HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 2008-008
RESOLUTION NO. 2008-008
RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
CHULA VISTA ADOPTING THE FINAL MITIGATED
NEGATIVE DECLARATION (MND) (lS-07-031) FOR THE
OXFORD STREET PROJECT; AND ADOPTING A
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
(MMRP) PURSUANT TO THE CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
WHEREAS, Concordia Lutheran Church submitted applications requesting approvals
for a Rezone from the R-I (Residential Single Family) Zone to the R-I-5-P (Residential Single
Family, Precise Plan) zone, establishing a Precise Plan Modifying District, and adopting Precise
Plan standards; a Precise Plan; and a Tentative Subdivision Map to subdivide 3.90 acres located
at 267 East Oxford Street into 24 single family residential lots, ( Project ); and
WHEREAS, on September 12, 2007, a Notice of Initial Study (NOI) was circulated to
property owners and residents within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project site; and
WHEREAS, Environmental Review Coordinator has reviewed the proposed project for
compliance with the California Environmental Quality Act and has conducted an Initial Study
(IS-07-031) in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act. Based upon the results
of the Initial Study the Environmental Review Coordinator has determined that the project could
result in significant impacts on the environment. However, revisions to the project made by or
agreed to by the applicant would avoid the effects or mitigate the effects to a point where clearly
no significant effects would occur; therefore, the Environmental Review Coordinator has
prepared a Mitigated Negative Declaration (MND IS-07-031) and associated Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program (MMRP); and
WHEREAS, on October 19,2007, a Notice of Availability (NOA) for Draft MND IS-07-
03 I was posted at the County of San Diego Clerks Office and circulated for a 30-day public
review period to property owners and residents within a 500-foot radius of the proposed project
site as well as any individuals and/or groups that had requested to be noticed; and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Resource Conservation Committee held a duly noticed
public hearing for Draft MND IS-07-014 on November, 19 2007 and voted 5-0-0-1 to
recommend that the City Council certify MND 07-031 and adopt the MMRP; and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista Planning Commission held a duly noticed public hearing for
Final MND IS-07-014 on December 12, 2007 and voted 6-0-0-1 recommending that the City
Council adopt Final MND 07-031 and adopt the MMRP in accordance with Planning
Commission Resolution No. PCZ-06-005/PCM-07-015; and
WHEREAS, the Chula Vista City Council held a duly noticed public hearing for the
Final MND IS-07-031 and MMRP on January 8, 2008; and
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 2
WHEREAS, the City Council considered Final MND IS-07-031 together with any
comments received during the public review process; and
WHEREAS, the Final MND IS-07-031 and other related materials are located in the
Planning and Building Department and maintained by the custodian of said documents who is
the Director of Planning and Building. This constitutes the record of proceedings upon which
this adoption of Final MND IS-07-031 is based.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Chula
Vista does hereby find, determine, and order as follows:
1. PLANNING COMMISSION RECORD
The proceedings and all evidence introduced before the Planning Commission at their
public hearing on Final MND 07-031 held on December 12, 2007, as well as the minutes
and resolutions resulting therefrom, are hereby incorporated into the record of this
proceeding. These documents, along with any documents submitted to the decision-
makers, including documents specified in Public Resources Code Section 21167.6,
subdivision(s), shall comprise the entire record of proceedings for any claims under the
California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code 921000 et seq.).
II. MND IS-07-031 CONTENTS
That the MND IS-07-031 consists of the following:
1. Initial Study Checklist IS-07-031; and
2. Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-07-031 (including supporting technical reports)
3. Comments and Responses
4. Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
(All hereafter collectively referred to as "MND IS-07-03I")
III. CERTIFICATION OF COMPIANCE WITH CALIFORNIA
ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT
That the City Council does hereby find that MND IS-07-031 (Exhibit "A" to this
Resolution), and the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program are prepared in
accordance with the requirements ofCEQA (Pub. Resources Code, 921000 et seq.), the
CEQA Guidelines (California Code Regs. Title 14 915000 et seq.), and the
Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista.
Mitigation Measures Feasible and Adopted
~
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 3
As more fully identified and set forth in MND IS-07 -031, the City Council hereby
finds pursuant to Public Resources Code Section 21080(c)(2) and CEQA
Guidelines Section 15074.1 that the mitigation measures described in the above
referenced documents are feasible and will become binding upon the entity
assigned thereby to implement the same.
Adoption of Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program
As required by Public Resources Code Section 21081.6, the City Council hereby
adopts the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (Program) set forth in
MND IS-07-031. The City Council further finds that the Program is designed to
ensure that, during project implementation, the permittee/project applicant and
any other responsible parties implement the project components and comply with
the mitigation measures identified MND IS-07-031 and associated Program.
IV. INDEPENDENT JUDGMENT OF CITY COUNCIL
The City Council has exercised their independent review and judgment and hereby finds
on the basis of the whole record before it that there is no substantial evidence that the
project will have a significant effect on the environment and concurs with the Planning
Commission and Environmental Review Coordinator's determination that Mitigated
Negative Declaration IS-07-031 in the form presented has been prepared in accordance
with requirements of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) the State CEQA
Guidelines and the Environmental Review Procedures of the City of Chula Vista and
adopts the Mitigated Negative Declaration and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program (IS-07-031).
V. NOTICE OF DETERMINATION
That the Environmental Review Coordinator of the City of Chula Vista is directed after
City Council approval of this Project to ensure that a Notice of Determination is filed
with the County Clerk of the County of San Diego. These documents, along with any
documents submitted to the decision-makers, including documents specified in Public
Resources Code Section 21167.6, subdivision(s), shall comprise the entire record of
proceedings for any claims under the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA")
(Public Resources Code ~21 000 et seq.).
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT the City Council of the City of Chula Vista finds
that the MND IS-07-031 and Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program have been prepared in
accordance with the requirements of CEQA (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.), CEQA
Guidelines (California Code Regs. Title 14 Section 15000 et seq.), and the Environmental Review
Procedures of the City of Chula Vista, and therefore is adopted.
Presented by
Approved as to form by
.'~\...~~~\~M\.
Ann Moore
City Attorney
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 4
PASSED, APPROVED, and ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Chula Vista,
California, this 8th day of January 2008 by the following vote:
AYES:
Councilmembers:
Castaneda, McCann, Ramirez, Rindone, and Cox
NAYS:
Councilmembers:
None
ABSENT:
Councilmembers:
None
Chory~#~
ATTEST:
d~!? ;r;/7~
Donna R. Norris, CMC: Interim City Clerk
STATE OF CALIFORNIA )
COUNTY OF SAN DIEGO )
CITY OF CHULA VISTA )
I, Donna R. Norris, Interim City Clerk of Chula Vista, California, do hereby certifY that the
foregoing Resolution No. 2008-008 was duly passed, approved, and adopted by the City Council
at a regular meeting of the Chula Vista City Council held on the 8th day of January 2008.
Executed this 8th day of January 2008.
J~ k *A~ .
Donna R. Norris; CMt: Interim City Clerk
""-------
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 5
EXl-lle,\-r"A"
Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT NAME: Oxford Street! Concordia Lutheran Church Residential
PROJECT LOCATION: 267 East Oxford Street
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO: APN #639-392-14-00
PROJECT APPLICANT: Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC
12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92014
(858) 481-8500
CASE NO.: IS-07-031
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT: October 19. 2007
DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING: November 19. 2007
PREPARER:
Richard Zumwalt AJ.C.P.. Associate Planner
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT:
November 20. 2007
Revisions made to this document subsequent to the issuance of the notice of availability of the
draft Mitigated Negative Declaration are denoted by underline.
A. Proiect Settin.
The 3.9 -acre project site is located at 267 East Oxford Street, within the urbanized area of Western
ChuIa Vista, (Exhibit 1- Locator Map). The site is approximately 100 feet east of the intersection of
Melrose Avenue and East Oxford Street Primary access to the site is currently provided directly off
of East Oxford Street The entire project site has been partially disturbed with previous uses including
a church, pre-schoolldaycare, and parking lot on the south side of the lot and play fields on the north
side of the lot The land uses immediately surrounding the project site are as follows:
North:
South:
East
West:
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
Single-Family Residential
B. Proi ect Descrit>!ion
The project proposes demolition of the existing Concordia Lutheran Church, daycarelcornmunity
building, and accessory buildings, and redevelopment of the 3.9 ac. site with 24 single-famiJy
detached residential dwelling units, (Exln"bit 2 - Site Plan). The site is desigoated Residential Low-
Medium (3-6dwelIing units per acre) on the City of ChuIa Vista General Plan and is zoned R-I-7
Single Family Residential. The project proposes a rezone from R-I-7 to R-I-5-P (Min. lot size of
5,OOO.sq. ft. with a Precise Plan ModifYing District); a Precise Plan; and Tentative Subdivision Map
proposing 24 residentiaIlots ranging from 5;006 sq. ft. to 6,249 sq. ft. in size, with 2 gsrage parking
spaces per home, a public street and ROA-maintained open space lots.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 6
Proposed on-site improvements include drainage facilities, sewer system facilities, fire hydrants,
retaining walls, fencing, improved paved areas. open space and landscape treatments. The proj ect is
identified as developable area within the City of Chula Vista Multiple Species Conservation Program
Subarea Plan, however, it is not located within the City's designated conservation area.
C. Conroliance with Zonin. and Plans
The proposed project site is within the General Plan RLM (Low-Medium Residential Densityl3-6
dwelling troits per acre) and RI (Single-Family Residential) Zone. The project proposes a rezone
from R-I to R-I-5-P (Min. lot size of 5,000 sq. ft. with a Precise Plan Modifying District). The
proposed project has been fotrod to be consistent with the applicable site development regulations and
the General Plan.
D. Public Comments
On September 12, 2007, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owoers within a 500-foot
radius of the proposed project site. The public review period ended September 24, 2007. One e-mail
response was received during this period regarding how project grading will affect the adjacent
properties and how.the design of the future homes would affect the neighbor's privacy. These issues
will be addressed in the Planning staff report regarding the project.
On October 19. 2007 the Notice of Availabilitv of the Prorosed Miti..ted Ne..tive Declaration for
the nroiect was nosted in the Countv Clerk's Office and circulated to Drooertv owners within a 500-
foot radius of the oroiect site. The 30-dav Dublic comment period closed on November 19. 2007. No
written comments were received as a result of this notice.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached Environmental
Checklist form) determined that the proposed project may have potential significant environmental
impacts however; mitigation measures have been incorporated into the project to reduce these impacts
to a less than significant level. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance
with Section 15070 of the State of Califomia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
Air Oualitv
Short-Term Demolition and Construction Activities
The project proposes demolition of the existing Concordia Lutheran Church, daycarelcommtmity
building and accessory buildings. The proposed proj ect WIll result in a short-term air quality impact
created from construction activities. The grading of the site for future single-fami1y residential
development and worker and equipment vehicle trips will create: temporary emissions of dust, fumes,
equipment exhaust, and other air pollutants associated with the construction and demolition activities.
