Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutRCC AGENDA PK 2005/01/03Mitigated Negative Declaration PROJECT NAME: Mater Dei High School and Church Complex PROJECT LOCATION: Intersection of Birch Road and Magdalena Avenue ASSESSOK'S PARCEL NO.: 643-052-13 and 643-052-14 PROJECT APPLICANT`. Catholic Diocese of San Diego CASE NO.: IS-04-002 DATE OF DRAFT DOCUMENT: December 17. 2004 DATE OF RESOURCE CONSERVATION COMMISSION MEETING. January 3, 2005 DATE OF FINAL DOCUMENT: Prepared by: Maria C. Muett A. Project Setting The project site consists of a vacant 51.17-acre area located in Village Six of the Otay Ranch Planned Community. Birch Road borders the site to the south, the future State Route 125 to the esst, Magdalena Avenue to the west, and single-family residences to the ^orth, (refer to Exhibit 'A' - Location Map). There are three detention silt basins located throughout the protect site. The protect site has been rough graded and contains steep slopes that run along the southern and western edges of the property. Berms have also been graded along the SR-125 corzidor at the eastern side of the property. Primary access to the project site will be off of Birch Road and Magdalena Avenue (across from the future elementary school site). Refer to Exhibit `B' Site Plan. Frontage roadway improvements are completed along Magdalena Avenue from Santa Veneta to Lokoya Drive (last residential collector before Birch Road intersection); tiom Magdalena Avenue and Lokoya Drive to Birch Koad (expected to be completed by the end of 2004). Birch Road is to he completed by the developer of Village Six m 2005 from La Media Avenue all the way to SR-125 Land uses surrounding the project sire consist of the following: North: Village Six/Single-family residences South: Village Seven/Single-family residences East: Future Interstate 12~ and Freeway Commercial retail use West. Village Six/Single-family residences and future elementary school site B. Project Descriotion The project proposal consists of a private high school and church complex for development in four separate phases. The project site is located within the Village Six SPA of Otay Ranch. The proposed project includes development of a church complex consisting of a sanctuary to accommodate total buildout of 1,000-1,800 parishioners, administration office and Pastoral Center. The Mater Dei High School includes school buildings to accommodate total buildout oC approximately 2,200 students, I ~0 1~roulty, and 50 staff personnel. The school buildings consist of classrooms, administration offices, library, fine arts and theater, student services, chapel and gymnasium. Outside areas include a stadium, sports fields, swimming pool, basketball courts, batting cage and tennis courts. The site is located within the Otay Ranch General Development Plan wuh a Land Use Designation of LMV (Low-Medium Village Density ResidentiaU CPF-2 & R-] 1/S-Z) m the Planned Community (PC) Zone. The four phases of development are outlined below. It is important to note [hat the development phases may be concurrent: Phase 1 Construction of the temporary sanctuary, within a modular unit, with 68 temporary parking spaces. This facility would be located m the northeast corner of the project site where parking lot "A" will ultimately be built. Erosion control measures shall be in place on all disturbed and undeveloped area. During Phase 1, as required by the Engineering Division the project design includes extension of 3fl-inch pipe into inlet and extension of inlet. This phase is a temporary use area and will be removed upon construction of Phase 2. Phase 2 Construction of the gymnasium facility with 500 temporary parking spaces. Erosion control measures shall be in place on all disturbed and undeveloped area. This phase would be a permanent building use. Phase 3 Construction of the chapel, two classroom buildings, student support building, church administration building, maintenance building, stadium, basketball courts, athletic fields and parking lots "A" through "C". Erosion control measures shall be in place on all disturbed and undeveloped area. This phase would be a permanent building use. Phase 4 Construction of [he buildout phase including the main sanctuary building, pastoral center, the two final classroom buildings, the library, school administration building, fine arts & theatre building, pool complex, tennis courts and parking lot "D". Erosion control measures shall be in place on all disturbed and undeveloped area. This phase would be a permanent building use. 'The project site is accessible via one driveway located off of Birch Road and two driveways located off of Magdalena Avenue. The project includes landscaped treatments, lighting, signage, drainage facilities pedestrian pathways, fencing, retaining walls, barrier walls, a screening fence for the baseball batting cage and sports field chain link fencing. The site was rough graded in 2003, in accordance with the mitigation measures identified in the EIR 98-O1. Proposed fill grading will occur over the entirety of the 51.17-acre srte. Grading includes 116,600 cubic yards to be excavated (primarily for the stadium). The excavated soil will be relayered over the whole project site. The proposed grading includes maximum cut depth of 17.50 feet, average cut depth at 7-feet, as well as maximum depth of fill at 2-feet. It is anticipated that no soil would need to be imported to or exported from the site. The project specific noise study determined that the noise bamers specified in EiR 98-01 are not regmred given the precise project site design. Noise issues are discussed further in the Noise Section below Prior Approvals and Environmental Documentation "17te Otay Kanch General Development Plan/SRP Program Einal E1R (E1R 90-O1) and the Sphere of Influence Update EIR have addressed the development oC Village Stx. The Otay Ranch Program EIR 2 was certitied by the City Council and San Diego County Board of Supervisors on October 28,1993. The Criy of Chula Vista certified the Sphere of Influence Update EIR and Mitigation Monitoring Program nn March 21, 1995. A Second "Pier Environmental Impact Report addressed [he adoption of a Sectional Planning Area Plan Cor Village Six of the Otay Ranch. In addition, the EIR included the evaluation of two concept tentative maps and a possible use of an area identified for a church and private high school. The impact area considered in this EIR totaled approximately 443 acres; this included 386 acres within the project area and 56.3 acres in two borrow/storage areas. The City of Chula Vista certified the Final Second Tier EIR and Mitigation Monitoring Program in December 2001. Environmental review for the proposed project has been regwred to address any potential environmental impacts beyond those originally anticipated in the Village Six EIR. This document is a tiered environmental document to the EIIt. Refer to the Phasing Table below for Phase descriptions, construction dates, parking quantity, studenUparishioners and staff quantity. 3 PROPOSED PROJECT - Phase I Com letion Winter 2005 Proposed Uses Sr/uare Foota e Proposed Ca aci Employees Parking Spaces Re ./Provided Temporary Modular Uni[ 2,840 Weekday Mass 2 staff members Weckdny Mass for church services & 20-100; 31/68 office use Saturday and Sunday Mass Sunday Mass up 65/68 to 219 _ _ PROPOSED PROJECT - _Phase 1I Com [eti_on Fall _2006 _ __ 6ymnas'ium 41,530 Special ~ Special (Temporary use for Events/(lame, ~ EventsiDaily church serviced UA) ~ Mass/Sunday Weekday Ma« ~ Mass 20-100 Saturday/Sunday Weekday Mass 58/500 i0001150U if Sundav dewy ~ 429;509 _ PKOPOSED_PROJECT -Phase 111 Crnn letian _Fnll 2007 _ Chapel 4,156 Weekday Mass 20-100 Saturday/Sundav_ Mass L,500 _ C'.lassroom Bldgs. (#3/#4) 58,70] 1,000 _ _ . Student Support 12,602 _ _ _ _ Church Adni;n. 12,087 _ Maintenance Bldg. 2,064 _ Storage 800 _ __ _ _ Stadium, Basketball Courts, Ball Fields _ Parking Lot A _ _ 135 Parking l.o[ B 198 Parkin T.ot C _. __ _ _ 154 Total Patkmg Weekdav 279/~'h Sundav 514/776 PROPOSED PROJECT -Phase IV Com letion Fa112009 Chwch 31,306 Pastoral Center 11,818 Classroom Bldg. 58,701 1,200; total 2,200 Libra 14,757 Administration 11,768 Fine Arts Theatre 25,710 Pool, Tennis Courts Parking Lot D 478 spaces Buildout Total: 290,000 2,200 students Combined 1,800 church Parking Lots members max. Weekday 579/965 Sunday 514/965 The project plans call for the redistribution of square footage between the sanctuary and school classrooms, as well as the relocation of sports lelds. The proposed sports fields are no[ any closer to the adjacent single-family residences than previously analyzed in EIR 98-O1. The total square footage of the church complex and high school is approximately the same as that analyzed in the certified F.IR Cor the Utay Ranch Village Six. The square footage of the high school and church complex m the EIR ~s 297,500 square feet. Hours of Operation -High School The hours of operation of the high school are 7:40 a.m. to 1:55 p.m. As reflected on the site plans, a student drop ofC and peek up area is designated for operation from 7:10 a.m. - 7 45 a.m. for the student drop off, and L40 p.m. - 2:10 p.m. for the student pickup. Students will walk to the adjoining sanctuary for services on Wednesday from 9:30 am to 10:30 am. Seasonal sporting events will occur at the high school during the following months, days and hours: a) Fall Sport events occur from September -November, at 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m.; b) Winter Sport events occur from November -June, at 3:00 p.m. and 7:00 p.m.; c) Spring sport events occur from March -June, at 3:00 p.m.; d) Friday night football contains pre/game from 6:00 p.m. - 7:00 p.m. and postgame from 9:00 p.m. - 10:00 p.m. Extra curricular activities will take place in the amphitheatre, fine arts/theater and pool. The amphitheater will only operate during school hours and be used only for school purposes. The fine arts/theater will he used only for school purposes during school hours and 3-4 nights per month during the school year. Pool use will operate during daylight hours and be used for school purposes and possibly community use. This is to be determined later and reevaluated by the City as required per the City Municipal Code, standards and regulations. Hours of Operatign - Sanctuar~plex Phase 1 The commercial coach/office will operate during the hours of 9:00 a.m. - 5:00 p.m. "fhe temporary coach will be used for occasional meetings Monday thru Thursday between the hours of 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. Mass services will occur daily beriveen the hours of 5:30 p.m. - 6:15 p.m., related meetings from 