HomeMy WebLinkAboutRCC AGENDA PK 1993/09/20negative declaration
PROJECT NAME: General Plan/Zoning Consistency Study
Subarea B4-F and Subarea B4-G
PROJECT Generally bounded by 5th Avenue to the east,
LOCATION: Broadway Avenue to the west, G street to the south
and Madrona Street to the north.
APN NVDffiERS: Subarea B4-F: 567-102-41,42; 567-103-13,14,23,25.
Subarea B4-G: 567-103-OS to 13; 567-140-06 to 10,13
to 19,23; 567-150.
PROJECT
APPLICANT: City of Chula Vista
CASE NO: IS-93-32 DATE: July 14, 1993
A. Protect Setting +
The project site consists of two subareas (B-4F and B-4 G) in
central Chula Vista totalling 16.6 acres. At the present
time, the entire study area contains parcels with zoning
designations inconsistent with the general plan designations
established as part of the 1989 General Plan Update. The
proposed project would provide consistency between the zone
and general plan in order to comply with state and local land
use policies and regulations.
Subarea B-4F consists of 6.9 acres generally located west of
Fifth Avenue, north of Park Way, south of Madrona Street and
east of Broadway Avenue (see Exhibit 1), This subarea is
built-out with higher density multi-family development. There
are approximately 300 multi-family residential units in this
subarea, with an estimated population of 808 persons.
Subarea B-4G covers 9.7 acres generally located west of Fifth
Avenue, north-of Vance Street, south of Madrona Street and
east of Broadway Avenue (see Exhibit 1). The housing stock
within this subarea used to be predominated by single-family
residences, however, due to the number of under-utilized
parcels, it has transitioned to a mixture of single- and
multi-family homes. There are currently 135 multi-family
residences in this subarea, with an estimated population of
466 persons. ,
Both subareas are located in previously developed and
urbanized areas of the City, therefore, it is not anticipated
that any sensitive plant or animal resources will be impacted.
All public services and facilities have already been provided
to both subareas.
city of ohula vista planning dapartmant
./•
«r~
M~
ra.o~ : nQ~
B
C.
Pro]ect Descrivtion
California Planning, Zoning, and Development Law requires that
general law city zoning designations be consistent with
general plan designations (Government Code Section 65860).
The same result is obtained in Chula Vista, a charter city,
because Government Code Section 65803 authorizes charter
cities to adopt an ordinance requiring consistency and Chula
Vista has done so (Chula Vista Municipal Code §19.12.020).
The proposed project would provide consistency between the
zone and general plan within both subareas through the
implementation of two types of discretionary actions--rezones
and/or general plan amendments.
In Subarea B-4F, a general plan amendment from Medium Density
Residential (6-11 du/ac) to High Density Residential (18-27
du/ac) will bring the zone and general plan into conformance.
The proposed general plan designation of High Density
Residential will more accurately reflect the existing multi-
family residential character of the area. This subarea has
already been built out at densitites higher than the existing
general plan designation. The proposed general plan amendment
will implement the existing R-3 zone.
In Subarea B4-G, a rezone and general plan amendment will be
implemented to achieve consistency. First, existing zoning
will be changed from R-3 Apartment Residential which allows up
to 32 du/ac to R-3-P22 Apartment Residential with Precise Plan
which allows up to 22 du/ac. The recommended R-3-P22 zoning
will be more compatible with existing lot sizes, density, and
overall development patterns in the subarea. Second, a
general plan amendment from Medium Density Residential (6-il
du/ac) to Medium-High Density Residential (12-18 du/ac) will
implement the R-3-P22 zone. Implementation of these two
discretionary actions will more accurately reflect the
existing community character.
Comvatibility with Zoning and Plans
Existing zoning within both subareas is currently R-3
Apartment Residential with a general plan designation of
Medium Density Residential (6-11 du/ac). The proposed project
is a city-initiated project to ensure that the zone and
general plan are in conformity with Chula Vista Municipal Code
§19.12.020.
The proposed project will more accurately reflect existing
development patterns in the subarea and in the surrounding
area. Surrounding land uses generally consist of
"Thoroughfare Commercial" and "Medium Density Residential" to
the west, "Public and Quasi-Public" and "Medium Residential"
to the south, and "Medium Density Residential" to the east and
north.
