HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Rpts./1999/02/24
AGENDA
CITY PLANNING COMMISSION
Chula Vista, California
7:00 p.m.
Wednesday, February 24, 1999
Council Chambers
Public Services Building
276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista
CALL TO ORDER
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE
ROLL CALL/MOTIONS TO EXCUSE
APPROVAL OF MINUTES
February 3, 1999
INTRODUCTORY REMARKS
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Opportunity for members of the public to speak to the Planning Commission
on any subject matter within the Commission's jurisdiction but not an item on
today's agenda, Each speaker's presentation may not exceed three minutes,
1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCM-95-01B; Amending the Otay Ranch SPA One Public
Facilities Financing Plan to expedite Olympic Parkway
Construction.
Staff is recommending that public hearing be continued to a date certain of March 10,
1999,
2. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC; Request to construct a gasoline
fueling facility at Costco Warehouse at 1144 Broadway - Costco
Wholesale,
3. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-99-18; Proposal to install, operate
and maintain a 45-foot high monopole, housing 12 panel
antennas and equipment building on the Eastlake High School
Sports Field - Nextel Communications,
Planning Commission
- 2-
February 24, 1999
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of the following applications filed by the Otay
Water District for 509 unincorporated acres located at the
northern terminus of Hunte Parkway:
1) PCI-99-01 - Prezone to A-8, Agricultural; and
2) PCC-99-16 - Conditional Use Permit to establish an 18-
hole championship golf course and associated facilities.
5. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC-99-26 - Request to construct, operate and maintain five 75
foot high monopole type AM transmission antenna on property
owned by the Otay Water District west of Eastlake High School
- Applicant: Pacific Spanish Network, Inc. a.k.a. KURS 1040
AM, San Diego
DIRECTOR'S REPORT:
COMMISSIONER COMMENTS:
ADJOURNMENT
to the Planning Commission Meeting of Wednesday, March 10, 1999 at
7:00 p,m, in Council Chambers,
COMPLIANCE WITH THE AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista, in complying with the American with Disabilities Act (ADA), requests
individuals who require special accommodations to access, attend, and/or participate in a City
meeting, activity, or service, request such accommodations at least forty-eight hours in advance
for meetings, and five days for scheduled services and activities, Please contact Diana Vargas
for specific information at (619) 691-5101 or Telecommunications Devices for the Deaf (TDD)
at 585-5647. California Relay Service is also available for the hearing impaired.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ~
Meeting Date 2/24/99
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit PCC 99-06; Request to construct
a gasoline fueling facility at Costco Warehouse at 1144 Broadway- Costco
Wholesale
On December 16, 1998 the Planning Commission held a public hearing on this item, Based upon
public input and Commission discussion, the item was continued to the meeting of January 27,
1999, The continuance was in order to allow the applicant to address the following concerns:
1) feasibility of relocating the proposed fueling facility to the rear of the Costco warehouse, 2)
adequacy of stacking analysis discussed in the traffic study (including a breakdown of anticipated
gallons/week sold broken down by days, peak hours, etc" and 3) adequacy of available parking,
The applicant has since requested the item be continued to the meeting of February 24, 1999,
The Environmental Review Coordinator has conducted an Initial Study, (IS 99-03) and concluded
that there would be no significant environmental effects. He, therefore, recommends that the
Negative Declaration issued on IS 99-03 be adopted,
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt the Negative Declaration prepared for IS 99-03 and adopt
Resolution PCC 99-06 conditionally approving the proposed fueling facility,
ANALYSIS:
1. Feasibilitv of on-site relocation of facilitv:
Due to potential stacking problems associated with the proposed location of the fueling facility,
the Commission requested the applicant work with staff to analyze locating the fueling facility to
the rear of the Costco warehouse, Two scenarios were prepared by the applicant (Options 1 and
2, See Attachment 2).
Staff has reviewed both of these scenarios and determined that neither one is advisable, "Option
I" has the potential for conflicts between customer ingress into the facility as well as concerns
Page 2, Item No.:L
Meeting Date: 2/24/99
regarding on-site turning movements required to exit the facility, "Option 2" is not a viable option
because it would greatly impact the existing loading dock area.
Based upon the latest queue analysis of the existing Rancho del Rey facility (conducted on January
7 & 9th, 1999), the applicant presented staff with a third location alternative (Option 3, See
Attachment 2) in which the existing Oxford Street driveway would be relocated approximately 30
feet further west to accommodate additional on-site stacking, This relocation of the driveway will
result in the loss of an additional twelve parking spaces,
2. Adequacy of Stackin~ Analysis.
The traffic analysis prepared for the project (June 25, 1998) included a discussion regarding the
amount of queue and associated stacking concerns, The study stated that there is approximately
120 feet of available stacking distance between the originally proposed location of the pump
islands and the Oxford Street driveway to the west. This distance allows for approximately six
vehicle lengths. As part of this original traffic study, a queue analysis was conducted during peak
hours on both a weekday (May 27, 1998) and weekend day (May 17, 1998) at the Rancho Del
Rey Costco. During this on-site analysis, the maximum queue at one of the pump positions was
five on a weekday and three on a weekend, The traffic study concluded that the length of the
queues anticipated at the Broadway fueling facility will be similar to the Rancho del Rey facility
and will rarely impact the Oxford Street driveway, It further concluded that, even if this were
to happen, it would not be a significant impact since Oxford Street is a relatively low volume
roadway and does not extend westward to any street.
At their meeting of December 16, 1998, the Planning Commission questioned the adequacy of the
stacking analysis as presented in the traffic study (the Design Review Committee had expressed
similar concerns). As a result, the Commission requested the applicant to provide information,
including the number of projected gallons of gasoline sold per week, broken down by day and
peak hour. The applicant responded by providing a generalized forecast for its Broadway facility
(see Attachment 3). In this forecast, the applicant explains why they believe the volume of cars
will be much less than at the Rancho del Rey facility, Based upon the request by the Planning
Commission, staff further requested the applicant to provide an additional daily/peak hour
breakdown of the data, The applicant has indicated this data is not available,
On January 4, 1999, the applicants traffic consultant met with City staff (including Traffic
Engineering) to discuss the issues which had been raised by the Commission at their meeting of
December 16, 1998, As a result of this meeting, the traffic consultant conducted a new queue
analysis of the Rancho del Rey facility as part of a revised traffic study (February 10, 1999, see
Attachment 5), This revised analysis indicates there were occasions when the queue exceeded six
cars, The revised study further indicates, however, that based upon Costco's forecast of 400,000
Page 3, Item No.:L
Meeting Date: 2/24/99
gasoline sales/month, queues of about one-half of those observed at Rancho del Rey are
anticipated at the Broadway facility. This equates to a maximum queue length of four (4) vehicles.
A follow up meeting was held with the applicant, their traffic consultant and City staff on
February 3, 1999 to further discuss the projected project impacts and recommendations, As a
result of these further discussions and infonnation provided, the Traffic Engineering section now
concurs with the applicant that the best location for the fueling facility is as originally proposed
by the applicant. Traffic Engineering concurs with the applicant that the volume of vehicles will
be significantly less than at the Rancho del Rey facility since: 1) there are a significantly largerO,
number of gasoline stations in the vicinity of the Broadway Costco site than exist in the vicinity
of the Rancho del Rey facility (and that some of the existing gas stations along Broadway offer
lower prices than gas stations surrounding the Rancho del Rey facility); and 2) the volume of
traffic along East "H" Street in the vicinity of the Costco facility is significantly higher than the
traffic volume along Broadway, For example, 1998 traffic counts along Broadway between Oxford
and Naples and between Oxford and Palomar Street were approximately 20,800 and 25,100
average daily trips (ADT's) respectively, On the other hand, 1988 traffic counts along East "H"
Street between Paseo del Rey and Paseo Ranchero were approximately, 44,400 ADT's, The
applicant has indicated that if the attendant present during peak hours is unable to control the
queue to a point where cars are stacked onto Oxford Street, the applicant will initiate the
relocation of the Oxford Street driveway further to the west. (It should be noted that the Planning
Commission, at their meeting of December 16, recommended an attendant be present on site at
all times (not just at peak hours)). As mentioned earlier, a concern of staff is that this relocation
of the driveway will result in the loss of twelve additional parking spaces,
3, Parking
At the meeting of December 16, 1998, the Planning Commission discussed concerns raised by
representatives of Kids Warehouse regarding the inadequacy of parking existing on the site, As
a result, staff was directed to further review the parking availability on the site,
The proposed project will result in the net loss of six parking spaces, However, the master
parking analysis (see Attachment 6) indicates there is actually a net excess of 32 parking spaces
available in the overall center. This includes the parking located to the rear of the existing
buildings, Forty five (45) employee parking spaces will be added/restriped directly behind the
Costco warehouse, It should be further noted that the lack of pedestrian access doors at the rear
of the existing businesses is detrimental to customer parking at the rear of the buildings. This
problem was actually worsened as a result of the tenant improvements to the Kids Warehouse
building which further impairs pedestrian access to the rear of the existing Price Bazaar,
Staff is recommending that a condition of approval of the project be that all Costco employees are
Page 4, Item No.:L
Meeting Date: 2/24/99
required to park in the forty five (45) designated parking spaces to the rear of the Costco
warehouse, These parking arrangements would be enforced as outlined in memorandum dated
October 14, 1998 from the General Manager of the Costco facility on Broadway,(See Attachment
7)
CONCLUSION
Based upon the direction of the Planning Commission, staff has worked with the applicant to
analyze a number of alternative locations for the proposed fueling facility at the subject site, In
addition to alternative location options, the applicant has provided an updated queue analysis of
vehicle stacking at the existing Rancho del Rey fueling facility, Based upon this review, and
further discussions with the applicant, staff believes the best location for the proposed facility is
that which was originally proposed by the applicant. Staff does not believe this will result in
increased traffic congestion or stacking of vehicles onto Oxford Street.
Attachments:
1. Planning Commission minutes and report of meeting dated December 16, 1998.
2. Optional locations 1,2 and 3 as presented by the applicant
3. Supplemental infonnation provided by applicant in response to Planning Commission concerns.
4. Negative Declaration issued for IS 99-03
5. Updated Traffic Study prepared by consultant
6. Narrative of Parking Analysis
7. Memorandum regarding enforcement of employee parking
8. Ownership Disclosure Statement
H: ISHAREDlPLANNINGlJEFFICOSTCO.RPT
RESOLUTION NO. PCC 99-06
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING APPROVAL OF A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ALLOW
THE CONSTRUCTION OF A FUELING FACILITY AT 1144 BROADWAY IN THE
CT (THOROUGHFARE COMMERCIAL) ZONE.
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a conditional use permit was submitted on July 29, 1998
by Costco Wholesale; and
WHEREAS, said application requests approval of a conditional use permit to allow the construction
and operation of a fueling facility at 1144 Broadway; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has conducted an Initial Study IS 99-03 of
possible envirorunental impacts associated with this project, and is recommending adoption of the Negative
Declaration issued on IS 99-03; and
WHEREAS, on October S, 1998 the Resource Conservation Commission voted 5-0 recommending
adoption of the Negative Declaration issued on IS 99-03; and
WHEREAS, on November 16, 1998 the Design Review Committee voted to conditionally approve the
architecture of the proposed project; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said special use permit
application and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper
of general circulation in the City and its mailing to property owners and residents within SOO feet of the
exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely December 16, 1998 at
7:00 p,m, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing
was thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was continued to January 27, 1999 in order for staff and the applicant to
resolve site planning issues; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission meeting of January 27, 1999 was canceled and continued to
February 3, 1999; and
WHEREAS, on February 3, 1999, the public hearing was opened and continued by the applicant to
the meeting of February 24, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered all reports, evidence, and testimony presented at
the public hearing with respect to subject application,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION DOES hereby
find, determine, resolve, and order as follows:
I. Findings.
1. That the proposed use at this location is necessary or desirable to provide a service or
facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or the
community. I
RpI;.'.O!lltlon prr QQ_On
Pogf' ')
The automated fueling facility will provide a necessary and desirable service by providing a convenient
fueling facility for Costco members, who will be able to shop and fuel their vehicles in one trip,
Furthermore, with the one-way traffic patterns and the electronic transactions, Costco members are
able to quickly refuel and continue on to park in the main parking lot and shop at the warehouse,
2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be detrimental to
the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.
The project will be subject to permitting by the San Diego Air Pollution Control District and by the
San Diego County Department of Environmental Health, as well as local permitting requirements for
the underground tank and piping system. The facility will be constructed according to applicable
building code requirements. The project exceeds the Municipal Code parking requirements in terms
of the number of parking spaces that are provided, Any potential visual impacts are mitigated by the
fact that there is adequate landscaping provided along Broadway, In addition, no traffic related impacts
are anticipated from the proposed project because adequate stacking room is provided within the
facility and the level of service on Broadway will not be reduced,
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified in the
code for such use.
The facility is required to comply with the regulations of the Municipal Code, and in any case where
it does not comply, this Conditional Use Permit is subject to modification or revocation, The Planning
Commission does hereby find that the conditions herein imposed on the grant of permit or other
entitlement herein contained is approximately proportional both in nature and extent to the impact
created by the proposed development.
4. That the granting of this conditional use pennit will not adversely affect the general plan
of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency.
Granting of this Conditional Use Permit will not affect the City of Chula Vista General Plan,
II. Conditional Grant of Pennit; Conditions
In light of the above findings, the Planning Commission hereby grants approval of the permit subject to the
following conditions:
A. Construct the Project as described in the application, except as modified herein or by the
Design Review Committee.
B. One on-site attendant shall be required at all times in order to enforce the single direction flow
of traffic and be otherwise available in the event of an emergency as well as provide assistance
to customers as needed.
C. Comply with all City ordinances, standards, and policies except as otherwise provided in this
resolution. Any violation of City ordinances, standards, and policies, or any condition of
approval of this Conditional Use Permit or any provision of the Municipal Code, as
~
Rp~n111ti()n prr QQ_Of\
Pogf' ,
determined by the Director of Planning, shall be grounds for revocation or modification of this
Conditional Use Permit by the City of Chula Vista,
D, The project will be subject to all requirements and conditions of approval of the Design
Review Committee DRC 99-08 regarding the architectural design of the facility as outlined in
letter to applicant dated November 17, 1998,
E. Comply with all requirements of the Chula Vista Building Division including the following:
1. Structural plans and engineering calculations must be stamped/signed by
Civil/Structural Engineer.
2, Obtain a building permit for the fueling facility.
3, Obtain a separate building permit for any signage proposed,
F. Comply with the City's Municipal Code noise standards, If on review the City finds that the
project does not meet the Municipal Code noise standards, the City may revoke or modify this
Conditional Use Permit.
G. Applicant/operator shall hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless the
City, its Council members, officers, employees, agents and representatives, from and against
any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and cost, including court costs and
attorneys' fees (collectively, "liabilities") incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly,
from (a) City's approval and issuance of the Conditional Use Permit, (b) City's approval or
issuance of any other permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in
connection with the use contemplated herein, and,( c) Applicant's installation and operation of
the facility permitted hereby, including, without limitation, Applicant's/operator's compliance
with this provision is an express condition of this Conditional Use Permit and this provision
shall be binding on any and all of the Applicant's/operator's successors and assigns,
H, This permit shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted conditions imposed after
approval of this pennit to advance a legitimate governmental interest related to health, safety
or welfare which the City shall impose after advance written notice to the Permittee and after
the City has given the Pennittee the right to be heard with regard thereto. However, the City,
in exercising this reserved right/condition, may not impose a substantial expense or deprive
Permittee of a substantial revenue source which the Pennittee cannot, in the normal operation
of the use permitted, be expected to economically recover,
I. Hours of operation shall be 5 a.m, to 10 p.m. Monday thru Friday and 8 a,m. to 8 p,m,
Saturday and Sunday.
J. Outdoor sound systems for music, paging, ads or similar announcments are prohibited.
K. Satisfy the following conditions to the satisfaction of the Chula Vista Fire Department:
1. Obtain a permit for installation of underground tanks, Complete form FPB-17
2. Provide cut sheet for tanks/equipment.
3, Provide approved fire extinguishers per UFC 1002,
.1
Rp~nlllt;nn prr QQ_O;;
p"gP 4
L. This conditional use permit shall become void and ineffective if not utilized within one year
from the effective date thereof, in accordance with Section 19.64,260 of the Municipal Code.
M, Prior to issuance of building permits, sewer capacity fees will be required based on final
building plans submitted.
N, Comply with all requirements of the Crime Awareness Unit of the Police Department including
scheduling a security evaluation of the site, Contact the Crime Prevention Unit at 691-5127.
O. Prior to commencement of operation, applicant shall install and/or restripe employee parking
spaces to the rear of the Costco warehouse facility,
P. All Costco employees are required to park in designated employee parking spaces to the rear
of the Costco warehouse, Said parking arrangement shall be enforced as outlined in memo
dated October 14, 1998 from Jesse Sanchez, General Manager of Costco #405, Chula Vista,
Q. Submit plans to the Sweetwater Authority for review prior to issuance of building permits.
R. Submit a lighting plan of the employee parking area to the Zoning Administrator for review
and approval prior to issuance of building permits.
IV. A copy of this resolution shall be transmitted to the applicant.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 24th day of February, 1999, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
John Willett, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
H, ISHAREDlPLANNINGIJEFFICOSTCO .RES
~
AtrAl.HM/;:NT .1
Planning Commission Minutes
- 3 -
December 16, 1998
2. PUBLIC HEARING: PCC-99-06; Request to construct a gasoline fueling facility at Costco
Warehouse, 1144 Broadway - Cost co Wholesale
Background: Jeff Steichen, Associate Planner reported that this is a request for a Conditional
Use Permit to allow for the construction of a six dispenser fueling facility on the site of the
existing Costco facility at 1144 Broadway immediately adjacent to the corner of Broadway and
Oxford Street. The entire shopping center site is comprised of 31.3 acres, of which, the Costco
site is 9 acres.
The proposed fueling facility will require the removal of 51 existing parking spaces in the
southeast corner of the site, Due the concern over loss of parking spaces, the applicant was
required to do an overall parking analysis of the entire 31.3 acre site, The applicant is
proposing to utilize a fenced-in area directly behind the Costco warehouse to accommodate
45 employee-only parking spaces,
During a preliminary review of the project on November 2, 1998, the Design Review
Committee had concern with there not being sufficient stacking distance between the pumps
and the drivew<,y coming off Oxford Street. Staff also has concern with stacking of vehicles
backing into the driveway and onto Oxford Street.
A traffic impact analysis for the project indicates that there is a stacking distance of
approximately 120 feet between the pump islands and the Oxford Street driveway, which
translates into approximately 6 vehicles, A study conducted at the existing Rancho Del Rey
facility, which also contains 6 dispensers, revealed that there were no more than 5 vehicles
qued at anyone time, The study concludes that the length of the ques anticipated will be
similar to the Rancho Del Rey facility and will rarely, if ever, impact the Oxford Street
driveway,
During the review process, comments were received from the Sweetwater Authority expressing
concerns with groundwater contamination, specifically a substance known as MTBE which is
considered to be potentially carcinogenic. Staff has met with SWA and has agreed to
condition the project to require that plans be submitted to them for review prior to issuance of
building permits,
Staff included a condition that an on-site attendant be present at all times, however, the
applicant opposes this condition and is proposing to have an on-site attendant only during peak
hours and available by roam phone which is worn at all times. Based on the applicants request
to modify this condition, staff contacted the Fire Marshal and he did not oppose the applicants
proposal because they had previously submitted plans which included the installation of video
monitors with the canopy, transmitting into the warehouse and the ability to initiate emergency
shut-offs from within the warehouse as well.
Applicant also requested to modify the language under the condition for hours of operation to
include the word "generally". Staff does not agree with this request.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt the Negative Declaration
prepared for IS 99-03 and adopt PCC-99-06 approving the conditional use permit for the
J
Planning Commission Minutes
-4-
December 16, 1998
proposed fueling facility with the revision to condition B as recommended by the applicant
regarding attendant hours.
COMMISSION DISCUSSION:
Commissioner Ray asked for clarification on the revised condition that was left on the
dais, because it reads "One on-site attendant shall be required at all times on the Costco
site and available by roam phone,..",
In addition, what does the word "generally" mean, on the hours of operation condition?
Jeff Steichen responded that the applicant is proposing have someone at all times at the
actual site, which includes the warehouse building and be available by roam phone,
but will only be at the gas station site during peak hour periods,
Staff does not agree adding the word "generally" on the hours of operation condition
because it would be extremely difficult to enforce.
Commissioner Thomas concurred with Commissioner Ray's concerns and stated that
he has first-hand experience as a former gas station dealer, with problems that may
arise such as, special needs for the handicapped, cars pulling out with the nozel in the
car, and spills, and strongly opposes not having a full-time attendant at the gas station,
Commissioner Tarantino asked if Costco should decide to close the Broadway facility
sometime in the distant future, what type of environmental impact would the fueling
facility have on any potential new tennant on the site.
Bob Leiter, Director, stated that fueling facilities are heavily regulated by the County
Environmental Health Department and other agencies, The City did conduct an Initial
Study which determined there were no environmental impact, however, that is
primaril'l regulated by agencies other than the City.
Commissioner O'Neill stated that the concern that Sweetwater Authority expressed over
the hazards associated with MTBE, although somewhat legitimate, are not as potentially
hazardous as they once thought, in comparison with the emissions. The Authority's
concerns probably stem from the use of wells and the double containment system fails.
Since all new tanks and former tanks are required by law to be retrofitted to the new
double containment tanks, the likelyhood of leaks occuring a greatly reduced.
Commissioner Hall expressed concern with not having a full-time attendant at the
fueling station site,
Public Hearing Opened 8:15
Bruce Kreager, Barghausen Consulting Engineers stated that the Costco fueling facilities offer
two grades of gasoline (Regular and Super Unleaded) typically at 6 cents plgal. less than their
~
Planning Commission Minutes
- 5-
December 16, 1998
competitors and are able to do this by sales volume and limiting the product to two types of
gasoline.
Mr. Kreager further stated that the hours of operation for the fueling facilities are typically from
5:00 a,m, to 10:00 p,m, on week days and 8:00 a.m, to 8:00 p,m, on weekends. He clarified
that the word "generally" was intended in the event that they might compress or expand the
hours of operation by an hour or half hour, and asked for clarification from staff what would
happen if they decided to change the hours; would they be in violation of this condition, or
would there be an administrative means by which to adjust the hours.
The fueling facilities are designed to be both fully automated and remotely supervised, All
sales are activated by the use of a Costco member card followed by inserting a credit or debit
card, and there are no cash sales,
The remote supervision, which the Fire Marshal supports, entails having video monitors on the
underside of the canopy that are positioned at the fueling pumps and are being relayed to the
front counter in the inside of the warehouse where there are monitors that display what is seen
on those cameras, Additionally, there is a help phone which is located at the canopy. If a
customer has difficultly operating the dispenser, they can request help by using the phone,
which will immediately ring the roam phone, a walkie-talkie-type phone, that the warehouse
manager wears at all times,
Mr. Kreager further stated that Costco has chosen to go above and beyond what is the current
State requirement for underground storage regulations and have installed monitoring systems
located between the dual walls of the tanks and inside the tanks which provide continuous
measuring of the levels of gasoline,
In response to the concern over people driving off with the nozzel in the car; the hoses that are
used by Costco have double-popped valves so that in the event that someone drives away, the
valve will contain the fuel within the hose and will not release any product into the
environment.
For the record, Mr, Kreager stated that Costco's commitment to staying at the Broadway
location can be substantiated by the amount of money they have invested in remodels, both
recently and future, which exceeds 2,5 million dollars,
Commissioner Thomas stated that he would support having staff do an administrative change
of hours if the applicant so desires, however, still opposes not having a full-time attendant.
Commissioner Ray stated his understanding is that if the applicant wishes to regress the hours
of operation, he may do so without City approval, however, if he wishes to expand the hours
of operation, it would need to be cleared with the City, however, he would support directing
staff to do it administratively.
Commissioner Ray also stated that as a user of the Rancho Del Rey station, he has experienced
excessive stackir;g and wanted to know what measures would be taken to ensure that the same
problem does not occur at the Broadway site,
,
Planning Commission Minutes
- 6-
December 16, 1998
Mr. Kreager responded that the traffic study indicated the traffic count on Broadway is about
half of that on East H Street (22,000 ADT's vs, 45,000 ADT's). Unlike other stations, the Costco
station is available only to members and studies indicate that people who are already shopping
at the warehouse will also make use of the station on that same trip, Furthermore, the volume
of sales at the Broadway facility is much less than that at Rancho Del Rey.
David Medelbaum, Kid's Warehouse, stated he opposes the project because it would
exacerbate the existing parking problem that adversely affects Kid's Warehouse. When they
first leased the space, the best that they were offered is to have designated pregnant parking in
front of the store, which could not be enforced, It is his opinion that this shopping center is
grossly short of parking spaces. The center simply is not designed to have employee or
customer parking in the rear of the building. This is a problem with vandalism and theft and
you need a full-time security guard policing the back parking lot, and would need to be fenced
in. Therefore, this is not an option to employees or customers.
Jackie, Kid's Warehouse Manager, strongly opposes the project because increased congestion
will worsen the existing traffic and parking problems,
Rafael Chavez, former Kid's Warehouse store manager, stated the parking situation was
problematic, narrow parking spaces, empty boxes and shopping carts, had his car broken into
when he parked in the rear.
Scott Boreman, Traffic Engineer, Linscott law & Greenspan, stated according to City parking
standards, even with the loss of 51 parking spaces, the parking requirements are met. In
addition, he stated that back in May when the parking and traffic analysis started, at a randomly
selected time, the parking utilization was at 55%.
Public Hearing closed 8:50
Commissioner Hall stated he appreciated the comments made by Kid's Warehouse personnel
and understood they have legitimate concerns, some of which can be addressed, like the empty
boxes and carts strewned throughout the already congested parking lot. He does have some
concern with not having the full-time attendant, however, if there have been no problems with
the Rancho Del Rey facility, he is inclined to support the applicant's proposal.
Commissioner Ray stated that (PRIOR TO APPROVING THE PROJECT) if the project is
approved, he would like to see an internal traffic flow and parking study and favored looking
into creative ways to lessen the queing and spill on to Oxford Street by moving the driveway
further west.
In addition, if the project is approved, Cmr, Ray would propose to have a six month review of
the parking and traffic conditions, and that a concerted effort be made by Costco to implement
a consistent, frequent cart removal program.
Chair Willett asked if the parking analysis figures on Attachment C included the parking in the
front only,
i
Planning Commission Minutes
-7 -
December 16, 1998
Jeff Steichen responded that it encompassed the entire site, including the back of the building.
Commissioner Thomas stated that he concurs with Cmr, Ray's comments, however, he would
like to have the additional information before the project is approved. He also asked how the
applicant and staff justifies removing 51 parking spaces from the existing lot to accommodate
the station.
In addition, he asked what was the projected gallonage for this facility.
Jeff Steichen responded that the applicant has submitted a parking plan which will contain 45
employee parking spaces at the rear of the Costco building and they will be requiring their
employees to park there,
Jessie Sanchez, Costco Manager responded that Rancho Del Rey gasoline sales is
approximately 195,000 gallons per week with 45,000 ADT, The projection for the Broadway
site at peak will be approximately 130,000 gallons per week,
Commissioner O'Neill stated that the stacking issue needs further review and the security and
housekeeping issues are probably out of the Commission's purview,
Bob Leiter stated that the traffic analysis reported that even if the traffic volumes were as great
as those at the Rancho Del Rey site, the stacking would accommodate the activity except on
rare occasions,
Commissioner O'Neill strongly urged the applicant to consider moving the facility to the rear
of the Costco building, Not only is this area underutilized, but with the added traffic to the
back, it would bring more security to the entire Price Bazaar tenants,
Bob Leiter concurs with the Commissioners desire to pursue the possibility of extending the
queing and staff would be willing to work with the applicant's traffic engineer to further explore
the possibi I ities.
Another possibility is to reconfigure and condition the parking space to be more accessible to
the other store fronts. However, it is not something that can be resolved tonight and perhaps
Costco would be willing to look into it.
MSC (O'Neill/Thomas) (6-0-0-0) to continue PCC-99-06 and request that the applicant further
study the feasibility of moving the facility to the rear of the building, improving the queing
situation soliciting the City Traffic Engineer's input, return to the Planning Commission with
a more comprehensive report which is to include statistical information on number of
vehicles based on projected gallon sales, ADT's, and that this item be continued to January
27, 1999. Motion carried.
4\
ATTACHMENT 1
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item -L
Meeting Date 12/16/98
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Conditional Use Pennit PCC 99-06; Request to construct
a gasoline fueling facility at Costco Warehouse at 1144 Broadway- Costco
Wholesale
The applicant is requesting a Conditional Use Permit to allow for the construction of a new
gasoline fueling facility on the southeast corner of the existing Costco store. The fueling facility
is intended to be immediately adjacent to the corner of Broadway and Oxford Street and to provide
service to customers visiting the Costco store, in much the same way as the service station on East
H Street at the Costco supports its customers,
The Environmental Review Coordinator has conducted an Initial Study, IS 99-03, of possible
environmental impacts associated with this project, Based on the Initial Study, the Environmental
Review Coordinator has concluded that there would be no significant environmental effects and,
therefore, recommends that the Negative Declaration issued on IS 99-03 be adopted,
RECOMMENDATION:
That the Planning Commission adopt the Negative Declaration prepared for IS 99-03 and adopt
Resolution P.C, 99-06 approving the conditional use pennit for the proposed fueling facility.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS:
Resource Conservation Commission:
On October 5, 1998 the Resource Conservation Commission voted 5-0 recommending adoption
of the Negative Declaration issued on IS 99-03,
Desig-n Review Committee:
On November 2, 1998, the project went before the Design Review Committee as a preliminary
review regarding the proposed architecture of the fueling facility, In addition to discussion of the
architecture, the DRC wanted it noted for the record that they had concerns regarding the stacking
of vehicles for the proposed project. They were concerned that there may not be sufficient
,~
P (' QQ-Oh
P~cr"" ,.,
stacking distance between the proposed pumps and the driveway corning off Oxford Street. This
concern is discussed in more detail in the body of this report, On November 16, 1998, the DRC
voted 3-0 to conditionally approve the architecture of the proposed project.
DISCUSSION:
1. Site Characteristics
The proposed Costco fueling facility will be located at the southeast corner of a 9,07 acre
developed parcel. The parcel is relatively flat and contains the existing Costco warehouse and
associated parking to the front, side and rear, Although a separate legal parcel, the 9,07 acre site
is integrated into the rest of the shopping center to the north, Thus, the entire 31.38 acre parcel
functions as one large shopping center bordered by Naples Street on the north, Broadway to the
east and Oxford Street to the south,
2, General Plan, Zoninv and Land Use
GENERAL PLAN ZONING CURRENT LAND USE
Site: Retail Commercial CC Retail Commercial
North: Retail Commercial CC Retail Co=ercial
South: Retail Commercial CCP Retail Co=ercial
East: Retail Commercial CT Retail Co=ercial
West: Light Industrial ILP Vacant
3. Proposal
A conditional use permit to allow for the construction and operation of a freestanding fueling
faciliry in conjunction with the existing Costco warehouse,
4, Analvsis
Operational Profile:
Gasoline dispensing will be achieved through use of a debit or credit card and no cash is accepted,
This will help to continue the flow of vehicles through the pump islands, In addition, the fueling
Ii
p r Oo-nh
p~ GP ~
station will only be open when employees are on duty at the Costco warehouse, Hours of
operation will be Monday thru Friday from 5 a,m, to 10 p,m, and Saturday/Sunday from 8 a,m,
to 8 p.m, Only Costco members will be allowed to purchase gasoline from the proposed fueling
facility ,
Traffic/Circulation:
According to the traffic impact analysis prepared for the project, the proposed fueling facility at
the southeast comer of the Costco site, directly adjacent to the intersection of Broadway and
Oxford Street will not have a negative impact on the level of service on the adjoining streets or
intersections, The traffic impact analysis documented that during the a,m, and p,m, peaks, all
intersections are expected to continue operating at Level of Service "B" with the proposed fueling
facility project, except for the intersection at Broadway and Palomar Streets which will continue
to operate at Level of Service "C" during the p,m, peak hours,
On-site circulation/stacking:
One concern regarding the proposed location of the fueling facility is the potential for stacking
of vehicles onto Oxford Street, This concern was also expressed by the Design Review
Committee at its meeting of November 2, 1998, The traffic impact analysis prepared for the
project includes a discussion about the amount of queue and associated stacking concerns, The
study indicates there is about 120 feet of available stacking distance between the pump island and
the Oxford Street driveway to the south, This translates to about six vehicles. As part of the
analysis, a queue smdy was conducted on both a weekday and weekend day at the Rancho Del Rey
Costco during peak periods, The maximum queue at one of the pump positions was five on a
weekday and three on a weekend, The study concludes that the length of the queues anticipated
at the Broadway fueling facility will be similar to the Rancho del Rey facility and will rarely
impact the Oxford Street driveway, If further concludes that, even if this were to happen on
occasion, it would not be a significant impact since Oxford Street is a relatively low volume
roadway and does not extend westward to any street. A schematic design showing the proposed
stacking ability of the fueling facility is shown in Attachment "B".
Parking Availability:
Due to concerns regarding the amount of parking available on the site after the removal of fifty
one (51) parking spaces in the front parking lot area in order to accommodate the construction
of the proposed fueling facility, the applicant was requested to prepare an updated Master Parking
Analysis for the entire 31.34 acre center on Broadway between Oxford and Naples Street, The
results of this analysis indicate there is actually a net excess of 32 parking spaces available in the
overall center, This includes existing parking located to the rear of the existin~ buildings, Forty
five (45) employee parking spaces will be added/restriped directly behind the Costco warehouse,
In order to insure that these employee parking spaces will be utilized for this purpose, the
appiicant has provided staff with a "parking plan" indicating how the employee parking program
It
P r Oo_nfi
p';!~p. 4.
would be enforced, Staff has conditioned the project to require the applicant to submit a lighting
plan for the employee parking lot to the Zoning Administrator for review and approval prior to
issuance of building permits, A narrative of the parking analysis is shown in Attachment "C".
Architecture/Design:
The originally proposed design of the fueling facility consisted primarily of a red metal canopy
and stucco columns, After a number of revisions to the original design of the project, the Design
Review Comminee voted 3-0 on November 16, 1998 to conditionally approve the project,
Although the overall concept of the design was acceptable, conditions of approval include
requirements for further refinements to the architectural treatment. See Attachment "D" for copy
of lener of conditions sent to the applicant.
Groundwater Contamination:
During the review period for the project, staff received comments from the Sweetwater Authority
requesting that they be given the ability to review and approve the proposed project due to their
concerns about potential groundwater contamination from this type of facility, The concern of
the Sweetwater Authority is the potential for groundwater conr.rnin.tion, Specifically, they are
concerned about a substance known as MTBE which is considered to be potentially carcinogenic
substance, The City Anorney's office has advised staff that the Sweetwater Authority does not
have any legal basis supporting it request to be allowed to approve the project, Nonetheless, staff
has met with the Authority regarding its concerns and has agreed to condition the project to
require that plans be submined to the Sweetwater Authority "for review" prior to issuance of
building permits, Further, the applicant has had preliminary discussions with the Sweetwater
Authority to discuss their concerns regarding the potential for groundwater contamination, Based
upon the direction from the City Anorney's office, the Sweetwater Authority is in agreement with
the proposed condition,
CONCLUSION
For the above mentioned reasons, staff recommends approval of the proposed project,
Attachments:
A. Location
B. Schematic of vehicle stacking potential
C, Narrative of parking analysis
D. Lener of conditional approval by Design Review Comminee
H: \HOME\PLANNINGVEFFlPCRPT\COSTCO
t)
1\ I I nUl IIVI LI.... I r\.
PROPOSED
OFFICE
BUILDING
\
\VACANT\
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
Target
r--; PALOMAR STREET
LJ
J
\
CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRJP1l0N:
C!) APPUCANT: Costeo Wholesale CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PROJECT 1144 Broadway Request: The addition of a (6) dispenser gasoline facility
ADDRESS: for Costco customers wtfhln !he existing parking lot.
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: If
NORTH No Scale PCC-99-06
h:\home\pianning\corlos~ocators\pcc9906.cdr 12/9/98
II :
I '. .
I :
I ,
I I
I[
III
j i!
i I
I I
i I
I i I
I J II
I ,I
I II
I III
:/ Ii
C i J II
~ == = i 'I i
"gill
~ - I 1
, I
I
i I J ; IllrI n 11111 U i
-is . , I! ~]EI
i I "I i . . II //11 I! ! I I ! lie II
. I. .1 I; I I I .
' ': """ \...i I" ,
Iii I ra ' . i I I ~
II i.! i ~ ,.1111 ~
" ~~I
I: /'::'
i ; I%.
. ,
nil i j 11111 I ~I
Jill! 11111 ! tW
II' I II ' , , I I I n .~ II ' I III/ ! I
. . .! Ii.: I I II c= II Iii I
II i . i III . i III ug Q \~ ~ I ~ J
t::JJ I!!::U EJB I . 'II ~ E8 ITI:!ID
~ em IT!::D m:rrJ crrr1.. _.,~ . - '"
_----it---
t::JJ --- J' ~ I
----- ,---- cF
IC!IiJ m=D Ir:::iD ~EB '
CiD em 1r:::iD.,.'" " ,~' !~i;-':!:3 '" I
I -- '---- L-:._TI /) II I
CWD~)"'~..' ~:~Im3~ . I
=1 - II If -.~ r-II ,. II_III _ 1
IIEiI3 ,m=:J !!:7D '" I c::u I!J:::IiD ~~ i i
8 FI)?Jt\~j[~5jl I ~ I j!
~I, &
III
II !
i Ii! III Q
i l~i!111
; ! I i ~
I
"
---.---
-.- - - - - - -
~~'r=J
SOl1RC2: :x:rghaus,," :""-=1'';''9 En"in"'=. Inc. (Juiy 19ge)
UNSCorr
LAW &
GRHNSP.-\N
A TT ACHMENT "8"
(J'
- -
I
I
I
.
i
i
i
I
I
I
I
.
I
I ~ I
! ~ '
I~ I
I
I
i
i
I
I
~I
NC~ I
1n
I .....,
VEHICLE ;:; lACKING ?LAN
ATTACHMENT "c"
CARLS JR 1/2.5 SEATS 2,528 SF 38
JOANN FABRICS & CRAFTS 1/200 SF 18,100 SF 91
FURNISHINGS CLUB 1/600 SF 14,480 SF 24
HOME BASE 1/200 SF I 114,645 S;: 574
L"VITZ FURNITURE 1/600 SF I 44,000 S;: 73
L"VITZ WAREHOUSE 1/1,000 SF 19,200 SF 19
PRICE BAZAAR 1/200 SF lB,350 SF 92
PEP BOYS 1/200 SF 9,500 SF 48
KIDS WAREHOUSE 1/200 SF 22,750 S;: 114
COSTCO WAREHOUSE 1/1,000 SF 23,109 SF 23
COSTCO WHOLESALE 1/200 SF 96,000 SF 480
COSTCO BAKERY/MEAT 1/800 SF 3,133 SF 4
COSTCO TIRE SALE/INSTALL 1/400 SF 5,621 S;: 14
COSTCO FOOD SERVICE 15 MIN. I 891 SF 15
TOTAL 392,307 SF 1609
SITE STATISTICS
SIT= AREA 31.34 ACRES
LOT COVERAGE 392,307 S;:
LOT COVERAGE RATIO 28.7 "'
10
PARKING REQUIRED 1,609 5T ALLS
PARKING PROVIDED 1,642 STALLS
HANDICAPPED PARKING tt., 32 STALLS
PA?KING RATIO 4. i B%/1 ,000 -.
~ .1/
~
~~~~
- -
CITY Oc
CHUL4 VISTA
?L.L..NNING :'=~;'.=,:[v1EN:
1\Dv~mber ]7, 1998
Ec.:-ghausen Consulting Engin~ers
1E2lS ned A v~nu~ South
1-:.~;E, WA 98031
Arrention Bru:;~ K. Creager
Sl;~ECT: DRC-99-08 - Proposal to construcr a 6-Disper.s~r Gasoline S~rvice Station along
v.ith Associated Site 1mprovem~ms.
D= Applicam:
On November 16, 1998, the Design Review Co=inee consid~red the site plan and design for
th~ proposal to construct a new 6-Dispenser Gasoline Service Station at 11 A A Broadway, Chula
Vi~.
Tn~ Committe::, after hearing staff's presentation and rece:ving other information aboUT the
proposal, unanimously voted to:
L Adopt the Negative Declaration issu~d for 1niri2.l Study 15-99-03.
.., Approve this project subject to th~ following conditions:
2,. A complete landscape and irrigation plan, prepar~d by a lands::ape
architect, shall be submirred with the building permit "Ppiication.
D. The north and south elevations or the C2cLOPY shall re ;nodified to rellec!
only on~ height for the canopy parapet.
c. The difference in height from one level of the canopy 10 the next sr.aI1 be
a minimum of 1 '-6".
d. Each of the outer edges of the canopy shall return ba:k 90 degrees at a
depth of twelve inches, giving an impr~ssion of bulk 10 the canopy.
(7
A TT ACHMENT "D"
-.,..-.-.---...-
DRC-99-08
,
\'ovembe:- 18. 1998
.
Tn~ calumns shall re squar~ with a minimum dimension of two r~~: in ~ach
dir~cI1on.
Th~ thr~ ind~ntations in =h column sha]] be a minimum of th;ee inches
in both depth and width and shalJ represent an indentation 1D a ,Weco
column, having three solid surfaces.
g. The signage on the east and west elevations sha]] re zs submitted on the
application.
n. Tnere shall re no signage on the north and south el~'ations of the canopy.
1. Spanm:r signs shaH be permitted facing north and south, mounted !?etween
each pair of columns. Tnese signs shall not be lighted.
J . Deleted.
You have the ;ight to appeal this decision to the Planning Commission. A completed appeal rorm,
aiong with a G.."'POsit amount of $2,000 must be received by this office within 10 days of the date
or this letter. Forms are available from the Planning DeparnnenL In the absence of said appeal,
the decision of the Design Review Committee is final.
Failure to use L'llS permit within one year from the date or this letter shall cause the permit to
Y>..:ome nu]] and void unless a written request ror an extension is received and granted prior to
:b~ ~xpiration G.a~.
if vou have any Questions, DJezse ca]] me at 476-5334.
.. .. . .
~
~
-
..
City (jerk
Mulvanney Partnership
::.: \j::II:r:::tI~~lanning~ c::99OE.aprll13:: \dr:990l.CT
(r
,
,
1- ;
~ ~;;;.:-;;:.:: \:1\
::: "'2~~~j
_ _ _ ~ ,:::"..)
~~=-;....L-,> \
;;.::::I-~~'I,
J ':::> C ::,.... 'I
~-=~~i~r
_.:--' _-::.;c..1
"" -., q ('0 ,
.f. :
;
I
,
J
i
,
, i
I (Si
. . : i~:'
.I,.,t
;:?'i:?Ji:I>i i'>i I
~ ~ ~~~)\ \)1.
::;.:;: <: ~J Z:,
;~ ;;'$'EI;;
'; ~ c.2;==\~1 i .
'" ~ ':.J:!- ;::;;,
:'~.. <=>j .....:
:; 7! .....:\J1
c ;J ~I'c~
=:--:: -:~-
5~~~
::i,;;J'fJ
~ .9 -
.....,,<::: .
~~~
--:..2' I
~-i
j8
,
, ~
'"
o
:::J
;;;
:n
:::J
r:-;
,.
-.--
OPTION 0# 1
-
~
~
,-
~
;--
,
ii!
;1:
,-
L---
(-.
~
.
-
;--
~
"
!I
.,
jl
J
--
-
=
~
_'"' .1
i ~
.Ii' j
i V !
'" '
~-
~I
~s ,j
c--
-.if;
i ::::=
! ....,c=!
; ~f; ~
-,'"-' '
-.:.::::-i -
-
II ~ i
I = I
I r
[ ~
I
I -
.,--
,,[ I
1 -
I ~ i -
1 " I c.-
i :; :1 ~~
--~-.
r=:-:I -;- ~ --
-
'""
..;.
ATTACHMENT
2
,,';.';-1"'::"Z' '
~~=-~~
$,.,.-;" -;....
---
o
--
I
,
,.
'.
1
- - ~
J,r::J;; '- b
T-...lC
~*='
,- .JL: .- . ~
1--""""" .i./ 1+--4"""
~ ~_;~-.r..
L.:.....-' ,I ',I ~-;:,-
I ,"""" ~ -. It:ID...J ~
o -1L. ':1L.J -
L- _'." ~:s
~ ., - ~I
" \1
.'
... -':
:Zr---J
~ ~
!~ -I
, j
,
,
I
,
t;JI,' j
l:
Il)
,
,
,
I
,~
:c~
/~
......=:;'-'
~-
.. -
~ >
~
(..$~
"..~('
"
a
-
g
,.:
;0
~
181
=
..
~
>
..
~
>
:---l !' I
'II 00 = -~
"'......:-
11 :>~
11~ ::.1':-;-
I
I
I
i I
n
-::.
7~
- !
?G
.~
""
Co
....
""
~d=;:::J'"!"II-
_C~M~~
=:c.....!"I1tntfS"
crJ!.........$-.~
[7f~:E5~ !;
r'!":S--- 3~
!./'J~!:!~I"'I~
i .:~~ ~
~ ~ ~0
=
~"~
,~ _II . "1
- ~ - : :';:1
g ~I ~~
~ .o.,-,~)
;' "'~~~
,-.;,":.,,~..-
:::: "" ""1',
> \....1r-----
- ~I~,,~""I
~i
~~ ::1
> I'?H ~\
-~ t!!~<I),'
,~ ?:\
_ ~.r-\
2.Ij\:::~ I
~
~
I
, J
,
=~Sg~
_0-
~:2~UlU1
~
~
c,
'fl
<
?;~Vi
=:=~2
(,
.;.:.:=
-7-"
--'
! 0\
3\
, ~I
-I
I ri
~
M
'::"1
;:
in
<
~
,
,
!I
I: !
\ i
I! I
, I
! I
, 1
I,
, ,
,
I'
i i
: i
-
N
~
N
g
~
~
~
~~
~=
~
~
~
--
..
~
"
_N
>
::::~
-
~
>
>
----------
-----------
----------
1--1--------
: I i
I I i
'~I
: - I,
~~~ I
- ~?~ I
~~F
-.,...~~ I
~ S-F~ I ' II
",-" ~ VI I ,
co;: Qc: I r I~)
!:'.:J1.f'::: I ~
~~f~ I (@II~ I
~,- ~W! ,,1
: ' IT=~ iil
I I ,: ,
" I
, 1
i I
, ,
, I
I ~ I
, - I
, j. ~ I
""C: ~:ii: g II
-o:--'=- - c:
'" 1- n I'
~s, '~c;g I I L---
"~ ~f~ ~ : i L-
~~_... I ~
7> ~: "'.
~ :;jg ~! ~
~ E:.l I
i.~g- )1
~i ~ ll! ~
."
::0 I i
I 1
::v I '
II
I
I,
Ii
IJ,~ ,~
II D~ 1lJ
",fd i3
",'" C>
,,<<> -
<3'
^
-1J
---,II---J I
ii' ~~g
ill "'+~-
,. b~_.
II! <'n :5
,,~.
1'1 ::-.,.
II! J: t:
:::: !I
I!
-II
"
~'"
,,~
",0
i:)~
",co
'"
--'
1= ~~III
r./) I I r== -~ ! .
,- ',-r-
r==::"":;"":;.:;c'-::;'''''::::;::;i;'~_~__
E i
l--
r-
L-
L-
,
~
;:;
"
,
f'7'1 :1
=!
;;;
"i
'"
s:
~
2
I
L-
L-
I
,-
l--
r-
I ,! I
.---J-_'_j__
__.._L L_ _.~~
....~=)
~
'0
'"
'"
'"
'"
'"
---
OPTION #2
Ii',.
eee
c::
I,
U
,
I
I
L
1C5.:
.,
n
"
n
~
s
~
~
~
is
n
"
>
"
~
<:'---'7
~g~R>:1!;S "
'0""1 ~
0'" " '"
f7i ~~5g n GO
""n~~"" = ~ .:.
~,." ~~ " .:.
1\ 0 ~ . '"
'" "' "' I;! OJ
~ ~ ~
~ 0
0
0 >
,,: c;
;:; :;::
... "'t...IQ;(JI >
~ -<
~ CZI:"'C,"a') '-<
_<O""O>~ "
--'-"'0:0_
VJVlV)(J'J~ ~
:"'1;"'71:'17"'1 '"
,
,
I
I
Tq
E--
---7-
~---I-i-I-
~I ;
,
~
,
f--
L---
1
,-
~
~
, '
-~~
cO-
"i:,
::>"
~
-
~
~
('1
,
'0 '
UJr" U1~g
3n O/"1~
~~ =~n
~ / ~. 0 _ _ _ _ 2<0=
-----
1:'.
1..t
,
.
~ _1
.
-"'I/1-j
!:- ,
-;:2~-,
-oz----,I
;::;c;')~
~~=1
,- ,
-=-,;;-'"
-~'_1
"
.
-,
_____1
"
,
,11-;
-_..~-"_.~ I
,
,
J
,
,
'" J
~t
H- ,
'I
,
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
I
,
,
1
,
,
I
1,1
_I
::r;::_
>.-:"
^>~
:-:::;
~;:..
:...;~
~
~
q
----------.
I
i
,~
1 I Co
, I ~
-.LJ" -1
TT~
I \ .;;:!.
I I ,.
I I 1",
-----
!5J
s
C;;
"
'"
e;
o
c
~
~
~
'-<
'"
o
~
'"
io-
I
I
I
, I
, I /
I !
I
, = I
, Q
I ~ '~;g
::5:=;
, ~-, ~
, ~
I , :-'s;
~ ~~
'"
I >
, >
,
,
I,
I
I ..1
li.~
I ijj!i. ~<~
i ~C:"
I ! z'.
....,HI
fec'-I
~ -
f\
I
\
I 1
; I
,
e:,
,x.
,.,
1"'-'
\~
\
i
-;r-- ---] I II;
" '!:::i"
})~~~~ ~ ~ L
~,::;..;, .... '\... ~"""-\
~ ~ ~ ~ ~-.......:
_..........;.:;.~..... -.,.....~ I
~"'"' t)..... '"'t-:::>
~::t-\'t-~ ........
" :;......... '1 ~
~~ ~(~ G< ~ ''-''\]
",'I: tF. ,. ~
~ 2 ~'-J:~': ~
,\ ~::;. I ~ ",'
.......S.:L~ """~.! "\
~ 'S. ') t ~
~ t:i... -....... ~
~ ' ~" .'
~.....~ __;'~ i
.:::,~ ~J \I:
',.. ~ ...
'- ,~ ~
-'.--:'~
,
'"
'"
"
, I
VI I
....
'"
'"
'"
....
LJ
""''"~ C
-!"'1~!"'1 ;=
,,~ '"
~~ " "
"'~
~ ~ .. C>
~ AJ ;:; IL
~ >' :;0
w 0
o.
* )>
0
N ::;::
U~~ ~ ::(
0>:'" ttlCn "-
(D(.o.ItJ>r-.:> ~
-l.oItxI.... ~
V1V1t/Hf) ~
;-.,;-.,;-.,;-., '"
=
~
'"
m
Z
U\
~
i"
~
5
z
. I
'I
.=
~
'"
m
U\
>
~
m
U\
i
~
I
I
I
~
BROADWA~
~
v>~8'
0"'" v>
z~r:
(,0
I
.1
n
= ~ =
I ~J~~
1 -----r-
~ I . .
=
m -----r- . I .
, x ~ ===
: Vi -----r- ---'--
~
z -----r- ,
C> ~ =c
~ =$ ----!-
'" -----r-
~
z -----r- --L.... I
C>
-t- --L.... ---,
~ - =++=
-----r-
~ o I ~
= =
--L. 1 -!-
I $
-----r- , ,
-----r- , ~
I --L.... ~ ::ri::
; =8 I
I , ~
--t--- It
-----;--- ----!- I -.L
-----r- I ---,-
~ ~~"'~ ~
I
-.L
~
'"
'"
\
\
\
\
e
!-
-r- -
\
- /Ortf;;?;(WA V-
- - --"'" - -
I
\
/
." ~U\
- Of""",
f;o~
0'"
~=
~c.
~~
'V
9tr.
lf7
::ir.;
OPTION +3
ATTACHMENT 3
RESPONSE TO THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
PLANNING COMMISSION
REQUEST FOR INFORMATION ON THE COSTCO
GASOLINE FACILITY
AT 1144 BROADWAY, CHULA VISTA, CA
BCE# 6647/COSTCO #405/CITY# PCC99-06
Revised 2-8-99
1. What is the forecast for gallons of gasoline sales at the Broadway facility? How
does this correlate with the numbers of trips shown in the traffic study? How does
that compare with the counts at Rancho Del Rey?
Volume of Total Total Gal
Gas Sales transactions cars per per car
(in gallons/ 4 week total day
4 week total)
COSTCO FORECAST: 400.000 30,760 1,098 13.00
(by COSTCO legal/real estate
division in March 1998)
FORECAST USED IN 782,000 60,200 2.150 13
TRAFFIC STUDY BY
LINSCOTT LAW
GREENSPAN:
(For "worst case" traffic
volume and impact analysis)
Chart 1. Range of Forecasts of Gas sales and Trip Generation for the Costco
Gasoline Facility at 1144 Broadway
Chart #1 depicts the range of forecasts for gasoline sales at the Costco facility on
Broadway. The range is from 400,000 to 782,000 gallons/month. The low forecast is
based on a gallons/month forecast made by Costco in March 1998. The high forecast is a
"worst case" scenario made by Linscott Law & Greenspan for the Traffic Impact
Analysis dated June 25, 1998. They estimated a maximum of 4,300 trips per day, which
is equal to 2,150 cars per day. (These estimates were based on the daily transactions at
Rancho Del Rey during the period February 16 through March 13, 1998.) For a
number of reasons stated below, Linscott Law Greenspan does not believe that the
"worst case" scenario will happen at the Broadway facility.
2,..1.
2
Chart #2 shows a sample of actual counts for Rancho Del Rey and the other San Diego
area sites. Rancho Del Rey's gas volumes are some ofthe highest in Costco's chain of
facilities, and thus represent a "worst case" scenario for the purposes of traffic impact
analysis.
COSTCO Period Volume of Total Total Average
Facility at: Gas Sales transactions cars per gallons
(in gallons/ Per 4 week day of gas
4 week period sold per
period) car
Rancho Feb 98: 737.261 57.225 2,043 12.88
Del Rey
Oct 98: 790.655 60.801 2,171 13.00
Morena Feb 98: N/A, opened
Boulevard 4/14/98
Oct 98: 655.539 51.238 1,830 12.79
Carlsbad Feb 98: 621.451 48.346 1,726 12.85
Oct 98: 692.097 53.070 1,895 13.04
Chart 2. Sample of Monthly Counts at San Diego Area Costco Gasoline Facilites
2. Will the volume of sales (and thus the # of cars) be higher at Broadway than at
Rancho Del Rey? Will the significantly lower price of gas at Costco attract an
influx of new Mexican customers to shop at the Broadway Costco?
The factors that are associated with the success of the Rancho Del Rey Costco gas station
are:
. high volume sale of merchandise,
. high volumes of cars on the adjoining streets,
. high market price of gasoline, and
. fewer competitors in the neighborhood.
At the Broadway facility three of these four factors are not present. There are six percent
fewer transactions at Broadway, traffic volumes on the adjacent street are one-half those
of"H" street, and there are many more gas stations in the vicinity of the Broadway
facility. These reasons have resulted in a forecast by Costco for lower gas volumes at
Broadway.
Response to Chula Vista PC.doc
w
3
The high price of gas has already lead to the success of the Rancho Del Rey, Morena
Blvd and Carlsbad facilities. However, we do not beJieve that Costco's lower price of gas
will force significant numbers of Mexican drivers to cross the border into the US to
purchase gasoJine at Costco, for several reasons:
· The distance from the border to Rancho Del Rey is less than 10 miles; the distance to
Broadway is 7.5 miles. If the draw to the less expensive gasoJine is significant, there
would already be a large volulme of Mexican customers at the Rancho Del Rey
faciJity. This is not the case.
· With a Costco warehouse already in Tijuana and a lengthy border crossing, there does
not appear to be a significant advantage to only to save on a tank of gas.
. The Costco gasoline facilities do not accept cash. Although Costco membership
cards are accepted internationally, the Costco credit cards are only available to US
residents.
. Unusually high percentages (84%) of the transactions at the Broadway Costco
Wholesale are paid in cash. A large majority of these cash paying patrons at
Broadway are Mexican customers.
3. Additional queuing analysis should be done to make certain that the traffic would
not impact the operation of the Oxford Street driveway.
At the request of the Planning Commission, a second queuing analysis was done by LLG
during January and February 1999. The results of this analysis are included in the
Traffic Impact Analvsis, revised February, 1999. Their summary conclusions are as
follows:
. During peak periods, queues of more than six vehicles were counted a relatively small
amount of the time. During off-peak periods, queues would exceed six vehicles only
on extremely rare occasions.
· The queuing at Broadway is not expected to match the queuing experienced at
Rancho Del Rey, because the gas sales and corresponding number of trips is not
expected to be that high.
. Queues are expected to extend to the Oxford Street driveway only on rare occasions.
4. Will the loss of parking in the main parking field affect Costco and other shopping
center tenants? There appears to be a need for additional parking analysis.
There have been two studies that have viewed the parking situation in different ways.
These are:
· A "Parking Plan" (a zoning code analysis), ofthe entire 30 acre shopping center
· A "Parking Survey" (a parking demand analysis), of the 16 acre +/-
Costco/Levi tz/Kids W arehouse/PriceB azaar/PepBoys parcels
'1'1
Response to Chula Vista PC. doc
4
The 1998 Parking Plan analyzes the parking that is required by the City of Chula Vista
Land Use Code for the entire 30 acre shopping center that includes Costco. For this plan
all businesses in this shopping center were asswned to be occupied; this includes the
vacant Levitz furniture sales building. For this 30 acre site, there are a total of 1.609
parking stalls that are required bv the Citv ofChula Vista. With the new Costco gas
station and the restriping of the employee parking on the west side of the warehouse,
there will be a total of 1642 parking stalls provided. Therefore, the parking provided
will exceed the required parking by 33 stalls.
The Parking Survey is an analysis of the parking that is used during weekday and
weekend peak periods. This parking survey was conducted by Linscott, Law &
Greenspan and a description of the survey is included in the Traffic Impact Analysis
report. During these peak periods, LL&G found that approximately 50 percent of the
parking field directly adjacent to Broadway is occupied. With the gas station there
will be a loss of 51 parking stalls adjacent to Broadway, and the restriping and
enforcement ofthe 45 employee parking stalls on the west side of the warehouse.
Therefore, there will be almost no net loss of parking capacity in the main parking
field.
5. Would future tenants in the vacant Levitz Furniture Warehouse have customer
access to the west, to the unused parking area on the west side of the Levitz/Kids
Warehouse/Price Bazaar building?
There is already pedestrian access and doors to the north side of the Levitz building that
can be easily accessed from the west parking lot. At one time there was customer access
to the west side of the the Kids' Warehouse space. This access was taken out when the
Kids Warehouse was remodeled.
We have not been able to obtain a response from the property owner/lessor of the
shopping center site to open up a customer entrance on the west side of the Levitz store.
We expect that the landlord would strongly encourage a future tenant of the Levitz space
to create access on the west side of the building. However, this will be dependent on the
tenant's space/floor plan requirements.
6. Will the gas station fit on the west side of the Costco warehouse?
Two layouts have been prepared. (See enclosed plans labeled option I and 2) The gas
station will not fit in this area due to:
. The narrow area behind the warehouse
. The maneuvering area required by the warehouse's delivery truck-trailers on the
south and west sides ofthe warehouse docks will conflict with the customer queuing.
. The long distance from the main building entrance (membership counter) where the
video monitoring station is located will not allow the facility to be easily monitored or
managed by Costco.
lo\
Response to Chula Vista PC.doc
5
(We believe that these issues of access and visibility will also be of significant concern
to Fire and Police officials. In fact, these issues were of concern to the Fire Marshal at
the Rancho Del Rey facility. At that location the Fire Marshal required a clear path of
travel from the tront of the warehouse to the gas station that would take no longer than
three minutes walking time.)
CONCLUSIONS:
For these reasons, Costco Wholesale still prefers the ori!!inal proposal. Costeo does
not believe that the volume of sales and queuing at Broadway will mateh that seen at
Rancho Del Rey. However, if it does, and if the on-site gasoline facility manager is
unable to manage the queuing activity, then Costco Wholesale would agree to
reconstruct the driveway as depicted on the Option #3 site plan (the "Relocate
Existing Driveway" option). This option will provide 145 feet queuing (7-8 cars) to
satisfy the queuing measured at the Rancho Del Rey facility in January 1999.
1.1,
Response to Chula Vista PC.doc
.,,---- _._,.._--_._-~.._"...--._..... ..-
ATTACHMENT 4
.negative deciaration
PROJECT NAME: Costco Gasoline Station
PROJECT LOCATION: 1144 Broadway, Chula Vista, CA.
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.:
618-200-50
PROJECT APPLICANT:
Costco
CASE NO: 1S-99-03
DATE:
August 27, 1998
A. Proiect Settin!!
The environmental setting for the project consists of a graded, paved landscaped and fully
developed 9.03 acre commercial site located at 1144 Broadway, Chula Vista, CA. The
subject site contains the Costco wholesale facility, a tire center, a commercial center, and
ancillary loading docks, concrete walkways, asphalt paving and landscaped areas. The
property and general surrounding area are relatively level, at elevations ranging from
about 50 to 55 feet above mean sea level (MSL). The property is bordered on the north
and south by commercial retail centers, on the east by Broadway, a major arterial, with
commercial development east of this street, and undeveloped properties to the west.
The present zoning for the site is CC (central commercial) and the General Plan
designation is Commercial ReraU. Properties to the north and south have similar
zoning and General Plan designations. Properties to the east are zoned CTP
(Transportation Commercial) and the General Plan designation is Commercial Retail.
Properties west of the project site are zoned ILP (Limited Industrial development) and are
designated for Research and Light Manufacturing by the General Plan.
The proposed fueling station will be located in an area presently used as parking east of
the existing Costco facility near the intersection of Broadway and Oxford Street. This
area is paved and contains scattered landscaped areas. No animal or plant species listed
as rare, threatened or endangered by local, State or Federal resource conservation and
regulatory agencies are known to be present in this fully developed and disturbed site.
J.1
~(~
-.-
'''''': -
--
-
ell)' oi ehulll vlsi2 [0!;;Ji'ining department CTTY Of
~._-----,"----~---,~--~-.~-~~~'_.~_-:-::-::::.
B. Proiect Description
The proposed project consists of the construction of an automated fuel dispensing facility
for Costco members only as an accessory use to the existing Costco facility. The propose d
station will include three dispenser islands with two double-sided gasoline dispensers at
each island, allowing for a total of 12 automobile fueling positions. The facility is
proposed to be covered by a single canopy.
The gasoline will be dispensed by debit or credit payment card only. No attendant will
be immediately available, however, the operation will be continuously monitored via video
cameras and alarms from the main Costco store. An emergency pump shut-off switch will
also be installed in the main store building. The applicant proposes to install the latest
technology to prevent environmental mishaps. The fuel tanks, lines and monitoring
equipment will be installed by state certified contractors. The installation of the
IIDderground tanks, fuel lines, control panels and emergency monitoring and response
devices and equipment will be subject to compliance with local, state and federal
regulations as applicable.
The applicant proposes to remove 51 existing parking spaces and about 300 sq. ft. of
landscaped area in order to construct the fueling station. The applicant will replace 45
parking spaces elsewhere and provide 900 sq. ft. of landscaped area throughout the project
site. The 51 parking spaces to be removed are not considered to be in a prime location
for patrons of the Costco facility. The commercial center located on the project site,
including the Costco facility would be in compliance with the parking requirements with
the parking requirements of the City's zoning ordinance. The proposed fueling facility can
not be built within drainage and/or sewer easements per City Policy. The applicant will
provide landscaping for the parking and perimeter areas in accordance with the City of
Chula Vista's Landscape Manual.
C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans
The existing zoning on the project site is C-C (Central Commercial Zone) and the General
Plan designation is Commercial-Retail. The proposed project will be compatible with
these land use desiguations with the approval of a conditional use permit.
D. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached
Environmental Checklist Form) determined that the proposed project will not have a
significant environmental effect, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report
will not be required. This Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
The following impacts have been determined to be less than significant. A discussion of
each of these less than significant impacts from the proposed project follows.
l.I
L Public Services Impact
Fire
The nearest fIfe station is located about 1/2 mile from the project site. The
estimated response time is less than seven (7) minutes. The response time
complies with the City Threshold Standards for fire and medical response times.
The fire department will review and approve the specifications of the under ground
fuel tanks and ancillary connections. A pennit will be required for the installation
of the proposed underground fuel tanks and equipment. In addition to the fire
department, the project will also require pennits from City Building Division and
the COURty of San Diego Environmental Health Hazardous Material Management
Division relating to the proper installation of underground fuel tanks, fuel lines,
electrical equipment and emergency shut-off controls. These standard procedures
will help ensure that no aspect of the proposed project will have an adverse impact
on the soils, underground water table or the physical surrounding environment.
Police Department
The Police Department indicates that adequate service can be provided to the
project site. The response time for Priority 1 and 2 calls are within range of the
City Threshold Standards
2. Utility and Service Svstems
Soils
Based on previous geotechnical studies conducted on the project site there is no
evidence of adverse soil conditions present. The applicant will be required to
prepare a project site specific soils report and comply with the recommendations
of the investigation as a standard condition of project approval.
Drainage
The Engineering Division indicates the existing on-site and off-site drainage
facilities are adequate to serve the proposed project. The project site is not locate d
within a flood plain. The City's Engineering Division will review and approve the
drainage/improvement plans including the necessary connections to existing storm
drains. The Engineering Division states that the proposed facility will not be
allowed to be built within drainage andlor sewer easement per City requirements.
(M;"bCllftt;\pIanning\lttith'-licgdcc.rornansJ
p""
::a..~
Streets/Traffic
The Threshold Standards Policy requires that all intersections must operate at a
Level of Service (LOS) "CO or better, with the exception that Level of Service
(LOS) "D" may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized
intersections. No intersections may reach an LOS "F" during the average weekday
peak hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempt from this
policy. The proposed project would comply with this Threshold Policy. The
Engineering Division has reviewed the project as proposed and has determined that
it would not adversely affect the existing level of service for surrounding streets
and intersections. The project would be associated with a Level of Service "CO for
Broadway and Oxford Street.
Based on the submitted traffic study (prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan on
6/25/98), the Average Daily Traffic (ADT) generated by the project traffic,
combined with the existing Costco facility and adjacent business center will
generate in excess of 200 peak-hour vehicle trips. The Engineering Division has
analyzed this figure and has determined that it would result in a less than
significant impact to existing circulation. The traffic study shows that the stacking
ability of vehicles waiting, as necessary, to fuel up would be enhanced by the
proposed siting of the fueling pumps in relation to the location of existing
driveways. The project stacking plan shows that each of the six fuel pumping
lanes would have the ability to process up to six vehicles before these woul d reach
driveway (ingress/egress) off of Oxford Street. The stacking, if it were to occur,
would not extend into any public roadway.
3. Aesthetics
The proposed project wit! be subject to the review and approval of the Design
Review Committee. The proposed site plan, architectural design, landscaping and
lighting plans will be subject to reviewed by planning staff and the DRC to ensure
the finished product will complement existing development and comply with
applicable design policies and regulations.
