HomeMy WebLinkAboutRCC AGENDA PK 2006/06/05Mitigated Negative Decl
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT LOCATION
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.
PROJECT APPLICANT
Terra Nova Service Station and Car Wash
350 East H Street
Chula Vista, CA
592-200-1600
Lorna Ratonel
DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT: May 16, 2006
DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING: June 5, 2006
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT:
PREPARED BY: Mary Venables, Associate Planner
A. Project Setting
The project site consists of an approximately .98 acre parcel located in the northern portion
of the Terra Nova Plaza Shopping Center. The Terra Nova Center is located south of East H
Street and east of Interstate 805. The site is situated in an urbanized area in the north-central
portion of the City of Chula Vista (See Exhibit A -Location Map). The project site is
developed with the existing Terra Nova Service Station, including a 725 square-foot
convenience store and two fuel islands containing a total of 14 fuel pumps.
Land uses surrounding the project site consist of the following:
North: Multi-family residential
South: Commercial Retail
East: Commercial Retail
West: Commercial Retail
B. Proiect Description
The project consists of site improvements to the existing service station, including the
addition of an 85-foot-long enclosed car wash facility and associated equipment room. The
car wash and associated equipment room would total 2,612 square-feet in area, and be
situated on the north portion of the parcel adjacent to East H Street.
In addition, a 1,425 square-foot expansion and remodel of the existing convenience store is
proposed. (See Exhibit B -Site Plan). Partial demolition of the existing convenience store
would be required in order to accommodate the remodel plan. All work would occur within
the confines of the current footprint of the service station complex and the new structures
would be constructed under the exiting canopy.
The proposed building materials would match the current structure, and the new elevation
design would be compatible with the existing structure. To accommodate the new car wash
facility, three fueling positions on the north fuel island would be eliminated. Vacuum hoses
would be located on the west side of the facility near the entrance to the carwash tunnel.
The existing service station and convenience store will remain in operation 24 hours per day.
The car wash hours of operation are proposed from 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekdays and
8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. on weekends. The project does not involve the removal or relocation
of any existing underground fuel storage tanks.
C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans
The site is located in the PC-C (Planned Community -Commercial) Zone and CR (Retail
Commercial) General Plan land use designation. The project is consistent with the applicable
zoning regulations and the Chula Vista General Plan. The project requires the approval of a
Design Review Permit by the Design Review Committee and a Conditional Use Permit by
the Planning Commission.
D. Public Comments
On August 4, 2005, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners and residents
within 500-foot radius of the proposed project site. The public comment period ended
August 18, 2005. Staff received one written communication regarding potential noise and
traffic impacts related to the car wash operations. This issue has been addressed in the
attached Tnitial Study Checklist and the technical studies noted below.
E. Identification of Environmental Effects
An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including the attached Environmental
Checklist form) determined that the proposed project may have potential significant
environmental impacts, however; revisions to the project have been made or mitigation
measures have been agreed to by the project proponent to reduce the impacts to a less than
significant level. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with
Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines.
Air Ouality
Located within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB), the project was analyzed using the Urban
Emissions Model URBEMIS 2002, a modeling tool developed by the California Air
Resources Board (GARB) to estimate air quality impacts from land use projects. As
summarized below, impacts resulting from the proposed project will be mitigated to a level
less than significant.
Spurt-Terra Impacts
A minor increase in air pollutants would occur during the construction and remodel phase of
the project. Fugitive dust would be created during the partial demolition phase as well as
during grading and construction activities. Because construction-related activities are
temporary, the impact to air quality from construction-related operations is considered short-
term in duration. Dust control measures required during construction operations would be
2
implemented in accordance with the rules and regulations of the County of San Diego Air
Pollution Control District (APCD) and the California Air Resources Board. The mitigation
measures contained in Section F below would mitigate short-term construction-related air
quality impacts to below a level of significance.
Long-Teem hnTacts
According to the Engineering Department, the proposed project would generate a minimal
amount of traffic and result in fewer daily trips than currently attributed to the existing
service station use. This would occur due to the reduction in the number of fueling positions
on the site. As demonstrated in the URBEMIS 2002 model, the emissions resulting from the
completed project would not exceed the Air Quality thresholds or result in significant long-
terni local or regional air quality impacts.
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
Soil/Groundwater Contaminnnis
The County of San Diego, Department of Environmental Health (DEH), is the lead agency
evaluating an unauthorized release of contaminants at the project site. According to DEH,
the ongoing case is in the assessment phase and the extent of contamination in the soil and
groundwater has not been resolved. In 2003 a Phase II Real Estate Site Assessment was
conducted and detectable concentrations of contaminants were found in some of the soil
samples. In addition, three groundwater monitoring wells were installed on the site. Samples
collected from the wells contained concentrations of contaminants below laboratory detection
limits. DEH has approved the installation of two additional groundwater monitoring wells on
the south portion of the site. According to information received from DEH on October 24,
2005, there do not appear to be any health risks to the occupants of the site and DEH has
indicated that the proposed site improvements may commence. A closure letter will be
issued by DEH upon completion of the assessment. No mitigation is necessary.
Asbestos and lead-based paint
The existing convenience store structure is proposed to be partially demolished and may
possibly contain asbestos and lead-based paint. Prior to any demolition activities the
presence of asbestos and lead-based paint must be ascertained and removed if present.
Licensed, registered, asbestos and lead abatement contractors in accordance with all
applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air
Pollution Control District Rule 361.145, Standard for Demolition and Renovation, will
perform the abatement. The mitigation measure contained in Section F below would mitigate
potential hazards hazardous material impacts associated with the release of asbestos and lead
to below a level of significance.
Wash tiverter/solvente~, waste
The car wash operations would involve storage and transport of hazardous solvents and
material normally associated with car wash facilities. As a standard condition of approval
any storage of hazardous materials or other pollutants must be under cover with adequate
containment in accordance with all federal, state and local regulations. These requirements
would mitigate potential impacts to a level of less than significant.
3
Hydrology and Water Quality
The project site is located in the Otay Water District (OWD) service area and is served by a
10-inch potable water main on East H Street. The operation of the proposed car wash is not
anticipated to result in a significant increase in the consumption of water otherwise available
for public use or deplete groundwater supplies or quality.
On-site drainage facilities consist of an existing private storm drain system that collects site
runoff and conveys the runoff to offsite public storm drain facilities. Off-site facilities consist
of a double 96" cast-in-place pipe in East H Street adequate to serve the project.
The design of the proposed car wash includes a water reclamation system to conserve water
and limit discharge of pollutants into the storm drain system. The car wash area and tunnel
will retain all drainage on-site. The proposed facility will be equipped with a wash bay
pit/clarifier tank and a cyclonic separator. The separator extracts solid-free liquid from the
reclaimed water and circulates it for reuse. The clarifier tank will require maintenance by a
licensed hauler approximately four times per year to remove and properly dispose of the
pollutants. In accordance with the County of San Diego Environmental Health Department
standards and regulations for water reclamation systems, filtered wastewater from this system
would be discharged into the City's sanitary sewer system.
