Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 1984-11573 RESOLUTION NO. 11573 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING RESIDENTIAL USE OF LOT 331 OF HIDDEN VISTA VILLAGE The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby resolve as follows: WHEREAS, Financial Scene, Inc. and Terra Nova Associates have requested that the approved Rice Canyon Section Planning Area (SPA) of the El Rancho Del Rey Specific Plan be amended in order to allow the use of approximately 3.4 acres of property (Lot 331 Hidden Vista Village Subdivision) presently designated for commercial recreation use to be used for residential purposes, and WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has found that the information contained in EIR-79-8, which was previously certified by the Council, is adequate for the proposed project and satisfies CEQA review requirements and recommends that said EIR be recertified, and WHEREAS, on February 22, 1984, the Planning Commission, in accordance with Resolution PCM-80-13-A, approved the residen- tial use of Lot 331 of Hidden Vista Village, and WHEREAS, the City Council has held a public hearing on March 20, 1984 to consider the amendment to the Rice Canyon SPA, and having heard testimony thereon, recommends approval of the residential use of Lot 331 of Hidden Vista Village. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista does hereby approve residential use of Lot 331 of Hidden Vista Village in accordance with Planning Commission Resolution PCM-80-13-A. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby recertify EIR-79-8 for the Hidden Vista Village development and has considered the information contained therein in reaching a decision on this project. Presented by Approved as to form by ~~-:J~r~tor Planning of ~" , ~~L:'_ .--;-:ell) -"..."r/t..-: ~/'f'-' , Thomas J. Harron, City Attorney HULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this ~ 84 ADOPTED AND APPROVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF 22nd day of March , by the following vote, to_it: ,YES: Councilmen IAYES: Councilmen ,BSTAIN: Cot.ncilmen BSENT: Councilmen Cox, Moore, McCand1iss, Scott, Malcolm None None None 'I Ma r the City of Chura Vista ,TTEST ~ ./.1Z--?~ ?J;c;Jth A~ (/ City Clerk t::' !l.(J" ;TATE OF CALIFORNIA ) :OUNTY OF SAN DIEGO ) 5 s. :!TY OF CHULA VISTA ) I, JENNIE M. FULASZ, CMC, CITY CLERK of the City of Chula Vista, California, 10 HEREBY CERTIFY that the above and foregoing is a full, true and correct copy of RESOLUTION NO. 11573 ,and that the some has not been amended or repealed. IATED (seal) City Clerk X-660 RESOLUTION NO. PCM-80-13-A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE USE OF COMMERCIALLY DESIGNATED PROPERTY FOR RESIDENTIAL PURPOSES WITHIN THE RICE CANYON SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA OF THE EL RANCHO DEL REV SPECIFIC PLAN WHEREAS, the City Council adopted Resolution 10081 approving the development plans for the Rice Canyon Sectional Planning Area of the El Rancho del Rey Specific Plan, and l~HEREAS, on January 12, 1984, Fi nand al Scene, Inc. and Terra Nova Associ ates requested penni ssi on to al ter the desi gnated 1 and use of approximately 3 acres of 1 and located on the south si de of East IIH" Street opposite Ridgeback Road from commercial recreation to residential in order to develop a 150-unit senior citizen housing project on said property, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a hearing on the change in land use designation and notice of said hearing together with its purpose was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City at least ten days prior to the hearing, and WHEREAS, the heari ng was hel d at the time and pl ace as adverti sed, namely 7:00 p.m., February 22, 1984, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed, and WHEREAS, the Planning Commission recertified EIR-79-8 and noted that the information contained in the report was considered in reaching a decision on this proposal. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION finds the proposed resi denti al development is in conformance wi th the text of the El Rancho del Rey Specific Plan. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends that the City Counci 1 adopt a resol uti on amendi ng the Ri ce Canyon SPA to permit residential development of Lot 331 of the Hidden Vista Village Subdivision subject to the fOllOWing conditions: 1. A parcel map or a lot line adjustment plat shall be required for the adjustment of the common property line between Lots 331 and 332. 1(-11577 2. Lot 332 (approximately 3.4 acres) shall be designated for senior citizen housing subject to Design Review Committee approval. The project shall not exceed a maximum of 150 units. The actual number of uni ts shall be based upon archi tectura1 desi gn considerations, site planning, and the livability of the project. A parking ratio of 1/2 space for each one-bedroom dwelling unit and 1 space for each two-bedroom unit shall be required. The building height shall be limited to three stories. 