HomeMy WebLinkAbout2006/11/21 Item 13
CITY COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item' 1..3
Meeting Date: 11/21/06
ITEM TITLE: PUBLIC HEARING: Consideration of a Tentative Subdivision Map
application filed by Villas Del Mar, LLC and known as Villas Del Mar,
Chula Vista Tract 04-06 for 10 single family residential lots on 2.06 acres
on the west side of North Del Mar Avenue between C street and Brisbane
Avenue
RESOLUTION: of the City Council of the City of Chula Vista
adopting Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
Program 1S-04-022, and approving and establishing conditions of Tentative
Map for Villas Del Mar, Chula Vista Tract 04-06.
SUBMITTED BY: Director of PI/ and Building ~
REVIEWED BY: City Manager il (4/5 Vote: es No_X-.J
This is an infill subdivision to develop a 2.06 acre, elongated rectangular parcel into 10 single
family residential lots, and one common lot containing the access driveway and common
landscaping areas ("Project"). The Project is located at 160 North Del Mar A venue within a well-
established single-family residential neighborhood ("Project Site").
The Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for compliance with
the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study in accordance with
the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results of Initial Study, the
Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could result in significant
effects on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by, or agreed to by, the
applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant
impacts would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, 1S-04-22.
RECOMMENDATION:
Adopt Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1S-04-
022; and approve Tentative Subdivision Map, Chula Vista Tract 04-06 in accordance with the
findings and subj ect to the conditions contained in the attached Draft City Council Resolution.
BOARDS AND COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION:
On March 6, 2006, the Resource Conservation Commission (RCC) determined that the Initial
Study prepared for the Project was adequate, and recommended adoption ofthe Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program 1S-04-022.
13-1
Page 2, Item: 1..3
Meeting Date: 11,f?1fOh
On May 10, 2006, the Planning Commission considered Rezone and Tentative Subdivision Map
applications to change the eastern 200 feet of the Project Site,from R-I to R-IP6, Residential
Single Family, Precise Plan, 6,000 square-foot lots, and subdivide the property into 12 single-
family residential lots, one corrunon lot containing the private access drive and a common open
space lot (see Attachment 4).
Due to the shape and topography of the Project Site, the Precise Plan guidelines prepared for the
Proj ect included certain deviation from the municipal code. These deviations included: reduction
in minimum lot size and increase in allowable building height. The 12-lot subdivision provided
lots ranging in size from 4,291 to 5,061, with an average lot size of 4,650.
After hearing staffs presentation and public testimony, the Planning Commission expressed
concerns about number and size of the lots, the number of deviations necessary to accorrunodate
the Project and the compatibility of the proposed development with the existing surrounding
single-family residential neighborhood. Area residents in attendance also expressed concern
about the potential negative impact the Project could have on the surrounding area, including
traffic and on street parking. Based on these concerns, the Planning Corrunission voted
unanimously (5-0) to recommend denial of the Project to the City Council (see Attachment 4.)
Subsequently, the applicant worked with city staff to resolve the issues raised at the hearing and
made significant changes to the Project. The revised Project design achieved three major
changes: I) reduced the number of lots from 12 to 10; 2) increase the lot sizes and the overall
average lot size from 4, 650 sq. ft. to 7,040 sq. ft. consistent with the underlying zone; and 3)
eliminate the previously requested deviations from the CYMC and consequently the need to
rezone the easterly 200 ft. of the Project Site and Precise Plan guidelines. With these changes, the
project is substantially more compatible with the existing residential neighborhood and
consistent with the CYMC and Chula Vista Subdivision Ordinance (CVSO). Based on the above,
the applicant requested to go back to the Planning Corrunission for consideration of his revised
Tentative Map and obtain their endorsement before the City Council hearing.
Pursuant to Section 2.04.570(B) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (CYMC), staffrescheduled
the project for Planning Corrunission reconsideration. On October 18, 2006, the Commission
reconsidered the revised Tentative Subdivision Map application, and after hearing staffs
presentation and public testimony, added draft condition requiring sidewalks on at least one side
of the private drive throughout the project (see Attachment 3, PC Meeting Minutes). The
Commission then approved the Project by unanimous vote (5-0-1, Clayton absent),
recommending the City Council approve the Tentative Subdivision Map based on the findings
and subject to the conditions contained in the draft City Council Resolution with the added
condition requiring sidewalks (see draft City Council Resolution, condition 17).
2
13-2
Page 3, Item: t 3
Meeting Date: '1j?1jOIi
PUBLIC INPUT:
In preparation for Planning Commission reconsideration of tlle Project, city staff scheduled a
neighborhood meeting on September 7, 2006. The purpose of the meeting was to present the
Project changes and obtain input from concerned citizens. While the neighbors acknowledged
that positive changes have been made to the Project, they were still concerned about guest
parking, emergency vehicle access and increase traffic on local streets.
Gnp.st p"rking
The concern is whether there is an adequate number of guest parking spaces within the Project?
If not there could be an impact on the neighborhood streets. Staff explained that the Project
provides 10 designated guest parking spaces and long driveways to accommodate additional
guests parking for special events. Combined, the Project could accommodate between 29 and 40
spaces which staff believes is adequate.
Fm~rE~nc.y Vp.hir.lp. Ar.c.p.~~'
The concern revolve around the adequacy of the private road width (24 f1.) to accommodate
emergency vehicles and trash trucks. Staff indicated that the Fire Department and Waste and
Recycling Manager had reviewed the revised design and found the private drive adequate to
provide emergency and service vehicle access.
Tr"ffi~ on T o~"l Strp.p.ts'
Concern was expressed by residents over existing traffic on local streets in the area and the impact
additional vehicle trips from the proposed subdivision could have. (See Section on Traffic/Off-Site
Circulation below)
DISCUSSION:
Project Site Characteristics
Except for an existing occupied single-family residence on the easternmost portion of the site
(near North Del Mar Avenue), the site is vacant and fenced with chain link fencing. The Project
Site is an elongated shaped parcel (661 ft. long x 80-155 ft. wide) located on the west side of
North Del Mar Avenue between C Street and Brisbane Avenue (see Locator Map). Access to the
site is possible from North Del Mar Avenue at the eastern end of the parcel and future Third
Avenue along the west side. However, Third Avenue is currently a "paper street" (a street that
appears on city maps, but is not constructed). Third Avenue is not planned to be improved in the
near future due to the current narrow right-of-way width, slope condition and difficulty acquiring
the additional right-of-way to meet city standards. A 24 ft. wide reciprocal access easement runs
along the north property line serving the subject site as well as the northerly adjacent parcels (see
13-3
Page 4, Item: 13
Meeting Date: 11/?Vnh
Tentative Map, Attachment 7.
Surrounding Land Uses
..
The Project Site is surrounded by single-family homes, apartments and a mobile home park. The
table below describes the surrounding land use designations, zoning and existing land uses in
more detail:
Location
General Plan Zoning Existing Land Use
Designation
Residential- Low RIP6 (except SFDNacant
Medium (RLM) easternmost 200 feet
currently zoned RI)
Residential- Low RI Single Family
Medium (RLM) Residential
Residential-Low RI/R3GD. Single Family
MediumlResidential - Residential! Apartments
Medium (RLM/RM)
Residential - Low RI Single-Family
Medium (RLM) Residential
Residential-Medium Mobile Home Park Mobile Home Park
(RM) (MHP)
Site
North
South
East
West
Proj ect Description
The Project consists of removing the existing house and subdividing the Project Site into 10
single-family residential lots, ranging in size from 5,805 to 8,657 square-feet, and one common
lot containing the private road and common landscaping areas. The average lot size is
approximately 7,040 square feet.
Grading
The grading consists of terracing building pads with elevation difference ranging from 2 to 17 ft.
(see Tentative Map, Attachment 7). A 24 ft wide access road, which meanders from north to
south and terminates on a cul-de-sac provides access to each individual lot. The road slopes
approximately 50 ft from North Del Mar Avenue to the center of the cul-de-sac. The steepest
slope is approximately 12%, which is permitted for private access roads. Concrete paving will be
used to maintain proper vehicle traction.
4
13-4
Page 5, Item: 13
Meeting Date: lV?lfO/i
In order to minimize the impacts to the eXIstmg topography while at the same time
accommodating the proposed private road through the project, the developer has proposed seven
"split level" lots whereby the retaining walls will be incorporated into the residential structure.
All seven of the proposed split-level lots (Lots 4-10) contain a 12-foot difference in elevation
between the upper and lower pad.
The overall grading program proposes 1,500 cubic yards of cut and 12,500 cubic yards of fill for
a total import of 11 ,000 cubic yards. The fill dirt is required in order to provide level and split
level building pads large enough to be compatible with the surrounding existing development.
Analysis:
Sitp. rnn~tr~;ntc::
The proposed project is constrained by the following factors:
. rnnfiv'r"tinn- The parcel is long (661 feet) and narrow(155 feet wide), with only 80 feet
of frontage along North Del Mar Avenue.
. Tnpngr"pny-The existing site contains steep terrain which slopes downward to the west.
. Acc~,,-Since the applicant only owns a portion of the joint easement at the northern edge
of the property, the proposed 24 foot wide private street, Villas Del Mar Court, contains a
portion centered along the existing easement and remainder entirely within the project
site. The easterly 220 feet of Villa Del Mar Court is proposed to be centered within the
existing easements that combine to serve not only the subject property but also adjacent
properties to the north. The remaining approximately 300 feet is proposed entirely within
the subject site and terminates in a cul-de-sac containing a 90 foot diameter turn-around
for service and emergency vehicles. This private street terminates approximately 130 feet
in from the western edge of the project site. Although the western edge of the project site
is adjacent to North Third Avenue, at this point Third Avenue is a "paper street" and not
suited for improvement to provide access (see discussion under Access/On-Site
Circulation).
Sllhr1;v;C::;OT1 Dec::;.e;:n
The eastern 200 foot portion of the site will contain two lots approximately 7,000 square feet in
size in order to ensure compatibility of lot sizes (Lots 1 and 2) with existing surrounding lots.
Lots 5, and 7 are below 7,000 square feet, which is allowed per section 19.24.080 of the CYMC.
This section specifies that 10% of the total number of lots may be a minimum of5,000 sq. ft. and
20% 6,000 sq. ft. as long as the overall average is at least 7,000 square feet. In this case, the
5
13-5
Page 6, Item: 13
Meeting Date: 11/?1jOh
average lot size will be 7,040 square feet. Letter Lot "A" contains the 24-foot access driveway,
guest parking bays and common landscape areas.
A rr~~~/()n_~ itp, rirr.ll1::lti nn
Access to the project will be via a 24 foot wide private drive connecting to North Del Mar
Avenue. A twenty foot wide driveway to each lot will be provided off of this private drive. The
terminus of the private street will be a cul-de-sac containing a 90 foot diameter turn-around that
has a concentric 30 foot diameter planter area. The cul-de-sac standards proposed are the same
as those required for public streets. Section 3-404.1 of the City's Subdivision Manual allows
private streets subject to the following criteria: 1) their use is logically consistent with a desire
for neighborhood identification and control of access, and where special overall design concepts
may be involved; 2) the use of private streets shall be limited to cul-de-sacs and to minor local
streets not carrying through traffic and those with a projected traffic volume not exceeding 800
ADT; and 3) private street designations shall be subject to review and approval by the Planning
Commission and the City Council.
The use of a private street minimizes the impacts to the surrounding areas in order to help
maintain the existing topography of the area. Private streets allow for steeper grades than a
public street would allow. As shown in subsequent discussion, an additional 90 ADT's are
projected with this project, well below the 800 ADT maximum. By providing a private street
ending in a cul-de-sac, there will be no concern about through traffic. The Fire Department has
reviewed the proposal and has determined that the proposed turn-around radius meets Fire
Department requirements.
Although North Third Avenue abuts the western edge of the property only half of the needed
right-of-way width for public residential street (30-feet) has been granted for a public street.
There are currently no street improvements in place. The applicant is not proposing and staff
does not support the use of Third Avenue as providing access to the development. Staff is
requiring twenty-foot paved access for sewer maintenance purposes beginning at the terminus of
the on-site cul-de-sac in a westerly direction to the property line and then in a northerly direction
along North Third Avenue approximately 500 feet (see Attachment 6, Figure 1). However,
widening of the Third Avenue easement in order to create a public road would be difficult due to
both topographic constraints as well as potential negative impact to the mobile home park located
to the west. Further, if an access road were to be provided by the applicant along North Third
Avenue, there is no room to provide a turn around that would meet the requirements of the
Engineering, Fire and Public Works Departments.
Tr"ffidnff-S;t~ rir~1I1Mion
A number of residents living near the project site have expressed concerns both in writing and
verbally at the neighborhood meeting of September 7, 2006 regarding project traffic impacts to
6
13-6
Page 7, Item: 13
Meeting Date: , 1/?',!Of;
the area (see Attachment 5). Although a traffic study was not required for this Project, staff
consulted with the City's Traffic Engineering Division who subsequently conducted some traffic
counts in the area and who provided the following summary analysis.
The proposed project is 10 single family homes with one existing single family home to be
demolished. Therefore, the traffic impacts are for the net additional 9 homes. Using a trip
generation rate of 10 vehicle trips per home assumes a total project traffic impact of
approximately 90 vehicles per day.
Engineering staff completed traffic counts in the area of the subject project. From March 22
through March 24, 2006 traffic counts were completed on North Second Avenue between
Bayview Way and Shirley Street. Also, speed and volume counts were conducted on North Del
Mar Avenue between Vista Del Mar Court and Nixon Place. The results of the data are as
follows:
North Second Avenue
North Second Avenue has an average daily traffic count of approximately 7,287 vehicles per day.
Of this total 3491 (48%) were in the northbound direction and 3796 (52%) in the southbound
direction. The percentage split shows that it is approximately evenly distributed. Since North
Second Avenue is a collector street, it circulates localized traffic as well as distributes traffic to
and from arterials and other collectors to access residential areas. The roadway design capacity is
7,500 vehicles per day according to the City's Subdivision Manual. At 7,287 trips per day, the
roadway is under design capacity and within design limits. This means that the roadway has
moderate volumes but would have minimal delays throughout most of the day and minimal to
some minor delays during certain peak hours of the day. The delays during the peak periods
would primarily be traffic queued up at the all-way stop sign at the intersection of North Second
Avenue and C Street.
North Del Mar Avenue
The residential street North Del Mar Avenue has an average daily traffic count of approximately
167 vehicles per day. Of this total 101 (60%) were in the northbound direction and 67 (40%) in
the southbound direction. The percentage split shows that it is almost a 2:1 ratio for northbound
versus southbound vehicles. Since North Del Mar Avenue is a residential street, which is meant
to be the roadway that generates local trips, the roadway design capacity is 1,200 vehicles per
day. The volume today is 14% of the design capacity and with the project, all of the traffic has to
utilize North Del Mar Avenue. The traffic volume with the project increases to 23% of the
design volume. This 23% figure represents a level of service "A" (less than 60% design
capacity) which means that the roadway would still not be expected to have any delays since the
low volumes would mean that conditions are generally free flow throughout the day. It would
take approximately 720 vehicles per day for the level of service on this street to decease to level
7
13-7
Page 8, Item: 13
Meeting Date: 11j?1/0h
of service "B", which would still be acceptable.
The speed count data showed that on this 25 MPH roadway.northbound speeds averaged 18
MPH and 85% of the vehicles were at 24 MPH or lower. F'or the southbound direction, the
average speed was 21 MPH and 85% of the vehicles were at 28 MPH or less. The southbound
direction has a downward grade as it approaches the stop sign at the T -intersection with C Street.
Bayview Way
Bayview Way is a residential street with no curb improvements and one-lane in each direction.
According to the City's Subdivision Manual, design capacity is 1200 Average Daily Trips
(ADI's). A recent traffic count conducted at the project frontage showed ADI's of 167 vehicles
per day. Therefore, with the project's anticipated 90 trips per day increase, expected volume of
traffic on Bayview Way will be less than 300 vehicles per day, which is still acceptable on this
local street. The proposed increase in project traffic impacts on the level of service of Bayview
Way would not change from level of service "A".
The City's Subdivision Manual design criteria for streets states that residential streets should
provide access to not more than 120 tributary dwelling units. This project area has
approximately 62 dwelling units and with the project, the total will increase to 73 dwelling units
served by the existing three access points; Bayview Way, Shirley Street and North Del Mar
A venue. Since the design criteria also states that single family residential development shall not
exceed 120 residential lots unless two points of access are provided and there are three points of
access, the proj ect does not create any traffic impacts on the local roadway network. The three
access points serve to better distribute the local traffic in this area.
P"rkinr
A two car garage is required and proposed for each of the 10 units. No parking will be allowed
along the private drive. The applicant is proposing 10 guest parking spaces on site, in two
parking bays, four spaces at the northwest edge of Lot 2 and six spaces at the cul-de-sac (see
Tentative Map, Attachment 7). In addition, there is room for approximately 3 on-street parking
spaces along N. Del Mar Avenue lot frontage. While no parking will be allowed along the private
drive, the individual access driveways could provide additional opportunities to accommodate
guest parking. The site could potentially provide for a combined total of between 29 and 40
guest parking spaces see Attachment 6, Figure 2) In order to affirm guest parking availability, the
following restrictions would be required in the Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions
(CC&R's) for the project:
. Garages must be free and clear to allow for parking of 2 vehicles at all times
. No on-street parking along private drive
. Driveways should be available to provide opportunities for parking of 2-4 guest vehicles.
8
13-8
Page 9, Item: 1.3
Meeting Date: 11,/71,10ii
Staff finds the proposed provision for guest parking more than adequate. In this particular instance,
more guest parking will be accommodated than in a typical subdivision which does allow for on-
street parking. The combination of one marked guest space per lot and the potential additional
parking on individual driveways could accommodate at least two additional guest spaces provides a
total of at least 3 guest parking spaces per unit. On-street parking for a subdivision providing
public street access, usually has room for only I to 2 parking spaces along the street for each lot. In
addition, the applicant will require the new homeowner to sign an agre=ent at the time of purchase
of the lot, accepting the CC & R's rules and regulations, which will include restrictions noted
above.
nr~in:::l~p.
Stormwater will be collected within the roadway with curb inlets, and from private property with
the use of catch basins and culverts, with provisions for easements where required. The
collectable storm water will be directed to a proposed underground detention system and will be
discharged-controlled before exiting at the northwest corner of the property. From this point, the
stormwater will flow over the surface on Third Avenue as it had done in the past.
The development will be required to comply with City's NPDES requirements and all water
quality issues.
Public Facilities
.water
The Sweetwater Authority has indicated there is a 6-inch main located on the east side of North
Del Mar Avenue. The owner will need to install a water main to this project. To date, the owner
has signed and returned the Authority's design requirement letter and paid the requested deposit
for engineering review.
S=
There are currently no sewer mains abutting the property that would allow for gravity-type flow.
The applicant proposes an off-site sewer main extension through the Third Avenue right-of-way
to the northwest. They will connect to an existing manhole approximately 267 feet northwesterly
within the Third Avenue right-of-way, and install a public 8" PVC sewer main, with concrete
encasement for the shallow installation up to the southwest corner of the site, then easterly into
the proposed Villas Del Mar Court cul-de-sac, and thence traverse up Villas Del Mar Court until
terminating in front of proposed Lot 1. In addition, the developer will construct a 15 ft. wide
roadway surface along the length of the portion of Third Avenue that will be served by the
9
13-9
Page 10, Item: J.=:>
Meeting Date: 11/?VOh
proposed line in that right-of-way. The developer must grant an easement to the City of Chula
Vista for maintenance of the proposed lines.
Schools
The project is within the boundaries of the Chula Vista Elementary School District, which serves
children Kindergarten through Grade 6. Both schools have indicated that there is sufficient
capacity to accommodate the elementary school students and middle and high school students
generated by the Project. The applicant would be required to pay applicable developer fees
based upon assessable area.
Earks
Applicant will be required to pay in-lieu park fees.
Prnjed r()mrli~n(;e with Growth M::m;:J.!:f':mf':T1t
This project is below the threshold required to prepare a Water Conservation or Air Quality
Improvement Plan.
Conflict ofInterest
Staff has reviewed the proposed holdings of the City Council and has found no holdings within 500
feet of the boundaries of the property which is the subj ect of this action.
CONCLUSION:
For the reasons stated above, staff recommends the City Council agree with the recommendation
of the Planning Commission and approve the draft City Council Resolution adopting the
Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program and approve Villas Del Mar
Tentative Subdivision Map based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained therein.
FISCAL IMPACT:
The applicant has paid all costs associated with the processing of the proposed tentative
subdivision and will be responsible for paying corresponding Development Impact Fees and
other applicable development fees, as they may be amended from time to time.
to
13-10
Page 11, Item: t.:>
Meeting Date: l1/?1jOh
Att:::lr.nm~nt~
1 Locator Map
2 Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program
3 Planning Commission Resolution and Minutes for October 18, 2006
4 Planning Commission Resolution and Minutes for May 10, 2006
5 Letters from Area Residents
6 Figures
7 Tentative Subdivision Map
8 Ownership Disclosure Form
J: planninglcasefilesl05\PCZ 05-031... \Villas Del MarlCCIstaffreportslCityCounci1lAl13forlnovember2006FINAL
11
13-11
13-12
"
ATTACHMENT 1
LOCATOR MAP
13-13
T ~.r-1 .t. ".-,1't..T--.
ATTACHMENT 2
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGAM
13-14
Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT NAME:
Villas Del Mar
PROJECT LOCATION:
160N.DelMarAvenue "
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.:
APN #563-290-0400
PROJECT APPLICANT:
Villas Del Mar Development LLC
Frederico Esco bedo
CASENO.:
IS-04-022
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT:
February 27, 2006
DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING: March 6, 2006 .
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT:
April 4. 2006 !Revised 9/21/2006)
PREPARED BY:
Maria C. Muett
RfNisions made to this document subsequent to the iScJuance of the notice of availability of the draft Mitigated
Negative Declaration are denoted by underline.
Background
A Mitigated Negative Declaration as-04-022) was prepared for the Villas Del Mar Proiect. which involved the
residential development of the 2.06-acre parcel within the western portion of the City. The Resource
Conservation Commission recommended adoption of the Mitigated Negative Declaration at their March 6.
2006 Meeting. On April 3. 2006 the Design Review Committee approved design of the proiect; The Planning
Commission recommended denial of the proiect on Mav 10. 2006. .The project has since been redesigned
reducing the n=ber of proposed lots from 12 to 10 lots. The proiect is scheduled for review bv the P1annine:
Commission on October 18. 2006. The changes to the proposed. proiect are minor with no additional
enviromnental impacts or issnes identified that are not alreadv covered under the Mitigated Negative
Declaration IS-04-022 addressed in the earlier proposal. Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5( c)
recirculation of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required.
A. Proiect Setting
The 2.06-acre project site is located at 160 N. Del Mar, within the urbanized area of Western Chula
Vista, (Exhibit 1- Location Map). The site is adjacent to N. Del Mar Avenue and near Vista Del Mar
Court and N. Third. Avenue. Primary access to the site is currently provided off of N. Del Mar .
