Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutAttachment 02 - Third Addendum to FEIR 13-01 - Apr 2024Addendum to EIR University Villages – Otay Ranch Village Eight East University Villages EIR 13-01; SCH No. 2013071077 – Village Eight East Sectional Planning Area APRIL 2024 PROJECT APPLICANT: HomeFed Otay Land II, LLC PROJECT LOCATION: City of Chula Vista Prepared by: 605 Third Street Encinitas, California 92024 Contact: Alexandra Martini 13570 2 JANUARY 2024 1 Introduction Otay Ranch Village 8 East is south of the extension of Main Street, north of the Otay River Valley, east of Village 8 West and west of State Route (SR) 125. This urban village, which was a component of the Otay Ranch University Villages Project Comprehensive Sectional Planning Area Plan (SPA) Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report was originally approved in 2014 and the SPA was subsequently amended in 2020. Current entitlements accommodate a total of 3,276 residential units, including 943 detached homes, 1,893 attached homes and 440 multi-family units in a mixed-use setting. Village 8 East also includes 20,000 square feet of retail/commercial uses, an elementary school, a neighborhood park and the 51.5-acre (gross) Otay Ranch Community Park South. Access to the village is provided via the extension of Main Street and Otay Valley Road with emergency and pedestrian access to the community park provided along a utility corridor in the southeast portion of Village 8 East. Primary access to the community park is via existing Avenida Caprise within Village 8 West. The project applicant proposes to amend the Village 8 East land use plan to reflect current market conditions and housing needs and to ensure the community relates more closely to the adjacent Village 8 West community and future Village 9 planned east of SR-125. The Otay Ranch University Villages Project Comprehensive Sectional Planning Area Plan Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) (EIR 13-01; SCH No. 2013071077; approved December 2014 with addendums adopted by the City of Chula Vista in September 2016 and in June 2021) contains a comprehensive disclosure and analysis of potential environmental effects associated with the implementation of Village Three North and a Portion of Village Four, Village Eight East, and Village Ten in the City of Chula Vista (City) (City of Chula Vista 2014 and 2016). Three SPA plans were approved as part of the approved project: (a) Otay Ranch Village Three North and a Portion of Village Four SPA Plan, (b) Otay Ranch Village Eight East SPA Plan, and (c) Otay Ranch Village Ten SPA Plan. Three Tentative Maps were also approved: (a) Village Three North and a Portion of Village Four, (b) Village Eight East, and (c) Village Ten. The 2016 Addendum contained revisions to the Village Three North land use plan and TM in order to create a viable mixed-use village core. The 2021 Addendum contained revisions to the Village Three land use plan and TM in order to increase medium-high and high density residential by changing land use designations for office and industrial uses. The 2014 FEIR and the 2016 and 2021 Addendums are collectively referred herein as the “University Villages FEIR”. This Addendum to the University Villages FEIR (Addendum) addresses proposed modifications to the applicable land use plan for Village Eight East, including the SPA Plan and TMs. The Otay Ranch University Villages Project Comprehensive Sectional Planning Area Plan Amendment FEIR tiers from the 1993 Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP) EIR. The Otay Ranch GDP establishes the development plan for the villages and town centers within the community of Otay Ranch. 2 Project Location and Regional Setting Otay Ranch lies within the East Planning Area of the City (Figure 1). The East Planning Area is bordered by Interstate 805 (I-805) to the west, San Miguel Mountain and State Route 54 (SR-54) to the north, the Otay Reservoir and the Jamul foothills to the east, and the Otay River Valley to the south. The Village Eight East site encompasses 575.3 acres in the southern edge of the Otay Valley Parcel in Otay Ranch. Village Eight East is located between Village Eight West to the west, and Village Nine to the east (Figure 2) The Village Eight East site includes gently sloping terrain and is situated above the bottom of the river valley. Village Eight East is surrounded by Otay Ranch Village Seven and Olympian High School to the north; SR-125 and Villages 13570 3 JANUARY 2024 9, 10 and the University Innovation District to the east; and Village 8 west, which is currently under construction, to the west. 3 Project Description Approved Project (2014) The approved land use plan for Village Eight East would allow for the construction of a total of 3,276 residential units, including 943 detached homes, 1,893 attached homes and 440 multi-family units, 20,000 square feet of mixed-use commercial; 10.3 acres for an elementary school; a 7.3 acre neighborhood park, 51.5-acre Otay Ranch Community Park South, 4.2 acres of Community-Purpose Facilities (CPF); and 33.8 acres of open space (Figure 3). Access to the village is provided via the extension of Main Street and Otay Valley Road with emergency and pedestrian access to the community park provided along a utility corridor in the southeast portion of Village 8 East. Proposed Project The Proposed Village 8 East Land Use Plan would include a Village Core area that would accommodate a mix of uses including multi-family residential and retail/commercial uses along with an elementary school site and a centrally located neighborhood park. A future multi-modal bridge, planned to accommodate NEV, bicycles and pedestrians is also planned in the Village Core linking Village 8 East and future Village 9. The proposed project would include 20,000 square feet of commercial/retail uses and 1,348 multi-family homes distributed across eight Village Core parcels. Other residential land uses include 1,664 multi-family residential units in 10 parcels designated Medium-High Residential. The elementary school site has an underlying “High” residential land use designation that could accommodate 264 multi-family units if the site is not utilized as a school site. The project also includes an alternative elementary school site/neighborhood park site configuration which would increase the size of the elementary school site and correspondingly reduce the neighborhood park site. This alternative configuration would be implemented based on the needs of the Chula Vista Elementary School District. The project also includes 253.6 acres of Preserve Open Space, 16.4 acres of manufactured slopes/basins and the 22.6-acre active recreation site (AR-11) located east of SR-125. Approximately 15.3 acres comprising perimeter slope areas are included in the gross acres of development parcels. The Village 8 East Final Map(s) will include open space easements over perimeter slope areas based on final engineering designs. The 43.3-acre (gross) Otay Ranch Community Park South is located south of Village 8 East. An existing water quality basin that serves Village 8 West is located in the western portion of the community park and the proposed project includes an additional water quality basin in the eastern portion of the community park to serve Village 8 East. The proposed project boundary includes areas that were not included in the FEIR for the University Villages Project. In total, the changes to the TM for Village 8 East would result in 0.99 acres of offsite grading not previously analyzed in the University Villages EIR. 13570 4 JANUARY 2024 Table 1. Village 8 East SPA Proposed Site Utilization Table Parcel Permitted Density Range Estimated Units1 Gross Acres2 Estimated Density3 Multi-Family Residential (MH) R-1 11-18 du/ac 154 9.9 15.6 R-2 11-18 du/ac 163 10.7 15.2 R-3 11-18 du/ac 162 11.4 14.2 R-4 11-18 du/ac 147 10.9 13.5 R-5 11-18 du/ac 155 11.0 14.1 R-6 11-18 du/ac 143 10.3 13.9 R-7 11-18 du/ac 226 15.8 14.3 R-8 11-18 du/ac 176 14.0 12.6 R-9 11-18 du/ac 196 15.4 12.7 R-10 11-18 du/ac 140 11.5 12.3 Total MH 1,664 120.9 13.8 Village Core4 VC-1 18-45 du/ac. 275 7.6 36.2 VC-2 18-45 du/ac. 430 11.3 38.1 VC-3A 18-45 du/ac. 161 5.5 29.3 VC-3B5 18-45 du/ac. 0 5.6 0 VC-4 18-45 du/ac. 192 4.5 42.7 VC-55 18-45 du/ac. 0 5.7 0.0. VC-6 18-45 du/ac. 142 5.3 26.8 VC-7 18-45 du/ac. 148 6.0 24.7 Total VC 1,348 51.5 26.2 Subtotal Residential 3,012 172.4 17.5xxx Other Community Purpose Facility6 CPF-1 1.2 Subtotal CPF 1.2 Parks P-17 7.3 P-211 43.3 AR-11 22.6 Total Parks 73.2 School S-17, 8 18-27 du/ac 264 11.3 23.4 13570 5 JANUARY 2024 Table 1. Village 8 East SPA Proposed Site Utilization Table Parcel Permitted Density Range Estimated Units1 Gross Acres2 Estimated Density3 Open Space Multiple Species Conservation Plan Preserve OS (Lots 1-4) 253.6 Manufactured/Basin OS (Lots 5-7)9 16.4 Total Open Space 270 Circulation Internal 22.5 External 9.2 Total Circulation 31.7 Caltrans Lots (to be dedicated) CT-1 1.4 CT-2 0.1 CT-3 1.9 Total Caltrans Lots 3.7 Future Development Lot A 1.0 Lot B 8.4 Total Future Development 9.4 Subtotal Other 400.5 OVERALL SPA10 3,276 572.9 Notes: 1 Estimated Units are provided for planning purposes only, do not represent the final unit allocation for each parcel and shall not be used to limit or restrict the final units allocated to any parcel.; The final unit allocation must remain consistent with the permitted density range applicable to the parcel. The final unit allocation shall be determined during Design Review and shall be documented in the Unit Tracking Table (Village 8 East SPA Plan, Attachment 1). Revisions to the Site Utilization Table shall not be required based on changes to the Estimated Units presented herein. 2 Final acreage information to be determined during final engineering. Acreage may vary due to rounding. Residential and Village Core gross acreage includes approximately 15.3 of perimeter open space areas. Open space easements shall be recorded over perimeter open space slopes that are to be maintained by the Master HOA or a Sub-Association, as determined during final design. 3 Estimated Density calculated based on gross parcel acreage. Final density to be determined during Design Review. 13570 6 JANUARY 2024 Table 1. Village 8 East SPA Proposed Site Utilization Table Parcel Permitted Density Range Estimated Units1 Gross Acres2 Estimated Density3 4 20,000 square feet of commercial uses are authorized within Village 8 East. Commercial SF may be developed within a single parcel designated VC or distributed among any parcel designated VC (VC-1 through VC-7). The final distribution of commercial SF to be determined during Design Review. The “Permitted Density Range” is not applicable to VC parcels with no residential units. 5 VC-3B and VC-5 are anticipated to be developed with non-residential uses only, consistent with the Village Core zoning district. The “Permitted Density Range” is not applicable to VC parcels with no residential units. 6 Per the Land Offer Agreement (7/8/2014), the Village 8 East SPA Plan shall designate 4.0 acres of CPF land. The Applicant is proposing to meet a portion of the Village 8 East CPF obligation by designating the 1.2-acre CPF-1 site as a private recreation facility. The remaining 2.8 acre CPF obligation shall be addressed in a separate agreement between the Applicant and the City of Chula Vista. 7 Both the Village 8 East SPA Plan and Tentative Map include the "Proposed” and “Alternative” configuration and acreage for the S-1 School Site and P-1 Neighborhood Park. Either the Proposed or Alternative may be implemented without the need for an amendment to the SPA Plan or TM. If the proposed configuration is implemented, the S-1 site would be 10.0 acre (net) and the P-1 park site would be 6.5 acre (net); however, if the alternative configuration is implemented, the S-1 site would be 12.0 acres (net) and the P-1 park site would be 4.6 acres (net). The final neighborhood park acreage shall be addressed in a separate agreement between the Applicant and the City of Chula Vista. 