HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Packet 2006/06/20
I declare under penalty of perjury that I am
employed by the City of Chula Vista in the
Office of the City Clerk and that I posted this ~ ~ fL.
ment on the bulletin board according t~~
ct requirements.
-5:----~
SI9ned~a~srA
Stephen c. ~dilla. Mayor
Patricia F. Chave7, Councilmember Jim Thomson, Interim City Manager
John McCann, COllncilmember Ann Moore, City AUorney
Jerry R. Rindone, COllllcilll1(>lllber Susan Bigelow, City Clprk
Steve Castaneda, COllllcilmember
June 20, 2006
6:00 P.M.
Council Chambers
City Hall
276 Fourth Avenue
CALL TO ORDER
ROLL CALL: Councilmembers Castaneda, Chavez, McCann, Rindone, and Mayor Padilla
PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE TO THE FLAG AND MOMENT OF SILENCE
SPECIAL ORDERS OF THE DAY
. OATH OF OFFICE
Jeff Justus - Design Review Commission
. OlD YOU KNOW...VOLUNTEERS INSPIRE BY EXAMPLE? Presented by Marcia
Raskin, Human Resources Director, and Bobbi Bennett, Senior Human Resources
Analyst.
CONSENT CALENDAR
(Items I through 5)
The Council will enact the Consent Calendar staff recommendations by one
motion, without discussion, unless a Councilmember, a member of the public, or
City staff requests that an item be removed for discussion. Jfyou wish to speak on
one of these items, please fill out a "Request to Speak" form (available in the
lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting. Items pulled from the
Consent Calendar will be discussed immediate~v following the Consent Calendar.
1. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AUTHORIZING THE CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE ENCROACHMENT PERMIT NO.
PE-682 FOR THE INST ALLA TION OF A RETAINING WALL AND FENCE ALONG
EASTLAKE P ARKW A Y
In September 2005, the Design Review Committee (DRC) approved the Eastlake Village
Walk at the southern comer of Eastlake Parkway and Miller Drive that consists of 13.3
acres of commercial land. VWE, LLC, owner of the project, is proposing to construct a
retaining wall and a fence within the City's right-of-way. The retaining wall was
approved by the DRC and will be maintained by VWE, LLC. (Acting Engineering
Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
2. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
RATIFYING THE SUBMITTAL OF A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION, DIVISION OF RECYCLING,
FOR FISCAL YEAR 200612007 FOR FUNDS FROM THE CALIFORNIA
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING FUND AND AUTHORIZING THE CITY
MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED
WITH APPLICATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE GRANT FUNDS
Chula Vista is eligible to receive $58,373 for 200612007 from the California Department
of Conservation, Division of Recycling to be used for beverage container recycling and
litter clean-up activities. (General Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
3. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING THE FILING OF A GRANT APPLICATION TO THE DEPARTMENT
OF CONSERVATION'S BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING COMMUNITY
OUTREACH PROGRAM FOR FUNDS TO ENHANCE RECYCLING SERVICES AT
SPECIAL EVENTS IN CHULA VISTA
The City's large special events annually generate almost three tons of waste that could be
recycled. The City intends to make the recycling process more convenient for event-
goers by enhancing and streamlining the City's existing special events recycling program.
Adoption of this resolution approves application for a Department of Conservation Grant
to help fund the project. (General Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
4. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPOINTING THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL SERVICES, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO
SIGN THE APPROPRIATE AND REQUIRED GRANT DOCUMENTATION
REGARDING THE MURRAY-HAYDEN PROGRAM UNDER THE SAFE
NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS, CLEAN WATER, CLEAN AIR AND COASTAL
PROTECTION BOND ACT OF 2000 FOR THE "GREG ROGERS PARK
IMPROVEMENTS (PRI69)" PROJECT
Page 2 - Council Agenda
http://www .chulavistaca.gov
June 20, 2006
State grant funds were previously accepted for the Greg Rogers Park hnprovements
(PR169) project and the Director of Parks & Recreation, or his designee, was appointed
to sign the appropriate and required grant documentation from the State. Due to
reorganizations since that time, it is necessary to appoint the Director of General
Services, or his designee, to sign the grant documentation. (General Services Director)
Staff recommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
5. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY
OF CHULA VISTA AND THE CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT
REGARDING JOINT OPERATION OF THE DYNAMIC AFTER SCHOOL HOURS
(DASH) AFTER SCHOOL RECREATIONAL PROGRAM, AND THE SAFE TIME
FOR RECREATION, ENRICHMENT, AND TUTORING FOR CHILDREN
(STRETCH) EXTENDED SCHOOL DAY EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM; AND
AUTHORIZING THE MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING
Adoption of the resolution approves an updated Memorandum of Understanding (MOU)
between the City and the Chula Vista Elementary School District for Fiscal Year
2006/2007, which includes expansion of the number of students served at one STRETCH
site (Mueller). It also increases enrollment of STRETCH students served at Lorna Verde
and Mueller due to the additional funding received from the After School Education and
Safety Program. The Chula Vista Elementary School District Board is expected to vote
on the Fiscal Year 2006/2007 MOU at its June 20, 2006 meeting. (Assistant City
Manager Palmer)
Staffrecommendation: Council adopt the resolution.
ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR
PUBLIC COMMENTS
Persons speaking during Public Comments may address the Council on any
subject matter within the Council's jurisdiction that is not listed as an item on the
agenda. State law generally prohibits the Council from taking action on any issue
not included on the agenda, but, if appropriate, the Council may schedule the
topic for future discussion or refer the matter to staff. Comments are limited to
three minutes.
PUBLIC HEARINGS
The following items have been advertised as public hearings as required by law.
If you wish to speak on any item. please fill out a "Request to Speak" form
(available in the lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the meeting.
Page 3 - Council Agenda
http://www.chulavistaca.gov
June 20, 2006
NOTE:
ITEMS 6 THROUGH 8 PERTAIN TO APPLICATIONS SUBMITTED BY
EASTLAKE COMPANY WITH REGARD TO THE EASTLAKE III
SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT. THEY WILL BE CONSIDERED UNDER
A CONSOLIDATED PUBLIC HEARING AND STAFF PRESENTATION.
6. CONSIDERATION OF CERTIFICATION OF THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR THE EASTLAKE III SENIOR
HOUSING PROJECT
In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), a Subsequent Envirorunental Impact Report (SEIR) has been prepared to
analyze the envirorunental impacts of the proposed EastLake III Senior Housing Project.
CEQA Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations and a Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program have been prepared, which reflect the conclusions of
the Final SEIR. The Final SEIR contains responses to comments received during the
public review period. (Planning and Building Director)
Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing and adopt the following
resolution:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CERTIFYING THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT (FSEIR 05-02) FOR THE EASTLAKE III SENIOR HOUSING
PROJECT; MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT; ADOPTING A
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS; AND ADOPTING A
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM PURSUANT
TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
7. CONSIDERATION OF AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN,
EASTLAKE III GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, SECTIONAL PLANNING
AREA PLAN, AND ASSOCIATED REGULATORY DOCUMENTS CHANGING THE
LAND USE DESIGNATION OF 18.4 ACRES AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
OLYMPIC PARKWAY AND WUESTE ROAD FOR THE EASTLAKE III SENIOR
HOUSING PROJECT
The applicant, EastLake Company, submitted applications to amend the City's General
Plan and EastLake Planned Community Regulatory docrunents to change the land use
designation of approximately 18.4 acres at the southwest corner of Olympic Parkway and
Wueste Road Intersection from Commercial Visitor to Residential High Density. The
proposed project would accommodate an Active Senior Adult Community proposing 494
condominium units with amenities and recreational facilities. (Planning and Building
Director)
Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing, adopt the following
resolution, and place the following ordinance on first reading:
Page 4 - Council Agenda
http://www.chulavistaca.gov
June 20, 2006
A. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN,
EASTLAKE III GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, THE EASTLAKE III
SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN, AND ASSOCIATED
REGULATORY DOCUMENTS FOR 18.4 ACRES (AKA EASTLAKE SENIOR
HOUSING PROJECT) AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OLYMPIC
PARKWAY AND WUESTE ROAD
B. ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING
AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE III PLANNED COMMUNITY
DISTRICT REGULATIONS AND LAND USE DISTRICTS MAP FOR 18.4
ACRES (AKA EASTLAKE III SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT) AT THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OLYMPIC P ARKW A Y AND WUESTE ROAD
8. CONSIDERATION OF A TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP TO SUBDIVIDE
APPROXIMATELY 19.6 ACRES INTO TWO LOTS AT THE SOUTHWEST
CORNER OF OLYMPIC PARKWAY AND WUESTE ROAD FOR THE EASTLAKE
III SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT
The applicant, Pulte Homes, filed a tentative subdivision map to subdivide 19.6 acres into
2 parcels for 494-unit condominium units. The project is located on the south side of
Olympic Parkway, west of the intersection of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road, within
the EastLake III master planned community. (Planning and Building Director)
Staff recommendation: Council conduct the public hearing and adopt the following
resolution:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
APPROVING TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP (PCS 06-11) FOR 19.6
ACRES AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OLYMPIC PARKWAY AND
WUESTE ROAD INTERSECTION FOR THE EASTLAKE III SENIOR
HOUSING PROJECT
ACTION ITEMS
The item listed in this section of the agenda, and is expected to elicit discussion
and deliberation. If you wish to speak on the item, please fill out a ..Request to
Speak" form (available in the lobby) and submit it to the City Clerk prior to the
meeting.
9. REPORT REGARDING CHAMPIONSHIP OFF-ROAD RACING (CORR)
CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT (PCC 06-054) MAY 20 AND 21, 2006 RACES
On May 2, 2006, the Council approved a Conditional Use (CUP) permit for
Championship Off-Road Racing (CORR) to conduct four weekend race events for short
track off-road truck races on the existing track in Village Two of the Otay Ranch. The
Council required City staff a report on the status of the May races. This report
summarizes staff's findings on the conduct of the races. (Planning and Building
Director)
Staff recommendation: Council accept the report and direct staff to continue monitoring
July races.
Page 5 - Council Agenda
http://www.chulavistaca.gov
June 20, 2006
OTHER BUSINESS
10. CITY MANAGER'S REPORTS
II. MAYOR'S REPORTS
Discussion regarding a letter /Tom Chula Vista Elementary School District regarding the
Ad-Hoc Committee
12. COUNCIL COMMENTS
A. Councilmember Castaneda: Consideration of adoption of the following
resolution:
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
IN SUPPORT OF ESTABLISHMENT OF ENFORCEABLE LIMITS ON
CALIFORNIA'S GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS AS PROPOSED IN
ASSEMBLY BILL 32
B. Deputy Mayor McCann:
CITY COUNCIL APPROVING THE ELIMINATION OF THE
COMPENSATION FOR THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION (CVRC) BOARD MEMBERS
CLOSED SESSION
Announcements of actions taken in Closed Session shall be made available by
noon on Wednesday following the Council Meeting at the City Attorney's office in
accordance with the Ralph M Brown Act (Government Code 54957. 7).
13. CONFERENCE WITH LABOR NEGOTIATORS PURSUANT TO
GOVERNMENT CODE 54957.6
Agency designated representatives: Councilmembers Steve Castaneda and Jerry
Rindone
Employee: Interim City Manager Jim Thomson
14. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING EXISTING
LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(a)
A. ACI Sunbow, LLC v. County of San Diego, CityofChula Vista
B. Reyes v City of Chula Vista (USDC 05 CV 2309)
15. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING SIGNIFICANT
EXPOSURE TO LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE
SECTION 54956.9(b)
Three Cases
Page 6 - Council Agenda
http://www.chulavistaca.gov
June 20, 2006
16. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL REGARDING INITIATION OF
LITIGATION PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT CODE SECTION 54956.9(c)
One Case
ADJOURNMENT to Thursday, June 22, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, and
thence to the Regular Meeting on July 11, 2006 at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers.
In compliance with the
AMERICANS WITH DISABILITIES ACT
The City of Chula Vista requests individuals who require special accommodations to access,
attend, and/or participate in a City meeting, activity, or service request such accommodation at
least forty-eight hours in advance for meetings and jive days for scheduled services and
activities. Please contact the City Clerk for specific information at (619) 691-5041 or
Telecommunications Devicesfor the Deaf(TDD) at (619) 585-5655. California Relay Service is
also available for the hearing impaired.
Page 7 - Council Agenda
http://www .chulavistaca.gov
June 20, 2006
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item
Meeting Date 06/20/06
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution Authorizing the City Engineer to issue
Encroachment Pe=it No. PE-682 for the installation of a retaining
wall and fence along Eastlake Parkway.
Acting Director of Engineering-UJi;>
Interim City Manager f
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
(4/SthS Vote: Yes _ No-XJ
On September 2005, the Design Review Committee (DRC) approved the Eastlake
Village Walk at the southern comer of Eastlake Parkway and Miller Drive that consists of
13.3 acres of commercial land. VWE, LLC, owners of the project, are proposing to
construct a retaining wall and a fence within City's right-of-way. The retaining wall was
approved by the DRC and will be maintained by VWE, LLC. Tonight's action is
pursuant to Section 12.28 of the Municipal Code
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None.
DISCUSSION:
The Village Walk at Eastlake is located in the comer of EastIake Parkway and Miller
Drive and is bounded by the future State Route 125 (SR-125). For location of the project,
refer to Exhibit "A".
With the construction of SR-125 and the overpass along Eastlake Parkway, a retaining
wall along Eastlake Parkway had to be constructed within City's right-of-way. (Per
Caltrans' Plans for SR-125, L-7, Segment 3C).
The owner of the site, VWE, LLC, will continue the construction of the wall 125 ft to the
east, along Eastlake Parkway, in addition to installing a safety fence (see Exhibit B). The
proposed retaining wall will be constructed per City of ChuIa Vista and CaItrans
Construction Standards, and will have a height ranging from 10.92 ft to 13.62 ft,
measured ITom top of wall to top offooting.
After the review of the application for encroachment permit and the corresponding
construction plans, staff is recommending the approval ofthe encroachment pe=it.
1-1
Page 2, Item ---i---
Meeting Date 06/20/06
.
This encroachment permit (Exhibit "B") will include an indemnity clause holding the
City, its agents and employees harmless from any damage that might result from the
constmction and maintenance of the retaining wall. In addition, the permit will contain
the necessary maintenance, removal and hold-harmless clauses. VWE, LLC has also
added provisions in their CC&Rs ensuring the maintenance of the retaining wall.
According to Section 12.28.020 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, a Council resolution
must authorize the issuance of this encroachment permit, since the retaining wall exceeds
five feet in height.
FISCAL IMPACT: VWE, LLC has paid the required application fee for processing the
encroachment permit and has an account with the City that will cover the costs for City
inspection.
Attachment:
Exhibit "A": Location Plat
Exhibit "B": Encroachment Permit PE-682
J:\Engineer\AGENDA\CAS2006\06~2D-06\Al13 for Encroachment Permit for Retaining Wal1.doc
1-2
t"i<~
0......><
(")t""=:
>t"i......
..,>cc
......~=:3
o ~ ~
z~>
'"d > ::
t"it"i
;..-~
'"'3>
..,
~
>
rJ1
..,
t"i
;..-
~
FUTURE SR125 TOLL HICHWA Y
I
I
I
~ I
z ""'"
~ ~ I
::b:
.."
I
I
~
<::>
~
"":I
~
~
~
::!J
-<:
r-
~
",
""'
~
'-
~
I~
I
1-3
EXHIBIT B
/?ecording reque,Yled i!./I ami
p/etzJ'e rell/mlo.'
City Clerk
City of Chula Vista
P.O. Box 1087
Chula Vista, CA 91912
[X] 77t1S document benijitr
permittee. J?ecording
fie requu-ed.
Affects Assessor's Parcel No(s) 595-071-04-00, 595-071-05-00,
595-071-06-00,595-071-07-00,595-071-08-00 & 595-071-09-00
(This space for Recorder's use, only)
C.V. File No. 0710-40-PE-682
AUTHORIZATION FOR ENCROACHMENT IN CITY RIGHT OF WAY
Permit No. PE-682
Pursuant to Chapter 12.28 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, permission is hereby granted by the City ofChula Vista
(hereinafter "City") to: VWE, LLC (hereinafter "Permittee") whose mailing address is 5465 Morehouse Drive, Suite 260
San Diego, CA. 92121-4714 to do work within a portion of City right-of~way.
AIl terms and conditions of this permit as to the Permittee shall be a burden upon Permittee's land and shall run with the
land. All conditions apply to Permittee and all his/her/their heirs, assigns, successors or transferees.
Whereas, the Permittee has requested the permission from City to encroach on said City's easement adjacent to and for
the direct benefit ofllie following described property:
ADDRESS: SE corner of Eastlake Parkway and MiHer Drive.
LEGAL DESCRIPTION: Real property in the City ofChula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, described
as fa !lows:
Parcel I of Parcel Map No. 19993, in the City of Chula Vista, County of San Diego, State of California, filed in the
Office ofthe San Diego County as instrument no. 06-0331790 of Official Records on May ]0, 2006.
PERMISSION IS HEREBY GRANTED to do the following work: The construction of a retaining wall and fonco
along Eastlake Parkway. Refer to Exhibit "A" attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.
(hereinafter "Encroachment")
NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of their mutual promises, and other good and valuable consideration, the parties
hereto agree as fa! lows:
Permission is hereby granted Permittee for the above-mentioned Encroachment on the real property of City described
above in accordance with the following conditions:
1. Encroachment shall be installed and maintained in a safe and sanitary manner by Permittee as determined by
City. Permittee acknowledges that the maintenance, replacement, and/or reconstruction of the Encroachment
shall be the sole responsibility of the Permittee.
2. Encroachment shall, in no way interfere with the maintenance of or operation of existing water meters, CATV
and telephone pedestals, public storm drain and sewer lines. Any costs arising from changes of or to any facility
due to the Encroachment shall be the sole responsibility of Permittee and subject to placement ofa lien on the
property if incurred by the City.
Page 1
1-4
3. Said installation shall conform to all standards and specifications as stated in the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
4. Permittee is to call Underground Service Alert (one call mark-out service) at 1-800-422-4133 a minimum of two
working days prior to any excavation being done in the City's right-of-way.
5. For all above ground Encroachments that could logically be subject to graffiti or similar acts, Pennittee shall
apply an anti-graffiti material to the encroaching object ofa type and nature that is acceptable to the Director of
Public Works.
6. Permittee shall immediately remove any graffiti from the encroaching object.
7. City shall have the right to remove graffiti or paint the encroaching object, the paint being provided and the cost
of labor paid by Permittee.
8. Permittee shall not allow Encroachment to block the existing course of surface drainage to the extent that it may
endanger the public or the surrounding properties or cause ponding of water.
This permit is revocable upon thirty (30) days written notice to the Permittee, and upon such notice, the installation must
be removed or relocated, as and when specified by the City, at Permittee's cost. If Permittee fails to remove or relocate
Encroachment within the period allotted, the City may cause such work to be done and the cost thereof shall be imposed
as a lien upon Permittee's property.
Permittee shall defend, indemnify, protect, hold harmless and release the City, its elected and appointed officers and
employees, from and against all past, present or future claims for damages, liability, cost and expense (including without
limitation attorneys' fees) arising out afar in any way related to the encroachment or the conduct of the Permittee, or any
agent or employee, subcontractors, or others (including third parties) in connection with the execution of the work
covered by this agreement. Except only for those claims arising trom. the sole negligence or sole willful conduct of the
City, its officers, or employees. Permittee's indenmification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorneys' fees and
liability incurred by the City, its officers, agents, or employees in defending against such claims, whether the same
proceed to judgment or not. Further, Permittee at its own expense shall, upon written request by the City, defend any
such suit or action brought against the City, its officers, agents, or employees. Permittee's indemnification of City shal!
not be limited by any prior or subsequent declaration by the Permittee.
Permittee hereby agrees to and shall release, hold harmless and defend City, it selective and appointive boards, officers,
agents and employees against any claim, and in any suit or proceeding, at law or in equity, for damages caused, or alleged
to have been caused, by actions taken or alleged to have been taken, or in anyway related to or arising from actions taken,
under this permit by Permittee directJy or by hislher/their agent(s), contractor(s), or agents or employees of same.
Permittee further agrees to and shall indemnify and hold harmless City, its elective and appointive boards, officers, agents
and employees, as indemnities, for any claim, suit or proceeding submitted, brought or instituted against City as a result
of actions taken, or alleged to have been taken, or in anyway related to or arising from actions taken, under this permit,
including, but not limited to, any asserted liability for loss of or damage to property or for personal injury, including
death.
The undersigned Pennittee hereby accepts the foregoing Encroachment permit upon the terms and conditions stated
herein and agrees to comply with all stated terms and conditions and with all applicable laws, including any applicable
provision of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. It is further agreed that if any part of Permittee's Encroachment or
Permittee's rights under this Encroachment Permit should interfere with the future use of the City's right of way by the
general public, it must be removed or relocated at Permittee's expense and such right shaH be terminated as and when
indicated by City.
In the event of a dispute arising as to the terms or interpretation of this permit, the City Engineer shall resolve said
dispute in his sole and unfettered discretion, reasonably applied.
Page 2
1-5
SIGNATURE PAGE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA:
Permit approved by:
Matthew T. Little
Acting City Engineer
Date:
(aO' ClerK 10 al/aen ad:l1owledgmenl.)
PERMITTEE:
Signature:
Colton T. Sudberry, President
VWE, LLC.
Date:
(JVOIa..'/' /0 a/lach ad:nowledgmenl/or each SlgnOIllre.)
(Corpora/e AII/narity required/or eaCH Signa/ol}l, !/ app/icab/e.)
[J:\Enbrjncer\LANDDEV\Projects\Eastlake VCNWiI18.&>e Walk@Eastlake\EncroachmentPermit_RetainingWall @EastlakePkwy.dac
Page3
1-6
"-0
<XJ
~ "
0'
~
r-W
w--'
w<
IU
V1V1
<C
f-
~
OJ
~
I
X
W
>'
/,
/
/
/,
V'
-
\, :
: '''', " " '-
+~,
!;\~
, It-J \ ~ ~_.,
"1 \ i \ i OJ_-L-1.J
: '\1\1 \ _ ~ , ".L_\=-4-+." . \-~rl
\ ~ -i J_< _""')"-\_, < ! ! ~ , ~
\ !I\~-~-; v ; ., \ \ 4-'1 ' _ ;
\ 11!! f"'\../
',J i LL
----'D-,'-. ,
\, '--),! \ : tf""""""" ~i i
-t'\ '\:i~3i ,i&J.;,iJ:.-.: :_.:~:'"'
~i\ .-(<:;;-'~l,....i.i'--_ w:__ "'__
\ '\~v-:;,.~);;;, ',""ft=:" - 5'"''',-,'''
'-" ",... i9-'nl., ,
.- " ',. " "t\ ~...~~.~ --- -_..... ti--'
.:;0 -. ""-. >._~ "
'i~ ~~~:t::
'\1 3t~\.....;.~ _____>_..
.\-+i -(:;9.!--x .. __y _
;' 1:1 ~G5!----{/) Ii .'_ .
~"""..,--w . :;.--..
<(is---..w .,~.
tu ~ ~.__..(/l ~,'-:~-:d~~
"""1 ~'i", iiII
~1'5, ~':'.~ '
<>a <t: 'U''''U :~~,'l~;
(/)0 w
. O:::~VJ
\
t\
\
L--
f-
W
W
I
V1
,
Ul
f-
W
w
I
V1
f-
W
W
I
V1
"
,
/
1 7
'-"-";~"!
, ,
\-'-,
, f
,-,
"-=)1"""'''''';'
"
--+---
......1-....,
',~
..
'--. 1!"-
.e.~,:::1.!.,",,,~
'<--.'.;,-,........
"""";:::t' ,__;"i!
~,<
~...-
( ~I-;
'f:-"---
,'H7'--:-_
; ..
~$""""-'~
!II' i;,\,. I
~~>.'~~~
-- ~~'\ '\
'>."
,
\
,
I ~
j ~
! ~ f
" -~-~./
r- ~
d:r.:::~~, :E ~ ..
~l5ri ! ! ! L~ ~ . <,
~ j Ct:~";'
,,', ;
\. ,C/
,,,-
'Ii. ~
,
"t~
'"
~~
,CJ
1'-0
N
~II
O~
~,
f-W
W-.J
W<(
IU
UJUJ
~
~
~
0-
<C uJ
- :i
-
.-I
f- tn
~ ..d::.
OJ uJ
~
I
X
W
,
....---. ii
\ ,j
f-iL~ ~~'7 w
'---"1\5:
l ii>
l!
~-\!
, ~\
\
\
_~:.~ -i;
'~ i!
t_~lii-
"
1--- ,,:
f- --~~---::
' -- ! '1
- !--~j
\.- _.611
X\ii", ',l~
.. 1----1\
I \~
XI', 1--1\:
;\
"ji
,j
"'L_
x - i
\i,' i
\' ..-
X\:_ _
-'
Xi
!r
it
.~
w
uw
Zi::::C
tzt5
f-.
~[.f'J\
Z~ ~_'
:::J\ ,
, 030
' ZJ---...
\, <i'ZO,
;'t.\ GI'F\
\,~, . --~1l~
\ '~'C)03:
' .. -O:::~
" ::CUD::;;,
. Z<(
:..rWD...\
1 8
>-
I-
0:::::
W
il
o
0:::::
il
11
..- i1
-"",-"".:.-
"-=:,-::,-=:","'-'"
.,
i!
J
1\
1\
i\
"-i1
~
,I
\1
';
",,~",,-
";,
'\;\
d.\.
\\
,
~-'1\
"\
..,~\
'\
,.. '11
Ld81\
~~'\j\
\ ~~l-;\
>"~ ,.
~ ZW_. \i
'2'~"
\<0 ';,
~~.- '~
0;: d,.. '(I
0;;0.,\
"<C
(J')\:)i":
--.J~:3:
<e~O
3=~ ci
C)!J'r~
2:'0<(
~Z3:
:z_~...
~:t30:::
ffioc;:
r;t:::u.....
~..
i!
'j
1j
i!
Ii
'I
,.
'I
1;
Ii
"
ii-
i,-
H'
\l
\\
i\
II
1j
Ii
11
~
'1
li
t'""!:
~ i_ ~
""
jj/
;;X
.....-.,
C=='..
..
>",,,""""'\'
"'f 'i~~~;~'
~ -.
\<'-'"
.,
~. <,\
',\
\\
\ " \"
:,,~,~.,jA
1'0
N
-II
0'
n
f-W
WW
w-o:
IU
V1V1
-
-
<C
f--
>----;
CD
>----;
I
X
W
~.
\
~
~
~
0-
~
L:L
....-\
'V>
L:L
vJ
\
3'
~
"'-
,~..~
1 9
>-
f-
0:::::
W
0...-
o
0:::::
0...-
w
:5
>
r"''''-C .-
~,,"' ,~;_ ";.'-',,,,1.;
-'W
~.~
",:5
r-
c..o(/]
~L3
z
<(~
Wz
",,-
~D.
<{
(/]0
:jQ=i
<(zo
::,3:wo::
;\~0V1
\\Z(.') >-
:~,~-~,.,,~,:.,
... 1-0.,0:::
wO\""<(
}~~,
"
-,
",.;,:-"
1"~:
'),
I\.
,
...~~ "
"
.~
.
'u.
...'
~:i;~;
,\;,,'('1"
'\'
"C',;:'"
,
,
\
'\
_~,.;o.
-"."
.,,,.,,,,..
co':;;'
!Ii'/)
r--o
N
- "
0'
'"
>-W
W--1
W<(
IU
(/)(/)
<t
~
f-
~
OJ
~
I
X
W
~
~
~
0-
uJ
:i
--1
tn
4-
uJ
"
t\
{\
II ._._~~,,_,__,.~-
--~\<;--~
\\
,\
.::::.::..:j
;\
J,~~"C~C~'
~'
,
,
'%-
-
a:
1 10
-.--
~,,...:;:;.:'-;:,,:,,-
"
-"W
-"""
~:S
>-
C)(/)
2OL5
~O
;:0>-
'. W~
Ct:
,~ :c
~~:~~.~" ;.'
_,"s,...::JCI:::: 3:
~UO\
~2O "
=>Wo::::;
()U1~
Z C),.<(
-20'30
~f=~
<(00::::
>-0<(
)~O\
'";.-
."-"'-
.
>-
I-
0::::
W ~.
~ ,-~
n'';;'-
..-'._'
b
0::::
D-
w
S:
>
,
0,
_0<-_
.
\
,
. \
~
,-
"
~",
,
"0
N
- II
0'
en
f-W
W-'
W..:
IU
(j)(j)
~
3-
~
cr::
<(
::: 0....
<C u.J
~ ~
~ <(
--1
f- I-
UJ
~ <(
CO u.J
~
I
X
W
1 11
--
,
.
--~
\;::-
--
'"
l
~~'-
,..---.
-'w
-''''
..:..:
;s::"~-
aVO
zL;5
~.-."-
'-<(::2
tJ~
-'C!;'I'
, O?Ju
\ <:(
\ {j1Q..-. ~
'~.---::j'5~
\ <:(zO
1 3:w~~_..
\-~D1>-
\ z(.?<(
\ zZ3:
, :::;;:f=~,_
\>-,~'cnJ:::
\wQ<
\ oct.. C-
,
l
r
l
,
\
L.__.'
i
,
,
,
\--
-----
>-
f-
0::::
W
D-
O
0::::
D-
w
S:
>
,-
-~~.
~.e_
'\.~
--.-'
>",;
,
>> <~
.
r'-O
N
-II
0'
<D
f-W
W-.J
W<{
IU
(J1(J1
:::
<(
f-
f---1
OJ
f---1
I
X
W
.
>-
<C
S
~
0::::
<C
D-
w
~
<C
--.J
I-
(J)
<C
w
'!,~..."'...' ....:.....
~ "
; \ \
. '
, ,~
. '
. '
, \'~
-, .._" --+~.
,
I
I
,- -.-.-- .,....-. ..-
--..,--- ....
,
I
....JW
....J'"
~:5
'"""
0(/)
Z<(
_w
Z
~~
wZ
",,-
o<;Q
<(
(/)0
::J~3i I
~i5c;l
""
~(/)>-
_0<{
~~3::
<{'"""'"
,"""0""
wO<(
}~D-
~
----
""
;0>'
:.",
SDR
.--- -- ". ".-'
.,. ----------...--... ,~...._~--"--
..-' -...---- - --.--'-."
..'-- --,.",-...
1 12
>-
f-
0::::
w
D-
O
0::::
D-
w
5
>
125
~:'
.
.'
. .
.--"-'",,--.-.-----
FG
EXHIBIT "A"
SHEET 7 of 7
CITY
VILLAGE
WALK
*
:s:
1'____.
,Q::
~
FG
TYPICAL SECTION
NO SCALE
I' l;j
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA AUTHORIZING THE
CITY ENGINEER TO ISSUE ENCROACHMENT
PERMIT NO. PE-682 FOR THE INSTALLATION OF
A RETAINING WALL AND FENCE ALONG
EASTLAKE PARKWAY
WHEREAS, VWE, LLC, owners of the Village Walk at Eastlake, located at the
corner of Eastlake Parkway and Miller Drive, are proposing to construct a retaining wall
and a fence within City's right-of-way; and,
WHEREAS, with the construction of SR-125 and the overpass along Eastlake
Parkway, a retaining wall along Eastlake Parkway had to be constructed within City's
right-of-way; and,
WHEREAS, according to Section 12.28.020 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code,
a Council resolution must authorize the issuance of this encroachment permit, since the
retaining wall exceeds 5 ft in height.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVBED, the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby authorize the issuance of Encroachment Permit PE-682 for
construction of the retaining wall and fence along Eastlake Parkway and within the City's
right-of-way.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Clerk is hereby directed to record
this resolution and permit.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Matthew T. Little
Acting Director of Engineering
H:\ENGINEER\RESOS\Resos2006\06-20~06\Reso for Encroachment Permit.doc
1-14
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item 1
Meeting Date 6/20/06
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution ratifying the submittal of a grant application to the
California Department of Conservation, Division of Recycling, for
Fiscal Year 2006-2007 for funds from the California Beverage
Container Recycling Fund and authorizing the City Manager or
designee to execute all documents associated with application and
acceptance of the grant funds
SUBMITTED BY:
Director of General Services ~
./'
City Manager jl (4/5ths Vote: _ No X )
REVIEWED BY:
The California Department of Conservation, Division of Recycling [DOR] is distributing $10.5
million for Fiscal Year 2006-2007 to eligible cities and counties for beverage container recycling
and litter clean up activities. The goal of the DOR's beverage container recycling program is to
reach and maintain an 80 percent recycling rate for all California Refund Value (CRV) beverage
containers, specifically those made of aluminum, glass, plastic, and bi-metal. Projects
implemented by cities and counties assist the DOR in reaching and maintaining its goal. Each
city is eligible to receive a minimum of $5,000 or an amount calculated by the DOR, on a per
capita basis, whichever is greater. These funds are available annually through the completion of a
funding request form. Chula Vista is eligible to receive $58,373 for 2006-2007. (A copy of the
application is attached.)
RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the Resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
The California Beverage Container Recycling and Litter Reduction Act requires the California
Department of Conservation, Division of Recycling [DOR] to distribute a total of approximately
$10.5 million per year to eligible cities and counties for beverage container recycling and litter
clean up activities (California Public Resources Code section 14581 (a)(4)(A)). Chula Vista is
eligible to receive a $58,373 award, calculated on a per capita basis.
No local matching funds are required by the State, and none are recommended. These funds will
assist the City in meeting the state-mandated landfill diversion requirements (AB 939, the
California Integrated Waste Management Act) by supplementing programs that will increase the
City's diversion of rigid containers, specifically, glass, aluminum, steel, and plastic food and
beverage containers. To receive these funds, the City must submit a funding request form
annually.
2-1
Page 2, Item OZ
Meeting Date 6/20/06
If received, the funds will be used to promote beverage container recycling in City programs
through placement ofrecycling containers in parks and other community locations, participation
in community clean-up events, and production and distribution of brochures and other
promotional materials to promote beverage container recycling. The funds may not be used for
activities unrelated to beverage container recycling or litter reduction.
FISCAL IMPACT: The funds are awarded upon request and are directed to beverage container
recycling and litter reduction programs. There will be no impact to the general fund as a result of
accepting these funds or implementing the programs described in the application. No matching
funds are required. If funds are awarded, staff will return to Council at a later date to appropriate
funds and amend budget as necesssary.
Attachment: Copy of electronic submittal form
J:\Attomey\Agenda Statements\CRV grant 2006 6-20-06.doc
.
2-2
Funding Request Form Print View
Page 1 of 2
California Department of Conservation
Division of Recycling
Community Outreach Branch
June 14, 2006
ATT ACHMEI'f'
Funding Request Form Summary
City/County: Chula Vista
Eligible Amount: $58,373
Contact for Funding Request Form
Ms. Lynn France
Conservation Coordinator
Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ave
Chula Vista. CA 91910-
Phone: (619) 397-6221 ex!.
Fax: (619) 397-6363 ext
Email: Ifrance@cLchula-vista.ca.us
Project Description
Chula Vista will use these funds to promote beverage container recycling in the municipal programs for all segments of the population
(residential, commercial, industrial, special events, schools) through brochures, premiums, and participation in a wide variety of special
events. Additionally, Chula Vista is in its third year of a Beautify Chula Vista Campaign where voiunteers, collect litter, paint out graffiti and
stencil storm drains. The City also provides litter bags to special events that are printed with the "Thanks for Making this a Litter Free Evenf'
logo. The Recycling Rangers actively walk the streets on collection days, peering into recycling carts to find people doing the right thing and
recognizing them. This funding will also be used to provide some parks with recycling containers. Chuia Vista has recently begun converting
multi-family complexes to single-stream recycling through the assistance of a DOC grant to increase bottle and can recycling. This type of
program requires continual follow up and City staff will continue the onsite work, meeting with managers and tenants to overcome barriers,
actively educate and increase recycling volumes.
Supermarket site restriction: No
Selected Activities
Amount
$20,000
Personnel
Program Administrator Other (Recycling Rangers/Interns)
Litter Clean-up
Public Parks I Recreational Areas Roadways
Community Events Equipments I Supplies
Recycled Content Products
Park I Playground Equipment Building Material
Signs
Advertising I Promotional
Promotional Items
Other (Billing Inserts and Program Bf)
Beverage Container Collection Programs
Bars I Restaurants Public Parks I Recreational Areas
Retail Establishments Government I Office Buildings
Curbside - Residential Curbside - Commercial
Curbside - Multi-family
Schools
Elementary
Entertainment Venues
Theatres
Concert Halls
Sports Complexes
Aquatic Centers
Community Events
Fairs
Equipment! Supplies
$10,373
$10,000
$8,000
Print Ads I Flyers I Posters
$5,000
Theme Parks
Community Centers
Open Markets
https:llcaprs.conservation.ca.goY/caprs/frflMainIFRFPrintView, aspx
2-3
06/14/2006
llnding Request Form Print View
Page 2 of 2
Recycling Bins I Liners I Bags
Storage Containers (dumpster, roll-off)
Recycling Education
General Public
Recycling Hotline I Website
Exhib~. I Booth.
Safety Equipment (giove., etc.)
$5,000
Workshops I Presentations
Recycling Guides I Booklets I Brochures
School I Assemblies I Shows
Grand Total
$58,373
These funds may not be used for activities unrelated to beverage container recycling or litter reduction. [Public Resources Code
14581.(a)(4)(C)]
.
ttps :// caprs. conservation. ca.gov/ caprs/frflMainIFRFPrint Yiew. aspx
2-4
06/14/2006
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA RATIFYING THE SUBMITTAL OF A GRANT
APPLICATION TO THE CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF
CONSERVATION, DIVISION OF RECYCLING, FOR FISCAL
YEAR 2006-2007 FOR FUNDS FROM THE CALIFORNIA
BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING FUND AND
AUTHORIZING THE CITY MANAGER OR DESIGNEE TO
EXECUTE ALL DOCUMENTS ASSOCIATED WITH
APPLICATION AND ACCEPTANCE OF THE GRANT FUNDS
WHEREAS, the California Department of Conservation, Division of Recycling [DOR] is
distributing $1.5 million for Fiscal Year 2006-2007 from the California Beverage Container
Recycling Fund to eligible cities and counties specifically for beverage container recycling and
litter clean up activities; and
WHEREAS, the goal of the DOR's beverage container recycling program is to reach and
maintain an 80 percent recycling rate for all California Refund Value (CR V) beverage
containers, which includes containers made of aluminum, glass, plastic, and bi-metal.
WHEREAS, projects implemented by cities and counties assist the DOR in reaching and
maintaining its goal; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to the provisions of California Public Resources Code section
14581(a)(4)(A), each city is eligible to receive a minimum of$5,000 or an amount calculated by
the DOR, on a per capita basis, whichever is greater; and
WHEREAS, the City is eligible for a DOR grant in the amount of $58,373 for the fiscal
year July 1,2006, through June 30, 2007; and
WHEREAS, the City has submitted a grant application to obtain those funds; and
WHEREAS, if received, the funds will be used to promote beverage container recycling
in City programs through placement of recycling containers in parks and other community
locations, participation in community clean-up events, and production and distribution of
brochures and other promotional materials to promote beverage container recycling.
NOW, THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista ratifies the submittal of a grant application to the California Department of Conservation,
Division of Recycling, for Fiscal Year 2006-2007 for funds from the California Beverage
Container Recycling Fund.
2-5
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED, that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
authorizes the City Manager or Designee to execute all documents associated with application
and acceptance of the grant funds.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Jack Griffin
Director of General Services
~~
, n Moore
;; City Attorney
H:lAttorneylFinal Resos\200616 20 061#04_Reso CRV grant 6-20-06,doc
.
.
2-6
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item ,..;,
Meeting Date 6/20/06
Resolution Approving the filing of a grant application to the
Department of Conservation's Beverage Container Recycling Community
Outreach Program for funds to enhance recycling services at special events in
Chula Vista.
ITEM TITLE:
SUBMITTED BY:
Director of Gen/ler~ Services (j Sf}-
City Manager . I
REVIEWED BY:
(4/Sths Vote: Yes_NoX)
The City's large special events annually generate almost three tons of waste that could be recycled.
The City intends to make the recycling process more convenient for event-goers by enhancing and
streamlining the City's existing special events recycling program. A Department of Conservation
grant would help fund the project.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the resolution approving the filing of a grant
application to the Department of Conservation's Beverage Container Recycling Community
Outreach Program.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS: NIA
DISCUSSION:
The City ofChula Vista strives to be an environmental leader in San Diego County - with recycling
efforts that began in 1990. By 2001, the City was recycling 54% of the household waste stream-
including beverage containers, mixed paper, cardboard, glass, plastics and metals. In 2005, the City
received a grant to help launch a new program to enhance service provision to multi-family residents.
Once fully implemented, the new program will eliminate confusion about the sorting ofrecyclables
and provide more capacity forrecycling at multi-family residences, without increasing service fees.
Staff now turns its attention to another major source of recycling potential. The City ofChula Vista
holds seven large public events annually such as street fairs and events held in parks.
Event
Cinco de Mayo
Taste of the Arts
Celebrate Chula Vista
Lemon Festival
Bonita Fest
Arturo Barrios Invitational
Holiday Festival, Tree Lighting & Starlight Parade
3-1
Location
Downtown
Bayside Park
Bayside Park
Third Avenue
Bonita Road
Bayftont
Memorial Park
& Downtown
Attendance
6,500
10,000
10,000
10,000
17,000
50,000
11 0,000
Page 2, Item :3
Meeting Date 6/20/06
These large entertainment events generate 10.9 tons of trash and 2.96 tons ofrecyclables annually.
Although the City provides small unmarked plastic containers that may be used for recycling, the
current recycling rate at special events is only 21 %, significantly below our target diversion rate of
50% or better. Environmental staff have identified the probable causes of the variance and have
developed problem solutions for each.
The proposed project will create a new permanent beverage container recycling program to service
special events in our City and make serious changes in the way Chula Vistans recycle. The project's
chief accomplishment will be to increase the diversion rate for beverage containers and other
recyclable products at large special events. The project will also help solve the current problem with
trash contamination in recycling containers at large events.
The project would achieve these outcomes by eliminating confusion about the recycling process and
enhancing recycling convenience at special events. First, the project will provide 150 new
strategically placed, clearly labeled, and universally recognizable recycling containers throughout
the designated event areas, sufficient to service our most well attended events. Second, each
container will be affixed with signage serving as graphical and bilingual educational tools for
recycling at each collection location (see example attached).
Finally, the project will ensure compliance with Assembly Bill 2176, which mandates waste
reduction at venue facilities and large events, by making it easier and more convenient for special
event coordinators (whether City departments such as Recreation, or private venues such as Coors
Amphitheatre) to develop comprehensive waste diversion plans and provide the required reporting as
part of their large event planning process.
The total project cost to accomplish these objectives is estimated to be $75,000. Staff proposes
applying to the Department of Conservation's Beverage Container Recycling Community Outreach
Program for grantfunding in the amount of$52,000 to implement the project. The proj ect will also
be partially funded by a $23,000 contribution in fabrication costs and in-kind services, or a 31 %
match from our partner, Allied Waste Services.
FISCAL IMPACT: There is no impact to the General Fund. If the resolution is approved, the City
will apply for Beverage Container Recycling Community Outreach Program funding in the amount
of $52,000, to be added to a contribution of $23,000 from our project partner, to meet the total
project cost of$75,000. If the grant is awarded, staff will return to Council with a reco=endation
to accept and appropriate the grant funds to the program. All costs to maintain and replace
recyclable carts and bins, as required, are borne by Allied Waste Services as a condition of their
contract agreement with the City.
M:\General Services\GS Administration\Council Agenda\Environmental\Special events recycling grantAl13, 6-20-06.doc
3-2
RESOLUTION NO, 2006-_
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE FILING OF A GRANT
APPLICATION TO THE DEPARTMENT OF
CONSERVATION'S BEVERAGE CONTAINER RECYCLING
COMMUNITY OUTREACH PROGRAM FOR FUNDS TO
ENHANCE RECYCLING SERVICES AT SPECIAL EVENTS
IN CHULA VISTA.
WHEREAS, the City of Chula Vista strives to be an environmental leader in San Diego
County; and
WHEREAS, by 2001 the City was recycling 54% of the household waste stream and in
2005 launched a new program to enhance service provision to multi-family residents; and
WHEREAS, the City now wishes to address the 2,96 tons of recyclables generated
annua]]y at large special events; and
WHEREAS, the City's current 21 % diversion (recycling) rate at special events IS
significantly below our target rate of 50% or better; and
WHEREAS, the proposed project would increase the diversion rate, reduce trash
contamination in recycling containers, and assist special event coordinators to comply with
mandated planning and reporting requirements; and
WHEREAS, City staff recommends applying for project funding from the Department of
Conservation's Beverage Container Recycling Community Outreach Program to help meet
project costs; and
WHEREAS, the project wil1 also be partially funded by contributions from our project
partner, Allied Waste Services;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby approve the filing of an application for local assistance funds from the
Beverage Container Recycling Community Outreach Program for the Special Events Recycling
Program,
Presented by
Approved as to form by
~;(\X\ \\~ ~\~
Ann Moore
City Attorney
Jack Griffin
Director of General Services
3-3
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
I
Item "
Meeting Date: 6/20/06
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution Appointing the Director of General Services, or his
designee, to sign the appropriate and required grant documentation
regarding the Murray-Hayden Program Under the Safe Neighborhood
Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000
for the "Greg Rogers Park Improvements (PRI69)" Project.
