HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1992/03/11 (2)
City Planning commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 11, 1992
1
1.
PUBLIC HEARING:
PCM-91-4. Consideration of Salt Creek
Ranch SPA Plan. Public Facilities
Financina Plan. and PC Reaulations: The
Baldwin Company (Continued)
A. BACKGROUND
On February 26, 1992, the Planning commission opened the public
hearing and took testimony regarding the Salt Creek Ranch sectional
Planning Area Plan and Public Facilities Financing Plan. The
Commission decided to keep the public hearing open and continue it
to their next meeting, March 11, 1992, so that the Planned
Community Regulations and Design Guidelines as well as CEQA
Findings could be reyiewed.
B. RECOMMENDATION
Based upon the findings attached to the previous staff report,
adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve the Salt
Creek Ranch section Planning Area (SPA) Plan, Public Facilities
Financing Plan, and PC Regulations subject to the conditions of
approval listed in the prior staff report as well as conditions
requested by the Sweetwater Union High School District, the Chula
vista Elementary School District and the EastLake Development
Company and per modifications listed in section C-3 of this report.
C. DISCUSSION
1. Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan
The following are issues that were discussed by the Commission
and members of the public at the February 26, 1992 Planning
commission meeting:
a. The need for residential lots in the 1/4-acre size range.
Staff response: The project proposes 440 single family
lots within Subarea 3 that will be a minimum of 1/3 acre
(ave. 1/2 acre) in size. within the two low density
cluster neighborhoods (neighborhood 7b & 8) the average
lot size exceeds 8,000 sq. ft. in size and some lots are
1/4 acre in size.
b. The developer should provide materials for education of
children regarding water conservation.
Staff response: If the Commission requests, this approach
can be coordinated with the deyeloper and the school
district concurrent with review of the tentative map.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 11, 1992
2
c. Consideration should be given by the city for a police
substation in the eastern territories.
staff response: This comment will be taken under
advisement by staff and considered when annually
reviewing City-wide Police threshold standards.
d. There should be some analysis (lifecycle costs) of who is
going to pay to maintain and/or replace capital
facilities beyond the 15 to 20 years that the financing
plan covers.
staff response: This comment will be taken under
advisement by staff and considered during preparation of
Public Facilities Financing Plan guidelines for future
projects.
e. Consideration should be given to providing two street
trees per lot for lots within Subarea 3, where lot
frontage and lot sizes are larger.
Staff response: The current City policy requires one
street tree per lot. Staff will be coordinating with the
city's Landscape Architect and street Tree Foreman to
determine appropriateness of this condition. This item
will be addressed in conjunction with the Tentative Map
review.
f. Representatives of the Bonita Valley Horsemen offered
their assistance in future discussions regarding the
lighting and design of the roadway equestrian
undercrossings as well as providing input on trail
designs.
staff response: Staff will coordinate with and request
input from local equestrian group representatives in
reviewing designs for equestrian facilities.
g. The residential units adjacent to the EastLake Business
Park could be significantly impacted by business park
noise if proper setbacks and screening are not
emphasized.
Staff response: Staff will be providing additional
exhibits to the Planning commission on this issue.
h. A request was made that staff proyide a brief explanation
of the density transfer policies of the city.
Staff response: Staff will be providing the Commission a
City Planning commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 11, 1992
3
brief synopsis of those sections of
of the General Plan dealing with
transfers (Sections 6.1 and 6.2).
the Land Use Element
density and density
2. written correspondence received
Sweetwater Union High School District - A request that the
City coordinate with the school district to require assurance
of school facility financing prior to tentative subdivision
map approyal (see attached).
Chula vista Elementary School District - Same as above.
EastLake Development Company - A request that the following
conditions be required: 1) A sound study be conducted at the
time of tentatiye subdivision map for those areas adjacent to
the Business Park. The responsibility for the study and any
required mitigation would be that of the Salt Creek Ranch
developer at the time either property process a tentative map.
2) Prior to the sale of units in neighborhoods 5 and 6, sales
disclosure documents be required which identify the allowable
uses in the EastLake Business Center.
staff response: Staff concurs with all of
requests made by the two school districts
Development Company and recommend that
incorporate these as conditions of approval
the comments and
and the EastLake
the Commission
for the project.
3. Additional or Modified Conditions of SPA
Staff forwarded to the Commission, at their last meeting,
condition no. 2 of the listed recommended conditions of
approval from the prior staff report. This condition was
erroneously left out of the staff report for the February 26,
1992 meeting (see attached "Condition No.2").
The developer suggested a wording change to condition no. la.
from the prior staff report for the SPA. Staff concurs with
the requested change and recommends that this condition be
modified as follows:
la.
The first
Facilities
follows:
paragraph
Financing
on page xi,
PIan shall
of the Public
be modified as
"The fist phase of Salt Creek Ranch could devalop
to a maximum of 1,137 dwelling units. No tentative
subdivision map shall be approved uB~il uBless (1)
~he ~eB~a~i~e map the completion of the H.N.T.B.
SR-125 financing study and determination as to the
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 11, 1992
4
consistency of the Salt Creek Ranch development
with the conclusions of the study, and unless the
tentative map is conditioned upon (2) the re~isieB
* compliance with the revised -t;he Eastern Chula
vista Transportation Phasing Plan (ECVTPP) and
Public Facilities Development Impact Fee (DIF)
Program based on those conclusions."
After further discussions with the developer on the issue of
whether the EastLake Buffer recreational trail should be
located entirely within the Salt Creek Ranch project or be
allowed to encroach offsite, staff is recommending that
condition no. 23d, of the January 26, 1992 staff report, be
modified as follows:
23. The recreation trail system shall be expanded to
include:
d. The recreation trail proposed within the
EastLake Business Park buffer shall be
designed to accommodate maintenance vehicles,
be a minimum of 10 feet in width, and be
provided with maintenance vehicle access at
each adjacent open-ended residential cul-de-
sac. The trail shall be located entirely
within the Salt Creek Ranch project boundary
unless an aqreement is reached between the
proiect proponent and the adiacent property
owner which is acceptable to the city. Design
and final layout of the recreation trail shall
ba subject to review and approval of the
Director of Parks and Recreation prior to
tentative map approval.
4. PC District Requlations
Planned Community (PC) District Regulations specifically
tailored to fit the proposed deyelopment provide standards and
regulations to guide the deyelopment of Salt Creek Ranch SPA.
These regulations, which proYide specific implementation
standards, should be applied in conjunction with the design
guidelines for both the residential and landscape elements of
the project. The standards contained in this document have
been patterned after other recently approyed masterplanned
communities within the City of Chula vista for consistency.
5. Desian Guidelines
As stated above, the design guidelines are an integral part of
the Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan. They are presented in a
city Planning commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 11, 1992
5
preliminary form to permit input from the Planning commission
prior to review of the Tentative Map.
The proposed guidelines are intended to establish minimum
standards for the design and architectural character of the
Salt Creek Ranch SPA. They are proyided to ensure that the
quality and fundamental concepts established at the master
planning stage are maintained in the final phase of detailed
planning and design.
The design guidelines are structured into four basic
sections: a) Design Review, b) community Design Guidelines, c)
Archi tectural Design Guidelines, and d) Landscape Architectural
Design Guidelines. These sections address unique features of
the Salt Creek Ranch project, including ridgeline development
and grading guidelines, project edge treatments, fuel
modification standards in natural open space areas, and scenic
corridor treatment.
MISC#4:\SALTCRK\SPA-92-4.PCR
CONDITION #2
The project applicant shall agree to participate in a regional or subregional multi-species
coastal sage scrub conservation plan. If, prior to approval of the grading plan for
Neighborhoods lOa, lOb and 11, an off-site regional wildlife corridor linking San Miguel
Mountain with the Upper Otay Reservoir has not been approved as part of the conservation
plan, the development of the 17-acre Neighborhood lOb shall not occur and a
reconfiguration of the northeastern Subarea 3 to provide a wider open space area for a
regional wildlife corridor shall be implemented. The width of the open space area shall be
sufficient to ensure long-term viability of the wildlife corridor, per crosshatched area on SPA
Exhibit #17. This condition shall also be included as a condition of the Tentative
Subdivision Map.
MEMOS:\CON#2.deb
Sweetwater Union High School District
ADMINISTRATION CENTER
1130 Fifth Avenue
Chula Vista, California 91911-2896
(619) 691.5500
F
Division of Planning and Facilities
February 20, 1992
Mr. Duane Bazzel, Principal Planner
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91911
RE: Salt Creek Ranch Public Facilities Financing Plan
Dear Duane:
Although you and I discussed the adequacy of the language of the December
24, 1992 Salt Creek Ranch Public Facilities Financing Plan, representatives
of the Baldwin Company haye made comments about the mitigation of school
impacts which lead our legal counsel to believe that Section 3.5.7 should be
strengthened to ensure that the Developer's, the City's and the School
District's understanding of the mitigation is the same.
Counsel has drafted the following language which I would like added to the
last three paragraphs of Section 3.5.7, it appears to erase any perceived
ambiguity which may be in the plan.
If deemed necessary by the Board of Trustees of the Sweetwater
Union High School District, the District will adjust enrollment
boundaries as necessary to utilize available school capacity. The
Baldwin Company has pledged the provision of certain lands for
secondary school facilities in the Otay Ranch project
commensurate with the need caused by the Salt Creek Ranch
Project.
As development applications are processed within the
boundaries of Salt Creek Ranch, the City will coordinate with
Mr. Duane Bazzel
February, 20, 1992
Page Two
the school district to ensure that any additional development
approvals do not take place until the provision for financing of
school facilities is approved by the school district.
The approval of a tentative map within the boundaries of Salt
Creek Ranch will not be made unless the City receives a letter
from the school district confirming the developer's participation
in financing programs approved by the District.
It is my understanding that the original language drafted by our consultants
relates to both Sweetwater and the Chula Vista Elementary School District.
As you can see, the language aboye is specific to Sweetwater; therefore, it
may be helpful to contact the City School District if communication on this
issue has not already occurred.
It is my hope that the PFFP can be amended. If there is a problem, please let
me know as soon as possible. Feel free to call me at 691-5553.
i&~inc rely,
~~
homas Silva
Assistant Director of Planning
BOARD OF EOUCA TION
JOSEPH D. CUMMINGS. Ph.D.
LARRY CUNNINGHAM
SHARON GILES
PATRICK A. JUDD
GREG R. SANDOVAL
SUPERINTENOENT
..K:>HN F. VUGRJN, Ph.D.
CHULA Vl....,fA ELEMENTARY SCHOvi. DISTRICT
84 EAST "J" STREET' CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 . 619425.9600
EACH CHILD IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH
R~C~/V~D
February 20, 1992
. r (;
Mr. Bob Leiter
Director of Planning
City of Chula vista
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
PLANNING
RE: Facilities Financing Plan - Salt Creek Ranch
Dear Mr. Leiter:
The District's legal counsel has reviewed the Facilities
Financing Plan for Salt Creek Ranch and recommends that the
following language be substituted for the last three
paragraphs of section 3.5.7 of the Plan:
The Sweetwater Union High School District will
adjust enrollment boundaries as necessary to
utilize ayailable school capacity. The Baldwin
Company has pledged the proyision of certain lands
for school facilities in the otay Ranch project
commensurate with the need caused by the Salt Creek
Ranch project.
As development applications are processed within
the boundaries of Salt Creek Ranch, the City will
coordinate with the school districts to ensure that
any additional development approvals do not take
place until the proyision for and financing of
school facilities is approved by each of the school
districts.
The approyal of a tentative map within the
boundaries of Salt Creek Ranch will not be made
unless the City receiyes a letter from the school
districts confirming the provision of necessary
school sites and/or additional school facilities or
participation in financing programs approved by the
school districts.
February 20, 1992
Mr. Bob Leiter
Page 2
RE: Facilities Financing Plan - Salt Creek Ranch
The addition of this language appears to adequately protect
the District's interest, assuming that the Financing Plan is
being approved as part of a Specific Plan and that
compliance with the Financing Plan is a condition of such
approyal.
If you have any questions, please contact me.
Sincerely,
~~~
Kate Shurson
Director of Planning & Facilities
KS:dp
cc: Carl Kadie
Tom Silva
4:saltcr-ffp
February 26, 1992
FB326
.___ __,_..~._ _____'n
Mr. Duane Bazzel
OTAY RANCH PROJECT OFFICE
315 4th Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
RE: Salt Creek Ranch/SPA Plan
Dear Mr. Bazzel:
We have reviewed the SPA Plan for Salt Creek Ranch
and the staff report and request the following
conditions be required.
1. A sound study be conducted at the time of
tentative map for those areas where Salt Creek
Ranch's proposed residential development abuts
EastLake's approved industrial uses. The
study and required mitigation will be the
responsibility of the Salt Creek Ranch
developer at the time either party processes a
tentative map.
2. Prior to the sale of units in neighborhoods 5
and 6, sales disclosure documents be required
which identify the allowable uses in the
EastLake Business Center.
Thank you.
Sincerely,
EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
~~
Kent Aden
Vice President, Community Development
KA:td
cc: Ms. Claudia Troisi, The Baldwin Company
/
..
....
....
EASTLAKE
DMLOPMENT
COMPANY
900 Lane Avenue
SUite 100
Chula Vista. CA 91914
(619) 421-0127
FAX (619) 421-1830
..
Date:
March 9, 1992
Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
4' 1/
Bob Leiter, Director of Planning ;),1f-,.
Response to Request Regarding Interpretation of the General Plan Density
Policies for Proposed Development Projects
To:
From:
Subject:
On February 26, 1992, during review of the Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan, the Planning
Commission requested that staff prepare a brief issue paper explaining how residential
densities are determined for development projects and what density transfers are
po",,"'tbl<. Tho followiog" . ,""""ton of bow tbo poIici" ",nwnod with;n tho 1=' U~
Element of the General Plan are implemented when reviewing a proposed development
proioct (Attalho' f" "fo"ore ." 'octto", 4.1. 6.1 & 6.2 of tho Go~t~ PI~ Lon' U~
Element).
peterminin~ Appropriate Densities
After development boundaries are initially defined (General plan Land Use Map), then
further refined (draft General Development Plan), an analysis of topography and
environmental considerations is performed to determine where the project's residential
density should be established between the "baseline" and "maximum" of a density range. The
potential density range for the I1rojec1 is defined by taking each individual development area
and the density range assigned to these areas (i.e., Residential Low - 0-3 dwelling units per
acre), then quantifying each of these areas within the project. Also included in quantifying
the project development area densities are dwelling unit credits from neighborhood parks
and roadway rights-of-way designated less than four lanes in size on the General Plan (ref.
Sec. 4.1).
The evaluation to determine the appropriate project density within the range (from
"baseline" to the "mid-point" of the range, or above) is based on the project's responsiveness
to the following issues (ref. Section 6.2):
1) Compatibility with existing and proposed surrounding land use patterns.
2) Sensitive response to the physical characteristics of the site (landform preservation,
surrounding and/ or internal circulation patterns, relationship to open space / greenbelt
systems, environmental considerations and natural amenities and visual and
functional quality).
3) AclUo"mont of a ,.no" of hou,;n, typ" ponni,.bl' within th' _.ctO! of tho
"range" and responsive to the improvement of the toWllSCape, sophistication and
livability of the area.
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of March 11, 1992
Page 8
du/ac) category of the Eastlake General Development Plan and Sectional
Planning Area Plan. The area designated OS (open space) also conforms to
these documents.
D. FINDINGS
Pursuant to Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act. the tentative
subdivision map for Salt Creek I Condominiums. Chula Vista Tract PCS-91-01.
is found to be in conformance with the various elements of the City's General
Plan based on the following:
1. The site is physically suitable for a ten lot. 141 unit residential and one
lot open space development. and the proposal conforms to all standards
established by the City for such projects.
2. The design of the subdivision will not affect the existing improvements
-- streets. sewers. etc. -- which have been designed to avoid any serious
problems.
3. The project is in substantial conformance with the Chula Vista General
Plan Elements as follows:
a. land Use - The project density of 15.16 dwelling units per acre is
consistent with the Medium High Density range of 11-19.9 du/ac.
b. Circulation - The project has a circular driveway system along the
outside boundary of the residential lots with appropriately placed
driveways to parking areas. Also included at strategic locations
are hammerhead turnarounds for larger vehicles. specifically fire-
fighting apparatuses.
c. Housing - This project is required to include low and moderate
income housing. An agreement between the City Council and the
applicant must be executed prior to the approval of the Final Map
by the City Council.
d. Conservation - Previous mitigation required that other areas within
Salt Creek I containing costal sage scrub habitat be preserved
both on and off-site. and that an on-site area be provided for the
SAL T\PCS91-01.RPT
city Planning commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 11, 1992
Page 1
4. PUBLIC HEARING: Conditional Use Permit PCC-92-30: reauest to
construct a 16-unit apartment proiect at
588 'L' street in the C-O zone- San Dieao
County Housina Authority
A. BACKGROUND
The applicant, San Diego County Housing Authority, requests
approval to construct 16 low-income apartment units at 588 'L'
street in the c-o Commercial Office zone. Multiple family housing
may be located in a c-o zone with the approval of a conditional use
permit.
The Environmental Review Coordinator conducted an Initial study,
15-92-07, of potential environmental impacts associated with the
implementation of the project. Based on the attached Initial
study and comments thereon, the Coordinator has concluded that
there would be no significant environmental impacts, and recommends
adoption of the Negative Declaration issued on IS-92-07.
The Design Review Committee will consider the project design on
March 23, 1992 (ref.DRC-92-32).
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Based on the Initial study and comments on the Initial study
and Negatiye Declaration, find that this project will have no
significant environmental impacts and adopt the Negative
Declaration issued on IS-92-07.
2. Based on findings contained in section "E" of this report,
adopt a motion to approve PCC-92-30 subject to the following
conditions:
a. The project design shall comply with the plan approved or
conditionally approved by the Design Review Committee (DRC-
92-32).
b. Measures such as a closed yentilation system and or noise
attenuation windows and doors in the westerly units with
special emphasis on the westerly wall facing the adjacent
commercial uses shall be required to mitigate interior
noise. Actual requirements will be determined by the city
when construction designs are completed.
c. A lighting plan incorporating low voltage lights
pointed downward on the north and east side of the projects
shall be required to mitigate the impacts of light and
glare on adjacent properties.
City Planning commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 11, 1992
Page 2
d. Proper removal of asbestos from the existing on-site office
structure shall occur prior to demolition. Such work shall
be performed by a licensed CAL-OSHA registered asbestos
abatement contractor in conformance with EPA regulations
Title 40#CFR#61, Subpart "M" and OSHA regulation Title 29
CFR 1926.48 and 1910.1001.
e. This permit shall be subject to any and all new, modified,
or deleted conditions imposed after adoption of this
resolution to advance a legitimate governmental interest
related to health, safety or welfare which City shall
impose after advance written notice to the permittee and
after the City has given to the permittee the right to be
heard with regard thereto, However, the city, in exercising
this reserved right/condition, may not impose a substantial
expense or deprive the Permittee of a substantial revenue
source which the which the Permittee can not, in the normal
operation of the use permitted, be expected to economically
recover.
C. DISCUSSION
Adiacent zonina and land use
North
South
East
West
R-1
R-3
R-3
C-T
Single Family
Multiple Family
Multiple Family
Commercial: Econo-Iube, Carwash
Existina site Characteristics
The project site is .75 acres located one lot to the
east of Broadway on the south side of 'L' Street. The
topography of the lot is generally flat. The site is
currently occupied by a one-story office building fronting
on 'L' Street and a garage structure at the rear of the
lot, the area between the structures is an asphalt parking lot.
Proposed Use
The San Diego county Housing Authority has applied for a
conditional Use Permit as required for multi-family residential
uses in the C-O zone. The applicant proposes construction of 16
multiple-family units, the project consists of five buildings, 33
parking spaces (including two 2-car garages), an outdoor sand play
area and an outdoor common area. Each individual unit has a small
private patio. The proposal complies with all of the standards for
multiple family development.
city Planning commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 11, 1992
Page 3
The proposal also addresses the need for lower-income family
housing within the City of Chula vista. The project represents on-
going implementation of a 1987 agreement between the City of Chula
vista and the County Housing Authority to provide for construction
and management of a total of 123 lower-income housing units within
the city.
D. ANALYSIS
The site represents an isolated c-o zoned parcel bounded by
multiple family residential to the east and south, and by auto
related uses to the west. There does not appear to be a demand to
redevelop the site for office use, and there is not shortage of
property in the area capable of office development since the
adjacent C-T zoned areas along Broadway provide for offices as a
principal permitted use. The conversion of the property to
multiple family use is thus not considered to have an adverse
impact on the zoning pattern for the area.
The project has been designed so that the units are located on the
southerly portion of the parcel, buffered from the commercial noise
and activity impacts to the west by an abutting commercial building
which fronts upon Broadway (Note: the initial environmental study
reviewed a prior plan which had the units distributed along the
entire length of the site and which, therefore, required 6-8 foot
high noise walls to protect the units formerly on the northerly
ortion of the site) The common open space and play areas are
located to the interior of the apartment structures and along the
easterly boundary closest to the adjoining apartment units to the
east. These design features will mitigate the potential for
conflicts with the commercial strip to the west.
The provision of lower-income housing is consistent with the intent
of the City Housing Element to provide housing for people of all
levels of income. This city policy is consistent with the state of
California mandate requiring each city to provide its "regional
fair share" of low income housing. Subsidized development such as
the proposed project represents a mechanism to construct lower-
income housing units which may be difficult to undertake privately
due to the high construction costs and development fees.
Approval of this project is consistent with the Referendum
Authority passed by voters on April 11, 1978. The referendum
authorized construction of 400 lower-income housing units based on
Article 34 of the state Constitution. This project proposes
construction 16 very-Iow-income housing units to meet a recognized
need for lower-income housing within the City of Chula vista.
City Planning commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 11, 1992
Page 4
The following comments have been submitted for information only by
the department indicated:
FIRE
1. Buildings shall be fully sprinklered to NFPA 3R.
2. Fire flow shall be provided at 1500 gallons per minute
(GPM) at 20 PSI.
3. One private fire hydrant shall be provided with
capacity of 500 GPM at 20 PSI.
4. A fire alarm system is required (either sprinkler
alarm or separate alarm).
5. All required fire flow (hydrants and mains) shall be
provided prior to placement of any combustible materials on
the building site.
ENGINEERING
These items will be required under the authority of the city of
Chula vista Municipal Code:
1. Sewer fees
2. A separate construction permit for work performed in the
public right-of-way
3. Public improvements including, but not limited to,
a. driveway approaches
b. street widening
c. a street light
d. curb, gutter and sidewalk
4. An improvement plan
5. A grading permit will be required if the exemption in the
Chula vista Grading Ordinance are not met
6. Dedication of street right-of-way.
Buildina
1. An Additional handicapped parking space (to proyide a total
of two) shall be required to comply with federal standards
to be enacted April 15, 1992.
E. FINDINGS
1. That the proposed use at the location is necessary or desirable
to provide a service or facility which will contribute to the
general well being of the neighborhood or the community.
The proposed project will satisfy a recognized
lower-income family housing supported by the
need
state
for
of
city Planning commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 11, 1992
Page 5
California, city Housing policies and the voters of the City
of Chula vista.
2. That such use will not under the circumstances of the particular
case, be detrimental to the health, safety or general welfare of
persons residing or working in the yicinity or injurious to
property or improvements in the vicinity.
The project will be established on a site adjacent to other
mUlti-family uses. Conditions have been imposed to reduce the
impacts of potential conflicts with the yarious surrounding
uses.
3. That the proposed use will comply with the regulations and
conditions specified in the code for such use.
Compliance
regulations
property.
4. That the granting of this conditional use permit will not
adversely affect the general plan of the City or the adopted plan
of any government agency.
with
shall
all
be
applicable conditions, codes
required prior to occupancy of
and
the
The granting of the permit is consistent with City policies to
provide housing for people of all levels of income, and
the project is consistent with state "regional fair share"
requirements for provision of lower-income housing as well.
The conversion of the site to multiple family use will not
result in a deficiency of property available for commercial
office development in the area.
mmw
STRE.ET
~
R ~ n
I I : I I : ; 1 'I:
, I ';; I i
: I . ,
: I ,,1-// -,-
': 'f I
___~j_____.-l._.f- -- ~/-
, f-
,. ~~-j
I I I
~,..
J'
.-
-',..-
--
--
L -
- ----
>
-
----
-
c ---
'n-~ II --~-i '- uo, ;":
~AY I _u. i~.........,
J ; , I ~ -- ~ : ;j
$.' I/~": -----I".' ~ >
_ r: i\" -- - L-
- ~ .-00 ::~5i
:- ~ r-n ~ IW".......
~ ~: : U~''
CHULA VIS1'JI
I---
f- -SIERRA WAY
LI
eJ
~I
G
1.J
EI
~
1"'1
~<:'T
:
"L"
aAVT T
~. - ~ I
- 0
'"
= <.> I ;'"
~. "e-'~ }" ~ :'~':'.
~'V MF" -ae"~tr.. "}-I I .' ~
~ \. ARIZONA ST. Z
."- /,1 : ! ILl
I..,,,,,, >
,,~. t ~
~
7
-p~ec.i~
~O~TIDtJ r~
/lrC <:> r-
r ~ Ifl.'"
5T
tE
-
::
~ - - . - -
-
'....---
5TRE~
Wl'5TBY
.
.
~
-/
-11>1, N
i
I~
...-1
r-
~
"-
~t..
, . ~--
, ,
'.
...
f-~
-!
-
-'"
'"
~
!\I
I
-r
.
.
(~'5)
'-C::;/ t-1F'/l.. "1-4- IJI<J'=
,"11~iiiii
i I
~
M~1t
e
:s I" ~I: T
....
~-1
-
-
-
==
,-
( U;U~iY~f.lt.A~ ].
.' . ?~ v ~T~J _
]
I
II
-
~ 1
WVK 5
-
:E
I
~
1
_ W
.. Jj lJlJ
J
,
._- .-
-
LOCATOR
kl.H.,llPt..e f~ ILX rt~N?
IN t- t? (c.e>\..1'N1~.1AI., 'q.P\~)
z.ot..J ~ -.
..
NORTH
~~ I
."
!:.
i '.'
~; - "~;'}~.:~~ .., -.' .
~~'-';''';:'''';~.'
__,,'~ eO,'_'" r:-'-
laal1S "[
r=
:~--J
,--
/
\
-
,.
-
..-," .
- ~
.' ~. ' .
. _.- .;-~_"".; f. "'-.......' ~
-. ~.... -'..
"
---~.;~~'. ...
,
r
I
'.' ,,' c;':j, ~~tO:~;';'H':' ::~}L. [j
-._ _ ~...L'-'."'~' _ ;j
I: il "-0- 1"
. " -!:r ,iI
~ ,~ ~~ :}=l: UI
'n~ gl,
~Ih
..
I" -
, iJ I jl ,I I.
.! f ! In
~ Ii! i 11 ii I.
IJ ~ .
!
Pj If' r
d, II h jll! I J
Hi if if fI h Jj I
o -
I il ~ J I
J II iI L h Hd
II j! b !! U! j U I! !
~
I
1 " .
.. . '! 11
~ I! ! to r.
~ ! Ii J I ! i j! ~ 1
~. 'i I . f I II ~..
0: j J!. ~ 11/ l U 11 d u
~ 0 ~ ~
!ei
. I
II I
~
II
.
Q)
0...
(\1
U
rfJ
"d
~
(\1
,...J
~
'(\1 .
.S
]
Q)
~
@2)
.~
c=
.C!&J
23 .:
@
~
~,
I
~
~
@
0])
5
W
t1
=:IT
.. ~" - ,,,,,,"',wn - ~,.-;.-*
...,.,.,. -'"<--:..../1- "'r ~"
. .00.. ~
..L331::llS 1 .....!1Jo~
i !
, I !
I I ,
, . ~ i
; I ,
0
I ~,~
. . 1
, i
F--- --- --X-- ---- -L__I~
! . ,
. , .
, ; i
,I, h ; II;
f i , i I
I ,
.t .
!I T
, I
I I
,
,
I' ,
" "
"!L., I
_I
ii
.
,
,
~ ~'
1:1; ~ 2
'"!
I
!
1
, 'I
I ~ '
" "
I" 'I
ill
II' ! ~
· i jl
,
I_~-
,
if
1L
~~L--.
00' .. .',n
~.._----
,
,
.
,
.
,
fa
.
a _
! ,
!
!
. .b
! '.
i2U;
;['01
,
, 1 '"',
o CI
.
,
,
!
00(:0'------
MJrn-
.
,
; -!~
1_/
i~
.
/
I
.1 i
"
n i~;
-
,
"
LEIi 1:
"
<0
~ 1- 8
! I j
; i] ~
, !
! 1
,
'1"
,i,
I /"
-.!
i ;1,
,i' I"
wl~ ~!~
,
,
I. -
,,-
~ ;
i:! .~ ~~
"., r
..:! I:
il
I:
CJ<(
zz
-",
rJ)O
:J!!'
0;;'
::r:".
>->0
::!~
:iEs
<(:>
LL:I:
1--0
wl;j
WUJ
a:"'
1--1;;
U)~
. m
::--I~
o
@ '"
o 0>
z. M
~;;; ~
15~ ~
~~ -
5~ ~
Uci II:
wo z
~5 !:2
.z <IJ
0" UJ
~. "
~~ f
5~ ~
~:t ~
I"if: ::J
~g: ~
:I:1!! c...
I
I I
Ji
,
j
!I.
!I,!
~~~"
~...u
"
I!
I
!
,
,
~ C .. Q
! 'I .,! !
;!I' '! j ,
" I is! ~ 1_
!'j ,,! u
..;!o~ ::'#'O!.. :! ~5
~I~~ 8:0 a 0 ~.
;~3~ ~!~ ~ ~ ~~
'.'S!,j! " ! i !~
,,!;,., ,g -: -,
!t;.~ti!'i ~~ .. u ~l
i"j,I. 1" i' ;;
o!i: I~~ ~t;.~ i ~~
~ i~~~~~!~~!~; ! ~ ~~~
. "'O~UN";_ ~ ~ ~..
~~! !!'!iiiij~il!i ',' I !II
w.~1j !!I..8'::;i::"'~~"'i\2 w~ i 8 ~~~
e ~ ~:",,'o"., !, i. " "I'
<D I ~95:1aw;t.1~;;;!..'O! ............ ..
EB
0i
~ .~ ~
rc "
I ~~-~~ri I':
..- I
1--P f
~
--L.-
---
~
L
.
.
.
.
"',
I
----...,
,
~-
...---
,
<
1
,
,
,
,
.~
,
....__1
,
,
o
-1
,
,
\}J i
k..r
..
,-
r-----'
illIil:;J
1ITIII:J
---L'"
ka
.
o
,
,
I;JIIIJJ
u,
'.III
"G)rrm ~
o
.
,
,
'---
<---I
:------l
~1il
1
,
~
,
;
.
.,
,
o
.
,
,
Ee;
I, -,
- -::
".......i
~ );
5
.,
" .'
o'
0:
" .
. -
h
. ,
~ ~
~ .
II"I!
~~!tl
,.-
~...u"
iJ &i:j:
H :..:~:
:;.b.
if
if
CJ~ 0
zz 0 N
_a:: ~ Q)
~ ~ ~~ ~
o '" .~ ~
:r:o o~
ci ~~
>-t;; :!~ ~
~5 80' a:
~:5 ~~ ~
<(,;:) c U}
lL.::r: ~~ w
u ~UI 0
tu Iii a:~' >-
UJ w ~~ ~
a:::: ~~ ~
I- (/) 05 :J
U);,J ~a; w
.. a:I 5~ a:
~::g:tg: a..
I
I
I
I- .
".
: ;
it .~-::I~
" -!or
..:!:!:
if
Ii
C!)~ 0
zz 0 N
_a: w
000 is '"
::>"- h M
o'i ~~ :1
:r:"_ :S~ ~
;>->' ~~
--'(/) o~ ~
-5 8 . a:
=<:5 w8 z
i1:~ F- '"
0
~~ iii
f-"- w
~d 0
wtu >-
ww ~~ a:
'"
a: a: 5z z
f-Ii; ~it :;
CI)~ zO OJ
in" w
:..J~ O.
O. a:
- '" .~ "-
" '.B\
.
~,
~
~
" . ,
" i
<
"
E9!
2
~ j
"
~ 9!- I
, . . 'I-
~! ~"i!'~
~ illliid
, 0
o'
. i ~~ ~......
,
.
'-J
;
.
,
1
---- - ~----------
>
0':'
O'
..
o.
~:!
~
'I~~
i I
>,
o.
o.
..
o.
iII~
~'"
o.
..
~;
g~
~~
..
o.
w !
~ .
~~ ~
" "
a:o ::
g;~~
~g~~
~S~~
~~~~.
~ I
~~ ~
.z I
a:~2S
0..... ._
g:d~
"'0.-51
~~:;
8~~~
~...H
~
,
.,"
.-
h
o
,
.
~;
~~
r ~~ if .~:~:
.. :,:1: , I
J:....~:: I
.' .- ,
~ J:; .. -.;1.
C!}:'f 0
ZZ 0
_a: w
~t2 ~~
~:J .-
0< ~~
J: '-: o~
'" ~!:::
>-!n ~cj
~> 80
~:5 ~ffi
<(:J 1-5
LL J: :SZ
f- "- ~~
wl;j ~~
ww ::I:~
a: g: ~~
f- U) cdt
CJ)~ ~~
:.J~ 5:
_ It) I...
.....~...
-
w !
JI
5' .
c..O ::
1-.-,
:5~!;::
gg!!~-
~i5~'
~~U
,
:
.0-.<,
o
,
!q
~,
,.
S~
~ i
~ I
z~
~Oi!
" .
!5~~~
go~::
~@!:
~~H
h
"I
i!!
l.o-,LZ
~
'"
~
IE
~
a:
Z
OJ
iij
w
c
ir
'"
Z
"
:J
w
a:
0.
!go
..
. .
~~
~~
~i
I
,
i
~E3 ,
.
.
z OJ !
0
" z
< 0
> " 1W:Iw.u.ct-.oc
Ji ~
,~ '~i
~:S~ ,r
'z. jg!
IOJ Iii
~E3 I
,
z
, . ". ~ ~
'rl:;l'~"" .O",'Z ~B ;1 ~i
~!
B I i:J:4
,
1!3 I !~i
z.
