HomeMy WebLinkAboutRCC AGENDA PK 2005/08/29Mitigated Negative Declaration
PROJECT NAME:
PROJECT LOCATION:
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL NO.
PROJECT APPLICANT:
CASE NO.:
River Park Estates
348 Palm Avenue
631-012-4500
Cherie and Morris McColley
IS-OS-006
DATE OE DRAF"t DOCUMENT: August I5, 2005
~y
DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING: Augus~'2'2005
DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT:
Prepared by:
A. Proiect Setting
Maria C Muett
The project site consists of partially vacant 2.54 areas located at 348 Palm Avenue. The site contains
four existing single-family residential units (refer to Exhibit 'A' -Location Map). The project site
has been partially graded for the existing residential units. Existing frontage roadway improvements
are partially completed along Palm Avenue.
Land uses surrounding the project site consist of the following:
North:
South:
East.
Wes[:
B. Project Description
Single-family residences
Single-family residences
Single-family residences
Single-family residences
The project proposal consists of subdividing five existing lots to create a total of ]2 single-family
residential lots. The project proposal will include the demolition of one single-family residence from
the five existing residences, to allow future development of 8 new manufactured single-family
residences. The proposed project includes onsite improvements that include drainage improvements, a
fire hydrant, retaining walls, 7-0 foot sewer and drainage easement, and landscape treatments.
Primary access to the project site is proposed from Palm Avenue. Refer to Exhibit `B' -Site Plan.
Off-stte tmprovements include street improvements and construction of a cul-de-sac at the end of
Palm Avenue.
C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans
The site is located in the Rl-SP (Single-Family Residential/Minimum Lot Size 5,000) Zone and RLM
(Residential Low-Medium Density/0-3 dwelling units per gross acre) Genera] Plan land use
designations.
The protect is consistent with the regulations of the R1-SP Zone and the RLM General Plan
designation. The project requires the approval of a Tentative Parcel Map and at a future time
development of single-family residences by either a building permit for a sole single-family residence
or Design Review for multiple single-family residences.
D. Public Comments
On April 13, 2005, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners and residents within a
500-foot radius of the proposed project site. The public comment period ended April 25, 2005. No
comments were received during this period.
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 less than significant level. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance
with Section 15070 of the State of Califomia Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines.
Air uali
Short-Tear:
The proposed project will result in a marginal increase in air pollutants during the demolition of one
of the existing single-family residences, and future development of the remaining 8single-family
residences. Fugitive dust would be created during these demolition construction activities. Air quality
impacts resulting from construction-related operations are considered short-term in duration since
construction-related activities are a relatively short-term activity. Dust control measures required
during construction operations would be 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-Term
The project site is located within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB). The proposed residential project
is consistent with the commercial designation of the project site under the adopted Chula Vista
General Plan and 7.oning regulations.
The proposed project will generate a minimal amount of traffic trips (80 Average Daily Trips). The
project-generated traffic is not a significant amount to create significant negative air quality impacts.
Additionally, the proposed residential land use has been included in existing regional air quality plans
and will not conflict with or violate any applicable air quality plans or standards. For these reasons,
the proposed project would not result in any si~mificant long-term local or regional air quality
impacts.
2
Hvdroloev and Water Oualit
Based upon review of the preliminary hydrology study and the proposed drainage improvements, the
Engineering Department has determined that there are no significant issues regarding the proposed
drainage of the project site. The proposed drainage improvements include curbs, a
detention/bioretention basin, brow ditches, a riprap system, and 8" drain pipes along the southeast
corner of the lower parcels. As required, the proposed drainage improvements would require
drainage to be dvected away from buildings and away from adjacent properties. The proposed
drainage improvements will improve the overall on site drainage system and accommodate the
proposed project. As a standard condition, a final drainage study will be required in conjunction with
the preparation of the project grading plans. In accordance with City standards, post-developed flows
shall not exceed pre-developed flows. Properly designed drainage facilities will be installed at the
time of the site development to the satisfaction of the City Engineer.
In addition, compliance with required NPDES regulations and Best Management Practice shall reduce
water quality impacts to a less than significance level. These measures are included as a part of the
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program (See Section F).
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
Lead and .Asbestos Removul
1'he potential exists for impacts to result from the demolition of one of the existing single-family
residences that may contain lead and asbestos. Therefore, during any demolition activities, a licensed
and registered asbestos and lead abatement contractor shall perform asbestos and ]cad-based paint
abatement m 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. "Fhe nutigahon measure contained in Section F below would mitigate potential impacts
associated with the release of asbestos and lead to below a level of significance.
F) MrtiKanon Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts
.9ir Quality
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.
• Usc electrical construction equipment as practical.
• Use catalytic reduction for gasoline-powered equipment.
• Use injection-timing retard for diesel-powered equipment.
• Water the constn~ction area twice daily to minimize fugitive dust.
• Stabilize graded areas as quickly as possible to mimmizc fugitive dust.
• Pave permanent roads as quickly as possible to mimm~ze dust.
• l?se electricity from power poles instead of temporary generators during building, if
available.
• Apply stabilizer or pave the last 100 feet of mtemal 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 trawled 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 winds exceed 25 miles per
hour.
Hydrology and Water Qualitk~
2. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the City Engineer shall verify that the final grading
plans comply with the provisions of Califomia Regional Water Quality Control Board, San
Diego Region Order No. 2001-01 with respect to construction-related water quality best
management practices.
3. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, the City Engineer shall verify that the grading or
construction plans comply with the provisions of Califomia Regional Water Quality Control
Board, San Diego Region Order No. 2001-01 with respect to permanent, post-constmction
water quality best management practices (BMPs). If one or more of the approved post-
construction BMPs is non-structural, then apost-construction BMP plan shall be prepared to
the satisfaction of the City Engineer prior to the commencement of construction. Compliance
with said plan shall become a permanent requirement of the Mitigation Monitoring and
Reporting Program.
