The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRCC AGENDA PK 1999/11/11 .-... -- . , MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION PROJECT NAME: EastLake Business Center II Annexation PROJECT LOCATION: North of Otay Lakes Road, east of EastLake Business Center I, and west of Hunte Parkway ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 595-080-25~00 PROJECT APPLICANT: The EastLake Company CASE NO: IS-00-03 DA TE: September 17, 1999 A. Project Setting The project site is located on the north side of Otay Lakes Road between Hunte Parkway and Lane A venue within the adopted EastLake III General Development plan. The site is limited to the north by a residential development known as Rolling Hills; to the east by future EastLake residential development; to the south by a residential neighborhood across Otay Lakes Road; and to the west by the existing EastLake Business Center I. The site is presently zoned PC, Planned Community, and designated Research and Limited Manufacturing in the City of Chula Vista General Plan and EastLake III General Development Plan. The project site occupies an area of rolling hills with site elevations ranging from approximately 740 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the east-central portion of the site to approximately 610 feet MSL along Otay Lakes Road in the southern portion of the site. The 107-acre site is currently being used for dry farming. The area surrounding the project site is rapidly transitioning from open agricultural uses to "Planned Community" development, including residential, business park, and commercial uses. EastLake Business Center I, bordering the project site to the west, has been graded and several manufacturingl1ight industrial finns have begun operations. Residential development (EastLake Greens) immediately to the south is separated from the project site by Otay Lakes Road, a six-lane prime arterial along the project frontage. 1 - - - B. Project Description The proposed project consists of incorporating 110 light industrial acres from the EastLake III General Development Plan (GDP) to the EastLake II GDP and EastLake I Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan. The project also includes a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide the above-mentioned acres into 16 industrial lots. PROJECT PERMITS REQUIRED EastLake II General Development Plan Amendment: The proposed amendments to the EastLake II General Development Plan consist of changing the GDP map, text, and statistics to incorporate from EastLake III 107.9 acres of Research & Limited Manufacturing (IR) with no change to land use. EastLake I Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan Amendments: The proposed amendments to the EastLake I SPA Plan are primarily to reflect the incorporation of the 107.9 acres of Research and Limited Manufacturing as BC-l, Business Center Manufacturing Park District in the Land Use Districts map and added acreage to the overall SPA statistics. Tentative Subdivision Map: The project also includes a tentative subdivision map to subdivide the 110 acres into 16 industrial lots and internal streets. Note: Amendments to the EastLake III GDP resulting from the above-mentioned GDP boundary adjustment and transfer of 110 acres to Eastlake II GDP will be incorporated as part of the overall EastLake III GDP replanning program, which is currently being processed. RESPONSIBLE AGENCIES Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES) C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans The project represents no change to the adopted land uses. 2 - - D. Identification of Environmental Effects An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached Environmental Checklist Form) determined that the proposed project will not have a significant environmental effect and that the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines that states a mitigated negative declaration shall be prepared when the initial study identifies potential significant effects, but: 1. Revision in the project plans or proposals made by, or agreed to by the applicant before a proposed mitigated negative declaration and initial study are released for public review would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur, and 2. There is no substantial evidence in light of the whole record before the agency, that the project as revised may have a significant effect on the environment. A discussion of these potentially significant impacts from the proposed project is found in Exhibit "A" as attached. E. Mitigation is found in Exhibit "A" as attached. F. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista: Doug Reid, Planning Marilyn Ponseggi, Environmental Planner Brian Hunter, Environmental Planner Luis Hernandez, Environmental Planner Applicant's Agent: Guy Asaro 2. Documents Chula Vista General Plan (1989) and EIR (1989) Biological Resources Survey, RECON (1999) Noise Technical Study, RECON (1999) Cultural Resources Survey, RECON (1999) Report of EIR-Ievel Geotechnical Investigation, Geotechnics, Inc. Hydrological Study, Hunsaker & Associates (1999) 3 - --- Overview of Sewer Service, Wilson Engineering (1999) EastLake Business Center II Fiscal Analysis, CIC Research, Inc (1999) Sub-Area Water Master Plan, John Powell & Associates, Inc. (1999) 3. Initial Study This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, any comments received on the Initial Study, and any comments received during the public review period for this Mitigated Negative Declaration. The report reflects the independent judgment of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review of this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth A venue, Chula Vista, CA 91910. ~ p~ ~. AGENT F R THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA 4 - - EASTLAKE BUSINESS CENTER II INITIAL STUDY SEPTEMBER 1999 Prepared for CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 FOURTH AVENUE CHULA VISTA, CA 91910 Prepared by ~[L~N RECON NUMBER 3198E CD 4241 Jutland Drive, Suite 201 San Diego, CA 9211 7 -3653 ·..~.I. .'. 619 / 270-5066 fax 270-5414 __ __'.1_. .. _.._ I- .'111_..,.... -0 This document printed on recycled paper - ..- EastLak", Business Center II Initial Study TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION 1 PROJECT LOCATION 1 BACKGROUND 1 ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING 1 PROJECT DESCRIPTION 4 PROJECT APPROV ALS 8 LEAD, RESPONSIBLE, AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES 9 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM RESPONSES 10 I. Aesthetics 11 II. Agriculture Resources 13 III. Air Quality 15 IV. Biological Resources 17 V. Cultural Resources 19 VI. Geology and Soils 22 VII. Hazards and Hazardous Materials 26 VIII. Hydrology and Water Quality 28 IX. Land Use and Planning 33 X. Mineral Resources 34 XI. Noise 35 XII. Population & Housing 37 XIII. Public Services 38 XIV. Recreation 40 XV. TransportationlTraffic 41 - - EastLak.", .Jusiness Center II Initial Study TABLE OF CONTENTS (cont.) XVI. Utilities & Service Systems 43 XVII. Thresholds Analysis 46 XVIII. Mandatory Findings of Significance 51 XIX. Project Revisions or Mitigation Measures 52 XX. Agreement to Implement Mitigation Measures 52 XXI. Environmental Factors Potentially Affected 52 XXII. Determination 53 REFERENCES 54 FIGURES 1: Regional location of proposed project 2 2: Vicinity location of proposed project 3 3: Existing vegetation map 5 4: Tentative tract map 7 - - EastLaJ.\.... Business Center II Initial Study INTRODUCTION This initial study identifies the potential environmental impacts with the proposed development and establishes mitigation measures to mitigate potential impacts. Since the subject site is presently designated Research and Limited Manufacturing in the City's General Plan and adopted EastLake III General Development Plan and no change to this land use designation is proposed, the project is basically a GDP/SP A boundary adjustment to allow the development of the subject site under the adopted regulatory documents of EastLake II GDP and EastLake I SPA plans. PROJECT LOCATION The 107.9-acre project site is located north of Otay Lakes Road, east of EastLake Business Center I, and west of Hunte Parkway on Assessor's Parcel No. 595-080-25-00. Figure 1 shows the regional location of the project site and Figure 2 shows the vicinity location. BACKGROUND The subject site is located at the northwest comer of the EastLake III GDP (adopted in 1990) and designated Research and Limited Manufacturing. Under the EastLake III GDP, the site was intended to be an extension of the westerly adjacent Business Center (EastLake Business Center I), which is part of the EastLake II GDP. However, with the exception of the Olympic Training Center, also adopted in 1990, the EastLake III GDP does not have adopted SPAs. For this reason, the applicant is requesting that the 110 industrial acres, presently in EastLake III GDP, be incorporated into the EastLake II GDP and EastLake I SPA with the same land use designation and subject to the same property development standards in order to meet present market demand for industrial land. The applicant has filed an application to replan the EastLake III GDP and adopt SPAs for two residential neighborhoods. Thus, the amendments to the EastLake III GDP resulting from the above-mentioned GDP boundary adjustment and transfer of 110 acres to EastLake II GDP will be incorporated as part of the overall EastLake III GDP replanning program. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING The project site is located on the north side of Otay Lakes Road between Hunte Parkway and Lane A venue within the adopted EastLake III General Development Plan. The site is limited to the north by a residential development known as Rolling Hills; to the east by future EastLake residential development; to the south by a residential neighborhood across Otay Lakes Road; and to the west by the existing EastLake Business Center I. 1 - - ~ United States of America ·d Mexicanos Estados Um os ~f~~N Irn t 0 MILES 2 4 FIGURE 1 ~..J Regional Location of the Project - - ~ /~\' t\ g\ I~~ >¡'.~~¡f'J;>~ ,\ ",~~ "cl' ----:3- rr1~~""\ J v ~ ~ ~ é// ;/ ~ ..~ ~",~1I' ~- -'>,. ~. ,-", R I ~. ~ :0--- - ...... r(l\~ 1\ ~ ~ ø OI~~l~~ß ~ \, . ~ :-:; ~ / ,\ ~ 'br:JJ \' ~,\\ \ --,.~ ~( \ ~( 1\ ~ \ ~ \.~ J ,\' \ ~I/~I ~~ I/V:;-;; <"01ID/1 '1';?'/?/ \\' \)f~I[)M( ~ t~yr--: ~ ~. -AI, 'I r;://l @ ¡ J (~ ~ J:. JII V '( ~ , ,'. ~ ""'~ ,l. / 'J' X: ~ j)J'''= 11 @~ I ?o '- '- ~ ~ c 1/.-------- ,7· "l"-,\\ R"-- 00/ \ I V/ ~ \\~!Y ~~ROJECTLOCATION '\ ~~,¿§J ~~ÇS ~ ~ ?o / í/ ~'-->-- '------.. '\\~ /' I I~~;¡~ ~b : ~~¡J») ~ ~~~ ,(~ !~~ ~~~ ~~X ~<iir -II' \~í~ I~~ ~~ 00, ~ S --wSM )d¿ > ,\ ( .-'\ ~\ ~~ ,L,---;d/ / 1~~~~í~~ø~~~~_~aWß~~~ d;. 1\ ~ 'r-~~'-:::::; 'í\ ~ \~: ( J,')\ )\\\\~ 1(C'D.~ "5 ~ '~r .~;~ 1\\ V :ß, ;:'\' p} )7, I '\, \ ~ {~ ~ I-.;e-i/û: ~ t:( ^~., '( L ~ 'K " ~o ':,:;- ~~ ~ ;5~ ~\ (~ (~._--'~ ~~ ~\~" \~ ( ~ ~ ~ þ ~ ~'f ~~.~ 7.5 ~ ~_~[(~ -;5)~~ ~'f170 t\ c >~~ . ~¡1 f--'"~" \ ,\ -;¡ I /!J 6'00 I . ~ .~~!r 0þ¡~, /" ~ ~.-J ^ _ '¡>L~ [\ /// ~l)' ~ ~ ,', ~ ~\\\~,/ f------------::- ~ .'''"''~)?¡- ~ ~~,r-;à))-cJ '.--=:..) :~ . ,.500 /þ ~ \:::- ~ \,~!( ~:J! '''-., ~ . I ' .v/ - ~ ' 83 ~ ( r./ I~~ ~~<=: t 17 -~i~~'1ß \~~cj~ \:-600 6 Y :'''\=- ~ ~ ,.. _< \¡ ~j~ /~tr:-' /; ~ '~':;g Q,.~ ) i'§ "",M~~ ~~r" 'AC>~\~ o ~~ - ~ ?drr--~ ~'Y(~S~~~~~~b~ 1 ! ~~~l~', ~fL~N Map Source: San Diego County 2000' Regional Base Map Series, Jamul quad [@ t Ii FEET 2000 FIGURE 2 4000 Project Vicinity -- -- EastLak.", rlusiness Center II Initial Study The site is presently zoned PC, Planned Community, and designated Research and Limited Manufacturing in the City of Chula Vista General Plan and EastLake III General Development Plan. The property is bounded on three sides by residential properties. To the north and the south are the existing residential communities of Salt Creek Ranch (Rolling Hills Ranch) and EastLake Greens, respectively. To the east is the future EastLake III residential community. To the west is the EastLake Business Center I area to which the proposed project would be annexed. The project site occupies an area of rolling hills with site elevations ranging from approximately 740 feet above mean sea level (MSL) in the east-central portion of the site to approximately 610 feet MSL along Otay Lakes Road in the southern portion of the site. The 107 -acre site is currently being used for dry farming. Figure 3 is an existing vegetation map. The area surrounding the project site is rapidly transitioning from open agricultural uses to "Planned Community" development, including residential, business park, and commercial uses. EastLake Business Center I, bordering the project site to the west, has been graded and several manufacturingllight industrial firms have begun operations. Residential development immediately to the south is separated from the project site by Otay Lakes Road, a six-lane prime arterial along the project frontage. Except for future construction of a high school and elementary school on Hunte Parkway, plans call for the undeveloped areas within EastLake III GDP, west of the Upper Otay Reservoir, to be developed with residential uses. There are no existing structures or other features of historical or cultural significance within the project site. PROJECT DESCRIPTION The proposed project is to develop the EastLake Business Center II area prior to the completion of the overall EastLake III General Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area planning program. To do this, the applicant proposes to delete the EastLake Business Center II site from the EastLake III GDP and annex it to the EastLake II GDP and the EastLake I Business Center SPA Plan. The Business Center II Supplemental SPA Plan is designed to implement the EastLake II General Development Plan (as amended). The community structure of the Business Center II project is essentially established by the existing Business Center I to which the expansion is tied. Thus, most of the Business Center I focal points, thematic elements, and so on will be extended as linear components as part of the proposed project. 4 +- o - .... C< ~ ~ . =;:::;;¡.2:! c ~ Q~- " :~oo _ S$~ ~ . ~ ..,,~ .8 ~ & ~ ....~ ~ ß . ~' 0 ~u e '. i. 'Š ~ >-< ~ ... o . > " .. ~ . < .. . - ,,"" · 181j II~ :i = Q -. - Lane. .Averu.l.e ,\ " - - EastLalœ Business Center II Initial Study A tentative tract map for the development of research and limited manufacturing uses on 107 acres is also proposed (Figure 4). The tentative tract map includes 76 net developable acres, a supporting internal road system, and landscaped manufactured slopes and buffer areas. Lot sizes range from approximately 3 acres to 12 acres in size. It is proposed to develop a portion of the site with 50,000 square feet of corporate office uses and 40,000 square feet of warehousing on Lot 1. Access to the site will be via Fenton Street (to Lane A venue) and via a proposed full access traffic signal on Otay Lakes Road. An off-site area east of the Business Center II area and west of Hunte Parkway is shown on the tentative tract map for grading to permit a balance of grading operations. Figure 4 shows conceptual grading in the off-site parcel to the east of the project site. The off-site area will not be permitted to otherwise develop prior to the adoption of the EastLake III SPA Plan. Phasing. The proposed project includes three primary phases of development based on the need to balance grading and infrastructure improvements. Phase 1 will include construction of entrances to the project from Fenton Street, portions of the Fenton Street extension and Street" A," and development of Units 1 and 6. Phase 2 will consist of the completion of the Fenton Street extension, construction of a portion of Street "B," and development of Units 7 through 10. Phase 3 construction will include completion of Streets "A" and "B," and development of the remaining units. The development of individual building sites will begin as the market dictates. Buildout of all building sites may occur over several years. The proposed phasing and actual construction timing may be modified during the EastLake Business Center II Master Tentative Map process and modification to the Public Facilities Financing Plan resulting from the Master Tentative Map conditions of approval. The traffic study prepared for the proposed project concludes that the Interstate 805ffelegraph Canyon Road interchange is a constraint in the area circulation system. This intersection currently operates below acceptable levels of service and would be significantly impacted if more than two seconds of delay are calculated as a result of traffic from any single project. Therefore, until either State Route 125 or Olympic Parkway are extended, the traffic study concludes that 42 gross acres (the proposed 10- acre Lot 1 facility + 32 additional acres) of the project site may be developed before reaching a significant traffic impact (greater than two-second delay) at the Interstate 805 Telegraph Canyon Road interchange. Similar calculations were conducted assuming that Olympic Parkway is extended to Paseo Ranchero. Results show that 59 gross acres (Lot 1 + 49 additional acres) of the site could be built before reaching a significant impact. 