A venue through a private road easement shared by properties to the north. The rectangular-shaped
flag lot site is covered with natUrally vegetated land, dry grasses and slopes from a gentle gradient to
steeper slopes towards the west. The entire project site has been partially disturbed with previous
uses including a single-family residence, garage and small accessory structures. The land uses
immediately surrounding the project site are as follows:
North:
South:
East:
West:
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family and Multi-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Mobile Home Park
13-15
B. ProiectDescription
The proposal consists of subdividing the project site into ~ 10 single-family parcels. Access to the
site would be provided via a private road entrance off of N. Del Mar Avenue. The project includes
the demolition and replacement of an existing single-family residence. The remaining U 2 parcels are
designed for single-family residential development. Proposed on'site improvements include drainage
facilities, sewer system facilities, fire hydrants, retaining walls, fencing, improved paved areas, open
space and landscape treatments: The proposal includes a Design Review Permit for, a Precise Plan, a
Rezone to change a portion of the property zoned Rl to RlP6, as well as a Tentative Map. The
project is subject to a Habitat Loss and Incidental Take (HUT) permit in accordance with the City of
Chula Vista Multiple Species Conservation Program Subarea Plan.
C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans
The proposed project site is within the. General Plan LM (Low-Medium Residential Density/3-6
dwelling units per acre) and Rl and RlP6 (Single Family ResidentiallPrecise Plan) Zone. The
proposal includes a rezone of the Rl portion of the site' to RlP6 area, thus creating an overall RlP6
zone. The proposed project has been found to be consistent with the applicable site development
regulations and the General Plan.
D. Public Comments
On December 22, 2005, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners within a SOO-foot
radius of the proposed project site. The public review period ended January 4, 2006. Two verbal
comments were received during this period regarding traffic circulation, density and unidentified sand
fill materials on site. The issues regarding traffic and undocumented fill are addressed in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration sections below.
On March 1. 2006. the Notice of Availabilitv of the Proposed Mitigated Negative Declaration for the
proiect was posted in'the County Clerk's Office and circulated to property owners within a SOO-foot
radius of the project site. The 30-dav public comment period closed on March 30. 2006. A written
comment letter was received from the Sweetwater Authoritv. The issue included minor edits to the
Utilities/Service Svstems portion of the Initial Studv ChecklistlMitigated Negative Declaration. Other
comment letters were received bv the Planning Department but not addressing the .adequacv of the
Mitigated Negative Declaration.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached Enviro=ental
Checklist form) determined that the proposed project may have potential significant enviro=ental
impacts however; mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce these impacts
to a less than significant level. ,This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance
with Section 15070 of the State of California Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
Air Qualitv
Short-Term ConstrUction Activities
. The proposed project will result in a short-term air quality impact created from construction activities
associated, with the proposed proj ect. The grading of the site for future single family residential
development and worker and equipment vehicle trips will create temporary emissions of dust, fumes,
equipment exhaust, and other air pollutants associated with .the construction activities. Air quality
impacts resulting from construction-related operations are conSidered short-term in duration.
. 13-16
In order to analyze potential project impacts/emissions, the emission factors and threshold criteria
contained in the 1993 South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Handbook feir Air
Quality Analysis were used.
Table 1 below provides a comparison of daily construction erriissions to the SCAQMD's emission
thresholds of significance for each criteria pollutant. Emissions were calculated using the URBEMIS
2002 model. The addition of emissions to an air basin is considered under CEQA to be a significant
impact. Implementation of the Mitigation Measure 1 contained in Section F below would mitigate
short-term construction-related air quality impacts td below a level of significance. These measures
are included as a part of the Mitigation Moriitoring and Reporting Program.
Table 1.0
Project Estimated Construction Emissions 2006/2007":
Pollutant CO ROG 'NO, S02 PMIO
Miti.ated (]bs/dav) (lbs/ dav) (lbs/day) Ibs/day (]bsldav/total)
Construction
equipment and 82.19 59.51 59.06 .31 7.39
lITading:
Significance ,
Threshold 1 550 75 100 150 150
Exceed No No No No No
threshold
ROG is used in the Air Quality Model and VOC is used in the SCAQMD Threshold Critena. For the purpose of
this analysis, ROG is used in this model.
Combined Shori-Term and Long-Term Impacts
In order to assess whether the project's contribution to ambient air quality is cumulatively
considerable, the project's operational emissions were quantified. The proposed project once
developed will not result in significant long-term air quality impacts. The minimal project generated
traffic volume would not result in significant long-term local or regional air quality impacts. Through
project design, emission-controlled construction vehicles and efficiency building product, no area
source or operational vehicle emission estimates will exceed the Air Quality significance thresholds;
therefore, no mitigation measures are required. Refer to Table 2.0 below.
Table 2.0
'Project Estimated Area and OP:erational Einissions 2006/2007*
Pollutant CO ROG NOx S02 PMlO
Mitigated. (lbs/day) (lbslday) (lbs/day) (lbs/day) (lbs/day)
Vehicle 15.04 1.23 1.49 0.01 1.36
Emissions
Area Sources 0.52 1.08 0.15 0.01 0.00
Total . 15.56 2.31 1.64 0.02 1.36
Significance 550 55 55 150 150
Threshold!
Exceed No No No No No
Threshold
'Source SCAQMD CEQA Handbook Air Quality Model 1993
1 South Coast Air Quality Management District/Air Quality Significance Thresholds
13-17
Biological Resources
A Biological Resource Analysis was prepared by Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc., dated
January 19, 2006, to assess the potential biological resource impacts of the project. A biological
reconnaissance survey of the project site was conducted on May II and June 2, 2005 to ident:ifY
existing vegetation on the site. On-site surveying included z,?ological assessment conducted by a
qualified zoologist on May 19,2005. The biological resource analysis is sn=arizedbelow.
The 2.06-acre project site consists of 0.11 acres of developed land and approximately 1.844-acres of
disturbed habitat. The site is located in an area designated as a urban/development area under the
City's Multiple Species Conservation Program (MSCP) Subarea Plan. The surrounding land to the
west, north, east and south are currently developed with residential uses. A portion of the northern
property is currently vacant and undeveloped. The already disturbed site contains Eucalyptus trees,
urban/developed land, non-native grassland vegetation and portions of earlier salt marsh vegetation,
specifically known as Cismontane Alakali Marsh community.
The project site is located within in the City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan boundary in an area
designated as a "Development Area." Under the Subarea Plan, the proposed project is subject to the
requirements under the Habitat Loss Incidental Take (HUT) Ordinance. In accordance with the
HLIT Ordinance,. those projects that are greater thim one acre, contain sensitive biological resources,
and are located outside of the "Covered Projects," must d=onstrate compliance with the Ordinance
ane! . obtain Take Authority from the City of Chula Vista for impacts to Covered Species. The
following is a sunnnary of the findings and impacts contained in the updated biological report as
required by the City's HLIT Ordinance, Section 17.35.
Vegetation Impacts
The biological report detennined that the development of the project would result in impacts to 1.14
acres of Non-native Grassland (NNG) habitat. According to the MSCP Subarea Plan, NNG is
designated as Tier ill (common uplands) habitat. Impacts to this habitat must be mitigated in
accordance with the City's MSCP Subarea Plan. This can be accomplished by providing evidence
that the NNG or. equivalent credits in a off site niitigation preserve bank has been acquired to the
satisfaction of the City's Planning and Building Department Director. Implementation of the
mitigation measures identified in Section F of this Mitigated Negative Declaration will reduce
identified indirect biological impacts to a level below significance.
Salt Marsh Vegetation Community
Along the northwest= portion ofthe project site, a tidal marsh that was once part of the S,yeetwater
River Estuary was identified. Early history records indicated that the construction of the flood control
levees and SR 54, eliminated any tidal activity. This area is dominated by non-native grasses and
shaded by eucalyptus trees. According to the biological resource study and concurred by the City's
third-party Biological Resource consultant, there are no hydrologic conditions that support the
Cismontane Alkali marsh vegetation, and those that were discovered were likely leaching out of the
existing alkaline salt area. The federal and state agencies that have jurisdiction over wetlands and
associated areas are not likely to consider this Alkali marsh remant to be significant under their
jurisdiction, and would not be considered a jurisdictional authority of the U.S. Army. Corp of
Engineers subject to 404 Take Permit regulations. This area is being avoided through project design,
as it is located within the IS-foot setback along the north boundary of the project site. This feature
does not function as a wetland nor as a salt marsh vegetation community.
In order to ensure avoidance of the habitat, prior to the issuance of any clearihg, grading or
construction permits, orange biological fencing will be installed around the remant marsh area
13-18
within the IS-foot property line setback, near Lot M J1 in accordance with the development plans and
to the satisfaction of the Enviromental Review Coordinator. The City's Mitigation Monitor will
conduct periodic site' visits to verify the placement of the biological fencing and to ensure that all
construction activities remain within the approved limits of grading. Implementation of the mitigation
measures identified in Section F of this Mitigated Negative peclaration will reduce potentially
significant biological impacts to a level below significance.
AnimallWildlife Species Impacts
The Non-native Grassland habitat, open space areas near the site, and the eucalyptus trees along the
northern boundary could be used as foraging habitat by common raptorial sensitive species of the
area. These species include Red-shouldered Hawks, Cooper's Hawks, and Red-tailed Hawks.
Impacts associated with clearing and grading activities upon raptor nesting are considered potentially
significant. Therefore, a pre-construction survey for nesting raptors will be required. A copy of the
pre construction survey results and recommendations must be submitted to the City's Environmental
Review Coordinator for review and approval.
In addition, the applicant will be required to provide evidence that the impacted area of NNG has
been properly mitigated in an offsite mitigation bank to the satisfaction of the City's Planning and
Building Director. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified in Section F of this
Mitigated Negative Declaration will reduce potentially significant biological impacts to a level below
significance.
Habitat Loss Incidental Take (HLII) Permit
Due to the impacts to the Tier ill habitat, Non-native Grasslands, the applicant will be required to
meet the Habitat Loss Incidental Take (HUT) fmdings and obtain a HLIT Permit from the City of
Chula Vista in accordance with the City's HLIT Ordinance (Section 17.35 of the CYMe).
Landscape Treatments
Based upon remant Alkali Marsh vegetation identified on the project site, any proposed landscaping
must not contain invasive vegetation that has the potential to infiltrate this habitat. In order to ensure
that this existing area is protected from invasive vegetation, prior to the issuance of a grading permit
the applicant will be required to prepare and submit a final landscape plan/palette to the City's
Environmental Review Coordinator for review and approval. Impl=entation of the mitigation
measures identified in Section F of this Mitigated Negative Declaration will reduce potentially .
significant biological impacts to a level below significance. This measure is included as part of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (See Section F).
Geolo!N and Soils
To assess the potential geological/soils impacts of the proj ect, a Geotechnical Investigation evaluation
was prepared by Geocon Incorporated/Geotechnical Consultants, dated November 18, 2003. The
study indicated that there are no known active faults existing on the project site or in the immediate
area. The closest known active fault is the Rose Canyon Fault located approximately 4.7 miles west
of the project site. The liquefaction potential on the site is considered to be low due remedial grading
recommendations, the presence of shallow and dense materials and the lack of shallow groundwater
over a majority of the project site. The groundwater level will fluctuate with seasonal rain and local
soil absorption. No significant geological or soil impacts would be created as a result of the proposed
proj ect as conditioned.
13-19
The geotechnical study indicates that a small area in the mid/eastern section of the project site
contains undocumented fill materials. The geotechnical study includes recommended measures fOr
the removal of unsuitable or recompaction of any suitable fill materials to mitigate significant
geological impacts. Prior to building permit issuance the applicant will be required to comply with
all the recommendations presented in the study. Details of the undocumented fill are disclosed under
the HazardslHazardous Materials Section below.
Submittal of a final soils report will be required prior to the issuance of grading permits to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. The mitigation measures contained in Section F below would
mitigate potential geological/soils impacts to a less than significance level. These measures are
included as a part ofthe Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Site History
Information provided by the current owner, historic aerial photographs, historic recordslzoning/Iand
use records and surrounding property owners indicate that the site has been mostly used for
residential purposes. Infonnation provided by a nearby resident indicated that a previous owner has
deposited undocumented fill on the project site. Since that time, much vegetation, dirt, and debris has
covered the remainder portion of the site.
Phase 11 Phase II
A Phase IIPhase II Environmental Site Assessment was prepared by Geocon, Inc., dated February 3,
2006, in order to assess the potential recognized environmental conditions or likely presence of any
hazardous substances or petroleum products into building structures, ground soil, ground water, or
surface water of the proj ect site.
On January 20,2006, a total of24 soil samples was. collected from four borings within the middle and
eastern portion of the project site. In addition, a sample of sandy material was collected from an area
that appeared to be the dispo.sallocation of the sandblasting waste. The fill included sandblasting
debris materials consisting of sticks, bricks, and plastic sheeting. Geocon Incorporated confirmed
that no groundwater was encountered in any of the trenches excavated during their investigation.
Concentrations of high PCBs or other potential contaminants were not detected in any of the
composite samples. Based upon the comparison of the various sampling concentrations and the
limitations encountered during the sample collection of the sandy material, Geocon recommended
further assessment, proper excavation and proper disposal. None of the CCR Title 22 Metals were
detected above respective limits.
On January 27th and 30th, 2006 approximately 30 cubic yards of undocumented fill/sandy material
was removed and taken to an authorized classified waste disposal facility. The material was
manifested as a non-hazardous waste solid due to its low concentrations as determined by the
analytical testing. After the removal of the sandy material additional continuation soils samples were
coIlected from the ground surface beneath the former pile. These additional soil samples were
analyzed and no PCBs or other contaminants were detected at or above the laboratory detection limit
in any of the additional soil samples.
According to the complete Phase II, the disposal of the undocumented fill/sandy material and
underlying groundwater do not pose a threat to public health. No significant hazardslhazardous
materials impacts are anticipated as a result of the proposed project, therefore, no mitigation measures
are required.
13-20
In the event any additional areas of waste are encountered during the project development, those areas
should be assessed. by a qualified enviro=ental site assessor and handled accordingly. Evidence of
such analysis and necessary remediation or removal, will be submitted to the Enviro=ental Review
Coordinator for review and determination.
"
Lead and Asbestos
The project proposal includes the demolition of the existing residence, garage and accessory
structures. The potential exists for impacts to result from the demolition of structures that may
contain lead and asbestos. Therefore, prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and registered
asbestos and lead abatement contractor will perform asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in
accordance to all applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations, including San Diego County
Air Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard for Demolition and. Renovation. The
mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate potential hazardslhazardous
materials impacts to a less than significant level. These measures are included as a part of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Septic Tanks
The project site is currently serviced by a septic tank system, below ground, located north of the
existing residence. Any equipment associated with the septic system should be removed and disposed
of in accordance with applicable standards and regulations. In the event any suspicious chemical
odors, or other potential enviro=ental concerns are encountered, a qualified professional will be
required to assess the areas of concern. Including the preparation and submittal of a written analysis,
identifying the areas of concern with appropriate measures, to the Enviro=ental Review Coordinator
for review. The mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate potential
hazardslhazardous materials impacts to a less than significant level. These measures are included as a
part of the Mitigatiol! Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Hvdrology and Water Qualitv
The existing site drains from east to west, running from North Del Mar Avenue to Third Avenue.
The drainage on North Del Mar Avenue remains in. the right-of-way, peaking at the connection point
to the proposed Villas Del Mar Court. Drainage from the lots along the south property line is diverted
by existing ditches and discharged onto Third A veriue to the west. The drainage flows from the lots
to the north, in a northwesterly direction, away from the subject property. The drainage system for
the subject site is designed to handle flows generated from the site plus a portion of the existing
residence.
The proposed drainage improvements include an underground detention system within the park/open
space area of Lot A, detention discharge control structure, private drainage easements, rip rap and
filtration systern at the western corner of the project site. No offsite grading or construction activities
for any infrastructure improvements is proposed within the northern 15 foot property setback near the
alkali marsh vegetation area.
According to the Engineering Department, the proposed improvements are adequate to handle the
project storm water runoff generated from the site. Additional Best Management Practices (BMPs)
included as part of the project design consist of a storm drain inlet protection system, rip rap outlet
protection, protection of access and perimeter containment measures including open space and
landscaped treatments throughout the project site.
As a standard condition, a final drainage study will be required in conjunction with the preparation of
the project grading plans. Properly design1'3<!~age facilities will be installed at the time of the site
development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In addition, compliance with required NPDES
regulations and B:MPs will reduce water quality impacts to a less than significant level. These
measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (See Section F).
Wastewater Management Sendces/Sewer System
The project site is within the boundaries of the City of Chula Vista wastewater services area. The
existing area sewer facility system includes sewer lines along Bayview Way and along Vista Del Mar
Court. There are currently no sewer mains abutting the property that would allow for gravity-type
flow. Therefore an off-site main extension through the Tbird Avenue right of way, and an 8" PVC
sewer main up to the southwest comer of the subject site and into the proposed project court cul-de-
sac are proposed to service the residential lots. The applicant will be required to submit a final sewer
plan to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The applicant is required to grant an easement to the
City of Chula Vista wastewater services for the purpose of maintenance of the proposed sewerlines.
No significant impacts to the City's sewer system are anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
F. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts
Air Quality
1. The following air quality mitigation requirements shall be shown on all applicable grading, and
building plans as details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and shall not be deviated from unless
approved in ,advance in writing by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator:
. Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units.
. Use low pollutant-emitting construction equipment.
. Use electrical construction equipment as practical.
. Use catalytic' reduction for gasoline-powered equipment.
. Use injection-timing retard for diesel-powered equipment.
. Water the construction area twice daily to minimize fugitive dust.
. Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible to minimize fugitive dust.
. Pave petmmient roads as quickly as possible to minimize dust.
. Use electricity from power poles instead of temporary generators during building, if
available.
. Apply stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of internal travel path within a construction site
prior to public road entry.
. Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior to vehicle entry on public roads.
. Remove any visible track-out into traveled public streets within 30 minutes of occurrence.
. Wet wash the construction access point at the end of each workday if any vehicle travel on
1ll1paved surfaces has occurred.
. Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent washout of silty material onto public
roads.
. Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 inches of freeboard to reduce blow-off during
hauling.
. Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on 1ll1paved surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles per
hour.
13-22
Biological Resources
2. To avoid any impacts associated with construction noise, construction must occur outside of
the breeding season for nesting raptors (January 15 through July 31). If construction must
occur during the breeding season for these species, prior to initiating any construction-related
activities (including clearing of vegetation, grubbing, a.i:td grading), pre-construction surveys
must be performed by a City-approved biologist to determine the presence or absence' of
nesting raptors within 500-feet of the construction area. The pre-construction survey must be
conducted within 10 calendar days prior to the start of construction, the results of which must
. be submitted to the City's Enviromental Review Coordinator for review and approval prior
to initiating any construction-related activities. If nesting raptors are detected, a noise
mitigation plan shall be' submitted and approved by the City's Enviromental Review
Coordinator prior to initiating any construction related activities.
3. . Prior to the issuance of any land development permits including clearing, grading or
construction permits, temporary orange biological fencing shall be installed around the
existing renmant Cismontane Alkali Marsh plant area-and reflected in the grading plans.
Fencing must be constructed in accordance with the development plans to the satisfaction of
the Enviromental Review Coordinator. The City's Mitigation Monitor will conduct periodic
site visits to verify the placement of the biological fencing and to ensure that all construction
activities remain within the approved limits of grading.
4. Prior to the issuance of any land development permits including clearing, grading or
COL\struction permits, the applicant obtain a Habitat Loss Incidental Take (HLIT) Permit from
the City for impacts to Tier ill habitat (Non-native Grasslands) in accordance with the City's
HUT Ordinance, Section 17.35.
5. Prior to the issuance of any land development permits including clearing, grading or
construction permits, the applicant shall submit evidence that 1.14 acres of Non-native
Grassland or equivalent credits have been permanently secured in a mitigation bank to the
satisfaction of the Planning and Building Director.
6. Prior to isouance of a grading permit, the applicant shall prepare and submit a fin"llandscape
plan/palette to the City's Enviromental Review Coordinator for review and approval to
erioure landscaping at the rear of Lot -W !l., within the property line setback, will be non-
invasive and compatible with the existing alkali marsh vegetation.
Geological
7. Prior to the issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City
Engineer that all the recommendations in the Geotechnical Investigation, dated November 18,
2003 have been satisfied.
HazardslHazardous Materials
8. Prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement
contractor shall perform asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in accordance to all
applicable local,state and federal laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air
pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard for Demolition and Renovation.
9. Prior to the issuance of any construction permits, any equipment associated with the septic
system shall be removed from the project site and disposed of in accordance with the
applicable County of San Diego Department ofEnviromental Health Services regulations. If
any chemical odors or potential enviromental concerns are encountered, a qualified
13-23
professional shall assess the area and submit a written report to the Environmental Review
Coordinator for review.
Hydrology and Water Ouality
10. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the City Engin~er shall verify that the final grading
plans comply with the provisions of California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San
Diego Region Order No. 2001-01 with respect to construction-related water quality best
management practices.
11. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a final drainage study shall be required in
conjunction with the preparation of the final grading plans. The City Engineer shall verify
that the final grading plans comply with the provisions of California Regional Water Quality
Control Board, San Diego Region Order No. 2001-01 with respect to permanent, post-
construction water quality best management practices (BM:Ps). If one or more of the
approved post construction BM:Ps is non-structural, then a post-construction BM:P plan shall
be prepared to the satisfaction of the City 'Engineer prior to the commencement of
construction. Compliance with said plan shall become a permanent requirement of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
12. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, temporary desilting and erosion control devices'
shall be installed. Protective devices shall be provided at every storm drain inlet to prevent
sediment from entering the stonn drain system. These measures shall be reflected in the
grading and improvement plans to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
G. Agreement to Implement Mitigation Measures
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and Operator stipulate that they have each read,
understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation mea.sures
contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review
Coordinator. Failure to sign the line(s) provided below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative
Declaration with the County. Clerk shall indicate the Applicant's and Operator's desire that the
Proj ect be held in abeyance without approval and that the Applicant and Operator shall apply for an
Environmental Impact Report.
<[: n- ':f' J (1
>'(t'Ii'Zt(ll-U -5.6001'00-
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
(or authorized repr ntativn
/Y /,
Signaufre>> Ap cant. Y't..'
(or authoJZlZed representative)
.?f(; 1/1 "J"Y
-vjZ7/0?
Date /
Zit? /0&
~te (
N/A
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
N/A
Date
Signature of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
13-24
H. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista:
Marilyn Ponseggi, Planning and Building Department
Marisa Lundstedt, Planning and Building Department
Steve Power, Planning and Building Department
John Schmitz, Planning and Building Department
Maria Muett, Planning and Building Department
Glen Laube, Planning and Building Department
Josie Gabriel, Planning and Building Department
Jeff Steichen, Planning and Building Department
Richard Zumwalt, Planning and Building Department
Sohaib Al-Agha, Engineering Department
Frank Rivera, Engineering Department
Samir Nuhaily, Engineering Department
Alex Al-Agha,Engineering Department
Beth Chopp, Engineering Department
Silvester Evetovich, Engineering Department
Jim Newton; Engineering Department
Ben Herrera, Engineering Department
Gary Edmonds, Fire Department
Lynn France, Conservation Coordinator
Krista Rhinehardt, Building and Park Construction
Others:
Dee Peralta, Chula Vista Elementary School District
Sweetwater Authority
2. Documents
City of Chula Vista General Plan, 2005 (as amended).
