Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAbout1994/09/06 Item 22 COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT Item .;1.2 Meeting Date 9/6/94 SUBMITTED BY: Public Hearing on the Acquisition of Certain Right-of-Way for Otay Valley Road. Resolution /7 t, ';9 Determining and Declaring the Public Necessity to Acquire Certain Right-of-Way for Otay Valley Road and Authorizing the Commencement of Condemnation Proceedings by outside Counsel to Acquire :a~d 1ht-of-Way Director of Public wzrk ~ City Attorney City Manage~ ~ ..--?- (4/5ths Vote: Yes..K..No_) ITEM TITLE: REVIEWED BY: In order to construct the Otay Valley Road Widening project, the City needs to obtain a portion of the property owned by SNMB, L.P. (a Delaware Limited Partnership). This property is located at the easterly end of the project and consists of about 1.0907 acres (out of 159.18 acre parcel owned by this partnership). Our right-of-way acquisition consultants, Ryals & Associates, have exhausted their efforts to obtain this dedication on a friendly basis. Due to time constraints, we cannot wait any longer and must begin eminent domain proceedings. RECOMMENDATION: The Council: I) hold the public hearing; 2) approve the resolution determining and declaring the public necessity to acquire certain right-of-way for Otay Valley Road, 3) use its power of eminent domain to condemn approximately 1.09 acres of property belonging to SNMB, L.P., a Delaware Limited Partnership for street, slope right, and temporary construction easement purposes; and 4) authorizing the commencement of condemnation proceedings by outside Counsel to acquire said right-of-way. BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: Not applicable. DISCUSSION: The City Council on June 7, 1994 by Resolution 17518 accepted bids and awarded contract for the improvement of Assessment District 90-2 (Otay Valley Road, Phase II & III from 1,200 feet east of Nirvana Avenue to the northerly limits of Otay Valley Road Subdivision in the City of Chula Vista, CA [ST-123]). Included in this work is the roadway work required to be constructed at the easterly end of the project where Otay Valley Road turns southerly towards Otay Rio Subdivision. A portion of the road is on property currently owned by SNMB, L.P. a Delaware Limited Partnership. Shown on Exhibit A is the property to be acquired, which includes right-of-way, slope rights, and temporary construction easement. SNMB Limited Partnership was notified in writing by certified mail, return receipt requested on August 4, 1994 of tonight's public hearing. Our right-of-way acquisition agent, Ryals & Associates, has been trying for some time to contact the property owner to discuss the need for the right-of-way and reach an agreement on the purchase thereof. To this date, our .<.). . / Page 2, Item d.)... Meeting Date 9/6/94 consultant has been unsuccessful in meeting with the property owner. Attached is a letter from Ryals & Associates outlining what steps they have taken to make contact and obtain the right- of-way. He recommended that we proceed with the necessary actions to enable the City to acquire the property through eminent domain proceedings. Exhibit B is a copy of the Notice of Public Hearing sent to the property owner. The California Code of Civil Procedures, Section 1240.030 provides that the power of eminent domain may be exercised to acquire property for a proposed project if the following conditions are established: A) The public interest and necessity require the project; B) The project is planned or located in a manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and least private injury; and C) The property sought to be acquired is necessary for the project. The property depicted on Exhibit A is necessary for the project. It provides for a safe intersection for trucks entering and exiting the Nelson Sloan Rock Quarry onto Otay Valley Road going either westbound or southbound. The roadway design provides for three lanes going across Otay River to the south such as to provide an acceleration lane for the trucks. In addition, the design provides for a safe exiting from Otay Valley Road going northbound into the Nelson Sloan property for trucks entering the Quarry site. The design of this project is such that it will provide the most public good and the least private injury. The property is necessary for construction of the Otay Valley Road project. The proposed taking of 1.0907 acres is a small portion of the total acreage owned by SNMB, L.P., a Delaware Limited Partnership. Balancing the need for improvements for health and safety purposes verses the effect on the SNMB, L.P., a Delaware Limited Partnership), it is reasonable to approve the eminent domain actions. Exhibit C is the legal description for the property to be acquired. Our right-of-way acquisition consultant, Rick Ryals, is available at the Council meeting tonight, to answer any questions concerning acquisition of this property. The Resolution includes authorization for legal counsel representation by Daley & Heft with concurrence of the City Attorney. Daley and Heft are also handling the legal work for other condemnations for that project. FISCAL IMPACT: Cost of acquisition of the right-of-way is approximately $16,400 for the actual property values plus an additional $2,500 to $15,000 for condemnation costs depending on whether or not the property owner fights the take. These costs were included in the Council resolution approving award of the contract for construction of Otay Valley Road Phases II & III. Attachments: Exhibits A, B, and C Ryals & Associates LetterB0fSCANNED SLH:sb File No: AO-08?, AO-088 m:\horne\engmeer\agenda\ovrrow.slh 081194 .2)'':;' ~~ ~ SCALE: 1".80' - - -----------.... - - , ---- _ =...... ~~ - LL::.'=O.-..... _!I"_ _ _ _ -~~----~~ - - -l! ., II .--:::-- . ". . . =!. - ~c-~.+-'----1!::'-.=-~=~ . -- - - , - ~ ,l.2~ J EXHIBIT IIA III ....0. . AO-DBB ....0. . AO-DBl CESAR V .MAGBUHA T ATE, SHEET 08-12-94 1 Of' 2 OT A Y V ALLEY ROAD 'WIDENING PHASES I, II, & III INTERIM CONSTRUCTION MUNA CUTHBERT APPR V D BY' SHALE L. HANSON . , , .1 ;1 tlLEAN/K1f ,/fAN, ~; II EXHIBIT -A2- Hf)$ \J .0. . AD-DBB \J.D. . AD-DB7 PREPARED BY' BE"T MUNA CUTH ~ V Y, SHALE L HANSON A\JN BY CESAR V.MAGBUHA T A E H 08-12-94 2 OF 2 TITLE OT A Y V ALLEY ROAD 'WIDENING PHASE L II 8. III INTERIM CONSTRUCTION ~~ -If- /:2 2 - / ~ ~v?- =~~ ~~-~ ""'"~--~ ~--- EXHIBIT B em OF CHUlA VISTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DIVISION August 4, 1994 CER 111' llill MAIL RETURN RECEIPI' REQUESTED File IAO-087/088 SNMB L TD Partnership 32 W. Lookerman Sq. Suite L 100 Dover, DE 19901 Attn: Mr. Patrick Patek SUBJECT: NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING; OTAY VALLEY ROAD WIDENING PROJECT; SAN DIEGO COUNTY A.P. NO. 644-060-17 Dear Mr. Patek: As you are aware, the City of Chula Vista has presented to you with an offer to acquire an interest in a portion of the above referenced property owned by you and necessary for the construction of the Otay Valley Road Widening Project. Due to the time constraints imposed by the construction schedule for this project we must proceed with the acquisition of these property rights prior to reaching an agreement. Therefore, you are hereby served notice that the City Council of the City of Chula Vista will hold a Public Hearing on August 23, 1994 at 6:00 p.m. or as soon thereafter as possible, in the Chula Vista City Council Chambers, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, California, with the intention ofadopting a Resolution of Necessity to acquire these property rights through eminent domain. The California Code of Civil Procedure, Section 1240.030 provides that the power of eminent domain may be exercised to acquire property for a proposed project if the following conditions are established. A. The public interest and necessity require the project. B. The project is planned or located in the manner that will be the most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury. C. The property sought to be acquired is necessary for the project. During the Public Hearing on August 23, 1994, the City Council will be asked to determine if the above conditions have been met concerning your property. If these conditions have been met, the adopted resolution will authorize the City of Chula Vista to acquire the necessary property by eminent domain. eJ.2~> 276 FOURTH AVE/CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/(619) 691-5021 Otay Valley Road Widening Notice of Public Hearing A.P. No. 644-060-17 August 4, 1994 Page 2 A new legal Description of the required easement is attached to this Notice, designated as Exhibit" A" and is more particularly shown on a plat designated as Exhibit "B". The amount of compensation to be paid is not a part of this proceeding and will not be considered by the City Council in determining whether a Resolution if Necessity should be adopted. You are entitled to appear and be heard regarding the adoption of the Resolution of Necessity if you file a written request to do so within fifteen (15) days of the date of the mailing of this Notice. Objections to the intended actions are limited as set forth below: 1. Your written request must be filed with: City Clerk City of Chula Vista 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 2. The written request must actually be on file within the above referenced fifteen (15) day period. Failure to file a written request results in a waiver of your right to appear and be heard. 3. The written request should include a statement of the condition(s) which you feel are pertinent to your property. The three Conditions which may affect your property are set forth above (designated as A, B, and C). By designating which condition(s) form the basis of your concerns and why, you will enable the City Council to have a full and expeditious review of your opinion of the project's affect on your property. Should you have any questions regarding this Notice, your rights as set forth herein, or the project, please do not hesitate to contact our Contract Acquisition Agent Mr. Richard Ryals at (619) 439-4011. Sincerely, CITY OF CHULA VISTA .... ~~'rt'~'_.