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m., Saturday mass at 5:30 p.m., and Sunday mass at 730 a.m. Phase 2 Upon the start of Phase 2, the activities and commercial coach of Phase 1 will cease operation. The gymnasium will be constructed during Phase 2 to be used as a temporary sanctuary and provide daily mass and meetings with the same hours as noted in Phase I. The reconciliation services and mass will take place on Saturday at 4:00 p.m. and 5:30 p.m., respectively. Sunday mass will occur at 7:30 a.m., 9:00 a.m., 10:30 a.m., and 12:00 noon. Phase 3 "fhe existing gymnasium will now only operate as a sanctuary on Saturday and Sunday, according to the service times noted in Phase 2. The Chapel will be constructed during this phase and provide daily mass at 5:30 p.m. The sanctuary administrative office will be constructed during this phase and the hours of operation will be 9:00 a.m. 5:00 p.m., meetings will be between the hours of 6:30 p.m. - 9:00 p.m. on Mondays thin Thursdays. S Phase 4 Monday thru Fnday the following services will be provided; a) mass sernces will take place at 8:00 a.m.; b) CCD Class will be conducted after school; c) adult instruction classes will take place in the evenings; d) funeral services and mass typically take 1-hour with procession following; e) pastoral center will have various activities and undefined hours at this time. Fhe reconciliation sernces and mass will take place on Saturday at 4:00 p.m. and 5:30 p.m., respectively. Sunday mass will occur at 7:30 a.m., 9:OQ a.m., 10:30 a.m., and 12:00 Hewn. C. Compliance with Zoning and Plans Phe site is located within the Otay Ranch General Development Plan with a Land Use Designation of LMV (Low-Medium Village Density Residential) and CPF-2 & R-ll/S-2 (Community Purpose Facility & Single Family Residential) in the Planned Community (PC) 'Lone. The project is consistent with the regulations of the PC Zone and with the LMV General Plan designation. The project requires the approval of Design Review by the Design Review Committee and a conditional use permit by the Planning Commission. D. Public Comments On October 28, 2004, a Notice of Initial Study was circulated to property owners within a 500-foot radius of the project site. The public comment period ended on November 8, 2004; staff received one verbal communication regarding the project description and planning process. In addition staff received one written communication regarding traffic and noise issues. These issues are addressed in the technical studies noted below. E. Identification of Envirorunental Effects An Initial Study conducted by the City of Chula Vista (including an attached Environmental Checklist form) determined that the proposed project would not have a significant environmental effect because of mitigation measures incorporated into the project, and the preparation of an Environmental Impact Report will not be required. This Mitigated Negative Declaration has been prepared in accordance with Section 15070 of the State CEQA Guidelines. Aesthetics The applicant has submitted a lighting plan in accordance with the mitigation measures of the Final Second Tier EIR for Otay Ranch Village Six. The proposed lighting plan addresses all proposed exterior lighting and the type used; metal halide. The applicant does not propose lighting at [he playing fields directly adjacent to the single-family residential properties to the north. The proposed lighting includes stadium lighting, parking lot lighting, church complex and school buildings lighting, court lighting as well as, walkway and landscape area lighting. "I'he lighting study indicates that no hghting rays or glare shall spread onto adjacent or surrounding residential properties. In addition, compliance with glare regulations (Section 19.66.100) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code (C'VMC) is regmred. No source of substantial glare or light will result that would adversely affect day or nighttime views in the area. No significant aesthetic Impacts to the surrounding residential properties that will result in substantially degrading the existing visual character or quality of the site and its surroundings as a result of the proposed project will occur. 6 I[ydrolo~~and Water uahty Ilydrology "1'he preparation of a drainage study will be required in conjunction with the preparation of final grading plans. Post-developed flows shall not exceed pre-developed flows and shall be directed away from neighboring properties. The drainage study will be required to demonstrate the amount of flows contributed by the proposed project and the adequacy of proposed facilities to handle said flows to the satisfaction of the City Engineer. According to the Engineering Department, no significant impacts to the City's storm drainage system are anticipated to result from the proposed development. Water Quality According to the Final Second Tier EIR, potential long-term, and indirect significant water quality impacts may be orated as a result of development within Village Six. All development within Village Six is required to be in compliance with [he appropriate Water Resources and Water Quality mitigation measures noted in the EIR. These mitigation measures include the approval of a detailed drainage study prior to issuance of a grading permit, submittal of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP), eroston control measures on all disturbed areas, plus erosion control measures in place during winter and spring months for the undisturbed areas, and treatment of urban pollutants. As a result of compliance with these measures the impacts are mitigated to a level less than significant. C'anstnrrtion BA1PS' Due to the size and existing condition of the project site, the preparation and Implementation of a Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (SWPPP) and the filing of a Notice of Intent with the Regional Water Quality Control Board will be required. Construction BMPS will be fully addressed in the SWPPP. During construction, BMPS from the California Best Management Practices IIandbook will be used, which have been frequently used on job sites and have been proven effective. Examples of construction BMPS include silt fences, sandbags, and hay bales, which are strategically placed around curb inlets, catch basins, and driveways in order to prevent silt and sediment from entering the storm drain system. Post-Colutntction BMPS In accordance with the mitigation measures of the EIR, the applicant is required to submit a SWPPP including maintenance responsibilities for review and approval by the City Engineer prior to issuance of grading permits. The SWPPP shall be consistent with the requirements of the Clean Water Act and the BMPS of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). The proposed site design BMPS include reducing imperviousness and utilizing landscaping throughout the site to provide some detention and infiltration. Landscaping will be provided on the project site in accordance with City standards. All trash container areas shall be designed not to allow nm-on from adjoining areas and he screened or walled to prevent off-stte transport of trash. Additional BMPS include catch basins, gravel bags, filter fabnc material/silt fencing, hydroseeding of undisturbed areas, bonded fiber matrix on all unprotected slopes, maintenance and cleanup of all nuisance materials. Required post-construction BMPS will be subject to the approval of a project- specitic water quality study by the Clty Engineer, and may therefore vary to some degree from the proposed BMPS described. However, the uverall result must be the same regardless of the specific BMPS approved. The City Engineer wlll take all necessary steps to ensure that the approved BMPS will be Implemented and will be sufficient to treat stte runoff prior to exlsting the site and entering the public storm drain in accordance with the applicable established water yuality standards. 7 Noise To assess the potential nose impacts of the project, an acoustical Impact analysis was prepared by Investigative Science and Engineering, Inc., Acoustical Site Assessment for d9ater Dei HiXh Schonl and Gntrch Facility -Chula Vista, C.9, and dated December 16, 2004, a copy of which is available for review at the Planning and Building Department. The results of thts analysis are summarized below. Noise Standards The acoustical analysts assessed the project with respect to the regulations contained in Chapter 19.68, Performance Standards and Noise Control, of the Chula Vtsta Municipal Code (Horse control ordinance) and the noise element of the Chula Vista General Plan. Pursuant to the Horse control ordinance, no person shall operate, or cause to be operated, any source of sound at any location within the city or allow the creation of any noise on property owned, leased, occupied, or otherwise controlled by such person which exceeds the established noise level limits (C.V.M.C. § 19.68.030(A)(4)). The Horse level limits of the noise control ordinance vary by receiving land use category and time of day (daytime versus nighttime). Per Section 19.68.030 (B)(4) of the noise control ordinance, if the ambient Horse level exceeds the established noise level limit, then the allowable noise exposure standard shall be the ambient noise level. The existing and potenial future noise-sensitive uses adjacent to the project site potentially affected by project-generated noise consist of single-family residences to the north, and surrounding residential single-family residences to the west. Ambient noise levels were measured during daytime hours at three locations during a I-hour period. Measurements collected at the monitoring locations reflected the typical worst case existing sound levels. The hourly average sound level (Leq) recorded over the monitoring period was a maximum of 60.4 dBA and this level was due to the combination of traffic along the existing surface street and nearby construction noises. The lowest recorded level 52.3 dBA was measured along Magdalena Avenue where sparse residential activities were noted. These levels were determined to be compatible with the proposed development plan. Iror the evaluation of potential off-site receivers due to on-site noise sources, the City nurse ordinance allows the facility to make hourly average noise levels of up to 55 dBA or the ambient, whichever is higher, during the daytime hours at the residential property line. When evaluating the potential noise impacts to on-site receivers due to off-site sources (i.e., traffic), for this project the City has specified a land use compatibility noise standard of 70 community noise equivalent level (CNEL) for the athletic fields and 65 CNEL for the remaining on-site outdoor use areas. It is noted that the noise analysis presented in EIR 98-01 used a land use compatibility noise standard of 65 CNEL for the entire school site. The analysis presented in EIIt 98-01 was based on a preliminary site design. Based on the proposed final site design assessed in the 2004 project specific noise analysis, the City has determined that a 70 CNEL land use compatibility noise standard is appropriate for the athletic fields. Traffic Noise As indicated, for this project the City's exterior noise level threshold for the noise-sensitive exterior uses excluding the athletic fields is 65 CNEL. Tor the athlehc playing fields, the City has determined that the applicable noise level threshold is 70 CNEL. As noted above this standard differs from that assumed in the noise analysis presented in EIR 98-01. The protected traffic noise impacts along Magdalena Avenue, Birch Road and future SR-125 were 8 assessed in the project specific analysis. The proposed project would generate a total of 8,727 average daily traffic (ADT) at pn~Iect buildout, which would be added to the local roadways over time corresponding to completion of the four project consnuction phases. 