E. Mitigation Necessary to A void Significant Effects
No specific mitigation will be required at this time.
(M:-\homc\pliIMiug\keith\n.egdec.rom:IIII)
P""
~
F. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista: Barbara Reid, Environmental Projects Manager
Benjamin Guerrero, Planning
Majed Al-Ghafry, Engineering
Duane Bazze!, Planning
Garry Williams, Planning
Brad Kemp, Building Division
J. Geering, Fire Dept.
Richard Preuss, Crime Prevention
Peggy McCarberg, Acting Deputy City Attorney
Chula Vista City School District: Dr. Lowell Billings
Sweetwater Union High School District: Katy Wright
Applicant's Agent: Barghavsen, Consulting Engineers
2. Documents
Chula Vista General Plan (1989) and EIR (1989)
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
Traffic Impact Analysis, Linscott, Law & Greenspan (June 25, 1998)
Soil Report, Mulvanny Partnership, (January 2, 1996)
:3 . Initial Studv
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any
comments received on llie Initial Study and any comments received during the
public review period for this Negative Declaration. The report reflects the
independent judgement of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding
the environmental review of this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning
Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910.
~ ~loI{-I01-L) ~e;-d)
ENVIRONMENTAL VIEW COORDINATOR
EN 6 (Rev. 5/93)
''''oS
(M:\bome~18IIIlin1~cith'\nqdec:,l1JITWI5i
~I
Case No.IS-99-03
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1. Name of Prop.c>:nent: Costco
2. JLe:ad Ag~ncy Name and Address: City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
ChuIa Vista, CA 91910
3. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 999 Lake Dr.
Issaquah, WA.
(425) 313-6312
4. Name of Proposal: Costco Gasoline Station
5. Date of CheckIist: August 25, 1998
Polenually
Polenlially Significanl Less lban
Significant Unless Significant N"
Impaci MiligaLed Impact Impacl
L LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
proposal:
a) Conflict with ge!;leral plan designation or D D D 181
zoning?
b) Conflict with applicable e;;';ironmental D D D 181
plans or policies adopted by agencies with
jurisdiction over the project?
c) Affect agricultural resources or operations D D D 181
(e.g" impacts to soils or farmlands, or
impacts from incompatible land uses)?
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement C 0 0 181
of an established community (including a
low-income or minority community)?
Page No. I
.3"2-
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Miligaled
Less lhan
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments: The proposed gasoline station will be in conformity with the central commercial
(ee) zoning designation and the retail commercial designation by the General Plan for this site.
There are no agricultural resources or operations present.
II. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would
the prop05al:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or D D D 181
local populatian projections?
b) Induce substantial growth in an area either D D D 181
directly or indirectly (e.g., through
projects in an undeveloped area or
extension of major infrastructure)?
c) Displace existing housing, especially D D D 181
affordable hausing?
Comments: The proposed praject will not induce populatian growth or displace housing. The
project will be located an an existing commercial site and will serve only customers of the
existing Costco facility.
III. GEOPHYSICAL. Would the propo5al Te5ult
in OT exp05e people to potentid impact5
involving:
a) Unstable earth conditions or changes in D D D 181
geologic substructures?
b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil?
c) Change in topography or ground surface
relief features?
D
D
181
D
D
D
D
181
d) The destruction, covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physical
features?
o
o
o
181
e) Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or aff the site?
D
D
D
181
3'
Page No.2
Potenlia1ly
Potenlially Significant Less lhan
Significant Unless Signilicant No
Impact M.itigated Impact ImpacL
fj Changes in deposition or erosion of beach 0 0 0 181
sands, or changes in siltation, deposition 01'....
erosion which may modify the channel of ~
a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay inlet or lake?
g) Exposure of people or property to geologic 0 0 181 0
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides,
mud slides, ground failure, or similar
hazards?
Comments: The propased building site is fully graded and consists of a paved parking lot
containing small landscaped areas. A soils report prepared by Geotechnical Exploration, Inc.
states that the general construction site area is underlain by firm to very stiff native silty clay
and medium dense sand. The report further states that these clayey soils are expansive, with
good-bearing strength characteristics and are suitable for support of the propased constructian.
The applicant will need to follow the recommendations of the updated soils report specific to
the construction site.
There are no known or suspected seismic hazards associated with the project site. The clasest
known fault is the Otay Valley Fault located about 2.0 miles south of the project site. The site
is not currently within a mapped Earthquake Fault Zone. Based on the anticipated earthquake
effect that could occur and the composition of the upper surface soils, a relatively minor
seismically-induced settlement is likely to occur. Potential geology/soils impacts are deemed
to be less than significant~ Compliance with standard building code requirements will
adequately address seismic-safety issues. No further mitigation will be necessary.
IV. WATER. Would the proposal~~sult in:
a) Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of surface
runoff?
b) Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding or tidal
waves?
o
o
o
181
o
o
o
181
c) Discharge into surface waters or other
alteration of surface water quality (e.g.,
temperature, dissolved oxygen or
turbidity)?
o
o
o
181
3'f
Page No.3
Polenlially
Polenlially Significanl Less lhan
Significanl Unless Significanl N"
Impacl Miligaled Impacl Impact
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in 0 0 0 181
any water body?
e) Changes in currents, or the course of 0 0 0 181
direction of water movements, in either
marine or fresh waters?
f) Change in the quantity of ground waters, 0 0 0 181
either through direct additions or
withdraw~s, ar through interception of an
aquifer by cuts or excavations?
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of 0 0 0 181
groundwater?
h) Impacts to graundwater quality? 0 0 181 0
i) Alterations ta the course or flow of flood 0 0 0 181
waters?
j) Substantial reduction in the amount of 0 0 0 181
water otherwise available for public water
supplies?
Comments: The praject site is fully developed with building and paved areas. No direct
impacts to drainage ar water flows are anticipated. The engineering division states that both
the on-site and off-site drain~e facilities appear adequate to serve the project. The project site
is not located in a floodplain. The project will be required to incorporate storm water
pollution preventian measures (SWPP1 into the hazardous materials Respanse Plan which is
required by ch. 6.95 of the CA. Health and Safety Code, and comply with Chapter 14.20 of
the Chula Vista Municipal Code, relating to management practices assaciated with construction
activity. The applicant will also be required ta file a Notice of Intent with the State Water
Resaurces Control Board for coverage under an NPDES Stormwater Permit as related to water
discharges associated with an activity that forms part of a larger common plan of development
that exceeds five acres in soil disturbance.
In an effort to protect the Chula Vista groundwater basin, the applicant may need to consult
with Sweetwater Authority as appropriate, regarding the installation of fuel, oil and lube tanks
and praposed site drainage plans. The City Engineering Division will be respansible for
reviewing and approving all grading and improvement plans and storm drain connections.
The Engineering Division states that the proposed facilities can not be built within drainage
or sewer easements. Na further mitigation will be required.
5~
Page No.4
V. AIR QUALITY. Would the proposal:
a)
Violate any air quality standard or contribute
to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
Expase sensitive receptors to pollutants?
b)
c)
Alter air mavement, moisture, ar
temperature, or cause any change in climate,
either locally or regionally?
Create objectionable odors?
d)
Polenlially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Potentially
Signiricanl
Unless
Miligaled
o
o
o
o
Less lhan
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
N"
Impact
181
181
181
181
e) Create a substantial increase in statianary or 0 0 181 0
non-stationary sources of air emissions or the
deterioration of ambient air quality?
Comments: The proposed construction of the gasoline station would temporarily create some
dust and emissions associated with construction activity. These short-term emissions are not
considered significant impacts, however, standard dust control measures would be
implemented, including watering exposed soils. The Average Daily Traffic (ADT) calculated
by the City Engineering Division to be generated by the proposed project is estimated to be
1,800. According to the traffic study prepared by Linscott, Law & Greenspan on June 25,
1998, approximately 42% of,the gas customers would already be at the project site to shop at
the Costco store. This would tend to minimize the 1,800 ADT figure as an additional impact
to air quality. No further mitigatiorr-will be required.
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION.
Would the proposal result in:
a)
Increased vehicle trips or traffic congestion?
b)
Hazards to safety from design features (e.g.,
sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
Inadequate emergency access or access to
near by uses?
Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-
site?
c'
)
d)
3"
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
181
o
o
o
o
181
181
181
Page ~o. 5
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or
bicyclists?
1) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting
alternative transportation (e.g. bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
P"lenlially
Polentially Significant Less than
Significanl Unless Significant N"
Impact Miligalerl Impact Impact
0 0 0 r8I
0 0 0 r8I
g)
Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts?
o
o
o
r8I
A "large project" under the Congestion
Management Program? (An equivalent of
2400 or more average daily vehicle trips or
200 or more peak-hour vehicle trips.)
Comments: The primary access roads to the project site are Broadway and Oxford Street.
Based on the proposed use, the total ADT for the project is calculated to be 1,800. The traffic
generated would not adversely impact the surrounding primary access roads including
Broadway and Oxfard Street which would both remain with an Level of Service (L.O.S.) of
'C'. A traffic impact analysis report was prepared for the proposed gasoline facility. The
report concluded that adjacent intersections would nat be adversely impacted and that the
propased facility location would allow for more than adequate stacking ability of cars, if this
were necessary, so as not to impact existing roadways, driveways or internal circulatian. A total
of 51 parking stalls would be removed and replaced with 45 stalls elsewhere. The net Costco
parking would be 389 parking stalls. This number would comply with the required parking
for the use. Additionally, the traffic study analyzed the overall parking supply for the
businesses served and found that the proposed parking would adequately serve the existing
parking demand.
h)
o
o
r8I
o
The Engineering Division concurred with the traffic study findings that the proposed project
traffic, including peak hour traffic volumes which would exceed 200 vehicle trips would result
in less than significant impacts to adjacent street intersections and roadways. Oxford Street
is presently built as an undivided two lane class II collector and Broadway is a four lane major
arterial separated by a raised median. Oxford Street is a relatively low volume roadway and
does not extend westWard to any street.
The fuel station is for COstCO members only and a great number of the users would already be
in the area as shoppers at the Costco facility. The station is proposed to be open only while
employees are on duty at the Costco store. No other impacts to traffic or circulation are noted
for this proposed project. No mitigation will be required.
~ 7 Page No. 6
Polentially
PolenUally Significanl less lhan
Significanl Unless Significant N"
Impacl t.liligaled Impacl Impacl
VII. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal result in impacts to:
a) Endangered, sensitive species, species of 0 0 0 181
concern or species that are candidates for
listing?
b) Locally designated species (e.g., heritage 0 0 0 181
trees)?
c) Locally designated natural cammunities (e.g, 0 0 0 181
oak forest, coastal habitat, etc.)?
d) Wetland habitat (e.g., marsh, riparian and 0 0 0 181
vernal pool)?
e) Wildlife dispersal or migration corridors? 0 0 0 181
f) Affect regional habitat preservatian planning 0 0 0 181
efforts?
Comments: The project site and surrounding commercially developed area are located in a
fully urbanized community and contain no native habitat. The site has been fully developed
with retail/wholesale commercial development and a paved and landscaped parking lot area.
No onimol or plant species listed as rare, threatened or endangered by local, State or Federal
resource conservatian and regulatory agencies are known to be present in this highly distUrbed
site. No adverse impacts tO,biological resources are noted.
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL'
RESOURCES. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation 0 0 0 181
plans?
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful 0 0 0 181
and inefficient manner?
c) If the site is designated for mineral resource 0 0 0 181
protectian, will this project impact this
protection?
CDmments: No evidence exists that indicates the proposed project would use energy in a
wasteful and inefficient manner. No impacts to non-renewable resources are noted.
'3'
P:l.ge So. 7
Polenliallv
Polentially Significani Less lhan
Signiricanl Unless Significanl N"
Impacl Uiligaled Impacl Impacl
IX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk of accidental explosion or release of 0 0 181 181
hazardous substances (including, but not
limited to: petroleum products, pesticides,
chemicals or radiation)?
b) Possible interference with an emergency 0 0 0 181
response plan or emergency evacuation plan?
c) The creation of any health hazard or 0 0 181 0
potential health hazard?
d) Exposure of people to existing sources of 0 0 0 181
potential health hazards?
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable 0 0 0 181
brush, grass, or trees?
Comments: The applicant is required by chapter 6.95 of the California Health and Safety
Code to implement a Hazardous Materials Response Plan. Compliance with standard
applicable local, state and federal regulations regarding the installation of fuel tanks and related
systems will ensure that the project will have no significant impact to the environment. No
further mitigation will be required.
X. NOISE. Would th~proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise leV'ds? 0 0 181 0
b) Exposure of people to severe noise levels? 0 0 181 0
Comments: Temporary construction noise would occur at the site, however, the short term
nature of the noise, and the fact that adjacent uses are of a commercial nature results in less than
significant impacts to the surrounding area. No further mitigation is required.
XI. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the proposal
have an effect upon, or result in a need for new
or altered government services in any of the
following areas:
Fire protection?
a)
o
o
181
o
, r
Page ;'110. 8
Potenlially
P"lentiaJly Significanl Less lhan
Significanl Unless Significanl N"
Impacl Mitigaled Impact Impact
b) Police protection? 0 0 181 0
c) Schools? 0 0 0 181
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including 0 0 0 181
roads?
e) Other governmental services? 0 0 0 181
CommfIlts: The project would not have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services. See discussion below for Fire and Police. State law currently provides
for a developer fee of $.31 for non-residential area to be charged. The split is $.14/sq. ft. for
Chula Vista Elementary School District and $.17/sq. ft. for Sweetwater Union High School
District to assist in financing facilities needed to serve growth. No mitigation will be required.
o
o
o
181
XII. Thresholds. Wzll the proposal adversely
impact the City's Threshold Standards?
Ai; described below, the proposed project does not adversely impact any of the seen
Threshold Standards.
a)
Fire/EMS
o
o
o
181
The Threshold Stan.dards requires that fire and medical units must be able to respond
to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85% of the cases and within 5 minutes ar less in
75% of the cases. The City-of Chula Vista Fire Department indicates that this
threshold standard will be met. The proposed project will comply with this
Threshold Standard.
Comments: The Fire Department states that adequate fire protection will be provided to the
facility without an increase in equipment or personnel.
b)
Police
o
o
o
181
tiP
Page No.9
Polenlially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Signiricanl
Unless
Mitigated
Less than
Significant
Impacl
N"
Impact
The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84% of Priority 1
calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 1
calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.10% of Priority 2 calls
within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 2 calls
of 7 minutes or less. The Police Department response for Priority 1 calls within the
vicinity of the proposed project are slightly above this Threshold Standard at 5
minutes and 4 seconds. Priority 2 calls average 7 minutes 1 second and are within the
vicinity to the reco=ended response time.
Comments: The police Department indicates that adequate service can be provided to the
project site. Any additional construction plans should be forwarded to the crime prevention
unit for evaluation.
c)
Traffic
o
o
o
[81
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must operate at a Level of
Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D" may
occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections. Intersections
west af I-80S are not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No intersection may
reach LOS "E" or "F" during the average weekday peak hour. Intersections af arterials
with freeway ramps are exempted fram this Standard. This Threshold Standard shall
be complied with by the proposed project.
Comments: No adverse impacts to traffic/circulation are noted from project appraval. See
discussion under Sectian VI'- Transportation/Circulation above.
d)
Parks/Recreation
o
o
o
[81
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/1,000 population. This
Threshold Standard does not apply to the proposed project.
Comments: No adverse impacts to parks or recreational opportunities are noted.
,
e'
)
Drainage
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows and volumes not
exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide
necessary improvements consistent with the Drainage Master Plan(s) and
City Engineering Standards. The proposed project does comply with this
Threshold Standard.
o
o
[81
o
Page ~o. 10
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potenlially
Significanl
Unless
Mitigate<!
Less lhan
Significant
Impact
N"
Impacl
Comments: The Engineering Division indicates that existing on-site and off-site drainage
facilities are adequate to serve the proposed project. The applicant will be required to file a
Notice of Intent with the State Water Resources Control Baard for coverage under an NPDES
Stormwater Permit. A general permit will be required for storm water discharges associated
with fueling activities found within a development site exceeding five acres. No further
mitigation will be required.
f)
Sewer
o
o
o
~
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed
City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary
improvements consistent with Sewer Master Plan(s) and City Engineering
Standards. The project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
Comments: The proposed project is not expected to create a need for any new utilities or
service systems. A 12" vcp sewer line is located in Industrial Blvd. which flows in a sautherly
direction. The Engineering Department indicates that existing sewer facilities should be
adequate to serve the proposed project. These will be evaluated at a future design stage. No
adverse impacts to sewers are noted. No mitigation will be required.
g)
Water
o
o
~
o
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and transmission
facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that water quality
standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction. The proposed project
will comply with this Threshold Standard.
Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever water conservation or fee
aff-set program the City of Chula Vista has in effect at the time of building permit
Issuance.
Comments: No adverse impacts to water quality are noted from project approval subject to
compliance with all applicable local, state and federal codes, ordinances and regulations for the
installation of fuel tanks and fuel lines and related systems.
XIII. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the proposal result in a need for new
rystems, or substantial alterations to the
following utilities:
""
Page So. 11
Potenlially
PoLentially Significant 1= than
Significanl Unless S'rgnificanL N"
Impacl Miligaled Impact Impacl
a) Power or natural gas? 0 0 0 J:!:I
b) Co=unications systems? 0 0 0 ~
c) Local or regional water trea=ent or 0 0 0 J:!:I
distribution facilities?
d) Sewer or septic tanks? 0 0 0 J:!:I
e) Storm water'drainage? 0 0 J:!:I 0
1) Solid waste disposal? 0 0 0 J:!:I
Comments: This project will not result in a need for new systems, nor result in alterations in
any utilities. No adverse impacts are noted. No mitigation is required.
XIV. AESTHETICS. Would the proposal:
a) Obstruct any scenic vista or view open to the 0 0 0 J:!:I
public or will the proposal result in the
creation of an aesthetically offensive site open
to public view?
b) Cause the destructian or modification of a 0 0 0 J:!:I
scenic route?
c) Have a demonstrable negati"€.aesthetic 0 0 ~ 0
effect?
d) Create added light or glare sources that could 0 0 0 J:!:I
increase the level of sky glow in an area or
cause this project to fail to comply with
Section 19.66.100 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code, Title 19?
p\ Reduce an additional amount of spill light? 0 0 0 J:!:I
~J Comments: The project will be subject to the requirements of the Design Review Committee
process and site plan review and will require landscaping and related improvements as
applicable. The applicant proposes to remove 300 sq. ft. of landscaped area but will replace this
with 900 sq. ft. of additional landscaping areas. No adverse impacts are noted.
Page No. 12
P"lenlially
Polentially SigniIicanl Less lhan
Significant Unless Significant N"
Impacl Miligaled Impact Impact
XV. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
proposal:
a) Will the proposal result in the alteration of 0 0 0 181
or the destruction or a prehistoric or historic
archaeological site?
b) Will the proposal result in adverse physical 0 0 0 181
or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic
building, structure or object?
c) Does the proposal have the potential to cause 0 0 0 181
a physical change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values?
d) Will the propasal restrict existing religious or 0 0 0 181
sacred uses within the potential impact area?
e) Is the area identified on the City's General 0 0 0 181
Plan EIR as an area of high potential for
archeological resources?
Comments: The project site is fully developed and disturbed by human activity. The
adjacent uses are all co=ercial in nature. No adverse impacts to cultural resources are
noted.
XVI. PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES. 0 0 0 181
Will the proposal result in the alteration of or
the destruction of paleontologfCaz resources?
Comments: No paleontological resources have been identified on or near the project, which
is located in a fully developed urban setting.
XVIL RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) Increase the demand for neighborhood or 0 0 0 181
regional parks or other recreational facilities?
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? 0 0 0 181
c) Interfere with recreation parks & recreation 0 0 0 181
plans or programs?
'-('- Page No. 13
Polenlially
Significanl
Impact
Polenlially
Significanl
Unless
Miligaled
Less lha"
Significanl
Impact
No
Impact
Comments: No impacts to Parks or Recreational Plans are noted.
XVIII. IvlANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE: See Negative Declaration
for mandatory findings of significance. If an
EIR is needed, this section should be completed.
a) Does the project have the potential to 0 0 0 181
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
co=unity, reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or
animal or eliminate important examples of
the major periods or California history or
prehistory?
Comments: The project site is in a fully developed urban setting. The project site has been
completely disturbed by human activity. The project site is surrounded by co=ercialland
uses and fully improved road systems. No impacts to wildlife population, habitat or
cultural/historical resources are noted.
,
Does the project have the potential to achieve
short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals?
Comments: The project does not have the potential to achieve short term environmental goals
to the disadvantage of long-term goals. The project is consistent with both the Zoning and
General Plan designation for the site.
b)
o
o
o
181
Page ~o. 14
'-+J
c) Does the project have impacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (" Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a
project are considerable when viewed in
connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
Comments: The project does not have any impacts that are individually limited, but
cumulatively considerable as a result of the applicant's compliance with all local and state
regulations and requirements.
PolenliaJly
Potentially SigniFicant Less than
Significant Unlcss Significant No
Impact Mitigaled Impact Impact
0 0 0 12!:1
d)
Does the project have environmental effect
which will cause substantial adverse effects
on human beings, either directly or
indirectly?
o
o
o
12!:1
Comments: The analysis contained in the Initial Study found no evidence indicating the
project will cause substantial adverse impacts to humans. The proposed project will be subject
to compliance with local and State standards regarding the installation, use, and storage of fuel
for daily operations. No mitigation will be required.
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES:
No mitigation will be required.
Project Proponent
Date
\II..{
Page No. 15
XX. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project,
involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially
Significant Unless Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the following pages.
o Land Use and
Planning
o Population and
Housing
o Geophysical
o Transportation! Circulation
o Public Services
o Biological Resources
o Utilities and Service
Systems
o Aesthetics
o Energy and Mineral
Resources
o Water
o Hazards
o Cultural Resources
o Air Quality
. 0 Noise
o Recreation
o Mandatory Findings of Significance
lfr
Page So. 16
XXI. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the
mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the
project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the
environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMP ACT REPORT is required.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the
environment, but at least one effect: 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier
document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by
mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets,
if the effect is a .potentially significant impacts" or "potentially significant unless
mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it
must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that the propased project could not have a significant effect on the
environment based on the evidence and analysis provided, and the previous and
present potential impacts V;hich (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier
Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avaided or
mitigated pursuant to that earlier Negative Declaration, including revisions or
mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project and (c) will be
addressed by existing applicable regulations and standards. An addendum has been
prepared to provide a record of this determination.
. -:;8 ~,&>{ ( --( c/-.J) "'!f-eI'f1}
Environmental Review Coord'nator
City of Chula Vista
IVCJ as) /9c:;.8
Date
. 'I"
~
o
o
o
o
Page ~o. 17
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
COSTCO GASOLINE FACILITY ADDITION
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared by:
LlN~OTT
LAW &
GRE8\JSPAN
ENGINEERS
8989 Rio San Diego Drive, Suite 135
San Diego, CA 92108
(619) 299-3090
June 25, 1998
Revised February 10, 1999
JPKlJB/ja
3-980799
~,
ATTACHMENT 5
TABLE OF CONTENTS
DESCRIPTION
PAGE
NO.
Introduetion ....... .............. ...... ......... ..... ...... ... ... m .... ..... ... .... ...... .......... ......... ........ ........... .... ..... 1
Projeet Deseription . ",m.. ..m..... .... ................ ... ..... ............. .... ......... .... ......... ................. ........... 1
Existing Street System........ ............... ............. ............ ...... .... ............... .... ... ....... ........ ............. 5
Existing Traffie Volumes .......................................:................................................................. 7
Project T raffie Generation.................. ... ......... ... ........ .... ... .... ......... ............ ..... ............ ............. 7
Projeet Traffie Distribution/Assignment ............................................................m..m............... 12
Traffie Impact Signifieanee Criteria ...m................................................................................... 12
Traffie Analysis Methodology .................................................................................................. 12
Existing Operations. ........ .... ......... ................ .... ....... ............. ... ...... ... ....... ... ........ .......... 21
Existing + Projeet Operations .................................................................................... 21
On-Site Queues. ....... ....... .............. ..... .... ..... ... ... ........ ...........m...m...................m ...m ..... ........ 21
Parking ........ ...... ........ ....... ..... .... .... ..... .... ... ... ... ........... ... .... .... ... ...... ... ........ ..... ..... .................... 25
Alternative Circulation Plan................ ............... ....m ........ .... .............. ............ .......... ................ 25
Conclusions... ... ....... ....... ...... ....... ...... .... ... ...... ... ......... .......... .............. ...... ... ... .......................... 29
'ff
799.TOC
APPENDICES
A Intersection Manual Count Sheets
B LLG Surveys/Costco Wholesale gasoline transactional data
C Signalized/Unsignalized Interseetion Caleulation Sheets
LIST OF TABLES
TABLE
NO.
DESCRIPTION
PAGE
NO.
1. Existing Average Daily Traffie (ADT) Volumes.................................................................. 9
2. Projeet Traffie Generation ................................................................................................. 10
3. Intersection Operations ....... .............. ....... ....... ... ..... ...... ... ..... ...... ........... ............. ...... ........ 22
4. Queue Count Summary .................................................................................................... 23
5. Existing Parking Demand...... .... .... ................ ..... ..... .... .......... ........ ...... ..... ................... ...... 26
6. Eastward Flow Alternative vs. Westward Flow Alternative................................................ 27
1.(,
799.TOC
LIST OF EXHIBITS
TABLE
NO.
DESCRIPTION
PAGE
NO.
1. Vicinity Map...................................................................................................................... 2
2. Projeet Area Map ............................................................................................................. 3
3. Site Plan ..... ......... ..... ........... .............. .... ....... ............... ................. ........ .... ...... ........ .......... 4
4. Existing Conditions Diagram ............................................................................................ 6
5. Existing Traffie Volumes .................................................................................................. 8
6a. Primary Trip Distribution .................................................................................................. 13
6b. Pass-by Trip Distribution .................................................................................................. 14
6e. Diverted Trip Distribution.................................................................................................. 15
7a. Primary Trip Assignment ................................................................................................. 16
7b. Pass-by Trip Assignment................................................................................................. 17
7c. Diverted Trip Assignment................................................................................................. 18
8. Total Projeet Trip Assignment.......................................................................................... 19
9. Existing (Redistributed) + Projeet Traffic Volumes .......................................................... 20
10. Vehicle Staeking Plan ...................................................................................................... 24
11. Parking Sector Designation ............................................................................................. 28
~
799.TOC
LINSCOTT
LAW &...
GREENSPAN
ENG!NEERS
TRAFFIC IMPACT ANALYSIS
COSTCO GASOLINE FACILITY ADDITION
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
INTRODUCTION
The following traffic study has been prepared to determine and evaluate the traffic
impacts on the loeal circulation system due to the proposed addition of a gasoline
facility to the existing Chula Vista Costeo Wholesale site. The projeet site is located on
the northwest eorner of the Broadway/Oxford Street intersection in the City of Chula
Vista. The gasoline faeility will be located on the southeast portion of the site. Exhibit
1 shows the general location of the projeet. Exhibit 2 shows a more detailed projeet
area map.
Ineluded in this traffie analysis is the following:
· Project deseription;
. Existing conditions description;
. Project traffie generation/distribution/assignment;
· Interseetion and street segment eapaeity analysis;
· Aeeess/On-site circulation discussion;
· Significance of Impaets; and
. Conelusions/Recommendations
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The existing Costco is loeated on the northwest earner of the Broadway/Oxford Street
intersection in the City of Chula Vista. The site is served by two driveways on
Broadway and four driveways on Oxford Street. It is proposed to add a gasoline faeility
to the Costeo site. The gas pumps will be loeated on the southeast earner of the site.
The proposed projeet is a fully automated, self serving fueling station. The proposed
station ineludes three islands with two double-sided gasoline dispensers eaeh, allowing
for twelve automobile fueling positions. Exhibit 3 shows the proposed site plan.
Gasoline dispensing is aetivated by a debit or eredit payment card and no eash is
aeeepted at the islands. Except for daily start up at opening and shut down at closing,
the facility is designed to operate without manpower. However, the facility is remotely
supervised at all times when an attendant is not present at the gas station.
Furthermore, the station will be opened only when employees are on duty at Costeo.
Only Costeo Wholesale members will be allowed to purehase gasoline.
r!
.1
i-------~
.) ,
,r--'~ ',~___
RMRSIDE CQUN1Y
-----~DiEGOCOUNiY
CAMP
PENDlETON
.::::::::~::.:.::..
......................
.......................
........................
.........................
.........................
..........................
...........................
............................
...........................
............................
............................
..........-..................
.............................
..............................
..............................
...............................
...............................
................................
................................
.................................
..................................
...................................
....................................
......................................
.......................................
':::::::::::::::::::::::::;;;':';;.Wiimi!.
.::.:::~t:.ttttttII:IIITI0I@lt::::::..
................................................
...................................................
.::::: :::::::: :::::::: :::::::::: :::::: c.iRl.SiWi'
jllfljlillll~
............................................................
............................................................
.............................................................
.....................................................h.....
............................................................
............................................................
.............................................................
.:::::::::::::::::.#/.'::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::::::::::::}::::::::::::::}::::4.:::::::::}}::::::::::}}::::::::::::::::~~C:~'.
:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::0:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::a:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::
::::::::::::::::::::::::::iiif.:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.
:}~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:~:}~:~:~:~:~:~:}~:}~:::~~:~:~{:~:~:~:~:}~{:~:~:}~:~:~:~:~:~:}~:~{:~:~:~:~:~::.
:::::::::::::::~:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::ri::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::i:i:;jij(ii:::::::
..............................................................
.........................................................
........................................................
.......................................................
........................................................
.......................................................
........................................................
........................................................
........................................................
........................................................
..........................................................
...........................................................
............................................................
::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::PACiFie:.
.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::P.:::::::::::::::::::::::::~!::::
':::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::0:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::":::::::.:::':':'.
.....................................................................
.::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::iiof:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::.:
'::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::~::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::;.. ..:::':::':".
'::I::IIIIIIIIII:IIIIIIIIftIII::I::IW.::: :r::::::::::::::.. ....~.:::.:.:
:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:,.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:.:':':':':':.:':':':':':':~.'.:.:.:.:.
.................................................................................. ....
................................................................................... ...
................................................................................... ..
.................................................................................... ...
.................................................................................... ...
..................................................................................... ...
..................................................................................... ...
...................................................................................... ...
...................................................................................... ..
...................................................................................... .
.{:::}}}}}::::::~::::::::::{{{{:::::::::::::::::::}}}}}}}}::::::})}::}})}:::~:."
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
.........................................................................................
........................................................................................
.........................................................................................
........................................................................................ .
........................................................................................
........................................................................................
.........................................................................................
..........................................................................................
..........................................................................................
.........................................................................................
.........................................................................................
.........................................................................................
.........................................................................................
.........................................................................................
..........................................................................................
..........................................................................................
..........................................................................................
...........................................................................................
..........................................................................................
...........................................................................................
..........................................................................................
..........................................................................................
..........................................................................................
..........................................................................................
JU'lNE
PROJECT SITE
USA
"""""
~
8
o
SOURCE: LLG Engineer.!, 1997
MILES
1
lIN",CO r r
LAW &.
C/{EEN'>PAN
!"'}...
VlCINIlY MAP
CHULA VISTA (BROADWAY) COSTCO GASOUNE FACILl1Y ADDmON
ENGINEERS
>> ,.._.....~
~\c.:\~Cootl!; IJI!-... -. _ ~\ \ \ ~ ~ ~ ",," ..~... '!li,/ (r ~I" --\ ....-"\'
~ . \ .t Ii:~ ~ I;; ~ "I -
;;:.1] - ~.~~ ~ j",'tv BRANDYWl E All .. ,- \ /"1\ \
,...., ~t. ~ -"'-" ',~ ,\111 i\ "00,,& ,\ 'I:, \
G),...cc 0",;' \-\t:..t>>'\ ' p I\' A1 '<e~ : \
~\~ ~~ \.t!< \ M"IT..",s;!\...+~ ~ I f_ 1\ -------,
~:'\ __,"_\o.;:\}:;~-;c~"'i~ ~""l~i'._',;-, )I..=-~^ ;:----.:'~\ ---:,----:;----
.,'. "",' \ .-r.:" ~" "" 'Y<J'; , "",.~_py w ,I
., :a.f~'~' ;;-;'., ~"I~/~ . -:2'<>''''~: ~~" ':";0" ":\ ;:- _ ~ ~-L.---i
~ ~ ;..rl~ ,.., ~t1~"'I~ _~". V " ,- - "
..~e ,",,' '\\ '~~"I'n , .;....- \'~. ,,- ~-=
~v ~ f I ~ ~ ~ -
~~ -is' ~ ,,~ ~\.~E JoV l~'<>rd~- "f' ".- ~\ ~I
~i:;.,,~~ ~""..".. ", "'?~:,!'-i'.~.,_ "~~ .\ "1
~ . """ ~~.P"~" ,>f.~\-' '" ~. ,
- ~....:K ~" ..... ~I- :\IIfi.., IW \ (;\ ~ w..RL ... 4. ~g' \'If.\.~ f-;
~~...afi?~.\-'~ # \.II i-'I, 1-"~~.rI'J.LT,I, ,\,vL l~~ ~ ~\\
~ ~ ,''it ,~",!<, .,,:' ~~,' "'" ~ ~\......... ~ ", \\
,."'\\.1. l\:.~.) ~ \ ~ 0{] .~' .-,...L~, -,... I \\~
~\i'';i~y.\ cr ""-"........0' ~ '\ \~I.::: "' ~ -A ~ Ii',:, ?,""
\.~.~~~~ \'{B ~",. ~ ~,t.M"V _ ':",,11 . .0\ ":..'
~i~ ",,'>';. ~ ~~"%:M"~ ~~,~~~ i)~!~);, ~O"'" '>\ "
~ ,,'> ': ,... ~ ,,~'''t-\~ ,,~ t~ ~i~TE r~':: ' 11 i-!
'~'~\< ", '~~~-'>~~~' - .~ ~10l~__-'~
~y. 'f;I."'" ~ ~::i$ 'it '9: "'0 ~ ':ItIt'jVd - ~;- j PIc;.:
1>0" V> '" V. ~ '% ':! ~1.... po. ". ..... ~ ~ ~ ~ ~.."!I Eli ~ If [ ~ / ....~:;
~-., ~. B .... ~~ -, _ ,..,~. ~ ':2 "" ,WiULLTOP ~ OR \, ;' I' I1!1! ~
lAS" $ 1 \\- \: ~,~_,,, ;-:K, ~ <S ~\;:; ~ 1100 I. _
"'~~~~~_~::~~~ ~':~!;I ~fi %~~::' -iL\~!~
"1!H ,:~"D 'K"~'i:: ',.,~ " \~ .\/1"!!F.t1 ^'W;;i ".",,( _~
-;;;;':c "^ ."'~ \~ . ~'II'f~\S! ~) 1 '~;: , ~"'~ /) ~_
~'<S!.~ ..- '" . '" -< . ~ ' · 1),--
'\'.;\. "S!'~" ~~ '''',.~ 'c' b "J~l~i; I-~f~~: o.i t:<, ..li: _ :) ,,~- ~^;
, \~ .......~ 91'" r: 'I I
_ \ ~'.,> ~ ~\ ,\-rl':':J ",,-"',,-.~ 7/
",,.. " ,\",,-; ';~V:\'I)I/ '
~' . AV "'" I i~
. ~'" '" . 300 ~ .', , O~-
= - ,," l!! ~.~ . Ir ~ 0
>.~", 'c \'" ".~_ ;:=:;-",,; "" \ I. WiT~
L".~ ' k .\~ ID'.6"'1 ,', ~,,': ~ ~~~
~'M\V".c' J~" ! I'~ ~7TII :L!~~ ~
-~\s-B,.v1<~,"~ ',!'O ~""",'" ,.. . II' :<!,,,~ .~
'0~ ti .",~:~..t:: ~ ~ ~ ."'Z ~
'!i{~ ",:, ~ 1f;t' ~c, - "t. -::?i <( i-l
\,.~~ "-"'~:lJf ~<:~I:,\;h V) 'I
.._.-",,'" ",' ~ . 1\2:'~ ' ...;;1-; ~'~F.~-:~~7 ~;1! : \ i'
, 0':$ ~\ '" ~tO, ;<""13' '-~"f;-' """ .~. I
3 ~ - .. ,~~; ..;0 - ,~"", .:- ,,". , "'l';.."!:~ 'J'" .'~. ,\ I'
,?"~ . ..... '1~\ . "'" · " "f- ""t",,\!,,! ~'" :-~~~- "$':':~i\
~.: -- '~.' . '""~--~'?:,.1iJ '. ~,~ '~~ ';'~f.~ '~'/'i \ I
. .'~.""" >"'<..:~- ~,',;~_-: .;:1,~) ~_,r8[,VD"";8 -~, , ._"'W~,
.c ',,~: ,'.:-:"t... ~~iYf.s" ~ ;"",~~ ~"-....... _ ~IU'C
~'t~,":'~" .. ,~. :i@.;L i. r-
)::~:~~~ ..& :::: ;'.~~41'~ if' ~ ~f~L:~
....- .... 'AV\01<. ..., "",,:,~ .'1'1 <jI> I ___,Y"'.' T,,~-m-~
~ ~,/-~:~;;~m.:~.L_ m_ _ _\ \-1---~~=:--=_~.1
c)..
~~\
!u;
-,~
"
,
>
S-J
3
~~
z
N
z
Q. 0
-< ~
:E c
c
~ <
5
Q::
-< u
t5 ~
La.J I&J
~ Z
0 ~
Q:: 0
Q. !fa!
C)
0
~
0
(,J
,...
~
~
c
~
0::
[II
'-'
g
>
:s
::J
::J:
()
"
Q,
"
::E
Ii
~
'"
..
"
E
"
~
,;,; ...
CJ
'" ...
::>
0 Z
'"
0
z
...
tot) z z
:5 0
~
a. i5
0
~ <
en ~
:J
(3
~
\oJ
Z
:J
0
. ~
. "
0
~
0
u
s:;
~
0
C!i
II::
In
.......
~
:>
I :5
. .~
=>
:I:
U
~
w
wi
.!
~
..
"I ~
ID
~
. '"
~l ;::,.
. ~
.. ..;
I .5
f
I :
"
Co
"
...
! co
"
:;:;
:;
..
"
0
<.:I
"
..
..
"
"
.r;
eo
"
'"
...
,;,; ..
<.:I ...
0:: ...
:::>
0
In
- - - -.- --.- - -'- -
.A,VaaVOIII
"
l
]
]
I
.. I
, I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
. I
...
I
I
,J
I
I
,
I
I
I
~I :i:i~~
1< 11 !5!i
I. iJ
~ I i~1I
i iiB~
,~I n
~~in
:8: III
o
:=J
,i
II
!~
I
I
I
I
I
I
\
\
\
iii
Q
'"
:::>
~
i
1=
EI '
~I=
'~l~UO
'.
rY
+
~
z
::::
-
r" v:
:-' ~ Z
"-' :...:..J.
':...f"'.>w
Z ." ,.,
-.-::: ,-
~ -J '-'
LINSCOTT
LA\!\' &
GREENSPAN
E N G [ NEE R 5
The development of the gasoline facility will result in the loss of 51 parking spaees. This
loss of parking is discussed in a subsequent seetion of this report.
EXISTING STREET SYSTEM
The City of Chula Vista Standards indieate that Expressways should be 104 feet in 128
feet of right-of-way (R/W), providing six thru lanes, a 16 foot wide raised median/left-turn
lane and emergency parking or bike lanes. Prime Arterials should be 104 feet wide in
128 feet of R/W providing six lanes, a 16 foot wide median/left-turn lane and emergeney
parking or bike lanes. Six-Lane Majors should be 104 feet wide in 128 feet of R/W
providing six thru lanes and a 16 foot wide raised median/left-turn. Four-Lane Majors
should be 80 feet wide in 100 feet of R/W, providing four thru lanes, a 16 foot wide
median/left-turn lane separating the two direetions of traffie flow. A Class 1 Collector
should be 74 feet wide in 94 feet of R/W, providing four lanes. A Class 2 Collector
should be 52 feet wide in 72 feet of R/W, providing two thru lanes and eurbside parking
with a eontinuous two-way left-turn lane. A Class 3 Collector should be 40 feet wide in
60 feet of R/W with two thru lanes and eurbside parking.
The following is a brief deseription of the existing roadway system in the projeet area.
Exhibit 4 shows an existing eonditions diagram for the streets and interseetions in the
project area.
Broadway is classified as a Four-Lane Major Street. It eurrently provides four lanes of
north/south travel separated by a raised median. Parking is prohibited, and bus stops
are located at severalloeations along Broadway. The posted speed limit is 45 mpil, and
within the project vicinity, Broadway is signalized at Naples, Oxford and Palomar
Streets.
Palomar Street is classified as a Six-Lane Major Street from Interstate 5 to Broadway.
Six lanes are generally provided from 1-5 to Broadway, and four lanes east of Broadway.
A raised median separates eastbound and westbound traffie. The speed limit is posted
at 45 mph, and eurbside parking is prohibited.
Naples Street is classified as a Four-Lane Collector Street running east/west within the
project area. It eurrently provides four lanes of undivided roadway in the project area.
Parking is generally permitted except in the vicinity of interseetions.
Oxford Street is an undivided two lane street running east/west from Broadway to the 1-
805. Curbside parking is generally provided exeept adjaeent to interseetions and no
speed limit is posted in the project area. Oxford Street provides direct aceess to the
projeet site.
rr
.C
v
..,."_..._.".._~.___..._".___."...,....__._._._H'. ___.__. _m_"
LiNse () I r
LA \V I\.
GREENSPAN
ENGINEERS
4U
2U
60
~H '.. ~
S'
{ "tr
c
...
en
'"
c
...
ILIL
ZZ
'--
-
-
NP ..J H '.. '.. ~ NP
NP ...} S NP
...} " " tt ('
-
-
.,
ILIL
ZZ
>-
~
Q
a
gj
s-,
4U
NAPLES Sf
2U
OXFORD
60
PALOJlAR Sf
O~Q4'
.,~
~
NO SCALE
4
EXISTING CONDmONS DIAGRAM
CHULA VISTA (BROADWAY) COSTCO GASOUNE FACIUTY ADDmON
~ ._........_,_. ...-.._.___...0_....._ ~_.. .___.___ __
LINSCOTT
LAW &
GREEI'JSB'\N
E N G ! NEE R 5
EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
Exhibit 5 shows the most reeent available existing daily traffic volumes (ADTs) on the
street segments in the projeet area as obtained from City of Chula Vista records. Table
1 shows the existing ADTs in tabular form. Exhibit 5 also shows AM and PM peak hour
turning movement eounts at the following key interseetions in the study area.
. Broadway/Naples Street
. Broadway/Oxford Street
. Broadway/Palomar Street
The turning movement eounts were eonducted in Mareh 1998 by Linscott, Law &
Greenspan (LLG). Appendix A contains the manual eount sheets.
PROJECT TRAFFIC GENERATION
There are no published traffie generation rates for adding gasoline faeilities to Costco
type facilities. The SANDAG generation rate for stand-alone gas stations is not
eonsidered applicable, especially since you must be a Costeo member to purehase
gasoline.
There are two other Costeo faeilities in San Diego County, Carlsbad and Rancho Del
Rey, which have reeently added gasoline faeilities. Sinee these facilities are almost
identical to the proposed projeet and similarly loeated near major arterials, traffic eounts
and surveys were eondueted and transaetional data were obtained at these sites to aid
in estimating the project traffie generation.
It should be noted that using these facilities to help estimate the proposed project traffie
generation likely results in a eonservative (overstated) analysis. This is because the
subject Costeo fronts on Broadway which currently earries 22,400 ADT. By
comparison, the Carlsbad Priee Costeo fronts on Palomar Airport Road whieh earries
43,500 ADT and the Raneho Del Rey Priee Costeo fronts on East H Street whieh carries
41,600 ADT. It is believed that the gasoline facility trip generation is direetly related to
the amount of commuter traffic on adjaeent streets. Additionally, Costeo is estimating a
monthly gas sales of 400,000 gallons but the traffic study is based on monthly gas sales
of about 782,000 gallons. Therefore, the traffie generation estimate in this report is
considered to be very conservative.
Table 2 shows a summary o~ the traffie generation ealeulations. This table shows that
based on data obtained from the Carlsbad and Raneho Del Rey sites, the project is
estimated to result in 2,150 patrons getting gas (4,300 ADT) on a typieal weekday with
59 and 179 patrons getting gas during the morning and afternoon peak hours,
respeetively.
Sf
7.
- ~.. UU"___. ......_.,_.~ _...____~_,_______. __u.____.___,..__.._., ._._.___~_. ,_"_
~
r:PROJECT co8~ A
(:SlTE '~'1
.....co
: ~] "- 48/82
/ / ,) I '-.. _ 24/66
"LL t ,44/86
17/ 96J1 ....t1"
5/59- 1 I
10/110, ~~;:;
-co
'"
0"'",
"'''''''
'"
"'coO
co",,,,
co
'"
coo'"
-"''''
,)+'-..
122/ 57 J
31/248-
40/107,
-co'"
"'co-
"'...'"
'"
"'0'"
"'..'"
..
,)+'-..
110/382J
413/685-
57/130,
NOTE: - AM/PM Peak hour valurnes are
shown at the inter:sections
LIN,>corr
l.\\\' ::-..
( .IU:EN'>PAN
'-- 1301 67
- 55/122
,110/87
,tr
"''''0
"'..'"
co_
'"
0"''''
1'-'"
'"
NAPLlIS ST
~
NO SCALE
5
\ooo4f EXISTING TRAFFIC VOLUMES
J W AM/PM PEAK HOURS
CHULA VlSTA- (BROADWAY) COSTCO GASOUNE FACIUTY ADDmON
ENGINEERS
OD'ORD
'-- 81/170
_ 565/570
r 77/170
,tr
PALO.VAR ST
",-co
.....",
-'"
'"
1''''",
fD?3CO
>-
;!
a
8!
O~CP'~
-t~
LINSCC >1r
Lr\\ V :y,
CI~EENSr),\i'\j
ENGINEERS
TABLE 1
EXISTING AVERAGE CAlLY TRAFFIC (ACT) VOLUMES
STREET SEGMENT YEAR AOT
Broadway
s/o Palomar Street 1994 16,100
n/o Palomar Street 1994 22,400
n/o Oxford Street - -
n/o Naples Street 1996 18,000
Naples Street
e/o Broadway 1996 6,500
Oxford Street
e/o Broadway 1996 5,600
Palomar Street
e/o 1-5 1996 31,200
e/o Broadway 1996 24,100
Souree: City of Chula Vista reeords.
Tab1.799
6/01/98
n
.9.
LINSCOTT
LAW &.
GREENSPAN
E N GIN E E R 5
TABLE 2
PROJECT TRAFFIC GENERATION
USE DAILY TRIP ENDS AM PEAK HOUR PM PEAK HOUR
(ADT)
VOLUME VOLUME VOLUME
IN OUT IN OUT
A. Total vehicles getting gas 4,300 3 591 591 1791 1791
(Less 42% trips going to - 1 ,800 - 0 -0 -75 -75
Costeo itself anyway4)
B. Total gas station trips only 2,500 59 59 104 104
Primary Trips (35%)2 875 21 21 36 36
Diverted Trips (20%)2 500 12 12 21 21
Pass-by Trips (45%)2 1,125 27 27 47 47
1. Based on vehiele eounts at Carlsbad and Rancho Del Rey sites.
2. Based on patrons surveys at Raneho Del Rey site.
3. Based on February and March 1998 transactional data (20 days) at Raneho Del Rey site which
averages about 782,000 gallons of gas sales per month. Costeo is foreeasting 400,000 gallons of
gas sales per month. Therefore, the numbers in this table are mueh higher than actually
anticipated.
4. Based on patron surveys at Carlsbad and Raneho Del Rey sites.
T ab2.799
2/10/99
'0
.10
~---_._,-_._._,"---"..._----,,--,._-,_..._~_._-_...-
LINSCOTT
LAW &
GREENSPAN
E N GIN E E R 5
A PM peak hour survey at the Carls bad and Rancho Del Rey sites revealed that 42% of
the gasoline facility patrons were going into Costeo itself anyway and are, therefore, not
new trips to the site. Therefore, Table 2 shows that the projeet is ealeulated to generate
the following new trips to the site.
. 2,500 ADT
· 59 inbound AM peak hour trips
. 104 inbound PM peak hour trips
An important traffic-related phenomenon associated with gasoline faeilities is that not all
traffie generated by a gasoline faeility is new to the street system. A relatively large
pereentage of trips are eaptured from traffic already on the street system. Trips ean be
eategorized as one of three types, as outlined below.
Primary Trips are trips made for the specifie purpose of visiting the generator. The
stop at the generator is the primary reason for the trip. For example, a home-to-
gasoline facility-to-home eombination of trips is a primary trip.
Pass-By Trips are trips made as intermediate stops on the way from an origin to a
primary trip destination. Pass-by trips are attraeted from traffic passing the site on an
adjaeent street (Broadway) that contains direet aeeess to the generator. For example, a
work-to-gasoline facility-to-home eombination of trips is a pass-by trip if the trip takes
the driver direetly "passed" the site.
Diverted Trips are trips attracted from the traffic volume on roadways within the vieinity
of the generator but which require a diversion from the roadway to another roadway to
gain aeeess to the site. For this projeet, this would be trips attraeted from roadways
sueh as Palomar Street and Naples Street.
LLG personnel condueted a survey during the peak eommuter hours (243 people) at the
Raneho Del Rey facility on East H Street in Chula Vista to aseertain the percentage of
patrons who are new to the street system (i.e. primary trips). Again, the pass-by and
diverted trips are already on the street system for another purpose. The survey results
are shown below and indieate that 35% of gasoline trips are new to the street system
(i.e, primary trips). If a patron diverted more than one mile to reach the site, it was
considered a primary trip.
Primary Trips = 35%
Diverted Trips = 20%
Pass-py Trips = 45%
Table 2 shows that the project is ealeulated to add 875 new ADT to the City street
system with 21 and 36 new AM and PM peak hour inbound trips to the street system,
l4{
11
.--~.,-_..,. ...."_._....._-~--_._..__._---------~-_.._----- ...~-
LINSCOTT
LAW &.
GREENSPAN
E ...../ GIN E E R 5
respeetively. Appendix B eontains the results of the LLG surveys and other Costeo
Wholesale gasoline transactional data used to determine the projeet trip generation.
PROJECT TRAFFIC DISTRIBUTIONI ASSIGNMENT
Exhibits 6a, 6b and 6c show the estimated projeet traffie distribution pereentages for
the primary, pass-by trips and diverted trips, respeetively. The primary trip distribution
was based on the loeation of residential areas within the nearby area. The pass-by and
diverted trip distributions were based on the eurrent eommuter traffie patterns on
Broadway, Naples and Palomar Streets.
Exhibits 7a, 7b and 7c shows the peak hour assignment of projeet primary, pass-by,
and diverted trips, respeetively. Exhibit 8 shows the total projeet traffie assignment (the
sum of Exhibits 7a, 7b, and 7e). Exhibit 9 shows the existing + projeet traffie volumes.
TRAFFIC IMPACT SIGNIFICANCE CRITERIA
The City of Chula Vista Growth Management Standards were used to determine
whether a projeet impaet is eonsidered signifieant. These standards state that LOS C or
better should be maintained at all interseetions with the exception that LOS D may
oeeur at signalized intersections for a period not to exeeed a total of two hours per day.
TRAFFIC ANALYSIS METHODOLOGY
The traffie analysis assesses three signalized interseetions in the project area as
previously outlined. The following deseribes the methodology used to determine
signalized intersection operations.
The sianalized interseetions were analyzed during the AM and PM peak hours by
determining the average delay per vehicle entering the intersection. The delay was
determined using a eomputer program whieh utilizes the methodology found in Chapter
9 of the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM). The delay values (seeonds) were qualified
by giving a Level of Service (LOS) or "Grade" to the eorresponding delay values for the
intersection as a whole. Levels of Serviee for signalized interseetions vary from A (free
flow, little delay) to F Uammed conditions). Appendix C provides a more detailed
explanation of the methodology, a full description of Levels of Service and all
intersection ealeulation sheets. Traffix software developed by Dowling Associates was
utilized to aid with interseetion ealculations. This is an interactive computer program
whieh has the ability to efficiently ealeulate levels of serviees at interseetions. All
caleulations performed by Traffix utilize 1994 HCM methodologies.
,,~
12
.' ...~__..__<_..~__. H<_ _ ._>> _._.._
NAPLlIS ST
OXFORD
W
PALOMAR ST
>-
~
~
0:
I:tI
O~Q4'
.,~
~
NO SCALE
6a
LINS( 0 r r
LA\\' '"
CIUEN,>PAN
<c 3 PRIMARY TRIP DISTRIBUTION
CHULA VISTA fSROADWAy) COSTCO GASOUNE FACIUTY ADDmON
ENGINEERS
-.---.-. ..__...".~,.,"._-- -.. .--- ,.-,.. -- -- .---.-- --
~
aut
00
.)Co
~
~,; "It
~~~!
20:l:~ ,t
MM
00
"Ie"
~
>-
~
~
~
NOTE:-(XX); Indicates negative precentage
LIi'J SC () r r
lAW &
GREENSI'A'J
~'1
NAPLES ::rr
OXFORD
PALOJlAR ::rr
~
NO SCALE
6b
PASS-BY TRIP DISTRIBUTION
CHULA VISTA. (I9ROADWAY) COSTCO GASOUNE FACILIiY ADOmON
ENGINEERS
a(
'"
'"
+
(5:1:)~ t;r
(20:1:)- (
25:1:" ~~
..,'"
NAPLES ST
~
'"
~/50:l:; '\
/ /25:1: a(
~/.:~~~
1(.:25:1: +
~~
25:1:" '\ t
a(a(
"''''
"''''
OXFORD
a(a(
00
..,'" ~ 5:1:
+'*' r(5:1:)
25:1:~ t
(20:1:)-
(5:1:)" ~
'"
PALOJUR ST
>-
~
~
!ij
O~"4'
.{l1;i
NOTE: - (XX): Indicates negative precenatge
~
NO SCAlE
6e
LlNSCO r r
lA\\' ::<.
C.R[EI\.~I'AN
(, -s- DIVERTED TRIP DISTRIBUTION
CHULA VISTA- (I3ROADWAY) COSTCO GASOUNE FACILIlY ADOmON
ENGINEERS
LEGEND
- - Inbaund
- - Outbound
LlNSCO r r
LA\\ &
CIUENSPAN
ENCINEERS
'"
......
'"
+ ,2/4
1/2, ~ f ('"
"''''....
..................
-ION
NAPLES ST
'"
~
~/o/)5 ~
~M:cr
\,,: 'i1~ _1/2
1/2- i
11/19~ '"
"-
-
-
OJ!FORD
"'''''''
..................
"'''''''
...J.I.,. '-5/9
31'S..) t
'"
;:,.
PALOJlAR ST
>-
~
~
0:
01
~
NO SCALE
70
I _L_ PRIMARY TRIP TRAFFIC VOLUMES
~T AM/PM PEAK HOURS
CHULA VISTA (IBROADWAY) COSTCO GASOUNE FACIU1Y ADDmON
NAPLES ST
~
""'"
"''''
..............
"''''
--
~
~ .;.
V/~ ~y ,t
16 28 ~
/PROJE~CT "'~
'" /SITE %//1
;;,./ ~
5/9,.} ,t
OJIFORD
~
"''''
..............
"''''
~
PALOJIAR ST
NOTE:
AM/PM Peak hour volumes are
shown at the intersections
(XX): Indicates negative volume
>-
~
a
!6
O~G4'
"'1'4'
~
NO SCALE
7b
LlNS('O r r
lA\\' ~
CREEI\SI'Ai'-.J
I PASS-BY TRAFFIC VOLUMES
10 ; AM/PM PEAK HOURS
CHULA VISTA (BROADWAY) COSTCO GASOUNE FACIUlY ADDmON
ENGINEERS
10
;:,.
.
~~~lJ!. t;
3/5, ~~
-r",
NAPLES ST
o
"-
'"
~ /11.)1 '\
~::< !<<~;:,:
~3/5 .
--
3/5, '\ t
1010
............
,..,,..,
OXFORD
"'-r
............
-r'" ~ 0/1
.'-.. ,(0/1)
3/5 J t
(2/4)-
(0/1) , ~
'"
PALOJIAR ST
- AM/PM Peak hour volumes are
shawn at the intersectians
- (XX): Indicates negative valume due to traffic
diverted from Palomar Street to Broadway
>-
~
~
~
NOTE:
O~CO'4'
.,~
~
NO SCALE
UNSCO r r
LA\\' i:\..
GREENSPAN
7c
DIVERTED TRIP TRAFFIC VOLUMES
~7 AM/PM PEAK HOURS
CHULA VISTA. (PROADWAY) COSTCO GASOUNE FACIUTY ADDmON
ENGINEERS
+
-
,
'"
+ ,2/4
(0/1)!. ,t;
(2/4) ,..u,,'"
4/7, '"
_a+
NAPLES ST
~
"''''
"'N
"
0'"
"'-
~
:.1+
~~19"'.)I ,t .
1//0 1~8/33"""" +c;;"
:!5 ~'",,1~;;:;'
, illj ~
o '/:'"
N ~1i! 6/ + _ 1/2
5/ 9...) ....t
1/ 2- 1~
14/24, ::J+
"
aN
OXFORD
~
"'-'"
........::::..::::...
"'.......... ~ 5/10
.)+'.. ,(0/ 1)
6/10...) t
(2/4)-
(0/1), ~
'"
PALOJiAR ST
>-
~
~
(!j
i!j
O~Q4'
<t~
NOTE: - AM/PM Peak hour volumes are
are shown at the intersections
- (XX): Indicates negative valume
~
NO SCALE
lINscorr
lA\\' &
CIU.ENSP,\N
8
ENGINEERS
TOTAL PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
AM/PM PEAK HOURS
CHULA VISTA- (BROADWAY) COSTCO GASOUNE FACIUlY ADDmON
"'00
<0,...",
""
~~;:;-
-"''''
.)~'...
122/56......
29/244 -
44/114,
'- 130/ 67
- 55/122
,112/91
,ti
,..."'''''
"'.'"
<0_
'"
-"',...
,..."''''
'"
NAPLES f!r
~~
~SlTE ""-
r/ ~;:::'~-1
:~] '-48/82
~~~'... 7~~~~
21/105...... ,t i
6/ 61- -<0.
24/134, <0",,,,,
,~.......
"''''''''
."''''
'"
<0,...",
"",...'"
"'.'"
'"
<0,...",
"'''''''
'"
.)~'...
116/392......
411/681-
57/129,
NOTE: - AM/PM Peak hour volumes are
shown at the inter:sections
LlNSCO r r
lA\\' &
(,({EENSI'AN
OXFORD
'- 86/180
- 565/569
, 77/170
,ti
"'0<0
."'''''
-on
'"
,....on
<0_'"
'"
PALOJlAR f!r
~
NO SCALE
9
EXISTING + TOTAL PROJECT TRAFFIC VOLUMES
(, So AM/PM PEAK HOURS
CHULA VISTA. (BROADWAY) COSTCO GASOUNE FACIUTY ADDmON
ENGINEERS
>-
~
~
8!
O~C}4'
..{~
.. .----.-.----.--.-.---.....-......-......----- .-.
LINSCOTT
LAW &
GRLENSPr\N
E N G J NEE R S
Table 3 shows a summary of the key intersection operations during the AM and PM
peak hours.
EXISTING OPERATIONS
Table 3 shows a summary of the existing operations at the key interseetions in the
projeet area during the AM and PM peak hours. This table shows that all intersections
are ealeulated to currently operate at LOS C or better during both the AM and PM peak
hours. This table also shows that LOS B is ealeulated at eaeh interseetion with the
exeeption of the Broadway/Palomar Street during the PM peak hour (LOS C).
EXISTING + PROJECT OPERATIONS
Table 3 shows that the addition of project traffie does not deerease the LOS at any of
the key intersections. LOS C or better operations are ealeulated. The delay increases
are minimal, with a maximum of 1.2 seeonds at the Broadway/Oxford Street
intersection.
ON-SITE QUEUES
It is desirable for the gas station queues at the faeility not to impaet operations on
Oxford Street. In order to determine the potential for queues at the gas pumps to
extend back to Oxford Str€et, a queue study was eondueted on both a weekday
(January 7th) and weekend day (January 9th) at the Rancho Del Rey Costeo during peak
periods. The number of ears staeked was counted every five minutes. The results of
this study are summarized in Table 4. Table 4 shows that queues of over six vehicles
were noted during a relatively small amount of the time during peak periods. Queues of
over six vehicles are extremely rare during non-peak times.
There is about 120 feet of stacking distanee between the pump island and the Oxford
Street driveway. This translates to about six vehieles as shown on the vehicle staeking
plan on Exhibit 10. Assuming this Costeo is similarly busy (about 780,000 gallons of
gas sold per month) to the Raneho Del Rey gasoline facility, queues are expected to
extend to the Oxford Street driveway only on rare oecasions. However, as previously
mentioned, Costeo's foreeast for gas sales is only 400,000 gallons per month.
Therefore, queues of about one-half (four vehicles) those observed at Raneho Del Rey
are antieipated at the Broadway facility. This queue length would not affect the Oxford
Street driveway. It should "also be noted that if the Oxford Street driveway was
impaeted by queues, a significant impaet would not result. There are two reasons for
this eonelusion. First, there is a second driveway on Oxford Street located just 150 feet
west of the subjeet driveway whieh patrons can use and seeond, Oxford Street is a
C4,
21
LlNSCO fT
LAy\' &
GRI::ENSP,~\N
ENGINEERS
M
W
...J
III
<(
I-
fJ)
Z
o
i=
<(
Ik:
W
a..
o
z
o
i=
(.J
w
fJ)
Ik:
W
I-
Z
(/J
+1- 0 !D!D !D!D !DO
...J
(!)o
zw
- -,
f-O
fJ)c:: ~ 0...... r- CO Q)LO
Xc.. C"'i'<i Q)C") ~o
w
w ...... ...... ...... ......N
0
(/)
0 !D!D !D!D !DO
(!) ...J
Z
f-
(/J
X >- 00 ...... LO 00 r-M
W ~ NC"'i OON ~o
w ...... ...... ...... ......N
0
~c::
<(::J ::2::2: ::2:::2 ::2:::2
wo <(c.. <(c.. <(c..
c..J:
-
- - aJ
Z aJ aJ aJ
~
0 aJ t!! -
~ (/J
f- - -
(/J (/J ~
() (J) -c CO
W ~ ~ E
(/J c.. .E 0
c:: CO X CO
W Z 0 c..
f- - - -
>- >- >-
z CO CO CO
- 3: 3: 3:
-c -c -c
CO CO CO
~ 0 0
0 ~ ~
!D !D !D
'"
"'co
"'",
"'-
.o~
",12
1--<0
s! <( !D 0 0 W U.
000000
Lric:ic:ic:iLriLri
>- ......NC")~~
~ VI 0 0 0 0 ^
w ----
o
O~T"""T"""T"""
c:iLric:ic:ic:i
......NC")
(J)
-c
c
o
<..1
aJ
'"
c aJ
<..1
-c '2:
~ aJ
:J(/)
(J)_
CO 0
aJ_
E ~
(J) aJ
.~ ...J
>- II
~(/)
WO
O...J
'0
22
LINSCOTT
LA\I\ &
GREENSPAN
TABLE 4
RANCHO DEL REY COSTCO GASOLINE FACILITY
QUEUE COUNT SUMMARY
E N GIN E E R 5
PERCENTAGE IN QUEUE
DATE & TIME QUEUE LENGTH
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 TOTAL
Thursday
January 7, 1999 0% 16% 52% 28% 4% 0% 0% 0% 100%
7:00 AM - 9:00 AM
Thursday
January 7,1999 0% 0% 0% 0% 4% 48% 32% 16% 100%
5:00 PM - 7:00 PM
Saturday
January 9, 1999 0% 0% 0% 0% 0% 28% 64% 8% 100%
12:00 PM - 2:00 PM
NOTE: The number of cars in queue was counted every five minutes during the indicated time period.
Tab4Q.799
2/10/99
"7,
.23
1.=::::::::1' ""
:;..;
~ ~ '
C=:=C=:::::::.:J _ _ _
~ IJDD E![j a:ID
~a:ID1JDD1JDD
n n- __--
~ """W.ll --___
u:::::@ IJDD IJDD
c:ID a:ID IJDD ~ _
---, 1 0 J
-- 1----
a:ID I~ ~~
.ml~-~ . 1C::m u
~ ~'l (~ )( (!?) W?) J i-=-=>- --';
Ii
'i1
I~
I
I
I
I
I
----------r
~ I
./
I
O!-,~
""
""
II
I
c!'
#
I
dJ
------
- --
OXFORD smEET
~
SOURCE: BCf9hcusen Cansulting Engineers, Inc. (July 1998)
NO SCAlE
10
LlNscorr
lA\\' &.
GIU:ENWAN
VEHICLE STACKING PLAN
'1~
CHULA VISTA '~ROADWAy) COSTCO GASOUNE FACILITY ADDmON
ENGINEERS
,...-.-,..,-.-.,-.-.,..,.-...,-----. .,....,...--,.------.-... ..-----
LINSCOTT
LAW ~
GREE~SPf\N
E N GIN E E R 5
lightly traveled roadway (5,000 AOT with an ultimate AOT of about 8,000). The potential
for queues impaeting Oxford Street is mueh less problematic than it would be on
Broadway.
If queues did extend to the Oxford Street driveway regularly, Costco personnel should
be present to manage the queuing activity. If this is not sueeessful, the subjeet
driveway should be reloeated westward approximately 30 feet.
PARKING
The project site (I.e. the area eneompassing Costeo, Kid's Warehouse, Levitz and Pep
Boys) eurrently eontains 745 parking spaces. The eonstruetion of the gasoline facility
will result in the elimination of 51 parking spaces. This will leave 694 parking spaees for
the site (739 onee Costeo provides 45 additional spaees behind Costeo for employees).
LLG eondueted a two hour parking eount in this area on Saturday, February 6th and
Tuesday, February 9th. The results of these eounts are shown in Table 5. This table
shows that a maximum of 385 parking spaees were occupied. This represents only
61 % of the post-gas station parking supply. Exhibit 11 shows the loeation of the four
seetors the site was divided into. Based on these two days of eounts, a parking supply
of 694 or 739 spaces should be more than adequate.
ALTERNATIVE CIRCULATION PLAN
The possibility of reversing the traffie flow at the gasoline faeility from the proposed
eastward flow to a westward flow has been diseussed. Table 6 shows a summary of
the pro's and eon's of the two directional flow alternatives. The westward alternative
would have the advantage of eliminating any ehanee of the vehicle queue extending to
the Oxford Street driveway. However, this flow pattern would result in a greater chanee
of wrong way movements sinee drivers entering the Oxford Street driveway would be
tempted to turn immediately eastward, faeing oneoming traffie. The westward flow may
also result in traffie eonfliets at the main north/south drive aisle between multiple exiting
vehieles and vehicles entering the site. Finally, we do not believe the queues will
extend to Oxford Street except on rare occasions. Overall, we believe the eastward
flow offers more advantages than the westward flow alternative.
7)
25.