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code.
Final Enviromnental Impact Report, City of Chula Vista General Plan Update, ElR No. 05-01,
December 13,2005.
City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, February 2003.
Biological Resource Analysis for the Villas Del Mar, Pacific Southwest Biological Services, Inc.,
January 19, 2006.
Preliminary Lotting and Grading Study/Earthwork and Drainage Statement for Villas Del Mar,
Chula Vista, Tri-Dimensional Engineering Incorporated, January 19,2004.
Preliminary Geotechnical Investigation for 160 North Del Mar Avenue, Chula Vista, Geocon,
Incorporated, November 18, 2003.
13-25
Phase l/Limited Phase II Environmental Site Assessment, Villas Del Mar, 160 North Del Mar
Avenue, Chu1a Vista, Geocon Incorporated, February 3,2006.
Historical Evaluation of 160 North De! Mar Avenue, Chu1a Vista, Scott A. Moomjian, January
30,2004.
3. Initial Study
This enviro=enta1 determination is based on the attached Initial Study, and any comments
received in reS]Jonse to the Notice of Initial Study. The report reflects the independent judgment
of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review of this
project is available from the Chula Vista Planning and Building Department, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 91910.
~:::r~~'
Environmental Review Coordinator
Date:
4//7'/~?
{ /
J:\Planning\M.ARlA\1nitial Study\Villas Del Mar\1S-04-022MND.doc
13-26
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT ' PROJECT DESCRIPTION: .
C) APPLlCAN1l Villas Del Mar Development LLC. INITIAL STUDY
PROJECT 160 N Del Mar Av.
ADDRESS: Request Proposing ORe for 12 single family dwelling's on individual 10m.
sCALE: I FILE NU~~~ 1"\.....,.. ,,)" 7
~ . <_.J _____. nf"C' nA (la.. C('7JlI:;~n~ nRr....oS--5S
Q
~
CJl
H
>-
~
I
<'1
E-<
H
~
H
~
~
r ,....II.,,<tI<.:.::,;..'::I.~::-~~ro'tB~~~~~
nJ9-....lKI>rt~ ~...<rK..,.."".v:>.^VlAO<l.t....""~.O"<1
.':J'uj lSuj;aau[du~tii;uojsuaU;ia~;.i1.V
OL6!/J V::I 'V.LSIA. nfl}j.)
3Df/3AY lOYJ'I -sa JUHaN 09L
H; ~
~~ ~ ~
H nin~ ~
,
. "<-;.."1
0'
-I
,
.lSW raa srrll!/i
0...
~
::8
fI1
;>
>-<
~
;Z;
fI1
E-f
~
CI1
>-<
;>
~
,-1
8
~
U
.'"'
o
~
>-<
U
~ ~
.' "
~ii lid~ !!.
5!lI ~:i~ !~
~a;; ,. ~~~~ ~!
III Ii!!: i Ii J :i;: III
;h .~'i.:l"i ... ~p:: ~~~i.... ~~
m ; iiilll ma IH!~ :l
~\\\\\\\'?t\\\\\\\\\"I(
. 1 '":
N
;.-
~
I "
~;I
~k
~ ;E~
~ ig~
i - ::':i~
Il 'I i~ii
d ;;~
"., =-:.
J, -1:
~l 7l,
"
ii
g ~ ~
~~~ ~~ irj
~l ~~ ~ ~;
~! ~ i ! ~ w I"!~
i~Ji g~~ ~ ~ ~~ i~~
~iS~qH ~ i ~ ~i ~~!
Ii! 't~!;l.' l'l! m
HI.! !~~ji!l ~!. ill,: ",'
~:;O:~~~ "::\ ~iS- ~~ ~l!.
( i!l d! ~ tit ~'i il:~ ~!J"
ii 1ml i!i~l-::!";J~ d
~,
lij.ll !1I~~:i.c~jo~~lj~li'j IHI10~~ .":
! .' _' !' ,l l
~! I. ~~!::l ~~~!'l ~
.~~ ~q~ H~-iH~ !j~~n~~::Bi ~I
H ~ n n ~ ~ H I ~ ~ ~ ; ~! i: ~ ~ i ~!: ~a~;,J ~
s~~ a is:;; ~ E~~~~ i'i:;: ~~;<s;o~:;: ~s~ ~~se8
~,
~ ~i.L ~!;;
i::L11
~ HH~!HH~5
(/}
-<
~
>
,
'&:l
.. ,..J.....,~.......'-
-,
.',2
~>
~ ,
:~.", l\
[]
~~
~~
.
,
;.
~
~
^'
.
%
o
i
k
.~
"-.;
::t:::
~
I
~
~
~
~
ATTACHMENT "A"
MITIGATION MONITORlNG AND REPORTING P~OGRAM (MMRP)
VILLAS DEL ii/lAR - 1S-04-022
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed Villas Del Mar project. The proposed project has been
evaluated in an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared in accordance with the
California Enviromental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State CEQA Guidelines (lS-04-022)
The legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate rnitigation measures are
implemented and monitored for Mitigated Negative Declarations.
AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant enviromental impacts.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this proj ect ensures adequate
implementation of mitigation for the following potential impacts( s):
I. Air Quality
2. Biological Resources
3. Geological
4. Hazards/Hazardous Materials
5. Hydrology arid Water Quality
MONITORING PROGRAM
Due to the nature of the enviromental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinators
shall be the Enviromental Review Coordinator and City Engineer of the City of Chula Vista.
The applicant shall be responsible to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program are met to the satisfaction of the Enviromental Review Coordinator and
City Engineer. The applicant shall provide evidence in written form confuming compliance with
the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-04-022 to the
Enviromental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. The Enviromental Review Coordinator
and City Engineer will thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have
been accomplished.
Table I, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist, lists the mitigation measures
contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Effects, of Mitigated Negative
Declaration IS-04-022, which will be implemented as part of the project. In order to determine if
the applicant has implemented the measure, the method and timing of verification are identified,
along with the City department or agency responsible for monitoring/verifying that the applicant
has completed each mitigation measure. Space for the signature of the verifying person and the
date of inspection is provided in the last column.
J:\PlanninglJvfARlA\Tnitial StudyWillas Del Mar\IS-04-022MMRPtextdoc
13-30
Table 1
Miti ation Monitorln and Re ortin Pro ram
ion
No.
Mitiga~ion Measure
. '. . . I
. . .: <.;; :""::i:dV1l1\~AT!9:N,;.M9~,!J,c)~IN.lf;:AI":J6;R.E,P"Q~1;IN9iF"t{Q,G~Arvni;:::i;"" :"~':... .. q::~ .
Method of
Verificat.lon
Timing of
Verification
: AIR QUALlTY.-'
'.. '_::;~':';~:/~::~;:/..~,;S-f;_~'-:~~~~!: ~V({~~~l,~~~_~,;:;:i\~";.';;i~~': '~:~T:~"i~ ;~~~;~::. ~~~~~~
x
x
T~e followIng aIr quallty.miUga~on reql,llrements shall be
shown on all applicable -gradIng, and bUlldlng plans as
details, notes, or as othelWlse appropriate:
. MInimize simultaneous operation of multiple
construction equipment units.
. Use low pollutant-emlttlng construc:tlon equipment.
. Use electrical construction equipment as practical.
. Use catalytic reduction fOf gasoline~powered
equipment.
. Use InJecUon~tlmlng retard for diesel-powered
equipment.
w . Water the con'structlon area twice dally to minimize
I fuglove dust
W
....... . Stabilize graded areas as qu]ckly-as possible to
minimize fugitive dust.
. Pave permanent roads as quickly as' possible to
minimize dust.
~
. Use electricity from power poles Instead of temporary _
generators during building, if available.
. Apply slabllizer or pave the last 100 feel of Internal
travel path within a constructton site prior to publlc
road entry.
. Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prIor
to vehicle entry on pUblic roads,
. Remove any visible track-out Into traveled public
streets withIn 30 mInutes of occurrence.
. . Wet wash the construction acc'ess point at the end of
each workday If any vehicle travel on unpaved
surfaces has occurred.
. ProvIde sufficlent perimeter erosIon control to pr~vent
washout of silty material onto public roads.
. Cover haul trucks or maIntain at least 12 inches of
freeboard to reduce blow-off during hauling.
. Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved
I surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles per hour.
Plan'Check/Slte
Inspectlon
Page. 1
Responsible Completed Comments
Party Initials Date
"pq't,. . :." ",;. ..:.... /'.,,". :,:"C:,;. :C",.', .;, . :<:,:.c '.:',."':. .,..' ..:..,: .... ....:.. .
"Cost:: .~~:"":-:;:':-~':-,: :c':i.'-.. :;.::.:;'.'.' ,:.......,.-.~
X ApplicanV City
EngIneering
. Department/City
Planning and Building
Department
..
"
el Mar (18-04-022)
.",'.
To avoid any Impacts associated with constructIon noise,
construction must occur outside of the breeding season
fornesllng raptors (January 151hrough July 31). If
constructlon must occur during the breeding season for
these species, prior to Initiating any constructiQn~related
activities (Including clearing of vegetation, grubbing, and
gradlhg), preconstructlon surveys-musfbe performed by
a City-approved biologist to determine the presence or
absence or nesting rap tors within 500~feet of the
construction area. The preconstruction survey must be
conducted within 10 calendar days prior to the start of
construction, the results of which must be submitted to
the City's Environmental Review Coordinator for review
and approval prior to initlating any construction-related
actlvUles. If nesting raptors are detected, a noiS8
mlUgaUon plan shall be submitted and approved by the
City's Environmental Review Coordinator prior to InltlaUng
any construction-related activities.
l. ~
w
I
w
""
Prior to the issuance of any land development pennUs
including clearing, grading, or construction permits,
temporary' orange biological fencing shall be Installed
around the exlsllng remnant CIsmontane Alkali Marsh
plant area and reflected In the grading plans. Fencing
must be constructed In accordance with the development
plans to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review
Coordinator. The City's Mitlgatlon Monitor will conduct
site periodic site visits to verify the placement of the
biological fencing and to ensure that all construction
activities remain within the annroved limits of nradlnQ.
Prior to issuance of any land development permits
Including clearing, grading or constructIon permits, the
appllcanl shall oblaln a Habllat Loss Incidental Take
(HUT) Permit from the City for Impacts to Tier III habitat
(Non-native Grasslands) In accordance with the City's
HUT Ordinance, Section 17.35.
Prior to the Issuance of any land development permits
Including clearing, grading or construction permits, the
applicant shall submit evidence that 1.14 acres of Non-
natlv'e Grassland or equivalent credits have been
permanently secured in a mlllgalion bank to the
sallsfacllon of the Planning and Building Dlreclor.
4.
5.
Plan Check/Site
Inspectlon
Plan .Check/Site
Inspection
Plan Check/Site
Inspection
Plan Check/Site
Inspection
Table 1
Page - 2
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
x
AppllcanUClty
Engineering
DepartmenUPlannlng
and Building
Department
x
ApplicanUCity
Engineering
DepartmenUPlannlng
anp Building
Department
x
ApplicanUClty
Planning and Building
DepartmenUClty
Engineering
Department
x
AppllcanUClty
Planning and Building
DepartmenUCity
Engineering
Department
Mitlqation Monitorinq and Reportinq Proqram
':c,.::
-......
.- .;
...
Miti ation Monitorin and Re ortin Pro ram
Table 1
6.
Prior to Issuance of a grading permit, the applicant shall
prepare and submit a final landscape pian/palelte to the
City's Environmental Review Coordinator {or review and
approval to' ensure landscaping at the rear of Lot 4.Q ~,
within the property line setback: wlii be non-invasiVe and
compalible wilh the exlsling alkali marsh vegetalion
communit .
B.
Prior to any demolition-activities, a licensed and
registered asbestos and lead abat~ment contractor shall
peIiorm asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in
accordance with all applicable local, state and federal
laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air
Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard for
DenioJilJon and Renovation.
~
w
I
w
w
9.
Prior to the Issuance of any construction permits, any
equipment associated with the septic system shall be
removed from the project site and disposed of in
accordance with the applicable County of San Diego
Department of Environmental Health Services
regulations. If any chemical odors or potential
environmental concerns are encountered, a 'qualified
professional shall assess the area and submit a written
report to the Environmental Review Coordinator for
review.
Plan Check/Site
Inspection
x
x
ApplicanUClty
Planning and Building
DepartmenUCity
Engineering
Department
ApplicanUCity
Planning and BUilding
DepartmenUCity
Engineering
Department
Plan Check/Site
Inspection
x
x
x
x
ApplicanUClty,
Planning and Building
DepartmenUCity
Engineering
Department
Page - 3
Mar (18-04-022)
Mitiaation Monitorina and Reoortina Proaram
Table 1
I <'cl(! HY"~O~~'~'f~' ~.W''fE~TQ 'I' . ~,
.<.l",-,-,,,.,.'-':-lt'., ,", '""},,.. ':;.....". ",
li:Mt.Z', "~f-~~~l\t; }~~ m~J , ..,' 1,,1" . ~,_wt~ '. ".~, ,;Ii.'
Prior to the Issuance of a grading permit, the City
Engineer shall verify that the flnat grading plans comply
with the provisIons of Callfornla Regional Water Quality
Control Boardl San Diego Region Order No, 2001-01 with
respect to constructlonwrel,ated water "quality best
management practIces.
Prior to the Issuance, of a grading permit, a final drainage
study shall be requIred In conJunctlon with the preparatlon
of the {lnal gradIng plans. The City Engineer shall verify
that the final grading plans comply with the provisions of
California Regional Water Quality Control Board, San
Diego Region Order No. 2001-01 with respecl to
permanent, post"constructlon water quality best
management practlces (BMPs). -If one ormore of the
approved -post construction BMPs Is non-structural, then
a post-construction BMP plan shall be prepared to the
satlsfactlon of the City Engineer prior to the
commencement of constructIon. Compllance with saId
plan shall become a permanent requirement of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Prior to the Issuance ofa grading permit, temporary -
desiltlng and erosion control devIces shall be Installed.
Protective devices shall be provided at every storm drain
Inlet to prevent sedimentfrom entering the storm drain
system. These measures shall be reflected in the grading
and Improvement plans to the satisfaction of the City
Engineer.
Ig\MARIA\lnitial Study\Villas Del Mar\IS-04-022MMRPtbl.doc
Plan Check/Site
Inspection
x
x
x
AppllcanVClty
PlannIng and Building
DepartmenUCity
EngineerIng
Departm~nt
Plan Check/Site
Inspection
x
AppllcanVClty
Planning and Building
DepartmenVQlty . .
Engineering
Department
x
x
'.
Page - 4
~rf?
----
ENVIROi'HVIENTAL CHECKLIST FaRlY!
-------,
01Y OF
CHUlA VISTA
1. Name of Proponent:
Villas Del Mar Development, LLC
Federico Escobedo
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
City of Chula Vista
Planning and Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
3. Address and Phone Number of Proponent:
160 North Del Mar Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
(619)420-4101
4. Name of Proposal:
Villas Del Mar
5. Date of Checklist:
6. Case No.:
February 20; 2006
18-04-022
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS QUESTIONS:
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issues: Significant With Significant Impact
Impact 1\1itigation Impact
Incorporated
1. AESTHETICS. Wou1dtheproject
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? 0 0 0 .
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, 0 0 0 .
but not limited to, tress, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or 0 0 0 .
quality of the site and its surroundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
o
o
o
.
13-35
Issues:
PotentLally
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
. With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impac~;
Comments:
a-b)The proposal includes the development of twelve single family residential units with site
improvements in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code and Design Review
Guidelines. The proposed landscape improvements would enhance and improve the aesthetic
quality of the surrounding hillside and neighborhood street, Del Mar Avenue. The proposed
project would not damage any scenic' resources, vegetation, or historic buildirigs within a state
scenic highway. The project site contains no scenic vistas or views open to the public. The
development layout is designed not to block any private vista views from the existing and
proposed residential units.
c) The proposal is an intill residential development project. The proposed project will not
substantially degrade the existing visual character' or quality of the project site or its adjacent
residential surroundings. The project site is planned for residential development according to the
General Plan Land Use regulations. .
d) The proposal will be required to comply with the City's IDIDlIDUID standards for roadway
lighting. The proj ect will be required to comply with the light and glare regulations (Section
19.66.100) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (CYMe). Compliance with these regulations will
ensure that no significant glare, or light would affect daytime or nighttime views in the
surrounding residential neighborhood area.
Miti!!ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
proj ect:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
o
o
o
.
b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or
a Williamson Act contract?
o
o
o
.
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion ofFannland, to non-agricultural use?
o
o
o
.
13-36
Issues:
Co=ents:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
lVIitigatian
Incorporated
No
Impac;
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a-c)The project site has been previously rough graded and surro,mding properties have been partially
developed. These properties are consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan and zoning
designation, and contain np agricultural resources or designated farmland. The proposal would
not convert Prime Farmland, Uniqu,e Farmland or Farmland of Statewide Importance to non-
agricultural use and no impacts to agricultural resources would be created as a result of the
proposed project.
Mitigation:
No mitigation measures are required.
ill. AIR QUALITY. Wouldtheproject:
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contnbute
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non-attainment. under an applicable
federal or state ambient air quality standard
(including releasing emissions, which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
number of people?
13-37
o
o
o
..
o
o
o
.
o
o
.
o
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
o
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
JYfitigatian
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impac.;
Comments:
(a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mltie:ation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant air quality impacts to a level oness than significance.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
proj ect
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or
through habitat modifications,. on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, Or
regulations, or by the California Department ofFish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
o
..
o
o
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
o
..
o
o
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally 0 0 .. 0
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any 0 0 .. 0
native resident or rnigratory fish or wildlife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with :my local policies or ordin:mces 0 0 0 ..
pmtecting biological resources, such as a tree
13-38
Issues :
preseo:vatlon policy ox oxcli:o=ce?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat
Conservation Plan, Natural Co=unity
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Comments:
a-f) See rvritigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mith!ation:
Potentially
Significant"
Impact
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
.
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
No
Im.pac~
o
. The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the rvritigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant biological resource impacts to a level ofless than significance.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
State CEQA Guidelines 9 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resource pursuant
to State CEQA Guidelines 9 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
feature?
13-39
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
.
.
.
Issues:
pot~ntially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
lVfitigation
Incorporated
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impac~.
d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred
outside offormal cemeteries?
o
o
II
Comments:
a) In order to assess potential. historic resources located on the project site or surrounding areas, a
historical evaluation study was prepared, datedJanuary 30,2004. The following details summarize the
results of the study. The existing residential siIucture was not associated with any important events or
individuals in terms of local, state or national history. The residence or site does not qualify as a
historic resource under national, state or local register criteria. The proposed project will not constitute
a substantial, adverse change to the significance of an historical resource as the residence has been
determined by the analysis not to be historically or arc.hitecturally significant within the project impact
area. Therefore, no substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in
Section 15064.5 is anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
b) Based on the level of previous site disturbance, the potential for significant impacts or adverse changes
to archaeological resource as defined in Section 15064.5 is not anticipated.
c) Based on the level of previous disturbance to the site and the relatively limited amount of additional
grading for the proposed project, no impacts to mrique paleol).tological resources or mrique geologic
features are anticipated.
d) No hUman remains are anticipated to be present within the impact area of the project site.
Mitigation:
No mitigation measures are required,
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adverse effects, including the risk of
loss, injury or death involving:
i.
Rupture of a koown earthquake fault, as
delineated on the roost recent Alquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a koown fault?
o
o
o
..
n.
Strong seismic ground shaking?
o
o
o
II
ill.
Seismic-related
ground failure,
including
o
o
o
II
13-40
Issu es:
liquefaction?
IV. Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on-
or off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on 'expansive soil, creating substantial
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal of wastewater?
Comments:
a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitigation:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
D
D
D
D
D
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
D
D
.
D
D
Less Than
Significant
Impact
D
.
D
.
D
No
Impac_~
II
D
D
D
.
The mitigation measures contained in SectionF of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially signiiicant geological impacts to a level ofless than signiiicance.
VIT. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS. Would the project:
a)
Create a significant hazard to the public or the
'environmeot through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b)
Create a sigoificant hazard to the public' or the
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
13-41
D
D
D
D
.
.
D
D
Issues:
release of hazardous materials into the
enviroment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Govemment Code section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the'
public or the enviroment?
e) For a proj ect located within an airport land use:
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private
airstrip, woUld the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including. where wildlands are adjacent to'
urbanized areas or where residences are
int=ixed with wildlands?
13-42
Potentially
Significant.
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
o
No
Impac5
II
..
..
II
II
II
Issues :
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Signific.ant
With
Mitigation
Inc.orporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impac~
Co=ents:
a and b) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E (Hazards/Hazardous Materials).
c) See J\iIitigated Negative DeclaratioJ;!, Section E. The proposed project site is located within one-
quarter mile of an existing school located on Second Avenue. The proposed proj ect will not emit
acutely hazardous emissions or materials, therefore, will not create a significant impact to the
schools within the surrounding area.
d) The proposed project is not located on a site included 'on the hazardous list pursuant to the
Government Code Section 65962.5, therefore, will not create a significant impactto the public or the
environment.
e) The project is not located within an airport land use plan nor within two miles of a public airport or public
use airport; therefore, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project area to adverse
safety hazards.
f) The project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip; therefore, the project development would
not expose people working in the proj ect area to adverse safety hazards.
g) The projeet is designed to meet the City's emergency. response plan, route access and emergeocy
evacuation requirements. The proposed fire improvements include an emergency turning radius and fire
hydrant. No impairment or physical interference with the City's emergency response plan is anticipated.
h) The project is designed to meet the City's Fire Prevention building and fire service requirements. No
exposure of people or structures to a significant risk ofloss, injury or death due to wildfires is anticipated.
:Mitigation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Hazards/Hazardous Materials impacts to a level of less than significance.
VITI. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
Would the project
a) Result in an increase in pollntant discharges to
receiving waters (including impaired water bodies
pursuant to the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list),
result in significant alteration of receiving water
quality during or following construction, or violate
any water quality standards or waste discharge
requir=ents?
o
.
o
o
13-43
Issues:
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which permits
have been granted)? Result in a potentially
sigrrificant adverse impact on groundwater quality?
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, in a manner, which
would result in substantial ero:;;ion or siltation on- or
off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site, or place
structures within a 1 00- year flood hazard area which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
e) Expose people or structures to a sigrrificant risk of
loss, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the failure ofa levee or darn?
f) Create or contnbute runoff water, which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
13-44
Less Than
PGtentialIy. Significant Less Than No
Significant "With Significant Impac~
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
0 0 . 0
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
Issues:
Co=ents:
(a-f) See :Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Miti2:ation:
Potentially
Significant. .