Air quality impacts resulting from construction-related operations are considered short-term in
duration.
In order to analyze potential project impacts/emissions, the emission factors and threshold criteria
contained in the 1993 South Coast Air Quality Management District CEQA Handbook for Air
Quali~ Analysis were used.
A comparison of daily construction emissions to the SCAQMD's emission thresholds of significance
for each pollutant was analyzed. Emissions were calculated using the URBEMIS 2002 model. The
addition of emissions to .an air basin is considered troder CEQA to be a significant impact.
Implementation of the Mitigation Measure 1 contained in Section F below would mitigate short-term
construction and rough grading and emissions related air quality impacts to below a level of
significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
~_J
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 7
Combined Short-Term and Long-Term Impacts
In order to assess whether the project's contribution to ambient air quality is cumulatively
considerable, the project's emissions were quantified with respect to regional air quality. The
proposed projec~ a small residential infill developmen~ once completed will not result in significant
long-term air quality impacts. The project is consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan Update.
The minimal project generated 'traffic volume of 240 trips would not result in significant long~term
local or regional air quality impacts. Through project design, emission-controlled construction
vehicles and efficiency building products and vehicles as mitigated, no area source or long term
operational vehicle emission estimates will exceed the Air Quality significance thresholds.
Implementation of the Mitigation Measure I contained in Section F would mitigate construction and
grading related air quality impacts to below a level of significance. These measures are included as a
part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Biololrical Resources
A Biological Resource Analysis was prepared by Dudek, dated August 31, 2007, to assess the
potential biological resource impacts of the project A biological reconnaissance survey of the project
site was conducted on March 30, 2007 to identify existing vegetation on the site. The biological
resource analysis is summarized below.
Habitat Loss Incidental Take (HUT) Permit
The project site is located within in the City of Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan boundary under the
City's MSCP Subarea Plan. The site is located in an area designated as a Development Area, but is
not located within a strategic preserve or conservation area. The project is subject to the requirements
of the Habitat Loss Incident Take (HUIJ Ordinance. In accordance with the HLIT Ordinance, those
projects that are greater than one acre, contain sensitive biological resources, and are located outside
the "Covered Projects," must demonstrate compliance with the Ordinance and obtain Take authority
from the City of Chula Vista for impacts to Covered Species. The following is a summary of the
findinga contained within the biological resource report as required by the City's HUT Ordinance,
Section 17.35.
Existing Conditions/ Plant Species
The 3.9wacre project site consists entirely of 1.8 acres of developed land on the south side of the site
with the existing church and accessory buildings, parking lo~ and ornamental plantings, and 2.1 acres
of disturbed lands including the playfield and non-native grasses and vegetation on the north side of
the site. Developed land includes two mature Indian Lallfel Figs and one Brazilian Pepper Tree, six,
I-ft. diameter eucalyptus trees, and turf-grass under-story. The non-native grasses and vegetation in
the disturbed lands result from establishment of a Bermuda-grass playfield which is mowed but
otherwise is no longer maintained and irrigated, resulting in a mixed growth of grasses and broad-
leaved weeds. Native vegetation cover is less than one percent of the vegetative cover onsite,
occurring on the perimeter of the site adjacent to fencing where the plants are not mowed. No
endemic or special status plants exist on the property.
Wildlife/Sensitive Species/Sensitive Habitats
The .biological report stated that wildlife species such as hirds and butterflies occupied the site,
although no mammal, amphibian or reptile species were detected during the survey.
Ten bird species and two butterfly species were detected on site. Most bird species observed were
common, disturbance-adapted species. Cooper's hawk (Accipiter cooperi), which is a covered species
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 8
under the City of Chula Vista's MSCP Subarea Plan and a State species of special concern, was
observed during the site survey. Existing large Indian Laurel Fig and Brazilian Pepper trees occWTing
on-site may provide suitable habitat for raptors, and a nest was observed in the Brazilian Pepper tree
on site. Due to the territorial !behavioral characteristics of the Coopers Hawk, it was assumed that
nest was used by them. No special status/wildlife species were reported within one mile of the
project site. No state or federally listed threatened or endangered wildlife species were observed in
the study area and are not expected to occur, due to the low quality of habitat onsite. Potential impacts
of the project on these resources and sensitive species. and mitigation measures are further discussed
in Project Impact section below.
Project Impact
The existing lot supports 2 large ornamental Indian Laurel Fig trees and 11arge Brazilian Pepper tree.
The proposed removal of these trees during development could impact potential habitat for the
Cooper's Hawk and other migratory bird species if the vegetation clearance occurs between January
15 thru August 15 during breeding season. If vegetation clearance occurs between August 16 and
January 14, development of the site would not result in significant impacts to biological resources. If
removal of habitat or construction activities must occur during the breeding season, pre-construction
surveys shall be conducted to determine the presence or absence of nesting rapters. The' proposed
project may result in impacts to sensitive biological resources and nesting raptors, and therefore,
mitigation measures are required. The project will be required to implement the mitigation measures
specified in Section F, and therefore no impacts to Cooper's Hawk or other migratory birds are
anticipated. The project will not be required to obtain a HLIT Permit pursuant to Section 17.35 of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code.
Further mitigation measures include implementation of construction BMPs, and clearing, grubbing or
grading permits. Implementation of the mitigation measures identified in Section F of this Mitigated
Negative Declaration would reduce potentially significant biological impacts to a level below
significance.
Geolo"" and Soils
To assess the potential geological/soils impacts of the project, a Geotechnical Investigation evaluation
was prepared by Geocon, Inc. dated April 18, 2007. No groundwater was encountered on the site and
no groundwater related problems, either dming or after construction, ar.e anticipated. No significant
geological or soil impacts would be created as a result of the proposed project as conditioned. The
potential for soi1liquefaction is considered to be low. The project site is not located in an active
Earthquake Fault Zone. The nearest active fault is the Rose Canyon fault approximately 6 miles
. away.
The site was graded previously with the development of the existing cburt:h. Proposed fill grading will
occur over the entirety of the 3.9-acre site. Grading is halanced, including 3,400 cubic yards per acre to be
excavated and filled, with a maximum cut and fill slope ratio of2:1. In the event ofa major earthquake, the
area could be subject to moderate to severe ground sbaking. However, the site is considered comparable to
others in the general vicinity. The site is also underlain with artificial fill and San Diego Formation and is
not suitable for support of structures. The project will require issuance of a grading permit to require
excavation of undocumented fill, re-grading and re-<:ompaction of the site, and review by the consultant of
project grading and foundation plans prior to submittal to regulatory agencies for appmva~ to minimize the
potential for damage to future structures as a result of unstable soils, ground-shaking, or subsidence.
_J
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 9
According to the City's Engineering Division, the project will require a grading permit. The
preparation and submittal of a final soils report Wll1 be required prior to the issuance of the grading
permit as a standard engineering requirement. In order to prevent silt discharge during construction,
the developer will be required to compl" with best management practices in accordance with RWQCB
NPDES Mrmicipal Permit, Order No. R9-2007-000 1. The appropriate erosion control measures
would be identified in conjunction with preparation of final grading plans and would be monitored
and implemented during construction by the Public Works Department Therefore, the potential for
the discharge of silt into City storm drainage systems would be less than significant. Implementation
of the mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate potential geological/soils
impacts to a less than significance level. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
In order to assess potential hazards/hazardous material impacts, dsted April 2007, Dudek prepared the
"Phase I Environmental Site Assessment - Concordia Lutheran Church and School" Report for the
project The project proposal includes the demolition of the existing church, accessory bnildings and
parking lot The report found that the potential exists for impacts to result from the demolition of
structures that may contain lead and asbestos. Therefore, prior to any demolition activities, a licensed
and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor will perform asbestos and lead-based paint
abatement in accordance to all applicable local, state and federa1laws and regulations, including San
Diego County Air Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard for Demolition and Renovation.
No evidence of additional hazards or hazardous materials or undocumented fill was observed on the
site. Implementation of the mitigation measures contained in Section F below would mitigate
potential hazards/hazardous materials impacts to a less than significant level. These measures are
included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
Ewolo"" and Water Oualitv
In order to assess potential hydrology and water quality impacts, a "Tentative Map Drainage Study
for Oxford Street", dated October 3, 2007, and amended October 17, 2007 and the "Tentative Map
Water Quality Technical Report for Oxford Streef' dated October 3, 2007, prepared by Hunsaker &
Associates, were submitted for the project and is summarized below:
Existing Conditions
The existing site is bordered on the north, west and east by existing single-family development.
Drainage from the existing development, including the buildings and playfield, flows southerly
toward East Oxford Street south of the site. The flows are then conveyed via existing curb, gutter aod
sidewalk in a westerly direction towards the intersection of Melrose and East Oxford Street.
Proposed
The project proposes construction of a storm drain system, including a curb and gutter system, a
cross-gutter, SwaleGard curb inlet filters, and a grass-lined swa1e. Low flows form the site would be
intercepted and diverted by proposed cross-gutters to curb-inlet filters wlrich will screen out larger
materials and discharge water directly ioto a proposed grass-lined swale located at the southwestern
comer of the project site. The grass-lined swa1e will convey flow in a westerly direction, and will be
graded at approximately 0.2% slope to permit water to percolate prior discharge to the public
curb/gutter system on East Oxford Street at the southwestern comer of the site.
Peak flows from the east side of the site will be conveyed along the proposed public street and bypass
the cross gutter, flowing directly to East Oxford Street A portion of the peak flows from the west
side of the site will enter the curb inlets filters and be diverted to the grass-lined swale before
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 10
discharge to the public curb/gutter system on East Oxford Street at the southwestern corner of the site
while the remaining will bypass the inlets and flow out to East Oxiord Street
According to the Engineering Department, the proposed improvements appear adequate to handle the
project storin water runoff generated from the site. The existing flows to East Oxiord Street were
analyzed under the 2, 10, 50 and 100-year flood event. Additional Best Management Practices
(BMPs) included as part of the project design consist of a storm drain inlet protection system (curb
inlet filters), grass-lined swale, and permeable pavement in the driveways. No adverse impacts to the
City's drainage threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
As a standard condition, a final drainage study will be required in conjunction with the preparation of
the project grading plans. Properly designed drainage facilities wl1l be installed at the time of the site
development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. In addition, compliance with required NPDES
regulations and construction BMPs such as de-silt basins and silt fences will reduce water quality
impacts to a less than significant level. Implementation of the mitigation measures contained in
Section F below would mitigate potential hydrology and water quality impacts to a level of less than
significance. These measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting
Program.