P'PC NDCHECK.LST Page 2
D. Identification of Environmental Effects
The following impacts have been determined to be less than
significant.
Less Than Significant Impacts
1. School Impacts
The Sweetwater Union High School District and Chula Vista
Elementary School District have both commented on the proposed
project. Both Districts expressed their concerns that the
project will have an adverse impact on school facilities.
Schools serving the study area include Chula Vista High
School, Chula Vista Junior High School, and Vista Square
Elementary School.
According to the Sweetwater Union High School District, Chula
Vista High School is operating at 114 ~ of capacity, and Chula
Vista Junior High School is operating at 97~ of capacity
(July, 1993). A letter received from the ,Sweetwater High
School District (April 9, 1993) indicates that an increase in
density could intensify the school overcrowding pressures in
central and western Chula Vista. A letter expressing similar
concerns was received from the Chula Vista Elementary School
District on April 19, 1993. The Elementary School District is
currently operating over their permanent capacity (Shurson,
July 1993).
Potential school impacts were assessed for both subareas.
Project implementation in Subarea B-4F will not create
additional dwelling units since maximum build-out has already
been attained. Therefore, no additional students will be
generated, and no impacts to schools will occur in Subarea B-
4F.
In Subarea B4-G, potential school impacts were evaluated by
calculating the number of additional dwelling units which may
be generated by project implementation, and applying student
generation factors obtained from each School District. A
total of 68 additional dwelling units could be constructed in
Subarea B-4G, if the project is approved, resulting in a
potential increase in students. --
Without project implementation, a total of 29 dwelling units
would be allowed by the existing general plan designations, if
under-utilized parcels were built out. The difference between
the number of dwelling units built under the proposed project
(68 du) and the existing general plan (29 du) results in a
total of 39 additional dwelling units in Subarea B-4G, after
project implementation.
Impacts to each School District were calculated based upon the
number of additional students which could be generated after
project implementation, assuming that maximum in-fill
WPC NDCHECK.LST Page 3
development occurs. The Chula Vista Elementary School
District's student generation rate of 0.30 students per
dwelling unit resulted in a total of 12 additional elementary
school students. The Sweetwater Union High School District's
student generation rates of 0.19 for junior high and 0.10 for
high school resulted in a total of 7 additional junior high
and 4 additional high school students for a total of 23
additional students. Table 1 reflects a comparative analysis
of how each school's enrollment figures will be affected by
these additional students.
The 12 additional elementary school students generated
represents a 2.1 ~ increase over current enrollment figures
for Vista Square Elementary School. The 7 additional junior
high school students represents 0.52 ~ over current enrollment
at Chula Vista Junior High School. And, the 4 additional high
school students represents a 0.22 g increase over current
enrollment figures for Chula Vista High School.
The total percentage increase in student generation over
existing enrollment figures for both School Districts will be
2.84 %. Because this represents a relatively=minor in student
generation, school impacts will be less than significant.
It should be noted, however, that although school impacts are
found to be less than significant under CEQA, the City and the
School Districts have been working together on the school
overcrowding issue. As a result, the City has agreed to allow
this project to proceed with the understanding that
development proposals subsequent to this project approval be
subject to a condition at the time of building permit
issuance. This condition is that the City of Chula Vista and
both School Districts agree to enforce any appropriate legal
mechanism sponsored by the Chula Vista Elementary School
District and the Sweetwater Union High School District, as may
be approved by the City, to reduce impacts to school
facilities.