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Th-'litigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impac~
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the :Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Hydrology/W .ter Quality impacts to a level of less than significance.
IX. LAND USE AJ."ID PLAJ.'lliING. Would the
project:
a) Physically divide an established co=unity?
b) Conflict With any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not limited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
c) Conflict With any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natnral co=unity conservation plan?
13-45
o
o
o
o
o
II
o
o
o
II
II
o
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
lVIitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impac~
Co=ents:
a) The project site is surrounded with single and multi-family residential, including nearby industrial land
uses. The proposed residential inIill project would be consistent with the cbaracter of the immediate'
surrounding .residential area and would not disrupt or divide an established co=unity; therefore, no
significant land use impact would occur as a result of the project.
b) The project site is located within the Rl and RIP6 (Single-Family ResidentialJPrecise Plan) Zones and
RLY1 (Low-Medium Density) General Plan land use designation. The project is required to rezone the
existing R16 parcel section to Rl for comprehensive compatibility. The project has been found to be
consistent with the all-respective zoning regulations, General Plan guidelines and regulations,
therefore; no significant land use impacts are anticipated.
c) Refer to :Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. - potential short-t= construction noise/raptor
nesting and biologically sensitive impacts are addressed in the :Mitigated Negative Declaration,
Section, under Biological Resources.
Mitil!ation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the :Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Land Use/Planning impacts to a level ofless than significance.
x. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the state?
o
o
o
..
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan? '
o
o
o
..
13-46
Issues:
Co=ents:
Potentially
Significant
Impact .
Less Than
Significant
With
:Mitigation
Incorporated'
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
LnpacJ
a) The project site has been previously disturbed with the existing single-family residential land use. The
proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the
region or the residents of the State of California.
b) The State of California Department of Conservation has not designated the project site for mineral
resource protection. Therefore, no impacts to mineral resources are anticipated as a result of the
proposed project.
Mitigatiou:
No mitigation measures are required.
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels
in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
c- standards of otheragencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundbome vibration or grounclbome noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the proj ect?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the proj ect vicinity above
levels existing without the proj ect?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
13-47
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
.
.
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
o
.
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
lV1itigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impac.t
would fue project expose people residing or working
in fue project area to excessive noise levels?
Comments:
a-d) It is anticipated that on-site workers and adjacent residential population may be exposed to
construction noise associated with short-term construction activities. However, the project will be
required to comply wifu the City's Noise Ordinance. In addition, due to the minimal construction
activities' associated with fue project, impacts to surrounding residential properties related to
construction noise levels are not expected to be significant. The proposed residential proj ect is not
located within fue Health Risk Assessment Area (HRAA), within 500 feet of any adj acent freeway or
highway. The project is not anticipated to potentially violate fue noise limits of fue. City's noise
control ordinance.
The project site contains eucalyptus trees and according to the Biological Resource Study, fuere is
potential for raptor nesting in eucalyptus trees. Potential short-term construction noiselraptor nesting
impacts are addressed in the Mitigated Negative DeClaration, Section E, under Biological Resources.
e-f) The project is not located within an airport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport, nor is it
located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, fue project development would not expose
people residing or working in the proj ect area to excessive noise levels.
Mitigation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would fue
proj ect:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
eifuer directly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
furough extension of road or ofuer infrastructure)?
D
D
D
.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating fue construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
D
D
D
.
c) Displace substantial numbers of people,
necessitating fue construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
D
D
D
.
13-48
Issues:
Potenti.a.lly
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
lYIitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impac:t
Co=ents:
"
a-c) The project is surrounded by existing residential development and involves the removal and
replacement of one single family residence. The proposed. project does not involve the extension of
public facilities that would induce substantial growth. Future residential development of the site for
the proposed 12 single-family residential units is consistent with the General Plan and would not
exceed the regional or local population projections. The proposed project would involve the partial
rezoning of the RIP6 to Rl Zone to be consistent with the adjacent single-family residential
properties to the north, south and east. The proposed project would not involve displacement of
existing housing or individuals.
Miti!!"ation:
No mitigation measlrres are required.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physically
altered gov=mental facilities, the construction ofwmch
could cause significant enviromental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any public services:
a. Fire protection? 0 0 . 0
b. Police protection? 0 0 0 .
c. Schools? 0 0 D .
d. Parks? 0 0 . D
e. Other public facilities? 0 0 D .
13-49
Issues:
Potentially
Significllnt'
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
lYlitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) Accorcling to the Fire Department, adequate fire protection services can continue to be provided to the
site. The applicant will be required to comply with the Fire Department policies for fire hydrant
placement, .fire truck tlUTIaround. and .new builcling construction. The City's Fire performance
o bj ectives and tIo.resholds will continue to be met.
b) Accorcling to the ChuIa Vista Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be
provided upon completion of the proposed proj ect. The proposed proj ect would not have a significant
effect upon or result in a need for substantial neW or altered police protection services. Tbe City's
Police performance objectives and thresholds will continue to be met
c) The proposed proj ect would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no significant adverse
impacts to public schools would result Accorcling to the Chula Vista Elementary School District letter
dated January 5, 2006, the applicant would be required to pay the statutory builcling permit school fees
for the proposed residential construction or an alternative financing mechanism such as participation in
or annexation to a CFD is recommended.
d) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infill
project. However, the applicant sball be required to pay Park Acquisition and Development Fees
(pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No. 2945 adopted by City Council on January 6,2004.
e) The proposed proj ect would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or expanded
governmental services and would continue to be served by existing public infrastructme.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a)
Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other recreational facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the facility
would oc= or be accelerated?
o
o
.
o
b)
Does the proj ect include recreational facilities or
require the construction or expansion 'of recreational
facilities, which have an adverse physical effect on
the enviroment?
o
o
o
.
13-50
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Significant"
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
a) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential iniill
project and would not impact existing or proposed recreational facilities. However, the applicant will
be required to pay Park Acquisition and Development Fees (pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No.
2945 adopted by City Council on January 6, 2004.
b) The project does not include the consi:r\1ction or expansion of recreational facilities. The project site is
not planned for anyfuture parks and recreation facilities or programs. Therefore, the proposed project
would not have an adverse physical effect on the recreational environment.
1\1itie:ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XV. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC. Would the
proj ect:
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads
or highways?
c) Result in a change in air tra.:ffic pattems, including
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantia1ly increase hazards due to a design
feature (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompauble uses (e.g., farm
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate =ergency access?
13-51
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Less Than
Patentinlly Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Imp.c.t
Impact .lY.fitigatian Impact
Incorporated
0 0 0 .
0 0 0 .
Issues:
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity?
Comments:
(a,b,d,e) According to the Traffic Engineering Department, the proposed residential infill project is not
anticipated to result in any significant traffic, crrculation or emergency access impacts. The project
generated traffic trips are minimal, approximately 120 Average Daily Trips (ADTs) that is not considered
to be a sugstantial increase ini either numbr of vehicle trips, volume or capacity. In addition, the project-
generated trips .will not exceed the level of service . standard, established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways. Therefore, will not create significant traffic
operations impacts along North Del Mar Avenue and surrounding residential or collector streets.
c) The proposal would not have any significant effect upon any air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a change in location that results in substantial safety risks.
f) The proposal includes garage space including pullout spaces and 10 parking spaces on Villas Del
Mar Court in accordance with the Chula Vista Zoning Code. The proposal meets ADA requirements
for accessibility and parking.
g) The proposal would not conflict with. adopted transportation plans or alternative transportation
programs. There are no bus turnouts or public transportation systems along this portion of N. Del
Mar Avenue.
.Mitigation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XVI. UTILITIES Ai"ID SERVICE SYSTEMS~
Would the ptoj ect:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
o
o
o
.
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
o
o
.
o
13-52
Issues:
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c)
Require or result in the construction of new stonn
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d)
Haire sufficient water supplies available to serve the
proj ect from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e)
Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment
provider, which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
f)
Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate the project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g)
Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
13-53
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
lYIitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
.
o
.
o
o
No
ImP3:ct
o
.
o
.
.
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The project site is located within an urban area that is served by all necessary utilities and service systems.
According to the Engineering Department, no exceedance of wastewater requirements of the Regional
Water Quality.Control Board would result fr.om the proposed project.
b) According to Sweetwater Authority correspondence dated February 22, 2006 and March 28. 2006. an
existing 6-inch water main is located on the east side of North Del Mar Avenue with one existing water
service- to the site. The proposed improvements will include a new water main extension wimin the
proDosed Drivate road that connects to the existing Authority water main in N OrID Del Mar Avenue. and
terminates in the ~ro:osed cul-de-sac. This would include new separate laterals and meters, as well as-the
ins:alh.tion af ro-l:~8. pressnre Friasi"l. .ackIlo,; a.',ices ",8. Bflcck ..-al',-es on a;ay mdi.,idual fire
protection sys:tems. for each Darcel. Should anv.ofthe DIoposed residences be required to have a buildin2:
fire sprinkler system. then each water service shall be eauiuoed with an anoroved backflow nIotection
device that would be owned and maintained bv the "Dronertv O\Vller. As the water facility improvements
are designed in accordance with water authority standards, no significant impacts to existing facility
systems will occur as a result of the proposed project.
See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E '(HazardslHazardous Materials and HydrologyfWater
Quality) for details regarding the existing septic tank and new wastewater service systems for the proposed
project.
c) The proposed project will result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities and expansion of
existing facilities. The poiential discharge of silt during construction activities could impact the storm
drain system. Appropriate erosion control measutes will be identified in conjunction with the preparation
of final grading plans to be implemented during construction. The proposed project is subject to the
NPDES General Construction Permit requirements and shall obtain permit coverage and develop a Storm
Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to issuance of grading permits. In addition, the proj ect
shall.be conclitioned to implement construction and post-construction water quality Best ManageDJ.ent
Prac-q.ces-(B:tvfPs) for storm water pollution prevention in accordance 'iVith the Chula Vista Standard Urban
Storm Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). No significant impacts to the City's storm drainage facilities are
anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
d) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater District. Pursuant to
correspondence from the Sweetwater Authority, the project may be serviced from the 6"-water main on N.
Del Mar A venue and the applicant "ill need to install a service main io service this site. The proposed
project will be required to construct expansions to existing water facilities as desCDoed in Section b aJ:>ov:e.
e) See XVI.a. and b.
f) The City of Chula Vista is served by regionallandfil1s with adequate capacity to meet the solid waste needs
of tb.e' region in accordance with State law.
g) The proposal would be conditioned to comply with federal, state and local regulations related to solid
waste.
Mitigation: See Section E of the Mitigated Negative Declaration; refer to the Hydrology and Water Quality and
Hazards/Hazardous Materials Sections. The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration would mitigate identified storm water/storm drainage and wastewater impacts to a level of less than
significant.
13-54
Issues:
XVII. THRESHOLDS
Will the proposal adversely impact the City's
Threshold Standards?
A) Library
The City shall .construct 60,000 gross square feet
(GSF) of additional library space, over the June 30,
2000 GSF total, in the area east of Interstate 805 by
buildout. The construction of said facilities shall be
phased such that the City will not fall below the city-
wide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000 population. Library
facilities are to be adequately equipped and staffed.
B) Police
a) Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed
police units shall respond to 81 percent of "Priority One';
emergency calls within seven (1) minutes and maintain
an average response time to all "Priority One"
emergency calls of 5.5 minutes or less.
b) Respond to 57 percent of "Priority Two" urgent calls
within seven (1) minutes and maintain an average
response time to all ''Priority Two" calls of 7.5 minutes
or less.
C) Fire and Emergencv Medical
Emergency responSe: Properly equipped and staffed fire
and medical units shall respond to calls throughout the City
within 7 minutes in 80% of the cases (measured annually).
D) 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
intersections.. Signalized intersections west ofI-80S .are not
to operate at a LOS below their 1991 LOS. No intersection
may reach LOS "E" or "F" during the average weekday
peak hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps
are exempted from this Standard.
13-55
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
. With
lYIitigntion
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
No
Impac:t
.
.
.
.
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issn es: Significant With . Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
E) Parks and Recreation Areas 0 0 0 .
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3
acres of neighborhood and comlUnity parJdand with
appropriate facilities/l,OOO population east ofT-80S.
F) Drainage 0 0 . 0
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows
. and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with the Drainage Master Planes) and City
Engineering Standards.
G) Sewer
o
o
.
D
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and
volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards.
Individual proj ects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master Planes) and City Engineering
Standards.
H) Water
o
o
D
.
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.
Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever
water conservation or fee offset program the City of Chula
Vista has in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
13-56
Issues:
Potentially
Significant.
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Imp~ct
,
CoIllIIients:
a) The project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no impacts to horary facilities would
result. No adverse impact to the City's Library Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed
project
b) According to the Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be provided upon
corupletion of the proposed project. The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a
need for substantial new or altered police protection services. No adverse impact to the City's Police Threshold
standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
c) According to the Fire Department, adequate fire protection and emergency medical services can continue to be
provided to the project site. Although the Fire Department has indicated they will provide service to the project,
the project will contribute to the incremental increase in fire service demand throughout the City. This increased
demand on fire services will not result in a significant cumulative impact No adverse impact to the City's Fire
and Emergency Medical Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
. d) According to the Traffic Engineering Division, the SUlIounding street segments and intersections including Third
Avenue and Del Mar Avenue will continue to operate in compliance with the City's traffic threshold standard
with the proposed project traffic. No adverse impact to the City's traffic threshold standards would occur as a
result of the proposed project
e) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infill project and
would not impact existing or proposed recreational facilities. However, the applicant shall be required to pay
ParlcAcquisition and Development Fees (pAD) in accordsnce with Ordinance No. 2945 adopted by City Council
on Janrurry 6,2004.
f) Based upon the review of the project, the Engineering Department has detennined that there are no sigDificant
issues regarding the proposed drainage improvements of the project site, The. proposed drain system includes
improvements to existing drainage culverts to halldle 100-year storm events, a series of iulets, private catch basins
and culverts, underground detention systems, discharge controls, and filtering systems. No adverse impacts to the
City's drainage threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project. .
g) The project site is within the boundaries of the City of Chula Vista wasiewater services area. The existing area
sewer facility .system includes sewer lines along Bayview Way and along Vista .Del Mar Court There are
currently no sewer mains abutting the property that would allow for gravity-type flow. Therefore an off-site main
extension through the TIrird Avenue right of way, and an 8" PVC sewer main up to the southwest comer of the
subject site and into the proposed project court cul-de-sac are proposed to service the various lots. The applicant
shall be required to submit a final sewer plan to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. The applicant is required to
grant an easeJ:lk-nt to the City of Chula Vista wastewater services for the purpose of maintenance of the proposed
sewer lines. No adverse impacts to the City's sewer system or City's sewer threshold standards will occur as a
result of the proposed project.
h) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater District Pursuant to correspondence
from the Sweetwater Authority, the project may be serviced from the 6" -water main on N. Del Mar Avenue and
the applicant will need to install a service main to service this site. No significant impacts to existing facility
systems or the City's water threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
13-57
Issues:
XVllI. iYlAJ.'IDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential tp degrade the
quality of the enviroment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife populatipn 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 or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the.
. incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current project, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have enviromental effects, which
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Comments:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impa.ct
Less ThaII
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Potential short-term construction noise/raptor nesting
and biologically sensitive impacts are addressed in the Mitigated NegatiVe Declaration, Section E, under
Biological Resources.
a)
b) The project site has been previously disturbed with a similar residential land use and site improvements.
No cumulative considerable impacts associated with the project when viewed in connection with the
effects of past projects, other current projects and probable future projects have been identified.
c) The proj ect will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, as the
proposed project has been mitigated to lessen any potential significant impacts to a level of less than
significance.
iYfitigation: The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant impacts to a level ofless than significance.
13-58
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR iYIITIGATION MEASURES:
Project mitigation measures are contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant
Impacts, and Table I, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, of Mitigated Negative Declaration
IS-04-022. .
XX. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT lVIITIGATION MEASURES
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and/or Operator stipulate that they have each read,
understood and have their .respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures
contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator.
Failure to sign below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative Declaration with the County Clerk shall
indicate the Applicant and/or Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval
. and that the Applicant and/or Operator shall apply for an Environmental Impact Report.
'Sf J( -;0 ~5"~&zcl"
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
/Zi14
Sigftawfe &f Applicant
(or authorized representative)
1 h; & ? .
~
N/A
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
N/A
Signature of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
13-59
. XXI. ENVIRONlVIENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The enviromental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated,"
as indicated by the checklist on the previous pages.
. Geophysical
OT ransportation/Traffic
. Biological Resources
o Energy and Mineral
Resources
o Public Services
o Utilities and Service Systems
o Land Use and Planning
o Population and Housing
o Aesthetics
o Agricultural Resources
. Hydrology/Water
.Hazards and Hazardous.
Materials
o Noise
o Cultural Resources
. Air Quality
o Paleontological
Resources
o Recreation
o Mandatory Findings of Significance
13-60
XXII. DETERiVIlNATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on. the
environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared.
r 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 revisions in
the proj ect have been made or agreed to by the proj ect proponent. A Mitigated
Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect on the environment,
and an Environmental Impact Report is required.
I find that the proposed project may have a "potentially significant impacf' or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact ori the. environment, but at least one
effect: I) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation.measures based on the earlier
analysis as described on attached sheets. An Environmental Impact Report is
required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards
and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative
Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
~~1!~~'
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of CI;mla Vista
'7/"//;J-
D~tel
]:\Planning\M.ARJA\Initial Study\Vi11as Del Mar\IS-04-022draftChecklistdoc
13-61
07
o
.
o
o
o
ATTACHMENT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION AND
MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 18, 2006
13-62
Planning Commission
- 2 -
October 18, 2006
1. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS 04-06; Consideration of a Tentative Subdivision Map
to divide a 2.06 acre project site into 10 residential lots.
Villas Del Mar, LLC. (Quasi-Judicial)
Background: Jeff Steichen reported that in this re-submitted project, the applicant is
requesting to divide a 2.06-acre site into a 10 lot standard residential subdivision.
While the previous project requested 12 residential lots with one common lot, the
request was revised based upon concerns raised at the May 10, 2006 Planning
Commission meeting. Along with the reduction in number of lots, the original project
proposal requested a rezone and precise plan, which are no longer necessary.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt Resolution PCS 04-
06A recommending that the City Council; 1) rescind previous action taken on original
project at the meeting of May 10, 2006, and; 2) approve the proposed Tentative
Subdivision Map based on the findings and subject to the conditions contained in the
City Council resolution.
Commission Questions/Comments:
Cmr. Tripp inquired why the Planning Commission would need to rescind a previous
action on a project that is different from the one that is being presented tonight.
Michael Shirey, Deputy City Attorney III responded that rather than requiring the
applicant to resubmit a whole new project, procedurally, staff determined that this was
the best way to handle it. Additionally, there are provisions in the code that allow for it
to be handled in this manner and even though the project has changed, staff would
rather rescind the prior project and move forward with the new proposal.
Cmr. Tripp stated that he noted a change in the new plans where they've relocated a
detention basin underneath a roadway and inquired if that was a standard practice to
locate them underneath a paved roadway.
Jim Newton, Sr. Civil Engineer responded that it is not uncommon to have a detention
basin underneath a paved surface; you'll find them in parking lots of commercial
projects and private streets.
Cmr. Felber inquired what provisions there are for sidewalks.
Jim Newton responded that as a private street cross section, sidewalks are not
required.
13-63
Planning Commission
- 3 -
October 18, 2006
Public Hearing Opened.
Alfred Welker, 168 North Del Mar Avenue stated thaj the main issue he wanted to
point out is that the lower portion of this subdivision should be served from a Third
Avenue extension.
Lance Longacker, 250 Vista Del Mar Court stated that the bottom portion of the
development is crammed with homes and they're not using Third Avenue to the best
of their ability. Mr. Longacker also pointed out that there is an alternate route around
the side of the trailer park to the east. He is also concerned that there are no
sidewalks proposed for the project.
GiI Martinez representing the applicant, stated he was available to answer questions.
Don Sandoval, 152 North Del Mar stated he hopes the project will not adversely
impact his quality of life and jeopardize the beautiful view of the harbor he has
enjoyed for the past 40 years. He urged the Commission to take all
recommendations into account.
Cmr. Bensoussan inquired if the walls that are being proposed along Third Avenue
had any landscaping surrounding them.
John Coffee responded that they are proposing to landscape both sides of the wall to
provide as much screening as possible.
Cmr. Bensoussan inquired why the Third Avenue entrance wasn't used.
Mr. Coffee responded that they would need to take additional land from southerly lots
in order to improve Third Avenue to the City's public street standards.
Jim Newton stated that currently the City's portion of the right of way along Third
Avenue is only 30 feet; the public street requirement is 62 feet wide. In order to
improve Third Avenue, it would entail acquiring additional land from multiple
landowners to the west.
Terry Sapp, 255 Shirley Street, stated her main concern is people not being able to
park in front of their house and how that will spill over to other public streets.
Public Hearing Closed.
13-64
Planning Commission
-4-
October 18, 2006
Cmr. Tripp stated that although he's not a fan of no sidewalks, the project is much
improved from the one that was previously submitted and is a better fit in the
neighborhood.
Cmr. Bensoussan stated that she concurs that the project is much improved and the
applicant addressed some of the concerns that were raised in the earlier hearing.
She is, however, concerned that there are no sidewalks being proposed and would
like the project to include sidewalks.
Cmr. Felber inquired what is the applicant's reason for excluding sidewalks.
Mr. Martinez stated that one of the considerations was that aesthetically the project
would look better without the sidewalks; there would be more room for landscaping.
There's also plenty of precedence established with private streets not having
sidewalks, however, if it comes down to it, they would hate to see the project be
jeopardized over sidewalks, therefore, they would be willing to reconsider their
position.
MSC (Vinson/Bensoussan) (5-0-1-0) that the Planning Commission adopt
Resolution PCS 04-06A recommending that the City Council; 1) rescind
previous action taken on original project at the meeting of May 10,2006, and; 2)
approve the proposed Tentative Subdivision Map based on the findings and
subject to the conditions contained in the City Council resolution with the following
additional Condition of Approval:
. That the project include a continuous sidewalk on at least one side of
the street.
Motion carried.
13-65
RESOLUTION NO. PCS-04-06A
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION 1) RESCINDING PREVIOUS ACTION TAKEN
ON ORIGINAL PROJECT AT MEETING OF MAY 10,2006 AND
2) RECO:MMENDINGTHAT THE CITY COUNCIL ADOPT THE
MITIGATED NEGATIVE DECLARATION AND MITIGATION
MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM IS-04-022; AND
APPROVING AND ESTABLISHING CONDITIONS OF A
REVISED TENTATIVE MAP TO DIVIDE 2.06 ACRES LOCATED
ON THE WEST SIDE OF N. DEL MAR AVENUE INTO 10
SINGLE-FAMILY RESIDENTIAL LOTS-VILLAS DEL MAR
DEVELOPMENT, LLC.
