The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutRCC AGENDA PK 2000/10/12 - - MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION October 12, 2000 DRAft Public_Services Building Conference Room 1 CALL MEETING TO ORDER: Vice-Chair Charles Bull called the meeting to order at 4:19 p.m. ROLL CALUMOTION TO EXCUSE: MSC (T. Thomas/Diaz) to excuse Chair Cindy Burrascano and Commissioner S. Thomas. Vote: (4-0) MEMBERS PRESENT: Vice-Chair Charles Bull, Commissioners Teresa Thomas, Juan Diaz and Pamela Bensoussan STAFF PRESENT: Marilyn Ponseggi, Environmental Review Coordinator Duane Bazzel, Principal Planner Christina Clark, Associate Planner Linda Bond, Recording Secretary GUESTS PRESENT: Laurie McKinley, McKinley Nielsen Associates Joe Monaco, Dudek & Associates Marianne Frost, Solomon Ward Seidenwurm & Smith APPROVAL OF MINUTES: None. ORAL COMMUNICATIONS: None. OLD BUSINESS: MSCP Subarea Plan Update Ms. Marilyn Ponseggi (Environmental Review Coordinator) indicated that staff and the consultant are looking for some recommendation either to adopt or not adopt the modifications to the MSCP Plan. The recommendations will be put into a memo, which will be going on to the Planning Commission and City Council. They are holding a joint hearing October 17, 2000 on the item. Staff gave the Commission an overview of the plan and specifically addressed species coverage and future preserve management. After questions of staff, the Commission discussed the plan. Vice-Chair Bull stated in his review of this plan as well as the County and City of San Diego's plans, that Chula Vista's plan is better than other subarea plans because it focuses on conservation rather than open space acquisition as other plans do. - - DRAFT RCC Minutes - 2 - October 12, 2000 Commissioners Diaz, T. Thomas and Bensoussan concurred with Vice-Chair Bull and had no other comments. MSC (T. Thomas/Diaz) to support the MSCP Plan for the City of Chula Vista. Vote: (4-0-0-2) with Chair Burrascano and Commissioner S. Thomas absent. NEW BUSINESS: None. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR COMMENTS CHAIR COMMENTS: None COMMISSIONER COMMENTS: None ADJOURNMENT: The meeting adjourned at 5:26 p.m. to a regular meeting on Monday, October 16, 2000, at 6:30 p.m. in Conference Room 1 of the Public Services Building, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA. Prepared by: ~d~~~ Linda Bond Recording Secretary (A:\lIb\RCC#1 \RCC1 01200mins.doc) - - . Mitigated Negative Declaration PROJECT NAME: Gateway Chula Vista: H Street and Third - Avenue PROJECT LOCATION: 16 separate parcels at the northwest comer of Third A venue and H Street in the city of Chula Vista ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.: 568-450-34 to 49 PROJECT APPLICANT: Gateway Chula Vista, LLC CASE NO: PCM-OO-ll Date: October 23,2000 A. Prolect Setting The proposed project site is located in the city of Chula Vista, the second largest city in the county of San Diego and the largest in the South Bay area. The city is located approximately six miles south of the city of San Diego's downtown core and approximately eight miles north of Tijuana, Mexico, and the international border (Figures 1 and 2). The "Gateway Chula Vista" project site occupies the northwest corner of Third A venue and H Street in the city of Chula Vista's urban core. The site consists of 16 separate but contiguous parcels zoned for commercial and professional office use. Existing on-site uses include a flower stand, lawn mower service, three office/professional buildings, print shop, furniture store, San Diego County Credit Union, and three single-family residences. Some of the parcels are currently vacant or underutilized (Table 1). Surrounding off-site uses to the east include a two-story office building and Saint Rose of Lima Church and School complex. Located to the north and west are several complexes of two-story apartment buildings. Uses to the south of H Street and the site include government offices associated with the South Bay Courts, Sweetwater Authority offices, and medical offices. Additional medical, professional, and financial service facilities are located west of the development site along H Street. 1 - - ,~ Otay Mesa I . United States of Amerzca Estados Unidos Mexicanos ,~ ~f~ON to FIGURE 1 [@ MILES 2 4 Regional Location of the Project M:jobsl3] 88E\graphicslregional.cdr - - . it . z, ,0 Map Source: U.S.G.s. 7.5 Minute topographic maps, ~[L~N National City and Imperial Beach quadrangles to FIGURE 2 [@ FEET 2000 4000 Project Vicinity R-3188E - - TABLE 1 EXISTING LAND USES Assessor Parcel No. Existing Use Acreage Building Area 568-450-340 & 350 C.V. Lãwn Mower Repair 0.31 1,000 s.f. 568-450-360 & 360 Office building 0.34 7,000 s.f. 568-450-380 Eumie Inc. Print Shop 0.17 1,350 s.f. 568-450-390 Flower stand 0.17 924 s.f. 568-450-400 Furniture sales/warehouse 0.63 12,000 s.f. 568-450-410 Vacant 0.11 NA 560-450-420 Vacant 0.09 NA 568-450-430 San Diego County Credit 0.50 4,000 s.f. Union 568-450-440 H Street Plaza office bldg 0.38 8,500 s.f. 568-450-450 Vacant 0.08 NA 568-450-460 Single-family residence 0.09 1,000 s.f. 568-450-470 Single-family residence 0.20 1,000 s.f. 568-450-480 Single-family residence 0.23 1,000 s.f. 568-450-490 Bahia Professional Center 1.33 5,400 s.f. 4 - - Approximately 75 percent of the proposed project site is located in Subarea 2 of the City's designated Town Centre I project area. The Town Centre I project area encompasses the urban redevelopment area as described in the Chula Vista Town Centre Redevelopment Plan and EIR. Under the adopted redevelopment plan, the area is divided into three subareas: Subarea 1 is the northernmost area and comprises the historic Central Business District. Subarea 2 comprises a connector strip between the Central Business District and the H Street commercial complex. South of H Street is Subarea 3, the Courthouse Addition (Figure 3). The three. Town Centre subareas extend from E Street to I Street and generally from Fourth A venue and the Civic Center to Del Mar A venue at its widest expanse. The Town Centre project area is planned for redevelopment consistent with the goals and vision outlined in the Town Centre Design Manual (City of Chula Vista 1980). B. Proiect Description Commercial Buildings The project proposes acquisition, demolition, and redevelopment of 16 separate but contiguous parcels that comprise the northwest cúrner of Third A venue and H Street (Figure 4). These existing 16 assessor parcels within the project site will be consolidated into three legal lots. Each of the lots will contain one mid-rise commercial/office building with a corresponding portion of the parking structure. The proposed project has a combined total of 334,860 square feet of leaseable area on 4.46 acres. There will be two 6-story buildings that stand 86 feet 8 inches in height and one 5-story building that stands 72 feet 2 inches high. This is consistent with the City of Chula Vista's General Plan for mid- to high-rise development. The buildings will include the use of different facades to create architectural variety and promote a pedestrian scale at street level. Buildings will be separated by landscaped pedestrian passages to facilitate access between the buildings and H Street or the parking structure (Figure 5). Figure 6 shows an artist's rendering of the project from the intersection of H Street and Third A venue. Parking A four- or five-level, 1,117 -space parking structure will be constructed along the north side of the buildings. The project provides two access driveways on Third A venue, one access driveway on H Street, and a valet/drop-off loop on H Street. The use of nonexclusive center turn lanes on both H Street and Third A venue will be provided into all of the site access driveways (see Figure 5). The project's mix of uses creates a shared parking scenario resulting in an excess of spaces at the highest hourly demand. 5 . ~ ~ ~ ~ ~~ c.:J .S' ~ - ~ ~ ...... = CI.) e ~ = . - ~ >- o.,~ ~. -. ~. ziti!¡· WI ~ LU....·. ~ I.! lee (!) ¡:5 ~ a ! ! ^ ., I..U ~·I~.}.~;!~I...I.I·".····· ... .~. ....J~. ~ ·1, i , i c.: .---'..." "<V I ,:,,- ~. , .., \ " -., " " I , I I /Þ'?=- , I ,.' , ,..._-'" I , , \ , ", \ \ \ , - .J ,. ~ \ 1:<1 ~ \ - I '" r , " :> ?;;:; " 1:<1 : "3 e I ..c: U ¡.... ~~~ ~ u .. t¡J ~ 00 u 00 Ê! M ~ ~ ~~III -, _. L ~ ~ J = ~.k~~ ~ ~ I ~'J - cc QJ CJ - '-' ellS ~ ~ aHIH.l ~ "= '3^V = = bJ) = ....c = = D ~ N ® >- bJ) ® a... = ca ~ 'C fI.) ® ® c ... ::::I ~ 0 ~ m c ca 0 · 11. oS · I ¡-: () .~ ® en ;þ: o 0 0 = = · ·ü o 0 · Q) N N o 0 Co o 0 0 en ISlE o 0 taë; 0 @ I = c 0 o 0 ® -c;; -;; u '" "'.... § ~~~ÜN 088S;; ® N Q., Q., 0 ._ 0 "'æ ~ "0 .:: C .- c = ;:s 0 ~ «I «I ff:s! o 0 0 .... '" ê > > 0 @ 0 ...... -- s:: ..... ~~t:S+-, ® 8J:,þï5..ü '" '" 0 ~ --- .- -- 1:1.:1 «I = c._ @) ,þ .- .- 0 ð !! ~~ ® a.. (JOO ('t) ü(Jü [( ® 8 ~ ® 0 ~ 00 '" c c 0 ...... '¡;j '13 0 '" '" h < ~ ..-..-. ~ .-..-..- >. k; 4) ¡: 0 0 ::E c Q) E- IJJ 00 í:! 00 ;:s '7 0 Ø<: 0 tI) ~~III 0 -- --- --------- '-r) = ----- .! --- ----- --- =- ---- -~ --- : I [ ¡~ ,~ i . '," ! I 5 y .. " = ø ~ ~ , 0 _ > v' .. , I ...... _ 0> .!!J 11 ¡Hi ~ 0> I '"" U :>- c TI TI 0 ;. '" ø c .... o""øo> c>- øøc:sz = ;''''2:c ot >Oø-. .. ~ ~ æ :g [¡¡ 5 B .\! (!) á' ,.,..... _ E '- 0 ø 0 '" 0 ,"~.>- Co o « '" c.. ,," .. . '" ---. - ~ .. c:= ... ~ - Q enU8Nif- pJ!LU , I I'>, I ~ \ I ~t " ;, a.:.\ ) \ I " I ... \ , i 1 I ¡ I >= 11 q Q) g. 92\ .~ ~ ~I o en J Ii!, ã; I I .~ I \! ¡' I \ I , I I I I I I , - \~ ' 0>0 I ' ~ ð '" c: '0 .- c: Q 0=0>0 00 ~ ' "',¡;¡ ø"" .;:;! , 1;; "'c \ B U êi5 I ~ .g> ìJ II .~ '" >= ø :sz "dt g p ~ c..c w <_ cc I Q):'::¡:E... e-.. ;ø -ø~.œ I àd 0 I. 8- I · ~ B'.s¡ ffi ,,. , ~ '" '0 0"'00 8 ~ '. '" c.. II) - I "'=' t.tJ ""E I ',~ ~ I r"-... 0 , 1.9 I. ' I . ..'..".'.",...., S ø::: ' I I .. 0 L ~ J I I'~ '" ~~III - - \0 ~ ::s ~ = ~ < ~ "'0 d - . 0004 ~ ..= ~ ~ "'0 = œ ..... ~ ~ - (¡) == I ~ 0 = 0 -0004 ..... ~ ~ !IJ - ~ ..... = I-C e 0 ~ ~ ~ ·0004 ..... ~ ~ Q.¡ !IJ - ~ I ~ <::::> <::::> "" 0 0 --... 00 '" <::::> <I,) <::::> ~ -. 'ü 0 '" '" ...... -< ~ o(! :>-. Lt.; <I,) c 0 0 ::E <::::> ;; +- UJ "" ~ "" ::I .... 0 ~ <I) ~~III <'-...... -" Project Phasing The Gateway Chula Vista project will be constructed in three phases as shown on Figure 7. Phase 1 of the project will redevelop the eastern area~ Phase 2, the central area; and Phase 3, the western area of the project site. It is possible that a combination of the project's phases may be constructed simultaneously depending on future market demand. Discretionary Approvals The following permits are required for project implementation: . Specific Plan for the Gateway Chula Vista project. . General Plan Amendment to the Circulation Element to reclassify H Street from a six-lane major street to a four-lane major street east of Fourth Avenue to Third Avenue. Lead Agency In conformance with Section 15050 and 15367 of the California Environmental Quality Act 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." Responsible Agencies Regional Water Quality Control Board (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit) C. Compatibility with Zoning and Plans Zoning The Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan has been prepared in accordance with Sections 65450-65457 of the Government Code and Chapter 19.07 of the City of Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance. The two underlying zones on the site from east to west are CC-Central Commercial Zone and CO-Administrative and Professional Office Zone (see Figure 4). The specific plan's regulations and guidelines are compatible with the underlying zoning for the area, including minimum lot sizes, building heights, and setback requirements in order to enhance the community character of the area. 10 - - J L t"'- bÐ = '3^V OèllH.l ~ -; ~f o t; ~ ~ ~ -CS' - ~ ® · - · --t ¡-= · en ® · @ ®D I ® ® ® ® ® ® 'ì :5 ~ ~ ca "'0 C ~ ! g --.. 0 --- -.. m co -.. '" -.. -.. C B c -..-- ca I « C 'g ..... õ: '" '" (,) <: .