6 ; , , , , , , " , , , , , , , " k , , , , ( , , ~7~ -- -" EastLak", ßusiness Center II Initial Study Drainage. On-site drainage has been designed to handle 50-year peak flows from the site into four existing outlets. One 36-inch outlet exists at the cul-de-sac, an IS-inch outlet at Fenton Street and 48-inch and 24-inch outlets in Otay Lakes Road. A detention basin will be constructed to serve the proposed project. Determination of its precise location will be based on a final drainage report being prepared by Hunsaker & Associates. The basin will either be located on-site in the southeast comer of the project site or within the off- site area to be disturbed by grading (see Figure 4). Grading: Figure 4 shows the proposed grading plan for the project, consisting of approximately 1.92 million cubic yards. An off-site area east of the Business Center II area and west of Hunte Parkway is shown on the tentative map for grading to permit a balance of grading operations. Figure 4 shows this off-site parcel. The final grading design would be subject to Chapter 15.04 of the City's Municipal Code. Slope banks in excess of five feet in height would be constructed at a gradient of 2 to 1 (horizontal to vertical) or flatter unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Minor interior slopes between lots may be 1.5 to 1. The off-site area will not be permitted to develop beyond the proposed fill stockpiling prior to the adoption of the EastLake III SPA Plan. Landscaping. The conceptual landscape plan shown in the SPA Plan provides a general design framework for reinforcing the development pattern already established in the adjacent development, Business Center I. Key elements of the landscape pattern are to provide a neighborhood entry from Otay Lakes Road to Business Center II and for Fenton Street to be an extension and connection between the two business parks, unifying them through landscaping and signage. PROJECT APPROVALS The following permits are required for project implementation: EastLake II General Development Plan Amendment: The proposed amendments to the EastLake II General Development Plan consist of changing the GDP map, text, and statistics to incorporate from EastLake III 107.9 acres of Research & Limited Manufacturing (IR) with no change to land use. EastLake I Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan Amendments: The proposed amendments to the EastLake I SPA Plan are primarily to reflect the incorporation of the 107.9 acres of Research and Limited Manufacturing as BC-l, Business Center Manufacturing Park District in the Land Use Districts map and added acreage to the overall SPA statistics. 8 - - EastLak\,; clusiness Center II Initial Study Tentative Subdivision Map: The project also includes a tentative subdivision map to subdivide the 110 acres into 16 industrial lots and internal streets. Note: Amendments to the EastLake III GDP resulting from the above-mentioned GDP boundary adjustment and transfer of 110 acres to EastLake II GDP will be incorporated as part of the overall EastLake In GDP replanning program, which is currently being processed. LEAD, RESPONSIBLE, AND TRUSTEE AGENCIES Lead Agency In conformance with Section 15050 and 15367 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City of Chula Vista will be the "lead agency," which is defined as the "public agency, which has the principal responsibility for carrying out or approving a project." Possible Responsibleffrustee Agencies Responsible agencies are those agencies that have a discretionary approval over one or more actions involved with development of the project site. Trustee agencies are state agencies having discretionary approval or jurisdiction by law over natural resources affected by a project. These agencies may include, but are not limited to, the following: Responsible Agencies Regional Water Quality Control Board (NPDES) 9 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: EastLake Business Center II GDP and SPA Amendment 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City ofChula Vista, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91910 3. Contact Person and Phone Number: Brian Hunter, Environmental Projects Manager, (619) 691-5016 10 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact I. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a 'scenic vista? 0 0 [g] 0 b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, but 0 0 0 [g] not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or 0 [g] 0 0 quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, 0 0 [g] 0 which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: Response to la. The proposed amendments to the approved EastLake n and In GDPs and EastLake I SPA Plan (1985) and future approval of a tentative map will not result in a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista. The project site is located in an area which has experienced a high degree of development. Future development will be subject to the design standards established in the GDP and SPA Plan. Development of the site is anticipated and was previously discussed in EIRs for the above-listed plans. Mitigation measures included in the EIR for the EastLake nI GDP include requirements to create, via the SPA Plan process, guidelines and design criteria governing site design, building setbacks, height limits, landscaping, and buffer/edge treatments, among other techniques (EastLake nI/Olympic Training Center SEIR #89-11, 1989) Impacts to Otay Lakes Road, which is designated a scenic highway, have been determined to be less than significant. Project design incorporates a landscaped open space buffer between proposed development areas and the highways. In addition, industrial sites are isolated by a grade differential~ the roadway and nearby residential areas are lower than the proposed industrial area. Project implementation is consistent with future development plans for the area and would not represent a significant change given the type and amount of surrounding development already located in the area {including varied density residential, public facilities including a fire station, and industrial uses). Views of these facilities and the treatment of the roadway itself will be consistent with the City's goal to maintain scenic quality and maximize the future scenic highway potential (General Plan, July 1989). Response to lb. The proposed project will grade and develop an existing dryland farm site. Surrounding areas to the north, west, and south are already developed or in the process of developing with urban uses. The Salt Creek West (Rolling Hills Ranch) single-family residential development is located to the north. 11 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Otay Lakes Road separates the site from EastLake Trails/Greens located to the south. EastLake Business Center I is developing researchllimited manufacturing uses to the west of the site consistent with the approved land use designation and zoning. The project will alter the appearance of the project site by allowing development of a hillside visible to eastbound travelers along Otay Lakes Road (Telegraph Canyon Road). The project will avoid impacts to scenic highways through provisions of an open space buffer and separation due to a grade differential. Development will not substantially damage scenic resources in the area. The site does not include visually significant trees, rock outcrops, or historic buildings that may contribute to the scenic quality of the area (EastLake nI/Olympic Training Center SEIR #89-11, 1989). Response to Ic. See responses Ia and Ib above. Future site development would be subject to the architectural and landscaping requirements outlined for the approved EastLake I SPA Plan and EastLake n GDP. Development plans must meet the design standards established for the approved plans. Therefore, project approval will not result in any significant impact to community aesthetics or visual quality. Response to Id. Future research and limited manufacturing facilities may employ outdoor lighting, signs, and materials that could contribute to light and glare in the project area. Impacts will be reduced to a less than significant level through implementation of mitigation measures identified in EIR 89-11 (1989) for the EastLake nI GDP. This includes use of low-pressure sodium vapor (LPSV) lamps in outdoor areas to , the extent feasible. Aesthetics Mitigation Impacts resulting from project development are discussed in the SEIR for EastLake In GDP (1989). The project will develop guidelines and design criteria via the SPA Plan detailing proposed compliance and will utilize LPSV lamps to reduce lighting/astronomical dark sky impacts as required by previously identified mitigation measures described in the SEIR for the EastLake nI GDP (1989). No additional mitigation is required. New mitigation for Lots 2, 3, 12, and 13 to be added after September 1, 1999 meeting. 12 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact II. AGRICULTURE RESOURCES. In determining whether impacts to agricultural resources are significant environ- mental effects, lead agencies may refer to the California Agricultural Land Evaluation and Site Assessment Model (1997) prepared by the California Department of Conservation as an optional model to use in assessing impacts on agriculture and farmland. Would the project: a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or 0 0 0 [g] Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program (FMMP) of the California Resources Agency, to non- agricultural use? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or a 0 0 0 [g] Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment 0 0 0 [g] which, due to their location or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland to non-agricultural use? Comments: Response to lIa. Lands designated and approved for urban development are not included on maps prepared by the California Resources Agency pursuant to the FMMP. The site is planned and zoned for development and does not contain designated Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance. (see Final EIR, City of Chula Vista General Plan Update, May 31, 1989, EIR #88- 2~ EastLake nI/Olympic Training Center SEIR #89-11) Response to lIb. As stated in la, the project site is zoned and designated for development with researchllimited manufacturing uses. The conversion of agricultural land was previously addressed in environmental documents allowing development of the EastLake landholding (which includes the project site) in the City's "Eastern Territories." This includes the Final EastLake EIR (WESTEC 1982), Environmental Impact Report, City of Chula Vista General Plan Update (SCH#88052511, EIR #88-2, 1989), and a subsequent environmental impact report prepared for EastLake In GDP (SEIR #89-11, 1989). Dry-farming activities in the area yield low-value crops. Nevertheless, approval of the adopted general plan was found to eliminate future use of the land for higher-yield production of coastal- dependent crops and the loss was determined to be significant and unmitigable (City of Chula Vista EIR #88-2). The City approved Findings of Overriding Consideration to allow the conversion of agricultural land for development on the EastLake landholding. The proposed project is consistent with the site's approved zoning and land use designation, which allows researchllimited manufacturing (IR) uses and 13 - ..- EastLake Business Center II Initial Study - will not result in additional impacts to agricultural lands. Impacts resulting from the proposed project are therefore not significant. Response to lIe. Project approval and development of the project site will not result in additional pressure to convert farmland to nonagricultural uses. The project site is bordered on the south by Otay Lakes Road and existing residential development. West of the site is EastLake Business Center I and to the north is existing residential development. Residential development is planned for the area between the eastern project boundary and Hunte Parkway. Agriculture Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 14 "- ..- EastLake Business Center II Initial Study . Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant ISSUE Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact III. AIR QUALITY. Where available, the significance criteria established by the applicable air quality management or air pollution control district may be relied upon to make the following determinations. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the 0 0 [g] 0 applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute 0 0 [g] 0 substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of 0 0 [g] 0 any criteria pollutant for which the project region is non-attainment under an applicable federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)? d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 0 [g] 0 concentrations? e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial 0 0 [g] 0 number of people? Comments: Response to Ilia. Project approval and subsequent site development will generate an incremental increase in short- and long-term emissions as businesses develop within the business park. Air pollutants will be generated during both the construction and operations phases. Development of the proposed business park is consistent with the approved land use plan for the site and is therefore consistent with the goals and objectives of the Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS). In addition, the proposed use is included in SANDAG's most recent Series Vln growth forecast used to prepare the State Implementation Plan (SIP). The SIP documents the necessary overall strategy and individual tactics by which the San Diego Air Basin can meet its attainment goal. As a consequence, development is anticipated and will not conflict with or obstruct implementation of the applicable air quality plan. The proposed amendments to the EastLake I SPA Plan, EastLake II and In GDPs, and subsequent development will therefore not result in a significant air quality impact. Response to IIlb. The project is consistent with the growth assumptions in the RAQS and SIP as stated above. The SEIR (1989) identified short-term significant construction-related impacts associated with previous approval of the EastLake III GDP, including EastLake Business Center II. No additional impacts will result from approval of the proposed amendments and subsequent development. Existing federal and 15 .