VVPC NDCHECK.LST Page 4
TABLE 1
ANALYSIS OF SCHOOL IMPACTS - BASED ON CURRENT ENROLLMENT
Assumes Maximum Buildout Conditions of
Existing (RM/R3P14) & Proposed (RMH/R-3P22) Zone Categories
RM/R-3P22 R-3P14 Difference
Current # Add'1 Students # Add'1 Students # Add'1 Students
School Enrollment (% Increase) (% Increase) (% Increase)
Vista Square
Elem. 570 21 (+3.6%) 9 (+1.5 %) 12 (+2.1%)
C.V.Jr High
School 1,367 13 (+0.95%) 6 (+0.43%) 7 (+0.52%)
C.V. High
School 1,835 7 (+0.38%) 3 (+0.16%) 4 (+0.22%)
'fetal SNdetrts 4i i 18 23
Note: .Enrollment as of April 1993
. Student Generation Factors:
Elementary: 0.30 students per household
Jr. High: 0.19 "
High School 0.10
wac rmc~cx.isr Page 5
2. Land Uee Impacts
The proposed discretionary actions will correct present
inconsistencies between the plan and zone in Subarea B-4F
through a general plan amendment. By changing the general
plan from Medium Density Residential (6-11 du/ac) to High
Density Residential (18-27 du/ac), the general plan
designation will conform with the (existing R-3) zoning.
Zn Subarea B4-G, existing R-3 Apartment Residential zoning
will be changed to R-3-P22 Apartment Residential with Precise
Plan. The R-3-P22 zone allows a lesser density (22 du/ac)
than the existing R-3 zone (32 du/ac). In addition, the
general plan designation will be changed from Medium
Residential (6-11 du/ac) to Medium-High Residential (12-16
du/ac) to implement and be consistent with the R-3-P22 zone.
Both the rezone and general plan amendment will more clearly
reflect the scale, lot sizes, and density patterns found in
this subarea.
Objective 12 of the general plan is tp "Provide for
development of multi-family housing in a~ipropriate areas
convenient to public services, facilities, and circulation"
(p.i-7). The project provides multi-family residential
development in a neighborhood transitioning to higher density
uses and within one-quarter mile of Broadway Avenue and the
Chula Vista Shopping Center. The analysis conducted in the
initial study for this project leads to the conclusion that
the project meets this objective.
Project implementation will provide consistency between zoning
and the general plan, will comply with state and local land
use regulations and policies, and will more accurately reflect
existing land use patterns in both subareas. Therefore, land
use impacts have been determined to be less than significant.
3. Traffic/Circulation Imcacta
Primary access is provided to these subareas by "G" Street,
Fifth Avenue and Broadway Avenue. The City Traffic Engineer
calculated the potential impacts to the surrounding
circulation system after project implementation: The
estimated average daily trips (ADT) before and after project
completion for these access routes is as follows:
Roadway Before After
5th Avenue 6180 6912
"G" Street 4320 5412
Broadway 22,210 22,768
WPC NDCHECK.LST Page 6
According to the Chula Vista Engineering Department, if
Subarea B-4G were built out under the existing R-3 zone, a
total of 744 ADT would be generated (Ammerman, 1993). The
number of ADT generated with project implementation was
calculated by multiplying the number of dwelling units under
the existing R-3 zone (93 du) by SANDAG's traffic generation
factor of 8 ADT per dwelling unit for multi-family residences.
With project implementation, a reduction in dwelling units
from 93 d.u. to 68 d.u would occur, thereby reducing the
number of ADT generated 744 ADT to 544 ADT or a reduction in
vehicular traffic by 200 ADT, as compared to potential
buildout under existing general plan and zoning.
In conclusion, project implementation will not result in a
substantial increase in vehicular traffic in Subarea B-4G.
Project implementation will actually result in a reduction in
the amount of trips potentially generated under existing land
use designations.
Primary access roads are adequate to serve the project, and
the level of service (LOS) will remain at LOSt"C" or better on
all roadways affected. No traffic impacts will occur in
Subarea B-4 F, since it is already built out. Therefore,
traffic and circulation impacts will be less than significant.
4. Population/Houaina Imvacte
The proposed general plan/zoning consistency project will
allow 68 dwelling units to be built, under a maximum build-out
scenario in Subarea B-4G. Because Subarea B-4F is already
built out, no population or housing impacts will occur within
this subarea.
According to the City's current population coefficient of 2.68
persons per dwelling unit, 68 dwelling units will result in a
population increase of approximately 196 persons, if maximum
in-fill development occurs. The population increase under
existing land use designations would allow up to 268 persons,
or 72 fewer persons with :project implementation.
Due to the reduction in population which could occur in
Subarea B-4G, population and housing impacts are less than
significant.