Noise
In order to assess potential noise impacts of the proposed project, a noise study was prepared by
Dudek, entitled "Concordia Lutheran Church - Residential Project, City of Chula Vista Exterior
Noise Study", dated April 17, 2007,.and addendum dated August 31, 2007 for the project. The study
anticipated that on-site workers and adjacent residential population may be exposed to construction
noise associated with short-term construction activities. However, the project MIl be required to
comply with the City's Noise Ordinance. In addition, due to the minimal construction activities
associated .with the project, impacts to surrounding residential properties related to construction noise
levels are not expected to be significant. The proposed residential project is not located within the
Health Risk Assessment Ares (HRAA), within 500 feet of any adjacent freeway or highway. The
project is not anticipated to potentially violate the noise limits of the City's noise control ordinance.
Residences on lots 1 and 24 will be directly exposed to auto traffic on East Oxford Street, and are
likely to be affected by exterior CNEL noise levels of approx. of 61 decibels. Typical residential
construction may lower the interior noise level approx. 20 dB with windnws closed. Installation of
mechanical ventilation and/or air conditioning in the homes on lots 1 and 24 in accordance with the
Ca. Building Code is necessary to ensure that windows can be closed to achieve compliance with the
45 dB interior standard. In addition, submittal of a subsequent noise study after installation of the
rooftop and HVAC equipment for review. Implementation of the mitigation measures contained in
Section F below would mitigate potential noise impacts to a level of less than significance. These
measures are included as a part of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
F. Miti..tion Necessary to Avoid Si2nificant Imoacts
Air Oualitv .
1. The following air quality mitigation requirements shall be shown on all applicable grading, and
building plans as details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and shall not be deviated from unless
approved in advance in writing by the City's Environmental Review Coordinator:
. Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units.
. Use low pollutant-emitting construction equipment.
. Use electrical construction equipment as practical.
. Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment.
. Use injection-timing retard for diesel~powered equipment.
~
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 11
. Water the construction area twice daily to minimize fugitive dust
. Stabilize graded areas as quickly as posSlble to minimize fugitive dust
. Pave permanent roads as quickly as possible to minimize dust
. Use electricity from power poles instead of temporary generators during building, if
available.
. Apply stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of internal travel path within a construction site
prior to public road entry.
. Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior to vehicle entry on public roads.
. Remove any visible track-out into traveled public streets within 30 minutes of occurrence.
. Wet wash the construction access point at the end of each workday if any vehicle travel on
unpaved surfaces has occurred.
. Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent washout of silty material onto public
roads.
. Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 inches of freeboard to reduce blow-off during
hauling.
. Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if YVinds exceed 25 miles per
hour.
. During rough grading, use of cooled exhaust gas re-circulation in conjunction with the
following:
a) Reduction of the number of pieces of equipment that operate simultaneously
b) Reduction of the number of hours that equipment operations daily. The reduction in
emissions would be directly proportional to the reduction in aggregate operating hours
and/or
c) U so equipment with lower horsepower ratings (emissions reduction would be directly
proportional to the reduction in aggregate horsepower)
. Requirement of one or a combination of the follo'Wing measures for reduction of emissions:
a) Reduction of the number of pieces of equipment that operate simultaneously
b) Reduction of the number of hours that equipment operations daily. The reduction in
emissions would be directly propcrtional to the reduction in aggregate operating hours
andlor
c) Use equipment with lower horsepower ratings (emissions reduction would be directly
proportional to the reduction in aggregate horsepower)
Bioloz.ical Resources
Migratory Birds I Cooper's Hawk
2. To ensure no direct and indirect impacts to raptors andlor any migratory birda occur during
construction (including clearing and grubbing), construction activities adjacent to nesting habit
should occur outside of the combined breeding season of JanWlI)' 15 to August 15 for these
species. If removal of habitat and/or construction activities adjacent to nest habitat must occur
during the breeding season, a pre-construction survey must be performed by a City-approved
biologist to determine the presence or absence of nesting birds on and within 300 feet of the
construction area and nesting raptors within 500 feet of the construction area. The pre-
construction survey must be concluded within 10 calendar days prior to the start of construction,
the results of which must be submitted to the City for review and approval prior to initiating any
construction activities. If nesting birds and/or raptors are detected by the City-approved biologist,
a bio-monitor must be present on-site during construction to minimize construction impacts and
ensure that no nests are removed or disturbed unb.l all young have fledged.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 12
~
Indirect Impacts
3. Prior to issuance of any land development permits, including clearing and grubbing or grading permits. the
project shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) identified in the Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan. BMPs shall be noted on grading and improvement plans and implemented during clearing
and site development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator in
order to avoid short-term indirect impacts to any biological resources in the project vicinity.
Geolo~ and Soils
4. Prior to the issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Engineer and
City Building Official that all the recommendations in the GeoTecbnicallnvestigation prepared by Geocon,
dated Aprlll8, 2007, have been satisfied.
HazardsIHazardous Materials
5. Prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor shall
perform asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in accordance to all applicable local, state and federal
laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard
for Demolition and Renovation.
Hvdrolo2V and Water Oualitv
6. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a final drainage study shall be required in conjunction with the
preparation of the fioa1 grading plans and lll1lSl demonstrate that the posr-development peak flow rate does
not exceed the pre-developmeDt flows as indicated in the "Tentative Map Drainage Study for Oxford
Street, prepared by Hunsaker & Associates, dated October 3, 2007", and amended October 17,2007, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. Additionally, the City Engineer shall verify that the final grading plans
comply with the provisions ofRWQCB NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. R9-2007...QOOl with respect
to cons1ruction~re1ated water quality best m.aI1agement practices. If one or more of the approved post
construction BMPs is non-structural, then a post-constrUCtion BMP plan shall be prepared to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the commencement of const:ruction. Compliance with said plan
shall become a permanent requirement of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
7. Prior to the issuaDce of a grading permit, temporary desilting and erosion control devices shall be installed.
Protective devices shall be provided at every storm drain inlet to prevent sediment from entering the storm
drain system. These measures shall be reflected in the grading and improvement plans to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator.
~
Interior - Vehicle Noise Mitigation
8. The windows of homes facing East Oxford Slreet (Lots I, 24) would need to remain closed to achieve a
45 CNEL interior noise level The design of these homes must include a means of mechaIiical ventilation
and/or air-conditioning. The mechanical ventilation should be in accordance with the latest addition of the
California and Uniform Building Code and to the satisfaction of the City Building Official md
Environmeutal Review Coordinator.
9. Prior to approval of building permits, the applicant shall submit a subsequent noise study for the homes on
Lots I and 24 to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator demonstrating that the final
roof-mounted HV AC and/or Air Conditioning equipment complies with the City's noise control ordinance
at the property boundaries of 45 dBA Leq during nighttime hours and 55 dBA Leq during daytime hours or
ambient noise levels, whichever is greater.
Construction Noise and Vibration Mitigation
lO. To TTl;'n;'!TI;7-e the potential Doise and vibration impacts during construction upon adjacent residences, the
following shall be required:
-~
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 13
3. Prior to issuance of any land development permits, including clearing and grubbing or grading permits, the
project shall implement Best Management Practices (B.M:Ps) identified in the Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan. B~s shall be Doted on grading and improvement plans and implemented during clearing
and site development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and Environmental Review Coordinator in
order to avoid short-t~ indirect impacts to any biological resources in the project vicinity.
Geolol!V and Soils
4. Prior to the issuance of construction permits, the applicant shall provide evidence to the City Engineer and
City Building Official that all the recommendations in the GeoTechnical Investigation prepared by Geocon,
dated Apn1l8, 2007, have been satisfied.
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
5. Prior to any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor shall
perform asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in accordance to all applicable local, state and federal
laws and regulations, including San Diego County.Air Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 - Standard
for Demolition and Renovation.
Hvdrolol?V and Water Oualitv
6. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, a final drainage study shall be required in conjunction with the
preparation of the final grading plans and must demonstrate that the post-development peak flow rate does
not exceed the pre-development flows as indicated in the "Tentative Map Drainage Study for Oxford
Street, prepared by Hunsaker & Associates, dated October 3, 2007", and amended October 17,2007, to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. Additiooa1ly, the City Engineer sball verify that the final grading plans
comply with the provisions of RWQCB NPDES Municipal Permit, Order No. R9-2007..QOOI with respect
to construction~related water quality best management practices. If one or more of the approved post
construction B:tv!Ps is non-structural, then a post-constru.ction BMP plan shall be. prepared to the
satisfactiou of the City Engineer prior to the commencement of construction. Compliance with said plan
shall become a permanent requirement of the Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program.
7. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, tempoI"3I)' desilting and erosion control devices shall be installed..
Protective devices shall be provided at every storm drain inlet to prevent sediment from entering the storm
drain system. These measures shall be reflected in the grading and improvement plans to the satisfaction of
the City Engineer and Enviromnental Review Coordinator.
Noise
Interior - Vehicle Noise Mitigation
8. The windows oflmmes facing East Oxford Street (Lots 1, 24) would need to remain closed to achieve a
45 CNEL interior noise level. The design of these homes must include a means of mechanical ventilation
and/or air-conditioning. The mechanical ventilation should be in accordance with the latest addition of the
California and Uniform Building Code and to the: satisfaction of the City Building Official and
EnviroIm:ll:ntal Review Coordinator.
9. Prior to approval of building permits. the applicant shan submit a subsequent noise study for the homes on
Lots 1 and 24 to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator demonstrating that the final
roof-mounted HVAC and/or Air Conditioning equipment complies with the City's noise control ordinance
at the property boundaries of 45 dBA Leq during nighttime hours and 55 dBA Leq during daytime hours or
ambient noise levels.. whichever is greater.
Construction Noise and Vibration Mitigation
10. To TrTi-n;m?:e the potential noise and vibration impacts during construction upOIl adjacent residences, the
fOllowing sball be required:
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 14
A. All construction equipment shall be equipped with improved noise muffling, and have the
manufacturers' recormnended noise abatement measures. such as mufflers, engine covers.
and engine Vlbration isolators in good working condition.
B. If possible, hydraulic equipment instead of pneumatic impact tools and electric powered
equipment instead of diesel-powered equipment shall be used for all exterior construction
work.
C. All equipment shall be turned off if not in use.
D. Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(1) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, project-related
grading, demolition or construction activities shall be prohibited between the hours of
10:0 p.rn. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Monday through Friday and between 10:00 p.rn. and 8:00 a.m. Saturdays and Sundays.