'" -
,,-
< <
- .
if T'~~
" :':F
;;.1:1:
'I
I.
Ii
CJ~ 0
zz 0 '"
_0: w
(/)0 c '"
::>!O z M
0<<' ~ ~
:1:"- .
0 ~
i i >-~ ~ Cii
...J!Q 8
-> 0:
::;;:5 w z
<::> iE CJ
"""'~.u .I',,~[ LJ..r . <n
tu~ 0 W
I ~ 0
. >-
~B :1iJjj 0 0:
L!jW ~ ..
a:g; z
1--(1) 0 :;
(/)~ z ::0
- ~ . W
0
,..J:JJ 0 0:
r Q.
~B ffiij
~B I
IE. !ffil ,.
-,
z z
0 0
" ~
. <0
.~j ffiij '~i
!~ ~E3
E3 )~! !~I
!~.
f f a,1
~ j :IIi;;
ri:i~o.'
.. !;~i
i ~H.'
'j'"i
,~ jJi
"':;i j
~.3~~
.1
'!'f:)"""'-L....IS
r
~E3 ~
I-
J
~8
~E3
"7OO)WJLJ...~.ae-
I
,
z!
0,
e.
~~~
,Wj
~ti~
,~-
l
1r.)ldJ.J..O'.11
z!
~~
~I
OW,
'"I
1~!
I> - 'j .,-,-
;....: ~I .!:r
.' .. "j;j-
..); i: R R .
-- - --.-
~B I!m
~B 1m!
~E3
~B
r
'I
I.
j:
I'
I
CJ ~ 0
~~ ffi N
000 is ~
::>~ ~~ ~
0< ~ ,
I". ~~ ~
>- ;0 ~~ '>
-I ~ 6~ Lu
-> 06 a:
::E:s wffi Z
<t:::J ~iS "
LL:I: 15~ ffi
I- ~ ~~ 0
LULU 8 ~~ 1;:
a: t-CC <(
a: I- ~i!< Z
I- ~ i~ :i
.~OO:-I iijCC ~
:..J~ 5~ a:
~ It) :1:<"'1 Il.
rn1i
11:3;
!
Ie
z!
0"
-,
~i
i~i
a(JI~
:~..
,
I
I
,
i
I
.
i
CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION
BOB LEITER-DIRECTOR OF PLANNING
FEBRUARY 27, 1992
SIRS,
I AM SENDING A COPY OF THE ORIGINAL LETTER THAT WAS SENT TO
THE INVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REVIEW CO-ORDINATOR ON OCTOBER 4, 1991.
HOW DID THE INVIRONMENTAL IMPACT STUDY APPROVE THE INITIAL
STUDY SHOWING NO SIGNIFICANT INVIRONMENTAL IMPACT CONCERNS
WHEN THE QUESTIONS WE RAISED IN OUR LETTER WERE NEVER ANSWERED?
SINCERELY,
O~~
CAROL HUGHES
RECEIVED
'III".,
PLANNII'J(
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
POBOX 1087
CHULA VISTA, CA. 92012
OCTOBER_~, 1991
ATTENTION:
~IANNE RICHARDSON,
I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPOSEO PROJECT AT 588 L STREET.
AS AN AQJACENT PROPERTY OWNER, I HAVE THESE CONCER8S:
1. DR~INAGE FRD~ PPQ~I~G L~T (HOW PROPOSED TO DO THIS)
2. ADDITIONAL CAR NOISE AND CAR LIGHTS FROM PROPOSED PROJECT,
STREET AND PARKING
3. THREE STORY BUILDING BLOCKING VIEW AND OCEAN BREEZE
4. WITH PROPOSED 1092 TO 1440 SQUARE FEET HOUSING WITH 1+
PARKING SPACES PER UNIT..NOT ADEQUATE WITH NO STREET PARKING
5. AS A LOW INCOME PROBECT ESTIMATE OF 57 PEOPLE NOT CORRECT
6. HOW CLOSE TO MY ENTRANCE IS PROPOSED PROJECT ENTRANCE AS IT
WILL BE SERVING AS EXIT ALSO
7. WHAT ABOUT PROPOSED PROJECT UTILITIES..UNDERGROUND OR ?
8. WHAT TYPE OF WALLS OR FENCES ARE PROPOSED FOR SECURITY BETWEEN
580 L STREET AND ~ROPOSED 568 L STREET ?
SINCERELY,
CAROL HUGHES
POBOX 173
LAKESIDE, CA. 92040
619-443-8635
~
negative declaration
PROJECT NAME: "L" Street Townhomes
PROJECT LOCATION: 588 "Le Street
Chula Vista, CA 91910
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO. 61~-061-07
PROJECT APPLICANT: Housing Authority of the County of San Diego
CASE NO: IS-92-07
DATE: October 10, 199~
A. Proiect SettinQ.
The project area, approximately 0.75 acre, is located within an urban area
of the City of Chula Vista. The U.S.G.S. quadrangle map following, shows
the project site in its regional and local vicinity. The site has one
office building located on the north end, a' garage on the south end, and
aspha 1t coveri ng the rem a i nder. Land uses surround i ng the site i nc 1 ude
two-story apartment buildings to the east, single family residential uses
to the invnediate north and northeast, convnercial uses to the northwest,
Econo-Lube and a car wash to the west, and an asphalt parking lot to the
south.
B. Proiect DescriDtion
The project proposes development of 16 townhome units, to be contained
within two buildings, each containing eight units. These units would be
rental units. Nine of the units would be 3-bedroom, and seven of the
units would be 2-bedroom. The conceptual plan for the project is shown on
the figure following the lo~al/regional vicinity map. As shown, a
playground is proposed to be located on the west side of the site.
Thirty-two tenant parking spaces and 6 guest spaces are proposed on the
ground floor. Also, the appl icant proposes dedication of sev.en feet of
frontage on "L" Street for future street widening.
C. ComDatibilitv w}th ZoninQ and Plans
The project density of approximately 21 dwelling units/acre (du/ac) is
consistent with the General Plan Land Use designation for the site, High
Density Residential (18-27 du/ac). The CoO zone allows the project land
use with a Conditional Use Permit. The building height (38 feet) is
within the allowable 45 feet maximum limit.
b/P'L I DO" U Hh"
...n/.7/0.,
clly of chuts vllts plsnning depsrtment
environmentsl review ..ctlon
~{f?
-.-
..~--..,;~~
....---
---
CllY OF
CHULA VISTA
-2-
D. Comoliance with the Threshold/Standards Policv
1. Fi re/EMS
The Threshold/Standards Pol icy 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 1n 75% of the cases. The City
of Chul a Vi sta has i ndi cated that this threshold standard will be
met, since the nearest fire station is one mile away and would be
associated with a four to five minute response time. The proposed
project will comply with this Threshold Policy.
2. Police
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that police units must
respond to 84% of Pri ori ty 1 call s within 7 mi nutes or 1 ess and
maintain an average response time to all Priority 1 calls of 4.5
minutes or less. Pol ice units must respond to 62% of Priority 2
calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time
to all Pri ority 2 call s of 7 mi nutes or less. The proposed proj"ct
will comply with this Threshold Policy.
3. Traffic
The Threshol d/Standards Pol icy requi res that all intersect ions must
operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the exception
that Level of Service (LOS) "0" may occur during the peak two hours
of the day at signal ized intersections. Intersections west of I-80S
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 arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this
policy. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Policy.
4. Parks/Recreation
The Threshold/Standards Policy for Parks and Recreation is 3
acres/l,OOO population. The proposed project will comply with this
Thresho 1 d Pol icy. The project will be requi red to pay the standard
park fee far residential development.
5. Drainage
The Threshold/Standards Pol icy requires that storm water flows and
volumes not exceed City Engineer Standards. Individual projects will
provide necessary improvements consistent with the Drainage Master
Plan (s) and Ci ty Engi neeri ng Standards. The proposed project wi 11
comply with this Threshold Policy.
6. Sewer
The Threshold/Standards Policy requires that sewage flows and volumes
shall not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects
~PC 4824H (Rev. 10/17/91)
-3-
will provide necessary improvements consistent with Sewer Master
Planes) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed project will
comply with this Threshold Policy.
7. Water
The Threshold/Sfandards Policy requires that adequate storage,
treatment, and transmission facil ities are constructed concurrently
with planned growth and that water quality standards are not
jeopardized during growth and construction. The proposed project
will comply with this Threshold Policy. The required waterflow will
be determined when detailed building plans are submitted.
Due to recent drought conditions, as a condition of project approval,
the appl icant 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 t.ime of building permit
issuance.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An initial study conducted by the City of Chula Vista determined that the
proposed project could have one or more significant environmental
effects. Specific mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce these
effects to a level of less than significant.
Because the mitigation measure will be implemented, and the significant
impacts avoided, preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will not be
required. Thus, this Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in
accordance with Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidel i nes. Specifi c
mitigation measures have also been set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring
Program which is attached as Addendum "A".
A summary of each of the potentially significant impacts from the proposed
project, and the corresponding mitigation measures, follows:
Air Oualitv - Impact - Any incremental contribution of pollutants in an
air basin which exceeds federal and/or state standards is considered
significant. .
Mitigation Measure - The applicant must agree to implement energy
conserving devices within the units and design units to minimize energy
use.
Water SUDD 1 v - Impact - Any incremental increase in the demand on water
supply is considered significant.
Mitigation Measure - The applicant must agree to any water conservation or
fee off-set program the City has in place at the time of building permit
issuance.
Noise - Impact - Existing noise in the project vicinity exceeds standards
of the City's Noise Ordinance for residential uses.
WPC 48Z4H (Re.. 10/17/91)
-4-
Mitigation Measures - Exterior (play area) mitigation requires development
of one 6-foot and one a-foot sound wall (shown on the site plan);
mitigation for interior noise could consist of inclusion of a clos.ed
ventilation system in all of the units, and/or noise attenuation for
windows and doors in the northerly units. (Actual requirements will be
determined by the City when preliminary construction designs are
completed.) .
liaht and Glare - Impact - New light could create impacts on the adjacent
apartments (to the east), and residences to the north.
Mitigation Measure - The applicant must submit a lighting plan which
includes low voltage lights pointed downward on the north and east side of
the townhomes.
Fire Protection - Impact - Fire services could be impacted without
installation of required facilities.
Mitigation Measures - The applicant must agree to install the facilities
required by the Chula Vista Fire Department, including two fire hydrants,
one publ ic at the northeast corner of driveway at "l" Street, and one
private at a location between the two buildings approximately 150 feet
from "l" Street. Other fac il it i es i nc 1 ude:
sprinklers in both buildings to NFPA 13R.
Class I standpipe per UFC 10-309.
waterflow to City requirements (determined when actual
construction plans are submitted).
Additionally, all hydrants and access must be in place and operable prior
to any combustible placed on the construction site. A fire alarm system
need not be installed if the sprinkler system has a local alarm to alert
occupants.
Schools - Impact - Area elementary and secondary schools are already over
capacity, and the addition of any new students places a significant burden
on the districts.
I
Mitigation Measare - The appl icant must agree to pay the standard school
fees, or, in lieu of fees, to participate in a Community Facilities
Di stri ct.
Parks and Recreation - Impact - An incremental impact will be placed on
the City's park and recreation facilities.
Mitigation Measure - The applicant must agree to payment of standard park
development fees.
Human Health - Impact - Asbestos occurs in the existing office building
onsite, and without proper removal, would present significant health
hazards to demolition and construction crews.
WPC 4824H (Rev. 10/17/91)
-5-
Mitigation Measure - Proper removal of asbestos must occur prior to
demolition by a licenses CAL-OSHA registered asbestos abatement
contractor, and all work must conform to EPA regulations Title 40#CFR#&1,
Subpart eM", and OSHA regulations Title 29 CFR 1926.48 and 1910.1001.
F. Findinas of Insianific~nt ImDact
Based on the following findings, it is determined that the project
described above will not have a significant environmental impact and an
Environmental Impact Report does not need to be prepared.
1. The project has the potential to substantially degrade the quality of
the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or
wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below
self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
cOlllllunity, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or
endangered pl ant or animal, or el iminate important examples of the
major periods of California history or prehistory.
The project is proposed for a location which has already been graded,
paved and developed, and, as such, it is not the habitat of any
sensitive plant or animal species, and will have no adverse impa.:ts
on the physical or biological environment.
2. The project has the potential to achieve short-tena environmental
goals to the disadvantage of long-tena environmental goals.
No short term goal s to the di sadvantage of long term goal s woul d
occur, as the project is consistent with the intended use of the site
(per the General Plan - 2010), and development would have to comply
with City Threshold Standards and site preparation standards.
3. The project has possible effects which are individually limited but
cumulatively considerable. As used in the subsection, "cumulatively
considerable" lIH!ans that the incremental effects of an individual
project are considerable when viewed in connection with the effects
of past projects, the effects of other current projects, and the
effects of probable future projects.
The project would create incremental noise, including temporary noise
from construction, and long term noise from project traffic. These
impacts are not considered significant, since noise level increases
on a long term basis are imperceptible, and construction impacts are
short term and controlled by standard hours of construction from 7:00
a.m. to 7:00 p.m. on weekdays. Regarding water supply, any new
demand on water in an area regionally impacted by the drought is
considered to be cumulatively significant. The applicant will
mitigate this impact by implementing water conserving design in the
units and in the landscaping. There would be an incremental increase
in air emissions from the 96 vehicles associated with the
development. Proximity to transit and service facilities would help
to reduce emissions. Finally, there is no significant growth
inducement associated with the project.
WPC 4824H (Rev. 10/17/91)
Up-pcr Otay Water SUp'ply Reservoir
See Section IV 4, below.
Chula Vista Greenbelt
The SPA plan proposes open space for the greenbelt area including trail use and
is consistent with the General Plan. Uses proposed adjacent to the Salt Creek corridor
include low medium and low density residential, a school site, a neighborhood park, and
a community center. Landscaping and setbacks would provide visual and spatial buffer
between the greenbelt and adjacent uses.
Otay Water District Reclamation Facilities
See Section II 2.
Affordable Housing
With respect to the potential impacts associated with provision of affordable
housing, the project applicant's affordable housing program shall be subject to review
and approval by the Planning Commission concurrent with Tentative Subdivision Map
approval.
The program shall be consistent with the following principles:
As determined by the 1991 Housing Element revisions, applicant will continue
to explore various methods to devote ten percent (10%) of the Salt Creek Ranch units to
affordable housing.
As provided by the Housing Element, the City of Chula Vista shall continue to
assist the applicant to fulfill the Housing Element affordable housing policy through the
following actions:
. Seek State and Federal subsidies for moderate and low income housing.
(Chula Vista Housing Element, Part 2, page 24, 1985).
. Consider the use of density bonuses consistent with State law. (Chula
Vista Housing Element, Part 2, page 24, 1985).
. Consider exploration of experimental planning, design and development
techniques and standards to reduce the cost of providing affordable
housing. (Chula Vista Housing Element, Part 2, 1985).
-12-
City Planning Commission
Agenda Items for Meeting of March 11. 1992
Page 6
Companies which shall provide. in part. that upon receiving written
notice from the City that said Cable Company is in violation of the terms
and conditions of the franchise granted to said Cable Company. or any
other terms and conditions regulating Cable Company in the City of
Chula Vista. as same may from time to time be amended. Developer shall
suspend Cable Company's access to said conduit until City otherwise
notifies Developer. Said agreement shall be approved by the City
Attorney prior to Final Map approval.
26. Prior to approval of a final map for any unit. the owner shall submit a
copy of said final map in a digital format such as (DXF) graphic file. This
Computer Aided Design (CAD) copy of the Final Map shall be based on
accurate coordinate geometry calculations and shall be submitted on 5
1/2 HD floppy disk prior to the approval of the Final Map.
The following are requirements of the City Code:
1. Prior to issuance of building permits. the developer shall pay:
a. Eastern Area Development Impact Fees. The amount of said fees
to be paid shall be that in effect at the time of issuance of building
permits.
b. Traffic Signal Participation Fees in accordance with City Council
Policy.
c. All applicable sewer fees. including but not limited to Sewer
Connection Fees.
d. Public Facilities Financing fees.
2. The developer shall comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code. Preparation of the Final Map and all plans shall be in
accordance with provisions of the Subdivision Map Act. Subdivision
Ordinance and the Subdivision Manual of the City of Chula Vista.
Fire DeDartment Reauirements:
1. Fire flow shall not fall below 1.500 GPM at any hydrant.
SAl T\PCS91-01.RPT
-6-
4. The environmental effects of a project will cause substantial adverse
effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly.
Hazardous materials have not been found on the property so11s 'or
groundwater which exceed EPA limits; asbestos does occur within the
existing structure and will be removed consistent with EPA and OSHA
regulations. .
G. Consultation
1. Individuals and Oraanizations
City of Chula Vista: Roger Daoust, Engineering
John Lippitt, Engineering
Cliff Swanson, Engineering
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering
Bob Sennett, Planning
Ken Larsen, Director of Building and Housing
Carol Gove,.Fire Marshal
Captain Keith Hawkins, Police Department
Marty Schmidt, Parks and Recreation Department
Diana Richardson, Community Development Department
Air Quality Consultant - Hans Giroux
Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva
Applicant's Agent: Cliff R. Largess, Project Manager
3989 Ruffin Road
San Diego, CA 92123-1815
2. Documents
Documents used in the preparation of this report include:
Chula Vista General Plan - 2010
Title 19, Ctula Vista Municipal Code
General Plan Update Environmental Impact Report
3. Initial Study
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial
Study as well as any comments on the Initial Study and the Mitigated
Negative Declaration. Further information regarding the
environmental review of the project is available from the Chula Vista
Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 92010.
WPC 4824H (Rov. 10/17/91)
-7-
4. Preoarers
The preparer of the Negative Declaration is the City of Chula Vista,
Contract Environmental Facilitator, Diana Richardson, with input from
other City staff.
5. letters Received 1n Resoonse to Notice of Initial Studv
Three letters, following, were received in response to the Notice of
Initial Study. Responses to each of the comments in the letters are
located after each letter. Additionally, one letter from the Chula
Vista Elementary School District was received describing required
fees. This letter is also attached.
M~~.0 ~
DOUG REID t
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
EN 6 (Rev. 12/90)
(
~PC 4824H (Rev. 10/17/91)
..'
"L" Housing - Noise, UH1645
FIGURE 1
; ~\~\W\\~ \~' .~~\ \:\\\.!. JV~~' ...'('-~~}p,r~~~%
, .. ; '.'''''' i' \ \\ \.~~~ ", ~\ \ \ \ '~' . "-..~\~~.. 'i:" "5f~'_,,;-S-",';\~~ \""""'N'T
. ~'I: . \\ .: ~~'\-':! I ~ \ . .. ',\\\lo'iI L.. ~... iZ------ ciu:::.o.;~~ ~'~ .. r IJJ
~/-:"\'...\ ~ ~ \\\ \. s.,.. ~ '. :~.~"..,:_ ~-"(.-;~, _I ..:\ \ ',_ ';-.. i/'
H[1/'ID \0\ '\~\I~' . '- \_~\t~.f~,\'--::-' '""7'""".t .\\\ ,I
S;.!r... :{i>1i~c.r""'\~'.~ba.~~~-HYfJlf \~.~<f -::~:-~''f.. Ij fl<t vVII . d 'r! _ '-; '\\ \ \o~{\;
[..t.t'.,'ii"-Le \..! ~ :j.'L ~~..,.. ""\:"'~ "'~\H"O'''' -. .' .;., i~-:'. "--:
;':i;'d.4-", I'~ . ~. '.. " -. ~'(\... (__~ .,._.$.. -_ ~_' Is.; \..,_
;.:"-'.:'1.... '. I fI\; : ~ -~ :; ~f(. ,/ ~~... ...... _.~ ;,~ - _'~_ ' -'1. ~
~,. : 'IT O~. ~~'~~-s2, :..~~~~\u 1.. ..' Y~.. .., '''''*~\\''
;1i'-:;\" u I'-~~~ ~~~ f~(~~\,o.~,<!.\-(., ~.) ~'-k
:ff;~.1 T; ~,,/.~~ I\~\ '~._~r_':':b~,'" m\\ 'j,..~,..~5~ \!I!.._r. ,-;.i ~'~I~
"':!~ ~ '\\V~~, 1'7 4'.: >_ .A ~~ '~")..;~~;.t;' ":-\.I-____,..,..,~~~. '. ,~~~
ji................ :i.'.........~...i....::I-~. ';' F-:: \1\'iC' .t:~b~\;_'~.'{)Oi'~:~ ~ ~.:c. '1j ;t.~) ".- . ,.~ ~kO\ ::.;\~;~"
!t<l"\......,. I' '. . ~ ?:r.,,'~- .:: -O'""~ -' .... ';'..,,:, ~~"n J\~';:;::
'V"+\\ i " ~, ~';"~ ........,' ~ .FO;.S,;~...,..~J-.:;,,\::,.,..-::.. ""~1 .....'
\\r.'.'jf'::,\. (. 11m-II %~',,\....... 'il.,.:_,~ W:~: ~~~. .~....~ .~.....~~'_.
;:~~\;:\; r.:<~~~.. - '~ r"- ~ - ~~ _.;\~A \\"\ ~~. '7_ \ 'F~\~"" " &1"1.:':"; _ ~ \.
....'.',:',.._" "....".... ~\\.!.. .,_ .- I. ---oe::;.".!. ~ " ~ h J IIICD'Sch I .
"M.t:::J .../...."i' I-~\_._~\Y~.o,... _ ." -";', ,.~... \...-... ~'" .. "'.: f
~~ :I: :;S!j,"\:{' / '\,:\:';'::.:;:?:.\ . --, ~. . ~ .~~ ,:.... '~~\.,:;: ~ 'i. ~'\.~~I '.: . \.
..,.....,E-<~.~I \~,...-::.q ~ .-~ ",. ~-..~;,.~,. I.'c',,~ :'. ,~~ .. :.",
.:,.::0;,':::"1 c:x;::.:>./:<~ _. ~a'.-:~...,~\,> ~ ,r.;--~\"~' '~.',~, ;,: )~a.., I. ~~
.\..............:...:/ 0:.'./...".'.....'.'....'.,.:, -.:..\ /_.. J ~A ~A' ..~ ~'~\': Q ~~I ;,~ )\C<<'l~ "\.~
.,.~z.<' ~. .])0' ~\ \_'.' v~ h.!Ji! ,. Jr\\i';;',\'
'(';}'111.:M}f ::':::-.. ':if:.-';'. .-=; ~ .'. ;::.' -.. . .~..~. '~~c:::v.l~~_;.
-"_..~;....:..;:! :'''?:'';~ J in ... ~ - .. ". Q' --.......-J' .0._ .1 _\..._ \ -_. \'
..'...',.;.,;:'1 ^ '.i,.",'/,;......:,. ~.~~ 1.- -'I' I . . r..... 1~,. . ~ 'I "1-;-- ,_I '," ,..,
.,.,",J ^ '.. ,.'""'C' . -1 -,' ~.'O __ ,\.i T"""'.c:::: '.3 ~ - '. .~-~
.,',<I:;! ^A//?.';tx~I..,....'_~n.. '~\,15 ,",~""P"k~= I....,...". "I
~.t~5.S i~~: :~.~.:;:~r\) ANrtP ..;~~ J.;.1~~3~JlQ riM; (~ ~r ~
/7':'~f?:,~~;;1tt~i=~~~J ~~~i' .t.l ; . "~L'D .~..r;lrr@':;~ ..' !,;." -.";,, '~:~n~'i
"./.I~ ~- .~: '::.' ..-./ '\." _0&00--' -. . . - _11 ~" ~~.. ~ , ~~-J
,.--.t ,. o<.~ ,,,, '" .J ~rr'l D' ~ ".;, < .-.Otay;=, .-." iii I. ""
'.".j .,:; ." < '4 0 ~"""nr ..i ..' '. "'..". I' ..
...,.",.~:...;...}." ~"!-.~~:.~.. ._ .. M ~3._v~... .t :.. .",. ,l;JH' -{ ._~ I ;; $T -.. I :.
;"'+~7i''''-i '..+ .jO,,,,':in+-#!i -.-::~s;. ':i' ...~'(....:".m.. .. ';;,,:,,"'0;":'-.::...1/' ''i..-,;....
:,.;.~71 t ! .~, Thi"Jlle~i~:u. :'m I- -X-,.: ~1 '- b -:\\ ~ r-II .II~-V:-....
I~III-I ~, ~ '-"', .~~.. .., '00 . -,,: '->:~n~:~~- :<'i>.,,~' LL.: __^I ij O.
1i':?;'__;_1 to'se.....'e . -, . ~1 ....;0:..... -_ ~\.:.......::.~~.f::(.;:.;..:>::-;r:.,.- ~:t'/~~~ ~ --...(_ -
". ..,1;;.0"00'" . \ \ iws" ~ --.~.-... .""'-<"~J>."~ii::;,T~''f.~.~~..-? - - ........
\-~;\t: , 21 r- ';-T- "~;'::;-=~'-;"'~~f.w~~ '-;-1-' -:j~i'=-~] 2} .:.~'
,,- ':11 -..-...... 0 d k-'" -. -~ -- ~1:'''' ,.&- ~.~ ...."..'"'~-~
; ,~~,.,II . -" - ..;__";.~~..~~\1;~~i,~~\ -\. '. ~ _ lA' ..~~~ f--' ~.- L~~..r:.,-,.-.::
,.~ ~.. -i.,; ^~...._. ~,~.... r~,,~ E:!ia ~o.:;.' &J -.
ii.~.';:~:'!.,1~, .. "0 Q ~ :IV~"-.....~ . ,t.~ ~\..., -=. ,,~~~~;.'t..~.5h,.,.~~~.~r ~..::..;..
;'....',,::"L . 0 ::= ,...... .~. . '. ...>:...----~~.i t ~.:' '... ,-~
~S:\'i~r.-.---- _':~~....., ~ # ~ ~ . 'T~_'~~~ -?"'....- I ~.Ji;!~t; J;.~~~~
fE~''''~'! ~ A3 :: ~_.~.._~.. ~~jc~;;_'!1:""'JV 1 / f_:loOj /ifrW(ll:d;~:.-:::.
, . '1;.!Ier.'id -< ~ ~ rf"'O' ......~-~~l?i;-;;:r~ I I ."=' ' ~ s i :. '"
~'. ~~.r~~ ,.- . -- ~a1l'a~;:;:;......"..~~~._~N~~Je - ~... fD, _-- :;;a==:~~
:~. ~:".~~/~)j ~r"\ h'~~~~ p~~~.~ c:>~~~> -C. :;! .m\ill.. .i 1~.;':1m'~;S;;;~
"iT...,., ..5 -. J. "! -.ox:: fj'-.r..' I-,~:" ewr ,.";;; . ". ~. OJ',
.~."" ,,,,.': ......:.. ',.-.. ./. ~';:=-:. ~:I ',: - '. W.II.,............ .'."'. ~ ~ '.' '1 1
- '...' .~. "\::~ 1.... ~ --.;:-r--r-'. Park). /"' 'I I~-: I
;h nliei< .\..-:r.~~~.:~?<1i_,~~u~~~o(' '.....:..:'':', ,'J l!Ji{X_" -; ':J~i~I:;
. ~-!'. ,Pa(" .~..~. ~ .'~-. . ~--=>. -'~---- r I.. '- -:.
~~~..~~c1n:_~. ...~~_ ~.;.."..\ \f~. \ '''''''--~~Mont&omerY... ,--f(I.,j_.___~-:::......... _ ~\..-f
.~iilI. ":-l.-+' .. ~~..tP .. '<If' (I. '. ~ .. W1I \ County ~i, :I'/~ 'I ~ --.... ,"';1
~~I "!J< .,-.0(._ ,~-,~:\ ,~... -no.., ". ..ii:;i!s .P"k',:,~.,~,' '-'.'f-::J:\.' 'I
: ~Q!Jl~~P'~ "': -. fO'iV~~'lI : ~ riE.~;: E ~ ~ ." . -'l_~~ _c, :.... .)
.~ :J!~:;.I.'-'::1'" =!.-, ..!_h.e_.(e~_::,: ~~.:~~ ~jS: -~'-"..u1: 1j..-'/jA{L. - ~ ~_'
..ti-c ............ ...."':fi<J .:'\.'- 1:-' "'-.271'- ) .10'1 _. T",'.,P'!k 26 '.. 41..
""'I: ~o =~~Of'J' "'::-PO~ ~ :~~~'~~:;:..-;: ;'~Ii:' -" _ _',-
USGS QUAD - CHULA VISTA
APPROX. SCALE I" = 2000'
-
BY:FEB 9/91
.'
CI)
Eo<
Z
r.:J
;Ii:;
Eo<
p:;
..;
p..
..;
><
p:;
o
Eo<
CI)
I
'"
CI)
Eo<
Z
r.:J
;Ii:;
Eo<
p:;
..;
p..
..;
><
p:;
o
Eo<
tIJ
1
'"
....
.... '
~~
II :/1
~"Y
!.J;.
~8'
--lit
. ~ .f-
Eo<
o
H
CJ
Z
H
:.:
p:;
..;
p...
.-',
I ~ ,i"f\
. J p. _, "'--'
~'~~!7 ,.
I ~~ .-:<~i
t- . - -.~~t'-'
~~~
-=-..... ~ -.,:'~-. -
.-/"\ ) ,- ':;''''; )!E{![ \
\~ r ~ ~:_-_ - :~~ ' .-=:;
".. i:f:,..,....--,,'<.:'-""'" f~ -'
,-\ ~~~f!$i~~ ,~:.;::' ~
I I ! ,..."~""~~.,,. ---'-f . -.........-
I,. . .!) ....,~~~:/>.~~i2 )'
-=-'t~=,,~~..-_, ~ -. ..-
Ik< -~~"'-"=d~~--"
J A.... .'"-<..~~.:?/!f- '.. ..
\ "l" ~ ~\~~~) ~ -- ~
I .. ..:. 3 -~ .CJ.......:.._J.-::-:..-_~ _
.1, \. 1- ..- -c. . '. .. ,,',
. '" - "'=.,.".,. .J' "" . ....' -
1 ~1-'.-""~ E....... . .
...,......:&~~.....1 ~: . I
1:; ~?i'~ 1 M ~ - ::'
I..,:,j,,~, ~~a:I~~ F, " ,,;;;
, ~~:_~ ~:h ~ ,
., "---i4;-':~ ,?" ~ - .IIIM::
:"j E;:'~~~ r -. r-'\~
.; .=.~~-', - If'''
.: ~-:=~~. \. ~~ ~
'j ~=-....:;.,,..,. -...:I,
'i '~f",( - ~';;
-J ~';;:-..==:_r _------.. ....._ ='
:!.I ~,..:...~.=r-...::o.i. ':'\ -,~
,;-" ~~, "". ~__CD,::""
~1 r-~~ :":-' )". .:~~~
i1~, .:J... m.~i~~...'-' J/.~~~:.~,
" ~'"'-,"'"~"~- -'~~--
i",,~""":'".:o'_' .--:',....-,,0:
.... --"~'-III if! " ,,:, .."",.......
'I ~;,~. ...6' WALL,
L\; fT:ft:-;<<##~t~~f!#
~ I l~j~~~:.~r4~;d1
''''''''''
.,
!
",
~
L STREET
FIGURE 2
,
CJ
Z
H Eo<
C :x:
H
H
::> CD
CQ M
H 0
..; Eo<
H
() -
P:; ,10
r.:J M
~
o
()
:x:
CI)
..;
~
P:;
<
()
"L" Housing - Noise, UH1645
><
P:;
o
Eo<;Ii:;CJ
tIJ;Ii:;C
10H
M()CQ
><~z
P:;()O
OHH
Eo<:>Eo<
CIJ~<
1r.:JE-<
...t/Jt/J
tI)
H
..;
() P:;
~ :..::1 ~
Eo< H
H r.:J P:;
CI) :> P:;
r.:J ..;
CJ H CQ
Z
H ~ ~
P:; t/J CI)
0 H H
Eo< 0 0
H Z Z
Z
0 (%. C
~ 0 r.:J
CI)
C Eo< 0
Z Z p..
::> H 0
0 0 P:;
C CI) p.. p..
z
r.:z ....
t!1 ~ ....
r.:J .. ....
..::i
j
~
p:j
By:FEB 9/91
RECEIVED
OCT 0 7 ,- -;
OCTO 7
James A. Berry
Marjorie M. Berry
885 Ash Ave.
Chula Vista, Ca. 91911
5 October 1991
fl.......-.........\I.,.~
. -
Dear Sirs;
This letter is in reference to Case no. IS 92-07 Development
16 unit of low rent.housing for low income families located
at 588 "L" street. Chula Vista.
I would like to list a few facts that should be considered during
your review of this project.
1. For 16 units and parking there will no room for any kind
of out door play or recreation area. So that means the children
will be on the streets most of time to find what ever recreation
they can.
2. Currently The residents of Aloha Yista Apartments use Ash
Avenue as their parking lot for overnight parking another 16
units will only compound this problem.
3. The car wash is a 24 hour operation the people who frequent
that operation do not care about the surronding residents
as they play their loud radios and drink beer at all times of
the day and night. And now a plan is to put 16 family units
next door to that operation.
4. The traffic flow from the units will be one way to the east
and I can fore-see many unauthoized "U" turns at the end of
the island as many people will not take the time to go around
the block so they can head west to Interstate 5.
5. The preyaling wind is from the west most of the time very
few days do we have winds from the east. The "TUNE AND LUB"
operation located on the corner is a "SMOG INSPECTION STATION"
during the time a smog inspection is performed the engine is
running and the exhaust will be directed into the unit complex
there will be little flushing effect to direct the exhaust
emissions from that area. Prior to my retirement I had many
years of experience with exhaust emmissions unless these units
are all air condition there will be health problems for the
people in the units. The "LUB AND TUNE" operation should be
terminated if the family unit project is approved.
We need low rent projects but the people deserve to be in a
residential section and not some buffer zone to a health hazzard.
(
v
i)Berry ,~
. '-~~ ~'.'- .... ,
~~ ., '~'-'-'-~ ~ ......._.---._------~-...................-~...-..-
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
POBOX 1087
CHULA VISTA, CA. 92012
OCTOBER 4, 1991
ATTENTION:
DIANNE RICHARDSON,
I HAVE CONCERNS ABOUT THE PROPOSED PROJECT AT 588 L STREET.