- ~ Eo-. - ~ '(3 ~ (1) § k; Q, 0 CJ) :; ü c -" 8 E-ª ;:3 0 , tI) ~ ~~III - "- General Plan and Land Use Element The City of Chula Vista initiated a General Plan Amendment to reclassify H Street east of Fourth Avenue to Third Avenue from a six-lane to a four-lane major street in the City of Chula Vista's General Plan. The adopted Chula Vista General Plan currently classifies H Street as a six-lane major street along the project frontage. This classification for H Street was established in the 1989 General Plan Update and Final EIR based on traffic projections at that time. The current traffic analysis for the Gateway Chula Vista project has indicated that acceptable roadway operations can be provided on H· Street with the existing four-lane section of H Street (BRW Inc. 2000). The Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan complies with all the applicable goals, objectives, policies, and guidelines of the Chula Vista General Plan. Redevelopment of the site with high-quality commercial and office uses as well as a landscaped comer plaza, streetscapes, and courtyards will act as a catalyst for the Town Centre redevelopment areas. In addition, redevelopment will increase the employment bases of Chula Vista's urban core. Circulation Element Designations The Gateway Chula Vista redevelopment site is located approximately halfway between Interstate 5 (1-5) and Interstate 805 (1-805). The project provides two access driveways on Third Avenue, one access driveway on H Street, and a valet/drop-off loop on H Street. The use of nonexclusive center turn lanes on both H Street and Third Avenue will be provided into all of the site access driveways. Currently, H Street is classified as a six-lane major street in Chapter 2, Section 5.4, of the Chula Vista General Plan from 1-5 to 1-805. Major streets are designed to carry high volumes of traffic and serve to distribute traffic to and from the freeway system. A General Plan Amendment to reclassify H Street from a six- lane to a four-lane major street east of Fourth Avenue to Third Avenue has been initiated by the City of Chula Vista. In the General Plan, a four-lane major street should be 80 feet wide inloo feet of right-of-way and provide four through lanes, a 16-foot-wide medianJleft-tum lane, and 8-foot curbside parking or bike lanes. H Street currently has two through lanes in each direction and varies in width from 62 to 103 feet in the project vicinity, with parking allowed mid-block on both sides of the street. The traffic analysis included the AM and PM peak traffic generated by the Scripps Hospital expansion and the South Bay Regional Center expansion. The average travel speeds and corresponding segment levels of service with project buildout are expected to decrease from existing speeds by no more than 3.8 miles 12 - - per hour (mph) during the AM peak and 2.4 mph during the PM peak. This will be in compliance with the acceptable level of service (LOS) of C or better. The northbound approach to the intersection of H Street and Third A venue will experience LOS F delays at the PM peak due to the proposed project and the expansion of the South Bay Regional Center or other similar projects. However, without expansion of the South Bay Regional Center, the intersection of H Street at Third A venue would operate at LOS D in the PM peak. Therefore, no improvements to existing intersection geometries are required at the intersection of H Street and Third A venue until the expansion of the South Bay Regional Center occurs or any other future project that will impact this intersection occurs. The project buildout traffic volumes were compared to Year 2020 traffic volumes generated by the SANDAG Series 9 TRANPLAN regional forecasting model and virtually no increase in the study area traffic volumes by the Year 2020 was anticipated. The traffic analysis for the Gateway Chula Vista project has indicated that acceptable roadway operations, with buildout of all known projects in the study area, can be provided on H Street with the existing four-lane section. Existing intersection and geometry and traffic control is sufficient to provide acceptable LOS D operations during the AM and PM peak hours, except for the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue. A northbound right-turn lane will be necessary to accommodate the combined increase in traffic caused by the expansion of the South Bay Regional Center and construction of the proposed project; however, it should only be constructed in conjunction with the South Bay Regional Center expansion or any other future project that will impact the intersection. This would facilitate traffic flow and improve overall intersection operations. Pedestrian circulation will flow through the courtyards and building entrances along H Street. The primary building entrances are located on the second floor, which is connected to the parking structure. Public Facilities Growth Management Tlli ~sholds There will be adequate water, sewer, and solid waste facilities to serve the project site. Pacific Waste Inc. is currently contracted by the City of Chula Vista to dispose of all solid waste materials within the city boundaries. They have indicated that they can provide service to the project site up to seven days a week, if needed. Solid waste from the proposed project will be trucked to the Otay Landfill, which is estimated to have capacity to receive solid waste for the next 25 years. The Sweetwater Authority provides water services to the proposed project and has determined based on fire flow requirements and projected land use that sufficient supplies of water are planned to be available. No new sewer improvements are necessary other than construction of six-inch sewer laterals to 13 - - each building. A sewage participation fee will be paid to the City for each phase of the project at the time of connection to the public sewer. At present, the sewerage participation fee for the project is $2,220.00 per 83.16 equivalent dwelling units. Assuming the same rate for all three phases, the project will generate just over $184,615.20 by completion. The proposed project would redevelop the existing site, which is primarily covered with paving or similar impervious surfaces, and will retain the existing drainage structures in the area. Redevelopment of the site is not expected to increase the rate of runoff of the site~ however. the following will be required with the first submittal of the improvement/grading plans: (1) a hydraulic study to show that the postdevelopment flow rate does not exceed the predevelopment flow rate and (2) incorporation of drainage facilities into the design. The Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan proposes that no hazardous waste materials will be generated at the project site, other than a potential for small amounts of medical wastes which will be disposed of in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal regulations. Therefore, the proposed redevelopment will comply with all the goals and objectives of the public facilities that serve the project site. The traffic thresholds will not be exceeded due to the proposed project except at the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue; however, this intersection's thresholds will only be exceeded at Phase 3 of the proposed project and development of the South Bay Regional Center or other similar projects. All other project study area roads will operate at an acceptable LOS C or better and intersections will operate at an acceptable LOS D or better at project buildout. The H Street and Third Avenue intersection will drop to LOS E during the PM peak hours. The northbound approach to this intersection will experience LOS F delays, resulting from the combined increase of traffic from the proposed project and the South Bay Regional Center expansion. A separate analysis of project buildout conditions without development of the South Bay Regional Center expansion indicates that the intersection of H Street and Third A venue would operate at LOS D during the PM peak. Construction of a northbound right-turn lane will be necessary to accommodate the combined increase in traffic caused by the expansion of the South Bay Regional Center and construction of the proposed project; however, it should only be constructed in conjunction with the South Bay Regional Center expansion or any other future project that will impact the intersection. This would facilitate traffic flow and allow for all intersections in the study area to operate at LOS C or better at non-peak hours and LOS D during peak hours of the day, which are consistent with the City's threshold standards. 14 - - 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 could have a significant environmental effect, but that the effects would be mitigated by the measures incorporated into -the . project. Therefore, 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. E. Mitigation A discussion of potentially significant impacts from the proposed project and mitigation measures to reduce these impacts to below a level of significance is provided below. BRW, Inc. prepared a traffic study to determine the environmental effects of a commercial development of this nature on the redevelopment area. This and the adopted planning and environmental documents applicable to site development are available for review at the City of Chula Vista Community Development Department, located at 430 Davidson Street, Suite B, Chula Vista, California 91910. Noise Section 19.68.030 of the City of Chula Vista Noise Ordinance limits noise levels on weekdays to 60 A-weighted decibels [dB(A)] from 7 A.M. to 10 P.M. (8 A.M. to 10 P.M. on weekends) and 50 dB(A) from 10 P.M. to 7 A.M. (10 P.M. to 8 A.M. on weekends). Normal operation and maintenance of the commercial buildings is not anticipated to result in noise levels that would exceed these standards. The project design incorporates an enclosed storage area, off-street loading spaces, an interior loading dock, and trash enclosures to minimize the impacts of noise. The parking structun.~ will be constructed adjacent to existing multi-family residential on the west and north. In some areas, the minimum separation between the residential structures and the parking structure will be approximately 20 feet. Activities in the portions of the structure that may remain open after 10 P.M. have the potential to exceed the nighttime noise ordinance standard. Additionally, car alarms and power sweeping of the structure are potential sources of nuisance noise. Therefore, the following measures will be incorporated into the project to lessen the noise impacts to below a significant level: I) Access to upper levels of the parking structure will be closed between the hours of 7:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. to limit potential noise impacts to neighboring properties. 15 - - 2) The north and west areas of the parking structure will be closed at the levels that remain open during the evening and nighttime hours. 3) Power sweeping of the structure will be limited to the hours of 7 A.M. to 10 P.M. on weekdays and 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. on Saturdays and will be prohibited on Sundays. During construction, equipment would generate temporary noise. At times these temporary noise level increases could be significant at the adjacent residential structures. Although construction and demolition activities are not subject to the exterior noise requirements of Municipal Code Section 19.68.030, restricting the construction activities to weekdays and Saturday only during the daytime hours (7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M.) would mitigate the temporary noise increases due to construction below a level of significance. Incorporation of these measures, as well as compliance with the general noise ordinance standards, will ensure that no significant noise impacts will occur. TransportationlTraffic The City of Chula Vista's Threshold Standards Policy requires that all inter- sections must operate at LOS C or better, with the exception that LOS D may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections. Project Direct Impacts A traffic study was prepared for the proposed project in September 2000. The project study area was approximately 2.5 miles long, with the H Streetffhird A venue intersection located approximately 1.1 miles east of 1-5 and 1.4 miles west of I-80S. The traffic analysis included the AM and PM peak traffic generated by the Scripps Hospital expansion and the South Bay Regional Center expansion. The project was assumed to be three commercial buildings using 334,860 square feet on the 4.46-acre project site. The proposed project type was calculated to add 879 peak AM hour trips (766 inbound/l13 outbound) and 1,084 peak PM hour trips (348 inbound/736 outbound) to the city street system. The combined peak period trips contributed by the project (1,963 trips) are estimated to be 15 percent of project average daily traffic (ADT) contributed to the system. Near- Term Cumulative The project study area roads consisted of H Street between 1-5 and 1-805 and Third and Fourth A venues between E Street and J Street. All project study area roads will operate at an acceptable LOS C or better and all study area roadways 16 - - and intersections will operate at acceptable LOS D or better with the exception of the intersection of H Street and Third A venue. This intersection will drop to LOS E during the PM peak hours based on cumulative impacts. The northbound approach to this intersection will experience LOS F delays, resulting from the combined increase of traffic from the proposed project and the South Bay Regional Center expansion or-other similar