-... -- EastLake Business Center II Initial Study state air quality regulations require that the project implement control measures to reduce dust and other criteria pollutants through use of best management practices (BMPs) during construction and best available control technologies (BACTs) during the operation of future manufacturing and industrial uses on the site. These may include sprinkling for dust control, covering excavated dirt, street sweeping, hydro seeding or landscaping as quickly as possible following disturbance, and controlling equipment emissions during grading and construction. Individual permits may be required for the operation of new manufacturing and research facilities to control emissions. Compliance with existing regulations and implementation of BACTs and BMPs will ensure that impacts remain below a level of significance. Response to IIIc. Project impacts will not be increased from those already addressed in the approved SEIR (1989). Project approval and subsequent development will incrementally increase existing emissions levels but will not result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria pollutant over the long term (see SEIR #89-09 and #89-11). Response to IIld. The proposed project GDP and SPA amendments will have no effect on future emissions. The City will review all future site development proposals for conformance with the amended SPA Plan prior to approval. Depending on the type of facility proposed, additional permits may be required from the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) to ensure that emissions conform with existing state and federal standards. The project will not expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Potential impacts are therefore less than significant. Response to IIle. See nId above. The proposed project will not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Proposed amendments to the EastLake I SPA and EastLake II and nI GDPs will have no effect. Future development of business center uses will be similar to already developed facilities in Business Center I. As for the approved GDP for the site and SPA Plan, future uses will be subject to additional review at the time specific site development plans are proposed to ensure conformance with the SPA Plan. Future uses, which are unknown at this time, must comply with existing air quality regulations. Impacts are less than significant. Air Quality Mitigation The project is required to meet minimum state and federal air quality regulations and comply with the goals and objectives of the RAQS governing construction and future uses. Additional measures may be required at the time specific development plans are submitted for individual lots. 16 "- ~- EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or 0 0 0 [g] through habitat modifications, on any species identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status species in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian 0 0 0 [g] habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, or regulations or by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally 0 0 [g] 0 protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other means? d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any native 0 0 [g] 0 resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites? e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances 0 0 0 [g] protecting biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance? f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat 0 0 0 [g] Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation Plan, or other approved local, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Comments: Response to IVa. RECON biologists conducted a biological resources survey of the project site on July 27, 1999, and its results are reported in a technical study (RECON 1999a). Previous surveys and studies were conducted on the property site and adjacent areas for the EastLake nI/Olympic Training Center completed in 1989. RECON also conducted a habitat assessment for quino checkerspot butterflies in September of 1998 and a focused survey for Otay tarplant (Hemizonia conjugens) in July, 1999. Neither were found on the Business Center n project site (RECON 1999a). 17 -- -- EastLake Business Center II Initial Study All of the reports conclude that there are few native species supported by the site, since the majority of the site has been under cultivation and the remaining acreage has been directly impacted by the agricultural practices. Therefore, the proposed project will not impact any plant or wildlife species that are federal or state listed or proposed threatened or endangered, Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) covered, narrow endemic, or hold special status in policies or regulations by the California Department of Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. Response to IVb. The proposed project will not impact any riparian or sensitive habitat since the site does not support any native vegetation communities and the majority of the site has been under cultivation. Response to IV c. The southwest corner of the property contains a cement drainage ditch on the southern boundary. This man-made facility appears to be part of a drainage system with a detention or de silting area, which drains into the cement drainage and into a pipe under Otay Lakes Road and off-site. The vegetation in the desiltation area is primarily the same as in the other disturbed areas on-site, with the dominant species including pampas grass (Cortaderia sp.), fennel (Foeniculum vulgare), Australian saltbush (Atriplex semibaccata), tamarisk (Tamarix sp.), Italian thistle (Carduus pycnocephalus), and horseweed (Conyza canadensis). However, because the area retains some water, it contains some wetland plant species (arroyo willow [Salix lasiolepis] and annual beardgrass [Polypogon monspeliensis]. The de silting area and drainage ditch amount to approximately 0.7 acre. Since this area is man-made, it is considered nonjurisdictional and exempt from a California Department of Fish and Game 1601 Streambed Alteration Agreement or a U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Section 404 permit. Response to IVd. The proposed project will not interfere substantially with the movement of any native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or impede the use of native wildlife nursery sites. Response to IVe. The proposed project will not conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources. Response to IVf. The project area lies within an area designated for development (take) by the City of Chula Vista MSCP subarea plan. Therefore, the project is deemed consistent with the MSCP. Biological Resources Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 18 .- - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 0 0 0 [g] significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 0 0 0 [g] significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to § 15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological 0 [g] 0 0 resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred 0 D 0 [g] outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: Response to Va. RECON conducted a cultural resource survey of the proposed project site in July 1999. The property is undeveloped with no evidence of historical resources present. The proposed project will not affect any historical resources. Response to Vb. RECON conducted a pedestrian survey of the proposed project site in July 1999. Archival information from the South Coastal Information Center, the San Diego Museum of Man, and the San Diego County Survey Records Department reveals five previously recorded sites on or adjacent to the property (RECON 1999b). These are CA-SDI-ll,572, CA-SDI-ll,573, CA-SDI-12,037, CA-SDI- 12,038, and CA-SDI-12,039 (Smith 1995). These sites have been tested and evaluated as part of the Salt Creek Ranch project (Pigniolo 1990, 1991 ~ Smith 1994). Three of these sites no longer exist, having been removed during the construction of Hunte Parkway. The pedestrian survey of the project site relocated the two previously recorded sites (CA-SDI-11,572 and CA-SDI-11,573). These two sites have been subjected to a testing program, and were not considered significant. No further work is requested or required. The proposed project will not adversely affect any archaeological resources. Response to V c. The Otay Formation is believed to underlie the entire site at depth (Geotechnics Inc. 1999). As discussed in previous documents for the EastLake community (EastLake Final EIR Vol. I 1982, Final EIR #86-04 EastLake Greens SPA and EastLake Trails Prezone and Annexation 1989), the Otay Formation possesses a high potential for containing significant fossil resources. The project area is considered to contain some of the richest deposits in California for the late Oligocene (27-28 million years old) fossil vertebrates. Previously excavated resources represent a very significant contribution to California paleontology. 19 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Large-scale grading and landform alteration may expose and destroy subsurface fossil resources. Imple- mentation of mitigation measures already identified in EIRs for the EastLake n GDP and EastLake GreensITrails will reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Response to Yd. There is no evidence of any human remains on the project site (RECON 1999b). Cultural Resources Mitigation No significant impacts to cultural resources have been identified and no mitigation is required. Paleontological Resources Mitigation The following mitigation measures are drawn from past efforts and have proven successful in protecting paleontological resources while allowing the timely completion of developments in San Diego and elsewhere in southern California. Potential impacts to paleontological resources would be reduced to below a significant level through implementation of these measures. 1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall confirm in writing to the City of Chula Vista that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to carry out the mitigation described herein. A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with a M.S. or Ph.D. in paleontology or geology who is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques. A paleontological monitor may be retained to perform the on-site monitoring in place of the qualified paleontologist. A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials and who is working under the supervision of a qualified paleontologist. 2. The qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall attend the preconstruction meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors. The paleontologist's duties shall include monitoring of grading, salvaging, preparation of collected materials for storage at a scientific institution that houses paleontological collections, and preparation of a monitoring results report. These duties are defined as follows: a. The paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall be on-site during the original cutting of previously undisturbed sediments of the Otay Formation to inspect cuts for contained fossils. The Sweetwater Formation should be monitored on an as-needed basis as determined by the paleontologist or paleontological monitor. The frequency of inspections would depend upon the rate of excavation, the materials excavated, and the abundance of fossils. The paleontologist would work with the contractor to determine the monitoring locations and amount of time necessary to ensure adequate monitoring of the project site. b. In the event that fossils are encountered, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall have the authority to divert or temporarily halt construction activities in the area of discovery to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely fashion. Because of the potential for recovery of small fossil remains, it may be necessary to set up a screen-washing operation on-site. 20 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study c. Fossil remains shall be cleaned, sorted, repaired, cataloged, and then stored in a local scientific institution that houses paleontological collections, such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. d. A monitoring results report with appropriate graphics summarizing the results (even if negative), analyses, and conclusions of the above program shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Chula Vista within 90 days following the termination of the paleontological monitoring program. 21 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the project: a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: i) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated 0 0 [g] 0 on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines and Geology Special Publication 42. ii) Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 [g] 0 0 iii) Seismic-related ground failure, including 0 [g] 0 0 liquefaction? iv) Landslides? 0 0 [g] 0 b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 0 0 [g] 0 c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, 0 [g] 0 0 or that would become unstable as a result of the project, and potentially result in on- or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction, or collapse? d) Be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 0 [g] 0 0 18-1-B of the Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property? e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use 0 0 0 [g] of septic tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of waste water? Comments: Geotechnics, Inc. conducted a geotechnical investigation of the proposed project site in July 1999. Their report is available at the Planning Offices, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91910. Response to VIa. Development of the proposed project will not expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury, or death involving: 22 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study i) Active faults. The site is located just east of the La N acion fault zone, which consists of several north/south-trending normal faults. Since the fault has not offset geologic formations younger than 11,000 years old, it does not represent a hazard to residential development. Further, faults become less active as you move easterly across the fault zone. No faults were encountered during site exploration (Geotechnics Inc. 1999). ii) Seismic ground shaking. The geotechnical report concludes that the most significant credible seismic event with respect to the subject site would be a 7.0 magnitude event on the Rose Canyon fault zone. For noncritical structures, the most significant probable seismic event would be a magnitude 6.4 event on the Rose Canyon fault zone. By designing structures to comply with the requirements of the governing jurisdictions, building codes, and standard practices of the Association of Structural Engineers of California, potentially significant ground-shaking impacts would be reduced to below a significant level. Hi) Ground failure, including liquefaction. Potentially liquefiable soils may exist in the colluvium and alluvium at the site. Therefore, in the areas to be developed, these materials would be removed and replaced with compacted fill. The potential for liquefaction to occur at the site after standard development procedures are implemented is considered not significant. iv) Landslides. Evidence of ancient landslides at the site was not found. Grading of the site may expose bedrock materials susceptible to instability in steep man-made slopes. Adherence to the recommended mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts to below a significant level. Response to Vlb. The proposed project will not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. Response to Vlc. The proposed project site is located in an area known for clay beds and loose, compressible soils. The clay beds create a potential for seepage due to the migration of perched groundwater to slope faces along the clay bed. These conditions are mitigated during rough grading of the site by construction of earthen buttresses on unstable slopes. Drains are installed at the rear of the buttresses to control groundwater migration. The loose, compressible soils are found over much of the site. These materials are subject to settlement under increased loads or due to an increase in moisture content from site irrigation or changes in drainage conditions. These materials are typically removed and replaced as a compacted fill in areas which will be subjected to new fill or structural loads. Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts to below a significant level. Response to Vld. Most of the earth material at the site is suitable for reuse in compacted fills. Excavations in the Otay Formation and colluvium/alluvium are expected to generate predominantly clayey sand and sandy clay with moderate to high expansion potentials, are slightly to moderately erosive, and are considered to be unsuitable for use as engineering material. To reduce the potential for differential movement, these soils must be removed and replaced with competent compacted fill prior to development of any building structure. The expansive material may be disposed of in deeper fills. 23 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Implementation of the recommended mitigation measures would reduce potential impacts to below a significant level (Geotechnics Inc. 1999). Response to VIe. The proposed project site will be served by public sewer and water. As a result, development will not result in significant impacts. Geology and Soils Mitigation No geotechnical conditions were encountered that would preclude the proposed construction. HQwever, a number of geotechnical considerations exist which should be addressed during planning and design of the project. Potentially significant geotechnical impacts would be reduced to below significant levels through implementation of the recommendations included in the technical report (Geotechnics Inc. 1999). 1. Faults and Seismicity. There are no known active faults underlying the project site. The most likely seismic hazards that may occur at the site would be associated with significant ground shaking due to an event located within the Rose Canyon fault zone. Potentially liquefiable alluvial soils may exist in the drainage courses at the site. However, removal of these materials should negate any potential for liquefaction. Design of structures should comply with the requirements of the governing jurisdictions, building codes, and standard practices of the Association of Structural Engineers of California. 2. Slope Stability. Evidence of existing slope instabilities, or landslides, was not encountered during this investigation. However, in some areas where clay beds will be located within cut slopes or underlying fill slopes, Geotechnics' analysis indicates that potentially unstable conditions may exist. The clay beds also create a potential for seepage due to the migration of perched groundwater to slope faces. These conditions are typically mitigated during rough grading of the site by construction of earthen buttresses on unstable slopes. Drains are installed at the rear of the buttresses to control groundwater. 3. Compressible Soils. Loose, compressible soils are found over much of the site. These materials, which include topsoil, colluvium, and alluvium, are subject to settlement under increased loads or due to an increase in moisture content from site irrigation or changes in drainage conditions. These materials are typically removed and replaced as a compacted fill in areas which will be subjected to new fill or structural loads. 4. Expansive Soils. Most of the earth material at the site is suitable for reuse in compacted fills. Vegetation and debris encountered in the topsoil throughout the site are considered deleterious and unsuitable for reuse in compacted fills. Excavations in the Otay Formation and colluvium/alluvium are expected to generate predominantly clayey sand and sandy clay with moderate to high expansion potentials. Expansive soils within pavement, foundation, or slab subgrade will generally heave when wetted, resulting in cracking or failure. To reduce the potential for differential movement, highly expansive soils are typically kept below the influence of foundations during grading. The expansive material may be disposed of in deeper fills and replaced with a compacted fill soil which has a low to moderate expansion potential. 24 - -- EastLake Business Center II Initial Study 5. Excavatability. In general, excavations at the site should be achievable using standard heavy earth- moving equipment in good working order with experienced operators. Some excavations in the Otay Formation may generate large, strongly cemented material that will require extra effort to crush or dispose. 6. Groundwater. Shallow, perched groundwater may be encountered at the site, particularly in the drainage courses. However, based on observations during this investigation, substantial dewatering efforts should not be necessary in areas which are to be developed. Future irrigation of the development will introduce significant quantities of water into the underlying soil. This creates the potential for seepage to develop at the faces of slopes. Although subsurface drains will be installed in areas where observations indicate that a potential for seepage exists, it is not possible to predict when and where seepage may ultimately occur. Seepage and localized groundwater conditions are typically addressed if and when they develop. 7. Transitions Between Cut and Fill. Development of any subdivision in hilly terrain will typically result in numerous contacts between cuts in bedrock and compacted fills (cut/fill transitions) within future building areas. In order to reduce the potential for distress associated with differential settlement, pads are typically graded so that structures do not straddle cut/fill transitions. This may be accomplished by overexcavating the cut portion of the building pad area so that foundations bear entirely on a relatively uniform depth of compacted fill. 8. Settlement. It has been Geotechnics' experience that deep fills, even if well compacted, will undergo some settlement over time. The amount of settlement is related to the fill depth, and the amount of surface irrigation and subsequent groundwater infiltration. These settlements are usually broad in nature and do not typically result in distress. Special foundation designs may be recommended in areas where settlement may be excessive. 25 "- .- EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant ISSUE Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS MATERIALS. Would the project: a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 0 0 0 [g] environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 0 0 0 [g] environment through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into the environment? c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or 0 0 0 [g] acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school? d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of 0 0 0 [g] hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazard to the public or the environment? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, 0 0 0 [g] where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, 0 D 0 [g] would the project result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area? g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere with an 0 0 0 [g] adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan? h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of 0 0 0 [g] loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires, including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized areas or where residences are intermixed with wildlands? Comments: Response to VIla. Potential future uses are unknown at this time. However, any use that might involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials would be subject to local and state 26 - ~- EastLake Business Center II Initial Study regulations regarding such uses. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064, subsection (i), provides that a change in the environment is not considered significant if it complies with a standard that was adopted for the purpose of controlling the significance of that change. A standard may include a rule, regulation, statute, ordinance, or order that has been adopted by any public agency after a public review. Response to VIIb. Potential future uses are unknown at this time. However, any use that might involve a hazardous material with a potential for accidental release would be subject to local and state regulations regarding such uses. CEQA Guidelines Section 15064, subsection (i), provides that a change in the environment is not considered significant if it complies with a standard that was adopted for the purpose of controlling the significance of that change. A standard may include a rule, regulation, statute, ordinance, or order that has been adopted by any public agency after a public review. Response to VIIc. The EastLake n Planned Community District Regulations for the EastLake Business Center n Supplemental SPA proposes that "No land or building shall be used or occupied in any manner which creates an unhealthful, dangerous, noxious or otherwise objectionable condition due to the use, storage or proximity to toxic materials." Implementation of this performance standard will guarantee that all future uses in the proposed business park will not create a public hazard due to the use of hazardous materials. Response to VIId. The proposed project site is not located on a site that is included on a list compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Response to VIle. The proposed project is not located within the adopted (Brown Field) airport land use plan. Thus, the project would not result in a safety hazard for people residing or working in the project area. Response to VIIf. There is no private airstrip in the vicinity of the project site. Therefore, the project will not pose any safety hazard for people working at the project site or in its vicinity. Response to VIIg. Annexation of the Business Center n project to the EastLake II GDP area proposes no fundamental change to adopted land uses or regulations. The project will not physically interfere with an adopted emergency response plan or emergency evacuation plan. Response to VIIh. The proposed project site is surrounded by existing or approved future development and will not expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss, injury, or death involving wildland fires. Hazards and Hazardous Materials Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 27 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would the project: a) Violate any water quality standards or waste discharge 0 0 [g] 0 requirements? b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere 0 0 0 [g] substantially with groundwater recharge such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the production rate of preexisting nearby wells would drop to a level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for which permits have been granted)? c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 0 0 [g] 0 site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, in a manner which would result in substantial erosion or siltation on- or off-site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the 0 0 [g] 0 site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, or substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site? e) Create or contribute runoff water which would exceed 0 0 ~ 0 the capacity of existing or planned storm water drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? f) Otherwise substantially degrade water quality? 0 0 [g] 0 g) Place housing within a 1 DO-year flood hazard area as 0 0 0 [g] mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate Map or other flood hazard delineation map? h) Place within a 1 DO-year flood hazard area structures D D D ø which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of 0 0 0 [g] loss, injury, or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam? j) Inundation by seiche, tsunami, or mudflow? 0 0 0 [g] 28 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Comments: Response to VIlla. Runoff flowing from impervious surfaces typically contains pollutants such as oils, fuel residues, and heavy metals, which would diminish water quality in downstream water. Runoff from future development of the site will be controlled and subject to NPDES permitting. See Response VnIf below. Response to VlIIb. Based on Otay Water District planning criteria, the proposed subarea master plan provides recommended potable and recycled water distribution systems and presents a phased imple- mentation plan for the proposed system improvements that will not significantly affect the amount of water available for public water supplies (PoweI1999). Response to VIIlc. Natural drainage patterns on-site are from the center of the site outward via several small drainages toward Otay Lakes Road, Hunte Parkway, and to the west. The proposed drainage plan consists of the construction of new drainage facilities that would connect with existing facilities located ' within existing roads on the western boundary (see Figure 4 of the initial study). Implementation of the storm drain plan will reduce impacts resulting from alterations to the course or flow of floodwaters to a less than significant level. Response to VlIId. The SEIR prepared for the Eastlake III GDP identified general drainage mitigation measures that require additional review of specific project plans to determine the necessity for specific measures such as on-site or off-site retention basins, fare-share payment of fees for the construction of new drainage facilities, and specific analysis of hydrological site conditions prior to approval of each SPA Plan to determine the size, capacity, alignment, and design of any flood control facilities necessary to protect the site from a 50-year storm flow and to mitigate downstream impacts of any increased rate of runoff from the site (City of Chula Vista 1989:4-69,4-70). Hunsaker & Associates prepared a site-specific hydrology study for the proposed Business Park that analyzes both pre- and postdevelopment 50-year peak flow rates from the site. The report is available for review at the Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91910. The report concludes that in developed conditions, 100 acres will drain from the site to the Telegraph Canyon watershed. The remaining five acres of site area will drain to Salt Creek. The eastern portion of the commercial site will drain to the Salt Creek Basin via three existing storm drains along Hunte Parkway and Otay Lakes Road (southeast corner of site). The remaining commercial development site will discharge into two of the existing storm drains located at Boswell Road and at the intersection of Lane Road and Otay Lakes Road. These latter flows eventually drain to the Telegraph Canyon Basin. Post development flows were below the designed pipe flows in all but one existing storm drain. Flow to the existing 24-inch pipe located at the southeast comer of the site exceeded the pipe design flow. A hydraulic analysis on this pipeline was conducted to determine its capacity. Calculations show that the storm drain can accommodate the additional capacity (Hunsaker & Associates 1999). 