AS AN ADJACENT PROPERTY OWNER, I HAVE THESE CONCERNS:
1. DRAINAGE FROM PARKING LOT (HOW PROPOSED TO DO THIS)
2. ADDITIONAL CAR NOISE AND CAR LIGHTS FROM PROPOSED PROJECT,
STREET AND PARKING
3. THREE STORY BUILDING BLOCKING VIEW AND OCEAN BREEZE
4. WITH PROPOSED 1092 TO 1440 SQUARE FEET HOUSING WITH It
PARKING SPACES PER UNIT..NOT ADEQUATE WITH NO STREET PARKING
5. AS A LOW INCOME PROJECT ESTIMATE OF 57 PEOPLE NOT CORRECT
6. HOW CLOSE TO MY ENTRANCE IS PROPOSED PROJECT ENTRANCE AS IT
WILL BE SERVING AS EXIT ALSO
7. WHAT ABOUT PROPOSED PROJECT UTILITIES..UNDERGROUND OR ?
8. WHAT TYPE OF WALLS OR FENCES ARE PROPOSED FOR SECURITY BETWEEN
580 L STREET AND PROPOSED 588 L STREET ?
SINCERELY,
~:>>u-~
CAROL HUGHES
POBOX 173
LAKESIDE, CA. 92040
619-443-8635
jD - h - 7/
~~~~
~~"
LJIZ- Jc ~ wJ /t. ~ o-C lc..J
-
~ ~ ~ fJ1.I.A- tu1u-. - S g g i. 4J.
~ i.- ic. ~ ~ a~ "",..f ~
~~..j;f~ ~ -a~
..{ -fb nu1- k. aeu, w-L rf ~ (y
~ ~ 1 DWL ~ ~ tk 7-// d-
~"f-~' ~ ~L ~ 1~
~ iVl( PJJ:. JJ _f o,f -iLr. ~ .
~~) 7rL~ S~
~~J~
-8-
A. James A. and Marjorie M. 8erry
1. Regarding children's play area, please see proposed site plan whi.ch
has an outdoor playground on the west side of the townhomes.
2. The project proposes 32 parking spaces for tenants (2 per unit) and 6
guest spaces, eliminating the need to park offsite.
3. Regarding land use compatibil ity, the General Plan designates this
site for High Density residential. The project proposes an 8-foot
sound walla long the western boundary adjacent to the car wash and
Econo-Lube. Additionally, sound attenuation features will be
implemented into the units.
4. Regarding project egress/ingress; due to the planned "L" Street
improvements, which include widening and a raised median, access will
involve a right-turn out only, and right-turn in only. "L" Street at
Fifth Avenue is wide enough to allow a U-turn if west is the desired
direction of travel.
5. Regarding air quality concerns, the issue of air quality was reviewed
as part of the Initial Study. The typical type and level 'of
emissions from the Econo-Lube would not create significant health
impacts. Emissions, at the worst, would be similar to being located
near a roadway where vehicles idle at stops. The townhomes will be
designed with ventilation, with intakes to be required either on top
or on any side other than the west side (see Discussion No.2).
WPC 4824H (Rev. 10/17/91)
-9-
B. Carol Hughes
1. Regarding drainage, the site will drain toward the north to "L"
Street. The applicant will submit site hydraulics and a drainage
plan as part of the grading plan (see Discussion No.3).
2. Regarding car noise and lights:
a) Lights
The applicant is required to submit a lighting plan with the
building plans which will include low voltage lighting pointed
downward away from the east and north (see Discussion No.7).
b) Car Noise
A noise study was performed, and it is the noise from the
surrounding area which requires mitigation. Car noise is
considered an incremental impact because noise levels would not
be perceptibly raised (see Discussion No.6).
3. Regarding views and ocean breeze, please see the proposed site plan.
The 3-story structures would block some views from the upper floor of
the 2-story apartments to the east. These units are oriented toward
the east, away from the proposed townhomes. Also, see Discussion No.
18. Ocean breezes could be slightly blocked by the townhomes. Due
to the orientation of the buildings, and the separation between the
two, significant blockage is not expected.
4. The Initial Study application incorrectly stated the number of
parki ng spaces to be 22. The correct number is 32, wi th 6 onsite
guest spaces.
5. The population estimate, 57, was derived by the applicant based on
information received regarding household size from the school
districts. The minimum number required is 50, and the maximum
allowed is 98. Please see Discussion No. 11, 12.
6. If the entrance in question is 580 "L" Street, the proposed site plan
shows the distance to be about 10 feet, from edge to edge.
7. Regarding utilities location of above - or underground, it is assumed
that electricity is the utility in question. SDG&E would not require
undergrounding the electric lines. However, if the City requires
undergrounding, the applicant would comply with this requirement.
8. Regardi ng security walls, none are proposed. The app 1 i cant proposes
a 6-foot wood fence around the project, with the exception of the
6-foot and 8-foot sound walls on the north and west sides.
~PC 4824H (Rev. 10/17/91)
-10-
C. Maxine and Duane Sterner
Regarding parking, there are 32 tenant and 6 guest spaces onsile,
eliminating the need for offstreet parking. The other comments regarding
crime, property value, and trash appear to be opinions of the authors and
have no relevance to t~e environmental analysis.
WPC '824H (Rev. 10/17/91)
BOARD OF EDUCATION
JOSEPH O. CUMMINGS, Ph.D.
LARRY CUNNINGHAM
~ARON GILES
PA TRK;K A. JUDO
GREG R. SANDOVAl
SUPERINTENDENT
JOHN F. VUGRN, Ph.D.
CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT
84 EAST "J" STREET 0 CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910 0 619425-9600
EACH CHILD IS AN INDIVIDUAL OF GREAT WORTH
September 26, 1991
RECEIVED
SEP 30 19q!
Ms. Maryann Miller
Environmental Review section
City of Chula Vista
276 Fourth Ayenue
Chula vista, CA 91910
PLANNING
RE: IS-92-07 / FA-544 / DP-881
Location: 588 "L" Street
Applicant: county of San Diego Housing Authority
Project: 16 units of Low Rent Housing
Dear Ms. Miller:
This is to advise you that the project, located at 588 "L"
Street, is within the Chula Vista Elementary School District
which serves children from Kindergarten through Grade 6.
District enrollment has been increasing at the rate of 4 - 5
percent oyer the past several years, and this is projected
to continue. Permanent capacity has been exceeded at many
schools and temporary relocatable classrooms are being
utilized to accommodate increased enrollments. The District
also buses students outside their attendance areas, both to
accommodate growth and assist in achieving ethnic balance.
currently a deyeloper fee of $1.58 per square foot of
assessable area ($ .70 for Chula vista Elementary School
District, $ .88 for Sweetwater Union High School District)
~s assessed for new residential construction and
additions/remodels of over 500 square feet.
Since developer fees currently allowed under State law
provide approximately twenty-five percent of the facilities
costs to house new students, the District encourages
developer participation in alternative financing mechanisms
to help assure that facilities will be available to serve
children generated by new construction. We are currently
utilizing Community Facilities Districts (CFD'S) as one
method to help fund this shortfall. Participation in a CFD
is in lieu of developer fees, with school mitigation paid by
the homeowner in the form of a special tax. Residential
projects of 20 units or more west of the I-805, and all new
development . east of the I-805, are recommended for
participation/annexation in a CFD. other smaller projects
are also given the opportunity to mitigate school impacts
through annexation in lieu of fees.
1.
Sweetwater Union High School District
ADMINISTRATION CENTER
1130 Fifth Avenue
Chula Visla. California 91911.2896
(619) 691.5500
Division of Planning and Facilities
RECEIVED
OCT 7 '? 1C;'~
-,
October 14, 1991
PLANNING
Mr. DDuglas Reid
City of Chula Vista
Planning Department
276 Fourth Ayenue
Chula Vista,CA 91911
Dear Mr. Reid:
Re: IS-92-07 588 ''L'' Street
The above subject project will have an impact on the Sweetwater Union High
School District. Payment of school fees will be required pursuant to
Government Code No. 65995 (Developer Fees) prior to issuance of building
permit.
omas Silva
Assistant Director of Planning
TS/ml
.'
September 26, 1991
Ms. Maryann Miller
Page 2
RE: IS-92-07/16 units of Low Rent Housing
The subject project, "L" street ~ownhomes, is located in the
Rice School attendance area. This school is presently
operating near capacity, and a developer fee as described
above is required to help mitigate school impacts. To fully
mitigate impacts this project will have on elementary
facilities, the project proponent is encouraged and has the
option to request annexation to CFD No. 5 in lieu of fees.
If you are interested in annexing to CFD No.5, please let
us know as soon as possible, and we will forward our
annexation criteria to you.
If you haye any questions, please contact this office.
Sincerely,
~r~~
Director of Planning
KS:dp
cc: Cliff R. Largess
Gabriel G. Rodriguez
.
I
\'.
INITIAL STUDY
City of Chula Vista
Application Form
A. BACKGROUND
fOR OffICE USE
Case No. .IS CjZ. a1
fee .~
Receipt No. 9
Da te Rec' d . I . I
Accepted by 11i~
Project No. I=A- 5' y,/
1. PRGJECT TITLE "L" Street Townhomes
2. PRGJECT LOCATION (Street address or description) 588 "L" Street
91910
("'hn1.=ro U;C:~;II. ~1l
Assessors Book, Page & Parcel No. APN 618-061-07
3. BRIEF PRGJECT DESCRIPTIOtJ Develop 16 units of 10~1 rent housinq
for very-low and low income families.
4.
5.
Name of Appl icant Housing Authority of
Address 3989 Ruffin Road
City San Diego State CA
Name of Pre parer/Agent Cliff R. Larqess
Address 3989 Ruffin Road
Ci ty . San Diego, State CJI_
\
Relation to Applicant Employee
the County of San Dieao
Phone 694-4815
Zip 92123-1815
Proiect Manaqer
Phone 694. 4815
Zip 92123-1815
6. Indicate all permits or approvals and enclosures or documents
required by the Environmental Review Coordinator.
a. Permits or approvals required:
General Plan Revision
--- Rezoning/Prezoning
--- Precise Plan .
--- Specific Plan
. X Condo Use Pennit
--- Variance
Design Review Committee Public Project
==== Tentative Subd. Map --- Annexation
Grading Permit --- Design Review Board
--- Tentative Parcel MaP ~ Redevelopment Agency
-X- Site Plan & Arch. Review
Other
b. Enclosures or documents (as required by the Environmental Review
Coordi nator).
x Location Map Arch. Elevations
--- Gradi ng Pl an --- Landscape Pl ans
:::x:: Si te Pl an --- Photos of Si te &
Parcel Map --- Setting
--- Preci se Pl an Tentative Subd. Map
--- Specific Plan --- Improvement Plans
--- Other Agency Permit or ;r- Soils Report
--- Approvals Required ---
x Eng. Geology Report
2l- Hydrological Study
Biological Study
--- Archaeological Survey
X Noise Assessment
--- Traffic Impact Report
.1L Other - AsI.Ie--h s ~
~f\v..j.'1 P!v"''T' Or. ~.:>
- " -
B. PROPOSED PROJECT,
1. Land Area: sq. footage 32,792.60 or acreage .7528
If land area to be dedicated, state acreage' and purpose.
7 feet of frontage on "L" Street for future \-lidening ,
2. Complete this section if project is residential.
a. Type development: Single family Two family
Hulti family x Townhouse Condomi ni urn
b. Number of structures and heights two (2) three (3) story
buildinas
Number of Units:
3 bedrooms 9
c.
1 bedroom
2 hedrooms
Total units 16
7
4 bedrooms
d. Gross density (DU/total acres) 21.25
e. Net density (DU/total acres minus any dedication) 21.78
f. Estimated project population 57
g. Estimated sale or rental price range $282 to $571 I
h. Square footage of floor area(s) I,092 sq ft 2 bdrrn: 1,440 !::qft 3barI
i. Percent of lot coverage by buildings or structures 29%
j. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided ~2.j-~ yuot~dc.UJ-'
k. Percent of site in road and paved surface 41%
3.
Complete this section if
a. Type( s) of 1 and use
b. Floor area
c. Type of constructio~
project is commercial or industrial.
Height of structure(s)
used in the structure
d. Describe major access points to the structures and the
orientation to adjoining properties and streets
e. Number of on-site parking spaces provided
f. Estimated number of employees per shift . Number of
shifts Total
g. Estimated number of customers (per day) and basis of estimate
-
- 3 -
h. Esti~ated range of service area and basis of estimate
i. Type/extent of operations not in enclosed buildings
j. Hours of operation
k. Type of exterior lighting
4. If project is other than residential, commercial or industrial
complete this section.
a. Type of project
b. Type of facilities provided
c. Square feet of enclosed structures
d. Height of structure(s) - maximum
e. U1ti~ate occupancy load of project
f. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided
g. Square feet of road and paved surfaces
C. PRillECT CHARACTERISTICS
1. If the project could result in the direct emission of any air
pollutants, (hydrocarbons, sulfur, dust, etc.) identify them.
Not Applicable
2. Is any type of grading or excavation of the property anticipated l'OC:
(If yes, c~mplete the following:)
a.
Excluding trenches to be backfilledbhow ~any cubic yards of
earth wi 11 be excavated? -.. 25 cub~c yards ~
b. How many cubic yards of fill will be placed?
c. How much area (sq. ft. or acres) will be graded?
250 cubic yards +
d. What will be the - Maximum depth of cut 2'
Average depth of cut 2'
Maxi~um depth of fill 2'
Average depth of fill 2'
- 4 -
3. Describe all energy consuming devices which are part of the proposed
project and the type of energy used (air conditioning, electrical
appl iance, heating equipment, etc.) solar domestic hot water
FAN. as a liances (stove): electr~c appL~ances \Q~snwa~er,
refriqerator. microwave was er dryer
4. Indicate the amount of natural open space that is part of the project
(sq. ft. or acres) 9,837 or .3 AC
5. If the project will result in any employment opportunities describe
the nature and type of these jobs. Not Applicable
6. Will highly flammable or potentially explosive materials or
substances be used or stored within the project
site? No
7. How many estimated automobile trips, per day, will be generated by
the project? 96 ADT
8. Describe (if any) off-site improvements necessary to implement the
project, and their points of access or connection to the project
site. Improvements include but not limited to the following: new
streets; street widening; extension of gas, electric, and sewer
lines; cut and fill slopes; and pedestrian and bicycle facilities.
Extend 6" fire service to curb, extend sewer and domestic water to
prgperty liRe Tn~t~ll ?4f rir;v~w~y ~rr~~~ Dpr ~;tp Dl~n
D. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING
1. Geology
Has a geology study been conducted on the property?
(If yes, please attach)
yes (attached)
Has a Soil~ Report on the project site been made?
(If yes, please attach)
2. Hydrology
Are any of the following features present on or adjacent to the
site? Yes (If yes, please explain in detail.)
yes (attached)
a. Is there any surface evidence of a shallow ground water
table? No water table 45 feetce ow grace
b. Are there any watercourses or drainage improvements on or
adjacent to the site? TeleQraoh Canyon Creek
- 5 -
c. Does runoff from the project site drain directly into or toward
a domestic water supply, lake, reservoir or bay?
Surface runoff to city storm drain system to San Diego Bay.
Could drainage from the site cause erosion or siltation to
adjacent areas? No
d.
e.
3. Noise
a.
Describe all drainage facilities to be provided and their
location. Roof and avement draina e directed to cond .
carry runo f to 'l" Street.
Will there be any noise generated from the proposed project site
or from points of access ~/hich may impact the surrounding or
adjacent land uses? No.
4. Biology
a. Is the project site in a natural or partially natural state?
No. This is an urban infill site
b. Indicate type, size and quantity of trees on the site and which
(if any) will be removed by the project. No vecration ; "
present on the site.
5. Past Use of the land
a. Are there any known historical resources located on or near the
project site? No known cultural on historical siqnificants
resources on the sHoe or the v~ncity of the site.
b. Have there been any hazardous materi al s di sposed of or stored on
or near the project site? Asbestos-containing material within the
existing commercial buildin wl11 be removed before demolishin the
Ul lng. ee a ac e s estos nvestlgatlon eport
6. Current land Use
a. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on the
project site. Existin9 improvpmpnt~ in.-lllrlp ~ nnp-~tn...y nff'irp
structure in the northeast corner. a aara!1e in the "nlJthp~~t ~nrner
and a 4-inch aSDhalt concrete parkinq lot ~rro~~ thp rpm~inrlpr of the
site.
.'
- 6 -
b. Describe all structures and land uses currently existing on
adjacent property.
North "L" Street a four-lane residential collector street
South Asphalt concrete parkin~ lot.
East Approx 70 "DIU two-story apartment complex.
West Car wash/muffler shop and auto QaraQe.
7. Social
a. Are there any residents on site? (If so, hOl" many?) No
b. Are there any current employment opportunities on site? (If so,
hou many and what type?) Seven FT employees of South Bay cities
Board of Realtors.
Please provide any other information which could expedite the evaluation of"
the proposed proJect.
This project has been approyed in concept by City Council
acting as Governing Body of the Chula Vista Redevelopment
Authority/under cooperation agreement between the City of
Chula Vista and County Housing Authority. All rental units
to be occupied by very low and low income tenants for econ-
omic life of project (50+ years)
,
,
- 7 -
E. CERTIFICATION
I,
C~ ~~w.'~?f: .
for Housinq Authoritv of the County of San Diego or
OImer/owner 1n escrow*
I,
or
Consultant or Agent*
HEREBY AFFIRM, that to the best of my belief, the statements and information
herein contained are in all respects true and correct and that all known
information concerning the project and its setting have been included in
Parts B, C and D of this application for an Initial Study of possible
environmental impact and any enclosures for attachments thereto.
DATE: .5~ pJe~&A, 17.. )91)
*If acting for a corporation, include capacity and company name.
\
Case No. :15- r.2 -07
CITY DATA
F. PLANNING DEPARTMENT
1.
Current Zonino on site:
North
South
East
West
t!..-o
- I
d.d ".; /1. a."../ f.
,
"
t.>
w...)
J
Does the project conform to the current zoning?
. h ~ -0 "Z4>'I.e..' . .
2. General Plan land use
designation on site:
North
South
East
West
Is the project compatible with the General Plan Land Use Diagram? ~
Is the project area designated for conservation or open space or adjacent
to an area so designated? nD
Is the project located adjacent to any scenic routes? A~
(If yes. describe the design techniques being used to protect or enhance
the scenic quality of the route.)
,
3. Schools
If the proposed project is residential. please complete the following:
Students
Permanent Temporary Current Generated
Schoo 1 c..p-wI-oj - CaDacitv EnrolfNIJ ..:J- From Proiect
-..J 'I. e
Elementary Li/(/1.r\ :J. f"u- '7/20 ;5 7tr
Jr. High c;......t..Lh~ /o7l> 31#0 1"100 I. (p
Sr. Hi g h c.J....u..h. Jisfc...... J 35" "SO 1 <lI' .j
4. Remarks:
~~-<J_
Director of Planning or Representative
~
10-3-9/
Date
LIDr OA COD
_, '2_
YS-447
G. ENGINEERING DEPARTMENT -
Cue No. I:S q::J.-o,
1. Drainaae
a.
Is the project site within a flood plafn? YEG (pf3(2.. A~ ~14t ~~) .
If so, state .whfch FEHA F100dway Frequency Boundary 5tJO Y!:'AQ...
I-k>WIS.V~" . k(J.JIIV ""J"'1~_ ~'re'~ ," n:::1.J:~I'LPII ~""'I':IAI I'J.IAAIW~I
~ ~C/""El) F/.t;Jo'D/~ FF~S 1# 71ffS ~ - FP4Tp::,- IS tolD ~~ IN
What is the location and descriptfon of existfng on-sfte ~~~~
drainage facU fties? "E;()~ r:/J'OI\/ o..I,.,IZ.T'H€'"-'.... -rD "L-" o;::;rR.E&T:
b.
c.
Are they adequate to serve the project? YE c,
If not, explain brfefly. tJ.(A
,
d.
What is the location and descrfption of exfsting off-site
drainage facnities? ~UIZ.FM';: J:I.I":b/ .M--nl-4l; IIL"-5'T72J:"F.I TV
~WAY.
e.
Are they adequate to serve the project? ~E:s.
If not, explain briefly. lot/A.
/
2. TranSDortation
a. What roads provfde primary access to the project? ~~~!/~)rY'
At-.tn ilL-if &'~er- -
b. What is the estfmated number of one-way auto trips to be
generated by the project (per day)? qt, nz,~II>AY
c. What is the ADT and estimated level of service before and after
project completion?
. Before After
A.D.T. ~OA-V"AY - Z.~7~o . 1.:;p:'~
"1.-" ~I&-"r_ 1"7110 '''7~~
L.O.S. ~kJA--Y - ~ c.. L-oc:. ~
"t.-" &.Jn2.E.~- /.,o!;, C. 1-0> t"-
If the A.-D. T. or L.O.S. is unknown or not applicable, explafn
briefly. .~!.
A
I
d. Are the primary access roads adequate to serve the project? If
not, explain briefly. Yeos
YS-LfCn
e.
Case No. IS- C(;:J..-07
Are there any intersections at or llear the point that will
result in an unacceptable Level of Service (LOS)? l./f'J~..1 .
If so, identify: Location
Cumulative L.O.S.
Is there any dedication required? ~~.
If so, please specify. "I..~ ,<,;. 'DEhrt;;IJ.~ A"'> k f'Uoq; T. CL;(,1 TC>mt!-
/10( 'T'IfE. CI~I-NrICJL1 '1..Jr.u,J-/r DI&' 7'1rC ~.'''bA' ~.. SuFFlt!.."IEIJr ~~tJf..
7t> ""Eel f/tIrl.-F-WIDT'H- ~ t:F -"'tiC> P"(~AJNrU;/IoJ WI/..L.Be. ~v/~'
Is there any street widening require~? y~.
If so, please specify. W/D~ _ "t.. CrP&""'" ~ f)/: ~W",y~ .
. 1...~4::E&,T10#.l TZ> MreT 1!.Hut".A. Vi(/;71 p",(~ ~T.:iJIc/l.t:> C, V~-Io.
f.
g.
h.
Are there any other street tllprovements required? Ye.o;:;_
If so, please specify the general nature of the IIecessary
improvements. t"U;77I<L.L- 'D(2./VEwAY ~
3.' Soils
a. Are there any anticipated adverse geotechnical conditions on the
project site? NO.
b. If yes, specify these conditions. ~~
4.
5.
c. Is a so11 5 report necess)ry? Net WM ."Prb>v~P ')
\ .
~and Form
{;1ZM>E;P
a. What ts the average ftat'I-~ slope of the site?
b. What is the maximum ~slope of the site?
~%
;1.%
Noise
Are there any traffic-related IIotse levels impacting the site that
are significant enough to justify that a notse analys15 be required
of the applicant? YE.~. - A 9T'VPY WM l'.NJ.rvc.7E.T:>
6. ~aste Generation
WPC 9459P
How much solid and liquid (sewage) waste' win be generated by the
proposed project.per day?
Solid 21B~ I.-BS./DW" liouid 3/f30 ~ lDA'(
I I
What is the location and size of existing sewer lines on or
downstream from the site? fd,," v.c:.Po IN '1(,.." 9rlU!:Er
Are they adequate to serve the proposed project? YE'i-.
-15-
. .
Cue No. TS Q::L-01
7. Remarks
Please identffy and dfscuss any remafnfng potentf.' adverse fmpacts,
.ftfgatfon ~asures, or other issues.
WPC 9459P
q;i~ I,~" \
Da1;l! .
"",N
y Engfneer or Representatfve
- .
-16-
.
.
Case No. ;lS- "l2.-07
H. FIRE DEPARTMENT
.
1. What is the distance to the nearest fire station? 6nd what is t.he
Fire Departllent's estillated reaction tillM!? / MIL.C?
'f - ~ h"Yh.} lA-TuS
2. Will the Fire Depirtment be able to provide an adequate level of fire
protection for the proposed facility without an increase in equipment
or personnel? \J (dT.s
.
.3. Remarks
,,::; I..:?O,z.&Lf tI. 5 /'? 17H-, CAI.Jr.
Fi re Marshal
o,/2(./~1
Date
WPC 9459P
-17-
CHULA VISTA FIRE DEPARTMENT
BUREAU OF FIRE PREVENTION
PLAN CORRECTION SHEET
"c- ~O "1' " -:f5 q ).-07 . ,/
Address c.,.) d' 0 Sr')-' Pl an File No. Checker6:S;t?t11f Date r/.t~I7/
Type Constr. Occupancy R- \ No. Stories -"3. Bldg. AreaU.~1:xnu~,,,,1#T(:)
The following list does not necessarily include all errors and omissions.
PROVIDE AND SHOW ON PLAN:
}) ~,;2;)""( d't-T I~') ILl.
c.)
Rl~v...J.t2(d
.47
Llf/1-S '\
T W::J 1= ((2 if J.Iy(fiA.WVS.
/J,JiE li'fA.du<.
4-tr "L.' ST.
AT N.I5'.
CiJI2/lJ~n:. of J)R.IV~t.JA-ll
.
0> OrJlE
'/w u t.!, lAI.....tD 1..(..5 S
() f<.l v IF / A c. c.. ~ ~s .
I
P 12 L U 1 r cd ,A- 0- A J.. u CA- T1 D ..J 13 {}" 71...:JI,;S 1.5 v -:j J.J IF
A('~{2AJ;j.,,{vf,,(-fJ<:IY If:jJ' f)i)v,,v
~ (-JLL. ~L<.I""'\)IIV~S. .C:;H4l-L Bcf -<'PI2"''((<'''~/VJt::> -r0
NFPft /3(<.
3'j (J L .4-!; S; T :s '7 A ..J j) PIP t.F 514,4- L L t3 IE 12 g& U-l ~ti1'}
4 5 ~ c.?Il.. fA. IZ.~ /0'.3 QC;
'i~ ~ A "T <?~ rz- ~ :J '-<.} L.) l \....... A IF j) (rt t$'YZ..~ I ,oJ (j 6 c...' t-t-i$,.J A~ I.-
@ (.,L I L i::> ,"-'I:; rzAc.q-s A- a....r f) ~ 7 (r'{2.A/1 ilU."'O~
~ rJL-L. 1...J.4tJ/LANT::' A/J D AC~lFC.> (V)~. /{y IIV PL~~l.I"
Atuf>. OPc.rll-4~L.LF iJf2,o,.J.. 1"0 --\AJ'1' ("~~t.<-5n06'-<S..s r-ACc.r:b
OJ-J THu c.."6\1..~'n-U-<..~"'uv 5 ,-rtJ ,
"
t~ F(~ AIA-A.,M S'i$.'Ttsf"\ v1I~ I1JJ"l if,g ftoJ $q-'.h.(..<.t'1) f,c Sl<.p($'l-v<s"""
FPB-29 .5 ,JIG,..., II '- ~ .5-( S Tc'-''''\. HId~ .Lu c.A-..... 4-<...412,"" To IU D'fl"'1 b c-v-.fArJ<L5.
ClSe No.
H-l. PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT
1. How .any
project?
2. How .any acres of developed parkland are within the 'ark Service
District of this ~roject IS shown in the PI~ and~creltfon Element
of the General P1an? (If applicable) ....w.~v."TIu~
3. What are the current park acreage requirements in the Park Service
District? (If applicable) !l-
4. Is project subject to Parks & Rfcreation Threshold requirements? 'r~~
If not, please explain.
necessary to serve the propo~ed
5. Are existing neighborhood and community parks near the project
adequate to serve the population increase resulting from this project?
r-uo
t.t>v
Neighborhood
COllllIunity Parks
6. If not, are parkland dedications or other mitigation proposed as
of the project adequate to serve the population increase?
"Ib~
~~
part
Neighborhood
Community Parks
7. Does this project exceed the Parks and Recreation Thresholds
established by City Counci1 policies?
'tJO
8. To meet City requirements, will applicant be required to:
tK/
Provide land?
Pay a fee?
'i r-S-
9. Remarks:
~f.s~
Par s and Recreation Director or Representative
'f. !l.Gi
Date
IoIDI' OA COD
,..
\, \, ~, \, \, \ \, \,
I I I I
I \/ I
I - .i~~ ~ ':'1 .. .C~ .... .- -
o. o. .~ r-" .- ... .
-~ ." ~ - . - .
.. I:: ~ ~ ..;: e j " - . ~i I
r:: ~.. if~
-=.e:- 1:1- - .: ri C
.. E=~'t= Ii ~!E
tJ lr .i .. . t
~~ .-'1 . . - -.. ~ J t 3]
;~ .. .11 . ~-f E. .. i~t .
t-I_! . :! ~ ~
t. ,:., :: .~ I .~ . .. I : i
1=". Ii :; . . .. . .:.
'It ;.fEi'=" ~::.: ~i II Ii" r ... I': .. ..
i=Jt .::: e -.. .
.1 i .. II - ~ J
.." cJ': . II; ~J
..t . : .- -i: . ~
J:;...: ~ ~ ~ j . - I :-:: ..
-... ." .I'" . .....: '=1 'I... ~~
~ . . I
.- o . ,;:: .a- I .~~ .. .
:. ... .- ~ -- .- .. 't ~ .! ...
!c.c ... .... - .~ :; I". J I::
r.: - 0..... ru~ . . -. -u
- .- . ~.. . =f. ~ . -.
Ii!: ...... c --r r "0 S -- -E. ~.
f...-:;':>S- -- . ~ - ._~ .
-. :r;;. ~.. t-; - ru. f.~ =1
- !oJ 0_ ~ .. 1'0'1: - -. a .... --
,i.. ."':"1 ~ - !i & ~..~ .~- .- ~
~.J. ... ..- a ...-- ...-" :c:;
u 'V _,Q w__ CD.. ...... ... Do_
.:
.: ::
.- ..: cO c .. ..; .; ~ .. ..; .;
... .; Do
..
~
w
..
~
..
a
.~ ---...
\, \, \, \,
'i Ii!
...
u
.
~ ~ I I
-
.
c
0
...
. a I
..
"
D
r
r . .. J ~u
. -... .-
. I' -~ 8'
- . c
.. . .- !1
I~ .. .. ..
I .. u.
-~ - .. -
I :: . "AI' Ii ...
t;... :8-
-. 0 ~ .- --
-~ 0_
- g.:: i - 1- .... ..- "!i
. _r ; .
- ...-
.. ~.:- r .." I'~ ..
I -- ~ ~-= ..
0 u .." .
;!! 1 - i I': i-S
-
I .... .:!
Ii - ---
..... Ii - ~..
0 1:= ~ .:
- ~
.r. ... 0 -1-
.. ..-
! .- !! -r --.
-.I j .8' ~~..
s. - .-
- -- ~.. .. u_
. - .31 !'x.. fi H
c - -
. a .. -~ &h
5:: - . ;5=
:; .. Cu.
! ~
1 I -
-- 0: .. ..; .; ...
.. .
--
--
;; Do.
U .. Do
.I ..: ... .; .. ..: ~ w... ..: ..
-- ~
.
..
..: - r
-
\
\, \, \ \ \ \, , \,
I I I I ,\, I. I
I J I J J '>1 J
i .:= r~ ..~ ~-~ I; . - ...
.. .. . x . 0
i -.-.-: . ..:1 - i . .
ii~j . f -~
. ~ .
~ ...- . i ~I
... - ,.1 ".1 ;: r -.
. "' ...- . iXI; i! "' .r
x ~. -= 'Ii - E E"
r .r ! . !
. - ~ . .
f - ~.::: U ~ .. i -~
. ~ -- . . .~
r . ,:i;.!h I .:; .. . .. . .
f f r f~ ': ..
II .. -..- -- . ! -h "':
,-I .: ~1 rl;. - i =r or
h .. -:;- 1! X ..... 0_ . ~ a:! .. .
.r ". -.. .. . . ~!I
! .. ,0 Ii.! ~~ f i -
.J.'I'f;~ -
-.. .... .. ."
....-.. Or 0" I:; rO ~-~
- - !~o~ .. :! ~ "0
- - -~o -- 0 -~ -::.
.. ;; c ~ _; - ~... ~ -...
." I"h .,.-..- - . ..~ --.
.!~ -I . V....I ... ~ - Eo;: a.~
.. . - .. o~ . -
~. ! rei::: ~.- r.- -- - - 1! _11
!I~ !In ;-. ..- - r .-
..- .... ;; 31 .00
1= . _A.~ 11-- ~-.. ~- ! I~-
... .&...o~ .Ii ce..... .s. .
""0- 0 -..00 =-~'i
- :i ..
I ~. ~.
:H 11. c
i i .DO
.,; .. ... .; .,; .. ... 0._
...... .... ...
.; .; ..: .; ....
~
~
.
~
~
a
...
o
.Ii
!I;
.0,;:
-.
.,;
'~,
..
o
-
o
.
!
~
.
.....0...
CJoo,__
0::
..-
.-1C
.1..,&
~...~
.._11
~--
II
.....1
"vo_
to.co
~ x
.. .
x"' -
X1:!'W
~~..
.0 .
- r
z..! I!'=~
r;;_ ._
'=:!'J"~
".-H
.-..
-_c :II
0___..
u
-
....
u_
.,;
~I~'
..
o
!
h
--
'W~
!'
~I
I~
;1
1;;:
~
-~
..
.:
-
~
;:
1-.....
~~.
"0.
-..~
...." ::
~.. '.1"
...5' ..~
.. f,....
:%.&':-
.~ jiB-
i j-
..~Ii
I!~-~
......
.'.'"
~ .=i
.1 t::
f._..-
.....~.
a_o.
....~_u
15;.~ =
..
"-., "> I
~..
Ii.:!
I.
.Ii
-=
-
..
-.
'.':
_x.
~--
II~-
I.~
....
~.
...
- .
-..~
:::1
:ou
~.-
x _
'1.'1
"0...
.a
o.
~-
..
1:'"
l~
.
It -r,::
-
.=:
-....
f1li
-.'::::
.-..
r.
; !
."1
Il~
.0-
....~
.;
"'-",
.. .
.--
OC.
i ii~
.. x..
"; _0..
E....:...
....: ~..
- "i!'&"
.. -~"I
i ! :.::
i ...!~
! !~~f
- ."n
;; ilL
i. _ II!
:. 15~::;'""
..
:
Ii: ..
..
\,
I
I
..~
:-
.
.
...-
01
rj
if
!1
....
-r
-
...
- .-
.. a=
1_1
,iI..
...
\,
\
=-= I'
c__
- ~.
-ox
.... ..
......
-0
:'E-
-.: .
