HomeMy WebLinkAboutPlanning Comm Reports/1993/03/03 (7)
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 3, 1993
Page 1
3.
PUBLIC HEARING:
GPA-93-04. Application bv EastLake Development
Companv for approval of a General Plan Amendment for
51 acres of EastLake Greens, located in two separate
parcels, one south of Eastlake High School. the second in
the southwestern portion of EastLake Greens.
BACKGROUND:
The applicant, EastLake Development Company, has submitted a General Plan Amendment for
consideration for 51 acres located within EastLake Greens in two separate parcels, one south of
Eastlake High School, on the east side of Eastlake Parkway, and west of the future alignment
of the Sr-125 freeway/tollway, (Subarea I) and the second in the southwestern portion of
EastLake Greens, also south and west of the San Diego Aqueduct and its 200' wide right-of-
way.
The proposed amendment would result in the redesignation of a portion of Subarea 1 from Low
Medium Density Residential (3 to 6 dwelling units per acre) to High Density Residential (18 to
27 dwelling units per acre), reconfiguration of the alignment of EastLake Parkway and the
relocation of an area designated for Public and Quasi-Public uses which will contain a future
Otay Water District Storage facility. Subarea 2 would be redesignated from Low-Medium
Density Residential (3-6 dwelling units per acre) to Medium-High Density Residential (11-18
dwelling units per acre).
This proposal was submitted by the EastLake Development Company in September, 1992, after
discussion with the Planning Department and Otay Ranch project staff. Both of these parcels
are adjacent to the EastLake "Land Swap" area of Otay Ranch, which will be granted to the
EastLake Development Company in exchange for land to the west which will be granted to the
Baldwin Company, owners of Otay Ranch. This proposed General Plan Amendment is a
"companion request" to the proposed General Plan Amendment/General Development Plan for
Otay Ranch, which is being considered by the Planning Commission in a series of public
hearings at this time.
RECOMMENDATION:
1. Find that the proposed project has no significant impacts which were not discussed in
EIR 86-04 for the EastLake Greens project, and adopt the proposed Addendum to
Environmental Impact Report EIR 86-04.
2. Adopt the attached Recommending Resolution by which you recommend that the City
Council approve the General Plan Amendment.
...3 - I
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 3, 1993
Page 2
DISCUSSION:
Proposal:
The proposed amendment to the Chula Vista General Plan would involve the following
changes in acreages of different general plan designations for the 51 acre area:
Existing Proposed
General Plan General Plan
Low-Medium Residential(3-6 du/ac)
Medium-High Residential(1l-18 du/ac)
High Residential(18-27 du/ac)
Open Space
Circulation Streets
Public/Quasi Public
22 acres
o acres
o acres
13 acres
9 acres
7 acres
o acres
15 acres
18 acres
o acres
8 acres
10 acres
(It should be noted that the decrease in area designated open space is due to a change in
mapping technique, since this open space is shown on the existing general plan as strips
of land adjacent to circulation element streets. No actual loss of open space is
contemplated as part of this project).
The project would result in an increase in allowable density in the 51 acre area from a
range of 66 to 132 dwelling units in the existing Low-Medium residentially designated
areas to a range of 489 to 756 dwelling units in the proposed Medium-High and High
Density residentially designated areas. Thus the maximum potential change in dwelling
units for these areas would be 690 dwelling units.
Historv:
As originally proposed and analyzed, EastLake Greens called for a total unit count of
3,609 dwelling units. In approving the project in 1989, the City Council reduced the
density and unit count of five parcels in EastLake Greens from High Density (18-24
du/ac.) to a density of 4.5 du/ac. Overall dwelling units were reduced from 3,609 to
2,774, a reduction of 835 dwelling units. The current General Plan Amendment would
re-designate one of these five parcels, R-26 which is part of Subarea 1, back to a High-
Density Residential General Plan Designation.
Otav Ranch Proiect:
The January 15, 1993 Otay Ranch Staff Report, Pages 16-19, describes a part of the
project known as the "EastLake Land Swap." The Land Swap area consists of 3 separate
3. oL
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 3, 1993
Page 3
parcels totaling 169 acres, which are located immediately adjacent to the EastLake
Greens project area. Actual proposed land uses in these areas are to be considered by
the Planning Commission as part of the Otay Ranch project. However, action on the
Land Swap area is closely related to action on this item, since both Subarea 1 and
Subarea 2 are adjacent to the Land Swap area.
The proposed uses for the 169 acre area are as follows:
Low-Medium Residential(3-6 du/ac)
Medium Residential (6-11 du/ac)
Medium High Residential (11-18 du/ac)
High Residential (18-27 du/ac)
Retail Commercial
Professional & Administrative Comm.