8 The S-1 school site has an underlying residential land use designation of High Residential. If the site is not developed as a school site, then it shall be developed as residential; however, if the site is developed as an elementary school, then the 264 units may be reallocated to another Village 8 East parcel or transferred to another village, as permitted in the Village 8 East PC District Regulations, Chapter 10, Implementation and Administration. 9 A portion of the Edge Trail and associated overlook features (approximately 1.76 acres) are included within the 8.2- acre OS-7 parcel. The Edge Trail area shall be secured with a public access easement and the 1.76 acres shall satisfy a portion of the Village 8 East park obligation. The 1.76-acre Edge Trail area is not counted toward meeting the Village 8 East open space requirement. 10 Village 8 East acreage adjusted from approved 2014 development area to reflect changes in SR-125 ROW and to facilitate the future SR-125 ROW Decertification process. 11 The P-2 Community Park / OS-6 Alternative would be implemented only upon City approval of the Alternative Compliance Program (“ACP”) Permit and Rough Grading Storm Water Quality Management Plan (“SWQMP”) (See TM Sheet 6 for additional details). This would increase the P-2 Community Park parcel to 47.4 acres (gross) and 39.0 acres (net) and correspondingly decrease the OS-6 parcel to 4.8 acres (gross) and 0.7 acres (gross). Circulation: Main Street between the Village 8 West couplet and the future SR-125 Interchange would be implemented as a 6-lane prime arterial roadway and includes a grade-separated Class IV Cycle Track on both sides and the Chula Vista Regional Trail on the south side. Transit access would be provided in shared flow travel lanes. Otay Valley Road (recently renamed La Media Parkway) from its eastern terminus in Village 8 West, would continue through Village 8 East as a four-lane major road with bike facilities, a Neighborhood Electric Vehicle (NEV) route on east of La Palmita Drive and the Chula Vista Regional Trail on the south side (full segment) and also on the north side (west of La Palmita Drive). Transit access would be provided in shared flow travel lanes. SR-125: Concurrent with the replanning effort in Village 8 East, CALTRANS has initiated a Project Study Report- Project Development Support (PSR-PDS) to evaluate alternatives that provide new local street connections, increase capacity, improve mobility, and relieve congestion on SR-125 between the Otay River and Birch Road. The 13570 7 JANUARY 2024 PSR-PDS includes four preliminary designs for the SR-125 interchanges at Main Street and Otay Valley Road. The Village 8 East land use plan reflects Alternative B. The TM will be revised to reflect the ultimate SR-125 right-of-way (ROW) and design. Alternative B: Couplet/Parallel Street System Interchange Alternative B consists of a couplet/parallel street system interchange with ramps at Main Street and La Media Parkway acting as a single freeway access point via connected one-way frontage roads (Type L-5 per Caltrans Highway Design Manual (HDM) Section 502.2(C)). For this alternative, vehicles traveling northbound on SR-125 would exit at Otay Valley Road and enter SR-125 at Main Street. Similarly, southbound vehicles would exit SR-125 at Main Street and enter SR-125 at Otay Valley Road. The on/off ramps at La Media Parkway and Main Street will be connected by two-lane, one-way frontage roads. This alternative will include three new overcrossings of SR-125 at Main Street (approximately 106’-4” wide), La Media Parkway (approximately 94’-4” wide), and a new pedestrian bridge (22’ wide). The proposed modifications to the approved project are as follows (see Figure 4): Chula Vista General Plan/Otay Ranch General D evelopment P lan Amendments As described above, the Otay Ranch University Villages Project Comprehensive Sectional Planning Area Plan Amendment FEIR tiers from the 1993 Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP) EIR. The Proposed Project includes amendments to the Chula Vista General Plan and Otay Ranch GDP to update the land use maps and tables to address the proposed Village 8 East land uses. Village Eight SPA Plan Amendment and Rezone The proposed project includes amendments to the Village 8 East SPA Plan and Appendices to reflect changes to the land use configuration, density and unit allocation within Village 8 East. The proposed project is consistent with the total number of units authorized in the approved SPA Plan and Tentative Map. The proposed project also addresses proposed changes associated with the SR-125 Interchange design at Main Street and La Media Road. As part of the proposed project, the SPA Plan text, tables, and exhibits would be updated to reflect the proposed land use changes. In addition, Village 8 East SPA Appendices including the Village Design Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP), Water Conservation Plan, and Energy Conservation Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan, Preserve Edge Plan, Fire Protection Plan would be updated consistent with the SPA Amendment. Refer to Figure 5 and Figure 6 and Table 1 for the proposed Village 8 East. In addition to the SPA amendment, the proposed project would rezone the Village 8 East site to implement the proposed land uses. Refer to Figure 5, Existing Zoning District Map, and Figure 6, Proposed Zoning District Map. Tentative Maps The 2014 Tentative Map included 575.3 acres and the Proposed Village 8 East Tentative Map includes 550.3 acres. The 2014 Tentative Map included the 22.6-acre AR-11 site, which is currently owned by the City of Chula Vista. AR-11 remains within the Village 8 East SPA boundary but is outside the Proposed Tentative Map boundary due to the ownership change. In addition to the exclusion of the AR-11 site from the Proposed Tentative Map boundary, the proposed tentative map has 2.4 fewer acres than the approved 2014 Tentative Map, representing a 25.0 acre reduction between the 2014 Tentative Map and the Proposed Tentative Map. The Proposed Tentative Map reflects the proposed Village 8 East land use changes and is consistent with the 3,276 residential units currently authorized within Village 8 East. The Proposed Tentative Map would include an alternative P-2 Community Park / OS-6 Alternative configuration that would reduce the size of the open space (OS-6) parcel and increase the 13570 8 JANUARY 2024 P-2 Community Park parcel. Implementation of this alternative would decrease the land uses designated Open Space (“OS”) by 4.1 acres and increase the land uses designated Park (“P”) by 4.1 acres, increasing the overall size of the P-2 Community Park from 43.3 gross acres to 47.4 gross acres and the OS-6 parcel would be reduced from 4.8 acres to 0.7 acres. This Alternative would only be implemented if the City of Chula Vista issues an Alternative Compliance Permit for Village 8 East consistent with the City’s MS4 Permit which results in stormwater pollutant control and hydromodification management through creation and approval of stormwater credits within the existing Otay River Mitigation Program. The proposed residential land use modifications would result in a decrease in trip generation and traffic impacts and would not substantially change trip distribution patterns (refer to Section 6 for additional discussion). No additional significant impacts beyond those previously analyzed in the University Villages FEIR or substantial increases in any identified significant impacts are anticipated. The City has prepared this addendum pursuant to Section 15162 of Title 14 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines to disclose minor changes in the approved project and some of the environmental effects as a result of proposed modifications, and to document that no new or substantially increased impacts will occur with implementation of the proposed modifications. 4 CEQA Requirements Sections 15162 through 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines discuss a lead agency’s responsibilities once an FEIR has been certified. Section 15162 of the CEQA Guidelines provides the following: a. When an EIR has been certified … for a project, no subsequent EIR shall be prepared for that project unless the lead agency determines, on the basis of substantial evidence in the light of the whole record, one or more of the following: 1. Substantial changes are proposed in the project which will require major revisions of the EIR … due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; 2. Substantial changes occur with respect to the circumstances under which the project is undertaken which will require major revisions of the EIR due to the involvement of new significant environmental effects or a substantial increase in the severity of previously identified significant effects; or 3. New information of substantial importance, which was not known and could not have been known with the exercise of reasonable diligence at the time the EIR was certified as complete, shows any of the following: A. The project will have one or more significant effects not discussed in the [Final] EIR; B. Significant effects previously examined will be substantially more severe than shown in the [Final] EIR; 13570 9 JANUARY 2024 C. Mitigation measures or alternatives previously found not to be feasible would in fact be feasible and would substantially reduce one or more significant effects of the project, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative; or D. Mitigation measures or alternatives which are considerably different from those analyzed in the [Final] EIR would substantially reduce one or more significant effects on the environment, but the project proponents decline to adopt the mitigation measure or alternative. In the event that one of these conditions would require preparation of a subsequent EIR, but “only minor additions or changes would be necessary to make the [Final] EIR adequately apply to the project in the changed situation,” a lead agency may instead issue a supplement to the FEIR (14 CCR 15163(a)). In the alternative, where the changes or new information will result in no new impacts, or no more severe impacts than any that were disclosed in the FEIR, a lead agency “shall prepare an addendum” pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. That section states that an addendum should include a “brief explanation of the decision not to prepare a subsequent EIR pursuant to § 15162” supported by substantial evidence (14 CCR 15164(e)). The addendum need not be circulated for public review but may simply be attached to the FEIR (14 CCR 15164(c), 15164(e)). As the lead agency for the approved project, the City must determine whether the proposed project creates previously undisclosed significant environmental impacts or a substantial increase in the severity of previously disclosed impacts (14 CCR 15162, 15163, 15164(a), 15088.5(a), and 15088.5(b)). As the following discussion demonstrates, it is appropriate for the City to prepare this Addendum to the FEIR, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15164. 5 Identification of Environmental Effects The environmental analysis provided in Section 6 of this Addendum supports a determination that approval and implementation of the proposed project would not result in any additional, or more substantial, significant environmental effects beyond those previously analyzed under the FEIR for the approved project. 