The Municipal Code, the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System (NPDES)
regulations and the City's Development and Redevelopment Storm Water Management
Requirements Manual, require the implementation of water quality Best Management
Practices (BMPs) to prevent pollution of storm drainage systems, both during and after
construction. The City Engineer will ensure that appropriate BMPs are implemented and are
sufficient to prevent discharge into storm drainage systems. Based upon the implementation
of standard engineering requirements and compliance with requirements of the BMPs, water
quality impacts would be reduced to below a level of significance. See Section F of this
Mitigated Negative Declaration.
As a standard Engineering condition, a final drainage and soils report will be required in
conjunction with the preparation of the project grading plans and must demonstrate that the
posy-development peak flow rate does not exceed the pre-development flows. No significant
impacts to the City's storm drainage system are anticipated to result from the proposed
project.
Noise
To assess potential noise impacts of the proposed project, Acoustical Analysis Report, Terra
Nuva Cur Wus1a, April 10, ?006 was prepared by Eilar Associates. The noise assessment
analyzed the project with respect to the regulations contained in Chapter 19.68, Performance
Standards and Noise Control, of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (noise control ordinance).
Noise Standards
The noise control ordinance does not allow activities that would create noise on property,
which exceeds the established noise level limits (C.V.M.C. § 19.68.030(A)(4)). The noise
level limits vary by land use category, and time of day (nighttime versus daytime). In
4
addition. the noise control ordinance establishes the normal noise level as the noise limit
when the existing noise level exceeds the standard. Table III of Chapter 19.68 specifies the
following noise limits:
APPLICABLE NOISE LIMITS
[dB(A)Leq]
Land Use Nighttimer Dayttime2
Multiple Dwelling residential 50 60
Commercial 60 65
Nighttime - 10:00 P.m. to 7:00 A.M. weekdays; 10:00 P.M. to 8:00 n.rvt. weekdays
ZDaytime - 7:00 a.Nt. to 10:00 P.M. weekdays; 8:00 n.tvt. to 10:00 r.m. weekends
Surrounding uses potentially affected by project-generated noise consist of multi-family
residential adjacent north across East H Street and retail commercial businesses adjacent
south, east and west within the Terra Nova Shopping Center.
Noise associated with the project proposal would include short-term construction noise,
traffic noise, carwash, vacuum cleaners and outdoor mechanical equipment noise, and loud
car stereos in the driveways.
Consn~zrction Noise
Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(7) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, construction work that
generates noise disturbing to persons residing or working in the vicinity is not permitted
between ] 0:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00
a.m. Saturday and Sunday, except when necessary for emergency repairs required for the
health and safety of any member of the community. Due to the presence of residential
development located north of the subject site, this provision of the Municipal Code applies to
the project and would ensure that residents would not be disturbed by construction noise
during the most noise sensitive periods of the day.
Traffic Noi.ce
The predominant noise currently affecting the project site is traffic traveling on East H Street.
The report concluded that East H Street would experience a minimal increase in traffic
volume due to future growth in the area but did not anticipate any major new noise sources
that would impact the project site.
Car Wash & G'aczretm
The proposed car wash utilizes a RYCO car wash system with drying fans enclosed within an
85 foot drive-tl>ru tunnel. The existing vacuum system will be removed to allow for the
installation of a new central vacuum system. The noise study indicates that during worst
case combined noise levels the project would be in compliance with the City's noise
ordinance.
5
Outdoor Meeharsical EquiprnentNoise
Heating, ventilation and air conditioning 1HVAC) equipment is proposed to be located on the
roof of the convenience store. Based on the preliminary plans and manufacturer's data
provided for the mechanical equipment, the noise assessment concluded that noise generated
from the HVAC would not exceed the City's noise standards. However, until such time as
the final equipment is chosen and a subsequent noise study is prepared, the potential noise
impacts related to the outdoor mechanical equipment are considered significant. The
mitigation proposed in Section F of this Mitigated Negative Declaration must be
implemented in order for impacts to be reduced to below a level of significance.
Loud Car Stereos
Car stereos in vehicles waiting for car wash services could create noise in excess of
allowable levels depending on the specific sound system and whether the windows are open
or closed. The Municipal Code identifies noise created by stereos and radios as nuisance
noise and is enforced by the Police Department. The display of signs requesting car stereos
be turned off during cleaning would help to mitigate potential impacts.
Transportation/Traffic
The Engineering Department estimated the weekday vehicle trip generation rate for the
proposed project to be 1,705 trips using the SANDAG Brief Guide of Vehicular Traffic
Generation Rates. It was determined that the proposed project would result in a decrease of
535 daily trips due to the reduction in the number of fueling positions from 14 to 11 on the
site. In turn, a reduction of weekday trips on East H Street would occur thus resulting in a
less than significant traffic impact.
To identify potential on-site circulation impacts associated with the development of the
project, Traffic Review of Terra Nova .Service Plaza, Apri125, 2005, was prepared by Darnell
& Associates, Inc. The study assessed pedestrian walk routes and travel patterns including
customers parking off-site found the circulation to be adequate.
h~ addition, the traffic analysis assumed that fuel deliveries would continue to occur during
late evening hours when the car wash is closed thus limiting the potential for blocking
circulation on-site. The on-site circulation mitigation measure proposed in Section F below
must be implemented in order for impacts to be reduced to below a level of significance.
The applicant conducted an on-site and off-site parking analysis of the entire Terra Nova
Shopping Center. [t was determined that adequate on-site parking exists within the
commercial center to accommodate the additional parking required as a result of the project
proposal.
F. Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts
Air Quality
1. "I'he following air quality mitigation measures shall be shown on all applicable grading,
and building plans and details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and shall not be
6
deviated from unless approved in advance in writing by the City's Environmental Review
Coordinator.
a) Minimize simultaneous operation of multiple construction equipment units
b) Use low pollutant-emitting construction equipment
c) Use electrical construction equipment as practical
d) Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment
e) Use injection timing retard for diesel-powered equipment
f) Water the construction area twice daily to minimize fugitive dust
g) Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible to minimize fugitive dust
h) Pave permanent roads a quickly as possible to minimize dust
ij Use electricity from power poles instead of temporary generators during building, if
available
j) Apply chemical stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of internal travel path within a
construction site prior to public road entry
k) Install wheel washers adjacent to a paved apron prior to vehicle entry on public roads
1) Remove any visible track-out into traveled public streets within 30 minutes of
occurrence
m) Wet wash the construction access point at the end of each workday if any vehicle
travel on unpaved surfaces has occurred
n) Provide sufficient perimeter erosion control to prevent washout of silty material onto
public roads
o) Cover haul trucks or maintain at least 12 inches of freeboard to reduce blow-off
during hauling
p) Suspend all soil disturbance and travel on unpaved surfaces if winds exceed 25 miles
per hour
Hazards/Hazardous Materials
2. During any demolition activities, a licensed and registered asbestos and lead abatement
contractor shall perform asbestos and lead-based paint abatement in accordance with all
applicable local, state and federal laws and regulations, including San Diego County Air
Pollution Control District Rule 361.145 -Standard for Demolition and Renovation.
3. Outdoor storage of hazardous materials or other pollutants shall be under cover and with
adequate containment all in accordance with federal, state and local laws and regulations.
Hydroloay/Water Quality
4. The applicant shall implement Best Management Practices (BMPS) to prevent pollution
of storm drainage systems, both during and after construction. Selection of appropriate
E3MPs shall be site and activity specific to prevent discharge of trash, debris, or non-
storm water to storm drainage systems resulting from carwash or auto detailing activities.