projects. All other approaches to this intersection will operate at LOS D for two hours or less. A separate analysis of project buildout conditions without development of the South Bay Regional Center expansion indicates that the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue would operate at LOS D during the PM peak. Construction of a northbound right- turn lane will be necessary to accommodate the combined increase in traffic caused by the expansion of the South Bay Regional Center and construction of the proposed project~ however, it should only be constructed in conjunction with the South Bay Regional Center expansion or any other future project that will impact this intersection. This would facilitate traffic flow and allow for all intersections in the study area to operate at LOS C or better at non-peak hours and LOS D during peak hours of the day. In order to mitigate this impact, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the third phase of the project, the developer shall post a cash deposit in an amount equal to the entire cost of providing a right-turn-only lane at the northbound approach of Third A venue and H Street. The cost of the right-turn-only lane shall include all direct and indirect costs associated with acquisition of right-of-way, clearing, demolition, and reconstructing of existing public and private improvements and the design and construction of the lane to the specifications to be established by the Director of Public Works. These costs shall be as determined solely by the Director of Public Works. The City shall use its best efforts to ensure that other projects that have been determined to significantly contribute to the impact at this intersection shall contribute their proportional fair share into a reimbursement district fund. In getting reimbursement, the City will determine the proportional share of the project to determine the reimbursement amount. Once determined, the fair-share contribution will represent each project's entire contribution and additional contributions shall not be secured by the City. A four- or five-level, 1,117-space parking structure will be constructed along the north side of the buildings. The project provides two access driveways on Third A venue, one access driveway on H Street, and a valet/drop-off loop on H Street. The project's mix of uses creates a shared parking scenario resulting in an excess of spaces at the highest hourly demand. The analysis of the site access driveways indicates that there will be sufficient gaps in traffic to allow vehicles to enter and exit the project site. There will be 17 -_. - acceptable delays to vehicles entering and exiting the site without the need for signalization at any of the site driveways, provided that the following measures are implemented: 1. Left turns out of the H Street driveway may be prohibited under project buildout conditions. Traffic will exit onto Third A venue and then proceed left onto H Street. 2. Left-turn storage will be provided at all site driveways where feasible, to remove left-turning vehicles from the through travel lanes. 3. The existing movement of traffic onto H Street from the site will be permitted prior to buildout of the project. Continuous monitoring of traffic operations at this site driveway will be required during interim time frame to determine the future implementation of appropriate traffic control. City engineers will determine if a signal is warranted with future redevelopment of the South Bay Regional Center or other similar projects and will reevaluate the need for a signal when more specific information is known about the site plan. 4. All access driveways will be constructed to connect the on-site (internal) circulation system to both Third A venue and H Street under interim development conditions associated with Phases 1 and 2. Long- Term Cumulative hnpacts The project buildout traffic volumes were compared to Year 2020 traffic volumes generated by the SANDAG Series 9 TRANPLAN regional forecasting model to determine whether additional background traffic is anticipated in the area by the year 2020. It was found that the estimated ADT volumes at project buildout are greater than the Year 2020 ADT volumes estimated by the SANDAG model. Therefore, study area levels of service in the Year 2020 are not anticipated to decrease below the levels associated with buildout of the proposed redevelopment project (BRW 2000). F. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations City of Chula Vista: Brian Hunter, Planning and Environmental Manager Byron Estes, Community Development Benjamin Guerrero, Environmental Manager Marilyn Ponseggi, Environmental Review Coordinator 18 - - Ralph Leyva, Senior Civil Engineer Dino Serifini, Civil Engineer Applicant's Agent: Tom McCabe, McCabe Harris Architects 2. Documents The following documents used during the preparation of the initial study/environmental checklist are available for review at the City of Chula Vista Community Development Department, located at 430 Davidson Street, Suite B, Chula Vista, California 91910. BRW, Inc. 1999 H Street Traffic Operations Analysis in the City of Chula Vista. June. 2000 Gateway Project Traffic Study in the City of Chula Vista. September. California Air Resources Board 1998 Emission Inventory 1996. Prepared by Technical Support Division, Emission Inventory Branch. October. Chula Vista, City of 1978 General Plan. 1980 Town Centre Design Manual. 2d ed. (January 1980). 1989 Chula Vista General Plan, July 1989. Update. 1996 Draft Subarea Plan - Multiple Species Conservation Program. 2000 Specific Plan for the Gateway Chula Vista Redevelopment Project. Geocon Incorporated 1999 Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment for Gateway Chula Vista, Chula Vista, California. November. 2000 Geotechnical Investigation for Gateway Chula Vista, Chula Vista, California, August. Mooney and Associates 2000 Archaeological Investigation of the Gateway Chula Vista Redevelopment Project. Letter to Mr. Brian Hunter, September 7. 19 - San Diego, County of 1992 1991/1992 Regional Air Quality Strategy. Air Pollution Control District. June. 1996 Integrated Waste Management Plan. San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 1999 URBEMIS7G Computer Program User's Guide and program, version 3.2. September 28. 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 Community Development Department, 430 Davidson Street, Suite B, Chula Vista, CA 91910. ~~nmenWManager 20 - - Gateway Chula Vista ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM 1. Project Title: Gateway Chula Vista (H Street and Third Avenue) 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Chula Vista, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910 3. Contact Persons and Phone Number: Brian Hunter, Planning and Environmental Manager, (619) 691-5016 1 - -- Gateway Chula Vista 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? D 0 [g D 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 0 [g] 0 quality of the site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, 0 0 [g] D which would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area? Comments: Response to la. The proposed redevelopment project is designed to replace a variety of existing commercial and residential buildings along with vacant land with a high-quality commercial and office use center. Gateway Chula Vista will consolidate 16 existing assessor parcels into three legal lots with one commercial building in each lot. All these buildings will be mid-rise buildings, two 6-story buildings that stand 86 feet 8 inches in height and one 5-story building that stands 72 feet 2 inches high. This is consistent with the City of Chula Vista's General Plan for mid-rise development. The buildings will include the use of different facades to create architectural variety and promote a pedestrian scale at street level. Landscaped courtyards and walkways will be incorporated into the design, which will create public outdoor activity areas promoting ethnic diversity and art in the "Town Centre" area. The project site is located in an area that is surrounded by a mix of commercial, residential, and public uses. Project implementation improves the existing aesthetic character of the site and is consistent with future development plans for the area and would not represent a significant change. Response to lb. The proposed project site does not include visually significant trees, rock outcrops, or historic buildings that may contribute to the scenic quality of the area. The project will alter the appearance of the existing developed site but will not create new significant aesthetic impacts. Response to Ie. See responses Ia and Ib above. Future site development will be subject to design, architectural, and landscaping requirements that are part of the proposed specific plan. Project approval will not result in any significant impact to community aesthetics or visual quality and will improve the aesthetic quality of the site and surrounding areas. 2 - - Gateway Chula Vista Response to Id. See responses Ia and Ib above. Future development plans may employ outdoor lighting, signs, and materials that could contribute to light and glare in the project area. Project design includes the use of shielding and directing of light sources away from streets, adjoining properties, and the sky. Streetlights at the project site will be placed approximately 75 feet apart and a minimum of two and a half feet back from the curb face, which is measured to the center of the pole shaft. The intensity of all light at the boundary of the project site will not -exceed 75-foot lamberts from a source of reflected light. Therefore, project approval will not adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. Aesthetic Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 3 - - Gateway Chula Vista 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 D 0 [g] Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment 0 D D [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, does not contain designated Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or Farmland of Statewide Importance, and has been graded. Response to lIb. As stated in la, the impacts resulting from the proposed project are, therefore, not significant. Response to lIe. Project approval and eventual development of the project site will not result in additional pressure to convert farmland to nonagricultural uses. The project site is bordered by existing development or graded land. Agriculture Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 4 - - Gateway Chula Vista Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant 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] D applicable air quality plan? b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute D D [g] 0 substantially to an existing or projected air quality violation? c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of 0 D [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] D number of people? Comments: Response to IlIa. Project approval and subsequent redevelopment will generate an incremental increase in short- and long-term emissions as redevelopment occurs. Air pollutants will be generated during both the construction and operation phases. Redevelopment of this site is consistent with the approved land use plan that currently exists and is therefore consistent with the goals and objectives of the current Regional Air Quality Strategy (RAQS) for San Diego and with 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. Consequently, air emissions associated with this project have been accounted for in the RAQS and no adverse air quality impacts are anticipated due to implementation of this project. Response to IIlb. See response to IDa above. The project is consistent with the growth assumptions in the RAQS and SIP. No additional impacts will result from approval of the proposed amendments and subsequent development. Existing federal and 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 measures include: 5 - -- - Gateway Chula Vista 1. All unpaved construction areas shall be sprinkled with water or other acceptable San Diego Air Pollution Control District (APCD) dust control agents during dust-generating activities to reduce dust emissions. Additional watering or acceptable APCD dust control agents shall be applied during dry weather or windy days until dust emissions are not visible. 2. Trucks hauling dirt and debris shall be properly covered to reduce windblown dust and spills. 3. On dry days, dirt and debris spilled onto paved surfaces shall be swept up immediately to reduce resuspension of particulate matter caused by vehicle movement. Approach routes to construction sites will be cleaned daily of construction-related dirt in dry weather. 4. On-site stockpiles of excavated material shall be covered or watered. 