3. Lot 331 (approximately 11.6 acres) shall be designated for residential land use at a maximum density of 232 units or 'approximately 20 uni ts per acre. The development shall adhere to the City.s R-3 zoning standards and the adopted Chu1a Vista Design Manual, subject to Design Review Committee approval. 4. A mi nimum of 20% of the 232 apartment units and 100% of the senior units shall be designated for low-income families subject to the approval of an agreement between the developer and the Ci ty Counci 1. 5. Joint access agreements for Lots 331 and 332 shall be recorded in accordance with the approved site plans. And that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 22nd day of February, 1984, by the following vote, to wit: AYES: Commissioners Pressutti, Green, Guiles, Cannon and 01Nei11 NOES: None ABSENT: Johnson and Shipe ~o).~ J n W. 01Nei11, Chairman ATTEST: ~~~L:~ Ruth M. Smith, Secretary WPC 0795P R-//673 ( . ~ Co M It1 Cl 0:::: ... ..... r-l H ..... It1 C'~ 0::: r 4.10 CTI 0 Ul+J >0-. -r-l ..ce~' ::- c- . ~1t1 o~, er-l Cl -r-l rg~~. It1 -..... co ~~ 'd r-: 't.i 0'1 N\.-I H.c .;>. Q) ::JHr-! 0'10 roo. \" Ul'O ..c::o ~ C c.' r" +l 0 Q) uu ... .r-l Q)Ul~ C C > UM 1t1.-\ \.-I 0 ....:l 0 0 ~: It ...... I1i Q..t:: -- \.-I E 0 r-l ~u (f) ty.p, (!) "'-r-l H s:: 1-1 >- It1 l-: 0 .. .r-l 4.1 -..... ~ ~o +J (!) -r-l ~o:::: -..... t Ul Q)..Q U \.-I r-lQ) -r-l ~ (J) 0 ... ro.r-l X-r-lO E-4 Q)~: 0 uc r.:l~+J H .e -r-l t' ..... +lr-lQ) ... ~ ,,:... -- :::> It-r-l 0 I'Ci ...:l s::uc t). (J) L--{SM .r-l Q) ~: ~ ...... ... E-iN ... 0 rcl 0 Q) ..,.. IJ') 00 ::J }- ~ I r-l -Q) ~ I: P I 4.1 ~: co Q) UJ HrLl 0 ro 0 U):> UJ U) C.l) CO+l 0:::: 0: +1 rLl:::> u)1-I , Ul ~ +l Q) Q).e }- Q) E-i U "''0 :3+l { CJ) ~ H c.z It o \.-I e \.-I U rLlr4 l-l t) 0 Q) :3 't :I: ..::; (,') :;[' E-4 Q) U :> c I ~ OE-i -r-l G.J O:::~ I t- \0 P, p:; Itco.; I ~ . O~ +l .eM CJ) r-l ~p.. Ul C :> +J ~ I <! -.....J r-l p..-:t ...... It:+J X\.P ~\ UJ :> (J) I: -.....N :3 cr. rn~: c ........, Q) ,....; OU MUl I: :3 N Q) CO -ri ..c:: >.~: M+l ...:l U+lO r-lrcl I: -r-l .......... +l q.~ :3 Q) "U :t; 0 0 o U Q) 0 H U-r-l I: l/) N ~; Cll Ul ml ~ M Cll4-l U-:t (!) M..c::O (J) :e: +l rn 't.i Cll ......:> c I: I:.e C'Cl 0 r::l rn -ri +l .,., Z U) U 0 r-l "I: ~ It1 p.. M 1t1-r-l It1 \.-I 0 M+l ~ H Cll ~ Ul'd -ri Q) r-l P, +l -r-l Q) ~E-i It1 .. S?I O:>r-l U ~ -ri I I +1 H It1Ig cr. ~ Ul rLl [f:l r-l r-l N 0 Q) U) :::> .. :3 ... Ml"'"l 7 \.-I :::>0:0 Z..cr-l MM ~ U o:=: o V In ~ -:t OH H 0 E-4 E-' r.'~ Z z E-' 4-: 0 00 c: ~ ~ U)ww p.. Or-i ~~ ro . Ocr.N H - "-J M c.. H 0:: ~ . a. OC::E-i U+lO 0:::0 H U)...... Z E-' . c.1~1 u rLl u z <( c. Ig ~ CJ 0 U . ~.c(l) H a. O:::+JH ~ . t:1 Q) p. C/') r::l e.c c.. ...::; ...... 4.1 0::: D /(' //57.? - i .' . I'L ~,~, ~-~,,~ ~'r~ .-:~ ~.t~. . - ~ .".. r .-' IB:!;:ID ~ ~ c:: c::;:} ;~ i~ i'" · I <till .... /f-//67~ f ;. ~ i l l t- Yo ,- . " . t { t , ~, r .. ~ t I- -, (, > ,,- i I ;, . ..: . ~..) i . ) :.. C.. ,,:. c. City of Chu1a Vista Chula Vista, Canfornia RECOMMENDATION AND FINDINGS OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR Pursuant to the provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended, the Environmental Review Coordinator on January 20, 1983, considered the following project: IS-83-13, Shell Oil Company Service Station On the basis of this initial study the following recommendation and findings are offered: A. RECOMMENDATION The Environmental Review Coordinator finds that the EIR-77-2 (Bonita Glen Specific Plan) is adequate and satisfies CEQA review requirements for the proposed project and recommends that the Planning Commission, City Council and Design Review Committee certify EIR-77-2 in that regard. B. FINDINGS An initial study application'has been submitted (IS-83-13, Shell Oil Company Service Station) to determine whether the information contained in the EIR-77-2 adequately discusses the environmental effects of the proposed project. The project involves an amendment to the Bonita Glen Specific Plan to include a self service gasoline station and car wash as permitted land uses in addition to development of these uses at the southeast corner of Bonita Road and Bonita Glen Drive. Information contained in the EIR remains valid since no development has occurred on the site and ci rcumstances surroundi ng the project site have changed very little. Mitigation contained in the EIR, which would be implemented with the development of the project, will include a signalized intersection at Bonita Road and Bonita Glen Drive and a raised median along the project frontage of Bonita Road. The City Engineer is currently coordinating efforts for these improvements. Other mitigation measures will be included as conditions of approval by the decision making body. Potential environmental effects which may result from the project implementation hav~ been adequately addressed in the EIR-77-2. ;P-I/57,/ . . CO.' o . (" - 0 -2- The initial study application and evaluation forms for the proposed project are on file and available for public review at the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010. DATE: January 20, 1983 /?