HomeMy WebLinkAboutAttachment 4a - A NOP Comment Letters (Compressed) (3)Appendix A
NOP Comment Letters
NOTICE OF PROJECT SCOPING MEETING
BY THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA has called and will convene a public
project scoping meeting as summarized below:
PROJECT: Environmental Impact Report (EIR20-0002) for the Sunbow Sectional Planning Area (SPA)
Plan Amendment for the Sunbow II, Phase 3 Project.
PURPOSE: Solicit public comment on the type and extent of the environmental analyses to be performed
under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), such as: Land Use, Aesthetics, Air Quality,
Biological Resources, Geology and Soils, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, Hazards, Hydrology and Water
Quality, Noise, Public Services and Utilities, Transportation/Circulation, and Cultural Resources.
DATES: November 9th to December 9, 2020 online (see review and commenting instructions below)
The purpose of a public scoping meeting is to inform the public that the lead agency, the City of Chula
Vista Development Services Department (DSD), is evaluating a project under CEQA and set forth in Public
Resources Code Section 21065 to solicit public comment regarding the type and extent of environmental
analyses to be undertaken. At the scoping stage, DSD describes the preliminary concept of the project, and
asks for public feedback regarding the scope of the EIR.
Under normal circumstances, public scoping meetings are held in a public location in the community near
the location of the proposed project. Pursuant to the Governor of the State of California's executive order
N-29-20, and in the interest of the public health and safety, the public may participate virtually in this
project scoping meeting.
HOW TO REVIEW THE PRESENTATION: Members of the public will be able to access a link to watch
a pre-recorded presentation via livestream at https://www.chulavistaca.gov/departments/development-
services/planning/public-notices/virtual-meetings. The link will remain live from November 9th to
December 9, 2020.
HOW TO SUBMIT COMMENTS: Visit the City’s webpage for a link to the online eComment portal at:
https://www.chulavistaca.gov/departments/development-services/planning/public-notices/virtual-
meetings.
The interactive scoping meeting will be available for viewing between November 9, 2020 at 8:30 AM
through December 9, 2020 at 5:30 PM. All comments regarding the scope of the EIR must be submitted
by December 9, 2020. All comments submitted online will be available to the public and City staff and the
applicant using the eComment portal.
eComments received after December 9, 2020 will not be considered by the City in determining the scope
of the environmental review. If you have difficulty or are unable to submit a comment, please contact Oscar
Romero at oromero@chulavistaca.gov for assistance.
Upon completion of the scoping process, all public comments will be organized and will be considered in
the preparation of the draft environmental document.
ACCESSIBILITY: Individuals with disabilities are invited to request modifications or accommodations in
order to access and/or participate in the scoping process by contacting the City Clerk’s Office at
cityclerk@chulavistaca.gov or (619) 691-5041 (California Relay Service is available for the hearing
impaired by dialing 711) at least forty-eight hours in advance of the opening date of the forum.
2
NOTICE OF PREPARATION OF A DRAFT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE
SUNBOW SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN
AMENDMENT FOR THE SUNBOW II, PHASE 3 PROJECT
PROJECT LOCATION
The proposed project is located within the Sunbow neighborhood in the City of Chula Vista,
California (Figure 1). Specifically, the project site is located south of Olympic Parkway and east
of Brandywine Avenue. The Otay Landfill is located to the south and southeast of the site and
undeveloped land is located to the east.
PROJECT BACKGROUND
The General Development Plan (GDP) for the Sunbow Planned Community, which originally
included 604.8 acres in eastern Chula Vista, was prepared in July 1989, and included guidelines
for land use mix and density, primary circulation pattern, open space and recreation concept, and
infrastructure requirements. The Sunbow GDP identified development of approximately 2,000
residential units, 10 acres of commercial space, and 46 acres of industrial use. The Environmental
Impact Report (EIR) for the Sunbow Planned Community was adopted on July 24, 1989. The
Sunbow SPA Plan, which serves as the implementation tool for the GDP, was approved by the
Planning Commission of the City of Chula Vista on January 24, 1990. Its goal was to define, in
more detailed terms, the development parameters for the Sunbow Planned Community.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The project encompasses approximately 135.7 acres (project site) that includes a 67.5-acre
development area comprised of 44.2 acres of residential uses, a 0.9-acre Community Purpose
Facility (CPF) site, 5.9 acres of public streets and 16.5 manufactured slopes/basins. Approximately
4.3 acres of conserved Poggi Creek Easement area, 0.3 acre of conserved wetland resource area,
and 63.6 acres of adjacent MSCP Preserve area are also within the project site.