1-..
I:!J
...1;-
. .1
.-..
_tr
..0
f:-i
~.s~!!
.coit
-_c_
.
..
..
.
.;
...
~
~
-
~
~
\,,\,
I I
I r
..
.
..
.
~~
Ii
:lb
it
=..
..
.,.
-~
....
...-
.-
::~
.!.
'\.I~r
u';
.C
.:..~
:1~
t::
.et
...-.
~~-
::;:. ...
:; t~le.. !
.. : ...
.:o.~ ~
.">'" ..
~i.&ca f
t::t oS ...
~~'i! t
:.::;:: ;:
,,--- 0
-~-...
-..
... .
Z:i~::; ,;
:;
I
I
I I 1'>1
I ">t '--> I I
~
!
-
x
-
t
...
.
~
z
~
.
i
...
0'11.
-
.
!
-
.
t
~
.
.
.
-
::
-
!
1 '>,
I
I
...
.
II
E
.
,
!
:;;
- ';
-
i i
-
. -
I !
1 .::
- ;:
= ~....
ii op
..
.c
~ ...
.! .;
\1
I
I
1:01
J~';
. I
~:I
. -
=..1-
t....p
!~ .
..e
.....
- -
. ...
- .
i!~:
::~:; ~
of!-"~
.;;=~:
...
\
I
'\1
!
-
i~
_!
..,
J~
....
d
.
-
-..
=:;r
:a_
1
.:e
......
--
1.
r~
~..
.
..
..
.
-
:
f
.
~
II
:s
~
..,
I;:
-...
~.
...
..~
.
~~
c.
..
..
.-
t~
.,...
e.
-.
...
.;
,;
..
1
-
.
.:!
:;
it
-
.
I
:
&
..
~
~
..:
..
::
...
~
.
..
.;
..:
ti~
.
::
.-
...-
.."
..
.....
...~
..
1:
.t
h-
i-
~"!
e_
_Of
.e
&-
~
:a
"", '> '>, "-., ~I ~I ".I~r ~J
I I I I
I I I
- ~ ... .. .... ee .... .... 1 - I'~ ! ....
. -Dl_e .. :1... x.: . .-
. . ;; ..c.. .. ! -I' ...
~ .-'a..... ... 't.. - -1
... ~ -'J~.= ':;'1 .
-:it. . ... ! .o. ;;
. 0 ~__. 0 .... f
Do . ~~'::~:: _..f -1 - Do . .
. C 'i .0. - 1'1 .....
. - ..:I.cj . r
J . - c .Ii . I
. .~ .:-- I: -
.. ... . ... .- u -c .. ..
. ! ..- ,.i .-0 ~ ::.= il
I~oi. &;c ... .
- . ..... I - ..I .
- ~ -'" -- t.. . i .. 'i) U ..
:; . ... :i:!~ - .::. ..:a:: t f:: .
..~ .,-
" 'tC- .. .. - i.
,,: i;:!'i:O . &-= .le- !, .. .1 _roo
.. .
~~ . .... -.. ...! & 2. :I'
.. - .:t~ "I. U !
ell - .-...: ~ .... ...
I :; = -.Ie -il' .1 .
:i l-.'" --j i~ .. -- -iii
.. -."U .... 5b =-- I.. ~ .=~ I-
. .::"'0; X ~~I! :a-,! -. --
-- .. = ..- ... II. .. .
. .. S ....1101 ... . .....! .1- -- .. ..- .-..
t:; -.& - I ~~~ 1:t .... x= .. . ....
i B 1: ~.! 1 . Ji .1 =~!'
I!~ ill . i: ...., 11..
c't'B",';: ::1. 'rs .... cu
- -c ... 1'-- ...... ....
.~ . .-.
t;o; -- -~~ .1.
... r. ..- !e
~- . 1:% .ra
.:1: .; .. .; ... -.. .- "'Do .; ... .; ,;
.; ~ ... = .; ..
... - ..
..
.
..
~
.;
"->1
~I
'>1
"'>
- ~.. ... 0- ~ ~ ~. :!lOt ":ii.l i! -C:.!:: ..wee- ...... -- .
.:..~~~."I...~1i -.. 01_-1 u.J- "'_e_ 000
.. --.. - .. .. .., -'I i I i!-~ ~-r
I .:!~ 5 ~ r_.....= I ":"~..Js I~-
_ =c ::.1
~-~-- = iOI.'" -0""'- r ...~..ol
10!:..._ ~-- a... .J ~. =- 0
't:~;:..I... ... -
i -e... c.= -.....-1 -::'c'"
~~...~~.I.a::O ..-E 'k- .. ..1_ i 0.;;
.2. cl~~ ..1:111 -...
""== ".I'" t~ ...! - .. .-::,j..e-=....I :~~
.. .. .....- ~ .:!,;= i-. tOO - .
;: J"-.a::':!' .... .0- t ';~ =~.I
........1 . !.~....-t 'i .:::d ..
- ..
, !; "':.. f.. ~y .1:: ..- ~..I ~...:~.. .
.I - = 0'10 . -
;; ""!- . I Waci-= -"'I- ... ~- Ii
.. I. --- ...- i..... I 1:-.
, I: io }..O ".. .I c... u . a=; - ~. .~ ..
r.. ::1-. .J.- -10= 1"1:-
r -~ t.. 1~ "".. i':::- u_~
i ....';! ! -!~ ":f~ ~ -~ ...... e......, . __u
&_- .... j.=
.I~I n.~ ,!.~:: . c .... JH .ttt!
i I .--........- .I:C-':IIK~I! .I .;;
.. ....."c.-."'...a:: .."'. ....1 "".....a::.-_
- =~.:!.~ C't: I'.f... r ..f~.&c~" .:!":~i.:: ..::.....
... .. --1.....,...... j !;i~;:I'~ .. 1-'.. ..e ..~~.J
r .~ --.._~ o A. ... 0 CII' .I""'."
.I.u 1"- =1!_I~. o_c iOOC .I = ~. Ig"'- ':1.
.. o.a::.. .... lot ... 0 ..".- 'V__ ..".... .....
j .- ... .; ,;
= ..
~
~
.
~
.~
. :a
.
~
';
E
Ii!'
~!
.u
HM
O.
...-
-
I
..
~~
_0
:::
...'"
.I
~
.....
,,~
.--
0-
-..1'"
. =
.
1=.1
-~-
~".
O.~
t~i
w&
-
-
1"
~
-
.
.
Jli
..
.. .
'-> I '-> I
I
I
...
-.i
..
:I
t...
.....
O~
!j
...
-
.
::;
=
~
&
~I";~
.-; i"B
'; Ii f~
o ...
r::..~....
_-=;;1
... -;
Of-"-&
---"
,,- -
A~.~A
J"" i.
~:.Io
... .-..
"''::Ie
::~~rl.
all.":
::.J~
. v..:....
-J:".
.#.. -:
..... -
&.0......
. -"
"...
".I t:::
.I..o~.
.
~
i
:
",-,
,,-
-.
~~
.-
o~
."-
~Mo
~o
..~;
0."
f~~
&;:1
.I ..
~ -
_~i
-~-
- ~
:a IE
i~~
::;111'
.t-
j-E
"..
..
::
I
'\1
..!.~
--..
..
~
",,0
-~~
~
=e
.~
00
t.;
~
_.:o~
I; ~
.... ~
j u_
.:-.: Ir
~:;~'O
.00
"-0
-.....-:.
=~~~
I a....
:; ..
co
..
,\,
I
.0.
::. I'
. -
.-...
...
00-
~iig
...
~"'u
.-
- ~
;:",3 .
f-......
~-~
_!.c~
:.. 41
f:k:
.:;..,0
!.H
:!'::"
_u~
=~=~
.......
...
\
-"'-
ouo
--~
~i~
. -
~ ..
&.u
I'
.ou
",,,,-
.. ...~
~
=.. .
.:~:
-:'2
:'i.1
&
flit:
.. .:!
.-.
~=.-
~o .
.. U;!::
II ..-
15:1:
.;
"'-I
I
"-.
1'.1
-~
~
;:c
M-
e'"
~
~;;
u
-.
~.
~o
i:l-.
-'!=
.u.
l.:~
~t
.-
..-
~iI':
-~
."
--.
--~
;;t&
.
..
..
.
...
..
~
~
.
~
~
III. Detenlination
(To be completed by the lead Agency.)
On the basis of th1s initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on
the environment. and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared.......[ ]
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant
effect on the environment. there w111 not be a signlf.icant effect in
this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached
sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION
WILL BE PREPARED...................................................[ )(]
.
I find the proposed project HAY have a significant effect on the
environment. and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is requlred........[ ]
IV.
SUMMARY OF ISSUES
1J~~~r- fr/1~d .
Signature f(\VII)<1'1)f'!J. ,.(....J~
For ~ 1 r.LJ A- rAs!-r..-
Date
(}(')ofur J I J 11 /
,
List all significant or potentially significant impacts identified In
the Initial Study checklist form.
Fnr11-.1"dA JJr.MrdA-
!t(Ot~J f'Jt:fl./J.;
YES
"/....
HAYBE
fi::rJ I.JML-
P Ml-v
'fu-/t I JVh"::-
'X.
sL-
Y.
i
K
V. APPLICANT ACCEPTANCE OF REQUIRED MITIGATION MEASURES
cr:.73,z/}/~fY
Date
M. DE MINIMIS FEE DETERMINATION
(Chapter 1706, Statutes of 1990 - AS 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 t~is project.
_ It is hereby found that this project could potentially impact
wildlife, individually or cumulatively and therefore fees in
accordance with Section 711.4 (d) of the fish and Game Code
shall be paid to the County Clerk.
u,./u.; ~- it f?D t.J
Environmental Review Coo dinat
10 - 4/- <1/
Date
..-- -----
(
DISCUSSION
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM
1.
Earth
See "Geotechnical Engineering Investigation for Multifamily Development
Project, 588 L Street." The conclusion of this report states "In our
opinion, no geologic hazards or significantly adverse soil conditions
were encountered witHin the project area that would preclude development
as presently proposed, provided the recommendations of this report are
followed." Regarding geologic hazards, the report states "The site could
be subjected to severe ground shaking in the event of a major earthquake
along any of the ... fault systems. However, the seismic risk at this
site is considered no greater than that of the surrounding developments
or the greater San Diego area in general."
2. Air Dual itv
Short-term construction emissions (dust), and long-term emissions from
residents vehicles would occur. Neither would be substantial, as
construction is short term and standard required measures to control dust
will be implemented (watering the soil); and vehicle emissions would be
minor. However, even minor contributions of emissions to an air ba5in
which exceeds federal and/or state limits, is considered to be a
significant impact. Mitigation can be accomplished by implementing
energy conserving devices into the units, such as compact florescent
lights, and energy saving appliances. Additionally, the project is
located convenient to transit facilities, and to service facilities, thus
providing opportunities for reduction in use of private vehicles. The
townhouses are located adjacent to an Econo-Lube bus i ness whi ch does
require that vehicles idle their engines for a short time. The
associated emissions are not significant from a health standpoint.
Additionally, the units will be ventilated (air conditioned). Intakes
will be required on the top of the buildings, or on any other side than
west.
3. Water
The project site is north of Telegraph Canyon Creek; project development
would not affect drainage characteristics of the creek. The 1988 FEMA
map shows the' site within the SOD-year floodplain, but Army Corps of
Engi neers Telegraph Canyon Channel Project has corrected fl oodi ng
prob 1 ems and site is no longer in the fl oodp la in. The site is already
covered over with development; project development would not create a
greater amount of surface water runoff, nor would it preclude substantial
water percolation to groundwater. The site naturally drains in a south
to north direction and discharges into gutters and drains on "L" Street.
The applicant will submit a grading plan, with hydrology calculations, to
identify specific onsite drainage features. The parking lot to the south
of the site also naturally dra i ns across the site. The app 1 i cant has
stated that the proposed site drainage would also collect this offsite
drainage.
~PC 4SZ4H (Rev. 10/17/91>
-1-
Water supply is serviced by Sweetwater Authority. A 6-inch line exists
on the north side of "L" Street which will be extended to the site.
Residential development would use a greater amount of water than what is
presently used at the site, but would not substantially reduce the amount
of water available for public water supply. However, because of the
extended drought in Southern California, any new demand on water .is
considered significant. The applicant must agree to any water
conservation or fee off-set program the City has in place to reduce the
impact to a level bel~w significant.
4,5. Plant/Animal Life
The project site is located within an urban area, and is void of any
natural plant or animal species.
6. Noise
See "Noise Investigation and Analysis for "L" Street Housing, Chula
Vista." The conclusion of this report is that existing and future
buildout noise in the project vicinity exceeds standards of the City's
Noise Ordinance for residential uses. Exterior (play area) mitigation
requires development of one 6-foot and one 8-foot sound wall; and
mitigation for interior noise is required and could consist of inclusion
of a closed ventilation system in all of the units, and noise attenuation
for wi ndows and doors in the northerly uni ts. Actual vent il at i on and
noise attenuation requirements will be determined when the preliminary
construction designs are completed. The project site will not create
noise that exceeds City standards. Vehicles entering and exiting the
site would travel along the easterly driveway, adjacent to the driveway
and apartments to the east. The noi se generated by project area cars
would not exceed 60 dB.
7. LiQht and Glare
The 2-story townhomes above parking would create new light. The
apartments to the east and residences to the north could be significantly
impacted if the townhomes included bright outside lighting on the north
and east sides. In order to avoid this impact, the applicant must submit
a lighting plan, and include low voltage lights, pointed downward, on the
east and north sides of the townhomes.
8. Land Use
The present land use (commercial office) would be changed, however, the
General Plan land use designation anticipates this type of development.
The zone for the site allows the proposed use with a conditional use
permit .
9. Natural Resources
Sixteen townhomes would consume an incrementally greater amount of fossil
fuels for energy use; the applicant proposes solar energy for hot water.
~PC 4SZ4H (Rev. 10/17/91>
-2-
10. Risk of Uoset
The 16 townhomes would not involve the use of hazardous substances
leading to risk of upset.
11 ,12.
Pooulation/Housinq
The General Plan land use designation anticipates the type and density of
land use that is proposed. The total number of project occupants is
anticipated by the 'Housing Authority to be 57, a number derived by
information from the school districts regarding household size.
Additionally, the County Housing Authority has occupancy standards that
must be met by each of the tenants, including the number of occupants per
unit, and number of overnight guests. The Housing Authority's standards
are based on the State of California Health and Safety Code (Section
50736 and 50771.1, Rental Housing Construction Regulations ("Tenant
Standards"). These standards require the following limits on household
size:
Minimum
Occuoancv
Maximum
Occuoancv
Two Bedroom Unit
Three Bedroom Unit
2
4
5
7
Based on these standards, the minimum occupancy required for the proposed
project is 50 and the maximum is 98. It must be noted that the maximum
occupancy is based on meeting certain household mix requirements,
including age and sex limits. Thus, it is unlikely that the maximum
number of 98 persons would occur, and that the number would be somewhere
between the minimum and maximum. The onsite manager monitors project
occupancy to ensure that these standards are complied with.
13. Transoortation/Circulation
The estimated number of one-way automobile trips generated by the project
per day is 96. The Level of Service "C" on Broadway, "L" Street, and at
the intersection woul d not be changed because of project development.
The project will develop 32 tenant and 6 guest parking spaces onsite, and
will dedicate seven feet of frontage along "L" Street for future street
widening. A .24-foot driveway access to "L" Street will provide the
access point from the site to the surrounding street system. With these
improvements and dedication, no significant impact to the street system,
or creation of traffic hazards would be expected.
14. Public Services
a. Fire Protection - See Chula Vista Fire Department Bureau of Fire
Prevention Plan Correction Sheet attached.
b. Police Protection - The Chula Vista Police Department had no
comments to make regarding project impact on their service.
c. Schools - See letters from the School Districts attached. Payment
of standard school fees or participation in a Communities Facilities
District in lieu of fees is required.
~PC 4SZ4H (Rev. 10/17/91)
-3-
d. Parks - There will be an incremental impact on the City's park and
recreat ion facil it ies, and payment of parkl and fees will be
required. The development will also have a playground for the
exclusive use of the tenants.
e. Publ ic Facil ities Maintenance - The project would not develop ilny
major facilities requiring maintenance by the City. There will be
incremental impact on sol id waste facil ities requiring sol id waste
reduction and recycl ing on-site, including recycling storage areas
and compost i ng. .
f. Other Governmental Services - No other governmental services would
be affected by the project.
15. EnerQv
See No. 9.
16. Thresholds
None of the
development.
17. Human Health
City Threshold Standards would be exceeded due to project
See "Report of a Phase I Environmental Property Investigation, 588 L
Street, Chula Vista, Californla," and "Limited Soil and Groundwater
Sampl ing Report for 588 L Street, Chula Vista, California." The final
concl us ion of soil and groundwater sampl i ng was that hydrocarbons were
not present above EPA standards. Also, see "Asbestos Investigation
Report for South San Diego Bay Cities Board of Realtors." Asbestos
occurs in the existing office on the site. This asbestos will be removed
before demolishing the building. The recommendation of this report must
be implemented; that is "if (asbestos) materials are to be removed or
disturbed for demolition or renovation, a licensed, CAL-OSHA registered
asbestos abatement contractor must be used. All work must conform to EPA
regulation Title 40 CFR61, Subpart "M," and OSHA regulations Title 29 CFR
1926.48 and 1910.1001.
18. Aesthetics
Some of the residents in the second story of the adjacent 2-story
apartments to the east will have views to the west blocked. These views
to the immediate views consist of a car wash and Econo-Lube business, and
more distant views are of urban development of a mixed nature. Also, the
westerly side of these apartment buildings which face the project area,
are the backside of the units; the units are oriented in the opposite
direction toward the east. The proposed project would not be
aesthetically offensive as it is subject to design guidelines of the
City. As such, the City will be reviewing and commenting on the
architecture and landscaping. Also, recommendations of the City's Design
Review Committee will be considered. The project's 3-story (anticipated
maximum 38-foot height), and 29 percent lot coverage by the buildings, is
well within the City's height limits (3.5 stories or 45 feet) and lot
coverage requirements.
~PC 4SZ4H (Rev. 10/17/91)
-4-
19. Recreation
Residents of the townhomes will have a play area within the project area,
but would also place an incremental demand on area facilities. See
comments from Parks Department. The appl icant will be subject to the
standard park impact fee imposed by the City on residential development
projects. .
20. Cultural Resources
The project site and surrounding area have been developed, and no
building with historical significance would be impacted by project
development. No impacts to cultural resources are expected since the
site is already graded and finish grading would result in minimal
excavation.
21. Mandatorv FindinQs of'SiQnificance
a. The project is proposed for a location which has already been
graded, paved and developed, and, as such, it is not the habitat of
any sensitive plant or animal species, and will have no adverse
impacts on the physical or biological environment.
b. No short term goals to the disadvantage of long term goals would
occur, as the project is cons i stent wi th the intended use of the
site (per the General Plan - 2010), and development would have to
comply with City Threshold Standards and site preparation standards.
c. The project would create cumulative noise impacts, including
temporary impacts from construction, and long term impacts from
project traffic on area streets. These jmpacts are not considered
significant, since noise level increases on a long term basis are
impercept i bl e, and construct i on impacts are short term and
controlled by standard hours of construction from 7:00 a.m. to 7:00
p.m. on weekdays. Regarding water supply, any new demand on water
in an area regionally impacted by the drought is considered to be
cumulatively significant. The applicant will mitigate this impact
by implementing water conserving design in the units and in the
landscaping. There would be an incremental increase. in air
emissions from the 96 vehicles associated with the development.
Proximity to transit and service facilities would help to reduce
emissions: Finally, there is no significant growth inducement
associated with the project.
d. Hazardous materi al s have not been found on the property soil s or
groundwater which exceed EPA limits; asbestos does occur within the
existing structure and will be removed consistent with EPA and OSHA
regulations.
~PC 4SZ4H (Rev. 10/17/91)
-5-
TilE CI71' OF CHULA VISTA PAR71' DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters
which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other
official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest In the contract, I.e., contractor,
subcontractor, material supplier.
Housin Authorit of the County of San Diego (Buyer)
South Bay Citles oar of ea tOrs wner/Seller)
~
If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership
interest in the partnership.
,
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a 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.
See attached list of Directors of
South Bay Cltles Board Of Kealtors
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff,
Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes...!..-.
No - If yes, please indicate person(s): 31 290 a ro riation for Redevelo ment Agency
Low-Income Housing Fund.
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent
contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
Clifton R. Largess III, Employee GeoCon, Inc. Consultant
Algert Englneerlng, Consultant
Fred Bast, Associate Engineer
County of San Diego, Consultant
6. Have you and/or yoUr officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a
Councilmember in the current or preceding election period'! Yes _ No.!.... If yes, stille which
Councilmember(s):
Pl'''' In is defined as; 'An)' ind;";dual,ji'71I, co-partnership, joial "cnllrre, associmion, social elllb, fralernal organizatiun. corpora'ioll.
('j"((//('. tnlSl, rcceil'er, syndicate, Ihis alld all)' olher CU/IIlIy, ci,)' alld COIIII"Y, ci,)', IIlllllicipalil)', <li.flricl or other poliliwl Jlfbdi"isiulI.
(Ir nllY other croup Qr comhination tlcling ns II lmil..
(NOTE: Atlaeh addilionaJ pages as neec""I)')
~I':: '1-1 7J:f I
~
I \.; '- \ /);SC!.OSlclc'll
Signature.: of contmctor/applican
Gabriel G. Rodriguez, Deputy Director
HousinQ Authority of the County of San D~o
Print Of type lIame.: of contr:,c([Jr/;lpplicant
[I~\."VI,t",f- II '.,U,'Jill
March 4, 1992
TO: Planning Commission
- 1
FROM: Bob Leiter, Director of Planning/~~c
SUBJECT: Proposed Workshop Schedule for Otay Ranch Project
Attached is a proposed schedule of joint workshop meetings between the City Planning
Commission and the County Planning Commission regarding the Otay Ranch Project. We would
like to discuss fhis schedule wifh you at your meeting on March 11, bofh to explain the intent
for holding these workshops, and to get your input regarding the proposed dates and times.
(olWk.mem)
TENTATIVE
JOINT PLANNING COMMISSION WORKSHOP'
SCHEDULE
DATE PLACE TIME SUBJECT MA 1TER
April 29, 1992 Otay Ranch House 1:30-5:00 Orientation
May 15, 1992 Otay Ranch House 8:00-3:00 Environmental Data
Resource Management Plan
Site Visit
May 29, 1992 County PERB Room 1:30-5:00 Plan Alternatives
Development Concepts
June 17, 1992 Chula Vista CR 2&3 1:30-5:00 Subregional Issues
July 31, 1992 County PERB Room 1:30-5:00 Issue Papers
Service/Revenue
August 19, 1992 Chula Vista CR 2&3 1:30-5:00 Public Facilities
Transportation Issues
Governmental Structure
· Depending on Draft EIR public review, schedule may need to be amended after August,
1992.
February 26, 1992
Subject:
Distribution List
Robert A. Leiter, Director of Planning !~t
Review of Possible Revisions to City Sign Ordinance
To:
From:
The City Council has decided to delay consideration of the sign ordinance amendments
previously forwarded to you on February 12 for initial review and comment. The Council wi1l
now consider these possible amendments in a City Council workshop scheduled for March 26,
1992, at 4:00 p.m. in the Council Conference Room at the north end of the City Hall Building
at 276 Fourth Avenue.
Enclosed herewith is a copy of the possible amendments. You may direct your comments in
writing or by phone to Steve Griffin of my staff. He can be reached at 691-5257. You may
also wish to attend the March 26 Council workshop at the time and location noted above.
Distribution List:
Planning Commission
Economic Development Commission
Design Review Committee
Chula Vista Chamber of Commerce
Downtown Business Association
Broadway Business Association
19.60 Signs
19.60.030
Application-Contents required-Determination authority-Appeals.
All signs requiring a sign permit shall be submitted for approval by the zoning
administrator, prior to installation. The application shall indicate the size, location, design,
color, lighting and materials of all signs to be erected. The application shall also contain
sufficient information on the architecture, colors and materials of the building on the site, as is
necessary to determine compatibility of the sign to the building. In addition, the applicant shall
submit a color rendering and/or paint sample boards or chips and/or actual materials to be used
on the sign.
The zoning administrator. or the desi~n review committee on ~rea!. shall determine
whether approval shall be granted for any sign based on its conformance with the regulations
and design standards set forth herein. Where an a,pDlication is denied by the zonine:
administrator. or the desi~n review committee on aDrea!. the ~,pIicant shall be informed in
writin~ of the chan~es necessary in order to a,pDrove the aDDlication. If the ~plicant chooses
to amend the a,pplication to reflect said changes. the zonine: administrator shalle:rant the permit.
The zonin~ administrator shall render a decision on a si~n permit within seven days of
the date of a,pplication or the permit shall be deemed ~proved. The decision of the zoning
administrator may be appealed to the pIanRiRg eemmissieR iR aeeeraanee 'l/itli the prBvisisRS Bf
Seeti6R I9.I1.()50. design review committee within ten workin~ days after the decision is
rendered. In the absence of such appeal, the determination by the zoning administrator shall be
final.
The desil!n review committee shall render a decision on the ~peal at the next available
desi~n review committee meetin~ or the si~n permit shall be deemed I\PProved. An ~,pea1
received at least ten days prior to a desi~n review committee meeting shall be scheduled for that
meetine:. The decision of the design review committee may be further aDDea1ed in accordance
with the provisions of Section 19.14.583.
(Sians 1960)
19.04.229 Sian. Combination Sian-Mural.
Combination Sian-Mural is a sian which has both a Commercial
messaae or content. reaardless of the use of alDhanumeric
sYmbols. and an artistic comDonent or aSDect. and is affixed to
the side of a buildina, fence or other wall bv Daint~ ~am~nation.
emulsion, or other similar Drocess. and is located o~ the same
DrODertv on which is beina conducted the commercial activity to
which the commercial messaae relates.
19.04.235 Sian. Electronic messaae board.
Electronic messaae board sian means a sian whose messaae is
disDlaved in liahts. or liaht emittina diodes. and is electronic-
ally chanaeable.
19.60.170 Flashing, animated or moving signs
prohibited-Except ions-Other prohibited signs.
No sign, as defined in this chapter, shall be moving, nor
shall light be intermittent or flashing, with the exception of
time and temperature signs~ afld barber poles and electronic
messaae board sians. as same may be herein Dermitted.
Signs are also prohibited with the exceDtion of those listed
as Dermitted in the above DaraaraDh which:
A. Intermittently reflect lights from either an artificial
source or from the sun; or
B. Have an illumination which is intermittent, flashing,
scintillating or of varying intensity; or
C. Have any visible portion in motion, either constantly or at
intervals, which motion may be caused by either artificial
or natural sources.
D. Utilize whirligigs or any similar item which uses wind as
its source of power. (Ord. 1575 S1 (part), 1974; Ord. 1356
S1 (part), 1971; Ord. 1212 S1 (part), 1969; prior code
S33.950(E) (3).
19.60.600 Combination Sian-Mural.
A. The Zonina Administrator. or his desianee. shall
determine if a sian or a Dictorial reDresentation is a
Combination Sian-Mural. The decision of the Zonina Administrator
shall be aDDealable to the Desian Review Committee in accordance
with the normal Drocedures for aDDeal of sian decisions.
B. A Combination Sian-Mural shall comDlv with all rules.
reaulations and other standards relatina to wall sians. and the
area of a sian-mural shall be included in calculatina the maximum
permitted sian area for a aiven buildina except t~e Zonina
Administrator may increase the total permitted si n area of a
aiven buildina if the Zonina Administrator s~all ~eem that the
Combination Sian-Mural has artistic value wh'ch w rrants such
consideration. The decision of the Zoni~a ~dmini~t;ator shall be
appealable to the Desian Review Committee f acco dance with the
normal procedures for appeal of sian decis'ons.
19.60.610 Electronic Messaae Board Reaulation.
On the condition that the location f~~ an electr~~ic ~ssaae
board sian is at least 500 feet from any her lawful pe itted
ectr nic messa e bo rd si t e Zonin dmi ist ator a. issue
a conditional permit for the use of an electronic messaae board
sian in any commercial zone except the ~ommer~ial-Neiahborhood
Zone uPon such conditions as said Zonin Administrator shall deem
appropriate but which conditions shall include. but shall not
necessarily be limited to. the followina:
A. The operator of said sian dedicates at least 30% of the
time messaaes are displayed on the sian to conveYin~ non-
commercial announcements. or other messaaes. of benefit to
the community. or to a sianificant portion of the community.
accordina to such rules and reaulations as may. from time to
time. be promulaated by the Zonina Administrator.
C\OR\SipaJ
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 11, 1992
Page 1
2. Consideration of Candidate CEOA Findings. Miti!!ation Monitorin!! Pro!!ram. and
Statement of Overriding Considerations for Salt Creek Ranch SPA. EIR-91-03
A. BACKGROUND
At the Planning Commission meeting of February 1992, the Commission certified the
Final EIR for this project. That document concluded that there were potentially
significant environmental impacts. Therefore, it is necessary to adopt CEQA findings,
overriding considerations, and a mitigation monitoring program.
B. RECOMMENDATION
1. Adopt the CEQA findings.
2. Adopt the Mitigation Monitoring Program.
3. Adopt the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
C. DISCUSSION
1. The CEQA findings conclude that there would be significant unmitigated impacts
in the following areas: cumulative landform/aesthetics, cumulative water supply,
and biological off-site impacts.
2. There would be significant but mitigable impacts in the following areas: land
use, landform, aesthetics--on and off site (project level), hydrology, water quality,
on-site biology, on- and off-site cultural resources, traffic, noise, water supply
and facilities, and waste water.
3. This EIR is supplemental to EIR-89-03 which found significant unmitigated
impact in cumulative air quality impact, significant but mitigabIe impacts on
schools, geology, soils, conversion of agricultural lands, public services and
utilities.
4. The Mitigation Monitoring Program is designed to assure the implementation of
measures to avoid significant environmental impacts.
5. The Statement of Overriding Considerations was drafted by the applicant's
attorney, reviewed and modified by staff. It now forms the basis for approving
this project given the significant environmental impacts which wil1 result.
(EIR91-03.CBQ)
SALT CREEK RANCH
SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN
SUPPLEMENTAL EIR-91-03
CANDIDA TE CEQA FINDINGS
IN ACCORDANCE WITH SECTION 21081
OF THE CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
AND SECTION 15091 OF TITLE 14
OF THE CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATION CODE
MARCH 1992
I. INTRODUCTION
Section 21081 of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) requires that no
project shall be approved by a public agency when significant environmental effects have been
identified, unless one of the fol1owing findings is made and supported by substantial evidence
in the record:
1) Changes or alterations have been required in or incorporated into the project
which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as
identified in the Pinal Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
2) Changes or alterations are the responsibility of another public agency and not the
agency making the finding.
3) Specific economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation
measures or project alternatives identified in the Pinal EIR.
The following findings are made relative to the conclusions of the Pinal
Supplemental EIR for the proposed Salt Creek Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan
(SCH #89092721) and all documents, maps, and i1lustrations listed in Section VI of these
findings. The project's discretionary actions include the fol1owing:
· Sphere of influence boundary change and annexation to the City of ChuIa
Vista;
. Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan; and
. P-C (planned community) zoning approval.
The Salt Creek Ranch project includes approximately 1,200 acres of land in the
southern foothi1ls of San Miguel Mountain, north of EastLake Technology Park and
northwest of Upper Otay Lake. The project site is located in the northern portion of the
37 square mile Eastern Territories as defined by the City of Chula Vista. Salt Creek
Ranch is situated on land currently under the jurisdiction of the County of San Diego;
however, all but 240 acres in the extreme northeastern corner of the project site are
within the City of Chula Vista's adopted Sphere of Influence.
The original SPA Plan project proposed a maximum of 2,817 residential units
(773.1 acres), neighborhood parks (31.0 acres), natural open space (360.8 acres), two
elementary school sites (24 acres), a fire station site (1.3 acre), two community purpose
facilities sites (7 acres), and major roads.
Analysis during preparation of both the draft SPA Plan document and draft EIR
revealed various environmental impacts of the original SPA Plan project. In response,
the applicant refined the project in an attempt to reduce or mitigate those impacts.
Alternative 5.3 (Pinal SPA Plan Design Alternative) was resubmitted to the City as the
revised SPA Plan. This modified design represents the current SPA Plan; it is examined
in the Pinal EIR and in the Response to Comments Section of the Pinal EIR. This design
proposes 2,662 residential units (749.7 acres), two neighborhood parks (total 29. 3 acres),
two school sites (23.1 acres), two community purpose facilities sites (7 acres), and a fire
station site (1 acre). The Final SPA Plan Design Alternative is environmentally superior
to the project as originally proposed.
The fol1owing findings are applicable to fhe project as revised and analyzed as fhe
Final SPA Plan Alternative in the Final EIR and in the Response to Comments section
of the Final EIR.
II. CITY OF CHULA VISTA FINDINGS
1) The City of ChuIa Vista, having reviewed and considered the information
contained in fhe record and fhe Final EIR for fhe Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan
finds fhat changes have been incorporated into the project which mitigate,
avoid, or reduce the level of identified impacts to insignificance or to levels
acceptable to the City.
2) The City of Chula Vista Planning Commission has determined that any
remaining significant effects on the environment found to be unavoidable are
acceptable due to overriding concerns.
3) The City of Chula Vista having reviewed and considered the information
contained in fhe Final EIR and the record, finds that none of fhe significant
environmental effects anticipated as a result of fhe proposed project are within
fhe responsibility of anofher public agency except for air quality and water
supply and water quality.
4) The City of Chula Vista, having reviewed and considered the information
contained in the Final EIR and fhe record, finds fhat no specific economic,
social, or other considerations make infeasible fhe mitigation measures
identified in fhe Final EIR.
5) The City of ChuIa Vista has independently reviewed, considered and
evaluated the Final EIR and the record. On the basis of that review, the City
of Chula Vista finds that the Final EIR reflects the City's exercise of
independent judgment over fhe environmental analysis contained in fhe Final
EIR pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21082.1. The City's finding
is supported by documents and other substantial evidence in the record.
-2-
6) The Planning Commission acknowledges that these Recommended CEQA
Findings are advisory and do not bind the City Council from adopting
findings to the contrary if they are supported by substantial evidence in the
record.