SUBMITTED BY:
Director of General Services CJ JJ- .
. ~
City Manager II (4/Sths Vote: Yes_No-X..)
REVIEWED BY:
On October 17, 2000 by Resolution 2000-356 the State grant funds were accepted for the Greg
Rogers Park Improvements (PRI69) project and appointed the Director of Parks & Recreation, or
his designee, to sign the appropriate and required grant documentation from the State. Due to
reorganizations since that time, it has become necessary to appoint the Director of General
Services, or his designee, the authorization to sign the grant documentation from the State.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the resolution.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable.
DISCUSSION:
On October 17,2000 by Resolution 2000-356 the State grant funds were accepted for the Greg
Rogers Park Improvements (PRI69) project and appointed the Director of Parks & Recreation, or
his designee, to sign the appropriate and required grant documentation from the State. Due to
reorganization of the Parks and Recreation Department, the oversight of construction and
expenditure of the grant funds fell under the responsibility of the newly created General Services
Department.
In an effort to comply with the State's Grant Procedures and Policies regarding the Murray-
Hayden Program Under the Safe Neighborhood Parks, Clean Water, Clean Air and Coastal
Protection Bond Act of 2000 for the "Greg Rogers Park Improvements (PRI69)" Project, staff is
recommending at this time that the Director of General Services be appointed as the agent to
conduct all negotiations, execute and submit all documents including, but not limited to,
Applications, agreements, payment requests and so on, which may be necessary for the
completion of the Project.
FISCAL IMPACT: None
M:\General Services\GS Administration\Counci] Agenda\Greg Rogers Park PR169\Appointed Position for MH Grant PR169.doc
4-1
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
RESOLUTION APPOINTING THE DIRECTOR OF GENERAL
SERVICES, OR HIS DESIGNEE, TO SIGN THE
APPROPRIATE AND REQUIRED GRANT
DOCUMENTATION REGARDING THE MURRAY-HAYDEN
PROGRAM UNDER THE SAFE NEIGHBORHOOD PARKS,
CLEAN WATER, CLEAN AIR AND COASTAL PROTECTION
BOND ACT OF 2000 FOR THE "GREG ROGERS PARK
IMPROVEMENTS (PRI69)" PROJECT.
WHEREAS, in October 17, 2000, by Resolution 2000-356, the Council accepted State
grant funds for the Greg Rogers Park Improvements (PRI69) project and appointed the Director
of Parks & Recreation, or his designee, to sign the appropriate and required grant documentation
from the State; and
WHEREAS, due to reorganization of the Parks and Recreation Department, the oversight
of construction and expenditure of the grant funds fell under the responsibility of the newly
created General Services Department; and
WHEREAS, staff is recommending at this time that the Director of General Services be
appointed as the agent to conduct all negotiations, and execute and submit all documents
including, but not limited to, applications, agreements, payment requests, and other documents
that may be necessary for the completion of the project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby appoint the
Director of General Services, or his designee, to sign the appropriate and required grant
documentation regarding the Murray-Hayden Program Under the Safe Neighborhood Parks,
Clean Water, Clean Air and Coastal Protection Bond Act of 2000 for the "Greg Rogers Park
Improvements (PR169)" Project.
Jack Griffin
Director of General Services
Approved as to fonn by
~~
n Moore
CIty Attorney
Presented by
H:\Attomey\Final Resos\2006\6 20 06\Appointed Position Reso (#7).doc
4-2
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
-
1-
Item:_
Meeting Date: 6/20/2006
ITEM TITLE:
Resolution approving the Memorandum of
Understanding between the City of Chula Vista and the Chula
Vista Elementary School District regarding joint operation of the
Dynamic After School Hours (DASH) after school recreational
program, and the Safe Time for Recreation, Enrichment, and
Tutoring for Children (STRETCH) extended school day
educational program; and authorizing the Mayor to execute the
MOU. 0'#
Assistant City ~ger Palmer
City Manager j/ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_No ~
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
The current MOU between the City and the Chula Vista Elementary School District, in
effect until June 30, 2006, authorizes the operation of two after school programs at
elementary school sites. The STRETCH Program, with its emphasis on literacy and arts
enrichment, is currently offered at seven district schools. The existing MOU also
authorizes the operation of a structured sports and recreation program called DASH
(Dynamic After School Hours), at 25 district schools and an enhanced DASH Plus
program at four school sites.
The intent of this report is to present an updated MOU between the City and the Chula
Vista Elementary School District for FY 2006-07, which includes an expansion in the
number of students served at one STRETCH site (Mueller). It also continues the
increased enrollment of STRETCH students served at Lorna Verde and Mueller due to
the additional funding received from the After School Education and Safety Program
which was approved by Council on November 22, 2005. The Chula Vista Elementary
School District Board is expected to vote on the FY 2006-07 MOU at their June 20, 2006
meeting.
STAFF RECOMMENDATION: That Council approve the Memorandum of
Understanding between the City of Chula Vista and the Chula Vista Elementary School
District regarding joint operation of the DASH (Dynamic After School Hours) after
school recreational program, and the STRETCH (Safe Time for Recreation, Enrichment,
and Tutoring for CHildren) extended school day educational program; and authorize the
Mayor to execute the MOU.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATIONS: nla
5-1
Item: C). Page 2
Meeting Date: 6120/2006
DISCUSSION:
Conducted by the Educational Services Division of the Chula Vista Public Library since
1999, the STRETCH and DASH programs continue to be a success. It is popular not
only with parents and school-age children, but with the City's partner, the Chula Vista
Elementary School District.
The City and the District are now ready to enter into a new Memorandum of
Understanding for FY 2006-07 (Attachment A). The new MOU authorizes:
. Continued operation of DASH at 25 elementary school sites. These sites include:
Allen, Arroyo Vista, Casillas, Chula Vista Hills, Clear View, Cook, Discovery,
EastLake, Halecrest, Hedenkamp, Heritage, Hilltop, Kellogg, Liberty, Thurgood
Marshall, McMillin, Olympic View, Palomar, Parkview, Rogers, Rosebank, Salt
Creek, Tiffany, Valle Lindo, and Veterans Elementary Schools.
. Operation of "DASH Plus" at Cook, Hilltop, Palomar and Valle Lindo
Elementary Schools. DASH Plus sites are open until 6:00 p.m. and offer
homework support and enrichment classes, as well as regular DASH
programming.
. Continuation of the STRETCH program at seven elementary school sites,
including Harborside, Lauderbach, Lorna Verde, Montgomery, Mueller, Otay, and
Rice Elementary Schools. (Additional state grant funding in FY 07 allows for an
increase in service from 80 children per day to 100 children per day at Mueller
Elementary. This brings the total up to five STRETCH schools which now serve
100 students; Otay and Rice serve 80 and 60 students respectively.)
As in previous MOUs, the City will recruit, hire, train and supervise staff to conduct both
STRETCH and DASH. The District will actively promote communication, cooperation
and coordination among and between school personnel and city personnel.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The proposed FY2006-07 budget for STRETCH and DASH is $2,137,819. The City will
provide $829,038 (plus in-kind expenses); the Elementary School District will provide
$588,187 and the State will provide (via the District) $720,594. These funds will be
appropriated as part of the FY2006-07 budget.
There is a conflict of interest for Councilperson Patricia Chavez because she resides
within 500 ft of Chula Vista Hills Elementary School.
5-2
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE MEMORANDUM OF
UNDERSTANDING BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND THE CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT
REGARDING JOINT OPERATION OF THE DYNAMIC AFTER
SCHOOL HOURS (DASH) AFTER SCHOOL RECREATIONAL
PROGRAM, AND THE SAFE TIME FOR RECREATION,
ENRICHMENT, AND TUTORING FOR CHILDREN (STRETCH)
EXTENDED SCHOOL DAY EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM; AND
AUTHORIZING MAYOR TO EXECUTE THE MOU
WHEREAS, the current MOU between the City and the Chula Vista Elementary School
District, in effect until June 30, 2006, authorizes the operation of two after school programs at
elementary school sites; and
WHEREAS, the STRETCH Program, with its emphasis on literacy and arts enrichment, is
currently offered at seven district schools; and
WHEREAS, the existing MOU also authorizes the operation of a structured sports and
recreation program called DASH at twenty-five district schools and an enhanced DASH Plus
Program at four school sites; and
WHEREAS, the City ofChula Vista and the Chula Vista Elementary School District are now
ready to enter into a new Memorandum of Understanding for FY 2006-2007; and
WHEREAS, the new Memorandum of Understanding authorizes:
. Continued operation of DASH at twenty-five elementary school sites
which include: Allen, Arroyo Vista, Casillas, Chula Vista Hills, Clear
View, Cook, Discovery, Eastlake, Halecrest, Hedenkamp, Heritage,
Hilltop, Kellogg, Liberty, Thrugood, Marshall, McMillin, Olympic View,
Palomar, Parkview, Rogers, Rosebank, Salt Creek, Tiffany, Valle Lindo,
and Veterans Elementary Schools.
. Operation of DASH Plus at Cook, Hilltop, Palomar, and Valle Lindo
Elementary Schools. DASH Plus sites are open until 6:00 p.m. and offer
homework support and enrichment classes, as well as regular DASH
programmmg.
. Continuation of the STRETCH Program at seven elementary school sites,
including Harborside, Lauderbach, Loma Verde, Montgomery, Mueller,
Otay, and Rice Elementary Schools. (Additional state grant funding in
5-3
FY 2007 allows for an increase in service from eighty children per day to
100 children per day at Mueller Elementary. This brings the total up to
five STRETCH schools which now serve 100 students; Otay and Rice
serve eighty and sixty students respectively.)
WHEREAS, as in the previous MOUs, the City will recruit, hire, train, and supervise staff to
conduct both STRETCH and DASH; and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Elementary School District will actively promote
communication, cooperation, and coordination among and between school personnel and city
personnel.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
does hereby approve the Memorandum of Understanding between the City ofChula Vista and the
Chula Vista Elementary School District regarding joint operation of the Dynamic After School
Hours (DASH) after school recreational program and the Safe Time for Recreation, Enrichment, and
Tutoring for Children (STRETCH) extended school day educational program; and authorize the
Mayor to execute the MOU.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
David Palmer
Assistant City Manager
H:lAnorneylFinal Resosl200616 20 06\#08_MOU DASH and STRETCH FY 2006-2007.doc
2
5-4
-
..
THE ATTACHED AGREEMENT HAS BEEN REVIEWED
AND APPROVED AS TO FORM BY THE CITY
ATTORNEY'S OFFICE AND WILL BE
FORMALLY SIGNED UPON APPROVAL BY
THE CITY COUNCIL
~Jfih~
. Ann Moore
City Attorney
Dated: & / / t1 /Of.f
/ /
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT
TO OPERATE AN AFTER SCHOOL RECREATIONAL PROGRAM
(DASH - DYNAMIC AFTER SCHOOL HOURS),
AND EXTENDED SCHOOL DAY EDUCATIONAL PROGRAM
(STRETCH - SAFE TIME FOR RECREA nON, ENRICHMENT AND
TUTORING FOR CHILDREN) FY 2006-2007
5-5
Attachment "A"
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
BETWEEN
THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
AND
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT
This MOD is entered into by the City of Chula Vista and the Chula Vista Elementary
School District.
This is an agreement to operate an after school recreational program ("DASH" -
Dynamic After School Hours), and an extended school day educational program
(STRETCH - Safe Time for Recreation, Enrichment and Tutoring for CHildren) in Chula
Vista Elementary School District schools in FY 2006-2007.
The parties agree that the Chula Vista Elementary School District shall:
1. Facilitate communication of the DASH and STRETCH Programs' missions, goals
and objectives to all participating school sites, in particular to principals, PTAs
and School Site Councils.
2. Actively promote cooperation and coordination among and between school sites
and all personnel involved in DASH and STRETCH activities.
3. Participate in the development and actualization of a plan to evaluate the DASH
and STRETCH programs.
4. Provide a staffliaison with the City as a key contact.
5. Coordinate the daily delivery of snacks for participating children through Child
Nutrition Services.
6. Provide the City of Chula Vista $1,308,781 in FY 2006-2007 towards the cost of
operating the DASH and STRETCH Programs, payable within 30 days of receipt
of four quarterly City of Chula Vista invoices of $327,195.25 each, on 9/1106,
12/1/06,3/1107, and 6/1/06.
The parties agree that the City of Chula Vista shall:
1. Provide a Library Department Manager to oversee and coordinate the DASH and
STRETCH Programs' activities, in cooperation with District staff.
2. Facilitate communication of the DASH and STRETCH Programs' missions, goals
and objectives to all participating staff.
3. Actively promote cooperation and coordination among and between school sites
and all personnel involved in DASH and STRETCH activities.
4. Participate in the development and actualization of a plan to evaluate the DASH
and STRETCH programs.
5. Operate the DASH Program at the following 25 District Schools: Allen, Arroyo
Vista, Casillas, Chula Vista Hills, Clear View, Cook (DASH Plus), Discovery
Charter, EastLake, Halecrest, Hedenkamp, Heritage, Hilltop (DASH Plus),
Kellogg, Liberty, Thurgood Marshall, McMillin, Olympic View, Palomar (DASH
5-6
Plus), Parkview, Rogers, Rosebank, Salt Creek, Tiffany, Valle Lindo (DASH
Plus), and Veterans Elementary Schools. Note: DASH Plus sites offer extended
hours and curriculum.
6. Recruit, hire, and train 54 part-time DASH Leaders (plus "floaters" as needed),
under the supervision of3 full-time DASH Supervisors.
7. Operate the STRETCH Program at the following 7 District Schools: Harborside
(100 students), Lauderbach (100 students), Lorna Verde (80 students),
Montgomery (100 students), Mueller (100 students), Otay (80 students), and Rice
(60 students) Elementary Schools.
8. Recruit, hire, and train 7 part-time, benefited STRETCH School Site
Coordinators, and 31 part-time Youth Leaders, (plus "floaters" as needed), under
the supervision of a full time STRETCH Supervisor.
9. Provide individual participating schools with detailed terms of agreement
regarding specific program hours, staffing, programming, shared use of facilities,
etc.
10. Contribute the following:
$829,038 in STRETCHlDASH budgeted general funds; City wide overhead
(human resources, payroll, finance, MIS, purchasing, and other City Departments)
- in kind.
II. Act as fiscal agent for the combined District and City funds, the duties of which
include but are not limited to budgeting, appropriating, expending, tracking, and
reporting funds.
The parties agree that a joint decision-making panel shall continue to govern the DASH
and STRETCH Programs. The panel is comprised of the following District and City
employees:
Chura Vista Elementarv School District:
Assistant Superintendent for Community and Government Services
District Director of Early Intervention
City of Chula Vista
Assistant City Manager/Chula Vista Public Library Director
Educational Services Manager
The parties further agree to hold each other harmless against any and all claims asserted
or liability established for damages or injuries, including death, to any person or property,
including an officer, agent or employee of one of the parties, which arise from or are
connected with or are caused or claimed to be caused by the negligent acts or omissions
of the District or the City in carrying out the terms of this agreement; provided, however,
that no duty to hold harmless the other party shall arise or exist regarding the established
sole negligence or willful misconduct of that party.
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY
SCHOOL DISTRICT
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
By:
By:
Date:
Date:
5-7
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item: b
Meeting Date: 6/20/06
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing: Consideration of the Final Subsequent Envirorunental
Impact Report (FSEIR #05-02) for the EastLake III Senior Housing
Project
SUBMITTED BY:
Resolution No. EIR 05-02 of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
certifying the Final Subsequent Envirorunental Impact Report (FSEIR
#05-02) for the EastLake III Senior Housing Project; making certain
Findings of Fact; adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and
adopting a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program pursuant to the
California Envirorunental Quality Aft
Director of Planning and Building
/
Interim City Manager if (
REVIEWED BY:
In accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), a
Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR), has been prepared to analyze the
environmental impacts of the proposed EastLake III Senior Housing Project (Project). CEQA
Findings of Fact and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been prepared that
reflect the conclusions of the Final SEIR. The Final SEIR #05-02 contains responses to
comments received during the public review period.
RECOMMENDATION:
That the City Council adopt Resolution EIR 05-02 certifying that the final Subsequent
Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR #05-02) for the EastLake III Senior Housing Project has
been prepared in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State
CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista; making
certain Findings of Fact; adopting a Statement of Overriding Considerations; and adopting a
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP).
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
The Resource Conservation Commission (RCe) reviewed the Draft SEIR #05-02 on May 15,
2006. The majority of the RCC comments focused on parking in the EastLake community as a
whole. After reviewing and discussing the document, the RCC found the document to be
adequate and in compliance with CEQA and voted (6-0-0-1) to recommend certification of
FSEIR #05-02 by the City Council. Specific responses to the RCC comments are provided in
FSEIR #05-02.
b-I
Page 2, Item:~
Meeting Date: 6/20/06
On May 31, 2006, the Planning Commission held a public hearing to close the public review
period for the Draft SEIR #05-02. Attached are the May 31, 2006 Planning Commission minutes
(Attachment 1). No members of the public commented on the FSEIR. Planning Commissioners
raised concerns regarding the proposed change in land use, water quality, traffic and aesthetics.
Comments received during the public hearing, as well as any written comments received during
the 45 day public review period, have been responded to in FSEIR #05-02 (Attachment 2). The
Planning Commission adopted a resolution at their meeting of June 14,2006 recommending that
the City Council certify the Final EIR (Attachment 2).
DISCUSSION:
The EastLake Company submitted an application requesting amendments to the General Plan,
EastLake III General Development Plan (GDP) and EastLake III Sectional Planning Area (SPA)
Plan for the proposed EastLake III Senior Housing Project. A Subsequent EIR was prepared that
evaluates the environmental effects of the proposed Project. The Project proposes development
of 494 "for sale" residential units in a gated, active senior community on 18.4 acres, with 1.2
acres of perimeter slopes remaining as open space.
The proposal calls for amendments to the:
· City of Chula Vista General Plan to change the land use designation of approximately
18.4 acres from Commercial Visitor to Residential High (18-27+dwelling units per acre
(du/ac));
· Eastlake III GDP to change the land use designation of 18.4 acres from Tourist
Commercial to Residential High (18-27+du/ac);
· EastLake III SPA to change the Site Utilization Plan designation of 18.4 acres from
Commercial-Tourist (C-2) to Multi-Family Seniors (VR-13), and amend the associated
regulatory documents, including the Design Guidelines, Public Facilities Finance Plan,
Water Conservation Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan, and Affordable Housing
Program; and
· Planned Community District Map of 18.4 acres from Tourist Commercial (TC) to Multi-
Family Seniors (RMS) and amend the EastLake III PC District Regulations to
accommodate the changes in land use
The existing 1.2 acres of open space that comprises perimeter slopes will remain open space. All
proposed amendments to the General Plan, GDP and SPA are fully described in the Project staff
report.
CEOA ComDliance
Because of the size, complexity of issues and extended buildout time frame of the EastLake
community, both the planning and environmental documentation associated with the EastLake
community have been tiered from the general to the specific. The first tier of planning and
t-.J.
Page 3, Item:~
Meeting Date: 6/20/06
approvals associated with the proposed project site was the approval of the Final EIR for
EastLake III, Olympic Training Center, EastLake Trails Prezone and Annexation (FEIR #89-09)
in October 1989. More recently, the Final Subsequent EIR for the EastLake III Woods and
Vistas Replanning Program and Subsequent Addendum (FSEIR #01-01) was approved in June
2001. The FSEIR #05-02 incorporates by reference and serves as a Subsequent EIR to the
FSEIR #01-01 as well as its associated Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations
and MMRP.
Comments on the Draft EIR
Letters of comment were received on the Draft SEIR #05-02 from the following agencies and
individuals:
Chula Vista Elementary School District
United States Fish and Wildlife Service
California Department of Toxics Substance Control
The letters and responses are included in FSEIR #05-02 (Attachment 2).
Additional Revisions to Draft EIR
Minor typographical corrections and clarifications have been made to information contained in
the Draft SEIR; the Final SEIR reflects the corrected information. None of the corrections
resulted in modifications to conclusions regarding significance of impacts.
Findin!!s of FSEIR #05-02
The Final EIR identified a number of direct and cumulative significant environmental effects (or
"impacts") that would result from the proposed Project. Some of these significant effects can be
fully mitigated through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures. Other impacts cannot be
avoided by the adoption of feasible mitigation measures. In order to approve the proposed
Project, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be adopted. The Statement of Overriding
Considerations is included as a part of the proposed "Findings of Fact." Implementation of the
proposed Project will result in significant unmitigated impacts, which are listed below and
further described in the attached Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
(Attachment 3).
Summarv of Environmental Impacts
The following discussion contains a summary of the impact conclusions for FSEIR #05-02.
Project level and cumulative impacts are identified and divided into three categories: significant
and unmitigated, significant and mitigated to less than significant, and less than significant.
&_ .:2,
-"
Page 4, Item:~
Meeting Date: 6/20/06
Significant and Unmitigated Impacts
The significant, unmitigable impacts identified in the Eastlake III Senior Housing FSEIR (#05-
02) are either cumulative or regional in nature. Cumulative impacts are sjgnificant when the
Project is combined with other projects in the subregion, whereas an impact that is regional in
nature is beyond the sole control of the City ofChula Vista.
FSEIR #01-01 identified several significant and unmitigated impacts associated with the
development of the EastLake III Community. All identified significant and unmitigated impacts
associated with the proposed Project described below, are consistent with the previously
identified significant unmitigated impacts in the FSEIR #01-01. The Project does not result in
any new unmitigated impacts that were not already identified in the previous FSEIR #01-01.
Landform Alteration! Aesthetics
FSEIR #01-01 identified a significant unmitigable cumulative impact associated with landform
alteration and the change in visual character from open expanses of rolling hills to development,
The Chula Vista City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for this impact.
Because the proposed Project's environmental analysis is tiered from FSEIR #01-01, this
significant cumulative impact related to landform alteration and aesthetics must be carried
forward for the proposed Project.
The proposed Project would contribute to the change in visual character of the western rim of the
Lower Otay Reservoir area. While the Project site has been graded and is no longer natural open
space, it is an undeveloped vacant site. The proposed Project would incrementally contribute to
the developed nature of the western rim of the reservoir. In conjunction with other existing,
developing or planning developments, the Project's contribution to the loss of undeveloped open
space would represent a significant, unmitigable cumulative impact.
Traffic/Circulation
FSEIR #01-01 concluded that significant cumulative traffic impacts associated with freeway
operations at I-80S would occur from buildout of the EastLake III community. The Chula Vista
City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding Considerations for this impact. Because the
proposed Project's environmental analysis is tiered from FSEIR #01-01, this significant
cumulative impact related to transportation and circulation must be carried forward for the
proposed Project. Because the proposed Project is part of the buildout of the overall EastLake III
community, it would result in an incremental traffic contribution to the regional traffic from
buildout of the community. Thus, a significant cumulative unmitigable traffic impact to I-80S
would result from the proposed Project.
6~'f
!
Page 5, Item:~
Meeting Date: 6/20/06
Air Ouality
FSEIR #01-01 concluded that buildout of the EastLake III community would result in
significant, unmitigable air quality impacts. The Chula Vista City Council adopted a Statement
of Overriding Considerations for this impact. Because the proposed Project's environmental
analysis is tiered rrom FSEIR #01-01, this significant cumulative impact related to air quality
must be carried forward for the proposed Proj ect. The proposed Proj ect would contribute
incrementally to overall cumulative vehicular emissions generated by buildout of the EastLake
III community. Therefore, the proposed Project would contribute to the significant, unmitigated
cumulative air quality impacts of the region.
Significant and Mitigated to Less than Significant
Significant impacts were identified in the following environmental issue areas. Mitigation
measures required in the EIR would reduce the impacts to less than significant.
. Light/Glare (Direct and Cumulative)
. Geology/Soils (Direct and Cumulative)
. Water QualitylHydrology (Direct and Cumulative)
. Traffic/Circulation (Direct)
. Air Quality (Direct)
. Noise (Direct and Cumulative)
. Public ServiceslUtilities (Direct and Cumulative)
. Biological Resources (Direct and Cumulative)
. Paleontological Resources (Direct and Cumulative)
Less than Significant Impacts
Less than significant impacts were identified in the following environmental issue areas:
. Agricultural Resources
. Biological Resources
. Cultural Resources
. Hazards/Risk of Upset
. Mineral Resources
. HousingIPopulation
CONCLUSIONS:
At the time FSEIR #01-01 was certified and adopted in June 2001, the City Council determined
that substantial social, environmental and economic benefits of the EastLake III project
outweighed the significant and unmitigable impacts associated with the project, and a Statement
/ ~
Ip-..-I
Page 6, Item:_
Meeting Date: 6/20/06
of Overriding Considerations was approved. The proposed Project would not result in impacts
beyond what was identified in FSEIR #01-0 I.
All feasible mitigation measures with respect to Project impacts have been included in FSEIR
#05-02. As described above, the Project will result in unmitigable impacts that would remain
significant after the implementation of these measures; therefore, in order to approve the Project,
the City must adopt a Statement of Overriding Considerations pursuant to CEQA Guidelines
Sections 15043 and 15093 (see Attachment 3, Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding
Considerations, Section XI).
The City has examined a reasonable range of alternatives to the proposed Project. CEQA
requires the examination of Project alternatives that could reduce or avoid significant impacts
even if the alternatives would not accomplish the Project objectives. The EIR evaluated three
alternatives: the No Development Alternative, Existing Land Use Alternative, and Reduced
Density Alternative. The No Development Alternative and the Reduced Density Alternative
were identified as the environmentally superior alternatives even though neither of these
alternatives would meet the Project objectives (see Attachment 3, Findings of Fact and Statement
of Overriding Considerations, Section X). Neither alternative would assure a high quality
development, would be consistent with City and Community goals and objectives, the Chula
Vista General Plan and EastLake III General Development Plan or would provide for diverse
land uses in the EastLake community.
FSEIR #05-02 meets the requirements of CEQA, and therefore staff recommends that the City
Council find that the FSEIR has been completed in compliance with CEQA and adopt the Draft
Findings of Fact, Statement of Overriding Considerations and MMRP.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The preparation and processing of the EIR is covered by the applicant's deposit account.
Attachments
I. Planning Commission Minutes - May 31, 2006
2. Final EIR 05-02 (bound document; previously transmitted under separate cover)
3. Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
t-fp
ATTACHMENT 1
Verbatim Transcript of the
Special Planning Commission Meeting
on May 31, 2006 to consider
EIR 05-02; Close of 45-day public review period for the Draft
Subsequent Environmental Impact Report and the Eastlake III
Senior Housing Project
Marni Borg, Environmental Projects Manager for the Eastlake III Senior Housing Project gave
an opening statement announcing the purpose for the meeting, as well as a brief overview of the
DEIR.
COMMISSION COMMENTS:
Cmr. Bensoussan - In your presentation you said 490 units and in the document it says 1,235
new residents, so residents meaning if you take 490 units you get 1,200 and something residents?
Marui Borg - They're one, two and three bedroom units, so we're projecting a certain number of
residents per unit.
Cmr. Bensoussan - I have a couple of concerns. We talk in the document going from
Commercial Tourist to Residential High Density. I'd like to know what mitigation has happened
to provide a replacement for the Tourist Commercial; has that happened? Because when the
General Plan was developed, that area was earmarked for Commercial Tourist because it's a
prime spot next to the Olympic Training Center and the lakes and so it would have been a natural
spot for a resort hotel and restaurant to service the training center and the tourist that come.
Jim Hare - Cmr. Bensoussan; what we'll do is we'll take these questions as we've indicated and
we're not going to respond to you directly this evening. So you put these questions on the record
and they are what environmental staff is obligated to respond to in the final document.
Cmr. Bensoussan - Okay, I understand. That's one because I didn't see that addressed in here
and it mayor may not be any environmental issues and it may be a gray area, but to me its an
environmental issue because we're asking for a General Plan Amendment and I'd like to see how
that's mitigated; the loss of that structure for that zoning.
In the table of the impacts it says under transportation and traffic the level of service at the
project driveway in Olympic Parkway will degrade to F as a result of the project trom vehicles
entering and exiting project. And then we have the mitigation measures, but then it says Level of
Significance after Mitigation, Less than Significant, but I'd like to know what that translates to in
terms of grade level; is it F, D, E; what is it. So maybe you can respond to that.
I'd like to know...throughout the General Plan and the Zoning, we talk about transitions. We
have transitions between low rise and high-rise and low density and high density and some
middle areas, and so this high density goes right next to Open Space, so I'd like to know what
mitigation measures are in place for that transition. I didn't see that anywhere being addressed.
~-7
Page 2
Another thing that concerns me is that the mitigation measures to ensure that there won't be any
degradation of the water quality since this is located next to an extremely sensitive water source;
I know this was a concern at the Resource Conservation Commission and I looked at the
mitigation measures and I wasn't wholely convinced that this...maybe Marilyn can address...oh,
not now; maybe later. I don't think that that's delved into enough in what monitoring would take
place once the project is built; if during the landscaping some architect or maintenance person
decides to use certain types of fertilizers that are toxic and they end up in the water source; I
think those are issues that are not addressed well enough.
I had some questions about the senior market rate housing, but I guess that's more project-
specific and not environmental-specific. So I'll reserve those, so that's about it.
Cmr. Felber - Are there any more questions from the Commission? If not, then I'll close the
public hearing on the Draft EIR.
b-r
ATTACHMENT 3
SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
FOR THE
EASTLAKE III SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT
CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT
AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
June 7, 2006
b-9
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section
Page
I. INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
II. ACRONYMS
III. PROJECT DESCRIPTION
IV. BACKGROUND
V. RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
VI. FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA
VII LEGAL EFFECTS OF FINDINGS
VIII MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
IX. SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
LAND USE
LANDFORM ALTERATION AND AESTHETICS
GEOLOGY AND SOILS
WATER QUALITY AND HYDROLOGY
TRANSPORTATION AND TRAFFIC
AIR QUALITY
NOISE
PUBLIC SERVICES AND UTILITIES
BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES
PALEONTOLOGICAL RESOURCES
1
2
6
8
9
11
11
13
14
15
15
15
15
15
16
16
16
17
17
b -~/ .J
X CUMULATIVE SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES 50
XI FEASIBILITY OF POTENTIAL PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
60
NO PROJECTINO DEVELOPMENT ALTERNATIVE
63
ALTERNATIVE MIX OF LAND USES
65
REDUCED DENSITY ALTERNATIVE
66
ENVIRONMENTALLY SUPERIOR ALTERNATIVE
68
XII STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
69
11
b-//
BEFORE THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
RE: EastLake III Senior Housing Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR); SCH
#2005091047; EIR 05-02
FINDINGS OF FACT
I.
INTRODUCTION AND BACKGROUND
The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (Final SEIR) prepared for the EastLake III
Senior Housing project addresses the potential environmental effects associated with
implementation of the proj ect. In addition, the Final SEIR evaluates three alternatives (1) the no
development alternative, (2) existing land use designation alternative (commercial tourist), and
(3) reduced density alternative (single family residential similar to surrounding development).
The Final SEIR represents a second tier EIR, in accordance with CEQA Section 21094, and tiers
off the Program EIR prepared for the EastLake Planned Community Master EIR (EIR #81-03).
These findings have been prepared to comply with requirements of the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA) (Pub. Resources Code, 9 21000 et seq.) and the CEQA Guidelines (Cal.
Code Regs., Title 14, 9 15000 et seq.).
I
6 -/:L
II.
ACRONYMS
"AAQS" means Ambient Air Quality Standards.
"AB" means Assembly Bill
"ADT" means average daily traffic
"AQIP" means Air Quality Improvement Plan
"ASTM" American Society of Testing of Materials
"APCD" means San Diego Air Pollution Control District.
"BMPs" means best management practices
"CalEP A" means California Environmental Protection Agency
"CaItrans" means California Department of Transportation
"CARE" means California Air Resources Board.
"CEQA" means California Environmental Quality Act
"cfs" means cubic feet per second
"City" means City of Chula Vista
"CMP" means Congestion Management Program
"CNEL" means community noise equivalent level
"CNPS" means California Native Plant Society
"CO" means carbon monoxide
"C02" means Carbon Dioxide
"CPF" means Community Purpose Facilities
2
b-/:3
.'\.--
"CPTED" means Crime Prevention Through Environmental Design
"CT" means Commercial -Tourist
"CW A" means Clean Water Act
"dB" means decibels
"dB (A)" means A-weighted decibels
"du/ac" means dwelling units per acre.
"EIR" means environmental impact report
"EP A" means Environmental Protection Agency
"EUC" means Eastern Urban Center
"FEMA" means Federal Emergency Management Agency
"FIRM" means Flood Insurance Rate Maps
"FSEIR" means Final Subsequent Environmental hnpact Report
"GDP" means General Development Plan
"GDP A" means General Development Plan Amendment
"GMOC" means Growth Management Oversight Committee
"HCM" means Highway Capacity Manual
"HUT" means Habitat Loss and Incidental Take
"HOA" means Homeowners Association
"LOS" means level of service
"MRZ" means Mineral Resource Zone
"MSCP" means Multiple Species Conservation Program.
"NOI" Notice of Intent
3
6- I if.-
"NaP" means Notice of Preparation
"NOx" means nitrogen oxides
"NPDES" means National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
"03" means ozone
"OTC" means Olympic Training Center
"PAD Fee" means Park Acquisition and Development Fee
"PC" means Planned Community .
"PFDIF" means Public Facilities Development Impact Fee
"PFFP" means Public Facilities Financing Plan
"PMIO" means Particulate matter less than 1 O-microns in size
"ppm" means parts per million
"RAQS" means Regional Air Quality Standards
"RMP" means Resource Management Plan
"ROC" means Reactive Organic Compounds
"ROWs" means right-of-ways
"RTP" means Regional Transportation Plan
"RWQCB" means Regional Water Quality Control Boards
"SANDAG" means San Diego Association of Governments
"SCAQMD" means South Coast Air Quality Management District
"SDAB" means San Diego Air Basin
"SDAPCD" means San Diego Air Pollution Control District
"SDCW A" means San Diego County Water Authority
4
~~S-
"SEIR" means Subsequent Environmental Impact Report
"SIP" means State Implementation Plan
"Sax" means sulfur oxides
"SPA" means Sectional Planning Area
"SR" means State Route
"SUSMP" means Standard Urban Stormwater Mitigation Plan
"SWPPP" means storm water pollution prevention plan
"SWRCB" means State Water Resources Control Board
"SZA" Select Zone Alignment
"TDM" means Transportation Demand Management
"TM" means Tentative Map
"TMDL" means Total Maximum Daily Load
"UBC" means Uniform Building Code
"USDA" means United States Department of Agriculture
"USGS" means United States Geological Survey
"USFWS" means U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service
"UST" means Underground Storage Tank
"VOCs" means volatile organic compounds.
"WCP" means Water Conservation Plan
"WDR" means Waste rlischarge Requirements
"WTP" means Water Treatment Plant
5
?~/,~
III.
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The EastLake III Senior Housing project presents a plan of development for the EastLake
Company within the Vistas area of the EastLake III GDP area. The EastLake III Senior Housing
project allows for a total of 494-unit senior housing project. The project will provide 25 -low and
25-moderate priced units off site or pay in-lieu fee as established by the City Council n
accordance with the EastLake III Supplemental Phase IV Affordable Housing Program. Other
land uses designated by the EastLake III Senior Housing project include a 14,000 square foot,
single-story recreational facility, which includes fitness and activity spaces, meeting rooms, spa
and indoor pool. Outside recreational elements include an outdoor pool and spa, BBQ facility,
multifunctional passive green spaces and a pedestrian paseo around the outer perimeter. The
EastLake III Senior Housing project would require an EastLake III General Development Plan
(GDP) Amendment to change 18.4 acre of "CT-CommerciaI Tourist" use to "Residential High
(18-27+ duJac)".
The proposed amendments to the General Plan, and EastLake III GDP and SPA would allow for
the development of an active seniors community. Additionally, the project will require a General
Plan Amendment, EastLake III General Development Plan (GDP) Amendment, and EastLake III
Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Amendment. The 494-unit senior housing project would consist
of 13 buildings, each four stories tall over a subterranean parking structure. The proj ect would
also include a 14,000 square foot, single-story recreational facility, which includes fitness and
activity spaces, meeting rooms, spa and indoor pool. Outside recreational elements include an
outdoor pool and spa, BBQ facility, multifunctional passive green spaces and a pedestrian paseo
around the outer perimeter. This senior housing community would be restricted to 55 and over,
would be gated, and housing units would be "for sale." The densities and unit numbers proposed
would result in approximately 1,235 new residents (based on 2.5 people/dwelling unit).
DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
The discretionary actions to be taken by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista (City)
include the following:
. General Plan Amendment to change 18.4 acres of "Visitor Commercial" use to
"Residential High";
· EastLake III General Development Plan (GDP) Amendment to change 18.4 acre of "CT-
Commercial Tourist" use to "Residential High (18-27+ duJac)";
· EastLake III Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Amendment to change 18.4 acres of
"Commercial-Tourist" use to "VR-13, Multi-Family Seniors" and establish a new land
6
b-/7
use district, "RMS, Multi-family Seniors> 15 duJacre". Amendments to the SPA would
also include amendments to the SPA's AQIP and WCP to ensure consistency with the
City's AQIP and WCP Guidelines. Additionally, an EastLake III SPA's Affordable
Housing Program would be amended to meet the City's affordable housing requirements;
. Tentative Map for the EastLake III Senior Housing Project.
In addition, this SEIR will be used by other responsible agencies to implement the proposed
project. Actions required by other agencies are discussed in Section 3.6.2 of the SEIR.
The City of Chula Vista is the lead agency and has discretionary power of approval for all the
actions pertaining to this project. The Final SEIR is intended to satisfy CEQA requirements for
environmental review ofthose actions.
PROJECT GOALS AND OBJECTIVES
As specified in the Final SEIR, the objectives of this project include:
. Assure a high quality of development, consistent with City and Community goals and
objectives, the Chula Vista General Plan and EastLake III General Development Plan.
. Create an economically viable plan that can be realistically implemented within current
and projected economic conditions.
--
. Provide for orderly planning and long-range development of the project to ensure
community compatibility.
.
Establish the necessary framework for and identify financing mechanisms to facilitate
adequate community facilities, such as transportation, water, flood control, sewage
disposal, schools and parks and provide adequate assurance that approved development
will provide the necessary infrastructure, when needed, to serve the future residents of
EastLake III.
.
Preserve open space and natural amenities.
.
Establish a planning and development framework which will allow diverse land uses to
exist in harmony within the community.
7
(P-ff
IV.
BACKGROUND
Development of the EastLake Planned Community has occurred in phases beginning with
EastLake I, followed by EastLake II and then finally EastLake III (EastLake 1 and EastLake II
were later combined so in effect there are currently two plarming areas - EastLake II and
EastLake III). The planning of each portion of the EastLake Planned Community began in 1982
and has occurred through several planning phases - starting with general parameters and
culminating with specific guidelines. A GDP was prepared for each development phase within
the EastLake community. A GDP provides a policy bridge between the Chula Vista General
Plan and detailed project development planning provided in a SPA Plan. SPA Plans were then
developed for each of the specific neighborhoods/development areas. SPA plans refine and
implement the development concepts outlined in the GDPs. In general, the EastLake SPA plans
define the land use mix, design criteria, primary circulation patterns, open space and recreation
concepts and infrastructure requirements.
Environmental documentation pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has
mirrored the tiered planning approach described above. Because of the size, complexity of
issues and extended build-out time frame of the EastLake development, both the planning and
environmental documentation associated with EastLake were tiered from the general to the
specific. The first tier of planning and approvals included the EastLake Planned Community
Master EIR (EIR #81-03) in February 1982. Subsequent EIRs have been prepared for GDP
Amendments and SPA Plans within EastLake I, II and III, including the Final EIR for EastLake
Greens SPA and EastLake Trails Pre-zone and Annexation (EIR #86-04) in 1989 and the Final
EIR for the EastLake Greens and EastLake Trails Replanning Program (EIR #97-04) in 1998.
The Final EIR for EastLake III, Olympic Training Center (OTe) (EIR #89-09) was prepared in
October 1989 and included the SPA plan for the OTC. It also included the GDP for all of
EastLake III as well as a proposal to annex EastLake II and the Trails (EastLake II) from the
unincorporated area of San Diego County into the City of Chula Vista. The most recent
environmental document prepared for the site is the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact
Report for the EastLake III Woods and Vistas Replarming Program (FSEIR #01-01) dated June
2001 and addendum dated May 2001. This Subsequent EIR addressed the EastLake III GDP and
SPA.
The proposed project is located in the Vistas community of the EastLake III SPA plan area. This
analysis tiers from the June 2001 FSEIR#01-0l which in turn tiers offthe original October 1989
Final EIR for EastLake III, Olympic Training Center, EastLake Trails Prezone and Armexation
(hereinafter referred to as EIR #89-09). Therefore, this EIR is a Subsequent EIR to the June
2001 FSEIR (FSEIR #01-01). Under such tiering principals, the proposed GDP Amendment
analysis is presented and should be reviewed at a subsequent, first-tier level ofreview. The SPA
8
/ C;
V --.,/["
Amendment analysis is presented and should be reviewed at a second-tier EIR level of review
(project-level).
While a second-tier analysis can rely on a first-tier analysis, it has the obligation to discuss any
changed circumstances or new information that might alter the first-tier analysis. Under
principals of tiering, if a first-tier document found significant impacts, then the second-tier EIR
must require the mitigation measures unless the analysis explains that the measures are not
applicable or that other mitigation measures can replace the previous measures and similarly
reduce the impacts to a level of insignificance. As such, each environmental analysis section in
this SEIR identifies the avoidable and unavoidable significant environmental impacts previously
identified in FSEIR #01-01 and EIR #89-09 and the required mitigation measures. This SEIR
also evaluates whether the previously required mitigation measures pertaining to this portion of
the SPA plan are still applicable, or whether there are other feasible mitigation measures that
were not previously considered that might similarly reduce the stated impacts to less than
significant. The Executive Summary and Mitigation, Monitoring and Reporting Program list all
mitigation measures that apply to the proposed project ftom previous tiers of environmental
review as well as new measures required by this analysis.
v.
RECORD OF PROCEEDINGS
For purposes of CEQA and the findings set forth below, the administrative record of the City
Council decision on the environmental analysis of this project shall consist of the following:
· The Notice of Preparation and all other public notices issued by the City in conjunction
with the project;
· The Draft and Final SEIR for the project (EIR #05-02) including appendices and
technical reports;
· All comments submitted by agencies or members of the public during the public
comment period on the Draft SEIR;
· All reports, studies, memoranda, maps, staff reports, or other planning documents relating
to the proposed project prepared by the City, consultants to the City, or responsible or
trustee agencies with respect to the City's compliance with the requirements of CEQA
and with respect to the City's actions on the proposed project;
9
"
&.01.0
. All documents, comments, and correspondence submitted by members of the public and
public agencies in connection with this project, in addition to comments on the SEIR for
the project;
. All documents submitted to the City by other public agencies or members of the public in
connection with the SEIR, up through the close of the public hearing;
. Minutes and verbatim transcripts of all workshops, the scoping meeting, other public
meetings, and public hearings held by the City, or videotapes where transcripts are not
available or adequate;
· Any documentary or other evidence submitted at workshops, public meetings, and public
hearings for this project;
· All findings and resolutions adopted by City decision makers in connection with this
project, and all documents cited or referred to therein; and
· Matters of common knowledge to the City, which the members of the City Council
considered regarding this project, including federal, state, and local laws and regulations,
and including but not limited to the following:
· Chula Vista General Plan;
· Relevant portions of the Zoning Code of the City;
· EastLake General Development Plan (GDP);
· EastLake III SPA Plan;
. City of Chula Vista Multiple Species Conservation Act Subarea Plan;
· EastLake III Woods and Vistas Replanning Program (FSEIR #01-01) Any other materials
required to be in the record of proceedings by Public Resources Code section 21167.6,
subdivision (e).
The custodian of the documents comprising the record of proceedings is Susan Bigelow, Clerk to
the City Council, whose office is located at 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California 91910.
The City Council has relied on all of the documents listed above in reaching its decision on the
EastLake III Senior Housing project, even if every document was not formally presented to the
City Councilor City Staff as part of the City files generated in connection with the EastLake III
Senior Housing project. Without exception, any documents set forth above but not found in the
10
b - ,)./
project files fall into two categories. Many of them reflect prior planning or legislative decisions
with which the City Council was aware in approving the EastLake III SPA Plan (see City of
Santa Cruz v. Local Agency Formation Commission (1978) 76 Cal.App.3d 381, 391-392 [142
Cal.Rptr. 873]; Dominey v. Department of Personnel Administration (1988)205 Cal.App.3d 729,
738, fn. 6 [252 Cal. Rptr. 620]. Other documents influenced the expert advice provided to City
Staff or consultants, who then provided advice to the City Council. For that reason, such
documents form part of the underlying factual basis for the City Council's decisions relating to
the adoption of the EastLake III SPA Plan (see Pub. Resources Code, section 21167.6, subd.
(e)(lO); Browing-Ferris Industries v. City Council of City of San Jose (1986) 181 Cal. App.3d
852,866 [226 Cal.Rptr. 575]; Stanislaus Audubon Society, Inc. V. County of Stanislaus (1995) 33
Cal.AppAtb 144,153,155 [39 Cal.Rptr.2d 54]).
