Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Rpts./1996/04/24 (5) PLANNING COMMISSION AGENDA STATEMENT Item: 2 Meeting Date: April 24. 1996 ITEM TITLE: Public Hearing: PCM 95-09; Consideration of seven General Development Plan Amendments to the Otay Ranch General Development Plan. Seven amendments to the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP) have been proposed by the applicant and are being recommended by City staff. Two of the amendments address processing requirements for the first Sectional Planning Area (SPA). The other five address text amendments to clarifY GDP language and requirements The amendments are indicated in this agenda statement by strikeouts and underlining. RECOMMENDATION: That the Planning Commission conduct the Public Hearing on the proposed amendments (PCM 95-09) to the Otay Ranch General Development Plan, close the hearing and adopt Planning Commission Resolution PCM 95-09 recommending approval of the General Development Plan Amendments to the City Council. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: None DISCUSSION: The SPA One applicant has identified several areas of the existing Otay Ranch General Development Plan that they seek to amend. A. Master Planned Villages The GDP Land Use Plan Implementation Section, page 113, requires: "Each village must be master-planned as a unit" The applicant has applied to amend the Otay Ranch GDP to delete this requirement rrom the plan. Staff believes the language proposed by the applicant is too broad and should be scaled back to apply only to those areas where there exist some rationale for permitting planning separate from the remainder of a designated village or planning area. Staff has identified three areas of the GDP Land Use Plan map where it would be appropriate to amend the GDP to enable these areas to develop separate from the village in which they are located: the Inverted "L", the Ranch House property and the area west of Paseo Ranchero in Villages One and Two. The applicant requested that the Freeway Commercial area of the Eastern Urban Center be added to the exception. PCSRGDP3.DOC April 17, 1996 Page 2, Item:]. Meeting Date: Avril 24. 1996 The Inverted "L" is part ofGDP Village 14 in Proctor Valley. The Ranch House is part of Village 13 and the area west of Paseo Ranchero is part of Village One and Two. The Freeway Commercial area is part of Planning Area 12, the Eastern Urban Center. These areas are separated from the village in which they are planned by topography or arterial streets. Applicants Proposal: Deleting the master planned village requirement would allow this area to develop under its own approvals City Staff Position: Maintain the requirement for master planned villages but provide an exception for this area to allow the Inverted "L", area West of Paseo Ranchero and the Ranch House property of the Mary Patrick Estate area to develop under its own SPA. Planning Commission Position: At the April 10, 1996 meeting, the Planning Commission took tentative action approving the master planned village exceptions for the Inverted "L", the Mary Patrick Estate, the areas west of Pas eo Ranchero and the Freeway Commercial in the Eastern Urban Center. Recommendation: Amend the GDP to provide an exception for the Inverted "L", the areas of Village One and Two west of Paseo Ranchero, the Mary Patrick Estate property and the Freeway Commercial area of the Eastern Urban Center from the master planned village requirement as indicated in Attachment A. B. Agricultural Irrigation The GDP policies prohibit an increase in irrigation for farming purposes Applicant's Proposal: The proposed GDP amendment would allow irrigation if authorized by the Preserve Owner/Manager (POM). City Staff Position: The rationale for the irrigation prohibition in the GDP was to limit the introduction of non-native grasses within the Otay Ranch. There are opportunities for nursery and truck farm operations on the Otay Valley parcel. Each SPA is required to address potential conflicts between urban development and agricultural uses as part of the SPA agricultural plan. Staff recommends that the Preserve Owner/Manager be given the discretion to determine if additional irrigated farm land is appropriate for Otay Ranch. Planning Commission Position: At their April 10, 1996 meeting, the Planning Commission took tentative action to support the POM authorizing additional farmland irrigation. Recommendation Amend the GDP to allow the POM to decide on farmland irrigation as indicated in Attachment A. PCSRGDP3.DOC April I?, 1996 Page 3, Item:]. Meeting Date: Avril 24. 