The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink AboutPlanning Comm Reports/1994/12/07 (3) City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of December 7, 1994 Page 1 2. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS-95-03: Tentative Subdivision MaD for Parcel R-20, known as Ventana. Chula Vista Tract 95-03. within the EastLake Greens Planned Communitv, and submitted bv Brehm Communities A. BACKGROUND Brehm Communities has submitted a Tentative Subdivision Map known as Ventana, Chula Vista Tract 95-03, in order to subdivide 13.7 acres into 109 single family lots and three open space lots. The property is designated as Parcel R-20 within the EastLake Greens Planned Community, and is located on the west side of South Greensview Drive, south of Clubhouse Drive. The Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project implements and falls under the purview of previous Negative Declaration IS-94-19, and that no further environmental review is necessary. B. RECOMMENDATION Adopt attached Planning Commission Resolution PCS-95-03 recommending that the City Council approve the Tentative Subdivision Map in accordance within the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the attached draft City Council Resolution. C. DISCUSSION The tentative map shows 109 single family lots with a minimum lot size of 3,000 sq.ft. The dwellings will range from 1,690 - 2,100 sq. ft. The lot and unit sizes are similar to those approved for the Cypress project (Parcel R-14) which is also being developed by Brehm. The Cypress project, nearing completion, is located at the northwest corner of North Greensview and Clubhouse Drives. The lots are arranged around a primary loop street and three cul-de-sacs, with a single access point from South Greensview Drive. The property adjoins a school site to the north, a park site and future development area to the west, and property slated for residential development to the south and across Greensview Drive to the east. The site is designated on the EastLake Greens SPA Plan for either attached or detached development at a density range of 5-15 dulac, with a target density of 9.3 dulac and target yield of 146 units. The project density of just under 8 dulac and project yield of 109 units are consistent with these SPA limits. The project development is subject to site plan and City Planning Commission Agenda Item for Meeting of December 7, 1994 Page 2 architectural review by the Zoning Administrator. The project has been reviewed and given conditional approval contingent upon approval of the tentative map. An issue which does not affect this project, but which arose at the last Commission hearing on an EastLake map, is the status of the affordable housing program for EastLake. As a member of the Task Force, Commissioner Moot explained at that hearing that the Task Force has been meeting for several months and has developed a program and identified nine candidate sites for affordable housing (please see attached exhibit). The program is expected to be forwarded to Council for adoption soon after the first of the year. Attachments Planning Commission Resolution Draft City Council Resolution Locator Tentative Map EastLake Greens SPA Plan Potential EastLake Affordable Housing Sites Mitigated Negative Declaration Disclosure Statement (m:\home\planning\pcs9503 .rpt) PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. PCS-95-03 RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL APPROVE THE TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR PARCEL R-20, KNOWN AS VENT ANA, CHULA VISTA TRACT 95-03, WITHIN THE EASTLAKE GREENS PLANNED COMMUNITY WHEREAS, a duly verified application for a tentative subdivision map was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista on August 25, 1994, by Brehm Conununities, and; WHEREAS, said application requests approval to subdivide Parcel R-20, known as Ventana, Chula Vista Tract 95-03, within the EastLake Greens Planned Conununity, and; WHEREAS, the property consists of 13.7 acres located on the west side of South Greensview Drive, south of Clubhouse Drive, and the proposal is to subdivide the property into 109 single-family lots and three open space lots, and; WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project implements and falls under the purview of IS-94-19, and that no further environmental review is necessary, and; WHEREAS, the Planning Director set the time and place for a hearing on the tentative map and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners and tenants within 1,000 feet of the exterior boundaries of the property at least 10 days prior to the hearing, and; WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised, namely 7:00 p.m., December 7, 1994, in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Conunission and said hearing was thereafter closed. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby readopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and the Mitigation Monitoring Program for IS-94-l9. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION reconunends that the City Council adopt the attached draft City Council Resolution approving the Tentative Subdivision Map for Chula Vista Tract 95-03 in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein, and that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City Council. PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 7th day of December, 1994, by the following vote, to-wit: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: ABSTENTIONS: William C. Tuchscher II, Chairman ATTEST: Nancy Ripley, Secretary (m:\home\planning\pcs9503.pcr) DRAFT CITY COUNCIL RESOLUTION RESOLUTION NO. A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AND IMPOSING CONDITIONS ON THE TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FOR PARCEL R- 20, KNOWN AS VENT ANA , CHULA VISTA TRACT 95-03, MAKING THE NECESSARY FINDINGS AND READOPTING THE MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND THE MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM FOR IS-94-19 I. RECITALS A. Project Site WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject matter of this resolution is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit A attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference, and commonly known as Unit 20 of EastLake Greens Tentative Subdivision Map, Chula Vista Tract 88-3; and for the purpose of general description herein consists of 13.7 acres located on the west side of South Greensview Drive, south of Clubhouse Drive within the EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area of the EastLake Planned Community ("Project Site"); and, B. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval WHEREAS, on August 25, 1994, Brehm Communities ("Developer") and EastLake Development Company ("Owner") filed a tentative subdivision map application with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista and requested approval of the Tentative Subdivision Map for Ventana, Chula Vista Tract 95-03 (known as Document No. on file with the office of the City Clerk) in order to subdivide the Project Site into 109 residential lots and three open space lots ("Project"); and C. Prior Discretionary Approvals WHEREAS, the development of the Project Site has been the subject matter of 1) a General Development Plan, EastLake II (EastLake I Expansion) General Development Plan previously approved by City Council Resolution No. 15198 ("GDP"); 2) the EastLake Greens Sectional Planning Area Plan, previously adopted by City Council Resolution No. 15199 ("SPA"); and 3) a Tentative Subdivision Map, previously approved by City Council Resolution No. 15200 ("TSM"), Chula Vista Tract 88-3, all approved on July 18, 1989; 4) an Air Quality Improvement Plan, EastLake Greens Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP); and 5) a Water Conservation Plan, EastLake Greens Water Conservation Plan (WCP); both previously approved by City Council Resolution No. 16898 on November 24, 1992; and 6) a GDP, SPA, TSM, AQIP and WCP amendment previously approved by City Council Resolution No. 17618 on August 16, 1994; and D. Planning Commission Record on Application WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held an advertised public hearing on said project on December 7, 1994, and voted to recommend that the City Council approve the Project based upon the findings and subject to the conditions listed below; and E. City Council Record of Applications WHEREAS, a duly called and noticed public hearing was held before the City Council of the City of Chula Vista on December 20, 1994, on the Project and to receive the recommendations of the Planning Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to same; and, NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby find, detennine and resolve as follows: II. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public hearing on this project held on December 7, 1994, and the minutes and resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding. III. MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION REVIEWED AND CONSIDERED; MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM; FINDINGS; APPROVALS A. Mitigated Negative Declaration The City Council of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed, analyzed and considered the previously approved Mitigated Negative Declaration on IS-94-19 (known as Document No. C094-180 on file in the Office of the City Clerk) and comments thereon, the environmental impacts therein identified for this project and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program") (known as Document No. C094-181 on file in the Office of the City Clerk) thereon prior to approving the Project. Based on the Initial Study and comments thereon, the -2- Council finds that there is no substantial evidence that the Project will have a significant effect on the environment and thereby readopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration. B. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program The City Council of the City of Chula Vista finds that the significant environmental effect(s) identified in the Mitigated Negative Declaration will be reduced to below a level of significance if the mitigation measures in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are implemented. The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program is hereby readopted to ensure that its provisions are complied with. IV. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA The City Council does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative Declaration on IS-94-19 and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been prepared in accordance with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista. V. INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT OF CITY COUNCIL The City Council finds that Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-94-19 reflects the independent judgment of the City of Chula Vista City Council. VI. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FINDINGS A. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.5 of the Subdivision Map Act, the City Council finds that the Tentative Subdivision Map for the Project is in confonnance with the elements of the City's General Plan, based on the following: 1. Land Use The proposed density of 7.95 du/ac is in compliance with the approved EastLake Greens SPA density range of 5-15 du/ac for the Project site. 2. Circulation All of the on-site and off-site public streets required to serve the Project will be constructed or DIF fees paid by the developer in accordance with the EastLake Greens Public Financing Plan and Development Agreement. -3- The public streets within the Project will be designed in accordance with the City design standards and/or requirements. The adjoining street system was designed to handle the anticipated flow of traffic from this and other area projects. 3. Housing The EastLake Greens SPA Plan area has been conditioned to provide a minimum of 10% affordable housing including a mix of housing types and lot sizes for single-family, townhouses, condominium and, eventually, apartment densities that will provide a wide spectrum of housing prices for persons of various incomes. The single-family detached residential housing type proposed within the Project is consistent with the EastLake Greens SPA Plan. 4. Conservation The Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for IS-94-19 addressed the goals and policies of the Conservation Element of the General Plan and found the development of the Project Site to be consistent with these goals and policies. 5. Parks and Recreation, Open Space The Project Site is located within the EastLake Greens SPA Plan area. The EastLake Greens SPA Plan provides public parks, trails and open space consistent with City policies. 6. Seismic Safety The Project is in conformance with the goals and policies of the Seismic Element of the General Plan for this site. 7. Safety The Fire Department and other emergency service agencies have reviewed the Project for conformance with City safety policies and have determined that it meets the City Threshold Standards for emergency services. -4- 8. Noise Noise mitigation measures included in the Environmental Impact Report SEIR-86-04 and Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-94-19 adequately address the noise policy of the General Plan. All dwelling units within the project will be required to be designed so as to not exceed the interior noise level of 45 dBA. Additionally, all exterior private open space will be shielded by a combination of earth, berm, wall, and/or buildings to achieve a 65 dBA noise level for outside private areas. 9. Scenic Highway The Project Site is not located along a designated scenic highway, but will provide a 10 ft. wide landscape buffer and decorative wall along Greensview Drive in order to enhance the appearance of the Project from the street. The project, as conditioned, will be required to provide a landscape buffer in conformance with landform grading and scenic highway principles of the General Plan. 10. Bicycle Routes Bicycle lanes have been incorporated within the EastLake Greens Planned Community area design and are presently in use. The public streets within the project are of adequate width to accommodate bicycle travel within the interior of the subdivision. II. Public Buildings No public buildings are proposed on the project site. The project IS subject to RCT fees prior to issuance of building permits. B. Pursuant to Section 66412.3 of the Subdivision Map Act, the Council certifies that it has considered the effect of this approval on the housing needs of the region and has balanced those needs against the public service needs of the residents of the City and the available fiscal and environmental resources. C. The configuration, orientation and topography of the site partially allows for the optimum siting of lots for passive or natural heating and cooling opportunities as required by Government Code Section 66473.1. -5- D. The site is physically suitable for residential development and the proposal conforms to all standards established by the City for such projects. E. The conditions herein imposed on the grant of permit or other entitlement herein contained is approximately proportional both in nature and extent to the impact created by the Project. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the Project subject to the general and special conditions set forth below. VIII. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL The approval of the Project which is stated to be conditioned on "General Conditions" is hereby conditioned as follows: A. Project Site is Improved with Project Developer, or their successors in interest, shall improve the Project Site with the Project as described in Tentative Subdivision Map Chula Vista Tract 95-03 and the Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-94-19 except as modified by this Resolution. B. Implement Mitigation Measures Developer shall diligently implement, or cause the implementation of, all mitigation measures pertaining to the Project identified in the Final Supplemental Impact Report for Eastlake Greens FEIR-86-04 and Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-94-19. C. Implement the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Developer shall implement, or cause the implementation of all portions of IS-94-19 Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program pertaining to the Project. D. Implement previously adopted conditions of approval pertinent to project. Unless otherwise conditioned, developer shall comply with all unfulfilled conditions of approval of the EastLake Greens Tentative Map, Chula Vista Tract 88-3 established by Resolution No. 15200 approved by Council on July 18, 1989, and shall remain in compliance with and implement the terms, conditions and provisions of Eastlake Greens Sectional Planning Area, Eastlake Greens Planned Community District Regulations, the Eastlake Greens Development Agreement, -6- the Water Conservation Plan and the Air Quality Plan, Design Guidelines and the Public Facilities Financing Plan. E. Implement Public Facilities Financing Plan Developer shall install public facilities in accordance with the Eastiake Greens Public Facilities Financing Plan as amended or as required by the City Engineer to meet threshold standards adopted by the City of Chula Vista. The City Engineer and Planning Director may, at their discretion, modify the sequence of improvement construction should conditions change to warrant such a revision. F. Project Phasing If phasing is proposed within an individual map or through multiple final maps, submit and obtain approval for a development phasing plan by the City Engineer and Director of Planning prior to approval of any final map. Improvements, facilities and dedications to be provided with each phase or unit of development shall be as determined by the City Engineer and Director of Planing. The City reserves the right to condition approval of each final map with the requirement to provide said improvements, facilities and/or dedications as necessary to provide adequate circulation and to meet the requirements of police and fire departments. The City Engineer and Planning Director may, at their discretion, modify the sequence of improvement construction should conditions change to warrant such a revision. G. Annexation Annex all property within the proposed subdivision boundary of each final map to the City of Chula Vista from the County of San Diego prior to approval of each map. H. Design Review Approval The final map shall comply with all applicable plans and conditions approved with DRC-95-l6. IX. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Prior to approval of the final map unless otherwise indicated, the developer shall: -7- STREETS. RIGHTS-OF-WAY AND IMPROVEMENTS I. Design, construct and dedicate right of way for all streets to meet the City standards for residential streets, or as approved by the City Engineer. Submit improvement plans for approval by the City Engineer detailing the horizontal and vertical alignment of said streets. 2. Guarantee the construction of all improvements (streets, sewers, drainage facilities, utilities, etc) deemed necessary to provide service to the subject subdivision in accordance with City standards. 3. Design streets to meet 250' minimum distance between centerline intersections or as approved by the City Engineer. 4. The waivers requested on the tentative map for the following are hereby granted: a) cui de sacs b) tangent length between Station 28 and Station 30 c) knuckles d) driveway separation from PCR to be 4 feet minimum 5. Present written verification to the City Engineer from Otay Water District that the subdivision will be provided adequate water service and long term water storage facilities. 6. Design all residential streets with 200 ft. minimum curve radii. 7. Obtain and grant to the City easements for the maintenance of the proposed sewer and storm drain between the northerly subdivision boundary and the point of connection to the existing facilities. Said easements shall be 10' wide minimum. GRADING 8. Submit and obtain approval by the City Engineer for final grading plans. 9. Provide an updated soils report or an addendum to the original document prepared by a registered engineer, as required by the City Engineer. 10. Submit and obtain approval by the City Engineer for an erosion and sedimentation control plan together with grading plans. 11. Submit a list of proposed lots indicating whether the structure will be located on fill, cut, or a transition between the two situations. -8- AGREEMENTS 12. Enter into an agreement with the City whereby: a. The developer agrees the City may withhold building pennits for any units in the subject subdivision if anyone of the following occur: (1) Regional development threshold limits set by the East Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan have been reached. (2) Traffic volumes, levels of service, public utilities and/or services exceed the adopted City threshold standards. b. The developer agrees that the City may withhold building pennits for any of the proposed development if the required public facilities, as identified in the PFFP or as amended or otherwise conditioned have not been completed or constructed to satisfaction of the City. The developer may propose changes in the timing and sequencing of development and the construction of improvements affected. In such case, the PFFP may be amended as approved by the Planning Director and City Engineer. 13. Agree to defend, indemnify and hold hannless the City and its agents, officers and employees, from any claim, action or proceeding against the City, or its agents, officers or employees to attack, set aside, void or annul any approval by the City, including approval by its Planning Commission, City Council or any approval by its agents, officers, or employees with regard to this subdivision pursuant to Section 66499.37 of the Map Act provided the City promptly notifies the subdivider of any claim, action or proceeding and on the further condition that the City fully cooperates in the defense. 14. Agree to hold the City hannless from any liability for erosion, siltation or increase flow of drainage resulting from this project. 15. Agree to insure that all franchised cable television companies ("Cable Company") are pennitted equal opportunity to place conduit and provide cable television service to each lot within the subdivision. Restrict access to the conduit to only those franchised cable television companies who are, and remain in compliance with, all of the tenns and conditions of the franchise and which are in further compliance with all other rules, regulations, ordinances and procedures regulating and affecting the operation of cable television companies as same may have been, or may from time to time be issued by the City of Chula Vista. -9- OPEN SPACE/ASSESSMENTS 16. Pay additional fees on a fair-share basis into Assessment District Numbers 90-3, 91-1 and other applicable assessment districts due to a change in units approved subsequent to District formation as determined by the City Engineer. 17. Pay all costs associated with apportionment of assessments for all City assessment districts as a result of subdivision of lands within the boundary. Request apportionment and provide a deposit to the City estimated at $40/unit/district to cover costs. 18. Prepare a disclosure form to be signed by the home buyer acknowledging that additional fees have been paid into the Assessment District or the Transportation DIF Fund, and that these additional fees are reflected in the purchase price of the home for those units which have a density change from that indicated in the assessment district's Engineer's Report. Submit disclosure form for the approval of the City Engineer. 19. Request annexation into EastLake Maintenance District #1 of all areas within the tentative map boundary not currently included in the district prior to approval of the first final map which includes said areas. Deposit $3,000 to initiate annexation proceedings. Pay all costs of proceedings. MISCELLANEOUS 20. Tie the boundary of the subdivision to the California System -Zone VI (1983). 21. Submit copies of Final Maps in a digital format such as (DXF) graphic file prior to approval of each Final Map. Provide computer aided Design (CAD) copy of the Final Map based on accurate coordinate geometry calculations and submit the information in accordance with the City Guidelines for Digital Submittal in duplicate on 5-1/2 HD floppy disk prior to the approval of each Final Map. X. CODE REQUIREMENT REMINDERS I. Comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. Preparation of the Final Map and all plans shall be in accordance with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the City of Chula Vista Subdivision Ordinance and Subdivision Manual. 2. Underground all utilities within the subdivision in accordance with Municipal Code requirements. -10- 3. Satisfy the requirement to pay the Transportation Development Impact Fees (TDIF) prior to final map approval if the fee is financed through an assessment district or pay the TDIF prior to issuance of building permits. 4. Pay the following fees in accordance with the City Code and Council Policy: a. The Transportation and Public Facilities Development Impact Fees. b. Signal Participation Fees. c. All applicable sewer fees, including but not limited to sewer connection fees. d. Interim Pre-SR-125 impact fee (effective January I, 1995). e. Telegraph Canyon Sewer Pumped Flows Development Impact Fees f. Salt Creek Sewer Basin Development Impact Fee 5. Pay the amount of applicable fees in effect at the time of issuance of building permits. The developer is advised that fees periodically change, and that it is the developer's responsibility to contact the appropriate City department or government agency to ascertain the amount of a given fee due to the time of collection. 6. Required fire hydrants must be installed and operable prior to delivery of any combustible construction materials. 7. If any part of the development will be adjacent to an open space area, particularly canyon rims, a plan for brush management and fire resistive landscaping must be submitted. XI. CONSEQUENCE OF FAILURE OF CONDITIONS If any of the foregoing conditions fail to occur, or if they are, by their terms, to be implemented and maintained over time, if any of such conditions fail to be so implemented and maintained according to their terms, the City shall have the right to revoke or modify all approvals herein granted, deny or further condition issuance of all future building permits, deny, revoke or further condition all certificates of occupancy issued under the authority of approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. No -11- vested rights are gained by Developer or a successor in interest by the City's approval of this Resolution. XII. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION The City Council directs the Environmental Review Coordinator to post a Notice of Determination and file the same with the County Clerk. XIII. INVALIDITY; AUTOMATIC REVOCATION It is the intention of the City Council that its adoption of this Resolution is dependent upon the enforceability of each and every term, provision and condition herein stated; and that in the event that anyone or more terms, provisions or conditions are determined by a Court of competent jurisdiction to be invalid, illegal or unenforceable, this resolution shall be deemed to be automatically revoked and of no further force and effect ab initio. Presented by Approved as to form by Robert A. Leiter Director of Planning Bruce M. Boogaard City Attorney (f: \home\planning\ ventana. ccr) -12- I "'{ R-'. I 5-' :.~ I I ~ '.2 $: po., ----- PROJECT LOCATION EXHIBIT A C HULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR APPLICANT: VENTANA @ EASTLAKE PROJECT OESCRIPTlON: GREENS SUBDMSION VENTANA C) ADDRESS: SOUTH GREENVIEW DRIVE Request: The development proposal consists of the construction of 109 single family SCALE: FILE NUMBER: dwellings on 13.7 acres NORTH NONE PCS - 95 - 03 LOCATOR :',~ , , PROJECT LOCATION CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR APPLICANT: VENTANA @ EASTLAKE PROJECT DESCRIPTION: GREENS SUBDMSION VENTANA C9 ADDRESS: SOUTH GREENVIEW DRIVE Request: The development proposal consists of the construction of 109 single family SCALE: FILE NUMBER: dwellings on 13.7 acres NORTH NONE PCS - 95 - 03 TENTATIVE MAP I , , I ! . I I , , ! I I , 'I' ': h ~il II': ~.. ~Ii~ ~ 0- ~ 5 ~ ;h, ; aim, ~ r H ~ ;; ;11 1'1 '( ,h~ :!,I iJi iii~ III' !! 11'~i! ii' III "t ";r ~ :; ~ ~ i I. I ~~ II II I! II I "I!! ~llllliiililllll!i I '1"1 nllii lid ", ~ \I'" 1IIIIIIh i.illlllilli I ,~" 'r'l I ~. I 'Ii,' I, - ~IJIJ, !! Ga ,I (, i,' I!', , I ~ III,.' I I IJ 'T ~ I II i 1'111' I ;~ I 1,'1' o..~ ~!A:i '"=~ ~ <:J CI) i:: 1&1 ~ ~~ ::;: .,.;~ !IiO ;it~ i ~ CI)~~ .... i:i 8 ~.... ;Ii ~~ ifi u~ ~ ...~ ~;it ct:~ ;! - ~ ~-,~:'- ~:~~ ~\"'io. ......~~ \. ~~:... ., \ r---~~-- \--\ ~;I~ :~'- I, \ 'I' '; II, \ 'J!~ ~~; i;::t ..,," i! I " I ! Ii i I! lI:d 'I ,II.. rp I III. ' nl!. I I !:! I' n!! I iI ~W i II q i : II! , Uj'i i illll;!I! I'! i ;!III ~ I ~ ~ ~ ~i! ! ! : ! ! d !! !!I! ! I , . I I , , I.: "II I ~I d 'II'" i, Iii"" 'Ii h.~ ! Iii ~ e ..I. i ~~.; '-: ! ' ~' , , -, { , \ij!';::' ~~':' ":t;'; ~ ~ ~~ . ! . . I , I, hi ill Iii " Ii! ". ,Ii ill \ ,,\/ r ",' j '----1 ;.t~l IllTl-:-i~. II '. . ~"! I U_d)'1 ., I 1ii ,I _ii, . '",,1, ", ~i""f: I 'I _/i !lJ=Y _/ ~ 1\ ~i \,:.- /1 "' ., ~ ,- / ---t~. . ( 1 I 1 I · - ~ , !,- t~~=6 1\ ~ . EASTLAKE GREENS SPA PLAN Iii: I)ooooooooooooooo~~~~~~~~~~oo~ ~ Iii . C'5 . O-NC').ll1cg....CD~O_NC")...ltHCp...CI J ~ ~l :ti~;~~~~~;;;;:t;:t;;;iiiiiiiii J _ a: CJ)~~" ~ ,~ :~ ~; ...~ , I ' l%~ . ~ r ci; , I - t ( . 1 \ z <( ....J a.. z o - t:( N - ....J i= ::> It i .O~.~~O~~~~~N~~~.~~~O~.~~O.O ~ ~.OOO.~~...~.CDCD._.~.N._.~..CD .... --- N - N ----N ~ E-' i C': .. .~ I :E i '~I~I~ 'c 'i:!-' ~ \]jl ~ .... ~. ~ CI) 31 '" .1/ ..;~ 1/ 1/ I, ! J OMCDNO-QOIl100_OCDMom..._ '" mN.mO~M~.MN~~~~.~ci~ ~ M -- ...-- - !CD . II> 'jI CI) ,! J UU 1'1 .. !lllr"Td 'd ~~J .~ uu ! . la 1 ~~tjj. . ! !!!!!!!~. JI ~~ iii JP ~ '0 ;g '0 ~I __N -N~.~~~ I ti j=' ~ ~ I . ~~";"":'";"":''?~~,;,~,;,~,;,~~ I ~0~~~~~O 0 0 .~ c: 0 0: z 1/ ........OMcg-CDmC').0Il1Mll1cgm~CDCDMO_MNIl11l10CD ~ NN~..~~~~~~..~~~"".O~NMM~d... ... _..._ ... CI .. 1/ ........CDOO......Il1.CDMcg.OIl1p...mm....OCDCDO...C')O_ _ ~~~~~~g!~~:~~::g~m~~gg~~~~mG ~ . 111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111111 111 111111111111111_____________________111_ ooooo~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~o~ :! ~ LU:::2 .~ N ci; N ci; ,;, ~ f~ ~ SW5 ,;, ~wl~ ~'':'''''''-'-''{~~ ~< lf1(!) ~ ! t .-J ~ . \ ~ POTENTIAL EASTLAKE AFFORDABLE HOUSING SITES POTENTIAL AFFORDABLE HOUSING SITES f' r;.~ "'-~ PHASEIAREA c. PHASE II AREA LEGEND o Potential Affordable Housing Sites PHASE I AREA . . .. PHASE II AREA -15- ~ MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION 18-94-19 MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM Mitigated Negal~ve Declaratio r>"tp-/ PROJECT NAME: Modification to the EastLake Greens GDP/SPA and the fonnation of an Assessment District for various public improvements PROJECT LOCATION: South of Otay Lakes Road between EastLake Parkway and Hunte Parkway PROJECT APPLICANT: Eastlake Development Company CASE NO: IS-94-19 DATE: February 28, 1994 A. Proiect Setting The project site located south of Otay Lakes Road between EastLake Parkway and Hunte Parkway and this general vicinity (Eastlake and Otay Ranch) do not involve any substantial soil or any geotechnical hazards that would impact the proposed project. The project is located within the San Diego air basin which is an air quality Don-attainment basin, The project includes a 97 dwelling unit increase because of the expansion in land area of the Greens SPA, This will not result in a substantial increase in emission into the air basin or any substantial degradation in air quality. However, because the increase in the projected units is more than SO, compliance with the City requirement for an Air Quality Improvement Plan must be met. Thus, this less-than- significant impact will be further reduced, The project site involves the Telegraph Canyon Creek, Poggi Canyon Creek and Salt Creek drainage basins, Future regional facilities in these basins may nee4 additional cumulative capacities to serve the 22,7 additional acres being added to the SPA boundary but the impacts of this project would not be significant. These drainage courses do not enter any potable water sources nor are they a significant source of any ground water. This property has been used for agricultural pwposes for many decades and is void of any significant vegetation or animal life. The project could affect raptor habitats but given the limited acreage this is not significant. There are various streets in the project area which have traffic volumes that may result n adverse noise levels. Once precise pad elevations n:lative to street elevations are known, specific mitigation will be identified and implemented. This residential project will not result in any significant sources of light or glare. The project as proposed is consistent with the other low-medium densities adjacent to and in the vicinity of the project site and the population levels are consistent with the project area. Public facilities and services including transportation are available and adequate to s~ ~ft.. the project site and vicinity. ==--'_-= - city of chula vl.ta planning department 01Y OF environmental review ..ction. OiUIA VISTA \ The underlying geological strata on the project site possess a high potentia1 for significant paleontological resources, Those areas which have been graded have been monitored and any significant resources recovered, This monitoring will continue in the currently non- graded areas. Mitigation of any potential cultural resources on the project site was previously implemented. . B. Proiect DescriDtion General DescriDtion The project is an amendment to the adopted Eastlake I General Development Plan (GDP), which includes EastLake Greens; an amendment to the adopted Eastlake Greens SPA Plan (SPA) and Tentative Tract Map; and the annexation of approximately 23 acres to the City of Chula Vista, The amendments to the GDP and Tentative Tract Map are intended to reflect those changes proposed in the SPA Plan. The changes in the SPA Plan are of the following two categories: 1. Amending the GDP/SPA to include those parcels of the recent Land Swap General Plan Amendment east of the SDG&E transmission easement (expansion of Parcels R-IO, R-20, and R-23 for 97 additional units), 2. Transfers of units within the existing SPA boundary to reflect refmements with no net increase of density. 