-11.r7~ I FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT BONITA GLEN SPECIFIC PLAN EIR-77-2 Issued by Environmental Review Committee March 17, 1977 Adopted by Chula Vista Planning Commission April 20, 1977 , . j I /(-1/57:J TABLE OF CONTENTS Section 1.0 Introduction . . . . . . . . 2.0 Project Description. . . . . . . . . . . . 3.0 Impact Analysis. . . . 4.0 Unavoidable Adverse . . . . . . . . . . . . 5.0 Alternatives to the Proposed :. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6.0 Relationship between local short term use of the environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long term productivity. . . . . . . . . . . 7.0 Irreversable Environmental changes that will result from the proposed project. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8.0 Growth-inducing Impact of the proposed action. . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9.0 Effects found not to be significant. . .... Input . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10.0 List of Figures Location . Map Conceptual Plan Alternative A Conceptual Plan Alternative B seismic Map Noise Contours Map Appendices on file in the Planning Dept. and available for public review. A. Initial Study 76-114 B. Bonita Glen Specific Plan C. Noise Analysis 1f-1157/ page 1 2 6 17 17 17 18 18 18 19 21 22 23 24 25 Section 1.0 Introduction 1.1 Purpose . This Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista to provide the public and decision making authorities with an analysis of the possible environmental consequences of implementing the Bonita Glen Specific Plan. This document will also discuss methods by which adverse impacts could be mitigated and possible alternatives to the project as proposed. This EIR has been prepared in compliance with the Environmental Review Policy of the City of Chula Vista and the Calif. Environmental Quality Act of 1970, as amended. Discretionary acts to be reviewed in consideration of the project include adoption of the specific plan, rezoning of a portion of the site, prezoning of another area and annexation of about 1.42 acres to the City of Chula Vista. Appendix A of this EIR is the evaluation form which resulted from the Initial Study of this project. This document will discuss those aspects of the project which could involve substantial and adverse environ- mental impacts identified in the initial study. 1.2 Executive Summary 1.2.1 This project involves the adoption of a specific plan wh1ch would regulate the develop- ment located at the southwest quadrant of Bonita Road & I-80S. The project could involve a mixture of commercial and residential uses. 1.2.2 There is an inferred earthquake fault trace which could transverse the site. A Registered Engineering Geologist should be present during the grading of the site to insure that no substantial hazard is present. 1.2.3 The site does have adverse soil conditions, however these environmental impacts can be mitigated through standard development regulations. 1.2.4 Any adverse effect on ground water due to this project and any impacts on this project due to ground water can be fully mitigated. However, on a long term cumulative basis, continued develop- ment in this general area will reduce the quality of ground water significantly. /<~IIS7~ 1.2.5 Although a portion of the project site is located on .the fringe of the Sweetwater River flood plain, there will be no adverse effects due to this project. 1.2.6 There will be an irreversible change in the land form of the project site. These impacts can be mitigated through standard development regulations. 1.2.7 The project will have an individually insignificant impact on air quality, but an incremental and cumulatively significant impact. 1.2.8 Mitigation measures can reduce the adverse noise impacts from I-80S traffic to an insignificant level. 1.2.9 Through the specific plan regulations, implementation of the gateway policies of the Scenic Route Element of the General Plan can be assured. 1.2.10 The elementary and junior high school facilities which serve this project are currently over capacity. If the residential element of the plan becomes more dominant, a potentially signi- ficant impact could result. 1.2.11 The project will result in a substantial increase in traffic volumes. Through mitigation proposed in this EIR, Bonita Glen Dr. and its intersection with Bonita Rd. ~an adequately accommodate the increased volumes. However, the proposed access directly onto Bonita Rd. could cause a substantial and adverse impact on the ability of Bonita Rd. to accommodate future traffic volumes and the safety of motorists near the Bonita Rd.