LlNscon
LAW &
GREENSPt\N
E N GIN E E R S
TABLE 5
EXISTING PARKING DEMAND
BROADWAY COSTCO
2/6/99 TOTAL NUMBER OF CARS PARKED
AVAILABLE
Sector SPACES 3:00 PM 3:30 PM 4:00 PM 4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM AVERAGE % OCCUPIED
A 179 6 6 5 7 4 5 6 3%
B 67 9 10 8 7 6 7 8 12%
C 303 249 218 208 222 188 173 210 69%
D 196 120 151 138 132 102 98 124 63%
TOTAL 745 384 385 359 368 300 283 348 47%
% Occupied 52% 52% 48% 49% 40% 38%
2/9/99 TOTAL NUMBER OF CARS PARKED
AVAILABLE
Sector SPACES 3:30 PM 4:00 PM 4:30 PM 5:00 PM 5:30 PM AVERAGE % OCCUPIEC
A 179 10 10 10 6 6 8 5%
B 67 9 10 6 1 2 6 9%
C 303 179 178 167 151 159 167 55%
D 196 71 73 72 73 67 71 36%
TOTAL 745 269 271 255 231 234 252 34%
% Occuoied 36% 36% 34% 31% 31%
NOTE: The value in the cell represents the number of parked vehicles at the indicated time.
TabS.799
2/10/99
"7'-(
.25.
.-1.., .__ _____
LINSCOTT
LAW &
GREENSP/\N
w
>
i=
<(
z
a:
w
I-
....I
<(
::
o
....I
LL
C
a:
<(
~
en
w
::
en
>
w
>
i=
<(
z
a:
w
I-
....I
<(
::
o
....I
LL
C
a:
<(
~
en
<(
w
F UJ
<D <D 0
6 -wen
~ .2"m Ca
;: ~ U
~ <D
.8 ><D~
_>0-
<D2' 0'::::;:::
(/)uC:: -o::J
ZC::<D g> E
O~E :;::: .!: en
ou~ 'x ctS Q)
~ 0 Q) E E
i= Q) E U ~
-
'"
a: <D>- ~BE
~~ ~ '" .- c: 0
C);: OOUJ
01lJ
....I a: ~ N
LLLL
OLL -0
a:<( c::
<(I- Q)
~~ x
Q)
(/)Z .~ >-
IlJIlJ '"
~a: Q) ;:
a: ::J Q)
=> Q).~
Q (/)::J~
C'-o
0_05
a:"'<D
a..~~
--
Q)(/)
"'-0
c:: ~
'" 0
~-
'" x
00
z.9
~
-0
c::
Q)
-
x >-
Q) '"
.~ ;:
Q)
>
(1)";::
::J-O
(/)Q)-
Z::JQ)
o ;:~
i= 0"'-
~(/)
Z --0
Q) ~
<( ",.8
~O c:: x
"'0
0....1 ~O
....Ia.. 0-
L.L.a..
0<( ~
a:>-
<(00 >- (j) >-
~fi1 '" - -:;:::
;: c:: '"
Q) Q)
(/)(/) E ~
<0 OJ '5
c:: Q)
1lJa.. 0 >
0 ~ 0 .~ oj
;: E
a: cD Q)c;;
eo ~ -"(ij
(/)0 OJc;;
0- c::.- 0 Q)
:;:::ctS c:: >
a: 8 0 '" Q) .;::
a.c$ :.::> =-0
'" c:: c";:: ;: c::
~ Q) 0-0 Om
U E U c:: (j) E
'm ~
(j) Q) (j) Q)
(j) > 01 E > 0
0 .- -
Q) ,,- ~ c::
....I E ...J'" 0 0
~ N C")
'"
'"
....
<ri
:is,,,
J:!",
;;OM
00
U::C\i
E N G r NEE R 5
<C
W
....I
00
<(
I-
.27.
7~-
~ z ~
... 0
(!'~ ::J
~ ..-- ~
en ()
0 z ~
z "
1/1
--- --- en ~
l LaJ
C 0
I 0:: ~
- ; ~ 0
()
I ()
LaJ ~
en
" :>
z :5
52 :::>
0:: J:
~ ()
- --
- -
-.- -
J. 't. Q 't 0 ~ .
A
~~
I ..
;~ r 'III
.'" I
:s.? j
:1E 1 i~
o
II n ;~~~
~gsi P
~ I g~su
~ hh~
~
.il
o
::J
::J
---
, I I
I I @
-"- If= I
: t::::i=
__.. _:~ l~UiJ
- - -- --- ----
~
28
I
,
~
W
WI
.1
~
..
~)
~2~
"
.
~I
M
"
~-)
'..... "f
{''-
,;<..Ji
...............
..--)
,~-/J
\"m"p
\... //ij'
....---
,~
~~
'"
..
...
...
LINSCOTT
l/\W 0.c
GREEI\lSPAN
ENGINEERS
CONCLUSIONS
Based on the established signifieanee eriteria,
significantly impaet the adjaeent intersections.
ealeulated with the addition of projeet traffic.
the projeet was ealeulated to not
LOS C or better operations are
Based on the parking eounts, a parking supply of 694 spaees should be more than
adequate.
The queue at the gas pumps may extend to the Oxford Street driveway on very rare
oeeasions. This is not eons ide red signifieant since Oxford Street is a relatively low
volume roadway and does not extend westward to any street.
If queues did extend to the Oxford Street driveway regularly, Costeo personnel should
be present to manage the queuing activity. If this is not successful, the subjeet
driveway eould be relocated westward approximately 30 feet to increase the queue
storage.
799.rpt
.29.
i"'\
ATTACHMENT 6
i :AR~S JR ~STAURAN,!96 SEA,S I 1/2.5 SEATS I 2,528 ~- 33
I JDANN F'AEP.!:S & CRAFTS ?.=i AIL I 1/200 SF' I 18,100 s:= Si
I RJRN!SHINGS :!..UB i ;:uRNrTURE I 1/600 SF I 14,480 SF ?'
-",
I I I
HOME B"-SE i PET AIL 1/200 s;: 114,545 -- --,
:::::- ~/-
I L=\fI7Z ;:URN:7UP.E I ;:JRNITUR; I 1/600 s;: I 44,000 S~ -."
I - I-
I LEVITZ WA~-=;';:1L!S:: , I I
) WAREHOUSE 1/1,000 S;: 19,200 _. 19
I PRICE BAZJ..AF. i ?.=i AIL , 1 1200 5" I 18,350 S~ 92
I I I
PEP BOYS i AUTO PARTS 1/200 S;: 9,500 s;: 48
KIDS WAR:."iOUSE i R,o. AIL I 1/200 SF , 22,750 s;: l' ,
I",
I COSTCO WAFeiDUSE i WAREHDL'S:: I 1/1,000 S" I 23,109 s:= 23
I CDSTCD WHD:.5ALE I I I
! R:7AIL 1/200 SF 96,000 s:= 480
I caSTCD BAK?Y/MEA, j Mt..NUi=ACTUR!NG I 1/800 s;: I 3,133 -. 4
I
I caSTCD TIHE 5A81NSi All. : ;..t:TO SERVIC= I 1/400 S;: I 5,521 s:= 14-
,
I caSTCD "'DO: SERVICE i ?57AURANT!7AK= OUT I 15 MIN. I 891 s:= 15
TOTAL I 392,307 SF' 1509
SfTE STATISTICS
s;~ AREA
31.34 ACR:::S
392,307 Sr:
28.7 0'
/0
1,609 S: ALLS
1,642 Sj ALLS
if(" 'O? Si.L.LLS
~-
L : po;.., ,.'1 nr-,n --
LJ: C:JV:::RAG:::
Lei: CDV::RAG::: RATIO
P';RKING R::QUIR::::)
?;":;K:NG PROVD::::)
;-;.!..NJIC.A?PED P4RKIN(3
?~,~K!NC; RA T!C
1~-76 04:~( ~r1 COSfL0 WHSE U405
L3c:5522
~-
ATTACHMENT 7
To: City of Cnula Vista Design Review Committee
From: Jesse Sanchez General Manager Costco #405 Chula Vista
Date: October 14.1998
R=: Gasoline Station I Employee Parking
After development of the Costco Gasoline facility and restrlping of the rear parking area our
employees will be required to park in the rear of the location. In the past prior to the Rancho Del
Rey locations existence the area we now propose for employee parking was In fact the employee
parking area. At that time the sales volume of the bUilding necessitated the need and it worked
out very well. At this time the security gate is operational and some employees do choose to park
there. In order to assurc that this parking works well we plan on doing the following:
. Sincc thc idca was born of locating a gasoline facility here we have already discussed with
the employees the need to park in the back and it has been accepted well.
. We will direct employees to park in the rear gated lot while they are at work and if for any
unforeseen reason there was not enough parking available instruct them to park on the west
side rear of the building.
We will instruct via a written memo to each employee that will be signed by them where to
park ~nd the need for It. The signed memo will remain in their file for future reference.
. We will post flyers in the breakroom as well as place an article in our monthly newsletter.
. The employee parking lot will be signed as such clearly.
Wcekly monitoring of the parking will be made to assure employees are utilizing the correct
parking area.
If you have any questions or concerns regarding this issue please feel to call me.
Tnafrous~ /1~
Je.SS?::nCh:;:t
"
1144 Broadway, Chula Vista, CA 91911 . (619) 427-5426. Fox (619) 422-2410
-,-."._-_. ,...'-,._-_._-----_.~._--".__.- -.--...--
ATTACHMENT
a
..UPEKDIX 3
7.~ CITY 0:= c...nJ!...A VISTA D:s:-......DSW-=: S7J..~"j
~.:::: Zj:: r-~:.:::~ 10 fi;~ ~ 5~:::r:=nt of Ji;~~u:-= of =:"".2:!l O"...-::::~bi? a: ~~:-.=a! int::~=:::. ?2ym:.n:.:.. OJ .:2.!:J?lf!l
=:::::-;~u~io~, :;: ,:! ~aa::;: -".::::::J IoViIJ r-,::..:i:-~ ~5-.::tj:)!~z:-}" li=:.i:Jr. 0: :b~ ?2:-'i 0: :::: Ci:;.' C:mr.=~, ?lznning Coffi:r~:.:.:b!:. 2-no
:::.1; o1h::r oITi::z: ~i=s. Tr;: b!l::r...ing infa:-::.2tiDII mCSI oc d~bs~:
1. Us! tb: ==:s of 211 pc:-.:ms h2viDg 2 fi~"n::ial int::::::;! in ti>: prop="Y w:.i=h is th:: sub]:::: of th:: appli::zti:Jn Dr th::
OJDI;-a::, :...g., (T'WD:::, z?pli:.2.Dt, CO~I~or, su"bo:>nt:a::lo:-. I:'".3I::nal suppI;:::.
PRl::: ::EIT
I)fr.)JJt:/C.
c C .5~~ 0 /vUbl ~5kl ~ G~I2i>,-
()J:.)I/:J!./jPEIV?I~.e of ON.f:'/fL. P;;'Vt::u;'?~D.!1
,
2. If an)' ".-:.:>n' jd::ntif:~ pu:suant lD [J) ai>:>v:: is a :::>;po:<!tiDn or paru:::ship, list th:: Il2:!:::S of all iDdividI:2.!5 cr.rming
mor:: lZ2Ii10% of ~ .>Zar=:s in th:: :::J']>O:<!tion or owning 2ny parm:::ship int::r:::st in tb: partD::~hip.
JJb~J~
~.
If any ?==!l' id::nrif:::.:! pursuant to (1) abov:: is Don-profit orpmi::atbn or a trust, TIs; th:: nam::s of any ?=,':>D
s=rvir1,g 2.S dir--:tor of U:: non-profit organization or zs tTUSl~ or b::r.:.fi::iaj)' or trustor of th: truSt.
II/A
~. B.av:: :-:Jt h.ad mor: ttan S"'..50 worth D[ busin::s.s t;4r.sr::t::d with any rn=b::~ of the City 5:aIT, Boards, C:Jr..mi55iDn5,
Com:nr.~=. aDd C:J:ndl within th:: p25t !W::Jv:: m::mths? Y::s_ No Y lfy=s, pl= indi::at:: per>on(s;:
. .
5. PI~<." i:!::ntify ::act aD: =ry p::!3D~ includiDg an}' ag::n:s, =ploy::::s, :::JI!5Ultant5, or ind::p::Dd::Dt cont:<!::tOI> who
you i;2\,:: zssigne.d 10 r::p:=nt you b::fDr:: th:: City in this IIlall::r.
RAl1r.::;AUSEN CORSDLTDlG ENGl.!<r.r.KS. IRC.
MIJIX L Rl\"Y P ARTh.::I:5ETI'
6. Hz\,= :~l1 and/or yw!..Ii om::::::; or zg=!.S., in In: a~ur~ga.l:" ~ntn1JU1:=:d ::lor: than Sl~roJ 1Q 2. Counciim:m~r iD th:
curr:::ll o~ pr::-~ing ::i=.ion p=ri~? Y::s_ No2 1f:"::S, 5:.al:: whi:b Coum:ilm=h::r(S):
J:ll:::
/ A
-/ Q?
/..j>O /.'(,
/ /
. . . (NQi-O' ~ additior:al F:,-.:s :tS to '~'Y)'"
yO ~V~
Signature of :;e>Irt:<!clor/appllC2n!
/2/?/c~r r~.-.q---.
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
......,
Item: ---.::2
Meeting Date:2/24/99
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Conditional Use Permit PCC-99-18, Proposal to install,
operate and maintain a 45-foot high monopole, housing 12 panel antennas
and equipment building on the Eastlake High School Sports Field - Nextel
Communications.
Nextel Communications is requesting permission to construct and operate an unmanned cellular
communications facility at 1120 Eastlake Parkway, at the Eastlake High School sports field. The
project will consist of an equipment building, emergency generator and a 45-foot monopole
supporting 12 directional (panel) antennas. The monopole location is proposed adjacent to the
existing sports field lighting standards. Refer to Attachment I. Slides will be presented during
the meeting.
The Environmental Review Coordinator has concluded this project is a Class I Categorical
Exemption from environmental review, minor alteration of an existing public facility, per the
California Environmental Quality Act.
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission adopt attached Resolution PCC-99-18
recommending that the City Council approve the Conditional Use Permit based on the attached
draft City Council Resolution and the conditions and findings contained therein.
DISCUSSION:
I . Site .characteristics
The site currently contains a public high school, associated a=ssory structures and athletic fields.
The monopole is proposed on the westernmost portion of the school football and track field, This
site is on a plateau overlooking the future alignment of State Highway 125.
2. G"n"r"l Pl"n 70ninE "ne! I -"ne! 1T '"
GFNFRAI PI AN 70NING CllRREN.T I A NT) 1TSF
Site Public/Open Space Public/Quasi High School
North Public/Open Space Open Space Community Park
Commercial Retail VC-I Shopping Center
South Public/Open Space Open Space Vacant and Future Highway
125 Alignment
Medium High PCR3 Residential
East Residential Low/Medium PC Residential
West Public/Open Space Open Space Open Space
Page 2, Item:
Meeting Date: ? /?4fCJ9
3. Propo'31
Nextel Communications proposes to construct an unmanned cellular communications facility at
Eastlake High School, at the west end edge of the school football field and track. The 45 foot
monopole will be placed near the top of the slope overlooking the future alignment of State
Highway 125. It will be situated in a line with the existing light standards for the field. Those
light standards are 80 feet in height. The proposed equipment building will consist of 350 square
feet. As requested by the school district, the new enclosure will provide 150 square feet for
school storage use and the remaining 200 square feet will accommodate the equipment supporting
the cellular facility system. (Refer to site plan and elevations, Exhibit A).
The applicant has indicated there may be need to operate an emergency generator during power
failures. This project has been conditioned to reflect compliance with the City Noise Ordinance.
In accordance with Section 19.48 (Unclassified Uses), Conditional Use Permits are required for
uses listed in this chapter, and shall be considered by the City Council upon recommendation by
the Planning Commission. Staff has reviewed the associated Design Review application on an
administrative level.
4. Simil3r P.t3hli.hmenf.
There is an existing cellular communications facility at the school site constructed by GTE
Mobilnet of San Diego. This project consisted of the installation of an architecturally integrated
wireless communications facility into the Performing Arts Building at Eastlake High School.
Another monopole cellular facility is located to the south approximately lh mile away. It is an
older version installed by the County of San Diego.
5. An3Iy.j.
The proposed wireless facility will be located in the PC (Public/Quasi Public) Zone, on the school
site. The Sweetwater Union High School District has governing authority over uses and functions
on school property. The District has authorized Nextel Communications Inc. To file the subject
application. (Refer to Attachment 2). The City of Chula Vista retains permitting authority.
The proposed use will be located on the sports field, which is fenced and bordered to the south
by a large open space area, future Highway 125 alignment, and Otay Ranch development. The
proposed monopole will be significantly shorter than the current light standards for the sports
field. The monopole is proposed at 45 feet and will be similar in design and color to the light
Page 3, Item:
Meeting Date: 2DAJ.99.
standards. Staff believes the site location, monopole height, and landscape buffer create a
minimal visual impact to surrounding residential properties.
6. Issues:
Oe, i En
Staff believed the equipment building proposed, Tl- I I metal building, did not have an appropriate
level of architectural design nor was it similar to the applicant's equipment buildings for other
sites. This was relayed to the applicant in their incompleteness letter of November 6, 1998. In
their response letter to staff of December 21, 1998, the applicant and school district reached an
agreement to construct the metal building similar to what is existing elsewhere on the school sports
field now. (Refer to Attachment 3). This new metal building would be for school storage use and
would serve as an equipment room for the applicant, Nextel. The total square footage of the
storage/equipment building is 350 feet.
AlternMive Sife'
The applicant searched for alternative project locations within their "needs" scope. (Refer to
Attachment 4). The City park site was recommended as well however, the applicant indicated
that Nextel had already pursued negotiations with the School District. Staff is satisfied with the
proposed siting based upon the applicant's alternative locations analysis within their "needs" area.
r:o-locMinE
The applicant could not co-locate on the same GTE facility attached to the Performing Arts
building for the following reasons. The height of the building did not serve Nextel's needs,
communication interference with the GTE facility, and the School District preferred another
location for Nextel's facility.
I'roject SifinE
The applicant originally proposed an 80 foot monopole in the interior of the school site. Staff
worked with the applicant in placing their monopole along the westernmost portion of the school
site, thus allowing a reduction of monopole height and integration with the line of existing light
standards. This would provide less visual impact to the surrounding residential properties as it
will blend with the light standards and will be shielded by existing landscaping.
Page 4, Item:
Meeting Date: )/)4/99
Fmi~~if'ln~
As requested, the applicant submitted proof of compliance with ANSI standards on emissions
control. (Refer to Attachment 4).
7. CnncJllSion
Staff is recommending approval based upon the findings and conditions of approval as noted in
the attached draft City Council resolution.
A tt~H'hmp.nt"
1. Locator Map
2. Reviewing Agency Comments
3. Letters dated November/December 1998
4. Co-locating Existing Facilities, Alternative Sites and Search Area Map
5. Disclosure Statement.
H :\I-IOME\PLANNING\MARIA \PCC\PCC9918. WPD
February 19, 1999 (9:23am)
RESOLUTION NO. PCC-99-18
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL GRANT A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT, PCC-99-18, TO NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS TO CONSTRUCT AN
UNMANNED CELLULAR COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 1120 EASTLAKE
PARKWAY.
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a conditional use permit was tiled with the City of Chula
Vista Planning Department on September 30, 1998 by Nextel Communications; and
WHEREAS, said application requests permission to construct an unmanned cellular communications
facility, 45 ft. high monopole and equipment building, at Eastlake High School, 1120 Eastlake Parkway; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has concluded that the project is a Class 1
Categorical Exemption from environmental review pursuant to the Calif(Jrnia Environmental Quality Act; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on said conditional use permit
and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general
circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners and residents within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries
of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was scheduled and advertised f()r February 10, 1999, 7:00 p.m. in the Council
Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission meeting of February 10, 1999 was cancelled and continued to
February 24, 1999; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered all reports, evidence, and testimony presented at the
public hearing with respect to subject application.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION does hereby
recommend that the City Council approve Conditional Use Permit PCC- 99-18 in accordance with the findings
and subject to the conditions and findings contained in the attached City Council Resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City CounciL
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 24th day of February, 1999, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSTAIN:
ABSENT:
------..----.--
John Willett, Chair
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
f
H:\HOMEIPLANNINliIMARIA IPCC\PCC9911:!I'.RES
Fchl1.1ary 17, 19992:00 p.m.
~
CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT
LC!)
PROJECT
APPLICANT:
Nextel Communications
PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PROJECT
ADDRESS.
Eastlake High School
1120 Eastlake Parkway
Request: Proposal to construct a 45 foot high monopole
and equipment room at Eastlake High School.
NORTH
SCALE:
No Scale
FILE NUMBER
PCC-99-18
h:lhomelplanninglcarlosllocatorslpcc9918.cdr 1 0/5/98 ~
..'w ,.,1,
",,',1. o,.! ~_
'..'
G.u.~ 10 .1998
RE: Real Property located at 1120 Eastlake Parkway
Chula Vista, CA 91915
To whom it mJlY concern:
The Swectwaler Union High School District is the owner of tbe referenced property. This
letter shall serve as notice that Nextel Communications. Inc. and their agent, JM
Consulting GI:OUP, are authorized by the Sweetwater Union High School District to
submit and process all necessary pcnnit applications for a ccllular communicatioruJ
f&::ilityon the referenced property,
S inccrely.
~d--dtZ~
($ignl1tUTC)
A~U8V 8.t!.ArnpbGL L
(print n~)
~s.SfITAIJI Su.fEe.IQJIE~foJJ-
(prlnuitJe) .pLA\-.\}..JI~~ '"' FAGIL/1,eS
cc: 1M Consulting Group. Inc.
:5
A TT ACHMENT 2
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT
84 EAST "J" STREET . CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . 619 425-9600
EACH CHILD IS AN INDMDUAL OF GREAT WORTH
BOARD DF EDUCATION
LARRY CUNNINGHAM
SHARON GILES
PATRICK A JUDD Oetober 20. 1998
PAMElA A. SMITH
MIKE A. SPEYRER
RECEIVED
SUPERINTENDENT
UBIA 5, GIl..Ph.D,
OCT 2 2 1qgf\
PLANNiNG
Ms. Maria Muett
Planning Department
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista. CA 91910
RE: PCC-99-18/ BB-773
Project: Monopole/Equipment Room at EastLake High School
Location: 1120 EastLake Parkway
Dear Ms. Muett:
Thank you for the opportunity to review and comment on the above
mentioned project.
Any facility that is owned and oceupied by one or more ageneies of federal,
state, or loeal government are exempt from sehool fees.
Even though no fees appear to be necessary, the District is still required to
sign oft on the Certificate of Compliance.
Sineerely,
-~~~" ~
(/ ~~:istant Supe ndent
for Business rviees and Support
LB:dp
v
REQUEST FOR COMMENTS
L~~la Vista Planning Departmc~t
DL~~
~ --.:::.. :
October 2, 1998
TO:
PLANNING:
-K-Graphics
eMailing Radius 300'
eDue Date 10/09/98
-K-Env. Review Coordinator
____Advance Planning
____Landscape Architect
-K-Rick Rosaler (Notice Only)
-K-Beverly Blessent
____Community Planning
EMERGENCY RESPONSE:
Police-Crime (Preuss)
Fire Marshal
ENGINEERING:
-K-Land Development
____Advance Planning
____Bill Ullrich (all CUP's)
RECEIVED
OCT C 2 7998
CIl r ,
Bo/(DIN" O""cl1
U & HOUSI';'C,!,
',G DEPT.
COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT:
____Otay Valley Rd. Redev.
____Town Centre I
____Town Centre II
____Southwest Redevelopment
____Bayfront Redevelopment
BUILDING & HOUSING:
~Permit Processin~'
____Code Enforcement
SCHOOL DISTRICTS:
~Chula Vista Elementary
~Sweetwater Union H.S.
OTHER:
Conservation Coordinator
FROM: Maria Muett
PCC-99-1B
ZAV-
PCZ-
PCM-
PUD-
PCA-
GPA-
Conditional Use Permit
Variance
Zone Change
Miscellaneous
Planned Unit Development
Zoning Text Amendment
General Plan Amendment
Other
(Planning Department)
Applicant/project Name:
Nextel Communications
Location: 1120 EastLake
parkwav
Request: Request to
to construct a 45 foot
hiQh monopole and equip-
ment room at EastLake
HiQh School.
(use this No. on time sheet)
Project Account Number BB-773
Planning Commission Meeting Date
Zoning Administrator Hearing Date 11/11/98
Comments to be received by 10/19/98
(tentative)
COMMENTS :\.c-5nL..t:rL:-r-\;~ Ci\-u:,,-'!..A'\1ON '5 ~ D~- ~ -p 1t~
~~s ~ 1'<\I.~~
,...-' _""" ,,,,,,,- L':'-.....I\ ~-LL\'I'iE ~,<~\ ~~'1..lifoN oP
t'---O'31......N'~I= .\\\it ""'" 'w~~..-L.
,AN1~Nf'r Q'\j ~c\....- \ IJ
__... ^,_ ,_". m__
C H U L A V I S TAP 0 L ICE D E PAR T MEN T
C RIM E PRE V E N T ION U NIT
PLAN REVIEW RBCOIOlBNDATIONS
continuation of surveillance/detection:
Exterior View Fencing
___ Wrought Iron
Tubular steel
Chain link
-K- Security Alarm Systems
Perimeter
Motion detection ___ Robbery/Hold Up
-K- Burglary/Intrusion
POLICE RESPONSE
Addressing -K- Access to property
Knox Box
-K- Visibility; allowing patrol officers to monitor activity
-K- Reporting procedures
POLICE SERVICES
-K- Training of management and employees in security procedures
and crime prevention awareness.
-K- Security Survey performed by the Crime Prevention Unit.
SPECIFIC RECOMMENDATIONS AND COMMENTS
As the hardware for this site will be in a building at ground
level concern must be given to insuring controlled access to the
radio equipment building.
Consideration should be given to the use of graffiti deterrent
materials for the equipment building.
A security evaluation of the site prior to completion of this
project is highly recommended. The security evaluation can be
scheduled by contacting the Crime Prevention Unit at 691-5127.
Thank you for the opportunity to have input into the planning
process. If you have any questions or if I can be of further
assistance please call me at the Crime Prevention Unit at
691-5127.
cc:
<-
CPTED
PD/Cpu
11/95
'.
"
"
...
.~
. c. :: ~
~\~
~
~~~~
~- ~-
CITY Of
CHULA VISfA
PLANNING DEPARTMENT
November 6, 1998
Nextel Co=un.ications, Inc.
c/o 1M Consuhing GTOUp, Inc.
5761 Copley Drive, Suite 100
San Diego, CA 92111
Chula Vista School District
Anention: Lowell Billings
84 East "J" Street
Chula Vista, CA. 91910
Subject:
Incomplete Application for PCC-99-l8 and DRC-99-2I, Monopole and
Equipment/Storage Room located at Eastlake High School, 1120 Eastlake
Par1.-way.
Dear Mr, Laub:
1i
Yom application for the above referenced project has been reviewed for completeness and accUracy
of filing. As a result, the project application has been found to be incomplete for processing.
Attached please find a list outlining additional information needed prior to finding the application
complete, non-conformities with development standards, and preliminary design issues.
Further processing of yom project cannot begin until, at a minimum, the incomplete items are
submitted and the application accepted as complete. However, to expedite processing of yom
project, it is reco=ended that all issues on the attached list be addressed now.
L Incomplete Items
Technical reports as acoustical analysis and any existing environmental studies.
Map of the search area around the proposed site and the alternate sites considered by NeA1el,
as wel1 as existing facilities in the surrounding areas and adjacent cities. This will be in
addition to yom letter indicating why the existing facilities in the City of Chula Vista cannot
be used,
Matrix of alternate sites considereu indicating their characteristics and constraints.
?
A TT ACHMENT 3
276 FOURTH AVENUE. CHULA VISTA. CALIFORNIA 91910' (619) 691-5101
@h>!.'-",""""",,~h,,"'
.
.
As you know :!i"om previous projects for similar uses, we typically have standard conditions
relating to noise, campliance with ANSI standards for EMF emissions, and no conflict with
ather transmissions in the area.
A standard condition for all monopole facilities is to provide co-locating opportunities. In
your case if this is not possible with other surrounding facilities, technical evidence must be
submitted to show non-compatibility with other facilities in the surrounding area.
In response to your inquiry on the existing monopole, put in by the County of San Diego. to
the south of the project site we are conducting research to confirm if co-locating is a
condition of approval for their similar type projects. If it is determined that they require it
as well, then attempts for co-locating as indicated in the above paragraph must be conducted.
If the County does not require co-locating on their facilities then we would not make that a
requirement on that particular monopole.
II. Prelim;n~TV Desj!!IJ Issues
The plans need more clarification regarding as to the design of the proposed
equipment/storage building. The roof actually projects vertically almost 3 feet and more
fascia identity is needed. The plans should include the adjacent school storage building,
indicating some attempt to make the two buildings consistent with each other, including
height. Additional screening landscaping is reconunended to ensure that the two storage
buildings are nDt quite so visible. This should be indicated on the plans.
III. Conunents :!i"om.other City Departments - See Attached.
Chula Vista School District
No specific conunents, onJy requirement is the ability to sign off on the Certificate of
Compliance.
Fire Denartment
Provide (I) 2Al OBC fire extinguisher for the Nextel equipment building.
Police Department
Concern must be given to insuring controlled access to the radio equipment building, since
it will be on ground level. Consideration should be given to the use of graffiti deterent
materials for the equipment building.
Buildinr and Safety Division
Structural calculations and building permit approval for construction of monopole and
equipment building. Coordination with the State Architect required for construction of
monopole and associated equipment on school property.
y
G[I~(nE'cj::iW...AJ!LSIA
"
.
.
k
i-
t
ShouJd you have any questions regarding the review process, please contact Maria Muen. Project
Planner at (619) 409-5801.
Sincerely,
17UA ~ ~ g 1fJc-LP l./
. l....... (..
Maria C. Muett,
Project Planner
Attachments: Reviewing Agency Comments
cc:
Rick Rosaler, Principal Planner
Beverly Blessent Acting Senior Planner
H:\Hm,I:E\!'LANNING\MARIA\PCL9918I.LTR
9
CJIY,OE.Cl:iL!L A V!~TA ..___.__._
Consulting Group, Inc.
'I I .. i ( Ii," .\ "
December 21, 1998
Ms. Maria Muett
City of Chula Vista
Department of Planning and Land Use
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE: Applications No. PCC-99-18 and DRC-99-21
Dear Ms Muett:
In response to you letter date November 6, 1998, I would like to address your
comments and requests for additional information.
"Incomplete Items"
Attached as Exhibit 1 is an Analysis of Maximum Permissible Exposure for the
project. This consists of a one-page summary and a detailed set of calculations
for each of the three sectors, This document verifies the project's compliance
with FCC standards for EMF emissions. Additionally, because the Nextellicense
strictly limits operation of this site to authorized frequencies, and these
frequencies are dedicated solely to Nextel, there is no possibility of conflict with
any other legally operating transmissions in the area.
Nextel proposes the possibility of an emergency generator to provide power in
the unlikely event of a power outage to the area. As you know, traditional forms
of telephone communications are often unavailable during power outages. In
those circumstances, cellular communications can be essential for emergency and
personal use. In the event of an unplanned loss of electrical power to the site as a
result of an emergency power outage or other breakdown in the electric
company's ability to provide continuous electrical service, we may use a
temporary generator to maintain continuous operation of the facility. Neither
the generator nor any fuel will be stored on the premises except during the time
of the power outage, and will be removed after power is restored. These
generators meet all EP A standards for pollution control. The generators include
a critical silencer and will be housed in factory-fit sound shield enclosures with
one-inch acoustical foam. Sound pressure was measured at 70.5 dBA at a
(f) ",0(3;"'1"<:>'100 (P;}..7~'f{F7
7S') C:;r,md Avenuc, Sllire 200 . C:lrlShllL CA 9200K . Tclcphmll": (7(,0) 72G ng6 . Fax: (760) 720-3819
Offices in: Seattle, S,m Fr,l11cisc<1, S,m JUSl', S,lI1t,1 B,nham, Long Reach, Irvine and S:1o Diego
-'~.._.,..~._- .-...---"---.--.. -....--...--.--- ""-'--_._~._-.__...+-- ..-..-
Ms. Maria Muett
December 21, 1998
Page 2
distance of 23 feet. This meets State code for noise abatement. Attached as
Exhibit 2 are the calculations for the proposed generators.
Attached as Exhibit 3 is a map of the original Coverage Objectives for the Nextel
Eastlake site. This map depicts the area we seek to serve with this site. Our
search for a site location was focused on the areas which could provide radio
coverage to this ring.
Exhibit 4 is a summary of the existing facilities within the area and the reasons
that co-location is not possible, and the requested matrix of alternate sites
considered.
"Preliminary Design Issues"
The proposed new building, which would house Nextel's radio/telephone
equipment and provide storage for school equipment, is designed to match the
existing adjacent school storage building. The Nextel equipment area is 10-feet
by 20-feet, but will be extended to lO-feet by 55-feet in order to match the 55-foot
length of the existing school building. The crest of both roofs will be oriented in
the same direction, and at the same height. Both the new building will be
constructed of the same metal materials in the same colors.
Because the new building is designed to match the existing building, your
request for adding fascia would have the effect of reducing the consistency of the
two buildings. It is our belief that this would create a greater visual impact. For
this reason we do not propose to add fascia to the proposed building.
The proposed new building has been sited between the existing building and the
top of a slope, below which is another school ball field. That slope is heavily
landscaped with trees and shrubs. The existing landscaping and building,
therefore, will effectively screen the proposed new building. Nextel cannot
provide landscape screening for the existing school storage building, which has
existed for many years in it's current location without complaint. Additionally,
the proximity of the existing building to the high school track (approximately 1-
foot) precludes any landscaping on that side.
"Comments from other City Departments"
We appreciate the opportunity to see comments from the other City departments
at this time. Most of these comments (school, fire, building) are standard
conditions of the building permit process. We will be submitting construction
drawings to the City for issuance of a building permit and will comply with the
requirements of all of the reviewing departments at that time. The comments of
the police department address the design of the building, and merit discussion
I(
Ms. Maria Muett
December 21, 1998
Page 3
here, A locked door will secure the building. The only exterior equipment will
be two air conditioning units mounted on the side of the building. These will be
secured behind a chain link fence that we will erect between the buildings. The
building will be equipped with both intrusion and fire alarms.
I hope these comments address all of your concerns and questions. It is our
desire that this project be advanced quickly to the Planning Commission for a
hearing. If you need any other information to allow you to proceed to that end,
please call me at (619) 650-4254,
Sincerely,
JM CONSULTING GROUP, INC.
/~
~~A-
Steve Laub
Zoning Manager
1'-
EXHIBIT 4
Co-location Opportunities
And
Alternate Locations Considered
Potential Co-location Sites In and Near Search Ring
I. Existing antennas on Eastlake High School gymnasium
1120 Eastlake Parkway
Reason rejected: insufficient height AGL, insufficient space on building walls
2. Existing wall-mounted antennas on industrial building, approx. 25' AGL
2311 Boswell Road
Reason rejected: too far north - will not cover Otay Lakes Road or Rancho del Rey
3. Existing antennas on SDGE lattice tower
2150 Eastlake Drive
Reason rejected: too far north - will not cover Otay Lakes Road or Rancho del Rey
4. Bonita AtWetic Club building
Otay Lakes Road
Reason rejected: too far west - will not cover Eastlake or Eastlake Greens
5. Pacific Bell switch building
Telegraph Canyon Road
Reason rejected: too low, too far west - will not cover Eastlake or Eastlake Greens
Alternate Sites Considered
6. Various commercial centers (Bonita Point Plaza, College Plaza, Otay Lakes Plaza)
Otay Lakes RoadJEast "H" Street
Reason rejected: too far west - will not cover Eastlake or Eastlake Greens
7. Southwestern College
Otay Lakes RoadJEast "H" Street
Reason rejected: too far west - will not cover Eastlake or Eastlake Greens
8. Fire Station #4
861 Elmhurst
Reason rejected: too far west, insufficient ground space
9. Eastlake Village Center
Otay Lakes RoadJEastlake Parkway
Reason rejected: elevation too low - will not cover Telegraph Canyon Road or H
Street
13
A TT ACHMENT 4
EXHIBIT 3
/'
(1'7tJ
O:Jl
C-8$ EAST LAKE
COVERAGE OBJECTIVE
1'10- '';~'''''~.>I! ,-
~ .' :.1. .:\~:.
~" t;~.. ..... .
-I~_~-~. ".>- - _'':'
I '.l:--:..:.'~ ";.\-
r I~-:::~~'" '--""11
, . -.7."~' -,. I,.
:.~~::~~~~~.'::~i;~f~;.:i:.
: "'-~l
.. -: i~ .4:..../~::~ '.:':;~~1 ~.-:
.':tf~~'~i~..
..,
I
I '
1.--#-",1
~>l
......\
,
,
I',
, ,
"~-\ J
\...-",.. ,
c~ EAST LAKE OBJECTIVE MAP I'f> DATE: 11/20/97
r::6"4 .; f
:';c..// _'
-*._----_..,
/V'
V
/j'l /::
\ ~...... ,
_...~'" \
..... .......",... \ \
~ \j
1\ '\ f\
I--\--\~-'\-\-I--\
\ \ \
\\1\
\ ',\
,. I")I~J--"" \
,\, I I
\J\(~
\1
'n
",>'
~ '
,
.. ~.....\
\
,
\
"
I
!
EXHIBIT 1
Analysis of Maximum Permissible Exposure
In 1996, the United States Congress pre-empted regulation by state and local
jurisdictions of electromagnetic fields and radio frequency interference, and vested that
authority with the Federal Communications Commission (FCC). Specifically, Section
704 (a) (7) (B) (iv) of the Telecommunications Act of 1996 states:
"No State or local government or instrumentality thereof may regulate the
placement, construction, and modification of personal wireless service facilities on
the basis of the environmental effects of radio frequency emissions to the extent
that such facilities comply with the Commissions regulations concerning such
emissions."
Many jurisdictions require, prior to approval of a proposed site, evidence of compliance
with the FCC regulations. The attached worksheets, as described by this narrative,
demonstrate the project's compliance with the FCC regulations.
The FCC set, as a standard for Maximum Permissible Exposure (MPE) for ESMR, a
power density measurement of 566 micro-watts/cm' (hourly average). The attached
worksheets describe the maximum calculated power densities for each of the three
sectors of the proposed Nextel Eastlake site at distances ranging from 1 meter to 500
meters. These calculations are produced from a computer model prepared by Nextel's
radio engineers. That model has been accepted by the FCC for calculating compliance
with FCC power density standards. Variables entered into these calculations include
the distance from the antenna support, the height of the antennas above ground, watts
per channel, antenna gain, and downtilt (if any) of the mounted antennas. From these
variables, the model calculates the angle and distance of a person on the ground, the
Effective Radiated Power (ERP), and the average power density to that person at that
distance.
The maximum power density exposure for the Eastlake site is calculated to occur at a
distance of 10 meters, where the hourly average exposure would be 8.744613559 micro-
watts/cm', or 5.1450 % of the FCC standard.
In 1997, the FCC also set a standard of 5% of the power density limit as the threshold
for Significant Contributors. Any site that exceeds that 5% would still be in compliance
with power density regulations, but would be required to be posted with signs to notify
people that an FCC regulated antenna site is in operation, The Nextel Eastlake site
meets the FCC 5% limit for this requirement.
Finally, the FCC license to Nextellimits the Effective Radiated Power (ERP) of any site
to 1000 watts. The maximum ERP for the Eastlake site will not exceed 1000 watts.
The Nextel Eastlake site complies with all FCC regulations and qualifies for an FCC
Catagorical Exemption because the lowest point of the antennas is at least 10 meters
from the ground. The lowest point of the antennas at the Nextel Eastlake site will be
12.5 meters (41 feet).
(~
00
~
N
~ ~ N
.
0 -C " '"
~ ...
- 11> ~U '" "'!
- ::> -c "
QJ ..c . U <: ~
QJ ";: ::> !i! LL '"
.<::: - U ::;; - -
(/J c: >< 0 rn
11> Q. W NN
.. 0 In 0 1" IE "" "" "" "" "" "" '#.cf. "" "" ""
CQ ~ OJ 0 :;;~ . . . . . . 0 0 0
0 " '" ... ~ N r-- 00 (J) OON (J) 0 ...
..c 0 LL '0 ~~ (J) 00 '" 00 '" '" (J) ~ ... '" '"
11> ~ E - c 0 '" ... (J) ... ... 0 00 ... r--
~ 0 '" 00 "- ... r-- 00 (J) ~ ~ ... ... '" '" N
::J QJ ,~ "" U5 @);g 0 0 0 0
- QJ c5 0
u (/) :s
::> 11> >
~ - ::J 0
CQ .0 ~ r-- ~ (J) '" r-- r-- (J) '" '" (J) '"
- (.J (9 ro '" 0 ~ N 0 0 '" ~ r-- '" 00
.. ~ "N .- " r-- '" 00 r-- 0 ... ~ N '" 00
:i (J) E UI- ;::
E .. ro <: Q) ~ '" ~ 0 ... 00 '" ... '" '"
'0 0> ~ <.) Q) .- ... r-- N (J) N (J) '" (J) N <0 00
0 c c';: '" ... ... '" N (J) '" '" ... '"
c 'Q) c ~~
~ a; => r-- r-- N N '" ~ (J) '" ... ... ...
.... I " ~ '" ~ r-- r-- '" 00 '" r-- 00 r-- ... N
11> (.J E' (/) 1:' <0: "- ~ LL '" r-- '" ... 0 (J) '" '" r-- N
U ns 0> 0) '" 0.. N '" '" cD '" ,.-: ,.-: 00 00 00 ,.-:
c: .; .c .... " '0
... > In
co "0 <II ~ "e 0 ro E
- .0 '0
.. C. m :;: :J ro 0 cr;
'6 ~ ~ '" In N ~ '" (J) '" (J) N 00 ... '" 0
0 <II CJ) :c " 0 '" ir' ~ 0 0 '" ... O? ... ~ r-- ... 00
.... c: W :;: c.. 0> 1:' .0 ro a: cD ,.-: 00 0 ~ ... '" ,.-: oj M
c: ~ '"
0 0 CJ) 0:: Q) " '0 w ~ ~ ~ '"
E ~ w .<::
c: ..!!! 0 w :c
0 .... 1:' ::J
~ ns .. " 0>
:;:: 0 .. 0 co (9 'Q)
u ...J - .... 3: E ~ .<::
c: ~ ...... "e "
11> .. W " ~
::> 3: ... - 0 '0 >
.... 'e '" c .~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 0 0 c '" '" => 0) O? N '" '" 00 ~ ... (J) '" ~ ":
CQ - - w 0 c ro ro E' '0 '0 ~ (J) oj 00 ,.-: cd '" cD '" '" ...
.. co U c.. ...... .2' '0 '0 0> .9 In
co <II :;: U -c c " W
c: CIJ U 11> '" ~ 8' ~ > '0 >
C 0 U 0 " 2
u.. 11> 1;; roro~ 1;; '"
...J Ii u u => " - - ro .0 '0 '0
w a; .... 0 ro '" <.) '" => w
u.. >< >, ~ uU:.=+-' '5"
u.. u W .. W ~ g f/) rn a..c '" u::
0 W .E ~ - - a. 0> ro "
- 0 o 0 co "w .~
0:: ~ Z 11> .E c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0>
<( U 11> '0 '0'0 c .<:: " 0) 'OJ '" 0 r-- '" ... 0 00 '" r-- "'! LL '"
co a " '0 C C => '0 ~ N M '" cD cd cd ,.-: OJ Cl.
u.. :;: .. ro Q) Q) Q} ~ ~ N '" (J)
E z - 1i)>>;:c ro ;:
11> 11> 11> :; >
W " .2. E E (]) 2 0
.<::: CJ) 11> In f-
- (.J :;: c ro -g.gg~~ ~
"
c: c..
>. .. <II
:!:: 0 "" In '"
.. 0:: ns In c J: ..
OJ '" - ... r-- (J) N '" (J) '" r-- N r-- '"
c: :;: ...J M " 'C .~ c ... ~ ~ ~ ..., 0 0 (J) O? 00 '"
11> N ~ 0 0
CJ) - ~ E '" 0 0
-c II) - <I: 0:: '" 0
~ w ns u "
11> c: W :J 0
3: co "C 0
0 0 ~ co 0 .
c. - M 0) ... ...... In
11> 11> co - c.. ...... (J) N c (J) N '" r-- ~ ... 00 N r-- N 00
0 . ~ '"
.<::: ::> It) M 0 '" '" 0 ": M ~ '" 0 '" 'C '" ... ... ~ N ~ ~ 0 '" O? ~ '"
- CIJ '" ... 0
-c - 0) 00 '" ~ ~ ro 0 0
11> ...... ~ > 0::
-
co ...... W u..
::> 1::
.2 0
co W In " ~ Q) Co
u I- In In U Co
I- it 2 N '" '" OJ 0) ~O) " " <: => 0 0
in .<::
0 '1: ,. '" '" " '0 g''C " '" UI ~ N "'... '" '" r-- '" (J) ~ N
- 0:: :;; ~ ~ 2 -
"a; => E E UI
- 0:: 0 .EI-c '0 C E
11> 0 c.. e
11> :;: 0
..c: u.. W -
.. It: 0:: co :;: ~ -
-c .... c: CQ 1:' 1:' '1:
co 0 c: c: <0: 0 :J
11> 0 11> c: In .<:: .9 c '0
~ c.. w - 11> W 0 'to '"
c. ~ c: '" c E
W - u 0: :c (9 0::
CJ) <( c: c
0:: <( <: ro 0:: ~ 0>- - '" ro
C Q) .<:: ._ c .. c
W ::J 0 W Cl. "<0: <0: c
'S I x c
c.. c- '0 x x ;: 0>"
Co Q) '" ro (/) ro 0 '0-
:;: ~ - <: "
E LL ,. :;; :;; O)::!; c 0) <0: a.
E
...
'"
I~ 00
"'
~
~
"" ~
. N
'E '" ~
...
""U ., "!
"C
. U r:: ~
1;jLL .,
:;: - en
0
NN
() '0 IE #- ?f2. ?f2. ?f2. oR oR oR oR oR oR oR oR oR oR oR ?f2. ?f2. ?f2. ?f2. oR oR oR oR oR oR oR oR oR oR oR oR oR oR oR oR "*?F- oR oR
() ro =>.<:: . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
LL '" .... OJ ... a '" "' ~ a ~ N CD CD OJ ~ ~ "' OJ ... N '" .... N OJ "' .... "' a N "' OJ '" "' '" OJ "' ~ .... ...
'0 ~;s: '" "' "' '" 00 ... 0 CD 00 ... '" ... .... .... '" OJ CD ... N 0 00 .... "' ... '" N N ~ a OJ OJ "' 00 .... .... .... CD CD
- c: '" "' "' .... a CD '" 0 00 .... CD "' ... ... '" '" N N N N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a a a a a a a a a
0 '" "' "- '" "' "1 N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 a a a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0
?f2. 1ij @):15 ci a a a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a a a a a a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a
~
~ OS> "' .... 00 ... 00 OJ OJ "' ;:: N "' "' .... N OJ ;;; ... '" "' N 0> ... .... ... .... CD .... "' CD ... 00 "' ... 0>
<0 N ... ~ CD N N OJ N N "' N 00 "' "' 0 00 '" 0> 00 .... ... N OJ .... "' ... CD "' "' .... "'
" N .- "C OS> .... .... "' "' a OJ a "' ~ ~ N ... CD "' ... '" a "' ~ OJ OJ "' CD 00 ... 00 OJ '" a .... "' ... CD OJ "' N ....
E ili- a .... '" N ...
0> r:: QI .. "' OJ N "' CD OJ "' "' '" '" '" '" OJ ... "' ... "' "' "' :;;: '" '" CD CD N N .... .... "' "' 00 '" "' a .... a ;;:;
'" <.> QI ii: ... '" .... 0 '" '" .... ... "' ... CD "' 0 0> a "' ~ N a .... a CD N .... ~ CD ... .... N .... ~ "' 00 CD '" '"
" 0 em '" ~ ~ ... 00 .... a OJ '" 0> a ~ ~ CD ~ a "' ~ .... "' ~ CD .... "' .... "' a "' a "' N ~ ~
;s: ~ .... "' ... .... .... OJ "' a .... OJ .... OJ OJ .... a .... CD N "' "' "' "' .... a '" .... N .... '" OJ CD N OJ .... ... N a "' CD
> ~ ., .. ... "' ... .... N '" CD 0> "' 0 CD '" 00 ~ "' '" N ~ 0 OJ OJ 00 .... .... CD CD "' "' "' ... ... ... ... ... '" '"
<( "- ~ LL '" ~ ~ "' OJ .... ... ... '" '" N "! N ~ 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a 0 0 0
0.. '" '" N 0 0 0 0 0 0 a a a 0 a 0 0 0 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
J'J a; ~ a "' "' CD a a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
ro ir CD .... .... "'! a 0 0 0 0 a 0 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
;s: II!: ~ rn r--: r--: 00 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
w ... ... ... ... "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "' "'
:ti a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0
OJ <( CD " "! "! 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 0 0 0 a 0 a a a a a
'0 a; m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a rn
a: CD
>
~ '"
'0 '0
CD
ii: N
~ a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a ro "
r:: 0>
OJ 'OJ 00 a a ..., "! "! "! "! "! N "! "! "! N "! "! "! "! "! "! "! N "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! LL '"
'0 C) ~ a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ :;; a.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
~
0
f-
rn -
c: .r:: "" '" CD a CD '" ~ OJ 00 .... CD "' ... '" '" N N N ~ ~ ~ a a a a a ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N N N
.~ -
"3: r:: "? "! "! ~ ~ ~ a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
'0 ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
., e a a a a
a: '" 0
"C
rn
c: ... N CD N OJ CD ... '" N ~ a OJ OJ "' 00 .... .... .... CD CD CD "' "' "' "' "' "' ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... '" '" '" '"
.,
'6 '" .... '" N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 a 0 a 0 a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a 0 0 0 0
'" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a:
t
QI 0
rn <.> c.
~ r:: 0. a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a a
" ::J g 0 0 a 0 a a
a; ., rn ..,. "' CD .... 00 0> 0 ~ N '" ... "' CD .... "' OJ 0 ~ N '" ... "' CD .... 00 OJ 0 ;;; N '" ... "' CD .... 00 0> 0
., ~ ~ N N N N N N N N N N '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" ... ...
E C E
0
~
-
'c
::>
( 1
"
c.
E
...
'"
"'
00
~
~
~ ~
. N
"C '" ~
~ ~
~ U ..
. U "C
>< LL C
.. ..
:!E - en
0
NN
u '0 IE ;F. 'rJ2.'<fl. ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
U 1;; :2~ . . . . . .
.... 00 CO '" ;:;; <J) .... '" '"
LL '0 ~:;: CD '" '" '" .... .... .... ....
- c <> 00 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 CO 00 =t <'1 00 0 0 0 0 0 0
'#W @)~ <> 00 0 0 0 0 0 0
.~
'" ... '" .... <J) <J) 00 '" 00 00
<1)N :!::-c CO <J) '" '" .... <J) ~ <P '"
OJ E 11)- .... N 00 0 '" .... <P N N
C '" ... 00 '" '" '" ~ N '" <P
CO " '" .- <0 ~ '" '" .... 0 N
Q; - eLL CD 0 '" ~ 00 <P '" .... ....
0 '"
> :;: ~ ... '" ~ '" 00 .... <P N ....
<t ~ .. .., '" '" 0 N N N '" N
=t ~LL ~ '" '" '" '" 0 '"
D.. <SO 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
II) '" s. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
'" Ii:' 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
:;: 0:: @
w '" '" "' "' '" '" '" '"
CI) ~ <> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
'0 a; "! 0 '" '" '" '" '" '" '"
CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 II)
0:: <i
>
2 '"
'0 -
<i 0
u:: '"
0 0 0 0 0 1;; <1)
c ~ 0 0 0 OJ
CI) 'n; "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! LL co
'0 C) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q; 0-
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ "
0
e-
ll) '"
c: .c "" .. N N N N N '" '" '"
co -
'6 "!i c <0 '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '"
co ~ e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
cr: '" 0
"C
II)
c: en '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '"
co
'6 '" <0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
co e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
cr:
1::
'" 0
II) " a.
Q; c a. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
Q) .. ::J ... '" .... '" co .... 00 <J) 0
- II) .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... '"
E II) E
C 0
~
-
'"
:::>
If'
<1)
0.
E
....
'"
00
Q)
en
CQ
..Q
Q)
~
::!
-
o
::!
~
-
en
E
o
~
....
Q)
o
r:: cD
20
"!1! 0.
", 0
.... r::
o 0
r:: E
o ~
:;::: 0
o ~
r:: Q)
.E ~
CQ .s
en CQ
CQ r::
C 0
...J
Wa;
U. 0
~ e
<( 0
u. CQ
Q) E
..c:en
-(J
r:: D..
~o
'w 0::
r:: ::!;
Q) en
"'w
~
Q) r::
~ CQ
o 0
0._
Q) Q)
..c: ::!
-",
Q)
-
..!!!
::!
o
Cij
o
o
-
-
Q)
CI)
..c:
en
",
CQ
Q)
~
0.
en
-
Cl)
Cl)
..c:
'"
C.
o
~
o
o
~
Cl)
Cl)
CfJ
N
...
o
-
u
Q)
en
Q)
..I<:
ra
...J
-
If)
ra
W
.....
M
co
10
W
!::
en
~
o
u.
I-
0::
o
D..
W
0::
W
D..
::!;
ra
.c
...
Q)
In
Q)
I:
"iij
"iii
...J
D:
W
W
z
a
z
W
~
N
-<(
U
;::'0
-oq
E!.-
0..<<;-
eno
:!:~
WLL
I-
~
o
D..
W
0::
....
o
W
I-
<(
C
:it
a;
.EI",
::!; 0
.. ::!;
r:: ..
r:: r::
Q) r::
- Q)
r:: _
<( r::
<(
ci
::!;
W
~
....
en
-
"E
W
D..
::!;
~
c
Q)
E
Q)
c;:; "
'" c
c: co co :::::I
c::(6ro e
Q.) "'0 -0 C)
"'C Cc)OI Q)-o
C1) ro 0 0 Q.) > Q.)
CI) ::It)roro::CB rn
oQ)roroCIJro :::I
>.~<..)u.s::!.......:c
..... ..Q (J) (J)~"5 ro
-E ......0 .0 CIJ .03 .~
"C E <:I -0 I::..c: Q)
Q) -0 C C Q.) ro :J
ro2(l)Q)..c:cro
"S(/'j>>~C >
() .2. E E Q) ~ .~
c~-g,g.g~ro:5
~
f"
Q)
Q;
E
c
:::J
(5
~
"
C
::J
E'
to>
Q)
>
"
.Q
'"
:;::
to>
'w
.c
Q)
>
"
.Q
'"
.1::- ro
to> c
'm c
I Q)
U) "
CD '"
'" '0
'" E
" "
Q) '"
Q:; "
" .Q
Q) '0
Q)
-
..
(J
.!1!
a;
(J
en
..
-
o
r::
.!1!
Q)
-
i:ij
ci
::!;
en
W
~
.E
en
-
"E
(J
(J
u.
....
o
...:
'E
::i
D..
0::
W
-
-
..
3:
o
o
o
......
:;::
:::J to>
t9 "(i)
~.c
Q)
>
."
Q)
"
2
'"
Q:;
'" 1i)
E
..... CtJ <'!
L{) co 0 t--: cr:i..... C"? 0 ~
co L() C"') .....
'" N
'c ..c ::jt
::J ::;:
o
It')
en
-
Q)
Q)
::!;
IJJ II) (/') Q.)
~~<Dme[DID
(1J~Q)-O~"'C2
:;: > E "
"
'" 00:
Q5 .c. 0
>- c () .E
u c a:
~ ~ Ck:: ~
_ ::::J () W 0..
::::I C" '+- X x
Q. ~ 0 co ctI
C LL '*t. :2 ::2:
c
'iij
:;::(5
.21 "E
Q)00:
I x
U) '"
CD::;:
~
~
c
U
"
'"
<Y
~ '" '"
~ <( ~
;0 to> Q)
o::9"E
OCDoO:
f'
"tI
~
'"
"tI
C
'"
~
'"
NN
IE:::R:::R:::R::::R::::R
~::~~N~ro
~~~~~g;;~
OCJ::Loq-r---a:!O').....
@)~oocici
~
";!!.()
xU
",LL
:;;'0
u"
U i;;
LL-o
'0 ffi
~U5
>0 I'-
Q)N~"'CCD
C)E~-;~
~ () G) u:: ~
Q.)>c.....r--
.3 > ..... n::I .....
....... ::l ::t LL ~
0.. N
"''''
"'Ii:"
"'0::
:;:w
ID~
" OJ
0::
c
co 0;
" "
'" ~
c.c~
ro;!:: r::
'0 ;0 ;0
'" '" 0
0:: "tI
'"
c
'"
:C;<:D
'"
<Y
t::
'" 0
f!? c.> Q.
Q) C Co
~ '" "
Q) ~..
E is g
~
-
'c
::J
;,!!
.
'"
.,.
~
-
'$.#-cF-
0><" N
~8a;
<'!~~
cft.cl-cft
0)0.,.
.,. "HO
-"'1'-
~~"!
O)U?r-....r-....O')L{)L.()O}lO
O.....NOOC'O.....!'-lOCO
f;i~6~~(o~I'-~f8
f'-..NCtJNO)C"')O}N.....ro
'Vo::::tL()C'\ICJ)C'/)L(')",,"<DM
r:::~~~u:;Rgr!~~
.....r--C'OvOO>C"')LO......N
-.;t..,fui<cir--:r--:cciccicci"":
C\I.....(Do">
..... 0 0 CD
ui<.cir--:o:i
<omN
~~""":
0_.,.
- --
COoo;tLOO
..-,..........00
",r--:o)M
- '"
00000000000
O')NLO<DC()N""":~tq.....f"-;
o)o)cci r--:0cDLO 'V "V 'V
00000000000
c?c!f"-;cq"",,:OCOMf""- If:!
NNC"?-.;tu1u1<.Occir--:O')
oo;tt'--CT>C\JlQO'JC"1I'--Nt--M
""":'?C'!"'!.....qqO)O)ct:!Lq
6000
O'>C\JLOr--.......q-COC\Jt--C\JCO
""":""":~"!"!~qqO')O')Lt)
666
NM'VI.()COt--COO');:~
<0
~
-
~
N
-
'"
c;:;
>
.!11",
"-
c;:; "
u::
ro ~
l.L. co
~D..
;0
"
f-
'"
c.
E
.,.
'"
<0
co
~
~
N
~ N
.
1:1 '"
~ ;:I;
~ U '"
. U 1:1 ~
>< LL r::
'" '"
::;; - -
0 '"
NN
u "2 IE ;f1 >R. >R. >R. >R. >R. >R. ?f >R. >R. >R. ~ >R. >R. >R. >R. >R. ~ >R. >R. ~ >R. >R. >R. >R. >R. "" "" "" "" "" "" "" >R. >R. "" >R. >R. >R.
U ::;;:.<.: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
OJ '" .... cr> " 0 '" '" ~ 0 ~ N CO CO cr> ~ ~ CO cr> " N '" .... N cr> co .... co 0 N '" cr> '" CO '" cr> '" ~ .... "
LL 1:1 ~$: '" '" '" '" co " 0 '" co " '" " .... ::;: .... '" cr> '" " N 0 co .... '" " '" N N ~ 0 cr> cr> co co .... .... .... '" '"
'0 r:: CD '" co .... 0 co '" 0 co .... co '" " '" '" N N N N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 '" '" '" '" '" '"
OJ co oj, "'! '" '" N N ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0
>R. iij @):2: <> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
~
~ .. co .... co " co cr> cr> '" ~ N co '" .... N cr> ~ " '" co N cr> " .... " .... co .... '" co ~ " co '" " cr>
N 'iij 1:1 00 N " ~ co N N cr> N N '" .... " N co '" ;::: "' '" co co '" cr> co .... " N cr> cr> .... '" .... " co co "' .... "' ....
'" .. .... .... co co 0 cr> 0 "' ~ ~ N co co " '" 0 '" ~ cr> cr> '" co co " co '" 0 co " co cr> '" N
OJ E r:: Gi ... '" cr> N co co cr> '" co '" '" '" 0 cr> " co '" co co ~ '" '" co co N N .... '" '" '" N '" co 0 .... 0 U; "
~ " " u:: .. ~ '" .... 0 '" '" .... " '" " co '" '" cr> '" " ~ N 0 " .... 0 co N .... ~ co .... .... N co ~ co co co '" ;;;
.. "" ~ " co .... '" cr> "" cr> 0 '" co co 0 co ~ .... '" ~ co .... '" .... " '" '" .... co 0 "' N ~ ~
'" C ;::: cr> ;::: ;; co "" N co
> $: ~ .... "' " .... cr> co 0 .... cr> .... cr> co .... ~ N co '" '" '" .... 0 "" .... N .... co cr> co '" cr> .... " N 0 co '"
<( ~ '" ... " co " .... N '" co cr> '" 0 N '" ~ co '" '" N ~ '" cr> cr> co .... .... co 0 '" '" 0 " " " " " "" '"
oj, ~ LL ... ~ ~ ~ ~ cr> .... 0 " " '" ~ "! "! ~ '" ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" 0
Q. .. M " 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" 0 0 0
In Q;' 11! 0 '" '" co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
"" <r co .... .... "" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
OJ ".; r-.: r-.: 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
$: ~ ~ co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
W " " " " '" '" "' '" '" '" '" "' '" '" '" '" '" '" "' '" '" '" "' '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" "' '" '" '" '"
CD ~ <> '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0
co " N N 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
'0 Gi en 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" 0 0 0 0
~ In
Qj
>
.!!1 ""
'0 '0
Qj
u:: N
~ 0 0 '" 0 0 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" 0 0 0 a '"
r:: OJ
CD 'iij co 0 0 ~ N "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! N N "! "! "! "! "! "! N N "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! LL OJ
'0 C) f' 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ " 0-
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
;:
0
f-
In -
r:: .r:: :;:; '" co 0 co '" ~ cr> co .... co '" " '" '" N N N ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N N N
OJ -
'6 'ii r:: "'1 "! N ~ ~ ~ '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" 0 0 0
OJ ~ e '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" 0 0 0 0 0
~ '"' 0
1:1
In
r:: ... N co N cr> '" " "" N ~ '" '" cr> co co .... .... .... '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" " " " " " " " " "" "" '" '"
OJ
'6 '" .... "" N N ~ ~ ~ '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 '" 0 '" '" '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 '" '"
OJ ..,; 0 '" '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" 0 0 0 0 0
~
t
" 0
[I! Co
() Co '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '"
'" r:: :J g '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '"
a; '" .. " '" co .... co cr> 0 ~ N '" " "' co .... co cr> 0 ~ N '" " "' co .... co '" 0 ~ N "" " "' '" .... co cr> '" ~
- ~ ~ ~ ~ ('oJ ('oJ ('oJ ('oJ ('oJ ('oJ ('oJ ('oJ ('oJ ('oJ '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '" " "
E "' E
i5 0
~
-
-
'E
:::0
~
'"
c.
E
"
'"
co
'C
~
~UI"3
. <.J 'C
>< LL ffi
"'~-
::!; 0 U)
~
on
...
"!
~
00
f1!
~
('oJ
N
NN
()"'CIE#'::!2.~"::::R.'::!2.';$!.,'::!2.'::!2.'::!2.
Uro~~TOO(b~~&~1bM
LL.-cO::>ml.OL[)l,{)l[)o:::t"V'V'V
O~:2~~~gggg~~~
(f.(j)@:::gooc:ic:icioooo
~
>-
Q)N:!::-C
O)E~4i
CIJ () G) .-
w-eLL
> ~ ... :u
<{ "- 'iI II..
0..
.....LOVmO">COl()coCO
1D000MO)t--m......(DC"1
~~~O~'V~N~
'C.....C"")I,{)LO.....OC"')N
COOI[)......OCICCLOv'V
f"oItC"?.....OCOt--CDLO"<;f'"
~C"?C"?C")NNNNN
c.!?~ooooooo
mocioc:icicio6
"'~
"'~
"'0::
:S:W
6qqq8q8gg
@~~~g~ggg
:ti 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
(D c( en 0 0 CO CO CO CO CO CO
'0 a; cD 6 6
0 0 0 0 0 0 '"
0:: a;
>
~ ""
'0 '0
a;
u: ""
~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ro "
c: C>
(D '0; "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! II.. '"
'0 C) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Q; 0-
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
'iI
0
f-
'" -
c: .c: :;:: '" ('oJ ('oJ ('oJ ('oJ ('oJ "" "" ""
'" - c:
'6 '!i "1 CO CO 0 0 0 0 0 0
'" 'iI e 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 0
OC '" 0
'C
'"
c: en "" "" "" "" "" "" "" ""
'"
'6 '" "1 CO CO 0 0 0 0 0 0
'" e 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6
OC
1::
'" 0
'" " c.
Q; c: c. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1i3 '" " '" "" ... '" co .... co '" 0
- '" ... ... ... ... ... ... ... ... '"
E ., E
i5 e
~
-
'"
::J
'::L.{
"
c.
E
...
""
00
'"
III
'"
.a
~
::I
-
CJ
::I
....
-
III
E
o
....
-
'"
CJ
c: CIi
.f!o
III Co
-0 0
_ c:
o 0
c: E
o ....
+:i 0
CJ ....
c: '"
.;! ~
'" ~
III '"
.. c:
C 0
...J
Wa;
u: CJ
0:: ~
<I: CJ
LL '"
'" E
..c:en
-u
c: 11.
~o
"jjj 0::
c: :!!
"'en
-Ow
....
'" c:
~ ..
o 0
Co_
'" '"
..c: ::I
--0
'"
-
'"
::I
CJ
'"
CJ
o
-
-
'"
'"
..c:
III
-0
'"
'"
....
Co
en
...
Q)
Q)
..c:
III
co.
o
~
o
o
....
Q)
Q)
CJ)
M
....
o
-
u
Q)
fI)
Q)
..\I::
C'CI
....I
-
I/)
C'CI
W
"'"
M
CO
It)
W
I-
in
a::
o
LL
I-
0::
o
11.
W
0::
W
11.
:!!
C'CI
.c
....
Q)
CO
Q)
I:
"iij
"'iij
....I
Iii
W
W
z
a
z
W
CO
0)
-
o
M
-
....
....
("II
_<c
u
:::10
'00
o .
........
0..'";"
fI)O
:::iE>
wu..
I-
0::
o
11.
W
0::
-
o
W
I-
<I:
c
:it
cila;
_-0
:!! 0
'" :!!
c: '"
c: c:
'" c:
- '"
c: ...
<I: c:
<I:
0:
:!!
en
W
....
o
-
III
-
"E
:!!
'"
-
in
....
c:
o
u
-
c:
'"
CJ
~
c:
'"
...
o
c:
III
W
....
.E
III
-
"E
u
u
LL
-
o
:!!
In
Q;
"
E
c
'"
>
o
.c
'"
:::J
o
~
"
c
"
e
OJ
'"
>
o
.c
'"
::=
OJ
'0;
.c:
'E
'"
E
'"
c; "
'" c
c: ro (IJ :J
croro e
Q) "'C "'C OJ
~gg>Q}~-g
:JenrornJ5..8 t)
oQ)ro-roC'Uro :J
>.::00.2_:.0
,-.Q(f.)CI)~"5(IJ
Q _0 -0 -0 (IJ "iE .!tl
"C "C"'C c:..c: Q.)