6 Analysis The following environmental issue areas are discussed in the order in which they appear in the University Villages FEIR. Land Use and Planning Village Eight East Land Use impacts were addressed in Section 5.1 in the University Villages FEIR. The University Villages FEIR determined that Village Eight East would not physically divide an established community. or be incompatible with any adjacent or surrounding land uses However, the University Villages FEIR did identify potential land use incompatibility impacts if City of San Diego water lines are not relocated before development of Village Eight East and short-term indirect impacts to surrounding land uses due to construction. The project would be 13570 10 JANUARY 2024 required to implement mitigation measures MM LU-1 and MM LU-2 to relocate the City of San Diego water lines if they have not already been relocated. Potentially significant land use compatibility impacts related to erosion, dust, and noise from the approved project construction would be reduced to less than significant levels through the implementation of mitigation measures (MM) AQ-2 (dust control), MM-BIO-6 (watering of graded areas), MM NOI-7 (acoustical analysis for elementary schools), and MM NOI-8 (limited hours of construction). Therefore, impacts of the approved project related to the physical division of an established community and land use compatibility were determined to be less than significant with the implementation of MM-LU-1, MM-LU-2, MM-AQ2, MM-BIO-6, MM- NOI-1, and MM-NOI-2. The development standards and guidelines proposed in the SPA Plan would ensure that a consistent community character is maintained within each village, as well as character consistent with surrounding development in Otay Ranch. In addition, the University Villages FEIR determined that the approved project would be consistent with applicable planning and regulatory documents and impacts would be less than significant The proposed project, including the P-2 Community Park / OS-6 Alternative, would not increase the severity of any land use impacts previously identified in the University Villages FEIR., The project applicant would still be required to adhere to MM LU-1, MM LU-2, MM AQ-2, MM BIO-6 MM NOI-7, and MM NOI-8 prior to and during project construction. The open space and MSCP Preserve areas would remain unchanged under the proposed modifications. Similar to that of the approved project, impacts related to the physical division of an established community and land use compatibility would remain less than significant with the implementation of MM-LU-1, MM- LU-2, MM-AQ2, MM-BIO-6, MM-NOI-1, and MM-NOI-2. Additionally, similar to the approved project, the proposed project would be consistent with applicable planning and regulatory documents and impacts would remain less than significant. No new significant land use impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR and impacts would remain less than significant with mitigation, no additional mitigation is required. Landform Alteration/Aesthetics Impacts to aesthetics were addressed in Section 5.2 of the University Villages FEIR. As analyzed in the University Villages FEIR, implementation of the approved project would not obstruct or screen views of local scenic resources identified by the City, including the Otay Valley Regional Park. Development of the approved project and the transformation of undeveloped and natural rolling hills to an urban residential environment would substantially alter the existing visual landscape by increasing density, intensity of use, and human activity in the project area. The approved project would retain open space and preserve areas and locate lower-density residential uses and open space buffers adjacent to the preserve and the Otay River Valley to maintain the scenic value of these areas. Approved project impacts to scenic vistas were determined to be less than significant. In addition, there are no historic buildings or designated or eligible state scenic highways located within the viewshed of the approved project. Furthermore, the approved project would not result in substantial adverse effects to views from a locally designated scenic roadway. As such, implementation of the approved project would not substantially damage scenic resources and impacts were determined to be less than significant. Lighting, glare, shade, and shadow impacts from the development of Village Eight East were analyzed in the University Villages FEIR. The University Villages FEIR found that while Village Eight East is undeveloped, development within Village Seven, just north of Village Eight, contributes to ambient nighttime lighting levels. Impacts from glare were avoided through compliance with the SPA design guidelines. It was determined that once developed, Village Eight East would have similar lighting sources as planned and existing development in the area, however light intensive uses such as parks, mixed-use residential, commercial, and CPF uses would have potentially significant 13570 11 JANUARY 2024 impact. Additionally, because specific development plans were not known, impacts related to shade and shadow impacts would be potentially significant. The University Villages FEIR included MM AES-2 through MM AES-4 to address lighting, shade, and shadow impacts. Mitigation measures MM AES-2 through MM AES-4 require the preparation of a site-specific lighting plan and photometric analysis for parks (MM AES-2), the preparation of a site specific lighting plan and photometric analysis for mixed-use residential, commercial, CPF, and multi-family residential (MM AES-3), and the preparation of a shadow analysis for any structures of three stories and above (MM AES-4). With the incorporation of MM-AES-2 through MM-AES 4, impacts related to light, shading, and shadows from the approved project were determined to be less than significant. Development of the approved project would create a substantial permanent change in the topography of the Otay Ranch area. The University Villages FEIR found that placing three new residential communities on currently undeveloped land would impact the aesthetic character of the area. Approximately 18.6 acres of natural steep slopes would be impacted within Village 8 East and would be subject to Otay Ranch GDP/Resource Management Plan (RMP) Otay Ranch-wide steep slope preservation requirement. Although all appropriate measures would be taken to reduce potential impacts associated with alterations to existing landforms and visibility from future development and roadways, impacts from the approved project were considered to be potentially significant. The University Villages FEIR included MM AES-1 to address visual impacts. Mitigation measure MM AES-1 requires the preparation of a Landscape Master Plan to demonstrate compliance with Otay Ranch GDP policies pertaining to blending development harmoniously with natural features of the land, including the Otay Valley Regional Park and its major canyons. Implementation of MM AES-1 would reduce impacts to visual character or quality to the extent feasible. However, because the approved project would result in urban development on the primarily natural, open space site, development would permanently alter the character of the project site. Additional mitigation that would maintain the existing character of the site and its surroundings is not available; therefore, impacts related to the visual character or quality of the site were found to remain significant and unavoidable. However, approved project impacts related to landform alteration were determined to be less than significant with the incorporation of MM-AES-1. The proposed modification would not result in changes to any public vantage points or distant scenic vistas. In the context of Village Eight East, and the larger Otay Ranch region, the proposed change in land uses at these locations would result in substantially similar changes to the visual environmental as the approved project. Similar to the approved project, the proposed project would still result in a substantial change to the visual character and quality at the project site despite the implementation of the MM-AES-1, and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Additionally, all nighttime lighting and sound walls would be similar to that analyzed for the approved project and impacts would be reduced to less than significant with the implementation of MM-AES-2 through MM-AES-4. The proposed project would still alter the existing landform of the project site, however, with the implementation of MM- AES-1, impacts would remain less than significant, similar to the approved project. Overall, views of the project site would remain substantially the same as those analyzed in the FEIR. The proposed project would be required to implement MM-AES-1 through MM-AES-4. No new significant landform alteration/aesthetic impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. Traffic, Circulation, and Access Approved Project Impacts to traffic were addressed in Section 5.3 of the University Villages FEIR. In summary, the results of the traffic analysis, as outlined in the University Villages FEIR, are: 13570 12 JANUARY 2024 • Year 2015 Conditions: o No significant impacts to study area intersections, roadway segments, freeways/state highways, or freeway ramps would occur. • Year 2020 Conditions: o Intersections:  After implementation of the identified mitigation measures (MM-TCA-4 through MM-TCA- 10), eight of the nine impacted intersections would operate at acceptable Level of Service (LOS) D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours. Impacts at the intersection of I-805 southbound (SB) Ramps / Olympic Parkway would remain significant and unavoidable. o Roadway Segments:  After implementation of the identified mitigation measures (MM-TCA-4 through MM-TCA- 10), all four directly impacted roadway segments would operate at acceptable LOS C or better in Year 2020 and impacts would be less than significant.  The identified cumulative impact to the roadway segment of Orange Avenue between Melrose Avenue and the I-805 SB ramps would remain significant and unavoidable. o Freeways/State Highways:  Identified cumulative impacts to I-805 from Market Street to Imperial Avenue and from Imperial Avenue to E Division Street would remain significant and unavoidable. o Ramp Metering:  The identified direct impact at the I-805 northbound (NB) on-ramp at Main Street would be mitigated by the Heritage Road connection and impacts would be less than significant. • Year 2025 Conditions: o Intersections:  After implementation of the identified mitigation measure (MM-TCA-12), the two directly impacted intersections would operate at acceptable LOS D or better during both the AM and PM peak hours and impacts would be less than significant. 13570 13 JANUARY 2024  The identified cumulative impact to the intersection of I-805 SB ramps/Olympic Parkway would remain significant and unavoidable. o Roadway Segments:  After implementation of the identified mitigation measure (MM-TCA-12), the two directly impacted roadway segments would operate at acceptable LOS D or better. Impacts would be less than significant.  The identified cumulative impact to the roadway segment of Orange Avenue between Melrose Avenue and the I-805 SB ramps would remain significant and unavoidable. o Freeway/State highways:  The identified significant cumulative impacts to the five segments of I-805 from State Route (SR-) 94 to Bonita Road would remain significant and unavoidable. o Ramp Metering:  Impacts to ramp meters under the Year 2025 conditions would be less than significant. • Year 2030 Conditions: o Intersections:  After implementation of the identified mitigation measure (MM-TCA-13), the directly impacted intersection of Discovery Falls Drive/Hunte Parkway would operate at acceptable LOS D during both the AM and PM peak hours.  