5. Heavy-duty construction equipment with modified combustion/fuel injection systems for emissions control shall be utilized during grading and construction activities. Catalytic reduction for gasoline- powered equipment shall be used. Also, construction equipment shall be equipped with prechamber diesel engines (or equivalent) together with proper maintenance and operation to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxide, to the extent available and feasible. 6. Use low-pollutant-emitting construction equipment. 7. Use electrical construction equipment, to the extent feasible. 8. The simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units shall be minimized (i.e., phase construction to minimize impacts). Compliance with existing regulations and implementation of the above BACTs and BMPs will be required to ensure that impacts remain below a level of significance. Response to Hlc. See response to IlIa above. 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. Response to HId. See response to IlIa above. The proposed project will have little effect on future emissions. The City will review all future site development proposals prior to approval, and depending on the type of facility proposed, a:lditional permits maybe required from the San Diego 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 HIe. See IIId above. The proposed project will not create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of people. Future uses will be reviewed during the permit process to ensure compliance at the time site development plans are proposed to ensure conformance with the proposed plan and existing regulations. Impacts are less than significant. Air Quality Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 6 - - Gateway Chula Vista Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant ISSUE 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 0 [g] 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 0 [g] 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 resou rces, 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. The project site has been graded and developed and is devoid of any sensitive or native habitat. 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, or narrow endemic or that hold special status in policies or regulations by the California Department ofFish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service. 7 - -- Gateway Chula Vista 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 graded and is already developed. Response to IV c. There are no wetlands on the proposed project site or in the near vicinity of the site. Therefore, the project will have no direct or indirect impact on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act. 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 a developed area according to the City of Chula Vista Draft MSCP Subarea Plan. Biological Resources Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 8 - - Gateway Chula Vista 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 ~ significance of a historical resource as defined in §15064.5? b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the 0 0 0 ~ significance of an archaeological resource pursuant to §15064.5? c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological 0 0 0 [g] resource or site or unique geologic feature? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred 0 0 0 [g] outside of formal cemeteries? Comments: Response to Va. On June 14, 2000, Mooney and Associates performed a site visit and record search for prehistoric and historic sites within a one-mile radius of the project site. There were no prehistoric or historic archaeological site records found on the area searched. The project site had no existing buildings with historical significance and no evidence of prehistoric occupation was found. The property has been graded and developed in conjunction with the previous approvals on the site, and there is no evidence of historical resources present. Response to Vb. See response to Va. The property has been graded and developed in conjunction with the previous approvals on the site, and there is no evidence of archaeological resources on the project site. Response to V c. The entire site is already graded and developed. There are no impacts to paleontological resources anticipated. Response to V d. There is no evidence of any human remains on the project site. Cultural Resources Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 9 - - Gateway Chula Vista Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS. Would the protect: 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 0 [g] 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 0 ~ 0 iii) Seismic-related ground· failure, including 0 0 0 [g] liquefaction? iv) Landslides? 0 0 0 ~ b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil? 0 0 0 ~ c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, 0 0 0 [g] 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 0 0 [g] 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 wastewater disposal systems where sewers are not available for the disposal of wastewater? Comments: 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: i) Active faults. The site is not delineated on the Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area. There are no known active or potentially active 10 - - Gateway Chula Vista faults at the site or in the immediate vicinity. The Rose Canyon fault, located approximately six miles northwest of the site, is the closest known active fault. There is no evidence that geologic formations have been offset within the past 11,000 years and faulting is not considered to be a hazard to development provided development is in conformance with requirements of the governing jurisdiction, building codes, and standard practices of the Association of Structural Engineers of California. ii) Seismic ground shaking. The most significant credible seismic event with respect to the subject site would be a 6.9 magnitude event on the Rose Canyon fault zone. For noncritical structures such as those proposed, the most significant probable seismic event would be a magnitude 5.7 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 will be reduced to below a significant level. iii) Ground failure, including liquefaction. The property has been graded and developed. The potential for liquefaction to occur at the site after standard development procedures are implemented is considered less than significant. iv) Landslides. The property site is on a flat, previously developed area that is not susceptible to landslides. The potential for landslides to occur after redevelopment is below a significant level. Response to Vlb. The proposed project will not result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil. The project site has been developed and the City requires, as standard conditions of construction, the employment of erosion control measures during constrUction and the prompt stabilization of disturbed areas before construction is completed. This reduces potential impacts to below a significant level. Response to Vlc. See response to VIaji, iii, and iv above. The proposed project site has been previously developed and would not become unstable as a result of redevelopment. Response to Vld. See response to Vlaji. The property has been developed in conformance with the previous approvals on the site. Response to VIe. Public sewer and water will serve the proposed project site. As a result, development will not result in significant impacts. Geology and Soils Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 11 - - Gateway Chula Vista Less Than Signific<mt Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant 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 [g] D environment through the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials? b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 0 0 [g] 0 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 rzJ D 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 0 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 D D ~ 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. Specific uses have yet to be determined at this time~ however, the principal uses will be primarily professional and administrative offices, retail commercial, specialty services, and restaurants. Any use that might involve the routine transport, use, or disposal of hazardous materials will be subject to 12 - - Gateway Chula Vista local and state regulations regarding such uses. Businesses that handle, use, or dispose of hazardous substances are subject to review and approval from the County of San Diego Health Department, Hazardous Materials Management Division, Air Pollution Control District, and/or Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) (National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System [NPDES] General Industrial Permit) prior to operation. Future uses at the project site will be required to comply with all applicable standards and regulations. Response to VIIb. See response VIla above. Businesses that use, store, or transport hazardous materials must receive permits prior to occupancy. Depending on the use, this may include approval from the Fire Department-Hazardous Materials Management Division, County of San Diego Health Department- Hazardous Materials Management Division for Plan Review, and/or San Diego County Air Pollution Control District. Response to VIIc. The Saint Rose of Lima Catholic Church and School complex is located directly east of the proposed project site. The Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan proposes that no hazardous waste materials will be generated at the project site, other than a potential for small amounts of medical wastes which will be disposed of in accordance with applicable local, state, and federal regulations. Compliance with this performance standard will guarantee that all future uses in the proposed site will not create a public hazard due to the use of hazardous materials. Response to VlId. The proposed project is not located on a site that is included on a list compiled pursuant to Government Code Section 65962.5. Geocon performed a Phase 1 environmental site assessment for the Gateway Chula Vista redevelopment project. The study concluded that the potential for the existing presence of impacts to the site from hazardous materials/wastes on-site or on properties in the vicinity is considered low. Response to VIle. The proposed project is not located within the adopted airport land use plan. Thus, the project will 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. Redevelopment of the project site 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 generally 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. 13 - - Gateway Chula Vista 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 0 [g] 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 0 [g] 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 0 [g] 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 [g] 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, 0 0 0 [g] which would impede or redirect flood flows? i) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of D D D [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] 14 - ~" Gateway Chula Vista 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. Project compliance with all federal, state, and local water qu.ality standards and waste discharge requirements must be demonstrated prior to receiving building and occupancy permits. Response to Vlllb. The proposed redevelopment project will not use groundwater or substantially interfere with groundwater recharge. Response to Vlllc. The proposed project will retain existing drainage structures and will utilize the existing drainage structures in the area for the current on-site developments. Response to VIIld. The proposed project will retain existing curb and gutter structures and will not substantially alter the drainage pattern of the site. Redevelopment will not increase the amount of impermeable surfaces, and erosion will be controlled. The project site has been developed and the City requires, as standard conditions of construction, the employment of erosion control measures during construction and the prompt stabilization of disturbed areas before construction is completed. This will reduce potential impacts to below a significant level. Response to VIIle. The proposed project would redevelop the existing site, which is primarily covered with paving or similar impervious surfaces. The following will be required with the first submittal of the improvement/grading plans: (1) a hydraulic study to show that the postdevelopment flow rate does not exceed the predevelopment flow rate and (2) incorporation of drainage facilities into the design. Implementation of the following measures will reduce potential polluted runoff from entering the storm drainage system of the project to less than a significant level: I) Parking areas and paved open spaces will be swept frequently to prevent buildup of trash and other pollutants that may enter the storm drainage systems. 