WHEREAS, on January 20,2004 a duly verified application for PCS 04-06 and on June 22,
2005 a duly verified application for PCZ 05-03 were filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning and
Building Department, requesting approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 2.06 acres
into 13 lots, and rezone application requesting a change from the R1 to RIP6 zone with Precise
Plan Modifying District Standards ("Previous Project"); and
WHEREAS, the project has subsequently been revised to eliminate the need for a rezone
with Precise Plan Modifying District Standards and to reduce the number of residential lots from 12
to 10, with the elimination of the common lot. In addition, the revised project no longer requires a
rezone application with Precise Plan Modifying District Standards ("Currently Proposed Project");
and
WHEREAS, the area of land commonly known as Villas Del Mar (pCS 04-06) Tentative
Subdivision Map (pCS-04-06), Chula Vista Tract No. 04-06, which is the subject matter of this
Resolution, is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference, and for the purpose of general description herein consists of2.06 acres located on
the west side ofN. Del Mar Avenue ("Project Site"); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed Project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has conducted an Initial
Study, IS-04-22 in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, based on the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator
has determined that the proj ect could result in significant effects on the environment. However,
revisions to the proj ect made by or agreed to by the Developer would avoid the effects or mitigate the
effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental
Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-04-22; and
WHERAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the changes to the
Currently Proposed Project, which were predicated upon previous Planning Commission and Public
Review, are minor with no additional environmental impacts or issues identified that are not already
covered under the Mitigated Negative Declaration 1S-04-022 addressed in the previous project.
Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15073.5( c) recirculation of the Mitigated Negative
Declaration is not required; and
13-66
WHEREAS, on May 10, 2006 the Planning Commission considered the Previous Project
and recommended denial of the rezone with precise plan and accompanying tentative subdivision
map for a 12 lot single family planned residential development; and
WHEREAS, following the Planning Commission meeting, the applicant has worked with staff in
an effort to develop a revised proj ect which addresses the concerns of the Planning Commission as
well as the surrounding residents; and
WHEREAS, pursuant to Chula Vista Municipal Code Section 2.04.570(B), the Currently
Proposed Project was brought back to the Planning Commission with a two part request: 1) that the
Planning Commission rescind their previous action of May 10, 2006 and 2) that the Planning
Commission consider the revised project proposed by the applicant; and
WHEREAS, on September 7, 2006, a neighborhood meeting was held at Rosebank EI=entary
School in order to discuss the Currently Proposed Project with surrounding neighbors; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby find that in the exercise of their
independent review and judgement, as set forth in the records of its proceedings,the Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-04-022) has been
prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA),
the State CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City Of Chula Vista,
and hereby recornn'lends that the City Council adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-04-022); and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Director set the time and place for a hearing on the
Project, 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 within 500 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 6:00 p.m.,
October 18, 2006 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission
and said hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION 1)
rescinds previous action taken on May 10, 2006 and 2) recommends that the City Council adopt the
attached Draft City Council Resolution approving the Proj ect, and Mitigated Negative Declaration
IS-04-022 in accordance with the findings and subj ect to the conditions contained therein.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED 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 18th day of October, 2006, by the following vote, to-wit:
13-67
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
Bryan Felber, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
J:\Plarming\Case Files\-05 (FY 04_05)\PCZ\PCZ_05-03\Resolutions\OCT 18 2006 PC RESOLUTION.doc
13-68
ATTACHMENT 3
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION
AND MINUTES FOR OCTOBER 18, 2006
13-69
RESOLUTION NO, PCZ 05-03/ PCS-04-06
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
CONIMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
DENY THE REZONE WITH PRECISE PLAN sTANDARDS; AND
DENY THE ACCOMPANYING TENTATNE MAP TO DNIDE
2.06 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF N. DEL MAR
AVENUE INTO 12 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND ONE CO:MMON
LOT IN ORDER TO ALLOW A PLANED RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT-VILLAS DEL MAR DEVELOPMENT, LLC.
WHEREAS, on January 20,2004 a duly verified application for PCS 04-06 and on June 22,
2005 a duly verified application for PCZ 05-03 were filed with the City of Chula Vista Planning and
Building Department, requesting approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 2.06 acres
into 13 10ts("Project"), and rezone application requesting a change from the Rl to RlP6 zone with
Precise Plan ModifYing District Standards ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, the area of land co=only known as Villas Del Mar (pCS 04-06) Tentative
Subdivision Map (pCS-04-06), Chula Vista Tract No. 04-06, which is the subject matter of this
Resolution, is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference, and for the purpose of general description herein consists of2.06 acres located on
the west side ofN. Del Mar Avenue ("Project Site"); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed Proj ect for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has conducted an Initial
Study, IS-04-22 in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, based on the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator
has determined that the proj ect could result in significant effects on the environment. However,
revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the Developer would avoid the effects orrnitigate the
effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental
Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-04-22; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Co=ission does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (1S-04-022) has been prepared in
accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State
CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City OfChula Vista; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission does hereby find that in the exercise of their
independent review and judgment, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (1S-04-022) in the form presented has been prepared in accordance with
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Review Procedures
of the City of Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission having received certain evidence on March 10,2006,
as set forth in the record of its proceedings herein by reference as is set forth in full, made certain
findings, as set forth in their reco=ending Resolution PCZ-05-03/PCS-04-06 herein, and
recommended that the City Council deny the Proj ect based upon findings of Section 19.14.576 of the
13-70
Municipal Code and in accordance with Government Code Section 66474; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Director set the time and place for a hearing on the
Project, 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 within 500 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 6:00 p.m., May
10, 2006 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said
hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
recommends that the City Council deny the Rezone with Precise Plan standards and accompanying
tentative map based upon the following findings:
1. That such use will under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to
the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity;.
The Commission finds that proposed precise plan development standards would
allow the applicant to develop the proj ect site in a way which is not compatible with
the existing development of the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed lot sizes
closest to North Del Mar Avenue are well below the size of the adjacent lots to the
north and south, as well as 2,000 square feet below the minimum lot size required by
the existing Rl zone established for parcels fronting on N. Del Mar Avenue and
surrounding residential streets. Traffic generated by allowing development under the
proposed precise plan could negatively impact the neighborhoods existing quality of
life.
2. That such plan does not satisfY the principles for application of the "P" modifYing
district as setforth in CVMC 19.56.041:
(a) The Commission finds that although the property is unique in terms of its
topographic constraints on the western portion of the project site, the eastern
portion could still be developed under the existing R-l zoning which would result
in lot sizes and overall density more compatible with the surrounding existing
neighborhood.
(b) The Commission finds that although the western portion of the property is
adj acent to and contiguous to a zone allowing different land uses, the eastern
portion which is currently zoned R-l is more consistent with the surrounding
residential development than would be the applicant proposal for the eastern
portion of the proj ect site under a precise plan.
(c) The basic or underlying zone regulations for the eastern portion of the proj ect site
currently zoned R -1 do allow this part of the development to achieve an efficient
and proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adj acent zones as said
13-71
adj acent uses on the eastern portion of site are also single-family residential R-l
zoned properties.
(d) Although the proj ect site consists of two slightly different zone classifications,
being a single parcel, is under one ownership. The Commission finds that it is
not necessary to place a P modifying district over the site in order to enhance
ability to coordinate development of the site.
3.That exceptions granted which may deviate from the underlying zoning
requirements are not warranted to meet the purpose and application of the P precise
plan modifying district;
While the allowance of a precise plan on the western portion of the site which already
contains a P precise plan modifier (RlP6) may allow for a better development pattern
on this portion of the site, given the topographic constraints, and variation in adjacent
land uses, the Commission finds it is not necessary to rezone or allow a precise plan
to extend to the eastern portion of the proj ect site given the size of the existing
residential development to the north, east and south.
4. That approval of this plan will not conform to the general plan and the adopted
policies of the city and therefore meets the reasons for denial stated in Section 66474
of the State Government Code.
Although the project proposed under the precise plan meets the density allowed
under the existing Residential-Low-Medium 3-6 dulacre designation of the General
Plan the Commission finds that the lot layout on the eastern portion of the site is not
compatible with existing lot sizes to the north, south and east. In addition, it is
necessary to adopt both the rezone and precise plan in order to achieve the proposed
density of 12 dulac which is at the upper range of density allowed (6 dulac). The
Planning Commission finds a more appropriate density given the surrounding
neighborhood would be more in the mid range of allowable density. This would also
allow the proj ect more consistent with City policies reflecting the importance of
neighborhood compatibility.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED 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 lOth day of May, 2006, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
13-72
Vicki Madrid, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
J:\Planning\Case Filesl-06 (FY 05-D6)IGP AI gpa-05-O I ]CS-03-01-PCRes
13-73
ATTACHMENT 4
PLANNING COMMISSION RESOLUTION
AND MINUTES FOR MAY 10, 2006
13-74
3. PUBLIC HEARING: PCS 05-03 f PCS 04-06; Consideration of the
following:
a. Rezone with Precise Plan Modifying District to
change to eastern 200 feet of project site from
R1 to R1 P6 along with Precise Plan
development standards.
b. Tentative Subdivision Map to divide 2.06 acre
project site located at 160 North Del Mar into
12 residential lots and one common lot in
order to allow a planned residential
development. Villas Del Mar, LLC.
Background: Jeff Steichen reported that the project proposes to subdivide a
2.06 acre lot into 12 single-family residential lots ranging in size from 4,291 sf
to 6,511 sf.
The site constraints of the project are:
Confiquration - The parcel is long and narrow with only 80 feet of frontage
along North Del Mar Avenue.
Topoqraphv - The existing site contains steep terrain, which slopes
downward to the west.
Access - Access to the project will be via a 24 foot wide private drive
connecting to North Del Mar Avenue. Due to the narrow width, no parallel on-
street parking shall be allowed. Although North Third Ave. abuts the western
edge of the property, only half of the needed right-of-way width for public
residential street has been granted for a public street. Widening of the Third
Avenue easement in -order to create a public road would be difficult due to
topographic constraints and negative impacts to the mobilehome park to the
west. If an access road were to be provided along northThird Avenue, there
is no room to provide a turn around that would meet the requirements for
emergency vehicles.
The applicant proposes rezoning of the eastern 200 feet of the site from the
existing R1 to match the existing R1 P6 zoning on the majority of the site.
This would allow for a rnaximum density of 6 units per acre.
Each of the units will have a two car garage and on-street guest parking is
being provided for 10 spaces. There are conditions being proposed for the
CC&R's stating that the garages must be free and clear for parking of two
vehicles at all times, no on-street parking will be allowed along the private
street and that the driveway should be available for additional guest parking.
Frank Rivera, City Engineer stated that based on concerns expressed from
surrounding residents, a traffic analysis was conducted and traffic counts
were conducted on North Del Mar and North Second Ave. which, determined
13-75
Planning Commission Minutes
-2-
May 10, 2006
that the added traffic that the proposed project would generate would still be
within the City's design guidelines as a level of Service C.
Staff Recommendation: That the Planning Commission adopt resolution
recommending that the City Council approve tbe proposed rezone and
Tentative Subdivision Map based on the findings and subject to the conditions '
contained therein.
Commission Comments:
Cmr. Nordstrom inquired how the no-parking restriction on the private street
within the project would be enforced.
John Schmitz responded that it would be part of the CC&R's and the Home
Owners Association would be responsible for enforcing those rules.
Cmr. Felber inquired how the parking in the garages would be enforced.
John Schmitz stated that, as with the no-parking restriction, the HOA would
be responsible for enforcing them.
Public Hearing Opened.
Gil Martinez, GMA IntI. stated that they worked extensively with all City
departments (Fire, Engineering, Planning) for over two years and as with
most in-fill projects, there are issues and constraints associated with the
proposal.
Mr. Martinez stated that after extensive work and redesign of the project, they
believe that they have a project that is compatible with the neighborhood and
surrounding land uses. The project offers the following benefits to the
community:
. the project is compatible with the neighborhood and land uses
. the project maintains the existing land form, slopes, etc.
. the project is satisfying the demand for moderate price housing
. the project is proposing a park accessible to the residents and maintained
by the HOA
. the project will contribute over a half million dollar in fees to the City
Mr. Martinez stated he was available to answer any questions or concerns
that the Commission or members of the public might have.
Cmr. Bensoussan asked for clarification as to whether the park would be
private or public.
13-76
Planning Commission Minutes
- 3-
May 10, 2006
Mr. Martinez responded that this is not a gated community, therefore, it would be
accessible to local residents, albeit, through a private street.
Lance Longaker, 250 Vista Del Mar Ct. stated that where normall a 7,000 sf lot
is what is required for a project such as this, the develQper is proposing to reduce
the lots to 4,300 sf in order to squeeze in 12 units into such a small area.
Furthermore, by developing on a private road s. a public road, they are able to
get away with not installing street improvements i.e. sidewalks, parking spaces,
and height requirements on the homes. If they reduced the project from 12 to 10
units, they'd be able to meet the turn-around space for emergency vehicles. He
opposes the project as proposed.
Don Sandoval, 153 North Del Mar, Chula Vista stated that his main concern is
that he's heard that the developer is going to haul in over 400 tons of dirt behind
his home to elevate the property. He is concerned with where the ground level is
going to be and what that's going to do with the view that he presently enjoys.
He opposes the project as proposed.
Duane Sandoval, 547 Laguna Street, Chula Vista, stated that he does not
oppose change, however, as Mr. Longaker stated earlier, the project size
exceeds what the property can comfortably support. Mr. Sandoval recommends
that the zone remain R-1 and stated that there will definitely be traffic impacts if
12 more houses are allowed to be constructed. He opposes the project as
proposed.
Terry Sapp, 255 Shirley Street, Chula Vista, stated she opposes the project as
proposed because the property is too small to support the density the builder is
proposing. Furthermore, it's inconceivable that residents would be prohibited
from parking in front of their own house or that someone's RV might impede
access to an emergency vehicle because the roads are too narrow.
Alfred Welker, 168 North Del Mar Avenue; stated he opposes changing the
zone from R-1 to R1P6 and opposes the project because of the small lot sizes in
order to cram as much density as the can get away with in this small parcel;
these many houses being served by such a narrow drive is going to create
problems.
Cmr. Bensoussan stated she counted 3 lots in the section that is zoned R-1 and
inquired from the developer what is the number of units he is proposing for this
section.
Federico Escobedo, representing Villas Del Mar responded that they are
proposing to put 2 units in the R-1 section.
Public Hearing Closed.
13-77
Planning Commission Minutes
- 4-
May 10, 2006
Cmr. Bensoussan inquired why this isn't a General Plan Amendment if they are
proposing to change the zone.
Mr. Schmitz responded that the General Plan land use designation would allow
them the density they are proposing; it's a matter. of how those units are
distributed within the property. This is one parcel with tWo zonings.
Cmr. Bensoussan stated she is concerned with compromising the integrity of
the R-1 zone. Already the allowance of ADU's in the R-1 zone is turning it into R-
2. Cmr. Bensoussan further stated that she doesn't see an overriding
consideration or need to change the zoning, other than to be able to get more
units on the parcel.
Cmr. Tripp stated that the project requires 12 deviations; its too big, too tight, it
doesn't fit and he won't be able to support the project.
MSC (Tripp/Bensoussan) (5-0) that the Planning Commission recommend
denial of the project. Motion carried.
13-78
RESOLUTION NO. PCZ 05-03/ PCS-04-06
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
DENY THE REZONE WITH PRECISE PLAN STANDARDS; AND
DENY THE ACCO:MPANYING TENTATNE.MAP TO DIVIDE
2.06 ACRES LOCATED ON THE WEST SIDE OF N. DEL MAR
AVENUE INTO 12 RESIDENTIAL LOTS AND ONE COMMON
LOT IN ORDER TO ALLOW A PLANED RESIDENTIAL
DEVELOPMENT-VILLAS DEL MAR DEVELOPMENT, LLC.
WHEREAS, on January 20,2004 a duly verified application for PCS 04-06 and on June 22,
2005 a duly verified application for PCZ 05-03 were filed with the CityofChula Vista Planning and
Building Department, requesting approval of a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 2.06 acres
into 13 10ts("Project"), and rezone application requesting a change from the Rl to RIP6 zone with
Precise Plan Modifying District Standards ("Project"); and
WHEREAS, the area of land commonly known as Villas Del Mar (PCS 04-06) Tentative
Subdivision Map (pCS-04-06), Chula Vista Tract No. 04-06, which is the subject matter of this
Resolution, is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference, and for the purpose of general description herein consists of2.06 acres located on
the west side ofN. Del Mar Avenue ("Project Site"); and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed Project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and has conducted an Initial
Study, IS-04-22 in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, based on the results ofthe Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator
has determined that the project could result in significant effects on the environment. However,
revisions to the project made by or agreed to by the Developer would avoid the effects or mitigate the
effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental
Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-04-22; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission does hereby find that the Mitigated Negative
Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (IS-04-022) has been prepared in
accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State
CEQA Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures ofthe City Of Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, The Planning Commission does hereby find that in the exercise of their
independent review and judgment, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (1S-04-022) in the form presented has been prepared in accordance with
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act and the Environmental Review Procedures
of the City of Chula Vista; and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission having received certain evidence on March 10, 2006,
as set forth in the record of its proceedings herein by reference as is set forth in full, made certain
findings, as set forth in their recommending Resolution PCZ-05-03/PCS-04-06 herein, and
recommended that the City Council deny the Project based upon findings of Section 19.14.576 of the
13-79
Municipal Code and in accordance with Government Code Section 66474; and
WHEREAS, the Planning and Building Director set the time and place for a hearing on the
Proj ect, 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 within 500 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 6:00 p.m., May
10, 2006 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, before the Planning Commission and said
hearing was thereafter closed.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
recommends that the City Council deny the Rezone with Precise Plan standards and accompanying
tentative map based upon the following findings:
I. That such use will under the circumstances of the particular case be detrimental to
the health, safety or general welfare of persons residing or working in the vicinity or
injurious to property or improvements in the vicinity;.
The Commission finds that proposed precise plan development standards would
allow the applicant to develop the project site in a way which is not compatible with
the existing development of the surrounding neighborhood. The proposed lot sizes
closest to North Del Mar Avenue are well below the size of the adjacent lots to the
north and south, as well as 2,000 square feet below the minimum lot size required by
the existing RI zone established for parcels fronting on N. Del Mar Avenue and
surrounding residential streets. Traffic generated by allowing development under the
proposed precise plan could negati vely impact the neighborhoods existing quality of
life.
2. That such plan does not satisfY the principles for application of the "P" modifYing
district as set forth in CVMC 19.56.041:
(a) The Commission finds that although the property is unique in terms of its
topographic constraints on the western portion of the project site, the eastern
portion could still be developed under the existing R -I zoning which would result
in lot sizes and overall density more compatible with the surrounding existing
neighborhood.
(b) The Commission finds that although the western portion of the property is
adj acent to and contiguous to a zone allowing different land uses, the eastern
portion which is currently zoned R-l is more consistent with the surrounding
residential development than would be the applicant proposal for the eastern
portion of the project site under a precise plan.
(c) The basic or underlying zone regulations for the eastern portion of the project site
currently zoned R -I do allow this part of the development to achieve an efficient
and proper relationship among the uses allowed in the adjacent zones as said
13-80
adjacent uses on the eastern portion of site are also single-family residential R-l
zoned properties.
(d) Although the project site consists of two slightly different ZOI).e classifications,
being a single parcel, is under one ownership, The Commission finds that it is
not necessary to place a P modifying district over the site in order to enhance
ability to coordinate development of the site.
3.That exceptions granted which may deviate from the underlying zoning
requirements are not warranted to meet the purpose and application of the P precise
plan modifYing district;
While the allowance of a precise plan on the western portion of the site which already
contains a P precise plan modifier (RlP6) may allow for a better development pattern
on this portion of the site, given the topographic constraints, and variation in adjacent
land uses, the Commission finds it is not necessary to rezone or allow a precise plan
to extend to the eastern portion of the project site given the size of the existing
residential development to the north, east and south.
4. That approval of this plan will not conform to the general plan and the adopted
policies of the city and therefore meets the reasonsfor denial stated in Section 66474
of the State Government Code.
Although the project proposed under the precise plan meets the density allowed
under the existing Residential-Low-Medium 3-6 du/acre designation of the General
Plan the Commission finds that the lot layout on the eastern portion of the site is not
compatible with existing lot sizes to the north, south and east. In addition, it is
necessary to adopt both the rezon.e and precise plan in order to achieve the proposed
density of 12 du/ac which is at the upper range of density allowed (6 du/ac). The
Planning Commission finds a more appropriate density given the surrounding
neighborhood would be more in.the mid range of allowable density. This would also
allow the project more consistent with City policies reflecting the importance of
neighborhood compatibility.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be transmitted to the
City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF CIlliLA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this lOth day of May, 2006, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
NOES:
ABSENT:
13-81
Vicki Madrid, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Diana Vargas, Secretary
J :\Planning\Case Files\-06 (FY 05-06)\GP A \ gpa-05-OI_PCS-03-O 1 ~PCRes
13-82
. l l' 1'1'1 : il!
'.->.-> 11:~!1 I
I I I:
~. ,).., '\' I ~'~ ~ if
:\: ,';; ~&~ r--th
"'T-nr,,-'l;I':I"--~-b,- -- I+'--T--~-~#!-' ~;:.1'!
, I~ \:" hl:;1 !I II!i!ljr'''- 'f, ,,'; ",
h.yf'- ~ lii-Lfi;1 I' I 'ii I';" : : I; II 5' I i
: J'~~> i'~ ~I 'I"~: . I I !
~~ I \ I I I
~ la\."1, I
it) I Ea " 1 I I
- ~?J!<Ii~ '{'\ . !
:BI'<~ . l~ ~ii! !" ,', '~;li 'i.' It-"-. II i
. -:k'ji"':;;;>;; I' . ~ ',', ~!l 1':,.[1 ""
.";,~, "-.1 I ~ '11 I~U !i'"
., .1];. ,I : i~ ~~ r ik'";lljl 'II ~
. :''1) l .; J-. ~" t-- . Ii! II ' li"'2
)r.';.:,/:... ,:,:':,t;::l~ il ~~, ' i~l! ,'I; 1'111'
'/' /~~ ~~::..~' '::'~'r ~ ~I' 'ii!.r.~lf~~r~T.".......... ~
'~'" . " ~\~ \\ ~ ~ ---11 ',.;1, :h ~li~IlIIIIlIIlI' >
: " " ~'" ~ p [ , Jill I CIl
~ ..l'i- , i:T . ~\ ,\ ~ ,,--Ij {, I 1m II III !II II U
:.L:-----.. ~ .;0< illll \\'~; ~ f \, . "_ ___~ trJ
~ . :t. - . ~\\\~ ~\\ \~ ~ 1-:'- 0 I l!mlll1i!ll1 r'
t(~ -..?-: -;~\ '-,.f>'- - " - ~ : :s:::
_~)h,. ~,: ~,\.\ -, "'0;>-'- ~, '\, >
~ \'\-l -'~,r: "1 ?-:J
""~. " ' "," _, ,"'IIP!"il!!' 'I' i '..