'the previous project analyzed in EIR 98-O1 was estimated to generate 8,435 AD"C. fheretore, this proposed pmlect is estimated to generate 292 additional ADT relative to that assessed in EIR 98-01. Nevertheless, this small change in project-generated traffic is not anticipated to adversely affect the buildout roadway noise levels in the area. Noise Barriers According to [he Otay Ranch Village Six Master Plan EIR (EIR 98-01) and the Engineering Division, the future predicted traffic volume along SR-125 is approximately 147,000 ADT with a southbound off ramp volume of 12,000 ADT, near the school and church complex. Traffic noise impacts were identified in the EIR noise technical study and mitigation was proposed to reduce impacts to Ics's than significant. As indicated, an updated site-specific noise analysis was prepared for the proposed project in 2004. The updated analysis considered the final proposed site plan as well as the existing and proposed future topography of the project site including the existing berms along the future SR-12S corridor. The results of flits site-specific noise analysis indicate that there are no anticipated traffic generated noise impacts to the school and church facility. Consequently, no mitigation, including that specified in EIR 98-01, is required. Thus the noise barriers specified in EIR 9R-01 are not required for implementation of the proposed project. Stationary Noise Sources Potentially significant stationary noise sources associated with the school and church operations and development activities consist of school events, rooRop air conditioners or equipment, short-term or phased construction activities, public address system, and school bells. A summary of the analysis of estimated noise generated by these stationary sources is as follows: Pr+filic Address Svstem/Bells Typical noise sources generated from school facilities and sports events include public address systems and bell signal systems that are essential to a school facility 'Elie Gty of Chula Vista Noise Ordinance, Section 19.68.OS0, regulates these signaling devices. The school and church shall be required to comply with [he City's Municipal Code Section 19.68.050, allowing the church and school to operate the bell as a signaling device and limits the sounding of these devices to no more than hvo minutes continually in any 60-minute period or intermittent sounding over afive-minute period in any hour. No significant noise impacts are expected to occur to any residential receptors as a result of the operation of the public address system or bell signaling system. HVAC/Roof-mounted Equipment Operation and details regarding the air conditioning (HVAC) and roof-mounted equipment are not available at this time. Upon completion of the mechanical design, the applicant shall be reyuired to submit separate noise analyses and mechanical plans for each phase subject to review the City linvironmental Review Coordinator prior to issuance of building permits for each phase. Upon review of additional noise analysis, tf ~t is determined [hat there are potential noise impacts created by the HVAC or other mechanical equipment, then applicable mitigation measures shall be developed to insure these impacts are lessened to a level of less than significant. The applicant shall be required to be in compliance with applicable mitigation measures identified in the updated noise 9 analysis. "Phis mitigation measure rs contained m Section F below Construction Noise Construction activities have the potential to cause short-term noise impacts to Horse-sensitive uses adjacent to the project site (i.e., single family resrdences). Noise produced by construction equipment varies substantially depending upon the type of equipment being used and its operation and maintenance. Noise rmpacts associated wrth constnrction activities typically occurs in several distinct phases, each with its own noise characteristics, including demolition, site preparation, and construction. Construction noise is exempt from the noise limits specified in Section 19.68.040 of the Chula Vista Municipal Code. However, pursuant to Section 17.24.050(7) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, construction work in residential zones that generates noise disturbing to persons residing or working in the vicinity is not permitted between 10:00 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. Uue to the presence of residential development adjacent and surrounding areas of the project srte, this provision of the Municipal Code applies to the project, which would ensure that residents would not be disturbed by construction noise during the most noise sensitive periods of the day. On-Site Phased Construction Noire Impacts Although construction noise is exempt from the levels specified in Section 19.68.040, at the request of the City potential construction noise levels were estimated for assessment of potential impacts to on-site receivers (e.g., classrooms). Cumulative worst-case levels associated with construction equipment were calculated for the closest sensitive on-site receptors that include the phasing areas (i.e., ciassroomslschool buildings or church facilities). The City of Chula Vista does not have fixed operation standards for these types of construction activities, however, assessment is discussed below. The noise levels due to construction activities estimated for a worse case scenario are an eight-hour average of 74 dBA Leq approximately 100 feet from the construction activities. "These levels have the potential to adversely affect noise-sensitive uses such as classrooms and other school or church buildings. As such, these noise levels are considered by the City to represent a potentially significant impact. Although the City does not regulate construction noise during the day it should be noted that if noise levels are found to be excessive enough to disrupt classroom activities, or impact students or teachers in the classrooms or church buildings, onsite temporary noise barriers or other noise abatement measures shall be implemented on a case-by-case basis to provide adequate attenuation [o the affected phased areas. The placement of any required noase barriers would be between the construction activities of the current phase and the impacted buildings of any previously completed phase. Examples of acceptable barrier materials include, but are not 3imited to, masonry block, wood frame with stucco, 0.5-inch thick Plexiglas, or 0.25-inch thick plate glass. Temporary construction barriers shall be constructed to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator. This mitigation measure is contained in Section F below. TrafficlCirculation To assess the potential traffic/circulation rmpacts of the project that includes phasing plan, methodology, findings and recommendations, a traffic impact analysis was prepared by Bill Darnel{ ~ Associates, Inc., Traffic Impact ,Study for the Proposed ?,200.Seedenl Mufer Del High Schonl and CTaurclr Facility }vithin Otav Ranch Village Six-Chula Vista, Cil, dated September 10, 2004. A copy 10 of this study is available for review at the Planning and Building Department. The results of this analysis are summarized below. Significance Criteria "The criteria utilized to determine tf a traffic impact at an intersection or street segment is considered significant is based on City of Chula Vista standards. Both project specific and cumulative impacts can be significant impacts. The applicable sigmGcance criteria utilized in the project traffic tmpact analysis are as follows: Signalized/Unsignalized Intersections A project specific impact to a signalized or unsignalized intersection would result if both of the following criteria are met l . Level of service is LOS E or I,OS F. 2. Project trips comprise 9% or more of entering volume. Cumulative impact if only condition #1 is met Street Segments A project specific impact to a street segment would result if the following criteria are met 1. Level of service is LOS D for more than 2 hours or LOS E/F for 1 hour. 2. Project trips comprise 9% or more of segment volume. 