3. The formation of an Assessment District to (94-1 Eastlake II) for the installation of public facilities to serve the project. Included is Table I, the Adopted Site Utilization Plan and Table 2 which summarizes the proposed residential changes, DescriDtion of Land SwaD Area Amendment Only those areas east of the transmission easement area included in this amendment. The ba1ance of the Land Swap Area (between the Otay Ranch and Eastlake), which was recently the subject of a General Plan Amendment, will be covered by a separate amendment. The purpose of including the areas in this proposed amendment separately is because they are logical expansions of existing parcels within the Eastlake Greens SPA plan. The parcels that are expanded by the recent GPA include Parcels R-IO, R-20 and R- 23. Upon favorable action, these areas are proposed to be annexed to the City of Chula Vista. Following is a description of each of these parcels: R-IO: The realignment of Orange Avenue to the south expanded this parcel's boundary. These expanded areas were designated Low- Medium Density on the General Plan. The mid-point of the density range (4.5 du/ac) is being proposed. The total increase for this parcel is 79 du (67 du in the Land Swap Area and 12 du in areas 'previously indicated as Orange AvenueIFuture Urban). WPC F:\HOMEIPLANNINaI736.9' Page 2 ~ABLE 1 EastLake Greens site utilization Plan Existinq Residential Land Us. statistics Parcel Density Acres Tarqet Tarqet Number Ranae Densitv Units R-l 0-5 19.7 2.7 54 R-2 0-5 14.7 2.7 40 R-3 0-5 21.8 3.8 83 R-4 0-5 24.0 4.3 104 R-5 0-5 23.0 4.6 105 R-6 0-5 17.4 5.0 88 R-7 5-15 10.7 6.0 65 R-8 5-15 16.4 5.9 96 R-9 5-15 8.5 5.3 45 R-10 '5-15 27.9 6.0 167 R-l1 5-15 14.6 6.3 92 R-12 5-15 14.3 6.5 93 R-13 5-15 22.6 6.3 142 R-14 5-15 11.4 7.4 84 R-15 5-15 11.6 7.6 88 R-16 5-15 10.5 7.9 83 R-17 5-15 29.7 7.2 214 R-18 5-15 9.9 8.8 87 R-19 5-15 14.9 10.6 158 R-20 5-15 13.6 12.0 164 R-21 5-15 10.0 12.0 120 R-22 5-15 10.8 13.5 146 R-23 5-15 13.7 15.0 205 R-24 15-25 5.0 10.0 50 R-25 15-25 7.4 10.0 74 R-26* 15-25 13.3 4.5 60 R-27* 25+ 8.9 4.5 40 R-28* 25+ 1).1 eI.!5 27 '1'O'lAL 412.4 ac 2774 du *Xnterim Designation " ., \ ~ABLE 2 EastLake Greens site utilization Plan Proposed Residential Land U.e statistice Parcel Density Acres ~arqet ~arqet I:ncrease(+) Humber Ranae Densitv units Decre&se(-\ R-l 0-5 19.7 2.7 54 0 R-2 0-5 14.7 2.7 40 0 R-3 0-5 21.8 4.7 102 +19 R-4 0-5 24.0 4.3 104 0 R-5 0-5 23.0 4.6 105 0 R-6 5-15 17.4 5.1 88 0 R-7 5-15 10.7 5.6 60 -5 R-8 5-15 16.4 5.9 96 0 R-9* 5-15 8.5 5.3 45 0 R-10 5-15 45.4 5.4 246 +79 R-11 5-15 14.6 6.0 87 -5 R-12 5-15 14.3 6.5 93 0 R-13 5-15 22.6 6.3 142 0 R-14 5-15 11.4 7.4 86 +2 R-15 5-15 11.6 6.5 65 -23 R-16 5-15 10.5 7.9 83 0 R-17 5-15 '29.7 7.2 214 0 R-18 5-15 9.9 8.8 87 0 R-19 5-15 14.9 10.6 158 0 R-20 5-15 15.7 9.2 153 +11 R-21 5-15 10.0 12.0 120 0 R-22 5-15 10.8 13.1 141 -5 R-23 5-15 15.8 13.5 214 +9 R-24 5-15 5.0 10.0 46 -4 R-25 5-15 7.4 10.0 78 +4 R-26* 5-15 13.3 4.5 60. 0 R-27 0-5 8.9 4.9 44 +4 R-2B 5-15 6.1 9.8- 1)0 +33 wrAL 434.1 ac 6.6 2871 du +97 *InteriJII Designation: parcel subject ~ ~utur. SPA Amendment to be consistent with the General Plan. 1-11-94 ( R-20: This parcel is expanded by a 2.1 acre triangle adjacent to the SDG&E casement The new area is computed at the mid-point of the Low-Medium density range (4.5 du/ac). A reduction is proposed for the parcel as a whole to reflect current planning/marketing, R-23: This parcel is identical to the changes for R-20, except that no decrease in the density is proposed. A net increase of 9 units are proposed for this 2.1 acre addition to the SPA. A total increase of 22.7 acres and 97 du are included in these three parcels. DescriDtion of Density Transfers This amendment includes density transfers within the existing SPA boundary to reflect current planning/marketing, These changes do not increase the number of units (2774 du) previously adopted, Following is a summary of the density transfers. Refer also to Table 2 for a composite of both density transfers and additions resulting from the additional Land Swap Areas, R-3 R-7 R-ll R-14 R-15 R-20 R-22 R-24 R-25 R-27 R-28 DU Increase DU Decrease +19 -5 -5 +2 -23 -20 -5 -4 +4 +4 +33 +62 -62 Parcel Number TOTAL DescriDtion of Assessment District Work The general description of work to be funded by Assessment District 94-1 consists of the following: 1. Street improvements consisting of grading, base, paving, gutter, sidewa1k, street lighting and landscaping within the following rights-of-way: a. South Greensview Drive from Clubhouse Drive to Unit 6 entrance (2.400 L.F., Phase I). b. South Greensview Drive from Silverado Drive to Hunte Parkway (3,400 L.F., Phase 2). c. South Greensview Drive from Unit 6 entrance to Silverado Drive (1,920 L.F., Phase 3). WPC F,\HOME\PLANNING\I736.94 Page 3 2. Utilities and underground improvements consisting of potable water facilities, stann drain facilities, sewer facilities, reclaimed water facilities, electric facilities, telephone facilities, gas facilities, television facilities as appropriate by applicable state and federal statutes within the following rights-of-way: ( a. South Greensview Drive from Clubhouse Drive to Unit 6 entrance (2,400 L.F., Phase I), b. South Greensview Drive from Silverado Drive to Hunte Parkway (3,400 L.F., Phase 2), c. South Greensview Drive from Unit 6 entrance to Silverado Drive (1,920 L.F., Phase 3). 3. D IF funded s1reet improvements consisting of grading, stann drain, base, paving, curb, gutter, sidewalk, medians, street lighting, landscaping and s1reet monumentation within the following rights-of-way: a, Hunte Parkway from Clubhouse Drive to South Greensview Drive (2,300 L.F., Phase 2). 4. DIF funded street and underground improvements consisting of grading, and stann drain improvements within the following rights-of-way: a, Hunte Parkway from South Greensview to Orange Avenue (1,270 L.F., Phase 2), b. Orange Avenue from Hunte Parkway to the SDG&E easement (3,500 L.F., Phase 2). Discretionarv Actions Associated (but not limited to) the Proiect Area I. General Development Plan Amendment 2. Sectional Area Plan (SPA) Amendment 3. Modification to the Eastlake Greens Site Utilization Plan 4. Establishment of District 94-1 5. Annexation 6. Tentative Subdivision Map 7. Design Review C. ComDatibilitv with ZoniDlz and Plans The project is consistent with the overall General Plan, The project involves an amendment to the more specific land use regulations of the East1ake Greens General Development Plan (GDP) and Sectional Planning Area Plan (SPA). D. Identification of Environmental Effects An initial study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including the attached Environmental Checklist Fonn) determined that the proposed project could have one or WPC F:\HOME\J'LA}OON0I1736.94 Page 4 more significant environmental effects, Subsequent revisions in the project design and/or specific mitigation measures will be implemented to reduce these effects to a level below significant, With project revisions and/or mitigation, no significant environmental effects will occur, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will not be required, This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Specific mitigation measures are set forth in the Mitigation Monitoring Program which is attached as Attachment "A". The following impacts are those that were detennined to be potentially significant and are required to be mitigated to a level below significant A discussion of each of these potentially significant but mitigatable impacts from the proposed project follows. Acoustics The Initial Study has noted that traffic volume on roadways in and adjacent to the project site could increase ambient noise to an unacceptable level. E. Mitil:ation necessary to avoid sil!l1ificant effects Specific project mitigation measures are required to reduce potentially significant environmental impacts identified in the initial study for this project to a level below significant.Mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project design and have been made conditions of project approval, as well as requirements of the attached Mitigation Monitoring Program (Attachment "A"). At the time of consideration . of a Tentative Subdivision Map or Design Review Supplemental Acoustical reports will be prepared for projects adjacent to Chula Vista General Plan Circulation Element Roadways. At that time the precise elevation of roadways and residential development pads will be available. With this infonnation, it will be feasible to make an accurate forecast of noise levels and the appropriate mitigation measures necessary to reduce noise levels to an acceptable 65 exterior dBA (CNEL). These acoustical reports must be based on the latest buildout traffic forecast and must validate the achievement of the 65 exterior dBA (CNEL) standard, F. Consultation 1. Individuals and Oreanizations City of Chula Vista: Roger Daoust, Engineering Cliff Swanson, Engineering Hal Rosenberg, Engineering Bob Sennett, Planning Ken Larsen, Director of Building &. Housing Carol Gove, Fire Marshal Crime Prevention, MaryJane Diosdada Marty Schmidt, Parks &. Recreation Dept Rich Rudolf, Assistant City Attorney WPC F:IIIOMElPLANNlNG\1736.9oI Page S Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva Applicant's Agent: Gary Cinti Cinti Land Planning 3625 Midway Dr., #292 San Diego, CA 9211 0 2. Documents Chula Vista General Plan (1989) and ElR (1989) Chula Vista Municipal Code Letter dated February 9, 1994 from Bruce Sloan, Sr. Project Manager, EastLakeDevelopment Co. regarding sewage generation in sewage basins, improvements and fmancing Letter dated February 7, 1994, Dennis C, Bowling, Director Water Resources Division, Rick Engineering Co" regarding the adequacy of drainage systems Letter dated February 18, 1994, Andy Schlaefli, Vice President Urban Systems Associates, Inc. regarding the adequacy of the Transportation Circulation System 3. Initial Studv This environmental detennination is based on the attached Initial Study as well as any comments on the Initial Study and this Mitigated Negative Declaration, and reflects the independent judgement of the City of Chula Vista, Further infonnation regarding the environmental review of the project is available from the Chula Vista Planning Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910. AL REVIEW COORDINATOR ENVlRO EN 6 (Rev, 5/93) WPC F,\IIOME\I'LANNINGl1736,94 Poge 6 Attachment A MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM MITIGATION MEASURE At the time of Consideration of a Tentative Subdivision Map or Design Review Supplemental Acoustical Reports will be prepared for projects adjacent to Chula vista General Plan Circulation Element Roadways. At that time, the precise elevation of roadways and residential development pads will be available. With this information, it will be feasible to make an accurate forecast of noise levels and the appropriate mitigation measures necessary to reduce noise levels to an acceptable 65 exterior dBA (CNEL) standard. MONITORING REOUIREMENT Prior to granting a tentative subdivision map or design review approval. a noise study forecasting noise levels and the appropriate measures necessary to reduce noise levels to an acceptable exterior 65 dBA CNEL is required. II> ~ ~ 5-1 ..... ...... ..... ....c.\A... ..... ...... ...... ..... ...... ..... OS'2 .... ..... :+\"2!i.. ..... ...... ..... os.. 5-2 I , i , PQ.I ~ AAfA OF DENSI1Y TRANSFER . ADDED TO SPA BOUNDARY CHULA VISTA PLANNING DEPARTMENT iC) APPLICANT: Eastlake Development CO. PROJECT DESCRIPTION: , EASTLAKE GREENS ADDRESS: 900 Lane Avenue General Development Plan Amendment SCALE: FilE NUMBER: and SPA Amendment l ~RTH NO SCALE 18-94-19 Case No. 15-94-19 APPENDIX 1 ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM (To Be Completed By Lead Agency) Background 1. Name of Proponent: Eastlake DevelO1!ment Co. 2. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 900 Lane Ave.. Suite 100. Chula Vista. CA 91913 3. Date of Checklist: Februarv 24. 1994 4. Name of Proposal: Eastlake Greens GDP/SPA Amendment s. Initial Study Number: 1S-94-19 Environmental Impacts 1. Earth. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE ~ a. Unstable earth conditions or changes in geologic substrUctures? t:I t:I . b. Disruptions, displacements. compaction or overcovering of the soil? [] . [] c. Change in topography or ground surface relief featureS? t:I . t:I d. The destruction. covering or modification of any wrlque geologic or physical featureS? [] [] . e. Any increase in wind or water erosion of soils, either on or off the site? t:I . t:I f. Changes in deposition or erosion of beach sands, or changes in siltation. deposition or erosion which may modify the channel of a river or stream or the bed of the ocean or any bay. inlet or Jake? [] [] . g. Exposure of people or propertY to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud slides. ground failure. or similar hazards? [] [] . Plie 7 WPCF:~!N736.!>4 g, Exposure of people or property to geologic hazards such as earthquakes, landslides, mud slides, ground failure, or similar hazards? o o . Comments: The project is proposed for an urbanizing area of eastern Chula Vista, There have no fmding of significant problems in the areas of geology soils or erosion, Generalized and more specific substantiation of the geotechnical and soil suitability of the project site is in the City of Chula Vista General Plan FEIR (1989), EastLake FEIR (1982), EastLake SPA I FEIR (1985), Eastlake Greens SPA & EastLake Trails Prezone & Annexation FSEIR (1989), and Otay Ranch FPEIR (1993), and other more specific geological and soils reports on file with the City of Chula Vista Public Works Department, Engineering Division, There will be some modification of existing topography, however, this is considered very minor and not significant given the lack of any significant topographic features, 2, Air. Will the proposal result in: ~ MAYBE 1:ill a, Substantial air emissions or deterioration of ambient air quality? o o . b, The creation of objectionable odors? o o . c, Alteration of air movement, moisture, or temperature, or any change in climate, either locally or regionally? o o . Comments: The San Diego air basin is a non-attainment air basin, The proposed project would result in an increase of 97 units within the Eastlake Greens SPA, The emissions from the traffic and energy generation associated with this project is not significant when considering the overall generation of emissions, On a cumulative basis, the emissions from this project are so minimal they are not cumulatively significant, 3. Water. Will the Proposal result in: ~ MAYBE 1:ill a. Changes in currents, or the course or direction of water movements, in either marine or fresh waters? 0 0 . b. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, or the rate and amount of surface runoff] 0 . 