~~ Cliff Swanson Deputy Director, Public Works/City Engineer ';':2~t CITY OF CHULA VISTA EXHIBIT C .' LEGAL DESCRIPTION VESTING: SNMB, LP., A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP TIlAT PORTION OF LOT 43 IN OTAY RANCHO, IN 1HE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACCORDING TO MAP TIlEREOF NO. 862, Fll.ED IN lHE OFFICE OF lHE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, FEBRUARY 7, 1900, DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS: PARCEL 1 (IUGHT-OF.WAY) BEGINNING AT A POINT ON 1HE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY DISTANT SOUlli 18037'10" EAST 499.12 FEET ALONG SAID RANCHO OTA Y BOUNDARY FROM TIlE SOUlliEAST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF MAP NO 8147; TIlENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUlliERL Y AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 157.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 34056'19" WEST, lHENCE ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 49041'39" AN ARC LENGTH OF 136.17 FEET; TIlENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUlli 75014'40" EAST 179.58 FEET; lHENCE SOUlli 14045'20" WEST 62.ooFEETj THENCE NORTH 75014'40" WEST 45.61 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 95.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUlliERL Y; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG TIlE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 107028'43" A LENGTH OF 178.21 FEET TO A POINT ON TIlE NORTIlERL Y LINE OF SAID LOT 44 OF OTA Y RANCH; THENCE DEPARTING THE ARC OF SAID CURVE NON-RADIALLY SOUlli 71058'08" WEST 9.63 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 44 TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF TIlAT EASEMENT FOR COUNTY HIGHWAY RECORDED APRll.. 9, 1979 AS FlLEJP AGE NO. 79-144675; THENCE NORTH 18037'10" WEST 78.39 FEET ALONG lHE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID EASEMENT FOR COUNTY HIGHWAY; lHENCE SOUlli 71022'50. WEST 55.00 FEET ALONG THE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID EASEMENT FOR COUNTY HIGHWAY TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION wrrn SAID RANCHO BOUNDARY; THENCE ALONG SAID RANCHO BOUNDARY NORTH 1803T10. WEST 119.86 FEET TO TIlE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.6794 ACRES (29596.36 SQ.FT.) WI'C I':'JIOME'SlQINEEIll19!l6.M .;..;..? Pap 1 PARCEL 2 (SLOPE EASEMENT) BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESfERLY RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY DISTANT SOUTH 18037'10" EAST 499.12 FEET ALONG SAID RANCHO OTA Y BOUNDARY FROM TIlE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF MAP NO 8147; THENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTA Y BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 157.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORlH 34056'19" WEST; TIlENCE ALONG SAID CURVE, lHROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 49041'39" AN ARC LENGlH OF 136.17 FEET; TIlENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 75014'40" EAST 179.58 FEET; TIlENCE NORlH 14045'20" EAST 10.00 FEET; TIlENCE NORlH 75014'40" WEST 179.58 FEET TO TIlE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 167.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; TIlENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE lHROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48041'33" A LENGlH OF 141.92 FEET; TIlENCE DEPARTING SAID ARC SOUTH 18037'10" EAST 10.39 FEET TO TIlE POINT OF BEGINNING SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.0731 ACRES (3186.26 SQ. FT.) PARCEL 3 (SLOPE EASEMENT) BEGINNING AT A POINT ON TIlE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY DISTANT SOUTH 18037'10" EAST 499.12 FEET ALONG SAID RANCHO OTA Y BOUNDARY FROM TIlE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF MAP NO 8147; TIlENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTA Y BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 157.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORlH 34056'19" WEST; TIlENCE ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 49041'39" AN ARC LENGlH OF 136.17 FEET; TIlENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 75014'40" EAST 179.58 FEET; TIlENCE SOUTH 14045'20" WEST 62.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; TIlENCE NORlH 75014'40" WEST 45.61 FEET TO TIlE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 95.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; TIlENCE WESTERLY LONG TIlE ARC OF SAID CURVE lHROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 107028'43" A LENGlH OF 178.21 FEET; lHENCE DEPARTING TIlE ARC OF SAID CURVE NORlH 71 058'08" EAST 10.41 TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHEASTERLY AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 85.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS SOUTH 89007'54" WEST; TIlENCE EASTERLY ALONG TIlE CIRCLE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 105037'26" A LENGlH OF 156.70 FEET; TIlENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 75014'40" EAST 45.61 FEET; TIlENCE NORlH 14045'20" EAST 10.00 FEET TO TIlE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.0489 (2130.78 SQ. FT.) WPC F:\Il0ME\ENG1NEI!R\1996.94 .l~ -y Page 2 PARCEL 4 (TEMPORARY CONSTRUCTION EASEMENT) BEGINNING AT A POINT ON TIlE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY DISTANT sourn 18037'10" EAST 468.07 FEET ALONG SAID RANCHO OTA Y BOUNDARY FROM TIlE SOUfHEAST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF MAP NO. 8147; TIlENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON.TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUfHERL Y AND HAVING A RADWS OF 187.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTII 32015'54" WEST; TIIENCE ALONG SAID CURVE, TIIROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 47001'14" AN ARC LENGTII OF 153.46 FEET; TIlENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE sourn 75014'40" EAST 199.58 FEET; TIlENCE sourn 14045'20" WEST 122.00 FEET; TIlENCE NORTII 75014'40" WEST 65.61 FEET TO TIlE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 65.00 FOOT RADWS CURVE CONCAVE SOUfHERLY; TIlENCE WESTERLY ALONG TIlE ARC OF SAID CURVE TIIROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 100005'17" A LENGTII OF 113.55 FEET; TIlENCE DEPARTING TIlE ARC OF SAID CURVE sourn 71 058'08" WEST 21.25 FEET TO TIlE BEGINNING OF ANON-TANGENT 85.00 FOOTRADWS CURVE CONCAVE SOUfHERL Y A RADIAL TO SAID CURVE BEARS sourn 89007'54" WEST; TIlENCE EASTERLY ALONG TIlE ARC OF SAID CURVE TIIROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 105037'26" A LENGTII OF 156.70 FEET; TIlENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE sourn 75014'40" EAST 45.61 FEET; TIlENCE NORTII W45'20" EAST 82.00 FEET, TIlENCE NORTII 75014'40" WEST 179.58 FEET TO TIlE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 167.00 FOOT RADWS CURVE CONCAVE SOUfHERL Y; TIlENCE WESTERLY ALONG TIlE ARC OF SAID CURVE TIIROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48041'33" A LENGTII OF 141.92 FEET; TIlENCEDEPARTlNG SAID ARC NORTII 18037'10" WEST 20.66 FEET TO TIlE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.2893 ACRES (12,600.59 SQ. FT.) Attached hereto and made a part of this legal description is a plat labeled Exhibit "B". The legal description and plat were prepared by me or under my direction. ~ I. '}/#. (.,-.. Shale L Hanson Civil Engineer, City of Chula Vista RC.E.18631 ~h./f~ wpc P,IHOME\ENOINEER\l996.94 .2~ .,1 Page 3 RYALS & ASSOCIATES REAL PROPERTY CONSULTANTS (619] 439-4011 August 11, ] 994 CITY OF CHULA VISTA 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 A TIN: Mr. Cliff Swanson Deputy Director, Public Works/City Engineer SUBJECT: OTAY VALLEY ROAD WIDENING PROJECT SNMB LTD. ACQUISITION; A.P. NO. 644-060-17 Dear Mr. Swanson: Per your request, the following is an account of our attempts to contact the owners of the subject parcel. As you are aware a portion of this parcel, together with several appurtenant easements must be acquired to complete the subject project. On June 1O, 1994 we made an offer on behalf of the City of Chula Vista to purchase the necessary property rights from the SNMB Limited Partnership. This offer was delivered to their Dover, Delaware office on June 13, 1994. Subsequent to making this offer, numerous attempts were made to contact representatives of this partnership. There is no listed phone number for this partnership, either in the State of Delaware or in San Diego County. After obtaining a Copy of the Deed by which SNMB acquired this property, it was learned that SNMB was an acronym for the Stephen and Mary Birch Foundation. As this foundation has interest in several local institutions, attempts were made to contact a representative through them. Ms. Gayle Biacco of Sharp Hospital was contacted and despite her efforts no contacts could be made. We then approached the Baldwin Company, who previously owned the property and, initially Mr. Fred Arbuckle of Baldwin tried with no success to contact this partnership. Subsequently, Mr. Rob Cameron of Baldwin also tried with no success. Based upon these attempts a letter was sent to SNMB on July 20, 1994 stressing to the property owners that due to the impending construction schedule, this acquisition must proceed and that it was imperative that we be contacted as soon as possible so that condemnation could be avoided. A copy of this letter is attached for your reference. Additionally, a second copy of the offer letter was sent. Based upon SNMB's lack of response to this letter and after discussions with City staff about the projects construction constraints, it was determined that the City would have to proceed with a Public Hearing to adopt a Resolution of Necessity on August .2.J. -/1/ 2125 EL CAMINO REAL. SUITE 215. OCEANSIDE. CA 92054 Mr. Cliff Swanson Otay Valley Road/SNMB Parcel August 11, 1994 Page 2 23, 1994. This was the last Council date that would allow the City obtain possession of the necessary interest in the subject property prior to the start of construction. Consequently, on August 4, 1994 a Notice of Public Hearing was sent SNMB notifying them of the August 23, hearing date. On August 10, 1994 we were contacted by Mr. Gene Korf, an attorney in New Jersey who is Corporate Council to the Foundation. He has indicated that he is aware of the situation, has forwarded all our correspondence to SNMB and is also tying to contact his client. He indicated that he and would assist us if possible. We will continue trying to make contact with this entity right up through the hearing in an attempt to negotiate a settlement to this acquisition without the use of eminent domain. Should you have any questions, or require further information, please do not hesitate to call. Sincerel y, ~.2-11 ~~f?