The City of Chula Vista's Threshold/Standards, adopted November 17, 1987,
were developed to assure fhat fhe quality of life enjoyed by fhe City's residents is
maintained while growfh occurs. That quality of life is also important to those who wish
to develop within the City. Implementation of fhe Threshold/Standards program assures
fhat significant, adverse impacts are avoided or reduced through sound planning and that
public services and the quality of fhe environment wiH be preserved and enhanced.
Based on these fhreshold/standards, changes have been incorporated into fhe project to
mitigate or avoid environmental effects. The 11 issues addressed in the
Threshold/Standards are discussed in Sections III and IV below.
III. SIGNIFICANT, UNMITIGATED IMPACTS
1) Aesthetics
Impact
The project, in combination with the various development projects in fhe Eastern
Territories area, would unavoidably contribute to a cumulative adverse effect on the
existing natura1Iandform and aesthetic character of the area. This impact would occur
wifh eifher the original project or fhe Final SPA Plan Design Alternative.
Mitii:ation
The proposed mitigation measures (Section IV.2, p. 9) would not mitigate this
impact to below a level of significance.
Finding
The only impact associated with landform alteration and aesthetics that cannot be
mitigated to below a level of significance is the cumulative impact Aside from the
mitigation measures in fhe Final EIR, no ofher measures were suggested in comments
submitted on the Draft EIR. Because no evidence of other measures has been presented
by the preparers of the Final EIR, the City, federal, state or local agencies or any other
interested persons, no further mitigation is determined to be feasible or reasonable.
(see Section IV.2)
-3-
2) Water SUp'ply
Impact
The project (as with any development) would contribute an incremental
cumulative impact on the region's water supply. This conclusion applies to both the
project as originally proposed and fhe Final SPA Plan Design Alternative.
Miti~ation
. Prior to approval of final map, the Master Plan of Water for Salt Creek
Ranch shall be approved by the City Engineer and OWD. Further, this plan
shall be revised to include a discussion of implementation and phasing, and
participation in fhe water allocation program and TSF financing for this
project and other projects in the OWD Master Plan service area.
. The exact locations for fhe proposed pump station and 3 million gallon
reservoir to serve fhe 1296 Zone shall be determined prior to approval of final
grading plans.
The following is incorporated from EIR 89-3:
. Prior to issuance of building permits, fhe project site shall either be annexed
by the OWD into Improvement District No. 22, or a new improvement
district shall be established for fhe project area. In addition, the project
developer shall obtain written verification from OWD at each phase of
development that the tract or parcel will be provided adequate water service.
. The project proponents shall, if feasible, negotiate an agreement wifh OWD
to commit to use of reclaimed water at fhe earliest possible date so that OWD
can ensure fhat an adequate supply is available. If such an agreement is
pursued, all documentation shall be subject to site-specific environmental
analysis, and shall conform to fhe applicable regulations of the City of Chula
Vista, Regional Water Quality Control Board and the State Department of
Health.
. Water conservation measures for on site landscaping and for maintenance of
roadside vegetation shall be created and implemented by the project
proponent, in coordination with the City Public Works Department and in
consultation with OWD or other qualified water agency/organization.
Conservation measures are recommended by the State Resources Agency
Department of Water Resources, and include but are not limited to planting
-4-
of drought tolerant vegetation and the use of irrigation systems which
minimize runoff and evaporation loss (see also following measure).
. The following water conservation measures should be provided;
implementation shall be approved prior to issuance of certificates of use and
occupancy;
a) Low-flush toilets (Section 17921.3, Health and Safety code).
b) Low-flush showers and faucets (California Administrative Code, Title
24, Par 6, Article I, TIO-1406F).
c) Insulation of hot water lines in water recirculating systems (California
Energy Commission).
Findine
The cumulative impact to regional water supply cannot be mitigated to below a
level of significance. Aside from the mitigation measures in the Final EIR, no other
measures were suggested in comments submitted on the Draft EIR. Because no evidence
of other measures has been presented by the preparers of the Final EIR, the City,
federal, state or local agencies or any other interested persons, no further mitigation is
determined to be feasible or reasonable.
(see Section IV. 11)
3) Offsite Area of ImDact (Biolo!!ical Resources)
ImDact
The development of Salt Creek Ranch would necessitate the construction of
additional offsite facilities (Le., water lines, seer lines and water reservoir) in order to
accommodate the future residents with adequate water and sewer services. Three offsite
areas directly adjacent to the project site would house these facilities. The location of
these parcels is shown and discussed in the Final EIR. The following is a brief
summary:
Hunte Parkway - This 46-acre parcel would contain the proposed alignment of Hunte
Parkway and the Salt Creek Interceptor line. Both improvements are proposed along
approximately the same alignment which has not yet been determined. Ultimately,
sewage flows wil1 be collected and treated at the future Otay Valley Water Reclamation
Facility.
-5-
East "H" Street - This 7.3-acre parcel would contain a portion of the future alignment
of East "H" Street and the Proctor Valley lO-inch sewer line. Both improvements are
proposed along approximately the same alignment which has not yet been determined.
This proposed gravity sewer line would tie in with the existing IS-inch gravity line
within the Spring Valley Sanitation District which conveys flow to the Spring VaHey
Outfall.
Waterline/Reservoir - This 11 I-acre parcel would contain a proposed waterline, access
road, and reservoir in order to provide water service to Zone 1296. The pad elevation
of the reservoir should be approximately 1,270 feet. A specific reservoir site has not
been established.
The offsite improvements wil1 incrementally add to the impacts detailed in the Salt
Creek Ranch GDP EIR 89-3. Impacts to coastal sage scrub are cumulatively significant
and remain partially mitigation through preservation and restoration. Sensitive placement
of the alignment and constriction of construction corridors wil1 significantly reduce
potential impacts to habitats and sensitive species through avoidance. If a large
population of San Diego coast barrel cactus cannot be avoided, a mitigation program to
include relocation should be initiated.
Mitigation Measures
Hunte Parkway. To mitigate potential impacts to disturbed wetlands to below the level
of significance, enhancement of riparian habitat at a 1: 1 ratio to any impacted wetlands
shall be implemented. This mitigation acreage shall be added to the mitigation acreage
for the Salt Creek Ranch development and incorporated into the wetland mitigation plan
(RECON 1991). Prior to construction, a 1603 Streambed Alteration Agreement must be
obtained from the California Department of Fish and Game.
East "H" Street. To mitigate the loss of 11.0 acres of coastal sage scrub and impacts to
California gnatcatcher to below the level of significance, a strategy of avoidance and
habitat enhancement shall be implemented. To avoid impacting the fuH 11 acres, the
construction corridor shall be restricted down from 100 feet on each side of the roadway
to a smaller area. The avoidance wil1 reduce impacts to the gnatcatcher territory to
below 6.2 acres. This wil1 retain the territory and reduce the impact to the gnatcatcher
to a level of non-significance. All remaining impacts shall require enhancement of
coastal sage scrub at a ratio of 1: 1. The mitigation site should be at a nearby location
and connected to a larger area of planned open space. The mitigation acreage shall be
added to the mitigation acreage for the Salt Creek Ranch development and incorporated
into the habitat enhancement plan (RECON 1991).
-6-
To mitigate impacts to coast barrel cactus to below the level of significance, a strategy
of avoidance and preservation shall be implemented. To avoid impacts to as many
individuals as possible, the construction corridor shall be restricted. The remaining
individuals that would be impacted should be preserved via transplantation into open
space. A detailed preservation plan should be designed by a qualified
biologist/horticulturist, who would assist in site selection, implement a 5-year monitoring
plan, and submit regularly scheduled reports to the City of ChuIa Vista.
To mitigate impacts to Otay tarpIant to below the level of significance, avoidance of the
population to greatest extent feasible shall be implemented. The alignment of the
roadway shall avoid the northernmost portion of the site and the construction corridor
should be restricted in this area.
Reservoir/Waterline. To mitigate the loss of 30.7 acres of burned coastal sage scrub to
below the level of significance, a combination of avoidance and habitat enhancement shall
be implemented. To avoid impacts to the full 30.7 acres, the construction corridor shall
be restricted. All remaining impacts would require habitat enhancement of nearby
burned coastal sage scrub at a ratio of 1: 1. This mitigation acreage shall be added to the
mitigation acreage for the Salt Creek Ranch development and incorporated into their
habitat enhancement plan (RECON 1991).
To mitigate impacts to San Diego golden star to below the level of significance,
avoidance of the population to the greatest degree feasible shall be implemented. The
alignment shall remain in the currently proposed position to the greatest extent feasible
and the construction corridor shall be restricted in the area where the population occurs.
Findinl!:
Potential impacts to coastal sage scrub are reduced through revegetation plans, but
remain significant as defined by the City's General Plan.
No additional mitigation measures were suggested in comments submitted on the
Draft EIR. Any further mitigation of the project's biological impacts is infeasible for the
following reasons:
. From a planning and environmental standpoint, the City's basic objective for
this project is to promote the goal contained in its General Plan to
"accommodate a full diversity of housing types, while maintaining an
orientation to detached single-family housing," and to further implement the
following objectives of its General Plan:
-7-
,
Date:
March 9, 1992
Subject:
Honorable Chairman and Members of the Planning Commission
1/;1/
Bob Leiter, Director of Planning J;~,(.>L-
Response to Request Regarding Interpretation of the General Plan Density
Policies for Proposed Development Projects
To:
From:
On February 26, 1992, during review of the Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan, the Planning
Commission requested that staff prepare a brief issue paper explaining how residential
densities are determined for development projects and what density transfers are
permissible. The following is a discussion of how the policies contained within the Land Use
Element of the General Plan are implemented when reviewing a proposed development
project (Attached for reference are Sections 4.1, 6.1 & 6.2 of the General Plan Land Use
Element).
Determinine- ApJIropriate Densities
After development boundaries are initially defined (General Plan Land Use Map), then
further refined (draft General Development Plan), an analysis of topography and
environmental considerations is performed to determine where the project's residential
density should be established between the "baseline" and "maximum" of a density range. The
potential density range for the project is defined by taking each individual development area
and the density range assigned to these areas (i.e., Residential Low - 0-3 dwelling units per
acre), then quantifying each of these areas within the project. Also included in quantifying
the project development area densities are dwelling unit credits from neighborhood parks
and roadway rights-of-way designated less than four lanes in size on the General Plan (ref.
Sec. 4.1).
The evaluation to determine the appropriate project density within the range (from
"baseline" to the "mid-point" of the range, or above) is based on the project's responsiveness
to the following issues (ref. Section 6.2):
1) Compatibility with existing and proposed surrounding land use patterns.
2) Sensitive response to the physical characteristics of the site (landform preservation,
surrounding and/or internal circulation patterns, relationship to open space / greenbelt
systems, environmental considerations and natural amenities and visual and
functional quality).
3) Achievement of a variety of housing types permissible within the character of the
"range" and responsive to the improvement of the townscape, sophistication and
livability of the area.
,
General Plan Density
Guidelines and Policies
2
March 9,1992
It may be determined that the appropriate density for a project should be above the
midpoint of the range. In such instance, the project shall contain features which provide
exceptional and extraordinary benefits to the residents of the City of Chula Vista, as
interpreted by the City Council after review by the Planning Commission.
Areas designated on the General Plan Land Use Map as open space, within the project
boundary, may be given density transfer credit at a rate of one dwelling unit per ten acres
of open space. This total may be added to the resultant number of units determined within
the overall density range to establish the maximum number of dwelling units permitted for
the project (ref. Section 6.2).
The maximum number of dwelling units permitted for the project may be distributed
throughout the project development areas provided that each development area not exceed
the high end of that particular density range, or be inconsistent with the character of the
residential land use category. .
In preparing the Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, additional implementation criteria
(Le., minimum lot sizes, landform grading, minimum road standards, etc.) may restrict the
development to a lesser number of units than the maximum established at the General
Development Plan stage of review.
misc#4:\dcnsity.mem
Land Use Element
There is no maximum density for this category. The density
shown as maximum indicates only that projects in the City have
traditionally been constructed below this density. Higher
densities are permitted if requisite conditions described in
Section 6.4 are satisfied.*
~.2 COMMERCIAL
Retail Commercial
This category includes neighborhood, community, and regional
shopping centers; retail establishments typical of traditional
downtowns, such as the shops on Third Avenue between E and G
Streets; and service commercial. This category may include
limited thoroughfare retail and automobile-oriented services if
they constitute a small part of a planned commercial develop-
ment.
Thoroughfare Commercial
This category includes all uses identified for Retail Commercial
plus thoroughfare retail and automobile-oriented services.
Visitor Commercial
This category includes transient lodging, such as hotels and
motels, restaurants, commercial recreation, and retail estab-
lishments.
Professional and Administrative
This category is intended for professional and administrative
office uses. Limited retail uses, which serve the nearby office
employees, are also permitted. Retail uses which predominant-
ly serve residential neighborhoods or shoppers from outside the
the immediate area are excluded from this category.
4.3 INDUSTRIAL
Research and Limited Industrial
This category includes research and development, light manu-
facturing, warehousing, and flexible-use buildings, which com-
bine the above uses with office space.
1-14
Land Use Element
6. POLICIES AND GUIDELINES
Because of its broad nature, the general plan requires inter-
pretation in its application to specific projects or actions which
require conformance with the plan. The policies and guidelines
contained in this section are an integral part of the general plan
and assist the user of the plan to interpret and apply the goals
and objectives of the land use categories, and the land use
diagram.
6.1 DEFINING DEVELOPMENT AREAS
The areas shown in the land use plan are a generalized
expression of the land use obj'ectives of the general plan. In the
currently developed areas of the City, the boundaries of land
use areas generally correspond with existing uses. In the
currently undeveloped areas of the City, the boundaries are
subject to interpretation based on topography and environ-
mental considerations, as well as land uses, and are not
intended to be quantified as the amount of land devoted to each
use. The following guidelines assist in further defining develop-
ment areas as additional topographic and environmental infor-
mation becomes available.
.....,
I.
The General Plan's Land Use Plan defines three general
categories of land: areas for urban development, transpor-
tation corridors, and open space/greenbelt areas.
a. The urban development areas are those which are
most suitable for residential, commercial, or indus-
trial development due to a variety of factors
induding relatively unconstrained topography,
location with respect to existing or future transpor-
tation corridors, and their potential to be provided
with utilities and public services.
b. The transportation corridors are established to
provide and protect land necessary to support the
ultimate circulation requirements of the land use
plan. The alignments are generally responsive to
the constraints of land form.
c. The open space areas are established to protect and
preserve sensitive natural land forms, vegetation,
wilc!iife habitat, canyons, drainage courses, and
mountains. They also serve to provide areas for
par ks and establish visual relief wi thi n the com-
mUnity.
1-19
Land Use Element
2. The urban development areas on the General Plan Land
Use Plan are defined based on the general topographic and
other data available for the entire planning area. More
detail data is expected to permit a more precise deter
mination of the urban development area as defined in
paragraph l.a. above. The more detailed determination
of the urban development areas, transportation corridors
and open space areas will be part of the planning review
process on specific development proposals.
3. The transportation corridors are defined as those public
rights-of-way that are included In the Circulation
Element of the General Plan. These include the following
roadway classifications, freeways, expressways, prime
arter ials, major streets and collector roads. .
If. Open space/greenbelt areas are generally defined on the
Land Use Plan by the following, and the major elements
are more specifically described in Section 7.3.
a. Flood way and flood way fringe.
b. Canyon or stream valley floor.
c. Slopes of 25% and greater that define a canyon,
stream valley or mountain.
d. Slopes of less than 25% but which are part of the
continuity of slopes defining a canyon, stream
valley, top of mountain, etc.
e. Transition areas at the top of slope adjacent to a
canyon.
f. Significant side canyons and stream valleys to a
main canyon.
g. Utility easements.
h. Developed parks and recreation areas. The location
of proposed parks, particularly neighborhood and
community parks, should typically be located on
generally level, well-drained land, suitable for cost
effective construction of recreation facilities. They
should also be easily accessible from the adjacent
residential communities. These parks are expected
to be both in canyon and valley open space areas and
on adjacent mesa areas.
1-20
Land Use Element
i. Important land forms.
j. Agricultural lands.
L
6.2 ESTAB,tSHING RESIDENTIAL DENSITJES WITHIN THE RANGE
The purpose of this section is to provide the criteria used in
determining the appropriate gross density for project imple-
mentation within any given range. There is no density within
the range which is assumed to be more desirable than any other,
whether that densi ty be at the lower or higher end of the ran ge.
In establishing densi ties, a primary obj ecti ve is to achieve an
overall density <::quilibrium. This achievement of equilibrium is
essential to the promotion of order, amenity, diversity, and
urban vitality.
In the City's evaluation to determine the appropriate densi ty
for a project, the assumed density, in any residential range,
begins at the "baseline density" and may move toward the upper
end of the range. The evaluation to determine the appropriate
density within the range shall be based on a thorough address-
ment of the project's adherence to the following issues:
-'"
1.
Compatibility with existing and proposed surrounding land
use patterns, both urban and rural, natural and manmade,
in order to achieve an overall reduction in land use
friction. Consideration shall also be given to proximity to
Urban A cti vi ty Centers and nodes (as discussed in Section
7.2).
2. Sensitive response to the physical characteristics of the
site having to do with:
a. Landform preservation, induding adherence to
grading policies stated in Section 7.7.
b. Surrounding and/or internal existing and proposed
circulation patterns as shown in the Circulation
Element.
c. Relationship to open space/greenbelt systems as
shown on the Plan Diagram.
d. Envi ronmental considerations and natural am eni ties.
e. Visual and functional quality.
3. Achievement of a variety of housing types pemissible
within the character of the "range" and responsive to the
1-21
Land Use Element
improvement of the townscape, sophistication, and
livability of the area.
Said variety shall not produce a haphazard or poorly
coordinated land use pattern from the standpoint of the
principles of sound city and townscape planning.
It may be determined that the appropriate density for a project
should be above the midpoint of the range. In such instance,
the project shaH contain features which provide exceptional and
extraordinary benefits to the residents of the City of Chula
Vista, as interpreted by the City Council after review by the
Planning Commission.
In no case shall a project be awarded a number of dwelling units
which exceeds the high end of the density range authorized by
the General Plan category, or be inconsistent with the
character of the residential land use category, as set forth in
Section Ii.l.
Notwithstanding the above, transfer of density is permitted
from an open space area designated on the General Plan, within
the boundaries of a project. This density may be transferred to
a residential development area at the rate of one dweling unit
per 10 acres. The transfer shall not result in a gross density
which exceeds the "maximum density" for the range.
Upon determination of the density, the Planning Department
shaH, within its report on a given project, forward its recom-
mendation to the Planning Commission and City Council. Said
recommendation shall include an analysis of how the project
addresses the issues contained in this section.
6.3 CLUSTERING OF RESIDENTIAL DEVELOPMENT
The concept of residential clustering involves the aggregation
of dwelling units onto a reduced land area in order to achieve a
more sensitive response to the site, and provide additional
amenity for the project residents, in the form of open space and
recrea tional opportunities.
The General Plan encourages the clustering of residential
development where such clustering accomplishes all of the
following:
1. Preserva tion of the natural landform;
2. Aggregation of open space within the development for
amenity and recreational purposes; and
1-22
"Objective 10. Encourage the development of a diversity of housing types
and prices. "
"Objective 11. Assure that new development meets or exceeds a standard of
high quality planning and design. "
"Objective 13. Encourage planned developments, with a coordinated mix of
urban uses, open spaces, and amenities. "
"Objective 14. For new developments in Eastern Territories, the predominant
character should be low medium density, single-family housing. Where
appropriate in terms of physical setting encourage development of quality,
large-lot housing. "
Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan addresses each of these General Plan policies.
The residential planned community provides a broad variety of housing types,
ranging from multi-family attached units to large estate lots consisting of at
least one acre. Multi-family housing is provided in accordance with the Chula
Vista General Plan, which previously took into account the location of
multi-family housing in areas convenient to public services, facilities and
roadway circulation. Salt Creek Ranch is uniquely situated between the
urbanized areas of Chula Vista to the west and the undeveloped areas to the
east. The project is an entirely residential community which wi11 provide
residents of Chula Vista with high quality, upper-end housing products which
are currently limited in the South Bay area. Salt Creek Ranch wi11 also
provide important transitions from the higher density developments adjacent
to future SR-I25 to the lower density estates in the eastern portion of Salt
Creek Ranch. Development within Salt Creek Ranch wi11 transition from the
R-M and R-LM categories in the western portion of the property to the low
density R - L category in the eastern and northern portions of the property site.
Because the proposed project realizes the City's basic General Plan housing
policies, any further restrictions on development in the eastern portion of the
project as further mitigation of the project's impact on coastal sage scrub
would frustrate and impede attainment of the City's basic project objectives.
· In addition, from an environmental perspective, this project satisfies the
mitigation criteria for coastal sage scrub which is contained in the Chula Vista
General Plan Update EIR. According to the General Plan EIR, offsite
mitigation by acquisition of equivalent coastal sage scrub habitat is only
suggested where there is a loss of "multiple gnatcatcher nesting territories. "
-8~
With respect to this project, all direct and cumulative impacts to the
California gnatcatcher have been mitigated to below a level of significance.
. No evidence has been presented by the preparers of the EIR, City Planning
Staff or any other interested persons which demonstrates that additional
mitigation is warranted in light of the mitigation measures discussed in EIR
89-3 already incorporated into the project. These measures include:
. The modified Salt Creek Ranch GDP wi1l preserve approximately
50 additional acres of coastal sage scrub than anticipated by the General
Plan. This area is proposed as open space in order to preserve habitat for
two species of special concern, the California gnatcatcher and the cactus
wren.
. The project applicant has agreed to participate in a regional or
sub-regional multi-species coastal sage scrub conservation plan (or else
preservation of a regional corridor on site) which wi1l preserve a wildlife
corridor from the San Miguel mountains to the Upper Otay reservoir.
This commitment wi1l result in permanent protection of additional acreage
of coastal sage scrub, or additional on site open space for the regional
corridor.
. The project applicant has agreed to revegetate approximately 30 acres of
disturbed habitat within the proposed open space areas with coastal sage
scrub.
. The project applicant has taken substantial steps to preserve a majority of
the 365 acres of coastal sage scrub on the project site. Less than one
quarter of the coastal sage scrub or approximately 89.6 acres wi1l be lost
to project development under the modified alternative A plan.
. Approximately 29 percent of the property, or 351 acres, is proposed for
open space (not including parks). An approximately 50 acre area located
north of the Upper Otay Reservoir is designated for residential
development in the General Plan, but is proposed as open space in the
GDP. This open space was set aside to preserve sufficient habitat for two
species of special concern, the gnatcatcher and the cactus wren.
-9-
IV. SIGNIFICANT, MITIGABLE IMPACTS
1) Land Use
Impact
The Final EIR for the Salt Creek Ranch GDP identified potential incompatibilities
with adjacent land uses. Potential conflicts include the proposed development's interface
with the EastLake Business Park, the Upper atay water supply reservoir, the ChuIa Vista
Greenbelt, the SDG&E power easement, and the atay Water District reclamation facility.
Similar potential incompatibilities are identified for the Final SPA Plan Design
Alternative. In addition, the provision of affordable housing has been addressed in both
the Final EIR for the Salt Creek Ranch GDP and in the Final Supplemental EIR for the
SPA Plan.
Interface with EastLake Business Park
Potential compatibility conflicts could occur from the placement of residential uses
adjacent to the EastLake Business Park which borders the project site to the south.
Upper atay Water Sup.,pIy Reservoir
The proposed project is residential development in proximity to the Upper atay water
supply reservoir.
Chula Vista Greenbelt
The ChuIa Vista General Plan depicts the City's Greenbelt traversing Salt Creek Ranch
through Salt Creek Canyon and stream valley. The development's interface with the
Greenbelt is important from an open space impact and continuity of use perspective.
atay Water District Reclamation Facilities
Along the northern edge of the proposed project, the property interfaces with the
reclamation facilities. Since future residents would be located in close proximity to the
facility's storage tanks and reclamation pond, a potential compatibility issue involves a
potential visual impact on adjacent residential uses.
-10-
Affordable Housing
As discussed in the Final EIR for the Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan, the City of ChuIa
Vista is in the process of revising its Housing Element and policies. The City is
currently working with the applicant to develop an affordable housing program which
will provide low income units as required by the City under the new policy. Prices are
projected to begin at $79,000 in 1990 dollars. Although the SPA plan does not fully
present an affordable housing program as required by the GDP conditions of approval,
the applicant has initiated discussions with lenders, governmental entities and non-profit
housing providers. The specific Salt Creek Ranch affordable housing programs will
evolve as the viability of funding options are evaluated for feasibility and development
plans become more precise. The specific Salt Creek Ranch affordable housing programs
will be subject to Planning Commission review and approval concurrent with
consideration of the Tentative Subdivision Map. The affordable housing program will
be consistent with the principals outlined in the mitigation section of the Final
Supplemental EIR. This issue is considered a significant impact until the program is
approved.
Mitigation
Interface with EastLake Business Park
A buffer zone has been designed to mitigate potential impacts associated with the
compatibility issue with the EastLake Business Park. This proposed buffer zone would:
. Include a slope which would vary in height (from 10 to 39 feet) and depth
to provide vertical and horizontal separation between uses.
. Vary in depth from an average of 50 feet to a minimum of 30 feet along
the single-family area.
. Vary in depth a minimum of 20 feet along the multi-family area.
. Be extensively landscaped with trees and shrubs to effectively screen and
separate housing from adjacent industrial uses.
. Contain a lO-foot wide meandering pedestrian/bike trail linking the
school/park site on the western edge to the Salt Creek Corridor.
. Contain open space connections from the single-family and multi-family
areas to this trail corridor. Multi-family recreational amenities will be
linked to this trail buffer.
-11-
The applicant will prepare and implement an affirmative fair marketing program
(ChuIa Vista Housing Element, Part 2, 1985), including a marketing plan to attract
qualified buyers for non-market rate housing.
Should it become infeasible, impractical or inappropriate to provide affordable
housing as determined by the pending housing element revisions, the applicant and the
City shall consider alternative methods of achieving affordable housing opportunities
including, but not limited to the fol1owing:
. Land Set Aside: An equitable donation of a building site which could be
made available to the County Housing Authority or other non-profit entity
to construct affordable housing.
. Off-Site Proiects: Construction of an affordable housing project at an
offsite location, including consideration of renewal, rehabilitation and
preservation projects, and the provision of homeless assistance program.
. In-Lieu Contributions: In-lieu contributions to be used to provide
assistance to other identified affordable housing efforts. The contribution
shall be evaluated to ensure its adequacy in relation to achieving assistance
opportunities commensurate to the level of the original project
requirement.
The applicant will actively explore the participation of South County jurisdictions
in non-profit housing agencies in the development, ownership and management of
affordable housing projects. The applicant will also assist these non-profit efforts to
increase their ability to secure additional funding resources to develop quality affordable
housing.
Findini:
AI1 significant land use impacts will be mitigated to below a level of significance
by the implementation of the mitigation measures delineated above.
2) Aesthetics
Impact
The proposed development would significantly alter the landform and visual
character of the site. This conclusion applies to both the original project and the Final
SPA Plan Design Alternative. See Section 3.2 of the Final Supplemental EIR.
-13-
Miti!!ation
Implementation of the proposed project would result in significant landform
impacts to the project site, and visual impacts for both fhe project site and the project
vicinity. In order to mitigate adverse impacts, specific design guidelines have been
included wifhin fhe SPA Plan. Project development wi1l require fhe implementation of
all design guidelines concurrent with the SPA Plan and subject to further review and
approval by the Design Review Committee (DRC). The guidelines which are contained
within fhe SPA Plan (Section III, Community Design Guidelines) address grading,
landscaping, fencing, signing, and scenic highways. Design guidelines are summarized
below:
. Grading: In addition to incorporation of fhe requirements of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code and ofher applicable city policies, graded areas are to be
contoured to blend wifh natural landform characteristics and minimize
disruption of fhe natural topography. A balance between cut and fill shall be
maintained, and all grading and drainage system plans shall be prepared under
fhe direction of a licensed civil engineer. Final grading plans shall be
reviewed by fhe City of ChuIa Planning Department to determine whether
large cut and fill slopes would impact views of open space areas from
residences and/or scenic highways, and areas of high sensitivity such as the
ridgeline and canyons in Sub-area 3 shall be subject to further review by fhe
DRC.
. Landscape: Plant materials shall be organized to provide buffering,
transition, and slope stabilization between land uses and streets, and between
development and open space areas. Manufactured slopes adjacent to habitat
enhancement areas shall be landscaped with vegetation consistent with the
Habitat Enhancement Plan. Landscaping and irrigation standards shall
conform with fhe City of ChuIa Vista Landscaping Manual.
. Scenic Hi!!hways: In accordance wifh fhe design guidelines, all homes
abutting the scenic highways (East H Street and Hunte Parkway) shall be set
back from the right-of-way a variable distance and landscaping shall be
intensified to buffer views of buildings. Any long distance views available
from the scenic highway shall be protected, and all signs within fhe viewshed
of the scenic highway shall be subject to further review.
To mitigate the potentially significant visual impacts associated with the Upper
Otay Reservoir, the applicant is proposing the following measures:
-14-
. Implementation of the Land Alteration Standards outlined in the GDP and
Chapter 5 of fhe SPA Plan.
. Revegetation of visible slope banks wifh native coastal sage scrub.
. Use of contour grading techniques as shown on the conceptual grading plan.
. Minimization of grading on the eastern portion of fhe site.
. Variable rear setbacks for homes as shown in Chapter 5 of the SPA Plan.
. Variable side yard separation as shown on the ridge-top layout in Chapter 5
of the SPA Plan.
. Retaining natural rock outcroppings as shown in the parks, open spaces, and
trails section of fhe SPA Plan.
. Installing landscaping as a backdrop to homes.
. Naturalize grading edges and tilt rear grading lines as shown on the Ridgeline
Grading Guidelines in Chapter 5 of the SPA Plan.
. Utilize berms along visible edges as shown on the RidgeIine Grading
Guidelines in Chapter 5 of the SPA Plan.
To mitigate fhe potential and visual impacts associated wifh fhe EastLake
Technology Park, the applicant is proposing the following measures which will mitigate
fhese impacts to below a level of significance:
. Provide a buffer zone along fhe southern edge of the property which will
include a slope along both fhe single- and multi-family areas. The slope will
vary in height (from approximately 10 to 39 feet) and width (from a minimum
of 20 feet in fhe multi-family area and 30 feet in the single family area, to a
maximum of 150 feet at its widest in the single family area).
. The buffer shall be extensively landscaped with treeS and shrubs to effectively
screen and separate housing from adjacent industrial uses.
. The buffer shall contain a 1O-foot wide meandering pedestrian/bike trail
linking the school/park site on the western edge to fhe Salt Creek corridor.
This trail corridor shall contain open space connections from fhe single-family
and multi-family areas, and link multi-family recreational amenities.
-15-
Along fhe northern and northwestern edge, the proposed project interfaces wifh
fhe Gtay Water District reclamation facilities. Since future Salt Creek residents would
be located in close proximity to the facilities storage tanks and reclamation pond, a
potentially significant visual impact exists. To mitigate the potentially significant visual
impact associated wifh the reclamation facilities, the applicant is proposing the fol1owing
measures:
. A slope will be placed along the northern edge which would vary in height
(from daylight at the edge up to 26 feet) and depth (from daylight at the edge
up to 50 feet) to obstruct any views into this area.
. Utilization of grading techniques to prevent views from most of the homes
into fhe reclamation area.
. Placement of homes to take advantage of natural off-site topography to the
north which prevents views into the reclamation area.
. Utilization of landscaping and adequate rear yard setbacks to minimize views
into this area from neighborhoods 12 and 13.
Residences situated adjacent to fhe SDG&E power easement in Sub-area 3 would
experience visual impacts due to existing SDG&E transmission lines. Site planning
measures such as proposed grading techniques, landscaping and home orientation would
minimize visual impacts from fhe project to the facilities.
Finding
Implementation of fhe mitigation measures delineated above will reduce fhe
project -specific impacts to below a level of significance.
(See Section 111.2)
3) Hydroloe:y
ImDact
The Final SPA Plan Design Alternative would create less impervious surface area
fhan the original plan. Either project would increase impervious surface area, resulting
in altered drainage courses and increased flow rates downstream. See Final Supplemental
EIR, Section 3.3.
-16-
Miti~ation
. For Basin A, development drainage shaH be routed to road crossing points for
outlet into the natural channel flow. Structure types to convey stream flows
under access roads would be determined prior to Final Map approval.
. Within Basin B, there are two Salt Creek crossing points, East H Street and
a northern access road. The East H Street crossing shall incorporate a
suitable drainage structure which wi1l accommodate the proposed trail system.
The type and sizing of this drainage system shall be determined prior to Final
Map approval. The northern structure shall be determined prior to Final Map
approval. Developed areas would be drained via storm drain systems to outlet
points adjacent to Salt Creek.
. A low flow pump diversion system wil1 be constructed to transport dry
weather flows out of Basin A (Upper Otay Lake Basin) and discharge them
into Basin B (Salt Creek Basin). This low flow diversion system wil1 be
designed for 137 gpm.
. A storm drain system shall be constructed within future Lane Avenue to
convey runoff within Basic C to existing facilities constructed by the EastLake
I project. The type of sizing of this system would be determined prior to
Final Map approval.
. Drainage facilities and energy dissipators shall be constructed in accordance
with the approved hydraulic analysis and shall be in place and functioning
prior to completion of the grading operation.
. Development of the subject project must comply with all applicable
regulations established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(EPA) as set forth in the National PoHutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit requirements for urban runoff and storm water discharge.
Findinl!:
AH significant impacts wi1l be mitigated to below a level of significance by the
implementation of the mitigation measures delineated above.
-17-
4) Water Ouality
Impacts
Potential impacts associated with watershed development in the Otay reservoirs
watershed include urban runoff, sewage spi1ls, and sedimentation. See Final
Supplemental EIR, Section 3.4.
The Final SPA Plan Design Alternative proposes a reduced density residential
development. Potential water quality impacts would be reduced, but stil1 potentially
significant.
Mitigation
. The project shall be subject to review and approval by the State Department
of Hea1fh Services (DHS). The project shall implement mitigation measures
as set by DHS prior to issuance of any grading permit.