4. Prior to the issuance of a grading permit, temporary desilting and erosion control devices
shall be installed. Protective devices will 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.
Hazards and Hazardous Materials
5. During 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.
F. Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista:
Marilyn R.F. Ponseggi, Planning and Building
Marisa Lundstedt, Planning and Building
Brad Remp, Planning and Building
Frank Rwera, Engineering
Samir Nuhaily, Engineering
Silvester Evetovich, Engineering
4
Dave Kaplan, Engmeenng
Bcth Chopp, Engineering
Mark Caro, Parks and Recreation
Kristi Burroughs, Landscaping
Amy Lindquist, Fire Department
Richard Preuss, Police Department
Dave Byers, Public Works and Operations
ApplicanUProperty Owner:
Morris and Cherie E. Mc Colley
Agent
Michael G. Aguilar, P.E.
Others:
California-American Water Company
Chula Vista Elementary School District
?. Documents
City of Chula Vista General Plan, 1989 (as amended)
'title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code
Preliminary Hydrology Calcs for River Park Estates, Chula Vista, October 8, 2004.
Preliminary Drainage Report for Rrver Park Estates, Chula Vista, August 5, 2005.
Initial Study
'T'his environmental determination is based on the attached Initial Study, and any comments
received in response to the Notice of Initial Study. The report reflects the independent judgment
of the City of Chula Vista. Further information regarding the environmental review of this
project is available from the Chula Vista Planning and Building Department, 276 Fourth Avenue,
Chula Vista, CA 91910.
Marilyn R. F. Ponseggt
Iinvironmcntal Rcvicw Coordinator
J1PI¢mm~gNAAhIAAImtiul smdy~IS-OS~H76drnfOMNU-doc
Date:
5
s,a.
la
remecr i i
wcanox ~
CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT
LOCATOR PROJECT River Park Estates
APPLICANT: PROJECT DESCRIPTION:
INITIAL STUDY
noD°iiess: 348 Palm Avenue Request: Proposal to subdivide a parcel into 8 SFD lots.
NORTH SCALE: FILE NUMBER:
No Scale IS-05-006
Related cases: PCS-05-14
J.\planning\carlos\locators\is05006.cdr 10.25.04
Exhibit A
e~~
i
C~
d R~~
Q e~
~ ~ ~~
7 ~ p ~t~
a~
F-W ~§E
Q~
Z
til
F=
W ~"
2
U
]G eff ; s !x Y ~6 ~~F S~ ~ 4 ! 9 ee ~# ~ 3S ~ yi
{ + p li i s 69 $ t
p~ ~ ~tjJi . ~ pp4 ~ d9 g~~~ g°
'i aa pp F' ~
e ~ ! P~~ d iN ~ ~~ , f ' ~ 3 ~ I
a C7 i 3E~e 1$~ !gyv~rj ~
6 ii ~, Y 4 ~Y ~ Cs~~ ~ ~ ! ~ 4 ~~e Q~~ E® Ba! P!i
~~~~s~~~=i~i~~r:~~~^~,3zo.~ _ -'~ ^ d ass®e®
i
~~
e
0.1
J]
k
w
ATTACHMENT "A"
MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP)
River Park Estates IS-OS-006
This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Progam has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista
in conjunction with the proposed River Park Estates. The proposed project has been evaluated in
an Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration prepared in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and City/State CEQA Guidelines (IS-OS-006). 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. Hydrology and Water Quality
3. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
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. The applicant shall provide evidence in written form confirming compliance with
the mitigation measures specified in Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-OS-006 to the
Environmental Review Coordinator and City Engineer. The Environmental Review Coordinator
and City Engineer will thus provide the ultimate veriftcation 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-006, 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.
1~'~Planning\MARIA\Initial Study\IS-OS-OOtiMMRPtexLdoc
d
a
F
N
C
E
E
0
U
a °'
'
v
^
v ~
n
N
E ~
o
U '~
m
a
N T T
~ o m U ~ c
as ~'c R
0 ~ ~mr
m
O
a
QW
Z o0
F= a ~ x
~
p
~ w.
'
a ~° so
uJ m ie
C U ~ U X
. N
Q R
F. `
`
Z ~ a
o
Q V X
C7 ~
z
O
w~
Z oo y
O ou h
L ;F c
i c
L O
w ~
~ ~ U v
Q ~ w
F d c
Q
O a Z• o p c
~ ~ tp ~ ~ N `O C O o_ ~ ~ p N
_ L N °' v E o 3 ° ~ ° ° m °. N >m
d c
C¢ d ~ N d ~ .E ~ d o N d $ j ~ ~ P n
m m n ~ N ~ 3 g y m o o" m aai `0 Rn o~ = o o'
~ o ° ° a R m ° ` o n
J
~
~~m E o
C
n n
• ?'
' a n a
Rid ia
a„
d >c
i
C J
° C o
U m
~L
N L> N
d J
QD O O -
U N R N R
a N
R N
N D
NR Od R N
«d °'O CV NOIO D_
N .
~ ry O
O E E
¢ C
~ ~ N
U T
- T _C
> O .N O O
U N N ~ S]
~ d c" N
a N
~
N
m .
a 4 ~ iO
c o O "U ~ ~
~ U
_
. N
m
- N C
R o Va
c a _
o U N
o y O p J
N
a m E
~ .~ m `° d ~ ~ m m o m ~ ~ °n` o u o 5 m R m o c
~~ ~ a~ N
°'
y o ' ~ °~ ~ ~ a ~ ~ ~~
°
°_
« _
m 3 y ~ ° ° m m m
0 m
N ~ u
~ r a
i _
E~ ~ 3 m a
O
o
W E O~ C
R ~_
~E U
` C
E R
~ N
N N N O
4 J o C
R u ~ 1)
p N
« j N D
`> R
R E
.
