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations,
the statement should be included in the record of the project
approval and should be mentioned in the Notice of
Determination." (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093)
The Decisionmaker(s) in approving the various permits that are the
subject of the FEIR, having considered the information contained in
the FEIR and supporting technical reports, GDP, and SPA~ and having
reviewed and considered the public testimony and record, makes the
following Statement of Overriding Considerations in support of the
Findings. The Decisionmaker(s) further find and conclude that the
public benefits of the project outweigh the identified significant
unmitigated impacts with regard to biological resources, cumulative
air quality, and regional water availability. The Decisionmaker(s)
find the following factors support approval of the project despite
the significant and unmitigated effects of the proposed project,
and make the following Statement of Overriding Considerations:
1. The project will fulfill · demonstrated need for housing in
the Chula Vista Sphere of Influence area.
According to SANDAG's Series 7 Growth Forecast, the population
within the City of Chula Vista Sphere will grow to 186,900 by 2010.
This represents a 31% increase over the 1986 sphere population of
129,200. The SANDAG forecast further projects that the n-mher of
occupied units will increase to 70,800 occupied units in 2010, up
35% over the 1986 total of 46,100 units. The regional population
is forecast to climb to 3,154,500 by 2010. While the population
19
Resolution No. 16768
Page 31
growth rate within the City of Chula Vista's current city limits is
22% below the regional rate, the growth rate in the sphere area is
projected at 174% higher than the regional rate.
The proposed lot and home sizes will be provided for varied single-
family market opportunAties wAthin the community. The 10%
affordable housAng requirement will beprovided by dedication of a
parcel off-sAte for this purpose, payment of in-lieu fees, or a
combination of these or other comparable measures.
2. The project is in conformenos with the Eastlake Policy Plan
and Chula Vista General Plan.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates General Development Plan (GDP) will
implement the Eastlake Policy Plan Goals to
· enable the City to adopt measures providing for the
development of the surrounding areas
· establish conditions which will allow land uses to exist
in harmony with the community
· and allow a diversity of uses, relationships, buildings,
and open space in · planned concept while insuring
substantial compliance with the spirit, intent, and other
provisions of the General Plan.
The project will be compatible with adjacent land uses and has been
designed to create harmony between land uses. Overall landforms
will be preserved and the project will adhere to the General Plan's
Scenic Highway Criteria.
3. The Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) prepared for the
project will provide a mechanism for funding needed facilities
within the City of Chula Vista.
The PFFP is the first to be prepared under the requirements of the
City of Chule Vistams Growth Management Program and Implementation
Ordinance No. 2448. The PFFP quantifies how the Telegraph Canyon
Estates project relates to all other projects which are at some
stage An the Cityms overall development process. It ensures that
the development of the pro~ect is consistent with the~verall goals
and policies of the citymsGeneral Plan, Gt~)wthManagement Program,
and that the development of the project will not adversely impact
the Quality of Life Standards.
Under the PFFP, the applicant will pay development impact fees for
public facilities (police, fire and emergency medical services~
schools and libraries~ parks and recreation) and water, sewer and
2O
Resolution No. 16768
Page 32
drainage) and a transportation development fee pursuant to the most
recently adopted program by the City Council.
4. The recreational facilities and funding provided by the
project are needed in the City of Chula Vista.
The project, as proposed, would provide private recreational
facilities for residents. In addition, the applicant will pay in-
lieu park fees which will be used to fund needed park and
recreation facilities in other areas of the City of Chula Vista.
~re:formation Of new
5. Approval of the project will ew~e~ite ~
Community Facilities Districts (CFD) ~o~~ y schools.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates project was formerly a part of the
Otay Ranch project, and thus it had been assumed that this parcel
would annex into the new CFD that will be formed for Otey Ranch if
that project is approved in the future.
As Telegraph Canyon Estates is now being processed separately, the
applicant has negotiated with both the Chula Vista Elementary
School District and the Sweetwater Union High School District to
form a new CFD prior to Otay Ranch. CFD 7 will annex the proposed
project with the Salt Creek Ranch project (already approved and
built) to provide funds for needed school facilities.
6. With the provision of an offsite easement dedication for 0.9
acres of existing wetlends to be preserved and incorporated
into a larger wetland habitat area, biological impacts will be
reduced to below a level of significance.
The project applicant proposes to coordinate the location and
dedication of an offsite conservation easement for 0.9 acres. If
this offlets mitigation occurs, the removal of oneits wetlands will
be mitigated. The exact location of the offsite conservation
easement will be determined and dedication will occur prior to the
removal of the oneits wetlands.
7. The provision of reclaimed water service to the site will
mitigate the impact regional to water availability.
The project proposes to construct an oneits dual-water system to
provide for the use of both potable and reclaimed water. The
production of reclaimed water is controlled by the Otay Water
District (OWD). Distribution of reclaimed water is controlled by
the construction of reclaimed water pipelines. Currently,
reclaimed water pipelines do not reach the project site. The OWDtS
Master Plan for reclaimed water facilities designates that
reclaimed water pipelines will be provided in OteyLakes Road, from
21
Resolution No. 16768
Page 33
Lane Avenue to the project site. k'nen these pipelines are
constructed, the project will be served by reclaimed water by the
OWD. The provision of service of reclaimed water will mitigate the
impact on water availability to below a level of significance.
For these reasons, on balance, the City finds that there are
planning, social, and economic considerations resulting from this
project that serve to override and outweigh the proJectes
unavoidable significant environmental effects.
22
Resolution No. 16768
Page 34
EXHIBIT B
TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES
MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
EIR 91-05
Resolution No. 16768
Page 35
223
Resolution No. 16768
Page 36 -
224
Resolution No. 16768
Page 37
225
Resolution No. 16768
Page 38
o
226
Resolution No. 16768
Page 39
227
Resolution No. 16768
Page 40
228
Resolution No. 16768
Page 41
r~ 0
rr m ~
229
Resolution No. 16768
Page 42
~n
230
Resolution No. 16768
Page 43
Resolution No. 16768
Page 44
232
Resolution No. 16768
Page 45
233
Resolution No. 16768
Page 46
PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista, California, this 25th day of August, 1992, by the following vote:
YES: Councilmembers: Horton, Malcolm, Moore, Rindone, Nader
NOES: Councilmembers: None
ABSENT: Councilmembers: None
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers: None
r o
Tim Na~le , May r
ATTEST:
ever yr~. AGthelet, ~ity Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) ss.
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do
hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. 16768 was duly passed, approved,
and adopted by the City Council held on the 25th day of August, 1992.
Executed this 25th day of August, 1992.
Beverly/.~Aut~elet, Ci~½ Cl~rk