VI.
FINDINGS REQUIRED UNDER CEQA
Public Resources Code section 21002 provides that "public agencies should not approve projects
as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures available which
would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of such projects." (Emphasis
added.) The same statute states that the procedures required by CEQA "are intended to assist
public agencies in systematically identifying both the significant effects of proposed projects and
the feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation measures which will avoid or substantially lessen
such significant effects" (emphasis added). Section 21002 goes on to state that "in the event
[that] specific economic, social, or other conditions make infeasible such project alternatives or
such mitigation measures, individual projects may be approved in spite of one or more
significant effects."
The mandate and principles announced in Public Resources Code section 21002 are
implemented, in part, through the requirement that agencies must adopt findings before
approving projects for which EIRs are required (see Pub. Resources Code, ~ 21081, subd. (a);
CEQA Guidelines, 9 15091, subd. (a)). For each significant environmental effect identified in an
EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a written finding reaching one or
more of three permissible conclusions. The first such finding is that "[ c ]hanges or alterations
have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the
significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR" (CEQA Guidelines, ~ 15091,
subd. (a)(I)). The second permissible fmding is that "[s]uch changes or alterations are within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding.
Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such
other agency" (CEQA Guidelines, 9 15091, subd. (a)(2)). The third potential finding is that
"[ s ]pecific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provision of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or
I I
to-d-J-
project alternatives identified in the final EIR" (CEQA Guidelines, 9 15091, subd. (a)(3)).
Public Resources Code section 21061.1 defmes "feasible" to mean "capable of being
accomplished in a successful manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account
economic, environmental, social and technological factors." CEQA Guidelines section 15364
adds another factor: "legal" considerations (see also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of
Supervisors (1990) 52 Cal.3d 553, 565 [276 Cal.Rptr. 410]).
The concept of "feasibility" also encompasses the question of whether a particular alternative or
mitigation measure promotes the underlying goals and objectives of a project (see City of Del
Mar v. City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 410, 417 ['83 Cal.Rptr. 898]). "'[F]easibility'
under CEQA encompasses 'desirability' to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable
balancing of the relevant economic;;, environmental, social, and technological factors" (Ibid.; see
also Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland (1993) 23 Cal.AppAth 704, 715 [29
Cal.Rptr.2d 182]).
The CEQA Guidelines do not define the difference between "avoiding" a significant
environmental effect and merely "substantially lessening" such an effect. The City must
therefore glean the meaning of these terms from the other contexts in which the terms are used.
Public Resources Code section 21081, on which CEQA Guidelines section 15091 is based, uses
the term "mitigate" rather than "substantially lessen." The CEQA Guidelines therefore equate
"mitigating" with "substantially lessening." Such an understanding of the statutory term is
consistent with the policies underlying CEQA, which include the policy that "public agencies
should not approve projects as proposed if there are feasible alternatives or feasible mitigation
measures available which would substantially lessen the significant environmental effects of
such projects" (pub. Resources Code, 9 21002).
For purposes of these findings, the term "avoid" refers to the effectiveness of one or more
mitigation measures to reduce an otherwise significant effect to a less than significant level. In
contrast, the term "substantially lessen" refers to the effectiveness of such measure or measures
to substantially reduce the severity of a significant effect, but not to reduce that effect to a less
than significant level. These interpretations appear to be mandated by the holding in Laurel Hills
Homeowners Association v. City Council (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 515, 519-527 [147 Cal.Rptr.
842], in which the Court of Appeal held that an agency had satisfied its obligation to
substantially lessen or avoid significant effects by adopting numerous mitigation measures, not
all of which rendered the significant impacts in question less than significant.
Although CEQA Guidelines section 15091 requires only that approving agencies specify that a
particular significant effect is "avoid[ ed] or substantially lessen[ ed]," these findings, for
purposes of clarity, in each case will specify whether the effect in question has been reduced to a
less than significant level or has simply been substantially lessened but remains significant.
12
t --- ,)3
Moreover, although section 15091, read literally, does not require findings to address
envirornnental effects that an EIR identifies as merely "potentially significant," these findings
will nevertheless fully account for all such effects identified in the Final SEIR (FSEIR).
In short, CEQA requires that the lead agency adopt mitigation measures or alternatives, where
feasible, to substantially lessen or avoid significant enviromnental impacts that would otherwise
occur. Project modification or alternatives are not required, however, where such changes are
infeasible or where the responsibility for modifYing the project lies with some other agency
(CEQA Guidelines, ~ 15091, subd. (a), (b)).
With respect to a project for which significant impacts are not avoided or substantially lessened
either through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures or a feasible envirornnentally
superior alternative, a public agency, after adopting proper findings, may nevertheless approve
the project if the agency first adopts a statement of overriding considerations setting forth the
specific reasons why the agency found that the project's "benefits" rendered "acceptable" its
"unavoidable adverse enviromnental effects" (CEQA Guidelines, ~~ 15093, 15043, subd. (b);
see also Pub. Resources Code, ~ 21081, subd. (b)). The California Supreme Court has stated
that, "[tJhe wisdom of approving. . . any development project, a delicate task which requires a
balancing of interests, is necessarily left to the sound discretion of the local officials and their
constituents who are responsible for such decisions. The law as we interpret and apply it simply
requires that those decisions be informed, and therefore balanced" (Goleta, supra, 52 Cal.3d 553,
576).
VII.
LEGAL EFFECTS OF FINDINGS
To the extent that these findings conclude that proposed mitigation measures outlined in the
SEIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or withdrawn, the City (or "decision
makers") hereby binds itself and any other responsible parties, including the applicant and its
successors in interest (hereinafter referred to as "Applicant"), to implement those measures.
These findings, in other words, are not merely informational or hortatory, but constitute a
binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City adopts the resolution( s)
approving the project.
The adopted mitigation measures are express conditions of approval. Other requirements are
referenced in the mitigation monitoring reporting program adopted concurrently with these
findings and will be effectuated through the process of implementing the project.
The mitigation measures are referenced in the mitigation monitoring and reporting program
adopted concurrently with these findings, and will be effectuated both through the process of
13
b--<r
implementing the EastLake GDP and through the process of constructing and implementing the
EastLake III Senior Housing Project.
VIII.
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
.
As required by Public Resources Code section 21081.6, subd. (a)(I), the City, in adopting these
[mdings, also concurrently adopts a mitigation monitoring and reporting program (MMRP) as
prepared by the environmental consultant under the direction of the City. The program is
designed to ensure that during project implementation, the applicant and any other responsible
parties comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified below. The program is described
in the document entitled EastLake III Senior Housing Project Mitigation Monitoring Reporting
Program. The City will use the MMRP to track compliance with project mitigation measures.
The MMRP will be available for public review during the compliance period.
The monitoring program is dynamic in that it will undergo changes as additional mitigation
measures are identified and additional conditions of approval are placed on the project
throughout the project approval process. The monitoring program will serve as a dual purpose of
verifYing completion of the mitigation measures for the proposed project and generating
information on the effectiveness of the mitigation measures to guide future decisions. The
program includes monitoring team qualifications, specific monitoring activities, a reporting
system, and criteria for evaluating the success of the mitigation measures.
IX.
SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The Final SEIR identified a number of direct and indirect significant environmental effects (or
"impacts") that the project will cause. Some of these significant effects can be fully avoided
through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures. Others cannot be fully mitigated or
avoided by the adoption of feasible mitigation measures or feasible environmentally superior
alternatives. However, these effects are outweighed by overriding considerations set forth in
Section XII below. This Section (IX) presents in greater detail the City Council's findings with
respect to the environmental effects of the project.
The project will result in significant environmental changes with regard to the following issues:
land use; landform alteration/aesthetics; geology/soils; water qualitylhydrology; traffic/
circulation; air quality; noise; public services and utilities; biological resources and
paleontological resources. These significant environmental changes or impacts are discussed in
Final EIR 05-02 in Table I-Ion pages 1-10 through 1-30 and in Chapter 5, Environmental
14
.
6-.)$
..
Impact Analysis, pages 5.1-1 through 5.10-4. No significant effects were identified for mineral
resources, biological resources (for main project site), cultural resources, hazards/risk of upset,
mineral resources, population/housing, The proposed project will result in unmitigable changes
to landform alteration/aesthetics (cumulative), traffic/circulation (cumulative) and air quality
(cumulative).
Land Use/Planning
Impacts related to land use and planning issues including incompatibility with the surrounding
community and inconsistencies with plans and policies adopted for purposes of avoiding an
environmental impact would not occur.
Landform Alteration/Aesthetics
The proposed project would not have a significant impact on visual resources or aesthetics.
However, in FSEIR #01-01, significant unmitigable impacts to visual quality were identified as a
result of landform alteration. Because this document is tiered from FSEIR #01-01, this impact
must therefore be carried forward. This project would have an incremental contribution to the
cumulative impact identified in FSEIR #01-01. In addition, the proposed project will result in
significant direct impacts associated with the increase in light and glare from the new
development area.
Geology/Soils
Impacts associated with slope instability would potentially be significant. Erosion during
construction, although short-term in nature, could be significant without erosion control
measures. Structures will be located over underground parking. Potentially significant impacts
to foundations and structures could occur if expansive soils are encountered. Potential impacts
resulting from other geological hazards such as seismic activity may also occur.
Water QualitylHydrology
Project implementation will introduce landscaping, impermeable surfaces and urban activities to
an area that is currently unoccupied by urban uses. Further, riew pollutant sources, such as
automobiles and household products would also be introduced into the area. Drainage of runoff
would be a concern particularly due to the project's location adjacent to Lower Otay Reservoir.
Traffic/Circulation
The level of service at the project driveway and Olympic Parkway will degrade to F as a result of
the project from vehicles entering and exiting the project, which would be a significant direct
15
6-..,Lb
impact of the proposed project. The potential conflict between construction-related traffic and
vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle traffic on Wueste Road and the adjacent trail would be a
significant direct impact of the optional construction access road. In FSEIR #01-01, significant
unmitigable impacts to traffic and circulation patterns were determined for 2005, 2010, 2015,
2020 and build-out conditions. Impacts to freeway operations were also identified as significant.
This impact from FSEIR #01-01 must therefore be carned forward. Because the proposed
project is part of the buildout of the overall EastLake III community, a significant cumulative
unmitigable traffic impact was identified for buildout of the community, and the proposed
project would result in an incremental contribution to the traffic from buildout ofthe community,
therefore a significant cumulative unmitigated traffic impact would occur.
Air Quality
During construction, ROC emissions would exceed the daily standard. This impact is considered
significant. Although construction-related emissions would not surpass PMlO thresholds, the
project will generate nuisance dust and fme particulate matter. In FSEIR #01-01, significant
unmitigable impacts to air quality were documented as a result of nonconformance with regional
air quality plans and overall project (entire EastLake III development) impacts on regional air
quality. TIlls impact identified in FSEIR #01-01 must therefore be carried forward. While the
proposed project would generate less than half of the projected traffic for the site under the
existing land use designation, it would still contribute incrementally to overall cumulative
vehicular emissions generated by buildout ofthe area.
Noise
The project will result in potential exposure to interior noise levels greater than the City's
allowable limit of 45 dB CNEL would be considered significant. Further, the project will result
in potential exposure of future residents to exterior noise levels (from patio and balcony areas)
greater than the City's allowable limit of 65 dB CNEL which would be considered significant.
Public ServicesfUtilities
The proposed SPA Plan would result in an incremental increase in public facilities if they are not
provided commensurate with demand. The incremental contribution of solid waste, and demand
on water and sewer service, parks, fire, police, emergency services, libraries and schools would
be significant. Safety issues for recreational trail users directly exposed to crossing construction
traffic due to the optional temporary construction access road are considered significant.
Potential indirect impacts to lands intended for conservation adjacent to the project site
(associated with Otay Valley Regional Park) are considered significant.
16
(;<..27
Biological Resources
Potential indirect impacts to lands intended for conservation adjacent to the project site
(associated with Otay Valley Regional Park) are considered significant. Potential direct impacts
to narrow endemic plant species that may occur within the optional off-site trail and optional
construction access road are considered significant. The project could potentially be inconsistent
with the HUT Ordinance which would constitute a significant impact.
Paleontological Resources
Impacts to previously undisturbed soils as a result of column borings would result in a significant
impact.
DETAILED ISSUES DISCUSSION
Land Use/Planning
Thresholds of Significance:
Threshold 1: Would the project physically divide an established community?
Threshold 2: Would the project conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy or regulation
of an agency with jurisdiction over the project (including, but not limited to the
general plan, specific plan, local coastal program, zoning ordinance) adopted for
the pUlpose of avoiding or mitigating an environmental effect?
Threshold 3: Would the project conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan or
natural community conservation plan?
Impact: None Identified. Impacts related to traffic and biological resources are discussed in
those relevant ElR sections and not in land use and planning.
Explanation:
N/A
Mitigation Measures:
Mitigation for the potential temporary conflict between the construction access road, Wueste
Road and the pedestrian trail is provided in under Traffic and Circulation. Mitigation for
potential trail and construction road incompatibilities with the City's MSCP Subarea Plan are
included under biological resources.
17
6 -.,) f
Finding:
Implementation of mitigation measures in Section 5.5, Traffic Circulation and Section 5.9
Biological Resources would reduce significant impacts to a level below significance.
Landform Alteration/Aesthetics
Thresholds of Significance:
Threshold I: Would the project have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
Threshold 2: Would the project substantially damage scenic resources, including, but not
limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic
highway?
Threshold 3: Would the project substantially degrade the existing visual character or quality of
the site and its surroundings?
Threshold 4: Creates a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect
day or nighttime views in the area?
.
Impact: Create a new source of substantial light or glare which would adversely affect
day or nighttime views in the area.
The project would introduce a new source of light and glare which would be potentially
significant.
Explanation:
The proposed project would introduce a new source of light and glare into the local community.
However, this site has previously been planned for development. The difference in night lighting
as compared to the Commercial-Tourist use would not be a substantial change. Therefore, there
would be no direct impact with regard to substantial light and glare. In order to assure that
indirect lighting affects on neighboring uses is minimized, a lighting plan will be required as part
of design review to mitigate this potential impact.
Mitigation Measures:
.
5.2-a Prior to approval of the Tentative Parcel map, the applicant shall submit a lighting plan as
a part of the Design Review application for the project. The lighting plan shall
demonstrate that project lighting is shielded from surrounding properties and that only the
minim~m amount of lighting required for safety purposes is provided to avoid adverse
18
6-~.7
effects on surrounding areas. In general, lighting fixtures shall be shielded downward
and away trom adjacent residential land uses, MSCP Preserve areas and Lower Otay
Reservoir.
Finding:
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.2 of the SEIR, pursuant to Section 15091(a)(1) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR to
a level of insignificance.
Impact: Initial site grading (;1s analyzed by FSEIR #01-01) would result in significant
visual and landform alteration impacts.
Initial site grading caused significant visual changes to the EastLake area.
Explanation:
In FSEIR #01-01, significant unmitigable impacts to visual quality were identified as a result of
landform alteration. This impact must therefore be carried forward. This project would have an
incremental contribution to the cumulative impact identified in FSEIR #01-01.
Mitigation Measures:
None
Finding:
Pursuant to Sections 15043 and 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, specific economic, social
or other considerations were made at the time initial site grading occurred and a Statement of
Overriding Considerations was adopted.
Geology/Soils
Thresholds of Significance:
Threshold I: Would the project expose people or structures to potential substantial adverse
effects, including the risk ofloss, injury or death involving:
a) Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated on the most recent Alquist-
Priolo Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the area or
19
6r3o
based on other substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to Division of Mines
and Geology Special Publication 42.
b) Strong seismic ground shaking?
c) Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction?
d) Landslides?
Threshold 2: Would the project result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of topsoil?
Threshold 3: Would the project be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, 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?
Threshold 4: Would the project be located on expansive soil, as defined in Table 18-I-B of the
Uniform Building Code (1994), creating substantial risks to life or property?
Threshold 5: Would the project have soils incapable of adequately supporting the use of septic
tanks or alternative waste water disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of waste water?
Impact: Exposure of people or structures to substantial hazards as a result of landslides.
Impacts associated with slope instability would potentially be significant for the proposed project
and optional construction road. The optional pedestrian trail would not result in potential
landside hazards due to minimal surface disturbance.
I
Explanation:
Slope instability could occur as a result of steep fill slopes generated during recompaction of the
existing pad and/or optional construction road. Soil saturation from over watering landscaping,
natural precipitation, and run-on from adjacent sites would also contribute to slope instability.
Slope instability could lead to localized landslides. Impacts related to slope instability would be
considered potentially significant.
Mitigation Measures:
.
5.3-a Prior to approval of grading plans, the following conditions are required to be on the
plans. The proposed project's grading plans shall demonstrate compliance with
remediation recommendations in the June 10, 2005 Geotechnical Investigation for the
project prepared by Geotechnics Incorporated, including but not limited to:
20
b-3!
.
''':
a) Upper soil layers shall be removed to a depth of two to three feet during initial
construction periods and replaced with competent compacted fill.
b) Replacement of native soils with compacted fill shall be required to eliminate the
potential for liquefaction.
c) Any areas subjected to new fill or structural loads shall be prepared with
compacted fill.
Finding:
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.3 of the SEIR, pursuant to Section 15091(a)(I) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR to
a level of insignificance.
Impact: Project would result in substantial soil erosion or loss of topsoil.
Erosion during construction, although short-term in nature, could be significant without erosion
control measures.
Explanation:
The potential for erosion would increase during construction as a result of vehicles and heavy
equipment accelerating the erosion process. Additionally, wind erosion could occur on bare soils
or where vehicles and equipment cause dust. While these impacts would be considered short-
term in nature, they would be significant due to the potential to result in substantial soil erosion
or loss oftopsoil.
Mitigation Measures:
>-
5.3-b Prior to approval of grading plans, a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
shall be prepared for the project that identifies specific Best Management Practices
....
(BMPs) to minimize erosion and control sedimentation. A copy of the SWPPP will be
kept onsite and issued to all supervisory staff working on the project. Project activities
resulting in excess erosion shall be haIted and BMPs adjusted to ensure off-site
sedimentation is avoided.
5.4-f Prior to the approval of a grading permit, the Applicant shall verify that runoff diversion
facilities (e.g., inlet pipes and brow ditches) have been be used to preclude runoff flow
down graded slopes. Drainage terraces for slopes in excess of 40 feet in vertical height
21
t- 3.)..
shall only be required for stabilization purposes. Slopes in excess of 40 feet in height
may not require terraces provided that slope-specific analysis demonstrates that such
measures are not needed in order to achieve the intent of the City's grading ordinance.
Energy-dissipating structures (e.g., detention ponds, riprap, or drop structures) shall be
used at storm drain outlets, drainage crossings, and/or downstream of all culverts, pipe
outlets, and brow ditches to reduce velocity and prevent erosion. The applicant shall
demonstrate compliance in grading plans prior to issuance of a grading permit.
Prior to issuance of the grading permit for any site in the drainage area, the Applicant
shall demonstrate that the proposed detention facilities would reduce 50-year post-
development peak flows to equal to or less than pre-development conditions. The
proposed onsite detention facilities shall be designed to ensure that there is no increase in
downstream (i.e., south of Olympic Parkway) velocities in Salt Creek. For areas with the
greatest potential for groundwater seepage, impacts could be reduced to a less than
significant level through installation of subsurface drains as determined by the Soils
Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. Implementation of these measures is the
responsibility of the applicant.
Prior to the start of grading activities, the brow ditch located at the base of the slope
between the Lower Otay Reservoir and the project site shall be inspected and sediment
that could cause runoff to breach the ditch shall be removed. The brow ditch shall be
inspected after each 0.5 inch.
Finding:
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.3 of the SEIR, pursuant to Section 15091(a)(I) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR to
a level of insignificance.
I
Impact: Project may be located on expansive soils, as defined in Table 18-1-B of the
Uniform Building code (1994).
I
Structures will be located over underground parking. Potentially significant impacts to
foundations and structures could occur if expansive soils are encountered.
Explanation:
Soil samples taken at various depths indicated that soils onsite have very low to low expansion
potential. During initial site preparation and compaction, alluvial material from nearby canyon
formations was utilized at the interiorlbase of the site. Alluvial material is generally expansive,
22
.
~-33
therefore during subterranean parking structure excavation, expansive soils could be exposed.
Potential exposure to expansive soils would result in a potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures:
5.3-a Prior to approval of grading plans, the following conditions are required to be on the
plans. The proposed project's grading plans shall demonstrate compliance with
remediation recommendations in the June 10, 2005 Geotechnical Investigation for the
project prepared by Geotechnics Incorporated, including but not limited to:
a) Upper soil layers shall be removed to a depth of two to three feet during initial
construction periOds and replaced with competent compacted fill.
b) Replacement of native soils with compacted fill shall be required to eliminate the
potential for liquefaction.
c) Any areas subjected to new fill or structural loads shall be prepared with
compacted fill.
Finding:
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.3 of the SEIR, pursuant to Section l5091(a)(I) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR to
a level of insignificance.
Impact: Potential impacts resulting from other geological hazards such as seismic activity
would occur.
Potential impacts resulting rrom other geological hazards such as seismic activity would be
significant.
Explanation:
Ground shaking could occur as a result of a seismic activity on a nearby active fault. Risk
associated with seismic ground shaking could potentially be significant. However, conformance
to standard practices of the Association of Structural Engineers of California and compliance the
Title 24 of the California code of Regulations and the Uniform Building Code, would reduce
impacts from ground motion.
23
/:r3F
Mitigation Measures:
5.3-a Prior to approval of grading plans, the following conditions are required to be on the
plans. The proposed project's grading plans shall demonstrate compliance with
remediation recommendations in the June 10, 2005 Geotechnical Investigation for the
project prepared by Geotechnics Incorporated, including but not limited to:
.
a) Upper soil layers shall be removed to a depth of two to three feet during initial
construction periods and replaced with competent compacted fill.
b) Replacement of native soils with compacted fill shall be required to eliminate the
potential for liquefaction.
c)
.
Finding:
Any areas subjected to new fill or structural loads shall be prepared with
compacted fill.
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.3 of the SEIR, pursuant to Section 15091(a)(I) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR to
a level of insignificance.
HydrologylWater Quality
Thresholds of Significance:
Threshold I:
Threshold 2:
.
Threshold 3:
.
Would the project violate any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
Would the project substantially deplete groundwater supplies or interfere
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 pre-existing nearby wells would drop to a
level which would not support existing land uses or planned uses for
which permits have been granted)?
Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
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?
24
6-35
Would the project substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
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?
Would the project create or contribute runoff water which would exceed
the capacity of existing or planned stormwater drainage systems or
provide substantial additional sources or polluted runoff?
Would the project otherwise substantially degrade water quality?
Would the project place housing within a IOO-year flood hazard area as
mapped on a federal Flood Hazard Boundary or Flood Insurance Rate
Map or other flood hazard delineation map?
Would the project place within a IOO-year flood hazard area structures
which would impede or redirect flood flows?
Would the project expose people or structures to a significant risk of loss,
i~ury or death involving flooding, including flooding as a result of the
failure of a levee or dam?
Would the project be exposed to inundation by seiche, tsunami or
mudflow?
Impact: The project would result in significant water quality impacts resulting from
construction and operational activities.
Threshold 4:
Threshold 5;
Threshold 6;
Threshold 7;
Threshold 8;
Threshold 9;
Threshold 10;
Explanation;
Construction of the proposed project has the potential to impact surface water quality due to
increased runoff and sediment transport ftom the site. Short-term water quality impacts may
occur to nearby water resources, including storm drains, ftom sediment-laden runoff ftom project
areas. Runoff ftom the parking lot, sidewalks, and landscaping could carry pollutants such as
bacteria, oil and grease, sediment, nutrients and heavy metals to the City's storm drain system.
Mitigation Measures;
5.4-a Prior to approval of a grading permit the Applicant shall obtain coverage under the
State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) NPDES General Permit No.
CAS000002, Waste Discharge Requirements for Discharges of Storm Water Runoff
Associated with Construction Activity. In accordance with said Permit, a Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and a Monitoring Program Plan shall be
developed and implemented concurrent with the commencement of grading activities.
The SWPPP shall specifY both construction and post-construction structural and non-
25
/ 3/
k?- ~
structural pollution prevention measures. The SWPPP shall also address operation
and maintenance of post-construction pollution prevention measures, including short-
term and long-term funding sources and the party or parties that will be responsible
for the implementation of said measures.
A complete and accurate Notice-of-Intent (NO!) shall be filed with the SWRCB. A
copy of the acknowledgement wm the SWRCB that a NOr has been received for this
project shall be filed with the City of Chula Vista when received. Further, a copy of
the completed NOr from the SWRCB showing the Permit Number for this project
shall be filed with the City of Chula Vista when received.
5 A-b Prior to approval of grading and construction plans, the Applicant shall demonstrate
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer compliance with all of the applicable
provisions of the Municipal Code and the City of Chula Vista SUSMP. The
Applicant shall incorporate into the project planning and design an effective
combination of site design, source control, and treatment control post-construction
BMPs and provide all necessary studies and reports demonstrating compliance with
the applicable regulations and standards. Post-construction BMPs shall be identified
and implemented as to abate identified pollutants of concern to the maximum extent
practicable standard described in the City of Chula Vista SUSMP.
.
5 A-c
Prior to issuance of a grading permit for any area of the project (including offsite
areas) draining towards the Lower Otay Reservoir, the applicant shall:
I) Obtain the approval of the City of Chula Vista and all other applicable
agencies for any proposed structural drainage runoff detention and/or
diversion facilities within the Otay Lakes Watershed.
2)
Obtain the approval of the City of Chula Vista and all other applicable
agencies of all operational and maintenance agreements associated with
any proposed structural drainage runoff detention and/or diversion
facilities within the Otay Lakes Watershed.
,
.
5.4-d Prior to approval of the grading plan, the Applicant shall verify that surface drainage
has been designed to collect and discharge runoff into natural stream channels or
drainage structures. In order to avoid indirect impacts to the Lower Otay Reservoir,
fertilizers, herbicides, and pesticides shall not be applied to the manufactured slopes
along the northern property of the property. Potable water shall be used for irrigation.
All drainage systems shall be designed in accordance with the City's Engineering
Standards and to the City of San Diego's Source Water Protection Guidelines for
New Developments (2004).
.
26
6-37
5.4-e The applicant shall design surface and subsurface drainage to preclude ponding
outside of designated areas, as well as flow down slopes or over disturbed areas.
5.4- f Prior to the approval of a grading pennit, the Applicant shall verify that runoff
diversion facilities (e.g., inlet pipes and brow ditches) have been be used to preclude
runoff flow down graded slopes. Drainage terraces for slopes in excess of 40 feet in
vertical height shall only be required for stabilization purposes. Slopes in excess of
40 feet in height may not require terraces provided that slope-specific analysis
demonstrates that such measures are not needed in order to achieve the intent of the
City's grading ordinance. Energy-dissipating structures (e.g., detention ponds, riprap,
or drop structures) shall be used at stonn drain outlets, drainage crossings, and/or
downstream of all culverts, pipe outlets, and brow ditches to reduce velocity and
prevent erosion. The applicant shall demonstrate compliance in grading plans prior to
issuance of a grading pennit.
Prior to issuance of the grading pennit for any site in the drainage area, the Applicant
shall demonstrate that the proposed detention facilities would reduce 50-year post-
development peak flows to equal to or less than pre-development conditions. The
proposed onsite detention facilities shall be designed to ensure that there is no
increase in downstream (i.e., south of Olympic Parkway) velocities in Salt Creek. For
areas with the greatest potential for groundwater seepage, impacts could be reduced
to a less than significant level through installation of subsurface drains as determined
by the Soils Engineer and approved by the City Engineer. Implementation of these
measures is the responsibility of the applicant.
Prior to the start of grading activities, the brow ditch located at the base of the slope
between the Lower Otay Reservoir and the project site shall be inspected and
sediment that could cause runoffto breacp the ditch shall be removed. The brow ditch
shall be inspected after each 0.5 inch.
5.4-g Prior to approval of the final map, and/or building permits (as determined by the City
Engineer), the Applicant shall submit a maintenance program for the proposed post-
construction BMPs and all private drainage facilities within common development
areas to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The maintenance program shall
,
include, but not be limited to: (1) a manual describing the maintenance activities of
said facilities, (2) an estimate of the cost of such maintenance activities, and (3) a
funding mechanism for fmancing the maintenance program. In addition, the
Developer shall enter into a Maintenance Agreement with the City to ensure the
maintenance and operation of said facilities.
27
/:>-3;
5.4-h Regular maintenance of the Greenbelt and Community trails shall be the
responsibility of the EastIake III HOA, depending on designation, to minimize the
potential for erosion into Lower Otay Reservoir. Prior to the approval of the TM, the
applicant shall submit a Landscape Responsibility map to identify funding for all
areas within the project.
5.4-i The following urban runoff control measures shall be shown as notes on the Tentative
Map. These measures shall be made a condition of the Tentative Map and shall be
implemented on the final grading and improvement plans. Implementation of these
measures is the responsibility of the applicant.
1) Per the Clean Water Act, BMPs to control pollutants and sediment from entering
storm water runoff are required for the project area. Source control BMPs via
landscaping of all slopes and street rights-of-way shall be provided to prevent
erosion. Any other applicable source control or BMPs which may be
implemented on a city-wide basis in conjunction with the City's Municipal
NPDES permit shall be incorporated into the specific plan. The size, capacity,
and location of any other pollution control devices which would be used to
capture urban pollutants onsite will be determined as part of the project-specific
drainage studies prior to the approval of future subdivision maps.
2) The City's Department of Planning and Building shall verify that the mitigation
measures are conditions for the approval of the tentative map and that they are
implemented on the grading plans for the project.
5.4-j
Prior to the issuance of any building permit, the applicant shall demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building that hazardous materials shall
not be stored along the eastern edge of the site. All hazardous materials shall be
stored within secondary containment capable of holding 150 percent of the largest
container. Hazardous materials shall be stored in a secure area that can be locked
during non-working hours. This will help prevent any unintended hazardous material
spills which could impact quality of runoff water from the site.
~
5.4-k Silt fence or a similar approved sediment barrier shall be installed along the eastern
perimeter of the project site, or as directed by a qualified erosion control specialist, to
prevent sediment transport into the Lower Otay Reservoir. Spoil stockpiles shall be
stored at least 20 feet from the perimeter of the site. A qualified monitor shall inspect
all erosion arid sediment control devices onsite prior to anticipated storm events,
....-
during extended storm events, and after each storm event to ensure that the structures
are functioning properly. Inspection logs shall be kept onsite and submitted to the
City upon request.
28
,...39
.
-
.,.
Finding:
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.4 of the SEIR, pursuant to Section 15091(a)(1) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR to
a level of insignificance.
Traffic/Circulation
Thresholds of Significance:
Traffic impacts are defined as ei.ther project specific impacts or cumulative impacts. Project
specific impacts are those impacts for which the addition of project trips results in an identifiable
degradation in level of service on freeway segments, roadway segments, or intersections,
triggering the need for specific project-related improvement strategies. Cumulative impacts are
those in which the project trips contribute to a poor level of service, at a nominal level.
Study horizon year describes a future period of time that corresponds to SANDAG's traffic
model years, and are meant to synchronize study impacts to be in line with typical study years of
2005,2010,2015 and 2030.
The measure of effectiveness for intersection operations is Level of Service (LOS). In the 2000
Highway Capacity Manual (HCM), LOS for signalized intersections is defined in terms of delay.
The LOS analysis results in seconds of delay expressed in terms of letters A through F. Delay is
a measure of driver discomfort, frustration, fuel consumption, and lost travel time.
For signalized intersections, LOS criteria are stated in terms of average control delay per vehicle
for a IS-minute analysis period. Control delay includes initial deceleration delay, queue move-
up time, stopped delay, and final acceleration delay. For unsignalized intersections, LOS is
determined by the computed or measured control delay and is defined for each minor movement.
Table 5.5-4, Level of Service Thresholds for Signalized and Unsignalized Intersections, depicts
the LOS criteria for both signalized and unsignalized intersections.
Level of Service Thresholds for Signalized and Un signalized Intersections
0.0 < 10.0
10.1 to 20.0
20.1 to 35.0
35.1 to 55.0
55.1 to 80.0
~80.0
0.0 < 10.0
10.1 to 15.0
15.1 to 25.0
25.1 to 35.0
35.1 to 50.0
,::50.0
29
/ ,/
f.t:>~)~J
Criteria for determining whether the project results in either project specific or cumulative
impacts on freeway segments, roadway segments, or intersections are as follows:
Short-Term (Study Horizon Year 0 to 4)
For purposes of the short-term analysis roadway sections may be defined as either links or
segments. A link is typically that section of roadway between two adjacent Circulation Element
intersections, and a segment is defined as that combination of contiguous links used in the
Growth Management Plan Traffic Monitoring Program. Analysis of roadway links under short-
term conditions may require a more detailed analysis using the Growth Management Oversight
Committee (GMOC) methodology if the typical planning analysis using volume to capacity
ratios on an individual link indicates a potential impact to that link. The GMOC analysis uses
the Highway Capacity Manual (HCM) methodology of average travel speed based on actual
measurements on the segments as listed in the Growth Management Plan Traffic Monitoring
Program.
Intersections
a) Project specific impact ifboth the following criteria are met:
1. Level of service if LOS E or LOS F.
11. Project trips comprise 5% or more of entering volume.
b) Cumulative impact if only (i) is met.
Street Links/Segments
If the planning analysis using the volume to capacity ratio indicated LOS C or better, there is no
impact. If the planning analysis indicates LOS D, E or F, the GMOC method should be utilized.
The following criteria would then be utilized:
a) Project specific impact if all the following criteria are met:
1. Level of service is LOS D for more than 2 hours or LOS ElF for 1 hour
11. Project trips comprise 5% or more of segment volume.
Ill. Project adds greater than 800 ADT to the segment.
b) Cumulative impact if only (i) is met.
30
6-f'I
Freeways
a) Project specific impact if all the following criteria are met:
1. Freeway segment LOS is LOS E or LOS F
II. Project comprises 5% or more of the total forecasted ADT on that freeway
segment.
b) Cumulative impact if only (i) is met.
Long-term (Study Horizon Year 5 and Later)
Intersections
a) Project specific impact if all the following criteria are met:
1. Level of service is LOS E or LOS F.
II. Project trips comprise 5% or more of entering volume.
b) Cumulative impact if only (i) is met.
Street Links/Segments
Use the planning analysis using the volume to capacity ratio methodology only. The GMOC
analysis methodology is not applicable beyond a four-year horizon.
a) Project specific impact if all the following criteria are met:
1. Level of service is LOS D, LOS E or LOS F.
II. Project trips comprise 5% or more oftotal segment volume.
1lI. Project adds greater than 800 ADT to the segment.
b) Cumulative impact if only (i) is met. However, if the intersections along a LOS D or
LOS E segment all operate at LOS D or better, the segment impact is considered not
significant since intersection analysis is more indicative of actual roadway system
operations than street segment analysis. If segment Level of Service is LOS F, impact is
significant regardless of intersection LOS.
31
/; "';"0 ,
c) Notwithstanding the foregoing, if the impact identified in paragraph a. above occurs at
study horizon year 10 or later, and is off site and not adjacent to the project, the impact is
considered cumulative. Study year 10 may be that typical SANDAG model year which is
between 8 and 13 years in the future. In this case of a traffic study being performed in
the period of 2003 to 2004, because the typical model will only evaluate traffic at years
divisible by 5 (i.e. 2005, 2010, 2015 and 2020). Year 2010 is only 5 years in the future.
Since the model year is less than 7 years in the future, study horizon year 10 (Year 2015)
is 11 years in the future.
d) In the event a direct identified project specific impact in paragraph a. above occurs at
study horizon year 5 or earlier and the impact is off site and not adjacent to this project,
but the property immediatyly adjacent to the identified project specific impact is also
proposed to be developed in approximately the same time frame, an additional analysis
may be required to determine whether or not the identified project specific impact would
still occur if the development of the adjacent property does not take place. If the
additional analysis concludes that the identified project specific impact is no longer a
direct impact, then the impact shall be considered cumulative.
Freeway Analysis
a) Project specific impact if all the following criteria are met:
1. Freeway segment LOS is LOS E or LOS F
ll. Project comprises 5% or more of the total forecasted ADT on that freeway
segment.
b)
Cumulative impact if only (i) is met.
""
Impact: The project would result in unacceptable service levels at an intersection.
The level of service at the project driveway and Olympic Parkway will degrade to an
unacceptable level of service.
.
Explanation:
The level of service at the project driveway and Olympic Parkway will degrade to F as a result of
the project from vehicles entering and exiting the project, which would be a significant direct
impact of the proposed project.
32
/, - '13
Mitigation Measures:
5.5-a Prior to approval of the grading plan, the applicant shall enter into an agreement to
design, construct, and secure a fully actuated traffic signal including interconnect wiring,
mast arms, signal heads and associated equipment, underground improvements, standards
and luminaires at the Olympic Parkway/Project Driveway intersection. The design of the
signal shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and conform to City standards.
The applicant shall provide the following intersection geometry:
Westbound: One left-turn lane (with 100 feet of storage) and two through lanes
Southbound: None
Northbound: One left-turn lane and one right-turn lane (With a storage length of 75 feet
in each)
Eastbound: One shared through/right lane and one through lane.
A signal shall be installed at the project driveway and two outbound (northbound) lanes,
one left-turn and one right-turn lane, and two inbound (southbound) lanes be provided.
5.5-b Prior to approval of building permits, the median opening on Olympic Parkway further
shall be relocated west from its current location to accommodate the proposed project
driveway.
5.5-c Prior to approval of building permits, a "No U Turn" sign for eastbound traffic on
Olympic Parkway at the Olympic Parkway/Wueste Road intersection shall be installed.
Finding:
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.3 of the SEJR, pursuant to Section 15091(a)(I) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEJR to
a level of insignificance.
Impact: Optional construction road would result in potential hazards to pedestrians and
Wueste Road traffic.
The potential conflict between construction-related traffic and vehicular, pedestrian and bicycle
traffic on Wueste Road and the adjacent trail would also be a significant direct impact of the
optional construction access road.
33
b4tj
Explanation:
It is estimated that approximately 25 percent of construction related traffic would access the
project site through this access point once the fIrst four buildings are constructed along Olympic
Parkway. This optional construction access road would help alleviate construction-related traffIc
along Olympic Parkway and construction-related traffic interaction with onsite residents.
Construction traffic would be minimal and sporadic in nature therefore LOS conditions on
Wueste Road would not be signifIcantly impacted. However, traffic safety issues may result as
the temporary road outlets into a sharp curve in Wueste Road and would cross an existing
bicycle and pedestrian trail.
Mitigation Measures:
5.5-d Prior to approval of the grading pennit for the temporary construction access road, a
Traffic Control Plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer for the
Wueste Road/access road intersection. The Traffic Control Plan shall be implemented
for the duration of the use of the temporary access road. The TraffIc Control Plan shall
address methods to avoid conflicts between vehicles on Wueste Road/pedestrians and
bicyclists on the trail adj acent to Wueste Road and construction vehicles entering and
exiting the site.
Finding:
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.3 of the SEIR, pursuant to Section 15091(a)(1) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identifIed in the SEIR to
a level of insignificance.
Impact: Initial site preparation and programmatic environn,ental analysis of the larger
EastLake community resulted in significant traffic impacts.
.
Original programmatic traffIc analysis determined that the larger EastLake area, of which this
project is a component, would result in significant impacts.
Explanation:
.
In FSEIR #01-01, signifIcant unmitigable impacts to traffic and circulation patterns were
detennined for 2005,2010,2015,2020 and build-out conditions. hnpacts to freeway operations
were also identifIed as significant. Because this environmental document is tiered off FSEIR
#01-01, this significant, unmitigable impact must be carried forward as the project would
contribute an incremental amount to these traffIc impacts. A traffic impact was identified for
34
b/~S-
buildout of the community, and the proposed project would result in an incremental contribution
to the traffic from buildout of the community, therefore a significant cumulative unmitigated
traffic impact would occur.
Mitigation Measures:
Specific mitigation measures were identified in FSEIR #01-01 to reduce potential significant
impacts, however cumulative impacts would be unmitigable.
Finding:
Pursuant to Sections 15043 and 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, specific economic social
and other considerations warranted adoption of the previous EIR. While mitigation measures
5.5-a - 5.5-c are feasible and will be completed to handle the local circulation issues, these
improvements will not lessen the cumulative impact of the regional development of eastern
Chula Vista to level below significant. Adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations
will be required should the decision makers choose to approve the proposed project.
Air Quality
Significance Thresholds:
Threshold I: Would the project conflict with or obstruct the implementation of the applicable
air quality plan?
Threshold 2: Would the project violate any air quality standard or contribute substantially to an
existing or projected air quality violation?
Threshold 3: Would the project result in cumulatively considerable net increase of any criteria
pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard (including releasing emissions which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
Threshold 4: Would the project expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
Threshold 5: Would the project create objectionable odors affecting a substantial number of
people?
35
r /,
ft,-%
Impact:
Expose people or sensitive receptors to significant pollutant concentrations.
During construction, Reactive Organic Compounds (ROC) emissions would exceed the daily
standard.
Explanation:
Many interior and outdoor painting supplies contain high levels of volatile organic compounds
(VOCs), which are a type of ROCs, to help them dry faster. VOCs emit smog-forming
chemicals into the air that are a major contributor to ground-level ozone pollution. Maximum
construction-generated ROC emissions of 360.27 pounds per day are anticipated to be associated
with project construction in 2008. (time period when painting of buildings and interiors would
occur) and would exceed the ROC threshold ofl37 pounds per day. The exceedance of the daily
ROC standard is considered significant as this would result in the release of a substantial
concentration of pollutants.
Mitigation Measures:
5.6-a To the maximum extent feasible, the project developer shall use zero-Volatile Organic
Compounds (VOC)-content architectural coatings during project construction/application
of paints and other architectural coatings to reduce ozone precursors. If zero- VOC paint
cannot be utilized, the developer shall avoid to the maximum extent feasible, application
of architectural coatings during the peak smog season: July, August, and September.
Finding:
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.3 of the SEIR, pursuant to Section 15091(a)(l) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR to
a level of insignificance.
/'
Impact: The project violates an air quality standard or contributes substantially to an
existing or projected air qnality violation
Although construction-related emissions would not surpass PMIO thresholds, the project will
generate nuisance dust and fine particulate matter.
Explanation:
Although construction-related emissions would not surpass PMIO thresholds, the project will
generate nuisance dust and fine particulate matter. Dust and particulate matter must remain
36
I /
10 ./''17
,.....~.
below an 100 pounds per day threshold. In the year 2006, the project would generate
approximately 26.11 pounds per day which is well within the allowable limit. Further, in 2007,
the project would result in 5.67 pounds per day and in 2008 it would be 7.33 pounds per day.
While this would not constitute a significant impact, mitigation has been included.
Mitigation Measures:
5.6-b Prior to approval of any grading permit, the following measures shall be placed as notes
on all grading plans and implemented during grading to reduce dust and exhaust
emissions (PMIO) and ozone precursors (ROC and NOx):
a) Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units
b) Use low pollutant-emitting equipment
c) Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment
d) Use injection timing retard for diesel-powered equipment
e) Water the grading areas a minimum of twice daily to minimize fugitive dust
f) Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible to minimize fugitive dust
g) Apply chemical stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of internal travel path within
the construction site prior to public road entry
h) Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior to vehicle entry on public
roads
i) Remove any visible track-out into traveled public streets within 30 minutes of
Occurrence
j) Wet wash the construction access point at the end of the workday if any vehicle
travel on unpaved surfaces has occurred
k) Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent washout of silty material
onto public roads
I) Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 inches of freeboard to reduce blow-off
during hauling
37
, .-/C
br~r
m) Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25
mph
n) Cover/ water onsite stockpiles of excavated material; and
0) Enforce a 20 mile-per-hour speed limit on unpaved surfaces.
Finding:
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.6 of the SEIR, pursuant to Section 15091(a)(1) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR to
a level of insignificance. .
Impact: The project would result in a cumulatively considerable net increase of any
criteria pollutant for which the project region is in non-attainment
The project would contribute to regional, cumulative air quality violations as a component of
EastLake communities buildout.
Explanation:
.
In FSEIR #01-01, significant unmitigable impacts to air quality were documented as a result of
nonconformance with regional air quality plans and overall project (entire EastLake ill
development) impacts on regional air quality. This impact identified in FSEIR #01-01 must
therefore be carried forward. While the proposed project would generate less than half of the
projected traffic for the site under the existing land use designation, it would still contribute
incrementally to overall cumulative vehicular emissions generated by buildout of the area.
,"
Mitigation Measures:
No feasible measure are available to mitigate this impact.
Finding:
Pursuant to Sections 15043 and 15093 of the State CEQA Guidelines, specific economic social
and other considerations warranted adoption of the previous EIR. While mitigation measures
5.6-a - 5.6-b are feasible and will be completed to handle project specific impacts, these
improvements will not lessen the cumulative impact to air quality due to the regional
development of eastern Chula Vista. Adoption of a Statement of Overriding Considerations will
be required should the decision makers choose to approve the proposed project.
)
38
.
6~t/'1
"- " -
Noise
Significance Thresholds:
Threshold 1: Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in excess of standards
established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
Threshold 2: Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive groundbome vibration or
groundbome noise levels?