. Prior to or concurrent with SPA Plan approval, a diversion ditch plan, or
other acceptable plan to handle drainage to fhe Otay Drainage Basin, shall be
prepared and approved by fhe City of Chula Vista, City of San Diego and
DHS. The plan shall analyze fhe possibility of sewage system failures; effects
of increased levels of nutrients salts and pesticides from landscaping and
irrigation; and effects of petroleum products from surface street runoff.
Additional environmental analysis may be required based on the specific
drainage ditch or other plans. Design of these plans shall also consider
providing additional capacity for concurrent or future development.
. The project applicant shall conduct an onsite mitigation monitoring program
to establish baseline data for runoff from the project site. This monitoring
program wi1l be continued until 400 units in fhe sub-basin have been
constructed in the sub-basin.
. The project proponent shall submit a erosion control plan prepared by a
registered civil engineer and a registered landscape architect in accordance
with City of Chula Vista design standards. The plan shall be approved prior
to issuance of grading permits and shall include placement of sandbags,
temporary sediment basins, and an erosion control maintenance plan.
-18-
. The project proponent shall submit a storm drain plan prepared by a
registered civil engineer in accordance with City of Chula Vista design
standards. The plan must be approved prior to the issuance of grading
permits and shall include permanent erosion control facilities.
. Development of the subject project must comply with all applicable
regulations established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency
(EP A) as set forth in the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
(NPDES) permit requirements for urban runoff and storm water discharge.
Pindinl!
Implementation of the mitigation measures delineated above and changes
incorporated into the project will mitigate all project and cumulative water quality
impacts to below a level of significance.
5) Biological Resources
Impact
The habitats, biological resources, and sensitive species occurring onsite have
been detailed in Pinal EIR 89-3 for the approved Salt Creek Ranch GDP. The proposed
SPA is quite similar to the approved GDP. The SPA limits of grading have been altered
so that they extend beyond the GDP limits in some areas. In other areas, however, the
SPA limits of grading have been confined further inside the GDP limits. The amount
of each habitat that would be impacted by the new grading limits includes an additional
1.5 acres of coastal sage scrub, 0.2 additional acre of riparian habitat, 3.3 acres less of
native grassland and 1. 8 acre more of disturbed grassland.
The additional areas of impact represent the sum of many small and disjunct areas
of impact. Thus the 1. 5 acres of impact to coastal sage scrub would be distributed
throughout the site and is not a singular area or the sum of a few areas. Additional SPA
impacts to coastal sage scrub are incremental and are not considered significant. The
impact to California gnatcatcher is no greater than it would be under the GDP. Thus the
SPA would not create any new significant impacts to California gnatcatcher. Although
coastal sage scrub would be slightly more impacted overall, a 2.7 acre patch of sage
scrub would be newly placed in natural open space. This patch contains a large cactus
thicket and a cactus wren nest. Implementation of the SPA would not impact any cactus
wren nests on the site, while the GDP would have impacted one thicket and one nest.
The SPA would not create any new significant impacts to cactus wren.
-19-
The additional impact to riparian habitats is 0.2 acre. All wetland impacts require
mitigation, due to fhe USFWS and ACOE "no net loss of wetlands" policy. Therefore,
impacts to riparian habitat are considered significant.
Native grassland onsite would be impacted less than it would have been under the
GDP. The increased amount of native grassland retained onsite would allow more
suitable habitat for the sensitive plant species fhat may occur there. Species wifh a high
potential of occurrence include Orcutt's brodiaea (Brodiaea orcuttii), Otay tarplant
(Hemizonia conjugens), and San Diego County needle grass (Stipa diegoensis). While
fhe SPA would reduce impacts to native grassland overall, the native grassland habitat
onsite should be surveyed as recommended in the original EIR.
The SPA would impact an additional 1.8 acres of disturbed grassland habitat.
The loss of fhis disturbed habitat is not considered significant.
MitilZation
To mitigate additional impacts to 0.2 acre of riparian habitat to below the level
of significance, creation/enhancement of riparian habitat shall be implemented. At a 2: 1
ratio, 0.4 acre of riparian habitat shall be created or enhanced. This mitigation acreage
shall be added to the mitigation acreage for the Salt Creek Ranch development and
incorporated into fhe wetland mitigation plan prepared by RECON.
Finding
Impacts to riparian wetland habitat would be mitigated to below a level of
significance through the mitigation measures delineated above.
(See Section III. 3)
6) Cultural Resources
The potential impacts to cultural resources as a result of implementation of the
SPA Plan are identical to those that would occur with implementation of the GDP.
These impacts were discussed in detail in Final EIR 89-3. See also Final Supplemental
EIR, Section 3.6.
Mitigation
. Mitigation of impacts to important cultural resources can be achieved through
eifher avoidance or by conducting a data recovery program. Avoidance could
include project redesign, or indexing the content of a site by excavating a
-20-
small sample then capping the site with 2 feet of fill and incorporating fhese
sites or portions of fhese sites into the Salt Creek Park system (Chula Vista
Greenbelt).
. If avoidance of important prehistoric archaeological resources cannot be
achieved, a data recovery program to mitigate development impacts shall be
conducted, including, where necessary, surface collection and mapping of
artifacts, a phased data recovery program, and monitoring. This phased
approach shall employ a random sample in conjunction with a focused
inventory for features (i.e., hearths). The data recovery program shall be in
accordance wifh a regional approach for all prehistoric sites wifhin Salt Creek
Ranch, Salt Creek I and EastLake III, thereby allowing a comprehensive
understanding for these sites. This regional understanding would also be in
agreement wifh the Bonita-Miguel Archaeological District wifhin which
CA-SDi-4,530/W-643 falls.
. The data recovery shall follow the Advisory Council's guidelines as defined
within Treatment of Archaeological Properties, A Handbook (ACHP 1980).
The treatment plan shall be oriented to address local and regional research
questions and clearly identify the methods to be used to address fhe research
questions. Research questions to be addressed are listed in ERCE's June 1989
Salt Creek Ranch Cultural Resource Evaluation on file at the City of Chula
Vista Planning Department.
. To ensure fhat potentially important historic archaeological resources assumed
to be present at fhe eight locales listed above are not adversely affected, a
program to include monitoring of grading activities with fhe possibility of data
recovery is recommended. This program shall provide for excavation,
recording and collection of resources if significant features, such as privies
or trash deposits, are located during grading. This program shall include
analysis of recovered artifacts in relation to an approved research design and
a report of findings.
. Indirect impacts may occur to historic sites located adjacent and exterior to
the project boundary (H-ll, H-1S, H-I6, H-17). Fencing of project
boundaries and strict avoidance of offsite impacts in fhese areas should occur.
The remaining nine sites (CA-SDi-7,I97A, CA-SDi-7,211, CA-SDi-8,206C,
CA-SDi-9, 169, CA-SDi-7,977, CA-SDi-ll,045, CA-SDi-ll,046,
CA-SDi-ll,626, and H-9) are identified as not important and, as such, need
not be addressed in this document.
-21-
Finding
All significant cultural, historic, and paleontological impacts will be mitigated to
below a level of significance by fhe implementation of fhe mitigation measures.
7) Traffic
Impact
The original proposed project would generate 31,290 daily vehicle trips with
2,777 trips expected during fhe morning peak hour and 2,986 trips expected during the
afternoon peak hour. The Final SPA Plan Design Alternative proposes 155 fewer
dwel1ing units than fhe original project fhus resulting in reduced vehicular trips.
However, fhe cumulative impacts to fhe roadway system would be similar. See Final
Supplemental EIR, Section 3.7.
Mitigation
Scenario IA (with Phase I and Proctor Valley Road Unpaved)
. The project applicant will construct East "H" Street through fhe project (Phase
I boundaries) to ultimate four-lane major street standards, consistent with the
City of ChuIa Vista design criteria.
. The project applicant will construct Hunte Parkway to ultimate four-lane
major street standards fhrough the project and offsite south to Telegraph
Canyon Road, consistent wifh fhe City of ChuIa Vista design criteria.
. The project applicant will construct Lane A venue as a Class II collector from
East "H" Street to meet existing improvements at its current terminals in the
East Lake Business Park, consistent with the City of ChuIa Vista's design
criteria.
. At fhe discretion of the City Traffic Engineer, the project applicant will install
traffic signals or bond for future installation at the following intersections:
East "H" Street/Lane Avenue
East "H" Street/Hunte Parkway
Lane A venue/Telegraph Canyon Road
Hunte Parkway/Telegraph Canyon Road
-22-
. The project applicant wi1l implement transportation demand management
strategies, including provisions of transit service and bus stops in order to
reduce fhe peak hour demand on the street network.
. Reduce the development potential of Phase 1 by 120 dwe1ling units. This
reduction will result in an acceptable level of service (LOS D) of the
intersection of East "H" Street and Hidden Vista Drive.
. The project applicant wi1l construct a two-lane roadway between Salt Creek
1 and Salt Creek Ranch to connect East "H" Street.
Scenario 2 (with Phase I, II, and III and State Route 125)
. The project applicant wi1l implement all the measures described under
Scenario 1 previously.
. The project applicant will construct State Route 125 as a four-lane roadway
between East "H" Street and State Route 54 with enhanced geometrics at fhe
intersections.
Finding
All significant impacts wi1l be mitigated to below a level of significance by the
implementation of fhe mitigation measures delineated above.
8) Noise
Impact
Traffic-generated and urban noise would result from project implementation.
Onsite future noise levels due to cumulative traffic will require on site noise attenuation
along various roadways. See Final Supplemental EIR, Section 3.8.
Mitigation
. The noise impact on fhe residences along East "H" Street shall be mitigated
by the placement of a solid wall or a wall/berm combination on the building
pads at the top of the slopes adjacent the roadway. The walls must be of
solid masonry construction with a material weight of at least 3.5 pounds per
square foot which would not allow any air spaces along fheir entire length.
-23-
. Each noise wall or wall/berm combination shall be placed on the building
pads at the top of the slope between the residences and the roadway and shall
be 5 feet high. The end of each noise wall must wrap around the building
pad enough to block the line of sight from all points in the exterior living
space to any portion of the impacting roadway. Figure 3-35 depicts the
proposed locations of the noise walls or wall/berm combinations. If the walls
or wall/berm combinations are incorporated into the project design, exterior
noise levels would be reduced to below a level of significance.
. Even with the incorporation of the above mitigation measures, exterior noise
level under buiIdout conditions wi1l continue to exceed 60 dBA Ldn on
portions of the project site. Therefore, in accordance with the standards set
by Title 24, an interior acoustical study wi11 be required for all multi-family
units proposed for the site. Possible mitigation measures to reduce interior
noise levels below the 45 dBA Ldn interior noise standard may include, but
are not restricted to, mechanical ventilation and closed window conditions.
Finding
Future onsite cumulative noise impacts wi1l be mitigated to below a level of
significance by the implementation of the mitigation measures delineated above.
9) Water
Impact
The project wi1l demand 1,531,531 gpd of potable water and 188,139 gpd of
reclaimed water for a total average water demand of 1,719,670 gpd. See Final
Supplemental EIR, Section 3.9.1.
Mitigation
. Prior to approval of final map, the Master Plan of Water for Salt Creek
Ranch shall be approved by the City Engineer and OWD. Further, this plan
shall be revised to include a discussion of implementation and phasing, and
participation in the water allocation program and TSF financing for this
project and other projects in the OWD Master Plan service area.
. The exact locations for the proposed pump station and 3 mi1lion gallon
reservoir to serve the 1296 Zone shall be determined prior to approval of final
grading plans.
-24-
· Prior to issuance of building permits, the project site shaH either be annexed
by the OWD into Improvement District No. 22, or a new improvement
district shall be established for the project area. In addition, the project
developer shaH obtain written verification from OWD at each phase of
development that the tract or parcel wi1l be provided adequate water service.
· The project proponents shall, if feasible, negotiate an agreement with OWD
to commit to use of reclaimed water at the earliest possible date so that OWD
can ensure that an adequate supply is available. If such an agreement is
pursued, all documentation shall be subject to site-specific environmental
analysis, and shall conform to the applicable regulations of the City of Chula
Vista, Regional Water Quality Control Board and the State Department of
Health.
· Water conservation measures for on site landscaping and for maintenance of
roadside vegetation shaH be created and implemented by the project
proponent, in coordination with the City Public Works Department and in
consultation with OWD or other qualified water agency/organization.
Conservation measures are recommended by the State Resources Agency
Department of Water Resources, and include but are not limited to planting
of drought tolerant vegetation and the use of irrigation systems which
minimize runoff and evaporation loss (see also following measure).
· The foHowing water conservation measures should be provided;
implementation shall be approved prior to issuance of certificates of use and
occupancy;
a) Low-flush toilets (Section 17921.3, Health and Safety code).
b) Low-flush showers and faucets (California Administrative Code, Title
24, Par 6, Article 1, TIO-I406P).
c) Insulation of hot water lines in water recirculating systems (California
Energy Commission).
Pindini:
All significant impacts associated with water supply and distribution wi1l be
mitigated by the implementation of the mitigation measures delineated above.
(See Section III. 5)
-25-
10) Waste Water
Impact
The project will generate approximately 788,760 gpd of wastewater. See Final
Supplemental EIR, Section 3.9.2.
Mitij1ation
. Prior to approval of final map, the Master Plan of Sewerage for Salt Creek
Ranch shall be approved by the City Engineer. Further, this plan shall be
revised to include a discussion of funding and implementation/phasing in
relation to this project and other associated project's phasing in the area.
. Interim and ultimate capacity in the Telegraph Canyon Interceptor shan be
determined prior to approval of final map.
. Ultimate capacity of the Salt Creek Interceptor shall be determined prior to
approval of final map.
. A storm water diversion plan shall be prepared that will protect the Upper and
Lower Otay reservoirs from sewage contamination, as discussed in Section
3.4, Water Quality.
. The project shall be subject to payment of waste water development fees (to
fund trunk sewer and other upgrades) or equivalent proportionate facility
financing mechanism identified by the City, when adopted. Payment shall
occur prior to issuance of building permits or earlier.
Finding
An significant impacts associated with waste water will be mitigated by the
implementation of the mitigation measures delineated above.
11) Offsite Areas of Impact - Landform/Aesthetics
Impact
The pad elevation of the proposed reservoir is higher than the elevation of the
project site and would be visible from the surrounding area. See Final Supplemental
EIR, Section 3.10.2.
-26-
Mitil:ation
. Landscaping shan be planted around the tank to shield views of the tank.
. The water tank shall be painted an unobtrusive color.
Findin!!
An significant impacts associated with offsite landform/aesthetics impacts wil1 be
mitigated by the implementation of the mitigation measures delineated above.
12) Offsite Areas of Impact - Cultural Resources
Impact
Hunte Parkway. Impacts to the Hunte Parkway parcel include the construction
of Hunte Parkway and a proposed sewer interceptor line. Both developments are
proposed along approximately the same alignment. Impacts relating to the
proposed interceptor line are anticipated along a IOO-foot wide pipeline
construction corridor and grading and fill impacts related to Hunte Parkway are
anticipated to be restricted to a 134-foot wide corridor. Construction of both the
proposed interceptor line and Hunte Parkway wil1 affect portions of
CA-SDi-I2,037, CA-SDi-I2,038, and CA-SDi-I2,039 and Isolate 1-314.
East "H" Street. A lO-inch pipeline and a segment of East "H" Street are
proposed for the East "H" Street parce1. Trenching and clearing as necessary is
anticipated along the IOO-foot wide pipeline construction corridor proposed along
the northern side of this parce1. Impacts related to the construction of East "H"
Street are anticipated to be restricted to a 170-foot wide corridor along the
existing Proctor Valley Road alignment and include grading and fill operations.
Construction of both the lO-inch pipeline and proposed East "H" Street segment
wil1 affect portions of site CA-SDi-4,530/W-643, which has been tested and
determined to be important pursuant to CEQA criteria.
Water Reservoir/Water Line. Impacts to the offsite water reservoir/water line
parcel include trenching and grading along a lOO-foot wide corridor and
construction of a water-storage facility. Both direct and indirect impacts of
equipment staging and access may affect cultural resources CA-SDi-II ,403 Locus
F, CA-SDi-ll,403 Locus G, CA-SDi-ll,4l5, CA-SDi-l2,030, CA-SDi-l2,03l,
CA-SDi-I2,032, CA-SDi-I2,033, CA-SDi-I2,034, CA-SDi-I2,03S,
CA-SDi-12,036, CA-SDi-I2,260, and CA-SDi-I2,261. Locus E of site
-27-
CA-SDi-11,403 is beyond the potential impact area and wil1 not be effected by
project development as it is currently planned.
Miti~ation
· The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) require mitigation of
impacts to important cultural resources. Sites CA-SDi-11,403 Locus F,
CA-SDI-11,4l5, CA-SDi-I2,03I, CA-SDi-I2,032, CA-SDi-I2,034, and
CA-SDi-I2,035 within the water reservoir/water line parcel and
CA-SDi-12,038 within the Hunte Parkway parcel were determined to qualify
as important cultural resources by testing pursuant to CEQA, and mitigation
of impacts to these cultural resources is required. Site CA-SDi-4,530/W-643
within the "H" Street parcel has been previously tested and determined
important under CEQA, and mitigation measures are necessary to address
impacts to that site. Site CA-SDi-4,530/W-643 also falls within the
Bonita-Miguel Archaeological District which requires evaluation under federal
criteria.
. Sites CA-SDi-12,030, CA-SDi-12,033, CA-SDi-I2,036, CA-SDi-I2,037, and
CA-SDi-12,039 and isolates 1-314, SC-I-l, SC-I-2, SC+3, and SC-I-4 were
determined to not qualify as important cultural resources, and therefore no
additional archaeological work for these resources is necessary. Cultural
resources CA-SDi-I2,260, CA-SDi-I2,26I and CA-SDi-II,403 Locus G were
not tested or evaluated at this time. Evaluation for determination of
importance under CEQA through a cultural resource testing program is
necessary at these sites.
· Mitigation of impacts to important cultural resources can be achieved through
either avoidance or by conducting a data recovery program. A voidance could
include capping sites with 2 feet of fin or redesign of project components.
Recommended mitigation measures include the following:
· If avoidance of archaeological resources cannot be achieved, a data recovery
program to mitigate development impacts to important cultural resource sites
shall be conducted, including, where necessary, surface collection and
mapping of artifacts, a phased data recovery program, and monitoring during
facility or other construction. This phased approach shall employ a random
sample in conjunction with a focused inventory for features (e.g., hearths).
The data recovery program shall be in accordance with a regional approach
for all prehistoric sites within Salt Creek Ranch, Salt Creek I and
EastLake III, thereby allowing a comprehensive understanding for these sites.
-28-
This regional program is in agreement with the Bonita-Miguel Archaeological
District.
. The data recovery program shall foUow the Advisory Council's guidelines as
defined within Treatment of Archaeological Properties, A Handbook (ACHP
1980). The treatment plan shall be oriented to address local and regional
research questions and clearly identify the methods to be used to address the
research questions. Research questions to be should be addressed are
provided in ERCE's June 1989 Salt Creek Ranch Cultural Resource
Evaluation, on file at the City of Chula Vista Planning Department.
Findin!!
AU significant impacts associated with offsite cultural resources impacts wi1l be
mitigated by the implementation of the mitigation measures delineated above.
V. SCOPE OF FINAL SUPPLEMENTAL EIR AND IMPACTS NOT FOUND TO
BE SIGNIFICANT
The Final Supplemental EIR addresses potential environmental impacts of the
proposed Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan. The proposed project is described in detail in
Section 2, Project Description, of the Final Supplemental EIR. The Final Supplemental
ErR contains the fuU range of sections required under CEQA for a Supplemental ErR:
Introduction, Project Description, Impact Analysis, Alternatives Analysis, Summary of
Unavoidable Significant Impacts, References and Consultant Identification.
Each of the issue areas/sections listed below were identified by the City of ChuIa
Vista as potentially significant environmental impacts requiring an updated analysis
and/or new analysis beyond that discussed in Final EIR 89-3 for the Salt Creek Ranch
GDP (SCH No. 89092721). The Final Supplemental EIR reviews in sufficient detail
these potential impacts associated with implementation of the project, constituting the
scope of this Final Supplemental EIR:
. Land Use
. Landform/Aesthetics
. Hydrology
. Water Quality
. Biological Resources
. Cultural Resources
. Transportation and Circulation
. Noise
. Public Services and Utilities (Water and Wastewater)
. Offsite Areas of Impact
Those issue areas considered not to require further analyses beyond that discussed
in Final EIR-89-3 by the City of ChuIa Vista are listed below.
. Conversion of Agricultural Lands (addressed in EIR 89-3)
. Geology/Soils (addressed in EIR-89-3)
. Air Quality (addressed in EIR-89-3)
. Fiscal Analysis (addressed in EIR-89-3)
. Public Services/Utilities (addressed in EIR-89-3)
Police Protection
Fire Protection
Schools
Parks, Recreation and Open Space
Gas, Electricity, Energy
Public Transit
Library Facilities
Solid Waste Disposal
During the comment period on the Draft Supplemental EIR, a commentator
suggested an approximate alternative alignment for access to offsite properties to the
north of the Salt Creek Ranch site. The City finds that this alternative is not feasible or
rasonabIe for the reasons set forth below:
. The issue of access was addressed during the General Development Plan
(GDP) environmental review process for the Salt Creek Ranch project.
The Final EIR for the GDP was certified in September, 1990. The Chula
Vista City Council approved the Salt Creek Ranch GDP and certified the
related Final EIR (EIR-89-3) in September, 1990. The administrative
record from the GDP environmental review process contains
correspondence and other documents relating to access for properties north
of the Salt Creek Ranch project site. In addition, the record contains the
Salt Creek Ranch GDP, which includes the traffic circulation plan (Figure
36) showing the approved access points, and a slope encroachment
analysis (Figure 25) i1Iustrating onsite slope constraints affecting the
access points. This slope analysis i1Iustrates that the approved access
point avoids encroachment into areas to the north which are located within
a 25 percent slope area. The record also contains the Final EIR for the
Salt Creek Ranch GDP. The Final EIR shows that onsite biological
constraints (primarily coastal sage scrub) eliminated other reasonable or
feasible alternate access points. The approved Salt Creek Ranch GDP and
related Final EIR also i1Iustrate that alternate access points to the north
would now encroach into designated onsite open space areas. The Salt
Creek Ranch GDP, the Final EIR and the record from the GDP
-30-
environmental review process are available for public review at the City's
Planning Department located at 276 Fourth Avenue, ChuIa Vista,
California.
. Based on existing available information for onsite sensitive resources and
offsite conditions, the access that is identified in the SPA Plan EIR is
consistent with the access analyzed in the Final EIR for the GDP and is
considered to be adequate to serve the properties north of the project site.
Further analysis of offsite development access will require, among other
things, the submission of proposed development plans (none submitted to
date), the documentation of offsite constraints and independent
environmental review at that time.
VI. THE RECORD
For the purposes of CEQA and these findings, the record of the Planning
Commission and City Council relating to these actions include the following:
1) Advisory Council on Historic Preservation (ACHP). 1980. Treatment of
Archaeological Properties: A Handbook. Federal Register 45 FR78808.
2) American Ornithologists' Union. 1983. Checklist of North American
Birds. 6th Edition. American Ornithological Union [Washington, D.C.].
3) Archaeological Planning Collaborative (APe). 1980. An Archaeological
Record Search and Field Survey of the Janal Ranch Property San Diego
County, California, Report on file at the South Coastal Information
Center, San Diego State University.
4) Atwood, J. 1980. The United States distribution of the California
black-tailed gnatcatcher. Western Birds 11:65-78.
5) Atwood, J.L. 1988. Speciation and geographic variation in black-tailed
gnatcatchers. Ornithological Monograph 42. 72 p.
6) Basmaciyan-Darnell, Inc. 1989. Traffic Study for Salt Creek Ranch,
City of Chula Vista. Revised January 22, 1990.
7) Batchelder, Ed. 1991. City of Chula Vista Planning Department.
Personal communication, October 15.
-31-
8) Bauder, E.T. 1986. San Diego Vernal Pools, recent and projected
losses; fheir conditions; and threats to fheir existence 1979-1990. U.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service, Office of Endangered Species.
9) Beauchamp, R.M. 1986. A flora of San Diego County. Sweetwater
River Press. 241 pp.
10) California Administrative Code, Title 24, Chapter I, Subchapter I, Article
4.
11) California Administrative Code, Title 24, Par 6, Article 1, T20-1406F.
12) California Department of Fish and Game. 1965. California Fish and
Wildlife Plan. The Resources Agency, Volume 3(c):908.
13) California Department of Fish and Game. 1985. Designated endangered
or rare plants The Resources Agency, June 19.
14) California Department ofHea1th Services (DHS). 1976. Letter addressed
to County of San Diego.
15) California, State of. 1988. Title 24, Noise Insulation Standards,
December.
16) ChuIa Vista, City of. 1974. Noise Element of the General Plan; June.
17) Chula Vista, City of. 1974. Scenic Highway Element of the Chula Vista
General Plan.
18) Chula Vista, City of. 1982. Chula Vista General Plan, EastLake Policy
Plan, City Council Resolution No. 10996, September 7.
19) ChuIa Vista, City of. 1982. Housing Element.
20) ChuIa Vista, City of. 1988. Noise Element of General Plan.
21) Chula Vista, City of. 1989. Municipal Code.
22) Chula Vista, City of. 1989. Planning Department, Cultural Resources
Testing and Evaluation of fhe Salt Creek Ranch Project, June.
23) ChuIa Vista, City of. I989a. General Plan Update. March.
-32-
24) ChuIa Vista, City of. I989b. General Plan Update EIR 88-2. March.
25) ChuIa Vista, City of. 1990. Salt Creek Ranch Annexation/General
Development Plan/Pre-Zone Final Environmental Impact Report (ECI/EIR
89-3). August, including the entire administrative record from that
environmental review and approval process.
26) Cowardin, L.J., F.C. Golet, and E.T. LaRoe. 1979. Classification of
Wetlands and Deepwater Habitats of the United States. U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, U.S. Department of Interior, December.
27) Davis, McMi1lan and Susan M. Hector. 1989. Cultural Resource Survey
and Archaeological Testing of a 20-Acre Portion of the Rancho San
Miguel Property, Bonita, California. Ms. on file at the South Coastal
Information Center San Diego State University. San Diego, California.
28) Dennis Gallegos, Andrew Pigniolo, and Roxana Phi1lips. 1988. A
Cultural Resource Testing and Evaluation for the Salt Creek Ranch
Project, Chula Vista, California. Report on file with the City of ChuIa
Vista.
29) ERCE Environmental and Energy Services Company. Noise Modeling for
EastLake III.
30) ERCE. 1989. Phase 1 Report, Amber Ridge California gnatcatcher
study. Prepared for Weingarten, Siegel, Fletcher Group, Inc.
31) ERCE. 1991. Technical Appendix for the California Gnatcatcher
Sweetwater River Habitat Conservation Plan. Prepared for San Diego
Association of Governments. April 1991. 87 pp.
32) Everett, W.T. 1979. Threatened, declining and sensitive bird species in
San Diego County. San Diego Audubon Society, Sketches, June.
33) F&G Regulations (Code No. 6.26 of Chapter 3, Article 1)
34) Federal Highway Administration's Stamina 2.0 Noise Prediction Mode1.
35) Federal Highway Administration. 1978. Highway Traffic Noise
Prediction Model (FHWA-RD-77-108), December.
-33-
36) Federal Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model, FHWA-RD-77-108.
37) Freel, Richard. 1976. Letter from Richard Freel (BLM Riverside
District Manager) to Russel1 L. Kaldenberg. August 3, 1976. Letter on
file with Russel1 Kaldenberg, USDI, BLM, Palm Spring Area Office,
Palm Springs, California.
38) GrinneI, 1. and A.H. Miller. 1944. The distribution of the birds of
California. Pacific Coast Avifauna 27.
39) Harris, Cyril M. 1979. Handbook of Noise Control. 2nd OOs.
McGraw-Hill, Inc.
40) Hol1and, R.F. 1986. Preliminary Descriptions of the Terrestrial Natural
Communities of California. Nongame-Heritage Program, California
Department of Fish and Game.
41) Jones, J.K., Jr., D.C. Carter, H.H. Genoways, R.S. Hoffman, and D.W.
Rice. 1982. Revised checklist of North American mammals north of
Mexico. Occasional Papers of the Museum Texas Tech. University
80:1-22.
42) Kuper, T.H. 1977. Reconnaissance of the marine sedimentary rocks of
southwestern San Diego County, Plates 1-4; in G.T. Farrand (00.),
Geology of southwestern San Diego County and northwestern Baja
California. Guidebook, San Diego Association of Geologists.
43) McIntire Group, The. 1990. Preliminary Hydrological Analysis for Salt
Creek Ranch.
44) Mestre Greve Associates. 1989. Noise Analysis for Salt Creek 1,
March.
45) Munz, P.A. 1974. A flora of southern California. University of
California Press, Berkeley. 1086 pp.
46) Oberbauer, T.A. 1979a. Distribution and dynamics of San Diego County
grasslands. Unpublished M.A. theses, San Diego State University, San
Diego.
47) Otay Water District Central Area Master Update. 1987.
-34-
48) Pacific Southwest Biological Services (PSBS). 1981.
49) Pacific Southwest Biological Services (PSBS). 1982.
50) Pacific Southwest Biological Services (PSBS). 1989. Report of a
biological assessment of the Rancho San Miguel Property, San Diego
County, California. San Miguel Partners, San Diego, California. 56 pp.
51) Rea, A.M. 1986. Cactus Wren. In A.R. Philips (ed.), Known Birds of
North Middle American. Part 1. Denver Museum of Natural History. p.
119.
52) RECON. 1987. Home range, nest site, and territory parameters of the
black-tailed gnatcatcher population on the Rancho Santa Fe Highlands
study area. September.
53) RECON. 1988. Survey of Biological Resources on the Baldwin
Property. January.
54) RECON. 1991. Habitat Enhancement Plan for Salt Creek Ranch.
Prepared for the Baldwin Company. March. 19 pp.
55) Reinen, R.H. 1978. Notice of exercise of Section 404 jurisdiction over
certain streams and wetlands in California. Los Angeles District, Corps
of Engineers. July 15.
56) Remsen, V. 1978. The species of special concern list: an annotated list
of declining or vulnerable birds in California. Western Field
Ornithologist, Museum of Vertebrate Zoology, University of California,
Berkeley.
57) Ritz, Frank et al. 1989. Otay Ranch Archaeological Survey: San Ysidro
Mountains Parcel, Proctor Valley Parcel, Otay River Parcel. Ms on file
at ERC Environmental and Energy Services Company.
58) San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 1985. Final Series
6 Regional Growth Forecasts, 1980-2000.
59) San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 1987. Draft Series
6 Regional Growth Forecasts.
-35-
60) San Diego Association of Governments (SANDAG). 1988. Traffic
Generators Manual, July.
61) San Diego, County of. 1983. Conservation Element (Part X) of the
County General Plan. Planning Department, GPA-80-61.
62) San Diego County Traffic Engineering. 1990. Telephone Conversation
with John Puskas and Larry Hurt. December. ADT for Proctor Valley
Road west of Melody Road counted in June, 1989.
63) SDHS (San Diego Herpetological Society). 1980. Survey and status of
endangered and threatened species of reptiles natively occurring in San
Diego County. Prepared for Fish and Wildlife Committee, San Diego
Department of Agriculture, 33 pp.
64) Smith, J.P. and R. York. 1984. Inventory of rare and endangered
vascular plants of California. California Native Plant Society, Special
Publication No.1, 3rd edition.
65) Smith, J.P. and K. Berg. 1988. Inventory of rare and endangered
vascular plants of California. California Native Plant Society, Special
Publication No.1, 4th edition.
66) Swanson, Clifford. Deputy Public Works Director. City of Chula Vista.
Written communication. 1992.
67) Tate, J., Jr. 1986. The Blue List of 1986. American Birds 40:227-236.
68) Tate, J., Jr., and D.J. Tate. 1982. The Blue List for 1982. American
Birds 35(1):3-10.
69) U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission and U.S. Department of the
Interior. 1978. Final Site Environmental Statement, Sundesert Nuclear
Plant Units 1 and 2, Report on file with SDG&E, San Diego, California.
70) United States Army Corps of Engineers. 1986. Corps of Engineers
wetland delineation manual. Environmental Laboratory, Waterways
Experiment Station, Vicksburg, MI. Technical report, pp. 9-86.
71) United States Environmental Protection Agency, Compilation of Air
Pollution Emission Factors. AP-42, Supplement 7.
-36-
72) United States Fish and Wildlife Service. 1985a. Endangered and
threatened wildlife and plants: Review of plant taxa for listing as
endangered or threatened species; Notice of review; Federal Register,
50(188):39526-39527, September 27.
73) Wade, Sue A. 1988. Archaeological Survey of Baldwin 1200-Acre
Property. Letter report on file at ERC Environmental and Energy Services
Company, San Diego, California.
74) WESTEC Services, Inc. 1981. EastLake EIR, Appendix A. Biological
survey report, prepared for the City of Chula Vista.
75) WESTEC Services, Inc. 1982. EastLake Final Environmental Impact
Report, prepared for the City of Chula Vista, February.
76) WESTEC Services, Inc. 1985. EastLake I Sectional Planning Area
(SPA) Plan final Environmental Impact Report, prepared for the City of
Chula Vista, January.
77) Wier Biological. 1983. Biological survey report and planning constraints
for the Alva-R-4S Ranch, prepared for PRC Engineering, San Diego.
78) Wier, H.A. 1986. Biological survey report of the Singing Hills Specific
Plan, McGinty Mountain, San Diego, California. Prepared for McGinty
Ranch General Plan partnership, San Diego, California.
79) Willdan Associates. 1991. Traffic Impact Study for Salt Creek Ranch.
80) Wilson Engineering. 1991. Master Plan of Reclaimed Water for Salt
Creek Ranch.
81) Wilson Engineering. 1991. Master Plan of Sewerage for Salt Creek
Ranch.
82) Wilson Engineering. 1991. Master Plan of Water for Salt Creek Ranch.
83) Wilson Engineering. 1991. Urban Runoff Report for Salt Creek Ranch.
84) Wirth Associates, Inc. 1981. Site Survey and Analysis, Miguel to
Mountain Springs Grade (Jade), Archaeological Survey Report, Volume
1. Report prepared by, and on file with Wirth Associates Inc., San
Diego, California.
-37-
Also included in the record are the following studies prepared for the Salt Creek Ranch
project:
1) Draft Salt Creek Ranch Specific Planning Area Plan (March 1991).