~
D J U
..• D N L
.
D O
~ N N U ~ U . l9
O E D d N _
N C
N- N C ~`. ¢ N O N y~
~ ~
O
V N O. C J ` °
lO
~
° C L C
0 D E C J
~
E
N
~
J
Q_ (0 LO J
Q C
YO O
U a
N E
-
N ~ N
N> ~
N~ ~
~ m N O
~
~ O
U .- ~ C
N T ,y
~
N
U R 0 9
mo d`
m
~ J R J
°
o C
o a"
'9
' C (ry
m J ~ J
'u a N
N
- 3 3~
an >
O
c N T
S a m U~
~ ~ N C
"
- 3
> `°
°l- N 'v o p
D 4
` = C C ° N
N J ~
O)~ E a 'C b D L d
N t
(0 « D` L w
J O g
~ (9 w
3
0 ~ .
3 o m mR =d NN R m~ wac 3v ~3 m°m ~
N r~~O
m
Q ~ 2 o a-
i E c E - ar
-i R - r ~ 3 i
a
a C
o R o
~ c
O ¢ .
6 =
~ ~ ~ ~ W m o 0
L
R o
o
C - c c m aJ m ' d ' : ~ ~ N n d a ~ N i '
m c
C o ~ ~ N ¢'C
~ m o~~ ~ ° ~ ~ ~o° jai ~~ UE a E tea, Q~° o co min ~af°i NJ a` 3 Uw<n Jm
Q F N a
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
•
• •
C O
OZ
d
A ~
D/ N
N
~ W
v
a
N
Q
F
m ~ m m
C
~
C C
~
C C
C
C C
O
-
~
D_ a
U m
~ O
~_ a
U~
C O
~_ a
~ m
?, D
C
C
C
D 'C N-Q N C
G
~ - N O N U~ C
C
T."C N D N U
C
~~ N
c a~ E ._ E
'
~~m c d E ._ E
~~
m c N
~=
m c m
~~
m
m
" m
m
' m
m
" ~
~
oinD °.
¢
a
co
o oinDn
n
nwo `
o oinDn
H
n
co `
o ncn
°a
w
~ a
m ¢
w
m ¢
o
N y
O O
X
X r
O O
X
d U p U
c ai a"
~
C X X x 3 O X
'
pU pU
a`o x x x a o x
U U
~ ~
~ ~
o _v o
N
3 ~
~ N
~
~ C
~ U °
~ U C
L
L
U ~ L
U ~ U
c n
m N c n
m w c
o
a_c a_c a_c
v
T T ?f
= C
~ C C O N
m
v o
" ~
C p D
~ U C
n
E°q ~
o y
L«
coat^-cno"w ~"m .~ m T
m y E m c
c4 d o
~0~0 ~.: `-'~ a3 0
v ...
~mDOmU a o
d'Oto 30
D
w
U
~ _ u a~ N N L
~
c
U~
o N E E« m
«
n c° o °~ ° D- E
d
° a m m a
m m
~
°' D
° ~~ c o m E
m rn
o ~'- N m m m ~'- m E c
E m N w~ p
m m ~ N
~~~Z
.~ J~oK °nNaa°'E.~tO madtd° yNC m'Qo
'" c mac
E~ o v a =o -d°awo o•o
U m
E o m ~~ o v~ > -~ N>-=o
~E 0°
u
N Nod->.p
° v E m e m
¢rnd0 ~ a
.
n~~o ~ m ymU c ~ m.`
aN.o .`m `~`vi .
6 ~'° moU°c
F m~~o3 c
°'m
mE o.o ~t°~c w~~caio w t0om«'oc«n
J D C ~- Ol D
d ~
W N c O U "' 0
E
'
`
°
n°~ .= N .- d- N
°
°
'
Et F
Q yj U ._. D O)
a~c
m m
Q
~ ~yE
d
m
m«a o
~. O-
•
m mw-o
w.
m5
~
° m
_
o
L
~6°
~ m
in
"=
°
v~
d
' o
m °'
' >m
m o,c oc°
° °m'o g.. u me
m
~
O °'
NO
rvca~ N"
O H
~ m
E
~oDmm~
(
R
~ p L U _N
C N
m
OO O-~ O« m
~
N (0
0 ~. 16
y oQ
°10 O J C
~O
'
Em`
°
O 0 ~ y N (n [O
on'° ~O
'
a T o o.
w5
~
n oc
;
-
N 6
~ C
_
0
N N C~ ~
> O N N N N y~
N« O L N D.
m o
>~
-
L C N yryl d
m E"
~ U `N
d ~ D D
D J
~om m
S
} N
Q
mm'
-O O- >
3 U •
y N C y N
•C
3~da~«u
wm
o O
O
wN>cNE ~ c
E N N N U
~c`o
m.