Threshold 3: A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise levels in the project vicinity
above levels existing without the project?
Threshold 4: A substantial temporary or periodic increase in ambient noise levels in the project
vicinity above levels existing without the project?
Threshold 5: For a project located within an airport land use plan or, 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?
Threshold 6: For a project located within the vicinity of a private airstrip, would the project
expose people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Impact: The project will result in exposure of persons to or generatiou of noise levels in
excess of standards established in the local general plan or noise ordinance, or
applicable standards of other agencies.
Potential exposure to interior noise levels greater than the City's allowable limit of 45 dB CNEL
would be considered significant.
Explanation:
The project would generate approximately 1,976 ADT and would increase the traffic volume by
up to approximately 1,720 ADT along Olympic Parkway. The future buildout traffic volume
along Olympic Parkway adjacent to the project site is projected to be approximately 31,800
ADT. The additional project-generated traffic would increase the existing noise levels along
Olympic Parkway by less than one dB CNEL (from 52 dB to approximately 53 dB). A one dB
CNEL increase in the noise level would not be perceptible to the human ear. A noise level
increase of up to three dB is generally not considered significant. Typically, a three dB change
39
~-50
in community noise is considered a just-noticeable difference. The noise level increase
associated with the project, shown in Table 5.7-6, Summary of Project Related Off-Site Traffic
Noise Impacts, would be less than significant. It should be noted that the SEIR reflects the
worse-case scenario ITom a project traffic noise contribution standpoint. Once the community is
built-out (i.e., ambient traffic levels increase due to more residents, traffic, etc.), the project's
audible contribution to the overall noise environment would be less compared to the existing
setting (due to less traffic, residents, etc.).
The future traffic noise levels would range up to approximately 69 dB CNEL at the patio and
balcony areas. These noise levels would exceed the City's exterior noise criterion which would
result in a significant impact.
The City and State require that interior noise levels not exceed a CNEL of 45 dB within multi-
family homes. Typically, with the windows open, building shells provide approximately 15 dB
of noise reduction. Therefore, rooms exposed to an exterior CNEL greater than 60 dB could
result in an interior CNEL greater than 45 dB. The upper floors of Buildings 1,2 and 13, which
are adjacent to Olympic Parkway, would be exposed to traffic noise ranging up to 70 dB CNEL.
Because rooms in Buildings 1,2 and 13 would be exposed to exterior noise levels of greater than
60 dB CNEL, it is anticipated that interior noise levels would exceed City and State requirements
of 45 dB CNEL which essentially exceeds allowable limits for operational activities. Therefore,
significant interior noise impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures:
5.7-a Prior to issuance of building permits, where exterior noise levels on internal roadways
exceed 60 CNEL, additional measures shall be required to attenuate interior noise to the
City's 45 CNEL standard, such as inoperable or double-paned windows. For those units
that require the windows to be closed to achieve the interior noise standard, forced-air
circulation or air conditioning shall be provided by the applicant. An acoustical analysis
shall be conducted for Buildings I, 2 and 13 that are adjacent to Olympic Parkway
concurrent with the submittal of construction drawings and shall be approved by the
Director of Planning and Building and the Environmental Review Coordinator prior to
approval of building permits. The acoustical analysis shall demonstrate that interior
noise levels due to exterior noise sources would be below the 45 CNEL standard.
5.7-b Five foot high noise barriers around the perimeter of the individual private patio and
balconies at some of the dwelling units in Buildings I, 2 and 13 (adjacent to Olympic
Parkway) would be required to mitigate for traffic noise impacts. Sound walls may be
constructed of any masonry material, or material such as tempered glass or Plexiglas with
a surface density of at least three pounds per square foot. The sound wall should have no
openings or cracks. The table below (Dwelling Units Requiring Sound Walls around
40
b-S7
Patios or Balconies), provides a summary of required walls that would achieve 65 CNEL
at the exterior patios/balconies.
Dwelling Units Requiring Sound Walls Around Patios or Balconies
t
204 2
302-306 3
402-406 4
2 409 4
Finding:
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.7 of the SEIR, pursuant to Section 15091(a)(I) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR to
a level of insignificance.
Public Services and Utilities
Significance Thresholds:
Threshold I: Would the project exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the applicable
Regional Water Quality Control Board?
Threshold 2: Would the project require or result in the construction of new water or wastewater
treatment facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
Threshold 3: Would the project require or result in the construction of new storm water
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental effects?
41
./ 2,
!::J-..;J~
Threshold 4: Would the project have sufficient water supplies available to serve the project
from existing entitlements and resources, or are new or expanded entitlements
needed?
Threshold 5: Would the project result in a determination by the wastewater treatment provider
which serves or project that it has adequate capacity to serve the project's
projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments?
Threshold 6: Would the project be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity to
accommodate the project's solid waste disposal needs?
Threshold 7: Would the project comply with federal, state, and local statutes and regulations
related to solid waste?
Threshold 8: Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated with the provision of
new or physically altered govermnental facilities, need for new or physically
altered govermnental 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:
Fire protection?
Police protection?
Schools?
Parks?
Other public facilities?
/
In addition, the City has adopted Growth Management Thresholds specific to the needs to the
City. These thresholds are consistent with the intent of CEQA and in effect, provide more
specific guidelines for significant findings. Therefore, the following significance thresholds are
used:
Threshold A: Developer will request and deliver to the City a service availability letter from the
Water District for each project.
Threshold B: Sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Threshold C: The City shall construct 60,000 gross square feet (GSF) of additional library
space, over the June 30, 2000 GSF total, in the area east of Interstate 805 by
42
b-53
buildout. The construction of said facilities shall be phased such that the City will
not fall below the citywide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000 population. Library
facilities are to be adequately equipped and staffed.
Threshold D: Stonnwater flows and volumes shall not exceed City Engineering standards.
Threshold E: Three acres of neighborhood and community parkland with appropriate facilities
shall be provided per 1,000 residents east on-80S.
Threshold F: Police Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall
respond to 81 % of the Priority I emergency caIls throughout the City within seven
(7) minutes and shall maintain an average response time to all Priority I caIls of
five minutes and thirty seconds (5.5 minutes) or less (measured annuaIly).
Threshold G: Police Urgent Response: Properly equipped and staffed police units shall respond
to 57% of the Priority III, urgent calls throughout the City within seven (7)
minutes and shall maintain an average response time to all Priority II calls of
seven minutes and thirty seconds (7.5 minutes) or less (measured annually).
Threshold H: Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical units shall
respond to calls throughout the city within seven (7) minutes in 80% of the cases.
Impact: The proposed SPA Plan would resnlt in an incremental impact on public
facilities if they are not provided commensurate with demand. The incremental
contribution of solid waste, and demand on water and sewer service, parks, fire,
police, emergency services, libraries and schools would be significant.
-
Explanation:
The project would not result in the need for new water, wastewater, stonn drain, school, fire
station, police or library facilities beyond those that are already constructed or planned for
construction due to the planned build-out of the EastLake area of which this project is a
component. That said, the project's future residents would have an incremental effect on the
City's ability to maintain adequate public services, therefore the project must pay a fair-share
development impact fee to help off-set this cost.
Mitigation Measures:
5.8-a Prior to approval the Final Map, the applicant shall demonstrate compliance with
recycling policies in the City's General Plan and Municipal Code. Demonstration of
43
! .c-7.<
:, --;;)-;-
compliance with these policies shall include construction of onsite recycling facilities,
recycling program establishment, etc.
5.8-b Prior to approval of the Final Map, a minimum of 3.86 acres of parkland will be
established within the project area in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Municipal
Code Section 17.10.40. Any shortfall in parkland acreage dedication shall result in
payment of the park acquisition component of the Park Acquisition and Development
(PAD Fee). Given the lack of available acreage that could be acquired to serve the
development, the acquisition component of the PAD Fee will be waived and a payment
of $4.1 million (including the development portion of the fee and land acquisition fee
adjusted over dedication at EastIake Vistas neighborhood park) will be made which can
be utilized to fund construction of park and public facilities serving the EastLake
Community. Any excess funds that remain once these facilities are complete can be
utilized on other park or public facilities serving the Eastern Territories of Chula Vista.
The Developer will pay the development component of the PAD Fee as required by the
City (EastLake III SPA Plan, February 20, 2006 and personal communication with Jack
Griffin, City of Chula Vista April 3, 2006).
5.8-c Prior to issuance of building permits, the applicant shall be required to pay the Public
Facilities Development Impact Fees (PFDIF) at the rate in effect at the time building
permits are issued as determined by the City Engineer, to offset impacts on City fire,
police, emergency services and libraries.
5.8-d Prior to approval of the Tentative Map, the applicant shall submit plans showing fire flow
and fire hydrant locations to the City of Chula Vista Fire Prevention Division for review
and approval.
5.8-e Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall pay all required school
mitigation fees at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued or enter into an
agreement to help fmance the needed facilities and services for the Chula Vista
Elementary School District and Sweetwater Union High School District.
5.8-f Water and sewer facility improvements shall be financed or installed on- and off-site in
accordance with the fees and phasing in the approved Public Facilities Financing Plan for
the SPA Plan.
5.8-g The City of Chula Vista shall continue to monitor Police and Fire Department responses
to emergency calls and report the results to the Growth Management Oversight
Committee on an annual basis.
44
,t...$5
Impact: The project would potentially impact recreational facilities.
Safety issues for recreational trail users directly exposed to crossing construction traffic as a
result of the optional construction road will be significant.
Explanation:
The construction road will directly affect the existing trail along the west side of Wueste Road.
Construction vehicles would cross directly over the trail and would pose a safety risk to
pedestrians, bicyclists and other recreational trail users during construction activities. For this
reason, mitigation, in the form of a Traffic Control Plan, will address safety issues related to
recreational trail users throughout project construction.
Mitigation Measures:
5.8-h Prior to approval of the grading permit for the optional construction access road, a traffic
control plan shall be prepared to the satisfaction of the City Engineer that addresses
pedestrian, bicycle and vehicular safety during construction at the intersection of Wueste
Road and the option construction access road.
Finding:
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.8 of the SEIR, pursuant to Section 15091(a)(I) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR to
a level of insignificance.
Biological Resources
Significance Thresholds:
Threshold 1 : Would the project conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat Conservation
Plan, Natural Conservation Community Plan, or other approved local, regional, or
state habitat conservation plan or other approved local, regional or state habitat
conservation plan?
Threshold 2: Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or 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?
45
~ - 6?o
Threshold 3: Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian habitat or other sensitive natura1
community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the
California Department ofFish and Game or US Fish and Wildlife Service?
Threshold 4: Have a substantial adverse effect on federally 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?
Threshold 5: 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 wildlife nursery sites?
Threshold 6: Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources,
such as a tree preservation policy or ordinance?
Impact: The project (including the optional pedestrian trail and construction access
road) would result in potential indirect impacts to sensitive species and habitats
within adjacent Preserve areas.
Potential direct impacts to narrow endemic plant species and potential indirect impacts to habitat
and reserve features may occur within the optional pedestrian trail and optional construction
access road should they be implemented.
Explanation:
The optional construction road and trail would impact areas that could support narrow endemic
plants. Although none were identified during winter 2005-2006 surveys conducted for the
project, surveys were not conducted within the optimal season for some of the annual narrow
endemic plants. Potentially suitable habitat for these plants exist onsite, and therefore, there is a
potential for impacts to narrow endemic plant species. This potential impact to narrow endemic
plants within the optional pedestrian trail and temporary construction roadway alignments would
result in a significant impact.
r
The proposed project and optional features would also be located adjacent to areas intended for
conservation, therefore indirect impacts related to urban pollutant runoff, toxic substances, new
light sources and invasive landscaping would occur and be considered significant.
Finally, without implementation of required mitigation, the project could potentially be
inconsistent with the City's HUT Ordinance which would constitute a significant impact.
46
.t ., S7
.,
Mitigation Measures:
5.9-a In accordance with the adjacency guidelines contained in the Subarea Plan, mitigation to
minimize indirect impacts to sensitive wildlife species, sensitive plant communities and
functions of the Preserve as envisioned in the City's Subarea Plan are as follows:
Drainage and Toxic Substances
Pollution reduction measures, such as oil and water separators, shall be installed in all
drainage systems at the property line to eliminate introduction of contaminants into
the Preserve. Such measures shall be indicated on grading plans and approved by the
City prior to issuance of any land development permit, including clearing and
grubbing and grading permits. The installation of these pollution reduction measures
shall be verified by the City during project construction.
Additional best management practices for reduction to impacts to drainages include:
slopes and channels will be protected trom erosion; storm drain stenciling and
signage will be employed, and control of post-development peak storm water runoff
discharge rates and velocities will be enacted to maintain or reduce downstream
erosion and to protect stream habitat. These measures shall be further outlined in the
project SWPPP.
Lighting
Light shielding to protect the Preserve trom spill-over during construction activities
shall be required. In addition, lighting proposed for the residential development shall
be directed away and shielded trom the Preserve. Low sodium lighting shall also be
utilized. Prior to issuance of a building permit, a lighting plan shall be submitted to
the City's Environmental Review Coordinator for review and approval. The lighting
plan shall illustrate the location of the proposed lighting standards and type of
shielding measures. Low-pressure sodium lighting shall be used if feasible and shall
be subject to the approval of the City's Environmental Review Coordinator and City
Engineer.
Noise
Construction activities shall include noise reduction measures or be conducted outside
the breeding season of sensitive bird species. In particular, grading restrictions shall
be implemented during the breeding season (February 15 through August 15) of the
California gnatcatcher, and if construction is proposed during the breeding season,
47
b ~~r-
noise levels shall not exceed 60 dB(A) Leq within 500 feet of an active gnatcatcher
nest.
Noise impacts adjacent to the preserve shall be minimized through installation of
berms or walls adjacent to the residential areas and any other use that may introduce
noises that could impact or interfere with wildlife utilization of the Preserve.
Invasives
Native vegetation shall be used for revegetating the temporary access road, and shall
be incorporated into the landscape plan to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning
and Building. Such measures shall be indicated on grading plans and approved by the
City prior to issuance of any land development permit, including clearing and
grubbing and grading permits. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, landscape plans
shall be submitted to the City for review and approval.
, ,
5.9-b Prior to issuance of any land development permit, including clearing and grubbing and
grading pennits, for the optional trail and temporary construction access road, the
applicant shall retain a City-approved biologist to conduct a Narrow Endemic species
survey. Once surveys have been completed, an impact analysis shall be prepared to
determine the impacts to any narrow endemic species found in those areas and include
mitigation measures in accordance with Section 5.2.3 of the City's Subarea Plan. Finally,
the impact analysis shall be submitted to the City's Environmental Review Coordinator
for review and approval prior to initiating any construction activities. If a narrow
endemic plant population is discovered, impacts shall be limited to 20% of the population
within the project area, and appropriate mitigation shall be provided to meet the
requirements of biological equivalency in Section 5.2.3.6 of the Subarea Plan. The City
shall prepare findings of equivalency to authorize "Take" of the portion of the plant
population.
r
If, after the comprehensive consideration of avoidance and minimization measures,
impacts exceed 20% of the covered Narrow Endemic Species population within the
project area, the City must make a detennination of biologically superior preservation
consistent with Section 5.2.3.7 of the Subarea Plan. This detennination shall be based on
appropriate mitigation sufficient to meet the requirements established for biologically
superior preservation identified in Section 5.2.3.7 of the Subarea Plan. The City shall
process the appropriate findings in accordance with Section 5.2.3.3 of the Subarea Plan.
If such [mdings carmot be made for either or both of these optional project features, the
feature(s) that are not consistent with the policies related to narrow endemic species shall
not be implemented.
48
b-sy
Finding:
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.9 of the SEIR, pursuant to Section l5091(a)(1) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR to
a level of insignificance.
Paleontological Resources
Significance Thresholds:
Threshold I: Would the project directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological resource
or site or unique geologic feature?
Impact: The project could potentially impact a unique paleontological resource.
The project may impact paleontological resources during grading and building piling excavation.
Explanation:
A majority of the grading activity onsite would impact the existing building pad Structure which
is situated on already disturbed soils. However, during construction, boring of the building
column holes may result in impacts to previously undisturbed soils underneath the existing
building pad structure. This would result in a potentially significant impact.
Mitigation Measures:
5. IO-a Prior to issuance of a grading pennit, the applicant shall confinn in writing to the City of
Chula Vista that a qualified paleontologist has been retained to carry out the mitigation
described herein. A qualified paleontologist is defined as an individual with a M.S. or
Ph. D. in paleontology or geology who is familiar with paleontological procedures and
techniques. A paleontological monitor may be retained to perfonn the on-site monitoring
in place of the qualified paleontologist. A paleontological monitor is defined as an
individual who has experience in the collection and salvage of fossil materials and who is
working under the supervision of a qualified paleontologist.
5.IO-b The qualified paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall attend preconstruction
meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors. The paleontologist's
duties shall include monitoring of grading, salvaging, preparation of collected materials
for storage at a scientific institution that houses paleontological collections, and
49
/ '" -
~ -(p J
preparation of a monitoring results report. For each step below, the paleontologist should
present results to the City of Chula Vista for review. These duties are defined as follows:
The paleontologist or paleontological monitor shall be on-site during the original
cutting of previously undisturbed sediments of the Otay Formation to inspect cuts
for fossils contained therein. The Sweetwater Formation should be monitored on
an as-needed basis as determined by the paleontologist or paleontological
monitor. The frequency of inspections would depend upon the rate of excavation,
the materials excavated, and the abundance of fossils. The paleontologist would
work with the contractor to determine the monitoring locations and amount of
time necessary to ensure adequate monitoring ofthe project site.
In the event that fossils are encountered, the paleontologist (or paleontological
monitor) shall have the authority to divert or temporarily halt construction
activities in the area of discovery to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely
fashion. Because of the potential for recovery of small fossil remains, it may be
necessary to set up a screen-washing operation on-site.
Fossil remains shall be cleaned, sorted, repaired, cataloged, and then stored in a
local scientific institution that houses paleontological collections, such as the San
Diego Natural History Museum.
A monitoring results report with appropriate graphics summarizing the results
(even if negative), analyses, and conclusions of the above program shall be
prepared and submitted to the City of Chula Vista within 90 days following the
termination of the paleontological monitoring program.
Finding:
r
As identified in Section 5.0, Subchapter 5.10 of the SEIR, pursuant to Section l5091(a)(I) of the
CEQA Guidelines changes or alterations are required in, or incorporated into, the project that
will substantially lessen or avoid the significant environmental effect as identified in the SEIR to
a level of insignificance.
x.
CUMULATIVE SIGNIF1CANT EFFECTS & MITIGATION MEASURES
Cumulative impacts are those which "are considered when viewed in connection with the effects
of past projects, the effect of other current projects, and the effects of probable future projects"
(Pub. Resources Code Section 21082.2 subd. (b)). Several development proposals have been
50
b-~/
submitted for consideration or have been recently approved by the City of Chu]a in proximity of
the project site for the EastLake III Senior Housing project. These "current or probable future"
development proposals can affect many of the same natura] resources and public intrastructure as
development of the EastLake III Senior Housing project. Potentially significant cumulative
impacts are associated with development of the project in conjunction with these surrounding
development projects.
In formulating mitigation measures for the project, regional issues and cumulative impacts have
been taken into consideration. Many of the mitigation measures adopted for the cumulative
impacts are similar to the project level mitigation measures. This reflects the inability of the
Lead Agency to impose mitigation measures on surrounding jurisdictions (i.e., City of San
Diego, City of National City, and Caltrans) and the contribution of these jurisdictions to
cumulative impacts. The project, along with other related projects, will result in the following
irreversible cumulative environmental changes. All page numbers following the impacts refer to
pages in the SEIR.
The Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the EastLake III Woods and Vistas
Replanning Program EIR (#01-01) provided a comprehensive examination of the cumulative
impacts associated with bui]dout of the entire EastLake ill project in conjunction with other
related projects. The proposed EastLake III Senior Housing project would not substantially
change the conclusions of the cumulative impact analysis trom the FSEIR #01-01.
Impact: Land Use, Planning and Zoning
Explanation:
FSEIR #01-01 stated that development that is consistent with the approved plans would not
result in any additional cumulative land use impacts. A significant land use impact would not
occur as long as basic planning principles are achieved. FSEIR #0]-01 concluded that the
development of the EastLake III Woods and Vistas parcels would generally be consistent with
and thus achieve the same basic planning principles as the City General Plan and Genera]
Deve]opment Plan for EastLake ill proposed at ,that time. The loss of agricultural land
associated with project development is a cumulative impact, however, it is not considered
cumulatively significant or cumulatively considerable because the land proposed for
development is neither prime agricultural land nor zoned for agricultural use.
A]though the proposed EastLake III Senior Housing project would require a General Plan
Amendment, and amendments to the EastLake III GDP and SPA, the change in land use trom
commercial tourist to high-density residential senior housing would not introduce a land use that
would be incompatible with the surrounding mixture of commercia], quasi-public and residentialouses. The change in land use would also not create a significant cumulative loss of commercia]
5]
6-0~
tourist use. Several other locations in eastern Chula Vista are planned for resort/hotel uses,
including the Otay Ranch Village 13 and Eastern Urban Center. Both sites are located within 2.5
miles of the site and could accommodate the visitors to eastern Chula Vista. Lastly, the proposed
project in conjunction with the buildout of other areas of Chula Vista will contribute to the
conversion of vacant land to urban uses in the eastern area of Chula Vista. However, the site is
planned for development, and is one of the last planned development parcels in the EastLake III
Vistas community. Further, the project site is surrounded by development, and services are
provided to the site. As such, the proposed project would be considered an "infill" development,
would not extend services or promote growth where none is currently planned, and would not
result in a cumulative loss of vacant land. The conversion of vacant land to residential uses and
change in land use from commercial tourist to high density senior housing is not considered
cumulatively significant.
Mitigation Measures:
No mitigation measures are required.
Finding:
The project would not result in a significant cumulative land use impact.
Impact: Landform Alteration/Aesthetics
Explanation:
FSEIR #01-01 states that the City of Chula Vista General Plan, EastLake III General
Development Plan and General Development Plan EIR anticipated the components of the
EastLake III project. Open expanses of rolling hills used for agricultural purposes would be
developed with clustered residential and commercial areas separated by open space. Consistent
with other EIRs, a significant unmitigable cumulative impact associated with landform alteration
and change in visual character was identified. The Chula Vista City Council adopted a
Statement of Overriding Considerations for this impact.
Because the proposed project's environmental analysis is tiered from FSEIR #01-01, this
significant cumulative impact related to landform alteration and aesthetics must be carried
forward in this document for the decision makers' review.
The proposed project will contribute to the change in visual character of the Lower Otay
Reservoir area. While the project site has been graded and is no longer natural open space, it is
an undeveloped vacant site. The proposed project would incrementally contribute to the
developed, suburban nature of the western rim of the Lower Otay Reservoir. These visual
52
,6~~3
changes will be most evident :ti-om the Lower Otay Reservoir, Olympic Parkway and Wueste
Road. In conjunction with other existing, developing or planned developments, the project's
contribution to the loss of open space would represent a cumulative impact. The mitigation for
the project impacts would be applicable for cumulative impacts to landform alteration and visual
quality associated with the proposed project. However, this impact would remain significant and
unmitigable.
Mitigation Measures:
No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce this project impact to a less than
significant level. As a result, the project would contribute to the incremental effect of the
significant, unmitigable landform- alteration/aesthetic impact that resulted when the EastLake III
area was developed.
Finding:
The only mitigation available to avoid this impact is the No Project Alternative. Adoption of the
No Project Alternative does not meet the goals and objectives of the proposed project discussed
in the SEIR. Therefore pursuant to section 15091 (a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations made this alternative infeasible.
As described in the Statement of Overriding Considerations, however the City Council has
determined that these impacts are acceptable because of specific overriding considerations.
Impact: Geology/Soils
Explanation:
FSEIR #01-01 did not identify cumulative impacts related to geology and soil conditions.
Geology and soil hazards associated with development on surrounding projects would be site-
specific and can be mitigated on a project-by-project basis. The project would not involve the
pumping or depletion of groundwater resources, which would have the potential to result in
cumulative impacts to groundwater resources and soil stability. Therefore, no significant
cumulative impacts related to geology and soil resources would occur.
Mitigation Measures:
No mitigation measures are required.
53
b ~'0 f'-
Finding:
The project would not result in a significant cumulative impact to geology and soil resources.
Impact: Water QuaIitylHydrology
Explanation:
FSEIR #01-01 concluded that cumulative impacts to atay Lakes Basin and the Salt Creek
Drainage Basin would occur as a result of development of the EastLake ill GDP and SPA Plan.
These impacts would be related to the potential for more channel and soil erosion into the
downstream areas. Increased erosion could negatively impact downstream water quality. To
reduce hydrological impacts to the atay Lakes Basin, the master drainage system was designed
to divert surface flows trom 243 acres to the Salt Creek Basin. Incorporation of this design
feature along with several Best Management Practices were detennined to reduce potential
significant cumulative impacts to water quality and hydrology to a level below significant.
Runoff trom project development areas, including surface parking lots and landscaped areas will
contribute to the incremental increase in urban runoff to the atay River system. However, the
proposed project site currently drains to an existing stonn drain system that funnels site drainage
to the Salt Creek Drainage Basin to avoid discharge into the atay Reservoirs. The proposed
project would not alter this drainage pattern. Further, the project would implement Best
Management Practices to maintain water quality in the Salt Creek Drainage Basin. AIl drainage
that leaves the project site would be filtered through mechanisms designed to trap pollutants
which would eliminate the project's regional contribution to cumulative water quality issues.. In
compliance with City thresholds, onsite runoff will not exceed pre-development volumes. The
project's compliance with applicable federal, state and city regulations for stonnwater and
construction discharges, including the application of Best Management Practices, would reduce
the project's contribution to cumulative impacts to water quality to a level below significance.
Mitigation Measures:
No mitigation measures are required.
Finding:
The project would not result in a significant cumulative impact to water quality and hydrology
resources.
54
b -~ S"
Impact: Traffic and Circulation
FSEIR #01-01 concluded that significant cumulative traffic circulation impacts at project area
intersections, street segments and freeway operations would occur through the years 2005, 2010,
2015, 2020 and at build-out. hnpacts to freeway operations at I-80S would remain signjficant
and umnitigable. The Chula Vista City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding
Considerations for this impact.
Because the proposed project's environmental analysis is tiered from FSEIR 01-01, this
significant cumulative impact related to transportation and circulation must be carried forward in
this document.
As discussed in Section 5.0, the proposed project would contribute 1,684 average daily trips less
than assumed for the site under the existing land use designation and as addressed in FSEIR #01-
01. The traffic analysis for the proposed project concluded that, in and of itself, the proposed
project would not result in a significant contribution to traffic on I-80S and would not result in a
sufficient contribution to regional road network to warrant a cumulative impact. The only traffic
impact identified was project specific. However, because the proposed project is part of the
buildout of the overall EastLake III community, a signjficant cumulative umnitigable traffic
impact was identified for buildout of the community, and the proposed project would result in an
incremental contribution to the traffic from buildout of the community, a signjficant cumulative
unmitigated traffic impact is identified.
Mitigation Measures:
No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce this significant impact to a less than
signjficant level.
Finding:
The only mitigation available to avoid this impact is the No Project Alternative. Adoption of the
No Project Alternative does not meet the goals and objectives of the proposed project discussed
in the SEIR. Therefore pursuant to section 15091 (a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations made this alternative infeasible.
As describe din the Statement of Overriding Considerations, however the City Council has
determined that these impacts are acceptable because of specific overriding considerations.
55
b -t, r:,
Impact: Air Quality
Explanation:
FSEIR #01-01 concluded that development of the EastLake ill community will result in
significant, unmitigable air quality impacts. Compliance with regional air pollution rules and
regulations will reduce potential short-term impacts related to construction, however will not
completely mitigate for them. Project operations-related impacts, including those related to
stationary and mobile sources are projected to exceed South Coast Air Quality Management
District thresholds and would therefore result in significant regional air quality impacts.
Therefore, significant unmitigable cumulative air quality impacts would occur as a result of
buildout of EastLake III. The Chula Vista City Council adopted a Statement of Overriding
Considerations for this impact.
Implementation of the proposed project would result in short-term impacts to air quality
associated with construction and long-term impacts associated with increased vehicle traffic.
The cumulative effect of the proposed project and other projects in the vicinity would
incrementally contribute to the San Diego Air Basin's levels ofPM-IO, ROG, NOx, CO, 03 and
S02. Dust control measures implemented during grading operations would be regulated in
accordance with the rules and regulations of the County of San Diego Air Pollution Control
District (APCD) and the California Air Resources Board, and, on a project level, not exceed
thresholds. However, the San Diego Air Basin is currently in non-attainment status for both
federal and state requirements for 03 and state requirements ofPM-IO; therefore, any emissions
would contribute to a significant impact. While the proposed project would generate less than
half of the projected traffic for the site under the existing land use designation, it would still
contribute incrementally to overall cumulative vehicular emissions generated by buildout of the
area. Therefore, the proposed project would contribute to the significant cumulative air quality
impacts which are not be fully mitigable on a project level.
Mitigation Measures:
No feasible mitigation measures are available to reduce this significant impact to a less than
significant level.
Finding:
The only mitigation available to avoid this impact is the No Project Alternative. Adoption of the
No Project Alternative does not meet the goals and objectives of the proposed project discussed
in the SEIR. Therefore pursuant to Section 15091 (a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, specific
economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations made this alternative infeasible.
56
6~67
As describe din the Statement of Overriding Considerations, however the City Council has
determined that these impacts are acceptable because of specific overriding considerations.
Impact: Noise
Explanation:
FSEIR #01-01 states that ambient noise levels in the project area would increase as a result of
new urban activities. Cumulative noise levels ITom EastLake III and other development in the
Eastern Territories would not exceed land use compatibility standards if mitigation measures for
impacts associated with development on a project-by-project basis are incorporated.
Cumulative noise impacts are discussed in terms of traffic-related noise and a general increase in
urbanization in an area. A project's contribution to cumulative traffic noise would be evaluated
on a project-by-project basis, and if significant impacts are identified (e.g., non-compliance with
noise standards) then mitigation requirements would be imposed. As described in Section 5.7,
Noise, anticipated interior noise levels warrant mitigation to reduce impacts to less than
significant due to the proximity of Olympic Parkway and anticipated traffic levels along this
roadway. Once built, the proj ect will contribute to the overall increase in ambient noise,
however similar to the conclusion described in FSEIR #0 I -01 for the entire EastLake III
community, because the project and other projects' noise levels within the area would not exceed
land use compatibility standards, cumulative noise impacts would not occur.
Mitigation Measures:
No mitigation measures are required.
Finding:
The project would not result In a significant cumulative impact to the surrounding nOise
environment.
Impact: Public Services/Utilities
Explanation:
FSEIR #01-01 analyzed cumulative impacts to water supply and sewer service. FSEIR #01-01
states that development of the EastLake III project would incrementally increase regional water
consumption, however this increase represents a less than significant impact given current water
availability. Further, this increase in water demand has been planned for within the City of
Chula Vista.
57
, .A
/ / ,'"
j:) "'"" <r
FSEIR #01-0 I indicates that development of the Woods and Vistas would incrementally reduce
the capacity in the Point Lorna Metro Sewer System. However, because the Metro system has
the capacity to accommodate future planned growth, the increased flows would not be
cumulatively significant. FSEIR #01-01 also noted the potential for increased sewer demand to
overwhelm the City's sewer infrastructure. Mitigation was contemplated and has largely been
completed to help convey flows within the City's system prior to its entrance into the Metro
facilities.
The project would involve an incremental increase in demand for public facilities. However, this
demand has been planned for by the City of Chula Vista. Sewer and water services are already
provided to the site, and the associated infrastructure is adequately sized to accommodate the
sewage generation and water demand. OWD has indicated that water supplies are available for
the proposed development. Because other projects considered as part of this cumulative analysis
would also be required to demonstrate sewer service and water availability, cumulative impacts
to sewer and water services would not be significant.
The proposed project would similarly increase demand on police protection and fire and
emergency services. The PFFP that has been prepared for the project addresses the need for
additional police services and recommends methods to maintain acceptable service levels. The
City will evaluate each project considered as part of this cumulative analysis on a similar level,
and each project will be required to pay fees to offset incremental increases in demand created by
the project. Therefore, cumulative impacts to law enforcement and fire protection are not
considered significant.
While the project is an age restricted facility, it may contribute to the cumulative need for
additional school facilities. The proposed project, as well as foreseeable future projects, will be
required to pay school fees to pay for school services and improvements commensurate with
need. Therefore, impacts to schools would not be considered significant.
The proposed project would create a demand for library services to serve its residents, and,
when considered with past, present and future developments, the project would contribute an
incremental demand on libraries. However, the project would pay development fees that would
be used towards library facilities within the City, in accordance with the City's Growth
Management Ordinance. Other projects considered as part of this cumulative impact analysis
would also be required to contribute development fees, as necessary to offset incremental
demand for library services. Therefore, cumulative impacts to libraries would not be significant.
Buildout of the proposed project in conjunction with the cumulative projects analyzed in this
analysis would increase the amount of solid waste generated within the region. As indicated in
Section 5.8, the Otay Landfill has sufficient capacity to accommodate the proposed project.
Additionally, the project, as well as other foreseeable future projects, would implement programs
58
Iv tP.9
and policies related to solid waste management and a recycling program. As a result, no
significant cumulative solid waste impacts would occur.
Mitigation Measures:
No mitigation measures are required.
Finding:
The project would not result in a significant cumulative impact to public facilities and services.
Impact: Biological Resources.
FSEIR #01-01 concluded that given the predominance of agricultural land and lack of sensitive
vegetation on the EastLake III project site, the project's contribution to cumulative biological
impacts would not be considered significant. The cumulative loss of sensitive habitats fi:om the
project and other cumulative projects within the City is addressed in the MSCP and the City's
Subarea Plan which was intended to provide the City with a comprehensive plan for preservation
of key biological resources while allowing remaining areas to be developed.
Development of this project, combined with the others described above, would contribute to the
increase in human presence within the eastern Chula Vista area. Continued development within
the eastern areas ofChula Vista and the extension ofSR-125 would extend urban land uses into
vacant areas characterized by natural habitats and utilized by the region's sensitive plant and
wildlife species. As indicated in FSEIR #01-01, approval of the MSCP and the City's Subarea
Plan was intended to mitigate for the cumulative loss of sensitive biological resources in Chula
Vista. The project is consistent with the MSCP and City's Subarea Plan. Therefore, the
proposed project, combined with existing, developing or planned projects would not result in
cumulative biological resource impacts.
Mitigation Measures:
No mitigation measures are required.
Finding:
The proj ect would not result in a significant cumulative impact to biological resources.
59
b~7o
Impact: Paleontological Resources
Explanation:
FSEIR #01-01 concluded that the EastLake III area contains significant paleontological
resources. Fossils were recovered from the underlying Otay and Sweetwater Formations in
previous EastLake construction and represent significant contributions to California
paleontology. This SEIR indicates that the presence of monitors during construction will
eliminate paleontological impacts on a project-by-project basis.
Monitoring for paleontological resources already occurred during grading of the site in 2002.
However, the proposed project may excavate below previously disturbed formation for the
subterranean parking. Therefore, this project may contribute to cumulative impacts to
paleontological resources during construction of the underground parking. This cumulative
impact will be mitigated through project-specific mitigation measures.
Mitigation Measures:
No mitigation measures are required.
Finding:
The project would not result in a significant cumulative impact to paleontological resources.
XI.
FEASIBILITY OF POTENTIAL PROJECT ALTERNATIVES
Because the project will cause significant environmental effects, as outlined above, the City must
consider the feasibility of any environmentally superior alternative to the project as finally
approved. The City must evaluate whether one or more of these alternatives could avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effects. Where no significant environmental
effects remain after application of all feasible mitigation measures identified in the SEIR, the
decision makers must still evaluate the project alternatives identified in the SEIR. Under these
circumstances, CEQA requires findings on the feasibility of project alternatives.
In general, in preparing and adopting fmdings, a lead agency need not necessarily address
feasibility when contemplating the approval of a project with significant impacts. Where the
significant impacts can be mitigated to an acceptable (insignificant) level solely by the adoption
of mitigation measures, the agency, in drafting its findings, has no obligation to consider the
feasibility of environmentally superior alternatives, even if their impacts would be less severe
60
6-71
than those of the projects as mitigated (Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of
the University of California (1988) 47 Cal.3d 376 [253 Cal.Rptr. 426]; Laurel Hills Homeowners
Association v. City Council (1978) 83 Cal.App.3d 515 [147 Cal.Rptr. 842]; Kings County Farm
Bureau v. City of Hanford (1990) 221 Cal.App.3d 692 [270 Cal.Rptr. 650)). Accordingly, for
this project, in adopting the findings concerning project alternatives, the City Council considers
only those environmental impacts that, for the finally approved project, are significant and
cannot be avoided or substantially lessened through mitigation.
If project alternatives are feasible, the decision makers must adopt a Statement of Overriding
Considerations with regard to the project. If there is a feasible alternative to the project, the
decision makers must decide whether it is environmentally superior to the project. Proposed
project alternatives considered must be ones that "could feasibly attain the basic objectives of the
project." However, the CEQA Guidelines also require an EIR to examine alternatives "capable
of eliminating" environmental effects even if these alternatives "would impede to some degree
the attainment of the project objectives" (CEQA Guidelines, section 15126).
The City has properly considered and reasonably rejected project alternatives as "infeasible"
pursuant to CEQA. CEQA provides the following definition of the term "feasible" as it applies
to the findings requirement: "feasible means capable of being accomplished in a successful
manner within a reasonable period of time, taking into account economic, environmental, social,
and technological factors" (pub. Resources Code, section 21061.1). The CEQA Guidelines
provide a broader definition of "feasibility" that also encompasses "legal" factors. CEQA
Guidelines section 15364 states, "the lack of legal powers of an agency to use in imposing an
alternative or mitigation measure may be as great a limitation as any economic, environmental,
social, or technological factor" (see also Citizens of Goleta Valley v. Board of Supervisors (1990)
52 Cal.3d 553, 565 [276 Cal.Rptr.41O)).
Accordingly, "feasibility" is a term of art under CEQA and thus may be afforded a different
meaning as may be provided by Webster's dictionary or any other sources. Moreover, Public
Resources Code section 21081 governs the "findings" requirement under CEQA with regard to
the feasibility of alternatives. Specifically, no public agency shall approve or carry out a project
for which an environmental impact report has been certified which identifies one or more
significant effects on the environment that would occur if the project is .approved or carried out
unless the public agency makes one or more of the following findings:
"Changes or alternations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or
substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final EIR" (CEQA
Guidelines, section 15091, subd. (a)(l)).
"Such changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public
agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other
61
6"-7-L
agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency" (CEQA Guidelines, section 15091,
subd. (a)(3)).
"Specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations, including provisions of
employment opportunities for highly trained workers, make infeasible the mitigation measures or
project alternatives identified in the final EIR" (CEQA Guidelines, section 15091, subd. (a)(3)).
The concept of "feasibility" also encompasses the question of whether a particular alternative or
mitigation measure promotes the underlying goals and objectives of a project (City of Del Mar v.
City of San Diego (1982) 133 Cal.App.3d 410, 417 [183 Cal. Rptr. 898]). "'[F]easibility' under
CEQA encompasses 'desirability' to the extent that desirability is based on a reasonable
balancing of the relevant economi~, environmental, social, and technological factors" (Ibid.; see
also Sequoyah Hills Homeowners Assn. v. City of Oakland (1993) 23 CaI.AppAth 704,715 [29
CaI.Rptr.2d 182]).
These findings contrast and compare the alternatives where appropriate in order to demonstrate
that the selection of the finally approved project, while still resulting in significant environmental
impacts, has substantial environmental, planning, fiscal, and other benefits. In rejecting certain
alternatives, the decision makers have examined the finally approved project objectives and
weighed the ability of the various alternative to meet objectives. The decision makers believe
that the project best meets the finally approved project objectives with the least environmental
impact.
The detailed discussion in Section IX and Section X demonstrates that all but five significant
environmental effects of the project have been either substantially lessened or avoided through
the imposition of existing policies or regulations or by the adoption of additional, formal
mitigation measures recommended in the SEIR. The remaining unmitigated impacts are the
following:
Landform Alteration and Aesthetics (cumulative - overall build-out of the EastLake
III area)
Traffic (cumulative - cumulative. traffic and circulation pattern impacts were
determined for 2005, 2010, 2015, 2020 and build-out conditions. Impacts to freeway
operations were also identified)
Air Quality (cumulative - nonconformance with regional air quality plans and overall
project [entire EastLake III development] impacts on regional air quality)
..,
The FSEIR #01-01 also identified significant and not mitigated impacts for landform alteration
and aesthetics, traffic, and air quality. The EastLake III Senior Housing project would contribute
62
b ;-73
to the significant, unmitigated impacts identified above and by the FSEIR #01-01. A Statement
of Overriding Considerations was previously adopted by City Council for the FSEIR #01-01,
from which the EastLake III Senior Housing SEIR tiers.
Thus, the City can fully satisfy its CEQA obligations by determining whether any alternatives
identified in the EIR are both feasible and environmentally superior with respect to the impacts
listed above (Laurel Hills, supra, 83 Cal.App.3d at 519-527 [147 Cal. Rptr842J; Kings County
Farm Bureau v. City of Hanford (1990) 22 I Cal.App.3d 692, 730-73 I [270 Cal. Rptr. 650J; and
Laurel Heights Improvement Association v. Regents of the University of California (1988) 47
Cal.3d 376, 400-403 [253 Cal. Rptr. 426]). Table 10-1 in the SEIR (SEIR, Chapter 10, page 10-
16) provides a summary table comparing each of the alternatives. As the following discussion
will show, no identified alternative qualifies as both feasible and environmentally superior with
respect to the unmitigated impacts.
To fully account for these unavoidable significant effects and the extent to which particular
alternatives might or might not be environmentally superior with respect to them, these findings
will not focus solely on the impacts listed above, but may also address the environmental merits
of the alternatives with respect to all broad categories of impacts - even though such a far-
ranging discussion is not required by CEQA. The findings will also assess whether each
alternative is feasible in light of the City's objectives for the project.
The City's review of project alternatives is guided primarily by the need to reduce potential
impacts associated with the project, while still achieving the basic objectives of the project.
Here, the City's primary objective is to comprehensively plan, coordinate, and implement
development over a large area. More specific objectives include those previously listed in
Section III. The City evaluated three alternatives to the proposed project, which are discussed
below (No Project/No Development Alternative, Existing Land Use Designation (Commercial _
Tourist) Alternative, and Reduced Density Alternative. A comparison of these alternatives is
included in the SEIR as Table 10-1 (SEIR, Chapter 10, page 10-16).
No ProjectINo Development Alternative
Section 15126, subdivision(e), of the CEQA Guidelines requires the evaluation of the "No
Project" alternative. Such an alternative "shall discuss the existing conditions, as well as what
would be reasonably expected to occur in the foreseeable future if the project were not approved,
based on current plans and consistent with available infrastructure and community services."
Under the "No Project/No Development" alternative, the project would not be developed, and
the project site would remain in its existing undeveloped condition. No amendments to the
General Plan, EastLake III GDP and SPA would be required.
63
~ ~7~'
With respect to the unmitigated impacts discussed in Section 5.0, Environmental Impact
Analysis, of this SEIR, the No Project/No Development alternative would not result in direct
impacts to landform alteration, biological resources, cultural resources, geological resources,
paleontological resources, traffic and circulation, air quality, utilities and public services, and
hazards/risk of upset. Cumulative impacts to landform and aesthetics, transportation and access,
and air quality would not result. However, impacts to land use would occur because the project
would not implement the City's General Plan, EastLake III GDP, and would not provide housing
opportunities within the City. With the No Project/No Development alternative, the site would
not be permanently removed from future development, since applicable plans for the site identify
its development.
Although the No Project/No Development alternative is considered environmentally preferable
to the proposed project because it would eliminate many direct and cumulative impacts, it would
not accomplish several of the goals and objectives of the proposed project and is therefore not
feasible.
Findings:
The No Project/No Development alternative would not meet any of the basic project objectives
as listed in Section 3.3, Project Objectives, of this SEIR, and in Section III of these Findings of
Fact.
The No Project/No Development alternative would not provide housing, conflicting with the
housing goals of the General Plan, which recommends that housing be provided for all income
groups.
Retention of the project site in its existing state as a graded development pad would be
inconsistent with the approved General Plan and existing EastLake GDP land use designations
for the site.
Retention of the site in its current vacant condition would not implement the goals of the General
Plan and would require re-evaluation of the existing GDP. The reduction in dwelling units would
result in a loss of anticipated contributions into the Public Facilities Financing Plan (pFFP) from
the dwelling units/structures that would otherwise have made payments upon issuance of
building permits. The loss of units under the No Project/No Development alternative would
result in a shortfall of contributions into the PFFP and potentially lead to insufficient funding for
the remaining public facilities currently identified in the PFFP for construction in this area.
"'
The City and County would receive lower long-term revenues in the form of property and sales
tax resulting from the non-development of the proposed residential areas.
64
,; r7-
b-/~
Implementation of the No Project/No Development Alternative would not achieve any of the
objectives established for the project. Although this alternative would at least temporarily
preserve land which is currently not developed, it would amount to a failure to plan the site for
eventual development, despite the planned community designation contemplated by the General
Plan and GDP.