The identified cumulative impact to the intersection of I-805 SB ramps/Olympic Parkway would remain significant and unavoidable. o Roadway Segments:  The identified cumulative impact to the roadway segment of Orange Avenue between Melrose Avenue and the I-805 SB ramps would remain significant and unavoidable. o Freeway/State Highways:  The identified significant cumulative impacts to seven segments of I-805 and four segments of SR-905 would remain significant and unavoidable. o Ramp Metering: 13570 14 JANUARY 2024  After implementation of identified mitigation measure (MM-TCA-14), the significant impact at the I-805 NB on-ramp at Main Street would be less than significant. Additionally, a significant impact related to deviations from identified construction phasing was identified. This significant impact would be reduced to a level below significant with incorporation of MM-TCA-17. As identified in the University Village FEIR, incorporation of mitigation measures MM TCA-1 through MM-TCA-17 would reduce potentially significant impacts to a level below significance with exception to the specific locations identified to remain significant and unavoidable (see above). Proposed Modifications A trip generation review was conducted to compare the trip generation of the proposed modification to the approved project (Chen Ryan 2023). The proposed modifications would generate approximately 31,776 ADT, 2,307, (530- in/1,777-out) trips during the AM peak hour, and 3,096 (2,078-in/1,018-out) trips during the PM peak hour. This change represents 4,000 less ADT, 592 less (305-in/287-out) AM trips, and 406 less (272-in/134-out) PM trips, when compared to the 2014 University Villages EIR. Since the nature of the proposed project’s land uses would remain similar to the approved project’s land uses, the external trip distribution patterns to the surrounding roadway network, including roadway segments, intersections, and freeway segments, would remain the same as those studied in the FEIR. Fewer project trips to a roadway, an intersection, a freeway, or a ramp meter indicate less or equal potential traffic impacts. As a result, the approved project represents a worst-case scenario. In addition, identified mitigation measures (MM TCA-1 through MM TCA- 17 in the University Villages FEIR) remain applicable. Therefore, no additional traffic analysis would be required. No new significant traffic, circulation, and access impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. Vehicle Miles Travelled Vehicle Miles Traveled (VMT) has been in general use for analyzing air quality/greenhouse gas emissions for more than a decade, and as such recent revisions to CEQA requiring VMT analysis for documents circulated for public review beginning July 1, 2020 do not represent new information that would require the preparation of a subsequent or supplemental EIR per Public Resources Code Section 21166 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15162(a)(3). Nevertheless, the City required a review of the proposed changes to the project relative to VMT. This involves the preparation of a Project Information Form as described in the City’s Transportation Study Guidelines to document whether or not the proposed changes would result in an incremental increase in traffic generation, compared to the project as previously approved, that exceeds applicable City screening criteria for small projects. Based on the information provided in the Project Information Form, the proposed land use modifications would result in a reduction in traffic generation. The proposed project results in a 4,000 trip decrease in number of trips and therefore generates less than 200 daily trips and meets the City-adopted small projects screening criterion. Given that the project meets the criteria for a small project under the City’s thresholds, the proposed changes would have a less than significant VMT impact. No new significant traffic, circulation, and access impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. 13570 15 JANUARY 2024 Air Quality Impacts to air quality were addressed in Section 5.4 of the University Villages FEIR. The University Villages FEIR concluded that the daily construction emissions for carbon monoxide (CO) and sulfur oxides (SOx) would not exceed the City’s significance thresholds. However, the volatile organic compound (VOC), oxides of nitrogen (NOx), coarse particulate matter (PM10), and fine particulate matter (PM2.5) emissions associated with project construction would exceed the City of Chula Vista’s emission thresholds and impacts would be significant and unavoidable. Criteria pollutant emissions for VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 were anticipated to be above the thresholds. Therefore, this impact was determined to be significant and unavoidable. Cumulative construction operations emissions of VOC, NOx, PM10, and PM2.5 were also determined to be significant and unavoidable. Operation of the approved project was determined to have significant and unavoidable impact due to the increase in land use intensity and vehicle trips compared to what was anticipated in local air quality plans. Additionally, criteria pollutant emissions from project operations for VOC, NOx, CO, PM10, and PM2.5 are anticipated to be above the thresholds and impacts were identified as significant and unavoidable. Furthermore, the University Villages FEIR concluded that as to the development of on-site land uses, impacts arising from the emission of toxic air contaminants (TACs) would be potentially significant if the site is developed to accommodate any light industrial uses, gas stations, or dry-cleaning facilities in proximity to sensitive receptors. The University Villages FEIR required the implementation of mitigation measures MM AQ-1 through MM AQ-3, which would require NOx minimization measures, best management practices (BMPs) to minimize PM10 and PM2.5, and compliance with San Diego Air Pollution Control District (SDAPCD) rules and California Air Resources Board (CARB) siting requirements. An update to the air quality and greenhouse gas emissions analysis was prepared to compare the proposed modifications to the approved project (Dudek 2024a). The proposed project would result in 4.64% fewer daily trips when compared to the approved project (Chen Ryan 2023). As a result, operational emissions of the proposed project (specifically those resulting from mobile sources) associated with Village Eight East would be reduced compared to the approved project. Construction emissions would remain unchanged, as no change in the construction schedule or required construction equipment is anticipated. The proposed project boundary includes areas that were not included in the FEIR for the University Villages Project. In total, the changes to the TM for Village 8 East would result in 0.99 acres of offsite grading not previously analyzed in the University Villages EIR. Due to the overall reduction in acreage of the project boundary and impact area, impacts related to air quality and greenhouse gas emissions would be similar or reduced compared to the 2014 FEIR (Dudek 2024a). Similar to the approved project, the proposed project would be required to implement MM-AQ-1 and MM-AQ-2 to reduce emissions from construction from construction, however, impacts of the proposed project would remain significant and unavoidable. A Health Risk Assessment (HRA) Screening Letter was prepared to determine the cancer risk and non-cancer health impacts to future sensitive residential receptors in Village Eight East from Diesel Particulate Matter (DPM) originating from vehicles traveling along SR-125 (Ldn Consulting 2023). Air dispersion modeling and health risk calculations were conducted using the American Meteorological Society/Environmental Protection Agency Regulatory Model (AERMOD) Version 19191 and the Hotspots Analysis and Reporting Program Version 2 (HARP2). The San Diego Air Pollution Control District’s 2019 Supplemental Guidelines for Submission of Air Toxics “Hot Spots” Program and the Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment’s 2015 Air Toxics Hot Spots Program Risk Assessment Guidelines Guidance Manual for Preparation of Health Risk Assessments were used to prepare the HRA Report. 13570 16 JANUARY 2024 Cancer risk at nine sensitive receptor locations was analyzed as part of the HRA Screening Letter. Cancer risk generated from DPM generated from SR-125 was determined to be below the 10 per one million exposure thresholds (Ldn Consulting 2023). Therefore, potential health risk at future residential receptors from SR-125 would result in potential cancer health risk less than the applicable SDAPCD threshold (Ldn Consulting 2023). The proposed project would have similar potentially significant impacts resulting from the emission of TACs from the development of onsite land uses if the site is developed to accommodate any light industrial uses, gas stations, or dry cleaning facilities in close proximity to sensitive receptors as the approved project. Similar to the approved project, the proposed project would implement MM-AQ-3 to reduce potentially significant impacts from TAC emissions and would be less than significant. The associated mitigation measures identified in the FEIR remain applicable to the proposed modifications. No new significant air quality impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. Noise Impacts to noise were addressed in Section 5.5 of the University Villages FEIR. The future noise level associated with future Main Street, SR-125 and La Media Parkway traffic volumes in Village Eight East would exceed the exterior noise criterion of 65 decibels (dB) Community Noise Equivalent Level (CNEL) and is considered a potentially significant impact. Additionally, residences adjacent to Main Street, SR-125 and La Media Parkway could exceed the Title 24 Interior Noise Standard of 46 dBA CNEL during the construction and operation of the approved project and is considered a potentially significant impact. Olympian High School is approximately 125 feet from the Village Eight East boundary to the north and project generated construction noise would pose a potentially significant impact on noise-sensitive receptors if construction hour limitations are not imposed. Mitigation measures MM NOI- 1 through MM NOI-9 would reduce all potentially significant noise impacts to a level below significance. A portion of the proposed project site was identified as being located within the 60–65 dB CNEL contour line of the Brown Field Airport. As described in the FEIR, impacts related to the exposure of sensitive receptors to excessive noise from airports would be less than significant. A noise technical memorandum was prepared to analyze the potential noise impacts associated with the proposed modifications compared to the approved project. (Dudek 2023a). The proposed modifications would result in the conversion of planned land uses from single-family neighborhoods to multi-family and would expand the mixed-use neighborhoods in the northeast portion of Village Eight East. These proposed changes to the project planning areas and their intended land uses do not change the acceptable noise level criterion of 65 A-weighted decibels community noise equivalent level (CNEL) that is applied uniformly across the project as reported in the noise sections of the FEIR. Similar to the approved project, the proposed project site would have the same noise exposure level to the Brown Field Airport, and impacts would remain less than significant. The mitigation measures identified in the FEIR remain applicable to the proposed modifications and would be applied as follows to reflect changes in the proposed land use: University Villages FEIR: - MM NOI-1 – This measure requires site-specific exterior acoustical analyses for any new single-family or multi-family residential development. This measure would continue to apply to all residential development in Village Eight East. 13570 17 JANUARY 2024 - MM NOI-2 – This measure requires site-specific interior acoustical analyses for any new single-family residential development. This measure would no longer apply in Village Eight East, since all of the single-family residential development has been replaced by multi-family residential development. - MM NOI-3 – This measure requires site-specific interior acoustical analyses for any new multi-family residential development. This measure would apply to all residential development in Village Eight East. - MM-NOI-4 – This measure requires site-specific exterior acoustical analyses for any new non-residential or mixed-use residential development. This measure would apply to P-2, AR-11, S-1, P-1a, VC-1, VC-2, VC-3, VC-4 and VC-5. - MM NOI-5 – This measure requires site-specific acoustical analyses for any new industrial development. This measure would not apply in Village Eight East, since there is no proposed industrial development. - MM NOI-6- This measure limits the active programing operation for the neighborhood park. This mitigation measure continues to apply to any development in Village Eight East. - MM-NOI-7- This measure requires the preparation of an acoustical analysis for elementary schools. This mitigation measure continues to apply to any development in Village Eight East. - MM NOI-8 – This measure limits the hours of construction activities. This mitigation measure continues to apply to any development in Village Eight East. - MM NOI-9 -This measure is site specific for Village Four and would not