1996 C. Practical Use of Solar Energy Systems The Otay Ranch Program EIR Findings of Fact provide that SPA plans must incorporate "solar heating to heat water for domestic uses and for swimming pools" (page 119). Applicant's Proposal: The project applicant has proposed that this standard be modified due to practical limitations of solar energy systems. The limitations of using passive solar water heating were reported in the 1992 Energy Technology Status Report prepared by the California Energy Commission. The report concludes that those obstacles include high capital costs, loss of tax incentives, lack of suitable sites, adverse structural requirements, aesthetic impacts of equipment, poor public opinion of solar systems and lack of manufactures and suppliers. In addition, participants in the drafting of the 179-page Findings of Fact recall that the reference to domestic water heating was to be deleted from the Findings. However, an inadvertent drafting error left the language in the text. The following amendment to the GDP would repair the mistake. This change would not result in altering the determination of significance in the GDP ElR. City Staff Position: Staff supports the proposed amendment. Planning Commission Position: At their April 10, 1996 meeting, the Planning Commission took tentative action to support the practical use of solar energy. Recommendation: Amend the GDP to provide for the practical use of solar energy as indicated in Attachment A. D. Transit Policies This amendment addresses two issues: flexibility of transit alignments and the appropriate time to dedicate transit rights-of-way. Applicants Proposal: The project applicant has applied to amend the Village One map in the GDP text to indicated a revised alignment for the trolley. SPA One realigns the light rail transit through Village One from the GDP alignment. The Village Cores are conceptually located on the GDP land use maps and are more precisely located on the SPA One land plan. The transit stations are planned in the center of the Village Core. The new alignment is proposed to run trom Telegraph Canyon Road up to Palomar Street in the area west of Paseo Ranchero in order to serve the Village One Core. The GDP Village Core policies indicate the cores are conceptually shown on the land use map and are allowed to shift based on more detailed studies. The same flexibility for transit alignment is not clear in the Land Use and Mobility chapters. PCSRGDP3.DOC ApriI1?,1996 Page 4, Item:]. Meeting Date: Amil 24. 1996 City Staff Position: Staff supports the proposed amendment to allow the transit alignment to shift based on the flexible village core policies for the precise location of the core at the SPA level In addition, there is a technical problem with the reservation and dedication requirements of the SPA. Right-of-way is dedicated at the final map stage. Dedication at the tentative map stage could only be accomplished by a grant of easement for right-of-way. Dedication at this stage is premature since the final map and improvement plans need to be coordinated and consistent. The recommended amendment requires transit line dedication as a condition of tentative map approval. Planning Commission Position: The Planning Commission took tentative action to support the transit right-of-way amendments at their April 10, 1996 meeting. The Commission expressed interest in the wildlife agencies comments on the transit alignment. The Fish and Wildlife Service believes the proposed corridor appears to impact additional sensitive resources and recommends maintaining the adopted transit alignment. Recommendation: It is, therefore, recommended that the GDP Village Definition and Organization, Transit Policies (page 102), the transit right-of-way and transit stop policies for Villages One, Five, Six, Nine and Planning Area Twelve (pages 123, 144, 147, 148, 160 and 178), transit stop policies for Villages Two, Three, Four, Seven and Eight (pages 128, 133, 139, 152 and 155) be amended as indicated in Attachment A and transit stop policies for Villages Ten and Eleven (pages 166 and 171) be added as indicated in Attachment A. E. Residential Noise Amendments The GDP EIR Findings of Fact prohibits residential development in noise impact areas unless the specific noise studies indicate exterior noise levels can be mitigated to 60 CNEL or below This level is more restrictive than the City's current standard. Applicants Proposal: Amend the GDP Residential Noise Standards to 65 CNEL. City Staff Position: The applicable Chula Vista standard is 65 CNEL. The GDP Program EIR does not explain why a different standard was proposed. Upon further review, it is apparent the standard should have been set at the City's current standard of 65CNEL. Planning Commission Position: The Planning Commission took tentative action to support the revised residential noise standard at their April 10, 1996 meeting. Recommendation: It is recommended that the GDP Residential Noise Standards be amended as indicated in Attachment A PCSRGDP3.DOC ApriI1? 1996 Page 5, Item:-1 Meeting Date: Avril 24. 