Q) "C C C Q.) ro :J
ro2Q)Q)..c:cro
:sw>>3:c>
0.~EEQ)~(J)
c~~.g"g~ro~
..
u
.~
.!:~ (IJ
OJ C
"(i) c
I '"
(f) 'E
OJ ~
In 0
'" E
" 0
i" ""
2 ..8
c _
'" 0
a;
u
"E
:J
11.
0::
W
~
::i-5,
c.9 "05
~.c:
'"
>
.:i5
"
.s
...
...
'"
3:
o
o
o
....
In
~ Q;
0") "
E
u:; 0 (J) C"\! C"?
CO<DI.{)~~;::MO.....
~ N r.n IJ)
c .c =It :g :g
,,::!; '$: '$:
In '"
WeD ~OOID
ID"C ~"C~
E "
i
In <0:
Q3 ..s::: 0
~ t: 0 .E
o c: (L
i ro 0:: ~
_ ~ u w a..
:::::I C" _ X X
Q, CD 0 ro ro
.E u: =I:t ~ :::2:
c
'tij
::=0
.Q> c
"'<0:
I ><
(f) '"
OJ::!;
~
'E
o
"
'"
a::
~ ~ ~
5:.g>2
0_ c
OOJ<O:
2.2...
"
~
::::e:UCU
o u"
)( u. i
"'--
:;:01/)
':J1.
o
'"
;1;
~
NN
8~~~~~~~~~rx;~g;~~
t:-g~:s:~~~~~~gtO;!~~
O!9co::1.~f':ro~......~~~~~~
~(j)@)~oooo
~
>. I'-
Q)N=="D'"
CJE~"i~
~ U G) i.i: ~
Q)::;:.C...r---.
> > '- (U .....
<:( :i ~ LL ~
0.. N
In'"
""Q:"
"'a::
'$:w
OJ~
"Gj
Or:
c
/D 'ij
"~
In '"
c:.c:;::;
ro:!:: c:
'C ;t ;t
'" '" 0
a:: "
In
C
'"
'OeD
'"
a::
1::
" 0
~ 0 0-
'" C 0.
CD.B~
E ;5 g
~
-
'c
:J
O)L()I"-J"-ml(')L()O)I.{)
O.....C\.IOOCO.....!'--lOco
C")COI"-O..........N.....L()CO
I,{)..... 0"'" co CD <<:tl"-M(D
~~fR~~~~~co~
,.....NNIl)......O)C").qvv
I"-I"-I.OCOLOI"-COI"-VN
.....f'-..:CD'I:2:00>C?LOf'-.;N
VVu1CDr--.:~COcCCO""':
<'\I.....{oO)
.....~o<q
lD(D""':CO
<OO>N
~O?v
o.....~
~ ~ ~
co "It" 1.0 a
.....l"-vt:C!
(01"'-0)(")
~ 0")
00000000000
O>NLO(oC:ON~O?tq.....",":
o)o)crir--.:ccicciLrioctoctoct
00000000000
~~"'":~"'<1:0C:O(,,)I"'-""'LO
NN(")~LriLricciccir--.:o)
octI"'-O>NLOC7)(")I"'-NI"'-(,,)
"'<1:~,,!,,!.....~~~~t:C!tq
0000
o)NLOI"'- "<t"CONI"'-NCO
"'<1:"'<1:~,,!,,!.....~~o)O')LO
..... cicici
NM"<t"L{)COf'-..COo)~~
co
!2!
N
N
In
c;
>
.!!!O")
"-
c; 0
u:
ro ~
u.. '"
~D..
'"
;:
o
f-
'"
c.
E
..,.
0")
co
."
~
~uco
. ()."
)( u.. ;
"'--
:EO(/)
NN
O~IE~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
~~~~~~~~~~~~~;~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
o2~~~~~~~~MO~~8~~~88~~~~~oooooooqog~~g~~~~~
~w@~oooaa 0000000000000000000000000000000
~
~
.
on
...
"'!
co
~
~
N
N
~
c;jQc;j
~ ~N~~ffi~~~~~~~N~~~ ~~ro~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
&~~~~~~re~gmg~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~g~~~~~~~~
~u~~g~~~~~~b~~~~~~~2~~~~~~g~~~~~~~~~ro~ffi~~~g
~~~~~~~~~~~g~~~~~~O~o.~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~M
-~lu..:~~~~660d~~~6666 ~~~~;6~666666666666666
6000
"';;;-
"'it
'" D<:
:i:w
~o~~~oooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooooo
~~~~~qqoqaaooooooqqqqqqoqaoooooqqqqqqqo
~~~~roooc;joooooooo6ooooooooo66oo6oooooooo
~~vvv~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
CD ~ <> 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
co ... "! N ~ '" '" 0 '" 0 0 0 0 '" '" 0 '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" 0 0 0
'0 a; .,; 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 6 6 6
oo
D<: a;
>
~ <<)
'0 -
a; 0
u: N
~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ro "
I: 0>
CD 'n; 00 '" '" ..., "! "! N N "! "! "! "! "! "! "! "! N N "! "! "! "! "! "! "! N N N "! "! "! "! "! "! N N "! "! LL '"
'" t'J f' 6 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ a; D..
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
:s:
0
I-
oo S
co .I: '" co 0 co <<) ~ 0> 00 i'- co "' " <<) <<) N N N ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ N N N N N N
'" - C; C; C;
'C 'i I: "'? N N ~ ~ ~ 0 0 '" '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '"
'" ;I e 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 6 6 0 0
OC '" 0
'0
oo
co '" N co N '" co ... <<) N ~ 0 '" '" co 00 i'- i'- i'- co co co "' "' "' "' "' "' ... " " ... ... ... ... ... <<) <<) <<) <<)
'" ... <<) N N ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '" '" 0 0 0
'C '"
'" e 6 6 0 0 0 0 6 0 6 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 6 6 6 6 6 6 0 0 0 6 6 6
OC
1::
.. 0
oo " a.
a; I: a. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
" '" " g 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ~ N '" ... "' co i'- co '" 0 ~ N <<) ... "' co i'- co '" 0 ~ N <<) ... "' co i'- co '" 0 ~
- II) ... "' co i'- co '" ~ ~ N N N N N N N N N N <<) <<) '" '" <<) <<) <<) <<) '" '" ... ...
E II) E
i5 0
~
-
."
::>
'-3
CD
0-
E
"
<<)
co
ro
~
~
N
~ N
.
"C on
~ ;:I;
~ <.J ..
. <.J "C ~
>< LL r::
.. ..
::;; ~ -
0 '"
NN
u 'E IE #- ""- ""- ;ft ;ft ""- ""- ""- ""-
u ::2'.::' 0 0 0 0 0 0
(1J .... ro ill '" ~ '" .... '" '"
LL "C g3: CD '" '" '" '" .... .... .... ....
~ co 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0 (1J ro oj, "'! 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
""- US @)~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0
~
~ ... '" .... '" '" ro '" ro ro
CO '" '" .... '" ~ '"
"N .- "C ... N ro '" '" .... ill ill N
e>E U>_ 0 N
r:: " ... ro '" '" ~ N ill
ro " " .- C ~ '" '" '" .... 0 '" N
(;j -eLL '" 0 '" ~ ro ill '" .... ....
0 '"
> 3: ~ ~ ... '" C;; "" ro .... ill N ....
<( .. .... '" 0 N N N 0 N
oj, 3: LL <D 0 0 0 0 0 ~
0- m 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
'" iD ~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
'" ir" 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
ro 0 0
3: a: @ 0 0 0 0 0 0
w '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '"
:Ii 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
0) <( "! ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ 0
"C &
CD 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 '"
(ij
>
.S! '"
"C ~
(ij 0
iii: '"
~ 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 ffi "
r:: e>
0) '0; c-; c-; c-; c-; c-; c-; c-; c-; LL ro
"C (!) ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ (;j 0..
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
"
0
f-
'" ~
r:: .<: '" N N N N N '" '" '"
(1J - r::
'6 '!i c 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
3: e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
ro <D 0
a:: "C
'"
co 0> '" '" '" '" '" '" '" '"
(1J
'6 <D C 0 0 0 ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
(1J e 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
a::
1::
" 0
'" u c.
(;j r:: c. 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0
1;) .. ::r .... '" .... '" '" .... ro '" 0
- U> .... .... .... .... .... .... .... .... '"
E U> E
i5 2
~
~
'c
:J
2-'1
"
c.
E
....
'"
ro
EXHIBIT 2
Total Energy Systems
A Division ot Morley.Murphy Co.
GENERATOR ACCESSORIES
Sound ShJeJd Enciosures
i
,
I :
'H
ill
, ,
I 'I
'I
:11
:1
'I
i!
I
=1
,=
=/
1 I
I
=
i:
Applic:1ble to the following:
10-100RZ
135-180RZD
20-180ROZI
230-300ROZD
Standard ~qUlpmem inc!udes ~nc:csure :nounred
crinc:U sile::!""r.
Heavy-guage (.090) olummum cesis;:'s
corrOSIOn.
Low-weight material md .Qe:lVY-g-'-ilge
design tacilitares use in mobile J.S well J.S
stationary o.ppli=ODS,
Ste::l skid base 'Nith removo.ble liiting .:yes
s'il11p!.ifj installation in scrionary o.pplicarioDS,
Single piece roof design pre'!ems \Varer. from
entering enclosure.
Heavy..:Juty latches =ure tamper.-proof
secarity o.nd satety,
Removable sound shie!d lifting eyes,
Sound shield 'mil mount [Q 0. subbase fuel
tank ~quipped gerrer:ltor Sel, Request the
sound shield with subbase fuel tank option
wherr ordering,
One inch aoousllc:U foam
fi.'"{ed oluminum :lIT intake louvers (optional
mownzed),
Housmg IDd skid base pamted in T otai Energy
Grav,
L.~
?:Lge U4 08/98
Application Data
Manufacturer Total Energy Systems
Material Aluminum alloy
Material Gauge ,090
No, of Doors 5
Type of Doors Hinged/removable
Latches Lockable! Alloy
Silencer Critical
Generator Set Temperature See Generator Set
and Altitude Derates Specification Sheet
Sound Data
Ratings and Performance
For generator set ratings and performance in the Total
Energy Systems sound shield enclosure refer to the
respective generator set specification sheet
Sound Shield Enclosure and Generator Set Testing
All Total Energy Systems sound shield enclosures are
factory fit The enclosure is completly assembled with
exhaust system, The complete assembly is ready to
be dropped on location with only fuel, electrical, and
start-up to be completed,
Sound Data Measurement Positions
Measurements Positions
and Distances for Data
Microphone Positions:
Microphone Distance:
(1-8) as shown
23 feet (7 meters)
(from center of enclosure)
3.28 feet (1 meter)
dBA, Sound Pressure
Microphone Height:
Data Measured in:
~/
" 2 )
"'--'"
-----0-----'
,
adiator
End
,
,
"
G)
,
,
,
Generator
End
"
23feet ~~,
(7m) ~
Radius '
- G> '
, -
- - -..." 5 - --
'-(.,
'0
Page 2/4 08198
..- ~_.._,-, ,.-.-- ... -,---<---,"_.- ..-.-._-._----~_._._.. -~~.. .-
->jf
Acoustic Data (dBA)*
Microphone Positions
Models 1 2 I 3 4 5 6 7 8
20RZ 57,5 58,5 60,5 58,5 57,5 Sg 60,5 Sg
30RZ 60,5 61.5 63,5 61,5 60,5 62 63,5 62
3SRZ 61,5 62,5 64,5 62,5 61,5 63 64,5 63
45RZ 61,5 62,5 64,5 62,5 61,5 63 64,5 63
SORZ 63,5 64,5 66,5 64,5 63,5 65 66,5 65
60RZ 63,5 64,5 66,5 64,5 63,5 65 66,5 65
70RZ 63.5 64,5 66.5 64,5 63,5 65 66,5 65
80RZ 66 67 69 67 66 67,5 69 67,5
100RZ 66 67 69 67 66 67,5 69 67,5
13SRZD - - - - - - - -
1S0RZD - - - - - - - -
180RZD - - - - - - - -
20ROZJ 67,5 68,5 70,5 68,51 67,5 69 70,5 69
30ROZJ 67,5 68,5 70,5 68,5 67,5 69 70,5 69
40ROZJ 67,5 68.5 70,5 68,5 67,5 69 70,5 69
SOROZJ 67,5 68,5 70,5 68,5 67,5 69 70,5 69
60ROZJ 67,5 68,5 70,5 68,5 67,5 69 70,5 69
80ROZJ 68,5 69,5 71,5 69,5 68,5 70 71,5 70
80REOZJ - - - - - - - -
100ROZJ 68,5 69,5 71,5 69,5 68,5 70 71,5 70
100REOZJ - - - - - - - -
12SROZJ 69,5 70,5 72.5 70,5 69,5 71 72,5 71
13SROZJ 69,S 70,5 72,5 70,5 69,5 71 72.5 71
1S0ROZJ 70,5 71.5 73,5 71,5 70,5 72 73.5 72
180ROZJ 70,5 71,5 73,5 71,5 70,5 72 73,5 72
200ROZD 73 74 76 74 73 74,5 76 74,5
230ROZD 74 75 77 75 74 75,5 77 75,5
2S0ROZD 74 75 77 75 74 75,5 77 75,5
27SROZD 74 75 77 75 74 75,5 77 75,5
300ROZD 74 75 77 75 74 75,5 77 75.5
Based on 1 inch sound asorbing material (2 inch available upon request)
** Engine data not available
*
Pogo 3/4 08/98
:1.,
GENERATOR ACCESSORIES
TOTAL ENERGY SYSTEMS
Sound Shield Enclosures
Weights and Dimensions
" I
R , II I
, "
= 1= I, =
, i,
R I ,
il I I
! " I I ~
~ i I, , I u
G I !, I I I
I = 1= Ii: =
II I
I
" I I wi
i
Ii
I " --LLl
I I !
I 12' :< : I~ Ls=J!
l 1--H I
A
Unit siZe Length Width Height Dimension Dimen~on Dimension Dimension Dimension Dimension Dimension Weight
A B C D E F G H X Y Ibs(kg)
!20-60ROZJ 102 42 56 62 4 26 32 22,437 78 40 550
20RZ (2590) (1066) (1422) (1574) (101) (660) (812) (569) (1981) (1016) (253)
10 & 18RY/RZ
20-100ROZJ 120 42 56 62 4 26 32 27,312 96 40 630
!:Jo-100RZ (3048) (1066) (1422) (1574) (101) (660) (812) (693) (2438) (1016) (285)
135-180ROZJ 168 60 78 84 6 26 32 41 144 58 910
130-150RZO (4267) (1524) (1981) (2133) (152) (660) (812) (1041) (3657) (1473) (412)
200-300ROZO 182 60 78 84 6 26 32 52,750 158 58 1200
180RZO (4622) (1524) (1981) (2133) (152) (660) (812) (1339) (4013) (1473) (545)
.--
Note: Dimensions are in inches (mm) unless otherwise noted.
Standard housing shown, optional mobile unit same overall dimensions except top of housing is flat and "D"
dimension does not exist
Poge 4/4 08198
-:l..~
APPENDIX B
1HE ( OF CHULA VISTA DISa-OSURE ~ .c:MENT
You are required to file a Stalement of Disclosure of cenain ownership or financial interests, payments, or campaign
c"ntributions, on aU matte:-s which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and
. olher official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
L List the names of aU persons having a financial inlerest in the property which is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier,
Sweetwater 1'n;on Hip'n Srhnnl TIic::trict
Kextel Communications, Inc.
,
\;
o
If any person' identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the nam::s of all individuals owning
more than 10% of the shar::s in the corporation or owning any partnership interesl in the partnership.
~lotorola Corporation
3, If any person' identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names of any person
se:ving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiaty or trustor of the trusL
4, Have you had more than S250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff, Boards, Commissions,
Committees, and Council within the past twelve months? Yes_ NoXX If yes, please indicate person(s):
5, Pl=e identify each and every person. including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who
you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
~f Consulting Group, Ine.
Derek Harding
Steve Laub
Cheryl M. Barker
Gary Huan
6,
Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggri'5i'te, contn'buted more than $1.000 to a Counci1member in the
current or preceding election period? Y::s_ No_ If yes, state which Councilmember(s):
Dale:
1-/-'78
. . . (N01E: A1tach additional pap :IS ~~~~
V
, s - ~ign ture 0 contractor/applic:ant
teve Lau
JM Consulting Group, Inc.
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
ATT ACHMENT 5 ~l...'
. ~u drfi1tai ar "Anyindivid1.La1.finn.. co-pcznnenhip, joiru vauurr, a.swcuwOlL.socUzl club.frlZlD'nD1 DrgilIUzaziOll., ccxporarion, ~DWt, reraver,~o<<,
lhiJ Qud any ~ cowu)', ciry and ccxmtP)', dry ~cipDlir>" disuict. or othc polirical .rubdivWOrl.. or GPI)' 0Ihc' group or combination tJaiJlg as 11 ww. "
RESOLUTION NO.___
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA GRANTING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT,
PCC-99-18, TO NEXTEL COMMUNICATIONS TO
CONSTRUCT AN UNMANNED CELLULAR
COMMUNICATIONS FACILITY AT 1120 EASTLAKE
PARKWAY
A. RECITALS
1. Project Site
WHEREAS, the parcel which is the subject matter of this resolution is represented
in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and for the
purpose of general description is located at Eastlake High School, 1120 Eastlake
Parkway ("Project Site"); and,
2. Project Applicant
WHEREAS, on September 30, 1998 a duly verified application for a conditional
use permit (PCC-99-18) was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning
Department by Nextel Communications (Applicant); and,
3. Project Description; Application for Conditional Use Permit
WHEREAS, Applicant requests permission to construct an unmanned cellular
communications facility consisting of a 45-foot high monopole. The facility will
consist of twelve (12) panel antennas, three small antenna supports, with 200
square foot equipment building on the Project Site; and,
4. Planning Commission Record on Application
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission scheduled and advertised a public hearing
on the Project for February 10, 1999, and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission meeting of February 10, 1999 was
cancelled and continued to February 24, 1999. The Planning Commission
considered a motion to support staff's recommendation for the monopole; and
5. City Council Record of Application
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held
before the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on , to receive the
'>#
Resolution No. _
Page #2
recommendation of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with
regrd to same.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby find,
determine and resolve as follows:
B. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence on the Project introduced before the Planning
Commission at their public hearing on this project held on February 24, 1999 and the
minutes and resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this
proceeding.
C. ENVIRONMENTAL DETERMINATION
The Environmental Review Coordinator has concluded that the project is a Class 1
Categorical Exemption from environmental review pursuant to * 15303 and * 15311 of the
California Environmental Quality Act.
D, CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The City Council does hereby find that the environmental determination of the
Environmental Review Coordinator was reached in accordance with requirements of the
California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental
Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista.
E. CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby make the findings required by
the City's rules and regulations for the issuance of conditional use permits, as hereinbelow
set forth, and sets forth, thereunder, the evidentiary basis that permits the stated finding
to be made.
I, That the proposed use at the location is necessary or desirable to provide a
service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the
neighborhood or the community.
The proposed cellular facility is necessary to provide and maintain a quality cellular phone
system in eastern Chula Vista, specifically providing service for the Eastlake and Otay
Ranch areas. The Nextel Communications system is used by many public service
providers including sheriff, police, fire and paramedics.
The requirement for mandatory sharing will eliminate or reduce unneccessary proliferation
of monopoles while providing future tower or antennae sites elsewhere in the City.
~ I
Resolution No. _
Page #3
2, That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be
detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or
working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the
vicinity.
According to study submitted by the applicant, cellular communications operate on low-
power radio waves. Emissions from cellular antennas have been shown to be below any
levels that would cause hazardous biological effects. In addition, cellular antenna
emissions are so far below all recognized safety standards that they constitute no hazard
to public health or safety. The project has been conditioned that the applicant prove
compliance with the accepted ANSI standards for emissions control.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions
specified in the code for such use.
Conditional Use Permit PCC-99-18 is conditioned to require the permittee and property
owner to fulfill conditions and to comply with all the applicable regulations and standards
specified in the Municipal Code for such use.
The conditioning of PCC-99-18 is approximately proportional both in nature and extent
to the impact created by the proposed development in that the conditions imposed are
directly related to and are of a nature and scope related to the size and impact of the
project.
4. That the granting of this conditional use pennit will not adversely affect the
general plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency.
The granting of PCC-99-18 will not adversely affect the Chula Vista General Plan in that
said project is proposed to be built on a public/quasi-public site, The site is surrounded
by residential, commercial and public/quasi uses, said uses conforming with the General
Plan.
F. TERMS OF GRANT OF PERMIT
The City Council hereby grants Conditional Use Permit PCC-99-l8 subject to the
following conditions whereby the applicant and/or property owner shall:
I. Construct the Project as described in the application, except as modified herein to
allow for the monopole design, storage/equipment building and emergency
generator.
2, Upon construction of the monopole, the applicant shall paint the monopole
structure a subdued gray shade to blend with the existing light standards on the
sports field.
~2.-.
Resolution No. _
Page #4
3. Upon construction, the applicant shall paint the storage/radio equipment building
the colors of the existing school storage building and adjust colors to match any
future building color changes.
4. The two small antennae on the storage/radio equipment building shall be painted
to match the building.
5. Cooperate in good faith with other communications companies in co-locating
additional antenna on pole structures and/or on the tops of buildings provided said
co-locatees have received a conditional use permit for such use at said site from the
City. Permittee shall exercise good faith in co-locating with other communications
companies and sharing the permitted site, provided such shared use does not give
rise to a substantial technical level- or quality-of-service impairment of the
permitted use (as opposed to a competitive conflict or financial burden). In the
event a dispute arises as to whether permittee has exercised good faith in
accommodating other users, the City may require a third party technical study at
the expense of either or both the permittee and applicant.
6. Comply with ANSI standards for EMF emissions. Within six (6) months of the
Building Division final inspection of the project, the Applicant shall submit a
project implementation report to the Director of Planning and Building which
provides cumulative field measurements of radio frequency (EMF) power densities
of all antennas installed at subject site. The report shall quantify the EMF
emissions and compare the results with currently accepted ANSI standards. Said
report shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of Planning and
Building for consistency with the project proposal report and the accepted ANSI
standards. If on review the City in its discretion finds that the Project does not
meet ANSI standards, the City may revoke or modify this conditional use permit.
7. Ensure that the project does not cause localized interference with reception of area
television or radio broadcasts. If on review the City in its discretion finds that the
project interferes with such reception, the City may revoke or modify the
conditional use permit.
8. Upon completion of construction, provide one 2A: IOBC fire extinguisher at a
location satisfactory to the Fire Marshal.
9. Obtain all necessary permits from the Chula Vista Building Department and Fire
Department.
10. Consideration should be given to the use of graffiti deterrent materials for the
equipment building, refer to Attachment 2.
33
Resolution No. _
Page #5
11. A temporary generator may be used only for emergency purposes during power
failures, and may not be stored on the site. It must be immediately removed upon
power restoration.
12. Compliance with the school district requirements, refer to Attachment 2.
13. Comply with the City's Municipal Code noise standards. Within three (3) months
of the Building Division's final inspection, the applicant shall submit a report to
the Director of Planning and Building which provides cumulative field
measurements of facility noises. The report shall quantify the levels and compare
the results with current standard specified in the Municipal Code for residential
uses. Said report shall be subject to review and approval by the Director of
Planning and Building for consistency with the project proposal dated September
30, 1998 and Municipal Code noise standards. If on review the City finds that the
project does not meet the Municipal Code noise standards, the City may revoke or
modify the permit.
14. This Conditional Use Permit services a defined service radius. If the Applicant
requests a second tower within the same service radius, the Applicant shall be
required to amend this Conditional Use Permit.
15. This permit shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted conditions
imposed after approval of this permit to advance a legitimate governmental interest
related to health, safety or welfare which the City shall impose after advance
written notice to the Permittee and after the City has given to the Permittee the
right to be heard with regard thereto. However, the City, in exercising this
reserved right/condition, may not impose a substantial expense or deprive
Permittee of a substantial revenue source which the Permittee can not, in the
normal operation of the use permitted, be expected to economically recover.
16. This conditional use permit shall become void and ineffective if not utilized or
extended within one year from the effective date thereof, in accordance with
Section 19,14,260 of the Municipal Code,
17. Applicant's failure to meet ANSI standards for EMF emissions or City's Municipal
Code noise standards or the interference with area reception shall constitute
grounds for revocation or modification of this conditional use permit.
18. The Applicant shall remove the monopole and return the site back to its original
condition within ninety (90) days of cessation of use of the monopole.
19. Applicant/operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and
hold harmless City, its Council members, officers, employees, agents and
representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands,
claims and costs, including court costs and attorney's fees (collectively,
.,..,
Resolution No. _ _
Page #6
"liabilities") incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City's
approval and issuance of this Conditional Use Permit, (b) City's approval or
issuance of any other permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary,
in connection with the use contemplated herein, and c) Applicant's installation and
operation of the facility permitted hereby, incl uding, without limitation, any and
all liabilities arising from the emission by the facility of electromagnetic fields or
other energy waves or emissions. Applicant/operator shall acknowledge their
agreement to this provision by executing a copy of this Conditional Use Permit
where indicated, below. Applicant's/operator's compliance with this provision is
an express condition of this Conditional Use Permit and this provision shall be
binding on any and all of Applicant's/operator's successors and assigns.
G. EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
The property owner and the applicant shall execute this document by signing the lines provided
below, said execution indicating that the property owner and applicant have each read, understood
and agreed to the conditions contained herein. Upon execution, this document shall be recorded
with the County Clerk of the County of San Diego, at the sole expense of the property owner
and/or applicant, and a signed, stamped copy returned to the Planning Department. Failure to
return a signed and stamped copy of this recorded document within ten days of recordation to the
City Clerk shall indicate the property owner/applicant's desire that the project, and the
corresponding application for building permits and/or a business license, be held in abeyance
without approval. Said document will also be on file in the City Clerk's Office and known as
Document No,
-----
Signature of School District Representative
Date
-----
--.--
Signature of Representative of
Nextel Communications
Date
H, ADDITIONAL TERM OF GRANT
This permit shall expire ten (10) years after the date of its approval by the City Council.
After the first five (5) years, the Zoning Administrator shall review this Conditional Use
Permit for compliance with the conditions of approval, and shall determine, in consultation
with the Applicant, whether or not the tower height can be lowered.
I.
NOTICE OF EXEMPTION
3;-
Resolution No.
Page #7
The City Council directs the Environmental Review Coordinator to post a Notice of
Exemption and file the same with the County Clerk.
J. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon
the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated; and that
in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by a
Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution and
the permit shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect
ah initio,
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning and Building
John M. Kaheny
City Attorney
H :\HOME\PI ,ANNING\MARIA \PCC\PC9918C. RES
Fehruary 17, 19992:00 p.m.
3~
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: ~
Meeting Date: 2/24/99
ITEM TITLE:
Consideration ofthe following applications filed by the Otay Water District
for 509 unincorporated acres located at the northern terminus of Hunte
Parkway:
1) PCZ-99-0I - Prezone to A-S, Agricultural; and
2) PCC-99-I6 - Conditional Use Permit to establish an IS-hole
championship golf course and associated facilities.
Applicant: Otay Water District
The proposed project consists of prezoning 509 unincorporated acres to A-S, Agricultural, a
prerequisite to annex the property to the City of Chula Vista, and establishment of an IS-hole
championship golf course and associated facilities, including a driving range, clubhouse, and other
amenities.
The Otay Water District has conducted an Initial Study (Attachment 6) of possible environmental
impacts associated with this project. Based on the Initial Study, City planning staff has concluded
that there would be no significant environmental effects and, therefore, recommends that the
attached Mitigated Negative Declaration be adopted.
OTHER BOARDS/COMMISSIONS: At its February 15, 1999 meeting, the Design Review
Committee considered plans for the clubhouse and accessory buildings; parking layout;
landscaping; fencing; and signage. The project was approved conceptually. A detailed
architectural package must be submitted to and approved by the DRC, prior to the issuance of
grading or building permits.
RECOMMENDATION:
I) Based on the Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration, adopt the attached
Mitigated Negative Declaration issued for this project.
2) Adopt attached Planning Commission Resolution PCC-99-I6/ PCZ-99-0I (Attachment 3)
recommending that the City Council adopt the attached Draft City Council Ordinance
(Attachment 4) prezoning a 509-acre parcel to A-S, Agricultural, in accordance with
Exhibit A, attached thereto; and adopt the Draft City Council Resolution (Attachment 4)
H: \HOME\PLANNING\KIM\REPORTS\OWD. CUP
1
Item:
Meeting Date: 2/24/99
approving a Conditional Use Permit to establish an IS-hole championship golf course and
associated facilities based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein,
DISCUSSION:
I) Site Characteristics
The 509-acre, rectangular-shaped parcel, where the project is proposed, is approximately
0.4 mile north of Proctor Valley Road, and is between the bases of San Miguel and
Mother Miguel mountains to the north, and Rolling Hills Ranch subdivision, currently
under construction, to the south. Phases II and III of Rolling Hills Ranch lie east of the
parcel, and the proposed San Miguel Ranch subdivision to the west (see Locator,
Attachment 1).
The site is divided into two major areas: 1) a 230-acre Habitat Management Area (HMA)
along the west, north and east property lines; and 2) a 254-acre "Usable Area" in the
central portion of the parceL While the HMA features steep slopes and canyons, the
"Usable Area" slopes gently from north to south, approximately 200 feet in elevation.
The golf course and accessory structures are proposed to be constructed in the central 254
acres, which presently house several water storage tanks and a caretaker house, While the
golf course has been designed around the existing water tanks and ground reservoirs (in
some instances these facilities are part of the golf course layout) the caretaker house is
proposed to be removed.
Existing access to the site is a dirt road extending northward from Proctor Valley Road.
2) Zoning and Land Use
A) Sweetwater Community Plan
D Site - Specific Planning Area
o East - Specific Planning Area
o West - Specific Planning Area
o North - Specific Planning Area
o South- N/A
H:\HOME\PLANNING\KIM\REPORTS\OWD.CUP
2
Item:
Meeting Date: 2/24/99
B) City of Chula Vista General Plan Designation
o Site - Open Space (Sphere of Influence)
o East - Low Density Residential (0-3 du/ac)
o West - Open Space
o North - Open Space
o South - Low Medium Density Residential
C) City/County Zoning
o Site - Specific Plan (County)
o East - PC, Planned Community (City)
o West - Specific Plan (County)
o North - Specific Plan (County)
o South - Pc. Planned Community (City)
3) ProDosal
The proposed project involves Prezone and Conditional Use Permit applications. The
following paragraphs describe each application separately:
Prezone
The Prezone application requests prezoning of 509 unincorporated acres, which are part
of San Diego County's Sweetwater Community Planning Area (more specifically the
Eastern Bonita Specific Planning Area) to the City's A-S, Agricultural Zone, The purpose
and intent of the Agricultural Zone is outlined in Section 19.20.010 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code (Attachment 7).
Approval of entitlements is a prerequisite for annexation to the City. An application has
been submitted to LAFCO, which will be considered by City Council in July.
Conditional Use Permit
The Conditional Use Permit proposal includes I) an IS-hole championship golf course; 2)
a lighted driving range; 3) chipping and practice greens; 4) an S,500 square-foot
clubhouse; 5) a 7,500 square-foot equipment/office building; 6) a 2,500 square-foot
fertilizer/chemical storage building; 7) a 6,000 square-foot golf cart storage building; S)
a 220 space parking lot; and 9) a tree and plant nursery (see Site Plan, Attachment 2).
The 254-acre golf club site also includes existing recycled water facilities, and on three
sides is surrounded by approximately 230 acres of a habitat preserve known as San Miguel
Habitat Management Area (HMA) which was designated by Otay Water District in 1994.
H:\HOME\PLANNING\KIM\REPORTS\OWD.CUP
3
Item:
Meeting Date: 2/24/99
The project also includes a segment of the City's greenbelt trail along the south property
line. The greenbelt trail continues north to a SDG&E easement.
In order to minimize noise and light impacts, the driving range will be located in a graded
depression, approximately 1,800-2,000 feet away from the nearest residential
neighborhood. The practice greens will be lit by parking lot equivalent lighting and will
be located north of the clubhouse,
The clubhouse will include food services, restrooms, pro shop, locker rooms, and office
space for facility staff. Seating capacity for the interior dining room will be a maximum
of 40 people, As many as 180 people will be able to be served for special events and
tournaments on the clubhouse's 1,600 square foot covered patio area.
Proposed hours of operation are from 5:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. daily. Three shifts of
employees (fifteen people per shift) will run the business operations, golf course
landscaping and equipment maintenance.
ANALYSIS
Prezone
Staff concludes that the proposal for prezoning the 509 acres (currently in unincorporated San
Diego County) to the A-8, Agricultural Zone designation is consistent with the City of Chula
Vista's General Plan designation of Open Space, and with the surrounding zoning and land uses.
Public necessity, convenience, general welfare, and good zoning practice also support the
prezoning to the Agricultural Zone. In addition, the prezoning is in substantial compliance with
the goals and objectives of the Eastern Bonita Specific Planning Area of the Sweetwater
Community Plan, which is an area plan of the City's General Plan,
Conditional Use Permit
The proposal to construct an ] 8-hole golf course and associated facilities, including a driving range,
would be, in staffs opinion, an appropriate use of the "Usable Area" of the overall site. The
proposed use is highly compatible with the surrounding land uses. The following paragraphs discuss
the major issues of the project and staff's recommendation:
Drivim! ram!e
The Chula Vista Municipal Code does not include specific guidelines for golf courses. However,
Section 19.58.170 addresses golf driving ranges. It states that:
H: \HOME\PLANNING\KIM\REPORTS\OWD. CUP
4
Item:
Meeting Date: 2/24/99
",Floodlights used to illuminate the premises shall be so directed and shielded as not to be an annoyance to any
developed residential property, The golf driving platform shall be not less than two hundred feet from any adjacent
R zone. The driving area shall be planted with grass, equipped with a sprinkler system, and maintained in good
condition at all times .
The driving range, which is proposed on the western boundary of the "Usable Area" and the
eastern boundary of the HMA, meets the criteria prescribed in the above-mentioned Section of the
Municipal Code, It would operate between the hours of 5:00 a.m, and 10:00 p.m. daily.
Operating until 10: 00 p. m. would necessitate floodlights for several hours in the evenings,
especially during winter months.
In an informal survey of local golf courses, staff has learned that 4:00-5:00 p,m, is a driving
range's typical closing time. However, there are a few courses that close their driving ranges as
late as 8:00 p,m, Based on this survey, the proposed hours of operation are significantly longer
than other golf courses in the metropolitan area,
The Sweetwater Community Planning Group recommends the golf course be open during daylight
hours only, stating that "intense lighting in an area next to endangered habitat will cause
significant negative impacts on the wildlife." A point illumination study commissioned by the
applicant indicates minor impacts on the adjacent Habitat Management Area, and the Mitigated
Negative Declaration for this project makes the determination that light and glare impacts would
be "less than significant." It notes that "the driving range lights would be oriented down toward
the range and in a northward direction, away from the adjacent communities." The driving rang e
would be in a graded depression, and utilize "optimum glare control" sports lighting that would
produce a glow, not glare, visible from the nearest residential development, at least 1,800-2,000
feet away,
Taking all the above factors into consideration, staff endorses the applicant's proposed hours of
operation to be 5:00 a,m. to 10:00 p.m" with the stipulation that any complaint from
surrounding neighborhoods would be sufficient grounds to review the Conditional Use
Permit, and potentially modify the hours of operation or impose additional conditions.
Greenbelt equestrian trail
To comply with the Specific Plan's goals and objectives, approximately fifty percent of the site
(primarily the steep slopes) have been designated environmental preserve and will remain
protected under a Habitat Management Area (HMA). In addition, the project includes an
important link of the City of Chula Vista greenbelt trail system along the south property Ii ne, and
continuing north along the eastern edge of the environmental preserve area (see Site Plan,
Attachment 2). Staff endorses the general location of the greenbelt trail, but recommends that the
trail design, construction specifications, signage and final alignment be submitted to the Planning
and Building Director for review and approval, prior to issuance of grading permits,
H:\HOME\PLANNING\KIM\REPORTS\OWD.CUP
5
Item:
Meeting Date: 2/24/99
The Sweetwater Community Planning Group and various citizens have recommended that the
greenbelt trail also be extended to the northern end of the Otay Water District property along the
western edge of the Usable Area (see Attachment 7). However, staff is not in favor of the trail
extension because it would run parallel to the proposed driving range and golf course fairways,
posing a considerable safety risk to users who could be struck by golf balls. The Otay Water
District has been meeting with various supporters of the trail to seek an alternative route north of
the Otay Water District property,
Parking
Staff conducted an informal survey of local golf course establishments, which indicated that the
average number of parking spaces provided is six spaces per hole. This project features 220 gues t
parking spaces and 15 employee spaces, Based on the average parking provided for this type of
facility, the project will have an excess of 127 spaces. Staff recommends that a minimum of lOS
standard size parking spaces (including handicap spaces) be maintained at all times.
Compliance with the City General Plan and adopted Policies
The proposal is consistent with the goals and objectives of the Eastern Bonita Specific Plan, which
include preserving steep terrain and natural beauty of the area, and connecting a system of riding
and hiking trails into existing and proposed adjacent trails with San Diego County and the City
of Chula Vista, This Conditional Use Permit proposal for an IS-hole championship golf course
and accessory facilities is in substantial compliance with: the goals and objectives of the Planning
Area of the Sweetwater Community Plan; the City of Chula Vista's General Plan designation of
Open Space; and the proposed prezoning designation of A-S, Agricultural.
CONCLUSION
For the reasons noted above, staff recommends conditional approval of the proposed prezoning
and Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the attached Draft City Council Resolution and
Ordinance.
Attachments
L Locator Map
2, Site Plan
3, Planning Commission Resolution
4, Draft City Council Ordinance/Resolution
5. Mitigated Negative Declaration
6, Agricultural Zone Description
7, Sweetwater Community Letter
8, Disclosure Statement
H:\HOME\PLANNING\KIM\REPORTS\OWD.CUP
6
/
,
SAN MIGUEL
RANCH
BOUNDARY
-"_..1..____
1--
-J
~"Si,_
~ 'f_~_---__
~_b.S\~ ~<_~
"'?'-
~
-~,
~
IL__
J_O,_
j COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
..--_.,
II
LEGEND -l
[[]]] Habitat Management Area
~ Usable Area (509 Acres)
CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT Otay Water District PROJECT OESCRIPTION:
C) APPLlCAN'r. PREZONE AND
PROJECT Otay Water District Use Area CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
N/O Proctor Valley Rd, near
ADORESS: Hunte Pkwy,
Request: Proposal to prezone 509 acres A-8,
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: Agricultural, and Conditional Use Perm~ to
NORTH No Scale PCC-99-16 establish an 18 hole championship golf course.
h:lhomelplanninglcarlosllocatorsIPCC9916,CDR 2/9/99
ATTACHMENT 1
RESOLUTION NO PCC 99-16/ PCZ-99-01
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VrSTA PREZONE 509 ACRES AT THE NORTHERN TERMINUS OF HUNTE
PARKWAY AGRICULTURAL (A-S); AND APPROVE A CONDITIONAL USE
PERMIT TO ESTABLISH AN IS-HOLE CHAMPIONSHIP GOLF COURSE AND
ASSOCIATED FACILITIES WITHIN THE SAME SITE - OTAY WATER
DISTRICT.
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a Conditional Use Permit and Prezone
was submitted to the Planning and Building Department of the City of Chula Vista on
September] 4, ] 998 by the Otay Water District ("Applicant"); and,
WHEREAS, said applications requested approval of a Conditional Use Permit to
establish an 18-hole championship golf course and associated facilities; and Prezone 509
acres located at the northern terminus of Hunte Parkway Agricultural (A); and,
WHEREAS, the Otay Water District, an independent Californian State agency, has
conducted an Initial Study of possible environmental impacts associated with this project,
and based on the Initial Study, the Planning Commission found that the project would have
no significant environmental impacts and adopted the Mitigated Negative Declaration issued
for this project; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Director set the time and place for a hearing
on said Conditional Use Permit and Prezoning applications, and notice of said hearing,
together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation
in the City and its mailing to property owners and residents within 500 feet of the exterior
boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertized, namely
February 24, 1999 at 7:00 p,m, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the
Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered all reports, evidence, and
testimony presented at the public hearing with respect to this applications; and,
WHEREAS, trom the facts presented, the Planning Commission hereby determines
that the Prezone and Conditional Use Permit, as conditioned, are consistent with the City
of Chula Vista General Plan and the California Government Code, and that the public
necessity, convenience, general welfare and good zoning practice support the requests,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING
COMMISSION, does hereby reoommend that the City Council adopt the attached draft City
Council Ordinance and Resolution approving the Prezone PCZ-99-01 and Conditional Use
2-
ATTACHMENT 3
Rp<o!"tion prr QQ-)~
p"gp)
Permit PCC 99-16 in aocordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained
in the attached draft City Council Resolution,
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this Resolution be transmitted to
the City Council and the Applicant
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this twenty fourth day of February, 1999, by
the following vote, to wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
John Willett, Chairperson
Diana Vargas, Secretary
(H: Ihome\planning\kimIPCC-9916.pcr)
ORDINANCE NO,
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA AMENDING THE ZONING MAP OR MAPS ESTABLISHED BY
SECTION 19,19.010 OF THE CHULA VISTA MUNICIPAL CODE
PREZONING 509 ACRES AT THE NORTHERN TERMINUS OF HUNTE
PARKWAY A-8, AGRICULTURAL
L RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the areas of land which are the subject of this Ordinance are
diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A and hereto incorporated herein as
Exhibit A; and for the purpose of General description herein consist of 509 acres
located at the northern terminus of Hunte Parkway ("Project Site"); and,
B, Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on September 14, 1999, The Otay Water District ("Developer") filed
an application requesting to prezone the Project Site to Agricultural (A-8)
("Project"); and,
C. Government Code Allowing Prezoning
WHEREAS, Government Code 65859(a) allows the City to prezone; and,
D. Prior Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS, the 509 acres are within the City of Chula Vista Sphere of Influence
and part of the Sweetwater Community Planning area of the General Plan
previously adopted by the City Council resolution No. on
E. Planning Commission Record on Applications
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on said
project on February 24, 1999, and voted to recommend that the City Council
approve the Project and Zoning Map amendment in accordance with the findings
listed below.
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at
their public hearing on this Project held on February 24, 1999, and the minutes and
resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this
proceeding.
f
1
ATTACHMENT 4
F. City Council Record on Applications
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the City
Council of the City of Chula Vista on March 23, 1999 on the Discretionary
Approval Application, and to receive the recommendations of the Planning
Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to same; and,
G, Discretionary Approvals Resolution and Ordinance
WHEREAS, at the same City Council meeting at which this ordinance was
introduced for first reading (March 23, 1999), the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista approved Resolution No. by which it approve a conditional use
permit to establish an 18-hole championship golf course and associated facilities
II NOW, THEREFORE, the City of Chula Vista does hereby find, determine and ordain as
follows:
A. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The City Council does hereby find that the Initial Study has been prepared in
accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the
Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and hereby adopts
the Mitigated Negative Declaration issued for this project.
B. FINDINGS
The City Council hereby finds that the proposed amendment to the Zoning Map
prezoning 509 acres at the northern terminus of Hunte Parkway is consistent with
the City of Chula Vista General Plan, and public necessity, convenience, the
general welfare and good zoning practice support the same.
C. APPROVAL OF ZONE AMENDMENTS
The City Council does hereby approve the amendments to the Zoning Map
prezoning the project site A-8, Agricultural as represented in Exhibit A
III. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Ordinance is dependent upon
the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated; and that
in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by a
Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution shall
be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
'"
2
IV, EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the thirtieth day from and after its
adoption,
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
John Kaheny
City Attorney
M :\home\planning\kim\pcz-9901.CCO
~
3
~.~
'/..:il:::::1111
I.
.
CASE NUMBER:
ACREAGE:
SCALE:
DATE:
DRAWN BY:
CHECKED BY:
2665.24'
I
~i COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
.---.-------.,.,.,....
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
.
L......
.
mi..,."., ...I;i
. .i.............J
...
'"
N
'"
CD
'"
650,68'
b
~
b
0>
r-:
0>
It)
CD
1_.
g ;'!;
!!! (/J
CI :;:
~ ~
....0:
o,u
>111'"
....'0
~I~
o -
u u
3998,58'
ROLLING HILLS
SUBDIVISION
EXHmIT A
PCZ - 99 - 01
CHULA VISTA PLANNING & BUILDING DEPARTMENT
I HEREBY CERTIFY THAT THIS ZONING MAP
WAS APPROVED AS A PART OF ORDINANCE
BY THE CITY COUNCIL ON
509.80
N.T.S,
2 - 11 - 99
CITY CLERK
DATE
C.J. ~
C9
, ZONING MAP
~!f?
---
~
mY Of
CHUIA VISfA
NORTH
h:lhomelplanninglcarloslzoninglpcz9901.cdr 2/11/99
DRAFT RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH AN 18-HOLE
GOLF COURSE ON 509 ACRES LOCATED AT THE NORTHERN TERMINUS
OF HUNTE PARKWAY WITHIN THE AGRICULTURAL ZONE.
L RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the parcel which is the subject matter of this Resolution is
diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A attached he reto and incorporated herein by
this reference, and for the purpose of general description herein, consists of 509 acres
at the northern terminus of Hunte Parkway ("Project Site"); and,
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on September 14,1998, a duly verified application for a Conditional Use
Pennit (PCC 99-16) was filed by Otay Water District ("Developer"); and,
WHEREAS, Developer requests permission to construct an 18-hole golf course and
associated facilities; and,
C. Prior Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS, the development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of an
application (PCZ-99-01) to prezone the site A-8 Agricultural; and,
D. Environmental Determination
WHEREAS, in accordance with the requirements of CEQA, the Environmental
Review Coordinator has determined that the Project requires the preparation of an
Initial Study, such study was prepared by the Otay Water District, a state agency, and
based on such study a Mitigated Negative Declaration was prepared and circulated for
public review,
E. Planning Commission Record on CUP Application
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project
on February 24, 1999 and voted _ to _ to adopt Resolution No. PCC 99-16
recommending that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Neg ative Declaration issued
for this project, and Resolution approving Conditional Use Permit PCC 99-16
based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein; and
1"
Resolution No.
Page No.2
WHEREAS, from the facts presented to the Planning Commission, the Commission
has detennined that the Project is consistent with the City of Chula Vista Gener al Plan
and that the public necessity, convenience and general welfare and good zoning
practice support the Project; and,
F. City Council Record of Application
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held before
the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on March 23, 1999, to receive the
recommendation of the Planning Commission and to hear public testimony with regard
to the same.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby find, determine and
resolve as follows:
II. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence on the Project introduced before the Planning Commission
at their public hearing on this Project held on February 24, 1999 and the minutes and
resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
III. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The City Council does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration issued for this
project has been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista.
IV, INDEPENDENT JUDGEMENT OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
The City Council finds that the Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared for this project
reflects the independent judgement of the City of Chula Vista City Council.
V, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby make the findings required by the
City's rules and regulations for the issuance of conditional use permits, as hereinbelow set
forth, and sets forth, thereunder, the evidentiary basis, in addition to all other evidence in the
record, that permits the stated findings to be made,
A. That the proposed use at the location is necessary or desirable to provide a service
or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the neighborhood or
the community.
9
Resolution No.
Page No,3
The proposed project at this particular location will provide residents of the
neighborhood and the community at large with recreational oppo rtunities at the public
golf course and pedestrian/equestrian trail.
B. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be
detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working
in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.
The golf course activity area, clubhouse, driving range and maintenance facilities are
located approximately 1,800 to 2,000 ft away from the nearest residential
development. In addition, approval of this project includes measures to avoid potentia I
impacts to the surrounding residential neighborhoods.
C. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified
in the code for such use.
Compliance with all applicable conditions codes and regulations will be required prior
to issuance of development permits.
D. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely affect the
General Plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency.
Approval of this project, as conditioned is in substantial conformance with City
policies and the General Plan.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY APPROVE THE
PROJECT SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH BELOW:
VI. TERMS OF GRANT OF PERMIT OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
The City Council hereby grants Conditional Use Permit PCC-99-16 subject to the following
conditions:
I, This approval is hereby granted for the golf course as depicted in plans provided for PCC-99;
contingent upon approval ofPCZ-99-0l and subsequent annexation ofthe Project Site to the
City ofChula Vista; and subject to conditions imposed herein.
2. Prior to issuance of building permits. construct a 10 foot wide, decomposed granite (d,g,)
greenbelt trail from the northern terminus of Hunte Parkway to the western boundary of the
site, along the south side of the SDG&E utility easement (outside the easement), The trail
design, construction specifications, signage and final alignment shall be approved by the
Director of Planning and Building prior to issuance of grading permits.
3. Install a nine foot tall fence along the south side of the access roadway extending from the
entrance to the end of the fairway/green of hole number one,
10
Resolution No.
Page No.4
4. Grant the City a 15 foot wide easement or easements for an equestrian trail along the south
property line; western edge of the golf course; and south side of the existing SDG&E
easement, ending at the western property line of the site. Exact location and alignment
shall be determined and approved by the Director of Building and Planning,
5, A minimum of 108 standard size parking spaces (including handicap spaces) must be
maintained at all times.
6. The golf course will be permitted to operate between the hours of 5:00 a,m. and 10:00
p.m., with the stipulation that any complaint from surrounding neighborhoods would be
sufficient grounds to review the Conditional Use Permit, and potentially modify the hours
of operation or impose additional conditions.
7, The project shall comply with all conditions of approval by the Design Review Committee
(file DRC-99-30).
8. Obtain a construction permit from the Engineering Department to perform any work in the
City's right-of-way,
9, Prior to issuance of grading permits, provide a detailed study, prepared to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer, to identify impacts to the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer.
10. Grading plans, addressing detailed soils and drainage analysis, shall be prepared by a
registered civil engineer.
I L Project shall comply with all the provisions of the National Pollutant Elimination System
(NPDES) and the Clean Water Program.
12, Project shall provide runoff detention facilities approved by the City Engineer to reduce the
peak runoff from the golf course to an amount equal to or less than the present 100-year
frequency peak runoff.
13, Any change to the operational profile or expansion of the use shall require approval by the City
Council and may result in additional conditions of approval and/or mitigation measures.
14, Construct the Project as submitted and approved by the City Council, except as modified
herein and/or as required by the Municipal Code, and as detailed in the project description.
15. Comply with all federal, state and local laws, regulations, permits, City ordinances, standards,
and policies except as otherwise provided in this Resolution,
fI
Resolution No.
Page NO.5
VII. ADDITIONAL TERMS AND PROVISIONS TO GRANT
I. This permit shall be subject to any and all new, modified or deleted conditions imposed after
approval of this permit to advance a legitimate governmental int erest related to health, safety,
or welfare which the City shall impose after advance written notice to the Permittee and after
the City has given to the Permittee the right to be heard with regard thereto. However, the
City, in exercising this reserved right/condition, may not impose a substantial expense or
deprive Permittee of a substantial revenue sources which the Permittee cannot, in the normal
operation of the use permitted, be expected to economically recover,
2, This Conditional Use Permit shall become void and ineffective if not utilized or extended
within one year from the effective date thereof, in accordance with Section 19.14.260 of the
Municipal Code,
3. A copy of this resolution shall be recorded against the property.
4, Any violations of the terms and conditions of this permit shall be ground for revocation or
modification of permit.
VIII. EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
Applicant shall execute and have notarized the attached Agreement (Exhibit "B"), indicating the
Applicant has read, understands and agrees to the conditions of approval contained herein, and will
implement same.
IX, INDEMNIFICATION/HOLD HARMLESS
Applicant/operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and hold harmless City,
its Council members, officers, employees, agents and representatives, from and against any and all
liabilities, losses, damages, demands, claims and costs, including court costs and attorneys' fees
(collectively, "liabilities") incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City's approval
and issuance of this Conditional Use Permit, (b) City's approval or issuance of any other permit or
action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary, in connection with the use contemplated herein,
and @ Applicant's installation and operation of the facility permitted hereby. Applicant/operator shall
acknowledge their agreement to this provision by executing the Agreement of this Conditional Use
Permit where indicated. Applicant's/operator's compliance with this provision is an express condition
of this Conditional Use Permit and this provision shall be binding on any and all
Applicant's/operator's successors and assigns,
X. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
The City Council directs the Environmental Review Coordinator to post a Notice of Determination and
file the same with the City Clerk,
I~
Resolution No,
Page No,6
XI. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon the
enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated; and that in the event that
anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction
to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution and the permit shall be deemed to be
automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
THIS RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL IS HEREBY PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY
COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA THIS 23RD DAY OF MARCH,
1999.
Presented by
Robert Leiter
Director of Planning and Building
John M, Kaheny
City Attorney
H,IHOMEIPLANNINGIKIMICITYCNCLIOWD-RES2,WPD
(~
/ I
PRO~T _ I
L09ATION ~ ~
u J__ .j~l ,L__
i
! COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
/
SA~ MI~UELi
RANCH
BOUNDARY
T-~--
[L
LEGEND-l
IIIIill Habitat Management Area
EZI Usable Area (509 Acres)
I
I ROLLING
I' HILLS RANCH
PHASE I & II
CH U LA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT Otay Water District PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C9 APPLICANT: PREZONE AND
PROJECT Otay Water District Use Area CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
N/O Proctor Valley Rd, near ,..,
ADDRESS: Hunte Pkwy.
Request: Proposal to prezone 509 acres A-8,
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: Agricultural, and Conditional Use Permit to
NORTH No Scale PCC-99-16 establish an 18 hole championship golf course.
h:lhomelplanninglcarlosllocatorsIPCC9916,CDR 2/9/99
EXHIBIT A
I
I
INITIAL STUDY ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST
AND IMPACT EVALUATION
I
I
1. Project Title:
Otay Water District Golf Course
2. Lead Agency:
Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Boulevard
Spring Valley, California 91978-2096
I
.
3, Contact Person:
Michael F. Coleman, AlCP
Environmental Specialist (619) 670-2293
4. Project Location:
The project site is located within unincorporated lands of San
Diego County adjacent to the eastern boundary of the City of
Chula Vista. Access to the project site is provided by an
unnamed dirt road extending northward from Proctor Valley
Road (future Hunte Parkway). The eastern extension of East
H Street is presently being constructed, along with the first
phase of the Salt Creek Ranch (now known as Rolling Hills
Ranch) development, through the former alignment of Proctor
Valley Road (Figures 1, 2 and 3). The property is located in
Section 23 of Township 17 South, Range 1 West, of the San
Bernardino Base Meridian, USGS 7.5' Jamul Mountains
Quadrangle. The project site is approximately O.4-mile north
of Proctor Valley Road.
.
i
i
.
.
5. Project Sponsor:
Oray Water District
2554 SweetWater Springs Boulevard
Spring Valley, California 91978-2096
.
.
.
6. General Plan Designation:
The site is currently within the County of San Diego; however,
it is located within the sphere of influence of the City of Chula
Vista. The site would be annexed into the City of Chula Vista.
Current land use designation in the County of San Diego is
Specific Plan (21); and City of Chula Vista is Open Space,
7. Zoning:
The site is zoned S88-Specific Planning Area within the
County of San Diego and prior to annexation into the City of
Chula Vista, the site would be pre-zoned Agriculture.
I
.
.
.
.
,r
ATTACHMENT 5
-
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 1
I
)
C;mo ?",r1(J~e!on
~,
L.lke
H~1Ulww
I
I
TlJ.rnerRest!TVOlr
'-\
.
Valley Center
I
,
Buma Vura Lagoon
AguaHedionda lAgoo~
Lake Wohlford
V
I
Wk.e Hodges
Pamo ResenOlr
~,?'t (ProposetI!
j Swherlnnd
,-/;,,:1 R,.serwJir
-? y
.
Escondida
I
.
Rancho Bernardo
Ramona
.
I
.
Poway
@)
I
I
I
152
.
:~Ipjne
I
,?-
wvelmuiReservoir
La Mesa. /1251
r'
illJ
~
""
.,.
I
<;>
~
I
..._~--,\
USA
MEXICO
I
Figure 1
~
~
~
No Scale
(~
Regional Map
j
P&D Environmental Services
Otay Water District
Golf Course Environmental Initial Study
t
t
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
j
t
Source: U.S.G.S. 7.5' Quadrangle. Jamul Mountains. 1975.
~
~
- - Use Area
.: Habitat Management Area
D Proposed Go~ eou...
Figure 2
SCALE: 1" = 2000'
,1 Vicinity Map
Golf Course Environmental Initial Study
P&D Environmental Services
Otay Water District
i
I
8. Project Description:
I
I
I
The project proposes annexation of the 509-acre District "U se Area" parcel to the City of Chula Vista,
detachment from Community Service Area (CSA) No. 135, and the construction of an 18-hole golf
course and driving range on land owned by the Otay Water District (OWD) , The Use Area consists
of a 254-acre proposed golf course site (including the 5.1-acre 711-3 and -4 Reservoirs Project) and a
nO-acre habitat management area. The remaining acreage is an ancillary operations area used by the
OWD,
I
I
The golf course is expected to be an Audubon International Signature Status course. To achieve
signature status, the golf course design would follow guidelines set forth by the Audubon Signature
Status Program. These guidelines address wildlife, natural resource, and sustainable development
issues. The western, northern, and eastern flanks of the proposed golf course site were designated in
1994 by Otay Water District as a habitat preserve known as San Miguel Habitat Management Area
(HMA). The HMA was designated to serve as a mitigation bank to address impacts associated with the
construction and operations of District projects and facilities,
I
I
I
I
I
Currently, the proposed golf course site has six open ponds that are used in the storage and
management of reclaimed water. Two ponds are north of the golf course. Ponds 1, 2 and 4
immediately north of the planned golf course would remain under District control and would not be
part of the golf course design, The remaining ponds would be controlled by the golf course. Ponds 3,
5, 6, and 8 would be incorporated into the design of the golf course. Ponds 7 and 9 would not be
changed as part of the project and would maintain their existing configuration. Two steel porable
water reservoirs are located at the north section of the site next to Pond 1. An SDG&E power line
right-of-way transects the south portion of the site near ponds 8 and 9. Access to the power lines
would be provided to allow SDG&E to maintain the right-of-way.
The project would involve the grading of a maximum of 700,000 cubic yards of balanced cut and fill
dirt on the project site. An excess of 200,000 cubic yards is available from the separate 711-3 and -4
Reservoirs Project located near the southern boundary of the Use Area and would be used as fill for
this project. The benefits of utilizing the fill from the construction of these reservoirs include a
reduction of traffic and air quality impacts because this material will not be exported off-site.
.
.
Salt Creek traverses the site in a north-south direction. An 8,500-square-foot clubhouse will be located
adjacent to the driving range near Hole 2. A 1,600-square-foot covered patio area will be included in
the clubhouse design. There will also be a 6,000-square-foot golf cart storage/maintenance building
adjacent to the clubhouse. Two paved parking lots would provide parking for 220 vehicles in a 71,500
square foot area. An unpaved turf overflow parking area will have 40 spaces for special events and will
also be adjacent to the clubhouse. A 7,500-square-foot maintenance building will be located in the
southwest comer of the course near Hole 1. This building will include an office, lockers for
employees and an area for storing equipment used in maintaining the golf course. A 2,500-square-foot
storage building for fertilizers and chemicals will also be located in the maintenance area, There will
also be a 400-square-foot wash bay area. Golf carts will be washed down in this area and the runoff
will be diverted into a storage tank for appropriate later disposal.
I
.
I
II
I
The project entrance would be via an extension of Hunte Parkway. Presently, Hunte Parkway is
planned to terminate into a cul-de-sac at the southern boundary of the golf course. The extension of
Hunte Parkway from the cul-de-sac within the project would be as a two-lane private road which
would terminate at the parking lot of the golf course, Construction of this private road is dependent
if
fJ P&D Environmental Services
- Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 5
I
I
.
upon the completion of the cul-de-sac turnaround with an alley-type driveway at the north end of the
Hunte parkway by Rolling Hills Ranch subdivision, This private road would terminate at the golf
course parking lor.
I
Grading on the proposed project would begin December 1999, The initial/mobilizing construction of
the project would take 10 days. The grading/irrigation phase of the project would be approximately
130 days. The total construction of the golf course would be approximately 140 days (6 months). The
growing period for the turf is proposed between July 2000 and March 2001. The golf course is
proposed to open in April 2001.
~
I
9, Surrounding Land Uses and Setting:
I
The project site lies at the bases of San Miguel and Mother Miguel mountains. At this time the land
west of the proposed project site is undeveloped. However the San Miguel Ranch development is
proposed for this area and is under environmental review. This proposed project would consist of a
residential community and the extension of State Route 125. Developed land and open space exist
south of the project site. The Rolling Hills Ranch Project is currently under construction immediately
south of the project site.
I
.
10. Other Agencies Whose Approval is Required (and permits needed):
I
The proposed project will require a Conditional Use Permit (CUP), grading permit and pre-zoning from
the City of Chula Vista. The annexation of the entire OWD Use Area parcel (509 acres) to the City of
Chula Vista will require approvals from the City of Chula Vista and the Local Agency Formation
Commission (LAFCO) , Although the project site is not subject to a property tax assessment, upon
annexation to the City of Chula Vista, it would be subject to a master property tax exchange agreement.
The project will require a grading permit from the office of the City Engineer of Chula Vista. This
would include grading plans prepared by a registered civil engineer, detailed soils, and drainage analysis.
Impacts to wetlands will require Section 404 permit from the u.s. Army Corps of Engineers (USACOE),
Section 1601 Agreement from California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG), and Section 401
Certification from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB).
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
it
-
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental ISIND
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 6
I
I
L'\,vlRONMD.1AL FACTORS POTEl'i11AllY AFFECTED
I
Tne environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this projec:, involving ar least
one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated" as
indicated by the checklist on the following pages,
Land Use and Planning 0 T ransporration! Circulation 0 Public Services
, , Population and Housing . Biological Resources 0 Utilities and Service Syste:ns
Geophysical 0 Energy and Mineral Resources 0 Aesthetics
Water 0 Hazards . Cultur.l Resources
~ :ill Qualiry 0 Noise 0 Recreauon
0 Mandatory Findings of Significance
I
I
i
DETERMINATION
I
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I
I iind that the proposed projeCt COULD NOT have a significant effect on the env'.ronment,
a!!d a NEGATIVE DECLARi\TION will be prepared.
.
I iind that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
:rrer.e will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on
an attached sh""" have been added to the project. A MITIGATED Nt.GATIVE
DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an
E:'\iVIRON1vfEN1AL Th1PACT REPORT is required.
.
.
I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at
least one effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier do=ent pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier. analysis
as described on ar-..ached sheers, if the effect is a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially
significant unless mitigated," .;\n ENVIRO!\ilvIENTAl Th1PACT REPORT is required, but
it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment,
Tner.e Wll.L NOT be a significant effect in this case ber..ause all potentially significant effects
(aj have been analyzed adequately in an e:>rlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b)
l:ave been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including r.evisions or mitigation
::r:easures that are imposed upon the proposed projeCt,
.
.
.
I
.
/O/:2cJI9A
Dare / '
.
A, ' ed Representative for
y Water District
.
l..~
.
o
-'
u
.
~
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 7
EVALUATION OF E."'NIRONMENTAL IMPACTS
j
1) A brief explarw.tion is required for all answer; except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported
by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact"
answer is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply
does not apply to projects like the one involved (e,g" the project falls outside a fault rupture zone),
A "No Impac::" answer should be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as
general standards (e.g., the project will not expose sensitive receptors to poilutants, based on a
project-specific screening analysis).
j
2) .'\11 answers must take into account the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site,
cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational
=pacts,
I
3) "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if an effect is significant or potemially significant, or if
the lead agency lacks information to make a finding of insignificance. If there are one or more
"Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, an EIR is required.
j
I
4) "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated" applies where the incorporation of mitigation measures
has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact" to a "Less than Significant Impact," The
lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce the effect to
a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be
cross-referenc..<>d).
j
,
5) Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process,
an effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration. Section
15063(o)(3)(D). Earlier analyses are discussed in Section xvn at the end of the checklist.
Potentially
I Potentially Signifi=t Less Than
Signifi=t Unless Signifi=t No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
1. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with general plan designation or zoning? 0 0 0 .
D) Conflict with applicable environmental plans or 0 0 0 .
policies adopted by agencies with jurisdiction over
the projeC"..?
oj Be incompatible with =tmg land use 111 the 0 0 0 .
.. . ;;
VlClillty,
d) Affect agricultural resources or operations? 0 0 0 .
0) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an 0 0 0 .
established co=unity?
\-,
(; P&D Environmental Services Otay Water District Golf Course
Environmental IS/NO Page 8
Explmation: The pmiect site is designated as Open Space by the City of Chula Vista Ge"-e:a: Plan, Its pre-zo"-e
desi:","ion would be _,..griculture, Development of a golf course would be allowed by the City's Open Space !.and
use ci5ignation and would conform to the related policies contained in the City's General Plan, No conflic: with
applicable environmerrral plans or policies is anticipated.. The project will be compatible with the o:rist:ing land uses,
OWD h2s an approv~ Habitat Management Area (HMA) that surrounds the proposed golf course site to the We51:,
north and east. When the HMA was approved by the resource agencies, the Use Area (proposed golf course site)
incluci..-d the potential ror future golf course uses. The HMA is part of the Oray-Sweetwater Unit of the San Diego
Narion.al Wildlife Rer-.1ge. South of the project site are several planned development co=uniries, The Rolling
Hills Ranch ProjeC"~ immediately south of the project site, is currently under construction. The pl=ed
development south or :he Rolling Hills Ranch Project includes the completed Ph2se 1 of the Eas-Jake Business ?ark
and the future Eastllle residential development areas of Woods and Woods West, The project site coosists of
unc....Q'veloped open sp~ and reservoirs. There are no active agricultural resources or operations existing on-site tnat
wollie be affected by ?rojecr development.
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact InlDacr
IT, POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the proposal:
a) Cumulatively exceed official regional or local 0 0 0 .
popularion projectioos?
b) Induce subsunrial grow in an area either directly 0 0 0 .
or indirectly?
0) Displace =ng housing, espec:ially affordable 0 0 . 0
housing?
Expimation. The proposed project would not geneme any population grow because it is a recreational facility.
The proposed project would not induce growth in the area. The golf co= would serve the growing population in
the Chula Vista area and would be developed adjacent to new and developing co=unities. TIle golf course would
not =end w= out of the proposed golf co=. Sewer/utilities would be consrructed to the clubhouse
and driving range. One homesite would be displaced, which is used by the OWD =akers. Thereiore,
development of the proposed project would result in the displacement of one existing house,
'2,.\..
~
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 9
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
C'O
Impact
1lI. GEOPHYSICAL Would the proposal result in or expose
people to potenrial impacts involving:
i
b) Ground shaking or liquefaclion?
0 0 . Q
0 0 . 0
0 0 0 .
0 0 0 .
0 0 . 0
a) Fault rupture?
OJ Seiche, t:sunami or volcanic h=d?
a') Landslides or mudslides?
i
eJ Erosion, changes in topogI2phy or unstable soil
conditions from excav:mon, grading or fill?
i
D Subsidence or the land?
o
o
o
.
i
g) Expansive soils?
o
o
o
.
h) Unique geologic or physical fearures?
o
o
o
.