3. Project adds greater than 800 ADT to the segment. Cumulative impact if only condition #1 is met. ExistinK Conditions The project site is on the north side of Birch Road, west of the future State Route 125. Access to the site will be provided via one location off of Birch Road and two locations off of Magdalena Avenue. At [he present time, Magdalena Avenue and Birch Road and the future SR-125 are no[ completed. Street improvements linked to the phased or accelerated project development are addressed below. Parking Requirements An analysis of the parking required for each phase of the project was completed. During each phase and buildout the proposed parking as noted above in the Phasing and Parking Tables will satisfy the City Municipal Code. The project proposes a total of 965 parking spaces and the required spaces per the City Municipal Code is a total of 950 spaces. Based on City Code a minimum of 579 parking spaces will be required to accommodate the typical weekday demand and a minimum of 514 parking spaces will be required to accommodate the Sunday Mass. "The proposed buildout-parking total of 965 will meet the City parlang requirements. No parking tmpacts are created by the phased or buildout project therefore no mitigation measures are required. Project Trip Generation The analysis of the buildout conditions with the addition of the full project would provide an assessment of the worse case scenario. The previously approved project (i.,e., a 45,000 square foot church and 2,200 high school students) was estimated to generate 8,439 AD"I' with ],626 AM peak hour trips and 434 PM peak hour trips. This proposed project would generate 292 additional trips, 105 more AM peak hour trips and 8 additional PM peak hour trips than previously approved. Phase/Breakdown The Phases of the proposed project are estimated to generate the following average daily trips (ADT); a) Phase 1 is estimated to generate 226 ADT with 1 AM peak hour trip and 102 PM peak hour trips, b) Phase 2 is estimated to generate 326 ADT with 1 AM peak hour trip and 112 PM peak hour trips, c) Phase 3 is estimated to generate 3,959 ADT with 735 AM peak hour trips, and 292 PM peak hour trips and, d) buildout of all four phases, the estimated generation is 8,727 ADT; 1,731 AM peak hour trips and 442 PM peak hour trips. The roadway network surrounding Village Six and the project site shall be built out to their ultimate configuration by 2006. Phase 1 is anticipated to be completed by winter of 2005, prior to the construction of Birch Road west of SR-125, the traffic generated by Phase 1 is estimated to be minimal and no significant traffic impacts to Magdalena Avenue are anticipated. No mitigation measures are required. Level of Service (LOS) Project .9ccess Levels oJService The entrance to the temporary Church Facility (the modular unit) will be constructed during Phase 1 and will take access via the Magdalena AvenuelSanta Venetia Street intersection. This intersection was analyzed under 2005 plus Phase 1 condition. All three-project access points and the Birch Road/Magdalena Avenue intersection were analyzed under buildout conditions. As analyzed, all approaches at the Magdalena Avenue/Santa Venetia Street intersection will operate at LOS B or better during the AM and PM peak hours render the Phase 1-2005 conditions. Under the buildout conditions, completion of Phase 4, the critical movements at all three access points and the Magdalena Avenue/Birch Road intersection will operate at LOS C' or better during both the AM and PM peak hours. "I'he increase of ADTs generated by the proposed project was not considered to be significant and no degradation of intersection or street segments occurred and the level of service (LOS) was maintained at LOS "C" or better. Street Segments/Access -Future Conditions According to the Engineering Division, Birch Road to the west of the proposed project site is planned to be constructed to provide six (6) travel lanes with three (3) lanes in each direction. Magdalena Avenue is proposed for construction between i3irch Road and Santa Venetia Street to provide four (4) travel lanes with two (2) lanes in each direction. Engineering requirements include the signalization of the school's main access off of Birch Road. The secondary htgh school access location off of Magdalena Avenue will be controlled by stop signs. The school staff entrance on Magdalena Avenue will be aligned with Santa Venetia Street, located on the south side of the Village 6 elementary school site. "The Magdalena Avenue and Santa Venetia Street intersection is currently constructed as a sgnalized T-intersection. Upon completion of the proposed project, the intersection and signal will require adjustment to include the staff entrance. The roadway network surrounding Village 6 and the proposed project site shall be built out to its ultimate configuration by 2006. These street segments are either currently in the process of being 12 constructed and/or planned for the future. In the case of SR-125 anticipated completion ism 2006. Phase 1 was originally scheduled for Fall 2004 but delayed until Winter 2005, pnor to the constniction of Birch Road located west of the portion adjacent to State Route 125. Thus the Phase 1 traffic was assessed within the existing roadway network and as noted no significant impact identified. The remaining phases are not anticipated for completion until Fall of 2006 or later. The roadway network will be built out to rts ultimate configuration prior to the Phases 2-4 generating traffic. In the case of phasing or accelerated compleuon of the project, the Engineering Division requires [he following improvements of the surrounding street segments for the proposed Conditional Use Permit to meet both contingencies, either by Phase or upon full completion. These are included as mitigation measures for the proposed project: Phase I - No mitigation measures required for Phase I . Phase 2 -Prior to occupancy of Phase 2, Magdalena Avenue from the existing improvements to Birch Road; Birch Road to La Media Road to Magdalena Avenue; and La Media Road from the existing improvements to Birch Road shall be completed. Phase 3 -Prior to occupancy of Phase 3, Birch Road from the existing improvements to the main entrance of the project along Birch Road shall be completed. Submittal of a striping and signing plan, prepared by a State of California licensed traffic engineer is required. In accordance with the requirements of the traffic study, the striping and signage plan shall analyze the need for signing and striping of a right-loin-only lane on westbound Birch Road, east of the main entrance. If it is determined that signage and striping are required, the installation of the required signage and striping shall be completed by a licensed Caltrans-certified traffic control contractor to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and at no cost to the City. Phase 4/buiklout - In the event of the proposed project accelerated to completion without phases, all traffic mitigation measures and off-site improvements must be met prior to final occupancy. Based upon the results of the Traffic Impact Analysis and incorporated conditions and measures, no significant project spca£c or cumulative impacts to the study area or street segments are estimated to result from the development of the proposed project. These mitigation measures are contained in Section F below. Air Quality The project site is located within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB). The proposed project will result in an increase in air pollutants during both the construction and operational phases of the project. Fugitive dust would be created during demolition, grading and construction activities. Although air quality impacts resulting from construction-related operations are potentially significant, they are considered short-term in duration since construction-related activities are a relatively short-term activity. Dust control measures implemented during grading operations would be regulated in accordance with the rules and regulations of the County of San Diego Atr Pollution Control District (APCD) and the California Air Resources Board. Any air quality impacts were covered in the Village Six E1R, and the required mitigation measures would mitigate short-term constniction-related air quality impacts to below a level of significance. No additional mitigation measures are required. 13 F Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Si¢mficant Imuacts Noise "The following noise mitigation requirements shall be shown on all applicable demolition, p~radmg and building plans as details, notes, or as otherwise appropriate, and/or shall be made conditions of project approval where appropriate. 1. Pursuant to Section 17.24.050(J) of the Chula Vista Municipal Code, project-related constriction activities shall be prohibited behveen the hours of 1000 p.m. and 7:00 a.m. Monday through Friday and between 10:00 p.m. and 8:00 a.m. Saturdays and Sundays. '. On-site noise monitoring by a registered noise consultant shall be conducted during grading and construction activities. If noise impacts are identified, then an additional noise analysis with appropriate mitigation measures shall submitted for approval by the Environmental Review Coordinator. The applicant shall be required to comply with the appropriate mitigation measures that may include temporary construction noise barriers to provide noise attenuation for noise impacts to the affected classrooms or other school and church buildings prior to the next phased development. 3. In the event of construction noise impacts to the phased classrooms or church buildings, the placement of any required noise barriers shall be placed between the construction activities of the current phase and the impacted buildings of any previously completed phase. Examples of acceptable barrier materials include, but are not limited to, masonry block, wood frame with stucco, 0.5-inch thick Plexiglas, or 0.25-inch thick plate glass. Temporary construction barriers shall be constn~cted to the satisfaction of the City's Environmental Review Coordinator. 4. Prior to approval of building permits for each phase of the development, and upon completion of the mechanical design for the HVAC and roof-mounted equipment, the applicant shall be required to submit separate nwse analyses and mechanical plans for review the City Environmental Review Coordinator to insure that noise levels from [he equipment will not exceed the City of Chula Vista's Noise Ordinance Standards. 5. Upon review of the additional noise analyses, if rt is determined that there are potential noise impacts created by the HVAC or other roof mounted eyuipment, then applicable mitigation measures shall be developed to insure these impacts lessen to a level of less than significance. The applicant shall be required to be in compliance with these applicable mitigation measures. G. All rooftop pumps, fans and air conditioners on the school and/or church complex buildings shall include mechanical silencers and be screened by a minimum 3-foot high roofop parapet. Traffic 7. Prior to occupancy of Phase 2, Magdalena Avenue from the existing improvements to Birch Road; Birch Road to La Media Road to Magdalena Avenue; and La Media Road from the existing improvements to Birch Road shall be completed. 8. Prior to occupancy of Phase 3, Birch Road tiom the existing improvements to the main entrance of the project along Birch Road shall be completed. 