Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRCC MIN 1993/03/22MINUTES OF A SPECIAL MEETING Resource Conservation Commission Chula Vista, California Conference Room #1 6:00 p.m. public Services Buildins Monday February 15 1993 CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meeting was called to order at 6:06 p.m. by Chairman Kracha. Commissioners Present: Chair Kracha, Hall, McNair, Myers. Commissioners Absent: Ghougassian, excused; Johnson, unexcused. Staff present: City Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid. Kim Glasgow, Ogden Environmental & Energy Services, Inc. Kim Kilkinney, Baldwin Company APPROVAL OF MINUTES: It was MSUC (Hall/McNair) to approve the minutes of the February 8, 1993 meeting, corrected to delete the next to last paragraph on page 2, and substitute with the notation that McNair concurred with the comments made by Myers. NEW BUSINESS Otay Ranch Final Program EIR-90-O1 Staff Introduction Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid advised members that the candidate findings of fact had been written with the new town plan in mind, but they will be re-written as the project changes. Mr. Reid noted as an example that staff no longer supported the mitigation measure of the off site purchase of coastal sage habitat. Rather, the 1,000 acres in question should be mitigation for future projects, although the actual details of this alternative have not yet been worked out. Discussion of CEOA Requirements Commissioner McNair questioned the staff supported plan over the plan known as the 'environmental alternative' . She referred to the candidate findings of fact, stating that this is not CEQA language, but is legal argument intended to persuade regarding CEQA requirements. McNair quoted CEQA sections 15021 and 15043, dealing with the choosing of a project (among alternatives) that minimizes environmental damage, and the circumstances under which projects may be approved despite significant affects. She asked why the envirotunental alternative was not considered feasible, and stated that in order to approve the plan supported by staff, specific benefits must be stated, along with specific reasons why it is not feasible to mitigate them. Commissioner Myers stated that she had the same questions as McNair, and questioned the Resource Conservation Commission -2- February 15. 1993 validity of the Environmental Impact Report, stating that too many issues were being deferred and that certain issues have not been resolved. Kim Glasgow of Ogden Environmental & Energy Services advised that in defining feasibility, CEQA takes into account economic, environmental, technological, social, and other factors. She also pointed out that this is a programmatic EIR, not a project EIR, and that this document is to provide general guidelines for future projects. Mr. Reid added that this EIR has been reviewed by attorneys specializing in CEQA, and they had found that the document has been prepared in compliance with the law. Further discussion took place regarding CEQA standards. Discussion of Plan Alternative Inadequacies McNair stated that she was not ready to vote on the FPEIR, as she still has questions. She asked for the reasons why the environmental alternative is not feasible. Ms. Glasgow responded that there were three predominant reasons why the environmental alternative is not considered feasible: the Resource Management Plan would not be implemented for economic reasons, the project would not serve housing needs due to insufficient multi-family housing, and the transit aspects of the project would not be implemented. Discussion ensued regarding these three issues as well as possible future conditions affecting the project. Kim Kilkinney of Baldwin offered input on the feasibility of implementing the RMP, as well as information on the commercial and industrial hub areas in San Diego County as they affect the need for more density in large planned communities of this scope. Further discussion took place regarding population densities and mass transit, air quality, and current economic trends. Chair Kracha stated that if members felt that the EIR is inadequate, they should state so now. McNair indicated that she would like more information, such as the defining of the goals and objectives of the Interjurisdictional Task Force pertaining to housing needs, and more specific information on the costs of supporting resource maintenance areas. Mr. Reid stated that he would obtain the ITF information, and operation costs for current open space maintenance districts as they may relate to Otay Ranch RMP costs, for the next meeting. MyeIS Stated that there were 13 non-mitigated impacts identified in the EIR in every alternative plan except the envirotunental alternative. She felt that both CEQA and the Ciry of Chula Vista mandate choosing the least destructive environmental alternative. Other Committee Cornments Commissioner Hall asked about the relocation of the FAA Vortek facility; Ms. Ogden responded that she believed the intent was to relocate the facility, but that this was the responsibility of the FAA. The extension of the railway was questioned, with Hall noting that she would like to see mitigation measures that reduce in the number of truck trips in the area. Hall also expressed concerns about the following issues: the providing of areas for stables (Mr. Reid pointed out that the zoning regulations created for the planned community could regulate this use as needed); Resource Conservation Commission -3- February 15. 