2) An adequate number of litter receptacles will be provided, particularly near the food establishments and open courtyards, in order to prevent trash from entering the storm drainage system. 3) Effluent from car detailing will not be permitted into the street gutter or other storm drains. Provisions will be made to dispose of the effluent in accordance with all local, state, and federal regulations. 4) The developer will implement BMPs to prevent pollution of storm drainage systems before and after construction. These measures are described and are included in response VllIf below. 15 -----.- - ._.. Gateway Chula Vista Response to VlIIf. For the management of storm water, municipalities in the San Diego region, including the City of Chula Vista, must comply with the RWQCB's NPDES Permit No. CA 0108758. The NPDES permit consists of wastewater discharge requirements for storm water and urban runoff. Specifically, the applicant is required to implement postconstruction BMPs to prevent pollution of storm drainage systems from the gas station, car wash, restaurants, parking lots, and trash collection areas. 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. 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. The project must comply with existing NPDES permit requirements. Such compliance would reduce impacts to a less than significant level. The redevelopment resulting on this site will not substantially degrade water quality. Impacts associated with development are, therefore, less than significant. Response to VIIIg. The proposed project does not include housing and 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 and does not propose construction of a levee or dam. Response to VlIIj. The distance between the subject site and the coast precludes damage due to seismically induced waves (tsunamis) or seiches. The lack of river tributaries or lakes in the project area reduces the probability for earthquake-induced flooding to negligible. Hydrology and Water Quality Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 16 - - Gateway Chula Vista 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 D ~ b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or 0 0 ~ D 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 ~ or natural community conservation plan? Comments: Response to IXa. The proposed project will not divide an established community. The area is already developed and the majority of the site is within the City's designated "Town Centre I Redevelopment area." Response to IXb. The proposed project will not change the ultimate land use that is planned and allowed for this site. The Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan has been prepared in accordance with Sections 65450-65457 of the Government Code and Chapter 19.07 of the City of Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance. The two underlying zones on the site are CC-Centra1 Commercial Zone and CO-Administrative and Professional Office Zone. The specific plan's regulations and guidelines are compatible with the underlying zoning for the area, including minimum lot sizes, building heights, and setback requirements. The General Plan Amendment proposed by the project would reclassify H Street from a six-lane major street to a four-lane major street east of Fourth Avenue to Third Avenue. Based on the traffic analysis performed for the project, this change would not represent a significant traffic circulation impact or a significant impact to the aòcpted Circulation Element. Response to IXc. The proposed project site is graded and located in an area already developed. The subject property will, therefore, not conflict with any habitat conservation plan or natural community conservation plan. Land Use and Planning Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 17 - - Gateway Chula Vista 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 D D D ~ 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 D 0 0 [g] mineral resource recovery site delineated on a local general plan, specific plan, or other land use plan? Comments: 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). Redevelopment of the site will have no impact on a locally important mineral resource. Mineral Resources Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 18 - ~ Gateway Chula Vista 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 D [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 0 [g] 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, D 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 0 0 [g] would the project expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: Response to Xla. Demolition and Construction: The proposed project will result in increased noise levels during demolition of existing structures and construction of new buildings that involve the use of graders, scrapers, bulldozers, backhoes, front-end loaders, pavers, and heavy trucks. Noise generated by these activities is rarely less than 70 dB(A) at 50 feet from the source and typically ranges between 80 and 90 dB(A). Demolition and construction activity is exempt from the City's exterior noise standards as discussed in Section 19.68.070 of the Municipal Code. Demolition and construction activities will be temporary in nature and impacts to exterior noise levels are considered to be less than significant. Daily Operations: On-Site Impacts: The redevelopment site plan includes the construction of three mid-rise commercial/retail/office buildings and a five-level parking structure. The project design incorporates an 19 - ~ Gateway Chula Vista enclosed storage area, off-street loading spaces, an interior loading dock, and trash enclosures to minimize the impacts of noise. The proposed uses will be subjected to traffic noise from Third A venue and H Street. The exterior noise standard for commercial property specified by the City is 70 community noise equivalent level (CNEL). Existing traffic volumes on H Street between Fourth A venue and Third A venue and Third A venue and Second Avenue are approximately 25,240 and 25,500 average daily trips, respectively. The traffic study prepared for the project (BRW Inc. 2000) indicates that the average vehicle speed on the roadways is typically less than 30 miles per hour. Existing traffic noise levels are estimated to be approximately 68 CNEL at 40 feet from the centerline of Third A venue and 70 CNEL at 40 feet from the centerline of H Street. The traffic study prepared for the project indicates that the resultant trips generated by the proposed project will generate 9,939 ADT within the H Street corridor. Because this project redevelops an existing commercial/residential area, not all of the 9,939 ADT generated by the proposed project represents new trips to the roadway system. The SANDAG Series 9 Year 2020 traffic forecast indicates that the Year 2020 traffic volumes for H Street between Fourth A venue and Third A venue and Third A venue and Second Avenue are projected to be 28,000 ADT and 24,000 ADT, respectively. This is compared to 32,700 ADT and 35,000 ADT estimated at project buildout. Consequently, Year 2020 traffic noise levels are not anticipated to increase from the existing conditions. The Year 2020 traffic-generated noise levels are projected to be approximately 69 CNEL at 40 feet from the centerline of Third A venue and 70 CNEL at 40 feet from the centerline of H Street. These projected noise levels are less than the City's 70 CNEL exterior standard for commercial uses. Consequently, no significant on-site noise impacts are anticipated due to traffic noise since any potential exterior uses along the roadways are anticipated to be at distances greater than 40 feet from the centerline of the adjacent roadways. Off-Site Impacts: The proposed project would construct one 5-story and two 6-story buildings for commercial office and retail uses. Mechanical equipment for the buildings (HV AC, etc.) will be located on the roofs. Because the surrounding residential buildings are genenJly two stories or less, this equipment will be shielded from view by the building structure. No significant noise impacts due to the mechanical equipment are anticipated in the residential areas. The proposed project also would construct a five-level parking structure (one subterranean level and four above ground). This parking structure will be constructed adjacent to existing multi-family residential on the west and existing multi-family residential on the north. In some cases, the separation between the residential structures and the parking structure will be approximately 20 feet. Employees and patrons arriving and leaving the project grounds and activities associated with daily operation of the facility will generate noise. The proposed uses will generate some noise as part of daily operation. Noise levels due to operation of the facility are regulated by Section 19.68.030 of the City of 20 - ,~ Gateway Chula Vista Chula Vista Noise Ordinance. Daytime noise levels at the residential property line are limited on weekdays to 60 dB(A) from 7 A.M. to 10 P.M. (8 A.M. to 10 P.M. on weekends) and 50 dB(A) from 10 P.M. to 7 A.M. (10 P.M. to 8 A.M. on weekends). As indicated, the project is estimated to generate 9,939 ADT. Access to the upper levels of the parking structure will be closed between the hours of7:oo P.M. and 7:00 A.M. to limit potential noise impacts to neighboring properties. Access to the street level of the parking structure will be allowed to serve retail uses that may be open for business in the evening. Normal operation and maintenance of the structure is not anticipated to result in noise levels that would exceed the standards at the residential properties. However, activities in the portions of the structure that may remain open after 10 P.M. have the potential to exceed the nighttime standard. Additionally, car alarms as well as power sweeping of the structure are potential sources of nuisance noise. Consequently, it is recommended that the north and west areas of the parking structure be closed in at those levels that will remain open during the evening and nighttime hours (after 7 P.M.) to limit nuisance noise impacts to the adjacent residential properties. Additionally, power sweeping of the structure shall be limited to the hours of 7 A.M. to 10 P.M. on weekdays, 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. on Saturdays, and prohibited on Sundays. Incorporation of these measures, as well as compliance with the general noise ordinance standards, will ensure that no significant noise impacts will occur at the adjacent residential use areas. Response to Xlb. The Gateway Chula Vista project próposes commercial/professional/retail uses. These uses are not expected to generate excessive ground-borne vibration or ground-borne noise levels in the project area. Response to Xlc. See response XIa. The proposed development project is replacing existing uses with similar, low-level noise-generating characteristics and, therefore, would cause no significant noise change in the area. Response to Xld. See response XIa. During construction, equipment would generate temporary noise. At times these temporary noise level increases could be significant at the adjacent residential structures. Although construction and demolition activities are not subject to the exterior noise requirements of Municipal Code Section 19.68.030, restricting the construction activities to weekdays and Saturday only during the daytime hours (7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M.) would mitigate the temporary noise increases due to construction below a level of significance. Response to Xle,f. The proposed project is not located in the vicinity of an airport or private airstrip. 21 - Gateway Chula Vista Noise Mitigation hnplementation of the following mitigation measures will reduce potential noise impacts to below a significant level: 1) Construction activities on the proposed project will be restricted to weekdays and Saturdays and only during the daytime hours between 7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M. 2) Access to upper levels of the parking structure will be closed between the hours of 7:00 P.M. and 7:00 A.M. to limit potential noise impacts to neighboring properties. 3) The north and west areas of the parking structure will be closed at the levels that remain open during the evening and nighttime hours. 4) Power sweeping of the structure will be limited to the hours of 7 A.M. to 10 P.M. on weekdays, 8 A.M. to 10 P.M. on Saturdays, and prohibited on Sundays. 