-f----~:~ k, i ,~-- ~~"..i:1i" ~~ojjHII!?j~llill~j~o.;:~III!lr:1 n
'~ g~ll! !rgg~~~~~~' . I ".:~-'~!IL:.~!t ~ ~;lli:li'I'!llllil~11 ~
~ Jr' 'E" 1.1 Ii I. IIi"!;! 0
1--- I ~ r" l"~ - III II II I.;! i' ~I' >-rj
,~ '!C'J '!i I I'" l n
__ !.J I; ~,,- .''7 _i I L~ ~ jl! i! i 1,IIll!;! a
:;-;--',' c. '. . i 'J--, ,01i\l r " b,:! I : ! I ~l h ~
--'-- . t..\' ,rM~.. ..'~~ --~~-, I \ .j i I I r Ij <:
T -~ ' . ~ ' tV ~ I...r . ~ Ii I;! CiJ
I .-. I I :ft~ ------ ~ .! ~
: .' " :P1g_,~j I. 1:1 ;ill.li Hi',! WI!I! iii ztrl
I I' ,.. "'l !,', ! "'I
v ['-" , . II ", ;,,!, 'I
~ I! _~ i I : l~~ aiQ ! ill' fll iill i:i i ~
. L-.__~ r .4'-',w'--- - - JIjJ-- -+---1 !i -"II'I! I 'ill ::l
________ ~ '. --' ':..- -' ire I -, ! I'! <:
. ~ , -.' ." ,II' ,!r. ':,111' I "I tr1
· \ ;1:1.1,~.~. . ill! I II! 2::::
(O~ --N---QEL MAW'AVE'; . 'o",J~~.:, ".--".------1 < II III II! - ;J>
wi ,'~-,. '-I;- . ~......)' \ ~L.~;k.( \,' il ----...! II ~ . I! "d
. ."'" '"Q. ~"1l ____ , ~\\\\\\\\\\II\\\\\\'(\';'i
I~ 0 ! 1m!!! ! Villas Del Mar
I.. -.l. :s lI: "'; 1lI0 NORTH DEL MAR A VENUE
~ ... j CHUU VISTA. CA fi1fnO
~~
s;.,'-J;f" >,' '
",,--;Z-,,-;I,,~ 7-.
-- ..'. "JI/!lr
y I r I~ !!h,Ti
",,-- .('
'---------.. -,
. '.
.~
Q~'
<~~~
~~ ~~ --W~n; ~c
-~;!I.... ].............
,./
~I
11.11
~i"J~~
~
I Iii
I AI!
,
1:nl.1;9I(!1","!OVI'.L.91Pl.~VVr-Jw.
13-83
~.o.IOXl'tl _...V.C'O'....14 __ ~AA__
UlI-nlW'N.~.lI~I~_Jlr...,.
ATTACHMENT 5
LETTERS FROM AREA RESIDENTS
13-84
October 1&,2006-
250 VISta Del Mar Court
Chula Vista, Ca. 91910
I~I ~~~~:llfjl
I /,.,~.!~ ILSlj
- PLANNING J
I ( L( r;' I'r i7-{)f? ~ i) i't'^ f':,
--'I 1).........-
RE: VlJl:as Del Mar DeveIopmeEl:
Case # PCS 04-06
Locari.on: 160
North Del Mar Avenue
Attn; Jeff Steichen, PrDj,ecLPlalmer
City Of Chllia Vista
Building 300. Clwl.a VlSta Civil; .ewer
276 Fourth Avenue, Chllia Vista, Ca. 91910
TIle proposed development located lit 160 North Del Mar Ave. co"";"',,,,, to xaisl:}
debatl:} amongst the neighborOOod- and- the City Planning Department. During a recent
n...tghihoI"h6oo ~with.theCity .on September 7, 2006 , residemsofoor ~.Y
gathered- to voice their concerns over the latest proposal for the project. It appeared to
many .af"US 1hai: 1he City coold oot address 1he l'eal problems voice in the meeting. lSsues
such. as trash service, postal service; on street parking, traffic related problems, side
walks, density'i'S. .existilmgSU!ll'OUl1dings :and 1heuse ofNorth Third Ave. as a viable mme
to access or depart the clevelopment, were not aclclressecl in the City propesal. It seems
t!!mt the fteqllent l'e5pO"USe to m.any .uf.am concemswas " tIDs project is a standard suIb
divisien: and requires no mocli!ieations". I feel that this project in it current proposal has
addressed sum.e of the issues :raised at 1he !lal;t PJamDing Commi,..,;on meeting, but fuiled
to. adclress the larger concerns of the neighborhood. I will attempt to clarifY these issues
ODe by ODe.
Allow me to express the fact that the neighborhood as a whole is not opposed to
the developmem:mtis Jlot , in:filet sum.e of OOi'!:IJlll"em JPffiblems with stray animals:md
the homeless people using the lot for sheIter or sOOrt cuts wollid be eliminated. That
bei1lg ;saW, land 1he c_""ilJ" fee11hJ1t the de.llStty fOrOOf' :small area would have 1mge
impact on our life style. The bottom portion of the 10t is already zoned RlP6 which
allows :up :to six 1wmes to be lmi1t lit the lower pmtion of 1he lot with precise plan
mocli!ications. The upper portion- of the lot has only eighty feet of frontage along N. Del
Mar Ave. :md lwt:l!lty fuuf feet wll! be aH'Cltted fOr a private mad lell.'!<'lEg only fifty six feet
for homes to be built on the south side- of the lot. Just looking at the- proposed ma!> shows
how crowded the llI"ea _ becvme andoot of place -with the existing strm::tUI:es in the
area. Al-so lot # 5 & 7 combined- is almost 2000 square feet less than the minimum
IeqOOcement :fur a stai!lilard lot size. Although the City d2ims this shortage is averaged out
in the-overall project, we believe-it further shows how the-plan- is cramming too many
13-85
"
homes on a lot not suited for it. This lot must remain zoned Rl if it is to be- accepted by
this .
".c~.
Next lets take- on the trash and posta! service- problems associated with this plan.
The ,devclopment will DlJt amd side walks IDr its hmne .ownir.sdue to the coostramts (jf
the-lot size- and its irregular shape. The- problem here is that the- trash services will only be
piclred up at the tDpofthe mm at North De:!.Mar Aw. which means that iliirtytrash,
recycle. and yard waste receptacles will crowd the street because. each can must be spaced
3 feet .apmt inomer IDr the tnu:klio pick them Hp. This wmdd l'eqlliire aOOuteieren fuel
of frontage street per home, For l(). homes the required space to stage-the- cans would be
about one lmndred .am rem feet (110 feet) {)[North Del:Mar Avemue fr~:For trasliI
pick up. If the Home Owners Association (HOA} will contract for dllillpster service, the-
space needed to stOife 3l1!Idgive .~ to the trash tm:ck wrndd be aclla!lernge to the
space starved development. The- Fostal Service will require a multiple lock box
located at North Del Mar AVeIme. The exact location.is not known at 1bis time. People
retrieving their mail will ultimately choose- to drive- up. the- steep incline- rather than walk,
mce there will be no side waJ1ks in the devel~. am park theiI'= ami troc.lrsnn the
frontage- road. The problems could become- even worse if the- HOA decides to make it a
gated private read.
Finally, I would like to point out the-advantages of using North Third Avenue- as an
access rmd Although difficrJilt, it wuuld;OOt be impossible for the city to widen and pave
this street, even if it is only a one- way road, its usefulness in our growing community
would have many advam.ages. For me thing having through meet Wooirl ailow:Forcity
maintenance- workers to easily access the- water, se-wer and storm drains. The- developer
.is already prepared to pave a portien ofTImod AvenneIDr this pmpose. The:future
homeowners of this development could use this read as an entrance! exit to their homes.
Also there.is more vacant .land that .abuts Third A__ which will.everntuaily be OOIlton
and will prove- to be- beneficial at that time- to the city as well as the- future- developer.
After this ,current deve1opmemt.is in place there will be no more access via North Del Mar
to reach the-undeveloped land. abutting Third Avenu~ Why not plan today for tomorrows
chail-ernges'l It's the right tbIDg to 00. Using Third Avemeas a viabJ.e route would .aiIow
emergency, maintenance and trash services to have easy access to the development as
welI.asaReviarethe traffii; 'ClIDCel'Ell expressed by the cnm...".."Y.
In closing, I would like to thank the City and Developer for working toward a better
cmmmmily fmaiO.. I believe that the pian is not being used to its best poi:enIiial but it isa
step in the right direction. I must reaffirm that the Rl zoning must remain in place unless
a better plan .is presented that may bellefil:alI cl' us , not jiN the developer. DenSty >
trash ,parking and traffic are the. main concerns for a no- vo-te- on this current request.
13-86
d'
~
~
\\ D
--=r:
d
<-..
<<: &2>\
----..
o
v
..
-+
~Jl
.,l
J ~
'-.0
::r::
.s
.n
,,- ('f)
f::'
March 17, 2006
Case Number: ORC-05-56
Project Description: Design Review for 12 unit planned residential development
known as "Villas Del Mar" '
Site Address: T 60 North De! Mar Avenue
Project Planner
Planning Dept
Bldo. 3()() , '
ChUia Vista Civic Center
276 Fourth Avenue
Chufa Vista, CA 91910
Attn: Jeff Steichen
! am a property owner in the surrounding area of this proposed development.
I am concerned' about the environmental impact that this project will have mainly
with traffic.. ,
I am suggesting that '!toe existing road, North Third Avenue, west of this project, be
used as the main access road for the residenls of the new homes in this development..
North Third. AvenL'e is already designated for utility use for trash and sewer for this.
development
Please have whatever issues for using North Third Avenue road be addressed and
resolved now. The map shows that there are undeveloped areas around this site..
These areas will probably be developed in the near future, and, they would also
benefit with the use this road.
Tnanks for your consideration in this matter.
Sincerely,
~J-'/31- da(j(j
.,........,..r.=:lI1,....'7r;::::~
r--'\ i~ fr'l!. :! \\/' j;::J I
'[_'' ,-" ,co., ,.7" n
'I )' " ,," '~ ,. .., '-
,,'-- ......... "'----' ",.. I]
I--=-- 1/ '
i; <1. 'II )
ullj MAR 1 7 2006 J~
PLANN1NG
T erne A. Sapp
255 Shirley St.
Chula VJ.Stil, CA 91910
280 Shirfey St
Chura VISta, Cfl, 91910
13-88
'. ._.:~'.. '. .,'''c. .',
t){
~
J
"
To Chula Vista Cirj COlillcil and Planrring
Apri.l 3, 2006 ,
Subj : New houses 'Nest of Del Mar between NixOIl Place and Ba}l1riew
"
I strongly object to the placement of 12 new houses and a park on the 2 Y. acres ofland
proposed for the following reasons:
With access streets and sideViralks there are no yards for the houses. Chula Vista should'
maintain. its bedroom community with nice houses and yards and not jam houses so close
together that neighbors can wash each others windows. Our neighborhood is zoned to
allow single family houses on a lot big enough to have a yard for families. It will ruin it
to jam houses on to little lots so small a park for all the hOllses must be built. A builder
will make his money and leave but we choose to live in our great neighborhood for many
years. Please do not destroy OUR NEIGHBOORHOOD OUR HOiVIES OUR LIFE
STYLE just because someone wants to make a few extra dollars at our expense.
Proposed park will have problems with who does 'up keep, it will be used by
neighborhood kids even though it is private, who will be liable for any accidents.
The'l~it.ion of 12 families with 2 cars or more will tremendously impact the traffic in
i;l;lis~urhood.
I1W'~ ~"
..{ , < - J,.'/ I
.i).,;, ,;;;, ,f/_ ,
R17~h d'" ",. tt~ tr" ""-
:0.,." ar :If:j. Da ca.lQ
209 N'1X0n PI
Chula Vista, CA 91910
~
13-89
'::~'-'::.....;':'.L.,.:,:c.:;'~l"_'''-',.;.::''',,,,,,,;;;'.;.;,:,~.,:,_:,.,
~ :,;..'- .: ,.
..:.-;_,c.' '.~~"~.'
,.~.- .;:,
--- '-...' -- '---
'..;'".\:"',o.,..::,.,~:.:,:;.
-;;':: ;.:,~~.;;':~".';~:~~:..........,.
'. ~..,_...;- -,.-'
c,.",:'" ~.~, :.,
""
/0
./~.~_,..l 1/:. :f
__~l.':;'-L.;# l._~.i .e," $
. "'^"~ ,it ~ ",.;1. ,'.f.
'i'? ~. ."'! -)
/ ..,f..f."".,:'},n,b....l
L>~{.l!i~!i"f:.ilrtiff
, r,...
':{z\
/
P/ ~
; L/!F;Niif,fir~
v
/8. "I '
,';:!-&'lW:# .. f..~f?'ft ~ ,(I'.,.~
,l~<T<lo-"':- .~~..-t...~~
~,
~
tk.,~.'
y=-s'li<s
"
;1~ ~J.,4 "-p...f- I. . ~ ,I ,rl-i- //-i~~~f n_/~A/..J _/J _ I
'J?,lf./ ~t,YX.~lr$;Z.~' :.l~"A-{f':~ .t1fi ;f'€:'vJd''' prg;.if:,..f'#"Jr.:!A.. nV;.e:. 1/;4$
, "
b,-(l7ur;llf Uf) ftj,ytc /SH!~$ . lP,/1th f11;'/,ndl/71'/1 m'l l{f![/.qAb;;?df!"r
Ii' I '. i I ........ U
- I I . I " i t f. ! ,j ,''/ ,,-,.
J.- i.i;witi~.J'tJ!/f'ICf rf'Ult lilt:- /./W'Q k/d/ $O,;J;i,~d.4Jr bE cfJ:''V'irfotJp.J
.... . ~ -I "/
......;6 >!'--"'" ....'" ,~I .M,}","?. t:
tjI&:t... Iv;J/';t.... r -11"-"'<9--1 9f
,i?~ I l,i
~ 3; jJ ,.~,;I
d.,J.
1,,;,;,11/1 i
, II J ,.-
~ ~"".,.J'.. . 1..,p
,.,./_ lu'A,-p.- _,iT~
iii'~.F-- ~ if ~~~. ~,..I"""~
R/vIl'
Olh"2
J (\l/;-~'''''
.~ """'! %.<if,> ~
.,.-:I_Id.'.~J::"'.J
i(~.?rri- :tJ
10
I ',r;"'" ~ :d! "
~.- ,t,.< _~":" --to "'"'
J /~ltI n,:; fiN", I A;;:
.,;'Jj-p'~~'
Jp~;f;:,.14-j S
, j J ,--r; . ' j r '
It,f i!li to g.<;: d.ft/f! ,OP$d: IIMr eil/CJ t.7f'
-_ i # C,," 1 _ II . . n ;; ~
l1!,;f,e~o& f}/aT 9, w~KJ 1'1.5 l,.,/€j,rf't-; !)Ay !II;:,;/'
.' ~ I
Tf /J,;:;,~$ 011:. ~1";/$IN;;;,e9e-Ilit:.y S-.l/t!ul/ h1"';::JC/~ !?i1I,;{ l~i!l
, /
., "l J /, ..' - J--
/It./ttiN?JPI,r.E We-A$' (M/ rne:: S'i"'tf.;:-:rl/ <:7.< ,fOln.e:.O"'./C wc..-eF"
..1 . . ? '. -,,;- I J J ' ! j J .
CI.-!iv'I."'/,'j {JJ"i Q(iY I/u!''-'''/; flu: kt.e:.-eJcr/CY !/EflJe.a_ C'Ot4.td AlgI
.:l' -r1 ..t.. j' >I ,.::.,..
C>:5:i 'pI./o dli? $!i<;!'e:.r ole pf7. ve,A1ecl'.t! IS i~ NA:;(/faw', 0,/1,,.
I ,/ , '. ,~- -/
eWe <2n~/' c?;4N piTS'; I'f}- ~fi.,::n~. fAe f:e6Ef Rife ove;e
ylt<:) ~v'r,( /#10 hiE Sl"fE6=t" /11"/.1 wheW C'/l;e;-, 11ft&' /-1.elE/
~ ~ t?'J L.. '/ I J .J'
//11 )',f:orIT OJ. -tift r/dmc,f j/J' tD/iCAf wb,f.5~, W~ tJi!lMl/C
TAG Sf-eEefs ,:,"'AC!td/ be IYMde: 5/lk,f befeRE. I7!CJ,e;;;:
TRI!Jlic sAIJuIJ.6-6" P./JdWcd" by bUlit/;;..y ./11cJrtF" !lc;/Hes.
l. M-:l1lV€,... wlJeR.E &1 lAe~ INf:s,e,s6c13 IS /(i!!'Aiy /l/i'f.t~!Ju/~
~ j I / . .L .. i.. J. J /;
t' Ii!:t" Crute/,fEr! /i'1I rA/S /I,{E./1 N-1vt::: Nt) I'fdo/C6 if) rl-'HJ'/
, +-' .I ,j 'j' 11 -9 .
Excq;! Ili$ ,ji'?{K.t;;Et:f. fYo s{de wn;;.xs 0"-:' fivEI'! L~t€.b.5.
- il'!! / / I. 1("'
-1. Vouid IMr~- td JE1E Jo,YJc kid 9'.;:-1' J:t("'&f/E"~ tJ~rd.ee
,
I ~. .,. .;P ~ -r- I. /~..! '!.. ~rI; .f ~ .Ii'
S~AtC/7!P'? .Is d&N<!!!. 14;:;;;;:' A looa L~,k. 4"{ rh~ ;:)MN!f1NN ~.<r#
~, J' , i' 'J. 1/ 'j , / J'~y t/. ,~A-- c
J~nd&!- 15 eJar 4iV& j?J,K X/aJ /fItC iH'Pt.r.. /'IfJ 1<?'f!lJFfT!f lor
./ . . ~.r
t " / LC
J'1-'1ol'/,el CP:;d p"11Me;k /1 l...!' C '
j . f ~ . ... .J..
j EfiClh'VJ' /lilt;')
'If - /.
' ~ -{..~ _,ft1_ _' 'A
h'() 1(1" ;v,,,- At,.-{
,."'''''
n~;l_
f/JE
13-90
~//.;/?~ //1
, .,.
"'---"'.,..;.................".,:.-..- _.;. -.-',--''-''",
'.. - . -
_,.'u . _._.._._~._'- ,,~+' ~.
. -". -'."-.,-....:..=..;.,...., .~"
. - . ."
-. ~-,-, ..-'. - .-' ~"~ -,' ...., ......'-~.~ ~-'.
'. ...,- 'L,,-,,' ::,-~-. _...... ~. .. ..' _:_:.~... ;'...': '- ... __"..'..:...
IU1T'M:;'~-~"20:5 '"':flUJj
! J.. ~ J
I -~'L';;t~i,\G--ij
.7U WhOm /-;- IlIat W/7CJ2!Y7)
03.c- /7-0(0
6)iYerlVlj +h~ fnj[;(!l, t[+ -
/ Ie 0 ;lJ Ue / mar 11ve
Cas~ # jJj(c. -oS--CG
--t - ard ,my -fdfr7l/'/ res/d-e ~+ 230
'. - sA r'rJ~y SF._ ~ C2st you 7'V jJl-6::Z5e
-- ----.- - (b()5/oer-__ Ci5/./79 .-. V; __. _3rd ~e.. asC{Cc~ss_
---{;;y --(;fiJre res/cjen-k -jO Yh-e qboue.
_ So.. r'J d-eue Iof/nef17, r)J~ C?J-e.. Cf)/J&-er:;d
- af:vUi ffie fro5fecfiye -frccfTrc y~r UJ/ f/
br:'. _ CO/f\lrL i0Y; c/~ SArr/u.; ST,. ~ _ luve-
yAree 57hCl1/ ehr/fret"_ C(fIC! no S!C/ei-Ucf:lf5
T10/ce .ct~avl tJurt~(f!ren I as we(! as /
Severa / _ ofh er ---ftcrnr //9 / f.,JZ!!: -jv c:-uvf
fr-O/Y1 fAt: :5~/Lez,1 buS' - 5-kp r:cf., +A-e.,
StLrn--f ,+t'rn-f' p-cof /-Q - ct(~ ir4.llell rc;3 Jz: _
ctJl ci WulYl .W oe K- ' MJr I f/LlJre f{--<<ff'r c -
p.. WI :5free-T wiC!, ROSe ,4 Jerrlb /~ ' .
rr5t . ,--to +N. CfJi)dyet\ InouY: (Jer1/Jo-rkJ
. ,().Je we/Wine /)~w.. r-fJ1lj::;eff~ . .
Cvf please / ?/-ea~-e,)CD/2j4erU$rI\.2 .
N :3id -/1ve ~ e 5kee <<5 ~. .
. mo. r'n q{CC,e..SS' -Jb 1-&-. /7etu deUC(CY0~
proJecf, :;r+ LJ-jrJuk! he more a:cceS9:f~k
~J6 -H~, ..5 . +3r.. J-h-e ..nekJ rcs)'OeflfS/
.. Corrl(WhH-rJ-h ~~1 i 151 / 5, f(.flc!.. ~CJSL
-L;'~.Pffln':7c /7;-,.,.,l I/-..,,;,!/I ai/O;fi~-Lo ~h-*,
. .
~. ~,...;,. .'-.. ,~,:~. .:......':,._...~'.... :..~,'" ,.:,.,'...~ ~",..." '.. _.~':_-:..> .;,'.~; ~.~..:. ..~-.. : .....'.;.."',~- _.;_~i- ,:......',:"",;.- .. _ ...., >,-_.,';"-_ _. . _ ',_ """" _. .". ",.. _,,' ~.. ~..:... " .:.'~ '. .'_.,'~ ". '-_., ~..:. :. -~".' "_'" .c._ .. . ,_' ,.._..:, ._ . -<-..::...": '.:.
. lJpn f-
. (tns/jer I Y
~y
. j'
r ~ ?
JUt ,prrV):f 4{/Z
f tJ I n; ) . erfL v tc':u--J ,
ji:e ft: '..
~. M / ~1l~.
j/l-R 1/ ItUJ~ JZUfn/ '
a+. 2-3u 5/;j',r-}-e'f ,s:'
{!.},.u/a 'V/5k elf /
9/9/D
13-92
..:"",~,..:::.,-,";.. ~~.,..",,: '-''... '-~:-;"'-'--' .,~., '.
_ "_-;;~:_ _'__..._ .,.~,..:'. ,,. :'~'_":"'~'...:-;,:'.. _,~,"'_...'_'- ,~.~'.;;., .~:~:'. .~""'.\ ~-"'~:',';;;: ~~"'i.(": "~,__~;_:;,,-_;::;,:,:,_;:_,,,,~,~,-,~, .. ':. .:.. ..~.'. _ .~. . ~.,-' '__ . .__ ,~ ... _..:, "_..
May 04,2006
250 Vista Del Mar Court
Chula Vista, Ca. 91910
/rR{1 II: i!: !: I W "rlITll
/U ill ~1~Y -3 moo 11.0/1
I I PLMJN:NG ! I
RE: Villas Del Mar Development,LLC
Case # PG2-05-03/PGS-04-06
Location: 160 North Del Mar Avenue
Attn; Jeff Steichen, Project Planner
City Of Chula Vista
Building 300, Ghula Vista Civic Center
276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, Ca. 91910
To Whom it iltlay Concern,
The proposed development located at 160 North Del Mar has
sparked some concern amongst neighbors in this somewhat tight-knit and
diverse community. Excess traffic, speeding and parking are the greatest
complaints from the surrounding impacted area, Therefore, I am writing
this letter in an effort to make the city aware of these concerns.