I
Expl:mation. The project site, like all of San Diego County, is in a seismically active area. T"" site is located in the
Peninsular Range Geomorphic Province, The area is identified by rugged, northwest trending mountain ranges to
the east and coastal plain to the west. Several earthquake fault zones exist in the regional vicinity or the project site
increasing the potential for earthquoke damage on-site, The Rose Canyon Fault, which is loctted approxi=elv 11
miles west of the project site, is one of the closest faults, dubhouse and maintenance buildings will be constructed
according to earthquake safety standards included in the Uniform Building Code to minim;,. damage from
earthquake activity. There may be significant ground shaking from a seismic event associ2ted with the Rose
Canyon Fault zone. The project area is approximately 9 miles from the coast at an elevation of 800 feet and is,
therefore, not an area susceptible to seiche or t:sunami event. Due to the limited topographic relief in the area, the
project site is not anticipated to be susceptible to landslides or mudslides. Interim erosion control measures would
be utilized during gr.ding on the project site, All gnded areas will be stabilized when gr:uJing is completed. The
pro!,osed project would not include any activities, such as mining or groundwater extractions, that could cause land
subsidence. The clubhouse and maintenance buildings would be located in an area of suiJle bedrock and any
expansive soils will be removed from the project site prior to construction. Geological and physical conditions of
the site are typical of the location., without remarkable or unique features.
I
I
!
I
~
L.:~
!
~
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 10
IV. WATER. Would:he proposal resuk in:
a) Changes in aDsorption mes, drainage panems, or
the rate and amount of surface runoff?
bi
Exposure of ?eople or property to water related
hazards such as flooding?
~,
Discharge into surface wate", or other alteration of
surface water quality?
aJ
Changes in the amount of surface water in any
water body?
e)
Changes in C'.lITents, or the course or direction of
water movement?
fJ
Change in the quantity of ground waters, either
through direct additions or withdrawals, or
through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
excavation?
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groundw:.ter?
h) Impacts to groundwater supply?
~ Substantial reduction in the amount of
groundwater otherwise available for public water
supplies?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
,,",0
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
0 0 . D
0 0 0 .
0 0 . 0
0 0 0 .
0 0 0 .
0 0 . 0
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
Explanation: Current conditions of the site allow for water percolation into the ground and no obstruction of
wate:- flow. The majority of the surface of the project area will remain pervious to rainfall and water flow. Paving
associated with parking and construction of the structIlreS will result in a small increase in impervious surfaces. The
drainage from these areas will be acco=odated by surface improvements. The project would incorporate runoff
detec-.ion facilities approved by the Gty Engineer of Chula Vista. These facilities wonld be used to reduce the peak
runoff from the golf course to an amount equal to or less than the present lOO-year frequency peak runoff. .-'en
El' A registered herbicide or pesticide would be applied to the golf course when needed. The drainage for the
project includes catch basins which would eliminate irrigation water from entering the Salt Creek drainage. Tbe
catch basins are designed to acco=odate rainfall events of one year duration. Water quality impacts to Salt C=k
from these sources are therefore limited.
Typicilly, water that traverses the site will be collected in the southernmost basin and pumped to one of the
northern reservoirs to be reused on..ite, Peak rainfall events will overflow this reservoir, Water will then move
downstream into the Salt Creek drainage, There would be no increased flooding associated with the project,
No changes are anticipated to any narural water bodies; however, artificial ponds on..ite (ponds 5, 6, and 8) would
be reconfigured and incorporated into the golf course design, These ponds are used by OWD for management of
their recycled water system, The proposed project would not change the current course or direction of water
move::nem:.
,y
~
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 11
i
I
I
The proposed projeo: would not directly alter the amount of groundwater ber..ause the area would generally re~';"
pemeable, allowing percolation of water into the ground. Also, there would be no cuts d..-ep enough to meo: any
groundwater aquifer, The proposed project would use reclaimed water for irrigation; therefore, no impaC"..s w the
groundwater supply would occur nor would there be an increase in public water supplies, The project would
comply with the National Pollutant Elimination System (N"PDES) and the Clean Water Program,
I
I
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact ImDact
V. AIR QUAllTY. Would the proposal:
a) Violate any air quality standard or contribute [Q an 0 0 0 .
existing or projected air quality violation?
b) Expose sensitive receptors to pollutants? 0 0 0 .
c) Alter air movement, moisture, or temperature, or 0 0 0 .
cause any change in climate?
d) Create objectionable odors? 0 0 0 .
I
I
I
I
I
Explanation: The project site is within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), which includes the entire County of
San Diego. The San Diego Air Basin is design3ted as a non-attainment area for ozone (OJ) and inhalable
particulate matter (pM,,,); the County is classified as an attainment area for carbon monoxide (CO), nitrogen
dioxide (NO,), sulfur dioxide (SO,) and lead (Pb), The San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD),
the regional agency empowered to regulate emission sources in the SDAB, maintains an air quality monitoring
station in the City of Chula Vista near the intersection of East J Street and Hilltop Drive, approximately seven
miles southwest of the project site. The one-hour average standard for 0, and the 24-hour average standar~ for
PM" are currendy exceeded in the area.
I
I
Air quality in the Chula Vista area is affected by emissions from a variety of sources. However, the primary
source of emissions in the vicinity of the project site is regional motor vehicle emission and local motor vehicle
traffic on nearby fr~ays and major arterial streets, including Ouy Lakes Road and East H Street.
f
Construction of the proposed project would generate short-term emissions of air pollutants. Construction
ac-.ivities would be required to adhere to applicable rules and regulations of the SDAPCD to reduce both
stationary and mobile source pollutant emissions during construction. More specifically, grading or the
proposed golf site would involve disturbance of approximately 700,000 cubic yards (balanced cut and fill) of
earJ1 plus 200,000 cubic yards originating from the 711-3 and -4 Reservoirs. site. This would result in the
emission of approximately 14,730 pounds or 7.4 tons of PM" during the entire grading period, which would
contribute to the continued exceedance of the 24-hour average standard for PM". However, these emissions
would occur temporarily and would cease at the completion of construc-.;on activities. fu a result, these would
nor be considered significant.
t
I
I
As discussed in the Transportation/Circulation Section (Section VI), the proposed project would generate
approximately 700 daily trips. Assuming an average trip length of 20 miles per trip, the proposed project would
generate approximately 14,000 vehicle miles per day (VMD). Using the EMF AClF emission factors and the
estimated VMD, the daily motor vehicle emissions generated by the proposed project would be approximately
186 pounds of CO, 19 pounds of reactive organic compounds (Roq, 26 pounds of NOv and less than 2 pounds
of PM", Stationary source emissions would be generated through the consumption of electricity and natural gas.
Since the proposed project is not anticipated to consume significant amounts of electricity and natural gas,
stationary sourc~ e!D.issions would be negligible. Therefore, total project emissions would remain below the
.J..r
I
I
I
(J P&D Environmental Services
- Environmental IS/ND
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 12
thresholds of signili=ce for all criteria pollutants (jjO pounds for CO, jj pounds for ROC, jj pounds for
NO" and ljO pounds ror PM,~; no significant impacts would occur, Additionally, the proposed project is not
ant.icipated to expose sensitive receptors to significant increases in pollutant concentrations as project emissions
would remain below the thresholds of significance.
The proposed projec.: would not involve any uses or create any structures that would alter air movement,
moisture or temperature or cause any changes in climate. The project site would be developed with an 18-hole
championship golf course, which would allow the site to remain open space, During project construction, heavy
equipment may emit ~ust fumes that are odorous within the immediate vicinity of the source; this would be a
short-term occurrence., which would cease at the completion of construction activities. Operation of the golf
course would not create any objectionable odors,
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Signilicant Unless Signilicant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
VI. TRANSPORTATION/CIRCULATION. Would the
proposal result ir.:
a) 10creased vehicle trips or traffic congestion? D D . D
b) Hazards to ..Iery from design features? D D D .
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby uses? D D D .
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? D D D .
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? D D D .
f) Conflicts with adopted policies supporting alternative D D D .
transponanon?
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacts? D D D .
Explanarion: The proposed project would generate 700 average daily trips (AD1). 10 prmous City/County
stUdies, traffic generation for the area north of Hunte Parkway was assumed to be 5,600 ADT, Due to the previous
traffic model assumptions, no new unmitigated traffic impacts would be expected. The only improvements needed
for the project would be a two-lane private road extension from the cul-<ie-sac of Hunte Parkway at the northerly
property boundary of the Rolling Hil1s Ranch project. A= to the site would be via this e:nension from Hunte
Parkway. The two-lane private street extension would dead-=d at the parking lot of the golf course. A maintenance
road and fire access road would be provided north of the parking lot to access the maintenance facility for the golf
course and the OWD potable and reclaimed water facilities, There are no hazards from the design features. The golf
course would provide two parking lots totaling 71,jOO square feet and include 220 spaces. There would also be a rnrf
overflow parking lot with 40 spaces that could be utilized during special events. This parking is sufficient for normal
operations as well as special events. There would be an equestrian! mountain bike trail routed around the southern
portion of the project site that would connect the Rolling Hil1s Ranch and San Miguel Ranch trails. This routing of
the trail around the golf course would not create a hazardous (e.g" errant golf balls) condition or create barrier.; for
pedestrians or bicyclists; conversely, it provides a safe access for pedestrians and bicyclists around the active golf
course, There are no applicable policies for alternative transportation. Tne project would not affect any rail,
waterborne, or air traffic modes of tr.nsportation through the project area.
~"
~
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 1 3
j
I
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Significant
Unless
Mitigated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
","A
Impact
I
Vll. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the proposal result
in impacts to:
i
a) Endangered, threatened or rare species or their
habitats (mduding but not limited to plants, fIsh,
insects, anirn>ls and birds?
o
.
o
o
I
d) Wetland habiw (e.g" marsh, npanan and vema!
pool)?
0 . 0 0
0 . 0 0
0 . 0 0
0 0 . 0
I
:,) Locally desi~.red species (e,g" heritage trees)?
c) Locally designated natural co=unities (e.g" oak
forest, coastal habitat, etc,)?
I
e) Wtidlife dispe=l or migration corridors?
Expl2I1ation:
I
As currently proposed, the project would directly impact 195.2 acres of OWD's Use Area. This includes 174.2 acres
of ruder:Il field! disturbed, 2.6 acres of riparian herb, 3A acres of tamarisk scrub, 0.9 acre of freshwater marsh, 0,9
acres of broom baccharis scrub, 0,1 acre of Diegan coastal sage scrub, 2.5 acres of exotic woodland, and 6.5 acres of
din roarls/ disturbed habiw. Three of the existing ponds would be reconfigured, reducing the non-jurisdictional
open water/pond coverage by 4,1 acres,
)
I
Impaas to the Diegan coastal sage scrub and broom baccharis would be considered sigoificant. These habitats are
considered sensitive and are a part of the state's Natural Co=unities Conservation Planning (NCCP) program.
These habitats would be mitigated under the conditions set forth in the biological survey report, and summarized
below.
t
t
Impaas to the ruder:Il field! disturbed and riparian herb have a m;n;m.1 botanical significance; however, they provide
important foraging habitat for a diversity of raptor species. As stated in the biological survey, these vegetation types
are considered Tier ill habitat because of their important foraging value for raptor species, r.lther than agricultural
lands, under OWD's Draft Habiw Conservation Plan (HCP). Although the Tier ill designmon is typically applied
to non-native grassland or chaparral supporting MSCP-<:overed species, this designation is appropriate for two
reasons: (1) there is little distinction betWeen ruderal fIeld and non.native grassland from a vegetation cover
p."pective and (2) both are dominated by non-native grasses and forbs, although ruderal fieid is usually dominated
by rorbs, such as mUS"..ard. The distinction between these two categories, ruderal fIeld and non-native grassland is
typically made by evidence of discing and brushing. Also, the Tier ill designmon is appropri= due to the high level
or raptor foraging doc-J.ttlented on the Use Area lands. Agricultural uses on the property were documented in the
eariy 1980s.
I
I
I
I
I
.4..'
I
(;
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 14
1
I
Proposed LandsCloe Desien
i.
Approximately 112,6 acres of the site would support an irrigated golf course (including a 20 acres driving range). In
addition, the landscaping plan proposes to plant one acre of screening shrubs with groundcover, 58.7 acres of native
and narnraIized grasses, and 9.7 acres of wetland mitigation areas.
j
Irrigated Golf COJa'Se
i
The portions of the golf course that would receive irrigation and regular mowing would consist of turf grasses.
These areas would also include areas of sand traps which would be a design feature within the fairways and greens.
Tees and greens receive the most frequent mowing and the closest cut, while roughs comprise a comparatively taller
grass cover. No distinction in greens, fairways, and roughs is required for the purpose of impact analysis, The turfed
areas are expected to permit wilcllife movement and would not prohibit raptor foraging activities on such an open
substrate. However, due to the required maintenance and need to control burrowing m,mm,l populations within
the turf, all such turf and irrigated lands are considered to be a significant impact to raptor foraging.
I
i
Native and Naturalized Grasses
t
The landscape plan proposes substancial portions of the proposed golf course to be vegetated with native or non.
invasive grasses, low~wing shrubs, or small groups of trees. Irrigation would be required to establish these
plantings but they would not require irrigation after inicial establishment. The landsClpe plan also proposes to
plant species native to the region, species that would not spread into nearby habitat preserves, and species that
would be expected to provide wilcllife habitat (cover, forage, nest sites, etc.) comparable to narive species. These
desig,nated areas would not be mowed. It is intended for these areas to become inhabited by small mammals
(rabbits, rodents, etc.) and provide a prey base for raptorial birds.
t
J
Sensitive Species Tmnocts
Sensitive Plants
I
The Otay tarplant is the most important sensitive plant on the project site, One individual plant has been identified
west of pond 2, This plant was clearly flagged and the project proponents have agreed that any necessary
adjustment to the project footprint would be made to avoid impacting this shrub,
I
No direct impact to the San Diego marsh elder is expected; any impact within the proposed golf course site would
not be considered significant due to the low numbers of individuals present and the low sensitivity of the species.
There are potential impacts to the Southwestern spiny rush, graceful tatplant, and decumbent goldenbush, but they
are not considered biologically significant. However, these species are reco=ended for consideration for any
revegetation and! or restoration efforts.
t
}
Sensitive Wild./ife
~
One important biological issue associated with the development of the golf course is the loss of raptor foraging
habitat, There are several sensitive species of raptors, including the golden eagle, northern harrier, white-tailed kite,
Coo!,er's hawk, red--shouldered hawk, peregrine falcon, prairie falcon, and burrowing owl, all of which have b"..-Il
observed on the proposed golf course site and! or the HMA; other co=on raptor species observed on--site include
red-tailed hawk and American kestrel. The loss of the raptor foraging habitat is considered cumulatively significant
due to the increase in development projects in the Proctor Valley/Sweetwater/Otay Mesa region. The Cooper's
hawk, white-tailed kite, co=on red.tailed hawk, American kestrel, and northern harrier would be expected to
remain resident to the vicinity and continue on--site foraging. Conversely, the golden eagle is more sensitive to
human presence and activity and on--site occurrence would be significandy reduced following project development.
I
1..1
~
~
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 1 5
~".,._--,,_._-,
The ~CP reco=~cis that a 4,OCC-foot radius (buffer zone) be preserved around the prim.ry and alternate eagle
nest sites (MSCP Volume 11: Appendix A 1995), The proposed golf course is approximateiy 6,000 feet from the
closest golden eagle nest, This distance is outside the protective buffer outlined in the MSCP, Based on availiWle
information, the viability of the nest site would not be significantly impacted. However, this is not the case for
eagle foraging areas; these impacts are cumulatively viewed as significant. Iv. stated in the biology report by Meckel
and Associates, the project site receives greater foraging intensity by eagles than other nearby sites. Eagles have been
observed capturing rabbits and squirrels in the open fields and along the storage ponds throughout the project site,
It is not known how much habitat loss and human encroachment would be toler:o.ted by the golden eagle. Due to
the severe decline of the species in San Diego County and its documented sensitivity to human encroachment, the
expected impact to the golden eagle is considered significant.
A pair of burrowing owls were observed on-site, utilizing three alternative burrows. For this reason, three ac....ive
burrows were assessed as being significantly impacted, in accordance with the guidelines outlined by the CDFG staff
report (CDFG 1995),
Other Direct Impacts to Wildlife
There would be a loss of weedy field habitat, which is potentially used by a small number of relatively low
sensitivity wildlife species, This loss would 'also affect species more typically associated with nearby sage SC1lb
vege"..aUon. However, this would not be considered a significant impact of the proposed project,
Indirect Im= to Sensitive 50ecies and Wildlife Resource Values
Although human ac".ivity associated with the oper:o.tion of the golf course is relatively low compared to other urban
land uses, it is expeaed to produce a variety of indirect impacts on the local wildlife populations and utilization
patterns. This human activity is believed to alter wildlife use for intolerant species such as the golden eagle, Other
typical species of nearby sage scrub habitat, including the coastal California gnatcatcher, are unlikely to be
S;gr>;nrontly impacted by human presence as long as there are adequate controls over access into the HMA.
Incidental kills of small m,mm,], and snakes are expected to increase as the result of an increase in automobile traffic
onto the property, The expected increase in mortality of small animals is not considered to be biolog{caIly
significant. However, recommendations are being offered to minimi?.I" this impact.
Wildlife Movement Corridors
The project area was previously maintained by discing. The golf course would not be Vety different from the
present conditions, The only effect the golf course might have is on the movement of wildlife in the early
eve:1ings. Vegetation should be allowed to establish betWeen fairways, it would create more cover for wildliie and
promote wildlife movement through the area. The consider-uion for use of artificial lighting would be an
important factor in wildlife movement, The driving range, buildings and ropport facilities would require
lighting, which would be designed in such a way that the surrounding HMA is not illuminated. Nocrumal
wildliie movement across the site may be discouraged due to the increase in lighting around the golf course,
However, to mtntmi7e the impac""...s associated with new lighting on-site, increased tree cover, reduced discing and
late night dark periods would be observed.. To allow wildlife movement to continue in much the same way, the
prooosed lights would be turned off at 10:00 p.m. Wildlife movement through the project site is not expected to
be significantly impacted by the golf course following implementation of these measures.
j..!!
~
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 16
!
I
Wetl:mds
I
The current design and layout of the golf course considered the location of wdand and juriscii60nal waters of the
u.s. However, the design would impaa 2,6 acres of riparian herb (CDFG and USACOE jurisdiction), 2.0 acres of
tamarisk scrub (CDFG and USACOE jurisdiction), 0,9 acres of freshwater marsh, and 0.10 acre of Jurisdic-jonal
Non-Wetland Waters of the US under the jurisdiction of ACOE and/or CDFG, totaling approximately ;,6 acres,
Due to the current state and federal policy of no net loss of wetlands, impac-.s to the jurisdic-jonal habitatS are
considered to be significant.
I
I
Ai; part of the site design, 9.7 acres have been identified for restoration of wetland habitats, These habitats would
include a mixture of fresh water marsh, riparian scrublands and riparian woodlands which are anticipated to be or far
superior quality than wetlands currently on the property. fu part of the revegetation effor-.s or existing wetlands
that would be impacted, invasive non-native species (tamarisk, fennel, etc.) would be removed.
I
Miti,,<>:1tion
I
The impact to 0,9 acres of broom baccharis scrub and 0.1 acres of coastal sage scrub would be mitigated by the
restoration of 1.; acre of sage scrub vegetation (t,e" a 1.;:1 replacement) within the golf course development plan as
stated in the Merkel & Associates Biological Survey,
I
Approximately 112.5 acres of raptor foraging habitat would be impacted by the proposed golf course, This number
represents the acres of ruderal field vegetation which would be replaced by irrigated golf course rorf, developed areas,
and screening shrubs with groundcover. Based on the OWD's draft HCP document, the p=anent loss of 112.5
acres of raptor foraging habitat, which is not located within a regional habitat preserve, would be mitigated by the
0.5:1 preservation of similar quality habitat located within a preserve, or by 1:1 preservation of similar habitat that is
not located within a preserve. Therefore, inclusion of approximately 56.3 acres or similar habitat into the HMA
would be considered appropriate mitigation under the OWD draft Subarea Plan.
I
I
I
Mitigation for impacts to the burrowing owls would include avoidance of direct impacts to occupied burrows
berwe-..n February 1 and August 31. This would eliminate potential impacts to eggs, nestlings, or dependent
fledglings. For each occupied burrow impacted, two artificial burrows would be created. Thus, six artificial
burrows would be created to mitigate for the three impacted burrows on the proposed golf course. Preservation
of 6,; acres of foraging habitat for each pair of burrowing owls present would also be required as mitigation.
Beoause the site provides over 50 acres of preservation of grasslands, no additional preservation will be required.
Passive relocation techniques would be used to move owls away from the occupied burrows prior to
construction, One-way doors would be used to prevent owls from returning to burrows that would be destroyed.
One or more weeks should be allowed to ensure the owls would acclimate to the new/alternate burrows. The
Dis1:rict is currently working in conjunction with Pacific Bay Homes, the City of Chula VISta, and CDFG to
develop a Rolling Hills Ranch/Ouy Water Dis1:rict Use Area Burrowing Owl Mitigation Plan. This is a focused
plan to provide a comprehensive treatment of burrowing owls to ensure their long-term viability in the project
area.
I
I
I
I
Mitigation for the loss of wetland vegetation due to impacts would be at a 1:1 or higher repl=ent ratio along Salt
Creek. Native riparian species would be incorporated into the mitigation plan as well as stringent erosion control
measures to prevent sedimentation into Salt Creek.
I
I
J
~
J
~
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 17
---~_.-.. ---
General Guidelines to Protect Biolocical Resourc""
In addition to the above mitigation measures, to ensure environme!ltal compliance and the protection of
biological resourc"", a mitigation plan for impactS to wetland r""ources through hahitat creation and
enhancement would be developed as part of the golf course design. Clearing of wetland and sage scrub vege"..ation
should be done in the non-breeding season which occurs from March 1 through July 31 to prevent impactS to
nesting birds. Prior to construction, approved limits would be marked to prevent accidental impactS beyond tne
grading limits. Spd limits on access roads would be strictly enforced by use of spd bumps, signage
(reco=ended 15 mph maximum), or other means to minimize road kills during public access to the facility,
An operational plan addressing golf course maintenance would be required This would inciude a management
prog:-.m to prevent re-_.;eval of golf balls that have been hit into the HMA and intentionally hitting golf balls intO
the HMA habitat.
Audubon Signature Series Golf Course
The District has agreed to commit to the creation of an Audubon Signature Series golf course. This would
enhance wildlife utilization and increase aesthetic values to the course. The golf course design would incorporate
the "'""ter, golf course, and agronomic issues set forth in the Audubon guidelines.
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
VIII. ENERGY AND MINERAL RESOURCES. Would
theproposai:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation plans? 0 0 0 .
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and 0 0 0 .
inefficient manner?
cJ Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral 0 0 0 .
resource that would be of future value to the region
and the residents of the state?
Explanation: The project would use OWD's recycled water system. The construetion of the project would inciude
the re--..onfiguration of three of the reclaimed water ponds, which is not anticipated to use substantial energy. The
project would not conflict with any adopted energy conservation plan. Golf courses, in general, use relatively low
amounts of energy and, wherever possible, energy efficient alternatives would be used There are no known
renewable resources on-site, and constrUction of the golf course would not preclude the future exrr-.ctions of valuable
mineral resources if identified in the future.
~J
~
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 1 8
lX. HAZARDS. Would the proposal involve:
a) A risk or accidental explosion or rdease or h=dous
substances (Including, but not limited to: oil,
pesticides, ch=icals or radiation)?
b) Possible interference with an emergency response plan
or emergency ~ation plan?
cJ The creation or any health h=d or potential health
hazard?
d} Exposure or people to existing sources or potential
health hazards?
e) Increased fire hazard in areas with flammable brush,
grass or trees?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Potentially
Signiricant
Unless
Mitigated
1'<0
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
L...'
.
0 0 0 .
0 0 0 .
0 0 0 .
0 0 0 .
Explanationr A stor.ge building would be specifically designed ror all potencially hazardous mate.-1als, rertilize" and
chemicals which would be stored in appropriate containers. Construction and operation or the proposed project
would rollow Cal/OS"'rlA regulation and Audubon requirements including elements ror employ"" safety training.
safety equipment, accidmt and illness prevention programs, h=dous substance exposure warnings, and emergency
action and fire prevention plan preparation, As a result, operation or the proposed project is not anticipated to
result in accidmtal explosions or release or hazardous substances. The existing SDG&E powdine that traverses the
site haS no known h=ds associated with short-term recreational use, Workers would be exposed to the
electromagnetic field given off by the power line during construCtion or the project and maintenance or the gr';"",
There are no known risks associated with the short-term exposures to the electromagnetic field. The area or the
project is undevdoped and would not interfere with emergency plans. The proposed project would not involve any
uses or activities that would create any health hazard. There are no existing sources or health hazards on the project
site, Tne golf coUtse would be improved with low flammability vegetation, which would be watered frequently to
maintain the greens, creating a lush area that would be fire resistant.
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
X. NOISE. Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels? 0 0 . 0
b) Exposure or people to severe noise levels? 0 0 0 .
Expl2I12tionr Future noise-sensitive land uses near the project site include the Rolling Hills Ranch, which is
currently under construction immediately south or the project site; future phaSes or Rolling Hills Ranch would
be located east or the project site, Additionally, there are 230 acres or HMA immediately west, north and east or
the golf course.
,t...
(5
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 19
Development of the proposed project would generate high noise levels intermittently during construction on and
adjacent to the projec: site, Noise levels would fluctuate depending on the construction phase, equipment type
and duration of use, ciistance betwe<n noise source and receptor, and presence or absence of barrie,,; between
noise source and receptor.
Noise levels from construction during ground clearing, excavation and grading actlvtues using the loudest
equipment such as bulldozers, backhoes, haul trucks, erc., would affect the sensitive recepto,,; in the immediate
vicinity of the projec: site, as they would experience noise levels as high as 89 dBA at a distance of 50 feet from
the construction site, Generally, construction noise would occur intermittently and would cease at tbe
completion of construction activities. A~ a result, impactS from construction noise would not be considered
significant.
Noise generated by tne operation of the proposed golf cou,,;e would primarily be traffic-generated; the proposed
project would contribute to a slight increase in local traffic volumes. As discussed in the
TransportationlCircdarion Section (Section VI), the proposed project would generate approximately 700 daily
trips, These trips, when distributed throughout the day, are not anticipated to perceptibly increase noise levels in
the project vicinity, .'vi a result, the proposed project is not anticipated to expose sensitive recepto,,; to severe
noise levels.
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
XI. PUBUC SERVICES. Would the proposal have an affect
upon, or resuh in 4 need for new aT dtETed grn;ernment
services in =y of the following areas:
a) Fire protection? 0 0 . Q
b) Police protection? 0 0 . 0
c) Schools? 0 0 0 .
d) Maintenance of public facilities, including roads? 0 0 0 .
e) Other governmental services? 0 0 0 .
Explan2tion: The project would m;n;m.lly increase local fire protection demands. Fire hydrants will be provided
in accordance with city requirements. Emergency access would also be av;U!able via the extension of the two-lane
private road from the cul-de-sac of Hunte Parkway. The wildland fire protection for the territoty is provided by the
California Division of Forestry. Upon annexation to the City of Chula VlSU, fire protection responsibilities would
be assumed by the City of Chula V 1SU Fire Department, The closest California Department of Forestry station is
Mome Vista and response time is from 5 to 15 minutes. The closest City fire station is Station #6, located at
975 Lane Avenue and the response time is within 7 minutes.
'J/
~
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 20
The project site is c.L-rendy under the jurisdiction of the County Sheriff's Department. Police protec:ion
responsibilities wouid be transferred to the City upon annexation, The closest Sheriff Department location is the
Impe:ial Beach station. and the response time is 8 minutes for priority calls. The nearest Chuia V lSta Police station is
276 4th Avenue, and the priority call response time is 7 minutes. The golf cour.;e wouid not create any new 5eC'.mty
problems in the area. The golf co= wouid be fenced and provide its own security personnel to meet most of the
on-site security needs, The City of Chuk Visu Police Department would be called for emergency or other illegal
incidents, The access road to the golf cour.;e would be maintained by the golf cour.;e, There would be no direct
increase in the school population because there is no increase in housing associated with this project. The proposed
project would not in=e any uses or activities that would place added demand for other gove=ental services,
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant ='io
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
XII. UTIUTIES A_"ID SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the
proposal result in a need fOT new systems, aT substantial
alteratiom to the following utilities:
a) Power or naru.ral gas? 0 0 0 .
b) Communications systems? 0 0 0 .
cJ Local or regional water treatment or distribution
faci1i' ) 0 0 0 .
tles.
J d) Sewer or septic tanks? 0 . 0 0
e) Storm water dninage? 0 0 0 .
Q Solid waste disposal? 0 0 0 .
!
Expl:m:lrion: The proposed project would require the use of electrical power and! or natural gas for the club house,
maintenance building and lighting on the cour.;e at night. A= woufd be provided for the maintenance of the
SDG&E easement trav=ing the site. Power and narural gas would be extended from adjacent Rolling Hills Ranch
development. The proposed project would require the insrallation of new telephone lines to the project site, Tnese
would be. used to schedule tee times and supply general information to the public about the operation of the golf
cour.;e. These added lines would not be a significant impact on communication services. The proposed project
would not affect any new water tre:ttment facilities,
The golf cour.;e would primarily use the existing recycled water system, The proposed projecr would use pouble
wat",- in the club house and irrigation for the greens and flushing the tees, Plans for the pouble and irrigation ......"'",-
use improvement plans would be submitted to the District. The plans wouid be reviewed for confOl1IlIDe< to
District specifications and requirements.
I
i
'I"f
I
~
P&D Environmental Services
::nvironmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 21
I
j
The proposed golf course is within the Salt Creek Sewer Basin which currently has no wastewater facilities in the
area. The golf course would require approximately six to eight equivalent dwelling ucits (EDUs) and several
alte:-natives has be<:n established to meet these requirements. These include:
I
t
. Use of the existing pump station on Gray lakes Road, which would require an agre<:ment with Eastlake, the
Ciry of Chula Vl5U, and OWED to acquire sufficient EDU credits;
. Temporary storage in a septic faciliry in which the ultimate sewer would be Proctor Valley Sewer.
j
. Establishment of a holding tank on site which would be pumped out every few days.
Implementation of anyone of these measures would result in impaCts less than significant,
I
The golf co=e would construct a storm drain system on site to accommodate storm water drainage, The proposed
project would produ,", a minimal amount of solid waste. This would be disposed of in the Otay Landfill.
t
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
XIII. AESTHETICS. Would the Proposal:
a) AHect a scenic vista or scenic highway? 0 0 0 .
b J Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect? 0 0 0 .
cJ Create light or glare? 0 0 . 0
j
i
I
t
Exphmation: The golf course would not be seen from any public scenic vista or highway; therefore, it wo"ld not
have a significant effect on loc:al views. The landscaping on the course is generally considered to have a beneficial
aesthetic impact, The proposed project would have a driving range, which would have night lighting. The driving
range would be situated north of the SDG&E easement and depressed to conceal it from the adjacent commucities.
The driving range lights would be oriented down toward the range and in a northward direction away from the
ad,iacent commucities, The lights would be turned off at 10 p,m,; therefore, no significant impw-.s would occur,
i
f
I
I
I
I
I
-ts-
I
(J
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental ISIND
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 22
i
f
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
XIV, CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would rhe proposal:
a) Disturb paleDntological resour=? 0 . 0 0
b) Disturb archa..-ological resour=? 0 0 0 .
c) Il"tfect historical resources? 0 0 0 .
d) Have the potential to cause a physical change which 0 0 0 .
would affect unique ethnic cuirural values?
e) Restrict exisring religious or sacred uses within the 0 0 0 .
potential impact area?
i
J
1
Explanation: There is a potential tha1 fossiliferous-forming straU would be disturbed. According to the District's
Water Resources Mas-..er Plan Moster ElR, a qualified paleontologist and! or paleontological monitor would be
required to monitor during grading and earthwork on the project site. The qualified paleontologist would anend
any preconstruction meetings to consult with the excavation contractor. The requirement for paleontological
monitoring would be noted on the construction plans. The paleontologist would include monitoring, salvaging,
preparing materials for deposit at a scienrific institution tha1 houses paleontological collections, and preparing a
results report which is described in.r..ail in the District's Water Resources Moster Plan ElR.
I
I
I
A C'.tlrural resources survey was conducted and identified several archaeological sites. which were tested and
determined to not be significant. The project site has no unique ethnic cultural value; therefore, project
implementation would not result in any impacts. The project site has no known religious or sacred uses, thus none
would be impacted.
I
Potentially
Potentially Significant Less Than
Significant Unless Significant No
Impact Mitigated Impact Impact
XV, RECREATION. Would the proposal:
a) locrease the demand for neighborhood or regional 0 0 0 .
parks or other recreational facilities?
b) Affect existing recreational opportunities? 0 0 0 .
I
I
Explanation: The proposed project would not increase the demand for parks or other recreational facilities. The
golf co""e would be open to the public and would serve as a recreational facility and provide additional recreational
opportunities. The proposed project would serve as a recreational facility to adjacent communities.
fJ
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental ISIND
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 23
I
XVI. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFlCA,'iCE
I
a) Does the project have the potential to de<>,p.de the
quality or the environme!lt, substantially reduce
the habitat of a fIsh or wildlife species, cause a fish
or wildlife population to drop below self.
susta.i.n.ing levds, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or restrict
the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal
or ...1im1n~re important examples of the major
periods or California histoty or prehistoty?
b) Does the project have the potential to achieve
short -te~ to the disadvantage of long-term,
environmental goals?
c) Does the project have 1ll1pacts that are
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? ("Cumuhrively considerable" means
that the incremental effectS of a project are
considerable when viewed in connection with the
effects of past projects, the effects of other current
proJectS, and the effectS of probable future
projects)
d) Does the project have environmental effectS
which will cause substantial adverse effectS on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
Potentially
SignifIcant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Potentially
SignifIcant
U cless
Mitigated
.
o
.
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
~o
Impact
c
.
o
.
Explmation: There are significant project specifid cumulative impacts associated with biological impacts; however,
with the incorporation of mitigation measures, these impacts are reduced to a level below significance. Please refe:- to
See-ion vn for more information.
~."
(;
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/NO
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 24
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
xvn. EARLIER A_~AL YSES.
Earlier analyses may be used where, pursuant to the tiering, program EIR, or other CEQA process, one
or more effects have been adequately analyzed in an earlier EIR or negative declaration per See-cion
15063(c)(3)(D).
a) Earlier analyses used. The following studies are available at the Ouy County Water Authority
offices at the address at the top of this form.
Fish and Wildlife Service, 1997, Ot4y.Sweetwater Unit San Diego National Wildlife Refuge -
Environmental Assessment and Land Protection Plan, April.
HELIX Environmental Planning, Inc., 1998. Ot4y Water District 711.3 and 711-4 Reservoirs ,Draft
Mitigated Negative DeclaraIion and Initial Study, August.
b) Explanation: This Initial Study relies in part on the following District Master Plan and associated
MEIR, which analyzed cOnsL.-uC"cion of the 711.3 and 711-4 Reservoirs:
Gallegos and Associates, 1998, Ot4y Water District Golf Course Project .Culrur-J Resource Survey,
July.
Merkel and Associates, Inc., 1998. Ot4y Water District Golf Course Project -Biological Survey of the
Use Area, August.
RECON, 1996. Ottry Water District Water Resources Master Plan -Final Master Environmental Impact
Report, May.
Urban Sysrems Associates, Inc" 1998. Ot4y Water District Golf Course Project -Traffic Survey, August.
c) Authority: Public Resources Code Sections 21083 and 21087,
d) Referen= Public Resources Code Sections 210800, 21080.1, 21080.3, 21082.1, 21083, 21083.3, 21C93,
21094, 21151; Sundstrom 'U. County of Mendocino, 202 Cal. App. 3d 296 (1988); Leonoff 'U. Monterry
Board ofSuper.Jisors, 222 Cal. App. 3d 1337 (1990).
l,
~
P&D Environmental Services
Environmental IS/ND
Otay Water District Golf Course
Page 25
Chapter 19.20
AGRlCULTURAL. ZONE
Sections:
19.20.010 Purpose and Intent.
19.20.020 Permitted uses.
19.20.030 Atxessory uses and buildings.
19.20.040 Conditional uses.
19.20.050 Sign regulations.
19.20.060 Height regulations.
19.20.070 Area, lot width and yard requirements.
19.20.080 Enclosures for .n;m.I<.
19.20.090 Site plan and architectural approva1.
10.20.100 Off-street parking.
19.20.110 Floor area per unit.
19.20.120 Off-street parlcing-Garages.
19.20.130 Performance standards.
19.20.010 Purpose and Intent.
The pWJ>ose of the agricultural zone is to provide a zone with appropriate uses for areas rural in
character, which are undeveloped and not yet ready for urbanization. The zone is intended to preserve in
agricultural use land which may be suited for eventual development in urban uses, and which will encourage
proper timing for the economical provision of utilities, major streets, and other facilities, so that orderly
development will occur. (Ord. 1212 ~1 (pan), 1969; prior code ~33.501(A)).
19.20.020 Permitted uses.
Principal permined uses in the agricultural zone include:
A. Agriculture, as defmed in Section 19.04.010, (See Section 19,58.030 for 'processing plants.');
B, One single-family dwelling per lot or parcel;
C. Public parks.
D. Factory-built home/mobile home on any lot subject to the provisions of Sections 19.58.145 and
19.58.530,
(Ord. 1941 gl (pan), 1981; Ord. 1356 gl (pan), 1971; Ord 1212 gl (part), 1969; prior code g33,501(B)),
19.20.030 Accessory uses and buildings.
Accessory uses and buildings customarily incidental to any of the above uses permined in the
agriculture zone, subject to the regulations for such as required herein, include:
~
1137
ATTACHMENT 6
(R 12/91)
A
:..ivi:1g quaners 0: persons regula:-jy employed on the premises and =ient labor, maximum of two
["",,;1ies; but no: including labOT camps, labor dwellings, or other acco=odations or areas for
=iem labor. [See Section 19,16.040E for provisions for labor dwellings or camps,);
B.
Guest houses (See Definitions Section 19,04,106, "guest house"), subject to the provisions of Section
19.58.020D, and not rented or otherwise conducted as a business;
c.
Customary incidemaJ home occupations, subject to the provisions of Section 19.14.490 of this code;
D,
Offioes incidental and necessary to the conduct of a permined use;
-,
Private garages and parking areas subject to the provisions of Sections 19.58.230 and 19.58.280;
r.
Roadside stane:' no: exceeding four. hundred square feet in floor area, for the sale of agricultural
p:-o:.ucrs grO'WIJ. 0::: the premises;
G.
Public and private nonco=erciaJ recreation areas, uses, and facilities, including counny clubs and
sv.imming pools subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.090;
H.
5:abies and co=ls subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.310,
(Ord, 21~5 ~2 (pan), 19B6; Ord. 212~ ~3, 1985; Ord, 1364 gl (pan), 1971; Ord. 1356 gl (pan), 1971; Ord,
1212 ~1 (parr), 1969; Oni 2124 83,1985; prior code g33.501(C)).
19.20.040 Conditional uses..
Conditional uses in the agricultural zone include:
A Poultry farms, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.240;
B, Kennels, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.190;
C. Ridi..'lg srables, subject to the pro,".sions of Section 19.58.190;
D, Guest ranches, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.270;
E. Qua.--rers, acco=odations, or areas for =ient labor in excess of two families, such as labor
dwellings or camps, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.200;
F. Electric substations and gas regulators, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.140;
G. Unclassified uses, see Chapter 19.54;
H. Stables and corrals, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.310;
L Hay and feed stores, retail, subject to the provisions of Section 19.58.175;
J. Plan! nUl"Series,
(Ord. 1604 gl, 1975; Oni. 1356 gl (part), 1971; Ord. 1212 gl (part), 1969; prior code g33.501(D)).
~f
(R 12/91)
1138
_._._._.._.___~___'__._w._
19.20.050 Sign regulations.
(
See Sections 19,60.020 and 19.60.030 for pennit requirement and 2?provaJ procedur.e,
A
Types of signs allowed: Residential (wall or freesrancting) subject to the following:
1. Wall: Maximum area, one and one-half square feet; or
2. Freestancting: Maximum area, one and one-half square feet; maximum height, six feet. The sign
shall maintain a ten-foot front setback.
B. Other signs: See Chapter 19.60 for public and quasi-public (Section 19,60.310); directional (Section
19.60.340); warning and insttuctional (Section 19.60.350); real estate (Section 19,60.380); residential
identification (Section 19.60.390); unclassified uses (Sectio::t 19.60Aoo); and business
(Section 19.60-430),
C. Other regulations: All signs are subject to the regulations of Sections 19,60.040 through 19.60.130
and to the standards of Sections 19.60,140 through 19.60.210.
D, Nonconforming Signs: See Sections 19,60.090 through 19.60,120.
(Ord. 157581 (pan), 1974; Ord, 135681 (pa.--r), 1971; Ord 1212 g1 (par:), 1969; prior code g33.501(E)).
19.20.060 Height regulations,
(
No sttucture shall exceed two and one-half stories or thirty-five feet in height, except as provided in
Section 19.16.040, (Ord. 1356 g1 (pan), 1971; Ord, 1212 g1 (pan), 1969; prior code g33.501(F)).
19.20.070 Area, lot width and yard requirements.
Tne following minimum requirements shall be observed in the agricultural zone, except where
modified for conditional uses: See Sections 19.16,020, 19.16.050, 19.16.060 and 19,16.080 ior exceptions
and modifications,
Yards in Feet
Classi-
fication
Lot
Areas
Lot
Width
(Ft.)
Maximum
Stories
Front and
Exterior
Side Yard
One
Side Yard
Both
Side Yards
Rear
A-8
A-X
8 acres 300 2 1/2 50. 20
as designated on zoning map but not less than eight acres.
50
50
. or not less than that specified on the building line map shall be provided and maintained. The setback
requirements shown on the adopted building line map for Chula Vista shall take precedence over the
setbacks required in the zoning disnict.
(Ord, 1356 g1 (pan), 1971; Ord. 1212 g1 (pan), 1969; prior code g33.501(G)).
!
"='
1139
(R 12/91)
---.--..-----...-
F'r8C:- J:;hrl Hammond To Klnl VanderBle
Date 2/8/1999 Time- 633-10 PM
Page 2 01 2
SWEETW A TEn
Community
Planning
Group
5 January 1999
To Otay Water District
2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd
Spring Valley, CA 91978
Attn: Michael Coleman
Subject: Proposed Golf Course
At its regular meeting on 3 November 1998 the Sweetwater Community Planning Group
considered the Otay Water District's proposal for a Golf Course to the east of the
Sweetwater Planning Area, Recognizing that this project will be on land that is in the
Chula Vista Sphere of influence and will be annexed, we welcome the opportunity to offer
the following recommendations,
1. The Sweetwater Community Planning Group strongly recommends that a
north-south pedestrian/equestrian trail easement be provided to connect the
southern Chula Vista developments and "green belt" to the preserve to the
north. This trail is a necessary addition to the existing and planned trails in
both Chula Vista and the Sweetwater Planning Area.
2, Night lighting on the Golf Course and Driving Range should be prohibited.
Allowing intense lighting in an area next to endangered habitat will cause
significant negative impact on the wildlife,
These recommendations were passed unanimously as a motion with 12 members
present and voting.
It should also be noted that several members took exception to the lack of disclaimer that
the "Audubon Signature" designation has nothing to do with The Audubon Society, This
should be ciearly stated and there should be some discussion that the Audubon Society
hasn't reviewed or commented on the project (uniess they actually have and their
comments are included in the project description and environmental documentation)
~_G~O-- ~
John A Hammond
Chairperson
P.O Box 460, Bonita, California 91908-0460
vr
ATTACHMENT 7
THF --ry OF a-nJL.6. VISTA DISa..OSURf ~ TEMENT
You are required 10 file. Slalcment of DI~closure of certain ownership or financial intercsts. paymcnlS, or campaign
conlrit>utiDns. on aU malle~ which will rcquirc discrctionaf)' action on the part of the City Council. Planning Commission. and
aU other offiCIal bodlCS, The following information must be disclose.d:
L UsI Ihe names of ~U pcrsons having a financial inlerest in the propeny which is the SUbjCCl of the application or the
contract, e,g.. owncr, applicant. contractor, subcontractor. malcrial supplier,
Otay Water District
2. If any person" identified pursuanl \() (1) above is a corporation or pannership, lisl the names of all individuals owning
more lhan JO% of lhc sharcs in lhe corporalion or o""Illng any pannership inlcrcsl in the partnership,
NOT APPLICABLE
3, If any person" idcntified pursuanl 10 (J) above i~ non-profit organizalion or a trust, list the namcs of any person
servmg as dircclor of the non-profit organization or as truste<: or bcnd\::iary or trustor of the trust.
NOT "PPLICABLF:
4, Have you had morc than S250 wonh of busines~ lransactcd wilh any mcmber of thc City staff, Boards, Commissions,
Commiuee.s, and Council within thc pasl twclve months? Yes_ No..1L If ycs, please indicate pcrson(s):
5, Plcase idcnlify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors who
you have 8S5igned 10 rcprcsent you before the City in this maner.
Michael Coleman Otay Water District
Mark Rowson Latitude 33
Betty Dehoney P&D
Mikp Srrnnp :A.111r1 hnff
Cary Bickler Cary Bickler Design
Mitrh Phil1inp V~n n)Tkp ~ :A.~~nc,
6, Have you and/or your offict:rs or agcnl~, in lhe aggrcgale, contribule.d more than SI,OOO to a Councilmember in the
current or preceding eleclion period' Yes_ NoL If yes, state wbieb Councilmember(s):
" " "(NOTE: Attacb additioaa! pap . D
ctor/applicant
Date:
September 8. 1998
Keith
Lewinger, GM Otay Water District
Print or type name of contractor/applicant
~~
. P~n'l is ikfmw 4r_' "All)' UlliJ''I~Di. jinf'L '()'pa'fP1~p. }OJIIJ ~r(_ t11JCX,lUlorJ.. scxUll dub, frDtrrYJAI flfpmiuu,OI(, 'Df1'O'tuJD'
Ilw IJ1I4 Ill')' oliw CO&l'U)', cuy wui COWIl1'), Ctl)' tnWuclpaJIIY. .iu:zncl, or other poilucGJ SUbJJVWOlI. (Y 1lIt)- Oliltl &"OUp tN COIIIJWUJ A TT ACHMENT 8
PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT
~-
Item:
Meeting Date: 02/24/99
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: PCC-99-26 - Request to construct, operate and
maintain five 75 foot high monopole type AM transmission antenna
on property owned by the Otay Water District west of EastLake
High School - Applicant: Pacific Spanish Network, Inc. a.k.a.
KURS 1040 AM, San Diego
The Applicant is proposing to construct, operate and maintain five 75 foot high monopole type
AM transmission antennas on 6,34 acres of a larger 11 acre site which is owned by the Otay
Water District (OWD). The site is located approximately 2,600 feet south of Otay Lakes Road
and 2,100 feet southwest of EastLake High School. The Site surrounded by Village Five in the
Otay Ranch on the north, south and west (see Attachment 1). Rather than constructing the
traditional lattice tower normally associated with AM radio transmission, the Applicant will be
utilizing a newer technology that uses large monopole/whip type antenna.
The Environmental Review Coordinator reviewed the application and directed the preparation of
a Mitigated Negative Declaration for IS-99-l5 (Attachment 2).
RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission recommend to the City Council
approval of PCC-99-26, a request to construct, operate and maintain five 75 foot high monopole
type AM transmission antenna on property owned by the Otay Water District.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: The Resource Conservation Commission
considered Initial Study IS-99-l5 at its meeting of February 15, 1999 and voted 4-0-3
recommending adoption, The RCC also recommended that the balance of the subject parcel be
kept in open space.
DISCUSSION:
L Site Characteristics
The vacant site consists of a rounded low ridge top, ranging in elevation from
approximately 575 feet to 625 feet above sea level. The site has been disturbed by
agricultural activities of the Otay Ranch and by grading in the area of a proposed road,
The subject parcel was once part of the Otay Ranch but was given to the Otay Water
District (OWD) for use as a reservoir. OWD may construct a water reservoir on the same
parcel just east of the area where the radio towers are proposed to be located, The plans
to construct the reservoir are pending but may not come to fruition. The area is zoned PQ
(Public/Quasi-public) and the General Plan designates the site as Public/Quasi-Public,
PCC-99-26: Pacific Spanish Network
Item No. _, Page No, 2
February 24, 1999
The subject parcel is part of a larger OWD complex which consists of two parcels. These
parcels are divided by a strip of land that will eventually be used as a pedestrian
connection across SR-125 to the EastLake master planned community.
2, General Plan. Zoning and Land Use
Site:
North:
South:
East:
West:
GENERAL PLAN
Public/Quasi-Public
Low-Med Res,
Low-Med Res,
SR-125
Low-Med Res,
ZONING
PQ
PC
PC
PC/Trans,
PC
CURRENT LAND USE
Vacant
Vacant (Village 5 of O.R.)
Vacant (Village 5 of O,R.)
Vacant
Vacant (Village 5 of O,R,)
3. Proposal
The proposed project consists of the installation of five monopole radio antennas mounted
on buried concrete slabs and having an approximate height of 75 to 76 feeL In addition
to five antennas, one transmitter shed measuring 200 sq,ft. and having a height of 10 feet
will be constructed, Each antenna will have 36 buried radial lines to aid in the
transmission of the AM signal. Each antenna will be surrounded by an eight foot high
chain link fence and landscaping, A six foot high chain link fence will be installed around
the perimeter of the 6.34 acre lease area and additional landscaping will be planted on the
property line.
The remainder of the parcel is not part of PCC-99-26, and no other planned OWD
facilities are part of this project. The City Council Resolution specifically excludes any
future plans the OWD may have for the remainder of the parcel and approval of PCC-99-
26 does not approve, accept or acknowledge OWD future plans for the remainder of the
parcel.
4, Analysis
When reviewing this project, staff considered a number of issues, including location,
visibility, access, land use compatibility, potential of interference with consumer electronic
equipment, and electro-magnetic/radio frequency (EMF/RF) emissions. The applicant
addressed these issues in a letter dated 1217/98 (Attachment 3). A summary is provided
below:
Location
Staff requested information from the Applicant as to why this particular location was
chosen as the site for their facility. The Applicant submitted a letter dated 12/28/98
PCC-99-26: Pacific Spanish Network
Item No, _, Page NO.3
February 24, 1999
(Attachment 4) in which they list the sites they considered, some of which are in Chula
Vista. It should be noted, however, that all sites on the list attached to the letter are
owned by the Otay Water District. The Applicant considered other properties owned by
the San Ysidro School District, Sweetwater High School District, Southwestern
Community College, City of National City, City of San Diego, Naval District, Sweetwater
Authority, and the County of San Diego. In all, the Applicant considered over 150 sites,
According to verbal reports to staff at several meetings with the Appl icant, the only other
site given serious consideration was the OWD property currently under review by the City
as a golf course located just north of Rolling Hills Ranch. This site was eventually
rejected after concerns were raised by the developer of the proposed golf course. Given
the remaining considered sites, the Applicant asserts that this is the only one that works
for their proposed facility based on FCC regulations and standards,
Visibility
The placement of the five monopoles will be lower than and to the northwest of the high
point of the knoll on which they are to be located (see Attachment 1). Immediately to the
northwest and west of the monopole area the Otay Ranch Company will be constructing
single family dwellings in Neighborhoods R-30 and R-31 of Village Five, Otay Ranch,
Because the knoll is at a higher relative elevation than the two neighborhoods, staff was
concerned about visibility impacts.
In order to address any negative visual impacts, the Applicant is proposing landscaping
along the property lines that abut the residential areas as well as around each tower, It
will be consistent with the Otay Ranch landscaping standards, The landscaping plan
proposes various types of eucalyptus, oak, sycamore and olive trees, some of which will
eventually grow to block the antennas from view. The landscape plan has been reviewed
by the City's Landscape Planner who recommends approval of the plan.
Staff spoke with representatives regarding visibility impacts from areas in Telegraph
Canyon Estates and EastLake who indicated they had no concerns over visibility.
However, the Otay Ranch Company expressed concerns because they own land
immediately to the north and west of the Project where they plan to build detached single
family dwellings in Neighborhoods R-30 and R-31.
The Otay Ranch Company representatives suggested that the landscaping include
eucalyptus trees in 24" boxes. Staff consulted the Landscape Planner who stated that it
is best if eucalyptus trees grow best if not in boxes and should therefore be planted in 15
gallon placements, This allows the roots to grow faster than if they were planted in 24"
boxes, However, staff is requiring that 25% of the perimeter trees be a combination of
California Sycamore, Coast Live Oak, and Fruitless Olive in 24" boxes and the remaining
PCC-99-26: Pacific Spanish Network
Item No, _, Page No.4
February 24, 1999
75% be a combination of Sugar Gum, Lehmann's Mallee, Red lronbark, Australian
Willow and Cajeput Tree in the 15 gallon size, The remaining understory plants would
remain as shown on the current landscaping plan,
Access
Immediately to the north of the subject property is an east-west trail corridor designed to
serve the residential areas. To the north of that corridor is another OWD property from
which the towers will be accessed. The proposed access requires incorporation into
already approved improvement plans and must be designed for the type of tra ffic that will
use it (e.g., service trucks, heavy equipment, etc.). This is addressed through a condition
of approval.
Land Use Compatibility
Staff has concluded that the proposed towers are compatible with the proposed nearby
residential land uses based on the fact that there will be adequate landscaping to screen the
towers from the residential areas and because the towers will not generate traffic other
than periodic inspection visits,
Potential for Interference
Of primary concern to staff was the potential for interference with emergency response
radios (police, fire, ambulance). Upon investigation, the Fire Department and Public
Works Department concluded the AM radio transmissions would not interfere with the
radios in emergency vehicles, Additionally, both school districts confirmed there would
be no interference with their communications.
There was also concern with the potential of interference with household electronics,
mobile telephones, etc. Staff contacted Shippenberg Township, Franklin Borough,
Pennsylvania as this is the only other place in the lower 48 states where this technology
is being used, The facility is located about one mile outside of town, but according to Mr.
Robert Weaver, of the Shippenberg Township, they have not experienced any interference.
Staff also contacted several wireless communications providers who stated that because of
the difference in transmission frequencies, mobile telephones are not affected by such
facilities.
The municipal code prohibits interference pursuant to Section 17.24.030, which reads:
PCC-99-26: Pacific Spanish Network
Item No, _, Page No, 5
February 24, 1999
"17.24.030 Interference with radio or television reception prohibited.
It is unlawful for any person to operate in the city any device,
appliance, equipment or apparatus generating or causing high frequency
oscillations or radiations which interfere with radio broadcast receiving
apparatus or wireless receiving apparatus or television receiving apparatus."
The issue of potential interference to consumer electronic devices is also addressed in the
Engineering Statement dated 2 October 1998 by Mullaney Engineering, Inc. (Attachment
5). According to the report, "The FCC recognizes that broadcast stations operating in full
compliance with the FCC's technical rules may still cause interference to nearby consumer
electronic devices. Consequently, the FCC has established Rules setting forth the
responsibility of station licensees and permittees to correct certain categories of
interference in a timely manner and at the stations licensee's expense."
This is similar to section 17,24,030 to the extent that it is unlawful to cause interference,
however, the City's ordinance, from a time perspective, is open ended, whereas the FCC
requires corrections within one year from the start of programming utilizing the new
antenna, Since the development of Village Five is just starting and residents will move
into the neighborhoods after the one year correction period, it is staff's opinion that this
time period should be extended,
Applicant's letter of December 7, 1998 (Attachment 3) includes a Supplemental
Engineering Statement dated 4 December 1998, also prepared by Mullaney Engineering,
Inc, This supplement includes an updated map of the one in the Mullaney report of 2
October 1998 (Attachment 5) titled Proposed KURS Blanketing Contours. This is the area
wherein the FCC requires stations to be financially responsible for correcting any
recognized blanketing interference problems within one year from the start of
transmission. The supplement points out that "these contours are not meant to indicate the
area wherein interference will definitely occur. '" Field tests have shown that the 1 V 1M
criteria vastly overstates the interference potential of an AM broadcast station,"
Based on this information, the Applicant has committed to correcting any interference
problems over the life of the facility, A condition is included in the resolution of approval
requiring the Applicant to correct interference problems within the FCC area for the life
of the facility,
EMF/RF Emissions
In their Engineering Statement dated 2 October 1998 (Attachment 5), Mullaney
Engineering, Inc. addressed this issue, The conclusion was that the worst case distance
for human exposure to EMF/RF emissions is 2 meters (6,6 feet) for both daytime and
PCC-99-26: Pacific Spanish Network
Item No. _, Page No, 6
February 24, 1999
nighttime operations. Reducing the risk of exposure will be accomplished by placing an
eight foot high fence around the base of each tower a minimum of 2 meters from the
tower. This will comply with FCC guidelines related to human exposure to EMF/RF
emissions,
CONCLUSION: Staff has concluded that the proposed AM radio transmission towers will not
adversely affect the local area and is compatible with surrounding area, However, the project
should be conditioned to require the station to correct interference beyond the one year FCC
period. The Applicant has offered to correct problems over the life time of the towers. Staff has
added the correction requirement to the conditions of approval.
Attachments
L Locator Map and Site Plans
2, Mitigated Negative Declaration for IS-99-15
3, Letter dated 12/7/98 from La Super K 1040 AM addressing issues
4, Letter dated 12/28/98 from La Super K 1040 AM re: sites considered for proposed facility
5, Engineering Statement dated 2 October 1998 by Mullaney Engineering, Inc,
6. Disclosure Statement
H :\HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\KURS\9926PC RPT
RESOLUTION NO. PCC-99-26
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHUlA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CHUlA VISTA
CITY COUNCil APPROVE CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-
99-26, A REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE AND
MAINTAIN FIVE MONOPOLE-TYPE AM TRANSMISSION
TOWERS ON PROPERTY OWNED BY THE OTAY WATER
DISTRICT IN THE VICINITY OF THE OTAY RANCH
RECIT AlS
WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of this resolution is
diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated
herein by this reference, and commonly known as APN 643-020-25; and
WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a Conditional Use Permit was
submitted to the Planning and Building Department on November 20, 1998 by
Pacific Spanish Network, Inc., a,k,a. KURS 1040 AM San Diego ("Applicant");
and
WHEREAS, said application requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit for
the construction, operation and maintenance of five monopole-type AM
transmission towers proposed to be located on a portion of APN 643-020-25
approximately 2,600 feet south of Otay lakes Road and about 2,100 feet
southwest fo Eastlake High School ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator reviewed the application and
directed the preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for IS-99-15
determining that mitigation measures are required to reduce potential
enviornmental impacts identified in the initial study for thei Project to a level
below significant; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission, in order to render a recommendation to
the City Council on this matter, set the time and place for a hearing on said
Conditional Use Permit PCC-99-26 and notice of said hearing, together with its
purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in
the City and its mailing to property owners and residents within 500 feet of the
exterior boundaries of the property at least ten days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely
7:00 p.m, February 24, 1999, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue,
before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed; and
H :\HOME\PLANN ING\MARTIN\KURS\9926PC.RES
f
Resolution No. PCC-99-26
Page No.2
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission considered all reports, evidence, and
testimony presented at the public hearing with respect to this application; and
WHEREAS, from the facts presented, the Planning Commission hereby
determines that granting the requested Conditional Use Permit PCC-99-26 is
consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan and the California
Government Code, and that the public necessity, convenience, general welfare
and good zoning practice support the request,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT, the Planning Commission
recommends that the City Council adopt the attached draft City Council Resolution
approving Conditional Use Permit PCC-99-26 in accordance with the findings and
subject to the conditions contained in the attached draft City Council Resolution.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the Planning Commission hereby determines
that this recommendation is consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan and
all other applicable Plans, and that the public necessity, convenience, general welfare
and good planning practice support the approval.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this Resolution shall be transmitted
to the City Council and the Applicant.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 26th day of February 1999 by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
John Willett, Chair
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
H: \HOME\PLANNING\MARTIN\KURS\9926PC. RES
l..
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA APPROVING CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT PCC-99-26, A
REQUEST TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE AND MAINTAIN FIVE
MONOPOLE-TYPE AM TRANSMISSION TOWERS ON PROPERTY
OWNED BY THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT IN THE VICINITY OF
THE OTAY RANCH, AND MAKING THE NECESSARY FINDINGS
I. RECITALS
1 . Project Site
WHEREAS, the property which is the subject matter of this resolution is
identified as Exhibit "A," attached hereto and desi9nated as APN 643-020-25
("Property"); and
2. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, Pacific Spanish Network, Inc., a.k,a. KURS 1040 AM San Diego
("Applicant") filed a duly verified application for a Conditional Use Permit on
November 20, 1998; and
WHEREAS, said application requests approval of a Conditional Use Permit for
the construction, operation and maintenance of five monopole-type AM
transmission towers proposed to be located on a portion of APN 643-020-25
approximately 2,600 feet south of Otay Lakes Road and about 2,100 feet
southwest of EastLake High School and adjacent to Village Five, Otay Ranch
("Project"); and
3. Environmental Review Coordinator Determination
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator reviewed the application and
directed the preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration for IS-99-15 and
determined that mitigation measures are required to reduoe potential
environmental impacts identified in the initial study for this Projeot to a level
below significant; and
5. Planning Commission Record on Application
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the
Project on February 24, 1999 at which time the Planning Commission voted to
recommend that the City Council approve the Project in accordance with staff's
recommendation and the findings and conditions listed below; and
6. City Council Record on Application
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on the Project
and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its
J
Resolution No.
Page 2
publication in the "Star-News," a newspaper of general circulation in the City,
and its mailing to property owners and residents within 500 feet of the exterior
boundaries of the property at least ten days prior to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, a hearing was held at the time and place as advertised in the "Star-
News," and noted in the mailed notice on March 16, 1999 in the Council
Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was
thereafter closed; and
WHEREAS, the approval of PCC-99-26 does not constitute the City's approval,
acceptance or acknowledgment of any future plans the Otay Water District may
have for the remainder of subject property.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL finds, determines, and resolves as follows:
II. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidenoe introduced before the Planning Commission at their
public hearing on this projeot held on February 24, 1999 and the minutes and resolution
resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
III. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The City Council hereby finds that Mitigated Negative Declaration for IS-99-15,
attached hereto as Exhibit "B", has been prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR guidelines
and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and hereby
determines that mitigation measures are required to reduce potential environmental
impacts identified in the initial study for this Project to a level below significant; and
IV, INCORPORATION OF ALL REASONABLE MITIGATION MEASURES
The City does hereby adopt and incorporate herein as conditions for this approval all
applicable mitigation measures, as set forth in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-99-15.
V, CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT FINDINGS
The City Counoil of the City of Chula Vista does hereby make the findings required by
the City's rules and regulations for the issuance of conditional use permits, as
hereinbelow set forth, and sets forth, thereunder, the evidentiary basis, in addition to
all other evidence in the record, that permits the stated findings to be made.
A. That the proposed use at the location is necessary or desirable to provide a
service or facility which will contribute to the general well being of the
neighborhood or the community.
The proposed project is desirable at this location in that the site provides a location that
is acceptable by the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) for the location of
'of
Resolution No.
Page 3
such a facility and in that the Applicant has asserted that the Project site is the only
site that meets the FCC's requirements for placing such facilities.
B. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular case, be
detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or
working in the vicinity or injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity.
The proposed Project is compatible with surrounding residential and institutional land
uses in that the Project will generate minimal traffic and will be screened from
residential areas by adequate landsoaping,
C. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and conditions specified
in the code for such use.
The conditions of approval, as applied to the Project, are such that the Applicant is
capable of oomplying with each one in that each condition was crafted so as to
implement the Project, yet preserve the public health safety and welfare.
D. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not adversely affect the
General Plan of the City or the adopted plan of any government agency.
The Projeot oonforms to all elements of the General Plan, the Otay Ranch General
Development Plan and other adopted plans affecting the Project Site and therefore will
not have an adverse impact thereon.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL DOES HEREBY APPROVE THE
PROJECT SUBJECT TO THE CONDITIONS SET FORTH BELOW:
VI. CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The City Council hereby grants Conditional Use Permit PCC-99-26 subject to the
following conditions whereby the Applicant shall:
GENERAL/PRELIMINARY
1. Implement the Project as submitted, unless otherwise modified herein.
2. Comply with all requirements of the Federal Communications Commission
(FCC), Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) and all Municipal Code
Requirements, and speoifically Section 17.24.030 of the Municipal Code, to the
satisfaction of the Director of the Planning and Building Department. Violation
of any federal, state or local regulations may cause this approval to be reviewed
by the Zoning Administrator for modification, revocation or referral to the
Planning Commission for appropriate aotion,
3. Comply with and implement all mitigation measures as found in Mitigated
Negative Declaration IS-99-15, to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review
Coordinator.
r
Resolution No,
Page 4
4. Prior to the first transmission and to the satisfaction of the Director of the
Planning and Building Department, paint each monopole flat gray.
5. At submittal for building permits, submit an irrigation plan, and revised
landscape plan to include 25% of the perimeter tree combination as California
Sycamore, Coast Live Oak, and Fruitless Olive in 24" boxes and the remaining
75% as a combination of Sugar Gum, Lehmann's Mallee, Red lronbark,
Australian Willow and Cajeput Tree in the 15 gallon size. Subject landscape
plan shall be prepared by a landscape architect registered in the State of
California.
Prior to the first transmission, install all landscaping and irrigation in accordance
with the approved revised landscape plan, to the satisfaction of the Director of
the Planning and Building Department. Applioant shall maintain landscaping and
irrigation in acoordanoe with the Chula Vista Landscape Manual.
6. Provide brush control of the site for the life of the facility, to the satisfaction of
the Fire Marshal.
7. Install a minimum six (6) foot tall tubular steel picket fence along all residential
areas. Subjeot wall design shall comply with the ViI/age Five, Otay Ranch
design standards as shown in Exhibit "C". Said wall shall be maintained by the
Applicant as long as the facility exists on the Project site. In the event
Applicant ceases use of the facility and removes it from the Project site,
Property Owner shall be responsible for oontinued maintenance of the subjeot
wall.
8. Prior to the start of construction, submit plans for the acoess road. Said access
road shall account for planned pedestrian aocess to EastLake already approved
and established for the area. Applicant shall cooperate with the City and other
interested property owners/developers in the area in planning and constructing
the access road.
9. Submit all plans to the Crime Prevention Unit of the Chula Vista Police
Department and implement any suggestions resulting therefrom, to the
satisfaction of the Chief of Police.
10. Prior to the start of transmission, inform the Director of the Planning and
Building Department in writing of the first day of transmission from the facility.
11. Prior to issuanoe of any building permit and to the satisfaction of the Director
of the Planning and Building Department, submit a oopy of the approved
tentative map(s) for Village One and Village Five of the Otay Ranch with an
overlay of the blanketing interference contour(s) (1 VIM).
12. Document all complaints resulting from the operations of the AM transmission
facility within the blanketing interference oontour(s) and the actions undertaken
by the radio station to remedy same, and, beginning one year after the start of
(.,
Resolution No.
Page 5
transmission, submit an annual report to the Zoning Administrator outlining each
complaint and the remedy.
13. Assume the financial burden for oorrecting blanketing interference caused by the
Project to surrounding consumer electronio and communication devices in
perpetuity, as determined by and to the satisfaction of the Zoning
Administrator. Applicant shall correct or otherwise address all complaints within
two weeks of the submittal of the complaint in writing to the radio station. If
complaints are not corrected or otherwise address, this approval may be
reviewed by the Zoning Administrator of additional oonditions of approval,
revocation or referral to the Planning Commission for appropriate action,
14. Not install, cooperate in or allow the installation of additional radio transmission
towers, buildings, or other such infrastructure without first obtaining all
appropriate permits from the City of Chula Vista and State and federal agencies.