-I-805 interchange. Through mitigation proposed in this EIR, which would preclude left hand turn movements, this significant impact can be avoided. la ~~Sy 2.0 Project Description This project involves the~adoption of a Specific Plan to regulate the development of the subject property in accordance with standards specified in the plan. The specific plan is incorporated in this document as Appendix B. . The general objectives of the Bonita Glen Specific Plan are as follows: 2.1 The establishment of standards and requlations for the planned development of 8.74 acres of land generally bounded by the I-80S/Bonita Rd. interchange, Bonita Rd., Bonita Glen Drive and Vista Drive, and graphically described on Exhibit A, of the Specific Plan. (See Fig. 1) 2.2 The encouragement of the development of an integrated residential-commercial project based upon special standards and regulations, and a predetermined conceptual plan, which is graphically depicted on Exhibit B, of the Specific Plan. (See Fig. 2 & 3) 2.3 The encouragement of higher levels of design freedom and land-planning innovation than those which could be achieved through the application of con- ventional zoning provisions. 2.4 The establishment of procedures for the administration and amendment of the Bonita Glen Specific Plan. The specific standards and regulations of the specific plan are as follows: 2.S The following land uses, when consistent with the adopted conceptual plan, and when approved under the project plan process and procedure, pursuant to Section 6.2; are permitted within the project area of the Bonita Glen Specific Plan. a. Book, stationary, clothing, shoe, variety, and jewelry stores. b. Pharmacies, saddle shops, cycleries, travel agencies, and restaurants. c. Specialty food stores, antique shops, and dry cleaning agencies. d. Small theatres and artists' studios. e. Banks, savings and loan offices, insurance offices, and real estate offices. f. Apartments, condominiums, residential hotels, motels, motor hotels. g. Other retail stores and services approved by the Planning Commission. 2 ;:? -IIS7,1 . 2.6 The standards and regulations contained herein represent the policy of the Planning Commission and City Council with regard to development in the Bonita Glen area. It is intended that the standards be considered as mor~ than guidelines but that they not be as inflexible as ordinance standards. The Planning Commission, upon the recommendation of the Zoning Administrator, may adjust said standards and regulations upon finding that said adjustment will not adversely affect the nature, character, design, order, amenity or intent of the Bonita Glen project or Specific Plan. An appeal from the action of the Planning Commission may be filed with the City Council, provided that it is filed within ten (10) days of the Planning Commission's action. 2.7 The following bulk, height, setback, parking, landscaping, urban design, and sign-control regulations shall apply to all uses and structures established and constructed within the project area of the Bonita Glen Specific Plan. a. Bulk Requirements Maximum building coverage: 40% of the net area of the site. Minimum distance between buildings: As determined by the Zoning Administrator, who shall use the height, location, length, and occupancy load of the involved building or governing criteria. b. Height Regulations Maximum building height: 30 ft. (2 stories) Maximum height of clock towers, spires, cupolas, belvederes and architectural features: 45 ft. c. Setback Requirements All buildings and structures shall be setback a minimum of 25 ft. from the street rights-of- way which abut upon the Retail Commercial area. d. Off-Street Parking Requirements Retail stores, restaurants, and dry cleaners: 1 off-street parking space per 200 sq. ft. of gross floor area. Offices: I Off-street parking space per 300 sq. ft. of gross floor area. Studios: I off-street parking space per 400 sq. ft. of gross floor area. Theatres: 1 Off-street parking space per 3.5 fixed seats. Residential apartments: Same as zoning regulations, see Section 19.62.050 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Residential hotels: 1 off-street parking space per guest room or suite. Other uses: To be determined by the Planning Commission~ 1 ~~n~ e. Landscaping Requirements A minimum of 15% of the net area of the project area of the Bonita Glen Specific Plan shall be devoted to landscaping, which may take the form of planted areas, architectural flooring, plazas, fountains, open enclosures, ponds, and mall furniture. f. Urban Design Requirements The design of each proposed land use, building, structure, sign, parking area, and site plan shall be reviewed by the Director of Planning, and shall be subsequently referred to the Planning Commission for its consideration and action. The Commission shall consider each proposed design from the standpoint of its consistency with the nature, character, and design quality of the Bonita Road-Bonita Glen Drive area, and the Bonita Community at large. The applicant, within 10 days after the date of Commission action, may file an appeal from the decision of the Planning Commission with the City Council. g. Sign Control Regulations A maximum of one sq. ft. of sign area per each lineal foot of building frontage, but not more than 50 sq. ft. of sign area shall be permitted for each land use in the project area. Said sign shall