The proposed project’s residential land use includes four unique multi-family attached residential
product types with 15 unique floor plans, ranging in square footage from approximately 1,100 to
2,050 square feet and from two- and three-stories. Each home includes a two-car garage and two
to four bedrooms.
Approximately 5.9 acres of the project site would be utilized for roadway and circulation. This
includes development of two proposed streets, Street A and Street B, which would both extend
east from Olympic Parkway.
The proposed land uses are shown in Figure 2. Table 1 provides a summary of land uses for the
project.
3
Table 1
Sunbow II, Phase 3 Land Use Summary
Sunbow II, Phase 3 Land Use
District Acres1 Units Density
Multi-Family Residential
R-1 RM 8.5 131 15.4
R-2 RM 4.6 73 15.8
R-3 RM 8.1 108 13.3
R-4 RM 8.2 118 14.4
R-5 RM 7.1 104 14.7
R-6 RC 7.6 184 24.1
Subtotal Residential 44.2 718 16.3
Other
Community Purpose Facility CPF 0.9
MSCP Preserve Conserved Open Space
(OS-1 to 3 and OS-9b) OSP 63.6
Poggi Creek Easement
(OS-4, 5, 6a and 6b) OS 4.3
Manufactured Slopes/Basins
(OS-7, 8, 9a, 10 to 13) OS 16.5
Conserved Wetland Resource Area (OS-14) OS 0.3
Public Streets Circulation 5.9
Subtotal Other 91.5
TOTAL 135.7 718 16.3
Notes: RM = Residential Multi-Family CPF = Community Purpose Facility; OSP = Open Space Preserve;
OS = Open Space
The proposed project includes a Chula Vista General Plan Amendment, Sunbow GDP
Amendment, Sunbow II SPA Plan Amendment, a rezone, and a Tentative Map. The proposed
project also includes a Chula Vista MSCP Boundary Adjustment to implement minor adjustments
to the development limits and the adjacent MSCP Preserve areas that would result in a 0.09-acre
increase to MSCP Preserve Area and an MSCP Minor Amendment to address off-site grading
adjacent to the southwestern boundary of the development area.
Construction of the proposed project is anticipated to begin in 2021 and is anticipated to be
completed in 2028.
4
EIR CONTENTS
Potential Environmental Effects of the Project
The City has determined that the project may cause significant adverse environmental effects and
potentially significant indirect, direct, and cumulative environmental effects. An EIR is, therefore,
required to comply with CEQA Guidelines Sections 15060 and 15081. Specifically, it has been
determined that an EIR will be prepared.
In accordance with the CEQA Guidelines and the City’s Environmental Procedures, the
environmental impact analysis will describe the environmental setting of the project, identify
potential environmental impacts, address the significance of potential impacts, identify mitigation
measures to address potentially significant environmental impacts, and determine the significance
of impacts after mitigation.
The scope of the EIR for the project will be based in part on comments received in response to this
NOP and public input received during the public scoping meeting. The EIR will address each of
the environmental issues summarized herein. A Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program
(MMRP) will be prepared to document implementation of the required mitigation measures. For
each mitigation measure, the timing of implementation will be identified and tied to a specific
project action. Responsible parties will be identified to implement and monitor the satisfaction of
each mitigation measure. The following environmental issues will be analyzed in the EIR:
Aesthetics
This section will describe all regulations, policies and guidelines governing views and aesthetic
considerations. This section will evaluate grading associated with the project and the potential
change in the visual environment based on the proposed development, including substantial effects
on scenic vistas and potential impact to scenic resources, if any are present in the vicinity of the
site. Further, this section will evaluate any potential conflicts with applicable zoning and other
regulations governing scenic quality.
Air Quality
An Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Emissions (GHG) Analysis will be prepared for the proposed
project and incorporated into the EIR. The air quality section of the EIR will describe the existing
air quality in the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB) in the vicinity of the project site, list relevant
policies that relate to air quality in the SDAB, and identify potential air quality impacts.
Biological Resources
This section of the EIR will address the potential direct and indirect impacts of the project on
sensitive biological resources. The evaluation will be based on project-specific biological
resources investigations as well as regional documentation of biological resources. Recent
biological resource surveys have been conducted for the site. In addition, project vicinity and
regional biological resources information (i.e., MSCP) will be reviewed for the study area. The
analysis will also include an analysis of the project’s compliance with the City’s MSCP and
5
Resource Management Plan (RMP). A Biological Resources Technical Report shall be prepared
for all areas of potential effect of the proposed project and will be included as an appendix to the
EIR.