- =~~: -~- --- ~,-- ..... CllY OF CHULA VISTA DEPARTMENT OF PUBLIC WORKS ENGINEERING DIVISION July 20, 1994 S N M B L TD Partnership 32 W. Loockerman Sq., Suite L 100 Dover, DE 19901 A TIN: Mr. Patrick Patek SUBJECT: OTAY VALLEY ROAD WIDENING PROJECT SAN DIEGO COUNTY A.P. NO. 644-060-17 Dear Mr. Patek: On June 10, 1994, the City of Chula Vista made an offer to S N M B LTD Partnership to purchase several easements across a portion of the subject property. These easements are necessary for the construction of the Otay Valley Road Project. In that offer it was stressed that it was extremely important that you or a representative of this partnership contact us due to the impending construction of this project. To dale we have not been contacted. While the City strongly desires to acquire these easements through negotiations, if we are not contacted within one week of the date of this letter, we will be forced to proceed with the acquisition through condemnation. For your convenience another copy of the City's offer has been mailed to you via U.S. Mail and should arrive shortly. All contacts should be made through the undersigned at (619)439-4011. Correspondence should be sent to: THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA C/O Ryals & Associates 2125 EI Camino Real Oceanside, CA 92054 Thank you for your consideration in this matter. We look forward to hearing from you shortly. Richard A. Ryals R/WA Contract Acquisition Agent ,).~-I:l 276 FOURTH AVECHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA 91910/{6191 691-5021 RESOLUTION NO. I 71, 1/'1 RESOLUTIoN of THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA FINDING AND DETERMINING PUBLIC INTEREST AND NECESSITY FOR ACQUIRING AND AUTHORIZING THE CONDEMNATION OF CERTAIN REAL PROPERTY WITHIN THE OTAY VALLEY ROAD STREET WIDENING PROJECT AND AUTHORIZING THE COMMENCEMENT OF CONDEMNATION PROCEEDINGS BY OUTSIDE COUNSEL TO ACQUIRE RIGHT-OF-WAY WHEREAS, the City of Chula vista is a chartered municipal corporation of the State of California ("City"); and, WHEREAS, in conjunction with its municipal purpose of providing transportation facilities, the city has resolved to widen otay Valley Road, currently a two lane asphaltic roadway to a 6 lane prime arterial and major street between 1-805 and the eastern city boundary, and have formed the Otay Valley Road Widening Assessment District No. 90-2 consisting of various parcels contiguous or proximal thereto and benefitting therefrom ("Project"), one of which is the subject parcel ("Property") which is legally described in Exhibit A and diagrammatically shown in the corresponding map designated as Exhibit B all of which are attached hereto and incorporated herein by reference; and, WHEREAS, the Board of supervisors of the county of San Diego ("County") on March 17, 1992, adopted Resolution No. 92-97 (which is hereby fully incorporated by reference) granting consent and jurisdiction to the City of Chula Vista for the formation of Otay Valley Road Assessment District No. 90-2 and consent to the City's authority to proceed with the Project, construction and maintenance of improvements therein, and authority and power to acquire rights- of-way where necessary (among other powers granted by said County reSOlution); and, WHEREAS, the Project includes roadway work required to be constructed within the jurisdiction of the County at the easterly end of the Project where Otay Valley Road turns in a southerly direction toward otay Rio subdivision, requiring acquisition of the Property described in Exhibit A, owned by SNMB, L.P., a Delaware limited partnership, for a permanent easement for street right-of- way, slope easements and a temporary construction easement; and, WHEREAS, at the regular meeting of the city Council held on May 26, 1992, the City received substantial and convincing evidence that the public interest and necessity require the project, and the Proposed Project is planned and located in a manner that will be most compatible with the greatest public good and the least private injury, and in order to effectuate the Project, the acquisition of the Property is necessary; and, WHEREAS, at said meeting, the City received substantial and convincing evidence that the city engaged in good faith .2J.' J.1 Resolution No. Page 2 negotiations for the voluntary acquisition of the Property which efforts included the extension of an offer for the acquisition of same at fair market value, and various correspondence and efforts to contact the affected owner and interest holders in the Property; and, WHEREAS, at said meeting, the city received substantial and convincing evidence that the acquisition of the Property is for a public use, to wit: the widening of a transportation facility; and, WHEREAS, the city is real property, or easement California Code of civil 1245.270; and, authorized to acquire the hereinafter interest in real property, pursuant to Procedure sections 1245.210 through WHEREAS, at a regular meeting of the City Council held on April 21, 1992, ("EIR Meeting"), the City Council reviewed and considered the environmental consequences resulting from the proposed Project all as more fully set forth as the proposed Project in the EIR No. 89-01; and as a result thereof, the City Council previously adopted Resolution No. 16599 at said EIR Meeting, finding that the Environmental Impact Report was prepared in compliance with CEQA ("Council certification Resolution"); and, WHEREAS, the City has considered all of the evidence submitted at the hearing including the staff report; NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA DOES HEREBY FIND, RESOLVE AND DETERMINE, BY A VOTE OF NOT LESS THAN TWO-THIRDS OF ITS MEMBERS, AS FOLLOWS: 1. Findings Related to Necessity of Project. A. Public Interest and Necessity Require the Project. The public interest, convenience and necessity of the city of Chula Vista, and its residents, require the Proposed Project in order to further the implementation of the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area Plan, and provide consistency with the City of Chula vista's Updated General Plan. B. Project Planned and Located for Greatest Public Good and Least Private Injury. The property described in Exhibit A is necessary for the project in order to provide for a safe .).).-1'1 Resolution No. Page 3 intersection for trucks entering the exiting the Nelson Sloan Rock Quarry onto otay Valley Road going either westbound or southbound. The roadway design provides for three lanes going across otay River to the south such as to provide an acceleration lane for the trucks. In addition, the design provides for a safe exiting from otay Valley Road going northbound into the Nelson Sloan property for trucks entering the Quarry site. The design of this project is such that it will provide the most public good and the least private injury. The property is necessary for construction of the otay Valley Road project. The proposed taking of 1.0907 acres is a small portion of the total acreage owned by SNMB, L.P., a Delaware Limited Partnership. The need for improvements for health and safety purposes outweighs the minor effect on SNMB, L.P., a Delaware Limited Partnership. C. Property to be Acquired is Necessary for the Project. The property easements are necessary for the project since they are located within the proposed right-of-way, slope easements and temporary construction easements as illustrated in Exhibit B. D. The taking, as to any portion of the property which is appropriated or dedicated to a public use, is for a compatible public use consistent with and authorized by Code of civil Procedure section 1240.510. E. The taking, as to any portion of the property which is appropriated or dedicated to a public use, is for a more necessary public use consistent with and authorized by Code of civil Procedure section 1240.610. 2. Findings Related to Power of Extra Territorial Condemnation. A. County Grant of Consent and Jurisdiction. On March 17, 1992, the County passed Resolution No. 90-2 granting the City consent and jurisdiction to proceed with the project including the assessment district, construction of improvements adjacent to 0<.). -/5 Resolution No. Page 4 County right-of-way, and acquisition of property, where necessary. B. Issues of Urgency, Expediency, Desirability and Necessity. The portion of property to be acquired is of urgent necessity to expediently complete the project and is manifestly desirable and essential to the declared objects of the city. The improvements within the County's jurisdiction are needed in order to provide consistency and overall safety of the roadway and to avoid having an unimproved middle section of road where it crosses County jurisdiction in the Otay River area. The County is issuing permits to the City for the improvements and is aware of the entire project, and has consented thereto. 3. Voluntary Offer to Purchase the Property Made. The offer required by section 7267.2 of the Government Code has been made to the owner of record for the acquisition of the required easements to the parcels necessary for the project. 