be located parallel to and attached to the front of the use it advertises or represents. In addition to the above signs, the entire project area may be represented by one 25' high, free- standing sign. The said sign shall not exceed 100 sq. ft. The Planning Commission may permit, in addition to the above signs, external directories and graphics. h. Access and Circulation Access to the site shall be as generally shown on Fig. 2 & 3. The access drive to Bonita Rd. shall be considered as a "trial" access point. This access may be closed by the City at such time as the City Council finds that the following conditions exist: 1) The use of the driveway adversely affects the movement of traffic on Bonita Rdi and 2) Adequate access to the center is available from Bonita Glen Dr. and Vista Dr. 4 tf...../IS73 In order to provide an adequate on-site circula- tion system and off-street parking area, non- . exclusive access easements shall be provided for the benefit of all property owners in the area. . 5 a~~ 3.0 Impact Analysis 3.1 Geology 3.1.1 Project Setting According to Special Report 123 prepared by the Calif. Division of Mines and Geology, there are two known earthquake faults located within 600 ft. of the site and two inferred faults located within 800 ft. (see Fig. 5) An investigation of the inferred fault to the west . traversing San Miguel Ranch, resulted in negative" findings and it is possible that the suspected fault trace does not exist farther north where it is projected to be located adjacent to the Bonita Glen boundary. 3.1.2 Potential Impact If the project site is transversed by a fragment of local earthquake fault traces, the project could be adversely effected by ground rupture. Thus the project and its occupants would be exposed to a greater seismic hazard than is normal for the So. Calif. area. 3.1.3 Mitigation A registered Engineering Geologist should be present during grading of the site to ensure that no fragments of earthquake fault transverse the property. If the site is subject to a ground rupture hazard the geologist should make recommendations regarding adequate structure set-back, foundation design, etc. 3.1.4 Analysis of Significance If all recommendations of the geologist are followed, the project will not be exposed to any greater seismic hazard than any other . area of Southern Calif. 3.2 Soils 3.2.1 Project Setting The soils exposed on the site are classified by the United States Department of Agriculture Soil Survey of the San Diego area as part of the Huerhuero series. These soils consist of moderately well drained loams that have a clay subsoil and slopes of 2 to 30 percent. h I( ~ / 1~2~__._ . __.m. 3.3 Ground Water 3.3.1 Project-Setting Soils reports prepared for projects in the area of this project have indicated that ground water levels are aroung 20 ft. below grade. The Sweetwater River ground water is used for irri- gation of the Bonita Golf Course to the north of the projct site. . 3.3.2 Potential Impact The development of the site will decrease the peremability of the property and lessen the in- flow of water into the underlying ground .water.. If ground water is found to be higher than anticipated, there will also be a greater potential for liquifaction. Liquifaction is the process by which the bearing ability or the cohesion of a soil is severly dimenished during an earthquake. This is to to an increase in the pressure of water in the soil caused by shaking and the soil properties. 3.3.3 Mitigation Any problem relating to liquifaction can be mitigated by several structural and grading techniques. In preparing a soils report for development of the site, questions regarding the ground water level and the potential for liquifacation should be addressed. 3.3.4 Analysis Potential impacts on ground water due to the development of the project will be insignificant because of the small portion of the total water shed involved. However, on a long term . cumulative basis, development within this general area and the proposed provision of the Sweetwater flood control channel will reduce the quality of ground water significantly. All impacts due to the potential for liquifaction can be avoided or mitigated to an insignificant level if the reco~endations of a soils engineer are followed. A'IIS/7) The distribution of the grading will likely be in the form of cuts at the higher elevations with fill being placed at the lower elevations. Also some redistribution of soils may be necessary due to the adverse soil conditions. The grading may result in a greater potential for erosion, siltation and drainage problems until the landscaping of exposed surfaces is completed.and the planting matures. The grading operation could also result in short term impacts due to the creation of dust and noise. 3.5.3 Mitigation The impacts associated with land form change can be mitigated through proper landscaping and maintenance of the slope areas. Although the land form change is irreversible, the natural land form in the project area is not a significant aesthetic feature of the community and the change is not adverse and substantial. 