Public/Quasi-Public
Open Space
Circulation Element Roads
Existing Proposed
General Plan General Plan
68 acres
32 acres
o acres
o acres
o acres
o acres
16 acres
34 acres
19 acres
16 acres
o acres
31 acres
18 acres
56 acres
22 acres
o acres
9 acres
17 acres
The Land Swap area proposal would extend southward an "Activity Corridor" along
Eastlake Parkway, from the Kaiser Hospital facility north of Telegraph Canyon Road to
the Eastern Urban Center within the Otay Ranch project. The "village" concept
proposed for adjacent areas within Otay Ranch was specifically rejected for this area
because the approved EastLake Greens plan does not conform to the "village" concept,
since its centerpiece is a golf course-oriented residential community.
Subsequent Approvals:
If this proposed General Plan Amendment is approved, the project proponents will need
to process 1) a General Development Plan for the area, 2) a Sectional Plan Area Plan,
including a Public Facilities Financing Plan, and 3) tentative and final subdivision maps
and/or precise plans, prior to issuance of any building permits for this area.
Communitv Forum:
On February 18, 1993, Planning Department staff conducted a community forum for this
proposed project at the Eastlake High School library . Nine citizens attended the forum.
The two chief reservations expressed about the project were 1) why the site was not
appropriate for single-family residential uses as called for in the existing General Plan,
and 2) whether the parcels would be included within the EastLake Community
3-3
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 3, 1993
Page 4
Association. The staff response to the first issue is included in the Analvsis section
below. The second issue is one which must be resolved between the residents of
EastLake Greens and the EastLake Development Company.
ANALYSIS:
Based upon the discussion above, staff recommends that the General Plan Amendment for both
Subarea 1 and Subarea 2 be approved. Staff's rationale for this recommendation is as follows:
I. The proposed General Plan and General Development Plan for the Otay Ranch parcel
substantially alter the land use and planning parameters for these two parcels. Subarea
1, located between Eastlake Parkway and the SR-125 alignment, is within the EastLake
"Activity Corridor" along SR-125. Use of the property for high density residential
purposes is compatible with other high intensity uses along this corridor, which runs
north to south from the proposed Kaiser Hospital facility to the north of Telegraph
Canyon Road, past commercial uses in the vicinity of Telegraph Canyon Road, a
community park site, Eastlake High School, this parcel, an Otay Water District storage
tank site, and retail "freeway commercial" uses proposed on the Otay Ranch project in
the vicinity of the future interchange of SR-125 and Orange Avenue. On the other hand,
use of the property for the existing allowed single-family residential uses is inappropriate
and undesirable given the fact that the site is surrounded by SR-125 to the west, the Otay
Water District storage facility site to the south, Eastlake High School and a water
aqueduct/transmission line to the north, and EastLake Parkway to the east. A multi-
family project would be better able to mitigate negative noise and visual impacts through
project design features, such as common walls, inward orientation toward common areas,
use of parking areas as buffers.
Subarea 2 is isolated from the remainder of EastLake Greens by a 200' wide easement
containing a major water aqueduct and SDG&E transmission lines. It is a "wedge" of
land amidst an area within the EastLake "Land Swap" area of Otay Ranch which is
proposed for Medium-High Residential (11-18 du/ac.) development because of its
location adjacent to the EastLake "Activity Corridor." Thus, this area of approximately
15 acres is also proposed for similar Medium-High Density Residential uses.
2. This general plan amendment would result in the potential addition of up to 486 multi-
family units to the EastLake Greens project from development in Subarea 1. (A project
at mid-point density would add 405 multi-family units). This represents approximately
15% of the total number of units within EastLake Greens, and would be the only high
density residential-designated area within the project. It thus would add these types of
units to the mix of development within EastLake Greens, thus creating a more balanced
project, and an opportunity for the provision of affordable housing. However, the
specific siting ofthis high density residential development will not have negative land use
3-"1
City Planning Commission
Agenda Item for Meeting of March 3, 1993
Page 5
friction effects upon any existing or proposed single-family development within the
EastLake Greens project.
Also, the multi-family development proposed for Subarea I is intended as a replacement
for the 450 multi-family units originally proposed for the EastLake Town Center north
of Telegraph Canyon Road, which were replaced by the approved Kaiser Hospital
facility. The EIR for the Kaiser Hospital identified the loss of affordable multi-family
housing opportunities as an adverse result of that proposal, and noted that EastLake
Greens and in fact the entire Eastern Territories did not have an alternative site for such
housing. At that time, Subarea I was identified as a potential alternative site for
affordable housing in the Eastern Territories, and the EastLake Development Company
thus is applying for this General Plan Amendment.