15. Implement all terms, covenants and oonditions contained herein, to the
satisfaction of the Director of the Planning and Building Department, unless
otherwise specified. If any of the terms, covenants or conditions contained
herein shall fail to occur or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and
maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and
maintained acoordin9 to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or
modify all approvals herein granted including issuance of building permits, deny,
or further condition the subsequent approvals that are derived from the
approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their
compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. The
applicant shall be notified ten days in advance prior to any of the above actions
being taken by the City and shall be given the opportunity to remedy any
deficiencies identified by the City.
VII. APPROVAL OF CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
The City Council does hereby approve Conditional Use Permit PCC-99-26 subject to the
conditions set forth on Section VI listed above and based upon the findings and
determinations on the record for this Project.
IIX, CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained aocording to their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted, deny, revoke or further condition
issuance of all future building permits issued under the authority of approvals herein
granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said
conditions or seek damages for their violation.
7
Resolution No.
Page 6
IX. EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
Applicant shall execute and have notarized the attached Agreement (Attachment
"A"), indicating the Applicant has read, understands and agrees to the conditions
of approval contained herein, and will implement same.
X. INDEMNIFICATION/HOLD HARMLESS
Applicant/operator shall and does hereby agree to indemnify, protect, defend and
hold harmless City, its Council members, officers, employees, agents and
representatives, from and against any and all liabilities, losses, damages, demands,
claims and costs, including court costs and attorneys' fees (collectively,
"liabilities") incurred by the City arising, directly or indirectly, from (a) City's
approval and issuance of this Conditional Use Permit, (b) City's approval or
issuance of any other permit or action, whether discretionary or non-discretionary,
in connection with the use contemplated herein, and @ Applicant's installation and
operation of the facility permitted hereby. Applicant/operator shall acknowledge
their agreement to this provision by executing the Agreement of this Conditional
Use Permit where indicated. Applicant's/operator's compliance with this provision
is an express condition of this Conditional Use Permit and this provision shall be
binding on any and all Applicant's/operator's successors and assigns.
XI. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
The City Council directs the Environmental Review Coordinator to post a Notice of
Determination and file the same with the City Clerk,
XII. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the Redevelopment Agency that its adoption of this Resolution
is dependent upon the enforceability of each and every term, provision and
condition herein stated; and that in the event that anyone or more terms,
provisions or conditions are determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be
invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution and the permit shall be deemed to
be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Planning and Building Director
John M. Kaheny
City Attorney
H:\HQME\PLANNINGIMARTIN\KURS\9926CC.RES
t
Resolution No.
Page 7
ATTACHMENT A
AGREEMENT BY AND BETWEEN
THE CITY COUNCIL OF
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND
PACIFIC SPANISH NETWORK, INC., A.K.A. KURS 1040 AM SAN DIEGO
AND OTAY WATER DISTRICT
RELATED TO THE CONDITIONAL APPROVAL OF PCC 99-26
The applicant/property owner shall execute this document by signing the lines provided
below, said execution indicating that the Applicant/property owner has read,
understand and agree to the conditions contained in Resolution No. , and will
implement same to the satisfaction of the City. Upon execution, this document and
a copy of Resolution No. shall be recorded with the County Clerk of the County
Clerk of the County of San Diego, at the sole expense of the property owner and/or
Applicant, and a signed, stamped copy returned to the City Clerk and a copy of same
to the Planning and Building Department. Failure to return a signed and stamped copy
of this recorded within thirty days or recordation to the City Clerk and a copy of same
to the Planning and Building Department shall indicate the property owner/applicant's
desire that the project, and the corresponding application for building permits and/or
business license, be held in abeyance without approval.
Signature of Representative of
Pacifio Spanish Network, Inc,
KURS Radio 1040AM
Date
Signature of Representative of
the Otay Water District
Date
,
KEs R\),
OTAY LA
EASTLAKE
HIGH
SCHOOL
\
\
\
PROJECT
lOCATION
\
\
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PACIFIC SPANISH NETWORK INC PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPLICANT: ' CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PROJECT Otay Water District Parcel Request: Proposal for construction, operation and
ADORESS: South of Otay Lakes Rd, maintenance of five (5) 75-foot tall radio transmission
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: monopoles,
NORTH No Scale PCC-99-26 ID
.
<(
.
-
.c
..1._~
X
W
h: \home\plann ing\carlos\locators\pcc9926, cdr 2/9/99
~'
l'
?
_c,
f. DC;
1
:,j
i
~ " ;--
r '--~.
~. ."t.;
<
(.- L-_,
,
"
gI
~
---------
-."-
~~
"
....::.>,,~
-,
--If
-
-
-
-
~t
. '--~;-""'Z:
,
--~
~~h
\~~~f
t:~:
s ~\/\
~,,"~
d~t
-------------
---- - -----
-
-----
,""", ii ~-
<"
lL
F'
~~f
,,-;
~. ;
"
~E'~'
- ;,-i:.,:'
- - ~: ~
- -..
.
~
c
.'
o
~,
.
.
.
.
, '.
-"'~ -
::::"'"'-
0( :-~.~~
":O._l
--
-
;;~,:. ':
:- ~ --,,~'
..:-'"
:- - '- ; : ~
.. t.f-~~ _~~
"~"" :'~, ~
,
~ :~;;f
" .' ~
~ :;~
--
-- "O',"",',~'.'''' --
'------~
~
.-------
-
!~
::'i:o,:
~,~>
,
'Ill!:
~n~:
=
- <
cJ
- <
- ~
-
"
> "
.'
-
..
.
.
c ""~
- "'::~
~ ::.- "'t'
'-- ~,~~
.t.,.,
~"-:'
'c~_
.:....,
,O;..".fI:J!'
~
-
-
<
-
-
-,
~' : :: ~ ~ ;
;- - " ~ ~ .
: . ~
;' ~ ~"~
'~
'''''C'
------;~:;::~?};~~~:i-_\
--- ,_._..~--
-;,:.::: ':...~.,,'''': '.~"'-, .., .." I!i :--:~~,;;\
- ',"K,
. =-f
-J,;~-J!~::-~~:,m
. ::1:': ".
~-.:----
'~\
'--
-~-:-
'.'
'--.--.-~
"
'c'
.. ~ ,
"'-c. .
"---,-,-.,
o , ~
:..
~ - ,
- t', ~ ,_ ~ _ :
'.
.
~ ~
'"""0':
~ ~~'~'~,r~,~,::
! ~~~mm
immm
.,
-,
',<.-
".. ~~~
() ~ _.'
~~-~~~.
~Hi~, ii
Wi ~;;'=~~f
\I.. ~~~8~~ .,.
o
"
/~
C':, ~
-~.:'"
~tH
2--'-~.:.!.
G3'SCoc':Jbc
--~--~-- ". '
"~"'~'Q' ....~-~~
- f
U:: :-
<
r ";
-';;. ':.::.---
~
"
-/
~._-'
<'
"
."~,'
~
<--...:::---
"
--
'<.:
:;:;-~---
-------
,
~ ~ ~
.L;i"'N
< ~.
< .
. "
>
..-
..- .
.
'~-t.
"'.~ \
L." .
\H;'~~-"
---,~---
- '
-- I
-
,-
,
,
i
I
-
-
-
-
~
-
::
-
.-
-
-
-
-
::
~
'"
::..
<
~
~
~
-
-.
-'-
-
-
-
-
-
<
<
-
<
-
-
-
~
-
.-
-
..
<
'"
~
-
"..
-
-
-
=-
~
-
-
-
-
-
, < "-
, -
\, -
- <
,
< - ~
-
- ~
\ , <
- -
-
.-
J:
\
, .">:'::~
-
~" ....
".,-.....
"',-
""""""'"
, - .
t-~
..,.~
E~<":&,
~~.
",:..-----
-
.
Co
t.~
--~", ~~f
.' ',~;
~ "
~ ~,
e"
n~
.:"c
--
~J.~
n,
'0
\~
:,.:{. - t" -==- =:: .
-E---~\~~~ ~"i-7~o:~::: ____
It
~
~
-
--
s
-
"-
,
~.
:0
~
=
,
-
.
><
-
........
-
Mitigated NegatIve Declaration
I,
i )
, ,
\..!
\..
"
?r:JJJ:,CT ~A]E:
KlJRS Radio Ant:o:nnas
P?JECT LOCL_-::10N:
A 63L a;:, kas:o:d Dortion ofland located on CY.a'\' Water DE::l:,
. ~
(OWD) property, about 1,600 f:o::o:t south of Otay Lakes Read
and 2.400 f:o::o:1 w:o:st of :2.astlake Parl:v:ay Drive and :~::
E2Stlakt Gr~~ns R~sid~ntja] communi!)'. Cl'0" of Chula \ -is:'2
L_,,::::::SSOR'S :<'?,CEL NO,
643-020-25-0()
Pr:JJ3CT A??UCA1\,T
Pacific Spanish N:o:rwork a,k,a KURS-l 040 Radio Station
CL-5:::NO,:
1S-99-15
DATE: January 11, 1999
A, PToj eGt Serring
Tne envITo=entaJ setting consists ofhi]]y knD]]S and corresponding slopes, Tne project sile
is located south of the Oray Water District water reservoir facility and north of the future
Palomar Road and west of the proposed future State Route 125, The site includes a rounded
low ridge lop, ranging in elevation from approximately 575-625 feet. The site has been
dismrb:O:Q by agricult!h-aJ activities and by grading in the area of the proposed access roac,
Tne site is zoned PC (planned Co=lI1'rity) and the General Plan designates the site as Pupilc
& Quasi Public,
Access to the site is through Otay Lakes Road. a designated 6-lane major arterial. The Otay
Water :=b",;:l water tan1: reservoirs are located to the north; va:an1 land 10 the east and SDUUJ
is ov.'Ved by th:o: District and is found in a nallli-aJ state ",'ith r:o:cent discing activities having
taken place: land to th:o: west is pres:o:ntly vacant but is b:o:ing improved for residentia]
develovmen: as part o:the Otay Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) 1.
B. Project Description
Tne proposed project consists of the installation of five whip monopole radio ant=as
mounted OTI buried concrete slabs and having an approximate height of about 75,8 feet
AddiTIonal;y, a transmitter shed measuring 200 sq, ft, and baving a heigbl of j 0 feel will be
COIlSt:rUCI:O:C., Each ant=a ",'i]j have 36 Du...;ed radial lines to aid in the reception and ,adiD
traP.srmSSiOIl, Each ant=a is propos:o:d tD '0:0: surrounded by an 8-fool high cbain link fence
and approved landscaping, A six-roDt high chain link rence wi]] b:o: install:o:d around th:o:
peTIm:o:ter D:the 634 &.,:o:s DfJeas:o:d ar:O:<L A dirt road wi]] b:o: graded tD provide access frDm
the existing OVVD facilities to the lease area.
A:\I:~,-..:.:nd2\IS980; _~;
Il
Pa"C ~Vt-
- -f'-
----=
-
Exhibit'S'
::ity oj ::hula vista planning oeoartment On' or
._~pnvirD~Dnt::a1 _.~""PViD"'_, c:.._+.,..... C~l H A \"cr.t.
Dis::re:l:;::';a.;' actior.5 iL~\."ojve the g;-anting 01 a Condiljona] use Perrni:.
C Compatibility with Zorring and Plans
The curr:::f. zoning on-sit:; is PC (P]anned Community) and tne site is designated as ?U'DjjC
&. Quasi ?-.JDJiC by the GeneraJ Plan, The proposed project is in comphance v-,jth the ZD~:~g
Orciinanc= and Gene;-,,: Pian,
~
]cienn:fj::2.:~J:J ofEn\'iTJ!L.-n~nla] Efie::!s
A.n Initio.: Study conciu::t::d by the City of Chula Vista (including an atlacned Environmenta]
CheclJis: fonn) det=ined that the proposed project wi]] not have a significant
enviro=ental effect, and the preparation of an Environmemal Impact Report wi]] not be
n~quired, 7'nis Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section
}S070 o:::::t State ~QA Guidelines,
1, ?nDllC Services Impact
Fire
Tne nearest fire s>..ation is located about 3 miles from the project site. The estimated
Tesponse time is less than seven (7) nllnutes, The Tesponse time complies with the
Ci:y T'hTeshold Standards for fire and medical Tesponse time, , Tnis Teview process
shall be coordinated with other Regulatory Agency Teview processes to ensme that
no 25pect of the Droposed project wi]] have an adverse impact on project site soiis,
umiergr01ll1d Wale;- table or the smmunding Tesidents and the physical environment,
Police
Tne Police Denamnent indicates the AVeI'age Response Time for Priority 1 caEs is
L :minutes, 47 seconds, This is just slightly above the ThTeshold Standard of L
minutes and 30 seconds, The Tesponse time for Priority 2 calls is 6 nllnutes and 2 ]
seconds, and this does comply with the T'hTeshoJd Standard, The POllce Department
will De able to Drovide adequate service to the proposed land use,
"
~~;::~::y and Sen'j:e Systems
Soils
3ased on the exi.-ring wateI' tank Teservoirs being on the pmject site for many year.s,
there is no evidence of adverse soiJ conditions pTesent that would affect the strucru:-al
integrity of the proposed ant=as or transmitteI' structUTe,
A:\lb..l.rnd.a\lS9807 .n~~
o
Pag~ :
Drainage
The Engineering Division indicates that existing on-site and off-site drainage waters
are adequately and naturally conveyed into nearby Poggi and Telegraph Canyons,
Sewer
The project as proposed does not require the installation of sewage facilities and
therefore no impacts to these are noted.
Streets/Traffic
The Threshold Standards Policy requires that all intersections must operate at a Level
of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D"
may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections, No
intersection may reach an LOS "F" during the average weekday peak hour.
Intersections of arterials with iTeeway ramps are exempt iTom this policy. The
proposed project would comply with this Threshold Policy for the immediately
affected Otay Lakes Road a six-lane prime arterial which would remain at a Level-of-
Service "C" with project approval,
Communication Systems
According to an engineering statement prepared by Mullaney Engineering, Ine., and
confirmed by Rick Matkin, City Building Service Superintendent and Dave Marsden,
Communications Division Supervisor, the proposed radio facility will operate with
a daytime power of 9kW and nighttime power of 4kW which is considered low
pressure conditions, In accordance with a memo dated 12/21198 and prepared by MI,
Matkin, the proposed radio rrequency would not interfere with the city's emergency
response communication system,
The Federal Communications Commission (F,CC) recognizes that broadcast
stations operating in full compliance with F.CC's technical rules may still cause
interference to nearby consumer electronic devices such as television receivers and
general communication systems, In the event that the operation of the radio antennas
create blanketing interferences, KURS Radio will fully comply with F.C.C.
requirements by responding to complaints of blanketing interference in a timely
manner, and assume the financial responsibility involved for correcting the problem,
The period of time whereby the Radio station retains financial responsibility shall
extend to one year after the blanketing area has been fully developed and occupied,
The conditions of approval of the conditional use pennit will address financia1
responsibility,
A:\iH'nJmda\is9R07.neg
<.-(
Page 3
-
".::: Quality
,n~ applicant is not requir~d to obtain a permit from the Air Quality Poliu:ion
Contro] Disui::t (APCD) ror the installation or an emergency back-up gen~alOr.
S:andard requir=ents regarding the control or fugitive dust shall apply during rn~
cO:l.>'Lruction ph25e and tbes~ shal] adequately address any temporary air pollu:JOn
D:-8:,1~ms.
t :::-~::s:n~t]cs
lIJ~ proposed project will be subject to granting or a conditional us~ pennit ane tb~
proposed ant=, transmitter structure, rencing and landscaping will be subject to
Planning staff review and approval, This will help ensure the proposed project will
complement futme proposed development, minimize visual impacts and complY
v;i:n all applici:Jle design regulations and policies, Tne visual impacts or the willp
ant=as worud not appear to be significant, however, the proposed rencing,
equipment shed and landscaping need to be subject to a further coordinated review
wi:b adjacent development in order to reduce potential impacts,
5, Paleontological
AccOTding to the Otay Ranch SPA One Final E.I.R. and the Otay Ranch Annexatjon
Final Second-Tier EJ.R., tbe proposed project site is within the upper SandslOn~
unit orthe Otay Formation, and has a high paleontological resource sensitivity, ,!lis
uni: or the Oray Formation has produced important vertebrate rossil remains, Tne
po:e:1Tial impac: to paleontological resources will be mitigated to a Jess than
significant level by complying willi the proposed mitigation.
6, Biological
Tne site is locat~ on a low hill and is covered mostly with a domestic barley m a
similar grain c:up, Two separate biota studies were conducted on-site for this
project. The irsI report (Merkel & Associates 9/3/98) described the predominant
no:r;-native vege:ation and the non-sensitive wildlife observed. Tne report ftuther
r~CJ:IllTIended :::;a: a focused search be done for the IN estern Blli'"Towing Owl sinc~
rodent holes w~~ observed on-site, The second survey (pacific Soutbwest Biologica]
SeT\ices, Inc, 9'11198) followed established BurroVvwg Owl Slli-vey Protocol and
encountered no sign ofBurrov;ing Owl habitation or activity, The conclusion ofth~
secDnd survey W25 that the project site does not support Burrov;ing Owls because
th~se species occupy flatter ground with vegetation or shorter stann-e than found at
th~ site, No TIL-rner studies were reco=ended, No mitigation will be reguired,
A:\llb"l::n::i2\is9807 .r:=g
IJ
Pag:- .;
-
1V)J-"'('"'~"-~,- -\""!"p....~a:-,:~.. !..voJ'd SJ'rm~"-J"''?'nt ::~J-""""'"
" -"'- ..:':"_J~~_ _ .............;:,~ _ l_ . _ ~_~ ...."'...de......_ ..........:::,
Sp~ijjc ;T.'oject mitigarioL measures ar~ reguired to reduc~ pot:::ntial :::nnronrn:::nlal Im:;,,::s
identifix in the initial srudy for tills project to a level below significant, Tne mitiga:JC)L
measures will be made a condition of project approval of the Conditionai use Pmnit, as -v.'~JJ
as reguir=:::nts ofth~ al1.ached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Attaciun::nt "A"),
Tn~ aDDji:~"1t sha11:
1, CooTdinate at u1" design stage, the proposed fencing and landscaping features v,'ijc
the corresponding Sun-OUDding residential land developers, Tne proposed f:::ncing
and landscaping plans shaTI be subject to review and approval by the City Planning
and Building Department
7 Ew"TITe that a paleontological monitor be on-site at al1 times dtL.-IDg excavation and
IT::Dching for the proposed project If and wh::n fossils are discovered, the
paleontologist sllall recover th=, The prepared fossils along with copies of all
pe:cinent field nOles, photos, and maps shal1 be deposited in a sci::ntific institution
camaining paleontological cOl1e..'"liODS such as the San Diego NaruraJ History of Man,
F, Consult.arion
1. Individuals and Organizations
Cicy of Chula Vi,,-:2.:
Doug Reid, Planning Division
B:::njamin Guerrero, Planning Division
Muna Cuthbert, Engineering
Majed AJ-GhaiTy, Engineering
Duane B=el, Planning Division
Brad K=p, Building Division
Doug Perry, Fire Marshal
Richard Preuss, Crime Prevention
Joe Gamble, Planning DivisionlParks & Rec, See,
Peggy McCarberg, Deputy City Anorney
Rick Matkin, Building Service Superintendent
Dave Marsd::n, Communications Division SupervisoT
Chula Vista CiT)' School District: Dr. Lowel1 Billings
Swet:twater union High Schoo] District: Kat}' Wright
Applicant's Ag::nt: Helix Environmental Planning Consultants, Tamara S, Ching
A:\l1b\1:n:ia\is9807.n=g
Iii
Paf!~ =
~
:J:J~uments
Cnula Vista G~~aJ Plan (J 989) and EIR (1989)
Titj~ 19, Chula Vista MunicIpal Cod~
CJ-.ay Ranch SPA 1 FinaJ ElK
CJ-.ay Ranch A.Ill1::xation Tj~~d E.LK
SL':Jplemental ::ngineering Statem~nL MujJan~y Eng, lne, (12/4/98)
3j~:z Surv~y, M~kel &. Asso~iat~s 19'3i98)
:= J:l!S~d Surv~\ rOT Burrowmg Owl, Pa::ific Southw~51 Bio, S~,j~~s, lne, (9!J ; :98)
CuiIUTal Resolli'~= Survey, Gaj]~gos &. Assoejat~s, (J 0/98)
.J, IniTIal Study
1 ills enviro=~tal det=ination is based on th~ attached Initial Study, any
~=ents rec~iv~ on the InitiaJ Study and any eo=~ts receiv~d during the pu'ojj~
T~vi~w period for this Negative D~claration, Tn~ n:port refj~ets th~ independent
jucigement of th~ City of Chula Vista, Furth~ information r~garding th~
::D\ironmentaJ r~vi~w of this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning
D::partment, 276 Fourth Avenu~, Chula Vista, CA 91910,
/', , //n/
/~ ' I'~~-A- ~~n~
DouglasJ'YReid '
En\ironmentaJ R~vi~w CoordinalDT
Dat~: janua,y' 11, 1909
A:lJlb\imda\is9807 _~;
Ii
Pa!!~ ~
Case .'\0. 15-99-] 5
E~\lRO"lME!\T4l CHEChLIST FORl\1
1.
!'iame of Proponent:
,
Lead Agen:::" !'iame and Address:
."
Address and Phone 1'\nmber of Proponent:
4.
!'iame ofProposa1:
5.
Date of Ch~klist:
1. L-'Ll\'D 'CSE .-'L"ill PL"-'\"",1NG: Would the
proposal:
a) Confu::'i with gen::raJ plan designation or
zoning?
b) Confu::'i Wlth apphcaD1e environmental plans or
pojJcies adopted DY agencies with mrisdiction
o\'::.- ~~ 'DT01~ct?
::) .tille::: agricultura] resources or operations (e,g.,
irnDa::!5 to soils or fz:rrn1ands. or impacts from
Incomparible land 15~5)?
d) DisTIl?: or divide me physical arrangement of an
estabEsned cornrrn.TI1ny (inc1uding a low-incom~
or nrinority cornrnu;:ri;y)?
Pacific Spanish Network a,k,a, Ki.7.S
Radio
City of Chula Vista
27 6 Fourth A venue
Chula V iSla, CA 9] 9][J
296 "H" Street TniTd r]oor
Chula Visla, CA, 9l9Hi
(619) 425-2132
Five whip radio ant=as for KURS Radio
January 8, 1999
f'olentially
Si~nific.::tnt
Impact
Potenti:III~'
Si::mificanr
Unless
Miti~ated
"
}mpa~
Le:ssth:w
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
-::ne presently GeveJoped site IS zoned planned community and designated Public and
0::2.5: Public jw c:"e City's Gen=] Plan Tne proposed project would reomre the granting
0: L Condniona; 'jse Pemm by the Cny. Tncre are no l1llpacts aT confiJC!5 "1th the zonmg
oc Genera] PIaL
Comments:
(,'"
P::~f"
A:\~::- ,i::lda\is988E:=LIT
r'lI1~n!I:JJI:
SI:,nirl:,:Jnr
"I>1f"nll:JII'
!-.J::niflc;lnr
(JllJcs~
!\1JII::alt.c;
~',[h;",
5'1:'flir,:;.n:
jmfj~C'
'"
Imn~c:
Im:.~:
n, POPULATION A.1\"D HOUSING: TFould the
proposa::
a) Clli-nillat;veJy exceec officiaJ regwna] or JocaJ
popu:.z:ion proJec:ior-5?
[] 0 [] ~
[] 0 - rz
l') i~.:iu.::= .substantja: g:OV.1:h In an area eItb~
=1:-~:::'~: aT IndiTe::::, "=.g.. througb projects In an
l.:TJ.;j~-:=;aptd aT~2 0:- e::lenSlOTI of major
,--,-,~ ^ture)'1
1......W_:l.... .
c) Dispze existing housing, especialJy affordabJe
hou..-.~g?
o
o
[]
jgi
Comments:
?mject impJementation wouJd not contribute to JocaJ popuJation growth nor dispJacernent
0: existing hOUSIng, No adverse impacts are noted,
ill GEOPHYSICAL: Wouid the proposal result in or
v..pose people 10 pOIenIial impacts involving:
a) utb-:abie earth conditions or changes in geologic [] [] U ~
suosr-r.J.....-rures?
b) Disruptions, displacements, compaction or [] [] [] [8i
overcovering of the soi]?
c) Cl1211ge in topograpny or grOlmd surface reJief [] [] [] rz
feamr~5?
d) Tne d~5UUctjon_ cove:ing or modification of any [] [] 0 rz
lliliqu:, geologic 0:- :Jnyslca] features?
e) ~A...l"]Y m:rease in wme or water erosion of soils, 0 0 0 rz
eith= or: or off the SIte?
f) C=ges in deposition or erosion of beach sands, [] 0 :] [8i
0, crumges in SiJtatiOIL deposition or erosion
v/rricn 1TI2Y modify m:: channel of a river or
stre= or the bed of me ocean or any bay m]et or
lak~:
g) ",::DDs:e of peopie 0, property to geoioglc ~ 0 :...J [K
h?7~""C3 such as earill~uakes, landslid::s, mud
shoes, ground failure, or simiJar hazards~
, 'r
A:\I::- \:;:-;ja\is9S33=Ljr;'-;-,
P8;:t'" ~
f'orl:n!I~J"
:'I:,oirn:..o'
Imp~~:
l'toll'nll;>ln
Sr~oirlt:;ln'
!mi~'
1\1r11:':lrrt
~,lfI:ilJ:
;..,:,njf'~:Jn:
Imr';!~'
I T:'1:'~ ~
Comments:
:. ~:-. adv~s~ 1~2.::.s r~t:arcimg soils OT g~ophys1caJ conal:1an.s are no:t::.. J-, gt:OJogJC T~~'7":
.,'~S pr~arec ~s part 0; the O:zy Ranch SectJOna1 Plan Area (S?f.) Cmt and tht :::c;~:
5e:;ond- Tier ElK No ground rupture or 1iquefaction hazards are expected a1 the pro,ec:
0,,", The m:aTe>: porentiaUy active fault is the La Nacion fault Jocarec aDOU! two miles \'::5'
0: the project sire, No mitigation wi]] be Tequired,
JI', WATER: f'Vould the proposal result in:
2) Cn~~::s m absoTp!j(JT; Tates, dramage patte:Tls, -, D :?
- - '-"
0:" tr::- :ate and arnOLLj~ of surfact runoff?
Q) E,;:?:':':::.:Tt of peop;t 0:- propeTt}' to water related " U --; g
~
n2.ZZ.:-~ such as fi008ing or tidal waves?
c) Disc:-.zrge in10 surface wa1er-s or other- aJ1er-a1ion D D D I1!i
of 5l.L:ac:e water quality (e.g., temperature,
disso!"ed oxygen or turbidity)?
d) C~.?e5 in the arnOl..rnl of surface v:at~ in any D D 'I g
ware:- '~ody?
e) Cn2:D.ges in currents. or the course of direction of D D u g
wate:- :novernents, u~ either marine or fresh
wa~?
Ii C'nange in the qilllIlrity of ground water-s, either- D D D !8j
tirr012gD dn-ect additions or withdTawals, or
tirrOugD inter-c~tion of an aquifer- by cuts or
excayarions?
g) j\lteTeC dn-ection cr rote of flow of groundwater-? D D D g
h) lmpa::s to groundv:at~ quality? D D ::J g
i) A1t=,ions to the course or flow of flood waters? 0 0 D g
j) SUD=tial reducDon in the amoun1 of water- D D u I1!i
othe:-wise availab1e JOT pubhc water supplies?
Comments: Tne Engineering Division indicates that the project site is not within 2 flood plain, Tne
pmject site flows naturally on-site and off-site into neaTDY Poggi and T e1egraph Canyons
. ~o adverse impacts aTe noted. No mitigation wiD be required,
\ A,IR QL-UJ:TY: TFouic' [he proposal,'
2) Vio1ale any an- quaET)' standaTd or contribute 10
an eJ:i=g orproJ~cted an qua1ity violation?
D
D
D
I1!i
b) E),:pose sensitive receptors to po11utants?
D
D
D
I1!i
'2.0
1',:\1;:- \imj8\is9808=t~.~,
P::::;~ 3
::: I ..:-.;:~ ;..::-- mo\'~m~::J:. ::-JOI.stUTt:, aT It:::J.;1t::-atuTt:. OT
:2.~:::: 2..c'1Y chang=: :r: .::ilmale, e1th~:- jo.::aliy OT
repo::any?
d) Cr~a~ objectionaDj~ odors?
e) CTear~ 2. substantia; mcrease in stationary or nOTI-
S:a!1CC2..)' sources 0: Err emissions aT the
d~l:::-JJratioD of amDJ::nl air qualiTY"
1'''I~n!l:JJ)'
~p:,,,ir'~n'
IrrH>:lC'
hJlt"n!I:Jlh
....,~nir,C:ln-
11 nl!."~'
:>1111!.';11l'(
I rn:'~ ~
;..e'\'II,;jr
~':,,,ir,:an'
Imnar'
"
~
-
z
o
o
rz
o
o
o
o
rz
~'~:. adverse 177TC2.::S to an quaj1T;' are TImed. A oacK-uf; geneTalO7" i.':ltfJ kss tnaT! 20~,
'::;~i;ehorse pow=:- would be used io:;- emergencies onjy. Tne project \'<,'o'.lic nm be requl:-e:
cc oDtain a p:;:;lm: t.'rrough the A.ir Po11utioD Contro] D!SmCl (APCD), :';0 mitigation v'il:
D~ reqUIred.
C0mmems:
,1. TRA_1\'SPORTATIO~/CIRCULATION: Would
the proposal result in:
a) Incr~25~d vehic1e =5 or traffic cong~stion?
b) Eua:-cs to safety rrom design features (e.g..
si-",,-p ctn'es or ciang::rous intersections) or
inco=arib1e us~s (e,g" farm equiprn::nt)?
c ) Inad~auate emergency access or acc~ss to nearby
uses?
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site?
e) rt2..ZaJC3 or barriers Jar pedestrians aT bicyclists?
f) Corilll:!5 \\'itb aooplt:.: policIes supponing
aiI=nve transpcr.ation (e,g, bus turnouts,
DJcycie racks)?
g) RaiL waterborne 0: arr traffic impacts"
h) A "iayge project" lIDd::r the Congestion
Manag=ent Prog:;-am" (An equiva1ent 012400
0; maTt average dailY vehicle nips aT 200 OT
more peak-hour vehicle trips.)
o
o
o
@
o
@
o
o
0 0 0 @
0 0 0 @,
0 0 0 @
0 0 0 @
o
o
[g!
o
o
o
[g!
o
Tn~ ~nginecring Dnrision states thaT toe project Sltt is adequate1y seT\'ed by Otay Lakes
Road and thai me project wou1d have no 1mpacts on this six-1ane prime aneriaL No
miTIgation wil1 De required.
Comments:
~I
PO~'5- L
A: \ 1::-, i::l::m \ is9 8J3 :r.. tIT
f'tHell1lall,
"fllt'nllaJh Srt'nif,can' Ln\llJan
S!::,nif,:an: ljrllc~' ~r::,nirl:an1
Imoac: "'irl'~a1t'(. Imoac: IH;:,~~
\'IL BJ OLCiGJ CAL RESCilriCES: WOUliIl1t
proposa.' i!!SUl1 in Imp:1c:': 10:
a) En~g~ed, sensit1v~ species, spt:Jes of [J [J [J E:
conc= or speci~s tha1 are candlcia~5 for hstmg?
bJ Lo^ah d-si[!!Jat-c SD-^i-s (" n "":l:a~e !r""s)" [J 0 0 E:
..... "_ .... b .... =>.~......... ......:::-h ........, .:::- .........:
CI Lo:.2.::Y designatec ;<.2.::JTa] communities (e.g. oak :i [J 0 [Z
~
Im-eS"_ coastal har,::.e:, ~1C,)?
dj W ~:;Z:JC habitat ( t.;... ::Jarsr~. npa:1aY; ano v~a] [J 0 :J E:
poolf
e) Wiidiife dispersal oc migration comdors? [J 0 0 @
f) Affec: regional habIra; preservation plamring 0 0 0 g
efforts:
Comments: Y;,~ proi~ct Si1~ is in a partia]]ynatur.al state, No tr~~s are fOlmd on the project site, whIcn
g::nera]]y consiStS of a flat m~sa with ridge top, The site has been disked and is fully
disturbed with no S::Il5Itive plant 5D~cies ~xisting on-site, Tne site is primarily covered v.-itfj
do,,-,est1cated ba:-ieys and grasses, No s::nsitive amma] or plant species were observec
dL.c-ing field investigations by Merkel & Associates, mc, 1998, On September 10, 1998,
Pa-^ific Southw~SIBiological Services, Inc biologists specializing in omithologyperform~d
a focused search for th~ Burrowing Owl (Sp~otyto cmricularia), Rod::nt burrows typicaliy
us~ by B. Owls were observed for remains of ow] prey and droppings with no sign of the
B. OwL The report concluded that the site does not support Burrowing Owls, No
mingation wi]] be required,
'lTI. E!\'ERGY A.."ID MI!\TR-U- RES0l3RCES:
TJ-ouic' the _:Jroposal:
a) Confiic: v.-ith adopted ::nergy conservation
plans?
[J
,0
o
g
b) Us~ nOD-renewable r~sources in a v.'asteful and
. ~_. ~
lTI~IDc)ent manner.
o
o
[J
[8:J
c) If the sit~ is designared for minerai resource
proteCTIOn, wiD till, 1JTOJect impact this
protecrion?
o
o
[J
{g!
Comments:
!~o l:npacts to no:-:-renewab1e resources are noted.
IX. HAZARDS: rVould the DTODosal involve:
~1....
.t.,:\!::: ,::~:::1:J\!s98Q3=~:.trrr,
~:::;~ =
l'Ull'nll:.JI'
J'fJI!:"nuOIJi< SI::-lIir,r:In' Lt:S\ th:II,
S I ~'n i rl C.:m' II"k~< S!~nirl:;Jni
Imp:.r; r\1m::-:l1t"L 1m!!;!,'
U 0 " Z
~
:":.i ._., of acclci~:-::..:::.' ~;:JJOSlOn 07" Ttjt:2.St 0;
~~-"~.:ious $Ub5~71:~~ (inducing. D:1: nOll1mned
to: ?=:To]eum PTOQU:!s, p~sticlo~s. cn~micals OT
;-ad;zzionJ?
bJ POEsJDk interferen:. ",th an emergency 0 0 0
Tf:S?:r....se plan OJ ~~gency evacuation plan?
c) Tr..:: :-:-:::ation o;.a;:..- n.a1th hazare: OT potential 0 0 @
n:::2.:::: ~azard?
cl - ^ ^
.:::;:?::~:..:;'"~ 01 peo~;:: :c ~xlstmg SOUT::':~.s OJ U 0 0
Do:~::a] health D2.:2.TC.S?
e) :in::-~2S~d fire hazaTc ill areas with fjammabl~ 0 0 0
ons:... gr-ass, or tre~s.?
z
z
rz:
CDmments: cn~ propos~d project radio frequencies wj]J not interfere with emergency resporse
:D:nmunicaticm systems as corrfumed by the City's Communications Division Supen~5oT,
:'0 highly fiarilir.aDk or potennally explosive materials will be used for the project :oa:n
o:1:he proposed amennas wilJ be surrounded by a six foot high chain-link fence, A six-foa:
;"gh chain linj: fence wj]J also surround the 634-acre lease area, Compliance V.1tn
."",blished s:Z;1:i2rd federal regulations and imalJation of the proposed fencing wilJ ::ns""~
i:I2.: people nOT workers become exposed to Radio frequency Emissions per esrablishec
?.c.c. guidelrnes, No adverse unpacts are noted, No mitigation 'wilJ be required,
X. NOISE: Would the proDosal result in:
a) In:T''-2.Ses in existing noise levels?
o
o
@
b,) Expo5lITe of peopl~ 10 severe noise levels?
o
o
o
I
rz:
'1 _J..J.lporary COb--"Dlction nois~ WOUJd occur at the site, however, the short term nature o~ ::'"1~
nOlSe, and the clli-;ance from any existing surrounding residential uses results in less tna!'
significant Impa:ts to the immediate area, All equipment including the emergency
g::nerator wiD b. housed within a transmJtter shed and win not exceed day or night eA'te:10T
noise level threshold standards per City Ordinances, No adverse impacts are noted, 0,;0
Th'tigation ,,>i]! b~ required,
Comments:
Xl PLJBLJC SERV1CES: Would the proposal have an
ef!ec: u.7JoT.. or resuh iI: :::. needfor ne11' or alzered
gove,rnm~n: servIces If :;ny of the following areas.-
a) ?IT. DTolection?
o
o
o
b) Pol]c~ urotection"
o
o
o
~5
rz:
~
~::;:= ::::
,L,' \~=- ,i:71::ia\!S9S05::i~.t':T
:: I ~,,=~;:,,:;;:,r.'
'-nltOnll:lJI'
1-'>I~n!la]l' SI:"nifH;.ano ~'!h","
,;;"::"nifli:.:.n: \llIlt..., ~I:,nir,~n:
Imn:"~' ~1Jtr::;Ht'r Jml''''c' IfW,~:-
I 0 - Z
0 0 0 Z
0 0 0 rz
dJ M~r;=ance ofpu'Dji: facilItJes, m:judmg
Toalli~)
e) cr.h~ govemrnen-:.aJ s~n!Jces'?
Comments: ~.~c' new GO\'~iTI~ra] services wi]] be requiTed 10 S~TV~ the proje::. !~(J adverse 1mpc.::~
2:"": nOled. FiT: 2.TIC police prolectjon can adequatejy De pTo\'ided.. !~(J rnnigalion wil: J:
"':":.::m:red.
\]l, THRESH OLDS: frill the proposal adversely
lmpacllne CllY's Threshold Standards?
o
o
o
z
As desCTi:,~d below, tiJ~ proposed proje:t does not advers~Jy impact any ofth~ se::n Threshold
Standard.s,
a) frrt'3\1S
o
o
LJ
~
Tn~ ,nr~shold StaIJdards requires that TIre and medica] units must be abk to r~spond to caEs
v:itr.r: / minutes 01 less in 85~~ of me cases and \vithin.5 minutes or less m 75%) of the C2S:.:5.
Tn~ Cuy of Chula Vi:,-;z has indicated that this threshold standard will b~ m~ since the near~s:
fir~ :;:ation is 3 miles away and wouid be associated with a 4-minute r~sponse rime, Tne
proposed project v.ill comply with this Threshold Standard.
Comments:
Tn~ Fire Depa,-rrn::nt indicates that adequat~ fire servic~ and protection :an be provided
to me proposed project site,
b) Poji:~
o
o
o
z
T:.'1t -=-:'yesho1d Stzniarcis require tnat police units must respond to 8.4~~, of Priority 1 C2.~~.:::
\,,'1;1:;;:: ~ minutes o~ j~ss and maintam an av~age response rime to all Priority 1 cans of 4,:
tnh-mt::s or iess, Poli:t units must respond to 62,10'/'0 ofPrioriry 2 cans within 7 minutes o~
j~ss auc maintain aJJ av~age respons~ rime to alJ Priority 2 cans of7 minutes or iess, Tnt
prop05~d project v.iil compJy with this Threshold Standard,
Comments:
Tnt Police Dep=::nt indicates that Crime Prevention personnel are a\-ailabie to assist tiJe
aJ:>ii:ant with se:urityrecomm::ndations, No significant adverse impacts to Police SeT\1:~
ar~ noted,
01 :~e=]c
LJ
o
u
~
'2-t
,t.,_ ,~:= ,i~:jo\is9B:J5::Lr.77i
P:::~= '7
"'!1I~nWoJ,
\,:'nir,:;;,n
""110111,,,1,-
""r~nir'~:.n
1 JI]lr~
.\1,t!~;'I("~'
:"'CS;II!;/IJ
."r::,njf(~m
Iml';'C:
I ,..,.,:,~:
I fT)!J:J c"
~ - ,,' ~ - - .,-. ~ "
. :-:= . ....-:~snoJO ,:):z.:--;:z:--:::.::, Tt:qU1Tt t!".a:.Gl.: mlt:T'5~::JOn::. :7]U5: (J~::-al:- at '-:. .:......~-,..::" (J: .')::;\'1:'::.: ,..:......__..::"
"C' :;:-- -J~tter, \\"iLl: :'l:: ~xception t~.....a: L~ve] of S~']Ct (LOSj "D" ma} u:cu:-- ounng lilt p::2:.i:
TWo :::;~urs of the cOzy a: signalized 1l'm:rsectJOns, Int~sectiDns west ofl-80S are nDt to op",-act
a: a =.DS below thei:-1987 LOS, No iIltersection may reach LOS "E" Dr "F" during the ave;-agt
weei:6!y peak hDlI:', Intersections Df arterials with iTeeway Tamps are exempted from :::'0
S:zu,zd, The propDsed project will camp!y with this TJ1Teshold StandaTd,
Comments:
-=-:'"It Engine~;}g Division has cietermined thai tne CUrr~1 LeveJ-of- Se:\']ce (LOS, .'=--"
=::_ioyed by cr..2y Lakes Road, a si):-lane majoT an~2.~, would r~2.m the same \':;:~.
z-=?Tova] oftne ?~oposed pro_lee:.. No mitigation \vl1j De Teoulrec_
d ') ?2.:-i:.= ?~creat1On
:-l
o
o
l8:
Tnt cTeshoJd S:anzd for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/Laaa population, This
S'."mzd dDes not zpply to the proposed proJect.
Comments:
}'c, adverse impa:IS to parks or recreational opportunities are not~d.
e) Th-ai2ge
o
o
::J
l8:
Tn" c:reshoid Standards require that storm wat::r flows and voiumes not exc~d City
EngJn=ring Standards, Individuai projects wiIJ provIde necessary improvements
CDt'si.,.'1..-nt with the lliainage Master Pian(s) and City Engineering Standards, Tne
pmposed project v,'ill compJy with this Threshoid Standard,
Comments:
OE-site drainage capacities will not be affected by project approvaL
f) Sewe;-
o
o
o
g
1 :1= ~7eshold Sta..'1.:z-cs require tnat sewage flows and volumes not ex:eeG City
tngin~g Sta.nd.a:-~. Indjvidua] projects will provide ne:essary improvements
consi,;,em with Sewe;- Master Plan(s) and City Engineenng Standards, Tne propDsed
prO.lec: wiIJ compiy >11th this ThreshDld Standard,
Comments:
Sewer capacities >lilJ nDt be affected through project impiementation,
g) 'v.'ate:
o
o
o
g
T'1:' -=-:'-::-eshold Sta.c'1zcis require th2o: adequate sto~ge. treatrn=nL and trar..smission facilitIes
aT:' co~5trUcted COnClL"TentJy WIth planned growth and that water quahty s:andards are nD:
.ieop,ml:zed during gmwth and construction, The proposed project wilJ compJy with this
Trr:esnoid Standarc,
Appiic2!1ts may also be required tD panicipate In whatever water conservation or fee off-set
prog;-arr; the City Df CnuJa Vista has in effect at the time ofbuiJding permit issuance,
~
f< '\i::--,I::l:J::J\ts98CJ::::r..t":-;--
p.........,.= i:
"OI~nl,;!lp
Sl~nirlc:lo'
[JlJjf"~'
MII!!:JI~C
"OIenllllt!,
~I~njrl~n'
Jmll:lr'
:....es<If';!"
SI;'njr'~OI
Jmm,c:
'"
Jm:;~:-
Comments:
- '. .. - ~- -' - -
2.:~ qual1:-y S:z.:-J.:..aTQ~ WOUiC noi. Dt: 2.:jt::t~G InTOugr, ~TO.l~Ci. lr:;.?j~;n~:.alJOn.
XIII. LlILITIES A.l\'D SER\lCE SYSTEMS: If/auld
the proposal resulI in a need for new S'is/ems, or
subsIanzi:Jl alterations 10 the following uIilities,'
a) p ow~ DT natura] gzs? 0 0 0
b) Co:=:~icationE ~.'SI-~s? n [gj 0
~) =-'o:::t=.. X" reg-iona: v:a~ treatmen: OJ distribution U 0 0
i"a:::i~:j:::=.s?
d) Sew=:- or septic tani;s" 0 0 0
e) Sl= waler drainag:o 0 0 0
f) Solie waste disposal" 0 0 0
z
z
!g)
!g)
[g:
Comments: -:-::: propos~c 1l5~5 win not gen~ate a need rOT new systems OT alteration to tl1~
2lorernentionee urihties, However, theproje~t may have thepotentiaJ to affe~t surrounding
e;=onic devices, Therefore, the applicant needs to aSSWIle the financial responsibihry
fa:- correcting blank..'1:ing interference ext....miing for one year after the blanketing area h25
'= fully developed and occupied, This wil1 be made a condition of approval of the
CD.P. as wen as applicant compliance with Chu1a Vista MmricipaJ Code Section
,'<;.20.120 dealing with construction management practices, Mirigation wiD no! :0:
T~ired.
Xf\', AESIHLllCS: WOuic'IheproposaI-
a) ObS::--.lCl any sceni~ "j5"'" or view open to the
publi: or wil1 the proposal result in the creation
of an aesthetically offensive site open to publi~
"iew?
o
[gj
Ii
o
b) Ca1!Se we destruction or modification of a scenic
route"
0 0 0 [gj
0 0 0 ~
I I 0 0 ~
c) Ha.ve E ciemonstrabi~ negative aesthetic effect?
0) (reat,; added hgh: 0:- glare sOlITces that couio
in:;r~e the leve1 of s1.'.Y glow in an area or cause
tills wo)ect to rail to comply with Section
19,66.1 00 of the Cnula Vista Municipal Code,
Titie 19"
:2..~
1-.: \]::- \I:n:x:; \ j:;98J5:::K.;:-:T;
~:::~e c
t') L=::..:.:~ an acici::::::::.:::... 2moun: 0: ;:lil: l]gn~'.
"Oll."ntJ;,Ii'
I'UJl."nllaJI' SJ~nir'c:.n' ;,~'!h;H:
S!::,nif,tanl tli1it~, :-.'~'nir'::;ml "
Imn:.lt: r\1'11::;Jtl."~ Jmp;zr: Irr'r,~~'
"I 0 U ~
Comments: ,De proJec;pro;>oses five 75,[ ioot high above grolIDd ]eve] whip ilke aJJt=as, Thes" wj]]
'tY.; SWTOlIDdx by an 8-fool high chain jjn1, fence, A six foot high chain 1ink fence wj]: be
6-ra]]ed around me perimeteT of the 6.34 acre leased site. Vi sua] simu1ations were
:r~ared to dtl..'":1IIine potenTIa] '~sua1 impacts from the proposed project The simujati om
S!JOW that the TIToject features wouid not b10ck view, However. the project represem, an
L;~anon 10 L1e lliTIy terram and me proJect apphcant would need 10 ""sure that th::re 'v,'j);
::: no adverst .,""lsua] impacts by coordmating landscapIng and f~:ing pToposal~ v:::i;
::~ts:=nl de\'ejC?::1~l tabng place m tDe vlcmjry and wIth the Cny of Chu12 V::s:c..
.':-.;?Toval of L";~ :x-oject 15 sUD_Je:: 1O.a ciis:retionaT)' Conditional US~ P _~.dlil process 2.S we}]
~ 2: site pIaL Z:1C 2.TchitectuJa1 review by Planning staff. Mitigation v!ilJ be regUlrec.
;"T. CULTI'Ro..L RESOT';"RCES: Would the proposal.-
a) Will me proposal resu1t in the a1tcration of or the
deSt;lh.-non or a pre!ristoric or historic
archaeologica1 site"
b) Wj]} tJe proposa] Tesult m adverse physica] or
a~y...n~~ effects to .c. premstoric or historic
ouiJamg, structure a:- object?
c) Does me proposal have the potentia1 to cause a
pnys:i::aJ change ,,-Dicn wouid affect lIDique
ethnic ::uhura1 va1u::s?
d) Will me proposal Testrict existing rehgious or
sacrec uses within me potentiai impact area?
e) Is me 2Tea identiiiec on me City's Gencra] Pian
sIT" ~ 2IJ area of ill .:rr potentiaj fo;
arcrUi=oiogica] resources?
Comments:
o
o
o
[g)
o
o
o
[g)
o
o
o
[g!
o
o
o
[g)
o
o
o
[g)
No urehistoric cr historic sites w::re identified by me Cultura1 Resources SUTVey conducted
by Gallegos &. A.ssociates (1998), Two isolate artifacts Tecovered during the survey w::re
scimritted to me South CoastailnformatioD Center at San Diego State University and
me San Diego Museum of Man for testing and these were identified as Dot significanT
anc no additio:w!.2 surveys or mitigation are needed for this project
),,\1. P_o..LEO",OLOGICAL RESOURCES: J.Vi/i the
proposa,; r::3uiI in the cJ.z!?Tarion of or tne desrrucrion
C?-(paleonroiogical resow-ces?
'L.,."\
o
!81
o
o
"::::2 10
A:\!2 \jrn:10 \is98J9::~~. ~
"OI~nIJall~
SI::,nifJ~n:
jmn~~1
f'mt"nl'4Ith
S'Cnif,c4In:
Im!f'S'
'>i.tt::':Jltr.
~~ltJ..n
SI?njrl("..Oln~
jmn..~'
I :1'~,~ ~
Comments: l:: a~~ordanc~ v.ith th~ Ola)' Ran~h SPA One E,LR, and the S~cond- Tier ,A.nnexa:JOT
:::J~, the proposed project site is lo~ated within the Upper Sandstone Unit of the 0:2:,
:=atlOn, anc fZS a high paleonto]ogi~aJ resource sensnJvity, The potentia1 impa:!S :c
:;~jeontolog:Jca' resources wiD De mnig:ated to a l~ss than sig:nifi~a.-Jt level thro'-1g:r,
:=omiate ml::g:aTIOn as foIJov.'s: ia) A paleomologica] rnonnor shalJ De a;;-SIte at ali tIme,
'::'::-.21!! excaVaLWT: and u-enching a:riviries for the proposed project. (0) -":;.~n~ and iffos:;i~s
2C'e discovered, "Daieomologist shaIJ recover these, (c) Prepared fossiis a10ng with come,
0: all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps shaIJ De deposited in a s~jennfic mstirunon
~D:1:aining paleontological coIJections such as the San Diego Naturai History Muse'-1m,
X\11. RECREATION: Would the proposal:
a) Incre25~ the demand for neighborhood or 0 0 0 @
regio-.2l parks or other recreational facilities?
r,.i _~=re=:. existing Te~eationa1 opportunities? 0 0 U @
c) Interi::r~ with recr~ation parks & recreation plans 0 0 0 @
orpro?<ffi15?
Comments: Tn::r~ are no recreational facilities that will be affected by the project.
A\1IL MA"JlIDATORY FINDINGS OF
SJGNIFIC"-l'I/CE: See Negative Declarationfor
mana.[lIo::,'.findings of sign~ilcance. {(an EIR is
needed, thjs seczion shouid be complezed.
a) Does ine project have ine potentiaJ to degrade
ine quality of the emimnment, substantiaIJy
reduce ine habitat 0: 2 fish or wildlife species,
cause 2 fish or wiid1if~ population to drop below
sdf-s~-raining 1 evels. threaten to eliminate a
pian! or animal co=umty, reduce th~ number
or remct: ine rang~ of 2 rare or endangered plant
or a.-TI:::;a; or e]jminat~ IIDpor.ant exampJes of the
majo:- p~ods or C2.1ifomia hislOT)" OT pr~history?
o
o
o
@
Comments:
A~ ine site is an ~X1Sring develop~d site ,,~thin an urbanized area, no sensitive plant oc
animal resources v.~ll be affected,
~'9'
1'.:\1::, \~:io\is98DB::i~.t":7
Po;:,="
~) :Lj::~~ :~~ proJ~:: ::29,':: :n~ pot~nl~2.: t() a:;;;~",'~
s:nY-:-~, 10 tnt o~sad\'antage ({jong-l~..,
en-,7amnenta1 goals?
"01enll;!]"
f'nr1:ntJ~]" S'l'nif'C;Jn' :.a~ lo..n
S';,oif,,;;n:. 1!II1t::'~. :;,;,nif,c;lm
Jmn~c. Mil'l':HCl Imp~~' I...:.;.~
:J U ..J Z
Comments:
T;~" scope anc nature of !h" pro,"C! wou]c no! T"SUlt in th" cm1ailm::n: of any ]ong-:=;
~"lTonmen:al goals.
: I ;:'0", :~" proJec; r.2"" nnvacts thai ar"
m:::~:l.:ua1Jy limit:::'. out cumulatIve]y
COI'.5]~::r.ab]e" ("Cumulatively considerab]""
m"= that the incr=enta] effects of a pro]"C!
ar" co-'..5iderabJe wh::n viewed in connection
W11i th" effects of past projects, th" effects of
otho::- current projeClS, and the effects of
pTo~a.~1e future pToje:ts.)
, ,
D
'I
""
""
Comments: -::-nere are no incr=ental impacts associated with the project
d) Do", th" projecI hay" environmental effecI
whicn win cause substantia] adverse effects on
h= beings, eith::r cfuectJy aT incfuectJy"
D
D
~
D
Comments:
No adverse effeClS to human beings is anticipated from project approvaL
"L~
?~~? ~:
~.: \ ~"iin d::J \is9 80B::!:. T;7':;
...~.
~~....
PROJECT REYISIO\'S OR MJTIGATIO'\ !\1EASLlli:S:
T.:J~ folloV\wg proj~ revisions cr mitigation m~aSUTes have been in:.:orpoTated into tn~ pro]e:.:! and v:ii: '~J~
=;=ented d=g the desigrr. :cmstruction oc op::r.atJOn of the project:
The proje:: 2.pplicant 5211 ~oordinat~ at tD.~ design stage, the proposed fen':.:mg and landsc:z;nng
features v.-;-.:: the cOITe5":J~:Jciing sUIToundmg Tesici~tiaJ land devejop:=rs. Tn~ 'DToposed fencm; 2.:1d
Jands:ap;:::g plans soar :,t subject to review and atJprova] by toe City P:anning and Hous;Tlg
Depa;-r:r.~:_
A pa1eon:~jogi:al momeD:' soa]] be or,-Silt at a]] tImes during ex:avation and trenchmg foe Tnt
proposed :>Toject. If anc wnen fossils are discovered, the paleontologist sha]] re:over them, Tnt
prepared f055ils along v.ifu copies of all pertinent fieJd notes, photos, and maps shal] be deposited ill
a scientiii: institution con:2llring pa]eonto]ogi:a] :ollections such as the San Diego Natura] Histo:y
of Man,
/1. I;/!//j
,~--., pro../..( jlJ!1i.
~je:t Proponent
~ If ~ f I
Dff'c=
xx. ENVIRO~-:ME1\'TAL FACTORS POTE!\TlALLY AFFECTED:
Tne environmental Ia.::tors che:kec beJow would be potentia]]y affected by this project, involving at leas; one
ir::;:::.:.:: that is c "Po:::Iria11y Signi:5:':c...-n Impact" 0, "Potentially Significant unless Mirigateci II as indicate::: -DY
tht :iedjist on the fonowing pages,
~d Use anc Planning
",j T ran5ponationlCircuJation
o Public S=v:ces
Population anc Housing
'-.J Biological Resour:es
o Utilities and Service
Systems
Gtophysical
'I Energy and Mill::r.a] Resources
~ Aesthetics
.',2.t~T
Hazards
@ Cultural
ResourceslPal eontoJogi ca]
_;i;- QualITY
:J Noise
o Recreation
:J Mandatory Findings of Significance
~D
f..: \t.:: \~~:J :J\is98:JB:::r....":'-:"
Po~~ :::
x:.::, DETI:HX;:'\ATJO~:
Cr:. ::J~ -oaSIS 0: L~ mltm] e"al12:w;::
j [::10 that the pTCJ?Osed project COULD NOT have a signifi:ant effect on the eD'~rcmment,
aTIC 2 :N'EGA1T\~ DECLAPJTION wilJ be prepared,
j :lTIG that a1thoug:L the proposec DToJect coui6 have a slgnlfi:ant effect on the environment, Z
:::;~~ will n01 ~t ~ 51gnificanl ~f:!-~:1 in this cast D~caus~ th~ mitigation m=:aSUTes ci~5::ib~d
DC 2:: allachec s:-:ee: have bee:: added to tk DTOle:t A MITIGATED }\;'EGATJ\'::
:)=-::LAR.A. TIO'\ '<',ilJ be pr:::J2cec
= :::-:: tha1 th~ ?:-G~:)5~d proje:: \~!..Y have 2. slgnifican: ~ffec1 on Tnt enYITOnrnent. 2.nc an
,:S',lRO:!'\~-:-,~l DviPACl P~PORT IS reouired
J flnd that the prODosed project J",,-^, Y have a significant effect(s) on the environment. but at
]= one efIe::: :! DaS been a~~uateJy analyzed in an earJier document pursuant to
ap:JDcabJe Jega] S'".J!I1dards, and 1) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the
ez:-l,:::- analysis 25 desCTI'bed on a~:hed sheets, if the effect is a "potentialJy signifi:ant
Jm?a:ts" or "po=:iany signifi:ant IIDJess mitigated," A.n ENVJRONMENTAL IMPACT
P20RT is re~ured, but it mISt anaJyze onJy the effects that remain to be addressed,
~
I :~: that a1thol!~~ :"":1e propose: ?Toject could have a significant effect on the
IT1Tonment, theee 'WILL NOT be 2 significant effect in this case because an potenria1iy
si."",fi:ant effects (2) Dave beeD analyzed adequate1y in an earJier EIR pursuant to
ap:JD:ab1e standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earJier EIR
inciuriing revisiOll5 or mitigatior meastlTes that are imposed upon the proposed project. A.n
actL'"I1dum has b= mepared to proVJde a record of this determination,
-
Janillli)' 8, 1999
liare
elC
bD'TO, ta1 R~1~ew Coordinatoc
City 0: Chu1a Vis::;
~,
A:\I::- ,::--::j8'\i:;98DB::L~
Pa~~ ',-
ATTACillva'\T 'cA"
Mitigation Monitoring Program
IS-99-15
~=: Miti;atj:o:: :c,:omtoring ~';'Jgram is pr::par::d for tht KUR5 ant::rmas and anciiia,)' ::qumT!1~:
D~JJJs::d ,,'itillr, ;2:1d located OT Olay Wat::!' District (O\\'D) propcrry aDout 1.600 fe::l soutb 0; CJ.zy
L2.i:es Road ir. :2t City of Cnu;z Vista, Tne kgislmion r::guir::s public ag::nci::s to ensurt :2al
ai=ouate mitigation measures aTe impl=ented and monitored on Mitigated Negative DeclaratioD.5,
su:i2 as 15-99-15,
A3 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant enviro=::ntal impa:::lS,
Tnt mitigation IDOnitOring program for this project ensures adequate implementation ofmitigation
fo~ me following potential impact: Aesthetics and Paleontological Resources,
Dll~ 10 the natur~ of the enviro=enta] issues identified, the Miti2:ation COIDnliance Coordinator
- .
(MCC), shall be mt Enviro=ental Review Coordinator (ERC) for the City of Chula Vista, It shal1
De me responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring
Pro~<1W are m~ to the satisfa...-tion of the ERe. Evidence in written fo= confirming compliance
wim the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration No, 15-99-15 shall be
prm-:ided by the paieontologicaJ monitor and applicant or agent identified in the attached Mitigarion
Monitoring and R~orting Che.+ii<:t, to the ERC as stipulated by each mitigation measure. The ERC
,,-:ill mus pro\-:ide me ultimate v::riiication that the mitigation measures have be::n accomplished,
~'2...
OC-:-IGA TJO'; ',,'JCJ".lTOE.I\G A'\:J p~POp;r~G C:-I~c}~:::;
PROJECT )\lJF: KURS P-ad.jo Am::nnas and ancilJary station ::guipmem
.l'\1TlA.L STUDY NO: 99-] 5
1~5:':':: A..r~2
_~.::~...:;~tJc:s
J~jgation M::2.>--u:r~ #]
",D~ project applicant shalJ coordinate at the design stage, the proposed fencmg and landscaping
reamres with th~ corresponding SlllTOunding r~sidentiaJ land developers. The proposed fencing and
laTI25caping p]= shall b~ sUDject to review and approval by the City Planning and Housing
D~artment.""
F,,:: compjjanc~ with this mmgatjon wi]] ensUT~ that pOlemial project impacts to aesthetic
wsideratioDS as a result or the instalJation of the five whip ant=as, th~ rallo station and
s=unding fencing and landscaping are properly accomplished with no additionaJ mitigation being
n::cessary.
Proj::ct Phase bnpl=entation (Proj::ct D::sign; Construction; Post Construction)
At:n~ Project D~sign Stage
R,.,D:msibJe _~gency (i::s)
Ci:y Planning &. 3uilding D::paicment
~~
'-C-:lGATJO','.'O'\lTOP.I''C:: ,LSD ?:opO?71'\G C:-Ec}~:ST
P?,OJECT )\AJv.2: KURS Raaio A.mennas allD ancillaJ)' station equipmem
I\1TlA.L ST1Jl)~' :'\10: 99-] 5
1.s5:l:: .-\re2
..- . - " -
.YE:,:::mtolog-JC2.l .......\.~50UTces
Jv.U:ogation M::a.5'-=~ #2
"A paleontoJogicaJ monitor shall be on-site at alJ times during excavation and trenching for th~
prD?osed project If and when rossils are discovered, the paleontoJogist shalJ recover them. 1 De
pr~ared fossils aJong with copies of a]] peninent field notes, photos, and maps sha]] be depositeD
in c. scientific institution containing paleontological co]]ectioDS such as the San Diego Natural
History of Man,"
Ful: complianc~ 'with this mitigation will ensur~ that potentiaJ project impacts to paleontoJogical
resources as a result of the instalJation of the five whip antennas, the radio station and surrounding
fencing and landscaping are properly accomplished with no additional mitigation being necessa....y.
Pro,iect Phase lmpl=entation (Project Design; Construction; Post Construction)
Tnmughout th~ construction phas~
R~~JDSJ"DI~ t. a<>n^\" (.]' PS')
...:;..~' ... - .=...."-~~- "....
Ciry Planning &. Buiiding Depa.'1II1ent
~'1
tn
'C
...
m
'C
c
m
....
en
c
C')
.-
tn
CI)
C
..:
~;~
--~
~~~
. ~N
~c:::::E
~ ,~
~~-
~~:
~"'O
~O~
ti~8
~o!ZO
~~<
~~~
~ ,~
:;;-~
","-
""~'"
5t;:j~
~~ '
2-{3
I ~-
-
-
m
3=
.r:.
(.)
c
m
a:
>-
<<S
....
o
w
~
g
'"
~~
u~
~i
. '"
",0
:'n~
::t;:
~s
"'~
u",
~:ti
"'~
~~
00
~~
g",
~~
~'"
u-
='"
_u
~~
~:E
m~
~" ~t!-
!!?" ,,<;-
~~ t;~~
.m ::E-:::E
~~ ii~
~:::E .,.,oU
~~ ;:j::::l:
_ ~v;(C
i::s G..Z:~
_..... .,.,tL:t-
u, 0 ~....... 0
:<:u "':;'"
c!Z ~E;:::
t;;:: ~ ,~
S~ ~~~
~a:: :;.r;;:>c-
j2!;i! ,,,is''' 1
.< ."uo
~6 5~:::
~~ S!i5~
,:; ~~~
C""
\
!
'"
o
,.
:g
'"
;:<
",::1
",0
"'~
00
w'"
~~
:=~
",'"
g~
8;j!
, ~
~s
",'"
",8
::;~
~~
0'2%
;;:~
::5:<
t!~
-?
~
~
~
'"
~~
~~
~w
",:g
u",
"'9~
a::......~
u"'~
:z:o;:;:
S~~
,. ':5
~::J~
~w..
u~'"
~et;;:
~",-
_00
~~~
~8~
,
r
I
"\
L---I
1.6
,
.1\. .
'"
y
~
~
~
.
0'~
~
o
<=
u
iiI~
~~
~~
"s
~:;;
5 5:0:
I;;~
:sg ~..:
='"
~u
Ir-- .L-,I
I I -I
I I
I I
L I
J
~
3
;J~
~u
l' I I
1[-- .r:] .1\"'1
.(}-,Z
, '
..
'..
..
-.- .
..
I. ~
""7
.(t-,I
~~
:"I~
.E
..'
.'
..
..
..
"
..
!>3
.'" .'
.. '
..
.. .
..
..
..
.'
..'
'..
..'
..
..
..
"
..
..
..
..
.,'
..
..
: ..'
.'
.'
,- ..
..
..
.6-,9
"
..
I
, I
.' I
I
I
I
I
I
I
~
o
'"
~
B
:0:
'"
~
s~
"'~
0'"
~~
0'"
~=
:5~
~-
o~
",,,,
,0
~;5
"u
;c~
w""
~~
~-
'=~
~~
"'~
_0
~w
"''''
~e
",'
::::
=
c;
:5
~
""
'"
~~
,,~
~fi;
w'"
t;:;~
5C1 i.I.J
~~ ~
uO '"
.....fi! 0
~:::: u;
gri ~
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
I
-~
-,-0
+~
_w
. 0
~U5
.,.'"
-~
~o
~~
~;i
~~
~~:Z:
%w +
:::if;:-
e.;es
"'~ '
;;~~
"'''''''
...:I~t;~
o,,:5:S
z~.o:6:
"
.
.
.
c
"
c
~
a
"
.
"
;;
~
c
~
a
C
Z
~
~
;;
~
~
.
Exhibit 'C'
PROJECT
LOCATION
\
L-
EASTlAKE
HIGH
SCHOOL
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PACIFIC SPANISH NETWORK INC PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPUCANT; , CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT
PROJECT Olay Water District Parcel Request: Proposal for construction, operation and
ADDRESS: South of Otay Lakes Rd, maintenance of five (5) 75-foot tall radio transmission
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: monopoles. ~J-
NORTH No Scale PCC-99-26
h :lhomelplanninglcarlosllocatorslpcc9926 ,cdr 2/9/99
Attachment 1
~ amo!j
XIHH
,DillO<Id V NN:liNV VffiIV W,UN3:J/.L::mu.sra <Id.L v M. A VlO
dBW AJ!UP!A
'UO.1SI"11U-QQ lnOl{IMt 'iJrvr;u JO <1rn lDUOLliNi ;0/ .iiJlfPlfilt loa.mll "iix},cUD.10 Iro ;r.mpwQ;U.lO O:J Oll'rfMl11un S! II
@Sam 'SONg ITJ'{OH.L,(q paI1f3!JMi03 rJ dDW f1/f.L@SJYJf SONg SYWOHJ. ,(q p;lluw3 uflIfS!1lLQd 1(1!M rmnpwdaJ dDUI amTI
i .. I~ ',..,. " If"",,,,,, n
I . -ij:l> .Q06l :: "l :aIB:JS = ~1
Ir r lllIDOIDtB
Ie. \ Zd a:JU.'IM 1
" \ \ Zd'M'1SY.I9
\~ I ZalOllM'!i
~,~ / Z~dOO~ ~
/ 1.t.IICI:I.OOM Z
,.../ l!.IICO can I
/ LVi.t\I3S
,
,
'0
t~
, ~O
,
,
/ ,
/ :
, /
~/ -"
, !. I
' ,
: / I
"
"
,
I ~.~ /
\ ---.;
! .... ..,-
i ...-- \
...... 1 \
----- I "
,
N
3.llS
.l~3rOl::Id
p-
\\
--
,
/
,
"~'
~~I
I a. ,,;;~
\\
~
c:;
---
,
"
,
--+-
i
/~/
I
i
i
I~?