29 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Also, a detention basin will be constructed to serve the proposed project. Determination of its precise location will be based on a final drainage report being prepared by Hunsaker & Associates. The basin will either be located on-site in the southeast corner of the project site or within the off-site area to be disturbed by grading (see Figure 4). Response to VIIIe. Calculations show that each of the four receiving pipes have capacity to convey the developed peak flows from the site. Runoff from future development of the site will be controlled and subject to NPDES permitting. See Response VIIIf below. Response to VlIIf. The EastLake In GDP SEIR (1989) identified mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts to water quality that would be expected as development proceeds within the planning area. Analysis determined that implementation of mitigation would reduce impacts to water quality to below a level of significance. These measures require: 1. plan coordination and approval of the City Public Works Department; construction of pads so as to collect and direct surface waters away from proposed structures to approved drainage facilities~ 2. ongoing maintenance of drainage facilities~ installation of subdrains under all fill locations in existing drainage courses to be determined during grading~ inspection and approval of placement of such facilities by the engineering geologist prior to fill placement~ 3. erosion control measures, including revegetation of slopes with drought-resistant vegetation and monitoring of irrigation amounts and timing; and 4. ongoing maintenance of drainage devices, including berms, swales, area drains, slopes, brow ditches, retention basins, terrace drains, and down drains to avoid blockages or ponding. In addition, for the management of storm water, municipalities in the San Diego region, including the City of Chula Vista, must comply with the Regional Water Quality Control Board's NPDES Permit No. CA 0108758. The NPDES permit consists of wastewater discharge requirements for storm water and urban runoff. In compliance with Permit No. CA 0108758, a BMP program for storm water pollution control has been created. BMPs appropriate to the characteristics of a project may be employed to reduce pollutants available for transport or to reduce the amount of pollutants in runoff prior to discharge to a surface water body. BMPs may include one or all of the following where increases in impervious surfaces substantially increase runoff rates and volumes: 1. Detention basins to trap pollutants, control release rates, and minimize downstream effects. 2. Infiltration basins to hold runoff and allow percolation into the ground. 3. Infiltration trenches and dry wells, holes, or trenches filled with aggregate and then covered. 30 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study 4. Porous pavement such as lattice pavers or porous asphalt used to replace large areas of paving that are not subject to heavy traffic. 5. Vegetative controls to intercept rainfall and filter pollutants and absorb nutrients. 6. Grass-lined swales or similar construction in place of a buried storm drain, usually in residential areas. 7. Nonstructural methods, such as controlling litter and waste disposal practices. Project approval will not result in impacts to water quality that have not been considered in the previous SEIR. The project must comply with existing NPDES permit requirements and with previously identified mitigation measures that reduce impacts to a less than significant level. Business Center n will not substantially degrade water quality. Impacts associated with development of EastLake Business Center n are therefore less than significant. Response to VIIlg. The proposed project is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area. Response to VIIlh. The proposed project is not located within a 100-year flood hazard area. Response to VIlli. The proposed project is not located downstream from a dam nor does it propose construction of a levee or dam. Response to VlIIj. The distance between the subject site and the coast and the site's elevation above sea level preclude damage due to seismically induced waves (tsunamis) or seiches. Due to the elevation of the site and lack of river tributaries or lakes, the probability for earthquake-induced flooding is negligible (Geotechnics Inc. 1999). Hydrology and Water Quality Mitigation The EastLake In GDP SEIR (1989) identified mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts to water quality that would be expected as development proceeds within the planning area. Analysis determined that implementation of mitigation would reduce impacts to water quality to below a level of significance. These measures require: 1. Plan coordination and approval of the City Public Works Department; construction of pads so as to collect and direct surface waters away from proposed structures to approved drainage facilities; 2. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit for its approval a final drainage study that determines the size and location of the proposed detention basin. 3. Ongoing maintenance of drainage facilities; installation of subdrains under all fill locations in existing drainage courses to be determined during grading~ inspection and approval of placement of such facilities by the engineering geologist prior to fill placement; 31 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study 4. Erosion control measures, including revegetation of slopes with drought-resistant vegetation and monitoring of irrigation amounts and timing~ and 5. Ongoing maintenance of drainage devices, including berms, swales, area drains, slopes, brow ditches, retention basins, terrace drains, and down drains to avoid blockages or ponding. In addition, for the management of storm water, municipalities in the San Diego region, including the City of Chula Vista, must comply with the Regional Water Quality Control Board's NPDES Permit No. CA 0108758. The NPDES permit consists of wastewater discharge requirements for storm water and urban runoff. In compliance with Permit No. CA 0108758, a BMP program for storm water pollution control has been created. BMPs appropriate to the characteristics of a project may be employed to reduce pollutants available for transport or to reduce the amount of pollutants in runoff prior to discharge to a surface water body. BMPs may include one or all of the following where increases in impervious surfaces substantially increase runoff rates and volumes: 5. Detention basins to trap pollutants, control release rates, and minimize downstream effects. 6. Infiltration basins to hold runoff and allow percolation into the ground. 7. Infiltration trenches and dry wells, holes, or trenches filled with aggregate and then covered. 8. Porous pavement such as lattice pavers or porous asphalt used to replace large areas of paving that are not subject to heavy traffic. 9. Vegetative controls to intercept rainfall and filter pollutants and absorb nutrients. 10. Grass-lined swales or similar construction in place of a buried storm drain, usually in residential areas. 11. Nonstructural methods, such as controlling litter and waste disposal practices. 32 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the project: a) Physically divide an established community? 0 0 0 [g] b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or 0 0 [g] 0 regulation or an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including but not limited to the general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan 0 0 0 [g] or natural community conservation plan? Comments: Response to IXa. The proposed project will not divide an established community. The site is currently planned and zoned for the proposed use (see Final EIRs for the EastLake n [1989] and EastLake nI [1989] General Development Plans). Response to IXb. The proposed project will amend the EastLake II GDP to include the project site within the EastLake n planning boundary. Approval of the amendment will not change the ultimate use that is planned and allowed for the site (see Final EIRs for the EastLake II [1989] and EastLake III [1989] General Development Plans). Response to IXc. The proposed project is located in an area already planned for development. The subject property is authorized for take, subject to the MSCP subarea plan, and will therefore not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan (see Final EIR for the EastLake III [1989] GDP, City of Chula Vista Draft Subarea Plan for the MSCP, and Figure 2 of the MSCP [August 1996]). Land Use and Planning Mitigation Impacts are less than significant and no mitigation measures are required. 33 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral 0 0 0 [g] resource that would be of value to the region and the residents of the state? b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important 0 0 0 [g] mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Comments: Geotechnics Incorporated prepared a Report of EIR-Level Geotechnical Investigation of the EastLake Business Center n site in July 1999. The report is available for review at the Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91910. Response to Xa. The proposed project site does not contain significant mineral deposits and is not located in either of the two aggregate resource sectors identified by the State Mining and Geology Board as being of regional significance (see Figure 3-1 of the City of Chula Vista's General Plan Update EIR [SCH #88052511]). Response to Xb. The project site is not located within the Otay River valley and is not designated for mineral resource protection according to the City of Chula Vista General Plan Update EIR (SCH #88052511). Development of the site would have no impact on a locally important mineral resource. Mineral Resource Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 34 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study - Less Than . Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact XI. NOISE. Would the project result in: a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in 0 [g] 0 0 excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of other agencies? b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive 0 0 0 [g] ground borne vibration or ground borne noise levels? c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise 0 [g] 0 0 levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in 0 [g] 0 0 ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above levels existing without the project? e) For a project located within an airport land use plan or, 0 0 0 [g] where such a plan has not been adopted, within two miles of a public airport or public use airport, would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, 0 D 0 [g] would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: RECON conducted a noise technical study in August 1999. The report is available for review at the Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91910. Response to XIa. The proposed project will result in increased noise levels in the project area during grading, construction, and operation. Grading and construction will involve the use of graders, scrapers, bulldozers, excavators, backhoes, front-end loaders, pavers, and heavy trucks. Construction noise will be temporary in nature and is considered a less than significant impact through compliance with the requirements of the City of Chula Vista Noise Ordinance. Although not required as mitigation, to lessen the potential effects of construction noise on the residential receivers to the south of the project site, it is recommended that construction activities be limited to the hours of 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. Monday through Saturday (RECON 1999c). 35 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study . . Response to Xlb. The Business Center n project anticipates future light industrial uses. These uses would not be expected to generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels in the project area. Response to Xlc. The proposed project will develop currently undeveloped land. On-site noise levels generally are not projected to exceed 70 community noise equivalent level (CNEL) except within an approximately 20-foot-wide strip measured from the edge of the pads adjacent to the roadway (RECON 1999c). At this stage of planning the locations of the future buildings and outdoor use areas have not been determined. Therefore, it shall be a condition of the tentative map that any proposed exterior usable areas associated with the future commercial uses not be placed within 20 feet of the edge of the pads adjacent to Otay Lakes Road. Response to Xld. During construction, construction equipment could generate significant, temporary noise levels on-site and at adjacent sensitive receivers. The proposed project will be subject to the requirements of the City of Chula Vista Noise Ordinance. Compliance with the Noise Ordinance construction requirements will ensure that noise impacts to adjacent sensitive receivers will be less than significant. Although not required as mitigation, to lessen the potential effects of construction noise on the residential receivers to the south of the project site, it is recommended that construction activities be limited to the hours of7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. Monday through Saturday (RECON 1999c). Response to Xle. The proposed project is not within the Brown Field land use plan. Response to XIf. The proposed project is not located in the vicinity of a private airstrip. Noise Mitigation It shall be a condition of the tentative map that any proposed exterior usable areas associated with the future commercial uses not be placed within 20 feet of the edge of the pads adjacent to Otay Lakes Road. 36 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study . Less Than . Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact XII. POPULATION & HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area either 0 0 0 [g] directly (e.g., by proposing new homes and businesses) or indirectly (e.g., through extension of roads or other infrastructure)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, 0 0 0 [g] necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating 0 0 0 [g] the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: Response to XIIa. The project is the proposed development of a site in an area that is currently developing. Planned communities have either been approved or are under construction on all four sides of the proposed project site. To the north and the south are the existing residential communities of Salt Creek Ranch and EastLake Greens, respectively. To the east is the future EastLake nI residential community. To the west is the EastLake Business Center I area to which the proposed project would be annexed. The project will provide access to these planned communities consistent with the City's adopted plans for development. Since the project represents no fundamental change to the adopted land uses or regulations for the project site, it will neither directly nor indirectly induce population growth not already planned for in the area. Response to XIIb. The proposed project will not displace existing housing nor require replacement housing because the project is located on undeveloped and vacant land. Response to XIIc. See response XIIb above. Population Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 37 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than . Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of new or physically altered governmental facilities or the need for new or physically altered governmental facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times, or other performance objectives for any of the public services: a) Fire protection? 0 D ~ 0 b) Police protection? 0 0 [g] 0 c) Schools? 0 0 0 [g] d) Parks? 0 0 D [g] e) Other public facilities? 0 0 0 [g] Comments: Response to XlIIa. Annexation of Business Center II into EastLake II and its subsequent development would not change the need for fire service in the area as previously analyzed in the EastLake III/Olympic Training Center EIR (City of Chula Vista 1990). The Chula Vista Fire Department currently meets the standard threshold for fire protection for the EastLake II area. Interim Fire Station No.6, located at 975 Lane Avenue in Business Center I, would be the primary station to serve Business Center II. In the long term, Fire Station No.6 will be relocated to East "H" Street and San Miguel Road and Fire Station No.8 will be constructed for the Salt Creek Ranch when EastLake Trails is fully developed. According to EastLake Trails/Greens Replanning Program EIR (EIR 97-04), a project like Business Center n will be conditioned to pay public facilities fees at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued. These fire conditions are also described in the Public Facilities Financing Plans (PFFP) for the EastLake II SPA, which describes public facilities fees for fire and emergency medical services based on equivalent dwelling units by development phase. Inclusion of the project in the PFFP would allow acceptable fire protection response times in the area at buildout of EastLake. This is considered a less than significant impact. Response to XlIIb. Annexation of Business Center n into EastLake n would subject the project to compliance with the PFFP for the EastLake Trails/Greens SPAs. The proposed project will be required to pay public facilities fees for police services based on equivalent dwelling units by development phase at 38 - ,,-.-.... EastLake Business Center II Initial Study . the rate in effect the time building permits are issued. This city-wide level mitigation would reduce current police service deficiencies to below a level of significance. Currently, the police department is addressing the threshold standard for deficiency by preparing a long- range strategic plan and a police facility master plan. The strategic plan will evaluate service levels, staff levels, methods of development, and any other factors related to service delivery. This will also include an evaluation of the established threshold, which may need to be adjusted. The public facility master plan will address the possibility of relocating the current police facility to a more central location. Response to XIllc. The proposed project will not generate an increase in dwelling units or population in the project area. Therefore, the annexation of the business park into EastLake n will not result in a need for new or altered school facilities or services. Response to Xllld. The proposed project will not generate an increase in dwelling units or population in the project area. Therefore, the annexation of the business park into EastLake II will not result in a need for new parks or park services. Response to XIlle. The proposed project will not result in a need for any other new or altered governmental services. Public Services Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 39 - ...-. EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than . Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant ISSUE Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact XIV. RECREATION. a) Would the project increase the use of existing 0 0 0 [g] neighborhood and regional parks or other recreational facilities such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelerated? b) Does the project include recreational facilities or 0 0 0 [g] require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities which might have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: Response to XIVa. The proposed project will not result in additional residential development and corresponding population and therefore would not increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities. Response to XIVb. The proposed project does not include any recreational facilities nor does it require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. Recreation Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 40 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than . Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant ISSUE Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact XV. TRANSPORTATIONITRAFFIC. Would the project: a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in 0 [g] 0 0 relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of 0 [g] D 0 service standard established by the county congestion management agency for designated roads or highways? c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including 0 0 0 [g] either an increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks? d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature 0 0 [g] 0 (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? 0 0 [g] 0 f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 0 0 [g] 0 g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs 0 0 [g] 0 supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus turnouts, bicycle racks)? Comments: Linscott, Law, & Greenspan prepared a traffic study for the proposed project in August 1999. The project was assumed to be a 50,000-square-foot corporate office and a 40,000-square-foot warehouse on 10 acres and an additional 97.9 acres of general industrial uses. This project type and size is calculated to add 8,870 ADT, 1,335 AM peak hour trips (1,700 inboundl265 outbound), and 1,420 PM peak hour trips (350 inboundll,070 outbound) to the city street system. The report is available for review at the Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91910. Response to XVa. The proposed project's traffic impacts are calculated to significantly impact the Interstate 805/Telegraph Canyon Road interchange. The extension of Olympic Parkway to Pas eo Ranchero would partially mitigate this impact but not to below a significant level. In order to mitigate project impacts fully, either SR-125 would have to be completed or Olympic Parkway extended to Hunte 41 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Parkway. However, prior to completion of these road improvements, the traffic analysis shows that significant impacts to the intersection can be avoided by limiting project buildout. Therefore, it is recommended that the tentative map be conditioned such that no more than 42 acres of the project site be developed until either of the recommended street improvements are completed. If Olympic Parkway is extended to Paseo Ranchero, an additional 37 acres (total of 59 acres) could be built before a significant impact would occur (Linscott, Law & Greenspan 1999). Implementation of these development limitations would mitigate potential traffic impacts to below a significant level. Response to XVb. See response XV a above. Response to XV c. The proposed project is not located in or near an air traffic corridor and will not adversely affect the safety of such a flight pattern. Response to XV d. The proposed project has no hazardous design features. Project access is from Otay Lakes Road. Left-turn pocket lanes are provided in each direction in order to provide for a safe intersection. Response to XVe. Emergency access to the business park is shown on the tentative map (see Figure 4 of the initial study). Response to XVf. The proposed project includes adequate parking capacity, which is based on City Design Guidelines. Response to XV g. The proposed project does not conflict with any adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation (Linscott, Law & Greenspan 1999). Transportation Mitigation No more than 42 gross acres (the proposed lO-acre Lot 1 facility + 32 additional acres) of the project site may be developed before either State Route 125 or Olympic Parkway are extended; however, if Olympic Parkway is extended to Paseo Ranchero, a total of 59 gross acres (Lot 1 + 49 additional acres) of the site may be built. The following project design considerations were relied upon in determining that project traffic impacts are less than significant: 1. A full access traffic signal at the proposed Otay Lakes RoadlFenton Street intersection will be built prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits. 2. A four-way stop at Fenton Street/Lane A venue intersection prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits. Upon buildout, the applicant will provide a fair share contribution to constructing a traffic signal at the intersection. 3. A traffic signal will be provided at the Otay Lakes Road/Lane A venue intersection prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits. 42 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact XVI. UTILITIES & SERVICE SYSTEMS. Would the project: a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the 0 0 ~ [g] applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or 0 0 D [g] wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm 0 D [g] 0 water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which could cause significant environmental effects? d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the 0 0 0 [g] project from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements needed? e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment 0 0 0 [g] provider which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted 0 0 ~ 0 capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and 0 D 0 [g] regulations related to solid waste? Comments: Response to XVla. Based on the results of flow metering performed on the Telegraph Canyon Truck Sewer over the last several years, portions of the sewer system have exceeded the pipe design capacity standards established by the Subdivision Manual of the City of Chula Vista. The current standard requires that the ratio of the depth of flow to the pipe diameter should not exceed 0.75. The most critical portion of this system currently has a flow ration of 0;77 during peak flow. While this condition is unacceptable based on City standards it would not result in a system overflow or pose a substantial risk until a flow ratio of 0.85 is attained. The proposed development along with other cumulative, previously approved, developments contributing to this basin will eventually generate flows that will exceed the 0.85 threshold. However, there is 43 ,- - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study capacity for the first phase of 12.7 gross acres. For development beyond Phase I (12.7 acres), the applicant must institute a monitoring program to monitor the flows with the system and to upgrade the deficient segments as soon as the threshold is reached. The applicant will be reimbursed from the Telegraph Canyon Sewer DIF fund for all costs associated with the needed upgrades. Response to XVlb. See response XVIa. Response to XVlc. The storm water drainage facilities proposed for Business Center n will be located in the street system and connect with the facilities located west of the project site in Business Center I. See Response VnId. Response to XVld. The proposed annexation of Business Park n into EastLake n and subsequent development will not alter the potable and recycled water supply requirements already evaluated for the project in EastLake nI/Olympic Training Center EIR (City of Chula Vista 1989). Adequate potable and recycled water storage and distribution facilities will be constructed in accordance with the proposed Subarea Master Plan for Business Center n (Powell and Associates, September 1999) and to the satisfaction of the Otay Water District. These water infrastructure improvements are also described in the proposed PFFPs for the proposed Business Center II SPA. The proposed PFFP identifies the development impact fees that the applicant needs to pay to mitigate impacts, the estimated cost of the facility, and the applicant's obligation to construct or pay for the necessary mitigation. Prior to approval of the first final map, the applicant shall provide written proof from Otay Water District that adequate water storage and distribution facilities are available to serve the Business Center n parcels. Response to XVle. The City of Chula Vista Engineering Division has calculated sewage generation at 3,000 gallons per day per acre for industrial use (City of Chula Vista 1997). Based on this daily use rate, the estimated wastewater generation for EastLake Business Center n is an average of 228,000 gallons per day. The phased construction of sewer facilities and participation in regional improvement programs, based on the approved master plan, would be incorporated into the PFFP or subdivision map conditions to assure timely provision of required facilities. The sewage generated by the proposed project would not cause the City to exceed its available capacity with the Metropolitan Sewerage System. Response to XVIf. The Business Center n project would incrementally require additional waste management programs and services from the City of Chula Vista. These impacts are considered not significant in the EastLake nI/Olympic Training Center SEIR. Additionally, waste disposal needs would be minimized by incorporation of recycling and waste reduction measures identified in the City's Source Reduction and Recycling Element of the County's Integrated Waste Management Plan (1996). Response to XVlg. See response XVIf above. 44 .- -, EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Utilities and Service Systems Mitigation Implementation of the following mitigation measures reduce potential utilities and service system impacts to below a significant level: 1. For development beyond Phase I (12.7 acres), the applicant must institute a monitoring program to monitor the flows with the system and to upgrade the deficient segments as soon as the threshold (0.85) is reached. The applicant will be reimbursed from the Telegraph Canyon Sewer DIF fund for all costs associated with the needed upgrades. 2. The proposed PFFP identifies the development impact fees that the applicant needs to pay to mitigate impacts, the estimated cost of the facility, and the applicant's obligation to construct or pay for the necessary mitigation. 3. Prior to approval of the first final map, the applicant shall provide written proof from Otay Water District that adequate water storage and distribution facilities are available to serve the Business Center n parcels. 4. The phased construction of sewer facilities and participation in regional improvement programs, based on the approved master plan, would be incorporated into the PFFP or subdivision map conditions to assure timely provision of required facilities. 45 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact XVII. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS. Would the project: a) Exceed the City's fire/EMS Threshold Standards? 0 [g] 0 0 b) Exceed the City's police Threshold Standards? 0 [g] 0 0 c) Exceed the City's traffic Threshold Standards? 0 0 0 [g] d) Exceed the City's parks/recreation Threshold 0 0 0 [g] Standards? e) Exceed the City's drainage Threshold Standards? 0 [g] 0 0 f) Exceed the City's sewer Threshold Standards? 0 [g] 0 0 g) Exceed the City's water Threshold Standards? 0 [g] 0 0 h) Exceed the City's air quality Threshold Standards? 0 0 0 [g] i) Exceed the City's economics Threshold Standards? 