G. AlITeement to Imnlement Miti..tion Measures
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and Operator stipulate that they have each read,
understood and bave their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures
contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review
Coordinator. Failure to sign the line(s) provided below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative
Declaration with the County Clerk shall indicate the Applicant's and Operator's desire that the
Project be held in abeyance without approval and that the Applicant and Operator shall apply for an
Environmental Jmpact Report. ~
~~OtA'('t-I.-<..
/'f>AA 0, ff;>J1J:;( - P.7j: ~iM\ OTIt{ (..l..L...
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
orized r tive)
[0 I\~( :LOO~
Date
lo/l,,!(.2L.l:>9
Date
Signature of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
N/A
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
N/A
Date
Signature of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
H. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista:
Steve Power, Planning and Bw1ding Department
Luis Hernandez, Planning and Building Department
Maria Muett, Planning and Building Department
Ben Guerrero, P1anning and Building Department
Josie Gabriel, Planning and Building Department
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 15
Glen Laube, Planning and Building Department
Lynnette Tessitore- Lopez, Planning and Building Department
Tom Adler, Engineering Department
Mario lngrasci, Engineering Department
Silvester Evetovich, Engineering Department
Jim Newton, Engineering Department
Hasib Baha, Engineering Department
Richard Hopkins, Public Works Operations
Steven Gonzales; Public Works Operations
David McRoberts, Public Works Operations
Khosro Aminpour, Public Works Operations
Muna Cuthbert, Public Works Operations
Kelly Briers, Fire Department
Others:
Rafael Munoz, Chula Vista Elementary School District
Hector Martinez, Sweetwater Authority
Laurie Edwards, Sweetwater Authority
Sweetwater Union High School District
David Gottfredson, RECON
2. Documents
City ofChula Vista General Plan, 2005 (as amended).
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code.
City ofChula Vista MSCP Subare~ Plan, February 2003.
Biological Resource Analysis prepared by Dudek, dated August 31,2007 and addendum.
Geotechnical Investigation for Oxford Street, Chula Vista, Ca.
dated April 18, 2007, and addendum dated October 8, 2007, by Geocon, Inc.
Phase 1 Environmental Site Assessment - Concordia Lutheran Church and School, 267 East
Oxford Street, Chula Vista, Ca. prepared by Dudek, April 2007, and addendum dated August 31,
2007.
Tentative Map Drainage Study for Oxford Street, dated October 3, 2007 and amended October
17, 2007 prepared by Hunsaker & Associates
Tentative Map Water Quality Technical Report for Oxford Street, dated October 2, 2007 and
amended October 2007 prepared by Hunsaker & Associates.
Air Quality uRBEMIS Model, dated October 2007
Concordia Lutheran Church - Residential Project, City of ChuIa Vista Exterior Noise Study",
prepared by Dudek, dated April 17, 2007, and addendum dated August 31, 2007.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 16
Archaeological Survey Report for Concordia Lutheran Church Project, 267 East Oxford Street,
Chula Vista, Ca., prepared by Brian F. Smith & Associates, dated April 3, 2007, and addendum
September 2007.
Overview of Sewer Service for the Oxford Street Proiect. dated Seotember 26 2007 and amended
October 2007. oreoared bv Dexter Wilson Enl!ineering.
3. Initial Studv
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, and any comments
received in response to the Notice oflnitial Study. The report reflects the independent judgment
of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review of this
project is available from the Chula Vista Planning and Building Department, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula yo CA 91910.
Date:
1/ /'LI (09-
I
J :\Planning\RicbardZ\Environmental\ 1S-07 -031.finaIMND
- .,
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 17
C HULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
C) API'IJCANl> Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC. INITIAL STUDY
PROJECT 267 E. Oxford Street Request 24 SFD development on a 3.9 acre Iol
ADO""""
S~ I FILE NUMBER:"
NORTH No Scale 15-07-031 _cases: PCS-07417. PCZ"l7418 & GPMl741
J:\Planning\Publlc NoticesIJS\IS07D31.cdr 0426.07
C)(\-j-IE)\T j
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 18
~
o
,.:.
o
'"
u
"-
-------------------- I~
e Iii! " ~i ~ I~
~ ~;i, l ,! d ~;!i' i '"'
!.ill..~.~.. ....~;.,:..i~.;~-~--~;n~.j.i.. m~..il...IJ~:
'!L'!el'!' .!! dl n i~ !~5
., . i~
I
..,,--
~
, ,
, ,
,
, , -Bi
,
8L
8~ '-'I
8i
,
,.
ei ,"
I
,
8i
@i /
., /
/
,
SL n13H.1 t-€ro-$a W<fIT
_ BttlS .ON c'fIW
- --t:-;ON-Ijiii.fi3I~J.B,3-tiOS?!nrIT "1-
" iil:: e~ Ii! I i f ~ l i
'.! 1 'I : ~l! I: i!1 ~" i:i~
~t ~ ;JIl! ~~.;~r ; I ~I!!f ~~ ~e
~j~tl.~en~ji_~ :_:~lij! !'"
o."~~U ~~ l,'- R;SI;:T!
!I !i !h!-.<:m-If Idi,h 'lil
, I" .. -
I
,.
I".,
I
i ~ ~ l.n I
i
I
.
0.;
~ i
:ij 0::: u I
~on
~ LL ~ !
~ X ~
~Oe
I
,
"
I
.'!
l!i~~ "l' i _
-~!lll ~ l
~."';-t1
. l;-.~...."..'."....-...J
lS'i ,-- ~ E' ,
I I; ...~-: ~
~-~_'L -lit~-- -~-~-;"~_~~:~-
~:., .I:".~ '.1'
1._ ~ l _' I
:~!!~:...-----,=~._- . '" I
'.,.' ;, d" '.::>j
fiE! Si ~ '--" _.~
~:- ~ - '. : -11:.11
I-. ::. " -::.; I
!.i;! . ."
iiI "'. ;il:"':l:>/ .: I'
,!" ; - ;.;'iij~."-_. t:..1
I i - ;:::\..~ - , C/J
I . ~~d.- j Cl
J I ~: iI:: ~ C:::
I - ------ ~~--- "-l
: .," ~ ~ ~ r ~
ll:l : <;
~. I
.. !~; II
ii; ~; Ii
~ s ..;.J
il.11!
.@i
n~~
'(j,
@i
@i
@!
@i
: r I:: ~. ,
~".
~, ~,I
qi
,'"'~
"-+---- I - ,,'--t~~':l!'-<f',
'''l~;:~'j :"'i d
J ""~. : CIl z ~ I':l Z
! (P; f I : ,~
I 9A R1JH.1 U-oLb+6eg N4'V
,f J- 1~9.o':,N~; ,---
:1: " ,-I ;,~EHirr:. b'37~S3W
,'J. ~,_~ 1m
t:\;
,-
,
- ~"..:;-
E'i-.I-\\~\T 2.
4J(
.-1.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 19
ATIACHMENT "A"
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
OXFORD STREET/CONCORDIA LUTHERAN CHURCH RESIDENTIAL -IS-07-031
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed Oxford StreetfConcordia Lutheran Church Residential project
The proposed project has been evaluated in an Initial StudylMitigated Negative Declaration
prepared in accordance with the California Enviro=ental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State
CEQA Guidelines (1S-06-007) The legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate
mitigation measures are implemented and monitored for Mitigated Negative Declarations.
All 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this proj ect ensures adequate
implementation of mitigation for the following potential impacts(s):
I. Air Quality
2. Biological Resources
3. Geology and Soils
4. Hazards/Hazardous Materials
5. Hydrology and Water Quality
6. Noise
MONITORING PROGRAM
Due to the nature of the enviro=ental issues identified, the Mitigation Compliance Coordinators
shall be the Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer of the City of Chula Vista.
The applicant shall be responsible to ensure that the conditions of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program are met to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator and
City Engineer. The applicant shall provide evidence in written form confirming compliance with
the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Dec1aration IS-07-031 to the
Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. The Environmental Review Coordinator
and City Engineer will thus provide the ultimate verification that the mitigation measures have
been accomplished.
Table I, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program Checklist, lists the mitigation measures
contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Effects, of Mitigated Negative
Declaration IS-07 -031, which will be implemented as part of the project In order to determine if
the applicant has implemented the measure, the method and timing of verification are identified,
along with the City department or agency responsible for monitoring/verifying that the applicant
has completed each mitigation measure. Space for the signature of the verifying person and the
date of inspection is provided in the last column.
J:\PlanniIlg\MARlA\Inilial Sl:u.dy\OxfDTll. Map\J5-07.o31MMRPtext.doc
Oxford Slr..UConcordla Lutheran Church ResldenllalllS-07 -031\
Mltiaatlon Monllorlna and Reoortina Proaram
Table 1
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM
MItigation Measur.
Comments
1.
The foIlfJIMng air qualltyrntUgatlon requlrernenblshan be
llhown on an applk:able grading, and buHdlng plana as
details, notes. or as otherwise appropriate:
. Mnlmlze simultaneous operation of mulUp~
COflstrucUon equlpmenl units.
. Use low polutant-emlttlng conslructlon equipment.
Use electrtcal COI'1Struction equipment as practical.
Use catatytlc reducUon for gasoDne-powered
equipment.
Use Inlectlon~tlmlng retard for dlesel.powered
eqUipment.
Wahlr the construction area tyAce dally to mlnlmlze
luglllve dusl
Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible 10
minimize fuglUve dusl.
Pave permanent roads as quickly Bill possible lo
minimize dust
Use eleclr1clty from power polealnslead of temporary
geoeram durlng building, If available.
. Apply lltablllzer or pave the last 100 feel of Internal
travel palh within a CONJtrucIlon slle prior 10 public
road entry.
Inslall wheel washera adjacent to a paved apron prior
10 vehicle enby on pubNc roads.
Remove any vlsIble track-oullnlo traveled publJc
streets within 30 minutes of occurrence.
Wet wash the construcUon access point at the end of
each WDfkday If any vehk:le lravel on unpaved
surfaces has ocaJrred.
. Provide sufficient perlmeter erosion control to prevent
washout of silty matelial onlo public roads.
Cover haullrUcks or maintain at least 12 Inches of
freeboard to reduce blow-oK during hauling,
Plan Check/Site
InspecUon
x
x
x
AppllcanU Clly
Engineering
Department/City
Planning and BuildIng
Department .
Psge~ I
"0""
'" (1)
OQ '"
(1) 0
~S
o.
::>
Z
?
N
o
o
00
,
o
o
00
Oxford SlreeVConcordla Lulheran Church Resldenllal (lS-07-0311
Mlt1aation Monltorina and Reoortlna Proaram
Table 1
. Suspend aU soli dls(urbanC9 and travel on unpaved
surfaces If winds exceed 25 mile!! per hour.