Mitigation necessary to avoid significant effects
The proposed project is not associated with any significant or
potentially significant environmental impacts, therefore, no
mitigation will be required.
wPC NDCHECK.LST
E. Consultation
Individuals and Organizations.
City of Chula Vista:
Maryann Miller, Planning
Roger Daoust, Engineering
Cliff Swanson, Engineering
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering
Lance Fry, Planning
Frank Herrera, Planning
Ed Batchelder, Planning
Ken Larsen, Director of
Housing
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Building &
Crime Prevention, MaryJane Diosdada
Marty Schmidt, Parks & Recreation Dept.
Rich Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney
Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva
Applicant's Agent: Lance Fry, Assistant=Planner, City of
Chula Vista
2. Documents
City of Chula Vista, Chula Vista General Plan (1989).
Chula Vista Municipal Code.
"Draft Chula Vista General
Plan/Zoning Consistency Study for Study Area B-4
(Subareas B-4F and B-4G)," May 10, 1993.
Initial Studv
This environmental determination is based on the attached
Initial Study, any comments received on the Initial Study
and any comments received during the public review period
for this Negative Declaration. The report reflects the
independent judgement of the City of Chula Vista.
Further information Yegarding the environmental review of
this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning
Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA _91910.
WPC NDCF~CK.LST
Case No. IS-93-32
APPENDIX I
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
(To Be Completed By Lead Agency)
Background
1. Name of Proponent: Citv of Chula Vista
2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 276 Fourth Avenue. 691-5101
3. Date of Checklist: April 14. 1993
4. Name of Proposal: General Plan/Zonine Consistencv Studv
5. Initial Study Number: IS-93-32
Environmental Impacts
1. Earth. Will the proposal result in:
YES MAYBE NO
a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in
geologic substructures? ^ ^ ^
b. Disruptions, displacements, compaction or
overcovering of the soil? ^ ^ ^
c. Change in topography or ground surface
relief features? ^ ^ ^
d. The destruction, covering or modification
of any unique geologic or physical features? ^ ^ ^
e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of
soils, either on or off the site? ^ ^ ^
f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach
sands, or changes in siltation, deposition
or erosion which may modify the channel of
a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or
any bay, inlet or lake? ^ ^ ^
g. Exposure of people or property to geologic
hazards such as eazthquakes, landslides, mud
slides, ground failure, or similaz hazazds? ^ ^ ^
vurc rmcazcx.tsT Page 9
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning will not be associated with soils or
geological impacts. The proposed project affects primarily previously developed pazcels.
At the time actual development or redevelopment occurs, a soils report or other technical
studies required to assess site specific soils and geology impacts will be required by the
Chula Vista Engineering Department.
2. Air. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO
a. Substantial air emissions or deterioration
of ambient air quality? ^ ^ ^
b. The creation of objectionable odors? ^ ^ ^
c. Alteration of air movement, moisture, or
temperature, or any change in climate,
either locally or regionally? ^ ^ ^
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning will result in an incremental
increase in air emissions as the result of 744 additional vehiculaz trips in the project
azea. According to the Chula Vista Engineering Department, the projected number
of ADT generated by the project is considered to be minor (see k13
Transportation/Circulation) and will not result in a substantial impact to local or
regional air quality.
3. Water. Will the Proposal result in:
a. Changes in currents, or the course or
direction of water movements, in either
mazine or fresh waters?
b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage
patterns, or the rate and amount of
surface runoff?
c. Alterations to the course or flow or
flood waters?
d. Change in the amount of surface water
in any water body?
e. Dischazge into surface waters, or any
alteration of surface water quality,
including but not limited to temperature,
dissolved oxygen or turbidity?
YES MAYBE NO
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^
^ O- ^
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^
wac rroc~cK.rsr Page 10
f. Alteration of the direction or rate of
flow of ground waters? ^ ^ ^
g. Change in the quantity of ground waters,
either through direct additions or
withdrawals, or through interception of
an aquifer by cuts or excavations? ^ ^ ^
h. Substantial reduction in the amount of
water otherwise available for public
water supplies? ^ ^ ^
i. Exposure of people or property to water
related hazards such as flooding or
tidal waves? ^ ^ ^
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning will not have an adverse impact on
water quality. The project will not result in a significant increase in surface runoff, since
the project consists predominantly of redevelopment of previously disturbed sites located in
an urbanized azea. Water service is already available to the subazeas, therefore, water supply
is not an issue. Individual redevelopment projects will be required to comply with any City
regulations governing water conservation which aze in place at the time of building permit
issuance.