The densities proposed for Subarea 2 at 11-18 dwelling units per acre are within the
range of numerous existing and planned townhome condominium developments within
the EastLake Greens project and thus would be compatible with the remainder of
EastLake Greens.
castlkpc.gh
3 .- .=:;
~\\ 4~
..
N
l' = 800'
~,
"
,
. ,
- - -_J
"
~
i
~
~--"".
t....~"'"
[AS TLAKE
\
\
\
\
\
\
\
" \
"
\
~
.,
,
"
.1
,
I
-"
)
/
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN
'jj
_ \ r
\ ~/ /
/ ....---'
L .----
AMENDMENT AREAS
o~
~.r
~~
~O
~
"
GPA 93-04
EASTLAKE GREENS
3. if'
GENERAL PLAN AMENDMENT
~
z
:>
0 :;
:;
w 8 ~
;;
en ~
'" e
a ffi :1:'0 Cf)
U c w
0... ~ ~~ f-
a " ---!
; c
0: .;;",S U
<(0.
0... fo<- Lf
o e
~ ~~ u
> - -I
(J)
:J
0...
E-< ~ -I
Z <(
~ f-
Cf) ~ z
0 w
Z z 0
Cf)
0 ~ w
ex:
- ,
~ z
j 0
~ z
Z Uj
0 ::::
C) p.. '0;
"- Ii;
~ >
- ::S
(j) ::5
W ~
0 z
~
(j
W iZJ
Z
(j) ~
~
:J ~ -I
0 <(
f-
~ Z
0 W
0
Z Cf)
w
<( iZJ ex:
<
--.J ~
<5
"" 0
~ ~
OJ u
0.. ([)
.c <5 >-
0 ~
'c ~ OJ
:J U C
E ([) Q)
E "" ~ E
~ OJ Q)
0 OJ
0 0.. I [iJ
0.. 0.. ([) ([)
0 I w
Q)
.2:.
OJ
~
u;
'c .S?
'E .0
co :J
<( 0,
OJ 'en Q)
OJ ~
C :J 0
0 0 0
'en
'" - Q)
'iiJ Q) .S? OJ
'0 .0 OJ
ill ~ :J :>
a: 0.. 0..
a: if 0 0
0.. >
u
'"
-
-a u
'"
t!. "'
:;
Q) "Q
OJ U ,...
(\) '" <;J 0'
-
:> -a '" '"
~ -
~ "
E .r:: "Q
~ OJ '"
OJ I
is
Q) E E ~
:2 OJ OJ -
, is is ~
3:
0 Q) Q) OJ
-' :2 :2 I
> I
:2 :2 :2 I
-'
3.- (
~ ~
~ @
~ ~ ~
u.
'" ~ S
<~
~..
~ g ""
,,0 ~
~" ~
@ ~ ~
::s ~ "
~g i
'f!
mo
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA PLANNING
COMMISSION RECOMMENDING THAT THE CITY COUNCIL AMEND THE
GENERAL PLAN FOR 51 ACRES LOCATED WITHIN THE EASTLAKE
GREENS COMMUNITY, SOUTH OF EASTLAKE HIGH SCHOOL AND ON
BOTH SIDES OF THE EXTENSION OF EASTLAKE PARKWAY
WHEREAS, a duly verified applications for a General Plan Amendment
was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista
on September 15, 1992 by the EastLake Development Company; and
WHEREAS, said applications requested that approximately 51 acres
located on within the EastLake Greens community, specifically
located on the west side of the southerly extension of EastLake
Parkway, south of EastLake High School (Subarea 1) and east of the
southerly extension of EastLake Parkway, south of EastLake Greens
Golf Course (Subarea 2) as diagrammatically depicted on the
attached Exhibit A, be amended from Low Medium Residential (3-6
du/ac.), Open Space, and Public/Quasi Public, to Medium High
Residential (11-18 du/ac.), High Residential (18-27 du/ac.) and
Public/Quasi Public (reconfigured), and that the alignment for
Eastlake Parkway as shown on the General Plan land use and
circulation diagram be adjusted (see Attachment B); and
WHEREAS, the Planning Commission set the time and place for a
hearing on said Project and notice of said hearing, together with
its purpose, was given by its publication in a newspaper of general
circulation in the city and its mailing to property owners within
500 feet of the exterior boundaries of the Property at least ten
days prior to the hearing in accordance with Government Code
Sections 65358, 65090 and 65091 (a) 1 and 2 and Chula Vista
Municipal Code Section 19.12.070; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study (Case No. 93-16) was prepared for the
proposed project; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator recommends that the
project be found to have no significant impacts which were not
discussed in EIR 86 - 04 for the EastLake Greens proj ect, and
recommends the adoption of an Addendum for the proposed project;
and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment has not been amended more than
three (3) times this calendar year and the Planning Commission
intends the General Plan Amendment recommended for approval by this
action to be heard, considered, consolidated and treated as one
General Plan Amendment along with the Otay Ranch General Plan
Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as advertised,
namely 7:00 P.M., March 3, 1993 in the Council Chambers, 276 Fourth
Avenue, before the City Council and said hearing was thereafter
3'{')
closed.