5. The applicant shall complete the applicable City of Chula Vista Development and
Redevelopment Storm Water Management Requirements Manual forms and comply with
the Manual's requirements.
6. Design and construction of the car wash tunnel shall include features that prevent
tracking of non-storm water to outdoor areas.
7
7. The trash enclosure area shall be covered and the site graded in such a way as to prevent
run-on into the trash enclosure area.
Noise
8. Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(J) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, project-related
construction activities shall be prohibited between the hours of 10:00 p.m. and 7:00 a.m.
Monday through Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. Saturdays and Sundays.
9. Prior to approval of building permits for the development, the applicant shall submit a
subsequent noise study to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator
demonstrating that the final roof-mounted HVAC and other roof mounted equipment
complies with the Citys noise control ordinance at the north property boundary of 50
dBA Leq (one hour) during nighttime hours and 60 dBA Leq (one hour) during daytime
hours and 60 dBA Leq (one hour) during nighttime hours and 65 dBA Leq (one hour)
during daytime hours at the south, west and east property boundaries or ambient noise
levels, whichever is greater.
10. All rooftop pumps, fans, and air conditioners on the buildings shall include appropriate
noise abatement and be screened by a minimum three-foot high rooftop parapet and shall
block the line-of--site view from the nearby properties to the exposed roof and mechanical
ventilation systems.
11. Signs shall be displayed requesting that car stereos be turned off while the cars are being
cleaned.
The noise mitigation requirements shall be shown on all applicable demolition, grading, and
building plans as details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and/or shall be made conditions of
project approval where appropriate.
Transportation/Traffic
12. Fuel deliveries shall not occur during car wash operating hours of 7:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m.
Monday through Friday and 8:00 a.m. to 10:00 p.m. Saturday and Sunday.
8
G. Agreement to lmplement Mitigation Measures
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant(s) and/or Operator(s) 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 the line(s) provided below prior to posting
of this Mitigated Negative Declaration with the County clerk shall indicate the Applicants'
and/or Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval and that the
Applicant and Operator shall apply for an Environmental Impact Report.
.>L.~2Nq ~• ~g ~~~" L
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
[or authorized representative
Jam- ~(~'~(p
na Applican Date
[or authorized representative]
Printed Name and Title of Operator
[if different from Applicant]
Signature of Operator Date
[if different from Applicant]
G. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista:
Marilyn R.F. Ponseggi, Planning and Building
Steve Power, Planning and Building
Jolui Schmitz, Plamiing and Building
Jeff Steichen, Planning and Building
Carolyn Dakan, Planning and Building
Frank Rivera, Engineering
Silvester Evetovich, Engineering
Dave Kaplan, Engineering
Sandra Hernandez, Engineering
Beth Chopp, Engineering
Ben Herrera, Engineering
9
Mark Caro, Parks and Recreation
Gary Edmonds, Fire Department
Richard Preuss, Police Department
Dave Byers, Public Works/Ops.
Applicant/Property Owner:
Lorna Ratonel
Applicant Agent:
Allen Sipe, Architect
Others:
David T. Charles, Otay Water District
Dee Peralta, Chula Vista Elementary School District
David Gottfredson, RECON
Cheryl Johnson, RECON
Kathy Babcock, San Diego Gas c& Electric
Jon Senaha, County of San Diego, Department of Environmental Health
Mike Vernetti, County of Svr Diego, Department of Environmental Health
2. Documents
City of Chula Vista General Plan Update, December 2005.
Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
Urban Emissions Model URBEMIS 2002, Terra Nova Car Wash and Service Station,
March 10, 2006.
Acoustical Analysis Report Terra Nova Car Wash, Eilar Associates, April 10, 2006.
Traffic Review of Terra Nova Service Plaza, Darnell & Associates, Inc., April 25, 2005.
Adequacy of Parking for Terra Nova Plaza Project (PCC OS-044) Memorandum, Jeff
Steichen, May 1, 2006.
Site Assessment Report and Pirst Quarter 2005 Groundwater Monitoring Report, Former
Shell Station, 350 East H Street, Chula Vista, California, NorthShore Engineering, Inc.,
January 27, 2005.
Second and Third Quarter 2005 Groundwater Monitoring Report, Shell Service Station,
350 East H Street, Chula Vista, Califomia, NorthShore Engineering, Inc., August 12,
2005.
Work Plan For Offsite Assessment At The Former Shell Service Station, 350 East H
Street, Chula Vista, California, NorthShore Engineering, Inc., August 15, 2005.
10
3. Initial Study
This environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, and any
comments received to the Notice of Initial Study. The report reflects the independent
judgement of the City of Chula Vista. Fm-ther information regarding the environmental
review of this project is available from the Chula Vista Planning and Building
Department, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910.
Marilyn R. F. Ponseggi
Environmental Review Coordinator
.l'\Planning\MaryV\Terta Nova Service Stalinn\IS-OS-015 mnddoc
Date:
11
-.OGATOR
I NORTK
'' b't,
-~pRpIECT
~ ~.ocat~oN
FR~~~gYBOs
J
'~~
Exhibit A
m~.
r ° u`
mU o ~
E2 ~ g
O ;U
Y 8 pU° Q .
' ~
~
0 3p n _
p ~
~ ~
(
a 0 gg
~
~
,
n o ~ u >o ° °t F
~
~~
q
e R3
A
~ R ~ ~ 9
in o io o i k
--
~4 t =4
I
6
v
n
i
S
n
m
m
z~
RRR
.EP
ae_
a~"
~f
vRp
pp
`m
~~u
Y
~ ;~ ~~'I
__
oO o o v
~o~~II~~
i -
_b
a 'r
0
/ r ~~ ~Ino Z~
C r-~L~. ..~QC
a
a' R
_U u'
~ pJ
u n
m
~ Fm
z u~
d U~
~ "nu
Z
4 Q
J .n
d V
W
F 2
~1~
w ..~
:I
w
W
K
F
F
Z
w
Exhibit B
ATTACHMENT A
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
Terra Nova Carwash, IS-OS-015.
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed Terra Nova Carwash project. The proposed project has been
evaluated in an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration (IS-OS-015) prepared in accordance
with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State CEQA Guidelines. The
legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate mitigation measures are implemented
and monitored for Mitigated Negative Declarations.
AB 3180 requires monitoring of potentially significant and/or significant environmental impacts.
The Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program for this project ensures adequate
implementation of mitigation for the following potential impacts(s):
1. Air Quality
2. Hazards/Hazardous Materials
3. Hydrology and Water Quality
4. Noise
5. Transportation/Traffic
MONITORING PROGRAM
Due to the nature of the environmental 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. Evidence in written form confirming compliance with the mitigation measures
specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration iS-OS-015 shall be provided by the applicant 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 1, 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-OS-015, 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 \Planning\MaryV\Terra Nova Service S[ationUS-OS-OI SmmrtexLdoe
r
d
a
R
F
C
d
E
E
O
V
a m
~ O
a N
E ~
o -
U .~
m
d °
a m
c~ Da
q a ~
o,
~ d
R' m ~
u c
C ~'
~ nao
a ¢
Z
i o X
U
r
C~ TJ
O C N
' C
DU
W O O
C V J
0
E ~" W
a
x
Z ~j °
v
Q
Z ~
~ r
0
H
Z c
0 o
a ~N N
« c
0
t W ~ U
Z d y
~ C e p
O > ate=
Q do ~ oo ° a
U1 a N
H E rn m
E y E ° ° a te= o n m o d n
C N U ~O C
~ N N R O °- O. J L N O L C
C -
N N ~¢ ~ N ~ E ~ 1D .~ o d N n > O C O) J
E
yo ~ ~ m 3 n >, a o °m` mo ~ mm c
3 on ~~ L
L N E ~ ~ °
°- . ~ O1 N O. N N C _
O C U O N L ~
> N
~ m~
~ o v
d m
C UI "O m N
T c ~
"O «~ N o « m ~ o c c
.~ O m m
N C m
= L C
~ E
° N
~O V T N N
C O O O j
C V N N
N ~
O R
N J "O W
C
q N ~ J
Q y
j ` 2
L U
- U
~ W Sl (0
V v V p
U N C~ O E
N N (0 vl O
U N
~ p J J O OI
d 6 L O « N
N
J a
m u Q'~
o f
c C
o
`o a
` v U
m N
m `
`m ~J O N
c m
j
-o °- O O
U N C U
o L N
m E C O
.
3 C N
m a
c
O N A N C w U C m m
C UI N 3 -O ~
N ~ (6 C O d U N E T m
O d N
y oc c¢ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~u -Ja ° E«° mr t~ DE cmE no N~ ~w
~
Ol ~ ~ ~
O 3
0
~ E C j U O U N ~i j N J U OI u U>1 N U! U T L~ (0 `.G N O N 3
E f' o
~ '' L
F- cc ~~ o m uE '~ d ~~ . d~ °'°~ o '
ff 33u- ate o mcNi
Q o ° ' '6 '¢ =
m > ¢ ~ o
E U
t > N ¢
t
u c ~ N
N N
N N
N N
.
N '
m m e c
m. N~
N W ~
.
n. O
N.- N
N '
N p N o y y]
j
~ o
rn o
~u
>
> p
>N O
~N
~w
cnE
aE
~~' _
J
¢~n
=a
K«w m J
~NN
d`o
U J
wN
d N
c .
~ m'c c
L J ~
¢ H a n m n u a d c m s x E c o a
0
Z
O
~
'u ~
~
ry
~
+ d
_
~ ~
ro
07
i_ 9
U m
C °~
u c
nma~i
sao
~~ X
o U
a
s'" X
o~
t c X
p~, U
R
r
V c - d
G d~
N d 7 C
U C m @
W
14~c0
X
X
d Q
N J
c
O
U
U N L ~
~ a u ...
d
c
N
4C0 ~, o
~t6R
NN
9 rC U C O~ J
°
d O C N
=_ o
/ m d
{
i
'!i p 0. N N
~ ~
C d m
m U ~' c
9
yao,„ >~pII
N OY
=
~~~° 9
~ m
U C
t
l
G O1 j'
C 6
T
W(
9 4
N
I Q'y
~
X
X
d-u`a ~-U mY
9~ N !6 4 O N ~i N
C
9 0 C 9~ i6 ~ 9 m
N v °~ o b £ '° M
G m m v V m
°-on'6 o+N ooa~
~ U lp p) 1 9 U U
~ G ~ N m
1 N C C N
F
[ ~~QN m~ ~GUO
~ J N Ni6N~ O m N
O
O o m°~~~ d Q< d
O 99 N U~ Old"
Q ~ E N d N C `S O O N~ N
y'°'D _ N (6 N N N
-O ~ ~ 0 .n - ~ r rG 3
Z_ T 4 C ~ C O R C [0
cao_y m-
4 p m ~-
G1 I
E
m
V ~~ i
U
G d
UCm
Q~4
V 4W '°
~ c X
X p cg
X a
X ~ ~ X
X ~' U
X
i X
o
U
U 6
~ ~ <
aU-
m c
N
u m
a
N L C
p`, U~
C
m
~~i
U c 9 ~
c m~g~
V Cm
~Qm ~
~ Q W _
°' o
~~
N L ~
p_ U_
V_
3
m
~9
(J N~
d
m
U C t~6
6 N m
IQao
d C
in
u p
R L C
oa V~
f ~
U N
C N N
t6 L C
aU-
N
OG
N CS
N O
mam
o °'
Off. N
° ~a ~ N
° m
~O C 9
C'l1 N ~
U 7'
O^ ° L b ~
9 N
OY
O NL+ LL N
C N L ~ m
N N >v
r N m ° i
o ~ Y N
y~°-mv
N°1°n o ~
pU O~ o
t6 y ~~
N 0. n ~
N N c m o
~ 2 ~ ~ r-
d y
N N O
mdn tm m'
m .o °~ 3 L~ o N j ~~
N N C u NN p~ U ~ O N C
~~m d m+~ m o m w~ m o
~ 9 N N E~ U N N N G N C
mElll Ot~ B >C N..- o ~
C ° U
`L o c.% U t6 d~ m rn c
N° U O V E U C p N
~o°'um c o mo ~ °$ -d
tll c?v o: tO ~ m ym L4'
O
D~ C ~L. 9~~ r N O
m'p U ~ 9 " ~ y N O ~ `° '^
d
~ °-NN4 N `m~ E cp yN is ~,
ry r$ N 0.9 m N a N N
Q °'cm m$'sn .n E ~ d3 ~ ~. ~3
~ .. 6 N
d~ N~ d O 3 d N i O ro
ro
? d 6Y O ~ N d
Z C a L f0 ~~~~ U d d~ ON r p N 9 N
L c6 _
u m 9 ~ 9~ ~ 6Q mL O~9 j N N C
O d N y'L ~ "OC C N m~ M N~ 00 Y E N
O 4~ ~ O 7 C t6 L N rL 3 [)
~ a T~ % N U ~ 7
S ~ m r
~i ~
N
t<i
m
~d
F-
m
G m
a
m
v m
m
m
T~
j ~
..9
Um
~v ~
~~
c c
jm
j ro m
oi m
c m E
roEt
c m
~
N f
c
ro ~
~~c m E
cm rnE
c
~ r
Uc2
d=N c
6m
~?
.
c o, ai0 m ad.^ ad
ao ¢ao
Q
x x
x
x
x
x
x x
m c
m Q N o
y V
N
d c d O
C °ry O ro L C
_myN aU-
0.UC ~mTry N'O N"6 mroro~
Ut_. N O Q J O O 7 2 ~ ~ yCj N O. O C N L
O 3
~ c ~ a o a -~~ x m o
m~ a s m d ro~ a m n u°i- m 3 n v-
N "O _J C J ~ ~ N O C ro
p~ U'6 .'>' a° L N °~ ~ D t6 'C. y~ ro 0
min ~U~m w y a~6i~ c~~ o my ai a.
