HomeMy WebLinkAbout1992/08/25 Item 14
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
Item /<114
Meeting Date 8/25/92
ITEM TITLE: Consideration of the Final Environmental Impact Report for a Prezoning,
Amendments to the EastLake General Development Plan (GDP) and P-C
District Regulation Amendments, Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan and
Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP), Air Quality Improvement Plan
(AQIP) and Water Conservation Plan for Telegraph Canyon Estates,
EIR-9l-05 (SCH 91071033)
RESOLUTION \ \0 '1 b ( Certifying the Final Environmental Impact
Report for a Prezoning, Amendments to the EastLake I General
Development Plan (GDP) and Planned Community District (PCD)
Regulations, Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, Public Facilities
Financing Plan (PFFP) , Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP), and Water
Conservation Plan for Telegraph Canyon Estates (EIR-9l-05) SCH
#91071033
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning ~(
REVIEWED BY: City Manager V~/,
k'"
(4/5ths Vote: Yes_No_XJ
The Final Environmental Impact Report (FEIR) before you for certification analyzes the
Telegraph Canyon Estates project which requires a Prezoning, Amendments to the EastLake I
General Development Plan and Planned Community District (PCD) Regulations, a Sectional
Planning Area (SPA) Plan, and Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP). In conformance with
the Growth Management Program, an Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) and Water
Conservation Plan were prepared for the project. The Annexation, Sphere of Influence
Amendment, and Tentative Subdivision Map are not part of the approvals being requested, at
this time, although the same EIR will be utilized when those requests are brought forward.
The project is located on 112.4 acres on the north side of Telegraph Canyon Road (Otay Lakes
Road), east of Rutgers A venue and immediately west of the future extension of State Route 125.
The project site corresponds to a portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 595-070-22.
RECOMMENDATION: That the City Council certify that the FEIR (91-05) has been prepared
in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State of California
CEQA Guidelines, and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista.
)~}4. -I
Page 2, Item ) 4 A.
Meeting Date 8/25/92
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION:
RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION
During the public review period for the DEIR (May 13, 1992 to July 22, 1992), the Resource
Conservation Commission (RCC) considered the document on June 22, 1992. The RCC
expressed their concern regarding cumulative air quality impacts, but voted unanimously to
recommend that the Planning Commission certify the FEIR.
PLANNING COMMISSION CONSIDERATION
On July 22, 1992 the Planning Commission held a public hearing to receive public testimony
on the adequacy of the Telegraph Canyon Estates Draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR).
On August 12, 1992 the Planning Commission passed a motion to certify the Final EIR.
DISCUSSION:
The Telegraph Canyon Estates EIR analyzes the environmental impacts associated with the
proposed construction of a maximum of 350 single-family residences on 80.7 acres, 26.1 acres
of open space and parks and recreational facilities, 1.5 acres designated for future community
purpose facilities, and 9.4 acres needed for an easement for future State Route 125.
DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
This FEIR analyzes the potential environmental impacts associated with implementation of the
following discretionary actions:
1. A prezoning action;
2. Annexation into Chula Vista;
3. An amendment to the Chula Vista Sphere of Influence;
4. An amendment to the General Development Plan (GDP) for the EastLake I SPA.
5. A Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan;
6. An amendment to the Planned Community District (PCD) Regulations for the EastLake
I SPA;
7. A Tentative Subdivision Map (TSM);
1~p4.~2.-
Page 3, Item )4 It
Meeting Date 8/25/92
8. Adoption of a Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP);
9. Adoption of an Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP);
10. Adoption of a Water Conservation Plan
CONTENTS OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT:
The FEIR contains responses to comments received during the public review period, including
comments made at the Planning Commission Public Hearing of July 22, 1992 on the DEIR. The
response to Comments section is located in front of the FEIR. As a result of comments received
during the public review period, some minor revisions have been made to the EIR, and where
appropriate, actual text changes have been made to the document. These changes do not change
the basic conclusions of the EIR.
RESPONSE TO COMMENTS
As a result of new information obtained during the environmental review process, several
refinements have been made to the "Water Availability" and "Biology" sections of the EIR.
Biology (wetland impacts) has been changed from "significant, but mitigable" to "significant and
unmitigated." This is due to the inability to identify a specific off-site mitigation area for the
O.9-acre wetland area impacted by the project. If a site becomes available and replacement
occurs at a ratio agreed upon by the City in consultation with the Department of Fish and Game,
biology impacts will be reduced below significance.
Water availability impacts have been changed from "significant, but mitigable" to "significant
and unmitigated" on a region-wide basis. This is due to the lack of availability of reclaimed
water to the project site, at this time. If reclaimed water become available in the future, water
availability impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance. These refinements do
not change any of the basic conclusions of the EIR or relieve the applicant from having to
mitigate biology and water availability impacts.
PUBLIC AND AGENCY REVIEW
The Telegraph Canyon Estates EIR was circulated through the State Clearinghouse for over a
45-day public review period beginning on May 21, 1992. The City of Chula Vista public review
period concluded on July 22,1992 with the close of the Planning Commission public hearing to
receive public testimony on the DEIR.
l'fA ~3
Page 4, Item /4 fL
Meeting Date 8/25/92
At the Planning Commission Public Hearing of July 22, 1992 public testimony was received
from two (2) persons, Norm Ross, a representative of the Chula Vista Sport Council, and
Veronica Sissons, a private citizen.
Six (6) outside public agencies, including CalTrans, California Department of Fish and Game,
Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), Office of Planning and Research, Sweetwater
Union High School District, and the Chula Vista Elementary School District submitted written
comments on the DEIR.
Three (3) City Departments, including the Engineering Department, City Attorney's office, and
Fire Department provided written comment. And two (2) private organizations, the Baldwin
Company (applicant) and EastLake Development Company commented in writing on the DEIR.
The EastLake Development Company letter was received after the close of the public review
period, but was also responded to in the FEIR.
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Since there are impacts which can not be mitigated below a level of significance, a Statement
of Overriding Considerations has been included with the Candidate CEQA Findings for the
Council's consideration on the project. Overriding considerations are required for air quality,
on a cumulative, region-wide basis, biology and water availability (region-wide).
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS
The following is an abbreviated version of the environmental analysis provided in the Telegraph
Canyon Estates FEIR.
1.
Geology/Soils/Paleontology
Significant, but Mitigable
ImDact:
The project site is associated with potentially compressive and expansive soils from the
underlying Sweetwater and Otay Formations. These underlying geological formations
have a high potential for containing paleontological (fossil) resources.
There are no known, active faults on or immediately adjacent to the site, however, the
potentially active La Nacion fault zone is approximately 3 miles to the west.
l'fA ~ ~
Page 5, Item I ~ A
Meeting Date 8/25/92
Mitilmtion:
Geology/Soils and Paleontology impacts are considered to be significant, but mitigable
with implementation of standard geotechnical measures during grading and project
construction. These mitigation measures are outlined on Pages 26 to 28 of the FEIR.
2.
Hydrology/Water Quality
Significant, but Mitigable
Imoact:
The site contains two primary, parallel drainages which flow in a north to south direction
into the Telegraph Canyon Creek, an earthen channel with drop structures transecting the
southern project boundary. A lesser drainage serves the southwestern comer of the site.
Runoff from an existing 36-inch storm drain and open concrete channel at the northern
project boundary delivers 129.2 cfs to Telegraph Canyon Creek during a SO-year storm.
This drainage infrastructure serves adjacent residential development to the north.
Short-term grading and construction activities will increase soil erosion potential.
Development of the site will replace natural vegetation with man-made surfaces, such as
hardscape which will create the potential for increased runoff and resultant water quality
impacts. Water quality impacts could also occur with vehicle maintenance and landscape
maintenance activities by future project residents.
Mitil!:ation:
Significant, but mitigable water quality impacts will be reduced to below a level of
significance through compliance with the standard engineering measures outlined on
Pages 35 - 36 of the FEIR, which includes compliance with National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) permit guidelines, submittal of an erosion control plan, and
submittal of a storm drain plan.
3.
Landform! Alteration
Significant, but Mitigable
Imoact:
The project will require the movement of 830,000 cubic yards of cut and fill. Dominant
site landforms include two north to south trending knolls on the east and west of the
project site. The deepest cut will be 45 feet on the eastern knoll and 40 feet in the
central swale area. Proximity to Telegraph Canyon Road, a designated Scenic Highway
on the Chula Vista General Plan, is associated with potential aesthetic/visual impacts.
J'II/ '" r;
Page 6, Item
Meeting Date
14^
8/25/92
Mitilmtion:
Significant, but mitigable landform/alteration and aesthetic impacts will be reduced to a
level below significance through compliance with the guidelines of the Chula Vista
General Plan Land Use Policies, the Scenic Highway Criteria, City of Chula Vista
Grading Ordinance, and the EastLake I Design Manual. Grading techniques such as
terracing, variable slopes, and contour grading will be utilized to reduce visual impacts
along Telegraph Canyon Road. Mitigation measures are outlined on page 62 of the
FEIR.
4.
Air Quality
Cumulatively Significant and Unmitigable
Imnact:
Short-term air quality impacts will be created during grading and construction activities.
Long-term, project phase impacts are associated with pollutants from the additional 3,500
Average Daily Trips (ADT), as well as household emissions from future residences.
Mitilmtion:
Short -term air quality impacts will be reduced to below a level of significance through
standard City dust control measures, such as regular watering of the site during grading.
Long-term air quality impacts are considered significant and unmitigable on a cumulative,
region-wide basis since San Diego is in a non-attainment area. Air quality reduction
measures are outlined on pages 74 to 75 of the FEIR, as well as the requirements
outlined on pages II-98 to II-99 of the Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP).
5.
Biological Resources
Significant and Unmitigated
Imnact:
The project site contains 2.0 acres of Disturbed/Ruderal; 1.8 acres of
Disturbed/Ornamental, and approximately .9 acres of Freshwater Marsh vegetation.
Loss of the Freshwater Marsh vegetation on site is considered to be significant, even
though the wetland resources on site are considered to be of a low habitat value.
ILIA ,~
Page 7, Item
Meeting Date
I~A
8/25/92
Mitilmtion:
If consensus is reached with the City in consultation with the California Department of
Fish and Game for the preservation of habitat off-site, biology impacts could be reduced
to below a level of significance. However, until a specific off-site mitigation area is
identified, biology impacts are deemed significant and unmitigable. Biological mitigation
is listed on page 82 of the FEIR.
6.
Cultural Resources
Less Than Significant
Imnact:
No cultural resources were revealed during the site survey, as well as the records search
conducted for the project site.
Mitilmtion:
An archeological/paleontological monitor shall be on site during grading operations to
minimize potential impacts to cultural or fossil resources are lost. If resources are found
on site, the developer shall be responsible for authorizing their deposit in an institution
staffed by qualified paleontologists, such as the San Diego Natural History Museum.
7.
Transportation
Significant, But Mitigable
Imnact:
An additional 3,500 Average Daily Trips (ADT) will be generated by the proposed
project, lowering the Level of Service (LOS) on Telegraph Canyon Road between Otay
Lakes Road and EastLake Parkway from LOS C to D. Approximately 80 percent of the
trips are projected to use Telegraph Canyon Road, 10 percent will go to Rutgers Avenue
via Gotham Street, and another 10 percent are estimated to use Lakeshore Drive via
Creekwood Way.
While the project will lower the LOS on the roadway segment between Otay Lakes Road
and EastLake Parkway from C to D, the intersection will still operate at LOS C during
the PM peak hour, which is within the acceptable range set by the City of Chula Vista
Threshold Standards.
l'fA -1
Page 8, Item 1%
Meeting Date 8/25/92
Mitil!:ation:
The applicant shall comply with the requirements of the City Engineering Department
by contributing its fair share to the area roadway improvements through the Development
Impact Fee program, as determined by the City Traffic Engineer during its annual review
of cumulative projects as part of the Eastern Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan.
Traffic mitigations is listed on page 99 of the FEIR.
8.
Noise Impacts
Significant, But Mitigable
Imoact:
An acoustical analysis conducted for the project analyzed noise impacts on a short-term
and long-term basis. Construction activities will create significant short-term noise
impacts, however, these will be temporary and will conclude when the project is built
out. Long-term noise impacts are associated with the potential impact to future residents
from proposed State Route 125.
Mitil!:ation:
Noise impacts will be reduced to below a level of significance through construction of
a 5.6 foot high noise wall along the rear yards of those lots that fall within the 65 CNEL
threshold contour. Final noise barrier design will be reviewed prior to the approval of
the Final Map to ensure compliance with City and CalTrans requirements.
9.
Land Use/General Plan
Significant, But Mitigable
Imoact:
The project is compatible with the existing and planned land uses for the site and the
surrounding properties. The 4.3 dwelling units per acre net density is within the General
Plan designation of 3-6 dwelling units per acre. There would be no significant, adverse
land use impacts associated with the proposed project.
Mitil!:ation:
The project will not result in any significant land use impacts, however, the applicant
shall be required to conform to the City's Affordable Housing Program. Land use
mitigation is outlined on pages 119 to 120 of the FEIR.
I~)q -8'
Page 9, Item
Meeting Date
14~
8/25/92
10.
Community Social Factors
Less Than Significant
ImDact:
The project will add 1,134 residents to the City, based upon a project population
generation factor of 3.24 occupants per dwelling unit. This represents approximately 6
percent of the population growth anticipated by SANDAG by the year 2010. This
population increase is within the General Plan growth forecasts, therefore, community
social factor impacts are considered to be less than significant.
11.
Community Tax Structure
Less Than Significant
ImDact:
The project revenues will exceed expenditures in every year and will total $827,043 to
the City of Chula Vista over a 15-year period. Therefore, socioeconomic impacts
associated with the project are deemed to be less than significant.
However, one of the EIR project alternatives (Alternative Design B) proposes the project
with a public versus private street system, which would reduce revenues to the City by
$372,325, for a total of $454,718 instead of the $827,043 for the proposed project.
Mitilmtion:
The project is not expected to have an adverse fiscal or socioeconomic impact, therefore,
mitigation is not deemed to be necessary.
12.
Parks/Recreation/Open Space
Less Than Significant
Imnact:
The project will increase parks and recreation demand by bring 1,134 new residents into
the City. The project will, therefore, increase the demand upon parks and recreation by
a total of 3.4 acres.
Mitie:ation:
The project site will contain 5.3 acres of private recreational/open space areas, however,
payment of in-lieu park fees for increasing demand upon public parks will also be
required to mitigate parks and recreation impacts to below a level of significance.
Parks/recreation mitigation is listed on page 144 of the FEIR.
N,q~q
Page 10, Item lL.\ f\
Meeting Date 8/25/92
13. Public ServiceslUtilities
School Imuacts:
Significant, But Mitigable
The project will introduce 105 new elementary school and high school students into the
area. Both School Districts have been operating above permanent capacities, therefore,
any additional students will have a significant impact on school facilities.
Mitil!:ation:
The Chula Vista Elementary School District is recommending annexation into a new
Community Purpose Facility (CFD No.7). The Sweetwater Union High School District
is also requesting annexation into a CFD. The applicant has met with the District and
is currently discussing the creation of CFD 7 which would service both Telegraph
Canyon Estates and Salt Creek Ranch. Mitigation of school impacts is outlined on page
157 of the FEIR.
Water Availabilitv Imuacts:
Significant and Unmitigated
Because Southern California is in its sixth consecutive critically dry year, new residential
development has the potential for significant water availability impacts. The project will
result in an estimated daily residential water demand of 210,000 gallons.
Mitil!:ation:
The County Water Authority is recommending a voluntary 10 percent reduction in water
consumption for new development through the use of low flow fixtures and drought-
tolerant landscaping. Prior to the recordation of the Final Map, a will-serve letter will
be required from the Otay Water District to verify that water facilities are available to
serve the project site. Water availability mitigation is outlined on page 157 to 158 of the
FEIR, as well as the requirements of the Water Conservation Plan.
14.
Public Health
Less Than Significant
Imuact:
An existing SDG&E transmission line corridor transects the eastern project boundary
containing twin 230 kV lines. Recent studies have been conducted regarding the
potential health effects of human exposure to the electric and magnetic fields (EMF)
created by transmission lines. The current status of the EMF issue is that there is no
/ ~ A 'It)
Page 11, Item ) \Ie ~
Meeting Date 8/25/92
scientific consensus regarding whether EMF exposure produces health impacts, and
additional studies are underway.
Mitilmtion:
There are currently no City policies limiting public exposure to EMF. Therefore, the
EIR states that the applicant shall comply with any future EMF policy adopted by the
City prior to consideration of the Final Map.
ALTERNATIVES ANALYSIS
Like the requirement to describe mItigation measures, the requirement to provide project
alternatives with an EIR is critical to CEQA's mandate to void significant environmental effects,
where feasible. This EIR describes a "range of reasonable alternatives to the project, or to the
location of the project, which could reasonably attain the basic objectives of the project," as well
as a comparative analysis of the merits of these alternatives. The alternatives analysis contained
in the EIR focused on alternatives which were capable of eliminating significant project impacts
or reducing them to a level of insignificance. The alternatives analysis discussion is on pages
175 to 179 of the FEIR.
CONCLUSION
The proposed Telegraph Canyon Estates Project will result in significant, unmitigated impacts
to air quality (cumulative), biology, and water availability (region-wide). Onsite and offsite
project alternatives were analyzed, and the "No Project" Alternative was the only alternative that
would avoid all significant impact. The "No Project" alternative is therefore environmentally
superior to the proposed project, however, project objectives cannot be met with this alternative.
Therefore, it is not determined to be a more appropriate alternative than the proposed project.
FISCAL IMPACT: Not Applicable.
WPC F:\home\pluming\22.92
ILl-A -II/iliA ../2..
RESOLUTION NO. ) ~1 b 1
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA CERTIFYING THE FINAL
ENVmONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR A PREZONE,
AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE I GENERAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN (GDP) AND PLANNED
COMMUNITY DISTRICT (PCD) REGULATIONS,
SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA (SPA) PLAN, PUBLIC
FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN (PFFP) , Am QUALITY
IMPROVEMENT PLAN (AQIP), AND WATER
CONSERVATION PLAN FOR TELEGRAPH CANYON
ESTATES (Em 91-05) SCH # 91071033
WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject matter of this resolution is identified
as a portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 595-0-70-22 consisting of 112.4 acres, denoted as the
"Project Site" on the attached Exhibit N ("Project Area"); and,
WHEREAS, an entity having control over all or a portion of the development of the
Project Area has proposed the redesignation of the Project Area as follows: 26.1 acres to Open
Space and Park/Recreational Facilities; 1.5 acres to Community Purpose Facility; and 9.4 acres
as a future State Route 125 easement, as shown on Exhibit B ("Proposed SPA Site Utilization
Plan"?
WHEREAS, the Staff of the City ("Staff') has determined that it will be necessary for
the City to "approve" the Project by consideration, now or in the future subject to the
discretionary activities identified in Section 1, "Executive Summary" under the sub-section
thereof, entitled "Project Description; and,
WHEREAS, based on a preliminary review of the Project, the Staff has determined that
the Project may have an adverse impact on the environment; and,
WHEREAS, the Staff has determined that the Project is not exempt, either statutorily or
categorically, from compliance with the statutory duty, as set forth in the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") to prepare an environmental impact report (Guidelines
15061); and,
WHEREAS it was concluded that there is substantial evidence, or a reasonable inference
from substantial evidence, that the Project may have a significant adverse effect on the
environment (Public Resources Code ("PRC") Section 21100, 21151) and therefore determined
to cause to be prepared an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") on the Project; and,
IFigure 3 from ErR page 6
2Figure 5, page 11 of ErR
\ ~ 'r\ - (~
WHEREAS, the City retained the services of a Consultant to prepare the DEIR on the
Project; and,
WHEREAS, a Draft Environmental Impact Report, dated May, 1992, ("DEIR")
evaluating the proposed Project was prepared; and,
WHEREAS, on May 21, 1992, the Staff filed a notice of completion ("NOC") of the
preparation of the DEIR with the Office of Planning and Research (Guidelines 15085[a]), and
indicated therein that the period for State Agency review and receipt of comments would be from
May 21, 1992 to July 6, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, on May 13, 1992, the Staff mailed through the United States Post Office
a Notice of Availability ("NOA") of the preparation of the DEIR to properties within 1,000
feet of the project site, and indicated therein that the period for public review and receipt of
comments would be from May 13, 1992 to July 22, 1992 ("Public Review Period"), and at the
same time of said mailing, published or otherwise gave in the manner required by law a notice
of the availability of the DEIR ("Notice of Availability") to the general public by newspaper
publication in the Star News on May 20, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, the DEIR was transmitted by the City of Chula Vista, as lead agency, to
all concerned parties for review and comment; and,
WHEREAS, written comments from the public on the DEIR were accepted during the
Public Review Period; and,
WHEREAS, as a result of comments from the public and other public agencies, no
significant new information was added to the DEIR, and the City has determined that the DEIR
did not need to be recirculated (PRC 21092.1); and,
WHEREAS, on July 22, 1992, the City Planning Commission, which is the designated
commission of the City for this purpose, held a public hearing for the purpose of evaluating and
responding to public comments, and in connection therewith, accepted public testimony on the
DEIR; and,
WHEREAS, City has provided response to comments made by any public agency on the
DEIR before certifying a Final EIR (PRC 21092.5); and,
WHEREAS, agency and public comments have been addressed in the Final
Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") for the Project; and,
Resolution
(SCH #91071033)
August 25, 1992
of the City Council of Chula Vista Certlfymg FEIR 91-05
Page 2
l~i\-I~
WHEREAS, the Final Environmental Impact Report was prepared in accordance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and its applicable Guidelines.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby find, determine, resolve and order as follows:
1. The Final Environmental Impact Report.
The Final Environmental Impact Report for the Project consists of:
A. Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR 91-05) SCH # 91071033, dated July,
1992, which contains
(1) The DEIR and comments on the DEIR;
(2) Responses to Comments on the DEIR; and,
(3) A Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
B. Appendices (A through J) to the FEIR
2. Certification.
The FEIR is hereby certified by the City Council to have been completed in compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act and all applicable guidelines (Guideline
15090) .
3. FEIR Reviewed and Considered.
The FEIR has been reviewed and considered by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista (Guideline 15090) prior to approval of the Project; and,
4. Resolution Not to Be Deemed Project Approval.
Nothing herein shall be deemed to constitute approval of the Project.
5. Record of Proceedings.
That the City Clerk shall certify to the passage and adoption of this resolution; shall
cause the same to be entered in the book of original resolutions of said City; shall make
Resolution
(SCH #91071033)
August 25, 1992
of the CIty Council of Chula Vista CertIfying FEIR 91-05
Page 3
\'-\:1\- l S
a minute of the passage and adoption thereof in the record of the proceedings of the City
Council of said City in the minutes of the meeting at which same is passed and adopted.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
U;ft{ U
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
of the City Council of Chula Vista Certifying FEIR 91-05
Resoluuon
(SCH #91071033)
August 25, 1992
JLtfl.-IJo
Page 4
-
,
\
\
I
I
I
I
,
"
SAN MIGUEL
. MOUNTAIN
<(
t:1
!!1
:I;
><
UJ
EASTLAKE
PROJECT SITE
~sr H
,
~~~
,
,
~..
~, "
1]f
No Scale
Ba.. Map From FORMA, 1"1
Affinis
Shadow Valley Center
847 Jamacha Road
EI~on.~ 92019
RELATIONSHIP OF SITE
. TO OTAV RANCH
AND EASTLAKE PROJECT AREAS
. \\4;)\-1
FIGURE 3
12'"
U"" )In;1
lIa-J-i~ If I t
Jhl 1
flln J p t I
~ 11111 II ill.
~ J I' ~n I
.::I ,... .1&' hI
. 4101
IZ'_ -..-...
--
------
~ i II
JII"
I I
! !
lln
l Jl
~:[
lllJ~
l'-tH\\_1 ~
.
..
'.
II)
III
II:
::l
l!
z
o
~
~
~
I/)
f
I/)
fa
~
If
I ...
f ~]-
~ ~ Jl~
i ~ Ii!
III
::: l-
iD
i:
x
UJ
=
t
RESOLUTION NO. EIR-91-05
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL
CERTIFY THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT FOR
A PREZONE, AMENDMENTS TO THE EASTLAKE I GENERAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN (GDP) AND PLANNED COMMUNITY
DISTRICT (PCD) REGULATIONS, SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA
(SPA) PLAN, PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN, AIR
QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN, AND WATER CONSERVATION
PLAN FOR TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES, (EIR 91-05) SCH
#91071033
WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject matter of this resolution is identified as a
portion of Assessor's Parcel Number 595-070-22 consisting of 112.4 acres, denoted as the
"Project Site" on the attached Exhibit A' ("Project Area"); and,
WHEREAS, an entity having control over all or a portion of the development of the Project
Area has proposed the redesignation of the Project Area as follows: 80.7 acres to Low to
Medium Residential (3 - 6 du/ac); 26.1 acres to Open Space and Parks/Recreational Facilities;
1.5 acres to Community Purpose Facility; and 9.4 acres as future State Route 125 easement, as
shown on Exhibit B ("Proposed SPA Site Utilization Plan"?
WHEREAS, the Staff of the City ("Staff") has determined that it will be necessary for the City
to "approve" the Project by consideration, now or in the future subject to the discretionary
activities identified in Section 1, "Executive Summary" under the sub-section thereof, entitled
"Project Description", of the FEIR; and,
WHEREAS, based on a preliminary review of the Project, the Staff has determined that the
Project may have an adverse impact on the environment; and,
WHEREAS, the Staff has determined that the Project is not exempt, either statutorily or
categorically, from compliance with the statutory duty, as set forth in the California
Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") to prepare an environmental impact report (Guidelines
15061); and,
WHEREAS it was concluded that there is substantial evidence, or a reasonable inference from
substantial evidence, that the Project may have a significant adverse effect on the environment
(Public Resources Code ("PRC") Section 21100, 21151) and therefore determined to cause to
be prepared an Environmental Impact Report ("EIR") on the Project; and,
'Figure 3 from EIR page 6
2Figure 5 page 11 of EIR
)4 A - \'1.
WHEREAS, the City retained the services of a Consultant to prepare the EIR on the
Project; and,
WHEREAS, a draft Environmental Impact Report, dated May, 1992, ("DEIR")
evaluating the proposed Project was prepared; and,
WHEREAS, on May 21 1992, the Staff fIled a notice of completion ("NOC") of the
preparation of the DEIR with the Office of Planning and Research (Guidelines 15085[a]), and
indicated therein that the period for State Agency review and receipt of comments would be from
May 21, 1992 to July 6, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, on May 13, 1992, the Staff mailed through the United States Post Office
a Notice of Availability ("NOA") of the DEIR to properties within 1,000 feet of the project
site, and indicated therein that the period for public review and receipt of comments would be
from May 13, 1992 to July 22, 1992 ("Public Review Period"), and at the same time of said
mailing, published or otherwise gave in the manner required by law a notice of the availability
of the DEIR ("Notice of Availability") to the general public by newspaper publication in the Star
News on May 20, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, the DEIR was transmitted by the City of Chula Vista, as lead agency, to
all concerned parties for review and comment; and,
WHEREAS, written comments from the public on the DEIR were accepted during the
Public Review Period; and,
WHEREAS, as a result of comments from the public and other public agencies, no
significant new information was added to the DEIR, and the City determined that the EIR need
not be recirculated (pRC 21092.1); and,
WHEREAS, on July 22, 1992, the City Planning Commission, which is the designated
Commission of the City for this purpose, held a public hearing for the purpose of accepting
public testimony on the DEIR; and,
WHEREAS, City has provided responses to comments made by any public agency on
the DEIR before certifying a final EIR (pRC 21092.5); and,
WHEREAS, agency and public comments have been addressed in the Final
Environmental Impact Report ("FEIR") for the Project; and,
WHEREAS, the Final Environmental Impact Report was prepared in accordance with the
provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act and its applicable Guidelines.
PC Resolution EIR-91-05
August 12, 1992
Page 2
If A- 2-D
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the Planning Commission of the City of
Chula Vista does hereby recommend that the City Council find, determine, resolve and order
as follows:
1. The Final Environmental Impact Report.
The Final Environmental Impact Report for the Project consists of:
A. Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR 91-05) SCH # 91071033, dated July,
1992, which contains
(1) Comments on the DEIR; and
(2) Responses to Comments on the DEIR.
B. Appendices (A through J) to the FEIR
2. Certification.
The FEIR is hereby certified by the City Council to have been completed in compliance
with the California Environmental Quality Act and all applicable guidelines (Guidelines
15090).
3. FEIR Reviewed and Considered.
The FEIR has been reviewed and considered by the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista (Guidelines 15090) prior to approval of the Project; and,
4. Resolution Not to Be Deemed Project Approval.
Nothing herein shall be deemed to constitute approval of the Project.
PC ResolutIon EIR-91-oS
August 12, 1992
Page 3
I LfA - ;2/
Signature Page to Planning Commission
Resolution EIR-91-05, dated August 12, 1992
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 12th day of August, 1992, by the following vote, to-wit:
AYES:
Chair Casillas, Commissioners Carson, Decker, Fuller, and Martin
NOES:
Commissioner Ray
ABSENT:
Commissioner Tuchscher
Joe D. Casillas, Chair
ATIEST:
Nancy Ripley, Secretary
(tceirpe.res)
PC Resolution EIR-91-05
August 12, 1992
Page 4
/~A -v.
-
\
SAN MIGUEL
MOUNTAIN
..:
!:::
!!l
J:
X
w'
EASTLAKE
PROJECT SrrE
~ST H
~
~~~
~APH
,
,
,
'1
\~
\\
"
~~
"
1]r
Ba.. Mlp From FORMA, 1"1
No Scal.
Affinis
Shadow Valley Center
&41 Jamacha Road
EI~on,~ 92019
RELATIONSHIP OF SITE
. TO OTAY RANCH
AN.D EASTLAKE PROJECT AREAS
-23
FIGURE 3
~ ! . J I I
II I p q I
, , I ,
IP-;i~ J If 1 t
If u z I. ; 11)1
i 11111. I I if I f
.::I f... 8.l' hI I
. eg)
121__~
U j J J
II U f f
, ,
1 1
tIn
.h Ii
~:[
lHl~
.) ttA - ';"1 .
.
~
III
III
a::
;:,
f!
~
~
I;
5
f
III
I
. ...
"]j
J .2 fi~
~ ~ Ii!
lXl
I-
iD
:c
x
w
:::
-
-
EXCERPT FROM RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MINUTES
OF JUNE 22, 1992
2. MaryAnn Miller reviewed EIR 91-05, Telegraph Canyon Estates (Baldwin). Discussion
and Questions from Commission included the following:
. Ghougassian - noise impacts from 125 could be a future impact.
. Kracha - p. S-5. proposed project will precede the Otay Ranch project. What would
happen if they do not become a part of Chula Vista? What happens to funding of
Chula Vista schools? Steve Doyle of Baldwin, 11975 EI Camino Real, clarified.
. Kracha - Ouestioned air Quality, park. recreation and open space. Park fees were
collected and distributed within districts. It is noted Mello Roos is proposed for
schools only. Builder fees pay for the public services.
. Hall - Discussed fiscal impact study; profitable balance in Eastlake High School,
considering elementary schools are going in the red. Auto license fees collected.