apply to Village Eight East. Project-generated traffic trips would be reduced when compared the approved project, which would further reduce noise impacts associated with future traffic. The proposed changes also include changes to expected future traffic volumes and the proposed modifications would result in a decrease in trip generation and traffic impacts and would not substantially change trip distribution patterns (Chen Ryan 2023). The University Villages FEIR assessed traffic noise impacts to future residential land uses adjacent to these higher traffic roadways. Similar to the approved project, the proposed project noise impacts would remain less than significant with the inclusion of MM-NOI-1 through MM-NOI-9. No new significant noise impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. Cultural Resources Cultural resources were analyzed in Section 5.6 in the University Villages FEIR. A total of 26 sites were located within the boundaries of Village Eight East, however only 15 sites would be directly impacted by the proposed development. One of these sites (Site SDI-12,809 was determined to be locally and regionally important and the remaining 14 sites were determined to be not of cultural significance. A portion of Site SDI-12,809 would be directly affected by development onsite. Due to the impact on Site SDI-12,809 and the potential indirect impacts associated with intrusion into sites during or after construction of the project, impacts from the approved project may occur. Therefore, since development of Village Eight East could cause a substantial change in the significance of this identified archaeological resource as defined in CEQA Guidelines Section 15064.5, impacts to this site were determined to be potentially significant in the University Villages FEIR and mitigation is required (MM CUL-1 through 13570 18 JANUARY 2024 MM CUL-5). Mitigation measures included archaeological and Native American monitoring during grading and procedures to follow if significant artifacts are uncovered. In addition, no human remains were identified within the project area during the cultural testing program. However, the possibility exists that human remains may be discovered during project grading and construction. Any disturbance of human remains that may occur during project grading or construction would be significant. Therefore, impacts would be potentially significant, and mitigation would be required to reduce potential impacts (MM CUL-6). MM CUL-6 detailed procedures to follow if human remains are uncovered on site. All impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance after implementation of MM CUL-1 through MM CUL-6. An archaeological and paleontological technical memorandum was prepared to determine whether or not additional archaeological impacts would occur as a result of the proposed modifications (Dudek 2024b). The proposed Project includes a Proposed Tentative Map with a slightly modified boundary, which includes 25.0 acres less than the 2014 Village 8 East Tentative Map, due to the exclusion of AR-11 (22.6 acres) from the Proposed Tentative Map boundary and minor project boundary adjustments (2.4 acres). The proposed Project also includes 0.99 acres of offsite grading not previously evaluated as part of the 2014 EIR study area for the Otay Ranch University Villages Project. These additional offsite grading impacts are primarily related to grading within the Caltrans right-of-way (ROW) associated with the frontage road, Main Street and ramps serving the proposed SR-125 Interchange. BFSA conducted the cultural resources study and evaluation for Village 8 East in 2012 (revised in 2014). Based on the review of the previous cultural resources studies and the University Villages EIR, only a portion of CA-SDI-12809 was identified within offsite grading areas. CA-SDI-12809 is a prehistoric site that was originally recorded by McGowan in 1971 (McGowan 1997). CA-SDI-12809 was also previously determined eligible for listing on the California Register of Historical Resources (CRHR) under Criterion 4 (Smith and Stropes 2014) and on the National Register of Historic Places (NRHP) under Criterion D (McDonald et al. 1993). The site was divided into 10 areas of artifact concentrations (Loci A through J) based on STP data. Only a portion of one cultural resource, designated as Locus E of CA-SDI-12809, was identified within an offsite grading area. CA-SDI-12809 was reevaluated as part of the archaeological and paleontological technical memorandum prepared by Dudek and it was determined that construction of SR-125 from 2003-2008 destroyed Locus E. According to Smith and Stropes (2014), impacts to Locus E were previously mitigated by Caltrans as part of the environmental clearance for the SR-125 ROW. Portions of the site are intact and are located outside the eight grading areas discussed herein, as well as outside the grading impacts analyzed in the FEIR. These portions of the site are located in the Chula Vista Multiple Species Conservation Plan (MSCP) open space preserve; these extant portions of the site will be avoided by the project design, and impacts within these loci would not occur with future development. The remaining loci of CA-SDI-12809 that are intact and considered as contributing elements to eligibility of the site (Loci F-J) have already been addressed by the FEIR. The approved Village 8 East Project has been conditioned with a Mitigation, Monitoring, and Reporting Program (MMRP) by the City of Chula Vista (City of Chula Vista 2014). No additional mitigation measures are necessary at this site as a result of the revised grading impacts identified herein. Construction monitoring will be implemented in all eight off-site grading areas (Dudek 2024b). Therefore, project implementation would not result in direct impacts to known cultural resources. Furthermore, as project development would have the potential to uncover unknown cultural resources or human remains, the proposed project would still be required to implement the mitigation measures (MM CUL-1 through MM CUL-6) identified in the FEIR. No new significant cultural resources impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. 13570 19 JANUARY 2024 Paleontological Resources Paleontological resources were analyzed in Section 5.7 of the University Villages FEIR. One fossil site was found within the bounds of the approved project site. Development of the area within the approved project site would encounter a formation with a “high paleontological resource sensitivity” that are assigned to the upper sandstone– mudstone member of the Otay Formation and a “moderate paleontological resource sensitivity” are assigned to the Otay Formation and Quaternary terrace deposits. Therefore, the University Villages FEIR determined that grading and construction activities could impact fossils potentially buried in the underlying formations. Based on the recognized potential to encounter fossils in these formations, impacts were considered potentially significant, and mitigation, as identified in the FEIR, was required (MM PAL-1 through MM PAL-4). Mitigation measures include retaining a qualified paleontologist, paleontological monitoring, and fossil recovery procedures. Impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance with implementation of the mitigation measures identified in the FEIR. An archaeological and paleontological technical memorandum was prepared to determine whether or not additional paleontological impacts would occur as a result of the proposed modifications s (Dudek 2024b). The proposed Project includes a proposed Tentative Map with a slightly modified boundary which includes 25.0 acres less than the 2014 Tentative Map, with the exclusion of AR-11 (22.6 acres) and minor boundary adjustments (2.4 acres). The Proposed Tentative Map also includes 0.99 acres of offsite grading impacts that were not previously evaluated as part of the overall development footprint studied by the 2014 FEIR for the Otay Ranch University Villages Project However, based on review of the previous paleontological resources studies and FEIR for Village 8 East, the additional areas were adequately analyzed by the previous studies and EIR since the geological units (the Otay Formation, Quaternary terrace deposits, and Quaternary alluvium) present in the additional areas were analyzed in the previous studies, and the San Diego Natural History Museum paleontological records search conducted for the previous studies covered the additional areas. The lower fanglomerate member of the Otay Formation was mapped by Kennedy (1977) as unnamed fanglomerate deposits (map unit Tfg) in this area (Dudek 2024b). Furthermore, the proposed project would still be required to implement the mitigation measures (MM PAL-1 through MM PAL-4) identified in the FEIR to reduce potential impacts to less than significant. No new significant paleontological resources impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. Biological Resources Impacts to biological resources were addressed in Section 5.8 of the University Villages FEIR. As indicated in the University Villages FEIR, implementation of the approved project would result in significant direct and indirect impacts to covered sensitive plant species, special status wildlife species, sensitive vegetation communities, jurisdictional waters and wetlands, native upland vegetation communities, and wildlife corridors. Implementation of MM BIO-1 through MM BIO-18 would reduce all potentially significant impacts to below a level of significance. A biological resource technical memorandum was prepared to analyze the impacts of the proposed Project compared to the approved project (Dudek 2024c). Dudek biologists identified eight additions to the development area analyzed in original biological studies conducted for the Village 8 East project. There are six locations along the eastern edge of Village 8 East where grading is proposed to extend beyond what was analyzed in the 2014 University Villages FEIR, primarily related to grading associated with the ramps, Main Street and the frontage road serving the proposed SR-125 Interchange. In addition, there is one area that extends into AR-11 located on the east side of SR-125, in which a portion of these grading impacts were included for analysis in the FEIR. Finally, there is an additional portion of a Future Development Lot (Lot B) that was not previously analyzed in the University Villages EIR. However, the areas immediately to the north and south, designated Future Development Lots A and B 13570 20 JANUARY 2024 on the 2014 Tentative Map, were a part of the University Villages FEIR. The Village 8 East jurisdictional aquatic resource delineation was recently updated for Future Development Lots A and B and included the 0.22-acre addition to Lot B. In total, the changes to the TM for Village 8 East would result in 0.99 acres of off-site grading impacts not previously analyzed in the University Villages EIR. Most of these impacts are to non-native grassland (0.62 acres) followed by 0.29 acres of coastal sage scrub and 0.08 acres of agricultural and developed areas (Dudek 2024c). Both non- native grassland and coastal sage scrub are considered sensitive vegetation communities. Impacts to 0.08 acre of agricultural and developed lands, neither of which is a sensitive land cover, would not be significant. While the impacts at these particular locations were not analyzed in the University Villages FEIR, impacts to coastal sage scrub and non-native grassland as a whole were analyzed and previously identified in the FEIR. Impacts to coastal sage scrub and non-native grassland were deemed less than significant with incorporation of mitigation measures, specifically MM BIO-1. As discussed in the 2014 FEIR, MM BIO-1 requires the conveyance of acreage to the preserve at a ratio of 1.188 of preserve for every acre (1 acre) of impact. The proposed project would implement MM-BIO-1. The potential impacts from the new offsite grading areas have been analyzed (Dudek 2024c), and the addition of 0.91 acre of impacts to non-native grassland and coastal sage scrub does not represent a new significant impact to sensitive biological resources. Therefore, the addition of 0.91 acre of