Cultural and Tribal Cultural Resources
This section of the EIR will address the project’s potential impacts to cultural resources and Tribal
Cultural Resources. Proposed site grading and other construction activities have the potential to
impact unknown resources. Consultation under Assembly Bill 52 will also be described. This will
be discussed in detail in the EIR. A Cultural Resources Technical Report shall be prepared for all
areas of potential effect of the proposed project and will be included as an appendix to the EIR.
Energy
This section of the EIR will calculate the energy usage (fuel, natural gas, and electricity) associated
with the project and analyze whether or not the project would potentially result in a significant
environmental impact due to wasteful, inefficient, or unnecessary consumption of energy
resources, or conflict with or obstruct a state or local plan for renewable energy or energy
efficiency.
Geology and Soils
A geology and soils technical report will be prepared and incorporated into the EIR. This section
will evaluate geology and soils issues pursuant to significance criteria based on Appendix G of the
CEQA guidelines, including issues related to soils suitability, and the potential for adverse
geotechnical conditions such as slope stability and seismic risks. This section of the EIR will also
address the project’s potential impacts to paleontological resources. Proposed site grading and
other construction activities have the potential to impact unknown resources. A Paleontological
Resources Study will be prepared and will be appended to the EIR.
Greenhouse Gas Emissions
This section of the EIR will summarize the results of the Air Quality and GHG Analysis for the
proposed project. The GHG analysis calculate the greenhouse gas emissions associated with the
project, as well as any greenhouse gas reduction measures to identify any project impacts. The
GHG section would also analyze the project’s consistency with the City’s Climate Action Plan
and any other applicable GHG plans, policies, or regulations.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
This section of the EIR will address risk of upset, hazardous emissions, proximity to airports and
the potential interference with emergency response plans. An environmental site assessment will
be prepared that identifies known and/or potential hazardous materials within the project site. The
radius study consists of a computerized database search of regulatory agency records to determine
whether there are currently, or were previously, any reports of hazardous materials contamination
or usage at the site or contamination at other sites within the search radius. The environmental site
6
assessment shall be included as an appendix to the EIR. This section will also be supported by a
project specific Fire Protection Plan.
Hydrology and Water Quality
A water quality and hydrology/drainage technical report will be prepared and incorporated into the
EIR. This section will evaluate effects of the project related to increases in impervious surfaces
and effects on groundwater recharge, water quality issues related to urban runoff, and storm drain
capacity issues resulting from changes in runoff patterns. This analysis will be supported by
drainage and stormwater technical studies.
Land Use and Planning
This section will identify all of the relevant goals, objectives and recommendations within
applicable plans/ordinances that pertain to the project related to minimizing environmental effects.
This section will analyze whether project implementation will be consistent with these plans and
policies.
Noise
An Acoustical Assessment will be prepared for the proposed project and the results of the technical
report will be incorporated into the EIR. This section of the EIR will evaluate the project’s potential
to increase noise levels above the baseline ambient noise condition, and will address compliance
with the noise policies and standards identified in the City’s General Plan. Both short-term,
construction-related noise, and long-term operational noise issues will be evaluated.
Population and Housing
This section will analyze the project’s effects on population and housing, both within Chula Vista
and the region. Population projections will be based on housing unit type and anticipated
occupancy. The discussion of housing and population issues will focus on (1) population growth,
which is primarily a “growth inducing impact”, (2) displacement of existing housing and (3)
displacement of people.
Public Services
This section of the EIR will evaluate potential impacts on public services. The existing services
and infrastructure will be identified and the potential for impacts to fire protection (including
emergency medical services), police services, schools, parks, and other services. The analysis in
this section will focus on the potential increased demand on services based on City-approved
standards and measures.
Recreation
This section of the EIR will evaluate the project’s potential to increase use of existing parks and
recreational facilities as well as the environmental impact of any recreational facilities included in
the project.
7
Transportation
This section of the EIR will be based on the transportation impact study and will address potential
conflicts with a program, plan, ordinance, or policy addressing the circulation system or CEQA
Guidelines Section 15064.3, subdivision (b). This section will address project Vehicle Miles
Travelled. Further, this section will analyze whether or not the project would substantially increase
hazards due to a geometric design feature or result in inadequate emergency access.