3.5.4 Analysis The impacts due to land form change can be mitigated to an insignificant level. 3.6 Air Quality 3.6.1 Project.Setting ~, The project site is located within the San Diego Air basin and the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District which maintains monitoring stations throughout the basin. The most serious air quality problem in the basin is due to the concentration of oxidants. This pollutant is a result of a complex chemical reaction involving organic hydrocarbons, nitrogen oxides 'and sunlight. The number of days per year during which a violation of the Federal standards of .08 parts per million, have been exceeded are as follows: 1971 181 1972 148 1973 135 1974 127 1975 96 1976* 131 *through Sept. only /?~IIS13 The federal standard for oxidants was exceeded at the Chula Vista monitoring station the following number of days =- 1972 1973 1974 1975 1976 60 67 48 42 30* " *through Sept. only. The most important localized source of air contaminants is I-80S just to the east of the project. This type of source generates a higher concentration of carbon monoxide in the immediate vicinity of the roadway than is typical of the air basin as a whole. An analysis of the impacts of I-80S on air quality near Telegraph Canyon Rd. was conducted in 1974 using the Gaussian Plume model. Assuming worst case conditions, such as Santa Ana winds, freeway congestion, and low speeds, increases in in concentration of 1.1 parts per million for 1976 and .7 parts per million for 1990 were forecast. The highest one hour average , recorded at the Chula Vista monitoring station was .9 parts per million. Thus the highest one hour level likely to occur at this site should be approximately 10.0 parts per million. The federal standard for CO concentration is 35 parts per million using a 1 hour average concentration. 3.6.2 Potential Impact Although the project is located adjacent to a freeway there will be no significant adverse impact due to the concentration of carbon monoxide. . The increase in vehicle usage due to the project 'would result in the emission of .03 tons (metric) of reactive hydrocarbons per day. This rep- resents a .012% increase in the overall air basin and a .24% increase in the City of Chula Vista's contribution to this pollutant. This is an individually insignificant impact. On a cumulative basis, continued growth in the air basin will make more difficult the goal of meeting the federal and state air quality standards. I? /1~7} 3.6.3 Mitigation The project as proposed is a mixed residential and commercial use development. This will serve to reduce the number of vehicle trips normally made from residential uses for commercial services. Design of the facility and the review of precise uses should promote this activity rather than greater use of the automobile. 3.6.4 Analysis The project will have an individually insignificant but an incremental cumulatively significant impact. 3.7 Noise 3.7.1 Project Setting A noise analysis, based on 1990 traffic projections, was performed to evaluate the effects of I-80S on the ambient noise level of the project site. Figure 5 illustrates the projected noise contours developed in the acoustical analysis. The site will range fron a high of nearly 76 dB Ld to a low of 55 dB ambient noise level. n 3.7.2 Potential Impact The residential uses and commercial customers will be subject to potentially unacceptable noise levels which could adversely impact the occupants of the project. 3.7.3 Mitigation The residential uses will be required to have an acoustical analysis to determine what insulation will be required to achieve a desirable interior noise level. The mitigative measures which result from that analysis will .be a requirement of building permit issuance. The graphics of the Bonita Glen Specific Plan suggest open space areas in internal malls & arcades. This design feature will use the structures to shield the open space areas from the acoustical impact. 3.7.4 Analysis Mitigation specified above can reduce any effect of acoustical impact from freeway noise to an insignificant level. 12 /{-//57~ 3.8 Scenic Route Policies 3.8.1 Project Setting The portion of Bonita Rd. fronting the project, is designated as a gateway in the Scenic Route Element of the General Plan. Any development proposal will be reviewed in relationship to the goal of enhancing this entryway to the City of. Chula Vista. 3.8.2 Potential Impact If the project is not well designed, without adequate landscaping, it could have a detri- mental impact on this gateway. 3.8.3 Mitigation The Specific Plan control of the development of the site can ensure the enhancement of the gateway to the community. The suggested graphics in the plan would result in an archi- tectural and landscape concept which would provide an aesthetically pleasing entry into the City of Chula Vista. 3.8.4 Analysis There will be no substantial adverse impact on this gateway to the City of Chula Vista. 