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the
Planning Commission the Commission finds that the project would
have no significant environmental impacts which were not discussed
in EIR 86-04 EastLake Greens project, and adopts the Addendum to
Environmental Impact Report EIR 86-04.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the
Planning Commission, the Commission recommends that the City
Council enact the draft ordinance and resolution as attached hereto
to amend the General Plan to redesignate 51 acres located on both
sides of the southerly extension of EastLake Parkway, south of
EastLake High School, and south of EastLake Golf Course, from Low
Medium Residential (3-6 du/ac.), Open Space, and Public/Quasi
Public, to Medium High Residential (11-18 du/ac.), High Residential
(18-27 du/ac.) and Public/Quasi Public (reconfigured), and that the
alignment for Eastlake Parkway as shown on the General Plan land
use and circulation diagram be adjusted (see Attachment B) .
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT a copy of this resolution be
transmitted to the owners of the property and to the City Council.
PASSED AND APPROVED BY THE PLANNING COMMISSION OF CHULA VISTA,
CALIFORNIA, this 3rd day of March, 1993 by the following vote, to
wit:
AYES
NOES:
ABSENT:
ABSTENTIONS:
Susan Fuller, Chairperson
ATTEST:
Nancy Ripley, Secretary
-3.- 7
RESOLUTION NO.
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY OF CHULA VISTA CITY COUNCIL
AMENDING THE GENERAL PLAN FOR 51 ACRES LOCATED WITHIN THE
EASTLAKE GREENS COMMUNITY, SOUTH OF EASTLAKE HIGH SCHOOL
AND ON BOTH SIDES OF THE EXTENSION OF EASTLAKE PARKWAY
WHEREAS, a duly verified applications for a General Plan Amendment
was filed with the Planning Department of the City of Chula Vista
on September 15, 1992 by the EastLake Development Company; and
WHEREAS, said applications requested that approximately 51 acres
located on within the EastLake Greens community, specifically
located on the west side of the southerly extension of EastLake
Parkway, south of EastLake High School (Subarea 1) and east of the
southerly extension of EastLake Parkway, south of EastLake Greens
Golf Course (Subarea 2) as diagrammatically depicted on the
attached Exhibit A, be amended from Low Medium Residential (3-6
du/ac.), Open Space, and Public/Quasi Public, to Medium High
Residential (11-18 du/ac.), High Residential (18-27 du/ac.) and
Public/Quasi Public (reconfigured), and that the alignment for
Eastlake Parkway as shown on the General Plan land use and
circulation diagram be adjusted (see Attachment B); and
WHEREAS, the Planning
1993, and voted
the Project; and
Commission held a public hearing on March 3,
recommend that the City Council approve
WHEREAS, the City Council set the time and place for a hearing on
said Project and notice of said hearing, together with its purpose,
was given by its publication in a newspaper of general circulation
in the city and its mailing to property owners within 1000 feet of
the exterior boundaries of the Property at least ten days prior to
the hearing in accordance with Government Code Sections 65358,
65090 and 65091 (a) 1 and 2 and Chula Vista Municipal Code Section
19.12.070; and
WHEREAS, an Initial Study (Case No. 93-16) was prepared for the
proposed project; and
WHEREAS, the Environmental Review Coordinator recommends that the
project be found to have no significant impacts which were not
discussed in EIR 86-04 for the EastLake Greens project, and
recommends the adoption of an Addendum for the proposed project;
and
WHEREAS, the General Plan Amendment has not been amended more than
three (3) times this calendar year and the City Council intends the
General Plan Amendment approved by this action to be heard,
considered, consolidated and treated as one General Plan Amendment
along with the Otay Ranch General Plan Amendment; and
WHEREAS, the hearing was held at the time and place as ~dvertised,
3.-/a
namely 6:00 P.M.,
Fourth Avenue, before the
thereafter closed.
, 1993 in the Council Chambers, 276
City Council and said hearing was
NOW THEREFORE BE IT RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the
City Council, the Council finds that the project would have no
significant environmental impacts which were not discussed in ErR
86-04 EastLake Greens project, and adopts the Addendum to
Environmental Impact Report EIR 86-04.