Utilities and Service Systems
This section of the EIR will evaluate potential impacts on utilities and service systems. The existing
services and infrastructure will be identified and the potential for impacts to water, sewer, drainage,
electrical, solid waste disposal, and telecommunication services. The analysis in this section will
focus on the potential increased demand on services based on City-approved standards and
measures. This analysis will be supported by water and sewer demand technical studies.
Wildfire
This section will analyze the project’s potential wildfire hazard impacts. Analysis would include
discussion regarding whether or not the project would be located in or near state responsibility
areas or lands classified as very high fire hazard severity zone and, if so, if the project would
substantially impair an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan,
exacerbate wildfire risks through winds or installation or maintenance of associated infrastructure,
or expose people or structures to significant risks, including downslope or downstream flooding
or landslides.
Alternatives
This section will consider a reasonable range of alternatives which avoid or mitigate the project's
significant impacts. Alternatives may include a reduced density/intensity alternative, alternative
land use alternatives, and other alternatives developed in coordination with the City. The
Alternatives section will include a comparative analysis of the various project alternatives in
relation to the proposed project. The analysis will include a quantitative analysis of effects, where
appropriate.
Other Mandatory Sections
Other mandatory sections that will be addressed in the EIR include: Cumulative Impacts, Growth
Inducement, Effects Found Not to Be Significant, and Significant Irreversible Environmental
Changes.
8
Figure 1 Project Location
9
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
10
Figure 2 Proposed Land Uses
11
INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK
STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gavin Newsom, Governor
NATIVE A MERICAN HERITAGE COMMISSION
Page 1 of 5
November 10, 2020
Oscar Romero
City of Chula Vista
276 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Re: 2020110148, Sunbow Sectional Planning Area Plan Amendment for the Sunbow II, Phase 3
Project, San Diego County
Dear Mr. Romero:
The Native American Heritage Commission (NAHC) has received the Notice of Preparation
(NOP), Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) or Early Consultation for the project
referenced above. The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code
§21000 et seq.), specifically Public Resources Code §21084.1, states that a project that may
cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource, is a project that
may have a significant effect on the environment. (Pub. Resources Code § 21084.1; Cal. Code
Regs., tit.14, §15064.5 (b) (CEQA Guidelines §15064.5 (b)). If there is substantial evidence, in
light of the whole record before a lead agency, that a project may have a significant effect on
the environment, an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) shall be prepared. (Pub. Resources
Code §21080 (d); Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, § 5064 subd.(a)(1) (CEQA Guidelines §15064 (a)(1)).
In order to determine whether a project will cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource, a lead agency will need to determine whether there are
historical resources within the area of potential effect (APE).
CEQA was amended significantly in 2014. Assembly Bill 52 (Gatto, Chapter 532, Statutes of
2014) (AB 52) amended CEQA to create a separate category of cultural resources, “tribal
cultural resources” (Pub. Resources Code §21074) and provides that a project with an effect
that may cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a tribal cultural resource is
a project that may have a significant effect on the environment. (Pub. Resources Code
§21084.2). Public agencies shall, when feasible, avoid damaging effects to any tribal cultural
resource. (Pub. Resources Code §21084.3 (a)). AB 52 applies to any project for which a notice
of preparation, a notice of negative declaration, or a mitigated negative declaration is filed on
or after July 1, 2015. If your project involves the adoption of or amendment to a general plan or
a specific plan, or the designation or proposed designation of open space, on or after March 1,
2005, it may also be subject to Senate Bill 18 (Burton, Chapter 905, Statutes of 2004) (SB 18).
Both SB 18 and AB 52 have tribal consultation requirements. If your project is also subject to the
federal National Environmental Policy Act (42 U.S.C. § 4321 et seq.) (NEPA), the tribal
consultation requirements of Section 106 of the National Historic Preservation Act of 1966 (154
U.S.C. 300101, 36 C.F.R. §800 et seq.) may also apply.
The NAHC recommends consultation with California Native American tribes that are
traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of your proposed project as early
as possible in order to avoid inadvertent discoveries of Native American human remains and
best protect tribal cultural resources. Below is a brief summary of portions of AB 52 and SB 18 as
well as the NAHC’s recommendations for conducting cultural resources assessments.
Consult your legal counsel about compliance with AB 52 and SB 18 as well as compliance with
any other applicable laws.