0 0 0 [g] j) Exceed the City's schools Threshold Standards? 0 0 0 [g] k) Exceed the City's libraries Threshold Standards? 0 0 0 [g] Comments: Response to XVlIa. The threshold standards requires that fire and medical units must be able to respond to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85% of the cases and within 5 minutes or less in 75% of the cases. The City of Chula Vista has indicated that the threshold standard will be met, since Interim Fire Station No.6, located at 975 Lane Avenue in Business Center I, would be the primary station to serve Business Center II. It is just a few hundred feet from the project site. In the long term, Fire Station No.6 will be relocated to East "H" Street and San Miguel Road and Fire Station No.8 would be constructed for the Salt Creek Ranch when EastLake Trails is fully developed. The new location would also be within minutes of the proposed project site. The proposed project will comply with this threshold standard. Response to XVlIb. The threshold standards require that police units must respond to 84% of Priority 1 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.1 % of Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an 46 -" - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study average response time to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. This standard has not been met over the last seven years. The Police Department has initiated efforts to address the response time deficiency (i.e., evaluation of staffing needs, service delivery areas, deployment methods, and false alarms from new residential development). As the phased development of the Business Center n parcels proceeds, the proposed project would incrementally contribute to current threshold deficiency in responding to Priority 1 and Priority 2 calls within the EastLake n project area. Development fees and increased tax revenues to the City from the proposed development would provide additional officers for the reporting districts 125, 126, 135, and 136. In addition, the public facility financing plans for developments in the eastern portion of the city include the potential for relocating the police station to a site that may better serve this area of the city. The proposed project will comply with this threshold standard. Response to XVIIc. The threshold standards require that all intersections must operate at a level of service (LOS) C or better, with the exception that LOS D may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections. Intersections west of Interstate 805 are not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No intersection may reach LOS E or F during the average weekday peak hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from the standard. The traffic study concludes that all intersections other than the I-805/Telegraph Canyon interchange, which is exempted from this threshold standard, will operate at a LOS C or better. No mitigation is required. Response to XVIId. The threshold standard for parks and recreation is 3 acres/l ,000 population. Because the proposed project does not generate dwelling units or population in the project area, it will not adversely impact City of Chula Vista threshold standards for parks and recreation. Response to XVIIe. The threshold standards require that storm water flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with the drainage master planes) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed drainage improvements have been sized to handle the estimated postdeveloped peak flows. The City of Chula Vista requires that increased runoff from urbanization be detained to levels at or below natural conditions for the 10-, 50-, and 100-year frequency storms. The results of the drainage study prepared for Business Center II shows that the 10-,50-, and 100-year storm peak discharges will be below the existing conditions peak discharges The proposed development must comply with the Regional Water Quality Control Board's NPDES Permit No. CA 0108758. Best Management Practices (BMPs) appropriate to the characteristics of the project must be employed to reduce pollutants available for transport or to reduce the amount of pollutants in runoff prior to discharge to a surface water body. The project will not result in any significant changes to the drainage patterns and implementation of BMPs will result in storm water discharge volumes which meet the established City threshold. Response to XVIIf. The threshold standards require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with the 47 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study sewer master planes) and City Engineering Standards. City of Chula Vista Ordinance Number 2533 established the sewer impact fee to be paid for future development within the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer System. The current fee is $216.50 and is subject to annual adjustment. The number of EDUs for the proposed project will be determined during the building permit process. Payment of the fees will mitigate potential adverse impacts to the sewer system to below a significant level. Response to XVIIg. The threshold standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that water quality standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction. Supply of potable water to the EastLake Business Center n will be furnished from Otay Water District reservoirs and pump stations and conveyed to the site by gravity through existing District transmission mains. Based on planned ground elevations within the Business Center, service to the site will be provided from the existing 980 Pressure Zone. Recycled water will be used to irrigate all landscaped areas, including lawns, planted borders, and road slopes and medians. It is estimated that the site will use up to 21,185 gallons per day during peak demand periods. The proposed project will pay capacity fees to OWD's Capital Improvement Program (CIP) at the time of water meter purchases as well as make all water facility improvements per the Sub-Area Water Master Plan prepared by John Powell & Associates (1999). The financing and construction of potable and reclaimed water facilities for the proposed project will reduce potential impacts to below a significant level. Response to XVIIh. The threshold standard for air quality states that "the City shall annually provide the San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) with a 12- to 18-month development forecast and request an evaluation of its impact on current and future air quality management programs, along with recent air quality data. The growth forecast and APCD response letters shall be provided to the Growth Management Ordinance (GMO) for inclusion in its annual review." The Regional Air Quality Strategy is based on growth projections derived from community and general plan land use designations. Business Center n parcels are in the city of Chula Vista, which is within the San Diego Air Basin. The 1991/1992 RAQS, as revised by the required 1994 triennial update, are being implemented by APCD throughout the air basin. If a project is consistent with the City's General Plan, it can be considered consistent with the growth assumptions in the RAQS (State of California 1989). The proposed project is consistent with Chula Vista's General Plan. Therefore, the proposed project is considered consistent with the growth assumptions in the RAQS. The proposed project is not growth inducing and has been designed to accommodate transit planning principles and bicycle and pedestrian routes as part of the SPA Plan. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the RAQS and would satisfy the threshold standard for air quality. Response to XVIIi. The goal for economics is "to provide land uses and activities which respond to the economic needs of the residents and the City of Chula Vista." The threshold standard is as follows: 48 -- - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study . 1. The City shall be provided with an annual fiscal impact report that provides an evaluation of the impacts of growth on the city, in terms of both operation and capital improvements. This report should evaluate actual growth over the previous 12-month period, as well as projected growth over the next 12- to 18-month period and 3- to 5-year period. 2. The City shall be provided with an annual economic monitoring report that provides an analysis of economic development activity and indicators over the previous 12-month period, as well as projected growth over the next 12- to 18-month period and 3- to 5-year period. CIC Research, Inc. prepared a fiscal analysis of the proposed project in August 1999. The report includes estimated City revenues, expenditures, and the resulting net fiscal impact on the City, which was determined to be positive. All of the relevant City threshold issues are evaluated in the report, which is available for review at the Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91910. Based on the fiscal analyses prepared by CIC Research, Inc. for Business Center n, project components are expected to have a positive net annual fiscal impact on the city. CIC Research estimates that the net fiscal impact from developing the Eastlake n Annexation is positive in year one ($88,902) and remains positive through project buildout ($343,929). It should be noted that during some years the net fiscal impact would be more or less due to occasional street repairs. This is considered a positive impact. Response to XVIIj. The City's goal with respect to schools is "to ensure that the Chula Vista City School District and Sweetwater Union High School District have the necessary school sites and funds to meet the needs of the students in new development areas in a timely manner." The proposed project would not result in the construction of any residential units and would not add to the city's school population. Therefore, the threshold standard for schools is not applicable to the project and causes no impact. Response to XVIIk. The goal for the libraries is to "provide a high quality, contemporary library system which meets the varied needs of the community." The threshold standard for the population ratio for library facilities is to provide 500 square feet (gross) of adequately equipped and staffed libraries per 1,000 population. The proposed project would not result in the construction of any residential units and would not add to the city's population. Therefore, the threshold standard for libraries is not applicable to the project and causes no impact. Thresholds Mitigation XVIIa. The proposed project shall be conditioned to pay public facilities fees for fire services at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued. XVIIb. The proposed project shall be conditioned to pay public facilities fees for police services at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued. xvnc. No mitigation is required. 49 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study XVnd. No mitigation is required. XVne. See mitigation for Response VInf above. XVnf. The proposed project shall be conditioned to pay public facilities fees for sewer services at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued. XVng. The OWD Water Resource Master Plan and the SAMP identify water facilities to be constructed that will provide the necessary water service to meet the District criteria. The applicant shall request and deliver to the City a service availability letter from the OWD prior to each final map. And, finally, the applicant shall provide water improvements according to the report entitled Sub-Area Water Master Plan for EastLake Business Center n by John Powell & Associates, August 1999. XVIIh. No mitigation is required. XVIIi. No mitigation is required. XVnj. No mitigation is required. 50 -- - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant ISSUE Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE. a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the 0 0 [g] 0 quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? b) Does the project have the impacts that are individually 0 0 [g] 0 limited, but cumulatively considerable? ("Cumulatively considerable" means that the incremental effects of a project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects.) c) Does the project have environmental effects, which 0 0 [gJ 0 will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 51 .- "- EastLake Business Center II Initial Study XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES The mitigation measures listed in Appendix A have been incorporated into the project and will be implemented during the design, construction, or operation of the project. XX. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES By signing the line provided below, the Applicant(s) and/or Operator(s) stipulate that they have each read, understood, and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures contained herein and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator. Failure to sign the line provided below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative Declaration with the County Clerk shall indicate the Applicant's and/or Operator's desire that the project be held in abeyance without approval and that the Applicant(s) and/or Operator(s) shall apply for an Environmental Impact Report. V~p ~ September 17. 1999 Signature Date Donald E. Haines City of Chula Vista Printed Name Agent For XXI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the preceding pages. [g Aesthetics o Agriculture Resources [g Air Quality o Biological Resources [g Cultural/Paleontological Resources [81 Geology / Soils D Hazards & Hazardous Materials [g Hydrology / Water Quality D Land Use / Planning o Mineral Resources [g Noise o Population / Housing [81 Public Services D Recreation [g Transportation / Traffic [g Utilities / Service Systems D Mandatory Findings of Significance 52 - "- EastLake Business Center II Initial Study XXII. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, 0 and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, ~ there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, 0 and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at 0 least one effect: 1) has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analysis as described on attached sheets, if the effect is a "potentially significant impacts" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." An ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, 0 there WILL NOT be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project. An addendum has been prepared to provide a record of this determination. SìJ?~ p ~ September 17. 1999 Date Donald E. Haines Citv of Chula Vista Printed Name Agent For 53 - - EastLake Business Center II Initial Study REFERENCES Chula Vista, City of 1978 General Plan. 1989a Chula Vista General Plan, July 1989. Update. 1989b EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and EastLake Trails Pre-Zone and Annexation Final Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. Prepared by ERC Environmental and Energy Services Co. June. 1989c EastLake nI/Olympic Training Center Supplemental Environmental Impact Report. October. 1990 EastLake In Planned Community Zone - General Development Plan. July. 1991 Chula Vista Growth Management Program. April. 1992 EastLake n Planned Community Zone General Development Plan. April. 1996 Draft Subarea Plan - Multiple Species Conservation Program. Geotechnics Incorporated 1999 Report of EIR-Level Geotechnical Investigation EastLake Business Center n. July 30. Linscott, Law & Greenspan 1999 Traffic Study for EastLake Business Center n. September 7. Powell, John 1998 Draft Subarea Master Plan within the Otay Water District. 1999 Sub-Area Water Master Plan for EastLake Business Center n, August. RECON 1999a Biological Technical Report for the Business Center II/Leviton Project. 