14 9. Prior to occupancy of Phase 3, submittal of a striping and signing plan, prepared by a State of Cahfumia licensed traffic engineer ~s reyuired. In accordance with the requirements of the traffic study, the striping and signage plan shall analyze the need for signing and stnping of a right-tum- only lane on westbound Birch Road, cast of the main enhance. If it is determined that signage and stnping are required, the installation of the required signage and striping shall be completed by a licensed Caltrans-certified traffic control contractor to the satisfaction of the City Engineer and at no cost to the City. ]0. In the event that the project is completed without phases, all mitigation measures and off-site improvements shall be met prior to final occupancy of the project. G. Consultation 1. Individuals and Organizations Ciry of Chula Vista Marilyn R.F. Ponseggi, Planning and Building Paul Hellman, Planning and Building Steve Power, Planning and Building Marisa Lundstedt, Planning and Building Rick Rosaler, Planning and Building Harold Phelps, Planning and Building Brad Remp, Planning and Building Frank Rwera, Engineering Samir Nuhaily, Engineering Silvester Evetovich, Engineering Dave Kaplan, Engineering Dino Seratini, Engineering Sandra Hernandez, Engineering Beth Chopp, Engineering Mark Caro, Parks and Recreation Justin Gipson, Fire Department Amy Lindquist, Fire Department Richard Preuss, Police Department Dave Byers, Public Works/Ops. Applicant/Property Owner: Catholic Diocese of San Diego Agent: Thomas Christian and Karyn Malmgren NTD Stichler Others: Otay Ranch Water District Chula Vista Iaementary School D~stnct Charly Bull and David Gottfredson, RFCON IS 2. Documents City of Chula Vista General Plan, 1989 (as amended) Title 19, Chula Vista Municipal Code Acoustical Site Assessment for Mater Dei High School and Church Facility -Chula Vista, CA, Investigative Science and Engineering, Inc., December 16, 2004. Traffic Impact Study for Mater Dei High School and Church Facility located within Village Six, Darnell & Associates, Inc., September 10, 2004. " Initial Study This 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 Deparhnent, 276 Fourth Avenue, Chula Vista, CA 91910. Marilyn R. F. Ponseggi Environmental Review Coordinator 1'\PlanningVvIARIA\Iml~al Study\IS-04-002Bdra111MND.doc Date: 16 i i ---- i -- ,; - _ i `I i ~~ ii - _ n - - - ~ 11 - = FUTURE ~I ; ~ ~- C ~,Q~~. A- _ - ~ PARK a II - r ~~~,,,. `~ ... P fl. ± ~ ELEMENTARY : ~ , ~ ~"~ II o ~ ~ slrE ~ - JASMINE III ~" it II SPNZP JEN~t~r ,' ~lC~ ' ~ , ', ; \\ it ,.; , 'AUBURN. /' ,~/' /~,.;" ~% II ~ `~ LANE ,%" ;,' ;' , / ,~ ",.'' ;%" II o ~ . Ana ~ ~~'/,'~, ,'/,/% it St ~+~ / ~/' . ,> ,. %~-' ~ ~~ PR01E T ~~ '~' '~ - - LOCATION ,I -___ - _ - - BIRCH RD _ - -- - -- II CHULA VISTA PLANNING AND BUILDING DEPARTMENT LOCATOR PROJECT APPLICANT. DIOCESE OF SAN DIEGO PROJECT DESCRIPTION: INITIAL STUDY PRwECT R 11lS-2 & CPF-2 Request: Pro 1 for a ovate hi h school and church ~~ p g ADDRESS. Okay Ranch Village Slx complex within Otay Ranch Vllage Six, R-11/S-2 and NORTH SCALE; FILE NUMBER: No Scale IS-04-002 CPF-2. Related Cases : DRC-04-04,PCC-04-004 Exhibit A .p n t ~ i F S g~ ~~~~ gg g p gaC qA¢Y A 7 Ff Y P99{~i~i@€S.cd~~~die9 ~~eenn~~ne~~~n~rii~n~~~o~~ ~, ,; ~ __ N (~~ ~ n [i a. R ~ ~ , ~\. / . .- ~~i :?~!t':.i pq -\ r.y , ~,,~~" ~ -.b - :. ~'. o . ;:; Vii, 4 i `~ o $', - ~ ~ . S~ wY i 'JJLG ' a w ~. @ ~`~.. iS ~.`L':IEjE f o ~. ~f p ~! 9'~ EI `~ ~Yt ~. y ° ~~'~ P °y ~ 3 ~IEI~ 9 B ES ~Ii v € A !~ a ia~ ~a~ g~` +'~ LL _ [[ d o 7 P gg5~~ : ~5~'w9i3t'w9fi~i~~1~a~tii~tE ~, s 0 i. 1 ia. E Er. i ii. E g~! ! l3~P ! 'y`~! ! '~gie! i !~~ ~ ii9~ E !1~~ F df 5; F v e 3 ! ! 3 'I\\~\ !i. / { s ! ~' ~~9! ! ! e ~~ ~1 ~ I f~ ~\ ~ ~ :E3f E{{u Rc F!iF e;i :{: -:~f'~EI G'F.a Sf =ill f'~ .-a Fi~~ is~ti. ~:.~f SFS''.'~'S s e.... ..:. _..+_E: F~:~j_ i ,,-i ra I~~ W ATTACHMENT A MITIGATION MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM (MMRP) Mater Dei High School and Church Complex - IS-04-002 This Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program has been prepared by the City of Chula Vista in conjunction with the proposed Serrano Family Parcel Map project. 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-04- 002). The legislation requires public agencies to ensure that adequate mitigation measures aze 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. Noise 2. 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-04-002 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 Necessazy to Avoid Significant Effects, of Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-04-002, 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 aze 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 1PlanningNdARIA~Ini~ial Study~IS-04-002MMRPtexLdoc N G O E E 0 V 4 d m Q E V m n Q G a Q. °¢ b O a a C7 Z O c ~ o0 ~ am G o ~ p E'~ Q ~ 7 (7 Y z O _ Y T 9 c ~ ~ ~ ~ ms f3 N N y m ~~ ~ c ~ rn ~rn 6cn 0 c `a> ~ c.: qn. ry U C dt 6 80' QRQ 4 W X x ~ x X 2 x ~ X X sc X '' u X c Z o g O v n G iw Z 01 e a ~> Q ~~' ~2 m N O P Y~ 2T C O m C U m c rn ~p C V C 6 Q N d a. o ~ o N U m c p ~ yy p N V = d d L G m e ~ d a o m c 'NO ro=°n U d m~~ ~ ~ p "gym i d U'S O oU= aU ~ U m d d~d^c mn R o m dcS, L.. Z a L N M O 0 Z ~V m ~~ N ~- ry _ ~_., C R U~ Vl d d d L r -- _' L~ro Q- d~ d d ~O E ~ C N O C Q U d O G .O N J L~ D_ W V E O N ~i N 9 0 9d~ CpoO adc Ors ~OC SJ ~ddZZ ry~d~~6NN myd ~dC ~l4 ? E. O U V d @t. ^ 7 N b d ~ E G d¢ N d U N i D .r d N N O X ~o-c d2 ~"P >.aE~ ocE ~°~jn moio mr.wU ° c=` od`S d10O m 'o c£Endm ~Gd o dd-O o,u ~~.'`yd .`-3,.00° m cN ~ $ ° 'G c p ~' i.dc c s ~ $ m a a ~ .. N m $ u~~ ~. rE ~ro E m c ~ - <~' U ~--9 d4d~E~O~c~~EL av~E 3o3Y~,l~9c da °'$°n`o~c_ U d v ZiNOC CO ~ACAd~60Ndd S0~9 UN~UOOV ~~~ OL ocpp od»c of °'o °. `o ti6 O-c5d cc=demo,.$m v_c $~~c3EO ~ U L d N N~ d tb a O l3 N~~ L O .~ L~ C N n~ ~ an 0 6 (.) N L~ O .Udi p d D d `ry f3 d o L d A 0 ~ O N O N n Z' N G W- n 7 4 '- U d 0• p ~ Nl~9C ~ O+.'n. 4i~U. 9 N N G OL N d0~ 0°~~ N~ O ~7nd~ dz .T N d~ N ~~ j 6 T p N C O O L Cp }` 7 CA dU d d ~ .. C A N. d i0 C G~ i ~ N N O` 9 O O E C d N E N D~ O U U d N d r O Y $.9 $ O d O N in E E 7 O E O T N O~ Ue d D K~ E O_ () O_ O N O O n N q~ N U U O 6 C U r `Of' N 7 m~ oN E9° of ~.QL °'°a m E ~ u°d o.~ ~ d.'• d m 4''_nc ~> L N O L O E N Co C N y~ .. O V N ry p` N +p- U ~ C N m 'y O> y¢ c w d U OU O-~O ~OUNGjO~QNNNb `dL, N~~CO.K/O ~~OK ff. 'O ,O dN O E W G c a d E° ^~ °' $ m i~ m d'~ c u d °' ro ~ n m m w ~.= 9 d c d E 9 ~ 9 ~ >jLO ro Or m_°EWn a h N R d ft G t s+q ~3 ° ~ rn C C C l6 ' w u rn c c ° ~U ~~ U ~ ~ c c ~°~. c. m oi~ Uccm o m °-- m ~~~~ U~ ~pd c~`m~~ a~9 J m F9 ~ U 4: ~«v °' E . ~ ami a L ~ cm 6 ~ ' Quci m Y~ Uwy t0 m c~E '. 4 U~ i. . gcmd ,~;~- C m N :n mvv 019 ry p 4w rod ca'E ~'cm , .Q ~+~Q QW AO c m dN d Q111 m 6 p d 4 ~ ~ aa° Y~tm x 6U X ~ ~~ ~ ~ X X K X c d Q r m c O m ~ u U m ~ O L m p C m m c ~V1~ ~° mL C m d C N~ U N C N N d U m (n ~ Y y C m d A L L C V U d (OL ~ aU- Vy _ N 9 U d N s N 0' U m N t0 U m N L 6 a U~ v imA N« 9 m O N aU< _ ° m o n o-U~ m o L ~ ccmw°'~9 m m ° ~ d a p U ~ 9 p v L m ~ ~« o n m m Q-~ M L m u m ui u ms m om o t °'~a~ m y~m~m °~ 3 00 N C B C 7 m U tpo C~~ fj ~ ON ~ C dimm w p O ~ m 9 ~~ m 6 6 ~_ U ~- O L O m O m 0 4~ ,o ° N< ~~ c N ~CL .~ O ~~ p O m r1' [O~yNdE N7c'~ cVNO ~`S - ~U9m~'m r., L°'pCA E:NO m EEmd~' o muE °-' 10m;n s mm no~rs- o~vv-roEs `m s~~ N 6O _ 7 b 0 S 7 d °0.. p~ ` L m N N N C m __ N O ~'m~~mON E O~ cm 'b O. 00900C~mOC UCdpp ['~ °p O mLV IO NnE GNE ~`QN mmO mVI NJ NmdmC10CW mNJ m- m s__ m U N N m N~ m U m ~'O U N m m L p 0.d O N N .- N N (6 1] ~ O F° N~ m L D~~ C 3 Vy. N~~ J- °G m J N B N tpi 00 II N .~ i6 E S O D Q 9 ~~/ LO Np VO1 ~ U « A c moE$ v.~.o sca_ 2t'm o~'mm m.LL m'gam rnm` ~~ rv m D m d m~~ p c s ~, '° ` r~ m c_ u.c m« L E° O m 0 ~ UI p 16 N% N O N cL T m N C m yr T N Q~ h O C " O m '- C N N N U E 9 p- 7, N m = C p 0 V N E 6 N N 6 U U O ~O % ~ j 0 6 °'m ~ C C C m C U 0 m N 6 RyG O~O~ cnON N69 m9 60~ Ury~~N OR acv ~~U m°~m LSo~m or rr dundt aEo«m uE~ on~'Et~ vrno+m ca m'" E '$ _rnEr E`-°~. uaK rcm o- ooimdN c6c_~«Em 'c °«U~ maim d=~~ o5mod omm cu'3 cc~a mm A.U 5ms E d U N v .._ E O~ p C~ O R Q• -y U N ~ m m ~ ~ L N N ~ p m 1Y ° m ~2 (0 O ~ ~ % ~ d ~ ~N m~ !s > cSa m°` go cad o m mo m ,amm ~' ~ p c n _ N ~' E J N O~ O 9 N O~ 4- J~_ O m d Q °. m ~ ~ C /i U Q~ Z '_~ ~ m u~ r _ t6 - `~ w d x m c R C >. N T K d T F C M I c- \I// :.~-_~ ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST FORM crtu n vtsrn ]. Name of Proponent: Catholic Diocese of San Diego 2. Lead Agency Name and Address: City of Chula Vista Planning and Building Department 276 Fourth Avenue Chula Vista, CA 91910 3. Address and Phone Number of Proponent: 3888 Paducah Drive San Diego, CA 92123 (858)490-8215 4. Name of Proposal: Mater Dei High School and Chwch Complex 5. Date of Checklist: December 14, 2004 6. Case No.; IS-04-002 ENVIRONMENTAL, ANALYSIS QUESTIONS: Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Issues: Significant b]it3gation Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact 1. AESTHETICS. Would the project: a) Have a substantial adverse effect on a scenic vista? ^ ^ ^ ^ b) Substantially damage scenic resources, including, ^ ^ ^ ~ but not limited to, tress, rock outcroppings, and historic buildings within a state scenic highway? c) Substantially decade the existing visual character or ^ ^ ~ ^ quality ofthe site and its surroundings? d) Create a new source of substantial light or glare, ^ ^ ~ ^ which would adversely affect day or nighttime views Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than ISSn CS: Significant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact IncorpornteJ Impact in the area? Comments: a-b)'fhe proposal includes development of a high school and church complex, with landscaped treatments and wall treatments along Magdalena Avenue and Birch Road in accordance with the City of Chula Vista Municipal Code, Otay Ranch Village Six Sectional Planning Area Plan Design Guidelines, and the Final Second Tier Environmental Impact Report (FIR 98-01) aesthetic mitigation measures. These landscape improvements would ensure that there are no negative aesthetic impacts to the Magdalena Avenue, Birch Road and the off ramp of SR-125 corridor. The project site contains no scenic vistas or views open [o the public, The proposed project would not damage any scenic resources, vegetation, nor historic buildings within a state scenic highway. c) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E_ d) See l.c. above. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required- 11. AGRICL7LTURAI. RESOURCF,S. Would the project: a) Convert Pnme Farmland, Unique Farmland, or ^ ^ ^ ~ Farmland of Statewide hnportance (Farmland), as shown on the maps prepared pursuant to the Farmland Mapping and Monitoring Program of the CahComia Resources Agency, tonon-agricultural rse? b) Conflict with existing zoning for agricultural use, or ^ ^ ^ ~ a Williamson Act contract? c) Involve other changes in the existing environment, ^ ^ ^ ~ which, due to their tocation or nature, could result in conversion of Farmland, to non-a~icultural use? Less Than Significant }'o[entially Wilk Less Than ISSUCS: Significant Mitigafion Significant No Impact Impact Incorporated Impact Comments: a-c) The project site was identified as a future community purpose facility site for a private high school and church use in the Otay Ranch Village Six SPA and EIR. Therefore, as per the Final Second Tier EIR, appropriate mitigation measures were implemented to reduce significant agricultural impacts between urban uses and agriculture operations as reflected in the agricultural plan. The agricultural plan included measures as buffers, vegetation shielding, notification to adjacent property owners, and fencing. The proposed project is required to be in compliance with the applicable mitigation measures and no further agricultural impacts are created as a result of the proposed project. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. III. AIR QUALITY. Would the project: a) Conflict with or obstruct 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 region 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? 3 Issues: Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Signincant Mitigation Significant Impact ]ncorporated Impact No Impact Comments: a-e) The project sift is located within the San Diego Air Basin (SDAB). The proposed land use has been included in the regional air quality projects and plans and will not conflict with or violate any applicable air quality plans or standards. According to the Final Second Tier EIR, the constmction of the proposed project would result in the generation of significant temporary equipment exhaust emissions, plus long-term significant cumulative emissions from project-generated vehicle trips. As a result, the listed mitigation measures in the Summary of Impacts and Mitigation Table within the L;IR, shall be implemented during construction and placed as notes on all grading plans for development within Village Six to lessen impacts to a level of less than significant. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. IV. BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES. Would the project: a) Have a subsi<antial 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 regulations, or by the California Department of Fish and Came or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? b) Have a substantial adverse effect on any riparian ^ habitat or other sensitive natural community identified in local or regional plans, policies, regulations or by the Califomia Depamnent of Fish and Came or U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service? c) Have a substantial adverse effect on federally protected wetlands as defined by Section 404 of the Clean Water Act (including, but not limited to, marsh, vernal pool, coastal, etc.) through direct removal, filling hydrological interruption, or other means? 4 Is$nCS: Less Than Significant Potentially ~;'ith Signincant Mitigation Impact Incorpora[eJ d) Interfere substantially with the movement of any ^ ^ native resident or migratory fish or wildlife species or with established native resident or migratory 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, regional, or state habitat conservation plan? Comments• Less Than Significant No ]mpact Impact ^ ^ a) The project site was rough gaded and leveled in 2003, in accordance with the Final Second Tier EIR. Based upon a field inspection by City staff, no candidate, sensitive, or special status species are present within or immediately adjacent to the proposed development area. b) Based upon the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and field inspection by City staff, no sensitive natural communities are present within or immediately adjacent to the proposed development area. c) Based upon the Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and field inspection by City staff, no wetlands are present within or immediately adjacent to the proposed development area. d) Based upon the Chula Vista MSCP Subara Plan and field inspection by City staff, no native resident or migratory wildlife corridors or native wildlife nursery sites exist within or immediately adjacent to the proposed development area. e) No biological resources would be affected by the proposal and no conflicts with local policies or ordinances protection biological resources would result. f) No impacts to local, regional or state habitat conservation plans would result since the project site is a designated development area pursuant to the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan and no biological resources are present on [he proposed project site. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. V. ClIL,TLTRAL RESOURCES. Would the poeject: a) Cause a substantial adverse change in the significance of a historical resource as defined in ^ ^ ^ ~ 5 Less"than Significant Potentially With Less Than ISSlleS: Significant Mitigation Significant No lmpa<t Impact Incorporated Impact 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? d) Disturb any human remains, including those interred ^ ^ ^ S outside of formal cemeteries? Comments• a-d) According to the Otay Ranch Village Stx Final Second Tier E1R, there are potentially significant cultural resouroes present in the Village Six SPA area. As a result, the listed cultural resource mitigation measures were required; such as brush and field reconnaissance and all brushing and grading within Village Six shall be monitored. This includes the proposed project and any future grading and constntction activities. All utility excavations, road grading and brush removal shall be coordinated with the archaeological monitor. These mitigation measures lessen the potential for cultural resource impacts as a result of the proposed project to a level of less than significant. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. VI. GEOLOGY AND SOILS -- Would the project: a) Expose people or stmctures to potential substantial adverse effects, including the risk of loss, injury or death involving: 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? ^ ^ ~ 6 Issues: ii. Strong seismic ground shaking? iii. Seismic-related Bound failure, including liquefaction? 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 not available for the disposal of wastewater? Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant No ]mpact Impact lncorporatea Impact ^ ^ ® ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ® ~ ^ ^ ® O ^ ^ ^ ~ 7 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than I$$Ut'.$: Signincant Mitigation Significant No lmpact Impact Incorporate) lmpact Comments: a-e) There were potentially significant geological impacts identified in the Village Six SPA area. The applicant is required to be in compliance with the applicable geological mitigation measures identified in the Final Second Tier EIR for the Otay Ranch SPA/Village Six. These impacts consist of potential earthquakes along off-site faults that would be a direct, long-term significant impact associated with the implementation of Village Six. The listed geological mitigation measures consist of construction and grading activity restrictions that includes removal and replacement of liquefiable soils with compacted fill, and keeping highly expansive soils below finish grade. During construction remove loose compressible soils, and replace compacted fill in areas that will be subjected to new fill or structural loads. During grading the developer shall construct earthen buttresses on unstable slopes with drains installed at the rear of the buttresses to control groundwater. Prior to approval of grading plans or the proposed project submittal of an additional geotechnica] study. The required mitigation measures lessen the potential for geological resource impacts to a level of less than significant. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. VII. HA7.ARD5 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? b) Create a signitcant hazard to the public or the ^ envirolrtrlent through reasonably foreseeable upset and accident conditions involving the release of hazardous materials into [he 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 [o Goverrunent Code section fi59G2.5 and, as a result, would it create a significant hazxtrd to the ^ ^ ^ ^ C 8 Issnes: public or the environment? Less Than Significant Potentially Wi[h Significant Mitigation ]mpact Incorporate) 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? f) 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 stmctures 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? Comments: Less Than Significant No Impact Impact ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ ^ a-h) The proposed project consists of a private high school and church. Per the Final Second Tier EIR, there are potentially significant impacts related to transport of hazardous materials as a result of project implementation. The project is subject to applicable mitigation measures regarding the use, transport, storage and disposal of hazardous materials in accordance with regulations of federal, state, and local agencies. The high school project will be required to be in compliance with the EIR mitigation measures as well as Federal, State, County of San Diego and local agency' regulations regarding hazards and hazardous materials. The required mitigation measures lessen the potential for Hazards/IIazardous Materials impact created by the proposed project to a level of less than significant. Mitigafion: No mitigation measures are required. VIII. HYDROLOGY AND WATER QUALITY. Would [he project: a) Result in an increase in pollutant discharges to ^ ^ ~ ^ ISSn eS: receiving waters (including impaired water bodies pursuant to the Clean Water Act Section 303(d) Iis[), result in sign»ficant alteration of receiving water quality during or following constmction, 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 ofpre-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? Potentially Significant Impact c) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattem ofthe ^ 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 oft=site? d) Substantially alter the existing drainage pattern of the site or area, including through the alteration of the course of a stream or river, substantially increase the rate or amount of surface runoff in a manner which would result in flooding on- or off-site, or place stmctures within a 100-year flood hazard area which would impede or redirect flood flows? e) Expose people or structures 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 the capacity of cxisting or planned stormwater drainage systems or provide substantial additional sources of polluted runoff? Less Than Significant with Mitigation Incorporated ^ ^ ^ ^ Less Than Significant Impact C No Impact ^ ~ ^ ~ 10 Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than I$snes' Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporate) Impact Comments: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. 