1996 F. Habitat Noise Mitigation The Otay Ranch Program EIR disclosed significant unavoidable impacts to riparian vegetation that is potential habitat for the federally endangered least Bell's vireo According to the Program EIR, the San Diego Association of Governments in a 1989 study theoretically estimated that noise levels above 60 dBA L,q in vireo breeding areas may impact the reproductive success of this species during their breeding season which occurs from March 15 to September 15. The EIR disclosed that in an area where major roadways are located or construction will be undertaken in close proximity to least Bell's vireo habitat, mitigation below a level of significance may not be possible. There is no least Bell's Vireo habitat within or adjacent to SPA One that would be affected by construction noise However, the Findings of Fact, adopted by the City in conjunction with Program EIR 90-01, establish a requirement that noise impacts to Least Bell's Vireo and California Gnatcatcher habitat shall be mitigated to achieve a level of 60 dBA L,q or below. The recirculated Biological Resources Section of the SPA One EIR determines there is no biological justification for requiring mitigation for 60 decibels, and a new standard of 65 dBA should be established. Applicant's Proposal: Amend the habitat noise standards to 65 dBA for gnatcatcher habitat City Staff Position: Support the change to 65 dBA and the Statement of Overriding Considerations. Planning Commission Position: The Planning Commission took tentative action to support the revised habitat noise standard at their April 10, 1996 meeting. Recommendation: It is recommended that the GDP habitat noise standard be amended as indicated in Attachment A. G. Grassland Species Performance Standard The GDP established performance standards for four grassland bird species requmng preservation of 80 percent or more of occupied habitat. These standards are rigid and are not achievable due to the wide ranging, foraging and breeding habits of the birds. In addition, the birds use disturbed habitat with non-native grasslands that are generally considered not to have other biological value. In addition, the regulatory status of the species has changed. The US. Fish and Wildlife Service is working on how to best identify future candidates from a large pool of at risk species. Applicant's Proposal: Amend the performance standards to provide habitat within the habitat preserve for these grassland birds. City Staff Position: Support the performance standard amendment. PCSRGDP3.DOC April 17, 1996 Page 6, Item:-1 Meeting Date: April 24. 1996 Planning Commission Position: The Planning Commission took tentative action to support the amended performance standards at their April 10, 1996 meeting. Recommendation: The performance standard for the four species should be amended as indicated in Attachment A Attachments I. General Development Plan Amendments 2. Resolutions 3. Disclosure Statement PCSRGDP3.DOC Aprill? 1996 ATTACHMENT A OT A Y RANCH GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENT PCM 95-09 MASTER PLAN VILLAGES Chapter 1 Land Use Plan Section E Implementation 1. Introduction Page 113 Each village must be master-planned as a unit, except for the Inverted "L". the areas of Village One and Two west of Pas eo Ranchero. Ranch House property and the Freeway Commercial area of the Eastern Urban Center. Planning Area Twelve which mav have their own SPA Plan approved prior to development of the particular area" TRANSIT ALIGNMENT Section D Land Use Design, Character and Policies 1. Village Definition and Organization Page 102 f Transit Policies Each village is planned to facilitate alternative method of transportation. The land use and circulation patterns of urban villages are organized around transit service and facilities. A significant alternative means of transportation is the trolley system. Several components of the GDP/SRP Land Use Plan encourage the use oftransit, such as: . Transit line rights-of-way shall be reserved approximately located at the SPA level and irrevocably offcred w.i!L\2!L<;:Q!.\!;!itiQ!!~~Lfor dedication at the Tentative Map level within Villages I, 5, 6, 9 and 12. . Trolley stops and/or stations shall be reserved...approximately located at the SP A level and irrevB0albly..offered--will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level in village core areas. GDPAMND.DOC April !?, 1996 Otay Ranch GDP Amendments PCM95-09 The following policies are intended to ensure that village cores and surrounding areas are readily accessible to facilitate a variety of modes of transportation . A 25-foot transit right-of-way shall be reservee--approximately located at the SPA level and inevooab!y---oft'-eroo- will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level within Village Entry Streets designated as transit routes. . Since the GDP/SRP village core locations are conceptually located on the L<!I)dmU~~__M<!l1____<!Jld_m<!r~m!Qb_\L1j.pprQxim<!!~lyJQ!<<!l~g--,!L!h~JiI'AJ_~.Y~) ~QI)~i.H~Jlt with the QPP/SRJ>-&oals. obiectives and policies. the transit line alignment on the Land Use Map may also shift to serve the village core based on an analysis required by the village core policies. Precise transit <!)ig!l.!)1eIlLwj)L_\Jemdelermi_!leg_mwitb.mthe_.px.ep~mti.Q.ILQLfiD!;llm<!p.