BE IT FURTHER RESOLVED THAT from the facts presented to the City
Council, the Council amends the General Plan to redesignate 51
acres located on both sides of the southerly extension of EastLake
Parkway, south of EastLake High School, and south of EastLake Golf
Course, from Low Medium Residential (3-6 du/ac.), Open Space, and
Public/Quasi Public, to Medium High Residential (11-18 du/ac.),
High Residential (18-27 du/ac.) and Public/Quasi Public
(reconfigured), and that the alignment for Eastlake Parkway as
shown on the General Plan land use and circulation diagram be
adjusted (see Attachment B) .
Presented by
Approved as to form by
Robert A. Leiter
Director of Planning
Bruce M. Boogaard
City Attorney
,3-! (
ADDENDUM TO ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT EIR-86-04
EASTLAKE GREENS SPA EASTLAKE TRAILS PREZONE & ANNEXATION
I, Introduction
PROJECT NAME: Eastlake General Plan Amendment
PROJECT LOCATION:
East of proposed SR-125 alignment; south of Telegraph
Canyon Road, north of Orange Avenue
ASSESSOR'S PARCEL #: Book 595 (Assorted parcels)
PROJECT APPLICANT: Eastlake Development Company
CASE NO: IS-93-16 DATE: January 15, 1993
II. Background
The environmental review procedures of the City of Chula Vista allow the Environmental
Review Coordinator (ERC) to prepare an addendum to a Negative Declaration or
Environmental Impact Report, if one of the following conditions is present:
../'
1. The minor changes in the project design which have occurred since completion
of the final EIR or Negative Declaration have not created any new significant
environmental impacts not previously addressed in the final EIR or Negative
Declaration;
2. Additional or refined information available since completion of the Final EIR or
Negative Declaration regarding the potential environmental impact of the project,
or regarding the measures or alternatives available to mitigate potential
environmental effects of the project, does not show that the project will have one
or more significant impacts which were not previously addressed in the final EIR
or Negative Declaration.
This addendum has been prepared in order to provide additional information and analysis
concerning land use, drainage, traffic and school impacts. As a result of this analysis, the basic
conclusions of the Environmental Impact Report have not changed. Land use, drainage, traffic,
and school impacts are found to be less than significant for the proposed project.
Therefore, in accordance with Section 15164 of the CEQA Guidelines, the City has prepared
the following addendum to the Environmental Impact Report for the Eastlake Greens SPA
Eastlake Trails Prezone & Annexation.
.3- / ~_
ill, Project Setting
The project involves two parcels totaling approximately 51 acres. The first parcel is
located on the northwest corner of Palomar Street and Eastlake Parkway, bounded to the
east by the planned SR-125 alignment. The second parcel is north of Orange Avenue
along the western and southern boundaries of the EastLake Greens SPA, where it adjoins
the Otay Ranch property (see parcels R-26, PQ-l, and R-9 on Exhibit A).
The land is currently vacant and has been used in the past for dry farming and cattle
grazing. The parcels have been graded and are covered with native grasses.
IV, Project Description
The proposed project is an amendment to the Chula Vista General Plan. As originally
proposed and analyzed, Eastlake Greens called for a total unit count of 3,609 dwelling
units. In approving the project in 1989, the City Council reduced the density and unit
count of five parcels in Eastlake Greens, R-24, R-25, R-26, R-27, and R-28, from High
Density (18-24 du/ac) to a density of 4.5 du/ac (see Exhibit A). Overall dwelling units
were reduced from 3,609 to 2,774, a reduction of 835 dwelling units. The current GPA
proposes increasing the density of parcel R-26 from Low-Medium to High Residential
(18-27 du/ac), changing parcel PQ-l from Public/Quasi-Public to Public/Quasi-Public and
High Residential, and increasing the density of parcel R-9 from Low Medium Residential
to Medium High (11-18 du/ac) as shown on Exhibit B. The proposed GPA would
increase the density range of these parcels from 66-132 residential units to 489-756
residential units. This is a potential increase from 357 to 690 residential units. A
summary of these changes is provided below.
Eastlake Greens original project
After reductions by Council in 1989
With proposed GP A
Total Units
3,609
2,774
3,464 (maximum)
Exhibit B of this document provides a detailed breakdown of the changes in General Plan
designations and acreage associated with the proposed project. Subsequent actions
required to implement the project will include amendments to the adopted EastLake
Greens II General Development Plan (GDP) and EastLake SPA Plan. These actions will
be subject to future environmental review at the time the particular projects are proposed.
V, Compatibility with Zoning and Plans
The proposed project involves a General Plan Amendment (GPA) on two separate sites
which are currently designated for approximately 22 acres of residential development,
7 acres of public and quasi-public development, 13 acres of open space, and 9 acres for
transportation infrastructure. The project proposes altering the General Plan designations
2
,3-V
to 33 acres of residential, 10 acres of public and quasi-public, and 8 acres of major
circulation systems. The density range of the parcels would increase from 66-132 units
to 489-756 units. The zoning on the site is "Planned Community" (PC), and the project
is compatible with this zoning.