CHAIRPERSON
Laura Miranda
Luiseño
VICE CHAIRPERSON
Reginald Pagaling
Chumash
SECRETARY
Merri Lopez-Keifer
Luiseño
PARLIAMENTARIAN
Russell Attebery
Karuk
COMMISSIONER
Marshall McKay
Wintun
COMMISSIONER
William Mungary
Paiute/White Mountain
Apache
COMMISSIONER
Julie Tumamait-
Stenslie
Chumash
COMMISSIONER
[Vacant]
COMMISSIONER
[Vacant]
EXECUTIVE SECRETARY
Christina Snider
Pomo
NAHC HEADQUARTERS
1550 Harbor Boulevard
Suite 100
West Sacramento,
California 95691
(916) 373-3710
nahc@nahc.ca.gov
NAHC.ca.gov
Page 2 of 5
AB 52
AB 52 has added to CEQA the additional requirements listed below, along with many other requirements:
1. Fourteen Day Period to Provide Notice of Completion of an Application/Decision to Undertake a Project:
Within fourteen (14) days of determining that an application for a project is complete or of a decision by a public
agency to undertake a project, a lead agency shall provide formal notification to a designated contact of, or
tribal representative of, traditionally and culturally affiliated California Native American tribes that have
requested notice, to be accomplished by at least one written notice that includes:
a. A brief description of the project.
b. The lead agency contact information.
c. Notification that the California Native American tribe has 30 days to request consultation. (Pub.
Resources Code §21080.3.1 (d)).
d. A “California Native American tribe” is defined as a Native American tribe located in California that is
on the contact list maintained by the NAHC for the purposes of Chapter 905 of Statutes of 2004 (SB 18).
(Pub. Resources Code §21073).
2. Begin Consultation Within 30 Days of Receiving a Tribe’s Request for Consultation and Before Releasing a
Negative Declaration, Mitigated Negative Declaration, or Environmental Impact Report: A lead agency shall
begin the consultation process within 30 days of receiving a request for consultation from a California Native
American tribe that is traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the proposed project.
(Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.1, subds. (d) and (e)) and prior to the release of a negative declaration,
mitigated negative declaration or Environmental Impact Report. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.1(b)).
a. For purposes of AB 52, “consultation shall have the same meaning as provided in Gov. Code §65352.4
(SB 18). (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.1 (b)).
3. Mandatory Topics of Consultation If Requested by a Tribe: The following topics of consultation, if a tribe
requests to discuss them, are mandatory topics of consultation:
a. Alternatives to the project.
b. Recommended mitigation measures.
c. Significant effects. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.2 (a)).
4. Discretionary Topics of Consultation: The following topics are discretionary topics of consultation:
a. Type of environmental review necessary.
b. Significance of the tribal cultural resources.
c. Significance of the project’s impacts on tribal cultural resources.
d. If necessary, project alternatives or appropriate measures for preservation or mitigation that the tribe
may recommend to the lead agency. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.2 (a)).
5. Confidentiality of Information Submitted by a Tribe During the Environmental Review Process: With some
exceptions, any information, including but not limited to, the location, description, and use of tribal cultural
resources submitted by a California Native American tribe during the environmental review process shall not be
included in the environmental document or otherwise disclosed by the lead agency or any other public agency
to the public, consistent with Government Code §6254 (r) and §6254.10. Any information submitted by a
California Native American tribe during the consultation or environmental review process shall be published in a
confidential appendix to the environmental document unless the tribe that provided the information consents, in
writing, to the disclosure of some or all of the information to the public. (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (c)(1)).
6. Discussion of Impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources in the Environmental Document: If a project may have a
significant impact on a tribal cultural resource, the lead agency’s environmental document shall discuss both of
the following:
a. Whether the proposed project has a significant impact on an identified tribal cultural resource.
b. Whether feasible alternatives or mitigation measures, including those measures that may be agreed
to pursuant to Public Resources Code §21082.3, subdivision (a), avoid or substantially lessen the impact on
the identified tribal cultural resource. (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (b)).
Page 3 of 5
7. Conclusion of Consultation: Consultation with a tribe shall be considered concluded when either of the
following occurs:
a. The parties agree to measures to mitigate or avoid a significant effect, if a significant effect exists, on
a tribal cultural resource; or
b. A party, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes that mutual agreement cannot
be reached. (Pub. Resources Code §21080.3.2 (b)).
8. Recommending Mitigation Measures Agreed Upon in Consultation in the Environmental Document: Any
mitigation measures agreed upon in the consultation conducted pursuant to Public Resources Code §21080.3 .2
shall be recommended for inclusion in the environmental document and in an adopted mitigation monitoring
and reporting program, if determined to avoid or lessen the impact pursuant to Public Resources Code §21082.3,
subdivision (b), paragraph 2, and shall be fully enforceable. (Pub. Resources Code §21082.3 (a)).