~<!Ilg improvement plans. Village One (GDP Page 123) . Right-of-way for traHsit shall be reser/ed approximatelv located at the SPA level and irrevocably offered will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level. . A tffiflSit trolley stop and/or station shall be reser.;ed approximately located at the SPA level and irrevocably offeree will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level in the village core. Village Five (GDP Page 144) . Right-of-way for transit shall be reserved approximately located at the SPA level and irrevocably off<:red will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level. . A tffiflSit trolley stop and/or station shall be reserved approximately located at the SPA level and irrevocably off<:red will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level in the village core. Village Six (GDP Page 147) . A tmfIsit trolley stop and/or station shall be reser/ed approximately located iR--tI1e village eore at the SPA level and irrevoeably offered will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level in the village core. GDPAlvtND.DOC April 17, 1996 2 ATTACHMENT A Otay Ranch GDP Amendments PCM95.<J9 Village Six (GDP Page 148) . Right-of-way fm transit shall be reserved approximately located at the SPA level and irrevocably offered will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level. Village Nine (GDP Page 160) . A tFaflsit trollev stop and/or station shall be reserved approximatelv located ifl--tfte village core at the SPA level and irrevocably effered will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level in the village core. . Right-of-way for transit shall be reser;ea approximately located at the SPA level and irrcvocably offered will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level. Planning Area 12 (GDP Page 178) . Transit line rights-of-way and tFaflsit trolley stop~/station~ within the EUC and Freeway Commercial area shall be reserved approximatelv located at the SPA level and irrevocably offered will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level. Village Two (GDP Page 128) . Although the village is not located along the light rail transit route, a transit stop shall be reserved approximately located at the SPA level and irrevocably offered will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level. Village Three (GDP Page 133) . Although the village is not located along the light rail transit route, Ai! transit stop shall be rcserved approximatelv located at the SPA level and irrevocably offered will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level. Village Four (GDP Page 139) . Although the village is not located along the light rail transit route, Ai! transit stop shall be reserved approximately located at the SPA level and irrevocably offcred will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level. Village Seven (GDP Page 152) . Although the village is not located along the light rail transit route, a transit stop shall be reserved approximatelv located at the SPA level and irrevecably offered will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level. GDPAMND.DOC April I? 1996 3 A IT ACHMENT A Otay Ranch GDP Amendments PCM95.09 Village Eight (GDP Page 155) . Although Village Eight is not eIHl located along the light rail transit route, a transit stop shall be rcserved approximatelY located at the SPA level and irrevocably offered will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level. Village Ten (GDP Page 166) . Although the village is not located along the light rail transit route. a transit stop shall be approximately located at the SPA level and will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level Village Eleven (GDP Page 171) . Although the village is not located along the light rail transit route. a transit stop shall be approximately located at the SPA level and will be conditioned for dedication at the Tentative Map level. Chapter 2 Mobility Section B Goals, Policies, and Objectives Trolley System Page 234 Regional transportation plans envision the expansion of the light rail system to connect the existing system to the international border and various urban areas, including Otay Ranch. Objective: The Otay Ranch land use and mobility plans shall incorporate regional plans for the expansion of the light rail system. Policy: Coordinate with MTDB, CVT and other transit agencies to provide for integration of the light rail line into Villages One, Five, Six and Nine, the Park and Ride and the Eastern Urban Center. The light [!IiIJm!1~ilI\)ig!1m~nt~hQW!1nQILtb~nG.Dl'LSRPnL~_ndnUs~_M<!pjs conceptual and will be more precisely located at the SPA level of planning. GDPAMND.DOC Aprill7,1996 4 ATTACHMENT A Olay Ranch GDP Amendments PCM95-09 FARMLAND IRRIGATION Chapter 10 Resource Protection, Construction, and Management Page 384 8. Resource Preserve - Interim Land Uses Policy: Existing agricultural uses, including cultivation and grazmg, shall be permitted to continue as an interim activity only where they have occurred historically and continually. No increase in irrigation shall be allowed except for temporary irrigation that may be installed as part of restoration plans, unless approved by the Preserve Owner/Manager. Grazing of sheep ...." SOLAR ENERGY Section E Energy Conservation page 393 Building Design and Use . Use of solar energy systems, as practical RESIDENTIAL AND HABITAT NOISE MITIGATION General Development Plan Performance Standards Page 121 L NOISE . Residential development within the impact area shall not be allowed unless the site specific noise study shows that the exterior noise level can be mitigated to 60 CNEL_2_~J;;NE_L or below and that the interior noise level can be mitigated to 45 CNEL or below . Impacts to Least Bell's Vireo and California Gnateatelter habitat shall be mitigated to achieve a level of 60 dBA Leq or below. GDPAMND.DOC April !?, 1996 5 ATIACHMENT A Otay Ranch GDP Amendments PCM95-09 ! Noise levels within gnatcatcher habitat shall. to the extent feasible. achieve 65 dBA. However. for the purpose of achieving the gnatcatcher preservation standard of 52 'Yo. those gnatcatchers impacted by 65 dBA or greater shall not be counted as preserved. RESOURCE PROTECTION, CONSERVATION AND MANAGEMENT Chapter 10 2. Preservation of Sensitive Resources Page 362 Include within the habitat preserve. occupied breeding and foraging habitat and sufficient potential habitat to maintain and enhance a viable metapopulation for the northern harrier. California horned lark. loggerhead shrike. and burrowing owl. GDPA....\I'\"D.DOC April 17, 1996 6 ATTACHMENT A RESOLUTION PCM 95-09 RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL APPROVAL OF AMENDMENTS TO THE OT A Y RANCH GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN WHEREAS, an application for amendments to the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP) was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department on October 19, 1994 and September 7, 1995 by the Otay Ranch L.P ("Applicant"), and; WHEREAS, the amendments to the Otay Ranch GDP involve six minor changes. These amendments affect master -planned villages, transit, irrigation of farmland, solar energy requirements, residential noise mitigation and habitat mitigation noise standards (Attachment A). Except for the amendment applying to villages being master-planned as a unit, the amendments will apply to the entire area affected by the Otay Ranch GDP ("Project"), and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for hearings on said GDP amendments and notice of said hearings, together with its purpose, was given by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and 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 hearings were held at the time and place as advertised on November 8, 1995 and November 15, 1995 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission Said hearings were continued to March 27, 1996, April 10, 1996 and April 24, 1996 by a motion of the Planning Commission at which time, said hearings were thereafter closed, and; WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Second-tier Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) EIR 95-0 I, a Recirculated Second-tier Draft EIR and Addendum, and Findings of Fact and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been issued to address environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Project, and; WHEREAS, this Second-tier EIR, the Recirculated EIR and Addendum incorporates, by reference, two prior EIRs: the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) EIR 90-0 I and the Chula Vista Sphere of Influence Update EIR 94-03 as well as their associated Findings of Fact and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Program EIR 90-01 was certified by the Chula Vista City Council and San Diego County Board of Supervisors on October 28, 1993, and the Sphere ofInfluence Update EIR 94-03 was certified by the Chula Vista City Council on March 21, 1995, and; WHEREAS, to the extent that these findings conclude that proposed mitigation measures outlined in the Final EIR and Addendum are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or withdrawn, the City of Chula Vista hereby binds itself and the Applicant and its successors in interest, to implement those measures. These findings are not merely informational or advisory, but constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City adopts the resolution approving the Planning Commission General Development Plan Amendments Page 2 Project. The adopted mitigation measures are express conditions of approval. Other requirements are referenced in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted concurrently with these Findings and will be effectuated through the process of implementing the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION hereby adopts Final Second-Tier Environmental Impact Report EIR 95-01 and Addendum. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION recommends that the City Council adopt the attached draft City Council Resolution approving the proposed amendments in accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein. BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the City CounciL C:\PCM95_09DOC Planning Commission General Development Plan Amendments Page 3 PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA this April 24, 1996 by the following vote, to wit: AYES: NOES ABSENT: ATTEST William C. Tuchscher II Chairman Nancy Ripley, Secretary Attachments: Attachment A Draft City Council Resolution C:\PCM95 _09 DOC RESOLUTION NO. RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA APPROVING AMENDMENTS TO THE OTAY RANCH GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN (PCM 95-09) WHEREAS, an application for amendments to the Otay Ranch General Development Plan (GDP) was filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning Department on October 19, 1994 and September 7, 1995 by the Otay Ranch L.P ("Applicant"), and; WHEREAS, the amendments to the Otay Ranch GDP involve six minor changes. These amendments affect master -planned villages, transit, irrigation of farmland, solar energy requirements, residential noise mitigation and habitat mitigation noise standards (Attachment A). Except for the amendment applying to villages being master -planned as a unit, the amendments will apply to the entire area affected by the Otay Ranch GDP ("Project"), and; WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for hearings on said GDP amendments and notice of said hearings, together with its purpose, was given by publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City and 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 hearings were held at the time and place as advertised on November 8, 1995 and November 15, 1995 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission Said hearings were continued to March 27, 1996, April 10, 1996 and April 24, 1996 by a motion of the Planning Commission at which time, said hearings were thereafter closed, and; WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Second-tier Draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) EIR 95.01, a Recirculated Second-tier Draft EIR and Addendum, and Findings of Fact and a Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been issued to address environmental impacts associated with the implementation of the Project, and; WHEREAS, this Second-tier EIR, the Recirculated EIR and Addendum incorporates, by reference, two prior EIRs: the Otay Ranch General Development Plan/Subregional Plan (GDP/SRP) EIR 90-01 and the Chula Vista Sphere of Influence Update EIR 94-03 as well as their associated Findings of Fact and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. Program EIR 90-01 was certified by the Chula Vista City Council and San Diego County Board of Supervisors on October 28, 1993, and the Sphere ofInfluence Update EIR 94-03 was certified by the Chula Vista City Council on March 21, 1995,and; WHEREAS, to the extent that these findings conclude that proposed mitigation measures outlined in the Final EIR and Addendum are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or withdrawn, the City of Chula Vista hereby binds itself and the Applicant and its successors in interest, to implement those measures. These findings are not merely informational or advisory, but constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City adopts the resolution approving the Project. The adopted mitigation measures are express conditions of approvaL Other requirements are Resolution No. Page 2 referenced in the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program adopted concurrently with these Findings and will be effectuated through the process of implementing the Project. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE CITY COUNCIL of the City of Chula Vista does hereby find, determine, resolve and order as follows: 1. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their public hearings on the Draft ErR, the Recirculated DEIR and Addendum held on November 8, 1995, November 15, 1995, March 27, 1996 and March 28, 1996, and their public hearings held on this Project on November 15, 1995, March 27, 1996, April 10, 1996 and April 24, 1996 and the minutes and resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding. These documents, along with any documents submitted to the decision makers, shall comprise the entire record of the proceedings for any California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) claims. II. CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA That the City Council does hereby find that FEIR 95-01 and Addendum, the Findings of Fact, the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program and the Statement of Overriding Considerations are prepared