. During rough grading, use of cooled exhaust gas
redrculalion In oonjunctlon with the following:
a) Reducllon of the number of pleC8B d equipment
Ihal operate sinultaneously
b) ReducUon of the number of hours ht equipment
opera~ons daBy. The reduction In emlsslons \'ItlUkt
be dlrectty proportional to the reduction In
aggregllle operaUng hours and/or
c) Use' equipment with- lower horsepower rsUngs
(emissions reduction would be dtrectly proportional
to !he reducUon In aggregate horsepower)
. Requirement of one or a comblnaUon of the following
measures for reduction of emissions:
s) Reduction of the number of pieces of
equlpmenllhal operate simultaneously.
b) ReductIon of the number 0' hours that equlpmenl
operaUons dally. The reduction In emissions
would be directly proporUonal to the reducUon In
aggregate operating hours end/or
c) Use equipment with lower horsepower rallngs
(emissions reduction would be directly
proportional to the reducllon In aggregate
horsepower).
Page-2
""'"
JQ ~
,., 0
NC
--
O'
::l
Z
o
tv
o
o
00
,
o
o
00
Oxford SlreeUConcordla Lutheran Church ResldenUal f1S-D7,031l
Table 1
Mltlaatlon Monltorino and ReoortinQ Proaram
.""jl"""'" , "1' ' ., "j' '''1 'n.' c'" " ""II"''''"'I'''~'''""I"",:'r."''''''lll,l,n:''lli~~'
"",', '~.' \ I I I I I _ " _ , ' , , ":..1 ,If < '1""1; I ,~ ,,4>> r'[i!1\l""
l;j h', II t 1'.\(" .,IJ'['I'll' ";~"l' I' II I . 4' - "~Fli'~!!,d\~j;-~"'~ Ii
:1;l ,I ;"u'l l"'-" 1-)- d' , -I' -)',rl,lll~"tr",-:':'t'll f " ' '1',\./ "~J"lr'ili>: . r ~
,iil:e,illLk-._l-Lr\ '~'S;>;;',...J\-. I, _' (> J.. l"~t.~,,,- ,,,_ ~ L~ _.'- ~,l" L'~ i_,~~ ._.,mllij./o.
2 . To ensure no direct and Indtrect Impacts to raptors and/or
any migratory birds OCQJl' durlng COllstrucUon Qndudlng
clearing and grubbing), construction activlUes adjacent to
nesting habltsl should occur outstde of Ihe combined
breeding seuon of JanuSf)' 15 10 August 15 for these
Specl.BS. If removal of habitat and/or constructfon
adlvlUes adjacent to nesl habitat must occur during the
breedklg SE!ason, a pre-constructlon survey must be
perfonned by a Clty.approved biologist to determIne the
presence Of' absence or nesting birds on and wtthln 300
reet of tha construcllon are8 and n8l!lUng raptors wllhln
500 feet of the conslrucUori area. The pre-oonatructton
survey musl be concluded YAlhin 10 calendar days prior
'0 the slart of conslructlon, the results of which mlmt be
submItted to the City for review and approval prlor 10
initiating any conslrucUon acUvlttes. If nesUng birds
and/or raplors are detected by the Clty-approved
biologist, a blo-monltor must be presenl otHIlie durlng
construcUon to minimize construction Impacts and ensure
that no nests are removed or dtsturbed untJ.[ all young
have fled ed.
3. Prlor to the Issuance of any land developmenl permits
IncludIng clearing and grubbJng or gradIng pennUs, the
project shall Implement Best Management Practices
(BMPs) identified in the storm Water PoIluHon PrevenUon
Plan. BMPs shaM be noted on grading and Improvement
plans and implemented durlng c1earlng Bnd site
development to the saUsfaclton pf the City Engineer and
Envtronmenlat Review Coordinator In order to avoid
short-term indirect Impacts 10 any biological resources In
the ectvlclni.
!"f:!:
I,"
.'
:':1-'
f
,II
Pdor to tuuance of OOflIIInldIOO permits, the appllcanl
shall provide evldencelo lhe City Engineer and City
Building Official that eU the recorrmendatlont In Ihe
Geotechnical Jnv8sf/gs'Ion, prepared by Geocon, dated
rtl1 e, 2007 have been saUsfted.
Plan Check/SHe
InspecUon
x
x
Plan Check/Site
Inspection
x
x
i "I, '. ", J'l', : Ii ;i! I ~'r...j'
11iIIiII:" !' '.i :' :":'Li 1"--;)<1)1[',-:1
" '" . ........... ,
,,,' .
Page. 3
x
x
AppllcanUCIly
Engineering
DepartmenUPlannlng
and BuDding
Department
x
AppncanVClty
EngIneering
OepartmenVftannlng
and Building
Department
:"1'""("
':',",f:",:flVP;;''-~:,~n:i!:'''1fu1-
,'[". ,y"', .~"..:"J,."';'jllfu,'
_. ,~".,;;"L_c.:.."":"~.J<:,'..;,l
AwI1canUClly
Planning and Building
DepartmentICity
Engineering
De rlmenl
""
J'ci
"
IV
IV
::<l
"
'"
o
[
O'
::s
Z
?
IV
o
o
00
.
o
o
00
il1.t
~
"
Oxford 8treeVConcordla Lutheran Church Residential (18-07.031\
Mifiaation Manltarlno and Reoortina proaram
Table 1
5.
Prior to any demolmon activities, a licensed and
reglslered asbestos and lead abatement contraclor shalf
perfonn asbestos and leed-b8ssd paint abalementln
accordance with all appllcable local. stale and federal
laws and regulations, Including San Diego County Air
Pollution Control rnstrlcl Rule 361.145 - Standard for
Demolillon and RenoViltlon.
Plan Check/Site
Inspect/on
x
x
x
AppllcanVClly
Planning and BuildIng
DepartmenllCUy
Engineering
Department
6.
7.
Prior to the ISsuance of a grading permit. a final drainage Plan Check/SIte
Sludy shall be required In conjunction w1Ut the preparaUon Inspectlon
of the final grading plans and must demonstrate that the
post.-developmenl peak ftOVt/ rale does not exceed the
pre-development flows 88 indicated in the "Tentattve Map
Drainage Study for Oxford Street-, prepared by Hunsaker
& Associates, deled Oclober 3. 2007 and amended
October 17. 2007 10 the saUsf9Cllon of the City Engineer.
Addlllonally, the City EngIneer shall verify that the flllal
grading plans comply with the provisIons of Cali'omla
Regional Water QuaMly Control Board, San Diego RegIon
Order No. 2001~01 with respect to oonstrucUon.related
water quallly best management practices. If one or more
of Ihe approved post conslructlon BMPs Is non--structural
then a post--construcUon BMP plan shall be prepared to
Ihe sallsfacllon of the City Engineer prior lo the
commencement of construction. CompDance with said
plan shall become a permanent requirement of the
Mlllgallon MonItoring and Reporting Program.
Prior to the Issuance of a grading permit, lemporary Plan Check/Site
desllUng and erosion conkol devices shan be Insta~ed. Inspection
Protective devices shaU be provIded at every slorm drain
Inlet 10 prevent sediment from enlerlng the slonn drain
system. These measures shall be reflected In the grading
end Improvemenl plans to the saUsfacUon of the City
Engineer Bnd Environmental Review COOfdlnalor.
AppllcanVClly
Planning and Building
DepartrnenllClty
EngIneering
Department
x
x
X AppllcanVCity
Planning and Building
DepartmenllCity
Engineering
Department
..
The w4ndows of homes facing East Oxford Street (Lots 1,
24) shall remain dosed to achieve a 45 CNEL Interlor
noise level. The design of these homes musllnclude a
means 0' mechanical venlllaUon andlor alr-condlllonlng.
The mechanIcal ventilatIon should be In accordance with
the latest addition of the Callfomla and Uniform Bulktlng
Code and to Ihe satlsfacUon of the Building Official and
Envlroomental Review Coordinator.
ApplJcantlClty
Planning and Building
DeparbnenllClty
Engineering
Department
Pagc-4
"O;:r;l
po '"
(JQ '"
'" 0
NC
w_
o'
::>
Z
?
N
o
o
00
,
o
o
00
Oxford SlreeUConcordla Lutheran Church Re.ldenllaIIlS-QHI31l
9.
Pnor to approval of building pennlts. the appUcant shall
submk a s~sequent noise sludy foJ homes on Lots 1 and
24 10 the saUsfactlon of lhe Environmental Review
Coordlnalor demonstrating that lhe final roof-mounted
HVAC and/or Nf CondItioning equipment compnes with
the Clly'. noise control ordinance al the property
boundaries of 45 dBA Leq during nightttme hour. and 55
dBA Leq during dayUme hours or ambient noise levels,
whichever Is crosier.
To minimize Ihe potenllal nols8 and v1braUoo Impacts
during construction upon adjacent residences, the
following shall be required:
A. All construction equipment shall be equipped
with Improved nols8 muffling, and hava the
manufacturers' reconvnended noise abatement
measures, such 8S mufflers, engine covera and
engine vtbrallon tsoIates In good working
candlUons.
10.
B. If possible, hydraunc equipment Instead of
pneumaUc impacts tools and eleclrlc powered
equipment Inslead of dleseH)oWered
equipment shall be used for all exterior
construcllon work.
C. All equipment shaH be turned oft tf not In use.
D. Pursuant to SectIon 17.24.050(J) 0' Itle Chuta
Vista Munkipal Code, prDJect.relaled grading,
demollUon or construcUon activIties shlilH be
prohibited belween Ills hours of 10:00 p.m. and
7;00 a.m. Monday Uvough Friday and between
10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through
Frklay and between 10:00 p.m. and 8;00 a.m.
Saturdays and Sundays.
J~\Plannlng\MARIA\lnhlal Study\Oxford Mlp\IS-07-031MMRPtbl.doc
L
Plan Check/Site
Inspection
Table 1
Page-5
x
x
x
AppllcanUClly
Plannlng and BuildIng
DeparbnentlClty
Engineering
Departmenl
Mitiaation MonllorJna and Reoortlna Proaram
"1:1 ?:I
'" C1>
(JQ '"
C1> 0
~s.
o.
i:l
Z
!='
N
o
o
00
,
o
o
00
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 25
~I~
---
em",
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CHULA VISV\
1. Name of Proponent: Concordia Lutheran Church clo
Brookfield Shea Otay, LLC
2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City ofChula Vista
Planning and Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
3. Address and Phone Number of Proponent:
Concordia Lutheran Church
c/o Brookfield Shea Olay, LLC
12865 Pointe Del Mar, Suite 200
San Diego, CA 92014
(858) 481-8500
4. Name of Proposal:
Oxford Street! Concordia Lutheran
Church Residential
5. Date of Checklist:
October 17, 2007
6. Case No.:
1S-07-031
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS QUESTIONS:
Issues:
Potentially
Sipificant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Wllh
Miti&;adon
Incorporated
Less Than
Sia:nificant
Impact
No
Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project
a) Have a substantial adverse effect 00 a scenic vista?
o
o
o
.