impact to the overall impact total does not represent a new or significant impact. A Quino Checkerspot Butterfly (“QCB”) was sighted within the Village Eight East SPA Plan area at a location that will be on the edge of grading within the Otay Ranch Preserve for a facility that will serve as a utility corridor, trail, and emergency access during biological surveys conducted for a nearby but unrelated project. The University Villages FEIR addressed potential QCB impacts related to presence of host plant and suitable coastal sage scrub habitat. As described in the University Villages EIR, impacts to QCB habitat in the Preserve east of SR-125 are required to comply with avoidance and minimization measure 4.b of the MSCP Subarea Plan. The approved project was determined to not impact any significant QCB habitat patches of plantain east of SR-125. The proposed project would be required to implement MM-BIO-16 and MM-BIO-17 to reduce indirect impacts to QCB and impacts would remain less than significant. As concluded in the memorandum prepared by Allan Matkins, the sighting of a QCB within the Village Eight East SPA area does not constitute new information of substantial importance that warrants further environmental review for the current project (Allen Matkins 2023). While these impacts related to the additional 0.29 acres of coastal sage scrub were not analyzed in the University Villages FEIR, they do not represent a new or significant impact. Impacts to the north and south of the 0.22-acre area east of SR-125, both of which are mapped as coastal sage scrub, were included in the University Villages FEIR. In addition, Caltrans conducted focused surveys for rare plants and special-status wildlife. Based on those surveys, there are no locations of either special-status plant or wildlife species within the additional 0.22 acres included in Lot B (Dudek 2024c). Based on a review of the biological resources determined to be present during previous surveys, and the requirement of preconstruction surveys for rare plants and jurisdictional aquatic resources, there are no additional impacts to biological resources beyond those identified in the FEIR. As concluded in the biological resource technical memorandum, the proposed project would be required to implement MM-BIO-1 through MM- BIO-18, and impacts would remain less than significant. No new significant biological resources impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. 13570 21 JANUARY 2024 Agricultural Resources Impacts to agriculture were addressed in Section 5.9 of the University Villages EIR. The approved project would convert approximately 476 acres designated as Farmland of Local Importance to residential and village land uses. Although the project area is no longer used for crops because of the lack of reliable and affordable water, the loss would contribute to an incremental loss of Farmland of Local Importance. Once fully developed, the approved project would eliminate all agricultural activity on site; however, there is potential for interim agricultural activity to occur within the project area, which could potentially result in land use conflicts with adjacent ownership areas. The Otay Ranch GDP Program EIR identified the potential for land use incompatibility as a short-term impact due to noise, odor, rodents, and chemical applications associated with agricultural activities adjacent to developed areas in the vicinity of the project area. The preparation of an Agricultural Plan was identified as mitigation to reduce the potential short-term impacts to below a level of significance. An Agricultural Plan was prepared as part of the SPA plan for Village Eight East. The plan allows for interim agricultural activity within the project area and adjacent ownership area and prevents potential land use impacts between developed land and ongoing agricultural activities by providing separation between urban uses and adjacent agricultural uses. However, the University Villages FEIR determined that the incremental loss of Farmland of Local Importance as a result of the approved project would be a potentially significant and unavoidable impact. No feasible mitigation measures exist. The University Villages EIR determined that there were no impacts related to conflict with zoning, Williamson Act contract, or General Plan agricultural resource policies or loss of forestry resources. The proposed modifications would reduce the proposed Tentative Map area by 25.0 acres (elimination of the 22.6 acre AR-11 site and 2.4 acres in minor boundary adjustments) and include 0.99 acres of off-site grading not previously analyzed in the University Villages FEIR. This 0.99 acres of offsite grading would impact 0.22 acres of Grazing Land and 0.77 acres of Farmland of Local Importance; however, this does not represent a new significant impact to agricultural resources, as similar impacts were identified in the University Villages FEIR. Due to the overall reduction in the acreage of the TM boundary for the proposed project, the overall proposed project would result in fewer impacts to Farmland of Local Importance and grazing land compared to the approved project Therefore, the project would impact fewer acres of Farmland of Local Importance than what was studied in the University Villages FEIR. As described above, there is no feasible mitigation for the impact to Farmland of Local Importance and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. The proposed modifications would not result new impacts to agricultural resources beyond what was analyzed in the FEIR. No new significant agricultural resources impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. Hydrology and Water Quality Impacts to hydrology and water quality were addressed in Section 5.10 of the University Villages FEIR. A Drainage Study and a Storm Water Quality Management Plan (SWQMP) were completed for the approved project as analyzed in the University Villages FEIR. The University Villages FEIR concluded that the project would be in compliance with all applicable federal, state, and local rules and regulations regarding water quality and hydrology. Through compliance with these rules and regulations and because the project would not use groundwater for water supply for construction or operation, impacts associated with groundwater were determined to be less than significant. However, the project would substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the project area in a manner that would result in substantial erosion or siltation on or off site. The alteration of the drainage pattern was determined to not impact flooding on or offsite. Development of the approved project would avoid placing housing and 13570 22 JANUARY 2024 structures within the 100-year flood hazard areas and the Savage Dam inundation zone impacts would be avoided or less than significant. Additionally, the approved project has the potential to substantially degrade water quality. Prior to mitigation, impacts would be significant. However, all impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance with the incorporation of MM HYD-1, and MM-HYD-5 through MM-HYD-7. The University Villages FEIR stated that the combination of the proposed construction and permanent low impact development best management practices (LID BMPs), which have been incorporated in the design of the approved project, are in place to ensure water quality treatment is maximized throughout the development. However, even with implementation of the BMPs, the approved project would still have the potential to violate water quality standards or waste discharge requirements. Mitigation measures identified in the University Villages FEIR (MM HYD- 1 through MM HYD-7) are required to reduce impacts to below a level of significance. Mitigation measures include erosion control, a stormwater pollution prevention plan, supplemental water quality reporting, post- construction/permanent BMPs, limitation of grading, hydromodification criteria, and a scour analysis. Village 8 East, as a Priority Development Project (“PDP”), is applying to utilize alternative compliance under the City of Chula Vista Alternative Compliance Program (ACP) for Natural System Management Practices (“NSMP”) consistent with San Diego Regional Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (“MS4”) Permit. The purpose of the City of Chula Vista ACP is to provide offsite pollution control treatment opportunities using NSMPs, specifically stream rehabilitation techniques, as allowed by provision E.3.c.(3) of MS4 Permit, as an alternative to the onsite structural Best Management Practice (“BMP”) performance standards set in Provisions E.3.c.(1) and E.3.c.(2)(a) of the MS4 Permit (Order R9-2013-0001, as amended) and the City of Chula Vista BMP Design Manual, dated August 2023. Participation in the ACP is allowed so long as the offsite alternative will have a greater overall water quality benefit than fully complying with the performance requirements of MS4 Provisions E.3.c.(1) and E.3.c.(2)(a) onsite and flow-thru treatment control BMPs sized and designed in accordance with MS4 Permit Provisions E.3.c.(1)(a)(ii)[a]-[c] are implemented on the development site. The Tentative Map Alternative will only be implemented if the City of Chula Vista issues an ACP permit for creating stormwater credits within the Otay River Mitigation Program and approves the Village 8 East Rough Grading Storm Water Quality Management Plan. The primary purpose of the ACP Credits is to achieve stormwater pollutant control, noting that the project is exempt from hydromodification management requirements. The proposed modifications would include minor boundary changes, however, the development footprint from that studied in the University Villages FEIR would remain largely the same. As concluded in the Drainage Study prepared for the proposed project, the proposed modifications would not result in the alteration of drainage or hydrology in areas beyond what was previously analyzed (Hunsaker & Associates 2023). While specific portions within Village Eight East would result in a change in land use, the overall potential for changes to hydrology and water quality would remain the same as analyzed in the FEIR. The proposed modifications would continue to comply with all applicable rules and regulations including compliance with National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit requirements for urban runoff and stormwater discharge. BMPs for design, treatment, and monitoring for stormwater quality would be implemented as delineated in the FEIR with respect to municipal and construction permits. The proposed modifications would comply with the most recent City of Chula Vista BMP Design Manual that contains added stipulations that were not in effect when the original project was approved, which would result in improved water quality discharge. Compliance with all applicable rules and regulations governing water quality as well as implementation of all mitigation measures identified in the University Villages FEIR (mitigation measures MM HYD-1 through MM HYD-7) would ensure that no additional impacts to hydrology and water quality beyond those previously analyzed would occur as a result of the proposed modifications. No new significant hydrology and water quality impacts would occur with implementation 13570 23 JANUARY 2024 of the Proposed Project or the Proposed Project with the ACP Permit, beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. Geology and Soils Impacts to geology and soils were addressed in Section 5.11 of the University Villages FEIR. The University Villages FEIR concluded that the approved project would have potentially significant impacts associated with expansive soils. All impacts would be mitigated to below a level of significance through implementation of mitigation measures MM GEO-1 and MM GEO-2 which include implementation of the recommendations contained within the project’s geotechnical investigations and ensuring all graded slopes have a minimum factor of safety of 1.5, which ensures a certain level of stability of slopes. The proposed modifications would result in minor alterations to the project boundary. As concluded in the updated Geotechnical Report, for the