The No Project/No Development Alternative is inconsistent with the City's objectives: to plan
the project area in a comprehensive manner in a way that deals with the logical extension of
public services and utilities; to plan for parks and open space to serve residents, and to create
densities sufficient to pay for all required services and inrrastructure. The alternative also fails to
meet objectives favoring an accommodation of future projected population in an area reasonable
close to future job-growth areas within the City.
For these reasons, the City Council concludes that the No Project/No Development Alternative is
not feasible (see City oj Del Mar, supra, 133 Cal.App3d at 417; Sequoyah Hills, supa, 23
Cal.App.4'h at 715).
Existing Land Use Designation (Commercial- Tourist) Alternative
The existing land use designation for the project site is for commercial-tourist uses. The existing
land use designation alternative would result in the continued development of the site for
commercial-tourist uses. No amendments to the general plan or EastLake III GDP would be
necessary. Since the FSEIR #01-01 addressed the development of the project site for
commercial-tourist uses; the impact characterization is a summary of conclusions rrom the
FSEIR #01-01. In cases where FSEIR #01-01 did not differentiate the impacts related to the
specific project site and instead referred to impacts rrom development of the larger Woods and
Vistas project, an independent analysis was provided.
Impact
The Existing Land Use Designation (Commercial - Tourist) Alternative would be consistent with
the existing General Plan and EastLake III GDP and SPA. The site would be developed with a
commercial tourist use that would support the OTC. The commercial tourist use would be
compatible with the surrounding existing and proposed land uses, which include residential and
commercial uses. Implementation of the Existing Land Use Designation Alternative would have
a similar effect on landfonn alteration as the proposed project because the site would change
rrom vacant land to urban development. Development of the site with a Commercial-Tourist use
would not directly impact biological resources. Indirect impacts on the adj acent MSCP Preserve
would still occur with this alternative. Similar to the proposed project, the Existing Land Use
Designation Alternative would not result in impacts to cultural resources. The Existing Land Use
Designation Alternative would result in the same geotechnical impacts and require the same
65
6-7?
mitigation measures that were provided in FSEIR #01-01. This Alternative would result in
similar impacts on paleontological resources as those presented for the proposed project.
Previous analysis for construction related impacts to water quality, as presented in FSEIR #01-
01, indicated that impairment to receiving waters resulting from conventional construction
techniques could be reduced to a less than significant level through the use ofBMPs. This would
be similar to the impacts generated by the proposed project.
FSEIR #01-01 evaluated the traffic impacts of implementation of the EastLake III SPA in its
entirety. FSEIR #01-01 assumed development of the site with Commercial Tourist uses. The
generation rate for Commercial Tourist uses is 200 trips per acre of commercial development.
Therefore, the Existing Land Use Designation Alternative would generate 3,660 ADT. This
alternative would generate approximately 1,684 more ADT than the proposed project.
The implementation of tourist-commercial uses at the project site would generate higher traffic
volumes than compared to the proposed project. Higher traffic levels will likely result in more
congestion which will in-tum contribute to the Region's current air quality non-attainment
levels.
Higher noise levels are anticipated to be generated ftom a Commercial-Tourist use as compared
to a senior housing development. A Commercial-Tourist use, such as a hotel with restaurant and
meeting spaces, would likely be very active, with a ftequent turn over of guests. As noted above,
the Commercial Tourist use would generate more traffic which would result in higher noise
levels adjacent to Olympic Parkway. Therefore, noise impacts associated with the Existing Land
Use Designation Alternative will be greater than those generated by the proposed project.
The Existing Land Use Designation Alternative would result in a similar need for public
facilities would have impacts on public facilities or services similar to the proposed project.
Findings:
The Existing Land Use Designation Alternative would not reduce impacts in the environmental
issue areas analyzed, and would in some cases result in greater impacts. Therefore, pursuant to
section l509l(a)(3) of the CEQA Guidelines, specific economic, legal, social, technological, or
other considerations make this alternative infeasible.
Reduced Density Alternative
The Reduced Density Alternative would consist of single-family residential uses that are typical
of the surrounding environment. Consistent with surrounding densities, approximately 56
single-family units could be developed on the site.
66
b--77
Impact
Similar to the proposed project, the Reduced Density Alternative would require a General Plan
Amendment and amendments to the EastLake III GDP and SPA. If the optional temporary
construction access road and trail are implemented, similar land use impacts would be associated
with these features as the proposed project. Therefore, impacts to land use, planning and zoning
would be the same as for the proposed project.
Implementation of the Reduced Density Alternative would have a similar change in landform
from a vacant site to a residential community. The scale, density and quantity of residential units
would be less than the proposed project. Aesthetically, the site would resemble single-family
neighborhoods to the west and .north and therefore would blend better from a community
character perspective compared to the proposed project. Light and glare would be introduced to
the site, similar to the proposed project.
Similar to the proposed project, this alternative would not have direct impacts on biological
resources. However, indirect impacts on the adjacent MSCP Preserve would still occur.
According to FSEIR #01-01 and EIR #89-09, no cultural resources that meet the significance
criteria under CEQA are located within the project site or optional temporary access road or trail
location areas. Therefore, neither the proposed project nor the Reduced Density Alternative
would result in impacts to cultural resources.
The Reduced Density Alternative would require the same geotechnical mitigation measures that
were provided in FSEIR #01-01 and suggested for the proposed project. However, this
alternative would eliminate the need for basement parking excavation which is anticipated to
expose unstable alluvium in the proposed project scenario.
The Reduced Density Alternative would result in similar impacts as those presented for the
proposed project. The potential for impacts to occur exists with the additional grading activities
that would be required from implementing future development on the project site. Mitigation
Measures from FSEIR #01-01 would therefore still be applicable.
The amount of runoff generated by this alternative would depend upon the area' of impervious
surfaces as compared to the proposed project. Runoff from the site could carry contaminants to
the storm drain system. Similar to the proposed project, BMPs would be required to treat runoff
prior to entering the storm drain system or, in the case of the southern slope, prior to entering the
Lower Otay Reservoir. Similar to the proposed project and in accordance with City
requirements, the volume of runoff could not increase above existing volumes. Therefore, similar
water quality and hydrology impacts would be applicable to the Reduced Density Alternative.
67
r
6--;7tf
The Reduced Density Alternative would result in approximately 56 single-family residential
units, which would generate approximately 560 ADT. This is 1,416 ADT less than what would
be generated by the 494-unit senior housing project. Therefore, traffic impacts from this
alternative would be less than those generated by the proposed proj ect. It is anticipated that the
level of service at the main driveway into the site would still be at unacceptable levels and would
warrant a traffic signal. Reduced traffic levels would also result in a corresponding reduction in
air quality and noise impacts, when compared to the proposed project.
Implementation of the Reduced Density Alternative would decrease the amount of water,
electricity, sewer, solid waste, police services and fire services required. The Reduced Density
project would generate the need for 0.42 acres of parkland (3 acresll,OOO people - 2.5 people per
single-family residential unit was assumed). Therefore, the amount of parkland generated by the
Reduced Density Alternative would be less than that of the proposed project.
Findings:
The Reduced Density Alternative would reduce impacts to traffic, air quality, noise and public
facilities and services. However, significant impacts have been identified for landform
alteration/aesthetics, traffic and air quality, which would not be reduced to levels below
significance with this alternative. Therefore, pursuant to section 1509l(a)(3) of the CEQA
Guidelines, specific economic, legal, social, technological, or other considerations make this
alternative infeasible.
Environmentally Superior Alternative
CEQA requires that an EIR identify the environmentally superior alternative among all of the
alternatives considered, including the proposed project. If the No ProjectINo Development
Alternative is selected as environmentally superior, then the EIR shall also identify an
environmentally superior alternative among the other alternatives.
The environmental analysis of alternatives presented above and summarized in Table 10-1
indicates, through a comparison of potential impacts from each alternative to the proposed
project, that the No Development Alternative is the environmentally superior alternative. If left
in its current state, no new impacts would be introduced to the area. This alternative would result
in the least impact to area roadways, aesthetics, the noise environment, air quality, biological
resources and public services. However, the No Development Alternative would not implernent
the General Plan, GDP or SPA for the site. Further, this alternative would not accomplish any of
the project objectives.
68
t:;9
I. '"
"
The Reduced Density Alternative could also be considered environmentally superior because it
would result in less traffic than the proposed project and would be less dense than the proposed
project. However, this alternative would not implement the General Plan, GDP or SPA for the
site and would not accomplish any of the project objectives, particularly related to providing a
diversity of housing types.
XII.
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS FOR THE PROPOSED
EASTLAKEIII SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT
SUBSEOUENTENVlRONMENTALIMPACTREPORT
The project would have significant, unavoidable impacts on the following areas, described in
detail in Section IX ofthese Findings of Fact:
. Landform Alterations/Aesthetics (cumulative)
. Traffic (cumulative)
· Air Quality (cumulative)
The City has adopted all feasible mitigation measures with respect to these impacts. Although in
some instances these mitigation measures may substantially lessen these significant impacts,
adoption of the measures will, for many impacts, not fully avoid the impacts.
Moreover, the City has examined a reasonable range of alternatives to the project. Based on this
examination, the City has determined that none of the alternatives (I) meets project objectives,
and (2) is environmentally preferable to the proposed project.
As a result, to approve the project, the City must adopt a "statement of overriding
considerations" pursuant to CEQA Guidelines sections 15043 and 15093. This provision allows
a lead agency to cite a project's general economic, social, or other benefits as a justification for
choosing to allow the occurrence of specified significant environmental effects that have not
been avoided. The provision explains why, in the agency's judgment, the project's benefits
outweigh the unavoidable significant effects. Where another substantive law (e.g., the California
Clean Air Act, the Federal Clean Air Act, or the California and Federal Endangered Species
Acts) prohibits the lead agency ITom taking certain actions with environmental impacts, a
statement of overriding considerations does not relieve the lead agency ITOm such prohibitions.
Rather, the decision-maker has recommended mitigation measures based on the analysis
69
/ F
~""'.rO
contained in the Final SEIR, recognizing that other resource agencies have the ability to impose
more stringent standards or measures.
CEQA does not require lead agencies to analyze "beneficial impacts" in an EIR. Rather, EIRs
are to focus on potential "significant effects on the environment," defined to be "adverse." (Pub.
Resources Code Section 21068.) The Legislature amended the definition to focus on "adverse"
impacts after the California Supreme Court had held that beneficial impacts must also be
addressed. (See, Wildlife Alive v. Chickering (1976) 18 Ca1.3d 190, 206 [132 CaI.Rptr. 377].)
Nevertheless, decision-makers benefit ftom information about project benefits. These benefits
can be cited, if necessary, in a statement of overriding considerations. (CEQA Guidelines Section
15093.)
The City finds that the proposed project would have the following substantial, social,
environmental and economic benefits. Anyone of the reasons for approval cited below is
sufficient to justify approval of the project. Thus, even if a court were to conclude that not every
reason is supported by substantial evidence, the City Council would stand by its determination
that each individual reason is sufficient. The substantial evidence supporting the various benefits
can be found in the preceding findings, which are incorporated by reference into this Section,
and in the documents found in the Record of Proceedings, as defined in Section N.
Community Planning and Development
The EastLake area contributes to air pollution in the San Diego Air Basin. Most of this pollution
is attributable to motor vehicles. The proposed EastLake III concept and specifically the
proposed project's of including an optional pedestrian trail would benefit the health and well-
being of the senior community as well as provide a benefit in terms ofvolunteerism, community
involvement, support, etc. for the Olympic Training Center.
Comprehensive Regional Planning
The GDP and the EastLake III SPA Plan project provide the opportunity to comprehensively
plan development that meets the region's needs for housing, jobs, inftastructure, and
environmental preservation. These benefits area made possible by EastLake's size and scope.
The EastLake GDP includes a provision for regional purpose facilities and public services that
area typically not undertaken for smaller development projects. The regional planning process
undertaken for the GDP involved long-range planning, ensuring maximum achievement of
policies and regulations of the City of Chula Vista.
The benefits offered by the regional planning process utilized for the GDP include the following:
· Comprehensive consideration of the GDP cumulative effects;
70
6~;/
· Consistency in the approach to resolving regional issues such as transportation, air
quality, habitat preservation, infrastructure, and public services planning; and
· Long-range coordination of local and regional pubJic facilities.
Housing Needs
The GDP will help meet a projected long-term regional need for housing by providing a wide
variety of housing types and prices. In recent years, the cost of housing compared to other uses
(e.g., commercial, industrial) has risen disproportionately to the cost of other uses in the
EastLake area, reflecting a shortfall in residentially zoned land. The GDP will help reduce the
cost of housing by designating an adequate supply of suitable land for residential development.
The EastLake III Seniors Housing project increases the housing stock in the City by
approximately 494 dwelling units. The project represents a future housing supply for the region.
Phasing will occur in response to market conditions, which will help fulfill the demand for
housing.
SANDAG has forecasted a need for an additional approximately 20,823 additional dwelling
units within the City of Chula Vista by 2005. The project will enact the SANDAG policies by
preserving existing pedestrian and trail systems adjacent to the site, preserving open space,
offering new homes and increasing the tax base for the City.
Fiscal Benefit
The project would generate new temporary construction-related jobs that would enhance the
economic base of the region.
The fiscal analysis identifies the estimated fiscal impact that the proposed amendment from
Tourist Commercial to High Density Residential will have on the City of Chula Vista operation
and maintenance budgets. This analysis is an amendment to the previous EastLake III SPA Plan
adopted on July 17,2001. The amended fiscal analysis includes the 18.4 acre EastLake Seniors
project.
The fiscal analysis presents future revenues and expenditures in current (2005) dollars. Also,
revenues and expenditures are presented annually, reflecting a conservatively projected
development absorption schedule based on information provided by the city and the developer.
This approach identifies annual project fiscal surpluses and deficits and represents a more
realistic approach when compared to assumed instant build-out.
71
I I" )
I. ......i-
t? (.,;..............
The fiscal revenues to the City associated with Eastlake III, for the proposed Seniors project,
range from $352,700 in the first year of development to $2,687,600 at build-out. Fiscal
expenditures by the City range from $273,000 in year one to $2,314,900 at build-out. The net
fiscal impact to the City from Eastlake III is positive in year one ($79,700) and remains so
throughout. At build-out (estimated 2007) the net fiscal impact to the City from EastLake III is
estimated to result in a surplus to the City of$372,700.
For these reasons, on balance the City Council finds there are environmental, economic, social,
and other considerations resulting from the project that serve to override and outweigh the
project's unavoidable significant environmental effects and, thus, the adverse unavoidable effects
are considered acceptable.
72
bvF3
RESOLUTION NO. EIR 05-02
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA
CERTIFYING THE FINAL SUBSEQUENT ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT
(SEIR 05-02) FOR THE EASTLAKE III SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT; MAKING
CERTAIN FINDINGS OF FACT; ADOPTING A STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS; AND ADOPTING A MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, The EastLake Company submitted an application requesting approvals for
amendments to the General Plan, EastLake III General Development Plan and EastLake III
Sectional Planning Area Plan for the EastLake III Senior Housing Project ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, a Draft Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (SEIR #05-02) was
issued for public review on April 14, 2006, and was processed through the State Clearinghouse;
and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing
for Draft SEIR #05-02 on May 31, 2006 to close the public review period; and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing
for the Draft SEIR #05-02 on June 14,2006; and
WHEREAS, a Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR #05-02) was
prepared on the Project; and
WHEREAS, FSEIR #05-02 incorporates, by reference, the prior EIRs that address the
subject property including the Final EIR for EastLake III, Olympic Training Center, EastLake
Trails Prezone and Annexation (FEIR #89-09) certified in October 1989 and the Final
Subsequent EIR for the EastLake III Woods and Vistas Replanning Program and Subsequent
Addendum (FSEIR #01-01) certified in June 2001 as well as their associated Findings of Fact,
Statement of Overriding Considerations and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Programs; and
WHEREAS, to the extent that the Findings of Fact and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations for the Project, dated June 2006 (Exhibit "A" of this Resolution, a copy of which
is on file in the office of the City Clerk), conclude that proposed mitigation measures outlined in
FSEIR #05-02 are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or withdrawn, the City of
Chula Vista hereby binds itself and the Applicant and its successors in interest, to implement
those measures. These findings are not merely information or advisory, but constitute a binding
set of obligations that will come into effect when the City adopts the resolution approving the
Project. The adopted mitigation measures contained within the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program Section of FSEIR #05-02 are expressed as conditions of approval. Other
requirements are referenced in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted
,:,\_,,'(.,'f
concurrently with these Findings of Fact and will be effectuated through the process of
implementing the Project.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL of the City
of Chula Vista does hereby find, determine, resolve and order as follows:
I. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their
public hearings on Draft SEIR #05-02 held on May 31,2006 and June 14,2006, as well
as the minutes and resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the
record of this proceeding. These documents, along with any documents submitted to the
decision-makers, including documents specified in Public Resources Code Section
21167.6, subdivision(s), shall comprise the entire record of proceedings for any claims
under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") (public Resources Code
g21000 et seq.).
II. FSEIR #05-02 CONTENTS
That the FSEIR #05-02 consists of the following:
1. Subsequent EIR for the Project (including technical appendices);
2. Comments received during public review and Responses; and
3. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP)
(All hereafter collectively referred to as "FSEIR #05-02")
III. ACCOMPANYING DOCUMENT TO FSEIR #05-02
I. Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
IV. CERTIFICATION OF COMPIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
That the City Council does hereby find that FSEIR #05-02, the Findings of Fact and the
Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, a copy which is
on file with the office of the City Clerk), and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program are prepared in accordance with the requirements of CEQA (pub. Resources
Code, g2l000 et seq.), the CEQA Guidelines (California Code Regs. Title 14 gl5000 et
seq.), and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City ofChula Vista.
./ r'.-
t.,-j..;)
c;..."" I
V. INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT OF CITY COUNCIL
That the City Council finds that the FSEIR #05-02 reflects the independent judgment of
the City of Chula Vista City Council.
VI. CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT, MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING
PROGRAM AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
A. Adoption of Findings of Fact
The City Council does hereby approve, accepts as its own, incorporate as if set
forth in full herein, and make each and every one of the findings contained in the
Findings of Fact, Exhibit "A" of this Resolution, a copy of which is on file in the
office of the City Clerk.
B. Statement of Overriding Considerations
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any feasible
alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant environmental effects
caused by the Project, or cumulatively, will remain. Therefore, the City Council
of the City of Chula Vista hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
15093, a Statement of Overriding Considerations in the form set forth in Exhibit
"A," a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, identifying the
specific economic, social and other considerations that render the unavoidable
significant adverse environmental effects acceptable.
C. Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted
As more fully identified and set forth in FSEIR #05-02 and in the Findings of Fact
for this Project, which is Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, a copy of which is on file
in the office of the City Clerk, the City Council hereby finds pursuant to Public
Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 that the
mitigation measures described in the above referenced documents are feasible and
will become binding upon the entity (such as the Project proponent or the City)
assigned thereby to implement the same.
D. Infeasibility of Alternatives
As more fully identified and set forth in FSEIR #05-02 and in the Findings of
Fact, Section XII, for this project, which is Exhibit "A" to this Resolution, a copy
of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, the City Council hereby finds
pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section
15091 that alternatives to the project, which were identified in FSEIR #05-02,
were not found to reduce impacts to a less than significant level or meet the
project objectives.
.t~ -, ~
V D ,",,'.
E. Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
As required by the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council
hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program set forth in
FSEIR #05-02. The City Council further finds that the Program is designed to
ensure that, during project implementation, the permittee/project applicant and
any other responsible parties implement the Project components and comply with
the mitigation measures identified in the Findings of Fact and the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
VII. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
That the Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista is directed after
City Council approval of this Project to ensure that a Notice of Determination is filed
with the County Clerk of the County of San Diego. These documents, along with any
documents submitted to the decision-makers, including documents specified in Public
Resources Code Section 21167.6, subdivision(s), shall comprise the entire record of
proceedings for any claims under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")
(Public Resources Code 921000 et seq.).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
finds that FSEIR #05-02, the Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations (Exhibit
"A" to this Resolution, a copy which is on file with the office of the City Clerk), and Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program have been prepared in accordance with the requirements of
CEQA (public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), CEQA Guidelines (Califomia Code Regs.
Title 14 Section 15000 et seq.), and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula
Vista, and therefore should be certified.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
James D. Sandoval, AlCP
Planning and Building Director
(~M e
City Attorney
Exhibit A Findings of Fact and Statement of Overriding Considerations
J r7
,^" .....--/""'
~ I,,;
"'"
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No.: /
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of the following applications filed by The EastLake Company,
for 18.4 acres at the southwest corner of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road
intersection within the EastLake III Planned Community:
a) GPA 05-02: Amendment to the City of Chula Vista General Plan to
change the land use designation from Commercial Visitor to Residential
High (18-27 du/ac).
b) PCM 05-07: Amendments to the EastLake III General Development
Plan (GDP), Sectional Planning Area Plan (SPA) and associated
regulatory documents, and Planned Community District Regulations and
Land Use Districts Map (aka "Epe Senior Project").
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning and Building
/' .
REVIEWED BY: City Manager d' (4/Sths Vote: Ye~No ~
Pulte Homes, in conjunction with the EastLake Company, is proposing to develop an Active
Adult Senior Community, consisting 494-unit market rate condominiums, on an 18.4-acre
portion of a 19.6-acre site located at the most easterly boundary of the EastLake III planned
community (see Locator). This project is oriented toward active seniors (i.e. one member of
household must be 55 years or older) and is the first such age-restricted market rate project
within the City of Chula Vista.
The project amenities includes a 15,000 square foot single-story community recreational facility,
which includes fitness and activity spaces, meeting rooms, spa, and ADA accessible indoor pool.
The outside recreational facilities include an outdoor pool and spa, Barbeque, onsite multi-use
green spaces, including an extensive walking trail system, landscaping, 'Bocce' courts, view
nodes, and multi-purpose passive green spaces. The Active Adult Senior Community will
provide additional housing for seniors and contribute to a balanced planned community for
EastLake III.
The proposed Senior Project will require amendment to the Chula Vista General Plan, the
EastLake III General Development Plan, Sectional Planning Area Plan, Planned Community
District Regulations and Land Use District Map, and other associated regulatory documents.
These amendments only pertains to the 18.4-acre development portion of the 19.6-acre site. The
amendments are further described on pages 5-6 of this staff report.
7-1
Page 2, Item No.: 1
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act and has determined that there is substantial evidence,
in light of the whole record before the City of Chula Vista, that the project may have a
significant effect on the environment; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
prepared a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR #05-02; SCH #2005091047).
Certification of the Subsequent EIR (EIR #05-02) for this project will be considered by the City
Council as a separate item.
There are no potential conflicts of interest for Planning Commissioners and City Council
members, as none of the Commissioners nor Council members lives within a 500-foot radius of
the subject site.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council adopt attached Resolution GPA 05-02/PCM
05-07, approving the proposed amendments to the:
. Chula Vista General Plan;
. EastLake III General Development Plan;
. EastLake III Sectional Planning Area Plan and associated regulatory documents; and
. EastLake III Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use Districts Map.
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: On June 14,2006, the Planning Commission considered the
proposed amendments. Following staffs presentation and public testimony, the Planning
Commission voted (4-0-1-0) recommending that the City Council approve the proposed
amendments.
BACKGROUND:
The 18.4-acre portion of the 19.6-acre site was originally envisioned and conceptually planned
for a resort hotel within the EastLake III GDP & SPA Plan which was adopted in July 2001. The
remaining 1.2-acre portion designated as Open Space. No change is proposed for the Open
Space portion. The site is currently designated as Tourist Commercial (TC). The site was
designated as Visitor/Tourist Commercial and planned to support Olympic Training Center
(OTC) visitors and various associated sports organizations.
However, the site remains vacant due to the lack of interest for a hotel/destination resort
development and potential integration with the adjacent OTC. Thus, the EastLake Company in
conjunction with Pulte Homes, is proposing a 494-unit "age restricted" active adult retirement
community on the site. The OTC is supportive of this proposal because their operation has not
needed the support hotel and the project will provide a potentially positive relationship between
the future residents of the development and the OTC.
The EastLake Senior project is a unique high density residential development. The following
information describing the project description, architecture, unit type, and amenity package was
provided by Pulte Homes.
7-2
-'I
Page 3, Item No.: I
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
. Description: The project will be an age restricted, "for sale," residential "gated" community
on 19.6-acre site overlooking the Lower Otay Reservoir. The site development area will
consist of an 18.4 acre development pad, with the 1.2 acres of perimeter slope adjacent to the
Olympic Training Center remaining as open space. The residential community is restricted
to persons 55 and over. Residential units will consist of 494 condominium units resulting in a
density of about 27 units/acre. The dwelling units will be contained within 13 buildings.
These 13 buildings will each have individual courtyards, and are carefully arranged and sited
to allow for minimal visual impact (from offsite) and maximize usable open space. Each
building is 4 stories over subterranean garage, with comer edges limited to 3 stories to break
up building mass at the edge of the pad. Each building is ADA compliant and houses 2
elevators for direct garage accessibility.
Site coverage consists of 33% buildings, 40% landscape areas and 27% street and surface
parking. The 40% landscape area exceeds the minimum City requirement of 15%. Each
building will contain 38 dwelling units and below-ground parking will allow for more
landscaped area for the use of residents. About 85% of the required parking is located
below-ground with the balance of parking spaces which is mostly visitor parking, located on
the surface.
. Architecture- The architecture is Andelusian (southern Spain), recalling the picturesque
villages of southern Spain and is very compatible with surrounding community architecture
of the EastLake III community. Each building elevation will have a different appearance and
contain numerous architectural projections and treatments to break up the massing of the
building.
. Residential Plan Types: Five plan models are proposed ranging in size from approximately
1000 to 1350 square feet. Each story/flat will contain a mixture of five model plan types,
ranging from 1 bedroom to 3 bedrooms with den options. The buildings are required to be
setback a minimum of 20 feet from the top of slope to reduce massing along Olympic
Parkway and Wueste Road, which are designated as scenic corridors.
. Amenitv Package: A 15,000 square foot single-story community recreational building is
proposed, which includes fitness and activity spaces, meeting rooms, spa, and ADA
accessible indoor pool. The outside recreational facilities include an outdoor pool and spa,
BBQ, and multi-use green spaces. The recreation facility is strategically sited to maximize
panoramic views of Lower Otay Lake. Additional site amenities include an extensive
walking trail system, landscaping, 'Bocce' courts, view nodes, and multi-purpose passive
green spaces. The project also proposes perimeter fencing and elaborate gated entry,
consistent with the EastLake III Design Guidelines. Open spaces (approximately 45% of the
site) include street side landscaping and intersection landscape nodes, passive and active
internal multi-use areas, Trail system, entry landscaping and hardscape activity areas around
the recreation building.
A public outreach meeting was conducted by the City in collaboration with the applicant on
November 5, 2005 at Arroyo Vista Elementary school to present the proposed project and gain
7-3
Page 4, Item No.: 7
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
feedback from the community. Noticing pf the meeting was mailed to over 600 residents
extending beyond 1,000 foot radius surroumjing the project site. Approximately 25-30 residents
attended the meeting. The response and fee~back from the community was positive. The city
continues to receive inquiries from commun(ity residents as to the availability and sales date for
the project.
At this time, The EastLake Company, LLO is requesting the above mentioned amendments to
accommodate The EastLake Senior residen1ial project. The applicant has submitted a Design
Review application for the proposed 494-wjJ.it condominium project, which will be considered
by the Design Review Committee (DRC)I The project was presented to the DRC as an
informational item on December 19, 2005. The DRC supported the proposed design and
provided meaningful design recommendatjons to improve the project. The applicant has
incorporated the recommendations, and th~ project is targeted for formal consideration and
approval by the DRC in early July.
DISCUSSION:
I. Existing Site Characteristics
The site is situated at the most easterly poIjtion of the EastLake III planned community. The
community is fully developed, except for th~ subject property and a 12 acre commercial site to
the north of the OTC. The approximate 19J6 acre site is located on the south side of Olympic
Parkway terminus, bounded by the Olympic Training Center (OTC) to the west and south, a
future retail commercial site to the north of $.nd fronting on Olympic Parkway, and Lower Otay
Lake east of Wueste Road. The Vistas MOu!1tain Hawk community park is to the northeast (see
Locator) .
The site has been graded as part of the Eas~ake III project, resulting in an approximate 10-15-
foot high man-made slope at the top of a 40-~00t natural slope at the eastern and southern edge of
the site.
1. Existing General Plan, SPA Land Use Designations and land use
General Plan CV nicipal PC District Land Existing Land Use
Code onin Use Desi nation
Site Commercial Visitor; PC, PI!m.ned Tourist Commercial; Vacant
Open Space Community Open Space
North Commercial Retail PC, Pl\iDI1ed Village Commercial Vacant
COmmunity
South Public Quasi Public PC, PI\illned Public Quasi Public Olympic Training
Commtunity Center
East Open Space OS, O~en Space Not a part- NAP Lower Otay
Reservoir
7-4
Page 5, Item No.: 1
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
West
Public Quasi Public PC, Planned
Community
Public Quasi Public Olympic Training
Center
2. Project Description
The proposed project includes amendments to the City's General Plan, the EastLake III General
Development Plan, EastLake III Sectional Planning Area Plan and associated regulatory
documents, and the EastLake III Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use
Districts Map. The proposed amendments are more specifically described below:
General Plan
Change 18.4 acres from Commercial Visitor to Residential High (18-27 DulAc) (see Figure 4a),
and corresponding Land Use Table 5-6 and 5-7 to reflect the proposed amendment.
EastLake III General Development Plan (GDP)
Change 18.4 acres from Tourist Commercial to Residential High (18-27+ DulAc), consistent
with the proposed General Plan (see Figure 4b).
EastLake III GDP - Text Amendments
The proposed amendments reflect the change in land use for the 18.4 acres of the EastLake III
GDP (see Attachment 5, General Development Plan tab).
EastLake III Sectional Planning Area Plan (SPA) - Site Utilization Plan
Change the Site Utilization Plan designation of 18.4 acres from Commercial-Tourist (C-2) to
Multi-Family Seniors (VR-13) (see Figure 4c).
EastLake nn SPA - Text Amendments
The proposed amendments reflect the change in land use for the 18.4 acres of the EastLake III
SPA (see Attachment 5, SPA Plan tab).
EastLake III Planned District Regulations - Land Use Districts Map
Change 18.4 acres from Tourist Commercial (CT) to Residential Multi-Family Seniors (RMS)
(see Figure 4d).
EastLake III Planned District Regulations - Text Amendments
In addition to various minor clean-up type amendments, the project includes the following text
amendments:
7-5
Page 6, Item No.:
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
7
Section II Residential Districts:
Pages 11.3-3, 3-10, 3-12, 3-13, 3-18, 3-20, 3-25: Provide the definition for the introduction of a
"RMS" land use district. The new RMS land use district identifies the type and size of uses
allowed within the "Residential Multi-Family Seniors" district, distinct from the other (RM)
Residential Multi-Family land use districts. The parking provision proposes allowance for
reduction in guest parking by 0.2 spaces per unit for I and 3 bedrooms only. The proposed
building height is 50'.
Section 11.3.4 Commercial Districts:
Pages 11.3-27 through 3-33 proposes deletion of the Tourist Commercial description and
provisions.
Section II.3.12.3 Scenic Highwav Setback Encroachments:
Page II.3-86 proposes allowance for encroachment into the Olympic Parkway Scenic Highway
Setback (from curb), currently at 75' based on review and approval of a "Corridor Plan" by the
Design Review Committee (see Attachment 5, PC District Regulations tab).
EastLake IIII Sectional Planning Area (SP A) Plan - Associated Regulatorv Documents
The SPA Plan associated regulatory documents contains Design Guidelines, Public Facilities
Financing Plan (PFFP), Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP), Water Conservation Plan
(WCP), and Affordable Housing Program (see Attachment 5, applicable tab).
ANALYSIS:
The site is zoned (Visitor/Tourist Commercial) and was designed to support the visitor activities
resulting from the development of the Olympic Training Center (aTe). The original studies for
the OTC concluded that based on the projected number of visitors the OTC would be the number
three tourist attraction in San Diego County. As of today, some 10 years after the opening of the
OTC, the number of visitors has been far less than what was anticipated. With the visitor count
below expectations, the development of the site is not feasible for visitor/tourist commercial use.
Since the master planning of this property, several other locations in Eastern Chula Vista have
been planned for commercial uses that could include resort/hotel. These locations, Otay Ranch
Village 13 and the Eastern Urban Center (EUe), both less than 2.5 miles to the east and the west,
respectively from the site, are considered better suited for resort/hotel development based on
their location on major thoroughfares and surrounding land uses.
After determining that the site is no longer suitable for Visitor/Tourist Commercial use, and after
considering several options, it was concluded by The EastLake Company that an active adult
(senior housing) high-density residential development as proposed by Pulte Homes was the best
use for the site. Senior market rate housing has not been provided in Eastern Chula Vista and
will expand the diversity of product types within the community. Additionally, the increase of
7-6
..- ,---~
-7
Page 7, Item No.: I
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
active adult seniors (retirement age) could provide volunteer infusion with the adjacent OTC,
nearby schools, and other private and public facilities.
The applicant states that the critical mass needed for a viable first class active adult community is
500 units. This number of units allows for the appropriate lifestyle activities and affordability of
the HOA dues structure to support the extensive amenity package (including full time staff).
Although a little less than the optimum 500 units, the 494-unit project was determined by Pulte
Homes to be a viable use for this site. .
The subject site was chosen by the applicant because of its location at the edge of the EastLake
III community and overlooking Lower Otay Lake, and its proximity to other EastLake III uses
such as the OTC, future retail commercial center (aka 'restaurant row')to the north of the OTC,
Mountain Hawk community park, and the City of Chula Vista trail system. Market studies and
focus groups conducted by Pulte Homes show a high demand for an active adult seniors project
of this type in Eastern Chula Vista.
General Plan Amendment
The proposed amendment to the General Plan consists of changing 18.4 acres from Commercial
Visitor to Residential High (18-27 DulAc) to accommodate the new EastLake Senior Project
proposed by The EastLake Company, LLC and Pulte Homes.
The site is situated at the most easterly edge of Chula Vista overlooking the Lower.Otay Lake.
Its prime location above Lower Otay Lakes serves as a gateway into Chula Vista from the east.
The southerly and westerly portions of the site are adjacent to the Olympic Training Center,
proximity to the 12-acre Retail Commercial site to the north (aka 'Restaurant Row'), Mountain
Hawk Community park to the northeast and Lower Otay Lake to the east are the basis to support
the requested amendment. The proposed land use change will provide an additional 494 units of
active adult seniors housing that is not currently available within the EastLake Community.
The proposed land use change would result in a loss of 18 acres of Commercial Visitor and an
increase of 18 acres in Residential High (18-27 DulAc). The 18 acres loss would result in a 24%
reduction of Commercial Visitor acreage within the City of Chula Vista, and a 4% increase in the
Residential High land use category.
The 18 acres loss of Commercial Visitor from the General Plan would eliminate the hotel/resort
type of development that could be constructed at the site under the adopted General Plan.
However, hotel/resort type land uses can be developed under certain zones such as the Central
Business (CB), Commercial Visitor (CV), Commercial Thoroughfare (CT), which mayor may
not be designated as a Commercial Visitor land use under the General Plan. Hotel uses are
allowed within the EastLake Business Center (BC) zone (which is Light Industrial General Plan
land use designation). Thus, the proposed 18 acres Commercial Visitor reduction in the General
Plan would not necessarily equate to the loss of hotel development opportunities within the City.
7-7
Page 8, Item No.:
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
1
EastLake III General Development Plan Amendment
The proposed amendment to the General Development Plan consists of changing 18.4 acres from
Tourist Commercial to Residential High (18-27+ DulAc), consistent with the General Plan
amendment request. As mentioned above, the orientation and location of the 19.6-acre site
allows synergistic development with the adjacent OTC, commercial retail, parks and surrounding
residential neighborhoods within EastLake III. The project will allow for an age restricted active
adult community to provide additional housing for EastLake residents and the city as a whole.
EastLake III SPA Plan Amendment
The EastLake Tourist Commercial site, was intended to serve the Olympic Training Center
within the SPA and the EastLake Planned Community as a whole. The deletion of the Tourist
Commercial Resort Hotel use, and the addition of 494 residential units would generate over
1,000 residents, and enhance the overall OTC and future 12-acre Retail Commercial center. An
active adult seniors land use is compatible with the OTC and future commercial development to
the north of the OTC.
The amendment to the SPA defines the development parameters, including the implementation
of the proposed GDP land use designation, urban design criteria, circulation, public facilities,
Water Conservation Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan and other necessary components to
ensure the proper integration of the EastLake Senior Project into the existing surrounding
residential, commercial and public-quasi public uses.
The following paragraphs describe in more detail the proposed amendments to the EastLake III
SPA plan.
Land Use:
Under the adopted EastLake III General Development Plan, the 18.4-acre subject site is
designated as TC, Tourist Commercial, which would allow for a Resort Hotel to compliment the
adjacent Olympic Training Center. The proposed land use change of 18.4 acres from TC, Tourist
Commercial to RH, Residential High (18-27+ DulAc) is intended to provide additional specialty
residential that currently does not exist, tied together by common urban design features and
urban design guidelines. The land uses have been crafted to provide independent development
. parameters and guidelines to ensure quality development and compatibility within the EastLake
III community.
Circulation:
The EastLake Senior Project will be served by Olympic Parkway, a Four-Lane Major Arterial
Road (see Attachment 5, SPA Plan tab).
Regional access will be provided primarily by I-80S located approximately 7 miles to the west,
and and in early 2007, by SR-125, approximately 2 miles to the west. The timing for installation
7-8
Page 9, Item No.:
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
7
of required improvements and financing mechanisms are discussed in the EastLake III Senior
Project Supplemental Public Facilities Finance Plan (PFFP) (see Figure 7).
Street improvements required to serve the project are identified in the PFFP. These
improvements include:
. Westbound Olympic Parkway: One left-turn lane (with 100 feet of storage) and two
through lanes;
. Northbound Olympic Parkway: One left-turn lane and one right-turn lane (with a storage
length of75 feet in each)
. Eastbound Olympic Parkway: One shared through/right lane and one through lane;
. Relocate the median opening on Olympic Parkway, further west from its current location
to accommodate the proposed project driveway as shown in Figure 11-2; and
. Install a "No U Turn" sign for eastbound traffic on Olympic Parkway at the Olympic
Parkway/Wueste Road intersection.
EastLake III Planned Community District Regulations Amendments
The EastLake III Planned Community District (PC) Regulations function as the zoning
regulations for the project. The PC District Regulations provide standards and regulations to
guide the development of the project. These regulations are applied in conjunction with the
EastLake III Design Guidelines to ensure the uses within the project are compatible and well
designed.
The EastLake III Planned Community District Regulations were adopted in 200 I. This
amendment (consisting of the introduction of a new land use district 'RMS') only affects the
subject 18.4 acres changing from commercial uses to residential.
The amendment consists of eliminating the description, provisions and development regulations
associated with the Tourist Commercial (TC) land use district; and adding a new description,
provisions and development regulations for the Residential Multi-Family (RMS) land use district
as listed on page 6 of this staff report. The remaining provisions of the EastLake III Planned
Community District Regulations remain unchanged.
EastLake III SPA Amendments - Associated Regulatorv Documents
Desif!n Guidelines:
The EastLake III Design Guidelines have been updated to include the conceptual design for the
EastLake Senior Proj ect, to ensure that the physical appearance will compliment the type of
other developments within the EastLake III planned community. The EastLake III Design
Guidelines stipulate design parameters that pertain to site planning, landscape architecture,
architecture and signage for the 19.6-acre subject site.
The Design Guidelines contain illustrations and guidelines to implement the design ideas
presented therein. Some of the urban design guidelines include land use diversity, site
7-9
Page 10, Item No.: 7
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
development character and conceptual building/parking/open space relationships within the
project. Because of the importance of unifying themes and designs over an extended period of
time until full build out, the Design Guidelines will be utilized to ensure overall consistency
while allowing for flexibility on the part of the Design Review Committee at the detailed site
plan level.
EastLake III Public Facilities Finance Plan:
.
The proposed Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) has been prepared by City consultants
based on water, sewer, traffic, drainage, biology and other technical studies. As required by the
City's Growth Management Ordinance, the proposed amendment to the EastLake III PFFP
analyzes the impact on public facilities and services and identifies the required public facilities
and services needed to serve the 18.4-acre portion of the 19.6-acre EastLake Senior Project
parcel ("Project") to maintain consistency with the City's Quality of Life Threshold Standards.
The PFFP describes in detail the cost, financing mechanism and timing for constructing public
facilities.
The public facilities needed to serve the project will be guaranteed by placing conditions of
approval on the tentative parcel map, payment of Development Impact Fees (DIF) at the building
permit stage, and/or utilizing Community Facilities Districts to fmance or maintain public
facilities. The PFFP consist the analysis of transportation, drainage, water, sewer, fire, schools,
libraries, parks, and fiscal impacts of the project, and are discussed as follows:
.
. Transportation
Based on the Traffic Impact Analysis prepared by the City's traffic consultant, Linscott, Law &
Greenspan (LL&G), dated August 16,2005, the adopted Tourist Commercial site is anticipated
to generate a total of 3,660 daily project trips with llO trips during the AM peak hour (66
inbound / 44 outbound) and 330 trips during the PM peak hour (165 inbound / 165 outbound).
However, the proposed senior's residential community would generate 1,976 daily project trips
(LL&G, August 16, 2006) with 40 inbound /59 outbound trips during the AM peak hour and 83
inbound / 55 outbound trips during the PM peak hour. Thus the proposed senior's project would
generate 1,680 less ADT with II fewer trips during the AM peak hour and 192 fewer trips
during the PM peak hour than projected for the adopted land use.
.
The City's Traffic Threshold Standard specifies that a Level of Service (LOS) of C or better, as
measured by average travel speeds on the arterial roads, shall be maintained with the exception
that during peak hours LOS D can occur for no more than two hours of the day or LOS ElF for
one hour. The LL&G report indicates that all key signalized intersections will continue to
operate at LOS D or better conditions. The northbound left-turn movement at the unsignalized
Olympic Parkway/Project driveway intersection is calculated to operate at LOS F during the
PM peak hour, which is identified as a direct impact of the proposed project. This direct
impact is mitigated by the installation of a signal and street improvements at the project
driveway, which would improve the intersection operation to LOS A in the AM and PM peak
hours. Street improvements include upgrading the intersection geometry per the Threshold
Compliance and Requirements of the PFFP and City Conditions of Approval. In addition, the
7-10
Page 11, Item No.:
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
7
LL&G report indicates that all key road segment operations will operate at LOS A or better at
buildout except the segment between East Palomar Street and Eastlake Parkway, which is
calculated to operate at an acceptable LOS D.
The EastLake III Seniors Project will be conditioned to pay Transportation DIF fees and Traffic
Signal Fees at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued for the project.
With the construction of the project level street improvements and with the payment of TDIF
and traffic signal fees listed above, the City's Quality of Life Threshold Standards will be
maintained at a Level of Service C or better at all key study intersections and street segments,
and potential direct traffic impacts will be mitigated to below significance.
,
. Drainage
The 18.4-acre site lies within the Otay Lakes Drainage Basin. However, runoff from the site is
diverted into the Salt Creek Basin to prevent impacts to the Lower Otay Reservoir. Presently,
runoff from the site is discharged into a 42-inch pipe and into the city's storm water conveyance
system in Olympic Parkway, which ultimately discharges into Salt Creek.
The project will be conditioned to provide for the conveyance of storm water flows in
accordance with City standards, policies and requirements. The Developer will design, install
and maintain on-site erosion protection. All permanent or temporary erosion control will be
designed to City standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Further, the project shall
comply with all Federal, State and Local storm water runoff and discharge regulations.
. Water
The Otay Water District will provide water service for EastLake III Seniors Project. The Otay
Water District has facilities in the vicinity of the project that can provide water service. It has
been determined by the OWD that the project will not receive recycled water for landscaping
since it is in an area that drains into the adjacent Lower Otay Reservoir. Land that drains into the
Upper or Lower Otay Reservoir is restricted from using recycled water for landscape irrigation to
avoid the potential for contamination of drinking water.
The total projected potable water demand for the EastLake III Seniors Project is approximately
148,200 gallons per day (gpd). The fire flow is 3,750 gallons per minute (gpm), which meets the
City's requirements. There is adequate off-site storage capacity to meet both potable water and
fire flow demands.
. Sewer
Sewer service to the project site is provided by the City of Chula Vista. The EastLake III
Seniors Project is located in the Salt Creek drainage basin. The project will connect to the
existing public 8 and I2-inch gravity sewer mains located north of Olympic Parkway in the
approved Neighborhood C-I site of the EastLake SPA Plan. This sewer collects flows generated
from the VR-9, VR-IO, VR-II and C-I sites and conveys the flows to the IS-inch diameter main
7-11
Page 12, Item No.:
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
7
in Olympic Parkway. The 15-inch main connects to the 18-inch Salt Creek Interceptor. The
capacity of these facilities to serve the proposed project has been assessed in the Final EastLake
Peninsula off-site Sewer Capacity Analysis Study dated November 8, 2005, by PBS&J.
Projected wastewater flows from the Seniors Project will ultimately discharge into the Salt Creek
Interceptor. Based upon the approved Tentative Map, the adopted land use for the site was
designated as a HotellResort. The average daily sewage flow was estimated to be 45,500 gpd or
172 equivalent dwelling units (EDU) for the adopted land use. The Seniors Project will result in
an increase in average flow of 53,300 gpd or 201 EDUs to the Salt Creek Interceptor.