I
!
I
I
rzl
I,
~-7;(
,
=
=
=
~
0:=
c.=
::I::::
.......
--
-
><
s
;>
><:
~
-;
m
'"
g
rn
-;
a
l)
"":
.,
o
.....
(t
r:i
-
~
-..:
()
~
~
>
1';;
>
>
z
....
tr1
z
z
>
t"'
o
r:i
~
-
,..
o
..
,.
s:
~
"d
""
'"
o
'-
m
()
-;
\ ,
..,. , r ~"- _ \ )
- / r --', "~~ ~-_~ \ ',>~ r::::~:, ~..,~
c- --~~~"-.,' /- , r 5 /^ ,- ,,-- ~ \ -'ti1 \ ' )-\ I \
( " " '" '" -^ r , ,^ ,_ v' \' _ ~ ~
\ -,' (A~, ,,,-:__, r~::r:," ,'- 1--/;' \'-:'-'_~ 1',-- \ "\
"> - '-, '>,p ,.\.. ""1 "v , ,.""" \/1 , \,
g g --':;'-~, \'-, , , :"..~, '~}--:~ r---',':, \:'~-~1 r~~J-\ v~ _\ _-/ \ I
..., - -- ~ r I I J--'-"'"'< _i ~ -<" " J \ .,.._ , "_~ _ ,\ , __ ,\; _,,<- \, _ _- \
" '" - """>> ,- ~ r" ,- --- , ..\_ _. I' " ,\..,__ __ \ \_ "-
CD .. \_--,~~\ \ ',.....-- --r~...<- -\ \ '8...........-. r--r --\ r-- -\'~- -\ ,_- _- ~ 1",,' '\_-- \
.., ,<.1..., [ , , . ,", " ","', " ,_, _ /, \ .~. ~ ." ,
o , ""c> 4, ,~,_ _, ',' ,., ., ,_ ,_, ',_\/~, '., ,
W "...>- r_1-, ,'" ", '.;--i" ,;,,--',-- ~ \" -- ^ _ _-, ,_- .~, \-_ _^ I
2. ....., 'r:l :c 1-, -, ""~~'" "~~'""", /_~ \,-;/ ~ 1'_", ..J1'""'8::("---; \-_ _-'I I 1
CD 0 o.j I J -J - ,--, \ ( 4. ~ 'T, \ "--..I, ,_ \\- .' \-' "
a; q:; t::" =j' , "F''', ,', C,/ok.c_, r<-w,;;.-.\ _ ,'_, ,'" , ,
o )>" t- :: ~h -j ii-:-~~ J I',", '.' ''"\'P--:,.''.-I I" '.'~ r-. ,/", '.__ -I r'"., I \
""- ~ : IC, -, - C l"""~, \'" '; '~':0'3'---I '';:'' .~ \-. -I",'"" I 1.-:,.__.-1 \- /" \
'" ~ f-j -. \~- - '-""--, , , '. , '~.J ," __, \"' -\-' '';1--., -1' __ ~ '\
m 0 t-~ -. - - , , , " r' A ", cJ "' ^" r" ,. " \-. -\-__ ^,,-,, .,~.. __ \
. " " ' , '"'''''''''' ,. ". ~ ''',''., " / , ". ". '\
" ",,, . c"""'"'''' "u """''''''''.x/,. ", \
".Cc C,' '.., '> _ """/ '''.., ,",,-, ".C//.,.., , , "
' '''''" """"''''''''', '''', ,'.-' , "", , /, "-, ".
' ""~.,,"'" ,'''"'''"'", '>, r, '~\',,>\ ';>,>.\ ';'.,.;, t";..:';:. \ ,
· "h_." ", -" "'/, "\,, ,. ,"', ''-'''''''/\ V'''1 ", " " ~
~ c_+_~ r--' r 1, 'co; c_+,~ ,-,.- " j' <" \eX,' j'.-I"~, __ ~~" , , __ ^
Z"~",.",., "V, ",', '1, " ,\<, H ,) ; " "I.."" , ,
o -~- ---~ ,-~: :,-; >---- ,--,.:~ y~" '. "t;; '. \Ar'". ,f."'r -<<^Y'/'':'' ~ /""/>..../~,,'\..),.-.J., \
<, '" ,., "n ". '" '<'. "', "'.-\ "'" , , ',-,., ('\ \ \\
... -...._~ J -!ii,"ffi' I~-I ~--t--^ --.,. --", . L> ,.., I' " ~ f. " " ., ~ , ,', " ,
'" "OJ ,- ^-<) " "-, (---o ~--c", '. ,~, ""'\ '. 'Co",,- / ^, /. .,..... Y,'." '" x , " , , y , '.
.. "'" ,. , -' c_"", , '. ",. '" >
CD - - - 1<..... _::"__...J...__~_ I" ..... 1~ ~ \..1:- 'r '<,....-<: 'f 'y 'y ,< , " ,'<.... ^,_ _~ \:_ _", \
J ~-F:"'__" I r;-- !!! '""; <""'~'" :~: ".^, '^--I-j ',Y,,) '(.... :..,....._ _~ ~_ .....\....
-~-i t':-':-_~t.... / ~..!. 'I" /-<; 'c~\e\ ',-,,-"-'-- \ 1--_] 1_::-<-_ /^-J' ?'/\YV'_-'>,':" ':/ .', ~O
--t-_j .', , , ~_ , " -;-'-"1--1 'j ___ ___...., , c . , ", _ .
'--.....-- "-~r' liE' ~ \""'..' v r '" 1-__ >---;--1 ______;, \" _'~, ) ,_, .
-, ". ." ,. ., '>, ""',,, '> "-v '"" . "'" ~~
-I..--r )..--r-_. ~-." I I ~~"! '\~", r,."\" ", ", ':'___~h_____~___-,-__ ~h~,~"",:, _
-t-_. t "", .. , ','> , 'v.. ',__", '>",> "~_"'" '''''~ .
..,.....-' -+-.,~ --.I!; I &1" \~, 'r',A. V /;';, "~'" '';T~=, : "_,,___" --.., ^^r" ^.o:-::::-___/ /
""'''-", "" 'x "-"H' ",_Co "h", '\
' ," ,'" ',,, '>~ ~k,. 0 "",~u""" .,"-c.u
I > ~ I 'O'~_ ,..,.,., > l , '^"---j 0, <" "" '__ f\
" , 'X "'--1 f ~ I I I P I L --f ---_.... 1-}-__1 I '- ;-<. ~~y -1....."- ___,,! /; \
' , " , -',,~., "', ", " " " ,',
1 ' · '" ,,,,, ". ".;" '__._ " "'''''__''Y "
n :J~ -( ~i \ '~' : ~ ....~:"f--: ;:::-:--. - -^" :' :>", , "/ /'/</..!.'"-,':f:/ \\
L.:.J~. ! "------;- ,_./', _/', r"" '-, _. '_' ". ( '^',//Z
. "'... ", hC,,_ . "",,, /, " ,/ . "
'I ~~ 'I 'i '-"-'-.."'-"'=----"'7< -~ >\ (/r ,- ^,: ~< .\ "',".';;? / n
'f' /_;0."'" \"'. ~"'" '~:_" 5'
6 /1 " > f""\.,', \'--'.~ ';'~'//t>~~'~,_., ~:
~~) 1/" ,/ /'>'" r' " c' ~ ' '--')j' /. ,
' -, "'~ ,; ct '" r' " \:" r-" " y"
'I "" " -', ", ,.~, ~ J \>\ '." ,> "
'i~"1 :. Il~8) ,f<",~. ,I c-:, """,~;. ~,
x '" '. " "C' 'c 0 ""." .','" '/j";/!I ~:
" , ' " , ", h , "V " ", '" ",' .. =
"~ ' 0 'j';- ~o "'.",, '''-A "~,' 'L-' 7 ", .,
~' " "'''0" , . " " I,
' , ". '''." "id, ~)/ .L _"
' "~'>_u ~ ''''''''':..~. u=,.~,
- -. ~---
..0....0 ST", '0"", ". ~! ~__
~ >,
: : ~i 'l
(-------' '--1l o. //
1 ~~...:.: /
, ...:.:'/
,t:-L [;] \) -::/
l ) ~
' " //
( _.-:.:...~~//
.-- ~
' (. w-'
' """~'j<-
3
z-
--~~~~
)
/
,/
"
'0
",.
~:s:
T_,
~ i~
,. :z
::;;::g~~i ~
0"0"'" .'
"'..."..........
~~~;o~
~m>~:::o
"~;;:;;a!
go~;;:::::::
%"''"000
;;;;:"'1:..,
"';;;,1::0-,:1...
... "''''0:
5smg:
~~g~~
~~~~~
~in~~
~~~~~
o "".Zz
"~:-;:"'ifi
"'~o."
>:;:~
~z
GBGBBBBB
.. ; ~ :. :, ~
E E ~ - - S
2 Z Z ;; ~ 'r'
~;~~~i:~::
~
'.
O.
~i
o.
~.
~;
~~
n
~.
, 0 0 ,
0 0 ~ ,
~ ~ ~ ~ ,
~'t
\
~
;arn~H
lJ3IO~d VNNaLNV vmrv '1V(liN3:J/lJrn.LSra ~aLV fA A VlO
d1rW UOH-B;)O'1 IB;)!qd1u~OdO.L pazrrB.laUa~
XIHN
"
"
I
2:, ,
I
~
"
Fl
-- - ----------
----,
, };:/!y--~"'''~-- --'-;:~'~:"--~-" '-- ,
~~!:. <~;~/L--Ir' - ,~'''; \ \ tJ 'I, ~ ~ 'v --..~:-~, ~
/--~.'--:::.~::~,'-~"__ i f"'::--__ ~, - D::\ \ - J \ Ij \,~ \\
":-:~~,~~ ,\ '~-~,: :c!2 '. ~\ \~ / O~,.~,.__, "- ~"'I:" \ '~t,._~..
/;~~("</~!-~ /f g ~ : \ 11(1) ~ U,,, \r.o ' . ''\ "
~ t~~ / IU.' I,,', !: ~; \ 712 ~ \ w b;:______- ....~. \.
r !".~/,,:)I:.J,::'!; r --::., ~\'~ ~\~/;;: --"... "'~J ,'\
/ ~!~ ~ Iii ( \g 0\ ~ \'---;~i_' '" "I \\'
" . "I ,- - I'
::~)~~I~'-"~~)! ';\ \, ji \ \'\--:~'iB}\\\'I:'\" \
~""J;:;: \', \ I ._\..: , ~
/' ~; \i~~i i I J \ \ - ~-... Iii
!~ !;t~ /\ \ r I ,/
---~:~==:-:.=~~ ~\~\ \~t !, "i",J
. _n_. --T \ \ ,Ii!; ,..'.. \ F"J:'
T II /;~ t~~'~ i" \',
-------~--~\ ,"~\Wr:l1i;":~~\.," ~~i~~>\ '> \ 1---
\ ./! .. 1 \ ., . j"'-c.'" -', '...... ~'" I
Tn_:~---yq!"i>- \~ ~.~~".i.'II~'1~~ "~'Ij\:'\"~~;'\\, 'j--,
~~~~i~:~:~:__~i:ifl 1~~~lZt ,/~~ ~~~~, ...J'! 01 ~<. ~-' ~ \ '.1:
"",-~ ~ ,~~ \ \~g,: ~~~_:...---- ......~;.."...
/, ,,' /',' ," ~,i, .....,
-I----.-~--------- \ ,/" \ .....\.....c \ ......":. I
\ ,,-<' \ \' ~..~ ". \ ..J I) \ ...... I
~ '",\ > ,;, ""... \~0,: . ~,.'. I:
~---''''''' ,\ ','.i ~ ~ '<\"......".. .,'1'
'......... i. \;', r.. i:> .~.~::::-.r
<':, )lQ, /' \ \ hJl',. '.." " isg ',~~;:-~:_~ ~ I
~i:>::. \\ 1\/): '~v'\\;--J!;' "j' .,~ I
~~-<;,' \ i t ~i I..,
~-.::::~~--' ...._/'\ ~ ......~~,t""';.., ~~ 1.:;~ I
\:",<, x" "1 /11 ."'\' " \ ',ilL jf; I'
\ \~- '- " \;~ . \../ .. '
":;-~,'~ \'."<< I \~tl -'-7--' h; ; J:
. ,. -- ,-: i /, ) "\L . '<:::L
------......-. ..___1---",' -, \' \ '.I '....'/ _____
.... "./ I, ), ' '~j \ I __~!!_' I ~-:'".!'__
c_..-.-- /':-:-~:. \..., j{:\:-:>I'~'l~~""'''~--_--m-
_Z
.
N~~
0',
(is';;:
IT;/:.
~~.~
-,~,:.
:i:: ;;:::~
2 0"'<
:c: ,,~~
u. 0-'0
g ::~6
....' 6~:2
~ :02
0. g:;;o
1:1:1 "'<<::
"" N",IIJ
~\';'~
~~~
<,.
~B~
::::....0'"
z 5~~D
2' 2Za:O
!,~p;
~ --...z
(.;I ......:IP;:;
::: ~:zz
o ~g~:5
~ -u>->-
C. g::::~~
~ <-,,-~1S
__ <O_lJ
;,;
.
~
g ~
.
o __
~ ~
III v.
. 0
c. ;:;::::
~ Q~;
CI:' 1::..<
~ !!1:"U
~ 0<>-'
o ..~'"
....
~ ~~~
11.1 ~"'CI
~ ~~~
~ 0..",
z '" ~
~S~ ~~ >-'
~~~ :J~O~
... f.~~~
~~~ ~~~g~
g~~~~~-~~
i':.~' :~~~~~~~~
~-<g"'i!;~"g
~5~z;:;g~'"
~~5:;:1t~~~~
.~o.1 ::::~~~~~~g~
~~tz~c~~'"
~~Ui!jo~g~~
g~~sz<~~o
0,,- ",>-.. ....z
i 8~~~~~g~~
~~
w<<
~o~'"
za:;;",
i~<1J
~'::~~5 ~~
",;ug:;: ?~
~6~;;;:: <;~
",,, OZ ~i;:
gl.~;;:~ u,~
~g~~~ t:
~U"7~ ~~
>-~~:I~ . f~
~~o--~5~ ri!!1
(;iff~~~~ ~i
~~~~~8 <<
~o--~~!r:: ~'"
O~II:~1t1l: .~~
"m"-"5~~ ~
~~~g~g: ~~
~
~
.
.
o
.
J
~
'"
..
~
g
~ 0
0(1",
.0
<: ~~II:
,;"~
;: g;:-s
g ;tV>""!!
~_ ~~~!i:
- -~~'"
;;! ~i...<J.
o ~~~:o:.
::: V>~...>
QII:V>__
~ !!.",~;:.
< ~S;~
~ "''''NO
"
.
~
NO
.0
~E
j~
._%N
~g~
iih
u~~
<
~
.
a
.
ffi
-~
~t'!
3..Lnotl\
31.VJ:S,
-.~'.--""'C3sOdO~
, ;"
'0.-.1 -h.
k I!",
/.'Vi"
:x
'\\
'~<
~~---
,
..
.
~~
-,"
'-,
-~-f:----
';<
'"',
~
,
\
--
.~
\
J-_
\
l
\" :>
\i 0
(2_
CO
~
, ~
'I m
\r, Q)
'.r, C
I..f- .-
J I.. OJ
" "
il--W
.' m
iL- >.
" 0
" '"
"I _
:I-.~
If--. <<t
:: 0
_r'-~..
r II Q)
! !, f2
J "-_.." ~
o
rJ)
i
\:
.
"
"
,
,
i.
"
"
,,' .
.....-:0
=
~
=
=
.:::;::
...
- -
... u
.~
:is ""
-,
- 2iJ
:: ""
I:J <:
... z
...
- Z
...
- Ui.1
:: i-
:. Z
~ <:
0 <:
Q. ~
0
Eo-; ..-1
"=' ~
~ .....
- ~
...
:: u
..... f::;
~
Q u
P2
"=' ,..
en
... i5
..
:: ~
... ""
.. i-
- <:
.~
- ~
~ >-
~ ~
.....
... 0
rJJ.
CD
'"
'"
><
--'
.......
==
\1!!! 1\
~i~\
~ Ii
\ !I
"
~i~fi
~ ~4~ \
II
"
~
__, J.. "1M :dO .l.Ji81a
~ "
~ in ;: ' -- 0;<;1 2!S 03S0d0""1 r
~_ ~ I I
\ /~/~ I
\ 'I 'II
\ ~:n
I"! / Ill!:: .!~ ;;J'
_' il1d ti /, ~~ I'
U\ ~ ~ \ ~~ ~ "
~~ b \ O[ II
~ ~ u \ ~~ ~ i
~ ~ ~ \ " " -/-,
~2~ \
~
I
l
I
!
,I d
u- .,
Co: ~I fI
~ ;.:
II
II
II
,\\
i" .
,-'V/ I'! "
)< iii'i ~
. .. .
..J (.' o~~
"~~ ~ ~~;
t: ~ ~ 0
~8 '
v
'>;::"
"
1.(11
()
S:IU
Z"'
"
" ~~~~~,
~~~~~"
~~
e--1
<I
l1J
'"
<I
~~
gilD
;j]<1.
o~
0<1.
<;
o 0
<I
\ o~ ~
~
\ -"s\7", , A I
';t ~,
;,:'
<(
o
~~
Q.
."
-
...
Z I1i
C ~
_ z
,...
."
U
o
....;
'<i>
"-
III
-
\1,
1...((
"~,I'
,[:';,/,,;
:,.1"/1
/;(/,1:::",
- -;,i\\/: :'-d
,,",{':I'-'
/?:,(?" ! <"
/~ >,,:,-' I \),j ,"
f:' ,J,
" ',~, 'i, ,,:;';' -",,:'.
" ":,' ",')
~)'J"J'It*tfA';"I1I.if:/'/'/:':~'<"~'~~~-
, ,\.~ ' ... W"!,!,'",,,
\<,!t~i . . .~i,:2f~/.i~iJ))))))~~)1j
. '\,'~cc/ 'c./~"/' /\/.,.,:";'11.
\:>~> -/r ,,:,'.~:,;'i ,'/_;,;~: 1:'
''-', 'r' ,-, :,f",_ _I' .'.:" , ,./":~'
:;~<J;.<,t(i U)~"t )., '.
. /::\::~/!,', (;\\\~\i> ~~;j'(~ii':ii;!".',.'
"", , . ,," , ''\ "~'I' \\~ ~'i'\\ "i'(1"',"/:,!"
, " " '\\~ \ " I"'_,I'J
" " \\ I; \ \: "1';',1 n',lIf,"!
'\\\',':', Ii (', /)'1 )Ij.,/!;""N>.j/.;,II,:I
\ 1'1' "j-' I J ....1/, !;>,,' 'J/' '
///''-'':'1<' (,~ (.?ri~;::^;:~..i': :[i:', I
\ "/,/",..,, .fl!' ."1:"",,
" /,.-;,;,., ('f!! A/';"','; V,I~;J~\
..'\ ' ~~, ,'/:',;/,)?~ :;21:,'}/ f.'::'/
'" ;"-,~. }.-':/! ;'1--'0
.. .........~ VIII"/",,'
'..f A/.lil/<.
~' A ;/ :~Ii: /-.
/lj/I/I!,..,.
:,{/f'l'.JQ:.,.r
'~. Ii '/>;(1
" jj;-.'::""'JIII'
.. l,vl,/."I"
- iI'l (--: '/1',1
/" I,,'ji<',' Ii:
-< ~ -' "'''":'
-~"__i"
: ;,1'\:il' ,
, ''-,n!', "
r,J'I" '"
,/j,i: },',:,:,//'
flJ, ' \I'I~(/'I;"f/./(.'.'/'"
J'!i;,,.' 'I: i" .:" -",...,/,i__i,','~~
"J IIL/I!:I; 1"/;'1,/':
"' I'j,1 ',) :/:
'}: '~j' J I, J I
.//I//rlj I ' I" I,
"' ,.'if (;I!i/iIlY);! 'I' 'I
,,;:I;,WI))/)I)I,'lli,lie.'." .
~ ~~I~~f#7d//,(ir-:
/1;1//-__,"'--"'" J I
/ /:/' ",( ! -' ,-"1.1:"
,i/ '/1,/,'" , -' ,~,:
':-'/.,','l.-'/ L
i/,"/ ii',",'/':'''--'' ~'-"'.,
Zj," "
.:')"~".....
...,... .'..
~,.. "'"
~ ":'f',
,
"I"
J-"',
,'\1,
,
~I
I
,
i
,
I
"",
\.,.
,\.'
'I"
I.
,~-,
J~~~rr:~::'IR '
// 550\'~~S~~:F~' " "/~~\,:
~..,;J~rvt.,
,-'" /"c1;<"'~POSED\ \ ' \~,.
\11.75 ACRES MAY BE SOLD (( "..<II\IoI~ ~ ,,..
t A MOle. ""
I OTAY RANCH HAS RIGHT . \ ~'to',,j,-,\~', z~' ,> "
.A 11.51 ,ACRE,S. A,"
\.I.:OF FIRST REFUSAL .\~ A .."'\ :{(~~' .
I' . ',/"'\ \./
"J.' "-Y \'--;:
\.- --
",I
/
C,'.'
oj"
o 'ACIf
fIfID'JUIO'
.;" oI'JRATloJJS
V....RO
,,...,
,~'. '
',', ,
.../
,./"
/
--
~',- . '; ,
"
j'--
',',':,":'""",
" ; , 1 I' I :: I' , \ Ii! i : i: ' ..,' ~','" :
,i,: 11,', '1\,' \1,\ ',IL ii" ~;-I~ ,',"
"':'j' 'i',:I,'i,;,',I\j:;~,/,:",j ;' I
'/I)JJ!!!"!!!IT.:" :~Tj:
' fIJI/Hi]'i!,'
",. 'I'/J" \.\\:;'
, ' ,1'
"
~1.....
I"
'Ie'
I ~ '
.0001
~ ~'17VOS
-.....-
o
z
w
o
~
o
o
o
I
0-:
o
CD
I
~1.JJ
We
U1 ZVl ii
Z -..J-..J~
o ~::!iJ)~w
f= t-U -I-
~ ZO:::--IZif)
- wwo=>
l'J g202~
r:n Vl2I::Ea:::
w wouo<(
o a:::U(f}Uc...
~ I I I I I
:::J a:::U(f}lL..Q...
9 2J
S
o
m Z
'"
Z
.,.
"-
"
o
u
Z
::J
>-
r
;!
()
<{
"-
w
UJ
o
0-
0-:
-
"
u
"
'--------
>-
0-:
<{
o
z
~
6
CD
0-
I
UJ
0-:
W
~
~
o
~
Z
<,
,~
"
0
u
" U
Z
" "-
" Q'
," >-
'D "-
W ~
~ 0
0 '"
Z
'" co
'"
'"
,-
'"
.,.
"-
"
o
0:
c"
\ [ ".' n,', ,
, ~;
.., , '
>-
Z
.,.
"-
"
o
"
r
u
Z
.,.
Q'
>-
.,.
,-
o
W
"C
~
~J
n f-
Z
I _w
:;;
<(Q.
~ 0-0
UJ-"
w
W I(;jz
\::,0:5
Ct: <( 0-
0-:0
~ W
>-UJ
(') <(0
rO-
LL 00
0-:
0-
u
~
f-
0'=2
zOO:
wtn
(DO
~'"
f-W
Zf::;::
W-,
",3:
'"
~>-
u~
f-O
Ow
z:r:
UJf-
o
-If-
wZ
u-
"'0
<{W
0.. X
UJW
_z
:r:z
f-<{
W
f-
o
Z
Mitigated Negative Declaration_
'\
PROJECT N.-\ME:
KURS Radio Antennas
PROJECT LOCATION:
A 6.34 ac. ieased portion ofland located on Otay Water District
(O\\'D) property, about ],600 feet south ofOtay Lakes Road
and 2,400 feet west of Eastlake Parl.-v,ay Drive and the
EastJake Greens Residentia] community, City of Chula Vista
ASS:::SSOR'S PL-RCEL NO.
643-020-25-00
PROJECT APPLICANT:
Pacific Spanish Network a,k.a KURS-1 040 Radio Station
C.A.SE NO.:
1S-99-15
DATE: January 11, 1999
A Project Setring
The environmental setting consists of hilly IalO11s and corresponding slopes. The project site
is 10cated south of the Otay Water District water reservoir facility and north of the futme
Palomar Road and west of the proposed futme State Route 125. The site inc1udes a rounded
low ridge top, ranging in elevation from approximate1y 575-625 feet. The site has been
disturbed by agricu1tmaJ activities and by grading in the area of the proposed access road.
The sit~ is zoned PC (planned Community) and the General Plan designates the site as Puplic
& Quasi Public.
Access to th~ site is through Otay Lakes Road, a designated 6-lane major arterial. The Otay
Vi' ater District water tank reservoirs are located to the north; vacant land to the east and south
is owned by the District and is found in a natmal state with recent discing activities having
taken plac~; land to the west is present]y vacant but is being improved for residentia1
deveJopment as part of th~ Otay Ranch Sectional Planning i'uea (SPA) I,
B, Project Description
The proposed project consists of the instal1ation of five whip monopole radio antennas
mounted on buried concrete slabs and having an approximate height of about 75.8 feet
Additionaliy. a transmitt~r shed measuring 200 sq. ft. and having a height of] 0 feet wil1 be
constructed. Each antenna wil1 have 36 buried radia] lines to aid in the reception and radio
transmission. Each antenna is proposed to be slllTOunded by an 8-foot high chain link fence
and approved landscaping. A six-foot high chain link fence will be installed around the
perimeter of the 6.34 acres of1eased area. A dirt road will be graded to provide access from
the existing OWD facilities to the lease area.
c<I
...,
s=
'"
a
..c:
.,
<IS
...,
...,
-<
A:\lIb"Jmda\is9807 .n~~
4>f
Page 1 ~~f?. .
-r-'
'---~
-
\.
city of chula vista planning department 01Y OF
environmental review section CHUL.<\ VISfA
Discretionary actions involve the granting of a Conditional Use Permit.
C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans
The ClllTent zoning on-site is PC (Planned Community) and the site is desi~'IJated as Pubjic
& Quasi Public by th~ General Plan. The proposed project is in compJiance with the Zoning
Ordinanc~ and Genera] Plan.
D Identificarion of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City ofChula Vista (including an attached Environmental
Checklist form) determined that the proposed project wiJl not have a significant
environmental effect, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report wiJl not b~
required. Tnis Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section
15070 ofth~ State CEQA Guidelines.
1. Public Services Impact
Fire
Th~ nearest fire station is located about 3 miles ITom the proj ect site. The estimated
response time is less than seven (7) minutes. The response time complies with the
City Threshold Standards for fire and medical response time. . This review process
shan be coordinated with other Regulatory Agency review processes to ensure that
no aspect of the proposed project wjJ] have an adverse impact on project site soils,
unaerground water table or th~ slllTounding residents and the physical environment.
Police
Th~ Police Department indicates the Average Response Time for Priority] caJls is
4 minutes, 47 seconds. This is just slightly above the Threshold Standard of 4
minutes and 30 seconds. The response time for Priority 2 cans is 6 minutes and 21
seconds, and this does comply 'with the Threshold Standard. The Police Department
will be able to provide adequate service to the proposed land use.
~
Utijny and Sen'ice Systems
Soils
Bas~d on the existing water tank reservoirs being on the proj ect site for many years,
there is no evidence of adverse soil conditions present that would affect the structural
integrity of the proposed antennas or transmitter structure.
A:\l1b\imda\is9807.neg
Page ~
4r
Drainage
The Engineering Division indicates that existing on-site and off-site drainage waters
are adequately and naturally conveyed into nearby Poggi and Telegraph Canyons.
Sewer
The project as proposed does not require the installation of sewage facilities and
therefore no impacts to these are noted.
Streets/Traffic
The Threshold Standards Policy requires that all intersections must operate at a Level
of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D"
may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections. No
intersection may reach an LOS "F" during the average weekday peak hour.
Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempt from this policy. The
proposed project would comply with this Threshold Policy for the immediately
affected Otay Lakes Road a six-lane prime arterial which would remain at a Level-of-
Service "c" with project approval.
Communication Systems
According to an engineering statement prepared by Mullaney Engineering, Inc., and
confirmed by Rick Matkin, City Building Service Superintendent and Dave Marsden,
Communications Division Supervisor, the proposed radio facility will operate with
a daytime power of 9kW and nighttime power of 4kW which is considered low
pressure conditions. In accordance with a memo dated 12/21/98 and prepared by Mr.
Matkin, the proposed radio ftequency would not interfere with the city's emergency
response communication system.
The Federal Communications Commission (F.C.C.) recognizes that broadcast
stations operating in full compliance with F.C.C's technical rules may still cause
interference to nearby consumer electronic devices such as television receivers and
general communication systems. In the event that the operation of the radio antennas
create blanketing interferences, KURS Radio will fully comply with F.C.C.
requirements by responding to complaints of blanketing interference in a timely
manner, and assume the financial responsibility involved for correcting the problem.
The period of time whereby the Radio station retains financial responsibility shall
extend to one year after the blanketing area has been fully developed and occupied.
The conditions of approval of the conditional use permit will address financial
responsibility.
A :\11b\1inda\is9807 .neg
Page 3
'Iv
4_0--._._'___..______. ~.___. ___~_~___. -.._.--._- ...".-~. ..,_
3. "Li:- Quality
Tn~ applicant is not required to obtain a permit rrom the Air Quality Pol1ution
Control District (/I.PCD) for the instal1ation of an emergency back-up generator.
Standard requirements regarding the control of fugitive dust shal1 apply during the
construction phase and these shal1 adequately address any temporary air pollution
proolems.
4. AtSThetjcs
Ttl~ proposed project wil1 be subject to granting of a conditional use permit and the
proposed antennas, transmitter structure, fencing and landscaping wil1 be subject to
Planning staffreview and approval. This wil1 help ensure the proposed project wil1
compJement future proposed development, minimize visual impacts and comply
with al1 applicable design regulations and policies. The visual impacts of the whip
antennas would not appear to be significant, however, the proposed fencing,
equipment shed and landscaping need to be subject to a further coordinated review
with adjacent a~velopment in order to reduce potential impacts.
5. Paleontological
According to the Otay Ranch SPA One Final E.LR. and the Otay Ranch Annexatjon
Final Second-Tier E.LR., the proposed project site is within the Upper Sandstone
Unit of the Otay Formation, and has a high paleontological resource sensitivity. This
unir of the Otay Formation has produced important vertebrate fossil remains. The
pot~Dtial impact ro paleontological resources wil1 be mitigated to a less than
significant leve] by complying with the proposed mitigation.
6. Biological
The site is located on a low hil1 and is covered mostly with a domestic barley or a
similar grain crop. Two separate biota studies were conducted on-site for this
project. The first report (Merkel & Associates 9/3/98) described the predominant
non-native vegetation and the non-sensitive wildlife observed. The report further
r~commended that a focused search be done for the Western Burrowing Owl since
rodent holes were observed on-site. The second survey (pacific Southwest Biological
Services, Inc, 9,'11/98) fol1owed established Burrowing Owl Survey Protocol and
encountered no sign of Burrowing Owl habitation or activity. The cDnclusion of the
second survey was that the project site does not support Burrowing Owls because
these species occupy flatter ground with vegetation of shorter stature than found at
the site. No further studies were recommended. No mitigation wi]] be required.
A:\lJb\iind.a\is9807 .n~g
~1
Page ~
E Mirigatio:-, '\ecessary 10 A void Significant Effects
Specific project mitigation measures ar~ required to reduce potential environmental impacts
identified in the initial study for this project to a level below significant. The mitigation
measures wi]] be made a condition of project approval of the Conditional Use Permit, as well
as requir=ents of the attached Mjtigation Monitoring Program (Attachment "A").
The appli~ant shall:
1. Coordinate at the design stage, the proposed fencing and landscaping features with
the corresponding surrounding residential land developers. The proposed fencing
and landscaping plans shall be subject to review and approval by the City Planning
and Building Department.
7 Ensure that a paleontological monitor be on-site at all times during excavation and
trenching for the proposed project. If and when fossils are discovered, th~
paleontologist shall recover them. The prepared fossils along with copies of all
pertinent field notes, photos, and maps shall be deposited in a scientific institution
containing paleontological co]]ections such as the San Diego Natural History of Man.
F. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista:
Doug Reid, Planning Division
Benjamin Guerrero, Planning Division
Muna Cuthbert, Engineering
Majed AJ-Ghafry, Engineering
Duane Bazze1, Planning Division
Brad Kemp, Building Division
Doug Perry, Fire Marshal
R.jchard Preuss, Crime Prevention
Joe Gamble, Planning Division/Parks & Rec. Sec.
Peggy McCarberg, Deputy City Attorney
R.jck Matkin, Building Service Superintendent
Dave Marsden, Communications Division Supervisor
Chula Vista City School District: Dr. Lowell Billings
Sweetwater Union High School District: Katy Wright
Applicant's Agent: Helix Environmental Planning Consultants, Tamara S. Ching
A:\llb\lind.a\is9807.neg
'-If?
Page 5
.'e.,..__'.._....__
7 Do~uments
Chula Vista General Plan (1989) and EIR (1989)
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
CTeay Ranch SPA I Final E.LR.
CT..ay Ranch !\Ill1~xation Tiered E.LR.
Supplemental Engineering Statement, Mullaney Eng. Inc. (12/4198)
Bio", Survey, M~kel & Associates (9/3/98)
r o~used Survey ror Burrowing Owl, Pacific Southwest Bio. Services, Inc. (9/11/98)
Cultural Resourc~ Survey, Gallegos & Associates, (J 0/98)
3. Initial Study
Tnis environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any
comments receiv~ on the Initial Study and any comments received during the public
review period for this Negative Declaration. The report reflects the independent
judg=ent of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the
en\TIonmentaJ review of this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning
Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910.
/l
f'- //?
Douglas .'Reid
Envlrornnental Review Coordinator
~{U/
Date: January I I, 1999
A:\llb\1iDda\is9807.neg
'1,
Page 6
---.--.. .~-_._--_.
-~-"--'-----"--"--'--
Case 1\0. 15-99-15
E!\"lRO:\'ME:\'TAL CHECKLIST FORM
1.
Name of Proponent:
2.
Lead Agency Name and Address:
3.
Address and Phone Number of Proponent:
4.
Name of Proposal:
5.
Date of Checklist:
I. LA..l\'D USE AND PL.......l\:\'ING: Would the
proposal:
a) Conflict with genera] p1an designation or
zoning?
b) Conflict with applicab1e environmental plans or
polici~s adopted by agencies with jurisdiction
ove:- tD~ project?
c) lufec: agricultural r~sources or operations (e.g.,
impacts to soils or farmlands, or impacts rrom
inconmatible 1and U5~s)"
d) Disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an
estabhshed communIty (inc1uding a 10w-income
or minority communiTY)"
Pacific Spanish Network a.k.a. KCRS
Radio
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 9]910
296 "H" Street. Third Floor
Chula Vista, CA. 91910
(619) 425-2132
Five whip radio antennas for KURS Radio
January 8, 1999
Potent jail)'
Significant
Impact
Polentiall~'
Si~nificant
Unless
Miti(::lted
No
Impact
Less than
Significanl
Impact
D
D
[81
D
D
o
[81
D
D
o
[81
o
o
o
[81
o
Comments: Tne presently developed site is zoned planned community and designated Pubhc and
Quasi Pubhc by th~ City's General Plan. The proposed project would require the granting
0:- 2 Conditional Use Permit by the CIty, There are no impacts or conflicts with the zoning
0: Genera1 Plan,
A:\!!:- \ilnda\is9BOBC::K. trm
PO;Je 1
J-o
f'n'enljall~
SI::,nificanl
Impact
l'OIt'n[iall~
Si~nificall1
linlcss
!l.liliJ:::lI{'(j
1..eo;;slh:w
Si~njrll:.J.nl
Impact
'\f.
Impact
n. POPULATION AND HOUSING: Would the
proposal:
a) CumwativeJy exceed official regionaJ or Jocal D D D [gJ
populati on proj ecti ons"
b) Induce substantia] growth in an area eIther D D 0 [gJ
dire:;;: or indiresr!\ (~.g., through projects In an
und:,\"~joped area 0:- extensjon of major
inlr2.5!:1lcture )?
c) Disp1aoe existing housing, especiaIJy affordable D D D [gJ
housing?
Comments: Project imp1ememation would not contribute to locaJ popuJation growth nor dispJacement
0: existing housing. No adverse impacts are noted.
m. GEOPHYSICAL: Would the proposal result in or
expose people to potemial impacts involving:
a) Unstable earth conditions or changes in geo10gic D D D [gJ
substructures?
b) Disruprions, displacements, compaction or D D D [gJ
overcovering of the soil?
c) Change in topography or ground surface relief D D D [gJ
features?
d) The de5truction, covering or modification of any D D D [gJ
unique geologic or physicaJ features"
e) ,i\ny in::rease in wind or water erosion of soils, 0 0 0 [gJ
either on or off the sIte"
f) Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, D 0 0 [gJ
or changes in si1tation, deposition or erosion
which may modify the channeJ of a river or
stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay inlet or
1ake"
g) Exposure of people 0, property to geologic 0 0 D [gJ
hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud
slides. ground fai1ure. or simiJar hazards?
A :\11::1 \iinda\is9808::k.1rm
'31
Page 2
"Olenliall~
Si!.'nific.:iIn!
ImTlatt
f'OIenl;al"
Si~niflcanr
tinless
Miti!:!ated
Le:s~ than
Si::-nirlcanl
Jmf':lC!
"
)mn~:'
Comments:
:~0 adverse 1m;::>a:ts regarding soils or geophysical conditions are not~G. A geologic repo:1
W"5 prepared as part of the Otay Ranch Sectional Plan Area (SPA) One and the Final
S~cond- Tier EJR No groillld rupture or liquefaction hazards are exp~cted at the proJ~:t
sj-"" The nearest potentially active fault is the La Nacion fault located about two miles w~5t
0: the project sit~. No mitigation wi]] be required,
IV. WATER: Would the proposal result in:
a) Cnang~5 in absorption rates, drainage patterns, 0 0 0 ~
or the ~ate and amOillll of surface runoff?
b) Exposure of peopj~ O~ property to water related 0 0 0 ~
haza~Qs such as flooding or tidal waves?
c) Dis:,..arge into surface waters or other alteration 0 0 0 ~
of striace water quality (e.g., temperature,
dissolved oxygen o~ turbidity)?
d) Changes in the amount of surface water in any 0 0 0 ~
water body?
e) Chang~s in currents, or the course of direction of 0 0 0 ~
wate~ movements, in ~ither marine or fresh
waters?
f) Change in the quantity of groillld waters, either 0 0 0 ~
through direct additioDS or withdrawals, or
through interception of an aquifer by cuts or
excayations?
g) Altered direction or rate of flow of groillldwater? 0 0 0 ~
h) Impa:!s to groundwater quality? 0 0 0 ~
i) Alterations to the course or flow of flood waters? 0 0 0 ~
j) Subst211tial reduction in the amoilllt of water 0 0 0 ~
otherwise available for public water supplies?
Comments: Tne Engineering Division indicates that the project site is not within a flood plain. The
project site flows natura]]y on-site and off-site into nearby Poggi and Telegraph Canyons
, ?\io adverse impacts are noted. No mitigation wi]] be required,
Y. AIR QLALITY: Would lhe proposal:
a) Violate any air quaiity standard or contribute to 0 0 0 ~
an existing or projected air quality violation?
b) Expose sensitive receptors to po]]utants? 0 0 0 ~
A:\ 1~:: \iindo\ is980B::k.trm
$"")...
Page 3
..-...."
+-- --,--_._"~..--..-.
,---_..._~--- -~-_.~--
C) Ahe::- 2..1-:- movement, moisture, or tempe:rature, or
caus~ any change In chmate. eIther 10caJJy or
regionaJJy?
d) Crea~ objectionable odors?
JOOll'nliall,
J"Henllalh Sil!njflcan~ Les, than
SI~lIirIC:ln! Unlts< ~!:,njflC3nt "'t,
!mr,ac! :'\liti:;!;JI('(J 1mp;Jc! Jmp:iC
0 0 0 1&
o
o
o
1&
e) Creale a substantia] increase in stationary or non-
stationary sources of air emissions or the
detenD~ation of ambl~nt air quahty"
o
o
o
1&
Comments:
"D adverse impaols to mr quallIY are noted. A back-up generalOr \\'lIh Jess than 200
b:-akehorse power would be us~d for em~rgencies only, Th~ project wDuid not be reqUIred
10 obtain a pennir through the Air PoJJution Control Dismct (APCD). ""D mitigation will
be required,
n. TR<\..l'o/SPORTA TION/CIRCULA TION: Would
the proposal result in:
a) Increased vehicJe trips or traffic congestion? 0 0 0 (gJ
b) Hazards to safety from design features (e,g.. 0 0 0 (gJ
sha.c-p curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
c) Inadequate emergency access or access to nearby 0 0 0 (gJ
uses?
d) Insufficient parking capacity on-site or off-site? 0 0 0 (gJ'
e) Hazards or barriers for pedestrians or bicyclists? 0 0 0 (gJ
f) Conflicts with adopled policies supporring 0 0 0 (gJ
a1ternative transporration (e.g. bus turnouts,
bicycle racks)?
g) Rail, waterborne or air traffic impacls? 0 0 0 (gJ
h) A "large project" under the Congestion 0 0 0 (gJ
Management Program" (An equivalent of 2400
or more average daily vehicle trips or 200 or
more peak-hour vehic1e trips.)
Comments: Tne Engineenng DivIsion states that the project site IS adequately served by Otay Lakes
Road and that the project would have no impacts on this six-lane prime arterial. No
mitigation will be required.
A: \1I~ \iinda \ is9BDBok, irm
rJ
Pog~ L
Potcllti~]I~
1'(Jltntj:.lIIl~ Sj~njric~nt Les~ th:w
Sicllifjc~n[ Ulllcs~ Sicnifican! "
]mp~tl I\lili,..~u'u Imp~ct Im!J~'::'
\1I. BIOLOGICAL RESOl'RCES: Wouldtne
proposal result in impacts 10:
a) Endangered, sensitive species, sp~cies of 0 0 0 0
conc= or species that are candidates for listing?
b) Localiy designated species (e.g" heritage trees)? 0 0 0 0
c) Local;y designated natural communIties (e.g, oak 0 0 0 0
fores~ coastal habitat. etc.)?
d) Weti2:JQ habltat (e,g.. marsh, nparian and vernal 0 0 0 0
poolj"
e) WildJife dispersal or migration comdors? 0 0 0 0
f) f\ffect regional habitat preservation planning 0 0 0 0
efforts?
Comments: Tn~ project site is in a partiaIJy natural state, No trees are found on the project site, which
generaIJy consists of a flat mesa with ridge top. The site has been disked and is fuIJy
disrurbed with no sensitive plant species existing on-site. The site is primariJy covered with
domesticated barleys and grasses, No sensitive animal or plant species were observed
during field investigations by Merkel & Associates, Inc. 1998. On September 10, 1998,
Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc biologists specializing in ornithology perfonned
a focused search for the Burrowing Owl (Speotyto cunicularia). Rodent burrows typicaIJy
used by B. Owls were observed for remains of owl prey and droppings with no sign of the
B. Owl. The report concluded that the site does not support Burrowing Owls. No
mitigation wil1 b~ required.
VIll. ENERGY AND MIJ'iER-\L RESOURCES:
Would the proposal:
a) Conflict with adopted energy conservation
plans?
b) Use non-renewable resources in a wasteful and
inefficient manner?
o
.0
o
o
o
o
o
o
c) If the site is designated for mineral resource
protection, wil1 this project impact this
protection?
Comments: 1\;0 impacts to non-renewable resources are noted.
o
o
o
o
IX. HAZARDS: Would the proposal involve:
A :\!~:J \ i~nda\is9808::k. trm
~~
Pag~ 5
+~.-.---~--- -----.---------- ----"----- ---. --- -- -~- - ----
a) A ;co;: of acciden121 exp]oslOn or release of
h=dous substances (mcluding. but not hmlled
to: pelTOleum products, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation)?
b) POSSJ-D1e interference with an emergency
respan.....se plan or emergency evacuation plan?
c) Tne ::-eation of any h~alth hazard or potentia]
heak, hazard?
d) EXpDS:lre ofpeop1e 10 existing sources of
pote:1:;al health hazards"
e) Incr::;,s~d fire hazard in areas wIth flammab1e
brus~ grass, or trees?
"oten!!;!.11I
!'!'ll"nti.ilh Si~l1ifi('~n! Le'!\~ th:m
Si!!uifii:.:Jn! linll's, Si~nific:lnt '..
1111[1:1('1 Miti~:t(l'U Impact !m[J~::
0 0 0 ~
D D D ~
0 0 lEI ~
0 0 0 ~
0 D 0 ~
Comments: Tne proposed project radio frequencies will not interfere with emergency response
communication systems as confinned by the City's Communications Division SupeT\~sor.
'-;"0 highly flammable or potentialJy explosive materials wiIJ be used for the project. Each
o:the proposed antennas wiIJ be surrounded by a six foot high chain-link fence. A six-foot
high chain link fence wiI1 also surround the 6.34-acre lease area. Comphance with
es:abhshed standard federal regulations and intaI1ation of the proposed fencing will ensure
fua: peop1e nor workers become exposed to Radio frequency Emissions per established
F,C.C. guidelines. No adverse impacts are noted. No mitigation ,,~I1 be required.
X. NOISE: Would the proposal result in:
a) Increases in existing noise levels" 0 0 lEI 0
b) Exposure of people 10 severe noise levels? D D 0 !EI
Comments: T =porary cOl151Tllction noise wou]d occur at the site, however, the short term nature of th~
noise, and the distance from any existing surrounding residential uses results in less than
significant impacts to the immediate area. AIJ equipment including the emergency
generator wiIJ be housed within a tranSlDltter shed and wiI1 not exceed day or night exterior
noise level threshold standards per City Ordinances. No adverse impacts are noted. No
mitigation wiIJ be required.
Xl. PUBLIC SERVICES: Would the proposal have an
effect upon. or result in a needfor new or altered
governmellt services in an)' a/thefallowing areas:
a) Fire protecti on?
b) Police protection?
o
o
o
!EI
o
o
o
!EI
p.,:\ 11:' \ ji:ido\is9808:::k. trm
PO;Je 6
rr
." -....--.. ._-------_.,-~..._.._-_.__...__....._,. ',---'"-
1'011'1111:..11,
f'ol~l1!iaIJ: Sil!nificOInl Les~ than
SI;!nificant Iinl(,5~ Sll!lJificanl ,.
Imn:H:1 Miti!:atl'd Impact I rnp:J.~~
C) SCn08!S'! 0 0 0 ~
d) Mamt<:nance of public facihties, including 0 0 0 @
roads?
eJ Oth~ governmenta] services" 0 0 0 ~
Comments:
'\0 new GovernmentaJ seT\~ces wi]] be required to serve the project. No adverse impacts
ar~ noted. Fir~ and pohce protecrion can adequately be provided.. No mitigation wi]] b~
ceouired,
XII.
THRESHOLDS: Will the proposal adversely
impact the City's T7zreshold Standards?
o
o
o
~
As described below, the proposed project does not adversely impact any of the seen Threshold
Standards,
a) Fire./EMS
o
o
o
~
The Tnreshold Standards requires that fire and medical units must be able to respond to caBs
\\~thin 7 minutes or less in 85% of the cases and within 5 minutes or less in 75% of the cas~s.
The City of Chula Vista has indicated that this threshold standard wiB be met, since the nearest
fire station is 3 miles away and would be associated with a 4-minute response time. The
proposed project \\~]] comply with this Threshold Standard.
Comments:
The Fire Depamn<:nt indicates that adequate fire service and protection can be provided
to the proposed project site.
b J Pohce
o
o
o
~
The Tnreshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84% of Priority I caBs
within 7 minutes OT iess and maintain an average response time to aB Priority I calls of 4.5
minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.10% of Priority 2 caBs within 7 minutes aT
less and maintain an average response time to a]] Priority 2 caBs of 7 minutes or less. The
proposed project wi]] comply with this Threshold Standard.
Comments:
Tne Police Depamnent indicates that Crime Prevention personnel are available to assist the
applicant with security recommendations. No significant adverse impacts to Police sen~ce
are noted.
cJ TrafT!C
o
o
o
~
A :\11:)\ i:ndo\is9808ck. trm
J(,
P0;18 7
~.".. ~ -~-~. .- ~"---,.-
"orentl~lJ~
SI~nific:Jnl
hnp:Jc!
I'fJlcllli"lh
Sj~nirrC:Jnl
I:IIII'~.'
,.1,1ih:.o:lIlot1
Les~ Ih:1II
SJ~nirlcant
Impacl
"
ImfJ~~o
Tnt -:-:rresho]d S~nda7"ci5 require tnat.a]] intersections must opITate at a Levt! of Service (L0Si
"C" oc Detter, ",oth tht exception that LeveJ of Service (LOS) "D" may occur during the pea;:
rwo hours of the dEy at signalized intersections. Intersections west ofJ-805 are not to opeTat~
at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No intersection may reach LOS "E" or nFn dtning the aVeTag~
weekdEy peak hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from t[115
Standard. The proposed project wilJ comply with this Threshold Standard.
Comments:
T.1e Engineering Division has detennined that the current LeveJ-of- Service (LOS) "C"
ec:]oyed by Otay Lakes Road, a six-lane major aneriaL would remam the same Wllr,
2.:J:Jrova] of the Droposed proj~ct.. No mitigation will be required,
d \ Parko R~creation
o
o
o
[8:
Tne Tbreshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/] ,000 population. This
standard does not apply to the proposed project.
Comments: 1\0 adverse impacts to parks or recreational opportunities are noted.
e) Drainage
o
o
o
f2i
Tn~ T nr~shold Standards require that stonn water flows and volumes not exceed City
Engineering Standards. Individual projects wilJ provide necessary improvements
consist..<>J1t with the Drainage Master Planes) and City Engineering StandErds. The
proposed project wi]] comply with this Threshold StandErd.
Comments:
Off-site drainage capacities wi]] not be affected by project approval.
f) S~wer
o
o
o
[8J
Tne T nreshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed City
Engmeering Standards, Individual projects wi]] provide necessary improvements
consist..<>J1t with Sewer Master Plan(s) and City Engineering Standards, The proposed
project wil1 comply ",-ith this Threshoid Standard.
Comments:
Sewer capacities ",,-i]] not be affected through project implementation.
g) Water
o
o
o
[8J
Tne TIrreshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment. and transmission facilitIes
are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that water quaJity standards are not
jeopardized dtning growth and construction. The proposed project wi]] comply with this
Tnreshold Standard.
Applicants may also be required to panicipate in whatever water conservation or fee off-set
program the City of Chula Vista has in effect at the time of building pennit issuance.
A: \I!::- \ flnda \is9808:::k. trn
r7
Pa~e 8
f'otenti:dh
SJ;!lJific::mt
!mr3~t
f'olenti.:Jlh
Sll:niri~a"t
ljnll's~
Mili!:aled
Less Ib:a]]
SJ!:nifir..ant
!mp3~t
~{,
!mn3tJ
Comments: "-Gter qualn)' standards would not be affected through project lmpiementation.
xm. VTILITIES AND SER'lCE SYSTEMS: Would
the proposal result in a need for new .')'slems, or
subslanrial alterations to Ihe following utililies:
a) Pow~ or natural gas? 0 0 0 [gI
b) Corn..~unications systems? 0 [gI 0 0
c) Loca; or regional water treatment or distribu!1on 0 0 0 [gI
faciliri~s?
d) Sewe;- or septic tanks" 0 0 0 [gI
e) Storm water drainage? 0 0 0 [gI
f) Solid waste disposal" 0 0 0 [gI
Comments: TD~ proposed us~s will not generate a need for new systems or alteration to the
aforementioned utilities. However, the project may have the potential to affect surrounding
electronic devices. Therefore, the applicant needs to assume the fmancial responsibility
for correcting blanketing interference extending for one year after the blanketing area has
been fu]]y developed and occupied. This will be made a condition of approval of the
C.D.P. as well as applicant compliance with Chula Vista Municipal Code Section
1420.120 dealing with construction management practices. Mitigation will not {je
required.
XIV. AESTHETICS: Would Ihe proposal.
a) Obstruct any scenic \~sta or view open to the 0 [gI 0 0
public or will the proposal result in the creation
of an aesthetically offensive site open to public
view?
b) Cause the destruction or modification of a scenic 0 0 0 [gI
route"
c) Have a demonstrable negative aesthetic effect" 0 0 0 [gI
d) Create added light OT glare sources that could 0 0 0 [gI
increase the level of s1.-y glow in an ar::a or cause
this project to fail to comply with Section
19.66.100 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code,
Title 19?
A:\H~ \linda\ is9BOBck,iTm
r;
Page 9
e) ReG:'::::: an addjt1O::2: amount of spjIJ hghf!
Po!enli:!lh
"otl'ntlall~ Si;:-nifir::m! L~_\fhan
Sj~nificant lInles~ Si~nifjcant ~I,
Imrac! J\litiJ:':lll'd Imr:lC! Imnac!
0 0 0 ~
Comments: Tne project proposes five 75.8 foot high above ground level whip like antennas. These will
De SWTounded by an 8- foot high chain link fence. A six foot high chain link fence will be
installed around the perimeter of the 6.34 acre leased site. Visual simulations were
prepared to det..'"ITI1ine potential visual impacts from the proposed project. The simulations
snow that the project features would not block view. However, the project represents an
2.iteration to the hilly terrain and the project applicant would need to ensure that there will
-oe no adverse \"1sua! impacts by coordmating landscaping and fencing proposals with
;)~esent deve]o;):n~nt taking plac~ in the vicinity and wIth the City of Chula Vista.
,~,:J:Jroval of the :rroJect is subject to a discretionary Conditional Use Permit process as well
2..S 2. site plan and architectural review by Planning staff. Mitigation will be required.
d) WiJI the proposal resuict existing religious or
sacred uses within th~ potential impact area?
e) Is the area identified on the City's General Plan
EIR 2..' an area of high potential for
archaeological resources?
Comments: No prehistoric or historic sites were identified by the Cultural Resources Survey conducted
by Gallegos & Associates (1998). Two isolate artifacts recovered during the survey were
submitted to th~ South Coastal Infonnation Center at San Diego State University and
the San Diego Museum of Man for testing and these were identified as not significant
and no additional surveys or mitigation are needed for this project.
:XV. CULTVRAL RESOU'RCES: Would the proposal:
a) Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the
desrruction or a pr~historic or historic
archaeological site"
b) Will the proposal result in adverse physical or
aesthe:ic effects to 2. prehistoric or historic
building, structure or object?
c) Does the proposal have the potential to cause a
physical change which would affect unique
ethnic cultural values?
),.,1.. PALEO"TOLOGICAL RESOURCES: Will the
proposal result in the aizeration of or the destruction
of paleonlOiogical resources?
o
D
D
181
D
D
D
181
D
D
D
181
D
D
D
~
D
D
D
181
D
181
D
o
A:\lb \iindo\is9808ck. trm
Page 10
r~
~.~_._'-~.._-------_._--_._._,.,---~.._.._.....-
Potentiall~
Sil!nifl~n!
Impatt
POlcnliall~.
SiJ:niflcant
lipless
Mitij:!ated
Less than
Siplificant
Impat!
"
ImrH..
Comments: In accordance with the Otay Ranch SPA One E.I.R. and the Second-Tier Mnexation
E.I.R., the proposed project site is located within the Upper Sandstone Unit of the Ot2\'
Fo=ation, and has a high paleontological resource sensitivity. The potential impacts to
paieontologicaJ resources wilJ be mitigated to a less than significant level througn
a:;y,opriate mitigation as fo]]ows: (a) A paleontologicaJ monitor shaj] be on-site at aj] tim~5
dri'1g excavation and 1Tenching activities for the proposed project. (b) When and iffossiis
ar~ discovered, a pa1eontologist shaj] recover these. (c) Prepared fossils along with copies
of aj] pertinent fidd notes, photos, and maps shaj] be deposited in a scientific institution
conmining paleontological coj]ections such as the San Diego Natural History Museum.
A''ll. RECREATION: Would the proposal:
a) Increzse the demand for neighborhood or 0 0 0 121
regional parks or other recreational facilities?
b) Affec; existing recreational opportunities? 0 0 0 121
c) Interfere with recreation parks & recreation plans 0 0 0 121
or programs?
Comments: There are no recreational facilities that wij] be affected by the project.
A,TII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICA,1'\ICE: See Negative Declaration for
mandalOn '.findings of significance. If an EIR is
needed, thZ:; section should be completed.
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade
the quality ofthe environment, substantia11y
reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species,
cause a fish or wildiife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a
plant or animal community, reduce the number
or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant
or animal or eliminate important examples of the
major periods or Califomia history or prehistory?
o
o
o
121
Comments: k the site is an existing developed site within an urbanized area, no sensitive plant or
animal resources wij] be affected.
A :\11:) \,oda\is9BOBck, fm1
/"
Page: 1
[, I Do~, :;,~ project n2Vt the potentlal to achi~ve
sho,,-!=n, to the dlsadvantage of Jong-term,
environmental goais"
Comments:
I'men!IJllh
l'ol~ntjall.\ Sij:nirican: Les_~ than
Srl!nifianl Unjcs~ Si:-nific:ln! "
Impact 1\1itlj:all.'c Impact imn..:-
0 0 0 ~
Tne scope and nature ofthe project would not result in the curtailment of any ]ong-t=
~vironmentaJ goals.
C) Do~, :n~ project nav~ impacts that are
mdiYiQUal1y limjt~d, but cumulatively
consJd::rable? ("Cumulatively considerable"
means that the incremental effects of a project
are considerable when viewed in cOIU1ection
with th~ effects of past projects, the effects of
oto::r current projects, and the effects of
probable future projects,)
o
o
o
[gJ
Comments: TDere are no incrementa] impacts associated with the project.
d) Does the project have environmental effect
which will cause substantial adverse effects on
human beings, either directly or indirectly?
o
o
o
[gI
Comments: No adverse effects to human beings is anticipated from project approval.
A :\11:) \linda\is9808::k. trm
Page 12
("
~"-"-~'---~---.--
XIX. PROJECT REVISIO~S OR MlTIGATIO~ MEASURES:
Tne foliowing project revisions or mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project and will be
impbnented during the design, construction or operation of the project:
1
The proje:: apphcant shall coordinate at the design stage, the proposed fencing and landscaping
features "1:n the correspondmg surrounding resJdentia] land developers. The proposed fencing and
landscaping plans shall be subject to review and approva1 by the City Planning and Housing
D::pamn:::::,
o
A paleomojogica] monitor shaH be on-site at aH times during excavation and trenching for the
proposed project. If and when fossils are discovered, the paleontologist shali recover them. Tn~
prepared fossils along with copies of ali pertinent field notes, photos, and maps shali be deposited in
a scientific institution containing paleontological coliections such as the San Diego Natura] History
of Man.
!JI f/fL
'ject Proponent
fl /(~ II
D~
xx. ENVIRO~!\1ENTAL FACTORS POTEl\'TlALLY AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentialiy affected by this project, involving at least one
impact that is a "Po=tialiy Significant Impact" or "Potentialiy Significant Unless Mitigated," as indicated by
the cneck]ist on the foliowing pages.
C Land Use and Planning U T ransportationJCirculation
C Population and Housing 0 Biologica] Resources
I Geophysical U Energy and Minera] Resources
L '\Yater I Hazards
o Public Services
o Utilities and Service
Systems
[81 Aesthetics
[81 Cultural
Resources/Pa]eontolo gica1
L Air Quality
U Noise
o Recreation
o Mandatory Findings of Significance
A: \I:~ \ilndo \is9808~k,iTm
,~
Page 13
XXI. DETER:\IT\ATJO!\:
Or tne basis of this initlal evalua!1or::
I fmd that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment,
and a NEGA ID'E DECLARATION will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the envIronment,
there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described
or: an attached sheer have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARA.TIO:>\ v.i11 be prepared,
I :::Jd that the pro:JDsed project M--', Y have a slgnificant effect on the environment. and an
E"-'1RUNMEJ\T.;L IMPACT REPORT is required.
J find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at
leaS! one effect: I) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to
applicable legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis as described on a!'.2.ched sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant
impacts" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." .!\n ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I fmd that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially
significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to
applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR,
including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. An
addendum has been prepared to provide a record of this determination.
;j
January 8, 1999
Date
[gJ
'--1
o
o
A: \ 11:0 \ii"da\is9808ck,trm
~~
Page 14
ATTACHMENT "A"
Mitigation Monitoring Program
15-99-15
Tr.:s MitigatioD \ionitoring Program is prepared for the KURS antennas and ancil1ary equipment
proposed within la.,d located on Otay Water District (OWD) property about 1,600 feet south ofOray
Lak~s Road in th~ City of Chuia Vista. The legislation requires public agencies to ensure that
ad~uate mitigation measures ar~ implemented and monitored on Mitigated Negative Declarations,
such as 1S-99-15.
AB 3] 80 requires monitoring of potentiaJly significant and/or significant environmental impacts.
Th~ mitigation monitoring program for this project ensures adequate implementation of mitigation
for th~ foJlowing potential impact: Aesthetics and Paleontological Resources.
Du~ to the natUT~ of the environmental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinator
(MCC), shalJ be th~ Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC) for the City of Chula Vista. It shal1
be the responsibility of the applicant to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring
Program are met to the satisfaction of the ERe. Evidence in written form confirming compliance
with the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration No. 1S-99-15 shall be
provided by the paleontological monitor and applicant or agent identified in the attached Mitigation
Monitoring and Reponing Checklist, to the ERC as stipulated by each mitigation measure. The ERC
wi]] thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have been accomplished.
1.,'1
1\CTJGATIO" MO"-ilTORING /l..,1\;1) REPORTING CHECKL:ST
PROJECT NAMe: KURS Radio Antennas and ancillary station equipment
I!\lTIA.L STUDY NO: 99-] 5
Issu~ /\Tea
A~s:n:;tics
Mitigation Measure #1
"TD~ project applicant shall coordinate at the design stage, the proposed fencing and landscaping
features with the corresponding surrounding residential land developers. The proposed fencing and
landscaping plans shall be subject to review and approval by the City Planning and Housing
D::partment."
Fuil compliance with this mitigation wi]] ensure that potential project impacts to aesthetic
considerations as a resuJt of the installation of the five whip antennas, the radio station and
surrounding fencing and landscaping are properly accomplished with no additional mitigation being
nec::ssary .
Project Phase lmplementation (project Design; Construction; Post Construction)
At the Project Design Stage
R::sponsible Agency (ies)
City Planning & Building Department
l.tr
\CTIGA TIO'\ \102\ilTORI'\G A!\'D REPORTING CHECKLIST
PROJECT NAME: KURS Radio lUJtennas and ancillary station equipment
ThlTIAL STIJDY :'\10: 99-15
Issu~ /uea
Pa;~ontological R~sources
Mirigation Measure #2
"A paleontoJogical monitor shall be on-site at all times during excavation and trenching for the
proposed project. If and when fossils are discovered, the paleontologist shalJ recover them. The
pr:-:pared fossils along with copies of all pertinent field notes, photos, and maps shall be deposited
in a scientific institution containing paleontological collections such as the San Diego Natural
History of Man."
Full compliance v.ith this mitigation wi]] ensure that potential project impacts to paleontological
resources as a result of the instalJation of the five whip antennas, the radio station and surrounding
fencing and landscaping are properly accomplished with no additional mitigation being necessary.
Project Phase Impl=entation (Project Design; Construction; Post Construction)
Throughout the construction phas~
R~spDnsible Agency (ies)
City Planning &. BuiJding Depanment
2
,.(.
KeY' Pi~zlll. :Cuildix:t
~\jr E 5>ITt-d, Third fJI>(,r
Chui.. '"ish., CA t!Jilj!
rho 16PJ) 427 Sr.;;
rn (619) .;27 (144'1
t'-rn~ij kur!O{l'pillcj-.eJl.n{.~
IllS,.........
Decemb=r /,1998
Dob Leite,
Director of ?lanning
CITY OF GiULA VISTA
Re: PCC-99-26j13-99-13
Dear Mr. Leiter.
m reSp0Il52 to your memo of December 2,1998, regarding Initial Comments, we
are providing the following information:
1.- Interference - items A B, and C all are addressed in attachments titled
"Supplemental Engineering Statemenf' of Mullaney Engineering, Inc.
2.- Location - This is also addressed in attachment titled "Supplemental
Engineering Statement" of Mullaney Engineering, Ine.
~.- Land Use Capability - A U.s. location where this same type of facility is
located in I'adio station \'I'HSP 1480 _.\M in Shippensburg, Pennsylvania.
Staff should contact the City of Shippensburg in order to determine what
current zoning applies to this facility.
,
Timing - We anticipate construction to begin immediately.
Respectfu1l~- .
,0 ~____ "/!1~~/
Jaime Bonilla Valdez
President
JEV:ifc
/ :..ei.Qocj:if"c4
,
! at"..achments
-'\ '-n
I~ ~C~i-\ ; ~~
~. r- " l \: ...,,1..<
I t_ 1-...,... .
~ <.: .
... - ,~~::
"
(" KURS radio San Diego
Attachment 3
J:J..." J_ '-'UllA"'~"-
J':)"'" ~ '-'LILLA"'::.... ~.~ II"!';.:!)
...~..."" fo GEoARtt.~_ ;..:..
ATTACHMENT 1
30\ g2i.S~~ '~';:.,:e.
3C1 590.97~ =i!:
m..,lien;)r@:o':':':'~ E-~ail
I/,CILLANEY ENGINEERING, IN:.
;:.4'" S_iJ,::;v :;;.:,:: :.:;-..;;::,
Gt.:;-o--{::D.S=.:"':;:'. t/:. 2::L~7
SUPPLEME~TAL
ENGI~EERING STA TEMENT
DISCUSSION OF
V!-.RIOUS ENGINEERING AND TECH!\ICAL ISSUES
RELA TIVE TO
THE ?ROPOSED OPERATION OF AM RADIO STA TJO!\ Kl:RS
FROM T",:::: OT A Y WATER DISTRICT SITE NEAR ?OGGI CA!\YON
Prepared on Behalf Of
QUETZAL BILINGUAL COMMUNICATIONS, INC.
4 December 1998
(,~
MULLANEY-ENGINEERING, INC.
SUPPLEMENTAL
ENGINEERING STATEMENT
DISCUSSION OF
\.;.?IOUS E~GjNEERING AND TECHNICAL ISSUES
RELA TIVE TO
THE ::?O?OSED O?~RA TION OF AM RADIO ST ATIO!'\ K-::RS
:::-ROM ,;-::: OTA Y WI-.TER DISTRICT SITE NEAR ?OGGI U.\YOJ\
Prepared on Boh,ilf Of
QuETZAL BILINGUAL COMMUNICATIONS. I1'C.
4 December 1998
MuLc.;;~Y Engjr:~~,ing, Inc., has been retained by Quetza] 3ilingual Communications,
Inc. (Quetzal). to provide additional information to that contained in the undersign's
Octob~, 2"d Sngineering Stalcment regarding certain aspects of the proposed operation
by AM broadcasr station KURS from the Otay Water Districr Site near Poggi Canyon.
The j:s~es add,~Esed are thos~ laid out in Items I. and 2. of a Decemb~r 2, 1998, Jette.
~-""'_.-_.~l'~) :,'-'',..,''~'''V..t~D1~ . ODp -+ Q t
flu)" ...... __1.) o. '_"...:,,- IS "" ~ .G!1nlD,:; ""pallm....n.