3.9 Schools 3.9.1 Project Setting The schools which serve this area and their current attendance and capacities are as follows: School Capacity Attendance -Rosebank Elementary Hilltop Jr. High Hilltop Sr. High 509 1600 1473 460 1440 1488 The elementary and junior high school facilities are currently operating over capacity. /.(-1/5?3 3.9.2 Potential Impact If residential uses are included in the project as proposed, there is a potential for an exacerbation of the existing school capacity problem in this area. 3.9.3 Mitigation . The school districts have indicated that if the developers of residential projects assist the districts in providing temporary facilities that in this area the declining enrollment combined with shifts in school boundaries and bussing patterns will preclude any substantial long term impact. 3.9.4 Analysis There will be no likely significant impact on the provision of educational services due to this project. If the residential element of the project becomes more dominant and a large number of family oriented dwelling units is proposed, additional analysis should be under- taken. 3.10 Parks & Recreation 3.10.1 Project Setting The Parks & Recreation Element of the General Plan identifies a need for 17.2 acres of park- land to serve the residents of this park service district in which the project is located. There are currently no parks in the service district. 3.10.2 Potential Impact The project will increase population in an area with insufficient parks and recreational facilities. Depending on the number of resi- dential units, the project could cause a further decline in the provision of parks and recreational facilities. 3.10.3 Mitigation The developers of any residential units will be required to dedicate and improve park lands or pay a park development fee. , 4 /?-/IS7J . 3.11 The Sweetwater Regional Park is located to the northeast of the I-80S/Bonita Rd. interchange. Any residents Qf this project would have access to that facility. 3.10.4 Analysis Due to the requirement for park fees and the proximity to major regional park facilities, no substantial impact on park service due to an increase in population is anticipated. Traffic 3.11.1 Project Setting The project has frontage on Bonita Rd. and Bonita Glen Dr. The existing traffic volumes on these roads are 19,080 ADT on Bonita Rd. and 1440 on Bonita Glen Dr. The existing inter- section is controlled by a STOP sign on Bonita Glen Dr. Vehicles approaching this inter- section on the minor street (720/day) are finding sufficient gaps in the traffic on Bonita Rd. to allow them to gain access to the major street. 3.11.2 Potential Impact The project will result in the generation of about 6600 daily trips. Assuming 90% of this volume would use Bonita Glen Rd., the total ADT would increase to 7340 which is above its practical capacity of about .5000. This volume would create potential traffic conjestion on Bonita Glen Dr. One of the alternatives proposes a trial access point onto Bonita Rd. This access could adversely affect the movement of traffic on Bonita Rd. and the I-80S inter- change which is immediately adjacent to this project site. 3.11.3 Mitigation The increase in traffic can be accommodated by three mitigation measures. They are: 1) the widening of Bonita Glen Dr. to accommodate additional traffic lanes and left hand turn pockets; 2) the installation of a traffic signal at Bonita Rd. and Bonita Glen Dr.; and 3) the prohibition of access directly onto Bonita Rd. from the property or the elimination of left hand turn movements with a raised median. There are serious design ~roblems associated with the signalization of the Bonita Rd./ Bonita Glen Dr~ intersection as proposed above, due to the proximity of the existing traffic signal on Bonita Rd. at the southbound ramps from I-80S and the potential future traffic signal on Bonita Rd. at "v" ~"'...r:>r:>'" ~""/1S71 3.11.4 Analysis If access is permitted directly onto Bonita Rd. under existing conditions, there will be a substantial and adverse impact on the capacity of this segment of Bonita Rd. and the ability to make safe turn and merger movements would be substantially hindered. This condition would likely result in a significant environmental impact. This impact could be mitigated to the maximum extent through the elimination of any vehicular access onto Bonita Rd. This approach would direct access via Bonita Glen Dr. to Bonita Rd. If that intersection were signalized with appropriate left and right hand turn lanes, there would be no significant impact. Because of the multiple ownership of various properties within the project site, it may not be feasible to prohibit access to a public right-of-way from properties with access only to those roads. To mitigate this potential traffic impact, approval of the specific plan could be conditioned upon the installation of a raised median in Bonita Rd. which would prohibit left hand turn movements into and out of the project. This mitigation would provide for the safety of the traveling public and an adequate capacity at the Bonita Rd/ I-80S interchange. Under these conditions there would be no sub- stantial environmental impact. j(-/157.3 . 