The number one complaint seems to be directed toward excess of
traffic in the immediate area. Our community is made up many senior
citizens that have been in this neighborhood since its development in the
'1940's. These senior citizens have since, raised their children, lost loved
ones in service to our country and have witnessed first hand the many
many changes that have taken place over the past 60 years within the city
limits; Since the early 1990's, the makeup of the neighborhood has
reverted back to'young families raising multiple children. In the past
fifteen years more than twenty (20) two storey homes have been errected
within this same city block adding more than eighty people to tnisonce,
quiet community. Inevitably, with more residents comes more visitors,
vehicles and traffic. Since the addition of 20 homes in the area, the c;ity of
Chula Vista has done little if anything to improve the streets, sidewalks or
address the traffic problems associated with the newly added residences
to this smail neighborhood. What are the plans that the City intencls to
implement with the addition of another 12 homes in an already congested
, neighborhood?
Secondly, speeding cars are a growing concern for us residents. It
is not uncommon for vehicles to be traveling on North Dei Mar avenue in
the 50 mile per hour range at any hour of the day or night. There are many
young children in the neighborhood playing in the streets and riding bikes
,scooter and roller skates. I, personally have witnessed on several
occassioils near misses between speeding vehicles and children on bikes.
13-93
_. ~.: ~..,:.,.,:.~,l-,-,,: ....,; ~:.
.......;.,:-....
'. . ....~:;... - -' - --,.' ""
. -,-. .~;:.~
~:~. --..-..... ..-,. '..' ,.~ - .....,.- .
Also, the comer of C street and North Del Mar Ave is a pick-up and drop-off
point for the RosebaI1K Elementary schooi which brings even more
vehicles to the neighborhood to retrieve or deliver their children to I from
the school bus. Vehicles from Second ave. routinely use North Dei Mar
avenue as an alternate ffiuie to access their point of destination. USl.laiiy,
people are racinq in their vehicles in an attempt to make it to the
Department of Motor Vehicles before it closes. What does the City intend
to do in regard to the speeding vehicles on this very small stretch of North
Del Mar Avenue? I have noticed in other areas of San Diego County that
problems are not addressed until AFTER someone is seriously hurt or
worse. I hope this is not the City Of Chi.lla Vista's standard praCtice.
Lastly, the lack of parking in the area is a growing problem. On Bay
View Way, vehicles park on both sides of the street leaving room for only
one vehicle to pass at a time. The problem will definitely impact the
surrounding area with the addition of the 12 proposed homes since
undoubtedly the new residents will use the street closes to their home.
Apartments in the immediate area already use North Del Mar, Del Mar Court
and Shirley street as an overflow parking lot. Does the proposed homes
have plans to provide extra parking for visitors and residents with more
than two (2) v.ehicles? How does the City plan to rectify this problem?
Please feel free to contact me in regards to this letter or any of the issues
mentioned abol/e. Also keep in mind that I am not speaking for just myself,
but for others in the neighborhood who have confided in me to share their
voices. I can provide names and addresses if it would be helpful to the
community.
Thank you for your time in this matter and hope to hear from you soon.
/ j/
C;:XtXnuftf C-U7L-
Mr. Lancelot C. Longaker
(619)Jl254-2191
13-94
13-95
:
ATTACHMENT 6
FIGURES
(U$8 r:> 'Y.&SM nnH:l 1'\- I
~.b'WII1iIlIJ1U.1IQNO. '! !I!
_....__~.A_IIlI_... ."1> j;i
:;,)f"")~"")f,t~V JOW 1"0 'OmA HI! i! i i ~
_oc II '; ..' I:. ]1 <~ ~:.
- .. oj" 'd---:-!'Y'l--1;:lT7--R:7~
~ J'!J!1.111 "f'>'_~.,., :: ~r~!i..2d\f'>i~W_):!lr"__
~ iliJ;ii~ i~ U\.. 11'-'-..: Ii i 'I " i:" I
:> 1',;"'1 ... ---....
~ ~,llt '~ I~ 'i.;~;,\1f;~~tj ~ ~
~ I; l kl !:lii l1i llilm ':P' . <~~~i !!
~ !' ~ ~1..tI~~ ''--. I
~ Ui! ! , l, ;, i;'tcr:j~~--\r
~ 1!!~~!I~I!I~&'tif~!~[ll
8 ~~r~;~-'~~.~;=-
< J),~ 1 Ir~-~
.t~i-~-~1; jP
'.;. f'..:....~. .....U......:. '. ",>'.,
I'... "'I
f~;"i< . 1 " ,;;jt.
. ...~:.~.~:~~t;)-
I IN. . "'j~
: j-ti ~ '.,: - ~~'>;~- <<0
.':" tk.~..->: ~ "<
:\1
,'I if\ <-.~,. :.
~L- ,-- t: ~ ~ ;Xc:
O"':::E
"'3:'"
C...VI
VI... VI i3
., ...
l~ OCVI
. Cl. VI
m 0......
,- ao:3:~_
Cl. c,_
";,,.,
1
1-5
, c,
4-l
:~
II f'01'
III.
I! I.
,
,
,
,
1 ' ,~
. i d I I I ig~9 f~
';' "" 'I 'll-lil';'
i~ ~~ ~ I ,J,~~~~u
q ~ ,,~ --.... " = ,
--"'-....----------
II
~.., -c. . _ - . '-
.;,.,..------
Il!
<\
-::-',..
>:') .
__ .~--.,5::;.7.:.~~.:
'i!,\\;:,\::'j[cr3'i
13-96
~
w
I
CD
....
"'-=-r'
0""" i '1""'"'- . ,.
'-... ;".'
----:,-;;;--'-~"-::~-~~"-'-\'_;_-:;;~-'-'-- ,---- ""''' /< < ,~+"~~.-';;~~~~I-;;vA;;;.~,~;,:~~~n_
,:=~~~C rfif;r~-,':;;?,~r~~I"~~'~'\'~.l:~c:J I, ]"~" I '~<I t'
j~~i. ' . '--l.l.." ,< -;;;; I"~ , D' . "." l:~'~, . ,...,,', ~ -[ 'r. ~
1 I', "'~-~ ~'.l' '~I ; > ' " - -~~','If!J' A",:-- . LOT 2 ,~_::OTJ ;,i :t
.J 7.0MlFT1 J - --..,_.J /1," : T'" ~' AU t ~'~o/./:: .~,..!. _- ~:J' , fta
I ",,, I~ " ...~ LOT 6 '''''' ,."",,'''. I" ~
I' fto! - I /1 _31., ~ '; ~V0:. ~,!!/!J~ ~\, ,X,'., , "...' ~ . .. 1- ._;'"i'l""',~~ . t "~.,,, i
.===tl" m:iIJ.~',,- ,'/'~ .)~~ \\, '\' _ ."'l. /., ,'" I ~",','1.0.Ff' '
i, ," I-"~~".. .:/:":'. .:>.. :,,!,~ \~ 140.. , (111",] 'e-D r
'1" '~,',-I~" ). ..... I"<'~.~~\I",,\ -"~ . ..~.~~~;_:':__L
.., ,~ao ~ ,'----,-~j .:.': Loii/,4 ',.'","::~ 1,,\ . 11 ...1,....... i
! ....71'7. 3,0 -- '-rIDm~.-:.... ~'.; 01':"'" :\.....,.~T.:",.~ 'J. ".: .
J LOT,O . - - ro:m__\:," ::)\(i ~'i'.':'~' ':'~"~~' '.':' <,',f~'1'"v'~'~..:";'" :"'~-7.'---'H T(''''i'' I. I
~"~" mnmm.', . , ..' ~~. ~t1I;m.., '.",..c.---- 'J' '!"""", ':1
.....m....[~~:::~ ....................... ~~~::..:::.?~'- ~;~~~::>~:.~~~._,~: -~~~-:~~=~~::I'..,I'. - J~.~.._._._. r
GUEST PARKING AVAILABILITY
ON SITE DESIGNA TED GUEST PARKING
DEL MAR AVE. FRONTAGE GUEST PARKING
OPPORTUNmES FOR ADDITIONAL PARKING
10 CARS
3
27
TOTAL.
40 CARS
Figure 2
.
.
ATTACHMENT 7
TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP
13-98
---r
l!illiiT
Iii i"~i1if 1
I i'~ i
, 'I
"
I,
:1
r-th
1......J!:a
..I
I
I
I
I
I~! Ii; ,lli Ii
__ CD_1
-<
.......
l'
...... ..... l'
11111111111 C;
I
!!lhmml ti
trJ
!mimml l'
~
>-
;:0
Wlii in HHHH HI pH Hii!/ir
i ulilqil'j 11'll ill I 1 Ii
: III: ! 1 I
i1811HI h!HII~o/~c,j:H\1I i [fil
("J
.....,
~ll !:;I ::11':1 i Iii ! !!! 0:1
-- l~1 ,d I ~ilPJli~~
M~' ill II j' JUI"l' >-rj
. I! II,'!!" ("J
II!" . I 1;101" ~
I,' i! ! I i!l"!~; C
'illl : ! I' 1i ll~ ~
'I i!;' Ii -<
'" I, I I ! (;j
;;:: ~ g ~
;J:>-
III lillO,,! mill n;I!1 !!ill !l!l!l!!;~ li!~ S
I' . II ", "I! 'i Ii I! -i .y
I !jll ,'1: 11111 '\;, , ~
i~ Ii ! I, 1 ,:1 ,. ! ..--
;: * ~ Ii "i~ ~
!II "Ill' ~! ;;1 ~-<
I !! ~ .. g ~~~ m
~ ~al:E ; Ii! ~
l! lU! I !;! l~l;'" ~
" II ~ ia. 'I"'" ..--
I 1 - 'I "'C
_L
T
I
I
. ~~
',.
-~
, ~
'-'"
ill:i '-'-
~i!
Ii
j!
il
~
o
-
,
~ !!!!!! l! Villas D.' Mar
,.., :; ~
~ !l .. P
. , ! 'I 180 NOffTH DEL MAR A VENUI!
~ ~ ~ CHlJl.A VISTA, CA 81910
'If
~ ~I'
"
.
~m71?1Pl1.~~O!'~!.~':'P!n~rf1JVt-IAA
13-99
~.o.IOXl'l'l POW"'r,UI2ll'. _.._ '1<1.__11.
~~~~~~I~~~~Ol.I~"""/<II_
ATTACHMENT 8
OWNERSHIP DISCLOSURE FORM
13-100
'. . _. '..'; ';'0:.., .1., ,.:~,,".;'. .'""L:< '.C ___. _~~C~.. C. + '.. ..': . ;
~,_ '_'0
.)f?
-1"-
0- _
P I ann I
n a
b
Building
Planning Qi'V*sion
Department
Development Processing
OTY OF
,HUlA VISTA
APPLICATION APPENDIX 8
)isdosure Statement
'ursuant to Council Policy 101-01, prior to any action upon matters that will require discretionary actiOn by the Council,
'fanning Commission and all other official boaies or the City, a statement or disclosure or certain ownership or iinancial
Iterests, payments, or campaign' contributions for a City of Chuia Vista election must be filed. The fOllowing inrormation
lust be disclosed: .
Ust the names or all persons having a financial interest in the property tIlat is the subject or t'1e application or the
contract, e.g., owner, applican~ contractor, subcontractor, material supplier.
\J1\1r.u Uti j..{t;<1 v""iiop.'-'<-V1+,LLL &,~I.,1.
':::::::'::""\1 c~("...~.:... 1)....:>" d~\=A~<;""1\-- LLC: c.,'e.o <::....0........... ~ ., I.A. <.....
I ,.; ....
'TY-\&l~(,v1Jid~'t.~\ 1:"iAs{\.l1C~(;~ . ::+"~cX~-(l~ <..,) J::.~ (,ubC~,j)6
.J :..J
Ir any person" identified pursuant to (1) above. is a corporation or partnership, list the names or all individuals with
a $2000 investment in the business (corporation/partnership) entity.
rz. ,..c...c...i ~ ro A ,: 0 ~\- c--.
Ru Dt"c..1 i~ ". c::::;l- <)-+-6-
<..c. c = v.{o A f .::;> S.\- 4- JL-t: Duc..-t 0
if any person" identified pursuant tb (1) above is a non-profit organization or trust, list tile names or any person
serving as director or the non-profrt organization or as trustee or beneiiciary or trustor or the trwsl ..
Please identify every person, including any agents, employees, consultants, or independentcontraciors you have
assigned to represent you before the City in this matter. .
.-;::- e.J eri c..,) :I sO bC7J)a
Jot-th... Cdf~t;"'-""
/ . ...., \ /
~Vt{!~ ,V-D...lv-"
Has <;iny person" associated with this contract had any financial dealings with an ofrlciaJ" or the City of Chula
Vista as it relates to this contract within the past 12 months. Yes No./
'0 . __
if Yes, briefly describe the nature or the financi'Cll interest the official" may have in this contracl
Have you made a contribution or mora than $250 within the past twelve (12) months to a current member or the
Chula Vista Cii'j Councii? No ./ Yes _ Ir yes, which Council member? .
13-1 01
..:,..:. -". . _..~ .:,....~...
. -' -~ _"':'.~.c. _':'..:.:~:!'",;..;. .. ~.~... .._',: ....:.-.... c.' .......:.:.... ,_,. ..;"::'; '~-,,'...::_ ,.::::....._;,
~. ".
.....-~ ~....,.......:.._...~.-
....' -~- ,.~.. .:..' . '';'"~-''''' -.. .': -'
..}!~
~,.-
~ ....
P I a [1 n i [1 g
&. B u ~ I _ct;;o.~ n g
Planning Division
Department
Development Processing
mY OF
..:HUIA VISfA
APPLICATION APPENDIX B
Disclosure Statement - Page 2
7. Have you provided-more than $340 (or an item of equivalent value) to an official~ of the City of Chula Vista in the
past twelve (12) months? (This includes being a source of income, money to retire a legal dem, gift, loan, etc.)
Yes No-L
If Yes, which official~ and what was the nature of item provided?
Date:
-{ /111
j- rJ
Cf
I
SigWdctor/APPlicant
~ G, ~ V{ \ )) Go,/" VNC ID(.l .<,c( ~ -I- UC.print or
type name of Contractor/Applicarlt '
*
Person is defined as: any individual, finm, co-partnership, joint venture, association, social club, fraternal
organization, corporation, estate, trust, receiver, syndicate, any other county, city, municipality, district, or other
political subdivision, -or any other group or combination acting as a unit.
~
Official inciUdes, but is - not limited to: Mayor, Council member, Planning Commissioner, Member of a board,
commission, or committee of tile City, empJoyee1 or staff members.
13-102
RESOLUTION NO. 2006-_(PCS-04-06)
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY
COUNCIL ADOPTING MITIGATED NEGATIVE
DECLARATION Ai~D MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM IS-04-022 AND APPROVING AND
ESTABLISHING CONDITIONS OF A TENTATNE MAP FOR
VILLAS DEL MAR, CHULA VISTA TRACT 04-06 - VILLAS
DEL MAR DEVELOPMENT, LLC.
I. RECITALS
A. Project; Application for Discretionary Approval
WHEREAS, on January 20, 2004, a duly verified application was filed with the City of
Chula Vista Planning and Building Department, requesting approval of a Tentative
Subdivision Map to subdivide 2.06 acres into 12 residential lots and one common lot
("Previous Project") by Villas Del Mar Development, LLC ("Developer"); and
WHEREAS, on May 10, 2006 the Planning Commission discussed the previous project and
expressed concerns 1) the number and size of lots and 2) the number of requested deviations
from development standards needed to develop the project; and
WHEREAS, following the Planning Commission meeting of May 10, 2006 the applicant has
revised the previous project and reduced the number of residential lots from 12 to 10 and
eliminated the common lot ("Currently Proposed Project"); and
B. Project Site
WHEREAS, the area ofland commonly known as Villas Del Mar Tentative Subdivision Map
(PCS-04-06), Chula Vista Tract No. 04-06, which is the subject matter of this Resolution,
and is diagrammatically represented in Exhibit "A", attached hereto and incorporated herein
by this reference, and for the purpose of general description herein consists of 2.06 acres
located on the west side ofN. Del Mar Avenue, north ofC Street, west ofN. Second Avenue
and south of Bay View Court, located within the Residential Low Medium Designation (3-6
dwelling units per acre) of the General Plan, and the Residential Single Family (R-I-P6) zone
(Single Family Residential Zone, Precise Plan Modifying District ), consisting of APN 563-
290-04 ("Project Site"); and
C. Environmental Determination
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the Previous Project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and conducted an Initial
Study, IS-04-22 in accordance with CEQA; and
WHEREAS, a Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-04-022) was prepared for the Previous
Project, which involved the residential development of the 2.06-acre parcel within the
western portion of the city; and
13-103
Resolution No. 2006-
WHEREAS, based on the results of the Initial Study, the Environmental Review Coordinator
determined that the Previous Proj ect could result in significant effects on the environment.
However, revisions to the Previous Project made by or agreed to by the Developer would
avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly no significant effects would
occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative
Declaration, IS-04-22; and
WHEREAS, on March 6, 2006, the Resource Conservation Commission determined that
Initial Study IS-04-22 for the Previous Project was adequate, and recommended adoption of
the Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-04-22; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the changes to the
currently proposed project, which were predicated upon previous Planning Commission and
Public Review, are minor with no additional environmental impacts or issues identified that
are not already covered under the Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-04-022 addressed in the
previous project. Therefore, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section l5073.5(c) recirculation
of the Mitigated Negative Declaration is not required; and
WHEREAS, on October 18,2006, the Planning Commission recommended adoption of
Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-04-22 to the City Council.
D. Pla.illl1ing Commission Record on Applicatiolls
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing on the Project on May
10, 2006, and after hearing staff's presentation and public testimony voted (5-0) to
recommend that the City Council deny the Project, in accordance with applicable findings;
and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing which rescinded
previous action to deny the project and reconsider a revised subdivision map with 2 lots less
and no other entitlements (Currently Proposed Project) on October 18, 2006, and after
hearing staffs presentation and public testimony voted 5-0-1 to 1) rescind previous action
taken on the original project on May 10, 2006 and 2) recommend that the City Council
approve the Currently Proposed Project with the added condition that the project be revised
to provide sidewalks on at least one side of private drive throughout the project, in
accordance with the findings and subject to the conditions listed below; and
E. City COlllncil Record on Applications
WHEREAS, the City Clerk set the time and place for the public hearing on the Project's
tentative subdivision map application; and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose,
was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation in the City, its mailing to
property owners within 500 feet of the exterior boundary of the Project, at least 10 days prior
to the hearing; and
WHEREAS, the duly called and noticed public hearing on the Project was held before the
City Council of the City of Chula Vista on November 14, 2006, in the Council Chambers,
276 Fourth Avenue, at 4:00 p.m. to receive the recommendations of the Planning
Commission, and to hear public testimony with regard to the same.
13-104
2
Resolution No. 2006-
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby find, determine
and resolve as follows:
n. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at its public
hearing on the Currently Proposed Project held on October 'II, 2006 and the minutes and
Resolution resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
III.CERTIFICATION OF COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA AND INDEPENDENT
JUDGMENT OF CITY COUNCIL
The City Council has exercised their independent review and judgment and concurs with the
Planning Commission, Resource Conservation Commission, and Environmental Review
Coordinator's determination that Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring
and Reporting Program (1S-04-22), in the form presented, has been prepared in accordance
with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA
Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista and hereby
adopt the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring Program IS-04-022.
IV. TENTATIVE SUBDIVISION MAP FINDINGS
A. Pursuant to Government Code Sections 65300 et. seq. (planning and Zoning Law), and
66473.5 (Subdivision Map Act), the City Council finds that the Project, as conditioned
herein, is in conformance with the elements of the City's General Plan based on the
following:
1. Land Use
The project will be developed at a density of 5 dwelling units per acre, which is
within the allowable residential density range of 3-6 dwelling units per acre. The
project design is consistent with the clustering provision of the Land Use Element,
because the clustered design will preserve significant areas of steep slope. Also, the
project proposes a detached single family planned development which will be
consistent with the character intended for a Residential Low-Medium area, and will
be more compatible with the development of the surrounding area, which is primarily
single family residential. The proposed proj ect provides housing opportunities in the
northwest portion of the City.
2. Circulation
The Developer will construct the on-site private street. Off-site public streets
required to serve the subdivision already exist. Required public street improvements
will be provided by the Developer through the attached Conditions of Approval. The
private street within the Project will be designed in accordance with the City design
standards and/or requirements and provide for vehicular and pedestrian connections.
This project area currently has 62 dwelling units. With this project, the total will
increase to 71 dwelling units served by the three existing streets: Bayview Way,
13-105
3
Resolution No. 2006-
Shirley Street and North Del Mar Avenue. The existing City design criteria states
that single family residential development shall not exceed 120 residential lots unless
two points of access are provided. The project does not create any traffic impacts on
the local roadway network because there are three existing points of access. The
three access points serve to better distribute the local traffic in this area. All city
standards will be maintained on all city streets.
3. Public Facilities
The Project has been conditioned to ensure that all necessary public facilities and
services will be available to serve the Project concurrent with the demand for those
services. There are no public service, facility, or phasing needs created by the Project
that warrants the preparation of a Public Facilities Financing Plan.
4. Housing
The Project is consistent with the density prescribed within the Residential - Low
Medium General Plan designation, and the Project provides additional opportunities
for single family residential home ownership.
5. Growth Management
The Project is in compliance with applicable Growth Management Element
requirements because there are no public service, facility, or phasing needs that
warrant the preparation of a Public Facilities Financing Plan.
6. ()Pen Space and Conservation
The project proposes clustering of the development of dwellings on the lower
elevations in order to minimize grading of steep slopes. The Environmental Review
Coordinator has prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-02-045, which
addressed the goals and policies of the California Environmental Quality Act, and
found the development of the site to be consistent with the goals and policies of the
Conservation Element.
7. Parks and Recreation
The Project has been conditioned to pay park acquisition and development fees prior
to recordation of the Final Map.
8. Safety
The City Engineer, Fire and Police Departments have reviewed the proposed
subdivision for conformance with City safety policies and have determined that the
proposal, as conditioned, meets those standards. A Fire Protection Plan has been
prepared and approved by the City Fire Marshal.
9. Noise
The Project has been reviewed for compliance with the Noise Element and will
comply with applicable noise measures at the time of issuance of the building permit.
The Project has been conditioned to require that all dwelling units be designed to
13-106
4
Resolution No. 2006-
preclude interior noise levels over 45 dBA and exterior noise exposure over 65 dBA
for all outside private yard areas.
10. Scenic Highwav
This Project Site is not located adjacent to or visil;lle from a designated sceruc
highway.