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but Dot limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
o
o
o
.
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
o
o
o
.
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
o
o
o
.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 26
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Signlf'u:ant
Impact
N.
Impact
in the area?
Comments:
a-b )The proposal includes the development of twenty-four single family residential units with site
improvements in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Municipal. The proposed landscape
improvements would enhance and improve the aesthetic quality of Oxford Stree~ the proposed
on-site public street and surrounding neighborhood. The proposed proj ect would not damage any
scenic resources, vegetation, or historic buildings within a state scenic highway. The site is
located on the side of a ridgeline developed with single-family homes, which slopes upbill to the
east Development of the project site with homes could affect views from these adjacent
properties. However, the development layout is designed to include side-yard setbacks, which
allow views between proposed homes and above the roofline of single-story homes. The
approval of the project will not substaotially degrade existing views across the property,
therefore, no significant aesthetic impacts are anticipated.
c) The proposal is an infill residential development project The proposed project will not
substaotially degrade the existing visual character or quality of the project site or its adjacent
residential surroundings. The project site is planned for single - family residential development
according to the General Plan Land Use regulations.
d) The project proposes one public streetlight on the cul-de-sac, and private lightiog for each
residence, which should not affect adjacent residences. An existing streetlight will serve the
project entry at the intersection of East Oxford Street and the proposed street The proposal will
be required to comply with the City's minimum staodards for roadway lighting. The project will
be required to comply with the light and glare regulations (Section 19.66.100) of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code (CYMe). Compliance with these regulations will ensure that no significant
glare, or light would affect daytime or nighttime views in the surrounding residential
neighborhood area.
Mitil!ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
project
a) Convert Prime Faxm1and, Unique Fannland, or
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Faxm1and), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Res~ Agency, to non-agricuJtura1 use?
o
o
o
.
b) Conflict with existiog zoning for agricultural use, or
o
o
o
.
--j
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 27
a Williamson Act contract?
Less Thall
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
0 0 0 .
Issues:
c) Involve other changes in the existing environment,
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
conversion of Farmland, to non-agricultural use?
Comments:
a-<:)The project site is developed with a church, pre-schooVdaycare, and parking lot on the south side
of the lot and play fields on the north side of the lot. The surrounding properties have been
developed with single-family homes. These properties are consistent with the Chula Vista
General Plan and zoning designation, and contain no agricultural resources or designated
farmland. The proposal would not convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland or Farmland of
Statewide Importance to non-agricultural use and no impacts to agricultural resources would be
created as a result of the proposed project.
Miti!!ation:
No mitigation measures are required.
m. AIR QUAliTY. Would the project
a) Conflict with or obstruct iroplernentation of the
applicable air quality plan?
o
o
o
.
b) Violate any air quality standard or contnbute 0 0 0 .
substantially to an existing or projected air quality
violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase 0 . 0 0
of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non-attaironent under an applicable
federal or state ambient. air quality standard
(including releasing emissions, which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
d) Expose seositive receptors to substantial pollutant 0 . 0 0
copccntrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial
o
.
o
o
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 28
Issues:
number of people?
Comments:
(a-<o) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Miti2ation:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
1.= ThaD
Significant
WIth
Mitfgatioll
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
N.
Impact
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant air quality impacts to a level ofless than significance.
rv.BIOLOGICALRESOURCES. Wouldthe
project
a) Have a substantial adverse effec~ either directly or
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
regulations, or by the California Department of Fisb
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian
habitat or other sensitive natural community
identified in local or regional plans, policies,
regulations or by the California Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Wator Act (including, but not limited to,
marsh, vernal pool, ccastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydrological interruption, or other
means?
o
o
o
.
.
o
o
o
o
o
o
.
__J
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 29
L~ Than
Potentially Significant Less Than No
Issues: Significant With Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any 0 . 0 0
native resident or migratory fish or wllcllife species
or with established native resident or migratory
wildlife corridors, or impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
oj Conflict with any local policies or ordinances 0 0 0 .
protecting biological resources, such as a lIee
preserv>.tion policy or ordi=nce?
I) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat 0 . 0 0
Conservation Plan, Natural Community
Conservation Plan, or other approved local,
regional, or state habitat conservation plan?
Comments:
a-I) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitie-ation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant biological resource impacts to a level of less than significance.
v. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of a historical resource as defined in
State CEQA Guidelines !i 15064.5?
o
o
o
.
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the
significance of an archaeological resoUICe pursuant
to State CEQA Guidelines !i 15064.5?
o
o
o
.
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique
paleontological resource or site or unique geologic
o
o
o
.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 30
c-
Issues:
PotentiaDy
Significant
Impact
LcssThan
Significant
With
MificstiOD
Incorponbed
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
feature?
d) Disturb any human rerrJllins, including those interred
outside offonnal cemeteries?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a) In order to assess potential bistoric resources located on the ~ecl site or surrounding areas, an
archaeological/historical evaluation entitled "Archaeological SUlVey for the Concordia Lutheran
Church Projecf' was prepared by Brian F. Smith & Associates, dated September 19, 2007. The
following details summarize the results of the study. The existing structures were constructed
between 1962-1965 and were not associated with any important events or individuals in terms of
local, state or national history. The existing struc1JJres and the site do not qualify as a bistoric resouree
under national, state or local register czjteria. The proposed project will not constitute a Sllbstantial,
adverse change to the significance of Illl bistorical resource as the structure has been dctennined by the
analysis not to be historically or architecturally significant within the project impact area. Therefore,
no substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in Section 15064.5
is anticipated and no mitigation measures are required.
b) The sill: has been disturbed by development of the church on the south 1/3 of the property and
previous playfield use of the northerly '])3 of the property. Based on the level of previous site
disturbance, the potential for significant impacts or adverse changes to archaeological resource as
defined in Section 15064.5 is not anticipated.
c) Based on the level of previous disturbance to the site and the relatively limited amount of additional
grading for the proposed project, no impacts to unique paleontological resources or unique geologic
features are anticipated.
d) No human remains are anticipated to be present within the impact area of the project sill: as the project
site has been previously disturbed with the existing church and auxilIary structures.
Mitigation:
No mitigation measures are required.
VL GEOLOGY AND SOILS - Would the project
a)
Expose people or structures to potential
substantial adve!se effects, including the risk of
loss, injury or death involving:
i
RlIpture of a known earthquake fuuIt, as
delineated on the most recent Alquist-Priolo
o
o
o
.
. .1
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 31
Less Than
Potentially Significant Less Than N.
Issues : Significant With Significant
Impact Mitigation Impact Impact
Incorporated
Earthquake Fault Zoning Map issued by the State
Geologist for the area or based on other
substantial evidence of a known fuult?
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? 0 . 0 0
ill.
Seismic-related ground fail\Jl'e, including
liquefaction?
iv. Landslides?
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit ar soil that is
unstable, or that would become unstable as a
result of the project, and potentially result in on-
ar off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, creating substantial
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
far the disposal of wastewater?
Comments:
a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitigation:
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentiaIIy significant geological impacts to a level ofless than significance.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 32
Issues:
PotentWIy
Significant
Impact
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS. Would the project
a) Create a significant h:=rd to the public or the 0
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the 0
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or bandle hazardous or 0
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or
proposed school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of 0
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Government Code section 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public or the environment?
e) For a project located within an aiIport land use 0
plan or, where such a plan has not been adopted,
within two miles of a public aiIport or public use
aiIport, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or worldng in the project area?
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private 0
airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing or worldng in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere 0
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of 0
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
Less Tun
Significant
With
Mitii;ation
Incorporated
o
.
o
o
o
o
o
o
Leo<. 1'h>n
Significant
Impact
.
o
o
o
o
o
o
o
No
Impact
o
o
.
.
.
.
.
.
.J
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 33
Issues:
Potenti2lJy
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitiption
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas or where residences are
intermixed with wildlands?
Comments:
(a-b) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
c) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. The proposed project site is located within one-<jUllrter
mile ofPalomar Elementary school located on East Palomar Street The proposed project will not
emit acutely hazardous emissions or materials, therefore, will not create a significant impact to the
schools within the surrounding area
d) The proposed project is not located on a site included on the County of San Diego Department of
Environmental Health Services Haz=Ious List pursuant to the G<>vemment Code Section 65962.5,
therefore, will not create a significant impact to the public or the enviromnent.
e) The project is not located within an airport land use plan nor within two miles of a public airport or
public use airport; therefore, the project would not expose people residing or working in the project
area to adverse safety hazards. .
f) The project is not located within the vicinity of a private airstrip; therefore, the project development
would not expose people working in the project area to adverse safety ha2ards.
g) The project is designed to meet the City's emergency response plan, route access and emergency
evacuation requirements. The proposed fire improvements include an emergency turning radius and
fire hydrant No impairment or physical interference with the City's emergency response plsn is
anticipated
h) The project is designed to meet the City's Fire Prevention building and fire service requirements. No
exposure of people or structures to a significant risk of loss, ir!jury or death due to wildfires is
anticipated
Mitigation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Hazards/Hazardous Materials impacts to a level of less than significance.
vm. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALTIY.
Would the project
a) Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to
receiving waters (including impaired water bodies
o
.
o
o
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 34
Issues:
pursuant to 1I1e Clean Waler Act Section 303(d) list),
result in significant alteration of receiving water
quality during or following construction, or violate
any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
b) Substantially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there would be a net deficit in aquifer
volwne or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre-existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which would not support
existing land uses or planned uses for which pemrits
have been granted)? Result in a potentially
significant adverse impact on groundwater quality?
c) SubstantiaIly alter 1I1e existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river. in a manner, which
would result in substantial erasion or siltation an- or
off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the
site or area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream or river, substantially increase the
rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which
would result in flooding on- or off-site, or place
structures within a lOO-yearflaad hazani area which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
e) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of
lass, injury or death involving flooding, including
flooding as a result of the fiu1ure of a levee or dmn?
f) Create or cantnbute runoff water, which would
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
Potentially
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
o
o
o
o
.
Less Thall
Significant
Impact
.
o
.
o
o
No
Impact
o
.
o
.
o
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 35
Issues:
Comments:
(a-1) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitil!ation:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Th.an
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impact
No
Impact
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant HyclrologylWater Quality impacts to a level ofless than significance.
IX. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
proj ect:
a) Physically divide an established community?