N N 3 U O~ J v,° > ° m d n'7 N ro
._. C d' L9~0 J ro y O ~ 6p.F N9 Qp)
°m ~3oro.~o¢m3 °mo o. in ~16roo
y ~'~o al"vo3-aNi °um o>.w Nrnwa
Cp~N~NTL I6N ~ ~-NE~C EC~
t L
NEomr ~ '~,nsmo da o
p~ 0 0 6 o d N~~ N -o ~ L c m .~ m t
~ ~
~' N> C U a':: ° ro O c4 y o L ~ N O c
9_ W V' s'C L E N O > C p N O
~~~E ~co'cm~"aci ;o o.~Em °O-=ro-o
a i d m e E o .n o ro~ u ~m o o c
~~ m L N N p, • C 0) °
N_w-~¢L..CU~~O Em°r Ny UNO
'> > E E .- u E m
r m ro C t L N ° E m E ro d c'° m
omo c~ cc-O rnEb oc Eom cU ~Eo
". `-' ~° ~~d ~cS.7 °m 1Owo ram ma
d N N"O E O M L"O U 9 Q N
d7
O
ro
N
U
C
ro L
a U
O
N
u
L- N
N
U
N_
5
N
:~
0
d
,E
y
0
U
6
~ N
N C
u ~
1~
~LL
A y
N ~
3 ° m
L O
~' C
N =
~~ N
Sc9
~ o m
~ ~ T
~E`°
QU
o g m
OpN
E
O d
~Eo
N N O
d O O
> ~ ~
D ° ro
a
mpg
lL L W
N
a~
~~i
._+_A_i.
,n ~,~
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM ~HUTA VISTA
I. Name of Proponent:
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
3. Address and Phone Number of Proponent:
4. Name of Proposal:
5. Date of Checklist:
6. Case No.
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS QUESTIONS:
Issues:
Lorna Ratonel
City of Chula Vista
Planning and Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
1515 "L" Avenue
National City, CA 91950
Terra Nova Service Station and
Car Wash
May 9, 2006
IS-OS-015
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect nn a scenic Arista?
h) Substantially damage scene resources, including, but
not limited to, tress, rack outcroppings, and historic
buildings within a state scenic highways
^ ^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^ ^
c) Substantially degrade the existing ~risual character or
quality of the site and its surroundings?
^ ^ ^ ^
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
1391109: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Tmpact Incorporated Impact
d) Create a new source of substantial light ox glare, ^ ^ ^ ~
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area?
Comments•
a-b) The project site contains no scenic resources, vistas or views open to the public, and is not in proximity
to a state scenic highway, therefore, there would be no impact to the aesthetics of the area.
c) The existing gas station/convenience store is located within a ful]y developed commercial/retail center.
The proposed car wash and convenience store addition would occur within the confines of the current
footprint of the service station and would incorporate architectural designs and building heights
consistent with the existing structures. The project would not degrade the visual character or quality of
the site or its surroundings.
d) The project will be required to comply with the light and glare regulations (Section 19.66.100) of the
Chula Vista Municipal Code (CVMC). Compliance with these regulations would ensure that no
substantial glare, or light would affect daytime or nighttime views in the surrounding area.
Mitieation: No mitigation measures are required.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. In
determining whether impacts to agricultural
resources are significant envirorunental effects, lead
agencies may refer to the California Agricultural
Land F,valuation and Site Assessment Model (1997
pxeparcd by the California Dept. of Conservation as
an optional model to use in assessing impacts nn
agriculture and farmland. Wnuld the project:
a) Concert Prune Farmland, Unique Pannland, ox ^
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps pxeparcd pursuant to the
Famrland Mapping and Monitoring Program of
the California Resources Agency, to non
agricultural use?
^ ^ ^
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
ISSUES: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
b) Contlict with existing zoning for agricultural use, ox a ^ ^ ^ ~
Williamson Act contract?
c) Involve other chattgcs u~ the existing envixotnnent, ^ ^ ^ ~
which, due to their location or nature, could result in
mnvcxsion of Farmland, to non-agmculmral use?
Comments•
a-c) The project site and surrounding land uses are fully developed, 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.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
III.AIR QUALITY. Where available, the
significance criteria established by the applicable
air quality management or air pollution control
district may be relied upon to make the following
determinations. Would the project
a) Conflict with or obstruct implementation of the
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute
substauti<2lly to an existvag ox projected air
quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net increase
of any criteria pollutant for which the project
region is non-attainment under an applicable
federal or state ambient air yuaGty standard
(including releasing emissions, which exceed
quantitative thresholds for ozone precursors)?
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^
Potentially
I$$Ile$: Significant
Impact
d) Expose setisitivc receptors to substantial pollutant ^
concentrations?
e) Cxcate objectionable odors affecting a substantial ^
number of people?
Comments•
a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Miti¢ation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the
projecT.
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ^
through habitat modifications, on any speciee
identified as a candidate, sensitve, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
rcgulatons, ox by the California Department of
Fish and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serc~ice?
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 L .S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally
protected wetlands as defined by Section X04 of the
Clean Water Act (induduig, but not linuted to,
marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct
removal, filling, hydmingical intermption, or other
means?
Less Than
Significant
With Less Thao
9litiga[ion Significant
Incorporated Impact
^ ^
No Impact
^
^
^
^
Issues:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any ^
native resident ox migratory fish ar wildlife species
or with established native resident or migraton~
wildlife corridors, ox impede the use of native
wildlife nursery sites?
e) Conflict with any local polices or ordinances ^
protecting biological resources, such as a tree
preservation policy or ordinance?
E] Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ^
Conservation Plan, Natural Comtnunit~•
Conservation Plan, ox other approved local,
regional, ox state habitat conservation plan?
Comments•
No Impact
^
^
a) The existing project site is fully developed as a gas station/convenience store. No candidate, sensitive or
special status species are present within or immediately adjacent to the proposed project site.
b) No local riparian habitat or other natural sensitive communities are present within or immediately
adjacent to the project site.
c) No wetland habitat present within or immediately adjacent to the developed project area.
d) There are no wildlife dispersal or migration corridors existing within or immediately adjacent to the
proposed project site.
e) The project site is fully developed; no biological resources would be affected by the proposal and no
conflicts with local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources would occur as a result of the
proposed development.
f) The proposed project site is located in a designated development area as defined by the City's MSCP
Subarea Plan. There are no biological resources present on the project site and the proposal would have
no impact to local, regional or state habitat preservation planning efforts.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
Less Than
Po[en[iatly Significant
Wi[h
Less Than
IS$IIC$i Significant Mitigation Significant ~'o Tmpact
Impact Incorporated Impact
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would die
pYOlect:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ^ ^ ^ ^
significance of a historical resource as defined in ~
15E~64.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the ^ ^ ^ ^
signiflcance of an archaeological resnuxce pursuant
to ~ 150645?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique ^ ^ ^ ^
paleontological resource or site or utuque geologic
feature?
d) Disturb any human remains, includutg dose ^ ^ ^ ^
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Comments:
a) The existing project site is located within a fully developed area. No historic resources are known or are
expected to be present 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.
b) The existing facility is not listed in, or currently eligible for listing in the California Register of Historical
Resources. No historic buildings or structures are present within the previously disturbed project site and
no prehistoric or historic objects are known. Therefore, the potential for 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 disturbance for the
proposed project, the potential to directly or induectly destroy a unique paleontological resource or site or
unique geologic feahu~e is not anticipated.
d) The proposed project consists of limited site improvements to an existing, fully developed facility. No
human remains are anticipated to be present within the previously disturbed impact area of the project.