Effect of tax money collected. Effect of traffic on 125 if it becomes a toll road. Subir
Wada, City Engineer & Traffic discussed the toll road.
. Ghougassian - air pollution and traffic.
. Hall - exclusive mobile homes needs to be rezoned by council. Storage for water and
water line to be built; until then, it's under permit allocation program from Otay Water.
Following discussion, it was MSUP (Ghougassian/Fox) to recommend certification of the EIR
91-05, motion carried unanimously, 5-0. It was further moved and seconded (Kracha/Fox)
to forward RCC's comment and concern of air pollution, cumulative unmitigated issues to the
region; motion carried unanimously, 5-0.
)~II_~5
DRAFl
DRAFli
-'J
EXCERPT OFDRAFf MINUTES OF PLANNING COMMISSION MEETING OF 8/12/92
ITEM 1:
CONSIDERATION OF THE FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT FOR EIR-91-05, TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES
SUBDIVISION - The Baldwin Company
Environmental Review Coordinator Miller noted that the Draft EIR-92-05 for Telegraph Canyon
Estates Subdivision had been circulated to the public and the responses to comments received
during the period, including comments from the RCC, Planning Commission, and from the
public testimony received at the July 22 public hearing were included in the Final EIR. The
Final EIR also contained responses to comments received from the two local citizens who
attended the Planning Commission hearing on the draft, Norm Ross and Veronica Sissons. Due
to information obtained during the public review period and in preparation for the Final EIR,
changes had been made to the level of significance determinations for biology and water
availability. Ms. Miller stated that biology had been changed from "significant but mitigable"
to "significant and unmitigated" since there was no off-site mitigation specific site which could
be referred to at that time for a no-net-Ioss of wetland resources. It was being deemed
significant and unmitigated; however, if a site was identified, the impact could be reduced to
below a level of significance. The project applicant was working toward identifying a mitigation
site.
Ms. Miller said, also, that water availability impacts had been changed from "significant but
mitigable" to "significant and unmitigated" on a regionwide basis, because there was no
guarantee at the present time that reclaimed water would be available to the project site. If
reclaimed water became available to the site, this could also be reduced below significance.
Staff was requiring adoption of a statement of overriding considerations as a precaution.
Commissioner Decker asked if the two unmitigated areas were included in the Statement of
Overriding Considerations, would they have to be mitigated later? Ms. Miller answered that it
was anticipated that the applicant would be mitigating those impacts; however, to comply with
CEQA, the issues needed to be taken at face value, and the Statement of Overriding
Considerations needed to be adopted. If, in the future, those impact areas were reduced, it
would not be a concern.
Commissioner Decker, referring to page 23 of the Final EIR, Site Seismicity, asked the potential
impact to surrounding homes if the water tank is ruptured during seismic activity. He felt that
should be included in the EIR. Ms. Miller answered that it was not required to be analyzed
under CEQA, because it already existed. Those issues should have been analyzed at the time
the water facility was being considered. Commissioner Decker was concerned with what would
happen to the surrounding homes if the water tank burst. Marsha Gross, AFFINlS, the
environmental consultant for the project, stated that the engineering standards for steel tank
reservoirs were designed so those types of facilities were able to withstand earthquakes of a
certain magnitude and adverse weather conditions. She believed that would have been analyzed
when the Otay Water District proposed to install water facilities in that area, regardless of
whether the area was developed at that time. Commissioner Decker referred to a tank located
;iflJ -2~
PC Minutes
-2-
August 12, 1992
in the desert which had broken recently, and was concerned with the possibility of flooding
homes downhill from this tank.
Commissioner Decker also asked how the .9 acres for wetlands evolved, and if it was an
overflow from the EastLake development. The consultant said it met the Federal definition of
a wetland, which includes wetland areas which have formed as a result of nuisance runoff. The
biological value of this particular wetland was low; however, because it met the Federal
definition, it had to comply. Commissioner Decker was curious as to how it could be a wetland
if it didn't exist before the lake was installed at EastLake.
Commissioner Decker asked about the open space area and if the ratio was usually included.
Senior Planner Griffin said the scenic corridor was required by the General Plan, and the
easements couldn't be constructed upon. The easements count for the total open space for the
project even though they are required by planning documents or easements. The gross project
density would include those areas.
Regarding transportation, Commissioner Decker disagreed with the conclusion that traffic was
mitigable. He felt that the cumulative effects made it significant and unmitigable.
He asked staff to explain their rationale.
Environmental Review Coordinator Miller explained that the traffic report determined that
although certain segments and intersections would be lowered in the level of service, it was not
deemed to be significant. Looking at the future traffic improvements anticipated in the area
although now there could be an impact, given the probability that improvements would be made
in the area, it is determined insignificant based on certain assumptions.
Senior Planner Griffin added that one of the conditions of approval was that the Telegraph
Canyon Estates project would be subject to an allocation program which would result from a
study that was underway on the SR-125 corridor. Projects currently in the pipeline are
cumulatively more than the system can handle without the SR-125 corridor. The allocation
program would be initiated and no building permits or tentative maps could be approved for this
project until the study is complete. This project would have to comply with that allocation
program.
Commissioner Decker wished for the City Council to be aware of the cumulative impacts, and
that they were not mitigable now or in the near future. SR-125 would not be built soon, and
the Council needed to say they could live with that, and vote for the Statement of Overriding
Considerations on that basis.
MSC (Decker/Carson) 5-1 (Commissioner Ray voted against; Commissioner Tuchscher
absent) that the Planning Commission adopt a resolution certifying the Final ElR, excluding
the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, has been prepared in accordance with
CEQA, the State CEQA Guidelines, and the environmental procedures of the City of Chula
Vista.
/~A - ~'7
PC Minutes
-3-
August 12, 1992
MSC (Decker/Fuller) 5-1 (Commissioner Ray voted against; Commissioner Tuchscher
absent) to certify that the Planning Commission has considered the infonnation contained
in the EIR prior to reaching a decision on the project.
Commissioner Ray stated he had voted "no" on the recommendation to certify the Pinal EIR,
because he had voted against certification when he had sat on the Resource Conservation
Commission. He wished to maintain that consistency. He had an ongoing concern with the
cumulative impact of any of the EIRs.
ITEM 2:
PUBLIC HEARING: PCZ-92-A AND PCM-91-07: CONSIDERATION OF
PREZONING, GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND P-C
REGULATION AMENDMENTS, SPA PLAN AND PUBLIC FACILITIES
FINANCING PLAN FOR TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES - Baldwin
Vista Associates
Senior Planner Griffin showed some exhibits of the project area, and described the project and
the surrounding land uses. The proposal was for a maximum of 350 detached single-family lots
with three dwelling-unit types. Mr. Griffin noted that the project called for private streets and
was a gate-guarded community. He explained the contouring of the grading, and the slope
variation and the 30' maximum height of the internal slopes and noted that a two-story dwelling
would practically obscure them from the public view from both Telegraph Canyon Road and the
internal street system. Mr. Griffin explained the buffering and separation from the adjoining
homes, and the landscaping of the area.
Staff preferred public streets and recommended that I) if the Commission accepted staff request
to require public streets, the main spine street be cul-de-saced and any through traffic use
another, more circuitous, route to slow traffic going downhill; and 2) that the community
purpose facility sites be combined into one site and either move them to the project entry or
adjacent to the common open space area in the center of the project; or preferably locate a
community purpose facility off-site south of Telegraph Canyon Road in the first phase of Otay
Ranch, assuming an agreement could be reached with the City to provide that site in the Otay
Ranch. If not, it would go back to one of the on-site alternatives which moved it away from the
existing residents and into the project itself.
Senior Planner Griffin noted an amendment to the traffic study showed that a public street
system would not generate any adverse impacts on the surrounding street network. Also
included in the recommendations was adoption of the water conservation and air quality plans,
which are required in conjunction with the SPA Plan. Based on the findings in the report, as
amended by a memo forwarded to the Commission prior to the meeting which added one finding
to the Planned Community findings, staff recommended approval of the project.
Commissioner Decker asked if the streets as planned would be adequate for public streets, as
well as private. Senior Planner Griffin concurred. He noted that the central spine street
additionally provided for a parkway between the curb and sidewalk and a wider sidewalk on the
)'fA - 28'
PC Minutes
-4-
August 12, 1992
westerly side to provide a trail connection through the project. The proposal was to allow the
trail to be used by the public. Even though vehicles could not use the street system, pedestrians
and bicyclists would be able to use the spine street under the private street scenario.
Commissioner Ray asked if there was any provision for drainage of runoff from the EastLake
property. Mr. Griffin noted the applicant had answered affirmatively.
Referring to page 2-2, #4, Commissioner Carson asked when the water offset policy would be
available. Assistant Planning Director Lee said it was still under development by the
Environmental Resources Manager.
In answer to Commissioner Carson, Mr. Griffin said the applicant was subject to the full park
fees. Private facilities are not credited against the public needs. Commissioner Carson
questioned the finding regarding private recreation sites and common open space contributing
to long-term liveability.
Commissioner Carson, regarding the fourth finding, did not feel a private recreation area would
supplement the public. Senior Planner Griffin said they were not replacing the public park
facilities but were supplementing the private yard spaces. Commissioner Carson also asked from
what adverse impacts were the surrounding areas being protected. Mr. Griffin answered it
would be from the noise and activity associated with the recreation areas if they were located
adjacent to the adjoining homes.
Commissioner Carson asked if the community facilities district for Salt Creek Ranch had been
established. Environmental Coordinator Miller answered that it was CFD #7, and was in the
process of being established. Commissioner Carson was concerned with the finding. Mr.
Griffin assured her that the project proponent was working with the school districts to form the
district to include both projects at once up front. The Telegraph Canyon Estates project would
not come up later; it was being formed to include both projects at this point. Commissioner
Carson felt the facility would take place anyway, because the project had been approved. The
formation would already take place with the Salt Creek Ranch project. She felt the wording for
this finding was wrong. It was explained that the formation of the district with both projects was
preferable from the District's point of view.
Commissioner Carson, referring to 1-20, under Community Tax Structure, asked the rate of
vacancies of newly constructed homes in the City of Chula Vista. Mr. Griffin did not know the
rate, but based on financing constraints, most of the new developments were being constructed
in small increments based on commitments. He did not feel there were many vacant units,
although the market was slow. Commissioner Carson was concerned with the number of homes
being built.
Commissioner Carson asked if the Health Department monitored the area for mosquitos. Ms.
Miller said the burden would be on the homeowners to complain to the appropriate agency.
)~A-)'~
PC Minutes
-5-
August 12, 1992
Anytime there is standing water, it would be attracting potential vectors and it could become a
nuisance to the homeowners in the area.
Commissioner Carson, regarding input of fertilizer, pesticides, and herbicides into the drainage
asked who would be dumping this. Senior Planner Griffin answered that the common recreation
areas would probably be replaced by private lots. There wouldn't be private facilities, so there
may be more use of household-type pesticides and fertilizers that would be adjacent to the central
swale area.
Questioning page 15 of the engineering report and discussion of landscape maintenance on page
2-41 of the General Development Plan, Commissioner Carson asked if the homeowners
association could specify certain types of drought-resistant plants or irrigation on private lots.
Mr. Griffin said it would be feasible and the Commission could include that as a
recommendation; however, the implementation and enforcement by the homeowners group may
be difficult. Commissioner Carson was concerned with outside water usage and felt the
Commission needed to take a stand.
Assistant Planning Director Lee suggested two possibilities: 1) that there may be a specific
limitation of water for each homeowner citywide, with the choice being the homeowner's as to
how to use it; and 2) the City may adopt a standard on a citywide basis relating to landscaping.
He felt that would be easier than trying to impose limitations on certain areas.
Commissioner Casillas noted that was the intent of developing a proposal to develop the
comprehensive plan in coordination with the Metropolitan Water District. It doesn't Seem to be
a priority with the elected officials; Commissioner Casillas thought the Commission's concern
should be reiterated. Commissioner Casillas concurred with Commissioner Carson that
education of the people regarding water usage was very important. Assistant Planning Director
Lee assured the Commission that staff is still working with the water policy issue, plus working
with the developers to provide education to the homebuyers.
Commissioner Fuller asked what the City's role was in the negotiation with the applicant
regarding a community purpose site off-site. Senior Planner Griffin said it would be a mutual
agreement between the City and the developer that the site is appropriate for a community
purpose facility and the City would have to agree to that. It would take place in the first phase
of Otay Ranch, so it could be brought on line as soon as possible. There would have to be some
assurances that the property would be coming into the City and it would be available within a
certain time. Mr. Griffin stated that the applicant had indicated compliance with that condition,
as written, so if the agreement couldn't be reached before this project was built out, the CPF
site would need to be provided on site in one of the two alternate locations.
Commissioner Fuller was of the opinion that the locations indicated in the project site behind
the water tower were appropriate or adequate. She asked if an alternate off-site location were
found, would the entire project have to be redesigned. Senior Planner Griffin answered that
those areas could be parceled into some additional single-family lots.
) ~ A - do
PC Minutes
-6-
August 12, 1992
Commissioner Fuller questioned the possible reduction in density; when the reduction could be
made. Mr. Griffin said there may be a minor adjustment in the basic yield for grading and
interface and compatibility during review and consideration of the tentative map. The lower
density alternative was an exercise through CEQA which had to be included in the document,
but no specific design proposal had been made for a lower density project. Any reduction in
the number of lots would be done at the tentative map stage; however, the Commission could
condition the approval of the SPA with any specific direction, it could be considered when
working with the applicant at the tentative map stage.
Senior Planner Griffin pointed out that condition 38, page 2-5, provided that approval of the
SPA Plan was not necessarily approving a certain yield, and it could change with the tentative
map.
Commissioner Fuller said she would feel more comfortable with 280 units rather than 350. She
was uncomfortable with the density of EastLake and continuing that trend east.
Assistant Planning Director Lee pointed out that the lot sizes were either equal to or greater than
the lots generally in the area and were consistent with the development in the area.
Commissioner Decker asked the total number of lots in the plan, exclusive of the CFD lots.
Mr. Griffin answered there were approximately 341; with the replacement of the CFD sites with
lots, a maximum of eight lots could be placed there, which would keep the total below 350.
There was a condition included which would keep the maximum at 350.
Commissioner Decker, referring to page 5 of the mitigation conditions, #34, asked why 3' wide
solid base for fences. Mr. Griffin said it was a requirement of the Parks & Recreation
Department for walls or fencing which fronts upon open space maintenance districts. Without
the solid base, there was a problem of maintenance--demarcation between the open space district
and private yards.
Commissioner Decker asked what would happen to the overflow of water from EastLake. Mr.
Griffin explained that it would be taken underground through the primary north/south spine
street system down to the channel.
Commissioner Ray, regarding public versus private streets, was concerned about the impact to
the residents in regard to children crossing the road, and additional traffic coming from the
College Estates and potentially from EastLake. Would more street lights or signs be required
in the project itself! Mr. Griffin stated the traffic consultant had considered that and did not feel
there would be any adverse impacts in the sense of facilities, thresholds, or service. There
would be a signal at Telegraph Canyon Road, and opportunity for pedestrians to cross the street
with the signal. Also, the internal system would be reconfigured to slow through traffic.
Commissioner Ray asked if the gated community would significantly reduce traffic. He was
concerned with the safety of children accessing the park across the street rather than the
) 'fA - .3 I
PC Minutes
-7-
August 12, 1992
threshold standard. Senior Planner Griffin said there would be some additional traffic with
public streets and a potential safety factor, but not considered significant by the experts.
There was general discussion by the Commissioners regarding the conditions relating to public
versus private streets.
This being the time and the place as advertised, the public hearing was opened.
Steve Doyle, representing Baldwin Company, 11975 El Camino Real, San Diego, 92130, said
he was impressed with the Commission's attention to detail. He gave some background of the
project, and described the procedure used to develop the current property. Mr. Doyle said they
were proposing a private, gate-guarded community. They wanted to have an identity, something
different, which would create a reason for homebuyers to look at the project. Mr. Doyle felt
that through traffic by automobiles would be restricted by a gate-guarded community, but they
were encouraging pedestrian and bicycle traffic. Mr. Doyle agreed that was not a good place
for the community purpose facility sites, but as a gate-guarded community, there were no good
CPF sites in the project since they needed public access. They would be working with staff to
come to an agreement to relocate those facilities to the first phase of Otay Ranch. Regarding
the cumulative impact on water availability, Baldwin was proposing and was conditioned to dual
pipe the project, providing reclaimed water piping for the project by hooking up to the EastLake
project when it is constructed. If it is not hooked to EastLake, it will be hooked into the Otay
Ranch project during its first phase of construction. Baldwin would also provide .9 acre offsite
mitigation for the biological impacts regarding wetlands. There would be underground piping
from the bottom of the slope to the drainage channel in front of the project to handle the
drainage from EastLake.
Mr. Doyle stated the project added traffic to the project, but it did not go over the level of
service thresholds which were required to be met by the Growth Management Plan.
Cumulatively, there is an excess of traffic; City staff is working with a consultant to develop an
allocation program; the project could not get an approved tentative map or pull a building permit
until that allocation program is decided.
Regarding Community Purpose Facility #7, Mr. Doyle said it had been announced by the
Elementary School District that the application had been accepted to create CPF #7. One CPF
with the two projects is a better mechanism to provide the facilities for the School District.
Commissioner Fuller asked Mr. Doyle if the private streets would increase the fees of the
homeowners. Mr. Doyle said there was an estimated monthly homeowners association fee of
$125 to $150 per month, with a private gate-guarded community including the maintenance of
the streets according to City standards, swimming pool, spa, tennis courts. There would be a
Mello-Roos for school facilities; there would not be an assessment district or any other type of
financing district for the public facilities because they were local-serving only.
JifA -- 301.
PC Minutes
-8-
August 12, 1992
Commissioner Ray asked if the maintenance of the streets included chip-seal. Mr. Doyle replied
affirmatively.
Commissioner Casillas asked if there was a provision for parking RVs. Mr. Doyle said there
had been discussion with San Diego Gas & Electric who has an easement which runs along the
easterly property line and had agreed to allow parking for the tennis courts and a certain number
of RV spaces.
Commissioner Decker questioned how the gated section would be handled if the northwestern
lots were included in the project, rather than as CPF lots. Using overhead projection, Mr.
Doyle showed examples of how that would be done.
No one else wishing to speak, the public hearing was closed.
Chair Casillas asked Senior Planner Griffin to summarize the recommendation of staff and the
options to amend the recommendations.
Mr. Griffin stated that the primary unresolved issue between staff and the applicant was the
public versus private street issue. By accepting the staff recommendation, as submitted to the
Commission, a public street system would be required rather than a private. If the Commission
preferred a private street system, the Commission should exclude condition no. 11. By adopting
the conditions as proposed, the Commission would also be providing the applicant with the
alternative of providing the CPF site off the property. If agreement could not be accomplished
between staff and the applicant regarding the CPF site, it would be relocated from the northerly
boundary at another more appropriate location on the property.
Commissioner Fuller, regarding public versus private streets, asked if private streets would lend
more safety for children and access to EastLake Park.
Commissioner Ray said he was concerned with the additional danger in the project area by going
to a public road system rather than the private.
Commissioner Fuller concluded that the concern was with additional through traffic for people
wanting to access the EastLake project by entering this project. Commissioner Ray added that
those accessing the eastern portion of the College Estates area may go through this project.
Senior Planner Griffin explained that if the option to adopt the staff recommendation for public
streets, another condition would require that the spine street would be cul-de-saced and through
traffic would be rerouted. This would require a more circuitous route and slow through traffic.
Commissioner Decker suggested that the Commission vote in two parts in order to segregate the
issue of the street system.
)'fA - a.3
PC Minutes
-9-
August 12, 1992
MS (Fuller/Martin) that based on the rmding contained in Section D of the staff report,
that the Planning Commission adopt a motion recommending that the City Council approve
PCZ-92-A and PCM-91-07; Consideration of Prezoning, General Development Plan and P-C
District Regulation Amendments, SPA Plan and Public Facilities Financing Plan for
Telegraph Canyon Estates, subject to Conditions 1 through 10, and 16 through 39,
including the rmding that the proposed prezoning is consistent with the City of Chula Vista
General Plan.
Assistant Planning Director Lee suggested that the Commission may wish to add a condition
condition which indicated that full park fees would be required of this project which would be
used to pay for and develop other parks in the area. This had been a concern of Commissioner
Carson.
Commissioner Carson stated she felt it should be included.
Commissioner Decker asked if the Commission voted to make this project public, would that
portion of the development which is parkland reduce the park fee. Mr. Lee answered
negatively. They would still be private parks.
Commissioner Carson said that based on Condition 38, since the Planning Commission would
have an opportunity to look at the number of dwellings that would be there, she had some
suggestions regarding reduction in density.
VOTE:
6-0 (Commissioner Tuchscher absent)
MS (FullerlRay) that the project be allowed to contain private streets.
Commissioner Decker asked if it would not be better to vote on items 11 through 15 in one
package.
RESTATEMENT OF MOTION:
Commissioner Fuller made a motion that conditions 11, 12, 13, 14, and 15 be deleted.
Senior Planner Griffin stated that item 15 was related to walls and could stand on its own.
Commissioner Ray clarified that approval of any or all of items 11 through 15 would still be
subject to tentative map approval for configuration of the street and roadways.
There was discussion regarding which conditions should remain for the project to go ahead with
private streets. Commissioner Carson asked staff if conditions 12, 13, and 14 should be
considered.
)'l-A ... .a~
PC Minutes
-10-
August 12, 1992
Senior Planner Griffin said if it was the desire of the Commission to go with private streets,
would there also be a desire to have the street network reconfigured. If the Commissioners
voted to accept the private street system, the conditions would be adjusted accordingly.
Commissioner Fuller clarified that the motion should incorporate private streets, the design of
which should be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer. Senior Planner Griffin
concurred.
RESTATEMENT OF MOTION:
MS (Fuller/Ray) that the project should incorporate private streets, the design of which
would be subject to approval of tbe City Engineer.
Discussion:
Commissioner Carson said she would vote 'no' because she felt they should be public streets.
Because of prior experience, she felt the project would come back for the City to take over
maintenance of the streets.
Assistant Planning Director Lee said that situation had occurred where streets met structural
street standards but not necessarily the street width. This project met all City standards; there
was on the part of staff, however, a concern that homeowners generally are not equipped to
handle street maintenance. If it is not taken care of in a systematic fashion, the streets start to
deteriorate before they realize the expense which would be involved in maintaining the streets.
He said it was a concern of staff that the people would come back to the City for maintenance.
In this case, there would be a homeowners association because of the private amenities and there
would be more communication. Also, because it was a large area, and there would be an effect
on the overall circulation with a large gated community.
Commissioner Decker asked how many miles of street were in the project. Mr. Lee answered
there were approximately 3 miles.
Commissioner Carson noted that she would vote for the public street system.
Commissioner Ray asked if the City could be contracted to maintain the roads on a regular basis
paid for through the homeowners fees, so they could maintain their gated community but still
be required to maintain it at a regular interval using the same contractor.
Senior Civil Engineer Ullrich answered that the main reason was the liability which the City
would incur by maintaining it and having equipment there. There was a possibility of suit if
there was a problem. The City preferred not to. The streets should be totally public or totally
private.
I~A - ~{""
PC Minutes
-11-
August 12, 1992
The Chairman had temporarily left the meeting, so Vice-Chair Decker declared a 3-minute
recess at 9:20 p.m. The Commission reconvened at 9:23 p.m.
MOTION WITHDRAWN:
Commissioner Fuller, after further consideration, withdrew her motion.
MSUC (Decker/Carson) 6-0 (Commissioner Tuchscher absent) to accept Conditions 11, 12,
13, 14, and 15 as stated.
ITEM 3:
ADOPTION OF CEQA FINDINGS AND OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS -TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES SUBDIVISION,
EIR-91-05
MS (Decker/Martin) that the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the
attached CEQA Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations.
Commissioner Carson asked for change of wording to No. 5 of the Statement of Overriding
Considerations as follows: "Approval of the project will enhance formation of new Community
Facilities Districts (CFD) for city schools."
The maker of the motion and the second accepted the modification.
RESTATED MOTION:
That the Planning Commission recommend that the City Council adopt the attached CEQA
Findings and Statement of Overriding Considerations, with the cbange in language
incorporated.
VOTE: 6-0 (Commissioner Tuchscher absent)
/ifA- ~
/L/IJ
WATER CONSERVATION PLAN
FOR THE
TELEGRAPH CANYON PROJECT
MAY 1992
Wilson Engineering
Consulting Engineers
)L/4 ~37
Introduction
In recent years, due to the ongoing drought conditions in California, the subject
of water conservation has been given increased attention. The growing
awareness of the need and value of water conservation has been sparked by
local and regional water purveyors concerned about meeting the water demands
of their customers during a time where water supplies have diminished. Water
conservation provides an alternative approach to the dual problems of
increasing demand for water in a community and finding new water sources to
meet that demand. The intent of water conservation is to manage water demand
so that the customers get the same service from less water.
Much has been done to educate consumers about the serious implications of a
long-term drought and the need for water conservation, but there is a practical
limit to the percentage reduction of water use in established communities. This
limit is a result of the types of plumbing fixtures installed in existing homes as
well as the difficulty in altering consumers' established pattern of water use.
Anywater conservation effort, voluntary or mandatory, requires the cooperation
of the public. Public information should be utilized to inform and convince the
consumer that a change in personal water use habits is in everyone's best
interest. The best long term results are expected to be achieved by educating
children in water conservation.
In recent years, the private development sector has become more attuned to the
concerns of water availability and has recognized the value of addressing water
conservation issues throughout planned development projects. By incorporating
low water use plumbing fixtures, promoting drought tolerant landscaping, and
providing educational materials to homeowners within the development project,
private developments can do much to cultivate an interest in water conservation
and establish new patterns of water use. These efforts can have significant
impacts with regard to reducing the need for securing and importing larger
quantities of water for use in San Diego County.
I
/1//)-5/<:/
PurDose
This report presents a review of the presently available technologies and
practices which result in water conservation in primarily residential
developments. The purpose of this report is to determine which of these
technologies and practices are most cost effective to implement within the
Telegraph Canyon project.
Based on an analysis of cost versus benefit, this report will present
recommendations for water conservation measures which will be incorporated
into the planning and design of the Telegraph Canyon project. A proposed
water conservation plan will identify the incremental costs associated with
installing water saving technologies and present the long-term benefits with
regard to water use reduction for the project.
Proposed development within the Telegraph Canyon project boundary includes
350 single family residential units. Because this project consists of residential
development only, the emphasis of this report will be on urban water control
devices.
Approximately half of the water used by residences in California is used
outdoors. For this reason, several options are presented that serve to reduce
outdoor water use. The latest water conservation devices will be presented
along with an evaluation of their feasibility.
Although not covered in detail, there are several secondary benefits to
conserving water that should be kept in mind when reviewing material in this
report. These benefits include reduced sewage flows, reduced natural gas use,
and reduced electricity use. Using less water in the shower, for example,
reduces the amount of energy required to heat the water and reduces the
amount of water input into the sewer system.
2
/L//J-J C)
Telel!raDb Canvon Proiect Water Use
Water usage is affected by, among other things, climate and the type of
development. In California, recent trends towards the construction of more
multi-unit housing, the general reduction in residential lot size, and a number
of local agency water conservation programs in effect are all tending to reduce
per capita water consumption. Total water use within the boundaries of the San
Diego County Water Authority is about 241 gallons per person per day and total
use within the boundaries of the Otay Water District is about 223 gallons per
person per dayl.
These values take into account commercial, agricultural, and industrial water
uses as well as residential use. The City of San Diego Water Utilities
Department calculated that an average single family household used
approximately 372 gallons per day in 1989. Assuming three persons per
household, this equates to an average residential water use of 124 gallons per
person per day.
Based on 350 dwelling units and a household size of 3.22 people per dwelling
unit, the expected population of the Telegraph Canyon development is 1,127.
Table 1 shows the projected water use for the Telegraph Canyon project.
Notice that the total projected water use is 286,280 gpd. It is anticipated that
94,248 gallons per day (average) of reclaimed water will be used within
Telegraph Canyon for irrigation of easements, parks and maintained open
space. This use of reclaimed water directly offsets potable water use on the
Telegraph Canyon project by 33 percent, or an estimated 104 acre-feet per year.
3
/11/) ~ /.1 {J
Table 1
Projected Water Use for Telegraph Canyon
Domestic Indoor
Domestic Irrigation
Domestic Parksl CPF
Open Spacel Parksl CPF
350 DUs
7.6 Acres
3.7 Acres
26.4 Acres
450 GPD/DU
3,570 GPDI AC
2,000 GPDI AC
3,570 GPDIDU
157,500
27,132
7,400
94,248 .
Total Water Use
286,280
192,032
Potable Water Use
Reclaimed Water Use
94,248
. Proposed to be irrigated with reclaimed water.
Water Rate
The water rate used to estimate the potable water savings in this study is $1.07
per 100 cubic feet. This rate represents an average that was computed from
Section 25 of the Otay Water District's Code of Ordinances. Under this
ordinance, the monthly charge is $0.91 per 100 cubic feet for the first 500 cubic
feet of use and $1.16 per 100 cubic feet for water use from 500 cubic feet to
2,500 cubic feet. An average water use of 1,500 cubic feet per month was used
to establish the average cost of potable water for the Telegraph Canyon project.
Rates differ according to land use, but since Telegraph Canyon is a residential
development, $1.07 per 100 cubic feet was considered appropriate. Based on
the Code of Ordinances, the current cost of reclaimed water from Otay Water
District is $1.17 per 100 cubic feet.
4
/~~4..L/ /
Water Conservation Measures
Implementing water conservation measures before the construction of a new
development project provides an opportunity to include measures that might not
be feasible or cost effective to retrofit within a developed area. There are
several measures described below that would be expensive to retrofit, but may
be cost effective if included in the initial construction. From the Department
of Water Resources2, statistics on several indoor and outdoor water
conservation measures were obtained and are listed along with a brief
description below. The statistics represent results from surveys of
manufacturers of the various water conservation devices. Indoor and outdoor
measures are discussed separately.
fNDOOR MEASURES
Ultra-Low Flow Toilet - The ultra-low flow toilet is designed to reduce water
used for toilet flushing to approximately 1.6 gallons per flush. This compares
to a standard low flush toilet which is rated at 3.5 gallons per flush. Section
17921.3 of the California Health and Safety Code requires that all toilets in
buildings constructed after January I, 1983 use a maximum of 3.5 gallons per
flush. This standard will be used as a basis for evaluating the benefits of
installing ultra-low flow toilets. It is expected that an ordinance will be passed
by January, 1992 requiring ultra low flow toilets to be installed in all new
construction. The toilet is the largest single inside use of water so large savings
can be realized by installing ultra-low flow toilets.
5
,/ L/ A ' !-/;J,
Ultra-Low Flow Showerhead - Ultra-low flow showerheads reduce the flow rate
for showers to 1.5 gallons per minute, whereas standard low flow showerheads
use 2.75 gallons per minute. California regulations require that all showerheads
sold in the state have a maximum flow rate of 2.75 gallons per minute. This
standard will be used as a basis for evaluating the benefits of installing ultra-
low flow showerheads.
Faucet Aerators - Aerators can save water by reducing both the flow rate and
splash, thereby increasing wetting effectiveness. Standard faucets have average
rated flow rates of 3.25 gpm and faucets with aerators have a flow rate of about
2.75 gpm. This translates into a daily savings of about 0.5 gallons per person.