VI. Compliance with the Threshold Standards
1. Fire/EMS
The Threshold Standards require that fire and medical units must be able to
respond to calls within 7 minutes or less in 85 % of the cases and within 5
minutes or less in 75 % of the cases'. The City of Chula Vista has indicated that
this threshold standard will be met, since the nearest fire station is 4 miles away
and would be associated with a 5 minute response time. The proposed project
would comply with this Threshold Standard.
In addition, Fire Station 6 will open in January 1993, approximately 1/2 mile and
2 minutes away from the project site. Specific development projects could be
required to meet additional, site-specific Fire Department requirements.
2. Police
The Threshold Standards require that police units must respond to 84 % of
Priority I calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average response time
to all Priority I calls of 4.5 minutes or less. Police units must respond to
62.10% of Priority 2 calls within 7 minutes or less and maintain an average
response time to all Priority 2 calls of 7 minutes or less. The proposed project
will comply with this Threshold Standard.
The Police Department has indicated that the proposed project will not impact
police services.
3. 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 signalized intersections.
Intersections west of I-80S are not to operate at a LOS below their 1987 LOS.
No intersection may reach LOS "E" or "F" during the average weekday peak
hour. Intersections of arterials with freeway ramps are exempted from this policy.
The proposed project will comply with this Threshold.
The proposed General Plan Amendment will not have an impact on traffic
circulation systems. According to the City Traffic Engineer, the actual change
3
.3 '-/f'
in land use associated with the implementation of the GPA may impact adjacent
local street segments and nearby intersections. Therefore, further traffic analysis
may be required at the time specific development is proposed. See Section VI for
a more detailed analysis of traffic mitigation.
4. Parks/Recreation
The Threshold Standards for Parks and Recreation is 3 acres/l,OOO population.
The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standards. Payment of
park fees may be required at the time specific projects are proposed.
5. Drainage
The Threshold Standards require that storm water flows and volumes not exceed
City Engineer Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary
improvements consistent with the Drainage Master Plan(s) and City Engineering
Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standards.
Existing one-site drainage consists of surface flow to catchments and city
storm water conveyance systems. The proposed GPA will not impact drainage
systems, however, improvements to existing facilities will be required when
specific development occurs.
According to the Engineering Department, off-site drainage flows into Poggi
Canyon. Existing facilities will not be adequate when the proposed project is
implemented. The Engineering Department has indicated that regional drainage
improvements may be necessary in the Poggi Canyon area when specific
development takes place. Future development will be reviewed on a case-by-case
basis. The proposed project, however, will meet this Threshold Standard. See
Section VI, for a more detailed discussion of drainage impacts.
6. Sewer
The Threshold Standards require that sewage flows and volumes shall not exceed
City Engineering Standards. Individual projects will provide necessary
improvements consistent with Sewer Master Plan(s) and City Engineering
Standards. The proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
The proposed project would not increase overall solid or liquid waste generation
in the Eastlake Greens Sectional Planning Area (SPA). Existing lines in the area
include an 8-inch polyvinylchoride (pVC) sewer leading to a 12-inch PVC sewer
in Otay Lakes Road. Flows from the Poggi Canyon Basin are pumped to the
Telegraph Canyon Basin. Some segments of the Telegraph Canyon Trunk Sewer
are over capacity. The City Engineering Department has indicated that payment
4
..5' 15
of fees in accordance with the Telegraph Canyon Basin Plan will mitigate these
impacts.
7. Water
The Threshold Standards require that adequate storage, treatment, and
transmission facilities are constructed concurrently with planned growth and that
water quality standards are not jeopardized during growth and construction. The
proposed project will comply with this Threshold Standard.
Because Southern California is in its 6th consecutive critically dry year, the
County Water Authority is recommending a voluntary 10% reduction in water
consumption for new development through the use of low flow fixtures and
drought-tolerant landscaping. Applicants may also be required to participate in
whatever water conservation or fee off-set program the City of Chula Vista has
in effect at the time of building permit issuance.
VII. Identification of Environmental Effects
School ImDacts
EIR-86-04 found that new students will be generated for both the elementary and
secondary school systems as a result of the project. One elementary and one high school
will be constructed within the project area. School construction is phased concurrently
with residential development.
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. School facility fees are $1.58 per square foot for residential
development and $0.26 per square foot for commercial and industrial development. Both
school districts collect their proportional allocation of these fees. For each square foot
of commercial and industrial development, the Chula Vista Elementary School District
receives $0.12 and the High School receives $0.14 to assist in financing school facilities.