22 - ~ Gateway Chula Vista Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant ISSUE Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact XII. POPULATION & HOUSING. Would the project: a) Induce substantial population growth in an area either 0 0 0 ~ 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 [g] D necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating 0 0 [g] D the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? Comments: Response to XIIa. The proposed redevelopment project is located in the urban core of the city of Chula Vista and would not induce substantial growth. A mix of existing commercial, residential, and public uses surrounds the site. Located to the north and west are several complexes of two-story apartment buildings. The Saint Rose of Lima Church and School complex is located east of the redevelopment area. Directly south of the project site is the South Bay Regional Center. 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 is replacing existing uses within the Town Centre area and is designed to serve existing and future development, which is consistent with the City of Chula Vista land use planning and approvals. The project will displace three residences within the project boundary, which will not necessitate the construction of substantial numbers of replacement housing elsewhere. Response to XIIc. See response XIIb above. Population and Housing Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 23 - -, Gateway Chula Vista 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 D 0 [g] c) Schools? 0 D 0 [g] d) Parks? 0 0 0 ~ e) Other public facilities? 0 D 0 [g] Comments: Response to XIIla. The Chula Vista Fire Department currently meets the standard threshold for fire/emergency medical services (EMS) protection for the proposed redevelopment area. There are two stations serving the project site: (1) Fourth and F Street Station and (2) 80 East J Street Station. The department staff has set the following design requirements for the proposed project: (1) a 20-foot-wide fire lane with 13.5 feet of unobstructed vertical clearance on the western side of the site, (2) fully sprinklered buildings, and (3) a fire flow of 1500 gallons per minute at 20 pounds per square inch. With these requirements met, Fire Department staff has determined that no new facilities will be needed and estimates their emergency response time to tLe project site to be two minutes and paramedic-level services by American Medical Response to be less than three minutes. Redevelopment of the project site will not result in a significant impact to the fire services of the Chula Vista Fire Department. Response to XIIlb. The proposed project replaces existing development with larger commercial office buildings. The Chula Vista Police Department has determined that they will be able to serve the project site while still maintaining their current level of services. The project will not change the requirement to pay public facilities fees for police services based on equivalent dwelling units by development phase at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued. This will reduce current police service deficiencies to below a level of significance. 24 - - Gateway Chula Vista 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. Response to XIIlc. The proposed project will not generate an increase in dwelling units or population in the project area. Therefore, it will not result in a need for new or altered school facilities or services. The project is in an area served by the Chula Vista Elementary School District and the Sweetwater Union High School District. A developer fee of $0.33 for nonresidential development will be imposed at the building permit stage. The two school districts that serve the Gateway Chula Vista Specific Plan would split this fee and use the moneys to finance facilities needed to serve future growth. Response to XIIld. The proposed project will not generate an increase in dwelling units or population in the project area. The project will not result in a need for new parks or park services. The redevelopment project integrates landscaped courtyards and walkways which creates public outdoor activity areas promoting ethnic diversity and art in the "Town Centre" area. Response to XIIle. 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. 25 ,- - Gateway Chula Vista 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 D [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. Therefore, redevelopment will not increase the demand for neighborhood or regional parks or other recreational facilities and would not cause substantial deterioration in existing facilities. See Response XIIIe. Response to XIVb. The proposed project does not include any recreational facilities and does not require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities that might have an adverse physical effect on the environment. Recreational Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 26 "- - Gateway Chula Vista Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact XV. TRANSPORTATION/TRAFFIC. 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 (Le., 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] 0 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: BRW, Inc. prepared a traffic study, "H Street Traffic Analysis, Chula Vista, California," for the proposed project in June 1999 and an updated study, "Gateway Project Traffic Study," in September 2000. The traffic analysis included the AM and PM peak traffic generated by the Scripps Hospital and the South Bay Regional Center expansions. The project redevelops an existing commercial/residential area and the traffic analysis used a conservative approach by not incorporating trips generated by the existing uses into the study. The Gateway project was assumed to be three commercial buildings using 334,860 square feet on the 4.46-acre project site. This project type and size is calculated to add 879 AM peak hour trips (766 inboundll13 outbound) and 1,084 PM peak hour trips (348 inboundl736 outbound) to the city street system. The report is available for review at the Community Development Department, located at 430 Davidson Street, Suite B, Chula Vista, California 91910. 27 -- - Gateway Chula Vista Response to XVa. The proposed project is calculated to generate an additional 879 trips (766 entering, 113 departing) during the morning peak hours and 1,084 trips (348 entering, 736 exiting) during the P.M. peak hours (BRW 2000). The combined peak period trips contributed by the project (1,963 trips) are estimated to be 15 percent of project ADT contributed to the system. The average travel speeds and corresponding segment levels of service with project buildout are expected to decrease from existing speeds by no more than 3.8 mph during the-AM peak and 2.4 mph during the PM peak. This will be in compliance with the acceptable level of service of C or better. The traffic study prepared for the project indicates that the resultant trips generated by the proposed project will generate 9,939 ADT within the H Street corridor. Because this project redevelops an existing commercial/residential area, not all of the 9,939 ADT generated by the proposed project represents new trips to the roadway system. Existing traffic volumes on H Street between Fourth A venue and Third A venue and Third A venue and Second A venue are approximately 25,240 and 25,500 average daily trips, respectively. The SANDAG Series 9 Year 2020 traffic forecast indicates that the Year 2020 traffic volumes for H Street between Fourth A venue and Third A venue and Third A venue and Second A venue are projected to be 28,000 ADT and 24,000 ADT. respectively. This is compared to 32,700 ADT and 35.000 ADT estimated at project buildout. Therefore, study area levels of service in the Year 2020 are not anticipated to exceed the levels associated with buildout of the proposed redevelopment project (BRW 2000). Response to XVb. All project study area roads will operate at an acceptable LOS C or better and all study area roadways and intersections will operate at acceptable LOS D or better with the exception of the intersection of H Street and Third A venue. This intersection will drop to LOS E during the PM peak hours. The northbound approach to this intersection will experience LOS F delays, resulting from the combined increase of traffic from the proposed project and the South Bay Regional Center expansion. All other approaches to this intersection will operate at LOS D. A separate analysis of project buildout conditions without development of the South Bay Regional Center expansion or any other future project at this intersection indicates that the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue would operate at LOS D during the PM peak. Construction of a northbound right-turn lane will be required to accommodate the combined increase in traffic caused by the expansion of the South Bay Regional Center or similar sized projects and construi..tion of the proposed project. However, it should only be constructed concurrent with the South Bay Regional Center expansion or any other future project that will impact this intersection. This would facilitate traffic flow and allow for all intersections in the study area to operate at LOS C or better at non-peak hours and LOS D during peak hours of the day. A southbound right-turn lane is incorporated into the project design and left turns may be prohibited out of the H Street driveway under project buildout conditions to reduce overall delays. 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 XVd. The proposed project has no hazardous design features. The project provides two access driveways on Third A venue. one access driveway on H Street, and a valet/drop-off loop on H 28 - ,~ Gateway Chula Vista Street. Left-turn storage lanes will be provided into all of the site access driveways in order to remove turning vehicles from through travel lanes. Response to XVe. Emergency access to the project site will be incorporated into future development plans. Response to XVf. A four- to five-level, 1,117-space parking structure will be constructed along the north side of the buildings. The project provides two access driveways on Third A venue, one access driveway on H Street, and a valet/drop-off loop on H Street. The project's mix of uses crèates a shared parking scenario resulting in an excess of spaces at the highest hourly demand. Response to XV g. The proposed project does not conflict with any adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting alternative transportation. Transportation Mitigation The traffic analysis for the Gateway Chula Vista project has indicated that, with project buildout, the Scripps Hospital expansion, and the South Bay Regional Center expansion, acceptable roadway operations can be provided on H Street with the existing four-lane section (BRW 2000). Currently, H Street is classified as a six-lane major street in Chapter 2, Section 5.4, of the Chula Vista General Plan from Interstate 5 to Interstate 805. Major streets are designed to carry high volumes of traffic and serve to distribute traffic to and from the freeway system. A General Plan Amendment to reclassify H Street from a six-lane to a four-lane major street east of Fourth Avenue to Third Avenue has been initiated by the City of Chula Vista. A separate analysis of project buildout conditions without development of the South Bay Regional Center expansion or other future project that impacts this intersection indicates that the intersection of H Street and Third A venue would operate at a LOS D during the PM peak. Therefore, no improvements to existing intersection geometrics are required at this intersection until the South Bay Regional Center expansion occurs or any other future project at the intersection occurs. Construction of a northbound right-turn lane will be necessary to accommodate the combined increase in traffic caused by the expansion of the South Bay Regional Center or other similar projects and constrl'ction of the proposed project; however, it should only be constructed in conjunction with the South Bay Regional Center expansion or any other future project at the intersection of H Street and Third A venue occurs. In order to mitigate this impact, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the third phase of the project, the developer shall post a cash deposit in an amount equal to the entire cost of providing a right-turn-only lane at the northbound approach of Third A venue and H Street. The cost of the right-turn-only lane shall include all direct and indirect costs associated with acquisition of right-of-way, clearing, demolition, and reconstructing of existing public and private improvements and the design and construction of the lane to the specifications to be established by the Director of Public Works. These costs shall be as determined solely by the Director of Public Works. The City shall use its best efforts to ensure that other projects that have been determined to significantly contribute to the impact at this intersection shall contribute their 29 - - Gateway Chula Vista proportional fair share into a reimbursement district fund. In getting reimbursement, the City will determine the proportional share of the project to determine the reimbursement amount. Once determined, the fair share contribution will represent each project's entire contribution and additional contributions shall not be secured by the City. The following project design considerations were relied upon in determining that there will be sufficient gaps in traffic to allow vehicles to enter and exit the project site area without the need for signalization at any of the site driveways: 1. The project approval will be required to dedicate and construct a southbound right-turn lane that will be constructed on Third A venue to facilitate traffic flow and improve overall intersection operations. 