MiHeation: No mitigation measures are required.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS - VG'ould the
pxujcct:
a) Expose people or stmctures to potential
substantial adverse effects, uicluding the risk of
Less Than
Po[eotially Significant
With
Less Than
ISSU ES: Significant !1litigation Signifcant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Tmpact
loss, injure- ox death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as ^ ^ ^ ^
delineated on the most recent ~lquist-Priolo
Earthquake Fault Luning Nlap issued by the State
Geologist fox the area ox based on other
substantial evidence of a known fault? Refer to
Division of Ylines and Geology Special
Publication 42.
ii. Strang seismic ground shaking? ^ ^ ^ ^
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including ^ ^ ^ ^
liquefaction?
iv. Landslides? ^ ^ ^ ^
h) Result in substantial soil erosion ox the los's of ^ ^ ^ ^
topsoil?
c) Be located nn a geologic uiut or soil that is ^ ^ ^ ^
unstable, ox that would become unstable as a
restilt of the project, and potentially xestdt in on-
ox off-site landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence,
liquefaction or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soIl, as defined in Table ^ ^ ^ ^
18-1 B of the Uniform Budding Cade (1994),
creating substantial risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the ^ ^ ^ ^
use of septic tanks ox alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are not available
for the disposal ofwastewatcr?
Issues:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No Impact
Comments•
a) The proposed project is located within a fully developed shopping center site. The Final EIR prepared
for dte Rice Carryon EIR79-8 identified several trace faults located in the vicinity of the project site.
The trace faults were attributable to the La Nacion and Sweetwater Fault zones and were determined to
be inactive (Shepardson Engineering, 1977). The adopted EIR contained mitigation measures designed
to reduce or prevent the potential for geologic hazards. Al] prior grading associated with the Terra
Nova Shopping Center was performed in accordance with the adopted EIR mitigation measures and
approved soils report. Therefore, impacts to geological resources would be less than significant.
b-d) The project site and the surrounding land uses are fully developed. All prior grading associated with the
Terra Nova Shopping Center, which included the proposed project site, was carried out in accordance
with the previously adopted mitigation measures and approved soils report.
e) The project does not propose the use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater disposal systems. Sewer
services will be provided by the City of Chula Vista. Therefore, development of the proposed project
would not result in impacts associated with the use of septic tanks or alterative wastewater disposal
systems.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ^
environment through the routine transport, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
h) Create a significant hazed to the public ur the ^
environment through reasonably foreseeable
upset and accident conditions involving the
release of hazardous materials into the
environment?
^
^
^ ^
^ ^
c) Enit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous ^ ^ ~ ~
or acutely hazudous tnatetials, substances, or
waste within one-quarter mile of an existing ar
proposed school?
Issues:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
Less Than
Significant No Impact
Impact
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of ^ ^ ^ ~
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
Uuvernment Code secnun 65962.5 and, as a
result, would it create a significant hazard to the
public ur the environment?
e) 1'or a project located within an airport Land use ^ ^ ^ ~
plan ox, where such a plan has nut been adopted,
within two miles of a public airport or public use
airport, would the project result in a safety hazard
Eor people residing or wnrkirtg in the project
area?
E) Pox a project within the vicinity- of a private ^ ^ ^ ~
airstrip, would the project result in a safety hazard
for people residing ox working ira the project
area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere ^ ^ ^ ~
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) lspose people ox structures to a significant risk ^ ^ ^ ~
of loss, injury or death invoh-ing wildland Gres,
including where wildlands are adjacent to
urbanized areas ox where residences are
uatennixed with wildlands?
Comments•
a,b) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
c-h) The project site is not located within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed school. The
project site is desig~Iated for commercial development according to the General Plan and Zoning
Ordinance and is not located within an airport land use plan or in the vicinity of a private airstrip
or wildlands.
Mitigation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F.
Issues:
HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY.
yy'ould the project:
a) Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to
receiving waters (including impaired water bodies
pursuant to the Clean Wates Act Section 303(d) list),
restilt in significant alteration of receiving water
quality during or following construction, or ~7olate
any water quality standards or waste discharge
requirements?
bl Substanially deplete groundwater supplies or
interfere substantially with groundwater recharge
such that there wotild be a net defiut in aquifer
volume or a lowering of the local groundwater table
level (e.g., the production rate of pre existing nearby
wells would drop to a level which wotild not
support existing land uses or planned uses for which
permits have been granted)? Result in a potentially
significant adverse impact on groundwater yualiry~
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significao[ Mitigation Sigoifican[
Impact Incorporated Tmpact
^ ^ ^
c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the ^
site ux area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream ox aver, in a manner, which
would xestilt in substantial erosion or siltation on- or
ofE-site?
^
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage. pattern of the ^ ^ ~
site ox area, including through the alteration of the
course of a stream ox aver, suhstandally increase the
rate or amount of surface mnoff in a manner which
wotild result in flooding on- nr otf-site, or place
stttxmres within a lU0-year Hood hazard area which
would impede or rediect flood flows?
e) L;xpose people or structures to a significant risk of ^ ^ ^
loss, injury ox death involving flooding, includiig
flooding as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
No Impact
^
Issues:
}) Create or contribute runoff water, which would ^
exceed the capacity of existing or planned
stotmwater drainage systems or pro~dde substantial
additional sources of polluted runoff?
Comments:
a-~ See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitigation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F.
LAND USE AND PLANNING. ~X~'otld the
project:
a) Physically di~nde an established cotnmututy? ^ ^ ^
b) Conflict with any applicable land use plan, policy, or ^ ^ ^
regulation of an agency with jurisdiction over the
project (including, but not lnnited to the general
plan, specific plan, local coastal program, ox zoning
ordinance) adopted fox the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an cnvironmc-ntal effect?
c) ConIlict with any applicable habitat conservation ^ ^ ^
plan ur natural community conservation plan?
Less Than
Significant
With Less Than
Mitigation Significant No Impact
Incorporated Impact
^ ~ ^
Potentially
Significant
Impact
^
^
^
Issues:
Comments:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Signifcant
Impact Tncorporated Impact
No Impact
a) The project site and the surrounding uses are fully developed. The proposed project would not disrupt or
divide the established cotmnuniry therefore no impact would occur as a result ofthe proposal.
b) The project site is located in the PGC (Planned Community Commercial) Zone and CR (Retail
Commercial) General Plan land use designation. The project is consistent with the applicable zoning
regulations and land use designations, therefore; no impacts are anticipated.
c) The project would have no impact or conflict with any applicable adopted envirotunental plans or policies and
would not conflict with the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan, which designated the proposed project
site as a Developed Area.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
MINERAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Result in the loss of availability of a known mineral ^ ^ ^ ~
resource that would be of value to the region and
the residents of the state?
b) Result in the loss of availability of a locally important ^ ^ ^ ~
mineral resource recovery site delvtcatcd on a local
general plan, specific plan ox other land use plan?
Comments•
a) The project site and the surrounding land uses are fully developed and would not result in the loss of
availability of a known mineral resource of value to the region or the residents of the State of California. No
impact to mineral resources would result from the proposed project.
b) The State of California Deportment of Conservation has not designated the project site for mineral resource
protection and no impact would occur as a result of the proposal.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
IS$UCS' Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Tmpact Incorporated Impact
NOISE. ~~'ould the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to ux generation of noise levels ^ ^ ^ ^
in excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordu~ancc, or applicable standards of
other agencies?
b) Exposure of persons to or generation of excessive ^ ^ ^ ^
groundbome ~dbratiun ox groundbarne noise levels?
c) A substantial permanent increase in ambient noise ^ ^ ^ ^
levels in the project vicinity above levels existing
without the pry ~jcct?
d) ~1 substantial temporary ox periodic increase in ^ ^ ^ ^
ambient noise levels in the project «cutiry above
levels existing without the project?
e) For a project located within an airport land use plan ^ ^ ^ ^
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project expose people residing ox working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Fox a project within the vicinity of a private aixsuip, ^ ^ ^ ^
would the project expose people residing ox working
in the project area to excessive noise levels?