4. Authority to Proceed in Eminent Domain Granted. The City of Chula Vista, and all appropriate officers, representatives and attorneys is hereby authorized and empowered to acquire the easements to said Property by condemnation is the name of the City of Chula vista to be used for the municipal purpose of enhancing a transportation facility, in accordance with the provisions of the Code of civil Procedure, and the Constitution of California related to eminent domain, and to that end, it is authorized and directed to commence and to prosecute an action or actions in eminent domain for the purpose of acquiring easements to the Property. 5. Retention of Eminent Domain Counsel Authorized. The City Attorney for the City of Chula Vista, as General Counsel, and the law firm of Daley & Heft, special attorneys for City are hereby authorized to prepare and prosecute in the name of the city, such proceeding or proceedings in the proper court having jurisdiction thereof, as are necessary for such acquisition; and to prepare and file such pleadings, documents, briefs, and .l~ -/" Resolution No. Page 5 other instruments and to make such arguments and to take such actions as may be necessary in the opinion of said attorneys to acquire for said City the said real property. Said attorneys are specifically authorized to take whatever steps and/or procedures are available to them under the Eminent Domain Law of the State of California including but not limited to Code of civil Procedure, Title 7, Chapters 1-12, sections 1230.010- 1273.050) . The City of Chula vista has urgent need for the immediate possession of such property, and the designated attorneys on behalf of the City are authorized and directed to secure an order of court authorizing the City of Chula vista to take possession of said property at the earliest possible date. 6. Compliance with CEQA Certified. In previous proceedings held by the City Council, at the EIR Meeting, the City Council, reviewed and certified the Final Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") was prepared in accordance with CEQA all as more fully set forth in the Council certification Resolution. 7. CEQA Findings. The Council has reviewed and considered the FEIR, No. 89- 01, and has fully considered the environmental effects of the project as shown therein. The City Council hereby finds as follows: A. Adoption of Findings. The City Council has reviewed, considered, and wholly agrees with the contents and does hereby approve, accept as its own, incorporate as if set forth in full herein, and makes each and everyone of the CEQA Findings of Fact attached hereto as Exhibit C, except as noted below in subsection (c). B. certain Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted. As more fully identified and set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto, the City hereby finds, pursuant to Public Resources Code section 21081 and CEQA Guidelines section 15091, that the mitigation measures described in the FEIR as feasible are in ,)02 - /7 Resolution No. Page 6 fact found by the City Council to be feasible, and will become binding upon the City. C. Infeasibility of Alternatives. As set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto, the City Council hereby finds that none of the proposed project alternatives set forth in the Final EIR can feasibly and substantially lessen or avoid the potentially significant adverse cumulative environmental effects that will not be substantially lessened or avoided by the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures. D. Adoption of Mitigation and Monitoring Program. As required by Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the City hereby adopts the mitigation monitoring and reporting program ("Program") set forth in Exhibit C, incorporated herein by reference. The City hereby finds the Program is designed to ensure that, during Project implementation, the Project proponent, and any other responsible parties, implement the Project components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in the Exhibit C. E. statement of Overriding Considerations. Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant adverse environmental effects caused by the Project will remain. Therefore, the city hereby issues, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15093 and as set forth in Exhibit C attached hereto, a statement of overriding considerations identifying the specific economic, social, and other considerations that render that unavoidable signi 'cant adverse environmental effect acceptable. . Presented by m:J) I John P. Lippitt Director of Public Works Bruce M. Booga rd City Attorney ~ .2,;l../Y EXHIBIT A .' LEGAL DESCRIPTION VESTING: SNMB, LP., A DELAWARE LIMITED PARTNERSHIP THAT PORTION OF LOT 43 IN OTAY RANCHO, IN 'IRE COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA ACCORDING TO MAP 'IREREOF NO. 862, FliED IN THE OFFICE OF THE COUNTY RECORDER OF SAID COUNTY, FEBRUARY 7, 1900, DESCRIBED AS FOllOWS: PARCEL 1 (RIGHT-OF-WAY) BEGINNING AT A POINT ON 'IRE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY DISTANT SOU1H 18'37'10" EAST 499.12 FEET ALONG SAID RANCHO ,OTA Y BOUND~Y FROM THE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF MAP NO 8147; 'IRENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTIIERL Y AND HAVING A RADIUS OF 157.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTII 34056'19" WEST, THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE TIIROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 49'41'39" AN ARC LENGTII OF 136.17 FEET; TIIENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOU1H 75'14'40" EAST 179.58 FEET; TIIENCE SOU1H 14 045'20" WEST 62.00 FEET; TIIENCE NOR TII 75014'40" WEST 45.61 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 95.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE WESTERLY , ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TIIROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 107"28'43" A LENGTII OF 178.21 FEET TO A POINT ON 'IRE NORTIlERL Y LINE OF SAID LOT 44 OF OTA Y RANCH; 'IRENCE DEPARTING 'IRE ARC OF SAID CURVE NON-RADIALLY SOU1H 71'58'08" WEST 9.63 FEET ALONG TIIE NORTIlERLY LINE OF SAID LOT 44 TO THE EASTERLY LINE OF THAT EASEMENT FOR COUNTY HIGHWAY RECORDED APRil.. 9,1979 AS FILElPAGE NO. 79-144675; TIlENCE NORTII 18'37'10" WEST 78.39 FEET ALONG THE EASTERLY LINE OF SAID EASEMENT FOR COUNTY HIGHWAY; THENCE SOU1H 71'22'50" WEST 55.00 FEET ALONG 1HE NORTHERLY LINE OF SAID EASEMENT FOR COUNTY HIGHWAY TO A POINT OF INTERSECTION WITH SAID RANCHO BOUNDARY; THENCE ALONG SAID RANCHO BOUNDARY NORTII 18"37'10" WEST 1i9.86 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.6794 ACRES (29596.36 SQ.FT.) WJ'C F:\HOME\E1'NlNEER\l996-904 .,2.2. -I? Page 1 PARCEL 2 (SLOPE EASEMENT) BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY DISTANT soum 18037'10" EAST 499.12 FEET ALONG SAID RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY FROM THE SOUTIIEAST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF MAP NO 8147; THENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTIIERL Y AND HA VlNG A RADIUS OF 157.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 34056'19" WEST; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE, THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 49041'39" AN ARC LENGTH OF 136.17 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE soum 75014'40" EAST 179.58 FEET; THENCE NORTH 14045'20" EAST 10.00 FEET; THENCE NORTH 75014'40" WEST 179.58 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 167.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTIIERL Y; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48041'33" A LENGTH OF 141.92 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING SAID ARC soum 18037'10" EAST 10.39 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.0731 ACRES (3186.26 SQ. FT.) PARCEL 3 (SLOPE EASEMENT) BEGINNING AT A POINT ON THE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY DISTANT soum 18037'10" EAST 499.12 FEET ALONG SAID RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY FROM THE SOUTIIEAST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF MAP NO 8147; THENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTIIERL Y AND HA VlNG A RADIUS OF 157.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTH 34056'19" WEST; THENCE ALONG SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 49041'39" AN ARC LENGTH OF 136.17 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE soum 75014'40" EAST 179.58 FEET; THENCE soum 14045'20" WEST 62.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING; THENCE NORTH 75014'40" WEST 45.61 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 95.00 FOOT RADIUS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE WESTERLY LONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 107028'43" A LENGTH OF 178.21 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING THE ARC OF SAID CURVE NORTH 71058'08" EAST 10.41 TO A POINT ON A NON-TANGENT CURVE CONCAVE SOUTIIEASTERL Y AND HA VlNG A RADIUS OF 85.