0 c, Alterations to the course or flow or flood waters? 0 0 . WPC F:\HOME\PLANNING\1736.94 Page 8 e. Discharge into surface waters. or any alteration of surface water quality. including but not limited to temperarure. dissolved oxygen or turbidity? [] [] . f. Alteration of the direction or rate of flow of ground waters? C C . g. O1ange in the quantity of ground waters. either through direct additions or withdrawals. or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations? C C . h. Substantial reduction in the amount of water otherwise available for public water supplies? C [] . i. Exposure of people or property to water related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves'? C [] . Comments: The project site and vicinity do not involve any affected marine or fresh water areas. flood waters. water bodies. or known ground water. Thcre will be a minor change in absorption rate which will result in minor-less-than-significant change in JU/loff (see letter from Dennis C. Bowling dated 2(7/94). 4. Plant Life. Will the proposal result in: m ~YBE Jill a. O1ange in the diversity of species. or number of any species of plants (including tteeS. shrubs, grass, crops, and aquatic plants)'? C C . b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of plants? D C . c. Introduction of new species of plants into into an area, or in a baIrier to the nonna! replenishment of existing species? C C . d. Reduction in IIC!'CIgC of any agricu1tura1 crop? C D . Comments: The project site has been used for agricu1tura1 purposes for decades and portions are now graded ilnd some areas havc been developed (transfer area). This gencral area is used as Raptor territory, however. with only a 22.7 acre increase in SPA~, this is not significant. Page 9 wpcF:~O\I736.94 S. Animal Life. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE NO L O1ange in the diversity of species, or numbers of any species of llIirnals (birds, land animals including reptiles, fish and shellfish, benthic organisms or insects)'? [] [] . b. Reduction of the numbers of any unique, rare or endangered species of llIirnals'? [] [] . c. Introduction of new species of animals into an area, or result in a barrier to the migration or movement of animals'? .[] [] . d. Deterioration to existing fish or wildlife habitat'? [] [] . Comments: The project site has been used for agricultural purposes for decades and portions are now graded and some areas have been developed (transfer area). This general area is used as Raptor territory, however, with only a 22.7 acre increase in SPA size, this is not significant. 6. Noise. Will the proposal result in: m. MAYBE ~ L Increases in existing noise levels'? [] [] . b. Exposure of people to severe noise levels'? [] . [] Comments: Traffic volumes on roadways in and adjacent to the project site could increase ambient noise to an unacceptable level. At the time of consideration of a Tentative Subdivision Map or Design Review, supplementalacousticaI reports will be prepared for projects adjacent to O1ula Vista General Plan Circulation Element Roadways. At that time the precise elevation of roadways and residential development pads. With this information it will be feasible to make an accurate forecast of noise Jcvds and the Ikyyropriate mitigation measures necessary to reduce noise levels and the appropriate mitigation measures necessary to reduce noise levels to an acceptable 6S exterior dBA (CNEL). These acoustical reports must be based on the latest buildout traffic forecast and must validate the achievement of the 6S exterior dBA (CNEL) . Itandani " ... 10 WI'C~O\I736.P4 7. Light and Glare. Will the proposal produce new light or glare? m. MAYBE NO [J [J . Comments: This is primarily a residential project that will not produce any significant new light or glare. If there are any unique sources proposed or established. they will be regulated through the pc:rl'onnance standards in the Municipal Code. 8. Land Use. Will the proposal result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of an area? m MAYBE 1m [J [J . Comments: The proposed project is in a planned community which is internally cmsistent that assures land use compatibility. The project expansion areas are within logical boundaries (the SDG&E transmission lines and East Orange Avenue). The overall external compatibility has been assured through coordination with the adjacent Otay Ranch. Otay Water District facilities and SR 125 alignmenL 9. Natural Resources. Will the proposal result in: m. MAYBE NO a. Increase in the rate of use of any natural resources? [J [J . Comments: There are no other natural resources such as sand and gravel on site which would be impacted by the proposed project. 10. Risk of Upset. Will the proposal involve: YES MAYBE 1m a. A risk of an explosion or the release of hazardous substances (including. but not limited to oil. pesticides. chemicals or radiation) in the event of an accident or upset conditions'? [J [J . b. Possible inteIference with 811 emergency response plan or an emergency evacuation plan? [J [J . Conunents: Given the residential character of the project there will be no involvement of hazardous materials above that typical of a residential1and use. The project will provide edequate. circulation in the case of the need for an evacuation or response plan. " 1'1&011 'WI'CF,~CN736.!04 ( 11. Population. Will the proposal alter the location distribution, density, or growth rate of the human population or an area? m. MAYBE !ill [J [J . Conunents: The distribution, density and growth of housing and population in this project are consistent with planning for this area. 12. HousiD&. Will the proposal affect existing housing, or create a demand for additional housing? m. MAYBE !ill [J [J . Conunents: The distribution. density and growth of housing and population in this project are consistent with planning for this area. The project will satisfy rather than create housing demands in this area. 13. TraDsportationlCirculation. Will the proposal result in: YES MAYBE !ill a. Generation of substantial additional vehicular movement? [J [J . b. Effects on existing parking facilities, or demand for new parking? [J [J . c. Substantial impact upon existing transportation systems? [J [J . d. Alterations to present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods? [J [J . e. Alterations to waterborne, rail or air traffic? [J [J . f. Increase in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists or pedestrians? [J [J . g. A "large project" under the Congestion Management Program? (An equivalent of 2400 or more average daily vehicle trips or 200 or more peak.hour vehicle trips). [J [J . Comments: The project will not result in any significant impact to transportation/cUt:u1ation/traffic (see memo from Harold Rosenberg, Traffic Engineer, dated 2121194. and Jetter from Andy Schlaefli. Vice President, Urban Systems Associates, dated 2118194). WI'C~CN736S4 Page 12 14. Public Services. Will the proposal have an effect upon or result in a need for new or altered { governmental services in any of the following areas: m. MAYBE :ill a. Fire protection'? See page 6 of Appendix m of the [] [] . Initial Study (City Data Sheet-Fire Dept.) and 16 Thresholds a. Fire/EMS below. b. Police protection'? See comments in Chula Vista Police Dept. Crime Prevention Unit, Plan Review recommendation dated 2/4194 and 16 Thresholds b. [] [] . c. Schools'? EastLake Development Co. has made the Eastlake projects participate in Community Facilities Districts in the Sweetwater Union High School District, and the Chula Vista Elementary School District to provide adequate school services in the area. [] [] . d. Parks or other recreational facilities'? The project will be required to provide adequate community and neighborhood parks to serve the population of the project. See Initial Study. Appendix m. Parks & Recreation Dept.. page 7. Also see 19 Recreation below. [] [] . e. Libraries'? The City of Chula Vista currently operates a library at the campus of the East1alce High School during the hoUlS the school library is not in operation. On a longer tenn basis. there is a requirement for a library site at Eastlake Village and a development impact fee to finance the facility. [] [] . f. Maintenance of public facilities. including roads'? There will be no substantial or unique impact on the maintenance of anv public facility as a result of the minimal increase in usage due to this project. [] [] . g. Other governmental services'? Other governmental Bgendes were notified and contacted during the Initial Study; DO other potential impacts were identified. [] [] . IS. EDer'IY. Will the proposal result in: m. MAYBE :ill a. Use of substantial 1II1I0000t of fuel or energy'? [] [] . WPC P:'BJME'a,ANNINO\1736.9oI Paae 13 b. Substantial increase in demand upon existing sources or energy. or require the development of new sources of energy? [J [J . Conunents: The project would result in a minor increase in energy requirements typical of a primarily residential project. This will not resuh in a substantial use of fuel or energy nor new sources of energy. 16. Thresholds. Will the proposal adversely impact the City' s Threshold Standards? YES MAYBE 1m [J [J . Conunents: As described below. the proposed project does not adve:sely impact any of the seven Threshold Standards. A. FirelEMS The Threshold Standards requiIes that fire and medical units must be able to respond to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85 % of the cases and within 5 minutes or less in 75% of the cases. The City of Chula Vista has indicated that this threshold standard will be met. since the neaIe5t fire station is one mile away and would be associated with a 3 minute response time. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. See Appendix m to the Initial Study. page #6. B. Police The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84% of Priority I calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 1 calls of 4.5 minutes or Jess. Police units must respond to 62.10% of Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. See comments in Chula Vista Police Department Crime PJevention Unit, Plan Review Recommendation dated 2/4/94. C. Traffic The Threshold Standards require that all interseCtions must operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better. with the exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D" may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signalized interseetions. interseCtions west of I-80S a:e 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 a:e exempted from this Standard. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. Pile 14 WI'C~CN736S0 I , The project will not result in any significant impact to tranSpOIUtion/ciIculation/ttaffic (see memo from Harold Rosenberg, Traffic Engineer, dated ']J21194, and Jetter from Andy Schlaefli, Vice President, Urban Systems Associates, dated 2/18/94). D. parks/Recreation The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 1ICre5/1,ooo population. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. The project will be required to provide adequate commwrlty and neighborhood parks to serve the population of the project. E. Drainage The Threshold Standards require that stann water flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with the Drainage Master Plan(s) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. See letter from Dennis C. Bowling, Director Water Resources Division,m Rick Engineering, dated 2/7/94.; memo from Roger Daoust, Sr. Civil Engineer, dated ']J23/94, F. Sewer The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with Sewer Master Plan(s) and City Engineering Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard. See letter from Bruce Sloan, Sr. Project Manager, Eastlake Development Co.. dated 2/9/94; memo from Roger Daoust, Sr. Civil Engineer, dated ']J23/94. G. Water The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment. and tranSmission facilities 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 Standard. Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever water coriservlltion or fee off-set program the City of Quia Vista has in effect at the time of bui)ding permit issuance. 17. Human Health. Will the proposal result in: m 1M YBE l:iQ a. Creation of any health hazard or potential health hazard (excluding mental health? D D . wpc~CN736.~ Pili. 1S b. ( . Exposure of people to potential health hazards? [J [J . Comments: The project site nor the operation of the project would result in any significant health hazard or an exposure to such a hazard. Please refer to references in f I above. 18. Aesthetics. Will the proposal result in: m. MAYBE NO L b. The obstiuction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, or will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view? . [J [J [J [J . The destlUction, or modification of a scenic route? Comments: The project will not obstJUct any public view or vistas. aeate any demoosttable negative aesthetic effect or, at this level of review. impact a scenic route. m MAYBE !:ill 19. Recreation. Will the proposal result in an impact upon the quality or quantity of existing recreational opportunities? [J [J . Comments: The project will be required to meet the recreational needs of its residents in accordance with City park standards which include recreational facility standards. 20. Cultural Resources. YES MAYBE !:ill L Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destlUction or a prehistoric or historic archaeological site? [J [J . b. Will the proposal result in advme physical or aesthetic effects to a prehistoric or historic building. strueture. or object? Does the proposal have the potmtial to cause a physical change which would affect unique ethnic cultural values? Will the proposal restrict existing religious or sacred uses within the potential impact area? [J [J . [J '[J . c. [J [J . d. p.e 16 wpc~CN736S4 e. Is the area identified on the City's . General Plan EIR as an area of high potential for archeological resources? ( [] [] . Comments: See Section 5.2.3 (pg. 5-3) of EIR"86-4 (Sch: 86052803). m MAYBE ~ 21. Paleontological Resources. Will the proposal result in the alteration of or the destruction of paleontological resources? ' [] . [] Comments: See Section 4.7 (pg. 4-75) of EIR-86-4 (Sch: 860522803). 22. Mandatory Findin&S or Significance. YES MA YBE ~ a. Does the project have the potential to 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 community. reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant animal or eliminate important examples or the major periods of California history or prehistory? [] [] . Comments: As has been noted above in this checklist. the site is void of any biological resources and therefore. would have no significant impact on any of these resourceS. Cultural resources (prehistoric and historic) have been previously mitigated and no further action is necessary. b. Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term goals to the disadvantage of long- term. environmental goals? (A short-term impact on the environment is one which occurs in a relatively trief, definitive period of time. while long-term impacts will endure well into the future.) [] [J . Comments: The proposed project conform to the QuIa Vista General Plan and therefore, the project complies with the long term goals of the City of ChuIa Vista for the site. Page 17 WPC p,\IIC1NEII'I>>INCN736.M c. Docs the project have impacts which are individually limited. but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total of those impacts on the environment is significant.) D D . Comments: The project impacts are so limited to preclude IIIIY significant cumulative impact. In the case of air quality impacts, the increase of 97 units, or I maximum of 970 ADT, compared to the existing,lIIId approved units IIIId ADT, the impact is minimallllld less than significant. Also, the site is void of IIIIY significant biological or cultural resources IIIId paleontological resources will be fully mitigated. d. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial advent effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly? D D . Comments: At the time of consideration of a Tentative Subdivision Map or Design Review, supplemental acoustical reports will be prepared for projects adjacent to Chula Vista General Plan Circulation Element Roadways. At that time the precise elevation of roadways IIIId residential development pads. With this infonnation it will be feasible to make l1li accurate forecast of noise levels IIIId the appropriate mitigation measures necessary to reduce noise levels IIIId the appropriate mitigation measures necessary to reduce noise levels to l1li acceptable 65 exterior dBA (CNEL). These acoustical reports must be based on the latest buildout traffic forecast and must validate the achievement of the 65 exterior dBA (CNEL) standard. Poae 18 WI'C~(N736.94 Mitiaation Measures (To be completed by the Applicant) I. as owner/owner in escrow. &ur.! N. $<.0;.',/\/ SR. "P!