in accordance with the requirements of the CEQA, the State EIR Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures ofthe City ofChula Vista. III. CONSISTENCY WITH THE GENERAL PLAN The proposed Project is consistent with the General Plan for the following reasons: A THE PROPOSED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS ARE IN CONFORMITY WITH THE CHULA VISTA GENERAL PLAN. The Otay Ranch General Development Plan was found consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan when it was approved on October 23, 1993. The Otay Ranch General Development Plan Amendments are minor in nature and do not impact the land use, circulation system, open space and recreational uses, and public facility uses set out in the GDP. These amendments will still advance the goals and objectives of the Otay Ranch GDP. CIPCM95_09.DOC Resolution No. Page 3 B. THE PROPOSED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS WilL PROMOTE THE ORDERLY SEQUENTIALIZED DEVELOPMENT OF THE INVOLVED SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA. The SPA One Plan and Public Facilities Financing Plan contain proVIsions and requirements to ensure the orderly, phased development of the project. The Public Facilities Financing Plan specifies the public facilities required by the Otay Ranch, and also the regional facilities needed to serve it. The proposed amendments to master- planned villages, transit, irrigation of farmland, solar energy requirements, residential noise mitigation, habitat mitigation noise standards and habitat performance standards will not have an impact on the sequential development of SP A One. C THE PROPOSED GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AMENDMENTS WILL NOT ADVERSELY AFFECT ADJACENT LAND USE, RESIDENTIAL ENJOYMENT, CIRCULATION OR ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY The villages within Otay Ranch are designed with an open space buffer adjacent to other existing projects, and future developments off-site and within the Otay Ranch Planning Area One. Four neighborhood parks will be located within the SPA One area to serve the project residents, and the project will provide a wide range of housing types for all economic levels. A comprehensive street network serves the project and provides for access to off-site adjacent properties. The proposed plan follows all existing environmental protection guidelines and will avoid unacceptable off-site impacts through the provision of mitigation measures specified in the Otay Ranch Environmental Impact Report. The proposed GDP amendments will not adversely affect adjacent land use, residential enjoyment, circulation or environmental quality. IV. CEQA FINDINGS OF FACT, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS A. Adoption of Findings of Fact The City Council does hereby approve, accept as its own, incorporate as if set forth in full herein, and make each and every one of the findings contained in the Findings of Fact, Attachment "A" of this Resolution known as document number ----' a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk. B. Certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted As more fully identified and set forth in FEIR 95-01 and Addendum and in the Findings of Fact for this project, which is Attachment "A" to this Resolution known as CIPCM95_09.DOC Resolution No. Page 4 document number --' a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, the City Council hereby finds pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 that the mitigation measures described in the above referenced documents are feasible and hereby binds itself and the Applicant and its successors in interest, to implement those measures. C. Infeasibility of Mitigation Measures As more fully identified and set forth in FEIR 95-01 and Addendum and in the Findings of Fact for this project, which is Attachment "A" to this Resolution known as document number --' a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, the mitigation measure regarding habitat noise mitigation described in the above referenced documents is infeasible. D. Infeasibility of Alternatives As more fully identified and set forth in FEIR 95-01 and Addendum and in the Findings of Fact, Section XI, for this project, which is Attachment "A" to this Resolution known as document number --' a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, the City Council hereby finds pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 2108 I and CEQA Guidelines Section 15091 that alternatives to the project, which were identified as potentially feasible in FEIR 95-0 I and Addendum were found not to be feasible E. Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program As required by the Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, City Council hereby adopts Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program ("Program") set forth in Attachment "B" of this Resolution known as document number --' a copy of which is on me in the office of the City Clerk. The City Council hereby finds that the Program is designed to ensure that, during project implementation, the permittee/project applicant and any other responsible parties and the successors in interest implement the project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in the Findings off act and the Program. F. Statement of Overriding Consideration Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and any feasible alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant environmental effects caused by the project, or cumulatively, will remain Therefore, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, a Statement of Overriding Considerations in the form set forth in Attachment "C", known as document number CIPCM95 ~ 09.DOC Resolution No. Page 5 --' a copy of which is on file in the office of the City Clerk, identifYing the specific economic, social and other considerations that render the unavoidable significant adverse environmental effects acceptable. V. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION That the Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista is directed after City Council approval of this Project to ensure that a Notice ofDeterrnination filed with the County Clerk of the County of San Diego. This docmnent along with any documents submitted to the decision makers shall comprise the record of proceedings for any CEQA claims. VI. Attachments All attachments and exhibits are incorporated herein by reference as set forth in full. C:\PCM95 _09 .DOC Resolution No. Page 6 PASSED, APPROVED and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City ofChula Vista, California, this May 14, 1996 by the following vote: YES NOES ABSENT Shirley Horton. Mayor ATTEST Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk STATE OF CALIFORNIA) COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO) ss. CITY OF CHULA VISTA) I, Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk of the City of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution No. _ was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council at a City Council meeting held on the 14th day of May, 1996. Executed this 14th day of May, 1996. Beverly A. Authelet, City Clerk Attachments: Attachment A: GDP Amendments Attachment B: Findings of Fact Attachment C: Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Attachment D: Statement of Overriding Considerations C:\PCM95_09.DOC THE CITY OF OnJI.A VISTA DISCLOSURE STA1J;..'\1..t:J~ 1 You are required to me a Statemen. uf Disclosure of cenain owner.;hip O! 1ancial interestS, pa\mentS. or :=:-c_ conmbullons. un all matter.; which \>.111 requ"e discretionary action on the pan at Lne City Council. Planning Comr:::.ss::c all utr,er uf[;uo; hodies. The foilo""ng Informollon must be disclosed: LLSt the "ames of all persons ha\1ng a financlJI intcrest in the propertv which is the subject of the Jppii;;;;: cor.trJC. c.g., O\\'T1Cf, 3ppiic..Jnt. contrJClOr. subcontr3Clor. matcn::11 supplier. '::~~....3":' ?C~J ::'.?, a (""";:::lif::r;.:a ~i'"7ite:: F'a!::.-l;:J....:J~ip O1it.a:: 3it~~i..se=1 L.? ::ci0:,-;i..-: 3....:i2:E!:"5/ a :'J3lif:rr.ia '~L2t::.cr. Smi th :-,r-e-::':::~y T. :J.::r::-"- =e':'21q::r.a-::: :'....c, a ':2J.ifcrria :..irr.i~ ~ip s ~ ~ 3, Ltd. Par~~er~~~~ If anv person" Identified pur.;uant to (1) above is a corporation or panner.;hip, list the namcs of all !ndl\1de"..' more than 10% of the shares In the wrporatlDn or owning any panner.;hip Intercst in the panner.ihip. :2.f~ P. Eald,;in .^<It::=r3 E. B316..w 3. If :JnV person" Idcnllficd pursuant to (1) ahove IS non-profit orgon,z;1tlon or 0 trust. list the names of Jr'. scr,'mg J.S director of the non-profit org~1niz..;J.uon or ::IS Iru~tCC or hcm.:f!cI3ry or trustor of the trust. Nil\. .j Ho\e \ou had more than SZ50 worth of husiness transacted with any member of the City staff. BoardS. Com"'."- Cummlttees. and CounCil within the past Iwelvc months" Ycs_ NoL- If yes. plcasc indic.:ac pcrsonl5]: - 5. PJc~sc identif\' each and every pcrson. including In\' agents. cmployees. consultantS, or indcpendent contrec:",-s .~ you h~vc assigned to rcprescnt you bcforc the City in this mattcr. Ki.~ .7d70 ~ Rorie finte:: Ti:.~cr..' J. O'Q:'Cc'J JaIES B31d..lin Ka:: :~ AlfrEd Pald..lin 6. Have vou and/or your officers or agents. in the aggregate, contributed more than SI,OOO to a Councilmember ir. current or preceding election period? Ycs_ Nol If yes, state which Councilmember(s): . . . (NOTE: Att;1ch additional pages as neN'<-'<'lry) . .. -"-/ ~/~ ~/ ~ /' Signature o~actor/applic':Jnt Kiln Jcrn Kil1<:ernV Print or type name of contractor/appiic.1r.: DJ:c: lci 1,,184 ...c-.", li ~find "". '.1m' ""'",.,""", """" :o-pam.min,p. I'''''' ,'C!W""'. ","cnanon sooal club. fra:"",a! o'1'am;:;1oo,,- co'PoranolL <SIQ!~;'USL ,"cc"''''', ".,.."". _',e em n<fle!' :oun'. ",. ena :OUl".-.' ,-u" '''",,,,clpalm'. .ill"''' 01 nlneT ,oilllcel suDdmszon or an." DIh""170UO or comomanon ecr.m; ~ a wu~