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? c) Conflict with any applicable habitat conservation ^ ^ ~ plan or natural community conservation plan? No Impact 11 Issues: Comments Less?han Signincant Potentially With Less'rhan Signincant Mitigation Signincant Impact Incorporate) Impact No Impact a) The proposed project is consistent with the General Plan land use and SPA Plan. The character of the surrounding area is maintained and, therefore, the project would not disrupt or divide an established community. h) "I'he project site is within the Otay Ranch Planned Community, Village Su, R-I1/S-2 and CPF-2 "Lone (Single l~ami]y Residential and Commumn, Purpose Facihry) and PC (Planned Community) General Plan designations. The project has been found to be consistent with [he applicable zoning regulations, Genera] Plan and O[ay Ranch SPA Plan guidelines and regulations. c) The proposed project requires approval of a Conditional Use Permit in accordance with the Otay Ranch SPA regulations and City Zoning Ordinance. The proposed project would no[conflic[ with any applicable adopted environmental plans or policies and is consistent with EIR 98-O1. Furthermore, the project would not encroach into or indirectly affect the Habitat Preserve area of the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. X. MINF,RAL 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? 12 I$$n CS: ~~OIIIIrlent5' less Than Significant Potentially Wi[h Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporate) Impact No Impact a) The project site has been rough graded and monitored in accordance with the Final Second Tier EIR, thus 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. h) Pursuant to the Environmental Impact Report for the City of Chula Vista General Plan, the State of Califomia Department of Conservation has not designated the project sr[e for mineral resource protection. Mitigation: 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 ^ ^ ^ ^ groundborne vibration or groundborne 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 projectlocated 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 or working in the project area to excessive noise levels? f) Por a project within the vicinity of a private airstrip, ^ ^ ^ ^ would the project expose people residing or working 13 Issues: in the project area to excessive noise levels? Comments: a-d) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Less Than Significant Potentially with Less'rhan Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporate) Impact No Impact 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 working on-site to excessive noise levels. t) The protect rs not located within the vicinity of a private austnp; therefore, the project deve]opment would not expose people working on-site to excessive noise levels. Mitif;ation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section F_ 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 infrastmcture)? b) Displace substantial numbers of existing housing, ^ ^ ^ 0 necessitating the constmction of replacement housing elsewhere? c) Displace substantial numbers of people, ^ ^ ^ ~ necessitating the construction of replacement housing elsewhere? 14 Issues: Comments• Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant D9itigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact ac) The proposed project was identified as an allowable use with a Conditional Use Permit per the Zoning (hdinance and is in compliance with the General Plan and the Otay Ranch Village Six SPA. This specific project does not involve any residential development that would induce substantial population growth in the area or require substantial infrastmchrre improvements. No permanent housing exists on the project site and no displacement of housing or person would occur as a result of the proposed project. Based upon the type of the proposal, no population growth inducement is anticipated. Mitigation: No mitigation measures are required. XIII. PUBLIC SERVICES. Would the project: 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 construction of which could cause significant environmental impacts, in order to maintain acceptable service ratios, response times or other performance objectives for any public services: a. Fire protection? ^ p ~ ^ b. Police protection? ^ ^ ~ ^ c. Schools? ^ ^ ^ ~ d. Parks? ^ ^ ~ ^ e. Other public facilities? ^ ^ ~ ^ IS Issues: Comments: Less Than Significant Potentially with Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact incorporated Impact No Impact a) According to the Final Second Tier EIR, Village Six project development would result in impacts to fire and emergency medical services if construction of these facilities does not coincide with anticipated population growth and increased demand for sernces. Mitigation measures that include fmancing in accordance with the Tees and phasing m the approved PFFP for the Village 6 SPA Plan and monitoring of Fire Department responses to emergency fue and medical calls for the GMOC annual report, were required to lessen the level of impact to less than signficant. The applicant of the proposed project is required to submit plans for a fire sprinkler system prior to building constmcuon and is required to comply with the Fire Department policies for new building construction. As of July 2003, the remodeling of Fire Station 4 and as of September 2003, the opening of new Fire Station 7 on the eastern side of the City have improved fire services and response times throughout the City. The proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or altered fire protection services. The City performance objectives and thresholds will continue to be met. b) According to the Final Second Tier EIR, Village Six project development would result in impacts to law enforcement sernces due to anticipated increase in calls for service and travel time required for such services. Mitigation measures in EIK 98-O1 addressed impacts by the payment of development impact fees (DIF). c) The proposed project would not induce population growth; therefore, no significant adverse impacts to public schools would result Accordmg to the Chula Vista School Dismct letter dated November 4, 2004, since the proposed project is limited to construction of buildings for religious and education purposes therefore, it is exempt from school fees. d) Because the proposed project would not induce population growth, it would not create a demand for neighborhood or regional parks or facilities or impact existing park facilities. The proposal mcludes sporting facilities, courts and fields. e) "fhe proposed protect would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or expanded governmental services and would be served by existing or planned public infrastructure. YIV. RECREATION. Would the project: a) Increase the use of existing neighborhood and ^ ^ ^ ~ regional parks or other recreational faci]ines such that substantial physical deterioration of the facility would occur or be accelemted? b) Docs the project include recreational facilities or ^ ^ ^ ~ require the constmetion or expansion of recreational 1G Issues: facilities, which have an adverse physical effect on the environment? Comments: Less "Phan Signincant Potentially R'ith Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact al Because the proposed project would not induce population growth, it would not create a demand for neighborhood or regional parks or facilities, nor impact existing neighborhood pazks or recreational facilities. b) The project does not include the construction or expansion of recreational facilities. According to the Pazks and Recreation Element of the General Plan, the project site is not planned for any future pazks and recreation facilities or progams. The proposal does include sports facilities, courts and fields for recreational purposes used by the school and occasional sports uses. Mitigation: 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 number of vehic]e trips, the volume to capacity ratio on roads, or congestion at intersections)? b) Exceed, 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 ^ ^ ^ ^ feahlre (e.g., sharp curves or dangerous intersections) or incompatible uses (e.g., farm 17 Issues: equipment)? e) Result in inadequate emergency access? ~ Result in inadequate parking capacity? g) ConFlict with adopted policies, plans, or programs supporting akemative transportation (e.g., bus hlmouts, bicycle racks)'? Comments: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Mitigation: See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section h. XVI. iITILITIF.S 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 constmction of which could cause significant environmental effects? c) Require or result in the construction of new storm water drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities, the consUvchon of which could cause significant environmental effects? dj IIave sufficient water supplies available to serve the project from exlsung entitlements and resources, or Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Signincant Mitigation Significant No Impact Impact ]ncorporaled Impact ^ ~ D 0 0 ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ^ ^ ^ 0 ^ ^ ^ ~ ^ ~ ^ O 18 ISSUCS: are new or expanded entitlements needed? Less Than Significant Potentially With Significant Mitigation Impact Incorporated e) Result in a determination by the wastewater treatment ^ provider, which serves or may serve the project that it has adequate capacity [o serve [he project's projected demand in addition to the provider's existing commitments? Less Than Significant ]mpact ~ He 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'? No Impact ^ 19 Issues: Comments• Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporate) Impact No Impact a) The project site is located within an urban area that is served by alt necessary utilities and service systems. No exceedance of wastewater requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board would result from the proposed project. b) See XVI.a. No construction of new water or wastewater treatment facilities or the expansion of existing facilities would be necessary. c) No construction of new storm drainage facilities or expansion of existing facilities would be necessary. d) The project site is within the potable water service area of the Otay Water District. Pursuant to correspondence from the Otay Water District, the project may be serviced from existing potable water mains. No new or expanded entitlements are anticipated for the proposed project. e) See 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 comply with federal, state and local regulations related to solid waste. Mitieation: No mitigation measures are required. RVII. THRESHOLDS 11'ill the proposal adversely impact the City's Threshold S[anrlards? A) Library O ^ ^ ~ The City shall construct 60,000 gross square feet (GSF) of additional library space, over the June 30, 2000 GSF total, in the area east oT Interstate 80S by buildout. 