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS soum 89007'54" WEST; THENCE EASTERLY ALONG THE CIRCLE OF SAID CURVE THROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 105037'26" A LENGTH OF 156.70 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE soum 75014'40" EAST 45.61 FEET; THENCE NORTH 14045'20" EAST 10.00 FEET TO THE TRUE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.0489 (2130.78 SQ. FT.) WPC F,\HOME\ENGlNEERll996.94 Page 2 cJ')"~O PARCEL 4 (TEMPORARY CONSTRUcnON EASEMENT) BEGINNING AT A POINT ON lHE WESTERLY RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY DISTANT SOlITH 18037'10" EAST 468.07 FEET ALONG SAID RANCHO OTA Y BOUNDARY FROM lHE SOUTHEAST CORNER OF LOT 17 OF MAP NO. 8147; lHENCE LEAVING SAID RANCHO OTAY BOUNDARY EASTERLY ALONG A NON-TANGENT CURVE, CONCAVE SOUTHERLY AND HAVING A RADWS OF 187.00 FEET, A RADIAL TO SAID POINT BEARS NORTII 32015'54" WEST; lHENCE ALONG SAID CURVE, TIlROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 47001'14" AN ARC LENGTII OF 153.46 FEET; lHENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 75014'40" EAST 199.58 FEET; lHENCE SOUTH 14045'20" WEST 122.00 FEET; lHENCE NORTIl75014'40" WEST 65.61 FEET TO lHE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 65.00 FOOT RADWS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; lHENCE WESTERLY ALONG lHE ARC OF SAID CURVE TIlROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 100005'17" A LENGTII OF 113.55 FEET; lHENCE DEPARTING lHE ARC OF SAID CURVE SOUTH 71058'08" WEST 21.25 FEET TO lHE BEGINNING OF ANON-TANGENT 85.00 FOOT RADWS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY A RADIAL TO SAID CURVE BEARS SOUTH 89007'54" WEST; lHENCE EASTERLY ALONG lHE ARC OF SAID CURVE TIlROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 105037'26" A LENGTII OF 156.70 FEET; THENCE TANGENT TO SAID CURVE SOUTH 75014'40" EAST 45.61 FEET; THENCE NORTIlI4045'20" EAST 82.00 FEET, lHENCE NORTIl75014'40" WEST 179.58 FEET TO THE BEGINNING OF A TANGENT 167.00 FOOT RADWS CURVE CONCAVE SOUTHERLY; THENCE WESTERLY ALONG THE ARC OF SAID CURVE TIlROUGH A CENTRAL ANGLE OF 48041'33" A LENGTII OF 141.92 FEET; THENCE DEPARTING SAID ARC NORTIlI8037'10" WEST 20.66 FEET TO THE POINT OF BEGINNING. SAID PARCEL CONTAINS 0.2893 ACRES (12,600.59 SQ. FT.) Attached hereto and made a part of this legal description is a plat labeled Exlubit "B". The legal description and plat were prepared by me or under my direction. kt.J. I. '}I~, ~ Shale L. Hanson Civil Engineer, City of Chula Vista R.C.E. 18631 "h/9~ wpc P,l/iOMElENGINEER\l996.'U ol.2-:l/ Page 3 n n, ..~~~"~v~ 'tI Jj. ill t.&h g ~ .. ::I .' EL 1 'DEA OF Nl1'i5'21'[ CURVE DATA LINE COURSE DATA 1SI 0- 5 r/ / / /-1 DENOTES PARC ~ Il) 11.11' LINE BEARING LENGTH ... a: en ACOUISITION 1.68 ACRES t ~... ~ """ CURVE RADIUS LENGTH DELTA Ll 571'SS'08'~ 9.63' ?;( ~ ~ I'" '.1 DENOTES AREA OF SLOPE ESHTS.I... I''f: '; 01'" '8'S,<. Cl 15700' 136.17' ~9'll'39' L2 N71'SS'08'[ 1I.U' :; ~ ~ PARCEL 218.1731 ACRESt) I r 4'" l ,s;88,l/~ C2 9500' 17B.21' 107'2B'~3' L3 518'37'10'[ 10.39' lO ..D .. PARCEL 3 11.(HBg ACREStl oj L tJ ,);/<'.8/8'.. C3 16700' 111.92' ~B'll'33' L1 N18'37'10'1/ 20.66' ~ 'D,.. ~ PARCEL 5 18.16SS ACRESt) "/1.tff FA ~ 'tllc(jo.i.:.... C~ B5.00' 156.70' 105'37'26' LS 571'58'08'1/ 21.25' '" ';l~ ~ b.~~1 DENOTES AREA OFFERED fOR ;~'tff/ '//01',.6< ('.i\.... 1 C5 IB7.00' 153.~6' 17'01'1~' L6 518'37'10'[ 105.00' ~::i:.: en DEDICATlDN AS PUBLIC HIGH- -'~'/~Y': "S;81J, ,..... '" L7 518'37'10'[ 20.00' ...~ WAY RECORDED AS flP ND. I ~/,,O)" '~'<'IJ'''~ C6 65.00' 113.55' 100'05'17' L8 N71'22'S0'[ 20.00' ffi if ~ I'" '/~/'g, ..0\ I L9 N18'37'10'[ 20.00' 0- 85-176i13 8'~") ,//..'t< ....t,g,'" . .~ BALDlHN VISTA Ll0 571'22'S0'~ 20.00' ~ lillIIIIIlIl OENDTES PARCEL 6 I _ 8t- ..... .I,?..'t< I~~~'" ASSOCIATES Ll1 527'Si'02'[ 90.70' S AIlEA=I.8SS ACRES, /, ~"'" / '/'/. $? "'/~-'/~'" \.... APN 6'14-060-0'1 Ll2 519'07'S2'[ 131.00' U ill I."'~/."':/. /~ t} ,;,", Ll3 511'01'19'~ 31.89' N ................,., J' /.~ ;./~ ,~ //(r'{ 01'/, ~ I~' NORTHERLY LINE LOT H Ll1 NI8'37'lI"~ 18 21' en::l "'"'~ - .. '"j" n;~~ : I ':r, OJ OTAY RANCH AS SHOWN ON LlS 51S'37'10'[ 10.37' .. ~ i-'~">,,;,""],,,"1 i;;'~, I / <8~ './ MAP THEREOF NO.B62 Ll6 N11'01'19'E 72.35' 10 1Ol5 >-z iii /C" 1:;'11'/-",-"" ~ .~'~ Ll7 N19'07'S2'1/ 37.91' .-.-II! ;- ~S ., ~. '/-.~~tS ,/:. \@)rPARCEL5 LlS N27'S1'02'~ 88.76' :;:;~ ~ .... a:o-!z /1. I ~~ ,"" ~ J.. l;a ,-PARCEL 7 Ll9 571'SS'08"1/ 20.30' ...J...JO- N:]O- tJ ~~~ f"/~/"~/' C2 ...\ C~ \ C6:g ;i>" " 20'TEMPORARY NOTE, ALL OIItENSIONS SHOWN HERlON l5 l5~ ....en ~ ~ "'.... ~ I ~ /' . \ \ ;" . .~\.'l' ""~" CONSTRUCTION AIlE CIlII'ILEO FROM RECORD DATA. N N 2: tJ~ ~ Q.. ~!Q ~V './~' ./ '/ .\ : 10';' ,~\. ~o$> EASEMENT L17 __ ~ .... .... z ex: en ~O 1'/''// ~'.: \' ~ A" c.- ._-.,-.. ......0 <Ct~<( NUl I 81<//"' \ ~..':) ~+v _-:.ill ----------- .... . Q.....'" I, /~,.'1s>/PARCEL.~~ .,'''~ [I,:",,,,.{;. ~Ll6';;"" v L9 ......(/6 ~ ~~ ... I '::- // '<e///:'///T.P.O:.rA:', ' '> ~.,"i 11 _ . -..I- rI :L ,;~r--"'('J ........ ~l1lili ~.... I ,'r,)~ ~'10 ;:;?'/~~--""'~~Gttl,~~ ~~r, I~,~"" Mt'3 'Th'~ :~\ ~~,,,::: . 3~ ... C5 ':: ~~ CO~~ SAr6r'~~~NIB'37'10'W:~" ~"-~ T'.j>:'o,i.~ ~~'lI\..II/'of~~~ a'c:> ai...1 I ~~ ~ ~~'1['." B~9.',~ ~.~ -"'~ PARCEL.6 It ,p:.".4'J'~t;~~ S; ~ "'lI: ,~ui m.0F C J(j:/.. ~ ~~~~77.B3' ,~" 122.17~ :;;~COUNTY OF ~~--;;::2.~~ 17~A1\L V/ ~ /" NIB'37'10'W 772.17' CITY OF CH~ _ ~1~~57~f~,~ ~ N1B'37'10'W ~.~ ~WESTERLY LINE RANCHO OTAY E 1/~ COR.SEC ~:95.B3' T.P.O.B. ESHT.FOR COUNTY HIGHWAY '--<_JT 2 t,E3fvl Ti8t, Fi.,:W S.W.COR.OF OTAY RANCH PARCEL U & R/W DEDICATED TO THE COUNTY ~~.:(' '-'n ;\f.)f'J F":f':i---n:'=S()--U9 PER R.0.S.7693 PARCEL '2 Of SAN DIEGO PER F/P NO. 79-H1675 ,).- -" "'- - - .. :E ..... ct: ~ t- z: ..... I ..... >-::: <t"" ~..... .... IJ...w Ou> .... l-iE Ie (!l.... HO a:ct: >- ~ .... -' .... > >- .... t- o oj .... := '" 0- L.~ .. r'" 5f-~' lD . l!> ... .. <> '" > lJl . I ~a: ~ .. Zoo ~;..:.r' =-LIJ Ffl ~u ~cg ~ ~ "" '" '. BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA RE: PROPOSED OTAY VALLEY ROAD WIDENING PROJECT FINDINGS OF FACT I. DESCRIPTION OF PROJECT Otay Valley Road is proposed by the City to be widened from Interstate Highway 805 (I-80S) to the eastern City boundary. This portion of Otay Valley Road is approximately 8,800 feet in length and crosses lands within the City of Chula Vista's Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area. Otay Valley Road is presently two lanes for most of its length, and increases in width to three and four lanes west of Brandywine Avenue and Oleander Avenue, respectively. The proposed project is to widen Otay valley Road to a six-lane prime arterial within a 128 foot right-of-way. The roadway will have a design speed of 55 miles per hour. Project elements include a 16-foot landscaped median, six 12-foot driving lanes, two 8-foot emergency parking lanes, and 12 feet behind each shoulder curb for sidewalks, landscaping and utilities. The proposed widening is consistent with the City's General Plan and Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan. The proposed widening will occur in two phases. Otay Valley Road widening from I-80S to Nirvana Avenue will occur during Phase I, and is anticipated to begin in 1992. Phase II will include the remainder of the road east of Nirvana, and is anticipated to be constructed within five years of Phase I completion. Financing for the proposed project. will be funded by the formation of an Assessment District. Thus, approval of the Assessment District is the financial method to implement the proposed project. II. ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD For purposes of CEQA and the findings set forth below, the administrative record of the City Council decision on this project shall consist of the following: 1. The Draft and Final EIR for the project; 2. All reports, memoranda, maps, letters and other planning documents prepared by the environmental consultant and the City, that are not privileged under the Public Records Act or any other relevant statutes; -I! .~, 3. All documents submitted by members of the public, 'and public agencies in connection with the proposed project; 4. Minutes and verbatim transcripts of all workshops, public meetings and public hearings held by the City and Redevelopment Agency; -1- .2.; "'.2.3 EJ~~~J~iT ..C!.i 5. Any documentary or other evidence submitted at workshops, public meetings and public hearings; and 6. Matter of common knowledge to the City, which it considers, including but not limited to, the following: a. Chula Vista General Plan - 2010 b. Chula Vista Zoning Ordinance c. Chula Vista Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan d. Chula Vista Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Project Area Implemen- tation PlanIDesign Manual Addendum e. Chula Vista Threshold/Standards Policy f. Otay River Valley Redevelopment Area Sensitive Biological Resources and Wetlands Delineation (1987). ilL TERMlNOLOGYITHE PURPOSE OF FINDINGS UNDER CEQA Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines requires that, for each significant environmental effect identified in an EIR for a proposed project, the approving agency must issue a written finding reaching one or more of the three allowable conclusions. The first is that "[c]hanges or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental effect as identified in the final ElR." (Emphasis added.) The second potential finding is that "[s]uch changes or alterations are within the responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and not the agency making the finding. Such changes have been adopted by such other agency or can and should be adopted by such other agency." The third permissible conclusion is that [s]pecific economic, social or other considerations make infeasible the mitigation measures or project alternative identified in the final ElR. --1, As regards the first of the three potential findings, the CEQA Guidelines do not define the difference between "avoiding" a significant environmental effect and merely "substantially lessening" such an effect. The meaning of these terms therefore must be gleaned from other contexts in which they are used. Public Resources code section 21081, on which CEQA Guidelines section 15091 is based, uses the term "mitigate" rather than "substantially lessen." The CEQA Guidelines therefore equate "mitigating" with "substantially lessening." Such an understanding of the statutory term is consistent with Public Resources Code section 21001, which declares the Legislature's policy disfavoring the approval of projects with significant environmental effects where there are feasible mitigation measures or alternatives that could "avoid or substantially lessen" such significant effects. -l! For purposes of these findings, the term "avoid" will refer to the ability of one or more mitigation measures to reduce an otherwise significant effect to a less-than-sil!nificant . level. In contrast, the term "substantially lessen" will refer to the ability of such measure . or measures to substantially reduce the severity of a significant effect, but not to reduce effect to a level of insignificance. Although CEQA Guidelines section 15019 requires only that approving agencies specify that a particular significant effect is "avoid[ed] or -2- . .2.J..