<n';f' IIt::R EI?s-rt,(K.l 7)Et/ c" Print name or . I. consultant or agent ~OO......,. ""'"' """""............... '"_. Z /t.~ jql' Signature Date Determination (To be completed by the Lead Agency. Check one box only.) On the basis of this initial evaluation: [J I find that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment, and a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be FPared. . I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. [J I find the proposed project MAY bave a significant effect on the environment, and an ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT is required. ~~./'1</ '-f1I! ~n..:..t (-I~"":'I J Environmental Review ' ator' , - Date "If acting for a corporation. include capacity and company 1W1IC. WPC F:'HOIdEIPlAIOONGII736.,. Pile 19 Case No. -:r,~ - q'-l - \'1 APPENDIX n DE MINIMIS FEE DETERMINATION (Chapter 1706. StatUtes of 1990 - AB 3158) . It is hereby found that this project involves no potential for any adverse effect. either individually or cumulatively on wildlife JeS0UICe5 and that a "Certificate of Fee Exemption". shall be prepared for this project. It is hereby found that this project could potentially impact wildlife. individually or cumulatively and therefore fee in accordance with Section 711.4 (d) of the FISh and Game Code shall be paid to the County Clerk. ~""'05. ~e ~d ~e.:>'c..:>s.",-, ...;:;~~~.. ~ \ R .litc/\ ~I.<>."" c;..~ G~'-' ~e:::>~<o~~"" 9\0.". ~ rt.;.J--Ic,~~) Environmental Revi w Coordinator 0I~'i"/'i <{ Date Paae 20 WI'C _OMIN'\ANIIINGIl'/3U4 - . " . CeseNo. 1~-qt.\~I'\ APPENDIX III CITY DATA SHEET PLANNING DEPARTMENT L n. m. ~rrent Zonin!! on site:--2c.. Nonh . South ,. East JI West ~ (~ f.m--,.~.~ ., I. II " Does the project confonn to the current zoning?-f ~. ~ . ~ - ~""""1 L....~4c.) ~eral Plan land use ~::atiL ~it~ ;:::- j~~.::...~':~'f\.~: ~-:J:?-<.~ South East ~_ ~.(~ '''''A.~~ A.......A.....7AJ a-I- DV~~~ West ~ ';"'!r. II 'I It ;!J.~' ,. I ~~ Is Ihe project compatible with Ihe General Plan Land Use Diagram? --S u...., Is the project II'U designated for conservation or open space or adiacent to an area 10 designated? ~-- If the proposed project is residential. please complete Ihe foUowing: 0IDentiDI Jll:1cn .!O . :J9 . .10 SlIIdeDlS GeDerated from Proiect IV. Units S~hoo1 ~.!)atitv EnrOl1m~t PmDose4 E'--"", ~.J.J .,,~' - - 47 JtmiorHiah ~......,,;~ 4f' SeaIor Hiah ~t;J. L- "t 7 -:;J:~ ~: ~!~.:; ~~ ~~~ !11~~.11 2." "-V .0 fJ~ l4~~. Director ofti.nrung or ~sen~ve :I:z.'J../~i D I -~ ~=-IU.laUn)(llf.I02U3) ..... 1 ~ APPUCATION CANNOT BE ACCEPTED UNLESS SITE PLAN IS FOLDED TO FIT INTO AN 8-1(2 X 11 FOLDER ...-,....,..,., -. ;~:~rMJ (t>pst:~t:'7<1~ ;~iK~r_.'. A.~Ptc:d~)' 't)m' Pi9ject}olo.FAc . .r ~~p~~~~1a~~ta ~~~,~~,~; BACKGROUND .~~ ~o;: ...., .......,.. .. 1. Project Title Eastlake Greens GDP /SPA Amendment ."JJ.'.;' 2. ' Project Location (Stteet address or description)East of SR- 1 2S, North of. orange Ave, South of otay Lakes Rd./ Telegraph Canyon Rd., . and West of Hunte Parkway_ A. INITIAL STUDY Assessors Book. Page &. Parcel No. NA 3. Brief Project Description The project is a transfer of D.V. within the existing Eastlake Greens SPA (no net increase) and an expans~on of the SPA boundary (22.7 ac and 97 dU).Refer to attached Project Descril 4. Name of Applicant Eastlake Development Company Address 900 Lane Ave., Ste. 100 Fax#421.,1S30 Phone 421-0127 City Chula Vista. State CA Zip 91913 S. Name of Preparer/Agent Gary Cinti - Cinti Land Planning Address 3625 Midway Dr., *292 Fax# 223-5108 Phone 223-7408 . City San Diego State CA Zip 92110 Relation to Applicant Land Planning Consultant 6. Indicate all pcnnits or approvals and enclosures or documents required by the Environmental Review Coordinator. ( a. Permits or approvals required. _ General Plan Amendment ~ RezontJPrezone . _ Onding hnnit _Tclllalh:e Parcel Map _ Site Plan at Arch. Review . ____ Special Use Permit )( Design Review Application X Tcnwive Subd. Map . _ Rcdevelopmeot Ar.erK:'J OPA _ RcdcvelDpmcnt Ar.CDCy DDA ___ Public Project +- AmleUlioo ____ SpecifIC Plan ~ Conditional Use Permit _ VuiaDce _ Coastal DcvcJopmc:nt J(. 0Ihcr I'I:nnit &'liP SR' If project is a General Plan Amendment andlor rezone, please indiClte the c:bange in designation from to b. Enclosures or documents (as required by the Environmental Review Cooniinator). ( _ Grading Plan _ Pan:el Map , . Precise Plan = Specific Plan _ TraffIC Impact Report _ Hazardous Waste Assessment Arch. Elevations . - Landscape Plans = Tcnwive SubcL.Map _ Improvement Plans _ Soils Report _ Geotechnical Report _ Hydrological Study _ Biological Study _ Archaeological Study _ Noise Assessment _ ~r Ar.cncy Permit -X-~r Project Descripti. . B. PROPOSED PROJECT 1. a. 161.4 (amend. area) Land Area: square footage or 8creage B <; J _ 2 f SPA area) If land area to be dedicated. state acreage ~d pwpose. . b. Does the project involve the constrUCtion of new buildings. or will existing structure be ~? Yes, see Project Description. 2. Complete this section. if project is residential or mixed use. L Type of developmen~ Single Family _ Two Family ~ Multi Family Townhouse Condominium' - - , b. Total number of structures 2871 residential du permi ttted c. Maximum height of structures varies per P.C. District Regulations d. Number of Units: 1 bedroom ...12- 2 bedroom ..liA- 3 bedroom ....12- 4 bedroom ..liA- Total Units ~ e. Gross density (DU/total acres) :3.4 f. Net density (DU/total acres minils any dedication) 6.6 g. Esamated project population to be determined h. Estimated sale or !ental price range to be determined i. Square footage of structure to be determined j. Percent oflot covClagC by buildings or sttuctures per P .C.' Regulations Ie. Number of on-site parking spaces to be provided per P.C. Requlations 1 Percent of site in road and paved surface to be determined X Complete this section if project is commercial or industrial or mixed use. L Type(s) of land use b. Floor ~ Height of lCr\JCtURS(s) Co Type' of consttuction used in the ItI:UCtIue d.Desaibc auVor access points to die suucturcs end the orientation to adjoining properties end streets Co Number of on-site parking spaces provided f. Estimated number of employees per shift Number of shifts Total g. ~cd number of ~01llClS (per day) and basis of estimate WPCIF:Oi~OZI",," (W. mD.b) (W 10Z2.f.I1 Paoe: 1. Hours of operation Type of exterior lighting }c.. , ,If project is other than residential, commerci.al or industrial complete this sedion. . a. Type of project . h. i j~ .k. L Estimated num~r of deliveries per day Estimated range of service area and basis of estimate Type/extent.of operations not in enclosed buildings b. Type of facilities provided Co Square feet of enclosed structures d. Height of sttucture(s) - mwrnum c. Ultimate occupancy load of project f. Number of on-sitc paIting spaces to be provided g. Square feet of road and paved swfaccs h. Additional p~ject dwacteristics C. PROJECT CHARACTERISTICS 1. Will the project be required to obtain a pennit through the Air Pollution Control District (APCD)? No. " 2. Is any type of grading or. cxcavmon of tbci property anticipated? Yes, based on future . Bubm1ttaJ.s. If yes, complete 1;he following: a. Excluding trenches to be backfilled, how many.cubic yards of earth will be excavated? NA b. How many cubi~ yards of fill will'be placed? NA Co, How much area (sq. ft. or acres) will be graded? NA d. What will be Ihe: ~m depth of cut NA . Avenge depth.of cut NA Maximum,depth of fill NA Average depth offill NA '~02I.....tJca.r.l_tJ)ca.r.llI22.tJ) Pace 3 ( 3. Descri~ all energy consuming devices which are part of the proposed project and the type of energy used (air conditioning. electrical appliance. heating equipmeiu. etc.) Nnrm~l TP~idential enerav use. 4. Indicate dIc amount of natural open space that is pan of ,dIc project (sq. ft. or acres) None. 5., If the project will JeSUIt in any employment opportunities dcsaibe dIc IUIIW'c and type of these jo~. Construction related 'jobs. " 6. Will highly flammable or potentially explosive materials or substances -be used or stored within . . the project site? NA 7. How many estimated automobile trips. per day. will be generated by the project? None in excess of those addressed in previousEIR. II. Describe [If any) off-siteimprovcments M~SSIl)' to impIcmcnt the project. and dlcir points of . access or COMCCtion to the project site. Improvements include but not Jimitcd to the fonowing: . new streets; street ~idening; extension of gas. eleCtric. and sewer lines; cut and fill slopes; and pcdcst:rian and bicycle facilities. None in excess of those previously' identified for EastLake Greens. (refer ~n Ra~tL~k~ Gr~enRPFFP). D. DESCRIPTION OF ENVIRONMENTAL SE1TING 1. . Geolol!V Has . geology study been conducted On the propcny? Yes, see Eastlake Greens ErR. (If )'CS. please attach) Has a soils repon on the project site been made? Yes. see Eastlake Greens EIR. (If )'CS. please attach) i 2. ,Hvdrolol!V , Arc any of the fonowing features present on or adjacent to the sue? (If )'CS. explain in detail.) L ' Is chcrc any surface evidence of a shallow growtd water table? No.' ,.' ~02I..u:scw:._tJlCW: 10Z1.tJ1 ..... b. c. d. e. 3. Noise L b. Axe there any watercourses or drainage improvements on or adjacent to the site? In previously approved facilities. Does runoff from the project site drain directly in to or toward a domestic Water supply. lake, reservoir or bay? No. Could drainage from the site cause erosion or siltation to adjacent areas? Potential exists but would be mitigated by conditions to future T.T. map , . besaibe all drainage facilities to be provided and their location. To be determined bv future submittals and previously approved tract map. Axe there any noise 1Ourc:es in the project vicinity which may impact the project site? No. Future arterials may impact some areas. Will noise from the project impact any sensitive I'CCCptOlS (hospitals, schools, single- family residences)? No. 4. Biolol!V L Does the site involve any Coastal Sage Scrub vegetation? No. b. Is the project site in a natural or partially naturaJ ~e? No. c. If yes, has a biological survey been conducted on ihe property? Yes x, No (Please attach a COPY.)Refer to previous EIR. d. Describe all trees and vegetation on the site. Indicate location, height, diameter, and species of trees, and which (if any) will be removed by the project. 8i te is semi- developed with remnants of previous dry farming/cattle grazing on. the remainder, S. Past Use of the Land L Axe there any known historical or archeological resources located on or near the project site? No. b. . Arc there any known paleontological reSources? No. c. Have there been any hazardous materials disposed of or stored on or near the project site? No. d~ What was the land previously used loti Dry farming/Cattle grazing WI'C-,F.IIIOMltII'IANHIN0IS'I'UREI70I02'.A.'.' (lid. 102UJI (lid. 1022-'JI p_s 6. Current Land Use a. Describe: all structures and land uses CUITently existing on the project site. **See answer below** b. Describe: all struCtures and land uses currently existing on adjacent propcny. North Eastlake Business Center' Souili Vacant Otay Ranch - Future development Ean Vacant - Future Eastlake Neighborhoods V(~ Eastlake High School/Community Park and Future developmer 7. Social . . . ~ofte on parcels proposeq fQr an increase L Axe ilierc any residents on IUC1. If 10, bow manY-I in units. b. Axe there any CUrTent employment opportunities on lite? No. If 50, how many and what type? 8. PJcase provide any other infonnation which may assist in the evaluation of the proposCdproject. Sites have been fully evaluated in Eastlake Greens SPA EIR and recent General Plan Amendment EIR for Land Swap areas. See also attached Project Description for additional aa~a. **Answer to 6(a): Construction/structures exists on approx. one-half of EastLake Greens. Parcels proposed for amend- ment with existing structures are only being amended to reflect existing conditions with no increase in units. , WPC:F.1~011-A." IRcf.I02D.9J) IW.ICI22.9J) Pqe6 E. CERTIFICATION ( I. IS ownerIowuer in escrow. F.~stl~keDevelopment Company ~ruce Sloan. Proiect Manager Print name or 1, consultant or agent. Print name HEREBY AFFIRM. that to the best of my belief, the statements and infonnation herein contained are in all respects 1nIC and correct and that all known infonnation concerning the project and its letting has been included in this application for an Initial Study of possible environmental impact and any enclosures for attachments thereto. . ~ Owner/Owncr in Escrow Signature or ~ or Agent Signature / / ,d~tf I ' Date -If ICting for a corPoration. include capacity and company name. .... 7 ~ ..tr.lWl'WD.ft'nDcn..t~ ILL lmrLeJ\JIIt!llZ1.D) INITIAL STUDY PROCESSING AGREEMENT Name of Applicant: Eastlake Development Company ~ 900 'Lane Ave., Ste. 100 Cil)': Chula Vista SIaIc CA Name of AUIhorized ReprcsenIaIive ("If' IiplDlory): 1'1 TU ce S loa n ~ Qon T.Anp J..v~.. Sf:.@ 100 City . "h" 1 2 \1'4 ~ ~::II State CA Apement Date: Deposit Amount $ 7 5 0 . 00 'Ibis Apeanent ("Agreement, between the City of 0IuIa Vista, a dw1erod municipal corporation ("City") 8Dd the forenamed applicant for III Initial Study (" Applicantj, drecIM as of die ~ Date ICI forth aiIove, Ii made with merence to the following faas: Phone 421-0127 Zip 91913 Phone 4"_0127 Zip 91913 Whereas. the Applicant bas applied to the City for III Initial Study of the type 1C000000erenced ("Initial Study' which the City bas required to be obtained as a condition to permitting the App1iclnt to develop a parcel of p.openy: IIId. Whereas. the City wiJl incur expenses in order to process said Initial Study through the mOIlS departments and Were the various boards and commissions of the City ("Processing Services"); 1IId. Whereas. the purpose of this agreement is to reimburse the City for all expenses it wiJl incur in connection with providing the Processing Services; Now, therefon:, the parties do hereby aa=. in caehange for the mutual promises hcnin conlaincd, lIS follows: L Applicant's Duty to Pay. The Applicant sha11 pay all of the City's expenses Incumd in providing Processing Service Idatcd to applicant's Initial Study. including all of the City's direct and overlIead c:osIs rdaIed Ihcreto. 'Ibis duty of the Applicant sha11 be memd to berein lIS the "Applicant's Duty to Pay." A. Applicant's Deposit Duty As parti:ll performance of the Applicant's Duty to Pay, the ApplicantsbaU cIepasiIthe IIIIOUIIt 1C000000erencec1 ("Deposit'. 1. The City sha11 char&e its lawful cpenses Incumd in providing f'.DCCISing Scr.ices 'against the App1icant's DeposiL 1f,ICIer the conclusion of ",~g the Applicant's Initial Study, any portion of the Deposit RII\Ii1IS. the City sha11 RtunI said balance to the Applicant without interest 1hcreon. If, during the pocessing of the Appliclnt'slnitial Study, the IIIIOIIIIt of ~ Deposit 'becomes exhausted. or is imminelltly likely 10 become exhausted in the opinion of the City. upon notice of same by the City ,the Applicant shall forthwith provide lOCh additional deposit as the City sha11 caltvll'lt as _lably lie{ '''1 10 continue to provide P;ocessing SeMa:s. The duty of the Applicant to initiaJly deposit and to supplement said deposit as herein required sha11 be known as the "Applicant's Deposit Duty". D. City's Duly The City shall, upon the condition that the Applicant is not in breach of the Applicant's Duty 10 Pay or the Applicant's Deposit Duty. use good faith to provide plocesslng IClVices in relation to the ~cant's Initial Study application. ' ~021""'91(W 102O.91)(W 1022.91) PAIC a ( Tht City shall haVt no lliIbility huwnda to tht Applicant for Iht fail= 10 process Iht Applicant's Initial Study application. or for failure 10 process tht Applicant's Initial Study within tht limt framt Rq~ by \he Applicant or tsIim:lltd by tht City. B. By Qecution of \hiS asreement. tht Applicant shall have DO right 10 cIi=t or ~ influence tht conduct of lilt Initial Study for which \he I\Pplicant bas I\Pplitd The City Iha11 1* its discretion ill evaluating 1M Appliclnt'slnitial SIUdy Ipp!icllion wiIhouI regard ID 1M Applicant's pomise ID pay for 1M P\ocess;ng Services. or thC eucalion of tht ~ A. m. IlemeditS A. Suspension of Processing In addition 10 all odIcr riahls IIId rcmodiea which tht City Jha11 ~ haft at law er equity, tht City bas tht rightlD auspmd lDdIor withholc1lM ....ceasi.