4.0 Unavoidable Adverse Environmental Impacts Most potential impacts wh.ich would result from the proposed project can be mitigated to an insignificant level as discussed in Section 3.0 of this report. Due to the nature of the project and its location adjacent to existing family dwellings, certain short term adverse effects such as noise and dust during construction can not be eliminated. The Chula Vista Municipal Code does, however, restrict hours of construction activities and requires that various engineering techniques be incorporated to control such impacts. Implementation of the project will also change the nature . of the existing residential environment and subject those properties adjacent to the site to an increased amount of traffic and related noise. An incremental increase in both air pollutants and sewage effluent will contribute to a cumulative impact on regional air quality and limited sewage treatment capacity respectively. 5.0 Alternatives to the Proposed Action A reduction in the proposed land use densities could be considered to reduce the anticipated traffic volumes and the related incremental increase in air pollutants. Project objectives would still be attainable, and the consumption of energy, water and natural building materials necessary for construction and future operations would be reduced as well as traffic and associated effects on air quality maintenance. The "no project" alternative would permit the independent development of central commercial land uses on various parcels within the project site. Although less intense demands for community services would result from R-l residential development similar environmental effects as described in Sections 3.1 thru 3.11 would result from the commercial development. The objectives of the proposed action would not be attained and no significant reduction in environmental consequences realized. 6.0 Relationship between local short term use of the Environment and the maintenance and enhancement of long term productivity. Implementation of the proposed project will commit almost 9 acres of land to long term development and will reduce the amount of potentially productive agricultural acreage wi t:dn the planning area. Agricul tural use of the property would be impractical due to limited acreage and surrounding urbanization. /{-//573 7.0 Irreversable Environmental changes that will result from the Proposed Project. Project implementation will result in the committment of natural building materials, energy resources and water resources, some of which are non-renewable. 8.0 Growth-Inducing Impact of the Proposed Action. Adoptiori of the Bonita Glen Specific Plan will encourage the development of the vacant lands and the redevelopment of the existing single family residential properties on- site, further contributing to the urbanization of the local area. Growth patterns within the subject vicinity have been accelerated since the construction of I-80S as can be witnessed by recent projects and current development proposals for adjacent vacant lands. 9.0 Effects found not to be Significant As determined in Initial Study 76-114 (See Appendix A) there are no significant natural or man-made resources present within the project area which could be adversely effected by project implementation, all utilities are available and police and fire departments services"are adequate to service the increased demand. 1 R f(-//S~3 Transcript of input at public hearing on EIR-77-2 for Bonita Glen Specific Plan April 20, 1977 Frank Ferreira: Ladies and gentlemen, I would like to oppose the Environmental Impact Report for the following reasons. I believe it was stated that the Environmental Impact ~eport does adequately describe on this particular area. I object to comments made, and one was that a geologist would be required to be on the project during all grading. I don't think that if a fault exists there I don't believe a geologist must be present to find or locate a fault. I think it can be done by other means. On the larger portion of the property which I own we have already gone in there some years ago and established a base for the soil. It would be my intent, if and when I ever developed this particular property, that we would merely continue to just bring the property up to the grade required for whatever project we developed for that. So, the geology work has been done on the greater portion of that project. The other portion of the EIR report that I object to is the fact that it is implied, I believe, that there would be some impact on the schools in the area, and I think perhaps this is correct if one assumed that development of existing R-3 property there would be for families. I do believe that I am the only owner of R-3 property in this particular or the subject area and, of course, I don't feel that this particular area is the type of area where apartments would be developed for children because of the amount of traffic. 19 ~~~~~