HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1992/01/22 (6)
January 14, 1992
FROM:
Chair and Members of the Planning commis~i~n
Ken Lee, Assistant Director of planning !;/
Marilyn R.F. Ponseggi, Environmental consu1tant~
TO:
VIA:
SUBJECT:
Final Environmental Impact Report for the Palomar Trolley
Center, EIR-91-02
consideration of the Final EIR for the Palomar Trolley Center was
continued from the January 8, 1992 meeting in order to allow for
the preparation of an addendum concerning the impact to schools.
Upon further review of the "community Infrastructure - Schools"
section, it was determined that the impact to schools from this
project is not a significant impact. The addendum, including the
analysis used for determining the level of significance, is
attached for your review.
Appendix B of the Final EIR contains the mitigation monitoring
program for this project. Action to recommend certification of the
Final EIR would include approval of the mitigation monitoring
program, which is a part of the Final EIR.
The candidate CEQA findings attached to the previous staff report
are virtually unchanged. section 3 - "Insignificant Impacts" now
lists "community Infrastructure" (including schools) as a less
than significant impact. Subsection 4 under section 4, "Community
Infrastructure" (last page) has now been deleted since the impact
is not significant and mitigations are not needed. The amended
pages are attached to this report.
The staff report from
staff recommendation,
remains unchanged.
the January 8, 1992 meeting, including the
are attached. The staff recommendation
(FEIRl.PAL)
SECOND ADDENDUM
A draft Environmental Impact Report (DEIR) for the Palomar Trolley Center
was completed in September 1991. The public review period for the DEIR
ended on November 6, 1991. Two addendums to the EIR have been prepared to
include minor technical changes or additions to the EIR. The first addendum is
presently included in the EIR and addresses the option of implementing the
project in two phases pursuant to the Semi-Exclusive Negotiating Agreement
(SENA). Although this option was included within the SENA prior to this, it
was not addressed within the Draft EIR. This second addendum addresses
impacts of the project on public educational facilities provided by the Chula
Vista Elementary School District and Sweetwater Union High School District.
PURPOSE AND SCOPE
This Addendum to the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the Palomar
Trolley Center (SCH# 89032915) is prepared in accordance with the California
Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Guidelines 15164. The purpose of an
addendum to an EIR is to comply with CEQA in instances in which the EIR
requires "minor technical changes or additions that do not raise important new
issues about the project's significant effects on the environment," and where no
factors are present that would require the preparation of either a subsequent or
supplemental EIR (15164 [a]). "An addendum need not be circulated for public
review but can be included in or attached to the Final EIR" (15164 [b]), "The
decision-making body shall consider the addendum with the Final EIR prior to
making a decision on the project" (15164 [c]).
This addendum provides additional technical information regarding the impacts
described in the Final EIR for the Palomar Trolley Center, a 198,200 square foot
community shopping center to be constructed on approximately 18.2 acres of
land. The information provided focuses on the estimated cost of additional
school facilities necessary to provide public educational services to new students
that will be generated by the development of the commercial center, and
available funding for such facilities under Section 65995 of the California
Government Code.
1
PROJECT DESCRIPTION
The Palomar Trolley Center project is a 198,200 square foot community
shopping center to be constructed on approximately 18.2 acres of land on the
south side of Palomar Street between Industrial Avenue and Broadway in the city
of Chula Vista. A complete project description is provided in Section 3.0,
Project Description, of the Pinal EIR.
ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT ANALYSIS
SCHOOLS
This analysis replaces the public school facilities analysis included within Section
5.5, Community Infrastructure. of the Final EIR.
ENVIRONMENTAL SETIING AND IMPACT
The environmental setting related to public educational services is described on
pages 5.5-4 and 5.5-5 of the Final EIR. In summary, educational services and
facilities for the general area in which the Palomar Trolley Center is located are
provided by the Chula Vista Elementary School District (CVESD) and the
Sweetwater Union High School District (SUHSD). Projected enrollment exceeds
the existing capacity of the three elementary schools administered by CVESD
(Harborside, Lauderbach, and Rice Elementary Schools). Projected enrollment
also exceeds the capacity of Chula Vista High School which is administered by
SUHSD. No new schools are currently planned for the area, therefore
relocatable classrooms are utilized by both school districts to meet projected
enrollments by increasing the capacity of existing schools.
The City of Chula Vista Threshold/Standards Policy provides for an annual
review of the impact of all projects, whether commercial or residential. This
policy requires the City to ".... annually provide the two local school districts with
a 12 to 15 month development forecast and request an evaluation of their ability
to accommodate the forecast and continuing growth." In reply, the school
districts provide information describing the following:
2
1, Amount of current capacity now used or committed;
2. Ability to absorb forecasted growth in affected facilities;
3. Evaluation of funding and site availability for projected new
facilities; and
4. Other relevant information.
Both school districts utilize the SANDAG report, "School District Development
Impact Fees: Relationship Between New Non-Residential Development and
Student Enrollment," to estimate student generation for the Palomar Trolley
Center project. The purpose of this report was to provide a basis for both school
districts to collect developer fees for school facilities on commercial and
industrial development as required by Assembly Bill 181 (1988). The CVESD
indicates that the project will generate approximately 47 new elementary school
students requiring an additional two classrooms of capacity at a revised estimate
of $240,000. The SUHSD estimates that the project will generate approximately
57 new junior high and high school students requiring two additional classrooms
at an estimated cost of $240,000. Taken together, the districts assert that 104
new students will be generated requiring additional facilities at an estimated cost
of $480,000.