The City's current contracted capacity rights with the METRO are expected to be exceeded in
about five years. However, with an allocation from the Southbay Treatment Plant, additional
capacity will be available. For longer term capacity needs, the new City of Chula Vista Sewer
Master Plan will form the basis for reevaluating the sewer capacity fee so that there is sufficient
funding to acquire the additional capacity rights. Negotiations between the City of Chula Vista
and the City of San Diego to acquire those rights are ongoing.
,
. Fire
Development of the project will cumulatively add to the need for fire service in the area.
Demographics of the project are anticipated to increase Fire Department responses. Fire Station
#8, located at 975 Lane Avenue in EastLake Business Center I would be the primary station to
serve the project. In the future, Fire Station #8 is proposed to be reconstructed in EastLake
Woods.
. Schools
The proposed project will not generate an increase in family dwelling units or school age
population in the project area. Therefore, the development will not result in a need for new
schools. However, the applicant will have to pay school fees at the rate in effect at the time
building permits are issued.
. Libraries
The proposed EastLake III Seniors Project will generate an estimated demand of 494 square feet
of additional library space. By 2009, the existing plus new library space will provide
approximately 132,000 square feet of space for the City of Chula Vista. The total forecasted city
projects including the EastLake III Seniors SPA project totals a demand of approximately
127,050 square feet by 2009. This results in an excess supply of 4950 square feet. No mitigation
is required other than the payment of the Public Facilities DIF for library facilities at the rate in
effect at the time building permits are issued.
. Parks
The project is served by the newly constructed Mountain Hawk community park, located
approximately v.-quarter mile northeast. The proj ect is responsible for both the park development
7-12
..\
...,
Page 13, Item No.: !
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
component and the acquisition of PAD fees. The project parkland requirement is 21.51 acres
based on CVMC 17.10 (Table F .6) in effect at the time the EastLake III SPA was approved in
2002. The SPA Plan Amendment provides 18.5 net acres of parkland. Any shortfall in parkland
acreage dedication shall result in payment of the park acquisition component of the Park
Acquisition and Development (PAD Fee). Given the lack of available acreage that could be
acquired to serve the development, according to city staff, the developer has negotiated a waiver
of the acquisition component of the PAD Fee in exchange for a payment of $2,666,260, which
can be utilized to fund construction of park and public facilities serving the EastLake Community.
Any excess funds that remain once these facilities are complete can by utilized on other park or
public facilities serving the Eastern Territories of Chula Vista. The Developer will pay the
development compoAent of the PAD Fee as required by the City. The estimated development
component of the PAD Fee is $1,384,682 (see Table F.7). Combined, the estimated fee for both
components of the PAD Fee is $4,050,942.
Water Conservation Plan:
The City's Growth Management Ordinance requires the preparation of a Water Conservation
Plan (WCP) for all major projects in accordance with the City's Water Conservation Plan
Guidelines. The total water demand projected for the EastLake Senior Project is 0.148 mgd
(million gallons per day). Numerous features have been included in the proposed project to
minimize the use of water during the construction and operation of the project. The estimated
potable water savings with conservation measures is 0.014 MGD or 9%.
The water conservation measures incorporated into the project as required by the City's WCP
Guidelines include hot water pipe insulation, pressure reducing valves, water-efficient
dishwashers, dual flush toilets and water-efficient landscaping. Additional water conservation
measures consist of State mandated fixtures and potential irrigation of some landscaping with
recycled water.
The EastLake Senior Project Water Conservation Plan demonstrates the value of incorporating
water conservation measures in buildings and irrigation systems for residential development.
The implementation of these measures will contribute to preserving a valuable natural resource.
Air Oualitv Improvement Plan (AOIP):
An Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) was prepared for the project in accordance with the
City's Growth Management Ordinance and the Growth Management Program. Air Quality
Improvement Plans must be prepared for all residential projects containing 50 dwelling units or
more.
Consistent with the Chula Vista's AQIP Guidelines, the developer of the project has committed
to participation in the GreenStar Building Efficiency Program. The GreenStar Program requires
the majority (50% or greater) of the structures 'be designed to exceed the California 2001 Title
24, Part 6, Energy Efficiency Standards (CA 9110, effective 6/1/01) Title 24 by 15%.
Implementation of these construction methods will result in energy efficient buildings as well as
contributing to an improvement in air quality.
7-13
Page 14, Item No.:
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
7
Affordable Housing Plan:
The EastLake Company has fulfilled its obligation for Low and Moderate housing in accordance
with the current EastLake III Affordable Housing Program. However, the additional 494 units
proposed by the EastLake Senior Project would require an additional 25 Low Income unit
requirement (see Attachment 5, Affordable Housing Plan). The Supplemental Affordable
Housing Program (Phase IV) outlines the proposal as follows:
. I 25 units located on the Olympic Training Center;
. 25 units outside of East Lake Community; or
. In Lieu Fee to the City's Community Development Housing Sectio!)..
The City's Community Development Department has reviewed the proposed Supplemental
Affordable Housing Program and recommends approval of EastLake's proposal as outlined. The
applicant will be required to provide the 25 Low Income units (whether constructed or in-lieu
fee) prior to the issuance of building permit for the 494 th unit. This will ensure that the 25 Low
Income units will be provided to meet the requirement of the 494-unit Senior Project.
CONCLUSION:
For the reasons mentioned above, staff recommends approval of the attached Resolution GPA
05-02/PCM 05-07 project subject to the conditions listed in the attached draft City Council
Resolution.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The fiscal analysis identifies the estimated fiscal impact that the proposed amendment from
Tourist Commercial to High Density Residential will have on the City of Chula Vista operation
and maintenance budgets. This analysis is an amendment to the previous EastLake III SPA Plan
adopted on July 17, 2001. The amended fiscal analysis includes the 18.4 acre EastLake Seniors
project.
The fiscal analysis presents future revenues and expenditures in current (2005) dollars. Also,
revenues and expenditures are presented annually, reflecting a conservatively projected
development absorption schedule based on information provided by the city and the developer.
This approach identifies annual project fiscal surpluses and deficits and represents a more
realistic approach when compared to assumed instant build-out.
The fiscal revenues to the City associated with Eastlake III, for the proposed Seniors project,
range from $352,700 in the first year of development to $2,687,600 at build-out. Fiscal
expenditures by the City range from $273,000 in year one to $2,314,900 at build-out. The net
fiscal impact to the City from Eastlake III is positive in year one ($79,700) and remains so
throughout. At build-out (estimated 2007) the net fiscal impact to the City from EastLake III is
estimated to result in a surplus to the City of $372,700.
7-14
.~
Page
15, Item No.:
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
7
Attachments
1. Planning Commission Resolution
2. Figures
3. EastLake 1II GDP/SPA Amendments-Document (previously transmitted under separate cover)
4. Disclosure Statement
J:\Planning\StanD\Eastlake\Peninsula Adult Retirement\Reports & Resos\PCM 05~07 EL Senior Project CC Agmda June 20, 06.doc
7-15
Olympic
Training
Center
Open Space (not a
part of the project).
[J Project Location
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C9 APPLICAIre Eastlake Company GENERAL PLAN & EASTLAKE III AMENDMENTS
PROJECT Olympic Parkway & Request Pl1Jposing to amend the General Plan and Eas1!ake III GDP, SPA &
ADDRESS: Wueste Road PC d'lShict regulations to convert 18.4 acres sita of Commen:ial- Tourist to High
SCALE: FILE NUMBER: Oensity Residential for an active seniors housing pl1Jject.
NORTH No Scale GPA-OS-{)2 & PCM-{)5-07 Related Cases: PC~7, 15-05-007, DRc-05-24
J :\planning\carlas\focators\gpa0502.cdr 06.02.06
7-16
RESOLUTION NO. GPA-05-02/PCM-05-07
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING TIIAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE Al\.1ENDMENTS TO
THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN, EASTLAKE III GENERAL DEVELOPMENT
PLAN, EASTLAKE III PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT REGULATIONS
AND LAND USE DISTRICTS MAP, AND THE EASTLAKE III SECTIONAL
PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN AND ASSOCIATED REGULATORY
DOCUMENTS FOR 18.4 ACRES (AKA EASTLAKE III SENIOR HOUSING
PROJECT) AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OLYMPIC P ARKW A Y AND
WUESTE ROAD.
WHEREAS, on October 18, 2004, a duly verified application was filed with the City of
Chula Vista Planning and Building Department by The EastLake Company, LLC ("Developer"),
requesting approval of amendments to the City's General Plan, EastLake III General Development
Plan, EastLake III Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use Districts Map, and the
EastLake III Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan and associated regulatory documents, including
design guidelines, Public Facilities Finance Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water
Conservation Plan for the 18.4 acres located at the southwest comer of Olympic Parkway and
Wueste Road ("Project); and,
WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject of this Resolution is diagrammatically
represented in Exhibit A and hereto incorporated herein by this Resolution, and commonly known as
EastLake Seniors Project, and for the purpose of general description herein consist of18.4 acres at the
southwest comer of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road intersection within the EastLake III Planned
Community ("Project Site"); and,
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed proj ect for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has determined that there is
substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the City ofChula Vista, that the project may
have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
prepared a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR #05-02; SCH #2005091047).
Certification of the Subsequent EIR (EIR #05-02) for this project will be considered by the Planning
Commission under separate item; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission finds that the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact
Report (FSEIR-05-02) and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared in
accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), and the
Environmental Review Procedures of the City ofChula Vista; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission having received certain evidence on June 14,2006, as
set forth in the record of its proceedings herein by reference as is set forth in full, made certain
findings, as set forth in their recommending Resolution GP A-05-02/PCM-05-07 herein, and
recommended that the City Council approve the Proj ect based on certain terms and conditions; and,
ATTACHMENT 1
7-17
WHEREAS, the Director of Planning aDd Building set the time aDd place for a hearing on the
Project, aDd notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the city and the mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the
exterior boundaries of the property, at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time aDd place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m., June
14,2006 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission aDd said
hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
recommends that the City Council adopt the attached Draft City Council Resolution and OrdinaDce
approving the Proj ect in accordaDce with the findings aDd subject to the conditions contained therein.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy oitms resolution be traDsrnitted to the City
Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 14th day of June, 2006, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTAIN:
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
Vicki Madrid, Chairperson
J:IPlanning'StanDlEastlakcWillage WalklRoports & Resos1PCM-04-14 PCRESO.doc
7-18
General Plan Amendment
-.
~~
~~
~
19.6 ac Project Site.
Change 18.4 ac from Commercial
- Visitor to Residential- High
1.2 acre Open Space to remain
un~
Lower
Otay
Reservoir
,/
~\I~
= I
~
Figure 4a
~ fASTLAKE III
A planned community by The EastLake Company
Cinti Lend Planning
---",,-- m
i'\.Ji I.....J
4+06
7-19
Attachment 2
General
Development
Plan
Adopted
Prooosed
land Use
RESIDENTIAL
I~~- 2138.2 2.2 650
LM Low Medium (3-6 dulse) 154.5 5.2 799
M MedIum (6.11 dulse) 73 10,0 73
MH Med-High (11-18 dUlae} 15.9 15.0 L
H High (18-27+ dulae) .JQ,l-+2:'5-
Sub-total Residential .",.. +.I-
NON-RESIDENTIAL ~ 5JI.
CR Camm. Retail 12.2
~ O....,,,.,.T.......i!t HU
P Pa'" 15.2
PQ publiclauas~Public 247.1
OS Open Space 135.7
Circulation ~
Subtotal Non-ResideJJtJal --~
TOTAL 942.3 -M- ""'*
U ~
(L).. Undertylng Low Density altemative!..and Use.
Refer to 1m for altemativ&land vse pllMsions..
.. E4STLAKE III
A planned comniUni1:y by The EastLake Company
Project
Site
Change 18.4 acfrOm
Commercial- Tourist to
Residential-High
Lower Otay ReseNOir
7-20
C1nff land Planning
fi:J9~
. - .. .- ~
~
Figure 4b
Site Utilization Plan
Adopted
Proposed
RESlDeN'OAL
......
I=rt LMdUs.
WR.-1 $ingleF.:amiIy
WM __
vow _._
..... ......F_
WA.6 SiJI:OI.F~
.n l1li SUb-t'Obll (Woadl.Ets$l1
I WJW I S.....F....,.
~ ...F_
RuNHtAI ~b-to..1 ~ WHO
Rtitkiel'ltiat SUb-totll twOOU):
......
.....
.....
.....
VIW
",...
VR-t
_1
\lM-
VR"
VR40
ViM1
VR.12
II-R.1
...F_
......F_
......F_
...F....,.
...F....,.
".F_
......F_
""""F_
.._-"
~wzt;.FamJly
:h1um.F:ilttMly
:td~y
-tdullf.Familv Seniors
Re~'i'l11aI Sub-tobtl {VistaS):
$ubototlt bsid.n"tYJ
NO~JlSscoemA1.
'C-1 Ccmme1doJ-RntaIt
W ~v T~III 'klill'if(
p..1 :PubIcPatk
P-2 Prlwle RilacatIGn
PO-1 ElltmetJtarySchoof
a ".H,,"S."""
PQ..3 :FIre SItUOn
CPFo'1 Comm.. PuIposIJ Fee.
os .Open..,...,.
0S4 0SISdI00I Po.....
hi*,_
SUb40taI Non-Ro.Ilknthd
rJ.2
....
13.5
1.7
t....3
"".S
1.1
.29
134~
1.'
au
oeM
24U
-411.1f;~ ~
m.1 U UII
AtfA'STLAI<E' 'III
.AP!~m~c:lc;O!I'!1fi1!1nltyt!Y ~.t;M~I\,:gqm~!'IY
PROJECT TOTAL
OSJ 1.0 ...
..." 1.7 59
.... U 17
41U 3.0 ...
2U 2,4 71
21$,2 1.g 410
IJ\I 24.7 6.5 135
IJ\I 1&3 8.7 122
43.0 .0 257
..... ... <<It
L 22.8 2.5 58
L 22.3 3.0 ..
L 383 3.1 118
IJ\I 2M 3~5 82
IJ\I 11,9 3.1 1St
LhI 26.S ".B .26
IJ\I 'US.t 5;5 '" LoIo,y O!ay
LhI 25.4 8.& ...
hi 7.3 1-0.0 73 RoIi1NQir
MH 7.7 ,... 1111
II" 8.2 1:&.:0 123
H 12.3 2.... 300
J:I 1BA m 49.1
..... Go> ......
W.A 7.1 1Mf
!!!\! M oW!
-- ... ~
CR
~
P
L
PO
PO
PO
PO
Os
OS
dr
7-21
Cinll!.<:lOCl PIOnI')1ng
1'1. Tim
- - u. 1L.-...J
51301OO~
Figu re 4c
~
i
.
Land Use Districts
Proposed
Stl'iI(Cout '" Text Deleted
Underline'" Text Added
Symbol ! [Definition
Rl1
Rl2
Rl3& Rl4
RE1
RE2 & RE3
RS1
RS-1a
RS2
RP1
RP2
RC
RM
RMS
VC
...;:G-
PQ
OS/P
OS
CPF
OS-1
SFD min. lot size 20;000 sf
SFD min. lot size 13,500 sf
SFD min. lot size 10,000 sf
SFD min. lot size 8,000 sf
SFD min. lot size 7,000 sf
SFD min. lot size 6,000 sf
SFD min. lot size 5,000-6,000 sf
SFD min. lot size 5,000 sf
SFD min. lot size 4,.200 sf
SFD min. lot size 3,150 sf
SFiMulti-Fam. from 8-15 dulac
MuIti-FaITlBty > 15 dulac
Multi-familv Seniors> 15 dulae
ViKage Commercial
TSYFietCsM'\fAsrelal
Public and Quasi-PlIblle Uses
Open SpacelPar1< & Ree.
Open Space - Passive
Community Purpose Facil~s
Open Space (PoIsnOal &:11001 Parl<ing)
Lower Olay
Re.erVo/r
Notes:
1~ R~rto the' Planned Cotmtunity LRsfrtcI, ReQUIaijOQa tIm for
<<11'T1p1ebMieflniUQn$ 'Snd requirements.
2, Bound8lies of Land Ute Di-riicts ,ate subject to ~cr adjustment
in 1t1e subdrmlon proceH;without formal aNWtdment to this. exhibit.
Project Location
.d EASTLAKE III
A p.lanned Qommunity by The Eastlake Company
7-22
Cinft Land Planning
r~~T'~L(1J
3/31106
Figure 4d
('Si ..
P I ann
n g
&
Building
Planning Division I
Department
Development Processing
Disclosure Statement
cm Of
(HUlA VISfA
Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary action by the Council,
Planning Commission and all other official bodies of the City, a statement of disclosure of certain ownership or financial
interests, payments, or campaign contributions for a City of Chula Vista election must be filed. The following information
must be disclosed:
1. list the names of all persons having a financial Interest in the property that is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applican~ contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
The EastLake Company, LLC
Pulte Homes
2. If any person' identified pursuant to (1) sbove is a corporation or psrtnership, list the names of sll individuals with
a $2000 investment In the business (corporation/partnership) entity.
Numerous - Available upon request
3. If any person' Identified pursuant to (1) above is a non-profit organization or trust, list the names of any person
serving es director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust.
4. Please identify every person, including any sgents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors you hsve
assigned to represent you before the City in this mstter.
Bm Ostrem
Sohail Bokhari
William Hezmalhalch
Gary Cinn
5. Has any person' associsted with this contract had any financisl deslings with an officisl" of the City of Chuls
Vists as it relstes to this contrsct within the psst 12 months. Yes_ No-L
If Yes, brieRy describe the nsture of the financisl interest the officisl" msY hsve in this contract.
6. Hsve you msde s contribution of more thsn $250 within the psst twelve (12) months to s current member of the
Chula Vists City Council? No ~ Yes _If yes, which Council member?
ATTACHMENT 4
7-23
.,...,t:. 1:....."....1-. A.........,...
rh"r... \/1...+.... I r...li~^.....1..
Q1Q1r\
I~, Q\ ..01 1:1 n,
,
~'i.'.'..,.:.,<
~.'~"
i<f;\',:\.
City Of Chula Vista
Disclosure Statement - Page 2
7. Have you provided more than $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official"" of the City of Chula Vista in the
past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a source of income, money to retire a Jegai debt, gift, ioan, etc.)
Yes_ No...1L
If Yes, which official*" and what was the nature of item provided?
Date: 10/13/04
y:::- ~ 0.Jrp
Signature of Contractor/Applicant
Bill Ostrem, President
The EastLake Company, LLC
Print or type name of Contractor/Applicant
"
Person is defined as: any individual, firm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, sociai club, fraternal
organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any ether county, city, municipality, district, or other
political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a unit.
..
Official includes, but is not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner, Member of a board,
commission, or committee of the City, empioyee, or staff members.
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista 17C~~fornla
91910
(619) 691-5101
RESOLUTION
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CIillLA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE CITY'S GENERAL PLAN,
EASTLAKE ill GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN, AND THE EASTLAKE
ill SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN AND ASSOCIATED
REGULATORY DOCUMENTS FOR 18.4 ACRES (AKA EASTLAKE ill
SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT) AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF
OLYMPIC P ARKW A Y AND WUESTE ROAD.
I RECITALS
A. Proj ect Site
WHEREAS, the area of land which are the subject of this Resolution are diagranunatically
represented in Exhibit A and hereto incorporated herein by this Resolution, and commonly
known as EastLake Seniors Project, and for the purpose of general description herein
consist of 18.4 acres at the southwest corner of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road within
the EastLake ill Planned Community ("Project Site"); and,
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS, on October 18, 2004, a duly verified application was filed with the City of
Chula Vista Planning and Building Department by The EastLake Company, LLC
("Developer"), requesting approval of amendments to the City's General Plan, EastLake
ill General Development plan, EastLake ill Planned Community District Regulations and
Land Use Districts Map, and the EastLake ill Sectional Planning Area (SPA) plan and
associated regulatory documents, including design guidelines, Public Facilities Finance
Plan, Air Quality Improvement plan and Water Conservation Plan for the 18.4 acres
located at the southwest corner of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road ("Project); and,
C. Prior Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS, development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of various
entitlements and agreements, including: 1) a General Plan Amendment, General
Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area Plan and associated Design Guidelines,
Public Facilities Financing Plan, Water Conservation Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan
and Comprehensive Affordable Housing Plan previously approved by City Council
Resolution No. 2002-220 on July 17, 2001; and 2) Planned Community District Regulations
and Land Use Districts Map approved by City Council Ordinance No. 2839 on July 24,
2001, and amended by City Council Ordinance No. 2963 on May 18, 2004; and,
D. Planning Commission Record of Application
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project on
7-25
June 14,2006 and voted
the Project; and,
to forward a recommendation to the City Council on
WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduce before the Planning Commission at
the public hearing on this project held on June 14, 2006 and the minutes and resolution
resulting there ftom, are hereby incorporated into the record of these proceedings; and,
E. City Council Record of Application
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project application
and notices of said hearings, together with its purposes given by its publication in a
newspaper of general circulation in the city, and its mailing to property owners within 500
feet of the exterior boundaries of the Project Sites at least ten days prior to the hearing.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby find, determine and
resolve as follows:
n. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act and has determined that there is substantial
evidence, in light of the whole record before the City of Chula Vista, that the proj ect may
have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, the Environmental Review
Coordinator has prepared a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (ElR #05-02; SCH
. #2005091047).
The City Council hereby finds that the Project, as described and analyzed in the Subsequent
Environmental Impact Report (ElR #05-02; SCH #2005091047), would have no new
effects that were not examined in said Final ElR (Guideline 15168).
m. APPROVAL OF GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
The Chula Vista General Plan Land Use Diagram is hereby amended as set forth and
diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A", a copy of which is on file in the office of the
City Clerk, known as Document , to change the land use designation of 18.4 acres at
the southwest corner of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road ftom Commercial Visitor to
Residential High (18-27 DulAc).
7-26
Resolution
Page 3
IV. GENERAL PLAN INTERNAL CONSISTENCY
The City Council hereby finds and determines that the General Plan is internally consistent
and shall remain internally consistent following the amendments thereon in this Resolution.
V. GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN FINDINGS
THE PROPOSED DEVELOPMENT AS DESCRIBED BY THE GENERAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN IS IN CONFORMITY WITH THE PROVISIONS OF THE
CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN, AS AMENDED.
The proposed amendments to the EastLake III General Development Plan reflects the land
use, circulation system and public facilities that are consistent with the City's General Plan
as proposed to be amended.
PLANNED COMMUNITY CAN BE INITIATED BY ESTABLISHMENT OF SPECIFIC
USES OR SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLANS WITHIN TWO YEARS OF THE
ESTABLISHMENT OF THE PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONE.
The proposed amendments to the EastLake III Sectional Planning area Plan only affects the
18.4 acres known as the EastLake Seniors Project, which was a continuation of the
EastLake IIII SPA Plan policies and development regulations, that was adopted by the City
Council on July 23,2002.
IN THE CASE OF PROPOSED RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT, THAT SUCH
DEVELOPMENT WILL CONSTITUTE A RESIDENTIAL ENVIRONMENT OF
SUSTAINED DESIRABLITY AND STABILITY; AND THAT IT WILL BE IN
HARMONY WITH OR PROVIDE COMPATmLE VARIETY TO THE CHARACTER
OF THE SURROUNDING AREA; AND THAT THE SITES PROPOSED FOR PUBLIC
FACILITIES, SUCH AS SCHOOLS, PLAYGROUNDS AND PARKS ARE ADEQUATE
TO SERVE THE ANTICIPATED POPULATION AND APPEAR ACCEPTABLE TO
THE PUBLIC AUTHORITIES HAVING JURISDICTION THEREOF.
The project proposes 494 residential units at high density (nearly 27 DulAc). The proposed
development is the first 'Active Adult Community' age-restricted (55+) community within
the City of Chula Vista, providing additional housing to a segment of retiring-age seniors.
The project density and design are compatible with the surrounding Olympic Training
Center, future retail commercial, multi-family developments, and Mountain Hawk
community park.
VI. ADOPTION OF AMENDED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
In light of the findings above, the amended EastLake III General Development Plan is
hereby as set forth and diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "B", approved and
adopted in the form presented to the City Council and on fIle in the office of the City
Clerk.
7-27
VII. SPA FlNDINGS/ APPROVAL
A.
THE SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLANS (AS AMENDED) ARE IN
CONFORMTIY WITH THE EASTLAKE ill GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AND THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN.
.
The EastLake ill Senior Project SPA Plan amendment reflect the land use,
circulation system and public facilities that are consistent with the EastLake ill
General Development Plan and the City of Chula Vista General Plan as amended
and diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "C", approved and adopted in the
form presented to the City Council and on file in the office of the City Clerk.
B. THE SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLANS WJLL PROMOTE THE
ORDERLY SEQUENTIALIZED DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVOLVED
SECTIONAL PLANNING AREAS.
The development of the Project Site is subject to the requirements, restrictions and
limitations prescribed in the EastLake ill Seniors Project Supplemental Public
Facilities Finance Plan (pFFP) and therefore will be constructed in the order
outlined in the PFFP.
C. THE EASTLAKE SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLANS, AS
AMENDED, WJLL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND USE,
RESIDENTIAL ENJOYMENT, CIRCULATION OR ENVIRONMENTAL
QUALITY.
The Land uses within the EastLake ill Seniors Project SPA plan represent the
circulation system and overall land use intent as previously envisioned in the
EastLake ill General Development Plan. Thus, the amended Supplemental SPA will
not adversely affect the adjacent land uses, residential enjoyment, circulation or
environmental quality of the surrounding uses.
D. IN THE CASE OF PROPOSED INDUSTRIAL AND RESEARCH USES, THAT
SUCH DEVELOPMENT WJLL BE APPROPRIATE IN AREA, LOCATION,
AND OVERALL DESIGN AND DEVELOPMENT STANDARDS ARE SUCH
AS TO CREATE A RESEARCH OR INDUSTRIAL ENVIRONMENT OF
SUSTAINED DESIRABILITY AND STABILITY; AND, THAT SUCH
DEVELOPMENT WJLL MEET PERFORMANCE STANDARDS
ESTABLISHED BY THIS TITLE.
The amendments do not involve areas planned for industrial or research uses.
E. IN THE CASE OF INSTITUTIONAL, RECREATIONAL, AND OTHER
SIMILAR NONRESIDENTIAL USES, THAT SUCH DEVELOPMENT WJLL BE
APPROPRIATE IN AREA, LOCATION AND OVER-ALL PLANNING TO THE
7-28
Resolution
Page 5
PURPOSE PROPOSED, AND
PROTECTED FROM ANY
DEVELOPMENT.
THAT SURROUNDING AREAS ARE
ADVERSE EFFECTS FROM SUCH
The proposed amendments do not involve Institutional, Recreational or similar
uses.
F. THE STREET AND THOROUGHFARES PROPOSED ARE SUITABLE AND
ADEQUATE TO CARRY THE ANTlCIP ATED TRAFFIC THEREON.
The Project Site will be served by Olympic Parkway, a 4-lane prime arterial.
Regional access will be provided primarily by I-80S located approximately 7
miles to the west, and eventually by the future SR-125, approximately 2 miles to
the west. Required improvements installation timing and financing mechanism are
discussed in the EastLake ill Seniors Project Supplemental Public Facilities
Finance Plan. Thus, the streets proposed to serve the Project Site are suitable and
adequate to carry the anticipated traffic thereon.
G. ANY PROPOSED COMMERCIAL DEVELOPMENT CAN BE JUSTIFIED
ECONOMICALLY AT THE LOCATION(S) PROPOSED AND WILL PROVIDE
ADEQUATE COMMERCIAL FACILITIES OF THE TYPES NEEDED AT
SUCH PROPOSED LOCATION(S).
The proposed amendments do not consist of proposing additional commercial
development. A 12-acre retail commercial directly north of the site will serve the
commercial needs of the EastLake ill community.
H. THE AREA SURROUNDING SAID DEVELOPMENT CAN BE PLANNED
AND ZONED IN COORDINATION AND SUBSTANTIAL COMPATIBILITY
WITH SAID DEVELOPMENT .
The proposed amendments are consistent with the previously approved plans and
regulations applicable to surrounding areas, and therefore said development can be
planned and zoned in coordination and substantial compatibility with said
development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that in light of the findings above, the City Council does
hereby approve the EastLake ill Seniors Project SPA amendments and adopts the amended
EastLake ill SPA plan as presented in Exhibit "C" subject to the conditions set forth below:
vrn. SPA PLAN CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
1. Implement the Federal and State mandated conservation measures outlined in the
EastLake ill Seniors Project Water Conservation Plan.
7-29
2. Implement the non-mandated water conservation measures, which include 1) Hot
Water Pipe Insulation 2) Pressure Reducing Valves, and 3) Water Efficient/Drought
Tolerant Landscaping.
3. Prior to approval of building permits for each phase of the project, the applicant shall
demonstrate that air quality control measures outlined in the EastLake ill Seniors
Project Air Quality Improvement Plan pertaining to the design, construction and
operational phases of the proj ect have been incorporated in the proj ect design.
4. Trash collection areas shall be covered, bermed or other approved method as
approved by the City Engineer to prevent runoff of water from the trash collection
areas across paved areas into the storm drainage systems.
5. The applicant shall implement all requirements of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program as stipulated in FSEIR-05-02.
6. Prior to approval of occupancy permit, the applicant shall prepare educational
materials related to MSCP Preserve issues and ensure that the materials are assembled
and distributed to the future residents of the proj ect, and signage be posted to provide
additional awareness of the proximity of the proj ect to the Preserve, to the satisfaction
of the Director of Planning and Building.
7. Prior to approval of the Final Map, submit to the Planning and Building Department
20 copies of the adopted EastLake ill GDP and PC District Regulations, EastLake ill
SPA, and associated regulatory documents in plastic 3-ring binders. Specific
document format, table of contents, binder size, cover and titles shall be as
determined by the Director of Planning and Building.
IX. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS
If any of the forgoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, and any of such conditions fail to be so
implemented and maintained according to the their terms, the City shall have the right to
revoke or modify all approvals herein granted, deny or further condition issuance of shall
future building permits, deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy
issued under the authority of approvals herein granted, instituted and prosecute litigate or
compel their compliance or seek damages for their violations. No vested rights are gained
by Developer or successor in interest by the City approval of this Resolution.
x. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon
enforceability of each and every term provision and condition herein stated; and that in the
event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by the Court of
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, if the city so determines in its
7-30
Resolution
Page 7
sole discretion, this resolution shall be deemed to be revoked and no further in force or in
effect.
Presented By:
Approved as to form by:
James D. Sandoval
Director of Planning and Building
J:\Planning'StanD\Eastlake\Peninsula Adult Retirement\Reports & Resos\PCM..Q5-07CC RESO.doc
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
7-31
California, this 20th day of June, 2006, by the following vote:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NAYS: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Stephen C. Padilla, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan Bigelow, City Clerk
STATE OF CALJFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
CITYOFCHULA VISTA )
I, Susan Bigelow, City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a
regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 20th day of June, 2006.
Executed this 20th day of June, 2006.
Susan Bigelow, City Clerk
7-32
....,
General Plan Amendment
lfj
-.
,~
-~
,
19.6 BC Project Site.
Change 18.4 ac from Commercial
- Visitor to Residential- High
1.2 acre Open Space to remain
un~
Lower
Dlay
Reservoir
~\I~
= I
~
Exhibit A
.. E4STLAKE III
A planned community by The EastLake Company
Cinti Land Planning
___10'''__ m
i""1....fi I... ~
4-6-06
7-33
~,---~
--, \\
-lr--
, ,.....
--=--r-<< '''-,
u
General
Development
Plan
Proposed
----.
-:-.::!;:-"::::"-"'''''
I ~ Ta",.' I ',I
Land Usa "
"
DU. '.
dulilc
I
RESIOEN11Al
I Low (0-3 dU/ac) 298,2 2,2 650
Low Medium (~ dufac) 154.5 5,2 199 -i
10.0 73 \\
Medium (6-11 du/ac) 1.3 :;'.:;(:...
'"
MH Mad-High (11-18 dulacj 15.9 15.0 239 )'1'1
H High (18-27+ dulac) 30.7 25.9 194 !i/
II:
Sub-mtal Residential SO'" 50 ~SS5 J~
NON-RESIDENTIAL J~
I Comm. Retail 12.2 ,.,.'9~I~)
::,:;:..
Parl< 15.2 ...~, "'"',
PQ PubliclQuasl..f'ublic 247.1
OS Open Space 135.7
Circulaton 25.5
SublOtaI Non-Rasidential 435.7
TOTAL 942.3 2.1 2.555
(L) 11 Undertying low Density alternative Land Use.
Refer to le1ll1 for alt,maUve lend use PfO'IlSlOns.
Lower Oray Reservoir
~ fASTLAKE III
A planned cDmmunity by The EastLake CDmpany
7-34
RESIDENTIAL
Woad.
I Parcel I Land Use I~
Number
WR-> Single Family L 65.8 1.. 64
WR-' Single Family L >4.. 1.7 5.
WR-3 SIngle Family L 40.6 1.' 77
...... SIngle Family L 46.. 3-. 13.
W... Single Family L 29.2 ... 71
.s nt 18ub-total (Woods East) 216.2 !.' 41.
~ SlngleFamuy LM 24.7 5.' 135
WR-7 Single Family LM 18.3 ..7 122
e ent I Sub-total (Woods West) 43.. .. 257
Residential Sub-total (Woods): 25'.2 ... &67
VIstas
YR-> Single Family L 22-8 2.5 55
VR.Z Single Family L 22.3 3.. .8
yo.3 Single Family L 36.9 3.1 11.
YR-4 Single Family LM 23.. 3.' 8.
VR-5 Single Family LM 17.9 3.7 87
VR.. Single Family LM 26.5 4.8 12.
VR-7 Single Family LM 18.1 5.5 ..
VR" Single Family LM 25.' ... '68
yo.. SlngleJMulli-Family M 7.3 10.0 73
VR-10 MUld-Family MH 7.7 15.. 11.
YR-11 Mu1~amny MH 82 15.0 123
VR.12 Mulu.Family H 12.3 24.4 300
VR-13 Multi-Famity Seniors H 18.4 26.8 494
Residential Sub-Iatal (VIstu1: 247.4 7.' 1,188
Sub-tDlal RHldenllal ..6.1 5.. 2."5
NON-RESIDENTlAL
<:-1 Commercial- Retail C. 122
P-1 Public Park P 13.5
P-Z Private Rea1tatlan L 1.7
PQ-1 Elementary Schaal PO 14.3
I'Q-, Jr. High School PO 24.8
PQ-3 Fire Statian PO 1.1
CPF-1 Comm. Purpose Fac. PO 12.'
OS Open Space- OS 134.6
0$-1 OS/SchaaI Parkfng OS 1.1
Ma}arClrclJlallon '" .5.5
SulHDtaI Nan-Re,ldenllat ""'2'ii.7
PROJECT TOTAL 748.3 3.4 2...5
;.--:~
, rj=C=o)Jo-;!(i
\ \1 ., !I"
\ "', ':' l \ ::
\A""'/""""'--"""")!
\ ...:.--'r;--..-J,
! ft, \1, Ii? ;!
i\,~\ii~;,cL,~t,
Site Utilization Plan
Proposed
Lower Olay
Reservoir
Project Location
Change 18.4 Be from COrnmerdal
Tourist (C.2) to Multi-family Seniors
(VR-13)
~EASTLAKE III
A planned community by The EastLake Company
Exhibit C
Cinti Land Planning
_.....Q(tltt__ m
n-n.U
6-6-06
7-35
ORDINANCE NO.
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE
EASTLAKE ill PLANNED COMMUNITY DISTRICT
REGULATIONS AND LAND USE DISTRICTS MAP FOR 18.4
ACRES (AKA EASTLAKE ill SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT)
AT THE SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OLYMPIC PARKWAY
AND WUESTE ROAD.
I. RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS the area ofland, which is the subject of this Ordinance is diagrammatically
represented in "Exhibit D" and incorporated herein by this reference and for the purpose of general
description herein consists of 18.4 acres known as EastLake ill Seniors Project, and located at the
southwest comer ofOlyrnpic Parkway and Wueste Road intersection within the EastLake ill Planned
Community ("Project Site"); and,
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS a duly verified application was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning and
Building Department on October 18, 2004 by The EastLake Company LLC, requesting amendments
to the EastLake ill Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use Districts Map; and,
WHEREAS, the Multi-Family Seniors (RMS) land use district is being created as a "Project
Specific Land Use District" to allow specific types of land uses only in conjunction with the
construction ofthe approximate 494 condominium units; and,
C. Prior Discretionary Approvals
WHEREAS, development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of various
entitlements and agreements, including: 1) a General Plan Amendment, General Development Plan
and Sectional Planning Area Plan and associated Design Guidelines, Public Facilities Financing
Plan, Water Conservation Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan and Comprehensive Affordable
Housing Plan previously approved by City Council Resolution No. 2002-220 on July 17, 2001; and
2) Planned Community District Regulations and Land Use Districts Map approved by City Council
Ordinance No. 2839 on July 24,2001, and amended by City Council Ordinance No. 2963 on May
18,2004; and,
D. Planning Commission Record of Application
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project on
June 14,2006 and voted ( ) to forward a recommendation to the City Council on the
7-36
Ordinance No.
Page 2
Project; and,
WHEREAS, the proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at
the public hearing on this project held on June 14,2006 and the minutes and resolution resulting
therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding verbally; and,
E. City Council Record of Application
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista on June 20, 2006, on the Proj ect discretionary approval applications, and to
receive the recommendation of the Planning Commission and to hear public testimony with regard to
same; and,
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the hearing on the Project application
and notices of said hearings, together with its purposes given by its publication in a newspaper of
general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property owners within 500 feet of the exterior
boundaries of the Project Sites at least 10 days prior to the hearing; and,
F. Discretionary Approvals Resolution and Ordinance
WHEREAS, at the same City Council hearing at which this Ordinance was introduced for
first reading on June 20, 2006 the City Council of the City of Chula Vista approved Resolution
_by which it adopted the amendments on the City of Chula Vista General Plan, EastLake ill
General Development Plan and EastLake ill Seniors Project Sectional Planning Area (S1> A) Plan.
. NOW THEREFORE, the City Council of the CityofChula Vista does hereby find, determine
and ordain as follows:
II. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at its public hearing
on the Project held on June 14, 2006, and the minutes and resolutions resulting there from, are
hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
III. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The City Council does hereby find that the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report 05-02
has been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act
(CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the CityofChula
Vista, and would have no new effects that were not examined in saidFEIR (Guideline 15168).
IV. FINDINGS FOR P-C PLANNED COMMUNITY ZONE AMENDMENTS
The City Council hereby finds that the proposed amendments to the EastLake ill Planned
Community District Regulations are consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan, as
concurrently amended, and public necessity, convenience, the general welfare and good zoning
7-37
Ordinance No.
Page 3
practice support the amendment.
V. APPROVAL OF ZONE AMENDMENTS
The City Council does hereby approve the amendments to the EastLake ill Planned Conununity
District Regulations, Land Use Districts Map as represented in "Exhibit D".
VI. INV ALIDITYj AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Ordinance is dependent upon the
enforceability of each and every te=, provision and condition herein stated; and that in the event
that anyone or more te=s, provisions or conditions are dete=ined by a Court of competent
jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforcable, this resolution shall be deemed to be automatically
revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
VII. EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force on the 30th day from and after its adoption.
Presented by:
Approved as to fo= b
James D. Sandoval
Director of Planning and Building
~
7-38
Ordinance No.
Page 4
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the CityofChula Vista, California,
this 20th day of June, 2006, by the fonowing vote:
AYES: Councilmembers:
NAYS: Councilmembers:
ABSENT: Councilmembers:
ABSTAIN: Councilmembers:
Stephen C. Padilla, Mayor
ATTEST:
Susan Bigelow, City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Susan Bigelow, City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing
Resolution No. was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a
regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 20th day of June, 2006.
Executed this 20th day of June, 2006.
Susan Bigelow, City Clerk
7-39
Land Use Districts
Proposed
S!r-i!.eoHt = Text Deleted
Underline = Text Added
Symbol I I Definition
Rl1
Rl2
Rl3 & Rl4
REi
RE2 & RE3
RS1
RS.1a
RS2
RP1
RP2
RC
RM
RMS
VC
4G-
PQ
O$IP
OS
CPF
OS-1
SFD min. lot size 20,000 sf
SFD min. lot size 13.500 sf
SFD min. lot size 10,000 sf
SFD min. lot size 8,000 sf
SFD mitt lot size 7.000 sf
SFD min. lot size 6,000 sf
SFD min. lot size 5,000-6,000 sf
SFD min. lot size 5,000 sf
SFD min. lot size 4,200 sf
SFD min. lot size 3,150 sf
SFJMuJti-Fam. from 8-15 dulae
Multi-Familty > 15 dulae
Multi-familv Seniors> 15 dulac
Village Commercial
TeblFiet CS"1M8feiaJ
Public and Quasi-P\Jblie Uses
Ol'en SpacelPark & Rae.
Open Space -Passive
Community P\Jrpose Facilities
Open Space (Poten~aI School Parldng) ,
Lower Olay
Reservoir'
Nata:
1. RoreftQ th8 P\anoed CommunityQJstrict R.egulationsJeJctfor
comptetedefil1ltiQl'\$: ~d r~quirenuti1t$,
2. SOundWies Of.Land use- DIsIricts hsubject to miiidr adj~
in the .subdiYisron:pr00e5*-withootfonnaJ amendment to Ihis e-xhibit.
Project Location
A fASTLAKE, III
A pIartnedcommunity by The Eastlai<<!Company
7-40
CI('ijj land Pbnning
!~r.T"i~
3/31106
Exhibit "0"
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
i'--:>,
Item No.: "t">
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
ITEM TITLE:
PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-06-11; Consideration of Tentative Subdivision
Map known as EastLake III Senior Housing Project, Chula Vista Tract 06-11
to subdivide approximately 19.6 acres into 2 lots for a condominium project
of 494 units - Pulte Homes. ,~
Director OfPI7 and Build~
City Manager (j/ (4/5thsVote: Yes_No...KJ
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
The applicant, Pulte Homes, submitted an application for a tentative subdivision map to subdivide
19.6 acres into 2 parcels containing 494 condominium units (see Attachment 3, Exhibit A and full
size plan). The Project is located on the south side of Olympic Parkway just west of the intersection
of Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road within the EastLake III master planned community (see
Locator).
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act and has dete=ined that there is substantial evidence,
in light of the whole record before the City of Chula Vista, that the project may have a
significant effect on the environment; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
prepared a Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (EIR #05-02; SCH #2005091047).
Certification of the Subsequent EIR (ErR #05-02) for this project wilI be considered by the
Planning Commission as a separate item.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt attached Resolution PCS-06-11 recommending that the City Council approve the proposed
tentative subdivision map based on the fmdings and subject to the conditions contained in the
attached City Council Resolution (see Attachment 3).
BOARDS AND COMMISSIONS: On June 14,2006, the Planning Commission considered the
proposed amendments. Following staffs presentation and public testimony, the Planning
Commission voted (4-0-1-0) recommending that the City Council approve the proposed
amendments.
BACKGROUND:
The subject property is located within the Activity Core area of the EastLake III planned
community. Amendments to the City's General Plan, EastLake III General Development Plan
and Sectional Planning Area Plan, being considered in separate items, accompanies this
8-1
Page 2, Item No.:
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
g
Residential High (18-17 du/ac). The proposed amendments would allow a density of 27 dulac,
which translates to approximately 494 dwelling units on the site. The approval of this Tentative
Subdivision Map is contingent upon approval of the proposed above-mentioned land use
amendments and the Ordinance entering into effect.
The applicant has submitted a Design Review application for the proposed 494-unit
condominium project, which will be considered by the Design Review Committee. The project
was presented to the DRC as an informational item on December 19, 2005. The DRC supported
the proposed design and provided meaningful design recommendations to improve the project.
The applicant has incorporated the recommendations, and the project is targeted for formal
consideration and approval by the DRC in early July.
Existing Site Characteristics
The project site is an irregular shaped parcel located at the southwest comer of Olympic Parkway
and Wueste Road adjacent to the United States Olympic Training Center (see Locator). 18.4
acres of the 19.6-acre site are the building pad created in 2002 as part of the Eastlake's mass
grading program, and the remaining 1.2 acres is a combination of natural and man made slopes
separating the leveled building pad from Olympic Parkway, Wueste Road and the Olympic
Training Center. The elevation difference between the building pad and the surrounding streets
vary from 0 at the parcel's main access point to approximately 40 ft at the intersection of
Olympic Parkway and Wueste Road. The Olympic Training Center is approximately 20 above
the subject site finished floor elevation (see Attachment 3, Tentative Subdivision Map). Access
to the site is from Olympic Parkway only. Emergency access as required by the Police and Fire
departments is proposed from the adjacent Olympic Training Center to the west via a 16-foot wide
paved road at the southwest portion of the site.
The project entry will be gate guarded. The gates will be controlled by Opticon controls as required
by the City's Fire Department. The gated entry is setback approximately 150 feet from Olympic
Parkway and meets the required minimum setback of the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Manual.
The private entry road rises at about a 5% grade with landscaped slopes on both sides and
terminates in a cul-de-sac. A second street (Street B) intersects Street A to serve Parcel 2. On street
perpendicular parking for visitors is provided along both streets.