Water Efficient Clothes Washer - Efficient clothes washers are designed to
reduce the amount of water used per load. Efficient clothes washers may use
about 45 gallons per load, whereas standard washers use about 55 gallons per
load. Clothes washers are often supplied by the owner so it is often times their
decision whether or not to install the more efficient and costly machines.
Water Efficient Dishwasher - Efficient dishwashers, like clothes washers, are
designed to reduce the amount of water used per load. Efficient dishwashers
use about 11 gallons per load versus standard dishwashers that use about 14
gallons per load. Since dishwashers are usually installed in new construction
projects, it is up to the developer whether or not to implement this measure.
Water Pressure Reduction - Pressure reducing valves are used to lower water
consumption through system leakage by reducing the pressure head to between
50 and 60 psi. Lower water pressure also reduces the flow rate from faucets in
wash basins resulting in more efficient use of the water. This device is mainly
useful in areas where water pressure is greater than 60 psi.
6
) L). jJ ,/,/7
I',' / 7/
OUTDOOR MEASURES)
~-
--</<-
.-
Water Conservation Guide - It is often a good idea to produce a landscape
watering guide and distribute it to the homeowners of a new development
project. The guide is designed to educate the homeowner on the efficient
irrigation of landscaping. Studies have shown that increased public awareness
and information is very important in an effective water conservation plan 3.
Besides efficient irrigation, a home water conservation guide can include
information on general conservation techniques, such as listing commonly
available drought resistant plants, and explaining how to install efficient
irrigation systems such as drip irrigation.
A sample of some tips that should be included in a water conservation guide are
-
listed below. -
. Select drought resistant plants.
. Irrigate early in the morning.
. Use drip irrigation as opposed to sprinklers to reduce
evaporation losses.
. Use soil moisture sensors for large turf areas.
. Build basins around trees and plants to avoid water run off.
. Use mulch around plants to absorb and retain water better.
. Sweep sidewalks and patios rather than hosing them off.
. Do not leave water running while washing car.
7
)li/?- JIll
. Do not leave water running while washing dishes, shaving, or
brushing teeth.
. Check for and fix leaks in pipes, faucets, and toilets.
This list is not intended to be all inclusive, but should provide some ideas on
what to include in a water conservation guide.
Low Water Use Landscaninl! - The purpose of this measure is to replace the
fa...miliar ornamental plants imported from the east coast with olants thatare
-
more adapted to the hot and dry conditions of California. Thes lants require
less water an ,II ITngated properly, will result in water savings. This measure
is especially attractive in new developments because low water use plants are
no more costly to plant than the familiar ornamental plants. Under this
measure turf area is not reduced; the substitution is made in the border areas
surrounding the turf. Water savings from low water use plants is estimated to
be 7.5% of outdoor water use.
Xeriscaninl! - Xeriscaping involves several principles that all serve to red uce
water use. These principles include reduction of turf area, use of low water use
plants, efficient irrigation, use of mulches to reduce evaporation from the soil,
and appropriate maintenance. The limiting of turf size provides the most
significant savings of water. Xeriscaping, while still attractive, can cut outdoor
water use by 50% if maintained properly.
Soil Moisture Sensors - Soil moisture sensors for automatic electronic systems
I
permit irrigation only when the turf needs water. Soil moisture sensors can
produce impressive water savings while permitting accurate and unattended
irrigation. Soil moisture sensors are particularly effective for large turf areas
such as those typically found in parks and multi-family residential
developments. It is estimated that this device can reduce outdoor water use in
-
these areas by 25 % . 0
'-
8
/ L/4 .I;I~
Automatic Timer Shutoffs for Manual Hose Systems - In the event that a home
is manually watered, automatic timer shutoffs are available for hoses so that it
becomes convenient to irrigate more accurately. The hose is shut off
automatically after the desired amount of time rather than when the homeowner
returns to shut it off. The effectiveness of this measure is further increased if
the homeowner has a knowledge of how long to irrigate. This device is expected
to reduce outdoor water use by 15% for houses using hoses to irrigate.
There are other types of irrigation systems available for use, but statistics on
their effectiveness in saving water were not readily available. An automatic
timer controlled sprinkler system is available and serves to eliminate the
possibility of forgetting to turn off the sprinklers. Drip irrigation systems are
also available. These systems reduce evaporation losses and losses due to wind
blown spray. In the past few years there have been amendments to the Zoning
Ordinance which establishes regulations and guidelines to conserve water on
outdoor landscaping in projects requiring County approval. This trend is
expected to continue to control the amount of water that will be used outdoors
in residential projects.
Water Conservation Costs
Costs for the various water saving measures are listed in Table 2. The
incremental cost presented in Table 2 represents the additional amount of
money required per household to implement a water conservation device, as
opposed to a standard device, in new construction projects. The benefit over
the service life of a measure is divided by its incremental cost to determine the
benefit/ cost ratio, as shown in Table 3. The higher the benefit of a measure is
relative to its cost, the more feasible it is to implement. A benefit! cost ratio
of 1 implies that the benefits received from a measure are equal to the cost of
implementing that measure. Therefore, all water conservation measures in
Table 3 with a benefit! cost ratio greater than 1 will more than pay for
themselves in water savings if implemented. Also, remember that additional
benefits are received by reduced sewage volume and energy savings. All cost
data was revised to January 1991, dollars using an ENR-CCI-LA of 59954.
9
/ L-/4 - L-/~'
Table 2
Costs for Water Conservation Devices
(All Costs in January 1991 Dollars)
< ..i.~...... StaJldll.rd Low Water Incremental
~~o;'u. .....
Co~t, U$e COd, 1\ ....... < CQst,
< ......... .<< douars delllar. 1,EJ)tJ ..... ..... . dollars! EDU
< ....... \<
<<<< .... < .....
Toilet 99 131 1.8 58
Showerhead 3 10 1.7 12
Faucet Aerator ~--- 3 3.4 10
Clothes Washer 517 633 I 116
Dishwasher 480 513 I 33
Pressure Reducing Valve ---- 165 I 165
Low Water Use Plants l 930 930 ---- 0
Xeriscape lJ 1,550 5,170 ---- 3,620
Soil Moisture Sensors * ---- 110 I 110
Automatic Timer ---- 20 2 40
Shutoffs for Manual Hose ~
Systems
Water Conservation _.-- 2 I 2
Guide x:
Water Reclamation 0 100,000* ---- 100,000*
-Total cltimated cost for the entire Telegraph Canyon project.
10
/L/1- L/7
~
-~
.~
\
,...
Table 3
Telegraph Canyon Water COD..rvatioD Me..ure.
(All eoata in January 1991 Dollara)
> I> > i>>.>
i.... .V.Lllt. . ....... >~"""'I> >>
> ii.
....... iF > ii >Ii.> ...... ..................W.~~~t.........
Vlilter FUnttiOn 7]fi';- .......t
...C!>iOti........... .....'.............o""E.....................
ConservatiOn .......,... mlllli_Ptt
"e..ute ,.,.u, 'e!lJdoOl~ ii
......... ....... (S/DUnl') ii:;;" >> >>i
1 2 3 4 5 6
........... ......... >> ........... ...,
INSIDE .> > > ..... ........ >> ..>........>
Ul tra low Flow Reduces FLush 24.0 58 25 12.53 313.26 5.4
Toilet Volume
Ultra Low Flow Reduces Shower 15.0 12 15 7.83 117.47 9.8
Shower Flow Rate
Faucet Aerator Appearance of 1.5 10 7 0.78 5.48 0.55
Greater Flow
Efficient Reduces 9.0 116 12 4.70 56.39 0.49
Clothes Washer Flow/Load
Efficient Reduces 1.5 33 12 0.78 9.40 0.28
Dishwasher Flow/Load
Pressure Reduces Flow 9.0 165 20 4.70 93.98 0.57
Reducing Valve Rate
... ................i....... ...i.................,....i....,.................... ....... >
OUTSIDE
low Water Use lowers Demand 27.0 0 20 14.10 281.93 (very high)
landsc8De for Watering
Xeriscaping Lower Demand 90.0 3,620 20 46.99 939.78 0.26
Landsc8Ding
Soil Moisture More Efficient 45.0 110 15 23.49 352.42 3.2
Sensors Watedng
Automatic Precise, Timed 27.0 40 5 14.10 70.48 1.8
Timer Shutoff Watering
Water Increases 30.0 2 5 15.66 78.32 39.2
Conservation Watering
Guide Efficiency
1l
Explanation and Sample Calculations for Table 3
Column 1 =
Savings per capita x 2.88 capita/DU average.
Column 2 =
Estimated cost per dwelling unit, See Table 3.
Column 3 =
Estimated service life.
Column 4 =
Column 1 x ($1.071 100 cf) x (1 cfl7.48 gallon)
x (365 dayl year)
Column 5 -
Column 3 x Column 4
Column 6 =
Benefitl cost ratio = Column 51 Column 2
Note: cf = cubic feet
12
,It//)- L/9
TVDical Water Conservation Plan
Table 4 shows some of the water conservation devices and their combined
savings if they are implemented. Notice that not all of the conservation
measures in Table 3 are listed in Table 4. This is because some of the
measures, especially outdoor measures, are overlapping in purpose. Because
an item is not listed in Table 4, however, does not imply that it is not feasible.
The purpose of Table 4 is to provide a typical water conservation plan for a
single family dwelling unit and to demonstrate the potential water savings
associated with such a plan. Note that implementing these devices results in a
water savings of 117 gallons per household per day while maintaining a
benefit! cost ratio of2.4. In addition, it is estimated that the Telegraph Canyon
project could save an additional 94,248 gallons of potable water per day by
using reclaimed water for the irrigation of common landscaped areas.
13
/Y/l~~~V
Table 4
Potential Water Conservation Plan for Telegraph Canyon
(All Costs in January 1991 Dollars)
..YS........".\ } \VlltetSa'fili.J$ Incdmelltlll 2 Benefit/Cost
cc .,.
- .......... ..
Pt!rRt!Sidellc~ C".TPer LLiCe Ratie>
.... .... (gpdtDU) R~s.dellce
...... ($) .............. ...............i
Ullra Low Flow 24.0 58 313.26 5.4
Toilet
UIlTS Low Flow 15.0 12 117.47 9.8
Shower
Faucet Aerator 1.S 10 5.48 0.s5
Efficient 9.0 116 56.39 0.49
Clothes Washer
Efficient 1.S 33 9.40 0.28
Dishwasher
Pressure 9.0 165 93.98 0.57
Reducing Valve
Low Water Use 27.0 0 281.93 (Very High)
Landscaping
Water 30.0 2 78.32 39.2
Conservation
Guide
TOTAL 111.0 396 956.23 2.4
14
/ L!4 / /c;/
References
1. San Diego County Water Authority, 1989 Annual
Report.
2. State of California, Department of Water Resources,
Water Plan, Water Conservation Assumptions, October
1989.
3. American Water Works Association Journal, Volume
79, No.3, March 1987.
4. Engineering News Record Journal, January 1991.
17
) 7~~(:I
MEMORANDUM
August 10, 1992
Subject:
Honorable Mayor and city Council Members
John Goss, city Manager~
Robert A. Leiter, Director of Planning /~
Final EIR - Telegraph Canyon Estates Subdivision
(FEIR 91-05)
To:
via:
From:
-------------------------------------------------------------------
Attached is the Final EIR for the proposed Telegraph Canyon Estates
subdivision. The project proposes 350-unit single-family
residential lots on 112 acres on the north side of Telegraph canyon
Road (Otay Lakes Road) immediately west of the future extension of
State Route 125.
Because the EIR has determined that air quality (cumulative),
biology, and water availability (cumulative) are significant and
unmitigated, a Statement of Overriding Considerations must be
adopted in addition to the CEQA Findings required for project
approval.
The Final EIR will be before your Council on August 25, 1992 for
certification prior to the consideration of the project. If you
have any questions on the EIR, please contact Maryann Miller,
Environmental Review Coordinator, 476-5330.
I Lj ff ~ ~c:~
See Contract No. 92-118
r
Pages 14A-56 through 14A-429
COUNCIL AGENDA STATEMENT
ltemJ.11s
Meeting Date 8/25/92
ITEM TITLE:
Public Hearing:
PCZ-92-A AND PCM-91-07: Consideration of
Prezoning, General Development Plan and P-C
District Regulation Amendments, SPA Plan and
Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality
Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan
for Telegraph Canyon Estates - Baldwin Vista
Associates
ORDINANCE ;;l. 5.;l7 Approving PCZ-92-A; Prezoning to P-C
Planned Community (PCZ-92-A) and the P-C District Regulation
Amendments for the Telegraph Canyon Estates Sectional Planning
Area (SPA) Plan
RESOLurlON 1L.1L..V Approving PCM-91-07: Approving and
imposing amendments and conditions on the Telegraph Canyon
Estates General Development Plan Amendment, Sectional Planning
Area Plan (SPA), Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP), Water
Conservation Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan, CEQA Findings.
Mitigation Monitoring Program, Statement of Overriding
Considerations and making the necessary findings (reference PCM-
91-07)
SUBMITTED BY: Director of Planning;2?!lt
REVIEWED BY: City Manager G~ (4/5ths Vote: Yes_NolO
f,J
Baldwin Vista Associates has submitted a development proposal for 112 acres of
presently unincorporated property located on the north side of Telegraph Canyon Road
directly east of Otay Lakes Lodge mobile home park and directly south of EastLake
Shores. The proposal calls for a maximum of 350 single family lots, plus two private
recreation areas, two Community Purpose Facility (CPF) sites, and over 20 acres of open
space.
The request is for approval of a prezoning to P-C Planned Community, an amendment to
the EastLake I General Development Plan and P-C District Regulations to include the
Telegraph Canyon Estates property. and a Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Plan, Public
Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP), Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water Conservation
Plan. Certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report for Telegraph Canyon
Estates, EIR-91-05. is the preceding item on the agenda.
148 -I
Page 2, Item~
Meeting Date 8/25/92
A public forum was held at EastLake Elementary School on June 18, 1992, to Inform
area residents about the project and City processing requirements. Ten residents
attended the forum.
RECOMMENDATION: That Council adopt the ordinance and resolution approving PCZ-
92-A and PCM-91-07.
BOARDS/COMMISSIONS RECOMMENDATION: an August 12, 1992, the Planning
Commission voted 6-0 to recommend that Council approve PCZ-92-A and PCM-91-07 In
accordance with the staff recommended conditions of approval, which include the
requirement that the project be served by public rather than private streets.
DISCUSSION:
Exlstine: site conditions
The site consists of 112 vacant, unincorporated acres bounded by mobile homes, single
family dwellings and an atay Water District water tank site to the west. single family
dwellings to the north, proposed State Route 125 to the east. and future residential in
atay Ranch to the south. Primary access to the property is provided by Telegraph
Canyon Road. Two additional access points are provided by streets which stub into the
northwest corner of the property: Gotham Street provides access from College Estates
to the west, and Creekwood Drive provides access from EastLake Shores to the north.
The property generally slopes from north to south, and consists of two gently sloping
knolls separated by a natural swale in the central portion of the site. Three major
easements extend across the property. A 20 ft. wide water easement extends southerly
from the water tank along the westerly boundary. A 120 ft. wide County Water Authority
easement extends diagonally from the northwest through the central portion of the site,
and a 120 ft. wide SDG&E easement extends along the easterly boundary. The Telegraph
Canyon drainage channel adjoins the southerly boundary of the site.
The Chula Vista General Plan designates the property for Low-Medium Residential (3-6
dwelling units per gross acre).
Development proposal
The proposal is for a private, gate-guarded community containing a maximum of 350
single family lots, and two private recreation areas. Two CPF sites are also proposed.
Three reSidential lot sizes are proposed. The largest lots, representing approximately 50%
of the residential land area and conforming to the City's basic R-1-7 lot standards, are
located In the northerly portion of the site adjacent to the existing single family homes
in EastLake Shores and College Estates. Smaller lots are located in the southwestern
portion of the property adjacent to the mobilehome park. An intermediate size lot is
\t{8-;2
Page 3, Item~
Meeting Date 8/25/92
provided In the eastern portion of the site adjacent to proposed State Route 125 and the
TCR corridor. The following table summarizes the lot sizes for the project.
AREA 41 OF LOTS AVG. SIZE MIN. SIZE
North 146 8,350 sq. ft. 60 x 100
Southeast 87 6,790 sq. ft. 50 x 100
Southwest 117 5.685 sq. ft. 45 x 112
The EastLake I P-C District Regulations and Residential Design Guidelines are intended
to regulate the development of the lots and the design of the dwellings.
Primary access to the project will be provided by way of a signalized Intersection with
Telegraph Canyon Road. A bridge-like structure over the drainage channel, decorative
walls and landscaping, and a turn-around with enriched paving would lead to the gated
entry to the project. Additional access will be provided at the northwest comer of the
properly, wherein Gotham and Creekwood would be extended to Intersect as public
streets. just east of which would be a second gated entry to the project.
The balance of the private interior streets follow the basic form of the properly in a
curvilinear pattern. All of the streets have been designed to meet City standards for
public streets with the exception of the main north-south spine street. This street
provides additional width for planted parkways (rather than standard monolithic curb
and sidewalk) and an 8 ft. rather than 5 ft. sidewalk along the westerly side to serve as
a public pedestrian trail from College Estates/EastLake to Telegraph Canyon Road. A
public easement would be established in order to allow pedestrians and bicyclists to use
this street and sidewalk/trail.
Gradln(!, open space and recreation
Grading follows the dominant natural land forms with curvilinear streets and terraced
lots. Interior slopes vary from 2: 1 to 4: 1 and are generally 30 ft. or less in height. Two
story homes will largely obscure these slopes from public view.
A significant scenic corridor. which varies in depth from 200 ft. to 660 ft. at the central
swale, is retained along Telegraph Canyon Road. Grading Is minimized in the corridor,
and that which does occur Is contoured with slope ratios which vary from 2: 1 to 6: 1. The
units along the scenic corridor will Incorporate one and two story elements. variable
setbacks and varied and detailed architectural treatment in order to enhance the view
from Telegraph Canyon Road.
In addition to the scenic corridor, open space areas will be maintained along the westerly
and easterly boundaries of the properly and along the County Water Authority easement
\l\fS-:3
Page 4. ItemJ.iJ3
Meeting Date 8/25/92
wWch runs diagonally through the site. Over nine acres along the easterly boundary of
the property will be reserved to accommodate proposed State Route 125. Two private
recreation areas are also proposed. A 0.7 acre recreation center in the central portion of
property acijacent to the CWA easement wll1 contain a pool, spa, changing room and
landscaping. A 1.5 acre site at the northeast corner of the site will contain multi-purpose
courts and a parking area. The following table summarizes the open space and
recreation areas.
AREA ACRES
TCR Scenic Corridor 20.8
125 Reservation (temporary) 9.4
CWA Easement 3.1
Recreation Center 0.7
Multi-purpose Courts 1.5
In addition to the 8 ft. wide sidewalk/pedestrian trail along the westerly side of the main
spine street, an additional 5 ft. wide decomposed granite trail separate from the sidewalk
will be established along the north side of Telegraph Canyon Road. Post and rail fencing
will separate the trail from the sidewalk.
Proiect interface/separation
The project will be buffered from adjoining residential areas by a combination of grade
differences, landscaped open spaces and solid walls. Grading along the northerly
boundary will lower the property an average of 20 ft. below the existing homes in
EastLake Shores, thereby preserving views for the majority of those homes (the slope
height varies from 45 ft. on the eastern edge to 6 ft. adjacent to the necessary street
connection at the westerly edge).
The property sits above the homes to the west. Grading will retain a height differential
of 8-12 ft. above the homes in College Estates, and 10-30 ft. above the mobile homes in
atay Lakes Lodge. These height differentials, along with permanent landscape buffers,
the 20 ft. wide atay Water District easement, and solid walls, will provide the separation
along the westerly boundary of the project.
Affordable housine:
Generally, projects consisting entirely of single family detached housing are not as
conducive to provision of housing for low and moderate income households as are
projects containing a mix of residential densities. The proposal for Telegraph Canyon
\ '\ ~-4
Page 5. Item / 'I B
Meeting Date 8/25/92
Estates is to meet the affordable housing requirement off-site through a land set aside,
an off-site project or an in-lieu contribution. This is consistent with the City's recently
adopted Housing Element, and the project proponent Is currently working with the City
Housing Coordinator to determine which alternative is most appropriate in this case. The
SPA Plan calls for an agreement to be reached pIior to approval of a tentative map.
Water Conservation Plan
The Telegraph Canyon Estates Water Conservation Plan is summarized in the SPA Plan
(Page 1I-86) and is enclosed with this report. The Plan states that the expected water
demand for the 350 dwellings is 190,432 gallons per day, plus 92,463 gallons per day of
reclaimed water to irrigate open space areas. However, the Water District reports that
there Is no schedule for when the volume of reclaimed water available would be adequate
to serve the project. The conservation measures recommended for implementation,
including ultra low flow toilets and showerheads, faucet aerators, water conservation
guide, drought tolerant plants, and efficient irrigation systems, are expected to save
approximately 35,000 gallons per day.
Consistent with the City's approach on pIior projects, staff is recommending that the
developer commit to participate In any off-site mitigation program adopted by the City
designed to offset all or a portion of their new water demand. Said program may require
one or more of the following:
. Compliance with a regional water use offset program, to be administered by
the San Diego County Water AuthoIity.
. Compliance with a local administered water use offset program [such
program may be administered by the City, water district, or a combination
of both};
. Implementation of specific water use offset measures for this project, if
neither a regional or locally-administered water use offset program Is In
place prior to issuance of building permits for any portion of this project.
In the event that a City-approved water offset policy is not in effect at the time building
permits are Issued, the requirements should be met through Implementation of specific
water offset measures for this project, with the level of offsets and specific measures to
be approved by the City. It should be noted that the City's Environmental Resource
Manager is currently working with several City Departments, as well as the interagency
Water Task Force to develop a recommended water offset program.
Air Quality Improvement Plan
The City's Growth Management Ordinance requires that projects of 50 units or greater
provide an Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP). The AQIP for Telegraph Canyon Estates
is summaIized on Page Il-89 of the SPA Plan and is enclosed with this report.
14B-S
Page 6. ltem~8
Meeting Date 8/25/92
Although most significant air quality measures are those policies and regulations
established at the broadest geographic level, i.e., State, Federal or Regional programs,
measures implemented on a City or project level can have a positive Impact. Air quality
mitigation in the Telegraph Canyon Estates AQIP focuses on strategies and measures
available to residential development projects. These include measures taken durtng
construction such as dust control, scheduling and emission standards for construction
trtps and equipment, and other measures related to the energy efficiency of the resulting
homes, such as energy conservation measures which exceed present standards, and pre-
plumbing of homes to facllltate passive solar collectors.
A new Regional Air Quality Plan is currently under development by SANDAG and the
APCD. This plan will focus on mobile source emissions. The principal measure under
consideration is a mandatory trtp reduction plan for all significant trtp generators. Any
land use provisions of the adopted plan will ultimately be the responsibility of the City.
As a condition of approval of the tentative map, the project design shall be reviewed to
ensure that any required measures of the new Regional Air Quality Plan can be
accommodated by the existing project design. In addition, at the recommendation of the
Transit Coordinator, a transit stop has been incorporated into the SPA Plan in the vicinity
of the project entry on Telegraph Canyon Road. Finally, the City's Environmental
Resource Manager is currently working with several City departments to develop an Air
Quality Improvement and Energy Conservation Program to be applied to all development
projects, which would implement the regional air quality plan, as well as new State
energy requirements. Compliance with this program will be evaluated at the tentative
map stage.
Public Facilities Financine: Plan
A Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) is required by the City's Growth Management
Program to ensure that phased development is consistent with the overall goals and
policies of the General Plan and Growth Management Program, and to ensure that
development of the project will not adversely impact the quality of life threshold
standards. The PFFP identifies financing mechanisms for all public faclllties required by
the project, and also contains an analysis of the fiscal impacts the project will have on
public agencies. The Telegraph Canyon Estates PFFP is enclosed with this report.
All of the facilities projected to be required for the project will be provided by subdivision
exactions or the payment of impact fees. Funding for school facilities will be provided by
the formation of a Community Facilities (Mello-Roos) Dlstrtct. The distrtct would include
this project as well as Salt Creek Ranch.
The fiscal analysis for Telegraph Canyon Estates covers a pertod of 15 years, four of
which depict the development phase of the project, and eleven years which depict the
impact of the completed project. For the City of Chula Vista, revenues are expected to
exceed expenditures in every year of the analysis, for an accumulated net fiscal balance
for the 15 year period of $827,043 if private streets are utilized in the project, or
ll\e.-/P
page7.ltem~
Meeting Date 8/25/92
$454,718 If public streets are required. The estimated average annual net fiscal Impact
on other local public agencies Is as follows:
Otay Water District
Chula Vista Elementary School District
Sweetwater Union High School District
- $ 676
- $5.000
$2,960
The negative fiscal impacts projected for the Otay Water District and Chula Vista
Elementary School District represent only a fraction of the expected revenues and cost
associated with the project, and any minor change in the assumptions or parameters
used In the analysis could change the net fiscal loss into a fiscal gain. Specifically. the
Otay Water District reports that rates would be adjusted as needed to balance revenues
and expenditures. And with respect to the Chula Vista City School District, as noted
earlier the project will be included within a Mello-Roos District in order to fund required
school facilities. (NOTE: The projected loss for both the Otay Water District and CVESD
represent operational costs for which the developer is not responsible.)
General Plan conslstencv
The gross project density Is 3.1 dwelling units per acre. The net residential density.
which Includes the residential lots. private recreation areas and Interior streets and open
space, Is 4.3 dwelling units per acre. This figure Is below the 4.5 du/ac mid-point for the
Low-Medium Residential (3-6 du/ ac) designation. Staff has concluded that this proposed
density is consistent with Section 6.2 of the Land Use Element of the General Plan
("Establishing Residential Densities Within the Range"), which requires consideration of:
1) compatibility with existing and proposed surrounding land use patterns; 2] sensitive
response to the physical characteristics of the site; and 3] achievement of a variety of
housing types. Other specific Issues with respect to General Plan consistency are
discussed under separate heading. I.e., land form preservation and grading, compatibility
with surrounding development, scenic corridor enhancement, affordable housing, and so
on.
Private versus public streets
The staff position with respect to private streets and gate-guarded projects, is that they
should only be used In isolated circumstances where they do not interrupt the Intended
or expected circulation pattern or the normal flow of traffic. This limits the use of private
streets to higher density projects. or smaller. Isolated single family developments with a
single access point and which otherwise do not tie into the surrounding circulation
network. An additional consideration Is the fact that the per unit costs for the
maintenance of private streets In a larger ,lower-density project. often become prohibitive,
and pressure mounts to either defer malntenance and/or petition the City to take over
the streets and assume the maintenance.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates project Is a larger, lower density single family development
which will have a signalized intersection with Telegraph Canyon Road, and which will
\~9>-1
Page 8. ltemJ.fB
Meeting Date 8/25/92
extend and tie Into streets from both College Estates and EastLake Shores. We do not
believe these circumstances support the establishment of a private gate-guarded
community at this location. A recommended condition of approval would require public
rather than private streets to serve the project. Coupled with this recommendation Is a
requirement that the main north-south spine street be cul-de-saced at Its northerly
terminus In order to require a more circuitous route and therefore slow through-traffic
using this street.
The applicant, Baldwin Vista Associates, has Indicated that they have reconsidered the
Issue of private versus public streets following the Planning Commission hearing, and
have now determined not to oppose the requirement for public streets. In anticipation
of this recommendation, the EIR, PFFP and traffic consultants were asked to prepare
alternative analyses based on a public street system. The respective analyses Indicate
that the conversion to public streets will maintain all applicable thresholds, and would
result In no other adverse Impacts or required mitigation measures. The conversion to
public streets with the City assuming maintenance responsibility would reduce the
expected fiscal benefit of the project to the City by $372,325, but would retain a positive
net fiscal benefit of $454,718 over the 15 year period of analysis.
Community purpose facility sites
The project Identifies a total of 1.5 acres to be reserved for Community Purpose Facilities
(CPF) consisting of two sites at the northwest and northeast Intersection of Gotham Street
and Creekwood Drive. The total acreage Is consistent with the Municipal Code
requirement that SPA Plans provide for 1.39 acres of land per 1,000 population for CPF
uses. However, It Is not believed that the size, configuration or location of the sites Is
consistent with the Intent of the ordinance to provide accessible and usable CPF sites
compatible with adjacent uses.
A large part of the problem In this case Is that the CPF requirement was anticipated to
be applied to much larger scale developments. Such developments provide the
opportunity for larger and thus more usable CPF sites which can be located on major
streets, and which can be more easily buffered from Incompatible land uses. The size
and location of the Telegraph Canyon Estates project does not provide the opportunity
to meet these goals In the most desirable fashion.
Alternative means to meet the CPF requirement on-site would be to combine the CPF
acreage Into a single, more usable site located at either the project entry off Telegraph
Canyon Road or, assuming public streets, adjacent to the central recreation area. The
preferred alternative In the judgment of staff and the applicant Is to meet the CPF
requirement off-site In conjunction with the developer's first phase of atay Ranch. This
would provide the opportunity to create a larger, more appropriately located site
consistent with the Intent of the ordinance. A recommended condition of approval allows
the developer to attempt to reach an agreement acceptable to the City regarding an off-
site alternative, or If such an agreement cannot be reached, would require the CPF
acreage to be relocated on-site.
I4.B - t
Page 9. ItemB,B
Meeting Date 8/25/92
The CPF sites presently shown on the SPA Plan can be replatted into additional single
family lots provided the total yield does not exceed the 350 lot maximum established by
the Plan.
FISCAL IMPACT: The Public Facilities and Financing Plan estimates the project would
have a net fiscal balance to the City of $827.043 with private streets. or a net fiscal
balance of $454,718 with public streets as recommended by staff.
Attachments:
Sectional Planning Area Plan~ \)
Public Facilities Financing Plan ~.'\ t
Air Quality Improvement Plan a" ).1"
Water Conservation Plan ~ to'"
'?~
WPC 0432P! A. 113
\ \.\8. - q /1# 8- 10
ORDINANCE NO. 2527
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY
COUNCIL APPROVING THE PREZONING TO P-C
PLANNED COMMUNITY (PCZ-92-A) AND THE P-C
DISTRICT REGULATION AMENDMENTS FOR THE
TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES SECTIONAL PLANNING
AREA (SPA) PLAN
WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject of this ordinance consists of
112.4 acres of presently unincorporated property located on the north side of Telegraph
Canyon Road directly east of Otay Lakes Lodge mobile home park and directly south of
EastLake Shores (Exhibit 4 of the Sectional Planning Area Plan); and,
WHEREAS, the project involves a prezoning to P-C Planned Community, an
amendment to the EastLake I General Development Plan and P-C District Regulations
to include the Telegraph Canyon Estates property therein, and a Sectional Planning Area
Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water
Conservation Plan involving a maximum of 350 single family lots, plus two private
recreation areas, two Community Purpose Facility sites, and over 20 acres of open space;
and,
WHEREAS, the above referenced plans and documents are incorporated herein
by reference, and the overall project as described in the Final Environmental Impact
Report, EIR-91-05, shall be developed in accordance with the description therein or as
modified by the conditions of approval, and that to the extent the project describes the
measures which will mitigate environmental impacts, the applicant shall implement those
measures contemporaneously with the project; and,
WHEREAS, in conjunction with the Telegraph Canyon Estates SPA Plan, the City
staff and Baldwin Vista Associates have concurred on the Planned Community (P-C)
District Regulation amendments for the project, a copy of which is on file in the office of
the City Clerk as Document No. PCM-91-07; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has by Resolution No. 16767 certified that the Final
Environmental Impact Report, EIR-91-05, was prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Review
procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and has further certified that the information
contained therein has been reviewed and considered by them; and,
WHEREAS, the recitals and resolutions of the City Council contained in Resolution
No. 16767 certifying EIR-91-05 are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; and,
WPC F:\home\planning\12.92
J4r;~1)
Ordinance No. 2527
Page 2
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on the
Telegraph Canyon Estates Sectional Planning Area Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan,
Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan on August 12, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, prior to the second reading of this ordinance, the City Council adopted
a resolution approving the Telegraph Canyon Estates Sectional Planning Area Plan,
Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water Conservation
Plan.