g
"O ~ O~ U~ >,~
m
.O y n ~~ p J_T' ~« O O L~ N
C D> L °D
C C N
D U
m
~ £ am«°E E ° m o= E"c
O V mmEFO . tn
K o
~m rv. ~
~ gc.L°-°a°iw
~ `o°~o~ mo nm
mcv°i
u u °~u oEE~
,-
~=y... m3N ~ tom
~ K
p
T O ~.-. O N (0 ~~ m pN O N E P. N N E :+ y
_
O N O N /n "O C j L L N~ C D
S 2W 3U ?'E dW O.>Z30N 0.«N~ dOaSNNW S UNNS ~UN
N c~ .T uj
a
a
a'
s
O
c
h
0
v
A
Q
C
L
C
1
a
\~l //
~iat~yir
CITY OF
ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM CHUTA VISTA
1. Name of Proponent:
2. Lead Agency Name and Address:
3. Addresses and Phone Number of Proponent:
4. Name of Proposal:
5. Date of Checklist:
6. Case No.
Moms and Cherie E. Mc Colley
City of Chula Vista
Planning and Building Department
276 Fourth Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91910
348 Palm Avenue
Chula Vista, CA 91911
(619)585-8350
River Park Estates
August 10, 2005
IS-OS-006
ENVIRONMENTAL ANALYSIS QUESTIONS:
Issues:
I. AESTHETICS. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista?
b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including,
but not limited to, trees, rock outcroppings, and
historic buildings within a state scenic highway?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
^ ^ ^ ~
^ ^ ^ ~
c) Substantially degrade the existing visual character or
quality of the site and its surruundings?
d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare,
which would adversely affect day or nighttime views
in the area`?
^ ^ ^ ~
^ ^ ^ ~
1
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
I$$Ue$; Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
Comments•
a-c) The proposal is an infill residential development project. The project site currently contains five single-
family residential homes and the remaining site is currently vacant. The project site does not contain
scenic resources, vistas or views nor is it within close proximity of a state scenic highway. The proposed
project will not substantially degrade the existing visual character or residential quality of the project site
or its residential surroundings. The project site is planned for residential development according to the
General Plan Land Use and MSCP Subarea Plan.
d) The proposal shall comply with the City's minimum standards for roadway lighting and shall be
completed to the satisfaction of the Director of Planning and Building. 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 will ensure that no substantial glare, or light would affect
daytime or nighttime views in the surrounding area.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
II. AGRICULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the
project:
a) Convert Prime Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ^ ^ ^ ^
Farmland of Statewide Importance (Farmland), as
shown on the maps prepared pursuant to [he Farmland
Mapping and Monitoring Program of the California
Resources Agency, to non-agricultural use?
h) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or ^ ^ ^ ^
a Williamson Act contract?
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-c) The project site is neither in current agricultural production nor adjacent to property in agricultural
production and contains no agricultural resources or designated farmland.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Is5lle5: Significant btitiga[ion Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
II[. AIR QUALITY. Would the project:
a) Conflict with or obstmct implementation of the ^ ^ ~ ^
applicable air quality plan?
b) Violate any air quality standard or contribute ^ ~ ^ ^
substantially to an existing or projected air
quality violation?
c) Result in a cumulatively considerable net ^ ^ ~ ^
increase of any criteria pollutant for which the
project relrion is non-attainment under an
applicable federal or state ambient air quality
standard (including releasing emissions, which
exceed quantitative thresholds for ozone
precursors)?
d) Expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant ^ ^ ~ ^
concentrations?
e) Create objectionable odors affecting a substantial ^ ^ ^ ~
number of people?
Comments:
a-e) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitisatioo:
The mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially stgmfieant air quality impacts to level of less than significance.
IV. BIOLOGICAL RFSOCIRCES. Would the project:
a) Have a substantial adverse effect, either directly or ^
through habitat modifications, on any species
identified as a candidate, sensitive, or special status
species in local or regional plans, policies, or
^ ^ ~
3
Issues:
regulations, or by the Califomia Department of Fish
and Game or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With
Significant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
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 [J.S.
Fish and Wildlife Service? '
c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally ^
protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the
Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh,
vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal,
filling, hydrological interruption, or other means?
d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any ^
native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or
with established native resident or migatory wildlife
corridors, or impede the use of native wildlife nursery
sites?
e) Conflict with any local policies or ordinances protecting ^
biological resources, such as a tree preservation policy
or ordinance'?
f) Conflict with the provisions of an adopted Habitat ^
Conservation Plan, Natural Community Conservation
Plan, or other approved local, refonal, or state habitat
conservation plan?
Less Than
Significant
Impact
^
No Impact
^
^
^
^
^
4
I$$nfS[
Comments:
Less'rhan
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Signincan[ Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No Impact
a) No endangered or sensitive species, species of concern or species that are candidates for listing are present
within or immediately adjacent to the developed project area.
b) No locally riparian habitat or other natural sensitive communities are present within or immediately
adjacent to the developed project area.
c) No wetland habitat is present within or immediately adjacent to the developed project area.
d) No wildlife dispersal or migration corridors exist within or immediately adjacent to the developed project
area.
e) No impacts to local policies or ordinances protecting biological resources are anticipated with the project
development.
t) No impacts to regional habitat preservation planning efforts will be created, as the development site is a
designated development area in the adopted Chula Vista Multiple Species Conservation Program Subarea
Plan.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
V. CULTURAL RESOURCES. Would the project:
a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance ^ ^ ^ ~
of a historical resouce as defined in State CEQA
Guidelines § 15064.5?
b) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance ^ ^ ^ ~
of an archaeological resource pursuant to State CEQA
Guidelines § 15064.5?
c) Directly or indirectly destroy a unique paleontological ^ ^ ^ ~
resource or site or unique geologic feature?
5
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
I$SUC$: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
d) Disturb any human remains, including those ^ ^ ^ ~
interred outside of formal cemeteries?
Comments•
a) The proposal is a residential infill project that does involve the demolition of one existing residential structure.