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including. but not limited to the general
plan, speciJic plan, local coastal prognun, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an envirorunental effect?
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation
plan or natural community conservation plan?
o
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
.
o
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 36
Issues:
Potenti28y
Significant
Impact
Less ThaD
Significant
With
Mitigation
lncorporated
Less Than
Significant
Impad:
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The project site is smrotmded with single-family residential land uses. The proposed residential infill
project would be consistent with the Chula Vista General Plan and cllarader of the immediate
surrounding residential area. The project would not disrupt or divide an established community;
therefore, no significant land use impact would occur as a result of the project
b) The project site is located within the Rl (Single-Family Residential) Zones and RIM (Low-Medium
Density) Gcneral Plan land use designation. The project is required to rezone the existing parcel to R-
I-S-P and be in compliance with the respective zoning. The project has been found to be consistent
with the General Plan guidelines and regulations, therefore; no significant land use impacts are
anticipated.
c) Refer to Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Potential short-term construction noise!raptor
nesting impacts are addressed in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section, under Biological
Resources.
Mitil!:atioD:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Land Use!Planning impacts to a level of less than significance.
X. MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project
a) Resuh in the loss of availability of a known mineral
resource that would be of value to the region and the
residents of the slate?
o
o
o
.
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally
important mineral resource recovery site delineated
on a local general plan, specific plan or other land
use plan?
o
o
o
.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 37
Issues:
Comments:
PotentiaDy
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Signific:ant
With
Mitigation
Iocorporated
No
Impact
Less ThaD
Significant
Impact
a) The project site has been previously disturl:>ed with the existing church. The proposed project would
not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region or the residents
of the Stale of California.
b) The Stale of California Department of Conservation has not designated the project site for mineral
resource protection. Therefore, no impacts to mineral resources are anticipated as a result of the
proposed project.
Mitieation:
No mitigation measures are required.
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure ofpeISons to or generation of noise levels
in excess of standards established in the local
general plan or noise ordinance, or applicable
standards of other agencies? .
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive
groundbome vibration or groundbome noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the project?
d) A substantial temporary or periodic increase in
ambient noise levels in the project vicinity above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project Jocated within an aiIport land use plan
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project an:a to excessive noise levels?
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
o
o
.
o
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 38
Issues:
PotentiaUy
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Siplficant
With
Midzation
Inc.orporated
Less Than
SipUlcant
Impact
No
Impact
f) For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip,
would the project expose people residing or working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
o
o
o
.
Comments:
a-d) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
e-f) The project is not located within an aiIport land use plan or within two miles of a public airport, nor is it
located within the vicinity of a private airstrip. Therefore, the project development would nct expose
people residing or working in the project area to excessive noise levels.
Mitigation:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant Noise impacts to . level ofless than significance.
XU. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
project
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area,
either directly (fur example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of road or other infrastructure)?
o
o
o
.
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
o
o
o
.
c) Displace substantial nwnbm of people,
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
o
o
o
.
~,
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 39
Issues:
Pot~ntiany
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Signific::ant
With
Mitigation
Incorporamd
LeS! Than
Significant
Impact
N.
Impact
Comments:
a-c) The project is surrounded by existing residential development and involves the removal of the
existing church and daycare buildings and related improvements. The proposed project does not
involve the extension of public facilities that would induce substantial growth. Future residential
development of the site for the proposed 24 single-family residential units is consistent with the
General Plan and would not exceed the regional or local population projections. The proposed
project would involve the rezoning of the site from R-I-? to R-I-5-P Zone, which is consistent with
the RIM General Plan designation of the site, which would be similar to the existing adjacent single-
family residential properties to the north, south and east. The proposed project would not involve
displacement of existing housing or individuals.
Mitintion:
No mitigation measures are required.
xm. PUBUC SERVICES. Would the project
Result in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
with the provision of new or physica11y altered
governmental facilities, need for new or physica11y
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant environmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or
other performance objectives for any public services:
a. Fire protection?
o
o
.
o
o
b. Police protection?
o
o
.
c. Schools?
o
o
o
.
o
ci Parks?
o
o
.
e. Other public facilities?
o
o
o
.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 40
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less nan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Lts5 ThaD
Significant
Impact:
No
Impact
Comments:
a) According to the Fire Department, adequllte fire protection services can continue to be provided to the
site. The applicant will be required to comply with the Fire Department policies for fire hydrant
placement, fire flow, fire truck access and new building construction. The City's Fire performance
objectives and thresbolds will continue to be met
b) According to the Chula Vista Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be
provided upon completion of the proposed project The proposed project would not have a significant
effect upon or result in a need for substantial new or altered police protection services. The City's
Police performance objectives and thresholds will continue to be met
c) The proposed project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no significant adverse
impacts to public schools would result According to the Chula Vista Elementary School District letter
dated May 22, 2007, the applicant would be required to pay the statutory building permit school fees
for the proposed residential construction or an alternative financing mechmrism such as participation in
or annexmion to a CFD is recomme:cded.
d) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infill
project However, the applicant shall be required to pay Park Acquisition and Development Fees
(pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No. 2945 adopted by City Council on January 6, 2004.
e) The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or expanded
governmental services and would continue to be served by existing public infrastructure.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project
a)
Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parle; or o1her recreational fucilities such
that substantia1 physical deterioration of the facility
would occur or be accelerated?
o
o
.
o
b)
Does the project incInde recreational fucilities or
require the construction or expansion of recreational
fucilities, which have an adverse physical effect on
the environment?
o
o
o
.
~-
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 41
Issues:
Comments:
Potentially
Signific:ant
Impac.t
Leu Thag
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
No
Impact
Uss Than
Significant
Impact
a) The proposed project would not induce significant population growth, as it is a small residential infill
project and would not impact existing or proposed recreational facilities. However, the applicant will
be required to pay Park Acquisition and Development Fees (pAD) in accordance with Ordinance No.
2945 adopted by City Council on January 6, 2004.
b) The project does not include the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. The project site is
not p1aooed for any future parks and recreation facilities or programs. Therefore, the proposed project
would not have an adverse pbysical effect on the recreational environment
Milinlion:
No mitigation measures are required.
XV. TRANSPORTATION / TRAFFIC. Would the
project
a) Cause an increase in traffic, which is substantial in
relation to the existing traffic load and capacity of
the street system (ie., result in a substantial increase
in either the nwnber of vehicle trips, the volwne to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at
intersections)?
b) Exceed, either individually or cwnu1atively, a level
of service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated roads
or highways?
c) Resu1t in a change in air traffic patterns, including
eilher an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase ha=ds due to a design
feature (e.g., shaIp curves or dangerous
intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., fium
equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access?
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 42
Less Than
Potentially Sia:nHlcant Less Than No
Issues: Significant With Significant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impact
Incorporated
f) Result in inadequate parking capacity? 0 0 0 .
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs 0 0 0 .
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Comments:
(a,b,d,e) According to the Traffic Engineering Division, in their memorandum dated September 25,2007,
the proposed residential infill project is not anticipated to result in any significant traffic, circulation or
emergency access impacts. The existing church and daycare generates approximately 304 Average Daily
Trips (ADTs), as compared to the proposed project, which will generate approximately 240 ADTs. The
traffic generated by the project will amount to a reduction of 64 ADT's. In addition, the project-
generated trips will not exceed the level of service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or highways. Therefore, due to the minimal traffic increase and
reduction of previous vehicular volume, the project will not create significant traffic operations impacts
along East Oxford Street and surrounding residential or collector streets.
c) The proposal would not have any significant effect upon any air traffic patterns, including either an
increase in traffic levels or a chaoge in location that results in substantial safety risks.
f) The proposal includes garage spaces in accordance with the Chula Vista Zoning Code, and parking
on the proposed public street The proposal meets ADA requirements for accessibility and parking.
g) There is an existing bus stop located I block westerly of the site at the intersection of Melrose and
East Oxford Street
h) The proposal would not conflict with adopted transportation plans or alternative transportation
programs.
Mitisration:
No mitigation measures are required.
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
o
o
o
.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 43
Issues:
b) Require or result in the construction of new water or
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant environmental effects?
c) Require or result in the cons1ruc1ion of new storm
water drainage facilities or expansion of existing
facilities, the constroction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a determination by lhe wastewater treabnent
provider, which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve lhe project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
f) Be served by a landfill wilh sufficient permitted
capacity to accommodate lhe project's solid waste
disposal needs?
g) Comply wilh federal, state, and local statutes and
regulations related to solid waste?
Less Than
Patentiany Signifil:::l.nt Less Than No
Significant With Significant
Impac=:t Mitigation Impact Impact
Inl:orporated
0 0 0 .
o
o
.
o
o
o
o
.
D
o
o
.
D
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 44
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Signifiant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Lm Than
SlgntIiCllDt
Impact
N.
Impact
Comments:
a) The project site is located within an urban area that is served by all necessary utilities aDd service systems.
According to the Engineering Department, wastewater requirements of the Regional Water Quality
Comol Board not be exceeded as a tesult of the proposed project
b) According to Sweetwater Authority correspondence dated April 24, 2007, an existing 8-inch water main is
located on the south side of East Oxford Street, with one existing water service to the site. The proposed
improvements will include a new water main extension within the proposed public road that connects to
the existing Authority 'Water main in East Oxford Street, and terminates in the proposed cul-de-sac. This
would include new separate laterals and meters for each parcel. As the water facility improvements are
designed in accordance with water authority standards, no significant impacts to existing facility systems
will occur as a result of the proposed project Adequate storage facilities exist to serve the project.
c) The potential discharge of silt chJring construction activities could impact the storm drain system.