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista does ordain as follows:
1. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings before the Planning Commission consisting of a
public hearing on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on July 22,
1992, and certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report and
the recommendation for approval of the Sectional Planning Area
Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan
and Water Conservation Plan on August 12, 1992, and the minutes
and resolutions therefrom are hereby incorporated into the record of
this proceeding.
2. EIR COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
The City Council of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed and
considered EIR-91-05, the environmental impacts therein identified
for this project, the Candidate CEQA Findings, the Mitigation
Monitoring Program, and the Statement of Overriding Considerations.
The City Council by certifying EIR-91-05, has found that it has been
prepared in accordance with the requirements of the California
Environmental Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the
environmental procedures of the City of Chula Vista.
3. P-C ZONE FINDINGS
The City Council hereby finds that the proposed prezoning to P-C
Planned Community is consistent with the City of Chula Vista
General Plan, and public necessity, convenience, the general
welfare, and good zoning practice support the prezoning to P-C
Planned Community.
WPC F:\home\planning\12.92
)LtY3...J;t
Ordinance No. 2527
Page 3
4. P-C DISTRICT REGULATION AMENDMENTS
The City Council does hereby conditionally approve and adopt the
amendments to the EastLake I P-C District regulations as set forth
in the Telegraph Canyon Estates SPA (PCM-91-07) subject to the
following conditions.
(a) If a CPF site(s) is to be provided on-site, the SPA Plan
and P-C District Regulations shall be amended to
include the CPF provisions from the Municipal Code.
(b) The P-C District Regulation amendment and related
discussion in the SPA Plan shall be revised to correctly
identify the RS-5 regulations as applying to the larger
lot product, and the RS-7 regulations as applying to the
intermediate and smaller lot products.
(c) That the developer shall implement each and every
Mitigation Measure identified in the Final Environmental
Impact Report, EIR-91-05, as Mitigation Measures.
(d) That the developer shall implement each and every
aspect of the Mitigation Monitoring Program for EIR-91-
05.
Failing said conditions, the approvals herein granted may, at the
option of the City, to be exercised by the City Council at a public
hearing, notice of which shall be given to the project applicant, be
revoked, modified or supplemented.
5. CEQA FINDINGS, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Adoption of Findinqs
The City Council does hereby approve and incorporate as if set forth
full herein the CEQA Findings for EIR-91-05, as contained in
Resolution No. 16768.
WPC F:\home\planning\12.92
)~~.. 13
Ordinance No. 2527
Page 4
Adoption of Mitiaation Monitorina Proaram
As required by Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City
Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program for EIR-91-05 as set forth in Exhibit B to Resolution No.
16768 and incorporates it herein by reference as if set forth in full.
The City Council finds that the program is designed to ensure that,
during the project implementation and operation, the project applicant
and other responsible parties implement the project components and
comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in the findings
and program.
Adoption of Statement of Overridina Considerations
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and
alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant environmental
effects caused by the project or cumulatively will remain. Therefore,
the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15093, adopts the Statement of Overriding
Considerations for EIR-91-05 identifying the specific economic,
social, and other considerations that render the unavoidable
significant adverse environmental effects still significant but
acceptable, a copy of which is attached to Resolution No. 16768 as
Exhibit A.
PRESENTED BY:
Bruce M. Boogaar
City Attorney
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
WPC F:\home\planning\12.92
\"ie,.-JLf
RESOLUTION NO. 16768
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA APPROVING AND IMPOSING
AMENDMENTS AND CONDITIONS ON THE TELEGRAPH
CANYON ESTATES GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AMENDMENT, SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN (SPA),
PUBLIC FACILITIES FINANCING PLAN (PFFP), WATER
CONSERVATION PLAN, AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT
PLAN, CEQA FINDINGS, MITIGATION MONITORING
PROGRAM, STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING
CONSIDERATIONS AND MAKING THE NECESSARY
FINDINGS (REFERENCE PCM-91-07)
WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject of this ordinance consists of
112.4 acres of presently unincorporated property located on the north side of Telegraph
Canyon Road directly east of Otay Lakes Lodge mobile home park and directly south of
EastLake Shores (Exhibit 4 of the Sectional Planning Area Plan); and,
WHEREAS, the project involves a prezoning to P-C Planned Community, an
amendment to the EastLake I General Development Plan and P-C District Regulations
to include the Telegraph Canyon Estates property therein, and a Sectional Planning Area
Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water
Conservation Plan involving a maximum of 3S0 single family lots, plus two private
recreation areas, two Community Purpose Facility sites, and over 20 acres of open space;
and,
WHEREAS, the above referenced plans and documents are incorporated herein
by reference, and the overall project as described in the Final Environmental Impact
Report, EIR-91-0S, shall be developed in accordance with the description therein or as
modified by the conditions of approval, and that to the extent the project describes the
measures which will mitigate environmental impacts, the applicant shall implement those
measures contemporaneously with the project; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council has by Resolution No. 16767 certified that the Final
Environmental Impact Report, EIR-91-0S, was prepared in accordance with the
requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act, the Environmental Review
procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and has further certified that the information
contained therein has been reviewed and considered by them; and,
WHEREAS, the recitals and resolutions of the City Council contained in Resolution
No. 16767 certifying EIR-91-0S are incorporated herein as if set forth in full; and,
WHEREAS, the City Council on August 2S, 1992, approved the first reading of an
ordinance prezoning the subject property to P-C Planned Community and adopting
) ~ ~ - /s
Resolution No. 16768
Page 2
amendments to the EastLake I P-C District Regulations to include the Telegraph Canyon
Estates property therein; and,
WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Planning Commission on the
Telegraph Canyon Estates Sectional Planning Area Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan,
Air Quality Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan on August 12, 1992; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission received certain evidence on August 12,
1992, as set forth in the record of its proceedings which are incorporated herein by
reference as if they were set forth in full, made certain findings as set forth in their
recommending Resolution No. PCZ-92-A/PCM-91-07, and recommended to the City
Council the approval of said applications and documents based on certain terms and
conditions and findings; and,
WHEREAS, a public hearing was scheduled before the City Council of the City of
Chula Vista on the Sectional Planning Area Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air
Quality Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan on August 25, 1992; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby find, determine, resolve and order as follows:
1. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings before the Planning Commission consisting of a
public hearing on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on July 22,
1992, and certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report and
the recommendation for approval of the Sectional Planning Area
Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan
and Water Conservation Plan on August 12, 1992, and the minutes
and resolutions therefrom are hereby incorporated into the record of
this proceeding.
2. EIR COMPLIANCE WITH CEQA
As evidenced by their adoption of Resolution No. 16767, the City
Council of the City of Chula Vista has reviewed and considered EIR-
91-05, the environmental impacts therein identified for this project,
the Candidate CEQA Findings, the Mitigation Monitoring Program,
and the Statement of Overriding Considerations. The City Council
by certifying EIR-91-05, has found that it has been prepared in
accordance with the requirements of the California Environmental
)lf~ - )b
Resolution No. 16768
Page 3
Quality Act, the State EIR Guidelines, and the environmental
procedures of the City of Chula Vista.
3. AMENDMENTS AND CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL
The City Council does hereby approve the SPA, PFFP, Air Quality
Improvement Plan and Water Conservation Plan subject to the
following amendments and conditions.
1) All mitigation measures contained in EIR-91-05 are hereby
made conditions of project approval.
2) The Public Facilities Financing Plan shall be approved subject
to the General and Special Conditions contained in the
Executive Summary. The following shall be added to the
General Conditions:
. The Public Facilities Financing Plan shall be followed
with improvements installed in accordance with said
plan or as required to meet threshold standards
adopted by the City of Chula Vista. In addition, the
sequence that improvements are constructed shall
correspond to any future Eastern Chula Vista
Transportation Phasing Plan adopted by the City. The
City Engineer may modify the sequence of
improvement construction should conditions change to
warrant such a revision.
. An annual fiscal impact report reflecting the actual
revenue and expenditure impacts based upon the
development of the project shall be prepared by the
developer. The project shall be conditioned to provide
funding for periods where expenditures exceed
projected revenues. The details of such a funding
program shall be determined prior to approval of the
tentative subdivision map.
3) The water conservation recommendations and implementation
program discussed on pages 15 and 16 of the Water
Conservation Plan, and as further amended by condition no.
4, are hereby made conditions of approval of the Water
Conservation Plan.
Nt2J. - 1'7
Resolution No. 16768
Page 4
4) The Telegraph Canyon Estates Water Conservation Plan shall
be revised to include the following language regarding a water
offset policy:
The project shall comply with a City-approved water use offset
policy in which one or more of the following offsite measures
may be required:
. Compliance with a regional water use offset
program, to be administered by the San Diego
County Water Authority.
. Compliance with a locally administered water
use offset program (such program may be
administered by the City, water district, or a
combination of both);
. Implementation of specific water use offset
measures for this project, if neither a regional or
locally-administered water use offset program is
in place prior to issuance of building permits for
any portion of this project.
In the event that a City-approved water offset policy is not in
effect at the time building permits are issued, the
requirements of this plan shall be met through implementation
of specific water offset measures for this project, with the level
of offsets and specific measures to be approved by the City.
5) The air quality mitigation measures and monitoring program
discussed on pages 24-26 of the Air Quality Improvement
Plan are hereby made conditions of project approval.
6) Prior to approval of a final map by the City Council, an
affordable housing agreement shall be reached between the
developer and the City. Said agreement shall be in accord
with the adopted Housing Element.
7) Approval of a tentative map will be subject to the findings of
the HNTB study of State Route 125 which will provide staff
and the City Council with the necessary information to assist
in determining and/or allocating project approvals.
Jlf~ - Ie!
Resolution No. 16768
Page 5
8) The SPA Plan shall be amended to provide for (1) the
consolidation and relocation of the CPF acreage adjacent to
the project entry or, in the case of a public street system,
adjacent to the central recreation site, or (2) an agreement
providing for a 1.5 acre or larger CPF site in the first phase of
Otay Ranch. If an agreement for the off-site alternative
cannot be reached between the City and developer prior to
tentative map approval, the map shall indicate a CPF site as
noted in (1) above until such agreement is reached.
9) If a CPF site(s) is to be provided on-site, the SPA Plan shall
be amended to include the CPF provisions from the Municipal
Code.
10) The P-C District Regulation amendment and related
discussion in the SPA Plan shall be revised to correctly
identify the RS-5 regulations as applying to the larger lot
product, and the RS-7 regulations as applying to the
intermediate and smaller lot products.
11) The project shall incorporate public rather than private streets,
the design of which shall be subject to review and approval of
the City Engineer.
12) If a public street system is required as a condition of approval
of the SPA Plan, the central north-south collector shall be cul-
de-saeed at its northerly terminus and the configuration of lots
and street designs shall be adjusted accordingly subject to
review and approval of the City Engineer. If the north-south
collector is cul-de-saced, a pedestrian easement or right-of-
way shall be provided at the end of the cul-de-sac or other
acceptable alternative to accommodate the proposed trail
component subject to review and approval of the City
Engineer and Director of Parks and Recreation.
13) If a public street system is required as a condition of approval
of the SPA Plan, the PFFP shall be revised to incorporate the
facilities and fiscal impacts thereof.
14) Should the project be served by public rather than private
streets, it may be necessary to review and modify the
proposed improvements for the central recreation area, I.e.,
/~;(, - Jet
Resolution No. 16768
Page 6
no pool or spa, but perhaps play structures, etc. Any
changes to the proposed improvements shall be subject to
review and approval of the Planning Commission and City
Council with the tentative map.
15) If the project retains private streets, the walls adjoining open
space districts shall be located outside the district boundary.
Should the project be served by public streets, the walls shall
be located within the district boundary.
16) The development and design of the private recreation areas
shall be subject to review and approval of the Director of
Planning prior to approval of a teRtative map.
17) Grading for the open space district lot shall provide a level,
clear area at least three feet wide, as measured from face-of-
wall to beginning-of-slope, along the length of any wall
abutting said area as approved by the City Engineer and
Director of Parks and Recreation.
18) Flag lot design shall adhere to the requirements and
standards for panhandle lots contained in the Municipal Code
(Section 19.22.150).
19) Final recreation trail and fence design and location shall be
subject to approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation.
20) The CC&R's for the project shall prohibit the parking of RV's
or boat trailers in the development.
21) The SPA Plan shall be revised to include the requirement that
each lot shall be served by at least one on-street parking
space within 200 ft. of the lot it serves. (Failure to meet the
standard may reduce the number of lots.)
22) Design details for the bridge-like structure at the project entry
shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer
and Director of Planning prior to approval of a tentative map.
23) The use of street signs other than the City standard is subject
to the review and approval and requirements of the City
Engineer.
)If ~ - J.D
Resolution No. 16768
Page 7
24) Specific proposals for enhancing the development edge along
the Telegraph Canyon Road scenic corridor, Le., varied
heights and setbacks, architectural treatment, and decorative
landscaping and walls, shall be subject to review and approval
with the tentative map.
25) The SPA Plan is hereby amended to reflect permanent rather
than temporary irrigation of open space districts unless an
exception is granted by the Director of Parks and Recreation
Department prior to approval of a tentative map.
26) All plant materials, sizes and locations, and provisions for
irrigation of open space maintenance areas shall require
review and approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation
prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
27) Access points to open space maintenance areas shall be
subject to review and approval by the Director of Parks and
Recreation prior to approval of a tentative map. The access
road along the easterly boundary will be continuous from the
multi-purpose courts, southerly to the Telegraph Canyon
drainage channel.
28) Graded access shall be provided to all storm drain cleanouts,
inlets and outlets, and paved access shall be provided to all
sewer manholes. Exceptions may be determined on a case
by case basis by the City Engineer.
29) Transit stop locations and designs, including benches and
shelters, shall be subject to review and approval by the
Transit Coordinator and the Director of Planning prior to
approval of a tentative map.
30) The installation of transit facilities shall be concurrent with
transit service availability. Since this may not coincide with
project development, prior to approval of a tentative map the
developer shall commit to fund these facilities.
31) A 5 ft. wide d.g. trail with a post and rail fence component
shall be located adjacent to the existing sidewalk on the north
side of Telegraph Canyon Road subject to review and
approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation.
I 'I ~ -:2,1
Resolution No. 16768
Page 8
32) The method of conveyance and maintenance and land to be
reserved for future right-of-way along proposed SR-125 shall
be determined, to the satisfaction of the Director of Public
Works, prior to approval of a tentative map.
33) A 3 ft. wide solid base shall be provided on all walls fronting
upon an open space district.
34) The specific treatment of between lot and rearyard slope
conditions will be subject to review and approval in
conjunction with the tentative map.
35) The three lots south of the water tank along the westerly
property line, in the RS-5 large lot area, shall have their side
property lines extended to the subdivision boundary to delete
this area from the open space maintenance district.
36) Telegraph Canyon Estates shall submit annual building permit
reports, traffic counts and fiscal impact analysis to the City
commencing with the construction of the project and
scheduled to coincide with the annual review of the Growth
Management Oversight Commission.
37) Approval of the SPA does not constitute approval of final lot
yields or configurations or street alignments or design as
shown on the SPA Plan. Modifications may be made by staff,
the Planning Commission or the City Council during the
consideration and review of the tentative map.
38) Ten bound, loose leaf copies of the final approved SPA Plan
and related documents, incorporating all conditions and
corrections, shall be filed with the Planning Department prior
to approval of a tentative map.
39) The SPA, PFFP, WCP and AQUIP Plans shall all be
implemented in the manner therein described except as
hereby amended, or except as may, from time to time, be
amended by the City Council.
Failing said conditions, the approvals herein granted may, at the
option of the City, to be exercised by the City Council at a public
/1 2J - 22,
Resolution No. 16768
Page 9
hearing, notice of which shall be given to the project applicant, be
revoked, modified or supplemented.
4. CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN, P-C PLANNED
COMMUNITY ZONE, GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AMENDMENT AND SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN
FINDINGS
P-C Planned Communitv zone and General Development Plan
amendment
1. The proposed development as described by the general
development plan is in conformity with the provision of
the Chula Vista general plan.
The proposed amendment to the EastLake I General
Development Plan is consistent with the Chula Vista General
Plan in that it shows the Telegraph Canyon Estates property
as Low-Medium Residential (3-6 du/ac) and establishes a
substantial open space reservation along the Telegraph
Canyon scenic corridor. The proposed net residential density
of 4.3 dulac is below the 4.5 dulac midpoint of the General
Plan LM range. It has been concluded that this proposed
density is consistent with Section 6.2 of the Land Use
Element of the General Plan, which requires consideration of
1) compatibility with existing and proposed surrounding land
use patterns; 2) sensitive response to the physical
characteristics of the site; and 3) achievement of a variety of
housing types.
2. A planned community development can be initiated by
establishment of specific uses or sectional planning area
plans within two years of the establishment of the
planned community zone.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates Sectional Planning Area Plan
has been submitted for concurrent consideration with the P-C
prezoning and EastLake I General Development Plan
amendment.
)~~ -;23
Resolution No. 16768
Page 10
3. In the case of proposed residential development, that
such development will constitute a residential
environment of sustained desirability and stability; and
that it will be in harmony with or provide compatible
variety to the character of the surrounding area, and that
the sites proposed for public facilities, such as schools,
playgrounds and parks, are adequate to serve the
anticipated population and appear acceptable to the
public authorities having Jurisdiction thereof.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates development consists of three
residential lot sizes in order to provide for varied and
balanced single family residential opportunities within the
project. Private recreation sites and common open space
areas will contribute to the long term livability and stability of
the neighborhood. Recommended alternative provisions for
Community Purpose Facilities will ensure sites are properly
located and of an adequate size to serve their intended use.
4. In the case of institutional, recreational, and other similar
nonresidential uses, that such development will be
appropriate in area, location and over-all planning to the
purpose proposed, and that surrounding areas are
protected from any adverse effects from such
development.
The provision of two private recreation areas will supplement
public park and recreation facilities for the residents of
Telegraph Canyon Estates and their location in the central
and eastern portions of the property will protect surrounding
areas from any adverse impacts. Recommended alternative
location for Community Purpose Facilities will also protect
surrounding residents from potential adverse impacts.
5. The streets and thoroughfares proposed are suitable and
adequate to carry the anticipated traffic thereon.
The streets have been designed to City standards and are
adequate to carry the anticipated traffic. The recommendation
to use public rather than private streets will incorporate the
project's streets into the surrounding circulation network.
If~- .24
Resolution No. 16768
Page 11
6. The area surrounding said development can be planned
and zoned In coordination and substantial compatibility
with said development.
Surrounding areas are already planned, zoned and developed
with compatible single family and mobile home uses.
Section Plannina Area Plan
1. The proposed sectional planning area plan is in
conformity with the general development plan of the P-C
zone, any adopted specific plans, and the Chula Vista
general plan and its several elements.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates Sectional Planning Area Plan
reflects the land use, circulation, open space and other
policies and elements of the EastLake I General Development
Plan and Chula Vista General Plan.
2. The proposed sectional planning area plan would
promote the orderly, sequentialized development of the
involved sectional planning area.
The SPA Plan and Public Facilities Financing Plan contain
provisions, requirements and standards to ensure the orderly
development of the project in a manner consistent with the
land use policies and facilities needs of the City and other
public agencies. The Telegraph Canyon Estates SPA is
proposed to be developed in a single phase with a 3 to 4 year
build-out.
3. The proposed sectional planning area plan would not
adversely affect adjacent land use, residential enjoyment,
circulation, or environmental quality.
The SPA Plan as conditioned will be compatible with
surrounding uses and will not adversely affect the
environment quality or circulation requirements of adjacent
areas.
/tf~ - zS-
Resolution No. 16768
Page 12
5. CEQA FINDINGS, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Adoption of Findinas
The City Council does hereby approve and incorporate as if set forth
full herein the CEQA Findings for EIR-91-05, a copy of which is
attached hereto as Exhibit A.
Adoption of Mitiaation Monitorina Proaram
As required by Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City
Council hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program for EIR-91-05, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit
S, and incorporates it herein by reference as if set forth in full. The
City Council finds that the program is designed to ensure that, during
the project implementation and operation, the project applicant and
other responsible parties implement the project components and
comply with the feasible mitigation measures identified in the findings
and program.
Adoption of Statement of Overridina Considerations
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and
alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant environmental
effects caused by the project or cumulatively will remain. Therefore,
the City Council of the City of Chula Vista, pursuant to CEQA
Guidelines Section 15093, adopts the Statement of Overriding
Considerations for EIR-91-05, a copy of which is attached hereto as
Exhibit A, identifying the specific economic, social, and other
considerations that render the unavoidable significant adverse
environmental effects still significant but acceptable.
6. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
The Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista is
directed, after City Council approval of this project, to ensure that a
notice of determination, together with a copy of this resolution, and
all ordinances and resolutions passed by the City Council in
connection with this project, if filed with the County Clerk of the
County of San Diego.
/ yi> .. !2L-
Resolution No. 16768
Page 13
PRESENTED BY:
APPROVED AS
~)
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaar
City Attorney
WPC F:\HOMEIPLANNINGIPCZ92A.RES
Il/~ ....21
EXHIBIT A
(
TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES
CEQA
CANDIDATE FINDINGS AND STATEMENT
OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
FOR FINAL ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT
REPORT EIR # 91-05
(SCH # 91071033)
IN ACCORDANCE WITII SECTION 21081
OF THE
CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALTIY
ACT
AND SECTIONS 15091 AND 15093 OF TITLE 14 OF THE
CALIFORNIA ADMINISTRATIVE CODE
/4~ -1.2
~.
I. INTRODUCfION
It is the policy of the state of California and the city of Chula
vista that a project shall not be approved if it would result in a
significant environmental impact if it is feasible to avoid or
substantially lessen the impact to a level below significant. Only
when there are specific economic, social, or other considerations
which make it infeasible to mitigate an impact, can a project with
significant impacts be approved.
Therefore, when an EIR has been completed which identifies one or
more potentially significant environmental impact, one of the
fOllowing findings must be made:
1. Changes or alternatives which avoid or SUbstantially lessen
the significant effects as identified in the FEIR have been
required or incorporated into the project, or
2. Such changes or alternatives 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, or
3.
specific economic, social or other
infeasible the mitigation measures or
identified in the FEIR.
[Public Resources Code Section 21081]
considerations make
project alternatives
A draft environmental impact report, dated May 1992 (the "Draft
EIR"), was prepared for the Project and circulated for 45 days for
pUblic comments. A public hearing was held on July 22, 1992. A
final environmental impact report, dated July, 1992 (the "Final
EIR" or "FEIR"), was prepared based on comments received on the
Draft EIR, including those received after the close of the public
comment period. The Final EIR consists of two parts: the EIR (with
technical revisions), and the comment letters and responses to
comments ("Response to Comments"). The Final EIR was also made
available to commentors August 5, 1992 to August 12, 1992 for
review, although this did not reopen the public review periOd.
The following Findings are made by the Decisionmaker(s) relative to
the conclusions of the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR *91-
05) for the proposed Telegraph Canyon Estates project (the
"Project") located in the City of Chula vista.
.
)If Iii. -- 29
( II. PROJECf DESCRIPTION
The 112. 4-acre Telegraph Canyon Estates project site is in the
Eastern Territories Planning Area of the City of Chula Vista. It
is north of Telegraph Canyon Road (Otay Lakes Road), immediately
west of the proposed future extension of state Route 125 (S.R.
125). The site is not presently a part of the city of Chula Vista,
but it is within the "special Study" area of the City's General
Plan, meaning that it will require action by the Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO) to be included into the Chula Vista
Sphere of Influence and annexed into the City.
The project is proposing to develop a maximum 350 single-family
dwelling units (du's), two private park areas, and two community
purpose facility sites on approximately 82 acres of the 112.4-acre
site, yielding a net density of 4.3 du/ac. Approximately 30.2 acres
of the property will be in open space.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates project area was originally included
as a part of the Otay Ranch area and has been included in previous
studies conducted for that larger project. Because the project
area is physically separated from the rest of the Otay Ranch
property by Telegraph Canyon Road, and because the site is adjacent
to the Eastlake Community, it is now being proposed as a
development separate from otay Ranch. If approved, it will be
developed in a manner similar to and compatible with the Eastlake
Planned Community and will be processed as an amendment to the
Eastlake General Development Plan, Sectional Planning Area Plan,
and Planned Community District Regulations.
III. DISCRETIONARY ACTIONS
The discretionary actions for the proposed project involve the
following permits/approvals and the Decisionmaker(s) who will take
such actions:
. an Annexation (Decisionmakers: LAFCO, the Chula Vista
Planning Commission, and the Chula Vista City Council)
.
a Chula Vista Sphere of
(Decisionmakers: LAFCO, the
commission, and the Chula Vista
Influence
Chula Vista
city Council)
Amendment
Planning
. a General Development Plan (GDP) Amendment
(Decisionmakers: the Chula Vista Planning Commission and
the Chula Vista city council)
2
) ~ ~ __ ~D
. a Sectional Planning Area (SPA) Amendment
(Decisionmakers: the Chula Vista Planning Commission and
the Chula Vista city Council)
. a Tentative Subdivision Map (TM) (Decisionmakers: the
Chula Vista Planning Commission and the Chula Vista City
Council)
These Findings are made by the Decisionmaker(s) pursuant to Section
21081 of the California Public Resources Code, and Section 15091
and 15093 of the California Administrative Code, title 14.
IV. THE ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
For purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")
and the findings hereinafter set forth, the administrative record
of the Decisionmaker(s) shall include the Draft Environmental
Report ("Draft EIR"), and the Final Environmental Impact Report
("Final EIR") and its appendices; Response to Comments on the Final
EIR; all reports prepared by staff and their consultants, all
documents submitted by members of the public and interested
agencies in connection with the EIRs and the Project generally; and
any documents embodying the Decisionmaker(s) or other action on the
Project, including staff reports and resolutions and the minutes of
public hearings on the Project.
v. TERMINOLOGY
Section 15091 of the CEQA Guidelines (Cal. Code of Regulations,
tit. 14) 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 three
allowable conclusions. The first is the "[c]hanges or alterations
have been required in, or incorporated into, the project which
would avoid or substantially lessen the significant environmental
effect as identified in the Final EIR." The second potential
finding is that II [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 not been 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 alternatives
identified in the Final EIR."
3
)~~ - ~I
\ VI. LEGAL EFFECT OF FINDINGS
To the extent that these findings conclude that mitigation measures
outlined in the EIR avoid or substantially lessen potentially
significant environmental effects, are feasible and have not been
modified, superseded, or withdrawn, the Decisionmaker(s) hereby
binds itself to require implementation of those mitigation measures
on the Project applicant and any assigns or successors in interest.
These findings constitute a binding set of obligations that will
come into effect when the Decisionmaker(s) adopts a resolution
approving the Project.
VII. MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
As required by Public Resources Code section 21081.6, the
Decisionmaker(s), in adopting these findings, also adopts a
mitigation monitoring and reporting program designed to ensure
that, during project implementation, the Project applicant, and any
other responsible parties comply with the feasible mitigation
measures identified below. That program is contained in the Final
EIR at pp. 211-223.
VIII. POTENTIALLY SIGNIFICANT AND SIGNIFICANT EFFECTS AND
MITIGATION MEASURES
The EIR sets forth environmental effects of the Project that would
be potentially significant or significant in the absence of
mitigation measures. These effects (or "impacts") are set forth
below, along with any mitigation measures adopted that will avoid
those potentially significant or significant effects. Also set
forth are certain significant effects that cannot be substantially
lessened or avoided even with the adoption of all feasible
mitigation measures proposed in the Draft and Final EIRS. In
adopting these findings, the Decisionmaker(s) also adopts a
statement of overriding considerations setting forth the economic,
social and other benefits of the Project that will render that
significant effect acceptable. That statement of OVerriding
Considerations is attached to this Resolution as Exhibit A.
Public testimony, written correspondence, and comments on the FEIR
indicate that there are differences of opinion as to the
conclusions in the FEIR and that the Project could result in
cumulatively significant and unmitigab1e impacts on air quality,
cumulatively significant and unmitigated impacts on water
availability, and significant and unmitigated impacts on biological
resources. The following presents the Decisionmaker(s) findings on
the impact of the Project.
4
)4& -3J.
IX. FINDINGS
A Public Resources ~ Section 21081(a)
The EIR sets forth environmental effects of the Project that would
be potentially significant or significant in the absence of
mitigation measures. These effects (or "impacts") are set forth
below, along with any mitigation measures adopted that will avoid
those potentially significant or significant effects. Also set
forth are certain significant effects that cannot be subs~antially
lessened or avoided even with adoption of all feasible mitigation
measures proposed with the Draft and Final EIRs.
1. Geology/Soils
Impact. Development of the site could expose the project to
geologic hazards associated with compressive and expansive soils
found on-site, and to hazards from regional seismic activity.
Findinq. Potentially significant geological impacts can be avoided
by adhering to the remedial grading measures set forth in the
geotechnical report prepared for the project, and by monitoring
during project grading. All grading and drainage plans will be
reviewed and approved by the City's Engineering Division prior to
issuance of a grading permit. A Testing and Observation Report
will be prepared and submitted to the city's Engineering Division
to verify that all requirements have been met.
Paleontological Sensitivity
Impact.
on-site
Project
strata,
impacts
The Oligocene Otay and Sweetwater Formations which occur
have a high potential for containing significant fossils.
grading may expose or destroy subsurface fossil-bearing
providing new and important paleontological data. Adverse
to paleontological resources could occur.
Findinq. A paleontological monitor will be on-site at all times
during original cutting of previously undisturbed sediments mapped
within the Sweetwater and Otay Formations. Project construction
will be temporarily halted, if necessary, to allow recovery of
fossil resources.
2. Hydrology/Water Quality/Groundwater
Impact. Short-term erosion impacts could occur during project
grading and construction. Existing erosion problems associated
5
J~~ -~ 3
with past agricultural uses will be eliminated after site
development, but the amount of runoff will increase with added
hardscape. The project could potentially degrade water quality in
Telegraph Canyon Creek from urban pollutants.
Findina. Mitigation will require implementation of an erosion
control plan during construction, construction of the storm drain
plan proposed in the SPA, and adherence to National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) requirements for urban runoff
and stormwater discharge. All plans shall be designed and
constructed to meet City Engineering Standards.