2. Left turns out of the H Street driveway may be prohibited under project buildout conditions. Traffic will exit onto Third A venue and then proceed left onto H Street. 3. Left-turn storage will be provided at all site driveways where feasible, to remove left-turning vehicles from the through travel lanes. 4. The existing movement of traffic onto H Street will be permitted prior to buildout. Continuous monitoring of traffic operations at this site driveway will be required during interim time frame to determine the future implementation of appropriate traffic control. City engineers will determine if a signal is warranted with future redevelopment of the South Bay Regional Center or other project at that site and will reevaluate the need for a signal when more specific information is known about the site plan. 5. All access driveways will be constructed to connect the on-site (internal) circulation system to both Third Avenue and H Street under interim development conditions associated with Phases 1 and 2. The project buildout traffic volumes were compared to Year 2020 traffic volumes generated by the SANDAG Series 9 TRANPLAN regional forecasting model to determine whether additional background traffic is anticipated in the area by the year 2020. It was found that the estimated ADT volumes at buildüut are greater than the Year 2020 ADT volumes estimated by the SANDAG model. Study area levels of service in the year 2020 are not anticipated to exceed the approximate ADT volumes associated with buildout of the proposed redevelopment project (BRW 2000). Therefore, the proposed reclassification of H Street to a four-lane major street from a six-lane major street along the project frontage would not represent a significant impact. 30 - ~ Gateway Chula Vista 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] 0 applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board? b) Require or result in the construction of new water or 0 0 0 [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 0 [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 D D [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 [g] 0 capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs? g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and 0 0 0 [g] regulations related to solid waste? Comments: Response to XVla. The City of Chula Vista operates and maintains its own sewer collection system, which connects to the City of San Diego's Metropolitan Sewer System. The project site is served via two existing eight-inch wastewater lines in Third Avenue and one existing eight-inch line in H Street. Phase I development, consisting of construction of the easternmost building, will connect to the westernmost line in Third Avenue and is proposed to raise the number of equivalent dwelling units (EDUs) from 4.017 to 23.25. Phases 2 and 3 development will connect to the line in H Street. The proposed sewer capacity of the Phase 2 development will raise the EDUs by 30.49, 1.0 EDU from the existing parcels to 31.49 EDUs proposed for Phase 2. The Phase 3 development will raise the sewer capacity from 14.47 EDUs for the existing parcels to 28.42 EDUs. The total sewer capacity proposed for the project is 83.16 EDUs, which raises the existing sewer capacity uses by 63.68 EDUs. City engineers have indicated that existing 31 - -" Gateway Chula Vista facilities are adequate to serve the proposed project. No new sewer improvements are necessary other than construction of six-inch sewer laterals to each building. A sewage participation fee will be paid to the City for each phase of the project at the time of connection to the public sewer. At present, the sewerage participation fee for the project is $2,220.00 per 83.16 EDUs. Assuming the same rate for all three phases, the project will generate just over $184,615.20 by completion. Response to XVlb. See response XVIa. Response to XVlc. The existing development site is either paved for parking or developed. The project will not significantly increase the amount or type of impervious surface area over that which currently exists. The project will therefore not significantly increase the rate of runoff generated from the site. The storm water drainage facilities for the proposed project will be located in the existing street system. Impacts related to the construction of storm drainage facilities are expected to be less than significant because generation rates would be essentially the same as currently exists. See also response vmd. Response to XVId. The Sweetwater Authority provides water services to the proposed project and has determined based on fire flow requirements and projected land use that sufficient supplies of water are planned to be available. The project will utilize two eight-inch water mains located at H Street and Third Avenue and will be required to install three new two-inch water lines to serve the primary buildings and three one-inch water lines and meters for irrigation of landscape. The existing connections are required to be capped and no new facilities will be necessary. Response to XVle. See response XVIa. The proposed project will not alter the existing sewage treatment capacity in the city of Chula Vista. Response to XVIf. Solid wastes from the proposed project will be trucked to the Otay Landfill, which is estimated to have capacity to receive solid wastes for the next 25 years. Additionally, waste disposal needs will 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. Utilities and Service Systems Mitigation No significant impacts have been identified and no mitigation is required. 32 - ....... Gateway Chula Vista Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant ISSUE Impact Incorporation Impact No Impact XVII. THRESHOLD ANALYSIS. Would the project: -" a) Exceed the City's fire/EMS Threshold Standards? 0 0 [g] 0 b) Exceed the City's police Threshold Standards? 0 0 [g] 0 c) Exceed the City's traffic Threshold Standards? 0 [g] 0 0 d) Exceed the City's parks/recreation Threshold 0 0 0 [g] Standards? e) Exceed the City's drainage Threshold Standards? 0 0 [g] 0 f) Exceed the City's sewer Threshold Standards? D 0 [g] 0 g) Exceed the City's water Threshold Standards? 0 0 0 [g] h) Exceed the City's air quality Threshold Standards? D 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 XVIIa. The City's threshold standards require that fire and medical units must be able to respond to calls within seven minutes or less in 85 pel cent of the cases and within five minutes or less in 75 percent of the cases. The Chula Vista Fire Department estimates their emergency response time to the project site to be two minutes and paramedic-level services by American Medical Response to be less than three minutes. The proposed project will comply with this threshold standard. See response xma. Response to XVIIb. The City's threshold standards require that police units must respond to 84 percent of Priority 1 calls within seven 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 percent of Priority 2 calls within seven minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 2 calls of seven minutes or less. The Chula Vista Police Station is located at 276 Fourth A venue, which is in proximity to the project site. The Police Department has indicated that they will be able to serve the project site while still maintaining their current level of service. 33 - -- Gateway Chula Vista Response to XVIIc. The traffic threshold standards require that all intersections must operate at a level of service C or better, with the exception that LOS D may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections. 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. H Street between 1-5 and 1- 805 is classified as a Class III Arterial according to the City of Chula Vista's Traffic Monitoring Program. The analysis of the roadway segment LOS, using average travel speed, is based on this functional classification of the roadway. The traffic analysis indicates that the existing intersection level of service is operating at LOS C or better during the AM and PM peak hours with the exception of the intersection of H Street at Fourth Avenue, Third Avenue, and Hilltop Drive, which operate at LOS D during the PM peak hours. The traffic thresholds will not be exceeded due to the proposed project except at the intersection of H Street and Third Avenue~ However, this intersection's thresholds will only be exceeded at Phase 3 of the proposed project and the development of the South Bay Regional Center expansion or other similar projects. All other project study area roads will operate at an acceptable LOS C or better and intersections will operate at acceptable LOS D or better at project buildout. The H Street and Third Avenue intersection will drop to LOS E during the PM peak hours. The northbound approach to this intersection will experience LOS F delays, resulting from the combined increase of traffic from the proposed project and the South Bay Regional Center expansion or similar projects. A separate analysis of project buildout conditions without development of the South Bay Regional Center expansion or other future project that impacts this intersection indicates that the intersection of H Street and Third A venue would operate at LOS D during the PM peak. Construction of a northbound right-turn lane will be required to accommodate the combined increase in traffic caused by the expansion of the South Bay Regional Center or other project at that site and construction of the proposed project~ however, it should only be constructed concurrent with the South Bay Regional Center expansion and or any other future project that would impact the intersection. This will facilitate traffic flow and allow for all intersections in the study area to operate at LOS C or better at non-peak hours and LOS D during peak hours of the day, which are consistent with the City's threshold standards. See also response XVa. Response to XVIId. The City's threshold standard for parks does not apply to this project. 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 City's 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 project will not prevent the project from meeting City standards. 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. Future development at the project site must comply with the RWQCB's NPDES Permit No. CA 0108758. 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. 34 - ~ Gateway Chula Vista Response to XVIH. The threshold standards require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed City engineering standards. City engineers have indicated that existing facilities are adequate to serve the proposed project. A sewage participation fee will be paid to the City for each phase of the project at the time of connection to the public sewer. At present, the sewerage participation fee for the project is $2,220.00 per 83.16 EDUs. Assuming the same rate for all three phases, the project will generate just over $184,615.20 by completion. 