~ i substantially lessen[ed], " these findings, for purposes of clarity, in each case will specify whether the effect in question has been fully avoided (and thus reduced to a level of insignificance) or has simply been substantially lessened (and thus remains significant). Moreover, although Section 15091, read literally, does not require findings to address environmental effects that an EIR identifies as merely .potentially significant," these findings will nevertheless fully account for all such effects identified in the Final EIR. IV. LEGAL EFFECT OF FINDINGS To the extent that these findings conclude that various proposed mitigation measures outlined in the Final EIR are feasible and have not been modified, superseded or withdrawn, the City of Chula Vista (City) hereby binds itself and any other responsible parties to implement those measures. These findings, in other words, are not merely informational or hortatory, but constitute a binding set of obligations that will come into effect when the City adopts a resolution approving the project. V. MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM As required by the Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, in adopting these findings, also adopts a mitigation monitoring and reporting program. The program is designed to ensure that, during project implementation, the City and other responsible parties comply with the feasible mitigation measures. That program is described in the document entitled, Otay Valley Road Widening Project Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program. VI. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND MITIGATION MEASURES The Final EIR identified a number of potentially significant environmental effects (or "impacts") that the Otay Valley Road widening would cause, all of which could be avoided through the adoption of feasible mitigation measures. These impacts are restated below, followed by page numbers in the Final EIR where the impacts are discussed. A. Geologic and soils impacts could occur from development of the roadway on the unstable river wash, stream sediments and clay lOOms found in the area (FEIR, p. 3-7). B. The project will result in the loss of 1.2 acres of Diegan Sage Scrub, 2.6 acres of TamarisklMulefat Scrubland, 0.2 acre of Willow Riparian Woodland, and 0.2 acre of Freshwater Marsh. Construction activities would impact 1.1 acres of TamarisklMulefat Scrubland and 0.2 acre Diegan Sage Scrub (FEIR, p. 3-26 to 3-27). -4 "i, C. The road widening would conflict with the existing administration, workroom and parking facilities of the City of Chula Vista Animal Shelter (FEIR, p. 3-38). -3- ,,2.2. - .2.5' D. The proposed project will accommodate traffic volumes that are expected to occur along the widened roadway due to long term development and population growth in the region. Congestion at roadway intersections is expected, including Oleander Avenue, Brandywine Avenue, Nrrvana Avenue, Maxwell Road, and at both the northbound and southbound on-ramps to I-80S (FEIR, p. 3-48 to 3-53). . E. Traffic congestion and hazards could result at the intersection of Otay Valley Road and the Nelson & Sloan Rock Plant until the full widening of Otay Valley Road occurs and the intersection with Paseo Ranchero is constructed (FEIR p. 3-52 to 3-53). F. Paleontological resources may occur in the project area and could be impacted by roadway development (FEIR, p.3-64). G. Increases in noise levels from increased traffic along the roadway are projected to exceed City guidelines for noise exposure (FEIR, p. 3-79 to 3-80). The sub-sections below restate the above-identified impacts and set forth the mitigation measures adopted to avoid the impacts. A. GEOLOGY/SOILS Potentially Significant Effect: Geologic and soils impacts could occur from development of the roadway on the unstable river wash, stream sediments and clay loams found in the area (FEIR, p. 3-7). Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures have been found to be feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been made binding on the City through these findings (FEIR, p. 3-8 to 3-9). 1. Unstable geology/soils materials will be removed or stabilized before roadway construction begins. Surficial layers of organic soils, debris and soft or loose deposits will be stripped from areas where fill will be placed. -Ii .,~ 2. .Compressive soils will be removed and replaced with properly compacted fill. Expansive soils will be buried deep in fills and not within the roadway section. 3. All slopes will be constructed at a minimum slope of 2.0 horizontal feet to 1.0 vertical feet. Temporary chain link debris fences, with meshes of I to 1-112 inch square, will be installed with a geofabric material along the bottom 18-24 inches of the fence to control silting in sensitive wetland areas which could result from sediments in runoff. -4- ~,). ~ J.?- B. BIOLOGY Potentially Significant Effect: The project will result in the loss of 1.2 acres of Diegan Sage Scrub, 2.6 acres of TamariskIMulefat Scrubland, 0.2 acre of Willow Riparian Woodland, and 0.2 acre of Freshwater Marsh. Construction activities would impact 1.1 acres of Tamarisk/Mulefat Scrubland and 0.2 acre Diegan Sage Scrub (FEIR, p. 3-26 to 3-27). Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as identified in the Final ElR. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures have been found to be feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been made binding on the City through these findings (FElR, p. 3-28). 1. Losses of wetland habitats will include Tamarisk/Mulefat Scrubland, Willow Riparian Woodland, and Freshwater Marsh tota11ing 3.0 acres, and will be mitigated by the creation of new wetland areas within the river valley. Any such mitigation will include extensive revegetation with willow woodland and the use of San Diego marsh-elder to maximize value to wildlife and mitigate for the loss to this sensitive plant species. Mitigation will be at a 2: 1 acreage replacement ratio for wetlands lost. 2. The roadsides adjacent to native vegetation communities east of Nirvana Avenue will be designed in a manner that would preclude the potential for vehicle access or illegal dumping into the river bottom or onto the slopes. Incorporation of guard rails or fences would be appropriate. Use of thorny vegetation may also be used in conjunction with temporary fences. 3. The roadway slopes will be revegetated with native plant materials indigenous to the area or which complement the existing native communities, such as sage scrub or sycamore woodland species. 4. Where construction activities are to occur in or adjacent to native vegetational communities, work will be restricted to the delineated project footprint by the placement of temporary construction fences or flagging along both sides of the street. This measure is incorporated in the project description. ...I! ""i, 5. If work site brushing occurs between April 1 anq September 15, the project site will be carefully examined by a qualified biologist prior to clearing. Should the site be found to support nesting birds including Least Bell's Vireo, Willow Flycatcher, or Yellow-breasted Chat, work within 300 feet of the nest site will be delayed until nesting has been completed. -5- ~,)"-2 ? 6. Following construction, the 20-foot wide construction corridor will be recontoured to natural or lower levels and revegetated with native vegetation favoring Willow and Mulefat Riparian Scrub with minor elements of Diegan Sage Scrub. These measures are consistent with the requirements and conditions of the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers 404 permit for this project, which are hereby incorporated by reference, and attached as Attachment . A . . C. LAND USE Potentially Significant Effect: The road widening would conflict with the existing administration, workroom and parking facilities of the City of Chula Vista Animal Shelter (FEIR, p. 3-38). Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures have been found to be feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been made binding on the City through these findings (FEIR, p. 3-39). 1. Impacts to the City's Animal Shelter will be mitigated through the redesign of the site and relocation of parking, workroom and administration facilities to the southern part of the property. D. TRAFFIC Potentially Significant Effect: The proposed project will accommodate increased volumes which are expected to occur along the widened roadway due to long term development and population growth in the region. Congestion at roadway intersections is expected, including Oleander Avenue, Brandywine Avenue, Nirvana Avenue, Maxwell Road, and at both the northbound and - southbound on-ramps to 1-805 (FEIR, p. 3-48 to 3-53). "'1 Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. -l! Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures have been found to be feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been made binding on the City through these findings (FEIR, p. 3-53 to 3-54). 1. Signals will be installed as the City Engineer determines is appropriate in order to meet the City's Traffic Threshold Standard. -6- .2 ~ ....If?'' 2. Maxwell Road will be restriped to provide a southbound left turn-lane at its intersection with Otay Valley Road. 3. As required in the Mitigation Monitoring Program, traffic conditions will be monitored by the City's Traffic Engineer to implement improvements at the appropriate time. Potentially Significant Effect: Traffic congestion and hazards could result at the intersection of Otay Valley Road and the Nelson & Sloan Rock Plant until the full widening of Otay Valley Road occurs and the intersection with Pasco Ranchero is constructed (FEIR p. 3-52 to 3-53). Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Mitigation Measures: The following mitigation measures have been found to be feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been made binding on the City through these findings (FEIR, p. 3-54). 1. As an interim measure, roadway improvements at this intersection shall be completed as part of Phase I. E. PALEONTOLOGY Potentially Significant Effect: Paleontological resources may occur in the project area and could be impacted by roadway development (FEIR, p.3-64). Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Mitigation Measure: The following mitigation measures have been found to be feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been made binding on the City through these findings (FEIR, p. 3-65). 1. A qualified paleontologist will be at the pre-grade meeting to consult with the grading and excavation contractors. ...i! '-~, 2. A paleontology monitor will be on site at all times during the cutting of previously undisturbed sediments through and immediately adjacent to the Mission Valley formation to inspect cuts for contained fossils. In the event that well-preserved fossils are discovered, the paleontological monitor will be allowed to temporarily direct, divert or halt grading to allow recovery of fossil remains in a timely fashion. Any fossil remains collected will be cataloged and deposited (with landowner's permission) at the San Diego Natural History Museum. -7- ,),2--2.9 F. NOISE Potentially Significant Effect: Increases in noise levels from increased traffic along the roadway (stated to occur with or without the project) are projected to exceed City guidelines for noise exposure (FEIR, p. 3-79 to 3-80). Finding: Changes or alterations have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which will avoid the potentially significant environmental effect as identified in the Final EIR. Mitigation Measure: The following mitigation measures have been found to be feasible and have been required either as a condition of approval or have been made binding on the City through these findings (FEIR, p. 3-81). 1. A perimeter masonry wall, six feet high, will be installed at the back lot line of some residences backing up to Otay Valley Road. The wall will be at the top of the slope, to utilize slope height to increase the line of sight break between traffic and rear yard receiver locations. (It should be noted that a large percentage of the noise at the west end of the project area comes from 1-805.) G.. CUMULATIVE EFFECTS The Cumulative Impacts analysis was based on the list of proposed and planned projects in the area, shown on Table 2.4-1 in the FEIR, and also on the Cumulative Impacts analysis contained in the General Plan Update FEIR (since the project is shown in the General Plan). In summary, cumulative impacts would occur in the issue areas of flooding downstream, biological resources, agricultural lands, traffic circulation, and noise. With the exception of agricultural lands, the project's contribution to cumulative impacts have been mitigated to a level below significance either through project mitigation measures, or through adherence to standard City engineering and building requirements. Regarding agricultural lands, the FEIR states that the project area is not primarily agriculturally oriented, with prevailing uses being residential and light industrial, and that loss of this acreage (3.9 acres) to the roadway does not create a project significant impact. -i! VII. INFEASmILITY ALTERNATIVE OF ALTERNATIVES OTHER THAN THE PROJECT '..~, The selection of project alternatives was based on CEQA's requirement of analysis of the No Project Alternative, the General Plan description of roadway location, and a site constraints analysis performed for this project (Otay River Valley Redevelopment Area Sensitive Biological Resources and Wetlands Delineation [Michael Brandman Associates, 1987]). Three different alternative alignments were evaluated subsequent to completion of this study before the proposed alignment was chosen. -8- .).:).:J t) The proposed project will not result in significant adverse impacts if all recommended mitigation measures are implemented. Because the project's impacts have been mitigated below a level of significance an analysis of the alternatives is not technically required. However, the decisionmakers, after reviewing the EIR and in approving the project specifically reject the No Project Alternative and the other alternatives for the following reasons: No Proiect Alternative The No Project Alternative consists of no action taken by the City of Chula Vista to construct or implement the proposed project or either of the project alternatives. This alternative would discourage future infill industrial growth along Otay Valley Road and inhibit economic growth in the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Area. This is contrary to the goals of the Chula Vista Redevelopment Agency as set forth in the Otay Valley Road Redevelopment Plan. The plan specifically calls for the correction of problems relative to circulation, infrastructure, and public utility inadequacies. The No Action Alternative would also be inconsistent with the City of Chula Vista's Draft General Plan Circulation Element roadway designation for Otay Valley Road, which calls for a six lane prime arterial and major street standards for Otay Valley Road. In addition, if this alternative is selected, the lack of capacity and low level of service on Otay Valley Road could constrain future developments north, south, and east of the project. Future development proposals that would contribute traffic to Otay Valley Road, or require the extension of utility services along the roadway, would be affected most. Locational Alternative I Locational Alternative 1 is the same as the project with the exception that the six lane roadway would be reduced to a four lane roadway east of Nirvana. The right-of-way would thus be decreased from 128 feet to either 100 feet or 84 feet (depending on design). The environmental consequences of constructing Locational Alternative 1 would be identical or very similar to the proposed project with respect to geology and soils, landform, land use, agriculture, aesthetics, cultural and paleontological resources, and park, recreation and open space. The differences in environmental impacts between Locational Alternative 1 and the proposed project are primarily to biological resources and to traffic conditions. Biology --\ This alternative reduces the right-of-way from 128 feet to 100 feet east of N"lIVana Avenue while retaining the same general road alignment as the proposed project. Impacts of this alternative would generally parallel those of the proposed project with only a slight reduction in magnitude. Loss of wetlands would total approximately 1.23 acres with proportionally fewer San Diego Marsh-Elder impacted. ...It Loss of habitat for riparian bird species would still be considered significant. Reducing the right-of-way to 84 feet would lower the wetland impacts to 0.60 acre, still resulting in significant adverse wetlands impacts. Under either the proposed project or the reduced widths of the Locational Alternative 1, wetland impacts and impacts to the sensitive San Diego Marsh-Elder are considered significant but mitigable through creation of replace- ment wetland habitats including the heavy utilization of marsh elder in the plantings. -9- .l~ ., J I Traffic The City's recommended maximum traffic volume for a four lane major street is 30,000 VPD. The General Plan forecast volume at build-out is 26,000 VPD east of Nirvana Avenue, thus the alternative of a four lane classification would seemingly be adequate. Such a classification would require an amendment of the General Plan Circulation Element. However, the roadway was not designed to be four lanes in this location because of traffic circulation considerations. This segment of roadway is located between Paseo Ranchero, which is planned as a six lane facility, and the rest of Otay Valley Road to the west, which also requires six lanes. The volumes of traffic entering the Otay Valley RoadlPaseo Ranchero intersection are projected to be 76,000 ADT. Thus, the six lane width along this segment of Otay Valley Road is necessary in order to provide sufficient capacity entering and exiting the intersection. Also, a short four lane segment of road between six lane roads on either side could create congestion and hazardous conditions. Locational Alternative 2 The environmental consequences of constructing Locational Alternative 2 would be the same as the proposed project and Locational Alternative 1 with respect to land use, agriculture, and parks, recreation and open space. Environmental impact differences between Locational Alternative 2 and the proposed project are identified for traffic conditions, biological resources, cultural resources, geology and soils, and landform and aesthetics, as well as traffic. Impacts to transportation are the same for Locational Alternative 2 as described above for Locational Alternative 1. Overall, impacts on the remaining natural, cultural, and scenic resources would be greater from Locational Alternative 2 than from the proposed project. Biology Under this alternative all direct adverse impacts to the wetland habitats would be eliminated. Due to the extensive slope cutting required, however, an extensive loss of quality Diegan Sage Scrub habitat and a wide array of sensitive plans and animals occurring on these hillsides would be severely impacted by this proposed alternative. The biological impacts of this loss would be significant. "'~. The only known large population of Greene's Ground Cherry would be lost. Such a loss is considered unmitigab1e. Also eliminated would be the dense stands of Coast Cholla and the Fishhook Cactus population. The latter occurs in densities seldom seen in San Diego County; moreover, the average size of specimens far surpasses other known substantial populations. Also heavily impacted would be the State-listed endangered Otay Tarwee