proposed project, which included evaluation of areas that were not previously studied in the University Villages FEIR, no new soils or geologic hazards outside the previously evaluated development area would be encountered (Geocon Incorporated 2023). The proposed modifications would result in similar development within Village Eight East that was assumed within the FEIR Mitigation measures (MM-GEO-1 and MM- GEO-2) requiring implementation of recommendations from project geotechnical investigations would still apply to the proposed modifications. Similarly, future development occurring under the proposed land use modifications would comply with the requirements of applicable building codes and other standards with respect to minimization of geologic hazards. Similar to the approved project, the proposed project would result in less than significant impacts with the incorporation of mitigation. No new significant geology and soils impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. Public Services Public services were addressed in Section 5.12 in the University Villages FEIR. The approved project would introduce an estimated increase of 8,527 people to the area that would create additional demand on public services. Prior to mitigation, the approved project would have potentially significant impacts on fire and emergency medical services and on police services, due to the increase in demand for service and the subsequent increase in average response times. Mitigation measure MM PUB-1 would mitigate impacts to fire and emergency medical services and mitigation measures MM PUB-3 through MM PUB-5 would mitigate impacts on police services. Such impacts would be reduced to less than significant. Additionally, Village Eight East would increase the potential number of future school-aged students in the City by an estimated 1,679 students. The increase of 1,679 new students to the project area would have potentially significant impacts on school facilities, as indicated in the University Villages FEIR. The implementation of mitigation measures MM PUB-6 (payment of School Facility Mitigation Fees) and MM PUB-7 (Chula Vista Elementary School District approval) to mitigate these impacts to less than significant. For overall planning purposes, the Otay Ranch GDP estimates the park land obligation based on 3 acres of park/1,000 population. The GDP estimates the population of Village 8 East at 8,419, representing a 740 person decrease from the approved project. Based on the 3 acres/1,000 formula, Village Eight East would require a total of 25.3 acres of parkland. However, the City of Chula Vista Park Land Dedication Ordinance requires 460 square feet of parkland for each detached home and 341 square feet of parkland for each attached home. Based on this requirement, the Village 8 East parkland obligation would be 26.5 acres. The proposed project would include 50.6 acres of parkland within the Applicant’s ownership, which would exceed the requirement; however, project implementation would increase demand for park and recreational facilities and impacts would be potentially 13570 24 JANUARY 2024 significant. Mitigation measures MM PUB-8 through MM PUB-13, which include the payment of Public Facilities Development Impact Fees (PFDIFs) and dedication of parkland, would mitigate impacts to be less than significant. Similar to the requirement for parkland, the City requires 500 gross square feet of library space per 1,000 population. The project would create demand for 11,000 square feet of library facilities. However, the project would still increase demand on library facilities and would require mitigation. Implementation of MM PUB-14 and MM PUB-15 would mitigate impacts to be less than significant. As identified in the University Villages FEIR, MM PUB-1 through MM PUB-15 would reduce impacts to public services below a level of significance. Mitigation measures include payment of the PFDIFs, incorporation of Crime Prevention through Environmental Design Features, school mitigation agreements or school facility mitigation fees, and park land dedication and/or the payment of park development fees or a combination or both per the City’s Parkland Dedication Ordinance. The proposed modifications would result in a direct decrease in the residential population from 9,159 to 8,419 persons (approximately 740 persons), as compared to the approved project (and, therefore, decreased demand for public services) within Village Eight East. the elimination of single-family units. The proposed project would include approximately 50.6 1 acres of public parks compared to the 58.8 acres provided in the approved project. The demand for Village Eight East for parkland is 26.5 acres of neighborhood and community parks for the approved project’s population. The proposed project would include 50.6 acres of community and neighborhood parks and therefore would still meet (and exceed) the City’s requirements for parks. While the proposed project would decrease the parkland that would be provided as compared to the approved project, the reduction in population related to the reduction in DUs and unit type would also result in a decreased demand for parks. Therefore, the proposed project would not increase demand for public services beyond that analyzed in the FEIR. Similar to the approved project, the proposed project would implement MM-PUB- 1 through MM-PUB-13 and impacts would remain less than significant. No new significant public services impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. Utilities Impacts to utilities were addressed in Section 5.13 of the University Villages FEIR. The University Villages FEIR concluded that impacts to water, sewer, solid waste, and energy would be reduced to below a level of significance with mitigation measures, with the exception of wastewater treatment facilities. The University Villages FEIR determined that the approved project, in conjunction with other cumulative development within the City, could require sewer treatment capacity beyond the City’s existing wastewater treatment capacity rights and allocated additional treatment capacity, resulting in potentially significant and unavoidable impacts associated with construction of a new or expanded facility. A comparison of water and sewer demand was completed for the proposed modifications against the approved project (Dexter Wilson 2023a, 2023b, and 2023c). The proposed modifications would result in a decrease in water demand by approximately 38.1 percent when compared to the approved project (Dexter Wilson 2023a). This decrease in demand would not impact the proposed water line sizing for Village Eight East (Dexter Wilson 2023a). The proposed project was estimated to have a total water demand of 728 acre feet per year. The proposed modifications would result in a reduction of 451 acre -feet per year. when compared to the approved project, which 1 For purposes of this analysis, the 22.6-acre Active Recreation (AR-11) site within the Village 8 East Approved and Proposed project boundary and analyzed in the University Villages FEIR has been excluded because it is owned by the City of Chula Vista and the Village 8 East park requirements would not be met within AR-11. 13570 25 JANUARY 2024 was estimated to have a water demand of 1,179 acre feet per year (Dexter Wilson 2023a). Additionally, the proposed modifications would increase total water conservation savings by 5.9 percent as compared to the approved project (Dexter Wilson 2023b). The estimated recycled water use would also be slightly decreased from the 2014 report due to a shift in the proposed land uses. Residential water conservation savings are also decreased slightly due to the shift from single family residential units to multi-family residential units. Therefore, the proposed modifications would not result in any new or more severe impacts to water infrastructure or supply with the implementation of MM-UTIL-1 through MM-UTIL-4, impacts would remain less than significant. The proposed modifications would result in a 17.7 percent decrease in sewer flow projected when compared to the approved project due to the reduction in units and the shift from single family units to multi- family units (Dexter Wilson 2023c). While the proposed project would reduce the sewer flow compared to the approved project, the development of treatment capacity beyond the City’s existing and allocated capacity would still result in a potentially significant and unavoidable impact associated with construction of a new or expanded facility. Therefore, the proposed modifications would not result in any new or more severe impacts to sewer infrastructure; however, and impacts would remain potentially significant even with the implementation of MM-UTIL-5 through MM- UTIL-7, impacts would remain significant and unavoidable t. Similar to the approved project, the proposed project would have less than significant impacts related to the generation of solid waste. Further, the proposed project would be consistent with all applicable statutes and regulations. The proposed project would have similar impacts related to energy demand as the approved project. Similar to the approved project, the availability of adequate long term energy resources in unknown, and therefore impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. Further, the proposed project would be consistent with all applicable statutes, regulations and policies, with respect to demand to energy resources. Therefore, the proposed modifications would do not result in any new or more severe impacts related to energy resource infrastructure and impacts would remain significant and unavoidable. No new significant utilities impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. Global Climate Change GHG emissions and global climate change were addressed in Section 5.14 in the University Villages FEIR. As described in the University Villages FEIR, the approved project would not result in a significant impact related to compliance with Assembly Bill 32. However, the approved project would have significant and unavoidable impacts related to substantially increased exposure to the potential adverse effects of global warming. The University Villages FEIR determined the approved project would result in further degradation to regional and local air quality from the formation of ozone precursors. For purposes of mitigating the formation of ozone precursors and minimizing the project’s exposure to the effects of global warming, Section 1.3 of the University Villages FEIR identified project design features that would assist with the reduction of operational emissions contributing to ozone formation. However, no feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce impacts to levels below significant. An update to the air quality and greenhouse gas emissions analysis was prepared to compare the proposed modifications to the approved project (Dudek 2024a). The proposed project would result in fewer daily trips when compared to the approved project (Chen Ryan 2023). As a result, operational emissions (specifically those resulting from mobile sources) associated with Village Eight East would be reduced (Dudek 2024a). Construction emissions would remain unchanged, as no change in the construction schedule or required construction equipment is 13570 26 JANUARY 2024 anticipated (Dudek 2024a). Similar to that for the approved project, the proposed project would implement GHG reduction measures as identified in the University Villages FEIR to reduce operational emissions to the extent feasible (and would be subject to current regulations which would further reduce GHG emissions beyond that originally evaluated, etc.). However, as no feasible mitigation measures have been identified, operational emissions with the proposed project would remain significant and unavoidable. Overall, GHG emissions would be reduced under the proposed modifications when compared to the approved project. No new significant climate change impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. Hazards and Risk of Upset Hazards were addressed in Section 5.15 in the University Villages FEIR. The University Villages FEIR determined that impacts associated with historic agricultural