'fhe constmction of said facilities shall be phased such that the City will not fall below the city- wide ratio of 500 GSF per 1,000 population. Library facilities are to be adequately equipped and staffed- ?U Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than ISSUfS: Significant Mitigation Significant ]mpact ]ncorporated Impact 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 Emereeney Medical ^ ^ ~ Emergency response: Properly equipped and staffed fire and medical units shall respond to calls throughout the Ciry within 7 minutes in 80"/a 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 Service (LOS) "D" may occur during the peak two hours of the day at signali~xd intersections. Signalised intersections west of I-805 are not to operate at a I,OS below their 1991 LOS. No intersection may reach LOS "E" or "P" drtring the average weekday peak hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this Standard. E) Parks and Recreation Areas ^ ^ ^ The Threshold Standard for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres of neighborhood and communtty parkland with appropriate facilities/1,000 population east of I-805. F) Drainage p ^ ~ The Threshold Standards requre that storm water flows and volumes not exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent wrth the Lhainagc Master Plan(s) and Clty Engineering Standards. No Impact C Zl Less Than Significant Potentially With Less Than 1.551105: Significant Si nificant Mitigation g Impact Incorporated Impa<1 Gj Sewer ^ ^ The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes no[ exceed City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary improvements consistent with Sewer Master Plan(s) and City Engineering Standards. H) Water ^ ^ The Tlueshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and transmission facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that water quality standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction. Applicants may also be required to participate in whatever water conservation or fee offset program the City of Chula Vista has in effect at the time of building permit issuance. No Impact ~~ Issues: Comments• Less Than Significant Potentially With Less'rhan Significant Mitigation Significant Impact Incorporated Impact No Impact a) The project is not a housing development; therefore, no impacts to library facilities would result. No adverse impact to the City's Library Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project. b) According to the Police Ihyarlment, adequate police protection services can continue to be provided upon completion of the proposed project. The proposed community purpose facility project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for substantial new or altered police protection services beyond that addressed in the Final Second "fier EIR. 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, adeyuate fire protection and emergency medical services can continue to be provided to the site. As of Iuly 2003, the remodeling of Fire Station 4 and as of September 2003, [he opening of new Fire Station 7 on the eastern side of the City have Improved foe services and response times throughout the City. 'fhe proposed project would not have a significant effect upon or result in a need for new or altered fire protection services beyond that addresud in the Final Second Tier EIR. No adverse impact to the City's Fire and Emergency Medical Threshold standards would occur as a result of the proposed project. d) See Mitigated Negative Declaration Section E. According [o the Traffic Engineering Section, with the addition of projected generated traffic, all roadway segments and intersections within the study area arc estimated to continue to operate at level of service "C" or better in compliance with the City's Traffic Threshold Standards. e) Because the project site is slated for development as a private school and church complex, this Threshold Standard is not applicable. f) A drainage study will be prepared in conjunction with the Tina] grading and improvement plans. Drainage facilities designed in accordance with the Drainage Master Plari(s) and City Engineering standards will be installed at the time of site development. The applicant proposes new and improved dramage facilities incorporated within the project site. No adverse impacts to the City's storm drainage system or City's Drainage Threshold standards will occur as result of the proposed protect. g) The proposed project is located within the Poggi Canyon Sewer Basin that will be served by the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor. According to the Engineering Division, the closest sewer facility is the 15-inch sewer line of the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor that runs along Olympic Parkway. The hydraulic analysis for the construction of the Poggi Canyon Basin Sewer Interceptor took into account [he flows of this proposed project. The Engineering Department has detemvned that these facilities are adequate to serve the proposed project. No new sewer facilities aze anticipated to be required and no adverse impacts to the City's Sewer Threshold standards will occur as a result of tbe proposed project. h) Pursuant to conespondence received from the O[ay Water District, dated July 14, 2004, there is a 12-inch potable main on Magdalena Avenue and an 8-inch rec ycled mom, 12-inch and 16-inch potable mains on Birch Road and the 12-inch recycled main on Birch Road that are cturently serving and may continue to serve the project site. The developer will be rcyuired to comply with the approved Sub-Area Master Plan (SAMP) for the Otay Ranch Village Six. Each servce must contain an approved R/P Backflow Devoe installed by the owner. "I7ie Project impacts to the Authority's storage, treatment, grid transmission Caclhties would be less than significant. 23 Less'rhan Significant Potentially with Less Than ISSUES' Significant Mitigation Signincant No lmpacl Impact Incorporated lmpacl XVIII. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE a) Does the project have [he potential to degrade [he ^ ^ ^ ^ quality of the environment, substantia]ly 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 [he 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 ofprobable firture 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 vacant and has been rough graded in accordance with the Final Second Tier EIR. The project site is located within an established wbaniud area within the Otay Ranch Village Six, and is within the designated development area of the adopted Chula Vista MSCP Subarea Plan. There are no ]mown sensitive plant or animal species or cultural resowces currently on the site. b) As described in the Mitigated Negative Declaration, significant direct project impacts would be mitigated to below a level of si~mificance through the required mitigation measures. No cumulatively considerable impacts associated with the project when viewed in connection with the effects of past protects, other current projects and probable future projects have been identified and none are contemplated that were not already addressed in the Final Second Tier EIR of the Otay Ranch Village Six SPA. c) See Mitigated Negative Declaration, Section E. Potential Impacts to humans associated with the traffic generation, short-term construction noise and project openmon noise would be mitigated to below a level of significance. ?.} XIX. PROJECT REVISIONS OR MITIGATION MEASURES: Project mitigation measures are contained in Section F, Mitigation Necessary to Avoid Significant Impacts, and Table 1, Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program, of Mitigated Negative Declaration IS-04-002. XX. AGREEMENT TO IMPLEMENT MITIGATION MEASURES By signing the line(s) provided below, the Applicant and/or Operator stipulate that they have each read, understood and have their respective company's authority to and do agree to the mitigation measures contained herein, and will implement same to the satisfaction of the Environmental Review Coordinator. Failure to sign below prior to posting of this Mitigated Negative Declaration with the County Clerk shall indicate the Applicant and/or Operator's desire that the Project be held in abeyance without approval and that the Applicant and/or Operator shall apply for an Environmental Impact Report. ~lV~ ~ ~1`~~ _ Printed Name and Title of Applicant ~- (or authorized relse.~entative) ~~ ~ ~ ~ 1~~ Signature ofd pplicant Date (or authori d representative) ~ Printed Name and Title of Operator (if different from Applicant) Signature of Operator (if different from Applicant) Date 25 XSI. ENVIRONMENTAL FACTORS POTENTIALLY AFFECTF,D: 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 fTranspor[ationlTraffic ^ Population and Sousing ^ Biological Resources ^ Geophysical ^ Energy and Mineral Resources ^ Public Services ^ Utilities and Service Systems ^ Aesthetics ^ Agricultural Resources ^ Hydrology/Water ^Hazards and Hazardous Materials ^ Cultural Resources ^ Air Quality ^ Paleontological Resources ^ Noise ^ Recreation ^ Mandatory Findings of Significance 2G %NII. 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 the mitigation measures described on an attached sheet have been added to the project. A Mitigated Negative Declaration will be prepared. I find that the proposed project may have a sigmificant effect on the environment, ^ and an Environmental Impact Report is required. I find that the proposed project may have a significant effect(s) on the environment, 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, if the effect is a "potentially significant impacts" or "potentially significant unless mitigated." 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, there will not be a significant effect in this case because all potentially significant effects (a) have been analyzed adequately in an earlier EIR pursuant to applicable standards and (b) have been avoided or mitigated pursuant to that earlier EIR, including revisions or mitigation measures [hat are imposed upon the proposed project. An addendum has been prepared to provide a record of this determination. Marilyn R.F. Ponseggi Environmental Review Coordinator City of Chula Vista J~\I'IanningU-0ARIA\Initial Study\IS-04 U02Checklist-duc Date 27