\g cllM lniIiaI-SlUdy which I: tht IUbp:t maI\C2' or \hiS Agreement, .. weU .. tht Initial Study which may be 1M IUb~ mailer of any other Permit which Applicant bas before tht City. B. Civil Co11ec\ion In addition 10 all oIha righls IIId ranedies which tht City Jha11 ocMrwise have all law er equity, lilt City bas \he right 10 c:oUcct all sums which arc or may becomt due hcrcundcr by civil .won, and upon instituting litigation ID c:oUcd _, tht p-evailing party Iha11 be entitled ID nasonablt atIOn\ty's f= had c:osIS. IV. MisceIJaneous A. Notices All notices. tbnands er Rquests provickd for er pamiaed 10 be liven puramnllO \hiS Agreement ' mUSl be in writing. All notices. demands and Rquesls 10 be JaltlO any party aha1I be clccmed 10 have been propc:rIy liven er served if penona1ly served er dqIosited in tht United SIaICS mail, adchssed ID such party, postagt prepaid, registcmt or cenifitd. with relum n:c:eipt Rquested. at tht addressc:s ickntiC'~ adjacentlD 1M aignatures cl tht panitS ~ B. Governing Law/Venut This Agn:cment sha1l be loverned by and c:onsIIIIed in 8CCOI'CIance with tht Laws of tht SlaIt cl Ca1ifornia. Any action arising under er relating ID \hiS Agreement aha1I be brought only in 1M fedual er stale couns located in San Diego County. Stale or Ca1ifornia. and If Ipplicablt. tht City of Chub vistA. er .. clost thereIo .. possibk. Venut for Ibis. qrcieIMII\, and performance hmunder. aha1I be tht City of Quia Vista. . C. Nultipk SignatoritS If Ih= arc multiple signatories ID Ibis asreemcnt on behalf of App1icant, each cl auch signatories Jha11 be jointly and ItveraUy liable fer tht petfonnance of Applicant's duties Iten:in let forth. D. Sigt\llOl)' Authority The signatory 10 Ibis agr=ment hereby WIIJIIIIS IIId ......:5/ nls tlmt it is tht duly designalCd IpIt for Iht Applicantllld has been duly authorized by tht Applicant ID QecuIe \hiS Agreement on behalf of tht ApplicanL Signatory aha1I be penona11y liable for Applicant's Duty 10 Pay and Applicant's Duty 10 Deposit in tht event it has not been authorized 10 eucute Ibis A,..--t by the ApplicanL ~02I''''''3(1101.ID3D.93)(IId'.Icm.931 Paae 9 E. Hold Harmless I \ Applicant sha1l defend, indemnify and hold harmless the City, its elected md appointed o(facas and employees, from and against all daims ror clama&es. liability, cost md Cltpense (including wilhout limitalion anomeys' rees) arising out or processing Applicant's Initial Study. Cltcept only ror diose cbims arising CJOm the sole ncgliScnte or sole wiIlCuI conduct or the City. incumd by the City. its oCrlCClS, qcnts, or employees in defending against such claims. whether the same proceed 10 judgement or DOL Funber. the Applicant, at its own Cltpense. 1halI. upon written RqUCSt by the City, defend any such suit or action brought against the City. its officas. agents, or employees. Applicant's indemnika1ion cl the City IhalI be limbed by any prior or subsequent declaration by the ApplicanL Administrative Claims Requirements and Procedures. No suit or arbi\l':ltiOll sh:l1l be brought arising out cl Ibis 8!1' eement, against die City .inless a claim lias fust been presented in writing and flied with the City or Chula Vista and acted upon by the City of Chula Vista in accordance with the poc:ecIiRs &I rorth in Chapter \.304 cl the 0wIa Vista Municip:ll Code, as same may from lime 10 lime be amended. die provisions or which are Incorporated by the reference as if rully set rorth herein. and such poUcics md procedures used by the City in the implemenlation or same. Upon request by the City, the Applicant sha1l meet and confer in good faith with the aty ror the purpose or resolving any dispute over die tamS or this AgreemenL Now. therefore. the parties hereto.l!aving r=d and undersIood the terms and conditions of this agreement, do hereby Cltpres5 their consent 10 the tamS hereor by setting their hand hereto 011 the date set rorth adjacent thereto. F. City City or Chula Vista 216 Fourth Avenue ;~~ Dated: ~/ '/1'1 ' Applicant (or authorized representative) Bruce Sloan, Project Mgr. Eastlake Development Company By; By; Dated: .' fI&e 10 ~.21""'''CW,I02D.''I(W.ID22.J31 '1 ~, THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT SI.'''"'''''t of disclosure of c:enain owuership interests, payments, or campaign coDlributions, on all matters which wi11 require discretiOllll)' action on the pan of the City Council. PIaIIning Commission,1IId all other official bodies. The following information must be disclosed: I. 2. 3. Ust the _ of all persons have . finaDciaJ inIerest in the conlnCl, i.e.. CODIJ'ICIOr, subcontractor aweriallllpplier. . ' R~~~18ke DeveloDment Company If l1li)' penon ideulified punuanllO (I) above is . corporltion or pu1Denhip, list the IIIDICS of all iDdividuail ownin& more than 10" oftbe IIwa fa the oorporadon or ownin& l1li)' pIItDeJShip III1erest in Ihe partnerShip. .,. t: 'Rn~wP 11 If any person identified pumllllllO (I) above is DOn-profit OI'Ianizllion or . uust, list the IIIDICS of any penon serving as director of the non-profit ora...;ulion or as uustee or beneficialy or uustee of the UUSt. tJl1 4. Have you had more than $2SO wonh of business _ed with any -'- of the City lUff, Boards, Commissions, CommitteeS and Council within the past twelve months? No . , s. Please identify each and eveI)' person, including any Igents, employees, consuIlIIIIS or iDd~t\ent contrlClOrs who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. Rnh Santos. Kent Aden. Bruce Sloan, Katy Wright 6. Have you mdlor your officers or 19erl!S, fa the 1UfC11Ie. contributed more than $1.000 10 . Council ~ in the c:uncm or precedin& dection period? Ya ( ] No "J If yes. IWe which Council 1II"V''''''is): . '- II dcfiaIId u: -. iIIdiYiduI1. firm. co-pu"IIIa'Ihi,Joim..... _ .. ..... ~ club. fIa-..J orr..l j .........- d~D.ISIIte. . -. _.1) .........-0Dd aIIJ' __.dIy ODd _.dIy. . ....;,y.diIIricI.._poIiIioaI---...." - paap . ~L'--tMe III:IiD& u . aait. . (NO'm: -.....' '...... -ty) ~k Bruce Sloan, proJect Manager Date: . Eastlake Development Cdmpany Print or type _ of contractor/applicant YS-S"ll Case No. -,:.~ -q""-f"f INTERDEPARTMENTAL COMMENT SHEETS ENGINEERING DIVISION I. Drainal!e A. J!; the project site within a flood plain'? ,Jo. If so. state which FEMA Floodway Frequency Boundary. ~'" . B. What is the location and description of existing on-site drainage facilities'?.sv~~.z: I="I.d4/ Il> ~WIA~.AJ.J" CITY 9r1::JJ!/ut~~..,.~ ~-IIM.'vI!!V~~ CY<S7"'II!AJI C. Axe they adequate to serve the project'? LID. If not. please explain briefly, 'Pl!L:I7"~/-- ~IR~ .,.,DL.,aJA/:.';:' IMP~':':~ W,u.. ~ ~---(fU'P~O WII&#.J T>e~1 AAA~~ ""'/1 JJX: - D. What is the location and description of existing off-site drainage facilities'? ~I ~/''''... 'PII ~AAJ"'~ r.De'1!:"JI' ~~1:. .l'A"'VrJJ "'~K AND ~t."- ~.r.eU' I ' E. Axe they adequate to serve the project'? NO. If not, please explain briefly. 1l~/./J?I.,AL. /M~o/.,.~e..-n::. ~y - ~/.~~Ai - f/oJ -n+E.. ~-r: {'~tY-.J AIJD ........T ~'~11!. ~^'~ AS ~"E.l~~ /'}/ .L-I J&L. . n. ~1~1~4- ,,; \ 1ranroonation AiJ NA~ -rD -nt~ -rPAFfI'lc' srtC>Y lip.. 'Rt!' J1iI.~1:I! &~'''5r. SPA E.fR.w'Iu..~. 1Zk;P/~(Y"(. f",c/Jg'l$E. IN '("1qA.FFu;.;:;W;; ~"'rne.1oJ ~ A. What roads provide primary access to the project'? 6Xt9r#0J6. ~ B. What is the estimated number of one-way auto nips to be generated by the project (per day)'? $). C. What are the Average Daily Traffic (A.D.T.) volumes on the.primary 8CCCSS I'OIIds before and after project completion1 Street Name Before Afrrz Do any of these volumes exceed the City's Level-of-ServiI:e (LO.s.) .C" design ADT volume'? If yes, please specify. .' ~C7'$TOREIN=p) (J.", 1021.93) (14, ID2U3) '''' 2 . Y$ -9f I Case No. rt;-'?4-fq If the A.D,T. or L.O.S. "C" design volume is unknown or not applicable. explain briefly. . D. Are the primal)' access roads adequate to serve the project? If not, please explain briefly. E. Would the project create unacceptable Levels of Service (LOS) at interseetions adjacent to or in the vicinity of the project site? If so, identify: Locinion Cumulative L.O.S. F. Is the proposed project a "large project" under the Congestion Management Program? (An equivalent of 2400 or more average daily vehicle trips or 200 or more peak-hour vehicle trips). If yes, a Traffic Impact Analysis (TlA) will be required. In this case the TlA will have to demonstrate that the project will not create an unmitigatable adverse impact, or that all related traffic impacts are not mitigated to a level of non-signifICance. Yes No The following questions apply if a Traffic Impact Analysis is not required. G. Is traffic mitigation required to reduce traffic impacts that will result from implementation of the proposed project? Yes No If yes, please describe. H. Is the project co!l~istent with the aiteria established in the City's Transportation Phasing Plan. General Plan Traffic Element, and all other penment traffIC studies? Please seference any other traffic impact stUdies for roadway segments that may be impacted by the poposed project. L J. Is a traffIC study required? Is there any dedication required? If so, please specify. Yes No Pile 3 WI'C~022.93 (aof.IIIUn)(aof. IADn) . YS-9f1 Case No. I$ .J1L(--{"f K. Is there any street widening required? If so. please ~cify. L. Arc there any other street improvements required? If so. please specify the senera1 nature of the aecessary improvements. M. Will the project and rdate4 public improvements provide satisfactory traffic lervice for existing conditions and future buildout General Plan conditions? (please provide a b,rief explanation). m. ~oils IV. A. Arc there any anticipated adverse geotechnical conditions on the project site? IJIoJ KJ.JDw.J . B. If yes, spec~y these conditions, ~A- . c. Is a Soils Report necessary? YG~ FE:)('(S-rIlJr.. SDI / ~ IZ~TS MlJS~~ DtD\-n:D /rlJt>/tJIZ. AM~~ 7?> (i>J4JJr::>e 'n(-E AqjAS Land Form N./A . 'P1?c~~ 'Tl) ~ M'fY"r:> Tt> 7"HE EX/STl~, ~(!'P ~PA . . A. What is the average natural slope of the site? B. What is the maximum natural slope of the site? V. ~ Arc there any ttaffic-related noise levels impacting the site that Ire significant tIIough to justify that a noise analysis be required of the applicant? 1J#J"'..Lo>lA& I. AJJ Au ~LI~1A~'r "Tr.) TuF ~A t;;/~ ,/JO(Se ~V5(S tVl4. Be. ~/~r:> . VL Waste Generation How much solid and liquid (sewer) waste wiD be pnerated by the proposed project per day? Solid ~ 'PIWJ,JDC. _~ DAY I'JIlIEIl... ~tr 1!W14iin~, At:\U~~ c:;'PA Liquid . ~';;;':~~6 ~.Q. D4yh!:'.:15" ~LJ~)l)v~ "r'U6 &)((qn~ A~lOb~_ ~ ' What is the location and size of existing sewer lines on or downstrelm from the lite? ,~.. Pv~ S~ urJ~ I-.J ~,.~;1'>AA"'L. "'-'-aIVn",J 11'!f'a.'I J~"'~ ~ AAl~ .It 12,t ~ ~ ~A.I~ ~JJ e:~ve PAiJ"'_-I (,.,-,.;; ~:"'e? ~~ (I.J.(T'Ul.u.."'JAu.. AI-1W~ wh,' ~ Vi .J W equate to s~ fpr ~ pr9ject? (If no. please explain) 1.10. SoME. SEI:.M~~ \~ K~~' & ]\\";\ ~ ~";";'J"7OItrl'.61Alr:>,.,-.;~. AMI!!.I.J~=1'rC. Tl:.> "'1'JIE 1"" r::~1UtPII t!A.t./"'JOIol ~,.L ~ 'P(..,4o(J HJD ~ ~(Jp~~v SE~ &'SiN Pu.#J WfU- Sf!: ~V(Deh. WI'C~D22.:!3 ~.IIIZI.9S)(Iot 1020,93) Pip" ~..gr ( CaseNo.~ VD. ~ationaJ Pol1utant Discharl!e Elimination Svstem CNPDES) Stormwater Reauirements Will the applicant be required to file a Notice of Intent with the Stale Water Resources Control Board for coverage under an NPDES StormWaler Pennit? YE~. , If yes. specify which NPDES permit(s) ~d explain why an NPDES permit is required. "'/oJ N.~ .WploAl"- -F'?' ~Ll.W~' ":J)(~.u.nt:.~~ ~r~.A~ wrn4 &&..l&.lr'flJV:~t>-.J !:~""'';'''':''IE.~. J" ~~,.,- ,< p,:::".:<(, ,tJ')~ 8e"'~u~e ,.,v"q;l '::/11'1;: AJI'~ :'U _ T.J19-v1Z...",t7 A+(b 7lJ::'/"..M~~ ft!>~ ~/r>P&.fE...,.,- /~ ~ ~F: ~ ~P~-() /'.m.ANf~ cr.A IJ ot= l::>E.//e'.J1AAaJ'r CR. S\I &" . Will a Storm Waler Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) be required for the proposed project? ',)( Yes No Additional comments IololJ.t!: . VD. Remarks Please identify and discuss any :emaining potential adverse impacts. mitigalion measures. or other issues. j74-e. ~/_fL:..A..,.,- ~ A!bA'o&EC1 JrSs.r~."--"",- "1}~I~"- ':1&'A"""'I~ F'oA. V,.JAI , C lAAe>I!JJI/~M'..n-z,. cih f q.f . . , Date ~~O%U3(RG,11I!1")(RG.102D.93) PIF' . Case No. JS-Q4-IGJ nRE DEPARTMENT A. What is the distance to the nearest fire station? ~ what is the Fire Depanment'. estimated reaction time? ~+o sL t, ~In"n. f'l"GNion +iVV\t:J : B. Will the Fue Dep~ment be able to provide an .scquate level of fire pvcection for the proposed facility without an increase in equipment or peDOMel'1 'I e.s. C. Remarks A.)OA.)e ~' V(1f[)f)i/J,,/U F" Marshal ot/{;}o/q'f Date . . - .' t ~m" fJfI.ICUJICJoI,IO>>.fJ) --- -.--,-...-- -- ",Ii - . Case No.-15-9+ I'j PARKS AND RECREATION DEPARTMENT A. Is project subject to Parks and Reaeation Threshold requirements? '(ji:S. If Dot, please explain. How many IaeS of parkland are ~~sPry to serve the proposed project? ~ ~ . ~~~ ".) c::;~ kp('"-'" c...-z.I\iJ\"I~' An existing neiJbborbood and community parks Dell'the project .sequate to sezve the population iDcrease suuhing from this project? Neighborhood ~ Community Parks tJ O. If not, are parkland dedications or other mitigation proposed as pan of the project adequate to serve the population increase'? Neighborhood ,,\"!~ Community Parks \' ~ ' To meet City requirements, will applicant be required to: Provide land'? 'rit-S Pay a fee'? '1",.,1' , Remarks: .B. c. D. E. F. . . . - tV". ~,~ ~."'f."'I't- Dare Parks and Reaeazion DirecIor or hpresr.hye .' .... 7 . Case No. 15-q4-/q LANDSCAPE PLANNING A. Does the project affect native plant conununities? If 10, pJease identify which communities. ~ Wi11the project RquUe native plantini? (pJease describe) ~ ~ ~ . B. PJease identify InY imponant or bi&hly vWbJe hiDsides 011 or adjlCelU to the project. ~ Who """""~' <0""_ (;f ~y).... '" ........,..............., ~ ~~~~:;~';;; ;;~_I J~ C. Of the totalue. to be developed, how much, Ind which IJ'eIS ue eXJ1CClCd to be Rplanted and Rquire supplemental watering? (pJease describe). E. Aze there InY other landscape requirements or mitiption for the project? t\.O ." , ~ ~s;~rve .,....~ ~~.......Cft.1D22." u. 1021n)..,. 1~~) ... ( ROUTING FORM DATE: January 18. 1994 I , / i I ! . ~ I '-. rl-~'~ ~~' .. ~.n urson, .JIu.UcUn9'~ lIoudn9'J ~ohn Lippitt, En9'ineerin9' (EIR only) Cliff swanson, En9'ineerin9' (EIR only) Hal Rosenberg, Engineerin9' (EIR only) Roger Daoust, En9'ineerin9' (15/3, EIR/2) Richard RUdolf, Asst City Attorney (Draft Neg Dec ~ EIR) Carol Gove, Fire Department, . Harty schmidt, Parks , Recreation Crime Prevention, police Department (H.J. Diosdado) current Plannin9' Duane Bazzel, Advance Planning Bob sennett, city Landscape Architect Bob Leiter, Plannin9' Director Chula vista Elementary School District, Xate Shurson SWeetwater union H.S. District, Tom silva (IS' EIR) Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR) LAFCO (IS/Draft EIR - If annexation is involved) other Doug Reid Environmental section SUBJECT: Application for Initial study (1S- 94-19/FA-~/DO 060 ) Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (E1R-_/FB-_/DO ) Review of a Draft EIR (EIR-_/FB-_/DP J Review of Environmental Review Record (FC- ERR- J Review of Draft Reg Dee (1S- /FA- /DO- , !l'he Project consists of: An amendment to the EastLake Greens General Development Plan and Sectional Area Plan which would result in: 1. The transfer of units within the existing boundaries of East Lake GreenS to refine densities with no net increase in the existing proposal density and 2. The addition of 22.7 acres to EastLake Greens development with an additional 97 dwelling units. Pleas. review the document and by 02-01-94 . ;I ~~~fc2-~~~- 4.~)<- ).zP. ( comments: d to .e any comments you have ROUTING FORM DATE: January 18, 1994 ro: Xen Larson, Building , Housing John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only) elitt Swanson, Engineering (EIR only) Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only) Roger Daoust, Engineering (IS/3, EIR/2) Richard Rudolt, Asst City Attorney (Dratt Neg Dec , EIR) Carol Gove, Fire Department . Harty Schmidt, Parks , Recreation Crime Prevention, Police Department (H.J. Diosdado) fl:"rrent planning' - -Duane Bazzel, Advance Planning Bob Sennett, City Landscape Architect Bob Leiter, Planning Director Chula vista Elementary School District, Xate Shurson Sweetwater Union H.S. District, Tom Silva (IS' EIR) Haureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR) LAFCO (IS/Draft EIR - If annexation is involved) other FROH: Doug Reid Environmental section SUBJECT: Application tor Initial study (IS- 94-1WFA-~/DQ 060 ) Checkprint Draft EIR (20 days) (EIR-____/FB-____/DQ ) Review ot a Draft EIR (EIR-_/FB-____/DP) Review of Environmental Review Record (FC-____ERR-_) Review ot Draft Neg Dec (IS- /FA- /DQ- ) !l'he project consists ot: An amendment to the EastLake Greens General Development Plan and Sectional Area Plan which would result in: 1. The transfer of units within the existing boundaries of East Lake Greens to refine densities with no net increase in the existing proposal density and 2. The addition of 22.7 acres to EastLake Greens development with an additional 97 dwelling units. Please review the document and torward to me any comments you have by 02-01-94 Comments: ,'-ff-t"P \'\~c. ~ ~ ~u...