4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO
a. Change in the diversity of species, or
number of any species of plants (including
trees, shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic
plants)? ^ ^ ^
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
raze or endangered species of plants? ^ ^ ^
c. Introduction of new species of plants into
into an azea, or in a barrier to the normal
replenishment of existing species? ^ ^ ^
d. Reduction in acreage of any agricultural
crop? ^ ^ ^
wec rroc~cx.i.sr
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning will not adversely impact plant species
or habitat. The project will be implemented in a previously developed residential
neighborhood. There aze no sensitive plant .species on the site. Further environmental
review may be required at the time future development is proposed to assess potential
biological impacts on a site specific basis.
5. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in:
a. Change in the diversity of species, or
numbers of any species of animals (birds,
land animals including reptiles, fish and
shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)?
b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique,
raze or endangered species of animals?
c. Introduction of new species of animals
into an azea, or result in a bazrier to
the migration or movement of animals?
d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife
habitat?
YES MAYBE NO
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^
t
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning will not adversely impact animal
species or habitat. The project site is a previously developed residential neighborhood with
no sensitive, threatened or endangered species. Further environmental review will be
required at the time actual=development is proposed in the future to assess the potential for
impacts to wildlife or wildlife habitat.
6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO
a. Increases in existing noise levels? ^ ^ ^
b. Exposure of people to severe noise
levels? ^ ^ ^
P'PC NDCHECK.LST Page 12
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning will not cause a substantial
increase in ambient noise levels within the subazeas. At the time actual development
or redevelopment takes place, environmental review will be required to assess the
potential for site specific noise impacts from development. Due to the .relatively
minor level of traffic generated, vehicular noise impacts aze not anticipated to be
significant. The proposed land uses aze compatible with surrounding land uses and
do not have the potential to create adverse impacts to neazby sensitive receptors.
7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce
new light or glare?
YES MAYBE NO
^ ^ ^
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning will not create a significant increase
in light or glaze impacts, due to the relatively minor number of additional dwelling units j
allowed (68 d.u.) over the existing land use designations.
8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a
substantial alteration of the present or
planned land use of an area?
YES MAYBE NO
^ ^ ^
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning will not have an adverse impact
on land use chazacteristics, since the project will bring the zoning and general plan
. designations into conformity with surrounding land uses already present. The project
will not increase densities substantially beyond that which aze currently allowed by
existing land use designations.
9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO
a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural
resources? ^ ^ ^
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning would impact naturalaesonrces
such as fossil fuels, due to the increase in the number of dwelling units on the site.
However, this increase would be minor and incremental, and is found to be less than
significant.
WPC NDCF~CK.LST
10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve:
a. A risk of an explosion or the release of
hazazdous substances (including, but not
limited to oil, pesticides, chemicals or
radiation) in the event of an accident or
upset conditions?
Possible interference with an emergency
response plan or an emergency evacuation
plan?
YES MAYBE NO
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning would not result in the use of any
explosives or the release of any hazazdous or toxic substances. The land use designation
would not permit the development of commercial or industrial facilities which could be
associated with a risk of explosion or hazardous waste.
11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location r YES MAYBE NO
distribution, density, or growth rate of the human
population or an area? ~ ^ ~
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning could have an impact on population in
the project area by allowing an increase in the number of dwelling units beyond that allowed
according to existing land use designations. However, the proposed project will not generate
a significant increase in population and would be compatible with existing densities in the
project azea. Thus, the proposed project will not be significantly growth-inducing.