There will be a total of 8,500 cubic yards (cy) of cut and 173,500 cubic yards of fill on site. The
underground garages will be excavated about 10 feet below surface, resulting in approximately
165,000 cy, and the fill will be distributed and compacted on site and balanced. Parking for
residents will be in underground garages beneath the dwelling units.
Zoning and Land Use
The proj ect site is surrounded by the following existing land uses and land use designations:
8-2
t
Page 3, Item No.: ~
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
Surrounding Land Uses
Chula Vista GDP Laod PC District
Municipal General Plan Use (Land Use Existing
Code Designation Designation District) Land Use
Prolect Site PC (Planned Commercial Tourist Tourist Vacant
Community) Visitor Commercial Commercial
(Proposed (Proposed (Proposed
Residential High Residential High Multi-Family
18-27 du/ac) 18-27 du/ac) Seniors RMS)
South PC (planned Public & Quasi- Open Space Open Space and Vacant
Community) Public (aTe) Public/Quasi-
Public (aTe)
East PC (planned Open Space Open Space Open Space Vacant and
Community) Lower Otay
Reservoir
West PC (Planned Open Space and Public/Quasi- Open Space and
Community) Public/Quasi- Public Public/Quasi- aTC
Public (aTe) Public (aTe)
North PC (Planned Commercial Commercial Village Vacant and
Community) Retail and Open Retail and Open Commercial and Open Space
Space Space Open Space
Project Description
The project consists of two lots containing 494 condominium units in 13 separate buildings for
sale to active adults 55 years of age and older. The gross area of the subdivision is 19.6 acres.
The pad area is 18.4 acres and the remainder of 1.2 acres is open space separating the project
from the OTC. The 13 condominium buildings are situated along two private streets with on
street visitor parking and underground parking for residents. Each condo building is 3 and 4
stories in height and each building contains an individual courtyard. The residential lots will be
served with a system of on site trails and a community recreational building (15,000 square feet)
for the use of the residents. An emergency access road is proposed west of Street B to connect to
the OTC parking lot.
Analysis
Land Use
With the proposed amendments to the General Plan, EastLake III GDP and the EastLake III SPA
Plan, the proposed tentative subdivision map will be in substantial comformance with the
General Plan, EastLake III General Development Plan and EastLake III Sectional Planning Area
(SPA) Plan. The proposed project will have a target density of 26.8 dulac.
8-3
Page 4, Item No.:
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
g'
Grading
The site is currently in a graded "pad" condition sloping gently to the northwest toward Olympic
Parkway. Site grading will be required and portions of the site will need to be raised 4 to 5 feet to
create gradual elevation changes. The underground parking garage for each building will be
excavated approximately 10 feet to establish the underground garage space. The cut and fill grading
on site will balance, thereby eliminating the need to export or import dirt.
The applicant is also considering an optional temporary off site construction access road and an
offsite trail connecting the proposed project with the Olympic Training Center. Both offsite grading
conditions are shown on the tentative map.
Circulation
Access is provided by gated entrances from Olympic Parkway which connects to an internal private
street system consisting of two streets with on street visitor parking. The intemal circulation is via
private streets and driveways with underground parking for residents. An emergency access road is
proposed at the southwest corner of the site. This emergency access road will provide a secondary
access route via the Olympic Training Center parking lot for emergency fire trucks.
All onsite and offsite public and private streets required to serve the subdivision will be constructed
or Development hnpact Fees paid by the developer in accordance with the EastLake ill Public
Facilities Financing Plan and Supplemental Facilities Finance Plan prepared for this project.
All streets serving the project will be designed per City standards and/or requirements.
Parks and Recreation. Open Space
The Developer will pay the development component of the Parkland Acquisition and
Development (pAD) Fee as required by the City. The estimated development component of the
PAD Fee is $1,384,682. Combined, the estimated fee for both components of the PAD Fee is
$4,050,942.
Schools
The project will be restricted to active adults 55 years of age or older and will not generate an
increase in family dwelling units or school age population in the project area, so there will be no
impact to either elementary or high school districts.. Therefore, the development will not result
in a need for new schools. School mitigation has been satisfied through the inclusion of this site
in Community Facilities District (CFD No. I), which was formed with the cooperation of the
EastLake Company. Based on age restrictions, local schools will not be impacted. However, the
applicant will have to pay school fees at the rate in effect at the time building permits are issued.
Drainage
The 19.6-acre site lies within the Otay Lakes Drainage Basin. However, runoff from the site is
diverted into the Salt Creek Basin to prevent impacts to the Lower Otay Reservoir. Presently,
runoff from the site is discharged into a 42-inch pipe and into the city's storm water conveyance
system in Olympic Parkway, which ultimately discharges into Salt Creek.
8-4
Page 5, Item No.:
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
!?
The proj ect will be conditioned to provide for the conveyance of storm water flows in
accordance with City standards, policies and requirements. The Developer will design, install
and maintain on-site erosion protection. All pennanent or temporary erosion control will be
designed to City standards and to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. Further, the project shall
comply with all Federal, State and Local stonn water runoff and discharge regulations.
Sewer
Sewer service to the project site is provided by the City of Chula Vista. The EastLake ill
Seniors Proj ect is located in the Salt Creek drainage basin. The proj ect will connect to the
existing public 8 and l2-inch gravity sewer mains located north of Olympic Parkway in the
approved Neighborhood C-l site of the EastLake SPA Plan. This sewer collects flows generated
from the VR-9, VR-lO, VR-ll and C-l sites and conveys the flows to the IS-inch diameter main
in Olympic Parkway. The IS-inch main connects to the 18-inch Salt Creek Interceptor. The
capacity of these facilities to serve the proposed project has been assessed in the Final EastLake
Peninsula off-site Sewer Capacity Analysis Study dated November 8, 2005, by PBS&J.
Projected wastewater flows from the Seniors Project will ultimately discharge into the Salt Creek
Interceptor. Based upon the approved Tentative Map, the adopted land use for the site was
designated as a Hotel/Resort. The average daily sewage flow was estimated to be 45,500 gpd or
172 equivalent dwelling units (EDU) for the adopted land use. The Seniors Project will result in
an increase in average flow of 53,300 gpd or 201 EDUs to the Salt Creek Interceptor.
The City's current contracted capacity rights with the METRO are expected to be exceeded in
about five years. However, with an allocation from the Southbay Treatment Plant, additional
capacity will be available. For longer tenn capacity needs, the new City of Chula Vista Sewer
Master Plan will form the basis for reevaluating the sewer capacity fee so that tb.ere is sufficient
funding to acquire the additional capacity rights. Negotiations between the City of Chula Vista
and the City of San Diego to acquire those rights are ongoing.
Potable & Recvcled Water
The Otay Water District will provide water service for EastLake III Seniors Project. The Otay
Water District has facilities in the vicinity of the project that can provide water service. It has
been determined by the OWD that the project will not receive recycled water for landscaping
since it is in an area that drains into the adjacent Lower Otay Reservoir. Land that drains into the
Upper or Lower Otay Reservoir is restricted from using recycled water for landscape irrigation to
avoid the potential for contamination of drinking water.
The total projected potable water demand for the EastLake ill Seniors Project is approximately
148,200 gallons per day (gpd). The fire flow is 3,750 gallons per minute (gpm), which meets the
City's requirements. There is adequate off-site storage capacity to meet both potable water and
fire flow demands.
Fire
Development of the proj ect will cumulatively add to the need for fire service in the area.
Demographics of the project are anticipated to increase Fire Department responses. Fire Station
8-5
Page 6, Item No.: C)
Meeting Date: 06/20/06
#8, located at 975 Lane Avenue in EastLake Business Center I would be the primary station to
serve the project. In the future, Fire Station #8 will be reconstructed in EastLake Woods.
Transportation/Transit
While there are currently no transit routes that serve this area, transit staff anticipates that this
project can become an active transit trip generator in the future. Transit staff has required a deposit
of $20,000 for future transit improvements at this site as a condition of development approval. This
amount will cover the cost of installing bus shelters, benches, and ADA accessible bus stop
facilities.
CONCLUSION:
Based on the analysis and the conclusions discussed above, staff recommends adoption of the
Resolution recommending that the City Council approve the tentative map based on the findings
and subject to the conditions contained therein.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The applicant has paid for all costs associated with the processing of the EastLake III Senior
Housing Project Tentative Subdivision Map and will be responsible for paying corresponding
Development Impact fees and other applicable development fees, as they may be amended trom
time to time.
Attachments
1. Locator
2. Planning Commission Resolution
3. Tentative Map
4. Disclosure Statement
.
J:\Planning\StanD\Eastlake\Peninsula Adult Retirement\Reports & Resos\CC Report June 20, 06.doc
.
8-6
Mountain
Hawk Park
Olvmpic
Training
Center
LEGEND
Open Space (not a
part of the project).
C Project Location
CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) APPUCANT, Pulle Homes SUBDIVISION
PROJECT Olympic Parkway & Request Conslderallon of a Tentative SlJbdlvision Map known as Eastl..akB III Senior Housing Project,
ADDRESS: Wuesle Road Chula Vista Tl8Ct ~11 to subcflVlde appmximately 19.6 acres into 21ab1 containing a total of 494
residential units Ie be sold as condominiums with the land and physlcallmprovemenb to be held In
SCALE: I FILE NUMBER: common. individual homeown&lS wID be given exclusive right Ie use applicable buDding air space and
NORTH No Scale PCS-Q6-11 fenceclyardarea. R..ated Cases: PC~7, 15-05-007, DRC<lS-24, GPA-OS-02
J:\planning\carlos\locators\pcs0611.cdr 06.02.06
8-7
RESOLUTION NO PCS 06-11
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION
RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE AND ESTABLISH
CONDITIONS OF THE TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR EASTLAKE III
SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT, CHULA VISTA TRACT 06-11- PULTE HOMES
WHEREAS, duly verified application for a tentative subdivision map was filed with
the City of Chula Vista Planning and Building Department on February I, 2006 by Pulte
Homes, Inc. ("Developer") requesting approval to subdivide 19.6 acres into 2 lots
("Project"), and,
WHEREAS the area ofland, which is the subject of this Resolution, is located at the
northeast corner of Olympic Parkway and EastLake Parkway within the EastLake III
Planned Community ("project site"); and,
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed
project for compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has determined
that there is substantial evidence, in light of the whole record before the City of Chula Vista,
that the proj ect may have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, the
Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Subsequent Environmental Impact
Report (EIR #05-02; SCH #2005091047); and,
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Director set the time and place for a hearing
on the tentative map and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property
owners and tenants within 500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days
prior to the hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00
p.m., June 14, 2006, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning
Commission and said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that on June 14, 2006, the Planning
Commission considered the proposed project and, after staffs' and applicant's presentations,
recommends that the City Council approve the attached City Council Resolution for Chula
Vista Tract 06-11 in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained
therein.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this Resolution be transrnitted to
the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 14th day of June, 2006 , by the following
vote, to-wit:
8-8
ATTACHMENT 1
.
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
J:IPlanninglStanDlEastlakelPeninsula Adult RetirementIPCS OS-07\PC Resa.dac
8-9
Vicki Madrid, Chairperson
P I ann
n g
&
Building
Planning Division I
Department
Development Processing
CITY OF
CHUlA VISTA
APPLICATION APPENDIX 8
Disclosure Statement
Pursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary action by the Council,
Planning Commission and all other official bodies of the City, a statement of disclosure of certain ownership or financial
interests, payments, or campaign contributions for a City of Chula Vista election must be filed. The following information
must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest in the property that is the subject of the application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applicant, contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
Pulte Home Corporation
The Eastlake Comnany. LLC
2. If any person" identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all individuals with
a $2000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity.
Numerous - Available upon request
3. If any person" identified pursuant to (1) above Is a non-profit organization or trust, list the names of any person
serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or trustor of the trust
4. Please identify every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independent contractors you have
assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
Brian Stun
Rill Qgtrem
'P.~11' Tl"::InF>o
5. Has any person" associated w~h this contract had any financial dealings with an official"" of the City of Chula
Vista as it relates to this contract within the past 12 months. Yes_ NO-L
If Yes, briefly describe the nature of the financial interest the official" may have in this contract.
6. Have you made a contribution of more than $250 within the past twelve (12) months to a current member of the
Chula Vista City Council? No _ Yes _ If yes, which Council member?
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista I California
8-10
91910
(619) 691-5101
Attachment 4
~'f?-
-11-
.
-
P I ann
n g
&
Building
Planning Division I
Department
Development Processing
CITY OF
CHUIA VISTA
.
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement - Page 2
7. Have you provided more than $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official"" of the City of Chula Vista in the
past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a source of income, money to retire a legal debt, gift, loan, etc.)
Yes No ~
If Yes, which offlcial- and what was the nature of item provid.ed?
.
Date: 2/1/06
.~
Signature of Contra tor/Applicant
Brian Stup, S nior Project
Pulte Home Corporation
type name of Contractor/Applicant
Manager
Print or
"
Person is defined as: any individual, finm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal
organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city, municipality, district, or other
poiitical subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a unit.
..
Official includes, but is not iimited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner, Member of a board,
commission, or committee of the City, employee, or staff members.
276 Fourth Avenue
Chuia Vista SL11alifornia
91910
(619) 691-5101
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING THE TENTATIVE
SUBDIVISION MAP (PCS 06-11) FOR 19.6 ACRES AT THE
SOUTHWEST CORNER OF OLYMPIC P ARKW A Y AND
WUESTE ROAD INTERSECTION FOR THE EASTLAKE III
SENIOR HOUSING PROJECT
I. RECITALS
A. Project Site
WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject matter of this Resolution is
diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A, copies of which are on file in the Office of the
City Clerk, incorporated herein by reference, and commonly known as EastLake III Senior
Housing Project Tentative Subdivision Map, Chula Vista Tract 06-11; and for the purpose of
general description herein consists of 19.6 acres, located at the southwest corner of Olympic
Parkway and Wueste Road within the EastLake III community ("Project Site"); and
B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on February 1, 2006, Pulte Homes ("Developer") filed a tentative subdivision
map application with the Planning & Building Department of the City of Chula Vista
requesting approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 19.6 acres into 2 parcels
to be developed with 494 attached/multi-family dwelling units, and includes a 15,000 square
foot community recreation building and walking trails ("Project"); and,
C. Prior Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, the development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of various
entitlements and agreements, including: I) a General Plan Amendment, General
Development Plan and Sectional Planning Area Plan and associated Design Guidelines,
Public Facilities Financing Plan, Water Conservation Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan
and Comprehensive Affordable Housing Plan previously approved by City Council
Resolution No. 2002-220 on July 17, 2001; and 2) Planned Community District Regulations
and Land Use Districts Map approved by City Council Ordinance No. 2839 on July 24, 2001,
and amended by City Council Ordinance No. 2963 on May 18,2004; and,
D. Planning Commission Record of Applications
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on the Project on
June 14, 2006 and after hearing staff presentation and public testimony voted ( ) to
recommend that the City Council approve the Project, in accordance with the findings and
subject to the conditions listed below; and,
E. Council Record of Applications
WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held before the City
Council of the City of Chula Vista on June 20, 2006, on the Project to receive the
recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to
the same; and,
8-12
Resolution xxxxx
Page 2
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for a hearing on said tentative subdivision
map application, and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its
publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, and its mailing to property
,owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundary of the project, at least 10 days prior to the
hearing; and,
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 6:00 p.m. on
June 20, 2006, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the City Council and
said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council hereby find, determine and
resolve as follows:
ll. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public
hearing on the Project held on June 14, 2006, and the minutes and resolutions resulting
thereftom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
ill. COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The City Council hereby finds that the Project, as analyzed in the Final Subsequent
Environmental hnpact Report for the EastLake ill Senior Housing Project (FSElR-05-02),
would have no new effects that were not examined in said FSElR (Guideline 15168).
IV. ACTION
The City Council hereby approves the resolution approving the EastLake ill Senior Housing
Project Tentative Map, Chula Vista Tract 06-05 involving 19.6 acres of land, finding it is
consistent with the City of Chula Vista General Plan, the EastLake ill General Development
Plan, EastLake ill SPA Plan, and all other applicable Plans, and that the public necessity,
convenience, general welf'!1"e and good planning and zoning practice support their approval
and implementation.
V. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FINDINGS
A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the City
Council finds that the Tentative Subdivision Map, as conditioned herein for EastLake ill
Senior Housing Project, Chula Vista Tract No. 06-11, is in confonnance with the
elements of the City's General Plan, based on the following:
a) Land Use and TransPortation
The proposed subdivision provides for two lots, to be developed with a 494-unit
condominium project. The site is designated Commercial Visitor and is proposed to
be amended to Residential High (18-27 dulac) in the Genera! Plan and Residential-
High (18-27 dulac) in the EastLake ill GDP and to VR-13 Multi-Family Seniors in
the EastLake ill SPA. Thus, the project as conditioned is in substantial compliance
with the amended EastLake ill GDP and SPA and is in substantial confonnance with
the amended General Plan.
8-13
,,"..
Resolution xxxxx
Page 3
All off-site public street improvements required to serve the subdivision have been
constructed and on site streets will be private.
The public streets serving the Project have been sized as prescribed in the Land Use
and Transportation Element of the General Plan and constructed per City design
standards and requirements. The modifications to off-site public street improvements
have been included in the conditions of approval. The streets are adequate to handle
this Proj ect and future proj ects in the area.
b) East Area Plan
The Project site is located within the East Area Plan area and will be consistent with
the plan and policies with the adoption of the amendments to the General Plan
described above.
c) Housing
The project is consistent with the density prescribed within the proposed amendment
to the EastLake ill SPA and provides a new type of active adult seniors housing for
persons 55 years of age and older. The EastLake ill Affordable Housing Plan is being
amended to require the applicant to provide 10% of the total number of housing units
offsite for affordable housing. Thus, the affordable housing requirement shall be
deemed to be satisfied upon the completion of construction of 25 units for low
income families and 25 units for moderate income families.
d) Conservation
FSEIR-05-02 addresses the goals and policies of the Environmental Element of the
General Plan and found the development of this site to be consistent with these goals
and policies.
There are no known earthquake faults on or around the proj ect site.
Herbicides and pesticides will be prohibited on all landscaped slopes draining into
Lower Otay Reservoir. A Water Conservation Plan and Air Quality Improvement
Plan have been prepared for the project. Noise mitigation measures included in the
FSEIR-05-02 will adequately address the noise goals and policies of the General
Plan.
The proj ect has been conditioned to require that all dwelling units be designed to
preclude interior noise levels in excess of 45 dBA and exterior noise exposure over 60
dBA for all outside habitable areas
e) Public Facilities and Services
The Project will be served by the new Mountain Hawk Community Park being
constructed north of this site within the EastLake Vistas neighborhood. The
Developer will pay park fees for the 494 units in accordance with the Parkland
Dedication Ordinance and the conditions of approval specify the amounts to be paid.
The Fire Department and other emergency service agencies have reviewed the
proposed subdivision for conformance with City safety policies and have determined
that the proposal meets the City Threshold Standards for emergency services.
8-14
Resolution xxxxx
Page 4
All required public facilities and services needed to serve the site such as water,
sewer, drainage, police, fire, emergency services, schools, libraries, and utilities exist
and/or will be provided by the Developer in accordance with the goals and policies of
the General Plan.
Although no designated regional off-street bicycle routes are included as components
of the internal circulation network, bicyclists will be readily able to share the internal
streets with motor vehicles due to low traffic volume and limited speeds allowed.
f) Economic Development
The fiscal impact of the project is analyzed in the project's Public Facilities and
Financing Plan. The development of the site as a resort/hotel development as
originally planned when the site was designated Co=ercial Tourist has turned out to
be infeasible due to fewer visitors to the Olympic Training Center and the relative
isolation of the site.
g) Growth Management
The project has prepared a Public Facilities and Financing Plan which analyzes
compliance with the City's Growth Management goals and policies, including the
Threshold Standards set by the Growth Management Ordinance. Development
impact fees will be required of the applicant.
B. Pursuant to Section 664t2.3 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Council certifies that it has
considered the effect of this proposal on the housing needs of the region and has balanced
those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City and the available
fiscal and environmental resources.
C. The configuration, orientation and topography of the site partially allows for the optimum
setting of lots for passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities as required by
Government Code Section 66473.1.
D. The site is physical]y suited for residential development and the proposal conforms to all
standards established by the City for such project.
E. The conditions herein imposed on the grant of permit or other entitlement herein
contained is approximately proportional both in nature and extend to the impact created
by the proposed development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the Project
subject to the general and special conditions set forth below.
VI. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
A. Project Site is Improved with Project
Developer, or their successors in interest, shall improve the Project Site with the Project
as described in the Tentative Subdivision Map, Chula Vista Tract 06-11, Final
Subsequent Environmental hnpact Report for the EastLake III Senior Housing Project
(FSEIR-05-02) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
8-15
Resolution x:xxxx
Page 5
B. Implement Mitigation Measures
Developer shall diligently implement, or cause the implementation of all mitigation
measures pertaining to the Project identified in the Final Subsequent Environmental
Impact Report for the EastLake ill Senior Housing Project (FSEIR-05-02) and associated
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Any such measures not satisfied by a
specific condition of this Resolution or by the project design shall be implemented to the
satisfaction of the Director of Planning & Building and Environmental Review
Coordinator. Mitigation Measures shall be monitored via the Mitigation Monitoring
Program approved in conjunction with FSEIR-05-02. Modification of the sequence shall
be at the discretion of the Director of Planning & Building should changes in the
circumstances warrant such revision.
C. Implement Public Facilities Financing Plan
Developer shall install public facilities in accordance with the EastLake ill Senior
Housing Project Public Facilities Financing Plan, as required by the Director of
Engineering, to meet the threshold standards adopted by the City of Chula Vista. The
Director of Engineering and Planning & Building Director may, at their discretion,
modify the sequence of improvement construction should conditions change to warrant
such a revision.
D. Design Consistency
The Developer shall develop the lots in accordance with the EastLake ill Planned
Community District Regulations and Design Guidelines and in accordance with approval
by the Design Review Committee.
VII. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
Unless otherwise specified or required by law: (a) the conditions and Code requirements
set forth below shall be completed prior to the Final Map as determined by the Director
of Planning and Building, the City Engineer, and the Director of General Services (h)
unless otherwise specified, "dedicate" means grant the appropriate easement, rather than
fee title. Where an easement is required the Applicant shall be required to provide
subordination of any prior lien and easement holders in order to ensure that the City has a
first priority interest and rights in such land unless otherwise excused by the City. Where
fee title is granted or dedicated to the City, said fee title shall be free and clear of all
encumbrances, unless otherwise excused by the City.
Should conflicting wording or standards occur between these conditions of approval, any
conflict shall be resolved by the City Manager or designee.
GENERALlPRELIMINARY
1. All of the terms, covenants and conditions contained herein shall be binding upon and inure to
the benefit of the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of the Developer as to any or all
of the property. For the purposes of this document the term "Developer" shall also include
Applicant". (Engineering, Planning & Building)
8-16
Resolution xxxxx
Page 6
2. Developer shall, comply, remain in compliance and implement, the terms, conditions and
provisions, as are applicable to the property which is the subject matter of this Tentative Map,
of: I) the EastLake ill General Development Plan (GDP) Amendment; 2) EastLake ill Sectional
Planning Area (SPA) Plan Amendment; 3) EastLake ill Planned Community District
'Regulations Amendment; 4) EastLake ill Design Guidelines Amendment; and 5) EastLake ill
Public Facilities Financing Plan Amendment all approved by the City Council on June 20, 2006
by Resolution No. . The Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City,
providing the City with such security (including recordation of covenants running with the land)
and implementation procedures as the City may require complying with the above regulatory
documents. Said Agreement shall also ensure that, after approval of the Final Map, the
Developer will continue to comply, remain in compliance, and implement such Plans. (Planning
& Building)
3. In the event of a filing of a Final Map, which requires oversizing of the improvements necessary
to serve other properties, said Final Map shall be required to include the installation of all
necessary improvements to serve the project, plus the necessary improvements for oversizing of
facilities required to serve such other properties. At the request of Developer, City shall
consider formation of a reimbursement district or any other reimbursement mechanism in
accordance with the restrictions of State Law and City ordinances. (Engineering)
4. If Developer desires to do certain work on the property after approval of the tentative map, but
prior to recordation of the applicable Final Map, he may do so by obtaining the required
approvals and permits from the City Engineer, Director of Planning and Building and Director
of General Services. The permits can be approved or denied in accordance with the City's
Municipal Code, regulations and policies. Said permits do not constitute a guarantee that
subsequent submitta1s (i.e., Final Map and improvement plans) will be approved. All work
performed by the Developer prior to approval of the applicable Final Map shall be at
Developer's own risk. Prior to issuance of grading and/or construction permit, the Developer
shall acknowledge in writing that subsequent submittals (i.e., Final Map, improvement plans)
may require extensive changes, at Developers cost, to work done under such early permit. Prior
to the issuance of a permit, the Developer shall post a bond or other security acceptable to the
City Engineer in an amount determined by the City Engineer to guarantee the rehabilitation of
the land if the applicable Final Map does not record. (Engineering)
5. If any of the terms, covenants or conditions contained herein shall fail to occur, or if they are, by
their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, and if any of such conditions fail to be
so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke
or modify all approvals herein granted, including issuance of building permits; deny, or further
condition the subsequent approvals that are derived from the approvals herein granted; and
institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek
damages for their violation. The Developer shall be notified ten (10) days in advance prior to
any of the above actions being taken by the City and shall be given the opportunity to remedy
any deficiencies identified by the City within a reasonable and diligent time frame.
(Engineering. Planning & Building)
8-17
Resolution xxxxx
Page 7
6. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall agree to defend, indemnify and hold
harmless the City and its agents, officers and employees, ftom any claim, action, or proceeding
against the City, or its agents, officers, or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul any
approval by the City of Chula Vista, including approval by its Planning Commission, City
'Council, or any approval by its agents, officers, or employees arising ITom challenges to the
Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report (FSEIR 05-02) for the EastLake ill Seniors
Project, and any or all entitlements and approvals issued by the City in connection with the
Project. (Engineering, Environmental, Planning & Building)
7. AI1y and all agreements that the Developer is required to enter into hereunder shall be in a form
approved by the City Attorney. (City Attorney)
8. Prior to issuance of any building permits the Developer shall agree to meet all the applicable
conditions of approval of the tentative map, as determined by the City Engineer and Director
of Planning and Building. (Planning & Building, Engineering)
ENVIRONMENTAL/PRESERV ATION
9. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall enter into a Supplemental Subdivision
Improvement Agreement (SSlA) to implement, to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning
and Building and the City Engineer, all applicable mitigation measures identified in the Final
Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the EastLake ill Senior Housing Project (FSEIR
05-02) and the associated CEQA Findings of Fact and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP), in accordance with the requirements, provisions and schedules contained
therein, and as further specified in these Tentative Map conditions. Modification of the sequence
of mitigation shall be at the discretion of the Director of Planning and Building should changes
in circumstances warrant such a revision. (Engineering, Planning & Building, Environmental)
10. The Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of all mitigation measures
pertaining to the Project identified in the Final Subsequent Environmental Impact Report for the
EastLake ill Senior Housing Project (FSEIR 05-02) and associated Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program. AI1y such measures not satisfied by a specific condition of this Resolution
or by the project design shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and
Building. Mitigation Measures shall be monitored via the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program approved in conjunction with FSEIR-OS-02. Modification of the sequence of
mitigation shall be at the discretion of the Director of Planning and Building should changes in
the circumstances warrant such revision. (Environmental, Planning & Building).
11. Prior to issuance of any land development permits, including clearing and grubbing and grading
permits, the Developer shall install temporary orange fencing around areas of native vegetation
to remain undisturbed. Fencing shall be shown on all grading plans and shall remain in place
during all construction activities. In addition, the Developer shall retain a City-approved
biologist to monitor the installation and on-going maintenance of this temporary fencing.
Evidence demonstrating this condition has been met shall be submitted to the City's
Environmental Review Coordinator for approval. (Environmental, Planning & Building).
8-18
Resolution xxxxx
Page 8
12. The Developer shall comply with all applicable requirements of the Califomia Department of
Fish & Game, the U.S. Department of Fish & Wildlife and the U.S. Army Corp of Engineers.
(Environmental, Planning & Building)
SUBDMSION DESIGN
13. The Developer shall install all street trees within the public right-of-way, and within the
landscape easement as applicable, in accordance with Chapter 12.32 of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code, the City's Landscape Manual and approved cross-sections in the EastLake ill
SPA plan; or as otherwise approved by the Director of General Services and Director of Public
Works. Location of trees and planters shall be contingent upon the location of street signs.
Under no circumstance shall a tree or shrub block the visibility of any street sign, regulatory,
warning or guide traffic signs. (Public Works, General Services)
14. Prior to the issuance of each rough grading permit proposing to grade individual lots and streets
for the Project, the Developer shall submit a study showing that all curb returns for any
intersection in excess of 4% grade, located within the permit boundaries, and all driveways,
comply with ADA standards at the front and back of sidewalks to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. (Engineering)
STREETS, RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND PUBLIC IMPROVEMENTS
15. The Developer shall provide security in accordance with chapter 18.16 of the Municipal Code.
Dedicate, and construct full street improvements for all public streets shown on the Tentative
Map within the subdivision boundary or off-site, as deemed necessary by the City Engineer to
provide service to the subj ect subdivision, in accordance with Chula Vista Design Standards,
Chula Vista Streets Standards,Chula Vista Subdivision Manual, and approved Tentative Map,
unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Said street improvements shall include, but
not be limited to, asphalt concrete pavement, base, curb, gutter and sidewalk, sewer, drainage
facilities, street lights, traffic signals, signs, stripping, fire hydrants and transitions to existing
improvements in the manner required by the City Engineer.
If improvement plans have been approved by the City, the amount of the security for the
above noted improvements shaH be 110% of the construction cost estimate approved by the
City Engineer. If improvement plans are being processed, the security for the improvement
shall be 150% of approved cost estimate. Or, if the City has not processed improvement
plans, the security for the improvement shall be 200% of construction cost estimate approved
by the City Engineer. A lesser percentage may be required if it is demonstrated, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, that sufficient data or other information is available to
warrant such reduction. (Engineering)
16. The Developer shall design all street vertical and horizontal curves. and intersection sight
distances to conform to the CalTrans' Highway Design Manual. AIl streets, which intersect
other streets at or near a horizontal or vertical curve, shall meet intersection design sight distance
requirements in accordance with City Standards. Sight visibility easements shall be granted as
necessary to comply with the requirements in the CalTrans Highway Design Manual and City of
8-19
Resolution xxxxx
Page 9
Chula Vista Policies. When a conflict between the CalTrans Highway Design Manual and
adopted City policies exists, the adopted City Policies shall prevail. Lighted sag vertical curves
will be p=itted at intersections per American Association of State Highway and
Transportation Officials (AASHTO) standards and with approval of the City Engineer.
, (Engineering)
17. The Developer shall construct sidewalks and pedestrian ramps on all walkways to comply with
the "Americans with Disabilities Act" (ADA) standards, as approved by the City Engineer. In
the event the Federal Government adopts new ADA standards for street rights-of-way, which
are in conflict with the standards and approvals for the Proj ect, all such approvals conflicting
with those new standards shall be updated to reflect the new standards. Unless otherwise
required by federal law, City ADA standards may be considered vested, as determined by
federal regulations, once construction has commenced. (Engineering)
18. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall acquire and then grant to the City all off-
site rights-of-way and easements necessary for the installation of required street improv=ents
and/or utilities. (Engineering)
19. The Developer shall notify the City, at least 60 days prior to consideration of the approval oftbe
applicable Final Map by City Council, if off-site right-of-way and easements cannot be obtained
as required by these conditions. (Only off-site right-of-way or easements affected by Section
66462.5 of the Subdivision Map Act are covered by this condition.) After said notification the
Developer shall:
a. Pay the full cost of acquiring off-site right-of-way or easements required by the Conditions
of Approval of the Tentative Map.
b. Deposit with the City the estimated cost of acquiring said right-of-way or eas=ents. Said
estimate is subject to the approval of the City Engineer.
c. Have all right-of-way and/or easement documents and plats prepared and appraisals
complete, as necessary to commence cond=nation proceeding, and as determined by the
City Engineer.
d. Request that the City use its powers of Eminent Domain to acquire right-of-way, easements,
or licenses needed for off-site improv=ents, or work related to the Final Map. The
Developer shall pay all costs, both direct and indirect, incurred in said acquisition.
It=s a, b, and c above shall be accomplished prior to the approval of the Final Map.
(Engineering)
20. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall enter into a Supplemental
Subdivision Improvement Agre=ent (SSIA) to:
a. Design, construct, and secure a fully actuated traffic signal including interconnect wiring,
mast arms, signal heads and associated equipment, underground improvements, standards
8-20
Resolution xxxxx
Page 10
and luminaries at the Olympic Parkway/Project Driveway intersection. The design of the
traffic signal shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and confo= to City
standards. The intersection geometry shall be the following:
Westbound:
Northbound:
Eastbound:
One left-turn lane (with 100 feet of storage) and two through lanes;
One left-turn lane and one right-turn lane (with a storage length of 75 feet
in each lane)
One shared through/right-turn lane and one through lane
A traffic signal shall be installed at the project driveway and two outbound (northbound)
lanes, one left-turn and one right-turn inbound (southbound) lanes shall be provided.
b. Relocate the median opening on Olympic Parkway further west from its current location
to accommodate the proposed project driveway. In addition, the applicant shall provide
the pertinent landscape improvements to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning &
Building, and the Director of General Services.
c. Provide pedestrian ramps to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
d. Install a "No U Turn" sign for eastbound traffic on Olympic Parkway at the Olympic
Parkway/Wueste Road intersection.
The Developer shall fully design the aforementioned improvements in conjunction with the
improvement plans for the related project. (Engineering, Planning & Building)
21. The Developer shall design landscape and irrigation plans such that street tree placement is
not in conflict with the sight visibility of any traffic signage. The Developer shall be
responsible for the removal of any obstructions within the sight visibility of said traffic signs
to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and the Director of General Services. (Engineering,
Planning & Building)
22. Any grading plans depicting a temporary construction access road shall show the following
info=ation and be subject to the following requirements:
a. Provide a detail alignment, profile and cross-section of the temporary construction access
road. In addition, show the limits of grading for the temporary construction access road
on grading plans.
b. Provide limits of grading to address slope stabilization.
c. Prior to recordation of the Final Map, the Developer shall enter into an agreement with
the City concurring to remove the temporary construction access road and restore the
slope to current conditions. The temporary construction access road shall be revegetated
with native vegetation in accordance with the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (MMRP) immediately upon closure of the temporary access road.
8-21
Resolution xxxxx
Page 11
d. The Developer shall provide hydraulic and hydrology reports which shall address any
issues related to the construction of the temporary road.
e. The Developer shall provide a letter of permission to grade from current property owner.
f. The Developer shall provide traffic control plans that shall include, but not be limited to:
· IngresslEgress to site (possible use of flag men pursuant to CalTrans traffic control
standards.)
· Exhibit that shows SOO-ft to the north and to the south of the proposed access to
Wueste Road
g. Provide information of proposed erosion control during construction and operation of the
temporary construction access road.
23. Any grading plans depicting a pedestrian trail connection to the OTC shall show the
following information and be subject to the following requirements:
a. Provide a detail alignment, profile and cross-section of the traiL In addition, show the
limits of grading for the trail on grading plans.
b. Provide limits of grading to address slope stabilization.
c. The Developer shall provide hydraulic and hydrology reports should which shall address
any issues related to the construction of the traiL
d. The Developer shall provide a letter of permission to grade from the current property
owner.
e. The Developer shall provide information of proposed erosion control during construction
and operation of the traiL
24. Prior to issuance of any grading permit proposing the creation of down slopes adjacent to public
or private streets, the Developer shall accomplish the following:
a. Obtain the City Engineer's approval of a roadside study to determine the necessity of
providing guardrail improvements at those locations.
b. Construct and secure any required guardrail improvements in conjunction with the
associated grading and/or construction permit, as determined by the City Engineer.
Guardrail shall be installed per CalTrans Traffic Manual and Roadside Design Guide
requirements or American Association of State Highway and Transportation Officials
(AASHTO) standards to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (Engineering)
8-22
Resolution xxxxx
Page 12
25. Prior to approval of the Final Map, Developer shall agree to install permanent street name signs
prior to the issuance of the first building permit for the applicable Final Map. (Engineering)
26. Maintenance responsibility of street trees within the Project shall be privately maintained by the
'EastLake Senior HOA. (planning & Building)
GRADING AND DRAINAGE
27. Prior to approval of grading plans, the Developer shall submit hydrology and hydraulic studies,
and calculations demonstrating the adequacy of downstream drainage structures, pipes and
inlets. Said studies and calculations shall be to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
(Engineering)
28. Prior to approval of grading plans, the Developer shall demonstrate the adequacy of existing
drainage runoff detention facilities or include, in the grading plans, the construction of
additional detention facilities, to ensure that the maximum allowable discharges after
development do not exceed pre-development discharges, all to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer. The Developer shall provide for the future maintenance of the detention basin
facilities through the establishment of a Master Home Owners Association, or other funding
mechanism as approved by the City. (Engineering)
29. The Developer shall submit to and obtain approval from the City Engineer and Director of
General Services of an erosion and sedimentation control plan as part of grading plans.
(Engineering Arks & General Services)
30. The Developer shall locate lot lines on the Final Map and grading plans at the top of slopes
except as shown on the Tentative Map or as approved by the City Engineer and Director of
Planning & Building. Lots shall be so graded as to drain to the street or an approved drainage
system. Drainage shall not be permitted to flow over slopes or onto adjacent property.
(Engineering, Planning & Building)
31. The Developer shall design and construct all grading and pad elevations to be within 2 feet of
the grades and elevations shown on the approved Tentative Map or as otherwise approved by
the City Engineer and Director of Planning & Building. (Engineering, Planning & Building)
32. The Developer shall obtain and submit to the City Engineer notarized letters of permission for all
off-site grading work prior to issuance of grading permit for work requiring said off-site
grading. (Engineering)
33. The Developer shall connect all private storm drains from the project into the public storm drain
system at a structure such as a cleanout or catch basin.
34. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall submit to the City Engineer a list of
proposed lots indicating whether the building structure will be located on fill, cut, or a transition
between the two situations. (Engineering)
8-23
Resolution xxxxx
Page 13
35.The Developer shall design and construct all public storm drains as close to perpendicular to the
slope contours as possible, but in no case greater than 15 degrees fi:om perpendicular to the
contours. (Engineering)
36.' The Developer shall provide a minimum of three (3) feet of flat ground access fi:om the face of
any wall to the beginning of the slope rounding for wall maintenance, unless otherwise
approved by the City Engineer. (Engineering)
37. The Developer shall provide a setback, as determined by the City Engineer based on Soil
Engineer recommendations, between the property lines of the proposed lots and the top or toe of
any slope to be constructed where the proposed grading adjoins undeveloped property or
property owned by others. The City Engineer shall not approve the creation of any lot that does
not meet the required setback. (Engineering)
38. The Developer shall design and construct the inclination of each cut or fill surface, resulting in a
slope, to not be steeper than 2:1 (two horizontal to one vertical), except for minor slopes as
herein defined. All constructed minor slopes shall be designed for proper stability considering
both geological and soil properties. A minor slope may be constructed no steeper than one and
one-half horizontal to one vertical (1.5:1) contingent upon:
a. Submittal and approval of reports by both a soils engineer and a certified engineering
geologist containing the results of surface and sub-surface exploration, and analysis. The
soils engineer and engineering geologist shall certify that in their professional opinion, the
underlying bedrock and soil supporting the slope have strength characteristics sufficient to
provide a stable slope and will not pose a danger to persons or property.
b. The installation of an approved slope planting program and irrigation system to the
satisfaction of the Director of Planning & Building.
c. "Minor Slope" is defined as a slope 4 feet or less in vertical dimension in either cut or fills,
between single-family lots and not parallel to any roadway. (Engineering)
39. Prior to issuance of grading permits or any other grant of approval for any landform
modification, the Developer shall delineate areas of native vegetation to r=ain undisturbed
based on adopted grading plans. (Planning & Building)
40. The Developer shall construct t=porary desilting basins at all discharge points adjacent to
drainage courses or where substantial drainage alteration is proposed in the grading plan. The
exact design and location of such facilities shall be based on hydrological modeling, and
determined pursuant to direction by the City Engineer. (Engineering)
41. Prior to issuance of a grading permit for any area of the project (including off-site areas)
draining toward the Lower Otay Reservoir, Developer shall accomplish the following:
8-24
Resolution xxxxx
Page 14
a. Obtain the approval of the City of Chula Vista and all other applicable agencies for any
proposed structural drainage runoff detention and/or diversion facilities within the Lower
Otay Reservoir Watershed.
'b. Obtain the approval of the City of Chula Vista and all other applicable agencies of all
operational and maintenance agreements associated with any proposed structural
drainage runoff detention and/or diversion facilities within the Lower Otay Reservoir
Watershed. (Engineering)
42. In order to avoid indirect impacts on the Lower Otay Reservoir the Developer and their
successors and assigns agree that fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides shall not be applied to any
proposed manufactured slopes that drain to Lower Otay Reservoir. Potable water shall be used
for irrigation of any landscaping on the proposed manufactured slopes that drain to Lower Otay
Reservoir. In addition, the storm conveyance systems shall include the use of the City of San
Diego's Source Water Protection Guidelines for New Development [2004] and incorporate best
site design and source controls to protect drinking water. (Planning & Building, Environmental,
Engineering)
43. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit for the project, the Developer shall demonstrate to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer, that proposed storm drain discharge does not exceed pre-
development discharge. (Engineering)
44. Prior to issuance of a grading permit, the Developer shall demonstrate that the grading plans are
in substantial compliance with the grading outlined in the Tentative Map. (Engineering,
Planning & Building)
45. The Development shall comply with all applicable regulations established by the United States
Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), as set forth in the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES), permit requirements for urban runoff and storm water discharge,
the Clean Water Act, and any regulations adopted by the City of Chula Vista, pursuant to the
NPDES regulations or requirements. Further, the Developer shall file a Notice of Intent with
the State Water Resources Control Board to obtain coverage under the NPDES General Permit
for Storm Water Discharges Associated with Construction Activity and shall implement a Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) concurrent with the commencement of grading
activities. The SWPPP shall include both construction and post construction pollution
prevention and pollution control measures and shall identify funding mechanisms for post
construction control measures. The Developer shall comply with all the provisions of the
NPDES and the Clean Water Program during and after all phases of the development process,
including, but not limited to, mass grading, rough grading, construction of street and
landscaping improvements, and construction of dwelling units. The Developer shall design the
Project storm drains and other drainage facilities to include Best Management Practices to
minimize non-point source pollution, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (Engineering,
Public Works)
8-25
Resolution xxxxx
Page 15
46. Prior to the approval of the final map, or issuance of the first grading p=it for the Project,
whichever occurs earlier, the Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City of Chula
Vista, wherein the Developer agrees to the following:
. a. Comply with the requirements of the Municipal Sto= Water P=it (Order No. 2001-01)
or as amended from time to time, issued by the San Diego Regional Water Quality
Control Board, including revision of plans as necessary.
b. Defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers and employees,
from any claim, action, proceeding, fines, costs, and expenses against the City, or its
agents, officers, or employees arising out of non-compliance with the requirements of the
NPDES regulations, in connection with the execution of any construction and/or grading
work for the Project, whether the non-compliance results from any action by the
Developer, any agent or employee, subcontractors, or others. The Developer's
indemnification shall include any and all costs, expenses, attorney's fees and liability
incurred by the City.
c. That the City Engineer may require incorporation of Standard Urban Water Mitigation
Plan (SUSMP) requirements during the implementation period preceding the adoption of
the local SUSMP by the City for all priority projects or phases of priority projects
undergoing approval process, in accordance with Order No. 2001-01, NPDES No.
CASOl08758 Municipal Permit, as determined by the City Engineer.
d. To not protest the formation of a facilities benefit district or any other funding
mechanism approved by the City to finance the operation, maintenance, inspection, and
monitoring of NPDES facilities. This agreement to not protest shall not be deemed a
waiver of the right to challenge the amount of any assessment, which may be imposed
due to the addition of these improvements and shall not interfere with the right of any
person to vote in a secret ballot election.
The above noted agreement shall run with the land contained within the Proj ect.
(Engineering, Public Works)
SEWER
47. The Developer shall design all sewer access points (manholes) to be located at centerline of
street, cul-de-sac center, or at the center of a travel lane, unless otherwise approved by the City
Engineer. (Engineering)
48. The Developer shall provide improved all-weather paved access to all public sewer manholes to
withstand H-20 wheel load or other loading as approved by the City Engineer. (Engineering)
49. Sewer access points (manholes) shall not be located on slopes or in inaccessible areas for
maintenance equipment. (Engineering)
8-26
Resolution xxxxx
Page 16
50. The Developer shall provide sewer manholes at all changes of alignment of grade, unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Sewers serving 10 or less equivalent dwelling units
shall have a minimum grade of I %. (Engineering)
51.' All PCC paved sewer and/or drainage maintenance access roads shall be 6 inches in thickness
and contain #4 reinforcement bars at 18 inches on center each way to prevent differential
displacement between concrete panels. (Engineering)
52. Sewer main pipes shall not run para11el and under slopes greater than 5:1 unless otherwise
approved by City Engineer. (Engineering)
53. Sewer lines, which are greater than 20 feet in depth, shall use C-900 or C-905 class pipe, as
approved by the City Engineer. (Engineering)
54. Developer shall process the conversion to a public facility of the 8 inch PVC private sewer
main, located within the 20-foot sewer easement, in Lot "A" of Parcel Map No. 19091. The
conversion to a public facility of the sewer main shall include, but not be limited to the
. following:
a. The access road above the sewer line shall be concrete paved and shall comply with City
Standards.
b. Sewer manhole covers will need to be per RSD M4 Locking Device.