Comments: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mifieation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
ISSnCS: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. ~;'ould the
project
a) Induce substantial population gruwth in an area, ^ ^ ^ ^
either ducctly (for example, by proposing new
homes and businesses) or indirectly (for example,
through extension of road or other uafrastructuxe)?
b) Displace substantial ntunbers of existing housing, ^ ^ ^ ^
necessitating die constmetion of replacement
housing elsewhere?
c) Displace suhstandal numbers of people, ^ ^ ^ ^
necessitating the construction of replacement
housing elsewhere?
Comments•
a-c) The proposed project involves minor expansion of the existing business. The proposal does not
involve residential housing and would not induce population growth in the area or require substantial
infrastructure improvements. No permanent housing exists on the project site and no displacement of
housing or people would occur as a result of the proposal. Based on the size and nature of the proposal
no impact to population or housing would occur as a result of the project.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
Kesult in substantial adverse physical impacts associated
uri[h the proc~ision of new or physically altered
governmental facilities, need fur new or phvsicallp
altered governmental facilities, the construction of which
could cause significant en~nronmental impacts, in order
to maintain acceptable service ratios, response tunes ox
other perfonnanec objectives for any public services:
a) Fire protection? ^ ^ ^ ^
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Thao
ISSll05: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
ImpaeC Incorporated Impact
b) Police protection? ^ ^ ^ ^
c) Schools? ^ ^ ^ ^
d) Parks? ^ ^ ^ ^
e) t_)ther public facilities? ^ ^ ^ ^
Comments•
a) Adequate fire protection services and response times can continue to be provided to the site without an
increase of equipment or personnel. The applicant is requilvd to comply with the Fire Department policies for
new building construction and fire prevention. The proposed project would not have a significaut effect upon
or result in a need for new or altered fire protection services. The City performance objectives and thresholds
will continue to he met.
b) Adequate pofice protection services and response trues 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 pertonnance objectives and thresholds will
continue to be met.
c) The proposed project would not induoe population grovvth; therefore, no signtificant adverse impacts to public
schools would result. According to the Chula Vista School District letter dated August 18, 2005, the applicant
would be required to pay the statutory building permit school fees for the non-residential
construction/proposed commercial buildings.
d} The proposed project would not induce population gow4h, therefore, the project would not have an impact on
or create a demand for neighborhood or regional parks or facilities or impact esisting park facilities.
e) The proposed project would not have an impact on or result in a need for new or expanded govermnental
services and would be served by esisting or plafined public infrastnlcture.
Mitifaation: No mitigation measures are required.
Issues:
XIV. RECREATION. U1ou1d the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and
regional parks or other xecrcational facilities such
that substantial physical deterioration of the
facility would occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include recreational facilities or
require the construction or e4pansiun of
xecrcational facilities which have an adverse
physical effect on the environment?
Comments•
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
^ ^ ^
No Impact
^
^ ^ ^ ^
a) The proposed project would not induce population growth therefore no impact to existing neighborhood parks
or recreational facilities resulting in physical deterioration would occur.
b) The project does not include or require the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. The Parks and
Recreation Element contained The City's current General Plan does not identify the site of the proposed project
as an area planned for any fuh~re parks, recreational facilities, or other recreational programs. No impact
would occur as a result of the proposal,
MitiEation: 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 (i.e., result in a substantial increase
in either the rnunber of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio nn roads, or congestion at
intersections):'
^
b) Exceed, either individually ox cumulatively, a level of ^ ^ ~
service standard established by the county
congestion management agency for designated
roads ox highways?
Issues:
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including
either an increase in haffic levels ur a change in
location that results in substantial safety asks?
d) Suhstantially increase hazards due to a design feature
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
iicompatible uses {e.g., faun rquipment)?
c) Result in inadcyuate emergency access?
f) Kestilt in inadequate parking capacity?
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, ox programs
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
n>rnouts, bicycle xacks)t
Comments•
a-g) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewatee treatment regturc7nents of the
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
^ ^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^ ^
^ ^ ^ ^
b) RegLUre or result i~ the construcrion of new water or ^ ^ ^ ^
wastewater heatrnent facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause significant em~ironmental effects?
Issues:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Thao
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
c) Require or result in the construction of new storm ^ ^ ^ ^
water drainage facilities or expausiun of existing
facilities, the construction of which could cause
significant environmental effects?
d) } Iave sufficient water supplies available to seine die ^ ^ ^ ^
project from existing entitlements and resources, or
are new or expanded entitlements needed?
e) Result in a deterrnu~ation by the wastewater treatment ^ ^ ^ ^
provider which suces or map serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to die provider's existing
commitmenh?
Be served by a landfill with suffiuent permitted ^ ^ ^ ^
capacity to accommodate the project's solid ~5~aste
disposal needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and ^ ^ ^ ^
regulations related to solid waste?
Issues;
Comments•
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No Impact
a) The project is located within an urban area that is served by all necessary utilities and service systems
and would not exceed the wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control
Board. Therefore, a less thou significant impact would occur as a result of the proposed project.
b) The proposed project would not require the construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities
or the expansion of existing facilities. The project includes an automated car wash with a water
reclamation system and separator to divide liquids and solids in compliance with Storm ~4'ater
Management principles. impacts to wastewater treatment facilities would be less than significant.
c) No construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities would be
necessary as a result of the proposed project. The project is required to implement Best Management
Practices to prevent pollution of storm drainage systems and comply with the City's Storm Water
Management Requirements therefore environmental impacts would be less than significant.
d) The project site is within the water service area of the. Otay Water District. There is a 10-inch water
main located on East H Streex currently serving the project site. No new or expanded entitlements are
anticipated therefore the proposed project would have a Less than significanC impact.
e) See XVI, a. and b. above
fl The City of Chula Vista is served by regional landfills with sufficient capacity to serve the project and
meet the solid waste needs of the region in accordance with State law. The proposal would have a less
than significant impact on regional landfills.
g) The proposal will be required to comply with federal, state and local regulations related to solid waste
and would have a less than significant impact on the environment.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
XVII. THRESHOLDS
bfrll the proposal adversely impact the City's
Threshold Standardc?
A. I.ibraz~
^ ^ ^ ^
The Ctty shall constxnct GQOl10 gross square Eect (GSF)
of additional library space, over the Juve 30, 3000
GSF total, iu the area east of Interstate 805 by
btuldout. 11~e a>nstniction of said facilities shall be
phased such that the City will not tall below the city-
wide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000 population. Libraty
facilities are to be adequately equipped and staffed.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
I38UC3: Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
H1 Police ^ ^ ~
a) F.mergcncv Response: Properly eyrupped and staffed
police units shall respond to 81 perceut of "Pnoriry
One" emergency calls witlvn seven (7) minutes and
maintain an average response time to all "Priority One"
emcrgene-~~ calls of 55 tninutes or less.
b) Respond to 57 pexeertt of "Priority Two" urgent calls
within seven (7) minutes and maintain an average
response tune to all "Priontp Two" calls of 7.5 tnututes
or less.