In pa;':icular, a disc~ssion wilJ b~
. ,
proy):=.: conce:-ilJng:
:) Lack of any expected impact on radio communications by th~ Police
2-TId Fire D~p2-nments:
:) Expec:~d extent of potential interference to consumer elee:ronies
=~\'iC~S:
==; ~efinj:~an of "mobil~ receivers"; and
~) Resrric:iom on the location of AM broadc:lst station KURS imposed by
:h~ Fede,2.! Communications Commission (FCC).
1,1
,
','
Engi:i~ring Statc:ncn~
Qu~:z..a! Bilingual Co:-nmunic. Jns, in:.
4 Dt:tmbcr 1998
MULLMiE.Y ENGINEERING, INC.
G::';::?'AL DISC'SSIO~ Or-I"'7"::RFERENC":
The potential of a:1 AM broadcast station to caus~ interf~rence to other radio devi:es
or ei~etronic equipment caTI be divided into thr~~ categories:
]) Co,enannel and adjacent channel interferer,ee: This oceurs when
._,&>
~jj ...
interf~r;cg station operates on a frequ~ncy the sa:T1e as or very close to rh~
T;-eou~,.:'. Df the sta::~;-i b:;inE intt;-f:j~c 'J.'jth. To 2\'~jd this typ:: c: jnterfer~i1::.
the FCC has ~stablished minimum distance separation requirerncnts for stations
operatir.g on the same or nearby frequ~nci~s.
2) Harmonics and sDurious emissions: This occur> when the interfering station
general~S extraneous signals on the frequency of ~he station b~ing interfered
with. To avoid this type of interference, the FCC has established strict limits on
th'e stre::gtn that th:s: extraneous sign2!S can have.
3) Rece;ver overload (also referred to 2.5 "brute force" interference): This occurs
when the affected receiver (or other electronic device) is 10cc.ted within close
proximity to the interfering station and is subjected to very high signal levels.
This is the type of interference treated by the FCC under the category of
.'blank~!ing interference".
W~,e;] operati;:; in accorDanc~ with th~ FCC Rulcs. an AM broadcast station would not
b: :xpected tD :::2.US~ interf:;=nce under categories 1) and 2) above. ,L.ny interference
wr:ich might occur under category 3) abov~ would be ve:-y limited in :;ature, A more
detailed discussion follows:
"C.-:-:':",1.".1. ] "'7"::?:":':REt-.;CE -:::> POLlCE At-.;D F:p.:: COMM\T!\JU.T10NS:
AM j:-oadcas: stations op~:-ate in the frequ~ncy band ~xtending from 540 kHz to
1700 kHz. In panicular, th~ station KURS proposal is for operation 0;] a frequency of
10-'-0 kHz. Police and Fir: radio starions can operate on various frequencies in th~
following bands:
MW Band
1630 kHz (fire only); j 722, ] 730, &. 2366-2490 kr:z (police only)
;6
o
Engj::~ring St~lcrn~n~
QU~:z.a] Bilingunl Co;:mmnic.. .-:os., 1 nc.
4 De=t:71ocr 1998
MUL.L.ANF-" ENGINEERING, INC.
High B~iJd .'./HF
37-46 MHZ: 72-76 MHZ
150- ] 70 MHZ: 220-222 MHZ
LDw B,,~,: \'HF
UHF B"nj 450-470 MHZ; 470,)] 2 MHZ
806-824 MHZ; 85 I -869 MHZ: 929-930 MHZ
M;crow2\~ ]427-1435 MHZ: 2450-2500 MHZ: & 10.550-]0.680 MHZ,
W::~, :i1~ eXCe?:iDn of th~ frequencieo in the MW rang~, the frequc;;:y ocparation
b~:ween the ).,),1 radio band and the police anD fire radio bands is sa great that nD
in:e~fer~nce would occur. f.s to the MW frequencies, nO:1~ are harmonically' related
to K1.:RS's freq:Jency Df ] 040 kHz. The FCC resrricrions on other S;J1.:~jous emisoions
m2f:e it unlik~ly that the proposed KURS operation WDuid interfere with any police Dr
fire s:a:ion (if 2ny) operating on the MW frequencjeo listed above. In the unliKely
ever,: that such interferenc~ dD~S occur, Quetzal will cODperate with the ?olice and Fire
De:;artments ta eliminate the problem.
P07:::>o;T1AL lKT:::RFERENCE To CONSUMER ELECTRONICS D=:VICES:
Th~ i V 1M Blanketing CDntours attached to the undersigned's 2 October 1998
En~2n~ering S:L.t:i7lcnt refle::t the area \\'herein the FCC rtquires the s:2tion licensee to
be ;ir;2neiaily responsible fDr correcting any recognized b12nketing jnt~~f~~ence. These
contours are not meant to indicate the area wherein interference will definiteh'
OCCU:-.
Fj~!d teots have 5hown that the I VIM criteria vaotly ovcrota\eo the interfercllce potcnti~1
of an AM brGc.oe2ot statio;:. In particular, in 4 cases, tests show~d no blanketing
in:~:-f::r~n:::e ?:-Db]~ms at signal levels up to at Je:2.st 4 Vi!\1. These cas~s are contained
in ?CC fiJes and are identifj~d on th:: foJiowinp Pape'
" ".
I A ham1o~i: is an integer multiple of the fundamental frequen:\'. I.E, for 1040 kHz. ""ITnonies woull1 ~~
:?08'~" k:-::. 3120 kr::. ~] 60 kHz. 520~! k~z.. C!:. .
'1
-:;-
En.gi:-,e~:-ing Statcm~:l:
Que:z..a~ Bilingual CO:T.r::unicn1 ..... In::.
4 Dt""",b<" 1998
MULLANEY ENGINEERING, INC.
I.
C;,"~:-:2.d2 BfOJG:.2.sting CornpZlr;y.ln:.
G,~,,"Da, Mississippi
P,~s~nt: 1400 kHz. 0.25 kW. 1]
P,D:J05~d: 1400.0.25 kW. I kW-LS. U
J FCC 2d 1009
St:,.:~y in fieid strengths from ] to 4 \'.:m showed no blank~ting
i:-;:=.:-i~:-~nce pjDD1~ms
-,
W:':OJ Radio. ]:1c.
O,'2ndo, Floric"
?,~s~nt: 990 kHz. 5 kW, 10 kW -LS, U. DA-N
?,oposd: 990 kHz,S kW, 50 kW-LS. U. DA-2
4 FCC 2d 437
S:;,\'ey showed "no blanketing with signals ~s high ~s 4.7 Vim.
3. C,,?~ Fear Broadcasting Company
F2:-';;tteville, j\iorth Caroiina
?rc~~nt: 940 kHz, I kW, 10 kW-LS, U, DA-N
Propc>sed: 940 kHz. I kW, 50 kW-LS, U, DA-2
S:;r\'~y In field strengths from 0.88 V 1m to 4.4 V 1m show~d no blanketing
int~rrerence problems
4 O.K. Broadcasting Company
r2:rTz.x, Virgini41
P;-~S:i1t: J310 kHz, 0.5 k\V. 1 k\V-LS, U, DA-N
?ro:Josed: 1:]0 kHz. 0.5 kW. 5 kW-LS. U. DA,2
S:;r-,'ey show~t! "no blanketing with signals :lS high as 4.3 Vim,
Th~,e is curren:Jy p~nding bdore the Commission a ru!e-making proc~cding in which
it h~s be~n proposed to jnCT~2se th~ AM blanketing contour ]evel in recognition of th~
abc\.~ fi~jd rr.~2.;;t::-ement s:udi::s (see "Comm~nt::; of the Assoc:~:jo:; of Fed~jt:J
Ca;-::2"nicarjo~5 Cansulting =:ngineers" in MM Docket )\.J. 96-62).
In j;ght or th~ preceding, artached is a modified version or the blanketing contour map
shov.-:ng both th~ ] Vim and 4 Vim contours for both proposed daytim~ and njghtlim~
KC?S operarioi";s. From th~ map it is clear that while the area wherein rhe FCC holds
'11...
-4-
____ m...._._..._____.....-.".._..._._.___...._.._.._....__.. _.._
En~i:.~dng S:;)lcm~;J.t
Qu!':z.a1 BiHnguaJ Cc:::.munh ms.111:.
4 n,,,,,mbcr J 998
MULLAN~Y ENGINEERING, INC.
~r)t s:2.tlon liCt;':s::~ financie:..1!Y liab]~ e>:t::ncs ~ :2i:- distaiJ:t from tht p:-:Jposed lOWt:-S,
th~ 2~~a whe~~i~, i~1terference is actu~lly likely to occur is quit~ sm~ll.
D:::;T'\TTlOK 0;0 --\iJOB1LE R"C"TVERS":
In :h~ blank~':~.g ~lIIemaki~g ;:>roceeuing referenced above. thc FCC includes the
TC< :w:ng twc :~;!njtions:
Mobile ?.~cciv~rs '
D~vices th~t do not r~m~in in one fix~d Jocation. Thes~
devices are excluded du~ ,0 their inhef~ntly transient
n~tur~.
Porr~b]~ K~ceivers' Capable of being c~rried, wh~ther oper~,ing by electric
cord or batteri~s.
NOTE:
Not ~II portable receive~s ar~ operat~d in the mobjl~ mode.
FCC SITE RESTRIC'TIO/'<S
FCC jnterferen~e pr6tection requirements limit the amount of sign~1 that K URS can
radi2re in the dj~~ction of p~otected st~tions. This in tum iimits the rr:~ximllm power
which can b~ ~sed, which ir, its rum limits th~ ~mount of sign~l which can be ~adiated
iI; :~.~ m~in jo~~ of th~ anr~nna Directional p~rtern. Th~ end result is ~ limit on rh~
Dis:ance from :h~ tower sit~ to the fieid strength contour which the FCC f'equ ires t9 b~
p]a~ed over th~ city of license (i.e. San Diego). By "moving too far to the east" KURS
w0:216 not be "hie to place the necessary field strength contour over S;m Diego.
SL:}.~MARY
Tn~ proposed K :""':RS opEra:ior: from the Ote)' V"/ater Dis:rict Site near Poggi Canyon
would nor cause interf::renc~ to Police or Fire rdio statior.s operating in the YHF, UHF
o~ Microwav~ D2.Dds. ]t is un1ikelv that KURS would cause interference to Police or
Fj,~ ,adio statioDs operating in the MW band.
ij
-)-
, -,._--"..~_.....-.
En~Ji.~nng Sta:('::;~n!
Qu,:z.al Bilingual Co:n",unic_..ons. Inc.
~ D~mbcr 1998
MULLA~ ' Y ENGINEERING, INC.
Tj;~ Zij~~ wh~:-~;:-, ir:terf~i~n::~ to consumer electronics :5 tlctu;-\]!y ];k:1y to OCCt:;- ;s
r:;c:h sm;lIlcr ti:"n Ihc arc;r whcrcin the FCC pl;rces thc fir;ancial burden for C01TCC:i:c,;
rs::'pizecJ t>1"~i,~ting inle,ference on the ,tation ]iccn,~~. Quelzal will be financ;:IJ:y
re",.:)Doible fo;- :::s r~latiYe]y f~w. if any, complaints thar are actually er.:JCcteu to occ~:r.
/'/)/
.','\ Yb "
///'1/ ( r1~/
/i)'-QYV'- ------- . c::r
Ai::; E. Gearing. P.E.
;~
-6-
. .-- ~.._-_.__."._,---- -...-..-.--...-...
~~ , ,,' . .. ,. /,........---.- ~ I ....
. = c, i ~J:l...~5
.~ ~
1 .5 D 1 KI,-CJI~:'I ER
S:JJ..[ L2oW<: - - - -
PRO?OSED KTJRS BLA1\'KETIN G CONTOURS MULL.A.NEY ENGINEERING, INC, )
GA!TH::?:;3~RG. IAARYlAND
KURS : ~)~J kHz SAN Di~GO. CA
DAY: 9.0 KW 3 TOWER DA DECEfl.3ER 1998
NIGH!: 4.0 KW 4 TOWER DA
. . .'
, ..u " .-,- --
,
)
)!:~ :
.~,., ,..( , ~. - /,;"-):.'J I /
,,,...... . .' 'J . ~..::(' I . - ~~!
. - ./~ ~~ '~?~"" , ~~.,r.r;.;::;- .{ i' / I
:. /- _' -- r~? ,;}.~', .;--:~LL'Cf~~
'il;(\~'~\~\';.".;-~-"""~ '" /: ,.:-;.\..~..........\ ",/;Ii.{- ';,-;.'
.,
~.\',/ r'>
\ I / "
?,-;\\\ J I:
"'0'(,/" .
7' .",," .'
- ........--.:\;~\. '
(.~
.32040'
]]7000'
,
,
'/
"
),' I: ...:?-,:-~.....
...../".;,,,
.--
"
/" \
, I t
'. \. .
II, -
-"
7
.
"
-'
\
.I
-
I
I'
\
\
(
"
II'
/ ' - .
"I~ ~--
.~.
,~ (
, \
~
'" I r
rGOL!-> ",t,
'I
I
-...1
"
='"
,
=3~
1000 mVJm DA Y
i;
'-.:.::~\ )
4000 mV/m DA Y
-,.....-.
4000 mV/m "IGIIT
-
/
: .:: ;:=--, , 1/ ........
.....--"
1,-1:/"
I,
1'1
" .
,:
~ I ,.,:,.~
II -_0::
10 _"':_
;:! """,,,,,,,,...c.~"'t-j.
C'"',"~ .
"'" '-'
'\ '. ~...~.:.
C_"_"" ..
'-.'_'1 "\"-,"
i':.'; \...-...,. ( .'
1/________-:-- '. ,<
I ~....._-:~J.
..>.... J' ..)
'-
\;:
.,
1"-~,
"
I Ii
I ' _Je'"
'~fJ/
~E -(i7~'i
i: : - ';\
, \.0 0i?J'o. \\. , ,'!1~
UG9C~D"'~i },,' _ ::.' _ ,~T _ - .- " ",,-,,<<-
I _ \, -'Jr,'7 -" __ .,,' -~-'~' I': ,',t ..:",,,~"<-< F
I;' '\\:\~",{-~' '" /. I ...~ ",;;-
.'.: - -.;",""p-;;... -" . /(,~ :..-.-'"
:)_~~ ~\ -:;:.==.. -.p~/V,,""r- --"'5/~'" - -~.
~~;j'-~~:?- - .- --;-'~I~'- .~_ .;-~- ~\ \ .~~ r -'
'I-:~-r' \1 '\!.', .!-:;I..;.,p' .qt.:) ,;; \'1J_.~": ",."';;
., '~i ' )',C} ;..anc%~~\U ";'f"'''''..: ...s;="",'",,' --:::"
, ...--~. .&~-_.. @: ::\i ~\ ,- ~"'~//~'.1:r:~''''''''v
/-. ...;;, ,'\ \;I\~::_." '/_~'~"I~"
,-,.. I,', \ \\11. ~--1\" '-.::\\
'.' ",'''1/ '\1" ,- ,. '
... ',' \ ,\~ " yo . , "
(.._ (__ '/]\',\ )\\~.~': .:/'1: ~-._..-'
.;.."., 1.:1'-' I '~I\'__"~~~"__ __ .
:1~".:'i '" >~r'::--:=,:::::~"';;':"''''''
',\' .{, \,- :Uvy:-~,....
",>::. /:%:6'(\'~ ---,c-''7)
/) ;:,1,. ';\,~:';;..-, ~.,~,\ \ --: ---;-
/ ~jh ,;J).iI'r J\(' . ~~'U':.. . I..
11/1\. /:I{I!f~~\l(t .'.":--..:,.,') ,( S7B
".:;),".':""::F':'l-'l~~\\. "''d/..','/I '.
, ))\\:.;"':."~~S/, .~.. I,:;. 'V' ('-
1.0
,.
c-
:',,')'.
"
, ,-",.,/
<<,............
-/{
,.
,.
,
"
,
/.
I
" \'
i\ "I
32037' 30"
1160571301'
,
"
",
I,
,
,
"
,
"
"
,
.z,riZS
:W, '6if.
\
.....--";) 1
( "
) ,
7~- , A'5<::/
I' f\"~
\. I _\, , '
). / ,\~., I.'
G--" ,V;
: ..
-~
,"""""
.
,
\'--;
~
...
\
0).\\,
',' \ !)\\'
. ')
~
7;'3 '. , '))
" I" ,',
"J \'i' l__
fiee'
r--~
./ I:b,
,.
'. .',jJ;F
_\~~-=-.,;~ "".
;~K._.",
, \,',\,1'0
. \
\,', '"
1\,., uy
I \ II"'" ',\', ".
\'::':.'
'.\\',',,";\ :.
1,!11'\
! __,;1 ,If
\ :;;,'
!'"
,
----
NIGHTTIME
DAYTIME
;-:r'l-'
/
/--' ."-
!:
I
.;.~:;~:;.~..p~I\;11
\\,\
J&OE
~
.-' .,.-
",,'
'"" .,
,.'~~~!f'~ ~
, ,
"1\\'.
'1\1\\
,,'I \1'.\
611 I I
r. I
, Ii'
i""
, /..\,
\\',-'1\\\\"
,I \~i\:\.\'
,
,I
"
)1
'; \'i~
,J;
i'
.,
"\\
,'t'
',I!
"" '.
.",\
':-;
..
;"
J\'
"
"
"
"
',i\.
~
-
~-'"
c: ::
:::;s
~::.
::<~
it~ "
~._.~:=.i:1
':':5}~~ s
, ' ,
~l!
'-
j!!\IIIIIl
,':t::,.-'_,--
"" ~ -.
~ -
.-:""'~"..;
-:<~ .....~~~~
~
.g
",~_LJ
-->"-
~_-2 G
~~c:
-~ ~
~~!:
- -,,!-~.'-:;::~
";':'--=~
E
~~~
~~:
~]~
~ ~{
~ ~ ~
::! ~;;
-= ~;:
~ 2;
c'1l':::
-~%~
c.=::_
",1.1;0
:::-:;:;:::
-=~--::
~;:::;
...:.-
1.1 ,,-
~~ ;::
f~ ;
r:;:; ::
~;.:::
~ ~~
" ~ '
-' . - ~
~~~-~
:::: -;. ~ :;::
~,..:;: -
~ ~ ~~
; ~ ;;:::
-;:::-:;-:::
_ :: ;;..-;-
~ - ~ ~
-
-'
:...
.....
V
CJ
,..,
-
V1
o
.-
'"0
-
-'2
g.~
-~
.~
::.ci
ON
~~
~-
~~
.
~
.',.;;=
'3~~
. C~::::
.~ .G\
.:.~
. Z:;:
~' J._
: ~ ,;~~
1 ~ ';i~
, \ '._a.5i.
, _ .. Cr ~,
~ - .' c:-
,.~
,.,
~ . '"!:!
" ._]~~
~ 3: 00
tIo e~
, =
, I~--
I .---
~,::tl .. ~~~
1:>-0
.-- .
,/ ~- ~Z~.
~-
i " -z"
I =-.;=
.....;~ - ;>~
--'~ _ -5;~
, >,.;.,;;
, ~
~..." '
,,/ '\:fb
=
2~
~~
.-
-<
:;:-:-
<~
~~~
~o . -
~;:::
51
~
.
"-
~=
:i.~
>~
~~
om
.~
~
<
-'! -
~E;~~
ac.~C\
"'::J>N
4ie~~
a...."'O
c C
o ~
u
.
"-
-i~L#" -""
:;a;. _/....
:;!'" ~:-
_0 "
,\::0:I ."
-~"/~
~;::, '" 'C@,',
:;.:.-c -
..c"'O .
"","? / "
>..,.~I \
....-~
0=
'0'"
::=1
",=
~:::
~
~:.-!?
~ " II -: ....
~:::::i 3; .~-
-<:;..:: l' .I
- ~.
~
~
:t'~~.'2: :. - - ;-:~~~ ~
<<:-.,,]15< -" ~ -"'S~~O - ~.i';~- /.'~'J-
~~!-a.~"E"'~;:~~' ~_~2'Q.c~.r:-"'.. j~:;':;
\-c = . 0 . - = - -" '~-;;..:E:Q." "'-" , ~ < =- -, .,'"",
~c2~~~~~3~ 'r ....-:s.c~~~.;\I--:~.=:.:.~~":~6~
--1 <.: 0 o~ ~" ~"" . -'ii'>- ~~"-....-- ~c=,_~_".,;..~r~.~,~c_-
~. . :~"~"=INHf~;'~::!f~'!'~'
J. < ....- _.0; ~. ~iJ' ' - - - -
r __>, :.-:~"",~-.-;.;~;::,~~~;~ ::-~Z:::~
;.._~ _-'c '-~ - --;..r'--""Y -. - "T-/;:.".-j...~_.-
';:':~-'~-:-:J:.,I~i~:~~,~~~~~t~~-
;_:~-:.:"~~_~ _. ' __"'~ __!~ ..y-,,~,-__?Z:"":C V _G 0
_ '," _.~' _; <-:~<~' J~~,1'~~~:f-f}~~;~!
[-~;'f,k;v:,__h~~_j' ~~"l?~:;~'%~~~l~~~~~~
. ...... _,.:... .:> ~;~-'~;~7~~~:::~- :J~;;~3.~>
.., >::> j .--:'"~ ...._.,:~,_oc..-==~---...;.-,c:::ccv:
-=_= ~ ~ ;; T -"' ....." - - _...",0 . C ~ ..
~~~~~:-~ 7,_jji~ ;,,,~jjr~";lmU
~~~:t'~~~ _~j~.[1]~~.:'~'c><, :~~ '-','
~~lfip:t (~~~~i!~~~~-1;f~~-+
_,-, _ _~___o=,"'!;~""'~"~~'~~''''''-
alii CI - . _.":"~~~:;~;i-~":::%~J~~':ft~~f-'-"
en
en
Q)
-
~
~
~
on
~
~=
--
--
c'::'
--
"';::~
-'"
.....c
'" -
5:=-
~:=
ai"
~~
c~
~'"
-~7@-~if~~~
._-~-~
-
I~;: ' . -- ,-:q:~cQ~~ -.;
.' - . ',,'"
.' _ ~h:'\"'" C'lQ ,
'--, -~~~~.~.~ ~,'
';'Of" n GC"!'In~~,.,it
___-,:..:"C:. "3" ~;-~ ,-...;:;- -~~
=-~--,;~~=-_,:=':=C:-,""",
-,
~?c~--=-.;;:~
~..:...-.,,;..'----~'
v-a'i~~
U'o..'c'.'
0.'.-.....0 .~
:~~-~~:
O.v--
-1:,-'
>~~
.... -Gi"E=
V'I c=
-....
O -~ov'
- ~~.~~:
-...,.-~..!!~
'"~ 'C G -
...,:t::J-=.!!:
~E.:~!:
J::;,~E--
.-;}o,:E1
....".y~U a.:cV;'
~~>-Q<.
- ,,,-<>'
''- 0 ~-~.,.-
~ 5~~
0....
~~.i!
_:::2='U=fII~'::~-A$.3:"O C'_-
.=-.t:cr;3.!.o='--~-""V-:.9:~
:~!t o~-~~E 3:~ 4I':!Q. ~':: ...
~~:~_O~O'=O= ~o-;: ~-
~<<r c:: ~,OIJE:;~"O oE'-E,S ~
"O..Q ~_<SI_E_i::"'P'E:. u"O C C .
2=-41'-"" s= 1:1 c: tGJ;! 0 o~-g
'<!r3.c:S-3:=;:.~::::; 111'-10:::
~ _..,g_::....,-~:;;=::-g 4I~~ C
_.=s.~~,_u...:;v>.- U-_Ia <II"
,:5-~~ ;~~~~!5;~~-~~'
~~::...,~:!:(H:~c.. ICI-.....::.c G'
;~~~~-~:"i~z:g~.~~i;. _~~
;.g_"t_~~~~~'~-:a~:cr_c~
_;'tT.o-..D....-.c~---g,'.~.
'=::1;'_J:;:E==-~-:.2~......:>_~-E
~~:;r~~..,..~G;.;:r~'
...~ .c:"V-o-:' :>~'^'C::~
~-"C..a ~ CI ."OS - o-~"'O='U"oo:::,
c.._~ E 2 E= ~;S:~3'=~~
a. 8 a.::: ~ 8:V 22<=!'
-....... ...:::-:
on
...
~
E
c>
.;
-
~
..
a.
'"
..
c>
-
-
'"
t
""
f'
.~
It.
C>:'
CI,.
'"
::>
"2
G
-:;,
'"
:2
::
, '
~~
~r.f\
,
-c..
C
',,;
>...:
<~
(.1
~.
-"'......
:h;
""
~.!
:~
,~
\..
'"
-:::
:'I.J
~~
,~
'"
-
"
o
<
-'.:.;
"
<L
::>
"
"
l'\ewli Ph.zJI Ruildini:
2':1t- H StH"l't, Third fluur
.jAt--J:....=-: , ,_ qCtq
1-0' --,,', ~ I '-,
~t ~ J ~. !
...." ,.,f\Jh;rr.'..... "
, 1='"\ "I IiLI (~ c.
Chul.. Yish., CA 1:/1':1111
Ph. foB) 4Zi 51i7i
Fu (019) 427 11441;/
l>-Dh,dl kurt'li1.-racr.cll.nel
..,.........
December 28,1998
Bob Leiter
Planning Director
CITY OF CHlJLA VISTA
Re: PCC99-26/15-99-15
Dear Mr. Leiter.
In response to the issue of the tower site location raised at our December
23,1998 meeting, I am providing the following information which we believe
demonstrates due diligence on the part of KURS Radio.
In general, our needs for an appropriate site were centered around a
parcel that was adequate in size, shape and topography and free from external
source that would interfere with the signal transmission. Further, we needed
something isolated enough not to create any negative visual impact on the
adjacent areas. Essentially, OUT minimum size requirement ranged from 10 to 15
acres.
Once a potential site is identified, the corresponding data is submitted to
the Engineering firm authorized to practice before the FCC, in our case Mullaney
Engineering, and then an analysis is conducted to determine site suitability in
relation to FCC standards. If it is determined that the site does not meet FCC
standards because of signal interference, topography or several other conditions,
then no amount of adjustment makes any difference, the FCC will not approve
that particular site.
With that background, we have been in the process of locating an
appropriate site for the last 2 years.
..,..,
KURS radio San Diego
Attachment 4
In thi:: time we have had discussions with several public agencies in the
South Bay area, incJuding San Ysidro Schoo] District, Sweetwater High Schoo]
District, Southwestern Community College, City of National City, City of San
Diego, Naval District, Sweetwater Authority, County of San Diego and of course
the Otay Water District.
\Vith the exception of the current site, all other sites that were considered
proved to ~ not acceptable.
VVe reviewed approximately 58 separate parcels belonging to the Otay
\''ater District, many of which are in the City of ChuJa Vista, before deciding on
the proposed site. The attachment titled "Otay Water District Properties" will
illustrate specifically some of them in ChuJa Vista.
Our records incticate that we have considered over 150 potential sites
before determining to go ahead with the proposed site.
In OUT estimation, given the strict criteria, we have demonstrated due
diligence in OUT search for an appropriate site.
Sincerely,
fJ .---v -11 ~
Jre Bonilla Valdez
President
,
Pccleiter.docj ifc4
I ,
attachments
'1
DTAY WATER DISTRICT PRDPERT-"
(Listed by Map Number)
MAP ~~ -?4i?@ ~ I SYS. I
. No. APN PROPERTY and ADDRESS ACRES MAP
I 515-]01-04 3-2 Reservoir (978-1) 0.55 3-:-b
2542 Penc~ Drive
" 517-]] 1-]5 Vista Grande Res. & PS (803-]) 1.20 36S
-
517-]] 1-68 ]612 Vista Grande Road
517-]] 1-69
517-282-09 ] 200- I Res~rvoir ],06 369
1697 Burris Drive
, 5] 8-] 02-75 Windriver/Sonnet PS 0.037 357
-"
2508 Windriver Road
4 5] 8-030-25 20-3 Reservoir (803-2) 1.43 357
2825 Willow Glen Drive
5 506-021-06 2-] & 2-3 Reservoir (832) , -, 332
..J./-,.
12] 18 Campo'Road
6 519-020-16 Rancho Jamacha Bdry - I.D. 2 0.43 '^"
-"-"-
519-331-28 Jamacha View - grant deed #899 .36
7 498-37]-07 Hillsdale Pump Station 0.32 ,or
.0)0
] 688 Jamacha Road
8 502-240-09 20-2 Res~rvoir (850-3) 2.06 ,--
,)))
12885 Jamacha Blvd.
9 -502-182-31 ~~:~~a~:::~~:UmPs~fi6~C~I'~ 342
506-010-10-
502"030-51
10 497-011-45 Russell Square Sewer Pump Sta. .0092 365
5139 1/2 Russell Square
11 506-02] -05 2-] Pump Station 0.55 331
12176 Highway 94
12 506-021-08 Steele Canyon Pump Station 0.23 331
11977 Singer Lane
:oroperty.dO:
"
Page]
4:24'%
DTAY WATER DISTRICT PROPERT""S
(Liste~ ::'y Ma;:> Number)
. MAP
, No.
APN
I PROPERTY and ADDRESS I
ACRES
SYS.
MAP
13 580-020-19 Ralph W Chapman Water Recyc. 6.26 3:9
580-020-28 Facility & FDIC Land Aquisition
#1059 - 11901 Singer Lane ..-=-
l' 596-0] 0-5 I 2-2 Reservoir (1090-1) 2.0] 320
.~
3033 Millar Ranch Road
15 596-11 ]-06 2-2 Pump Station 0.74 320
596-21 ]-07 3029 Mi1lar Ranch Road
]6 59&-031-02 9-] Pump Station 0.19 321
13255 Campo Road
17 596-062-24 9-] Reservoir & 9-2 Pump Sta. 5.20 ^~~
-"--
3102 Vista Diego Road
18 596-062-18 Vista Diego Hydro-Pneumatic 0.09 ^~~
-"__
Station - 315] Vista Diego Rd.
19 519-200-05 9- R PI::Pf'Ln1T' (1 AS5 ~ 1:nYl1T.P- 336
--
519-200-06 9- 3 Reservoir (1485- 1) 0.64
15008 Lyons Valley Road
20 596-173-18 9-3 Pump Station 0.14 3~~
-~
14303 Lyons VaHey Road
11 597-220-44 9-2 & 9-4 Reservoir (1296 -1-2) L08 307
597-221-43 13635 Bear Mountain Way 5.01
~~ 597-220-56 Otay Property 0.002 307
Bear Mountain Way
^^ 59'7-270-18 Ranch lamul Pump Sta. (1581-1) 0.16 206
-'.J
14715 PresiHa Drive
24 505-672-21 20-] Reservoir (850-1) 0.93 317
2105 Ledge Avenue
;:.roperry.ooc
fb
4/:14/98
Page 2
GTAY WATER DISTRICT PROPERT""S
(Listed by Map Number)
MAP SYS.
No. APN PROPERTY and ADDRESS ACRES MAP
..,- 579-031-]8 ] -4 Res~rvoir & Pmnp Station 0.68 3:6
-)
579-03]-16 (1004) 1828 La Presa Avenue 0.54
26 579-364-] 7 ]-3 Reservoir & Pmnp Station 0.59 301
(546-]) 1230 Buena Vista Ave.
27 5-7 -46] -06 ] -2 Rese;'\'oir - Hydro Pnemnatic 0.35 30:
Station (451-1)
8136 Dorchester Drive
28 5'9-408-02 ]-1 Reservoir (657-J) 0.74 303
5ryc408-03 ]-6 Reservoir (657-2)
1156 San Bernardino Avenue
29 585-160-20 Jamacha Blvd. 1.32 200
Grant De~d #587
30 579-3]0-21 Parcels for 36-inch Pipeline 0.355
579-310-26 La Presa Ave./San Carlos Street
579-310-27
579-310-28
31 586-] 80- 17 Quarry Road I Elkelton 0.064 197
.32 5~~160-40 Aqueduct Connection No.5 0.16 198
5 g...1 60-4] and Chlorine Starion
58~532-68 444 R1L';:ton Avenue
33 579-322-25 Caltrans/Hwy 54 - 36" pipeline 0.91 198
34 505-672-19 La Presa Pump Station 0.62 317
505-672-20 ] 0557 Jamacha Bouievard
:.:; 505-230-51 Otay Warer District Offices C13.3i) 3]8
505-230-16 2554 Sweetwater Springs Blvd.
505-230-37 Otay OperationslWarehouse
505-230-40 2553 Sweetwater Springs Blvd.
505-230-47
505-230-23
=~Q~~rrY.QOC
JI
4/24/98
Page 3
OTAY WATER DISTRICT PROPERT~'5
(Listed by MaD Number)
MAP I SYS.
No. APN PROPERTY and ADDRESS ACRES MAP
505-23] -30
36 580-0] 0-21 1-5 Reservoir / Hydro-PnelllDatic 1.12 3(>-"
Station (850-2)
] 07] 0 Elevator Road
37 5E:5-J40-14 Wastewater Reclamation Use ....:;r,ci-r. 1 -c
........_0
5E:5-140-21 Area 980-1 & 980-2 Reservoirs
595-040-0] 10770 Proctor Valley Road
595-040-03
595-040-04
595"040-05
595-040-08
38 595-020-07 Tax Deed in Haley's Addition 0.92 158
(Unimproved)
/;\ 640-050-33 22-2 Reservoir (485-1) 0.92 112
'J
. -
\ 996 East H Street
G 640-070-34 Chula Vista Branch Office Site 0.51 95
640-142-08 (Unimproved)
~ 643-020-08 Central .'\rea PlllDp Station & 2.00 l' ,1
.~
'-.J 643-020-25 Reservoir (613-1)
643-020-26 10391 Oray Lakes Road
643-020-27
643-020-35
643-020-40
644-221-60
~ 643-020- J3 Patzig Reservoir (624-1) 6.10 114
0 10389 Otay Lakes Road
/~ 595-070-48 22-3 Reservoir (71 ]-1) 5.09 131
! ~.) :
J 2010 Gotham Street
Cj 595-370-68 22-1 & 22-4 Reservoir (711-1) 2.29 131
2710 Otay Lakes Road
:Jwm:ny.doc
s.~
4/24/98
Page 4
DTAY WATER DISTRICT PRDPERTI"'.s;
(Lisled ~y Map Num~er)
MAP
No.
APN
PROPERTY and ADDRESS I
ACRES
SYS.
MAP
r 644-221-68 I.D. 1 0 R~servoirs 0.99 66
~)
(458-1 & ~58-2)
651 Point Barrows Road
46 648-01 0- 23 Ro]] Res~rvoir (5~1-1) 18.29 "
~~
6-"6-040- 1.4 444 Alta Road
646-040-16
648-010-25 Future Reservoir Site 3.71 55
Grant Deed ;"1070 (part of parcel)
47 648-010- J7 High Head Pump Station (870- I) 1.07 55
442 Aha Road
48 648-010-19 Upper Res~rvoir (870-1) 8.42 55
440 Alta Road
49 648-070-18 Otay Mesa Road/Alta Road 3.64 26
Pipeline
50 646-130-09 Otay M~sa RoadIHarvest Road ..,-
-)
Valve Station Vault
(COlo'1\'TY OF S,A....1\!DlEGO)
51 646-120-22 Otay M~sa Op~rations Center 9.84 25
9287 Airway Rd. S.D., 92173
-.., 515-05] -07 Singing Hi]]s R~servoir (803-3) 1.72 370
)-
13690 Highway 94
(~ 595-321-12 Eastlak~ Pmnp Station 0.59 131
\..J 2420 Oray Lakes Road
,~ 6~3-020-21 Eastlake 30 MG Reservoir 15.06 114
~-
J 1230 Eastlake Parl,:way
55 519-312-61 Wiid Mustang Place 335
Grant Deed #1001 (portion of)
:J:-crp:=ny.do::
y)
-I,':2~19S
Page 5
DTAY WATER DISTRICT PRDPERTI.,.s
(Listed ::'y Map Number)
MAP SYS.
No. APN PROPERTY and ADDRESS ACRES MAP
56 597-04]-28 JamuJ House Property 9.84 " .
:;I_"-}
13690 Highway 94
~
, -~ 593-382-39 Rancho D~I Rey WeIJ Site 1.2] 1:-
~/)
.-/ Rcho Del Rey p")' @ Terra Nova
"~,
58 :~-Ol 0-37 F utuT~ Res~rvoir Site 4.85 66
,
--./ Sequoia S1., ChuJa Vista
TOT.A.L ACRES: r~
)-
"
Page 6
~&.I
4/24/98
:'7":meny.do::
-' ~ -
':,'-'-' - .;.-~
,....j I /..;.TlI
~ >SJII'Id""r1ng. lrJL :";'vl.-.::,~' jl~/
P.02
.K'....H.<.j.J.IIoW'~...y
,Y.;;..t'II'!oj l.Iun.."E..... P.t:. f1~fIo.t1
~I tU _ ......"...... "to
JQ, t7~n .D11!. Vol:.
~Ol ~tJO.1I-761 fz7.
...-".....>>".'1r-.......-~. C.._"
MULLANEY ENGINEERINQ. INC,
ooeg SH....OY GROVC: COlJP,7
GArTHER38URQ, MD 20t!.i7
2 October 1993
M,. Robert A. Leitcr, AICP
Dj,ector ofpjannjng
Planning Deparlment
2:~, Four':.h A\'~:-,u~
Cld? Vista. C;, 919JO
RE: KURS, 1040 kHz, San Diego, CA
Proposed OpcrntloD from Otay Water
Districl SIte near Poggi Cllnyon
D~~r Mr. Leiter:
Mr. J~irne Bonilla of QuetzaI,BIlillgu:ll Communi'catlons, IIIC., requested th6.t 1 prepare
ar. engineering analysis IIddrc.ssIng variou~ technical concerns relative to the proposed
op~"'tion from thc OtD)' Water District Site ne:u- Poggi CanyOl\ by AM radio &ultion
KURS. J 040 kHz. San Diego, CA. r believe the attached EngineerIng Stalement is
rc:sponsj\,~ to those concerns.
if you have: any questions or ~uirc anythjng further pk.a:>e let me know.
Very truly yours.
~c~
Alan E. Geming, P.E.
Se11ior Eng.neer
EDe. - Er>ginecring Stattmcnt
cc: Mr. Jaime Bonilla
Nir. Allnn Sotzsky
Robert L. Thompson, Esquire
[with enclosure]
-1-
~
d
Attachment 5
~'L~-~2-~8 ~0;~S r~
1~:-'.\2j' En9-int2:t"~1ng, :nc':;' -590-::;757
?03
Jr,k.". J ....r_:...J.);';.Y
J;)j-(t~ 1'-. ~""Wi"", ..1::... ::Ii;\o(~
J..1.1".Nt..~.Al\H+C,.,..ii..
:i0'1 ~:?'...r"t. "0;':;:.
,jOI ~BO.;7.s,;, F,u.
"'~1Iwl\~r~c.,,,ttI", [.mul!
MUl.LANEY ENC!IN!:ERINa, I!-IC,
P(I..(;{I Gti.wr GRO'w'E COURT
O.A.!TI-(E~SaURO, MD 201371
ENGXN'EERING STATEMENT
DISCUSSJON OF
V ARJOUS F.NGJNEERING AND TECHNICAL ISSUES
RELATIVB TO
THE PROPOSED OPERATION OF AM RADIO STATION KURS
FROM THE OTAY WATER DISTRICT SITE NEAR POGGI CANYON
P'cpare~ an Bohalf Of
QUETZAL BILINGUAL COMMUNICATlONS,INC.
:2 Oclot>er ] 998
s-'
::I..
-"
Gc:"~02-S:8 20:25 r-':ullaf"j,
Ep9in~~T,ng~ 2rl':= 301-59
;J757
"'.04
MULLANEY ENCINEEfIJNQ. INC.
ENGINEER.ING STATEMENT
DISCUSSION OF
VARIOUS ENGINEE.RJNG AND TECHNICAL rSSlJES
RELATIVE TO
THE PROPOSED OPER^TION OF AM RADIO STATlON K1..iRS
FROM T:-!E OTAY \'I'!,TER DISTRICT SITE NEAR POGGI CANYON
Prcp~l~d 011 Behnlf 01
QUETZAL BILINGUAL COMMUNICA TJONS, INC.
2 October 1998
MIll!aMy Engim:cring, Inc., has been retained by Quetzal Bilingual Communicat:ons,
Inc. (Quetzal). 10 review certain aspects of the proposed operation by AM broadcast
J;t&lion KURS from the Otay Water District SilC nellr Poggi C!l.lJyon. The jtem~
addressc-.s ale lb()sc laid out in "OWD A.ntennn Project - Processing Steps and Tim..line
- 1" Rough D,aft" dated 09i2-198. In particulnr, 11 discussion wil] be provided'
concerning:
1) Potential human e"posur~ to radiofre:qucl1cy C"RP") e:miss;o"s,
2) Potent;al imc:rfenncc to conSUTUer e k,c!I'onics d"vice:~,
3) A!ternmive ntHelma sites considered,
4) Rcstrictju!l~ on the location Ilnd operation of AM broadcast station
KVRS imposed b}i either the: Federal Communications Commission (FCC)
or Fcdcral Avintion Administration (FAA), and
5) Co-location of pther facilities at the proposed site.
Some of these :.!sues also IJ1"Y be addressed in other rdated filings to be submitted by
Quci,,~I.
-1-
f?
Ll
- ~ '- .
::""'d
L '-'. ~--'
I~
iariey EI~g1r-,eer1r-'Q.
I tiC 3.
-590-Q7~-.7
P.05
L."1;;in(:ui..,g S~t~lncnl
QU<t1.J111HJjn~.;.;;1 Co",munkotiODJ<. Inc.
Z October! 9n '
MULLAhEY ENGINEERING, INC.
G~NGR~LBA~KOROU~V
Thc Federal CommunicutioD5 Commission (FCC) is the main fed~rnl agcncy char!;cd
Wilh Jc!:uj;::.ing tbe construction and operation of hro~d;:nsl st<ltions $ueh :>$ KURS.
Also, the Federal Aviotion AcJrnini~trmjoo (FAA) monitors the potcnti"l impact th;'1
oroudcnst stotion "11\::::In~ structures may havc em acronautical sufety.
,;.mong ;h~ vnr;ous technical rules enforced 0)' the FCC Ill'C tho.e ck.igned to control
":,,xf'os-ure- to R1'7 ef1.~j,.n;jonJ; :aud to lirn1t in\orfere.noo to oJc.ctronic dc-vice", lO~Gtcd witbln.
clOse proximJty to a broadcast station transmitter/antenna site. Abo, the pee places
restrictions cOrleen-ung interference protection to other brondcllst stations and Ininimum
sc['vice requi:emcl1t5 10 the ~IIJtion 's city of license, This l~st two critcria tcnd to limit
tile aTea wherein the FCC wjJJ permit a station to Jocatc its lransmiucr/nnte:ma site.
The FAA Rules regarding :.c.rpn"utiea! obstructions and h""ilrds to air n:tvigalion abo
can rest.rict the area wherein a broadeOls! stlltion may Jocate an nntcnna st.ructurc.
As pan of the standard process to secure It cons:ruction permit to build the pruposed
KURS facility ilnd to secure II license to cover operation of the facilities once bu i It, the:
PCC wiii require Quetzal tD dcmo/1stratc that:
I) The proposed KURS fncilit;c. will cml1P!v with the pertinent FCC Rules
governing CXPQ~ure to RF emissions,
2j Quctza! will como!" with the pertinent FCC Rules regardIng mitig:njon of
irtlcrrc.re.-n.:.:c en used to nearby clcctrol1ic: dcvk;es,
3) The proposed KURS facilities ,)"iII fall" protect from intc::rierc::ncc al1 othcr
previously authorized broadcast "tations, ';
4) The:: proposed: XURS ar,tenna structures "'onlll not be a b'lzlIrd w aIr
1,;'1.vigation.
The foJJowing pnragraphs provide a more detail"c'. discussion of the requirements of the
'\'a..jOi1S RUles.
-2-
fa
c:
~.
_,..__,....____.n._'_...__~.-------.-.--
~~
_-':':- 2G.:L /
,''1uJ -I ar,
Erlg-jr.eerlng..
Inc 301-S~
9757
P.06
Ln:.itK.'orinc Sjll~tmc:nL
Qu!:fZDl Dilfnsu;I! C'tlm:l'lUnfc.:::tUOM, Int.
: Dc1<ibcr 1'598
MULL.ANEY ENGINEERING, INC.
FAA STTE RE,fK1CT10N~
;h= [owen proposd to he: cmpJo)'ed by Quctzal for the XU RS directional ante:nl1a array
wIll be only approximate])' i6 feet in Ldght above ground level. The FCC and FAA
Rule. do not normalJ)' rc:quire notificatioJJ of structures less than 200 fe~r high as such
:ine:! !;trueture, would not constitute ~n aeronautical obstruction unless 10cated vc.ry
c:JSC to an airp"~t. The prc>pc>sed KURS towen hn\'c been studied relative to Brown
Field 10=QlcC "PFoximalcly fcur mil". soutb of the proposeu KURS site. The propo3cd
KURS towers de n()t I'couke notification to the FAA.
FCC SITE RESTR1CTIONS
Interfercnce protection requirements of the FCC Rules, result in both Ibe daytimc ~nd
nighttime KURS antenna systems generating the strDnge.t signal in n southwesterly
cL:ect;OD_ This in tUIn lcnd$ to " l'l>quircment that thc sIalion locate its
transmittcI/antenna sile to the north and e:aSl oftrn: area it wishes to serve. While II site
further north would be preferable 10 the: one under current consideration, Quetzal 11n5
Spcnt morc than a decade attempting to secure such a sileo without success. The FCC
Ruk rcquireJToent~ copce;niog th" minimum signaJ str"ngth which mu.t De placed over
J! broadcnst station' s city of license limits KURS from moving 100 rar east. The O:ay
Wa~c.r District Site nCIlr Poggi Canyon now under consideration, IIppear. to be the best
site available.
POTEr"Tlb.t,)'1JJMAN Ex J>OSlJRF. 'to RAnTOI'REOtrENCY EMISSIONS
Th~ FCC Rld~5 noquire that al1 broadc:u;t stations be designed aod consrructcu such that
<lcithcr workers nor the gen~ral puhlic aTC cJ;posed to levyls of mdiofrequenc-y
ci::cuomagne1ic fjclds exceeeing identified guiddincs adopted by the FCC. Cmrcnt!y
tht ,,~niJ1ent gtlidoli!1e~ arc thD~c set fortb in "Biological Effects Itnd Exposure Criteria
for Elidiof:rcqucncy Elcctn>magnetic. FicJds," NCRP' Report No. S6 (! 9&f.) nnd "Safety
,~CRP ' National Council on Radiation Prolection 3I1d Moosuronlcl1U
-}-
r~
{
~~L-C~-9a 20:~~ ,~~
ar>gy Eng-in~er1ng.. Inc 3~ -590-9757
P.07
l~ngij1{'''t'"inB $t4J"C1t'1l'nt
QUou.a1 BmngraJ COU1nnm!-::O:J<>,,,, Inc..
;. Dcrober 1'98
MULLANEY Z!NGIHEERINO, INC.
Leveh with Respect to Hum"Jl Exp".u,c to Rndio Frcquc!lC:y Electromagnetic Fie!ds.
3 kHz to 30C: GHz," ANSlilEEE' C95.I.r 992.
Thc proposed KURS facility i~ for opermion OD 1040 kHz with daytime pOwer of 9 I:W
;lnd nighttime power of 4 tW. Tile worst CD~C distance for compliance with FC~
gujdcijne~ f", general ?uLjj; expawTC is 2 merer> (6.6 fcct) ror both duytime lmu
nighttime QPc~arion.
In order to prevent "xces.;"e exposure to the general public, onch of the propou:d
Kl.JRS IOwors will havc n bn~~ fence localed 1]0 Ics~ than 2 meters from the tower. The
rt:foCC willi>:; eight [eel in height and wiJ] h~vc a locked gale 10 restrict access 10
authorized personnel.
Standnrd operating proeedure~ will be estnbUshcd to ensure that when work illSidc the
tower base fences is require.d, workers wiIJ not be expose.d to RF emission5 in ""ceS5
of Ihe pertinent established guideline levels for controlled areas.
PQTEN'!'!AL IhTjlRFERENC'O' To CONSTJMEU ElECTI\ONICS DEVICES
The FCC recognizes thut broadcDs! stotiom operating in full compjjance wjth tIle FCC's
technical ruk. rr.ny still <.:<Iuse interference to nearby consumer electronics devices.
Consequently, ~he FCC hils established Rules SCtti11g fortb the responsibility of statioD
licensees and permittees to correct certain categories of inlGrfercncc in B timely manner
and :it the station liecn~cc' 5 ""pense. In particular, Section 73.88 of the AM BroiJdcaSl
Rules states:
..
,
j
AN$! - American National Sland:lJ'd, lno:l;tu1c
IEEE -lnstituu: of@<>etrical nnd Electronics Engineers. Inc.
-4-
'(1
...
~~~~-U~-_~6 ~U:~l r~ullal'l
Engineer1ng, Inc 301-59
J757
P.08
D~inl'l:'rjllJ1. St.:n.c..,-:p:nt
QU"",-al IJiltngll:l! CommunlcOI!o::., Inc.
: O<'ot>cr 1~9B
MULLANf!Y ENOINEERtNO, INC.
'.The ;j~~nstoto of each bronde.:st 5l01iol1 i. required to siltisfy all
Tcr..or.nbJc complain~ of blanketing interference within the ! VI.}')
contour',
)>:ote: For more dctnilcd iJ1structjon~ concerning operational
n::spc)JJ.ibilitks of jjcenscc~ und permittees under thiE
,p-':~n o. (-3 "I R(h) ( \ j (d' ..
~....._h' , ~1t::C ~'J. .J .' c) i\nt ).
The referenced rele sections J'(:C]uirc that licen.ceE or permittees S:llisfy 1111 complaints'
of bl;mkcring interference which arc rec~ived by the station dUring" one year period
beginning wirn commencement of progrnmminS uti li::ing th<: ilCW anlenntl. Re~oJut-ion
of complaints a!1: to be at no charge 10 Ihe complainant. The FCC RuJes specifically
cJ;empt cl'rtain i:a:e!.!orie~ of devic.cs: malfunctioning or mistuncd receivers, improperly
;ns!al\e.rl nn\en'Q~ systems, the Use of high gain nIllennas. or the use of anlenna booster
amplifiers. Mobile receivers and lJon-Rf devices such as lape recorder. or hi-fi
amplifiers (phonographs) are also excluded.
FolJ"wJng the O:1e year pericd of full financiaJ obligation to satisfy blanketing
complaints, licensees are stm req!!ired to provide technical inform~tion or assistance
to aid complainants in remedying blanktotin,g intcrfcrenct.
Most incidences of illtcrference to consumer electron;cs devices caused by nearby AM
broacicllst station transmitters can be eured by the installation of an approprjale filter
al the affected device or fe-routing interconnecting cables. In extreme cases it may be
ncce",~r)' It> n:place the afroclcd de"ice ",'jth a m"ctcJ whkh is ID5>re resistive to outside
Rf' energy. There are thou....nds d' AM broad Cas! Mations opcnllLng thrcughout thc
tbl1tec States, many with powers well in e;;cc.. of Ihose proposed for lIse by KtJRS,
M.~ny of these stlltions haye the1r .ludics <lnd business offices co-located with their
'l':v.: prV~o.\cC KURS 1 VIm bJIlIJKeting contour would extend n ma:>timtml of 1.9 kn.
(1.2. mile) daytime and 1.1 km (0.7 mib) nighuime - ""e IItlAchw map.
.5,
"fl
f.
~,. --~"... ....-
-~---- ---
---......- ----
0LL-C2-98 ~U:33 l~l
.z..nEY Engineering. lnc 3l "590-9757
P.09
EI~Riuc~rj~ &~Bt~mcnt
QuctUI.I!ilingu>J ['.<>I'>J""nil"'t.io-..s, luc.
20c'obcr 199f
MUU.ANI:.Y ENGINEERING, INC,
trnmmjtter and ;intennas. 1n such cn~es. the signal strength 0>1 the 6tuciio~ and office.>
would be mucb higher th211 would typically be th~ case for II nearby rcsidcnce.,. Thm
,hcsc suniDns 5uccessfuliy employ cjabornle telephone systems and other electronic
device" Hleh <..> Iltpe recorders, phonographs, tekyjsion receiver:;, etc., !urthcr nlpport~
~h~ con<:.JutljDJ1 thf\t bJQni=:il~I; inlcrfcrcnce ;:an be r'cadily solvcd.
SlrM~1^~Y
The FCC has established Ruks COVl:TlIIg both human cXposure to radiofrequcncy'
emissions tnd mitigation of interference to consumer cJec:tronic devices, The proposed
KURS facilities wi!J be designed !lnd built to compl). with these Rule,. Furthermore,
Quetzal will comply the: I'c<;jldremcnt" concerning responding to complaints of
bianKetinj; interference in a timely manner.
Qa::tza\ has spent more than l\ decade 3eilrc1!in& {PI' a site to locate the KURS
directional Mtenna system. The combined requirements of interference protcetinn~ to
other bro!lde:lsl stations :lnd required minimum ct've['agc to the eil}' of license (San
Diego), plus the inability to obtlliI1 approval for a more northerly locatdd site, rc>su1l in
the Otny Wllter District Site IIc"r Poggi C~nyon currently under consideration being the
"cst site avaiL"ble.
WhiJe it would be tc>ehnicdJy feasible for olher radio transmission facilities to :;hare
the KURS site, Quelzill has no plans to permit such co-loc;atie>n with the exception of
OIIlY Water District instz.Jlations for its own use.
"
~ p./"' '
A-~~G~
Alan E, Gearing, P.E.
-6-
12...
q
"._L-
l'':::-~2. 20:35
r1\.J -11 an\
Engin6Br1ng~
Inc 301-59
)757
P, JO
MULLANEY ENOINEERING, INC.
DECLARATION
I. tllon E. G~it:ing, dCcJMC and st~tc Lhn! 1 am a !;ruduntc electrical cngineer with a
B~chJOT ofScie~,cc dcpcc in Eketrica) EI!ginccril1!: from SUNY University nt Buffalo.
nOe: r nm '1 fcg;n~rcd pTof~ssional engineer in tbe District of Columb;8 [since J 979),
t:,~::: rhat I h;.vc p:-ovided c:ngineering sc.rviccs in the area of tclecammn[']i~"tjons sinc.e.
2973. My gu;.JifieatioM I>O':;:n expert in radiu engineering arc n matter of record with
the f'~dert\! C-.:JUlmuni"ations ComlTli~~ion. I am tl senior enelucer with the firm of'
Ml:J]aney Engineering, Inc., consulting ra(/io teJeeoIllffiun!elltion5 ~nginecrs with offices
in Gaithersburg, Maryland,
The firm of MulJ,.ney Ellginecdnl? lne., has been retained by QUETZAL BILINGUAL
COMMUNICA TJONS, 1NC., to prepare the attached engineering &tatcm~nt cOII{;(;rning
hun:ll/l e
device". lInd ,,{her technfcllI issrle.t relative to the proposed operation of AM radio,
station KURS from the Olay Water District site n~!' Poggi Canyon.
AU filets comained therein arc true of my own knowledge c:):eept thosl:' S::l\oo te> be on
iofocmation and relief. and a$ to tho,,, facts, J berieve them to be true. I clodare under
p~nalty of perjury lhat the fDregoing is true and correct.
tJLe C;~
Alan E. Gul'ing, P.E.
District of CDlumbia Number 7406
Executed cn the 20d day of October 1998
,~
IC
-'--- ,-
'"'-' L - ",,8 20: 3/"
HI.,.
~ney Eng1nBBrit-,g.
]nc 3C_-590-9757
P.11
.nn"o'
117" ec'
.....1-
,:,.,:../ '':._','':'JUJI';'~:'':''''"-' \'!I~;:-3.'"'!"r'!~~:',,-:-';J, ..; .,\\....,~..:/..../--_'_.,--;;' j' !".' I:.
t'~;;''fir;-:'(d(,.f~~N~~(''Jl:I.. '/'(,1;[ '4}',~, 'il~',"'{ ,'-' /."";0 '~1 I '. '"
~_.~.,,~~l,"f.l,,"?~-~;frt:;:f!j~')r!I\' ;;~\\~,:.:,;Ail.\V~O:~::'\~-~"\'~W-;;;;/,~"~..M~ j /:, 'Ir.'''''' .\\.~.: ~..
" ,~""^""."," "'''''''~''"'''='''\\' "'''~''il''i:' "\f . '.:\
v.--'.:,;T~I}.!I,k~~:.j-'-.~')4.<-.. _~L~_'\~;-""~-''''~';.~,.~..f,.:~U:i~)'4 " \ 1 ',-'-=:.., '",j;
'-'-1. .........~- 0./"''-:1:;,\,_,,_,.. ~~~ ~ ~2!7' ,,'~ii.-V". or ,I _ .\ i_
~ -.-- ~---J' / ;--1,' (,:'::.~,,::"~\~'y\ \' ':....':i.::.~. ~ ~ ..., ~(('r' <,:' <r'.;7;.~ :"!.! \ Ii. ,'-:\ ',:: / I I,' <
.' '. r~'._',j'\ - ';\~'. "--". ~._._ '...... (( . -.oJ;:_..... " l ' I I, .,~, :
F=;.
---.;
.::;
o
1
PROPOSED KURS
VIM BLANKETING CONTOURS
KURS 1 Q.4.0 kH% SAN OEGD. CA
DA~ 9.0 KW 3 TOwtR DA
NIGH:'; 4.0 KW "~OWE:R DA
MULLANEY ENGINEERING,
GAmfERSSlJRO. LW!Y\,'.NO
INC.
~
-
1 M!LES
SCJJ..r 1;24i<
=
-
.5
. ,
o
KILOMETER
~
-~
SEPTEMBER
199B
\'"
___"____,,,,_ '______._u,~'-
~ '-'~---':"::' 20;041
~"'iu -Ilan
Engineer1ng, Inc 301-55
9/57
? .12
"/'_"11'>0 .,. '.'U-..~. ""w
.to'..r'1"'. UU'~;.....,_...,!:y. ~.!;: f . ""'-.,
----~---
AJ.^"'~.CI~~'r
MULLANE:.V ENOINfOE;RING, tr.JC,
:JO' Sl7.1.tn10"'OIt~
3D1 t\?O.Q,:.- Fa...
n'1"n...'P.~~~_:;~"", 1:;,.m~~
P{..aO SMADy G-:=i-::Wr.; C':-:.)i II,"!"
GA,[Tt-II,::....55'J"'C'I. M{J ~"7
S1!ptember 1998
PRO?ESSIO~L BACKGROUND OF ALAN E. GEARrNG, P.E.
).,1011 E. :;~oriI19 15 .. senlor el1gineer at. Mullan,,}' Engineering,
Inc_, " !'irr: enga9.d in !'<.dio telecor.:municatlons engin""ring.
Mull~~~y En;i~~~:in9, Inc.] and it5 p~edeceszor firms, have been
providinry conQulting engineering cervices to the broadcast and
teleco~unicatiQns industria, sinCQ 1950. The firm currently provides
&erVi::es for A!1, FM, TV, LPTV, MDS/MMDS/ITrS, Cellular, and other
types of the radio telecommunication systems.
~r. Gearing's principalarea~ of Experti~e include AM, FM, end TV
engineering, as w~Jl a6 engineering d~sign of microwa~e.
MDS/!"~"'~S/!Tr:;;, cellula.., traditional t".o-way radio, and paging
systems. More specifically, Mr. Gearing has extensive experience in
frequency ~llocation studies (both for established radio services and
for identif:C'i,."g &pcctrum fOt" new service,,) i prop..gttUan :shll::lie.,;; MI
anten"" design and adjustment; prepilration of FCC applicetions for
most t.ypes of radio :;.ystems req\liring FCC licensing; "itc suryeys
concerning exposure to radio frequency radiation compliance with A~SJ
guidelines, coordinat;.ion with the rederal Aviat.lon Administration
concerning t.he impact or proposed telecommunications services on
aviat.~o" installations, And the development of computer: aided
engineering s~ft~arc.
Prior to joining Mullaney Engineering in 1995, ~r. Gearing worked
for !"E'Ver:al y&C!rz on his own as well as being associated with the
Washington a:eCl consulting engineoring finns of ,Rubin e"dnarek and
ASsoCiates, 1nc. (RBAJ, 1993-1994; and Jules Cohe" /J.nd Associates.
p.e. (JCI.A), 1973-1!il91. In addition to ,'ork in 'the bro;1dcAct <orea,
while a~ RBA ~r. G9aring parti~ipDted (on behalf Qf a major cli$nt of
the fi~~) in the TIA standacd committee meetings dealing with the APCO
Pruject 25, to develop standards for a new digital Public Safety radio
1
~J
1~
_'~L ~~~-~~L> "'_v_'::":"~ t-)
.~t.~..>' Eng1neer1r,~.. it'le .3
-590-97t:.7
P.13
I'rofe&sional Back", _ Jur,d of Alan .1:. Gear Jng
SepteJaber 1998
MULLANEY ENOIN::;ERINO. INC.
Project 25, to develo? .tandardc for u r.ew digital Public ~afety radio
system. On behalf of another client, hlO particip"ted in the indue try
c~~ittees on developing a domestic digital audio bro"dcas~ system and
hi,,:. speed digital :!'l subcar!ier system. He also work$d with
telecorn~uniCction~ s~~vice providers ~eguirin9 freQuency cocrclination
ser','ice to ::it into the CI:"o...diJd spectrum (collision avoidance systems
for ground ~ehiclcs an1 wireless biotelemetry devices for monitoring
i:::€rlsive cc,re- paticr..t~).. At JC&P./ whel-e he spe.nt ~:1ght.e-en years
after college. he worked in all are~s of broadcast and radio
telecommunications engineering. In 199Q end 1991 he W6S the engi~er
in ::hat:9E of a project to an/11yze the dIgital audio broadcasting
zystem developed in Rurope for its suitability for implement~tion in
the U.S. The work included study of the appropriate reIJion of the
electromagnetic spectrum for implementation of the new servJce.
development of a suitable propngation !!'.odel, deterl1lina'tion of tt1e
po~er requirements for variou~ sErvice area objectives, and the
development of altern..te frequency al,location scheDles for thi.s
country. Ee ...as heavily involved in the design' of cGllular radio
systemB including the area of t.raffic engineering. At; the ti11le he
left JC&A he was a -partner of the firm and held the posj tion of
Vice-president/Secretary.
Mr. Gear.ing has served as an instructor for the Di re,ctional
I>.ntenna System!> SC>JI\inarl; aponsored by the National Association of
Bt"oa::kasters. He has presented papereo at the Broadcast Engineering
con~erence of the NAB on djgital audio broadcast. H~ has participated
on :~e FCC Radio Advisory Committ~e studying changes to be made to the
rules governing the AI! broadcast systRm and chaired the working party
dGOolir.g \dth adjacent channel nighttime interference o:alculations. lie
also co-authored a chapter in the 7th edition of .The NhB Engineedn']
!!.andbook ~
M!:. Gearins is e =orzuer President of th€ Association Df Federal
Co~unications CO~5ulting Engineet"s (AfCCE) and a r.ember of the
Inst.itute of Electrical and. Electronic Engineerl& (IEEE). He is ~
merob~r of the IEEE'~ Broadcast Tochnology Society Administrative
2
.,j,
r:.
.. ~",",._~_.__..._.~'--- ._--~-~.-_."_.,._...-.,"--'-
'::"'::,:,-'-~-02-;'B 20:4b r1:"li161-t!
Eng1naMrlng. lrlc 301-59
~7S7
P,14
Professional 8ackg~. ~d ot Alan E. Gearing
Septa..'!;',,!: 1990
MULLANEY ENGINEERING, INC.
Co=ittee and has; hrice servad as chcinnan of the l;;E:E
brcaa~a.t Sy~po$ium. ~r. Gearing also iE a member of
Consumer Electronics. Vehicular Technology,
ElectrUI!1/29netic Compatibility Societies. He is
no.tione,l Engineering lioner Society ('1'a'.1 Beta Pi),
B~~a~=as~ E~;ineer5 ;55E}, and the Associetion of
Com1t,.:.~~~ion OE!ic&~~ (h.?CO). In. 1964 he WBG 8~lect.ed
El'S Annu" 1
tbe I E:EE
Propagation. and
a member of thc
the Society cf
Public Safety
as Centennial
You~~ Eng1n~e~ ty th~ E=ood~a~t ~echnolo9Y Soci~ty of the 1~EE and he
iz :~sted in =he Second Edition of Who's Who in Frontiers of ScieIlce
dnd :'",chnoloov,
------........
HI'. Gearing is a graduate of the stat~ Univendty o( New York
univ~rlSlty at 5utfalo, having graduated Magna Cum Laude ir. E1e~trical
Engin:~Lin9 wi~h concentration in communications Engineering and solid
~tate '""terials. He has 'completed one year of post graduate study at
Bro-m University majDring in communications engineering and
informatlon th"'Dry. P.r. Geuring i~ a registered professional engineer
in the District of Columbia and is currently pu!:suing registration in
the commonwealth of Virginia and the state of Maryland.
3
'1,
4.
5.
6
THE
TY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSCR,TATEl\1L"T
Stat~:TJ~ni. of cllsck,;;:...::--:: of CCT1aJf oTncrship intcr~sls. p2:::TJ~!1lS. or Cam~2.1g:n contrib:J:i:r;:~,. or: a]] manc:-~ WhJCr \\'iL
ream,:: clscrctior.a~. ~:ljon on th~ Da~ of th~' CJ!\' Coun:::i~. ?:annlTI!2 COffii-russ1on. and al: Oln~; ofiicia; -D(Jci]~s.
, . . .. -
The iuIJowmg info:-rnzlJOn must b::: ci;s~josed:
J.
List the narn~s of all p~rsons who have a financiaJ inrerest in the contract, i.e.. contractor. subcontractor, mat~ria]
supplier.
Pacific Snan;sh "Network Inc Jaime Bonilla VaJd~? ICo-AppJicant witb Otav Water District)
o
If any persons identified pursuant to (]) above is a cDJl'oration or parmership, list the names of all individuals
owning mort than 10%) of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnershIp interest in the partnership.
Jaime Ranine VaJoe?;, S~cr~tarv-Treasnrer of Pacific Spanish 1\ietwork Jnc He;, the sole
sharehoJderin this comoration.
3.
Jf any person identified pursuant to (I) above is a non-profit organization or a trust, Jist the names of any person
serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustee of the trust.
Not Auulicab1e
Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of th~ City staff, Boards, Commis-
sions, Commirre~s and Council within the past twelv~ monthsry
No
Please identifY each and every p~rsoD, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent contractors
who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this marrer.
Law Firm of Barbosa and Garcia, California Land Use Consultants. Pacific Southwest Biologica]
Services. Ine.. Mateo Cam",-illo
Have you andJor your officers or agents, in the aggr~gate, contributed more than $1,000 to a Council member in
th~ current or preceding elecrion periodry Yes l ] No [X] Ify~s, state which Council member(s):
Person is defined as: "Any individual, finn. co-parmership, joint vemure. association. social club, fraternal organization, corporation, estate, trust,
receive!". syndicale. this ano any other ceuTlty. city and county. city. municipainy. district or orn::-. poiitical subdivisioI:. 0; any other group DT combination
actmg a.." r: unIt.
(NOTE: Anaen additiona: pag::s as necessary)
Date:
1\
.rv .
& q
/
'V--
Si alure of contractor/applicant
J !ME BONILLA V.
T" t or type name of comractor/applicant
~,.. ,
Attachment 6
\\lPC:F:IJIOM3PL4NNING'STORED\I02J-A.93 (Ref. ]0:1.0.93) (Ref. 1021.931
Page 14