population, along with significant colonies of Coast Barrel Cactus and Cleveland's Golden Stars. -Ii One pair of California Gnatcatchers would probably be lost from the slopes under this alternative. The Orange-throated Whiptail population would also be impacted. The Diegan Sage Scrub slopes which would be impacted are considered excellent gnatcatcher habitat. -10- .2';' .. .:J;i. Cultural Resources Locational Alternative 2 would impact all of the cultural resource sites that will be affected by the proposed project, and would additionally impact another potentially significant site. Thus, Locational Alternative 2 is less preferred for cultural resources than the proposed project. Geology and Soils Locational Alternative 2 would require cutting into the steep hillsides located in the northeastern section of the project area. Soil conditions in this area consist of terrace escarpments and are considered to be unstable due to the presence of cobble strata. Consequently, greater maximum slope ratios could be required (e.g., 4:1) thereby increasing even further the amount of land disturbed. In addition, retaining walls, with a maximum height of 20 feet, would most likely be required as mitigation. In summary, Locational Alternative 2 is less preferred than the proposed project with respect to geotechnical and soils constraints. Landform! Aesthetics Locational Alternative 2 would also result in significant landform impacts. This Alternative would result in major landform alteration due to the amount of cutting that would be required to achieve 2: 1 or 4: 1 slope ratios. Cut slopes would be required north of the roadway for approximately one-half mile in the northeastern part of the project area. Maximum height of cut slopes would be approximately 65 feet. Landform modifications in this area would have significantly adverse impacts on landscape aesthetics since this Alternative would result in strong visual contrasts with the current natural hillsides and vegetation cover. Consequently, Locational Alternative 2 is less preferable than the proposed project with respect to landform and aesthetics. -fA ""~, -11- ..l:J. . JJ STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS Pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15093, the Chula Vista City Council in approving the Assessment District which implements the roadway which is the subject of the FEIR, having considered the information contained in the FEIR, and having reviewed the public testimony and record, makes the following Statement of Overriding Considerations in support of the Findings and the action of the City Council approving the Assessment District. All of the identified potentially significant project impacts have been mitigated to a level less than significant, as set forth in the Findings. The project also contributes to cumulative impacts. However, as set forth on page 8, these impacts were deemed to be less than significant. The City Council finds and concludes that the public benefits of the roadway project would outweigh any significant and/or cumulative impacts. The City Council has reviewed and considered all of the alternatives described in the Final EIR. The project selected by the Council was chosen for two major reasons: . It is consistent with the General Plan. . It accommodates projected buildout traffic. The alternatives were rejected by the Council: . No Proiect Alternative -- because of inconsistency with the General Plan, lack of roadway capacity for projected traffic volumes, and low level of service that would result. . Locational Alternative No. I -- because of inconsistency with the General Plan, lack of roadway capacity necessary to handle future volumes of traffic utilizing the Otay Valley Road/Paseo Ranchero intersection, poor traffic design, and because this alternative does not reduce any impacts to a level below significant. . Locational Alternative No.2 - because of equal or greater environmental impacts associated with this slightly different alignment. The decisionmakers fmd that the following factors support the approval" of the Assessment District which implements the project, and therefore, sets forth and adopts the following Statement of Overriding Considerations: ~ -'"t, 1. The roadway project is consistent with, and thus will fulfill attainment of the General Plari designation as six lane prime arterial and major street, and the Redevelopment Plan goal which" calls for the "development of a more efficient and effective circulation corridor free from hazardous vehicular, pedestrian, and bicycle interfaces." 2. As set forth in the findings, mitigation measures have been incoxporated into the Project or made binding on the applicant through the adoption of the Findings, which reduce impacts below a level of significance. -12- .,2,;.....1'1 3. Approval of the Assessment District which implements the Project will result in the following benefits: . Restoration of approximately 6 acres of wetland within the Otay River floodway (twice the impacted amount). . Construction of needed roadway improvements commensurate with General Plan requirements to serve existing and anticipated development in the area. . Construction job opportunities in an economy which is currently suffering from such opportunities. . Construction of the roadway will permit, support, and help promote the further industrial development of the Otay Valley area which includes over 200 acres of undeveloped land zoned for light industrial land use. This will provide numerous job opportunities in construction, business, and industry. . Construction of the roadway will improve the public safety and aesthetics in the area. The current facility is inadequate to support current and anticipated volumes of traffic, and for most of its length does not include curb, gutters, or sidewalks, has poor road surface conditions, and is visually cluttered with overhead utility lines. -!I<. .....~, -13- >>-;1> 'OTAY VALLEY ROAD WIDENING PROJECT MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM Monitorinl! Prol!ram Description and PU1lXlse Public Resources Code ~ 21081.6 requires a lead or responsible agency that approves a project where an Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has identified significant environmental effects, to adopt a "reporting or monitoring program for adopted or required changes to mitigate or avoid significant environmental effects. " The City of Chula Vista is the lead agency for the Otay Valley Road Widening Project. A Draft and Final EIR was prepared for this project which addressed potential environmental impacts and, where appropriate, recommended measures to reduce substantially or avoid the impacts. A Mitigation Monitoring Program is required to ensure that the adopted measures are implemented. The City of Chula Vista will adopt this Mitigation Monitoring Program (MMP) after considering the Final EIR. Roles and Resoonsibilities The MMP for the proposed project will be in place through both phases of the project, including final design, pre-grading, construction and operation. The City of Chula Vista has the primary enforcement role for the implementation of mitigation measures. The City's Environmental Review Coordinator (ERe) will provide final approval for the completion of the implementation of measures. The ERC will appoint a Mitigation Compliance Coordinator (MCC) who will be responsible for the actual monitoring of the implementation of measures. The MCC will interface with the ERC, the City Engineer, the City Landscape Architect, the Construction Supervisor, and the Biological Monitor, all who have some responsibility for the implementation of measures. Mitigation Monitorinl! Procedures The MMP consists of Mitigation Monitoring Program Procedures, filing requirements, and reporting and compliance verification. These procedures are outlined below. -l! Mitigation Monitoring Program Procedures: Table 1 identifies the procedures of the MMP. For each mitigation measure, it states the monitoring activity, the timing of implementation of the measure, and who is responsible for verifying that the measure has been implemented and for "~~~ [mal approval. Mitigation Monitoring Program Files: Files shall be established to document and retain the records of the MMP. The files shall be established, organized, and retained by the City of Chula Vista Planning Department. Reporting and Compliance Verification: The City's Mitigation Monitoring Report Forms are designed to record the monitoring activity in a consistent manner with appropriate approvals. -14- ~.;. "'Jt, The forms will be completed and signed by the individuals responsible for the monitoring and approval of the measures. These forms will be placed in the MMP files. Program Operations The following steps shall be followed for implementation, monitoring, and verification of each mitigation measure: 1. The City of Chula Vista, Environmental Review Coordinator (ERC), shall designate a Mitigation Compliance Coordinator, who will be responsible for monitoring the implementation of the mitigation measures. 2. The ERC shall provide to the MCC, the Mitigation Monitoring Report Forms; a copy of Table 1; and other pertinent information. 3. The MCC shall coordinate the implementation of the mitigation measures and shall complete a Form for each activity, and forward the report to the ERC for final approval. 4. All completed forms shall ~en be placed in the MMP files. Mitigation measures shall be implemented as specified by the Mitigation Monitoring Program Summary. During any project phase, unanticipated circumstances may arise requiring the refmement or addition of mitigation measures. The ERC, with advise from staff, is responsible for recommending changes to the mitigation measures, if needed. If mitigation measures are refmed, the ERC would complete a Mitigation Monitoring Report Form documenting the change, and shall notify the appropriate design, construction, or operations personnel about refined requirements. [C:IWPS IIOVROADIFINDINGS.TXT) -Ii '..., -15- ..2,1. ~ .j?