2) Final Salt Creek Ranch Specific Planning Area Plan (November 1991).
3) East Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan.
Also included as part of the Planning Commission and City Council record are the
following:
1) Final EIR-9I-03, Salt Creek Ranch (February 1992), including all related
appendices.
2) Documentary and oral evidence presented to the Planning Commission and/or
City Council during public hearings on EIR-9I-03 and the Salt Creek Ranch SPA
Plan project.
3) Matters of common knowledge to the Planning Commission and/or City Council,
including these and all other formally adopted policies and ordinances:
a. The City of Chula Vista General Plan
b. The Zoning Ordinance of the City of Chula Vista
c. The Municipal Code of the City of Chula Vista
-38-
SAL T CREEK RANCH
DRAFT
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
IN ACCORDANCE WITH AB 3180
MARCH 1992
Proposed Insert to page 10, before the heading "Monitoring":
To mitigate the potentially significant visual impacts associated with the Upper Otay
Reservoir, the applicant is proposing the following measures:
. Implementation of the Land Alteration Standards outlined in the GDP and Chapter
5 of the SPA Plan.
. Revegetation of visible slope banks with native coastal sage scrub.
. Use of contour grading techniques as shown on the conceptual grading plan.
. Minimization of grading on the eastern portion of the site.
. Variable rear setbacks for homes as shown in Chapter 5 of the SPA Plan.
. Variable side yard separation as shown on the ridge-top layout in Chapter 5 of the
SPA Plan.
. Retaining natural rock outcroppings as shown in the parks, open spaces, and trails
section of the SPA Plan.
. Installing landscaping as a backdrop to homes.
. Naturalize grading edges and tilt rear grading lines as shown on the RidgeIine
Grading Guidelines in Chapter 5 of the SPA Plan.
. Utilize berms along visible edges as shown on the Ridgeline Grading Guidelines
in Chapter 5 of the SPA Plan.
To mitigate the potential and visual impacts associated with the EastLake Technology
Park, the applicant is proposing the following measures which wi1l mitigate these impacts to
below a level of significance:
. Provide a buffer zone along the southern edge of the property which wi1l include
a slope along both the single- and multi-family areas. The slope wi1l vary in
height (from approximately 10 to 39 feet) and width (from a minimum of 20 feet
in the multi-family area and 30 feet in the single family area, to a maximum of
150 feet at its widest in the single family area).
. The buffer shall be extensively landscaped with trees and shrubs to effectively
screen and separate housing from adjacent industrial uses.
. The buffer shall contain a 1O-foot wide meandering pedestrian/bike trail linking
the school/park site on the western edge to the Salt Creek corridor. This trail
corridor shall contain open space connections from the single-family and multi-
family areas, and link multi-family recreational amenities.
Along the northern and northwestern edge, the proposed project interfaces with the Otay
Water District reclamation facilities. Since future Salt Creek residents would be located in close
proximity to the facilities storage tanks and reclamation pond, a potentially significant visual
impact exists. To mitigate the potentially significant visual impact associated with the
reclamation facilities, the applicant is proposing the following measures:
. A slope will be placed along the northern edge which would vary in height (from
daylight at the edge up to 26 feet) and depth (from daylight at the edge up to 50
feet) to obstruct any views into this area.
. Utilization of grading techniques to prevent views from most of the homes into
the reclamation area.
. Placement of homes to take advantage of natural off-site topography to the north
which prevents views into the reclamation area.
. Utilization of landscaping and adequate rear yard setbacks to minimize views into
this area from neighborhoods 12 and 13.
Residences situated adjacent to the SDG&E power easement in Sub-area 3 would
experience visual impacts due to existing SDG&E transmission lines. Site planning measures
such as proposed grading techniques, landscaping and home orientation would minimize visual
impacts from the project to the facilities.
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM
This mitigation monitoring program was prepared for the City of Chula Vista for the Salt
Creek Ranch Specific Planning Area (SPA) Plan project to comply with AB 3180, which
requires public agencies to adopt such programs to ensure effective implementation of
mitigation measures. This monitoring program is dynamic in that it wi1l undergo changes
as additional mitigation measures are identified and additional conditions of approval are
placed on the project throughout the project approval process.
The Salt Creek Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan EIR is supplemental to the Salt
Creek Ranch Annexation/General Development Plan Pre-Zone EIR (EIR 89-3, certified in
September 1990). A mitigation monitoring program was also prepared for EIR 89-3, and
measures that have not yet been implemented have been incorporated into this updated
mitigation monitoring program.
This monitoring program wi1l serve 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
the following:
. Monitoring team qualifications
. Specific monitoring activities
. Reporting system
. Criteria for evaluating the success of the mitigation measures
The Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan project includes approximately 1200 acres ofland in the
southern foothills of San Miguel Mountain, north of EastLake Technology Park and
northwest of Upper Otay Lake currently under the jurisdiction of the County of San Diego.
The project site is located in the northern portion of the 37 square mile Eastern Territories
as defined by the City of ChuIa Vista. All but 240 acres in the extreme northeastern corner
of the project site are located within the City of Chula Vista's adopted Sphere of Influence.
Elevations on the project site range from approximately 550 feet above mean sea level
(AMSL) in the western portion of the site to over 1100 feet AMSL in the northern portion
of the property.
1
The principal components of the Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan include 2,662 residential
units, 380 acres of parks/open space, 31 acres of public facilities including two schools, a
fire station and a community purpose facility, and 36 acres of major roads on
approximately 1,197 acres. These project components are discussed in detail in the ErR
text.
The supplemental ElR environmental analysis, incorporated herein as reference, focused on
10 issues determined to be potentially significant by the City of Chula Vista. The
environmental analysis concluded that for all of the environmental issues discussed, some
of the significant and potentially significant impacts could be avoided or reduced through
implementation of recommended mitigation measures. The 10 issue areas are land use;
landform/aesthetics; hydrology; water quality; biological resources; cultural resources;
transportation and circulation; noise; public services and utilities; and offsite areas of
impact. Cumulatively adverse impacts were identified for landform/alteration and
cumulatively significant, unmitigable impacts were identified for water. With respect to the
offsite areas of impact, cumulatively significant, partially mitigable impacts were identified
for biology, specifically coastal sage scrub.
Those issue areas considered not to require further analyses beyond that discussed in EIR
89-3 include: conversion of agricultural land; geology/soils; air quality; fiscal; public
services including police protection, fire protection, schools, parks, gas and electricity;
public transit, library facilities and solid waste disposal; however, applicable mitigation
measures which require implementation during construction of the project have been
included in this program.
AB 3180 requires monitoring of only those impacts identified as significant or potentially
significant; the monitoring program for the Salt Creek Ranch project therefore addresses the
impacts associated with the issue areas identified above.
Miti~ation Monitorin!: Team
A monitoring team should be identified once the mitigation measures have been adopted as
conditions of approval by the Chula Vista City Council. Managing the team would be the
responsibility of the Mitigation Compliance Coordinator (MCC). The monitoring activities
would be accomplished by the Environmental Monitors (EMs), Environmental Specialists
2
CESs), and the MCC. While specific qualifications should be determined by the City of
Chula Vista, the monitoring team should possess the fo1lowing capabilities:
. Interpersonal, decision-making, and management ski1ls with demonstrated
experience in working under trying field circumstances;
. Knowledge of and appreciation for the general environmental attributes and
special features found in the project area;
. Knowledge of the types of environmental impacts associated with construction
of cost-effective mitigation options; and
. Excellent communication ski1ls.
The responsibilities of the MCC throughout the monitoring effort include the following:
. Overall implementation and management of the monitoring program;
. Quality control of the site-development monitoring team;
. Administration and preparation of daily logs, status reports, compliance reports
and the final construction monitoring report;
. Liaison between the City of Chula Vista, the Salt Creek Ranch developer, and
the applicant's contractors;
. Monitoring of onsite, day-to-day construction activities, including the direction
of EMs and ESs in the understanding of a1l permit conditions, site-specific
project requirements, construction schedules and environmental quality control
effort;
. Ensure contractor knowledge of and compliance with all appropriate permit
conditions;
. Review of a1l construction impact mitigations and, if need be, propose
additional mitigation;
. Have the authority to require correction of activities observed that violate project
environmental conditions or that represent unsafe or dangerous conditions;
. Maintain prompt and regular communication with the onsite EMs and ESs, and
personnel responsible for contractor performance and permit compliance.
The primary role of the Environmental Monitors is to serve as an extension of the MCC in
performing the quality control functions at the construction sites. Their responsibilities and
functions are to:
3
a) Maintain a working knowledge of the Salt Creek Ranch permit conditions,
contract documents, construction schedules and progress and any special
mitigation requirements for his or her assigned construction area;
b) Assist the MCC and Salt Creek Ranch construction contractors in coordinating
with City of Chula Vista compliance activities;
c) Observe construction activities for compliance with the City of ChuJa Vista
permit conditions; and
d) Provide frequent verbal briefings to the MCC and construction personnel, and
assist the MCC as necessary in preparing status reports.
The primary role of the Environmental Specialists is to provide expertise when
environmentally sensitive issues occur throughout the development phases of project
implementation and to provide direction for mitigation.
Prol!Tam Procedural Guidelines
Prior to any construction activities, meetings should take place between all the parties
involved to initiate the monitoring program and establish the responsibility and authority of
the participants. Mitigation measures which need to be defined in greater detail wil1 be
addressed prior to any project plan approvals in follow-up meetings designed to discuss
specific monitoring effects.
An effective reporting system must be established prior to any monitoring efforts. All
parties involved must have a clear understanding of the mitigation measures as adopted and
these mitigations must be distributed to the participants of the monitoring effort. Those that
would have a complete list of all the mitigation measures adopted by the City of Chula Vista
would include the City of ChuIa Vista, the Salt Creek Ranch developer, the MCC and the
construction crew supervisor. The MCC would distribute to each Environmental Specialist
and Environmental Monitor a specific list of mitigation measures that pertain to his or her
monitoring tasks and the appropriate time frame that these mitigations are anticipated to be
implemented. In addition to the list of mitigations, the monitors wi11 have mitigation
monitoring report (MMR) forms with each mitigation written out on the top of the form.
Below the stated mitigation measure, the form wil1 have a series of questions addressing
4
the effectiveness of the mitigation measure. The monitors shall complete the MMR and file
it with the MCC fo1Iowing their monitoring activity. The MCC wiI1 then include the
conclusions of the MMR into an interim and final comprehensive construction report to be
submitted to the City ofChuIa Vista. This report wiI1 describe the major accomplishments
of the monitoring program, summarize problems encountered in achieving the goals of the
program, evaluate solutions developed to overcome problems and provide a list of
recommendations for future monitoring programs. In addition and if appropriate, each
EM, and/or ES wiI1 be required to fi1I out and submit a daily log report to the MCC. The
daily log report wiI1 be used to record and account for the monitoring activities of the
monitor. Weekly/monthly status reports, as detennined appropriate, wiI1 be generated from
the daily logs and compliance reports and will include supplemental material (i.e.,
memoranda, telephone logs, letters). This type of feedback is essential for the City of
Chula Vista to confonn the implementation and effectiveness of the mitigation measures
imposed on the project.
Actions in Case of Non-compliance
There are generally three separate categories of non-compliance associated with the adopted
conditions of approval:
. Non-compliance requiring an immediate halt to a specific task or piece of
equipment.
. Infraction that initiates an immediate corrective action (no work or task delay).
. Infraction that does not warrant immediate corrective action and results in no
work or task delay.
In a1I three cases, the MCC would notify the Salt Creek Ranch contractor and the City of
Chula Vista, and an MMR would be filed with the MCC on a daily basis.
There are a number of options the City of Chula Vista may use to enforce this program
should non-compliance continue. Some methods commonly used by other lead agencies
include "stop work" orders; fines and penalties (civil); restitution; pennit revocations;
citations; and injunctions. It is essential that all parties involved in the program understand
the authority and responsibility of the onsite monitors. Decisions regarding actions in case
of non-compliance are the responsibility of the City of Chula Vista.
5
The following text includes a summary of the project impacts, and a list of all the associated
mitigation measures. The monitoring efforts necessary to ensure that the mitigation
measures are properly implemented are incorporated into the measures. All the mitigation
measures identified in the EIR are anticipated to be translated into conditions of project
approva1. In addition, once the project has been approved and prior to its implementation,
the mitigation measures shall be further detailed.
SUMMARY OF PROJECT IMPACTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES
The following text includes a summary of the project impacts, a list of all the associated
mitigation measures and the monitoring efforts necessary to ensure that the measures are
properly implemented. All the mitigation measures identified in the EIR are recommended
to be translated into conditions of project approval and are stated herein in language
appropriate for such conditions. In addition, once the Salt Creek Ranch project has been
approved and during various stages of implementation, the mitigation measures shall be
further detailed by the designated monitors, City of ChuJa Vista, and the applicant.
Land Use
SummarY of Imnacts
Potentially significant land use impacts involve compatibility and potential health impacts
relative to use of the SDG&E easement as a trail, and the project's inconsistency with the
General Plan with respect to the provision of affordable housing.
Miti!!ation Measures
. The potential land use compatibility impacts relative to use of the SDG&E
easement as a trail shall be mitigated by coordination with SDG&E during all
phases of future planning. The applicant shaH obtain a written agreement with
SDG&E to gain pennission to use the easements. The agreement shall discuss
relevant issues including pennissibIe uses, maintenance, and liability. This
agreement shall be obtained prior to tentative map approval.
. To mitigate potential health impacts associated with the proximity of residential
and trail uses to the high voltage transmission line, the applicant shaH puH
6
houses back away from the easement by a conservative distance (no standards
are available) and provide buyers of homes adjacent to the easement with a
white paper informing them of the current controversy concerning
electromagnetic fields, the applicant should also either move the proposed trail
away from the easement or post signs at regular intervals in both English and
Spanish alerting trail users of the potential risks.
. With respect to the potential impacts associated with provision of affordable
housing, the project applicant's affordable housing program shall be subject to
review and approval by the Planning Commission concurrent with SPA plan
approval.
The program shall be consistent with the following principles:
As determined by the 1991 Housing Element revisions, applicant will continue
to explore various methods to devote ten percent (10%) of the Salt Creek Ranch
units to affordable housing.
As provided by the Housing Element, the City of Chula Vista shall continue to
assist the applicant to fulfill the Housing Element affordable housing policy
through the following actions:
Seek State and Federal subsidies for moderate and low income housing.
(ChuJa Vista Housing Element, Part 2, page 24, 1985).
Consider the use of density bonuses consistent with State law. (Chula Vista
Housing Element, Part 2, page 24, 1985).
Consider exploration of experimental planning, design and development
techniques and standards to reduce the cost of providing affordable
housing. (Chula Vista Housing Element, Part 2, 1985).
The applicant will prepare and implement an affirmative fair marketing program
(Chula Vista Housing Element, Part 2, 1985), including a marketing plan to
attract qualified buyers for non-market rate housing.
7
Should it become infeasible, impractical or inappropriate to provide affordable
housing as determined by the pending Housing Element revisions, the applicant
and the City shall consider alternative methods of achieving affordable housing
opportunities including, but not limited to the following:
Land Set Aside: An equitable donation of a building site which could be
made available to the County Housing Authority or other non-profit entity to
construct affordable housing.
Off-Site Proiects: Construction of an affordable housing project at an off-
site location, including consideration of renewal, rehabilitation and
preservation projects, and the provision of homeless assistance program.
In-Lieu Contributions: In-lieu contributions to be used to provide assistance
to other identified affordable housing efforts. The contribution shall be
evaluated to ensure its adequacy in relation to achieving assistance
opportunities commensurate to the level of the original project requirement
The applicant wi11 actively explore the participation of. South County
jurisdictions in non-profit housing agencies in the development, ownership and
management of affordable housing projects. The applicant wi1l also assist these
non-profit efforts to increase their ability to secure additional funding resources
to develop quality affordable housing.
Monitorin~
Mitigation monitoring of the above measures shall occur by appropriate City review and
approval as dictated in each measure (i.e., City Planning review and acceptance prior to
tentative map approval). The applicant shall provide a copy of the written agreement from
SDG&E to the City Planning Department prior to tentative map approva1. The applicant's
affordable housing program shaH be subject to review and approval by the Planning
Commission as a condition of project approval.
8
Landform! Aesthetics
SummarY of Impacts
Development of Salt Creek Ranch wi1l permanently alter the existing landform, rural
character, and visual quality of the project site. Potentially significant visual impacts
anticipated with the development of Salt Creek Ranch include impacts to residents to the
south and southwest of the project site, impacts to Chula Vista Greenbelt users including
the Upper Otay Reservoir, impacts to scenic highway users, and offsite visual impacts
associated with EastLake Technology Park, the Otay Water District reclamation facilities,
and the Upper Otay Reservoir.
Mitie:ation Measures
Project development will require the implementation of all design guidelines concurrent
with the SPA Plan and subject to further review and approval by the Design Review
Committee (DRC). The guidelines which are contained within the SPA Plan are
summarized below:
. Gradin&: In addition to incorporation of the requirements of the ChuJa Vista
Municipal Code and other applicable city policies, graded areas are to be
contoured to blend with natural landform characteristics and minimize
disruption of the natural topography. A balance between cut and fin shall be
maintained, and all grading and drainage system plans shan be prepared under
the direction of a licensed civil engineer. Final grading plans shall be reviewed
by the City of ChuIa Vista Planning Department to determine whether large cut
and fin slopes would impact views of open space areas from residences and/or
scenic highways, and areas of high sensitivity such as the ridgeline and canyons
in Sub-area 3 shall be subject to further review by the DRC.
. Landscape: Plant materials shall be organized to provide buffering, transition,
and slope stabilization between land uses and streets, and between development
and open space areas. Manufactured slopes adjacent to habitat enhancement
areas shan be landscaped with vegetation consistent with the Habitat
Enhancement Plan. Landscaping and irrigation standards shall conform with
9
the City of Chula Vista Landscaping Manual, subject to further review and
approval by the DRC.
. Scenic Hi ~hways: In accordance with the design guidelines, all homes abutting
the scenic highways (East H Street and Hunte Parkway) shall be set back from
the right-of-way a variable distance and landscaping sha1l be intensified to
buffer views of buildings. Any long distance views available from the scenic
highway shall be protected, and a1l signs within the viewshed of the scenic
highway shall be subject to further review by the DRC.
Monitorin~
The City of Chula Vista Design Review Committee wi11 review, approve, and monitor all
project design guidelines, including grading, landscaping, fencing, signing, and scenic
highway plans during all phases of development.
Geology/Soils
SummarY of Impacts
Geotechnical constraints to development onsite include difficulty in rock excavation; soil
and topsoil removal; and slope instability. Seismic ground acceleration potential exists,
typical of the area.
Miti~ation Measures
The fo1lowing measure is in reference to detailed recommendations from the GeoSoiIs
February 1988 and August 1988 reports. The reports are on file at the City Planning and
Engineering Departments.
. Conclusions and recommendations of the February 1988 and August 1988
GeoSoils reports, pages 23 through 42, and 24 through 39, respectively, shall
be adhered to in accordance with City procedures, subject to approval of the
City Engineer prior to any tentative map approvals. Recommendations therein
cover the fo1lowing topics, actions and potential impacts: ripping, soil
removals, slope stability/grading, erosion control, sub-surface water control,
10
earthwork grading and balancing. soil expansion, slope design, grading
guidelines, foundation recommendations, retaining waH design, graded slope
maintenance and planting, and procedures for grading plan review.
Monitorin~
Implementation of the above geotechnical measure sha11 be verified by City review of future
tentative maps, which are subject to City Engineer approva1. Subsequent geotechnical
work shaH delineate specific grading and similar onsite monitoring activities to be
conducted during project grading and construction by a qualified geologist.
Hydrology
SummaI)' of Impacts
The increase in impervious surface as a result of the proposed project would increase
runoff flow rates downstream.
Miti!!ation Measures
To ensure that there are no hydrologic impacts, the foHowing measures shaH be
implemented:
. For Basin A, development drainage shaH be routed to road crossing points for
outlet into the natural channel flow. Structure types to convey stream flows
under access roads would be determined prior to Final Map approval.
. Within Basin B, there are two Salt Creek crossing points, East H Street and a
northern access road. The East H Street crossing shaH incorporate a suitable
drainage structure which wiU accommodate the proposed trail system. The type
and sizing of this drainage system shaH be determined prior to Final Map
approva1. The northern structure shaH be determined prior to Final Map
approval. Developed areas would be drained via storm drain systems to outlet
points adjacent to Salt Creek.
11
Monitorine-
.
A low flow pump diversion system will be constructed to transport dry weather
flows out of Basin A (Upper Otay Lake Basin) and discharge them into
Basin B (Salt Creek Basin). This low flow diversion system will be designed
for 137 gpm.
.
A stonn drain system shaH be constructed within future Lane A venue to convey
runoff within Basic C to existing facilities constructed by the EastLake I project.
The type of sizing of this system would be detennined prior to Final Map
approva1.
.
Drainage facilities and energy dissipators shan be constructed in accordance
with the approved hydraulic analysis and shan be in place and functioning prior
to completion of the grading operation.
.
Development of the subject project must comply with an applicable regulations
established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EP A) as set
forth in the National PoHutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) pennit
requirements for urban runoff and stonnwater discharge.
Implementation of the above measures shall be guaranteed by City review of the required
analysis and drainage plans, which are subject to the City Engineer's and City Landscape
Architect's approval prior to tentative map submittal acceptance. The City will ensure
confonnance with all applicable City flood control, Otay Water District and State Regional
Water Quality Control Board regulations prior to issuance of grading pennits. Detailed
monitoring (field) measures for the construction period shan be delineated at the
subdivision leve1.
Water Quality
SummarY of Impacts
Project development would create potential water quality impacts to downstream areas and
the adjacent Upper and Lower Otay Reservoir.
12
Miti!!ation Measures
. The project shaH be subject to review and approval by the State Department of
Health Services (DHS). The project shall implement mitigation measures as set
by DHS prior to issuance of any grading permit.
. Prior to or concurrent with Final Map approval, a diversion ditch plan, or other
acceptable plan to handle drainage to the Gtay Drainage Basin, sha11 be prepared
and approved by the City of Chula Vista and DHS. The plan shall analyze the
possibility of sewage system failures; effects of increased levels of nutrients
salts and pesticides from landscaping and irrigation; and effects of petroleum
products from surface street runoff. Additional environmental analysis may be
required based on the specific drainage ditch or other plans. Design of these
plans shall also consider providing additional capacity for concurrent or future
development.
. The project applicant shall conduct an onsite mitigation monitoring program to
establish baseline data for runoff from the project site. This monitoring
program wil1 be continued until 400 units in the sub-basin have been
constructed in the sub-basin.
. The project proponent shan submit a erosion control plan prepared by a
registered civil engineer and a registered landscape architect in accordance with
City of Chula Vista design standards. The plan shall be approved prior to
issuance of grading permits and shan include placement of sandbags, temporary
sediment basins, and an erosion control maintenance plan.
. The project proponent shall submit a storm drain plan prepared by a registered
civil engineer in accordance with City of Chula Vista design standards. The
plan must be approved prior to the issuance of grading permits and shall include
permanent erosion control facilities.
. Development of the subject project must comply with all applicable regulations
established by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) as set
forth in the National PoHutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit
requirements for urban runoff and storm water discharge.
13
Monitorin~
Mitigation monitoring of the above measures shaH occur by appropriate City staff review
and approva1. Specific, onsite field mitigation monitoring requirements and activities shaH
be established prior to any onsite grading pennits or tentative map approvals.
Biological Resources
SummarY of Imoacts
Project development wi1l significantly and directly impact riparian wetlands, native
grassland and coastal sage scrub habitat, and the California gnatcatcher and cactus wren,
both sensitive species. Construction practices and long-tenn urban activities also present
secondary threats to adjacent and/or sensitive non-developed areas.
Miti~ation Measures
. The project applicant shall comply with the measures outlined in the Habitat
Enhancement Plan prepared for the Salt Creek Ranch project during all stages of
development.
. A spring (May-June) survey of the native grassland habitat onsite (Subarea 3)
shaH be conducted to determine the presence/absence and abundance of
sensitive plant species that could be expected to occur in this habitat prior to
approval of grading plans. The sensitivity of the loss of native grassland habitat
shall be detennined after the results of this survey are provided to City staff.
. The developer shall agree to participate in a regional multi-species coastal sage
scrub conservation plan. If, prior to approval of the grading plan for areas lOa,
JOb, and 11 (which are identified as the three easternmost "L" areas on
Figure R-l of the Final EIR), an acceptable off-site regional wildlife corridor
linking San Miguel Mountain with the Upper Otay Reservoir has not been
adopted as part of the conservation plan, then development of the 17 acre
R-L development area in the eastem portion of the property shall not occur and
a reconfiguration of the northeastern R-L area to provide a wider open space
area for a regional wildlife corridor shaH be implemented. The width of the
14
open space area shall be sufficient to ensure long-term viability of the wildlife
corridor. This condition shall also be applied to conditions of the Tentative
Subdivision Map.
. Selective grading shall be required and enforced, i.e., only areas immediately
subject to development should be graded.
. Grading shan be prohibited during the rainy season (November through
March).
. Erosion prevention measures such as fences, hay bales, and/or detention basins
shall be onsite during development and in place prior to construction.
. Manufactured slopes and disturbed grassland in open space areas shan be
revegetated with native scrub species found in the area. Revegetation of these
areas would have me benefits of potentially providing habitat for the California
black-tailed gnatcatcher, increasing the quality of the riparian buffer in selected
areas, and reducing me probability of nonnative landscaping materials invading
natural habitats. Species suitable for this revegetation include the following:
Artemisia californica
Eriogonum fasciculatwn
Lotus scoparius
Salvia mellifera
Salvia apiaoo
Haplopappus venetus
Eschscholzia californica
Lupinus spp.
California Sagebrush
Flat-topped Buckwheat
Deerweed
Black Sage
White Sage
Goldenbush
California Poppy
Lupine
. The coastal sage scrub revegetation areas shan be effectively hydroseeded,
followed by a tackified straw mulch. Materials and seed mixes may be changed
only with me approval of the project bioIogist/horticulturist.
. This habitat shall be irrigated as needed for the first year to accelerate
establishment and coverage. The hydro seeding shall be completed in the
summer, if possible, so as to establish cover prior to the rainy season. A
15
number of annual species are included in the hydroseed mixture (California
poppy and lupines) to provide color to the slopes. The species should reseed
themselves yearly.
General Recommendations
Implementation of the following recommendations wil1 buffer and protect sensitive wetland
and upland habitats and the wildlife therein, and prevent further degradation of the habitat
during and after the construction process.
Construction Practices: Additional loss of habitat could occur from the use of heavy
equipment in wetland areas, on- and offsite. Nonsensitive construction practices resulting
in additional impacts to wetland vegetation would increase the total wetland impact acreage,
and, ultimately, the amount of mitigation required. Impacts to wetland vegetation adjacent
to the grading areas would be reduced by adherence to certain construction practices, as
outlined below.
. Heavy equipment and construction activities shall be restricted to the grading
areas to the greatest degree possible in order to reduce direct impacts to wetland
habitat. Construction of cut and fin slopes, and equipment used for this
construction, wi1l be kept within the limits of grading. Prohibited activities in
the wetland habitat include staging areas, equipment access, and disposal or
temporary placement of excess fil1. Construction limits and wetland habitat
shall be flagged by a qualified biologist. Construction activities shall be
monitored by an onsite inspector to ensure that grading activities do not affect
additional acreage. Any unauthorized impacts cause by construction operations
would require that the contractor replace all habitat to its original condition, with
wetland habitat potentially being restored at greater that a 1: 1 ratio.
. Fueling of equipment shall not occur in any portion of the site near the
intermittent stream.
. Areas designated as natural open space shall not be grubbed, cleared, or graded,
but shall be left in their natural state.
16
. To ensure that contractors are fuUy aware of specific restrictions of the project,
such as staging areas, limits of fiU, no vehicle zones, and other appropriate
regulations, information shaU be clearly shown on the construction plans.
Contractors shaU be fuUy aware of the sensitivities and restrictions prior to
bidding.
Open Space: The primary means of mitigating significant impacts to biological resources is
the preservation of a system of open space which encompasses the most valuable habitat or
sensitive species onsite. Designation of open space is an initial step in preservation of the
sensitive resources therein. The integrity of open space must also be preserved through
adherence to responsible construction practices, as outlined above, and the exclusion of
certain post-construction activities.
The following measures are provided to minimize the effects of the development in natural
open space areas subsequent to construction activities:
. In the event that a fire or fueIbreak is deemed necessary, plant species used in
this area shaU be noninvasive, so as to reduce impacts to remaining native
vegetation. Suitable species from a biological standpoint would be low
growing, moderately fire-retardant, native species such as prostrate coyote bush
(Baccharis pilularis var. pilularis).
. No clearing of brush shall be allowed outside the fire or fuelbreak, and no
fuelbreak clearing will be allowed in sensitive habitat areas. In general, the
limits of the fueIbreak will be measured from the building pads. The width of
the fuelbreak may be reduced by the use of low-growing, fire-retardant species
(see above measure).
. Plants in riparian and/or natural areas within the project's boundaries shaU not
be trimmed or cleared for aesthetic purposes.
. Revegetation of cut slopes external and/or adjacent to natural open space shall
be accomplished with native plant species which presently occur onsite or are
typical for the area. Suitable species include California sagebrush (Artemisia
californica), flat-top buckwheat (Eriogonumfasciculatum ssp.fasciculatum),
black sage (Salvia mellifera), and San Diego sunflower (Viguiera laciniata). If
17
this area is hydro seeded, measures shall be taken to ensure the exclusion of
nonnative, weedy species from the mixture.
. Fencing shall be installed as feasible and acceptable to the City around the
natural open space area to prevent adverse impacts to biological resources from
domestic pets and human activity. An alternative would be the planting of
barrier plant species that would discourage pedestrian activity into open space
areas. Nonnative species would not be acceptable as barrier plantings within
open space areas. No active uses shall be planned in the open space easements,
including building structures or construction of trails through this area.
. Landscaping around buildings shaH utilize noninvasive exotic species or
preferably, native plant species found in the area. Species present onsite, such
as desert elderberry (Sambucus mexicana) and California buckwheat, would be
suitable for planting.
. The City of Chula Vista shall assure the long-term conservation of remaining
native habitat onsite (wetlands and uplands) by dedicating these areas as part of
a natural open space easement. The City shall place an open space easement in
this acreage which would eliminate future building activity and, in effect, set
this area aside for the preservation of wildlife. Additional trails or recreational
facilities which would promote pedestrian activity in open space areas at the
expense of wildlife shall not be constructed.
Monitorine:
Implementation of the above measures shaH be verified by City review and approval of the
tentative and [mal maps, habitat enhancement plan, specific mitigation plan, landscape plan,
and construction plans and by monitoring by the City's environmental consultant. The
native grassland spring survey shall be completed by the applicant's biological consultant
prior to grading plan approval. Detailed field monitoring measures for the construction
period shall be delineated at the subdivision level and shall be performed by the City's
environmental consultant.
18
Cultural Resources
Summary of Impacts
Development of Salt Creek Ranch will directly impact 16 of the 18 important archaeological
and historical sites within the project area. Portions of six of those sites, and one additional
site are also at risk of indirect impacts due to project development. The site also possesses
a high potential for the existence of significant paleontological resources.
Miti!!ation Measures
. Mitigation of impacts for important cultural resources will be achieved through
either avoidance or by a data recovery program. A voidance could include
capping sites with 2 feet of fill and incorporating them into the Salt Creek Park
System (ChuIa Vista Greenbelt).
. If avoidance of important prehistoric archaeological resources cannot be
achieved, a data recovery program to mitigate development impacts shall be
conducted, including, where necessary, surface collection and mapping of
artifacts, a phased data recovery program, and monitoring. This phased
approach shall employ a random sample in conjunction with a focused
inventory fOf features (Le., hearths). The data recovery program shall be in
accordance with a regional approach for all prehistoric sites within Salt Creek
Ranch, Salt Creek I and EastLake III, thereby a110wing a comprehensive
understanding for these sites. This regional understanding would also be in
agreement with the Bonita-Miguel Archaeological District within which CA-
SDi-4,530/W-643 falls.
. The data recovery shall follow the Advisory Council's guidelines as defined
within Treatment of Archaeological Properties, A Handbook (ACHP 1980).
The treatment plan sha11 be oriented to address local and regional research
questions and clearly identify the methods to be used to address the research
questions. Research questions to be addressed are listed in ERCE's June 1989
Salt Creek Ranch Cultural Resource Evaluation on file at the City of ChuIa Vista
Planning Department.
19
. To ensure that potentially important historic archaeological resources assumed
to be present at the eight locales listed above are not adversely affected, a
program to include monitoring of grading activities with the possibility of data
recovery is recommended. This program shall provide for excavation,
recording and collection of resources if significant features, such as privies or
trash deposits, are located during grading. This program shall include analysis
of recovered artifacts in relation to an approved research design and a report of
findings.
. Indirect impacts may occur to four historic sites located adjacent and exterior to
the project boundary (H-ll, H-I5, H-I6, H-I7). Fencing of project
boundaries and strict avoidance of off-site impacts in these areas shall occur.
. Prior to issuance of a mass-grading permit the developer shall present a letter to
the City of Chula Vista indicating that a qualified paleontologist has been
retained to carry out resource mitigation. (A qualified paleontologist is defined
as an individual with an MS or PhD in paleontology or geology who is familiar
with paleontological procedures and techniques.
. A qualified paleontologist and archaeologist shall be at the pre-grade meeting to
consult with the grading and excavation contractors.
. A paleontological monitor shall be onsite at all times during the original cutting
or previously undisturbed sediments of the Otay Formation to inspect cuts for
contained fossils (the Otay Formation occurs generally above 680 feet
elevation). The Sweetwater Formation shall be monitored on a half-time basis.
Periodic inspections of cuts involving the Santiago Peak Volcanics shall be
conducted in accordance with recommendations of the qualified paleontologist.
(A paleontological monitor is defined as an individual who has experience in the
collection and salvage of fossil materials. The paleontological monitor should
work under the direction of a qualified paleontologist.)
. In the event that well-preserved fossils are discovered, the paleontologist (or
paleontological monitor) shall be allowed to temporarily direct, divert, or halt
grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely manner. Because of the
20
potential for the recovering of smal1 fossil remains such as isolated mammal
teeth, it may be necessary to set up a screen-washing operation on the site.