The estimate of 104 new students relies on the SANDAG report's
methodological assumption that the Palomar Trolley Center project creates new
jobs in the area served by the school districts that are filled by individuals not
presently residing in the area; that is the new jobs will be filled by individuals
whose families will move into the area served by the school districts. These
newly arrived families represent the source of the new students affecting the
districts and requiring additional facilities. To accommodate these new families,
new housing units must also be provided within the area served by the school
districts (excluding a normal vacancy factor for housing stock in the area, a new
family moving into an existing housing unit simply replaces the family that
previously resided in the unit and, on the average, there is no net increase in the
number of students). Under the SANDAG study, the number of new housing
units associated with the 104 students is approximately 190, based on an
estimated average student generation rate of .58 students per housing unit.
Section 65995 of the California Government Code authorizes school districts to
collect fees from developers of both residential and non-residential projects to
offset school facility impacts related to such development. The present
limitations on school facility fees are $1.58 per square foot for residential
development and $.26 per square foot for commercial and industrial
development. Both school districts collect their proportional allocation of these
fees. For each $1.58 levied on residential development, CVESD receives $,70
and SUHSD receives $.88. For each square foot of commercial and industrial
development, CVESD receives $.12 and SUHSD receives $.14. The collection of
fees from the developers of residential and commercial/industrial projects is available to provide school facilities for new students attributable to new
development.
3
The Palomar Trolley Center includes approximately 198,200 square feet of
commercial development, and the total school facility fee available to the districts
is approximately $51,532 (198,200 square feet x ,$26 per square foot) to offset
new student generation. Of that amount, CVESD receives $23,784, and SUHSD
receives $27,748. Assuming construction of new units under the SANDAG
methodology, the districts will also receive a school facility fee for residential
development of approximately $390,260 to offset that same new student
generation (190 new housing units x 1,300 square feet per housing unit x $1.58
per square foot). Of that amount, CVESD would receive $172,900, and SUHSD
would receive $217,360. The combined fees available from both commercial and
residential development for the facilities necessary to accommodate 104 new
students are approximately $441,792. Separately CVESD receives $196,684, and
SUHSD receives $245,108.
Certain residential developments requiring legislative action (general plan
amendments, rezonings) within the school districts' jurisdiction west of I-80S can
be required to annex to Community Facility District # 5, instead of paying the
school facility fees described above. CFD # 5 is a form of benefit assessment
district established under the Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act to finance
the construction of school facilities necessitated by new growth. The estimated
bonding capacity for CFD # 5 is $105,000,000, During 1991, the City of Chula
Vista issued building permits for 111 residential units in the area of the city that
lies west of 1-805. According to CVESD records, 1991 residential projects west
of I-80S in the city have added from 28 to 45 residential units to CFD # 5. The
residential units added to CFD # 5 represent approximately 25 to 40 percent of
the 111 total residential building permits issued in 1991 for the area. Assuming
that 25 percent of new residential development (47 housing units) within the area
is required to annex to CFD # 5 instead of paying school facility fees, the present
tax revenue value of adding 47 housing units to CFD # 5 is approximately
$95,403 for CVESD and $156,734 for SUHSD. If 47 of the 190 housing units
theoretically associated with new student generation annex to CFD # 5, the
remaining 143 units will contribute an estimated residential school facility fee of
$130,130 to CVESD and $163,592 to SUHSD. The school facility fees
contributed by 143 housing units combined with the present value of 47 housing
units annexing to CFD # 5 is estimated at $225,533 for CVESD and $320,326 for
SUHSD. Combining the fees/CFD # 5 present tax revenue value for residential
and fees for commercial development, ($51,532 total), estimated funds available
to CVESD and SUHSD are $249,317 and $348,074 respectively.
Based on these estimates, the total school facility fees and the present tax
revenue value of residential units which may annex to CFD # 5 exceeds the total
cost of new facilities required by $117,391 ($597,391 available/$480,OOO needed),
On an individual basis the fees available to CVESD are approximately $9,317
higher than facility costs ($249,317 available/$240,OOO needed). For SUHSD, the
estimated fees available exceed the estimated facility costs by $108,074 ($348,074
available/$240.000 needed).
4
Based on this analysis, the availability of school facility fees and present tax
revenue value of residential projects reasonably assumed to annex to CFD # 5 to
offset the potential impact of projected new student generation reduces that
potential impact to a level of less than significant.
MITIGATION MEASURES AND LEVEL OF SIGNIFICANCE AFTER
MITIGATION
Based on the analysis presented above, the impact of the Palomar Trolley Center
project on school facilities is less than significant, and no mitigation is necessary,
5