9. Required Consideration of Feasible Mitigation: If mitigation measures recommended by the staff of the lead
agency as a result of the consultation process are not included in the environmenta l document or if there are no
agreed upon mitigation measures at the conclusion of consultation, or if consultation does not occur, and if
substantial evidence demonstrates that a project will cause a significant effect to a tribal cultural resource, the
lead agency shall consider feasible mitigation pursuant to Public Resources Code §21084.3 (b). (Pub. Resources
Code §21082.3 (e)).
10. Examples of Mitigation Measures That, If Feasible, May Be Considered to Avoid or Minimize Significant Adverse
Impacts to Tribal Cultural Resources:
a. Avoidance and preservation of the resources in place, including, but not limited to:
i. Planning and construction to avoid the resources and protect the cultural and natural
context.
ii. Planning greenspace, parks, or other open space, to incorporate the resources with culturally
appropriate protection and management criteria.
b. Treating the resource with culturally appropriate dignity, taking into account the tribal cultural values
and meaning of the resource, including, but not limited to, the following:
i. Protecting the cultural character and integrity of the resource.
ii. Protecting the traditional use of the resource.
iii. Protecting the confidentiality of the resource.
c. Permanent conservation easements or other interests in real property, with culturally appropriate
management criteria for the purposes of preserving or utilizing the resources or places.
d. Protecting the resource. (Pub. Resource Code §21084.3 (b)).
e. Please note that a federally recognized California Native American tribe or a non-federally
recognized California Native American tribe that is on the contact list maintained by the NAHC to protect
a California prehistoric, archaeological, cultural, spiritual, or ceremonial place may acquire and hold
conservation easements if the conservation easement is voluntarily conveyed. (Civ. Code §815.3 (c)).
f. Please note that it is the policy of the state that Native American remains and associated grave
artifacts shall be repatriated. (Pub. Resources Code §5097.991).
11. Prerequisites for Certifying an Environmental Impact Report or Adopting a Mitigated Negative Declaration or
Negative Declaration with a Significant Impact on an Identified Tribal Cultural Resource: An Environmental
Impact Report may not be certified, nor may a mitigated negative declaration or a negative declaration be
adopted unless one of the following occurs:
a. The consultation process between the tribes and the lead agency has occurred as provided in Public
Resources Code §21080.3.1 and §21080.3.2 and concluded pursuant to Public Resources Code
§21080.3.2.
b. The tribe that requested consultation failed to provide comments to the lead agency or otherwise
failed to engage in the consultation process.
c. The lead agency provided notice of the project to the tribe in compliance with Public Resources
Code §21080.3.1 (d) and the tribe failed to request consultation within 30 days. (Pub. Resources Code
§21082.3 (d)).
Page 4 of 5
The NAHC’s PowerPoint presentation titled, “Tribal Consultation Under AB 52: Requirements and Best Practices” m ay
be found online at: http://nahc.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2015/10/AB52TribalConsultation_CalEPAPDF.pdf
SB 18
SB 18 applies to local governments and requires local governments to contact, provide notice to, refer plans to, and
consult with tribes prior to the adoption or amendment of a general plan o r a specific plan, or the designation of
open space. (Gov. Code §65352.3). Local governments should consult the Governor’s Office of Planning and
Research’s “Tribal Consultation Guidelines,” which can be found online at:
https://www.opr.ca.gov/docs/09_14_05_Updated_Guidelines_922.pdf.
Some of SB 18’s provisions include:
1. Tribal Consultation: If a local government considers a proposal to adopt or amend a general plan or a
specific plan, or to designate open space it is required to contact the appropriate tribes identified by the NAHC
by requesting a “Tribal Consultation List.” If a tribe, once contacted, requests consultation the local government
must consult with the tribe on the plan proposal. A tribe has 90 days from the date of receipt of notification to
request consultation unless a shorter timeframe has been agreed to by the tribe. (Gov. Code §65352.3
(a)(2)).
2. No Statutory Time Limit on SB 18 Tribal Consultation. There is no statutory time limit on SB 18 tribal consultation.
3. Confidentiality: Consistent with the guidelines developed and adopted by the Office of Planning and
Research pursuant to Gov. Code §65040.2, the city or county shall protect the confidentiality of the information
concerning the specific identity, location, character, and use of places, features and objects described in Public
Resources Code §5097.9 and §5097.993 that are within the city’s or county’s jurisdiction. (Gov. Code §65352.3
(b)).