. Fossil remains col1ected during any salvage program shal1 be cleaned, sorted,
and cataloged and then with the owner's permission, deposited in a scientific
institution with paleontological col1ections such as the San Diego Natural
History Museum.
Monitorin~
A qualified archaeologist and a qualified paleontologist shall be retained onsite to monitor
and/or perform the mitigation measures outlined above. The developer shall present a letter
to the City of ChuJa Vista as verification of the above prior to issuance of a grading permit.
Transportation and Circulation
SummarY of ImDacts
The Salt Creek Ranch project will generate approximately 31,290 new daily vehicle trips
with 2,777 trips expected during the morning peak hour and 2,986 trips expected during
the afternoon peak hour.
Miti!!ation Measures
Improvements necessary as a result of Salt Creek Ranch project implementation include:
Scenario 1 (with Phase I and Proctor Vallev Road Unpaved)
. The project applicant will construct East "H" Street through the project to
ultimate four-lane major street standards, consistent with the City of Chula Vista
design criteria.
. The project applicant wi1l construct Hunte Parkway to ultimate four-lane major
street standards through the project and offsite south to Telegraph Canyon
Road, consistent with the City of Chula Vista design criteria.
21
. The project applicant wil1 construct Lane A venue as a Class II collector from
East "H" Street to meet existing improvements at its current tenninals in the East
Lake Business Park, consistent with the City of ChuIa Vista's design criteria.
. At the discretion of the City Traffic Engineer, the project applicant wil1 install
traffic signals or bond for future installation at the following intersections:
East "H" Street/Lane Avenue
East "H" Street/Hunte Parkway
Lane A venuetrelegraph Canyon Road
Hunte Parkwayffelegraph Canyon Road
. The project applicant wi1l implement transportation demand management
strategies, including provisions of transit service and bus stops in order to
reduce the peak hour demand on the street network.
. Reduce the development potential of Phase 1 by 120 dwel1ing units. This
reduction will result in an acceptable level of service (LOS D) of the intersection
of East "H" Street and Hidden Vista Drive.
. The project applicant wil1 construct a two-lane roadway between Salt Creek 1
and Salt Creek Ranch to connect East "H" Street
Scenario 2 (with Phase I. II. and III and State Route 125)
. The project applicant will implement all the measures described under Scenario
1 previously.
. The project applicant wil1 construct State Route 125 as a four-lane roadway
between East "H" Street and State Route 54 with enhanced geometrics at the
intersections.
Monitorin~
The project's participation in the ECVTPP and the appropriate traffic mitigation, as required
by the above measures, shall be confinned by City review of subsequent SPA Plan and
22
other applications. Traffic monitoring occurs on a citywide basis as dictated by the City
Traffic Engineer; it is recommended that critical intersections identified in this EIR be
monitored at least twice per year and preferably more frequently in order to determine
specific implementation schedules of required improvements and to identify any other
potential problem areas.
Noise
Summary of Impacts
Noise modeling of Salt Creek Ranch buildout conditions indicated that noise levels wi1l
exceed 70 dBA Ldn in some portions of the project area and wi1l exceed the 65 dBA Ldn
standard in several areas. Noise levels in excess of 65 dBA Ldn in outdoor living spaces
are considered significant and require mitigation. In addition, multifamily residences
located in an area on the project site where the future exterior noise level is expected to
exceed 60 dBA Ldn will require an interior acoustical analysis.
Miti2:ation Measures
. The noise impact on the residences along East "H" Street roadway segments
sha11 be mitigated by the placement of a solid wall or a wall/berm combination
on the building pads at the top of the slopes adjacent to East "H" Street. The
wa11s must be of solid masonry construction with a material weight of at least
3.5 pounds per square foot which would not a110w any air spaces along their
entire length and sha11 be constructed by the applicant prior to first occupancy
approval.
. Each noise wall or walVberm combination shall be placed on the building pads
at the top of the slope between the residences and the roadway and shall be 5
feet high. The end of each noise wa11 must wrap around the building pad
enough to block the line of sight from all points in the exterior living space to
any portion of the impacting roadway.
. Even with the incorporation of the above mitigation measures, exterior noise
level under buildout conditions wi11 continue to exceed 60 dBA Ldn on portions
of the project site. Therefore, in accordance with the standards set by Title 24,
23
an interior acoustical study will be required for all multi-family units proposed
for the site. The applicant shaH provide the City verification that the units
comply with the Title 24 standards prior to issuance of building permits.
Possible mitigation measures to reduce interior noise levels below the
45 dBA Ldn interior noise standard may include, but are not restricted to,
mechanical ventilation and closed window conditions.
Monitorin~
A qualified acoustical engineer shaH conduct the noise analysis to the satisfaction of the
City of Chula Vista prior to occupancy, to ensure noise levels are within the City's
thresholds. The recommendations of these noise studies shall be incorporated into the final
project design where applicable.
Air Quality
SummarY of Impacts
Project traffic wi1l contribute to cumulatively significant regional air quality impacts.
Because the project was not incorporated into regional growth forecasts and air quality
attainment plans, project emissions wi1l constitute a cumulative impact contribution.
Project traffic wi1l contribute to cumulatively significant local air quality impacts on four
street segments, projected to operate at an unacceptable level (LOS D or worse) under
future cumulative traffic conditions. Local short-term air quality impacts will result from
grading activities and construction equipment.
Miti~ation Measures
The project will incorporate traffic flow improvements (e.g., road construction), and will
identify bicycle routes and bus stops at the SPA Plan and subsequent stages of planning.
Most intersections affected by the project would be maintained at LOS C or better, although
four street segments would operate at LOS D or worse.
The foHowing measures shaH be adhered to, subject to approval by the City, to reduce
short-term poHutant emissions:
24
. Heavy-duty construction equipment with modified combustion/fuel injection
systems for emissions control shaH be utilized during grading and construction.
. Watering or other dust palliatives shall be used to reduce fugitive dust;
emissions reductions of about 50 percent can be realized by implementation of
these measures.
. Disturbed areas shall be hydroseeded, landscaped, or developed as soon as
possible and as directed by the City to reduce dust generation.
. Trucks hauling fill material shall be properly covered.
. A 20 mile-per-hour speed limit shall be enforced on unpaved surfaces.
Monitorim!
The required activities and use of equipment shall be monitored by the City's environmental
consultant on an irregular basis. The monitor will confirm, via the mitigation monitoring
report, that appropriate equipment is used; that watering occurs; that landscaping occurs
immediately after grading completion; that trucks are covered; and that speed limits onsite
are enforced. Implementation of traffic flow improvements and bicycle routes and bus
stops shall be confirmed by City review of SPA Plan and tentative maps, subject to City
approval.
Public Services/Utilities
Summary of Impacts
The project will create an increase in demand for public services including water, sewer,
police, fire protection, schools, parks/recreation, public transit, and library services. The
project will also create an increase in demand and impact on utilities and non-renewable
energy resources such as gas and electric service.
25
Water
Miti!!ation Measures
. Prior to approval of Final Map, the Master Plan of Water for Salt Creek Ranch
shall be approved by the City Engineer and OWD. Further, this plan shall be
revised to include a discussion of implementation and phasing, and participation
in the water allocation program and TSF financing for this project and other
projects in the OWD Master Plan service area.
. The exact locations for the proposed pump station and 3 million gallon reservoir
to serve the 1296 Zone shall be determined priorto approval of Final Map.
. Prior to issuance of building permits, the project site shall either be annexed by
the OWD into Improvement District No. 22, or a new improvement district shall
be established for the project area. In addition, the project developer shall
obtain written verification from OWD at each phase of development that the tract
or parcel will be provided adequate water service.
. The developer shall participate in whatever water conservation, no net increase
in water consumption, or fee off-set program the City of Chula Vista has in
effect at the time of building permit issuance.
. The project proponents shall, if feasible, negotiate an agreement with OWD to
commit to use of reclaimed water at the earliest possible date so that OWD can
ensure that an adequate supply is available. If such an agreement is pursued, all
documentation shall be subject to site-specific environmental analysis, and shall
confonn to the applicable regulations of the City of ChuIa Vista, Regional Water
Quality Control Board and the State Department of Health.
. Water conservation measures for onsite landscaping and for maintenance of
roadside vegetation shall be created and implemented by the project proponent,
in coordination with the City Public Works Department and in consultation with
OWD or other qualified water agency/organization. Conservation measures are
recommended by the State Resources Agency Department of Water Resources,
and include but are not limited to planting of drought tolerant vegetation and the
26
use of irrigation systems which minimize runoff and evaporation loss (see also
following measure).
. The following water conservation measures should be provided; implementation
shall be approved prior to issuance of certificates of use and occupancy;
a) Low-flush toilets (Section 17921.3, Health and Safety code).
b) Low-flush showers and faucets (California Administrative Code, Title 24,
Par 6, Article 1, TIO-1406F).
c) Insulation of hot water lines in water recirculating systems (California
Energy Commission).
Monitorin~
The developer shall obtain a will-serve letter from OWD prior to the issuance of building
permits for each phase of development. The Master Plan for Water and Reclaimed Water,
and the Water Conservation Plan shall be approved by the City and OWD prior to Final
Map approval. Water conservation measures shall be implemented prior to the issuance of
use and occupancy permits.
Wastewater
Miti~ation Measures
. Prior to approval of Final Map, the Master Plan of Sewerage for Salt Creek
Ranch shall be approved by the City Engineer. Further, this plan shall be
revised to include a discussion of funding and implementation/phasing in
relation to this project and other associated project's phasing in the area.
. Interim and ultimate capacity in the Telegraph Canyon Interceptor shall be
determined prior to approval of Final Map.
. Ultimate capacity of the Salt Creek Interceptor shall be determined prior to
approval of Final Map.
27
. A storm water diversion plan shall be prepared that wil1 protect the Upper and
Lower Glay reservoirs from sewage contamination, as discussed in Section 3.4
of the EIR; Water Quality.
. The project shall be subject to payment of waste water development fees (to
fund trunk sewer and other upgrades) or equivalent proponionate facility
financing mechanism identified by the City, when adopted. Payment shaH
occur prior to issuance of building permits or earlier.
Monitorin!!
The Wastewater Master Plan shall be approved by the City prior to the approval of the Final
Map. The project applicant shaH pay wastewater development fees (or an equivalent
financing mechanism identified by City) prior to the issuance of building permits.
Police Protection
Miti!!ation Measures
. The project is subject to adherence to City threshold standards and criteria for
police protection service. The project applicant shall contribute to the General
Fund.
Monitorin~
The City shall ensure that the police threshold standards would be met prior to the issuance
of building permits.
Fire Protection
Miti!!ation Measures
. Prior to approval of the project SPA Plan, the fire station location for CV#4
shall be approved by the CVFD.
28
. The project shaH adhere to General Plan threshold standards and criteria for fire
protection service.
MonitorinL:
The fire station site sha11 be approval by the CVFD prior to Final Map approval. The City
shall ensure that the fire protection threshold standards would be met prior to the issuance
of building pennits.
Schools
MitiL:ation Measures
. The project shall adhere to General Plan threshold criteria regarding school
facilities and services.
. Prior to Final Map approval, the project proponent shall provide documentation
confirming elementary school site locations and CVCSD approval of school
locations on Salt Creek Ranch. This approval shall entail site location, size and
configuration of schools, with provisions for access and pedestrian safety to the
satisfaction of CVCSD. Funding shall also be addressed and confirmed in
accordance with CVCSD procedures.
. Prior to Final Map approval, the project proponent shall provide documentation
to the City confirming satisfaction of SUHSD facility funding requirements to
offset Salt Creek Ranch student generation impacts. Funding would likely be
satisfied via formulation of a Mello Roos CFD or other means acceptable to
SUHSD.
. Prior to issuance of any building pennits on Salt Creek Ranch, the proponent
shall obtain written verification from CVCSD and SUHSD (wil1-serve letters)
that adequate school facilities and associated financing wil1 be provided for
project generated students.
29
Monitorin~
The City shaH ensure that the school threshold standards would be met prior to the issuance
of building permits. Mitigation monitoring shaH occur as dictated in each mitigation
measure above.
Parks, Recreation and Open Space
Mitie-ation Measures
. The project sha1l adhere to General Plan Threshold Standards.
. The project shaH comply with the City Local Park Code requirements.
. The project SPA Plan shall further define the boundaries, acreage and manner
of open space preservation (e.g. dedicated open space; preservation easements)
on the Salt Creek Ranch property in a form and manner acceptable to the City
Parks and Recreation Department and Planning Department.
Monitorin~
The City Parks Department shall ensure that the park threshold standards and Local Park
Code requirements would be met and that adequate open space preservation would be
provided prior to Final Map approval.
Gas, Electricity, Energy
Miti~ation Measures
. The project shaH, to the extent feasible and to the satisfaction of the City,
provide the foHowing:
Encourage the use of public transit by providing bus loading zones at key
locations onsite; and facilitate non-vehicular travel by incorporating bicycle
and pedestrian trails on site.
30
Implement efficient circulation systems including phased traffic control
devices.
Adhere to updated Title 24 building construction and design standards.
Insta1llandscaping that provides afternoon shade, reduces glare, encourages
summer breezes, discourages winter breezes.
Minimize reflective and heat absorbing landscapes.
Reserve solar access and implement passive solar systems.
Develop dwellings on sma1llots to decrease indoor and outdoor heating and
lighting requirements.
Install energy efficient appliances in residential developments.
Limit strict lighting and install energy efficient lights.
Demonstrate energy conservation practices.
Use appropriate building design, orientation, landscaping and materials to
maximize passive solar heating and cooling, and construct energy-efficient
structures, subject to approval of the DRC, Building and Housing
Department, and Planning Department.
. The recreational uses proposed for the SDG&E easement in the site's northeast;
uses shall be subject to the approval of the City and SDG&E.
Monitorin~
The project applicant shall demonstrate adherence to the energy conservation practices
delineated above to the satisfaction of the City prior to Precise Plan approval; provision of
the bus loading zones, trails, and other design practices shall be approval at the tentative
map level while lighting systems, appliances, and solar energy systems shall be approved
prior to issuance of certificates of use and occupancy. The recreational uses in the SDG&E
easement shall be approved by the City and SDG&E prior to Final Map approval.
Public Transit
Miti~ation Measures
. Prior to final site plan approval, the developer shaH consult with City Planning
and City Transit staff regarding location of transit facilities (i.e., bus stops)
31
onsite. Should there be a need for such facilities, site design shaH provide for
said facilities, subject to review and approval by the City.
Monitorin~
Monitoring shall occur as dictated in the above mitigation measure.
Library Facilities
Mitil:ation Measures
. The project applicant shall adhere to General Plan library thresholds, and shall
participate in any funding programs created for financing of a library facility
(Le., developer fees, Mello-Roes Community Facilities District for Salt Creek
Ranch, etc.) to serve the vicinity, as deemed appropriate by the City.
Monitorinl!
The City shall ensure that the project will meet the library threshold standards and that the
project will participate in library funding, as deemed appropriate by the City, prior to the
issuance of building permits.
Offsite Areas of Impact
Biological Resources
SuI111I1a1Y of ImDacts
Hunte Parkwav. Approximately 13.8 acres of habitat would be impacted. Additional
impacts from the construction corridor would total 19.7 acres. Because a detailed
alignment has not yet been determined, any proposed impacts to disturbed wetlands would
be considered significant. The exact amount of impact to each habitat is unknown at this
time.
East "H" Street. The construction of this roadway would result in the loss of
approximately 5.0 acres of high quality coastal sage scrub and is considered significant.
32
Additional impacts from the construction corridor would total 6.0 acres of coastal sage
scrub. Potential impacts to coast barrel cactus and California gnatcatcher are considered
significant
ReservoirlWaterline. Construction of the reservoir and waterline would significantly
impact 30.7 acres of burned coastal sage scrub. This includes 7.1 acres for the 5 ISO-foot
long access road and 23.6 acres within the construction corridor. The access road would
result in significant impacts to Cleaveland's golden star.
Miti~ation Measures
Hunte Parkway
. To mitigate potential impacts to disturbed wetlands to below the level of
significance, enhancement of riparian habitat at a 1:1 ratio to any impacted
wetlands shall be implemented. This mitigation acreage shall be added to the
mitigation acreage for the Salt Creek Ranch development and incorporated into
the habitat enhancement plan (RECON 1991). Prior to construction, a 1603
Streambed Alteration Agreement must be obtained from the California
Department of Fish and Game.
East "H" Street
. To mitigate the loss of 11.0 acres of coastal sage scrub and impacts to
California gnatcatcher to below the level of significance, a strategy of avoidance
and habitat enhancement shall be implemented. To avoid impacting the fun
11 acres, the construction corridor could be restricted down from 100 feet on
each side of the roadway to a smaller area. The avoidance should reduce
impacts to the gnatcatcher territory to below 6.2 acres. This would retain the
territory and reduce the impact to the gnatcatcher to a level of non-significance.
An remaining impacts would require enhancement of coastal sage scrub at a
ratio of 1: 1. The mitigation site shall be at a nearby location and connected to a
larger area of planned open space. The mitigation acreage shall be added to the
mitigation acreage for the Salt Creek Ranch development and incorporated into
the habitat enhancement plan (RECON 1991).
33
. To mitigate impacts to coast barrel cactus to below the level of significance, a
strategy of avoidance and preservation shaH be implemented. To avoid impacts
to as many individuals as possible, the construction corridor could be restricted.
The remaining individuals that would be impacted should be preserved via
transplantation into open space. A detailed preservation plan should be
designed by a qualified biologist/horticulturist, who would assist in site
selection, implement a 5-year monitoring plan, and submit regularly scheduled
reports to the City of ChuIa Vista.
. To mitigate impacts to Otay tarpIant to below the level of significance,
avoidance of the population to greatest extent feasible shaH occur. The
alignment of the roadway shaH avoid the northernmost portion of the site and
the construction corridor shall be restricted in this area.
Reservoir/W aterline
. To mitigate the loss of 30.7 acres of burned coastal sage scrub to below the
level of significance, a combination of avoidance and habitat enhancement sha11
be implemented. To avoid impacts to the fuH 30.7 acres, the construction
corridor shaH be restricted. All remaining impacts would require habitat
enhancement of nearby burned coastal sage scrub at a ratio of 1:1. This
mitigation acreage shall be added to the mitigation acreage for the Salt Creek
Ranch development and incorporated into the habitat enhancement plan
(RECON 1991).
. To mitigate impacts to San Diego golden star to below the level of significance,
avoidance of the population to the greatest degree feasible shall be implemented.
The alignment shall remain in the currently proposed position and the
construction corridor shall be restricted in the area where the population occurs.
Monitorin~
A qualified biologist/environmental specialist shall be retained to oversee the construction
of East "H" Street, Hunte Parkway and the Reservoir/Waterline and monitor the
implementation of the above measures.
34
Landform/Aesthetics
Summary of Impacts
The pad elevation of the reservoir would be located at an elevation higher than the Salt
Creek Ranch project site, resulting in a potentially significant visual impact to surrounding
residents.
Mitil!ation Measures
. The water tank shall be painted an unobtrusive color to ensure that it blends in
with the natural environment as much as possible. The area surrounding the
water tank shall be landscaped to shield views of the tank to the satisfaction of
the City of ChuIa Vista's landscape architect.
Monitorin~
The City of Chula Vista Design Review Committee will review and approve the water
reservoir construction and landscape plan prior to Final Map approva1.
Cultural Resources
SummarY of InlDacts
Hunte Parkway. Construction of both the proposed interceptor will significantly impact
site CA-SDi-I2,038 which has been tested and determined to be important pursuant to
CEQA criteria.
East "H" Street. Construction of the lO-inch pipeline and proposed East "H" Street
segment wi11 significantly impact site CA-SDi-4,S30/W-643 which has been tested and
determined to be important pursuant to CEQA criteria.
ReservoirlWaterline. Trenching and grading activities necessary for construction of the
reservoir and installation of the waterline would significantly impact sites CA-SDi-11,403
Locus F, CA-SDi-II,4I5, CA-SDi-I2,032, CA-SDi-I2,034, and CA-SDi-I2,03S.
35
Cultural resource sites CA-SDi-I2,260, CA-SDi-I2,26I, and CA-SDi-11,403 Locus G,
also located on this site, were not yet tested or evaluated.
Mitie:ation Measures
. The Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) require mitigation of impacts
to important cultural resources. Sites CA-SDi-11,403 Locus F, CA-SDI-
11,415, CA-SDi-I2,03I, CA-SDi-I2,032, CA-SDi-I2,034, and CA-SDi-
12,035 within the water reservoir/water line parcel and CA-SDi-I2,038 within
the Hunte Parkway parcel were determined to qualify as important cultural
resources by testing pursuant to CEQA, and mitigation of impacts to these
cultural resources is required. Site CA-SDi-4,S30/W-643 within the "H" Street
parcel has been previously tested and determined important under CEQA, and
mitigation measures are necessary to address impacts to that site. Site CA-SDi-
4,S30/W-643 also falls within the Bonita-Miguel Archaeological District which
requires evaluation under federal criteria.
. Evaluation for determination of importance under CEQA through a cultural
resource testing program is necessary at cultural resource sites CA-SDi-I2,260,
CA-SDi-I2,26I and CA-SDi-II,403 Locus G.
. Mitigation of impacts to important cultural resources can be achieved through
either avoidance or by conducting a data recovery program. A voidance could
include capping sites with 2 feet of fIn or redesign of project components.
. If avoidance of archaeological resources cannot be achieved, a data recovery
program to mitigate development impacts to important cultural resource sites
shall be conducted, including, where necessary, surface col1ection and mapping
of artifacts, a phased data recovery program, and monitoring during facility or
other construction. This phased approach shall employ a random sample in
conjunction with a focused inventory for features (e.g., hearths). The data
recovery program shan be in accordance with a regional approach for all
prehistoric sites within Salt Creek Ranch, Salt Creek I and EastLake III,
thereby allowing a comprehensive understanding for these sites. This regional
program is in agreement with the Bonita-Miguel Archaeological District.
36
. The data recovery program shall follow the Advisory Council's guidelines as
defined within Treatment of Archaeological Properties, A Handbook (ACHP
1980). The treatment plan shall be oriented to address local and regional
research questions and clearly identify the methods to be used to address the
research questions. Research questions to be should be addressed are provided
in ERCE's June 1989 Salt Creek Ranch Cultural Resource Evaluation, on file
at the City of ChuJa Vista Planning Department
Monitorin~
A qualified archaeologist shall be retained to monitor the implementation of the above
measures.
37
This Page Intentionally Left Blank
38
03/05/92 13:19
'5'619 431 95H
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
BACKGROUND
The California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the State CEQA Guidelines
provide:
"(a) CEQA requires the decision-maker to balance the benefits of a proposed
project against its unavoidable environmental risks in determining whether to
approve the project If the benefits of a proposed project outweigh the
unavoidable adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental effects
may be considered 'acceptable.'
(b) Where the decision of the public agency allows the occurrence of
significant effects which are identified in the final EIR but are not at least
substantially mitigated, the agency shaJl state in writing the specific reasons to
support its action based on the final EIR and/or other information in the
record. This statement may be necessary if the agency also makes a finding
under Section 15091(a)(2) or (a)(3).
(c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations, the
statement should be included in the record of the project approval and should
be mentioned in the Notice of Determination." (Guidelines ~15093).
THE STATEMENT
The City finds that the mitigation measures discussed in the CEQA Findings, when
implemented, avoid or substantial lessen most of the significant effects identified in Final
Supplemental EIR 91-03 for the Salt Creek Ranch Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan.
Nonetheless, certain significant effects of the Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan are unavoidable
even after incorporation of all feasible mitigation measures. These unavoidable effects are
described in Section III of the CEQA Findings. In approving this project, the City has
balanced the benefits of the Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan against these unavoidable
environmental effects. In this regard, the City finds that all feasible mitigation measures
identified in the CDQA Findings, have been or will be implerm::ule:u wilh the: pruje:ct, am!
any remaining significant unavoidable effects are acceptable due to the following specific
planning, social, economic and other considerations, aJl of which are based upon the facts
set forth below, the CEQA Findings, Final Supplemental EIR 91-03, and the record of the
proceedings for this project:
1. Salt Creek Ranch, a planned residential community in the City of Chula Vista's
Eastern Territories, is consistent with the demand for housing in Chula Vista. The
project is a weJl-balanced residential community that wiJl provide local residents of
1
03/05/92 13:20
'5'619 431 9512
~003
Chula Vista and residents in the region the choice of diverse housing types in
accordance with the following policies contained within the City's General Plan
Update:
. Encourage the development of a diversity of housing types and prices.
. Assure that new development meets or exceeds a standard of high-quality
planning and design.
. Provide for the development of multi-family housing in appropriate areas
convenient to public services, facilities and circulation.
. Encourage planned developments, with a coordinated mix of urban uses, open
space and amenities.
. For new developments in Eastern Territories, the predominant character
should be low medium density, single-family housing. Where appropriate in
terms of physical setting encourage development of quality, large-lot housing.
The Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan (Alternative 5.3, Final SPA Plan Design Alternative)
addresses each of these General Plan policies. The residential planned community
provides a broad variety of housing types, ranging from multi-family attached units
to large estate lots consisting of at 1c:ast one acre. Multi-family housing is provided
in accordance with the Chula Vista General Plan, which previously took into account
the location of multi-family housing in areas convenient to public services, facilities
and roadway circulation. Salt Creek Ranch is uniquely situated between the
urbanized areas of Chula Vista to the west and south and the undeveloped area to
the east. The project is an entirely residential community which will provide residents
of Chula Vista with upper-end housing products which are currently limited in the
South Bay area. The Salt Creek Ranch SPA Plan wiU also provide important
transitions from the higher density developments adjacent to future SR-125 to the
lower density estates in the eastern portion of the project. Development within Salt
Creek Ranch will transition from the R-M and R-LM categories in the western
portion of the property to the low density R-L category in the eastern and northern
portions of the property site.
2. The project provides logical community land uses, enhances opportunities for the
long-term productivity of the community of Chula Vista and the surrounding region,
and maintains and conserves valuable resources, aU of which are consistent with the
City's long-term planning goals. The mix of single and multi-family uses in close
proximity to proposed commercial and industrial uses will provide opportunities for
persons to reside in areas adjacent to employment facilities and, thus, will help to
relieve typical employment community impacts, such as traffic, noise and air quality
effects.
2
03/05/92 13: 21
"0'619 431 9512
Ij!J 004
3. With adoption of Alternative 5.3 (Final SPA Plan Design Alternative), the project will
result in construction of a number of roads which are integral parts of the City's
General Plan Circulation Element. For example, roadway improvements will involve
construction of portions of East H Street, Hunte Parkway and Lane Avenue to
ultimate standards through the project. The project will also contribute to off-site
roadway improvements on a fair share basis with other area developers by
participation in the Eastern Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan (ECVTPP).
Significant landscaping buffer areas will be provided along major roads in accordance
with the City's Circulation Element. The project will incorporate pedestrian and
bicycle pathways and equestrian paths or trails within transportation corridors as
recommended by the City's Circulation Element.
4. The project reserves approximately 351 acres of natural open space constituting
approximately 29% of the project site. Implementation of the project will provide
for the long-term preservation of the sensitive biological resources located in the
natural open space areas and provide for wildlife corridor links in those areas. The
natural open space incorporated into the approved Salt Creek Ranch GDP has
wildlife corridors that are, on average, approximately 600 feet wide; the narrowest
sections are greater than 200 feet wide, except in planning area lOb. The project
applicant has also agreed to the following additional mitigation measure:
. The developer shall agree to participate in a regional or sub-regional multi-
species coastal sage scrub conservation plan. If, prior to approval for the
grading plan for areas lOa, lOb and 11 (which are identified as the three
easternmost "L" areas on Figure R-l of the Final ErR), an off-site regional
wildlife corridor linking San Miguel Mountain with the Upper Otay Reservoir
has not been approved by the City as part of the conservation plan, then
development of the 17 acre R-L development area in the eastern portion of
the property shall not occur and a reconfiguration of the northeastern R-L
area (as shown on Figure R-l of the Final EIR) to provide a wider open
space area for a regional wildlife corridor shall be implemented. The width
of the open space area shall be sufficient to ensure long-term viability of the
wildlife corridor (as shown on Figure R-l). This condition shall also be
applied to conditions of the Tentative Subdivision Map.
5. The project substantially mitigates adverse effects to coastal sage scrub habitat
through preservation of on-site coastal sage scrub in excess of the preservation
anticipated in the Chula Vista General Plan. Specifically, the General Plan
anticipated preservation of approximately 158 acres of the existing coastal sage scrub
habitat on the Salt Creek Ranch property. The approved Salt Creek Ranch GDP
preserves approximately 50 acres of additional coastal sage scrub over and above the
acreage anticipated to be preserved in the General Plan. Coastal sage scrub habitat
is left intact in sufficiently large blocks to accommodate most of the California
gnatcatcher known to exist onsite. In addition, the project applicant has agreed to
3
-
03/05/92 13:22
'5'619 431 9512
~005
revegetate approximately 30 acres of disturbed habitat within the proposed biological
open space area with coastal sage scrub to partially mitigate the cumulative loss of
coastal sage scrub habitat This revegetation will have the benefit of providing
additional potential California gnatcatcher habitat. In addition, Alternative 5.3 (Final
SPA Plan Design Alternative) will not create any new significant impacts to the
California gnatcatcher as compared to the approved Salt Creek Ranch GDP.
Although coastal sage scrub will be slightly more impacted overall (1.5 acres), a 2.7
acre patch of sage scrub will be placed in natural open space. This patch contains
a large cactus thicket and a cactus wren, which would have been impacted under the
approved Salt Creek Ranch GDP.
6. The General Plan Update calls for creation of a continuous, 28-mile Greenbelt
around the City of Chula Vista. The Greenbelt provides a unique opportunity to
develop a significant network of open space, trails, and recreational activities for the
citizens of Chula Vista and residents in the surrounding region. In essence, the
Greenbelt represents a continuous open space area which visually and functionally
links all the communities and the principal parks and recreational resources of the
City including active recreational facilities, natural open space, wildlife habitats and
a connecting trail system. This continuous system begins at the Chula Vista Bayfront,
extends through Otay River Valley to the Otay Lakes, north through the Otay Lakes
area and along Salt Creek to Mother Miguel Mountain and Sweetwater Reservoir
and west along the Sweetwater Regional Park to the Bayfront. The Salt Creek
Ranch project supplies an important link in the Greenbelt called for in the General
Plan Update. By adoption of Alternative 5.3 (Final SPA Plan Design Alternative)
for Salt Creek Ranch, the City further implements its Greenbelt in the following
ways:
. The 20-acre neighborhood park will be adjacent to Salt Creek which links the
park to the City's Greenbelt, all of which is consistent with the City's General
Plan.
. The 20-acre neighborhood park is the preferred location of the City's Parks
and Recreation Department because it is more centrally located to serve the
residents of Salt Creek Ranch and Salt Creek I, as well as the citizens of the
City of Chula Vista and the surrounding region.
. The 20-acre neighborhood park adjacent to Salt Creek allows preservation of
an existing stand of Eucalyptus trees which provides an immediate "grove"
effect for the community park.
. The 20-acre neighborhood park maintains the natura] open space link in the
southeast corner of the project site and, thus, allows for the preservation of
sensitive coastal sage scrub and wetland habitats. The sage scrub is habitat '.'
4
03/05/92 f3: 23
'5'619 431 9512
~006
for species ('Insite, including the grasshopper sparrow, the California
gnatcatcher and the nesting sites of the cactus wren.
7. The project will result in a comprehensive planned community providing a logical
extension of City services, including public transportation, law enforcement, fire
protection and public utilities.
8. The project advances the City's environmental goals by encouraging water
conservation and reclamation programs, mass transit facilities and an extensive trail
system.
9. The project also contains a number of other additional overriding public benefits,
such as:
. Incorporation of two school sites into the design of the project (20 acres).
. Incorporation of two church sites into the design of the project (7 acres).
. Incorporation of a fire station site into the design of the project (1 acre).
. A standby commitment to participate in a funding program to finance a new
library facility.
. Commitment to participate in a regional or sub-regional multi-species coastal
sage scrub conservation plan. If, prior to approval of the grading plan for
areas lOa, lOb and 11 (which are identified as the three easternmost ilL" areas
on Figure R-1 of the Final EIR), an off-site regional wildlife corridor linking
San Miguel Mountain with the Upper Otay Reservoir has not been approved
by the City as part of the conservation plan, then development of the 17 acre
R-L development area in the eastern portion of the property shall not occur
and a reconfiguration of the northeastern R-L area (as shown on Figure R-l
of the Final EIR) to provide a wider open space area for a regional wildlife
corridor shall be implemented. The width of the open space area shall be
sufficient to ensure long-term viability of the wildlife corridor (as shown on
Figure R-l). This condition shall also be applied to conditions of the
Tentative Subdivision Map.
. A focal point of the open space system is the Salt Creek Corridor, designated
in the Chula Vista General Plan as a major portion of the Chula Vista
Greenbelt, a 28-mile open space and park system within the City. Salt Creek
will form a major open space corridor within the project and will be
extensively landscaped. A park system, consisting of a 20-acre neighborhood
park along the Salt Creek Corridor and a 7-acre neighborhood park in the
western portion of the project, will provide recreational activities along the
5
03/05/92 13:24
'5'619 431 9512
~007
. '
City's Greenbelt. The Salt Creek open space corridor will connect to the
Eastlake open space corridor within Salt Creek to the south and will provide
a significant passive open space amenity for the entire Eastern Territories. An
extensive undeveloped open space system in the eastern portion of the
property will provide connections from Upper Otay Lake to the San Miguel
Mountains to the north. This open space system will connect to the portion
of the Chula Vista Greenbelt planned around Otay Lakes. Open space
greenbelt, parkway and bikeway systems throughout Salt Creek Ranch, and an
equestrian trail system, will be linked to the enhanced Salt Creek, the eastern
undeveloped open space areas, the park along the Salt Creek corridor and the
City's Greenbelt.
. The landscaping for Salt Creek Ranch will establish the community character
east of future SR-125 and is envisioned as a more native, naturalized plant
type than in the development areas west of the SR-l25 corridor; drought-
tolerant plant materials will be emphasized.
For these reasons, on balance, the City finds that there are planning, social, economic and
other considerations resulting from this project that serve to override and outweigh the
project's unavoidable significant environmental effects and, thus, the adverse environmental
effects are considered acceptable.
6