3. Landform Alteration/Aesthetics
Impact. The project will require a balanced cut and fill of
830,000 cubic yards. The grading plan has been developed to follow
the dominant site landforms, and the project is proposed to be
constructed in a terraced fashion. The maximum manufactured slopes
will be 50 feet in height and the deepest cut will be 45 feet on
the eastern knoll.
Findina. Because the project area is adjacent to Telegraph Canyon
Road, which is designated a Scenic Highway by the City of Chula
Vista, the SPA has been developed to conform with the Telegraph
Canyon Scenic Highway Criteria. The project will provide setbacks
from the canyon floor: preserve and enhance the natural stream
corridor and trail system: ensure that the project's architectural
design, height and siting of structures, and landscaping and signs
are considered in the development: and provide landscaping to
beautify the adjacent portion of the scenic route inside the
proj ect area. The proj ect I s design concept is based on design
elements of the Eastlake Design Manual Guidelines, in order to
assure compatibility with the adjacent Eastlake communities.
4. Air Quality
Impact. The project will create short term impacts from dust and
emissions during project construction. It will incrementally add
to cumulative impacts to the San Diego Air Basin by adding
pollutants from increased traffic and household emissions.
Findina. Mitigation for short term effects will require
implementation of dust control measures during project grading, and
compliance with the requirements of the APCD and ARB. Long-term
impacts will be reduced by adherence to the Air Quality
Implementation Plan prepared for the SPA. However, because the San
Diego region is a non-attainment area for ozone and particulate
matter, cumulative air quality impacts will remain significant and
unmitigable. 'Specific economic, social, or other considerations
6
)If~ -34-
make infeasible other mitigation measures or project alternatives.
The remaining unavoidable significant cumulative impacts are
acceptable when balanced against the facts set forth above and in
the attached statement of Overriding Considerations.
5. Biological Resources
ImDact. The majority of the project site is characterized by
disturbed and weedy vegetation associated with past agricultural
uses. The project will eliminate this vegetation, along with 0.9
acres of wetland habitat.
Findinq. Although the wetland habitat is fragmented and of low
quality, its loss is still considered a significant impact. Its
loss could be mitigated by the applicant's dedication of 0.9 acres
of wetland habitat off-site (Otay Ranch), to be preserved in
conjunction with adjacent wetland habitat. Until specific off-site
mitigation for biology is imposed and adopted, the impact to the
freshwater marsh would be considered significant and unmitigated.
6. Transportation
ImDact. The project will generate a maximum of 3500 average daily
trips (ADT). The level of service (LOS) will be lowered from C to
D on Telegraph Canyon Road between otay Lakes Road and Eastlake
Parkway, from B to C between Crest Drive and Paseo Del Rey, and
from A to B between Paseo del Rey and paseo Ladera, but
intersections will operate at acceptable levels and no significant
direct impacts will occur.
Findinq. The applicant will pay its fair-share of area
improvements to reduce cumulative impacts. These may include
roadway widening, restriping, or installation of other signals;
this will be determined by the city Engineering Department during
its annual review of cumulative impacts of all projects in the
Eastern Chula Vista Transportation Phasing Plan (ECVTPP). While
the project will not require a traffic signal on Telegraph Canyon
Road, the applicant is proposing to fund and provide a signal.
7. Noise
ImDact. Construction of the project will expose existing residents
to short-term noise impacts. The project will not increase ambient
noise levels significantly, but portions of the property will be
subject to long-term adverse noise impacts from traffic on S.R.
125.
7
)'fB -Z)
Findina. Mitigation will require construction of a noise wall
along the eastern portion of the site, and possibly the use of
noise-reducing construction materials and techniques. All noise
walls will be constructed in conformance with the design guidelines
set forth in the SPA, which follow the Eastlake I Design
Guidelines. All noise mitigation measures shall be made conditions
of the final map. Prior to issuance of building permits, the City
of Chula Vista's Noise Abatement Division shall review final
grading plans to determine whether additional noise materials are
required for second stories of homes which may be impacted by
future noise from S.R. 125.
8. Land Use/General Plan/Zoning
ImDact. The project area will require annexation to the City of
Chula Vista, which will require approval by the Local Agency
Formation Commission (LAFCO). The proposed density is consistent
with the city's General Plan designation for the site and conforms
with guidelines set forth in the Eastlake Planned Community
District Regulations, General Development Plan, and Sectional
Planning Area Plan. No significant land use impacts have been
identified.
Findina. The project includes a 1. 5-acre Community Purpose
Facility (CPF) site, which meets the net acreage requirement of the
city. The required 10 percent affordable housing requirement will
be met by dedication of a parcel off-site for this purpose, payment
of in-lieu fees, or a combination of these measures.
9. Parks/Recreation/Open Space
ImDact. The project will increase park/recreation use demand by
bringing approximately 1,134 new residents into the City. Under
the provisional standards for parks set forth by the City of Chula
Vista, the Telegraph Canyon project is required to set aside a
total of 3.4 acres as dedicated park land.
Findina. The SPA proposes to dedicate 30.2 acres (27%) of the
total 112.4 project acreage to parks, recreational areas, and open
space. These will include private neighborhood parks and mini-
parks. A portion of the central natural swale and the entire
drainage channel adjacent to Telegraph Canyon Road will be
preserved as open space, as will the eastern property boundary
abutting the proposed S.R. 125 freeway. These open space easements
will constitute approximately 20 acres. A San Diego County Water
Authority easement, in the center of the site, will be developed as
a linear garden totalling 3.1 acres. A public trail is also
proposed to connect the project to the Eastlake Community and to
the proposed community recreation center. Private
8
) ~ ~ - 3(.
parks/recreational and open space areas totalling 5.3 acres are
proposed. These consist of a of a recreational center with a
changing cabana, pool and spa, a private multi-purpose court area,
and the linear garden mentioned above. To provide additional
mitigation for impacts to park facilities, the applicant shall pay
in-lieu park fees in conformance with Section 17.10 of the Chula
Vista Municipal Code. This will be done prior to or as a condition
of the Final Map.
10. Public Services and Utilities
Impact. The project will introduce 102 new elementary school
students and 105 secondary students into the area. Because the
Chula Vista School District elementary schools and the Sweetwater
Union High School District secondary schools are operating above
permanent capacities, the addition of these students will create
significant adverse impacts.
Findina. The applicant is currently negotiating with the Chula
vista Elementary School District to form a CFD for Salt Creek Ranch
and the Telegraph Canyon Estates project (CFD 7). The project will
annex into the CFD prior to the Final Map. The applicant has also
met with the Sweetwater Unified High School District to begin
negotiations to form a new Community Facilities District (CFD 7).
The project will be required to annex into CFD 7 prior to the Final
Map. Annexations into this new CFD will fully mitigate impacts to
the districts.
Impact. Implementation of the project will increase demand on
water. Based on the Central Area Water Master Plan Update average
of 600 gallons per day per dwelling unit, the proposed 350-unit
project will result in an estimated daily residential water use
rate of 210,000 gallons. The SPA proj ects an average potable water
demand of 190,432 gallons per day, and an average reclaimed water
demand of 92,463 gallons per day, for a total daily water demand
projection of 282,895 gallons.
Findina. While increased water consumption is a major regional
issue, the project is capable of providing water to residents. The
Central Area Water Master Plan has specified an infrastructure that
will allow a sufficient amount of water to serve the project, and
barring general regional unavailability, water can be supplied to
the project. The project will meet water Threshold/Standards.
However, on a project specific basis, water impacts shall remain
significant but mitigable pending the requirement to obtain a will-
serve letter from the OWD once building permits are issued.
In response to regional water shortage, the Telegraph Canyon
Estates project proposes additional conservation measures for
individual households, including use of ultra-low flow indoor
9
N& - 31
fixtures and appliances (low-flush toilets, showers and faucets),
pressure reducing valves.
It is estimated that approximately 92,463 gallons of potable water
per day could be saved if reclaimed water is used to irrigate
common areas (parks and open space) within the project. While
reclaimed water is not currently available for use within the
proposed project, the project is providing a system to use
reclaimed water irrigation when it becomes available. As this
project's contribution, the applicant shall either install the line
across project frontage or pay a proportional share of the line, as
determined by the Otay Water District. The size of the line will
be determined by the City of Chula vista and the OWD, based on the
demand for reclaimed water in the project's vicinity. Since
reclaimed water is not currently available for the project to
offset water demand, water availability impacts are deemed
significant and unmitigable on a cumulative regionwide basis. If
reclaimed water service becomes available in the future, this
cumulative water availability impact will be mitigated.
11. Public Health
Impact. The data available at the present time are not sufficient
to warrant a determination of health and safety hazards to future
residents from proximity to the existing SDG&E transmission lines.
Findina. While the determination of a significant impact cannot be
concluded at this time, the project applicant shall comply with any
future EMF policy adopted by the City of Chula Vista prior to
consideration of the Final Map. This measure would reduce
potential impacts to below a level of significance.
B. Public Resources~ Section 21081(b)
The Decisionmaker(s) having reviewed and considered the information
contained in the FEIR for the project, and the information in the
Administrative Record, finds that there are no further changes or
alterations to the project that would avoid or substantially lessen
the significant environmental impacts that are within the
responsibility and jurisdiction of another public agency and should
be adopted by such other agency.
10
/9 ~ - 3.~
C. Public Resources ~ Section 2108Hc): ~ Infeasibility m Miti~ation Measures
~ Proiect Alternatives Other.Ilmn.1hl: Proposed TeleiTlIPh Canyon Estates.
The Decisionmaker(s) approval of the Project as proposed will cause
significant adverse environmental effects which cannot be fully
mitigated to biological resources, cumulative air quality, and
cumulative water availability. The mitigation measures outlined in
Section A of these Findings will reduce impacts to biological
resources to below a level of significance. However, until the
mitigation parcel is recorded, the biological impacts shall remain
significant. The unmitigable effects to cumulative air quality and
regional water availability cannot be fully mitigated on a project
specific basis, at this time.
The Decisionmaker(s) has also considered whether any of the project
alternatives outlined in the EIR could feasibly substantially
lessen or avoid this effect while satisfying the objectives of the
Telegraph Canyon Estates project. (See citizens ~ Oualitv Growth
~ ~ of Mount Shasta (1988) 198 Cal. App.3d 433, 433-445 [243
Cal.Rptr. 727]; see ~ Pub. Resources Code, section 21002.) As
will be explained below, the Decisionmaker(s) concludes that none
of the proposed alternatives could feasibly both meet the Project's
objectives and substantially lessen or avoid the unavoidable
significant effects of the Project, and thus has decided to approve
the Project as proposed with all feasible mitigation measures
outlined above.
However, pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21081(c), the
Decisionmaker(s) find and conclude that the following independent
economic, social, or other considerations make infeasible the
project alternatives or other possible mitigation measures as
identified in the EIR. The Decisionmaker(s) further find that each
independent consideration, standing alone, would be sufficient to
make infeasible the following project alternatives.
1. J::!Q Project Alternative/No Development Alternative.illi1 Alternative ~ Analysis
This alternative consists of no annexation, GDP, SPA, or TSM for
the project. The site will remain under County jurisdiction, and
will remain under limited control under the S-87 (Special Study
Area) land use designation until studies were completed to enable
reclassification of the property. At this point, it would be
speculative to determine what type of development will be allowed,
but it is anticipated that it will be required to provide either a
transitional land use from adjacent undeveloped land to more
densely developed land (such as that present at Eastlake Shores);
or be developed consistent with other types of residential uses on
adjacent parcels within the City of Chula Vista. It is probable
11
lL(g -~')'
that an overall development plan, such as a specific plan, will be
required by the County, to avoid piecemeal development on a lot-by-
lot basis.
If the property were developed under the existing land use
designation and zoning, the 2.5-acre minimum lot size would allow
a gross maximum of 44 single-family dwelling units on the 112-acre
parcel. This number will likely be lower, in reality, given the
constraints on developable land (easements for SOG & E and the
SDCWA, wetland area, and setbacks for scenic highways and S.R.
125). All grading will be subject to the County's Resource
Protection Ordinance. Impacts to landform alteration/aesthetics,
air quality, biological resources, traffic, air quality and
hydrology will probably be reduced. Impacts to geology/soils,
noise, and public health will be similar to the proposed project's
impacts under this alternative. Impacts regarding social factors,
community tax structure, and demands on public services will likely
be greater. Given the site's proximity to the City of Chula vista,
these impacts will directly affect the City (schools, parks,
sewers, water supply, emergency services, etc.) and
Threshold/standards Policy would probably be exceeded. This
alternative would not be consistent with the City's General Plan or
Zoning Ordinance. Due to these social considerations, this
alternative is considered infeasible.
No Development. Under this alternative, the project area will
remain vacant and land use will remain unchanged. No impacts to
geology, hydrology, landform alteration, air quality, biological
resources, traffic, noise, public facilities, parks, or public
health will occur. Like the no project alternative, this
alternative would not be consistent with the City of Chula vista's
or County of San Diego's land use designations for residential
development, and it would result in loss of tax revenue for the
city. It is also considered to be infeasible due to these social
factors; additionally, it would not achieve the basic objectives of
the proposed project.
2. Alternative Desi~.A
This alternative will be a reduced project developed at a low-
medium residential density (R-1-7). A total of 280 single-family
homes would be constructed on approximately 70 acres resulting in
a density of 4.0 dwelling units per acre. Open space would
increase to 31.6 acres and would encompass a larger portion of the
central swale on-site. The Community Purpose Facility would remain
the same as in the proposed project.
No circulation plan has been designed for this alternative, but
access points -would be the same as those in the proposed project,
12
J1~ -Ifo
and the overall street and cul-de-sac system would be similar. If
this alternative is adopted, the following impacts are expected to
occur.
Geoloav/Soils. Impacts would be similar to those of the proposed
project. Constraints from these factors would not expected to be
more or less difficult under this alternative or the proposed
project.
Bvdroloav/Water Qualitv/Groundwater. In terms of project drainage
effects on water quality, the discharge into the Telegraph Canyon
Creek Channel is regulated by the National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination system (NPDES) permit requirements: as such, neither
the proposed project nor this alternative (or any alternative) can
have a discharge that significantly degrades (as defined by the EPA
in the NPDES requirements) the water quality in the receiving
channel. Fewer houses would probably translate to fewer vehicles
using and parking on the streets, resulting in less material to be
carried off during rainstorms. While this could allow easier
attainment of the NPDES requirements, the reduction in material is
not likely of sufficient magnitude to affect the way the system
would be designed to meet NPDES requirements.
This alternative may result in less runoff, as there would likely
be less hardscape and more permeable surface (yards, open space).
Even with the same design the reduction would not be proportional
to the drop in units, as the road system could not be reduced
proportionally. Calculations on storm drainage capacity in
Telegraph Canyon Creek channel showed that the proposed project's
input is less than significant, and that the channel would still be
well under capacity. This alternative may result in less runoff:
but the amount of runoff was not found to have a significant impact
with the proposed project.
with the inclusion of much of the central swale in open space there
would likely be somewhat more input of fertilizers, pesticides, and
herbicides into the drainage than under the proposed project, as
there would likely be private yards adjacent to the swale. Private
use of these chemicals is difficult if not impossible to control.
Landform Alteration/Aesthetics. Landform alteration would be
similar under the proposed project and this alternative. The
overall landform would be retained, and the street system must be
created, regardless of the 60-unit difference.
Aesthetics is a subjective environmental issue. People who object
to the placement of a 3S0-unit residential project on this site
would likely object to the placement of a 280-unit project.
Conversely, even with having to maintain the street system, a
reduction in units may allow the designers to create a more
aesthetically -pleasing project. Given that a street system is
necessary, it is likely that the proposed project and a design
13
14;;. -1/
under this alternative would be considered aesthetically similar by
most passers-by.
within the project, the retention of the marsh area would likely
have mixed reactions from the residents. Small areas of marsh do
not have the wildlife that people find attractive. The marsh would
quickly become a solid band of cattails if left alone. This is not
considered aesthetically pleasing by most people. The odors of the
decomposing vegetation in the summer and the presence of mosquito
and biting flies would be objectionable to residents living near
the marsh. From an aesthetics perspective, the landscaping of the
proposed project and the elimination of the biting insects would
likely be considered preferable by the majority of residents.
Air Oua1itv. From a project perspective, the reduction in units
associated with this alternative would result in lesser air quality
impacts, as fewer vehicles would be present, and fewer fireplaces
and furnaces would be used. From a regional perspective, impacts
depend on whether it is assumed that the 60-unit difference
disappears, or if it is fulfilled elsewhere. The main source of
air pollution in the county is from vehicles. If the 60 units will
be supplied elsewhere, and if that compositely creates more travel
for the inhabitants to work and shop, then greater air quality
effects will occur than with the proposed project. If the 60-unit
difference disappears, or if the "displaced" inhabitants select
housing that will result in less travel, then lesser air quality
effects will occur than with the proposed project. However, this
alternative would still result in cumulatively significant
unmitigable impacts.
Bio1oaica1 Resources. As noted in the Biological Resources
technical report, and in the EIR section, the marsh area is not of
high value. Potentially adverse impacts associated with
preservation of the wetland within the development are discussed
above under aesthetics. While preservation on-site of resources is
usually the preferable choice, given the size and isolated nature
of the marsh area to be retained, preservation of higher quality
habitat Off-site, as in the proposed project, would result in
greater ecological value.
CUltural Resources. There is no impact on cultural resources with
either the proposed project or this alternative.
Transtlortation. The number of projected ADTs for the proposed
project is 3500: with this alternative that number would be reduced
to 2800. Less traffic would be considered a beneficial impact,
although cumulative impacts would still occur and mitigation
measures similar to those required for the proposed project would
be needed.
Noise. The noise generator for this project is largely the future
State Route 125 and Telegraph Canyon Road. These noise sources are
14
/ Lf~ - 'I-~
independent of the project density. Under this alternative more
redesign may be possible as a part of the noise mitigation, but
features such as noise walls would prObably still be required.
Land Use/General Plan/Zonina. Both the proposed project and
alternative are in general compliance with these issues.
issue of affordable housing and community purpose facilities
be met with the proposed project and this alternative.
Community social Factors. Neither the proposed project nor this
alternative would have impacts to community social factors.
this
The
will
Communi tv Tax structure. This alternative would generate lesser
fees, as it results in lesser density. Fewer units would be built,
resul ting in lower property tax assessments. Fees paid to
schools, parks, the water district, and other public facilities
would be reduced.
Parks/Recreation/ODen SDace. More open space would be created with
this alternative than with the proposed project. The tennis
courts, pool, and jacuzzi facilities associated with the proposed
project are eliminated in this alternative. The decreased number
of units would result in fewer funds for public park land and no
private recreational facilities would be provided.
Public Services and utilities. Lesser demands would be placed on
public services and utilities with this alternative. The number of
students projected would reduced from 105 to 84, but the project
would still be required to annex into a CFD to fully mitigate
impacts.
Public Health. The lesser density of this alternative may allow
designers to incorporate greater distance from the transmission
lines. At this time it is not possible to determine significance
of the lines to public health.
As discussed above, incorporation of a part of the marsh into the
project allows a source of mosquitoes and biting flies, and
provides a potential for disease. This alternative could introduce
significant health concerns.
Thus, while this alternative would reduce some impacts, mitigation
measures similar to those required for the proposed project would
still be needed. This alternative would not create significant
impacts to biological resources, but could create impacts to
aesthetics and public health by preserving the marsh on-site.
Cumulative impacts to air quality would remain unmitigated under
this alternative. Therefore, as this alternative does not
substantially avoid or lessen the adverse effects of the proposed
action, it is not considered to be environmentally preferable and
therefore is infeasible.
15
J~~ - Lf:3
3. Alternative DesilP1,B
This alternative would be identical to the proposed project, except
the proposed street system would be public rather than private.
All impacts associated with this project would be the same as with
the proposed project, except those related to Community Tax
structure.
As currently proposed, the proj ect contains approximately 2.5 miles
of private local streets. As such, the city of Chula Vista would
not incur any maintenance costs. Such costs would be borne by the
property owners through a homeowners association. If the streets
were dedicated to the City of Chula vista as public streets,
however, the city would be required to maintain them within its
regular street maintenance program in its Operations and
Maintenance Budget.
Redesignation of the private streets to public would allow through-
traffic to gain access through the project site. However, volumes
of traffic are not projected to change significantly, and
additional traffic impacts are not expected to occur under this
alternative.
The proposed project would have a net positive fiscal balance for
the City of Chula Vista, with assessed fees and taxes exceeding
costs. with the city assuming the streets and the ensuing
maintenance, that fiscal balance would remain positive, although it
would be reduced. Under the proposed project (private streets) the
net positive fiscal balance in year fifteen would be projected at
$827,043. Under this alternative (public streets), the projected
net positive fiscal balance would be $454,718. This is a reduction
of $372,325.
This alternative would result in the same impacts as the proposed
project, with the exception of community tax structure. The City'S
fiscal balance, while still positive, would be reduced under this
alternative. The significant, unmitigated impacts with respect to
biological resources and cumulative air quality and water supply
would remain. While this alternative cannot be deemed infeasible
it would not substantially lessen or avoid the adverse effects
created by the proposed project and is not considered to be
environmentally preferable.
4. Off-Site Alternatives
The State supreme Court has recently ruled that EIRs must include
an analysis of alternative sites for proposed projects, even though
the sites may not be owned by the applicant [Citizens of Goleta
Valley v. Board of supervisors ("Goleta I") (2d oist. 1988) 197
Cal. App. 3d 553 [276 Cal. Rptr. 410]). Three alternative sites
16
/1 B-1-~
were analyzed in the EIR. These are considered infeasible because
the potential environmental effects were found to be greater than
those expected on the proposed project area.
A ~ Ranch Alternative ~
This site consists of approximately 500 acres within the otay Ranch
property and is located southwest of the Telegraph Canyon Estates
site. Like the Telegraph Canyon Estates property, this site is
within the unincorporated area of San Diego County.
This site encompasses a portion of Poggi Canyon. The site is within
the County of San Diego's otay Subregional Plan and is subject to
land use and zoning regulations defined in that document. The
General Plan's land use classification for the property is
Residential (low-medium density, 3-6 du per acre), and the site is
zoned A-70, Limited Agriculture, allowing 1 du per 4 or 8 acres).
The proposed otay Ranch plan would provide low-to-medium density
(3-6 du/acre) residential development on this parcel.
If the otay Ranch alternative site is chosen, impacts to
geology/soils, hydrology/water quality/groundwater, air quality,
cultural resources, traffic, public services, and public health are
expected to be similar to those which would occur with
implementation of the project as proposed. Fewer impacts related
to landform alteration and noise are expected. However,
impacts to biological resources could potentially increase, and the
effect on community tax structure would be greater. Particularly
in terms of biological resources, this alternative is not
considered to be environmentally preferable.
B. ~ ~ Alternative ~
This site also consists of approximately 500 acres of vacant land.
It is within the jurisdiction of the City of San Diego, and is
about 0.5 miles east of I-80S, north of otay Mesa Road. The site
is presently vacant and is surrounded by vacant land. It is within
the city of San Diego's otay Mesa Community Planning area and is
designated for mixed land uses (very low to low-medium density
residential, neighborhood commercial, parks, and schools). The
property includes portions of the proposed california Terrace and
Hidden Trails projects. Brown Field is approximately one mile east
of the site.
If the otay Mesa alternative site is chosen, impacts to traffic,
community social factors and tax structure, and public services are
expected to "be similar to those which would occur with
17
/ ~ ~ - J./-r
implementation of the project as proposed. Fewer impacts would
occur with respect to parks, recreation, and open space. However,
it is anticipated that impacts would be greater to geology/soils,
hydrology/water quality/groundwater, landform alteration and
aesthetics, biological and cultural resources, land use/general
plan elements, and public health.
c. Eastlake Vistas.iUllJ Woods
This 500-acre site is composed of two parcels north and south of
otay Lakes Road and west of the Lower Otay Reservoir. It is in the
city of Chula vista's Eastern Territories and is the easternmost
property within the Eastlake Planned Community. The property is
proposed to be developed as the Eastlake Vistas and Woods
residential neighborhoods.
The site is currently vacant, with development existing to the east
and approved to the west. The future extension of S.R. 125 is just
over one mile west of the site. Salt Creek, an important
biological and aesthetic resource, is located on-site.
If the Eastlake vistas and Woods alternative site is chosen,
impacts are expected to be approximately the same as on the
proposed project site for landform alteration/aesthetics, air
quality, traffic, land use, community social factors and tax
structure, utilities, and public health. Impacts related to noise
and parks/recreation/open space would likely be reduced. However,
there is the potential for increased impacts to geology/soils,
hydrology, and biological and cultural resources.
18
)~~ - L4
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS:
B8c~ound
The state CEQA Guidelines provide:
"(a) CEQA requires the Decisionmaker(s) to balance the benefits of
a proposed project against its unavoidable environmental risks
in determining whether to approve the project. If the
benefits of a proposed project outweigh the unavoidable
adverse environmental effects, the adverse environmental
effects may be considered 'acceptable'.
(b) Where the decision of the public agency allows the occurrence
of significant effects which are identified in the Final EIR
but are not at least substantially mitigated, the agency shall
state in writing the specific reasons to support its action
based on the Final EIR and/or other information in the record.
This statement may be necessary if the agency also makes a
finding under Section 15091(a) (2) or (a) (3).
(c) If an agency makes a statement of overriding considerations,
the statement should be included in the record of the project
approval and should be mentioned in the Notice of
Determination." (CEQA Guidelines Section 15093)
The Decisionmaker(s) in approving the various permits that are the
subject of the FEIR, having considered the information contained in
the FEIR and supporting technical reports, GDP, and SPA; and having
reviewed and considered the public testimony and record, makes the
following statement of Overriding Considerations in support of the
Findings. The Decisionmaker(s) further find and conclude that the
public benefits of the project outweigh the identified significant
unmitigated impacts with regard to biological resources, cumulative
air quality, and regional water availability. The Decisionmaker(s)
find the following factors support approval of the project despite
the significant and unmitigated effects of the proposed project,
and make the following Statement of Overriding Considerations:
1. The project will LulLill a demonstrated need Lor housing in
the Chula vista Sphere oL Influence area.
According to SANDAG's Series 7 Growth Forecast, the population
within the city of Chula Vista Sphere will grow to 186,900 by 2010.
This represents a 31% increase over the 1986 sphere population of
129,200. The SANDAG forecast further projects that the number of
occupied units will increase to 70,800 occupied units in 2010, up
35% over the 1986 total of 46,100 units. The regional population
is forecast to climb to 3,154,500 by 2010. While the population
19
JLf9. ,t7'
growth rate within the city of Chula Vista's current city limits is
22% below the regional rate, the growth rate in the sphere area is
projected at 174% higher than the regional rate.
The proposed lot and home sizes will be provided for varied single-
family market opportunities within the community. The 10%
affordable housing requirement will be provided by dedication of a
parcel off-site for this purpose, payment of in-lieu fees, or a
combination of these or other comparable measures.
2. The project is in conformance with the Eastlake Policy Plan
and Chula Vista General Plan.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates General Development Plan (GDP) will
implement the Eastlake Policy Plan Goals to
. enable the city to adopt measures providing for the
development of the surrounding areas
. establish conditions which will allow land uses to exist
in harmony with the community
. and allow a diversity of uses, relationships, buildings,
and open space in a planned concept while insuring
substantial compliance with the spirit, intent, and other
provisions of the General Plan.
The project will be compatible with adjacent land uses and has been
designed to create harmony between land uses. Overall landforms
will be preserved and the project will adhere to the General Plan's
Scenic Highway Criteria.
3. The Public Facilities Financing Plan (PFFP) prepared for the
project will provide a mechanism for funding needed facilities
within the City of Chula vista.
The PFFP is the first to be prepared under the requirements of the
City of Chula Vista's Growth Management Program and Implementation
Ordinance No. 2448. The PFFP quantifies how the Telegraph Canyon
Estates project relates to all other projects which are at some
stage in the city's overall development process. It ensures that
the development of the project is consistent with the overall goals
and policies of the city's General Plan, Growth Management Program,
and that the development of the project will not adversely impact
the Quality of Life Standards.
Under the PFFP, the applicant will pay development impact fees for
public facilities (police, fire and emergency medical services;
schools and libraries; parks and recreation; and water, sewer and
20
J i f2> ~ tfJ
Aug.19 '9212:02
AFFINIS
FAX 441-6421
P. 2/ 4
drainage) and a transportation development fee pursuant to the most
recently adopted program by the city council.
4. The recreational facilities and funding provided by the
project are needed in the city of Chula vista.
The project, as proposed, would provide private recreational
facilities for residents. In addition, the applicant will pay in-
lieu park fees which will be used to fund needed park and
recreation facilities in other areas of the city of Chula vista.
5.
Approval of the project will ellflelfiee ~. formation of new
Community Facilities Districts (CFD) 'loi-^"ciey schools.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates project was formerly a part of the
otay Ranch project, and thus it had been assumed that this parcel
would annex into the new erD that will be formed for otay Ranch if
that project is approved in the future.
As Telegraph Canyon Estates is now being processed separately, the
applicant has negotiated with both the Chula vista Elementary
School District and the Sweetwater Union High School District to
form a new crD prior to otay Ranch. erD 7 will annex the proposed
project with the Salt Creek Ranch project (already approved and
built) to provide funds for needed school facilities.
6. with the provision of an offsite easement dedication for 0.9
acres of existing wetlands to be preserved and incorporated
into a larger wetland habitat area, biological impacts will be
reduced to below a level of significance.
The proj ect appl icant proposes to coordinate the location and
dedication of an offsite conservation easement for 0.9 acres. If
this offiste mitigation occurs, the removal of onsite wetlands will
be mitigated. The exact location of the offsite conservation
easement will be determined and dedication will occur prior to the
removal of the onsite wetlands.
7. The provision of reclaimed water service to the site will
mitigate the impact regional to water availability.
The project proposes to construct an onsite dual-water system to
provide for the use of both potable and reclaimed water. The
production of reclaimed water is controlled by the Otay Water
District (OWD). Distribution of reclaimed water is controlled by
the construction of reclaimed water pipelines. CUrrently,
reclaimed water pipelines do not reach the project site. The OWD's
Master Plan for reclaimed water facilities designates that
reclaimed water pipelines will be provided in Otay Lakes Road, from
21
/ Lf ~ - fer
Lane Avenue to the project site. When these pipelines are
constructed, the project will be served by reclaimed water by the
OWO. The provision of service of reclaimed water will mitigate the
impact on water availability to below a level of significance.
For these reasons, on balance, the City finds that there are
planning, social, and economic considerations resulting from this
project that serve to override and outweigh the project's
unavoidable significant environmental effects.
22
/~~-9
TELEGRAPH CANYON EST A TES
MITIGATION MONITORING AND
REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
EIR 91-05
11 If- -S7
EXHIBIT B
N
N
W
'-
~
~
,
b
Mitigation Measures
Table 11.1
DRAFT MmGATION, MONITORING, AND REPORTING PROGRAM
TImeframe
Responsibility
for Verification
Date of
Completion
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitigation Complete,
Dated, and Verified
11.1 GeoIogy/Pllleontology
Geoloav
1.