4. Conclusion of SB 18 Tribal Consultation: Consultation should be concluded at the point in which:
a. The parties to the consultation come to a mutual agreement concerning the appropriate measures
for preservation or mitigation; or
b. Either the local government or the tribe, acting in good faith and after reasonable effort, concludes
that mutual agreement cannot be reached concerning the appropriate measures of preservation or
mitigation. (Tribal Consultation Guidelines, Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (2005) at p. 18).
Agencies should be aware that neither AB 52 nor SB 18 precludes agencies from initiating tribal consultation with
tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with their jurisdictions before the timeframes provided in AB 52 and
SB 18. For that reason, we urge you to continue to request Native American Tribal Contact Lists and “Sacred Lands
File” searches from the NAHC. The request forms can be found online at: http://nahc.ca.gov/resources/forms/.
NAHC Recommendations for Cultural Resources Assessments
To adequately assess the existence and significance of tribal cultural resources and plan for avoidance, preservation
in place, or barring both, mitigation of project-related impacts to tribal cultural resources, the NAHC recommends
the following actions:
1. Contact the appropriate regional California Historical Research Information System (CHRIS) Center
(http://ohp.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=1068) for an archaeological records search. The records search will
determine:
a. If part or all of the APE has been previously surveyed for cultural resources.
b. If any known cultural resources have already been recorded on or adjacent to the APE.
c. If the probability is low, moderate, or high that cultural resources are located in the APE.
d. If a survey is required to determine whether previously unrecorded cultural resources are present.
2. If an archaeological inventory survey is required, the final stage is the preparation of a professional report
detailing the findings and recommendations of the records search and field survey.
a. The final report containing site forms, site significance, and mitigation measures should be submitted
immediately to the planning department. All information regarding site locations, Native American
human remains, and associated funerary objects should be in a separate confidential addendum and
not be made available for public disclosure.
Page 5 of 5
b. The final written report should be submitted within 3 months after work has been completed to the
appropriate regional CHRIS center.
3. Contact the NAHC for:
a. A Sacred Lands File search. Remember that tribes do not always record their sacred sites in the
Sacred Lands File, nor are they required to do so. A Sacred Lands File search is not a substitute for
consultation with tribes that are traditionally and culturally affiliated with the geographic area of the
project’s APE.
b. A Native American Tribal Consultation List of appropriate tribes for consultation concerning the
project site and to assist in planning for avoidance, preservation in place, or, failing both, mitigation
measures.
4. Remember that the lack of surface evidence of archaeological resources (including tribal cultural resources)
does not preclude their subsurface existence.
a. Lead agencies should include in their mitigation and monitoring reporting program plan provisions for
the identification and evaluation of inadvertently discovered archaeological resources per Cal. Code
Regs., tit. 14, §15064.5(f) (CEQA Guidelines §15064.5(f)). In areas of identified archaeological sensitivity, a
certified archaeologist and a culturally affiliated Native American with knowledge of cultural resources
should monitor all ground-disturbing activities.
b. Lead agencies should include in their mitigation and monitoring reporting program plans provisions
for the disposition of recovered cultural items that are not burial associated in consultation with culturally
affiliated Native Americans.
c. Lead agencies should include in their mitigation and monitoring reporting program plans provisions
for the treatment and disposition of inadvertently discovered Native American human remains. Health
and Safety Code §7050.5, Public Resources Code §5097.98, and Cal. Code Regs., tit. 14, §15064.5,
subdivisions (d) and (e) (CEQA Guidelines §15064.5, subds. (d) and (e)) address the processes to be
followed in the event of an inadvertent discovery of any Native American human remains and
associated grave goods in a location other than a dedicated cemetery.
If you have any questions or need additional information, please contact me at my email address:
Andrew.Green@nahc.ca.gov.
Sincerely,
Andrew Green
Cultural Resources Analyst
cc: State Clearinghouse
“Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system
to enhance California’s economy and livability”
S T A T E O F C A L I F O R N I A ------- C A L I F O R N I A S T A T E T R A N S P O R T A T I O N A G E N C Y G a v i n N e w s o m , G o v e r n o r
DEPARTMENT OF TRANSPORTATION
DISTRICT 11
4050 TAYLOR STREET, MS-240
SAN DIEGO, CA 92110
PHONE (619) 688-3137
FAX (619) 688-4299
TTY 711
www.dot.ca.gov
Making Conservation
a California Way of Life.