WATER
55. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall present verification to the City Engineer
in the form of a letter from Otay Water District indicating that the assessmentslbonded
indebtedness for all parcels dedicated or granted in fee to the City have been paid, or that no
assessmentslbonded indebtedness exist on the parcel(s). (Engineering)
56. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall present verification to the City Engineer
in the form of a letter from Otay Water District that the subdivision will be provided adequate
water service and long-t= water storage facilities. The Developer shall phase and install water
system improvements as required by the Otay Water District. (Engineering, Planning &
Building)
AGREEMENTSIFINANCIAL
57. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall enter into a Supplemental Subdivision
Improvement Agreement with the City where the Developer agrees to the following:
a. That the City may withhold building permits for the subject subdivision if anyone of the
following occurs:
8-27
Resolution xxxxx
Page 17
1. Regional development threshold limits set by the East Chula Vista Transportation
Phasing Plan, as amended from time to time, have been reached or in order to have the
Project comply with the Growth Management Program as may be amended from time to
time.
11. Traffic volumes, levels of service, public utilities and/or services either exceed the
adopted City threshold standards or fail to comply with then effective Growth
Management Ordinance, and Growth Management Program and any amendments
thereto. Public utilities shall include, but not be limited to, air quality, drainage, sewer
and water.
iii. The required public facilities, as identified in the PFFP, or as amended or otherwise
conditioned have not been completed or constructed to the satisfaction of the City. The
Developer may propose changes in the timing and sequencing of development and the
construction of improvements affected. In such case, the PFFP may be amended, as
approved by the City's Director of Planning and Building and the Public Works
Director. (Engineering, Planning & Building)
b. Defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City and its agents, officers and employees, from
any claim, action or proceeding against the City, or its agents, officers or employees, to
attack, set aside, void or annul any approval by the City including approval by its Planning
Commission, City Council or any approval by its agents, officers, or employees with regard
to this subdivision pursuant to Section 66499.37 of the State Map Act; provided the City
promptly notifies the Subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding, and on the further
condition that the City fully cooperates in the defense. (Engineering, Planning & Building)
c. P=it all cable television companies franchised by the City of Chula Vista equal
opportunity to place conduit and provide cable television service for each lot or unit within
the Tentative Map area. Developer further agrees to grant, by license or easement, and for
the benefit of, and to be enforceable by, the City of Chula Vista, conditional access to cable
television conduit within the properties situated within the final map only to those cable
television companies franchised by the City of Chula Vista, the condition of such grant
being that: (a) such access is coordinated with Developer's construction schedule so that it
does not delay or impede Developer's construction schedule and does not require the
trenches to be reopened to accommodate that placement of such conduits; and (b) any such
cable company is and remains in compliance with, and promises to remain in compliance
with the terms and conditions of the franchise and with all other rules, regulations,
ordinances and procedures regulating and affecting the operation of cable television
companies as same may have been, or may from time to time be, issued by the City of Chula
Vista. Developer hereby conveys to the City of Chula Vista the authority to enforce said
covenant by such remedies as the City determines appropriate, including revocation of said
grant upon determination by the City of Chula Vista that they have violated the conditions
of grant. (Engineering, Planning & Building)
d. That the City may withhold the issuance of building permits for the Project, should the
Developer be determined by the City to be in breach of any of the terms of the Tentative
8-28
Resolution xxxxx
Page 18
Map Conditions or any SSIA. The City shall provide the Developer of notice of such
determination and allow the Developer reasoruilile time to cure said breach. (Engineering,
Planning & Building)
e. Hold the City harmless fi:om any liability for erosion, siltation or increase flow of drainage
resulting ITom this project (Engineering, Planning & Building)
f. Participate, on a fair share basis, in any deficiency plan or financial program adopted by
SANDAG to comply with the Congestion Management Program (CMP). (Engineering)
g. To not protest the formation of any future regional impact fee program or facilities benefit
district to finance the construction of regional facilities. This agreement not to protest shall
not be deemed a waiver of the right to challenge the amount of any assessment which may
be imposed due to the addition of these new improvements and shall not interfere with the
right of any person to vote in a secret ballot election. (Engineering)
58. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall provide a deposit in the amount of
$20,000.00 pay<J,ble to the City of Chula Vista for Capital Improvement Project "Transit
Facilities Citywide" STL-312- Acct # 40300-7999/2415312403400000 for future transit
improvements to the satisfaction of the City of Chula Vista Transit Coordinator. (Engineering,
Planning & Building)
59. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall comply with all previous agreements as
they pertain to this tentative map. (Engineering, Planning & Building)
60. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall contract with the City's current street
sweeping ITanchisee, or other server approved by the Director of Public Works to provide public
street sweeping for each phase of development on a ITequency and level of service comparable
to that provided for similar areas of the City. The Developer shall cause street sweeping to
commence immediately after the final residence, in each phase, is occupied and shall continue
sweeping until such time that the City has accepted the street, or 60 days after the completion of
all punch list items, whichever occurs first. The Developer further agrees to provide the City
Special Operations Manager with a copy of the memorandum requesting street sweeping
service. Such memorandum shall include a map of areas to be swept and the date the sweeping
will begin. (public Works)
61. Prior to approval of the Final Map for the project, the Developer shall enter in an agreement
with the City to provide affordable housing units as specified in the EastLake ComprehensivepAffordable Housing Program, or as amended ITom time to time. (Community Development)
62. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall provide evidence, satisfactory to the
Director of Planning & Building that all school fees have been paid, if required, and all
development conditions for the Sweetwater High School and Chula Vista Elementary School
Districts are satisfied. (planning & Building)
8-29
Resolution xxxxx
Page 19
63. The Developer shall implement the fin~ Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) measures as
approved by the City Council, and as may be amended ITom time to time, and shall comply and
remain in compliance with the AQIP.
64. 'The Developer acknowledges that the City Council may, ITom time-to-time, modify air quality
improvement and energy conservation measures as technologies and/or programs change or
become available. The Developer shall modify the AQIP to incorporate those new measures
upon request of the City, which are in effect at the time, prior to or concurrent with each Final
Map approval within the Project. The new measures shall apply to development within all
future map areas, but shall not be retroactive to those areas, which receive Final map approval
prior to effect of the subject new measures. The Developer acknowledges and agrees that the
City has adopted the City of Chula Vista Air Quality Improvement Plan Guidelines (AQIP
Guidelines) as approved per Resolution No. 2003-260 and that such guidelines as approved and
as maybe amended from time-to-time shall be implemented.
65. The Developer shall implement the final Water Conservation Plan (WCP) measures as approved
by the City Council, and as may be amended ITom time to time, and shall comply and remain in
compliance with the WCP. (planning & Building, Environmental)
66. The Developer acknowledges that the City Council may, ITom time-to-time, modify water
conservation measures as technologies and/or programs change or become available. The
Developer shall modify the WCP to incorporate those new measures upon request of the City,
which are in effect at the time, prior to or concurrent with each Final Map approval within the
Proj ect.The new measures shall apply to development within all future map areas, but shall not
be retroactive to those areas, which receive Final Map approval prior to effect of the subject new
measures. The Developer acknowledges and agrees that the City has adopted the City of Chula
Vista Water Conservation Plan Guidelines (WCP Guidelines) as approved per Resolution No.
2003-234 and that such guidelines as approved and as may be amended ftom time-to-time shall
be implemented.
67. Prior to issuance of building permits, the Developer shall be required to submit a detailed
acoustical analysis to the Environmental Review Coordinator prepared by a qualified acoustical
consultant that demonstrates that building structures are adequately designed such that second-
floor interior noise levels, due to exterior sources, will be at or below the 45 CNEL interior
standard. Where exterior noise levels exceed 60 CNEL, additional measures shall be required to
attenuate interior noise to the 45 CNEL standard in compliance with the noise mitigation
measures required in FSEIR 05-02 and the associated MMRP. (Planning & Building,
Environmental)
PARKS, TRAILS AND LANDSCAPE
68. Prior to approval of the first Final Map for the Project, the Developer shall comply with the
provisions of the City of Chula Vista Parks and Recreation Master Plan as adopted, and
amended ftom time to time, and as it affects facility and other related requirements for the
Project's parks. (General Services)
8-30
Resolution xxxxx
Page 20
69. Prior to approval of the first Final Map, the Developer shall pay to the City all applicable
parkland acquisition and development fees (pAD fees) in accordance with CYMC Chapter
17.10, Parkland Dedication Ordinance ("PDO"). Given the lack of available acreage that could
be acquired to serve the development, the acquisition component of the PAD Fee will be waived
'and a payment of $2,666,260 will be made which can be utilized to fund construction of park
and public facilities serving the EastLake Community. Any excess funds that remain orice these
facilities are complete can be utilized on other park or public facilities serving the Eastern
Territories of Chula Vista. The Developer shall pay the development component of the PAD
Fee as required by the Director of General Services Department. (General Services)
70. Regular maintenance of the" Greenbelt and Community trails and open space shall be the
responsibility of the EastLake ill HOA. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer must
provide evidence that the aforementioned maintenance responsibility has been included in the
EastLake ill HOA budget to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (Engineering)
71. Prior to the issuance of grading permit, or as otherwise approved by the Director of General
Services, the Developer shall prepare, submit and obtain the approval of the Director of General
Services, City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator for a landscape and irrigation
slope erosion control plan. All plans shall be prepared in accordance with the current Chula
Vista Landscape Manual (as may be amended from time to time), Grading Ordinance and
Biology section of the SEIR 05-02. Developer shall install erosion control in accordance with
approved plans no later than six months from the date of issuance of grading permit. (General
Services, Engineering, Planning & Building Environmental).
72. Prior to the issuance of the first construction permit for the proj ect, the Developer shall prepare,
submit and obtain the approval of the City Engineer and the Director of Parks & Recreation, for
open space, parkways, medians, trails and streets Landscape and Irrigation Improvement Plans.
All plans shall be prepared in accordance with the current Chula Vista Landscape Manual and
the SPA, as amended from time to time. Developer shall install all improvements in accordance
with approved plans to the satisfaction of the Director of General Services, the Director of
Public Works, and the City Engineer. (General Services, Engineering)
73. Prior to the approval of any Final Map for the Project that contains open space, the Developer
shall enter into an agreement to secure and construct open space landscape improvements within
the Final Map area. All landscape improvements shall be bonded for in amounts as det=ined
by the Director of Parks & Recreation and approved as to form by the City Attorney. Developer
shall prepare, submit and obtain the approval for the Director landscape improvement plans
simultaneously with improvement plans for the applicable Final Map areas. (General Services.
Planning & Building)
74. The EastLake ill Senior Housing Project's Homeowners Association ("HOA") CC&Rs shall
contain the requirement that, should the HOA seek to be released by the City from the
maintenance obligations for the project's open space and trails, the HOA shall first obtain
written consent from the City, which may be withheld at the City's sole discretion, and 100% of
the property owners within the HOA. (General Services, Planning & Building)
8-31
Resolution xxxxx
Page 21
75. Developer agrees to immediately relocate, at Developer's sole expense, the necessary above
and/or underground utilities to acco=odate the required street trees within the street tree
planting easement and median, as det=ined necessary by the Director of General Services and
the City Engineer. (General Services, Engineering)
EASEMENTS
76. The Developer shall grant on the Final Map minimum l5-foot wide easements to the City of
Chula Vista as required by the City Engineer for construction and maintenance of public sewer
facilities, as applicable. (Engineering)
77. The Developer shall grant on the Final Map minimum l5-foot wide easements to the City of
Chula Vista as required by the City Engineer for construction and maintenance of public storm
drain facilities, as applicable. (Engineering)
78. The Developer shall grant to the City on the Final Map, a minimum of 10-foot wide easement (5
feet wide for general utilities and 5 feet wide for landscape purposes) adjacent to street right-of-
way within public open space lots, unless otherwise approved by the City Engineer.
(Engineering)
79. The Developer shall grant rant on the Final Map, a 20-foot minimum sewer and access easement
for sewer lines located between residential units, unless otherwise required by the City
Engineer. All other easements shall meet City standards for required width. (Engineering)
80. Prior to recordation of the Final Map the Developer shall process the granting to the City of
Chula Vista of the 20-foot sewer easement or a reduced width acceptable and approved by the
City Engineer, within Lot "A" of Parcel Map No. 19091. (Engineering)
81. Prior to recordation of the Final Map the Developer shall acquire an easement iTom the owner of
Parcel A of Parcel Map No. 19955, for those portions of the Fire Access Road encroaching into
the above referenced Parcel A. (Engineering)
MISCELLANEOUS
82. Prior to approval of the Final Map, the Developer shall submit copies of the Final Map in a
digital format. The drawing projection shall be in Califomia State Plane Coordinate System
(NAD 83, Zone 6). The digital file of the final maps shall combine all map sheets into a single
CADD drawing, in DXF, DWG or Arc View (GIS) format and shall contain the following
individual layers:
a. Subdivision Boundary (closed polygons)
b. Lot Lines (closed polygons)
c. Street Centerlines (polygons)
d. Easements (polylines)
e. Street names (annotation). (Engineering)
8-32
Resolution xxxxx .
Page 22
FIRE AND BRUSH MANAGEMENT
83. Prior to approval of the first grading permit or Final Map for theProject, the Developer shall
submit and receive approval by the Director of General Services and the City's Fire Marshall of
'a Brush Management Program for the Project- showing three fire protection zones up to 90 feet
from all buildings or as determined appropriate by the Director of General Services and City's
Fire Marshall. (Fire, General Services)
84. Prior to issuance of the grading permit, provide the Initial Cycle of fire managementlbrush
clearance within lots adjacent to natural open space areas subject to approval by the Fire
Marshal and Director of General Services (Fire, General Services)
85. The Developer shall provide fire hydrants every 300 feet for multi-family residential units. All
hydrants shall be operable prior to delivery of combustible building materials, and minimum 20-
foot wide, all-weather fire access roads shall also be provided or an acceptable alternative
approved by the Fire Marshall and in compliance with the C.F.C. (Fire)
86. Prior to issuance of the first building permit for model units, provide a 20-foot wide hard surface
and required fire hydrant with required water pressure to the satisfaction of the Fire Marshall.
All production units shall require permanent access and water supply. The Applicant shall
sign/date and reproduce the construction access/water supply agreement on all grading and
architectural plans. (Fire)
CODE REQUIREMENTS
87. The Developer shall comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code
including Chapter 15.04 "Grading Ordinance" as amended. Preparation of the Final Map and all
plans shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the City of
Chula Vista Subdivision Ordinance and Subdivision Manual. (Engineering)
88. The Developer shall underground all utilities within the subdivision in accordance with
Municipal Code requirements to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. (Engineering)
89. The Developer shall comply with all relevant Federal, State, and Local regulations, including
the Clean Water Act. The Developer shall be responsible for providing all required testing and
documentation to demonstrate said compliance as required by the City Engineer. (Engineering)
90. The Developer shall comply with Council Policy No. 522-02 regarding maintenance of natural
channels within open spaces. (Engineering)
91. The Developer shall pay the following fees in accordance with the City Code and Council
Policy:
a. The Transportation and Public Facilities Development Impact Fees
b. Signal Participation Fees
c. All applicable sewer fees, including but not limited to sewer connection fees
8-33
Resolution xxxxx
Page 23
d. Salt Creek Sewer DIF.
The Developer shall pay the amount of said fees in effect at the time of issuance of building
p=its. (Engineering, Planning & Building)
GROWTH MANAGEMENT/PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN (pFFP)/
PHASING
92. Developer shall comply with Chapter 19.09 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (Growth
Management) as may be amended from time to time by the City. Said chapter includes but is
not limited to: threshold standards (19.09.04), public facilities finance plan implementation
(19.09.090), and public facilities finance plan amendment procedures (19.09.100).
(Engineering, Planning & Building)
93. Developer shall develop the Project in accordance with the approved SPA and PFFP phasing
plan. (Engineering, Planning & Building)
HOMEOWNERS ASSOCIATIONS (HOA)/DECLARATION OF COVENANTS,
CONDmONS AND RESTRICTIONS CC&Rs)
94. The Declaration of Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&Rs) shall be submitted and
approved by the City Engineer, City Attorney, Director of Planning & Building, Director of
General Services and Director of Public Works. The CC&Rs shall include but not be limited to
the following obligations:
a. A requirement that the EastLake ill Senior Housing Project HOA shall maintain
comprehensive general liability insurance against liability incident to ownership or use of
the EastLake ill Senior Housing Project Homeowners property.
b. Before any revisions to provisions of the CC&Rs that may particularly affect the City can
become effective, said revisions shall be approved by the City. The EastLake ill Senior
Housing Project HOA shall not seek approval from the City of any revisions of conditions
relating to the CC&Rs pursuant to the conditions of approval without the prior consent of
100% of the holders of first mortgages or property owners within the EastLake ill Senior
Housing Project HOA.
c. The EastLake ill Senior Housing Project HOA shall defend, indemnify and hold harmless
the City and its agents, officers and employees, from any claim, action, or proceeding
against the City, or its agents, officers, or employees related to or arising from the
maintenance activities of the MHOA.
d. The EastLake ill Senior Housing Project HOA shall not seek to be released by the City from
the maintenance obligations described herein without the prior consent of the City, which
may be withheld in the City's sole discretion, and 100% of the holders of first mortgages or
property owners within the MHOA.
8-34
Resolution xxxxx
Page 24
e. The EastLake ill Senior Housing Project HOA is required to procure and maintain a policy
of comprehensive genera1liability insurance written on a per occurrence basis in an amount
not less than one million dollars combined single limit The policy shall be acceptable to the
City and name the City as additionally insured.
f. The CC&Rs shall include provisions assuring EastLake ill Senior Housing Project HOA
membership an advance notice such as the USA Dig Alert Service in perpetuity.
g. The CC&Rs shall include provisions that provide the City the right, but not the obligation,
to enforce the CC&R provisions in the same manner as any owner in the Project.
h. The CC&R provisions may not be revised at any time without prior written permission of
the City.
1. The EastLake ill Senior Housing Project HOA shall not seek to dedicate or convey for
public streets, land used for private streets without approval of 100% of all the HOA
members or holders of first mortgages within the HOA
J. In order to avoid indirect impacts to Lower Otay Reservoir, the Developer and their
successors and assigns agree that fertilizers, herbicides and pesticides shall not be applied
to any manufactured slopes that drain to Lower Otay Reservoir. Potable water shall be
used for irrigation on the manufactured slopes that drain to Lower Otay Reservoir. In
addition, the storm conveyance systems shall include the use of the City of San Diego's
. Source Water Protection Guidelines for New Development (2004) and incorporate best
site design and source controls to protect drinking water.
95. Future property owners shall be notified during escrow by a document to be initialized by the
owners of the maintenance responsibility of the EastLake ill Senior Housing Project HOA
and their estimated annual cost. The Developer shall submit the document and obtain the
approval of the City Engineer and Director of Planning and Building prior to approval of the
Final Map for the Project. (Engineering, Planning & Building)
VITI. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS
If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be
implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented
and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify alJ
approvals herein granted, deny, or further condition issuance of all future building permits,
deny, revoke, or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of
approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with
said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No vested rights are gained by Developer
or a successor in interest by the City's approval of this Resolution.
IX.INV ALIDITYj AUTOMATIC REVOCATION
It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon
the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated; and that in
the event that anyone or more terms, provision, or conditions are determined by a Court of
.
8-35
Resolution xxxxx
Page 25
competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution shall be deemed
to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio.
It is in the public's interest for City to require EastLake to indemnify the City against the
adverse risks and costs of a challenge to City's actions in approving the Tentative
Subdivision Map for EastLake ill Senior Housing Project, Chula Vista Tract 06-11 and
related discretionary approvals, if any; and
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the Mayor of the City of Chula Vista is hereby authorized
and directed to execute said agreement for and on behalf of the City.
Presented by:
Approved as to form by:
---
)
Jim Sandoval
Director of Planning & Building
titlAnn Moor
City Attorney
8-36
-.-
...
u
w
.,
0<
-D::z~
-D. '" ';"
a..- s:~
:JiwC)~g
UJ~Z~t;
><C-"'~
I-..IU)>>--
~ ... ::>> ~ g
a]U)OG5
I-<C:C~=>
WD::~G
o
-
Z
W
U)
,I III!
iI11~'IHHjiH
III .;, , I
I I ! nind!
.,!!'d'id;!!ii
~ 'i;q!~ --~~i~
j!I!!~ .II!!!!,!
I I wi I
I' ;. , ," I nill; !
i .. "j" 'I I' , 'hi'" .
:!!I! i lill: ! i. !I'll !: m,il! i Ii !
';i",'III!L, I! I:. I il !!I"!i' I! ! ':
I; I, I' i !!'I j',! Wl'il h I ,Iii! ! i!' jl~ P
!,IIIII! i ',i! I h ' ;didi! i! ili!!,!;!1 I fl' I
.: 1!!!!!I!i!!ii!illill!!j!I,il!i!i,l!!jii!!!1li!lill!I!!!!i!!,!,!
'I Ihh I!" 'I" i I 'il '11"1' 'n' "n! oil '
!i pm!!I'.:!!!!!!'1i Ih:W!!'Ii.i:iij!1i:!I!i!i!!;. !il! :~!
Ii I! I: i:! '. hi. ',' :11 !II~ ,I' Ii!' ,!I ~'III!: L !illl'~!~ II =n III~ Ii' III
'I ,!,rdu.,: 1IIIi!iw!'iilll'! I :"jiLljlll!lt;!j'II"'I!
~I!. !!! !I!!;!! !~iI!i !!.!I!:!!I !I!~ !I!;I! !!I !:! !IU:'!!!=!::!I!! !!I!:I
,
"
I
!"O
.
!
~ "
~ " '.
~ iI ~ 2~
~ :i D ,<
~ '/112
, "
! I~
!
,
I,! I
! II II
,
!
II
! "I
! II.
~:'-.J!
L j\
-il-:~l II
'!Ii.l)'
"Ihl
.
"
"
~,
.
ffi
~
~
~I!
m 'i ~
!'~ I. .~
ai ;i
: irl!1 t
/ jsi! r
JiU ~
l~i!1
II
"I
;1 ~
!1!
~g~
\:/
fffr~
i ,r ,I
I "
,
.~ ~ ~~~;~T:,f
o 0
;
Ii .
~ H ~ ~ .
!! ,
~ ! i . I
'! '!' .
'III' II .1 !
i, I' ' ., ~ii h~
, .
!!I! I' " I .11"
I' 'I . iI . , :11 ila ~ .!~ ,
!i ..' Ii I 101~ ~ ~
8 .1 ~ ~ I ,_; id
I. "1
n1H!i .. ~ ' II! ih , il~
., .
pip" <J c ~ !tag i'i i .
~ I ~~ I I: ~ 1,; 1o~1o 1~1o I:!
i I ~; I III hI I~ !
m I i .!l1i ~~~nU
~ I "I !' '. ~(i ! Iii.
~ ; I ~I.~ ~ ,I i ~ I!: '"
Ii 1,1" II!; ,.! !Ii 1(' <'. ~I !!ft ..
: i' ~ a.l. ~ ii h' H~ :i} !Iii , .
<II .. ~.. . ..
>-
to
W
~,
=~~
~ w~'~
~:::.::: z;!
r= :5 (fj ~
1>51-:::1:5
~ (1)0:>
, ~ <( J: ~I
I" w o::~
\'1" 00.
11;1 tE I
till! en,
!II.,
j,l
(J)' ,
r" I.'
, "
I,}
, I
n!
~ II!~
~ i!;: I I
3; 11i' .
ffi :h~ I t
~i
II
"j
!I.
i)'
h~
c/ .
~L/'P J
-;.\ ! ,j
i~ I; Ii
"I~ 'IIi!
-, "
~ - '"=
~~ LIJ.
'!i ~ 'I
~, ~ I;
i I,) ~ I'.JI
!, ! 'I'
0:: ~i'
I ~I: ~ ;u~
:1
8-37
EXHIBIT 'A'
i C'\I 'II{"oI ~
,
..
>-
U
W
;~~
," ~ ~~!
~ :)Z,!
~ I ~ I- ~;
:z U) 0 ~
~!: j:! <(::r.i]
:; I~~ W~~
""II!'! 05
!". -
_"1' z
i ~ .i!~! ~
"
.."". .'
, <':0> - j
.! I,
-'-"
-.
"',"'
I
;, .,
;'
;:-
.(])
. ~
'.
,J'
1,-
j,f
I
,
! !
I;
,,",,
"
"
'.~~
"J' . ,
>_"~..., _ ~ ,i-
fi .-t ,~ ,"!i
), Lilli
'.'!' t, !!','
ft-
lU"
>-
"Z
_w
leU
"
>-~
-,Z
az
<(
a:
>-
, ~
;.<!'~
. ' ~,
Ie' !!"
-tw....
II
~
- ~
,
nl !
I !
~ ,
I; i ~~j ~
I!i! I
"j ~
t.1 .I .
, ~
~, I
0
~
<I ,
;i ~
i ~
! I
.
! <
"
11 !
\ 'I i
" 0
.
~I
roC;
D
-,'"
w'C
uO
a:z
;:"
Q,
:,
,II
, . .
I!
ii' c,-,:<;-;,
..
_f-
....
--
,r
,
.,
.
,;'::/,~ '
EXHIBIT 'A'
8-38
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item No.:
Meeting Date: June 20, 2006
Cj
ITEM TITLE:
Report: On Championship Off-Road Racing (CORR) Conditional Use
Permit (pCC 06-054) May 20 and 21,2006 races.
Dire"", of PI=ri"" ~d B"il~
1
City Manager d (4/5ths Vote: Yes No X)
SUBMITTED BY:
REVIEWED BY:
On May 2, 2006 the City Council approved a Conditional Use (CUP) permit for Championship
Off-Road Racing (CORR) to conduct four weekend race events for short track off-road truck
races on the existing track in Village Two of the Otay Ranch. The Council required City staff to
report back on the status of the May races. This report summarizes staffs fmdings. No major
issues arose from the conduct of the race that would require the modification or revocation of the
CUP.
RECOMMENDATION: Accept the report and direct staff to continue monitoring July races.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: N/A
DISCUSSION:
CORR held the off road truck races on the existing track in Village Two of the Otay Ranch on
May 20 and 21 as permitted by the CUP. This report is in response to the City Council
requirement for a debriefing after the first CORR race event weekend.
City staff and CORR representatives met to review the first racing event weekend. According to
CORR representatives, the attendance increased from the last year's races. There were no major
issues or concerns generated by the larger crowds. In general, all of the conditions of approval
were implemented, and where minor issues occurred, they were quickly corrected during the
event.
City staff including planners, environmental monitors, code enforcement offices, traffic
engineers, Fire Marshal and Police officers met on May 24th to review the conduct of the May
race. City staff then discussed their findings with CORR representatives on June I st. It was
agreed upon at that meeting that revisions to the operational plans will be made to address all of
the concerns prior to the July 22nd and 23rd race weekend. The CUP provides for revisions to the
operational plans to address minor issues. The revisions to the operational plans are as follows:
I. Traffic Control Plan (Traffic Engineering and Police Dept.): CORR representatives and
the Police Department were satisfied with the traffic flow both before and after each race
day. Nearly all public access to the site including campers was ITom Olympic Parkway
9-1
Page 2, Item No.: ~
Meeting Date: June 20. 2006
and Heritage Road, which provided substantial queuing and there was no stacking into
the public streets. CORR representatives would like to allow approximately 1/3 of the
public (based on the approximately 70 campers and the patrons needing handicapped
access) to utilize the secondary access point at La Media Road and Birch Road. In return
for such an allowance, CORR representatives will provide barricades and security
personnel at the residential entries into Village Six to prevent any race traffic from
occurring in residential neighborhoods. Staff believes that this access with additional
control will not impact the Village Six residences.
2. Security Plan (Police Dept.): The plan will be updated to eliminate in and out privileges
for patrons, except for campers. Due to the in and out privileges, there were five auto
thefts that occurred in the parking lot on the first race day, this privilege was eliminated
the next day and no additional thefts occurred. The Police Department also has a safety
concern with the use of small-motorized vehicles (mini-bikes, pocket bikes, and go-carts,
golf carts) associated with the race teams in the pedestrian aisle between the grandstands
the race team pits. As a result, the use of small-motorized vehicles will be eliminated
behind the grandstands, and these small-motorized vehicles will be limited to the
perimeter drive aisle north of the pit areas.
3. Emergency Medical Plan (Fire Dept.): The plan will be updated to address equipment
needs and training. The Fire Department will continue to work with CORR
representatives to determine the need for brush trucks, water trucks, Jaws of Life
equipment, and ambulance services on site. In addition, CORR representatives will
coordinate training for pit personnel on the clearance of track accidents and the use of fire
extinguishers the day prior to the next race weekend. Additional safety measures and
barricades to protect the infield and the grandstand areas may also be implemented as part
of the revised Emergency Medical Plan.
In addition, it was agreed upon that any changes to the site plan will be reviewed and approved
well in advance of the upcoming July 22nd and 23rd race weekend. CORR representatives will
present City staff a site plan showing proposed revisions to the previously approved site plan by
June 30th.
By providing the revised site plan early on, any changes to the location and spacing of temporary
structures such vendors and race team pit and tent areas can be addressed prior to actual race set-
up. For example, the Fire Department and CORR representatives are working together to
determine whether the canopies currently used for the tent structures above the race team pit
areas can be allowed per the Fire codes.
The Code Enforcement Section participated in the monitoring of the race event weekend
(working off the applicant's deposit account). Code Enforcement Officers worked both race
days and noted the following issues:
. Two race teams (and their diesel IS-wheel trucks) arrived prior to the Wednesday arrival
time prescribed in the conditions for arrival during the week prior to the race events;
9-2
..
Page 3, Item No.:
Meeting Date: June 20. 2006
Cj
.
The number ofrace trucks on the racetrack exceed the permitted one at a time rule during
the Friday practice sessions;
Race team members were driving haphazard on pocket-bikes, scooters and ATV's
beyond the race team pit-area into the pedestrian aisle behind the grandstands;
A live band was seen playing music within one of the vendor beer gardens, and there was
a Mariachi band moving through the crowd;
A second helicopter was seen over the racetrack;
There was too much trash piling up in the parking lots;
Two campfires were seen in the camp ground area but were quickly extinguished;
There were signs advertising the race event located within the public right-of-way.
.
.
.
.
.
.
In response, CaRR representatives noted that the vendors who sponsored the live entertainment
between races and the second helicopter were uninformed of the conditions. caRR
representatives promised to communicate the conditions of approval to all race participants to
avoid future violations. Additional trash receptacles will be provided in the parking lots. The
signs were removed from the public right-of-w1Y as soon as CaRR officials were notified.
Code Enforcement was also the City contact for citizen phone complaints. There were a total of
three citizen complaints received by the Code Enforcement Section regarding the race event
weekend. The complaints were as follows:
. Dogs brought onto the race event site that were without leashes;
. Noise, and the dust clouds that were created around the racetrack during the racing
events, and
. The ugly view of the tent canopies that could be seen from nearby residential homes, and
the mud that was tracked onto La Media Road the Monday morning after the race
weekend (due to rains that occurred Sunday evening after the race events ended).
Environmental monitors were on site during the race events and reported that all Mitigated
Negative Declaration mitigation measures and reporting requirements were followed.
FISCAL IMP ACT:
caRR's deposit accounts paid for all staff time to inspect and monitor the race event.
J :\Planning\OtayranchVPB\CORR\COUNCIL AGENDA ST A TEMENT.6.20Report.doc
9-3
Qt-: LOUVlC-C I
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT
84 EAST "J" STREET. CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . 619425-9600
EACH CIDLD IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH
BOARO OF EDUCATION
CHERYL S. COX, EdD.
LARRY CUNNINGHAM May 19, 2006
PATRICK A. JUDD
BERTHA J. L6PEZ
PAMELA B. SMIm
SUPERINTENDENT
LOWELL J. BILLINGS, EcLD.
The Honorable Steve Padilla
Mayor of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
JUN 0 1 2006
Dear Mayor Padilla:
The Ad Hoc Committee was formed in 2003 to continue the work of the
Chula Vista City/Schools Community Task Force on Growth. Specifically,
the Committee was charged to review the following issues:
. Current and projected school enrollment relative to building design
capacity.
. Currently issued and projected building permits.
. Factors affecting student generation rates.
. School construction plans, schedules, and projected completion
dates.
. Impacts of infrastructure requirements on school construction.
. School capital funding status.
. Plans for joint use of facilities.
The Committee met five times during 2004 and 2005. While there are still
outstanding requests for agenda items on a common school calendar and
traffic in school areas, it must be noted that these issues fall outside the
original scope of this Committee. That is not to diminish their importance but
to suggest that this is not the venue to address them. Recently, the
) Superintendents of five South County school districts (Chula Vista, National,
San Ysidro, South Bay, and Sweetwater) drafted common school calendars
for the 2006-07 school year. These proposed calendars will be jointly
reviewed by the Boards of Education of the five districts and, hopefully, jointly
bargained with employee organizations. Regarding traffic in school areas,
we find working directly with the specific school district's Business Office and
the City of Chula Vista Traffic Department is the most expedient manner to
resolve concerns.
11-1
The impetus for forming the Ad Hoc Committee was a need for clear and
accurate communication regarding the status of school construction. We
believe that appropriate communication vehicles for sharing relevant
information are in place for all three agencies. In particular, the changes
listed below have filled any identified communication gaps:
· The City of Chula Vista expanded its Growth Management
Oversight Commission annual report to include specific questions
regarding both school districts' abilities to accommodate growth in
student enrollment. (A copy of these sections is attached.) These
items include detailed information regarding new facilities/schools
required to accommodate forecasted growth during the next five
years.
· The City of Chula Vista, the school districts, and residential
developers communicate frequently regarding the location, access,
traffic patterns, and the size and design of new schools. The
practice of co-locating elementary schools and neighborhood parks
continues.
· Each January, the Sweetwater Union High School District provides
a report to its Board of Trustees on its facilities
Information is available on the district's
www.suhsd.k12.ca.us.
master plan.
website at
· Both school districts prepare an annual School Facilities Needs
Analysis. CVESD reports on facilities needed to accommodate
growth and construction funding sources during this report.
· Both school districts prepare a five-year projection of facility
improvement needs by school site as part of their deferred
maintenance plan.
· Both school districts provide an annual newsletter to all taxpayers
in community facilities districts (CFDs) formed to fund school
construction. These newsletters address the following topics:
o How Mello-Roos Districts are established.
o Why Mello-Roos special tax assessment rates vary.
o The length of time that assessments are levied.
o Which schools were built with Mello-Roos taxes.
o How special taxes are disclosed.
o How many different CFDs exist.
11-2
Since the formation of the original Task Force, and even since the
establishment of the Ad Hoc Committee, both school districts have
significantly expanded and upgraded their Internet presence. Many of the
above referenced documents as well as additional information regarding
progress on construction projects and Governing Board or City Council
agendas and action are published on the following websites:
City of Chula Vista
Chula Vista Elementary School District
Sweetwater Union High School District
www.ci.chula-vista.ca.us
www.cvesd.k12.ca.us
www.suhsd.k12.ca.us
We believe that the most important objective of the Ad Hoc Committee,
furthering communication among the three agencies and between each
agency and the public, has been met. From this perspective, we propose
that we disband this Committee. If you do not concur, please contact Susan
Fahle at (619) 425-9600, extension 1370.
The Ad Hoc Committee demanded a great deal from its members, and we
remain grateful for your commitment and service.
Sincerely,
~h-t~
Bertha J. Lopez
Chairperson,
Ad Hoc Committee
A>fOtf!I1/. ;:>, ~/
"' /' .
// (
/ l.,6wel\ J Billings, E .0.
l/Superintendent, (/
Chula Vista Elementary School District
11-3
RESOLUTION NO.
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA IN SUPPORT OF
ESTABLISHMENT OF ENFORCEABLE LIMITS ON
CALIFORNIA'S GREENHOUSE GAS EMISSIONS
AS PROPOSED IN ASSEMBLY BILL 32
WHEREAS, the overwhelming majority of the world's climate scientists
now agree that global warming is a real problem, that the pace of warming is
likely to accelerate over the next century, and that human activity is the likely
cause of the build-up in global warming pollution; and
WHEREAS, addressing the impacts of global warming may severely
burden state and local government agencies with new costs and obligations; and
WHEREAS, local governments significantly influence the community's
greenhouse gas emissions through their actions concerning land use,
transportation, construction, waste management, energy supply, and energy
management; and
WHEREAS, actions taken by local government to reduce greenhouse gas
emissions and increase energy efficiency provide multiple local benefits by
improving air quality and public health, and saving money for the local
government, its businesses, and its residents; and
WHEREAS, independent economic studies demonstrate that reducing
California's greenhouse gas emissions to 1990 levels by 2020 is achievable and
will save California families and businesses billions of dollars and provide tens of
thousands of new jobs by 2020; and
WHEREAS, by acting soon to limit greenhouse gas emissions, California
can capture significant economic benefits by securing a leadership position in the
emerging worldwide clean energy market; and
WHEREAS, California has a long history of national leadership on
environmental policy, and California's actions are critical to protect the state from
global warming.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City of Chula Vista
supports establishment of enforceable limits on California's greenhouse gas
emissions as proposed in Assembly Bill 32.
Presented By:
Approved as to form by:
Steve Castaneda
Councilmember
,~~ /J ~l!~<v~~
Ann Moore
City Attorney
H:\Attorney\Final Resos\2006\6 20 06\Resolution in Support of AB32 June 20 2006.doc
rl ;.,
G. 20'o~ A<jeJ["lck..,
c..c,\..Lf)c.; \ CO"" "" e.i'-!:5
-r-Je0'\ t;l.:E>
RESOLUTION NO. 2006 - \C\3
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA
VISTA MODIFYING THE COMPENSATION FOR THE BOARD OF
DIRECTORS OF THE CHULA VISTA REDEVELOPMENT
CORPORATION AS SET IN COUNCIL RESOLUTION 2004-
383/AGENCY RESOLUTION 1900.
WHEREAS, on February 3, 2004, the City Council and Redevelopment Agency
directed staff and consultants to prepare an analysis and discussion paper on the creation
of a 501(c)3 corporation; and
WHEREAS, on November 23, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution 2004-
383 authorizing the creation of the 502(c)3, directing staff to prepare the necessary
documents, appropriating a fiscal year 2004/2005 operating budge and compensation
schedule; and directing staff to report back with the necessary documents; and
WHEREAS, on November 23, 2004, the City Council adopted Resolution 2004-
383 establishing a compensation schedule for the 501(c)3 board members at $750 per
month and $1500 per month for the Board Chair; and
WHEREAS, on May 24, 2005, the City Council adopted the final legal and
operating documents to complete the formation of the 501(c)3; and
WHEREAS, included in those documents adopted on May 24, 2005 were the
Bylaws for the 501(c)3, the Chula Vista Redevelopment Corporation ("CVRC"); and
WHEREAS, the Bylaws of the CVRC, set out in Article VII, Section 5 that:
Section 5. Comoensation. Directors may receive such
compensation for their services and reimbursement for
costs and expenses incurred in service to the corporation, as
may be fixed or determined by resolution of the City
Council of the City Chula Vista, as may be amended from
time to time by the City Council.
WHEREAS, the City Council has reevaluated the amount of compensation for the
directors and would like to consider alternative compensation structures, including a
tiered structure for the Independent and City Directors; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has determined that in the interim the compensation
should be set at $0 effective August I, 2006.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby:
I. Modify the compensation schedule pursuant to Article VII, Section 5 of the
Bylaws, for CVRC members from $750 per month to $0 and from $1500 per
month for the Board Chair to $0 effective August 1,2006.
2. Request the City Attorney to report back regarding the ability to have a tiered
compensation schedule for the Independent Directors and City Directors.
3. Directs the City Attorney to return with the necessary modifications to the
Bylaws and any other operating documents necessary to eliminate the
payment of compensation to the Board of Directors and/or to create the tiered
compensation schedule for the Independent Director and City Director.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
John McCann
Deputy Mayor
Ann Moore
City Attorney
J:AttomeylReso/Benefits/Compensation CRVC
,,, RECEIVED
~li? Mayor and City Council
~ ~it~ ~~:rthhU~v~~S~: '06
~ -<=-c: Chula Vista, Ca 91910 JJN 22 P12:56 M E M 0
CllY OF 619691 5044 - 619 476 5379 Fax
CHULA VISTA
~j~:i~~~.?'~;:~~1!I~~tliQ~_~:'~~~ir~w.~~~~;H~~.z,'~~~-'
Thursday, June 15, 2006
TO: The Honorable Mayor & City Council
CC:
FROM:
Jim Thomson, City Manager
Maria Kachadoorian, Director of Finance
Ed Van Enoo, Office of Budget
Steve Castaneda, councilm~{
FY '07 Budget Recommendations
JU;'l 1 5 2000
RECEIVED
RE:
~~~~m:lI.iflli'.JIftJ~:om~~~aY:ll'.~J1~E-"';"~~~;~~~~~
As the City Council moves to adopt the proposed budget for FY 07, I would like to
provide recommendations for additions to the budget document now under
consideration. In particular, I would recommend that the council consider additions in
three areas: Community Choice Aggregation (CCA), shifting additional resources to
street maintenance/repair and enhancing constituent service and policy review capacity
within the Mayor/City Council offices.
./
1. COMMUNITY CHOICE AGGREGATION
In May of 2004, Chula Vista took a major step in moving closer toward energy
independence and securing a long-term strategy to utilize more renewable and clean
energy sources by approving an ordinance to designate itself a community choice
aggregator. Over the last two years much has been done to clarify the feasibility of
aggregator status. Community meetings have been held, the Public Utilities
Commission has adopted rules favorable to CCA and an initial feasibility study has been
completed and accepted by the City Council.
Now, we are at a pivotal point. The council must make an informed decision whether to
move forward with implementation or abandon the effort all together. I recommend that
we take the needed steps to determine if CCA makes business and policy sense, By
updating the business plan and analyzing the fiscal implications of CCA as a result of
the recently adopted rules and tariffs, the Council can more accurately determine the
best direction to pursue with respect to CCA.
I recommend that the Council approve resources needed to generate the necessary
data regarding the feasibility of a Chula Vista CCA program and bring back the matter to
the full Council for a policy decision on the final stages, including implementation.
2. ESTABLISH STREET REPAIR/MAINTENANCE FUND
This year's budget includes a significant increase in the capital improvement budget.
While that budget includes a significant amount of investment for maintenance, all
dedicated funds appear to be as a result of restricted fees, taxes and grants. There are
no General Fund revenues dedicated to this core responsibility. Though I believe that a
portion of discretionary funds should be invested for road maintenance, I understand
that the current budget proposed by the City Manager does not have the capacity to
withstand a major shift of obligations from the General Fund. I would ask, however that
the budget for the next two-year cycle include an option to dedicate General Fund
revenue for street maintenance purposes.
Regarding this year's budget, at the budget workshop held on June 8th, I recommended
that we implement a plan to request that each department submit proposals/strategies
to streamline operations and reduce costs. We should aggressively pursue this
program and quantify savings on a quarterly basis in a report included with other
financial data we currently receive. It is my recommendation that we dedicate realized
savings to a fund that would augment existing street maintenance operations. Though
the additional revenue may be nominal at first, it would go a long way to indicate the
city's commitment to reducing costs and reinvesting in infrastructure that directly
benefits our citizens.
3.CONSTlTUENT SERVICES
ENHANCEMENTS
AND
POLICY
REVIEW
ANALYSIS
The rapid increase in our population and the growing diversity of the city's
neighborhoods has put a greater demand on each of the Council offices as they strive
to respond to our community's needs. It is becoming clear that the position of Council
Aide has become more demanding with respect to duties and expertise. In order to
attract and retain qualified and motivated individuals to serve, I propose that we offer
compensation commensurate with the degree of professionalism and commitment
required to adequately serve the citizens of Chula Vista.
Over the last year, the Aide position has evolved to demand an higher level of expertise
to include Constituent Services, Community Representative, Policy Advisor, including
work on City Council Subcommittees and Councilmember Board Assignments, i.e.
Water, Energy, etc., Media Relations, CVRC, Intergovernmental Liaison and Business
Office Professional.
~,
,,~.
In other jurisdictions, base salaries for similar positions range from $35,000 for entry-
level positions to in excess of $80,000 for experienced policy aides. I am not
recommending that the city adopt a wide compensation range, however I do believe that
salaries should be competitive with other jurisdictions that place similar demand on their
at-will employees. Currently, the Council has a base figure of $57,000 (inclusive) to
compensate staff, I would recommend that the Council consider increasing that figure to
bring the pay scale in line with jurisdictions that demand the same level of work and
expertise. I would recommend that the Council consider increasing the line item by
$15,000 to give each member a greater ability to attract and retain qualified staff to best
serve their constituents.
.,
',..'!i_
~F
'\ w.."
.. ~'"
Thank you for your consideration.
;,:'
_.,~, '->,