Subsurface exploration shaR be
pelformed In the lonn 01 geologic
logging 01 large diameter borings
In the vicinity 01 cut slopes, once
grading plans are specificalty
dellned, to determine K bentonitic
clay seams exist and to determine
K actual subsurface condtilons
reflect those anticipated In the
technlcel repori.
2.
In areas 01 proposed ftR or
structures,aa vagetellon or other
abandoned structures or utilities
shan be strfpped and/or removed
from the stie. Topsoo, coouvlum.
and aAuvlum shal be removed to
bedrock and replaced by densely
compactedfta.
Unsuttable fta materials wlR be
removed during grading and clean
ftn (free 01 debris and rocks)
wIR be brought In, wetted down,
and densely recotnpacted. Fins
constructed on natural slopes
steeper than 5:1 (horlz./vert.)
shaD be keyed and benched
Into bedrock.
3.
4.
Selective grading lor building pads
and streets shall be done to avoid
expansive solis or clayey alluvial
materials.
PrIor to
Issuance of
grading permti
and during
project
grading
. .
. .
. .
City Engineering Dept.
. .
. .
N
N
.,..
-----
~
~
I
W
Table 11.1 Continued
Mitigation Measures
TImeframe
Responsibility
for Verification
Date of
Completion
Mitigation Complete,
Dated, and Verified
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
5.
Rock dlsposal Is recommended to be
In a non-structural area, wtth larger
rocks Incorporated Into lower parts
of compacted fills tt performed under
the observation and testing by a
geotechnical consultant, and may
require special rock handling equipment.
6.
Buildings shall not straddle a cut-fin
transition due to potential differential
settJernentsof bedrock and fig mater-
Ials wtthln building pads. Undercuts and
grading are to be done In accordance
wtth recommendations of the geotechnical
report (Appendix B),
7,
To avoid surface slope failures, appro-
priate plant material selectionsand
irrigation components and design shall
be reviewed and approved by the CRy's
Landscape Archttects.
6.
Surface runoff to natural and graded
areas shall be minimized, Pad dralnaga
shall be dlrected to suitable disposal
areas via aved swales and storm drains.
Subdralns shan be placed under an
fills located In drainage courses.
9,
Soil axpanslon potential shall be
evaluated on a Iot-by-lot basis upon
completion of project grading. If tt Is
determined that conditions are not
acceptable for standard foundation
design, additional measures (such as
lime treatment. removal of soHs, or
post-tensioned slab foundations)
shan be Implemented,
Prior to
Issuance of
grading permtt
and during
project grading
Prior to
Issuance of
grading permtt
and during
project grading
Prior to
Issuance of
grading permtt
and during
project gradlng
. .
Prior to
Issuance of
building permtt
CRy Engineering Dept.
. .
CRy Landscape Archttect
CRy Engineering Department
CRy Engineering Dept.
and Building Dept.
'"
'"
'"
~
~
I
~
Table 11.1 Continued
Mitigation Measures
TImeframe
Responsibility
for Verification
Date of
Completion
Mitigation Complete,
Dated, and Verified
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
10. The City of Chula Vista wm also PrIor to City Engineering Depl.
require detailed grading and drainage approval of
plans to ba prepared In confonnance whh grading
The Chula Vista Municipal Code. the Sub- plans
division Manual, and all applicable
ordinance, policies. and standards.
11. Final grading and foundation plans will PrIor to City Engineering Depl.
Include design and construction racorn- Issuance 01 and Building Depl.
mendations found In Appendix B to this EIR. building permit
12. A quaHfled geotechnical geotechnical During project City Engineering Depl.
consuhantwlll monhor project grading to grading & geotechnical consuhant
detennlne that grading compiles whh reo-
comendations made In geotechnical report.
II soli conditions are differenct from those
""Pected, modltlcations may be made.
13. The geotechnical consuhantwlll ba Prtorto
required to submh a Testing and Dbser- Issuance of
vation Report to the CIty'sEnglneerlng building pennh
Division to verify that ati requirements
heve been met during project grading.
Paleontoloav
1. Tha appRcant shall provide a letter to PrIor to City Engineering Depl.
the City of Chula Vista verhylng that Issuance of
a qualified paleontologist has been grading pennh &
retained to Implement a mhlgation program. prior to grading
2. Tha paleontologist shan 8llend a pre- PrIor to com- . .
grading meeting to consullwhh the mencement of
grading and excavation contractors. grading
3. A paleontologlcal monhor wm ba on-she During project City Engineering Depl. and
at all times during original culling of grading paleontological monhor
previously undisturbed sediments mapped
whhln the Sweetwater and Dtay Fonnatlons.
N
N
'"
--
~
~
I
~
Table 11.1 Continued
Mitigation Meaaures
T1meframe
Responsibility
for Verification
Date of
Completion
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitigation Complete,
Dated. and Verified
4.
~ lossllsare encountered, the paleon-
tologist or paleontologlcel monRor shaH
recover them. II recovery requires an
extended selvage time, the paleontologist
or paleontological monRor will be "lowed
to temporarily direct, divert, or han
grading to "low recovery In a timely manner.
The paleontologist or paleontologlcel monRor
will be aHowed to set up a screen-washlng
operation on-sRe, ~ necessary, to recover
small lossll remains (e.g., mammal teeth, etc.).
5.
6.
AI lossll remains collected during the mon-
Roring and salvage program shaH be cleaned,
sorted, cataloged, and deposRed In a
scientific Instltution wRh paleontological
coHections such as the San Diego Natural
HlstoryMuseum.
11. 2 HydroIogy,.,....QuaIIy~
Water QualRY,
1. Project must comply wRh !!! applicable
negulations established by the US EPA
as set lorth In thathe National Pollutant
Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
permR requirements lor urban runoff and
stonnwater discharge and any regulations
adopted by the cny 01 Chula Vista thereto.
2.
The applicant shall submR an erosion
control plan In accordance wRh cny 01
Chula Vista design standards. At a minimum,
the Plan shall evaluate the need lor, sandbegs,
temporary sediment basln(s), and similar
measures. The fltan shall also evaluate
the need lor an erosion control maintenance
program; and Included one ~ needed.
During project
grading
. .
Prior to
tentative map
& Improvement
plans
Prior to
issuance of
grading permn
cny Engineering
Dept. and
paleontological
monitor
cny Englneerlng
Dept.
cny Engineering Dept.
Table 11.1 Continued
Mitigation Measures
TImeframe
Responsibility
for Verification
Date of
Completion
=====================================================================================================================
Mitigation Complete.
Dated, and Verified
3.
The developer shall be requ~ed 10 obtain
an NPDES constructlonperm~ for Ihe
subject property from Ihe Stale Waler Re-
sources Control Board and 10 subm~ pollu-
tanl control and mon~orIng plans 10 Ihe
Regional Water Quality Control Board
prior 10 Ihe Issuance of grading p~s.
" Ihe Stale does not require developments
Nke Ihe proposed project 10 comply w~h
Ihe constructlonperm~ process prior 10
completion of grading, Ihls condition
becomes ineffective,
Orainaoe:
1. The appllcanl shall su~ a slorm
drain plan In accordance ~h City
N of Chula Vista design standards.
N
.... 2. Adhere 10 slandard engineering
practices and Ihe Engineering
-- Departmenl's grading guidelines.
--{::: 3. Place a banier betw_ property and
Q:t adjacent dralnageway unlll 9O'llo
I landscape coverage Is achieved.
~ 4. The appIIcanl shall pay Ihe Telegraph
Canyon Drainage fee.
11. 3 UnIonn AIknlioflIA..dI........
1,
Grading for Ihe Telegraph Canyon
Estales project shall adhere 10
Ihe guidelines of Ihe Chula Vista
Generel Plan Land Use Element.
Prior 10
approval of
as-buIK
grading
plans
Prior 10
Issuance of
grading p~
During project
grading
. .
Prior 10
Final Map
Prior 10
approval of
grading
perm~
City Engineering
. .
. .
. .
City Engineering
City Planning
'"
'"
co
---
~
~
I
lJI
--.l
Table 11.1 Continued
Mitigation Measures
T1meframe
Responsibility
for Verification
Date of
Completion
Mitigation Complete,
Dated, and Verified
=====================================================================================================================
2. Development 01 the project shan
comply wnh the Scenic Highway
Criteria.
3.
The mitigation monnoring program
shall entail review 01 grading plans
and tha T entalive SUbdivision Map by
the CUy Engineering Department to
ensura compliance wnh the CUy's
grading and design standards.
The landscape plan shall be reviewed
and approved by the CUy Landscape
Archnect
4.
11.4 AIr QuoIIy
Consbuction-Pha InmBds
1.
Dust control through regular wetering 01
the sne during grading operations wiD
be requ~ed as a IUgnive dust abetement
measura to reduce emissions dullng grading.
2.
Comply wnh adopted policies 01 APCD and ARB
~<;1I'O'Ctp.........I~_........
.
A';t'l'lrf ~''O'ldtrR.-..... ""r Ft't'1
f9.~litll1ti or ",aDO RAl1it
ro'lt9t
Prior to
approval 01
grading
permn and Im-
provement pians
Prior to
building
permn.
Prior to
grading
permn or dur-
Inggradlng
p..l.......
IUGUIR;. gf
":"'l'...,p....~.p~l11!
CUy Engineering Dept.
CUy Landscape Archnect
CUy Engineering Dapt.
.....:.y or"'RRIRi
N
N
\0
'-
~
~
,
~
Table 11.1 Continued
Mitigation Measures
T1meframe
Responsibility
for Verification
Date of
Completion
Mitigation Complete.
Dated. and Verified
=====================================================================================================================
?
C'QRtrmlct".... Fr.cjlj'~ ....I..~ Wf~'
'9A1HJP'Ati~q fRatvRAl9' "'I:II;~ mgot
lWq 1~ ~-~ 11""'3~ ,,~,I"9mTt'r:
.R~ r.cKI.,k:ot~at RVm9'ti IfG prv pl'tmlltr'il to OR
1XJ'IRIlgQ ~~... fadHt_q ...... ..I panr"
lolartR1Jmlfll vvllvotvmtor IF. vr
1:1(7"," '''r.- "OOIt~~ .~,l..vm~~
m\@@i~iiIiW~)
11. 5 IIIologIeoI Resources
1.
The area to be lost win be replaced
by the preservation ot wetland habUat
off site at a one to one ratio In com-
pliance wnh Department 01 Fish and
Game & US Fish & WlldlOe ServIce
requirements.
2.
The 011 sUe mitigation area win be In
assoclationwnh a larger marsh or ri-
parian area. to encourage the eslabHsh-
ment 01 habttat 01 meaningful size to
wlldlOe. Beesusethe wetland area on
sUe Is less than one acre In size. U
fans under the national pennittlng
requirements 01 the flmry Corps 01 Engineers.
The AppDcant shan preserve the long-tenn
conservation 01 wetland areas 011 sUe by
dedicating 0.9 acres to the City as part
of a natural open space lot or easement.
The City shan place a natural open space
lot or easement In this acreage which would
eliminate future bundlng activity and which
would set 0.9 acres aside lor the preservation
01 wetiands off-sUe.
3.
~...........
In"~A't of
1;>' .11"'1"'3 por:mitr
Prior to
Final Map
El'IU-dI"'gn'Vt
City Planning
N
W
o
-
-{:::;:
6:s
I
Table 11.1 Continued
MItigation Measures
Tlmeframe
Responsibility
for Verification
Date of
Completion
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Mitigation Complete.
Dated, and Verified
11.7 T.........bdlun
1.
Provide the project's contribution
of funds towerd roedway Improvements
called ou1ln the ECVTPP. The spec:lflc
Improvements required for the proposed
project (such os possible roadway widening
restriplng, or Inslellation of signals)
will be determined by the City of Chula
V1sle's Engineering Department.
A11lmprovemenls wiD be funded on a falr.
share basis among projects. The project's
fair share contribution towerd millgating
direct and cumulative Impacts wlU ba made
a condition of the TSM.
2.
11.8 NoIse
T emDorarv lmeacts
1.
ConsbuctionwiD be DmKed to the
hourS of 7 a.m. to 10 p.m. on Monday
through Friday, 7 a.m. to 8 p.m. on
Saturday and Sunday, and prohlblted
on Federal hoDdays to minimize
temporary effects.
~ Lona Term Imoacts.
1.
Consbuct noise bani.... along the
rear properiy lines of those lots proposed
wKhln the 65 dBA-contour,
consist of 5.5-foot high, gep-free
slumpstone or masonry sound weffs
or barriers.
Prior to
issuance of
building permKs
. .
Prior to
grading permK
and during
project
grading
Prior to
issuance of
buHdlng pennK
City Engineering
and BuDding Dept.
BuDding Dept.
City Engineering
and Building Dept.
Table 11.1 Continued
Mitigation Measures
TImeframe
Responsibility
for Verification
Date of
Completion
=====================================================================================================================
Mitigation Complete,
Dated, and Verified
2.
All noise walls will be constructed
In conlormance with Ihe design guide-
Nnes set lorth In Ihe SPA. which lollow
the Eastlake I Design Guidelines.
Materialswin conslslol stucco or
slone wans with plexiglass panels.
3.
AddhlonaJ nolse-reducing building mater-
Ials (extra Insulation. double-paned
glass, or mechanical venlllatlon) may
be required 10 mhigaJe noise Impacts
lor some homes. No second story balconies
shaN lace S.R. 125.
Prior to
Issuance of
building permhs
. .
'"
w 11.9 Und~~
....
Mitigation win consislol 2!!! 01 Ihe lonowlng:
"- 1. Dedicale a parcel oil-she lor Ihe Prior to
~ constructional Iow-Io-moderate Income approval 01
~ housing to meet Ihe 10% requiremenl; Final Map
. .
, 2. Pay In-lleu lees to tha City for the
construction of low-to-moderale Income
housing 10 meet the 10% requirement;
S' 3. Or provide a parcel which partially
C) meets Ihe 10% requirement and pay In-
Oeu lees 10 meet the rest.
11.12 P8rb. R............. Opon Space
1.
The appOcant shaO pay in-lleu park
lees in conlormance whh Section 17.10
01 the Municipal Code.
Prior to
approval 01
Final Map
City Planning
BuNdlng Dept.
City Planning
. .
. .
. .
Table 11.1 Continued
Mitigation Measures
TImeframe
Responsibility
for Verification
Date of
Completion
Mitigation Complete.
Dated. and Verified
====================================================================================================================
Schools
11.13 _ SonIces end UlMes
I.
~
I.
2.
N
W
N 3.
~
~
~
I
~
........
4.
5.
6.
Ann... Inlo Ihe new CFDs which ere being
lonned lor Ihe Satt Creek Ranch and
Telegraph Canyon projects.
The appllcenl shall ob1aln wlll.seove
lellers!rom Ihe OWO.
The project may also be requ~ed 10
pay Central Area Reservoir F....
Implemenl waler conseovaUon measures
lor individual households,as detailed
In Ihe SPA.
Feature droughl-reslslanl planls
In landscaping
Provide a syslem 10 use reclaimed
waler Irrigation when tt becomes
available.
" potable waler will be requ~ed
unll reclamed waler becomes avail.
able, all waler lines shall be planned
to avoid future cross-connections.
Prior 10
Final Map
Prior 10
building permtt
Prior 10 building
& grading pennlla
Prior 10
grading permtt
Prior 10 mprove-
menl plans
. .
CUy Planning
BuDding Dap!.
CUy Planning and
Building Dap!.
CUy Landscape
Archttect
CUy Engineering
N
W
W
.........
~
I
~
~
~hle 11.1 Continued
Mitigation Measures
T1meframe
Responsibility
for Verification
Date of
Completion
Mitigation Complete.
Dated, and Verified
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
mlfiDY.::t&1iiWitt&I
tttm@;w_I~I.III'[lllillllll[~IIII.II@mq;;~~!ilIj-
-=-
Sewer Service
II rnon~or1ng determines Inadequate sewer capaclty
within the larger drainage basin, the lollowlng
m~lgatlon win be required:
1.
The developer shan be required to
construct project-specific sewage
system Improvements.
2.
The developer shaH also be required
to contribute toward the costs 01 any
mon~orlng and to construct, or con-
tribute towards the costsol constnJct-
lng, any required tnJnk sewer improve-
ments In proportion to the development's
now with respect to the cumulative waste
water nows generated by new development
w~hln the Telegraph Canyon basin.
11.14 PubIc HeoIIh
1.
The project appUcanl shan comply w~h
any Iuture policy regarding EMF adopted by
the City 01 Chula Vista prior to
consideration 01 the Final Map.
Durlng on-golng
City monnorlng of
sewer system
City Englneerlng
During on-golng
CIty mon~orlng
of sewer system
City Englneerlng
Pliorto
Final Map
City Planning
RESOLUTION NO. PCZ-92-A1PCM-91~7
RESOLUTION OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF THE
CITY OF CHULA VISTA RECOMMENDING CITY COUNCIL
APPROVAL AND IMPOSING CONDITIONS ON THE
TELEGRAPH CANYON ESTATES PROJECT INVOLVING A
PREZONING TO P-C PLANNED COMMUNITY, AN
AMENDMENT TO THE EASTLAKE I GENERAL
DEVELOPMENT PLAN AND P-C DISTRICT REGULATIONS,
SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN, PUBLIC FACILITIES
FINANCING PLAN, AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN,
WATER CONSERVATION PLAN, CEQA FINDINGS,
MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM AND STATEMENT
OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
WHEREAS, the area of land which is the subject of this resolution consists of
112.4 acres of presently unincorporated property located on the north side of Telegraph
Canyon Road directly east of Otay Lakes Lodge mobile home park and directly south of
EastLake Shores (Exhibit 4 of the Sectional Planning Area Plan); and,
WHEREAS, the project involves a prezoning to P-C Planned Community, an
amendment to the EastLake I General Development Plan and P-C District Regulations
to include the Telegraph Canyon Estates property therein, and a Sectional Planning Area
Plan, Public Facilities Financing Plan, Air Quality Improvement Plan, Water Conservation
Plan, CEQA Findings, Mitigation Monitoring Program and Statement of Overriding
Considerations for a maximum of 350 single family lots, plus two private recreation areas,
two Community Purpose Facility sites, and over 20 acres of open space on the subject
acreage; and,
WHEREAS, the Final Environmental Impact Report forthis project (EIR-91-05) has
been certified by the Planning Commission; and,
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission having received certain evidence on August
12, 1992, as setforth in the record of its proceedings and incorporated herein by
reference as if setforth in full, made certain findings as setforth herein and recommended
to the City Council the approval of said project applications and plans based on certain
terms and conditions; and,
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION
OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA does hereby recommend that the City Council
determine, find, and resolve and order as follows:
.,
, .
) tf~ - 1,3
Resolution No. PCZ-92-NPCM-91-07
Page 2
1. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings before the Planning Commission consisting of a
public hearing on the Draft Environmental Impact Report on July 22,
1992, and certification of the Final Environmental Impact Report on
August 12, 1992, and the minutes and resolutions therefrom are
hereby incorporated into the record of this proceeding.
2. CONDITIONAL APPROVAL
The Planning Commission does hereby recommend conditional
approval of the following: A prezoning to P-C Planned Community,
an amendment to the EastLake I General Development Plan and P-
C District Regulations to include the Telegraph Canyon Estates
property, Telegraph Canyon Estates Sectional Planning Area Plan,
Telegraph Canyon Estates Public Facilities and Financing, Air Quality
Improvement and Water Conservation Plans, and CEQA Findings,
Mitigation Monitoring Program, and Statement of Overriding
Considerations for Telegraph Canyon Estates. The above
referenced plans and documents are incorporated herein by
reference. The overall project as described in the Final
Environmental Impact Report shall be developed without variance
from the description or as modified by the conditions of approval,
and that to the extent the project describes the measures which will
mitigate environmental impacts, 'the applicant shall implement those
measures contemporaneously with the project. The zoning, planning
and land use applications listed above are subject to the following
conditions (unless otherwise noted, all conditions shall be
accomplished prior to approval of a tentative map). The following
conditions shall be implemented, and the applicant's continued right
to use the property in the manner herein permitted shall be
conditioned on the continued maintenance of all such conditions:
1) All mitigation measures contained in EIR-91-05 are hereby
made conditions of project approval.
2) The Public Facilities Financing Plan shall be approved subject
to the General and Special Conditions contained in the
Executive Summary. The following shall be added to the
General Conditions:
/'1/& - ''I
Resolution No. PCZ-92-NPCM-91-07
Page 3
. The Public Facilities Financing Plan shall be followed
with improvements installed in accordance with said
plan or as required to meet threshold standards
adopted by the City of Chula Vista. In addition, the
sequence that improvements are constructed shall
correspond to any future Eastern Chula Vista
Transportation Phasing Plan adopted by the City. The
City Engineer may modify the sequence of
improvement construction should conditions change to
warrant such a revision.
. An annual fiscal impact report reflecting the actual
revenue and expenditure impacts based upon the
development of the project shall be prepared by the
developer. The project shall be conditioned to provide
funding for periods where expenditures exceed
projected revenues. The details of such a funding
program shall be determined prior to approval of the
tentative subdivision map.
3) The water conservation recommendations and implementation
program discussed on pages 15 and 16 of the Water
Conservation Plan, and as further amended by condition no.
4, are hereby made conditions of project approval.
4) The Telegraph Canyon Estates Water Conservation Plan shall
be revised to include the following language regarding a water
offset policy:
The project shall comply with a City-approved water use offset
policy in which one or more of the following offsite measures
may be required:
. Compliance with a regional water use offset
program, to be administered by the San Diego
County Water Authority.
. Compliance with a locally administered water
use offset program (such program may be
administered by the City, water district, or a
combination of both);
J'f~ -4-S-
Resolution No. PCZ-92-AlPCM-91-07
Page 4
. Implementation of specific water use offset
measures for this project, if neither a regional or
locally-administered water use offset program is
in place prior to issuance of building permits for
any portion of this project.
In the event that a City-approved water offset policy is not in
effect at the time building permits are issued, the
requirements of this plan shall be met through implementation
of specific water offset measures for this project, with the level
of offsets and specific measures to be approved by the City.
5) The air quality mitigation measures and monitoring program
discussed on pages 24-26 of the Air Quality Improvement
Plan are hereby made conditions of project approval.
6) Prior to approval of a final map by the City Council, an
affordable housing agreement shall be reached between the
developer and the City. Said agreement shall be in accord
with the adopted Housing Element.
7) Approval of a tentative map will be subject to the findings of
the HNTB study of State Route 125 which will provide staff
and the City Council with the necessary information to assist
in determining and/or allocating project approvals.
8) The SPA Plan shall be amended to provide for (1) the
consolidation and relocation of the CPF acreage adjacent to
the project entry or, in the case of a public street system,
adjacent to the central recreation site, or (2) an agreement
providing for a 1.5 acre or larger CPF site in the first phase of
Otay Ranch. If an agreement for the off-site alternative
cannot be reached between the City and developer prior to
tentative map approval, the map shall indicate a CPF site as
noted in (1) above until such agreement is reached.
9) If a CPF site(s) is to be provided on-site, the SPA Plan shall
be amended to include the CPF provisions from the Municipal
Code.
10) The P-C District Regulation amendment and related
discussion in the SPA Plan shall be revised to correctly
)'1/3 -"
Resolution No. PCZ-92-A1PCM-91-0?
Page 5
identify the RS-5 regulations as applying to the larger lot
product, and the RS-? regulations as applying to the
intermediate and smaller lot products.
11) The project shall incorporate public rather than private streets,
the design of which shall be subject to review and approval of
the City Engineer.
12) Provided a public street system is required as a condition of
approval of the SPA Plan, the central north-south collector
shall be cul-de-saced at its northerly terminus and the
configuration of lots and street designs shall be adjusted
accordingly subject to review and approval of the City
Engineer. If the north-south collector is cul-de-saced, a
pedestrian easement or right-of-way shall be provided at the
end of the cul-de-sac or other acceptable alternative to
accommodate the proposed trail component subject to review
and approval of the City Engineer and Director of Parks and
Recreation.
13) Provided a public street system is required as a condition of
approval of the SPA Plan, the PFFP shall be revised
accordingly.
14) Should the project be served by public rather than private
streets, it may be necessary to review and modify the
proposed improvements for the central recreation area, Le.,
no pool or spa, but perhaps play structures, etc. Any
changes to the proposed improvements shall be subject to
review and approval of the Planning Commission and City
Council with the tentative map.
15) Provided the project retains private streets, the walls adjoining
open space districts shall be located outside the district
boundary. Should the project be served by public streets, the
walls shall be located within the district boundary.
16) The development and design of the private recreation areas
shall be subject to review and approval of the Director of
Planning prior to approval of a tentative map.
1'18 - t/?
Resolution No. PCZ-92-AlPCM-91-07
Page 6
17) Grading for the open space district lot shall provide a level,
clear area at least three feet wide, as measured from face-of-
wall to beginning-of-slope, along the length of any wall
abutting said area as approved by the City Engineer and
Director of Parks and Recreation.
18) Flag lot design shall adhere to the requirements and
standards for panhandle lots contained in the Municipal Code
(Section 19.22.150).
19) Final recreation trail and fence design and location shall be
subject to approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation.
20) The CC&R's for the project shall prohibit the parking of RV's
or boat trailers in the development.
21) The SPA Plan shall be revised to include the requirement that
each lot shall be served by at least one on-street parking
space within 200 ft. of the lot it serves. (Failure to meet the
standard may reduce the number of lots.)
22) Design details for the bridge-like structure at the project entry
shall be subject to review and approval of the City Engineer
and Director of Planning prior to approval of a tentative map.
23) The use of street signs other than the City standard is subject
to the review and approval and requirements of the City
Engineer.
24) Specific proposals for enhancing the development edge along
the Telegraph Canyon Road scenic corridor, Le., varied
heights and setbacks, architectural treatment, and decorative
landscaping and walls, shall be subject to review and approval
with the tentative map.
25) The SPA Plan shall be revised to reflect permanent rather
than temporary irrigation of open space districts unless an
exception is granted by the Director of Parks and Recreation
Department prior to approval of a tentative map.
26) All plant materials, sizes and locations, and provisions for
irrigation of open space maintenance areas shall require
/~,g -(,~
Resolution No. PCZ-92-A1PCM-91-07
Page 7
review and approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation
prior to the issuance of a grading permit.
27) Access points to open space maintenance areas shall be
subject to review and approval by the Director of Parks and
Recreation prior to approval of a tentative map. The access
road along the easterly boundary will be continuous from the
multi-purpose courts, southerly to the Telegraph Canyon
drainage channel.
28) Graded access shall be provided to all storm drain cleanouts,
inlets and outlets, and paved access shall be provided to all
sewer manholes. Exceptions may be determined on a case
by case basis by the City Engineer.
29) Transit stop locations and designs, including benches and
shelters, shall be subject to review and approval by the
Transit Coordinator and the Director of Planning prior to
approval of a tentative map.
30) The installation of transit facilities shall be concurrent with
transit service availability. Since this may not coincide with
project development, prior to approval of a tentative map the
developer shall commit to fund these facilities.
31) A 5 ft. wide d.g. trail with a post and rail fence component
shall be located adjacent to the existing sidewalk on the north
side of Telegraph Canyon Road subject to review and
approval of the Director of Parks and Recreation.
32) The reservation for the State Route 125 right-of-way shall be
placed in an open space district pending its transfer to the
State.
33) A 3 ft. wide solid base shall be provided on all walls fronting
upon an open space district.
34) The specific treatment of between lot and rearyard slope
conditions will be subject to review and approval in
conjunction with the tentative map.
I c.) tB - &/1
Resolution No. PCZ-92-A1PCM-91-07
Page 8
35) The three lots south of the water tank along the westerly
property line, in the RS-5 large lot area, shall have their side
property lines extended to the subdivision boundary to delete
this area from the open space maintenance district.
36) Telegraph Canyon Estates shall submit annual building permit
reports, traffic counts and fiscal impact analysis to the City
commencing with the construction of the project and
scheduled to coincide with the annual review of the Growth
Management Oversight Committee.
37) Approval of the SPA does not constitute approval of final lot
yields or configurations or street alignments or design as
shown on the SPA Plan. Modifications may be made by staff,
the Planning Commission or the City Council during the
consideration and review of the tentative map.
38) Ten bound, loose leaf copies of the final approved SPA Plan
and related documents, incorporating all conditions and
corrections, shall be filed with the Planning Department prior
to approval of a tentative map.
3. CONSISTENCY WITH GENERAL PLAN, P-C PLANNED
COMMUNITY ZONE, GENERAL DEVELOPMENT PLAN
AMENDMENT AND SECTIONAL PLANNING AREA PLAN
FINDINGS
P-C Planned Community zone and General Develooment Plan
amendment
1. The proposed development as described by the general
development plan Is In conformity with the provision of
the Chula Vista general plan.
The proposed amendment to the EastLake I General
Development Plan is consistent with the Chula Vista General
Plan in that it shows the Telegraph Canyon Estates property
as Low-Medium Residential (3-6 du/ac) and establishes a
substantial open space reservation along the Telegraph
Canyon scenic corridor. The proposed net residential density
of 4.3 du/ac is below the 4.5 du/ac midpoint of the General
Plan LM range.
Fig - 7tJ
Resolution No. PCZ-92-NPCM-91-07
Page 9
The proposed prezoning is consistent with the City of Chula
Vista General Plan, and public necessity, convenience, the
general welfare, and good zoning practice support the
prezoning to P-C Planned Community.
2. A planned community development can be Initiated by
establishment of specific uses or sectional planning area
plans within two years of the establishment of the
planned community zone.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates Sectional Planning Area Plan
has been submitted for concurrent consideration with the P-C
prezoning and EastLake I General Development Plan
amendment.
3. In the case of proposed residential development, that
such development will constitute a residential
environment of sustained desirability and stability; and
that It will be in harmony with or provide compatible
variety to the character of the surrounding area, and that
the sites proposed for public facilities, such as schools,
playgrounds and parks, are adequate to serve the
anticipated population and appear acceptable to the
public authorities having Jurisdiction thereof.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates development consists of three
residential lot sizes in order to provide for varied and
balanced single family residential opportunities within the
project. Private recreation sites and common open space
areas will contribute to the long term livability and stability of
the neighborhood. Recommended altemative provisions for
Community Purpose Facilities will ensure sites are properly
located and of an adequate size to serve their intended use.
4. In the case of Institutional, recreational, and other similar
nonresidential uses, that such development will be
appropriate In area, location and over-all planning to the
purpose proposed, and that surrounding areas are
protected from any adverse effects from such
development.
I'f~ -.71
Resolution No. PCZ-92-A/PCM-91-07
Page 10
The provision of two private recreation areas will supplement
public park and recreation facilities for the residents of
Telegraph Canyon Estates and their location in the central
and eastem portions of the property will protect surrounding
areas from any adverse impacts. Recommended alternative
location for Community Purpose Facilities will also protect
surrounding residents from potential adverse impacts.
5. The streets and thoroughfares proposed are suitable and
adequate to carry the anticipated traffic thereon.
The streets have been designed to City standards and are
adequate to carry the anticipated traffic. The recommendation
to use public rather than private streets will incorporate the
project's streets into the surrounding circulation network.
6. The area surrounding said development can be planned
and zoned In coordination and substantial compatibility
with said development.
Surrounding areas are already planned, zoned and developed
with compatible single family and mobile home uses.