Appropriate erosion control measures will be identified in conjunction with the preparation of final
grading plans to be implemented during construction.. The proposed project will result in the construction
of new storm water drainage facilities, :including grassy swales tmd a detention basin located at the
southwest comer of the. site. Installation of these improvements in conjtmction with the proposed project
will result in a reduction of stOIm. water flow. The proposed project is subject to the NPDES General
Construction Permit requirements and sbaI1 obtain permit coverage and develop a Stonn Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to issuance of grading permits. In addition, the project shall be
conditioned to implement construction and post-coostruction water quality Best Management Practices
(BMPs) for storm water ponution prevention in accordance with the Chula ViSta Standard Urban Storm
Water Mitigation Plan (SUSMP). No significant impacts to the City's storm drainage b.cilities are
anticipated as a result of the proposed project
d) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Sweetwater District Pursuant to
correspondence from the Sweetwater Authority, dated September 25, 2007, adequate storage facilities
exist, and the project may be serviced from the 8"-water main on East Oxford Street and the applicant will
need to install a service main to service this site. A fire flow of 1,500 gallons per minute fire flow at 20 psi
pressure for a two hour duration, as required by the Chula VISta Fire Department, is available to serve the
project The proposed project will be required to construct expansions to existing water facilities as
descnbed in Section b above.
e) An Overview of Sewer Service for the project was prepared OIl September 26, 2007 and amended October
2007, prepared by Dexter Wilson Engineering. The project site is witbin the boundaries of the City of
Chula Vista wastewater services area. The existing sewer facility system includes 8-inch sewer lines along
East Oxford Street and one sewer lateral to serve the existing church. There are currently no sewer mains
serving the northerly part of the site. Therefore a new 8-inch sewer Iatera1line witbin the proposed public
street, connecting the sewer main in East Oxford Street is proposed to service the lots. The applicant shall
be required to submit a final sewer report and plan showing compliance with the City's Sewer Design
Criteria, to the satisfaction ofth.c City Engineer. No adverse impacts to the City's sewer system or City's
sewer threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project
f) The City of Chula Vista is served by regional landfills with adequate capacity to meet the solid waste needs
of the region in accordance with State law.
g) The proposal would be conditioned to comply with federa.l, state and local regulations related to solid
~w. .
Mitil!ation" The mitigation measures contaiD.ed in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
identified storm water/storm drainage and wastewater impacts to a level of less than significant
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 45
Issues:
xvn. THRESHOLDS
Will the proposal adversely impact the City's
Threshold Standards?
A)~
The City shall construct 60,000 gross square feet
(GSF) of additional library space, 0= the June 30,
2000 GSF total, in the area east of InleIslate 805 by
buildout The construction of said facilities shall be
phased such that tba City will not fall below the city-
wide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000 population. Libnlry
facilities are to be adequately equipped and staffed.
B)Police
a) Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed
police units shall respond to 81 percent of "Priority One"
emergency calls within seven (TJ minutes and maintain
an average response time to all "Priority One"
emergency calls of 5 5 minutes or less.
b) Respond to 57 percent of ''Priority Two" urgent calls
within seven (7) minutes and maintain an average
response time to all "Priority Two" calls of 7.5 minutes
or less.
C) Fire and Emenzencv Medical
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire
and medical units shall respond to calls throughout the City
within 7 minutes in 80% of the cases (measured annually).
D) Traffic
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must
operate al a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with tba
exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D" may occur
during tba peak two hours of the day at signalized
inler1;ections. Signalized intersections west ofI-805 are not
to operate a1 a LOS below their 1991 LOS. No intersection
may reach LOS ''E" or "F" during the average weekday
peak hour. Intersections of arteria1s with freeway IllIllpS
are exeropted from Ibis Standard.
Potenti.ally
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
Less nan
Significant
With
Mitigation
Ineorporated
o
o
o
o
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
o
N.
Impact
.
.
.
.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 46
Issues:
E) Parks and Recreation Areas
'The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3
acres of neighborhood and community parkland with
appropriate facilitiesll,OOO population east ofI-805.
F) Drainaae
'The Threshold S1>ndards require that storm water flows
and volumes not exceed City Engineering S1>ndards.
Individual projects will provide necessazy improvements
consistent with the Drainage Master P1an(s) and City
Engineering S1>ndards.
G) Sewer
'The Threshold SW:ldards require that sewage flows and
volmnes not exceed City Engineering S1>ndards.
Individual projects will provide necessary improvements
consistent with Sewer Master PIan(s) and City Engineering
Standards.
H) Water
'The Threshold S1>ndards require that adequate storage,
treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed
concurrently wi1h planned growth and that water quality
standards are not jeopardized during growth and
construction.
Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever
water conservation or fee offset program the City of Chula
Vista bas in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
~-
.---------------- .~.-
Less Than
Potentially Siplificu.t Less Than N.
Significant With Sign1f1c:ant Impact
Impact Mitigation Impaet
Incorporated
0 0 0 .
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
o
o
.
o
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 47
Issues:
Potentially
Significant
Impact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
SignifiC1lnt
Impact:
No
Impact
Comments:
a) The project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no impacts to h'brary facilities would
result No adverse impact to the City's Library Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed
project
b) According to !be Police Department, adequate police protection services can coll1inue to be provided upon
completion of the proposed project The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a
need for substantial new or altered police protection services. No adverse impact to the City's Police Threshold
standards would occur as a result of the proposed project
c) According to the Fire Depa.rtment. adequate fire protection and emergency medical services can continue to be
provided to the project site. Although !be Fire Department has indicated they will provide sCIvice to !be project,
!be project will coottibule to the incr=ental increase in fire service demand drrougbout lbe City. This increased
demand on fire services will not result in a significant cumulative impact. No adverse impact to the City's Fire
and Emergency Medical Threshold stmdards would occur as a result of the proposed project
d) According to !be TIllffic Engineering Division, the surnmnding street segmcms and intersecti"", iDcluding East
Oxford Street and Melrose A v= will continue to operate at !be same Lcvcl of Savice in compliance wilb the
City's 1rafIic threshold stmdard with the proposed project tIllffic. No edverse impact to the City's 1rafIic
threshold standards would occur as a result oftbe proposed project
e) The proposed project wouId not induce significant population growfu, as it is a small residential infill project and
would not impact existing or proposed recreational facilities. However, the applicant sball be required to pay
Park Acquisition and Development Fees (pAD) in accordance wilb Oniirumce No. 2945 adopted by City Couucil
on January 6, 2004.
f) Based upon !be review of !be project, !be Eugineering Department has determined lbat lbcre are no sigDilicant
issues regarding the proposed draioage improvemcIJts of the project site. The proposed drain system includes
improvemetlt'l to existing dtainage culverts to handle 2, 10, 50 and 100-year storm even", . series of inlels,
privare catch hasins and culverts, undcrgroond detention systl:Im, dischargc controls, and tiltcring systems. No
adverse impacts to the City's dtainagc threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project
g) An Overview of Sewer Service for !be project was prepared on Septmnber 26, 2007 and amended October 2007
by Dexter Wilson Engineering. The project site is within the boundaries of the City of Chula Vista wastewater
services area. The existing sewer tacility system includes 8-inch sewer lines along East Oxford Street and one
lateral to sern: the existing cburclL There arc CUIreDtly no sewer mains serving the llOrtbcrly part of the site.
Therefore . !lOW 8- inch sewer lateral line within !be proposed public street, cOlllleCting lbe sewer main in East
Oxford Street is proposed to service !be to". The applicant shall be required to sobmit a final sewer report and
plan showing compliance with the CIty's Sewer Design Criteria, to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. No
adverse impacts to lbe City's scwu system or City's sewer 1breshold standards will occur as a result of !be
proposed project
b) The project site is within !be potable water service area of the Sweetwater District as llOted in 1heir
cotrespondc:DJ:e. PuIswmt to cotte5pODdcnce from !be Sweetwater AuIhority dated 4124107, !be project may be
serviced fi:om lhe 8" -water main on East Oxford Street and !be applicant will Deed to instaI1 . service main to
service this site. No significant impacts to existing mciIity systems or lbe City's ~ threshold standards will
-occur as a result of !be prOposed project
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are requ:ired.
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 48
I : ~
Issues:
xvm. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project bave the potential to degrade the
quality of the enviromnent, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or
wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
community, reduce the nwnber or restrict the range
of a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prehistory?
b) Does the project bave impacts that are individually
1imited, but cwnulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when viewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other =t project, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project bave enviromnentaI effects, which
will cause substantial adverse effects on hwnan
beings, either directly or indirectly'?
Comments:
Potentially
SigniflcaDt
Impact
Less Than
Significnt
With
Mitl&atioD
Incorporated
N.
Impact
Less Than
Significant
Impact
o
o
o
.
o
o
D
.
o
o
D
.
a) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Potential short-term construction Illptor nesting impacts
are acklressed in the Mitigated Negative Declamtion, Section F, under Biological Resow=:.
b) The project site bas been previously disturbed with a church land use and site improvements. No
cumulative considerable impacts associated with the project when viewed in connection with the effects of
past projects, other current projects and probable future projects bave been identified.
c) The project will not cause substantial adverse effects on hwnan beings, either directly or indirectly, as the
proposed project bas been mitigated to lessen any potential significant impacts to a level of less than
significance.
Mitigation: The mitigation measures con1ained in Section F of ihe Mitigated Negative Declamtion would mitigate
potentially significant impacts to a level ofless than significance.
..
__...$
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 49
, <
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES:
Project mitigation measures are contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant
hnpacts, and Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, of Mitigated Negative Declaration
IS-07-031.
xx. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant andlor Operator stipulate that they have each read,
understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures
contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator.
Failure to sign below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative Declaration with the County Clerk shall
indicate the Applicant andlor Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval
and that the Applicant andlor Operator shall apply for an Environmentallmpact Report.
,Af->.."\. Wi=- ~rf.J./[
e;..o~ "IM-oP<< ~
MAI"\ D. fi;.vNf3( - ~: t;N)fd{(,<.{J tM( /-l..<-
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
~
Signature of Applicant
(or authorized representative)
to ((f! ;.,00 'l--
Date
N/A
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
N/A
Signature of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Date
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 50
. , c
XXI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTlALL Y AFFECTED:
The environmental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless Mitigated,"
as indicated by the cbecklist on the previous pages.
o Land Use and Planning
o Population and Housing
. Geophysical
o Agricultural Resources
. HydrologylWater
. Air Quality
o Paleontological
Resources
...
DTransportation/Traffic
. Biological Resources
o Energy and Mineral
Resources
o Public Services
o Utilities and Service Systems
o Aesthetics
~azards and Hazardous
Materials
. Noise
o Cultural Resources
o Recreation
o Mandatory Findings of Significance
-
Resolution No. 2008-008
Page 51
.' _ r
xxn. DETERMINATION:
On the basis of this initial evaluation:
I find that the proposed project could not have a significant effect on the
environment, and a Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because revisions in
the project have been made or agreed to by the project proponent A Mitigated
Negative Declaration will be prepared.
I find that the proposed project DlJIY have a significant effect on the environment,
and an Environmental Impact Report is required.
I find that the proposed project may have a "potentially significant impacf' or
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the enviromnent, but at least one
effect I) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier
analysis as descnoed on attached sheets. An Environmental Impact Report is
required, but it must analyze only the effects thai remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the
enviromnent, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been anal;zed
adequately in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards
and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to thai earlier EIR or Negative
Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imPosed upon the
proposed project, nothing further is required.
1I/'l/Io9:
Date J
- ,--'. .,.~.
---'-----'--'--~--
~-
. ",~,,"""~!'\.. '-"""'.,'~ l{?"
---',-
o
.
o
o
o
~.
~'F.~