12. Housing. Will the proposal affect existing YES MAYBE NO
housing, or create a demand for additional
housing? ~ ^ ~
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning would not have a significant, adverse
affect on housing availability, nor will it create a demand for additional housing. The project
is designed to bring the general plan designation and zoning of the project site into
conformity to reflect more closely the chazacter of existing development. The project could
result in an increase in available housing stock in Chula Vista. Thus, the project will not
have a significant adverse effect on housing stock in the City.
wec rmcxecx.~sr Page 14
13. Transportation/Circulation. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO
a. Generation of substantial additional
vehicular movement? ^ ^ ^
b. Effects on existing pazking facilities,
or demand for new pazking? ^ ^ ^
c. Substantial impact upon existing
transportation systems? ^ ^ ^
d. Alterations to present patterns of
circulation or movement of people
and/or goods? ^ ^ ^
e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air
traffic? ^ ^ ^
f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor
vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? ^ ^ ^
g. A "lazge project" under the Congestion
Management Program? (An equivalent of
2400 or more average daily vehicle trips
or 200 or more peak-hour vehicle trips). ^ ^ ^
Comments:
The proposed GPA and rezone would have an incremental effect on traffic generation. Fifth
Avenue, Broadway Avenue, and "G" Street provide primary access to the project azea. Up
to 744 Average Daily Trips (ADT) would be generated with buildout of the site under the
existing R-3 zoning. This represents aworst-case scenario of traffic generation because the
R-3 zone allows a higher trip generation than the proposed project. The ADT on "G" Street
would increase from 4,320 to 5,412, the ADT on Fifth Avenue would increase from 6,180
to 6,912 and the ADT on Broadway would increase from 22,210 to 22,768. The current
Level of Service (LOS) for Fifth Avenue, Broadway, and "G" Street is "C" or better. The
LOS would remain at "C" or better after project implementation. The Engineering Division
has indicated that these roads aze adequate to serve the project, and no street improvements
or dedication would be required. At the time at which specific development is proposed, the
engineering division may require additional measures to ensure traffic impacts aze less than
significant. Thus, the proposed project would not have an adverse impact on traffic or
circulation systems.
wrc rroctffcK.LSr Page 15
14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered
governmental services in any of the following azeas:
YES MAYBE NO
a. Fire protection? ^ ^ ^
b. Police protection? ^ ^ ^
c. Schools? ^ ^ ^
d. Pazks or other recreational facilities? ^ ^ ^
e. Librazies? ^ ^ ^
f. Maintenance of public facilities, including
roads? ^ ^ ^
g. Other governmental services? ^ ^ ^
Both School Districts expressed their concern that a change in tie zone or general plan
designation for the project site could have an adverse impact on schools. Specifically, an
increase in density could intensify the overcrowding pressures facing the District in
Central/Western Chula Vista.
However, the proposed action would alter the general plan designation and/or the zoning to
bring the land use designations into conformity. The project would not increase the density
beyond that which is currently allowed under the existing R-3 zoning. A comparative
analysis of impacts to each School District indicates that a total of 23 new students will be
created with project implementation. This increase represents a 2.84 % increase overall.
City routing forms indicated that the proposed General Plan/Zoning Consistency Study would
not have a significant adverse effect on any other Public Services.
I5. Energy. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO
a. Use of substantial amount of fuel or
energy? ^ ^ ^
b. Substantial increase in demand upon
existing sources or energy, or require
the development of new sources of
energy? ^ ^ ^
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning could result in an increase in
energy consumption, since the project will allow an increase in the number of
dwelling units currently on the site. However, the increase will be minor and
incremental, is found to be less than significant.
-_
WPC NDCNECK.IST age
16. Thresholds. Will the proposal adversely impact
the City's Threshold Standazds?
YES MAYBE NO
~ ^ ^
Comments:
As described below, the proposed project will not adversely impact any of the seven
Threshold Standazds.
A. Fire/EMS
The Threshold Standazds requires that fire and medical units must be able to respond
to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85% of the cases and within 5 minutes or less in
75% of the cases. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standazd,
since the General Plan/Zoning Consistency study will have no impact on response
times. The Chula Vista Fire Depaztment requires that with any new development,
water supply to azea and fue depaztment access be provided.
B. Police
The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84% of Priority
1 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority
1 calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to 62.10% of Priority 2
calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority
2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold
Standard, as the proposed General Plan amendments and rezoning will not have any
impact on Police services.