1999b Cultural Resources Survey of the EastLakeILeviton Property, San Diego, California. 1999c Noise Technical Report for EastLake Business Center II, City of Chula Vista. September. San Diego, County of 1992 1991/1992 Regional Air Quality Strategy. Air Pollution Control District. June. 54 - - ATTACHMENT A Mitigation Measures ~ - The following measures identified in the Final SEIR for the EastLake nI/Olympic Training Center apply to the proposed project site and shall be adhered to: Aesthetics Mitigation 1. Proposed subsequent tentative maps and site plans will comply with SPA Plan guidelines to ensure that significant adverse visual impacts within the project site are minimized. Design guidelines and criteria involve site design, building setbacks and height limits, landscaping and buffer/edge treatments, among other techniques. 2. Development within the project shall utilize low-pressure sodium vapor (LPSV) lamps in outdoor areas to the extent feasible. Air Quality Mitigation The project is required to meet minimum state and federal air quality regulations and comply with the goals and objectives of the RAQS governing construction and future uses. Additional measures may be required at the time specific development plans are submitted for individual lots. The following measures identified in the Final SEIR for the EastLake nI/Olympic Training Center apply to the proposed project site and shall be adhered to, subject to the approval by the City, to reduce short-term pollutant emissions: 1. Use watering or other dust palliatives to reduce fugitive dust; emissions reductions of about 50 percent can be realized by implementation of these measures. 2. Disturbed areas should be hydroseeded, landscaped, or developed as soon as possible to reduce dust generation. 3. Trucks hauling fill material should be properly covered. 4. Enforce a 20 mile-per-hour speed limit on unpaved surfaces. 5. Utilize heavy-duty construction equipment that IS equipped with modified combustion/fuel systems for emissions control. Paleontological Resources Mitigation The following mitigation measures are drawn from past efforts and have proven successful in protecting paleontological resources while allowing the timely completion of developments in San Diego County and elsewhere in southern California. Potential impacts to paleontological resources would be reduced to below a significant level through implementation of these measures. A-I - - . 1. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall confirm in writing to the City of Chula Vista that a qu.alified paleontologist has been retained to carry out the mitigation described herein. A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with a M.S. or Ph.D. in paleontology or geology who is familiar with paleontological procedures and techniques. A paleontological monitor may be retained to perform the on-site monitoring in place of the qualified paleontologist. A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials and who is working under the supervision of a qualified paleontologist. 2. The qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall attend the preconstruc- tion meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors. The paleontol- ogist's duties shall include monitoring of grading, salvaging, preparation of collected materials for storage at a scientific institution that houses paleontological collections, and preparation of a monitoring results report. These duties are defined as follows: a. The paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall be on-site during the original cutting of previously undisturbed sediments of the Otay Formation to inspect cuts for contained fossils. The Sweetwater Formation should be monitored on an as-needed basis as determined by the paleontologist or paleontological monitor. The frequency of inspections would depend upon the rate of excava- tion, the materials excavated, and the abundance of fossils. The paleontologist would work with the contractor to determine the monitoring locations and amount of time necessary to ensure adequate monitoring of the project site. b. In the event that fossils are encountered, the paleontologist (or paleontological monitor) shall have the authority to divert or temporarily halt construction activities in the area of discovery to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely fashion. Because of the potential for recovery of small fossil remains, it may be necessary to set up a screen-washing operation on-site. c. Fossil remains shall be cleaned, sorted, repaired, cataloged, and then stored in a local scientific institution that houses paleontological collections, such as the San Diego Natural History Museum. d. A monitoring results report with appropriate graphics summarizing the results (even if negative), analyses, and conclusions of the above program shall be prepared and submitted to the City of Chula Vista within 90 days following the termination of the paleontological monitoring program. A-2 - - . Geology and Soils Mitigation No geotechnical conditions were encountered that would preclude the proposed construction. However, a number of geotechnical considerations exist which should be addressed during planning and design of the project. Potentially significant geotechnical impacts would be reduced to below significant levels through implementation of the recommendations included in the technical report (Geotechnics Inc. 1999). 1. Faults and Seismicity. There are no known active faults underlying the project site. The most likely seismic hazards that may occur at the site would be associated with significant ground shaking due to an event located within the Rose Canyon fault zone. Potentially liquefiable alluvial soils may exist in the drainage courses at the site. However, removal of these materials should negate any potential for liquefaction. Design of structures should comply with the requirements of the governing jurisdictions, building codes, and standard practices of the Association of Structural Engineers of California. 2. Slope Stability. Evidence of existing slope instabilities, or landslides, was not encountered during this investigation. However, in some areas where clay beds will be located within cut slopes or underlying fill slopes, Geotechnics' analysis indicates that potentially unstable conditions may exist. The clay beds also create a potential for seepage due to the migration of perched groundwater to slope faces. These conditions are typically mitigated during rough grading of the site by construction of earthen buttresses on unstable slopes. Drains are installed at the rear of the buttresses to control groundwater. 3. Compressible Soils. Loose, compressible soils are found over much of the site. These materials, which include topsoil, colluvium, and alluvium, are subject to settlement under increased loads or due to an increase in moisture content from site irrigation or changes in drainage conditions. These materials are typically removed and replaced as a compacted fill in areas which will be subjected to new fill or structural loads. 4. Expansive Soils. Most of the earth material at the site is suitable for reuse in compacted fills. Vegetation and debris encountered in the topsoil throughout the site are considered deleterious and unsuitable for reuse in compacted fills. Excavations in the Otay Formation and colluvium/alluvium are expected to generate predominantly clayey sand and sandy clay with moderate to high expansion potentials. Expansive soils within pavement, foundation, or slab subgrade will generally heave when wetted, resulting in cracking or failure. To reduce the potential for differential movement, highly expansive soils are typically kept below the influence of foundations during grading. The expansive material may be disposed of in deeper A-3 - ..- . . fills and replaced with a compacted fill soil which has a low to moderate expansion potential. 5. Excavatability. In general, excavations at the site should be achievable using standard heavy earth-moving equipment in good working order with experienced operators. Some excavations in the Otay Formation may generate large, strongly cemented material that will require extra effort to crush or dispose. 6. Groundwater. Shallow, perched groundwater may be encountered at the site, particularly in the drainage courses. However, based on observations during this investigation, substantial dewatering efforts should not be necessary in areas which are to be developed. Future irrigation of the development will introduce significant quantities of water into the underlying soil. This creates the potential for seepage to develop at the faces of slopes. Although subsurface drains will be installed in areas where observations indicate that a potential for seepage exists, it is not possible to predict when and where seepage may ultimately occur. Seepage and localized groundwater conditions are typically addressed if and when they develop. 7. Transitions Between Cut and Fill. Development of any subdivision in hilly terrain will typically result in numerous contacts between cuts in bedrock and compacted fills (cut/fill transitions) within future building areas. In order to reduce the potential for distress associated with differential settlement, pads are typically graded so that structures do not straddle cut/fill transitions. This may be accomplished by overexcavating the cut portion of the building pad area so that foundations bear entirely on a relatively uniform depth of compacted fill. 8. Settlement. It has been Geotechnics' experience that deep fills, even if well compacted, will undergo some settlement over time. The amount of settlement is related to the fill depth, and the amount of surface irrigation and subsequent groundwater infiltration. These settlements are usually broad in nature and do not typically result in distress. Special foundation designs may be recommended in areas where settlement may be excessive. Hydrology/Water Quality Mitigation The EastLake In GDP SEIR (1989) identified mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts to water quality that would be expected as development proceeds within the planning area. Analysis determined that implementation of mitigation would reduce impacts to water quality to below a level of significance. These measures require: 1. Plan coordination and approval of the City Public Works Department; construction of pads so as to collect and direct surface waters away from proposed structures to approved drainage facilities; A-4 - -- . . 2. Prior to the issuance of grading permits, the applicant shall submit for its approval a final drainage study that determines the size and location of the proposed detention basin. 3. Ongoing maintenance of drainage facilities; installation of subdrains under all fill locations in existing drainage courses to be determined during grading~ inspection and approval of placement of such facilities by the engineering geologist prior to fill placement; 4. Erosion control measures, including revegetation of slopes with drought-resistant vegetation and monitoring of irrigation amounts and timing; and 5. Ongoing maintenance of drainage devices, including berms, swales, area drains, slopes, brow ditches, retention basins, terrace drains, and down drains to avoid blockages or ponding. In addition, for the management of storm water, municipalities in the San Diego region, including the City of Chula Vista, must comply with the Regional Water Quality Control Board's NPDES Permit No. CA 0108758. The NPDES permit consists of wastewater discharge requirements for storm water and urban runoff. In compliance with Permit No. CA 0108758, a BMP program for storm water pollution control has been created. BMPs appropriate to the characteristics of a project may be employed to reduce pollutants available for transport or to reduce the amount of pollutants in runoff prior to discharge to a surface water body. BMPs may include one or all of the following where increases in impervious surfaces substantially increase runoff rates and volumes: 6. Detention basins to trap pollutants, control release rates, and minimize downstream effects. 7. Infiltration basins to hold runoff and allow percolation into the ground. 8. Infiltration trenches and dry wells, holes, or trenches filled with aggregate and then covered. 9. Porous pavement such as lattice pavers or porous asphalt used to replace large areas of paving that are not subject to heavy traffic. 10. Vegetative controls to intercept rainfall and filter pollutants and absorb nutrients. 11. Grass-lined swales or similar construction in place of a buried storm drain, usually in residential areas. 12. Nonstructural methods, such as controlling litter and waste disposal practices. A-5 - ....-....... - . Noise Mitigation 1. It shall be a condition of the tentative map that any proposed exterior usable areas associated with the future commercial uses shall not be placed within 20 feet of the edge of the pads adjacent to Otay Lakes Road. Transportation Mitigation The following development restrictions shall apply to the proposed project: 1. No more than 42 gross acres (the proposed 10-acre Lot 1 facility + 32 additional acres) of the project site may be developed before either State Route 125 or Olympic Parkway are extended. However, if Olympic Parkway is extended to Paseo Ranchero, a total of 59 gross acres (Lot 1 + 49 additional acres) of the site may be built. The following project design consideration was relied upon in determining traffic impacts are less than significant: 2. A full access traffic signal at the proposed Otay Lakes Road/Fenton Street intersection will be built prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits. 3. A four-way stop at Fenton Street/Lane A venue intersection prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits. Upon buildout, the applicant will provide a fair share contribution to constructing a traffic signal at the intersection. 4. A traffic signal will be provided at the Otay Lakes Road/Lane A venue intersection prior to the issuance of any occupancy permits. Utilities and Service Systems Mitigation Implementation of the following mitigation measures reduce potential utilities and service system impacts to below a significant level: 1. For development beyond Phase I (12.7 acres), the applicant must institute a monitoring program to monitor the flows with the sewer system and to upgrade the deficient segments as soon as the threshold (0.85) is reached. The applicant will be reimbursed from the Telegraph Canyon Sewer DIF fund for all costs associated with the needed upgrades. 2. The proposed Pubic Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) identifies the development impact fees that the applicant needs to pay to mitigate impacts, the estimated cost of the facility, and the applicant's obligation to construct or pay for the necessary mitigation. A-6 - --. ~ ~ 3. Prior to approval of the first final map, the applicant shall provide written proof from Otay Water District that adequate water storage and distribution facilities are available to serve the Business Center n parcels. 4. The phased construction of sewer facilities and participation in regional improvement programs, based on the approved master plan, would be incorporated into the PFFP or subdivision map conditions to assure timely provision of required facilities. For development beyond Phase I (12.7 acres), the applicant must institute a monitoring program to monitor the flows with the system and to upgrade the deficient segments as soon as the threshold is reached. The applicant will be reimbursed from the Telegraph Canyon Sewer DIF fund for all costs associated with the needed upgrades. A-7