use of the property and the proximity to Brown Field Municipal Airport would result in potentially significant impacts. The University Villages FEIR also determined that Munitions of Explosive Concern exist on the Village Ten site. However, since the proposed modifications do not involve modifications to the Village Ten site, this impact and associated mitigation are not included in the analysis below. Otay Ranch land was historically cultivated for agricultural use (primarily dry-farmed grain crops). In some areas, contaminated soils associated with former agricultural use have been identified. Soils in the project area may contain organochlorine pesticides, organophosphorus pesticides, organochlorine herbicides, and metals including arsenic. In the event that the proposed project encounters contaminated soils during grading and excavation, increased health risks to construction workers and future residents could occur, as well as potential impacts on water quality. The University Villages FEIR determined that prior to mitigation the project would have potentially significant impacts associated with exposure of construction workers and future residents to pesticide residues. MM HAZ-1 requires a soils assessment to be prepared to determine whether residual pesticides, herbicides, and/or arsenic are present on site. The nearest airport to Village Eight East is the Brown Field Municipal Airport, which is located approximately 3 miles south. The University Villages FEIR determined that the Village Eight East does not lie within the Flight Activity Areas on either the runway approach or departure paths. However, the Village Eight East SPA is located within the Brown Field Airport Federal Aviation Administration (FAA) height notification boundary (Federal Aviation Regulations at 14 CFR, Part 77 (FAR Part 77)). FAR Part 77 is issued by the FAA and establishes the standards which govern the height of objects on and around an airport. The University Villages FEIR determined that impacts would be potentially significant prior to mitigation. Since the proposed project is in the same location as the approved project, compliance with MM HAZ-3 through MM HAZ-5 would be required in order to reduce impacts to below a level of significance. Mitigation measures include filing a Notice of Proposed Construction or Alteration with the FAA, providing proof of FAA clearance to the satisfaction of the Development Services Director, and recording the Airport Overflight Agreement with the County Recorder’s office. The University Villages FEIR further determined that implementation of a Fire Protection Plan (FPP) prepared for the approved project would reduce wildland fire risk to a less than significant level. The FPP outlined defensible space requirements based on the potential risk and predicted fire behavior. The structures of the approved project would include ignition resistant materials per the latest Chula Vista Fire and Building Codes. Structure protection would be complemented by a system of improved water availability, capacity and delivery; fire department access; monitored defensible space/fuel modification; interior fire sprinkler systems in all structures, monitored interior 13570 27 JANUARY 2024 sprinklers in applicable structures; and other components that would provide properly equipped and maintained structures with a high level of fire ignition resistance. The proposed project would not substantially alter the land uses which could cause an increase in the severity of previously identified impacts. Impacts could still result due to earthmoving activities and the historical agricultural use of the land. Mitigation measures identified in the FEIR would still be required to reduce potentially significant impacts from hazardous materials to a level below significance with the implementation of MM-HAZ-3 through MM- HAZ-5. Similarly, coordination and notification with FAA would still be required of the proposed project and with implementation of MM-HAZ-3 through MM-HAZ-5, impacts would be less than significant. The proposed project would alter development along the eastern development edge where some development area has been removed, and some has been added to accommodate the SR-125 design. An update to the FPP was prepared for the proposed modifications (Dudek 2023b). The Village Eight East FPP for the approved project was approved by the City Chula Vista Fire Department (CVFD) in 2014. The approved FPP, as revised, was compared with the proposed modifications (Dudek 2023b). Based on the evaluation of both documents, it was determined that the findings of the approved FPP, as revised, remain applicable and valid with some minor changes. Five amendments to the approved 2014 FPP were identified. The first amendment includes the application of current 2022 Chula Vista Fire Codes and Chapter 7A of the 2022 California Fire Code. The second amendment includes an amendment to update the project description in the FPP to match the proposed project. The third amendment would include alteration to the fuel modification zone and fences. The fuel modification zones (FMZ) would remain the same as the approved project with the exception of 1) a reduction of the 100-foot FMZ around the P-2 Community Park to 30 feet around the perimeter and maintain a 100-foot FMZ around all structures within the P-2 Community Park, 2) the fire wall adjacent to the multi-family is unnecessary and will instead be tubular steel or post & rail and 3) Zone “0”, which will be located on all sides of and directly adjacent to all structures. The fourth and fifth amendments would include an updated proposed plant palette and prohibited plant list. (Dudek 2023b). These amendments are consistent with the approved FPP and the analysis contained in the University Village FEIR. Therefore, the proposed modifications would not increase potential impacts related to wildland fire. No new significant hazards or risk of upset impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. Housing and Population Population and housing impacts associated with the approved project were discussed in Section 5.16 in the University Villages FEIR. As stated therein, the Village Eight East portion of the approved project would result in an approximate population increase of 8,527 people. The University Villages FEIR determined that although the approved project would result in substantial population growth, compliance with the Chula Vista General Plan and Otay Ranch GDP amendments, preparation of a Public Facilities Financing Plan, payment of Development Impact Fees and Transportation Development Impact Fees, and adherence to the updated San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG) 2050 Regional Growth Forecast would ensure that the approved project would have less than significant impacts associated with population growth. Therefore, no mitigation measures would be required. The estimated population associated with the proposed project is 8,419, representing a 740 person decrease from what was analyzed in the FEIR. Additionally, there would be no new potential to displace existing people or housing, as the areas that would be added to the site are undeveloped and do not contain housing. No new 13570 28 JANUARY 2024 significant population and housing impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no mitigation is required. Mineral Resources Mineral resources were addressed in Section 5.17 in the University Villages FEIR. Village Eight East contains land that is classified as MRZ-2 or MRZ-3. The MRZ-2 classification for mineral resources represents areas where adequate information indicates that significant mineral deposits are present, or where it is judges that a high likelihood exists for their presence. The MRZ-3 classification for mineral resources represents an area that has the potential for mineral deposits but where no resources have been identified. As determined in the University Villages FEIR, although Village Eight East is located on MRZ-2 and MRZ-3 land. The development within MRZ-2 would be limited to access and emergency access roads within the Community Park in Village Eight East, and the remainder of development would be located on MRZ-3 land. Further, the General Plan designates the area within the MRZ-2 land within Village Eight East as Open Space and Residential Low Medium, and not extractive uses. The SPA Plan does not propose extraction, however, on site resources could be made available. Therefore, implementation of the approved project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state. As such, impacts would be less than significant. The proposed project would reduce the proposed Tentative Map area by 25.0 acres (elimination of the 22.6 acre AR-11 site and 2.4 acres of minor boundary adjustments) and include 0.99 acres of off-site grading not previously analyzed in the University Villages FEIR. The proposed offsite grading would include 0.79 acres of MRZ-3, and 0.20 acres of MRZ-2. Similar to the approved project, the 0.2 acres of MRZ-2 would not be proposed for extractive uses that would result in a permanent loss of known mineral resources. Further, due to the decreased area of the TM boundary, the total disturbed area would be decreased compared to the development footprint studied in the University Villages FEIR. Therefore, the total area that may contain known significant mineral resources would be less than what was previously evaluated development area. Impacts to mineral resources would remain less than significant, similar to the approved project. No new significant mineral resource impacts would occur beyond those identified in the University Villages FEIR; no additional mitigation is required. 7 Conclusion This document identifies all changed circumstances and provides the proposed modifications that were not previously analyzed and disclosed in the University Villages FEIR. The City has determined that none of the changes associated with the proposed project require the preparation of a Subsequent or Supplemental EIR pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15162 and 15163. Attachments: Figure 1, Project Location Figure 2, Project Area Figure 3, Approved Village 8 East Site Utilization Figure 4, Proposed Village 8 East Site Utilization Figure 5, Existing Zoning District Map Figure 6, Proposed Zoning District Map 13570 29 JANUARY 2024 4 References Allen Matkins. Leek Gamble Mallory & Natsis LLP. 2023. University Villages - Village Eight East - Quino Checkerspot Butterfly Sighting Does Not Necessitate Further Environmental Review. May 2023 Chen Ryan. 2023. Village 8 East Trip Generation Review. September 2023. City of Chula Vista. 2014. University Villages Comprehensive SPA Plan Amendment Final Environmental Impact Report. December 2, 2014. City of Chula Vista. 2016. Addendum to EIR – University Villages – Village Three North and a Portion of Village Four. December 16, 2016. City of Chula Vista. 2021. Addendum to EIR – University Villages – Village Three and a Portion of Village Four. June 15, 2021. Dexter Wilson. 2023a. Otay Ranch Village 8 East SPA Amendment Water Evaluation. September 14, 2023. Dexter Wilson. 2023b. Otay Ranch Village 8 East SPA Amendment Water Conservation Plan Evaluation. September 14, 2023. Dexter Wilson. 2023c. Otay Ranch Village 8 East SPA Amendment Sewer Evaluation. September 14, 2023. Dudek. 2023a. Otay Ranch Village Eight East– Noise Update Analysis. September 2023. Dudek. 2023b. Village Eight East Fire Protection Plan Addendum and Figures Updates. September 2023. Dudek. 2024a. Otay Ranch Village Eight East Project – Air Quality and Greenhouse Gas Update. January 2024 Dudek. 2024b. Archaeological and Paleontological Memorandum for the Otay Ranch Village 8 East Project. Chula Vista, CA. January 2024. Dudek. 2024c. Village 8 East Tentative Map Revisions – Biological Review. January 2024. Geocon Incorporated. 2023. Update Geotechnical Report- Otay Ranch Village 8 East Chula Vista, California. September 30, 2023. Hunsaker & Associates. 2023. TM Drainage Study for Otay Ranch- Village 8 East. September 2023. Ldn Consulting. 2023. Otay Village 8 East Development Health Risk Screening Letter. City of Chula Vista, CA. September 25, 2023. INTENTIONALLY LEFT BLANK