December 8, 2020
11-SD-805
The Sunbow II, Phase 3 Project
NOP (SCH# 2020110148)
Mr. Oscar Romero,
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
Dear Mr. Romero:
Thank you for including the California Department of Transportation (Caltrans) in
the review process for the Sunbow II, Phase 3 project development located near
interstate 805 (I-805). The mission of Caltrans is to provide a safe, sustainable,
integrated and efficient transportation system to enhance California’s economy
and livability. The Local Development-Intergovernmental Review (LD-IGR)
Program reviews land use projects and plans to ensure consistency with our
mission and state planning priorities.
Caltrans has the following comments:
Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) Traffic Analysis
- In accordance with Senate Bill (SB) 743 as of July 1, 2020, public agencies
are required to use VMT as the metric to evaluate transportation impacts
associated with future developments. Please provide a VMT-based traffic
impact study using the Caltrans Vehicles Miles Traveled-Focused
Transportation Impact Study Guide for the Sunbow II project. Please see
the links provided below.
https://dot.ca.gov/-/media/dot-media/programs/transportation-
planning/documents/sb-743/2020-05-20-approved-vmt-focused-tisg-
a11y.pdf
Mr. Oscar Romero
December 8, 2020
Page 2
“Provide a safe, sustainable, integrated and efficient transportation system
to enhance California’s economy and livability”
https://opr.ca.gov/ceqa/updates/sb-743/
- Please include the intersection at I-805 and Olympic Parkway as part of
the VMT traffic analysis.
Complete Streets and Mobility Network
Caltrans views all transportation improvements as opportunities to improve
safety, access and mobility for all travelers in California and recognizes bicycle,
pedestrian and transit modes as integral elements of the transportation system.
Caltrans supports improved transit accommodation, improved bicycle and
pedestrian access and safety improvements, signal prioritization for transit, bus
on shoulders, ramp improvements, or other enhancements that promote a
complete and integrated transportation system. Early coordination with
Caltrans, in locations that may affect both Caltrans, the City of Chula Vista and
other partner agencies, is encouraged.
Right-of-Way
Any work performed within Caltrans’ Right-of-Way (R/W) will require
discretionary review and approval by Caltrans and an encroachment permit will
be required for any work within the Caltrans’ R/W prior to construction.
As part of the encroachment permit process, the applicant must provide an
approved final environmental document including any California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) determinations addressing environmental impacts within
Caltrans’ R/W, and any corresponding technical studies.
If you have any questions, please contact Roger Sanchez, of the Caltrans’
District 11 Development Review Branch, at (619) 987-1043 or by e-mail sent to
roger.sanchez-rangel@dot.ca.gov.
Sincerely,
electronically signed by
MAURICE EATON, Branch Chief
Local Development and Intergovernmental Review Branch
Theresa Acerro submitted a new eComment.
Meeting: Scoping Meeting/NOP: EIR20-0002 Sunbow II, Phase 3 Environmental Impact Report
Item: PUBLIC COMMENT
eComment: need to analyze burning of methane gas to south of property, need to get input from
residents living across street on Orange and living next to landfill about any health challenges,
smells, etc, .need to analyze added cost to residents of retiring landfill, loss of green waste
recycling, other recycling? if landfill were to close, value of living landfill in community, health
effects of living close to a landfill and options for expanding its life, Health Effects of Landfill
Exposure: https://intpolicydigest.org/2018/12/08/studies-show-the-horrid-health-effects-of-landfill-
exposure/, https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/05/160524211817.htm, , effect on
computers of over 700 more daily cars and another signal on Olympic Parkway
View and Analyze eComments
This email was sent from https://granicusideas.com.
Unsubscribe from future mailings
Theresa Acerro submitted a new eComment.
Meeting: Scoping Meeting/NOP: EIR20-0002 Sunbow II, Phase 3 Environmental Impact Report
Item: PUBLIC COMMENT
eComment: need to analyze burning of methane gas to south of property, need to get input from
residents living across street on Orange and living next to landfill about any health challenges,
smells, etc, .need to analyze added cost to residents of retiring landfill, loss of green waste
recycling, other recycling? if landfill were to close, value of living landfill in community, health
effects of living close to a landfill and options for expanding its life, Health Effects of Landfill
Exposure: https://intpolicydigest.org/2018/12/08/studies-show-the-horrid-health-effects-of-landfill-
exposure/, https://www.sciencedaily.com/releases/2016/05/160524211817.htm, , effect on
computers of over 700 more daily cars and another signal on Olympic Parkway
View and Analyze eComments
This email was sent from https://granicusideas.com.
Unsubscribe from future mailings