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. The proposed project will use the water services of the Sweetwater Authority, which has determined that supplies of water will be available and supplied through two eight-inch mains which serve the project site. There are no new facilities required except for the addition of three two-inch and three one-inch water main connections and meters located within the site. The proposed project will comply with water conservation measures by (1) fitting restrooms with low- flow showerheads and toilets~ (2) landscaping areas with drought-tolerant plants~ and (3) installing efficient irrigation systems, such as soil moisture sensors and drip irrigation. This will reduce potential impacts to below a significant level. Response to XVllh. The threshold standard for air quality states that "the City shall annually provide the San Diego Air Pollution Control District 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. The project area 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 1998). The proposed project is generally consistent v,ith Chula Vista's General Plan. Therefore, the proposed project is 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 pedestrian routes as part of the project plan. Therefore, the proposed project is consistent with the goals and objectives of the RAQS and satisfies 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: 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 35 -,~. - - Gateway Chula Vista 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 I8-month period and 3- to 5-year period. The existing fiscal analysis for the project area 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. The proposed project would not significantly affect the existing fiscal analysis except to increase the income-producing potential of the area. 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 XVlIk. 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 XVlla. 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. XVllc. See response XVa. The traffic analysis for the Gateway Chula Vista project has indicated that, with buildout of all known projects in the study area, acceptable roadway operations can be provided on H Street with the existing four-lane section (BRW 2000). Construction of a northbound right-turn lane will be necessary to accommodate the combined increase in traffic caused by the expansion of the South Bay Regional Center, or other similar projects, and construction of the proposed project. However, it should only be constructed concurrent with the South Bay Regional Center or any other similar project on that site. This would facilitate traffic flow and allow for all intersections in the study area to operate at LOS C 36 - ..-- Gateway Chula Vista or better at non-peak hours and LOS D during peak hours of the day, which are consistent with the City's threshold standards. XVIId. No mitigation is required. XVIle. No mitigation is required. XVIIf. 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. XVIlg. No mitigation is required. XVITh. No mitigation is required. XVIIi. No mitigation is required. XVIIj. No mitigation is required. 37 -, -, Gateway Chula Vista Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUE Significant Mitigation Significant 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 [g] 0 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 [g] 0 will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? 38 - - . Gateway Chula Vista XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES The mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project and will be implemented during the future design, construction, or operation of the project. These measures include the following: Noise Section 19.68.030 of the City of Chula Vista Noise Ordinance limits noise levels on weekdays to 60 A-weighted decibels [dB (A)] from 7 A.M. to 10 P.M. (8 A.M. to 10 P.M. on weekends) and 50 dB(A) from 10 P.M. to 7 A.M. (10 P.M. to 8 A.M. on weekends). Normal operation and maintenance of the commercial buildings is not anticipated to result in noise levels that would exceed these standards. The project design incorporates an enclosed storage area, off-street loading spaces, an interior loading dock, and trash enclosures to minimize the impacts of noise. The parking structure will be constructed adjacent to existing multi-family residential on the west and north. In some areas, the minimum separation between the residential structures and the parking structure will be approximately 20 feet. Activities in the portions of the structure that may remain open after 10 P.M. have the potential to exceed the nighttime noise ordinance standard. Additionally, car alarms and power sweeping of the structure are potential sources of nuisance noise. Therefore, the following measures will be incorporated into the project to lessen the noise impacts to below a significant level: 1. Access to upper levels of the parking structure will be closed between the hours of 7:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. to limit potential noise impacts to neighboring properties. 2. The north and west areas of the parking structure will be closed at the levels that remain open during the evening and nighttime hours. 3. Power sweeping of the structure will be limited to the hours of 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. on weekdays and 8 a.m. to 10 p.m. on Saturdays and will be prohibited on Sundays. During construction, equipment would generate temporary noise. At times these temporary noise level increases could be significant at the adjacent residential structures. Although construction and demolition activities are not subject to the exterior noise requirements of Municipal Code Section 19.68.030, restricting the construction activities to weekdays and Saturday only during the daytime hours (7:00 A.M. to 7:00 P.M.) would mitigate the temporary noise increases due to . construction below a level of significance. Incorporation of these measures, as well as compliance with the general noise ordinance standards, will ensure that no significant noise impacts will occur. 39 - - Gateway Chula Vista Transportationffraffic The traffic analysis for the Gateway Chula Vista project has indicated that, with project buildout, the Scripps Hospital expansion, and the South Bay Regional Center expansion, acceptable roadway operations can be provided on H Street with the existing four-lane section (BRW 2000). Currently, H Street is classified as a 'six-lane major street in Chapter 2, Section 5.4, of the Chula Vista General Plan from Interstate 5 to Interstate 805. Major streets are designed to carry high volumes of traffic and serve to distribute traffic to and from the freeway system. A General Plan Amendment to reclassify H Street from a six-lane to a four-lane major street east of Fourth A venue to Third A venue has been initiated by the City of Chula Vista. A separate analysis of project buildout conditions without development of the South Bay Regional Center expansion or other future project which impacts this intersection indicates that the intersection of H Street and Third A venue would operate at a LOS D during the PM peak. Therefore, no improvements to existing intersection geometrics are required at this intersection until the South Bay Regional Center expansion occurs or other similar projects. Construction of a northbound right-turn lane will be necessary to accommodate the combined increase in traffic caused by the expansion of the South Bay Regional Center or other similar project on that site and construction of the proposed project. However, it should only be constructed concurrent with the South Bay Regional Center expansion or any other future project that will impact the intersection. In order to mitigate this impact, prior to the issuance of a building permit for the third phase of the project, the developer shall post a cash deposit in an amount equal to the entire cost of providing a right-turn-only lane at the northbound approach of Third A venue and H Street. The cost of the right-turn-only lane shall include all direct and indirect costs associated with acquisition of right- of-way, clearing, demolition, and reconstructing of existing public and private improvements and the design and construction of the lane to the specifications to be established by the Director of Public Works. These costs shall be as determined solely by the Director of Public Works. The City shall use its best efforts to ensure that other projects that have been determined to significantly contribute to the impact at this intersection shall contribute their proportional fair share into a reimbursement district fund. In getting reimbursement, the City will determine the proportional share of the project to determine the reimbursement (li:10unt. Once determined, the fair-share contribution will represent each project's entire contribution and additional contributions shall not be secured by the City. The following project design considerations were relied upon in detennining that there will be sufficient gaps in traffic to allow vehicles to enter and exit the project site area without the need for signalization at any of the site driveways: 1. The project approval will be required to dedicate and construct a southbound right-turn lane that will be constructed on Third A venue to facilitate traffic flow and improve overall intersection operations. 40 - - Gateway Chula Vista 2. Left turns out of the H Street driveway may be prohibited under project buildout conditions. Traffic will exit onto Third Avenue and then proceed left onto H Street. 3. Left-turn storage will be provided at all site drivewayswhere feasible, to remove left-turning vehicles from the through travel lanes. -" 4. The existing movement of traffic onto H Street will be permitted prior to buildout. Continuous monitoring of traffic operations at this site driveway will be required during interim time frame to determine the future implemèntation of appropriate traffic control. City engineers will determine if a signal is warranted with future redevelopment of the South Bay Regional Center and will reevaluate the need for a signal when more specific information is known about the site plan for the South Bay Regional Center expansion. 5. All access driveways will be constructed to connect the on-site (internal) circulation system to both Third A venue and H Street under interim development conditions associated with Phases 1 and 2. The project buildout traffic volumes were compared to Year 2020 traffic volumes generated by the SANDAG Series 9 TRANPLAN regional forecasting model to determine whether additional background traffic is anticipated in the area by the year 2020. It was found that the estimated ADT volumes at buildout are greater than the Year 2020 ADT volumes estimated by the SANDAG model. Study area levels of service in the year 2020 are not anticipated to exceed the approximate ADT volumes associated with buildout of the proposed redevelopment project (BRW 2000). Therefore, the proposed reclassification of H Street to a four-lane major street from a six- lane major street along the project frontage would not represent a significant impact. 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 linb 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 Env allmpact Report. ~ ~'( 14W Date r ~m~~~ ~~ ~~ V~*~(u,~ Agent For ) 41 .--...0- - Gateway Chula Vista 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. D Aesthetics D Agriculture Resources D Air Quality D Biological Resources D Cultural/Paleontological Resources D Geology / Soils D Hazards & Hazardous Materials D Hydrology / Water Quality D Land Use / Planning D Mineral Resources 181 Noise D Population / Housing D Public Services D Recreation [8J Transportation / Traffic D Utilities / Service Systems D Mandatory Findings of Significance XXll. DETERMINATION On the basis of this initial evaluation: I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, D and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, 181 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, D and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. I find that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect(s) on the environment, but at D least one effect: 1) has been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measul es 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, D 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. 42 ._~. -, - Gateway Chula Vista ~~ \D 'L,\. OD Signa ure Date' Brian Hunter City of Chula Vista Printed Name Agent For RECON Number 3188E 43 I I <!I311n!J , a<!ln;) !JN1!~JX3 v- _ _ .2!.ld~ ~ _ _ _ I !JNJdHI1~ a3~CdC<!ld ] n~ AO µ---a '::J I-!"",;....... .. ,0 IS 14 - . ¡ \J .-J I \' V U o' r·m..¡ -L ~ ----9M{dI~lS &3&BdEtèIC; I'~ - - --+-- - - I· - ____~dJ<!Il~a3~Odœd~___ I X3 "------' I 'ö311...6·· 'i -û<:itiJ- 1133DöGCîd r~< h T -In_-;~~ ~I" I: &: \,,{' ~ II ' j I "'t . ~~ - I, . ,¡;, -I ~I ~i ~I ¡:, ""'I ~I - ¡ ""' "",, !i ~:::;I - I ",' C" I- I:JI z I.J '" ~I- ¡;ï1 ~: X J :;;' :;;1 I ' w x _I - > Co ..wl x" x .5 . Wi WI I ~, 1,68 :, ' I · u ., I . ".., ~,-~ : I l ~' ~_ ~: ~i.. I Á .....) I 11'1 I f' I I L~"",' -'~'-'''jJ At <'< ~ ,-,.. ".... -0 .' < , " . . ~ " """1JoI . 8 'v 6 'I, '0 '0 'h!;¡ , ' , I · M. . ~ ! I I I I I I I ,', I . I I I,' I I 'I I ,I I I Rt I I I - I , rc'<> - I I ¡ ~. I I I ! · I I I I I oCI ~ . I x- , oCI , I I I r . I i I a~.. . I I ~ I I a~" I" , I , I n.. I (\;'1 I ¡ I ¡ I I I t ¡. "~I ,¿ '61" I- ~ û::' ~ ~t