C. Traffic
The Threshold Standazds require that all intersections must operate at a Level of
Service (LOS) "C = or better, with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D"
may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections.
Intersections west of I-805 are not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS. No
intersection may reach LOS "E" or "F" during the average weekday peak hour.
Intersections of azterials with freeway ramps aze exempted from this Standazd. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
Fifth Avenue, Broadway, and "G" Street provide primary access to the project. Up
to 720 Average Daily Trips (ADT) would be generated with buildout of the site
zoned R-3 (the land use designation with the greatest trip generation). The ADT on
"G" Street would increase from 4,320 to 5,040, the ADT on Fifth Avenue would
increase from 6,180 to 6,540 and the ADT on Broadway would increase from 22,210
to 22,750. The current Level of Service (LOS) for Fifth Avenue, Broadway, and
"G" Street is "C" or better. The LOS would remain at "C" or better after project
implementation.
wrc rencnecK.csr Page 17
The Engineering Division has indicated chat these roads aze adequate to serve the
project. No street improvements or dedication would be required. Thus, the project
would not have an adverse impact on traffic or circulation systems.
D. Pazks/Recreation
The Threshold Standazd for Pazks and Recreation is 3 acres/1,000 population. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standazd since the proposed
General Plan amendments and rezoning will not effect pazks or recreation facilities.
E. Drainage
The Threshold Standazds require that storm water flows and volumes not exceed Ciry
Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with the Drainage Master Plan(s) and City Engineering Standards. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. Existing on-site drainage
consists of surface flow along streets to the main central basin drainage channel. No
additional on-site drainage facilities will be required. Off-site drainage facilities
consist of the main centra drainage basin channel. Downstream facilities west of
Broadway aze currently inadequate. However, the City Engineering Division has
indicated that this will be corrected when Project No. DR-116, "Central Drainage
Basin Improvements" is constructed in fiscal yeaz 1993-1994. Thus, drainage
facilities will be adequate to serve the proposed project.
F. Sewer
The Threshold Standazds require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed Ciry
Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master Plan(s) and City Engineering Standazds. The proposed
project will comply with this Threshold Standard. The project azea is served by an
8-inch line in parkway, a 15-inch and 8-inch line in Broadway, a 15-inch and 12-
inch line in "G" Street, and a 10-inch line in "F" Street. All lines lead to an 18-inch
line in "G" Street, west of Broadway. Buildout under the most intensive zoning (R-
3), would result in an increase of 17,900 gallons of liquid waste a day over the
existing sewage generation. The Engineering Division has indicated that existing
lines aze adequate to serve the proposed project.
G. Water
The Threshold Standazds require that adequate storage, treatment, and transmission
facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that water quality
standazds are not jeopazdized during growth and construction. The proposed project
will comply with this Threshold Standard. At the time development actually takes
place, applicants must agree to no net increase in water consumption or participate
in whatever water conservation or fee off-set program the City of Chula Vista has in
effect at the time of building permit issuance.
wx rmcxecK.LSr Page 1
17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO
a. Creation of any health hazazd or potential
health hazard (excluding mental health)? ^ ^ ^
b. Exposure of people to potential health
hazards? ^ ^ ^
Comments:
The Initial Study found that no adverse impacts to human health will be created by project
implementation.
18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO
a. The obstruction of any scenic vista or view
open to the public, or will the proposal
result in the creation of an aesthetically
offensive site open to public view? ^ ^ ^
b. The destruction, or modification of a scenic route? ^ ^ ^
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning aze designed to bring existing land use
plan and zone designations uno conformance with the chazac[er of existing development
within these two subareas. The project will not have an adverse impact on the visual or
aesthetic quality of the project vicinity, since the project will allow development to take place
in a manner visually consistent with the surrounding land uses.
19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an YES MAYBE NO
impact upon the quality or quantity of existing
recreational opportunities? ^ ^ ^
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning will take place on- a previously
developed residential neighborhood, and will not impact existing recreational opportunities.