~&~' , o.d) ~ t ~~""-~ ~ ~c..c..(fp.,f'k ....0 (Q..o~ ~ "1 ctv C><~ $) ~ ~ Ov-. . ROUTING FORM ( DATE: January 18. 1994 ~: Xen Larson, Building , Housing John Lippitt, Engineering (EIR only) Clitt Swanson, Engineering (EIR only) Hal Rosenberg, Engineering (EIR only) Roger Daoust, Engineering (15/3, EIR/2) Richard Rudolt, Asst city Attorney (Dratt Heg Dec , EIR) Carol Gove, Fire Department Marty schmidt, Parks , Recreation crime Prevention, police Department (M.J. Diosdado) current Planning Duane Bazzel, Advance Planning 9Ot' ;::'Itfhnet"t, t'l~y.,.....l..__k~'hH.rct' ~ob Lei ter, Pl anning Dir.c:tor --""_.-,, . Chula Vista Elementary School District, Xate Shurson ~ sweetwater Union H.S. District, Tom silva (IS , EIR) Maureen Roeber, Library (Final EIR) LAFCO (IS/Draft EIR - If annexation is involved) other FROM: Doug Reid Environmental Section SUBJECT: Application tor Initial Study (15- 94-1WFA-~/DO 060 ) Checkprint Dratt EIR (20 days} (EIR-_/FS-_/DO ) Review ot a Dratt EIR (EIR-_/FS-_/DP) Review ot Environmental Review Record (FC- ERR-_) Review ot Dratt Neg Dec (15- /FA- /DO- ) !l'he Project consists ot: An amendment to the EastLake Greens General Development Plan and Sectional Area Plan which would result in: 1. The transfer of units within the existin9 boundaries of East Lake Greens to refine densities with no net increase in the existing proposal density and 2. The addition of 22.7 acres to EastLake Greens development with an additional 97 dwelling units. Please review the document and torward to me any comments you have by 02-01-94 COlIIINnts: ~ /. .y~y: CHULA VISTA POUCE DEPARTMENT CRIME PREVENTION UNIT ( PLAN REVIEW RECOMMENDATIONS " - . ~ -. -;.., ~ ~: ~- . ..... .: ~. DATE: t-....~ ~ /qq;.f TO: ~ R..e)..J I LlaMe.... P.il.t n f'I er........ VIA: ~~,?~~.4hv, i),v. FROM: "Y11~r ~ ( 5 Q...f...5 . PROJECT: ::J.,:>. q4 -/ q Q.I/'YI-U1d. 'f..o.-JM..L- 6J~ ~~ ?bM. _ The Critne Prevention Unit does not have any c:omments regarding this project at this time. _ Infonnation on the project, or within the plans. does not provide enough detail to pennit crime prevention analysis. .2SL.- Please forward the following infonnation to the Crime Prevention Unit when available. ~ Elevations Floor Plans L Landscape and Lighting Plans ~ Site Development Plans Comments: f?-1 Yf.....C (f'ou-n-;t 7f~L V AP/Jr'; /U) Ch7uni:viIp rtiJi:tLd Y-/J Y-t--L G~ .p~-.J' f2,,, cJUHI1..,J'/71Ht:f >4) ~ . ~ tJ..1...l.t)./ . 'l:n1.J :1- ~-tJ....r~ u<.J~ Y4",4,/ t1~tI7/ ~_ -:&r"A.A/ ' " cc:: Brookover. SCA C7IED ...... Farm 1!DII:IIIl,.116123 MEMORANDUM DATE: February I, 1994 FROM: Doug Reid Environmental Review Coordinator Duane E. Bazze~ Principal Planner TO: SUBJECT: Initial Study for EastLake Greens GDP/SPA Amendment (IS-94-19) The Advance Planning Division appreciates the opportunity to comment on the proposed project identified above. From an environmental analysis standpoint it appears that the EastLake Greens ElR and Addendum sufficiently addressed the proposed density transfers within EastLake Greens. The proposed transfer of units are occurring under the umbrella of the original1y-approved EastLake Greens SPA and Tentative Map (2,774 units), therefore, unless there are significant shifts in unit locations it would appear that the original ElR adequately addresses the transfers. It should not be forgotten, however, that as a condition of approval of a recent GP amendment to Parcel 26 of the Greens (GPA-93-04), the City Council re-enacted the affordable housing requirement for the Greens (deferred with the Tentative Map approval) and directed staff to work with a task force to develop recommendations by July of this year on how to handle the low and moderate income housing within this project. This direction from Council included the consideration of any density transfers necessllI}' to achieve the housing requirement. It does not appear that the proposed density transfers are significant enough to impact the task force efforts, but nevertheless, these efforts should be considered prior to approving any SPA amendment. The 97 units to be annexed and added to the Greens have only been analyzed at a General Plan level (within the Otay Ranch Program EIR) and not at the detail necessary with a GDP and/or SPA. This needs to be taken into consideration when analyzing potential environmental impacts. Additionally, project-level analysis needs to be coordiDated with the Community plAnning Division of the plAnning Department (Otay Ranch SPA Team) on the issue of land use and design interface with East Orange Avenue and efforts on the adjacent Otay Ranch. cc: Ken Lee Steve Griffin Amy Wolfe 1-.......) MEMORANDUM , February 1, 1994 File # YS-591 FROM: SUBJECT : Doug Reid, Environmental Coordinator Clifford L. Swanson, Deputy Public Works Director~~ Ci ty Engineer " Harold Rosenberg, City Traffic Enginee~ Eastlake Greens General Development and Sectional Area Plans Amendment TO: VIA: In response to your concern regarding our transportation comment in the subject initial study application, the following paragraph should be added to Section VII of the application. Previous traffic studies have shown that the circulation system plan prior to the construction of SR125 does not have sufficient capacity to absorb additional trips beyond those trips accounted for in the approved maps including the approved Eastlake Greens. Thus the Eastlake Greens proposed expanded development project will have to be limited to the number of trips identified in the approved project EIR traffic study. However, the applicant may wish to perform a supplemental traffic study to examine possibilities of expanding the City's circulation system (e.i. extension of E. Orange Avenue between I-B05 and Eastlake Greens) to provide the needed capacity. A reference to the City's interim SR-125 financial study (HNTB study) and improvement scheduling are a critical element of the study. ZAO: rb cc: Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer (P. -.-.,............,........XC,PUUIIUIII>,&AO> MEMORANDUM February 21, 1994 File # YS-551 SUBJECT: Doug Reid, Environmental Coordinator . Clifford L, Swanson, Deputy Public Works Directort. Y City Engineer Y, Harold Rosenberg, Traffic Engine<:!X / . "~ '''~.:J. Eastlake Greens GDP/SPA Amendment Traffic Study (IS-93~ ~ TO: VIA: FROM: I have reviewed the attached traffic impact report by Urban Systems dated February 18, 1994 and fmd it to be acceptable. The new trips from the added 97 units to the Eastlake Greens approved units of 2774 have no significant impact on the City's circulation system, ZAO:dv Attachment CI':'BOME\ENGINEER\1I<AFFIC\11U'S1tJDY :LAO URBAN SYSTEMS J'WSOCIATES, INC. "'--. 7IwPIC e.a_. _ . I'ROJ!r:r -- ~. ,::::::. ,:::: CoH$Ll.TANTS TO INDUSTRY MID GovE/fMIENT '.; i y :::'.. G~ '_;L:'" ,,,'~~ ~ :- :-~~'-;'.~:::;:" ".:-:-: ::[:.:1' 1534 fES 22 AM 9: 4S February 18. 1994 Mr. Hal Rosenberg City TraffIC Engineer CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vasta. CA 92010 Dear Hal: Urban Systems Associates, Inc. (Urban Systems) was retained by Eastlake Development to evaluate possible Impacts from the development of additional dwelling units In the Eastlake Greens GDP/SPA Amendment. The Eastlake Greens GDP/SPA Amendment proposes an Increase of 97 dwelling units from 2,774 DU to 2,871 DU. frQject Trip Generation The development of 97 additional dwelling units will result In the following peak hour and dally trip generation. ~ PEAK PM PEAK USE INTENSITY GENERATION N:ff .....TE ~ ~ IN:OUT IN:OUT PIft PM IN:OUT IN:OUT &PUT &PUT SFDU 1700 1Ct/DU 170 ft 78 2:8 18:82 1~ 17 7:3 18:211 n can be observed. the 97 additional units will result In 97 PM peak hour trips. Of the 97 PM peak hour trips, 68 are Inbound and 29 outbound to the project. The AM peak would have 78 additional peak hour trips with 16 Inbound and 62 outbound during the peak. previous Traffic Study AssumDtions A traffic study for KaIser Hospital (EasUake I SPA Amendment by JHK Associates) Yi.U comDleted on ADrll 20. 1992. The KaIser Hospital traffic study represents the most recent analysis of interim conditions for eastern Chula VIsta (east of 1-805). The analysis for interim conditions assumed the 'approved projects' level of development for It's interim analysis. The 'approved project. level of development was based on the Final Eastern Chula Vista ' Transportation Phasing Plan Update prepared by Wildan AssocIates (1191). 101_ ~7 _. _"._a~ ~C'!D _ <<.1ftLCUI MUJ.. .&rJl:.tl.J/ll.~ Mr. Hal Rosenberg February 18, 1994 Urban Systems Associates, Inc. ( In the final report for KaIser Hospital dated April 20, 1992, (page 41), the approved project development scenario will result in approximately 193,230 additional dally trips in Eastem Chula Vista. The analysis included trips generated by 2,774 units in the EastJake Greens project. Using the "approved projects" condition as the bpe, impacts from the KaIser Hospital were evaluated. Attachment 1 shows the NIIIPM peak hour intersection level of service from the KaIser Hospital traffic analysis. k. shown In Attachment 1, all intersections are forecasted to operate at a level of service "D" or better. KaIser Hospital Impacts to the intersection of Otay Lakes at EastJake Parkway (the critical Intersection for the KaIser Project) for the NIIIPM peak results In a level of service "C" to "D". Intersection delay was 5.2 seconds for the NIl peak and 5.4 seconds In the PM peak at this location. The Increased delay at this location was due to more than 14,000 daily trips from the Kaiser project being added to the base conditions. The KaIser analysis concludes that the intersection delay at Otay Lakes Road and Eastlake Parkway Is 25.8 seconds In the NIl peak and 29.8 In the PM peak which translates to a level of service D. It should be noted that the Intersection delay at Otay Lakes Road and Eastlake Parkway could be Increased as much as 10 seconds and still remain at a level of service "D". SPA Amendment ImDacts In oreler to determine possible impacts from the proposed SPA amendment, project traffic was added to the Intersection analysis discussed above. All other assumDtI2n! for the computer intersection analysis remained the same. k. shown on Attachment 2, the resulting level of service Including project traffic remained "D" for both the NIl and PM peak. A comparison of Attachment 1 and 2 shows that with project traffic the Intersection delay Increased only 1.5 seconds In the NIl peak and 2.1 seconds In the PM peak. this clearly indicates that the Spa Amendment for Interim (worst case) conditions Is not likely to create Impacts which would require mitigation or change the level of service at EastJake Parkway and Otay Lakes Road. In addition, possible Impacts from the proposed SPA amendment were analyzed for the intersection of Eastlake Parkway and Fenton Street. Base conditions for the intersection analysis were obtained from the Scripps Clinic TraffIC analysis dated March SO, 1993. For the base conditions, signal timing was optimized which resulting In a level of service "D" for the P.M. peak or an Intersection delay of 36.7 seconds (see Attachment 3). Project traffic was then added to the base conditions. All other assumptions for the computer intersection analysis remained the same. H shown on Attachment 3, the resulting level of service Including project traffic remained "D". Intersection delay changed only 0,4 seconds to 37.1. this clearly shows that the SPA amendment for interim conditions Is not Hkely to create Impacts which would require mitigation. At build out or with an interim 125 or with an Orange Avenue connection, Spa Amendment Impacts would be even smaller because there would be multiple access routes. ~7 .,- Mr. Hal Rosenberg February 1 B, 1994 Urban Systems AssocIates, Inc. BaSed on the Information discussed above, Impacts from the development of 97 additional units appear to have minimal impacts on the circulation system. We therefor suggest that no further 1raffic analysis Is neceS9ary. Please call us If you have any questions regarding the analysis discussed above. , APSrms:vks Attachments cc: Bruce Sloan Cliff Swanson Doug Reid ,. vuaam.'l7 1101_ r I C/) Ci5 ~ ...J <C Z <C a: => o :I: ~...J <C<c w.... a.._ zfu -Qo 1-....:1: \ ~oc:c: ~WW G(f)CJ) <c:c:_ I-W<C I-....~ <z" -c:c: --0 ~LL. - t a: C/) w a: a.. - .~; z~ I~ ~~ c:O f~ A ~:E ~ 2~ ! ctJ " o<Z .. ..... ag !i ~~ !b U i II ~~ ~! co< f'" .. ei ~ ..~a if i fg ~ B~ ~ d ~~ !~ E! "\ ~- ' ! i~ QQUDUUCQOUU UUUO.OQU.. .Q Q OC_QOO I a.. :1!/'-i F ~~-. ~~"~~~~~~~a ~~~~~~~~~~ illa ;~~~q~ . ~..~_~o.~c _o~_..-c.. ~-~-~ 'e;; ~~"~_N~~"R -~""-"~"-- -~~" ... - i 1_\ I i~ QDuDUUDDDUU UUUDaDUuaa .u . ....aDDU a : ~ =1 ~~~~~~~~~~~ ~..~~~~~~~~ ~ ~~~~. il ~~~R.RA~.Re ~~R~~nR~~= -a . .~=~~~ .. . 1 : J JIJ I II J ; !!jl)!IJill!!I!1 i!)!! III!III!!! !~I!!!iJ!!g]!j!iJ8JI!!i!IJJjljl!~i I ' unn! t 11111 I!!!!!!!! II I I!III .~~~~!!!!!I! 111ii)ll~~ ~i I ~~... IJJJJ~~~~~=~ =~!~~~~~g! !I I !!ffl _"~.~.~_.Q=~ ::~~=.:~~R ~~ ~ .~~.~ . . ~- Is _uuuU...U.O uuuoauu-u. -0 c ac_vuv ! ... .Ii ~ ! "'=1"'~"~~~""I~"t~o:l( 1C!"t""":-:"~"'~'iC!~ ill. "t ~~"",:"1C!" ~.. .~~_~~_..~ ~~~~~...._ ~ ~ ~~_D.. 'i~1 ___N______ _N_N ----- N N N _N__ 1_\ ! I! auuuuaaauaD UUUDauu-u-.u ...._uuu ~IJ~:I ~:~~~=~:~~~ ~~~~~~~~~~ .~ . .~~~~: ~. s_~"______~ ="_R e__=_ R _MS_ . ... i ' I J I JIJ J II I I Jlb)u,'jll IUJ ,!IP IU1I"Jlj !~iJ~~ij i ~~II~~I iJ~li I ~ <!~~I a!I~!ailll!!< a! !11!Iil Jlil!)a! . J JUIUI t IIIII1111111 I!!!!!!!II II J II!I! JJIII!!iiii! illll})}!! !I I !!fff _ft~.~.~..a== =~=~~=~2=R ~~ ~ .~~~i . ~ ~ ~ \::) ~.. tH ~II -':I- t; ~~:i ..~ !OS ~i .!!I. i If ri d .iii t it !d!1. ... h I..; t Ii jlil ~ Fi ! f[.i~ ~ U I~ cj ! -a~ J Ili ! U4~!t . IU ~UI t ~ {..'S Jh.l ~ I IB] ~ Id ~ ...: PI . i I] tit ~J -]- il hi I d It 1!.!!~ J I..U lit JSY JI II '!Jj ~ i II Fit I i ~ I M t,U 1 i ~ t II Utt I' ~ Hil ~lH II h I t'l'l Ih ~ ... , , 16] hd ~ ! ~ .:... ~!I J J~st ! J I G ~ "'I: I::! ~ ~ c: o u.. en en ~ ~ < z~ <0 zw Q3 ....a: (\I~e.. ~eno za:w ~wCl) :I:~O ~~e.. ~__o <LOa: C\le.. ~ 'w a:J: en.... w c: e.. - ~ a: w .... z - : 1 ~~~~~~I ~ 1~1 ~~I t2 : : I =:::::::::::::::: I I: I ~iE 00 I ::s I : 1 i !5 .......!; iDe 0 cia : I .:........ '\ :c : ~~ IoCIC IoCM ~c:: S I' ~ : I I z: ~.I .. . 1 "-'In"'''' t I '. S : t ~c:c:c:c:c: &:1:':.';';: ... : i 1:::====: 1I~"''''f''I'''l :!~.uuc ~~! aN .. .. ~ 'I . .... . UAo I Q. . : I M.:I"~ !~~.........lt I . ~ ~ ~ ~. : I .. I 1.. .. ~~ I ~N : u ~c:c:c:c:c: II) DooDlE ~"II i: : I:::::::::::: tni "'rI"'WI . U : ~.. I !3r;t2!3r;t2 ~: I:JSou......u.~..u..:.. :,"E :: .......... ct: 0000!!!I ~a:~ I- ta "'E -:0::-:0.::* = I 1...113 I:. 000000'1 OOOOIH I....~~~~~~~~~~~I! :l1li U ......1 I~ I..~.."'.......,.......,..I~ .:~ .." ...ft"""" I Iii I OIi:iN~t"t'""''''''''''f'II"'''' I ""...............1"1 I ., .... 00 I C I !:J;;": la!looooi ~ ool~ I:: ti ::i Ci t ..:I~"".. 'oell! I i I ~ i..; ._ tn' ."" I g..r-............._..,t"t .. ......_.............. g.oooOI..... 001 U .....'"...."0".,1"1.... I : i: III =: I E & I I lie Ie Ie tc .. 1 .......,................ fit..,........ & ===i!O I E :- 000000000000' ::! In .. 1 ... In::: a~.... ; =- " .~ ..... ~ I oC'" I H . "CI'I~O'II ... ~~ ................i............. i. I i3oC' .....:0 . .l:MMM .... ~:~:~;::;::;;:;:s c " :...~~=.m D :~... 00001 .. .... ... ........ .... . oCi:Iri' "" IE >_0000 I 0000000000'" ~ :t5~gE~ ~ =:~~~NI ~t:::::::il:~=O j4M toe 00 t::2:!::::: ....... E =. ~..... . . . . . "0::" ti fIoI . . . . fi...: we:..: : :t '"I' ...... " "13 ., :l5o(~";';~ = : kloJ~!C~ ...CII.....~CQ... '0. , ., ISE ....1"'" , , . :I~ .... N 2i:MMM t C......o ".0.. ~N" K 0000 c_oooo :5. ' "" . a-OOOO !>~u CIIUDC "."11) ~ I: . 000000. . . . . . . . I . ............."'... I . ..................., . ' . , . ' . ' : ~........ I . ' . ' . 000000. . . . . . . . . : I::::::: . I . ~ , . I'! ' : ~ ..~...~ I : 5 fi I : I " 000000 I i I~~~~~~!~D ::::\ i~ = ~........ I~; ::::1, :. Q ~~~~~~II ooool~ i.~ :\ =======1 =10000 Et !ti"' I &I I ..