Upon evaluation of the existing residential structure, it has been determined that the subject residence is not
historically significant. The structure does not embody the distinctive characteristics of any particular
architectural style and/or is not a representative sample of the best of one style of architecture. 'there is no
evidence or record to indicate that the building meets any of the criteria for consideration for the listing on the
Ciry of Chula Vista Historic Resource List. Therefore, the project will not result in any impacts to a historical
resource as defined in Section 15064.5 is anticipated.
b) Due to previous site disturbance and minima] cut and fill slope levels needed for the proposed project, the
potential for impacts to archaeological resources is considered to be less than significant.
c) Due to previous site disturbance for the existing residences, the potential for impacts to paleontological
resources is considered to be less than significant. No unique cultural features are (mown to be present on the
site.
d) No human remains are anticipated to be present within the impact area of the project.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS --Would the project:
a) Expose people or structures to potential substantial
adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or
death involving:
i. Rupture of a known earthquake fault, as delineated ^ ^ ^ ~
on the most recent Alquist-Priolo Earthquake Fault
Zoning Map issued by the State Geologist for the
area or based on other substantial evidence of a
known fault?
ii. Strong seismic ground shaking'? ^ ^ ^ ~
iii. Seismic-related ground failure, including liquefaction? ^ ^ ^ ~
6
Potentially
I$$OeS: Significanl
Impact
iv. Landslides? ^
b) Result in substantial soil erosion or the loss of ^
topsoil?
c) Be located on a geologic unit or soil that is unstable, ^
or that would become unstable as a result of the
project, and potentially result in on- or ofF site
landslide, lateral spreading, subsidence, liquefaction
or collapse?
d) Be located on expansive soil, creating substantial ^
risks to life or property?
e) Have soils incapable of adequately supporting the ^
use of septic tanks or alternative wastewater
disposal systems where sewers are no[ available for
the disposal of wastewater?
Comments:
Less Than
Significanl
with Less Than
Mitigation Significant
Incorporated Impact
^ ^
^ ~
^ ^
^ ^
^ ^
No Impact
^
^
^
^
(a-e) According to the Engineering Department, the project site is not within a mapped Earthquake Fault Zone
and there area no known or suspected seismic hazards associated with the site. The preliminary soils report
Cor the project indicates the proposed earthwork quantity includes a minimal net 21 cubic yards of imported
fill. "fhe submittal of a final soils report is required prior to issuance of grading and construction permits to
determine soil conditions and provide foundation and pavement recommendations. Due to the previous
development of the site and minimal grading required for the proposed project, no significant geological
impacts are anticipated.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
VII. HAZARDS AND HAZARDOUS
MATERIALS. Would the project:
a) Create a significant hazard to the public or [he
environment through the routine tmn~ort, use, or
disposal of hazardous materials?
^ ~ ^ ^
7
Issues:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially Wilh
Signincant Mitigation
Impact Incorporated
b) Create a significant hazard to the public or the ^
environment through reasonably foreseeable upset
and accident conditions involving the release of
hazardous materials into the environment?
c) Emit hazardous emissions or handle hazardous or ^
acutely hazardous materials, substances, or waste
within one-quarter mile of an existing or proposed
school?
d) Be located on a site which is included on a list of ^
hazardous materials sites compiled pursuant to
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 airport land use plan ^
or, where such a plan has not been adopted, within
two miles of a public airport or public use airport,
would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
~ For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ^
would the project result in a safety hazard for
people residing or working in the project area?
g) Impair implementation of or physically interfere ^
with an adopted emergency response plan or
emergency evacuation plan?
h) Expose people or structures to a significant risk of ^
loss, injury or death involving wildland fires,
including where wildlands are adjacent to urbanized
areas or where residences are intermixed with
wildlands?
Less Than
Significant No Impact
Impact
^ ^
^ ^
^ ^
^
^
^
^
^
^
^
H
Issues:
Comments•
a-h) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitieation:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact ]ncorporated Impact
1'he mitigation measures contained in Section F of the Mitigated Negative Declaration would mitigate
potentially significant hazards hazardous materials impacts to level of less than significance.
VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALTI'Y.
Would the project:
a) Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to
receiving waters (including impaired water bodies
pursuant to the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) list),
result in significant alteration of receiving water
yuality 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 volume or a
lowering of the local groundwater table level (e.g., the
production rate of pre-existing nearby wells would
drop to a level which would not support existing land
uses or planned uses for which permits have been
granted)? Result in a potentially significant adverse
impact on groundwater quality?
c) Subsi<•rntially alter the existing drainage pattem 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 erosion or siltation on- or off-site?
d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem 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 runofh in a manner which
^
^
No lmpacl
C
^
9
Potentially
Issnes: Significant
Impact
would result in flooding on- or off-site, or place
structures within a 100-year flood hazard area which
would impede or redirect flood flows?
e) Expose people or stmctures to a significant risk of loss, ^
injury or death involving flooding, including flooding
as a result of the failure of a levee or dam?
f) Create or contribute mnoff water, which would exceed O
the capacity of existing or planned stormwater
drainage systems or provide substantial additional
sources of polluted runoff?
Comments•
(a-f) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E.
Mitigation:
Less Than
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 water quality impacts to level of less than significance.
IY. LAND USE AND PLANNING. Would the
project:
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,
specific plan, local coastal program, or zoning
ordinance) adopted for the purpose of avoiding or
mitigating an environmental effect?
^ ^
^ ^
^
^
^ ~
^ ~
10
Less Than
Significant
Potentially Wkh less Than
tSSneS: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
l mpact Incorporated Impact
c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation plan ^ ^ ^ ^
or natural community conservation plan?
Comments:
a) The proposed residential project would be consistent with the residential character of the surrounding area and,
therefore, would not dismpt or divide an established community.
b) The project site is within the R-15P (Single-Family Residence/5,000 square feet minimum lot area size/Precise
Plan) 'Lone and RLM (Low-Medium/8-]2 dwelling units per acre) General Plan designations. The project is
consistent with the applicable zoning regulations, Generat Plan and the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan.
c) The project would not conflict with any applicable adopted environmental plans or policies. Furthermore, the
project would not encroach into or indirectly affect the MSCP Preserve area. The project site is designated as
development area in the MSCP Subarea Plan.