C) Fire and Emergency 1Yledical ^ ^ ~
Emergency response: Properly equipped and started fire
and medical units shall respond to calls dtroughout the City
within 7 tna~utes i~ HO°~~ of the cases (measured annually).
D) Traffic ^ ^ ^
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must
operate at a Level of Service (LOS) "C" or better, with the
exception that Level of Serzice (LOS) "D" may <xcur
dtuing the peak two hours of die day :tt stgnauzed
intersections. Signalized intersections west oEI-805 :ue not
to operate at a LOS below their 1991 LOS. No
intersection may reach LOS "E" or "F" dtu-ing the average
weekday peak hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway
ramps axe exempted from this Standard.
E) Pails and Recreation .'lreas ^ ^ ^
'Ike '17ireshold Standard Eor Parks and Recreation is 3
acres of neighborhood anti community parkland with
appropriate Facilities / 1,OllU population east of I-805.
h) Drauia~e ^ ^ ~
The 'threshold Standards rcxluire that storm water flows
and volumes not exceed City Engitcering SGmdards.
individual pmjccts will prrnide ncces'sary anprovements
consistent with the Drainage Master Plan(s) and Clry
Fnc~Yinccriag Standuds.
No Impact
^
Issues:
G) Sewee
11~e 1lireshold Standards require that sewage flows avd
volumes not exceed City Engineenng Sandards.
Indi~ridual projects w2U provide necessary improvements
cunsistca~t with Sewer 1\2astex Plan(s) and City Engineering
Standards.
HJ l~'arer
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage,
treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed
concurrently with planned growth and that water quality
standards are not jeopardized during a ow?h and
constnution.
ypplicants map also be required to participate in whatever
water conservation or fee off set program the City of
Chnla Vista ha.s ui effect at the time of brulding permit
issuance.
Potenfially
Significant
Ympact
Less Than
Significant
With
Mitigation
Incorporated
Less Than
Signitcant
Impact
^
^
No Impact
Issues:
Less Than
Signifcant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No Impact
Comments:
a) The project would not induce population growth; therefore, no impacts to library facilities would result. No
impact to the City's Library Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
b) According to the Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be provided at the
project site. The proposal would not have a significant effect upon or result ht a need for substantial new or
altered police protection services. No impact to the City's Police threshold standards would occur as a result
of the proposed project.
c) According to the Fire Deparhent, adequate fire protection and emergency medical services can continue to be
provided to the site. The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new
or altered fire protection services. No adverse impact to the City s Fire threshold standard would occur as a
result of the proposed project.
d) According to the Traffic Engineering Section, East H Street currently exceeds the LOS "C" threshold standazd
however, the proposed project will result in a reduction in weekday trips. No further impact to the City's
Traffic threshold standard would occur as a result of the project.
e) Because the project site is a commercial land use, the Parks and Recreation threshold standard is not
applicable.
f) The applicant does not propose any new or improved drainage facilities on the project site. The applicant will
be required to implement Best Management Practices (BMPs) to prevent pollution of stone drainage systems
both during and after construction and prevent discharge of trash, debris, or non-stomt water to the storm
drainage systems. !n addition, the applicant will be required to comply with the City of Chula Vista's
Development and Redevelopment Stone Water Management Requirements Manual. Therefore, no adverse
impacts to the City's storm drainage system or Citys Drainage Threshold standards would occur as result of
the proposed project.
g) The Engineering Division has determined that the existing sewer facilities are adequate to serve the proposed
project. No new sewer facilities are necessary and no adverse impacts to the City's Sewer Threshold
standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
h) According to the Otay Water District, water service eau be provided via a 10-inch water main located on East
H Street. Additionally, OWD has dctennined that the existing water storage, treattnent, and transmission
facilities are adequate to serve the project. The proposal would not result in a significant impact to the
City's Water Threshold Standards.
Mitiaation: No mitigation measures are required.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
IS$neS: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
XV11I. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) lloes the project have the potential to degrade the ^ ^ ^ ^
quality of the en~nxonment, substantially reduce the
habitat of a fish ox wildlife specks, cause a fish ox
wildlife population to drop below self sustainuig
levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal
communih', reduce the number or restrict the range
of a rare ox endangered plant or animal ox eLrtnnate
important examples of the major periods of
California history or prelustoxy?
b) Does the project have itnpacts that axe individually ^ ^ ^ ~
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable
when mewed in connection with the effects of past
projects, the effects of other current project, and the
effects of probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have envirotamental effects which ^ ^ ^ ^
will cause substantial adverse effects on human
beings, either directly or indirectly?
Comments•
a) The project site is currently developed and located within an established urbanized area within the designated
development area of the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and there are no known sensitive plant or
animal species or cultural resources on the site. No adverse impacts would occur as a result ofthe proposal.
b) No cumulatively considerable impacts associated with the project when viewed in connection with the effects
of past projects, other current projects and probable future projects have been identified. As described in the
Mitigated Negative Declaration, project impacts would be mitigated to below a level of significance through
the required mitigation measures.
c) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Potential impacts to humans associated with air quality,
hazards hazardous materials, hydrology/water quality, noise and transportation/traffic generation would be
mitigated to below a level of significance.
Miti¢afion: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F.
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES:
Project mitigation measures are contained in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-OS-015, Section F,
Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts and Table 1 Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
XX. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant(s) and/or Operator(s) 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 the line(s) provided below shall indicate the
Applicants' and/or Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval.
oL..o2,cet~ ~ -~~~~~ ~~
Printed Natne and Title of Authorized Representative of
[Property Owner's Name]
~iG•~
e Aut ~esentative of Date
[P Erty Owner's Name]
Printed Name and Title of
[Operator if different from Property Owner]
Signature of Authorized Representative of
[Operator if different from Property Owner]
Date
XXI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTED:
The enviromnental factors checked below would be potentially affected by this project, involving at
least one impact that is a "Potentially Significant Impact" or "Potentially Significant Unless
Mitigated," as indicated by the checklist on the previous pages.
^ Land Use and Planning
^ Transportation/Traffic
^ Public Services
^ Population and
Housing
^ Geophysical
^ Biological Resources
^ Energy and Mineral
Resources
^ Utilities and Service
Systems
^ Aesthetics
^ Agricultural Resources
^ Hydrology/Water
^ Hazards and Hazardous
Materials
^ Cultural Resources
^ Air Quality
^ Threshold Standards
^ Noise ^ Recreation
^ Mandatory Findings of Significance
XXII. 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 Iind 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 may have a significant effect on the ^
enviromnent, and an Environmental Impact Report is required.
I find that the proposed project may have a "potentially significant impact" or ^
"potentially significant unless mitigated" impact on the enviromnent, but at least one
effect 1) has been adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable
legal standards, and 2) has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the
earlier analysis as described on attached sheets. An Environmental Impact
Report is required, but it must analyze only the effects that remain to be addressed.
I fmd that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the ^
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed
adequately in an earlier E1R or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable
standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EII2 or
Negative Declaration, including revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed
upon the proposed project, nothing firrther is required.
Marilyn R.F. Ponseggi
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
Date
P\Planning\MaryV\Terra Nuva Survme S[a[ion\IS-OS-015CKLST doe