11. Seismic Safety
A preliminary geotechnical investigation has been prepared for the project, which
determined that a trace of the potentially active Nacion Fault is present on the
property. The report recommended that certain geotechnical mitigation measures be
required, which have been included in the Mitigated Negative Declaration as
conditions of approval. Also, another condition of approval has been included which
requires that a detailed soils report and geo-technical study be prepared in conjunction
with grading plans, and that the Developer follow the recommendations of the
geotechnical report and study prepared in conjunction with the grading plans.
B. Pursuant to Government Code Section 66473.1 of the Subdivision Map Act, the City
Council finds that the configuration, orientation, and topography of the site allows for the
optimum siting of lots for natural and passive heating and cooling opportunities and that
the development of the site will be subject to site plan and architectural review to insure
the maximum utilization of natural and passive heating and cooling opportunities.
C. Pursuant to Government Code 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.
D. The site is physically suited for residential development because the proposed site can
accomodate the density of residential development called for by the General Plan while at
the same time grading the site in such as way that is sensitive to the existing sloping
topography of the site.
E. The conditions herein imposed on the grant of permit or other entitlement herein
contained are approximately proportional both in nature and extend to the impact created
by the proposed development.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED that the City Council does hereby approve the Project subject to
the general and special conditions set forth below.
V. Govemment Code Section 66020 NOTICE
Pursuant to Government Code Section 66020(d)(I), NOTICE IS HEREBY GNEN that the 90
day period to protest the imposition of any impact fee, dedication, reservation, or other exaction
described in this resolution begins on the effective date of this resolution and any such protest
must be in a manner that complies with Section 66020(a) and failure to follow timely this
13-107
5
Resolution No. 2006-
procedure will bar any subsequent legal action to attack, set aside, void or annual imposition.
The right to protest the fees, dedications, reservations, or other exactions does not apply to
planning, zoning, grading, or other similar application processing fees or service fees in
connection with the project; and it does not apply to any fees, dedication, reservations, or other
exactions which have been given notice similar to this, nor does it revive challenges to any fees
for which the Statute of Limitations has previously expired.
VI. GENERAL CONDITIONS OF APPROY AL
A. Project Site is Improved with Project
The Developer, or hislher successors in interest and assigns, shall improve the Project Site
with the Project as described in the Tentative Subdivision Map, Chula Vista Tract No. 04-06,
Villas Del Mar.
Yn. SPECIAL CONDITIONS OF APPROY AL
A. The conditions herein imposed on the tentative map approval herein contained is
approximately proportional both to nature and extent of impact created by the proposed
development. Unless otherwise specified, all conditions and code requirements listed below
shall be fully completed by the Developer or successor-in-interest to the City's satisfaction
prior to approval of the Final Map, unless otherwise specified:
GENERAL/ PLANNING AND BUILDillG
1. All of the terms, covenants and conditions contained herein shall be binding upon and
inure to the benefit of the heirs, successors, assigns and representatives of the Developer
as to any or all of the property.
2. Developer and/or his/her successors in interest, shall comply, remain in compliance and
implement, the terms, conditions and provisions, as are applicable to the property which
is the subject matter of the Tentative Subdivision Map, as recommended for approval by
the Planning Commission on October 18, 2006. Prior to approval of the Final Map for
the project, the Developer shall enter into an agreement with the City, providing the City
with such security and implementation procedures as the City may require compliance
with the above regulatory documents. The Agreement shall also ensure that, after
approval of the Final Map, the Developer and hislher successors in interest will continue
to comply, remain in compliance, and implement such Plans.
3. Any and all agreements that the Developer is required to enter into hereunder shall be in a
form approved by the City Attorney.
4. Design and construct all street improvements in accordance with Chula Vista Design
Standards, Chula Vista Street standards, and the Chula Vista Subdivision Manual unless
otherwise approved by the City Engineer. Obtain City Engineer approval of detailed
improvement plans prepared by a registered civil engineer licensed in the State of
California detailing horizontal and vertical alignment of public improvements.
13-108
6
Resolution No. 2006-
Said improvements shall include, but not be limited to, asphalt concrete pavement, base,
concrete curb, gutter, sidewalk, pedestrian ramps, driveway, sewer and water utilities,
drainage facilities, street light, and fire hydrants.
5. Guarantee the construction of public street improvements deemed necessary to provide
service to the subject subdivision in accordance with City s~andards.
6. Detailed street tree Plans for the Project shall be submitted concurrent with grading plan
submittal and approved prior to approval of the Grading Permit by the Director of
Building and Planning or designee. Plans shall be prepared by a registered Landscape
Architect pursuant to the City's Landscape Manual, City Grading Ordinance and
Subdivision Manual.
7. All retaining wall footings that occur within planter areas shall be of a deep-footed design
to accommodate shrub plantings and tree planting where occur. In some cases this may
be a specially designed footing to satisfy this condition. The tree and shrub plantings
shall conform to the approved landscape concept plan.
8. Developer shall comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code,
the City Growth Management Ordinance, and the City's General Plan, as amended from
time to time. The Developer shall prepare any fmal maps and all plans in accordance
with the provisions of the Subdivision Map Act and the City of Chula Vista Subdivision
Ordinance, Grading Ordinance, the Landscape Manual, and Subdivision Manual.
9. If any of the terms, covenants or conditions contained herein shall 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 including issuance of
building permits, deny, or further condition the subsequent approvals that are derived
from the approvals herein granted, institute and prosecute litigation to compel their
compliance with said conditions or seek damages for their violation. The Developer shall
be notified in writing 10 days in advance prior to any of the above actions being taken by
the City and shall be given the opportunity to remedy any deficiencies identified by the
City.
10. Submit a "Recycling and Solid Waste Management Plan" which has been approved by
the City of Chula Vista Conservation Coordinator. The plan shall d=onstrate those steps
the Developer will take to comply with Municipal Code, including but not limited to
Sections 8.24 and 8.25, and meet the State mandate to reduce or divert at least 50 percent
of the waste generated by all residential, commercial and industrial developments. The
Developer shall contract with the City's franchise hauler throughout the construction and
occupancy phase of the proj ect. The plan shall incorporate trash enclosures which are
designed to comply with the City's N.PD.E.S. permit if applicable, to provide
compatibility with the architectural style of the development, and to enhance trash
enclosure doors where they are highly visible.
13-109
7
Resolution No. 2006-
11. Developer shall diligently implement, or cause the implementation of all mitigation
measures pertaining to the Project identified in Mitigated Negative Declaration, IS-04-22.
Mitigation measures not satisfied by a specific condition of this Resolution or by Project
design shall be implemented to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building.
Mitigation Measures shall be monitored via the Mitigation Monitoring Program approved
in conjunction with the above Mitigated Negative Dilc1aration. Modification of the
sequence of mitigation shall be at the discretion of the Director of Planning and Building
should changes in the circumstances warrant such revision.
12. Developer and/or its successors-in-interest shall, to the satisfaction of the Environmental
Review Coordinator, deposit funds sufficient to pay the costs associated with the hiring
of a Mitigation Monitor (biological specialist) to oversee the implementation of the
biological mitigation measures identified in the IS-04-22 Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
13. Present written verification to the City Engineer from Sweetwater Authority that the
subdivision will be provided adequate water service and long-term water storage facilities
and comply with other requirements delineated in comment letter dated March 28, 2006.
14. Install fire hydrants as determined by the City Fire Marshall. Said hydrant locations shall
be shown on the grading and/or improvement plans.
15. Provide evidence to the satisfaction of the City Engineer of ties to established survey
monuments for the proposed street centerlines prior to issuance of any grading or
construction permits, or approval of the final map.
16. Developer shall submit copy of agreement for review and approval by the Director of
Planning and Building for new homeowners to sign agreeing to restriction contained
within the CC&R's regarding the use and restrictions for individual driveways and
garages.
17. Include sidewalks along at least one side of private drive thoughout the project. Submit
revised drawings to Director of Planning and Building and City Engineer for review and
approval prior to issuance of grading permits.
GRADING/DRAINAGE/NPDES
18. Submit and obtain approval by the City Engineer of grading plans prepared by a
registered civil engineer. All grading and pad elevations shall be within 2 feet of the
grades and elevations shown on the approved tentative map or as otherwise approved by
the City Engineer and Planning Director. Grading and improvement plans shall be based
on NA VD88 vertical datum. All offsite grading and construction shall require signed and
notarized letters of permission from the affected property owners.
19. Design all lot grading so that lot lines are located at the top of slopes. This may require
the use ofretaining walls along some lot lines. All retaining walls shall be noted on the
13-110
8
Resolution No. 2006-
grading plans and include a detailed wall profile. The maximum height of all retaining
walls shall not exceed 6 feet per Section 19.58.150 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code.
Structural wall calculations are required if walls are not built per City Standards and/or if
fences are to be placed on top of retaining walls.
20. Submit and obtain approval by the City Engineer for <j1l erOSlOn and sedimentation
control plan as part of grading plans.
21. Show the location of cut/fill lines based on existing topography on grading plans.
22. Submit a list of proposed lots indicating whether the structure will be located on fill, cut,
or a transition between the two situations prior to approval of the final map.
23. Submit a detailed geotechnical report prepared, signed and stamped by both a registered
civil engineer and certified engineering geologist prior to approval of grading plans and
issuance of a grading permit.
24. Submit a drainage study prepared by a registered civil engineer to be reviewed and
approved by the City Engineer prior to issuance of a grading permit or other development
permit. Design of the drainage facilities shall consider existing onsite and offsite
drainage patterns. The drainage study shall calculate the pre-developed and the post-
developed flows and show how downstream properties and storm drain facilities are
impacted. The study shall include calculations sizing the proposed underground
detention system. The extent of the study shall be as approved by the City Engineer. The
energy dissipaters shall be designed to accommodate the runoff velocities from a 100-
year storm.
25. All onsite drainage facilities shall be private.
NPDESREOUffiEMENTS
26. Comply with all provisions of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination Syst=
(NPDES) and the Clean Water Program during and after all phases of the development
process, including but not limited to: rough grading, construction of street and
landscaping improvements, and construction of dwelling units.
27. The IS-foot wide sewer access road (Third Avenue Extension) shall be designed to
handle storm water runoff form the site and from the adjacent properties to the north.
Provide erosion control measures at the northerly end of said sewer access road and a
PCC cross gutter at the storm drain outlet structure from the development.
28. The proposed project is subject to NPDES General Construction Permit requirements.
Obtain permit coverage and develop a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP)
prior to the issuance of a Land Development (Grading) Permit. Said SWPPP shall
include construction and post-construction Best Management Practices (BMPs) for storm
water pollution prevention, as well as funding mechanisms for post-construction BMPs.
1 3-111
9
Resolution No. 2006-
29. The applicant is required to complete the applicable forms upon submittal of the project
grading plans (see City of Chula Vista's Development and Redevelopment Storm Water
Management Requirements Manual) and comply with the Manual's requirements.
30. According to the NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. 2001-01, this project is
considered a Priority Development Project and, hence, subject to the requirements of the
Standard Urban Storm Water Mitigation Plans (SUS:Ml's) and Numeric Sizing Criteria.
31. The developer shall enter into an agreement to fully implement NPDES best management
practices ("B:Ml's") to reduce the amount of pollutants entering the city's storm water
conveyance system, including but not limited to:
a. Providing storm drain system stenciling and signage; more specifically:
i. Provide and maintain stenciling or labeling near all storm drain inlets and
catch basins.
11. Post and maintain City-approved signs with language and/or graphical
icons that prohibit illegal dumping at public access points along channels
and creeks.
b. Installing and using efficient irrigation systems and landscape design; more
specifically:
1. Employ rain shutoff devices to prevent irrigation after precipitation.
11. Adjust irrigation systems to each landscape area's specific water
requirements
Ill. Using flow reducers or shutoff valves triggered by a pressure drop to
control water loss in the event of broken sprinkler heads or lines.
IV. Employing other comparable, equally effective, methods to reduce
irrigation water runoff.
c. Employing integrated pest management principles. More specifically, eliminate
and/or reduce the need for pesticide use by implementing Integrated Pest
Management (lPM), including: (I) planting pest-resistant or well-adapted plant
varieties such as native plants; (2) discouraging pests in the landscaping design;
(3) distributing lPM educational materials to homeowners/residents. Minimally,
educational materials must address the following topics: keeping pests out of
buildings and landscaping using barriers, screens, and caulking; physical pest
elimination techniques, such as, weeding, squashing, trapping, washing, or
pruning out pests; relying on natural enemies to eat pests; and, proper use of
pesticides as a last line of defense.
d. Educate the Public. More specifically, the Homeowners Association, through
Property Management, etc., shall inform residents about the City's non-storm
water and pollutant discharge prohibitions. This goal can be achieved by
distributing informative brochures (some available free from the City of Chula
Vista) to new home buyers and dedicating sections of newsletters to storm water
quality issues, as applicable.
13-112
10
Resolution No. 2006-
SEWER I WATER
32. All proposed public sewer lines shall be located within the 24-foot public sewer and
access easement. Developer shall be responsible for obtafning any needed offsite sewer
easements.
33. Design and construct all the sewer mains and manholes within Villas Del Mar Court and
the Third Avenue Extension to public standards in accordance with Chula Vista Design
Standards and Chula Vista Subdivision Manual.
34. A Portland Cement Concrete (PCC) paved access is required through the development.
An asphalt concrete (AC) paved access is required through the Third Avenue Extension
to accommodate City sewer maintenance trucks and fire trucks. All paved access shall be
designed based upon a Traffic Index (TI) of 5.0.
35. If the flow line elevation at the end of the proposed gutter at the northerly end of the
sewer access road is higher than the rim elevation of the existing sewer manhole just to
the north of the property limits, the existing sewer manhole shall be upgraded to a water
tight sewer manhole.
36. An additional sewer manhole shall be required either upstream or downstream ofMH 5,
to prevent a ninety (90) degree bend in the sewer main.
37. The paved sewer access on Third Avenue shall extend to the existing northerly sewer
manhole shown on the Tentative Map.
38. Removable bollards or an approved access gate shall be required at the entrance to the
sewer access road, just south of Lot 10.
STREETS
39. Provide a laO-watt street light on North Del Mar Avenue as approved by the City Traffic
Engineer.
40. Design and construct public street improvements fronting the properties located at 160
and 152 North Del Mar Avenue to connect to the existing improvements south of the
project and provide a transition north of the project. Installation of street improv=ents
shall include, but not be limited to curb, gutter, sidewalk, alley type apron, cross gutter,
approved pedestrian ramps, and street light on per City Standards. Street improvements
on North Del Mar require a centerline to curb width of 18 feet.
41. Driveway dimensions shall include the width of the driveway flares. Driveways shall
comply with the City of Chula Vista driveway standards per CVCS IA.
13-113
11
Resolution No. 2006-
42. Streets within the development shall be private.
43. The existing power pole shall be relocated as shown on the Tentative Map. All utilities
services for the subdivision shall be underground.
EASEMENTS
44. Grant to the City a 24-foot public sewer and access easement over the public sewer lines
on the Final Subdivision Map.
45. A private 10-foot storm drain easement on Lot 8 shall be granted on the Final
Subdivision Map to APN 563-290-05-00,152 North Del Mar Avenue.
46. Grant to the City on the Final Subdivision Map a 5.5 foot wide street tree planting and
maintenance easement along North Del Mar Avenue as shown on the Tentative Map.
47. The private 5-foot landscape (Lots 1-10) and 25-foot general utility and drainage
easement (Lot A) within the subdivision boundary shall be conveyed to subsequent
purchasers of Lots 1-10 pursuant to the requirements of Section 18.20.150 of the
Municipal Code of the City of Chula Vista.
AGREEMENTS
48. Agree to defend, indemnify and hold harmless 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 of Chula Vista,
including approval by its Planning Commission, City Councilor any approval by its
agents, officers, or employees with regard to this subdivision pursuant to Section
66499.37 ofthe 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.
49. Agree to hold the City harmless from any liability for erosion, siltation or increase flow
of drainage resulting from this proj ect.
50. Agree to ensure that all franchised cable television companies ("Cable Company") are
permitted 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 terms 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.
51. Agree to comply with all applicable sections of the Chula Vista Municipal Code and
prepare the Final Parcel Map and all plans in accordance with the provisions of the
Subdivision Map Act, Subdivision Ordinance and the Subdivision Manual of the City of
Chula Vista.
13-114
12
Resolution No. 2006-
52. Agree to include provisions in the Declaration of Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions
(CC&R's) assuring maintenance of all common landscaping, open space, streets,
driveways, sewer and drainage systems, which are private. The City of Chula Vista shall
be named as a party to said Declaration authorizing the City to enforce the terms and
conditions of the Declaration in the same manner as any.owner within the subdivision.
All the individual homeowners of the project shall own all private driveways jointly and
inseparably. Include provision that no private facilities shall be requested to become
public unless 100% of all homeowners have agreed in the form of a written petition.
53. Prior to the approval a Final Map, a Declaration or Supplementary Declaration of
Covenants, Conditions, and Restrictions (CC&R's) shall be submitted and subject to the
approval of the City Engineer and City Attorney. The CC&R's shall include the
following obligations of the Homeowners Association (HOA):
1. A requirement that the HOA shall maintain comprehensive general liability
insurance against liability incident to ownership or use of the following areas:
-All open space lots that shall remain private,
-Other Master Association property.
11. Before any revisions to provisions of the CC&R's that may particularly affect the
City can become effective, said revisions shall be approved by the City. The
HOA shall not seek approval from the City of said revisions without the prior
consent of 100 percent of the holders of first mortgages or property owners within
the HOA.
111. The HOA shall defend, indemnify and hold the City harmless from any claims,
demands, causes of action liability or loss related to or arising from the
maintenance activities of the HOA.
IV. The HOA shall not seek to be released by the City from the maintenance
obligations described herein without the prior consent of the City and 100 percent
of the holders of fIrst mortgages or property owners within the HOA.
v. The HOA is required to procure and maintain a policy of comprehensive general
liability insurance written on a per occurrence basis in an amount not less than
one million dollars combined single limit. The policy shall be acceptable to the
City and name the City as additionally insured to the satisfaction of the City
Attorney.
v!. The CC&R's shall include provisions assuring maintenance of all open space lots,
streets, driveways, drainage and sewage systems which are private.
V11. The CC&R's shall include provisions assuring HOA membership in an advance
notice such as the USA Dig Alert Service in perpetuity.
viii. The CC&R's shall include provisions that provide the City has the right but not
the obligation to enforce the CC&R provisions the same as any owner in the
project.
13-115
13
Resolution No. 2006-
lX. The CC&R provisions setting forth restrictions in these Tentative map conditions
may not be revised at any time without prior written permission of the City.
x. The HOA shall not dedicate or convey for public streets, land used for private
streets without approval of 100% of all the HOA members or holder of first
mortgages within the HOA.
Xl. The HOA shall maintain all water quality facilities III conformance with the
NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. 2001-01
XU. The CC&R's shall include provisions assuring compliance with the solid waste
and recycling program requirements, to the satisfaction of the City Conservation
Coordinator.
Xlll. The HOA shall maintain all landscaping installed in common areas as defined by
the CC&R's.
XIV. CC&R's shall include restriction related to garages and parking as follows:
· Garages must be free and clear to allow for parking of 2 vehicles at all
times.
. No on-street parking along private drive (other than designated guest
parking spaces).
· Driveways shall be available for additional guest parking
54. Developer agrees to submit Homeowners Association budget for review and approval by
the City Engineer for the maintenance of private streets, water quality improvements,
storm drains, sewage systems, electrical system, plumbing and roof. More specifically,
said budget shall include the following provisions and maintenance activities:
a. Streets must be sealed every 7 years and overlaid every 20 years
b. Sewers must be cleaned once a year with the contingency for emergencies
c. Red curbs/striping must be painted once every three years.
d. The Homeowners Association shall be responsible for service utilities including
water and sewer, and the billing and payment of these utility costs.
e. Storm Water quality facilities inspected prior to and after every rain event and
cleaned as necessary (twice a year minimum); media inserts replaced as
recommended by the manufacturer; with a contingency for emergencies. The
budget shall also include a monitoring program including sampling and
preparation of an annual report, when required by the City.
13-116
14
Resolution No. 2006-
MISCELLANEOUS
55. Tie the boundary of the subdivision to the California System-Zone VI (NAD '83).
56. Submit copies of the final map, grading plan, and improvement plan in a digital format
such as (DXF) graphic file prior to approval of the 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 3 'is HD floppy disk prior to the approval of the Final Map.
57. Submit a conformed copy of a recorded tax certificate covering the property prior to
approval of the Final Map.
58. 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.
59. Developer shall install and make operable the fire hydrants, emergency vehicular access
and street signs prior to delivery of combustible building materials, to the satisfaction of
the City Fire Marshal. Said hydrant locations shall be shown on the improvement plans.
60. Provide precise underground fire service plans prior to locating Fire Department
connections and post indicator valves, with placements to be approved by CVFD. All
Fire Department connections must not be any closer than three feet to the face of curb.
61. Provide a water flow analysis for the underground fire service utility. Show all
calculations on a point-to-point system. Provide proof that the most remote fire hydrant
can produce a minimum flow of 1,500 gpm for 2 hours at 20 psi.
62. All underground fire service installation is to be inspected by CVFD. Call 72 hours in
advance to schedule an appointment.
63. Provide contractors material and test certificate for underground pipe.
64. Design all dwelling units to preclude interior noise levels over 45dBA and exterior noise
exposure over 65 dBA for all outside private yard areas.
64. Submit a phasing plan showing sequence of construction and occupancy of the project,
including installation of landscaping, recreation amenities, utilities, and fire protection
improvements.
65. Developer agrees to pay the all applicable fees in accordance with the City Code and
Council Policy. including applicable Transportation Development Impact Fees (TDIF)
and Public Facilities Development Impae.t Fees ("PFDIF").
13-117
15
Resolution No. 2006-
VITI. EXECUTION AND RECORDATION OF RESOLUTION OF APPROVAL
The property owner and the Developer shall execute this document by signing the lines
provided below, said execution indicating that the property owner and Developer have each
read, understood, and agreed to the conditions contained herein. Upon execution, this
document shall be recorded with the County Recorder of the County of San Diego, at the sole
expense of the property owner and the Developer, and 'a signed, stamped copy of this
recorded document shall be returned to the Planning and Building Department. Failure to
return a signed copy and a stamped copy of this recorded document within thirty days of
recordation to the City Clerk shall indicate the property owner and Developer's desire that
the Project, and the corresponding application for building permits and/or a business license,
be held in abeyance without approval. Said document will also be on file in the City Clerk's
Office and known as Document No.
Signature of Developer or Property Owner
Signature of Developer
IX. 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. The Developer shall be notified ten (10)
days in advance prior to any of the above actions being taken by the City and shall be given
the opportunity to remedy any deficiencies identified by the City within a reasonable and
diligent time frame.
X. 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, provision, 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:
Jim Sandoval
Director of Planning & Building
J:\Planning\casefileslfy05-06\PCS-03-0 I \pcs03-01.Draft _ CC _ Reso.(CC) doc
13-118
16
EXHIBIT "A"
T ~ 11. -'. Jlrl..,. ~