Miti¢a6on: No mitigation measwes aze required.
Y. 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 delineated on a local
general plan, specific plan or other land use plan?
t1
Issues:
Comments•
Less'rhan
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No Impact
a) The project site is currently developed with existing single-family residences and the site has been previously
disturbed. The proposed project would not result in the loss of availability of a known mineral resource of value
to the region or the residents of the State of Califomia.
b) The State of Califomia Department of Conservation has not designated the project site for mineml resource
protection. No impacts to mineral resources are anticipated as a result of the proposed project.
MitiQafion: No mitigation measures are required.
XI. NOISE. Would the project result in:
a) Exposure of persons to or generation of noise levels in ^ ^ ^ ^
excess of standards established in the local general
plan or noise ordinance, or applicable 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 located within an airport ]and use plan or, ^ ^ ^ ^
where such a plan has not been adopted, within two
miles of a public airport or public use airport, would
the project expose people residing or working in the
project area to excessive noise levels?
tl For a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ^ ^ ^ ^
would the project expose people residing or working
l?
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
I$$n C$: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
in the project area to excessive noise ]evels?
Comments:
a, c and d) Due to the residential character of the existing surroundings, the proposed small residential
infi11 project is not anticipated to result in any significant noise impacts to noise-sensitive land
uses in the immediate vicinity. Compliance with the noise control ordinance of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code [hat regulates the maximum one-hour average sound level generated at the
property line is mandatory for any activities occurring on-site.
b) It is anticipated that neighboring individuals may be exposed to minor groundbome vibration or groundbome
noise levels associated with short-term constmction activities. Due to the minimal construction activities
associated with this project, impacts related to groundbome vibration and groundbome noise levels are not
expected to be significant. Additionally, compliance with the noise control ordinance of the Chula Vista
Municipal Code, Section 17.24.050(.T), will reduce any potential noise impacts and enswe that residents would
not be distwbed by construction noise during the most noise sensitive periods of the day.
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 excessive noise
levels.
4 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 excessive noise levels.
Mitigation: No mitigation measwes are required.
XII. POPULATION AND HOUSING. Would the
project:
a) Induce substantial population growth in an area, either ^ ^ ^ ^
directly (for example, by proposing new homes and
businesses) or indirectly (for example, through
extension of road or other infrastructure)'?
b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ^ ^ ^ ^
necessitating the constmction of replacement housing
e]sewhere?
c) Displace substantial numbers of people, necessitating ^ ^ ^ ^
the construction of replacement housing elsewhere?
13
Issues:
Comments•
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No Impact
a-c) The project is surrounded by existing residential development and does not involve the removal of any
dwelling units or the extension of public facilities that would induce substantial growth. Future residential
development of the site is consistent with the General Plan and would not exceed the regional or local
population projections. The proposed project would not involve displacement of existing housing or
individuals.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures aze required.
XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project:
a) Result in substantial adverse physical impacts
associated with the provision of new or physically
altered governmental facilities, need for new or
physically altered governmental facilities, the
constrnction of which could cause significant
environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable
service ratios, response times or other performance
objectives for any public services:
Fire protection? ^ ^ ^ ^
Police protection? ^ ^ ^ ^
Schools? ^ ^ ^ ^
Parks? ^ ^ ^ ^
Other public facilities? ^ ^ ^ ^
lq
I$$ne$[
Comments:
Less Than
significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Signincant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No Impact
a) According to the Chula Vista Fire Department, adequate fire protection services can continue to be provided to
the site. 'fhe applicant is required to comply with the Fire Department policies for new building constmction and
is required to install a new fire hydrant onsite. The City's Fire performance objectives and thresholds 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. Furthermore, the applicant would be required to pay the statutory building pemrit
school fees for the proposed residential dwellings.
d) Because the proposed project would not induce significant population growth. The project will not create a
significant demand for neighborhood or regional parks or facilities or impact existing park facilities.
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 infrastmcture.
Mitiaation: No mitigation measures are required.
XIV. RECREATION. Would the project:
a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and regional
parks or other recreational facilities such that
substantial physical deterioration of the facility would
occur or be accelerated?
b) Does the project include ro~creational facilities or
require the constmction or expansion of recreational
facilities, which have an adverse physical effect on the
environment?
^
^
IS
Issues:
Comments:
Less'I'han
Significant
Po[entialh' with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No Impact
a) The proposed project specifies the subdivision and construction of 8 additional dwelling units, therefore, the
applicant is required to pay Park Acquisition and Development (PAD) fees per Chapter 17.10 "Parklands &
Public Facilities" of the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code. The respective fees shall be paid in full prior to the
issuance of building permits. The proposed project would not induce substantial population gow[h, nor would it
create a demand for new neighborhood or regional parks or facilities. Therefore, [he proposed project would not
have an adverse physical effect on the recreational environment.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures aze required.
7CV. 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 number of vehicle trips, the volume to
capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)?
b) F,xceed, either individually or cumulatively, a level of ^ ^ ^ ^
service standard established by the county congestion
management agency for designated roads or
highways'?
c) Result in a change in air traffic patterns, including ^ ^ ^ ^
either an increase in traffic levels or a change in
location that results in substantial safety risks?
d) Substantially increase hazards due to a design feature ^ ^ ^ ^
(e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or
incompatible uses (e.g., farm equipment)?
e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ^ ^ ^ ^
1) Result in inadequate parking capacity'? ^ ^ ^ ^
IG
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
ISSII CS: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
g) Conflict with adopted policies, plans, or programs ^ ^ ^ ~
supporting alternative transportation (e.g., bus
turnouts, bicycle racks)?