EIR-86-04 found that impacts to school facilities could be mitigated to a level of less than
significant to the satisfaction of the school districts in the context of existing binding
agreements regarding school sites and financing. The Planning Department has worked
with representatives of both Otay Ranch (the Baldwin Company) and the EastLake
Development Company to establish strategies to mitigate school impacts. The
Sweetwater Union High School District has indicated that they have no objection to the
proposed General Plan Amendment. The Chula Vista Elementary School District has
entered into an agreement with the Eastlake Development Company and the Baldwin
Company to ensure school impact are mitigated adequately. Therefore, impacts to
schools from the proposed project will be less than significant.
5
.3 -/(,.,
Land Use
The proposed GP A would have an impact on land use, as it involves altering the use and
density on the sites. However, the total number of units currently proposed is at least
145 units less than that previously assessed in the Eastlake Greens EIR-86-04. EIR-86-
04 found that implementation of the Eastlake Greens project would not have adverse land
use policy impacts, therefore no specific "litigation measures or policies are required for
the proposed project. Thus, land use impacts from the proposed GPA are found to be
less than significant.
Drainage
EIR-86--04 found that no significant, unmitigable impacts to hydrology or drainage would
result from implementation of the Eastlake Greens project if recommendations in the
preliminary geotechnical report and any subsequent geotechnical reports are implemented.
These recommendations include: minimizing surface runoff into downslope natural areas
and graded areas; planting slopes with appropriate drought-resistant vegetation as
recommended by a landscape architect; and regularly maintaining drainage devices such
as graded berms, swales and area drains. In addition, drainage system plans must be
approved by the City of Chula Vista's Department of Public Works.
At the time specific development occurs, additional environmental review will be
required to ensure impacts to drainage. facilities are less than significant. All
recommendations contained in EIR-86-04 must be followed to the satisfaction of the City
Engineering Division.
Traffi c
In addition to complying with all requirements of the Engineering Division at the time
specific development is proposed, the proposed project must comply with the traffic
mitigation measures set forth in EIR-86-04, as follows:
1. Improve Telegraph Canyon Road between State Route 125 and Eastlake
Greens/Trails boundary to six lane prime arterial standards.
2. Construct Hunte Parkway and Eastlake Parkway as major roads between
Telegraph Canyon Road and Orange Avenue.
3. Construct a southbound SR 125 to eastbound Telegraph Canyon Road loop ramp
at the SR 125/Telegraph Canyon Road intersection, or extend SR 125 south to
East Palomar Street (which would connect to the Eastlake SPA II street system).
Compliance with these mitigation measures will ensure that impacts to traffic are
less than significant.
6
3-/'1
vrn, Consultation
1. Individuals and Organizations
City of Chula Vista: Diana Lilly, Planning
Roger Daoust, Engineering
John Lippitt, Engineering
Cliff Swanson, Engineering
Hal Rosenberg, Engineering
Bob Sennett, Planning
Ken Larsen, Building and Housing Department
Carol Gove, Fire Marshal
Captain Keith Hawkins, Police Department
Martin Schmidt, Parks and Recreation Department
Chula Vista City School District: Kate Shurson
Sweetwater Union High School District: Tom Silva
Applicant's Agent: Eastlake Development Company
2. Documents
IS-92-21 Addendum to Environmental Impact Report EIR-86-04 Eastiake Greens SPA
Plan/Trails Pre-zone and Annexation Final Supplemental Environmental Impact
Report Eastiake Village Center South (March 31, 1992)
City of Chula Vista Environmental Review Procedures
EIR-86-04 Eastiake Greens SPA Plan/Trails Pre-zone and Annexation Final
Supplemental Environmental Impact Report (ERCE, June 1989)
Eastlake SPA I Plan
City of Chula Vista General Plan
Title 19, Chula Vista Zoning Code
)101"--4 d..fi.--t'- O. )~UA.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW COORDINATOR
7
5'/ if
ffi Ii'" 1111.;; ill! II' P ~ U !lr~. t~~i
-
Q. tlF..........:::.. ot .. . .. ,. .. .. . 0 .. 0 .. . . . . . ..
I . .~..... ...............;;....
c: I ......;......:w..........;....~.~~
.... .....' ~.~_....~. ft.~....H
o ... ........ -' -~- ;;
15!I! ~. i. i
.~ Ii .....oCl.o.............ccc....Fcccc
.- i~
~ . ---r --
::J ~ 1......\....:.....:...:..\.. 0&
~ ;i............................;
$~Ii *
i:i5
ilf'. .
..,::%
, 11'1'
'I '
I!
,..... -..... -... .... );~ ~ i~ ~ i
1!!Hhmmillllli L ! ~(.D
~ilDJJIII]]]]]]]] ~81i UJ
. ~'-I
. -' \
'. ""-::::-:..~~
. A<~ ....-4..