In addition, the project will not increase densities beyond that currently allowed under the
existing zoning, and thus will not result in a significant adverse effect on existing recreational
facilities.
wpc rroctrecK.isT Page 19
20. Cultural Resources. YES MAYBE NO
a. Will the proposal result in the alteration
of or the destruction or a prehistoric or
historic azchaeological site? ^ ^ ~
b. Will the proposal result in adverse
physical or aesthetic effects to a
prehistoric or historic building, structure,
or object? ^ ^ ~
c. Does the proposal have the potential to
cause a physical change which would
affect unique ethnic cultural values? ^ ^ ~
d. Will the proposal restrict existing
religious or sacred uses within the
potential impact azea? ^ ^ ~
i
e. Is the azea identified on the Ciry's
General Plan EIR as an area of high
potential for azcheological resources? ^ ^ ~
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning will take place on land which has been
previously developed and disturbed. The site is identified in the City's general plan EIR as
an azea of low to moderate potential for cultural resources. The azea is an existing
residential neighborhood, and is surrounded by residential and commercial development.
Therefore, the project will not adversely impact cultural resources.
21. Paleontological Resources. Will the proposal result in the YES MAYBE NO
alteration of or the destruction of a paleontological
resource? ^ ^ ~
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning will take place in an existing residential
neighborhood which has been previously developed and disturbed. Therefore, the project
will not adversely impact paleontological resources.
WPC NDCHECK.LST Page 20
22. Mandatory Findings of Significance.
a. Dces the project have the potential to
degrade the quality of the environment,
substantially reduce the habitat of a fish
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife
population to drop below self sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or
animal community, reduce the number or
restrict the range of a raze or endangered
plant or animal or eliminate important
examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
YES MAYBE NO
^ ^ ^
Comments:
The proposed General Plan zoning Consistency Study does not have the potential to adversely
impact the quality of the natural environment, reduce the habitat of fish or wildlife species,
or eliminate a plant or cotttmunity. The project site has been previously developed and
disturbed, and contains no significant biological resources.
b. Dces the project have the potential to
achieve short-term goals to the
disadvantage of long-term, environmental
goals? (A short-term impact on the
environment is one which occurs in a
relatively brief, definitive period of time,
while long-term impacts will endure well
into the future.) ~ ~ ~
Comments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning will not achieve short-term
environmental goals at the expense of long term goals. The project is designed to bring the
General Plan and zoning into conformance with each other, which will allow a greater degree
of consistency of development in the short and long term.
c. Dces the project have impacts which aze
individually limited, but cumulatively
considerable? (A project may impact two
or more separate resources where the
impact on each resource is relatively
small, but where the effect of the total
of those impacts on the environment is
significant.) ~ ~ ~
wrc rmct~cx.tsr Page 21
Comments:
The proposed general plan ametdments and rezoning will not result in any significant,
adverse environmental impacts which aze cumulative or growth-inducing in nature. The
project will not cause an increase in density beyond that which is currently allowed.
d. Dces the project have environmental
effects which will cause substantial
adverse effects on human beings, either
duectly or indirectly? ~ ~ ~
Cotments:
The proposed general plan amendments and rezoning not have the potential to harm human
beings either directly or indirectly. No impacts to human health were identified in the initial
study.
r
wPC NDCHECK.LST Yage 2"1
Determination
(To be completed by the Lead Agency. Check one box only.)
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
^ I fmd that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the
environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepazed.
^ I fmd that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation
measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepazed.
^ I fmd the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the enduonment, and
an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required.
~n~,~~aau. e .~1~.c.a~. ~•i~• 93
Environm tal Review Coordinator Date
wvc rrocttecK.tsr - Page 23
Case No. ~ S 9 3.3 Z,
APPENDIX II
DE 11-IINIMIS FEE DETERII~IINATION
(Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990 - AB 3158)
It is hereby found that this project involves no potential for any adverse effect, either
individually or cumulatively on wildlife resources and that a "Certificate of Fee Exemption'
shall be prepared for this project.
It is hereby found that this project could potentially impact wildlife, individually or
cumulatively and therefore fee in accordance with Section 711.4 (d) of the Fish and Game
Code shall be paid to the County Clerk.
0 i~stu ~ , ,L(D.~,
Environme tal Review Coordinator
~. ru- 9.~
Date
t
wec rmc~cx.rsT Page 24