Comments-
(a-g) According to the Traffic Engineering Department, the proposed residential infill project is not anticipated
to result in any significant traffic, circulation or emergency access impacts. The project generated traffic trips
are minimal, approximately 80 new Average Daily Trips (ADTs), and will not create adverse traffic operations
along Palm Avenue or adjacent connector streets (Main Street and Otay Valley Road). According to the Traffic
Study, the current Level of Service for Main Street and Otay Va]Iey Road, is LOS "C", and with the proposed
project generated traffic will continue to operate at LOS "C" or better.
Mitieation: No mitigation measwes are required.
XVI. UTILITIES AND SERVICE SYSTEMS.
Would the project:
a) Exceed wastewater treatment requirements of the ^ ^ ^ ~
applicable Regional Water Quality Control Board?
b) Require or result in the constmction of new water or ^ ^ ~ ^
wastewater treatment facilities or expansion of
existing facilities, the construction of which could
cause silnificant environmental effects?
c) Reyuire or result in the construction of new storm water ^ ^ ~ ^
drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the
construction of which could cause significant
environmental effects`?
d) Have sufficient water supplies available to serve the ^ ^ ^ ~
project from existing entitlements and resowces, or are
new or expanded entitlements needed?
17
Issues:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment ^
provider, which serves or may serve the project that it
has adequate capacity to serve the project's projected
demand in addition to the provider's existing
commitments?
^ ^ ^
f) Be served by a landfill with sufficient permitted capacity ^ ^ ^ ^
to accommodate the project's solid waste disposal
needs?
g) Comply with federal, state, and local statutes and ^ ^ ^ ^
regulations related to solid waste?
IR
Issues:
Comments•
Less Than
Significant
Potentially ~Vilh Less Than
Significant Miligalion Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
Ho Impact
a) The project site is located within an urban area that is served by all necessary utilities and service systems.
The wastewater treatment requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board would not be
exceeded with the proposed project.
b) The proposed project area is within the California-American Water Company service territory. Existing
water mains are located along the frontage of the project site fronting Palm Avenue, off of Main Street. In
order to serve the proposed project site it will include a main extension to the property line, a new fire
hydrant and new domestic water meters on each service connection. As par[ of the development process
the applicant shall coordinate with the Califomia-American Water Company for proper design guidance.
According to the Engineering Division, the capacity of the existing sewer system within the project area is
adequate to accommodate the proposed project. The proposed improvements will include the extension of
the existing 8-inch sewer main from Palm Avenue through the interior private road within a 7-0 foot
drainage and sewer easement. As par[ of final design, the applicant will be required to submit a final sewer
plan for approval by the City Engineer, prior to issuance of a grading permit, indicating the location of
individual private sewer pumps, force main laterals, and sewer access road (private street) for regular
maintenance.
c) The potential discharge of silt during construction activities could impact the storm drain system.
Appropriate erosion control measures will be identified in conjunction with the preparation of Etna] grading
plans to be implemented during construction. The proposed project is subject to the NPDES General
Construction Permit requirements and shall obtain permit coverage and develop a Storm Water Pollution
Prevention Plan (SWPPP) prior to issuance of grading permits. In addition, the project shall be conditioned
to implement construction and post-construction water quality Best Management Practices (BMPs) for
storm water pollution prevention in accordance with the Chula Vista Standard Urban Storm Water
Mitigation Plan (SUSMP).
d) The project site is within the water service area of the California-American Water Company based upon
correspondence from the water authority dated May 20, 2005. Existing water supply was granted by the
Califomia State Health Department on June 2, 1967 for Permit No. 67-43. The proposed project is subject
to expanded facilities as described in Section b.
e) Sce XVI.a. and b.
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 federal, state and local regulations related to solid
waste.
Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required.
19
Less Than
Significant
Potentially With Less Than
ISSUeS: Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
%VII. THRESHOLDS
Will the proposal adversely impact the City's
Threshold Standards?
A. Library ^ ^ ^
The City shall construct 60,000 gross square feet (GSF)
of additional library space, over the June 3Q 2000 GSF
total, in the azea east of Interstate 805 by buildout. The
construction of said facilities shall be phased such that
the City will not fall below the citywide ratio of 500
GSF per 1,000 population. Library facilities are to be
adequately equipped and staffed.
B)Police ^ ^ ^
a) Emergency Response: Properly equipped and staffed
police units shall respond to 81 percent of "Priority One"
emergency calls within seven (7) 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 Emer~ency Medical ^ ^ ^
Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and
medical units shall respond to calls throughout the City
within 7 minutes in 80% of the cases (measured annually).
D) Traffic ^ ^ ^
The Threshold Standards require that all intersections must
operate at a Level of Servtce (LOS) "C" or better, with the
exception that Level of Service (LOS) "D" may occur during
the peak two hours of the day at signalized intersections.
Signalized intersections west of I-805 are not to operate at a
LOS below their 1991 LOS. No intersection may reach LOS
"E" or "F" during the average weekday peak hour.
Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted
from this Standard.
No Impact
^
^
^
211
I.ess'rhan
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
I$sne$: Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
E,) Parks and Recreation Areas ^ ^ ^
The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres
of neighborhood and community parkland with appropriate
facilities/1,000 population east of I-805.
F) Drainage ^ ^ ^
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows and
volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual
projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with
the Drainage Master Plan(s) and City Engineering Standards.
G) Sewer ^ ^ ^
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and
volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual
projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with
Sewer Master Plan(s) and City Engineering Standards.
H) Water ^ ^ ^
1'he Threshold Standards require that adequate storage,
treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed
concrurently with planned growth and that water quality
standards are notjeopazdized during growth and construction.
Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever
water conservation or fee off-set program the City of Chula
Vista has in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
No Impact
^
^
?1
ISSUCS:
Less Than
Significant
Potentially with Less Than
Significant Mitigation Significant
Impact Incorporated Impact
No Impact
Comments•
a) The project would not induce substantial population growth; therefore, no impacts to library facilities would
result. No adverse impact to the City's library tlueshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
b) According to the Police Department, adequate police protection services can continue to be provided upon
completion of the proposed project. The proposed tentative parcel map for future development of 8 new single-
family residential units would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for substantial new or altered
police protection services. No adverse impact to the City's police threshold standards would occur as a result of
the proposed project.
c) According to the Fire Department, adequate fire protection and emergency medical services shall be provided to
the project site. Although the Fire Department has indicated they will provide service to the project, the project
will contribute to the incremental increase in fue service demand throughout the City. This increased demand on
fire services will not result in a significant cumulative impact. No adverse impact to the City's fire threshold
standards would occur as a result of the proposed project.
d) The surrounding street segXrlents will continue to operate in compliance with the City's traffic threshold Standard
LOS "C" or better) with the projected project traffic. No adverse impact to the City's traffic threshold standards
would occur as a result of the proposed project.
e) Park pad obligation will be required per City Ordinance (refer to Municipal Code Chapter 17.10).
f) Based upon the review of the project, the Engineering Department has determined that there are no
significant issues regarding the proposed drainage improvements of the project site. The proposed drainage
improvements include a detention basin, a riprap system, and drain pipes along the southeast comer of the
lower parcels. As a standard condition, a final drainage study will be required in conjunction with the
preparation of the project grading plans and appropriate erosion control measures will be identified and
implemented. In accordance with City standards, post-developed flows shall not exceed pre-developed
flows. Properly designed drainage facilities will be installed at the time of site development to the
satisfaction of the City Engineer. No adverse impacts to the city's storm drainage system or City's
drainage threshold standards will occur as a result of the proposed project.
g) The capacity of the existing sewer system within the project area is adequate to accommodate the proposed
project. The project will include the extension of an existing 8-inch sewer main and extended along the
private road to serve the proposed residential units. As par[ of final design, the project will be conditioned
that the applicant be reyuired to submit a sewer plan for approval by the City Engineer, prior to issuance of
a grading permit, indicating the location of individual private sewer pumps and force main laterals. No
adverse impacts to the City's sewer system or City's drainage threshold standards will occur as a result of
the proposed prolect.
h) Existing water mains are located along the frontage of the project site fronting Palm Avenue and Main
Street. The capacity of these existing facilities is adequate to serve the proposed prolect site. The proposed
project will include the main extension to the property line. As part of the development process the
applicant shall coordinate with the Callfomia-American Water Company for proper design guidance. No
adverse impacts to the City's water system or City's water threshold standards will occur as a result of the
proposed project.
22
Less Than
Significant
Potentially Wilk Less'fhan
I$$Ue$: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact
Impact Incorporated Impact
XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF
SIGNIFICANCE
a) Does the project have the potential to degrade the ^ ^ ^ ~
quality of the environment, 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 number or restrict the range of
a rare or endangered plant or animal or eliminate
important examples of the major periods of California
history or prehistory?
b) Does the project have impacts that are individually ^ ^ ^ ~
limited, but cumulatively considerable?
("Cumulatively considerable" means that the
incremental effects of a project are considerable when
viewed in connection with the effects of past projects,
the effects of other current project, and the effects of
probable future projects.)
c) Does the project have environmental 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, and is within the
designated development area of the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan. There are no known sensitive
plant or animal species or cultural resources on the site.
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.
c) "fhe project will not cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly, as it is a site
planned for future residential development.
Mitigation Measures: No Mitigation Measures are required.
~3
XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES:
Project mitigation measures are contained in Section F, Mitigation necessary to avoid Significant Impacts
and "table I, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, of Mitigation Negative Declaration IS OS-006.
XX. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES
By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and Operator stipulate that they have each read,
understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation 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 [he Applicant's and Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance
without approval and that the Applicant an~ ra~hall a~ fo~nvironmental Impact Report.
C
~,Q.r ; ~- ~, ~i ~ ~ ~'e'~ YEA ~r~~C-a, ~`' ~~e
Printed Name and Title of Applicant
(or ayT•lto~ed representative)
f ~
_.. _
®~ ~:
Signature of Applicant Date
(or authorized representative)
Printed Name and Title of Operator
(if different from Applicant)
Signature of Operator
(if di ferent f om Applicant)
Date
2-}
XXI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY 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 checklist on the previous pages.
^ Land Use and Planning ^ Transportation/Traffic ^ Public Services
^ Population and Housing ^ Biological Resources ^ Utilities and Service Systems
^ Geophysical ^ Energy and Mineral Resources ^ Aesthetics
^ Agricultural Resources
^ Hydrology/Water ~ Hazards and Hazardous ^ Cultural Resources
Materials
^ Air Quality ^ Noise ^ Recreation
^ Paleontological ^ Mandatory Findings of Significance
Resources
25
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 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 may have a significant effect on the environment, and an ~
Environmental Impact Report is required.
I find that the proposed project may have a "potentially significant impact" or "potentially ~
significant unless mitigated" impact on the environment, but at least one effect: 1) has been
adequately analyzed in an ear]ier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, and 2)
has been addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier analyses as described on
attached sheets. An Environmental Impact Report is required, but it must analyze only
the effects that remain to be addressed.
I find that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the ~
environment, because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately
in an earlier EIR or Negative Declaration pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have
been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR or Negative Declaration, including
revisions or mitigation measures that are imposed upon the proposed project, nothing
further is required.
Marilyn R.F. Ponseggi Datc
Environmental Review Coordinator
City of Chula Vista
J \PlanningUAARIAVnitial Study\IS OS-006Checklistdoc
?G