,f";:J!':f7/ '.....~ ~
,# ;:~ 1'-,- ~\
,~v ........ . - .X
-;.,.., ....,. "'-' - ~,
I..d.~~,..". \.. \ ./':\~\
,'7/~~ I .. / ../ -_\~'\ \ .
.-.;'%'''' '", - ~ /'... \'
-'%:7/ I .,";,'~ .' / .' . '\'\:
:.", /' '" ,/ - ~,~.\\. ," ...,:
% "1 \>.'.' -- - .
. . ";' ^ ~~' r \
" ,," ",0, ~(~ - -/ I . ,
, v:' '> ", "':.s, "\, . -'--'-'11'.
:.& . (? _=_J""\ 1 --, I,',
",' 'C ~ '-! , .. \':
. _0/, ,,~ . . ~ I'" I I I.
I .",-' r:-..)~.~"'\ 0"1 .
. '> " .. I '\.
;{<. ~ V I .
l~vl 'J'- '/'
f<' ,: I
~
Lf1 '
l \
\
'\
" \
-~- .
.
. .
....
--~
.21'......
....-1
\ I
. h Ij
\,'. /,
'----., 'J
'. _,~.!J I
II
t J
!m
If:!
I
.
011;
[JJ
EJ
. ~._~ \ '.. *.;
5' -/1'
.
PROPOSED GENERAL pT <\N AMENDMENT
~
(
EXISTING GENERAL PLAN
Rt!s:idl!ntiA1
~
22 ac
DU Rllnae
1H Low-Radium (3-6)
66-132 du
Hon-ReKidenti81
PQ PUblic/OUsi-Public 7
o Opan Spaca 13
Circulation -2
~C'rAL
11 &C
""'132 du
V)/IVffP,5fTY
Note: Shaded area is area of proposed GPA.
PROPOSED GENERAL PLAN
Retd.dt!!ntiJl11
~ DU Rl!lnae OU Proco<<ed
15 165-270 du 196
J.i 324...UI6 du ~
3J ao "'-751 Au 120
10
~
.. a. 526 du
KH Redium Hi9h (11-18)
H Hi9h (18-27)
811B-'I'C'rAL
Non-ReR!f5ef'ltie1
PQ Public/OUasi-Public
Circulation
'1'O'I'AL
.'
/J1J/VE'flSnY
Exhibit B
.~Acr.. are .ro.. .~r.. ....d on ,Jant..c.r r..'Ln,.. Actual ..t .~r.. ~iJl vary_
S" . co:? 6
THE CITY OF CHULA. VISTA PARTY DISCLOSURE STATEMENT
Statement of disclosure of certain ownership interests, payments, or campaign contributions, on all matters
which will require discretionary action on the part of the City Council, Planning Commission, and all other
official bodies. The following information must be disclosed:
1. List the names of all persons having a financial interest In the contract, i.e., contractor,
subcontractor, material supplier.
EASTLAKE DEVELOPMENT COMPANY
2. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is a corporation or partnership, list the names of all
individuals owning more than 10% of the shares in the corporation or owning any partnership
interest in the partnership.
DAVID B. KUHN, JR
nZl1\TTPT. n T.1l.NR
J.G. BOSWELL
3. If any person identified pursuant to (1) above is non-profit organization or a trust, list the names
of any person serving as director of the non-profit organization or as trustee or beneficiary or
trustor of the trust.
N/A
4. Have you had more than $250 worth of business transacted with any member of the City staff,
Boards, Commissions, Committees and Council within the past twelve months? Yes
No 2 If yes, please indicate person(s):
5. Please identify each and every person, including any agents, employees, consultants or independent
contractors who you have assigned to represent you before the City in this matter.
BOB SANTOS
KENT ADEN
KATY WRIGHT
6. Have you and/or your officers or agents, in the aggregate, contributed more than $1,000 to a
CounciJmember in the current or preceding election period? Yes _ No.4- If yes, state which
CounciJmember(s):
Pcpqm is defined as: "Any indh'idua/, firm, co-partnership, joint ~!enfllre, association, social cIub,jrntemnl organization, corporalion,
{'JUIIC, lnest, receiver, s)'lldicmc, Ihis and nllY oIlIer COll1llY, ciO' and country, city, nllmicipn/ify, district or Ollla political subdi\';sioll,
or OilY Ollla group or combination acting as a unit."
,
(!"OTE: Attach additional pages as necessary)
8-h-~2.,
!!(ii t'JI,C>flf
Signatur of corl'tractor/applicant
KATY WRIGHT
Date::
Print or type name: of contractor/applicant
.3 " c;;:; ( [RL'\i\cJ ]]_~U,')O)
: \ '\DISCLOSLD11