~........! i & . ~ "'I " ii I il-;::::-- Eloooo'.i ; :~ .1 :a=:: !:t. r ... :c-.... '"': =:;WJ 1 ... II. 'c. .~...o . ",'SH ..'I....Oft ~ :~~i1..1 ~..."'" .;~~~~ :c :t6~~~~: "_NNNN III: : : : : : :, el;::;:o ;: :!.:..: 1 ......... . 0 go . '"' . , . . . Ie _0 : 0 g::~E.t:':::5:' I:~~o I~oo.o ..t.!!J" ::: _ft. . R ~.. t 9'4 : :~:!~=III :.: ,",~2a;::B I !i~1i:1 ~ ...... ~. c";';oo .......I"t.. . Ii. ..-............ .. au: !3r;tf!3UfB~ a I Ih & !............15..... ! " ~ I " I .. "' = I , , I , I '0 I , . , .. i~ i~ .. "' N I . .n . ~ . s" .. I"t... I: ;:1 1: I~ !3r;t2!>~tfB!lc!DUuu"u."DD"'" I I I... 1....9'4~....~".9'4. i ..;....00.....:..;. ! :: iDNNHNftN.Nftft : 00 u:::=~:=:t:~" tete .. .......9'4...~o...."..OIn e.1 000000000000 i ~~. u:~:=~~~~~~; ! ... ~~~~~~~~~~~~I I 00000000000 ~~, ei I" =.'1 & ,! .. '" I !~....~....~..~.... ,',' ~ !>nf!3~ne! i ! a I 11..1 a I I 1:1 i:: 00 00 .. Su S Q D u .... ~~ ... 00 .. H H ,.. I: .. .... N IMMN E H , .. I: .. ~ ~ ~ IS I G ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ct) ~ m ::s ~ t r ( ~ o W "? o 0: 0.. o W U) o 0..1- OW O:W 0..0: wI- :I:U) ~Z 0:0 01- I.LZ W U)I.L CO) en ~ 1->-< Z..J ~< >- :I:z< ~<~ I-z ~ <00: -< ~n. o wW U)~ 0:< W-J ~I- ZU) -< iC)W N - , W a: Q.. - ( ~ a: w I- Z - '~:'~ . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ~ E E I : II) i ~ ~ ~ i I : i5" a ~ : "': ~: . ~ : I; .... III . .~a. Ii .1 l..c ..."". . ..~ . !.... .. . ~.c"',," "~.. tot . ~ III I .. I ~ :...5ISEe: ~I: : : : : :: el:::o = :!::::: .... . ... . . . . . -.. ~III . . . . Ri.:.h : :5 ., : ~c~;"j";~ : : ~1oI:!C~ ...jIOI~CQ'" ~ I ~1 ~~ !2 I I: I ~E ::s . ..........:.. .0 .. . 0 1 15 ' . ..., " ,. :c il'i' .ue MIe.... 2 " , E ~ ',!! ....... ::s .; .~~..:..: i .. I I.~~"'''':M~ teN" ~~ ~ . t tiE ..... !~ ~ .. Ela : t . : : ~ l:n .;::..........: ... D. I " t ~ i i" .. ~~ I' ~" I. Z 0.001 · ~ 1Ift1lft1lft1lft. U ; I ~~tE~~tE !.c~uu.~u.o.uo ~ fi I E. ''''''' c.. 0000 I. Ii3 I ~ - ...t: ........Ii I I I 'D .& & 00001... ..11...0"............... r 0.0000 I I E a . . . . . . . . ., .... . . . . . . It'" .......................... I ILl II"""'".""' ~I 10 .....................1"11. ......_......... I :! ,... DO I Q I. 1 w'loooo ~tb oold .- : i CAo It 1-: ~..a... IC 5 t.a I~ I .. I .................'".... ..__....__..1 e_OOOO lit... 00 I u.,....................." I I E& I MMM' . I ...."'PI.............."'''' I ::::0 1 B: ::;.. t 00000000000 I' .. I 2~a&.. I I=- I 2.. 1 .... I ~ lit. lit. ~~: u::=::~::::I& : 0000 E ...: ~~~~~~~~~~~: I ~;~~~~I I 00000000001 I _"""", I I It... 00 I . t I t I.tue ..1 e, t.. I III 00001 f. =.11 G I! I ~_OOOOI . .I~ t e~oooo! l.a....a....a...a..! I:' i I ~l:tf~r:1K2e~!:S i I i 11=:i D I C$! I I I = 1~ 0000001 ..... .1 ...."'...."'... ...................1 . , , I ........~ I I, ~~~~~~: . ..."'......'" I ................... ... II ......~~ CIO ..000. Ii: ..........;.. ................... .. oi . ...a... 11....00 ~.. ~. ~lStl! . 0000001 III o. 001 1 : .............1 ~ ~:b 001. . : M.................: too "'PI.. ;Olio i ~CI . . CI i i .........~ t B I~ .ue lit. ~~ I 5 i ~ :: ...... . .. II I! ~~~~~~ k.r":":..i..i too I : I:::::: I_Pl~~~ III~ MMM ~~I a ~ ~. i ..IE ........~ !~..... g:" .. ::\I;~ : : ~ 5 . ...00. 1;... . . . . . . ., I ...0 .. LI I . .~~~~::II; ;;;; I :"':"'llli!~~~~~~~~~~ ; il I Id~~~~~lla ~. ..I;~;;;;;;;;:; I. I :1 !el i iC.... :Ii; .... I! ': : ....... ! !i .........~........I =: ..:. I 5'1-.-:::.--- .......~ .. u.~.....~...PI..."1 ........... Ea I I lellt.... -...................... i~ i:1 .:.. i~....1 E ~:.. ...........! I !1.~XIIIIII:;:. i lellt IeM .. ~1=:iiSiii!I'1 = : i!ai'.s I ""... &_1111. ...........1 i~: ": .~~~.I .......... I ...tcJ.. ... =5:1i:::::j :;.: ;::::: E =~18 Ii ..: ti" :.: : :, c- . . . ., t:............~..~, ~ ~.I.~E~~JJII 1~:5. _....1 ~~tE~~tEP.!i ~ !a : :SIII~BI ~~~I 1111: I I 1.1 I I I I IS ~ ~ ~ IS ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ Ct;) ~ ~ ::s 1 JI MEMORANDUM February 23, 1994 File Number YS 591 FROM: SUBJECT: Doug Reid, Environmental Review coor~i~fftor Roger Daoust, Senior Civil Engineer ~' TO: Initial Study 94-019, EastLake Greens GDP & SPA Amendment This is to clarify our comments (on sewers and drainage) dated February 1, 1994 concerning the information provided in the application for the subject Initial Study. Our comments on drainage (Section I, A through E) noted that project specific improvements would be required as development occurs and further, that regional improvements in Salt Creek and Poggi Canyon may be required as development occurs. This comment was meant to convey that development of the overall General Development Plan area would probably require construction of regional level drainage improvements. Any additional development which may occur as a result of this amendment may require greater capacity in those facilities, but we believe that the added capacity would be insignificant. Our comments on Section VI, Waste Generation, noted that some segments of the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer will be over capacity at, or prior to, General Plan buildout conditions. This comment addressed the fact that the EXISTING Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer lacks capacity to serve the buildout development. A Development Impact Fee (DIF) is presently in place for gravity basin development, and a Telegraph Canyon Pumped Basin DIF will be in place very shortly, as will a Salt Creek Basin DIF. The parallel and upgraded facilities provided for through the collection of these fees will be adequate for the provision of sewer service to all of the affected development areas for as long as necessary. The additional development which may result from th,e proposed amendment may have a non-significant impact on one segment of the sewer line. That impact would be that an upgrade required by the overall development would increase by a minor degree with the added development. No increase in the DIF would occur. aI.D: YSaUl .:\HOKI\KNGIN8IR\ISt6.01' EXHIBIT A l DescriPtion of Work Assessment District 94-1 The general description of work to be funded by Assessment District 94-1 consists of the following: 1. Street improvements consisting of grading, base, paving, gutter. sidewalk, street lighting and '''''''V'lPing within the following rights-of-way: a. South Greensview Drive - from Clubhouse Drive to Unit 6 entranee (2,400 L.F., Phase 1). b. South Greensview Drive - from Silverado Drive to Hunte Parkway (3,400 L.F., Phase 2). c. South Greensview Drive - from Unit 6 entrance to Silverado Drive (1,920 L.F., Phase 3). 2. Utilities and underground improvements consisting of potable water facilities, storm drain facilities, sewer facilities, reclaimed water facilities, electric facilities, telephone facilities, gas facilities, television facilities as appropriate by applicable state and federal statutes within the following rights- of-way: a. South Greensview Drive - from Clubhouse Drive to Unit 6 entrance (2,400 L.F., Phase 1). b. South Greensview Drive - from Silverado Drive to Hunte Parkway (3,400 L.F., Phase 2). c. South Greensview Drive - from Unit 6 entrance to Silverado Drive (1,920 L.F., Phase 3). 3. DIF funded street improvements consisting of grading, storm drain. base. paving, curb. gutter. sidewalk, medians, streetlighting, landscaping and street monumentation within the following rights- of-way: a. Hunte Parkway _ from Clubhouse Drive to South Greensview Drive (2,300 L.F., Phase 2). 4. DIF funded street and underground improvements consisting of grading. aDd ltorm drain improvements within the following rights-of-way: · a. Hunte Parkway - from South Greensview to Orange Avenue (1,270 L.F.. Phase 2). b. Orange Avenue _ from Hunte Parkway to the SDG&E easement (3,500 L.F.. Phase 2). ~ WPC' p:'. \1615.114 ~ . . -. ,- _... ~(":'o r II;. r~ RU;IfJ ruCK ENGli'tEERlNG COMPANY S;111 Dil'PO C:dlrurni:1 92110.2~9f1 \rl;I~" Jh'(j:~u\,' V;~',"\"1 {fll~1 291.(liOi F.""X. u'l91 :!91~ltI~ "J r;:-!'";. .. . -- _. 133~! February 7. 1994 Mr. Clifford Swanson City of Chu1a Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista. California 91912 RE: EASTLAKE GREENS - GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT AND SPA AMENDMENT (J-12347) Dear Mr. Swanson: This is to confirm that the storm drainage system designed for EastLake Greens has adequate capacity to accommodate the run-off generated b)' additional areas being incorporated into EastLake Greens SPA boundary. as shown on the attached exhibit. In addition. areas being added do not adversely impact the drainage S)'Slem previously planned and approved as pan of Tentative Map for Chula Vista Tract No. 88-03, Should you have any questions. please call me, Sincerely. , ~CK ENGIN~';'~RMPANY P-L~ Dennis C. Bowlin~,?. R.C.E. Director. Water Resources Division DCB:kt.OOl Enclosure cc: M1'. Doug Reed. City of Chu)a Vista , Mr. Bruce Sloan. EastLake Development Company Mr, Houshmand Aftahi. Rick Engineering Company " . F.-, , , ~ ""~ . , ' Febroary 9,1994 Mr. Cliff Swanson City Engineer CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 Re: EastLake Greens Development Plan and Spa Amendment IS.94.19 Dear Cliff: As a part of the review of the referenced initial study the engineering department noted possible adverse impacts to the sewer system serving the East Lake Greens Project. As a response to this concern, I have quantified the impact of the Plan Amendment in each of the sewer basins within the EastLake Greens Project. This review (anached) has concluded that the impacts of the additional development within each of the basins is minimal when compared to previous land use and system analysis performed by the city. If you have any questions regarding this information, please do not hesitate to call me. , Sincerely, EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY Broce Sloan Senior Project Manager cc: Doug,Reid . Environmental Review Coordinator J1j ... .. EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENt COMPANY 900 Lone A_ Suite 100 Chuto IAsto. CA 91914 (619) 421.0127 fA)/. (619) 421.1830 . ~ -- SALT CREEK BASIN GRAVI1Y SEWER ANALYSIS Sewer service to the Salt Creek Basin within the EastLake Greens Project in cUI1'ently provided by the Dtay Lakes Road Uft Station (located at Dtay Lakes Road and Salt Creek) and the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer. The proposed EastLake Greens General Development Plan and Spa Amendment affects the following parcels within the Salt Creek Basin: Parcel Existing Units Proposed Units Increase+/ Decrease- R-3(south) 42 51 9 R-I0 167 246 79 R-ll 92 87 <5> R-22 146 141 <5> R-23 205 214 9 R-27 40 44 4 Net Change In Units 91 The flow generated by the additional 91 dwelling units (based on 250 GPD per DU) is 15.8 GPM. This amount represents an increase of I.4D~ over the 1100 GPM flow rate assumed to be generated by the EastLake Project within the Salt Creek Basin (see Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Improvement and Financing Plan Amendment Incorporating Pumped Flows, Figure 8, Page II). The operation of the Otay Lakes Road Uft Station and Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer should not be significantly impacted by the relatively minor increase in the flow rate. ,. . . TELEGRAPH CANYON SEWER BASIN IMPROVEMENT AND FINACIAL PLAN The proposed General Development Plan and Spa Plan Amendment will affect 4 par<:els (R-7, R-ll, R-14, and R-24) that are located within the boundary of the Telegraph Canyon Gravity Sewer Basin. At the time the Basin Improvement and Financing Plan was developed EastLake Development Company and the City assumed the unit counts proposed in the Amendment. Therefore, no modification to the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Improvement and Financing Plan is required. POGGI CANYON SEWER BASIN Sewer service to the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin within the EastLake Greens Project is currently provided by the EastLake Parkway Pump Station and the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer. The proposed EastLake Greens General Development Plan and Spa Amendment affects the following parcels within the Poggi Canyon Basin: Parcel Existing Units Proposed Units Increase+/ Decrease- R-3(north) 42 51 9 R-14 84 86 2 R-IS 88 6S <13> R-20 164 143 <21> R-2S 74 78 4 R.28 27 60 33 Net Change In Units 14 The Average flow to the EastLake Parkway Pump Station (as outlined in the Telegraph Canyon Sewer Basin Improvement and Financing Plan Amendment Incorporating Pumped Flows) is 254 GPM. At a rate of 250 gallons per day per unit the net increase in units generates an additional 2.4 GPM. The operation of the EastLake Parkway Lift Station and the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer should not be significantly impacted by the relatively minor increase in flow rate. . .: 1"'1AR- ~-94 .....ED 1':': 1 Z; CHULA ..... I STA SC:...tOCIL. I ~:.; .r _ P.et2 IOARD Of EDUCATION ICSEPH D, ~INGS. Ph.D, LARRY CUNNINGHAM SHARON G"ES PATRIC~ A, JUDD GREG R. SANDOVAl SUPERINTENDENT 1I1lIAS.GIl.PII.D, CHULA VISTA ELEMENTARY SCHOOL DISTRICT 84 EAST "J" STREET. CHt:L<\ \'ISTA, CALJFOR!'\IA \11910 . 619425,96UO -----.-- .- --.-.----. --- EACH CHlI.D IS A." ISD1\'IVt:.".L OF GREAT WOHTII March 9, 1994 Mr, Doug Reid Environmental Review Dept. City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 RE: EastLake Greens GDP/SPA Amendment Dear Mr Reid, The proposed GDP/SPA Arne--:dmen\ will Increase the total dwelling unit count within EastLake Greens by 9~' units from 'L774 to 2871 At the Dlstnct-wide average student genera\!on rate of 0.3 students/unit. tlois equates to 861 students. It is anticipated that all ctlildrer. fiOm EastLake Greens Including those from the additional 97 units wili aHe1(! SchoQI No S5 which will be constructed In the EastLake Greens Community and has a proposed opening date of July. 1995 This school is planned to cpen on a single-track year.round schedule and eventually convert to a multi-track year.round schedule when required to accommodate enrollment. All elementary school facilities within the EastLake Community will be financed by participation in Community F a::lllties Dlstnct No 1, which fully mitigates all project impacts on schools. If you have any questions, ple"se contact me Sincerely, ~~ S\\.0-''-~C''''- Kate Shurson Director, Planning & Facilities .' KSdp cc: Katy Wright '..'8k.,"mOlld DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Please identify each and every person. including any agents. employees. consultants or independent contractors who you have assigned (0 represent you before the City in this matter. SB&O, Inc. : Peter "Randy" Sarino, President SB&O,Inc, Susan K, La Plannin ~1ana er J re ~ 1,' [20 - -r_ ~ r - +- ,,"), C:::,',roYl' (I, f' ( '-c f"uor! t:. '1 r;iCi '~1 (WO I 'f('prr:~,(J ~\ .!t,.~ 1 ',"f' ') ) r~ :~, r ~r r'~ll (0' ')'( r :'~i L'(" '2.,(r:',~ 1(' l' rr'[. :,~" (';';\1 t.1. (. i Have you and/or your officers or agents. in the aggregate. contributed more than $1.000 to a Council '. I Y rile:, member in the current or preceding election period? Yes [ ] No [XI If yes, state which Council mG y, ~ member(s): 01dJ ' 0, 0- IO<k~ do-k ) THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DISCLOSURE STATEMENT Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on aJ] 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: I. List the names of all persons have a financtal interest in the contract. Le.. contractor. subcontractor, !1)aterial sUQPlier tastla'Ke Development Company (Owner) Brehm Communlties (Purchaser) 2. If any person identified pursuant to (l) above is a corporation or partnership. list the names of all individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in tbe corporation or owning any partnership interest in , the partnership, F"()rr-€5t LD, ~r€J'I >\-\ 3, If any person identified pursuant to (I) 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 trustee of the trust. 4. Have you had more than $250 wonh of business transacted with any member of the City staff. Boards. Commissions. Committees and Council within the past twelve months" nO 5, 6, Person is defmed as: ~ Any individual. firm, co-parmership, joint venture, associauon, social club. fraternal organization, corporalion, estate. trust, receiver, syndicale, this and any other county, city and county, ciry. municipality, distncl or other political subdivision, or any other group or combination acting as a unit. ~ (NOTE: Attach additionaJ pages as necessary) Date: ~!J-7-/ 4 f Scot Sandstrom/Brehm Communities Print or type name of contractor/applIcant WPC:F:\HOMEIPLANNINGISTORED\I02! -A.9J:Rc(. 1020.93) (Ref, 1021.93) Page II