Section Plan nino Area Plan
1. The proposed sectional planning area plan Is In
conformity with the general development plan of the P-C
zone, any adopted spaclflc plans, and the Chula Vista
general plan and Its several elements.
The Telegraph Canyon Estates Sectional Planning Area Plan
reflects the land use, circulation, open space and other
policies and elements of the EastLake I General Development
Plan and Chula Vista General Plan.
2. The proposed sectional planning area plan would
promote the orderly, sequentiallzed development of the
Involved sectional planning area.
The SPA Plan and Public Facilities Financing Plan contain
provisions, requirements and standards to ensure the orderly
development of the project in a manner consistent with the
I~,g - 7::2.
Resolution No. PCZ-92-NPCM-91-07
Page 11
land use policies and facilities needs of the City and other
public agencies. The Telegraph Canyon Estates SPA is
proposed to be developed in a single phase with a 3 to 4 year
build-out.
3. The proposed sectional planning area plan would not
adversely affect adjacent land use, residential enjoyment,
circulation, or environmental quality.
The SPA Plan as conditioned will be compatible with
surrounding uses and will not adversely affect the
environment quality or circulation requirements of adjacent
areas.
4. CEQA FINDINGS, MITIGATION MONITORING PROGRAM, AND
STATEMENT OF OVERRIDING CONSIDERATIONS
Adoption of Findinas
The Planning Commission does hereby recommend that the City
Council approve and incorporate as if setforth full herein the CEQA
Findings for EIR-91-05.
Adoption of Mitiaatio'n Monitorina Proaram
As required by Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the
Planning Commission hereby adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program for EIR-91-05 and incorporates it herein by
reference as if setforth in full. The Planning Commission
recommends that the Council find that the program is designed to
ensure that during the project implementation and operation, the
project applicant and other responsible parties implement the project
components and comply with the feasible mitigation measures
identified in the findings and program.
Adoption of Statement of Overridina Considerations
Even after the adoption of all feasible mitigation measures and
alternatives, certain significant or potentially significant environmental
effects caused by the project or cumulatively will remain. Therefore,
the Planning Commission recommends that the City Council of the
City of Chula Vista issue, pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section
J'f/d. -13
Resolution No. PCZ-92-A1PCM-91-07
Page 12
15093, adopt the a Statement of Overriding Considerations for EIR-
91-05 identifying the specific economic, social, and other
considerations that render the unavoidable significant adverse
environmental effects still significant but acceptable.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA
VISTA, CALIFORNIA, this 12th day of August, 1992, by the following vote, to wit:
AYES: Commissioners Casillas, Fuller, Carson, Decker, Martin and Ray
NOES: None
ABSENT: Commissioner Tuchscher (with notice)
Joe D. Casillas, Chair
ATTEST:
Nancy Ripley, Secretary
WPC 0432P.RES
1'/6- 7'1'
":",<.
THE CITY OF CHUU nSTA PARTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters
which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other
offidal bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest In the contract, I.e., contractor,
subcontractor, material supplier.
Baldwin Vista Associates, Ltd., A Limited Partnership
~
If any person identified pursuant to (I) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership
interest in the partnership.
James P. Baldwin
Alfred E. Baldw1n
3.
If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names
of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or heneficiary or
trustor of the trust.
N/A
4.
Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff,
Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months'! Yes
No ~ If yes, please indicate person(s):
5.
Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent
contractors who you have assigned to represent you hefore the City in this matter.
fl. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, col1trihuted more th:1Il SI,OOO to a
Coul1cilmell1her in the current or preceding election p.:riod'! Y.:s _ No ~ If yes, state which
Councilll1.:mh.:r(s):
P~'r'\ In is ucfincd as: "AllY i/Jdin'dual. Jirm. c:o-pnr",('rsllip, joim I'(,II/llre', nssocimio/J, SOCIO! ell/h, FllIenw/ orgoniZ({/IOIl, (orporllfiOll,
.'J/O/(', II'lIJ!, 1'('cC'h'('/" .\)'Ildic(l/C', llIis (llld fillY other CUlIIlIY, CifY (//1(1 cOlmll!', dry, mlflliCljJtI!iry, di.~'fric' or Oilier jJo!ilicol.wbdil'uiol1.
III" tllIY o,IIel' group or comhinlllioll (/Clmg (lJ tI IIl/il,"
f):II.::
t:"OTE: Allach IIIJJilionat p:lgcs as ncccs'.lIV)
/ t - 5'~ 7/
; \ l>!"{ 'I ()"j )'\ II
Stephen P. Doyle J ~ICE; P'C~(O.-.J-r
!'rilll (Ir type' 11:1111" III Ull1tr:ll.tor!:lpplic:Jlll
)4-6- 7~
... I ." "HI
ot~ JLI B
720-A Edgewater Drive
Chula Vista Cl)..r,19l3-2437
AugustR[CG E.9if:l:. ""c
-gz
1\\.Ib 24 ll.9.59
City Council Members
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Public Services Building
Chula Vista CA 91910
C\1'( .
CIT'( Ct
it>.
,;-~~.'Orr\CE.
CASE NO. PCZ-92-A and PCM-9l-07
Honorable Members of the City Council:
This is to advise you that I, as a property owner at EastLake
Shores, The Villas at EastLake, do challenge and oppose the
prezoning, general development plan amendment and sectional
planning area plan as outlined in a notice I received recent-
ly.
When I bought this property, which was
cribed as "City Close, Country Quiet,"
have the developers keep that promise.
in my estimation, mean or imply the new
planned amendment, et cetera.
advertised and des-
I fully expected to
"City Close" does not,
city proposed by this
There is no water, we are told; we are in a sixth-year drought,
we are told. Where, therefore, is the water to come from for
an other 350 families in this area? In addition to that, we
already are faced with traffic congestion, with no allevia-
tion to the problem in the near future. Wherefore should we
be encumbered with additional problems to our atmosphere, en-
vironment and peace of mind? This planned proposition makes
"City Close, Country Quiet" ludicrous and a breach of a con-
tract with us as home owners by the developers and by you,
the City Council of Chula vista.
Re",ectfulY
~. C
rIa C. Mason
~ted,
;::/ A ~?~
, 'i~(2/)
tlff--??
/~J z'O q~ JY.!3)
Wj ~t5 o/dq;7~
ot~ /'1!3
City Council Members
CITY OF CHULA VISTA
Public Services Building
Chula Vista CA 91910
720-A Edgewater Drive
Chula Vista Ch.~19l3-2437
Augus~e.ccE9Y;1:.U
W. I\\Ji 24 Jl.9 :59
.' ~ ')\51 A
~~\ ~L€RY,;S OFfICE.
CASE NO. PCZ=92-A and PCM-9l-07
Honorable Members of the City Council:
This is to advise you that I, as a property owner at EastLake
Shores, The Villas at EastLake, do challenge and oppose the
prezoning, general development plan amendment and sectional
planning area plan as outlined in a notice I received recent-
ly.
When I bought this property, which was
cribed as "City Close, Country Quiet,"
have the developers keep that promise.
in my estimation, mean or imply the new
planned amendment, et cetera.
advertised and des-
I fully expected to
"City Close" does not,
city proposed by this
There is no water, we are told; we are in a sixth-year drought,
we are told. Where, therefore, is the water to come from for
an other 350 families in this area? In addition to that, we
already are faced with traffic congestion, with no allevia-
tion to the problem in the near future. Wherefore should we
be encumbered with additional problems to our atmosphere, en-
vironment and peace of mind? This planned proposition makes
"City Close, Country Quiet" ludicrous and a breach of a con-
tract with us as home owners by the developers and by you,
the City Council of Chula Vista.
,-R~ctfe ;zt:'~
I
Ila C. Mason
~ J;'~(Y)
0)~' 1'~.
/~J z:o ff~ 11f.!3;
Wj '0 o/o<~~..z
/L/ 5 ~?6
'0 ~
~
\ \ ~ (..
,-..~
. .
If-!f
From:
August 25, 1992
/ S'
Chris Salom~~ L,
Bob Leiter "'t<<-
Honorable Mayor and Councilmembers
Date:
To:
Re:
Amendment to Affordable Housing Condition of
SPA Plan, Condition No. 6 of Resolution 16768
We recommend amendment of the aforementioned Condition 6, on page
14B - 18 of the Agenda Report, contained in Resolution No~ 16768,
to read as follows:
"Prior to approval of a final map by the city council, an
affordable housing agreement shall be reached between the
developer and the City. said agreement shall be in accord
with the adopted Housing Element. In the neqotiation for said
affordable housinq aqreement. the city shall have the option.
at a minimum. to require the Applicant to dedicate fee title.
without reservation or reversion. to sufficient land which. in
the iudoment of the city. will permit the construction of
housinq for low and moderate income families. as defined in
the Housinq Element to the General Plan of the citv. in the
confiquration of a site plan to be approved bY the citv. but
which will be for not less than three (3) buildable acres. in
a location and of a character satisfactory to the city."
tceaha1.wp
)ife. 7;
Giroux &; Associates
Environmental Consultants
/Lj(J
!
AIR QUALITY IMPROVEMENT PLAN
TELEGRAPH CANYON SPA
CITY OF CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
Prepared for:
The Baldwin Company
Attn: Steve Doyle
11975 El Camino Real, Ste. 200
San Diego, CA 92130
Date:
August 6, 1991
/LJ(5/30
17744 Sky Park Circle, Suite 210, Irvine, California 92714 . Phone (714) 851-8609 . FlU (714) 851-8612
TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE #
10.1 INTRODUCTION. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . ., 1
10.2 PLANNING CONTEXT ............................. 2
10.3 APPROACH . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4
10.4 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES ..................... 5
10.5 AIR QUALITY LEGISLATION AND PLANS. . . . . .. . . . .. . 7
Background
Air Quality Plan Requirements
Transportation Control Measures
Indirect Source Regulations
Other Planning Programs Affecting Air Quality
10.6 AIR QUALITY SETTING. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 14
10.7 PROJECT AIR QUALITY IMPACTS. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 19
10.8 AIR QUALITY IMPACT MITIGATION ................ 24
10.9 MITIGATION MONITORING/CONCLUSIONS. . . . . . . . . .. 26
REFERENCES . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .. 27
JLj{f-Z/
10.1 INTRODUCTION
P1lQ)Ose
The purpose of this Air Quality Improvement Plan (AQIP) for the Telegraph Canyon SPA
is to fulfill requirements in the Growth Management Program (GMP) of the City ofChula
Vista. As described below, the GMP results from a long term, comprehensive planning
process.
The City of Chula Vista has looked comprehensively at future development and its related
impacts on public facilities and services. The approvals of the Threshold Ordinance and the
General Plan update were the first steps in growth management planning. The policy
process then led to the preparation and adoption of the Growth Management Element and
fmally the Growth Management Program.
The City's Growth Management Program is the last component in the Plan to form a
comprehensive growth management system. This program implements the Growth
Management Element of the General Plan and establishes an orderly process to carry out
the development policies of the City. It directs and coordinates future gr9wth patterns and
rates to guarantee the timely provision of public facilities and serviceS"~e primary area
of focus of the Growth Management Program is east of 1-805 where most of the remaining
vacant land within the City and its sphere of influence is located, including the proposed
project site.
1
it! ;J - .8.:;"
10.2 PLANNING CONTEXT
This AQIP draws from State, regional and local planning requirements. The California
Clean Air Act (CCAA), the common name for AB-2595 (Sher), is the driving mechlln;!m'l
in the current revision to the San Diego Air Basin Air Quality Management Plan. The
CCAA requires submittal of an air quality improvement plan for each basin not in
attainment with state or federal standards. Pollutants within the Basin that exceed state or
federal clean air standards include orone, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide and sub-10-
micron diameter respirable particulate matter (PM-lO). This plan is intended to meet state
law and is also expected to serve as the framework for air quality planning efforts required
under the recently (November, 1990) promulgated National Clean Air Act amendments.
The CCAA also serves as a base for many regional growth guidelines such as SANDAG's
Draft Quality of Life Standards and Objectives document, prepared by the Regional Growth
Management Technical committee. It covers eight topics: air quality, water quality, sewage
disposal, sensitive lands protection, solid waste management, toxic and hazardous waste
management, transportation system management and housing. These regional standards and
objectives follow State and Federal law. At a minimum, they must be implemented on a
regional level by agencies such as the Air Pollution Control District (APeD), Regional
Water Quality Control Board, County Water Authority, etc. The methods that guide the
Regional Growth Management Strategy in San Diego County are, of necessity, long term
in nature and will involve every city and special district in the county, including the City of
Chula Vista.
Federal and state air quality standards provide the framework for the air quality,
transportation system management (TSM) and transportation demand management
components of the SANDAG Quality of Life Standards and Objectives. The California Air
Resources Board (ARB) has classified the San Diego region as a severe non-attainment area
for photochemical air pollution (ozone) and projects non-compliance with State standards
until 1997. According to the San Diego APCD, the major sources of air pollutants in the
region are motor vehicles and pollution transport from Los Angeles. Given this situation,
local air quality improvement efforts are focused on transportation issues. To address
transportation-related air quality problems, level of service standards for arterials, highways
and transit systems are being developed along with goals for reducing single occupant auto
trips.
Actions necessary to achieve State and Federal clean air standards, and TSM and TDM
objectives include:
2
J LI(J - 63
reducing solo auto trips by carpooling and using transit
promoting telecommuting and staggered work schedules
improving transit service
building additional high occupancy vehicle lanes
coordinating traffic signals and implementing other circulation system
improvements
reducing trip lengths through jobslhousing balance, mixed use development
and focusing development near transit stations.
The regional air quality attainment plans required by AB-2595 are now being prepared by
SANDAG and the APeD. Although the areas of focus are well known, specific guidelines
and standards are not currently available. Thus, a direct comparison or evaluation of the
measures included in this AQIP with the regional standards cannot be made at this time.
This Telegraph Canyon project, however, is residential, and specific requirements for
residential projects are expected to be minimal in the new regional Air Quality Plan (AQP).
In other words, because the AQP will focus more on transportation measures beyond the
control of any single residential project developer, project consistency with the Plan is very
likely.
At the local planning level, cities must contribute to the air improvement effort with a day
to day decision making framework to ensure attainment of regional standards and objectives.
Even though no current local air quality plan exists in Chula Vista, the City Council is in
the process of implementing the Growth Management Program which requires Air Quality
Improvement Plans (AQIP) for major development projects (50 residential units or
commercial/industrial projects generating more than 500 trips per day. Through the Growth
Management Program, Chula Vista is actively working to establish effective long-term
strategies that implement State and regional air quality standards and objectives.
3
)L-j[J --? i
10.3 APPROACH
In order to insure that the role of transportation-related air pollution emISSIons are
rninimi7.ed as much as possible, an increasing number of measures in the regional AQP will
deal explicitly with tripNMT reduction. The principal measure under consideration is a
mandatory trip reduction plan for all significant trip generators (APCD Regulation XIV).
To some extent, the City of Chula Vista AQIP requirements are designed to insure that all
available emissions reduction measures are incorporated into project plllnning regardless of
the ability of air quality agencies to promulgate such measures on a basinwide scale. As the
APCD and other agencies establish mandatory growth-related air emissions control
measures, the discretionary aspect of what can/should be included in the project AQIP may
diminish. Its role and function, however, are not expected to be completely eliminated even
if a comprehensive package of growth-related emissions control is ultimately developed on
a regional scale because the AQIP is designed to show the maximum emissions reduction
that a project Q&l achieve, and not the minimum that it must achieve.
Air quality mitigation in this AQIP focuses on the strategies and measures available to
residential development projects. Few transportation/air quality improvement measures in
the State and regional plans directly address issues of impact mitigation for these projects.
The majority address transportation system efficiency, alternative transportation modes,
heavy vehicle restrictions, and increased vehicle occupancy. None of these are directly
influenced by residential development. Some measures are available, however, and will be
incorporated into the project as appropriate. These include integration of land uses,
construction of facilities to support public transportation, and the provision of private group
transportation where feasible. Efforts will be made to educate future residents on the needs
and resources available to minimize air quality impacts. The roles and responsibilities of all
affected parties are described in the following section.
4
/1j0/~5
10.4 ROLES AND RESPONSIBILITIES
In order for this plan to be effective, it is necessary to clearly assign appropriate re,,,. .....u
responsibilities to all of the participants in the development and occupancy phases of the
Telegraph Canyon SPA project. There are three primary groups involved:
developer/builders, government/service agencies, and future residents. Each has an important
role to play, as described below.
1. Developer/Builder
The community developer, The Baldwin Company, is providing the basic
planning, design, and management of this commumty level
transportation a es, ve cular and non-vehicular, will be implemented by
the master developer. Individual builders will construct homes according to
the standards seCby the master clevelQPer (and the City) and will be <-
responsible for ener 'ng and management within their own project.
uilders will also be the primary commumcators WI home-buyers. s
role they will be responsible for identifying the energy conservation features
incorporated in the project and educating home-buyers re~ding a continuing
conservation effort -",""
2. Property OwneT'lllResidents
The long term success of the air quality mitigation effort rests with residents
who choose their own modes of transportation, driving habits and lifestyles.
In the aggregate, choices by residents affect air quality in the region more than
any efforts by the City or developer.
Generally, commercial and industrial land uses, with a concentrated number
of automobile trips, have significant opportunities to initiate air
quality/transportation mitigation measures. The ultimate utilization of public
transit or non-vehicular transportation developed by commercial and
industrial uses, however, will depend on future residents who are influenced
by the availability and convenience of such facilities. At the residential level,
mode choice will be influenced by the trip destination, and less so the
residential origin of the trip. Any residential air quality planning contribution
rests more on facilitating that mode choice, and less so on creating the actual
inducement to use something besides a single occupant vehicle as the mode of
transportation choice.
5
/Lj !S- yr:,
3. Government/Service A&encies
The City of Chula Vista will review project plans and monitor this air quality
plan. Because of its development approval role, the City can effectively
enforce transportation phasing and other standards for new construction.
Some local public transportation systems are operated under authority of the
City, in cooperation with regional operators. The City can also be a source
of on-going education and air quality awareness through citizen
co=unication programs.
The San Diego APCD will adopt regional air quality plans to meet State and
Federal standards. Although these plans will focus primarily on
transportation issues, land use and indirect source guidelines will also be
included. State law prohibits the intrusion of the APeD on the land use
decision authority of the City, so it will be up to the City to implement any
such guidelines.
To a certain extent, the local school districts also have a role to play with the
transportation they offer to students. Bussing of students to school facilities,
instead of requiring parent auto trips, can have beneficial effects similar to
encouraging public transit for employment co=uting. Both behaviors reduce
total trips, thus improving air quality and traffic congestion.
6
/115 ~o?
10.5 AIR QUALITY LEGISLATION AND PLANS
Baclq~round
Based on air quality data from the regional air quality monitoring network, the California
Air Resources Board classified San Diego County as a non-attainment area for the State
ozone (OJ and respirable particulate matter (PM-lO) air quality standards. In addition, the
western portion of the County was classified non-attainment for the State nitrogen dioxide
(NO,J and carbon monoxide (CO) standards.
Ozone is the primary concern in San Diego County. Despite considerable reductions in
ozone levels during the past ten years, in 1989 San Diego County exceeded the Federal
standard on 55 days and the State standard on 158 days. Pollution transported from the
greater Los Angeles area was responsible for approximately two-thirds of the days exceeding
Federal standards and one-half the days over State standards. By comparison, the State
nitrogen dioxide and carbon monoxide standards were not violated in Chula Vista in the last
six years, and only infrequently on a basinwide scale.
Because violations of the CO and N02 standards are minimal compared to the significant
03 problem, the principal focus of the regional air quality effort will be directed toward
reducing reactive organic gases and oxides of nitrogen, which are ozone precursors.
The ARB motor vehicle pollution control program will continue to significantly reduce
reactive hydrocarbon, oxides of nitrogen, and carbon monoxide emissions. Transportation
control measures will also reduce these emissions. Since 80"10 of the region's CO and 50"10
of the N02 pollution is from on-road motor vehicles, these two controls will substantially
contribute to attaining and maintaining CO and N02 standards. While transportation
control measures and motor vehicle emission controls will be major elements in the CO and
N02 control program, additional stationary source control measures may be necessary to
control oxides of nitrogen.
Air flJll.lity Plan ReqJIir....."nts
I. Involved A~encies
The four agencies involved in the air quality planning process are the Environmental
Protection Agency (EPA), which is responsible for the administration of the Federal Clean
Air Act; the State Air Resources Board (ARB), which is responsible for the implementation
7
/ i {f.,?~t/
of the California Clean Air Act of 1988; the San Diego County Air Pollution Control
District (APeD), which is responsible for developing the Air Quality Plan mandated by the
CAAA and for regulating the emissions in the region; and SANDAG, which is responsible
for the preparation of the transportation control measures in the Air Quality Plan. The Plan
is to be consistent with the traffic congestion management and regional growth management
plans also being prepared by SANDAG. Within the ARB and APCD long term strategy,
Chula Vista can contribute to air quality improvements, even though it does not have a
formal role in formulating the Plan. State law does allow local agencies to administer
APCD regulations if the following conditions are met:
Measures adopted and implemented are as stringent as the District's measures.
The local agencies submitting an implementation plan have sufficient resources
and the District approves the plan.
The District adopts procedures to audit local agency performance to insure
compliance. The District can revoke the delegation for inadequate
performance.
Any land use provisions of the adopted plan will ultimately be the responsibility of the City
as State law prohibits the APCD from intruding in this area.
2. Air (~1I" lity Stancl"rcl~
Attainment of air quality standards is based on Federal and State laws which establish such
standards, with the State standards more strict than Federal standards (see Table 1). Given
this situation, compliance with State law will generally lead to conformance with Federal
law.
The California Clean Air Act (CCAA) of 1988 requires that each air district develop and
submit a plan by July 1991 showing how the district will achieve the mandated standards.
In their plans, the districts must consider all emission sources, independent of transport into
the air basin. Each district not in attainment of the standards by 1994 must reduce non-
attainment pollutants or their precursors by an average of 5% per year, beginning from the
1987 levels. The plan must also demonstrate that improved air quality will be maintained
after attainment; thus, the plan must have provisions for continued air quality improvement
to acco=odate growth. The plan must contain transportation control measures,
transportation system management, and direct source regulations.
8
)~{]'-3/
TABLE 1
Ambient Air Quality Standards
Aver8glng California Standards National Standards
Pollutant
TIme Concentration Method" Primary Secondary Method "
Ozone 1 Hour 0.09 ppm Ultraviolet 0.12 ppm Same as Ethylene
(180 ugtm3) Photometry (235 ugtm3) Primary SId. Cherrilumneecence
8 Hour 9.0 ppm Non-dispersivI 9.0 ppm Non-disponlva
Carbon (10 mglm3) Infrared (10 mglm3) Same a. Infrared
Monoxidl 20 ppm SpactnlSCOpy 35 ppm Primary S1Ds. SpeclIOscopy "
1 Hour (23 mglm3) (NDIR) (40 mglm3) (NDIR)
Amual 0 0.053 ppm
Nitrogen Average Gas Ph..e (100 uglm3) Same as G.. Phase
Chemilumi. Chemilumi.
Dioxide 0.25 ppm Primary S1d. n_ca
1 Hour nascence .
(470 uglm3)
Annual 80 uglm3
Average . (0.03 ppm) .
24 Hour 0.05 ppm " 365 uglm3 .
Sulfur (131 uglm3) Ultraviolat (0.14D1lm) Pararoaoanilina
DiOXide Fluorescence 1300 ugIm3
3 Hour . 0 (0.5 ppm)
1 Hour 0.25 ppm 0 .
(655 ugtm3)
Amual Size Sat8Cllve
Geometric 30 Uglm3 Inial High . .
".., .
Suspended Mean Volume Sampler
Partic::uiate and
M attar 24 Hour 50 uglm3 Gravimetric 1SO uglm3 Innal
Same as Saperatipn
(I'M,.) Analysis
Annual Primary and
S1ds. Grav'm8tric
Arithmetic - 0 50 uglm3 Analysi.
Mean
Sulfates 24 Hour 25 uglm3 Turbidimetric
Barium Sulfate . - -
30 Day 1.5 uglm3 . .
Lead Average AlllmlC Alllmic
Calendar Absorption Same as Absorption
Quanef . 1.5 ugim3 Primary Std.
Hydrogen 1 Hour 0.03 ppm Cadmium Hydr. 0 .
Sulfide (42 uglm3) oxidl STRactan .
Vinyl Chloride 0.01 0 ppm T edlar Bag
(chloroalllene) 24 Hour (26 ugim3) Collection, Gas . . .
Chromatography
Visibility In .utflCient amount to rllduc8 lIIe
prevailing visibility to le..lllan
Reducing 1 Observation 1 0 mill' when the reiative . . .
Particles humidity is Ie.. lIIan 70'l'.
Applicable Only in the Lake Tahoe Air Basin
Carbon 8 Hour 600m NOIR
Monoxide (7 mglm3) . 0 .
Visibility In sufficient amount to reduce the
Reducing 1 Observation p_ailing villibility ID II" lIIan . /15- / i? .
30 mil. when 1111 relallVe
Partlcla. humicitv i. Ie.. than 70%.
ARB Fact Sheet 38 (revised 7/88)
3. Mandated Measures
Because the violation of clean air standards in the San Diego region is classified as "severe,"
specific controls are required by State law. These are: the best available retrofit control
technology for existing sources; a permitting program that mitigates emission increases from
all new and modified sources; reasonably available transportation control measures; indirect
and area source control measures; and, specifically, transportation control measures to hold
vehicle emissions constant after 1997, to achieve an average commute-time ridership of 1.5
persons per vehicle by 1999 and to achieve use of a significant number of low-emission
vehicles by fleet-operators.
If the region cannot meet the 5% annual reduction standard, then the next best level of
reduction is to be achieved. The CCAA authorizes the ARB to adjust the emission
reduction target for individual areas, if two legal conditions are met. First, the Plan must
include all feasible measures and, second, the region must be expeditiously implementing the
Plan. Based on the currently available data, the APCD believes that the 5% annual
reduction will not be met and thus the "all feasible measures" standard will be applied.
TranlQ)Ortation Control Measures
In November 1990, the APCD Board adopted criteria for developing a transportation
control measures (TCM) plan. The plan is being prepared by SANDAG according to the
criteria of APCD, and, once completed, the plan will be implemented through district
regulations and transportation system improvements.
The TCM criteria addressed six major areas: transportation demand management (reduction
in number vehicle trips and heavy duty vehicle restrictions); alternative transportation mode
capacity expansion (public transit, park and ride, high occupancy vehicle facilities and
bicycle/pedestrian facilities); transportation system management (traffic signals and incident
management); land use (jobs/housing balance, mixed use development and focused
development); market based incentives (fees and taxes); and, driving restrictions.
Regulations which will be proposed to meet these criteria could include:
1. Ride sharing and van pool programs.
2. Employer subsidized transit ticket passes.
10
)1/!f-7)
3. Aexible work schedules to accommodate ride sharing and transit.
4. Telecommuting and teleconferencing.
5. Parking incentives to support ride sharing.
6. Trip management education.
7. Limiting heavy duty truck traffic during peak commute periods and reducing
the number of trips through better fleet management.
8. Measures to reduce trips to large facilities.
In addition, the Air Quality Plan will contain transportation system measures that attempt
to reduce motor vehicle emissions through the following measures:
1. Adding more high occupancy vehicle bypass ramps and lanes.
2. Improving transit services.
3. Special bridge toll rates for drivers who ride share.
4. Increase bus fleets and upgrading of vehicles.
5. Development of long range policies supporting vehicle trip reduction.
Indirect Source RepIations
A residential development is considered an indirect source in that it generates/attracts motor
vehicle trips, although the homes themselves do not directly impact air quality. Because all
feasible measures will be required, indirect source measures will be included in the AQP.
The focus of these provisions will be to reduce motor vehicle-related emissions, although
measures addressing aspects of development such as improved energy conservation could be
included. Key elements for indirect source regulation would include the following:
1. New source review and approval prior to construction.
2. Determine if the project is consistent with the APeD Air Quality Plan.
II
)L-/tJ -- 92
. (
3. Analysis of the location, distance, time of day, vehicle occupancy and mode
split.
4. Assess the quantity of air pollution which could result from the project.
5. Require the best available design to reduce trips, maintain or improve traffic
flow, reduce vehicle miles traveled and implement appropriate transportation
control measures.
6. Defme the means for monitoring results.
7. Issue a permit specifying air quality construction and operating requirements
to provide a basis for determining ongoing compliance.
8. Incorporate energy conservation measures/opportunities in new construction.
Other Plannil1& Provams Affectin& Air Quality
As noted earlier, other planning programs are currently underway which should be
coordinated with the Air Quality Plan. Currently, the City of Chula Vista is participating
in the regional effort to implement a transportation demand management (TDM) ordinance.
City staff is evaluating the model transportation demand ordinance prepared by SANDAG.
The near term focus of the regional transportation demand program will be on the largest
components of the principal traffic stream: employment travel, college and university
student travel, and goods movement. The objectives for each of the larger traffic
components are as follows:
1. The objectives of the freeway traffic element policies and programs shall lead
to the achievement of a 1.4 average vehicle occupancy rate for all area
freeways during the principal travel period by the year 2000 and a 1.5 average
vehicle occupancy rate by the year 2010.
2. The objectives of the employment traffic element policies and programs shall
lead to the achievement of a 50% drive alone ratio for region-wide
employment traffic during the principal travel period by the year 2000 and
40% drive alone ratio by the year 2010.
12
/Y{f-;3
3. The objectives of the college and university traffic element policies and
programs shall lead to the achievement of a 50% student drive alone ratio by
the year 2000; and a 40% student drive alone ratio by the year 2010.
4. The objective of the goods movement traffic element policies and programs
shall lead to the achievement of a 25% reduction in goods movement traffic
during the principal travel period by the year 2000; and a 35% reduction by
the year 2010.
Violation of the transportation demand management ordinance as currently proposed may
constitute a violation of the Regional Air Quality Plan.
The basic requirements of the transportation demand management ordinance would be that
employers prepare plans to encourage carpooling and use of other modes of travel and fIle
annual reports showing the degree of compliance with said standards. In addition, each
colJege and university will develop, implement and promote student commute alternatives
which achieve the regional colJege university student drive alone targets.
Finally, with respect to the goods movement/trucking traffic element, each business providing
goods movement/trucking traffic sernces shalJ develop, implement andpslJmote a non-peak:
period delivery program along with other measures. These policies shalJ further reduce truck
traffic during the principal travel period, which is defmed as 6;30 a.m. to 8;30 a.m. through
1995, after which time it shalJ be 6;00 a.m. to 9:00 a.m.
The draft version of Regulation XIV embodying these objectives of a regional TDM
ordinance is currently being discussed in briefmgs, workshops and other public forums.
Although similar to a comparable Reg. XV TDM ordinance in the South Coast Air Basin,
the San Diego Air Basin TDM plan has even more ambitious targets, schedules and
employment levels that it seeks to include. Although it will take some period of time to
prepare and implement individual plans, the importance of Reg. XIV in regulating some
portion of transportation-related air quality impacts is undeniable.
13
ji(J ~1LI
10.6 AIR QUALITY SE '"rING
Meteorolou'C.Jimate
The climate of Chula Vista, as with all of Southern California, is largely controlled by the
strength and position of the semi-permanent high pressure center over the Pacific Ocean.