1993 additional consideration to be given to building in floodplain areas; the County's potential use of Wolf Canyon as a dump site (Ms. Ogden responded that currently, five sites are being considered); and the designating of Otay Valley Road as a scenic highway. Chair Kracha read the policies section (15003) of CEQA. He stated that since this item would be going to the Planning Commission in March, his recommendation was that next week the committee make a recommendation to certify the EIR, or not make a recommendation with specific reasons. He asked Mr. Reid to bring the Planning Commission schedule involving the Otay Ranch FPEIR to the next meeting. ADJOURNMENT The meeting was adjourned by Chair Kracha at 8:12 p.m. ~;~~~ ~ ~ v uti ~. Patty i evins, Recorder MINUTES OF A SCHEDULED SPECIAL MEETING Resource Conservation Commission Chula Vista, California 6:00 p.m. Conference Room #1 Monday, March 1, 1993 Public Services Building CALL MEETING TO ORDER/ROLL CALL: Meeting was called to order at 6:05 p.m. by Chairman Kracha. City Staff Environmental Review Coordinator Doug Reid called roll. Present were Commissioners Hall, Kracha, Ghougassian, McNair, Myers. Johnson arrived at 6:31 p.m. Duane Basil, staff person on the Otay Ranch project team, answered questions regarding the goals, objectives and policies of the EIR. Also present were Kim Kilkenny and Kim Glasgow. Myers addressed LAFCO's concern of deferral of studies with the possibility of annexation in mind. Staff responded the project does not take into consideration this possibility. Specific studies (i.e., water) was also deferred to the SPA level. Again it was pointed out that if water is not available, Otay Ranch will not be built. Additionally, local water companies are not malting any statements on the current general plan level. Discussion was held on why the environmental alternative is not acceptable. Staff replied on the issue that it does not provide for adequate mass transit. Mitigation did not provide for the trolley but is serviced by other transits. Myers referred to a South Bay Rail & Transit study done in February 1991 noting that ridership is down. The village concept was also listed as a viable alternative. The document was analyzed from the environmental standpoint and has met CEQA requirements. Staff's recommendation complies with the goals and objectives of the EIR. Following discussion, it was moved and seconded (Ghougassian/Hall) to recommend certification of the EIR of the General Development Plan of Otay Ranch. In further discussion, Myers stated the project does not meet CEQA requirements for the following reasons: - Inappropriate review period (CEQA recommends 90 days) - Problem with Chula Vista being the lead agency - Alternatives are not varied enough - Indirect issues on the impact of environment are inadequately covered - Too many significant unmitigable impacts - Given the size of the document, there was inadequate time for review Doug Reid responded for staff: Otay Ranch is a program EIR and multi-phased. Full disclosure of all environmental effects had to be made and were specifically identified. They went through the possibility that all mitigation won't reduce significant impacts but may have adverse effects. Indirect impacts are addressed at this general level. The alternatives listed are the ones with little or no adverse effects. Chula Vista is the lead agency, but the County of San Diego Page 2 provides the technical expertise. The 90 day review period, determined by the City Council and Board of Supervisors, in actuality, ended up with around 260 days for public review. Since this project involves over 2300 acres, the outcome would therefore be a lengthy document with lengthy hearings. Staff provided more detail in its studies than was actually required. Noting over 11 azeas of environmental concerns for RCC's consideration, most of which is deferred to the SPA level, Myers stated this is more reason not to certify the EIR as a commission. McNair added that with open and public dissent, the City could incur considerable litigation costs. Staff responded that Tina Thomas has extensively addressed in writing the range of alternatives and all concerns listed. The vote was then taken: Ayes - Kracha/Hall/Ghougassian; Nos -Johnson/McNair/Myers; 3-3, motion failed. It was then moved and seconded (Myers/Johnson) that RCC not certify the EIR due to its inadequacy and deferral to later studies and later levels at all areas of concern, in particular, lack of diversity of alternatives and excessive significant unmitigable environmental impacts. Vote: Ayes -Johnson/McNair/Myers; Nos - Kracha/Hall/Ghougassian; 3-3; motion failed. Kracha indicated the options and recommendations for Commissioners at this time: • Speak before the Planning Commission on behalf of RCC or as an RCC member • Write to the Mayor and City Council and express personal concerns • Attend other public hearings and express personal concerns COMMISSIONER'S COMMENTS: • Kracha announced the Echo Art Contest on Apri15, sponsored by the Chula Vista Earth Day Committee. • Progress is being made on using battery-powered vehicles, to be tested on Ford, Chevy and Toyotas. • Hall will make personal recommendations on the Otay Ranch project. • Johnson requested staff provide feedback on comments made by RCC after the Fianning Commission and Council receive them. Doug Reid will again follow up on this item. ADJOURNMENT: The meeting was adjourned by Chairman Kracha at 8:01 p.m. Respectfully submitted, EXPRESS SECRETARIAL SERVICES c-c < <~ Barbara Taylor