The high pressure ridge over the West Coast creates a repetitive pattern of frequent early
morning cloudiness, hazy afternoon sunshine, clean daytime onshore breezes and little
temperature change throughout the year. Limited rainfall occurs in winter when the oceanic
high pressure center is weakest and farthest south as the fringes of mid-latitude storms
occasionally move through the area. Summers are often completely dry with an average of
10.3 inches of rain falling each year from November to early April at Lower Otay Reservoir,
the nearest climate station to the project site.
Unfortunately, the same atmospheric conditions that create a desirable living climate,
combine to limit the ability of the atmosphere to disperse the air pollution generated by the
large population attracted to the San Diego County climate. The onshore winds across the
coastline diminish quickly when they reach the foothill communities east of San Diego, and
the sinking air within the offshore high pressure system forms a massive temperature
inversion that traps all air pollutants near the ground. The resulting horizontal and vertical
stagnation, in conjunction with ample sunshine, causes a number of reactive pollutants to
undergo photochemical reactions and form smog that degrades visibility and irritates tear
ducts and nasal membranes.
Because coastal areas are well ventilated by fresh breezes during the daytime, they generally
do not experience the same frequency of air pollution problems found in some areas east of
San Diego. Unhealthful air quality within the San Diego Air Basin's coastal communities,
such as Chula Vista, may occur at times in summer during limited localized stagnation, but
occurs mainly in conjunction with the occasional intrusion of polluted air from the Los
Angeles Basin into the County. Localized elevated pollution levels may also occur in winter
during calm stable conditions near freeways, shopping centers or other major traffic sources,
but such clean air violations are highly localized in space and time and would not be found
at the project site. Except for the occasional interbasin transport, air quality in the project
vicinity is probably quite good.
Local meteorological conditions in the project vicinity have not been routinely monitored,
but they likely conform to the regional pattern of strong onshore winds by day, especially
in summer, and weak offshore winds at night, especially in winter. These local wind patterns
are driven by the temperature difference between the normally cool ocean and the warm
14
/L)tJu 1~
interior and steered by any local topography. In summer, moderate breezes of 8-12 mph
blow onshore and upvalley from the SW by day, and may continue all night as a light
onshore breeze since the land remains warmer than the ocean. In winter, the onshore flow
is weaker and reverses to blow from the NE in the evening as the land becomes cooler than
the ocean.
Both the onshore flow of marine air and the nocturnal drainage winds are accompanied by
two characteristic temperature inversion conditions that further control the rate of air
pollution dispersal throughout the air basin. The daytime cool onshore flow is capped by
a deep layer of warm, sinking air. Along the coastline, the marine air layer beneath the
inversion cap is deep enough to accommodate any locally generated emissions. However,
as the layer moves inland, pollution sources (especially automobiles) add pollutants from
below without any dilution from above. When this progressively polluted layer approaches
foothill communities east of coastal developments, it becomes shallower and exposes
residents in those areas to the concentrated reacted byproducts of coastal area sources. A
second inversion type occurs when slow drainage or stagnation of cool air at night creates
10ca1ized cold "pools" while the air above the surface remains warm. Such radiation
inversions occur throughout the San Diego area but are strongest within low, channelized
river valleys. They may trap vehicular exhaust pollutants such as carbon monoxide (CO)
near their source until these inversions are destroyed by surface warming the next morning.
Any such CO "hot spots" are highly localized in space and time (if they occur at all), but
occasionally stagnant dispersion conditions are certainly an important air quality concern
in combination with continued intensive development of the Chula Vista area. The intensity
of development near the project site is extremely low such that non-local background
pollution levels during nocturnal stagnation periods are also low. The local airshed,
therefore, has considerable excess dispersive capacity that limits the potential for any
loca1ized air pollution "hot spots" from project implementation.
Air Qr".li(y
Ambient Air Quality Standards (AAQS): In order to gauge the significance of the air
quality impacts of the proposed Telegraph Canyon SPA project, those impacts, together with
existing background air quality levels, must be compared to the applicable ambient air
quality standards. These standards are the levels of air quality considered safe, with an
adequate margin of safety, to protect the public health and welfare. They are designed to
protect those people whose current health condition makes them most susceptible to further
respiratory distress, such as asthmatics, the elderly, very young children, people already
weakened by other diseases or illness and persons engaged in strenuous work or exercise,
15
1t/8-7b
called "sensitive receptors." Healthy adults can tolerate occasional exposure to air pollutant
concentrations considerably above these minimum standards before adverse effects are
observed. Recent research has shown, however, that chronic exposure to ozone at levels that
just meet Federal AAQS may nevertheless have an adverse respiratory health impact. Just
meeting standards may not provide a sufficient health protection cushion for sensitive
receptor populations.
National AAQS were established in 1971 for six pollution species with states retaining the
option to add other pollutants, require more stringent compliance, or to include different
exposure periods. The initial attainment deadline of 1977 was extended to 1987 for certain
National AAQS, and that deadline passed with the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB) still far
from attainment. A California Clean Air Act (AB-2595) and a new Federal Clean Air Act
have both since been promulgated that establish more realistic implementation timeframes
for airsheds with moderately degraded air quality such as SDAB. Because California had
established AAQS several years before the Federal action and because of unique air quality
problems introduced by the restrictive dispersion meteorology, there is considerable
difference between State and Federal clean air standards. Those standards currently in effect
in California are shown in Table 1. The new Federal Clean Air Act requires that EPA
review all National standards, and EPA has indicated that some of the Federal AAQS will
be proposed for modification within the next 1-2 years.
Baseline Air Quality: The nearest air quality measurements to the project site are made in
downtown Chula Vista by the San Diego County Air Pollution Control District (APeD),
the agency responsible for air quality planning, monitoring and enforcement in the SDAB.
Table 2 summarizes the last six complete years (final 1990 data have not been officially
published) of monitoring data from the Chula Vista (80 East J. St.) station. Progress toward
cleaner air is seen in almost every pollution category in Table 2. The only national clean
air standard that was exceeded throughout the 6-year monitoring period was the hourly
ozone standard which was exceeded an average of less than 4 times per year (once per year
is allowable). The more stringent State standards for ozone and for 10-micron diameter
respirable particulate matter (PM-lO) were exceeded on a somewhat higher frequency; but,
overall air quality in Chula Vista, as representative of the Telegraph Canyon project site, is
nevertheless very good in comparison to other areas of the SDAB.
There are no clear-cut trends in the Chula Vista baseline air quality data in Table 2 except
to note that any improvement of the few standards routinely exceeded in very slow.
Extrapolation of the pollution trendline suggests that limited violations of standards could
occur well into the future. Since observed San Diego County ozone air quality sometimes
derives from the southward drift of pollution from the South Coast Air Basin which is
16
JL/(J- 7;
forecast to continue to exceed ozone standards to the year 2007, some ozone standard
violations will likely occur in the County beyond the 1996-7 attainment target date despite
Countywide pollution control efforts. A further improvement in ambient air quality from
locally generated emissions reductions will thus occur within the next decade, but complete
attaimnent of all standards may not happen until after the turn of the century.
.."
17
/J/e ,-7 [5
TABLE 2
CHULA VISTA AREA AIR QUALITY MONITORING SUMMARY
(Daya Standarda Were E"eeeded and Maxima For Period. Indicated)
Pollutant/Standard 1984 1985 1986 1987 1988 1989
Qmuc:
I-Hour> 0.09 ppm 18 28 20 15 17 21
I-Hour> 0.12 ppm 4 4 2 2 4 7
I-Hour ? 0.20 ppm 0 I 0 0 0 0
Max. I-Hour Cone. (ppm) 0.15 0.20 0.14 0.16 0.22 0.16
Carbon Monnyic1l'::
I-Hour> 20. ppm 0 0 0 0 0 0
8-Hour > 9. ppm 0 0 0 0 0 0
Max. I-Hour Cone. (ppm) 7. 7. 7. 7. 7. 8.
Max. 8-Hour Cone. (ppm) 4.6 3.9 5.1 3.4 3.6 4.7
Nitro2en Dioxide:
I-Hour> 0.25 ppm 0 0 0 0 I 0
Max. I-Hour Cone. (ppm) 0.20 0.16 0.14 0.15 0.21 0.16
Total Sru,nended Particulates:
24-Hour? 100 uWm' 0/61 0/61 1/61 1/30 4/46 3/57
24-Hour > 260 uWm' 0/61 0/61 0/61 0/30 0/46 0/57
Max. 24-Hour Cone. (uWm) 88. 96. 119. 100. 109. Ill.
Particulate Sulfate:
24-Hour ? 25. uWm' 0/61 0/54 0/60 0/51 0/57 0/60
Max. 24-Hour Cone. (uWm) 18.0 15.4 17.6 13.3 17.2 16.5
IQhalable Particulates CPM-IQ):
24-Hour > 50 UWm' 3/51 5/61 3/56 7/61
24-Hour > ISO uWm' 0/51 0/61 0/56 0/61
Max. 24-Hour Cone. (UWm) 104. 68. 58. 69.
Note: Standards for sulfur dioxide and particulate lead have been met with a wide margin of aafely in 1984-89, and lIR,
therefore, not shown.
Source: California Air Resources Board, Summary of Air Quality Data, 1984-89. Chula V18ta APCD Monitoring Station
(except for BOme particulate data which "'" from San Diego APCD Island Avenue Station.)
JLjiJ j~?
10.7 PROJECf AIR QUALITY IMPACfS
The development of the Telegraph Canyon Project will generate approximately 3,500 daily
automobile trips. These trips would result in increased air emissions on new and existing
roadways. Short-term construction activities will generate dust and diesel emissions resulting
in short-term emissions impacts.
Construction Impacts
Soil disturbance to prepare the Telegraph Canyon SPA project site will generate fugitive dust
during the construction phase. Soil dust is typically chemically inert and much of the dust
is comprised of large particles that are readily flltered by human breathing passages and also
settle out on nearby surfaces. It comprises more of a potential soiling nuisance than an
adverse air quality impact.
Construction activities for large development projects are estimated by the U. S.
Environmental Protection Agency to add 1.2 tons of fugitive dust per acre of soil per month
of activity. If water or other soil stabilizers are used to control dust, the emissions can be
reduced by 50 percent or more. However, fugitive dust control using water must be
balanced against the need to conserve water resources. Currently, water conservation has
taken priority. The California ARB, in its development of area source emissions calculations
of fugitive construction dust, estimates that the net disturbance area for single family homes
is one-fourth acre with a six month disturbance duration. Total dust emissions over the
project development lifetime could therefore total 630 tons without the application of dust
control procedures calculated as follows:
350 DU x 0.25 AC/DU x 1.2 tonlAC/MO. x 6 MO. = 630 tons
"Standard" dust control procedures, assuming reclaimed or other water resources for dust
control are available, total suspended particulate (TSP) can reduce emissions to perhaps 300
tons. The respirable PM-IO fraction of fresh construction dust is perhaps one-third of TSP.
The probable PM-IO burden associated with this project is therefore about 100 tons.
Assuming perhaps a two-year buildout cycle (500 work-days), the average daily PM-IO
generation rate will be around 400 pounds per day from construction activity fugitive dust.
With prevai1ing onshore flow, the receptor population exposed to construction dust
emissions will be development east of the project site, except during infrequent west to east
Santa Ana winds when site activity dust plumes will blow westward. With other on-going
residential development in eastern Chula Vista of considerably larger scope than this project,
the individual air quality impact of construction dust from the Telegraph Canyon SPA will
19
/ L/(f ~ j/JO
be insignificant. Cumulatively, however, the emissions from this project will mix with dust
from multiple other developments. While the individual PM-lO impact from each project
is insignificant on a regional scale, construction activities represent a very significant portion
of the overall regional PM -10 burden. As a PM -1 0 attainment strategy is developed for the
basin, control on construction dust to reduce cumulative impacts will become increasingly
more important.
In addition to fugitive dust, construction activities would also cause combustion emissions
to be released from on-site construction equipment and from off-site vehicles hauling
materials. Heavy duty equipment emissions are difficult to quantify because of day-to-day
variability in construction activities and equipment used. California residential and roadway
construction entails an expenditure of around 75,000 Brake-Horsepower-Hours (BHP-HR)
of on and off-site equipment operations per single family residence constructed. If all that
equipment is diesel-powered, the following emissions will result over the buildout lifetime of
this project:
Pollutant Species
Emissions
Reactive Organic Gases
24.4 tons
Carbon Monoxide
89.8 tons
Nitrogen Oxides
260.9 tons
Exhaust Particulates
21.0 tons
Sulfur Dioxide*
6.3 tons
*
=
Assuming 0.05% sulfur fuel
Source:
California ARB, 1977 Area Source Inventory Documentation (1980)
These emissions will represent a non-negligible contribution to the basinwide pollution
inventory, especially the diesel equipment NOx burden. Anticipated new State pollution
standards for non-roadway equipment may somewhat reduce the overall project
20
)Lj8 / If) /
contribution, but not to any appreciable extent. As with the dust emissions, the mobile
nature of these emissions will preclude the creation of an individually significant impact, as
no receptor is directly exposed to equipment exhaust pollution for any extended period.
Cumulatively, however, the temporary combustion emissions will contribute to the continued
inability to meet all air quality standards on a regional basis.
Construction impacts are primarily centered on the parcel under development. Impacts may,
however, also "spill over" into the surrounding community. The spillage can be physical
where trucks lose dirt from tires or from uncovered trailers which is then pulverized and
lofted by passing vehicles. Spill-over may also be figurative where slow-moving trucks
moving dirt or hauling concrete and other building materials slow down non-project traffic
to more pollution-inefficient speeds, especially for vehicle movements during the 7-9 a.m.
peak commute travel period. Soil erosion into traveled roadways, street blockage/detours
to install utilities, contractor employee job-site commuting, or on-road parking by contractor
employees are all mechanisms by which on-site activities may affect off-site pollution
generation. Manufacture of building materials such as dust from rock or concrete batch
plants and evaporative emissions from asphalt for roadway paving or solvents and other
volatile organic compounds used in surface coatings also create small temporary pollution
increments associated with building 350 homes. Each of these impacts is individually small
and temporary and insignificant, even when all project activities are considlired cumulatively.
This is, however, not the only project that will be under construction at any given time in
San Diego County. It is, therefore, the cumulative impact of numerous projects with
incrementally very small and temporary numerous construction activity air quality impacts
that leads one to conclude that cumulative impacts from all construction is cumulatively
significant.
Mobile Source Impacts
Chronic impacts to air quality due to project implementation result primarily from
automobile emissions. The proposed project will result in an increase in air emissions.
Impact significance is generally determined by whether growth is consistent with projections
in the regional air quality plan, which, until a new plan is adopted, is the 1982 Revisions to
the State Implementation Plan (SIP). Iffuture development has been anticipated in the 1982
SIP, then air quality impacts are considered mitigated by adherence to the measures as
outlined in the SIP. The proposed project is consistent with SANDAG Series VII
projections, while the 1982 SIP is based on Series V projections. Typically, Series VII
projections are higher than Series V. Adherence to the policies and measures in the 1982
SIP may result in some residual impacts, as not all growth has been anticipated. However,
21
JW-/()c2
the air quality planning process now underway utilizes the Series VII projections and will
result in a new Air Quality Plan that will supersede the 1982 SIP. With adoption of the new
plan, the projects will be in conformance with the regional air quality plan.
Project-specific air quality impacts can be estimated using procedures developed by the ARB
to calculate regional mobile source emissions. Emissions associated with the Telegraph
Canyon SPA are presented in Table 3. Table 3 shows the relative contribution of this
project to the forecast basinwide burden in the year 2000. The sma11 fraction that this
project represents is not meant to necessari1y show (in)significance, but only to indicate that
any reduction in the project burden from any single project is microscopic on a regional
scale. For vehicular source impact mitigation to have a measurable effect, it must affect all
travel from all existing and future development and not any single project. Because of the
inability of any single developer or any single political jurisdiction, such as the City of Chula
Vista, to affect the travel mode choice of the entire region, it requires regional
transportation/air quality plans to effectively attack the most significant source of continuing
air quality degradation.
Localized air quality impacts can also result from vehicle emissions. The volume of carbon
monoxide released when a large volume of slow moving vehicles are contained in one sma11
area can create air pollution "hot spots". Often such "hot spots" can occur when intersection
congestion reaches LOS F where numerous idling cars allow for a steady pollution build-up.
If traffic on project area roadways were to deteriorate to these levels, potentially significant
"hot spots" could result.
On-Site T1I'lpacts
Emissions from residential activity including painting, household cleaning, fumigation,
gasoline powered lawnmowers, chemicals associated with swimming pools, wood burning
fireplaces and barbecues, while not considered significant, will have a cumulative impact on
regional air quality. Within the South Coast Air Basin (Los Angeles area), regulations to
prohibit or restrict some of these types of air impacts are being adopted. If similar
regulations are adopted in the San Diego region, the SDAPCD (or its designee) will enforce
compliance, including at the proposed project.
22
JL/e ~ /!J3
TABLE 3
TELEGRAPH CANYON SPA MOBILE SOURCE EMISSIONS
Analysis
Emissions (pounds/day)
ROG.
PM-lO
SOx
CO
NOx
1995
2000
2005
2010
Air Basin -
Year 2000
Project Share
of Basin
52.1
73.9
7.6
8.7
582.7
42.3
6.7
8.0
500.9
68.6
39.5
66.8
6.6
7.6
470.6
38.8
66.6
6.4
7.5
463.0
493,600
2,036,740 515,880
0.009"10
0.025% 0.013%
Source:
.
=
URBEMIS3 Model & Rancho del Rey AQIP
Assuming 92% of Total Organic Gases (TOG) are Reactive Organic Gases
(ROG).
/L/e - J{;!L/
10.8 AIR QUALITY IMPACT MITIGATION
The ability of any residential developer to create substantial air quality impact mitigation
is minimal. The primary route to air quality mitigation and reduction of project impacts to
an insignificant level is conformance to the adopted regional air quality plan. As discussed,
the new Air Quality Plan is now being prepared that incorporates the growth projections
with which this project is consistent. To decrease project level emissions, the City of Chula
Vista will adhere to recommendations made by the 1982 SIP and the forthcoming San Diego
Air Quality Plan regarding local participation in air emission reduction measures.
As is evident from the preceding discussion, the focus of any local air quality improvement
measures are direct sources (industrial uses) and transportation behavior. The Telegraph
Canyon project, as a residential development, is not a direct source. Thus, the project
approach is to provide alternative transportation routes, and in some cases facilities, and
encourage and/or educate residents to use them.
Because this project has only a residential component, the ability of the developer to
implement developer-sponsored air quality improvements is very limited. The ability of this
project to incorporate effective emissions reductions is further hampered by location,
topography, and street layout. Hillside travel in outlying areas of the City with primarily
cul-de-sac streets clearly invites use of the private automobile as the almost exclusive means
of transportation. Even getting from one part of the neighborhood to another may require
a vehicle because the terracing and dead-end streets could make walking or bicycling
unattractive within the community. Project implementation will not adversely affect
intersection performance that would lead to air pollution CO "hot spots" such that the
generally unmitigable component of project-related traffic is the regional contribution to
photochemical smog.
The area where the Baldwin Company as master developer can have some air quality
impact/benefit is with regard to non-resident transportation emissions. Discretionary actions
by the developer, either in terms of constraints on the contractor or on the type of product
built, can create some reduction of the project impact. Such potential actions include:
Using adequate dust control during soil disturbance by either scheduling mass
grading during the early spring when natural soil moisture is high, or by
importing non-potable water resources for supplemental moisture addition.
Establishing an off-site dust control program to keep on-site dirt from being
carried or washed or tracked onto traveled roadways. Program elements
24
-----
Jy(]-//J--':J
should include:
a. perimeter erosion control
b. truck tarping or load watering for dirt hauling
c. daily street sweeping/washing at construction access points and
on internal paved roadways.
Requiring combustion equipment exhaust pollution minimization through a
mandatory 90-day tune-up cycle for all on-site equipment.
Reducing off-site traffic interference from construction personnel commuting
and materials movement by:
a. providing rideshare incentives for construction personnel
b. restricting any lane closures to off-peak travel periods
c. scheduling truck access such that 80 pe~ daily receipt of
concrete or other building materials and other truck
arrivals/departures occur between 9 a.m. and 3 p.m.
Incorporating energy conservation measures that exceed minimum Title 24
energy budget requirements by 10 percent of estimated use.
Pre-plumbing homes to encourage and facilitate use of passive solar thermal
collectors for spa or home water heating requirements.
25
/ ye/ jO?
10.9 MITIGATION MONITORING/CONCLUSION
Monitorina
To assure compliance with project mitigation measures, City staff will require compliance
with the forthcoming San Diego Air Quality Plan. The City General Plan also includes
policies encouraging adherence to these measures. Prior to or as a condition of approval
of the tentative map, the project design plan would be reviewed by the City Planning
Department to insure that required measures can be accommodated by existing project
design.
Transportation control measures (TCMs) and development/transportation improvement
phasing are also controlled by the City of Chula Vista through the forthcoming Growth
Management Plan. These measures will address the potential impacts associated with
congested traffic on any project-impacted roadways. The mitigation measures included in
the Transportation Phasing Plan will be implemented before issuance of the occupancy
permit per the Public Facilities Finance Plan.
Conclusion/Analysis of Sipificance
Development of the project will result in increased traffic on new and existing roadways and
additional air emissions. Fugitive dust released from construction activity presents a short-
term nuisance and would not constitute a significant impact. The development of the
proposed project is consistent with SANDAG Series VII projections and not the Series V
projections associated with the 1982 SIP which is considered a significant impact. The SIP
revisions, which are currently being initiated using Series VII projections will be completed
and adopted prior to build-out. The project will be in compliance with the provisions of the
new Air Quality Plan and impacts are expected to be minimized. Compliance with the Air
Quality Plan would typically defme project impacts as less than significant, but potential
difficulties in implementing the AQP transportation measures because of site layout, design
and topography suggests that project-related air pollution emissions will be cumulatively
significant and not mitigable if not so on an individual project basis.
26
lie -It) 7
REFERENCES
California Air Resources Board; Answers to Commonly Asked Questions about the
r.::llifornia Clp.::In Air Act's Att::llnmp.nt P):::1nn;nlJ ReQuiremp-nt~ (CCAA Guici::lnl".P.
Paper #1; August 1989.
California Air Resources Board; California Clean Air Act Tran&l)ortation ReQJrirements
Guitlance (CCAA Guidance Pl\per #2); February 1990.
California Air Resources Board; Executive SnmmaJ:Y - California ClpJln Air Act Guidance
on the Development of Indirect Source Control Prowams: July 1990.
California Air Resources Board; SnmmaJ:Y of Air Quality Data, 1984-89.
Cinti & Associates; Draft SPA Plan Rancho del Rey SPA II; November 1988.
Cinti & Associates; Draft SPA Plan Rancho del Rey SPA III: August 1990.
P&D Technologies; Final Supplemental EIR Rancho del Rey SPA III: November 1990.
SANDAG; 1991 Air Qlla lity Plan Development Process ( A~da Rt:I)ort R-74): September
28, 1990.
SANDAG; Air Qllalityrrran&l)Ortation Control Measure Criteria (A~enda Rt:I)ort R-92):
November 16, 1990.
SANDAG; RelPonal Onality of Life Factors. Standards and OQjectives (A~enda Rt:I)ort RB-
.12); November 16, 1990.
San Diego County Air Pollution Control District; Memorandnm: Tran&l)ortation Control
Measure Criteria: November 21, 1990.
San Diego County Air Pollution Control District; California Clean Air Act - Air Qnality
Strate~ Development Worlcplan; nld.
Ventura County Air Pollution Control District; Guidelines for the Prt:Paration of Air
Qllality Intpact Analyses; October 24, 1989.
Willdan Associates and Bud Gray; Draft Growth Mana.~ement Proa:ram - City of Chula
Yis1a; August 1990.
27
)~6'//t//
.,.,
~1f7
u' I.
~!.J:~ r4
I
INVOICE & STATEMENT
The Star-News
nQ35858
Direct Payments to: 835 Third Ave., Chula Vista, CA
(619) 427.3000
Mail Address:
~ City of Chula Vista
City Clerks office
276 4th Ave
C~Jla Vista,Ca. 91910
P,O. Box 1207, Chuta Vista, CA 91912
Date: 8/ . C /9 c
Acct. No. l :::> t:.
508900
~
~
PLEASE RETURN ONE COPY OF STATEMENT WITH YOUR REMITTANCE
DESCRIPTION
I DATE
INCHES I
I CHARGES L.=I BALANCE
:;.; SI.1
i
;C! ":/
... '- . I l
"at i ce
CV2271
8/15
3 3/4inches
FORM SO . 14
CHULA VISTA STAR-NEWS * NATIONAL CITY STAR-NEWS * IMPERIAL BEACH STAR-NEWS
1'-/ !3~/{/r
<"~\J c-,,_
"?
File No.
PUBLIC HEARING CHECK LIST
't,!.J-s!q;;y
SUBJECT L",,~ 'tf'1~' ~ ~.,.J ~~ ... (L~ ~~
. ,0 .' e,~
LJTI'1r" ~~ ~Pl\ ~ ~ (7~ U:hL ~.....,;., (7~ r l--
, .~
~<hr-' f.,t:A;b..., - 0,...9. ..D....~ VVJ'!<.- Q,..,o~
~ /
SENT TO STAR NEWS FOR PUBLICATION -- BY FAX V ; BY HAND ; BY MAIL
PUBLICATION DATE ~ 1/5 / 1117- - -
CITY COUNCIL PUBLIC HEARING DATE
MAILED NOTICES TO PROPERTY OWNERS c.... f::,~ NO. MAILED
(\
PER GC 54992 Legislative Staff, Construction Industry Fed, 6336 Greenwich Dr Suite F. San Diego, 92122
LOGGED IN AGENDA BOOK ';( / 1.i<--I'1d-'
COPlES TO:
Administration (4) V
Planning /
Otiginating Department
Engineering v'
Others
City Clerk's Office (2) V
POST ON BULLETIN BOARDS
SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS:
-58-
/1 !J ~ / / I
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT THE CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL will hold
a public hearing to consider the following:
PCZ-92-NPCM-91-07: Consideration of Prezoning, General
Development Plan and P-C Regulation Amendments, SPA Plan
and Public Facilities Financing Plan for Telegraph Canyon
Estates - Baldwin Vista Associates.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this matter in court, you may be limited to
raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing described in this
notice, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Clerk's Office at or prior to the
public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday,
August 25, 1992, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building, 276 Fourth
Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED: August 12, 1992
Beverly A. Authelet
City Clerk
/1/1} -II).
DATE:
August 10, 1992
TO:
FROM:
SUBJECT:
(,\
Beverly Authelet, City Clerk ~~
Nancy Ripley, Planning Department
Referral from Planning Commission meeting of August 12, 1992
Please schedule the following for Council consideration at the meeting of
August 25, 1992
Forwarded herewith: Public Hearing Notice(s) and Mailing List(s).
Forthcoming: Resolution(s)
PH PCI-92-AjPCM-91-07: Consideration of Prezoning, General Development
Plan and P-C Regulation Amendments, SPA Plan and Public Facilities
Financing Plan for Telegraph Canyon Estates - Baldwin Vista Associates
RESO Adoption of CEQA Findings and Overriding Considerations - Telegraph
Canyon Estates Subdivision, EIR-91-05
(Not part of public hearing: Consideration of the Final Environmental
Impact Report for EIR-91-05 - Telegraph
Canyon Estates Subdivision)
/Lf [) -- //:1
~"i..
-'
\.).. [''-' v-.:;.
,f'
NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING
BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA, CALIFORNIA
NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN THAT A PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL
of Chula Vista, California, for the purpose of considering a prezoning,
general development plan amendment and sectional planning area plan for
approximately 100 acres of presently unincorporated property located on the
north side of Telegraph Canyon Road, directly east of the Otay Lakes Lodge
mobil e home park and di rectly south of EastLake shores. The proposal is to
develop the property into a private, gate-guarded community with a maximum of
350 single family detached dwell ings, including common open space areas and
two sites total ing 1.5 acres designated for community purpose facil ities at
the northwest corner of the project site. Copies of the proposed planning and
project documents are on fi 1 e in the offi ce of the Pl anni ng Department. Any
petitions to be submitted to the City Council must be received in the City
Clerk's office no later than noon of the hearing date.
If you wish to challenge the City's action on this proposal in court, you may
be 1 imi ted to ra is i ng only those issues you or someone el se rai sed at the
public hearing described in this notice, or in written correspondence
delivered to the City Council at or prior to the public hearing.
SAID PUBLIC HEARING WILL BE HELD BY THE CITY COUNCIL on Tuesday, August 25,
1992, at 6:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers, Public Services Building,
276 Fourth Avenue, at which time any person desiring to be heard may appear.
DATED: August 10, 1992
CASE NO. PCZ-92-A and PCM-91-07
Beverly Authelet
City Cl erk
WPC 0437p/2661P
liB ~i/ f
~IE/LV~ . ,
. .. ~~.,....., \
. ~ mIl "Tn ~ '\ fA / . . ~~~
, )J11!l1ll ~"" 1}1 ~ "';'<'< _ I \
. . ~ V --?l L,.. r ~?:'l\~
"i\ ..~ -~ ~r -..'-\~-\ ",.
' 'I"... ~'I c;;:::;
. ~~.. m
. ~....<<tJ. -'l · "-f-r-
~a .A"l . " ~~ 1J. iJOi \ ~"
..
. y. -. 'To :---"
I lOW/> " ~) · ,..
" H- ~ ~~} -t..LI.~ "". ~
. 'I . ~, . . .
~/ .~ V- ,'-,..t I \ . .
~ ~w~~ ~\'\' ,\ ,.: ."S
,.....- x. .........: ~l \-"" ~
t,~. _~lT'''.~ '/ ~"'I '\
' ~.. ~ II . ~... --J. fJJ 1 f!T\: 0,
'..,
. . i._ k>~ . 'hW
. ''<'1l/"~1.... . I~"';'
r;..... . ......\.. lJ.. 1f~1.
G~~~~~. .~ :.J..( ~~-H
:>'" ~~;'\~ ...../ ~F
~~~~ , . .
. . ~/m:.:s.;~,~' . )f~i 1 ..~~.,:~,nf,m: ~. ;..'~ 'I
~ .A
;~f:~\\ '\":~~".~~~~. .
. V. ~~<{ \ JJ , ~ 01~.
. .... ",\. . JJ.::w. ,~
. .' ~'~1-Y) ~r
.'~ ;')"':~'i . ~ i
~~~...< . I:: .
. y 1-.
l~~ ~_! _ 1:: .
~ ,
., i-.
" . '\~
,>- . . >X -:-i}] :~ ,\
\. . " ,
,<. . f:::
.:" ,,'-1~__ t 0 \'\ ~
'. ,'" -
I': \ '1'- .
',\ . \-
.. -~a~'r
..
'. ~-
... ',', "
~T1 t't-l:
,
,
- .
. .
..
.- ~
...
(1'E~PIl tAJ.JY~~r~rAlTt1 1 LOCATOR
31)0 bE.T ~W OS,...."L.e FJ.H' ~
. L -' . ~ ,?Cz.- 92.-A UDt-fE$ ~ APP~)(; ~ w.P.~
!J Pc.M-'1/-0 7 ~ Jill{ ~ //5
- -.-.--...
NORTH